High River Gold Mines Ltd.
TSX : HRG

High River Gold Mines Ltd.

April 24, 2012 10:01 ET

High River Announces Updated Reserve and Resource Estimates for Berezitovy and Burkina Faso Properties

TORONTO, ONTARIO--(Marketwire - April 24, 2012) - High River Gold Mines Ltd. (TSX:HRG) ("High River" or the "Company") today reported the results of the recently completed mineral reserve and resource estimates prepared for Berezitovy and High River's properties in Burkina Faso. Nord Gold N.V., High River's controlling shareholder, had updated "competent person reports" prepared for such properties by Wardell Armstrong International ("WAI"), which included updated mineral reserve and resource estimates. WAI is currently preparing technical reports compliant with National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101") in respect of such estimates. The Company expects to file the completed reports in forty-five days. The mineral resources and reserves have been estimated and classified according to the Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (2004). The "qualified person" in charge of the preparation of the technical reports is Dr. Phil Newall, BSc (ARSM), PhD (ACSM), CEng, FIMMM, Director with WAI.

Highlights

The updated reserves and resources estimates as of January 1, 2012 for:

  • Berezitovy mine in Russia
    • 18,351 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.63 g/t of gold grade resulting in 963 koz of proven and probable gold reserves; 21,148 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.58 g/t gold grade resulting in 1,076 koz of measured and indicated gold resources; 6,208 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.24 g/t gold grade resulting in 247 koz of inferred gold resources
  • Taparko-Bouroum mine including Nairy, Baola, F12, Welcome Stranger, Yeou and Ankouma in Burkina Faso
    • 7,190 kilotonnes of ore, with 2.72 g/t of gold grade resulting in 629 koz of proven and probable gold reserves; 9,468 kilotonnes of ore, with 2.48 g/t of gold grade resulting in 756 koz of indicated gold resources; 8,654 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.87 g/t of gold grade resulting in 520 koz of inferred gold resources
  • Bissa development project, including Bouly, Gougré, Liliga, Bissa Sud and Zinigma in Burkina Faso
    • 30,611 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.83 g/t of gold grade resulting in 1,803 koz of proven and probable gold reserves; 75,834 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.23 g/t of gold grade resulting in 2,991 koz of measured and indicated gold resources; 63,332 kilotonnes of ore, with 0.95 g/t of gold grade resulting in 1,938 koz of inferred gold resources
  • Labola project
    • 1,231 kilotonnes of ore, with 1.22 g/t of gold grade resulting in 48,136 oz of inferred gold resources

Note: Mineral resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.

Mineral Resource/Reserve Estimates

Mineral resources and reserves have been estimated and classified according to the Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (2004) (the "JORC Code"). The JORC Code is an acceptable foreign code under NI 43-101.

Berezitovy

The Berezitovy resource model has been derived from geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of measured resources were 30m x 30m (along-strike x down-dip) and 60m x 60m for indicated resources. The extent of inferred resources was limited to 120m but contained within the defined mineralised zones.

The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the un-mined, in-situ resources are shown in the table for three different cut-off grade levels: 0.3g/t, 0.5g/t and 0.7g/t Au.

Berezitovy Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January, 2012)
(in accordance with guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Ore Type Sulphide
Cut Off Grade (g/t) 0.3 0.5 0.7
Measured Tonnes (kt) 10,275 9,669 8,510
Au (g/t) 1.66 1.74 1.89
Metal kg 17,046 16,791 16,094
koz 548 540 517
Indicated Tonnes (kt) 12,410 11,479 9,755
Au (g/t) 1.38 1.45 1.60
Metal kg 17,066 16,685 15,644
koz 549 536 503
Measured + Indicated Tonnes (kt) 22,685 21,148 18,266
Au (g/t) 1.50 1.58 1.74
Metal kg 34,112 33,476 31,738
koz 1,097 1,076 1,020
Inferred Tonnes (kt) 7,362 6,208 4,627
Au (g/t) 1.11 1.24 1.45
Metal kg 8,150 7,679 6,729
koz 262 247 216
Notes: 1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a feasibility study or pre-feasibility study. 2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.3. Grade represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.
As a continuation of mineral resource modelling of the Berezitovy deposit, WAI has undertaken a pit optimisation using the Mineral Resource Block Model prepared by WAI and updated in January 2012. The model was depleted to contain only those mineral Resources that have not been extracted as of January 1, 2012. WAI used NPV Scheduler® software for the optimisation, applying the conceptual financial and technical parameters shown in the following table.
WAI Pit Optimisation Parameters
Parameter Units Value
Metal Price (Au) US$/oz 1,250
Metal Price (Au) US$/g 40.19
Selling Cost US$/g 3.2
Production Rate ktpa 2.0Mtpa
Discount Rate % 10
Dilution % 6
Mining Recovery Factor % 97
Mining Cost (Ore and Waste) US$/t 2.05
Processing Cost (per t of processed ore) US$/t 15.00
Gold Recovery % 89
Final Pitwall Angle Degrees 55
The results of the WAI pit optimisation as calculated by NPV Scheduler® are presented in the table below.
Berezitovy Open Pit Ore Reserves (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Proven Probable Proven + Probable Pit Summary
Ore Type COG Ore
kt
Au
g/t
Au
kg
Au
kOz
Ore
kt
Au
g/t
Au
kg
Au
kOz
Ore
kt
Au
g/t
Au
kg
Au
kOz
Waste
kt
Stripping Ratio
t/t
Sulphide (In-situ) 0.50 9,102 1.71 15,531 499 5,332 1.91 10,189 328 14,433 1.78 25,721 827 38,656 2.7
Sulphide (Stockpiles) 0.50 3,917 1.08 4,245 136 3,917 1.08 4,245 136
Total 9,102 1.71 15,531 499 9,249 1.56 14,435 464 18,351 1.63 29,966 963
Note: Mining Factors of 6% Dilution and 97% Mining Recovery applied
*Waste is given inclusive of Inferred material

Taparko

The criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of indicated resources were 20m x 20m (along strike and down dip). Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of inferred resources were 80m x 80m (along strike and down dip).

The final block models were cut against the topographic/pit surveys dated January 1, 2012 and used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources for all resources are shown in the table below for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0g/t Au.

Taparko Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Cut Off Grade 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Indicated Tonnage (kt) 5,583 5,055 4,180 3,170
Au (g/t) 2.84 3.05 3.43 3.96
Metal kg 15,835 15,437 14,324 12,555
oz 509,078 496,286 460,526 403,647
Measured +Indicated Tonnage (kt) 5,583 5,055 4,180 3,170
Au (g/t) 2.84 3.05 3.43 3.96
Metal kg 15,835 15,437 14,324 12,555
oz 509,078 496,286 460,526 403,647
Inferred Tonnage (kt) 2,013 1,803 1,485 1,125
Au (g/t) 2.67 2.89 3.24 3.72
Metal kg 5,379 5,218 4,818 4,194
t oz 172,946 167,752 154,881 134,817
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.
As a continuation of mineral resource modelling of Taparko deposit, WAI has undertaken a pit optimisation using the Mineral Resource Block Model prepared by WAI and updated in January 2012. The model was depleted to contain only those mineral resources, which have not been extracted as of 01 January 2012. WAI used NPV Scheduler® software for the optimisation, applying the conceptual financial and technical parameters shown in the following table.
WAI Pit Optimisation Parameters
Parameter Units Value
Metal Price (Au) US$/oz 1,250
Metal Price (Au) US$/g 40.19
Production Rate ktpa 1,750
Discount Rate % 10
Dilution % 5
Mining Recovery Factor % 97
Mining Cost* (Ore and Waste) US$/t 1.9
Processing Cost (per t of processed ore) US$/t 13.1
G&A US$M 17.5
Gold Recovery % 90
Final Pitwall Angle Degrees 45
Note: additional cost of US$4.6/t was included into mining cost for F12 deposit as the ore from the deposit has to be transported from the F12 mine site to the main processing plant at Taparko.
The results of the WAI pit optimisation for Taparko as calculated by NPV Scheduler® are presented in the table below.
Taparko Open Pit Ore Reserves (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Open Pit (Area) GT 2N2K 3/5 Total
Cut Off Grade (g/t) 0.67 0.67 0.67 -
Proven Tonnage (kt) - - - -
Au (g/t) - - - -
Metal kg - - - -
koz - - - -
Probable Tonnage (kt) 993 1,187 2,779 4,959
Au (g/t) 4.18 1.66 2.86 2.83
Metal kg 4,149 1,976 7,945 14,071
koz 133 64 255 452
Proven + Probable Tonnage (kt) 993 1,187 2,779 4,959
Au (g/t) 4.18 1.66 2.86 2.83
Metal kg 4,149 1,976 7,945 14,071
koz 133 64 255 452

F12 and Welcome Stranger

The criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of indicated resources at F12 were 20m x 20m (along-strike x down-dip). Inferred resources were allocated to blocks within the mineralised zone wireframes within 50m of a composite sample. All of the modelled resources at Welcome Stranger were classified as inferred due to high very short scale variability between paired holes.

The final block models were used as a basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the tables below for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.5, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0g/t Au.

F12 Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Cut Off Grade 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0
Measured Tonnage (kt) 0 0 0 0
Au (g/t) 0 0 0 0
Metal kg 0 0 0 0
oz 0 0 0 0
Indicated Tonnage (kt) 2,364 2,217 1,836 1,326
Au (g/t) 2.52 2.63 2.91 3.36
Metal kg 5,948 5,829 5,345 4,449
oz 191,240 187,416 171,845 143,031
Measured + Indicated Tonnage (kt) 2,364 2,217 1,836 1,326
Au (g/t) 2.52 2.63 2.91 3.36
Metal kg 5,948 5,829 5,345 4,449
oz 191,240 187,416 171,845 143,031
Inferred Tonnage (kt) 646 604 550 442
Au (g/t) 2.74 2.88 3.04 3.34
Metal kg 1,772 1,738 1,669 1,477
oz 56,956 55,889 53,665 47,490
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.
Welcome Stranger Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Cut Off Grade 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0
Measured Tonnage (kt) 0 0 0 0
Au (g/t) 0 0 0 0
Metal kg 0 0 0 0
oz 0 0 0 0
Indicated Tonnage (kt) 0 0 0 0
Au (g/t) 0 0 0 0
Metal kg 0 0 0 0
oz 0 0 0 0
Measured + Indicated Tonnage (kt) 0 0 0 0
Au (g/t) 0 0 0 0
Metal kg 0 0 0 0
oz 0 0 0 0
Inferred Tonnage (kt) 210 199 181 162
Au (g/t) 5.03 5.26 5.67 6.12
Metal kg 1,054 1,045 1,023 989
oz 33,875 33,601 32,900 31,799
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.
The results of the WAI pit optimisation for F12 only was calculated by NPV Scheduler®, using the same parameters as Taparko. The results are presented in the table below.
Boroum F12 Open Pit Ore Reserves (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the Guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Open Pit (Area) F12
Cut Off Grade (g/t) 0.82
Proven Tonnage (kt) -
Au (g/t) -
Metal kg -
oz -
Probable Tonnage (kt) 2,087
Au (g/t) 2.42
Metal kg 5,049
oz 162,324
Proven + Probable Tonnage (kt) 2,087
Au (g/t) 2.42
Metal kg 5,049
oz 162,324
Note: 5% dilution and 97% mining recovery applied

Nairy

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of indicated resources were 40m x 40m (along strike x down dip) and for inferred resources were 80m x 80m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.4g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Nairy Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
COG JORC Classification Volume Tonnes Density Au Contained Metal
(m3) (t) (t/m3) (g/t) (kg) (troy oz)
0.4 Indicated 401,549 1,084,182 2.7 1.23 1,334 42,874
0.4 Inferred 884,092 2,387,048 2.7 0.99 2,363 75,978
1.0 Indicated 186,423 503,341 2.7 1.87 941 30,262
1.0 Inferred 331,417 894,826 2.7 1.56 1,396 44,880
1.5 Indicated 91,904 248,142 2.7 2.54 630 20,264
1.5 Inferred 122,769 331,477 2.7 2.15 713 22,913
2.0 Indicated 62,387 168,444 2.7 2.92 492 15,814
2.0 Inferred 48,585 131,180 2.7 2.82 370 11,893

Baola

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of indicated resources were 40m x 40m (along strike x down dip) and for inferred resources were 80m x 80m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.4g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Baola Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
COG JORC Classification Volume Tonnes Density Au Contained Metal
(m3) (t) (t/m3) (g/t) (kg) (troy oz)
0.4 Indicated 232,359 627,370 2.7 0.74 464 14,926
0.4 Inferred 332,252 897,081 2.7 1.06 951 30,572
1.0 Indicated 30,943 83,547 2.7 1.31 109 3,519
1.0 Inferred 132,902 358,835 2.7 1.65 592 19,036
1.5 Indicated 5,999 16,196 2.7 2.00 32 1,041
1.5 Inferred 69,824 188,524 2.7 2.02 381 12,244
2.0 Indicated 2,260 6,103 2.7 2.48 15 487
2.0 Inferred 27,417 74,027 2.7 2.50 185 5,950

Yeou

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of inferred resources were 40m x 50m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.4g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Yeou Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
COG JORC Classification Volume
(m
3)
Tonnes
(t)
Density
(t/m
3)
Au
(g/t)
Contained Metal
(kg) (troy oz)
0.4 Inferred 426,790 1,066,052 2.50 2.39 2,550 81,980
1.0 Inferred 333,567 821,087 2.46 2.87 2,357 75,765
1.5 Inferred 211,808 523,880 2.47 3.76 1,968 63,286
2.0 Inferred 144,568 359,517 2.48 4.62 1,663 54,459

Ankouma

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the sample spacing. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of Inferred resources were 40m x 40m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.5g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Ankouma Mineral Resource Estimate - Total Resources (WAI, 01 January 2012)
COG JORC Classification Volume
(m
3)
Tonnes
(t)
Density
(t/m
3)
Au
(g/t)
Contained Metal
(kg) (troy oz)
0.5 Inferred 708,507 1,815,679 2.56 1.26 2,296 73,825
1.0 Inferred 352,915 896,641 2.54 1.78 1,599 51,417
1.5 Inferred 161,162 396,308 2.46 2.37 941 30,254
2.0 Inferred 63,619 159,579 2.51 3.27 522 16,792

Bissa

Criteria for defining resource categories were also derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of measured resources were 20m x 20m (along strike and down dip), forindicated resources were 40m x 40m (along strike and down dip), for inferred resources were 80m x 80m (along strike and down dip).

The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. A summary of the results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.3g/t, 0.5g/t, 1.0g/t and 1.5g/t.

Bissa Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004)
)
Ore TypeLaterite/Saprolite/Transition/Fresh
Cut Off Grade (g/t)0.30.51.01.5
MeasuredTonnage (kt)2,2081,9641,3961,082
Au (g/t)2.242.473.173.73
Metalkg4,9474,8514,4254,038
oz159,039155,966142,251129,814
IndicatedTonnage (kt)72,19461,78926,74112,573
Au (g/t)1.091.211.842.56
Metalkg78,69174,76549,20332,187
oz2,529,9892,403,7421,581,9231,034,838
Measured + IndicatedTonnage (kt)74,40263,75328,13713,656
Au (g/t)1.121.251.912.65
Metalkg83,63879,61653,62836,225
oz2,689,0282,559,7081,724,1741,164,652
InferredTonnage (kt)25,24919,6517,0422,852
Au (g/t)0.911.051.662.33
Metalkg22,97720,63411,6896,645
oz738,714663,393375,807213,639
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.

As a continuation of mineral resource modelling at Bissa, WAI has undertaken a pit optimisation using the Mineral Resource Block Model prepared by WAI. The model was depleted to contain only those mineral resources that have not been extracted as of 01 January 2012. WAI used NPV Scheduler® software for the optimisation applying the conceptual financial and technical parameters shown in the following table.

WAI Pit Optimisation Parameters
ParameterUnitsValue
Metal Price (Au)US$/oz1,250
Metal Price (Au)US$/g40.19
Production ratektpa4,000
Discount Rate%10
Dilution%6
Mining Recovery Factor%97
Mining Cost (Fresh Ore)US$/t1.65
Mining Cost (Weathered Ore)US$/t1.65
Mining Cost (Waste)US$/t1.65
Ore Processing Cost (per t of processed ore)US$/t13
Gold Recovery (Weathered and Fresh ore)%90
G&AUS$M/yr18
Final Pitwall AngleDegreesVarious for 4 regions

The results of the WAI pit optimisation as calculated by NPV Scheduler® are presented in the table below.

Bissa Open Pit Ore Reserves (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the Guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Ore/Rock TypeOre (kt)Au (kg)Au (g/t)
Weathered Proven1142942.57
Weathered Probable10,74218,6551.74
Fresh Proven1,3654,0312.95
Fresh Probable16,80730,3041.80
Weathered Proven and Probable10,85618,9491.75
Fresh Proven and Probable18,17234,3351.89
Total Proven and Probable29,02853,2841.84
Waste* (kt)156,989
Notes:
COG=0.9g/t Au
Mining Factors of 6%
Dilution and 97% Mining Recovery applied.
*Waste is given inclusive of Inferred material, which is also treated as waste

Bouly

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of indicated resources were based on a sample spacing of less than 80m x 35m along and across strike and with a minimum of 8 samples required from a minimum of 2 drillholes. Inferred resources were those resources which were estimated but did not fulfil the criteria for indicated classification. The grades in the final resource block model were derived from drill hole sample composites based on Ordinary Kriging for Au. The following table shows the WAI resource estimate for Bouly, dated 01 January 2012.

Bouly Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
MeasuredTonnage (kt)0
Au (g/t)-
Metalkg0
oz0
IndicatedTonnage (kt)9,037
Au (g/t)0.84
Metalkg7,625
oz245,139
Measured + IndicatedTonnage (kt)9,037
Au (g/t)0.84
Metalkg7,625
oz245,139
InferredTonnage (kt)32,150
Au (g/t)0.75
Metalkg24,127
oz775,673
Notes:
1. Cut-off grade of 0.6 g/t.
2. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
3. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
4. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.

Gougre

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of indicated resources were 40m x 40m (along strike and down dip) and for inferred resources, 80m x 80m (along strike and down dip). No measured resources were assigned at Gougre.

The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.5g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Gougre Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Cut Off Grade0.51.01.52.0
MeasuredTonnage (kt)----
Au (g/t)----
Metalkg----
oz----
IndicatedTonnage (kt)3,0442,4681,6691,080
Au (g/t)1.902.162.603.07
Metalkg5,7855,3354,3383,314
oz185,997171,509139,473106,554
Measured + IndicatedTonnage (kt)3,0442,4681,6691,080
Au (g/t)1.902.162.603.07
Metalkg5,7855,3354,3383,314
oz185,997171,509139,473106,554
InferredTonnage (kt)3,1211,862947528
Au (g/t)1.391.832.412.96
Metalkg4,3523,4102,2821,566
t oz139,922109,64473,36750,360
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.

As a continuation of mineral resource modelling of the Gougré deposit, WAI has undertaken a pit optimisation using the mineral resource Block Model prepared by WAI and updated in January 2012. The model was depleted to contain only those mineral resources that have not been extracted as of 01 January 2012. WAI used NPV Scheduler® software for the optimisation, applying the conceptual financial and technical parameters provided in the below table.

WAI Pit Optimisation Parameters
ParameterUnitsValue
Metal Price (Au)US$/oz1,250
Metal Price (Au)US$/g40.19
Selling CostUS$/g3.2
Production Ratektpa750
Discount Rate%11.2
Dilution%6
Mining Recovery Factor%97
Mining Cost (Ore and Waste)US$/t6.53
Processing Cost (per t of processed ore) OxideUS$/t13.79
Processing Cost (per t of processed ore) SulphideUS$/t21.22
Gold Recovery%95
Final Pitwall AngleDegrees45

The results of the WAI pit optimisation and subsequent ore reserve estimate are presented in the table below. Only the measured and indicated mineral resources were utilised in the optimisation. The table also includes a mining schedule for the Gougre deposit.

Gougré Open Pit Ore Reserves (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
ParameterUnitYearTotal
123
Rock Minedkt7,1194,65317511,947
Probable OreOxidekt99.4--99.4
g/t1.44--1.44
Transitionkt301.94.0-305.8
g/t1.852.47-1.86
Sulphidekt348.9745.983.31,178.1
g/t1.621.821.891.76
Total Probable Orekt750750831,583
Contained Metalg/t1.691.821.891.76
kg1,2671,3641582,789
koz40.7343.865.0889.66
Waste*kt5,8523,289179,159
Stript/t7.804.390.215.78
Notes: Mining Factors of 6% Dilution and 97% Mining Recovery applied
Cut-off-grade: Oxide 0.57g/t, Sulphide 0.78g/t.
*Waste is given inclusive of Inferred material

Liliga

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of inferred resources were 80m x 80m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.4g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Liliga Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
COGJORC ClassificationVolume
(m
3)
Tonnes
(t)
Density
(t/m
3)
Au
(g/t)
Contained Metal
(kg)(troy oz)
0.4Inferred1,626,5834,391,7752.71.476,456207,562
1.0Inferred952,2932,571,1912.71.995,117164,505
1.5Inferred512,9561,384,9812.72.673,698118,890
2.0Inferred299,740809,2982.73.342,70386,905

Bissa Sud

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of inferred resources were 80m x 80m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.4g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Bissa Sud Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
COGJORC ClassificationVolume
(m
3)
Tonnes
(t)
Density
(t/m
3)
Au
(g/t)
Contained Metal
(kg)(troy oz)
0.4Inferred241,451651,9172.70.8857418,444
1.0Inferred62,324168,2752.71.392347,520
1.5Inferred17,53947,3562.71.89902,878
2.0Inferred5,95416,0752.72.38381,230

Zinigma

Criteria for defining resource categories were derived from the geostatistical studies. Key drillhole spacings for the allocation of inferred resources were 66m x 55m (along-strike x down-dip). The final block model was used as the basis for resource evaluation. Summary results of the evaluation of the in-situ resources are shown in the table below, for four different cut-off grade levels: 0.5g/t, 1.0g/t, 1.5g/t and 2.0g/t Au.

Zinigma Mineral Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Cut Off Grade0.51.01.52.0
MeasuredTonnage (kt)----
Au (g/t)----
Metalkg----
oz----
IndicatedTonnage (kt)----
Au (g/t)----
Metalkg----
oz----
Measured + IndicatedTonnage (kt)----
Au (g/t)----
Metalkg----
oz----
InferredTonnage (kt)3,6871,854839361
Au (g/t)1.171.602.062.51
Metalkg4,3172,9591,725904
oz138,79295,15055,46529,071
Notes:
1. Mineral Resources are not reserves until they have demonstrated economic viability based on a Feasibility study or pre-feasibility study.
2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of any reserves.
3. The contained Au represents estimated contained metal in the ground and has not been adjusted for metallurgical recovery.

Labola

Estimated resources for the Labola deposit were classified as inferred resources due to the limited sampling density, uncertainties regarding QA/QC and lack of data regarding dry density measurements. The grades in the final resource block model were derived from all drilling sample composites and were based on the IDW3 estimate. The mineral resource estimate is shown in the table below.

Labola Inferred Resource Estimate (WAI, 01 January 2012)
(in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code (2004))
Cut Off Grade (g/t) Inferred
Tonnes (kt) Density (t/m3) Au Grade (g/t) Metal Au (oz)
0.4 1,231 2.4 1.22 48,136
0.6 905 2.4 1.48 42,927
1.0 481 2.4 2.09 32,272
2.0 163 2.4 3.43 17,950
3.0 68 2.4 4.84 10,552
4.0 35 2.4 6.17 7,027

Data Verification

Dr. Phil Newall is a "qualified person" as defined by NI 43-101 and as a qualified person completed the verification of data on which the above mineral reserve and resource estimates were based. This verification included an assessment of QA/QC data, sample preparation and assay methodologies, core recoveries, density data, data inputs, survey data and validation of historic exploration data used in the estimate. Data were validated by using field checks, statistical methods and evaluating written protocols.

High River has implemented QA/QC procedures at all projects to ensure best industry practice in sampling and analysis of the drill core samples.

The Berezitovy mine has its own dedicated onsite core storage shed and preparation facility. All sample analysis at Berezitovy is undertaken in the on-site laboratory (process plant) which is adequate for the level of prospecting work. The laboratory uses a range of Standard Reference standards supplied by Rocklabs. The standard ore sample assays 1.65ppm Au (tolerance +/- 0.08ppm Au) and the tailings sample assays 0.71ppm Au (tolerance +/- 0.03ppm Au).

At Taparko mine, core from all mineralized intersections is stored in well-organized racks at the mine. For the Bissa development project, High River has a dedicated facility in the town of Kongoussi which includes core storage and sample preparation.

The primary analytical laboratory used by High River for the Taparko, Bouroum, Bissa and the other projects in Burkina Faso is Abilab in Ouagadougou. The Abilab laboratories do not have recognised accreditation, but are part of the ALS Laboratory Group and implement quality assurance and quality control measures generally meeting international industry standards. Reverse circulation and core pulp samples were also submitted to ALS Chemex, Sudbury and SGS, Ouagadougou laboratories for check assaying. High River partly relied on the laboratory internal quality control measures, and also implemented strict external quality control measures consisting of inserting an appropriate frequency of control samples (blanks, field standards and certified reference standards).

Assay data for the Bouly project was acquired from the BIGS Global Laboratory in Ouagadougou in 2010. The SGS Laboratory in Ougadougou was used for external quality control. High River has a written procedure for collecting, handling, labelling and assaying drilling samples, which conforms to industry best practice. High River's internal quality control procedures specify use of field duplicates, blanks and certified reference standards to measure any bias in sampling or assaying.

None of the laboratories contracted by High River for sample analyses has any relationship to, or interest in, High River or any of its projects.

Qualified Person

Dr. Phil Newall, BSc (ARSM), PhD (ACSM), CEng, FIMMM, Director with WAI is the qualified person responsible for supervising the preparation of this press release and the scientific and technical information contained in this press release. Dr. Newall is independent of High River.

Cautionary Note

The grades presented in the above tables are not meant to imply recoverable gold. Mineral resources and reserves have been estimated and classified according to the JORC Code. High River is not aware of any known environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing or other relevant issues that could potentially affect the estimate of mineral resources or reserves. The mineral resources and reserves may be affected by subsequent assessments of mining, environmental, processing, permitting, taxation, socio-economic and other factors.

About High River

High River is an unhedged gold company with interests in producing mines, development and advanced exploration projects in Russia and Burkina Faso. Two underground mines, Zun-Holba and Irokinda, are situated in the Lake Baikal region of Russia. Two open pit gold mines, Berezitovy in Russia and Taparko-Bouroum in Burkina Faso, are also in production. Finally, High River has a 90% interest in a development project, the Bissa gold project in Burkina Faso, and a 50% interest in an advanced exploration project with NI 43-101 compliant resource estimates, the Prognoz silver project in Russia.

This release contains forward-looking statements. Wherever possible, words such as "intends", "expects", "scheduled", "estimates", "anticipates", "believes", and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved, have been used to identify these forward-looking statements. Although the forward-looking statements contained in this release reflect management's current beliefs based upon information currently available to management and based upon what management believes to be reasonable assumptions, High River cannot be certain that actual results will be consistent with these forward-looking statements. A number of factors could cause events and achievements to differ materially from the results expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. These factors should be considered carefully and prospective investors should not place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements necessarily involve significant known and unknown risks, assumptions and uncertainties that may cause High River's actual results, events, prospects and opportunities to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Although High River has attempted to identify important risks and factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors and risks that cause actions, events or results not to be anticipated, estimated or intended, including those risk factors discussed in the Company's 2011 Annual Information Form. There can be no assurance that the forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, prospective investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this release, and High River assumes no obligation to update or revise them to reflect new events or circumstances, unless otherwise required by law.

Contact Information