Announcement PDF Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 1 of 20 ASX ANNOUNCEMENT 20 August 2026 NEW HARTS RANGE LICENCE UNLOCKS PRIORITY SYBIL COPPER TARGET Undrilled historical VTEM target to advance to field validation and ground EM following grant of EL34245 H I G H L I G H T S ▪ Exploration Licence EL34245 (Harts Range 1), covering approximately 384km², granted on 30 July 2026, enabling Litchfield to advance the undrilled Sybil copper target within its expanded Harts Range position. ▪ Historical exploration identified a VTEM response at Sybil and reported surface rock-chip results of up to 0.9% Cu and 0.1% Zn,¹ with no previous drilling identified in the historical information reviewed. ▪ Multiple independent datasets now support follow-up at Sybil, including historical conductivity and surface copper anomalism, together with a broader gravity response and favourable geological and structural setting. ▪ Sybil occurs within Riddock Amphibolite, the same broad geological unit that hosts the nearby third-party Basil copper-cobalt deposit, approximately 24.6km east of Sybil. ▪ Field work is planned to commence over the coming weeks, including geological mapping, validation and resampling of historical copper occurrences, ground-truthing of the historical VTEM target and ground EM surveying to refine the target ahead of any decision on future drilling. ▪ Drill targets at Oonagalabi are being refined to better test both strike continuity and true width, with a drilling program to commence as soon as practical. The exploration results reported in this announcement are historical in nature and are subject to the disclosures set out under the Competent Person’s Statement. A JORC Code (2012) Table 1 disclosure relevant to the historical exploration results reported in this announcement is provided as Appendix A. The information is limited to that available from historical records and is unable to be verified to the current JORC Code. Accordingly, the historical exploration results should not be relied upon for the purposes of Mineral Resource estimation or economic evaluation. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 2 of 20 Litchfield Minerals Limited (ASX:LMS) (“Litchfield” or the “Company”) advises that Exploration Licence EL34245 (Harts Range 1), covering approximately 384 km² within the Company’s expanded Harts Range position in central Australia, was granted on 30 July 2026. The newly granted licence allows Litchfield to advance the Sybil copper target, an undrilled target identified through historical exploration in the Lizzie Creek area and now being reassessed as part of the Company’s broader, belt-scale review of Harts Range. Sybil is located approximately 33.6km south-east of the Company’s Oonagalabi Project and approximately 24.6km west of the third-party Basil copper- cobalt deposit (Figure 1). Historical exploration identified an airborne electromagnetic (VTEM) response at Sybil and reported surface rock-chip results of up to 0.9% Cuand 0.1% Zn.1 Litchfield’s subsequent compilation of historical and regional datasets places the target within a broader gravity response and favourable geological and structural setting (Figure 2). No previous drilling at Sybil has been identified in the historical information reviewed. With EL34245 now granted, Litchfield plans to move Sybil from desktop interpretation into field validation, including geological mapping, validation and resampling of historical copper occurrences, ground-truthing of the historical VTEM target and ground electromagnetic surveying. Managing Director Comment Litchfield Minerals Managing Director Matt Pustahya said: “The value of taking a belt-scale approach is that we can bring together work completed by different explorers, at different times and for different purposes and assess it within one geological framework. Sybil is a good example. Historical exploration identified an EM target and copper at surface, then subsequentlyourbroaderreview hasadded gravity, geologyand structural contextaround it. None of those datasets on their own determine what is in the ground, however, together they give us a clearer reason to undertake the next stage of work as well as helping refine the direction of our efforts. Now that EL34245 has been granted, we can move from interpretation to field testing. Our priority is to validate the historical information, better constrain the conductor with ground EM and determine whether the target warrants progression toward drilling. This is the approach we are applying across Harts Range: integrate the evidence, reduce the geological uncertainty and direct capital to the targets that continue to strengthen as more information is added. Similarly,weare currentlyrefiningnew drill targetsatOonagalabi, withthe intentionofreturning to the Main Zone as soon as practical to further test the scale, geometry and controls on the mineralisation identified to date, including potential higher-grade zones. 1 Mithril Resources Limited, Huckitta Investor Presentation, 3 May 2011 and Broken Hill Presentation, 24 May 2011. The presentations report Sybil rock-chip results of up to 0.9% Cu and 0.1% Zn associated with a VTEM anomaly and state that displayed assay values are from surface rock-chip samples. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 3 of 20 Figure 1. Sybil tenement setting within the Company’s Harts Range tenure, showing Sybil relative to the Oonagalabi Project and the third-party Basil, Baldrick and Blackadder deposits and prospects. SYBIL COPPER TARGET Sybil was initially identified through historical exploration undertaken by Mithril Resources across the Lizzie Creek area. Airborne VTEM surveying completed in 2010 identified a significant electromagnetic response in the Sybil area (Figure 2). A broader VTEM survey was subsequently completed across the wider Huckitta/Lizzie Creek area in 2011, providing additional regional electromagnetic coverage.2 2 Mithril Resources Limited, MD Presentation to Investors / Resources Investment Expo, 23 July 2010; Geotech Airborne Pty Ltd, Survey and Logistics Report on a Helicopter Borne Versatile Time Domain Electromagnetic (VTEM) Survey, Huckitta Area, Australia, Project AA1003A, July 2011. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 4 of 20 Subsequent Mithril reporting recorded surface rock-chip results of up to 0.9% Cu and 0.1% Zn1 associated with the Sybil target and described the Lizzie Creek VTEM targets as occurring in a geological setting comparable to the nearby Basil copper-cobalt system.3 No previous drilling at Sybil has been identified in the historical information reviewed by Litchfield. Historical records reviewed also do not establish whether ground EM follow-up was completed specifically at Sybil. Figure 2. Key survey data summary providing the broader, tenement scale context of the Sybil Copper Target within EL34245. INTEGRATED DATA STRENGTHENS SYBIL Litchfield has compiled the historical VTEM information with regional gravity, magnetic, geological, structural and surface geochemical datasets to reassess Sybil within the broader Harts Range mineral systems framework. This work identifies a broadly rounded gravity high beneath the wider Sybil area, with the historical VTEM target and reported surface copper occurring within the same broader geological setting. 3 Mithril Resources Limited, Investor Presentation / Project Pipeline, 30 August 2011. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 5 of 20 Preliminary modelling by Litchfield’s geophysics consultants of the historical airborne EM response indicates numerous,large, shallow north-dipping conductorplates extending over more than 1km length at the Sybil target (Figure 3). Ground EM is planned to better constrain the geometry, strength and depth extent of the conductive response before any decision on future drill testing. The combination of historical conductivity, surface copper anomalism, gravity response and favourable geology provides multiple independent datasets supporting further investigation of the target. Importantly, the source of the geophysical responses remains unknown. Electromagnetic and gravity anomalies can be generated by a range of geological sources and do not, in themselves, demonstrate the presence, grade or economic significance of mineralisation. Ground-based exploration is required to determine the geological significance of the Sybil anomalies. BASIL REGIONAL GEOLOGICAL CONTEXT Sybil is interpreted to occur within Riddock Amphibolite, the same broad geological unit that hosts the nearby Basil copper-cobalt deposit, approximately 24.6km east of Sybil. Basil provides useful regional evidence that significant copper-cobalt mineralisation has formed within the Harts Range geological environment. Historical drilling reported by Mithril Resources included4 : ▪ 146.5m @ 0.24% Cu and 0.03% Co; ▪ 131.6m @ 0.30% Cu and 0.04% Co; ▪ 59.1m @ 0.63% Cu and 0.07% Co, including 13m @ 0.89% Cu and 0.05% Co; and ▪ 56m @ 0.52% Cu and 0.06% Co. Copper-cobalt mineralisation at Basil was historically identified over more than 2km of strike.⁵ In March 2012, Mithril Resources reported, under the JORC Code (2004), an Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate of 26.5 Mt at 0.57% Cu and 0.05% Co at a 0.3% Cu cut-off for Basil.5 Basil is located on third-party tenure and Litchfield has no ownership interest in the deposit. The Basil information is historical and is included solely to provide regional geological context. The historical estimate and exploration information have not been independently verified by Litchfield to current JORC Code standards and should not be relied upon for Mineral Resource estimation or economic evaluation of Sybil. The geological association between Sybil and Basil does not demonstrate that similar mineralisation is present at Sybil. The source and significance of the Sybil anomalies can only be established through further exploration. 4 Mithril Resources Limited, Resources & Energy Symposium Presentation, Broken Hill, 24 May 2011. 5 Mithril Resources Limited, Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate for the Basil Copper-Cobalt Deposit, ASX Announcement, 21 March 2012. The estimate was reported in accordance with the JORC Code (2004) Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 6 of 20 Figure 3. Historical priority VTEM conductivity anomalies and rock-chip locations over gravity data at the Sybil Copper Target within EL34245 Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 7 of 20 FIELD WORK TO COMMENCE IN SEPTEMBER Following the grant of EL34245, Litchfield is preparing to commence field work at Sybil over the coming weeks. Initial work is expected to include: ▪ Geological and structural mapping across the target area; ▪ Locating, validating and resampling historical copper occurrences; ▪ Systematic rock-chip and surface geochemical sampling; ▪ Ground-truthing of the historical VTEM targets; and ▪ Ground EM surveying to better constrain the geometry, strength and depth extent of the conductive response. The results will be integrated with theexisting geologicaland geophysical datasets todetermine whether Sybil progresses to more advanced target definition and drill testing. Any future drilling would remain subject to land access, heritage, environmental and regulatory requirements. In addition, our intention is to return to Oonagalabi and drill a series of new holes across the Main Zone to better test both strike continuity and true width of the mineralised system. The program will also test our evolving geological model, including the potential for a steeply dipping shear zone to be a key control on mineralisation, while targeting areas where this structural setting may have focused higher-grade copper-zinc mineralisation. We are looking to better understand results such as:6 OGRC017: 161m @ 0.5% Cu, 1.0% Zn OGRC010: 91m @ 0.9% Cu, 1.3% Zn OGRC016: 91m @ 0.6% Cu, 1.0% Zn OGRC014: 90m @ 0.6% Cu, 1.8% Zn OGRC004: 63m @ 0.45% Cu, 0.4% Zn OGRC003: 53m @ 0.55% Cu, 0.44% Zn OGRC001: 31m @ 0.32% Cu, 1.0% Zn OGRC006: 35m @ 0.24% Cu, 0.77% Zn 6 Results are refenced in the following LMS ASX Announcements: 3 June 2025 – “Gold Emerges in High-Mag Zone at Oonagalabi”; 17 November 2025 – “91m @ 0.9% Cu and 1.3% Zn Confirmed at Oonagalabi”; 10 December 2025 – “148m Copper intercept expands Oonagalabi Main Zone”; 5 February 2026 – “Further Thick Copper-Zinc Mineralisation at Oonagalabi” Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 8 of 20 BELT-SCALE TARGET GENERATION Sybil forms part of Litchfield’s broader strategy to reassess historical exploration across its expanded Harts Range position within a single mineral systems framework. Rather than assessing individual anomalies and targets in isolation, the Company is integrating historical electromagnetics, gravity, magnetics, geochemistry, geology and structural information to identify areas where multiple datasets support further exploration. The review is continuing across Litchfield’s granted Harts Range tenure and has also identified areas of interest within exploration licence applications that remain subject to grant. No exploration activity will be undertaken on application ground until the relevant title has been granted. Litchfield will progressively report additional targets as the historical review advances and as tenure becomes available for exploration. HISTORICAL EXPLORATION DATA The information in this announcement that relates to historical Exploration Results has been reviewed by Dr Matthew McGloin (MGeol, PhD), a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and a full-time employee of Litchfield Minerals Limited. Dr McGloin has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, the commodities being explored for, and the exploration activities being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code). Dr McGloin was not involved in the collection or generation of the historical Exploration Results and therefore cannot independently verify all aspects of the original sampling, analytical procedures or QA/QC beyond the information contained within the available historical records. However, Dr McGloin has reviewed the available historical reports, exploration data and supporting documentation and, on the basis of that review and his knowledge and experience of the geology and mineralisation of the region, considers the historical Exploration Results to be sufficiently reliable and fairly represented for the context in which they are presented in this announcement. Nothing identified during that review has caused Dr McGloin to question the reasonable use of those results for their stated exploration purpose. Dr McGloin consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on the information reviewed by him in the form and context in which they appear. The historical result should not be interpreted as representing a true width, average grade or continuous mineralised interval. The Company intends to undertake field validation and confirmatory sampling as part of the planned exploration program. Authorised for release by the Board of Litchfield Minerals Limited. Matthew Pustahya Managing Director Matthew@litchfieldminerals.com.au Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 9 of 20 ABOUT LITCHFIELD MINERALS Litchfield Minerals Limited (ASX: LMS) is a nimble, capital-efficient copper explorer in the Northern Territory, applying the disciplines used by major mining companies to discover and de-risk large-scale mineral systems. Our exploration strategy combines a Mineral Systems approach with structured decision gates, modern technology and rigorous capital allocation. Every exploration decision is guided by evidence, ensuring capital is deployed where it has the greatest potential to create value. By operating with the technical discipline, governance and decision-making processes expected by major mining companies, Litchfield is building high-quality exploration opportunities while positioning itself as a credible partner for future discovery. Follow us on: www.litchfieldminerals.com.au https://twitter.com/Litchfield_LMS https://www.linkedin.com/company/litchfield-minerals-limited/ COMPETENT PERSON STATEMENT The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is intended to be based on, and to fairly represent, information and supporting documentation to be compiled by Dr. Matthew McGloin (MGeol, PhD), a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and a full-time employee of Litchfield Minerals Limited. Dr. McGloin has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposits under consideration, and to the activity being undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the JORC Code). This statement, and Dr McGloin’s consent to the inclusion of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which they appear, will be finalised prior to release. FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS This announcement may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors. Forward-looking statements include those that are predictive in nature, depend on or refer to future events or conditions, or include words such as may, will, expect, intend, plan, estimate, anticipate, believe, continue, target or similar expressions. Such statements are based on assumptions and judgements held by the company as at the date of this announcement and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. Litchfield Minerals Limited does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law or the ASX Listing Rules. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 10 of 20 Appendix A JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Sybil Target – EL34245, Lizzie Creek / Harts Range, Northern Territory JORC Code Compliance (Historic Data) The exploration results reported in this Table are historical in nature and are derived from reports prepared by Mithril Resources during the 2010s. The information is limited to that available from historical records and is unable to be verified to the current JORC Code (2012 Edition). The historical exploration results should not be relied upon for Mineral Resource estimation or economic evaluation. Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.) Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (eg 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 (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m 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 (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. The announcement reports historical surface rock- chip sampling and historical airborne electromagnetic (VTEM) data at the Sybil target; no new Litchfield sampling results are reported. Mithril Resources publicly reported rock chip laboratory results in the Sybil target area with up to 0.9% Cu and 0.1% Zn and stated that the displayed assay values were from surface rock-chip samples. The specific sample ID, exact sample location, collection technique, sample mass and representativity for the Sybil result have not been identified in the records reviewed and the result has not yet been independently verified by Litchfield. The Sybil conductor is shown in Mithril material within 2010 VTEM coverage. Available historical presentations describe it as a large VTEM anomaly. A later 2011 Geotech VTEM survey covered the wider Huckitta/Lizzie Creek area; those later survey specifications are not assumed to be the acquisition parameters of the original Sybil anomaly. Source refs: R2–R6, R10. Gravity data referred to in this announcement are derived from the GRV2019 Complete Spherical Cap Bouguer Anomaly grid (400m cell size, GDA94 / MGA Zone 53). The grid is a pre-existing regional product compiled from ground gravity station data acquired by previous operators and government surveys. No gravity stations have been acquired by Litchfield, and station spacing, station accuracy and the terrain and Bouguer corrections applied are those of the source Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 11 of 20 dataset. Grid values are supplied in µm/s² and have been converted to mGal by dividing by 10. Drilling techniques Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open- hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg 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). No drilling has been completed at the Sybil target in the historical information reviewed. No drilling results from Sybil are reported in this announcement. Not applicable. 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. No drilling results from Sybil are reported. Not applicable. 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. No drill core or drill chips from Sybil are reported. Historical mapping and rock-chip observations are used only as reconnaissance geological context. Detailed geological logging of the specific historical Sybil rock-chip sample is not available in the source material reviewed. 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. The preparation and sub-sampling procedures for the specific historical Sybil rock-chip result (0.9% Cu and 0.1% Zn) have not been located in the source documents reviewed. No assumptions are made regarding those procedures. The historical result is reported as previously disclosed and remains to be field-validated by Litchfield. No new Litchfield assay results are reported. Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 12 of 20 • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. 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 (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. The laboratory, analytical method, detection limits are known for the historical rock chips results however QA/QC for the specific historical Sybil rock- chip results have not been identified in the source material reviewed. Accordingly, the historical assay is not treated as independently verified by Litchfield. For geophysics, the original 2010 Sybil VTEM acquisition specifications have not been located. The later Geotech AA1003A survey (May 2011) over the broader Huckitta area used a helicopter-borne VTEM system with a 26m diameter, four-turn transmitter loop, 25Hz repetition rate, 200A peak current, peak dipole moment of 425,000NIA, nominal transmitter/receiver terrain clearance of 49 m, and a Geometrics optically pumped caesium-vapour magnetometer. EM data were subjected to sferic rejection and low-pass filtering; magnetic data were diurnally corrected, tie-line levelled and micro- levelled. These specifications are disclosed as regional historical survey context only, not as confirmed specifications of the original 2010 Sybil anomaly. Source refs: R4, R6. 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. The historical Sybil rock-chip result has not yet been independently replicated by Litchfield. Mithril’s contemporaneous public reporting was issued with a Competent Person statement under the then-current JORC Code (2004). Litchfield intends to locate the historical sample position where practicable and undertake geological mapping and confirmatory surface sampling. No adjustment has been made to the historical reported Cu or Zn values. Source refs: R4. 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. The coordinates of the historical 0.9% Cu and 0.1% Zn Sybil rock-chip are provided in open file reporting from 2010 by Mithril Resources The 2011 Geotech regional survey data were delivered in UTM Zone 53S / WGS84 and MGA Zone 53 / GDA94 coordinate fields. Source refs: R4, R6. The gravity grid is supplied on a 400m cell size in GDA94 / MGA Zone 53. The peak of the Sybil gravity anomaly is located at approximately 507,800mE 7,416,400mN. The precision of that position is limited by the 400m grid cell size and by the station spacing Litchfield Minerals Limited · www.litchfieldminerals.com.au Page 13 of 20 of the underlying regional gravity survey; it is a gridded position and not a surveyed one. 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. The historical Sybil rock-chip sampling was reconnaissance in nature; the sampling density and spacing for the specific Sybil result are not documented in the sources reviewed and are not sufficient to establish grade continuity. The original 2010 Sybil VTEM line spacing has not been confirmed from the source materials reviewed. A later 2011 VTEM survey over the wider Lizzie Creek area included 697 line-km on nominal 200 m-spaced traverse lines with 2,000m-spaced tie lines. These later survey parameters must not be attributed to the original Sybil anomaly unless data lineage is confirmed. No sample compositing is reported. Source refs: R2, R6, R9. The gravity grid has a 400m cell size. The cell size reflects the gridding of the regional dataset and is finer than the station spacing of the underlying gravity survey; detail at scales below the station spacing is a product of interpolation. More closely spaced ground gravity would be required to further resolve the geometry of the anomaly. 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. The orientation of the original 2010 VTEM flight lines relative to the Sybil conductor has not been confirmed from the documents reviewed. The later 2011 wider Lizzie Creek block was flown on nominal north-south traverses with east-west tie lines; the geological signi