LITHIUM EXPLORATION

Ontario, Canada

Regional Map showing Ontario/ Manitoba – show the active operations with refining facility, as well as advanced stage projects, and then grass roots projects. If possible, show road, rail, and location of proposed Li separator and car manufacturing facilities

STARMET is supporting the Green Revolution by driving exploration for new Lithium potential in an emerging Lithium hub.

The property is located within a highly prospective geological setting featuring good outcrop exposure, and is:

  • Easily accessible year-round by way of wellmaintained highway and logging roads;
  • Proximal to refining, a planned Li separator plant and EV manufacturing;
  • Has a good local labour force to draw from.
Starmet will be advancing its EF claims, Shilcott claims, and Bruce Claims, which are located within a highly prospective geological setting featuring good outcrop exposure and are contiguous to Beyond Lithium Inc’s (CSE: BY) 2023 discovery of spodumene-bearing pegmatites zone at its Ear Falls Project.

Ear Falls Project

Chinook Exploration Ltd. was contracted by Starmet Ventures Inc. (CSE: STAR) to review the Ear Falls Project for the potential of LCT pegmatite occurrences and provide an exploration strategy for the project.

All publicly available data sources were reviewed in detail. A compilation spatial dataset was generated consisting of geology, geophysics, geochemistry, and historic assessment reports.

Limited historical exploration data exists on the current Starmet tenure. The tenements overlay topographic lowlands (outcrop poor) consisting of glaciolacustrine and glaciofluvial sediments cover (poor geochemical media). It is recommended that a phase 1 program consisting of reconnaissance prospecting and mapping be completed in the fall of 2024.

JPL Project Overview

The goal of the exploration program is to identify occurrences of spodumene bearing pegmatites OR gold-bearing quartz veins (shear-hosted orogenic). Limited potential to identify sediment hosted iron formations exists, but economically tough to generate interest. Clear potential for economic size and grade is required to advance the project no significant results, it is recommended that the tenure be optioned/joint ventured/or dropped, with no further work conducted.

Location & Access

  1. EF Claims can be accessed by truck and foot directly from the Town of Ear Falls or by boat to the western claim boundary
    • Chilcott claims can be
  2. Chilcott claims can be accessed by road
    • 30-minute drive from Ear Falls via Wenesaga Road
  3. Bruce Claims has no easily accessible road or trail to access
    • Suggest access via boat from Showalters Fly-In Lodge
    • Boat rentals available

Tenure

  1. Beyond Minerals discovery of 600m of outcropping spodumene bearing pegmatite
  2. All tenements staked within direct proximity to Starmet claims group with exception of directly north of Bruce Claims
    • Not recommended to stake – wholly lowland swamp/marsh
  3. Bruce Claims
    • 15 cells = 306.41Ha
  4. EF Claims
    • 167 cells = 3413.64Ha
  5. Chilcott Claims
    • 120 cells = 2458.38

Tenure – Annual Assessment Credits

  1. Required Annual Expenditures = $400/ cell
  2. Bruce Claims
    • 15 cells = 306.41Ha
    • $6000/yr
  3. EF Claims
    • 167 cells = 3413.64Ha
    • $66,000/yr
  4. Chilcott Claims
    • 120 cells = 2458.38
    • $48,000
  5. TOTAL = $120,000 to maintain tenure for 1 year past expiry
  6. August 10, 12, 13, 2025 Expiry

Regional Exploration History

Filed Assessment Reports

  1. (Schelski, 2013 & 2015) – Mapping and Prospecting 1a. identified granitic outcrops on the Chilcott Claims – follow-up sampling recommended 1b. Pegmatite Outcrop
  2. (Laurentian Goldfields, 2010) – Airborne mag, geochemical sampling, and mapping – No samples or outcrops on Bruce claim group
  3. Same (Laurentian Goldfields, 2010) program. No samples on overlapping areas of EF claims

Regional Geology

  1. Beyond Minerals discovery coincident with margins of a muscovite bearing (two mica) granitic body in contract with metasedimentary rocks
    • Near regional dextral shear structure (Beryl showing)

  2. Several iron ore formations near contract of felsic intrusive rocks and metasedimentary rocks

  3. 3 unique suites of felsic intrusive rocks in area

Regional Surficial Geology

  1. Area is dominated by glaciolacustrine sediments (green)
    • Very poor media for geochemical sampling
    • Transported
    • Poor ion movement through clay/silts
  2. Lack of Tills – Unable to perform systematic till sampling over tenure
  3. Glaciofluvial gravels (brown) and sand also poor for Geochem sampling
    • Transported media
  4. Still potential for limited outcrop within claim boundaries

Regional Magnetics – TMF

  1. Regional GSC Compilation airborne magnetics Total Magnetic Field (400m, 2017)
  2. Clearly defines intrusive rocks in the area

  3. No distinct regional structures underlying claim

  4. Unfortunately, does not cover Bruce Claims area

  5. Coincident magnetic highs about known iron formations

  6. No signature at or near pegmatite outcrop

Regional Magnetics – 2VG

  1. Regional GSC Compilation airborne magnetics second vertical derivative (400m, 2017)

  2. Floatation within Tonalite intrusive rocks in the Chilcott claims area suggest thin metasedimentary cover with proximal underlying intrusive complex

  3. Suggests potential E-W strike of thin (<800m) wide foliated tonalite occurrences within southern EF Claims
  4. 2VG magnetic highs coincident with iron formations in the area

Regional Radiometrics – Potassium

  1. Regional GSC Compilation airborne radiometrics – potassium signal (400m, 2017)

  2. Discrete potassium response highs require follow-up for potential intrusive rock outcrops (A & B)

  3. Slight signal response differences between differing intrusive suites

Regional Lake Sediment Geochemistry

  1. Regional OSG Deep Lake Sediment geochemistry dataset

  2. Again, unfortunate lack of data coverage within the Starmet claim groups

  3. Two samples within Chilcott claims
    • No anomalism with Li, Be, Nb, Rb, Sn Cs, As, Pb, Zn compared to known mineralized districts
    • 12 and 19ppm Li not considered anomalous
    • Sample ID: 00-D-2714 & 00-D-2715

EF Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (Red)

  3. Target rock types:
    • Pegmatites
    • Iron rich formations within meta sets (gossans)
    • Granitic Intrusives meta sets (source plutons)
    • Quartz Veins

  4. Potential Iron Formations proximal to foliated tonalite suite

EF Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (red)

  3. Areas of Distinct 2VD Mag Highs (yellow)
  4. Potential Iron Formations proximal to foliated tonalite suite

EF Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

     

  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (red)

  3. Areas of Distinct 2VD Mag Highs (yellow)

  4. Discrete radiometric potassium response anomalies B & C (green)

Chilcott Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)
  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (Red)

  3. Target rock types:
    •  Pegmatites
    • Iron rich formations within metaseds (gossans)
    • Granitic Intrusives daylighting through metaseds (source plutons)

  4. Potential iron formations proximal to foliated tonalite suite

Chilcott Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

  2. Schlenski (2013&2015) identified numerous outcrops in the Chilcott Claims area including felic non-foliated granitic rocks directly south of the claim group within metaseds

  3. Identified pegmatite outcrops south of Chilcott claims (on Beyond Lithium’s group)

Chilcott Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (red)

  3. Magnetics clearly display foliation within tonalite with fold hinge trending through claim block

  4. Inspect intersection of axial plane with metaseds contact (purple)

Chilcott Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

     

  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (red)

  3. Magnetics 2VD more clearly display foliation within tonalite
    • Prospect along foliation trend for potential pegmatite outcrops

  4. 2VD foliation persists within mapped metased package – thin metased package? Underlying intrusive complex?

Chilcott Claims – Exploration Strategy Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (3-4 Days)

  2. Target areas of topographic highs for potential outcropping bedrock (red)

  3. Discrete potassium radiometric – response anomaly juxtaposed to fold nose (Green) – Follow up with prospecting

Bruce Claims – Exploration Strategy – Phase 1

  1. Phase 1: Reconnaissance Prospecting and rock sampling (1 Day)

  2. Poor access by truck or foot, suggest access via boat from Showalters Lodge (grey line)

  3. No geophysical or geochemical coverage over Bruce Claims

  4. Limited prospecting looking for iron potential iron formation or muscovite-bearing granites
Copyright © 2024 STARMET VENTURES INC