Tinone Reports Completion of Successful Phase 1 Drill Program and Discusses Future Plans FOR Its Great Pyramid TIN Project, Tasmania, Australia
TINONE REPORTS COMPLETION OF SUCCESSFUL PHASE 1
DRILL PROGRAM AND DISCUSSES FUTURE PLANS FOR ITS
GREAT PYRAMID TIN PROJECT, TASMANIA, AUSTRALIA
TSX.V: TORC OTCQB: TORCF
VANCOUVER, BC
,
Feb. 2, 2023
/CNW/ -
TinOne Resources Inc.
(TSXV: TORC) (OTCQB: TORCF) ("
TinOne
" or the "
Company
") is
pleased to announce it has completed its Phase 1 drill program at its Great Pyramid Tin (Sn) Project ("
Great Pyramid
" or the "
Project
")
located in the tier one mining jurisdiction of
Tasmania, Australia
.
Drilling has now concluded with a total of 4,687 metres completed and data compilation and modelling are underway. The program has
been successful in continuing to define significant tin mineralization near surface, at depth and adjacent to historical drilling.
Highlights
Great Pyramid mineralization extended to approximately 380 metres below surface.
Interpreted granite source not encountered, therefore mineralization remains entirely open at depth.
Mineral Resources Tasmania geophysical modelling interprets granite at depth below Great Pyramid in the range of 700 – 1300
metres.
Mineralization remains open in all directions laterally.
Integrated stratigraphic-structural model being developed to assist numeric modelling.
"We are very pleased to have completed our Great Pyramid Phase 1 drill program safely and within budget," commented
Chris
Donaldson
, Executive Chairman. "The results of the program have been outstanding in delivering consistent tin intersections from
within the area of historical activity and, importantly, outside this area. These results and geological interpretation indicate that the
Great Pyramid system is of significant scale and has only been partially tested, to date. Our geological team is developing its detailed
interpretation and will be using this information to plan our next phases of drilling which will be focussed on fully testing the system."
Key Results
The 2022 program was designed to:
Test the depth and lateral dimensions of mineralization within the vicinity of the historical drilling and resource estimate;
Obtain grade and continuity data utilising modern drill and analytical techniques, within the area of the historic exploration activity;
and
Test a large-scale IP chargeability anomaly adjacent to the historic resource.
Tables 1 and 2 present full results from the 2022 program and compiled results from all historical drilling known from the Great Pyramid
area. The tables show that the 2022 program returned results in line with historical data and includes outstanding intersections of higher
grade such as:
22GPRC012 78 metres @0.51% Sn (see Company news release
September 06, 2022
)
22GPRC016 51 metres @0.29% Sn (see Company news release
September 06, 2022
)
22GPRC021 14 metres @0.36% Sn (see Company news release
January 18, 2023
)
22GPRC022 15 metres @0.45% Sn (see Company news release
October 11, 2022
).
The 2022 Great Pyramid drill program was highly successful in confirming the presence and tenor of significant tin mineralization in the
area of historical drilling activity and historical resource estimate. Weighted average tin grade for all 2022 recorded intersections
1
was
0.23% Sn which is in accord with historical drill data (Tables 1 and 2).
In addition, the program successfully defined significant mineralization at depth below the historical resource estimate in the area of
sparse historical drilling. Highlights at depth included:
22GPRC003 (see Company news release
November 22, 2022
)
18 metres @0.31% Sn from 308 metres downhole
5.4 metres @0.46% Sn from 330.6 metres downhole
13 metres @0.22% Sn from 359 metres downhole
22GPRC006 (see Company news release
September 06, 2022
)
49 metres @0.17% Sn from 65 metres downhole
Including 8 metres @0.3% Sn from 86 metres downhole
These TinOne drill holes and the historical data have not defined the lower limit of the system, which remains entirely open at depth.
A relatively minor component of the program was directed to testing the lateral extent of mineralization due to access, with the network
of historical drill access tracks being utilized to obtain a more cost effective drill program for this first round of drilling. However, despite
this, the program has also delivered significant results laterally away from the historical drilling and resource estimate, with highlights
including:
22GPRC021 (see Company news release
January 18, 2023
)
40 metres @0.13% Sn from 58 metres downhole
14 metres @0.36% Sn from 128 metres downhole
17 metres @0.21% Sn from 181 metres downhole
22GPRC002 (see Company news release
June 29, 2022
)
14 metres @0.18% Sn from 3 metres downhole
6 metres @0.22% Sn from 24 metres downhole
These drill holes and historical drill data have not defined the lateral limits of the Great Pyramid system, which remains open laterally in
all directions (Figure 2).
_____________________________
1
See Table 1 and 2 notes for parameters.
Three drill holes (22GPDD010, 22GPRC018A, 22GPRC019, 22GPDD023) were drilled (for a total of 1275.9 metres) to test IP
chargeability anomalies to the northeast and east of the area of historical exploration activity. These holes intersected sedimentary rocks
of the Mathinna Supergroup with strong hornfels effects at depth and variable amounts of pyrite (interpreted to be both diagenetic and
hydrothermal) and minor base metal sulphides. No significant tin mineralization was encountered. The chargeability anomalies may be
explained by the presence of pyrite, however more detailed analysis, including petrophysical property measurements, will be undertaken
and integration into the broader Great Pyramid geological model undertaken.
Geological Interpretation
The tin systems of northeastern
Tasmania
are regarded as classical examples of granite-related tin-polymetallic systems (Taylor, R.G.
1979,
The geology of tin deposits
). Well known systems such as Anchor (Taheri and Bottrill, 2005,
Devonian granites and associated
mineralization in northeast and northwest
Tasmania
),
Aberfoyle
2
, Lutwyche
2,
Story's Creek
2
,
Rex Hill
2
(see TinOne news release
July
07, 2022
) and
Royal George
2
are hosted in or directly associated with Devonian granites of the S-type alkali feldspar suite and it is
generally regarded that the granites are the source of hydrothermal fluids and metals for formation of the systems. In the
Aberfoyle
,
Lutwyche and Story's Creek systems, the bulk of mineralization is hosted in Mathinna Supergroup sedimentary rocks above the granite
body, with deeper mining levels and drilling demonstrating the connection. In these systems a clear zoning from tin-rich at higher levels
above the granite zoning downward to higher tungsten content adjacent to and within the granite. The
Aberfoyle
system is known over a
vertical extent of in excess of 300 metres.
It is highly significant that in most respects (mineralogy, metal association, alteration character), the Great Pyramid system conforms to
the granite-related model, yet no granite has yet been encountered in the project area.
Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT) developed an integrated geophysical and geological model for the Scamander Mineral Field,
including Great Pyramid (Scamander 3D geological and geophysical model). The Great Pyramid system occurs on a steep gradient
("shoulder") in the MRT model, and the model estimated that the upper granite surface exists at between 700 and 1300 metres below
the Great Pyramid system (Figure 3).
(
https://www.mrt.tas.gov.au/geoscience/3d_geological_and_geophysical_modelling/scamander_3d_geological_and_geophysical_modelling
).
The TinOne 2022 drill program provided support for this model and the granite association of the Great Pyramid system with the key
evidence being the consistent presence in deeper holes of spotted hornfels
3
. However, despite drilling to depths of almost 400 metres
below surface, no granite has yet been encountered at Great Pyramid. In the other Mathinna Supergroup hosted systems in
Tasmania
(e.g.
Aberfoyle
, Lutwyche, Story's Creek), mineralization continues to the granite contact and also within the granite. By comparison (and
in context of the MRT model and observed geology), it can be interpreted that the Great Pyramid system may extend for a significant
distance below current drill levels and potentially continue into the interpreted underlying granite.
____________________________
2
See
https://tinone.ca/project/aberfoyle-tin-resource/
3
Hornfels – a contact metamorphic rock formed by the heating of sedimentary (or other) rocks by the intrusion of a magma, including granite.
The mineralization encountered to date at Great Pyramid is interpreted to have two inter-related control mechanisms (Figure 4).
1
.
Structure - north easterly striking, steeply dipping structures (TinOne observations, historical exploration reports by Aberfoyle Ltd
and BHP Ltd) that transect the sedimentary package and are interpreted to have acted as conduits for mineralizing hydrothermal
fluids arising from the granite at depth.
2
.
Sedimentary rock type - not all of the sedimentary sequence is equally favourable for the production of elevated tin grades and
therefore certain units are more strongly mineralized. These units tend to be the more quartz-rich sandstone parts of the sequence
and it is interpreted that their brittle fracture patterns within the favourable structural domains promotes mineralization. A challenge
is that the Mathinna Supergroup sedimentary rocks were strongly folded at a time before intrusion of the granite magma and
formation of the related mineralization.
The interaction of the folded sedimentary geometries, structural zones and interpreted granite is schematically shown in Figure 4. The
figure highlights the potential geometries and relationships expected at Great Pyramid and illustrates why in some places the
mineralization is more laterally continuous than in other places. The figure also illustrates that, based on knowledge from other deposits
in northeastern
Tasmania
, mineralization could be expected to continue in favourable host rocks into the interpreted granite contact.
Next Steps
With the successful completion of the Phase 1 drill program, the TinOne technical team has significantly advanced its understanding of
the Great Pyramid system and focus has now shifted to interpretation and integration of the various data sets. This interpretation and
modelling phase will develop an understanding of the inter-related controls discussed above and guide more efficient targeting of
additional drilling and future resource estimation.
TinOne has engaged a PhD-trained expert in the structural geology of northeastern
Tasmania
and a PhD-trained expert sedimentologist
to work together with the TinOne team and an external resource geologist to develop an integrated structural-sedimentological-
geostatistical model. This model will inform additional drilling, principally targeting lateral extensions and a resource estimation at the
appropriate time.
Table 1:
TinOne Resources Great Pyramid RC and core drill results.
Hole
Intersection
width (m)
From
(m)
Sn
(%)
Comments
22GPDD001A
23
0
0.23
Diamond cored hole. Inside historical resource area
26
29
0.22
Diamond cored hole. Inside historical resource area
11
61
0.45
Diamond cored hole. Inside historical resource area
8
120
0.28
Diamond cored hole. Inside historical resource area
5
148
0.38
Diamond cored hole. Below historical resource area
22GPRC002
14
3
0.18
Outside historical resource area
6
24
0.22
Outside historical resource area
22GPRC003
39
3
0.25
Inside historical resource area
Incl
16
18
0.34
18
308
0.31
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
5.4
330.6
0.46
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
13
359
0.22
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
14.1
379.15
0.15
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
6.2
398.8
0.12
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
7.15
420.85
0.16
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
22GPRC004
17
41
0.13
Outside historical resource area
8
243
0.15
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
22GPRC005
30
8
0.26
Inside historical resource area
23
64
0.12
Below historical resource area
22GPRC006
9
48
0.20
Below historical resource area
Incl
8
86
0.30
49
65
0.17
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
29
160
0.15
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
6
238
0.27
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area
13.5
250
0.14
Diamond tail. Below historical resource area. To end of hole
22GPRC007
21
2
0.30
Inside historical resource area, to end of hole, abandoned in
old workings
22GPDD008
8
4
0.20
Diamond cored hole. Inside historical resource area
14
24
0.20
Diamond cored hole. Inside historical resource area
13
134
0.15
Diamond cored hole. Outside historical resource area
4
171
0.25
Diamond cored hole. Outside historical resource area
22GPRC009
No significant mineralization
22GPDD010
Diamond cored hole. No assayed returned yet
22GPRC011
5
1
0.41
Predominantly outside historical resource area
25
12
0.16
Predominantly outside historical resource area
7
42
0.30
Predominantly outside historical resource area
4
82
0.40
Predominantly outside historical resource area
22GPRC012
78
11
0.51
Predominantly outside historical resource area
Incl
23
34
1.09
Outside historical resource area
8
122
0.27
Outside historical resource area
22GPRC013
20
3
0.14
Inside historical resource area
14
36
0.16
Below historical resource area
6
105
0.13
Below historical resource area
22GPRC014
5
16
0.27
Inside historical resource area
12
26
0.20
Inside historical resource area
48.8
87
0.14
Outside historical resource area. Part RC, part diamond tail
5
171
0.13
Diamond tail. Outside historical resource area
22GPDD015
48
12
0.15
Diamond hole. Predominantly within historical resource area
Incl
3
34
0.68
22GPRC016
51
2
0.29
Inside historical resource area
Incl
20
4
0.43
22GPRC017
9
39
0.20
Outside historical resource area
11
66
0.10
Outside historical resource area
22GPRC018A
No significant assays – diamond tail yet to be assayed
22GPRC019
No significant assays
22GPRC021
40
58
0.13
Outside historical resource area
14
128
0.36
Outside historical resource area. Part RC, part diamond tail
17
181
0.21
Outside historical resource area
22GPRC022
15
22
0.45
Inside historical resource area, to end of hole, abandoned in
old workings
22GPDD023
Diamond cored hole. No significant results. Only partially
assayed
22GPRC024
21
16
0.22
Inside historical resource area
14
47
0.10
Inside historical resource area
NOTES: All intersections are calculated with a cut-off grade of 0.1% Sn with maximum consecutive internal waste of 4 metres.
All intersections are downhole widths, true widths are uncertain.
TinOne drill hole numbering is in the form 22GPRCXXX for
reverse circulation (
RC) holes and 22GPRDDXXX for diamond holes with numbering allocated in sequence.
Analytical results have been received for holes 22GPRC002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 007, 009, 011, 012, 013, 014, 016, 017, 018A, 019, 021, 022 and 024. Hole 22GPRC020 failed at 12 metres and was not assayed. The target area for this hole was
drilled by 22GPRC021.
Diamond holes completed to-date and with assays pending are 22GPDD10 and 22GPDD023 (Part). Diamond tail extensions have been completed for RC pre-collar holes 22GPRC003, 22GPRC004, 22GPRC005, 22GPRC006, 22GPRC014
and 22GPRC021 with assays pending for 22GPRC018A.
Table 2:
Great Pyramid historical drill results.
Hole
Intersection
width (m)
From
(m)
Sn
(%)
Year
Company
Comments
18GPD001
52.2
1.5
0.29
2018
TNT Mines Ltd
Diamond hole
11
60
0.11
30
180
0.27
15
234
0.11
BHP001
16.45
22.56
0.20
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP002
15.24
0
0.22
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
10.98
24.38
0.12
1965
BHP
BHP005
16.46
4.27
0.12
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP006
3.66
29.87
0.47
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP007
34.75
0.61
0.25
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP008
14.63
20.73
0.15
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP011
17.07
0
0.23
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP013
13.41
0
0.22
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP014
49.38
9.75
0.14
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP015
6.1
0
0.34
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
9.15
13.41
0.19
1965
BHP
BHP020
32.11
6.9
0.36
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BHP026
29.26
11.58
0.17
1965
BHP
Percussion hole
BPD001
39.4
15.7
0.15
1980
BHP
Diamond hole
BPD002b
28
0
0.21
1980
BHP
Percussion hole
BPD003
24.55
31.7
0.30
1981
BHP
Diamond hole
BPD005
14.8
0
0.17
1981
BHP
Diamond hole
BPD007
19
0
0.16
1981
BHP
Diamond hole
38.61
66.25
0.30
1981
BHP
BPD009a
26.65
21.75
0.18
1981
BHP
Diamond hole
BPD009b
14
4
0.53
1981
BHP
Percussion hole
18
24
0.14
1981
BHP
BPD010
33.3
14.8
0.25
1981
BHP
Diamond hole
BPD011
14.84
22.36
0.11
1981
BHP
Diamond hole
10.74
64.3
0.13
13.75
113.8
0.12
DDS001
16.61
164.59
0.10
1965
BHP
Diamond hole
GPY001
10.66
28.96
0.15
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Diamond hole
GPY002
18.29
3.05
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Diamond hole
24.38
45.72
0.21
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
GPY003
28.95
10.67
0.43
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Diamond hole
35.05
44.2
0.28
GPY005
56.39
0
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Diamond hole
GPY006
44.2
0
0.39
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Diamond hole
MD001
10.66
137.7
0.20
1976
Tas. Mines Dept
Diamond hole
MD003
12
27.88
0.23
1977
Tas. Mines Dept
Diamond hole
MD004
10.82
15.68
0.20
1978
Tas. Mines Dept
Diamond hole
11.07
75.2
0.18
SPG1a
10
30
0.24
1983
Shell
Percussion with diamond tail from 121m
14
72
0.12
42.9
236.7
0.22
10.2
291.8
0.15
H001
16.84
4.5
0.31
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H002
10.67
12.19
0.14
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
9.14
30.48
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H003
9.14
13.72
0.22
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H004
42.67
0
0.22
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H005
30.48
13.72
0.45
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H006
16.77
9.14
0.33
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H007
7.62
1.52
0.35
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
30.48
15.24
0.16
H008
27.43
0
0.29
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
13.72
32
0.25
H010
13.72
1.52
0.34
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
10.67
32
0.11
H014
32.01
1.52
0.25
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H015
21.34
1.52
0.24
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H016
22.86
4.57
0.22
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H017
35.06
1.52
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H018
19.82
9.14
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H019
21.34
0
0.29
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H020
10.67
7.62
0.14
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
12.19
22.86
0.41
H021
10.67
0
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
16.77
19.81
0.15
H022
6.1
0
0.33
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
15.24
12.19
0.17
H024
6.1
0
0.37
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
22.86
10.67
0.21
H025
12.19
6.1
0.16
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H026
24.38
7.62
0.25
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H028
30.48
0
0.18
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H032
9.14
7.62
0.33
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H034
10.67
22.86
0.23
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H036
10.67
1.52
0.20
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H037
18.29
16.76
0.18
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H038
12.19
12.19
0.11
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H041
30.48
0
0.36
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H042
36.58
0
0.26
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H043
28.96
0
0.39
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H044
24.38
0
0.39
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H045
15.24
1.52
0.18
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H046
16.77
4.57
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H047
6.09
3.05
0.34
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H049
15.24
1.52
0.14
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
9.14
30.48
0.14
H051
27.44
1.52
0.49
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H052
22.86
1.52
0.33
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H053
9.15
4.57
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
4.57
18.29
0.58
H054
24.39
4.57
0.72
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H055
25.91
1.52
0.37
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H056
24.38
6.1
0.34
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H057
10.67
7.62
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H061
12.2
1.52
0.18
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H062
32.01
12.19
0.18
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H063
7.62
3.05
0.39
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
10.67
22.86
0.16
H064
9.14
3.05
0.34
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H065
9.15
27.43
0.42
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H066
24.39
1.52
0.25
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H068
12.19
10.67
0.23
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H069
10.67
24.38
0.19
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H072
6.09
6.1
0.48
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H080
10.67
1.52
0.31
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H081
27.43
6.1
0.15
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H082
25.91
15.24
0.34
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H087
16.77
12.19
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H092
10.67
4.57
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H095
16.76
15.24
0.13
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H096
10.66
13.72
0.22
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H097
6.09
21.34
1.23
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H102
10.67
3.05
0.23
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H103
18.29
1.52
0.64
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H105
9.15
9.14
0.35
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
10.66
28.96
0.18
H107
10.67
24.38
0.12
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H108
21.34
4.57
0.18
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
12.19
30.48
0.15
H109
10.67
3.05
0.20
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H111
10.67
10.67
0.86
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
9.15
27.43
0.21
H114
13.72
19.81
0.19
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H122
27.43
3.05
0.26
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H123b
39.62
3.05
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H124
10.67
25.91
0.19
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H126
7.62
21.34
0.45
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H128
9.14
3.05
0.27
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H130
10.67
15.24
0.23
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
9.14
30.48
0.15
H131
10.67
3.05
0.43
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H132
27.43
6.1
0.22
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
H135
10.66
21.34
0.14
1970
Aberfoyle Ltd
Percussion hole
NOTES: All intersections are calculated with a cut-off grade of 0.1% Sn with maximum consecutive internal waste of 4 metres.
All intersections are downhole widths, true widths are uncertain.
18GPD001 analyzed by lithium borate fusion ICP-MS or XRF.
BHP*** series holes analyzed at an unknown laboratory by unknown method.
BPD*** series holes analyzed at ALS Brisbane by XRF.
DDS001 analysed at BHP Newcastle, method unknown.
GPY*** series holes analyzed at the Aberfoyle Mine laboratory at Rossarden, method unknown.
MD*** series holes analyzed at Tasmania Mine Department laboratory in Launceston, method unknown.
SPG1a analysed at Comlabs, method unknown.
H*** series holes analyzed at the Aberfoyle Mine laboratory at Rossarden, method unknown.
The reader is cautioned that the historical drill results are based on prior data and reports prepared by previous property owners. The reader is cautioned not to treat them, or any part of them, as current and that a qualified person has not done
sufficient work to verify the results and that they may not form a reliable guide to future results. Specifically, in most cases, analytical techniques are not known and no QA/QC protocols are known for most drill holes and as such analytical
results may be unreliable. Drill core from historic diamond drill holes DDS001, BPD001, BPD003, BPD005, BPD007, BPD009A, BPD010, BPD011, GPY001, GPY002, GPY003, GPY004, GPY006, MD001, MD003, MD004, SPG1A and
18GPD001 is available in the Mineral Resources Tasmania drill core storage facility for viewing and limited sampling.
Figure 1: Location of the Company’s projects in the mining friendly jurisdiction of Tasmania (CNW Group/TinOne Resources Corp.)
Figure 2: Great Pyramid drill hole plan showing Sn grades and key selected intersections. The mineralization is open in all directions
laterally and at depth. (CNW Group/TinOne Resources Corp.)
Figure 3: Oblique view of Mineral Resources Tasmania granite surface model showing the location of the Great Pyramid system at 700-
1300 metres above the modelled granite contact on a “shoulder” position.
By comparison with other systems in northeastern Tasmania, it
is possible that the Great Pyramid system continues at depth into the granite contact zone. (CNW Group/TinOne Resources Corp.)
Figure 4: Great Pyramid conceptual model, showing the interaction of the two principal local controls on mineralization (i.e. favourable
sedimentary units and feeder fault structures).
Detailed work is underway to define these controls in detail to guide further drilling and
resource estimation. (CNW Group/TinOne Resources Corp.)
About the Great Pyramid Tin Project
Geological Setting
The Great Pyramid deposit is located around a topographical feature known as Pyramid Hill and is hosted by Silurian to Devonian
Mathinna Supergroup sandstones. The mineralization is formed by closely spaced sheeted northeast trending, cassiterite (SnO
) bearing
veins associated with silicification and sericite-pyrite alteration. The deposit style and regional comparisons suggest that a tin-fertile
granite exists at depth below the deposit, however this has not been encountered in drilling and the deposit is open at depth. Geological
interpretation indicates that certain sedimentary units within the folded Mathinna Supergroup sediments are more favourable hosts and
diamond drilling being undertaken by the Company during the current campaign, combined with numerical modelling, will assist in
developing a deeper understanding of controls on grade for follow-up drilling.
The deposit is currently known over a strike length of more than 500 metres with an average width of approximately 150 metres. The
depth extent of the deposit is unknown with only nine historical drill holes greater than 150 metres deep. These rare deeper holes
encountered encouraging tin mineralization to depths of approximately 300 metres below surface
2
.
Historic Resources and Drill Data
1
A historical mineral resource estimate was completed on the Great Pyramid Project (the "
Historical Estimate
") for TNT Mines
Ltd.
1,2,3,4,5
(Table 2).
Table 2:
Historical Estimate on the Great Pyramid Project
1,2,3,4,5
Great Pyramid Inferred Mineral Resource - JORC 2012
Sn% CUT OFF
TONNES (Mt)
GRADE (Sn%)
CONTAINED TIN (kt)
0.1
5.2
0.2
10.4
NOTES
1. Source: "Inferred Mineral Resource for the Great Pyramid Tin Deposit in Tasmania, Abbott, 2014" prepared by Jonathon Abbott of MPR for Niuminco Group Ltd. The effective date for the Historical Estimate is February 26, 2014.
2. The Historical Estimate was prepared using the 2012 Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee Code (JORC). The Historical Estimate was not completed using CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves and is not supported
by a technical report completed in accordance with National Instrument 43-101.
3. The estimation of the Historical Estimate utilized close spaced historic percussion (~85%) and lesser diamond drill holes with drill spacing in the estimation area typically 15 x 30m and locally closer. The Inferred Resource was estimated using
Multiple Indicator Kriging method of 1.5 metre down-hole composites within a mineralized domain interpreted from tin grade. Continuity of tin grades was characterised by indicator variograms at 14 indicator thresholds. The estimates are
extrapolated a maximum of approximately 30 metres from drilling. Gemcom software was used for data compilation, domain wireframing, and coding of composite values, and GS3M was used for resource estimation. Resources were estimated
into 15 by 30 by 3 m blocks (across strike, strike, vertical) aligned with the 067o trending drilling grid. Planview dimensions of the blocks approximate average drill hole spacing. For precise volume representation, resource estimates include the
proportion of block volumes within the mineralized domain below surface. The modelling included a three-pass octant-based search strategy. Search ellipsoid radii (across strike, along strike, vertical) and minimum data requirements for these
searches were: Search 1: 20 by 20 by 4 m (16 data), Search 2: 30 by 30 by 6 m (16 data), Search 3:30 by 30 by 6 (8 data). Model validation included visual comparison of model estimates and composite grades, and trend (swath) plots, along
with comparison with estimates from alternative estimation methodologies and previous model estimates. The Historical Estimate is restricted to the area of close spaced drilling and 90% of the resource occurs within 40 metres of surface.
Although the limited deeper drilling has encountered mineralized material this was not included in the Historical Estimate. The mineralized domain wireframe used to constrain the estimates was primarily interpreted on the basis of tin assay grades
and restricts estimates to the volume tested by reasonably close spaced drilling. The wireframe was trimmed by the cross-cutting dyke and soil units interpreted from drill hole logging and geological mapping. Investigation of alternative
interpretations included resource estimation with assumed dominant mineralization controls varying from flat lying to steeply west dipping. These models did not give significantly different total estimates.
4. The reader is cautioned that the Historical Estimate is considered historical in nature and as such, is based on prior data and reports prepared by previous property owners. The reader is cautioned not to treat them, or any part of them, as
current mineral resources or reserves. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the Historical Estimates as current resources and TinOne is not treating the Historical Estimates as current resources. Significant data compilation,
re-drilling, re-sampling and data verification may be required by a qualified person before the Historical Estimates can be classified as a current resource. There can be no assurance that any of the historical mineral resources, in whole or in part,
will ever become economically viable. In addition, mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. Even if classified as a current resource, there is no certainty as to whether further exploration will
result in any inferred mineral resources being upgraded to an indicated or measured mineral resource category.
5. The Company has determined that the Historical Estimate is reliable, and relevant to be included here because it was estimated using close spaced drilling with modern geostatistical methods and software by an experienced resource geologist
and provides a guide to the location of the Great Pyramid mineralized zone. This will be used to assist in targeting drilling to undertake testing of the extent and grade of the mineralized system.
Quality Assurance / Quality Control
Drill core and RC samples were shipped to ALS Limited in
Brisbane, Australia
for sample preparation and for analysis. The ALS
Brisbane facilities are ISO 9001 and ISO/IEC 17025 certified. Tin and tungsten are analysed by ICP-MS following lithium borate fusion
(ALS method ME-MS85), overlimit results are reanalysed by XRF (ALS method XRF15b). Forty-eight element multi-element analyses
are conducted by ICP-MS with a four-acid digestion (ALS method ME-MS61).
Control samples comprising certified reference samples, duplicates and blank samples were systematically inserted into the sample
stream and analyzed as part of the Company's quality assurance / quality control protocol.
About TinOne
TinOne is a TSX Venture Exchange listed Canadian public company with a high-quality portfolio of tin projects in the Tier 1 mining
jurisdictions of
Tasmania
and
New South Wales, Australia
. The Company is focussed on advancing its highly prospective portfolio while
also evaluating additional tin opportunities. TinOne is supported by Inventa Capital Corp.
Qualified Person
The Company's disclosure of technical or scientific information in this press release has been reviewed and approved by Dr.
Stuart
Smith
., Technical Advisor for TinOne. Dr. Smith is a Qualified Person as defined under the terms of National Instrument 43-101.
Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange)
accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This news release includes certain "Forward–Looking Statements" within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995 and "forward–looking information" under applicable Canadian securities laws. When used in this news release, the
words "anticipate", "believe", "estimate", "expect", "target", "plan", "forecast", "may", "would", "could", "schedule" and similar words or
expressions, identify forward–looking statements or information. These forward–looking statements or information relate to, among
other things: the development of the Company's projects, including drilling programs; and future mineral exploration, development and
production.
Forward–looking statements and forward–looking information relating to any future mineral production, liquidity, enhanced value and
capital markets profile of TinOne, future growth potential for TinOne and its business, and future exploration plans are based on
management's reasonable assumptions, estimates, expectations, analyses and opinions, which are based on management's
experience and perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, and other factors that management believes are
relevant and reasonable in the circumstances, but which may prove to be incorrect. Assumptions have been made regarding, among
other things, the price of gold and other metals; no escalation in the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic; costs of exploration and
development; the estimated costs of development of exploration projects; TinOne's ability to operate in a safe and effective manner
and its ability to obtain financing on reasonable terms.
These statements reflect TinOne's respective current views with respect to future events and are necessarily based upon a number of
other assumptions and estimates that, while considered reasonable by management, are inherently subject to significant business,
economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties and contingencies. Many factors, both known and unknown, could cause
actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from the results, performance or achievements that are or may
be expressed or implied by such forward–looking statements or forward-looking information and TinOne has made assumptions and
estimates based on or related to many of these factors. Such factors include, without limitation: the Company's dependence on early
stage mineral projects; metal price volatility; risks associated with the conduct of the Company's mining activities in
Australia
;
regulatory, consent or permitting delays; risks relating to reliance on the Company's management team and outside contractors; risks
regarding mineral resources and reserves; the Company's inability to obtain insurance to cover all risks, on a commercially
reasonable basis or at all; currency fluctuations; risks regarding the failure to generate sufficient cash flow from operations; risks
relating to project financing and equity issuances; risks and unknowns inherent in all mining projects, including the inaccuracy of
reserves and resources, metallurgical recoveries and capital and operating costs of such projects; contests over title to properties,
particularly title to undeveloped properties; laws and regulations governing the environment, health and safety; the ability of the
communities in which the Company operates to manage and cope with the implications of COVID-19; the economic and financial
implications of COVID-19 to the Company; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities;
employee relations, labour unrest or unavailability; the Company's interactions with surrounding communities and artisanal miners; the
Company's ability to successfully integrate acquired assets; the speculative nature of exploration and development, including the risks
of diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; stock market volatility; conflicts of interest among certain directors and officers; lack of
liquidity for shareholders of the Company; litigation risk; and the factors identified under the caption "Risk Factors" in TinOne's
management discussion and analysis and other public disclosure documents. Readers are cautioned against attributing undue
certainty to forward–looking statements or forward-looking information. Although TinOne has attempted to identify important factors
that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be anticipated, estimated or
intended. TinOne does not intend, and does not assume any obligation, to update these forward–looking statements or forward-looking
information to reflect changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or any other events affecting such statements or
information, other than as required by applicable
SOURCE
TinOne Resources Corp.
View original content to download multimedia:
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/February2023/02/c4415.html
%SEDAR: 00048559E
For further information:
and to sign-up to the mailing list, please contact: Chris Donaldson, Executive Chairman, Tel: (604) 813-3931,
Email: [email protected]
CO: TinOne Resources Corp.
CNW 08:00e 02-FEB-23