Announcement PDF ASX Release 19 May 2023 Gold-Antimony-Arsenic Association identified at Rushworth Gold Project Dart Mining NL (ASX:DTM) (“Dart Mining” or “the Company”) has determined that antimony and arsenic co-occur with gold mineralisation at the Phoenix Hill prosect, Rushworth, indicating similarities in the mineralisation style to several nearby significant gold mines. Highlights ▪ Drill chips from previous Reverse Circulation drilling completed at the Phoenix Hill prospect at Rushworth, Central Victoria have been re-assayed by multielement methods ▪ Sample assays indicate that gold mineralisation co-occurs with antimony & arsenic, providing similarities to the nearby Fosterville gold mine ▪ Peak assay values include 10.6 g/t Au, 0.26% Sb, & 370 ppm As ▪ These data also provide information on notable pathfinder elements for soil sampling undertaken across the Rushworth Goldfield Chairman, James Chirnside commented: “This fundamental exploration approach and results is very important in establishing the elemental pathfinder relationships that are so essential to forward looking exploration activities. The fact that Dart holds 100% of this important historic Goldfield is as exciting as it is prospective”. Visit our webpage: www.dartmining.com.au Find us on LinkedIn: Dart Mining NL For more information, contact: James Chirnside, Managing Director Email: jchirnside@dartmining.com.au Phone: +61 447 447 613 Dart Mining NL ABN: 84 119 904 880 412 Collins Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Page | 1 MULTIELEMENT ASSAY RESULTS Reverse Circulation (RC) drill chips obtained from drilling undertaken by Dart Mining across the Phoenix Hill prospect in Rushworth, Central Victoria (DTM ASX April 2023; DTM ASX April 2021; Figure 1), have been re-assayed by various techniques providing important insights into the nature of the mineralisation system. All 1253 drill pulps representing 1 metre drilling intervals were analysed by portable X-Ray Fluorescence (pXRF), with a subset of 270 samples submitted for multielement analysis by four-acid digest, and 65 samples submitted for 50g fire assay to provide comparison to the 2kilogram cyanide leach analysis reported in DTM ASX April 2021. Results of the pXRF analysis of As and Sb (validated by laboratory-based four acid digest) analysis demonstrate that gold mineralisation co-occurs with elevated arsenic and antimony (Figure 2). Downhole plots show a clear concordance in Au, As and Sb, with peak As and Sb enrichment occurring with elevated Au values (Figure 2). This is notable as observations of sulphides in the Rushworth Goldfield have been rare to date, although Cherry (1994) noted that stibnite was the primary sulphide species, with lesser arsenopyrite and pyrite. Trace pyrite was identified in drill chips, primarily diagenetic pyrite associated with black shales encountered at depth in hole RARC09, although rare arsenopyrite was also observed in addition to rare visible gold in drill chips and panned from pulps (Figure 3). The general absence of sulphides across most holes is attributed to the generally shallow nature of the 44 holes drilled across the project, almost all of which remained within the oxide zone. Figure 1 – Location of the Phoenix Hill project on an enhanced digital terrain model (eDTM) derived from LiDAR data across the Rushworth area (DTM ASX April 2023). Page | 2 Figure 2 – Selected downhole plots for Au, As and Sb assays for RC holes drilled at Phoenix Hill. See DTM ASX April 2021 for further details on the RC drilling program and reported assays. Figure 3 – Gold panned from a 0.4kg sub-sample collected from drilled interval 18 - 19m in RDRC03, which assayed at 7.0 g/t Au. Page | 3 VALIDATION OF ANALYTICAL METHODS Comparison of four acid digest and pXRF data for As and Sb demonstrate that the pXRF results provide an accurate representation of the drill pulp composition (Figure 4). Comparison of samples run through a 50g fire assay method compared to those processed by the 2kg cyanide leach demonstrates that the 50g fire assay produces results that are representative of the gold mineralisation, although some outliers in this data show that the fire assay under-reports some of the higher-grade gold mineralisation in this nuggety-gold dominated system (Figure 4). Figure 4 – Validation of assay methods. A) Comparison of As values by pXRF and four-acid digest (ALS method ME-MS61). B) Comparison of Sb values by pXRF and four-acid digest (ALS method ME-MS61). C) Comparison of Au methods, showing that 50g fire assay provided a consistent result compared with a 2kg cyanide leach, although some higher-grade assays are under-reported by the fire-assay method in the nuggety style of gold mineralisation. Page | 4 PROJECT OVERVIEW The Rushworth Goldfield is located in Central Victoria, 140 km north of Melbourne, and 65 km east of Bendigo. The Rushworth Goldfield is well-exposed, with the host strata exposed at surface. These strata have been tightly folded into upright, east-west trending folds, and two primary lines of goldquartz veining that extend for a cumulative strike length of approximately 14 km. Gold mineralisation is interpreted to be an orogenic, epizonal style similar to that forming high-grade gold shoots at the nearby Fosterville Mine. Within the Rushworth Goldfield, mineralised quartz veins have been intersected at depths below 400m in a limited number of historical workings, and up to 200m in modern drill holes. Historical workings rarely proceeded beyond the water table, leaving most veins untouched at depth. Following the recent success at Fosterville, and the currently heightened state of interest in Victorian goldfields, competition for tenure in this area of Central Victoria is fierce. Dart Mining’s strategic 254 km2 landholding in Central Victoria spans the entire historic Rushworth Goldfield, and is bordered by Chalice Goldmines to the northwest, and Nagambie Resources to the south and east. Figure 5 – Location of the Rushworth orogenic gold project, Central Victoria. References Cherry (1994). Report on Geological Investigations on ELs 3155, 3130, 3055 and 3056, Rushworth, Central Victoria. New Holland Mining NL October 1994. Page | 5 Approved for release by the board of directors. For more information contact: James Chirnside Managing Director Dart Mining NL jchirnside@dartmining.com.au +61 447 447 613 Peter Taylor Investor Relations NWR Communications peter@nwrcommunications.com.au +61 412 036 231 About Dart Mining Dart Mining’s (ASX: DTM) objective is in exploring, evaluating, and developing, several historic goldfields, as well as validating a new porphyry province in Northeast Victoria. The area is prospective for precious, base, battery, and other strategic metals. These include Lithium, Gold, Silver, Copper, Molybdenum, Zinc, Tungsten, Tin, Tantalum, and other important minerals. Dart Mining has built a strategically important gold exploration footprint in the Central and Northeast regions of Victoria, where historic surface and alluvial gold mining proves the existence of a significant regional gold endowment. ––– END ––– Competent Person’s Statement The information in this report has been compiled, and verified by Dr. Ben Hines PhD, MSc, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Dr. Hines is the Exploration Manager for Dart Mining. Dr. Hines has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a competent person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Dr. Hines consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Forward-Looking Statement Certain statements contained in this document constitute forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, Dart Mining’s current expectations, estimates and projections about the industry in which Dart operates, and beliefs and assumptions regarding Dart’s future performance. Such forward-looking statements are based on a number of estimates and assumptions made by the Company and its consultants in light of experience, current conditions and expectations of future developments which the Company believes are appropriate in the current circumstances. When used in this document, words such as; “anticipate”, “could”, “intends”, “estimate”, “potential”, “plan”, “seeks”, “may”, “should”, and similar expressions are forward-looking statements. Although Dart believes that its expectations presented in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, such statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause the actual results, achievements and performance of the Company to be materially different from the future results and achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned that forward-looking information is no guarantee of future performance and accordingly, investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Page | 6 APPENDIX 1 TENEMENT STATUS All tenement applications continue to pass through the approvals process with the tenements remaining in good standing as of the 31st of March 2023 (Table 1.1 – Figure 5). Table 1.1. TENEMENT STATUS MIN006619 Mt View 2 Mining License Area (km2) Unless specified 224 Ha 100% NE Victoria EL5315 Mitta Mitta4 Exploration Licence 148 100% NE Victoria EL006016 Rushworth4 Exploration Licence 32 100% Central Victoria EL006277 Empress Exploration Licence 87 100% NE Victoria EL006300 Eskdale3 Exploration Licence 96 100% NE Victoria EL006486 Mt Creek Exploration Licence 116 100% NE Victoria EL006764 Cravensville Exploration Licence 170 100% NE Victoria EL006861 Buckland Exploration Licence 414 100% NE Victoria EL007007 Union Exploration Licence 3 100% Central Victoria EL006994 Wangara Exploration Licence 190 100% Central Victoria EL007008 Buckland West Exploration Licence 344 100% NE Victoria EL007099 Sandy Creek Exploration Licence 437 100% NE Victoria EL006865 Dart EL (Application) 567 100% NE Victoria EL006866 Cudgewa EL (Application) 508 100% NE Victoria EL007170 Berringama EL (Application) 27 100% NE Victoria EL007430 Buchan EL (Application) 546 100% Gippsland EL007435 Goonerah EL (Application) 587 100% Gippsland EL007425 Deddick EL (Application) 341 100% Gippsland EL007428 Boebuck EL (Application) 355 100% NE Victoria EL007426 Walwa EL (Application) 499 100% NE Victoria EL007754 Tallandoon EL (Application) 88 100% NE Victoria RL006615 Fairley’s2 Retention License 340 Ha 100% NE Victoria RL006616 Unicorn1&2 Retention License 23,243 Ha 100% NE Victoria EL9476 Woomargama Exploration Licence 188 100% New South Wales ELA6536 Yambacoona EL (Application) 549 100% New South Wales ELA6548 Barellan EL (Application) 159 100% New South Wales Tenement Number Name Tenement Type Interest Location All tenements remain in good standing as of 31 March 2023. NOTE 1: Unicorn Project area subject to a 2% NSR Royalty Agreement with Osisko Gold Royalties Ltd dated 29 April 2013. NOTE 2: Areas subject to a 1.5% Founders NSR Royalty Agreement. NOTE 3: Areas are subject to a 1.0% NSR Royalty Agreement with Minvest Corporation Pty Ltd (See DTM ASX Release 1 June 2016). NOTE 4: Areas are subject to a 0.75% Net Smelter Royalty on gold production, payable to Bruce William McLennan. Page | 7 APPENDIX 3 JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION – TABLE 1 SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA Criteria JORC Code Explanation Commentary Sampling techniques • • Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling was used to obtain 1m bulk samples (~30 kg) which were collected in plastic bags and examined for lithological logging purposes. • Samples off the cyclone were split via a riffle splitter and collected in a calico bag, which was removed every 1m to produce 1m composite samples (~ 3.5kg). The cyclone was cleaned out at the end of each hole and periodically during drilling. • In interpreted unmineralised, mineralised or altered zones, 1m samples were submitted for analysis. • Samples submitted to Gekko were whole sample crushed to 90% <2mm, riffle/rotary split off 2.0-2.4 kg, pulverise to >90% passing 75 microns, then assayed by Gekko methods Leachwell (2kg sample by BLEG), followed by FA30 (30g fire assay) on Leachwell tails. • Certified Reference Materials OREAS 235, OREAS 237, OREAS 245, as well as CRM blank OREAS C27e were inserted every 10-25 samples as part of a QA/QC system. • Rock samples were dried, crushed and whole sample pulverized and riffle split. A sample aliquot (2kg) is taken for analysis. Gold has been analysed by Gekko Method Leachwell (BLEG), with fire assay on tails indicating it can be considered a total extraction technique for Au at Rushworth (>99.5% recovery rate of Au in samples) • 44 RC drillholes were drilled by EDrill Pty Ltd limited over the extent of mineralised structures. • Face sampling 5.5” hammer Reverse Circulation drilling • Holes surveyed using an Eastman single shot camera for collar shots. Verified using clinometer and compass survey of rods. • Each 1m sample was weighed and results recorded to monitor sample recovery – a high average recovery was achieved in all holes. • Experienced geologists ensured best drilling and sampling practices were maintained. • Experienced drillers ensured best drilling and sampling practices were maintained, including pausing drilling between sample intervals to ensure all sample is out of the system and regular cleaning of the sampling equipment. • There was no observable relationship between sample recovery and grade. • All holes were logged in their entirety. • • • 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. Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. 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. 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.). Drill sample recovery • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. Measures taken to maximise sample 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. • • Logging • Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and Page | 8 • • Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • • • • • • geotechnically logged to a 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. If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether sampled wet or dry. For all sample types, the nature, quality 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. • Sample sizes are considered appropriate to correctly represent the mineralisation style, and the thickness and consistency of intersections being sampled. • 100% of the drilling was logged. • pXRF soil samples are located by GPS and notes taken where cultural contamination is suspected or sample site is adjacent to historic workings. • Chip/grab samples were logged for qualitative mineral percentages, mineral species and habit, and each sample location is recorded. • All drill related data are referenced to the original ASX report by date published. All details appear in the original report. • RC samples were collected from a riffle splitter mounted directly beneath the cyclone. • RC samples from all intervals were collected as 1m composite samples at the splitting stage at the drill site. • 12.5% of the sample was split with the remainder collected in residue bags. • All RC samples were dry across the whole drill program, largely due to the shallow (30m) nature of the holes. • The RC sampling procedure is appropriate for the mineralisation style of disseminated gold and is better described in the body of the report. 2kg samples were prepared for analysis by Leachwell (BLEG) technique, which is appropriate for the style, setting and grainsize of the material being sampled. • The rock chip sampling procedure is appropriate for the mineralisation style. • The samples were sent to ALS Global Laboratories, Pooraka SA or Gekko Systems, Ballarat, Victoria. • Soil samples are collected from the top of the B-Horizon with a pick and scoop, then dried prior to analysis. pXRF analysis is undertaken on the small sample cup of the soil sample and the results reported in a digital csv file output per sample. Standards and duplicates are inserted at regular intervals and reviewed. • The sample size is considered representative to estimate the local metal content of the soil developed above the disseminated style of gold mineralisation targeted. • Sampling was conducted at a reconnaissance level with regular duplicate and CRM samples inserted for analysis by pXRF. All results are in line with expectations. • Individual <7kg chip / grab samples were collected from outcrop, individual chips making up the sample were <40mm and chipped from a random selection of the mineralisation to generate a representative average sample of the mineralisation targeted. • The whole sample was crushed and pulverised prior to sub-sampling at the laboratory via riffle splitting. • Chip sampling generally collects <7kg of finely chipped rock sample across outcrop or underground openings with the entire sample sent for whole sample crush and grind. The sample size and sub-sampling method is thought suitable for a sulphide Page | 9 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. 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. 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. / fine gold and nuggety gold environment. • All drill related data are referenced to the original ASX report by date published. All details appear in the original report. RC samples • Samples were submitted to Gekko Systems and analysed for gold using the Leachwell method (BLEG), followed by a 30g fire assay (FA30) of BLEG tails to determine BLEG gold recovery rate. • In all instances, Fire Assay showed >99.5% gold recovery by the Leachwell (BLEG) analysis, indicating it can be considered a total extraction technique for gold mineralisation at Rushworth. • Samples were whole sample crushed, pulverised to P90 at 75um and assayed by Gekko Leachwell Method followed by 30g Fire assay (Gekko method FA30) on the Leachwell tails. • Leachwell (BLEG) analysis included 2.0-2.5kg of split sample run through a Leachwell cyanide solution of 50% m/v for 24 hours, with Au determination by Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS) • Fire assay of Leachwell tails were processed by filtering off of Leachwell tail, dried, rolled and sub-sampled to 30g; Lead collection fire assay with silver used as the secondary collector, Au grade determined by AAS. • Orogenic Au standards OREAS 235, OREAS 237, and OREAS 245, as well as rhyodacite blanks (OREAS C27e) were included every 10 – 25 samples as part of the internal QA/QC system. All results are within expected confidence limits. • Gekko Systems conducted their own internal laboratory checks, which included 3 blanks and 6 certified reference materials within each batch of 100 analyses. • Laboratory blanks, standards are reviewed per batch to monitor accuracy and precision. Rock Chip Samples • Samples were submitted to ALS Global (Pooraka) and analysed for gold using ALS methods AU-AA26 (fire assay is considered a total extraction technique for gold) and ME-MS61 (four acid digest is considered a total extraction technique for copper exploration), Cu-OG62 (ore grade copper by three acid digest and HCl leach) and Ag-OG62 (ore grade silver by three acid digest and HCl leach). These techniques are appropriate and considered a total extraction technique for Au & Cu. • Samples were whole sample crushed, pulverised and assayed by ALS method AUAA26, ME-MS61, Cu-OG62 and Ag-OG62. • Au standards OREAS 235, OREAS 237, and OREAS 245, along with porphyry copper standards OREAS 503d, OREAS 504c and OREAS 506, as well as rhyodacite blanks (OREAS C27e) were included every 20 samples as part of the internal QA/QC system. All results are within expected confidence limits. Page | 10 Verification of sampling and assaying • • • • Location of data points • • • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. The use of twinned holes. Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. Discuss any adjustment to assay data. Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and downhole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. Specification of the grid system used. Quality and adequacy of topographic control. • A field duplicate sample was collected every 20 samples and analysed within the same sample run. • ALS conducted their own internal laboratory checks. • Laboratory blanks, standards are reviewed per batch to monitor accuracy and precision. • A direct comparison between internal pXRF and laboratory analysis of arsenic is referenced in the body of the report, a high correlation is evident from the dataset. • QAQC procedures were adopted during the in-house pXRF analysis with regular sample duplicates and CRM inserted, assay data is within expectation. Laboratory analysis only uses internal laboratory CRM results. • Chip and Grab samples were submitted to ALS Chemex and analysed for Au using ALS method Au-AA26 – a fire assay technique for total digestion. • Due to the reconnaissance nature of the sampling, no QAQC procedures were adopted other than internal laboratory CRM. • The laboratory supplies all assay data as an export to a CSV file. The raw data is edited to separate all duplicates and CRM results into a QA/QC tab in the CSV file and reviewed. • Verification of significant intersections were made by alternative company personnel. • No independent review of assay data has been carried out. • Data were logged into spreadsheet and checked. • Electronic-only assay data is imported into a spreadsheet from the laboratory’s electronic data. • No holes were twinned at this early exploration stage. • Below detection limit data is identified in Appendix 1 using a < character followed by the detection limit. • All drill related data are referenced to the original ASX report by date published. All details appear in the original report. • pXRF analysis requires the manual entry into the XRF unit of the Sample number of the soil sample. The sample number and associated analysis is stored as a digital file within the pXRF unit for later export to a CSV file. The raw data is edited to separate all duplicates and CRM results into a QAQC tab in the CSV file and reviewed. <LOD results are also deleted from the dataset to allow numerical fields to be plotted. • The location of drill hole collars and geological mapping confirmed using a Garmin GPSMAP 66i GPS, set to MGA94 Grid Datum (Zone 55) with topographic control taken from the GPS. Accuracy is variable but maintained <3m during the mapping process with constant visual quality assessment conducted. • Hand-held GPS was used to survey a control point and drill hole collar positions are then measured by tape and compass relative to the GPS control. The Page | 11 • • • • • Data spacing and distribution • • • Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. 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 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. 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. • • • • accuracy between holes is <0.5m but absolute accuracy is relative to the original GPS control point at <5m. All maps, plans and data are on an MGA datum and GDA94 zone 55 projection. Elevation is established from the GPS control point. The location of the chip / grab / soil samples and geological mapping used a Garmin GPSMAP 62S GPS using the MGA94 Grid Datum (Zone 55) with topographic control taken from the GPS. Accuracy is variable but maintained <5m during the mapping process with constant visual quality assessment conducted. Mine workings are located using GPS control and then tape and compass survey for underground development. All drill related data are referenced to the original ASX report by date published. All details appear in the original report. Drill sites were restricted to existing tracks. It was not intended to establish a drill spacing for resource estimation although these holes may be used at a later date. All drill related data are referenced to the original ASX report by date published. All details appear in the original report. Soil sample spacing may be variable and is designed to capture variability in the key pathfinder element analysed with respect to the geological model of the mineralisation under review. The regional soil program reported uses a nominal 50m sample spacing as this was considered the maximum spacing that would capture regional mineralisation trends. Soil pXRF results are used for geochemical studies only and are not composited. Where exposure allows, multiple chip samples are collected across mineralised structures to assess the continuity of Au grade. Rock chip sampling is limited by outcrop exposure. Reconnaissance-scale chip / grab samples are not presented or considered to be representative of the average grade. Grab samples only represent the grade at a single point within the rock exposure. Sample spacing is designed to allow an initial assessment of gold mineralisation and is not suitable for future resource estimation activities. Drilling was restricted to existing tracks and pads. However, in all cases it was possible to drill at a high angle to the host structures and achieve a suitable orientation that cross cuts the mineralisation. True width intersections are provided in drill sections, there appears to be no relationship between drill orientation and mineralisation grades. Due to the steep grade of tracks and topography, hole orientation was limited or dictated by landscape physiology in some instances. Regional 50m soil grid aligned north-south across a ~6.5x3 km area. No significant sample bias is considered to be introduced because of the orientation of the soil lines without being noted in the body of the report. Page | 12 Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. • Grab samples do not capture any aspect of the potential variation in grade in relation to the orientation of the mineralisation and represents only a single point inside the mineralisation. Chip samples are collected perpendicular to strike where possible to avoid any sample bias and only where outcrop or subcrop exists. The orientation of rock chip samples is recorded and indicated in diagrams.