Silver47 Achieves 80% Silver and 77% Gold Extraction from Belmont Tailings at the Hughes Project, Nevada

Original announcement by orestocks on

Company
Silver47 Exploration Corp
Ticker
AGA.V
Exchange
Unavailable
Region
Nevada
Primary commodity
Silver
Secondary commodities
Gold
Document categories
Metallurgy, Resource update
Extracted
2026-09-21 12:09:43 UTC

Analysis by Minestarters Atlas

Minestarters Atlas analysis

Summary

Silver47 has reported successful metallurgical testing on the Belmont tailings at the Hughes Project in Nevada, achieving 80% silver and 77% gold extraction via agitated cyanide leach at a 53 µm grind. While heap leach testing was unsuccessful due to permeability issues, the results support further evaluation of a mill-based processing route for the 2.74 Moz AgEq inferred resource.

Reasoning: The metallurgical results demonstrate high recovery potential for the tailings, though the failure of heap leach testing narrows the processing options to more capital-intensive agitated leaching.

Positive factors

  • Strong silver and gold extraction results from agitated cyanide leach
  • Finer grind size shows clear improvement in recoveries
  • Low organic carbon and sulphur suggest low refractory/preg-robbing risk
  • Identified a clear processing pathway (agitated leach) over heap leach

Negative factors

  • Heap leach testing failed to sustain permeability
  • Extraction results are reported on a calculated-head basis rather than measured heads

Facts used in scoring: 7

Classification and evidence

Mill Routeneutral

Processing via mill or concentrator (CIL, CIP, tank leach, flotation).

Why it applies: Testing indicates agitated cyanide leaching is the leading processing approach.

Evidence · text

“agitated cyanide leaching, as opposed to heap leaching, is the leading processing approach”

Free Millingpositive

Simple, clean ore amenable to standard processing without oxidation.

Why it applies: Low organic carbon and sulphur suggest low potential for preg-robbing or refractory behaviour.

Evidence · text

“Sulphide sulphur averaged 0.50% and organic carbon 0.13%, suggesting low potential for preg-robbing or refractory behaviour.”

Inferred Resourcenegative

Speculative category — limited drilling, geological continuity assumed but not confirmed. Cannot support economic studies alone.

Why it applies: The metallurgical testing is associated with an inferred mineral resource.

Evidence · text

“associated with the inferred mineral resource of 1.8 Moz silver and 11 koz gold”

Heap Leach Routeneutral

Processing via heap leach — lower CAPEX and OPEX, lower recovery expected.

Why it applies: the document describes a heap_leach route ("heap leach")

Multi-Domain Testedpositive

Variability across ore domains (oxide, transition, fresh) has been addressed.

Why it applies: 2 distinct composites were tested

Extracted facts

Stored fact records: 7. Some facts used in scoring do not have a stored record.

Resource Estimates (2)

inferredHughes Project · silverTonnes: 1260000Grade: 44Grade Unit: g/tContained Metal: 1.8Contained Unit: mozView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
silver
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Resource scope

Estimate type
resource
Reporting standards
ni_43_101
Resource group id
resource:7374cd12de654f5f16fb

Resource Data

Category
inferred
Tonnes
1260000
Grade
44
Grade Unit
g/t
Contained Metal
1.8
Contained Unit
moz

Metal Equivalent

Assumptions Disclosed
Yes

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: The resource is in the inferred category.

Negative factors

  • Inferred category limits confidence

Evidence · text

“inferred mineral resource of 1.8 Moz silver and 11 koz gold (44 g/t Ag and 0.3 g/t Au, or 68 g/t AgEq*) within approximately 1.26 Mt”

Tags used in scoring

Inferred Resourcenegative

Speculative category — limited drilling, geological continuity assumed but not confirmed. Cannot support economic studies alone.

Why it applies: category is "inferred"

Cut-off Undisclosednegative

High-grade interval reported without stating the cut-off grade used for compositing.

Why it applies: no cutoff_grade was stated

NI 43-101 Compliantpositive

Resource estimate prepared in compliance with NI 43-101 (Canada) — high reporting standard.

Why it applies: reporting_standards includes ni_43_101

inferredHughes Project · goldTonnes: 1260000Grade: 0.3Grade Unit: g/tContained Metal: 11Contained Unit: koz goldView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
gold
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Resource scope

Estimate type
resource
Reporting standards
ni_43_101
Resource group id
resource:7374cd12de654f5f16fb

Resource Data

Category
inferred
Tonnes
1260000
Grade
0.3
Grade Unit
g/t
Contained Metal
11
Contained Unit
koz gold

Metal Equivalent

Assumptions Disclosed
Yes

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: The resource is in the inferred category.

Negative factors

  • Inferred category limits confidence

Evidence · text

“inferred mineral resource of 1.8 Moz silver and 11 koz gold (44 g/t Ag and 0.3 g/t Au, or 68 g/t AgEq*) within approximately 1.26 Mt”

Tags used in scoring

Inferred Resourcenegative

Speculative category — limited drilling, geological continuity assumed but not confirmed. Cannot support economic studies alone.

Why it applies: category is "inferred"

Cut-off Undisclosednegative

High-grade interval reported without stating the cut-off grade used for compositing.

Why it applies: no cutoff_grade was stated

NI 43-101 Compliantpositive

Resource estimate prepared in compliance with NI 43-101 (Canada) — high reporting standard.

Why it applies: reporting_standards includes ni_43_101

Metallurgical Results (5)

agitated cyanide leachHughes Project · silverRecovery: 80.7 %Head Grade: 40.6Head Grade Unit: g/tView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
silver
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Test Work

Program Status
preliminary
Test Type
agitated cyanide leach
Sample
West composite (101.2 kg)
Grind P80
53 µm

Recovery

Recovery
80.7 %
Recovery Basis
actual_test
Head Grade
40.6
Head Grade Unit
g/t

Lab

Laboratory
Forte Analytical LLC

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: Strong silver recovery achieved at 53 micron grind.

Positive factors

  • High silver recovery at fine grind

Evidence · text

“At the finest grind tested (P80 53 µm), the West composite returned 76.5% gold and 80.7% silver extraction”
agitated cyanide leachHughes Project · goldRecovery: 76.5 %Head Grade: 0.27Head Grade Unit: g/tView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
gold
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Test Work

Program Status
preliminary
Test Type
agitated cyanide leach
Sample
West composite (101.2 kg)
Grind P80
53 µm

Recovery

Recovery
76.5 %
Recovery Basis
actual_test
Head Grade
0.27
Head Grade Unit
g/t

Lab

Laboratory
Forte Analytical LLC

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: Good gold recovery achieved at fine grind.

Positive factors

  • Solid gold recovery for tailings

Evidence · text

“the West composite returned 76.5% gold and 80.7% silver extraction”

Tags used in scoring

Low Recoverynegative

Recovery below the weak band for the commodity and processing route.

Why it applies: 76.5% is below the weak band (80%)

agitated cyanide leachHughes Project · silverRecovery: 80 %Head Grade: 45.4Head Grade Unit: g/tView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
silver
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Test Work

Program Status
preliminary
Test Type
agitated cyanide leach
Sample
East composite (137.1 kg)
Grind P80
53 µm

Recovery

Recovery
80 %
Recovery Basis
actual_test
Head Grade
45.4
Head Grade Unit
g/t

Lab

Laboratory
Forte Analytical LLC

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: Strong silver recovery achieved at 53 micron grind.

Positive factors

  • High silver recovery at fine grind

Evidence · text

“the East composite returned 77.3% gold and 80.0% silver”
agitated cyanide leachHughes Project · goldRecovery: 77.3 %Head Grade: 0.28Head Grade Unit: g/tView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
gold
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Test Work

Program Status
preliminary
Test Type
agitated cyanide leach
Sample
East composite (137.1 kg)
Grind P80
53 µm

Recovery

Recovery
77.3 %
Recovery Basis
actual_test
Head Grade
0.28
Head Grade Unit
g/t

Lab

Laboratory
Forte Analytical LLC

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: Good gold recovery achieved at fine grind.

Positive factors

  • Solid gold recovery for tailings

Evidence · text

“the East composite returned 77.3% gold and 80.0% silver”

Tags used in scoring

Low Recoverynegative

Recovery below the weak band for the commodity and processing route.

Why it applies: 77.3% is below the weak band (80%)

agitated cyanide leachHughes Project · silverHead Grade: 40.6Head Grade Unit: g/tView all details
Link to this fact

Identity

Project
Hughes Project
Commodity
silver
Region
usa_nv
Reported Region
Nevada
Ticker
AGA.V

Test Work

Program Status
preliminary
Test Type
agitated cyanide leach
Sample
West composite (101.2 kg)
Grind P80
106 µm

Recovery

Recovery Basis
actual_test
Head Grade
40.6
Head Grade Unit
g/t

Lab

Laboratory
Forte Analytical LLC

Review

Needs Review
No
Historical
No

Dates

Event date
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z

Reasoning: As-received grind baseline.

Evidence · text

“West composite (101.2 kg) grading 0.27 g/t Au and 40.6 g/t Ag”

How Atlas produces this analysis

Minestarters Atlas uses automated extraction to summarize mining announcements, identify reported measurements, and classify supporting evidence. Sentiment reflects the extracted narrative and classification rules; it is an interpretation, not a reported measurement. Evidence quotes and context are provided where available. Missing data, low-confidence results, and review flags indicate limitations. Check the original publisher announcement before relying on an interpretation.