Saturday, September 26, 2026
MiningNewsTerminal
Saturday, September 26, 2026 Admin

FWZ.V ·

Fireweed Announces Positive Metallurgical Test Results

Metallurgy & Processing

Page 1 of 4

NEWS RELEASE

May 15th, 2018 TSXV: FWZ

Fireweed Announces Positive Metallurgical Test Results

Vancouver, British Columbia: FIREWEED ZINC LTD. (“Fireweed” or the “Company”) (TSXV: FWZ)

is pleased to announce positive result s from metallurgical tests conducted as part of the Preliminary

Economic Assessment (“PEA”) work underway for the Macmillan Pass Zinc Project, Yukon. Base

Metallurgical Laboratories of Kamloops, BC, performed the test work under supervision by Fireweed’s

PEA contractor, JDS Energy and Mining, Inc. (“JDS”).

Highlights

 Excellent metallurgical results based on the most extensive and representative work to date.

 The “global” composite zinc concentrate graded 58% Zn at 89% Zn recovery. The “global” lead

concentrate contained 61% Pb at 75% Pb recovery.

 The zinc results compare favorably to a 2012 test program which resulted in concentrate

containing 58% Zn at 80% recovery.

 High quality, low iron concentrate is expected to be attractive to smelters.

“The results give us confidence that the Macmillan Pass project will produce concentrates

desirable to potential traders and global sm elter customers,” commented Brandon Macdonald,

CEO. “These results confirm and improve upon past metallurgical studies and will help inform

the economics in our upcoming PEA. We expect to announce PEA results in the coming weeks.”

Table 1. Summary of Macmillan Pass Global (65% Tom + 35% Jason) Composite Metallurgical Results

Product Grade Metal Recoveries (%)

Zinc % Lead % Silver g/t Lead Zinc Silver

Feed 7.3 3.2 44 100 100 100

Lead Concentrate* 8.9 61.5 688 75 55 9

Zinc Concentrate* 58.4 2.2 88 7 89 22

*Note: Lead and Zinc are a weighted average from Lock Cycle Tests BL0236 LCT45 cycles D&E

Description of Metallurgical Test Work

This new work not only extended cove rage into previously untested de posit zones, but also included test

procedures, such as dense media separation (DMS) tests, not undertaken in prior programs.

Core were selected from eight drill holes spatially, mineralogically and grade representative of the known

deposit zones. Drill core was large, HQ size core (61. 1 mm (2.4 inch) diameter). Total sample weight was

553.5 kg (1,220 lbs), including 5% hanging-wall and footwall waste rock dilution.

Page 2 of 4

For the first phase of testing, the eight core were combined into five composite samples: two from the

Tom West zone, one from Tom East and two fro m Jason Main. This phase included mineralogy,

comminution and flotation tests.

A second set of three composites was then prepared from the five phase one composites. These three

composites represent both the major deposits, Tom (combined West and East), Jason Main, and a

“global” sample made up of a 65% Tom and 35% Jason blend, representative of the total projected project

production across both deposits. This second set of co mposite samples underwent locked cycle testing to

determine recovery and concentrate grades close to what would be expected in an operating plant.

Analyses for other elements in the concentrates, and tailing filtration tests, were also completed.

Mineralogy

Tests revealed acceptable liberation of sphale rite and galena at a primary grind of P 80 50 µm (80%

passing through a 50 micron mesh).

Comminution

Comminution test work determined the grinding energy required to liberate lead and zinc minerals prior

to flotation, and abrasion testing to determine mill and grinding media wear characteristics:

 The composites tested had SAG Circuit Specific Energy (SCSE) values of 7.82 and 9.2 kWh/t.

 Bond ball mill work index (BWi) tests at a siev e size of 106 µm showed the material to be

moderately soft with BWi values ranging from 8.8 to 14.0 kWh/t.

 Abrasion index results averaged 0.27 g.

These low specific energy and bond work indices predict relatively low energy consumption for grinding.

Locked Cycle Testing (LCT)

LCT simulates a continuous, stable, processing plant flotation circuit. The LCT employed a conventional

flotation flowsheet at a target primary grind size of P 80 50 µm. Regrinding was included in both the lead

and zinc circuits, with grind sizes of 15 µm and 25 µm respectively. The LCT45 results for the global

blend sample had an average lead concentrate grade of 61% Pb at 75% Pb recovery, and an average zinc

concentrate grade of 58% Zn at 89% Zn recovery.

Other Elements

The iron levels are low, at about 1.5%, a feature desi red by zinc smelters. De leterious element levels

were generally low, except for mercury at 155 ppm and silica at 4% in the global zinc concentrate. Either

or both may incur modest smelter penalties. See Appendix for values of other elements in concentrates.

Conclusions

The Tom and Jason deposits reacted well to conventional flotation concentration processing. The global

material, simulating blending of feed from Tom and Jason zones, also reacted well, revealing no material

issues with blending Tom and Jason mineralization. This ability to blend material will allow flexibility in

planning mining and processing scenarios. Concentrate recoveries and grades were all excellent. Details

of these metallurgical tests will be presented in the pending PEA report.

Page 3 of 4

Future Metallurgical Plans

Additional metallurgical work is planned for 2018 to build and improve on these results. Objectives of

future work will include:

1. Build up of a full geometallurgical block model to better predict recoveries, concentrate grades

and general optimization and coordination of mining and processing operations.

2. Better understand variability in lead and silver metallurgical performance. Additional test work

will be performed to optimize and improve lead performance.

3. Further optimize the concentrates to improve their specifications.

Technical information directly related to the metallurgical work in this news release has been reviewed

and approved by Kelly McLeod, P.Eng., Senior Process Engineer for JDS Energy & Mining Inc. and a

‘Qualified Person’ as defined under Canadian National Instrument 43-101. Other technical information

(not directly related to the metallurgical work) has been reviewed and approved by Brandon Macdonald,

P.Geo, a ‘Qualified Person’ as defined under Canadian National Instrument 43-101.

Definitive Option Agreements Signed

Further to the Company’s news release dated Marc h 27, 2018 announcing the signing of letter option

agreements with Constantine Metal Resources Ltd./Carlin Gold Corporation and Golden Ridge Resources

Ltd. for large neighbouring claimblocks, Firewe ed is pleased to announ ce that definitive option

agreements have been signed and TSX Venture Exchange approval received for both options.

About Fireweed Zinc Ltd.: Fireweed Zinc is a public mineral ex ploration company focused on zinc and

managed by a veteran team of mi ning industry professionals. The Company is advancing its large 470

km2 Macmillan Pass Project in Yukon, Canada, whic h is host to the 100% owned Tom and Jason zinc-

lead-silver deposits with recently announced new Mineral Resources (see Fireweed news release dated

January 10, 2018 for details) and a pending PEA ec onomic study. The project also includes option

agreements on large blocks of adjacent claims (MAC, MC, MP, Jerry, BR and NS) which cover projected

extensions of mineralization from the Jason area a nd areas where previous exploration identified zinc,

lead and silver geochemical anomalies in critical host geology.

Additional information about Fire weed Zinc and its Macmillan Pass Project, can be found on the

Company’s website at www.FireweedZinc.com and on SEDAR at www.sedar.com .

ON BEHALF OF FIREWEED ZINC LTD.

“Brandon Macdonald”

CEO & Director

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation S ervices Provider (as that term is defined in the

policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Forward-Looking Statements

This news release contains “forward-looking” statem ents and information relating to the Company and the

Macmillan Pass Project that are based on the beliefs of Company management, as well as assumptions made by and

information currently available to Company management. Such statements reflect the current risks, uncertainties and

assumptions related to certain factors including but not limited to, without limitations, exploration and development

risks, expenditure and financing requirements, general economic conditions, changes in financial markets, the ability

Page 4 of 4

to properly and efficiently staff th e Company’s operations, the sufficiency of working capital and funding for

continued operations, title matters, First Nations relati ons, operating hazards, political and economic factors,

competitive factors, metal prices, relationships with ve ndors and strategic partners, governmental regulations and

oversight, permitting, seasonality and weather, technol ogical change, industry practices, and one-time events.

Additional risks are set out in the Company’s prospectus dated May 9, 2017 and filed under the Company’s profile

on SEDAR at www.sedar.com. Should any one or more risks or uncertainties materialize or change, or should any

underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results an d forward-looking statements may vary materially from

those described herein. The Company does not undertake to update forward ‐looking statements or forward ‐looking

information, except as required by law.

APPENDIX: SELECTED LEAD AND ZINC CONCENTRATE ELEMENT ANALYSIS RESULTS**

Element  Symbol  Units  Analytical 

Method 

Global Lead 

Concentrate 

Global Zinc 

Concentrate 

Zinc  Zn  %  AR‐AA  8.3  58.2

Lead  Pb  %  AR‐AA  63.8  2.2

Silver  Ag  g/t  AR‐AA  688  88

Antimony  Sb  ppm  AR‐ICP  642  32

Arsenic  As  ppm  AR‐ICP  152  24

Bismuth  Bi  ppm  AR‐ICP  <2  4

Carbon  C  %  Leco  2.4  0.68

Cadmium  Cd  ppm  AR‐ICP  488  1870

Cobalt  Co  ppm  AR‐ICP  24  20

Chromium  Cr  ppm  AR‐ICP  93  54

Copper  Cu  ppm  AR‐ICP  195  712

Iron  Fe  %  AR‐AA  1.6  1.4

Mercury   Hg  ppm  AR‐ICP  40  155

Manganese  Mn  ppm  AR‐ICP  69  168

Molybdenum  Mo  ppm  AR‐ICP  21  6

Nickel  Ni  ppm  AR‐ICP  71  36

Selenium  Se  ppm  AR‐ICP  46  < 5

Silica  SiO2  %  FUS‐Na2O2 ‐ICP  2.37  3.98

Sulfur  S  %  FUS‐Na2O2 ‐ICP  16  30.8

Vanadium  V  ppm  AR‐ICP  58  29

**Note: Concentrates analyses from Lock Cycle Test BL0236 LCT45 cycle E