The Snow Lake project is de-risked, is high grade, has excellent infrastructure, is located in a politically stable country within a world class mining camp and has growth potential for copper, gold, zinc and silver.

— Ken Lapierre, President and CEO of Rockcliff Copper Corporation

The Snow Lake Project, totalling in excess of 45,000 collective hectares is located in and around the Snow Lake mining camp and hosts the highest grade unmined NI 43-101 copper deposits (the gold-rich Talbot copper deposit and the Rail copper deposit) and the highest grade unmined historical zinc deposits (the Lon zinc deposit, the Bur zinc deposit and the Morgan zinc deposit).  The Snow Lake Project  also includes the highest grade former lode gold producer (Laguna) and a gold property (Snow Lake Gold) with multiple gold-rich zones adjacent to a former million ounce gold producer and a gold processing facility and a Net Smelter Return Royalty (NSR) on the Tower property which includes the T-1 copper deposit in the FF-SL Greenstone Belt.  Rockcliff also owns the MacBride zinc deposit located north of Snow Lake near Leaf Rapids, Manitoba. 

Under the supervision of Rockcliff Copper Corp. President & CEO Ken Lapierre, the Snow Lake Project located in Manitoba, Canada has advanced significantly with multiple discoveries of high grade copper, gold, zinc and silver. 

Exploration on the project has followed an “exploration template for success” and has included:

  • +20,000 line kilometres of helicopter generated magnetic and Electromagnetic coverage
  • +2,500 line kilometres of helicopter generated “deep penetrating” VTEM coverage.
  • Multiple surface Electromagnetic geophysical surveys covering known targets and discovering new targets for follow-up exploration
  • +50,000 metres of NQ sized drilling
  •  Numerous NI43-101 technical and resource reports
  •  +$22M of exploration to 2016

Presently the property hosts 6 deposits of high grade copper, gold, zinc and silver as tabulated below:

figure-snowlake.png

(1)*The Talbot report completed by RPA dated January 26, 2016 and press released February 3, 2016. CIM definitions were followed, 2.0% copper cut-off was used with US$3.50 copper, US$1450 gold, US$1.25 zinc and US$22 silver. Metal recovery for copper was 95%, gold at 70%, zinc at 85% and Silver at 65%. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic value. **The Rail Deposit report completed by SRK Consulting dated December 19, 2012 and press released December 21, 2010. CIM definitions were followed, 2.0% copper cut-off was used with US$3.00 per pound and a metal recovery of 80% without considering revenues from other metals. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not demonstrate economic viability. ***The Tower (T-1) deposit report completed by CCIC Inc. dated January 20, 2013 and press released December 6, 2012. CIM definitions were followed, 0.5% copper cut-off was used using US$3.63 per pound. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic value.****The Lon, Bur, Morgan and MacBride deposits are historical deposits. The reader may refer to the Lon deposit press released October 31, 2007 and the Bur deposit press released September 29, 2016 and the Morgan deposit press released November 22, 2016 and the MacBride deposit press released December 1, 2016. An internal report was completed by Granges Inc. in 1993 for the Lon deposit, Manitoba Government reports in the 1990s for the Morgan deposit and an internal report by Knobby Lake Mines in 1977 for the MacBride deposit, however not all of the parameters used, assumptions made and methods used to prepare the historic estimates are not known at this time. A public report was completed by Hudbay in 2007 and filed on SEDAR for the Bur deposit. Its parameters are known. Additional drilling would be required to upgrade all historical resources to a current Mineral Resource as the historic information does not satisfy the requirements set out by NI 43-101. Neither Rockcliff Copper nor its Qualified Persons have done sufficient work to classify the historic estimates as current Mineral Resources and are not treating the historical estimates as a current Mineral Resource. The reader is cautioned that the Lon, Bur, Morgan and MacBride historical resources should not be relied upon as they do not satisfy current Mineral Resource or Mineral Reserve terminology. *****Copper and Zinc equivalent grades were estimated for historical resources using US$2.35 copper, US$1300 gold, US$1.15 zinc and US$20 silver for the Bur deposit and US$2.50 copper, US$1300 gold, US$1.15 zinc and US$20 silver for the Lon, Morgan and MacBride deposits.