ACN 119 057 457
AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES EXCHANGE ANNOUNCEMENT
26 July 2021
FIRST DRILL-HOLE AT RYBERG INTERSECTS SIGNIFICANT SULPHIDE MINERALISATION HIGHLIGHTS
- Hole MIDD001 is the first ever drill-hole at the Ryberg Project and has been successfully completed, intersecting significant sulphide mineralisation from 78.24m to 133.12m (for a total of 54.88m) downhole.
- Sulphides are present in semi-massive, matrix, vein and disseminated forms. The most abundant zone of mineralisation is between 117-124m downhole that contains approximately 4.5m of sulphide-bearing rock.
- Preliminary investigations indicate that mineralisation may consist mostly of pyrrhotite and pentlandite, plus minor chalcopyrite which is a typical magmatic sulphide assemblage.
- MIDD001 was collared on electromagnetic (EM) target ME1, within the Miki magmatic sulphide prospect.
- Drill core will be processed and assayed as soon as possible.
- The second drill-hole MIDD002 is near completion, and rigs have been established on holes MIDD003 and MIDD004, all of which are targeting magmatic sulphides at the Miki Prospect.
Conico Limited (ASX: CNJ) ("Conico" or "the Company") and its wholly owned subsidiary Longland Resources Ltd ("Longland") are pleased to announce preliminary results from drill-hole MIDD001, the first ever drill-hole to at the Ryberg Project designed to test a magmatic sulphide target.
The drill-hole encountered a sequence of highly altered gneiss intruded by mafic rock that contains zones of intense sulphide mineralisation (figures 1,2 & 3), commencing at 117m drilled depth. In aggregate the sulphide-rich portions of the drill core cover a width of approximately 4.5m and consist of non-pyritic sulphide that is likely to be pyrrhotite and pentlandite, plus minor chalcopyrite - therefore prospective for nickel and copper. The results are preliminary in nature as no drill core has yet been sent for analysis, with results in this announcement coming from observation of the core by a suitably qualified and experienced geologist.
Longland CEO Mr Thomas Abraham-James said:
"I would like to start by saying thank you to the shareholders and directors of Conico for putting their faith in Longland Resources when they acquired the company last year. We are a greenfields exploration company in a location far from Australia, they saw what I did in the potential of our Greenland assets. I take tremendous satisfaction in the first ever drill-hole to occur at Ryberg encountering significant sulphide mineralisation."
The Ryberg Project is located on the east coast of Greenland (Figure 4) approximately 350km NW of Iceland. Longland (a wholly owned subsidiary of Conico) is the 100% owner and operator of the licences that cover an area of 4,521km2.
The current drilling program is focussed on two priority targets at Ryberg that commenced in July. The prospects are:
- The Miki Prospect (Cu-Ni-Co-Pd-Au): Magmatic sulphide mineralisation associated with mafic dykes/sills that have intruded through Archean basement gneiss and Cretaceous sediments. There are well developed showings of copper-palladium-gold-rich sulphides at surface, with mineralisation occurring as globular sulphides up to ~15 cm in diameter consisting of pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite. Grab samples from surface returned up to 2.2% copper, 0.8% nickel, 3.3g/t palladium and 0.15 g/t gold. A second nickel-rich sulphide phase is also present, with surface samples grading up to 0.8% nickel and 0.1% cobalt.
- The Sortekap Prospect (Au-Ni): Gold mineralisation is present at surface and is associated with quartz veins within Archean amphibolite, with surface samples grading up to 2.7 g/t Au. The mineralised veins trend ENE-WSW and appear in rusty bands in the field, caused by the oxidation of sulphides associated with the veins. Three sulphide phases have been identified which are arsenopyrite, pyrite and minor chalcopyrite. Adjacent to the gold veins is an ultramafic intrusion exhibiting magmatic sulphides with surface samples grading up to 0.33% nickel.
This ASX Announcement contains preliminary results from the first hole drilled at the Miki Prospect magmatic sulphide target. There are three diamond drill rigs on site that commenced drilling on the 19th of July 2021, with the first hole MIDD001 completed on the 25th July and the second and third holes (MIDD002 & MIDD003) currently underway. All holes are targeting the Miki Prospect however one rig is scheduled to mobilise to the Sortekap Prospect later in the season.
Hole MIDD001 was drilled at an 80 angle using a CDI 500 heli-portable diamond drill rig from surface (Figure 6). The hole encountered ice until 30m drilled depth, then immediately entered Archaean gneiss that persists for the majority of the hole except where it is intruded by a coarse grained equi-granular rock between 117-124m drilled depth, the rock is likely to be mafic gabbro and is coincident with the zone of most sulphide mineralisation that contains approximately 4.5m of sulphide-bearing rock (Figure 7). It is worth noting however that sporadic pyrrhotite-pentlandite (plus minor chalcopyrite) is visible further up the hole in the form of fine veins and disseminations, and further downhole as matrix breccia and fine veins.
Further mineralogical analysis is required but drill core observations indicate that sulphides are non-pyritic, most depicting varying shades of bronze colours, low hardness, slightly magnetic and are therefore compatible with pyrrhotite-pentlandite assemblages, plus minor chalcopyrite.
The sulphide mineralisation which extends over 54.88m shows gradational textural characteristics with increasing sulphide content. In order starting from shallow to deep the visible sulphides consist of:
- Fine veins (mm to cm scale)
- Numerous commencing at 78.24m drilled depth
- Sulphide matrix breccias (~30% sulphide)
- 100.91-101.59m downhole
- 120.66-121.41m downhole
- 121.83-121.88m downhole
- 132.77-133.12m downhole
- Disseminated
- 117.10-117.20m downhole
- Semi-massive sulphide (30-50% sulphide)
- 117.5-120.47m downhole
- 121.41-121.83m downhole
All Miki Prospect drill-holes planned for this season are targeting modelled plates interpreted by geophysicist Kim Frankcombe from EM data acquired in 2020 (Figures 5 & 6). The interpretation concluded that three modelled plates satisfy the EM signal and are collectively referred to as the ME1 target. The three plates form a U shape that may represent sulphides accumulated along the base of a chonolith (intrusive conduit that channels magma) that is 300m wide and open along strike to the west. Drill-hole MIDD001 was drilled on the western margin of the southern-most plate and the mafic rocks intersected between 117-124m may represent the margin of the interpreted chonolith.
Drill-hole MIDD001 was terminated at 217m depth in un-mineralised gneiss. The core is in the process of being cut, then sampled and sent for assay this week. Assays are anticipated to be received in 4-6 weeks, pending turnaround time at the assay laboratory.
In addition to the drilling, a regional 200m line spaced heli-borne magnetic survey is underway.
Guy T Le Page, FFIN, MAusIMM
Executive Director
COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT
The information contained in this report relating to exploration results relates to information compiled or reviewed by Thomas Abraham-James, a full-time employee of Longland Resources Ltd. Mr. Abraham-James has a B.Sc. Hons (Geol) and is a Chartered Professional (CPGeo) and Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (FAusIMM). Mr. Abraham-James has sufficient experience of relevance to the styles of mineralisation and the types of deposit under consideration, and to the activities undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the Joint Ore Reserve Committee (JORC) "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves". Mr. Abraham-James consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on information in the form and context in which it appears.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This announcement contains forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements are expressed in good faith and believed to have a reasonable basis. These statements reflect current expectations, intentions or strategies regarding the future and assumptions based on currently available information. Should one or more of the risks or uncertainties materialise, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary from the expectations, intentions and strategies described in this announcement. No obligation is assumed to update forward-looking statements if these beliefs, opinions and estimates should change or to reflect other future developments.
Annexure 1
| Drill-hole |
Easting |
Northing |
Elevation |
Dip |
Azimuth |
Length |
| MIDD001 |
565,714 |
7,571,884 |
298m |
-80 |
215 |
217m |
Annexure 2
JORC Code, 2012 Edition
Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data
| Criteria | JORC Code Explanation | Commentary |
Sampling
techniques | Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. |
* Sampling of MIDD001 was conducted using standard industry practices with diamond drilling. |
| | Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. |
* Drill-hole MIDD001 was angled to optimally intersect the interpreted electromagnetic conductor. |
| | Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. |
* Mineralisation in drill-hole MIDD001 has not been quantitively determined and is awaiting assay. The determination in this report is qualitative, based on visual observation made by the Competent Person who is a geologist on site. |
| Drilling techniques | Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g. 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.). |
* Wireline diamond drilling using a 56.5mm drill bit and standard tube. The core has not been orientated but will be surveyed using a Reflex EZ-Track multi-shot tool upon completion. The drill rig is a CDI heli-portable fly rig operated by Cartwright Drilling Inc. |
| Drill sample recovery | Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. |
* All drill core has been geotechnically logged with core recovery measured per drill core run (3m). The core recovery is excellent, averaging 98% for the drill-hole. |
| | Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. |
* The drill crew was notified of the target depth and likelihood of intersecting sulphides, accordingly they eased pressure on the drill bit from that depth onward to minimise the chance of core destruction. All drill core was then placed in trays with lids to ensure that no core was lost during transportation from the drill site to core logging facility. The drill core was then reconstructed into continuous runs on an angle iron cradle by the geologist. Depths were checked against depths indicated on the core blocks. |
| | 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. |
* Not applicable as no assays have been conducted to date. |
| Logging | Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. |
* All drill core has been geologically and geotechnically logged by a qualified geologist to a level of detail that supports appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. |
| | Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography. |
* The logging is qualitative. All drill core was photographed. |
| | The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. |
* Drill-hole MIDD001 was logged in full. |
| Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation | If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. |
* No sampling has been undertaken. |
| | If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. |
* Not applicable as the drill-hole is core. |
| | For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. |
* Not applicable as no sampling has been undertaken. |
| | Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. |
* Not applicable as no sampling has been undertaken. |
| | 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. |
* Not applicable as no sampling has been undertaken. |
| | Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. |
* Not applicable as no sampling has been undertaken. |
| Quality of assay data and laboratory tests | The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. |
* Not applicable as no assaying has occurred. |
| | For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. |
* Not applicable as no such tools have been used. |
| | Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. |
* Not applicable as no sampling or assaying has occurred. |
| Verification of sampling and assaying | The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. |
* Consultants utilized by the Company have verified the findings of the on-site geologists. |
| | The use of twinned holes. |
* Not applicable as no twinned holes have been drilled. |
| | Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. |
* All logging data was entered into a computer on site, with daily backups taken and stored on hard drives and the cloud. |
| | Discuss any adjustment to assay data. |
* Not applicable as no assaying has occurred. |
| Location of data points | Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. |
* Drill-hole MIDD001 was located using a handheld Garmin GPS with an accuracy of ±4m. |
| | Specification of the grid system used. |
* UTM WGS84 Zone 25N. |
| | Quality and adequacy of topographic control. |
* Topographic information was sourced from the Greenland Mapping Project (GIMP) digital elevation model (30m accuracy). |
| Data spacing and distribution | Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. |
* Not applicable as only MIDD001 has been drilled on this particular electromagnetic target. |
| | 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. |
* Not applicable as only MIDD001 has been drilled on this particular electromagnetic target. |
| | Whether sample compositing has been applied. |
* Not applicable as no sampling has occurred. |
| Orientation of data in relation to geological structure | Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. |
* The strike and dip of drill-hole MIDD001 was designed to intersect the electromagnetic target at an adjacent angle, not along strike. Therefore the sampling conducted by the drill-hole is considered unbiased. |
| | 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. |
* There are no known biases caused by the orientation of drill-hole MIDD001. |
| Sample security | The measures taken to ensure sample security. |
* The drill core is stored onboard the Company's charter vessel which is considered highly secure. |
| Audits or reviews | The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. |
* No audits or reviews have been carried out at this time. |
Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
| Mineral tenement and land tenure status | Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. |
* The Ryberg Project is wholly within Mineral Exploration Licences 2017/06 and 2019/38, located on the east coast of Greenland. They are held 100% by Longland Resources Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Conico Ltd. |
| | The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. |
* The tenure is secure and in good standing at the time of writing. There are no known impediments. |
| Exploration done by other parties | Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. |
* Previous work mentioned (2017 VTEM survey) was planned and managed by Longland Resources Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Conico Ltd.
* Historic rock-chip sampling was conducted by Platina Resources Ltd and University of Leicester. |
| Geology | Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. |
* Deposit type: Magmatic.
* Geological setting: The project area is located within the North Atlantic Igneous Province (NAIP), a Tertiary volcanic centre that covered an area of approximately 1.3 million km2 in continental flood basalts (6.6 million km3 in volume), making it one of the largest volcanic events in history. Volcanism is associated with the opening of the North Atlantic, and presence of a mantle plume (what is now the Icelandic hotspot). The project area represents an erosional interface where the flood basalts have been removed, revealing the basement geology beneath. The project area is adjacent to a triple junction (failed rift) and consists of Archaean orthogneiss, Tertiary gabbro/flood basalt, and Cretaceous-Tertiary sediments (rift valley basin). Approximately 70% of the geology within the sedimentary basin has been intruded by Tertiary sills that are feeders to the overlying plateau basalts. There are also feeder dykes, and layered mafic intrusions - it is likely that there is also a large ultramafic body present at depth, evidence for this is in the form of ultramafic xenoliths brought to surface by magma conduits.
* Style of mineralisation: magmatic copper and nickel sulphides with appreciable cobalt, palladium and gold. |
| Drill hole Information | A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:
- easting and northing of the drill hole collar
- elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar
- dip and azimuth of the hole
- down hole length and interception depth
- hole length.
|
* Refer to Annex 1. |
| | If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case. |
* This is not the case. |
| Data aggregation methods | In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.
Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. |
* Not applicable as no sampling or assaying has occurred. |
| | The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. |
* Not applicable as no sampling or assaying has occurred. |
| Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths | - These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.
- If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.
- If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'down hole length, true width not known'). |
* The geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill-hole angle is not known. All reported lengths are in reference to down-hole length, true width not known. |
| Diagrams | Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. |
* Refer to Figures 5 and 6. |
| Balanced reporting | Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results. |
* Not applicable as no sampling or assaying has occurred. |
| Other substantive exploration data | Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. |
* Previous exploration results are detailed in:
Conico Ltd press release on the 11th December 2020, entitled 'EM Survey Reveals Highly Prospective Chonolith at Ryberg'.
Conico Ltd press release on the 29th July 2020, entitled 'Conico to acquire East Greenland projects via acquisition of Longland Resources'.
Holwell et al, Mineralium Deposita, 2012, 47:3-21. |
| Further work | The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). |
* The Company is in the process of acquiring (200m line spacing) regional magnetic data over the entirety of the licence areas.
* Diamond drilling testing for lateral extensions of mineralisation, and large-scale step-out drilling. |
| | Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. |
* Refer to Figures 5 and 6. |
26.07.2021 Dissemination of a Corporate News, transmitted by DGAP - a service of EQS Group AG.
The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.
The DGAP Distribution Services include Regulatory Announcements, Financial/Corporate News and Press Releases.
Archive at www.dgap.de
CONICO LTD 
