NI43-101Woodjam

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

1/39

NI43-101 Technical Report for the Woodjam Copper Gold Project, British Columbia

Wildrose Resources Ltd.

Global Geological Services Inc. i

July 14, 2006

National Instrument 43-101

Technical Report

for the

Woodjam Copper Gold ProjectCariboo Mining Division, British Columbia

for


By

Geoffrey Goodall, P.Geo.Global Geological Services Inc.

July 14, 2006

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

2/39




July 14, 2006

SUMMARY

The Woodjam Property is located in the Cariboo Mining Division of central British Columbia andlies approximately 50 kilometres east of Williams Lake and 10 kilometres south of Horsefly. Theproperty is comprised of nine contiguous legacy claims and 60 map-staked claims totalling26,936.3 hectares located on NTS map sheet 93A/3 and 93A/6 at geographic coordinates of

5216' N latitude, 12500' W longitude. The property is host to five mineralized zones at variouslevels of exploration, with the Megabuck Zone historically being the focus of a majority of theexploration.

The Woodjam property is owned 40% by Wildrose Resources Ltd. with Joint Venture partnerand operator Fjordland Exploration Inc. holding the remaining 60% interest. All claims are ingood standing and recorded in Fjordland's name at BC Mineral Titles Online to facilitatemanagement of the claims.

The Woodjam property is situated within the Quesnel Trough, a regional geological feature thatis host to numerous copper and/or gold occurrences, many of which have produced significantamounts of these commodities. The property is underlain by a succession of Triassic-Jurassic

Takla Group volcanic and related sedimentary rocks intruded by the Jurassic aged TakomkaneBatholith to the south. The claims include the northern contact with the batholith, severalmonzonite to syenite plugs of unknown affinity and two granodiorite plugs possibly related to theTakomkane Batholith. Younger Miocene aged basalts overlap these older units on the westernside of the property and as isolated islands further to the east.

The Woodjam claims cover at least five documented copper-gold, copper only and gold onlyoccurrences hosted by subvolcanic alkalic intrusives, generally of Jurassic age. The MegabuckZone has historically received the majority of focus and is delineated as a gold-coppermineralized system in a monzonite intrusive and bounding volcaniclastics. A mineralizedenvelope approximately 175 metres thick (true thickness) trending northeast and dippingapproximately 45 to the southeast has being defined from drilling to date. Drilling has returned

mineralization up to 50 metres averaging better than 1.0 grams per tonne (g/t) gold withassociated copper concentration to 0.2% and is a strong indication of the potential of thismineralized system. To date, the Megabuck Zone has been tested by 11,787 metres of drilling.

The Takom Zone, another of the mineralized zones identified at the Woodjam Property, islocated approximately 2.5 kilometres south of the Megabuck Zone. This zone is underlain byTakla Group volcanics intruded by granodiorites, biotite-quartz diorites and monzodiorites thatmay be related to the Takomkane Batholith. A 10.6 metre intercept grading 1.27 g/t gold and0.13% copper was obtained from hole 74-03 and diamond drill hole 05-48 returned 0.10 g/tgold and 0.12% copper over 82.6 metres. Total drilling on the Takom Zone amounts to 1,682metres.

The Megabuck East Zone is located approximately 1 kilometre east of the Megabuck Zone.The zone is defined by Induced Polarization and magnetic geophysical anomalies discoveredduring the 2001 geophysical survey, an anomalous copper-in-soils anomaly delineated by a2005 soil sampling program, and 560 metres of drilling, which intersected semi-massivechalcopyrite mineralization in one drill hole grading 42.3 ppb Au and 0.90% Cu over 15.4metres. The remaining mineralized zones on the Woodjam Property are at an early stage ofexploration. At this time the potential for a copper-gold system is open laterally and to depth.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

3/39



Global Geological Services Inc. ii

July 14, 2006

The Megabuck Zone has demonstrated "Porphyry-style" gold-copper mineralization generallyrelated to alkalic sub-volcanic intrusive bodies. A comparative model to the Megabuckmineralization due to the high gold to copper ratio would be the Kemess Mine operated byNorthgate Minerals Corp. The Kemess Mine contains proven and probable reserves (31 Dec2005) of 68 M tonnes grading 0.65 g/t Au and 0.21% Cu in the South deposit and 424 M tonnesgrading 0.30 g/t Au and 0.16% Cu in the North deposit.

Drill results from the three zones that have been tested on the Woodjam property confirm a goldand copper mineralized system that appears to be open laterally and to depth. Although thecomplex geology and numerous fault offsets complicate the geologic model, the explorationtargets have suitable multi-component signatures that warrant further exploration.

The objective of the next phase of exploration will be to conduct a systematic drill program onthe Megabuck Zone in order to establish a preliminary resource model for this area. Grid drillingon an approximate 100 metre by 100 metre pattern to the south and east of knownmineralization within an area of high magnetic signature is recommended.

It is estimated that the recommended exploration will cost $1,700,000 to complete.

Given positive results from this program, other target areas within the Woodjam Property wouldjustify further exploration.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

4/39




July 14, 2006

Table of Contents

SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................... i1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................1

1.1 Purpose of Report .........................................................................................................11.2 Sources of Information ..................................................................................................1

1.3 Definitions and Abbreviations........................................................................................11.4 Field Examination..........................................................................................................2

2 Disclaimer .........................................................................................................................23 Property Description and Location ....................................................................................24 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography.......................65 History ...............................................................................................................................66 Geological Setting .............................................................................................................9

6.1 Regional Geology..........................................................................................................96.2 Property Geology ..........................................................................................................9

7 Deposit Types .................................................................................................................128 Mineralization ..................................................................................................................13

8.1 Megabuck Zone...........................................................................................................13

8.2 Takom Zone ................................................................................................................138.3 Megabuck East Zone ..................................................................................................148.4 Spellbound Zone .........................................................................................................148.5 Ho Showing .................................................................................................................14

9 Exploration ......................................................................................................................159.1 Geophysics..................................................................................................................15

9.1.1 Airborne Magnetics Survey .................................................................................159.1.2 Ground Magnetics Surveys .................................................................................159.1.3 Induced Polarization Surveys ..............................................................................15

9.2 Soil Geochemistry .......................................................................................................1510 Drilling .............................................................................................................................1811 Sampling Method and Approach.....................................................................................20

11.1 Soil Geochemistry .......................................................................................................2011.2 Drill Core .....................................................................................................................20

11.2.1 2002 Program......................................................................................................2011.2.2 2003 Program......................................................................................................2111.2.3 2004 Program......................................................................................................2111.2.4 2005 Program......................................................................................................2111.2.5 2006 Program......................................................................................................22

12 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security ...................................................................2313 Data Verification..............................................................................................................2414 Adjacent Properties.........................................................................................................2515 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing.................................................................2516 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates .........................................................25

17 Other Relevant Data and Information .............................................................................2618 Interpretation and Conclusions .......................................................................................2619 Recommendations ..........................................................................................................2620 References......................................................................................................................2821 Certificate of Qualified Person ........................................................................................30

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

5/39



Global Geological Services Inc. ii

July 14, 2006

List of Figures

Figure 1 Property Location Map ....................................................................................... 4Figure 2 Woodjam property claim map and mineralized zones ............................................ 5Figure 3 Regional Geology .............................................................................................10Figure 4 Property Geology ..............................................................................................11

Figure 5 Copper in soil Geochemistry ..............................................................................17Figure 6 Drill Hole Locations ............................................................................................19

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Woodjam Property Mineralized Zones .................................................................3Table 5.1 Exploration History Chronology.......................................................................... 7Table 5.2 Significant Historic Drill Hole Intercepts ..............................................................8Table 12.1 Sample Preparation and Analytical Methods Acme ........................................23Table 12.2 Sample Preparation and Analytical Methods Global ........................................24Table 13.1 Reference Samples .......................................................................................24

Table 19.1 Recommended Exploration Budget .................................................................27

List of Appendices

Appendix I Woodjam Property Claim Listing .....................................................................32

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

6/39



Global Geological Services Inc. 1

July 14, 2006

1 Introduction

This report summarizes the results and exploration activities conducted on the Woodjamproperty and makes recommendations for further work to define zones of mineralization.The technical report was prepared at the request of Wildrose Resources Ltd.("Wildrose"), a public company whose shares are listed on the TSX Venture Exchange

under the symbol WRS. Wildrose owns a 40% interest in the Woodjam property withjoint venture partner Fjordland Exploration Inc. (Fjordland) holding the remaining 60%interest. Details of the joint venture agreement are summarized in Section 3. Fjordlandis designated as operator of the joint venture for exploration and development purposes.

Recommendations are included herein for an exploration drill program to further defineareas of copper-gold mineralization within the Megabuck Zone on the Woodjamproperty. A budget of $1.7 million is required to support the recommended workprogram.

This report has been completed by a Qualified Person as defined by the CanadianSecurities Administrators' ("CSA") National Instrument 43-101, Standards of Disclosure

for Mineral Projects, according to the format and content specified in Form 43-101F1,Technical Report. This report draws extensively on company reports prepared by JohnPeters, P.Geo. for Fjordland.

1.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to summarize the geological, geochemical, geophysical,and diamond drilling evaluation of the Woodjam Property, located in the Cariboo MiningDivision. The report is intended to be submitted to the TSX Venture exchange and otherregulatory bodies in connection with listing requirements for Wildrose.

1.2 Sources of Information

The sources of information and data used in the preparation of this report are referencedin Section 20 (References). Chief among these references are project and assessmentreports prepared by John Peters, P.Geo. Exploration Manager for Fjordland, as well asprevious work filed with the BC Ministry of Energy and Mines and geological reportsprepared by various authors working with the Geological Survey of Canada and the BCGeological Survey.

1.3 Definitions and Abbreviations

asl above sea levelAu gold

BC British ColumbiaBCGS BC Geological SurveyCIM Canadian Institute of Mining and MetallurgyCu copperDDH diamond drill holeg/t grams per tonneGSC Geological Survey of CanadaGPS Global Positioning SystemIP Induced Polarization geophysics survey technique

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

7/39




July 14, 2006

Kg KilogramNI43-101 National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral ProjectsNSR Net Smelter ReturnNTS National Topographic Systemppm parts per millionRC reverse circulation drill hole

1.4 Field Examination

Mr. Geoffrey Goodall, P.Geo, a geological consultant and independent Qualified Person,is the author of this report. Mr. Goodall conducted a field examination of the Woodjamproperty most recently on May 31, 2006 to document and verify the Megabuck showing,geological features and drill hole information. In addition, Mr. Goodall reviewed the drillhole sample assay certificates from specific holes from the 2005 and 2006 drill programsas a check against reported values and did not detect any discrepancies.

2 Disclaimer

The author has relied on the reports, opinions and statements of experts who areconsidered qualified persons. Information concerning legal, environmental, political orother issues and factors relevant to this technical report have been provided byrepresentatives of those fields.

All information adopted for use in this report by the author was obtained from sourcesconsidered to be reliable and the information is believed to be true and correct. Severalof the historic Assessment Reports were prepared prior to the establishment of NI 43-101 reporting requirements for technical reports and as such due not comply with currentstandards. Such information is treated as historic in nature and has not been reliedupon in its entirety by the author.

Historical geological, geophysical and analytical data used in this report have beenpresented as originally reported and, to the authors knowledge, all of the survey datareported is factual. No responsibility is assumed for the accuracy of such items thatwere furnished by other parties and the author makes no personal warranties orrepresentations concerning such historic information.

3 Property Description and Location

The Woodjam property is located in the Cariboo Mining Division of central BritishColumbia, NTS map sheet 93A/3 and 93A/6 at geographic coordinates; latitude 5216'N, longitude 12500' W as shown on Figure 1. The property is centered near the villageof Horsefly, located approximately 60 kilometres east of the city of Williams Lake.

In 1998 Wildrose began acquiring ground as existing claims in the area lapsed.Consolidation of the core area around the Megabuck showing was completed inFebruary, 1999. At that time, the Woodjam property consisted of a contiguous group ofeight 4-post mineral claims totalling 3,550 hectares. Further claims were added to theproperty base between 1999 and 2006. In early 2006, an additional 22,174 hectares ofcontiguous mineral claims were acquired. Currently, the Woodjam propertyencompasses a total area of 26,936.3 hectares.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

8/39




July 14, 2006

Claim information, as taken from the BC Mineral Titles Online website on 15 June 2006,is listed in Appendix 1. The Woodjam property is outlined in Figure 2.

Mineral Titles Online, the electronic mineral claim recorder for the Province of BritishColumbia, indicates the above claims are 100% owned by Fjordland Exploration Inc.Title to the claims is held by Fjordland, as operator of the project to expedite

maintenance on the claims. Wildrose maintains ownership of 40% of the propertythrough a Joint Venture Agreement dated March 29, 2006, as amended May 31, 2006.

The original claims that Wildrose acquired were staked using compass and chain. On 10June 2005, Durfeld Geological Ltd of Williams Lake was contracted to conduct adifferential GPS survey of the legal corner posts of certain of the field located claims.Results of the survey were forwarded to the chief gold commissioner for accuratepositioning of the claims. All claims acquired since January, 2006 were done using theMineral Titles Online service.

On 1 August 2001 Wildrose and Fjordland signed an agreement whereby Wildrosegranted an option for Fjordland to earn a 60% interest in the Woodjam Property by

incurring $1.5 million in exploration expenditures with cash and share payments of$150,000 and 300,000, respectively over a five year period. Fjordland has subsequentlyvested into a 60% interest in the property. The Woodjam Joint Venture (WJV) wasformed to further explore and develop the property. The participants in the WJV areFjordland (60%) and Wildrose (40%). Fjordland remains the operator.

Mineralized occurrences as described by British Columbia Minfile Database and historicexploration include the following as shown in Table 3.1 below.

Reference # Name Metallic Minerals093A 078 Woodjam Chalcopyrite, Gold, Pyrrhotite, Pyrite,093A 124 WL Molybdenite, Pyrite Chalcopyrite

093A 206 Takom Pyrite, Chalcopyrite, Gold093A 205 Spellbound Chalcopyrite, Pyrite093A 204 Discovery Chalcopyrite093A 015 Ward's Horsefly Gold093A 014 Miocene Gold093A 047 Ho Chalcopyrite, PyriteTable 3.1: Woodjam Property Mineralized Zones

There are no known environmental issues or liabilities specific to the Woodjam claims.Exploration activities are being conducted under permit number MX-10-194. Areclamation bond for the 2006 diamond drill program has been posted with the BCgovernment and has been granted approval number 06-1102049-0202.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

9/39

0 15 30

kilometres

MountMount

PolleyPolley

WOODJAMPROPERTY

Horsefly

Quesnel Lake

Horsefly Lake

Likely

Carib

ooLak

e

WilliamsLake

Barkerville

QuesnelR

iver

QR MineQR Mine

F ra s e rRiv e r

Quesnel

British Columbia

Woodjam

Property8

FIGURE 1: LOCATION MAP

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

10/39

0

4

8

kilome

tres

SG-20

Woodjam#11

Woodjam5

WoodjamX

Woo

djam#9

WoodjamZ

Woo

djamY

Woo

djamW

Woodjam2

WW-2

WW-10

WW-8

WW

-3

W

W-1

SG-25S

G-26

WW-13

WW-12

WW-11

WW-9

WW-5

WW-6

WW-7

WW-4

SG-17

SG-12

SG-13

SG-24

SG-41

S

G-39

SG-33

SG-14

SG-23

HO

DISCOVERYSPELLBOUND

Woodjam#8

Wood

jam#10

Woodjam#7

Woodjam#14

SG

-5

SG-4

SG-1

SG-2

SG-3

SG-6

SG-7

SG-9

SG-8

SG-

11

SG-1

0

SG-15

SG-18

SG-21

SG-16

SG-22

SG-19

Woodjam#6

Woodjam#12

SG-27

SG-28

SG-29

S

G-30

SG-31

SG-32

SG-34

SG-35

SG-36

SG-37

SG-38

SG-40

SG-42

PINE

MIOCENE

WARD'SHORSEFLY

BL

EK

HOBSON'SHORSEFLY

RED

MOFFAT

K

WUNLAKE

WOODJAM

WOOD

C

ANT

WL

HORSEFLY

BEEKEEPER

TAKOM

WoodjamProperty

CLAIMMAP

NTS93ACaribooMD

j

OtherClaims

as

of16May2006

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

11/39




July 14, 2006

4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography

The area of the Woodjam property is flat to gently sloping with few rock outcropexposures. The property is largely vegetated by first and second growth fir and pineforests that have been partly clear-cut and selectively logged. Elevations vary from low

marshy areas at approximately 850 metres above sea level (asl) to rolling hills at 1,240metres asl. Numerous small lakes, many beaver dammed, dot the property and streamstend to be of low gradient and do not cut to bedrock. Exposure of bedrock is limited tosteeper hillsides, ridgetops and roadcuts. Lower areas are usually covered by extensiveglacial till and alluvium. The last glacial advance appears to have been toward thenorthwest.

Year round access by road via Horsefly is gained by travelling south on the Starlike Lake- Woodjam Creek logging road. Logging roads access most of the property and newlogging access roads are currently being developed into the area to the east of theMegabuck Zone.

Climatic conditions are typical of the central interior of British Columbia. Averageminimum low temperatures for January are -18C and average maximum highs for Julyare +24 C. Frost free days last on average from mid-May to mid-August. Between Mayand September precipitation at a low-elevation station is about 400 millimetres, almosttwice that of Williams Lake, 60 kilometres to the west. During April snow depths in theQuesnel Plateau (approximately 700 metres asl) are typically one to two metres.

The village of Horsefly is a supply centre for the local logging and ranching populationand has readily available skilled labour as well as board, lodging, fuel and other supplyoutlets. Field operations are generally conducted with crews lodged in Horsefly or innearby fishing lodges. Residential power lines run to Starlike Lake on the northwesternedge of the property. Year round work conditions for diamond drilling and geophysical

surveys are hampered only by snow accumulation.

5 History

The first gold found in the Cariboo was along the Horsefly River in 1859 which prompteda major gold rush into the region. A second gold rush period hit the Horsefly area in1887. Placer gold operations were common throughout the Quesnel Belt during theearly 1900's, however there is no documented evidence of placer activity on theWoodjam property during this period. The earliest recorded work in the area occurred inthe 1960's prompted by the wave of exploration for porphyry copper deposits.

The history of the original discovery of the Megabuck Zone on the Woodjam claims is

uncertain but presumably the area attracted initial attention due to a prospecting find. Asmall hand trench on the northern slope of the small knoll hosting the Megabuck Zone isthe earliest testament to work in the area covered by the current claims. This workappears to predate the earliest documented work on the property that started in 1966.

The Woodjam property has been intermittently explored over the intervening 40 yearsand is well documented in the public record. A chronology of exploration activities basedon assessment reports prior to 2001 is summarized in Table 5.1 below:

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

12/39




July 14, 2006

Year Owner Survey Type QuantityZoneCovered

1966-1967

Helicon Exploration Ltd& Magnum ConsolidatedMining Company

Geology & I. P.surveys

Unknown Megabuck

1973-1974 Exploram Minerals Ltd

I.P. Survey

MagnetometerSoil Geochemistry

24.1Iine-km

34.3 line-km228 samples

Megabuck/Takom

1974-1977

Exploram Minerals Ltd Diamond Drilling5 holes -1056m

Megabuck/Takom

1983Archer Cathro andAssocs

Geology MappingSoil Geochemistry

2,100 samplesPeripheralClaims

1983-1984

Placer Development CoLtd

Diamond DrillingSoil GeochemistryMag/VLF-EMSeismic

15 holes -1266m910 samples53.6 line-km6 locations

Megabuck

1984Archer Cathro andAssocs Soil Geochemistry 3,644 Samples Properywide

1986 Big Rock Gold Ltd Trenching 692 mMegabuck/Takom

1987Archer Cathro andAssocs

I.P., Mag, & VLF-EM

70 line-kmMegabuck

1990 Auspex Gold Ltd Soil Geochemistry 58 samples Takom

1991-1992

Noranda Exploration CoAirborne Mag/EMSoil GeochemistryTest Pitting

222 km22 samples44 pits

Megabuck/Takom/Spellbound

1999Phelps DodgeCorporation

MagnetometerDiamond Drilling

90 line-km4 holes -198 m

Megabuck

Table 5.1: Exploration History Chronology

In 1998 Wildrose acquired claims in the area as prior claims began to expire. In 1999Wildrose optioned the Woodjam claims to Phelps Dodge Corporation of Canada, Limited(Phelps Dodge). In February 1999 Phelps Dodge undertook additional staking andinitiated a field program including reconnaissance mapping and prospecting and thedrilling of four diamond drill holes totalling 198 metres. In spite of intersecting goldmineralization (34 metres of 1.01 g/t gold) in the most northerly drill hole (DDH99-20),Phelps Dodge withdrew from the Woodjam project in 2000.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

13/39




July 14, 2006

A listing of significant historic drill hole intersections is provided in Table 5.2 below.

Zone ByHOLE-ID

AZ DIPLENGTH(m)

Au(g/t)

Cu(%)

From(m)

To(m)

Interval(m)

74-01 360 -46 228.6 1.24 0.13 1.1 88.7 87.6

Explo

ram

74-02 205 -45 175.3 0.77 0.08 4.8 149.4 144.6

83-03 179 -60 175.60.540.39

0.130.05

30.0147.0

36.0165.0

6.018.0

83-04 180 -60 152.0 1.30 0.16 3.7 51.0 47.3

83-06 360 -50 96.3 0.65 0.15 18.3 66.0 47.7

83-07 180 -60 68.0 0.47 0.08 21.3 68.0 46.783-12 0 -90 30.5 0.23 0.04 11.6 30.0 18.4

83-13 0 -90 12.0 0.79 0.11 2.1 12.0 9.9

Placer

84-17 0 -90 69.2 0.14 0.02 36.0 66.0 30.0

Megab

uck

Phelps

Dode99-20 0 -90 200.3 0.98 0.13 2.4 44.0 41.6

74-03 270 -45 230.0 1.30 0.13 108.2 118.9 10.7

Takom

Explor-

am77-01 140 -45 153.0 0.002 0.09 100.6 104.2 3.6

Table 5.2 Significant Historic Drill Hole Intercepts

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

14/39




July 14, 2006

6 Geological Setting

6.1 Regional Geology

The Quesnel Trough, a large regional depositional feature extending 2000 kilometres

from the U.S. border in the south to the Stikine River in the north, forms a portion of thedominantly alkalic and sub-alkalic volcanic and sedimentary assemblage in this region.This geologic belt hosts several large tonnage copper-gold porphyry type deposits,many of which have been or are currently being mined including Highland Valley, Afton,Mount Polley, Gibraltar, Kemess and Bell-Granisle. The geological belt and many of themineral occurrences have been well documented in public literature, such as Barr, et al,1976; Panteleyev, 1995 and McMillan, 1991 and is presented in Figure 3.

The Quesnel Trough alkali-porphyry deposits occur in basalts and andesitic flows,fragmental rocks and alkalic intrusive complexes. The deposits are generally gold-copper systems consisting of chalcopyrite-pyrite and minor bornite sulphidemineralization. The sulphide zones are developed adjacent to concentrically-zoned

alkaline plutons which are themselves seldom sulphide bearing.

The Quesnel Trough assemblage is made up of rocks of the Nicola (south), Takla(central) and Stuhini (north) Groups consisting of a series of volcanic islandscharacterized by generally alkalic to sub-alkalic basalts and andesites, related sub-volcanic intrusive rocks, and derived clastic and pyroclastic sedimentary rocks.

The Takomkane Batholith is a large predominantly calc-alkalic intrusive with a surfaceexpression of approximately 40 by 50 kilometres. It comprises one of a series of at leastsix large coeval bodies including the Guichon Batholith (hosting the Highland Valleydeposits) and Granite Mountain Batholith (hosting the Gibraltar deposit).

6.2 Property Geology

The Woodjam property is underlain by a succession of Triassic-Jurassic Takla Groupvolcanic and related sedimentary rocks intruded by the Jurassic aged TakomkaneBatholith to the south. The claims include a possible northern contact with the batholith,several monzonite to syenite plugs of unknown affinity and two granodiorite plugspossibly related to the Takomkane Batholith. Younger Miocene-aged basalts overlapthese older units to the west of the property and as isolated islands further to the east.Figure 4 presents the property geology of the Woodjam property as defined byWetherup, 2000.

The Takla Group is typified by the abundance of basalt to trachy-andesitic infill and

associated co-magmatic alkalic centres. Typical exposures consist of andesitic tuffs,tuffites and flows, greywackes, and minor siliceous conglomerates. Detailed work in thevicinity of the Megabuck Zone has shown the Takla rocks to be a complex succession ofmaroon and green augite and feldspar porphyries, with related tuffs, pyroclastic brecciasand related sedimentary rocks. Some altered and brecciated rocks interpreted as sub-volcanic intrusive complexes also occur in the Megabuck Zone. Bedding measurementsthroughout the property trend west to west-southwest dipping moderately to the north(Wetherup, S. 2000).

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

15/39

5810000 mN

5815000 mN

5795000 mN

5800000 mN

5805000 mN

5780000 mN

5785000 mN

5790000 mN

630000mE

625000mE

5775000 mN

620000mE

610000mE

615000mE

605000mE

600000mE

0 5 10

kilometres

MiPlCvb

MiPlCvb

Qal

EJsy

EKaca

lJNvc

EKasf

EJsy

EKaca

muTrN

MIOCENE

SPELLBOUNDWOODJAM

WL

TAKOM

Qal

Qal

al

Qal

Qal

lJNvc MiPlCvb

uTrNvb

EJsy

Cvb

EJsy

lJNvc

uTrNvb

EJsy

uTrNvb

lJNvc

MiPlCvb

EJsy

MiPlCvb

MiPlCvb

MiPlCvb

MiPlCvb

LTrJgd

WARD'S HORSEFLY

HO

HORSEFLY

DISCOVERY

Age Group Unit Lithology

PLEISTOCENE & HOLOCENE none Qal glacial, fluvial, alluvial deposits

MIOCENE TO PLEISTOCENE Chilcotin MiPlCvb basaltic volcanic rocks

EOCENE Kamloops EKaca calc-alkaline volcanic rocks

EOCENE Kamloops EKasf mudstone, siltstone, shale fine clastic sediment

EARLY JURASSIC unnamed EJsy syenitic to monzonitic intrusive rocks

LOWER JURASSIC Nicola lJNvc volcaniclastic rocks

LATE TRIASSIC TO EARLY JURASSIC unnamed LTrJgd granodioritic intrusive rocks

UPPER TRIASSIC Nicola uTrNvb basaltic volcanic rocks

MIDDLE TRIASSIC TO UPPER TRIASS Nicola muTrN undivided sedimentary rocks

REGIONALGEOLOGY

ANDPROPERTYHOLDINGS

MAP

Figure 3

After: B.C. Ministry of Energy and Mines, Geofile 2003-21 (N.W.D. Massey, et al)

WoodjamProperty

MINFILE Occurrence

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

16/39

Figure 5: Property Geology (after Wetherup, 1999)

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

17/39




July 14, 2006

In the region of the Woodjam property, the Takomkane Batholith is typically anequigranular granite to quartz-monzonite. A number of border phases occur adjacent tothe batholith including several diorite and monzodiorite plugs and dykes as well as adistinctive bladed feldspar granodiorite porphyry. Diorite and monzodiorite rocks aremedium grained, and contain 10-20% hornblende as the dominant mafic mineral.

Hornfels and epidote alteration is prevalent within the volcanic units and increases inintensity with proximity to the Takomkane Batholith and its satellite phases. Weakepidote alteration takes the form of epidote rich pods (1-3%) which occur predominantlyalong bedding planes. Moderate propylitic alteration is typified by numerous epidotepods (5% to 15% of the rock). Finally, intensely altered volcanic rocks are highlymagnetic and contain abundant epidote throughout (15-20%). Locally, magnetite-epidote alteration can grade into magnetite-biotite (potassic) alteration. East of theTakom Zone, podiform epidote alteration occurs along east-west oriented fractureswithin diorite and is associated with tourmaline veining and rare chalcopyrite. Tourmalineveining also occurs within hornfelsed volcanic rocks in the Spellbound Zone.

7 Deposit Types

The Quesnel Trough assemblage hosts numerous deposits of porphyry gold-copperstyle mineralization generally related to dioritic or monzonitic sub-volcanic intrusivebodies (Barr, et al., 1976) including the Maud Lake, Mount Polley, Kwun Lake, LemonLake and Quesnel River (QR) deposits.

The Quesnel Trough alkali-porphyry deposits occur in basalt and andesitic flows,fragmental rocks and alkalic intrusive complexes. Gold-copper deposits consisting ofchalcopyrite-pyrite and minor bornite sulphide mineralization are associated with someof these intrusive bodies. The sulphide zones are developed adjacent to concentrically-zoned alkaline plutons which are themselves seldom sulphide bearing.

Alkaline porphyry deposits are characteristically molybdenum poor and chemically andregionally distinct from the calc-alkalic copper-molybdenum (McMillan, 1991). Unlikemost alkalic porphyry copper situations where quartz is rare or absent, the Megabuckand Takom Zones show evidence of silicification and quartz veining, with veins up to onecentimetre in width.

Other modes of gold occurrence are possible within the alkaline porphyry depositenvironment and the Quesnel Trough in general. Included are volcanic exhalative orfumarolic deposits that may have been deposited earlier in the volcanic cycle, prior tointrusion of the alkaline stock, and are beyond the influence of the alteration halo.Stockwork vein and contact metasomatic types are also possible.

The Mount Polley Mine, located 30 kilometres to the north of Woodjam, and the QRdeposit approximately 45 kilometres to the northwest illustrate different modes of goldoccurrences within the alkaline porphyry environment. Mount Polley is hosted in thebrecciated upper portion of the pluton itself, whereas the QR zone occurs a few hundredmetres from the pluton, but within the propylitic zone of the intrusion's alteration halo.The deposits provide the most obvious models and guides for exploration of theWoodjam Property (Watson, 1984).

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

18/39




July 14, 2006

8 Mineralization

As provided in Figure 2 and Table 3.1 above, there are numerous documentedoccurrences of copper and gold mineralization in the region with similar affinities to theWoodjam property.

Detailed BC MINFILE reports of the occurrences can be viewed on the governmentwebsite as noted in Section 20 (References). The Woodjam, Woodjam East, Takom,Spellbound, and Ho occurrences are all situated on the core claims that have receivedthe majority of exploration activities since 2001.

8.1 Megabuck Zone

A total of 11,787 metres of drilling in 52 holes have been drilled into the Megabuck Zonefrom 1974 to the present. Mineralization in the Megabuck Zone apparently occurs as alarge, irregular and complex tabular-shaped gold-copper mineralized zone hosted withinvolcanoclastics intruded by felsic stocks and dykes. A north-south trending fault systemconstrains mineralization at the eastern margin.

Alteration of the monzonite consists of potash feldspar, chlorite-carbonate with epidote,and magnetite. Alteration of the volcanic rocks consists of patchy silicification andchloritization, with local development of epidote, magnetite and pyrite, and chalcopyrite.Hornfelsing is prevalent within the volcanic units in increasing intensity towards theintrusives. Hornfels is manifested by disseminated and replacement concentrations ofepidote and tourmaline.

Sulphide mineralization occurs as chalcopyrite and lesser bornite within quartz veinlets,fractures and as disseminations outside of quartz veinlets. Pyrite is relatively common asdisseminations, especially peripheral to the zones of copper-gold mineralization and inapparently younger zones of argillic alteration (Main, 1986). Gold is believed to occur as

tiny blebs within the chalcopyrite (Pryce, 1983). Magnetite is usually present inconcentrations of 1-3% throughout the rock, however, during drill it appeared that k-feldspar alteration and late clay alteration destroyed the magnetite.

Gold-copper ratios average approximately 1g/t Au to 0.14% Cu. Chalcopyritemineralization along fault planes near the main deposit carry elevated copper anddepressed gold grades due to copper's greater propensity to remobilize. A geneticallyearly and relatively extensive gold distribution is associated with potassic flooding anddisseminated chalcopyrite. A second gold distribution appears related to epithermalalteration that has introduced quartz veining, brecciation, bleaching, and silicificationaccompanied by sericitic and argillic alteration. A small (0.4 m) wide, gouge filled faultwas intersected by drilling in two holes resulting in gold grades of 8.2 g/t Au over 2.0

metres and 62.7 g/t Au over 0.4 metres.

8.2 Takom Zone

The Takom Zone is located approximately 2.5 kilometres south of the Megabuck Zone.The zone is defined by large (~ 500m x 1500m) coincident IP chargeability and coppergeochemistry anomalies.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

19/39

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

20/39




July 14, 2006

consists of disseminated chalcopyrite, pyrite and malachite within stringers cutting thefelsic intrusion.

9 Exploration

9.1 Geophysics

9.1.1 Airborne Magnetics Survey

In 1992, Noranda completed an airborne magnetics survey over their holdings on theWoodjam Property. The magnetic character of the Megabuck and Takom Zones areclearly defined by the survey delineating the magnetite rich volcanics and intrusivesassociated with the two zones. Additional anomalies are defined by the survey includingthe Megabuck East and several untested satellite targets.

9.1.2 Ground Magnetics Surveys

Historically, several companies have completed ground magnetometer surveys over

various portions of the Property including Exploram (1974), Placer (1983), and ArcherCathro (1984). More recently, Phelps Dodge completed a survey in 1999 extendingfrom the Megabuck to the northwest corner of the Takom Zone. In conjunction withFjordland's 2001 IP survey, a ground magnetics survey was completed extending fromthe Megabuck to the Megabuck East Zones.

9.1.3 Induced Polarization Surveys

Previous induced polarization surveys completed in the project area were done in theearly 1970's (Exploram, 1974) or using a low-powered transmitter (Archer Cathro, 1987).In 1992, Noranda compiled the data from the previous surveys. Fjordland completed atotal of 23 line kilometres of IP and magnetic surveys on the Woodjam Property in 2001.

The IP survey encompassed the area north, east and west of the Megabuck Zone.

The survey defined a large, 1650 x 780 metre, chargeability anomaly extendingnortheast from the Megabuck Zone. Known areas of mineralization at the MegabuckZone occur on the edge of the anomaly southwest of the chargeability high. Thechargeability high corresponds with a moderate to low resistivity feature. This surveycompared well with previous surveys conducted over the same areas.

Chargeability highs, most prominently defined at the Megabuck and Takom Zones, forma roughly circular pattern approximately 4 kilometres in diameter. Known areas ofmineralization at the Megabuck showing fall on the edge of an open-ended inducedpolarization chargeability anomaly that measures approximately 500 metres by 1,000

metres. Mineralization encountered at the Takom Zone to date lies within thechargeabiltiy high. This suggests that although IP may be useful in generally locatingprospective areas, other surveys are necessary in order to define drill targets.

9.2 Soil Geochemistry

Historic soil geochemistry surveys encompassed Megabuck and Takom Zones as wellas two additional previously untested zones. Copper distribution in the Megabuck Zoneappears relatively small (140 metre diameter) with an approximately 2 kilometre long

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

21/39




July 14, 2006

linear anomaly trending to the west-northwest (figure 5). Noranda Exploration Companyidentified a coincident surface glacial dispersion train, consisting of angular boulders(float) in 1992. A quotation from Noranda's last report (Walker, 1992) concerning thedispersion train reads as follows: "The strongest copper and gold responses from therock samples came from the Megabuck float train where values of 0.1 - 0.4% copper and1-6 gpt gold were recorded. This float train with this range of values is traceable for at

least 2 kilometres west-north-west of the showing". The character of the soil anomalysuggests glacial "smearing" of the Megabuck mineralization to the west-northwest,however, the soil anomaly still requires subsurface testing.

Two separate coinciding soil geochemistry surveys in the Takom Zone, completed byExploram (1974) and Archer Cathro (1983), delineated an anomalous copper-in-soilsanomaly measuring 1 x 2 kilometres coinciding with an IP chargeability high. Copper insoils was widespread with high values exceeding 1% copper.

Through prospecting, several float rocks in what is now known as the Megabuck EastZone were found containing chalcopyrite. On 25 May 2003 a total of 57 soil sampleswere collected by L. Peters along 3 lines spaced approximately 200 metres apart in the

vicinity of Megabuck East Zone. An additional 36 soils were collected by the author on 2infill lines on 14 July 2003. Anomalous soil samples were mainly localized along theperiphery of the highest chargeability zone of the IP anomaly to the east of theMegabuck Zone. Overburden cover in the area between Line 3 and Line 5 was relativelyshallow (between 7 m and 13 m as demonstrated during drilling) suggesting that soilgeochemistry may be a useful tool in delineating subsurface mineralization in the area.

In 2004 three grids were positioned over three heretofore untested IP anomalies and tillswere sampled to test the potential for subsurface copper distribution. A total of 603 soilsamples were collected by Francois Larocque of Kitwanga BC and J.P. Charbonneau ofWilliams Lake, BC at 50 metre intervals along lines cut 200 metres apart. Results wereintegrated into an historic database of property soil geochemistry. Grids A and B

delineated large (1000 x 700 m and 1000 x 1200 m) zones anomalous in coppermineralization in soils.

Overburden cover in Grids A and B appears relatively shallow. The 2003 drillingprogram in the vicinity of Grid A determined overburden depths to be between 10 and 25metres. As the surface substratum is composed of transported glaciated tills, it ispossible that some contamination from external sources or possibly a dispersion patternmay be the source of anomalous results. Hole WJ-03-30 intersected 15.4 metres of0.9% copper mineralization in area of high copper-in-soils suggesting that soilgeochemistry is a viable tool in delineating subsurface mineralization in the area.

In the vicinity of Grid B, sparse outcrop is visible near the anomalous copper-in-soils.

Follow-up prospecting in the area did not reveal a possible source of the soil anomalyand further exploration is required.

No anomalous copper mineralization in soils was discovered in Grid C. Examination ofthe ground conditions, however, shows low-lying swampy conditions which may maskany geochemical signature and soil sampling may not be an effective way of testing forsubsurface mineralization in this portion of the property.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

22/39

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

0 375 750

metres

metres

metres

GRID A

GRID B

GRID C

* Contour interval 25 ppm Copper

Woodjam 2005 Soil GeochemistryCopper in Soils (ppm)Figure 4

N

N

N

N

NN

NNN

N

NN

NN

N

0 375 750

metres

IP Chargea

Grid A

Grid

Grid C

Takom Zone

Megabuck Zone

MegabuckEast Zone

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

23/39




July 14, 2006

10 Drilling

From 1974 to 1999, 23 diamond drill holes totalling 2,437 metres and ranging in depthfrom 12 metres to 200 metres, were drilled in the Megabuck Zone by Exploram MineralsLtd, Placer Development Company, and Phelps Dodge. Results from this previous

drilling is summarized in Table 5.2.

Drilling under the Woodjam option and joint venture between Wildrose and Fjordland hasbeen ongoing since 2002. To date, a total of 10,940.2 metres of drilling has beencompleted in 42 holes. Three mineralized zones have been drill tested with 9,350metres drilled in the Megabuck Zone, 561 metres in the Megabuck East Zone, and 1,030metres in the Takom Zone. Locations of all holes prior to 2005, including historic drillcollars (where they could be found), were surveyed using a differential GPS system andare presented in Figure 6.

Drilling in the Megabuck Zone to date has delineated an irregular tabular-shaped gold-copper mineralized zone over an approximate 400 metre by 250 metre area and

approximately 175 metres thick (true thickness) that trends northeast and dips generally45 to the southeast. Mineralization is associated with multiple episodes of potassically-altered intrusive stocks consisting mainly of a monzonitic composition. Displacementdue to faulting of the layered sequences restricts correlation between drill holes.

Rock units encountered during drilling show various types and degrees of alteration.Host rocks were propylitized exhibiting sericitic and potassic alteration near mineralizedzones. Significant bleaching of rock units occurs in and around fault zones. Propylytic,potassic, and sericitic alteration is evident with feldspars and mafic minerals having beenaltered to epidote and chlorite. Magnetite-hematite aggregates appear to be a relativelylate feature occurring throughout the drill core in the Megabuck Zone.

The 2003 diamond drill program tested a new zone of mineralization (Megabuck East),consisting of anomalous soil and rock samples taken in 2003 in the proximity of the 2001IP chargeability anomaly located east of the Megabuck Zone. A breccia zonedominated by quartz-carbonate veining and semi-massive chalcopyrite mineralizationgrading 42.3 ppb Au and 0.9% Cu over 15.4 metres was intersected at approximately43.5 metres downhole in DH-03-30. Gold concentrations appear to be lower in theMegabuck East Zone than encountered in the Megabuck Zone.

Drilling at the Takom zone confirmed the potential for a separate very large copper-goldsystem. Six of eight RC drillholes drilled encountered anomalously mineralized hostrocks similar to those in the Megabuck zone including a hole that graded 0.16% copperover almost 40 metres. A follow-up core hole (05-48) returned 0.10 g/t gold and 0.12%

copper over 82.6 metres and ended in mineralization that appeared to be strengthening.At this time the potential for a copper-gold system is open laterally and to depth.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

24/39

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

25/39




July 14, 2006

11 Sampling Method and Approach

11.1 Soil Geochemistry

During the 2003 soil sampling program, soil samples were taken by L. Peters from tills

and, where possible, from the local "B" horizon using a hand auger. Samples of no lessthan 500 grams were placed into "Kraft" paper soil sample bags and each bag wasmarked with the line and station. Samples were taken at 50 metre intervals along 4 lines(Lines 2-5) spaced approximately 200 metres apart to the east of the Megabuck Zone.An additional line of samples (Line 1) were taken to the north of the Megabuck Zone.UTM coordinates were recorded at each location using a Garmin 12Map GPS.

Mincord Exploration Consultants Ltd of Vancouver, BC, a non-arms length contractorwith principals in common to Wildrose, conducted a program of soil sampling from Julyto August 2005. Control grids were constructed in three locations on the Propertycoincident with historic IP chargeability anomalies. Grid lines were positioned andchecked in the field using a Garmin 12Map GPS on baselines and line endpoints. Lines

were turned 90 off baselines at 200 metre intervals. Stations along lines were chainedand marked at 50 metre intervals using a compass and chain. Grid A is composed of6,750 m of lines and a 1,000 m baseline, Grid B is composed of 11,450 m of lines and a2,200 m baseline, and Grid C is composed of 8,650 m of lines and a 1,600 m baselinetotaling 31,650 metres of lines cut.

A total of 603 soil samples were collected at 50 metre intervals along lines cut on GridsA to C. All samples were taken from the enriched "B" horizon approximately 30centimetres below surface. Soil samples were taken using a geotool and placed intoKraft paper bags with sample grid locations marked on using a felt pen.

No sample preparation was conducted by an employee, officer, director or associate of

Fjordland or Wildrose prior to delivery to the laboratory for analyses. All soil sampleswere transported by the sampler to Acme Analytical Laboratories Ltd ("Acme") andanalyzed for a 36-element suite of elements. Acme, fully accredited under ISO 9002, islocated at 852 East Hastings St., Vancouver, BC.

11.2 Drill Core

11.2.1 2002 Program

During the 2002 diamond drill program a total of 429 intervals from the 1,009.4 metres ofcore obtained were sampled and shipped to Acme Analytical Laboratories Ltd. foranalyses. The core was halved using a hydraulic core splitter, one half placed into a

plastic sample bag and closed using plastic closure ties, the remaining half placed backinto the core box for archiving. The samples were then packaged for shipping and sentby bonded courier freight to the laboratory for analyses. Sample intervals and resultsare recorded on the drill logs in Appendix A.

All core from the 2002 drilling program was sampled at approximately 2 metre intervals.Care was taken to eliminate sampling biases that could impact the analytical results. All

jewelry was removed prior to handling core and the work area was kept clean during

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

26/39




July 14, 2006

splitting and sampling. Sample quality was found to be acceptable during sampling ofthe 2002 drill core.

11.2.2 2003 Program

A total of 126 intervals from the 375.5 metres of core obtained were split, sampled and

shipped to Acme Analytical Laboratories Ltd. for analyses. The core was halved using ahydraulic core splitter, one half placed into a plastic sample bag and closed using plasticclosures, the remaining half placed back into the core box for archiving. The sampleswere then packaged for shipping and sent by bonded courier to the laboratory foranalyses.

Care was taken to eliminate sampling biases that could impact the analytical results. Alljewelry was removed prior to handling core, rocks or soils and the work area was keptclean during splitting and sampling. Sample quality was found to be acceptable duringsampling of the 2003 soils, rocks and drill core.

11.2.3 2004 Program

All intervals of core derived from the 2004 drilling program were sampled. During thePhase 1 program, drill core was logged and split on site. A secure core logging andsampling facility was rented in Horsefly for the Phase 2 work program.

A total of 1,924 intervals from the 3,967.58 metres of core obtained was split into halvesusing a manual core splitter, one half placed into plastic sample bags and closed usingplastic closure ties. The remaining drill core half was left in labeled core boxes at thecore logging facility. Samples were collected at approximately 2.0 metre intervals or lessdepending on geology and mineralization. The intervals represented the porphyriticnature of mineralization identified by the drilling.

J. Page, P. Geo., B. Johnson, P.Geo and J.P. Charbonneau were the contractemployees that conducted the drill program for Mincord Exploration. No employee,officer, director or associate of Wildrose handled samples prior to delivery to thelaboratory for analyses.

All samples were packaged for shipping and sent by bonded courier to the laboratory foranalyses. Sample intervals and results are recorded on the drill logs in Appendix B.Sample quality and analysis was found to be acceptable during sampling of the 2004drill core.

11.2.4 2005 Program

During the 2005 drill program, both reverse circulation (RC) and diamond drill coremethods were applied.

Drift Exploration Drilling Ltd. conducted the RC drilling. Rock chips from the 2005 RCdrilling program were recovered in 5-foot (1.52 metre) intervals from a drill mountedcyclone and passed through a splitter. All rock cuttings were logged and split on site.The samples were placed into Hubco Sentry sample bags and marked with samplenumber on tag and bag exterior. Two duplicate splits of approximately 4 kilogram eachwere obtained from each sample interval, one sent for analyses and the other for

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

27/39




July 14, 2006

archiving. Samples for shipping were placed into large rice bags and shipped via VanKam Freightways from Williams Lake to Global Discovery Labs (Global Labs) locatedat 1486 East Pender Street Vancouver, BC for analyses. Global Labs is a business unitof Teck Cominco Ltd. and is an independent laboratory that routinely participates in andreceives certification of proficiency in the CANMET administered Proficiency TestingProgram for Mineral Analysis Laboratories (PTP - MAL).

A total of 518 intervals were collected during the RC drilling. Each 5-foot (1.524metre)sample interval was combined, homogenized, and split by the lab (Global) to a 10-foot(3.05 metre) interval. Each 10-foot interval, totaling 261 samples, was analyzed for asuite of 31 element ICP and solvent extraction for gold. Preparation and analyticalprocedures followed by the lab are outlined in Appendix E.

LeClerc Drilling conducted the core drilling. The drill crew transported the core from thedrill at the end of each shift to a secure logging facility located at 3062 Boswell St,Horsefly, BC. The core was then logged, split, and stored on premises. All corehandling was done by or under the supervision of L. Peters, P.Geo., T. Muraro, P.Eng.or representatives of LeClerc Drilling. Care was taken to eliminate sampling biases that

could impact the analytical results. All jewelry was removed prior to handling core, rocksor soils and the work area was kept clean during splitting and sampling.

Drill core was systematically sampled at approximate 1.5 to 2.0 metre intervals. A totalof 766 intervals from the 2017.6 metres of core obtained were split into halves using aconventional manual core splitter, one half placed into plastic sample bags and closedusing plastic strap closures. The remaining drill core half was left in labeled core boxesat the core logging facility. The intervals were deemed adequate given the broad extentof mineralization demonstrated from historic drilling.

Core samples were shipped to Global Discovery Labs (Global) for analyses. All coresamples were analyzed for a suite of 31 element ICP and fire assay for gold.

Preparation and analytical procedures followed by the lab are outlined in Appendix E.

11.2.5 2006 Program

Leclerc Drilling conducted the core drilling program in 2006. Core was brought by thedrillers to the core logging facility in Horsefly at the end of each shift. Drilling depth in theholes were measured by the drillers in feet and the geological crew later converted thesemeasurements to metres. The core was logged and split at the facility. Samples wereplaced in sequentially numbered sample bags with corresponding sample tag insideeach. A similarly numbered tag was stapled in the core box at the beginning of eachsample interval. Sample intervals ranged from two to three metres, depending on

geology and mineralization.

An analytical standard, CDN-CGS-7, was purchased from CDN Laboratories andintroduced into the sample stream every thirty samples. Results from the standard werecompared with analytical values and any discrepancies noted. Split samples wereplaced into individual plastic sample bags, sealed with a cable tie and placed into sacksfor shipping. The geological staff transported the samples to Williams Lake where thesacks were shipped to the lab via Van-Kam Freightways. All of the samples wereanalyzed at Global Discovery Laboratories in Vancouver with exception of WJ06-54 and

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

28/39




July 14, 2006

55, which were analyzed at Acme Analytical Laboratories, also in Vancouver. The drillcore is stored at the core logging facility in Horsefly.

12 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security

Sample handling and preparation was conducted under the supervision of Qualified

Person, John Peters, P.Geo. Core was delivered to the secure core handling facility inHorsefly for logging and sampling at the end of each drill shift. A secure chain ofcustody of samples was maintained from collection at the drill through to delivery to thebonded courier for delivery to the lab. Core and samples were never left unattended inan area where outside influences could contaminate analytical results.

Core samples were shipped via Van Kam Freightways to either Acme AnalyticalLaboratories Ltd. (Acme) or Global Discovery Labs (Global) for analyses as described inSection 13. Acme, fully accredited under ISO 9002, is located at 852 East Hastings St.,Vancouver, BC. Preparation and analyses of samples at the lab consisted of thefollowing shown in Table 12.1:

Type Method Code Procedure

Core prep R150crush (4 kg to -10 mesh (70%), split, pulverize 250 g to -150 mesh (95%).

Soil prep SS80 Dry at 60, sieve 100 g to -80 mesh

30-elementICP

1D50 g sample split leached with 3 ml aqua regia (2-2-2HCl-HNO3-H2O) at 95C for 1 hour, diluted to 10 ml,analyzed by ICP-ES for 35 element suite.

30-elementICP

1DX15 g sample split leached with 90 ml 2-2-2 HCl-HNO3-H2O at 95C for 1 hour, diluted to 300 ml, analyzed byICP-MS for 35 element suite.

Fire Assay(Au) 3B 30 g sample analyzed by FA/ICP for Au.

Cu Analyses(> 10000ppm)

7AR1 g sample split leached with 2-2-2 HCl-HNO3-H2O,diluted to 100 ml, analyzed by ICP-ES for Au + Cu

Table 12.1: Sample Preparation and Analytical Methods (Acme)

Global Labs, located at 1486 East Pender Street, Vancouver, BC, routinely participatesin and receives certification of proficiency in the CANMET administered ProficiencyTesting Program for Mineral Analysis Laboratories (PTP - MAL). Preparation andanalyses of samples at the lab consisted of the following on Table 12.2:

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

29/39




July 14, 2006

Type Method Code Procedure

Core prepSample dried, coarse crushed to -6 mm size, finecrushed to -2 mm size, split to 250 to 300 gramsubsample, milled in "puck and ring mill to 150 mesh.

28-elementICP

MQP(ICP3) 5 g sample digested in aqua regia on a sand bath at 95C for 3 hours, diluted and mixed on vortex, thenanalyzed by ICP for 28 multi-element package

Fire Assay(Au)

AUL(Au4)30 gram sample analyzed by FA/ AA finish (low level) 1A.T.

Table 12.2: Sample Preparation and Analytical Methods (Global)

13 Data Verification

During the property visit conducted on May 31, 2006, Geoffrey Goodall, P.Geo.,consulting professional geologist and independent Qualified Person, was providedunrestricted access to all available information pertaining to the project.

As part of the verification process, Goodall examined mineralized exposures at theMegabuck Showing and drill collar location using a GPS and digital camera to locate,document, verify and confirm data against the corresponding database entries and mappostings. Diamond drill core from historic and recent drill campaigns were examinedand mineralized intervals compared against reported analytical results.

In addition, Goodall collected five samples for verification and comparison purposes.These samples were collected by him personally and remained in his position untildelivered to the laboratory for analysis. Analytical results for these samples are providedin Table 13.1 below. The results from this relatively small subset of data generated forthe Woodjam property compare favourably with both historically reported values and

those returned from the recently completed exploration programs.

In the opinion of Geoffrey Goodall, P.Geo. and as shown in Table 13.1 below, resultsfrom the samples he collected fairly represent the anticipated tenor of mineralization tobe expected from a copper gold porphyry system such as that found at the Woodjamproperty.

Sample ID Description Gold(g/t)

Copper(ppm)

138-1 Outcrop exposure of Megabuck Showing 1.205 1440138-2 Outcrop of andesite at site 04-32 0.952 1155138-3 Drill core from 06-55 at 234.0 to 235.3 m 0.792 1825

138-4 Drill core from 06-53 at 173.0 to 175.0 m 2.690 4420138-5 Drill core from 04-37 at 18.0 to 20.0 m 1.360 1530

Table 13.1: Reference Samples

Historic geophysical data has been reviewed and compared to current surveys forverification prior to acceptance. IP and magnetic geophysical surveys in the area of theMegabuck Zone were conducted in 2001. This work duplicated previous surveys andconfirmed the results previously obtained. Similarly, copper-in-soil geochemicalanomalies from historic exploration have been confirmed either by duplicating portions of

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

30/39




July 14, 2006

the survey areas or drill testing. The author is confident that the historic results arereliable and it is appropriate to incorporate this data into the current database.

Drilling data from previous reports has been reported as stated. Units of measurement,however, have been converted to metric. Drill composite grades were calculated fromanalytical certificates found in the appendices of the relevant assessment reports.

Analytical results are based on sampling of one half of the drill core. Generally, thehistoric half drill core that was archived on site was found in a state of disorder with mostmarkings obliterated with time and hence was not quartered for check analyses. At thistime, historic drilling accounts for only 28% of total drilling. Gold-copper grades and theopportunity of a "nugget effect" are generally low and as such, filtering of intervals ofhigher grades was unnecessary.

The analytical labs normally perform routine check analyses during sample runsincluding in-house standards and repeats. In addition, custom Certified ReferenceMaterial was inserted into the sample stream as regular checks on the analyticalprocedures. Routinely, pulp samples from each of Acme or Global were sent to another

lab for duplicate analyses. Acme, in general, has good repeatability of their own labstandards in both gold and copper while Global Labs are more variable. Overall, thevariance for repeatability of both standards and sample duplicates for both laboratoriesis acceptable and it is the author's opinion that the analytical procedures were adequatefor this stage of exploration.

14 Adjacent Properties

There are no properties lying adjacent to the Woodjam property that are relevant tomineralization found on the Woodjam Property or have impacted the assessment of theproperty.

15 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

The only know metallurgical testing that has been conducted on mineralized rock fromthe Woodjam property was performed by Coastech Research Inc. for Archer Cathro &Assoc. in 1985. Drill core from a 47.3 metre composite (3.7 metres to 51.0 metres) ofhole DDH-83-04 was subjected to a column cyanide leach test. This interval of drill core,grading 1.3 g/t gold and 0.16% copper, was taken from the Megabuck mineralized Zone.

It was determined that although most of the gold is associated with unoxidizedsulphides, it can be recovered by cyanide leaching. Also, it was noted that recovery isdependent upon permeability, gold recovery increasing to 37.6% from 22.3% with finercrushing.

16 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

The BC Ministry of Energy and Mines' Minfile database reports that a prospectus for BigRock Gold Ltd. (Peatfield, G.R., 1986) quotes a resource of 1,360,000 tonnes @ 0.70 g/tAu surrounding 725,000 tonnes @ 1.30 g/t Au and 0.15% Cu in the Megabuck Zone.Details of the resource calculations are unknown. This resource has not been relied onor reported as an actual resource by Wildrose and is included here for its historicsignificance.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

31/39




July 14, 2006

There are no mineral resource estimates completed on any area encompassed by theWoodjam Property that conform to CIM guidelines.

17 Other Relevant Data and Information

There are no other relevant data and information pertaining to the 2003 explorationprogram known to the author not already included in this report.

18 Interpretation and Conclusions

The Woodjam property is situated in the Intermontane Belt of the Quesnel Trough, ageologic terrane noted for hosting numerous alkaline porphyry copper-gold deposits.The northern limit of the Woodjam Property is four kilometres southeast of the operatingMount Polley gold-copper mine, and 16 kilometres due south of the Spanish Mountaingold discovery.

The Woodjam property hosts six zones of mineralization including the Megabuck,Megabuck East, Takom, Spellbound, Discovery and Ho, as well as several geophysicaland/or geochemical targets. The majority of exploration has focused on the MegabuckZone and it is the most advanced target. Drilling has delineated a large gold-coppermineralized system extending over a 250 metre by 350 metre area. Mineralizationtrends northeast, dipping approximately 45 to the southeast and is approximately 175metres thick, although some mineralization has been intersected to depths of 350metres. Mineralization is truncated by mineralized faults to the northeast atapproximately grid-line 50 mN. Although the complex geology and numerous faultoffsets complicate the picture, the exploration targets remain open in all directions and todepth.

Magnetic signatures tend to coincide with the extent of mineralization in the MegabuckZone. The magnetic high anomalies generally define an alteration halo and extend tothe southeast of the known mineralization for a distance of 300 metres at a width of 450metres.

Drilling at the Takom zone confirmed the potential for a separate very large copper-goldsystem. The Takom zone is defined by coinciding 2 kilometre by 1 kilometre soilgeochemical and induced polarization (IP) geophysical anomalies. Drilling encounteredweakly mineralized host rocks similar to those in the Megabuck zone including a corehole (05-48) that intersected 82.6 metres of 0.10 g/t gold and 0.12% copper and endedin mineralization that appeared to be strengthening.

19 Recommendations

It is the opinion of the author of this report that the Woodjam property is of sufficientmerit to justify the following recommended exploration program.

As the Megabuck Zone is the most advanced and consistently mineralized of the knownzones discovered to date, it is recommended that a systematic drill program beconducted to determine the extent of the mineralized system with the intent of producing

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

32/39




July 14, 2006

a preliminary resource model. A detailed grid drilling program based on an approximate100 metre by 100 metre spaced pattern to the south and east of known mineralization inan area of high magnetic background is recommended. Approximately 40 holes drilledto a average depth of 250 metres would be required.

As detailed in Table 19.1 below, a budget of $1,700,000 would be required to support

this program.

Item CostDrilling (10,000 m) 1,250,000Geological Support 175,000Analytical 100,000Shipping 13,000Supplies 7,000Contingencies (10%) 155,000TOTAL 1,700,000

Table 19.1: Recommended Exploration Budget

Given positive results from the recommended work program, additional drilling would berequired to fully assess the remaining exploration targets known on the Woodjamproperty.

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________Geoffrey Goodall, P.Geo.

July 14, 2006

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

33/39




July 14, 2006

20 References

Barr, D.A., Fox, P .E., Northcote, K.E. and Preto, V.A. (1976): The Alkaline SuitePorphyry Deposits -A Summary; in Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera,Sutherland Brown, A. Editor, Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, SpecialVolume 15, pages 359-367.

Bull, 1997: (BCDM) Geology and Mineral Deposits of the Quesnel River. Horsefly Area.Campbell, S. and Pentland, W., 1983: (Placer Development Ltd), A Diamond Drilling

Report on HorseflyProperty. Assessment Report 12,522.Campbell, S., 1984: (Placer Development Ltd), A Diamond Drilling Report on Horsefly

Property LS1, AB3 Mineral Claims. Assessment Report 12,301Cannon, R. and Pentland, W.S., 1983: Geological, Geophysical & Geochemical Report

on the Horsefly Property.Carne, J.F., 1984: (Rockridge Mining Corporation), Geological and Geochemical Report

on the Ravioli 85-1 to 3 Group. Assessment Report #13,741.Cruz, E., 1975: (Exploram Minerals Ltd), Geochemical Survey on the HS-D Mineral

Claim Group. Assessment Report 5548.Cruz, E., 1977: (Exploram Minerals Ltd), Assessment Work #6315 on the WL Claims.

Imperial Metals Corporation 2000 Annual ReportHallam Knight Piesold Ltd., 1993: Kemess South Gold-Copper Project, Application

Report, Volume 1 Executive Summary.Lang, J.R., Stanley, C.R. and Thompson, H.F.H. (1993): A Subdivision of Alkalic

Porphyry Cu- Au Deposits into Silica-saturated and Silica- undersaturatedSubtypes; in Porphyry Copper-Gold Systems of British Columbia, MineralDeposit Research Unit, University of British Columbia, Annual Technical Report -Year 2, pages 3.2-3.14.

M.E.G., 2001: Vancouver Mining Exploration Group (Short Course), Iron Oxide Copper-Gold Deposits.

Main, C.A. and Came, J.F., 1984: (Archer, Cathro & Asoc.), Geological andGeochemical Report on the Rav 1-4 Group. Assessment Report 12,268.

Main, C.A., 1986: (Rockridge Mining Corporation), Trenching Program on MegabuckMineral Property by Archer Cathro & Assoc.

Main, C.A., 1987: (Archer, Cathro & Asoc.), Geophysical Report on MegabucksProperty, by Delta Geoscience Ltd.

McMillan, W.J. (1991): Porphyry Deposits in the Canadian Cordillera; in Ore Deposits,Tectonics and Metallogeny in the Canadian Cordillera, B. C. Ministry of Energy,Mines and Petroleum Resources, Paper 1991-4, pages 253-276.

McMillan, W.J. and Panteleyev, A. (1988): Porphyry Copper Deposits; in Ore DepositModels, Roberts, R.G. and Sheahan, P.A, Editors, Geoscience Canada, ReprintSeries 3, pages 45-58.

Morton, J.W., 2001: (Wildrose Resources Ltd.), Summary Report on the WoodjamProperty. In- house Report.

Mutschler, F .E. and Mooney, T .C. (1993): Precious Metal Deposits Related toAlkaline Igneous Rocks -Provisional Classification, Grade-Tonnage Data, andExploration Frontiers; lUGS/UNESCO Conference on Deposit Modeling, Ottawa,1990, Proceedings Volume, Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper40, pages 479-520.

Panteleyev, A. 1995: Porphyry Cu-Au: Alkalic, in Selected British Columbia MineralDeposit Profiles, Volume 1 -Metallics and Coal, Lefebure, D.V. and Ray, G.E.,Editors, British Columbia Ministry of Energy of Employment and Investment,Open File 1995-20, pages 83-86.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

34/39




July 14, 2006

Peatfield, G.R., 1986: (Big Rock Gold. Ltd), Megabuck Mineral Property, by MinQuestExploration Associates Ltd. Inclusion in Prospectus.

Pentland, W., 1983: (Placer Development Ltd), A Geochemical Report on the HorseflyProperty. Rebagliati, C., 1983: (Rebagliati Geological Consulting Ltd.),

MEGABUCK -A Synvolcanic Alkaline Intrusive Associated Gold Prospect. Summary

Report.Peters, L.J., 2003: Diamond Drilling Report on the Woodjam Claims.Scott, A., 2001: (Fjordland Minerals Ltd), Logistical Report -Induced Polarization and

Magnetometer Surveys by Scott Geophysics Ltd,.Stevenson, D., 1991: (Auspex Gold Ltd.), Geology and Geochemical Report on the

Takom 1-2 Claims. Assessment Report 21,221.Sutherland Brown, A., (1976): Porphyry Deposits of the Canadian Cordillera; Canadian

Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 15, 510 pages.Walker, T., 1992: (Noranda Exploration Company Limited), Summary Report of 1992

Exploration Activities on the Megabuck Property.Watson, I.M., 1984: (Rockridge Mining Corporation), Report on the Starlike Property,

Inclusion in prospectus.

Wetherup, S. and Kulla, G. 2000: (Phelps Dodge Corporation of Canada, limited),Diamond Drilling Report on the Woodjam Property.

White, G. and Cruz, E.D., 1974: (Exploram Minerals Ltd), Geophysical Report onMagnetometer and Induced Polarization Surveys. Assessment Report 5411.

White, G. and Cruz, E.D., 1974: (Exploram Minerals Ltd), Geophysical Report on HSMineral Claims. Assessment Report 5311.

White, G. and Cruz, E.D., 1974: (Exploram Minerals Ltd), Geophysical Report onMagnetometer and Induced Polarization Surveys, Ray Mineral Claims.Assessment Report 5299.

White, G. and Cruz, E.D., 1914: (Exploram Minerals Ltd), Geophysical Report on HS 1-46 Mineral Claims. Assessment Report 4766.

Wilson, B, 1985: (Archer, Cathro & Assoc Ltd), Column Cyanide leaching of Megabuck

Ore, Horsefly, BC. Unpublished Report.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

35/39




July 14, 2006

21 Certificate of Qualified Person

I, Geoffrey Goodall, P.Geo., do hereby certify that:

1. I am president of:Global Geological Consultants Ltd.

1315 Arborlynn DriveNorth Vancouver, BC, CanadaV7J 2V6

2. I graduated with a degree of Bachelor of Science in Geology from the Universityof British Columbia in 1984.

3. I am a member of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists ofBC and a Fellow of the Geological Association of Canada.

4. I have worked as a geologist for over 21 years since my graduation fromuniversity.

5. I have read the definition of qualified person set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI43-101) and certify that by reason of my education, affiliation with aprofessional association (as defined by NI 43-101) and past relevant workexperience, I fulfill the requirements to be a qualified person for the purposes ofNI 43-101.

6. I am responsible for the preparation and review of all sections of the technicalreport titled Technical Report on the Woodjam Copper Gold Project, CaribooMining Division, British Columbia. I visited the property most recently on May31, 2006 for one day to examine drill core from the recent programs, check someof the drill hole locations and mineralized outcrop exposures.

7. I have not had prior involvement with the property that is the subject of theTechnical Report.

8. I am not aware of any material fact or material change with respect to the subjectmatter of the Technical Report that is not reflected in the Technical Report, theomission to disclose which makes the Technical Report misleading.

9. I am independent of both Wildrose Resources Ltd. and Fjordland Exploration Inc.applying all of the tests in section 1.5 of the National Instrument 43-101.

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

36/39




July 14, 2006

10. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1, and the TechnicalReport has been prepared in compliance with that instrument and form.

11. I consent to the filing of the Technical Report with any stock exchange and otherregulatory authority and any publication by them for regulatory purposes,

including electronic publication in the public company files on their websitesaccessible by the public, of the Technical Report.

Dated this 14th day of July, 2006.

_____________________________Signature of Qualified Person

Geoffrey Goodall_____________________________Print Name of Qualified Person

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

37/39




July 14, 2006

APPENDIX 1

WOODJAM PROPERTY CLAIM LISTING

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

38/39




July 14, 2006

TenureNumber

Claim Name Good To DateArea(ha)

367190 WOODJAM 5 2009/Feb/19 500.0367883 WOODJAM #6 2009/Feb/19 500.0367884 WOODJAM # 7 2009/Feb/19 500.0

367885 WOODJAM #8 2009/Feb/19 450.0367886 WOODJAM # 9 2009/Feb/19 500.0367887 WOODJAM # 10 2009/Feb/19 500.0367888 WOODJAM # 11 2009/Feb/19 500.0367889 WOODJAM #12 2009/Feb/19 100.0412157 WOODJAM 14 2009/Jul/06 500.0524781 WOODJAM X 2007/Jan/05 178.1524783 WOODJAM Y 2007/Jan/05 118.8524784 WOODJAM Z 2007/Jan/05 39.6524820 WOODJAM W 2007/Jan/06 118.8533866 WOODJAM 2 2007/May/10 257.1

533446 SG-1 2007/May/03 493.4533448 SG-2 2007/May/03 493.4533450 SG-3 2007/May/03 493.4533451 SG-4 2007/May/03 493.6533452 SG-5 2007/May/03 493.8533453 SG-6 2007/May/03 493.6533454 SG-7 2007/May/03 493.8533456 SG-8 2007/May/03 493.6533457 SG-9 2007/May/03 493.8533458 SG-10 2007/May/03 493.6533459 SG-11 2007/May/03 493.8533461 SG-12 2007/May/03 493.7

533462 SG-13 2007/May/03 493.9533463 SG-14 2007/May/03 493.9533465 SG-15 2007/May/03 494.1533466 SG-16 2007/May/03 494.3533467 SG-17 2007/May/03 494.1533469 SG-18 2007/May/03 494.1533470 SG-19 2007/May/03 494.1533471 SG-20 2007/May/03 494.1533473 SG-21 2007/May/03 494.3533474 SG-22 2007/May/03 494.2533475 SG-23 2007/May/03 494.0533868 SG-24 2007/May/10 197.3533869 SG-25 2007/May/10 493.4533870 SG-26 2007/May/10 493.3533871 SG-27 2007/May/10 493.4533872 SG-28 2007/May/10 493.4533873 SG-29 2007/May/10 493.6533874 SG-30 2007/May/10 335.8533921 SG-31 2007/May/11 494.0533922 SG-32 2007/May/11 494.2

8/3/2019 NI43-101Woodjam

39/39



533923 SG-33 2007/May/11 494.3533924 SG-34 2007/May/11 494.4533925 SG-35 2007/May/11 494.5533926 SG-36 2007/May/11 494.5533928 SG-37 2007/May/11 494.7533929 SG-38 2007/May/11 495.0533931 SG-39 2007/May/11 495.0533932 SG-40 2007/May/11 495.0533933 SG-41 2007/May/11 495.1533934 SG-42 2007/May/11 475.3533476 WW-1 2007/May/03 494.8533477 WW-2 2007/May/03 494.6533478 WW-3 2007/May/03 415.4533479 WW-4 2007/May/03 494.3533906 WW-5 2007/May/11 494.0533908 WW-6 2007/May/11 494.2533909 WW-7 2007/May/11 494.3

533910 WW-8 2007/May/11 494.4533911 WW-9 2007/May/11 494.5533912 WW-10 2007/May/11 494.6533913 WW-11 2007/May/11 475.1533915 WW-12 2007/May/11 415.7533917 WW-13 2007/May/11 475.1

NI43-101Woodjam

Documents

Transcript of NI43-101Woodjam