FireFly Metals announces Mineral Resource increased by 51% at Green Bay Copper Gold Project, Canada
Article content
All samples submitted by FireFly were subjected to rigorous internal and external QA/QC protocols. These include the routine inclusion of certified reference materials (standards), blank samples and duplicate samples. Sample pulps were also analysed at another independent laboratory (SGS) to confirm validity.
Article content
For further detail regarding analytical techniques, please refer to Appendix B ‘Table 1 – Section 1 (Ming Mine)’.
Article content
Ming Deposit Mineral Resource Estimation Methodology
Article content
Mineralisation Domains
Article content
Leapfrog software was used for lithology and mineralisation domain wireframing.
Article content
Twenty-two mineralisation domains are defined in the current model:
Article content
Twelve of these represent massive sulphide and stringer deposits along and below the felsic contact (vein style domains).
Six east dipping feeder structures (vein style domains).
Two envelopes to capture the lower grade stringer mineralisation around massive sulphide and feeder zones described above (intrusion style domains).
Two lower footwall zone (LFZ) domains, including an inner core of high-grade (LFZ_HG) and an outer lower-grade (LFZ_LG) domain.
Article content
Article content
These domains were based on mineralisation style and statistical analysis.
Article content
The overall stockwork zone is defined based on logged alteration and sulphide content. Within this geological envelope, the high-grade LFZ was refined using a 0.6% Cu lower cut-off, allowing consistent zones of internal waste in the high-grade core to be reclassified.
Article content
Data Treatment
Article content
The Mineral Resource estimation utilises 2m composites for all DD sampling data, composite residuals smaller than 0.3m have been removed from the estimation.
Article content
Detailed exploratory data analysis, variography, and model validation was carried out using Isatis and other software.
Article content
Treatment of extreme high grades were dealt with by using a cap grade strategy.
Article content
Industry-standard 3D geological modelling software was used for data compilation, calculating and coding composite values, estimating and reporting.
Article content
Estimation
Article content
All lodes are estimated using ordinary kriging (OK) with the same domains used to estimate Cu, Au, Ag, S and Zn. OK estimation was completed using an oriented search ellipsoid. A three-pass search strategy was employed for each estimated variable, with search directions aligned to the major, semi-major, and minor axes of the variogram.
Article content
During the first pass, search radius approximating between 70 to 100% of the variogram ranges were utilised, with a requirement of a minimum of 8 and a maximum of 12 composites. A maximum of 5 composites per drillhole was allowed for all domains with the exception of certain VMS lodes where a maximum of 3 composites were chosen to allow better definition of vertical grade zonation. For the second pass, the search radius was expanded to double the first pass. To ensure full estimation of all domains, a third pass search distance was increased to extents of the data and the minimum sample requirement reduced to 4 or 6 composites.
Article content
The parent block size of 10m(X) x 10m(Y) x 5m(Z) represents 30 to 50% of the average drill spacing in the zone classified as Indicated. Parent blocks have been sub-celled to 2.5m x 2.5m x 2.5m.
Article content
For further detail regarding the estimation methodology, please refer to Appendix B ‘Table 1 – Section 1 (Ming Mine)’.
Article content
Ming Deposit Mineral Resource Classification
Article content
Mineral Resources have been classified on the basis of confidence in the geological and grade continuity using the drilling density, and the distance to sample selections. These were evaluated individually for each mineralisation domain.
Article content
Measured Mineral Resources have been defined generally where the closest drillhole sample is within 15m and the average distance to samples used for estimation within 20m.
Article content
Indicated Mineral Resources where the closest drillhole sample is within 30m and the average distance to samples used for estimation within 40m.
Article content
Inferred Mineral Resources where the closest drillhole sample is within 90m or greater if there is enough geological and grade continuity. Material outside these criteria are constrained by boundary strings and do not form part of the Mineral Resource. Distance to historical workings has been used to downgrade the Mineral Resource category where required.
Article content
A Mineral Resource category smoothing has been applied to ensure category continuity and to remove isolated blocks or small zones and avoid mosaic-like patterns in the Mineral Resource classification.
Article content
This classification is considered appropriate given the confidence that can be gained from the existing data density and results from drilling.
Article content
A long section of the November 2025 MRE model showing Mineral Resource Categories is presented in Figure 20.
Figure 20: Long section showing the Mineral Resource Categories for the November 2025 MRE with all drillholes shown. This includes both historical drilling and all holes completed by FireFly since acquisition of the Project in October 2023.
Article content
Ming Cut-off Grade
Article content
The cut-off grade of 1% Cu has been calculated based on the likely input components of mining, processing, recovery and administration costs. Commodity prices used are well below current spot prices however have been maintained the same as the October 2024 MRE parameters to ensure like-for-like comparisons.
Article content
Cu price of US$8,750 and 95% metallurgical recovery
Au price US$2,500 and 85% metallurgical recovery
Ag price US$25 and 85% metallurgical recovery
Article content
The gold-rich 1806 and 1807 VMS domains have been reported at a 1% CuEq cut-off.
Article content
Modifying Mining and Metallurgical Factors
Article content
The mineral resource is reported in-situ, however conservative economic factors and cut-off grades were applied. The cut-off grade used was 1% copper. Mining costs assumed in the cut-off grade calculation assume a combination of transverse and longitudinal long hole open stoping (LHOS) with paste backfill. Processing costs were guided by benchmarked operations that utilise floatation to produce a copper-gold concentrate for external extraction.
Article content
Recovery assumptions are based on the previous operations at Ming. Economic evaluation studies are in progress to further increase confidence in the cut-off grade and refine modifying factors applied.
Article content
In the opinion of the Company, all elements included in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold based on current market conditions, metallurgical test work, and the Company’s operational experience.
Article content
Little Deer Mineral Resource Estimate
Article content
The Little Deer Mineral Resource Estimate as of November 2025 is presented in Table 6. This estimate has been prepared in accordance with the JORC Code (2012 Edition) and Canadian National Instrument 43-101. The estimate was prepared by independent consulting group P&E Mining Consultants Inc. in conjunction with FireFly employees.
Article content
No additional drilling has been completed at Little Deer and the MRE remains unchanged from the previous estimate. For further details on the Little Deer Mineral Resource Estimate, please refer to the ASX announcement dated 29 October 2024 titled ‘Resource Increases 42% to 1.2Mt of contained metal at 2% Copper Eq.’
Article content
TONNES
COPPER
GOLD
SILVER
CuEq
(Mt)
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
(%)
(‘000 t)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(%)
Measured
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Indicated
2.9
2.1
62
0.1
9
3.4
320
2.3
TOTAL M&I
2.9
2.1
62
0.1
9
3.4
320
2.3
Inferred
6.2
1.8
110
0.1
10
2.2
430
1.8
Article content
Table 6: Little Deer Mineral Resource Estimate as at November 2025. Note that this MRE remains unchanged from the previous MRE.
Article content
ABOUT FIREFLY METALS
Article content
FireFly Metals Ltd (ASX, TSX: FFM) is an emerging copper-gold company focused on advancing the high-grade Green Bay Copper-Gold Project in Newfoundland, Canada. The Green Bay Copper-Gold Project currently hosts a Mineral Resource prepared and disclosed in accordance with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code 2012) and Canadian National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) of 50.4Mt of Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at 2.0% for 1,016Kt CuEq and 29.3Mt of Inferred Mineral Resources at 2.5% for 722Kt CuEq. The Company has a clear strategy to rapidly grow the copper-gold Mineral Resource to demonstrate a globally significant copper-gold asset. FireFly has completed a 130,000m diamond drilling program.
Article content
FireFly holds a 70% interest in the high-grade Pickle Crow Gold Project in Ontario. The current Inferred Mineral Resource stands at 11.9Mt at 7.2g/t for 2.8Moz gold, with exceptional discovery potential on the 500km2 tenement holding.
Article content
The Company also holds a 90% interest in the Limestone Well Vanadium-Titanium Project in Western Australia.
Article content
For further information regarding FireFly Metals Ltd please visit the ASX platform (ASX:FFM) or the Company’s website www.fireflymetals.com.au or SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
Article content
COMPLIANCE STATEMENTS
Article content
Foreign Resource Estimate – Green Bay Project (August 2023)
Article content
The Company first announced the foreign estimate of mineralisation for the Green Bay Project on 31 August 2023 (Foreign Estimate). At that time, the Mineral Resource Estimate was a foreign estimate prepared in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101. A competent person had not done sufficient work to classify the Foreign Estimate as Mineral Resources in accordance with the JORC Code. It was uncertain that, following evaluation and/or further exploration work, that the Foreign Estimate would be able to be reported as Mineral Resources in accordance with the JORC Code.
Article content
The Foreign Estimate has now been superseded by the Mineral Resource Estimate prepared in accordance with the JORC Code (2012 Edition) presented in this announcement. The Foreign Estimate is referenced in this announcement for comparative purposes only.
Article content
Please refer to the ASX announcement dated 31 August 2023 titled ‘AuTECO to acquire Green Bay Copper-Gold Project in Newfoundland, Canada’ for supporting information and details regarding the Foreign Estimate.
Article content
Metal equivalents
Article content
Metal equivalents for the Mineral Resource Estimates have been calculated at a copper price of US$8,750/t, gold price of US$2,500/oz and silver price of US$25/oz. Individual Mineral Resource grades for the metals are set out in Appendix A of this announcement.
Article content
Metallurgical factors have been applied to the metal equivalent calculation. Copper recovery used was 95%. Historical production at the Ming Mine has a documented copper recovery of ~96%. Precious metal (gold and silver) metallurgical recovery was assumed at 85% on the basis of historical recoveries achieved at the Ming Mine in addition to historical metallurgical test work to increase precious metal recoveries.
Article content
In the opinion of the Company, all elements included in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold based on current market conditions, metallurgical test work, and the Company’s operational experience and, where relevant, historical performance achieved at the Green Bay project whilst in operation.
Article content
Copper equivalent was calculated based on the formula CuEq(%) = Cu(%) + (Au(g/t) x 0.82190) + (Ag(g/t) x 0.00822).
Article content
Mineral Resource Estimate – Little Deer
Article content
The Mineral Resource Estimate for Little Deer referred to in this announcement was first reported in the Company’s ASX announcement dated 29 October 2024, titled ‘Resource Increases 42% to 1.2Mt of contained metal at 2% Copper Eq.’
Article content
Mineral Resource Estimate – Pickle Crow Project
Article content
The Mineral Resource Estimate for the Pickle Crow Project referred to in this announcement was first reported in the Company’s ASX announcement dated 4 May 2023, titled ’High-Grade Inferred Gold Resource Grows to 2.8Moz at 7.2g/t‘.
Article content
Exploration Results
Article content
Previously reported Exploration Results at the Green Bay Copper-Gold Project referred to in this announcement were first reported in accordance with ASX Listing Rule 5.7 in FireFly’s ASX announcements dated 31 August 2023, 11 December 2023, 16 January 2024, 4 March 2024, 21 March 2024, 29 April 2024, 19 June 2024, 3 September 2024, 16 September 2024, 3 October 2024, 10 December 2024, 12 February 2025, 25 March 2025, 7 May 2025, 17 July 2025, 9 October 2025, 16 October 2025, and 27 October 2025, and as may be otherwise cross-referenced in this announcement.
Article content
Original Announcements
Article content
FireFly confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original announcements referred to or cross-referenced in this announcement and that, in the case of Mineral Resource Estimates, all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the original announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Persons’ and Qualified Persons’ findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcements.
Article content
COMPETENT PERSONS AND QUALIFIED PERSONS STATEMENTS
Article content
The information in this announcement that relates to the Ming Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate is based on and fairly represents information and supporting documentation prepared and compiled by Mr Michael Job, BSc (Geology), MSc (Geostatistics). Mr Job is a full-time employee of Cube Consulting Pty Ltd who specialises in mineral resource estimation, evaluation and exploration. Neither Mr Job nor Cube Consulting Pty Ltd holds any interest in FireFly Metals Ltd, its related parties, or in any of the mineral properties that are the subject of this announcement. Mr Job is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 and a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101. Mr Job has reviewed the contents of this ASX announcement and consents to the inclusion in this announcement of all technical statements based on his information in the form and context in which they appear.
Article content
The information in this announcement that relates to the Little Deer Mineral Resource Estimate is based on and fairly represents information and supporting documentation prepared and compiled by Mr Eugene Puritch, P.Eng., FEC, CET. Mr Puritch is President and a full-time associate of P&E Mining Consultants Inc. P&E Mining Consultants Inc. who specialises in mineral resource estimation, evaluation, mining and exploration. Neither Mr Puritch nor P&E Mining Consultants Inc. holds any interest in FireFly Metals Ltd, its related parties, or in any of the mineral properties that are the subject of this announcement. Mr Puritch is a member of the Professional Engineers Ontario and Professional Engineers and Geoscientists Newfoundland and Labrador, each of which is a Recognised Professional Organisation (RPO) under the JORC Code 2012, and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 and a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101. Mr Puritch has reviewed the contents of this ASX announcement and consents to the inclusion in this announcement of all technical statements based on his information in the form and context in which they appear.
Article content
All technical and scientific information in this announcement has been reviewed and approved by Group Chief Geologist, Mr Juan Gutierrez BSc, Geology (Masters), Geostatistics (Postgraduate Diploma), who is a Member and Chartered Professional of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Gutierrez is a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 and a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101. Mr Gutierrez is a full-time employee of, and holds securities in, the Company. Mr Gutierrez has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 and a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101. Mr Gutierrez consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which they appear.
Article content
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
Article content
This announcement may contain certain forward-looking statements and projections, including statements regarding FireFly’s plans, forecasts and projections with respect to its mineral properties and programs. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of words such as ’may‘, ’might‘, ’could‘, ’would‘, ’will‘, ’expect‘, ’intend‘, ’believe‘, ’forecast‘, ’milestone‘, ’objective‘, ’predict‘, ’plan‘, ’scheduled‘, ’estimate‘, ’anticipate‘, ’continue‘, or other similar words and may include, without limitation, statements regarding plans, strategies and objectives.
Article content
Although the forward-looking statements contained in this announcement reflect management’s current beliefs based upon information currently available to management and based upon what management believes to be reasonable assumptions, such forward-looking statements and projections are estimates only and should not be relied upon. They are not guarantees of future performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors many of which are beyond the control of the Company, which may include changes in commodity prices, foreign exchange fluctuations, economic, social and political conditions, and changes to applicable regulation, and those risks outlined in the Company’s public disclosures.
Article content
The forward-looking statements and projections are inherently uncertain and may therefore differ materially from results ultimately achieved. For example, there can be no assurance that FireFly will be able to confirm the presence of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves, that FireFly’s plans for development of its mineral properties will proceed, that any mineralisation will prove to be economic, or that a mine will be successfully developed on any of FireFly’s mineral properties. The performance of FireFly may be influenced by a number of factors which are outside of the control of the Company, its directors, officers, employees and contractors. The Company does not make any representations and provides no warranties concerning the accuracy of any forward-looking statements or projections, and disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements or projections based on new information, future events or circumstances or otherwise, except to the extent required by applicable laws.
Article content
APPENDIX A
Article content
Green Bay Copper-Gold Project Mineral Resources
Article content
Ming Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate
Article content
TONNES
COPPER
GOLD
SILVER
CuEq
(Mt)
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
(%)
(‘000 t)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(%)
Measured
6.3
1.5
94
0.3
50
1.9
388
1.7
Indicated
41.2
1.7
708
0.4
488
3.2
4,320
2.1
TOTAL M&I
47.5
1.7
802
0.4
537
3.1
4,708
2.0
Inferred
23.1
2.0
456
0.7
553
5.9
4,379
2.6
Article content
Little Deer Mineral Resource Estimate
Article content
TONNES
COPPER
GOLD
SILVER
CuEq
(Mt)
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
(%)
(‘000 t)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(%)
Measured
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Indicated
2.9
2.1
62
0.1
9
3.4
320
2.3
TOTAL M&I
2.9
2.1
62
0.1
9
3.4
320
2.3
Inferred
6.2
1.8
110
0.1
10
2.2
430
1.8
Article content
GREEN BAY TOTAL MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE
Article content
TONNES
COPPER
GOLD
SILVER
CuEq
(Mt)
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
Metal
Grade
(%)
(‘000 t)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(g/t)
(‘000 oz)
(%)
Measured
6.3
1.5
94
0.3
50
1.9
388
1.7
Indicated
44.1
1.7
769
0.4
496
3.3
4,638
2.1
TOTAL M&I
50.4
1.7
863
0.3
546
3.1
5,026
2.0
Inferred
29.3
1.9
566
0.6
563
5.1
4,810
2.5
Article content
FireFly Metals Ltd Mineral Resource Estimates for the Green Bay Copper-Gold Project, incorporating the Ming Deposit and Little Deer Complex, are prepared and reported in accordance with the JORC Code 2012 and NI 43-101.
Mineral Resources have been reported at a 1.0% copper cut-off grade.
Metal equivalents for the Mineral Resource Estimates have been calculated at a copper price of US$8,750/t, gold price of US$2,500/oz and silver price of US$25/oz. Metallurgical recoveries have been set at 95% for copper and 85% for both gold and silver. These assumptions are made of the basis of historical production at the Ming Mine and additional metallurgical test work. Copper equivalent was calculated based on the formula: CuEq(%) = Cu(%) + (Au(g/t) x 0.82190) + (Ag(g/t) x 0.00822).
Totals may vary due to rounding.
Article content
APPENDIX B – JORC CODE, 2012 EDITION
Article content
Table 1 – Ming Mine
Article content
Section 1 – Sampling Techniques and Data: Ming Mine (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)
Article content
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.
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 1m 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.
The deposit has been extensively sampled through diamond drilling (DD), conducted by both FireFly and previous operators. In total, 1,610 drillholes have been completed, amounting to 319,534 metres of drilling at depths ranging from 10 to 1,771 metres. Of this, FireFly contributed 354 DD holes totalling 116,794 metres.
DD sample intervals are based on geological observations. All the core is sampled in 1m intervals with some smaller samples down to minimum core length of 0.3m to accommodate geological and mineralisation contacts. Half NQ diamond drill core was submitted for analysis.
DD sampling by previous operators assumed to be to industry standard at that time.
The following is a summary of the core sampling procedure:
All sample collection, core logging, and specific gravity determinations were completed by FireFly under the supervision of a professionally qualified registered geologist.
NQ core was marked for splitting during logging and is sawn using a diamond core saw with a mounted jig to assure the core is cut lengthwise into equal halves. Half core core sampling was used for BQ core. Historically, whole core was sampled at times.
Half of the cut core is placed in clean individual plastic bags with the appropriate sample tag.
QA/QC samples are inserted into the sample stream at prescribed intervals.
The samples are then placed in rice bags for shipment to the offsite laboratory’s facility.
The remaining half of the core is retained and incorporated into Firefly’s secure core library located on the property.
FireFly drill analysis was completed at ISO-certified Eastern Analytical laboratories. The samples are dried, crushed, and pulverised. Samples are crushed to approximately -10 mesh and split using a riffle splitter to approximately 300 g. A ring mill is used to pulverize the sample split to 98% passing -150 mesh. Sample pulps and rejects are picked up at Eastern by FireFly staff and returned directly to the Project site. Sample rejects are securely stored at the FireFly 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).
Historic diamond drilling was predominately NQ (47.6 mm diameter) with some BQ (36mm) associated with grade control programs.
FireFly diamond drilling exclusively NQ and NQ2 (47.6 mm and 50.6mm diameter respectively) size with core oriented by REFLEX ACT III core orientation tool. Except for 3 holes where the last 50-60 metres were completed with BQ tail due to bad ground and drilling difficulties.
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.
All care is taken to ensure the full recovery of the core, yet certain drilling conditions, such as broken ground, can impede 100% recovery.
There is no known relationship between sample recovery and grade. Drilling conditions have been noted to be competent in historical reports. FireFly core recovery averages >95%.
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.
Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.
The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
The following steps are completed during the core logging procedure:
Sample security and chain of custody start with the removal of core from the core tube and boxing of drill core at the drill site.
The boxed core remains under the custody of the drill contractor until it is transported from the drill to the secure on-site core facility.
Core boxes are opened and inspected to ensure correct boxing and labelling of the core by the drill contractor.
The core is metre marked, cleaned and oriented with the orientation line drawn using the marks form REFLEX ACT III core orientation tool.
The drill core is geologically logged, photographed, and then marked and tagged for sampling and splitting.
Core logging describes variations in lithology, alteration and mineralisation.
Data associated with core logging and related assay results and other downhole information including orientation surveys are recorded in the AcQuire database System.
Measured parameters include structural orientation with respect to core axis, lost core as a percentage of recovered length, and fracture density, which are determined by the intensity and thickness of mineralisation at specific intervals.
Each core sample is assigned a tag with a unique identifying number. Sample lengths are typically one metre but can depend on zone mineralogy and boundaries.
Sample core that is not mineralised is marked in 1.0 metre lengths.
Wing samples are marked at 0.5 metres and sampled at the extremities of mineralised intervals to ensure anomalous grades do not continue into the surrounding wall rock.
100% of the core is logged.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation
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.
Most FireFly drilling is NQ and NQ2. 3 drillholes were completed with a BQ tail.
For NQ diameter the core was sawn in half following a sample cutting line determined by geologists during logging and submitted for analysis on nominal 1m intervals or defined by geological boundaries determined by the logging geologist.
Historic diamond drilling has been half core sampled.
Samples are dried at approximately 60°C , crushed and pulverised. Samples are crushed in a Rhino jaw crusher to approximately 80% -10 mesh, and split using a riffle splitter to approximately 250-300g. The remainder of the sample is bagged, labelled and stored as coarse reject. A ring mill is used to pulverise the sample split to 95% passing -150 mesh. Sample pulps are picked up at Eastern Analytical by FireFly staff and returned directly to the Project site.
For pre-FireFly samples, sample preparation, analytical procedures and QA/QC used on the property were reviewed by independent consultants WSP in 2018, stating in their report that sampling practices meet industry standards and display acceptable levels of accuracy and precision.
All core sampled in the prospective intervals when required wing samples are marked from 0.5 metres up to 20m and sampled at the extremities of mineralised intervals to ensure anomalous grades do not continue into the surrounding wall rock.
No purpose lab audit has been completed. FireFly personnel and external consultants have visited the Eastern Analytical facilities on several occasions and observed that lab practices, equipment overall cleanliness meets industry standards.
Pre-FireFly, most of the BQ core was entirely crushed for the assays by Rambler Metals and Mining Canada Ltd. (Rambler).
Field duplicates were completed using ¼ core and inserted into the sample series at a rate of 2% of samples. Analysis results were acceptable considering the style of mineralisation being heterogeneous with stockwork stringers of chalcopyrite.
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.
All FireFly and Rambler results reported in this announcement were analysed by Eastern Analytical in Springdale, NL.
34 elements were determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP). A 200mg subsample is totally dissolved in four acids and analysed by ICP-OES.
Ore grade elements, Cu, Zn, Pb, Fe and Ag are dissolved via 3 acid digestion and analysed by atomic adsorption (AA).
Gold assays were determined by fire assay with atomic adsorption finish.
As part of the QA/QC program duplicate, blank and Certified Reference Material (CRM) samples are inserted alternately. Blanks are inserted one every 50 samples. CRMs are inserted every 20 samples. Field duplicates are taken approximately one every 40 samples. Blanks and CRMs are also randomly inserted in zones of suspected high grades. The minimum insertion rate for CRMs is 5%, which FireFly adheres to. Historical data collected by Rambler was also subject to a similar rigorous QA/QC regime.
In addition to the Company QAQC samples (described earlier) included within the batch the laboratory included its own CRMs (Certified Reference Materials), blanks and duplicates.
Sample assay results continue to be evaluated through control charts, log sheets, sample logbooks and signed assay certificates to determine the nature of any anomalies or failures and failures were re-assayed at the laboratory.
Verification of sampling and assaying
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.
FireFly routinely sends sample pulps for independent umpire lab check to the SGS laboratory in Burnaby. Results correlate very well with Eastern Analytical results.
There are no purpose twinned holes in the dataset but a comparison of the results of different drilling generations showed that results were comparable.
FireFly logging data, assay certificates and other relevant information are stored in an AcQuire database and on a site server.
All pre-FireFly logging data was completed, core marked up, logging and sampling data was entered directly into an MX deposit or Fusion database.
FireFly is not aware of any adjustments made by Rambler to the assay data. Similarly, FireFly has not made any adjustments to assay data.
WSP completed an independent audit in 2018 where a representative number of assay certificates were compared to digital assay database and no discrepancies were found.
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.
Specification of the grid system used.
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Drill collars were surveyed by the FireFly mine survey crew upon completion of the drill program.
The set-ups for the underground drill collars were marked by the FireFly mine survey crew, and the drilling contractor was expected to set up properly on line. A FireFly geologist checked the underground drill set-up during the drilling program to ensure accuracy.
Downhole surveys are completed using a Reflex Sprint IQ gyro multi-shot instrument to provide azimuth and dip reading down the hole. The Reflex Sprint IQ gyro instrument is calibrated at least once a year to ensure accuracy of results.
Previous drilling has been set-out and picked up in both national and local grids using a combination of GPS and Survey instruments and are assumed to be to industry standard. Directional surface holes completed using Devico® technology.
The underground development has been picked up by surveyors creating high confidence in the topographic control which drillholes, both historical and recent, are referenced against.
Collar coordinates are recorded in local mine grid. Survey data was collected in mine grid and in UTM grid (NAD83 Zone 21).
Topographic control is from Digital Elevation Contours (DEM) 2019 and site surveyed DGPS pickups.
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.
Mineral Resources are based on a maximum of approximately 90m drill spacing. In specific zones it can be greater than 100m where there is enough evidence of grade and geological continuity. The data spacing and distribution is considered sufficient to establish geological and/or grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource classifications to be applied.
Core is sampled to geology contacts; sample compositing is not applied until the estimation stage.
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.
Most of the underground drill hole orientations were perpendicular to sub-perpendicular to the mineralisation but variable in places where low angle drilling to the mineralisation has been completed in zones without suitable drilling platforms.
The drill orientation to mineralised structures is not thought to make a material difference in the Mineral Resource estimation as most intercept widths are interpreted to be close to true width.
Sample security
The measures taken to ensure sample security.
Core was placed in wooden core boxes close to the drill rig by the drilling contractor. The core was collected daily by the drilling contractor and delivered to the secure core logging facility on the Ming Mine site. Access to the core logging facility is limited to FireFly employees or designates.
Audits or reviews
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.
Regular reviews of DD sampling techniques are completed by Senior Geologists and Resource Geologists and conclude that sampling techniques are satisfactory and industry standard.
All recent FireFly sample data has been extensively QAQC reviewed internally and externally.
Pre-FireFly data audits were conducted as part of NI-43-101 resource estimation by independent consultants WSP in 2018. It was WSP’s opinion that the drilling, sampling and logging procedures put in place by Rambler met acceptable industry standards and that the information can be used for geological and resource modelling.
Article content
Section 2 – Reporting of Exploration Results: Ming Mine (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)
Article content
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 security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a license to operate in the area.
FireFly owns a mineral land assembly consisting of one map-staked mineral license (023175M) and two mining leases (141L and 188L) totalling 955.4 ha and registered in the name of FireFly Metals Canada Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of FireFly Metals Limited. All of these mineral lands are contiguous and, in some cases, overlapping and are located in the area of the former Ming and Ming West mines. In early 2015 the mineral license 023175M replaced the original license 014692M by claim reduction as requested by Rambler.
FireFly holds all the permits required to operate the Ming Mine.
All lands are in good standing with the Provincial Government, and FireFly is up to date with respect to lease payments (for leases) and required exploration expenditure (for licenses).
Exploration done by other parties
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.
Ming Mine Early History: Auriferous sulphides and copper was found in the area in 1905 by Enos England.
The Main Mine sulphide zone was found in 1935 about 600ft north of the Enos England discovery. In 1940, the Newfoundland government drilled eighteen diamond drill holes totalling 5,000ft.
An airborne electromagnetic survey was flown from 1955 to 1956.
The Ming Mine was discovered in 1970 by a helicopter borne AEM system. A large low-grade stringer type copper deposit was later discovered in the footwall 300ft to 500ft below the Ming mineralisation during mining operations and delineated by 36 diamond drill holes. Mining ceased at the Ming Mine in 1982 because of low copper prices.
In 1988, the property was awarded to the Rambler Joint Venture Group (a Consortium of Teck Exploration, Petromet Resources Ltd, and Newfoundland Exploration Company Ltd). Exploration consisted of ground geophysics and soil geochemistry, resulting in discovery of the Ming West deposit. 48 diamond drill holes (25,534ft) were completed
Altius Minerals Corporation: Under the terms of an option to purchase agreement with Ming Minerals, Altius conducted exploration on the Rambler property in 2001, 2003, and 2004. In 2001, a lithogeochemical program was initiated to chemically fingerprint rocks of the hanging wall and footwall to the sulphide deposits.
Rambler Metals and Mining PLC: Rambler Metals and Mining PLC was a UK-based company listed on London’s Alternate Investment Market (AIM). Rambler held a 100% interest in the Ming property and between 2005 and 2023 and conducted a multi-phase diamond drilling program consisting of surface drilling, directional drilling, and underground delineation drilling. A total of 220,704m from 1,365 diamond drill holes were completed by Rambler. Between 2012 and 2022 the Ming Mine produced 3Mt at 1.86% Cu and 0.71 Au for total of 55Kt of copper and 68Koz of gold.
The Ming Mine was placed on care and maintenance in February 2023.
In October 2023, FireFly (then named AuTECO Minerals Ltd) acquired the Project under the sales and investment solicitation process (SISP) ordered by the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada on 15 March 2023 as part of the restructuring proceedings of Rambler Group under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada).
FireFly conducted drilling to test down plunge extent of VMS and footwall stringer lodes.
An underground exploration drive has been completed to allow further drilling at more favourable drill angles.
Geology
Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.
The Green Bay Project is a Noranda-type Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide (VMS) hosted by Cambrian-Ordovician metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks of the Pacquet Harbour Group. The style of mineralisation, alteration, host rock, and tectonism most closely resemble other VMS deposits throughout the world. The deposit consists of several individual massive sulphide lenses and their underlying stockwork zones. It is thought that the stockwork zone represents the near surface channel ways of a submarine hydrothermal system and the massive sulphide lens represents the accumulation of sulphides precipitated from the hydrothermal solutions, on the sea floor, above and around the discharge vent. The Ming Deposits are polymetallic (Cu, Au, Ag ± Zn) massive sulphides that occur along the flank of a felsic dome. The Ming Deposits have undergone strong deformation and upper greenschist to amphibolite facies metamorphism. The massive sulphide bodies are now thin and elongate down the plunge of the regional lineation (30-35ºNE). Typical aspect ratios of length down-plunge to width exceed 10:1, and the bodies exhibit mild boudinage along the plunge. The foot wall stock work comprises mainly of quartz-sericite-chlorite schist, which hosts disseminated and stringer pyrite and chalcopyrite with minor sphalerite, galena, and pyrrhotite with locally significant gold contents that could represent a discordant stockwork stringer feeder zone. The mineralisation is crosscut by younger mafic dykes.
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 meters) of the drill hole collar
dip and azimuth of the hole
down hole length and interception depth
hole length.
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.
No new exploration results are reported. Please refer to the Compliance Statements in this announcement for details of previous exploration results reported.
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.
The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.
No new exploration results are reported. Please refer to the Compliance Statements in this announcement for details of previous exploration results reported.
Metal equivalent results have been calculated at a copper price of US$8,750/t, gold price of US$2,500/oz, silver price of US$25/oz
Metallurgical recoveries have been set at 95% for copper and 85% for both gold and silver. These assumptions are made of the basis of historical production at the Ming Mine and additional metallurgical test work.
FireFly has completed additional metallurgical test work that may support improved recoveries, however the October 2024 MRE assumptions have been used to make the November 2025 MRE comparable.
CuEq(%) = Cu(%) + (Au(g/t) x 0.82190) + (Ag(g/t) x 0.00822)
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’).
No new exploration results are reported. Please refer to the Compliance Statements in this announcement for details of previous exploration results reported.
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.
Maps and sections are included in the body of this announcement as deemed appropriate by the Competent Person.
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.
No new exploration results are reported. Please refer to the Compliance Statements in this announcement for details of previous exploration results reported.
Other substantive exploration data
Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; ge