Artemis Resources Limited — Interim / Quarterly Report 2021

Jul 28, 2021

ASX Announcement

June 2021 Quarterly Report

==> picture [138 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

29 July 2021

Highlights

Paterson Project

Final diamond drill hole locations for the Apollo, Atlas, Juno and Voyager targets were determined, and sufficient funds allocated to budget in the quarter to drill these targets and more upon receipt of final heritage clearances from the Traditional Owners.

As detailed and extensive planning in advance of the Q3/Q4 2021 Paterson drill campaign is now largely complete with the Paterson Central exploration team currently in the pre-mobilisation phase with respect to rig booking and logistical planning in advance of receiving final heritage clearances. Once complete, the Company will then move to immediately commence drilling and intends to drill continuously for the remainder of the calendar year.

The Company intends to provide a more detailed update on the proposed final drill program hole locations and site mobilisation start dates in the near future.

Carlow Castle Au-Cu-Co Project

The commencement of the newly planned campaign of drilling for circa 11,000 metres, signals a new phase of exploration and evaluation at the Carlow Castle Project. This drilling is also designed to test the long-awaited Good Luck and Little Fortune Projects, located approximately one kilometre to the south of Carlow Castle.

As at 30 of June, a total of 16 holes have been drilled for a total of 3,506 metres of which 2,020 metres was RC and 1,486 metres was diamond.

Results for RC holes ARC310 to 313 and ARC315 have been received which focussed on the Carlow Castle Western Zone. These holes returned significant results of:

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 6m @ 14.97g/t Au, 7.09% Cu, 0.06% Co from 53 metres Hole ARC310

• ➢ Including; 3m @ 13.92g/t Au, 5.11% Cu 0.03% Co from 54 metres

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 6m @ 2.61g/t Au, 0.54% Cu, 0.14% Co from 186 metres Hole ARC311

• ➢ Including; 1m @ 6.27g/t Au, 1.07% Cu, 0.05% Co from 187 metres

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 4m @ 2.09g/t Au, 0.50% Cu, 0.06% Co from 121 metres Hole ARC313

• ➢ Including; 1m @ 5.76g/t Au, 1.74% Cu, 0.07% Co from 124 metres

==> picture [9 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 1m @ 9.29g/t Au, 0.67% Cu, 0.17% Co from 114 metres Hole ARC312

Diamond drilling results are pending review and RC drilling at Carlow Castle is currently in progress, testing the new interpretation designed to add significant ounces to the project.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 1 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES W www.artemisresources.com.au

Carlow Castle Mineral Resource Estimate

The Mineral Resource report was completed by CSA and submitted in May. The updated Mineral Resource is 14.3 million tonnes at 0.7 g/t Au, 0.4% Cu, and 0.05% Co for 320,000 ounces gold, 53,000 tonnes contained copper, and 7,000 tonnes contained cobalt. The difference in resource numbers occurred due to additional drilling, redefinition and increase in the confidence of the model.

The Company is currently reviewing the recent Mineral Resource estimate with a view to approaching the Carlow Castle Project via a new strategy, aiming to increase tonnages and grade by targeting the higher-grade mineralised features, thus allowing for more effective geological control to drive project development. The current Q3 2021 RC drill program has been designed to achieve this objective and combined with the Mineral Resource review should, with success, allow the Company to clearly demonstrate the potential of the project to host a robust and significant gold, copper and cobalt resource.

Munni Munni Project

Drilling at Munni Munni comprised of 15 RC drill holes for 2,740 metres, completed between April and May, with drill holes spread through the entire upper portion of the mineralisation, to a maximum depth of 250 metres.

Significant intersections include:

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 7m @ 2.20g/t 2PGE + Au (1.46g/t Pd, 0.67 g/t Pt, 0.07g/t Au) from 124 metres, 21MMRC005;

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 7m @ 2.35g/t 2PGE + Au (1.33g/t Pd, 0.84 g/t Pt, 0.18g/t Au), from 96 metres , 21MMRC006;

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 4m @ 2.45g/t 2PGE + Au (1.31g/t Pd, 0.85g/t Pt, 0.29g/t Au) from 60 metres , 21MMRC007;

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 5m @ 2.35g/t 2PGE + Au (1.36g/t Pd, 0.68g/t Pt, 0.31g/t Au) from 75 metres , 21MMRC008;

==> picture [10 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

• 4m @ 2.87g/t 2PGE + Au (1.76g/t Pd, 0.89g/t Pt, 0.22g/t Au) from 115 metres, 2MMRC010.

Artemis is pleased to have now executed a full Joint Venture Agreement and associated documents that will proceed to a Joint Venture Agreement for 100% of the Munni Munni Project with Platina Resources Limited in the ratio of beneficial interests, 70% ARV and 30% PGM.

Artemis and Platina continue to explore ways to monetise Munni Munni for the benefit of shareholders.

Radio Hill FLEM Survey

A Fixed-Loop Electromagnetic (FLEM) survey was completed in May which detected deep and untested conductor anomaly zones of interest identified from historic deep drilling and follow-up DHEM survey data. From this survey, the Radio Hill Project is still considered prospective for additional Ni-Cu-Co-PGE discoveries. Recommendations for further work at Radio Hill are pending.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF W www.artemisresources.com.au Page 2 of 47

Whundo GAIP Survey

A Gradient-Array Induced Polarisation (GAIP) survey was conducted at the Whundo VMS project to identify VMS-style mineralisation along target trends located to the northeast of the main Whundo deposit. Additional work has been recommended postsurvey that has identified anomalous trends that will require another GAIP survey and drilling.

SUMMARY OF DRILLING AT CARLOW CASTLE

Artemis Resources (ASX: ARV) is pleased to release this June Quarterly, highlighting the achievements gained during the reporting period.

The June Quarterly results include the final assays from the initial holes drilled at the beginning of the circa 11,000m program, which is the follow up program from the 2020 Q4 drilling campaign. This program will continue into Q3.

Drill statistics and completed holes are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1, respectively.

Table 1: Drill statistics for June Quarterly

Location	No of Holes	RC (m)	Diamond (m)	No of Samples	No Samples Submitted	No Samples Received	No of Samples Outstanding
East Zone	6		1290.7	1276	1097	782	494
West Zone	9	2020		2046	2046	2046	0
Cross-Cut	1		195.3	201	0	0	201

Several assays from the beginning of the planned drilling program have returned significant results and these have been used to define and update the remaining holes in the program. These are shown in Table 2.

==> picture [420 x 228] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Location of drill collars drilled during the June Q2 period. Section lines are shown in red with corresponding section co-ordinates.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 3 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

The rationale behind the new drilling program was to test the interpreted shallow plunging high-grade gold and copper shoots in and below the Carlow Castle Western Zone, the steeply dipping high-grade shoots on the eastern zone, the steep down-plunging gold shoots at Quod Est and the new interpretation of Cross-Cut.

Table 2: Carlow Castle drilling assay results averaged over significant drill intercept intervals bases on 1m assay samples, intersections defined by either >0.5g/t Au or >0.5%Cu, max 2m internal dilution. NSI = no significant intercept with values above lower cut off.

Hole No	Comment	From	To	Downhole Width (m)	True Width (m)	Au (g/t)	Cu (%)	Co (%)
ARC310		53	59	6	5.4	14.97	7.09	0.06
	Including	54	57	3	2.7	13.92	5.11	0.03
		112	113	1	0.9	1.42	0.05	0.03
		168	170	2	1.8	1.61	0.16	0.13
		225	226	1	0.9	1.37	0.06	0.01
ARC311		136	142	6	5.4	1.35	0.34	0.07
		154	155	1	0.9	2.49	0.49	0.02
		186	192	6	5.4	2.61	0.54	0.14
	Including	187	188	1	0.9	6.27	1.07	0.05
ARC312		9	10	1	0.9	1.61	2.33	0.05
		28	34	6	5.4	2.68	1.10	0.02
	Including	31	34	3	2.7	4.34	1.75	0.01
		56	61	5	4.5	1.66	0.26	0.04
		83	85	2	1.8	1.15	0.19	0.03
		114	115	1	0.9	9.29	0.67	0.17
		144	145	1	0.9	2.63	0.23	0.01
ARC313		35	36	1	0.9	1.11	0.05	0.01
		44	45	1	0.9	1.21	0.28	0.03
		82	83	1	0.9	1.06	3.93	0.01
		105	106	1	0.9	1.30	0.08	0.18
		110	112	2	1.8	2.07	0.44	0.31
		121	125	4	3.6	2.09	0.50	0.06
	Including	124	125	1	0.9	5.76	1.74	0.07
		147	148	1	0.9	1.35	0.14	0.10
		199	200	1	0.9	5.17	0.38	0.01
ARC315	NSI

A reinterpretation of the structural setting and mineralising events have returned high-grade gold, copper and cobalt assays on the main shoots (Figure 2) and is defining the extent of the rich, lower grade gold-copper-cobalt “halo envelop” surrounding the internal high-grade zones.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 4 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

The Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) completed by CSA Global and released in May, is being reviewed, considering the updated interpretation of the Carlow Castle system. This information, along with the updated interpretation will be incorporated into the new model and drive future drilling campaigns.

==> picture [451 x 244] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Longsection of Carlow Castle looking north showing the high-grade trends (hot colours) in the 2021 block model. The dots denote the target pierce points of the drill holes.

==> picture [396 x 328] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Section 506730mE, intersections for Hole ARC310. (Refer to Figure 1 for location)

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF W www.artemisresources.com.au Page 5 of 47

==> picture [468 x 292] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Section 506670mE showing intersections for holes ARC311 and ARC312 (refer to Figure 1 for location)

==> picture [468 x 323] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Section 506770mE showing intersections for hole ARC313 (Refer to Figure 1 for location)

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

US:ARTTF

FRA:ATY

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 6 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Along with the potential in the Carlow Castle main zone, the Quod Est System located to the immediate north, is another area developing into a significant gold and copper resource, (refer to Figure 1 for location).

Quod Est mineralisation trends north to northeast, with a steeply dipping mineralisation plunge to the southeast, controlled by a gabbro/basalt contact. Significant results for Quod Est are included in the 23 April 2021 ASX release. Drilling at Quod Est is in progress.

Discovery of the Cross-Cut Zone by testing geophysical targets had intersected several high grade zones associated with north-westerly striking structures, (refer to Figure 1).

A new interpretation has been put forward, using airborne magnetic data and the SAM survey which suggests that Cross-Cut may be a series of en-echelon mineralised structures, as shown in Figure 6. Previous drilling had intersected significant copper and gold numbers, which are noted in the 23 April 2021 ASX release. Drilling at Cross-Cut is in progress.

==> picture [466 x 252] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Updated interpretation (plan view) of the Crosscut Zone showing the potential for repeated mineralised structures of an en echelon nature. Holes have been repositioned in the current drill program to test these features. Background image of SAM survey.

==> picture [472 x 165] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 7 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES W www.artemisresources.com.au

CARLOW CASTLE MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

During the quarter, the Mineral Resource for the Carlow Castle Project was updated by CSA Global using all data available as of 19 May 2021; this includes an additional 129 drill holes for 22,395 m since the 2019 Mineral Resource update. The additional drillholes were mainly at the eastern end of the Carlow Main zone and in the newly discovered Cross-Cut zone.

An open pit optimisation was completed to constrain the reported Mineral Resource. The updated Carlow Castle Mineral Resource is 14.3 million tonnes at 0.7 g/t Au, 0.4% Cu, and 0.05% Co for 320,000 ounces gold, 53,000 tonnes contained copper, and 7,000 tonnes contained cobalt.

Table 3 shows the updated resource numbers compared to the 2019 resources numbers.

Table 3. Comparison between 2021 and 2019 Mineral Resource estimates

Type	2021 Inferred	2021 Inferred	2021 Inferred	2021 Inferred	2019 Inferred	2019 Inferred	2019 Inferred	2019 Inferred
	Tonnes (kt)	Au (g/t)	Cu (%)	Co (%)	Tonnes (kt)	Au (g/t)	Cu (%)	Co (%)
Oxide	4,400	0.4	0.3	0.04	5,100	2.1	0.6	0.1
Transitional	3,100	0.7	0.5	0.06	-	-	-	-
Fresh	6,900	0.9	0.4	0.06	2,800	0.7	0.6	0.05
Total	14,300	0.7	0.4	0.05	8,000	1.6	0.6	0.08

The 2021 Mineral Resource is materially different to the previously reported 2019 Mineral Resource, with a significant decrease in Au, Cu, and Co grades, and an increase in resource tonnes. The contained gold decreased by 98,000 ounces, contained copper increased 5,000 tonnes, and contained cobalt was approximately the same (Figures 7 and 8).

==> picture [407 x 207] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7. Waterfall chart of changes in the MRE for contained gold between 2019 and 2021 estimates

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 8 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

==> picture [391 x 207] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8. Waterfall chart of changes in the MRE for contained copper between 2019 and 2021 estimates.

Comparison between the 2019 and 2021 Mineral Resource

The 2021 Mineral Resource for Carlow Castle incorporated a significant amount of additional surface RC and diamond drilling. The decrease in resource grades and contained metal is a direct result of increased drilling below the -100mRL (approximately 140m below surface) as shown in Figure 9.

Below -100 mRL, the estimated mean gold grade decreased from 1.25 g/t Au in the 2019 model to 0.5 g/t Au in the 2021 model. Similarly, copper decreased from 0.3% Cu to 0.25% Cu, and cobalt from 0.05% Co to 0.03% Co. Material differences in the data and estimation methodology between the 2019 and 2020 Mineral Resource models are discussed below.

==> picture [455 x 224] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

Carlow Main Au grade by RL
2000000 2.0
1500000 1.5
1000000 1.0
500000 0.5
0 0.0
2021 tonnes 2019 tonnes 2019 Au g/t 2021 Au g/t
40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 -110 -120 -130 -140 -150 -160 -170 -180 -190 -200 -210 -220 -230 -240 -250 -260
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 9. Carlow Main zone 2019 and 2021 model tonnes and Au grades by RL

Differences in the Input Datasets

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF W www.artemisresources.com.au Page 9 of 47

Several very high-grade drill holes were drilled down dip in 2018: ARC133, ARC138, ARC139, and 18CCAD010. The 2021 Mineral Resource included several additional infill drillholes drilled across the mineralisation adjacent to ARC133, ARC138 and ARC139 and 18CCAD010 that reported lower Au, Cu, and Co grades and improved the confidence in the mineralisation interpretation (Figure 10).

==> picture [424 x 298] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 10. Cross-section 507 520 mE showing ARC138 and ARC139, 2019 block model, and 2019 Whittle shell

A comparison of the composite data for the Carlow Main zone showed the mean composite Au grade decreased from 0.60 g/t in 2019 to 0.55 g/t in 2021, while Cu composite grades increased from 2,935 ppm to 3,720 ppm, and Co composite grades stayed approximately the same. The changes in mean grades for Au and Cu are reflected in the Mineral Resource.

Differences in the Interpretation Approach

The 2019 mineralisation wireframe for Carlow Main used manual sectional interpretation on 40 m spacings at a nominal 500 ppm Cu cut-off. The 2021 model utilised a probabilistic indicator modelling method to model the complex and variable grade and geological continuity effectively. Nested indicator grade shells were generated at 200 ppm Cu, 500 ppm Cu, and 0.5 g/t Au cutoffs.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 10 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES W www.artemisresources.com.au

The additional 0.5 g/t Au sub-domain was created for the 2021 model to constrain the influence of the high-grade down-dip drillholes. In areas with no infill drilling the 500 ppm Cu wireframes in 2019 and 2021 are generally comparable.

Differences in the Volume Covered

Infill drilling led to a refinement in the mineralisation interpretation and subsequent decrease in volume below -100 mRL. The decrease in volume was largely driven by infill drilling on four sections (507 380 mE; 507 500 mE; 507 540 mE; and 507 620 mE).

The additional drilling removed poorly constrained volume that had been projected down-dip in 2019, especially on the footwall.

Differences in the Estimation Parameters

The two models used different treatments of outlier grades. For the 2019 model, no top cuts were applied; grades above certain thresholds were restricted to a search distance of 10 m, or inside the OK panel in which they were situated. For the 2021 model, a top cut was applied to high grades before estimation.

Differences in the Open Pit Optimisation Parameters

Both the 2019 and 2021 models were constrained by a Whittle open pit optimisation to account for the reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction (RPEEE) test of the JORC Code. The optimisation parameters for both models were identical except for increased commodity prices in 2021.

Differences in Mineral Resource Classification Approach

The resource classification followed similar approaches in the 2019 and 2021 models. In the 2019 model, the lower extents of the optimized resource shell were constrained by the extent of the mineralisation wireframe. The 2021 Whittle shell was not limited by the wireframe, but by grade and tonnage of mineralisation. Material below the -220 mRL was left unclassified based on limited drill data. The Carlow Main zone remains open at depth.

Differences in the Estimation Method

The change from a localised uniform conditioning (LUC) estimation method in 2019 to a global ordinary kriging (OK) method in 2021 was based on the improved mineralisation domaining and population statistics with infill drilling.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 11 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES W www.artemisresources.com.au

==> picture [488 x 221] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 11. 2019 block model resource classification (Inferred – 3; Unclassified – 4) with 2019 Whittle shell

==> picture [455 x 42] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [488 x 220] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 12. 2021 block model resource classification (Inferred – 3; Unclassified – 4) with 2021 Whittle shell

Summary of Findings from the 2021 and 2019 Resource Comparisons

• Some of the 2020 and 2021 drilling has drilled through parts of the 2019 Carlow Main zone resource model.

• This drilling has reduced the volume of the mineralisation and the contained metal below the -100mRL.

• Additional resource has been added in the newly discovered Cross-cut zone.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 12 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

• The balance of the 2020-2021 drilling has extended the Carlow Main mineralisation at depth; none of this additional mineralisation is reported in the current Mineral Resource as it is below the optimized resource pit shell.

• Three drillholes that were drilled down-dip had a disproportionate effect on the Au grade below -100 mRL in the 2019 model; this has been rectified by the additional infill drilling and revised domaining.

• The change from LUC to OK has not significantly changed the grade-tonnage selectivity prediction, due to the additional data available for the 2021 model.

• The optimisation parameters for the 2021 model are the same as those used in 2019, except for higher commodity prices.

• The 2019 and 2021 Inferred Mineral Resiurce classification is justified given the changes described above.

Strategy for Carlow Castle

Following the Mineral Resource update for Carlow Castle, a detailed review of the current resource and exploration strategy has been conducted.

It is proposed that a structural review and interpretation be completed, and drill targets identified and tested. The new interpretation will include a re-modeling of Carlow Castle using previous drill data, current drilling data, assay results and mineralisation trends.

• Interpretation of the geology and structural setting;

• Remodel and generate additional drill targets;

• Step out drilling to add additional ounces to a currently increasing resource base;

• Regional review to stitch together data from various disciplines and generate new targets.

MUNNI MUNNI PGE PROJECT H1 DRILL PROGRAM

Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling of 15 drill holes for 2,740 metres has been completed in May, with drill holes spread through the entire upper portion of the mineralisation, to a maximum depth of 250 metres. Samples were processed at ALS Global.

Joint Venture Formation with Platina Resources Limited

Following a period of constructive dialogue, Artemis is pleased to have now executed a full Joint Venture Agreement and associated documents that allow for to formal formation of a Joint Venture over 100% of the Munni Munni Project with Platina Resources Limited in the ratio of beneficial interests, 70% ARV and 30% PGM.

==> picture [455 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 13 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Drilling and Multi-elements Results

The RC drilling program was designed to confirm the PGE horizon located on the northern nose of the >20km long Munni Munni mafic intrusive Complex, on a 50 x 50 metre drill pattern.

A non-JORC resource estimation was calculated using historic holes which had defined the mineralised horizon. The recent drill program was designed to infill the historic drilling.

Holes 2MMRC0014 & 015 were targeted to test mineralisation along the poorly defined eastern side of the mafic intrusive Complex.

As the PGE horizon is essentially a stratigraphic zone, historical drilling has been widely spaced and very selectively assayed; Artemis has undertaken a broad multi-element analytical suite to improve the subtle lithological variations.

Location of Munni Munni tenements and completed drill hole collars are located in Figure 13. Sections relating to the completed drilling are located in Figures 14 and 15.

==> picture [467 x 342] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 13: Munni munni location map highlighting recent drilling in red and section locations in yellow.

==> picture [472 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 14 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

==> picture [377 x 313] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 14: Section 481800mE – 2PGE + Au intercepts.

==> picture [378 x 313] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 15: Section 481700mE – 2PGE + Au intercepts.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

US:ARTTF

FRA:ATY

ARTEMIS RESOURCES W www.artemisresources.com.au

Page 15 of 47

In the diamond drill core from 2018 essentially only gabbros and pyroxenites were recognised, likewise in the RC chips only gabbros, pyroxenites and sediments with various minor intrusive dykes were noted.

Holes 18MMAD006 with 21MMRC003 and 21MMRC004 show the direct correlation of the PGE results and the remarkable continuity and consistency of the lithochemistry.

The RC data shows slightly lower absolute results for the PGE but occurs in the same relative ’stratigraphic‘ position. Virtually all PGE occur within the websterite lithology with a lesser amount in the pyroxenite due the PGE occurring very close to the contact between the two units.

Significant results from the PGE zone in this drilling program include:

• 7m @ 2.20g/t 2PGE + Au (1.46g/t Pd, 0.67 g/t Pt, 0.07g/t Au) from 124m, 21MMRC005;

• 7m @ 2.35g/t 2PGE + Au (1.33g/t Pd, 0.84 g/t Pt, 0.18g/t Au), from 96m, 21MMRC006;

• 4m @ 2.45g/t 2PGE + Au (1.31g/t Pd, 0.85g/t Pt, 0.29g/t Au) from 60m, 21MMRC007;

• 5m @ 2.35g/t 2PGE + Au (1.36g/t Pd, 0.68g/t Pt, 0.31g/t Au) from 75m, 21MMRC008;

• 4m @ 2.87g/t 2PGE + Au (1.76g/t Pd, 0.89g/t Pt, 0.22g/t Au) from 115m, 2MMRC010.

RADIO HILL FIXED-LOOP ELECTROMAGNETIC (FLEM) SURVEY

Resource Potentials Pty Ltd (ResPot) completed a high-level review of Radio Hill project tenements M47/161 and M47/337 to determine what geophysical exploration datasets are available, highlight geophysical anomaly zones, identify anomalies and target areas of interest that remain untested, or are under- tested by drilling.

The aim is to provide recommendations for additional geophysical surveying, and then to plan, monitor, process and interpret new geophysical surveys carried out over target areas of interest. FLEM surveying was completed by GAP Geophysics in April 2021.

This study identified deep and untested conductor anomaly zones of interest identified from historic deep drilling and follow-up DHEM survey data and reports, with DHEM targets shown projected to surface on the map in Figure 16.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF W www.artemisresources.com.au Page 16 of 47

==> picture [387 x 406] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 16: Radio Hill Project tenements M47/161 and M47/337 (black outlines), mine infrastructure (dashed blue outlines), and the Radio Hill resource wireframes projected to surface (red) over a satellite image. The recent FLEM survey coverage area is outlined in yellow.

The Radio Hill project area is still considered to hold potential for additional discoveries of NiCu-Co-PGE sulphide deposits at depths >500m and to the south of the mined out NiS deposits, where long conduits likely follow the base of the intrusion. However, additional deposits are most likely located at least 600m below surface based on drilling and DHEM results and are therefore too hard to identify using airborne or surface-based EM survey methods.

Recommendations to this program are pending.

==> picture [472 x 103] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 17 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES W www.artemisresources.com.au

WHUNDO GRADIENT-ARRAY INDUCED POLARISATION (GAIP) SURVEY

Artemis Resources hold mining rights to the Whundo VMS project tenements, located approximately 45km S of Karratha in Western Australia. The Whundo Zn-Cu-Pb-Ag VMS deposit has been mined in places and is now in care-and-maintenance status. The project area still holds some un-mined deposits and has potential for additional VMS deposits that remain to be discovered.

This study identified VMS mineralisation potential along a target trend located to the NE of the main Whundo deposit and covers the Yannery and Ayshia prospect areas. These prospect areas may host only weakly-conductive base metal mineralisation, such as sphalerite-rich or disseminated sulphide deposits, that were not identified using previous electromagnetic (EM) survey methods. Therefore, a new induced polarisation (IP) survey was planned and carried out over this area to identify chargeable sulphide mineralisation that was not detected by historic EM surveying. This is highlighted in green on Figure 17.

==> picture [390 x 407] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 17: Whundo Project tenements M47/007 and M47/009 (black outlines), and the Whundo resource wireframe (red) over a satellite image. The recent GAIP survey area is outlined in green, and the known prospect locations are highlighted by blue arrows

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 18 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

A new GAIP survey area is recommended to be surveyed between the Whundo deposit and the recent GAIP survey area, as highlighted by the yellow square, (Figure 18).

This proposed GAIP survey area will cover a gap in survey coverage between Whundo and Yannery and cover the highest-amplitude chargeability anomaly located in the SW corner of the recent GAIP survey block.

Shallow RC drilling is recommended to test the chargeable and resistive target trend identified between Yannery and Ayshia prospects, as highlighted by the dashed black outline. This anomaly trend can be tested by RC drill transects planned across the trend. Untested VTEM target outlines to the NE and W of Whundo should also be RC drill tested. These targets are shown in Figure 18.

==> picture [407 x 426] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 18: Whundo Project tenements M47/007 and M47/009 (black outlines), VTEM anomaly outlines from late-time VTEM data (pink), early-time anomalies (dashed blue), historic Whundo drillhole collar locations coloured by max Zn, and a semi-transparent colour GAIP ternary image where conductivity is red, chargeability is green and resistivity is blue, all overlying a greyscale derivative magnetic image background

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 19 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

CORPORATE

Health and Safety

The Company continues to comply with all State guidelines to ensure the health and safety of its workforce, contractors, and the community in which it operates.

There is currently no significant impact on operations as a result of COVID-19.

Artemis has had no Occupational Health and Safety incidences during the quarter.

The Company ended the Quarter with a cash balance of $9.1m and liquid listed investments of circa $590,000.

Capital Raising

The Company raised $7 million at 6 cents a share in early June 2021 issuing 116.7 million new shares. The raise was strongly supported by European and Australian Institutional Investors.

Board of Directors

The Board welcomed Dr Simon Dominy as a Director on 1 July 2021. Dr Dominy is Adjunct Professor at the Western Australian School of Mines (WASM), Curtin University, and a Visiting Associate Professor at the Camborne School of Mines (CSM), University of Exeter, UK.

A mining geologist-engineer with over 25 years’ experience, Dr Dominy has since 2015 been working with a number of private and listed entities developing/operating gold projects including: MG Gold Ltd; Novo Resources Corporation (TSV: NVO); Scotgold Resources Ltd (AIM: SGZ) and OCX Gold Group.

Between 2004-2014 he was an Executive Consultant/General Manager with the Snowden Group based in Australia and UK, including two years contracted out to LionGold Corporation (SGX: A78).

Simon is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (“FAusIMM”) and the Australian Institute of Geoscientists (“FAIG”).

Mr Boyd Timler resigned as a director on 24 May 2021.

Other

The Company spent ~$1.8 million on exploration in the quarter ended 30 June 2021, principally on the drilling programs at Carlow Castle and Munni Munni, and exploration planning at Paterson’s outlined above.

Payments to Directors, related parties and their associates during the quarter amounted to $192,000, being salaries, superannuation and directors’ fees.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

US:ARTTF

FRA:ATY

ARTEMIS

RESOURCES

Page 20 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

About Artemis Resources

Artemis Resources (ASX: ARV; FRA: ATY; US: ARTTF) is a Perth-based exploration and development company, led by an experienced team that has a singular focus on delivering shareholder value from its Pilbara gold projects – the Greater Carlow Gold Project in the West Pilbara and the Paterson Central exploration project in the East Pilbara.

For more information, please visit www.artemisresources.com.au

This report has been approved for release by the Board.

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT PATERSONS RANGE:

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results complies with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code) and has been compiled and assessed under the supervision of Dr Jayson Meyers, a consultant to Artemis Resources Limited and a Director of Resource Potentials Pty Ltd. Dr Meyers is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Geoscientists. He has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the JORC Code. Dr Meyers consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Dr Meyers does not hold securities in the Company.

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT WEST PILBARA:

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled or reviewed by Steve Boda, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Geoscientists (AIG). Mr Boda is an employee of Artemis Resources Limited. Mr Boda has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Boda consents to the inclusion in the announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATION (MRE)

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr Phil Jankowski, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Jankowski has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Jankowski consents to the inclusion in this website of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [455 x 43] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF W www.artemisresources.com.au Page 21 of 47

Tenement List - All tenements are located in Western Australia.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

Project	Tenement Status Company
Purdy’s Reward	L47/782 Pending KML No 2 Pty Ltd
Carlow Castle	E47/1797 Live KML No 2 Pty Ltd
Rh Wll	P47/1929 Live KML No 2 Pty Ltd
	E47/3719 Live KML No 2 Pty Ltd
ut e	E47/3487¹ Live Elysian Resources Pty Ltd
	E47/3341¹ Live Hard Rock Resources Pty Ltd
47 Patch	E47/3361¹ Live Elysian Resources Pty Ltd
	E47/3564¹ Live Elysian Resources Pty Ltd
	E47/3340¹ Live Hard Rock Resources Pty Ltd
	E47/3390¹ Live Hard Rock Resources Pty Ltd
Elysian / Hard	P47/1832¹ Live Hard Rock Resources Pty Ltd
Rock	P47/1881¹ Live Hard Rock Resources Pty Ltd
	E47/3534¹ Live Jindalee Resources Pty Ltd
	E47/3535¹ Pending Jindalee Resources Pty Ltd
	P47/1833¹ Pending Jindalee Resources Pty Ltd
Whundo	L47/163 Live Fox Radio Hill Pty Ltd
	M47/7 Live Fox Radio Hill Pty Ltd
	M47/9 Live Fox Radio Hill Pty Ltd
Radio Hill	M47/161 Live Fox Radio Hill Pty Ltd
	M47/337 Live Fox Radio Hill Pty Ltd
	L47/93 Live Fox Radio Hill Pty Ltd
Weerianna	M47/223² Live Western Metals Pty Ltd
Silica Hills	L47/781 Pending KML No 2 Pty Ltd
ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

W www.artemisresources.com.au Page 22 of 47

		E47/1746 Live		KML No 2 Pty Ltd
	Telfer	E45/5276 Live		Armada Mining Pty Ltd
	Sing Well	P47/1622 Live		KML No 2 Pty Ltd
		P47/1112 Live		KML No 2 Pty Ltd
	Nickol River	P47/1126 Live		KML No 2 Pty Ltd
		P47/1925 Live		KML No 2 Pty Ltd
		E47/3322⁵ Live		Karratha Metals Pty Ltd
		M47/123⁵ Live		Platina Resources Ltd
	Munni Munni	M47/124⁵ Live		Platina Resources Ltd
		M47/125⁵ Live		Platina Resources Ltd
		M47/126⁵ Live		Platina Resources Ltd

1– 70% Artemis – Karratha Gold Joint Venture

2 – 80% Artemis

3 – 70% Artemis

4 – 70% Artemis – Joint Venture with Platina Resources

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

US:ARTTF

FRA:ATY

ARTEMIS

RESOURCES

Page 23 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Table 4:Carlow Drill Collar Survey June Q2 2021 (MGA50 Grid)

HoleID	Type	Easting GDA94	Northing GDA94	RL (m)	Dip	Azimuth Mag	Total Depth (m)
ARC310	RC	506720	7698808	37	-60.71	179.89	260
ARC311	RC	506670	7698822	37	-60.53	180.39	260
ARC312	RC	506670	7698768	36	-59.99	180.03	200
ARC313	RC	506760	7698762	36	-60.65	180.05	220
ARC315	RC	506560	7698740	35	-60.14	180	150
21CCDD001	DD	507540	7698470	30	-60.11	359.72	300.2
21CCDD002	DD	507580	7698590	30	-60.27	1.92	110.6
21CCDD003	DD	507580	7698550	30	-60.43	359.96	177.3

Table 5: Significant results for the Q2 June RC drilling at Carlow Castle. Results are >0.5g/t Au or >0.5% Cu

Hole No	From (m)	To (m)	Downhole Width (m)	Au (g/t)	Cu (%)	Co (%)
ARC310	34	35	1	0.300	0.014	0.042
ARC310	40	41	1	0.900	1.585	0.009
ARC310	53	54	1	1.430	1.700	0.050
ARC310	54	55	1	47.300	11.250	0.065
ARC310	55	56	1	26.500	9.510	0.060
ARC310	56	57	1	9.700	9.900	0.057
ARC310	57	58	1	4.350	6.900	0.050
ARC310	58	59	1	0.530	3.250	0.035
ARC310	59	60	1	0.320	0.266	0.009
ARC310	112	113	1	1.420	0.053	0.027
ARC310	113	114	1	0.380	0.870	0.074
ARC310	129	130	1	0.670	0.264	0.141
ARC310	136	137	1	0.320	0.145	0.007
ARC310	137	138	1	0.320	0.116	0.009
ARC310	138	139	1	0.450	0.090	0.034
ARC310	142	143	1	0.370	0.640	0.036
ARC310	143	144	1	0.330	0.159	0.012
ARC310	168	169	1	1.650	0.177	0.102
ARC310	169	170	1	1.570	0.136	0.155
ARC310	204	205	1	0.330	0.573	0.029
ARC310	214	215	1	0.450	0.068	0.228
ARC310	222	223	1	0.300	0.211	0.011
ARC310	225	226	1	1.370	0.063	0.003
ARC311	6	7	1	0.550	0.139	0.007
ARC311	45	46	1	0.570	0.180	0.021
ARC311	53	54	1	0.280	0.126	0.060
ARC311	56	57	1	0.480	0.181	**0.082 **
ARC311	100	101	1	0.540	0.214	0.066
ARC311	109	110	1	0.320	0.090	0.060
ARC311	117	118	1	0.280	0.715	0.014
ARC311	132	133	1	0.330	0.047	0.010
ARC311	136	137	1	2.550	0.223	0.058
ARC311	139	140	1	1.650	0.570	0.058

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

US:ARTTF

FRA:ATY

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 24 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole No	From (m)	To (m)	Downhole Width (m)	Au (g/t)	Cu (%)	Co (%)
ARC311	140	141	1	2.870	0.565	**0.157 **
ARC311	141	142	1	0.690	0.269	0.072
ARC311	154	155	1	2.490	0.486	0.016
ARC311	175	176	1	0.460	0.068	0.012
ARC311	176	177	1	0.570	0.099	0.016
ARC311	181	182	1	0.340	0.090	0.008
ARC311	182	183	1	0.780	0.187	0.011
ARC311	186	187	1	0.650	0.155	0.024
ARC311	187	188	1	6.270	1.075	0.054
ARC311	189	190	1	1.460	0.106	0.083
ARC311	190	191	1	5.930	1.630	0.610
ARC311	191	192	1	1.140	0.199	**0.061 **
ARC312	9	10	1	1.610	2.330	0.053
ARC312	28	29	1	0.860	0.340	0.025
ARC312	29	30	1	0.840	0.385	0.030
ARC312	30	31	1	1.350	0.621	0.015
ARC312	31	32	1	6.950	0.570	0.011
ARC312	32	33	1	1.700	0.841	0.013
ARC312	33	34	1	4.370	3.830	0.022
ARC312	35	36	1	0.320	0.297	0.011
ARC312	46	47	1	0.330	0.186	0.053
ARC312	47	48	1	0.420	0.196	0.045
ARC312	49	50	1	0.290	0.282	0.026
ARC312	53	54	1	0.480	0.363	0.030
ARC312	55	56	1	0.310	0.059	0.010
ARC312	56	57	1	2.440	0.125	0.015
ARC312	57	58	1	1.450	0.328	0.016
ARC312	59	60	1	0.260	0.066	0.018
ARC312	60	61	1	4.010	0.713	0.118
ARC312	66	67	1	0.880	0.051	**0.397 **
ARC312	77	78	1	0.490	0.563	0.025
ARC312	78	79	1	0.480	1.410	0.018
ARC312	83	84	1	0.760	0.073	0.050
ARC312	84	85	1	1.530	0.304	0.014
ARC312	93	94	1	0.300	**0.664 **	0.013
ARC312	105	106	1	0.560	0.295	0.013
ARC312	114	115	1	9.290	0.673	0.169
ARC312	115	116	1	0.380	0.098	0.014
ARC312	116	117	1	0.390	0.112	0.015
ARC312	118	119	1	0.570	0.049	0.022
ARC312	125	126	1	0.370	0.221	0.030
ARC312	134	135	1	0.330	0.099	0.023
ARC312	144	145	1	2.630	0.234	0.006
ARC313	14	15	1	0.460	0.058	0.010
ARC313	35	36	1	1.110	0.046	0.010
ARC313	43	44	1	0.480	0.128	0.034
ARC313	44	45	1	1.210	0.283	0.028
ARC313	82	83	1	1.060	3.930	0.010
ARC313	90	91	1	0.340	2.110	0.011
ARC313	103	104	1	0.320	0.222	0.030
ARC313	105	106	1	1.300	0.079	0.185
ARC313	110	111	1	0.990	0.421	0.570

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

US:ARTTF

FRA:ATY

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 25 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole No	From (m)	To (m)	Downhole Width (m)	Au (g/t)	Cu (%)	Co (%)
ARC313	111	112	1	3.150	0.463	0.047
ARC313	121	122	1	2.170	0.018	0.083
ARC313	122	123	1	0.360	0.156	0.083
ARC313	124	125	1	5.760	1.740	0.071
ARC313	130	131	1	0.370	0.050	0.007
ARC313	140	141	1	0.440	0.172	**0.062 **
ARC313	147	148	1	1.350	0.145	0.098
ARC313	148	149	1	0.360	0.091	0.046
ARC313	151	152	1	0.640	0.393	0.243
ARC313	152	153	1	0.420	0.128	0.090
ARC313	170	171	1	0.280	0.574	0.013
ARC313	195	196	1	0.730	2.070	0.007
ARC313	199	200	1	5.170	0.376	0.002
ARC315	NSI

Table 6: Drill Collar Locations for Munni Munni

Hole ID	Type	Easting	Northing	RL	Grid	Azimuth(True)	Dip	Depth
18MMAD001	DDH	482199.26	7664902.04	86.73	MGA-50	4.11	-60.1	100.5
18MMAD002	DDH	482660.00	7664952.82	81.86	MGA-50	5.17	-60.1	101.8
18MMAD003	DDH	482340.74	7664909.75	89.17	MGA-50	5.77	-60.2	100
18MMAD004	DDH	482454.88	7664874.92	85.70	MGA-50	4.47	-59.2	120
18MMAD005	DDH	481898.96	7664872.90	83.68	MGA-50	0	-70	100
18MMAD006	DDH	481796.57	7664865.99	82.57	MGA-50	0.84	-60.3	108.8
18MMAD007	DDH	482143.34	7664922.90	94.51	MGA-50	0	-80	110
18MMAD008	DDH	482454.50	7664875.00	85.70	MGA-50	0	-80	110
20MMRC001	RC	485794.94	7661174.67	96.57	MGA-50	90	-60	160
20MMRC002	RC	485863.85	7662228.67	92.18	MGA-50	90	-60	200
20MMRC003	RC	485901.19	7662571.11	91.25	MGA-50	90	-60	180
20MMRC004	RC	486293.89	7663240.68	89.82	MGA-50	90	-60	80
20MMRC005	RC	481923.45	7664887.17	82.84	MGA-50	0	-60	100
20MMRC006	RC	482201.58	7664896.23	86.94	MGA-50	0	-90	160
20MMRC007	RC	482492.96	7664856.56	88.47	MGA-50	180	-80	190
20MMRC008	RC	479730.23	7664005.47	102.58	MGA-50	330	-70	150
20MMRC009	RC	480200.52	7663223.59	104.73	MGA-50	0	-90	150
20MMRC010	RC	480309.48	7662943.32	106.57	MGA-50	0	-90	160
20MMRC011	RC	479598.19	7663830.25	123.01	MGA-50	320	-60	200
20MMRC012	RC	479696.24	7663809.66	112.06	MGA-50	330	-60	198
21MMRC001	RC	481699.73	7664781.70	83.18	MGA-51	0.00	-60	150
21MMRC002	RC	481699.72	7664779.73	83.07	MGA-52	0.00	-90	150
21MMRC003	RC	481814.44	7664795.24	83.58	MGA-53	0.00	-90	150
21MMRC004	RC	481814.52	7664797.22	83.51	MGA-54	0.00	-60	150
21MMRC005	RC	481844.03	7664739.96	84.73	MGA-55	0.00	-60	150
21MMRC006	RC	481862.44	7664843.06	83.49	MGA-56	0.00	-90	150
21MMRC007	RC	481864.87	7664843.26	83.67	MGA-57	30.00	-60	150
21MMRC008	RC	481974.29	7664875.13	86.89	MGA-58	20.00	-60	150
21MMRC009	RC	482895.77	7664802.80	82.58	MGA-59	0.00	-60	150
21MMRC010	RC	482502.76	7664821.49	98.79	MGA-60	350.00	-60	150
21MMRC011	RC	482798.12	7664827.12	82.19	MGA-61	0.00	-60	170
21MMRC012	RC	482713.67	7664884.68	85.61	MGA-62	0.00	-60	150
21MMRC013	RC	486247.37	7660700.45	98.29	MGA-63	0.00	-60	150
21MMRC014	RC	485899.50	7660489.58	99.18	MGA-64	0.00	-60	250
21MMRC015	RC	486247.366	7660700.47	98.29	MGA-65	0.00	-60	250

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY

US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS

RESOURCES

Page 26 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Table 7: Significant Intersections for Munni Munni

Hole_ID	M From	M To	Width	Sample Type	Pd	Pt	Au	2PGE+Au	Co	Cu	Ni
18MMAD001	40.5	41	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.02	0.01	0.20	0.23	100	2660	1320
18MMAD001	41	41.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.66	0.49	0.60	1.74	130	4130	1910
18MMAD001	41.5	42	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.00	1.85	0.40	4.25	90	1430	950
18MMAD001	42	42.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.13	1.34	0.08	3.55	70	340	530
18MMAD001	42.5	43	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.92	0.88	0.04	2.83	70	210	530
18MMAD001	43	43.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.15	0.45	0.06	1.66	70	320	520
18MMAD001	43.5	44	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.34	0.36	0.24	1.93	90	1070	780
18MMAD001	44	44.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.73	0.14	0.04	0.91	70	380	540
18MMAD001	44.5	45	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.95	0.15	0.06	1.16	60	340	500
18MMAD001	45	45.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.11	0.17	0.12	1.39	100	1090	830
18MMAD001	45.5	46	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.59	0.08	0.06	0.73	70	520	570
18MMAD001	46	46.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.38	0.06	0.02	0.45	80	170	550
18MMAD001	46.5	47	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.50	0.41	0.02	0.93	80	120	510
18MMAD001	47	47.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.28	0.76	0.06	2.10	90	420	610
18MMAD001	47.5	48	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.03	80	190	530
18MMAD001	98	98.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.05	0.02	0.01	0.08	170	100	2260
18MMAD001	98.5	99	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.60	0.28	0.16	1.04	140	2080	2660
18MMAD001	99	99.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.00	0.00	0.01	90	100	1040
18MMAD002	22	22.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.00	0.03	0.04	110	3160	1540
18MMAD002	22.5	23	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.59	0.41	0.72	1.71	120	3430	1710
18MMAD002	23	23.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.09	0.85	0.27	3.21	80	1140	790
18MMAD002	23.5	24	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.30	0.04	0.07	0.41	90	890	730
										0.22	0.12
18MMAD003	34	34.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.01	0.24	0.26	160	4400	1960
18MMAD003	34.5	35	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.07	0.04	0.47	0.58	140	3420	1620
18MMAD003	35	35.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.06	2.01	0.72	4.79	180	3790	2010
18MMAD003	35.5	36	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.71	2.53	0.22	5.46	100	1250	940
18MMAD003	36	36.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.14	1.40	0.29	3.83	80	400	650
18MMAD003	36.5	37	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.40	0.46	0.08	1.94	80	240	610
18MMAD003	37	37.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.62	0.53	0.15	2.30	80	430	730
18MMAD003	37.5	38	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.92	0.29	0.04	1.25	160	2290	1370
18MMAD003	38	38.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.93	0.39	0.17	1.48	140	2070	1190
18MMAD003	38.5	39	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.04	0.02	0.00	0.06	80	260	560
18MMAD004	56.7	57	0.3	ASSAY 1/4	0.11	0.07	0.02	0.20	110	1160	620
18MMAD004	57	57.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.75	0.22	0.07	1.05	120	2090	1160
18MMAD004	57.5	58	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.19	0.14	0.03	0.36	90	580	710
18MMAD005	34	34.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.01	0.23	0.25	100	2880	1350
18MMAD005	34.5	35	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.12	0.09	0.40	0.60	110	3100	1360
18MMAD005	35	35.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.80	1.83	0.52	4.15	100	2600	1250
18MMAD005	35.5	36	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.82	1.79	0.25	3.85	80	930	780
18MMAD005	36	36.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.05	1.42	0.10	3.57	80	460	620
18MMAD005	36.5	37	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.24	1.34	0.06	3.64	80	380	620
18MMAD005	37	37.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.71	0.92	0.04	2.67	70	250	530
18MMAD005	37.5	38	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.23	0.53	0.05	1.80	80	340	590
18MMAD005	38	38.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.57	0.37	0.16	2.10	110	970	920
18MMAD005	38.5	39	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.72	0.24	0.06	2.02	80	260	610
18MMAD005	39	39.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.75	0.10	0.04	0.88	80	180	580
18MMAD005	59	59.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.00	0.00	0.01	60	180	330
18MMAD005	59.5	60	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.41	0.17	0.06	0.64	120	3990	1840
18MMAD005	60	60.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.61	0.35	0.10	1.05	110	2770	1480
18MMAD005	60.5	61	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.87	0.60	0.19	1.65	110	3020	1680
18MMAD005	61	61.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.24	0.14	0.04	0.42	90	1340	1090
										0.33	0.17

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 27 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole_ID	M From	M To	Width	Sample Type	Pd	Pt	Au	2PGE+Au	Co	Cu	Ni
18MMAD005	65	65.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.00	0.00	0.01	40	60	200
18MMAD005	65.5	66	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.30	0.19	0.05	0.53	50	680	420
18MMAD005	66	66.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.24	0.75	0.20	2.19	130	3290	1880
18MMAD005	66.5	67	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.41	0.60	0.18	2.19	140	3310	2200
18MMAD005	67	67.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.21	0.11	0.04	0.36	80	630	1040
18MMAD005	67.5	68	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.35	0.18	0.05	0.58	90	760	1120
18MMAD005	68	68.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.18	0.10	0.03	0.31	90	570	1000
18MMAD005	68.5	69	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.09	0.63	0.10	1.82	130	2320	1630
18MMAD005	69	69.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.19	0.12	0.05	0.36	90	380	980
18MMAD006	27.5	28	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.00	0.13	0.14	120	3210	1400
18MMAD006	28	28.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.76	0.69	0.33	1.78	100	2330	1160
18MMAD006	28.5	29	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.66	1.21	0.14	3.00	80	420	560
18MMAD006	29	29.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.49	0.77	0.06	2.32	80	360	540
18MMAD006	29.5	30	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.29	0.67	0.06	2.01	80	350	540
18MMAD006	30	30.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.76	0.14	0.07	0.97	80	440	600
18MMAD006	30.5	31	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.48	0.09	0.02	0.59	80	390	580
18MMAD006	31	31.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.10	0.19	0.08	1.37	70	380	550
18MMAD006	31.5	32	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.55	0.26	0.03	0.85	70	260	530
18MMAD006	32	32.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.16	0.25	0.11	1.51	100	1070	740
18MMAD006	32.5	33	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.32	0.17	0.04	0.53	80	230	540
18MMAD006	33	33.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.04	0.01	0.00	0.05	70	150	500
18MMAD007	65	65.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.06	0.03	0.36	0.45	110	3440	1490
18MMAD007	65.5	66	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.56	1.60	0.49	3.64	100	2410	1160
18MMAD007	66	66.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.98	1.44	0.09	3.50	90	430	590
18MMAD007	66.5	67	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.58	0.55	0.13	2.26	90	770	700
18MMAD007	67	67.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.91	0.16	0.14	1.21	90	1320	900
18MMAD007	67.5	68	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.55	0.12	0.04	0.71	90	410	590
18MMAD007	68	68.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.68	0.11	0.07	0.85	80	850	700
18MMAD007	68.5	69	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.64	0.08	0.04	0.76	90	440	620
18MMAD007	69	69.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.71	0.23	0.05	0.98	90	380	620
18MMAD007	69.5	70	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.34	0.26	0.01	0.61	80	130	530
18MMAD007	70	70.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.42	0.25	0.02	0.69	90	240	560
18MMAD007	70.5	71	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.02	0.01	0.00	0.03	90	160	550
18MMAD008	81.5	82	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.01	0.00	0.00	0.01	60	260	470
18MMAD008	82	82.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.67	0.25	0.07	0.99	80	1520	950
18MMAD008	82.5	83	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	1.46	1.03	0.33	2.81	100	2080	1330
18MMAD008	83	83.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	3.14	2.15	0.48	5.77	120	2400	1690
18MMAD008	83.5	84	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	2.66	2.00	0.45	5.11	150	2570	2040
18MMAD008	84	84.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.74	0.72	0.21	1.67	90	1890	1200
18MMAD008	84.5	85	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.73	0.52	0.13	1.39	80	990	1140
18MMAD008	85	85.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.08	0.06	0.01	0.14	60	190	490
18MMAD008	85.5	86	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.66	0.47	0.11	1.24	90	1940	1170
18MMAD008	86	86.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.64	0.37	0.09	1.10	80	1850	1040
18MMAD008	86.5	87	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.03	0.02	0.01	0.05	60	130	520
18MMAD008	87	87.5	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.18	0.09	0.03	0.30	70	340	540
18MMAD008	87.5	88	0.5	ASSAY 1/4	0.69	0.57	0.18	1.44	100	1580	1130
18MMAD008	88	89	1	ASSAY 1/4	0.14	0.08	0.02	0.24	80	440	670
20MMRC003	133	134	1	RC	0.25	0.05	0.04	0.33	62	638	336
20MMRC003	134	135	1	RC	0.48	0.19	0.12	0.78	78	1590	613
20MMRC003	135	136	1	RC	0.71	0.25	0.12	1.08	90	2310	870
20MMRC003	136	137	1	RC	0.08	0.02	0.05	0.15	79	356	401

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 28 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole_ID	M From	M To	Width	Sample Type	Pd	Pt	Au	2PGE+Au	Co	Cu	Ni
20MMRC005	18	19	1	RC	0.00	0.00	0.04	0.05	95	1640	924
20MMRC005	19	20	1	RC	0.34	0.33	0.23	0.90	125	2810	1350
20MMRC005	20	21	1	RC	1.74	1.37	0.20	3.30	96	1450	981
20MMRC005	21	22	1	RC	1.88	1.03	0.13	3.03	85	861	752
20MMRC005	22	23	1	RC	0.97	0.20	0.09	1.26	94	887	794
20MMRC005	23	24	1	RC	0.50	0.09	0.04	0.63	82	497	616
20MMRC005	24	25	1	RC	0.24	0.17	0.01	0.42	82	177	521
20MMRC006	69	70	1	RC	0.03	0.01	0.10	0.15	100	1275	532
20MMRC006	70	71	1	RC	0.62	0.60	0.30	1.51	76	1520	846
20MMRC006	71	72	1	RC	0.85	0.61	0.06	1.52	85	802	423
20MMRC006	72	73	1	RC	0.90	0.29	0.16	1.35	96	1140	669
20MMRC006	73	74	1	RC	0.62	0.33	0.12	1.06	105	1500	695
20MMRC006	74	75	1	RC	0.16	0.08	0.03	0.26	81	355	605
20MMRC006	101	102	1	RC	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.01	59	296	143
20MMRC006	102	103	1	RC	0.62	0.39	0.08	1.10	131	2280	937
20MMRC006	103	104	1	RC	0.22	0.11	0.04	0.37	87	708	812
20MMRC007	121	122	1	RC	0.01	0.01	0.14	0.16	97	2280	1280
20MMRC007	122	123	1	RC	0.49	0.44	0.33	1.26	95	2810	1280
20MMRC007	123	124	1	RC	1.70	1.50	0.17	3.37	89	1090	736
20MMRC007	124	125	1	RC	1.33	0.76	0.05	2.13	81	511	527
20MMRC007	125	126	1	RC	1.08	0.40	0.12	1.60	82	874	722
20MMRC007	126	127	1	RC	0.57	0.17	0.05	0.80	75	416	572
20MMRC007	127	128	1	RC	0.54	0.16	0.02	0.71	76	380	594
20MMRC007	128	129	1	RC	0.70	0.22	0.03	0.94	76	260	573
20MMRC007	129	130	1	RC	0.09	0.04	0.01	0.14	74	133	528
20MMRC011	143	144	1	RC	0.06	0.04	0.19	0.29	88	1960	873
20MMRC011	144	145	1	RC	0.87	0.82	0.42	2.11	89	2360	1050
20MMRC011	145	146	1	RC	0.78	0.78	0.14	1.69	77	781	587
20MMRC011	146	147	1	RC	0.83	0.44	0.09	1.35	78	829	601
20MMRC011	147	148	1	RC	0.95	0.17	0.07	1.20	83	1460	853
20MMRC011	148	149	1	RC	0.64	0.08	0.04	0.76	75	1200	762
20MMRC011	149	150	1	RC	0.48	0.15	0.05	0.68	76	632	576
20MMRC011	150	151	1	RC	0.21	0.08	0.01	0.30	74	239	473
20MMRC012	193	194	1	RC	0.01	0.01	0.14	0.15	84	2710	1200
20MMRC012	194	195	1	RC	0.37	0.30	0.15	0.82	81	1060	756
20MMRC012	195	196	1	RC	1.00	0.60	0.10	1.70	79	909	651
20MMRC012	196	197	1	RC	0.80	0.37	0.06	1.23	73	659	544
20MMRC012	197	198	1	RC	0.62	0.21	0.04	0.86	73	656	556
21MMRC001	78	79	1	RC	0.01	0.01	0.17	0.19	117	3380	1485
21MMRC001	79	80	1	RC	0.95	1.01	0.20	2.16	87	1400	863
21MMRC001	80	81	1	RC	0.59	1.18	0.05	1.82	79	350	551
21MMRC001	81	82	1	RC	0.17	0.39	0.02	0.58	74	210	519
21MMRC001	82	83	1	RC	0.01	0.02	0.01	0.04	78	214	550
21MMRC002	115	116	1	RC	0.01	0.01	0.19	0.21	102	2470	1285
21MMRC002	116	117	1	RC	0.11	0.16	0.33	0.61	106	2970	1400
21MMRC002	117	118	1	RC	1.37	1.36	0.35	3.07	102	1980	1120
21MMRC002	118	119	1	RC	1.20	1.68	0.11	2.99	89	555	672
21MMRC002	119	120	1	RC	1.00	1.71	0.07	2.78	89	476	644
21MMRC002	120	121	1	RC	0.59	1.36	0.06	2.01	86	462	634
21MMRC002	121	122	1	RC	0.16	0.77	0.08	1.01	91	944	801
21MMRC002	122	123	1	RC	0.09	0.53	0.02	0.64	91	403	673

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 29 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole_ID	M From	M To	Width	Sample Type	Pd	Pt	Au	2PGE+Au	Co	Cu	Ni
21MMRC002	123	124	1	RC	0.15	0.88	0.04	1.07	88	359	644
21MMRC002	124	125	1	RC	0.07	0.35	0.02	0.43	80	185	574
21MMRC002	125	126	1	RC	0.21	0.73	0.07	1.01	90	625	735
21MMRC002	126	127	1	RC	0.03	0.15	0.01	0.19	77	155	578
21MMRC003	107	108	1	RC	0.00	0.01	0.18	0.19	98	2710	1310
21MMRC003	108	109	1	RC	0.54	0.61	0.61	1.76	112	3550	1580
21MMRC003	109	110	1	RC	1.58	1.52	0.36	3.46	98	1630	1020
21MMRC003	110	111	1	RC	1.27	1.64	0.13	3.03	85	632	661
21MMRC003	111	112	1	RC	0.78	1.43	0.05	2.26	81	376	579
21MMRC003	112	113	1	RC	0.26	0.80	0.08	1.14	85	624	687
21MMRC003	113	114	1	RC	0.15	0.70	0.05	0.90	94	1080	865
21MMRC003	114	115	1	RC	0.11	0.56	0.02	0.68	72	302	553
21MMRC003	115	116	1	RC	0.07	0.37	0.01	0.45	75	178	562
21MMRC003	116	117	1	RC	0.06	0.38	0.01	0.46	78	134	566
21MMRC003	117	118	1	RC	0.15	0.77	0.01	0.93	83	160	614
21MMRC003	118	119	1	RC	0.54	1.08	0.02	1.63	87	131	640
21MMRC003	119	120	1	RC	0.03	0.10	0.00	0.13	83	88	599
21MMRC004	80	81	1	RC	0.01	0.01	0.16	0.18	103	3080	1305
21MMRC004	81	82	1	RC	0.68	0.76	0.39	1.82	94	2430	1175
21MMRC004	82	83	1	RC	1.38	1.44	0.26	3.08	91	1300	871
21MMRC004	83	84	1	RC	1.28	1.49	0.16	2.92	88	836	726
21MMRC004	84	85	1	RC	0.18	0.67	0.04	0.88	84	369	571
21MMRC004	85	86	1	RC	0.02	0.04	0.02	0.08	84	187	520
21MMRC005	122	123	1	RC	0.00	0.01	0.18	0.19	102	3850	1710
21MMRC005	123	124	1	RC	0.17	0.19	0.38	0.74	104	3130	1460
21MMRC005	124	125	1	RC	1.48	1.56	0.10	3.14	79	836	705
21MMRC005	125	126	1	RC	1.07	1.73	0.06	2.86	74	326	543
21MMRC005	126	127	1	RC	0.14	0.98	0.14	1.26	95	1225	876
21MMRC005	127	128	1	RC	0.19	0.90	0.05	1.14	86	628	619
21MMRC005	128	129	1	RC	0.07	0.46	0.04	0.57	73	245	368
21MMRC005	129	130	1	RC	1.45	3.67	0.12	5.23	151	2610	1250
21MMRC005	130	131	1	RC	0.33	0.94	0.02	1.29	88	638	730
21MMRC005	131	132	1	RC	0.17	0.56	0.02	0.75	81	292	635
21MMRC005	132	133	1	RC	0.01	0.02	0.00	0.03	79	103	613
21MMRC006	94	95	1	RC	0.00	0.00	0.03	0.03	89	1560	981
21MMRC006	95	96	1	RC	0.13	0.21	0.50	0.84	120	4040	1725
21MMRC006	96	97	1	RC	1.59	1.56	0.50	3.65	100	2420	1250
21MMRC006	97	98	1	RC	1.76	1.69	0.24	3.69	85	1000	824
21MMRC006	98	99	1	RC	1.20	1.79	0.10	3.08	76	410	599
21MMRC006	99	100	1	RC	0.72	1.50	0.05	2.26	78	319	572
21MMRC006	100	101	1	RC	0.31	1.27	0.22	1.80	94	1010	828
21MMRC006	101	102	1	RC	0.12	0.53	0.07	0.72	73	331	587
21MMRC006	102	103	1	RC	0.20	0.97	0.11	1.28	78	391	613
21MMRC006	103	104	1	RC	0.10	0.58	0.04	0.71	77	295	583
21MMRC006	104	105	1	RC	0.06	0.33	0.01	0.40	80	209	587
21MMRC006	105	106	1	RC	0.10	0.57	0.02	0.69	81	268	588
21MMRC006	106	107	1	RC	0.29	1.02	0.03	1.34	81	302	591
21MMRC006	107	108	1	RC	0.04	0.11	0.00	0.16	79	139	575
21MMRC006	136	137	1	RC	0.00	0.01	0.00	0.02	90	310	290
21MMRC006	137	138	1	RC	0.19	0.45	0.07	0.71	101	2060	634
21MMRC006	138	139	1	RC	0.03	0.07	0.01	0.11	80	669	596
21MMRC006	139	140	1	RC	0.55	1.00	0.10	1.65	88	3870	939
21MMRC006	140	141	1	RC	0.06	0.08	0.01	0.14	105	975	1535

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 30 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole_ID	M From	M To	Width	Sample Type	Pd	Pt	Au	2PGE+Au	Co	Cu	Ni
21MMRC007	59	60	1	RC	0.03	0.04	0.28	0.35	121	3230	1440
21MMRC007	60	61	1	RC	1.81	1.76	0.32	3.89	99	1900	982
21MMRC007	61	62	1	RC	1.25	2.02	0.69	3.96	89	1010	742
21MMRC007	62	63	1	RC	0.19	0.95	0.14	1.28	106	1470	917
21MMRC007	63	64	1	RC	0.14	0.52	0.01	0.67	82	252	584
21MMRC007	64	65	1	RC	0.03	0.04	0.01	0.07	89	257	647
21MMRC008	74	75	1	RC	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.01	69	148	509
21MMRC008	75	76	1	RC	0.22	0.38	0.11	0.71	86	1575	838
21MMRC008	76	77	1	RC	0.61	1.03	0.22	1.85	99	3120	1385
21MMRC008	77	78	1	RC	0.75	1.48	0.33	2.55	92	2960	1875
21MMRC008	78	79	1	RC	1.25	2.72	0.64	4.60	121	4950	3110
21MMRC008	79	80	1	RC	0.60	1.23	0.30	2.13	90	2600	1755
21MMRC008	80	81	1	RC	0.09	0.18	0.03	0.30	62	510	691
21MMRC008	81	82	1	RC	0.03	0.06	0.01	0.10	70	212	649
21MMRC008	82	83	1	RC	0.06	0.12	0.03	0.20	72	392	724
21MMRC008	83	84	1	RC	0.16	0.31	0.08	0.56	74	1105	986
21MMRC008	84	85	1	RC	0.18	0.36	0.08	0.62	93	916	1260
21MMRC008	85	86	1	RC	0.02	0.04	0.01	0.07	76	146	788
21MMRC008	86	87	1	RC	0.64	1.27	0.30	2.22	114	4180	2340
21MMRC008	87	88	1	RC	0.35	0.80	0.17	1.32	93	1930	1675
21MMRC008	88	89	1	RC	0.24	0.56	0.13	0.94	90	1295	1445
21MMRC008	89	90	1	RC	0.19	0.45	0.09	0.73	90	992	1380
21MMRC008	90	91	1	RC	0.01	0.03	0.01	0.05	71	135	836
21MMRC009	NSI
21MMRC010	114	115	1	RC	0.02	0.10	0.27	0.39	119	3490	1590
21MMRC010	115	116	1	RC	1.46	1.35	0.61	3.42	141	3410	1735
21MMRC010	116	117	1	RC	1.20	2.21	0.12	3.53	73	418	646
21MMRC010	117	118	1	RC	0.19	0.80	0.07	1.06	71	361	599
21MMRC010	118	119	1	RC	0.73	2.66	0.10	3.49	97	817	925
21MMRC010	119	120	1	RC	0.05	0.17	0.03	0.24	77	277	595
			0	RC
21MMRC010	131	132	1	RC	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.03	76	66	588
21MMRC010	132	133	1	RC	1.05	1.59	0.25	2.89	118	2190	1300
21MMRC010	133	134	1	RC	0.05	0.08	0.01	0.14	77	199	604
21MMRC010	141	142	1	RC	0.05	0.09	0.01	0.15	74	301	653
21MMRC010	142	143	1	RC	0.21	0.40	0.05	0.66	93	1420	1055
21MMRC010	143	144	1	RC	0.01	0.02	0.01	0.03	80	101	795
21MMRC011	141	142	1	RC	0.00	0.00	0.07	0.07	78	1710	757
21MMRC011	142	143	1	RC	0.11	0.21	0.36	0.68	98	3000	1260
21MMRC011	143	144	1	RC	1.39	1.94	0.12	3.44	82	609	602
21MMRC011	144	145	1	RC	0.57	1.40	0.09	2.06	80	533	588
21MMRC011	145	146	1	RC	0.06	0.27	0.04	0.37	85	787	726
21MMRC011	151	152	1	RC	0.00	0.01	0.00	0.01	82	154	559
21MMRC011	152	153	1	RC	0.31	0.74	0.11	1.16	101	2180	1115
21MMRC011	153	154	1	RC	0.33	0.84	0.11	1.27	106	3570	1255
21MMRC011	154	155	1	RC	0.07	0.14	0.02	0.24	76	688	649
21MMRC012	82	83	1	RC	0.01	0.10	0.01	0.12	101	1220	771
21MMRC012	83	84	1	RC	0.31	0.39	0.10	0.80	111	2180	1225
21MMRC012	84	85	1	RC	0.13	0.26	0.03	0.42	84	556	731
21MMRC012	85	86	1	RC	0.08	0.26	0.02	0.36	92	838	782
21MMRC012	86	87	1	RC	0.05	0.10	0.03	0.18	84	389	627

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 31 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Hole_ID	M From	M To	Width	Sample Type	Pd	Pt	Au	2PGE+Au	Co	Cu	Ni
21MMRC012	87	88	1	RC	0.07	0.12	0.02	0.20	86	302	620
21MMRC012	88	89	1	RC	0.13	0.31	0.04	0.47	102	826	775
21MMRC012	89	90	1	RC	0.25	0.55	0.08	0.88	99	1110	849
21MMRC012	90	91	1	RC	0.28	0.50	0.08	0.85	91	979	860
21MMRC012	91	92	1	RC	0.83	1.48	0.36	2.66	111	3690	1980
21MMRC012	92	93	1	RC	1.03	2.99	0.42	4.44	118	4300	2230
21MMRC012	93	94	1	RC	0.22	0.47	0.06	0.76	85	1100	920
21MMRC012	94	95	1	RC	0.01	0.04	0.00	0.05	80	278	594
21MMRC012	95	96	1	RC	0.04	0.07	0.01	0.12	91	901	732
21MMRC012	96	97	1	RC	0.05	0.10	0.02	0.16	93	891	752
21MMRC012	97	98	1	RC	0.14	0.19	0.06	0.40	104	1865	990
21MMRC012	98	99	1	RC	0.04	0.09	0.02	0.14	87	769	736
21MMRC012	99	100	1	RC	0.26	0.27	0.09	0.62	105	2140	1100
21MMRC012	100	101	1	RC	0.21	0.25	0.07	0.53	105	2220	1140
21MMRC012	101	102	1	RC	0.29	0.37	0.31	0.97	120	2870	1370
21MMRC012	102	103	1	RC	0.12	0.21	0.05	0.38	118	2250	1190
21MMRC012	103	104	1	RC	0.19	0.30	0.07	0.56	123	2530	1340
21MMRC012	104	105	1	RC	0.12	0.21	0.04	0.37	112	1780	1130
21MMRC012	133	134	1	RC	0.00	0.01	0.00	0.01	148	34	1980
21MMRC012	134	135	1	RC	0.13	1.09	0.03	1.25	167	1185	2350
21MMRC012	135	136	1	RC	0.27	1.07	0.04	1.38	148	512	2370
21MMRC012	136	137	1	RC	0.01	0.05	0.00	0.07	150	84	2040
21MMRC013	103	104	1	RC	0.03	0.05	0.15	0.23	88	2080	1000
21MMRC013	104	105	1	RC	1.12	1.06	0.34	2.51	88	1230	808
21MMRC013	105	106	1	RC	0.77	1.32	0.06	2.14	81	285	544
21MMRC013	106	107	1	RC	0.30	0.86	0.07	1.23	105	839	765
21MMRC013	107	108	1	RC	0.15	0.67	0.06	0.88	112	1090	918
21MMRC013	108	109	1	RC	0.03	0.05	0.02	0.10	108	1730	899
21MMRC013	109	110	1	RC	0.04	0.21	0.03	0.28	154	5250	1790
21MMRC013	110	111	1	RC	0.03	0.07	0.01	0.11	85	1010	736
21MMRC013	111	112	1	RC	0.08	0.18	0.03	0.29	76	517	592
21MMRC013	112	113	1	RC	0.19	0.41	0.10	0.70	97	1040	898
21MMRC013	113	114	1	RC	0.16	0.36	0.07	0.59	100	1260	928
21MMRC013	114	115	1	RC	0.00	0.02	0.01	0.03	66	122	466
21MMRC013	130	131	1	RC	0.05	0.10	0.02	0.16	53	274	445
21MMRC013	131	132	1	RC	0.23	0.49	0.09	0.82	86	1180	929
21MMRC013	132	133	1	RC	0.01	0.03	0.00	0.04	73	244	527
21MMRC014	NSI
21MMRC015	99	100	1	RC	0.13	0.13	0.06	0.32	80	1670	576
21MMRC015	100	101	1	RC	0.18	0.75	0.07	1.00	88	1915	656
21MMRC015	101	102	1	RC	0.27	0.72	0.14	1.13	89	3200	1100
21MMRC015	102	103	1	RC	0.20	0.50	0.10	0.80	92	2420	915
21MMRC015	103	104	1	RC	0.05	0.22	0.01	0.28	94	621	489

==> picture [455 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 32 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria		Commentary
Sampling	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut	Reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain both
techniques	channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard	2m composite and one metre samples, using a 5 ¼” face sampling hammer.
	measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	Samples were collected on a 2m composite basis to a prescribed depth predetermined by previous drilling, wireframing and assay data. Once the predetermined depth is achieved, the sampling reverts to one metre sample through the orezone to EOH.
	Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.	After composite sample results received, all samples that return a value of >0.1g/t Au will result in the resplitting of the one metre bulk bags at site using a 75:25 jones riffle splitter. These one metre
	Aspects of the determination of	samples are then submitted for analysis.
	mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.	All samples are pulverized to produce a 50g charge for fire assay.
	In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3	Drilling sampling techniques employed at the Artemis core facility include saw cut HQ (63mm) drill core samples.
	kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g	Both RC and HQ wireline core is currently being
	charge for fire assay’). In other cases more	used to drill out the geological sequences and
	explanation may be required, such as	identify zones of mineralisation that may or may
	where there is coarse gold that has	not be used in any Mineral Resource estimations,
	inherent sampling problems. Unusual	mining studies or metallurgical testwork.
	commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	Duplicate samples were collected at the rig from a static cone splitter, with the primary and duplicate bag both simultaneously collected from separate
		chutes.
		For RC, the cyclone was cleared between rod
		changes to minimise contamination.
Drilling	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation,	Reverse Circulation drilling completed by Topdrill.
techniques	open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube,	Drilling was completed using a truck mounted T685 Schramm rig mounted on 8x8 trucks
	depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit	This can produce 1000psi/2700CFM with an axillary
	or other type, whether core is oriented	booster which is capable of achieving dry samples
	and if so, by what method, etc).	at depths of around 300m.
Drill sample	Method of recording and assessing core	Recoveries are recorded on logging sheets along
	and chip sample recoveries and results	with encounters with water and whether the
recovery	assessed.	samples are dry, moist or wet.
	Measures taken to maximise sample	Drilling recoveries for Reverse Circulation drilling
	recovery and ensure representative	were >80% with some exceptions that maybe
	nature of the samples.	caused by loss of return through faults or
	Whether a relationship exists between	encounters with water.
	sample recovery and grade and whether	>90% of samples returned dry.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 33 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria		Commentary
	sample bias may have occurred due to	Statistical analysis shows that no bias of grade
	preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse	exists due to recoveries
	material.
Logging	Whether core and chip samples have been	RC samples were collected from the static cone
	geologically and geotechnically logged to	splitter as two samples, one bulk sample and one
	a level of detail to support appropriate	primary (analytical) sample.
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.	The bulk samples are one metre splits.
	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,	These bags are then placed in neat rows of 50 bags each clear of the rig for safety reasons.
	channel, etc) photography.	A field technician mixes the bag by hand before
	The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	taking a sample using a sieve and sieves the sample to remove fines.
		The sieved sample is then transferred to a wet sieve
		in a bucket of water, and the sample is sieved
		further until rock fragments are clearly visible.
		These rock fragments are then logged by the site
		geologist, taking note of colour, grainsize, rock
		type, alteration if any, mineralisation if any, veining
		if any, structural information if notable and any
		other relevant information.
		This information is then written down on pre-
		printed logging sheets, using codes to describe the
		attributes of the geology.
		A representative sample is transferred to pre-
		labelled chip trays into the corresponding depth
		from where the sample was drilled from.
		The remainder of the sample from the sieve is then
		transferred into a core tray that has been marked
		up by depths at metre intervals.
		An identification sheet noting the hole number and
		from-to depths that correspond to each tray is then
		written up and placed above the tray and a
		photograph is taken of the chips.
		The hole is logged in its entirety, hence 100%
		The geological data would be suitable for inclusion
		in a Mineral Resource Estimation (MRE)
Sub-sampling	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether	RC samples were collected on the drill rig using a
techniques and sample	quarter, half or all core taken. If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet	cone splitter. If any mineralised samples were collected wet these were noted in the drill logs and database.
preparation	or dry.	The RC drilling rig is equipped with a rig-mounted
	For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.	cyclone and static cone splitter, which provided one bulk sample of approximately 20-30 kilograms, and a sub-sample of approximately 2-4 kilograms for every metre drilled.
	Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.	Field QC procedures involve the use of Certified Reference Materials (CRM’s) as assay standards, along with duplicates and blank samples. The
	Measures taken to ensure that the	insertion rate of these was approximately 1:20.
	sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected, including for instance	For RC drilling, field duplicates were taken on a routine basis at approximately1:20 ratio usingthe

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF Page 34 of 47

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria		Commentary
	results for field duplicate/second-half	same sampling techniques (i.e. cone splitter) and
	sampling.	inserted into the sample run.
	Whether sample sizes are appropriate to	Primary and duplicates results have been
	the grain size of the material being	compared.
	sampled.	The sample sizes are appropriate, representative
		and are considered more than adequate to ensure
		that there are no particle size effects relating to the
		grain size of the mineralisation.
Quality of assay	The nature, quality and appropriateness	All samples were assayed by ALS-Chemex (ALS) in
data and	of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is	Perth, which is a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) Australia accredited
laboratory tests	considered partial or total.	organisation. The laboratory techniques below are
	For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the	for all samples submitted to ALS and are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation defined within the Carlow Castle Project area
	analysis including instrument make and	The sample preparation followed industry best
	model, reading times, calibrations factors	practice. Fire assay samples were dried, coarse
	applied and their derivation, etc.	crushing to ~10mm, split to 300g subsample,
	Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether	followed by pulverisation in an LM5 or equivalent pulverising mill to a grind size of 85% passing 75 micron.
	acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of	This fraction was split again down to a 50g charge
	bias) and precision have been established.	for fire assay
		Both 30g and 50g sample sizes were chosen for
		analysis of gold, with fire assay (Au-AA26) with ICP
		finish and determination by AAS. The limit of 100
		g/t was not reached for any samples. The larger
		sample size of 50g was predominantly selected to
		provide greater confidence in the analyses.
		All samples were dried, crushed, pulverised and
		split to produce a sub-sample of 50g which is
		digested and refluxed with hydrofluoric, nitric,
		hydrochloric and perchloric acid (4 acid digest).
		This digest is considered a total dissolution for most
		minerals.
		Analytical analysis is performed using ICP-AES
		Finish (ME-ICP61A) for Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Bi, Ca, Cd,
		Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Ga, K, La, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Ni, P, Pb,
		S, Sb, Sc, Sr, Th, Ti, Tl, U, V, W, Zn.
		The original assay technique used for copper and
		cobalt was 0.25 g sample with four acid digest and
		ICP-AES finish. When the upper limits of the range
		recommended by the lab were exceeded, a method
		more appropriate method was used to re-assay
		another sample of the pulp. For assays that reached
		the limits of 1% for the 30 g, the laboratory method
		ME-ICP61A was triggered, using 0.40 g samples
		with the same liberation and finish techniques.
		Standards are matrix matched by using previous
		pulps from drilling programs and homogenised
		using certified laboratories.
		Standards were analysed by round robins to
		determine grade.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 35 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria		Commentary
		Standards were routinely inserted into the sample
		run at 1:20.
		Laboratory standards and blank samples were
		inserted at regular intervals and some duplicate
		samples were taken for QC checks.
Verification of	The verification of significant intersections	Sampling was undertaken by field assistants
sampling and	by either independent or alternative company personnel.	supervised by experienced geologists from Artemis Resources. Significant intercepts were checked by
assaying	The use of twinned holes.	senior personnel who confirmed them as prospective for gold mineralisation.
	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic)	No twin holes using RC was completed in this program.
	protocols.	Electronic data capture on excel spreadsheets
	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	which are then uploaded as .csv files and routinely sent to certified database management provider.
		Routine QC checks performed by Artemis senior
		personnel and by database management
		consultant.
		PDF laboratory certificates are stored on the server
		and are checked by the Exploration Manager.
Location of	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to	A Garmin GPSMap62 hand-held GPS was used to
data points	locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and	define the location of the initial drill hole collars. Standard practice is for the GPS to be left at the site
	other locations used in Mineral Resource	of the collar for a period of 5 minutes to obtain a
	estimation.	steady reading. Collar locations are considered to
	Specification of the grid system used.	be accurate to within 5m.
	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	A high-quality downhole north-seeking multi-shot or continuous survey gyro-camera was used to determine the dip and azimuth of the hole at 30m
		intervals down the hole
		The topographic surface was calculated from the
		onsite mine survey pickups and subsequently
		verified by RTK GNSS collar surveys.
		Zone 50 (GDA 94).
		Surface collar coordinates are surveyed via RTK
		GNSS with 1cm accuracy by a professional
		surveying contractor.
Data spacing	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration	In certain areas, current drill hole spacing is
and distribution	Results. Whether the data spacing and distribution	variable and dependent on specific geological, and geochemical targets.
	is sufficient to establish the degree of	A nominal 40x20m drill spacing is considered
	geological and grade continuity	adequate to establish the degree of geological and
	appropriate for the Mineral Resource and	grade continuity appropriate for JORC (2012)
	Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and	classifications applied.
	classifications applied.	No sample compositing to date has been used for
	Whether sample compositing has been	drilling completed by Artemis. All results reported
	applied.	are the result of 1 metre downhole sample
		intervals.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 36 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria		Commentary
Orientation of data in	Whether the orientation of sampling	Drill holes were designed to be perpendicular to
relation to geological	achieves unbiased sampling of possible	the strike of known mineralisation. Due to the
structure	structures and the extent to which this is	structural and geological complexity of the area,
	known, considering the deposit type.	mineralisation of unknown orientation can be
	If the relationship between the drilling	intersected.
	orientation and the orientation of key
	mineralised structures is considered to
	have introduced a sampling bias, this
	should be assessed and reported if
	material.
Sample security	The measures taken to ensure sample	The chain of custody is managed by the supervising
	security.	geologist who places calico sample bags in
		polyweave sacks. Up to 10 calico sample bags are
		placed in each sack. Each sack is clearly labelled
		with:
		Artemis Resources Ltd
		Address of laboratory
		Sample range
		Samples were delivered by Artemis personnel to
		the transport company in Karratha and shrink
		wrapped onto pallets.
		The transport company then delivers the samples
		directly to the laboratory.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of	Data is validated upon up-loading into the master
	sampling techniques and data.	database. Any validation issues identified are
		investigated prior to reporting of results.

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria				Commentary
Mineral tenement		and	Type, reference name/number, location	Drilling by Artemis was carried out on E47/1797 – 100%
land tenure status			and ownership including agreements or	owned by Artemis Resources Ltd. This tenement forms
			material issues with third parties such as	a part of a broader tenement package that comprises
			joint ventures, partnerships, overriding	the West Pilbara Project.
			royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and	This tenement is in good standing.
			environmental settings.
			The security of the tenure held at the
			time of reporting along with any known
			impediments to obtaining a licence to
			operate in the area.
Exploration	done	by	Acknowledgment and appraisal of	The most significant work to have been completed
other parties			exploration by other parties.	historically in the Carlow Castle area, including the Little
				Fortune and Good Luck prospects, was completed by
				Open Pit Mining Limited between 1985 and 1987, and
				subsequently Legend Mining NL between 1995 and
				2008.
				Work completed by Open Pit consisted of geological
				mapping, geophysical surveying (IP), and RC drilling and
				sampling.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 37 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria				Commentary
				Work completed by Legend Mining Ltd consisted of
				geological mapping and further RC drilling.
				Legend also completed an airborne ATEM survey over
				the project area, with follow up ground-based FLTEM
				surveying. Re-processing of this data was completed by
				Artemis and was critical in developing drill targets for
				the completed RC drilling.
				Compilation and assessment of historic drilling and
				mapping data completed by both Open Pit and Legend
				has indicated that this data is compares well with data
				collected to date by Artemis. Validation and
				compilation of historic data is ongoing.
				All exploration and analysis techniques conducted by
				both Open Pit and Legend are considered to have been
				appropriate for the style of deposit.
Geology		Deposit type, geological setting and style		The Carlow Castle Co-Cu-Au prospect includes a
		of mineralisation.		number of mineralised shear zones, located on the
				northern margin of the Andover Intrusive Complex.
				Mineralisation is exposed in numerous workings at
				surface along quartz-rich shear zones. Both oxide and
				sulphide mineralisation are evident at surface
				associated with these shear zones.
				Sulphide mineralisation appears to consist of
				Chalcopyrite, chalcocite, cobaltite, pyrrhotite and pyrite
Drill hole	Information	A summary of all information material to		Drill hole information is contained within this release.
		the understanding of the	exploration
		results including a tabulation of the
		following information for	all Material
		drill holes:
		easting and northing of the drill hole
		collar
		elevation or RL (Reduced Level –
		elevation above sea level in metres) of
		the drill hole collar
		dip and azimuth of the hole
		down hole length and interception depth
		hole length.
		If the exclusion of this information is
		justified on the basis	that the
		information is not Material and this
		exclusion does not detract from the
		understanding of the	report, the
		Competent Person should clearly explain
		why this is the case.
Data	aggregation	In reporting Exploration Results,		All intervals reported are composed of 1 metre down
methods		weighting averaging	techniques,	hole intervals for Reverse Circulation drilling.
		maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material		Aggregated intercepts do include reported lengths of higher-grade internal intercepts.
		and should be stated.		No upper or lower cut-off grades have been used in
		Where aggregate intercepts incorporate		reporting results.
		short lengths of high grade results and		No metal equivalent calculations are used in this report.
		longer lengths of low grade results, the
		procedure usedfor such	aggregation

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 38 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria				Commentary
			should be stated and some typical
			examples of such aggregations should be
			shown in detail.
			The assumptions used for any reporting
			of metal equivalent values should be
			clearly stated.
Relationship		between	These relationships are particularly	The mineralisation in the Carlow Castle Western Zone
mineralisation		widths	important in the reporting of Exploration	strikes generally E-W and dips to the north at
and intercept lengths			Results.	approximately -75 to -80 degrees. The drill orientation
			If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.	was 180 -60 dip. Drilling is believed to be generally perpendicular to strike. Given the angle of the drill holes and the interpreted dip of the host rocks and mineralisation, reported intercepts approximate true
			If it is not known and only the down hole	width.
			lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	True thicknesses are calculated from interpretation deriving from orientation of high-grade intervals, orientation of the main mineralised trend and its dip.
				This is an estimation only and can change according to
				additional information.
Diagrams			Appropriate maps and sections (with	Appropriate plans are shown in the text.
			scales) and tabulations of intercepts
			should be included for any significant
			discovery being reported These should
			include, but not be limited to a plan view
			of drill hole collar locations and
			appropriate sectional views.
Balanced reporting			Where comprehensive reporting of all	This release reports the results of five RC holes. The
			Exploration Results is not practicable,	significant results tabulated in the release are reported
			representative reporting of both low and	at a base grade of >0.5 g/t Au or >0.5% Cu. Internal
			high grades and/or widths should be	dilution of up to 2 m may be included in an intersection.
			practiced to avoid misleading reporting
			of Exploration Results.
Other	substantive		Other exploration data, if meaningful	Targeting for the RC drilling completed by Artemis was
exploration data			and material, should be reported	based on compilation of historic exploration data, and
			including (but not limited to): geological	the surface expression of the targeted mineralised
			observations; geophysical survey results;	shear zones and associated historic workings.
			geochemical survey results; bulk samples
			– size and method of treatment;
			metallurgical test results; bulk density,
			groundwater, geotechnical and rock
			characteristics; potential deleterious or
			contaminating substances.
Further work			The nature and scale of planned further	Further work (RC and diamond drilling) is justified to
			work (eg tests for lateral extensions or	locate extensions to mineralisation both at depth and
			depth extensions or large-scale step-out	along strike.
			drilling).
			Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas
			of possible extensions, including the
			main geological interpretations and
			future drilling areas, provided this
			information is not commercially
			sensitive.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 39 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

SECTION 3 – Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Database integrity	Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.	Geophysical files were uploaded from the data logging device to the contractor’s central storage database and then provided in both raw and corrected/filtered format in CSV, LAS and PDF format. This has removed the potential for transcription errors and for reference checks. Core logging was completed by Artemis on site using project-specific logging codes and a database management system; DataShed™, with primary key fields and look-up tables. Collar survey, down hole survey and assay files were loaded from source files using templates to load into predefined tables. These measures enforced strict referential integrity and validation rules to prevent corruption errors. The Competent Person found no material errors and deemed the database was fit for the purpose of Mineral Resource estimation.
	Data validation procedures used.	The Competent Person checked the drillhole files for the following errors prior to Mineral Resource estimation: • Absent collar data • Multiple collar entries • Questionable downhole survey results • Absent survey data • Overlapping intervals • Negative sample lengths • Sample intervals which extended beyond the hole depth defined in the collar table. • Assay values reported as negative detection limits were updated to half detection limits.
Site visits	Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.	The Competent Person has not visited the site, but has relied on information from colleague Mr Matt Clark, Senior Resource Geologist, collected during a site visit in April 2021.
	If no site visits have been undertaken, indicate why this is the case.	The Competent Person considers that the information provided to him by colleague Mr Matt Clark allows him to appropriately consider the necessary factors in establishing Mineral Resources for the confidence estimated.
Geological interpretation	Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.	The host lithologies at Carlow Castle are basalt and gabbro, with mineralisation predominantly in basalt with a strong lithological control on mineralisation between basalt and gabbro. The dominant control on mineralisation is by structures potentially far smaller than the drill hole spacing and smaller than which can be explicitly modelled. Therefore, the geological model consisted of waste and mineralisation.
	Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.	No material assumptions have been made which affect the MRE reported herein.
	The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.	The Competent Person is confident any alternative interpretations would result in globally immaterial differences in the Mineral Resource estimate.
	The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.	Mineralisation generally shows a continuous grade distribution from un-mineralised through to high grade, with minor inflectionpoints within the log-probability plot

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 40 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.	for the distribution. One such inflection occurs at 200 ppm Cu, on which definition of mineralisation lodes were based. A second cut-off at 500 ppm correlated with high- grade copper, gold, and cobalt, and also correlated with structural measurements defined by structural logging and modelling. The geological model includes a shallow, approximately 3 m thick overburden surface and an oxide horizon that averages 40 m depth. Transitional material is typically 10 to 20 m thick and extends down to 100 m depth in the eastern section of Carlow Main.
Dimensions	The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.	The Carlow Main lodes have been modelled as a set of anastomosing fingers extending off and conjoining a major central zone that follows a broad sigmoidal curve whose average centreline at 769,660 mN strikes 1,200m east- west. The anastomosing lodes vary in thickness from 5 m where they pinch to 90 m in the thickest portion. The high- grade 500 ppm copper shell averages 30-40m thick, within the low-grade 200 ppm copper wireframe that extends up to 50 m to the north and south. At the western end, mineralisation dips steeply north, and at the eastern end it dips steeply south. Mineralisation in Carlow Main has been interpreted to a maximum of 630 m below surface, averaging 280 m. The Quod Est and Cross Cut mineralisation have been modelled similarly with low-grade 200 ppm copper shell and inner high-grade 500 ppm grade shells. Quod Est and Cross-Cut lodes have been interpreted as a steeply east dipping lodes. The major lode at Quod Est outcrops and strikes NNE, bifurcates at its southern third, and measures about 200 m overall, with maximum depth of 180 m. The Cross Cut mineralisation has been interpreted as two lode structures that strike 150 m NNE and dip steeply east, to a maximum depth of 180 m.
Estimation and modelling techniques	The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen, include a description of computer software and parameters used	The Mineral Resources were estimated within nine estimation domains, representing Carlow Castle Main, Quod Est and Cross Cut, formed from the mineralisation model interpreted at nominal cut-offs of 200 ppm and 500 ppm Cu. The domains were further split into overburden, oxide and fresh by the oxidation wireframes. A small volume wireframe was modelled in the eastern section of Carlow Main based on a 0.5 g/t Au cut-off to control the influence of high-grade holes that were drilled subparallel to mineralisation. All geological modelling was undertaken using Leapfrog Geo software. Estimation domains were modelled using indicator interpolants and the nominal 200 ppm Cu, 500 ppm Cu, and 0.5 g/t Au cut-off grades. Statistics, grade and density estimates, and variography, were undertaken in Supervisor software, and composite selection and block coding, undertaken in Surpac software, used the combined domains as hard boundaries. Samples were composited to 1 m intervals based on assessment of the raw drillhole sample interval lengths. Quantitative Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis (QKNA) was undertaken usingSupervisor software to assess the effect

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 41 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		of changing key kriging neighbourhood parameters on block grade and density estimates. Kriging Efficiency and Slope of Regression were determined for a range of block sizes, minimum and maximum samples, search dimensions and discretisation grids. A two-pass search ellipse strategy was adopted, whereby the first pass equated to the full range of the relevant variogram model for each domain, with a minimum of 8 samples, maximum of 20 samples and a maximum of 6 samples per hole. The second pass search ellipse was between 2 to 3.5-times the variogram model range, with a minimum of 8 samples, maximum of 16 samples and a maximum of 6 samples per hole. All blocks were filled in the first two passes. A 20 mE x 10 mN x 10 mRL parent cell size was constructed covering the full volume of the mineralisation and additional space for mine infrastructure planning. Sub- celling was employed to 5 mE x 5 mN x 5 mRL to improve block volume fitting to the complex wireframe. Mineralisation domains were coded in the block model below the overburden surface, and further coded by oxidation domain. High grade cuts were used to constrain outliers in the dataset as described above. Grade interpolation for Au, Cu, Co, As, S was completed using ordinary kriging (OK) into the parent block cells. The search employed a dynamic anisotropy to allow the ellipse to rotate along the sinusoidal mineralisation domains.
	The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data.	Several previous historical resource estimates have been completed previously. These reports were available to the Competent Person. These did not necessarily cover the same area as this Mineral Resource update and were volumetrically smaller in their extent. Further; while these Previous Mineral Resources are quoted below, the approach taken to modelling and estimation differs fundamentally from that of the current estimate Consequently, the models are not directly comparable. In 2018, Mr Philip Jones estimated Mineral Resources reported in accordance with the JORC Code for Carlow South using drilling data provided by Artemis to model mineralisation wireframes that were based on a total net smelter return of >$30 using the following metal factors: • Copper: Price: $4.473/lb; Recoveries: 75% (mining and metallurgical recovery) • Gold: Price: $USD1282.10/oz; Recoveries: 90% (mining and metallurgical) • Cobalt: Price: $54,500/t; Recoveries: 75% mining and metallurgical In January 2019 Al Maynard & Associates estimated Inferred Mineral Resources at Carlow Castle South and Quod Est of 7.7 Mt @ 0.51% Cu, 1.06 g/t Au and 0.08% Co. Four domains, based on the strike of the mineralisation, were used in the modelling. High grade cuts were also applied using mean grades +2SD of copper, gold and cobalt per domain. Grades were interpolated by Inverse Distance Squared (ID2).

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 42 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		In November 2019, CSA Global estimated Inferred Mineral Resources at Carlow Castle South and Quod Est of 8 Mt @ 0.6% Cu, 1.6 g/t Au and 0.08% Co, reported above a lower cut-off of 0.3% Cu, and within a theoretical optimised pit shell. Two estimation domains for Carlow Main and Quod Est were used in the modelling based on a lower cut-off grade of 500 ppm copper. Grade interpolation was completed initially by ordinary kriging into panels, with post- processing using localised uniform conditioning (LUC) within the panels to derive an estimate at the smaller selective mining unit (SMU) scale. Grade limiting was employed in the panel estimates to restrict the influence of very high grades to 10 m. The optimised pit shell used for the Mineral Resource reporting used the following parameters: • 50ooverall slope angle • Oxide and Fresh used same recoveries/processing costs • $48.1/t processing cost • 85% copper recovery • 94.8% gold recovery • 73% cobalt recovery • Mining costs $/t incremented by depth ranging from $2.57 through to $5.77 inclusive. • Copper: $9000/t • Gold: $2000/oz • Cobalt: $48,000/t
	The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.	The co-products, gold and cobalt, are assumed to be recoverable within the mineralisation wireframe volumes that have been modelled on a copper grade cut-off. The metallurgical testwork for gold and cobalt may not be representative of the material reported as Mineral Resources. However, the metallurgical testwork results show that gold and cobalt can be recovered.
	Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation).	Arsenic and sulphur have been estimated, although it is unknown at this stage of the project if they are deleterious for copper, gold and cobalt.
	In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed.	The dimensions of the parent block used for estimation represents approximately half the drillhole spacing in the X orientation and one quarter the spacing in the Y orientation.
	Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.	SMU units were not modelled. The parent block size of 10 m in the Z direction is approximately twice the size of assumed SMU of 5 m high mining benches. The assumed SMU has been determined based on the assumption of a production scenario utilising small to medium size earthmoving equipment (for reference; 125 tonne excavator, plus CAT 777 or equivalent haul trucks). In the experience of the Competent Person,this

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS

RESOURCES

Page 43 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		equipment selection may be considered typical for a deposit of the size and style of Carlow Castle.
	Any assumptions about correlation between variables	No assumptions have been made regarding the correlation of variables.
	Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates.	Logged geology, alteration and structural controls were used in the interpretation of lodes within the resource model. Hard boundaries were used for estimation between mineralised domains.
	Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.	For the estimate of grades, high-grade cuts were applied to reduce the influence of extreme outliers. These values, determined by statistical analysis including review of CV values, histograms, log-probability plots and mean- variance plots.
	The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drillhole data, and use of reconciliation data if available.	Standard model validation was completed using numerical methods (histogram and swath plots) and validated visually in section and 3D against the input raw drillhole data, composites and blocks.
Moisture	Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.	Tonnages have been estimated on a dry basis.
Cut-off parameters	The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied.	The Mineral Resources were reported at a 0.3 ppm Au.Eq cut-off, within a Whittle™ theoretical optimisation that used the following factors: • 50° overall slope angle • Oxide, Transitional and Fresh used same recoveries / processing costs • $48.1 / tonne processing (includes refining, insurance and G&A) • Recoveries, which in Artemis’ opinion have a reasonable potential to be achieved, are: • 85% Cu recovery • 94.8% Au recovery • 73% Co recovery • Mining Costs $ / tonne incremented by depth (coded into each block in the model by RL), ranging from $2.57 through to $5.77 inclusive • Prices: o Cu $9,400 / tonne o Au $2,200 / oz o Co $50,000 / tonne • 2.5% royalty per ounce payable on gold produced. 5% royalties per tonne payable on both copper and cobalt produced. • Au.Eq was calculated from a combined weighted grade of Au, Cu, Co using the same commodity prices and metallurgical recoveries as the optimisation. Au.Eq = Au (ppm) + Cu (%)x1.19 + Co (%) x 5.44
Mining factors or assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonableprospectsfor	Open pit mining is considered as the appropriate method for future studies, and the Competent Person believes that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction based on the outputs of the Whittle optimisation completed.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 44 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made.	A minimum mining width of 2 m was applied (downhole composite width). No other mining assumptions were made. Detailed mining assumptions such as dilution and minimum mining widths will be included in any optimisation, detailed mine planning and Life of Mine plan.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions	The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.	Preliminary metallurgical testwork was conducted by ALS Metallurgy in 2019 focussing on the metallurgical amenability of selected samples to a conventional gravity gold, cyanide leach and flotation processes. Results are detailed below: Gold • 48% of gold by testwork on metallurgical samples was recovered using gravity separation, and most of the balance of the non-gravity gold is recoverable in sulphide concentrates as a by-product using standard flotation. Copper • Quick floating copper minerals produced a high-grade, premium copper concentrate of approximately 30% Cu. • Deleterious elements including arsenic may be managed with a light concentrate polishing using regrind or blend control. Recoveries depended on mineralogy, with 77–85% copper recoveries achieved. • Unrecovered copper minerals are predominantly represented by non-floating silicates or secondary oxide copper minerals. Cobalt • Cobalt recoveries ranged from 73–79%. Saleable Cobalt concentrate grades ranging 2.3–5.3% Co were produced. Cobaltite (CoAsS) is the dominant cobalt bearing mineral and is therefore intrinsically linked to arsenic affecting its sale price. Artemis believe the gold recovered by metallurgical testwork could be sold in concentrates as a credit or recovered on site using a cyanide leach process. Acid soluble copper testwork has been completed for oxide and transitional ore and estimated in the block model by inverse distance (ID2) to guide additional metallurgical sampling. CSA Global recommend additional metallurgical programs across the Mineral Resource incorporating results from acid soluble copper and multi-element analysis. Further geometallurgical testwork to develop quantitative mineralogy and rock mass studies is also recommended.
Environmental factors or assumptions	Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the	No assumptions regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options have been made. Sulphur and arsenic have been estimated into the model to allow the assessment of potentially acid forming minerals and other environmentally sensitive residue.

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS RESOURCES

Page 45 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered, this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.
Bulk density	Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples.	For mineralisation, downhole geophysical gamma density was used to estimate density by OK using the relevant variogram and estimation parameters for each statistical domain. Only sample points that had a calliper measurement of not more than 20% of the nominal hole diameter for each hole type were included in the analysis and data for estimation. The gamma density was visually correlated point-by-point to each overlapping water immersion determination of specific gravity on HQ3 core, which found a strong correlation. The size and range of lengths of density determinations are considered by the Competent Person to be robust. A correlation of 0.05 was calculated between sample lengths and density determinations, confirming that the sample length has no impact on the density. The gamma-density of the RC hole is weakly low-biased compared to the diamond core density, while the gamma- density of the diamond hole is very weakly high-biased. Sample points were composited to 1 m length prior to estimation. Waste densities were applied from nominal values.
	The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit.	The gamma determines a quantitative, in situ measurement of density that accounts for void spaces. The measurements have been calibrated to regular calibration holes in iron ore deposits in the Pilbara, and on materials at the contractor’s facility. The water immersion method measurements were determined by measuring the weight of part or the entire sample in air and water and then applying the formula bulk density = weight_air/(weight_air-weight_water). Samples of drill core were sealed with a masonry sealant/wax and allowed to dry prior to bulk density determination. The estimate of density was undertaken within oxidation domains in the mineralisation.
	Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials.	The gamma density data were considered sufficient in number for all material types, quantitative and unbiased when large calliper deviations from the nominal hole diameter were removed. Calibration was undertaken using comparison to other holes and to density measured by water immersion. The approach adopted is considered robust.
Classification	The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories.	The MRE was classified as Inferred based on the level of geological understanding of the mineralisation, quality of samples, density data, drillhole spacing, historical nature of the drilling,detail of metallurgical information available

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ARTEMIS RESOURCES ASX:ARV

FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

Page 46 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		for soluble / insoluble copper speciation and sampling and assaying processes.
	Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data).	The classification reflects the overall level of confidence in mineralised domain continuity based the mineralisation drill sample data numbers, spacing and orientation. Overall mineralisation trends are reasonably consistent within the various lithotypes over numerous drill sections.
	Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit.	The Mineral Resource classifications applied appropriately reflect the view of the Competent Person.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates.	Internal audits were completed by CSA Global which verified the technical inputs, methodology, parameters and results of the estimate.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence	Where appropriate, a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.	The accuracy of the MREs is communicated through the classification assigned to the various parts of the deposits. The MREs have been classified in accordance with the JORC Code (2012 Edition) using a qualitative approach. All factors that have been considered have been adequately communicated in Section 1 and Section 3 of this table. The MRE statement relates to a global estimate of in-situ tonnes and grade.
	The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used.	The accuracy of the MREs is communicated through the Inferred classification assigned to the deposit. The MRE has been classified in accordance with the JORC Code. All factors that have been considered have been adequately communicated in Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3 of this table. The MRE statement relates to a global estimate of in-situ tonnes and grade.
	These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available.	No production data are available.

==> picture [455 x 98] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [49 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

ASX:ARV FRA:ATY US:ARTTF

ARTEMIS

RESOURCES

Page 47 of 47

W www.artemisresources.com.au