New G-Star Gold Prospect at Marvel Loch Airfield Project

only

Highlights:

Date: 9 November 2021

• G-Star Gold Prospect identified from first pass Auger

ASX Code: KGD

geochemistry sampling.

• 217 follow up auger geochemistry samples recently completed

Board of Directors:

Kula Gold Limited (KGD) is pleased to announce a new gold prospect

has been identified at the Marvel Loch - Airfield Project (KGD 100%).

Mark Stowell (Chairman)

First pass auger geochemistry sampling has defined the newly named

Mark Bojanjac

G-Star Prospect, which extends over a strike length of 2,200m in the

John Hannaford

Southeast of E77/2621 (Figure 1).

use

Simon Adams

Shares on Issue:

215,175,632 Ordinary Shares

3,100,000 Options

personal

Cash (Q3/2021):

$2.5 Million

Co tact Details:

Office: 20 Howard Street, Perth WA

6000

Email: cosec@kulagold.com.au

www.kulagold.com.au

@KulaGold

For

Figure 1. Kula Gold Ltd's Marvel Loch - Airfield Gold Project showing location

of the new G-Star Gold Prospect, Boomerang Kaolin Prospect and Crayfish

Gold Prospect.

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Drill sample

•

Method of recording and assessing core

• 10 - 15 kg per metre was recovered (density

recovery

and chip sample recoveries and results

dependent).

assessed.

• There is no

relationship between sample

•

only

Measures taken to maximise sample

recovery and grade.

recovery and ensure representative nature

of the samples.

• Whether

a

relationship

exists

between

sample recovery and grade and whether

sample bias may have occurred due to

preferential

loss/gain

of

fine/coarse

material.

L gging

•

Whether core and chip samples have been

• Chips were

qualitatively logged for basic

use

geologically and geotechnically logged to a

lithology, mineralogy and colour.

level

of

detail to

support

appropriate

Mineral

Resource

estimation,

mining

studies and metallurgical studies.

• Whether

logging

is

qualitative or

quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,

channel, etc) photography.

• The

total

length and percentage of the

relevant intersections logged.

personal

•

If core, whether cut or sawn and whether

•

Sample preparation

is industry standard

Sub-

s mpling

quarter, half or all core taken.

where up to 3kg of sample is pulverized and

techniques

•

a nominal 40gram charge is taken for fire

a d sample

If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled,

assay.

preparation

rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet

• No field duplicates were taken as it is a first

or dry.

• For all sample types, the nature, quality

pass geochemistry program.

and appropriateness of the sample

preparation technique.

• Quality control procedures adopted for all

sub-sampling stages to maximise

representivity of samples.

•

Measures taken to ensure that the

sampling is representative of the in situ

material collected, including for instance

results for field duplicate/second-half

sampling.

• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to

the grain size of the material being

sampled.

Quality of

•

The nature, quality and appropriateness of

•

Fire assay technique

is industry standard

assay data

the assaying and laboratory procedures

when assaying for Au, Pt and Pd.

For

and

used and whether the technique is

• Repeat samples, randomly selected by the

laboratory

considered partial or total.

tests

•

laboratory,

were

within

statistically

For

geophysical

tools,

spectrometers,

acceptable limits, and no outliers were noted

handheld XRF instruments, etc, the

in the laboratory inserted standards.

parameters used in determining the

analysis including instrument make and

model, reading times, calibrations factors

applied and their derivation, etc.

4

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

•

Nature of quality control procedures

adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates,

external laboratory checks) and whether

acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of

bias) and precision have been established.

Verification

•

The verification of significant intersections

•

Sampling was undertaken by personnel

of sampling

by either independent or alternative

employed by the auger company, Sahara

and

company personnel.

Operations (Australia) Pty Ltd

assaying

only

•

The use of twinned holes.

• Sahara manually recorded appropriate data

•

Documentation of primary data, data entry

in the field, which was then digitized into

spreadsheets and sent through to Kula.

procedures, data verification, data storage

•

(physical and electronic) protocols.

Kula

geologists

checked

sample

use

•

Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

coordinates against designed auger lines

and

requested sample spacing

in GIS

software.

• Primary data was loaded into an access type

database by qualified data people.

• No adjustments were made to the assay

data.

Location of

•

Accuracy and quality of surveys used to

•

Sample coordinates were obtained using

data points

locate drill holes (collar and down-hole

handheld GPS with 3 - 5m accuracy in XY.

surveys), trenches, mine workings and

• Coordinates were collected in GDA94 Zone

other locations used in Mineral Resource

estimation.

50 and reported as such.

• Specification of the grid system used.

•

Quality and adequacy of topographic

control.

Data

•

Data spacing for reporting of Exploration

• Samples were taken at ~50m intervals along

pacing and

Results.

~400m spaced lines.

distribution

personal

• Whether the data spacing and distribution

is sufficient to establish the degree of

geological

and

grade

continuity

appropriate for the Mineral Resource and

Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and

classifications applied.

• Whether sample compositing

has been

applied.

Orientation

•

Whether the orientation of sampling

•

Auger holes were vertical which is

f data in

achieves unbiased sampling of possible

appropriate for medium being sampled.

relation to

structures and the extent to which this is

geological

known, considering the deposit type.

Forstructure

• If the relationship

between

the drilling

orientation and the orientation of key

mineralised structures is considered to

have introduced a sampling bias, this

should be assessed and reported if

material.