ASX Announcement & Media Release
New G-Star Gold Prospect at Marvel Loch - Airfield
Project.
only | Highlights: |
Date: 9 November 2021 | • G-Star Gold Prospect identified from first pass Auger |
ASX Code: KGD | geochemistry sampling. |
• 217 follow up auger geochemistry samples recently completed | |
Board of Directors: | Kula Gold Limited (KGD) is pleased to announce a new gold prospect |
has been identified at the Marvel Loch - Airfield Project (KGD 100%). | |
Mark Stowell (Chairman) | |
First pass auger geochemistry sampling has defined the newly named | |
Mark Bojanjac | |
G-Star Prospect, which extends over a strike length of 2,200m in the | |
John Hannaford | Southeast of E77/2621 (Figure 1). |
use | |
Simon Adams | |
Shares on Issue: | |
215,175,632 Ordinary Shares | |
3,100,000 Options | |
personal | |
Cash (Q3/2021): | |
$2.5 Million | |
Co tact Details: | |
Office: 20 Howard Street, Perth WA | |
6000 | |
Email: cosec@kulagold.com.au | |
www.kulagold.com.au | |
@KulaGold | |
For | Figure 1. Kula Gold Ltd's Marvel Loch - Airfield Gold Project showing location |
of the new G-Star Gold Prospect, Boomerang Kaolin Prospect and Crayfish | |
Gold Prospect. | |
Sahara Operations (Australia) Pty Ltd (Sahara) completed first pass auger geochemistry sampling on behalf of Kula in April 2021 (refer ASX releases 12th April 2021 and 2nd July 2021), with 215 samples taken over the G-Star area (Figure 2). Samples were taken at a median depth of 2m and targeted the interface below the transported cover. Results of up to 18ppb gold define a northwest- southeast striking geochemical anomaly that extends over 2,200m and is open to the northwest (Figure 2).
Kula engaged Sahara's Mobile Auger Rig to complete a further 217 infill auger geochemistry samples at G- Star during October 2021. Company geologists were onsite for the start of the program to ensure sampling of the correct horizon via appropriate sampling technique. Haematitic lateritic soils and saprolite clays-a favourable sampling medium-were observed. Sample locations are provided in Figure 2.
Located 3.5km north of the Nevoria Gold Mine (+600,000oz gold), and 9km east of the 3 Moz Marvel Loch Gold Mine, the G-Star Prospect sits within the Ghooli Dome.
1
For personal use only
Kula geologists consider the possibility that G-Star is underlain by amphibolite and BIF greenstone (the predominant host rock of most of the gold deposits in WA).
G-Star may be much like the previously unmapped greenstone discovered by Kula in a major technical breakthrough during RC drilling at the nearby Crayfish Gold Prospect (refer ASX release 2nd July 2021).
The highly prospective greenstone belts of the Southern Cross Region have produced over 15m ounces of gold to date, at an average of 3-5g/t gold and are the reason Kula staked this region as its lead project.
Should auger geochemistry provide sufficient data to define a drill target within the prospect area, then a RC drill rig will be mobilised with some urgency to test the target. Results from geochemical assays (gold and multi-element) will be reported in due course.
Figure 2. Kula's new G-Star Gold Prospect identified from results of first pass auger geochemistry sampling (yellow, green and blue dots), and location of the recently completed follow up auger geochemistry samples (white dots).
RC drilling of the Boomerang Kaolin Prospect is scheduled to start next week.
By order of the Board
About the Company
Kula Gold Ltd (ASX: KGD) is a Western Australia gold exploration company focussed on large land positions and structural geological settings capable of hosting ~1m oz deposits.
The company has projects within the Southern Cross WA region including Rankin Dome and Marvel Loch, as well as near Kurnalpi and Brunswick. The company has a history of large gold resource discoveries with its foundation Woodlark Island project in PNG.
2
Competent Person Statement | ||||||||||||||
The information in this report that relates to geology and exploration is based on information compiled by Mrs. | ||||||||||||||
Melanie Hickman, a Competent Person who is a member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and the | ||||||||||||||
Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mrs. Hickman is a Geology and Exploration Consultant who has been engaged by | ||||||||||||||
Kula Gold Ltd. Mrs. Hickman has sufficient experience, which is relevant to the style of mineralisation, geology and | ||||||||||||||
only | type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a competent person under the | |||||||||||||
2012 edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the 2012 | ||||||||||||||
JORC Code). Mrs. Hickman consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on her information in the form | ||||||||||||||
and context in which it appears. | ||||||||||||||
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 report - E77/2621 | ||||||||||||||
use | Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data | |||||||||||||
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections) | ||||||||||||||
Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | ||||||||||||
Sampling | • Nature and | quality | of | sampling | (eg cut | • | Sampling was completed by personnel | |||||||
techniques | channels, | random | chips, | or | specific | employed by the auger contractor, Sahara | ||||||||
specialised | industry | standard | Operations (Australia) Pty Ltd (Sahara). | |||||||||||
personal | measurement tools appropriate to the | • | Samples were taken on the interface | |||||||||||
minerals | under investigation, such as | |||||||||||||
down hole gamma sondes, or handheld | between transported material and saprolite. | |||||||||||||
XRF instruments, etc). These examples | • Sahara utilised a scoop to take a composite | |||||||||||||
should not be taken as limiting the broad | ||||||||||||||
meaning of sampling. | sample (typically 1m maximum but up to 2m | |||||||||||||
where lithologies extended across more | ||||||||||||||
• Include reference to measures taken to | than 1m). | |||||||||||||
ensure sample representivity and the | • The sample was taken by ~ 3 scoops from | |||||||||||||
appropriate | calibration | of | any | |||||||||||
measurement tools or systems used. | the sample bucket (representative as | |||||||||||||
possible) to approximately 2kg. The sample | ||||||||||||||
• Aspects of the determination of | placed into a prenumbered calico bag, 10 | |||||||||||||
mineralisation that are Material to the | samples are placed in a polyweave bag and | |||||||||||||
Public Report. | Ziplock tied on site. | |||||||||||||
• In cases where 'industry standard' work | • Samples were sent to Bureau Veritas Perth, | |||||||||||||
has been done this would be relatively | where they were sorted and dried. The | |||||||||||||
simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was | whole sample crushed then pulverized and | |||||||||||||
used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 | a nominal 40gram charge is taken by the | |||||||||||||
kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g | laboratory. | |||||||||||||
For | charge for fire assay'). In other cases more | • The 40 gram charge is then subject to total | ||||||||||||
explanation may be required, such as | ||||||||||||||
where there is coarse gold that has | digest in a four acid digest and the solution | |||||||||||||
inherent | sampling | problems. | Unusual | is read by an ICP machine using OES to | ||||||||||
commodities or mineralisation types (eg | determine Au, Pt and Pd to 1ppb. | |||||||||||||
submarine | nodules) | may | warrant | |||||||||||
disclosure of detailed information. |
Drilling techniques
- Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).
- A Landcruiser mounted S10 Auger rig with a 4-inch blade was used. Drill spoil was collected in a plastic container.
3
Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | ||||||||||||||||
Drill sample | • | Method of recording and assessing core | • 10 - 15 kg per metre was recovered (density | |||||||||||||||
recovery | and chip sample recoveries and results | dependent). | ||||||||||||||||
assessed. | • There is no | relationship between sample | ||||||||||||||||
• | ||||||||||||||||||
only | Measures taken to maximise sample | recovery and grade. | ||||||||||||||||
recovery and ensure representative nature | ||||||||||||||||||
of the samples. | ||||||||||||||||||
• Whether | a | relationship | exists | between | ||||||||||||||
sample recovery and grade and whether | ||||||||||||||||||
sample bias may have occurred due to | ||||||||||||||||||
preferential | loss/gain | of | fine/coarse | |||||||||||||||
material. | ||||||||||||||||||
L gging | • | Whether core and chip samples have been | • Chips were | qualitatively logged for basic | ||||||||||||||
use | geologically and geotechnically logged to a | lithology, mineralogy and colour. | ||||||||||||||||
level | of | detail to | support | appropriate | ||||||||||||||
Mineral | Resource | estimation, | mining | |||||||||||||||
studies and metallurgical studies. | ||||||||||||||||||
• Whether | logging | is | qualitative or | |||||||||||||||
quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, | ||||||||||||||||||
channel, etc) photography. | ||||||||||||||||||
• The | total | length and percentage of the | ||||||||||||||||
relevant intersections logged. | ||||||||||||||||||
personal | • | If core, whether cut or sawn and whether | • | Sample preparation | is industry standard | |||||||||||||
Sub- | ||||||||||||||||||
s mpling | quarter, half or all core taken. | where up to 3kg of sample is pulverized and | ||||||||||||||||
techniques | • | a nominal 40gram charge is taken for fire | ||||||||||||||||
a d sample | If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, | assay. | ||||||||||||||||
preparation | rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet | • No field duplicates were taken as it is a first | ||||||||||||||||
or dry. | ||||||||||||||||||
• For all sample types, the nature, quality | pass geochemistry program. | |||||||||||||||||
and appropriateness of the sample | ||||||||||||||||||
preparation technique. | ||||||||||||||||||
• Quality control procedures adopted for all | ||||||||||||||||||
sub-sampling stages to maximise | ||||||||||||||||||
representivity of samples. | ||||||||||||||||||
• | Measures taken to ensure that the | |||||||||||||||||
sampling is representative of the in situ | ||||||||||||||||||
material collected, including for instance | ||||||||||||||||||
results for field duplicate/second-half | ||||||||||||||||||
sampling. | ||||||||||||||||||
• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to | ||||||||||||||||||
the grain size of the material being | ||||||||||||||||||
sampled. | ||||||||||||||||||
Quality of | • | The nature, quality and appropriateness of | • | Fire assay technique | is industry standard | |||||||||||||
assay data | the assaying and laboratory procedures | when assaying for Au, Pt and Pd. | ||||||||||||||||
For | ||||||||||||||||||
and | used and whether the technique is | • Repeat samples, randomly selected by the | ||||||||||||||||
laboratory | considered partial or total. | |||||||||||||||||
tests | • | laboratory, | were | within | statistically | |||||||||||||
For | geophysical | tools, | spectrometers, | acceptable limits, and no outliers were noted | ||||||||||||||
handheld XRF instruments, etc, the | in the laboratory inserted standards. | |||||||||||||||||
parameters used in determining the | ||||||||||||||||||
analysis including instrument make and | ||||||||||||||||||
model, reading times, calibrations factors | ||||||||||||||||||
applied and their derivation, etc. | ||||||||||||||||||
4 |
Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | ||||||||||||
• | Nature of quality control procedures | |||||||||||||
adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, | ||||||||||||||
external laboratory checks) and whether | ||||||||||||||
acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of | ||||||||||||||
bias) and precision have been established. | ||||||||||||||
Verification | • | The verification of significant intersections | • | Sampling was undertaken by personnel | ||||||||||
of sampling | by either independent or alternative | employed by the auger company, Sahara | ||||||||||||
and | company personnel. | Operations (Australia) Pty Ltd | ||||||||||||
assaying | ||||||||||||||
only | • | The use of twinned holes. | • Sahara manually recorded appropriate data | |||||||||||
• | Documentation of primary data, data entry | in the field, which was then digitized into | ||||||||||||
spreadsheets and sent through to Kula. | ||||||||||||||
procedures, data verification, data storage | • | |||||||||||||
(physical and electronic) protocols. | Kula | geologists | checked | sample | ||||||||||
use | • | Discuss any adjustment to assay data. | coordinates against designed auger lines | |||||||||||
and | requested sample spacing | in GIS | ||||||||||||
software. | ||||||||||||||
• Primary data was loaded into an access type | ||||||||||||||
database by qualified data people. | ||||||||||||||
• No adjustments were made to the assay | ||||||||||||||
data. | ||||||||||||||
Location of | • | Accuracy and quality of surveys used to | • | Sample coordinates were obtained using | ||||||||||
data points | locate drill holes (collar and down-hole | handheld GPS with 3 - 5m accuracy in XY. | ||||||||||||
surveys), trenches, mine workings and | • Coordinates were collected in GDA94 Zone | |||||||||||||
other locations used in Mineral Resource | ||||||||||||||
estimation. | 50 and reported as such. | |||||||||||||
• Specification of the grid system used. | ||||||||||||||
• | Quality and adequacy of topographic | |||||||||||||
control. | ||||||||||||||
Data | • | Data spacing for reporting of Exploration | • Samples were taken at ~50m intervals along | |||||||||||
pacing and | Results. | ~400m spaced lines. | ||||||||||||
distribution | ||||||||||||||
personal | • Whether the data spacing and distribution | |||||||||||||
is sufficient to establish the degree of | ||||||||||||||
geological | and | grade | continuity | |||||||||||
appropriate for the Mineral Resource and | ||||||||||||||
Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and | ||||||||||||||
classifications applied. | ||||||||||||||
• Whether sample compositing | has been | |||||||||||||
applied. | ||||||||||||||
Orientation | • | Whether the orientation of sampling | • | Auger holes were vertical which is | ||||||||||
f data in | achieves unbiased sampling of possible | appropriate for medium being sampled. | ||||||||||||
relation to | structures and the extent to which this is | |||||||||||||
geological | known, considering the deposit type. | |||||||||||||
Forstructure | • If the relationship | between | the drilling | |||||||||||
orientation and the orientation of key | ||||||||||||||
mineralised structures is considered to | ||||||||||||||
have introduced a sampling bias, this | ||||||||||||||
should be assessed and reported if | ||||||||||||||
material. | ||||||||||||||
5
This is an excerpt of the original content. To continue reading it, access the original document here.
Attachments
- Original document
- Permalink
Disclaimer
Kula Gold Limited published this content on 08 November 2021 and is solely responsible for the information contained therein. Distributed by Public, unedited and unaltered, on 08 November 2021 21:45:00 UTC.