Perth Mining Geology Conference 2019 Special Report

A s e l e c t i o n o f r e s o u r c e a n d e x p l o r a t i o n a n a l y t i c a l d a t a

www.rscmme.com

As it was in 2017, RSC is again the Platinum Sponsor of the 2019 International Mining Geology

Conference being held in Perth, Western Australia (25–26 November 2019). The conference

provides the opportunity to take stock of what has been happening since the beginning of

the year and report a global overview of recent mineral resources and exploration drilling.

RSC, in collaboration with opaxe, has prepared this special report on mineral resources and

exploration drilling results. The report uses information published by resources companies

listed on the world’s major stock exchanges between January - October 2019. A larger

dataset was required for some statistics and the footnotes on each page provide information

on the dataset used.

This year RSC has been particularly interested in investigating relationships between

mineralisation style and mineral resource metrics (size/grade). Some of the outcomes of this

investigation are provided here for your interest.

We hope you enjoy the report and look forward to seeing you at the conference should you

be attending (see us at Booth #10). For more information on RSC’s geological project

management and consulting, contract geologist and pXRF rental services please go to

www.rscmme.com.

The RSC team

about

2019 mineral resources

3

JORC NI43-101 SAMREC

Location Reports

Oceania 272

North America 231

Africa 105

South America 98

Asia 54

Europe 31

Seabed Resources 1

A total of 792 mineral resources were reported from 01 January to 31 October 2019. The JORC Code was used as the reporting standard for 51% of thosereports. The most active reporting region was Oceania (34%) followed by North America (29%).A single seabed resource was reported by DeepGreen Metals Inc.

Data only includes initial, updated and upgraded mineral resources reported from 01 January to 31 October 2019. Reports where the mineral resource was unchanged are not included in these statistics.

2019 estimation techniques

4

Only 64% of resource reports stated an estimation technique. Of the reports which stated a technique, the most popular technique was ordinary kriging (69%), followed by inverse distance methods (25%).

Data relates to the 792 initial, updated and upgraded mineral resources reported between 01 January and 31 October 2019.

Indicator, <1%

Finite Element Method, <1%

Nearest Neighbour, <1%

Ordinary Kriging

Inverse Distance Methods

Datamine

15%GEOVIA GEMS

6%

GEOVIA Surpac

20%

Leapfrog

24%

Micromine

13%

Minesight

2%

Vulcan

10%

Other

10%

Geo-modelling software

2019 resource estimation software

5

Leapfrog, Surpac and Datamine were the most widely used software packages for geo-modelling. Datamine and Surpac were also the most widely used packages for resource estimation followed by Vulcan and Micromine.

Statistics only relate to those reports which mentioned the software used. Full dataset included 792 initial, updated and upgraded mineral resource reports published between 01 January and 31 October 2019. Only 449 reports mentioned the geomodelling software used and only 441 mentioned the estimation software used.

Datamine

23%

GEOVIA GEMS

8%

GEOVIA Surpac

22%

Leapfrog Edge

2%

Micromine

11%

Minesight

3%

Vulcan

13%

Isatis

3%

GS3M

2%Other

13%

Estimation software

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

7

7

8

8

9

9

9

11

11

11

17

23

28

37

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

3

3

1

4

4

Al Maynard & Associates Pty Ltd.

Ashmore Advisory Pty Ltd.

McElroy Bryan Geological Services Pty Ltd.

Moose Mountain Technical Services

SGS Canada Inc.

Trepanier Pty Ltd.

Xenith Consulting Pty Ltd.

IHC Robbins

MPR Geological Consultants Pty Ltd.

Payne Geological Services

Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd.

Cube Consulting Pty Ltd.

Micon International Ltd.

P&E Mining Consultants Inc.

AMC Consultants Pty Ltd.

APEX Geoscience Ltd.

H&S Consultants Pty Ltd.

CJSC Polymetal Engineering

Golder Associates

Mining Plus Pty Ltd.

Optiro Pty Ltd.

Roscoe Postle Associates Inc.

SRK Consulting

CSA Global Pty Ltd.

Number of resource reports published

Initial Resource

Reported Resource

CSA Global has produced the most resourcereports in 2019 (37 reports). CSA Global andSRK Consulting have both produced four initialresource reports.

Full dataset included 792 initial, updated and upgraded mineral resource reports publishedbetween 01 January and 31 October 2019. Graph only includes those companies whopublished 5 or more reports. Of the 792 reports, 23 did not state the affiliation of theCompetent/Qualified Person. A further 32 reports stated that the Competent/Qualified Personwas independent of the reporting company but did not provide any further detail.

2019 resource consulting companies

6

14%

41%Proportion of resources

estimated internally by a

company employee

Proportion of initial resources

estimated internally by a

company employee

20

20

20

20

21

22

22

22

23

24

26

26

27

29

29

31

31

34

38

39

39

43

46

51

Andrew Scogings (CSA Global, KlipStone Pty Ltd.)

Dmitry Pertel (CSA Global)

Jake Russel (Westgold Resources Ltd.)

Reno Pressacco (RPA Inc.)

David Williams (CSA Global)

Robert Sim (SIM Geological Inc.)

Gilles Arsenau (SRK, Arseneau Consulting Services Ltd.)

Hamish McLauchlan (Bathurst Resources Ltd.)

Stephen Juras (Eldorado Gold Corp.)

Christine Standing (Optiro Pty Ltd.)

Ingvar Kirchner (AMC Consultants Pty Ltd.)

Brian Wolfe (International Resource Solutions Pty Ltd.)

Rob Hutchison (Ramelius Resources Ltd.)

Paul Payne (Payne Geological Services)

Shaun Searle (Ashmore Advisory Pty Ltd., RPM Global)

Simon Tear (H&S Consultants Pty Ltd.)

Gary Giroux (Giroux Consultants Ltd.)

Lauritz Barnes (Trepanier Pty Ltd.)

Daniel Doucet (Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd.)

Valery Tsyplakov (CJSC Polymetal Engineering)

Eugene Puritch (P&E Mining Consultants Inc.)

Christopher Emerson (Pan American Silver Corp.)

Lynn Widenbar (Widenbar and Associates Pty Ltd.)

Martin Wafforn (Pan American Silver Corp.)

Number of resource reports published

The most published mineral resourcequalified/competent persons were determinedusing opaxe’s full dataset. Twenty-fourqualified/competent persons have signed off 20or more resource reports, and between them acollective 952 reports have been published. Goldwas reported in 64% of those resources.

The most active qualified/competent person wasMartin Wafforn who produced 51 reports in thedataset. Precious metals were estimated in all ofhis resources.

Dataset included 4253 initial, updated and upgraded mineral resource reports published between10 June 2014 and 19 November 2019. Of the 4253 reports, 36 did not state the CP/QP. Graph onlyincludes the 24 CP/QPs who have published 20 or more resource reports. Commodity typestatistics represent proportions from the 952 collective reports by the 24 CP/QPs. Some resourcescontain multiple commodities (and multiple commodity types), therefore numbers may not addup to the total.

mineral resource QP/CPs

7

24% Base Metals

24% Industrial Minerals

72% Precious Metals

2019 initial resources

8

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

3

3

3

3

5

6

6

7

8

11

15

16

17

44

Uranium

Titanium

Sulfur

Rubidium

Rare Earth

Platinum

Phosphorus

Palladium

Magnesium

Indium

Ilmenite

Germanium

Coal

Caesium

Graphite

Potassium

Aluminium

Silica

Tantalum

Tin

Nickel

Iron

Vanadium

Lithium

Cobalt

Lead

Zinc

Copper

Silver

Gold

63%

Base Metals

38% 33%

Industrial MineralsPrecious Metals

A total of 79 initial resources have been reported in 2019. Oceania reported the most initial resources (29), followed by North America (23). The JORC Code was the most popular reporting standard, being

used for a total of 48 reports. The remaining 39% of initial resource reports were reported under NI 43-101. Most initial resources estimated precious metals (gold or silver). Base metals were estimated in

38% of the initial resources.Full dataset included 79 initial mineral resource reports published between 01 January and 31 October 2019. Some resources contain multiple commodities (and multiple commodity types), therefore numbers may not add up to the total.

JORC

NI 43-101

0

2

4

6

8

10

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Ma

r-16

Ap

r-16

Ma

y-16

Jun

-16

Jul-

16

Au

g-16

Sep

-16

Oct

-16

No

v-16

Dec

-16

Jan

-17

Feb

-17

Ma

r-17

Ap

r-17

Ma

y-17

Jun

-17

Jul-

17

Au

g-17

Sep

-17

Oct

-17

No

v-17

Dec

-17

Jan

-18

Feb

-18

Ma

r-18

Ap

r-18

Ma

y-18

Jun

-18

Jul-

18

Au

g-18

Sep

-18

Oct

-18

No

v-18

Dec

-18

Jan

-19

Feb

-19

Ma

r-19

Ap

r-19

Ma

y-19

Jun

-19

Jul-

19

Au

g-19

Sep

-19

Oct

-19

Nu

mb

er in

itia

l re

sou

rce

s

JORC

NI43-101

initial resource reporting codes

9

Between January 2016 and October 2019, a total of 199 initial resources have been reported. Since March 2019, JORC Code usage for initial resources has been trending consistently

above NI 43-101 on a monthly basis.

0

50,000,000

100,000,000

150,000,000

200,000,000

250,000,000

300,000,000

Inferred Indicated Measured Total

Ag

Ou

nc

es

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

18,000,000

20,000,000

Inferred Indicated Measured Total

Au

Ou

nc

es

2019 initial resources – precious metals

10

North America, 32%

Oceania, 25%

Africa, 23%

South

America,

11%

Asia, 6%

Europe, 3%

Distribution of Au Ounces

North America

62%

Oceania

4%

Africa

10%

South

America

5%Europe

19%

Distribution of Ag Ounces

Forty-four initial resources from2019 contained gold1. Thoseresources have a combined total of18.6 Moz contained Au (14.4 MozInferred, 4.1 Moz Indicated and0.042 Moz Measured).

Sixteen initial resources from 2019contained silver1. Those resourceshave a combined total of 291.4 Mozcontained Ag (110.9 Moz Inferred,178.9 Moz Indicated and 1.5 MozMeasured).

1 Full dataset included 79 initial mineral resource reports published between 01 January and 31 October 2019. Some resources contain multiple commodities (and multiple commodity types), therefore numbers may not add up to the total.

0.1

1

10

0.1 1 10 100 1000

Au

Re

sou

rce

gra

de

(g/t

)

Total Resource (Mt)

Lode Au

Epithermal (adularia-sericite)

Porphyry

Kuroko-type VAMS

Carlin

Cloncurry-type IOCG

Skarn

Granite-related

Intrusion-related Au

Intrusion-related Cu-Au Telfer

CRD Manto deposit

Merensky Reef-type Ni-PGE

Placer Au

Porphyry exocontact vein

Cobar style Pb-Zn-Cu-Au

deposit styles: initial gold resources

A total of 69 initial gold resources were reported between 01 July 2017 and 30 June 2019. The largest initial gold resource was Solgold Plc’s Alpala porphyry deposit with 12.3 Moz contained Au. The most common mineralisation style was lode gold.

11

Bubble size represents contained Au ounces

Big Strike, Braveheart Resources Inc.

Monster Lake, IAMGOLD Corp.

Eastmain Mine, Eastmain Resources Inc.Bellevue, Bellevue Gold Ltd.

Star Mountains, Highlands Pacific Ltd.

Bolcana, Eldorado Gold Corp.

Cascabel, SolGold Plc

0.5

5

50

500

0.1 1 10 100

Ag

Re

sou

rce

gra

de

(g/t

)

Total Resource (Mt)

Epithermal (adularia-sericite)

Kuroko VAMS

Lode Au

MVT style Pb-Ag-Zn

Granite-related

Cobar style Pb-Zn-Cu-Au

CRD Manto deposit

Intrusion-related Cu-Au Telfer

Irish-style Pb-Zn

Porphyry

Sediment-hosted Cu-Ag-Co

Skarn

Historic Mine slag

deposit styles: initial silver resources

12

Bubble size represents contained Ag ounces

A total of 28 initial silver resources were reported between 01 July 2017 and 30 June 2019. The largest initial silver resource was Myanmar Metals’ Bawdwin

project, a Kuroko-type volcanic-associated massive sulfide deposit containing 128.3 Moz Ag. The most common mineralisation style was epithermal (adularia-

sericite).

Bayhorse, Bayhorse Silver Inc. Las Chispas, SilverCrest Metals Inc.Bawdwin, Myanmar Metals Ltd.

DeLamar, Integra Resources Corp.

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

Inferred Indicated Measured Total

Re

sou

rce

To

nn

es

Cu

Zn

Pb

North

America

32%

Oceania

16%

Africa

12%

South

America

23%

Europe

17%

Distribution of Zn Tonnes

North America

32%

Oceania

13%Africa

10%

South America

13%

Europe

32%

Distribution of Pb tonnes

North America

87%

Oceania

6%

Africa

1%

South America

2%

Europe

4%

Distribution of Cu Tonnes

2019 initial resources – base metals

13

A total of 2.97 Mt Cu, 2.81 Mt Znand 0.986 Mt Pb were added acrossthe reported initial resources in20191.

North America hosts an extensive87% of the initial Cu resources.Highland Copper Company’s WhitePine North project amounted to animpressive 2.4Mt of contained Cu.

1 Full dataset included 79 initial mineral resource reports published between 01 January and 31 October 2019. Some resources contain multiple commodities (and multiple commodity types), therefore numbers may not add up to the total.

0.05

0.5

5

0 1 10 100 1000

Cu

Re

sou

rce

gra

de

(%)

Total Resource (Mt)

Kuroko VAMS

Porphyry

Skarn

Sediment-hosted Cu-Ag-Co

Cloncurry IOCG

Granite-related

Irish Pb-Zn

Komatiitic-hosted nickel sulphide

Intrusion-related Cu-Au Telfer

Porphyry exocontact vein

Lode Au

Kipushi Cu-Zn-Pb

Mn-Ni-Co-nodules

Merensky Reef Ni-PGE

Cobar style Pb-Zn-Cu-Au

Historic tailings

A total of 30 initial copper resources were reported between 01 July 2017 and 30 June 2019. The largest initial copper resource was DeepGreen Metals’ Clarion Clipperton Zone polymetallic nodule deposit with 9.8 Mt contained Cu. Kuroko-type volcanic-associated massive sulfides and porphyries were the most

common mineralisation classes.

deposit styles: initial copper resources

14

Bubble size represents contained Cu tonnes

La Plata, Toachi Mining Inc.

Bonya, Thor Mining Plc

Farellon, Altiplano Minerals Ltd.

Collerina, Collerina Pantera, Avanco Resources Ltd. Clarion Clipperton Zone, DeepGreen Metals Inc.

Cascabel, SolGold Plc.

Mocoa, Libero Mining Corp.

JORC NI43-101 (no code)

2019 exploration drilling

15

A total of 2476 exploration drilling reports have been released in 2019. Oceania reported the most drilling results (997) followed by North America (859).

Fifty percent of drilling results were reported under NI 43-101. The JORC Code was used as the reporting standard for 47% and the remaining 3% did not

mention a reporting code.Reports published between 01 January and 31 October 2019. Dataset does not include amended or clarified reports.

Location Reports

Oceania 997

North America 859

Africa 248

South America 202

Asia 61

Europe 109

Seabed Resources 0

Pursuing Resource

Definition

44%

Resource Development

34%

Pursuing Technical

Study

6%

Mine Development

4%

Active Mining &

Production

12%

Mine in Care &

Maintenance

<1%

Project Status

2019 exploration drilling

16

Base Metals

32%

17%

Industrial Minerals

79%

Precious Metals

Of the 2476 exploration drilling reports published in 2019, 1970 included precious metals, 781 included base metals and 418 included industrial

minerals. Gold was the most reported commodity and was included in 1860 reports. These results come from projects at a variety of project levels. Only

12% of the reports came from a project that is actively mining and 44% of the reports came from projects with no defined mineral resources.Reports published between 01 January and 31 October 2019. Dataset does not include amended or clarified reports. Some results contain multiple commodities (and multiple commodity types), therefore numbers may not add up to the total. Graph only shows commodities with 10 or more mentions.

10

11

11

11

12

13

14

14

16

16

21

22

23

28

31

31

37

40

43

55

111

133

162

242

319

590

624

1860

Bismuth

Coal

Manganese

Arsenic

Potassium

Aluminium

Titanium

Magnesium

Rare Earth

Silica

Tungsten

Palladium

Platinum

Tantalum

Iron

Graphite

Vanadium

Uranium

Molybdenum

Tin

Lithium

Nickel

Cobalt

Lead

Zinc

Copper

Silver

Gold

2019 in-depth on porphyry exploration

17

Opaxe’s deposit type data can be used to provide objective comparisons between drill intersections for projects of similar mineralisation style. Exploration drilling

results have been reported for 35 porphyry projects in 2019. The standout results were from the Filo del Sol, Thorn, Productora, Antakori, Freegold Mountain and

Tatogga projects.Dataset included drilling reports for porphyry projects published between 01 January 2019 and 30 September 2019.

All projects have been classified as a porphyry project based on the interpretation of the mineralisation of that project as stated in the companies’ intercept announcement itself. For comparative purposes the top intercept for each unique porphyry project has been converted into an Au-equivalent

grade (g/tonne) x length (m) shown by the bubble size. See details relevant to AuEq conversions on page 19.

The number in each bubble corresponds to the name of the project in the table. Projects labelled as (R) represent projects in the resource development stage. Projects labelled (E) represent projects in the exploration/resource definition stage.

The change in the share price of the company associated with the announcement is shown and has been calculated as per:

- X% (24 hrs) = the difference between the closing share price on the trading day preceding and the opening share price on the trading day after the announcement

- X% (4 day) = the difference between the closing share price on the trading day preceding the announcement and the opening share price on the 4th trading day following the day of the announcement.

1 Alvarroes (R), -7% (24hr), -4% (4 day)

2 Lake Roe (R), 0% (24hr), 0% (4 day)

3 Zoro (R), 0% (24hr), 0% (4 day)

4 Karibib (R), -11% (24hr), -6% (4 day)

5 Piedmont (R), 5% (24hr), 9% (4 day)

6 Pilgangoora (R), 3% (24hr), 5% (4 day)

7 Irgon (E), 0% (24hr), 0% (4 day)

8 Bougouni (R), -6% (24hr), -6% (4 day)

9 Mina do Barroso (R), -1% (24hr), 1% (4 day)

10 Buldania (E), -12% (24hr), -3% (4 day)

11 Tansim (E), 0% (24hr), 0% (4 day)

12 Finniss (R), -4% (24hr), -7% (4 day)

13 Ewoyaa (E), -1% (24hr), -1% (4 day)

14 Kathleen Valley (R), -14% (24hr), -6% (4 day)

15 Uis (E), -4% (24hr), -1% (4 day)

16 Pioneer Dome (R), 5% (24hr), 110% (4 day)

17 PAK (R), -4% (24hr), 4% (4 day)

18 Manono (R), -10% (24hr), -32% (4 day)

18

17

13

12

1514

16

98

5

1110

6

74

1

3

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Au

Eq

. (g

/t)

Interval (m)

2019 in-depth on pegmatite exploration

18

Exploration drilling results have been reported for 18 pegmatite projects in 2019. The standout results were from the Manono, PAK, Ewoyaa and Finniss

projects.Dataset included drilling reports for pegmatite projects published between 01 January 2019 and 31 October 2019.

All projects have been classified as a pegmatite project based on the interpretation of the mineralisation of that project as stated in the companies’ intercept announcement itself. For comparative purposes the top intercept for each unique pegmatite project has been converted into an Au-equivalent

grade (g/tonne) x length (m) shown by the bubble size. See details relevant to AuEq conversions on page 19.

The number in each bubble corresponds to the name of the project in the table. Projects labelled as (R) represent projects in the resource development stage. Projects labelled (E) represent projects in the exploration/resource definition stage.

The change in the share price of the company associated with the announcement is shown and has been calculated as per:

- X% (24 hrs) = the difference between the closing share price on the trading day preceding and the opening share price on the trading day after the announcement

- X% (4 day) = the difference between the closing share price on the trading day preceding the announcement and the opening share price on the 4th trading day following the day of the announcement.

disclaimer and compliance warning:Reports included in this special report are from the public reporting domain, using internationally recognised reporting codes and national instruments such as JORC, SAMREC, NI 43-101, PERC and other codes in line with CRIRSCO. Technical reports include publicly released exploration drilling results, resource estimations, PEAs, scoping studies, PFS and feasibility study reports, optimisation studies, and supporting acquisition full technical reports. Transaction reports are Public Reports relating to the transactions of mineral exploration, resource development and mining properties, including property acquisitions, company acquisitions and takeovers.

The information in this special report does not qualify as a Public Report as defined by clause 6 of the JORC Code (2012). It is not prepared for the purpose of informing investors or potential investors or their advisors, and is not published for or on behalf of any of the companies mentioned in this report. Opaxe has no equity or other interest in any of the companies mentioned in this bulletin.

Opaxe takes no responsibility for the compliance of the Public Reports reviewed for this special report. It is up to each individual company to make sure that mineral resources arereported in a material and transparent manner in compliance with the relevant reporting codes for the respective jurisdiction. Investors or potential investors using the information inthis special report are recommended to download the full reports directly from the company’s website.

Any of the companies mentioned in this special report should not use excerpts of this bulletin in their public reporting, including company presentations, websites or social mediaunless these comply with the relevant clauses of the reporting code for the respective jurisdiction. For ASX-listed companies, this includes clauses 26 and 50 of the JORC Code (2012).

Drill intercept grades on pages 17 and 18 have been converted into AuEq using metal prices (USD) sourced from www.uxc.com, www.quandl.com/collections/markets/commodities,markets.businessinsider.com/commodities or www.metalbulletin.com/lithium-prices-update. Intercept grades were converted to AuEq. using metal prices from the week of the publicannouncement. To view the metal prices used please see the opaxe Resource Report Bulletin from the relevant week.

The formula used to convert drill intercept grades to gold equivalence using stated metal price is as follows:𝐴𝑢𝐸𝑞 𝑔/𝑡 = σ𝑛=1𝑧 𝐶𝑛 𝑔/𝑡 x 𝐶𝑛($/𝑔)𝐴𝑢 $/𝑔Where z is the number of listed components (e.g. Au, Ag, Pb, Cu, Zn, Li) and Cn is the nth component in that list.

Gold has been chosen as the metal equivalent for all conversions as it is the most widely-used and best-understood benchmark.

Opaxe has not investigated and is not aware of the detail of metallurgical recoveries for these mineral resources. Metallurgical recoveries have not been taken into consideration in theconversions of each mineral resource mentioned in this special report. It is uncertain that all the elements included in the metal equivalent calculations have a reasonable potential tobe recovered and sold. The reader needs to use reasonable caution to avoid being misled in these instances.

19