Corvus Gold ULC - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

For the transition period from to

CORVUS GOLD INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (604) 638-3246

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Shares, no par value

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes  ☐   No  ☒

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter:        $124,579,221

As of August 8, 2019, the registrant had 111,962,845  Common Shares outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE 

To the extent specifically referenced in Part III, portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the registrant’s 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into this report. See Part III.

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE TO U.S. INVESTORS REGARDING ESTIMATES OF MEASURED, INDICATED AND INFERRED RESOURCES AND PROVEN AND PROBABLE RESERVES

The mineral estimates in this Annual Report on Form 10-K have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the securities laws in effect in Canada, which differ from the requirements of United States securities laws. As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms “mineral reserve”, “proven mineral reserve” and “probable mineral reserve” are Canadian mining terms as defined in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 “Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects” (“NI 43-101”) and the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (the “CIM”) CIM Definition Standards on mineral resources and mineral reserves, adopted by the CIM Council, as amended. These definitions differ from the definitions in the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Industry Guide 7 (“SEC Industry Guide 7”). Under SEC Industry Guide 7 standards, a “final” or “bankable” feasibility study is required to report reserves, the three-year historical average price is used in any reserve or cash flow analysis to designate reserves, and the primary environmental analysis or report must be filed with the appropriate governmental authority.

In addition, the terms “mineral resource”, “measured mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource” are defined in and required to be disclosed by NI 43-101; however, these terms are not defined terms under SEC Industry Guide 7 and are normally not permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the SEC. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of a mineral deposit in these categories will ever be converted into reserves. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all, or any part, of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists or is economically or legally mineable. Disclosure of “contained ounces” in a resource is permitted disclosure under Canadian regulations; however, the SEC normally only permits issuers to report mineralization that does not constitute “reserves” by SEC Guide 7 standards as in place tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures.

Accordingly, information contained in this report and the documents incorporated by reference herein contain descriptions of our mineral deposits that may not be comparable to similar information made public by U.S. companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements under the United States federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

The term “mineralized material” as used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, although permissible under SEC Industry Guide 7, does not indicate “reserves” by SEC Industry Guide 7 standards. We cannot be certain that any part of the mineralized material will ever be confirmed or converted into SEC Industry Guide 7 compliant “reserves”. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of the mineralized material will ever be confirmed or converted into reserves or that mineralized material can be economically or legally extracted.

CAUTIONARY NOTE TO ALL INVESTORS CONCERNING ECONOMIC ASSESSMENTS THAT INCLUDE INFERRED RESOURCES

The Company currently holds or has the right to acquire interests in an advanced stage exploration project in Nye County, Nevada referred to as the North Bullfrog Project (the “NBP”) and exploration project referred to as the Mother Lode Project (“MLP”). Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves have no demonstrated economic viability. The preliminary economic assessment on the NBP and the MLP is preliminary in nature and includes “inferred mineral resources” that have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and are considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. It cannot be assumed that all, or any part, of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies. There is no certainty that such inferred mineral resources at the NBP will ever be realized. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists or is economically or legally mineable.

CAUTIONARY NOTE CONCERNING HISTORIC ESTIMATES

The historic estimates (Inter-Rock Gold Inc. Annual Report 1996, subsequently changed to Inter-Rock Minerals Inc. available on www.sedar.com) for the Mother Lode property contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K should not be relied upon. These estimates are not NI 43-101 compliant nor compliant with SEC Industry Guide 7 reserve requirements. While the Company considers these historical estimates to be relevant to investors as it may indicate the presence of mineralization, a qualified person for the Company has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimates as current mineral resources as defined by NI 43-101 or SEC Industry Guide 7 and the Company is not treating these historical estimates as a current mineral resource.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K and the exhibits attached hereto contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended, and “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation, collectively “forward-looking statements”. Such forward-looking statements concern our anticipated results and developments in the operations of the Company in future periods, planned exploration activities, the adequacy of the Company’s financial resources and other events or conditions that may occur in the future. Forward-looking statements are frequently, but not always, identified by words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “intends,” “estimates,” “potential,” “possible” and similar expressions, or statements that events, conditions or results “will,” “may,” “could” or “should” (or the negative and grammatical variations of any of these terms) occur or be achieved. These forward looking statements may include, but are not limited to, statements concerning:

Such forward-looking statements reflect the Company’s current views with respect to future events and are subject to certain known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Many factors could cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements that may be expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including, among others, risks related to:

Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described herein. This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect any of the Company’s forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements about the future and are inherently uncertain, and actual achievements of the Company or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including without limitation those discussed in Part I, Item 1A, Risk Factors, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which are incorporated herein by reference, as well as other factors described elsewhere in this report and the Company’s other reports filed with the SEC.

The Company’s forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management as of the date of this Annual Report. The Company does not assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements if circumstances or management’s beliefs, expectations or opinions should change, except as required by law. For the reasons set forth above, investors should not attribute undue certainty to or place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

¹ For SEC Industry Guide 7 purposes this study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.

² SEC Industry Guide 7 does not require designation of a qualified person.

USE OF NAMES

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K, unless the context otherwise requires, the terms "we", "us", "our", "Corvus", "Corvus Gold Inc." or the "Company" refer to Corvus Gold Inc. and its subsidiaries.

Metric Equivalents

For ease of reference, the following factors for converting Imperial measurements into metric equivalents are provided:

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

General Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the BCBCA with the name “Corvus Gold Inc.” on April 13, 2010 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of ITH, with an authorized capital consisting of an unlimited number of Common Shares. Pursuant to the corporate spin-out of Corvus from ITH by way of a plan of arrangement among ITH, the shareholders of ITH and Corvus under the BCBCA, effective August 26, 2010, Corvus was spun out as a separate and independent public company, and each shareholder of ITH received one-half of a Common Share.

We are a reporting issuer in the Canadian Provinces of British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario and the Common Shares are listed for trading on the TSX under the trading symbol “KOR” and are quoted for trading on the OTCQX under the symbol “CORVF”.

Our head office is located at Suite 1750 – 700 West Pender Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6C 1G8, and our registered and records office is located at Suite 2200, HSBC Building, 885 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3E8.

We are a mineral exploration company engaged in the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties. We currently hold or have the right to acquire interests in the NBP and the MLP in Nevada. We are in the exploration stage as our Properties have not yet reached commercial production and our Properties are not beyond the preliminary exploration stage. All work presently planned by us is directed at defining mineralization and increasing understanding of the characteristics of, and economics of, that mineralization.

Emerging Growth Company Status

We qualify as an “emerging growth company” as defined in Section 101 of the Jumpstart our Business Startups Act (“JOBS Act”) as we do not have more than $1,000,000,000 in annual gross revenue and did not have such amount as of May 31, 2019, being the last day of our last fiscal year.

We may lose our status as an emerging growth company on May 31, 2020, the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the first sale of common equity securities pursuant to an effective registration statement.

As an emerging growth company, we are exempt from Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Section 14A (a) and (b) of the Exchange Act. Such sections are provided below:

As long as we qualify as an emerging growth company, we will not be required to comply with the requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Section 14A(a) and (b) of the Exchange Act, we may however determine to voluntarily comply with such requirements in our discretion.

Intercorporate Relationships

We have five material subsidiaries:

The following corporate chart sets forth all of our material subsidiaries:

Recent Corporate History

In May 2010, the board of directors of ITH approved a proposal to undertake a spin-out transaction to segregate its then existing assets into two separate and highly focused companies.

The spin-out transaction pursuant to the Arrangement was approved by the shareholders of ITH on August 12, 2010, and the final order of the Supreme Court of British Columbia approving the plan of arrangement necessary to implement the transaction was received on August 20, 2010. The effective date of the Arrangement was August 26, 2010 and the Common Shares commenced trading on the TSX on August 30, 2010. Under the terms of the Arrangement, ITH retained all assets relating to the Livengood gold project in Alaska, together with approximately $33 million in working capital, while Corvus received all of ITH’s other existing Alaska and Nevada assets (including the shares of Corvus Nevada), together with approximately $3.3 million in working capital.

Following the completion of the Arrangement, Corvus held four advanced to early stage exploration projects in Alaska (Chisna, Terra, LMS and West Pogo) and the advanced exploration stage NBP in Nevada. Our primary focus is to leverage our exploration expertise to discover major new gold deposits. Furthermore, we intend to try and build ourselves into a non-operator gold producer with significant carried interests and royalty exposure. To meet this objective, all of the Alaskan projects received by us in the Arrangement have been sold.

We also received from ITH a 100% interest in the NBP, which is Corvus’ sole material mineral property and the primary focus of our exploration activities. Since the acquisition of the NBP from ITH, we have expanded the NBP by entering into additional leases of patented lode mining claims and staking additional unpatented lode mining claims.

In June 2017, Corvus acquired 100% of the MLP from Goldcorp USA, Inc. and staked two additional claim blocks adjacent to the MLP. The MLP is in close proximity to Corvus Gold’s NBP with potential for integration into a single operation.

Business Operations

Summary

We currently hold, or have rights to acquire, interests in two mineral properties in Nevada, USA, the NBP and the MLP. The Company’s objectives with respect to these Properties are to evaluate the potential of the Properties and to determine if spending additional funds is warranted (in which case, an appropriate program to advance the Properties to the next decision point will be formulated and, depending upon available funds, implemented by us) or not (in which case the Properties may be returned by us to the optionor/lessor or, in respect of properties in which we are earning an interest, be returned to the optionor thereof). Our present focus is on the exploration and, if warranted, development of the NBP, located 15 kilometres north of Beatty, Nevada, and the MLP, located in the Bare Mountain District, approximately 10 kilometres from the NBP. Corvus also staked two additional claim blocks, the MN claim group, to the northwest of the Mother Lode claims, and the ME claim group, to the east of the Mother Lode claims, and the GAP claim group, immediately to the south of NBP. The progress on, and results of, the work programs on our material mineral property is set out under Part I, Item 2, Properties in this Annual Report. We continue to assess additional mineral property acquisitions but do not presently contemplate entering into any such agreements, other than in connection with the NBP and the MLP.

We are in the exploration stage and do not mine, produce or sell any mineral products at this time. With respect to the NBP and MLP, our present preliminary studies indicate that any production would be through a combination of heap leaching some of the mineralization (and treatment of the leaching solution to recover gold and silver) and processing higher grade mineralization through a plant incorporating both a gravity concentration-cyanide leach circuit and a concentration circuit followed by pressure oxidation of the concentrate and then leaching of the oxidized filtrate.

Exploration drilling has been focused on the MLP with Phase I beginning at the MLP in September 2017. Phase II exploration drilling at MLP began in January 2018 and was completed July 2018. Phase I and Phase II drilling results were used to develop a maiden Mineral Resource estimate for the MLP which was reported in September 2018 (NR 18-15). Exploration drilling continued at MLP, Phase III, until April 2019, at which time the drilling rig was moved to NBP.

Availability of Raw Materials

All of the raw materials we require to carry on our business are readily available through normal supply or business contracting channels in Canada and the United States. Since commencing current operations in August 2010, we have been able to secure the appropriate personnel, equipment and supplies required to conduct our contemplated programs. As a result, we do not believe that we will experience any shortages of required personnel, equipment or supplies in the foreseeable future.

Dependence on a Few Contracts

Our business is not substantially dependent on any contract such as a contract to sell the major part of the Company’s products or services or to purchase the major part of its requirements for goods, services or raw materials, or on any franchise or license or other agreement to use a patent, formula, trade secret, process or trade name upon which its business depends. Rather, our ability to continue making the holding, assessment, lease and option payments necessary to maintain our interest in our mineral projects is of primary concern. We do not presently anticipate any difficulties in this regard in the current financial year.

Competitive Conditions

There is aggressive competition within the minerals industry to discover and acquire mineral properties considered to have commercial potential. We compete with other entities for the opportunity to participate in exploration projects which we believe are promising. In addition, we compete with others in efforts to obtain financing to acquire and explore mineral properties, acquire and utilize mineral exploration equipment and hire qualified mineral exploration personnel. We may compete with other junior mining companies for mining claims in regions adjacent to our existing claims, or in other parts of the world should we dedicate resources to doing so in the future. These companies may be better capitalized than us and we may have difficulty in expanding our holdings through the staking or acquisition of additional mining claims or other mineral tenures.

In competing for qualified mineral exploration personnel, we may be required to pay compensation or benefits relatively higher than those paid in the past, and the availability of qualified personnel may be limited in high-demand mining periods, such as was in past years when the price of gold was higher than it is now.

Government Regulation

The exploration and development of a mining prospect is subject to regulation by a number of federal and state government authorities. These include the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the United States Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) as well as the various state environmental protection agencies. The regulations address many environmental issues relating to air, soil and water contamination and apply to many mining related activities including exploration, mine construction, mineral extraction, ore milling, water use, waste disposal and use of toxic substances. In addition, we are subject to regulations relating to labor standards, occupational health and safety, mine safety, general land use, export of minerals and taxation. Many of the regulations require permits or licenses to be obtained and the filing of Notices of Intent and Plans of Operations, the absence of which or inability to obtain will adversely affect the ability for us to conduct our exploration, development and operation activities. The failure to comply with the regulations and terms of permits and licenses may result in fines or other penalties or in revocation of a permit or license or loss of a prospect.

Federal

On lands owned by the United States, mining rights are governed by the General Mining Law of 1872, as amended, which allows the location of mining claims on certain federal lands upon the discovery of a valuable mineral deposit and compliance with location requirements. The exploration of mining properties and development and operation of mines is governed by both federal and state laws. Federal laws that govern mining claim location and maintenance and mining operations on federal lands are generally administered by the BLM. Additional federal laws, governing mine safety and health, also apply. State laws also require various permits and approvals before exploration, development or production operations can begin. Among other things, a reclamation plan must typically be prepared and approved, with bonding in the amount of projected reclamation costs. The bond is used to ensure that proper reclamation takes place, and the bond will not be released until that time. Local jurisdictions may also impose permitting requirements (such as conditional use permits or zoning approvals).

Nevada

In Nevada, initial stage surface exploration activities that do not disturb the surface, do not require any permits. Notice-level exploration permits (“NOI”) are required (through the BLM) for the NBP and MLP to perform drilling or other surface disturbing activites with less than five acres extent. More extensive disturbance requires submittal and approval of a “Plan of Operations” and “Environmental Assessment” from the BLM. In May 2013, Corvus obtained an amended Plan of Operations allowing 100 acres of surface disturbance in the public lands portion of the NBP, which is considered sufficient by us for our currently planned drilling and characterization program. Reclamation costs have been re-estimated on a 3-year basis, with the most recent submitted June 19, 2019. We also applied for, and received in August 2013, a NOI for disturbance of an additional 1.3 acres outside the currently defined NBP area in order to allow us to drill water monitor wells and perform geotechnical soil investigations outside the NBP area. This NOI has been reviewed and extended until May 9, 2021 by BLM. In June of 2015, the Company applied for, and received a NOI which allowed an additional 2.1 acres of disturbance for exploration of the Eastern Steam-heated Alteration zone, outside of the NBP permit area. On December 7, 2015, a decision allowing the increase in disturbance area to 4.8 acres in the Eastern Steam-heated Alteration zone was received from BLM. This Notice has been extended to 2021. In August of 2017, the Company received an NOI from BLM which allowed 4.8 acres of surface disturbance for drilling exploration at the MLP. In June 2018, Corvus received approval of an NOI for 4.4 acres of disturbance at the Company’s Willy’s Exploration Project near the MLP. In September 2018, Corvus received approval of an NOI for 0.7 acres of disturbance at the Company’s Sawtooth Project site near the MLP. As of May 24, 2019, the Company had posted with the BLM, as security for the reclamation obligations, a Surety Bond of USD 411,191. In general, exploration activities in Nevada can be carried out on a year-round basis. Mining is conducted in Nevada on a year round basis, both open pit and underground.

In Nevada, we are also required to post bonds with the State of Nevada to secure our environmental and reclamation obligations on private land, with amount of such bonds reflecting the level of rehabilitation anticipated by the then proposed activities. Currently, the Company has posted with Nevada Division of Minerals BMRR in the State of Nevada, as security for these reclamation obligations, a Surety Bond of USD 209,070.

In June 2013, formal meetings were held with officials of both the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (“NDEP”) and the BLM to discuss the design criteria for the environmental baseline studies that will be required to support the development of a Plan of Operation and other permit applications necessary to enable any mining at or production from the NBP. In January 2014, Corvus Nevada executed a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with the Tonopah Office of the BLM for definition of baseline characterization requirements and development of a mining plan of operations at the NBP. Characterization plans for hydro-geologic modeling studies, rock geochemical studies and biologic/wildlife studies have been developed and have been reviewed by BLM specialists. We are in the process of responding to comments and additional requirements received from the BLM with respect to such plans.

In July 2019, the Company submitted revised Environmental Assessment (“EA”) and Exploration Plan of Operations (“PoO”) documents for 145 acres of surface disturbance required for an expanded drilling and exploration program at the MLP. That application is pending approval of the BLM.

If we are successful in the future at discovering a commercially viable mineral deposit on our property interests, then if and when we commence any mineral production, we will also need to comply with laws that regulate or propose to regulate our mining activities, including the management and handling of raw materials, disposal, storage and management of hazardous and solid waste, the safety of our employees and post-mining land reclamation.

We cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws, regulations or permitting requirements, or changes in the ways that such laws, regulations or permitting requirements are enforced, interpreted or administered. Health, safety and environmental laws and regulations are complex, are subject to change and have become more stringent over time. It is possible that greater than anticipated health, safety and environmental capital expenditures or reclamation and closure expenditures will be required in the future. We expect continued government and public emphasis on environmental issues will result in increased future investments for environmental controls at our operations.

Environmental Regulation

Our mineral projects are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations governing protection of the environment. These laws are continually changing and, in general, are becoming more restrictive. The development, operation, closure, and reclamation of mining projects in the United States requires numerous notifications, permits, authorizations, and public agency decisions. Compliance with environmental and related laws and regulations requires us to obtain permits issued by regulatory agencies, and to file various reports and keep records of our operations. Certain of these permits require periodic renewal or review of their conditions and may be subject to a public review process during which opposition to our proposed operations may be encountered. We are currently operating under various permits for activities connected to mineral exploration, reclamation, and environmental considerations. Our policy is to conduct business in a way that safeguards public health and the environment. We believe that our operations are conducted in material compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Changes to current local, state or federal laws and regulations in the jurisdictions where we operate could require additional capital expenditures and increased operating and/or reclamation costs. Although we are unable to predict what additional legislation, if any, might be proposed or enacted, additional regulatory requirements could impact the economics of our projects.

U.S. Federal Laws

The Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), and comparable state statutes, impose strict, joint and several liability on current and former owners and operators of sites and on persons who disposed of or arranged for the disposal of hazardous substances found at such sites. It is not uncommon for the government to file claims requiring cleanup actions, demands for reimbursement for government-incurred cleanup costs, or natural resource damages, or for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by hazardous substances released into the environment. The Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), and comparable state statutes, govern the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste and authorize the imposition of substantial fines and penalties for noncompliance, as well as requirements for corrective actions. CERCLA, RCRA and comparable state statutes can impose liability for clean-up of sites and disposal of substances found on exploration, mining and processing sites long after activities on such sites have been completed.

The Clean Air Act (“CAA”), as amended, restricts the emission of air pollutants from many sources, including mining and processing activities. Any future mining operations by the Company may produce air emissions, including fugitive dust and other air pollutants from stationary equipment, storage facilities and the use of mobile sources such as trucks and heavy construction equipment, which are subject to review, monitoring and/or control requirements under the CAA and state air quality laws. New facilities may be required to obtain permits before work can begin, and existing facilities may be required to incur capital costs in order to remain in compliance. In addition, permitting rules may impose limitations on our production levels or result in additional capital expenditures in order to comply with the rules.

The National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) requires federal agencies to integrate environmental considerations into their decision-making processes by evaluating the environmental impacts of their proposed actions, including issuance of permits to mining facilities, and assessing alternatives to those actions. If a proposed action could significantly affect the environment, the agency must prepare a detailed statement known as an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), other federal agencies, and any interested third parties will review and comment on the scoping of the EIS and the adequacy of and findings set forth in the draft and final EIS. This process can cause delays in issuance of required permits or result in changes to a project to mitigate its potential environmental impacts, which can in turn impact the economic feasibility of a proposed project.

The Clean Water Act (“CWA”), and comparable state statutes, impose restrictions and controls on the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States. The discharge of pollutants into regulated waters is prohibited, except in accordance with the terms of a permit issued by the EPA or an analogous state agency. The CWA regulates storm water mining facilities and requires a storm water discharge permit for certain activities. Such a permit requires the regulated facility to monitor and sample storm water run-off from its operations. The CWA and regulations implemented thereunder also prohibit discharges of dredged and fill material in wetlands and other waters of the United States unless authorized by an appropriately issued permit. The CWA and comparable state statutes provide for civil, criminal and administrative penalties for unauthorized discharges of pollutants and impose liability on parties responsible for those discharges for the costs of cleaning up any environmental damage caused by the release and for natural resource damages resulting from the release.

The Safe Drinking Water Act (“SDWA”) and the Underground Injection Control (“UIC”) program promulgated thereunder, regulate the drilling and operation of subsurface injection wells. The EPA directly administers the UIC program in some states and in others the responsibility for the program has been delegated to the state. The program requires that a permit be obtained before drilling a disposal or injection well. Violation of these regulations and/or contamination of groundwater by mining related activities may result in fines, penalties, and remediation costs, among other sanctions and liabilities under the SWDA and state laws. In addition, third party claims may be filed by landowners and other parties claiming damages for alternative water supplies, property damages, and bodily injury.

Nevada

Other Nevada regulations govern operating and design standards for the construction and operation of any source of air contamination and landfill operations. Any changes to these laws and regulations could have an adverse impact on our financial performance and results of operations by, for example, requiring changes to operating constraints, technical criteria, fees or surety requirements.

Key Personnel

As at August 8, 2019, we have two full time employees and six part-time consultants. Our operations are managed by our officers with oversight by the Directors. We engage geological, metallurgical, and engineering consultants from time to time as required to assist in evaluating our property interests and recommending and conducting work programs.

Gold Price History

The price of gold is volatile and is affected by numerous factors all of which are beyond our control, such as the sale or purchase of gold by various central banks and financial institutions, inflation, recession, fluctuation in the relative values of the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies, changes in global and regional gold demand and the political and economic conditions.

The following table presents the high, low and average afternoon fixed prices in U.S. dollars for an ounce of gold on the London Bullion Market over the past five calendar years and the current calendar year to date:

Data Source: www.kitco.com

Seasonality

The NBP and the MLP are not subject to material restrictions on our operations due to seasonality.

Available Information

We make available, free of charge, on or through our Internet website, at www.corvusgold.com, our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and our current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Our Internet website and the information contained therein or connected thereto are not intended to be, and are not incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the following risk factors in addition to the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Each of these risk factors could materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition, as well as materially and adversely affect the value of an investment in our Common Shares. The risks described below are not the only ones facing the Company. Additional risks that we are not presently aware of, or that we currently believe are immaterial, may also adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. We cannot assure you that we will successfully address these risks or that other unknown risks exist that may affect our business.

Risks Related To Our Company

We will require significant additional capital to fund our business plan.

We will be required to expend significant funds to determine if proven and probable mineral reserves exist at our Properties, to continue exploration and if warranted, develop our existing Properties and to identify and acquire additional properties to diversify our Properties portfolio. We have spent and will be required to continue to expend significant amounts of capital for drilling, geological and geochemical analysis, assaying and feasibility studies with regard to the results of our exploration. We may not benefit from some of these investments if we are unable to identify commercially exploitable mineralized material.

Our ability to obtain necessary funding for these purposes, in turn, depends upon a number of factors, including the status of the national and worldwide economy and the price of gold and silver. We may not be successful in obtaining the required financing or, if we can obtain such financing, such financing may not be on terms that are favorable to us. Failure to obtain such additional financing could result in delay or indefinite postponement of further mining operations or exploration and development and the possible partial or total loss of our potential interest in our Properties.

We have a limited operating history on which to base an evaluation of our business and prospects.

Since our inception we have had no revenue from operations. We have no history of producing metals from any of our properties. Our Properties are exploration stage properties. Advancing properties from exploration into the development stage requires significant capital and time, and successful commercial production from a property, if any, will be subject to completing feasibility studies, permitting and construction of the mine, processing plants, roads, and other related works and infrastructure. As a result, we are subject to all of the risks associated with developing and establishing new mining operations and business enterprises including:

The costs, timing and complexities of exploration, development and construction activities may be increased by the location of our Properties and demand by other mineral exploration and mining companies. It is common in exploration programs to experience unexpected problems and delays during drill programs and, if commenced, development, construction and mine start-up. Accordingly, our activities may not result in profitable mining operations and we may not succeed in establishing mining operations or profitably producing metals at any of our properties.

We have a history of losses and expect to continue to incur losses in the future.

We have incurred losses since inception, have negative cash flow from operating activities and expect to continue to incur losses in the future. We incurred the following losses from operations during each of the following periods:

We expect to continue to incur losses unless and until such time as one of our Properties enters into commercial production and generate sufficient revenues to fund continuing operations. We recognize that if we are unable to generate significant revenues from mining operations and dispositions of our properties, we will not be able to earn profits or continue operations. At this early stage of our operation, we also expect to face the risks, uncertainties, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by companies at the start up stage of their business development. We cannot be sure that we will be successful in addressing these risks and uncertainties and our failure to do so could have a materially adverse effect on our financial condition.

Negative Operating Cash Flow

The Company is an exploration stage company and has not generated cash flow from operations.  The Company is devoting significant resources to the development of the Properties and to actively pursue exploration and development opportunities, however, there can be no assurance that it will generate positive cash flow from operations in the future.  The Company expects to continue to incur negative consolidated operating cash flow and losses until such time as it achieves commercial production at a particular project.  The Company currently has negative cash flow from operating activities.

Increased costs could affect our financial condition.

We anticipate that costs at our projects and Properties that we may explore or develop, will frequently be subject to variation from one year to the next due to a number of factors, such as changing grade, metallurgy and revisions to mine plans, if any, in response to the physical shape and location of the body. In addition, costs are affected by the price of commodities such as fuel, steel, rubber, and electricity. Such commodities are at times subject to volatile price movements, including increases that could make production at certain operations less profitable. A material increase in costs at any significant location could have a significant effect on our profitability.

Risks Related to Mining and Exploration

Our Properties are in the exploration stage.

The NBP and the MLP have estimated mineral resources identified, but there has not been a mineral reserve estimation in accordance with NI 43-101 or SEC Industry Guide 7. There is no assurance that we can establish the existence of any mineral reserves on the NBP or the MLP in commercially exploitable quantities. Until we can do so, we cannot earn any revenues from the Properties and if we do not do so, we will lose all of the funds that we expend on exploration. If we do not discover any mineral reserves in a commercially exploitable quantity, the exploration component of our business could fail.

We have not established that our NBP or MLP contains any mineral reserve according to recognized reserve guidelines, nor can there be any assurance that we will be able to do so. A mineral reserve is defined by the SEC in its Industry Guide 7 as that part of a mineral deposit, which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserve determination. The probability of an individual prospect ever having a “reserve” that meets the requirements of the SEC’s Industry Guide 7 is extremely remote; in all probability our mineral Properties do not contain any “reserves” and any funds that we spend on exploration could be lost. Even if we do eventually discover a mineral reserve on our Properties, there can be no assurance that they can be developed into producing mines and extract those minerals. Both mineral exploration and development involve a high degree of risk and few mineral properties which are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines.

The commercial viability of an established mineral deposit will depend on a number of factors including, by way of example, the size, grade and other attributes of the mineral deposit, the proximity of the mineral deposit to infrastructure such as a smelter, roads and a point for shipping, government regulation and market prices. Most of these factors will be beyond our control, and any of them could increase costs and make extraction of any identified mineral deposit unprofitable.

The nature of mineral exploration and production activities involves a high degree of risk and the possibility of uninsured losses.

Exploration for and the production of minerals is highly speculative and involves much greater risk than many other businesses. Most exploration programs do not result in the discovery of mineralization, and any mineralization discovered may not be of sufficient quantity or quality to be profitably mined. Our operations are, and any future development or mining operations we may conduct will be, subject to all of the operating hazards and risks normally incident to exploring for and development of mineral properties, such as, but not limited to:

Any of these risks can materially and adversely affect, among other things, the development of properties, production quantities and rates, costs and expenditures, potential revenues and production dates. We currently have very limited insurance to guard against some of these risks. If we determine that capitalized costs associated with any of our mineral interests are not likely to be recovered, we would incur a write-down of our investment in these interests. All of these factors may result in losses in relation to amounts spent which are not recoverable, or result in additional expenses.

We have no history of producing metals from our current mineral properties and there can be no assurance that we will successfully establish mining operations or profitably produce precious metals.

We have no history of producing metals from our current mineral Properties. We do not produce gold or silver and do not currently generate operating earnings. While we seek to move our Properties into production, such efforts will be subject to all of the risks associated with establishing new mining operations and business enterprises, including:

It is common in new mining operations to experience unexpected problems and delays during construction, development and mine start-up. In addition, our management will need to be expanded. This could result in delays in the commencement of mineral production and increased costs of production. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that our activities will result in profitable mining operations or that we will successfully establish mining operations.

Estimates of mineral resources are subject to evaluation uncertainties that could result in project failure.

Unless otherwise indicated, mineralization figures presented in this Annual Report and in our filings with securities regulatory authorities, press releases and other public statements that may be made from time to time are based upon estimates made by independent geologists and mining engineers. When making determinations about whether to advance any of our projects to development, we must rely upon such estimated calculations as to the mineral resources, mineral reserves and grades of mineralization on our properties. Until ore is actually mined and processed, mineral resources, mineral reserves and grades of mineralization must be considered as estimates only.

Our exploration and future mining operations, if any, are and would be faced with risks associated with being able to accurately predict the quantity and quality of mineral resources/reserves within the earth using statistical sampling techniques. Estimates of mineral resource/reserve on our Properties would be made using samples obtained from appropriately placed trenches, test pits and underground workings and intelligently designed drilling. There is an inherent variability of assays between check and duplicate samples taken adjacent to each other and between sampling points that cannot be reasonably eliminated. Additionally, there also may be unknown geologic details that have not been identified or correctly appreciated at the current level of accumulated knowledge about our Properties. This could result in uncertainties that cannot be reasonably eliminated from the process of estimating mineral resources/reserves. If these estimates were to prove to be unreliable, we could implement an exploitation plan that may not lead to commercially viable operations in the future.

Any material changes in mineral resource/reserve estimates and grades of mineralization will affect the economic viability of placing a property into production and a property’s return on capital.

As we have not completed feasibility studies on our Properties and have not commenced actual production, mineral resource estimates may require adjustments or downward revisions. In addition, the grade ultimately mined, if any, may differ from that indicated by our feasibility studies and drill results. Minerals recovered in small scale tests may not be duplicated in large scale tests under on-site conditions or in production scale.

The mineral resource estimates contained in this Annual Report have been determined based on assumed future prices, cut-off grades and operating costs that may prove to be inaccurate. Extended declines in market prices for gold or silver may render portions of our mineralization and resource estimates uneconomic and result in reduced reported mineralization or adversely affect any commercial viability determinations we may reach. Any material reductions in estimates of mineralization, or of our ability to extract this mineralization, could have a material adverse effect on our share price and the value of our Properties.

There are differences in U.S. and Canadian practices for reporting reserves and resources.

Our mineral resource estimates are not directly comparable to those made in filings subject to SEC reporting and disclosure requirements, as we generally report mineral reserves and mineral resources in accordance with Canadian requirements. These requirements are different from the practices used to report mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates in reports and other materials filed with the SEC. It is Canadian practice to report measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources, which are generally not permitted in disclosure filed with the SEC by United States issuers. In the United States, mineralization may not be classified as a “reserve” unless the determination has been made that the mineralization could be economically and legally produced or extracted at the time the reserve determination is made. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of measured or indicated mineral resources will ever be converted into reserves.

Further, “inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and as to whether they can be mined legally or economically. Disclosure of “contained ounces” is permitted disclosure under Canadian regulations; however, the SEC only permits issuers to report “resources” as in place, tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures.

Accordingly, information concerning descriptions of mineralization, mineral reserves and mineral resources contained in this Annual Report, or in the documents incorporated herein by reference, may not be comparable to information made public by other United States companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements of the SEC.

Our exploration activities on our properties may not be commercially successful, which could lead us to abandon our plans to develop our properties and our investments in exploration.

Our long-term success depends on our ability to identify mineral deposits on our existing Properties and other properties we may acquire, if any, that we can then develop into commercially viable mining operations. Mineral exploration is highly speculative in nature, involves many risks and is frequently non-productive. These risks include unusual or unexpected geologic formations, and the inability to obtain suitable or adequate machinery, equipment or labor. The success of gold, silver and other commodity exploration is determined in part by the following factors:

Substantial expenditures are required to establish proven and probable mineral reserves through drilling and analysis, to develop metallurgical processes to extract metal, and to develop the mining and processing facilities and infrastructure at any site chosen for mining. Whether a mineral deposit will be commercially viable depends on a number of factors, which include, without limitation, the particular attributes of the deposit, such as size, grade and proximity to infrastructure; metal prices, which fluctuate widely; and government regulations, including, without limitation, regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties, land tenure, land use, importing and exporting of minerals and environmental protection. We may invest significant capital and resources in exploration activities and abandon such investments if we are unable to identify commercially exploitable mineral reserves. The decision to abandon a project may have an adverse effect on the market value of our securities and the ability to raise future financing.

The volatility of the price of gold and silver could adversely affect our future operations and, if warranted, our ability to develop our properties.

The potential for profitability of our operations, the value of our Properties, the market price of the Common Shares and our ability to raise funding to conduct continued exploration and development, if warranted, are directly related to the market price of gold and silver. Our decision to put a mine into production and to commit the funds necessary for that purpose must be made long before the first revenue from production would be received. A decrease in the price of gold and/or silver may prevent our Properties from being economically mined or result in the write-off of assets whose value is impaired as a result of lower gold and silver prices. The prices of gold and silver are affected by numerous factors beyond our control, including inflation, fluctuation of the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies, global and regional demand, the sale of gold by central banks, and the political and economic conditions of major gold and silver producing countries throughout the world.

The volatility in gold prices is illustrated in the table presented under the heading “Business – Business Operations – Gold Price History” below.

The volatility of mineral prices represents a substantial risk which no amount of planning or technical expertise can fully eliminate. In the event gold and/or silver prices decline or remain low for prolonged periods of time, we might be unable to develop our Properties, which may adversely affect our results of operations, financial performance and cash flows.

We may not be able to obtain all required permits and licenses to place any of our properties into production.

Our current and future operations, including development activities and commencement of production, if warranted, require permits from governmental authorities and such operations are and will be governed by laws and regulations governing prospecting, development, mining, production, exports, taxes, labor standards, occupational health, waste disposal, toxic substances, land use, environmental protection, mine safety and other matters. Companies engaged in mineral property exploration and the development or operation of mines and related facilities generally experience increased costs, and delays in production and other schedules as a result of the need to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permits. We cannot predict if all permits which we may require for continued exploration, development or construction of mining facilities and conduct of mining operations will be obtainable on reasonable terms, if at all. Costs related to applying for and obtaining permits and licenses may be prohibitive and could delay our planned exploration and development activities. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permitting requirements may result in enforcement actions, including orders issued by regulatory or judicial authorities causing operations to cease or be curtailed, and may include corrective measures requiring capital expenditures, installation of additional equipment, or remedial actions.

Parties engaged in mining operations may be required to compensate those suffering loss or damage by reason of the mining activities and may have civil or criminal fines or penalties imposed for violations of applicable laws or regulations. Amendments to current laws, regulations and permits governing operations and activities of mining companies, or more stringent implementation thereof, could have a material adverse impact on our operations and cause increases in capital expenditures or production costs or reduction in levels of production at producing properties or require abandonment or delays in development of new mining properties.

We are subject to significant governmental regulations, which affect our operations and costs of conducting our business.

Our current and future operations are and will be governed by laws and regulations, including:

Companies engaged in exploration activities often experience increased costs and delays in production and other schedules as a result of the need to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permits. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permits may result in enforcement actions, including the forfeiture of mineral claims or other mineral tenures, orders issued by regulatory or judicial authorities requiring operations to cease or be curtailed, and may include corrective measures requiring capital expenditures, installation of additional equipment or costly remedial actions. We may be required to compensate those suffering loss or damage by reason of our mineral exploration activities and may have civil or criminal fines or penalties imposed for violations of such laws, regulations and permits.

Existing and possible future laws, regulations and permits governing operations and activities of exploration companies, or more stringent implementation, could have a material adverse impact on our business and cause increases in capital expenditures or require abandonment or delays in exploration.

Our activities are subject to environmental laws and regulations that may increase our costs of doing business and restrict our operations.

All phases of our operations are subject to environmental regulation in the jurisdictions in which we operate. Environmental legislation is evolving in a manner which will require stricter standards and enforcement, increased fines and penalties for non-compliance, more stringent environmental assessments of proposed projects and a heightened degree of responsibility for companies and their officers, directors and employees. These laws address emissions into the air, discharges into water, management of waste, management of hazardous substances, protection of natural resources, antiquities and endangered species and reclamation of lands disturbed by mining operations. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations and future changes in these laws and regulations may require significant capital outlays and may cause material changes or delays in our operations and future activities. It is possible that future changes in these laws or regulations could have a significant adverse impact on our Properties or some portion of our business, causing us to re-evaluate those activities at that time.

Legislation has been proposed that would significantly affect the mining industry.

Members of the United States Congress have repeatedly introduced bills which would supplant or alter the provisions of the United States General Mining Law of 1872. If enacted, such legislation could change the cost of holding unpatented mining claims and could significantly impact our ability to develop mineralized material on unpatented mining claims. Such bills have proposed, among other things, to either eliminate or greatly limit the right to a mineral patent and to impose a federal royalty on production from unpatented mining claims. Although we cannot predict what legislated royalties might be, the enactment of these proposed bills could adversely affect the potential for development of unpatented mining claims and the economics of existing operating mines on federal unpatented mining claims. Passage of such legislation could adversely affect our financial performance.

Regulations and pending legislation governing issues involving climate change could result in increased operating costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

A number of governments or governmental bodies have introduced or are contemplating regulatory changes in response to various climate change interest groups and the potential impact of climate change. Legislation and increased regulation regarding climate change could impose significant costs on us, our venture partners and our suppliers, including costs related to increased energy requirements, capital equipment, environmental monitoring and reporting and other costs to comply with such regulations. Any adopted future climate change regulations could also negatively impact our ability to compete with companies situated in areas not subject to such limitations. Given the emotion, political significance and uncertainty around the impact of climate change and how it should be dealt with, we cannot predict how legislation and regulation will affect our financial condition, operating performance and ability to compete. Furthermore, even without such regulation, increased awareness and any adverse publicity in the global marketplace about potential impacts on climate change by us or other companies in our industry could harm our reputation. The potential physical impacts of climate change on our operations are highly uncertain, and would be particular to the geographic circumstances in areas in which we operate. These may include changes in rainfall and storm patterns and intensities, water shortages, changing sea levels and changing temperatures. These impacts may adversely impact the cost, production and financial performance of our operations.

Our relationship with the communities in which we operate impacts the future success of our operations.

Our relationship with the communities in which we operate is important to ensure the future success of our existing operations. While we believe our relationships with the communities in which we operate are strong, there is an increasing level of public concern relating to the perceived effect of mining activities on the environment and on communities impacted by such activities. Certain non-governmental organizations (“NGOs”), some of which oppose globalization and resource development, are often vocal critics of the mining industry and its practices. Adverse publicity generated by such NGOs or others related to extractive industries generally, or its operations specifically, could have an adverse effect on our reputation or financial condition and may impact its relationship with the communities in which we operate. While we believe that we operates in a socially responsible manner, there is no guarantee that our efforts in this respect will mitigate this potential risk.

Our business is subject to evolving corporate governance and public disclosure regulations that have increased both our compliance costs and the risk of noncompliance, which could have an adverse effect on our stock price.

We are subject to changing rules and regulations promulgated by a number of governmental and self-regulated organizations, including the SEC, applicable securities regulatory authorities in Canada, the TSX, the OTCQX, applicable Canadian authorities and the Financial Accounting Standards Board. These rules and regulations continue to evolve in scope and complexity and many new requirements have been created in response to laws enacted by Congress, making compliance more difficult and uncertain. Our efforts to comply with new regulations have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.

Land reclamation requirements for our properties may be burdensome and expensive.

Although variable depending on location and the governing authority, land reclamation requirements are generally imposed on mineral exploration companies (as well as companies with mining operations) in order to minimize long term effects of land disturbance.

Reclamation may include requirements to:

In order to carry out reclamation obligations imposed on us in connection with our potential development activities, we must allocate financial resources that might otherwise be spent on further exploration and development programs. We plan to set up a provision for our reclamation obligations on our Properties, as appropriate, but this provision may not be adequate. If we are required to carry out unanticipated reclamation work, our financial position could be adversely affected.

We face intense competition in the mining industry.

The mining industry is intensely competitive in all of its phases. As a result of this competition, some of which is with large established mining companies with substantial capabilities and with greater financial and technical resources than ours, we may be unable to acquire additional attractive mining claims or financing on terms we consider acceptable. We also compete with other mining companies in the recruitment and retention of qualified managerial and technical employees. If we are unable to successfully compete for qualified employees, our exploration and development programs may be slowed down or suspended. We compete with other precious metal companies for capital. If we are unable to raise sufficient capital, our exploration and development programs may be jeopardized or we may not be able to acquire, develop or operate additional precious metal projects.

A shortage of equipment and supplies could adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

We are dependent on various supplies and equipment to carry out our mining exploration and, if warranted, development operations. The shortage of such supplies, equipment and parts could have a material adverse effect on our ability to carry out our operations and therefore limit, or increase the cost of, production.

Joint ventures and other partnerships may expose us to risks.

We may enter into joint ventures or partnership arrangements with other parties in relation to the exploration, development and production of a certain portion of the Properties in which we have an interest. Joint ventures can often require unanimous approval of the parties to the joint venture or their representatives for certain fundamental decisions such as an increase or reduction of registered capital, merger, division, dissolution, amendments of constating documents, and the pledge of joint venture assets, which means that each joint venture party may have a veto right with respect to such decisions which could lead to a deadlock in the operations of the joint venture. Further, we may be unable to exert control over strategic decisions made in respect of such Properties. Any failure of such other companies to meet their obligations to us or to third parties, or any disputes with respect to the parties’ respective rights and obligations, could have a material adverse effect on the joint ventures or their properties and therefore could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial performance, cash flows and the price of the Common Shares.

Our directors and officers may have conflicts of interest as a result of their relationships with other companies.

Our directors and officers are also directors, officers and shareholders of other companies that are similarly engaged in the business of acquiring, developing and exploiting natural resource properties. Consequently, there is a possibility that our directors and/or officers may be in a position of conflict in the future.

Our failure to strictly comply with anti-corruption laws could have a material adverse effect on our reputation and results of operations.

Our operations are governed by, and involve interactions with, many levels of government in numerous countries. We are required to comply with anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the Canadian Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In recent years, there has been a general increase in both the frequency of enforcement and the severity of penalties under such laws, resulting in greater scrutiny and punishment to companies convicted of violating anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws. Furthermore, a company may be found liable for violations by not only its employees, but also by its contractors and third-party agents. Our internal procedures and programs may not always be effective in ensuring that we, our employees, contractors or third-party agents will comply strictly with such laws. If we become subject to an enforcement action or in violation of such laws, this may have a material adverse effect on our reputation, result in significant penalties, fines and/or sanctions imposed on us, and/or have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Our failure to strictly comply with Canada’s Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act could have a material adverse effect on our reputation and results of operations.

The Canadian Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act (“ESTMA”), which became effective June 1, 2015, requires public disclosure of payments to governments by mining and oil and gas companies engaged in the commercial development of oil, gas and minerals who are either publicly listed in Canada or with business or assets in Canada. Mandatory annual reporting is required for extractive companies with respect to payments made to foreign and domestic governments at all levels, including entities established by two or more governments, including Indigenous groups. Reporting on payments to Canadian First Nations will commence in 2018 for payments made in 2017. ESTMA requires reporting on the payments of any taxes, royalties, fees, production entitlements, bonuses, dividends, infrastructure improvement payments, and any other prescribed payment over C$100,000. Failure to report, false reporting or structuring payments to avoid reporting may result in fines of up to C$250,000 (which may be concurrent). We commenced ESTMA reporting in 2017. If we become subject to an enforcement action or in violation of ESTMA, this may result in significant penalties, fines and/or sanctions imposed on us resulting in a material adverse effect on our reputation.

Our business is affected by the global economy.

Global financial conditions continue to be characterized as volatile. In recent years, global markets have been adversely impacted by the credit crisis that began in 2008, the European debt crisis and significant fluctuations in fuel and energy costs and metals prices. Many industries, including the mining industry, have been impacted by these market conditions. Global financial conditions remain subject to sudden and rapid destabilizations in response to future events, as government authorities may have limited resources to respond to future crises. A continued or worsened slowdown in the financial markets or other economic conditions, including but not limited to consumer spending, employment rates, business conditions, inflation, fuel and energy costs, consumer debt levels, lack of available credit, the state of the financial markets, interest rates and tax rates, may adversely affect our growth and profitability. Future crises may be precipitated by any number of causes, including natural disasters, geopolitical instability, changes to energy prices or sovereign defaults. If increased levels of volatility continue or in the event of a rapid destabilization of global economic conditions, it may result in a material adverse effect on commodity prices, demand for metals, including gold, silver, zinc, copper and lead, availability of credit, investor confidence, and general financial market liquidity, all of which may adversely affect our business and the market price of our securities.

We may experience difficulty attracting and retaining qualified management to meet the needs of our anticipated growth, and the failure to manage our growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

We are dependent on a relatively small number of key employees, including our President and Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Operating Officer. The loss of any officer could have an adverse effect on us. We have no life insurance on any individual, and we may be unable to hire a suitable replacement for them on favorable terms, should that become necessary.

It may be difficult to enforce judgments or bring actions outside the United States against us and certain of our directors.

We are a Canadian corporation and certain of our Directors are neither citizens nor residents of the United States. A substantial part of the assets of several of these persons, are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for an investor:

Our results of operations could be affected by currency fluctuations.

Our Properties are located in the United States and most costs associated with this property are paid in U.S. dollars. There can be significant swings in the exchange rate between the U.S. and Canadian dollar. There are no plans at this time to hedge against any exchange rate fluctuations in currencies.

Title to our properties may be subject to other claims, which could affect our Properties rights and claims.

There are risks that title to our property may be challenged or impugned. Our current Properties are located in Nevada and may be subject to prior unrecorded agreements or transfers or native land claims and title may be affected by undetected defects. There may be valid challenges to the title of our Properties which, if successful, could impair development and/or operations. This is particularly the case in respect of those portions of our Properties in which we hold our interest solely through a lease with the claim holders, as such interest is substantially based on contract and has been subject to a number of assignments (as opposed to a direct interest in the property).

Several of the mineral rights to our Properties consist of “unpatented” lode mining claims created and maintained in accordance with the United States General Mining Law of 1872. Unpatented mining claims are unique property interests, and are generally considered to be subject to greater title risk than other real property interests because the validity of unpatented mining claims is often uncertain. This uncertainty arises, in part, out of the complex federal and state laws and regulations under the United States General Mining Law of 1872. Also, unpatented mining claims are always subject to possible challenges by third parties or validity contests by the federal government. The validity of an unpatented lode mining or mill site claim, in terms of both its location and its maintenance, is dependent on strict compliance with a complex body of U.S. federal and state statutory and decisional law. In addition, there are few public records that definitively determine the issues of validity and ownership of unpatented mining claims. Should the federal government impose a royalty or additional tax burdens on the portion of the property that lie within public lands, the resulting mining operations could be seriously impacted, depending upon the type and amount of the burden.

We may be unable to secure surface access or purchase required surface rights.

Although the Company acquires the rights to some or all of the minerals in the ground subject to the mineral tenures that it acquires, or has a right to acquire, in most cases it does not thereby acquire any rights to, or ownership of, the surface to the areas covered by such mineral tenures. In such cases, applicable mining laws usually provide for rights of access to the surface for the purpose of carrying on mining activities, however, the enforcement of such rights through the courts can be costly and time consuming. It is necessary to negotiate surface access or to purchase the surface rights if long-term access is required. There can be no guarantee that, despite having the right at law to access the surface and carry on mining activities, we will be able to negotiate satisfactory agreements with any such existing landowners/occupiers for such access or purchase of such surface rights, and therefore we may be unable to carry out planned mining activities. In addition, in circumstances where such access is denied, or no agreement can be reached, we may need to rely on the assistance of local officials or the courts in such jurisdiction the outcomes of which cannot be predicted with any certainty. Our inability to secure surface access or purchase required surface rights could materially and adversely affect our timing, cost or overall ability to develop any mineral deposits we may locate.

Our properties and operations may be subject to litigation or other claims.

From time to time our Properties or operations may be subject to disputes which may result in litigation or other legal claims. We may be required to assert or defend against these claims which will divert resources and management time from operations. The costs of these claims or adverse filings may have a material effect on our business and results of operations.

We do not currently insure against all the risks and hazards of mineral exploration, development and mining operations.

Exploration, development and mining operations involve various hazards, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, metallurgical and other processing problems, unusual or unexpected rock formations, structural cave-ins or slides, flooding, fires, metal losses and periodic interruptions due to inclement or hazardous weather conditions. These risks could result in damage to or destruction of mineral properties, facilities or other property, personal injury, environmental damage, delays in operations, increased cost of operations, monetary losses and possible legal liability. We may not be able to obtain insurance to cover these risks at economically feasible premiums or at all. We may elect not to insure where premium costs are disproportionate to our perception of the relevant risks. The payment of such insurance premiums and of such liabilities would reduce the funds available for exploration and production activities.

We are dependent upon information technology systems, which are subject to disruption, damage, failure and risks associated with implementation and integration.

We are dependent upon information technology systems in the conduct of our operations. Our information technology systems are subject to disruption, damage or failure from a variety of sources, including, without limitation, computer viruses, security breaches, cyber-attacks, natural disasters and defects in design. Cybersecurity incidents, in particular, are evolving and include, but are not limited to, malicious software, attempts to gain unauthorized access to data and other electronic security breaches that could lead to disruptions in systems, unauthorized release of confidential or otherwise protected information and the corruption of data. Various measures have been implemented to manage our risks related to information technology systems and network disruptions. However, given the unpredictability of the timing, nature and scope of information technology disruptions, we could potentially be subject to operational delays, the compromising of confidential or otherwise protected information, destruction or corruption of data, security breaches, other manipulation or improper use of our systems and networks or financial losses from remedial actions, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, competitive position, financial condition or results of operations.

Risks Related to the Common Shares

We believe that we may be a “passive foreign investment company” for the current taxable year which may result in materially adverse United States federal income tax consequences for United States investors.

We generally will be designated as a “passive foreign investment company” under the meaning of Section 1297 of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (a “PFIC”) if, for a tax year, (a) 75% or more of our gross income for such year is “passive income” (generally, dividends, interest, rents, royalties, and gains from the disposition of assets producing passive income) or (b) if at least 50% or more of the value of our assets produce, or are held for the production of, passive income, based on the quarterly average of the fair market value of such assets. United States shareholders should be aware that we believe we were classified as a PFIC during our tax year ended May 31, 2019, and based on current business plans and financial expectations, believe that we may be a PFIC for the current and future taxable years. If we are a PFIC for any year during a U.S. shareholder’s holding period, then such U.S. shareholder generally will be required to treat any gain realized upon a disposition of Common Shares, or any “excess distribution” received on its Common Shares, as ordinary income, and to pay an interest charge on a portion of such gain or distribution, unless the shareholder makes a timely and effective "qualified electing fund" election (“QEF Election”) or a "mark-to-market" election with respect to the Common Shares. A U.S. shareholder who makes a QEF Election generally must report on a current basis its share of our net capital gain and ordinary earnings for any year in which we are a PFIC, whether or not we distribute any amount to our shareholders. A U.S. shareholder who makes a mark-to-market election generally must include as ordinary income each year the excess of the fair market value of the Common Shares over the taxpayer’s basis therein. This paragraph is qualified in its entirety by the discussion below under the heading “Certain United States Federal Income Tax Considerations.” Each U.S. shareholder should consult its own tax advisors regarding the PFIC rules and the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership, and disposition of Common Shares.

If we fail to establish and maintain an effective system of internal control, we may not be able to report our financial results accurately or to prevent fraud. Any inability to report and file our financial results accurately and timely could harm our reputation and adversely impact the trading price of our Common Shares.

Effective internal control is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and prevent fraud. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, we may not be able to manage our business as effectively as we would if an effective control environment existed, and our business and reputation with investors may be harmed. As a result of our small size, any current internal control deficiencies may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operation and access to capital. Although as of May 31, 2019, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, there can be no assurance that our internal control over financial reporting will remain effective.

Our share price may be volatile and as a result you could lose all or part of your investment.

In addition to volatility associated with equity securities in general, the value of your investment could decline due to the impact of any of the following factors upon the market price of the Common Shares:

In the last 12 months, the price of our stock on the TSX has ranged from a low of $1.55 to a high of $3.39. In addition, stock markets in general have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations and the market prices of securities have been highly volatile. These fluctuations are often unrelated to operating performance and may adversely affect the market price of the Common Shares. As a result, you may be unable to resell any Common Shares you acquire at a desired price.

We have never paid dividends on the Common Shares.

We have not paid dividends on the Common Shares to date, and we may not be in a position to pay dividends for the foreseeable future. Our ability to pay dividends with respect to the Common Shares will depend on our ability to successfully develop our Properties and generate earnings from operations. Further, our initial earnings, if any, will likely be retained to finance our operations. Any future dividends on Common Shares will depend upon our earnings, our then-existing financial requirements and other factors, and will be at the discretion of the Board.

Investors’ interests in our Company will be diluted and investors may suffer dilution in their net book value per Common Share if we issue additional employee/Director/consultant options or if we sell additional Common Shares to finance our operations.

In order to further expand the Company’s operations and meet our objectives, any additional growth and/or expanded exploration activity will likely need to be financed through sale of and issuance of additional Common Shares, including, but not limited to, raising funds to explore the Properties. Furthermore, to finance any acquisition activity, should that activity be properly approved, and depending on the outcome of our exploration programs, we will likely also need to issue additional Common Shares to finance future acquisitions, growth and/or additional exploration programs of our Properties or to acquire additional properties. We will also in the future grant to some or all of our Directors, officers, and key employees and/or consultants options to purchase Common Shares as non-cash incentives. The issuance of any equity securities could, and the issuance of any additional Common Shares will, cause our existing shareholders to experience dilution of their ownership interests.

If we issue additional Common Shares or decide to enter into joint ventures with other parties in order to raise financing through the sale of equity securities, investors’ interests in the Company will be diluted and investors may suffer dilution in their net book value per Common Share depending on the price at which such securities are sold.

We are subject to the continued listing criteria of the TSX and our failure to satisfy these criteria may result in delisting of the Common Shares.

The Common Shares are currently listed on the TSX. In order to maintain the listing, we must maintain certain financial and share distribution targets, including maintaining a minimum number of public shareholders. In addition to objective standards, the TSX may delist the securities of any issuer if, in its opinion, the issuer’s financial condition and/or operating results appear unsatisfactory; if it appears that the extent of public distribution or the aggregate market value of the security has become so reduced as to make continued listing on the TSX inadvisable; if the issuer sells or disposes of principal operating assets or ceases to be an operating company; if an issuer fails to comply with the listing requirements of TSX; or if any other event occurs or any condition exists which makes continued listing on the TSX, in the opinion of the TSX, inadvisable.

If the TSX delists the Common Shares, investors may face material adverse consequences, including, but not limited to, a lack of trading market for the Common Shares, reduced liquidity, decreased analyst coverage of the Company, and an inability for us to obtain additional financing to fund our operations.

The issuance of additional Common Shares may negatively impact the trading price of our securities.

We have issued Common Shares in the past and will continue to issue Common Shares to finance our activities in the future. In addition, outstanding options, warrants and broker warrants to purchase Common Shares may be exercised, resulting in the issuance of additional Common Shares. The issuance by us of additional Common Shares would result in dilution to our shareholders, and even the perception that such an issuance may occur could have a negative impact on the trading price of the Common Shares.

We are an “emerging growth company,” and we cannot be certain if the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make our Common Shares less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We will lose our status as an emerging growth company on May 31, 2020. We cannot predict if investors will find our Common Shares less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our Common Shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our Common Shares and our stock price may be more volatile. Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can also delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves of this exemption from new or revised accounting standards and, therefore, will be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

Broker-dealers may be discouraged from effecting transactions in Common Shares because they are considered a penny stock and are subject to the penny stock rules.

The Common Shares are a penny stock. The SEC has adopted Rule 15g-9 which generally defines “penny stock” to be any equity security that has a market price (as defined) less than USD 5.00 per share or an exercise price of less than USD 5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. The Common Shares are covered by the penny stock rules, which impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell to persons other than established customers and “accredited investors”. The term “accredited investor” refers generally to institutions with assets in excess of USD 5,000,000 or individuals with a net worth in excess of USD 1,000,000 or annual income exceeding USD 200,000 or USD 300,000 jointly with their spouse. The penny stock rules require a broker-dealer, prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from the rules, to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document in a form prepared by the SEC, which provides information about penny stocks and the nature and level of risks in the penny stock market. The broker-dealer also must provide the customer with current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock, the compensation of the broker-dealer and its salesperson in the transaction and monthly account statements showing the market value of each penny stock held in the customer’s account. The bid and offer quotations, and the broker-dealer and salesperson compensation information, must be given to the customer orally or in writing prior to effecting the transaction and must be given to the customer in writing before or with the customer's confirmation. In addition, the penny stock rules require that prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from these rules, the broker-dealer must make a special written determination that the penny stock is a suitable investment for the purchaser and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction. These disclosure requirements may have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity in the secondary market for the Common Shares. Consequently, these penny stock rules may affect the ability of broker-dealers to trade in the Common Shares.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Nevada Properties

NBP and MLP

Our principal mineral properties are the NBP and the MLP, which form a unified gold exploration project (the “NBP-MLP”) located in northwestern Nye County, Nevada, in the Northern Bullfrog Hills and Bare Mountains to the east, north and west of the town of Beatty. The NBP-MLP does not have any known proven or probable reserves under SEC Industry Guide 7 and the project is exploratory in nature. The Technical Report, “Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment for the Integrated Mother Lode and North Bullfrog Projects, Bullfrog Mining District, Nye County, Nevada” is available under Corvus’ SEDAR profile at www.sedar.com and EDGAR profile at www.sec.gov. The Technical Report describes the integration of the two properties into a single mining operation. The Technical Report is referred to herein for informational purposes only and is not incorporated herein by reference. The Technical Report contains disclosure regarding Mineral Resources that are not SEC Industry Guide 7 compliant proven or probable reserves. See “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors Regarding Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources and Proven and Probable Reserves” above.

The preliminary economic assessment on the NBP and the MLP is preliminary in nature and includes “inferred mineral resources” that have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and are considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. It cannot be assumed that all, or any part, of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category.

The following disclosure is derived, in part, and supported by the Technical Report.

Property Description and Location

The NBP-MLP is located in the Bullfrog Hills and Bare Mountains of northwestern Nye County, Nevada (Figure 1), and covers about 12,314 hectares of patented and unpatented mining claims in sections 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 36 of T10S R46E, in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, 24, 25, 26, 34 and 35 of T11S R46E, in sections 2, 3, 9, and 10 of T12S R46E, in sections 19, 30, 31 and 32 of T10S R47E, in sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, and 18 of T11S R47E, in sections 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 22, 23, 26, 27, 34, 35 and 36 of T11S R47E, in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of T12S R47E, and in sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17 and 18 of T12S R48E of MDBM. In addition at NBP, we have a total of nine option/lease agreements in place that give us control of an aggregate of 51 patented lode mining claims (Figure 1). Corvus Nevada owns an additional five patented claims (the Millman claims) and a 430 acre property with 1600 acre-feet of water rights located north of NBP in the Sacrobatus hydrographic basin (Basin 146). During October 2018, the NBP was extended to the south by locating the GAP claims, which consist of 190 Federal Lode mining claims extending south from the previous southwest boundary of the NBP.

Figure 1. Property Map showing the Location of the North Bullfrog, Mother Lode and Gap claim groups with respect to the town of Beatty, NV.

The MLP is located north of the Bare Mountains of northwestern Nye County, Nevada (Figure 1) and is connected to the southeast corner of the NBP. The MLP consists of about 3,570 hectares (8,820 acres) of federal unpatented lode mining claims located in Sections 10, 11, 14, 15, 22, 23, 26, 27, 34, 35 and 36 of T11S, R47E; Sections 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 of T12S, R47E; and Sections 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17 and 18 of T12S, R48E, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (“MDBM”). The individual claim blocks are the MN claims, the Mother Lode claims and the ME claims.

Studies at the MLP-NBP have been focused on the integration of the NBP and the MLP into a single mining operation. The Technical Report describing the integrated NBP-MLP dated November 1, 2018 and amended November 8, 2018 is available on SEDAR.

Title and Ownership

Redstar Gold Joint Venture and ITH Land Purchase

Redstar Gold Corp. (“Redstar”) originally staked 213 unpatented lode mining claims and optioned 21 patented lode mining claims from six private parties in 2006. ITH optioned the original NBP land package from Redstar in 2006, creating the North Bullfrog Property Joint Venture (“NBPJV”). ITH added 11 patented lode mining claims (the Mayflower property) to the NBPJV in 2007 under the Greenspun lease agreement. Redstar added 12 patented lode mining claims (the Connection and adjacent properties) to the NBPJV in 2008 under the lease agreement with Lunar Landing LLC. In August 2009 ITH purchased 100% interest in the NBPJV from Redstar by paying Redstar $250,000 and issuing 200,000 ITH common shares. These holdings were then transferred to Corvus during the spin out. Corvus completed an additional option lease agreement on two patented lode mining claims in the Jolly Jane area in March 2011. In May 2014, Corvus amended its existing lease agreement with Kolo Corp. to add the Yellow Rose and Yellow Rose No. 1 claims. In March 2015 Corvus added a second option lease agreement with Lunar Landing LLC, to lease the Sunflower, Sunflower No. 1 and Sunflower No. 2 claims for a total of nine option agreements on private land. Table 1 summarizes the obligations of the nine leases which are part of Corvus’ responsibilities on the NBP.

Table 1: Summary of Lease Obligations that are part of the NBP

Corvus has added an additional 808 federal unpatented lode mining claims which were staked in 2012, and added an additional 57 federal unpatented lode mining claims which were staked in late 2014.

The Gregory, Wiley, Kolo Corp., Milliken, Pritchard and Lunar Landing leases contain provisions for extension of the lease beyond the initial term, as long as active exploration or mining activities are maintained by the Company. The leases are now extended annually under this provision.

Gregory Property (North Pioneer Area) Notification of Extension Term

Pursuant to a mining lease made and entered into as of June 16, 2006 between Redstar and an arm’s length individual, Redstar has leased one patented mineral claims which form part of the North Bullfrog project holdings. The lease is for an initial term of 10 years, and for so long thereafter as mining activities continue on the claims or contiguous claims held by the lessee. The lessee is required to pay advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties) of USD 2,000 on execution, USD 2,000 on each of June 16, 2007, 2008 and 2009, USD 3,000 on June 16, 2010 and each anniversary thereafter, adjusted for inflation. The lessor is entitled to receive a 2% NSR royalty on all production, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 1,000,000 per 1% (USD 2,000,000 for the entire royalty).

Hall Property (Savage Valley Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease made and entered into as of May 22, 2006 between Redstar and two arm’s length individuals, Redstar has leased three patented mineral claims. The lease is for an initial term of 10 years, and for so long thereafter as mining activities continue on the claims or contiguous claims held by the lessee. The lessee is required to pay advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties) of USD 8,000 on execution, USD 4,800 on each of May 22, 2007, 2008 and 2009, USD 7,200 on May 22, 2010 and each anniversary thereafter, adjusted for inflation. The lessor is entitled to receive a 2% NSR royalty on all production, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 1,000,000 per 1% (USD 2,000,000 for the entire royalty).

Kolo Property (Jolly Jane Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease made and entered into as of May 8, 2006 between Redstar and an arm’s length private Nevada corporation, Redstar has leased two patented mining claims (Jolly Jane and ZuZu). The lease is for an initial term of 10 years, and for so long thereafter as mining activities continue on the claims or contiguous claims held by the lessee. The lessee is required to pay advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties) of USD 2,000 on execution, USD 2,000 on each of May 8, 2007, 2008 and 2009, USD 3,000 on May 8, 2010 and each anniversary thereafter, adjusted for inflation. The lessor is entitled to receive a 3% NSR royalty on all production from the Jolly Jane and ZuZu claims, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 850,000 per 1% (USD 2,550,000 for the entire royalty).

The Kolo lease agreement was amended on May 29, 2014 to add the Yellow Rose and Yellow Rose No. 1 patented claims to the agreement. The term remained the same, but the amended lease includes additional Advance Minimum Royalty payments of USD 2,400 per year for years one and two, increasing to USD 3,600 per year thereafter (adjusted for inflation) for the Yellow Rose claims. The Lessor is entitled to receive a 3% NSR royalty on all production from the Yellow Rose claims, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 770,000 per 1% (USD 2,310,000 for the entire royalty).

Milliken Property (Pioneer Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease made and entered into as of May 8, 2006 between Redstar and two arm’s length individuals, Redstar has leased three patented mining claims. The lease is for an initial term of 10 years, and for so long thereafter as mining activities continue on the claims or contiguous claims held by the lessee. The lessee is required to pay advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties) of USD 4,000 on execution, USD 3,500 on each of May 8, 2007, 2008 and 2009, USD 4,500 on May 8, 2010 and each anniversary thereafter, adjusted for inflation. The lessor is entitled to receive a 2% NSR royalty on all production, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 1,000,000 per 1% (USD 2,000,000 for the entire royalty).

Prichard Property (Pioneer Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease made and entered into as of May 16, 2006 between Redstar and an arm’s length individual, Redstar has leased 12 patented mineral claims. The lease is for an initial term of 10 years, and for so long thereafter as mining activities continue on the claims or contiguous claims held by the lessee. The lessee is required to pay advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties) of USD 20,500 on execution and USD 20,000 on each anniversary thereafter. The lessor is entitled to receive a 4% NSR royalty on all production, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 1,000,000 per 1% (USD 4,000,000 for the entire royalty).

Lunar Property (Connection Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease and option to purchase agreement made effective October 27, 2008 between Redstar and an arm’s length limited liability company, Redstar has leased (and has the option to purchase) 12 patented mining claims. The ten-year, renewable mining lease requires advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties, but not applicable to the purchase price if the option to purchase is exercised) of USD 10,800 on signing and annual payments for the first three anniversaries of USD 10,800 and USD 16,200 for every year thereafter. Redstar has an option to purchase the property (subject to the NSR royalty below) for USD 1,000,000 at any time during the life of the lease. Production is subject to a 4% NSR royalty, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 1,250,000 per 1% (USD 5,000,000 for the entire royalty).

Lunar Property (Sunflower Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease and option to purchase agreement made effective March 30, 2015 between Corvus Nevada and an arm’s length limited liability company, Corvus Nevada has leased (and has the option to purchase) three patented mining claims. The three and a half year, renewable mining lease requires advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties, but not applicable to the purchase price if the option to purchase is exercised) of USD 5,000 on signing and annual payments for the three anniversaries of USD 5,000. Corvus Nevada has an option to purchase the property (subject to the NSR royalty below) for USD 300,000 at any time during the life of the lease. Production is subject to a 4% NSR royalty, which may be purchased by the lessee for USD 500,000 per 1% (USD 2,000,000 for the entire royalty).

Sussman Property (Jolly Jane Area)

Pursuant to a mining lease and option to purchase made effective March 1, 2011 between Corvus Nevada and an arm’s length individual, Corvus Nevada has leased, and has the option to purchase, two patented mineral claims. The lease is for an initial term of 10 years, subject to extension for an additional 10 years (provided advance minimum royalties are timely paid), and for so long thereafter as mining activities continue on the claims. The lessee is required to pay advance minimum royalty payments (recoupable from production royalties, but not applicable to the purchase price if the option to purchase is exercised) of USD 20,000 on execution, USD 25,000 on each of March 1, 2012, 2013 and 2014, USD 30,000 on March 1, 2015 and each anniversary thereafter, adjusted for inflation. The lessor is entitled to receive a 2% NSR royalty on all production. The lessee may purchase the royalty for USD 1,000,000 per 1%. If the lessee purchases the entire royalty (USD 2,000,000) the lessee will also acquire all interest of the lessor in the subject property.

Greenspun Property (Mayflower Area)

ITH, through what is now Corvus Nevada, entered into a mining lease with an option to purchase with the Greenspun Group for 183 acres of patented lode mining claims that cover much of the Mayflower prospect. The Mayflower lease requires Corvus to make payments and complete work programs as outlined in Table 2. During the term of the lease any production from the Mayflower property is subject to a sliding scale royalty, also outlined in Table 2. Corvus has the right to purchase a 100% interest in the Mayflower property for $7.5 million plus a 0.5% NSR (if gold is less than $500) or 1.0% (if gold is above $500) at any time during the term of the lease (subject to escalation for inflation if the option is exercised after the 10th year of the lease). The annual property taxes to be paid by Corvus for the Mayflower property are $214. On February 11, 2015, the Mayflower mining lease with option to purchase was amended with the addition of an anti-dilution clause applying to the ITH shares and with an increase in the annual payment to include 25,000 Common Shares. On November 22, 2017, the term of the lease was extended for 10 additional years to December 7, 2027.

Table 2: Summary of the Material Terms of the Mayflower/Greenspun Group Lease

Millman Property

On February 21, 2013 Corvus Nevada signed a purchase agreement, which was subsequently closed on March 28, 2013, for the purchase of the surface rights only to five patented lode mining claims owned by Mr. and Mrs. Gordon Millman and located east of the Mayflower Property. This ground could be used for potential overburden storage from the Mayflower deposit as well as improving access to the Mayflower Property in general. Corvus Nevada purchased the surface rights for USD 160,000. Additionally, Corvus Nevada agreed to pay the Millmans a fee of US $0.02 per ton of any potential overburden storage subject to a minimum storage of 12 million short tons of material. The note for the storage fee of $240,000 was paid on December 17, 2015.

Sarcobatus Property

In December 2013, SoN Land and Water LLC, wholly owned by Corvus Nevada, completed the purchase of an 170 hectare fee simple parcel of land approximately 30 kilometres northwest of the NBP which carries with it 1,600 acre feet of irrigation water rights within the Sarcobatus Flats water basin. The cost of the land and associated water rights was USD 1,034,626. The Company has registered the purchase of water rights with the Nevada State Engineer (“NSE”) and has changed the use to mining on July 18, 2017. Corvus has received a temporary transfer of the extraction point for a portion of the water (80 acre feet) to the NBP. Corvus has applied to transfer the point of extraction of all of the water rights to the NBP, and that application is in process. The water right requires annual renewal and the 2019 application is pending approval.

Other property considerations

All of the unpatented lode mining claims are on U.S. public land administered by the BLM. These claims give Corvus the right to explore for and mine minerals, including gold and silver, subject to the necessary permits. The current exploration permits from BLM and NDEP allow Corvus surface access, maintenance of roads, drilling and sampling, and a defined amount of accompanying surface disturbance. The unpatented lode mining claims require payment of yearly maintenance fees to the BLM and Nye County (recording fees) of an aggregate of USD 145,000 (estimated for 2019). Annual property taxes to be paid by Corvus for some of the properties under the original six Redstar leases and subsequent leases are listed in Table 1.

The unpatented lode claims at the Mother Lode property will require payment of yearly maintenance fees to BLM and Nye County (recording fees) of an estimated USD 100,000 (estimated for 2019).

Current exploration activities are covered by a Plan of Operations (NVN-83002) with the BLM. Two exploration Plans of Operation are in place with the NDEP (NDEP#0280 private land and #0290 public land administered by the BLM) that fulfill the State of Nevada permitting obligations on private and public lands, respectively. Additional exploration activities are covered by five Notices of Intent (“NOI”) with the BLM. Those NOIs (N-9221, N-93906, N-95622, N-96894 and N-96991) have temporary terms renewable every two years, and currently extend to 2020. Reclamation bonds, related to environmental liabilities to which the Properties are subject, are in place to cover activities on the Properties. Corvus’ reclamation liabilities are covered by surety bonds issued by Lexon Insurance Company in the amount of USD 284,386 for 89.2 acres (excludes the NOI bonded obligations) of disturbance on public land with the BLM and USD 209,070 for 25.4 acres of disturbance on private land with NDEP. An additional $126,805 of reclamation liability cost for the five NOIs is also covered by the Lexon Insurance Company.

Accessibility, Physiography, Climate and Infrastructure at NBP-MLP

The Properties are accessible by a two and one half hour (209 kilometres, 130 mile) drive north of Las Vegas, Nevada along US Highway 95. US Highway 95 is the major transportation route between Las Vegas, Nevada, Reno, Nevada and Boise Idaho. Las Vegas is serviced by a major international airport. The Properties lie immediately to the west and to the east of the highway. Beatty, Nevada is the closest town to the property with a population of about 1,100 and contains most basic services. The nearest major supply point that would support a major mining related activity is Las Vegas, Nevada about 160 kilometres to the southeast. There are several accessible old mine workings. Access around both Properties is by a series of reasonably good gravel and dirt roads that extend to most of the important exploration areas.

The Properties are in Western Nevada’s high desert, which receives about 15 centimetres of precipitation per year, mostly as modest snow fall in the winter and thunderstorms in the summer. The average daily temperature (°F) varies from a low of 40 (5 °C) in January to a high of 80 (27 °C) in July. The hills at the Properties are covered with sparse low brush including creosote, four-wing saltbush, rabbit brush and Nevada ephedra. The Properties are in the Basin and Range province, with the local topographic relief ranging from only a few hundred feet to 1000 feet. Most of the areas at the Properties are characterized by low hills separated by modest width valleys.

There are currently no other structures or infrastructure on the Properties. Major mining and construction equipment sales and service are readily available throughout Nevada; however, most major mining operations are located in the northern part of the state and are serviced from the cities of Reno and Elko. Human resources are readily available within the community of Beatty and historically provided a substantial portion of the workforce for the Bullfrog Mine, which operated between 1989 and 1998 as both an open pit and underground gold mining operation. Pahrump, approximately 110 kilometres to the southeast of Beatty, is a larger community with a population of 36,000. Pahrump is a local regional center, with a hospital and emergency medical services, a college campus with technical training for industrial support and expanded service sectors.

Electrical power is provided to the immediate area of both the NBP and Mother Lode Properties by the Valley Electric Association, Inc. (“VEA”), which is headquartered in Pahrump. A 135 kV line runs from the south to the Beatty substation, and a 25 kV line runs north from Beatty, NV along Highway 95. VEA began upgrading its existing electrical facilities, on the eastern portion of the NBP, in mid-2013. The upgrade has a separate circuit of 15 Mw capacity and will accommodate the presently anticipated future demand at NBP. The Company contributed USD 28,500 for the line upgrade. Two electrical feeder lines run west from the main line, one to the perimeter of the NBP to power an aggregate crushing plant operating in the southern portion of NBP and a second that traverses the NBP to power a centrally located microwave station and the Company’s weather station which has been installed on Corvus controlled patented mining claims near Mayflower. A feeder line currently runs from US Highway 95 up Fluorspar Canyon to a communications installation in the Bare Mountains above Mother Lode. We anticipate that adequate power will be available for all proposed future mining operations at both Properties.

Water resources for a mining project at NBP must be obtained from the ground water. There appears to be sufficient resources in the ground water basins at the NBP, and the Company has registered the water rights purchased in Sarcobatus with the NSE. The Company has converted the Sarcobatus water rights to a temporary mining use, and has applied to transfer the point of extraction to the NBP. Water wells, booster stations, and pipelines would be developed to provide water to the mine, process facilities, and ancillary structures. The current plan would be to drill several wells northwest of the heap leach pad and install a fresh water line from the well fields to the process plant. The hydrologic characterization program was advanced at the end of 2018 by drilling a water well in the NW corner of NBP which confirmed the potential of water well sites in the Sarcobatus Flats (Nevada State Water Basin 146) within the northwest portion of the NBP.

In 2019 the NSE conveyed existing water rights at the Mother Lode project to Corvus. The water rights, 144.4 acre-feet, were used for mining of the Mother Lode mine and the Daisy mine during the period 1988-1996 and represent the combined duty of 3 existing water wells near Mother Lode (MW-3, MW-4 and PW-2). Corvus has developed video borehole logs that confirmed the condition of the wells and has re-completed 2 of the wells (MW-3 and MW-4) to supply water for future exploration drilling.

Geology and Mineralization

Regional Geologic Setting

NB-MLP lies within the Walker Lane mineral belt and the Southwestern Nevada Volcanic Field (SWNVF). The regional stratigraphy includes a basement of Late Proterozoic to Late Paleozoic metamorphic and sedimentary rocks. Basement rocks are overlain by a thick pile of Miocene volcanic and lesser sedimentary rocks of the SWNVF, ranging in age from ~15-7.5 Ma (Figure 2). The pre-Tertiary rocks exhibit large-scale folding and thrust faulting, having been subjected to compressional deformation associated with multiple pre-Tertiary orogenic events. The stratigraphy of the SWNVF is dominated by ash flow tuff sheets erupted from a cluster of nested calderas known as the Timber Mountain Caldera Complex. The southwestern edge of the caldera complex lies approximately eight kilometres northeast of the MLP, and ten kilometres east of the NBP (Figure 2). The stratigraphy of the SWNVF includes voluminous ash flow tuff sheets, smaller volume lava flows, shallow intrusive bodies, and lesser sedimentary rocks. Many of the volcanic units exposed around NBP-MLP include ash flow tuffs that originated from the caldera complex. Other volcanic units are locally sourced outside of the caldera complex, particularly at the NBP.

The Bullfrog and Fluorspar Hills comprise a somewhat isolated structural domain within the Walker Lane, where both pre-Tertiary and Miocene rocks have been subjected to large-scale, W- to WNW-directed, syn-volcanic extension (i.e. down-to-the-west normal faulting and east-tilting of stratigraphy). Extensional faulting was coincident with magmatism and volcanic activity between ~15-9.4 Ma. Hydrothermal alteration and gold mineralization were also episodic through this time period. If present, through-going right-lateral faults of the Walker Lane are poorly exposed in the SWNVF. One possible example of a NW-trending, through-going Walker Lane structure cuts through the historic Silicon and Thompson mine areas to the northeast of the MLP (Figure 2). Despite the dominance of caldera volcanism in the region, little or no mineralization is associated with any caldera ring fracture system. Rather, mineralization is typically associated with extensional faults outside of the caldera complex.

Extension is accommodated by the Bullfrog Hills Fault System (BHFS); a complex group of kinematically linked faults that facilitate WNW-directed extension and east-tilted block rotation. The primary structure of the BHFS is the Southern Bullfrog Hills Fault (SBHF). The SBHF is an east-west-trending, north-dipping, district-scale, low-angle detachment fault. West of Beatty, in the main Bullfrog district, the SBHF separates Proterozoic metamorphic rocks in the footwall from weakly metamorphosed Paleozoic sedimentary and Tertiary volcanic rocks in the hanging wall. East of Beatty, in the Bare Mountain sub-district, the same fault is called the Fluorspar Canyon Fault (“FCF”, Figure 2). The FCF cuts up-section from west to east such that in Fluorspar Canyon it separates Paleozoic sedimentary rocks (footwall) from brittle Tertiary volcanic rocks (hanging-wall). The FCF continues to cut up-section to the east until it eventually separates brittle Tertiary rocks (footwall) from brittle Tertiary rocks (hanging-wall) at Mother Lode. The magnitude of displacement along the SBHF-FCF appears to decrease from west to east across the greater Bullfrog district. The northward dip of the SBHF-FCF generally increases from west to east including: ~20^o north at the Bullfrog mine, 25-30^o north in lower Fluorspar Canyon, 45^o north at the Secret Pass mine, and 55-65^o northwest at Mother Lode.

Secondary structures of the BHFS include large-displacement, NNW- to NNE-trending, moderately to steeply west-dipping, down-to-the-west, normal faults. These faults accommodate the east-tilting of the Tertiary units throughout the Bullfrog and Fluorspar Hills. Hydrothermal alteration and gold mineralization are often spatially associated with these large-displacement faults. Such faults are expected to have listric shapes at depth. The MP fault, which hosts the Bullfrog vein at the Bullfrog mine, is an example of a listric fault. Another example is the Contact Fault, which truncates the north side of the Montgomery-Shoshone deposit. The Contact fault also hosts low-grade mineralization under Rhyolite Valley. The Road Fault at the NBP is the northern continuation of the Contact Fault. Such faults are interpreted to sole into the SBHF-FCF detachment fault at depth.

Figure 2 Regional Geology of the Greater Bullfrog District

The long period of syn-volcanic extension in the western SWNVF between ~15-9.4 Ma (depending on location) includes at least two periods of accelerated extension documented in the Bullfrog and Fluorspar Hills. Regional work has identified a major period of extension between ~12.7 Ma and 11.6 Ma culminating with the eruption of the Timber Mountain Group ash-flows between 11.6 and 11.45 Ma. Evidence for this period of extension lies west of Mother Lode where the 12.7 Ma Tiva Canyon Tuff is tilted up to 45^o east, but the nearby 11.6 Ma Rainier Mesa Tuff is essentially horizontal. Block rotation of up to 45^o is documented between 12.7 and 11.6 Ma in the Fluorspar Hills. Mineralization at Mother Lode is coincident with the onset of this period of accelerated extension. Regional work postulates a second period of accelerated extension between 11.4 Ma and 10.5 Ma, which resulted in major block rotation, rapid erosion and the deposition of the Rainbow Mountain Debris Flow Sequence. In the Mayflower area, the base of the Rainbow Mountain Debris Flow Sequence is tilted as much as 55^o east, whereas the top of the sequence is tilted only 25^o east. Block rotation of up to 30^o is documented in this area while the Mayflower basin was filling with debris. In the southern Bullfrog Hills east of Rainbow Mountain, the 11.45 Ma Ammonia Tanks tuff is tilted as much as 70^o east, whereas the base of the overlying Rainbow Mountain sequence is tilted only 35^o east. The block rotation of 35^o is documented in this area between 11.4 and 10.5 Ma. Extensional faulting continued through ~9.5 Ma, with an additional 25^o of eastward rotation of the Rainbow Mountain Sequence. Extensional faulting ceased in the Bullfrog Hills prior to the eruption of the relatively flat-lying 9.4 Ma Pahute Mesa Tuff. The 10 Ma age of Bullfrog and Mayflower mineralization and the 9.5-10.2 Ma age of the Eastern Steam-heated Zone at NBP coincide with the culmination of extensional tectonism in the Bullfrog Hills.

Extensional faulting in the Bullfrog and Fluorspar Hills created fault-bounded sedimentary basins which filled with basement- and volcanic-derived sediments (e.g. the Sedimentary Rocks of Joshua Hollow, the Jolly Jane Formation, and the Rainbow Mountain Debris Flow Sequence). During younger periods of extension, older normal faults in the hanging-walls of large-displacement listric faults may have experienced significant reactivation and subsequent eastward rotation, such that they may exhibit relative reverse displacement.

MLP Geology

The stratigraphy of the Fluorspar Hills has been described in pamphlets that accompany published geologic maps. The local stratigraphy at MLP has been refined by Corvus based on pit mapping and exploration drilling. Brief descriptions of units present in the MLP area are given in the following descriptions. Figure 3 is a simplified geologic map of the Mother Lode deposit area.

Due to the position of the main claim block, surface exposures of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks are limited at the MLP (Figure 3). The Paleozoic rocks encountered in drilling are differentiated only by lithofacies. The lithofacies-based units are informally correlated to major Paleozoic units, and interpreted as separated by thrust faults. The most abundant lithology is a thick sequence of light to medium grey massive dolomite (Psd), which correlates with the Silurian Lone Mountain Dolomite. Overlying the dolomite in drill holes and in outcrop south of the Mother Lode pit is a heterogeneous siliciclastic sequence (Psq) dominated by quartzite with lesser dolomitic quartz sandstone, sandy dolomite, and sandy limestone. The Psq sequence is interpreted to be a highly attenuated, dismembered thrust slice including Eureka Quartzite, Antelope Valley Limestone and possibly other Ordovician through Devonian lithologies. The Psq unit structurally overlies Psd along a thrust fault identified herein as the SNA thrust fault (Figure 3). Overlying the Psq sequence is another dismembered sequence dominated by black siliceous graphitic argillite with lesser dark grey limestone and dolomite (Pss). Lithologies of the Pss sequence resemble Mississippian and Devonian lithologies exposed in the Joshua Hollow area south of Mother Lode. The Pss sequence is interpreted to be a dismembered thrust slice overlying Psq along a second thrust fault identified herein as the Joshua thrust.

Despite variations in thickness, the Paleozoic stratigraphy described above is recognized consistently in reverse circulation drill holes at Mother Lode. The SNA thrust places older Ordovician(?) rocks over younger Silurian rocks. The Joshua thrust places younger Devonian and Mississippian(?) rocks over older Ordovician(?) rocks. Both thrust faults appear to dip moderately to gently east. Paleozoic sedimentary rocks, primarily Psd, host 18% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

The age of the platy, silty carbonate rocks in the southeast corner of the Mother Lode pit has been the subject of much debate by previous workers. The well-indurated and variably folded nature of the platy rocks suggests they are older pre-Tertiary rocks. Based on Corvus drilling, the platy rocks overlie Tertiary volcaniclastic and conglomeratic sediments. The current interpretation is that these platy rocks are indeed Tertiary in age and are assigned to the Sedimentary Rocks of Joshua Hollow. If the platy rocks can be determined through micro-fossil work to be pre-Tertiary, then this exposure would be interpreted as a gravity slide block of older Paleozoic rocks shed into the SRJH basin.

The Sedimentary Rocks of Joshua Hollow (SRJH) comprise a heterogeneous sedimentary sequence subdivided into five lithofacies units including: 1) older tuffaceous sediments (Tjs1); 2) conglomerate (Tjc); 3) volcaniclastic sandstone (Tjvs); 4) grey welded tuff (Tjt); and 5) fine-grained carbonaceous sediments (Tjs). The stratigraphic order is generally ascending, but the subunits typically inter-finger with each other laterally and are locally repeated vertically. There is substantial lithologic variability in the SRJH between drill holes. The SRJH are collectively up to 150 metres thick in the Mother Lode area. Tjvs and Tjs comprise the bulk of the SRJH sequence, and are the only sub-units exposed in the Mother Lode pit. Tjc, Tjvs and Tjs comprise a generally fining-upward sequence deposited in a local Tertiary basin marginal to the ancestral Bare Mountain structural high. The SRJH were originally named for sparse recessive exposures south of Mother Lode in lower Joshua Hollow. The age of the SRJH is unknown, but pre-dates the 14 Ma quartz-porphyry rhyolite dike swarm of eastern Bare Mountain. The SRJH are considered time-stratigraphic equivalents of the Tr1 sediments in the southern Bullfrog Hills (>14 Ma). It is possible that the lower SRJH includes sediments as old as Oligocene. All subunits of the SRJH are known to be mineralized at Mother Lode. The SRJH hosts 40% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

The basal sedimentary sequence includes variegated pink, light green and light brown tuffaceous siltstone, fine tuffaceous sandstone, and tuffaceous-conglomeratic sandstone. When present, Tjs1 lies unconformably on Paleozoic rocks along the basal Tertiary unconformity. Thickness varies from 0-30 metres in drill holes, suggesting the unit was deposited on an erosional unconformity of significant relief or may have been subjected to erosion. Tjs1 is not known to crop out anywhere in the Mother Lode area. Tjs1 is distinctive from the overlying Tjvs and Tjs sub-units, suggesting that it was derived from a different provenance area. Tjs1 may be, in part, a time-stratigraphic equivalent of the Oligocene Titus Canyon Formation recognized elsewhere in the Bullfrog district.

Figure 3 - Simplified Geologic Map of the Mother Lode Area

Overlying and interbedded with Tjs1 is a distinctive siliceous to locally calcareous conglomerate unit. The unit includes fine to coarse angular lithic gritstone, gritty pebble conglomerate and coarse pebble to cobble conglomerate. Tjc contains clasts of a variety of Paleozoic sedimentary lithologies including chert, quartzite, dolomite, limestone, sandstone and siltstone. Tjc also contains clasts of Mesozoic (?) granitoid rocks, Tjs1 lithologies, and minor Tertiary volcanic rocks. Where Tjs1 is absent, Tjc conglomerate lies directly on Paleozoic rocks along the basal Tertiary unconformity. Tjc often contains conspicuous rounded, broken, deformed and healed Paleozoic clasts that resemble those found in conglomerates mapped as Titus Canyon Formation elsewhere in the Bullfrog district. Tjc varies in thickness from 0-30 metres, apparently being deposited in channels along an unconformity of significant relief. Because of their inter-fingering nature, Tjc and Tjs1 have been lumped together as a single unit for the purpose of geologic modeling. The combined Tjc-Tjs1 units host 5% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

Overlying and locally interbedded with Tjc are intervals of fine to coarse, bedded to non-bedded, calcareous and siliceous volcaniclastic sandstone. Tjvs sandstone typically exhibits an equigranular salt and pepper texture as a result of detrital grains of white feldspar, black biotite, minor grey quartz, and small black carbonaceous lithic fragments. Highly irregular rip-up clasts of carbonaceous Tjs up to 20 centimetres are common within the volcaniclastic sandstones. The drilled thickness of individual sandstone intervals varies from <1 to >30 metres. Volcaniclastic sandstone is interpreted as channel-filling debris derived predominantly from Tertiary volcanic rocks. Tjvs is well-mineralized where it exhibits the light grey color of strong illite-pyrite alteration. Tjvs hosts 18% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

A distinctive light grey welded tuff subunit has been recognized in a few of the northeastern-most drill holes. The tuff is similar in color and composition to the volcaniclastic sandstone but exhibits a welding fabric defined by white flattened pumice clasts. The tuff subunit varies in drilled thickness from 10 to 30 metres. It generally occurs in the lower portion of the SRJH and is expected to thicken to the northeast in future drilling. Tjt is mineralized in every hole that it has been recognized. Tjt may prove to be a significant mineralized marker unit in future drilling. The grey welded tuff currently hosts <1% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

Fine grained carbonaceous sediments comprise the bulk of the upper portion of the SRJH. Lithofacies include variably carbonaceous, mostly calcareous to locally siliceous, laminated mudstone and siltstone, massive or flaser-bedded water-lain tuff, and variably argillaceous laminated lacustrine limestone (i.e. marl). Carbonaceous sediments are commonly interbedded with lenses of Tjvs volcaniclastic sandstone. The drilled thickness of individual intervals of Tjs varies from 10-50 metres within the SRJH. Some of the highest grades in the Mother Lode deposit are hosted in Tjs carbonaceous sediments. Tjs hosts 17% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

The Lithic Ridge Tuff is recognized by Corvus geologists as a distinct stratigraphic unit in drill holes and on the north high-wall of the Mother Lode pit. The tuff had been erroneously logged by previous operators as a xenolith-rich porphyritic dacite intrusive phase. The Lithic Ridge Tuff consists of poorly to moderately welded, generally lithic-rich, quartz-biotite-feldspar-bearing ash-flow tuff. Lithic content varies from <5 to 20+%, including common green altered porphyritic dacite clasts and a variety of Paleozoic clasts. The Lithic Ridge Tuff overlies the upper beds of the SRJH along an irregular mixed contact zone, suggesting a significant volume of SRJH soft sediments were ripped-up into the base of Tlr as it was being deposited. The Lithic Ridge Tuff is a well-known regional ash-flow unit of the SWNVF dated at 14 Ma Tlr is ubiquitously hydrothermally altered, sulphidized and locally mineralized in the Mother Lode deposit area. Tlr hosts 4% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the Mother Lode assay database.

Rhyolite porphyry dikes in the Mother Lode area are part of a NNE-trending, west-dipping swarm of hydrothermally altered dikes that intrude pre-Tertiary rocks for over 14 kilometres along the eastern flank of Bare Mountain. The dikes at Mother Lode comprise the northernmost exposures of the dike swarm, and the only exposures known to intrude Tertiary rocks. The dikes form somewhat tabular to highly irregular, discontinuous bodies in both the hanging wall and footwall of the Fluorspar Canyon Fault. Where relatively unaltered, the rhyolite has an aphanitic to granophyric groundmass with phenocrysts of quartz, plagioclase, sanidine, biotite and minor hornblende. Quartz, biotite and plagioclase phenocrysts >5 mm are common. Where intensely altered and mineralized, the groundmass is replaced by a mixture of illite-smectite. Mafic minerals are progressively altered to chlorite and replaced by pyrite in mineralized rhyolite. Feldspars are altered to calcite, illite, or adularia. Rhyolite porphyry dikes have yielded age dates ranging from 14.4 to 13.8 Ma with an accepted average age of ~14 Ma. An interpretation from new drilling at Mother Lode is that rhyolite dikes intrude the Lithic Ridge Tuff and may have formed a local lava flow overlying the Lithic Ridge Tuff. Dike emplacement and the eruption of the Lithic Ridge Tuff are closely related to magmatic activity at ~14 Ma. Tip is the dominant host lithology at Mother Lode, hosting 33% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the assay database.

A second sedimentary sequence has been recognized overlying the Lithic Ridge Tuff. The unit includes limonitic to carbonaceous, siliceous to calcareous, fine volcaniclastic sandstone and siltstone similar to Tjs and Tjvs. North of the Mother Lode pit, the Tys unit varies in thickness from 0 to 10 metres and increases to a maximum known thickness of 70 metres in ML 18-072 west of the pit. Tys is lumped in with Tlr in the geologic model. Tys is not known to be mineralized at Mother Lode.

The regionally extensive Crater Flat Group has been described to include the Tram Tuff (Tct) and Bullfrog Tuff (Tcb) members crop out to the northeast of Mother Lode and in Fluorspar Canyon. Neither tuff has been identified in-situ in the Mother Lode drilling area. The tuffs are similar in texture and composition, both being moderately crystal-rich welded tuffs that exhibit ubiquitous hydrothermal alteration. The younger Bullfrog Tuff has been dated at 13.25 Ma. The Bullfrog Tuff is the primary host unit at the Secret Pass Deposit.

In the Fluorspar Hills, the Paintbrush Group is comprised of two members: the 12.8 Ma Topopah Springs Tuff (Tpt), and 12.7 Ma Tiva Canyon Tuff (Tpc). The Paintbrush tuffs are typically reddish brown, aphanitic, phenocryst-poor and densely welded. Paintbrush tuffs are distinctly shard-rich and phenocryst-poor compared to other major ash flow tuffs of the SWNVF. The Paintbrush Group has an exposed thickness of nearly 600 metres north of the Secret Pass Deposit but is not recognized in the Mother Lode area. The contact between the underlying Bullfrog Tuff and basal vitrophyre of the Topopah Springs Tuff is well-exposed on the north high-wall of the Secret Pass Pit.

A substantial thickness of heterolithic debris flow breccia (Toxh) overlies the Tiva Canyon Tuff ~1.5 kilometres west of the Mother Lode deposit. Such breccias in the Mother Lode area are mapped as Tox (i.e. older breccia). The Tox unit is analogous to younger post-Rainier Mesa debris flow breccia deposits of the Rainbow Mountain Sequence at NBP. Tox is predominantly heterolithic but may locally contain monolithic breccias (Toxm) of rhyolite porphyry, SRJH, Lithic Ridge Tuff, or Crater Flat Group tuffs. Heterolithic debris flow breccias are generally non-bedded, very poorly sorted, and contain sand- to large boulder-size clasts of all older units. Tox exists only in the hanging wall of the FCF, where it unconformably overlies Tp, Tip, Tlr, Tys and SRJH. Tox is interpreted to have been deposited on an angular erosional unconformity of significant relief. Up to 150 metres of Toxh has been penetrated in the hanging-wall of the Fluorspar Canyon Fault west of the Mother Lode pit. Tox is interpreted as mass-wasted scarp breccias and alluvial fan deposits that have been shed off fault scarps, including the FCF, during the period of accelerated extension between 12.7-11.6 Ma. Based on stratigraphic relations, Tox is considered a post-mineral unit at Mother Lode (post-12.7 Ma), but it is also known to contain gold. The distribution of oxide gold mineralization in Tox suggests that the mineralization is detrital in nature, having been mass-wasted off the mineralized footwall of the FCF. Tox hosts 2% of the samples >0.2 g/t gold in the assay database.

The lower part of the Timber Mountain Group includes rhyolitic tuffs and lava flows that are known as the Pre-Timber Mountain tuffs (Tprt) and lavas (Tprr) respectively. These units are undated but occupy the stratigraphic position between the Paintbrush Group (or Tox, if present) and the large volume Timber Mountain tuffs. Tprt consists of light-colored, non-welded to bedded, lapilli rich, pumaceous lithic-rich crystal tuff. Tprt is up to 150 metres thick in the Mother Lode drilling area. Tprt appears to blanket paleo-topography cut on the Toxh debris flow sequence. Tprt was deposited during or just after the period of accelerated extensional tectonism associated with the deposition of Tox. Tprt is not known to be mineralized at Mother Lode but exhibits ubiquitous steam-heated alteration north and west of the deposit.

Tprt represents pyroclastic deposits associated with Tprr rhyolite volcanism. Tprr consists of aphanitic to fine porphyritic, massive to flow-banded, rhyolite lava flows (i.e. flow-dome complexes) at the Twisted Canyon and Sawtooth areas of MLP and at the Spicerite target areas at NBP. The rhyolite varies in appearance from relatively fresh, grey to black, glassy perlite or obsidian, to tan to pale green strongly devitrified zeolitic rhyolite. Tprr is not present in the Mother Lode area.

Regionally there are two large-volume ash flow sheets that comprise bulk of the Timber Mountain Group. These include the 11.6 Ma Rainier Mesa Tuff (Tmr) and 11.45 Ma Ammonia Tanks Tuff (Tma). The Timber Mountain tuffs are typically densely welded, crystal-rich ashflow tuffs, with 15-20+% phenocrysts of quartz, feldspar and biotite. The units can be distinguished from each other by the presence of sphene and bluish chatoyant sanidine phenocrysts in the Ammonia Tanks Tuff. In the Mother Lode area, the Rainier Mesa Tuff directly overlies steam-heated Tprt. The Rainier Mesa Tuff may overlie Tprr or Tp elsewhere in the district. The Rainier Mesa Tuff is sub-horizontal, relatively unaltered, and entirely post-mineral in the Mother Lode area. The Ammonia Tanks Tuff is recognized only at the Sawtooth target area.

Older unconsolidated gravel deposits of late-Miocene to Pliocene age occur at the Willy’s target area along the eastern rangefront area of Bare Mountain, and at the Twisted Canyon and Baileys Gap target areas on the east side of Oasis Valley (see Figure 2). The gravels form sub-horizontal terraces that are commonly, deeply incised. Underlying older rocks are often poorly exposed in the bottoms of incised ravines below the terrace gravels. The older gravels at the MLP are correlated to the Gravels of Sober-up Gulch on the west side of Oasis Valley at NBP. The thickness of Tgs is highly variable, but not expected to exceed 100 metres. An 8.2 Ma age for a tuff unit within the Gravels of Sober-up Gulch east of Bare Mountain has been reported.

The Mother Lode deposit is largely covered with unconsolidated Quaternary gravels. Quaternary gravels range in thickness from 1-20 metres in the Mother Lode drilling area. The Quaternary gravels are variably caliche-cemented and form stable vertical walls in the Mother Lode pit.

NBP Geology

The NBP is within the Walker Lane structural province and the Southwestern Nevada Volcanic Field (“SWNVF”). The Project lies approximately ten kilometres west of the western margin of the middle Miocene Timber Mountain caldera complex of the SWNVF and many of the volcanic units exposed on the NBP originated from the caldera complex. However, it appears that many of the most important host rocks to the mineralization are locally derived from what is now known as the NBH Volcanic Complex (“NBVC”) and are slightly older than the main ash flows erupted from the Timber Mountain Caldera. The region is underlain by Paleozoic sedimentary rocks which are the basement for the mid-Miocene tuffs and related rocks that are the hosts for most of the mineralization in the Bullfrog mining district. The region was subjected to extensional faulting which was contemporaneous with volcanism and localized sedimentary basins filled with reworked volcanic and basement debris developed as a result. Multiple episodes of extension have been documented. Most of the major fault zones have northerly strikes with normal displacement to the west. However, hanging wall antithetic faults are also present. Some of the major faults are interpreted to have listric shapes, similar to the main mineralizing fault at the Bullfrog mine, and likely sole into a district-scale detachment fault at depth. During younger periods of extension many of the older faults in the hanging walls of these listric structures have experienced significant rotation. Figure 4 is a geologic map of NBP showing target exploration and resource areas:

The NBH is underlain by pre-Tertiary basement rocks consisting of Precambrian to Cambrian sedimentary rocks of the Wood Canyon, Zabriskie and Carrara Formations. The basement rocks are exposed on the property in two prominent erosional windows. The pre-Tertiary windows are remnants of a basement structural high of significant relief upon which the Tertiary rocks were deposited. The basement rocks are overlain by a sequence of Miocene volcanic and lesser sedimentary rocks of the SWNVF.

The lowermost Tertiary rocks are known as the Jolly Jane Formation and consist of a basal conglomerate overlain by a sequence of heterogeneous sedimentary rocks including mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. The basal conglomerate is a time transgressive surface lag deposit which generally contains abundant clasts of pre-Tertiary basement rocks. The type locality for this unit is known from drilling in the Jolly Jane area and consists of up to 50 metres of heterogeneous sediments which appear to have been accumulated in a structural basin prior to and during the onset of volcanism. Sandstone, silt, shale and calcareous sediments are present with both black organic-rich and hematitic intervals also present. It is common to see tuffaceous sediments in the upper portions of the sand and shale sequences. The thickness and composition of the Jolly Jane Formation is highly variable, and is interpreted to have been deposited on a Tertiary erosional unconformity of significant relief.

The Jolly Jane Formation is overlain by the Savage Formation which consists of locally-sourced lava domes, flows and associated intrusive rocks of dacitic to rhyolitic composition. The Savage Formation also includes intercalated volcaniclastic intervals (re-worked dacite) and locally carbonaceous sediments. It is rather heterogeneous in terms of the thickness and the areal distribution of individual domes, flows and epiclastic intervals. The Savage Formation is only locally mineralized.

The Pioneer Formation rhyolitic pyroclastics overlie the Savage Formation dacites. The Pioneer Formation ranges from 10 to more than 200 metres in thickness and consists of monotonous lithic lapilli tuffs. In the northern parts of the NBP these tuffs are mixed with rhyolite domes of uncertain origin, however, dating shows that the tuffs and rhyolites are essentially the same age. Epiclastic sediments found at the top of the Pioneer Formation suggest that an angular unconformity is developed between this sequence and the overlying Sierra Blanca Tuff. The Pioneer Formation is extensively altered and hosts a large portion of the disseminated gold mineralization.

The Sierra Blanca Tuff is a large rhyolitic ash flow tuff that blankets the NBP. Unlike the preceding units, which appear to have been locally derived, the Sierra Blanca Tuff probably represents a regional ash flow eruption that came from outside the NBP. The Sierra Blanca Tuff varies in thickness from <70 metres at Jolly Jane to >160 metres at North Sierra Blanca. The tuff consists of a single cooling unit and is densely welded. The densely welded nature makes the rock brittle and, as a consequence, it is the most important host for both disseminated and vein style mineralization at the NBP.

Following the deposition of the Sierra Blanca Tuff, local volcanism continued with the deposition of the Savage Dacite, another locally-sourced sequence of lava domes, flows, pyroclastics and epiclastics of primarily dacitic composition. The Savage Dacite varies greatly in both thickness and composition, characterized by alternating eruptive cycles of geochemically different dacitic magmas. The Savage Dacite is only mineralized where it is in contact with significant fault structures.

Zircon dating shows that the entire sequence from Pioneer Formation through the Savage Dacite was deposited between 16.1Ma and 14.4Ma, making it among the oldest volcanic in the region.

Figure 4: Geologic Map of NBP Showing Target and Resource Areas and Legend of Geologic Symbols

The 13.5Ma Crater Flat Tuff, which consists of two regionally extensive ash flow cooling units, appears to overlie the Savage Dacite at both Savage Valley and Jolly Jane but the contact is not exposed at the surface. The Crater Flat Tuffs are extensively altered at both YellowJacket and Jolly Jane but no significant mineralization has yet been identified in these units.

The Rainbow Mountain Sequence is the most heterogeneous unit of the NBH. It consists of intercalated sequences of heterolithic and monolithic sedimentary debris flow breccias, large slide bocks derived from local volcanic and sedimentary units, as well as rhyolitic ash flows and rhyolite domes. The debris flow breccias are bedded but poorly sorted, consisting of sand – to large boulder-size clasts of predominantly volcanic rocks. Both gravity sliding and fluvial processes appear to have played a role in deposition. The volcanic debris is derived from many of the SWNVF units that are preserved as tabular ash flow tuff sheets elsewhere in the Bullfrog Hills. These include the Crater Flat Group, the Paintbrush Group and the Timber Mountain Group tuffs. The debris flow breccia deposits are largely the result of the re-working of the SWNVF units via gravity sliding and alluvial fan development around fault-bounded basement structural highs. The Debris Flow Breccia sequence represents a period of dynamic extensional faulting, scarp development and mass wasting. Massive, relatively intact blocks of monolithic breccias are interpreted as landslide megabreccia deposits that were shed off local fault scarps. Gold mineralization at Mayflower and Connection is hosted in the Rainbow Mountain Sequence. The thickness of this unit exceeds 300 metres in the Mayflower area.

Mineralization

MLP Mineralization

Mother Lode is characterized as a sediment, intrusive, and locally volcanic-hosted disseminated gold deposit. Mineralization most closely resembles Carlin-type sediment-hosted gold deposits of north-central Nevada. There is similarity to Carlin-type deposits and evidence for a large buried porphyry-type magmatic system associated with the rhyolite dike swarm at eastern Bare Mountain. The Mother Lode deposit formed at ~12.7 Ma, which is much younger than the typical ~40 Ma age in north-central Nevada. The nature of mineralization is rather passive and with very low introduction of secondary silica, suggesting it may have formed at a shallower depth and at lower temperature than typical Carlin-type deposits. Mineralization exhibits geochemical associations between Au and As-Sb-Hg-Tl-Te-Bi-F, with very low Ag and base metals.

The Mother Lode deposit model consists of structurally and stratigraphically-controlled disseminated gold mineralization hosted primarily in rhyolite porphyry dikes (Tip) and the Sedimentary Rocks of Joshua Hollow (SRJH). Lesser volume hosts include Paleozoic sedimentary rocks (Psd and Psq), Tertiary volcanic rocks (Tlr), and debris flow breccias (Tox). Mineralization in Tip, SRJH and Tlr is mostly sulphide, but may be oxidized depending on depth. Mineralization in Psd, Psq and Tox is mostly oxide. The current interpretation is that oxide mineralization in Tox is detrital, with mineralized rock having been mass-wasted as scarp breccias into the hanging-wall of the FCF. Paleozoic rocks are most commonly mineralized in proximity to dike margins but are also mineralized along subtle non-dike-filled structures and as pseudo-stratiform jasperoid bodies.

The primary structural control feeding mineralization at Mother Lode is a series of north-trending, 50-70^o west-dipping rhyolite dike-filled structures. Mineralization is both semi-tabular and highly irregular as fluids ascended along dike-filled structures in the underlying Paleozoic rocks, through the Tertiary unconformity, and expanded upward into the Tertiary section. Mineralizing fluids appear to have bled out laterally away from mineralized dikes into favorable permeable lithologies and secondary structures, including the FCF. Deeper drilling has extended the deposit to the west, where it appears that the FCF plays a significant role as a high-grade structural feeder (Figure 3). The potential for additional mineralized dikes in the vicinity of the FCF at depth to the west below current drilling is a highly attractive target.

Rhyolite dikes along the entire Bare Mountain swarm were subjected to high-temperature, sanidine- and biotite-stable alteration shortly after emplacement. At Mother Lode, biotite-stable alteration was followed by a lower temperature pervasive illite-smectite-pyrite event that affected both the dikes and surrounding wall rocks. The illite-smectite-pyrite event penetrates well up into the Lithic Ridge Tuff, forming a large sulphidation halo around the gold mineralization. Illite-smectite-pyrite alteration typically exhibits strongly elevated As, Sb and Tl, and may be well-mineralized or only anomalous in gold. The evidence suggests an early relatively barren illite-pyrite event is followed by an overprinting main stage Au-Te sulphidation event.

Trace element geochemistry associated with gold mineralization in drill hole samples includes: As (max 9262 ppm), Sb (max 1429 ppm), Te (max 16 ppm), Tl (max 17 ppm), Hg (max 30 ppm) and Bi (max 25 ppm). The elements with the strongest correlation to gold are tellurium and arsenic. Base metals are very low at Mother Lode. Elevated base metal values are largely associated with basement rocks. The presence of fluorite veining and a strong association between gold and fluorine has been reported at Mother Lode. Fluorine is not included in the multi-element analysis used by Corvus, but fluorite has been identified in the Mother Lode pit. Petrographic studies on sulphide concentrates from drill holes at Mother Lode identified growth zones in pyrite grains exhibiting concentrations of arsenic. It has been concluded that the Mother Lode deposit formed at a depth of 500-1000 metres or less, from gold-bearing fluids with temperatures between 200-240^oC. High-grade gold appears to be associated with remobilized carbon, particularly in Tjs and Tjvs in the upper portion of the deposit. Remobilized carbon appears to have accumulated in a blanket-like zone above the upper reaches of the rhyolite dikes.

Jasperoid in Paleozoic rocks appears to have both structural and stratigraphic control. Jasperoid intervals in drill holes commonly contain significant Ag values up to 100 ppm. The average Ag/Au ratio from jasperoid samples is 15:1. The average Ag/Au ratio in non-jasperoid Tertiary rock-hosted samples is <0.5:1. Jasperoid mineralization in Paleozoic rocks may be a separate mineralizing event that predates the main Mother Lode gold system. Jasperoid is typically oxidized and yields high cyanide shake leach recoveries.

NBP Mineralization

All of the mineralization at NBP can be classified as low-sulphidation epithermal mineralization. There are at least two and possibly three distinct periods of mineralization present. Older mineralization, before 11.2 Ma, is observed at the Sierra Blanca and Jolly Jane mineral resource areas. A younger mineralization, 10 Ma, occurs at the Mayflower mineral resource area.

In both mineralization periods, there are two styles of low suphidation gold/silver mineralization; (1) high-grade, fault controlled fissure veins, vein breccias and stockworks (Mayflower, Liberator, YellowJacket, Liberty and others), and (2) low-grade disseminated replacement deposits (Sierra Blanca, Jolly Jane and Mayflower). The low-grade, disseminated mineralization is currently the more abundant type at NBP.

Mineralization at Sierra Blanca can be classified into six different styles:

Pervasive disseminated mineralization occurs in the Pioneer Formation and Sierra Blanca Tuff over virtually the entire area at Sierra Blanca at 0.2-0.3 g/t gold grade. Oxidation of this mineralization extends locally to 200 metres and is associated with good cyanide leach metallurgical recovery. Fault hosted mineralization has been encountered in numerous locations (NS10, E30, NE40, NE50, NE60 and Savage Faults) with consistently higher gold grade (1-17 g/t) than the disseminated mineralization. Where oxidized, the fault zones respond well to cyanide leaching.

Quartz vein and stockwork mineralization occurs primarily in the YellowJacket deposit, a generally NW striking structural corridor along the eastern side of Sierra Blanca. The gold-bearing quartz vein and stockwork zones are generally gray translucent quartz with native gold and electrum, and varying amounts of acanthite or other silver sulphosalts. Metallurgical testing indicates the potential for high gold and silver recovery with cyanide leaching, both above and below the oxidation horizon.

The pervasive disseminated mineralization at Sierra Blanca and the Josh vein and stockwork mineralization at YellowJacket comprise approximately 84% of the gold resource at NBP.

Jolly Jane is located in the middle of NBP and virtually all of the geological elements common to NBP are found there. Disseminated mineralization occurs within the Sierra Blanc Tuff, which is thinner, approximately 70 metres as compared to a thickness of >160 metres at Sierra Blanca. The mineralized Sierra Blanca Tuff is preserved a horst between the West Jolly Jane Fault and the East Jolly Jane Fault. Gold grade is similar to Sierra Blanca disseminated mineralization with slightly lower cyanide leach recovery.

Younger, fracture controlled deposits at Mayflower and Pioneer were historically mined. The Mayflower Mine developed on a calcite vein and stockwork zone along a NW striking, steeply SW-dipping fault zone in silica-adularia-altered heterolithioc debris flow breccia in the Rainbow Mountain Sequence. Multiple high-grade gold areas have been identified, surrounded by low-grade mineralization. Mayflower mineralization is typically 0. 4-0.5 g/t and is well oxidized with good cyanide leach recovery.

Historical Exploration Work

The Bullfrog district is informally divided into three subdistricts: 1) Main Bullfrog {west of Beatty NV, along the Southern Bullfrog Hills Fault [SBHF] in Figure 2}; 2) North Bullfrog {west Oasis Valley in the northern Bullfrog Hills in Figure 2}; and 3) Bare Mountain {east of Beatty NV along the Fluorspar Canyon Fault [FCF] in Figure 2}. Figure 2 shows the modern (red) producing mines and the general areas of the subdistricts. Gold was first discovered in the main Bullfrog district by Frank “Shorty” Harris and Ernest Cross on August 9, 1904 at the location of the Original Bullfrog mine. The discovery sparked a rush of prospectors and within a few weeks the district was staked “for nine miles in all directions from the sagebrush flats, including part of the desert to the tip of every summit in sight”. District production is estimated at 111,805 ounces of gold and 868,749 ounces of silver between 1905 and 1921. The Montgomery-Shoshone mine was the most important mine in the district, operating between 1907 and 1910. A number of other small mines in the Main Bullfrog and North Bullfrog subdistricts contributed to the total reported production.

The Bare Mountain subdistrict is also known historically as the Fluorine district. Gold was first discovered on the east side of Bare Mountain in 1905 as prospectors flocked to the Beatty area after the discovery at Original Bullfrog mine. Gold was first discovered in Fluorspar Canyon in 1906 near the Daisy shaft. Unreported amounts of gold were produced from a number of small operations around Bare Mountain between 1907 and 1929. Gold prospecting led to the discovery of a number of fluorite vein deposits associated with gold mineralization including the Daisy (or Crowell), Goldspar and Mary mines. Daisy was by far the largest fluorspar mine producing 204,508 tons between 1919 and 1986. Fluorspar Canyon was named because of a number of fluorite occurrences in the Daisy area.

Mercury was discovered in 1908 at the Harvey (also known as the Telluride) mine on the northeast flank of Bare Mountain just one kilometer south-southwest of the Mother Lode deposit. The Harvey mine operated intermittently between 1912 and 1943 producing 72 flasks of mercury. Another mercury occurrence known as the Tip Top mine lies along the Flatiron jasperoid just 800 metres southwest of the Mother Lode deposit. The Tip Top mine has no documented production, but may have produced up to 100 flasks of mercury. The Harvey and Tip Top mines are known to have gold associated with cinnabar, but no reported gold production. Mercury was later discovered at the Thompson mine in 1929. The Thompson mine is located 5 kilometres northeast of Mother Lode, and is reported to have had only minor mercury production.

Ceramic grade high-purity silica was produced at the Silicon mine between 1919 and 1929, located 1.5 kilometres northwest of the Thompson mine.

Modern exploration for precious metals in the main Bullfrog subdistrict began as early as 1982, when geologists from St. Joe Minerals Corporation became interested in the Montgomery-Shoshone area. St. Joe Minerals conducted extensive exploration in the area of the Montgomery-Shoshone and Senator Stewart mines, resulting in the discovery of the Bullfrog vein deposit in 1987. Several company acquisitions resulted in Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”) being the final owner and operator of the mine. The Bullfrog mine produced gold and silver from three deposits including: 1) Bullfrog (open pit and underground); 2) Montgomery-Shoshone (open pit); and 3) Bonanza Mountain (open pit). Between 1989 and 1999, the Bullfrog mine produced 2.31 million ounces (“Moz”) of gold and 3.0 Moz of silver. The Gold Bar open pit mine, located 4 kilometres northeast of the Original Bullfrog mine, produced a small (unreported) amount of gold in the late 1980’s.

Modern exploration for precious metals in the North Bullfrog subdistrict began as early as 1974. There has been no reported modern production from the North Bullfrog subdistrict.

Modern exploration for precious metals in the Bare Mountain subdistrict began in the 1973 when Cordilleran Exploration Company (“Cordex”) staked claims in the Sterling mine area. Between 1973 and 1977, Cordex discovered and delineated bulk-tonnage sediment-hosted gold mineralization at the Sterling mine. In 1978, Cordex leased the Sterling property to Saga Exploration Company (“Saga”). Saga continued to explore the property, and in 1980 formed the Sterling Mine Joint Venture (“SMJV”). The SMJV began producing gold in April 1980.

Cordex explored the Paleozoic sedimentary rocks in Fluorspar Canyon starting in the mid-1970’s, focusing on gold mineralization associated with the fluorite occurrences. In 1979, U.S. Borax Incorporated (“US Borax”) (Pacific Coast Mines) staked the original BVC claims in the Fluorspar Canyon area. U.S. Borax was primarily interested in uranium, but recognized the potential for bulk-tonnage volcanic-hosted disseminated gold mineralization, and discovered the Secret Pass deposit in 1981. In 1985, Cordex entered into a joint venture agreement with U.S. Borax, and by 1989 had earned 100% interest in the U.S. Borax holdings, which would become the core of the Daisy mine property. In 1990-1991, Inter-Rock Gold, Inc. (“Inter-Rock”), through a series of transactions, acquired an option to earn 100% interest in the Daisy mine property, subject to a 25% back-in right to Cordex. Between 1985 and 1994, Cordex was involved in the discovery and delineation of two new sediment-hosted gold deposits at Daisy South and Daisy West, as well as expanding the Secret Pass deposit. In 1994, Inter-Rock had earned 100% interest in the Daisy mine property through the funding of ongoing exploration, and Cordex (now Rayrock Mines Inc. (“Rayrock”)) elected to exercise their back-in rights to hold 25% interest in the property. In 1995, the Mother Lode property was purchased by Rayrock from U.S. Nevada Gold Search Joint Venture (“USNGSJV”) and incorporated into the Daisy mine property. The Daisy mine partnership subsequently consisted of Rayrock as the operator (35%) and Inter-Rock as the majority owner (65%). The Daisy mine partnership began mining the Secret Pass and Daisy West deposits in late 1996 and ceased mining operations in late 1999. Inter-Rock sold all interest in the Daisy mine property back to Rayrock in 1998. Gold production from the Daisy leach pad continued into 2001.

Reported modern production of 351,744 ounces from Bare Mountain subdistrict has come from the following deposits: 1) 212,744 ounces produced at the Sterling mine (open pit and underground) between 1980 and 2015; 2) 104,000 ounces produced from the combined Secret Pass and Daisy West open pit mines between 1996 and 2001; and 3) 35,000 ounces produced from the Mother Lode open pit mine between 1989-1991.

The discovery and production history of the MLP is presented in the section below.

MLP History

In 1983, shortly after U.S. Borax had discovered the Secret Pass deposit, Galli Exploration Associates (“Galli”) which was later spun off as GEXA Gold Corporation (“GEXA”) in 1987, prospected and staked claims in the Mother Lode-Joshua Hollow areas east of Secret Pass. In 1985, Galli drilled 54 shallow holes in the Flatiron jasperoid area along the Fluorspar Canyon Fault. Mineralized intercepts were generally narrow, low grade, and confined to the fault zone. Galli geologists recommended drilling the pediment area where the Fluorspar Canyon Fault was projected to intersect a northwest-trending rangefront fault. The Mother Lode deposit was discovered in 1987 with drill hole ML-59, which intersected 47m (155 ft) of 1.7 g/t (0.049 ounces per ton) gold. GEXA also discovered the SNA deposit under pediment to the south of Mother Lode in 1987.

The Mother Lode deposit was delineated by drilling in 1987 and 1988. In 1988, GEXA formed USNGSJV with U.S. Precious Metals, Inc. and contract miner N.A. Degerstrom, Inc.. Mining of the Mother Lode deposit began in 1989. Between 1989 and 1991, the USNGSJV produced approximately 35,000 ounces of gold at Mother Lode at an average grade of 1.8 g/t gold. The bulk of the gold production came in 1990. Mining ceased in 1991 as oxide reserves were mined-out.

Rayrock purchased the Mother Lode property in 1995 from the USNGSJV; incorporating the Mother Lode and SNA deposit resources into the Daisy mine property. Rayrock continued to explore the Mother Lode-SNA area through 1997. Rayrock also intended to mine sulfide resources at Mother Lode as a part of their Daisy mine plan but a declining gold price in 1998 prohibited this development. Some mining development was done in the Mother Lode pit between 1998 and 1999, but no separate gold production was reported.

Glamis Marigold Mining Company (“Glamis”) acquired all of the assets of Rayrock in March 1999, including 100% interest in the Daisy mine property. Glamis continued limited gold recovery from the Daisy leach pad into early 2001. The majority of the Daisy mine property was dropped by Glamis in 2001 and 2002, and the Daisy Project began reclamation work. Glamis retained a small portion of the Daisy Project property including the 13 mining claims covering the Mother Lode mine area. Goldcorp USA, Inc. acquired all of the assets of Glamis in 2006, including the 13 claims at Mother Lode. The Mother Lode claims were transferred into Goldcorp Daisy LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Goldcorp USA, Inc.) in 2014. In May 2017, Corvus acquired Goldcorp Daisy LLC from Goldcorp USA, Inc. In 2017-2018, Corvus had staked 436 additional mining claims which comprise the current MLP land position shown in Figure 1.

In May 2016, Glamis was notified by the BLM that the BLM was closing the Plan of Operations and authorizing a reclamation cost estimate reduction of 100%. In June 2016, Goldcorp Daisy LLC received notification from the BMRR that all regulatory requirements for permanent closure of the Daisy mine had been met, and that the Water Pollution Control Permit was terminated. Goldcorp Daisy LLC was relieved of all obligations under Nevada Revised Statutes 445 A and the Nevada Administrative Code 445A. BMRR also concurred with the BLM’s decision and terminated the Reclamation Permit 0031 noting that all reclamation and surety liability associated with the permit had been successfully completed.

Sterling Gold Mining Corp began acquiring land and staking open ground in the Daisy-Secret Pass-Mother Lode area in 2005, and by 2007 had assembled a substantial land position at northern Bare Mountain covering all the former Daisy mine property and surrounding Glamis’ small Mother Lode claim block. The land position is currently owned by Coeur Mining Inc.

NBP History

The NBP is in the Bullfrog Mining District. Gold was discovered at what was to become the original Bullfrog mine by Frank “Shorty” Harris and Ernest Cross on August 9, 1904. Two periods of mining activity account for the majority of production from the District. It is reported that 111,805 ounces of gold and 868,749 ounces of silver were produced between 1905 and 1921, after which there was little production until the 1980s. In early 1982 geologists from St. Joe Minerals Corporation became interested in the District. They conducted extensive exploration in the area of the Montgomery-Shoshone and Senator Stewart mines, resulting in the discovery of the Bullfrog deposit in mid-1986. Several company acquisitions resulted in Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”) being the final owner of the mine. The Bullfrog mine produced gold and silver from three separate deposits including: 1) main Bullfrog (open pit and underground); 2) Montgomery-Shoshone (open pit); and 3) Bonanza Mountain (open pit). Between 1989 and 1999, it is reported that the Bullfrog mine produced 2.31 Moz of gold and 3.0 Moz of silver.

The early history of the NBP is comingled with the greater Bullfrog Mining District. The Pioneer and Mayflower were the principal mines in the northern part of the district. The Pioneer mine was most active between 1909 and 1926 with about 15,000 feet of underground workings, all being developed within 330-feet of the surface. There are no accurate production figures, but limited records suggest that head grades were about one quarter ounce of gold per ton. The Mayflower mine was probably active during the same time, but again there are no reliable production records. Underground development at Sierra Blanca, Jolly Jane, Savage Valley, and YellowJacket also attest to historic mining and production, probably during the same period.

Modern exploration started in the early 1970s and consisted of a number of companies with focuses on different parts of the property. These programs consisted of a variety of activities including surface mapping and sampling, underground mapping and sampling, and drilling.

Between the early 1970s and the end of the Barrick exploration in the mid-1990s, approximately 249 rotary and reverse-circulation drill holes were drilled on the NBP.

With the downturn in gold price at the start of the 21^st Century, interest in the NBP was essentially nonexistent. Redstar became attracted to the North Bullfrog area in late 2005, and started staking claims and acquiring leases on patented mining claims. In March 2007, Redstar granted ITH the right to earn an interest in the NBP and thereafter formed the NBPJV. In December 2007 ITH completed a lease of the Mayflower property, which was included in the NBPJV. Following the execution of the NBPJV agreement, ITH commenced active exploration on the NBP. In October 2008, Redstar completed a lease of the Connection property, which was also included in the NBPJV. On August 4, 2009, ITH purchased Redstar’s interests in the NBP and continued the exploration program as sole owner/lessor. On August 26, 2010, ITH spun out Corvus as a separate public company in a transaction which resulted in Corvus owning Corvus Nevada, through which all interest in the NBP was held, thus resulting in Corvus indirectly acquiring all of the interest in and responsibilities for the NBP.

Updated NBP-MLP Mineral Resources

Corvus has prepared the following Mineral Resource Estimates in accordance with the disclosure obligations in NI 43-101 and in accordance with the CIM Definition Standards. There have been historic resource estimates at MLP, within the context of NI 43-101, including actual mine production. In addition to NBP Resource Estimates, this report is the first Mineral Resource estimate at MLP since the adoption of NI 43-101. Project mineral inventories are reported at various cut-off-grades and classifications.

Vulcan^® Software was used to estimate and quantify the Project Mineral Resources. Vulcan^® software utilizes a block modeling approach to represent the deposit as a series of 3-D blocks to which grade attributes, and other attributes can be assigned. Mineral inventories have been pit-constrained using Whittle^® in order to demonstrate the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction. General statistics and geostatistics were evaluated using GSLIB^®, Sage2000^®, Rockworks^® Utilities, Excel and a variety of internally developed programs. Maps, cross sections, project layout and other visual aides were evaluated with Vulcan^® and ArcGIS^®.

The evaluation of Mineral Resources for the NBP-MLP Project involved the following procedures:

Table 3 summarizes the Mineral Resources, classified according to CIM definitions, for the Project. Reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, defined in this section of the report, assume open pit mining, run-of-mine heap leach processing of oxide mineralization, mill processing of un-oxidized mineralization or mill processing of gravity separable gold and silver.

Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. Numbers may not add up due to rounding. There are no known environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political, or other relevant factors that may materially affect the Mineral Resource estimate in this report. The Qualified Person for the Mineral Resource Estimate is Scott Wilson.

Table 3 Mother Lode and North Bullfrog, Pit-constrained, Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources at Gold Selling Price of USD $1,250 per Ounce (Effective date September 18, 2018)

* - Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors: The above table uses the terms “mineral resource,” “measured mineral resource,” “Indicated mineral resource”, “measured and indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource”. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of a mineral deposit in the above categories will ever be converted into SEC Industry Guide 7 compliant reserves. MLP and NBP do not contain SEC Industry Guide 7 compliant reserves and the properties are exploratory in nature. See “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources and Proven and Probable Reserves” above.

NBP-MLP Project Development Activities

Mother Lode Metallurgical Test Program

Metallurgical test work had been performed during the historical mining at Mother Lode and Daisy Projects during the period 1987-1999. Both of those projects had focused on mining of oxidized mineralization and historical metallurgical testing data was available, as well as production histories on gold recovery from the heap leach facilities. Both projects had recognized the existence of substantial sulphide mineralization that was not amenable to heap leaching and had performed preliminary studies on BioOx as a potential technology to allow processing of the sulphide mineralization.

During 2018, fresh materials from core and field duplicates from the MLP RC drilling were obtained and composites developed for oxide material, two sulphide materials, and for comminution tests. The sulfide materials were predominantly associated with the two different geologic units; Tip1 – a porphyritic rhyolite intrusive, and Tjvs – sediments of Joshua Hollow.

The 2018 test program took place at McClelland Laboratories, Inc., Hazen Research, Inc. and Resource Development, Inc.

Three metallurgical composites were prepared from drill hole reject samples to represent oxide material, sulfide material, type Tip1, and sulfide material type Tjvs. The samples comprising these composites were RC drill duplicate samples and were nominally minus 6.3 mm (1/4" in.) size.

Two additional composites were prepared for comminution testing. The samples were half-HQ core, nominally 25.4 mm (1") diameter in size.

A separate set of 52 oxide samples were investigated for preg-rob assaying, as well as a series of bottle roll tests to demonstrate CN gold recovery.

McClelland Laboratories completed:

Additionally,

NBP Activities

Monitoring programs to develop baseline characterization data for support of future permitting activities continued during the period. Water quality monitoring wells and surface springs were sampled in July and December 2018, and in May and June 2019.

The required annual Noxious Weed survey was reported in November 2018, and the survey results did not indicate the presence of any noxious weed at the NBP site. The survey is performed annually and inspects the areas previously disturbed by Corvus exploration activities. The 2019 survey was conducted in June 2019 and results are pending.

The Company operated a meteorological monitoring station at NBP and submitted quarterly reports to the NDEP in September 2018, January 2019 and April 2019.

The Sarcobatus water rights have been renewed for the 2018-2019 period. Quarterly pump tests have been performed and the production volumes reported to Nevada Division of Water Resources. A temporary change of use to mining application was granted by the Nevada Division of Water Resources in 2018. The extraction point of 80 acre-feet of the water was transferred to the NBP to support future exploration operations, and a production water well was drilled in the northwest corner of the NBP, in the Sarcobatus Basin. A tank farm installed to support drilling operations during 2019.

MLP Activities

Baseline data collection work to support the preparation of an EA for an expanded exploration project at Mother Lode was completed during 2019. The EA document and Plan of Operations documents were submitted for review in November 2018. Additional field survey information was required and was collected in April 2019, and revised EA and Plan of Operations documents were submitted to BLM in July 2019.

A Right-of-Way application for use of the existing roads between the MLP site and the existing water wells was submitted to BLM in July 2019.

The historic Mother Lode water production well MW-4 was surveyed by video camera in November 2018 and found to be in serviceable condition. Pumping equipment was installed in November and approximately 6000 gallons of water was produced at a rate of 110 gpm. Historic well MW-3 was re-completed in January 2019. A video log of well PW-2 was performed in January 2019 and indicated that the well was in good condition. The re-completion of PW-2 is planned for December 2019. Completion reports were submitted to Nevada Division of Water Resources.

Planned Exploration Work 2019-2020

Exploration drilling was moved from Mother Lode to North Bullfrog in May 2019. Drilling will performed between May-October 2019 on the Cat Hill, Japeroid, YellowJacket and Deep Rhyolite targets. Following completion of the NBP drilling, the drilling rig will be moved back to the MLP in October 2019 for further exploration.

Exploration Budget 2019-2020

The Company currently projects an exploration expenditure of USD 1.7 million during the 12 months beginning June 1, 2019.

Qualified Person and Quality Control/Quality Assurance

Jeffrey A. Pontius (CPG 11044), a qualified person as defined by NI 43-101, has supervised the preparation of the scientific and technical information that forms the basis for the disclosure in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (other than the Mother Lode mineral resource estimate) and has reviewed and approved the disclosure herein. Mr. Pontius is not independent of the Company, as he is the Chief Executive Officer and President and holds common shares and incentive stock options in Corvus.

Carl E. Brechtel (Colorado PE 23212, Nevada PE 008744 and Registered Member 353000 of SME), a qualified person as defined by National Instrument 43-101, has coordinated execution of the technical work and has reviewed and approved the disclosure in this Annual Report on Form 10-K related thereto. Mr. Brechtel is not independent of the Company, as he is the Chief Operating Officer and holds Common Shares and incentive stock options in Corvus.

The work programs at the NBP and MLP were designed and supervised by Mark Reischman, Corvus Gold’s Nevada Exploration Manager, who is responsible for all aspects of the work, including the quality control/quality assurance program. On-site personnel at the project log and track all samples prior to sealing and shipping. Quality control is monitored by the insertion of blind certified standard reference materials and blanks into each sample shipment. All resource sample shipments are sealed and shipped to American Assay Laboratories in Reno, Nevada, for preparation and assaying.

Assaying for the NBP and MLP holes has been performed by American Assay Laboratories (“AAL”) in Sparks, Nevada. Corvus has no business relationship with AAL beyond being a customer for analytical services. The Sparks laboratory is Standards Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario Accredited Laboratory No. 536 and conforms with requirements of CAN-P-1579, CAN-P-4E (ISO/IEC 17025:2005).

Check assaying has been performed by Bureau Veritas North America (“BV”, formerly Inspectorate America Corporation), in Sparks Nevada and Vancouver, Canada, and ALS Minerals Laboratories (“ALS Minerals”), in Sparks, Nevada. Corvus has no business relationship with BV or ALS Minerals beyond being a customer for analytical services. The BV laboratory is Accredited Laboratory No. 720 and conforms to requirements of CAN-P-1579, CAN-P-4E (ISO 9001:2008) and ALS is Accredited Laboratory No. 660 and conforms to requirements of CAN-P-1579, CAN-P-4E (ISO/IEC 17025:2005).

Mr. Scott E. Wilson, CPG (10965), Registered Member of SME (4025107) and President of Resource Development Associates Inc., is an independent consulting geologist specializing in Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource calculation reporting, mining project analysis and due diligence evaluations. He has acted as the Qualified Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the Mineral Resource estimate and the Technical Report. Mr. Wilson has over 29 years of experience in surface mining, resource estimation and strategic mine planning. Mr. Wilson and Resource Development Associates Inc. are independent of the Company under NI 43-101. Mr. Wilson, a Qualified Person, has verified the data underlying the information disclosed herein by reviewing the reports of AAL and all procedures undertaken for QA/QC. All matters were consistent and accurate accordingly to his professional judgment. There were no limitations on the verification process.

For additional information on the NBP-MLP, including information relating to exploration, data verification and the Mineral Resource estimates, see the Technical Report, which is available under Corvus’ SEDAR profile at www.sedar.com and EDGAR profile at www.sec.gov. The Technical Report is referred to herein for informational purposes only and is not incorporated herein by reference. The Technical Report contains disclosure regarding Mineral Resources that are not Guide 7 compliant proven or probable reserves, see “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors Regarding Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources and Proven and Probable Reserves” above.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are not a party to any pending legal proceedings and, to the best of our knowledge, none of our Properties or assets are the subject of any pending legal proceedings as required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 103 of Regulation S-K.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Pursuant to Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act, issuers that are operators, or that have a subsidiary that is an operator, of a coal or other mine in the United States are required to disclose specified information about mine health and safety in their periodic reports. These reporting requirements are based on the safety and health requirements applicable to mines under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the “Mine Act”) which is administered by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”). During the fiscal year ended May 31, 2019, none of the Company’s or its subsidiaries’ properties or projects was subject to regulation by MSHA under the Mine Act and thus no disclosure is required under Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Price Range of Common Shares

The Common Shares are listed and posted for trading on the TSX under the symbol “KOR”. In the United States, the Common Shares are quoted for trading on OTXQX under the symbol “CORVF”. Any over-the-counter market quotations on the OTCQX reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not represent actual transactions.

As at August 8, 2019, there were 111,962,845 Common Shares issued and outstanding, and the Company had approximately 123 shareholders of record. On August 7, 2019, the closing price of the Common Shares as reported by the TSX was $2.16 and the closing bid price on the OTCQX was USD 1.62.

Dividends

Since its inception, Corvus has not paid any dividends. Corvus has no present intention of paying any dividends, as it anticipates that all available funds will be invested to finance the growth of its business. The Board will determine if and when dividends should be declared and paid in the future after taking into account many factors, including Corvus’ financial condition, operating results and anticipated cash needs at the relevant time. There are no restrictions which prevent Corvus from paying dividends.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

All sales of unregistered equity securities during the period covered by this report were previously reported in a Current Report on Form 8-K.

Repurchase of Securities

None

Equity Compensation Plan

The following summary information is presented as of May 31, 2019

2010 Incentive Stock Option Plan (“Plan”)

On July 8, 2010, the Company adopted a “rolling” stock option plan reserving, for the grant of incentive stock options, a maximum number of Common Shares equal to 10% of the issued Common Shares at the time of any stock option grant. The Plan was subsequently approved by the TSX (subject to approval of the shareholders) on July 28, 2010 and was approved by the shareholders on August 12, 2010. As required by the TSX, the Plan, incorporating certain amendments, was reapproved by the shareholders on October 29, 2013 and October 20, 2016. The Plan will require re-approval by the shareholders on or before October 20, 2019.

The Plan is intended as an incentive to enable the Company to attract and retain qualified directors, officers, employees and consultants of the Company and its affiliates, promote a proprietary interest in the Company and its affiliates among its employees, officers, directors and consultants, and stimulate the active interest of such persons in the development and financial success of the Company and its affiliates.

The Plan is administered by the Compensation Committee of the Board (“CC”). Options are granted by the Board based upon the recommendations of the CC. The following is a brief description of the Plan, which description is qualified in its entirety by the Plan.

Subject to the overall 10% limit described in 2 above, and the limitations on options to insiders as set forth above, there is no maximum limit on the number of options which may be granted to any one person.

Exchange Controls

Canada has no system of exchange controls. There are no Canadian restrictions specifically targeted to restrict the repatriation of capital or earnings of a Canadian public company to non-resident investors, and there are no laws in Canada or exchange restrictions specifically targeted to restrict the remittance of dividends, interest or other payments to holders of the securities of Corvus, other than Canadian withholding tax as described under “Certain Canadian Federal Income Tax Considerations for US Resident Holders” below.

Certain Canadian Federal Income Tax Considerations for US Resident Holders

The following is, as of the date hereof, a general summary of the principal Canadian federal income tax considerations under the Income Tax Act (Canada) and the regulations thereunder (collectively, the “Canadian Tax Act”) and the Canada-United States Tax Convention (1980), as amended (the “Convention”) generally applicable to a beneficial owner of Common Shares who at all relevant times: (i) is a resident of the United States for purposes of the Convention and a “qualifying person” within the meaning of the Convention; (ii) is neither resident nor deemed to be resident in Canada for purposes of the Canadian Tax Act; (iii) does not use or hold, and will not be deemed to use or hold, Common Shares in a business carried on in Canada; (iv) for purposes of the Canadian Tax Act deals at arm’s length with Corvus and is not affiliated with Corvus; and (v) holds the Common Shares as capital property within the meaning of the Canadian Tax Act (each such holder, a “US Resident Holder”). Generally, the Common Shares will be considered to be capital property to a US Resident Holder unless the US Resident Holder holds or uses such shares or is deemed to hold or use such shares in the course of carrying on a business of trading or dealing in securities or has acquired them or been deemed to have acquired them in one or more transactions considered to be an adventure in the nature of trade.

In some circumstances, persons deriving amounts from the Common Shares through entities that are fiscally transparent for United States federal income tax purposes (including limited liability companies) may be entitled to benefits under the Convention. US Resident Holders are urged to consult with their own tax advisors to determine their entitlement to benefits under the Convention based on their particular circumstances.

This summary is not applicable to a US Resident Holder: (a) that is a “financial institution” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act) for the purposes of the mark-to-market rules contained in the Canadian Tax Act; (b) that is a “specified financial institution” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act); (c) an interest in which would be a “tax shelter investment” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act); (d) that makes or has made a functional currency reporting election pursuant to Section 261 of the Canadian Tax Act; (e) that has entered into or will enter into, a “derivative forward agreement” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act) in respect of the Common Shares; (f) that receives dividends on the Common Shares under or as part of a “dividend rental arrangement” (as defined in the legislative proposals to amend the Canadian Tax Act released on July 31, 2015); or (g) that acquired Common Shares pursuant to an employee stock option. Moreover, this summary does not apply to a US Resident Holder: (i) that is an insurer that carries on an insurance business in Canada and elsewhere; (ii) that is an “authorized foreign bank” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act); or (iii) that is subject to the proposed “treaty shopping” rule proposed in the 2014 Canadian federal budget released on February 11, 2014.  Such US Resident Holders should consult their own advisers.

This summary is based upon the current provisions of the Canadian Tax Act in force as of the date hereof, the current provisions of the Convention, and counsel’s understanding of the current published administrative policies and assessing practices of the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”). This summary does not anticipate or take into account any changes in law or in the administrative policies or assessing practices of the CRA, whether by legislative, governmental or judicial decision or action, except only the specific proposals to amend the Canadian Tax Act publicly announced by or on behalf of the Minister of Finance (Canada) prior to the date hereof (the “Tax Proposals”). This summary assumes that the Tax Proposals will be enacted in the form proposed. This summary does not take into account provincial, territorial or foreign income tax legislation or considerations, which may differ significantly from the Canadian federal income tax considerations discussed herein. No assurances can be given that the Tax Proposals will be enacted as proposed or at all, or that legislative, judicial or administrative changes will not modify or change the statements expressed herein.

This summary is not exhaustive of all possible Canadian federal income tax considerations applicable to an investment in Common Shares. The following summary is of a general nature only and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed to be, legal or income tax advice to any particular US Resident Holder. US Resident Holders should consult their own income tax advisors with respect to the tax consequences applicable to them based on their own particular circumstances. This summary is qualified accordingly.

Taxation of Dividends

Under the Canadian Tax Act, dividends paid or credited, or deemed to be paid or credited, to a US Resident Holder on the Common Shares will be subject to Canadian withholding tax at a rate of 25% of the gross amount of such dividends unless the rate is reduced under the Convention. Under the Convention, a US Resident Holder that is entitled to the benefits of the Convention will generally be subject to Canadian withholding tax at a rate of 15% of the gross amount of such dividends. This rate is reduced to 5% in the case of a US Resident Holder that is the beneficial owner of the dividends and that is a company that owns beneficially at least 10% of the voting stock of Corvus. Under the Convention, dividends may be exempt from such Canadian withholding tax if paid to certain US Resident Holders that are qualifying religious, scientific, literary, educational or charitable tax-exempt organizations or qualifying trusts, companies, organizations or arrangements operated exclusively to administer or provide pension, retirement or employee benefits or benefits for the self-employed under one or more funds or plans established to provide pension or retirement benefits or other employee benefits that are exempt from tax in the United States and that have complied with specific administrative procedures.

Disposition of Common Shares

Generally, a US Resident Holder will not be subject to tax under the Canadian Tax Act in respect of any capital gain realized by such US Resident Holder on a disposition of Common Shares unless the Common Shares constitute “taxable Canadian property” (as defined in the Canadian Tax Act) of the US Resident Holder at the time of the disposition and the Common Shares do not constitute “treaty-protected property” to the US Resident Holder pursuant to the Convention.

Generally, as long as the Common Shares are then listed on a “designated stock exchange” as defined in the Canadian Tax Act (which currently includes the TSX), the Common Shares will not constitute taxable Canadian property to a US Resident Holder, unless at any time during the 60-month period immediately preceding the disposition of the Common Shares the following two conditions are met concurrently: (a) the US Resident Holder, persons with whom the US Resident Holder did not deal at arm’s length, a partnership in which the US Resident Holder or a non-arm’s length person holds a membership interest directly or indirectly through one or more partnerships, or the US Resident Holder together with such persons or partnerships, owned 25% or more of the issued shares of any class or series of the capital stock of Corvus; and (b) more than 50% of the fair market value of the Common Shares was derived directly or indirectly, from one or any combination of real or immovable property situated in Canada, “Canadian resource properties”, “timber resource properties” (each as defined in the Canadian Tax Act), and options in respect of or interests in, or for civil law rights in, any such properties (whether or not such property exists).

Even if the Common Shares are taxable Canadian property to a US Resident Holder, any capital gain realized on the disposition or deemed disposition of such Common Shares will not be subject to tax under the Canadian Tax Act if the Common Shares are “treaty-protected property”. Under the Convention, the Common Shares of a US Resident Holder will generally constitute “treaty-protected property” for purposes of the Canadian Tax Act at a particular time unless the value of the Common Shares at such time is derived principally from real property situated in Canada. For this purpose “real property” has the meaning that term has under the laws of Canada and includes any option or similar right in respect thereof and usufruct of real property, rights to explore for or to exploit mineral deposits, sources and other natural resources and rights to amounts computed by reference to the amount or value of production from such resources.

US Resident Holders should consult their own tax advisors as to whether their Common Shares constitute taxable Canadian property or treaty-protected property.

Certain U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations for U.S. Holders

There may be material tax consequences to U.S. Residents in relation to an acquisition or disposition of Common Shares or other securities of the Company. U.S. Residents should consult their own legal, accounting and tax advisors regarding such tax consequences under United States, state, local or foreign tax law regarding the acquisition or disposition of our Common Shares or other securities, in particular, the tax consequences of the Company likely being a "passive foreign investment company" (commonly known as a “PFIC”) within the meaning of Section 1297 of the United States Internal Revenue Code.  See the section “Item 1A. – Risk Factors - The Company is likely a “passive foreign investment company”, which will likely have adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences for U.S. shareholders” above.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Not Applicable

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements for the two years ended May 31, 2019 and 2018, and the related notes thereto, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions.  Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of many factors, including, but not limited to, those set forth under the section heading “Item 1A. Risk Factors” above and elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K.  See section heading “Forward-Looking Statements” above.

Current Business Activities

General

NBP and MLP Project Exploration

Drilling continued at the MLP during June 1, 2018 through April 8, 2019, with 48 holes completed for 19,241 m drilled. The drilling rig was then moved to the NBP for the remainder of the fiscal year on May 31, 2019, and a total of 9 holes for 2,625 m drilled.

Baseline characterization work continued in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2019, with water quality sampling in September and December 2018 and in January and June 2019. The site meteorological station continued to operate with quarterly reports submitted to NDEP. Wildlife and botanical surveys required by the site operating permits were performed as required, including Invasive Weed surveys and Wildlife surveys for baseline characterization at the MLP. Water sampling was begun at MLP at the water production well sites.

Further metallurgical testing of Mother Lode sulfide and oxide mineralization was initiated in April 2019 at Research Development Inc., SGS Canada and McClelland Laboratories.

Financing

On June 7, 2018, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement equity financing and issued 1,730,770 common shares at a price of $2.60 per share for gross proceeds of $4,500,002. The Company paid an additional $14,605 in share issuance costs.

In November 2018, the Company issued 4,036,900 common shares on the exercise of 4,036,900 stock options at an exercise price of $0.86 per stock option for net proceeds of $3,453,924.

On December 20, 2018, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement equity financing and issued 800,000 common shares at a price of $2.60 per common share for gross proceeds of $2,080,000. In connection with the financing, the Company paid an additional $10,242 in share issuance costs.

In April 2019, the Company issued 615,000 common shares on the exercise of 615,000 stock options at an exercise price of $1.40 per stock option for net proceeds of $861,000.

On June 5, 2019, the Company issued 500,000 common shares at a price of $1.80 per common share to EMX Royalty Corporation for gross proceeds of $900,000. The Company also completed the sale of the royalties where four non- core Alaskan royalty interest owned by Corvus was sold to EMX Royalty Corporation for a purchase price of $350,000.

2019 Outlook

During 2019-2020, drilling at the NBP will continue with drill testing of targets at Japeroid and north YellowJacket. Up to 8,500 m are planned for NBP. The drill rig is projected to move back to MLP in October 2019, to drill up to 5,200 m, including some pre-collared holes for up to 1,500 m of follow up coring.

The MLP water well PW-2 will be re-completed in late 2019.

Baseline characterization data will continue to be collected at NBP and MLP, including water quality samples, Invasive weed surveys and meterological data.

Results of Operations

Year ended May 31, 2019 Compared to Year ended May 31, 2018

For the year ended May 31, 2019, the Company had a net loss of $10,858,005 compared to a net loss of $9,298,163 in the prior year. Included in net loss was $1,633,957 (2018 - $673,233) in stock-based compensation charges which was a result of stock options granted during the year and previously granted stock options which vested during the year. Stock-based compensation in the current year comprised of stock options granted on September 15, 2016 and July 31, 2017 which vested during the year and stock options granted on November 19, 2018 and April 9, 2019. The prior year had stock-based compensation arising from stock options granted on September 9, 2015, November 13, 2015, June 22, 2016, September 15, 2016 and July 31, 2017 with vesting during the prior year. The increase in loss of $1,559,842 in the current year was due to a combination of factors discussed below.

The primary factor for the increase in net loss was the exploration expenditures of $5,636,641 incurred in the current year compared to $5,333,180 in the prior year. The exploration activities of the Company increased mainly due to an increase of $218,607 incurred in the exploration in the current year compared with the prior year as the Company secured additional financing throughout the year and focused its exploration efforts on the NBP-MLP and partly due to increased stock-based compensation charges of $140,318 during the current year compared to $55,464 in the prior year. Management expects increases in exploration costs over prior year are likely to continue in the immediate future year as the Company secured further financing in April and June 2019.

Consulting expenses increased to $1,054,967 (2018 - $625,677) mainly due to an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $728,748 during the current period compared to $306,510 in the comparative period of the prior year.

Insurance expenses increased to $213,548 (2018 - $201,415) mainly due to increased insurance premiums as a result of increased Director and Officer Liability coverage during the current year.

Investor relations expenses increased to $1,308,792 (2018 - $909,798) mainly due to an increase in advertising and marketing during the current period as part of the Company’s efforts to secure additional financing and financial advisory fees incurred. There is an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $218,853 during the current period compared to $92,351 in the comparative period of the prior year.

Office expenses decreased to $119,687 (2018 - $132,168) and rent expenses decreased to $74,529 (2018 - $99,440) mainly due to the Company moving its Denver office location in the comparative period of the prior year.

Professional fees increased to $376,322 (2018 - $261,428) due to the professional fees incurred for updating the tax model for the Technical Report and the adjustment of prior years’ audit overaccrual. The increase is also due to an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $12,051 during the current period compared to $7,332 in the comparative period of the prior year.

Regulatory expenses increased to $162,313 (2018 - $96,982) mainly due to an increase in share prices which resulted in an increase to the reporting issuer participation fee which is calculated based on share prices.

Travel expenses increased to $275,602 (2018 - $213,335) mainly due to more property tours conducted during the current period as part of the Company’s effort in securing additional financing throughout the year.

Wages and benefits increased to $1,782,198 (2018 - $1,302,813) mainly due to an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $533,987 during the current period compared to $211,576 in the comparative period of the prior year and an increase of $156,974 in wages and benefits in the current period mainly as a result of increase in wages and bonuses to the CEO and COO of the Company and as a result increase in corresponding employee expenses.

Other expense categories that reflected only moderate change year over year were administration expenses of $430 (2018 - $422), and depreciation expenses of $15,069 (2018 - $18,020).

Other items amounted to an income of $162,093 compared to a loss of $103,485 in the prior year. There was an increase in foreign exchange gain of $85,258 (2018 – loss of $123,758), which is the result of factors outside of the Company’s control and an increase in interest income of $76,835 (2018 - $20,273) as a result of less investment in cashable GIC’s during the prior year.

Three months ended May 31, 2019 Compared to Three months ended May 31, 2018

For the three months ended May 31, 2019, the Company had a net loss of $2,862,083 compared to a net loss of $2,184,520 in the comparative period of the prior year. Included in net loss was $671,809 (2018 - $164,368) in stock-based compensation charges which is a result of stock options granted during the period and previously granted stock options which vested during the period. Stock-based compensation in the current period comprised of stock options granted on July 31, 2017, November 19 2018 and April 9, 2019 which vested during the period. The prior period comparative had stock-based compensation arising from stock options granted on September 15, 2016 and July 31, 2017 which vested during the comparative period of the prior year. The increase in loss of $677,563 in the three month period of the current year was due to a combination of factors discussed below.

The primary factor for the increase in the net loss was the exploration expenditures of $1,418,450 incurred in the current period compared to $1,257,796 in the comparative period of the prior year. The exploration activities of the Company increased mainly due to an increase of $119,724 incurred in the exploration in the current period compared with the comparative period of the prior year as the Company secured more funding via exercise of stock options in April 2019 and focused its exploration efforts on the NBP-MLP and partly due to increased stock-based compensation charges of $55,228 during the current period compared to $14,298 in the comparative period of the prior year. Management expects increases in exploration costs over prior periods are likely to continue in the immediate future periods as the Company secured further financing in June 2019.

Consulting fees increased to $391,083 (2018 - $156,695) mainly due to an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $305,614 during the current period compared to $75,445 in the comparative period of the prior year.

Investor relations expenses increased to $305,952 (2018 - $293,503) mainly due to an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $88,177 during the current period compared to $22,534 in the comparative period of the prior year. The increase was offset by a decrease in investor relations-related travels due to timing of marketing trips.

Professional fees increased to $108,921 (2018 - $66,993) mainly due to an increase in the audit accrual and legal fees, and an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $4,518 during the current period compared to $1,821 in the comparative period of the prior year.

Regulatory expenses increased to $59,932 (2018 - $10,671) mainly due to an increase in the base and variable fee paid to the TSX in the current period.

Travel expenses increased to $87,263 (2018 - $49,375) mainly due to more property tours conducted during the current period as the Company’s efforts to secure additional financing.

Wages and benefits increased to $446,545 (2018 - $269,744) mainly due to an increase in stock-based compensation charges of $218,272 during the current period compared to $50,270 in the comparative period of the prior year.

Other expense categories that reflected only moderate change period over period were administration expenses of $107 (2018 - $106), depreciation expenses of $3,807 (2018 - $4,543), insurance expenses of $55,757 (2018 - $54,136), office expenses of $33,753 (2018 - $23,731) and rent expenses of $19,008 (2018 – $19,956).

Other items amounted to an income of $68,495 compared to an income of $22,729 in the prior period. There was an increase in foreign exchange to a gain of $46,601 (2018 – $15,023), which was the result of factors outside of the Company’s control and an increase in interest income of $21,894 (2018 - $7,706) as a result of more investment in cashable GIC’s during the current period.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

The Company has no revenue generating operations from which it can internally generate funds. To date, the Company’s ongoing operations have been financed by the sale of its equity securities by way of public offerings, private placements and the exercise of incentive stock options and share purchase warrants. The Company believes that it will be able to secure additional private placements and public financings in the future, although it cannot predict the size or pricing of any such financings. In addition, the Company can raise funds through the sale of interests in its mineral properties, although current market conditions have substantially reduced the number of potential buyers/acquirers of any such interest(s). This situation is unlikely to change until such time as the Company can develop a bankable feasibility study on one of its projects. When acquiring an interest in mineral properties through purchase or option, the Company will sometimes issue Common Shares to the vendor or optionee of the property as partial or full consideration for the property interest in order to conserve its cash.

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which presume the realization of assets and discharge of liabilities in the normal course of business for the foreseeable future. The Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon achieving profitable operations and/or obtaining additional financing.

In assessing whether the going concern assumption is appropriate, management takes into account all available information about the future within one year from the date the consolidated financial statements are issued.  There is substantial doubt upon the Company’s ability to continue as going concern, as explained below and in the financial statements.

The Company has sustained significant losses from operations, has negative cash flows and has an ongoing requirement for capital investment to explore its mineral properties.  Based on its current plans, budgeted expenditures, and cash requirements, the Company has sufficient cash to finance its current plans for the 18 months from the date the consolidated financial statement are issued.

The Company reported cash and cash equivalents of $4,145,085 as at May 31, 2019 compared to $2,610,541 as at May 31, 2018. The change in cash position was the net result of $9,401,728 used for operating activities, $47,318 used for capitalized acquisition costs, $1,769 used on property and equipment, and $10,863,867 received from the private placements of common shares in June 2018 and December 2018 (net of share issue costs), and exercise of stock options during the year ended May 31, 2019.

As at May 31, 2019, the Company had working capital of $4,204,082 compared to working capital of $2,562,047 as at May 31, 2018. On June 7, 2018, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement equity financing and issued 1,730,770 common shares at a price of $2.60 per share for gross proceeds of $4,500,002. During the second quarter of the year, an aggregate of 4,036,900 common shares were issued on the exercise of 4,036,900 stock options at an exercise price of $0.86 per stock option for net proceeds of $3,453,924. On December 20, 2018, the Company closed a private placement equity financing and issued 800,000 common shares at a price of $2.60 per common share for gross proceeds of $2,080,000. During the fourth quarter of the year, an aggregate of 615,000 common shares were issued on the exercise of 615,000 stock options at an exercise price of $1.40 per stock option for net proceeds of $861,000. On June 5, 2019, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement equity financing and issued 500,000 common shares at a price of $1.80 per share for gross proceeds of $900,000 and sold its non-core Alaska royalty interest for a purchase price of $350,000.

The Company expects that it will operate at a loss for the foreseeable future and believes the current cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient for it to maintain its currently held properties, and fund its currently anticipated general and administrative costs until February 2020. Following February 2020, the Company will need to scale back anticipated activities and costs or raise additional financing to fund operations through the year ending May 31, 2020. The Company’s current anticipated operating expenses are $5,240,000 until February 29, 2020 and $6,030,000 until May 31, 2020. The Company’s anticipated monthly burn rate averages approximately $582,000 for June 2019 to February 2020, where approximately $359,000 is budgeted for administrative purposes and approximately $223,000 is for planned exploration expenditures and holding costs for the NBP and the MLP. From June 2019 to May 2020, the Company’s anticipated monthly burn rate averages approximately $503,000, of which $328,000 is budgeted for administrative purposes and approximately $175,000 is for planned exploration expenditures and holding costs for the NBP and the MLP. In any event, the Company will be required to raise additional funds, again through public or private equity financings, prior to the end of February 2020 in order to continue in business. Should such financing not be available in that time-frame, the Company will be required to reduce its activities and will not be able to carry out all of its presently planned exploration and, if warranted, development activities at the NBP and the MLP on its currently anticipated scheduling.

Despite the Company’s success to date in raising significant equity financing to fund its operations, there is significant uncertainty that the Company will be able to secure any additional financing in the current or future equity markets. See “Risk Factors – We will require additional financing to fund exploration and, if warranted, development and production”. Failure to obtain additional financing could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operation and could cast uncertainty on our ability to continue as a going concern. The quantity of funds to be raised and the terms of any proposed equity financing that may be undertaken will be negotiated by management as opportunities to raise funds arise. Specific plans related to the use of proceeds will be devised once financing has been completed and management knows what funds will be available for these purposes. Due to this uncertainty, if the Company is unable to secure additional financing, it may be required to reduce all discretionary activities at the NBP and the Mother Lode Property to preserve its working capital to fund anticipated non-discretionary expenditures beyond the 2021 fiscal year.

The Company has no exposure to any asset-backed commercial paper. Other than cash held by its subsidiaries for their immediate operating needs in Alaska and Nevada, all of the Company’s cash reserves are on deposit with a major Canadian chartered bank. The Company does not believe that the credit, liquidity or market risks with respect thereto have increased as a result of the current market conditions. However, in order to achieve greater security for the preservation of its capital, the Company has, of necessity, been required to accept lower rates of interest, which has also lowered its potential interest income.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

The Company has no off-balance sheet arrangements.

Environmental Regulations

The operations of the Company may in the future be affected from time to time in varying degrees by changes in environmental regulations, including those for future removal and site restoration costs. Both the likelihood of new regulations and their overall effect upon the Company vary greatly and are not predictable. The Company’s policy is to meet or, if possible, surpass standards set by relevant legislation by application of technically proven and economically feasible measures.

Critical Accounting Policies

Basis of presentation

These consolidated financial statements are presented in Canadian dollars and have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“US GAAP”).

Basis of consolidation

These consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, the “Group”), Corvus USA (a Nevada corporation), Corvus Nevada (a Nevada corporation), Raven Gold (an Alaska corporation), SoN (a Nevada limited liability company) and Mother Lode Mining Company LLC (a Nevada limited liability company). All intercompany transactions and balances were eliminated upon consolidation.

Significant judgments, estimates and assumptions

The preparation of these financial statements in accordance with US GAAP requires management to make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and reported amounts of expenses during the reporting year. Actual outcomes could differ from these estimates. These financial statements include estimates which, by their nature, are uncertain. The impacts of such estimates are pervasive throughout the financial statements, and may require accounting adjustments based on future occurrences. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the year in which the estimate is revised and future periods if the revision affects both current and future years. These estimates are based on historical experience, current and future economic conditions and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.

Significant estimates

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty that management has made at the end of the reporting year, that could result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities, in the event that actual results differ from assumptions made, relate to, but are not limited to, the carrying value and the recoverability of the capitalized acquisition costs, the assumptions used to determine the fair value of stock-based compensation, and the estimated amounts of reclamation and environmental obligations.

Significant judgments

Critical accounting judgments are accounting policies that have been identified as being complex or involving subjective judgments or assessments. The Company made the following critical accounting judgments:

Cash and cash equivalents

Cash equivalents include highly liquid investments in term deposits that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash with original maturities of three months or less, and term deposits with original term of maturities greater than three months but are cashable after 30 days with no penalties, and are subject to an insignificant risk of change in value.

Foreign currency translation

The presentation currency of the Company is the Canadian dollar.

The functional currency of each of the parent company and its subsidiaries is measured using the currency of the primary economic environment in which that entity operates. The functional currency of Corvus USA, Corvus Nevada, Raven Gold, SoN, and Mother Lode Mining Company LLC is US dollars, and for the Company the functional currency is Canadian dollars.

Transactions and balances

Foreign currency transactions are translated into the functional currency using the exchange rates prevailing at the date of the transaction. Foreign currency monetary items are translated at the year-end exchange rate. Non-monetary items measured at historical cost continue to be carried at the exchange rate at the date of the transaction. Non-monetary items measured at fair value are reported at the exchange rate at the date when fair values were determined.

Exchange differences arising on the translation of monetary items or on settlement of monetary items are recognized in profit or loss in the Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss in the year in which they arise.

Exchange differences arising on the translation of non-monetary items are recognized in other comprehensive income (loss) in the Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss to the extent that gains and losses arising on those non-monetary items are also recognized in other comprehensive income (loss). Where the non-monetary gain or loss is recognized in profit or loss, the exchange component is also recognized in profit or loss.

Parent and Subsidiary Companies

The financial results and position of foreign operations whose functional currency is different from the presentation currency are translated as follows:

Exchange differences arising on translation of foreign operations are transferred directly to the Group’s exchange difference on translating foreign operations in the Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss and are reported as a separate component of shareholders’ equity titled “Cumulative Translation Differences”. These differences are recognized in profit or loss in the year in which the operation is disposed of.

Property and equipment

Recognition and measurement

On initial recognition, property and equipment are valued at cost, being the purchase price and directly attributable costs of acquisition or construction required to bring the asset to the location and condition necessary to be capable of operating in the manner intended by the Company, including appropriate borrowing costs and the estimated present value of any future unavoidable costs of dismantling and removing items.

Property and equipment is subsequently measured at cost less accumulated depreciation, less any accumulated impairment losses, with the exception of land which is not depreciated.

When parts of an item of property and equipment have different useful lives, they are accounted for as separate items (major components) of property and equipment.

Subsequent costs

The cost of replacing part of an item of property and equipment is recognized in the carrying amount of the item if it is probable that the future economic benefit embodied within the part will flow to the Company and its cost can be measured reliably. The carrying amount of the replaced part is derecognized. The costs of the day-to-day servicing of property and equipment are recognized in profit or loss as incurred.

Major maintenance and repairs

Subsequent costs are included in the asset’s carrying amount or recognized as a separate asset, as appropriate, only when it is probable that future economic benefits associated with the item will flow to the Company and the cost of the item can be measured reliably. All other repairs and maintenance expenditures are charged to profit or loss during the financial year in which they are incurred.

Gains and losses

Gains and losses on disposal of an item of property and equipment are determined by comparing the proceeds from disposal with the carrying amount, and are recognized net within other items in profit or loss.

Depreciation

Depreciation is recognized in profit or loss on a declining-balance basis at the following annual rates:

Additions during the year are depreciated at one-half the annual rates.

Depreciation methods, useful lives and residual values are reviewed at each financial year-end and adjusted if appropriate.

Mineral exploration and evaluation expenditures

The Company’s mineral projects are currently in the exploration and evaluation phase. All direct costs related to the acquisition of mineral property interests are capitalized. Mineral property exploration costs are expensed as incurred. At such time that the Company determines that a mineral property can be economically developed, subsequent mineral property expenses will be capitalized during the development of such property.

Impairment of long-lived assets

The Company assesses long-lived assets for impairment or when facts and circumstances suggest that the carrying amount of an asset may exceed its recoverable amount. Impairment analysis includes assessment of the following circumstances: a significant decrease in the market price of a long-lived asset or asset group; a significant adverse change in the extent or manner in which a long-lived asset or asset group is being used or in its physical condition; a significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate that could affect the value of a long-lived asset or asset group, including an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected for the acquisition or construction of a long-lived asset or asset group; a current-period operating or cash flow loss combined with a history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or forecast that demonstrates continuing losses associated with the use of a long-lived asset or asset group; a current expectation that, more likely than not, a long-lived asset or asset group will be sold or otherwise disposed of significantly before the end of its previously estimated useful life. The term more likely than not refers to a level of likelihood that is more than 50%.

Asset retirement obligations

The Company records a liability based on the best estimate of costs for site closure and reclamation activities that the Company is legally or contractually required to remediate at the time environmental disturbance occurs. The provision for closure and reclamation liabilities is estimated using expected cash flows based on engineering and environmental reports and accreted to full value over time through periodic charges to profit or loss. As at May 31, 2019, the Company recorded a provision of $419,286 (USD 309,000) (2018 - $366,641 (USD 283,000)) for environmental rehabilitation.

Income taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. Under the asset and liability method, the effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion or the entire deferred tax asset will not be realized.

Share capital

The proceeds from the exercise of stock options, warrants and escrow shares are recorded as share capital in the amount for which the option, warrant or escrow share enabled the holder to purchase a share in the Company.

Commissions paid to agents, and other related share issuance costs, such as legal, auditing, and printing, on the issue of the Company’s shares are charged directly to share capital.

Valuation of equity units issued in private placements

The Company has adopted a residual value method with respect to the measurement of shares and warrants issued as private placement units. The residual value method first allocates value to the more easily measurable component based on fair value and then the residual value, if any, to the less easily measurable component.

The fair value of the common shares issued in the private placements was determined to be the more easily measurable component and were valued at their fair value, as determined by the closing quoted bid price on the announcement date. The balance, if any, is allocated to the attached warrants. Any fair value attributed to the warrants is recorded as contributed surplus. Upon exercise of the warrants, the related fair value is reallocated to share capital.

Earnings (loss) per share

Basic loss per share is calculated using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the year. The Company uses the treasury stock method to compute the dilutive effect of options, warrants and similar instruments. Under this method, the dilutive effect on earnings (loss) per share is calculated presuming the exercise of outstanding options, warrants and similar instruments. It assumes that the proceeds of such exercise would be used to repurchase common shares at the average market price during the year. However, the calculation of diluted loss per share excludes the effects of various conversions and exercise of options and warrants that would be anti-dilutive. For the year ended May 31, 2019, 10,000,000 outstanding stock options (2018 – 9,861,900) were not included in the calculation of diluted earnings (loss) per share as their inclusion was anti-dilutive.

Stock-based compensation

The Company follows the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Section 718 “Compensation - Stock Compensation”, which establishes accounting for equity based compensation awards to be accounted for using the fair value method. The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the grant date fair value of the awards. Compensation expense is measured at the grant date and recognized over the requisite service period, on a straight line basis, which is generally the vesting period. Upon exercise of stock options, the related fair value is reallocated to share capital.

Non-monetary transactions

All non-monetary transactions are measured at the fair value of the asset surrendered or the asset received, whichever is more reliable, unless the transaction lacks commercial substance or the fair value cannot be reliably established. The commercial substance requirement is met when the future cash flows are expected to change significantly as a result of the transaction. When the fair value of a non-monetary transaction cannot be reliably measured, it is recorded at the carrying amount (after reduction, when appropriate, for impairment) of the asset given up adjusted by the fair value of any monetary consideration received or given. When the asset received or the consideration given up is shares in an actively traded market, the value of those shares will be considered fair value.

Joint venture accounting

Where the Company’s exploration and development activities are conducted with others, the accounts reflect only the Company’s proportionate interest in such activities. The Company currently is not a party to any joint venture arrangements.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards Updates

Accounting Standards Update No. 2018-13 Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820). In August 2018, the FASB issued amendments to achieve common fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. The amendments on changes in unrealized gains and losses, the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements, and the narrative description of measurement uncertainty should be applied prospectively for only the most recent interim or annual period presented in the initial fiscal year of adoption. All entities are required to adopt the new standard for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. For calendar year-end public companies, this means an adoption date of January 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the guidance has no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

Accounting Standards Update No. 2018-07 Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718). In June 2018, the FASB issued amendments to improve nonemployee share-based payment accounting. The amendments expand the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. An entity should apply the requirements of Topic 718 to nonemployee awards except for specific guidance on inputs to an option pricing model and the attribution of cost. Public business entities are required to adopt the new standard for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. For calendar year-end public companies, this means an adoption date of January 1, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the guidance has no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

Accounting Standards Update No. 2018-02 Income Statement – Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220). In February 2018, the FASB issued amendments to reclassify certain tax effects from accumulated other comprehensive income. The amendments allow a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The amendments in this Update also require certain disclosure about stranded tax effects. All entities are required to adopt the new standard for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. For calendar year-end public companies, this means an adoption date of January 1, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the guidance has no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-02 Leases (Topic 842). In February 2016, the FASB issued amendments on accounting of leases. These are elements of the new standard that could impact almost all entities to some extent, although lessees will likely see the most significant changes. Lessees will need to recognize virtually all of their leases on the balance sheet, by recording a right-of-use asset and a lease liability. Public business entities are required to adopt the new leasing standard for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. For calendar year-end public companies, this means an adoption date of January 1, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the guidance will have an immaterial impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and disclosures.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Not Applicable

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

	Crowe MacKay LLP
	1100 – 1177 West Hastings Street Vancouver, BC V6E 4T5 Main +1 (604) 687-4511 Fax +1 (604) 687-5805 www.crowemackay.ca

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Corvus Gold Inc.

Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Corvus Gold Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, changes in equity, and cash flows for the years then ended, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Company as at May 31, 2019 and 2018 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Going Concern

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 1. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

/s/ Crowe MacKay LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2011.

Vancouver, Canada

August 8, 2019

CORVUS GOLD INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Expressed in Canadian dollars)

Nature and continuance of operations (note 1)

Approved on behalf of the Directors:

These accompanying notes form an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

CORVUS GOLD INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

For the Years Ended May 31,

(Expressed in Canadian dollars)

These accompanying notes form an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

CORVUS GOLD INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

For the Years Ended May 31,

(Expressed in Canadian dollars)

Supplemental cash flow information (note 10)

These accompanying notes form an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

CORVUS GOLD INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY

(Expressed in Canadian dollars)

These accompanying notes form an integral part of these consolidated financial statements