WOWINGRAGONG

Geological setting and mineral system

The project sits in the concealed southern Junee–Narromine Volcanic Belt (JNVB) of the Macquarie Arc, Lachlan Orogen — the Ordovician–Early Silurian arc terrane whose principal endowments are intrusion-related, porphyry and porphyry-distal copper–gold systems, including Cowal, Northparkes and Marsden (Glen et al. 2007; analogues cited for geological context only). Basement beneath 3–37 m of alluvial cover at the historical collars (up to ~120 m regionally) is interpreted Cotton Formation siltstone, logged in the 1990–91 drilling as fine, cleaved, strongly weathered oxidised siltstone; no volcanics, intrusives or hydrothermal alteration were logged anywhere on the property (R00000728, Appendix 1 log sheets). Any concealed intrusive or volcanic source below the 88 m end of hole F9 is a geochemical and geophysical inference, not an observation: no historical hole penetrated more than ~50 m of basement, and none reached the depth at which an inferred source would sit. The synthesis carries this as one of several readings, alongside more parsimonious alternatives (Technical Synthesis v4.0, §5.4).

The geochemistry: what the historical dataset has already demonstrated (values are ppm responses in oxidised chips, not mineral intersections)
Hole F9 (deepest hole, 88 m; 55 basement samples): Cu to 180 ppm (~73 m) within a sustained 100–180 ppm zone below ~55–60 m; Zn steps up 4–5× to 150–260 ppm, peaking at 260 ppm (~81 m); both decline to background over the final three samples before end of hole (ALS Batch 221, in R00000728; depths approximate, estimated from sample sequence)	Not independently confirmed: a single 1990 AAS batch on oxidised aircore chips, with no CRMs or blanks documented and no independent QA check yet performed. Resolving actions: laboratory gold check-repeats and method-code verification (Phase 1, Appendix C); sample-by-sample twin comparison from the Stage-A RC twin with modern multi-element ICP-MS (~A$55–115k all-in).
F3: Zn 210–230 ppm (two samples, CF1207–08); F7: Cu 55–65 ppm (R00000728)	Comparable tenors that mean the F9 anomaly is not yet demonstrably localised. Resolving action: full 176-sample basement screen across all nine holes (Phase 1 desktop, Appendix C) — localised vector versus broad lithological background.
Gold: maximum 0.05 g/t Au by AAS (F9); bulk-cyanide-leach maximum 23 ppb (F2) (R00000728)	As reported; a ppt/ppb notation inconsistency in the source is recorded in the synthesis's flagged-inconsistencies list. Gold values are very low in absolute terms and settle the 1991 gold question, not the base-metal one.

Exploration history: one campaign, one documented model-driven exit — the multi-element base-metal response was recorded but never interpreted
Period	Operator (licence)	Model targeted	Departure reason
1990–91	BHP Gold Mines Ltd; Newmont Australia Ltd on acquisition (EL 3617)	Epithermal / lode-quartz gold on a gravity-defined buried basement high; basement screened for gold only	Gold-only screen peaked at 0.05 g/t; results reported as equivocal and the AAS gold as disappointing; further drilling flagged but not completed on the available record; licence lapsed (R00000728, §Summary, §4.2–4.3)
1991–2026	Open ground	—	No subsequent explorer on the available record; ELA7078 lodged by CAADIA 25 June 2026 with no overlapping authority or application. Why a parcel in a first-order copper–gold belt remained open is not established (Synthesis §2.2)

Why the anomaly is still available — in the operator's recorded words

Wrong commodity, wrong model. The operator selected the ground on the reasoning that Palaeozoic NSW gold deposits commonly sit on buried topographic highs (Gidginbung and Peak Hill cited as analogues) and screened basement for gold alone, by bulk-cyanide leach and five-element AAS (R00000728, §1–2). It recorded the AAS gold as disappointing and the programme outcome as equivocal (R00000728, §Summary, §4.3). The copper–zinc response in F9 sat in the same assay sheets and was never developed — it did not fit a gold-on-a-hill model, in a belt whose dominant endowment is porphyry and intrusion-related copper–gold (Synthesis §5.3).

The analytical gap. The 1990 suite was Au–As–Cu–Pb–Zn by AAS plus BCL gold: no multi-element ICP-MS, and the porphyry pathfinder elements (Ag, Mo, Bi, Te, S) were never assayed. The log sheets carried explicit hydrothermal-alteration fields that were never populated — only weathering was logged — and no CRMs or blanks are documented (Synthesis §4.9). The operator also noted that the absence of volcanics prevented tracing the Forbes–Parkes thrust on the then-available regional aeromagnetics (R00000728, §3); modern open-file TMI, derivative and RTP-tilt products now show discrete magnetic architecture beneath the cover, including a first-order north-north-west corridor on which F9 sits (Synthesis §5.1 — read from uncalibrated imagery, not yet gridded or modelled).

The untested target. The operator flagged further drilling but did not, on the available record, complete it under EL 3617 (R00000728, §4.2). The synthesis's precise formulation: the F9 copper–zinc interval peaks mid-interval (~73–85 m) and declines to background across the final three samples before end of hole at 88 m; whether any system continues below 88 m is untested. The vertical aircore holes sampled only the topmost, oxidised basement and did not reach the depth at which an inferred source would sit (Synthesis §4.4, §5.3).

The miss, precisely. The operator paid to drill the anomaly, paid to assay it, and never read the answer: the strongest copper response and the only down-hole zinc step-up of the programme sit in the deepest hole's own assay sheets (F9; ALS Batch 221, in R00000728), but the campaign was scored on gold alone, and on gold it failed. The hole was stopped at 88 m with the Cu–Zn interval having peaked mid-interval and declined to background over the final three samples — so the question the data poses, whether any system resumes below 88 m, was never asked and remains untested (Synthesis §4.4, §5.3). What CAADIA is offering a partner is not a new anomaly; it is the first base-metal interpretation of a dataset the 1991 operator bought and shelved.

System scale — footprint, depth-tested, and model context

Footprint (dimensions, never tonnes). The nine collars cluster over ~3 km × 3 km; the F9 anomalous interval spans ~30 m down-hole (sustained Cu below ~55–60 m; the zinc step-up across the deepest ~15 samples). The interpreted north-north-west demagnetised corridor runs through the eastern side of the cluster, with an arcuate magnetic margin wrapping the southern and eastern edge of the central magnetic low — all read from uncalibrated open-file imagery; amplitudes, wavelengths and depths have not yet been measured. Maximum basement penetration to date is ~50 m in one hole. Model context (belt class, not project). The host belt's endowments — Cowal, Northparkes, Marsden — are cited in the synthesis for geological context only; no resource figure is reported, and no analogue size range is attributed to this project. The conservative case is stated with equal weight: the most parsimonious reading of the same data is shallow, dense, barren siltstone basement, with lithological background and supergene enrichment as the other alternatives (Synthesis §5.4). Commercial argument. The synthesis offers no price-based or commercial recharacterisation, and none is made here.

The targets

Primary — the F9 interval below 88 m, on the gravity-high / magnetic-low pairing. The known technical limitation is stated plainly: the pairing is three features in proximity read off uncalibrated images, not a calibrated registration; a magnetic low over shallow, non-magnetic siltstone with a gravity high is equally consistent with dense, barren basement, no alteration was logged anywhere on the property, and density and magnetisation modelling cannot distinguish barren dense basement from an altered intrusive — only drilling can (Synthesis §5.2, §5.4). The designed test resolves it directly: the Stage-A RC twin (~120–150 m) re-samples the 37–88 m interval at multi-element ICP-MS and drills below the historical end of hole. Secondary — F3 zinc / F7 copper: resolved at desktop cost by the 176-sample screen (localised vector versus lithological background). Secondary — the NNW corridor and arcuate margin: refined by re-gridding the operator's own 39 line-km 1991 Bouguer gravity and inverting the 2022–23 Forbes–Dubbo AEM, so any Stage-B collar is sited on a modelled body, not a projected one.

Testing the thesis: gates, kill criteria, cost to answer (holes are designated Stage A / Stage B in the design; no hole IDs are yet assigned)
Phase + cost	Scope	Gate & kill criterion
Phase 1 — desktop, ~A$10–30k	1991 Bouguer gravity re-grid; AEM retrieval/inversion; collar re-read, datum transform and formal overlay; 176-sample basement screen; laboratory check-repeat tabulation (Appendix C items)	Gate 1 (drill decision): proceed only on a coherent modelled source with F9 confirmed in-block. Kill: broad lithological background and no modelled source — the play closes at desktop cost, pre-rig.
Stage A — RC twin of F9, ~120–150 m; central case ~A$85k all-in (range A$55–115k)	Cased through ~37 m cover; continuous 1 m samples; 4-acid ~48-element ICP-MS + fire-assay Au; CRM, blank and field duplicate at ≥1-in-20; NATA laboratory (ALS Orange — the original 1990 lab, aiding comparability); sample-by-sample twin comparison against the CF-series	Gate 2: Stage B only if primary Cu–Zn is confirmed AND an open modelled source is defined. Kill (binary, ~A$85k): tenor not reproduced, or confirmed supergene with no open source — the design's own words: “A clear negative — confirming the anomaly is a shallow supergene feature with no open source — is an explicit and valuable success criterion” (Drill-Program Design v1.0, §11). A negative re-frames the project to the parsimonious barren-basement case and closes it cheaply.
Stage B — contingent diamond hole, HQ→NQ, ~200–350 m; A$150–350k	Inclined (≈ −60°) across the interpreted grain; fresh core for logging, multi-element assay, petrography, spectral (HyLogger-style) logging and physical properties; downhole EM if a conductor is modelled	Committed only on a Gate 2 pass. Nothing in Stage B is committed by the design; collar, azimuth, dip and depth are outputs of Stage A plus the geophysical model.

Technical Manager: Dr Tim McConachy FAusIMM (1974), Senior Fellow SEG, former Rio Tinto Chief Geologist.

Data room (under NDA): technical synthesis v4.1, Phase 1 drill programme design, source register and figure set.

Contact: Doug Alcock, Managing Director, CAADIA Metals Pty Ltd — dalcock@caadiametals.com.au

No JORC (2012) Mineral Resource, Ore Reserve or Exploration Target is declared or implied. Historical results are compiled from GSNSW open-file (DIGS) records, have not been verified by a Competent Person for public reporting, and are provided for context only. The IRGS / distal-replacement interpretation is a working hypothesis under test; alternative interpretations of the geophysical data exist. Earn-in terms are indicative and non-binding, subject to contract, due diligence and grant of the Exploration Licence.