Copper Giant Identifies Thirteen Targets Beyond the Mocoa Resource and Its Interpreted Extensions
Seventeen ranked areas within a 9-by-9-kilometre study strengthens the exploration case around the Company's billion-tonne inferred copper-molybdenum resource1.
VANCOUVER, BC, Sept. 16, 2026 /CNW/ -- Copper Giant Resources Corp. ("Copper Giant" or the "Company") (TSXV: CGNT) (OTCQX: CGNRF) (FRA: 29H0) today reports the results of an independent geophysical modelling and predictive targeting study completed by Mira Geoscience Ltd. ("Mira") over its Mocoa copper-molybdenum porphyry project in Putumayo, Colombia. The study covers an 81-square-kilometre area centered on the Mocoa deposit and defines 17 ranked target areas, 13 of them beyond the current resource footprint and its interpreted extensions. Drilling continues at La Estrella, and the Preliminary Economic Assessment ("PEA") remains on plan for delivery in the fourth quarter of 2026.
Highlights
- A billion-tonne deposit, and geology that supports looking beyond it: Mocoa hosts an Inferred resources of 12.7 billion pounds (Blbs) copper-equivalent (CuEq*) at an average grade of 0.51% CuEq*, including 7.7 Blbs of copper at 0.31% Cu and 1.0 Blbs of molybdenum at 0.039% Mo, within 1.12 billion tonnes (Bt). Repeated mineralizing events over a fertile magmatic window of roughly ten million years, three high-grade cores (refer to news release dated October 7, 2025) and three drill-tested mineralized breccia corridors (refer to news release dated June 22, 2026), are consistent with more than one mineralized center.
- Thirteen targets beyond the resource and its interpreted extensions: two of the 17 ranked areas fall within or adjacent to the current resource footprint, two are interpreted extensions within 1.5 kilometres of it, and thirteen lie beyond (Figure 1, Table 1).
- Five of the Company's 2022 targets corroborated: the model outlined five of the nine exploration targets the Company defined in 2022 without being provided those target outlines (refer to news release dated May 3, 2022).
- The strongest opportunity sits next to work already underway: the two highest-ranked areas outside the resource footprint sit 433 metres northeast (G01) and 1,304 metres south-southwest of it (G04), on the Mocoa – La Estrella corridor where drilling is underway and coincide with copper and molybdenum anomalies in surface sampling. The corridor remains undrilled for 1.7 kilometres south of the last hole.
- 81 square kilometres studied, more than 128,300 hectares in the land package: the same approach could be extended beyond it. The Company is evaluating options for a broader program in the Jurassic belt.
"Mocoa already holds more than one billion tonnes, and it sits in a belt that remains underexplored. This study is the first pass across the core of that belt on ground we control, and it gives us thirteen places to test beyond the resource, next to where we are drilling." – Edwin Naranjo Sierra, Vice-President of Exploration.
The Modelling Program
Mira Geoscience Ltd. is an independent geoscience consultancy specializing in three-dimensional geological and geophysical modelling. The study covered the 9 by 9 kilometre core of the Mocoa project at a resolution of 25 metres and was completed in July 2026.
The work had four stages. Mira first reprocessed the Company's airborne magnetic data and re-inverted it into three dimensions using an unconstrained magnetization vector inversion, a method that resolves both the strength and the direction of magnetization and is therefore able to handle remanent magnetization, which is common in intrusive systems of this age and latitude. Mira then interpreted the structural architecture of the district from the magnetic and LiDAR data, and unconstrained magnetic inversion model, mapping an ENE-trending set of strike-slip structures and an NNE-trending set that together control the geometry of the interpreted intrusive bodies. The interpretation was then propagated in three-dimensions to generate a geology model capturing both general lithology and key magnetic domains. This allowed for the implementation of a geology-constrained magnetization vector inversion with a greater sensitivity to variations within the interpreted geological domains. Lastly, Mira applied balanced random-forest predictive modelling to map probabilities of identifying the targeted feature within the resulting model. Because some datasets cannot be propagated in three dimensions, Mira generated the appropriate two- and three-dimensional products separately and compiled them into a single three-dimensional environment. The two-dimensional models map the probability of encountering soil geochemical anomalies at surface; the three-dimensional models map the probability of encountering high-grade assays at depth.
The predictive model was trained to recognize the combination of geophysical and geochemical characteristics related to known copper and molybdenum mineralization at Mocoa and was then applied across the full two- and three-dimensional model extents. Targets of a different mineralization style are therefore not expected to be recovered by the models. Training data were drill-hole assay intervals for the three-dimensional models and surface soil geochemistry for the two-dimensional models. Training and testing data were separated by spatial groups rather than at random, so that the model's ability to predict ground it had not been trained on could be evaluated, providing a means to estimate the quality of the prediction beyond the training and testing data. Mira delivered 34 model-selected locations, which the Company has consolidated into 17 target areas.
What the Model Reproduced
Two of the 17 areas fall within or immediately adjacent to the current Mocoa resource footprint. Their recovery by the model is the internal control on the exercise: the areas were selected from the modelled data rather than from the Company's resource outline. Beyond the deposit itself, the model independently reproduced five of the nine exploration targets that the Company's geological team previously defined in 2022 from surface mapping, geochemistry and the earlier interpretation of the airborne survey data. Those target outlines were not provided to Mira in any format. The soil geochemistry and drill-hole data that informed the 2022 interpretation were, however, part of the study dataset. The agreement between the model and the earlier targets is therefore corroboration of the Company's interpretation and not a measure of discovery performance.
Two of the previously defined targets were confirmed with the model's highest classification values; three received partial support; one is not supported by any layer from the new study and will be reviewed; and the remaining three fall in areas where the Company has not yet completed sufficient surface coverage to evaluate them.
Target Areas
The Company independently ranked the 17 areas using a weighting that reflects both the number and the type of data layers that support each one (magnetic architecture, modelled susceptibility, radiometric alteration signature, surface rock and soil geochemistry, mapped alteration and structural setting). Rock geochemistry is one of the Company's ranking layers; it was not used to train the predictive models, which were trained on drill-hole assays in three dimensions and on soil geochemistry in two dimensions. Areas supported by three or more independent layers are prioritized for follow-up, because no single layer defines a target on its own, whereas several coincident layers provide the context needed to define, categorize and rank one. A smaller number of strong indicators can therefore outrank a larger number of weaker ones, and the ranking is not reordered to make the layer count read sequentially. Area G03 falls within the current resource footprint and area G02 lies 296 metres east-southeast of its boundary; both correspond to known mineralization and serve as the internal control on the exercise. The ranked areas are summarized in Table 1.
Target |
Position relative |
Distance (m) |
Target |
Supporting |
Category |
G01 |
Northeast |
433 |
Target 8 |
7 |
Extension |
G02 |
East-southeast |
296 |
-- |
7 |
Validation |
G03 |
West-southwest |
Within |
-- |
7 |
Validation |
G04 |
South-southwest |
1,304 |
Target 3 |
5 |
Extension |
G05 |
Southwest |
2,567 |
-- |
6 |
New |
G06 |
Southeast |
1,676 |
Target 5 |
6 |
Validation |
G07 |
Northeast |
1,919 |
-- |
5 |
New |
G08 |
West |
1,853 |
-- |
4 |
New |
G09 |
East-southeast |
2,674 |
Target 5 |
4 |
Validation |
G10 |
North |
1,616 |
-- |
3 |
New |
G11 |
West-southwest |
1,513 |
-- |
4 |
New |
G12 |
Northeast |
2,688 |
Target 6 |
3 |
Validation |
G13 |
West-northwest |
2,449 |
-- |
2 |
New |
G14 |
North-northwest |
2,771 |
Target 7 |
1 |
Validation |
G15 |
Northeast |
3,671 |
-- |
1 |
New |
G16 |
Northwest |
2,832 |
-- |
1 |
New |
G17 |
Northeast |
4,530 |
-- |
1 |
New |
Table 1 – The 17 target areas defined by the Mira Geoscience predictive targeting study, consolidated from 34 model-selected locations. Areas are ordered by an internal ranking that weights both the number and the type of independent data layers supporting each one -- magnetic architecture, modelled susceptibility, radiometric alteration signature, surface rock and soil geochemistry, mapped alteration and structural setting -- and not by proximity to the current resource. Distance is measured from the boundary of the current resource footprint. Category is assigned in priority order: "Extension" where the area is interpreted as an extension of the current resource footprint; "Validation" where it corresponds to the footprint itself or to a target the Company defined in 2022, and "New" where neither applies. Several of the new areas have not yet been covered by the Company's surface sampling and are therefore untested rather than downgraded. Five of the nine exploration targets defined by the Company in 2022 were outlined by the model, which was not provided with those target outlines. The target areas are exploration priorities and are not mineral resources. |
Interpretation
The distribution of the target areas is consistent with the Company's working model of Mocoa as a clustered system with more than one mineralized center rather than a single deposit. The highest-ranked areas outside the current resource footprint lie along a corridor that runs northeast and south-southwest from the deposit, following the interpreted intersections of the two structural datasets.
Two features of the model outputs are of particular technical interest. The strongest single predictor in three dimensions was anomalous magnetic susceptibility -- the difference between the constrained inversion result and the starting model built from drill-hole measurements. That the model learned from this variable rather than from proximity to mapped intrusions indicates that it is responding to information in the geophysical data that the existing geological interpretation does not already explain. In the two-dimensional setting, the strongest predictor was the thorium-to-potassium ratio, which is used as a proxy for potassium added to the near-surface by hydrothermal fluids as opposed to potassium inherited from the host rock. Its predictive value links a low-cost airborne measurement to the Company's surface soil geochemistry and offers a reconnaissance tool for the wider land package.
Next Steps
The Company will prioritize the ranked areas for ground follow-up, beginning with those closest to the current resource and to the Mocoa – La Estrella corridor, where mapping and surface sampling can be completed from existing access. Areas that retain support after that work will be considered for drill testing. The study also establishes an approach that could be applied beyond the 81-square-kilometre study area; the Company is evaluating options for a broader exploration program on its regional land package. The work described in this news release was completed within the Company's existing 2026 exploration budget; the drilling program at La Estrella and the timing of the PEA are unchanged.
Qualified Person and Technical Notes
Edwin Naranjo Sierra, Vice-President of Exploration for Copper Giant, is the designated Qualified Person within the meaning of National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101") and has reviewed and approved the technical information in this news release. Mr. Naranjo holds an MSc. in Earth Sciences and is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (FAusIMM). Mr. Naranjo is not independent of the Company.
The three-dimensional modelling, structural interpretation and predictive targeting described in this news release were completed by Mira Geoscience Ltd., an independent geoscience consultancy, under the supervision of Thomas Campagne, P.Geo., Senior Geophysicist (EGBC registration # 42956), who is the author of the underlying study and is independent of the Company.
The airborne magnetic and radiometric data on which the modelling is based were acquired in 2021 and have been previously disclosed. The modelling, structural reinterpretation and targeting results reported here are new and are disclosed for the first time in this news release.
Copper Giant operates according to a rigorous Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) protocol consistent with industry best practices. For surface samples, 2.5 kg of material is taken on each outcrop using chip or channel techniques. Samples are taken by well-trained field helpers supervised by the geologist of the company. Samples were bagged, tagged and packaged for shipment by truck from Copper Giant's facilities in Mocoa, Colombia to the ActLabs certified sample preparation facility in Medellin, Colombia. ActLabs is an accredited laboratory independent of the Company. In order to monitor the ongoing quality of assay data and the database, Copper Giant has implemented QA/QC protocols which include standard sampling methodologies, the insertion of certified copper and molybdenum standard materials, blanks, and duplicates (field, preparation and analysis) randomly inserted into the sampling sequence. No material QA/QC issues have been identified with respect to sample collection, security and assaying.
Inferred Mineral Resources are considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that all or any part of the Inferred Mineral Resources will be upgraded to an Indicated or Measured category.
*Copper equivalent (CuEq) is calculated as: CuEq (%) = Cu (%) + 5.278 × Mo (%), utilizing metal prices of Cu - US$4.00/lb and Mo - US$20.00/lb and metal recoveries of 90% Cu and 95% Mo.
The target areas described in this news release are conceptual in nature. They are derived from geophysical modelling and machine-learning predictions and are not mineral resources. There has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource on any of these target areas, and it is uncertain whether further exploration will result in the delineation of a mineral resource. The classification values produced by the model express the degree of similarity between a given volume of rock and the geophysical and geochemical signature of known mineralization at Mocoa; they are not, and must not be interpreted as, estimates of grade, tonnage or contained metal. Geophysical inversions are non-unique: more than one distribution of physical properties can reproduce the same measured data, and the depth and thickness of modelled bodies are the least well constrained aspects of any such model.
1 Notes on the MRE of the project
1. The MRE was completed by Kevin Hon, B.Sc., P.Geo., Senior Resource Geologist, and Warren Black, M.Sc., P.Geo., Senior Consultant: Mineral Resources and Geostatistics, both of APEX. Mr. Hon and Mr. Black are independent Qualified Persons, as defined by NI 43-101, and are responsible for the completion of the Mineral Resource Estimate, with an effective date of November 18, 2025. Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P.Geo., President & CEO of APEX, completed a peer review of the estimate.
2. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
3. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.
4. The Inferred Mineral Resource in this estimate has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of the Inferred Mineral Resource could potentially be upgraded to an Indicated Mineral Resource with continued exploration.
5. The Mineral Resources were estimated in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions (2014) and Best Practices Guidelines (2019) prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council.
6. Economic assumptions used include US$4.00/lb Cu, US$20.00/lb Mo, process recoveries of 90% for Cu and 95% for Mo, a US$10/t processing cost, G&A costs of US$1.00/t, and a 3% NSR royalty.
7. CuEq* values are calculated using a Cu-to-Mo value ratio of 1:5.278, incorporating both metal prices and metallurgical recoveries.
8. The constraining pit optimization parameters include a US$2.5/t mining cost for both mineralized and waste material and 45° slopes. Pit-constrained Mineral Resources are reported at a cutoff of 0.25% CuEq*.
About the Mocoa Porphyry System
The Mocoa Project is located in Colombia's Department of Putumayo, approximately 10 kilometres from the town of Mocoa in the country's south. Copper Giant controls more than 128,300 hectares of district-scale tenure through granted titles and applications, covering a significant portion of the Jurassic porphyry belt--an underexplored and highly prospective metallogenic corridor within the northern Andes.
Mocoa was first identified in 1973 through a regional geochemical survey conducted by the United Nations and the Colombian government. Follow-up programs between 1978 and 1983 included geological mapping, IP and magnetic geophysics, surface sampling, drilling, and metallurgical testing. Subsequent drilling by B2Gold in 2008 and 2012 refined the geological interpretation and confirmed the large scale of the system.
The deposit is hosted in Middle Jurassic dacite and quartz-diorite porphyries intruding andesitic to dacitic volcanics of the Central Cordillera, a 30-kilometre-wide tectonic belt that extends into Ecuador and also contains major porphyry systems such as Mirador, Warintza, San Carlos, and Panantza. Mocoa exhibits classic porphyry-style zonation with a potassic core surrounded by sericite and propylitic alteration. Mineralization consists principally of disseminated chalcopyrite and molybdenite, accompanied locally by bornite and chalcocite, and is associated with stockwork veining and hydrothermal breccias.
A distinguishing geological feature of Mocoa is the presence of a fertile magmatic window spanning roughly ten million years, a prolonged and unusually productive interval of magma generation and evolution that is not commonly observed in other Jurassic porphyry systems within the same belt. This extended fertile period provides a compelling explanation for the system's large metal endowment, broad alteration footprint, and overlapping intrusive and hydrothermal events.
The deposit demonstrates more than 1,100 metres of vertical continuity, with multiple intrusive phases, brecciation episodes, and vein generations reflecting a dynamic and long-lived magmatic–hydrothermal evolution, likely influenced by more than one porphyry center. Mocoa remains open along several directions and several satellite targets across the broader land package support the interpretation of a district-scale mineralized system.
Mocoa's Mineral Resource Estimate¹ comprises Inferred resources of 12.7 billion pounds (Blbs) copper-equivalent (CuEq*) at an average grade of 0.51% CuEq*, including 7.7 Blbs of copper at 0.31% Cu and 1.0 Blbs of molybdenum at 0.039% Mo, within 1,120 million tonnes (Mt).
1 For further information refer to the NI 43-101 Technical Report, entitled "Technical Report and Updated Mineral Resource Estimate for The Mocoa Project, Putumayo Department, Colombia", dated January 8, 2026, prepared by Michael Dufresne (P.Geo, P.Geol, MSc), Warren Black (MSc, P.Geo), Kevin Hon (BSc, P.Geo) and Chester de Leon (P.Eng), with an effective date of December 23, 2025. The Mineral Resource Estimate contained in that report has an effective date of November 18, 2025.
About Mira Geoscience
Mira Geoscience Ltd. is an independent geoscience consultancy and software developer founded in 1999 and headquartered in Montreal, Canada, with offices in Vancouver, Canada and Perth, Australia. The firm specializes in multi-disciplinary 3D and 4D modelling and data management solutions for mineral exploration and geotechnical hazard assessment, combining geological and geophysical modelling, 3D-GIS technology, and integrated interpretation and visualization.
Mira Geoscience works with major mining companies, mid-tier producers and junior explorers, as well as geological surveys, governmental organizations and universities. It is the developer of the Geoscience ANALYST platform, in which the three-dimensional compilation of the Mocoa project described in this news release was assembled and delivered to the Company.
Mira Geoscience is independent of Copper Giant. The Mocoa study was completed under the supervision of Thomas Campagne, P.Geo., Senior Geophysicist.
About Copper Giant
Copper Giant Resources Corp. is part of the Fiore Group, a private and well-established Canadian organization known for building successful, high-impact companies across the natural resource sector. Copper Giant was formed with a singular focus: to advance high-quality copper projects beyond resource definition--responsibly, efficiently, and with long-term positive impact.
The Company is led by a team with uncommon experience, having successfully taken some of the few major copper mines developed in the past two decades from discovery through to construction.
Copper Giant's current focus is the Mocoa copper-molybdenum deposit in southern Colombia, one of the largest undeveloped resources of its kind in the Americas. Recent exploration success has revealed potential well beyond its original footprint, highlighting Mocoa as a broader district-scale opportunity--and the catalyst for the Company's name and evolution.
Guided by the values of respect and responsibility, and grounded in its Good Neighbor philosophy, Copper Giant is committed to creating enduring values for all stakeholders and playing a meaningful role in the global energy transition.
Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
This news release includes forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. All statements within, other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding the results of the geophysical modelling and predictive targeting study completed by Mira Geoscience Ltd.; the number, ranking, location and prospectivity of the target areas described herein; the interpretation of Mocoa as a district-scale, multi-phase porphyry system with multiple mineralized centers; the Company's planned ground follow-up on the target areas and any subsequent drill testing; a potential broader exploration program on the Company's regional land package; the results of ongoing drilling at the La Estrella target; the timing, completion and results of the Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA); and other activities and achievements of the Company, including, but not limited to, the timing and success of the advancement of the Mocoa Project and the expansion of the Mocoa resource base, are to be considered forward-looking statements. Although Copper Giant believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those in forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements include market prices and volatility with the Company's common shares, exploitation and exploration successes, uncertainty of reserve and resource estimates, risks of not achieving production, continued availability of capital and financing, processes, permits and filing requirements, risks related to operations in foreign and developing countries and compliance with foreign laws and including risks related to changes in foreign laws and changing policies related to mining and local ownership requirements in Colombia, and general economic, market, political or business conditions and regulatory and administrative approvals. There can be no assurances that such statements will prove accurate and, therefore, readers are advised to rely on their own evaluation of such uncertainties. Copper Giant does not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.
SOURCE COPPER GIANT RESOURCES CORP.
Additional Information: Ian Harris, Chief Executive Officer, [email protected], +1 303 956 2944; Tetiana Konstantynivska, Vice President Investor Relations, [email protected], +1 778 829 8455
Share this article