ASX Announcement

17 July 2020

Option Acquired over 244,000 Ounce High-Grade Gold Project

==> picture [509 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

Highlights

Pursuit Minerals Limited has entered into a binding option agreement with Golden Buck Ventures LLC (GBV) and Moreton Gold Pty Ltd (MOR) (together, the Vendors), granting Pursuit the right to purchase a 100% interest in the Buck Mountain Gold Project, in Arizona, USA
The Buck Mountain Gold project is a high-grade alluvial gold project with significant complementary silver and Platinum Group Metals (PGM’s) mineralisation
The mineral resource at the Buck Mountain Gold Project, compiled in compliance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101, has been estimated to be 1.248 Mt at 6.1 g/t gold for 244,000 Oz’s with the gold, silver, PGM mineralisation open at depth and laterally

The mineral resource compiled in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101, is a foreign mineral resource estimate and it was not compiled in accordance with the JORC code. The Competent Person has not done sufficient work to classify this foreign mineral resource estimate as a Mineral Resource in accordance with the JORC Code. It is uncertain that following evaluation and/or further exploration work that the foreign mineral resource estimate will be able to be reported as Mineral Resources in accordance with the JORC code.

The NI-43-101 foreign mineral resource estimate was calculated for the gold bearing alluvial gravels to a depth of 15 feet over an area of 45 acres, while drilling from 2008 showed that the mineralised gravels extend to at least a depth of 30 feet and the project covers an area of 320 acres (1.3km[2] ),
The project is located 18 miles northeast of Lake Havasu City in Mojave County, Arizona
Metallurgical processing of a 16.2 ton bulk sample resulted in average recovered grades of 4.8g/t Au, 119.66g/t Ag and 0.55g/t Pt
Pursuit has paid an initial US$20,000 cash payment for exclusivity over the Buck Mountain Gold Project until 30 September 2020, following which Pursuit has the right to acquire 100% of the project with a payment of US$75,000 in cash, plus deferred payments and a royalty
In conjunction with the transaction, Pursuit has executed a mandate with CPS Capital Group and has secured firm commitments to raise A$600,000 through the issue of 120,000,000 shares at 0.5 cent each

Pursuit Minerals Limited (ASX: PUR , Pursuit or the Company ) is pleased to announce that the Company has entered into an exclusive option agreement, which grants Pursuit the right to purchase a 100% interest in the Buck Mountain Gold Project, located 18 miles northeast of Lake Havasu City in Arizona, USA, ( Option ).

The project covers extensive areas of alluvial gravels containing gold, silver and PGM mineralisation, with mining having been conducted in the project area since the early 1900’s (Figure One).

Pursuit CEO, Mark Freeman, said “ The Buck Mountain Gold Project is an advanced gold-silver-PGM project and our expectation is that the NI-43-101 foreign mineral resource can be reclassified as a JORC (2012) compliant Mineral Resource with minimal additional infill drilling. The Company is very excited about the

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

potential to significantly increase the high-grade gold-silver-PGM mineralisation on the basis that the existing Resource was measured within the alluvial gravels down to a depth of 15 feet and during the 2008 drilling it was determined that the gold, silver and PGM bearing alluvial gravels extend to at least 30 feet. Significantly as the mineral resource was estimated within 50 acres and the leases cover 320 acres. In addition we believe that the potential to develop the project can be quickly assessed in a very cost effective manner due to the simplified nature of feasibility studies applicable to alluvial gold deposits along with the extensive metallurgical test work which has already been completed.”

Due Diligence Period

Pursuit has until 30 September 2020 to complete a program of due diligence on the Buck Mountain Gold Project.

In 2014 a large number of auger soil and gravel samples were collected from 128 sample locations on a regular grid across the entire project area. The samples were collected, from surface to an approximate depth of 3-4 feet. These samples are currently in storage awaiting processing and fire assay for gold. Pursuit will process and assay a limited number of these large samples to further verify the grade and distribution of gold-silver mineralisation within the alluvial gravels.

Pursuit will also re-drill 21 of the auger samples sites from 2014. Data from these activities will be important in determining if the due diligence program is successfully completed.

Figure One – Buck Mountain Gold Project Location

==> picture [331 x 323] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Buck Mountain Gold Project

Regional Geological Setting and Mineralisation

The Buck Mountain Gold Project claims are located on an alluvial fan surrounding the Mohave Mountains which lie within the Basin and Range province of the western United States, where eroded mountain ranges are separated by sediment-filled valleys or basins. The Mohave Mountains have a long history of sedimentation, igneous activity, metamorphism and structural deformation. Many indications of mineralisation have been recorded, and a long mining history can be traced back as far as the early Spanish settlers. The alluvial gold-silver placers supported an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 miners during the 1930’s depression years. Wet processing was undertaken along the Colorado River, but on the higher levels of the alluvial fan (Figure Two), where there was no surface water, dry rockers recovered only coarse gold. The bulk of the Buck Mountain alluvial fan was never worked during the 1930’s due to the lack of surface water needed to process the alluvial material. Subsequent to the 1930’s extensive aquifers have been located within the project area.

Within the Basin and Range Province of the south-

Figure Two – Alluvial Fan Generalised Model

==> picture [239 x 286] intentionally omitted <==

western United States, eroded mountain ranges are separated by sediment-filled valleys or basins, many of which have internal drainage. The ranges have originated through structural uplift, and the sediments filling the basins have been derived through erosion of the uplifted mountain range blocks.

The geology of the Mohave Mountains is a unique combination of altered, intruded, metamorphosed and structurally deformed rocks which in part, have their origin in the earth's crust at depths up to 10-12 km. Mineralisation is widespread, although mostly in small deposits of gold, silver and tungsten.

The Basin and Range regional extensional tectonics of the western United States has produced uplifted fault blocks with open fracturing. Pervasive hydrothermal alteration of the rocks occurred, probably contributing to the precious metal inventory. Tectonic erosion, combined with weathering in the desert environment, has formed a vast alluvial fan surrounding the Mohave Mountains, the true thickness of which is unknown. A conservative depth of 15 feet has been assumed for the purposes of estimating recoverable precious metals from the Buck Mountain Gold project.

The precious metals, predominantly gold, silver and PGM’s, are contained within the gravels of an alluvial fan, shedding off Buck Mountain within the Mohave Mountain Range. Gold occurs as free coarse to micron sized gold, which can be extracted by various techniques. Silver occurs as an insoluble hydrothermal salt within the matrix of, and coating, the alluvial gravels. Two bulk samples and other tests have confirmed the presence of gold, silver and Platinum Group Metals (PGM) within the gravels.

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

X Announcement

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

March 2020 Quarterly Activities Report

An important feature of the alluvial placers within the project area is the widespread nature of the mineralisation. Almost every historical assay returned values of precious metals above background levels, regardless of the method used to process the samples, or the laboratory used to assay the samples.

Due to the established geological continuity of the alluvial placers and the results of bulk testing undertaken in 1988 and 2008, a foreign mineral resource was estimated to be approximately 244,000 Oz’s @ 6.1g/t gold within the alluvial gravels down to a depth of 15 feet, using a density for the alluvial gravels of 1.5. The foreign mineral resource is open at depth and laterally in all directions.

The Buck Mountain Gold Project covers an area of 320 acres (1.3km[2] ) and consists of 18 placer claims (Table One, Figure Three).

Accessibility, Infrastructure and Climate

The Buck Mountain Gold Project is located 18 miles northeast of Lake Havasu City in Mojave County, Arizona USA (Figure One). Access from the main highway (Interstate 40) is along gravel roads which have been well maintained. The area has a dry, desert climate. Winters are cool with a few frosts, while summers are hot with temperatures commonly reaching over 50 degrees Celsius. Annual rainfall averages 3.6 inches. Rains when they come may be deluges so heavy that desert soil, surfaced with desert pavement, cannot absorb them. Alluvial fans, like the Buck Mountain alluvial fan, form when muddy floods, redistribute the sand and gravel of the watercourse, or change the route of the stream, and carry fresh loads of mud and silt down on to the internal drainage basins. Such muddy floods dry up so rapidly that hours afterwards, only the damp, smooth sand in the washes reveals that a storm has passed.

Vegetation consists of a few hardy trees and shrubs - mesquite, catclaw, the green-barked palo verde; cactus, creosote bush, and tall-branched octillo. Wildlife is sparse, consisting of jack rabbits, chipmunks, rattle snakes, tarantulas, scorpions and hawks.

Foreign Classified Mineral Resource

The Buck Mountain Gold Project mineral resource, reported in compliance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101, was estimated to be 244,000 Oz’s @ 6.1g/t gold within the alluvial gravels down to a depth of 15 feet, using a density for the alluvial gravels of 1.5. Drilling in 2008 determined that the gold, silver and PGM bearing alluvial gravels extend to at least 30 feet, indicating that there is significant upside potential to the mineral resource.

exploration work that the foreign mineral resource estimate will be able to be reported as Mineral Resources in accordance with the JORC code.

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Table One – Placer Claims Comprising the Buck Mountain Gold Project

Claim	Disposition	Area (Acres)	Claim Type	County	Claim Last Assessed
BM 5-4	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 5-6	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 5-8	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 6-3	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 6-4	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 6-5	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 6-6	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 6-7	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM6-8	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 7	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 7-2	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 7-3	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 7-4	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 7-5	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 7-6	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 8-2	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 8-4	Active	20	Placer	Mohave,AZ	2020
BM 8-6	Active	20	Placer	Mohave, AZ	2020

Figure Three – Buck Mountain Gold Project Detail

==> picture [317 x 310] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

The foreign mineral resource was estimated for an area 45 acres, while the Buck Mountain Gold Project covers an area of 320 acres. Post the option period the Company will focus on expanding the mineral resource.

The Vendors have previously completed several metallurgical studies including the processing of a bulk sample of 16.2 tons of alluvial gravels which produced recovered grades of 4.8g/t Au, 119.66g/t Ag & 0.55g/t Pt (see Table Two, Figure Four and section below).

Table Two – Grades of Recovered Metals from 16.2t Bulk Test

Source	Au	Ag	Pt	Ru	Rh	Pd	Os
Concentrate	0.47	23.14
Middlings	0.47	31.24
Pt button	1.28	1.66	0.26
PGM button		0.42		.002	.003	.003	.004
Recovered Metals(Oz)	2.20	56.46	0.26	.002	.003	.003	.004
Oz/short ton	0.14	3.49	.016	.0001	.0002	.0002	.0002
g/t	4.80	119.66	0.55	.003	.007	.007	.007

Figure Four – Gold and Silver Dore Produced from the 16.2 Ton Bulk Test

==> picture [451 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

The foreign mineral resource estimation for the Buck Mountain Project was detailed in a report dated 30 April 2009 authored by Moreton Gold Pty Ltd (one of the project Vendors). The report summarised the results of the “Large Diameter Drilling Testing Program” which was undertaken in 2008 (see section below). The foreign mineral resource estimation was based upon the results of 9 large diameter drill holes completed in 2008. Average gold grades were determined for the top 15 feet (4.57m) of the alluvial gravels in the 9 large diameter drill holes which were drilled across an area of 45 acres. Each large diameter drill

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

hole was assigned an area of influence of 5 acre’s (20,234m[2] ). Therefore, the area drilled by the 9 large diameter drill holes represents an area of 182,106m[2] (45 acre’s) and a volume of 832,224m[3] , to a depth of 15 feet (4.57m). With an average density of 1.5, the volume drilled by the 9 large diameter holes, corresponds to total tonnage of alluvial gravels of 1,248,000t. The average grade determined by the 9 large diameter drill holes was 6.09g/t Au, resulting in a foreign mineral resource estimate of 244,000 Oz’s of gold.

The foreign mineral resource for the alluvial gravels at Buck Mountain from 2008 was reviewed in April 2019 in a report, compiled in compliance with Canadian National Instrument 43-10, by Graham Brown MSc, FAusIMM, FEIANZ, CPEA, on behalf of Golden Buck Ventures LLC, one of the Vendors. The foreign mineral resource was classified as a Measured Mineral Resource in accordance with the definitions of the CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves. Under the CIM Standards a Mineral Resource is a concentration of solid material of economic interest in the earth’s crust in a form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. A Measured Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which the quality, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of Modifying Factors (such as mining, processing, metallurgical and infrastructure), to support mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The Buck Mountain alluvial gravels have been classified at this level of confidence to due the fact that a bulk sample has been taken, large diameter drilling has been completed across the deposit, mining and processing methods have been investigated and the deposit has simple geometry. In comparison to the CIM Standards Definition of a Measured Resource, the JORC Code (2012) Definition of Measured Resource requires that the estimate of the grade and tonnage of the mineralisation can be estimated to within such close limits that any variation would be unlikely to significantly affect the potential economic viability. The Buck Mountain foreign mineral resource classification does not meet the definition of a Measured Resource under JORC (2012), but it does meet the CIM Standard definition for Measured Resource.

The key factors relating to the reliability of the foreign resource estimate for the alluvial gravels at Buck Mountain, in comparison to the criteria detailed in Table 1 of Appendix 5A of the JORC Code, are; the assumption to assign an area of influence of 5 acres around each of the 9 large diameter drill holes, the decision to assign an average grade of 6.09g/t Au for the alluvial gravels within the 45 acre area drilled by the 9 large diameter drill holes and the density of 1.5 for the alluvial gravels. If a density of 1.35 is assigned to the alluvial gravels then the total tonnes of alluvial gravels within the 45 acre area reduces to 1,123,500t and the total contained gold to reduces to 219,000 Oz’s. Given the 9 large diameter drill holes sampled a significant volume of alluvial gravel at each location, due to the fact that each drill hole had an internal diameter of 23 inches, and the fact that the large diameter drill holes were spaced 75m – 200m apart, the Competent Person assesses that the foreign resource estimate is an accurate representation of all the geological and geochemical data available from the Buck Mountain Project. The reliability of the foreign resource estimate can be also assessed by comparing the foreign resource estimate to the average grade of the bulk sample which was collected in 1988. The bulk sample comprised a significant amount of material, at 16.2 tonnes, and this material was determined to have an average recovered grade of 4.8g/t Au, which includes processing losses. To a reasonable extent the result from 1988 bulk sample corroborates the grade of the foreign resource estimate.

Within the due diligence period up until the end of September 2020, Pursuit will assay some of the existing auger samples collected in 2014 and also re-drill 21 of the auger samples sites from 2014. Data from these activities will be important in determining if the due diligence program is successfully completed. Provided

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

the due diligence program is successful then Pursuit will look to complete a follow up large diameter drilling program prior to the end of 2020 and data from this program will be used to upgrade the mineral resource.

The results from the due diligence program will allow Pursuit to assess with much greater confidence the reliability of the foreign resource estimate. The size and grade of the foreign resource estimate was a key factor for Pursuit to enter into the transaction with the Vendors for the Buck Mountain Project. Consequently, the ability to verify the resource and reclassify under JORC (2012) is material to the project proceeding.

Further details regarding the foreign resource estimate are given in the Attached JORC Table 1.

1988 Bulk Test

In 1988 a 16.2t bulk sample of alluvial gravels was taken from the Buck Mountain Gold Project on claim BM 5-8 (Table One, Figure Three) and subjected to a test program designed to replicate all the steps intended for a full-scale mine, mill and refinery. Wherever possible, the actual equipment intended to be used in a commercial mineral processing operation, or an equivalent type which would produce the same result, was used to extract, concentrate and assay gold-silver-PGM concentrates from Buck Mountain claim BM 5-8. The 16.2t bulk sample was concentrated into two samples and processed as follows:

No. 1 and No.2 concentrates were driven to Little Rock, Arkansas for fine grinding in a Palla mill to -400 mesh and reduced to approximately 85% -400 mesh (38 microns).
Magnetic separation of the ground No. 1 and No.2 concentrates were then undertaken at the laboratories of the Eriez Magnetic Company at Erie, Pennsylvania.
The magnetic and non-magnetic fractions of the No.1 and No.2 concentrates were then taken to Fort Wayne Indiana, where they were tabled on the laboratory slimes table at the Deister Manufacturing Company. The whole of the concentrates and middlings from this table were separately retained, and the tails were discarded after samples were taken for assay.
The recovered concentrates from the tabling were taken back to Phoenix, Arizona for pyrometallurgical and electrolytic treatment in the laboratories of Complex Metals Inc.
Electrolysis of the metal bars from this smelt was carried out, resulting in an anode and cathode mud being recovered, which were then re-smelted. The smelt and electrolysis cycle were repeated three times, with the slags and precipitates being assayed for retained metals.
After a final refining in a furnace, the recovered gold and silver metals were weighed. Further chemical processing of the filtrates retained from the gold and silver extraction resulted in the recovery of PGM’s.
The actual gold, silver and PGM’s present were physically recovered as buttons and weighed (Figure Four).

The results from the 1988 Bulk Sample are given above in Table Two.

2008 Large Diameter Drill Testing Program

In 2008 nine large diameter rotary drill holes were completed in the area of the 1988 bulk test. The nine holes were drilled to a depth of between 25-30 feet using a Soilmec R-516 soil auger drilling rig. The top portion of each drill hole was cased using a 15-foot length of 23-inch inner diameter casing, which was driven ahead of the drill bit in order to limit smearing of material between samples, which were generally taken at 5-foot intervals. Samples below 15 feet were taken in an open hole. The locations and details of the nine large diameter drill holes drilled in 2008 are given in Table Three and shown in Figure Six.

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Samples from each of the nine large diameter drill holes were collected in “super-sacks” and sealed at each drill hole location. Samples from the top 15 feet of each drill hole (i.e. three, five-foot samples) were transported to Mountains States R&D International in Vail, Arizona, for processing. The samples were processed via dry screening to minus 850 microns and then a gravity concentrate was produced on a Wilfey or Deister table. The gravity concentrates were then fire assayed using a standard flux procedure with a silver inquart.

The individual assay results for each of the three 5-foot samples, from each of the nine large diameter drill holes, were then composited to give an average gold grade from surface to a depth of 15 feet in each drill hole. The mean gold grade obtained from the nine large diameter drill holes was 6.09g/t Au (see Table Four and Figure Six for individual drill holes results).

Figure Five. Bulk testing on Buck Mountains Placer Claim No.6

==> picture [361 x 206] intentionally omitted <==

Table Three – Large Diameter Drill Holes (2008)

Drill Hole	Easting (m) UTM Zone 11S, Datum NAD27	Northing (m) UTM Zone 11S, Datum NAD27	Elev (Ft)	Casing Depth (Ft)	Total Depth (ft)	Inclination (degrees)	End Date
HV-01	766792	3835234	1912	14	28	90	12 Oct 08
HV-02	766777	3835164	1917	13	30	90	12 Oct 08
HV-03	766791	3835390	1905	12.5	25	90	15 Oct 08
HV-04	766638	3835307	1917	11	30	90	14 Oct 08
HV-05	766542	3835164	1924	12	30	90	13 Oct 08
HV-06	766644	3835096	1924	12	30	90	11 Oct 08
HV-07	766508	3834983	1935	11	30	90	10 Oct 08
HV-08	766679	3834984	1927	13.5	30	90	10 Oct 08
HV-09	766588	3834904	1935	13	30	90	19 Oct 08

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Figure Six – Large Diameter Drilling 2008

==> picture [358 x 365] intentionally omitted <==

Table Four – Results from the Nine Large Diameter Drill Holes (2008)

Hole	Average Gold Grade from 0 - 15ft of Large Diameter Drill Hole (Aug/t)
HV-01	8.1
HV-02	12.73
HV-03	3.39
HV-04	2.79
HV-05	7.63
HV-06	3.22
HV-07	0.68
HV-08	12.72
HV-09	3.53
Mean Grade(g/t)	6.09

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

The mean gold grade determined for the Buck Mountain gold bearing alluvial gravels of 6.09g/t Au from the nine large diameter drill holes, compares favourably to the average recovered gold grade of 4.8g/t Au from the 1988 16.2t Bulk Sample. The average grade of 6.09g/t Au for the nine large diameter drill holes is for the top 15 feet of the alluvial gravels.

Both the results from the 1988 Bulk Sample and the 2008 Nine Hole Large Diameter drilling program confirm the Buck Mountain alluvial gravels contain high grade gold-silver-PGM mineralisation.

2014 Auger Sampling Program

In the first quarter of 2014 an extensive surface sampling program was conducted on the Buck Mountain Gold Project by the Vendors. A total of 128 locations were sampled on 200m spaced lines across Buck Mountain Project area (Figure Seven). Sampling was undertaken using a 2-man contactor team from Accurate Lands. Using an auger post hole digger, a hole was drilled at each of the 128 locations, to a depth of 3-4 feet. Three representative samples were then collected from each sample location. A Chain of Custody form was completed for the samples collected each day during the 5-Acre sampling program.

The samples from the 2014 auger sampling program were transported to a secure locked storage facility in Lake Havasu City. Despite being collected in 2014 the auger samples are yet to be processed and assayed to determine their gold, silver and PGM content.

Figure Seven – 2014 Auger Sampling Program

==> picture [340 x 346] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Proposed Exploration Program

Pursuit believes that the Buck Mountain Gold Project can be assessed within a relatively short time frame, due to the simplified nature of feasibility studies required for alluvial mining projects and due to the fact that a significant amount of processing and metallurgical work has already been completed from the Bulk Test of 1988 and the 2008 Large Diameter Drilling Program. Pursuit will look to utilise the extensive project data already existing too rapidly assess the potential of the Buck Mountain Gold Project to deliver an economic Mineral Resource.

Within the first 12 months following acquisition of the Buck Mountain Gold Project, Pursuit intends to incur the following expenditure on the project:

Activity	Budgeted expenditure (A$)
Due diligence (including payment of option fee, processing 26 assays, collect additional 21 samples and construct data set)	$75,000
Exercise of initial US$75,000 option (50% paid in cash)	$55,000
Seismic program to determine depths of gravels	$20,000
Assay of existing samples (230)	$92,000
Infill drilling program and assays	$135,000
Reserve upgrade report	$50,000
Desktop study	$73,000
Total	$500,000

Transaction Consideration

(a) Consideration : The following consideration is payable to the Vendors:

i. A payment of US$20,000 by Pursuit to GBV and MOR for exclusive due diligence until 30 September 2020 (Term). This payment has been made and allocated on the basis of 100% to GBV;
ii. an initial payment of US$75,000 upon the exercise of a 12-month option over the project (Initial Payment). Notice of the exercise of the option must be given within 10 business days of the conclusion of the Term. The Initial Payment is to be allocated on the basis of 100% to GBV;
iii. a second payment of US$75,000 to be satisfied in any combination of cash or fully paid ordinary shares in Pursuit (Pursuit Shares) at Pursuit’s discretion, subject to a maximum of 50% Pursuit Shares and a minimum of 50% cash, to be paid no later than twelve (12) months after the date of the initial payment (Second Payment). The Second Payment is to be allocated on the basis of 70% to GBV and 30% to MOR; and

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

iv. a final payment of US$600,000 to be satisfied in any combination of cash or Pursuit Shares at Pursuit’s discretion, subject to a maximum of 50% Pursuit Shares and a minimum of 50% cash, to be paid no later than eighteen (18) months after the date of the Second Payment, (Final Payment). This Final Payment is to be allocated on the basis of 50% to GBV and 50% to MOR.

The number of Pursuit Shares issued will be calculated at a price equal to the ten (10) day volume weighted average share price of Pursuit as at the date of the relevant Pursuit Share issuance. The issue of Pursuit Shares to the Vendors will be subject of prior shareholder approval in general meeting.

(b) Royalty : Subject to the satisfaction of the Final Payment, Pursuit will grant the Vendors a 2.5% net smelter royalty on all gold produced from the project, payable quarterly in arrears. This royalty payment is to be allocated on the basis of 50% to GBV and 50% to MOR.

Relevantly, if Pursuit forms the view that it no longer wants to pursue exploration and/or development of the Buck Mountain Gold Project, it is able to give notice of this intention to the Vendors and return the project to the Vendors. In this circumstance, any deferred payments not already paid and the royalty will fall away.

Termination

The Agreement may be terminated in the following circumstances:

i. Pursuit does not validly exercise the option to acquire the Projects on or before 30/09/2020; or
ii. if Pursuit fails to meet any of its obligations to make any payment due to Vendors.

In the event of termination, the Vendors shall retain all payments and other compensation received from Pursuit prior to the termination.

Capital Raising

In order to fund the proposed acquisition and planned work programs, Pursuit will place 120,000,000 shares at an issue price of 0.5 cent per share to raise up to A$600,000 ( Placement ). The Placement will need to occur as a two-tranche placement, with 65,240,000 shares being issued upfront under the Company’s existing placement capacity under Listing Rule 7.1 and 54,760,000 shares being issued subject to receipt of shareholder approval at a general meeting. CPS Capital acted as Lead Manager to the Placement and the Company has received firm commitments to raise the full $600,000. Messrs Peter Wall, Mark Freeman and Matt O’Kane, all being directors of the Company, will take up $45,000 total of the Placement directly or through their controlled entities. The issue of these shares will form part of the second tranche and will be subject to shareholder approval.

Incentive Options & Management Remuneration

The Board has resolved to issue a total of 66,000,000 unlisted options to management and directors of the Company under the terms and conditions of the Pursuit Minerals Employee Share Option Plan. The options are awarded to staff and directors as a component of compensation packages partly in lieu of a portion of cash salary in order to reduce cash costs to the Company and so there is a component of at risk compensation according to share price performance. The award of options incentivises increased reward if the Company’s share price increases and aligns employees with shareholders’ interests. The options are exercisable at $0.007 within 3 years from issue and will vest 50% after 6 months and the balance after 12

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

months.

The issue of 59,000,000 options to directors as tabled below, is subject to shareholder approval at the general meeting due to be held to approve tranche 2 of the Placement:

Mark Freeman 23,000,000 Jeremy Read 13,000,000 Peter Wall 13,000,000 Matthew O’Kane 10,000,000 Other staff 7,000,000 Total 64,000,000

In addition to the above, the Board has agreed to increase Mr Freeman’s remuneration as CEO, Company Secretary and CFO to $15,000 per month to reflect the additional workload associated with the Buck Mountain Project.

For more information about Pursuit Minerals and its projects, contact:

Mark Freeman Jeremy Read CEO Technical Director E: [email protected] E: [email protected] T:+ 61 412 692 146 T: + 61 447 379 744

Competent Person’s Statement

Statements contained in this announcement relating to exploration results, are based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr. Jeremy Read, who is a member of the Australian Institute of Mining & Metallurgy (AusIMM), Member No 224610. Mr. Read is a NonExecutive Director of the Company and has sufficient relevant experience in relation to the mineralisation style being reported on to qualify as a Competent Person for reporting exploration results, as defined in the Australian Code for Reporting of Identified Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC) Code 2012. Mr Read consents to the use of this information in this announcement in the form and context in which it appears.

Forward Looking Statements

Disclaimer: Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts. Words such as “expect(s)”, “feel(s)”, “believe(s)”, “will”, “may”, “anticipate(s)” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements include, but are not limited to statements regarding future production, resources or reserves and exploration results. All of such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the control of the Company, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forward-looking information and statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: (i) those relating to the interpretation of drill results, the geology, grade and continuity of mineral deposits and conclusions of economic evaluations, (ii) risks relating to possible variations in reserves, grade, planned mining dilution and ore loss, or recovery rates and changes in project parameters

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

as plans continue to be refined, (iii) the potential for delays in exploration or development activities or the completion of feasibility studies, (iv) risks related to commodity price and foreign exchange rate fluctuations, (v) risks related to failure to obtain adequate financing on a timely basis and on acceptable terms or delays in obtaining governmental approvals or in the completion of development or construction activities, and (vi) other risks and uncertainties related to the Company’s prospects, properties and business strategy. Our audience is cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements that speak only as of the date hereof, and we do not undertake any obligation to revise and disseminate forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof, or to reflect the occurrence of or non-occurrence of any events.

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix One

Geochemical Results from 2008 Large Diameter Drilling Program

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

Summary of Geochemical Results from 2008 Large Diameter Drilling

Sample Number	Sample Type	Gold(Oz/t)	Gold(g/t)
0109-133285 0109-133286 0109-133287 0109-133288 0109-133289 0109-133290 0109-133291 0109-133292 0109-133293 0109-133294 0109-133295 0109-133296 0109-133297 0109-133256 0109-133257 0109-133258 0109-133259 0109-133260 0109-133261 0309-133401 0309-133402 0309-133403 0309-133404 0309-133405 0309-133406 0309-133407 0309-133408 0309-133409 0309-133410 0309-133411 0309-133412 0309-133413 0309-133414 0309-133415 0309-133416 0309-133417 0309-133418 0309-133419 0309-133420 0309-133421 0309-133422 0309-133423 0309-133424 0309-133425 0309-133426 0309-133427 0309-133428 0309-133429	6150-09-HV-04 -1/4 +1/8m siltstone 6150-HV-03 -1/8 +20m Composite Table 2n Mid 6150-09-HV-03 -1/8 + 20m Composite Table Concentrate 6150-09-HV-03 -20 Composite 0-15' Table Tail -10mm 6150-09-HV-03 -20 Composite Table Concentrates 6150-09-HV-03 -20 Composite Table 1st Mid 6150-09-HV-03 - 20 Composite Table 2nd Mid 6150-09-HV-03 -1/8 +20m Composite Table Tails 6150-09-HV-03 -1/8 +20m Composite Table 1st Mid 6150-09-HV-03 Composite 0'-15' -1/4" +1/8" 6150-09-HV-04 Composite 0'-15' +11/8" -1/4" 6150-08 Table Tail HV-06 6150-09 HV-06 -1/8 to -20 HV-07 Table Concentrate -20m HV-7 Tabe Middling #1 -20m HV-07 Table Middling #2 - 20m HV-097 Table Tailing -20m HV-07 -1/4" +1/8" Composite HV-07 -1/8" +20m Composite HV-01 Table Concentrate -20m HV-01 Table Middlings #1 - 20m HV-01 Table Middlings #23 -20m HV-01 Table Tailings - 20m HV-01 -1/4" +1/8" Composite HV-01 -1/8" +20m Composite HV-02 Table Concentrate -20m HV-02 Table Middlings #1 -20m HV-02 Table Tailing -20m HV-02 -1/4" +1/8" Composite HV-02 1/8" +20m Composite HV-05 Table Concentrate -20m HV-05 Table Middling #1 -20m HV-05 Table Middling #2 -20m HV-05 Table Tailing -20m HV-05 -1/4" +1/8" Composite HV-05 -1/8" +20m Composite HV-08 Table Concentrate -20m HV-08 Table Middling #1 -20m HV-08 Table Middling #2 -20m HV-08 Table Tailing -20m HV-08 -1/4" +1/8" Composite HV-08 -1/8" +20m Composite HV-09 Table Concentrate -20m HV-09 Table Middling #1 -20m HV-09 Table Middling #2 -20m HV-09 Table Tailing -20m HV-09 -1/4" +1/8" Composite HV-09 -1/8" +20m Composite	0.128 0.097 0.542 0.082 0.232 0.826 0.133 0.115 0.201 0.156 0.165 0.165 0.141 0.039 0.077 <0.0015 0.031 <0.0015 0.030 1.113 0.792 0.355 0.350 0.229 0.221 0.324 0.220 0.297 0.214 1.310 0.211 0.145 0.195 0.090 0.669 0.543 1.440 1.832 0.176 0.814 0.269 0.072 0.078 0.131 0.182 0.14 0.104 0.067	4.24 3.21 17.94 2.71 7.68 27.34 4.40 3.81 6.65 5.16 5.46 5.46 4.67 1.29 2.55 <0.05 1.03 <0.05 0.99 36.84 26.22 11.75 11.59 7.58 7.32 10.72 7.28 9.83 7.08 43.36 6.98 4.80 6.45 2.98 22.14 17.97 47.66 60.64 5.83 26.94 8.90 2.38 2.58 4.34 6.02 4.63 3.44 2.22

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [185 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

JORC Table One

==> picture [471 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report - Stormyra Prospect

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or		• The Buck Mountain Alluvial Gold Project claims are located on an alluvial
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to		fan surrounding the Mohave Mountains which lie within the Basin and
	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. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.		Range province of the western United States, where eroded mountain ranges are separated by sediment-filled valleys or basins. The general area has a long mining history which can be traced back as far as the early Spanish settlers. The alluvial gold-silver placers supported an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 miners during the depression years of the 1930’s.
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the		However, the majority of the Buck Mountain alluvial fan was never
	Public Report.		worked during the 1930’s due to the lack of surface water needed to
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be		process the alluvial material.
	relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1	m	• 1985 Initial Surface Sampling– Initial testing of the Buck Mountain
	samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for		Project area was undertaken in 1985. Twenty, one-pound surface
	fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.		samples of soil and gravel were collected from ridges, slopes and beds of washes (dry stream beds). Samples were collected using a spade and bucket and bagged for assay. • 1988 Bulk Sample Testing– In 1988 a bulk sample was taken and passed
			through a testing regime which incorporated all the steps intended for a
			full-scale alluvial mine, mill and refinery. Gravel was extracted from nine
			locations over an area of approximately 50 acres. Alluvial gravels were
			extracted from each of the nine areas using a backhoe which could
			excavate to a depth of 14 feet and generally the samples from each of the
			nine locations were extracted from the full 14 feet that the backhoe could
			dig down to. The gravel from the nine locations was consolidated into a
			single sample weighing 16.185 short tons or 14.683 metric tonnes.
			• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling–In2008, nine large diameter rotary drill
			holes were completed in the area of the 1988 bulk test. The nine holes
			were drilled to a depth of between 25-30 feet using a Soilmec R-516 soil
			auger drilling rig. The top portion of each drill hole was cased using a 15-
			foot length of 23-inch inner diameter casing, which was driven ahead of
			the drill bit in order to limit smearing of material between samples, which

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		were generally taken at 5-foot intervals. Samples below 15 feet were
		taken in an open hole. Initially a 20-inch outer diameter clean-out bucket
		was used to extract the samples, but this process proved to be inefficient
		in terms of time and sample recovery. This process was replaced by a 19-
		inch open auger to extract the samples, which proved to be more efficient
		in terms of time and sample recovery. Samples were bagged in bulka
		bags at 5 feet intervals. Three 5 feet samples were taken in the top 15
		feet of each of the nine large diameter drill holes.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program– In February and March 2014, auger
		samples were recovered from 128 locations within a Auger area within
		the Buck Mountain Project area. The sampling was undertaken by an
		independent two-person contract crew from Accurate Lands, Lake
		Havasu City, Arizona. The sampling utilized two All Terrane Vehicles
		(ATV’s), one of which carried a motorized auger, of a size authorized by
		the USA Bureau of Land Management. The two-man auger post hole
		digger penetrated to a depth of 3-4 feet at each sample location. From
		the material recovered from each of the 128 sample locations, for the 3-
		4 feet interval, the material from the auger hole was homogenized and
		then 3 representative samples were collected and individually bagged for
		later assay. The auger drill bit was thoroughly cleaned after each sample
		was removed from the auger hole by brushing the residue with a fine soft
		brush into a sample bag in order to retain any fine and heavy material.
		Any residue material retained in the cleaning bush was shaken into the
		sample bag. The samples taken from the 128 auger holes were placed
		into a secure storage facility under a third-party Chain of Custody process.
		As of July 2020, the samples from the 2014 Auger Sampling Program have
		not yet been assayed.
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing– The bulk sample collected in 1998 was a
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or	composite sample of material taken from 9 different sites across a 50-
	standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	acre area within the Buck Mountain Project. At each sample site a backhoe was used to dig an open hole to a depth of generally 14 feet and
		alluvial gravels extracted from the 14 feet deep open hole. Alluvial
		gravels from the 9 fourteen feet deep open holes were composited to
		form a single bulk sample weighing 16.185 short tons.
		• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling- The nine holes were drilled to a depth of

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		between 25-30 feet using a Soilmec R-516 soil auger drilling rig owned by
		Daves Drilling LLC of Phoenix Arizona. The top 15 feet of each drill hole
		was cased with a 15-foot length of 23-inch internal diameter cashing
		which was driven ahead of the drill bit in order to prevent smearing
		between samples.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program– The auger samples from the 2014 Auger
		sampling program were collected with a two-person hand auger post
		hole digger which was capable of drilling to 3-4 feet. From each 3-4-foot-
		deep open auger hole, 3 bags of representative alluvial gravels were
		collected from drill hole material which had been homogenized.
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing– The 16.185 short ton bulk sample was
recovery	and results assessed.	generated by combining samples taken from nine locations across the
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	project area. At each location a 14-foot hole was dug with a backhoe. From each hole, four backhoe buckets of gravel were discarded, and each fifth bucket of alluvial gravel was loaded on a truck. This process was repeated at each of the nine sample sites. Therefore, in terms of the actual sample collection there should be no bias due to preferential loss
		or gain or fine or coarse material.
		• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– In order to ensure the representative
		nature of each of the three 5 foot samples taken from each of the nine
		large diameter drill holes, a 15 foot 23-inch inner diameter casing, was
		driven ahead of the drill bit in order to limit smearing of material between
		samples. The entire sample from each 5-foot interval was then collected
		in a large bulka bag. A compositive sample from each of the nine large
		diameter drill holes was then generated by combining each of the 3 bulka
		bags containing each 5-foot interval which had sampled the alluvial
		gravels. As the entire sample of alluvial gravels was effectively sampled
		there should be no bias due to loss or gain of fine or coarse material due
		to the sampling process. There will be no relationship between sample
		recovery as the entire sample was recovered.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program– 128 auger holes were drilled with a
		motorized two-person auger for the Auger sampling program. Each
		auger hole was drilled to a depth of 3-4 feet. The auger holes were open
		holes. From the material extracted from each hole three
		“representative” samples were taken from homogenized material.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Photographs of each auger hole were taken and the Competent Person
		has reviewed a representative number of auger hole photos. From the
		photographic evidence available it appears that the relatively narrow
		diameter of the two-person post hole digger produced samples of the
		alluvial gravel biased towards finer grained material. Therefore, the
		auger holes may be biased towards the finer grained alluvial gravels.
		However, as the samples from the 128 auger holes collected in 2014,
		have not yet been assayed, it is not yet possible to determine if the assay
		values have been affected by a bias in the grain size of the samples.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	• The Competent Person has not been able to determine if any of the
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral	samples collected from the 1985 Initial Surface Samples, the 1988 Bulk
	Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.	Sample, the 2008 Large Diameter Drilling and the 2014 Auger Auger
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	samples, were geologically logged, other than to describe the samples as samples of alluvial gravels and some general comments about the proportion of coarse and finer grained material in the drill holes. Very
		general comments about the geological profile are available from the
		2008 Large Diameter Drilling program which noted that the alluvial
		gravels have a large amount of rocky material down to 10 feet depth and
		then below 10 feet a much higher proportion of finer material
		predominates. Drill holes HV-06 and HV-04 were the holes with the
		highest proportion of rocky material. Below 10 feet there is limited rocky
		material and below 15 feet the geological profile is essentially made up
		of fine alluvium, being mainly sand and silt. No qualitative or quantitative
		geological data has been sighted by the Competent Person for the Buck
		Mountain Project.
Sub-sampling	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing– The 16.185 short ton bulk sample was
techniques	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether	generated by combining samples taken from nine locations across the
and sample preparation	sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field _duplicate/second-half sampling. _	project area. At each location a 14-foot hole was dug with a backhoe. From each hole four backhoe buckets of gravel were discarded, and each fifth bucket of backhoe alluvial gravel was loaded on a truck. This process was repeated at each of the nine sample sites. This process is effectively a sub-sampling process as only every fifth bucket of alluvial gravel was used to generate the sample. From each of the nine sample sites, 1-2 short tons of alluvial gravel was collected. These samples were then

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material		combined to create the overall 16.185 short ton bulk sample. The 16.185
	being sampled.		short ton bulk sample from trucked from the Buck Mountain Project area
			to Lake Havasu City where the bulk sample was weighed, and the alluvial
			gravel screened to minus one-quarter inch. The oversize sample was
			discarded, and the undersize material weighed. The undersize material
			was trucked to Casa Grande, south of Phoenix, Arizona. Here the total
			sample of minus one-quarter inch material was crushed to minus 60
			mesh, in a hammer mill and then passed over a Wilfrey wet concentrating
			table. The total concentrate and middlings were separately retained in
			5-gallon buckets and representative samples of the tailings were retained
			for assay with the other tailings discarded. The total concentrate was
			then taken to Little Rock, Arkansas, where the concentrate was further
			reduced in a vibratory Palla Mill to approximately 85% passing 400 mesh
			(38 microns). The finely ground final concentrate was transported to Erie,
			Pennsylvania where it was separated into magnetic and non-magnetic
			fractions at the test laboratory of Erie Magnetics Inc. The non-magnetic
			fraction of the final finely ground concentrate was retained while the
			magnetic fraction was discarded with a representative sample retained
			for assay. The non-magnetic fraction of the final finely ground
			concentrate was then transported to the Deister Concentration Company
			in Fort Wayne, Indiana, where it was passed over a slimes table. The
			whole of the concentrate and middlings from the slimes table separation
			were retained in 5-gallon buckets. The concentrates from the slimes
			table were then transported to Phoenix, Arizona, where the concentrates
			were smelted in a laboratory furnace producing metal bars via
			electrolysis. The smelt and electrolysis process was repeated three times
			with the slags and metal precipitates being assayed and retained for
			metals. After the final refining process the recovered gold, silver and
			PGM’s metals, as buttons, were weighed. The gold and silver buttons
			recovered by this process were tested for purity by Johnson Matthey
			Limited, metal refiners based in Auckland, New Zealand, who reported
			gold at 93.8% and silver at 99.7%. The total metal recovered from the
			1998 bulk test was as follows: Au – 4.8g/t, Ag – 119.66g/t, Pt 0.55g/t.
			• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– Nine 23-inch internal diameter holes were
			drilled as apart of the 2008 Large Diameter DrillingProgram. From each

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		hole 3 samples were taken over 5 feet intervals. The sample preparation
		was conducted at Mountains States R&D International at Vail, just
		outside of Tucson, Arizona. A number of variations of the screening and
		tabling were investigated until a consistent visual result was obtained for
		the separation of the concentrate, middlings and tailings. The tabling was
		undertaken using a Deister concentrating table. Screening was then done
		at +1/8”, -1/8”, +20 mesh and -20 mesh. The -1/8” to 20 mesh fraction
		was initially split and assayed but was later ground to various mesh seizes
		from 20 mesh to 50 mesh for tabling on the Desiter concentrating table.
		Issues were encountered with processing the samples from drill hole HV-
		06 on the Deister table due to the 1/8” particles being at the high end of
		the particle size recommended for the Deister table. Consequently, it
		was decided to dry screen at 20 mesh (850 microns) and then table the
		-20 mesh fraction separately. Additionally, the -1/8” to +20 mesh was
		initially split and assayed but was later ground to various mesh sizes from
		20 mesh to 50 mesh for tabling. In drill hole HV03, the -1/8” to +20 mesh
		size fraction was ground to 80% -50 mesh (300 microns) for tabling. The
		tabling results were less satisfactory for drill hole HV04, as the bulk of the
		gold reported to the table tailings. In drill hole HV04, the sample was
		ground to -20 mesh, 50% of the gold reported to the concentrate and the
		middling. This was potentially due to there being too many fines
		generated and a slimes deck may have been a better way to concentrate
		the sample rather than the Deister table.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program– The samples from the 2014 Auger
		Sampling program have not yet been processed, sub-sampled or assayed.
		A Chain of Custody Form was completed for all samples collected as a
		part of this sampling program. Samples were transported from the
		project area to Havasu City where the off-loading of the samples from the
		field vehicle was observed by Anthony Tusa, the Custodian, and the Chain
		of Custody Form was signed by the field samplers and Anthony Tusa, who
		also verified that all of the samples designated on the Chain of Custody
		form had been offloaded into the secure locked shed where the samples
		have remained.
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing– Due to the presence of PGM’s in the samples
assay data	procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or	it was decided that regular fire assays would not be reliable and some of

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
and	total.	the PGM’s and PGM complexes are either not soluble or only partially
laboratory	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,	soluble in acid. Therefore, it was decided to conduct fire assays in
tests	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their	accordance with the “Henderson Silver Inquart Assay Method”. This method is as follows:
	derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	`o` Metal concentrates were mixed with flux in a metal mixing box in the following proportions: § 5 grams of concentrate § 2- grams of borax
		§ 7- grams of litharge
		§ 1 gram silver
		§ 15 grams flour
		`o` Concentrate and flux mix was placed in a scorifying dish at
		2,000oF for 45 minutes
		`o` Our and cool. Break slag from lead and cupel lead button
		at 1,700oF
		`o` Weigh silver button
		`o` Part IN 1:6 HNO, to distilled water. Warm until button is in
		solution
		`o` Leave on hot plate until dry. Put crucible in furnace for tw
		hours at 600oF
		`o` Remove from furnace and cool. Add 80 to 100ml distilled
		water and warm
		`o` Filter and wash three times in hot distilled water
		`o` Filter until free of ash, cool and weigh
		`o` Calculate mixture of metals and analyze
		• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– The various concentrates produced from
		the nine holes, which comprised the 2008 Large Diameter drilling
		program, were assayed at the Copper State Analytical Laboratories using
		the “Henderson Silver Inquart Assay Method” as described above.
		Repeat and reference samples where used to ensure repeatability of the
		results. The repeat samples showed that some samples may have
		returned gold values higher than expected. There was a suspicion that
		a silica sand used by Mountains States R&D International to clean the
		sample pulverising equipment between samples may have been
		contaminated. The sand which byMountains States R&D International

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		used to clean the equipment was assayed with a 4-acid digest, which
		showed the sand contained >0.02g/t Au. Additionally, Copper State
		Analytical Laboratories had been sent two independent reference
		samples for fire assay, with and without the silver inquart, to check the
		results. One of the reference samples when fire assayed by Copper State
		Analytical Laboratories produced a result within two standard deviations
		from the reference standard, while the fire assay of the second
		reference sample was outside of two standard deviations. It was
		determined that impurities in the silver inquarts may have contaminated
		the second reference sample, leading to the anomalous result.
		However, further investigation of the accuracy of the results produced
		by Copper State Analytical Laboratories was undertaken. Follow up
		assays on samples from drill holes HV-01, 02, 05, 08 and 09 gave variable
		results and fire assay values were not consistent for these holes. The
		variability in the results for holes HV-01, 02, 05, 08 and 09, does not
		appear to be due to any contamination introduced during the pulverising
		of the samples at Mountains States R&D International. The issue
		appears to relate to inaccuracy and poor repeatability in the fire assays
		produced by Copper State Analytical Laboratories. This issue will be
		investigated by Pursuit Minerals during its due diligence program by
		collecting new samples and undertaking fire assays at a laboratory
		independent to Copper State Analytical Laboratories. The results
		generated during the 2008 Large Diameter Drilling program are given in
		Appendix One.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program– The samples taken from the 2014 auger
		sampling program have not yet been assayed. The samples have been
		stored in a secure facility under an independent Chain of Custody
		process, since 2014.
Verification of	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	• In 1988 a 16.2 short ton bulk sample was collected. This sample was a
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	composite of material dug from 9 fourteen feet deep holes across a 50-
assaying	• The use of twinned holes.	acre region. This bulk sample produced recovered gold at an average
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	grade of 4.8g/t Au. In 2008 nine large diameter auger drill holes were drilled across the same 50-acre region that the bulk sample was taken from in 1988. The top15 feet of the 9 nine diameter holes were

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		assayed and gave an average gold grade of 6.1g/t Au. This result
		compared favorably with the grade of the bulk samples from 1988.
		• While the large diameter holes from 2008 where not drilled exactly next
		to the nine pits from the 1988 bulk sample, they were in close
		proximity, sampling the same 50-acre area of alluvial gravels and hence
		give a reasonable test of the repeatability of the gold grades within the
		alluvial gravels.
		• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing & 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– The primary
		data from both these testing programs were initially stored as paper
		records. The data was subsequently scanned into PDF data files and
		stored on a secure computer system which was routinely backed up. As
		a part of its due diligence investigations Pursuit Minerals have
		transcribed the assay and drill hole information from the PDF files into
		Excel spreadsheets which are now stored in the company’s file system
		which is maintained within a DropBox file system_._
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program- The samples from the 2014 Auger
		Sampling program have not yet been processed, sub-sampled or
		assayed. A Chain of Custody Form was completed for all samples
		collected as a part of this sampling program. Samples were transported
		from the project area to Havasu City where the off-loading of the
		samples from the field vehicle was observed by Anthony Tusa, the
		Custodian, and the Chain of Custody Form was signed by the field
		samplers and Anthony Tusa, who also verified that all of the samples
		designated on the Chain of Custody form had been offloaded into the
		secure locked shed where the samples have remained.
		• No adjustment of assay data, nor twinned holes were undertaken.
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing –The location of the nine pits, which were
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used	dug in 1988 to provide the 16.2 short tons of material for the bulk
	in Mineral Resource estimation.	sample, were located on topographic maps and then digitized to give
	• Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	their latitude and longitude. The estimated accuracy is +/- 100m. • 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– The nine large diameter drill holes were
		located in the field with a handheld GPS to an estimated accuracy of +/-
		10m.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program –Each sample location was
		professionallysurveyed byEric L Stephan,a Registered land surveyor of

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Arizona. The estimated accuracy of these samples is +/- 2m.
		• Coordinates are given as latitude and longitude or as Easting and
		Northings: Datum = Arizona 0203, Western Zone (1993, feet)
		(EPSG:2224): Projection: US State Plane Coordinate System (1993, feet)
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing –The location of the nine pits, which were
and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the	dug in 1988 to provide the 16.2 short tons of material for the bulk
distribution	degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	sample, were variably spaced across an area of 50 acres
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– The nine large diameter drill holes were located within a 50 acres area and varied in separation from 75m to 200m
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program –Samples were collected 100m apart
		along lines spaced 200m apart
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	• The deposit is an alluvial gold deposit with gold included within coarse
data in	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	gravels, from the surface to a depth of approximately 10 feet and then
relation to geological structure	the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	below 10 feet in finer grained silts and sands. Drilling and sampling such a deposit with vertical holes and vertical pits, will achieve unbiased sampling and is appropriate for the style of deposit.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• 1988 Bulk Sample Testing –A representative of the project owner was
security		present when the bulk sample was collected, processed and assayed to
		ensure sample security.
		• 2008 Large Diameter Drilling– A representative of the project owner
		was present when the nine large diameter drill holes were drilled,
		processed and assayed to ensure sample security.
		• 2014 Auger Sampling Program- The samples from the 2014 Auger
		Sampling program have not yet been processed, sub-sampled or
		assayed. A Chain of Custody Form was completed for all samples
		collected as a part of this sampling program. Samples were transported
		from the project area to Havasu City where the off-loading of the
		samples from the field vehicle was observed by Anthony Tusa, the
		Custodian, and the Chain of Custody Form was signed by the field
		samplers and Anthony Tusa, who also verified that all of the samples
		designated on the Chain of Custody form had been offloaded into the
		secure locked shed where the samples have remained.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•No audits of the sampling techniques have been undertaken.
reviews

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including	• The project consists of 18, 20-acre placer claims granted to the project
tenement and	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint	owner, Golden Buck Ventures LLC. The current claims are valid until
land tenure status	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and 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.	25/8/2020 and can be renewed on an annual basis by the payment of the annual claim fee of US$165 per claim. There are no annual expenditure commitments. • The 18 claims comprising the project are currently valid and there are no know impediments to progressing the project through to a decision
		as to whether the project should be put into production. If a production
		decision is made it will be subject to gaining the appropriate licences
		(mining and environmental) to construct a mine in this location.
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• The 1988 bulk sample was collected, processed and reported by the
done by other		current project owners Golden Buck Ventures LLC.
parties		• The 2008 large diameter drilling program was funded and managed by
		Moreton Gold Limited, an unlisted Australian mineral exploration
		company, who were farming into the Buck Mountain Project at that
		time.
		• The work completed on the project by Golden Buck Ventures LLC and
		Moreton Gold Limited was managed and reported on by Graham A
		Brown MSc, FAusIMM, FEIANZ, CEPA in a series of reports written over
		the period from 1988 until 2019. Graham Brown has sufficient
		experience to qualify as a Competent Person, under the JORC Code
		(2012), for the style of deposit (alluvial gold) being reported.
		• Utilizing results from the 2008 Large Diameter Drilling program Moreton
		Gold estimated a foreign mineral resource for a 45 acre section of the
		Buck Mountain Project. The foreign mineral resource estimation for the
		Buck Mountain Project was detailed in a report dated 30 April 2009
		authored byMoreton Gold PtyLtd(one of theproject Vendors). The

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		report summarised the results of the “Large Diameter Drilling Testing
		Program” which was undertaken in 2008 (see section below). The
		foreign mineral resource estimation was based upon the results of 9
		large diameter drill holes completed in 2008. Average gold grades were
		determined for the top 15 feet (4.57m) of the alluvial gravels in the 9
		large diameter drill holes which were drilled across an area of 45 acres.
		Each large diameter drill hole was assigned an area of influence of 5
		acre’s (20,234m2). Therefore, the area drilled by the 9 large diameter
		drill holes represents an area of 182,106m2(45 acre’s) and a volume of
		832,224m3, to a depth of 15 feet (4.57m). With an average density of
		1.5, the volume drilled by the 9 large diameter holes, corresponds to
		total tonnage of alluvial gravels of 1,248,000t. The average grade
		determined by the 9 large diameter drill holes was 6.09g/t Au, resulting
		in a foreign mineral resource estimate of 244,000 Oz’s of gold. The
		foreign mineral resource for the alluvial gravels at Buck Mountain from
		2008 was reviewed in April 2019 in a report, compiled in compliance
		with Canadian National Instrument 43-10, by Graham Brown MSc,
		FAusIMM, FEIANZ, CPEA, on behalf of Golden Buck Ventures LLC, one of
		the Vendors. The classification of the foreign resource was not stated in
		either the report from 2009 or 2019. Therefore, at this time it is not
		possible to compare the foreign mineral resource to the classifications
		used in the JORC Code (2012).The key factors relating to the reliability of
		the foreign resource estimate for the alluvial gravels at Buck Mountain,
		in comparison to the criteria detailed in Table 1 of Appendix 5A of the
		JORC Code, are; the assumption to assign an area of influence of 5 acres
		around each of the 9 large diameter drill holes, the decision to assign an
		average grade of 6.09g/t Au for the alluvial gravels within the 45 acre
		area drilled by the 9 large diameter drill holes and the density of 1.5 for
		the alluvial gravels. If a density of 1.35 is assigned to the alluvial gravels
		then the total tonnes of alluvial gravels within the 45 acre area reduces
		to 1,123,500t and the total contained gold to reduces to 219,000 Oz’s.
		Given the 9 large diameter drill holes sampled a significant volume of
		alluvial gravel at each location, due to the fact that each drill hole had
		an internal diameter of 23 inches, and the fact that the large diameter
		drill holes were spaced 75m – 200m apart,the Competent Person

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		assesses that the foreign resource estimate is moderately reliable. The
		reliability of the foreign resource estimate can be also assessed by
		comparing the foreign resource estimate to the average grade of the
		bulk sample which was collected in 1988. The bulk sample comprised a
		significant amount of material, at 16.2 tonnes, and this material was
		determined to have an average recovered grade of 4.8g/t Au, which
		includes processing losses. To a reasonable extent the result from 1988
		bulk sample corroborates the grade of the foreign resource estimate. In
		order to verify the foreign resource estimate, Pursuit will undertake a
		two-stage process. Initially, samples from the 2014 auger sampling
		program (see details below), from across the project area, will be
		assayed for gold, silver and PGM’s. This will determine the amount of
		gold from surface to a depth of 3-4 feet. The auger holes are spaced
		100m apart on 200m spaced lines and hence provide a consistent
		coverage of data points across the project area. Following assaying of
		the 2014 auger samples, additional large diameter drilling, down to a
		depth of a minimum of 15 feet will need to be completed within the 45
		acre area of the foreign resource estimate. The geo-statistical variability
		of gold across the project area, as determined by assaying the 2014
		auger samples, will determine the drill spacing of follow up large
		diameter drill testing. Further determination of the density the gold
		bearing alluvial gravels will need to be undertaken. Within the due
		diligence period up until the end of September 2020, Pursuit will assay
		some of the existing auger samples collected in 2014 and also re-drill 21
		of the auger samples sites from 2014. Data from these activities will be
		important in determining if the due diligence program is successfully
		completed. Provided the due diligence program is successful then
		Pursuit will look to complete a follow up large diameter drilling program
		prior to the end of 2020 and data from this program will be used to
		upgrade the mineral resource. The results from the due diligence
		program will allow Pursuit to assess with much greater confidence the
		reliability of the foreign resource estimate. The size and grade of the
		foreign resource estimate was a key factor for Pursuit to enter into the
		transaction with the Vendors for the Buck Mountain Project.
		Consequently,the abilityto verifythe resource and reclassifyunder

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		JORC (2012) is material to the transaction proceeding.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• The Buck Mountain Project claims are located on an alluvial fan
		surrounding the Mohave Mountains which lie within the Basin and
		Range province of the western United States, where eroded mountain
		ranges are separated by sediment-filled valleys or basins. The Mohave
		Mountains have a long history of sedimentation, igneous activity,
		metamorphism and structural deformation. Many indications of
		mineralisation have been recorded, and a long mining history can be
		traced back as far as the early Spanish settlers. The alluvial gold-silver
		placers supported an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 miners during the
		depression years of the 1930’s. Wet processing was undertaken along
		the Colorado River, but on the higher levels of the alluvial fan, where
		there was no surface water, dry rockers recovered only coarse gold. The
		bulk of the Buck Mountain alluvial fan was never worked during the
		1930’s due to the lack of surface water needed to process the alluvial
		material. Subsequent to the 1930’s extensive aquifers have been located
		within the project area. The Basin and Range regional extensional
		tectonics of the western United States has produced uplifted fault blocks
		with open fracturing. Pervasive hydrothermal alteration of the rocks
		occurred, probably contributing to the precious metal inventory.
		Tectonic erosion, combined with weathering in the desert environment,
		has formed a vast alluvial fan surrounding the Mohave Mountains, the
		true thickness of which is unknown. A conservative depth of 30 feet has
		been assumed for the purposes of estimating recoverable precious
		metals from the Buck Mountain Gold project. The precious metals,
		predominantly gold, silver and platinum, are contained within the
		gravels of an alluvial fan, shedding off Buck Mountain within the Mohave
		Mountain Range. Gold occurs as free coarse to micron sized gold, which
		can be extracted by various techniques. Silver occurs as an insoluble
		hydrothermal salt within the matrix of, and coating, the alluvial gravels.
		Some of the gold and silver mineralisation occurs as coatings on the
		alluvial clasts. This suggests that the Buck Mountain precious
		mineralisation contains a hydrothermal component in addition to the
		alluvial gold. Hydrothermal fluids are postulated to have precipitated
		some of thegold and silver mineralisation onto the alluvial clasts and

Criteria JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary	Commentary
	also into the finder grained material between the larger clasts. An important feature of the alluvial placers within the project area is the widespread nature of the mineralisation. Almost every historical assay returned values of precious metals, regardless of the method used to process the samples,or the laboratoryused to assaythe samples.
Drill hole Information • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: `o` easting and northing of the drill hole collar `o` elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar `o` dip and azimuth of the hole `o` down hole length and interception depth `o` 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.	Drill Hole	Easting (m) UTM Zone 11S, Datum NAD27	Northing (m) UTM Zone 11S, Datum NAD27	Elev (Ft)	Casing Depth (Ft)	Total Depth (ft)	Inclinati on (degree s)	End Date
	HV-01	766792	3835234	191 2	14	28	90	12 Oct 08
	HV-02	766777	3835164	191 7	13	30	90	12 Oct 08
	HV-03	766791	3835390	190 5	12.5	25	90	15 Oct 08
	HV-04	766638	3835307	191 7	11	30	90	14 Oct 08
	HV-05	766542	3835164	192 4	12	30	90	13 Oct 08
	HV-06	766644	3835096	192 4	12	30	90	11 Oct 08
	HV-07	766508	3834983	193 5	11	30	90	10 Oct 08
	HV-08	766679	3834984	192 7	13.5	30	90	10 Oct 08
	HV-09	766588	3834904	193 5	13	30	90	19 Oct 08
Data aggregation methods • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation 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.	• No top cuts have been applied to results given in this report. • Aggregate intercepts do not include short lengths. • The 1988 Bulk Sample was a composite sample of 16.2 short tons constructed by combining material dug from nine 14 feet deep pits across a 50-acre region. • The results from the 2008 Large Diameter drilling are average assays results representing the grade of gold contained with the intervals from 0 to 15 feet depth in each of the nine holes which formed the Large Diameter drilling program.
Relationship between mineralisation • These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If thegeometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole	• The Buck Mountain Alluvial Fan Gold deposit is a flat lying deposit which goes from surface to at least a depth of 15 feet. Given the deposit is flat

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
widths and	angle is known, its nature should be reported.	flying all the pits and drill holes previously used to investigate the
intercept	• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there	deposit have been vertical holes which is appropriate given the flat lying
lengths	should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true _width not known’). _	orientation of the mineralized gravels.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with 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.

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary

Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	• All informing sample intervals are reported.
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades
	and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
	Exploration Results.
Other substantive exploration	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and	• The gold in the Buck Mountain deposit comprises free gold which can be extracted by gravity separation, but also complex gold, of possible
data	method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,	hydrothermal origin, which will need to be recovered by a chemical
	groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential	leaching method. In addition, the deposit has significant silver and
	deleterious or contaminating substances.	PGM content and both these will need to be extracted via chemical
		methods. Significant further metallurgical test work is needed in order

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		to finalize a processing flow sheet for the project.
		• To evaluate a sodium-bromide leach process for a processing system
		for the Buck Mountain Gold Project, a lab analysis was conducted on
		samples from 2008 Lage Diameter Drilling program the through
		Bahamian Refining Company, a company that sells custom built
		sodium-bromide leach plants. The lab analysis was conducted at
		Copper State Labs. The lab used 4 slightly different basic pH formulae
		and yielded from 1 oz/ton to 8 oz/ton using both AAS and ICP analysis
		methods. It was also decided to obtain a gold precipitation value from
		one of the solutions. The assay result for gold was 0.5 oz/ton (in line
		with pressure acid leach). This confirms comments in the public domain
		(E&MJ Aug, 1988) that AAS and ICP analysis cannot be used in
		conjunction with sodium-bromide leach solutions. The results from the
		total acid digest and the gold precipitation were consistent. This
		provides “proof of process” on the sodium-bromide leach and shows
		the pressure acid digest results can be used to confirm assay results.
		From the results of the work conducted by Graham Brown in 1988,
		platinum, palladium, osmium, iridium and other PGM’s are present in
		the deposit. Due to the presence of PGM’s in the samples (in particular
		osmium and iridium), regular fire assays were not regarded as reliable,
		and as some PGM’s and PGM complexes are not soluble or only
		partiallysoluble in acids.
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	• Pursuit Minerals initially plans to complete a due diligence program
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	on the Buck Mountain Project. This program will involve the
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	following: `o` Assaying of a representative number of samples from the 2014 auger drilling program, samples which have not yet
		been assayed
		`o` Re-drilling a number of the auger holes from 2014 to
		investigate the accuracy of the auger samples from 2014.
		`o` Site visit using a local experiences alluvial gold geologist
		• If the due diligence detailed above is successful, Pursuit Minerals
		would then exercise its option to acquire the project on the
		following terms:

Commentary	Commentary
•	Consideration: The following consideration is payable to the
	Vendors:
	`o`	A payment of US$20,000 by Pursuit to GBV and MOR for
		exclusive due diligence until 30 September 2020 (Term).
		This payment has been made and allocated on the basis of
		100% to GBV;
	`o`	an initial payment of US$75,000 upon the exercise of a 12-
		month option over the project (Initial Payment). Notice of
		the exercise of the option must be given within 10 business
		days of the conclusion of the Term. The Initial Payment is to
		be allocated on the basis of 100% to GBV;
	`o`	a second payment of US$75,000 to be satisfied in any
		combination of cash or fully paid ordinary shares in Pursuit
		(Pursuit Shares) at Pursuit’s discretion, subject to a
		maximum of 50% Pursuit Shares and a minimum of 50%
		cash, to be paid no later than twelve (12) months after the
		date of the initial payment (Second Payment). The Second
		Payment is to be allocated on the basis of 70% to GBV and
		30% to MOR; and
	`o`	a final payment of US$600,000 to be satisfied in any
		combination of cash or Pursuit Shares at Pursuit’s
		discretion, subject to a maximum of 50% Pursuit Shares and
		a minimum of 50% cash, to be paid no later than eighteen
		(18) months after the date of the Second Payment, (Final
		Payment). This Final Payment is to be allocated on the basis
		of 50% to GBV and 50% to MOR.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		•	Royalty: Subject to the satisfaction of the Final Payment, Pursuit will
			grant the Vendors a 2.5% net smelter royalty on all gold produced
			from the project, payable quarterly in arrears.

AI assistant

PURSUIT MINERALS LTD Capital/Financing Update 2020

65626_rns_2020-07-16_b3fa6a4b-2830-4a9e-8299-9476fe9233a1.pdf

Option Acquired over 244,000 Ounce High-Grade Gold Project

Highlights

Due Diligence Period

Buck Mountain Gold Project

Regional Geological Setting and Mineralisation

Figure Two – Alluvial Fan Generalised Model

Accessibility, Infrastructure and Climate

Foreign Classified Mineral Resource

1988 Bulk Test

2008 Large Diameter Drill Testing Program

Figure Six – Large Diameter Drilling 2008

2014 Auger Sampling Program

Figure Seven – 2014 Auger Sampling Program

Proposed Exploration Program

Transaction Consideration

(a) Consideration : The following consideration is payable to the Vendors:

Termination

Capital Raising

Incentive Options & Management Remuneration

months.

For more information about Pursuit Minerals and its projects, contact:

Competent Person’s Statement

Forward Looking Statements

Appendix One

Geochemical Results from 2008 Large Diameter Drilling Program

Summary of Geochemical Results from 2008 Large Diameter Drilling

JORC Table One

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report - Stormyra Prospect

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

AI assistant

PURSUIT MINERALS LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2020

65626_rns_2020-07-16_b3fa6a4b-2830-4a9e-8299-9476fe9233a1.pdf

Option Acquired over 244,000 Ounce High-Grade Gold Project

Highlights

Due Diligence Period

Buck Mountain Gold Project

Regional Geological Setting and Mineralisation

Figure Two – Alluvial Fan Generalised Model

Accessibility, Infrastructure and Climate

Foreign Classified Mineral Resource

1988 Bulk Test

2008 Large Diameter Drill Testing Program

Figure Six – Large Diameter Drilling 2008

2014 Auger Sampling Program

Figure Seven – 2014 Auger Sampling Program

Proposed Exploration Program

Transaction Consideration

(a) Consideration : The following consideration is payable to the Vendors:

Termination

Capital Raising

Incentive Options & Management Remuneration

months.

For more information about Pursuit Minerals and its projects, contact:

Competent Person’s Statement

Forward Looking Statements

Appendix One

Geochemical Results from 2008 Large Diameter Drilling Program

Summary of Geochemical Results from 2008 Large Diameter Drilling

JORC Table One

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Report - Stormyra Prospect

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

More from PURSUIT MINERALS LTD

PURSUIT MINERALS LTD Capital/Financing Update 2020