North Bay Resources Inc (NBRI)

[mick]

#52/\08-26-2019/ Technical Assessment Report on the Mount Washington Property
http://www.northbayresources.com/2019_MW_43101.pdf

Vancouver Island, British Columbia
NTS 092F/14
BCGS 092F074 & 092F075
Latitude 490 45’ 23” Longitude 1250 15’ 22”
UTM NAD83 Zone 10N 337500E 5514000N
For
North Bay Resources Inc.
PO Box 162
Skippack, PA, USA 19474
By
Jacques Houle P.Eng.
6552 Peregrine Road
Nanaimo, B.C. V9V 1P8
August 26, 2019
===========================================================

to Stage 5 (K’omoks), and several more at various stages. Co-operation agreements between
local First Nations and a proponent are usually required to successfully develop a mineral
property today in B.C. However, it is assumed under the B.C. government’s 2-Zone Model
within its Sustainability in B.C. Mining Criteria that the Mount Washington Property is available
for future exploration, development and mining, and that the B.C. Ministry of Energy and Mines
will act as an effective advocate and permitting authority on behalf for any proponent who
follows its laws and regulations required during all stages of any future work on the Mount
Washington Property.
Interpretations and Conclusions
The various surveys, analyses, tests and excavations conducted on the Mount Washington
Property area during the +50-year period mainly from 1940 to 1992 has identified at least 24
mineral occurrences containing varying combinations of gold, silver, copper, molybdenum
and/or tellurium in clusters over an area of 10 km. by 4 km. Hundreds of ore-grade intercepts
at current metal prices were achieved in natural and trenched outcrop samples or diamond drill
holes by numerous operators on most of the 24 mineral occurrences on or adjacent to the
Property. One attempt at mining and recovering only copper from a narrow vein deposit using
open pit mining methods and producing a single flotation concentrate was not successful, and
resulted in environmental damage that has since been mitigated. This may have been due in
part to problems with mining narrow vein deposits by open pit methods, and in part due to the
polymetallic nature of the mineral deposit and related analytical and metallurgical challenges.
Systematic, multi-year exploration programs completed by junior and senior companies have
been successful both on the Mount Washington Property and in the surrounding mineral area.
However, a portion of the mineral area to the southwest of the Mount Washington Property
was alienated from exploration and development in 1990 when it was being actively explored
by major companies. At that time, the Lakeview-Domineer project was in the B.C. Mine
Development Review process, and included a viable metallurgical process to recover both gold
and copper. Funding to develop the project could not be obtained by owner Better Resources,
due in part to the mining industry’s negative perception of political environment for mining in
B.C. at that time, including Vancouver Island, and due to low metal prices. The project ceased,
and very limited exploration activity has occurred in the Mt. Washington area since 1992.

====================================================

The Subvolcanic Cu-Au-Ag (As-Sb) - (L01) mineral deposit profile category created by the BC
Geological Survey in 1995 to capture the Equity Silver Past Producer (MINFILE 093L001) in
central B.C. appropriately describes all the metallic mineral occurrences in the Mount
Washington Property area. This target exploration model was not published or well-known at
the time most of the exploration work was done in the area, and so is a new model to test. The
older and more common Epithermal and Porphyry mineral deposit profiles and their sub-types
can be genetically and spatially related to sub-volcanic types within a district, and are also
appropriate and have been successfully used in the Mount Washington Property area.
With current metal prices, the Mount Washington Property warrants modern data compilation,
and systematic multi-year exploration programs. Such programs would be more effective in
both the Lakeview-Domineer area and in the Wolf Lake area, if the fragmented title status in
those areas of the property were consolidated through agreements on various mineral titles.
The Murex Breccia and Oyster Breccia areas are well covered by North Bay’s mineral titles.
Recommendations
The Mt. Washington property should first be re-evaluated based on its regional geological
setting compared to other similar settings worldwide which host past or currently producing
mines, with consideration to mineral deposit types and models. Today’s geological literature is
much more extensive than it was at the times when the Mt. Washington area was being
actively explored. In the author’s opinion, some of the key points to consider in such a
comparison would be:
• Eocene age intrusive associated deposits and mineral districts
• Breccias – tectonic, intrusive and hydrothermal
• Fault structures – low angle detachment faults, steep faults particularly those associated
with or proximal to known mineral occurrences
• Polymetallic – gold, silver, copper, molybdenum and/or tellurium
• Epithermal, porphyry and sub-volcanic mineral deposit types

=========================================================