Tambor Termination Report

Professionals in resources, mining, processing, construction and the environment www.cam-llc.
com
Technical Report
Tambor Gold Project
Republic of Guatemala
Prepared for
Radius Exploration Ltd.
January 7, 2004
037171
Prepared by
Chlumsky, Armbrust and Meyer, LLC
George A. Armbrust, PhD., CPG

Kenneth L. Meyer
Robert L. Sandefur, P.E.
William W. Walker, PhD
200 Union Boulevard, Suite G13

Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Telephone: 303-716-1617
Fax: 303-716-3386
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section No. Page No.
1.0 SUMMARY........................................................................................................ 1.1
1.1 Property Description................................................................................ 1.1

1.2 Location................................................................................................... 1.1
1.3 Ownership ............................................................................................... 1.1
1.4 Geology and Mineralization.................................................................... 1.2
1.5 Exploration and Data Compilation.......................................................... 1.2
1.6 Mineral Resource Estimate ..................................................................... 1.3
1.7 Development and Operation.................................................................... 1.4
1.8 Conclusions and Recommendations........................................................ 1.5
2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 2.1
2.1 Terms of Reference ................................................................................. 2.1

2.2 Purpose of Report.................................................................................... 2.1
2.3 Sources of Information............................................................................ 2.1
2.4 Data Gathering and Site Visits by CAM ................................................. 2.2
2.5 Units and Abbreviations.......................................................................... 2.2
3.0 DISCLAIMER.................................................................................................... 3.1
4.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .............................................. 4.1
4.1 Property Location .................................................................................... 4.1

4.2 Property Description................................................................................ 4.3
4.3 Property Ownership................................................................................. 4.3
5.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE

AND PHYSIOGRAPHY.................................................................................... 5.1
5.1 Property Access....................................................................................... 5.1

5.2 Physiography and Climate....................................................................... 5.1
5.3 Infrastructure ........................................................................................... 5.1
6.0 HISTORY ........................................................................................................... 6.1
7.0 GEOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 7.1
7.1 Regional Geology.................................................................................... 7.1

7.2 Local and Property Geology.................................................................... 7.1
7.2.1 Lithology .................................................................................... 7.2
7.2.2 Structure ..................................................................................... 7.2
7.3 Deposit Type ........................................................................................... 7.3
7.4 Mineralization ......................................................................................... 7.6
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
8.0 EXPLORATION AND DATA COMPILATION .............................................. 8.1
8.1 Geochemical Surveys, Mapping, and Trenching .................................... 8.1

8.1.1 Sartre Zone ................................................................................. 8.3
8.1.2 Lupita Zone ................................................................................ 8.3
8.1.3 Bridge Zone................................................................................ 8.3
8.1.4 Valery Zone................................................................................ 8.4
8.1.5 TBS Zone (including Escondida, LTR) ..................................... 8.4
8.1.6 JNL Zone.................................................................................... 8.4
8.1.7 Achiotes/Q78 Zone .................................................................... 8.5
8.1.8 La Laguna Zone ......................................................................... 8.5
8.1.9 Guapinol Zone............................................................................ 8.5
8.2 Topographic Surveys............................................................................... 8.6
8.3 Drilling .................................................................................................... 8.6
8.3.1 2002 Drilling .............................................................................. 8.6
8.3.2 2003 Drilling .............................................................................. 8.9
8.4 Geological and Geotechnical Logging .................................................... 8.10
8.5 Sampling Method and Approach............................................................. 8.11
8.6 Sample Preparation and Analyses ........................................................... 8.12
8.7 Specific Gravity Determinations ............................................................. 8.13
8.8 Data Verification by Radius and Gold Fields.......................................... 8.14
8.9 Data Verification by CAM ...................................................................... 8.14
8.9.1 QA/QC Programs ....................................................................... 8.14
8.9.2 Drill Collar-Topography Check ................................................. 8.15
9.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ............................................................................... 9.1
10.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING................... 10.1
11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE................................................................ 11.1
11.1 Geological Model .................................................................................... 11.1

11.2 Statistical Analyses ................................................................................. 11.1
11.3 Variographic Analyses ............................................................................ 11.5
11.4 Block Model Construction ...................................................................... 11.6
11.5 Mineral Resource Classification ............................................................. 11.7
11.6 Mineral Resource Estimate ..................................................................... 11.8
11.7 Exploration Potential............................................................................... 11.9
12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE................................................................... 12.1
13.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS.................................................... 13.1
14.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................... 14.1
15.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 15.1
16.0 CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFICATION............................................................. 16.1
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page No.
1-1 Indicated Resource Estimate (0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)....................................... 1.4

1-2 Inferred Resource Estimate (0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)......................................... 1.4
1-3 Inferred Resource Estimate, Laguna North (1.0 g/t Au cutoff grade) ................ 1.4
4-1 UTM Coordinates Area of Interest .................................................................. 4.3

4-2 Tambor Project Mineral Concessions................................................................. 4.3
8-1 Highlights of Guapinol and Poza del Coyote Drilling........................................ 8.10

8-2 QA/QC Sample Statistics ................................................................................... 8.15
11-1 Resource Estimation Criteria .............................................................................. 11.1

11-2 Model Geometric Parameters ............................................................................. 11.7
11-3 Indicated Resource Estimate (0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)....................................... 11.8
11-4 Inferred Resource Estimate (0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)......................................... 11.8
11-5 Inferred Resource Estimate, Laguna North (1.0 g/t Au cutoff grade) ................ 11.8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Page No.
4-1 Location of the Tambor Property........................................................................ 4.1

4-2 Map of License and License Applications.......................................................... 4.2
6-1 Mineralized Structures and Veins Systems in the La Libertad District .............. 6.3
7-1 Geologic Map, Tambor Property ........................................................................ 7.4

7-2 Active Gold Mines and Advanced Exploration Projects .................................... 7.5
7-3 Mineralized Zones, Tambor Project ................................................................... 7.7
8-1 Location of Geochemical Sampling Grid ........................................................... 8.2

8-2 Geologic Map and Drill-Hole Location, Guapinol South-Poza del Coyote ....... 8.7
8-3 Geologic Map and Drill-Hole Location, Laguna North ..................................... 8.8
11-1 Longitudinal Section, Guapinol South Area....................................................... 11.2

11-2 Cross Section, Laguna North Area ..................................................................... 11.3
11-3 Log Au Cumulative Frequency Plot (1-m composites), Guapinol South ........... 11.4
11-4 Log Au Cumulative Frequency Plot (1-m composites), Poza del Coyote .......... 11.4
11-5 1-m Au Composite Omni-directional 0.3 g/t Indicator Variogram,
Guapinol South ................................................................................................... 11.5
11-6 1-m Au Composite Omnidirectional 0.3 g/t Indicator Variogram,
Poza del Coyote .................................................................................................. 11.6
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
1.0 SUMMARY
At the request of Radius Exploration Ltd. (Radius), Chlumsky, Armbrust and Meyer, LLC (CAM) has
conducted a technical review and prepared a mineral resource estimate for the Tambor Gold Project (the
Project) located in the Republic of Guatemala. Exploration on the property has been conducted by Radius
and their joint venture partner Gold Fields Exploration B.V. (Gold Fields), a wholly owned subsidiary of Gold
Fields Ltd. of South Africa.
CAM previously participated in a review of the Tambor Project as part of a study conducted by L.R.
KILPATRICK ASSOCIATES INC. (LRK) for BMO Nesbitt Burns. The results of the LRK study are
described in a report entitled Review of Exploration Projects, Radius Exploration Ltd., Guatemala and
Nicaragua, dated October 16, 2003.
For the current technical review and mineral resource estimation, which is the subject of this report, CAM
conducted a thorough review of the exploration database and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
procedures used by Radius and Gold Fields. Descriptions of the geology, exploration methods and resource
estimation procedures are included in this report.
1.1 Property Description
The Tambor Project consists of 12 concessions (licenses) for a total of 107,072.21 hectares. The 12 licenses
consist of individual blocks with surface areas between 100 and 78,522 hectares. A list of concessions
showing the name, ID number, area in hectares, and date granted is presented in Table 4-2 of this report.
1.2 Location
The Tambor Project is located in south-central Guatemala. The UTM coordinates of the area of interest
which contains the licenses and license applications are listed in Table 4-1 of this report.
1.3 Ownership
Radius announced on October 22, 2003 that it had reached an agreement with Gold Fields Inc. whereby
Radius will purchase all of Gold Fields interest in the Tambor Joint Venture. The purchase price to be paid
by Radius is 1,300,000 common shares in the capital stock of the Company. This transaction will give Radius
a 100 percent interest in all of the Tambor Properties located in Central Guatemala, and will increase Gold
Fields equity interest in Radius to 5,100,000 shares, 12.9 percent of the issued capital of the Company.
The Tambor Joint Venture (55 percent Gold Fields / 45 percent Radius) was formed in 2001 to explore the
Tambor Property.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
1.4 Geology and Mineralization
Current understanding of the gold mineralization on the Tambor Property identifies the known zones as
classic examples of orogenic lode gold deposits. Gold mineralization is associated with convergence of North
American and Caribbean plates, major structures which evolved from transpressional to transcurrent
movement. Mineralization is post-peak metamorphism. The gold zones are structurally controlled,
discordant veins, quartz-crush zones, and vein stockworks associated with shear zones. The majority of the
systems are Au-As systems, with arsenopyrite the most common sulfide. Hydrothermal plumbing systems are
laterally and vertically extensive, with a combined strike length of over 30 kilometers.
The Project hosts at least 13 gold-bearing mineral occurrences spread over a 14 by 6 kilometer area.
Mineralized zones include; Sastre, Lupita, Chorro, Valery, Escondida, LTR, TBS, Bridge, JNL, La Laguna,
Guapinol, Poza del Coyote, and Cliff Zone.
1.5 Exploration and Data Compilation
The Tambor Property received progressively detailed work programs between 2000 and 2003. Exploration
consisted of database establishment and development, reconnaissance sampling, soil sampling, anomaly
evaluation and target identification, target evaluation, permitting, road construction, target definition, and in
the most advanced areas drilling.
Significant anomalies were generated from gold in rock, soil, and stream sediment sampling as well as
follow-up trenching and drilling. Gold anomalies are variably associated with silver, arsenic, mercury, and
antimony anomalies. The initial exploration program included the establishment of 100 line-kilometers of
grid and soil sampling. Gold Fields evaluated the soil database and concluded that nine major gold-in-soil
anomalies have been identified in the area based on a grid soil survey comprised of 3,958 samples collected
over an approximate 11 square kilometer area. The grid area was also geologically mapped and over 1,400
rock samples were collected along the 7-kilometer gold trend.
During the first phase of drill testing a total of 30 reverse circulation and diamond drill holes were completed
on three zones: Sastre Zone, Bridge Zone, and Lupita Zone. Gold Fields then drilled several additional
targets included the Laguna, JNL, Lupita, Lagartija, and TBS Zones. The most recent drilling was focused on
the Poza del Coyote, Guapinol and Cliff Zones.
CAM examined core from one complete drill hole, selected intervals from three other holes, and their
corresponding drill logs. The drill logs examined presented a good representation of the drill core. The logs
are well designed and allow the geologist logging the core to easily represent the alteration, mineralization,
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
rock type, and other geological data. It is CAM's opinion that the exploration programs were conducted
following internationally accepted practices.
The data verification program conducted by Radius, Gold Fields, and Gregory Smith (Technical Report,
September 2003) included verification of geologic and assay data. It is CAM's opinion that the verification
programs were conducted in a diligent manner and followed acceptable procedures in checking and correcting
errors in the database. The quality of the exploration database is suitable for resource estimation.
1.6 Mineral Resource Estimate
CAM obtained copies of the plan maps and cross sections showing the geological interpretation, and the
locations of drill holes, trenches and other surface samples for the Guapinol South, Cliff Zone, Poza del
Coyote, and Laguna North areas.
Geologic zones defining mineralization at a 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade were drawn on sections and digitized.
The sections were drawn approximately perpendicular to the mineralized zones. The digitized zones were
projected perpendicular to the sections, one half the distance to the nearest section. The longest distance
between sections was 50 meters; therefore, the maximum projection distance was 25 meters.
A block model was constructed for the Poza del Coyote and Laguna North areas using a 1-meter-square block
size. The model size for the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone area was too large for the modeling software used by
CAM to use 1-meter-square blocks; therefore, the dimension along strike (east-west direction) was increase to
2 meters for this area. Grades were assigned to mineralized envelopes by averaging all composites within that
envelope. Tonnage for a particular mineralized envelope was calculated by counting all blocks assigned to
those envelopes and multiplying the volume by the assumed specific gravity of 2.67.
Based on the variographic analysis and observations of the continuity of mineralized zones from section to
section, all blocks within 15 meters of sample points are classified as indicated resources in the Guapinol
South-Cliff, and Poza del Coyote areas. Mineralization in these areas shows fairly good continuity along the
east-west trending shear zone; however, the drill-hole spacing is too large to define measured resources.
Other resources within the 0.3 g/t Au grade boundary (generally 15 to 30 meters from sample points) are
classified as inferred resources.
At Laguna North, resources are based on drill holes on only two cross sections, and the continuity of
mineralization between the two sections is not as clear; therefore, all resources in this area are classified as
inferred resources.
The indicated resource estimates for the Tambor Project as of November 2003 are presented in Table 1-1.
Inferred resources for the project are presented in Table 1-2.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
z Table 1-1
z Indicated Resource Estimate
z (0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)
z Grade z Contained
z Area z Tonnes
z (g/t Au) z Gold Ounces
Guapinol South-Cliff Zone 336,000 3.910 42,200
Poza del Coyote 120,000 4.024 15,500
Total 456,000 3.940 57,800
z Table 1-2
z Inferred Resource Estimate
y Grade y Contained
y Area y Tonnes
y (g/t Au) y Gold Ounces
Poza del Coyote 228,000 4.219 31,000
Laguna North 1,951,000 1.950 122,200
Total 2,547,000 2.641 216,200
Inside of the Laguna North deposit, there is a higher grade zone within the low-grade envelope. CAM
constructed an inner higher-grade shell using a 1.0 g/t Au contour. All other modeling methods remained the
same as at the 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade. Inferred resources for Laguna North at the 1.0 g/t Au cutoff grade are
shown in Table 1-3. Compared with the resource estimate at the 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade, the higher grade
zone contains less than half the tonnes at more than double the average grade and a reduction of contained
gold ounces of 16 percent.
z Table 1-3
z Inferred Resource Estimate
y Grade y Contained
y Area y Tonnes
y (g/t Au) y Gold Ounces
Laguna North 674,000 4.724 102,300
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
1.7 Development and Operation
The project is at an early to intermediate stage of exploration. Results to date have been encouraging.
Indicated and inferred resources have been identified, and it is CAM's opinion that because of the relatively
conservative criteria used to define inferred resources (geologically constrained zones with blocks 15 to 30
meters from a sample point), in-fill drilling in these areas should convert a significant amount of the inferred
resources to measured or indicated categories.
There is considerably more strike length to the west on the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone trend that contains
anomalous gold in soil and rock samples that has not had any drill testing. Also there is a parallel zone of
anomalous gold in soil and rock sampling about 1 kilometer to the north that has had no drilling. It is
considered likely that the current resource could be doubled or tripled or even more with a concerted drilling
program. Because of the somewhat erratic nature of the en echelon veining that dies out and picks up
randomly, the resource will require close spaced drilling to convert to measured and indicated resources.
1.8 Conclusions and Recommendations
In summary, CAM's conclusions are as follows:

Additional exploration is warranted to increase the degree of confidence in the resources and to locate new
mineralized zones.
The exploration programs were conducted following internationally accepted practices.
The verification programs were conducted in a diligent manner and followed acceptable procedures in
checking and correcting errors in the database. The quality of the exploration database is suitable for resource
estimation.
CAM visually reviewed results of QA/QC data and believes that in general the number and type of QA/QC
samples are sufficient for a project at this state of exploration.
CAM's review of cross sections and level plans show reasonably good continuity for the mineralized zones at
a cutoff grade of 0.3 g/t Au. High grade intercepts (greater than 2.0 g/t Au) occur on many of the cross
sections, but it is difficult to demonstrate continuity of individual zones with the generally wide section
spacing of 50 meters. CAM used a 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade to define mineralized zone for resource estimation.
Additional drilling is needed to define resources at a higher cutoff grade.
CAM's recommendations are as follows:
The surface topography and/or drill-hole locations should be adjusted to assure that the database and surface
topography are internally consistent prior to future exploration.
Test the drill-hole samples against the surface samples to determine if there is any type of surface enrichment
in this deposit, and if necessary restrict the range of influence of surface samples.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Obtained additional near spaced drilling data to demonstrate mineable continuity, particularly along strike,
and define the range of influence of the samples at higher cutoff grades.
Core samples that are representative of the mineralized material and host rocks should be selected and
specific gravity determinations should be done on these samples to determine accurate tonnage factors for
converting rock volumes into tonnes.
Metallurgical testwork should be done to determine the most appropriate method for gold recovery. This
information is needed to determine the likely cutoff grade required for reserve estimation.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
2.0 INTRODUCTION
At the request of Radius Exploration Ltd. (Radius), Chlumsky, Armbrust and Meyer, LLC (CAM) has
conducted a technical review and prepared a mineral resource estimate for the Tambor Gold Project (the
Project) located in the Republic of Guatemala. Exploration on the property has been conducted by Radius
and their joint venture partner Gold Fields Exploration B.V. (Gold Fields), a wholly owned subsidiary of Gold
Fields Ltd. of South Africa. The project is at an early to intermediate stage of exploration.
2.1 Terms of Reference
CAM's scope of work for the technical review and mineral resource estimation focused on a detailed review
of the geological interpretation, exploration program, data compilation, including quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) procedures. CAM previously participated in a review of the Tambor Project as part of a
study conducted by L.R. KILPATRICK ASSOCIATES INC. (LRK) for BMO Nesbitt Burns. The results of
this study are described in a report entitled Review of Exploration Projects, Radius Exploration Ltd.,
Guatemala and Nicaragua, dated October 16, 2003.
As part of the current study, CAM obtained the exploration database and other supporting documents from
Gold Fields and constructed a block model of the deposits. CAM has prepared an independent resource
estimate for the project.
2.2 Purpose of Report
The purpose of this technical report is to serve as an estimate of the mineral resources for the Tambor Gold
Project.
CAMs report can serve as an independent report prepared by a Qualified Person as defined by the Canadian
National Instrument 43-101 and the companion policy 43-101CP. The definitions of the measured, indicated
and inferred resources, as used by CAM, conform to the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and
Petroleum (CIM) guidelines as defined in CIM Standards on the Mineral Resources and Reserves Definitions
and Guidelines, dated August 20, 2000.
2.3 Sources of Information
The main sources of information used in preparing this report are the report by LRK stated above and a report
entitled Technical Report on the Central America Projects, Guatemala Properties, Gold Fields Joint Venture,
Marimba Joint Venture, Eastern Projects Including Holly/Banderas Joint Venture and Nicaraguan
Properties, 100% Radius Licences and Applications, prepared by Gregory F. Smith and dated September 25,
2003. A complete list of references is provided in Section 16 of this report.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
2.4 Data Gathering and Site Visits by CAM
During CAM's participation in the LRK study for BMO Nesbitt Burns, William W. Walker, PhD, Geology,
conducted a site visit of the Tambor Property on September 22-26, 2003. Examinations were made of surface
exposures, drill core, drill logs, and the sample logging facilities. Dr. Walker also reviewed the sample
preparation and quality assurance/quality controls (QA/QC) procedures used by Gold Fields in conducting the
exploration program. By reason of his education, affiliation with a professional association (SME) and past
relevant experience, Dr. Walker fulfills the requirements for conducting a technical review for purposes of NI
43-101.
CAM obtained a copy of the computer database from Gold Fields, along with electronic files of interpreted
cross sections, geological maps, trench maps, drill hole survey data, and electronic copies of the drill logs.
2.5 Units and Abbreviations
For the purpose of this report, all common measurements are given in metric units. All tonnages shown are in
metric tonnes of 1,000 kilograms, and precious metal values are given in grams or grams per metric tonne.
To convert to English units, the following factors should be used:
1 short ton = 0.907 metric tonne (MT)

1 troy ounce = 31.103 grams (g)
1 troy ounce/short ton = 34.286 g/MT
1 foot = 30.48 centimeters = 0.3048 meters
1 mile = 1.61 kilometer
1 acre = 0.405 hectare
The following is a list of abbreviations used in this report:
Abbreviation Unit Or Term
C degree Celsius
AA atomic absorption
Ag silver
AT assay-ton
Au gold
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Abbreviation Unit Or Term
CAM Chlumsky, Armbrust and Meyer, L.L.C.
CIM Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
FA fire assay
ft foot
g gram
Gold Fields Gold Fields Exploration B.V.
gpt or g/t Ag grams of silver per tonne
gpt or g/t Au grams of gold per tonne
ha hectare
hr hour
ICP Induced Coupled Plasma analysis
kg kilogram
km kilometer
LRK L.R. KILPATRICK ASSOCIATES INC.
m meter
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
Radius Radius Exploration Ltd.
RC reverse circulation
oz ounce
t metric ton (tonne)
US$ United States dollars
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator co-ordinates
yr year
/ per
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
3.0 DISCLAIMER
This report, entitled Technical Report, Tambor Gold Project, Republic of Guatemala, January 7, 2004, was
prepared by Chlumsky, Armbrust and Meyer, LLC (CAM) for Radius Exploration Ltd. (Radius).
The opinions and conclusions presented in this report are based largely on the data provided to CAM during
the site visit, data transferred electronically to CAM by Radius (the owner of the Tambor Gold Project), and
Gold Fields Exploration B.V. (the manager of the exploration program). Some of the data used in this report
were not within the control of Radius, Gold Fields or CAM. It is believed by CAM that the information and
estimates contained herein are reliable under the conditions and subject to the qualifications set forth in this
report. CAM confirms that standard engineering practices have been used by Radius and Gold Fields in
conducting the exploration programs; however, CAM makes no expressed or implied warranties regarding the
accuracy of the data or the resource estimate prepared by CAM.
The use of this report or any information contained therein shall be at the user's sole risk, regardless of any
fault or negligence of Radius, Gold Fields or CAM.
CAM has not conducted a legal review of ownership or property boundaries, and presents this information for
general reference only.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
4.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The property location, description and ownership are presented in this section of the report.
4.1 Property Location
The Tambor Project is located in south-central Guatemala. The location of the Project relative to the North
American, Caribbean and Cocos Tectonic Plates is shown in Table 4-1.
Figure 4-1
Location of the Tambor Property
The UTM coordinates of the area of interest which contains the licenses and license applications included in
the Tambor Project are listed in Table 4-1. The location of the licenses and license applications are shown in
Figure 4-2.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 4-2
Map of Licenses and License Applications
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Table 4-1
UTM Coordinates Area of Interest
Corner UTM Easting UTM Northing Corner UTM Easting UTM Northing
1 749,500 1,628,000 2 749,500 1,650,000
3 815,000 1,650,000 4 815,000 1,628,000
5 800,000 1,628,000 6 800,000 1,604,000
7 780,000 1,604,000 8 780,000 1,628,000
4.2 Property Description
The Tambor Project consists of 12 concessions for a total of 107,072.21 hectares. A list of concessions
showing the name, ID number, area in hectares, and date granted is presented in Table 4-2.
Table 4-2
Tambor Project Mineral Concessions
Name ID# Area (HA) Details
8,164.72 minus 1,600 returned to Cia Expl.
1 Golazo LEXR-064 granted Aug. 14, 1999
de Minas y Canteras for 6,564.72
2 La Vega I LEXR-595 212.3 granted May 23. 2001
3 Unidad Tipo LEXR-418 1,900 application area for extension time granted May 6, 2000
4 Santa Magarita LEXR-461 625 granted Nov. 22,2000
5 El Dulce LEXR-740 8,200 granted Oct. 29, 2002
6 La Laguna LEXR-674 275 granted Oct. 30, 2002
updated licences under
7 Progreso I LEXR-021 78,522.19
application
8 Tizate LEXR-598 165 granted Nov. 1, 2002
9 Carlos Antonio LEXR-559 458 granted Nov. 12, 2002
10 El Injerto LEXR-657 100 grantedNov. 1, 2002
11 Cipres I-A LEXR-710 9,950 grantedJan. 28, 2003
12 La Colonia LEXR-756 100 granted Jun. 6, 2003
Total 072.21107,
4.3 Property Ownership
Radius announced on October 22, 2003 that it had reached an agreement with Gold Fields Inc. whereby
Radius will purchase all of Gold Fields interest in the Tambor Joint Venture. The purchase price to be paid
by Radius is 1,300,000 common shares in the capital stock of the Company. This transaction will give Radius
a 100 percent interest in all of the Tambor Properties located in Central Guatemala, and will increase Gold
Fields equity interest in Radius to 5,100,000 shares, 12.9 percent of the issued capital of the Company.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
The Tambor Joint Venture (55 percent Gold Fields / 45 percent Radius) was formed in 2001 to explore the
Tambor Property.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
5.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE
AND PHYSIOGRAPHY
Accessibility to the property, physiography and climate, and infrastructure are addressed in this section of the
report.
5.1 Property Access
Access to the Tambor Property is by paved highway from the capital Guatemala City to various regional
centers (El Progresso, Chiquimula, and others) and then via secondary paved roads to nearby towns. Variably
maintained 2- wheel and 4-wheel drive roads access the mineralized zones and other parts of the Project
Areas. The international airport in Guatemala City is serviced by daily flights to Miami and other North and
Central American cities. The main port of entry into Guatemala is Puerto Barrios, located on the Caribbean
coast approximately 300 kilometers northeast (by paved highway) of Guatemala City.
5.2 Physiography and Climate
Elevations within the Project Areas are lowest at less than 300 meters above sea level in some of the principal
valleys. The land often rises sharply into limestone and/or younger volcanic terrains often exceeding 1,500
meters in elevation. The areas usually cover rolling to moderate topography. Less arable land is generally
covered with scrub and in places pine forest while more arable land has been deforested and supports small
plots of crops.
The climate in the area is subtropical and comprises a dry season from December to April and a rainy season
from May to November. The driest months are generally February and March and the wettest months are July
and September. The average annual rainfall is 1000 - 2000 millimeters. Temperature varies little throughout
the year averaging 22C and ranging between 30C and 10C.
5.3 Infrastructure
The regional center for the central and eastern Projects is the city of Chiquimula (population 40,000) located
two hours from Guatemala City by paved road. The majority of the people work in the agricultural sector or
in small, artisan craft businesses. Local labor is plentiful however the pool of skilled workers is small. A
modern electrical line serves Chiquimula. The Project area has abundant water supplies in permanent streams
and rivers.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
6.0 HISTORY
During 2000 and 2001 Radius identified and evaluated a belt of gold mineralization extending through central
Guatemala. This belt is within and adjacent to a major transcrustal structure, the Motagua Suture zone. This
structural zone represents the collision plate boundary between the North American Plate and the Caribbean
Plate. Radius investigated and documented gold occurrences along a 150-kilometer strike length of the
structural zone.
Radius conducted grid soil sampling followed by trenching on gold anomalies in the most favorable 25-
kilometer long portion in the west-central part of the gold belt. In July 2001, Radius commenced a drilling
program initially utilizing reverse circulation and followed by core drilling on the Lupita and Sastre zones.
This initial drilling indicated a significant thickness of low grade gold at the Lupita zone (Hole LWRC-04 had
135.6 meters with a grade of 1.22 grams-per-tonne gold (g/t Au)). The mineralization was in quartz with
disseminated pyrite and arsenopyrite in carbonaceous phyllites. Initial reverse circulation drilling at Sastre
returned 1.5 to 10.6 meter thicknesses of 1.0 to 1.5 g/t Au.
Radius and Gold Fields Ltd. signed a Letter of Intent in November 2001 to form a joint venture on the gold
belt that Radius had identified along the Motaqua Structural Zone. The joint venture was named the Tambor
Joint Venture. To earn a 55 percent interest in the venture, Gold Fields was required to spend US$5 million
on exploration over a three year period.
Gold Fields became operator of the Tambor JV on December 1, 2001. They immediately began an evaluation
of the extensive Radius database of reconnaissance geology, soil grid sampling and rock sampling. Early
work focused on the Bella Vista area including the Laguna North, Laguna South and JNL targets and on the
Tierra Blanca area, all in the western end of the JV property. In the Bella Vista area, 15 hand trenches were
excavated on six of the nine known soil anomalies.
During 2002, Gold Fields conducted initial scout drilling on seven areas, mainly on the west end and east end
of the JV properties. Of these seven areas, only the Laguna North area has received follow-up drilling. In the
final months of 2002, high-grade quartz vein hosted mineralization with visible gold was located at Guapinol
South. Hand excavated trenches there returned values up to 10.1 meters of 31 g/t Au in trench GP-5.
In early 2003, Gold Fields made a new high-grade discovery 200 meters east of the Guapinol South veins in
an area called Poza del Coyote. The first trench on this zone returned a high-grade core of 10.93 meters at
66.83 g/t Au within a broader lower-grade mineralized zone. An initial ten-hole reverse circulation drilling
program returned high-grade intercepts in five holes with moderate-grade intercepts in four additional holes.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
After completing the first stage drilling at Poza del Coyote, Gold Fields moved a Kluane core drill onto the
Guapinol South area and had completed 31 core holes by the end of July. About half of the holes had high-
grade intercepts, although some were fairly narrow (1.5- to 2.0-meter core length). The core drill was then
moved to Poza del Coyote and the Cliff zone between there and Guapinol. The results from the Cliff zone
returned some high-grade intercepts.
At a Joint Venture meeting in Guatemala at the end of September, Gold Fields notified Radius that they
intend to withdraw from the JV because the anticipated size of the resource does not meet their criteria for
development. Gold Fields indicated that a minimum of 2 million ounces reserves for their account was
required for them to proceed with a project. Through September, Gold Fields has expended approximately
US$3.5 million.
Gold Fields has prepared several resource estimates for the Tambor JV properties but has not made them
public. The main part of the resource is in the Guapinol South, Cliff, and Poza del Coyote area. CAM has
prepared an independent estimate of mineral resources in these areas. CAM's resource estimate is presented
in Section 11 of this report.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
7.0 GEOLOGY
The following description of the regional and property geology is summarized from Section 6 of the
Technical Report prepared by Gregory Smith, and from information gathered during the site visit.
7.1 Regional Geology
The Tambor Property is located in Guatemala, Central America. Central America can be described as a land
bridge between North and South America. The area has a highly complex and very active tectonic history
that is a result of the interaction of several lithospheric plates and has created a diversity of depositional
environments, deep-seated structures, and numerous mineral deposits. The geographic relationship between
the various tectonic plates is shown in Figure 4-1.
Guatemala is bisected with the northern Maya Block separated from the southern Chortis Block of the
Caribbean plate by the Motagua-Polochic Fault System. The Caribbean Plate is one of three small plates
sandwiched among the three larger North American, South American, and Pacific Plates. Northern Nicaragua
is also underlain by the Chortis Block. The tectonic affiliation for much of southern Nicaragua remains under
debate.
Rocks within the broad fault-bounded zone are dominated by three stratigraphic groups; Paleozoic basement,
Cretaceous to Tertiary sediments, and Tertiary to recent volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks. All rock units are
cut by coeval and younger intrusions related to the eastward migration of the Caribbean Plate.
7.2 Local and Property Geology
The Motagua-Polochic Fault and Jocotan Fault represent transitions for the geology of central and eastern
Guatemala. Rocks to the north of these faults are dominated by blocks of basement including schist, massive
limestone and sedimentary units, and ultramafics, which form the Central America Mountain System. To the
south and west the geology is largely Tertiary volcanic rocks of the Pacific Volcanic Belt.
The pre-Tertiary rocks have been folded and later block faulted into basins that parallel the major trend of the
Guatemalan mountains. The area was also the site of Tertiary volcanism centered within the elongate basins
parallel to the trend of the Motagua and Jocotan Fault Zones and the axes of the major folds. These grabens
were sites of deposition for the overlying thick sequences of red beds.
Distribution of the Tertiary red beds along major fault zones is the result of volcanism along the zones of
weakness and subsequent accumulation of volcanic detritus in basins that were controlled by normal faulting.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Pyroclastic activity increased throughout the Tertiary and thick blankets of tuff often occur on all but the most
prominent peaks of pre-Tertiary rocks.
Siliceous flows, basalts, lahars, and pyroclastics were deposited throughout the Pliocene and Pleistocene.
7.2.1 Lithology
The Tambor Property is primarily underlain by amphibolites, phyllites and argillites, and minor limestone
lenses of the El Tambor Formation. The siliceous and carbonaceous argillites mapped on the property may be
members of the El Tambor Formation or the lower El Pilar Group. The El Tambor Formation comprises a
west-trending band that extends across the property. Throughout most of the property, schistosity and
cleavage dip consistently and moderately to the southsouthwest. On the Unidad Tipo block, schistosity and
cleavage orientations are much more diverse, suggesting proximity to a fold hinge.
On the eastern half of the area, amphibolites host the Sastre, TBS, Escondida and LTR zones. The
amphibolites are well-foliated, fine- to medium-grained and medium to dark green in color where fresh.
Chlorite, biotite and epidote are also present, which, along with actinolite and tremolite, are interpreted to
represent retrograde greenschist facies metamorphism after initial lower amphibolite facies metamorphism.
Metamorphic quartz veins and boudins are common within these amphibolites. The protoliths for the
amphibolites are believed to be gabbros and mafic volcanic rocks. In outcrop, argillites are pale to medium
grey, strongly clay-altered, strongly foliated and finely banded with common coarser lenses and grains of
quartz and plagioclase. These argillites are probably derived from volcanic detritus. Light grey to grey-
brown phyllites are strongly foliated, fine- to medium-grained and strongly altered to sericite, clay and Fe-
oxides, particularly in mineralized zones. Metamorphosed sandstones weather light grey and consist of fine-
to medium-grained quartz in an argillically-altered matrix.
The El Tambor Formation is in fault contact with quartzose sandstones of the Santos Formation and a
Mlange Zone of San Diego Phyllites and El Tambor Formation. The El Tambor Formation and Mlange
Zone are also in fault contact with, and locally intruded by, locally termed, Santo Domingo and Tres Sabanas
granite to quartz monzonite intrusions. On the western half of the property, Tertiary to Quaternary basalt
flows overlie San Diego and El Tambor phyllites. Thick, localized Quaternary accumulations of
unconsolidated pumiceous ignimbrite, ash and diamicton are common throughout the property.
7.2.2 Structure
The Tambor Property is located above and to the south of the Motagua Fault Zone, a crustal-scale, left-lateral
strike-slip fault with several sub-parallel splays, including the Polochic, Jocotn and Chamelecn Faults. The
dominant structural grain on the property is a south-dipping schistosity, averaging 104/58S, prevalent in the
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
El Tambor Formation meta-volcanic and meta-sediment rocks. Strongly brecciated and intensely fractured
mineralized zones on the property are strongly structurally controlled with two orientations noted. Foliation
sub-parallel and shallow north-northeast dipping faults have been noted in the Sastre, TBS, LTR, and Lupita
West Zones. Relative timing of these faults is generally not known, but an exposure in the Sastre Zone
exhibits one of these shallow north-northeast dipping shears cutting a foliation-parallel shear. The orientation
of the flat-lying shears averages 326/16N. Later episodes of faulting are also present and appear to truncate
and/or displace mineralization. These block faults strike 150 to 200 and dip moderately.
A geologic map of the Tambor Property is shown in Figure 7-1.
7.3 Deposit Type
Based on the complex geologic environment on the Tambor Property, several types of gold deposits are valid
exploration targets. Potential gold -bearing mineralized systems include low-sulfidation, epithermal-style,
gold-bearing systems. Additionally the area has potential for structurally-controlled vein mineralization, and
disseminated/replacement style gold mineralization. Plutonic centers and appropriate structural/lithological
traps would promote these styles of mineralization.
A map showing the location of several active exploration projects, advanced precious metal properties, and
operating gold mines is presented in Figure 7-2. Brief descriptions, using publicly available information, for
several of these other projects are included.
In the adjacent portion of Honduras (30 to 150 kilometers east of Guatemalan Projects) gold is currently being
mined at the San Andres Mine (20 kilometers southeast). Heap leach gold mining at Geomaque Explorations
Ltd.s Vueltas del Rio Mine (40 kilometers east) is exploiting a probable gold reserve of 2.1 tonnes grading
2.5 g/t Au, Walford, 2002.
Glamis Gold Ltd.s San Martin Mine in Honduras occurs in a geological environment similar to the Marimba
Project. The mine entered commercial production in 2001 and produced 113,000 ounces in 2001. Glamis
reported production of 38,695 ounces in the third quarter of 2002.
The Cerro Blanco Gold Project, located 20-80 kilometers south, hosts low sulfidation epithermal and hot
springs related gold mineralization.
Drilling on the Marlin Project by Francisco Gold (now Glamis Gold Ltd.) in equivalent rocks along the
parallel Motagua Fault in western Guatemala has outlined a measured gold resource of 4.2 tonnes grading 1.9
g/t Au and 29g/t Ag and an indicated resource of 8.6 tonnes grading 1.5 g/t Au and 22g/t Ag (Voorhees,
2002).
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 7-1
Geologic Map, Tambor Property
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 7-2
Active Gold Mines & Advanced Gold Projects
In Northern Central America
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
In Nicaragua, the area of Siuna Bonanza La Rosita (locally referred to as the Mining Triangle) is
located 50 kilometers northeast of Radius Las Brisas Project. Siuna is a past producing gold-copper skarn
which was mined by open pit from 1939 to 1954 and underground from 1943 to 1968. The Bonanza District
contains more than 100 quartz veins and produced around 3 million ounces in the last 100 years,
COPSEM/INMINE, 1991. The Rosita Mine is a smaller past gold copper producer with mineralization
hosted in skarn and structurally controlled zones in igneous rocks.
The gold -zinc Coco Mina Deposit is located 50 kilometers north of Bonanza. Mineralization is contained in
a zone of altered, kaolinized, sericitized and pyritized intermediate volcanic rocks within a caldera-like
structure, Middleton and Campbell, 1979.
Black Hawk Minings active El Limon Gold Mine, located in NW Nicaragua (>70,000 ounces of gold
produced in 2001), extracts gold from a series of veins cutting intermediate to felsic volcanic rocks.
Cerro Mojn Mine, in central Nicaragua, consists of a low sulfidation epithermal gold deposit in andesite,
Johnson et al., 2001. The mine went in to production in 1997.
7.4 Mineralization
Current understanding of the gold mineralization on the Tambor Property identifies the known zones as
classic examples of orogenic lode gold deposits. Gold mineralization is associated with convergence of North
American and Caribbean plates, major structures which evolved from transpressional to transcurrent
movement. Mineralization is post-peak metamorphism. The gold zones are structurally controlled,
discordant veins, quartz-crush zones, and vein stockworks associated with shear zones. The majority of the
systems are Au-As systems, with arsenopyrite the most common sulfide. Hydrothermal plumbing systems are
laterally and vertically extensive, with a combined strike length of over 30 kilometers.
The Tambor Project hosts at least 13 gold-bearing mineral occurrences spread over a 14 by 6 kilometer area.
The location of these occurrences is shown in Figure 7-3. Mineralized zones include; Sastre, Lupita, Chorro,
Valery, Escondida, LTR, TBS, Bridge, JNL, La Laguna, Guapinol, Poza del Coyote, and Cliff Zone.
The Sastre Zone consists of a series of shallowly dipping, strongly oxidized and fractured or brecciated
tabular bodies from 5 to 41 meters thick. Evidence from trenching suggests that there may be stacked or
fault-repeated mineralized bodies. The dominant controls on mineralization appear to be two sets of shear
zones: foliation sub-parallel, shallowly to moderately south dipping shears, and flat-lying to shallowly north-
dipping shears.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 7-3
Mineralized Zones, Tambor Project
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
The Lupita Zone consists of hydrothermal quartz with disseminated pyrite and arsenopyrite in carbonaceous
phyllites. Amphibolite schist hanging wall rocks were conspicuously unmineralized. The Chorro Zone
appears to be a westward continuation of the Lupita Zone however, controls on mineralization are not well
understood and the zone is structurally more complex. As in the Lupita Zone, the hanging wall consists of
chlorite schist, which is likely an altered amphibolite, with mineralization hosted in a siliceous argillite or
phyllite along this contact. This siliceous argillite is buff to grey-white and is commonly silicified and
brecciated, largely sericite and clay altered. In addition to white, probably metamorphic, quartz, the siliceous
argillite is cut by dark grey quartz veinlets that contain arsenopyrite. Mineralized material is strongly
oxidized with abundant limonite, locally abundant hematite, and minor scorodite.
The Bridge Zone consists of hot spring-related gold mineralization observed primarily in railroad
embankments, trenches and outcrops along Ro Las Caas 4 kilometers west-southwest of the Sastre Zone.
Active hot springs located on the south bank of the river and just above the railroad tracks first drew
Tombstone to examine the property. These hot springs are actively depositing sulfur at the vent site. The
underlying geology is comprised of friable carbonaceous argillite overlain by Tertiary felsic tuff and
Quaternary ash.
The Valery Zone is located approximately 2.5 kilometers southwest of the Sastre Zone. This area is underlain
by variably altered and commonly brecciated and siliceous argillites, phyllites and sericite schists, chlorite
schists and mafic meta-volcanic rocks. Northwest-striking faults have placed these units in contact with
Santo Domingo intrusions. Locally, small dykes related to this intrusion are found in sericite schist.
Siliceous argillites are invariably argillically-altered, brecciated, silicified and commonly cross-cut by quartz
stringers. Pervasively silicified zones contain angular fragments of dark grey siliceous argillite and are cross-
cut by vitreous to milky quartz stringers and contain up to 10 percent finely disseminated arsenopyrite.
Trenching has confirmed interpretations that the mineralization is contained in a flat-lying to gently dipping
thrust zone between Tambor meta-volcanics in the hanging wall and Tambor phyllites in the footwall.
The TBS Zone (including Escondida and LTR) consist of auriferous mineralization exposed in a series of
outcrops and trenches located approximately 2 kilometers southeast of the Sastre Zone. These zones are
hosted in variably-altered amphibolite schist, as at the Sastre Zone, in close proximity to Santo Domingo
intrusions. Limestone lenses are also present within the altered amphibolites. The mineralized zones are
characterized by strong orange-brown carbonate alteration, a high degree of fracturing and brecciation,
sericite-clay alteration and lesser quartz veining. Stockwork calcitequartz veining marks more resistant
zones and outcrops. Drilling at TBS/LTR has intersected sub-horizontal mineralized zone with strong quartz-
carbonate-sericitelimonite alteration in multiple intervals. Altered zones contain erratic weak to moderate
iron oxide psuedomorphs after pyrite-arsenopyrite. Additional zones of weak carbonatization, quartz-calcite
veining and weak to moderate sulfide mineralization are present in the footwall to the main altered zone.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
The La Gartija Zone is the farthest east of the identified mineralized Zones on the Gold Fields Joint Venture.
Mineralization is associated with 0.5 to 2m wide shear structures or breccia zones. These structures are
commonly oriented E-W but with variable dips. Low-grade mineralization (0.5 to 1 g/t Au) is associated with
narrow fracture zones or stockwork zones parallel to foliation. The mineralization is projected to dip at a low
to moderate angle to the north.
The JNL Zone is located approximately 2.5 km northeast of San Pedro de Ayumpuc. The area is underlain by
El Tambor Formation phyllites and mica schists that have been intruded by Tres Sabanas granitic intrusions,
related to the Santo Domingo intrusions. Tertiary to Quaternary basalts locally form valley-fill deposits.
Mineralization is comprised of strongly argillically-altered phyllites with quartz veinlet stockworks. Detailed
mapping indicates that anomalous gold values are associated with iron oxide-rich low angle brittle fault
structures, quartz crush zones, quartz-sulfide veining along axial planar cleavages to crenulation folds and in
some cases, to quartz veining.
The Achiotes / Q78 Zone is adjacent to and approximately 500 meters east of JNL. The gold mineralization
at Achiotes occurs principally in arsenopyrite-bearing quartz veins and in greenish black silicified structures
in phyllites, accompanied by stockworks of white quartz veinlets. Quartz veins typically range from 10 to 30
cm in thickness but exceptionally range up to 5 meters. Silicified zones in phyllites typically range from 20
cm to 1m in thickness, with a maximum observed thickness of 4 meters. Veins and silicified zones in phyllite
tend to be concordant with foliation and dip moderately to steeply to the north.
The La Laguna Zone is the largest of the western anomalies. Mineralization at La Laguna Zone formed
during a deformation event which resulted in NE verging faulting and folding of the Tambor units. The
Laguna Zone is located on the WSW facing limb of a large property-scale, complex fault-bend/propagation
antiformal fold system and is dominated in section by north verging displacement on SW-dipping faults. The
northern portion is characterized by stockwork vein zones and sheared stockwork vein zones typically
running 1 to 2 g/t Au. Pervasively clay altered zones typically run <500 ppb Au. Gold grades are
systematically higher to the south, corresponding to higher elevations. Mineralization in the southern portion
of Laguna Zone is contained in a network of conjugate shears, sigmoidal veins and possible flat veins within
foliated granitoid host rocks. The zone is bounded by a set of NW-striking reverse fault zones that dip
moderately to the west-southwest.
The Guapinol Zone is a large gold anomalous zone on the eastern end of the western anomalies. Gold is
associated with arsenopyrite-bearing quartz veins in phyllite host rocks. Visible gold is readily evident in
association with the quartz veins. The target is a series of mesothermal gold-quartz vein ("orogenic lode
gold") system associated with regional scale structures. Gold-quartz veins structurally controlled by east-west
trending vein system associated with regional scale, strike slip fault. Mineralization is hosted by phyllites.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
The eastern extension of the zone also contains mineralized quartz veins including the Poza del Coyote Zone
and Cliff Zone.
Gold mineralization at Guapinol and Poza del Coyote occurs within and adjacent to quartz veins localized in
an east-west trending, steeply dipping zone of mylonitized phyllites. The mylonite zone is structurally
complex with evidence of an extensive history of shearing and quartz vein emplacement. Surface prospecting
suggests a potential strike length of up to 2,000 meters for the vein system
Assay results from trenching and drilling, discussed under the sections Exploration and Drilling respectively,
have confirmed the presence of high-grade gold mineralization associated with vein quartz and arsenopyrite.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
8.0 EXPLORATION AND DATA COMPILATION
The following description of the regional and property geology is summarized from Section 6 of the
Technical Report prepared by Gregory Smith (Sept 2003), the LRK report (Oct 2003), and from information
gathered during the site visit.
The Tambor Property received progressively detailed work programs between 2000 and 2003. Exploration
consisted of database establishment and development, reconnaissance sampling, soil sampling, anomaly
evaluation and target identification, target evaluation, permitting, road construction, target definition, and in
the most advanced areas drilling. This work outlined a series of shear-hosted oxide gold zones along a 6-
kilometer strike length of the Tambor thrust fault.
All samples collected on the Property have been analyzed at independent commercial laboratories for gold
and a variety of pathfinder elements including; mercury, antimony, and arsenic. Rock samples have been
described for geology and mineralization and located using Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) co-
ordinates. Descriptions of the rock samples include the nature of the material being sampled (outcrop, float,
etc.), and the widths of mineralized zones where appropriate. A database has been compiled which includes
all rock, soil, and stream sediment samples.
8.1 Geochemical Surveys, Mapping and Trenching
Significant anomalies were generated from gold in rock, soil, and stream sediment sampling as well as
follow-up trenching and drilling. Gold anomalies are variably associated with silver, arsenic, mercury, and
antimony anomalies. The geochemical response of gold in both soils and stream sediments appears good and
may be used on both a property-wide and detailed survey stage. Background levels for gold is less than 15
parts per billion (ppb) Au and most of the mineralized areas commonly contain numerous samples in excess
of 100 ppb Au and individual samples often exceed 500 ppb Au.
The initial exploration program included the establishment of 100 line-kilometers of grid and soil sampling.
Gold Fields evaluated the soil database and concluded that nine major gold-in-soil anomalies have been
identified in the area based on a grid soil survey comprised of 3,958 samples collected over an approximate
11 square kilometer area. The grid area was also geologically mapped and over 1,400 rock samples were
collected along the 7-kilometer gold trend. The location of the grid areas are shown in Figure 8-1. See Figure
7-3 for the location of the mineralized zones.
The Sastre Zone, Lupita-Chorro Zone, and Bridge Zone were the first to be tested in detail. Recent work has
focused on the Guapinol, Poza del Coyote, and Cliff Zones.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 8-1
Location of Geochemical Sampling Grid
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
8.1.1 Sastre Zone
The Sastre Zone is exposed in a series of trenches, outcrops, and two adits on a north-trending ridge between
800 and 900 meters elevation. These workings cover an area of approximately 500 by 300 meters, and
trenching in the Sastre North Zone has tested this mineralization for 400 meters along strike. The Sastre Zone
remains open down-dip and to the south and post-mineral faulting appears to have displaced it to the west at
the West Ridge Zone. Soil geochemistry indicates that the zone is closed off to the northeast. The Sastre
Zone occupies a 600 meters by 500 meters area where prospecting and hand trenching programs have
outlined six oxide gold zones within a large gold in soil geochemical anomaly. The first work program tested
the zones with hand trenches returning average values of 4.9 g/t Au over 12.8 meters, 7.8 g/t Au over 24.5
meters, and 7.3 g/t Au over 30.5 meters. A 10-meter deep exposure in an excavator pit confirmed high-grade
values in the hand trenches.
8.1.2 Lupita Zone
The Lupita Zone is located approximately 600 meters west of the Sastre Zone along the northeast-facing slope
of a ridge. The mineralized zone has been traced along this ridge in trenches and outcrops. Hand-dug
trenches in the Lupita Zone returned average values in the 1 to 2 g/t Au range over thicknesses of up to 30
meters. The flat lying Lupita Zone target measures 300 by 300 meters and remains open to extension.
Significant intervals encountered in the trenches include: 2.46g/t Au over 37.3 meters, 2.09g/t Au over 34.6
meters, and 2.01g/t Au over 19.3 meters.
The Lupita Zone extends into the Chorro area approximately 400 meters west. Trenches and prospecting and
rock sampling indicates that it could extend an additional 400 meters to the west. Significant trench
intersections include: 1.71g/t Au over 7.9 meters, 1.12g/t Au over 11.5 meters, and 5.47g/t Au over 3.3
meters.
8.1.3 Bridge Zone
Bridge Zone work traced the mineralization over a 600-meter by 300-meter area before it disappears under
ash cover. Channel and trench samples within the mineralized unit at Bridge returned gold values in the 2 to
4 g/t range over significant widths including 3.59 g/t over 85 meters. The zone is open to the southeast, but
rock sampling indicates that the zone weakens to the northwest, occurring as a broad zone greater than 200
meters in length of anomalous carbonaceous phyllite containing <1.0 g/t Au. The tuff units overlying the hot
spring sites are locally silicified and sulfidized with anomalous Au, Ag, As and Sb values. Significant trench
intersections include: 1.47g/t Au over 12.0 meters, 1.69g/t Au over 11.4 meters, 2.56g/t Au over 65.0 meters,
and 3.43g/t Au over 100.0 meters.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
8.1.4 Valery Zone
The Valery Zone is located approximately 2.5 kilometers southwest of the Sastre Zone. Float samples of
mineralized blocks contained coarse gold and adjacent trench samples returned 14.1 g/t Au. The overall
thickness of the zone is not known, and it remains open along strike and to the south. Soil geochemistry
suggests that the zone may be limited to the west, but remains open to the east along strike. Significant trench
intersections include: 1.54g/t Au over 45.0 meters, 1.20g/t Au over 25.0 meters, 2.29g/t Au over 19.0 meters,
and 4.51g/t Au over 19.0 meters.
Trenching completed at the Valery Zone in May 2002 returned mineralization averaging 1.18 g/t over 24
meters. A series of 72 pits were excavated (August, 2002) in the Valery area in August 2002 to exposed a
more three-dimensional view of the mineralized system. Results of the pitting demonstrated that the
mineralized zone occurs in a 10- to 20-meter thick remnant of phyllites in thrust contact with underlying
unmineralized amphibolites.
8.1.5 TBS Zone (including Escondida, LTR)
The Escondida, LTR and TBS Zones consist of auriferous mineralization exposed in a series of outcrops and
trenches located approximately 2 kilometers southeast of the Sastre Zone and immediately north of highway
CA-9. Mineralized zones in the TBS West trenches remain open in all directions and soil geochemistry
indicates that this zone may be continuous with the LTR Zone to the west. Significant trench intersections
include: 1.73g/t Au over 11.8 meters, 4.42g/t Au over 25.0 meters, 1.93g/t Au over 27.9 meters, 3.14g/t Au
over 11.2 meters, 2.44g/t Au over 26.3 meters, 1.43g/t Au over 5.7 meters, 2.45g/t Au over 6.4 meters, and
2.42g/t Au over 12.0 meters.
Soil geochemistry suggests both zones may be delimited to the south but remain open to the east, west and
north, and may be continuous with the Sastre Zone.
8.1.6 JNL Zone
Work at the JNL Zone is not as far advanced as some of the other zones on the Joint Venture. The gold in soil
anomaly is approximately 800 meters long by 50 to 100 meters wide. Trenching to date has returned 7.5
meters @ 6.21g/t Au, 7.0 meters @ 3.36g/t Au, 9.0 meters @ 1.68g/t Au, 13.9 meters @ 5.4g/t Au, and 19.9
meters @ 9.7g/t Au.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
8.1.7 Achiotes / Q78 Zone
Soil sampling has defined a series of east west trending soil anomalies in the central portion of the western
half of the Property. Highly anomalous portions of the anomalies were tested by hand trenching. Trench
results at Achiotes include ACHS-1 with 4.60 meters averaging 13.4 g/t Au (open to north) and 1.94 meters at
9.4 g/t Au (Open to north and south) and 1.30 meters at 1.2 g/t Au, ACHS-2 with 1.97 meters at1.301 g/t Au
and 4.99 meters at 4.024 g/t Au, and ACHS-3 with 10.35 meters at 2.172 g/t Au. The latest trench ACHN-12
returned two mineralized intervals: 3.04 meters at 2.945 g/t Au and 6.13 meters at 2.913 g/t Au. Sampling of
a 30-meter extension (August, 2002) to the original trench ACHS-1 identified an additional mineralized zone
grading 4.85 meters at 7.595 g/t Au. Trenching on the adjacent Q78 anomaly has returned 1.5 meters at 1.23
g/t Au in an area where reconnaissance sampling returned a maximum value in rock samples of 13.2 g/t Au.
8.1.8 La Laguna Zone
The Laguna Zone is the farthest west anomaly identified to date on the Tambor Property. The gold in soil
anomaly consist of two parallel east-west trending anomalies (North and South) each approximately 600
meters long by 200 to 400 meters wide. Reconnaissance sampling along the trend has returned up to 19.4 g/t
Au. Trenching returned 14 meters at 2.91g/t Au, 35.2 meters at 2.57g/t Au, 9.94 meters at 2.74g/t Au, 44.0
meters at 6.16g/t Au, and 28 meters at 1.84g/t Au. Laguna North roadcuts confirmed grades indicated by
earlier trenching. Mineralized intervals from the roadcuts include 23.57m averaging 1.848 g/t Au and 56.09m
averaging 5.353 g/t Au. Grades range up to 25.068 g/t Au with the higher grades commonly being associated
with quartz veins.
8.1.9 Guapinol Zone
Soil sampling has outlined gold in a soil anomaly measuring 100 meters in length by 100 to 250 meters in
width. In general, the east-west trend of the Guapinol soil anomaly encompasses steep slopes covered by
dense brush and wooded areas with heavy undergrowth. Trenching returned 26.05 meters at 5 g/t Au and
7.47 meters averaging 2.647 g/t Au. Initial sampling in southern portion of the area confirmed presence of
high grade gold mineralization ranging to 64.931 g/t in grab samples. Reconnaissance along the trend of the
vein system identified high-grade mineralization of 42.397 g/t approximately 400 meters to east of the
discovery area and 9.11 g/t approximately 200 meters west of discovery area. Guapinol trench GP-1,
completed in September 2002, returned 26.05 meters averaging 4.648 g/t Au (26.05 meters at 5.936 g/t Au in
check sampling). Included within the 26-meter mineralized zone is a 10.42-meter interval averaging 8.739 g/t
Au.
Through December 2002, a total of 21 trenches have been excavated and sampled in the Guapinol area. Six
of the trenches are located in the Guapinol North area and 15 are located in the Guapinol South area. This
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
trenching at Guapinol continued to indicate strong gold mineralization with GP-7 averaging 7.61 g/t Au over
a 7.49-meter interval, GP-9 averaging 20.806 g/t Au over 8.81 meters, including 6.36 meters at 28.344 g/t Au,
GP-10 averaging 8.41 g/t Au over 4.60 meters and GP-13 averaging 34.28 g/t Au over 2.1 meters. Potential
strike length for Guapinol South vein zone approaching 2 kilometers with the vein system remaining open
both to west and to east.
Trench GP-29 returns interval of 10.9 meters at 66.8 g/t Au within a broad zone that included 5.3 meters at
3.0 g/t, 2.98 meters at 1.98 g/t and 1.7 meters at 2.2 g/t. Soil grid shows a strong 300-meter long gold
anomaly outlining the known mineralization and open to the southeast. Exploration on the Tambor Property
has advanced a number of prospective areas within the belt to the drill ready stage, and several of the
mineralized zones have been drill tested during 2002 and 2003. Results are discussed in Section 8.3 under
Drilling.
8.2 Topographic Surveys
Topographic data was supplied to CAM by Gold Fields as dxf files, with contour intervals at 5-meter spacing.
8.3 Drilling
Starting in 2001 Radius completed a detailed surface exploration program on the Tambor Gold Project. This
work outlined a series of drill targets in an east-west rending belt. During the first phase of drill testing a total
of 30 reverse circulation and diamond drill holes were completed on three zones: Sastre Zone, Bridge Zone,
and Lupita Zone. Gold Fields then drilled several additional targets included the Laguna, JNL, Lupita,
Lagartija, and TBS Zones.
The most recent drilling was focused on the Poza del Coyote, Guapinol and Cliff Zones and since May of this
year 44 core holes have been drilled totaling just under 5,000 meters.
A plan map and longitudinal section through the Guapinol South-Cliff-Poza del Coyote Zones showing the
geology and drill-hole locations is presented in Figure 8-2. A geological map showing the drill-hole locations
in the Laguna North Zone is presented in Figure 8-3.
8.3.1 2002 Drilling
The first drill holes on the Tambor Property were completed on the Lupita Zone. The Lupita Zone holes cut
mineralized intervals in several holes including LWRC#1 25.9 meters at 2.09g/t Au, LWRC#2 61.0
meters at 1.28g/t Au, LWRC#3 69.8 meters at 1.00g/t Au, LWRC#4 135.6 meters at 1.22g/t Au, LWRC#6
18.3 meters at 1.39g/t Au, and LWRC#7 149.3 meters at 0.77g/t Au.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 8-2
Guapinol South Poza del Coyote Drill Program
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 8-3
Laguna North Zone Drill Hole Locations
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
This first phase also tested the nearby Sastre Zone with eight holes totaling 565 meters. Significant results at
the Sastre Zone include 3.1 meters at 1.3g/t Au, 6.1 meters at 1.49g/t Au, and 10.6 meters at 0.99g/t Au. A
600-meter length of near- surface gold mineralization exposed in hand trenches, adits and an excavator trench
along the flanks of Sastre Ridge was tested. Drilling returned continuously mineralized gold-bearing
intercepts, three of which were in excess of 100 meters long containing hydrothermal quartz with
disseminated pyrite and arsenopyrite in carbonaceous phyllites. Drilling at the Bridge Zone (500 meters west)
intersected significant results including BZRC#1 with 146.3 meters at 0.56g/t Au.
Gold Fields has drilled several additional targets within the Tambor Property in the last two years. Further
drilling in 2002 (total 3,611 meters) included the Laguna (1,593 meters), JNL (479 meters), Lupita, (608
meters) Lagartija (329 meters), and TBS Zones (602 meters).
Five drill holes totaling 498.35 meters were completed at Laguna North in early 2002 and an additional five
drill holes totaling 555 meters were completed at Laguna South in 2002. A second phase drilling program
successfully extended the zone of known gold mineralization at Laguna North to the west and down-dip from
previous intercepts in drill holes BVRC-02-001 and BVRC-02-002. Drill-hole BVRC-02-015 encountered
strong mineralization averaging 12.158 g/t Au over an 18.29-meter interval within a 45-meter thick zone of
+100 ppb Au mineralization. Similar to drill-hole BVRC-02-002, the zone of gold mineralization was
associated with sheared quartz veins and silicified and brecciated greenstones in the hanging wall of the
Footwall fault zone. Drill hole BVRC-02-017 extended the zone of gold mineralization a further 50 meters to
the west with two +1 g/t Au mineralized intercepts exceeding a combined 16 meters within a 53-meter thick
zone exceeding 100 ppb Au. Consistent with projections, drill hole BVRC-02-017 was also successful in
extending the mineralization to the west of the Hanging Wall Fault which appears to have displaced the
mineralized zone approximately 55 to 60 meters downward on the west side of the fault. With drill holes
BVRC-02-002, -015 and 017, the mineralized zone has now been confirmed over a down-dip distance
exceeding 200 meters.
Five drill holes completed in Sept/Oct 2002 at Lupita West totaled 608.08 meters. Drilling at Lupita
encountered numerous zones of low grade mineralization associated with arsenopyrite/pyrite bearing quartz
vein stockworks in hanging wall to an assumed fault. Intercepts include: 7.625 meters at 1.85g/t Au, 3.05
meters at 1.78g/t Au, 3.05 meters at 2.98g/t Au, and 1.52 meters at 1.096g/t Au. Drill results from Lagartija
indicate only weak gold mineralization associated with thin, isolated shear zones. A four-hole reverse
circulation drill program was completed at the TBS/LTR area in October 2002.
8.3.2 2003 Drilling
Drilling on the Tambor Property in 2003 through October 2003 has totaled 44 drill holes for a total advance of
just under 5,000 meters, testing the Guapinol South and Poza del Coyote zones. These two zones are located
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
at the eastern end of a 7-kilometer long gold-in-soil anomaly. Drilling intersected locally robust gold-
arsenopyrite-quartz bodies hosted within an east-west trending shear zone. Some of the better drill
intersentions in the two zones are listed in Table 8-1.
Table 8-1
Highlights of Guapinol and Poza del Coyote Drilling
Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Gold (g/t)
Guapinol South (2003)
PRDD-03-21 58.84 63.58 4.74 11.72
PRDD-03-27 28.95 33.52 4.57 39.79
PRDD-03-28 38.10 39.62 1.52 45.66
PRDD-03-33 74.70 80.03 5.33 72.12
PRDD-03-39 16.76 18.29 1.53 33.70
PRDD-03-44 4.57 10.21 5.64 5.80
PRDD-03-51 35.05 39.62 4.57 11.20

Poza del Coyote (2003)
PRRC-03-04 22.10 25.15 3.05 28.36
PRRC-03-05 15.24 20.57 5.33 18.03
PRRC-03-07 35.05 46.48 11.43 4.87
PRRC-03-08 24.38 38.86 14.48 15.05
PRRC-03-11 34.29 39.62 5.33 11.07
Drilling at Guapinol has tested 375 meters of strike length and approximately 200 meters vertical depth.
Assay results confirm the presence of significant gold mineralization associated with south-dipping, en
echelon, discordant veins within a mylonitic phyllite unit, with vein widths of up to 4 meters. Both gold and
arsenic mineralization is restricted to the quartz veins and their immediate wall rocks.
The results for holes 027, 028, 030 and 033 confirm the extension of high-grade mineralization to the east of
Trench GP5, plunging to the southeast. If Poza del Coyote is included, close to 750 meter strike length of this
vein system has been tested and there are still many high-priority soil anomalies to be addressed.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Drilling in the Cliff Zone, a new vein outcrop discovered between Poza del Coyote and Guapinol South
identified wide low-grade intervals, up to 19.8 meters at 1.57 g/t Au in hole PRDD-03-051, and narrower,
high-grades intervals, such as 4.57 meters at 11.2 g/t Au in hole PRDD-03-051.
8.4 Geological and Geotechnical Logging
The geologic logs were designed to contain the main geologic criteria used to delineate the model zones.
Logging sheets were maintained for both reverse circulation and core-hole samples. A numeric coding
system was developed to enter the various geological parameters into the Gemcom program. DATA recorded
includes hole ID, from/to distances, percent sample recovery, rock quality designation (RQD), lithology,
brecciation, alteration, oxidation, rock color, sulfide minerals present and amount, veins, mineralization, and a
general description of the lithology, alteration, mineralization structure, and unique attributes of the interval.
The Gold Fields binder of drill logs was examined by CAM at the San Jos del Golfo core sawing, sampling
and storage area. The core from one whole drill hole was laid out, and reviewed and compared to the drill
log. In addition, selected intervals of three additional drill holes were examined. The drill logs examined
presented a good representation of the drill core. The logs are well designed and allow the geologist logging
the core to easily represent the alteration, mineralization, rock type, etc. In addition, Gold Fields prepared a
memorandum describing Guapinol diamond drilling, logging, and sampling procedures, that presents a
thorough description of how these procedures should be performed.
Because fluctuations in foliation (kink folds) are deemed to be critical to localization of ore mineralization,
particularly in the Guapinol area, a significant number of core runs were oriented. This is a method whereby
the core is scribed with a core orientation spear so that its orientation relative to the hole is known and the
direction of foliation with respect to the core axis can be measured. By also knowing the hole azimuth and
dip, the actual foliation dip and strike can be calculated.
Gold Fields surveyed their drill holes at approximately 50-meter intervals and always at total depth of the
hole, hole conditions permitting. Surveys were conducted with a Sperry Sun single shot survey tool.
8.5 Sampling Method and Approach
All samples collected to date and referenced in this report have been collected under the supervision of
qualified persons. Sampling has been carried out using industry standard practices.
Location for each sample in the database is controlled by UTM co-ordinates compiled from a combination of
notes, locations plotted on government 1:50,000 topographic maps as well as data from hand-held GPS units
commonly carried by sampling personnel.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Soil samples have been collected using industry standard practices. Sample lines are generally laid out at
100- to 200-meter line spacings and samples taken at 25-meter intervals along the lines. In anomalous areas
of interest, the sample line interval and/or sample spacing would be decreased and in some cases additional
perpendicular lines would be run. Samples have been manually collected from pits dug on average 25
centimeters below surface with sample material placed into kraft paper sample bags. As with all rock
samples, each soil sample has been assigned a unique number.
Rock sample size is variable depending on the material being sampled but averages approximately 1.5
kilograms. Material is placed in durable plastic bags, assigned a unique sample number, and sealed for
delivery to the lab.
Trenches were laid out to cut perpendicular across the interesting geologic feature (vein, breccia zone, etc.).
Where possible the trenches would be excavated to bedrock. Trenches were hand dug or excavated by
mechanical means. Due to safety concerns, the hand-dug trenches did not exceed 2 meters depth. Most
samples were taken over 1.0 to 1.5 meter intervals. Gold Fields sampling of trenches were generally on set
intervals such as 1.5 meters.
Sample locations are clearly marked in the field often with both metal tags and more visible flags or paint.
Detailed descriptions of sample location, nature of material, representative characteristic of the sample, and
lithology, alteration, and mineralization are noted in the field.
With the exception of some reverse circulation drilling, the bulk of all drilling was done with hand-portable
Kluane diamond drills. All core is photographed prior to logging and sawing. All core is sawed: of the
core is sent for analyses, and the remainder kept in storage. Core sawing sampling and storage facilities were
examined by CAM. The facilities were clean and well organized with no obvious sources of potential
contamination. The facilities are walled, gated and locked at night, although some of the staff also sleeps on
site.
8.6 Sample Preparation and Analyses
Samples are collected into shipments at Radius secure facilities and driven by Radius personnel to the
facilities of Rocky Mountain Geochemical/BSi Inspectorate Laboratories (BSi) in Guatemala City,
Guatemala. BSi is a subsidiary of Inspectorate America Corporation, which is ISO 9002-certified. Samples
are prepared by BSis staff at their preparation facility in Guatemala City and pulps are flown to Reno,
Nevada for all analytical work at Rocky Mountain Geochemical's laboratory.
Stream sediment samples were shipped to BSis preparation lab in Guatemala City where a 300-gram split
was pulverized to minus 200-mesh and shipped to their Reno, Nevada facility. In Reno this sub-sample was
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
assayed for Au by a 30-gram fire assay with atomic absorption finish (30g FA/AA) and for 30 additional
elements by aqua regia Induced Coupled Plasma (ICP) analysis.
Soil samples were shipped to BSis preparation lab in Guatemala City where they were sieved to minus 80-
mesh and a 300-gram split was pulverized to minus 200-mesh, and shipped to their Reno facility. In Reno
this sub-sample was assayed for Au by a 30g FA/AA and for 30 additional elements by aqua regia ICP
analysis.
Rock samples were delivered to BSis preparation lab in Guatemala City where they were crushed to
minus10-mesh and a 300-gram sub-sample was pulverized to minus 200-mesh and shipped to their Reno
facility. In Reno this sub-sample was assayed for Au by a 30g FA/AA and for 30 additional elements by aqua
regia ICP analysis. All rock samples returning >1.0 g/t Au were subsequently re-assayed by 30-gram fire
assay (FA) with gravimetric finish.
Radius employed a rigorous Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) approach for sample preparation
and analyses to insure reliable results. Sample blanks and duplicates were inserted into the sample stream.
Duplicate samples, prepared from sample rejects were also sent to a second laboratory for gold check
analyses. Radius reports sending up to 20 percent duplicate samples out as checks.
Gold Fields inserted a lab blank and a field blank (from an unmineralized drill hole) as well as one of several
standard samples with each sample batch. The blanks and standards were generally inserted randomly;
however, the geologist in charge of logging and sampling often inserted a blank immediately following a
sample thought to be well mineralized to see if there is any spill-over contamination. After a somewhat poor
start during which time Gold Fields rejected results from several batches and required the laboratory to re-
assay the samples, the later results have proven to be quite acceptable. Gold Fields reported that they are now
very satisfied with the analytical results they are receiving.
Because there were numerous high gold assays from the drilling on Guapinol, Gold Fields also conducted
Metallic Sieve Analysis on numerous higher grade samples and compared these to Fire Assay results using
both AA and Gravimetric finish. A total of 212 comparisons were made with FA/AA (ppb) and 132
comparisons with FA/Grav (g/t). The results show clearly that conventional FA are a good indicator of total
gold content and that the added expense of conducting Metallic Sieve analyses is not warranted.
8.7 Specific Gravity Determinations
Gold Fields used a specific gravity value of 2.67 to convert volumes to tonnes in their preliminary resource
estimates. This value is not based on direct measurements of specific gravities on drill core samples for the
Tambor Property, but is a reasonable value for quartz veins material containing minor amounts of sulfide
minerals a for phyllite host rocks. CAM recommends that core samples that are representative of the
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
mineralized material and adjacent country rock should be collected and the specific gravity of these samples
should be measured using conventional water-immersion methods.
8.8 Data Verification by Radius and Gold Fields
Gold Fields has maintained a strict quality assurance and quality control program throughout the exploration
on the Tambor Property and all data has been supplied to Radius and reviewed by Gregory Smith, the author
of the Technical Report, dated September 25, 2003. Verification has including field duplicates for analyses
from outcrops, trenches and drill holes. Additionally, re-analyses has been completed of pulps and rejects
from original samples at the original lab. Finally, check assaying has included the submittal and analyses of
field re-samples, pulps, and rejects to secondary independent commercial laboratories.
Gold Fields has also completed metallic sieve analyses on select mineralized intervals from the Guapinol
South drilling. The results continue to indicate that normal fire assays are good indicators of the total gold
content of the samples. Above 1 g/t, both the AA-finish and the gravimetric-finish fire assay values are
generally in close agreement with the metallic sieve result.
Gold Fields reports that assay results received during the drilling have been in compliance with their rigid
internal QA/QC standards and procedures. Assay turn-around time is approximately 2 to 3 weeks for
conventional FA results and an additional week for ICP analyses.
8.9 Data Verification by CAM
Drill hole and trench data were provided to CAM in Access databases and converted to ASCII for use in the
MicroModel geological modeling and mine planning system. Surface topography data were provided as to
DXF files; one covering Laguna North area, and the other covering the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone and Poza
del Coyote areas. Contour lines were extracted as polylines for use in the MicroModel mine planning system.
8.9.1 QA/QC Programs
The database provided by Gold Fields contained considerable information on the QA/QC programs that had
been undertaken by Radius and Gold Fields. Basic statistics on the number and types of QA/QC samples
used during the drilling program are given in Table 8-2.
As can be seen by examining the table, approximately 10 percent of the samples are standards, duplicates and
blanks. CAM visually reviewed results of QA/QC data and believes that in general the number and type of
QA/QC samples are sufficient for a project at this state of exploration.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Table 8-2
QA/QC Sample Statistics
Sample Type Number of Samples
Field_Blank 486
Field_Duplicate 255
Field_Standard 190
Metallic_Sieve 130
Original_Samples 10,986
Totals 12,047
8.9.2 Drill Collar-Topography Check
CAM compared the elevation of the drill-hole collars from survey data with the elevation shown on the
topographic maps. Most of the surveyed collar elevations are within 3 to 4 meters of the elevation on the
topographic map, with the maximum difference of 12.2 meters. CAM believes that the differences in
elevation are acceptable for projects at this stage of exploration, especially as the topography is steep and
rugged. CAM recommends that the surface topography and/or drill-hole locations should be adjusted to
assure that the database and surface topography are internally consistent prior to future exploration.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
9.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES
The Tambor Property is located in a mineralized belt that includes properties held by several other companies
with active exploration projects. Several of these other projects are discussed in Section 7.3, Deposit Types,
in this report.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
10.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALURGICAL TESTING
No metallurgical test work was provided to CAM by Radius or Gold Fields for mineralized material from the
Tambor Project. The mineralogical composition of the mineralized material suggests that gold may be
recovered by conventional grinding and leaching, and lower-grade parts of the deposit may be amenable to
heap leaching of crushed ore; however, metallurgical testing is needed before any conclusions can be made
regarding recovery of gold from this material.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE
A description of the geological and computer block modeling, variographic analysis, resource classification,
and resource estimation is presented in this section of the report.
11.1 Geological Model
CAM obtained copies of the plan maps and cross sections showing the geological interpretation, and the
locations of drill holes, trenches and other surface samples for the Guapinol South, Cliff Zone, Poza del
Coyote, and Laguna North areas. The plan maps are shown in Figures 8-2 and 8-3.
The geological model developed by Gold Fields is based on the exploration and blasthole data as of
October 2003. The number of cross sections, cross section orientations, and approximate drill-hole
spacings in each area are shown in Table 11-1.
Table 11-1
Resource Estimation Criteria
Item\Area Guapinol South-Cliff Poza del Coyote Laguna North Total

Number of Cross Sections 13 5 2 20
Section Orientation north-south N20E east-west
Section Spacing 25 to 50 meters 25 to 50 meters 50 meters
Holes and Trenches 1 to 6 3 to 7
4 to 6 76
per section (ave. 3 to 4) (ave. 4 to 5)
20 to 100 20 to 100 20 to 150
Hole spacing on Sections (meters)
(ave. 50) (ave. 40) (ave. 50)
A longitudinal section along the Guapinol South deposit showing mineralized intervals is presented in
Figure 11-1. A cross section through the Laguna North deposit showing mineralized intervals is
presented in Figure 11-2.
11.2 Statistical Analysis
CAM composited all assay data to 1-meter composites. A cumulative frequency plots of all composites for
the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone and Poza del Coyote are given in the Figures11-3 and 11.4, respectively.
While there are two high-grade composites in the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone data (Figure 11-3), these fall on
the linear projection of all composites above about 20 g/t Au, so CAM elected not to cap grades for this
preliminary resource estimate. For the Poza del Coyote area (Figure 11-4), there are only two high-grade
composites and these fall below the linear projection of all composites above 0.7 g/t Au, so CAM elected not
to cap grades for this preliminary resource estimate.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 11-1
Longitudinal Section, Guapinol South Area
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 11-2
Cross-Section, Laguna North Area
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 11-3
Log Au Cumulative Frequency Plot (1-m composites), Guapinol South
Figure 11-4
Log Au Cumulative Frequency Plot (1-m Composites), Poza del Coyote
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
11.3 Variographic Analysis
To assess the mineable continuity of a deposit and hence how far resources may reasonably be projected,
CAM uses an indicator variograms at an approximate mining cutoff. For purposes of this initial resource
assessment a cutoff grade of 0.3 g/t Au was selected. It should be noted that selection of a final cutoff for
the deposit will require metallurgical testing. The 0.3 cutoff grade assumes a heap leach processing
scenario.
Omni-directional 0.3 g/t Au indicator variograms were constructed for the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone
(Figure 11-5) and Poza Del Coyote areas (Figure 11-6). The Laguna Norte was omitted because only two
sections were available through the area. These indicator variograms, which are based mostly on
downhole or along trench data, are reasonably well behaved and showed ranges of slightly more than 15
meters. Given the long strike length of the deposit, CAM believes that longer-ranges may be found along
strike; however, additional drilling would be required to confirm these longer ranges.
Figure 11-5
1-m Au Composite Omni-directional 0.3 g/t Indicatior Variogram
Guapinol South
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Figure 11-6
1-m Au Composite Omidirectional 0.3 g/t Indicatior Variogram
Poza del Coyote
11.4 Block Model Construction
Geologic zones defining mineralization at a 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade were drawn on sections and digitized.
The sections were drawn approximately perpendicular to the mineralized zones. The digitized zones were
projected perpendicular to the sections, one half the distance to the nearest section. The longest distance
between sections was 50 meters; therefore, the maximum projection distance was 25 meters. The model
geometric parameters for Guapinol South-Cliff Zone, Poza del Coyote, and Laguna North are shown in
Tables 11-2.
A block model was constructed for the Poza del Coyote and Laguna North areas using a 1-meter-square block
size. The model size for the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone area was too large for the modeling software;
therefore, the dimension along strike (east-west direction) was increased to 2 meters for this area.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Table 11-2
Model Geometric Parameter
Origin Block Size
Area Number of
(meters) (meters)
Guapinol South Northing 35400.00 Rows 300 Row 1.00
Easting 80800.00 Columns 400 Column 2.00
Elevation 700.00 Benches 300 Bench 1.00
Poza del Coyote Northing 35512.00 Rows 133 Row 1.00

Laguna North Northing 35150.00 Rows 250 Row 1.00

One-meter composites were assigned to mineralized envelopes on the basis of where the centroid of the
block was located. Composite assignments were adjusted to match the 0.3 g/t Au mineralization cutoff
grade by up to 1 meter. For example, if a 1-meter composite with a grade of 8.3 g/t Au was adjacent to a
composite which had been assigned to the mineralized envelope, it would be assigned to that same
envelope. Conversely, if a 0.02 g/t Au composite, which had been assigned to the mineralized envelope,
was adjacent to a composite which had not been assigned to a mineralized envelope, the 0.02 composite
would be removed from the mineralized envelope.
Grades were assigned to mineralized envelopes by averaging all composites within that envelope.
Tonnage for a particular mineralized envelope was calculated by counting all blocks assigned to those
envelopes and multiplying the volume by the assumed specific gravity of 2.67.
11.5 Mineral Resource Classification
Based on the variographic analysis and observations of the continuity of mineralized zones from section
to section, all blocks within 15 meters of sample points are classified as indicated resources in the
Guapinol South-Cliff, and Poza del Coyote areas. Mineralization in these areas shows fairly good
continuity along the east-west trending shear zone; however, the drill-hole spacing is too large to define
measured resources. Other resources within the 0.3 g/t Au grade boundary (generally 15 to 30 meters
from sample points) are classified as inferred resources.
At Laguna North, resources are based on drill holes on only two cross sections, and the continuity of
mineralization between the two sections is not as clear; therefore, all resources in this area are classified
as inferred resources.
11.6 Mineral Resource Estimate
The indicated resource estimates for the Tambor Project as of November 2003 are presented in Table 11-
3. Inferred resources for the project are presented in Table 11-4.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
Table 11-3
Indicated Resource Estimate
(0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)
Grade Contained
Area Tonnes
(g/t Au) Gold Ounces
Poza del Coyote 120,000 4.024 15,500
Total 456,000 3.940 57,800
Table 11-4
Inferred Resource Estimate
(0.3 g/t Au cutoff Grade)
Grade Contained
Area Tonnes
Poza del Coyote 228,000 4.219 31,000
Laguna North 1,951,000 1.950 122,200
Total 2,547,000 2.641 216,200
Inside of the Laguna North deposit, there is a higher grade zone within the low-grade envelope. CAM
constructed an inner higher-grade shell using a 1.0 g/t Au contour. All other modeling methods remained
the same as at the 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade. Inferred resources for Laguna North at the 1.0 g/t Au cutoff
grade are shown in Table 11-5. Compared with the resource estimate at the 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade, the
higher grade zone contains less than half the tonnes at more than double the average grade and a reduction
of contained gold ounces of 16 percent.
Table 11-5
Inferred Resource Estimate
(1.0 g/t Au cutoff grade)
Grade Contained
Area Tonnes
Laguna North 674,000 4.724 102,300
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
11.7 Exploration Potential
Drilling and trench sampling at Guapinol South-Cliff Zone, Poza del Coyote and Laguna North has
delineated 456,000 tonnes of indicated resources at an average grade of 3.94 g/t Au (57,800 contained
ounces of gold), and 2,547,000 tonnes of inferred resources at an average grade of 2.64 g/t Au (216,100
ounces of gold). The inferred resources are delineated by mineralized boundaries constrained by geologic
information and are projected no more than 30 meters from assayed intervals. It is CAM's opinion that
in-fill drilling in these areas should convert a significant amount of the inferred resources to measured or
indicated categories.
There is considerably more strike length to the west on the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone trend that contains
anomalous gold in soil and rock samples that has not had any drill testing. Also there is a parallel zone of
anomalous gold in soil and rock sampling about 1 kilometer to the north that has had no drilling. It is
considered likely that the current resource could be doubled or tripled or even more with a concerted
drilling program. Because of the somewhat erratic nature of the en echelon veining that dies out and
picks up randomly, the resource will require close spaced drilling to convert to measured and indicated
resources.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE
This project is at the early to intermediate stage of mineral exploration and mineral reserves have not been
defined.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
13.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS
Through surface sampling and geologic mapping, Radius and Gold Fields have located many geochemical
anomalies containing gold and other indicator elements for gold mineralization. Additional exploration is
warranted on these anomalies. The Project hosts at least 13 gold-bearing mineral occurrences spread over a
14 by 6 kilometer area. Mineralized zones include; Sastre, Lupita, Chorro, Valery, Escondida, LTR, TBS,
Bridge, JNL, La Laguna, Guapinol, Poza del Coyote, and Cliff Zone.
Drilling has been conducted on 11 of the mineralized zones. Some, such as the Lupita Zone, contained wide
intervals of low-grade gold mineralization (intervals of 25 to 150 meters long averaging between 0.8 and 2.1
g/t Au). Higher grade zones were identified in the Guapinol South-Cliff Zone, Poza del Coyote, and Laguna
North areas where mineral resources were defined. Additional exploration is warranted to increase the degree
of confidence in the resources and to locate new mineralized zones.
CAM examined core from one complete drill hole, selected intervals from three other holes, and their
corresponding drill logs. The drill logs examined presented a good representation of the drill core. The logs
are well designed and allow the geologist logging the core to easily represent the alteration, mineralization,
rock type, and other geological data. It is CAM's opinion that the exploration programs were conducted
following internationally accepted practices.
The data verification program conducted by Radius, Gold Fields, and Gregory Smith (Technical Report,
September 2003) included verification of geologic and assay data. It is CAM's opinion that the verification
programs were conducted in a diligent manner and followed acceptable procedures in checking and correcting
errors in the database. The quality of the exploration database is suitable for resource estimation.
Approximately 10 percent of the samples assayed from the exploration programs are standards, duplicates and
blanks. CAM visually reviewed results of QA/QC data and believes that in general the number and type of
QA/QC samples are sufficient for a project at this state of exploration.
CAM compared the elevation of the drill-hole collars from survey data with the elevation shown on the
topographic maps. Most of the surveyed collar elevations are within 3 to 4 meters of the elevation on the
topographic map, with the maximum difference being 12.2 meters. CAM believes that the differences in
elevation are acceptable for projects at this stage of exploration, especially as the topography is steep and
rugged.
CAM's review of cross sections and level plans show reasonably good continuity for the mineralized zones at
a cutoff grade of 0.3 g/t Au. High grade intercepts (greater than 2.0 g/t Au) occur on many of the cross
sections, but it is difficult to demonstrate continuity of individual zones with the generally wide section
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
spacing of 50 meters. CAM used a 0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade to define mineralized zone for resource estimation.
Additional drilling is needed to define resources at a higher cutoff grade.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
14.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
For a project at this stage of exploration the simple practice of averaging all the composites within a
mineralized envelope is acceptable; however, as a project progresses further, the following items are required:
The surface topography and/or drill-hole locations should be adjusted to assure that the database and
surface topography are internally consistent prior to future exploration.
Test the drill-hole samples against the surface samples to determine if there is any type of surface
enrichment in this deposit, and if necessary restrict the range of influence of surface samples.
Obtained additional near spaced drilling data to demonstrate mineable continuity, particularly along
strike, and define the range of influence of the samples at higher cutoff grades.
Core samples that are representative of the mineralized material and host rocks should be selected and
specific gravity determinations should be done on these samples to determine accurate tonnage
factors for converting rock volumes into tonnes.
Metallurgical testwork should be done to determine the most appropriate method for gold recovery.
This information is needed to determine the likely cutoff grade required for reserve estimation.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
15.0 REFERENCES
The sources of information used in preparing this report are as follows:
1. L.R. Kilpatrick Associates Inc., October 16, 2003; Review of Exploration Projects, Radius
Exploration Ltd., Guatemala and Nicaragua, dated October 16, 2003.
2. Johnson, M.D., R.W. Bybee, and J.D. Strapko; 2001; Geology and Gold Mineralization at the Cerro
Mojn Deposit, La Libertad,, Nicaragua in New Mines and Discoveries in Mexico and Central
America. Society of Economic Geologist - Special Publication #8, p. 331 338.
3. Middleton, R.S. and E.E. Campbell, 1979; Geophysical and Geochemical methods for Mapping gold-
bearing structures in Nicaragua. Geological Survey of Canada, Economic Geology Report 31, p. 779-
798.
4. Ridgeway, S., August 13, 2003, Radius Reports High-Grade Drill Results, Guapinol South, News
Release2003-11, Radius Exploration Ltd.
5. Ridgeway, S., October 22, 2003, Radius Purchases Gold Fields Interest in the Tambor Joint Venture.
Resource Calculation Underway, News Release 2003-16, Radius Exploration Ltd.
6. Smith, G.F., September 2003; Technical Report on the Central America Projects, Guatemala
Properties, Gold Fields Joint Venture, Marimba Joint Venture, Eastern Projects Including
Holly/Banderas Joint Venture and Nicaraguan Properties, 100% Radius Licenses and Applications.
7. Vehrs, T., April 2003, Sampling and Quality Control Procedures Poza del Coyote Drill Program,
Gold Fields Internal Memorandum.
8. Vehrs, T., October 2003, Tambor Joint Venture, Quality Control of Sampling and Assaying
Procedures, Gold Fields Internal Memorandum.
9. Voorhees, J.S., 2002; Marlin Project Technical Report for Glamis Gold Ltd. Filed with SEDAR,
June 2002.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
16.0 CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFICATION
George A. Armbrust
200 Union Blvd., Suite G-13
Lakewood, CO 80228
Phone (303) 716-1617
Fax (303) 716-3386
I, George A. Armbrust, of Lakewood, Colorado, do hereby certify that:
1. I am a Consulting Geologist, and Partner in the mining consulting firm Chlumsky, Armbrust and
Meyer LLC (CAM) at 200 Union Blvd., Suite G-13, Lakewood, Colorado 80228.
2. I am a Certified Professional Geologist (Number 7561) in the American Institute of Professional
Geologists, a Registered Geologist, State of Wyoming (Registration Number 1051), and a member
of the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG) and Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration
(SME).
3. I graduated from the University of Ottawa in 1963 with a B. Sc. Honours degree in Geology, and
from the University of Colorado in 1967 with a PhD in Geology.
4. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1967.
5. I have read the definition of qualified person set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101)
and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined in
NI 43-101) and past relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a qualified person
for the purposes of NI 43-101.
6. I am responsible for the preparation of the Technical Report entitled Technical Report, Tambor
Gold Project, Republic of Guatemala, dated December 1, 2003 (the Technical Report). The
Technical Report is based on my knowledge of the geology of the area covered by the Technical
Report, and on review of published and unpublished information on the property and surrounding
areas. A site visit and review of the exploration program was conducted on September 22-26, 2003,
by Dr. William W. Walker, a Consulting Geologist and Registered Geologist, State of Wyoming
(PG-2903), working for CAM.
7. I am not aware of any material fact or material change with respect to the subject matter of the
Technical Report that is not reflected in the Technical Report, the omission to disclose which makes
the Technical Report misleading.
8. I am independent of Radius Exploration Ltd. applying all of the tests in section 1.5 of National
Instrument 43-101.
9. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the Technical Report has been
prepared in compliance with that Instrument and Form.
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004
10. I consent to the filing of the Technical Report with and stock exchange and other regulatory
authority and any publication by them, including electronic publication in the public company files
on their website accessible by the public, of the Technical Report.
Dated this 7th day of January, 2004
___________________________
George A. Armbrust, PhD, CPG
CAM 037171
January 7, 2004

Tambor Termination Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tambor Termination Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Professionals in resources, mining, processing, construction and the environment www.cam-llc.

George A. Armbrust, PhD., CPG

200 Union Boulevard, Suite G13

Section No. Page No.

1.0 SUMMARY........................................................................................................ 1.1

1.1 Property Description................................................................................ 1.1

2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 2.1

2.1 Terms of Reference ................................................................................. 2.1

3.0 DISCLAIMER.................................................................................................... 3.1

4.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .............................................. 4.1

4.1 Property Location .................................................................................... 4.1

5.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE

5.1 Property Access....................................................................................... 5.1

6.0 HISTORY ........................................................................................................... 6.1

7.0 GEOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 7.1

7.1 Regional Geology.................................................................................... 7.1

8.1 Geochemical Surveys, Mapping, and Trenching .................................... 8.1

9.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ............................................................................... 9.1

10.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING................... 10.1

11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE................................................................ 11.1

11.1 Geological Model .................................................................................... 11.1

12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE................................................................... 12.1

13.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS.................................................... 13.1

14.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................... 14.1

15.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 15.1

16.0 CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFICATION............................................................. 16.1

Table No. Page No.

1-1 Indicated Resource Estimate (0.3 g/t Au cutoff grade)....................................... 1.4

4-1 UTM Coordinates Area of Interest .................................................................. 4.3

8-1 Highlights of Guapinol and Poza del Coyote Drilling........................................ 8.10

11-1 Resource Estimation Criteria .............................................................................. 11.1

Figure No. Page No.

4-1 Location of the Tambor Property........................................................................ 4.1

7-1 Geologic Map, Tambor Property ........................................................................ 7.4

8-1 Location of Geochemical Sampling Grid ........................................................... 8.2

11-1 Longitudinal Section, Guapinol South Area....................................................... 11.2

1.1 Property Description

1.5 Exploration and Data Compilation

1.6 Mineral Resource Estimate

Guapinol South-Cliff Zone 336,000 3.910 42,200

Poza del Coyote 120,000 4.024 15,500

Total 456,000 3.940 57,800

Poza del Coyote 228,000 4.219 31,000

Laguna North 1,951,000 1.950 122,200

Total 2,547,000 2.641 216,200

1.8 Conclusions and Recommendations

In summary, CAM's conclusions are as follows:

CAM's recommendations are as follows:

2.1 Terms of Reference

2.2 Purpose of Report

2.3 Sources of Information

2.5 Units and Abbreviations

To convert to English units, the following factors should be used:

1 short ton = 0.907 metric tonne (MT)

The following is a list of abbreviations used in this report:

Abbreviation Unit Or Term

CAM Chlumsky, Armbrust and Meyer, L.L.C.

CIM Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum

Gold Fields Gold Fields Exploration B.V.

gpt or g/t Ag grams of silver per tonne

gpt or g/t Au grams of gold per tonne

ICP Induced Coupled Plasma analysis

LRK L.R. KILPATRICK ASSOCIATES INC.

ppb parts per billion