# EDGAR Filing Document

**Accession Number:** 0001514597
**File Stem:** 0001062993-25-012149
**Filing Date:** 2025-6
**Character Count:** 641396
**Document Hash:** a74ae63fb818749fb7673cb9580ce0db
**Contains OCR:** False
**Source Format:** 

## Filing Content

## Filing Summary
**0001062993-25-012149.hdr.sgml**: 20250625

**ACCESSION NUMBER**: 0001062993-25-012149

**CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE**: 20-F/A

**PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT**: 84

**CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT**: 20241231

**FILED AS OF DATE**: 20250625

**DATE AS OF CHANGE**: 20250625

**FILER**: 

**COMPANY DATA:**
- **COMPANY CONFORMED NAME:** FURY GOLD MINES LTD
- **CENTRAL INDEX KEY:** 0001514597
- **STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION:** GOLD & SILVER ORES [1040]
- **ORGANIZATION NAME:** 01 Energy & Transportation
- **EIN:** 000000000
- **STATE OF INCORPORATION:** A1
- **FISCAL YEAR END:** 1231

**FILING VALUES:**
- **FORM TYPE:** 20-F/A
- **SEC ACT:** 1934 Act
- **SEC FILE NUMBER:** 001-38145
- **FILM NUMBER:** 251074301

**BUSINESS ADDRESS:**
- **STREET 1:** 401 BAY STREET
- **STREET 2:** 16TH FLOOR
- **CITY:** TORONTO
- **STATE:** A6
- **ZIP:** M5H 2Y4
- **BUSINESS PHONE:** 8446010841

**MAIL ADDRESS:**
- **STREET 1:** 401 BAY STREET
- **STREET 2:** 16TH FLOOR
- **CITY:** TORONTO
- **STATE:** A6
- **ZIP:** M5H 2Y4

**FORMER COMPANY:**
- **FORMER CONFORMED NAME:** AURYN RESOURCES INC.
- **DATE OF NAME CHANGE:** 20131119

**FORMER COMPANY:**
- **FORMER CONFORMED NAME:** GEORGETOWN CAPITAL CORP
- **DATE OF NAME CHANGE:** 20110307

?xml version='1.0' encoding='ASCII'? Fury Gold Mines Limited: Form 20-F/A - Filed by newsfilecorp.com

------

**UNITED STATES**

**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

**Washington, D.C. 20549**

**FORM 20-F/A**

**Amendment No. 1**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **☐ REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934** 

**OR**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934** 

**For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024** 

**OR**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934** 

**OR**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **☐ SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934** 

Date of event requiring this shell company report

For the transition period from to

Commission File No. <u>**001-38145**</u>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>**Fury Gold Mines Limited**</u>

(Translation of registrant's name into English)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>**British Columbia, Canada**</u>

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

<u>**401 Bay Street, 16th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5H 2Y4**</u>

(Address of principal executive office)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Phil van Staden, Chief Financial Officer, +1 (647) 673-7664,** **phil.vanstaden@furygoldmines.com** 

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>**401 Bay Street, 16th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5H 2Y4**</u>

(Name, telephone, email and/or facsimile number and address of Company Contact Person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Title of Class | &nbsp;&nbsp;Trading Symbol(s) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Common Shares, no par value | &nbsp;&nbsp; FURY | &nbsp;&nbsp; NYSE American and Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) |

---

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer's classes of capital or stock as of the closing of the period covered by the Annual Report: **151,556,273 Common Shares**

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

☐ Yes ☒ No

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

☐ 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 such files).

☒ Yes ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, and/or an emerging growth company. See definition of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," and "emerging growth company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act:

Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☒ <br> Emerging growth company ☐

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, 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 has filed a report on and attestation to its management's assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant's executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; U.S. GAAP | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ☐ |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ☒ |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Other | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ☐ |

---

If "Other" has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow.

Item 17 ☐ Item 18 ☐

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

☐ Yes ☒ No

------

**EXPLANATORY NOTE**

Fury Gold Mines Limited (the "**Company**") is filing this Amendment No. 1 (the "**Amendment No. 1**") to the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 originally filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "**SEC**") on April 1, 2025 (the "**Original 2024 Form 20-F**") to (i) provide additional information regarding its mineral properties under Item 4 of this Amendment No. 1, and (ii) to update the disclosure provided in the Company's technical report summaries for the Company's Eau Claire Property and Committee Bay Property, each as revised and filed as Exhibit 15.2 and 15.8 to this Amendment No. 1. Other than as expressly set forth above, this Amendment No. 1 does not, and does not purport to, amend, update or restate any other information set forth in the Original 2024 Form 20-F, and the Company has not updated disclosures included therein to reflect any events that occurred subsequent to April 1, 2025.

This Amendment No. 1 consists solely of the preceding cover page, this explanatory note, the updated Item 4, the signature page, the updated certifications from the Company's principal executive officer and principal financial officer as exhibits 12.1 and 12.2 required by Rule 12b-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the restated exhibits 15.2 and 15.8 and related consents of qualified persons.

**Item 4 - Information on the Company**

**A. History and development of the company**

**Name, Address and Incorporation**

The Company was incorporated under the British Columbia Business Corporations Act (the "BCBCA") on June 9, 2008, under the name Georgetown Capital Corp. The Company was a Capital Pool Company under the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange (the "TSXV") and, accordingly, on February 23, 2011, the Company completed a qualifying transaction (the "Qualifying Transaction") with Full Metal Minerals USA Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Full Metals Minerals Ltd. Pursuant to the Qualifying Transaction, the Common Shares began trading on the TSXV. On October 15, 2013, the Company changed its name to Auryn Resources Inc. On November 1, 2016, the Company completed its graduation to the TSX and the Common Shares began trading on the TSX. In connection with the Company's graduation to the TSX, the Common Shares were voluntarily delisted from the TSXV. On July 17, 2017, the Common Shares also commenced trading on the NYSE American.

Fury Gold is a reporting issuer in all of the provinces and territories of Canada. In addition, the Common Shares are registered under Section 12(b) of the U.S. Exchange Act by virtue of being listed on the NYSE American. The Company's legal registered and records office is in care of its attorneys at 1500-1055 West Georgia Street Vancouver, BC, V6E 4N7 and the mailing address is 401 Bay Street, 16th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, M5H 2Y4. The SEC maintains a web site that contains reports and other information regarding registrants that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov.

------

**2020 Merger and Reorganization**

On October 9, 2020, the Company concurrently acquired all of the then-issued and outstanding shares of Eastmain Resources Inc. ("Eastmain") while distributing (or "spinning out") shares of two subsidiaries to its shareholders ("Spinco Transactions") in accordance with the terms and conditions of the arrangement agreement dated August 10, 2020 (the "Arrangement Agreement"). The Spinco Transactions resulted in the divestment of the Company's South American exploration assets to focus on Canadian mineral projects. On October 5, 2020, the Eastmain Transaction and the Spinco Transactions received the approval of both the Company's and Eastmain's shareholders, and on October 7, 2020, the British Columbia Supreme Court and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved the Reorganization Arrangement and the Eastmain Arrangement, respectively, and both courts issued final orders approving the Eastmain Transaction and the Spinco Transactions. In accordance with the terms of the Arrangement Agreement, the Company changed its name to "Fury Gold Mines Limited" pursuant to a certificate of change of name dated October 8, 2020.

Immediately following the closing of the Transaction, the Company's ticker symbol for the Common Shares was changed to "FURY" effective October 12, 2020 on the NYSE American and October 13, 2020 on the TSX. Eastmain's shares were delisted from the TSX and removed from the OTCQB after the end of trading on October 9, 2020. Immediately following the closing of the Eastmain Arrangement, Eastmain became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fury Gold.

**2022 Sale of Homestake Mineral Project to Dolly Varden Silver Corporation for Dolly Varden Shares**

On February 25, 2022, the Company announced the completion of the sale of the Homestake Ridge project to Dolly Varden Silver Corporation ("Dolly Varden"), a publicly traded corporation listed on the TSX Venture Exchange. Pursuant to the Homestake Purchase Agreement entered into on December 6, 2021, Dolly Varden acquired 100% of Homestake Resource Corporation from Fury in exchange for a $5 million cash payment and the issuance of 76,504,590 common shares of Dolly Varden. On October 13, 2022, the Company reduced its holdings to 59,504,590 by selling 17 million common shares, representing 22.2% of the Company's interest in Dolly Varden, for gross proceeds of $6.8 million, and resulting in the Company's interest in Dolly Varden being reduced to 25.8%. Following further dilutive equity financings completed by Dolly Varden on December 22, 2022 and November 2, 2023, Fury Gold held 59,504,590 common shares, representing a 22.03% interest in Dolly Varden as at December 31, 2023. The Company's interest in Dolly Varden was further reduced by 5,450,000 shares in a March 2024 private sale, and by 3,000,000 shares in an October 2024 private sale, resulting in in the Company's interest being 16.11% in Dolly Varden as at December 31, 2024.

**2022 to 2024 Unification of the Éléonore South Gold Project**

On September 12, 2022, the Company and its joint venture partner Newmont Corporation ("Newmont"), through their respective subsidiaries, completed the acquisition of the remaining approximately 23.77% participating interest of Azimut Exploration Inc. in the Éléonore South Joint Venture ("ESJV"), on a pro-rata basis. Following the completion of the transaction, the 100% ESJV participating interests were then held 50.022% by the Company and 49.978% by Newmont with Fury remaining the operator under an amended and restated joint operating agreement.

On February 29, 2024, the Company completed the purchase of Newmont's 49.978% interest in the Éléonore South Gold Project in Quebec ("**Éléonore South**") for $3,000,000. As a result of the consolidation, Fury Gold is the 100% owner of Éléonore South. The Company also acquired Newmont's 30,392,372 common shares or 10.98% of Sirios Resources Inc. ("Sirios") as part of the transaction for an additional $1,300,000. Sirios shares have been acquired for investment purposes, and Fury will evaluate its investment in Sirios on an ongoing basis with respect to any possible additional purchases or dispositions. In March 2024, the Company sold 1,514,000 common shares of Sirios, resulting in the Company's interest in Sirios being reduced to 10.4%. Following further dilutive equity financings completed by Sirios in 2024, the Company's holding interest in Sirios as at December 31, 2024 was less than 9.9%.

------

**Inter-corporate Relationships**

Fury Gold conducts its business through a number of wholly-owned subsidiaries depicted in a diagram under the Organizational structure section. It owns 25% of a shared service provider company, Universal Mineral Services Ltd. (with three other junior resource explores each owning 25%) which is further discussed under "Related Party Transactions" below.

**Significant Events and Highlights**

**2022**

**2022 Eau Claire Exploration Program** 

In October 2022, the Company completed the initial drilling program at Eau Claire and the Percival prospect, completing a total of approximately 52,700m from 2020-2022, with the final 17,700m completed in 2022. Additionally, the company completed a B-horizon soil sampling program at Lac Clarkie, a property adjacent to the Eau Claire project.

The Expansion Drill Program, Exploration Drill Program and the Regional Exploration Program are discussed below under "Eau Claire Project - 2023 Eau Claire Exploration Program".

**2022 Changes to Management and the Board**

On March 9, 2022, the Company announced the appointment of Bryan Atkinson, P.Geo, to Senior Vice President (SVP), Exploration and Michael Henrichsen, P.Geo, to Chief Geological Officer, effective immediately. The Company also announced that Salisha Ilyas, Vice President of Investor Relations, has resigned to pursue other opportunities.

On May 24, 2022, the Company announced that the Company's Board Chair, Ivan Bebek, was retiring from the Board, effective June 29, 2022 and would be an advisor.

**2022 Financing**

On April 14, 2022, the Company completed a non-brokered private placement with two placees, who include a Canadian corporate investor and a US institutional investor, for a private placement sale of 13.75 million common shares of the Company at a price of $0.80 per share for gross proceeds of $11,000,000.

**2022 Completion of Sale of Homestake Ridge Project to Dolly Varden and Investor Rights Agreement**

On February 25, 2022, the Company completed the sale of the Homestake Ridge Project to Dolly Varden. Pursuant to the agreement entered into on December 6, 2021 ("Homestake Purchase Agreement"), Dolly Varden purchased 100% of the shares of the Company's subsidiary, Homestake Resource Corporation for a $5,000,000 cash payment and the issuance of 76,504,590 common shares of Dolly Varden (the "Homestake Transaction"). As a result of the sale, the Company has an indirect economic interest in the Homestake Ridge Project through its ownership of shares of Dolly Varden but does not have legal control over either Dolly Varden or the Homestake Ridge Project.

------

In connection with the Homestake Transaction, Dolly Varden and Fury Gold entered into an investor rights agreement (the "Homestake Investor Rights Agreement") pursuant to which Fury Gold has the following rights, and is subject to the following obligations:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(i) Fury Gold will have the right to appoint two nominees to the Dolly Varden board so long as Fury Gold owns greater than 20% of the Dolly Varden common shares outstanding. As Fury Gold now owns less than 20% but greater than 10% of the Dolly Varden shares outstanding, Fury Gold's nomination right has been reduced to the right to appoint one nominee to the Dolly Varden board. Tim Clark, the Chief Executive Officer of Fury Gold, and Michael Henrichsen, the Chief Geological Officer of Fury Gold, joined the Dolly Varden Board upon closing of the Homestake Transaction. As Fury Gold now owns less than 20% but greater than 10% of the Dolly Varden shares outstanding, only Mr. Clark remains a director.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(ii) Fury Gold will have the right to appoint one member to Dolly Varden's technical committee for the purpose of providing non-binding advice and recommendations to the Dolly Varden board for so long as Fury Gold is entitled to appoint one nominee to the Dolly Varden board.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(iii) Fury will have pre-emptive rights to maintain its ownership percentage in Dolly Varden for so long as Fury Gold owns more than 10% of the outstanding Dolly Varden common shares, subject to certain carve-outs and top-up rights.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(iv) Fury Gold will not sell the Dolly Varden Shares during the one-year hold period following closing and will provide to Dolly Varden the right to direct the sale of any DV Shares proposed to be sold by Fury Gold after the expiry of the initial one-year hold period.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(v) Fury Gold will, for the initial two-year period following closing, and subject to Fury Gold continuing to hold at least 10% of Dolly Varden's outstanding shares, vote its shares in accordance with Dolly Varden management's recommendations at each meeting of the shareholders of Dolly Varden, subject to exceptions for certain excluded matters, including special resolutions, minority shareholder votes required pursuant to Multilateral Instrument 61-101 and matters that would materially and adversely impact Fury Gold disproportionately.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(vi) Fury Gold will not, for the initial three-year period following Closing, and subject to Fury Gold continuing to hold at least 10% of Dolly Varden's outstanding shares, acquire additional securities of Dolly Varden, solicit proxies separately from any Dolly Varden board approved proxy circular or otherwise seek to control management, the board or the policies of Dolly Varden.

**2022 Partial Sale of Dolly Varden Shareholdings**

On October 3, 2022, the Company announced that it had entered into a non-brokered sale agreement to sell 17 million common shares of Dolly Varden at $0.40 per share, representing approximately 7.4% of the outstanding common shares of Dolly Varden. The gross proceeds received by the Company upon the close of the transaction on October 13, 2022, was $6.8 million. At December 31, 2022, the Company held a 23.5% interest in Dolly Varden.

------

**2023** 

**2023 Eau Claire Exploration Program** 

On February 13, 2023, Fury Gold provided an update on targeting the wholly owned Lac Clarkie project immediately to the east of its 100% owned Eau Claire project in the Eeyou Istchee Territory in the James Bay region of Quebec. The Company has defined a total of eight gold targets through the completion of a B-horizon soil sampling program. Six of the targets lie along the Cannard Deformation Zone, which hosts numerous gold occurrences along its >100 kilometre (km) mapped extent, including Fury's Eau Claire Deposit and Percival Property.

In April 2023, Fury Gold commenced a drilling program at the Eau Claire Deposit, comprising of 10,000 to 15,000 metres, with the goals of i) continuing expansion of the high-grade Eau Claire resource; ii) following up on the 2022 success at the Percival Prospect 14 km to the east of Eau Claire; and iii) advancing several early-stage exploration targets along the Cannard Deformation Zone to the drill ready stage.

On July 10, 2023, the Company announced its 2023 summer exploration program and the restart of all exploration activities, which had been interrupted since June 5, 2023, due to a governmental emergency fire evacuation order.

On August 3, 2023, Fury announced results for the first three 2023 core drill holes at the high-grade Eau Claire gold project. The 2023 drill program focused on the continued expansion of the Hinge Target located immediately west of the Eau Claire Deposit. Drilling at the Hinge Target continues to return multiple stacked zones of gold mineralization from each drill hole, including 5.0m of 3.6 g/t Au within a broader interval of 14.0m of 2.37 g/t Au. Additional drill intercepts include 6.5m of 2.66 g/t Au, 6.0m of 2.77 g/t Au and 1.0m of 10.35 g/t Au.

On October 3, 2023, the Company reported the results for an additional two infill core drill holes from the Hinge Target at the Eau Claire Project. The 2023 drill program continues to focus on infill drilling at the Hinge Target located immediately west of the Eau Claire Deposit. Every hole completed at the Hinge Target to date has intercepted two corridors of stacked gold-bearing quartz tourmaline veins and alteration, including 3.5m of 5.73 g/t gold and 11.27 g/t Tellurium and 7.43g/t gold over 2.5m within a broader interval of 4.65g/t gold and 8.72 g/t Tellurium over 4.5m. Drill holes 23EC-065 and 23EC-068 represent the continuation of a series of infill drill holes designed to tighten up the spacing of the 2022 Hinge Target drilling to a nominal spacing of 60-80m. The stacked intercepts through these new holes continue to exhibit the overall strength of the mineralized system within the Hinge Target.

On November 28, 2023, the Company reported additional results from the 2023 infill drilling program at the Hinge Target at the Eau Claire Project. Drilling continues to intercept multiple zones of gold mineralization, including 5.5m of 4.52 g/t gold and 3.0m of 3.34 g/t gold from 23-EC-069; 1.0m of 20.20 g/t gold and 3.5m of 3.51 g/t gold from 23EC-070; 1.0m of 19.55 g/t gold from 23EC-066; and 3.5m of 3.82 g/t gold from 23EC-067.

On January 17, 2024, the Company reported results from the 2023 drilling program at the Hinge Target at the Eau Claire Project. Highlights from the seven drill holes include 31.77 g/t gold over 3.50m from 23EC-077; 65.0 g/t gold over 0.50m and 14.25 g/t gold over 1.0m from 23EC-074; 2.56 g/t gold over 7.50m from 23EC-068; and 3.41 g/t gold over 6.50m and 5.0 g/t gold over 3.50m from 23EC-075.

------

On February 6, 2024, the Company announced the final set of results from the 12,000m 2023 drilling program at the Hinge Target, part of the high-grade Eau Claire Project. Highlights from these last five drill holes include 17.62 g/t gold over 3.50m, including 29.80 g/t gold over 2m, and 22.20 g/t gold over 0.50m from 23EC-079; and 5.49 g/t gold over 3.50m from 23-EC-078. The reported intercepts from drill hole 23EC-082 of 17.62 g/t gold over 3.50m is within 135m of surface and is completely open to surface and to the west, above the rest of the Hinge Target.

**2023 Changes to Management and the Board**

On February 22, 2023, the Company announced that its Board of Directors has appointed Brian Christie as an Independent Director, effective immediately. Mr. Christie most recently served as Vice President, Investor Relations at Agnico Eagle Mines Limited, prior to which Mr. Christie worked for over 17 years as a precious and base metals mining analyst and brings with him extensive experience in the capital markets and the mining industry. Mr. Christie holds a BSc. in Geology (University of Toronto) and an MSc. in Geology (Queen's University) and is a member of the Canadian Investor Relations Institute (CIRI) and the National Investor Relations Institute (NIRI). On May 15, 2023, the Company announced the appointment of Mr. Christie as Board Chair, replacing Mr. Jeffrey Mason, who was appointed Board Chair on January 11, 2023 and continues to serve as Independent Director of Fury Gold. The Company also announced that Michael Henrichsen, Chief Geological Officer, resigned from his role to pursue other interests.

On June 23, 2023, Phil van Staden, having previously served as the Company's Corporate Controller since 2020, was appointed Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company and brings over 15 years of diverse international experience in various accounting roles and industries throughout South Africa and Canada. He holds B. Commerce and B. Commerce Honours degrees, respectively, from the University of Pretoria and the University of South Africa. Mr. van Staden took over from Dr. Lynsey Sherry, who had been the Chief Financial Officer since November 2020. Mr. van Staden was appointed (permanent) Chief Financial Officer effective January 1, 2024.

On September 5, 2023 Fury announced that it had appointed Ms. Isabelle Cadieux as an Independent Director, effective immediately. Ms. Cadieux, a professional geologist, brings more than 30 years of experience in mineral exploration and financing in the mining sector. She last held the position of Managing Director, Investment at SIDEX, a Québec institutional fund that finances exploration companies, including Fury, and continues to hold shares in Fury, where she served from 2001 until 2023. She holds an M.Sc. in Mineral Exploration (MINEX) from McGill University and a B.Sc. in Geology from the University of Ottawa. Ms. Cadieux acted as President of the Ordre des géologues du Québec (OGQ) in 2008, sat on the Board of Directors from 2005 to 2010, and was Director of the Canadian Council of Professional Geoscientists from 2007 to 2011 where she represented the OGQ. From 2011 to 2016, she was a member of the Executive Committee of the UQAT-UQAM Chair in Mining Entrepreneurship. Throughout her career, she has been involved in various sector-related organizations, among others the Québec Mineral Exploration Association (AEMQ), the Canadian Institute of Mines and Metallurgy (CIM), Minalliance and Mine d'Avenir.

**2023 Financings**

In March 2023, the Company closed a bought-deal private placement (the "March 2023 Offering") of 6,076,500 Common Shares of the Company that qualify as "flow-through shares" (the "FT Shares") at a price of $1.44 per FT Share for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $8.750 million. The proceeds from the March 2023 Offering were used to incur "flow-through mining expenditures" in connection with the exploration of the Company's Eau Claire and ESJV projects. As at December 31, 2023, the Company had approximately $544,000 available to incur flow-through mining expenditures before December 31, 2024.

------

**2023 Corporate developments**

On October 12, 2023, the Company filed a short form base shelf prospectus (the "Shelf Prospectus") with the securities commissions or similar regulatory authorities in all of the provinces and territories of Canada and has filed a corresponding registration statement on Form F-10 with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. As a result of the completion of these filings, the Company is permitted to publicly offer up to $75 million of common shares, subscription receipts, warrants, and units or any combination thereof to investors in Canada and the United States during the 25-month period from October 12, 2023, that the Shelf Prospectus is effective.

**2024**

**2024 Exploration Program** 

On June 28, 2024, the Company announced the filing of a Canadian law compliant Technical Report for the Increased Mineral Resource Estimate for the high-grade Eau Claire deposit as well as a Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate for the Percival deposit located in the Eeyou Istchee Territory of the James Bay region of Quebec. The Eau Claire project now contains a combined mineral resource of 1.16Moz gold (Au) at a grade of 5.64 g/t Au in the Measured and Indicated category as well as an additional 723koz gold at a grade of 4.13 g/t Au in the Inferred Category. Gold mineralization remains open for expansion in all directions at both the Eau Claire and Percival deposits through additional drilling.

On September 9, 2024, the Company announced results from the diamond drilling program at the greenfield Serendipity Prospect on its wholly owned Eau Claire project in the Eeyou Istchee Territory in the James Bay region of Quebec. The Serendipity Prospect lies within the same prospective geological setting as the Company's Percival Deposit. In total 3,871 metres (m) were drilled in 10 holes across five distinct targets at Serendipity. Drill hole 24SD-009 targeted a biogeochemical anomaly overlying the easterly extension of the structure controlling the mineralization at Serendipity and intercepted 12.16 g/t gold over 3.0 m (Figures 1 and 2, Table 1). Drill hole 24SD-002 targeted a biogeochemical anomaly at the hinge of an interpreted fold within volcanic stratigraphy and intercepted 5.27 g/t gold over 1.0 m. The two noted intercepts above are separated by over 2 kilometres (km) indicating the potential for a large mineralizing system at Serendipity. The Company is in the process of planning follow-up drilling at Serendipity for 2025.

On October 7, 2024, the Company announced the discovery of high-grade lithium outcrop on the western claim block of its 100% owned Éléonore South project in the Eeyou Istchee Territory in the James Bay region of Quebec. The outcrop sampling program targeted the historical Fliszar showing lepidolite bearing pegmatite as well as new rock exposures over an area of approximately 1000 x 500 metres (m) resulting in the collection of 34 samples. Seven samples returned high-grade values above 1.75% lithium oxide (Li2O) with a peak value of 4.67% Li2O. The Company's focus remains on the gold prospectivity of the Éléonore South project. However, the announced lithium results provide additional exploration targets as the overall project is advanced.

On October 24, 2024, the Company announced the results from the summer exploration program at its 100% Committee Bay project in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut. The 2024 exploration program defined three drill ready shear zone hosted targets advanced through a combination of till sampling, rock sampling and geological mapping:

------

* Three Bluffs Shear, where drilling in 2021 intercepted 13.93 g/t Au over 10 metres (m) (see news release dated December 1, 2021);

* Raven Shear where 7 rock samples have averaged 16.12 g/t gold; and

* Burro West where a 300 by 300 m discrete >90th percentile gold in till anomaly has been defined with a peak value of 50 ppb gold.

On November 12, 2024, the Company announced the finalization of drill targeting at the Éléonore South gold project in the Eeyou Istchee Territory in the James Bay Region of Quebec. Drilling will target robust geochemical gold anomalies within the same sedimentary rock package that hosts Newmont's Éléonore Mine. The completed biogeochemical sampling survey covered an interpreted fold nose within the Low Formation sediments where an orientation level study identified a large-scale gold anomaly in a similar geological, geophysical, and structural setting to that of the nearby Éléonore Mine. Six priority drill targets across over 3 kilometres (km) of prospective folded sedimentary stratigraphy have been identified. These six targets encompass multi point gold anomalies above the 90th percentile of the data and correlate with moderate pathfinder elemental anomalies, most notably arsenic which is associated with gold mineralization at the Éléonore Mine. The Company intends to mobilize crews in Q1 2025 for an initial fully funded 3,000 - 5,000 metre (m) diamond drilling program.

**2024 Changes to Management and the Board**

On January 10, 2024, the Company announced the appointment of Phil van Staden, the current Interim CFO of the Company, to the position of Chief Financial Officer effective as of January 1, 2024.

On June 27, 2024, as a result of the voting at its Annual General Meeting ("AGM") of Shareholders held on June 26, 2024, the Company confirmed that each director nominee listed in the Company's management information circular dated May 14, 2024, in connection with the AGM were re-elected as directors of the Company and that Deloitte LLP was re-appointed as the Company's auditor. Mr Mason did not stand for re-election as a director in 2024.

**2024 Financings**

On June 13, 2024, the Company closed the $5 Million financing announced on May 23, 2024. The Company issued 5,320,000 common shares of the Company that qualify as "flow-through shares" as defined under subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and section 359.1 of the Taxation Act (Québec) (the "FT Shares") at a price of C$0.94 per FT Share for total gross proceeds to the Company of C$5,001.

**2024 Corporate developments**

On February 29, 2024, the Company, and its joint operation partner Newmont Corporation ("Newmont"), through their respective subsidiaries, closed a transaction whereby the Company acquired 100% control of the joint operation interests, the Éléonore South project, consolidating these properties into the Company's portfolio at which time the joint venture operation was dissolved. The 49.978% that Newmont held was acquired by the Company for $3,000 while incurring $22 in transaction costs. As part of the transaction, the Company acquired 30,392,372 shares of Sirios Resources Inc. from Newmont which represented a 10.98% share at the time. The Company has sold a portion of the Sirios shares to retain under 9.9% which is the insider reporting threshold in Canada.

------

**2024 Partial Sale of Dolly Varden Shareholdings**

On March 14, 2024, the Company announced that it had sold 5.45 million common shares of Dolly Varden at $0.735 per share, for gross proceeds of $4,006, lowering its holdings to 19.99% and decreasing its right to one director on Dolly Varden under its Investors Rights Agreement, to which notice have been given. On October 4, 2024 the Company sold another 3 million common shares of Dolly Varden for gross proceeds of $3,356 lowering its interest to 16.11% as at December 31, 2024.

**2025**

The Company entered into the Arrangement Agreement with QPM on February 25, 2025. Under the terms of the Arrangement Agreement, Fury Gold has agreed to acquire QPM pursuant to a statutory plan of arrangement (the "**Arrangement**") under Section 192 of the Canada Business Corporations Act (the "**CBCA**") whereby Fury Gold will acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of QPM on the basis of 0.0741 of one common share of Fury Gold for each share of QPM (the "**Exchange Ratio**") as consideration for the acquisition. On March 6, 2025, Fury and QPM amended and restated the Original Arrangement Agreement in order to address certain technical matters related to QPM's share capital (the "**Amended and Restated Arrangement Agreement**", as further amended on March 19, 2025 and together with the original Arrangement Agreement, the "**Arrangement Agreement**"). In addition, each outstanding option and warrant of QPM will become exercisable to purchase shares of Fury following closing in accordance with the Exchange Ratio. Fury anticipates that approximately 8,385,030 common shares of Fury will be issued on closing of the Arrangement and that an additional 879,277 common shares will be issuable upon exercise of QPM options and warrants after closing. Fury Gold has obtained the approval of the Toronto Stock Exchange and NYSE American for the completion of the acquisition and related share issuances. Closing remains subject to the approval of the shareholders of QPM, the receipt of a final court order approving the Arrangement under the CBCA and satisfaction of other customary conditions to closing. Closing is anticipated to occur by April 30, 2025 if the required shareholder and court approvals are obtained. QPM's main asset is the Sakami gold project located in Eeyou Istchee James Bay territory in Québec, Canada (the "**Sakami Project**"). QPM's other assets include the Cheechoo-Eleonore Trend gold project which is adjacent to the northwest to the Sakami Project, and the Elmer East gold and lithium project located in Eeyou Istchee James Bay territory in Québec, Canada. QPM also holds a 68% interest in the Kippawa rare earths project and a 100% interest in the Zeus heavy rare earths project, both of which are located in the Témiscamingue region of Québec, Canada.

**B. Business Overview**

Fury Gold Mines is a Canadian-focused gold exploration company strategically positioned in two prolific mining regions: the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Quebec and the Kitikmeot Region in Nunavut. Fury Gold has a portfolio of mineral properties of which three are considered material at this time: the Eau Claire property located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Northern Quebec (the "Eau Claire Project"), the Committee Bay gold project located in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut (the "Committee Bay Project") and the Éléonore South property also located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Northern Quebec ("Éléonore South Project") which was determined to have become material as of March, 31, 2025.

------

Since 2016, the Company has been actively exploring its mineral projects with the goal of identifying new areas of significant mineralization. As discussed in relevant project sections below, the majority of this work has taken place away from the known deposit areas in the form of regional exploration and prospect drilling at satellite targets. Though this work has yet to lead to the discovery of any new material mineral deposits, it has strengthened the Company's understanding of the geological systems and provided new evidence with respect to the projects' continued perspectivity. The Company expects to continue its exploration on the Eau Claire Project and Éléonore South project through 2025.

The Company has not yet determined whether any of its mineral property interests may contain economically recoverable mineral reserves. The Company's continuing operations and the underlying value of the Company's mineral property interests are entirely dependent upon the existence of economically recoverable mineral reserves, the ability of the Company to obtain the necessary financing to complete the exploration of its mineral property interests, obtaining the necessary mining permits, and on future profitable production or the proceeds from the disposition of the exploration and evaluation assets. See "Risk Factors" section for further information.

**Reliance on Key Personnel**

Most aspects of the Company's business require specialized skills and knowledge. Such skills and knowledge include the areas of geology, mining, metallurgy, engineering, environment issues, permitting, social issues, capital markets, financing and accounting. While competition in the resource mining industry can make it difficult to locate and retain competent employees in such fields, the Company has been successful in finding and retaining personnel for the majority of its key processes. See "Risk Factors - Qualified and Experienced Employees, Management, and Board Members".

In addition, some members of Fury Gold's technical and management teams have a track record of successfully monetizing assets for all stakeholders. Fury Gold conducts itself to the highest standards of corporate governance and sustainability.

**Competitive Conditions**

The mineral exploration industry is competitive and Fury Gold will be required to compete for the acquisition of project opportunities. As a result of this competition, Fury Gold may not be able to acquire or retain prospective mineral projects, technical experts that can find, develop and mine such mineral properties and interests, workers to operate its mineral properties, and capital to finance exploration, development and future operations. The Company competes with other mining companies, some of which have greater financial resources and technical facilities, for the acquisition of mineral property interests, the recruitment and retention of qualified employees and for necessary investment capital with which to fund its operations and projects. See "Risk Factors - Competitive Conditions".

**Cyclical and Seasonal**

The Company's mineral exploration activities may be subject to seasonality due to adverse weather conditions affecting exploration including, without limitation, incremental weather, frozen ground and restricted access due to snow, ice or other weather-related factors. Further, the mining business, and particularly the precious metals industry, including the gold industry, is subject to metal price cycles. Moreover, the mining and mineral exploration business is subject to global economic cycles effecting, among other things, the marketability and price of gold products in the global marketplace. See "Risk Factors - Commodity Price Fluctuations and Cycles".

------

**Intangible Properties**

The Company's intangible property, including its mineral and surface rights, is described elsewhere in this document. The Company's business is not materially affected by intangibles such as business or commercial licenses, patents and trademarks or other intellectual property.

**Environmental Protection**

Exploration activities are subject to numerous and often stringent environmental laws and regulations. Compliance with such laws and regulations increases the costs of and delays planning, designing, drilling and developing the Company's properties. To the best of management's knowledge, the Company is in compliance in all material respects with all environmental laws and regulations applicable to its exploration and drilling activities. Fury Gold is committed to meeting or surpassing all applicable environmental legislation, regulations, permit and license requirements, and to continuously improving its environmental performance and practices. The Company embraces safe, socially and environmentally responsible and sustainable work practices during all activities. Fury Gold seeks to utilize innovative technologies and techniques to reduce its environmental footprint across all of the Company's projects. This includes awarding drill contracts to an EcoLogo certified contractor at Eau Claire, the use of Rotary Air Blast (RAB) drilling at the Committee Bay Project, which reduces water usage, footprint and time on the ground, and the use of drone imagery to allow targeted ground-based follow up of outcrop. Current costs associated with compliance are considered to be normal. See "Risk Factors - Environmental Regulatory, Health & Safety Risks" and "Risk Factors - Environmental Protection".

**Employees**

As at December 31, 2024, the Company had approximately 9 equivalent full-time employees located primarily in Canada. The Company shares certain technical and administrative functions provided by Vancouver-based Universal Mineral Services Ltd. on a full-cost recovery basis (See "Related Party Transactions"). The Company also relies on consultants and contractors to carry on many of its business activities and, in particular, to supervise and carry out mineral exploration and drilling on its mineral properties. No management functions of Fury Gold are performed to any substantial degree by a person other than the directors or executive officers of Fury Gold.

**Social and Environmental Policies**

Building and maintaining good corporate citizenship is an important component of Fury Gold's business practices. The Company has adopted several social and environmental policies and codes of conduct that are essential to its operations. The Company's operating practices are governed by the principles set out in its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Diversity Policy, Insider Trading Policy, Indigenous Relations Policy, Disclosure Policy and Whistle-Blower Policy..

Fury Gold endeavours to contribute to the communities in which it operates by focusing on activities that can make a meaningful, positive and lasting difference to the lives of those affected by its presence. Fury Gold prioritizes creating mutually beneficial and long-term partnerships with the communities where it operates, respecting their interests as our own. Fury Gold establishes constructive local partnerships to contribute to local priorities and interests and to have communities benefit both socially and economically from its activities. The Company seeks opportunities to maximize employment and procurement for local communities through the provision of suitable training opportunities and resources.

------

Fury Gold endeavours to engage in open and transparent dialogue with governments, local communities, Indigenous peoples, organizations and individuals on the basis of respect, fairness and meaningful consultation and participation.

Further information regarding Fury Gold's corporate governance policies and charters can be found on its website at https://furygoldmines.com/about-us/governance/.

**Indigenous and Local Community Engagement**

Fury Gold respects and engages meaningfully with Indigenous and local communities at all of its operations. The Company is committed to working constructively with local communities, government agencies and Indigenous groups to ensure that exploration work is conducted in a culturally and environmentally sensitive manner. The Company's engagement with Indigenous and local communities is governed by the principles set out in its Indigenous and Community Relations Committee Charter. Moreover, Fury Gold is committed to:

• sharing information about its projects and operations, providing meaningful opportunities for input and dialogue and involving local and Indigenous communities in archaeological work, environmental assessments and related studies;

• making meaningful efforts to reach agreements with local and Indigenous groups on the preferred method of participation and engagement processes;

• exploring opportunities for local and Indigenous communities to benefit from its projects and activities, which may include employment, contracting, training, community benefits and agreements, as appropriate to the type and stage of activity being undertaken; and

• engaging in candid and respectful dialogue with a view to resolving or minimizing any disagreements and ensuring full communication in respect of any unresolved issues.

Fury Gold is committed to responsible mineral exploration. The Company is dedicated to collaborating with Indigenous peoples and communities to establish and maintain effective, lasting, and mutually beneficial relationships. To achieve this commitment, we strive for relationships based on transparency, mutual respect, and trust. Accordingly, Fury implemented an Indigenous Relations Policy in 2024, which can be found on the Company's website at www.furygoldmines.com/about-us/governance.

During the year ended December 31, 2024, the Company received its Ecologo certification for mineral exploration. Ecologo is the first comprehensive certification for mineral exploration companies and their service providers that features third-party certification of environmental, social and economic practices in Quebec.

Additionally, during the first quarter of 2022, the Company undertook a qualitative environmental, social and governance ("ESG") assessment with Digbee, a technology company which provides qualitative assessment tools to mining companies to track their ESG achievements. Fury Gold received an overall score of BB with a range of CC to A broken down into a corporate score of BB with a range of B to A and a project score of BB with a range of CC to A for both the Eau Claire and Committee Bay projects. These results are considered strong for an exploration company and the Company is continually evaluating and implementing initiatives to improve future scores. Fury Gold conducted a second annual Digbee ESG Certification in 2024, and achieved an overarching score of BBB with a range of CC to AA as of June 2024. A corporate score of A with a range of BB to A was obtained, which is considered to be strong for an Exploration company. The Eau Claire project achieved a score of BB with a range of CC to AA. The Company continues to evaluate and implement initiatives to improve future scores.

------

During 2023 and 2024, the Company's subsidiary, Eastmain, entered into a Services Agreement with Stajune Ventures Inc, a business entity of the Cree Nation of Eastmain which provided for the local First Nation personnel, to provide services for the Summer exploration activities at the Eau Claire project during those years.

Fury Gold's Indigenous and Community Relations Committee Charter can be viewed on its website at https://furygoldmines.com/about-us/governance/.

**Cultural Awareness** 

In 2021, employees and the board of directors participated in a multi-module accredited in-house learning program aimed at developing Indigenous cultural competency. This program is provided to any new board members as part of the director onboarding process. In 2024, employees and the board of directors completed additional cultural awareness training which focused on the Indigenous communities in the regions of its projects in Quebec.

Fury, in partnership with the Cree Hunters Economic Security Board and 15 other mining and exploration companies, contributed to a voluntary fund totalling C$750,000 for the Reconstruction Initiative Forest Fires Fund 2023. This initiative aimed to support the rebuilding of cabins destroyed by the 2023 wildfires in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay territory of Quebec.

------

**C. Organizational Structure**

The following diagram depicts the Company's corporate structure as of December 31, 2024, and its material subsidiaries, including the name, jurisdiction of incorporation and proportion of ownership in each:

![form20fax001.jpg](form20faxz001.jpg)

Not reflected in the above organization chart is the Company's non-material 25% interest in a shared service provider entity, Universal Mineral Services Ltd ("UMS"). (See interest of "*Related Party Transactions - Universal Mineral Services*").

------

**A. Property, Plant and Equipment and Exploration and Evaluation Assets**

**Summary of Mineral Properties**

At December 31, 2024, the Company's three main 100% held material mineral properties were the Eau Claire Project and the Éléonore South Project located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Northern Quebec, and the Committee Bay Project located in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut, Canada. The Éléonore South Project has been determined to have become material effective March 31, 2025 as a result of the Company increasing its ownership interest to 100% and increasing exploration expenditures. The Company also held a number of non-material mining properties that are described in the table below:

---

| | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Property** | **Jurisdiction** | **Ownership** | **Operator** | **Number <br>of <br>Claims** | **Area of <br>Claims <br>(hectares)** | **Number <br>of <br>Leases** | **Area <br>of <br>Leases (ha)** | **Property <br>Stage** | **Mineralization <br>Style** | **Infrastructure** |
| **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** | **Material Properties** |
| Eau Claire | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 446 | 23284.5 |  |  | Resource | Orogenic Gold | 30 person camp |
| Eleonore South | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 282 | 14760.46 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold | 20 person camp |
| Committee Bay | Nunavut | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 142 | 179704.52 | 57 | 58689.69 | Resource | Orogenic Gold | 100 person camp |
| **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** | **Non-Material Properties** |
| Lac Clarkie | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 564 | 29734.48 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Lac Lessard | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 47 | 2475.54 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Reservoir | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 116 | 6089.69 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Lidge | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 36 | 1900.8 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Radisson | Quebec | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 152 | 7850.34 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Eastmain Mine | Quebec | 25 | Benz Mining | 152 | 8014.36 |  |  | Resource | Orogenic Gold | 30 person camp |
| Ruby Hill East | Quebec | 25 | Benz Mining | 88 | 4640.05 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Ruby Hill West | Quebec | 25 | Benz Mining | 178 | 9380.16 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |
| Gibson MacQuoid | Nunavut | 100 | Fury Gold Mines | 38 | 45424.93 |  |  | Exploration | Orogenic Gold |  |

---

------

A map showing the locations of the Company's mineral properties is provided below:

![form20fax002.jpg](form20faxz002.jpg)

***Quebec Properties***

The Company has two material properties located in the Province of Quebec, Canada, namely the Eau Claire Project and the Éléonore South Project.

The Eau Claire Project is a resource stage project, 100% held and operated by Fury, comprised of 446 claims, totaling 23,284 hectares(ha). Located in 1:50,000 scale NTS map sheets 33B04 and 33B05, approximately 320 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Quebec. The centre of the property is located at approximately 75.78 degrees longitude west and 52.22 degrees latitude north.

------

The early exploration stage Éléonore South Project, 100% held and operated by Fury, comprises 282 claims, totaling 14,760 hectares (ha). Located in 1:50,000 scale NTS map sheets 33B12 and 33C09, approximately 200 km east of the Cree community of Wemindji, 330 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Quebec. The centre of the property is located at approximately 75.98 degrees longitude west and 52.58 degrees latitude north.

A map showing the locations of the Company's material and non-material Quebec mineral properties is provided below:

![form20fax003.jpg](form20faxz003.jpg)

***Nunavut Properties***

The Company has one material property located in the territory of Nunavat, Canada, namely the Committee Bay Project.

The Committee Bay Project, 100% held by Fury, is a resource stage project comprising 156 claims and 57 crown leases, totalling 254,623.05 hectares (ha). located in 1:250,000 scale NTS map sheets 56J, 56K, 59O and 56P, approximately 430 km northwest of the town of Rankin Inlet. The approximate centre of the Project is located at Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) co-ordinates 7,400,000m N and 570,000m E (NAD 83, Zone 15N).

------

A map showing the locations of the Company's material and non-material Nunavut mineral properties is provided below:

![form20fax004.jpg](form20faxz004.jpg)

------

Below as a summary of all mineral resources for the Company's material mineral properties as at December 31, 2024, as discussed in detail below. The Company does not have any mineral reserves as at December 31, 2024. The Company does not have any mineral resource estimates for its non-material properties:

---

| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Project** | **Measured Mineral Resources** | **Measured Mineral Resources** | **Measured Mineral Resources** | **Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Indicated Mineral Resources** | **Measured + Indicated Mineral <br>Resources** | **Measured + Indicated Mineral <br>Resources** | **Measured + Indicated Mineral <br>Resources** | **Inferred Mineral Resources** | **Inferred Mineral Resources** | **Inferred Mineral Resources** |
| **Project** | **Tonnes** | **Au g/t** | **Contained <br>Au (oz)** | **Tonnes** | **Au g/t** | **Contained <br>Au (oz)** | **Tonnes** | **Au g/t** | **Contained <br>Au (oz)** | **Tonnes** | **Au g/t** | **Contained Au (oz)** |
| Eau Claire | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1612000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.67 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;294000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4781000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;866000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6393000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1160000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5445000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.13 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;723000 |
| Committee Bay |  |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2075000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.85 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;523835 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2075000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.85 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;523835 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2934000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.63 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;720364 |
| Total | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1612000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.67 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;294000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6856000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.31 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1389835 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8468000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1683835 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8379000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.36 | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1443364 |

---

**Notes on the Eau Claire Mineral Resources:**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(1) The Mineral Resource Estimates were initially reported by Dupere, Eggers and Dean (2024) with an effective date of May 10, 2024.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(2) The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as current by the Qualified Person, Ms. Valerie Doyon P. Geo,* Senior Project Geologist of the Company*.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(3) The classification of the current Mineral Resource Estimate into Measured, Indicated and Inferred has been completed in accordance with the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(4) All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(5) The mineral resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(6) Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that most Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(7) The Project mineral resource estimates are based on a validated database which includes data from 1202 surface diamond drill holes totalling 406,431 m, and 426 surface channels (Eau Claire deposit) for 1,345 m. The resource database totals 273,402 drill hole assay intervals representing 267,721 m of data and 2,254 channel assays for 1,316 m.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(8) The MRE for the Eau Claire deposit is based on 280 three-dimensional ("3D") resource models representing the 450, 850 and hinge zones. The MRE for the Percival deposit is based on 29 3D resource models representing high grade and lower grade halo zones.* 

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(9) Grades for Au were estimated for each mineralization domain using 1.0 metre capped composites assigned to that domain. To generate grade within the blocks, the inverse distance cubed (ID*<sup>*3*</sup>*) interpolation method was used for all domains of the Eau Claire deposit and ID*<sup>*2*</sup> *for Percival deposit. An average density value was assigned to each domain.*

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(10) Based on the location, surface exposure, size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using open-pit mining methods. In-pit mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au. The in-pit resource grade blocks are quantified above the base case cut-off grade, above the constraining pit shell, below topography and within the constraining mineralized domains (the constraining volumes).*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(11) The pit optimization and base-case cut-off grade consider a gold price of $1,900/oz and considers a gold recovery of 95%. The pit optimization and base case cut-off grade also considers a mining cost of US$2.80/t mined, pit slope of 55⁰ degrees, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(12) The results from the pit optimization, using the pseudoflow optimization method in Whittle 4.7.4, are used solely for the purpose of testing the "reasonable prospects for economic extraction" by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade. A Whittle pit shell at a revenue factor of 0.52 was selected as the ultimate pit shell for the purposes of this mineral resource estimate.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(13) Based on the size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using underground mining methods. Underground mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au. The mineral resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below surface/pit surface and within the constraining mineralized wireframes (considered mineable shapes). Based on the size, shape, general thickness, and orientation of the mineralized structures, it is envisioned that the deposits may be mined using a combination of underground mining methods including sub-level stoping (SLS) and/or cut and fill (CAF) mining.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(14) The underground base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au considers a mining cost of US$65.00/t mined, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(15) The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.*

***Notes on the Committee Bay Resource Estimate:***

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*1. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves as they do not have demonstrated economic viability, although, as per S-K 1300 requirements, which are consistent with CIM requirements, the Mineral Resources reported above have been determined to have demonstrated reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*2.* The Mineral Resources were estimated in accordance with the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions (2014) and Best Practices Guidelines (2019) prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council*.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*3. The Mineral Resources Committee Bay Gold Project was initially reported in Ross (2017) - QP David A. Ross, M.Sc., P.Geo, effective date of May 31, 2017.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*4. The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as current by the Qualified Person, Mr. Bryan Atkinson, P. Geo,* Senior Vice-President, Exploration of the Company*.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*5. The Cutoff grades were determined using average block grade values within the estimation domains and an Au price of US$1,200/oz, and Process Recovery of 93%, Open Pit mining costs of C$10.00/t, Underground mining costs of C$70.00/t, Process and G&A costs of approximately C$75/t and an exchange rate of 1.25 US$/C$.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*6. The mineral resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction .*

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*7. A bulk density values value of 3.15 t/m*<sup>*3*</sup> *was assigned based on available SG measurements.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*8. Differences may occur in totals due to rounding.*

**Eau Claire Project**

The following disclosure relating to the Eau Claire Project (other than the disclosure regarding the 2023 Eau Claire exploration programs) is based on information derived from the technical report summary on the Eau Claire Project entitled "*Technical Report on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada*" prepared by Mrs. Valerie Doyon, the Company's Senior Project Geologist, with an effective date of December 31, 2024 (the "**Eau Claire Technical Report Summary")**, as attached to this Annual Report as Exhibit 15.2. The Eau Claire Technical Report Summary conforms to SEC's Modernized Property Disclosure Requirements for Mining Registrants as described in Subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K, Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations ("**S-K 1300**") and Item 601(b)(96) - *Technical Report Summary*. All information of a scientific or technical nature contained below and provided after the date of the Eau Claire Report has been reviewed and approved by Mrs. Valerie Doyon, the Company's Senior Project Geologist and a "qualified person" for the purposes of S-K 1300.

The Eau Claire Project is a material property for the purposes of S-K 1300.

**Property Description and Location**

The Project is located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Territory of Northern Quebec, approximately 320 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal. The property is accessible, year-round, by the Route du Nord and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week.

The approximate centre of the Project is located at Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) co-ordinates 5,786,800m N and 453,000m E (NAD 83, Zone 18N). The approximate UTM co-ordinates for the centre of the currently defined Eau Claire deposit are 5,785,100m N and 444,600m E. The Project is located within National Topographic System (NTS) 1:50,000 scale map-areas; 33B04 and 33B05.

**Land Tenure**

As of the effective date of the Eau Claire Technical Report Summary the Eau Claire Project, 100% held by Fury, comprises 446 claims, totaling 23,284 hectares(ha). Located in 1:50,000 scale NTS map sheets 33B04 and 33B05, approximately 320 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal. The property is accessible, year-round, by the Route du Nord and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week. The centre of the property is located at approximately 75.78 degrees longitude west and 52.22 degrees latitude north.

The Project is north of the 52nd parallel (52ºN) and as such is subject to the provisions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975), and the Paix des Braves Agreement (2002). The Project falls within the Eeyou Istchee Territory of the Eastmain Cree First Nation, including trap line VC36 held by Dr. Ted Moses as the Cree Tallyman, and on Category III lands, as established under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

------

The figure below presents property location and claims comprising the Eau Claire Deposit:

![form20fax005.jpg](form20faxz005.jpg)

The book value of the Eau Claire Project as at December 31, 2024 is provided below:

---

| |
|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Name of Material Property** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Eau Claire Project<br>&nbsp;&nbsp; $31100000 <sup>(1)</sup> |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(1)* Book value of the Company's mineral projects under the Company's IFRS accounting policy primarily reflects project acquisition costs because the Company expenses rather than capitalizes all exploration costs as they are incurred. Acquisition costs may include allocations of the cost of corporate acquisitions of acquired companies which own mineral projects which allocations can increase the book value of the mineral projects of the acquired company above what the acquired company itself carried them at. The financial statement notes record exploration by general area rather than by individual property so aggregate expensed exploration costs for individual properties are not possible to determine from the financial statements alone. The book value of mineral properties may be reduced as a result of impairment charges where the Company concludes that the book value must be reduced in the face of evidence of impairment. Accordingly, readers are cautioned that mineral property book value is not intended to reflect the fair value of the mineral project at any given time.

------

**Existing Infrastructure**

Fury, through its Eastmain subsidiary, maintains a forty-person camp to support exploration activities at the Eau Claire project. The closest infrastructures to the Eau Claire deposit include a number of hydroelectric complexes and associated infrastructure, including the EM-1 hydroelectric complex. The EM-1 complex is located within 15 kilometres of the Eau Claire gold deposit. Hydro Québec has established a 600-person camp at EM-1 that includes fuel and medical services. More major necessities such as skilled labour and specialized equipment are sourced from Val-d'Or or Chibougamau. Many services are now available through numerous Cree owned businesses and partnerships in Mistissini, Eastmain and Nemaska.

**History**

Key historical events are:

* 1897: First reconnaissance survey in the area by the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) (A. P. Low).

* 1942: Mapping of the Eastmain Greenstone Belt by the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) (Shaw).

* 1966: Eade from the Geological Survey of Canada mapped the area of interest at a 1:1 000 000 scale.

* 1971 and 1972: Canico carried out a "winkie" drilling program (19 holes).

* 1973 to 1977: SEREM and Société de développement de la Baie-James (SDBJ) carried out geochemical surveys, prospecting, rock sampling, airborne and ground geophysics, geological mapping, and diamond drilling.

* 1978: Mapping at the 1:100 000 scale by the Ministère des Richesse Naturelle (MRN) (Franconi)

* 1985 to 1990: Westmin conducted airborne geophysics, soil geochemistry, prospecting, mapping, trenching and drilling (79 DDH, totalling 8,937 metres)

* 1995 to 2001: SOQUEM conducted soil geochemistry, geological mapping, trenching and drilling (54 DDH totalling 19,639 metres)

* 2002 to 2020: Eastmain Resources carried out geochemical and airborne geophysical surveys, geological mapping, prospecting, trenching and drilling. A total 816 diamond drilled holes, totalling 277,410.6 metres, were drilled. In 2018, discovered the Percival prospect where they drilled 13,182.6 metres in 2018 and 2019.

**Geology and Mineralization**

The Eau Claire project is contained within the La Grande volcano-plutonic Subprovince (2,752 to 2,696 Ma) of the Superior Province approximately 30 kilometres south of the contact with the metasedimentary Opinaca Subprovince (2700 to 2648 Ma). Portions of the La Grande Subprovince were formerly referred to as the Eastmain Greenstone Belt. Depending on the literature, the Eastmain Greenstone Belt has retained its title as a distinct greenstone belt lying within the La Grande Subprovince.

------

The La Grande Subprovince consists of four volcanic cycles erupted between 2,752 and 2,705 Ma (Kauputauch, Natel, Anatacau-Pivert, and Komo-Kasak formations). The supracrustal rocks of the region are intruded by syn-volcanic (2747 to 2710 Ma) and post- or late-tectonic (2,697 to 2,618 Ma) tonalite- trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) suites.

The Eastmain Greenstone Belt consists of a 5- to 10-kilometre wide by 150-kilometre long succession of Archean bimodal volcanic rocks (Figures 2 and 3). The volcanic sequence includes lowermost mafic volcanic rocks overlain by felsic pyroclastic to volcaniclastic rocks, intercalated facies of iron formation, shaly and graphitic sedimentary units.

The majority of the gold mineralization identified to date at Eau Claire occurs as stacked late quartz tourmaline veining (VQTL) within interbedded mafic volcanics and volcaniclastic sequences proximal to regional D2 shear zones. Gold mineralization also occurs within altered host rock without veining occurring as centimetre to several metre wide tourmaline-actinolite ± biotite ± calcite replacement zones around vein selvages. A third style of gold mineralization recently identified in silicified breccias and quartz veins hosted in sediments and volcanic rocks proximal to iron formation on the eastern side of the Eau Claire Project. Eau Claire hosts over 12 showings, the most advanced being the Eau Claire deposit and the Percival prospect.

Gold mineralization at the Eau Claire gold deposit is generally located within approximately EW trending structurally-controlled, high-grade en-echelon quartz-tourmaline veins and adjacent altered wall rocks, as well as variable width ESE trending sheared and foliated alteration zones. The alteration zones are parallel to the overall foliation and are thus believed to represent an altered stratigraphic unit. The vein systems are predominantly hosted within a thick sequence of massive and locally pillowed mafic volcanic flows, interbedded with narrow intervals of volcaniclastic meta-sedimentary rocks. Both gold bearing vein sets may occur with as narrow intervals with tourmaline and develop into thick quartz-tourmaline veins with zoned tourmaline+/-actinolite+/-biotite+/-carbonate alteration halos which can measure up to several metres in thickness.

The Eau Claire deposit is a structurally-controlled gold deposit. Mineralization occurs primarily in a series of sheeted en-echelon quartz-tourmaline veins and associated metre scale alteration zones. Carbonate within the veins is associated with gold mineralization. The overall trend of the mineralized veins is controlled by a structural corridor sub-parallel to the D2 Cannard Deformation Zone. Individual veins are up to 1 metre thick and extent for at least 100 metres along strike.

Veins are composed of quartz and tourmaline; the ratio between quartz with accessory calcite to tourmaline can vary from 100 percent quartz to 100 percent tourmaline. The quartz-tourmaline veins are massive, banded and/or brecciated. Pyrite, pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite and rare molybdenite generally constitute less than 1.5 percent of the composition of these veins but can be upwards of 20% locally. Commonly, brecciated veins contain angular blocks of tourmaline, ranging in size from less than one to more than 25 centimetres in size. Fragments are cemented by a quartz-carbonate matrix. Breccia textures locally form a "piano key" pattern with angular tourmaline blocks aligned perpendicular to the vein walls. This texture is due to protracted deformation that affected already formed veins and generated new veins (tension gash veins developed on pre-existing laminated veins). The piano-key breccia has been observed throughout the deposit at all scales in tourmaline veins of less than 1 centimetre to more than 1 metre thick. A "ladder vein" texture has also been observed in outcrop at the 450 West Zone consisting of massive tourmaline layers with quartz-carbonate "ladders" aligned perpendicular to the vein walls.

------

Gold occurs as isolated grains or as clusters of fine-grained particles. Irregular to sub-angular shaped gold grains range in size from less than 10 micrometres to 1 millimetre. In rare instances, grains up to 1 centimetre in size have been observed. Locally, veins contain micrometre-size clusters of visible gold particles. Tellurobismuthite (Bi2Te3) occurs throughout the deposit. Gold and tellurides occur within micro fractures in quartz, interstitial to granular tourmaline grains, at the contact between massive aphanitic tourmaline and quartz bands, and along tourmaline laminations.

Gold mineralization also occurs within altered host rock without veining occurring as centimetre to several metre wide tourmaline-actinolite ± biotite ± calcite replacement zones around vein selvages.

The two major vein areas discovered to date in the resource area (the 450 West and 850 West zones) form a crescent-shaped mineralized, surface projected footprint 1.8 kilometres long by more than 100 metres wide, which has been traced to date to a vertical depth of 900 metres. Veins within the 450 West zone typically strike 85 degrees and dip 50 to 65 degrees to the south. Veins within the 850 West zone typically strike 60 degrees and dip subvertically.

**Mineral Resources**

A Mineral Resource Estimate was first disclosed in a 2015 Technical Report (SRK, 2015) and updated in 2017 (Armitage and Hafez, 2017). The 2017 updated Mineral Resource Estimate was subsequently updated for use in a 2018 preliminary economic assessment (2018 PEA) study (Puritch et. al. 2018). No updated economic study was conducted on the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate and the 2018 PEA is no longer current and should not be relied upon. The 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate included the addition of Fury's 2020 through 2023 drilling to update the resource wireframes and block model.

The Eau Claire project contains a combined Mineral Resource of 1,160,000 oz of Au at a grade of 5.65 g/t in the Measured and Indicated category, and an additional 723,000 oz of Au at a grade of 4.13 g/t Au in the Inferred Category

Completion of the MREs involved the assessment of a validated drill hole and channel sample database, which included all data for surface drilling and surface and channel sampling completed through the end of 2023. Completion of the MREs also included the assessment of updated three-dimensional (3D) mineral resource models (mineral resource domains), 3D topographic surface models and 3D overburden surface models.

The Inverse Distance Cubed ("ID3") and Inverse Distance Squared ("ID2") calculation methods restricted to the mineral resource domains were used to interpolate grades for Au (g/t) into block models for all deposit areas.

The 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) was prepared using 2019 CIM Best Practice Guidelines for mineral resource estimation. The wireframe grade shell models represent the drilled mineralization and are suitable for use in block model estimations. The Eau Claire deposit meets the criteria of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction in the combined open pit and underground portions of the MRE.

There is no mineralization that qualifies as Mineral Reserves on the Eau Claire Project.

------

**Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security**

Drill core was placed sequentially in wooden core boxes at the drill by the drillers and sealed with top covers and ties before transport. The core boxes were transported by ATV and/or Pickup trucks on a twice daily basis for the conventional drill and one time a day for the helicopter supported drill. The core was transported to the camp where depth markers and box numbers were checked and the core was carefully reconstructed in a secure core facility. The core was logged geotechnically on a 3 m run by run basis including, core recovery, RQD. Magnetic susceptibility and XRF measurements were taken every metres.

The core was descriptively logged and marked for sampling by an OGQ registered geologist or geologist in-training, paying particular attention to lithology, structure, alteration, veining/brecciation, and sulphide mineralization.

Logging and sampling information was entered into MX Deposit cloud-based core logging application by MINALYTIX INC. which allowed for the integration of the data into the project database.

The core was photographed both wet and dry after logging but prior to sampling.

**Sampling, Analysis and Data Verification** 

Core recovery is generally very good to excellent, allowing for representative samples to be taken and accurate analyses to be performed. Half-core samples, 0.5 metre to 1.5 metre long, were taken where the rock was mineralized and/or altered. In the case of the Snake Lake and Percival holes, the core was sampled along the entire length of each hole.

Individual core samples were placed in rice bags which were sealed using uniquely numbered zip ties. Completed sample shipments for the Extension Program in 2020 and early 2021 and all 2022 drilling were sent to ALS Lab in Val d'Or, QC (ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and ISO 9001:2015 accredited facility) for preparation and analysis. Preparation included crushing core samples to 90% < 2mm and pulverizing 1000g of the crushed material to better than 85% < 75 microns. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (Au-AA24) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (ME-MS61). In 2020-2021, where Au-AA24 results are greater than 5 ppm Au the assay are repeated with 50 g nominal weight fire assay with gravimetric finish (Au-GRA22), the 5 ppm threshold was change for 10 ppm in 2022. QA/QC programs using internal and lab standard and blank samples, field and lab duplicates and re-assay indicate good overall accuracy and precision.

Sample shipments from the exploration program in 2021 were sent to Actlabs in Val d'Or, QC for preparation and then to Actlabs in Thunder Bay, ON for analysis. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (1A2B-50) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (1F2). Where 1A2B-50 results were greater than 5 ppm Au the assay were repeated with 50 g nominal weight fire assay with gravimetric finish (1A3-50). QA/QC programs using internal standard samples, field and lab duplicates and blanks indicate good.

Analytical samples for the Extension Program from March 2021 through to October 2021 were sent to Bureau Veritas (BV) lab in Timmins, ON (ISO/IEC 17025 accredited facility) for preparation and analysis. Preparation included crashing core sample to 90% < 2mm and pulverizing 1000g of crushed material to better than 85% < 75 microns. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (BV code FA450) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (BV code MA200). Where FA450 results are greater than 5 ppm Au the assay is repeated with 50 g nominal weight fire assay with gravimetric finish (FA550-Au). QA/QC programs using internal and lab standard and blank samples, field and lab duplicates and re-assay indicate good overall accuracy and precision.

------

**Internal Controls**

QC protocols were established in 2002 and carried through with minor refinements through the current drilling program.

The QA/QC program comprises the systematic insertion of standards or CRMs, blanks, as well as field, coarse reject, and pulp duplicates. QC samples have been inserted into the sample sequence at a frequency of approximately 1 sample per 25 samples for CRMs and blanks, 1 sample per 50 samples for field duplicate samples, 1 sample per 75 samples for coarse reject duplicates, and 1 sample per 25 samples for pulp duplicates. Approximately 15.1% of samples assayed have been QC samples in the drilling programs from 2020 to 2023. All QC samples were analyzed by the primary analytical lab (ALS). Check sampling of selected rejects and pulps has also been completed at both ALS and ACT laboratories in 2022 through 2024.

Sample batches with suspected cross-sample contamination or certified reference materials returning assay values outside of the mean ± 3SD control limits are considered analytical failures by the Company and assay reruns were requested when deemed warranted.

*ALS has its own internal QA/QC program, which is reported in the assay certificates, including the coarse reject and pulp duplicate assays. The Fury QA/QC program includes monitoring of laboratory internal QC results.***Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing**

Work performed in the SGS 2017 study was performed essentially on a single master sample. The sample included appropriate vein and mining dilution from the hanging wall and footwall. This sample was well documented and traceable.

The 2017 metallurgical testing indicated that gravity concentration with cyanide leaching outperformed production of a gold bearing flotation concentrate. The reported gold recoveries of 95 percent are supported by testing performed. The process was very simple with a primary grind size and reagent consumption levels that are typical for this style of deposit.

The limited metallurgical testwork conducted to date suggests that a high proportion of the gold can be recovered by conventional means and the Eau Claire material is relatively free-milling. Additional metallurgical testwork is recommended particularly to optimize leach parameters and investigate variability of the mineralization with respect to comminution requirements.

**2024 Mineral Resource Estimate** 

**Mineral Resource Estimate (effective December 31, 2024)<sup>(1-</sup>**<sup>**1**</sup><sup>**5**</sup><sup>**)**</sup>

Category Tonnes (g/t Au) Contained Au (oz) <br> Measured 1,612,000 5.67 294,000

------

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| Category | Tonnes | (g/t Au) | Contained Au (oz) |
| Indicated | 4781000 | 5.64 | 866000 |
| Total Measured & Indicated | 6393000 | 5.65 | 1160000 |
| Inferred | 5445000 | 4.13 | 723000 |

---

**Open Pit and Underground Mineral Resources for Eau Claire Deposit (effective December 31, 2024)<sup>(1-1</sup>**<sup>**5**</sup><sup>**)**</sup>

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | Open Pit (surface to 150 m) | Open Pit (surface to 150 m) | Open Pit (surface to 150 m) | Underground (150 m - 860 m) | Underground (150 m - 860 m) | Underground (150 m - 860 m) |
| Category | Tonnes | (g/t Au) | Contained<br>Au (oz) | Tonnes | (g/t<br>Au) | Contained<br>Au (oz) |
| Measured | 1157000 | 5.19 | 193000 | 455000 | 6.9 | 101000 |
| Indicated | 1291000 | 4.19 | 174000 | 3490000 | 6.17 | 692000 |
| Measured & Indicated | 2448000 | 4.66 | 367000 | 3945000 | 6.25 | 793000 |
| Inferred | 69000 | 4.39 | 10000 | 2566000 | 6.08 | 502000 |

---

**Open Pit and Underground Mineral Resources for Percival Deposit (effective December 31, 2024)<sup>(1-15)</sup>**

Open Pit (surface to 150 m) Underground (150 m - 860 m) <br> Category Tonnes (g/t Au) ContainedAu (oz) Tonnes (g/tAu) ContainedAu (oz) <br> Inferred 2,253,000 1.81 131,000 557,000 4.47 80,000

*Notes:*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*1.* The effective date of the Eau Claire project Mineral Resource Estimates ("MREs"), including the Eau Claire and Percival deposit estimates, is May 10, 2024.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*2.* The Mineral Resource Estimates were estimated by Maxime Dupéré, B.Sc., géo. of SGS Geological Services and is an independent Qualified Person as defined by NI 43-101.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*3.* The classification of the current Mineral Resource Estimates into Measured, Indicated and Inferred mineral resources is consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*4.* All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*5.* The mineral resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*6.* Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that most Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*7.* The Project mineral resource estimates are based on a validated database which includes data from 1202 surface diamond drill holes totalling 406,431 m, and 426 surface channels (Eau Claire deposit) for 1,345 m. The resource database totals 273,402 drill hole assay intervals representing 267,721 m of data and 2,254 channel assays for 1,316 m.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*8.* The MRE for the Eau Claire deposit is based on 280 three-dimensional ("3D") resource models representing the 450, 850 and hinge zones. The MRE for the Percival deposit is based on 29 3D resource models representing high grade and lower grade halo zones.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*9.* Grades for Au were estimated for each mineralization domain using 1.0 metre capped composites assigned to that domain. To generate grade within the blocks, the inverse distance cubed (ID3) interpolation method was used for all domains. An average density value was assigned to each domain.

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*10.* Based on the location, surface exposure, size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using open-pit mining methods. In-pit mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au. The in-pit resource grade blocks are quantified above the base case cut-off grade, above the constraining pit shell, below topography and within the constraining mineralized domains (the constraining volumes).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*11.* The pit optimization and base-case cut-off grade consider a gold price of $1,900/oz and considers a gold recovery of 95%. The pit optimization and base case cut-off grade also considers a mining cost of US$2.80/t mined, pit slope of 55⁰ degrees, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*12.* The results from the pit optimization, using the pseudoflow optimization method in Whittle 4.7.4, are used solely for the purpose of testing the "reasonable prospects for economic extraction" by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade. A Whittle pit shell at a revenue factor of 0.52 was selected as the ultimate pit shell for the purposes of this mineral resource estimate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*13.* Based on the size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using underground mining methods. Underground mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au. The mineral resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below surface/pit surface and within the constraining mineralized wireframes (considered mineable shapes). Based on the size, shape, general thickness, and orientation of the mineralized structures, it is envisioned that the deposits may be mined using a combination of underground mining methods including sub-level stoping (SLS) and/or cut and fill (CAF) mining.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*14.* The underground base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au considers a mining cost of US$65.00/t mined, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*15.* The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.

**2023 Mineral Resource Estimate**

***Eau Claire Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate as of December 31, 2023***

Mineral Resource Estimate (effective February December 31, 2023)<sup>(1-7)</sup>

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| Category | Tonnes | (g/t Au) | Contained Au (oz) |
| Measured | 906000 | 6.63 | 193000 |
| Indicated | 3388000 | 6.06 | 660000 |
| Total Measured & Indicated | 4294000 | 6.18 | 853000 |
| Inferred | 2382000 | 6.53 | 500000 |

---

**Open Pit and Underground Mineral Resources (effective December 31, 2023)<sup>(1-7)</sup>**

------

---

| | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | Open Pit (surface to 150 m) | Open Pit (surface to 150 m) | Open Pit (surface to 150 m) | Underground (150 m - 860 m) | Underground (150 m - 860 m) | Underground (150 m - 860 m) |
| Category | Tonnes | (g/t Au) | Contained Au (oz) | Tonnes | (g/t Au) | Contained Au (oz) |
| Measured | 574000 | 6.66 | 123000 | 332000 | 6.56 | 70000 |
| Indicated | 636000 | 5.13 | 105000 | 2752000 | 6.27 | 555000 |
| Measured & Indicated | 1210000 | 5.86 | 228000 | 3084000 | 6.30 | 625000 |
| Inferred | 43000 | 5.06 | 7000 | 2339000 | 6.56 | 493000 |

---

*Notes:*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*1.* The classification of the current Mineral Resource Estimate into Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources has been completed in accordance with the definitions under S-K 1300, which are consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*2.* All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*3.* All Resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by 3D wireframe models (the constraining volumes), and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*4.* Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to a Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that most of the Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*5.* Open pit Mineral Resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au within a conceptual pit shell and underground Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au outside the conceptual pit shell. Cut-off grades are based on a gold price of US$1,250 per ounce, a foreign exchange rate of US$0.80 and a gold recovery of 95%.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*6.* The results from pit optimization are used solely for the purpose of testing the "reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction" by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*7.* There is no certainty that all or any part of the Inferred Mineral Resource will be upgraded to an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource as a result of continued exploration. There is no other relevant data or information available that is necessary to make the technical report summary understandable and not misleading.

**2024 Mineral Resource Estimates Classification**

Gold grades were estimated into the blocks for the deposit block models. Blocks within each mineralized domain were interpolated using composites assigned to that domain. To generate grade within the blocks, the inverse distance cubed (ID3) interpolation method was used for all domains for the Eau Claire deposit and ID2 for the Percival deposit.

For all domains, the search ellipse used to interpolate grade into the resource blocks was interpreted based on orientation and size of the mineralized domain. The search ellipse axes are generally oriented to reflect the observed preferential long axis (geological trend) of the domain and the observed trend of the mineralization down dip/down plunge.

------

Three to four passes were used to interpolate grade into all the blocks in the grade shells; interpolation parameters varied by deposit area. All blocks were classified as Measured for Pass 1, Indicated for Pass 2 and Inferred for Pass 3 and 4.

**Discussion on 2024 versus 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate** 

The 2024 Eau Claire project mineral resource estimate of 1.16Moz Au at a grade of 5.64 g/t Au in the Measured and Indicated category as well as an additional 723koz Au at a grade of 4.13 g/t Au in the Inferred Category incorporates the additional drilling completed between 2021 and 2023 at the Eau Claire deposit as well as provided a maiden resource estimate for the Percival deposit located 14 km to the east of Eau Claire. The additional drilling resulted in the addition of 307koz Au in the Measured and Indicated category (a 36% increase) and 223 koz Au in the Inferred category (a 44.6% increase).

**Conclusions**

The Eau Claire and Percival deposits contain within-pit and underground Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources that are associated with well-defined mineralized trends and models. The deposits are open along strike and at depth. Project geologists have a good understanding of the regional, local, and deposit geology and controls on mineralization. The geological models are reasonable and plausible interpretations of the drill results.

Mineral Resources for the Eau Claire deposit were estimated assuming combined open pit and underground mining methods. At cut-off grades of 0.5 g/t Au for open pit and 2.5 g/t Au for underground, Measured Mineral Resources are estimated to total 1.61 Mt at an average grade of 5.67 g/t Au containing 294,000 ounces gold. At the same cut-off grades, Indicated Mineral Resources are estimated to total 4.78 Mt at an average grade of 5.64 g/t Au containing 860,000 ounces gold. At the same cut-off grades, Inferred Mineral Resources are estimated to total 5.44 Mt at an average grade of 4.13 g/t Au containing 723,000 ounces gold. The open pit resources were constrained by a preliminary pit shell generated in Whittle software.

The limited metallurgical testwork conducted so far suggests that the gold can be recovered by conventional means, such as a combination of gravity followed by cyanide leaching of the concentrate. Additional metallurgical testwork will be warranted if further exploration increases the size of the resource.

The Author considers that the Project has potential for delineation of additional Mineral Resources and that further exploration is warranted. Given the prospective nature of the Property, it is the Author's opinion that the Property merits further exploration and that a proposed plan for further work by Fury is justified. The Author is recommending Fury conduct further exploration, subject to funding and any other matters which may cause the proposed exploration program to be altered in the normal course of its business activities or alterations which may affect the program as a result of exploration activities themselves.

------

**Recommendations**

The following summarizes the work programs recommended by the author of the Eau Claire Technical Report Summary.

Fury's intentions are to continue exploration on the Property in 2025 and onwards. The proposed work program consists of a regional portion focused on refining known gold occurrences within the Percival - Serendipity trend, 14km to the east of Eau Claire, and attempting to define new prospects in areas with favourable geological and structural settings. In addition to the regional program, a drill program focused on the Eau Claire deposit has been proposed to tie-in the mineralization identified 450m west of the current resource with the aim of updating the current mineral resource. Additional drilling would focus on the Percival prospect and other nearby geochemical anomalies to determine the continuity and scale of gold mineralization.

Fury has gained a better understanding of the combination of pathfinder elements and structural controls on the gold mineralization at Percival. The broad low-grade gold mineralization occurs along a well-defined east-west trending structural splay of the Cannard Deformation Zone. Certain elemental associations, most notably Arsenic, Bismuth, and Tungsten, are proving to be important pathfinders for the gold mineralization. Higher-grade gold within the broader corridor is controlled by secondary shearing and is identified by the high degree of silicification. With this knowledge, the Company has refined their targeting along the Percival to Serendipity Trend identifying ten priority targets for 2024. These identified targets lie within the same stratigraphic package as Percival Main and have undergone varying degrees of deformation. The proximity of the main Cannard and Hashimoto Deformation Zones varies from one target to the other and may have a significant impact on the gold mineralization. Fury believes the varying degrees of deformation are an important control on both gold mineralization and the potential preservation of a sizeable, mineralized body.

The recommended work program is anticipated to include the collection of 15,000 infill till and biogeochemical samples and 30,000 m of diamond drilling. Drilling would be allocated with 2,000 m to 7,500 m focused on testing biogeochemical anomalies within the Percival - Serendipity trend, approximately 20,000 m at the Eau Claire deposit for resource expansion, and 2,500 m to 8,000 m at Percival for resource expansion. Subsequent to the completion of additional drilling on the Property, updated MREs are planned which will form the basis of an updated engineering study in the form of an updated Preliminary Economic Assessment.

The total cost of the planned work program by Fury is estimated at up to $14.2 M shown in the table below. The Company has not yet made a decision to fully implement these recommendations as they are financing and success dependent.

**Recommended Work Programs**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cost<br>Estimate<br>(C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | &nbsp;&nbsp;1750000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | &nbsp;&nbsp;750000 |
| Drilling | Diamond Drilling (30,000m at $175/m) | &nbsp;&nbsp;5250000 |
| Till Sampling | Detailed sampling program | &nbsp;&nbsp;1500000 |
| Land Management | Consultants. Assessment Filing, Claim maintenance | &nbsp;&nbsp;750000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | &nbsp;&nbsp;75000 |

---

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cost<br>Estimate<br>(C$)** |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | &nbsp;&nbsp;35000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;75000 |
| Expediting | Expediting | &nbsp;&nbsp;150000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter | &nbsp;&nbsp;450000 |
| Fuel |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;1200000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | &nbsp;&nbsp;100000 |
| Update MRE and PEA |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;600000 |
| Sub-total | Sub-total | &nbsp;&nbsp;12935000 |
| Contingency (10%) |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;1293500 |
| Total |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;14228500 |

---

**2020 - 2024 Eau Claire Exploration Program** 

From 2020 through to 2024, Fury completed a total of 120 diamond drill holes for approximately 75,654.3 m on the Project. The drill program consisted of i) an extension phase focused on extensions to the known vein corridors along strike from the current resource ("Extension Program"); ii) an exploration phase designed to test targets along the 4.5km long deposit trend ("Exploration Program") and iii) an exploration phase of drilling designed to test targets at the Percival and Serendipity prospects 14km east and 20 km northeast of the Eau Claire Deposit respectively. Large stepout drilling in 2022 increased the mineralized footprint of the Eau Claire deposit by over 450m to the west. At Percival Fury intercepted 13.5 m of 8.05 g/t gold (Au) outlining a 500x100x300m zone of gold mineralization.

The 2023 drilling campaign focused on the Hinge Target, which is located west of the deposit, adjacent to the 850 W zone, and the at Percival prospect area. Results from the 2023 Hinge drilling expanded the Hinge Target gold mineralization 50m up-dip and 75m to the west respectively, over 450m from the defined Eau Claire Resource as well as intercepting high grade shallow mineralization on the eastern edge of the Hinge target.

The Extension Program at the Eau Claire deposit was designed to target strike extensions of the known vein corridors to the west and southeast of the current mineral resource. To date, Fury Gold has drilled twenty one holes targeting the southeast extension of the Eau Claire Resource with intercepts including: 23.27 g/t Au over 7.09m, 11.56 g/t Au over 6.04m, 59.3 g/t Au over 0.96m and 4.89 g/t Au over 2.94m. Results from the four holes completed in the second quarter of 2022 were released on August 3, 2022 including 4.43 g/t Au over 1.43m and 4.60 g/t Au over 1.25m. Two additional holes were completed in October 2022 with results released on January 23, 2023 including 3.91 g/t Au over 2.50m.

The exploration drilling program along the Eau Claire deposit trend continues to demonstrate the potential to significantly expand the Eau Claire deposit to the west. The focus has been on the Western Hinge, and Gap Zone as well as along the north limb of the anticline. All exploration targets within the Deposit Trend have the potential to significantly expand the Eau Claire mineralized footprint. To date the footprint of gold mineralization has been increased by over 455m or 25% at the Hinge Target alone and remains open to further expansion to the West.

------

**Regional Exploration** 

The Company completed 11,497.8m in 18 diamond drill holes in 2022 and 2023 at Percival. Five holes targeted the parallel hinge 500m to the east of Percival proper. All holes intercepted silicified sulphide rich breccias, however only narrow low grade gold values were returned. The remainder of the drilling tested extensions of the historical gold mineralization at Percival proper. The results from the Percival proper drilling program confirm that the high-grade core of the Percival mineralization plunges steeply to the west and remains open in all directions. Highlights included an 85m step out from historical high-grade mineralization which intercepted 13.5m of 8.05 g/t Au, (including 3.00m of 25.8 g/t Au) in drill hole 22KP-008 and a 150m step out which intercepted 7.5m of 4.38 g/t Au, (including 3m of 8.7 g/t Au, and 3m of 5.5 g/t Au) in drill hole 22KP-005. As well as 279 g/t Au over 1.5m along the eastern edge of the defined mineralization. With the recent drilling the gold mineralization at Percival Main is represented by a 500 m by 100 m footprint with high-grade gold being defined to 300 m below surface hosted within folded sulphidized, silicified, and brecciated sediments.

**Committee Bay Project**

The following disclosure relating to the Committee Bay Project is based on information derived from the technical report summary entitled "*Technical Report on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada*" dated effective December 31, 2023, prepared by Bryan Atkinson, P.Geo., as Senior Vice President Exploration of Fury Gold (the "Committee Bay Technical Report Summary"). The Committee Bay Technical Report Summary conforms to the SEC's Modernized Property Disclosure Requirements for Mining Registrants as described in S-K 1300 and Item 601(b)(96) - *Technical Report Summary*. All information of a scientific or technical nature contained below and provided after the date of the Committee Bay Technical Report Summary has been reviewed and approved by Mr. Atkinson as a "qualified person" for the purposes of SK-1300.

The Committee Bay Project is a material property for the purposes of S-K 1300. The 2023 Committee Bay Technical Report Summary is considered to still be current as not material work was conducted on the project in 2024.

**Description and Location**

The Committee Bay Project is located in the eastern part of the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut, approximately 430 km northwest of the town of Rankin Inlet, Nunavut. The Project is accessible by air, either from Rankin Inlet or Baker Lake, Nunavut. Rankin Inlet and Baker Lake are serviced seasonally by barge and ship. The hamlets of Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Naujaat, Gjoa Haven, Taloyoak, and Kugaaruk are accessible by scheduled commercial flights.

The Committee Bay Project consists of 57 Crown Leases and 150 mineral claims in six non-contiguous blocks totaling approximately 247.972.53 ha.

------

The figure below presents property location and claims comprising the Committee Bay project:

![form20fax006.jpg](form20faxz006.jpg)

The book value of the Committee Bay Project as at December 31, 2024 is provided below:

---

| |
|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Name of Material Property** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Committee Bay Project<br>&nbsp;&nbsp; $8100000 <sup>(1)</sup> |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(1)* Book value of the Company's mineral projects under the Company's IFRS accounting policy primarily reflects project acquisition costs because the Company expenses rather than capitalizes all exploration costs as they are incurred. Acquisition costs may include allocations of the cost of corporate acquisitions of acquired companies which own mineral projects which allocations can increase the book value of the mineral projects of the acquired company above what the acquired company itself carried them at. The financial statement notes record exploration by general area rather than by individual property so aggregate expensed exploration costs for individual properties are not possible to determine from the financial statements alone. The book value of mineral properties may be reduced as a result of impairment charges where the Company concludes that the book value must be reduced in the face of evidence of impairment. Accordingly, readers are cautioned that mineral property book value is not intended to reflect the fair value of the mineral project at any given time*.*

**Access, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography**

The Committee Bay Project is accessed via fixed wing charter primarily through a 914 m, graded, esker airstrip at Hayes Camp, a permitted, seasonally prepared 1,580 m winter ice airstrip, which is constructed on the adjacent Sandspit Lake, or a 320 m tundra airstrip at the Bullion Camp.

------

The Committee Bay Project is located in the Wager Bay Plateau Ecoregion of the Northern Arctic Ecozone (Marshall and Schutt, 1999). This ecoregion is classified as having a low arctic ecoclimate. Summers are short and cold, with mean daily temperatures above freezing only in July and August. Snow cover usually lasts from September to June, but it can fall during any month. Most of the lakes are icebound until approximately mid-July. Precipitation is moderate throughout the year, but drifting of snow in the winter can result in considerable localized accumulations, particularly on the sides of hills. Fog is often a problem near the coast and at higher elevations particularly during the late spring to early summer and the fall months.

There is no permanent infrastructure at the Committee Bay Project. The Company maintains four camps to support seasonal exploration campaigns in various portions of the Committee Bay Project, namely the Hayes Camp (100-person capacity), the Bullion Camp (20- to 40-person capacity), Crater Camp (40-person capacity) and the Ingot Camp (10-person capacity). A drill water system is maintained at the Three Bluffs site.

**Geology, Mineralization and Deposit Types**

The Committee Bay Project area, situated in the Churchill Structural Province, is underlain by Archean and Proterozoic rocks and extensively covered by Quaternary glacial drift. It comprises three distinct Archean sub-domains (Prince Albert Group, Northern Migmatite, and Walker Lake Intrusive Complex).

The Committee Bay Greenstone Belt (the "CBGB"), which hosts the gold occurrences discussed in the Committee Bay Report, is composed of Prince Albert Group rocks. These are bounded by the wide, northeast-striking Slave-Chantrey mylonite belt to the northwest and by the Amer and Wager Bay shear zones to the south. Two major fault systems, the northeast-striking Kellet fault and the northwest-striking Hayes River fault, intersect the central portion of the CBGB and cut the Prince Albert Group rocks. Gold occurrences in the CBGB appear to be spatially related to the major shear systems and their sub-structures indicating the potential for the re-mobilization of mineral-bearing fluids along these structures.

The regional strike of rock units in the West Laughland Lake area is generally north but shows a degree of variability. Units, generally vertically dipping in much of the CBGB, have a more moderate to shallow dip at Four Hills. Rocks generally strike northeast from Four Hills east to the Committee Bay Project. In the Hayes River area, the east-striking Walker Lake shear zone is the dominant structure. Dips in the Hayes River area are generally sub-vertical and there is evidence of flexural shear and silicification along lithological contacts between iron formation and talc-actinolite schist (meta-komatiite). Rocks of the Curtis River area, approximately 120 km northeast of the Hayes River area, strike northeast and dip sub-vertically.

The iron formations that host the Three Bluffs, Antler, Hayes, and Ledge gold occurrences have unique lithological associations with their contact rocks and do not appear to be stratigraphically equivalent.

Three low, rounded, rusty outcrops, called West, Central, and East, comprise the Three Bluffs gold occurrence. Gold mineralization is hosted in gossanous, predominantly oxide, silicate, and sulphide facies iron formations. Iron formation thicknesses range from 25 m to 30 m at the West Bluff to 55 m at the Central Bluff. The Three Bluffs iron formation maintains a thickness of 10 m for a minimum strike length of 1.8 km and is at least 55 m thick for 700 m. The iron formations are poorly banded to massive with locally shared, quartz-veined intervals of up to 3 m near lithological contacts. Chlorite and epidote alteration indicates either lower amphibolite grade metamorphism (epidote-amphibolite facies) or the result of retrograde greenschist facies metamorphism associated with gold deposition. Local mineralization, composed of disseminated pyrite and pyrrhotite, can occupy up to 50% of the rock volume.

------

**History**

Key historical events for the project are include:

(i) in 1961 and 1967, mapping was done in the area by the Geological Survey of Canada ("GSC");

(ii) in 1970, King Resources Company conducted reconnaissance geological mapping and sampling in the Laughland Lake and Ellice Hills areas, with follow-up work including geophysics and detailed mapping, trenching, and sampling;

(iii) in 1970, 1974, and 1976 Cominco Ltd. Carried out reconnaissance and detailed geological mapping, ground geophysics, and sampling in the Hayes River area;

(iv) in 1971, the Aquitaine Company conducted airborne electromagnetic ('EM") and magnetometer surveys;

(v) from 1972 to 1977, detailed re-mapping of the area was done by the GSC;

(vi) in 1979, Urangesellschaft Canada Ltd. Carried out reconnaissance airborne radiometric surveys and prospecting for uranium in the Laughland Lake area;

(vii) in 1986, Wollex carried out geological mapping and rock sampling in the West Laughland Lake area;

(viii) in 1992, GSC conducted geological re-assessment of the mineral potential of the Prince Albert Group;

(ix) in 1994, channel sampling carried out over the Three Bluffs area but the results were lost;

(x) in 1996, Terraquest Ltd. Conducted a high-resolution airborne magnetometer survey;

(xi) from 1997 to 1998, P.H. Thompson Geological Consulting Ltd. Conducted regional geological mapping in the Three Bluffs area;

(xii) from 1999 to 2002: GSC conducted a multi-disciplinary study of the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt;

(xiii) from 1992 to 2012, North Country Gold and its predecessors Carried out prospecting, rock sampling, gridding, airborne and ground geophysics, geophysics, geological mapping, and reverse circulation and diamond drilling on several of the gold targets including Three Bluffs, Three Bluffs West, West Plains, Anuri, Inuk, Antler, and Hayes.

Historical drilling (pre-2015) on the Project amounts to 68,269.98 metres drilled in 426 drill holes. Of the historical drilling, 351 drill holes comprising 58,575.56 m were completed at Three Bluffs and are the basis for the Three Bluffs Mineral Resource described below.

**Sampling, Analyses and Data Verification**

*Committee Bay RAB Drilling QA/QC Disclosure*

------

Intercepts were calculated using a minimum of a 0.25 g/t Au cut off at beginning and end of the intercept and allowing for no more than four consecutive samples (six metres) of less than 0.25 g/t Au.

Analytical samples were taken using 1/8 of each 5ft (1.52m) interval material (chips) and sent to ALS Global ("ALS") Lab in Yellowknife, NWT and Vancouver, BC for preparation and then to ALS Lab in Vancouver, BC for analysis. All samples are assayed using 30g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (Au-AA25) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (ME-MS61). Quality Assurance/Quality Control ("QA/QC") programs using internal standard samples, field and lab duplicates and blanks indicate good accuracy and precision in a large majority of standards assayed.

*Committee Bay Diamond Drilling QA/QC Disclosure*

Intercepts were calculated using a minimum of a 0.25 g/t Au cut off at beginning and end of the intercept and allowing for no more than six consecutive metres of less than 0.25 g/t Au.

Analytical samples were taken by sawing NQ diameter core into equal halves on site and sent one of the halves to ALS Lab in Yellowknife, NWT for preparation and then to ALS Lab in Vancouver, BC for analysis. All samples are assayed using 50g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (Au-AA26) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (ME-MS61). QA/QC programs using internal standard samples, field and lab duplicates and blanks indicate good accuracy. Due to the nuggety nature of mineralization encountered, the Company will be running additional analysis on duplicate samples to better understand the analytical precision.

True widths of mineralization are unknown based on current geometric understanding of the mineralized intervals.

*Committee Bay Grabs QA/QC Disclosure:*

Approximately 1 to 2 kg of material was collected for analysis and sent to ALS Lab in Vancouver, BC for preparation and analysis. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (Au-AA26) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (ME-MS61). QA/QC programs for 2018 rock grab samples using internal standard samples, lab duplicates, standards and blanks indicate good accuracy and precision in a large majority of standards assayed. Grab samples are selective in nature and cannot be consider as representative of the underlying mineralization.

Core arrives in camp at the end of each drill shift where geological technicians check and correct and downhole distance discrepancies. Technicians record core recovery, fracture density and orientation, magnetic susceptibility, and overall rock quality designation. Geological logging follows, comprising measurement and descriptions of geological units and the collection of semi- quantitative data such as the number of visible gold occurrences, volume percent sulphide minerals, volume percent of alteration minerals, volume percent vein quartz, etc. Sample intervals are then designated by the logging geologist focusing on sulphide bearing and/or silicified Intervals that are well bracketed by apparently unmineralized rock. Protocols limit sampling intervals between 0.75 m and 1 m in length with a minimum length of 0.3 m and a maximum length of 1.5 m so long as geological boundaries were honoured.

Drill core is digitally photographed and core samples are marked for sawing. Sampling intervals, geological boundaries, and a saw line are marked by the logging geologist and the core is sawed in half longitudinally by technicians. One half of the core is placed in a sample bag with a uniquely numbered tag and secured with plastic cable ties. Each batch of 20 field samples contain a blank and one of four commercial certified reference materials. The remaining half core is returned to the core box for reference. The majority of the reference core remains on-site except for chosen intervals which are taken to Edmonton, Alberta for display purposes. Individual sample bags are placed inside a larger bag which is closed with a security seal for shipment to the laboratory.

------

Assaying procedures are generally similar to those used in 2003, with some minor modifications. The standard aliquot size was increased to 2AT (58.32 g) and the samples were all analyzed using FA with a gravimetric finish. Selected samples, containing visible gold or which assayed greater than 20 g/t Au, are re-analyzed using metallic screen fire assay that include twin 2AT gravimetric assays of the fine fraction. A pulp from each sample is sent for standard 30 element ICP analysis using a three-acid digestion.

All the RAB and diamond drill core samples are analyzed at the ALS laboratory in Vancouver, BC, by fire assay of a 50 g sample followed by a gravimetric finish according to ALS lab code Au-GRA22 and by a multi-element inductively couple plasma atomic emission spectrometry or mass spectrometry ("ICP-AES/ICP-MS") package following a four acid digestion of a one gram sample according to ALS lab code ME-MS61. Sample intervals with visible gold in core were assayed using a Screen Fire Assay method on a one kg sample according to ALS lab code Au-SCR24 where the entire sample is screened to 100 μm and fire assays are performed on a 50 g sample of <100 μm material and on the entire >100 μm material. The fire assay is calculated as a weighted average of the two fire assays.

In the opinion of Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. ("RPA", formerly Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates Inc.), the sample collection, preparation, analysis, transport, and security procedures at the Committee Bay Project are adequate for use in the estimation of mineral resources.

**Internal Controls**

Fury's internal QA/QC procedures include the insertion of Certified Reference Materials (CRMs), field blanks and duplicates representing a minimum of 10% of samples assayed. When visible gold was observed additional CRMs and blanks were inserted immediately following the suspected high-grade to test lab contamination.

No blank material submitted returned assay values above the gold detection limit of the analytical methodology.

Analytical results for duplicate samples were reviewed and compared for any extreme outliers. Given the highly variable nature of gold mineralization duplicate analyses were used qualitatively in order to determine the degree of variance within the particular prospect being drilled.

Sample batches with suspected cross-sample contamination or certified reference materials returning assay values outside of the mean ± 3SD control limits are considered analytical failures by the Company and assay reruns were requested when deemed warranted.

ALS has its own internal QA/QC program, which is reported in the assay certificates, including the coarse reject and pulp duplicate assays. The Fury QA/QC program includes monitoring of laboratory internal QC results

------

**Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing**

*2003 Metallurgical Testing*

Dawson Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc. of Salt Lake City, Utah, was commission in 2003 to conduct metallurgical tests on Three Bluffs mineralized material. Twelve drill core samples, eight high-grade and four low-grade, totaling approximately 20 kg were used. The mineralogical study reported the principal sulphide minerals as pyrrhotite with minor pyrite. No reference was made to any deleterious elements in the samples.

The test indicated that 92% gold recovery could be achieved with cyanidation but the presence of pyrrhotite would result in high cyanide consumption. RPA notes that these preliminary tests suggest gold at Three Bluffs can be recovered using conventional methods.

*2008 Metallurgical Testing*

Mineral processing testwork comprising exploratory gravity concentration, cyanide leaching, and froth flotation studies were undertaken by Process Research Associates Ltd. ("PRA") under the guidance of RPA. The sample used was a 110 kg composite of drill core samples from the 2007 exploration program with an average estimated grade of 4.3 g/t Au and 7.5% S.

Additional gravity recovery test work on Three Bluffs mineralization was performed by Knelson Research Technology Centre. An 18 kg sample, taken from a composite of coarse rejects sample material from 2007 drill core samples, was subjected to multi-pass testing utilizing a bench-scale enhanced gravity concentrator. The tests were designed to examine recovery trends for gold and gold-bearing sulphides.

Based on the composite sample tested it was expected that Three Bluffs mineralization could be processed by various standard beneficiation steps to recover approximately 93% of the gold. The limited metallurgical testwork conducted to date suggests that the gold can be recovered by conventional means, a combination of gravity and flotation followed by cyanide leaching of the concentrate. The metallurgical test results indicated that a combination of gravity and flotation followed by cyanide leaching of the concentrate is likely the most suitable processing option.

*2009 Metallurgical Testing*

Follow-up work at PRA was then undertaken in April 2009 to look specifically at a flowsheet consisting of gravity recovery followed by cyanidation. These results were reported by PRA on May 6, 2009.

At a primary grind size P80 of 74 μm, gold was effectively extracted by gravity and flotation, with 96% of the gold recovered. In a single Locked-Cycle test, a gravity circuit recovery of 60.5% gold in 0.22% of mass, followed by a cleaner flotation recovery of 35.3% gold in 17.7% of the mass, was obtained. Thus, an overall gold recovery of 95.8% in 17.9% of the mass was shown to be possible. Flotation recovery without gravity scalping was also reasonably successful.

Flotation concentrate was subjected to cyanide leach testwork. A total of eight concentrate leach tests were performed. A single whole ore cyanide leach test obtained 79.2% gold extraction after 48 hours and 94.6% after 72 hours.

Several issues were identified during metallurgical testing of samples, the largest issue lies with cyanide consumption. Cyanide consumption has been found to be extremely high at up to 0.2 kg/h, while leaching kinetics remain low. Another issue that has been identified is that gold bearing sulphides are not amenable to enhanced gravity separation, therefore batch concentration and not continuous gravity concentration should be utilized.

------

Based on the samples tested to date, Three Bluffs ore is generally considered to be relatively free-milling. Gravity concentration has been effective in recovering up to 60% of the gold. Much of the remaining gold can be effectively recovered by either flotation or cyanide leaching to produce an overall metallurgical recovery above 90%. RPA recommends further optimization and variability work on a greater variety of samples from the Three Bluffs property if further economic studies are conducted.

There has been no mineralogical processing and metallurgical testing since 2009.

**2023 Mineral Resource Estimates**

The mineral resources at the Committee Bay Project are estimated to be approximately 2.07 million tonnes of indicated mineral resources grading 7.85 g/t Au, containing 524,000 ounces of gold, and 2.93 million tonnes of inferred mineral resources grading 7.64 g/t Au, containing 720,000 ounces of gold as of September 11, 2023. No additional drilling within the resource has been completed and the 2017 Mineral Resource Estimate and the 2017 block model remains appropriate for the 2023 mineral resource calculation in the opinion of Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson acknowledges that some other parties may be using somewhat higher long-term gold price assumptions than were used for this estimate. A bulk density of 3.15 t/m<sup>3</sup> was applied for estimation of tonnage. This value was derived from a total of 6,426 density determinations carried out on drill core from a variety of locations in the deposit.

The estimate was carried out using a block model method constrained by wireframe grade shell models, with Inverse Distance Cubed ("ID3") weighting. Two sets of wireframes and block models were employed: one contemplated open pit mining and the other, underground mining. The block model grade interpolations were checked by (i) an inspection of the interpolated block grades in plan and section views and comparison to the composite grades, and (ii) through a statistical comparison of global block and composite mean grades. Inspection of the block grades in plan and section indicates that the grade estimation honours the drill hole grades reasonably well.

The reported mineral resources at calculated cut-off grades of 3.0 g/t Au for open pit mining and 4.0 g/t Au for underground mining based on the following assumptions:

* Gold Sale Price: US$1,200/oz;

* Process Recovery 93%;

* Open Pit Mining Cost C$10.00/t;

* Underground Mining Cost C$70.00/t;

* Process + G&A Costs C$75.00/t; and

* Exchange Rate 1.25 US$/C$.

To fulfill the resource criteria of "reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction", a pit shell analysis was run on the 0.5 g/t Au model to determine how much of the deposit could potentially be extracted using open pit methods. The analysis was done using Whittle software with very preliminary assumptions for pit slopes, metallurgical recovery, prices, and costs.

For this mineral resource the preliminary pit shell that was optimized in 2013 using a different gold price and cost assumptions (listed below) than those used to calculate the updated cut-off grade. Mr. Atkinson considers this approach reasonable given that the pit shell used to report open pit resources is conceptual and the relative difference between the underground and open-pit resource cut-off grades is negligible.

------

The following cost assumptions were used:

* Gold Sale Price: US$1,500/oz;

* Overall Pit Slope Angles: 50°;

* Process Recovery 93%;

* Mining Cost US$10.00/t; and

* Process + G&A Costs US$60.00/t

Blocks from the open pit model captured within this shell were considered eligible for reporting as open pit resources. The same pit shell was applied to the underground model, except that blocks from this model were included in the resource only if they were outside of the shell.

**Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2023<sup>(1-7)</sup>**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Class** | **Type** | **Cut-off**<br>**(g/t AU)** | **Tonnes**<br>**(000 t)** | **Gold Grade**<br>**(g/t Au)** | **Contained<br>Gold** <br>**(oz Au)** |
| Indicated | Open Pit | 3.0 | 1760 | 7.72 | 437000 |
| Indicated | Underground | 4.0 | 310 | 8.57 | 86000 |
|  | **Total** |  | **2070** | **7.85** | **524000** |
| Inferred | Open Pit | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;590 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.57 | &nbsp;&nbsp;144000 |
| Inferred | Underground | 4.0 | 2340 | 7.65 | 576000 |
|  | **Total** |  | **2930** | **7.64** | **720000** |

---

*Notes:*

*1. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves as they do not have demonstrated economic viability, although, as per CIM requirements, the Mineral Resources reported above have been determined to have demonstrated reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

*2. The Mineral Resources were estimated in accordance with S-K 1300 definitions, which are consistent with the definitions adopted by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions (2014) and Best Practices Guidelines (2019) prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council.*

*3. The Mineral Resources Committee Bay Gold Project was initially reported in Ross (2017) - QP David A. Ross, M.Sc., P.Geo, effective date of May 31, 2017.*

*4. The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as effective as of December 31, 2023 by the Qualified Person, Mr. Bryan Atkinson, Senior Vice President Exploration of the Company.*

*5. The Cutoff grades were determined using average block grade values within the estimation domains and an Au price of US$1,200/oz, and Process Recovery of 93%, Open Pit mining costs of C$10.00/t, Underground mining costs of C$70.00/t, Process and G&A costs of approximately C$75/t and an exchange rate of 1.25 US$/C$.*

*6. A bulk density values value of 3.15 t/m3 was assigned based on available SG measurements.*

*7. Differences may occur in totals due to rounding.*

**Exploration Program Recommendations**

The following summarizes the work programs recommended by the authors of the Committee Bay Technical Report Summary for the Committee Bay Project. The Phase 1 program is anticipated to include collection of 15,000 infill detailed till samples and 7,500 m of Diamond drilling along the shear zone sub-parallel to the Three Bluffs deposit. The Phase 1 program is estimated to cost approximately $5 million. Details of the recommended Phase I program can be found below.

------

A Phase 2 exploration program will be drill intensive. An additional 10,000 - 15,000 m of diamond drilling should be completed at the Three Bluffs deposit to explore the down dip potential of the limb mineralization as well as tying in the newly identified shear zone hosted mineralization with the ultimate goal of updating the Mineral Resource Estimate. An additional 10,000 m of drilling should be allocated to regional targets defined from the Phase 1 program. The Phase 2 program is estimated to cost between $15 and $20 million. Details of the recommended Phase 2 program can be found below although readers must appreciate there is no certainty that Fury will carry out all or a portion of these recommendations in the foreseeable future.

**Recommended Work Programs for 2024 and beyond**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Phase 1** | **Phase 1** | **Phase 1** |
| **Type** | **Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 350000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 150000 |
| Drilling | Three Bluffs Diamond Drilling (7,500 meters at $220/m) | 1650000 |
| Till Sampling | Detailed sampling program | 120000 |
| Land Management | Consultants. Assessment Filing, Lease Payments | 250000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 30000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 35000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 15000 |
| Expediting | Expediting (Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Churchill) | 150000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter, Fixed Wing | 450000 |
| Fuel |  | 1000000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 100000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **4550000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 455000 |
| **Total** |  | **5005000** |
|  | **Phase 2** |  |
| **Type** | **Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 1750000 |
| Drilling | 20,000 - 25,000 m Diamond Drilling at Three Bluffs and regional | 6500000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 750000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 50000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 150000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 75000 |
| Expediting | Expediting (Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Churchill) | 550000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 1250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter, Fixed Wing | 1950000 |
| Fuel |  | 2750000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 400000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **16175000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 1617500 |
| **Total** |  | **17792500** |

---

------

**2015 through 2021 Committee Bay Exploration by Fury**

Since acquiring the Project, Fury Gold has completed a total of 47,194.47 m of RAB drilling in 271 drill holes as well as 14,006.28 m of diamond drilling as part of the Phase 1 recommendations detailed above. In addition to the drilling extensive regional and infill till geochemical campaigns, ground and airborne geophysical surveying as well as aerial drone surveying have been undertaken. The Company has incurred approximately $60M in expenditures exploring the Project. The Company views that the results from this exploration further support conclusions drawn in the Committee Bay Report and do not represent a material change to the Committee Bay Project. The Company intends to continue its exploration in accordance with the Phase 2 recommendations with the continued testing of regional drill targets and expansion drilling at the Three Bluffs deposit.

The Company did not undertake an exploration program at Committee Bay in 2022 in order to focus available resources on the exploration program in Quebec.

**2018 Committee Bay Exploration Program**

During 2018, the Company drilled approximately 10,000 m across several targets in the vicinity of the Three Bluffs deposit but away from known mineralization. Summarized results from this program are highlighted as follows:

* Aiviq - 16 core and 7 RAB holes - The majority of the core drill holes intersected 20 - 40 meter widths of intense quartz veining and sulphidized banded iron formations. Results from the Aiviq core drill program include highlights of 13.5 m of 1.54 g/t gold (including 6 m of 3.3 g/t gold) 4.5 m of 2.93/t Au, and 1.5 m of 8.95/t Au;

* Kalulik - 8 RAB holes - The 2018 drill program at Kalulik identified two separate gold-bearing hydrothermal systems, 4 km apart, that intersected broad zones of low-grade mineralization over 10 - 20 meter widths within sulphidized banded iron formations and associated quartz veining. These results include 21.34 m at 0.4 g/t gold and 16.76 m at 0.45 g/t gold; and,

* Aarluk - 7 RAB holes - At the Aarluk prospect the best intercept was 3.05 m of 3.39 g/t gold, which was encountered in a weakly sulphidized banded iron formation.

**2019 Committee Bay Exploration Program**

During 2019, the Company followed up on the results from its 2018 program by completing the following:

------

* Machine Learning - A total of twelve new targets were generated through unbiased processing of existing exploration data. Two of the targets overlapped with the Company's geologist derived targets adjacent to the Aiviq and Kalulik discoveries;

* Drill Program - A 2,700m diamond drill program at the Committee Bay Project targeted a combination of both machine learning and traditional geologist generated targets and drilled a new gold-bearing system along the regional fault zone that hosts the Aiviq and Kalulik systems. These results include 30 m of 0.67 g/t gold, including 1.5m of 5.03 g/t gold; and

* IP Survey - A 27 line - kilometer induced polarization survey was conducted to identify both chargeability and conductivity targets along the Aiviq-Shamrock corridor.

**2021 Committee Bay Project Drill and Exploration Program**

The Company completed 2,587m of diamond drilling during a six-week field program in the third quarter of 2021. The drilling was focused on expanding the defined high-grade mineralization at the Raven prospect and testing the potential mineralization below the current resource at the Three Bluffs deposit.

<u>Raven Prospect</u>

The Raven prospect is located in the southwest third of the Committee Bay Gold Belt, approximately 50 km west of the Three Bluffs deposit. The prospect is situated along an 8km long shear zone where defined gold mineralization is strongly associated with arsenopyrite within sheared and altered gabbros as well as within quartz veins marking the contact between the gabbro and metasediments over a known strike length of approximately 1.2 km. There have been 207 rock samples historically taken over the defined area of mineralization, with 30 samples returning values greater than 5 g/t gold with a peak value of 143 g/t gold. Importantly, only 1.2 km of the 8 km shear zone has been systematically explored to date.

The prospect has a total of nine historical drill holes totaling 1,670 m with intercepts including 5.49 m of 12.6 g/t gold, 2.84 m of 31.1 g/t gold, and 5.38 m of 2.99 g/t gold over a drilled strike length of 400 m. Historical drilling at the prospect has defined a high-grade body of mineralization approximately 250 m in length, with a 30-degree plunge to the east that is open along strike and down dip. Highlights include drill intercepts of 9.18 g/t gold (Au) over 1.5 m and 7.30 g/t Au over 1.0m in drill hole 21RV-012 and 0.88 g/t Au over 8.00 m in drill hole 21RV-011 as well as rock grab results of up to 32.90 g/t Au from a newly identified gold mineralized outcrop 150 m to the south of the Raven structure that was drilled in this program.

The reported intercepts have extended mineralization 160 m down dip and 70 m along strike from historical drilling at Raven. These results paired with the identification of a previously untested gold mineralized structure clearly indicate the significance of the Raven structure and shear zones in general, as exploration targets along the belt. Additional till sampling was completed at the Raven prospect to explore the entire length of the 8 km shear zone to define new targets. The sampling has identified high-grade gold mineralization 150 m south of the main Raven showing along an undrilled structure at the edge of an 8 km long regional shear zone. Seven rock grab samples from outcrop returned results above 10 g/t Au with a peak of 32.9 g/t Au. Gold and arsenic in till now define a coherent 1,400 m by 500 m anomaly at Raven.

------

<u>Three Bluffs Deposit</u>

The Three Bluffs deposit contains a high-grade resource defined by 525,000 oz at 7.85 g/t gold in the indicated category and 720,000 oz at 7.64 g/t gold in the inferred category. The deposit is characterized by gold mineralization hosted within a folded, silicified, and sulphidized banded iron formation. The anticline that defines the deposit has a strike length of approximately 4km and has been drilled from 150 m to 650 m vertical depth and is open down dip. High-grade mineralization at the deposit is associated with high conductivity responses due to the intense sulphidation of the banded iron formation as evidenced in the hinge zone of the anticline.

Fury Gold's primary target for 2021 at the Three Bluffs deposit was a conductive body that measures 600 m by 200 m at a vertical depth of between 300 m and 500 m. The target is down dip from high grade mineralization within the limbs of the anticline and is offsetting the following intersections: 5 m of 40.6 g/t gold, 5.3 m of 29.03 g/t gold, 11 m of 16.23 g/t gold, 5 m of 15.2 g/t gold, 2 m of 21.81 g/t gold, and 2 m of 19.38 g/t gold. The Company completed a single drill hole that intersected 10.0 m of 13.93 g/t Au, 3.0 m of 18.67 g/t Au and 1.0 m of 23.2 g/t Au. These intercepts are associated with a deformation zone within a meta-sediment unit that is underexplored at Three Bluffs.

![form20fax007.jpg](form20faxz007.jpg)

Figure 2: Three Bluffs Gold Deposit Long Section Looking North depicting the 2021 drilling results.

**2022 and 2023 Committee Bay Project Exploration Program**

The Company did not undertake an exploration program in 2022 and 2023 in order to focus all resources on the Quebec programs. However all claims were and are maintained in good standing.

**2024 Committee Bay Project Exploration Program**

The 2024 exploration program prioritized follow-up and infill sampling of highly anomalous regional gold-in-till samples with unidentified sources. The exploration model focused on regional shear zones proximal to favourable lithologies such as iron formation and ultramafic lithologies.

Three drill targets have now been determined:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. Three Bluffs Shear, where drilling in 2021 intercepted 13.93 g/t Au over 10 metres (m) (see news release dated December 1, 2021);

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2. Raven Shear where 7 rock samples have averaged 16.12 g/t gold; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3. Burro West where a 300 by 300 m discrete >90th percentile gold in till anomaly has been defined with a peak value of 50 ppb gold.

The program resulted in the collection of 546 infill till samples from two detailed grids, Burro West and Aarluk East, and 69 rock samples from 5 targets.

The 2024 mapping and rock sampling focused on shear zones proximal to and sub-parallel to favourable lithologies for gold mineralization within the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt with samples being collected at Three Bluffs, Raven, Burro, Aarluk East and Aarluk West.

The mapping and rock sampling at Three Bluffs was able to confirm the continuity of the interpreted shear zone that is sub-parallel to the Three Bluffs iron formation to the east of the reported 2021 intercept of 13.93 g/t gold over 10 m from drill hole 21TB152 (see news release dated December 1st, 2021). The reported 2021 intercept was a 120 m step out from the defined high-grade Three Bluffs gold deposit which on its own demonstrates the potential to meaningfully expand the known resource. The mapped continuation of this sub-parallel shear zone to the east trends into an area where there is no historic drilling providing an excellent near deposit drill target.

At Raven rock sampling and mapping has identified a mineralized sub parallel shear zone to the south of the main Raven showing where the average grade from seven rock samples collected is 16.12 g/t gold. The extensions along strike of the Raven south shear zone are obscured by glacial till deposits however, the average grade from outcrop sampling and prevalence of visible gold observed in the limited outcrop are encouraging and warrant drilling.

Infill till sampling at the Burro West target has identified a robust multi point +90th percentile approximately 300 x 300 m gold in till anomaly. The Burro West anomaly is spatially associated with a break in the regional magnetics data which is interpreted as a sheared contact between mafic volcanics and ultramafic lithologies. Additionally, the highest gold value returned from all the 2024 infill till samples is located at the SW corner of the Burro West grid and remains open.

The Aarluk East grid returned several intriguing moderate isolated gold in till anomalies associated with interpreted regional structures that require additional mapping work to potentially advance to the drill ready stage.

**2023 Committee Bay resource estimate and technical report**

Three Bluffs resource estimations were completed by APEX Geoscience Ltd. ("APEX") (see the Technical Report on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada, dated September 11, 2023, and filed under Fury's SEDAR+ profile). It supersedes all previous Committee Bay technical reports.

The Company expects to incur approximately $160 in annual mineral claims expenditures in 2025, in order to keep the property in good standing. Payments totalling $157 were made during the year ended December 31, 2024, in respect of these mineral claims.

------

**Éléonore South Project**

The following disclosure relating to the Éléonore South project is based on information derived from the technical report summary on the Éléonore South Project entitled "*Technical Report on the Éléonore South Project, Quebec, Canada*" prepared by Mrs. Valerie Doyon, the Company's Senior Project Geologist with an effective date of December 31, 2024 (the **"Éléonore South Technical Report Summary"**), as attached to this Annual Report as Exhibit 15.3. Mrs Doyon is a technically "qualified person" for the purposes of SK-1300. The Éléonore South Technical Report Summary conforms to SEC's Modernized Property Disclosure Requirements for Mining Registrants as described in Subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K, Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations ("S-K 1300") and Item 601(b)(96) - Technical Report Summary. All information of a scientific or technical nature contained below and provided after the date of the Éléonore South Report has been reviewed and approved by Mrs. Valerie Doyon.

The Éléonore South Project has been determined to be a material property for the purposes of S-K 1300 effective March 31, 2025.

**Property Description and Location**

The Éléonore South Project, 100% held and operated by by Fury, is an exploration stage project comprised of 282 claims, totaling 14,760 hectares (ha). Located in 1:50,000 scale NTS map sheets 33B12 and 33C09, approximately 200 km east of the Cree community of Wemindji, 330 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal. The property is accessible, year-round, by either the James Bay Highway or Route du Nord and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week. The centre of the property is located at approximately 75.98 degrees longitude west and 52.58 degrees latitude north.

116 of the claims are subject to an escalating Net Smelter Royalty (NSR) held by Osisko Royalties (Osisko Royalty). The Osisko Royalty is tied to overall production from these claims as well as from the Éléonore Mine property claims held by Newmont Corporation. The royalty amounts to 2% on the first 3 Moz of gold production and tops out at 3.5% after 8 Moz Au production. The royalty increases by 10% for gold prices above US$550/oz Au - again topping out at 3.5%. The remaining 166 claims are free of any royalty.

The Project is located north of the 52nd parallel (52ºN) and as such is subject to the provisions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975), and the Paix des Braves Agreement (2002). The Project falls within the Eeyou Istchee Territory and straddles the boundary between the Cree Nations of Wemindji and Eastmain, including trap lines held by Angus Mayappo and Roderick Mayappo (tallyman).

The Éléonore South project is located on Category III lands, as established under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. Category III lands are administered by the province of Quebec, and they do not have any substantial restrictions on mineral exploration. A notice of work must be forwarded to the Wemindji and Eastmain Communities and the tallyman prior to initiating exploration activities. The Project straddles the traditional territories of the Cree Nations of Wemindji and Eastmain (Figure 1) and lies on traplines VC-29, VC-35 and VC-36.

The figure below presents property location and claims comprising the Éléonore South Project:

------

![form20fax008.jpg](form20faxz008.jpg)

The Éléonore South property is strategically located in an area of prolific gold mineralization within the Eeyou Istchee James Bay gold camp and is locally defined by Newmont's Éléonore mine and Sirios Resources' Cheechoo deposit. The property has been explored over the last 12 years by the joint venture focused on the extension of the Cheechoo deposit mineralization within the portion of the Cheechoo Tonalite on the joint venture ground. Approximately 27,000 m of drilling in 172 drill holes, covering only a small proportion of the property at the Moni and JT prospects has been completed. Notable drill intercepts include 53.25 m of 4.22 g/t gold (Au); 6.0 m of 49.50 g/t Au including 1.0 m of 294 g/t Au and 23.8 m of 3.08 g/t Au including 1.5 m of 27.80 g/t Au.

In December 2020, Fury Gold announced the recognition of a large-scale gold in till anomaly on the Éléonore South property through a review of historical datasets. This target has not been drill tested. In September 2021 the ESJV initiated a field program designed to refine the broad geochemical anomaly into discrete targets for further follow up and eventual drill testing. Additionally, a regional survey was completed on the southern third of the property where no historical systematic sampling had been completed.

During the third quarter of 2022 an orientation biogeochemical sampling survey was completed over a buried fold hinge target interpreted to be hosted within the same sedimentary rock package as Newmont's Éléonore mine. A total of 641 biogeochemical samples were collected. In addition to the biogeochemical orientation survey the Company completed a rock sampling program within the nine discrete gold in soil anomalies identified from the 2021 field work. The nine discrete gold in till anomalies are centered on an east-west structural corridor that separates intrusives to the south and sediments to the north. The importance of this new structural framework is that the newly defined gold in till anomalies are located along deep-rooted structures clearly visible in the geophysical data. Based on the elemental associations observed of gold with arsenic, bismuth and tungsten, in both the historical and infill sampling the most likely style of mineralization to be encountered in the nine targets will be the Cheechoo style observed at the JT and Moni showings.

------

The book value of the Éléonore South Project as at December 31, 2024 is provided below:

---

| |
|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Name of Material Property** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Éléonore South Project<br>&nbsp;&nbsp; $6000000 <sup>(1)</sup> |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(1)* Book value of the Company's mineral projects under the Company's IFRS accounting policy primarily reflects project acquisition costs because the Company expenses rather than capitalizes all exploration costs as they are incurred. Acquisition costs may include allocations of the cost of corporate acquisitions of acquired companies which own mineral projects which allocations can increase the book value of the mineral projects of the acquired company above what the acquired company itself carried them at. The financial statement notes record exploration by general area rather than by individual property so aggregate expensed exploration costs for individual properties are not possible to determine from the financial statements alone. The book value of mineral properties may be reduced as a result of impairment charges where the Company concludes that the book value must be reduced in the face of evidence of impairment. Accordingly, readers are cautioned that mineral property book value is not intended to reflect the fair value of the mineral project at any given time*.*

**Access, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography**

The Project is located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Territory of Northern Quebec, approximately 200 km east of the Cree community of Wemindji, 330 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal (NTS Map sheet 33B12 and 33C09). The Project is 15 km southeast of Newmont Corporation's Éléonore Mine (Figure 1). The property is accessible, year-round, by either the James Bay Highway or Route du Nord and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week.

The property is accessible, year-round through a combination of the Billy Diamond (James Bay) Highway, the Route du Nord and Hydro-Quebec's Sarcelle road. Sirios Resources has constructed a resource access road which leads to the Cheechoo Deposit within the Cheechoo Tonalite along the central east portion of the Property. Éléonore South is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week.

Fury, through its Eastmain subsidiary, maintains a 20-person camp to support exploration activities at the Éléonore South project. The hydroelectric power line that feeds Newmont's Éléonore Mine transects the Éléonore South property (Figure 1). Newmont's Éléonore mine complex, including a private airport are located 15 km to the northwest. Necessities such as skilled labour and specialized equipment are sourced from Val-d'Or or Chibougamau. Many services are now available through numerous Cree owned businesses and partnerships in Wemindji, Eastmain and Nemaska.

The property is located within the Canadian Shield and is characterized by many lakes, swamps, rivers, and low-lying terrain. The Property is bordered to the west by the Opinaca Reservoir. The Gipouloux River flows westward through the northern portion of the Property. The Éléonore South project is located in the boreal forest where forest fires are common. Vegetation is typical of taiga, including areas dominated by sparse black spruce, birch, and poplar forests, in addition to large areas of peat bog devoid of trees.

------

Overburden is typically 3 to 4 m thick, with the exception of isolated areas where overburden thickness can reach 20 m. Numerous glacial eskers often reaching tens of km in length can be seen of satellite images.

Rock outcrops are sparse due to the abundance of quaternary deposits and swamps. The topography of the area is subdued and characterized dominantly by lowlands, with few hills that attain elevations up to 300 m above sea level.

**Geology, Mineralization and Deposit Types**

The Éléonore South property is in the northeastern part of the Archean Superior Province (4.3-2.6 Ga; Percival et al., 2012), in a region comprising both the La Grande and Opinaca Subprovinces. Both subprovinces were largely constructed and metamorphosed during a series of micro-continent collisions formerly known as the "Kenoran Orogeny" (ca. 2,720-2,660 Ma; Card, 1990; Percival et al., 2012). The property is entirely enclosed in the southwestern part of the La Grande Subprovince known as the Eastmain River domain at proximity of the boundary with the Opinaca Subprovince. This proximity with the Opinaca boundary is considered highly prospective for various types of gold mineralization along both north and south portions of the contact exemplified by the Éléonore and Eastmain mines, and several exploration projects such as Corvet Est, Poste Lemoyne and La Grande Sud.

The Éléonore South property is characterized by the widespread presence of metasedimentary rocks and felsic intrusions. The northern part of the main block consists almost exclusively of the LGSP Low Formation (which has in the past been attributed to the OPSP). The Low Formation comprises essentially variably recrystallized tubiditic biotite meta-wacke along with minor aluminous porphyroblasts bearing meta-pelite bands, conglomerates and iron formations. Its deposition is poorly constrained due to a complex history resulting in apparently conflicting dates. The Ell Lake diorite (2,706±2 Ma, Fontaine et al., 2017) intrudes the sediments, setting a local minimum age for consolidation, while sedimentation is locally thought to have kept going well after 2,700 Ma (Bandyayera et al., 2010; Ravenelle, 2013). However, some parts were deposited as early as shortly after 2,714 Ma. (Bandyayera et al., 2010) The sediments were therefore likely deposited in a tectonically active basin with magma intruding barely consolidated sedimentary rocks, while some parts were still sedimenting. Proximity and similarity in composition and chronology suggest that the Low Formation could represent a more proximal lower grade extension of the Laguiche basin (OPSP).

Two distinct styles of mineralization have been identified to date; structurally controlled quartz veins hosted within sedimentary rocks similar to the high-grade mineralization observed at the Éléonore Mine; and intrusion-related disseminated gold mineralization similar to that seen at the low-grade bulk tonnage Cheechoo deposit with higher grade potential as seen at the JT and Moni Prospects on the project.

**History**

Regional exploration work was undertaken in the 1970s to evaluate the mineral economic potential of the area in anticipation of the flooding· resulting from the construction of the James Bay hydroelectric projects. Lake bottom sediment and geophysical surveys were conducted as well as regional geological mapping. Systematic and focused exploration work on the property started in 2005.

------

1970

In 1970's, Société de Développement de la Baie James (SDBJ) did an evaluation of the mineral endowment of the area in anticipation of the flooding that was planned with the building of the James Bay hydroelectric projects (GM 34000, 34001, 34002 and 38167).

1976

In 1976 Quebec Government (MRNF) carried out a geological compilation of the James Bay area (DP 358 - Dube & al.,1976).

1977

In 1977 Quebec Government (MRNF) carried out a geological mapping covering the western part of the NTS 32/C09 (DPV 446 - Remick, 1976).

1999

In 1999 Quebec Government (MRNF) carried out a geological reconnaissance which covered the eastern part of the NTS 33/B12 (Simard & Gosselin, 1999).

2002

In 2002 Quebec Government (MRNF) worked on a geological synthesis report by Moukshil et al., 2002 - ET2002-06.

2003

In 2003, Azimut Exploration Inc. acquires by map designation the Opinaca C Property. The property counts 99 claims, (news release from 2003, November 24th).

2004

In 2004, Viriginia Gold mines discovered the Roberto gold deposit located 15 km north and adjacent to the Eastmain's Éléonore South Property (Robinson & Tolhurst, 2011).

Following the discovery of Roberto deposits, Azimut Exploration Inc. increases its holding near the area of Éléonore discovery and add 67 map designated claims to Opinaca C property. The property totalized at this time 166 conjugate claims owns at 100% by Azimut (news release from 2004 November 22nd).

2005

In March 2005, Azimut Exploration Inc. and Eastmain Resources Inc. signed an agreement for the Opinaca C property (news release from 2005, March 30th). Eastmain could acquire a 50% interest from Azimut Exploration during a 5-year period for certain payments of cash and shares.

In the summer of 2005, Eastmain Resources contracted Geotech Limited to carried out a helicopter-borne geophysical survey. It included a time domain electromagnetic and magnetic survey. A total of 1021-line km were flown on a 100 m spacing. Several EM anomaly groupings were identified (GM 62241).

------

Groundwork was conducted by Eastmain Resources for 2005 summer. A geochemical soil survey was completed over the entire property on a 100 m by 500 m grid alongside a prospecting and reconnaissance mapping survey. A total of 2118 soil samples (B-horizon) were collected and confirmed a large gold arsenic anomaly. A total of 202 rocks samples were collected and selected grab samples assayed up to 3390 ppb gold and 4170 ppm arsenic. The prospecting/mapping work confirmed underlying rock and alteration (aluminosilicate) are comparable to Roberto Gold Deposit (GM 62732).

2006

In March 2006, an interpretation of the airborne geophysical surveys flown by Geotech in 2005 was done by Eastmain. A total of 6 areas of interest were identified from the electromagnetic data (GM 62242).

In April 2006, Azimut, Goldcorp and Eastmain sign a Three-Way Joint Venture agreement to merge the 166 claims from Opinaca C block (azimuth and Eastmain) to 116 additional claims (Goldcorp) located north and west of the property. This new merged will become the Éléonore South property and count 282 claims in total split in two blocs (the main block with 248 claims and the west block with 34 claims). Eastmain was appointed the Project operator. Eastmain had the option to earn 33% of the property by funding certain exploration work.

In summer/fall 2006, Eastmain continue to work on the Éléonore South property, and 318.8-line km of grid was cut over 40% of the property. The grid line was completed with a north-south orientation at 200 m spacing and 50 m station. A regional geochemistry soil sampling (O, A and B-horizon) was executed and a total of 8639 samples were harvested and 688 samples from 2005 survey were re-assayed to obtain more precise multi-element values. Several km-size multi-element (Au-As-Sb) Roberto-type geochemical anomalies were detected. A geological mapping and prospecting survey were completed at 200 m line intervals. A total of 675 rock samples were collected from outcrops and boulders. From this number, 11 outcrops assayed between 100 to 1,915 ppb and 9 boulders assayed between 100 to 4,750 ppb. Details mapping and trenching were carried out to follow-up on 7 anomaly areas from 2005 campaign and geophysical survey. A total of 19 trenches were excavated totalizing 3,580 linear m and 380 rock samples were collected (331 grabs and 49 of 1 m intervals channel samples). Several trenches (9) assayed at least one value between 100 to 12,950 ppb. The best value was found in trench 1A (2,090 ppb gold with and > 10,000 ppm arsenic) and in trench 1E (one grab of 12,950 ppb gold and 527 ppm arsenic and a channel composite of 1.4 g/t Au across 16 m). Trench 1A is associated with the WB showing and trench 1E is associated with the JT Prospect (GM 63371).

Eastmain contracted Geotech Limited to carried out a helicopter-borne geophysical survey on the new claims added to the property. It included a time domain electromagnetic and magnetic survey. A total of 814.6-line km were flown on a 100 m spacing. Several EM anomaly groupings were identified (GM 63373).

2007

In 2007, Eastmain Resources contracted Abitibi Geophysics to complete a resistivity/induced polarization survey. A total of 267-line km was surveyed over the central area of the main grid and over JT Prospect. A gradient IP survey and a dipole-dipole configuration was carried out. The resistivity signature showed two distinctive resistivity unit split by a very conductive lineament interpreted as a major shear zone corridor (GM 64031).

------

A 9.2-line km grid was cut over JT to facilitate the IP survey. A mapping and prospecting survey was carried out on the property. The goal was to complete the regional mapping, to visit the previous gold and arsenic soil anomalies and the preliminary IP conductors. A total of 387 grabs were assayed and 10 samples return values between 30 and 1,130 ppb gold. Trenches was excavated to investigate firstly the JT Prospect and then to investigate geochemical, geophysical and geological target across the property. Several trenches were excavated for a total of 5,074-line-m split in 28 trenches and 3,391 channel samples. Visible gold was identified first the first time at JT (trench 1E) and some of the best channel composite graded 10.98 g/t over 3.0 m and 15.73 g/t over 2.0 m, 20.0 g/t over 2.0 m. Trench 1A (WB showing) return 7,950 ppb Au over 1.0 m (GM 64030).

Eastmain contracted L.E. Reed Geophysical Consultant Inc to interpret the VTEM and mag survey done on the property in the year 2005 and 2006. The interpretation confirms the existence of several conductor with some associated to mag anomalies (GM 64032).

Eastmain contracted Mehmet F. Taner to conduct a petrographic and mineralogical study. A total of 18 grab samples were analyzed under the microscope. The study confirmed the presence of alumino silicate as alteration in the metasediment. A brief look at the metamorphism mineralogy indicates an upper greenschist to amphibolite metamorphic grade on the property. No gold was found in the thin section and the assays return all below detection limit for those grab samples (GM 64033).

2008

In 2008, Eastmain began a drilling campaign on the Éléonore South property. A total of 3,129 m of drilling were done in 16 drill holes. From this number, 1,275 m were completed on the JT Prospect and 1,854 m were complete on other anomalies. A total of 2,750 core samples were collected and assayed for gold. Holes ES08-09 to ES08-13 drilled the JT Prospect and all intercepted gold value. Several assays return between 500 to 18,400 ppb gold. Holes ES08-15 and ES08-16 were drilled 4 km southeast of JT and tested anomalous rocks trenched and return few values between 550 to 4,980 pbb (GM 64367).

In 2008, Goldcorp mandated Inlandsis Consultant s.e.n.c. to carried a till survey to cover the whole Éléonore Property and part of the Éléonore South Property. Samples were collected at 100 m to 200 m spacing along lines distributed at every 1 km to 1.5 km. A total of 32 samples were collected on the north-west side of the property. Several anomalies of more than 0.1 ppm gold were identified (GM 65193).

2009

In 2009, Eastmain drilled a total of 3,697 m on the Éléonore South property split in 14 drill holes. Drilling was divided in 3 parts focusing on JT and WB showing and on regional geological, geophysical and geochemical anomalies. Multiple broad zones of anomalous gold and arsenic were intersected, and one composite calculated 0.54 g/t over 14 m gold. Total of 28 assayed intervals return more than 1 g/t gold with 2 samples over 9 g/t gold. Drilling on the WB showing confirm the continuation of the mineralization and one composite return 0.37 g/t over 24 m of gold. Two drill holes tested regional anomalies. One of the holes drilled at 2.5 km southeast of JT return a composite value of 0.93 g/t over 4 m with a peak value of 1.64 g/t over 1 m gold. During fall, Eastmain also completed a mapping and prospecting survey. A total of 64 grabs were collected and 2 samples return assays over 500 ppb (GM 65239).

------

2010

In 2010, Eastmain drilled a total of 3,622 m on the Éléonore South property split in 17 drill holes. Drilling was divided in 3 parts focusing on JT and WB showing and on regional geological, geophysical and geochemical anomalies. Drilling on JT intersected 15 intervals which contain greater than 1.0 g/t, with a maximum of 3.81 g/t gold. The JT Prospect remain open to the west, south and north. One hole was testing the south extension of the WB showing. Hole return one value of 0.79 g/t over 1.0 m. Three holes from the regional targeting located approximatively at 2.5 km and 4.5 km southeast of JT return value up to 2.41 g/t gold. A total of 90 grabs were collected during a mapping and prospecting campaign. Best value from the prospection survey returns 61 ppb gold (GM 65891).

2012

In the summer of 2012, Eastmain contracted Eagle Mapping from Coquitlam, British Columbia to conduct an aerial Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) survey over the Éléonore South property. The survey permits to delineate some structure to be tested in the future (GM 68093).

2016

In 2016, Azimut Exploration Inc. performed a prospection program to test several previously uncovered geochemical soil anomalies. Prospecting focused on the soil anomalies localized in the northern sector of the property and on the southeast side of JT just south of the Cheechoo discovery. A total of 448 samples were collected including 432 grabs samples from outcrops and boulders and 16 channel samples. Results return 48 samples with values over 1.0 g/t (grabs and channel). A total of 12 grab samples returned values between 11.65 to 247.0 g/t. The best channel composite return results of 19.22 g/t Au over 3.8 m, 7.85 g/t Au over 3.4 m, 49.18 g/t Au over 4.0 m and 50.37 g/t Au over 3.50m Gold is found in pegmatite and tonalite rocks and all the gold value but one were found east of the JT Prospect identified as the Moni Prospect (GM 71311).

In fall 2016, Azimut conducted a first phase drilling campaign and 2,509.6 m was drilled split in 12 holes. Drill holes were mostly targeting the Moni Prospect and the Cheechoo extension all return value values over 0.5 g/t with 10 assays over 2.5 g/t gold. Some of the calculated composites give value of 8.88 g/t gold over 2.5m, 0.83 g/t gold over 12.0 m, 5.0 g/t gold over 4.0 m and 0.76 g/t gold over 21.58 m. Two drill holes were targeting a linear high mag anomaly, and one assay return 0.1 g/t gold (GM 71346).

2017

In 2017, Azimut carried out a drilling program (second phase) contemporary to a prospecting and mapping survey. Phase 2 drilling program consists of 32 drill holes totalizing 7,176.2 m. Drill targets were selected from coincident geochemical and geophysical anomalies in the vicinity of the Cheechoo extension and Moni Prospect. All drill holes but 2 return gold values over 0.5 g/t and the best assay up to 68.8 g/t gold. Some of the best calculated composites give value of 4.74 g/t gold over 6.0 m and 3.75 g/t gold over 23.25 m (GM 71346).

In 2017, Azimut carried out a prospection survey and a total of 458 surface samples were collected and comprises 313 grabs samples, 82 channels on 17 trenches and 63 soil samples. The exploration program focused on the soil anomalies localized in the northern sector of the property and on the southeast side of JT just south of the Cheechoo discovery (on Moni Prospect and Cheechoo extension). The exploration program confirmed the presence of gold in many areas of the property. The best gold results returned 96.6 g/t Au over 1.0m from the Moni Prospect in a quartz-feldspar vein / Tonalite (channel R16) and 1,500 g/t Au from the Trench prospect from an angular boulder of quartz-feldspar±biotite and pegmatitic vein with native gold. The Trench prospect is situated just southwest of the Moni Prospect (GM 71972).

------

2018

In winter 2018, Azimut drilled 30 holes (28 new holes and 2 extension holes) for a total drilled of 5,448.6 m. Drill targets were collared on coincident geochemical and geophysical anomalies and based on the results from the 2017 prospection campaign. A total of 3,940 core samples were assayed for gold. Drilling campaign focused on the southwestern extension of the Cheechoo discovery, the Moni Prospect discovered in the Summer 2016 campaign, the Trench Prospect Iocated southwest of the Moni Prospect and an elongated E-W trending magnetic high to the south. Drilling from the southwestern Cheechoo extension return 32 values over 1.0 g/t. The best calculated composite in the tonalite assayed value of 2.02 g/t over 4.4 m, 2.50 g/t over 3.05 m and 2.44 g/t over 7.10 m. Drilling on the Moni Prospect return 100 values over 1.0 g/t. Some of the best intersect were obtained in the tonalite with calculated composite of 13.58 g/t over 2.5 m, 8.46 g/t over 8.4 m and 2.58 g/t over 7.8 m (GM 71647).

In the summer of 2018, Eastmain Resources Inc. carried out a stripping program to extend the exposure of the Moni Prospect and to expose the under explored west-south-west extension of Moni. A total of 9 trenches were dug and 2,352 m2 of rock were exposed and 225 samples were collected. Only 5 trenches on 9 were sampled due to lack of pegmatite dykes in some trenches. A total of 23 samples graded over 0.1 g/t gold and 2 graded over 1.0 g/t gold. Those 2 samples are found in trench TRES18-01 at the Moni Extension and return value of 2.18 g/t gold over 0.9 m and 2.5 g/t gold over 1.0 m (GM 73120).

In fall 2018, Eastmain conducted a first phase of drilling. A total of 7,216.4 m was drilled split in 27 holes. All drill holes return values over 0.1 g/t gold and 26 of them return value over 0.5 g/t gold. The campaign tested the JT Prospect with 4 holes and the others tested the Cheechoo southeast extension. In JT, the hole ES18-140 return one value of 28.3 g/t gold over 0.5 m in wacke and the hole ES18-141 return the best composite calculated of 0.64 g/t over 6.9 m. The Cheechoo Southeast Extension return value up to 84.0 g/t gold over 1.0 m and some of the best calculated composite return 3.8 g/t gold over 3.9 m, 3.5 g/t gold over 3.5 m and 22.4 g/t gold over 4.0 m (GM 73121).

In 2018, Les Mines Opinacas mandated Ios Services Géoscientifiques to carried a till survey to cover between the 2008 lines to evaluate the mineral potential in the Roberto deposit neighbourhood. Samples were collected at 200 m to 250 m spacing along lines distributed at every 1 km to 1.5 km. A total of 27 samples were collected on the north-west side of the property and 6 in the north-north-west side of the property. Gold grains count varied from 4 to 16 in the north-north-west side of the property and varied from 17 to 66 in the north-west side of the property both on normalized on 10 kg samples (GM 71452).

2019

In winter 2019, Eastmain conducted a second phase of drilling. A total of 4,708.5 m was drilled split in 14 holes and hole extension. The drilling campaign was achieved on the Cheechoo southeastern extension. All drill hole return value over 0.1 g/t gold and best assay graded 63.2 g/t gold on 1.0 m. Some of the best calculated composite return 8.7 g/t gold over 8.2 m and 12.7 g/t gold over 3.5 m (GM 73121).

In summer 2019, Eastmain carried out a field work survey with mapping, rock sampling, soil sampling and channel sampling. No excavator was available on-site in 2019. Chennel sampling was executed on 2018 trenches and on outcrops. The objective of the campaign was to identify new prospective areas for further work. In total, 1,299 rock samples, 130 channel samples and 1,744 A-B-C-horizon soil samples were collected. The soil samples were collected every 50 m with an interline spacing of 400 m and were then analyzed by XRF at the Eastmain Éléonore South coreshack. The XRF study permit to identified 5 geochemical signature and a new geological map was interpreted. A total of 9 rocks sample return values between 0.114 and 0.828 ppm gold. Sample are found in the extreme north, West, and south-west of the property and south of the Cheechoo tonalite. Mapping on the property permit to recognize several geological units as felsic intrusion, sediments and mafic volcanic. The channel sampling was done in the Moni trend to follow-up on 2018 anomalies. In total 57 samples return values over 0.1 g/t and 6 return value over a 1 g/t. The best values are associated with the Bill zone and the 101 zone and vary between 1.285 and 5.426 g/t (GM 73381).

------

At total of 37,816 m of drilling in 164 drill holes has been completed on the Property. Drilling has largely focussed on the Moni - JT trend and successfully defined two zones, 2,000 m x 750 m at Moni and 1,200 m x 500 m at JT, of lower-grade intrusion related gold mineralization similar to that of the Cheechoo gold deposit. The Moni trend comprises the Cheechoo Southwest Extension and JT Prospect comprises the WB Prospect. Within the lower-grade gold mineralization halo, there are a series of structurally controlled quartz vein stockworks which host significantly higher grades of gold.

**Sampling, Analyses and Data Verification**

Method of analysis varied since the beginning of the project. QC protocols were established in 2008 and carried through with minor refinements through the current drilling program.

Quality Control (QC) samples were introduced into the sample stream at a rate of 4% for both blank samples and CRM samples. Fury increases this rate to 5% and add field duplicates in the form of quarter sawn core samples introduced into the sample stream at a rate of 1 in 50 samples.

Core recovery is generally very good to excellent, allowing for representative samples to be taken and accurate analyses to be performed. Half-core samples, 0.5 m to 1.5 m long, were taken. The core was sampled along the entire length of each hole. Samples intervals were recorded with red grease pencil on the drill core during logging. Each sample was assigned a laboratory sample number for analytical purposes.

The sample is split along the cutting line and starting and stopping at the marked red arrows on the core. Place one half of the core in the bag and place the other half back in the core box with the cut face upwards. He/she is to place the sample end pieces (the core marked with red arrows) cut face side up, with the arrows pointing in the appropriate direction.

Samples with native gold were identified. This was to make sure the core cutting blade was cleaned before and after each of these mineralized samples by cutting through a concrete block.

Split core samples were placed in fiber rice bags in batches and labelled for shipment to ALS laboratories (ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and ISO 9001:2015 accredited facility) for preparation and analysis. These sacks were sealed with cable ties and fiber tape and shipped by commercial transport companies directly to the lab. A control file, the laboratory sample dispatch form, includes the sample-bag numbers in each shipment. The laboratory sample dispatch form accompanies the sample shipment and is used to control and monitor the shipment. The lab sends a confirmation email with detail of samples received upon delivery.

------

In the opinion of The Author, the logging, sampling, assaying, and chain of custody protocols practiced through the history of the Project meet or exceed industry standards. The drill programs have been configured and carried out in a manner that is appropriate for the geometry of the known mineralization. Drill holes are oriented perpendicular to strike and aimed to intersect the zones at an angle generally greater than 45°. As such, the samples should be representative of the mineralization as it is presently known.

The Author has reviewed the QC reports and files, as well as the laboratory procedures undertaken and conclude that the QC program for the Project is sufficient to support the current level of exploration. QC sample failures were dealt with on a case-by-case basis and were documented with commentary in the Dispatch Returns table within the database.

The Author has been involved in all exploration programs on the Project since 2020 and was last on-site August 2024.

Comprehensive data verification was performed by Fury Gold Mines. These included checks against original data sources, standard database checks such as from/to errors and basic visual checks for discrepancies with respect to topography and drillhole deviations.

The Author has been personally involved in the integration and merging of the historical drill data into the current database. This work included relogging of historical holes to provide consistency of logging codes across all generations of drilling, as well as spot checks of drill core versus drill logs to verify the geologic model. During this process sample intervals were verified. Lastly, the assay database was compared to original assay certificates. No errors were found within the geologic or assay databases.

**Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing**

There has been no metallurgical testing completed on the Éléonore South project.

**Mineral Resource Estimates**

There are no Mineral Resource Estimates for the Éléonore South Project.

**2024 Éléonore South Exploration Program**

**Biochemical Sampling** 

A biogeochemical sampling survey designed to target an interpreted fold nose within the Low Formation sediments in an area where conventional soil or till sampling was not possible due to the ground conditions was completed in the summer of 2024. The targeted area exhibited similar geological, geophysical, and structural characteristics to those present at the nearby Éléonore Mine. Six priority drill targets across over 3 km of prospective folded sedimentary stratigraphy have been identified. These six targets encompass multi point gold anomalies above the 90th percentile of the data and correlate with moderate pathfinder elemental anomalies, most notably arsenic which is associated with gold mineralization at the Éléonore Mine.

------

**Drilling**

In winter 2024, Fury carried out a drilling campaign to focus on Moni Trend structural corridors and following up on previous drill intercepts of 53.25 m of 4.22 g/t Au; 6.2 m of 14.7 g/t Au and 23.8 m of 3.08 g/t Au (figure 6). In total, 2,331 m of were drilled in 7 holes. A total of 1,704 core samples were sent to the lab to be tested for gold. The drilling campaign work area was 2,500 m east-west by 800 m north-south. Most holes were drilled at 320 degrees azimuth and one at 140 degrees and one through north. All holes dip at -50 degrees.

The holes intersected broad gold zone with local gold peak value. The hole 24ES-161 intersected 0.44 g/t gold over 137.5 m (Table 13) including 9.7 g/t over 1.5 and 8.33 g/t gold over 8.33 g/t (Table 14). The hole 24ES-162 intersected 0.5 g/t gold over 115.5 m.

The 2024 Fury drilling campaign show the continuity at depth of the mineralized zone in the Cheechoo Tonalite.

**Conclusion**

The Éléonore South project is an early-stage exploration project with limited previous drilling and sampling completed. The drilling completed to date has confirmed the presence of a Reduced Intrusion Related Gold System (RIRGS) within the southern portion of the Cheechoo Tonalite. Additionally, surface work completed by Fury has identified several gold in soil anomalies and biogeochemical anomalies which all require additional follow up work.

**Recommendations**

Future exploration efforts should focus on the high-grade gold potential of the Cheechoo tonalite while also continuing to advance the identified gold in soil and biogeochemical anomalies to the drill ready stage. The recommended Phase 1 work program consists of a 5,000 - 6,000 m drilling program targeting the robust Eleonore style gold targets identified through the biogeochemical sampling program. The Phase 1 program is estimated to cost approximately $3.1 million, shown in below table.

The Phase 2 exploration program will be drill intensive. An additional 10,000 - 20,000 m of diamond and reverse circulation drilling should be completed to follow up on the results from the phase 1 program as well as within the Cheechoo Tonalite to determine if sufficient continuity of gold mineralization is present to prepare a maiden mineral resource estimate. The Phase 2 program is estimated to cost between $7.5 and $10 million, as shown below. Readers are cautioned that Fury may not carry out all or even a portion of these recommendations as they re financing and success contingent.

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
|  | **Phase 1** |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 500000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 400000 |
| Drilling | Diamond Drilling (5,000m at $150/m) | 750000 |
| Land Management | Consultants. Assessment Filing, Claim maintenance | 5000 |

---

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Type** | **Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 10000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 5000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 5000 |
| Expediting | Expediting | 7500 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 200000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter | 600000 |
| Fuel |  | 250000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 100000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **2873500** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 287350 |
| **Total** |  | **3121250** |
|  | **Phase 2** |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 1250000 |
| Drilling | Diamond Drilling (10,000 - 20,000m) | 2000000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 1000000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 25000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 10000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 125000 |
| Expediting | Expediting | 150000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 550000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Fright, Travel, Helicopter | 1500000 |
| Fuel |  | 600000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 250000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **7460000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 746500 |
| **Total** |  | **8206000** |

---

The Company expects to incur approximately $35,000 annually in project maintenance costs, including certain mineral claims payments, in order to keep the properties in good standing in 2025.

------

**Item 19 - Exhibits**

**B. Index to Exhibits**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **Exhibit No.** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Name** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[12.1](exhibit12-1.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (\*)](exhibit12-1.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[12.2](exhibit12-2.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (\*)](exhibit12-2.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[13.1](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1514597/000143774925010348/ex_793760.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (\*\*)](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1514597/000143774925010348/ex_793760.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[13.2](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1514597/000143774925010348/ex_793761.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (\*\*)](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1514597/000143774925010348/ex_793761.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[15.2](exhibit15-2.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Technical Report Summary for the Eau Claire Project - Revised (\*)](exhibit15-2.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[15.4](exhibit15-4.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Consent of Bryan Atkinson, Qualified Person (\*)](exhibit15-4.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[15.5](exhibit15-5.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Consent of Valerie Doyon, Qualified Person (\*)](exhibit15-5.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[15.8](exhibit15-8.htm) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Technical Report Summary for the Committee Bay Project - Revised (\*)](exhibit15-8.htm) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;101.INS | &nbsp;&nbsp;Inline XBRL Instance Document–the instance document does not appear in the Interactive Data File as its XBRL tags are embedded within the Inline XBRL document |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[101.SCH](fury-20241231.xsd) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document](fury-20241231.xsd) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[101.DEF](fury-20241231_def.xml) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document](fury-20241231_def.xml) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[101.LAB](fury-20241231_lab.xml) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document](fury-20241231_lab.xml) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;[101.PRE](fury-20241231_pre.xml) | &nbsp;&nbsp;[Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document](fury-20241231_pre.xml) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;104 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted as Inline XBRL and contained in Exhibit 101). |

---

(\*) Filed as an exhibit to this Amendment No. 1 to Form 20-F

(\*\*) Previously filed with the Original 2024 Form 20-F on April 1, 2025

------

**SIGNATURES**

The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 20-F and that it has duly caused and authorized the undersigned to sign this Amendment No. 1 to Form 20-F on its behalf.

---

| |
|:---|
| **FURY GOLD MINES LIMITED** |
| <u>By: /s/ Phil van Staden</u> |
| Name: Phil van Staden |
| Title: Chief Financial Officer |

---

Date: June 25, 2025

------

## Exhibit 12.1

------

**EXHIBIT 12.1**

**CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

I, Forrester Clark, of Fury Gold Mines Ltd. Certify that:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Fury Gold Mines Ltd. (the "Issuer");

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4. The Issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Issuer and have:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5. The Issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Issuer's auditor and the audit committee of the Issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: June 25, 2025

---

| |
|:---|
| */s/ Forrester A. Clark* |
| Forrester A. Clark |
| Chief Executive Officer |

---

------

## Exhibit 12.2

------

**EXHIBIT 12.2**

**CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

I, Phil van Staden, of Fury Gold Mines Ltd. Certify that:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Fury Gold Mines Ltd. (the "Issuer");

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4. The Issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Issuer and have:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5. The Issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Issuer's auditor and the audit committee of the Issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: June 25, 2025

---

| |
|:---|
| */s/ Phil van Staden* |
| Phil van Staden |
| Chief Financial Officer |

---

------

## Exhibit 15.2

------

<u>**S-K 1300 TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY ON THE EAU CLAIRE<br>PROJECT**</u>

<u>**QUEBEC, CANADA**</u>

**Prepared for Fury Gold Mines Ltd.**

![](exhibit15-2xm001.jpg)

**Qualified Persons:** 

**Valerie Doyon, P. Geo.**<br>**Senior Project Geologist, Fury Gold Mines Limited**

Effective as of: December 31, 2024

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Contents**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| 1 Executive Summary | 6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.1 Overview | 6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.2 Conclusions | 9 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.3 Recommendations | 10 |
| 2 Introduction and Terms of Reference | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.1 Sources of Information | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.2 Personal Inspection | 12 |
| 3 Property Description | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.1 Location | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.2 Project Ownership | 13 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.3 Mineral Tenure | 13 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.4 Royalties and Encumbrances | 13 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.5 Permitting | 13 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.6 First Nations Rights | 14 |
| 4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.1 Accessibility | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.2 Climate | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.3 Local resources & Infrastructure | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.4 Physiography | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.5 Conclusions | 17 |
| 5 History | 17 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.1 Pre 2002 Exploration | 17 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.2 2002 - 2019 Eastmain Resources Exploration | 19 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.3 Previous Resource Estimates | 19 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.3.1 Discussion on Previous Resource Estimates | 20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4 Historical Drilling | 20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.5 Past Production | 20 |
| 6 Geological Setting and Mineralization | 20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.1 Geology | 20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.1 Structure | 23 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.2 Mineralization | 25 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.3 Alteration | 25 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.4 Deposit Types | 26 |
| 7 Exploration | 29 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.1 Percival Biogeochemical Sampling | 29 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2 Geophysical Surveys | 31 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2.1 2020 Gradient Array Induced Polarization Survey | 31 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2.1.1 Methodology | 31 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2.2 2022 DCIP Survey | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2.2.1 Methodology | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3 Drilling | 34 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.1 2002 - 2013 Drilling | 34 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.2 2015 Drilling | 34 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.3 2016-2017 Drill Program | 35 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.4 2018 - 2019 Drill Program | 38 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **2** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.5 Discussion on Drilling Completed Prior to 2020 | 38 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.6 Fury Gold Mines Drilling 2020-2024 | 38 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.7 Eau Claire Drilling | 39 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.8 Percival Drilling | 41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.9 Methodology | 43 |
| 8 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security | 46 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.1 Diamond Drilling | 46 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.1.1 QC Sampling | 48 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.2 Summary | 48 |
| 9 Data Verification | 49 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.1 Database Verification | 49 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.2 2020 through 2024 Quality Assurance and Quality Control | 49 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.2.1 Certified Reference Material | 50 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.3 Conclusions | 50 |
| 10 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing | 51 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.1 2001 COREM Metallurgical Testing | 51 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.2 2010 SGS Minerals Metallurgical Testing | 51 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3 2017 SGS Minerals Metallurgical Testing | 53 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.4 Conclusions | 56 |
| 11 Mineral Resource Estimate | 56 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.1 Summary | 56 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.2 Drill Hole Database | 57 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.3 Mineral Resource Modelling and Wireframes | 58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4 Composites | 60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.5 Grade Capping | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.6 Specific Gravity | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.7 Block Model Parameters | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.8 Grade Interpolation | 64 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.9 Mineral Resource Classification Parameters | 67 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.10 Reasonable Prospects of Eventual Economic Extraction | 69 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.11 Mineral Resource Statement | 70 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.12 Model Validation and Sensitivity Analysis | 76 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.12.1 Sensitivity to Cut-off Grade | 78 |
| 12 Mineral Reserve Estimates | 80 |
| 13 Mining Methods | 80 |
| 14 Processing and Recovery Methods | 81 |
| 15 Infrastructure | 81 |
| 16 Market Studies | 81 |
| 17 Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups | 81 |
| 18 Capital and Operating Costs | 81 |
| 19 Economic Analysis | 81 |
| 20 Adjacent Properties | 81 |
| 21 Other Relevant Data and Information | 81 |
| 22 Interpretation and Conclusions | 81 |
| 23 Recommendations | 84 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **3** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

24 References 86 <br> 25 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant 87 <br> 26 DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE 88

**Tables**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Table 1: Eau Claire Gold Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate Effective as of December 31, 2024 | 8 |
| Table 2: Eau Claire Project Exploration Budget | 11 |
| Table 3: Summary of Drilling Completed by Fury | 39 |
| Table 4 Eau Claire area significant intercepts | 39 |
| Table 5 Percival area significant intercepts | 42 |
| Table 6: QC Sample Statistics for Core Sampling 2020 - 2023 | 49 |
| Table 7: Fury Internal CRMs for Diamond Drilling | 50 |
| Table 8: Total Drill Hole and Channel Sample Database for the Eau Claire Project | 57 |
| Table 9: Eau Claire Deposit Zone and Domain Summary | 60 |
| Table 10: Statistical Analysis of the Drill and Channel Assay Data from Within the Eau Claire and Percival Deposit Mineral Domains | 61 |
| Table 11: Statistical Analysis of the 1.00 m Composite Data from Within the Deposit Mineral Domains | 61 |
| Table 12: Deposit Block Model Geometry | 63 |
| Table 13: Parameters used for Whittle™ pit optimization and Calculation of In-pit and Underground Base-case Cut-off Grades | 70 |
| Table 14: Combined Mineral Resource Estimate for the Eau Claire Project | 71 |
| Table 15: Eau Claire Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate | 71 |
| Table 16: Percival Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate | 72 |
| Table 17 Comparison of Average Assay and Composite Grades with Global Block Model Grades | 76 |
| Table 18: Eau Claire In-Pit and Underground Mineral Resource Estimate, at Various Au Cut-off Grades | 78 |
| Table 19: Percival In-Pit and Underground Mineral Resource Estimate, at Various Au Cut-off Grades | 80 |
| Table 20: Eau Claire Project Exploration Budget | 85 |

---

**Figures**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Figure 1: Property Location and Claims | 15 |
| Figure 2: Eau Claire Deposit Stratigraphy | 21 |
| Figure 3. Regional Geology | 24 |
| Figure 4: Percival Biogeochemical Sampling | 30 |
| Figure 5: Gradient Array DCIP defined structural intersections to the north of the Snake Lake mineralized structure as well the convergence of the Eau Claire and South Tonalite structures. | 32 |
| Figure 6: 2022 Percival DCIP IP Survey area depicting the identified resistivity anomalies in relation to the biogeochemical anomalies. | 33 |
| Figure 7: Fury Diamond Drilling Methodology Flow Sheet | 45 |
| Figure 8: Diamond Drilling Sample Preparation and Analysis Flow Sheet - ALS | 46 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **4** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Figure 9: Oblique view looking NW depicting all drilling and channel sampling utilized in the 2024 Mineral Resource Estimation. | 59 |
| Figure 10: Oblique view looking NE depicting all drilling and wireframes utilized in the 2024 Mineral Resource Estimation. | 59 |
| Figure 11: Plan View: Eau Claire Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 0.52 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18) | 74 |
| Figure 12: Isometric View Looking North: Eau Claire Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 0.52 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18) | 74 |
| Figure 13: Plan View: Percival Inferred Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 1.0 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18) | 75 |
| Figure 14: Plan View: Percival Inferred Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 1.0 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18) | 75 |
| Figure 15 Comparison of ID<sup>3</sup> (MRE), ID<sup>2</sup> & NN Models for the Eau Claire Deposit | 77 |
| Figure 16: Comparison of ID3 (MRE), ID2 & NN Models for the Percival Deposit | 77 |

---

**Appendices**

Appendix 1 - Eau Claire Claims List 89

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **5** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**1 Executive Summary**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.1 Overview**

Fury is a Vancouver based Canadian public company involved in mineral exploration and development. Fury is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the NYSE American Stock Exchange.

This Technical Report Summary (TRS) conforms to United States Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Modernized Property Disclosure Requirements for Mining Registrants as described in Subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K, Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations (S-K 1300) and Item 601 (b)(96) Technical Report Summary. The purpose of this TRS is to support the disclosure of the Eau Claire Property Mineral estimates with an effective date of December 31, 2024.

The Eau Claire Project (The Project), 100% held by Fury, comprises 446 claims, totaling 23,284 hectares(ha). Located in 1:50,000 scale NTS map sheets 33B04 and 33B05, approximately 320 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal. The property is accessible, year-round, by the *Route du Nord* and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week. The centre of the property is located at approximately 75.78 degrees longitude west and 52.22 degrees latitude north.

The Project is north of the 52nd parallel (52ºN) and as such is subject to the provisions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975), and the Paix des Braves Agreement (2002). The Project falls within the Eeyou Istchee Territory of the Eastmain Cree First Nation, including trap line VC36 held by Dr. Ted Moses as the Cree Tallyman, and on Category III lands, as established under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

The Project is located in the La Grande volcanic subprovince (2800 to 2738 Ma), east the Opinaca metasedimentary subprovince (2703 to 2674 Ma) and lies within the Eastmain Greenstone Belt (2752 to 2696 Ma). The Eau Claire gold deposit and the Percival prospect occur within a few kilometres of the Cannard Deformation Zone, a crustal scale structural break and is hosted in the Natel Formation (2739 to 2720 Ma), which is made up of komatiites, komatiitic basalt, massive to pillowed basaltic and andesitic flows of tholeiitic affinity (magnesian tholeiites and iron tholeiites), with interbedded sequences of mudstone, wacke and iron formation.

The majority of the gold mineralization identified to date at Eau Claire occurs as stacked late quartz tourmaline veining (VQTL) within interbedded mafic volcanics and volcaniclastic sequences proximal to regional D2 shear zones. Gold mineralization also occurs within altered host rock without veining occurring as centimetre to several metre wide tourmaline-actinolite ± biotite ± calcite replacement zones around vein selvages. A third style of gold mineralization recently identified in silicified breccias and quartz veins hosted in sediments and volcanic rocks proximal to iron formation on the eastern side of the Project. Eau Claire hosts over 12 showings, the most advanced being the Eau Claire deposit and the Percival prospect.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **6** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

From 2020 through to 2024, Fury completed a total of 120 diamond drill holes for approximately 75,654.3 m on the Project. The drill program consisted of i) an extension phase focused on extensions to the known vein corridors along strike from the previous resource ("Extension Program"); ii) an exploration phase designed to test targets along the 4.5 km long deposit trend ("Exploration Program") and iii) an exploration phase of drilling designed to test targets at the Percival and Serendipity prospects 14 km east and 20 km northeast respectively of the Eau Claire Deposit. Large step out drilling in 2022 increased the mineralized footprint of the Eau Claire deposit by over 450 m to the west. At Percival Fury drilling returned intersections up to 13.5 metres at 8.05 g/t gold and outlined a 500x100x300 m zone of gold mineralization. 2024 drilling at Serendipity intercepted a previously unknown mineralized structure that returned an assay od 12.16 g/t gold over 3.0m. The 2020 through 2023 drilling has expanded the footprint of the Eau Claire mineralization and drilling was completed outside of the previous Eau Claire resource area. This new extension drilling by Fury has now been included in the current Mineral Resource Estimate.

The 2024 Mineral Resource estimate is summarized in Table 1. Mineral Resources have been classified in accordance with the definitions for Mineral Resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves dated May 10, 2014 (CIM (2014) definitions).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **7** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 1: Eau Claire Gold Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate Effective as of December 31, 2024**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Category** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Contained Au<br>(oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Measured | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1612000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.67 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 294000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Indicated | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4781000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 866000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Measured & Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **6393000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **5.65** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **1160000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **5445000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **4.13** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **723000** |

---

Notes:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(1) The Mineral Resource Estimates were initially reported by Dupere, Eggers and Dean (2024) with an effective date of May 10, 2024.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(2) The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as current by the Qualified Person, Ms. Valerie Doyon P. Geo,* Senior Project Geologist of the Company*.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(3) The classification of the current Mineral Resource Estimate into Measured, Indicated and Inferred has been completed in accordance with the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(4) All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(5) The mineral resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(6) Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that most Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(7) The Project mineral resource estimates are based on a validated database which includes data from 1202 surface diamond drill holes totalling 406,431 m, and 426 surface channels (Eau Claire deposit) for 1,345 m. The resource database totals 273,402 drill hole assay intervals representing 267,721 m of data and 2,254 channel assays for 1,316 m.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(8) The MRE for the Eau Claire deposit is based on 280 three-dimensional ("3D") resource models representing the 450, 850 and hinge zones. The MRE for the Percival deposit is based on 29 3D resource models representing high grade and lower grade halo zones.* 

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(9) Grades for Au were estimated for each mineralization domain using 1.0 metre capped composites assigned to that domain. To generate grade within the blocks, the inverse distance cubed (ID*<sup>*3*</sup>*) interpolation method was used for all domains of the Eau Claire deposit and ID*<sup>*2*</sup> *for Percival deposit. An average density value was assigned to each domain.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(10) Based on the location, surface exposure, size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using open-pit mining methods. In-pit mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au. The in-pit resource grade blocks are quantified above the base case cut-off grade, above the constraining pit shell, below topography and within the constraining mineralized domains (the constraining volumes).*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(11) The pit optimization and base-case cut-off grade consider a gold price of $1,900/oz and considers a gold recovery of 95%. The pit optimization and base case cut-off grade also considers a mining cost of US$2.80/t mined, pit slope of 55⁰ degrees, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **8** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(12) The results from the pit optimization, using the pseudoflow optimization method in Whittle 4.7.4, are used solely for the purpose of testing the "reasonable prospects for economic extraction" by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade. A Whittle pit shell at a revenue factor of 0.52 was selected as the ultimate pit shell for the purposes of this mineral resource estimate.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(13) Based on the size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using underground mining methods. Underground mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au. The mineral resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below surface/pit surface and within the constraining mineralized wireframes (considered mineable shapes). Based on the size, shape, general thickness, and orientation of the mineralized structures, it is envisioned that the deposits may be mined using a combination of underground mining methods including sub-level stoping (SLS) and/or cut and fill (CAF) mining.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(14) The underground base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au considers a mining cost of US$65.00/t mined, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(15) The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.*

The author is of the view that there are no environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political, or other relevant factors applicable to the Project that could be seen as precluding mineral production once normal compliance with the many environmental and other governmental requirements are met. Accordingly, none of the foregoing factors are such that they could be said to materially adversely affect the 2023 Mineral Resource estimate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.2 Conclusions**

The Eau Claire and Percival deposits contain within-pit and underground Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources that are associated with well-defined mineralized trends and models. The deposits are open along strike and at depth. Project geologists have a good understanding of the regional, local, and deposit geology and controls on mineralization. The geological models are reasonable and plausible interpretations of the drill results.

Mineral Resources for the Eau Claire deposit were estimated assuming combined open pit and underground mining methods. At cut-off grades of 0.5 g/t Au for open pit and 2.5 g/t Au for underground, Measured Mineral Resources are estimated to total 1.61 Mt at an average grade of 5.67 g/t Au containing 294,000 ounces gold. At the same cut-off grades, Indicated Mineral Resources are estimated to total 4.78 Mt at an average grade of 5.64 g/t Au containing 860,000 ounces gold. At the same cut-off grades, Inferred Mineral Resources are estimated to total 5.44 Mt at an average grade of 4.13 g/t Au containing 723,000 ounces gold. The open pit resources were constrained by a preliminary pit shell generated in Whittle software.

The limited metallurgical testwork conducted so far suggests that the gold can be recovered by conventional means, such as a combination of gravity followed by cyanide leaching of the concentrate. Additional metallurgical testwork will be warranted if further exploration increases the size of the resource.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **9** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The Author considers that the Project has potential for delineation of additional Mineral Resources and that further exploration is warranted. Given the prospective nature of the Property, it is the Author's opinion that the Property merits further exploration and that a proposed plan for further work by Fury is justified. The Author is recommending Fury conduct further exploration, subject to funding and any other matters which may cause the proposed exploration program to be altered in the normal course of its business activities or alterations which may affect the program as a result of exploration activities themselves.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**1.3 Recommendations**

Fury's intentions are to continue exploration on the Property in 2025 and onwards. The proposed work program consists of a regional portion focused on refining known gold occurrences within the Percival - Serendipity trend, 14km to the east of Eau Claire, and attempting to define new prospects in areas with favourable geological and structural settings. In addition to the regional program, a drill program focused on the Eau Claire deposit is planned to tie-in the mineralization identified 450m west of the current resource with the aim of updating the current mineral resource. Additional drilling would focus on the Percival prospect and other nearby geochemical anomalies to determine the continuity and scale of gold mineralization.

Fury has gained a better understanding of the combination of pathfinder elements and structural controls on the gold mineralization at Percival. The broad low-grade gold mineralization occurs along a well-defined east-west trending structural splay of the Cannard Deformation Zone. Certain elemental associations, most notably Arsenic, Bismuth, and Tungsten, are proving to be important pathfinders for the gold mineralization. Higher-grade gold within the broader corridor is controlled by secondary shearing and is identified by the high degree of silicification. With this knowledge, the Company has refined their targeting along the Percival to Serendipity Trend identifying ten priority targets for 2024. These identified targets lie within the same stratigraphic package as Percival Main and have undergone varying degrees of deformation. The proximity of the main Cannard and Hashimoto Deformation Zones varies from one target to the other and may have a significant impact on the gold mineralization. Fury believes the varying degrees of deformation are an important control on both gold mineralization and the potential preservation of a sizeable, mineralized body.

The proposed work program is anticipated to include the collection of 15,000 infill till and biogeochemical samples and 30,000 m of diamond drilling. Drilling would be allocated with 2,000 m to 7,500 m focused on testing biogeochemical anomalies within the Percival - Serendipity trend, approximately 20,000 m at the Eau Claire deposit for resource expansion, and 2,500 m to 8,000 m at Percival for resource expansion. Subsequent to the completion of additional drilling on the Property, updated MREs are planned which will form the basis of an updated engineering study in the form of an updated Preliminary Economic Assessment.

The total cost of the planned work program by Fury is estimated at $14.2 M (Table 2).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **10** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 2: Eau Claire Project Exploration Budget**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Item** | **Details** | **Cost (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 1750000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 750000 |
| Drilling | Diamond Drilling (30,000m at $175/m) | 5250000 |
| Till Sampling | Detailed sampling program | 1500000 |
| Land Management | Consultants. Assessment Filing, Claim maintenance | 750000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 75000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 35000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 75000 |
| Expediting | Expediting | 150000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter | 450000 |
| Fuel |  | 1200000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 100000 |
| Update MRE and PEA | Update MRE and PEA | 600000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **12935000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 1293500 |
| **Total** |  | **14228500** |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **11** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**2 Introduction and Terms of Reference**

This Technical Summary Report on the Eau Claire Project (the Project), located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Territory of Northern Quebec, Canada is authored by Valerie Doyon, Senior Project Geologist at Fury. The purpose of this report is to document the current Mineral Resource estimate of the Eau Claire deposit and to outline the work completed by Fury on the Project. Fury is a Vancouver-based exploration company formed in June 2008 which is engaged in acquiring, exploring, and evaluating natural resource properties in Canada. It is a reporting issuer in British Columbia whose common shares trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX: FURY) and the NYSE-American (NYSE: FURY).

On October 9, 2020, the Company acquired all the issued and outstanding shares of Eastmain Resources Inc. ("Eastmain") in accordance with the terms and conditions of the arrangement agreement dated August 10, 2020 (the "Arrangement Agreement"). In accordance with the terms of the Arrangement Agreement, the Company changed its name to "Fury Gold Mines Limited" pursuant to a certificate of change of name dated October 8, 2020.

The Project represents a strategic land position covering prospective lithologies and structures for gold deposits. The Project hosts the Eau Claire deposit, which is at the resource definition stage, as well as a large land position which merits additional exploration.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**2.1 Sources of Information**

The Eau Claire Project has been the subject of several prior NI43-101 Technical Reports. The most recent prepared by Maxime Dupéré, Ben Eggers and Sarah Dean Geologists with SGS Geological Services entitled "Mineral Resource Estimate Update for the Eau Claire Project, Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Quebec, Canada" dated June 25<sup>th</sup>, 2024 with an effective date of May 10<sup>th</sup>, 2024.

The documentation reviewed by the Authors, and other sources of information, are listed in Section 24 of this report.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**2.2 Personal Inspection**

Ms. Doyon has been involved in all exploration programs on the Project since 2020 and was last on site from June to August 2024.

**3 Property Description**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**3.1 Location**

The Project is located in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Territory of Northern Quebec, approximately 320 km northwest of the town of Chibougamau and 800 km north of Montreal. The property is accessible, year-round, by the *Route du Nord* and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **12** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The approximate centre of the Project is located at Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) co-ordinates 5,786,800m N and 453,000m E (NAD 83, Zone 18N). The approximate UTM co-ordinates for the centre of the currently defined Eau Claire deposit are 5,785,100m N and 444,600m E. The Project is located within National Topographic System (NTS) 1:50,000 scale map-areas; 33B04 and 33B05.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**3.2 Project Ownership**

The Project consists of 446 map designated claims covering 23,284.5 ha, (Figure 1, Appendix 1) 100% owned by Eastmain Resources Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Fury. Appendix 1 lists all the claims along with the relevant tenure information including their designation number, registration and expiry dates, area, assessment work credits and work requirements for renewal. The boundaries of the claims have not been legally surveyed. The mineral rights exclude surface rights, which belong to the Quebec government.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**3.3 Mineral Tenure**

Under the Quebec Mining Act, claims or cells are map staked. The map-designated coordinates of the cells are the legal limits of said claims, the physical limits can be verified by consulting the Government of Quebec's Ministère de Ressources Naturelles et des Forets (MERN) GESTIM website.

In Quebec, available mining lands are defined as geo-referenced polygons which can be applied for by holders of Quebec prospecting licenses through an online portal. The person identifies the claim ('clicking') and pays the required fee online. In the case of mining claims that are expiring or to be cancelled, these lands are made available for acquisition at a designated future date and time, allowing for all interested parties to become aware when these lands are available. In the case of open lands or re-opened lands, the first person to complete the transaction receives the mineral tenure. Funds to for transactions with MERN such as claim acquisition and renewal may be deposited in advance in a dedicated account with the Ministry.

Under the current Quebec Mining Act claims are required to be renewed every two years for a fee of $170. Work requirements are based on the number of hectares in each claim and increase each 2-year term to a maximum reached at the 7<sup>th</sup> term (14<sup>th</sup> year). Work requirements also vary on whether the claim is located north or south of the 52<sup>nd</sup> parallel. The Eau Claire Project claims require expenditures equivalent to $978,765.00 every two years to remain in good standing, currently there is over $70 million in excess expenditures registered on the Property (Appendix 1).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**3.4 Royalties and Encumbrances**

There are no Royalties applicable to the Eau Claire Project claims.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**3.5 Permitting**

A forest intervention permit is required for any logging activity, Including clearing for roads, camps, and drill pads. Documentation for such a permit must be submitted by a forest engineer to the Chibougamau or Amos forest management unit, part of the MERN. In accordance with the Paix des Braves protocols, a representative from the MERN will contact the Cree Tallyman who owns the trap line where logging is needed; the Tallyman then has 45 days to provide his approval. A small logging royalty, stumpage fee, is deemed payable to the Ministry.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **13** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

A "special intervention permit" is required to conduct drilling. This permit is very similar to and replaces the forest intervention permit. Road construction necessitating any earthmoving requires authorization from the MERN. This request is made concomitantly with the forest intervention permit request and may take a few months to be approved.

Installation of a temporary or permanent camp requires a permit to be issued by the Municipalité de la Baie-James, from Matagami. Installation must comply with municipal regulations as well as the Ministry of the Environment and the Fight against Climate Change (Ministère de l'Environnement et Lutte contre les changements climatiques - MELCC), especially concerning wastewater management.

No specific permit is required to conduct geophysics, line cutting, or other activities not requiring significant logging.

Based on personal visits and given that the Project is exploration stage, Ms. Doyon is of the view that other than camp site rehabilitation there are no material environmental liabilities associated with the Project. Fury has all required permits to conduct the proposed work on the Project. Ms. Doyon is not aware of any other significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform the proposed work program on the Project.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**3.6 First Nations Rights**

The Project is located north of the 52nd parallel (52ºN) and as such is subject to the provisions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975), and the Paix des Braves Agreement (2002). The Project falls within the Eeyou Istchee Territory of the Eastmain Cree First Nation, including trap lines held by Dr. Ted Moses (tallyman).

The Eau Claire project is located on Category III lands, as established under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. Category III lands are administered by the province of Quebec and they do not have any substantial restrictions on mineral exploration. A notice of work must be forwarded to the Eastmain Community and the tallyman prior to initiating exploration activities. The Project is located within the traditional territories of the Cree Nation of Eastmain. The entire Project lies on trapline VC-37, currently assigned to Dr. Ted Moses.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **14** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Figure 1: Property Location and Claims**

![](exhibit15-2xm003.jpg)

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **15** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.1 Accessibility**

The Project is located 350 kilometres north of the town of Chibougamau and borders the northern shore of the EM-1 Hydro Quebec reservoir in the James Bay region (NTS Map sheet 33B04 and 33B05). The exploration camp is located 2.5 kilometres east of the Eau Claire deposit at 52.22 degrees north and 75.79 degrees west.

The property is accessible, year-round, by the *Route du Nord* and is located 100 km north of Nemaska, serviced by commercial flights twice per week. The Route du Nord from the town of Chibougamau is a 350- kilometre long all-season gravel road extending from the town of Chibougamau to the Cree village of Nemaska (and onto Hydro Québec's installation at EM-1). Beyond EM-1, road access to the project involves crossing the Eastmain Reservoir and the EM-1 spillway via an all-season road installed by Hydro Québec.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.2 Climate**

The climate is typical of northern Quebec and is characterized by temperate to subarctic conditions. The average summer temperatures vary from 10 to 25 degrees Celsius during the day and 5 to 15 degrees Celsius at night (June to September). Winter temperatures range from -35 to -10 degrees Celsius. Winter season can start in late October and can continue until May. Precipitation varies during the year reaching an average of 2 metres annually and is characterized by snow cover in the winter months and moderate rainfall in the summer months. Exploration activities can be carried out year-round.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.3 Local resources & Infrastructure**

Fury, through its Eastmain subsidiary, maintains forty-person camp to support exploration activities at the Eau Claire project. The closest infrastructures to the Eau Claire deposit include a number of hydroelectric complexes and associated infrastructure, including the EM-1 hydroelectric complex. The EM-1 complex is located within 15 kilometres of the Eau Claire gold deposit. Hydro Québec has established a 600-person camp at EM-1 that includes fuel and medical services. More major necessities such as skilled labour and specialized equipment are sourced from Val-d'Or or Chibougamau. Many services are now available through numerous Cree owned businesses and partnerships in Mistissini, Eastmain and Nemaska.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.4 Physiography**

The property is located within the Canadian Shield and is characterized by many lakes, swamps, rivers, and low-lying terrain. The project is located in the boreal forest where forest fires are common. Vegetation is typical of taiga, including areas dominated by sparse black spruce, birch, and poplar forests, in addition to large areas of peat bog devoid of trees.

Overburden is typically 3 to 4 metres thick, with the exception of isolated areas where overburden thickness can reach 20 m. Numerous glacial eskers often reaching tens of kilometres in length can be seen of satellite images.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **16** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Rock outcrops are sparse due to the abundance of quaternary deposits and swamps. The topography of the area is subdued and characterized dominantly by lowlands, with few hills that attain elevations up to 330 metres above sea level. The area is drained by the Eastmain River, which now drains the Eastmain Reservoir located near the southern margin of the property.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.5 Conclusions**

The Eau Claire Project is a remote greenfields site with limited existing roads, no power or water. Development of the project will require:

* Upgrading of the current road access to allow for drive in / drive out operations on a scale suitable to development.

* Connecting to the nearby Hydro Quebec renewables grid.

* Upgrading of the current camp

* Development of local water resources for potable and non-potable water consumption.

In the opinion Ms. Doyon, the Eau Claire Project site offers, subject to customary environmental and other regulatory compliance, adequate surface rights and land suitable for the construction of a processing plant, tailings facility, waste rock dumps, and mining camp. The project site has several suitable sources of water pending the necessary approvals.

**5 History**

The following is taken from Armitage and Hafez (2017) and describes work completed in the general vicinity of the Project prior to 2017. Work completed after 2017 is summarized from previously submitted assessment reports.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.1 Pre 2002 Exploration**

Exploration on the Project dates back to the early 1970s when SEREM Quebec Inc. (SEREM) and Société de Développement de la Baie-James (SDBJ) completed airborne electromagnetic surveys and limited core drilling in search for volcanogenic massive base metal sulphide deposits (SRK, 2015).

In 1984, Westmin and Eastmain initiated a comprehensive gold and base metal exploration program that covered the former Eastmain Greenstone Belt. From 1984 through 1989, Westmin and Eastmain completed a multi-staged exploration program which included airborne geophysical surveys, line cutting, geochemical rock and soil surveys, ground geophysical surveys, prospecting, geological mapping, and core drilling.

A property-wide airborne electromagnetic and magnetic survey contracted by Westmin formed the basis of a comprehensive exploration program that led to the discovery of the Eau Claire gold deposit in 1987. The joint venture conducted a systematic soil sampling program over all known electromagnetic anomalies on the property. Flagged and cut grids were completed on isolated electromagnetic anomalies along with prospecting, geological mapping, and rock sampling. A large gold-in-soil geochemical anomaly was detected in the south-western portion of the property proximal to the outcropping gold-bearing quartz- tourmaline vein, currently identified as the B Vein in the 450 West zone.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **17** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Sampling and mapping were conducted on local area cut grids focussing on short strike-length airborne geophysical conductors. Westmin collected 1,036 rock samples that were assayed for gold only. The rock sample data ranges from less than 5 parts per billion to 22.2 g/t Au.

Soil surveys were completed over small, localized grids using a grub hoe to sample the soil's B-horizon. Samples were assayed for gold only.

Westmin completed a total of 54 core boreholes (5,922 metres) from 1987 to 1989, which resulted in the discovery of several gold-bearing quartz-tourmaline veins. The presence of these veins (including veins currently known as VEIN B, C, D, F and G) demonstrated continuity in three dimensions within the upper portion of the Eau Claire gold deposit.

The property was dormant from 1990 to 1995.

From 1996 through 2001, SOQUEM managed the exploration activities on the Clearwater property, which included ground geophysical surveys, line cutting, prospecting, geological mapping, trenching and core drilling. A comprehensive soil sampling program covered the entire property on a 100 by 500 metre grid. In 1996, SOQUEM commissioned Sigma Geophysics Inc. (Sigma) to complete ground magnetic and induced polarization (IP) surveys over four grid areas. The surveys were completed over the Rosemary, Eau Claire, Aupapiskach, and Natel areas. In total, Sigma completed 168.5 line kilometres of ground magnetic survey and 130.9 line kilometres of IP surveys. The magnetic data were collected on 100 metre line and 12.5 metre station spacing using an EDA Omniplus instrument.

Magnetic, resistivity, and chargeability data were presented on 1:5,000 scale map sheets for each grid area. The Eau Claire Deposit was not detected from the geophysical surveys.

Between 1996 and 2001, SOQUEM collected 556 rock samples for analysis. The principal area of interest defined by the SOQUEM rock sampling was the surface expression of the 450 West Zone. SOQUEM also found gold-bearing quartz-tourmaline veins 2 kilometres east of Eau Claire at the Snake Lake prospect.

In 1999, a backhoe was brought to the property to expedite surface trenching. Extensive surface trenching in 1999 exposed multiple high-grade, quartz-tourmaline veins (currently known as VEIN P, JQ, R, and S) at the 450 West zone. Surface stripping demonstrated lateral continuity of these veins for up to 200 metres and variable thicknesses, from less than 0.5 metres to 3.2 metres. Systematic channel sampling across these veins at 5- to 10-metre intervals yielded gold intercepts ranging from less than 1.0 to 406.5 g/t Au. SOQUEM completed 95 core boreholes (19,639 metres) on the property between 1996 and 2001.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **18** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.2 2002 - 2019 Eastmain Resources Exploration**

Eastmain completed campaign style ground exploration programs from 2002 through to 2013. Little ground work aside from drilling was completed post 2013. The ground work completed by Eastmain included outcrop and trench mapping, soil sampling, ground and airborne geophysical surveying and trenching.

Soil sampling across the Project identified a number of anomalous targets. Several of these targets; Rosemary, Spider, Boomerang, Snake Lake and Clovis are located along the Cannard Deformation Zone within the Eau Claire deposit trend. On the eastern side of the property the Natel, Knight and Serendipity prospects were identified early on. The Percival prospect was not identified until 2018 through prospecting. Percival does not have a gold in soil anomaly associated with the near surface gold mineralization from the historical Eastmain work.

Airborne geophysical surveys were completed in 2005 (VTEM and magnetics with 100m line spacing), 2012 (Magnetics with 25 - 50m line spacing) across the entire property. A VTEM and magnetics grid targeting the Knight - Serendipity trend which includes Percival was completed in 2019. The airborne geophysical data was utilised to refine the structural and geologic models for the entire property.

In 2012 an airborne light detection and ranging (LiDAR) and aerial photography survey was flown over the entire Project. Digital elevation models and high resolution orthophoto imagery was provided. The LiDAR survey identified several new structural and stratigraphic features while also providing confirmation of the structural interpretations based off of the airborne geophysical data.

The combined LiDAR and magnetics interpretation showed the main stratigraphic units within the Project area are controlled by east-west oriented D2 structures.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.3 Previous Resource Estimates**

In 2002, SOQUEM reported an Indicated mineral resource of 258,678 ounces of gold contained within 972,900 tonnes grading 8.27 g/t Au (9.62 g/t Au uncut), and an Inferred resource of 60,233 ounces of gold contained within 508,665 tonnes grading 3.68 g/t Au (3.79 g/t Au uncut).

In 2015 SRK completed a Mineral Resource Estimate reporting a combined open pit and underground resource of 0.97 Mt grading 7.29 g/t Au for 227koz Au in the Measured Category, 6.26Mt grading 3.60 g/t Au for 724koz Au in the Indicated category and 5.07Mt grading 3.88 g/t Au for 633koz Au in the inferred category. Open pit mineral resources were reported at a cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t gold and underground mineral resources were reported at a cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t gold. The cut-off grades consider a gold price of US$1,300 per ounce of gold and a gold recovery of 95%.

In 2018 an Updated Mineral Resource Estimate and Preliminary Economic Assessment on the Eau Claire Gold Deposit, Clearwater Property, Quebec, Canada" dated July 3<sup>rd</sup>, 2018, and with an effective date of February 4<sup>th</sup>, 2018, was prepared by Eugene Puritch, P.Eng., FEC, CET, Antoine Yassa, P.Geo., Andrew Bradfield, P.Eng. of P&E Mining Consultants Inc. and Allan Armitage, Ph.D., P. Geo of SGS Canada Inc.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **19** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

In 2023 the 2018 Resource was restated by David Frappier-Rivard, P.Geo., of Fury Gold Mines and Maxime Dupere, P.Geo. of SGS Geological Services.

5.3.1 ***Discussion on Previous Resource Estimates***

The historical Mineral Resource Estimates summarized above are superseded by the 2024 Mineral Resources Estimate. Additional drilling, interpretation and modeling has been completed subsequent to the historical resource estimates. The historical resource estimates summarized above show a linear progression through time as more data and information was added at the Eau Claire Deposit and in the opinion of Ms. Doyon were reasonable with the information available at the time the resource estimates were completed. The only current mineral resource estimate for the Eau Claire Project is Ms Doyon's 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate discussed in Section 11 of this report.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.4 Historical Drilling**

Drilling completed on the Project supports the 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate and is described in Section 7 of this report.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.5 Past Production**

There has been no previous production from the Project.

**6 Geological Setting and Mineralization**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.1 Geology**

The Eau Claire project is contained within the La Grande volcano-plutonic Subprovince (2,752 to 2,696 Ma) of the Superior Province approximately 30 kilometres south of the contact with the metasedimentary Opinaca Subprovince (2700 to 2648 Ma). Portions of the La Grande Subprovince were formerly referred to as the Eastmain Greenstone Belt. Depending on the literature, the Eastmain Greenstone Belt has retained its title as a distinct greenstone belt lying within the La Grande Subprovince.

The La Grande Subprovince consists of four volcanic cycles erupted between 2,752 and 2,705 Ma (Kauputauch, Natel, Anatacau-Pivert, and Komo-Kasak formations). The supracrustal rocks of the region are intruded by syn-volcanic (2747 to 2710 Ma) and post- or late-tectonic (2,697 to 2,618 Ma) tonalite- trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) suites.

The Eastmain Greenstone Belt consists of a 5- to 10-kilometre wide by 150-kilometre long succession of Archean bimodal volcanic rocks (Figures 2 and 3). The volcanic sequence includes lowermost mafic volcanic rocks overlain by felsic pyroclastic to volcaniclastic rocks, intercalated facies of iron formation, shaly and graphitic sedimentary units.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **20** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm002.jpg)

**Figure 2: Eau Claire Deposit Stratigraphy**

Metamorphic grade varies on a regional scale within the La Grande Subprovince from greenschist to amphibolite facies.

Geological studies completed throughout the region show evidence of multiple deformation events, including:

* A D1 event characterized by a penetrative foliation axial-planar to east-northeast- to northwest- trending F1 folds

* A D2 event characterized by an east-trending crenulation cleavage axial-planar to moderately- plunging F2 folds

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **21** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Eau Claire is underlain by a bimodal volcanic sequence of mafic volcanic flows, felsic volcaniclastic rocks, sulphide iron formation, and graphitic metasedimentary rocks, intruded by a variety of felsic sub-volcanic plutons and dikes. The volcano-sedimentary sequence has been folded into an east-west-trending, west-plunging anticline, located at the western end of the Clearwater property.

The Eau Claire deposit straddles the contact on the south limb of an anticline between lowermost felsic volcaniclastic rocks overlain by mafic volcanic flows. Gold-bearing quartz-tourmaline veins from the Eau Claire deposit crosscut the volcanic/sedimentary rock contact and in turn are crosscut by late northeast- trending mafic dikes. The contact between volcanic and sedimentary rocks is a marker horizon that forms a broad open fold along the north limb and a tight fold closure immediately west of the deposit, as well as an east-west trending south limb that has been traced for several kilometres. Iron formation occurs along the southern limb of the antiform east of Eau Claire and is locally isoclinally folded.

The Eau Claire deposit is principally contained within a thick sequence of massive and pillowed mafic volcanic flows and felsic volcaniclastic rocks intruded by multiple phases of tonalite and felsic (quartz- feldspar) porphyry stocks, sills, and dikes (Figure 2).

A crescent-shape felsic porphyry dike swarm referred to as the Campbell Porphyry bounds the hanging wall (south) contact of the Eau Claire gold deposit. The overall shape of the Eau Claire gold deposit follows the contour of the felsic porphyry dike swarm. A second felsic porphyry dike swarm intruded the western end of the Eau Claire deposit coincident with the F2 fold nose.

The footwall rocks at the deposit consist of a thick sequence of east-west-trending, south-dipping volcaniclastic, ash to lapilli tuff and sedimentary rocks including greywacke, siltstone, mudstone, and conglomerate and felsic quartz-feldspar porphyry dykes. These rocks predominate throughout the central portion of the property and are locally intercalated with mini-cycles of mafic volcanic rock and amphibolite (mafic metavolcanic) alternating with felsic volcaniclastic rocks.

Gold mineralization at the Eau Claire gold deposit is generally located within approximately EW trending structurally-controlled, high-grade en-echelon quartz-tourmaline veins and adjacent altered wall rocks, as well as variable width ESE trending sheared and foliated alteration zones. The alteration zones are parallel to the overall foliation and are thus believed to represent an altered stratigraphic unit. The vein systems are predominantly hosted within a thick sequence of massive and locally pillowed mafic volcanic flows, interbedded with narrow intervals of volcaniclastic meta-sedimentary rocks. Both gold bearing vein sets may occur with as narrow intervals with tourmaline and develop into thick quartz-tourmaline veins with zoned tourmaline+/-actinolite+/-biotite+/-carbonate alteration halos which can measure up to several metres in thickness.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **22** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.1 Structure**

Due to the complex structural geology of the Eau Claire project complete property and deposit-scale structural studies were completed by SRK in 2012 and 2014. Field-based studies reported evidence of four deformation episodes at the Clearwater property:

* D1 deformation characterized by S1 penetrative foliation, high strain zones, and isoclinal F1 folds

* D2 deformation characterized by S2 crenulation cleavage, southwest-plunging F2 folds, east- trending and northeast-trending shear zones

* D3 deformation characterized by northwest-trending crenulation cleavage, east-northeast-plunging F3 folds (only documented in the eastern part of the property), and northwest-trending shear zones

* D4 deformation characterized by two sets of brittle faults including northeast-trending sinistral and northwest-trending dextral strike-slip faults

A geological interpretation of aeromagnetic data over the Project revealed the following additional structural information:

Kilometre-scale fold interference patterns occur on the Project

* D1, D2, and D3 shear zones occur, and are preferentially developed, in mixed volcaniclastic and mafic volcanic rock sequences

* A major D2 east-west-trending structure, known as the Cannard Deformation Zone, occurs approximately 1 kilometre south of the Eau Claire gold deposit and can be traced laterally for more than 100 kilometres based on regional airborne magnetic survey data

* Several gold occurrences including the Eau Claire deposit and the Spider, Snake Lake, and Percival showings are distributed within or immediately adjacent to the Cannard Deformation Zone

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **23** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Figure 3. Regional Geology** 

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **24** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.2 Mineralization**

The Eau Claire deposit is a structurally-controlled gold deposit. Mineralization occurs primarily in a series of sheeted en-echelon quartz-tourmaline veins and associated metre scale alteration zones. Carbonate within the veins is associated with gold mineralization. The overall trend of the mineralized veins is controlled by a structural corridor sub-parallel to the D2 Cannard Deformation Zone. Individual veins are up to 1 metre thick and extent for at least 100 metres along strike.

Veins are composed of quartz and tourmaline; the ratio between quartz with accessory calcite to tourmaline can vary from 100 percent quartz to 100 percent tourmaline. The quartz-tourmaline veins are massive, banded and/or brecciated. Pyrite, pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite and rare molybdenite generally constitute less than 1.5 percent of the composition of these veins but can be upwards of 20% locally. Commonly, brecciated veins contain angular blocks of tourmaline, ranging in size from less than one to more than 25 centimetres in size. Fragments are cemented by a quartz-carbonate matrix. Breccia textures locally form a "piano key" pattern with angular tourmaline blocks aligned perpendicular to the vein walls. This texture is due to protracted deformation that affected already formed veins and generated new veins (tension gash veins developed on pre-existing laminated veins). The piano-key breccia has been observed throughout the deposit at all scales in tourmaline veins of less than 1 centimetre to more than 1 metre thick. A "ladder vein" texture has also been observed in outcrop at the 450 West Zone consisting of massive tourmaline layers with quartz-carbonate "ladders" aligned perpendicular to the vein walls.

Gold occurs as isolated grains or as clusters of fine-grained particles. Irregular to sub-angular shaped gold grains range in size from less than 10 micrometres to 1 millimetre. In rare instances, grains up to 1 centimetre in size have been observed. Locally, veins contain micrometre-size clusters of visible gold particles. Tellurobismuthite (Bi<sub>2</sub>Te<sub>3</sub>) occurs throughout the deposit. Gold and tellurides occur within micro fractures in quartz, interstitial to granular tourmaline grains, at the contact between massive aphanitic tourmaline and quartz bands, and along tourmaline laminations.

Gold mineralization also occurs within altered host rock without veining occurring as centimetre to several metre wide tourmaline-actinolite ± biotite ± calcite replacement zones around vein selvages.

The two major vein areas discovered to date in the resource area (the 450 West and 850 West zones) form a crescent-shaped mineralized, surface projected footprint 1.8 kilometres long by more than 100 metres wide, which has been traced to date to a vertical depth of 900 metres. Veins within the 450 West zone typically strike 85 degrees and dip 50 to 65 degrees to the south. Veins within the 850 West zone typically strike 60 degrees and dip subvertically.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.3 Alteration**

Alteration zones associated with gold mineralization are often wider and volumetrically more extensive than the veins (SRK, 2015). The alteration halo ranges from 1 centimetre to several metres wide. Composition and mineralogy of the alteration zones bordering the veins varies according to the bulk composition of the host lithology. Where the veins are hosted by felsic to intermediate volcanic rocks or felsic porphyry, the alteration occurs as silicified and tourmaline-rich replacement zones, and as massive bands along the foliation. Veins hosted within the mafic volcanic rocks are characterized by a symmetrically zoned alteration pattern with an internal actinolite-tourmaline dominant mineral assemblage, and an external biotite- carbonate dominant assemblage. These alteration zones range from centimetre to several metres in thickness.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **25** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Both actinolite and tourmaline occur as non-foliated radiating prismatic and or fibrous aggregates and/or bands of acicular euhedral crystals. Biotite-carbonate assemblages occur more often as foliated, fine-grained aggregates. Actinolite-tourmaline alteration enveloping veins may be gradational with the quartz- tourmaline veins and contain gold. It is common to observe significant amounts of gold within tourmaline and/or actinolite and/or biotite altered rock with little or no visible vein material. Wide intervals of biotite-carbonate rock often form an external alteration zone to the sheeted quartz-tourmaline veins within mafic volcanic host lithologies. Both actinolite-tourmaline and biotite-carbonate alteration assemblages represent the strike and dip continuation of the quartz-tourmaline vein system where structural attenuation may have boudinaged the veins.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.4 Deposit Types**

Gold mineralization at Eau Claire is structurally controlled and exhibits similar geological, structural and metallogenic characteristics to Archean Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein (lode) deposits. These deposits are also known as mesothermal, orogenic, lode gold, shear-zone-related quartz- carbonate or gold-only deposits (Dubé and Gosselin, 2007).

The following description of Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits is extracted from Dubé and Gosselin (2007).

*Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are structurally controlled, complex epigenetic deposits that are hosted in deformed and metamorphosed terranes. They consist of simple to complex networks of gold-bearing, laminated quartz-carbonate fault-fill veins in moderately to steeply dipping, compressional brittle-ductile shear zones and faults, with locally associated extensional veins and hydrothermal breccias. They are dominantly hosted by mafic metamorphic rocks of greenschist to locally lower amphibolite facies and formed at intermediate depths (5-10 km). Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are typically associated with iron-carbonate alteration. The relative timing of mineralization is syn- to late- deformation and typically post-peak greenschist-facies or syn-peak amphibolite facies metamorphism.*

*Gold is mainly confined to the quartz-carbonate vein networks but may also be present in significant amounts within iron-rich sulphidized wall rock. Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are distributed along major compressional to transpressional crustal-scale fault zones in deformed greenstone terranes of all ages, but are more abundant and significant, in terms of total gold content, in Archean terranes. However, a significant number of world-class deposits (>100 t Au) are also found in Proterozoic and Paleozoic terranes.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **26** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

*The main gangue minerals in greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are quartz and carbonate (calcite, dolomite, ankerite, and siderite), with variable amounts of white micas, chlorite, tourmaline, and sometimes scheelite. The sulphide minerals typically constitute less than 5 to 10% of the volume of the orebodies. The main ore minerals are native gold with, in decreasing amounts, pyrite, pyrrhotite, and chalcopyrite and occur without any significant vertical mineral zoning. Arsenopyrite commonly represents the main sulphide in amphibolite-facies rocks and in deposits hosted by clastic sediments. Trace amounts of molybdenite and tellurides are also present in some deposits.*

*This type of gold deposit is characterized by moderately to steeply dipping, laminated fault-fill quartz- carbonate veins in brittle-ductile shear zones and faults, with or without fringing shallow-dipping extensional veins and breccias. Quartz vein textures vary according to the nature of the host structure (extensional vs. compressional). Extensional veins typically display quartz and carbonate fibres at a high angle to the vein walls and with multiple stages of mineral growth, whereas the laminated veins are composed of massive, fine-grained quartz. When present in laminated veins, fibres are subparallel to the vein walls.*

*Individual vein thickness varies from a few centimetres up to 5 metres, and their length varies from 10 up to 1000 m. The vertical extent of the orebodies is commonly greater than 1 km and reaches 2.5 km in a few cases.*

*The gold-bearing shear zones and faults associated with this deposit type are mainly compressional and they commonly display a complex geometry with anastomosing and/or conjugate arrays. The laminated quartz-carbonate veins typically infill the central part of, and are subparallel to slightly oblique to, the host structures. The shallow-dipping extensional veins are either confined within shear zones, in which case they are relatively small and sigmoidal in shape, or they extend outside the shear zone and are planar and laterally much more extensive.*

*Stockworks and hydrothermal breccias may represent the main mineralization styles when developed in competent units such as the granophyric facies of differentiated gabbroic sills, especially when developed at shallower crustal levels. Ore-grade mineralization also occurs as disseminated sulphides in altered (carbonatized) rocks along vein selvages. Due to the complexity of the geological and structural setting and the influence of strength anisotropy and competency contrasts, the geometry of vein networks varies from simple (e.g. Silidor deposit), to fairly complex with multiple orientations of anastomosing and/or conjugate sets of veins, breccias, stockworks, and associated structures. Layer anisotropy induced by stiff differentiated gabbroic sills within a matrix of softer rocks, or, alternatively, by the presence of soft mafic dykes within a highly competent felsic intrusive host, could control the orientation and slip directions in shear zones developed within the sills; consequently, it may have a major impact on the distribution and geometry of the associated quartz-carbonate vein network. As a consequence, the geometry of the veins in settings with large competence contrasts will be strongly controlled by the orientation of the hosting bodies and less by external stress. The anisotropy of the stiff layer and its orientation may induce an internal strain different from the regional one and may strongly influence the success of predicting the geometry of the gold-bearing vein network being targeted in an exploration program.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **27** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

*The veins in greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are hosted by a wide variety of host rock types; mafic and ultramafic volcanic rocks and competent iron-rich differentiated tholeiitic gabbroic sills and granitoid intrusions are common hosts. However, there are commonly district-specific lithological associations acting as chemical and/or structural traps for the mineralizing fluids as illustrated by tholeiitic basalts and flow contacts within the Tisdale Assemblage in Timmins. A large number of deposits in the Archean Yilgarn craton are hosted by gabbroic ("dolerite") sills and dykes as illustrated by the Golden Mile dolerite sill in Kalgoorlie, whereas in the Superior Province, many deposits are associated with porphyry stocks and dykes. Some deposits are also hosted by and/or along the margins of intrusive complexes (e.g. Perron-Beaufort/North Pascalis deposit hosted by the Bourlamaque batholith in Val d'Or. Other deposits are hosted by clastic sedimentary rocks (e.g. Pamour, Timmins).*

*The metallic geochemical signature of greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein orebodies is Au, Ag, As, W, B, Sb, Te, and Mo, typically with background or only slightly anomalous concentrations of base metals (Cu, Pb, and Zn). The Au/Ag ratio typically varies from 5 to 10. Contrary to epithermal deposits, there is no vertical metal zoning. Palladium may be locally present.*

*At a district scale, greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits are associated with large-scale carbonate alteration commonly distributed along major fault zones and associated subsidiary structures. At a deposit scale, the nature, distribution, and intensity of the wall-rock alteration is controlled mainly by the composition and competence of the host rocks and their metamorphic grade.*

*Typically, the proximal alteration haloes are zoned and characterized - in rocks at greenschist facies - by iron-carbonatization and sericitization, with sulphidation of the immediate vein selvages (mainly pyrite, less commonly arsenopyrite).*

*Altered rocks show enrichments in CO2, K2O, and S, and leaching of Na2O. Further away from the vein, the alteration is characterized by various amounts of chlorite and calcite, and locally magnetite. The dimensions of the alteration haloes vary with the composition of the host rocks and may envelope entire deposits hosted by mafic and ultramafic rocks. Pervasive chromium- or vanadium-rich green micas (fuchsite and roscoelite) and ankerite with zones of quartzcarbonate stockworks are common in sheared ultramafic rocks. Common hydrothermal alteration assemblages that are associated with gold mineralization in amphibolite-facies rocks include biotite, amphibole, pyrite, pyrrhotite, and arsenopyrite, and, at higher grades, biotite/phlogopite, diopside, garnet, pyrrhotite and/or arsenopyrite, with variable proportions of feldspar, calcite, and clinozoisite. The variations in alteration styles have been interpreted as a direct reflection of the depth of formation of the deposits.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **28** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

*The alteration mineralogy of the deposits hosted by amphibolite-facies rocks, in particular the presence of diopside, biotite, K-feldspar, garnet, staurolite, andalusite, and actinolite, suggests that they share analogies with gold skarns, especially when they (1) are hosted by sedimentary or mafic volcanic rocks, (2) contain a calc-silicate alteration assemblage related to gold mineralization with an Au-As-Bi-Te metallic signature, and (3) are associated with granodiorite-diorite intrusions.* 

Canadian examples of deposits hosted in amphibolite-facies rocks include the replacement-style Madsen deposit in Red Lake and the quartz-tourmaline vein and replacement-style Eau Claire deposit in the James Bay area.

**7 Exploration**

From 2020 to 2024, Fury Gold has completed systematic disciplined exploration programs with the goals of advancing known prospects through to the drill stage and identifying new prospects. The Company deployed biogeochemical sampling techniques to image the Percival mineralization, completed ground geophysical surveys at the Eau Claire Deposit Trend and along the Percival trend. Additionally, Fury compiled all historic exploration data into a single accessible database, reprocessed and reinterpreted the historical property scale geophysics data. The work completed by Fury to date has resulted in a refined targeting process and identification of areas and targets overlooked by previous explorers. The Company continues to explore through the testing of regional targets like Percival, Serendipity and Agua Clara and with a view to seeking to expand the Eau Claire deposit area which remains open along strike and to depth.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**7.1 Percival Biogeochemical Sampling**

The Percival prospect did not provide a gold response from the historical soil sampling data that covered the mineralization, leading the Company to conduct various orientation geochemical surveys over the zone in an attempt to obtain a direct high contrast gold response from the mineralized bedrock overlain by shallow tills. The 2020 orientation survey was able to successfully detect the gold mineralization at Percival through biogeochemistry sampling.

Subsequent to the results of the orientation study at Percival the Company completed a biogeochemical survey covering 6.5km of prospective stratigraphy along the Percival trend. The survey identified 15 discrete gold anomalies with associated pathfinder elements (+/- As, Pb, Zn) (Figure 4). Two of these anomalies were previously known prospects, Percival and Carodoc, the remaining 13 anomalies are new occurrences of gold and associated pathfinder mineralization.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **29** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Through the combined interpretation of the magnetics data and results from the biogeochemical survey a NNW trending structural corridor was recognized. This structural trend is parallel to the regional fold hinge axis that links the Percival and Serendipity prospects. Gold mineralization appears to be concentrated along these newly identified structures where they intersect folded mafic volcanic stratigraphy along the east west limb of the regional fold proximal to the Cannard deformation zone.

![](exhibit15-2xm008.jpg)

**Figure 4: Percival Biogeochemical Sampling**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.1.1 ***Biogeochemical Methodology***

Biogeochemical samples were collected approximately every 50 m, over 100 m spaced traverse lines. The sampling grids were oriented perpendicular to the trend of the prospective lithologies. Approximately 200 g of black spruce twigs was collected at each sample site by hand. Samples were collected preferentially from healthy trees approximately of the same age and height. Samples were placed in a numbered cloth sample bag, with a sample tag placed inside the bag. The bags were tied shut. Sample data was recorded in field data loggers. At camp, samples were organized and hung to dry prior to shipping to ALS in Vancouver for gold and multi-element analysis.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **30** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**7.2 Geophysical Surveys**

7.2.1 ***2020 Gradient Array Induced Polarization Survey***

During late 2020 the Company completed a gradient array direct current induced polarization (DCIP) survey over the Eau Claire deposit trend. The gradient array DCIP survey data was collected over four survey blocks using 12.5m receiver dipole spacing. A total of 12.86km<sup>2</sup> was covered with the survey. This survey method was selected to assist in discriminating low sulphide/low conductivity targets such as the Eau Claire deposit Quartz-Tourmaline vein and High-Grade Schist systems. The gradient array DCIP survey identified a series of related primary and secondary shear zones controlling gold mineralization at the Eau Claire deposit (Figure 5).

**7.2.1.1 Methodology**

Including overlapping regions, the total survey consists of 116.5 line-km of data covering a 7.0 km long and 1.5 km wide grid of 100 m spaced lines. This survey design uses fixed A-B current electrodes outside the survey area, with a gap of distance L. The M-N potential electrodes are displaced in lines parallel to the alignment formed by A and B. The Mi Ni spacing is equal to l. The gap between M and N depends on the desired resolution. The L/l ratio is typically between 40 and 120. In the case of this survey, L is 3000 m, and l is 12.5 m, so the L/l ratio is 240.

The distance between current electrodes for each block is as follows: Block A, 2933 m; Block B, 2929m; Block C, 2937 m; Block D and D', 3005 m; Block E, 2977 m. The MN separation was 12.5 m. Block A covered 2.38 km2; Block B covered 1.94 km2; Block C covered 2.03 km2; Block D covered 1.98 km2; Block E covered 2.39 km2; Block BC covered 1.46 km2; and Block D' covered 0.68 km2, for a total of 12.86 km2.

For quality control and leveling purposes, several repeat readings were measured, and a complete block, Block B, was resurveyed during the second phase of the program.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **31** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm009.jpg)

**Figure 5: Gradient Array DCIP defined structural intersections to the north of the Snake Lake mineralized structure as well the convergence of the Eau Claire and South Tonalite structures.**

7.2.2 ***2022 DCIP Survey***

A 29 line-km Induced Polarization ground geophysical survey along the Percival trend was completed in 2022. The survey targeted the strongly silicified core of the Percival mineralization and was able to identify a number of strong resistive anomalies that coincide with previously identified biogeochemical anomalies (Figure 6).

**7.2.2.1 Methodology**

The IP survey was achieved on 3 distinct locations of the main grid that was implemented for this campaign. Overall, 18 N/S irregularly spaced profiles ranging in length between 0.975 and 2.025 km were read by IP. These lines were implemented over a distance of 6.5 km from the same base line (LB 0+00) oriented E/W, the latter being used by snowmobile to travel within the survey area.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **32** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The chaining was done every 25 m and wooden pickets were used. On each of these pickets, the line and station numbers were indicated with a marker every 25 m and an aluminum tag every 100 m. The location for some of the pickets along the baseline and tie lines was determined with a Garmin non-differential hand-held GPS receiver. This information was ultimately used to geo-reference the IP database to the UTM18N_NAD83 coordinate system.

The IP survey was carried out by using the pole-dipole electrode array with a nominal ''a'' spacing of 37.5 m and a separation factor (n) ranging from 1 to 20.

![](exhibit15-2xm010.jpg)

**Figure 6: 2022 Percival DCIP IP Survey area depicting the identified resistivity anomalies in relation to the biogeochemical anomalies.**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **33** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**7.3 Drilling**

Drilling throughout the Eau Claire Project has taken place intermittently from 1972 through to 2024. A total of 410,253.8 m of drilling has been completed in 1,214 diamond drill holes across the entire Project area.

7.3.1 ***2002 - 2013 Drilling***

Between 2002 and 2013 Eastmain completed 177,713m of diamond core drilling in 534 drill holes. The drilling was completed within an area measuring approximately 2,200 metres east-west and 900 metres north-south has. The drilling pattern was designed to intersect the gold-tellurium mineralization. The majority of boreholes were drilled with a dip between 45 and 60 degrees, and an azimuth of 355 degrees.

The 2007 and 2009 drill campaign focussed on tightly spaced, 12.5m infill drilling at the 450 West Zone.

2010 drilling successfully confirmed the lateral continuity of the 850 West Zone underneath surface quartz-tourmaline veining identified in surface trenching. Regional drilling at Boomerang and Snake Lake was also completed in 2010. Broad zones of ,1 g/t Au were intersected from the 2010 regional program.

Drilling in 2011 through to 2013 focussed on the 450 West Zone and proximal strike extensions.

7.3.2 ***2015 Drilling***

Eastmain completed 29 drill holes (ER15-553 to -581) totalling 12,898 metres at Eau Claire in 2015. The drilling was focused on expanding Measured & Indicated Open Pit and Ramp Accessible Underground gold resources, within the upper portion (top third) of the Eau Claire Deposit.

Assay data from holes 553 to 573 confirms 45 gold-bearing intercepts ranging from 0.50 to 25.6 grams gold per tonne (g/t) over widths ranging from 2.0 to 11.5 metres (see Eastmain news release dated December 22, 2015 posted on SEDAR). Nineteen assay intervals exceeded cut-off grade for underground resources (2.5 g/t Au) at Eau Claire, with an average grade of 8.78 grams gold per tonne over an average width of 2.78 metres.

2015 drilling confirmed the continuation of gold mineralization laterally to the east Measured and Indicated gold resources identified in the SRK Report at Eau Claire. Several half-metre-wide high-grade vein intersections from ten of the drill holes reported herein contain very-fine-grade visible gold and range in grade from 24.5 to 98.8 g/t.

Infill core sampling of previous drill holes was also completed. Infill sampling confirmed a high-grade interval from hole ER08-131, which assayed 6.65 g/t Au over 5.0 metres, from within the JQ Vein at a depth of 66.0 metres. When combined with assay results from the adjacent P Vein, the intersection provides a composite interval grading 6.75 g/t Au across 13.8 metres, lying within the 450 West Zone. A total of 1,438 infill core samples were taken during the 2015 exploration program. Infill sampling of near-surface intervals within potential open-pit areas may contribute to current mineral resources.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **34** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

7.3.3 ***2016-2017 Drill Program***

The 2016 through 2017 drilling program was designed to improve upon the resource classification of the 2015 SRK Mineral Resource Estimation as well as testing the Snake Lake prospect to the east of the Eau Claire deposit. A total of 90,448.9m was drilled in 236 drill holes. Of the total 2016-2017 drilling, 82,180m in 206 drill holes targeted the Eau Claire deposit, the remaining 30 holes tested the Snake Lake prospect.

Significant drill intercepts of the 2016-2017 drilling campaign are summarized below:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-583 10.2 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-584 79.7 g/t Au over 0.5m and<br> 11.5 g/t Au over 13.5m, incl. 21.3 g/t Au over 5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-606 43.1 g/t Au over 2.0m<br> incl. 96.8 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-602 35.3 g/t Au over 0.7m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-608 67.7 g/t Au over 2.4m and<br> 6.17 g/t Au over 5.3m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-617 15.8 g/t Au over 3.5m<br> incl. 66.6 g/t Au over 0.7m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-620 6.74 g/t Au over 6.6m<br> incl. 31.3 g/t over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-621 20.2 g/t Au over 1.5m,<br> incl. 49.1 g/t Au over 0.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-632 5.79 g/t Au over 4.1m,<br> incl. 11.9 g/t Au over 1.6m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-645 14.6 g/t Au over 1.7 m,<br> incl. 12.4 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-648 29.3 g/t Au over 1.0m.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-658 5.6 g/t Au over 11.3 m,<br> incl. 11.9 g/t Au over 2.3m and<br> incl. 7.82 g/t Au over 3.9m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-666 8.95 g/t Au over 4.6m,<br> incl. 20.4 g/t Au over 1.8m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-674 8.31 g/t Au over 13.3m,<br> incl. 11.4 g/t Au over 8.8m;<br> 4.28 g/t Au over 2.3m<br> 11.4 g/t Au over 2.5m,<br> incl. 45.5 g/t Au over 0.5m

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **35** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-681 3.02 g/t Au over 11.0m,<br> incl. 4.48 g/t Au over 6.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-686 4.89 g/t Au over 4.5m and<br> 3.50 g/t Au over 2.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-689 47.4 g/t Au over 1.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER16-695 14.1 g/t Au over 6.2m<br> incl. 73.1 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-696 26.8 g/t Au over 2.5m,<br> incl. 54.9 g/t Au over 1.0 m, 19.5 g/t Au over 1.3m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-697 43.7 g/t Au over 2.0m,<br> incl. 73.4 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-700 4.80 g/t Au over 4.0m and<br> 6.29 g/t Au over 0.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-703 9.77 g/t Au over 3.5m,<br> 7.78 g/t Au over 2.9m, and<br> 70.7 g/t Au over 0.6m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-705 16.2 g/t Au over 1.6m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-706 6.54 g/t Au over 9.0m,<br> incl. 16.7 g/t Au over 2.5m,<br> incl. 66.6 g/t Au over 0.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-708 20.0 g/t Au over 2.1m, and<br> 63.4 g/t Au over 0.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-711 9.98 g/t Au over 5.0m,<br> incl. 33.7 g/t Au over 1.0m,<br> 11.9 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-712 4.37 g/t Au over 5.0m, and<br> 10.1 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-713 20.7 g/t Au over 2.2m, and<br> 46.4 g/t Au over 0.7m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-717 37.7 g/t Au over 0.9m,<br> 32.8 g/t Au over 0.5m, and<br> 3.44 g/t Au over 4.3m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-718 30.6 g/t Au over 4.9m,<br> incl. 254 g/t Au over 0.5m,

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-720 10.2 g/t Au over 8.5m,<br> incl. 24.3 g/t Au over 2.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-723 42.3 g/t Au over 3.7 m,<br> incl. 206 g/t Au over 0.5m

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **36** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-723 51.8 g/t Au over 0.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-725 63.4 g/t Au over 0.5m,<br> 31.6 g/t Au over 0.7m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-727 34.5 g/t Au over 1.5m,<br> incl. 50.0 g/t Au over 0.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-729 6.10 g/t Au over 3.5 m,<br> incl. 10.8 g/t Au over 1.5m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-730 48.8 g/t Au over 0.5 m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-734 5.66 g/t Au over 6.8m,<br> incl. 17.9 g/t Au over 1.0m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-744 5.36 g/t Au over 5.4m,<br> incl. 13.3 g/t Au over 1.9m

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-757 21.8 g/t Au over 1.1m,<br> incl. 37.4 g/t Au over 0.6m.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-774 30.8 g/t Au over 4.1 m (intersected a HGS Vein)

The continuity of the High-Grades schists ("HGS") was also drill tested by drilling down-strike of the structure over 143m, intersecting multiple major intercepts:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• ER17-776 6.25 g/t Au over 4.5m, incl. 9.36 g/t Au over 1.5m<br> 15.3 g/t Au over 6.0m, incl. 41.6 g/t Au over 2.0m<br> 3.98 g/t Au over 8.3m, incl. 8.70 g/t Au over 2.5m<br> 7.09 g/t Au over 35.8m, incl. 9.23 g/t Au over 13.7m<br> incl. 12.8 g/t Au over 4.5m.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **37** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

7.3.4 ***2018 - 2019 Drill Program***

The 2018 and 2019 drilling programs were mostly focus on the newly discovered Percival Prospect. A total of 16,468.6m was drilled in 53 drill holes. Of the total 2018-2019 drilling, 13,182.6m in 47 drill holes targeted the Percival Prospect. The remaining drilling were collared in the Serendipity area (3 DDH) and the Eau Claire deposit (3 DDH). The best results were from Hole ER18-822, ER18-823 ER19-832 returned broad intercepts of respectively 78.5m of 1.456 g/t Au, including 8.2m of 4.45 g/t Au, 87.0m of 2.35 g/t Au, including 31.5m of 3.13 g/t Au and 52.75m of 1.8 g/t Au, including 22.0m of 3.21 g/t Au. ER18-829 with 34.1m of 2.05 g/t Au, including 4.5m of 11.95 g/t Au, ER19-839 with 12.0m of 3.04 g/t Au, including 7.0m of 4.66 g/t Au, ER19-845 with 7.0m of 3.13 g/t Au, including 2.0m of 8.47 g/t Au, ER19-852 with 22.85m of 1.18 g/t Au, including 14.85m of 2.05 g/t Au

7.3.5 ***Discussion on Drilling Completed Prior to 2020***

It is the opinion of Ms. Doyon that the diamond drilling conducted prior to 2020 at the Eau Claire Project meets or exceeds current industry best practices. Ms. Doyon is unaware of any drilling or recovery issues that may impact upon the accuracy and reliability of the results. In the opinion of Ms. Doyon the results generated from the pre 2020 drill programs are suitable for use in a Mineral Resource Estimation.

7.3.6 ***Fury Gold Mines Drilling 2020-2024***

From 2020 through to 2024, Fury completed a total of 120 diamond drill holes for approximately 75,654.3 m on the Project. The drill program consisted of i) an extension phase focused on extensions to the known vein corridors along strike from the current resource ("Extension Program"); ii) an exploration phase designed to test targets along the 4.5km long deposit trend ("Exploration Program") and iii) an exploration phase of drilling designed to test targets at the Percival and Serendipity prospects 14km east and 20 km northeast of the Eau Claire Deposit respectively. Large stepout drilling in 2022 increased the mineralized footprint of the Eau Claire deposit by over 450m to the west. At Percival Fury intercepted 13.5 metres (m) of 8.05 g/t gold (Au) outlining a 500x100x300m zone of gold mineralization.

The 2023 drilling campaign focused on the Hinge Target, which is located west of the deposit, adjacent to the 850 W zone, and the at Percival prospect area. Results from the 2023 Hinge drilling expanded the Hinge Target gold mineralization 50m up-dip and 75m to the west respectively, over 450m from the defined Eau Claire Resource as well as intercepting high grade shallow mineralization on the eastern edge of the Hinge target.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **38** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 3: Summary of Drilling Completed by Fury**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Target** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Core size** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Number of<br>holes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Metres drilled<br>(m)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Years** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Deposit Extension stepouts &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;NQ and HQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;27 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12721.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2020-2022 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Western Hinge &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;NQ and HQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;33 | &nbsp;&nbsp;21307.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2021-2023 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gap &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;HQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2020.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2022 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Western Limb &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;HQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7498.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2021 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;North Limb &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;HQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1615.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2022 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Down plunge East Extension &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;NQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9186.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2020-2021 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Snake Lake &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;NQ and HQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5922.1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2021 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;NQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;11497.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2022 and 2023 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Serendipity &nbsp;&nbsp;DDH | &nbsp;&nbsp;NQ | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3880 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2024 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total:** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**110** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**71771.3** |  |

---

7.3.7 ***Eau Claire Drilling***

The Extension Program at the Eau Claire deposit was designed to target strike extensions of the known vein corridors to the west and southeast of the current mineral resource. To date, Fury Gold has drilled twenty one holes targeting the southeast extension of the Eau Claire Resource with intercepts including: 23.27 g/t Au over 7.09m, 11.56 g/t Au over 6.04m, 59.3 g/t Au over 0.96m and 4.89 g/t Au over 2.94m. Results from the four holes completed in the second quarter of 2022 were released on August 3, 2022 including 4.43 g/t Au over 1.43m and 4.60 g/t Au over 1.25m. Two additional holes were completed in October 2022 with results released on January 23, 2023 including 3.91 g/t Au over 2.50m.

The exploration drilling program along the Eau Claire deposit trend continues to demonstrate the potential to significantly expand the Eau Claire deposit to the west. The focus has been on the Western Hinge, and Gap Zone as well as along the north limb of the anticline. All exploration targets within the Deposit Trend have the potential to significantly expand the Eau Claire mineralized footprint. To date the footprint of gold mineralization has been increased by over 455m or 25% at the Hinge Target alone and remains open to further expansion to the West.

**Table 4 Eau Claire area significant intercepts**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **hole ID** | **from** | **to** | **Au<br>(ppm)** | **true<br>length<br>(m)** | **Including** |
| 20EC-002 | 399.9 | 403.7 | 4.89 | 2.94 | 2.47 m at 5.4 g/t (399.9-403.1 m) |
| 20EC-003 | 377.5 | 384 | 4.45 | 5.43 | 2.51 m at 8.9 g/t (381-384 m) |
| 20EC-003 | 391 | 393 | 8.84 | 1.68 |  |
| 20EC-004 | 451 | 457 | 3.06 | 5.1 | 3.4 m at 3.5 g/t (451-455 m) |
| 20EC-005 | 312 | 319 | 11.56 | 6.04 | 3.45 m at 18.5 g/t (313-317 m) |
| 21EC-013 | 597 | 600 | 8.87 | 2.88 |  |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **39** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| 21EC-013 | 612 | 613 | 59.3 | 0.96 |  |
| 21EC-022 | 319 | 327.5 | 23.27 | 7.09 |  |
| 21EC-025 | 362.5 | 364 | 9.37 | 1.33 |  |
| 21EC-026 | 663 | 668 | 2.71 | 4.96 | 1.49 m at 6 g/t (663-664.5 m) |
| 21EC-026 | 720 | 721.5 | 7.3 | 1.49 |  |
| 21EC-026 | 747.5 | 751 | 3.21 | 3.49 |  |
| 21EC-028 | 586 | 591 | 2.6 | 4.97 |  |
| 21EC-028 | 637 | 638.5 | 7.77 | 1.49 |  |
| 21EC-030 | 379.5 | 381 | 14.27 | 1.29 |  |
| 21EC-032 | 9.5 | 11 | 8.5 | 1.5 |  |
| 21EC-032 | 608.5 | 609.5 | 12.81 | 1 | 0.5 m at 22.4 g/t (609-609.5 m) |
| 21EC-041 | 237.5 | 240.5 | 3.38 | 3 |  |
| 21EC-041 | 314 | 317 | 9.36 | 3 |  |
| 22EC-047 | 393 | 401 | 1.81 | 8 |  |
| 22EC-048 | 445 | 448.5 | 4.79 | 3.5 | 1 m at 11.9 g/t (445-446 m) |
| 22EC-048 | 468 | 469 | 14.19 | 1 | 0.5 m at 27.2 g/t (468.5-469 m) |
| 22EC-048 | 522 | 525.5 | 5.86 | 3.5 |  |
| 22EC-048 | 536 | 541.5 | 2.5 | 5.5 | 1 m at 9.84 g/t (537.5-538.5 m) |
| 22EC-048 | 663 | 664 | 20.6 | 1 |  |
| 22EC-048 | 671 | 674 | 3.36 | 3 |  |
| 22EC-048 | 681 | 684.5 | 3.73 | 3.5 |  |
| 22EC-048 | 692 | 709.5 | 1.29 | 17.5 |  |
| 22EC-055 | 651 | 655 | 5.75 | 4 | 2 m at 9.03 g/t (651.0-653.0 m) |
| 22EC-058 | 352.5 | 353.5 | 45 | 1 |  |
| 22EC-059 | 181.5 | 183 | 22.77 | 1.5 |  |
| 22EC-059 | 380 | 381.5 | 15.3 | 1.5 |  |
| 23EC-062 | 451 | 452 | 10.35 | 1 |  |
|  | 493 | 507 | 2.37 | 14 | Including 5m at 3.6 g/t (499-504m) |
| 23EC-062 | 622 | 628 | 2.77 | 6 | Including 1m at 7.61 g/t (622-623m) |
| 23EC-063 | 684.5 | 691 | 2.66 | 6.5 | Including 1.5m at 5.49 g/t (688-689.5m) |
| 23EC-063 | 708 | 719 | 1.23 | 11 |  |
| 23EC-065 | 663.5 | 666 | 5.90 | 2.5 | Including 1m at 13.95 g/t (665-666m) |
| 23EC-065 | 674.5 | 678 | 5.73 | 3.5 | Including 1m at 18.5 g/t (677-678m) |
|  | 694 | 698.5 | 4.65 | 4.5 | Including 2.5m at 7.43 g/t (696-698.5m) |
|  | 724 | 729.5 | 1.94 | 5.5 |  |
|  | 350 | 351 | 19.55 | 1 |  |
|  | 702.5 | 706 | 3.82 | 3.5 | Including 1.5m at 6.05 g/t (704.5-706m) |
| 23EC-068 | 387 | 392 | 2.62 | 5 | Including 1.5m at 4.83 g/t (389.5-391m) |
| 23EC-068 | 435 | 442.5 | 2.56 | 7.5 | Including 1.5m at 4.83 g/t (441-442.5m) |
| 23EC-069 | 643.5 | 646.5 | 3.34 | 3 |  |
| 23EC-069 | 650 | 655.5 | 4.52 | 5.5 | Including 4m at 5.71 g/t (650-654m) |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **40** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| 23EC-070 | 480.5 | 484 | 3.51 | 3.5 | Including 1.0m at 8.04 g/t (481.5-482.5m) |
| 23EC-073 | 214.5 | 218.5 | 3.83 | 4 | Including 1.0m at 11.6 g/t (217.5-218.5m) |
| 23EC-073 | 248.5 | 250 | 8.30 | 1.5 | meets sub-interval criteria as well |
| 23EC-074 | 486 | 486.5 | 65.30 | 0.5 | meets sub-interval criteria as well |
| 23EC-074 | 522 | 523 | 14.25 | 1 | meets sub-interval criteria as well |
| 23EC-075 | 419 | 422 | 3.83 | 3 | Including 1.0m at 8.94 g/t (421-422m) |
| 23EC-075 | 478 | 483 | 2.37 | 5 |  |
| 23EC-075 | 487.5 | 494 | 3.41 | 6.5 |  |
| 23EC-075 | 592.5 | 596 | 5.00 | 3.5 | Including 1.0m at 15.15 g/t (592.5-593.5m) |
| 23EC-076 | 295.5 | 300 | 2.84 | 4.5 |  |
| 23EC-077 | 290 | 293.5 | 31.77 | 3.5 | meets sub-interval criteria as well |
| 23EC-078 | 371.5 | 375 | 5.49 | 3.5 | meets sub-interval criteria as well |
| 23EC-078 | 697 | 706.5 | 1.88 | 9.5 | Including 1.5m at 6.31 g/t (703.5-705.0m) |
| 23EC-079 | 271 | 279.5 | 3.35 | 8.5 | Including 3.0m at 5.7 g/t (275-278m) |
| 23EC-079 | 321 | 328.5 | 2.24 | 7.5 |  |
| 23EC-082 | 182.5 | 186 | 17.62 | 3.5 | Including 2.0m at 29.8 g/t (182.5-184.5m) |
| 23EC-082 | 366.5 | 367 | 22.20 | 0.5 | meets sub-interval criteria as well |
| **Main intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 2g/t\*m with grade is no less than 1g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m** | **Main intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 2g/t\*m with grade is no less than 1g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m** | **Main intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 2g/t\*m with grade is no less than 1g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m** | **Main intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 2g/t\*m with grade is no less than 1g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m** | **Main intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 2g/t\*m with grade is no less than 1g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m** | **Main intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 2g/t\*m with grade is no less than 1g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;*Including intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 7g/t\*m with grade is no less than 3.5g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*Including intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 7g/t\*m with grade is no less than 3.5g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*Including intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 7g/t\*m with grade is no less than 3.5g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*Including intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 7g/t\*m with grade is no less than 3.5g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*Including intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 7g/t\*m with grade is no less than 3.5g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m* | &nbsp;&nbsp;*Including intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 7g/t\*m with grade is no less than 3.5g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 2m* |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 55° and dip azimuth of 191.5° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 55° and dip azimuth of 191.5° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 55° and dip azimuth of 191.5° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 55° and dip azimuth of 191.5° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 55° and dip azimuth of 191.5° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 55° and dip azimuth of 191.5° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 43° and dip azimuth of 180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 43° and dip azimuth of 180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 43° and dip azimuth of 180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 43° and dip azimuth of 180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 43° and dip azimuth of 180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;True thickness calculation based on dip of 43° and dip azimuth of 180° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** |

---

7.3.8 ***Percival Drilling***

The Company completed 11,497.8m in 18 diamond drill holes in 2022 and 2023 at Percival. Five holes targeted the parallel hinge 500m to the east of Percival proper. All holes intercepted silicified sulphide rich breccias, however only narrow low grade gold values were returned. The remainder of the drilling tested extensions of the historical gold mineralization at Percival proper. The results from the Percival proper drilling program confirm that the high-grade core of the Percival mineralization plunges steeply to the west and remains open in all directions. Highlights included an 85m step out from historical high-grade mineralization which intercepted 13.5m of 8.05 g/t Au, (including 3.00m of 25.8 g/t Au) in drill hole 22KP-008 and a 150m step out which intercepted 7.5m of 4.38 g/t Au, (including 3m of 8.7 g/t Au, and 3m of 5.5 g/t Au) in drill hole 22KP-005. As well as 279 g/t Au over 1.5m along the eastern edge of the defined mineralization. With the recent drilling the gold mineralization at Percival Main is represented by a 500 m by 100 m footprint with high-grade gold being defined to 300 m below surface hosted within folded sulphidized, silicified, and brecciated sediments.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **41** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 5 Percival area significant intercepts**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Hole ID** | **From<br>(m)** | **To (m)** | **Au<br>(ppm)** | **Length<br>(m)** |
| 22KP-001 | 236 | 240.5 | 0.49 | 4.5 |
| 22KP-001 | 347 | 356 | 0.25 | 9 |
| 22KP-004 | 331.5 | 339 | 1.23 | 7.5 |
| 22KP-004 | 351 | 360 | 0.32 | 9 |
| 22KP-004 | 367.5 | 370.5 | 0.78 | 3 |
| 22KP-004 | 378 | 408 | 0.71 | 30 |
| 22KP-004 | 429 | 430.5 | 2.86 | 1.5 |
| 22KP-004 | 439.5 | 444 | 1.49 | 4.5 |
| 22KP-004 | 537 | 543 | 0.39 | 6 |
| 22KP-005 | 358.5 | 390 | 1.39 | 31.5 |
| 22KP-005 | 408 | 412.5 | 0.92 | 4.5 |
| 22KP-005 | 447 | 457.5 | 0.63 | 10.5 |
| 22KP-005 | 468 | 472.5 | 3.88 | 4.5 |
| 22KP-006 | 223.5 | 231 | 1.51 | 7.5 |
| 22KP-006 | 247.5 | 250.5 | 1.34 | 3 |
| 22KP-006 | 267 | 270 | 0.78 | 3 |
| 22KP-006 | 328.5 | 343.5 | 1.81 | 15 |
| 22KP-007 | 61.5 | 66 | 1.76 | 4.5 |
| 22KP-008 | 193.5 | 210 | 0.45 | 16.5 |
| 22KP-008 | 234 | 261 | 4.34 | 27 |
| 22KP-008 | 277.5 | 282 | 0.50 | 4.5 |
| 22KP-008 | 379.5 | 394.5 | 1.16 | 15 |
| 22KP-008 | 465 | 468 | 0.83 | 3 |
| 23KP-009 | 221 | 243.5 | 0.52 | 22.5 |
| 23KP-010 | 268.5 | 288 | 0.66 | 19.5 |
| 23KP-010 | 432 | 442 | 0.31 | 10 |
| 23KP-010 | 472.5 | 483 | 0.32 | 10.5 |
| 23KP-011 | 399 | 406 | 1.00 | 7 |
| 23KP-011 | 624 | 676.5 | 0.34 | 52.5 |
| 23KP-011 | 691 | 701.5 | 0.40 | 10.5 |
| 23KP-012 | 310 | 358.5 | 0.86 | 48.5 |
| 23KP-012 | 373.5 | 390 | 1.42 | 16.5 |
| 23KP-012 | 441 | 455 | 1.09 | 14 |
| 23KP-012 | 591 | 600 | 0.43 | 9 |
| 23KP-012 | 660 | 666 | 0.54 | 6 |
| 23KP-013 | 529.5 | 544 | 1.05 | 14.5 |
| 23KP-013 | 677.5 | 678.5 | 4.78 | 1 |
| 23KP-013 | 687 | 717 | 0.30 | 30 |
| 23KP-014 | 378 | 396 | 0.50 | 18 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **42** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Hole ID** | **From<br>(m)** | **To (m)** | **Au<br>(ppm)** | **Length<br>(m)** |
| 23KP-014 | 549 | 566.5 | 0.29 | 17.5 |
| 23KP-014 | 639 | 643.5 | 0.33 | 4.5 |
| 23KP-015 | 344 | 348.5 | 93.09 | 4.5 |
| 23KP-015 | 412.5 | 432.5 | 1.20 | 20 |
| 23KP-015 | 449 | 456.5 | 0.64 | 7.5 |
| 23KP-015 | 497 | 507 | 1.88 | 10 |
| 23KP-015 | 564 | 567 | 0.99 | 3 |
| 23KP-016 | 412.5 | 433.5 | 0.27 | 21 |
| 23KP-016 | 451 | 464.5 | 0.49 | 13.5 |
| 23KP-016 | 482.5 | 497.5 | 0.88 | 15 |
| 23KP-016 | 504 | 532.5 | 0.42 | 28.5 |
| 23KP-017 | 469.5 | 472.5 | 0.77 | 3 |
| **Intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 0.25g/t\*m with grade is no less than 0.25g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 6m** | **Intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 0.25g/t\*m with grade is no less than 0.25g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 6m** | **Intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 0.25g/t\*m with grade is no less than 0.25g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 6m** | **Intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 0.25g/t\*m with grade is no less than 0.25g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 6m** | **Intervals - Au grade\*thickness no less than 0.25g/t\*m with grade is no less than 0.25g/t, maximum consecutive dilution 6m** |
| **Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | **Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | **Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | **Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** | **Downhole thickness was used due to the unknown zone orientations** |

---

7.3.9 ***Methodology***

Diamond drilling was contracted to Youdin Rouillier Drilling Inc from Amos (Rouillier), Qc. Rouiller used helicopter portable VersaDrill at Percival and VersaDrill on skid around the Eau Claire deposit. Rouiller partnered with RJLL Dlilling Inc, who used a helicopter portable DrillCo drill at Persival and a conventional mobile drill HTM 2500 around the Eau Claire deposit. The conventional drills produced NQ size (47.6 mm diameter) and/or HQ size (63.5 mm diameter) core, while the helicopter supported rigs produced NQ size core. The conventional drills were moved between drill sites with a D6R dozer, while the helicopter supported drills were moved and supported by Astar 350 B3 helicopters provided by Panorama helicopters from Alma, Qc (2022) or a Bell 407 provided by HTS Héli-Transport from Trois-Rivières, Qc.

The locations of drill hole pads were initially marked using a handheld GPS instrument and the azimuth of the holes was established by compass. Once the pad was built and the drill moved onto it, an Azimuth Aligner instrument manufactured by Minnovare Pty. Ltd., or an APS manufactured by Reflex was used to establish the azimuth. An inclinometer was used to establish the dip.

The attitude of the hole with depth was determined using a DeviShot instrument manufactured by Devico AS or a Sprint-IQ instrument manufactured by Reflex in single shot mode with readings taken by the drillers. The initial reading was taken at a depth 15 m with subsequent readings taken nominally at 15 m intervals. An OGQ registered geologist checked the core before making the decision to terminate the holes. Upon completion of the hole, the casings were left in place and covered with a casing cap, marked with the casing's coordinated. Subsequently all hole locations were surveyed with differential GPS.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **43** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Drill core was placed sequentially in wooden core boxes at the drill by the drillers and sealed with top covers and ties before transport. The core boxes were transported by ATV and/or Pickup trucks on a twice daily basis for the conventional drill and one time a day for the helicopter supported drill. The core was transported to the camp where depth markers and box numbers were checked and the core was carefully reconstructed in a secure core facility. The core was logged geotechnically on a 3 m run by run basis including, core recovery, RQD. Magnetic susceptibility and XRF measurements were taken every metres.

The core was descriptively logged and marked for sampling by an OGQ registered geologist or geologist in-training, paying particular attention to lithology, structure, alteration, veining/brecciation, and sulphide mineralization.

Logging and sampling information was entered into MX Deposit cloud-based core logging application by MINALYTIX INC. which allowed for the integration of the data into the project database.

The core was photographed both wet and dry after logging but prior to sampling.

Figure 7 depicts the flow sheet for Fury's Diamond drilling methodology.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **44** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm011.jpg)

**Figure 7: Fury Diamond Drilling Methodology Flow Sheet**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **45** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**8 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**8.1 Diamond Drilling**

Core recovery is generally very good to excellent, allowing for representative samples to be taken and accurate analyses to be performed. Half-core samples, 0.5 metre to 1.5 metre long, were taken where the rock was mineralized and/or altered. In the case of the Snake Lake and Percival holes, the core was sampled along the entire length of each hole.

Individual core samples were placed in rice bags which were sealed using uniquely numbered zip ties. Completed sample shipments for the Extension Program in 2020 and early 2021 and all 2022 drilling were sent to ALS Lab in Val d'Or, QC (ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and ISO 9001:2015 accredited facility) for preparation and analysis. Preparation included crushing core samples to 90% < 2mm and pulverizing 1000g of the crushed material to better than 85% < 75 microns. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (Au-AA24) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (ME-MS61). In 2020-2021, where Au-AA24 results are greater than 5 ppm Au the assay are repeated with 50 g nominal weight fire assay with gravimetric finish (Au-GRA22), the 5 ppm threshold was change for 10 ppm in 2022. QA/QC programs using internal and lab standard and blank samples, field and lab duplicates and re-assay indicate good overall accuracy and precision.

Sample shipments from the exploration program in 2021 were sent to Actlabs in Val d'Or, QC for preparation and then to Actlabs in Thunder Bay, ON for analysis. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (1A2B-50) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (1F2). Where 1A2B-50 results were greater than 5 ppm Au the assay were repeated with 50 g nominal weight fire assay with gravimetric finish (1A3-50). QA/QC programs using internal standard samples, field and lab duplicates and blanks indicate good.

Analytical samples for the Extension Program from March 2021 through to October 2021 were sent to Bureau Veritas (BV) lab in Timmins, ON (ISO/IEC 17025 accredited facility) for preparation and analysis. Preparation included crashing core sample to 90% < 2mm and pulverizing 1000g of crushed material to better than 85% < 75 microns. All samples are assayed using 50 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (BV code FA450) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (BV code MA200). Where FA450 results are greater than 5 ppm Au the assay is repeated with 50 g nominal weight fire assay with gravimetric finish (FA550-Au). QA/QC programs using internal and lab standard and blank samples, field and lab duplicates and re-assay indicate good overall accuracy and precision.

Figure 8 depicts the Sample preparation and analyses undertaken by Fury for Diamond drill samples.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **46** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm012.jpg)

**Figure 8: Diamond Drilling Sample Preparation and Analysis Flow Sheet - ALS**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **47** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

8.1.1 ***QC Sampling***

QC protocols were established in 2002 and carried through with minor refinements through the current drilling program.

Quality Control (QC) samples are introduced into the sample stream at a rate of 5% for both blank samples and CRM samples. Field duplicates in the form of quarter sawn core samples, are introduced into the sample stream at a rate of 1 in 50 samples.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**8.2 Summary**

In the opinion of Ms. Doyon the logging, sampling, assaying, and chain of custody protocols practiced through the history of the Project meet or exceed industry standards. The drill programs have been configured and carried out in a manner that is appropriate for the geometry of the deposit. Drill holes are oriented perpendicular to strike and aimed to intersect the zones at an angle generally greater than 45°. As such, the samples should be representative of the deposit as it is presently known, and suitable for use in Mineral Resource estimation.

Ms. Doyon reviewed the QC reports and files, as well as the laboratory procedures undertaken and conclude that the QC program for the Project is sufficient to support a Mineral Resource estimate. QC sample failures were dealt with on a case by case basis and were documented with commentary in the Dispatch Returns table within the database.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **48** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**9 Data Verification**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.1 Database Verification**

Comprehensive data verification was performed by SRK (2015) and Allan Armitage, Ph. D., P.Geo. and Sabry Hafez, Ph. D., P.Eng, with SGS Canada Inc, as part of the 2017 Mineral Resource Estimate and again by Dupere et al. (2024) as part of the 2024 Updated Mineral Resource Estimate as outlined in supporting NI43-101 reports (Armitage and Hafez, 2017 and Dupere et al., 2024). These included checks against original data sources, standard database checks such as from/to errors and basic visual checks for discrepancies with respect to topography and drillhole deviations.

Ms. Doyon has been personally involved in the integration and merging of the historical drill data into the current database. This work included relogging of historical holes to provide consistency of logging codes across all generations of drilling, as well as spot checks of drill core versus drill logs to verify the geologic model. During this process sample intervals were verified. Lastly, the assay database was compared to original assay certificates. No errors were found within the geologic or assay databases.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.2 2020 through 2024 Quality Assurance and Quality Control**

The QA/QC program comprises the systematic insertion of standards or CRMs, blanks, as well as field, coarse reject, and pulp duplicates. QC samples have been inserted into the sample sequence at a frequency of approximately 1 sample per 25 samples for CRMs and blanks, 1 sample per 50 samples for field duplicate samples, 1 sample per 75 samples for coarse reject duplicates, and 1 sample per 25 samples for pulp duplicates. Approximately 15.1% of samples assayed have been QC samples in the drilling programs from 2020 to 2023. Combined QC sample statistics for this period are presented in (Table 11-5). All QC samples listed were analyzed by the primary analytical lab (ALS). Check sampling of selected rejects and pulps has also been completed at both ALS and ACT laboratories in 2022 through 2024.

**Table 6: QC Sample Statistics for Core Sampling 2020 - 2023**

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Original<br>Samples** | **Standards** | **Blanks** | **Field<br>Duplicates** | **Coarse Reject<br>Duplicates** | **Pulp<br>Duplicates** | **QC Sample<br>Total** | **QC<br>Sample %** |
| 49628 | 2395 | 2070 | 1,113 pairs | 779 pairs | 2,440 pairs | 8797 | 15.1% |

---

Sample batches with suspected cross-sample contamination or certified reference materials returning assay values outside of the mean ± 3SD control limits are considered analytical failures by the Company and assay reruns were requested when deemed warranted.

ALS has its own internal QA/QC program, which is reported in the assay certificates, including the coarse reject and pulp duplicate assays. The Fury QA/QC program includes monitoring of laboratory internal QC results.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **49** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

9.2.1 ***Certified Reference Material***

Internal Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) were inserted into the sample stream at a rate of 3%. The tolerance limits for accuracy were considered to be two standard deviations above or below the expected value. CRMs returning values outside of the defined tolerance limits were marked as failed and Fury requested the analytical laboratory to re-assay the analytical batch that contained the failed standard. Table 7 summarizes the CRMs utilized during Fury's drilling programs.

**Table 7: Fury Internal CRMs for Diamond Drilling**

![](exhibit15-2xm006.jpg)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**9.3 Conclusions**

It is the opinion of Ms. Doyon that the data verification and QA/QC procedures being implemented by Fury meet or in most cases exceed industry best practices. The Eau Claire Project has seen consistent implementation of these practices from early in the Project's history.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **50** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Since acquiring the Project, Fury has implemented strict scrutiny of the QA/QC results and has dealt with any notable issues directly with the analytical laboratory in a timely fashion.

The geological and assay databases are well maintained and the current protocols in place should ensure the database remains reasonably error free. The database in its present form is suitable for use in a Mineral Resource Estimation.

**10 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing**

Metallurgical testing was previously completed on Eau Claire mineralization by COREM in 2001 and by SGS in 2010 and 2017.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.1 2001 COREM Metallurgical Testing**

Four 25-kilogram composite samples were taken separately from the P, JQ, R, and V16 veins and sent to COREM for metallurgical testing. This sampling provided preliminary information on density, grinding characteristics, grade, gold fineness, and gravimetric- and total gold recovery. The average specific gravity values of the stock samples varied between 2.87 and 2.99.

COREM completed a series of crushing, milling and flotation tests. A suite of accessory elements was found to be associated with the gold, which included silver, tellurium, bismuth and molybdenum. Results indicated that on average 63 to 79 percent (%) of the gold in the samples could be extracted by gravity circuit and that 95.7% to 98.6% of the gold could be recovered by conventional cyanide extraction methods. The studies also indicated that most gold grains were extremely fine thereby necessitating a finer mill-grind for full recoveries.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.2 2010 SGS Minerals Metallurgical Testing**

In 2010 SGS Mineral Services (Lakefield Research) evaluated the ore characteristics through mineralogy, chemical analyses and comminution testing. A secondary goal of the testwork was to explore several processing avenues for the purpose of establishing a preliminary gold recovery flowsheet. The deportment and recovery of tellurium was also monitored in the program.

Four vein composites representing the P, JQ, R, and S veins and one master composite (an equally weighted blend of the four vein composites) were subjected to ore characterization, metallurgical and environmental testing. These composites were prepared from assay reject material in freezer storage at SGS (Lakefield) from analytical work completed in 2008.

The SGS test work completed on the master and vein composite samples indicated the following:

Mineralization Characterization

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **51** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

* Calculated and direct gold grades showed significant variation in the master and vein composites ranging from approximately 11 g/t Au in Vein JQ and R to approximately 38 g/t Au in Vein S.

* In terms of acid generating potential, the samples indicated very low risk.

* The Bond ball mill work indices ranged from 10.2 (Vein S) to 11.1 (Vein P). These samples are considered to be soft in ball mill grindability terms.

* A brief mineralogical examination of the four vein composites revealed that pyrrhotite is the principal sulphide mineral with minor amounts of pyrite and chalcopyrite.

Metallurgical Testing:

* Gravity separation will generate significant gold recovery in an industrial setting. Gold recoveries ranged from 30 to 45% in the master composite and up to 74% from the S vein composite.

* Tellurium did concentrate to some extent along with the gold in the gravity separation. Approximately 7% recovery in the JQ vein composite up to a maximum of 25% in the S vein composite.

* Flotation of the master composite gravity separation tailings, at grind sizes ranging from 121 to 65 μm, resulted in excellent gold recovery for all of the tests conducted. Approximately 94% gold recovery was achieved at a P80 of 121μm while ~96% was achieved at P80 = 65 μm.

* Gold recovery by gravity separation plus flotation ranged from 92% to 97% in the variability tests completed for the vein composites.

* Further development of the flotation option, including optimizing primary grind size, improving conditions to achieve higher tellurium recovery, further investigating rougher concentrate cleaning and the impact of regrinding on cleaner circuit performance is strongly recommended.

* Tellurium recovery was significant in rougher flotation, ranging from a low of 77% from the JQ vein composite to a maximum of 87% from the S vein composite.

* Cyanide leaching of gravity separation tailing yielded an excellent gold response in all tests completed with approximately 95.7% of the gold being recovered in the gravity plus cyanidation flowsheet at 121 μm for the master composite. Gold recoveries ranged from 95.6% from the R vein composite to 98.2% from the S vein composite.

* Flotation concentrate cyanidation yielded a unit gold extraction of 98.3% at a grind size of 121 μm. Overall circuit gravity separation + flotation concentrate cyanidation yielded a gold extraction of 92.8%.

Environmental:

* The acid-base accounting and net acid generation tests completed on the various feed and tailing streams generated in the program clearly indicate that the samples will not generate acid mine drainage.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **52** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.3 2017 SGS Minerals Metallurgical Testing**

In 2017 SGS Mineral Services (Lakefield Research) completed additional metallurgical test work. The test program was completed on a single metallurgical composite comprising both ore and waste-rock (mining dilution) representative of the Eau Claire Deposit (SGS, 2017). Ore characterization testing including broad spectrum chemical analysis, baseline acid mine drainage testing, comminution (ball mill grindability) testing, mineralogy, bulk mineralogy by QEM-RMS (QEMSCAN) rapid mineral scan), and chemical head analysis. Metallurgical testing included gravity separation and investigation of flotation and cyanide leaching. A waste rock sample was subjected to baseline acid mine drainage testing. The following is a summary of the conclusions and recommendations of SGS (2017) as presented in the executive summary. The summary by SGS includes comparisons to the 2010 test work.

The testwork encompassed:

* The chemical and mineralogical characterization of ore and potential dilution from hanging wall and foot wall (HW-FW) contact areas;

* The chemical, comminution, and metallurgical evaluation of a 4:1 blend of ore and HW-FW dilution material (Master Composite); and

* The environmental characterization of waste rock (herein referred to as the ARD Composite) and process tailing solids (cyanide leached Master Composite).

2017 test material returned gold grades of 6.56 g/t, 0.08 g/t, and 4.98 g/t, were reported for the Ore, HW- FW, and Master Composite, respectively, in the 2017 program. Silver reported as <2 g/t in all samples.

Sulphide sulphur grades were 0.99%, 0.28%, and 0.84% in the Ore, HW-FW, and Master Composite, respectively.

Gold grades in the 2010 testwork were 18.6 g/t in the Master Composite and 11.1 g/t, 14.0 g/t, 10.9 g/t, and

37.7 g/t in the JQ, P, R, and S Vein Composites, respectively. Silver grades averaged approximately 5 g/t in the Vein and Master Composites. Sulphide sulphur grade ranged from approximately 0.5% in Vein S to approximately 0.9% in Vein R.

Acid mine drainage testing in the 2017 program (acid-base accounting {ABA} and net acid generation {NAG}), indicated that the ARD (waste rock) Composite may be net acid generating and that the Master Composite process tailing is likely not an acid generator. The results were not absolute in either case. The tests completed on the Vein Composites in 2010 indicated very low potential for acid generation, however, based on the visuals presented above and selectivity in the 2010 material, these samples should not be considered representative of the entire resource.

The 2017 Bond ball mill work index of the Master Composite of 11.2 kWh/t (metric), fell into the moderately soft category of hardness in terms of ball mill grindability. The Vein Composites tested in 2010 ranged from 10.2-11.1 kWh/t, putting all material tested at the 33rd percentile of hardness or lower, according to an SGS database of similar tests.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **53** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Mineralogical data generated for the Ore and HW-FW Composites compared well with the similar studies completed in 2010 on the Vein Composites. In most cases, pyrrhotite was identified as the primary sulphide, with accompanying lesser amounts of pyrite and much less chalcopyrite. The Ore Composite contained approximately 1.5% pyrrhotite and approximately half as much pyrite, while the HW-FW Composite had approximately equal masses of pyrrhotite and pyrite, at 0.22% and 0.28%, respectively.

An FL Smidth (Knelson) gravity recoverable gold (GRG) test indicated a reasonably high GRG value for the Master Composite at 39%. Batch gravity separation testing on the composite yielded 24% gold recovery. Batch gravity separation testing in the 2010 program gave generally higher gold recoveries, ranging from 37% (R Vein) to approximately 74% (S Vein). The 2010 Master Composite yielded an average gold recovery of 37.6%. The likely reasons for the better performance of the vein samples in the 2010 testwork are their much higher gold grades and their greater proportion of coarse gold as indicated in the comparative screened metallic sieve oversize (about 18.5% in the 2010 testwork and approximately 4% in the 2017 Master Composite). Further gravity separation testing is recommended to generate data which may be used in a circuit modelling exercise as well as a preliminary design exercise.

All flotation and cyanidation testwork was conducted on gravity separation tailing.

Rougher flotation testing in the 2017 program indicated a significant issue with slimes generation in grinding, leading to fouling of the rougher concentrates. The slimes, which had the visual appearance of talc, are thought to be related to the amphibole content of the material. It should be noted that, while the amphibole content of the 2010 material was similar, the slimes issue was not observed. Master Composite mass pulls were significantly higher in the 2017 program (approximately 18-25% at P80's in the 94-107 μm range) than in the 2010 testwork (approximately 5-10% at P80's in the 81-121 μm range). The Vein Composites (2010) yielded approximately 11% or less mass pull in all cases. The addition of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) reduced mass pull to a more reasonable 7.5-9.5%. Reagent schemes in the two programs were otherwise the same.

A primary grind P80 of approximately 100-110 μm was selected as optimal for flotation in the 2010 program. Overall (gravity + flotation) gold recoveries of approximately 93% or higher were typically achieved with the 2010 Master Composite when ground to that size range. Vein Composite gold recoveries were similar. In the 2017 program, however, the new Master Composite yielded overall gravity plus flotation gold recoveries of only approximately 80-85%, at the same grind same size range. Grinding to P80 = 58 μm or finer was required to achieve overall gold recoveries of >90%.

Cleaner flotation tests in the 2017 program yielded excellent final concentrate gold grades (approximately 120 g/t) and mass rejection. Final mass recovery, in three cleaning stages, was in the 2.1-2.4% range. In tests without rougher concentrate regrinding prior to cleaning, gold recoveries to the third cleaner concentrate were approximately 78% (overall gravity + cleaner flotation), and these improved to approximately 83% with regrinding. In similar tests completed in 2010, gravity + cleaner flotation gold recoveries, at similar mass pulls were in the 88-91% range, albeit from much higher grade feed material.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **54** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Given the comparatively disappointing flotation performance observed in the 2017 program versus the 2010 work, and considering the relatively high value of the ore, attention was refocused on whole ore cyanide leaching of Master Composite gravity separation tailing.

In tests completed at primary grind P80 sizes ranging from of 95 to 49 μm, applying conditions as in the 2010 testwork, gold extractions of 92-95% (gravity + cyanidation) were achieved in 48 hours. There appeared to be no clear correlation between P80 and gold extraction. All subsequent testwork was conducted at the approximately 48 μm P80 grind size.

Additional tests evaluating preparation, lead nitrate addition, higher cyanide dosage (0.75 g/L versus 0.5 g/L NaCN), and high free lime (2 g/L CaO) concentration were completed. Increasing cyanide concentration had a positive effect on final gold extraction. Preparation with lead nitrate had a positive effect on leach kinetics, with leaching being essentially complete sometime between 8 and 24 hours. In tests without preparation and lead nitrate, leaching appeared to continue beyond 24 hours. Increasing cyanide concentration, from 0.5 to 0.75 g/L NaCN, following preparation with lead nitrate, resulted in the maximum gold extraction (96-97%) being achieved, in only 8 hours of leaching. Tests completed with preparation and lead nitrate resulted in significant reductions in cyanide consumption, from approximately 1.3 - 0.2 kg/t (NaCN per tonne of leach feed basis). A similar effect was noted in the 2010 testwork, with even lower consumptions being noted (0.10 - 0.14 kg/t).

Leach kinetics were dramatically reduced in the high CaO tests using the baseline 0.5 g/L NaCN concentration (i.e. 87% leach extraction after 24 hours). Increasing the cyanide concentration to 0.75 g/L NaCN, following preparation with lead nitrate, in a test with high CaO, resulted in leach kinetics and a final gold extraction similar to the tests with high cyanide and preparation with lead nitrate. The high CaO protocol appeared to offer no benefit. This procedure was tested because the Clearwater material is known to contain tellurium mineralisation and high solution CaO has been shown to enhance gold leaching from telluride minerals in some cases. The evidence suggests that the gold in the Clearwater ore is probably not materially associated with tellurium minerals. It should be noted that tellurium assayed at 8 g/t in the 2017 Master Composite and, owing to limitations in the analytical method or matrix interference from the material, at <50 g/t in the 2010 samples.

Overall gold recovery by gravity separation + gravity tailing cyanidation yielded results in the 2017 program that compared very well to parallel testwork completed in 2010. Gold recovery from the 2010 Master Composite (at a 14.8 g/t Au head grade) was 95.7% with a final tailing grade of 0.66 g/t Au. In 2017 overall gold recovery from a head grade of 4.85 g/t Au was approximately 96%, with a final tailing grade of approximately 0.20 g/t Au.

Despite the head analyses that indicated <0.05% graphitic carbon (C(g)) in the samples, it was noted that gold extraction appeared to decrease somewhat as leach retention times were extended. Literature on the subject describes other potential preg-robbing constituents, including certain clay species and sulphide surfaces. The observed effect was not detected in all tests and so cannot be absolutely verified. It is recommended that the preg-robbing potential of the Clearwater material be evaluated.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **55** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**10.4 Conclusions**

Work performed in the SGS 2017 study was performed essentially on a single master sample. The sample included appropriate vein and mining dilution from the hanging wall and footwall. This sample was well documented and traceable.

The 2017 metallurgical testing indicated that gravity concentration with cyanide leaching outperformed production of a gold bearing flotation concentrate. The reported gold recoveries of 95 percent are supported by testing performed. The process was very simple with a primary grind size and reagent consumption levels that are typical for this style of deposit.

The limited metallurgical testwork conducted to date suggests that a high proportion of the gold can be recovered by conventional means and the Eau Claire material is relatively free-milling. Additional metallurgical testwork is recommended particularly to optimize leach parameters and investigate variability of the mineralization with respect to comminution requirements.

**11 Mineral Resource Estimate**

Maxime Dupéré, Geologist at SGS Geological Services completed an updated MRE at Fury's Eau Claire Project as part of the June 25, 2024 Technical Report (Dupéré, et al., 2024). The below is a direct excerpt from the current NI43-101 Technical Report.

A Mineral Resource Estimate was first disclosed in a 2015 Technical Report (SRK, 2015) and updated in 2017 (Armitage and Hafez, 2017). The 2017 updated Mineral Resource Estimate was subsequently updated for use in a 2018 preliminary economic assessment (2018 PEA) study (Puritch et. al. 2018). No updated economic study was conducted on the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate and the 2018 PEA is no longer current and should not be relied upon. The 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate included the addition of Fury's 2020 through 2023 drilling to update the resource wireframes and block model.

Ms. Doyon has been involved in the exploration programs at Eau Claire since 2020 and has reviewed and audited the resource models and resulting Mineral Resource Estimate included within the June 25, 2024 NI43-101 compliant technical Report and has concluded they meet the requirements set out in SK-1300 and as such takes responsibility for the resource statement.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.1 Summary**

Completion of the MREs involved the assessment of a validated drill hole and channel sample database, which included all data for surface drilling and surface and channel sampling completed through the end of 2023. Completion of the MREs also included the assessment of updated three-dimensional (3D) mineral resource models (mineral resource domains), 3D topographic surface models and 3D overburden surface models.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **56** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The Inverse Distance Cubed ("ID<sup>3</sup>") and Inverse Distance Squared ("ID<sup>2</sup>") calculation methods restricted to the mineral resource domains were used to interpolate grades for Au (g/t) into block models for all deposit areas. Measured, Indicated, and Inferred mineral resources are reported in the summary tables in Section 11.11. The MREs presented below takes into consideration that the deposits may be mined by either open pit or underground mining methods.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.2 Drill Hole Database**

To complete the current MREs for the Project, a database comprising a series of comma delimited spreadsheets containing surface diamond drill hole information was provided by Fury. The database included hole location information, down-hole survey data, assay data, lithology data and density data. After review of the database, the validated data was then imported into GEOVIA GEMS version 6.8.3 software ("GEMS") for statistical analysis, block modeling and resource estimation. No errors were identified when importing the data. The data was validated in GEMS and no erroneous data, data overlaps or duplication of data was identified.

The database provided by Fury and used for the MREs included data for 1,202 surface diamond drill holes totalling 406,431 m, and 426 surface channels (Eau Claire deposit) for 1,345 m (Table 8). The resource database totals 273,402 drill hole assay intervals representing 267,721 m of data and 2,254 channel assays for 1,316 m. The average assay sample length from drilling is 0.98 m, and from channel sampling is 0.58 m.

**Table 8: Total Drill Hole and Channel Sample Database for the Eau Claire Project**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Project Drill Hole Database** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Project Drill Hole Database** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Coordinate System** | &nbsp;&nbsp;NAD83 UTM Zone 18 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total Number of drill holes (diamond)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;1202 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total metres of drilling** | &nbsp;&nbsp;406,431 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total number of drill assay samples** | &nbsp;&nbsp;273402 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total drill assay sample length** | &nbsp;&nbsp;267,721 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Average drill assay sample length** | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.98 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total Number of channels** <u>**(Eau Claire)**</u> | &nbsp;&nbsp;426 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total metres of channels** | &nbsp;&nbsp;1,345 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total number of channel assay samples** | &nbsp;&nbsp;2254 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total channel assay sample length** | &nbsp;&nbsp;1,316 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Average channel sample length** | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.58 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total number of SG Samples** | &nbsp;&nbsp;649 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **57** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.3 Mineral Resource Modelling and Wireframes**

For the current MRE for the Eau Claire deposit, Fury provided the author with a total of 22 three-dimensional ("3D") geological models for the Eau Claire deposit area, 280 3D resource models (mineral resource domains), representing the 450, 850 and Hinge Zones (Table 10) (Figures 9 and 10) and a digital elevation surface model (LiDAR) for the Eau Claire area. The geological models were constructed in Leapfrog 3D Geological Modelling Software ("Leapfrog") and the resource domains were modeled in either GEMS or Leapfrog. All 3D geological and resource models were clipped to topography.

The Eau Claire mineral resource domains were modeled considering geology and structure and considering an approximate 1.0 g/t cut-off grade based on assay samples and a minimum mining width of ~ 2.0 metres. For those intersections that did not meet the minimum mining width requirement, the solid outline was drawn to take in waste (internal dilution) from either side of intersections. The models were extended 12.5 to 25 metres beyond the last known intersection along strike and 25 - 50 metres down dip.

The 280 vein structures defining the Eau Claire deposit extend for approximately 1,900 metres along strike and to depths of up to 900 metres in the eastern end of the deposit area.

The Eau Claire deposit is subdivided into three zones: the 450, 850 and Hinge zones. In the 450 zone, modelling defined three general orientations of primary quartz-tourmaline vein sets. A well-defined east-west trending and moderately south dipping high grade vein system (450HGV) and steeper dipping high grade veins (450HGVST), a series northwest-southeast trending, moderately southwest-dipping veins (450NW, 450HGS), and a series of west-northwest-trending, moderately south-southwest dipping veins (450WNW).

Vein modelling in the 850 and Hinge zones defined three primary vein systems: a distinct steep northeast-southwest primary vein set (850HG) that crosscuts older shallow-to-moderately dipping northwest-southeast trending vein sets (850SHLOW and 850HINGE).

In addition to the primary vein systems discussed above, a secondary set of mineral resource domains referred to as 450EXTRA and 850EXTRA (previously referred to as "vein swarm domains") are defined as zones of intermittent veining and alteration, where drilling density is insufficient to model individual veins with confidence. Like the primary veins, the secondary veins were modelled using an approximate 1.0 g/t cut-off grade based on assay samples and a minimum mining width of ~ 2.0 metres. As well, intersections that did not meet the minimum mining width requirement, the solid outline was drawn to take in waste from either side of intersections.

The vein structures of the Eau Claire deposit are mainly hosted within the iron (Fe) and magnesium (Mg) rich basalts.

For the current MRE for the Percival deposit, Fury provided the author with a total of 5 3D geological models, 29 3D resource models (mineral resource domains), representing the higher grade (PERCIVHG) and lower grade halo (PERCIVLG) mineralization (Figure 10), a 3D model of the overburden, and a digital elevation surface model (LiDAR). The geological models and 3D resource models were constructed in Leapfrog. All 3D geological and resource models were clipped to topography.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **58** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The 29 vein structures defining the Percival deposit extend for approximately 600 metres along strike (~175⁰) and to depths of up to 500 metres, dipping ~85⁰ south.

![](exhibit15-2xm014.jpg)

**Figure 9: Oblique view looking NW depicting all drilling and channel sampling utilized in the 2024 Mineral Resource Estimation.**

![](exhibit15-2xm015.jpg)

**Figure 10: Oblique view looking NE depicting all drilling and wireframes utilized in the 2024 Mineral Resource Estimation.**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **59** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 9: Eau Claire Deposit Zone and Domain Summary**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Area** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**ROCK<br>CODE<br>(GEMS)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**# of<br>Domains** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**BLOCK ROCK<br>CODE (GEMS)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**SG** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Eau Claire | &nbsp;&nbsp;450 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;450HGVST | &nbsp;&nbsp;18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;450 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;450EXTRA | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 (series of small domains) | &nbsp;&nbsp;90 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;450 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;450HGV | &nbsp;&nbsp;142 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;450 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;450HGS | &nbsp;&nbsp;4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;110 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;450 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;450WNW | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;120 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;450 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;450NW | &nbsp;&nbsp;6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;130 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;850 Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;850HG | &nbsp;&nbsp;46 | &nbsp;&nbsp;140 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Hinge Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;850HINGE | &nbsp;&nbsp;37 | &nbsp;&nbsp;160 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;Hinge Zone | &nbsp;&nbsp;850SHLOW | &nbsp;&nbsp;23 | &nbsp;&nbsp;150 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.92 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Total |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;262 |  |  |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Eau Claire Waste Models | &nbsp;&nbsp;Eau Claire | &nbsp;&nbsp;Various | &nbsp;&nbsp;22 | &nbsp;&nbsp;200 - 240 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.75 - 3.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival | &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival | &nbsp;&nbsp;PERCIVHG | &nbsp;&nbsp;18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;300 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.95 |
|  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;PERCIVLG | &nbsp;&nbsp;11 | &nbsp;&nbsp;310 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.95 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival Waste Models | &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival | &nbsp;&nbsp;Various (incl. OB) | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;400 - 430<br>(1 - OB) | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.80 - 2.95 (1.80 OB) |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.4 Composites**

The database provided by Fury and used for the Eau Claire and Percival MREs included assay data for 1,202 surface drill holes totalling 406,431 m and 426 short channels totalling 426 m (Eau Claire) (Table 10). The assay database totals 273,402 drill samples and 2,254 channel samples. The assay database was sub-divided into assay samples restricted to within the mineral resource domains.

A statistical analysis of the assay data from within the Eau Claire and Percival resource domains is presented in Table 11.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **60** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 10: Statistical Analysis of the Drill and Channel Assay Data from Within the Eau Claire and Percival Deposit Mineral Domains**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Deposit** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Percival** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Total # of Assays | &nbsp;&nbsp;12261 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1097 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Sample Length Range | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.10 - 2.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.35 - 1.60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Average Sample Length | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.63 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.23 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Minimum Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Maximum Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;2540 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.79 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.01 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;27.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.67 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Coefficient of variation | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.56 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.99 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;97.5 Percentile | &nbsp;&nbsp;38.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.22 |

---

**Table 11: Statistical Analysis of the 1.00 m Composite Data from Within the Deposit Mineral Domains**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Eau Claire Deposit** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**450HGVST** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**450HGV** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**450EXTRA** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**450HGS** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**450WNW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**450NW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**850HG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**850HINGE** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**850SHLOW** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Total # of Composites | &nbsp;&nbsp;202 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4286 | &nbsp;&nbsp;311 | &nbsp;&nbsp;567 | &nbsp;&nbsp;642 | &nbsp;&nbsp;96 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1073 | &nbsp;&nbsp;338 | &nbsp;&nbsp;508 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Minimum Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Maximum Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;63.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;252 | &nbsp;&nbsp;202 | &nbsp;&nbsp;70.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1263 | &nbsp;&nbsp;31.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;372 | &nbsp;&nbsp;36.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;67.8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.82 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.84 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.41 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.04 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.14 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.30 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.32 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.33 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.94 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.92 | &nbsp;&nbsp;50.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.19 | &nbsp;&nbsp;21.8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.23 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Coefficient of variation | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.73 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.83 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.57 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9.77 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.72 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.54 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.18 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;97.5 Percentile | &nbsp;&nbsp;43.2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;33.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;27.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;22.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;30.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;28.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;12.6 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9.78 |

---

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Percival Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Percival Deposit** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**PERCIVHG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**PERCIVLG** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Total # of Composites | &nbsp;&nbsp;567 | &nbsp;&nbsp;777 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Minimum Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Maximum Grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;279 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.86 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Mean | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.39 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Standard Deviation | &nbsp;&nbsp;13.3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.36 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Coefficient of variation | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.40 | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.92 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;97.5 Percentile | &nbsp;&nbsp;11.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.36 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **61** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.5 Grade Capping**

A statistical analysis of the composite database within the resource models (the "resource" population) was conducted to investigate the presence of high-grade outliers which can have a disproportionately large influence on the average grade of a mineral deposit. High grade outliers in the composite data were investigated using statistical data, histogram plots, and cumulative probability plots of the 1.5 m composite data.

After review, it is the opinion that capping of high-grade composites to limit their influence during the grade estimation is necessary for Au. The capping analysis was done based on vein orientation. A summary of grade capping values within the mineralized domains. The capping applied to the deposit composites has had the desired effect of limiting the influence of high-grade outliers on the global MREs. The capped composites are used for grade interpolation into the deposit block models.

There is a high proportion of composites capped in the 450HGV domains. Most of the capped composites are channel samples. The strict capping of the channel samples was done to limit their influence on the Eau Claire MRE.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.6 Specific Gravity**

The author was provided with a limited database of 649 SG measurements previously collected and used for previous and current mineral resources for the Eau Claire deposit. The 646 SG measurements, collected from 450 vein structures and waste, ranged from a value of 2.56 to 3.24 and averaged 2.92. After a review of the database, it was decided that 3 anomalously low samples (< 2.50) be removed from the database, bringing the total to 646 samples. The average grade of the 646 samples averaged 5.76 g/t Au and there appears to be little correlation of density value and gold grade.

The data was subdivided into samples from within the revised 450 vein domains and samples from outside the 450 vein domains. Of the 646 samples, 364 samples are from with the 450 vein domains. The average SG of these samples is 2.92 with a range of 2.56 to 3.21; the average grade of these samples is 9.1 g/t Au. A total of 282 samples are from outside the vein domains and average 2.93 with a range of 2.63 to 3.24.

Due to the lack of data, it was decided that a fixed SG value be used for the resource models and for waste. The average SG values used by mineralization and waste domain for the current MRE for the Eau Claire deposit are presented in Table 14-2 above. A value of 2.92 was assigned to the 450 vein domains as well to the 850 and Hinge Zone vein domains as veins in the three areas are mineralogically similar. Waste domain SG values range from 2.75 to 3.00 for the intrusive, metasedimentary and metavolcanic host rocks.

It is strongly recommended that Fury collect additional data from past drilling from the 450 as well as 850 and Hinge zones and implement a sampling protocol for SG data collection for future drilling.

For the Percival Zone, data is limited to 11 SG samples from the mineralized zone, which range from a value of 2.67 to 3.87 (massive sulphide sample). The 11 samples averaged an SG of 2.96 and 11.5 g/t Au.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **62** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

For the Percival deposit, a value of 2.95 was assigned to the mineralized domains. Waste domain SG values range from 2.80 to 2.95 for the metasedimentary and metavolcanic host rocks. As for the Eau Claire deposit, it is strongly recommended that Fury collect additional data from past drilling from the Percival deposit and implement a sampling protocol for SG data collection for future drilling.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.7 Block Model Parameters** 

The deposit mineral resource domains are used to constrain composite values chosen for interpolation, and the mineral blocks reported in the estimates of the mineral resources. Block models within UTM coordinate space, were created for each deposit area (Table 12). Block model dimensions, in the x (east m), y (north m) and z (level m) directions were placed over the domains with only that portion of each block inside the shell recorded (as a percentage of the block) as part of the MREs (% Block Model). The block size for each block model was selected based on drillhole spacing, composite length, the shape and orientation of the resource domains, and the selected mining methods (open pit vs underground). At the scale of the deposit models, the selected block size for each model provides a reasonable block size for discerning grade distribution, while still being large enough not to mislead when looking at higher cut-off grade distribution within the model. The models were intersected with surface topography to exclude blocks, or portions of blocks, that extend above the bedrock surface.

**Table 12: Deposit Block Model Geometry**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Block Model** | &nbsp;&nbsp;<u>***Eau Claire***</u> | &nbsp;&nbsp;<u>***Eau Claire***</u> | &nbsp;&nbsp;<u>***Eau Claire***</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Block Model** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**X (East)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Y (North)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Z (Level)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Corner Origin (NAD 83) | &nbsp;&nbsp;443400 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5784550 | &nbsp;&nbsp;340 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Extent (block count) | &nbsp;&nbsp;400 | &nbsp;&nbsp;240 | &nbsp;&nbsp;195 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Block Size | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 m | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 m | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Rotation (counterclockwise) | &nbsp;&nbsp;0° | &nbsp;&nbsp;0° | &nbsp;&nbsp;0° |

---

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Block Model** | &nbsp;&nbsp;<u>***Percival***</u> | &nbsp;&nbsp;<u>***Percival***</u> | &nbsp;&nbsp;<u>***Percival***</u> |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Block Model** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**X (East)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Y (North)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Z (Level)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Corner Origin (NAD 83) | &nbsp;&nbsp;457200 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5781570 | &nbsp;&nbsp;370 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Extent (block count) | &nbsp;&nbsp;260 | &nbsp;&nbsp;180 | &nbsp;&nbsp;200 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Block Size | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 m | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 m | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 m |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Rotation (counterclockwise) | &nbsp;&nbsp;0° | &nbsp;&nbsp;0° | &nbsp;&nbsp;0° |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **63** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.8 Grade Interpolation**

Gold grades were estimated into the blocks for the deposit block models. Blocks within each mineralized domain were interpolated using composites assigned to that domain. To generate grade within the blocks, the inverse distance cubed (ID<sup>3</sup>) interpolation method was used for all domains for the Eau Claire deposit and ID<sup>2</sup> for the Percival deposit.

For all domains, the search ellipse used to interpolate grade into the resource blocks was interpreted based on orientation and size of the mineralized domain. The search ellipse axes are generally oriented to reflect the observed preferential long axis (geological trend) of the domain and the observed trend of the mineralization down dip/down plunge.

Three to four passes were used to interpolate grade into all the blocks in the grade shells; interpolation parameters varied by deposit area. All blocks were classified as Measured for Pass 1, Indicated for Pass 2 and Inferred for Pass 3 and 4.

**Grade Interpolation Parameters by Domain**

<u>Eau Claire Deposit</u>

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGVST** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGVST** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGVST** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGVST** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGV, EXTRA** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGV, EXTRA** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGV, EXTRA** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGV, EXTRA** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 4** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 4** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;190° | &nbsp;&nbsp;190° | &nbsp;&nbsp;190° | &nbsp;&nbsp;190° | &nbsp;&nbsp;180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;180° | &nbsp;&nbsp;180° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Dip | &nbsp;&nbsp;-57° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-57° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-57° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-57° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-40° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-40° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-40° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-40° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intermediate Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;280° | &nbsp;&nbsp;280° | &nbsp;&nbsp;280° | &nbsp;&nbsp;280° | &nbsp;&nbsp;270° | &nbsp;&nbsp;270° | &nbsp;&nbsp;270° | &nbsp;&nbsp;270° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy X | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;90 | &nbsp;&nbsp;90 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Y | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;90 | &nbsp;&nbsp;90 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Z | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Max. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Drill Holes | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **64** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGS** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGS** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGS** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450HGS** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450WNW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450WNW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450WNW** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 4** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;195° | &nbsp;&nbsp;195° | &nbsp;&nbsp;195° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Dip | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Intermediate Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp; 325° | &nbsp;&nbsp; 325° | &nbsp;&nbsp; 325° | &nbsp;&nbsp; 325° | &nbsp;&nbsp; 285° | &nbsp;&nbsp; 285° | &nbsp;&nbsp; 285° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Anisotropy X | &nbsp;&nbsp; 25 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 50 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 80 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 100 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 25 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 45 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Anisotropy Y | &nbsp;&nbsp; 25 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 50 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 80 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 100 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 25 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 45 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Anisotropy Z | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 15 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 15 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 15 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Min. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 3 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 3 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 3 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 3 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Max. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Min. Drill Holes | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 2 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **65** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450NW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450NW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 450NW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HG** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 4** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;235° | &nbsp;&nbsp;155° | &nbsp;&nbsp;155° | &nbsp;&nbsp;155° | &nbsp;&nbsp;155° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Dip | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-45° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-85° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intermediate Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;325° | &nbsp;&nbsp;325° | &nbsp;&nbsp;325° | &nbsp;&nbsp;245° | &nbsp;&nbsp;245° | &nbsp;&nbsp;245° | &nbsp;&nbsp;245° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy X | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Y | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Z | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;30 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Max. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Drill Holes | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 |

---

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850SHLOW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850SHLOW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850SHLOW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850SHLOW** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HINGE** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HINGE** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HINGE** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: 850HINGE** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;255° | &nbsp;&nbsp;255° | &nbsp;&nbsp;255° | &nbsp;&nbsp;255° | &nbsp;&nbsp;210° | &nbsp;&nbsp;210° | &nbsp;&nbsp;210° | &nbsp;&nbsp;210° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Dip | &nbsp;&nbsp;-32° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-32° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-32° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-32° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-35° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-35° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-35° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-35° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intermediate Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;165° | &nbsp;&nbsp;165° | &nbsp;&nbsp;165° | &nbsp;&nbsp;165° | &nbsp;&nbsp;120° | &nbsp;&nbsp;120° | &nbsp;&nbsp;120° | &nbsp;&nbsp;120° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy X | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Y | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;45 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Z | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Max. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Drill Holes | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **66** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

<u>Percival Deposit</u>

---

| | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVHG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVHG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVHG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVHG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVLG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVLG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVLG** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Domains: PERCIVLG** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 4** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 1** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 2** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 3** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Pass 4** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° | &nbsp;&nbsp;175° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Principle Dip | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° | &nbsp;&nbsp;-77° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Intermediate Azimuth | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° | &nbsp;&nbsp;85° |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy X | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Y | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 | &nbsp;&nbsp;25 | &nbsp;&nbsp;50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;100 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Anisotropy Z | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 | &nbsp;&nbsp;20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Max. Samples | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Min. Drill Holes | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1 |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.9 Mineral Resource Classification Parameters**

The classification of the current MREs into Measured, Indicated and Inferred resources is consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves, including the critical requirement that all mineral resources "have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction".

An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an Indicated Mineral Resource. An Indicated Mineral Resource has a higher level of confidence than an Inferred Mineral Resource but has a lower level of confidence than a Measured Mineral Resource.

A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth's crust in such form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.

Interpretation of the word 'eventual' in this context may vary depending on the commodity or mineral involved. For example, for some coal, iron, potash deposits and other bulk minerals or commodities, it may be reasonable to envisage 'eventual economic extraction' as covering time periods more than 50 years. For many gold or base metal deposits, application of the concept would normally be perhaps 10 to 15 years.

The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated, or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling.

***Inferred Mineral Resource***

An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated based on limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity.

An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **67** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

An Inferred Mineral Resource is based on limited information and sampling gathered through appropriate sampling techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings, and drill holes. Inferred Mineral Resources must not be included in the economic analysis, production schedules, or estimated mine life in publicly disclosed Pre-Feasibility or Feasibility Studies, or in the Life of Mine plans and cash flow models of developed mines. Inferred Mineral Resources can only be used in economic studies as provided under NI 43-101.

There may be circumstances, where appropriate sampling, testing, and other measurements are sufficient to demonstrate data integrity, geological and grade/quality continuity of a Measured or Indicated Mineral Resource, however, quality assurance and quality control, or other information may not meet all industry norms for the disclosure of an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource. Under these circumstances, it may be reasonable for the Qualified Person to report an Inferred Mineral Resource if the Qualified Person has taken steps to verify the information meets the requirements of an Inferred Mineral Resource.

***Indicated Mineral Resource***

An 'Indicated Mineral Resource' is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics can be estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.

Geological evidence is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.

An Indicated Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to a Measured Mineral Resource and may only be converted to a Probable Mineral Reserve.

Mineralization may be classified as an Indicated Mineral Resource by the Qualified Person when the nature, quality, quantity and distribution of data are such as to allow confident interpretation of the geological framework and to reasonably assume the continuity of mineralization. The Qualified Person must recognize the importance of the Indicated Mineral Resource category to the advancement of the feasibility of the project. An Indicated Mineral Resource Estimate is of sufficient quality to support a Preliminary Feasibility Study which can serve as the basis for major development decisions.

***Measured Mineral Resource***

A Measured Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the application of Modifying Factors to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **68** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Geological evidence is derived from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to confirm geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.

A Measured Mineral Resource has a higher level of confidence than that applying to either an Indicated Mineral Resource or an Inferred Mineral Resource. It may be converted to a Proven Mineral Reserve or to a Probable Mineral Reserve.

Mineralization or other natural material of economic interest may be classified as a Measured Mineral Resource by the Qualified Person when the nature, quality, quantity and distribution of data are such that the tonnage and grade or quality of the mineralization can be estimated to within close limits and that variation from the estimate would not significantly affect potential economic viability of the deposit. This category requires a high level of confidence in, and understanding of, the geology and controls of the mineral deposit.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.10 Reasonable Prospects of Eventual Economic Extraction** 

The general requirement that all Mineral Resources have "reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction" implies that the quantity and grade estimates meet certain economic thresholds and that the Mineral Resources are reported at an appropriate cut-off grade considering extraction scenarios and processing recoveries. To meet this requirement, based on the location, depth from surface and depth extent, size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation of the deposits of the Project, the Author considers that the Eau Claire and Percival deposit mineralization is amenable for open pit and underground extraction.

To determine the quantities of material offering reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction by open pit mining methods, reasonable mining assumptions to evaluate the proportions of the block model (Measured, Indicated, and Inferred blocks) that could be "reasonably expected" to be mined from open pit are used. The open pit optimization parameters used are summarized in Table 13. A Whittle (GEOVIA Whittle™ 2022) pit shell at a revenue factor of 0.52 was selected as the ultimate pit shell for reporting the Eau Claire in-pit MRE; a Whittle pit shell at a revenue factor of 1.0 was selected as the ultimate pit shell for reporting the Percival in-pit MRE.

The reader is cautioned that the results from the pit optimization are used solely for the purpose of testing the reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade. A selected base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au is used to determine the in-pit MREs for the Eau Claire property.

The reporting of the in-pit MREs are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. The in-pit mineral resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below topography/overburden and within the 3D constraining mineralized wireframes (the constraining volumes).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **69** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

To determine the quantities of material offering reasonable prospects for economic extraction by underground mining methods, reasonable mining assumptions to evaluate the proportions of the Eau Claire and Percival block models (Measured, Indicated and Inferred blocks) that could be reasonably expected to be mined from underground are used. Based on the location, size, shape, general thickness, and orientation of the of both the Eau Claire and Percival deposits, it is envisioned that the deposits may be mined using a combination of underground mining methods including sub-level stoping (SLS) and/or cut and fill (CAF) mining. The underground parameters used, based on these potential mining methods, are summarized in Table 14-8. Underground Mineral Resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 2.50 g/t Au. A base case cut-off grade of 2.50 g/t is applied to identify blocks that will have reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction by underground mining methods.

The reporting of the underground resources is presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. The underground mineral resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below topography/pit surface and within the 3D constraining mineralized wireframes (the constraining volumes).

**Table 13: Parameters used for Whittle™ pit optimization and Calculation of In-pit and Underground Base-case Cut-off Grades**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameter** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**USD** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Unit** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gold Price | &nbsp;&nbsp;1900.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;$ per ounce |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;In-Pit Mining Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.80 | &nbsp;&nbsp;$ per tonne mined |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground Mining Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;65.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;$ per tonne mined |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Processing Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;12.50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;$ per tonne milled |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;General and Administrative (open pit and underground) | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;$ tonne of feed |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Transport cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;$ per tonne milled |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Overall Pit Slope | &nbsp;&nbsp;55.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Degrees |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Gold Recovery | &nbsp;&nbsp;95.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Percent (%) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Mining loss / Dilution (open pit) | &nbsp;&nbsp;5/5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Percent (%) / Percent (%) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Mining loss/Dilution (underground) | &nbsp;&nbsp;10/10 | &nbsp;&nbsp;Percent (%) / Percent (%) |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;In-pit cut-off grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;g/t Au |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground cut-off grade | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;g/t Au |

---

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.11 Mineral Resource Statement**

The MREs for the Project are presented in Table 14 to Table 16 and includes MREs for the Eau Claire and Percival deposits (Figures 11 - 14).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **70** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The Eau Claire project contains a combined Mineral Resource of 1,160,000 oz of Au at a grade of 5.65 g/t in the Measured and Indicated category, and an additional 723,000 oz of Au at a grade of 4.13 g/t Au in the Inferred Category (Table 14).

**Table 14: Combined Mineral Resource Estimate for the Eau Claire Project**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Category** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained Au (oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Measured | &nbsp;&nbsp;1612000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.67 | &nbsp;&nbsp;294000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Indicated | &nbsp;&nbsp;4781000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp;866000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured & Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**6393000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**5.65** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**1160000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**5445000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**4.13** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**723000** |

---

**Highlights of the Eau Claire Mineral Resource Estimate are as follows (Table 14):**

* The Eau Claire deposit contains mineral resources of 1,160,000 oz of gold (6.39 million tonnes at an average grade of 5.65 g/t Au) in the Measured and Indicated category, and 512,000 ounces of gold (2.64 million tonnes at an average grade 6.04 g/t Au) in the Inferred category.

* The open pit mineral resource includes, at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au, 367,000 ounces of gold (2.45 million tonnes at an average grade of 4.66 g/t Au) in the Measured and Indicated category, and 10,000 ounces of gold (69 thousand tonnes at an average grade of 4.39 g/t Au) in the Inferred category.

* The underground mineral resource includes, at a base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au, 793,000 ounces of gold (3.95 million tonnes at an average grade of 6.25 g/t Au) in the Measured and Indicated category, and 502,000 ounces of gold (2.57 million tonnes at an average grade of 6.08 g/t Au) in the Inferred category.

**Table 15: Eau Claire Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Category** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained Au (oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Open Pit<br>(base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Measured | &nbsp;&nbsp;1157000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.19 | &nbsp;&nbsp;193000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Open Pit<br>(base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Indicated | &nbsp;&nbsp;1291000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.19 | &nbsp;&nbsp;174000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Open Pit<br>(base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured & Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2448000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**4.66** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**367000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Open Pit<br>(base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**69000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**4.39** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**10000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground<br>(base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Measured | &nbsp;&nbsp;455000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.90 | &nbsp;&nbsp;101000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground<br>(base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Indicated | &nbsp;&nbsp;3490000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.17 | &nbsp;&nbsp;692000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground<br>(base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured & Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**3945000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**6.25** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**793000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground<br>(base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2566000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**6.08** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**502000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Combined open pit and Underground | &nbsp;&nbsp; Measured | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1612000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.67 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 294000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Combined open pit and Underground | &nbsp;&nbsp; Indicated | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4781000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 866000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Combined open pit and Underground | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Measured & Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **6393000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **5.65** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **1160000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; Combined open pit and Underground | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **2635000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **6.04** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **512000** |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **71** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Highlights of the Percival Mineral Resource Estimate are as follows (Table 15):**

* The Percival deposit contains an inferred mineral resource of 211,000 oz of gold (2.81 million tonnes at an average grade of 2.34 g/t Au)

* The open pit inferred mineral resource includes, at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au, 131,000 ounces of gold (2.25 million tonnes at an average grade of 1.81 g/t Au).

* The underground inferred mineral resource includes, at a base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au, 80,000 ounces of gold (557,000 tonnes at an average grade of 4.47 g/t Au).

**Table 16: Percival Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate**

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Category** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained Au (oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Open Pit<br>(base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t) | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2253000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**1.81** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**131000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Underground<br>(base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au) | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**557000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**4.47** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**80000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Combined open pit and Underground | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2810000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2.34** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**211000** |

---

Notes:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(1) The Mineral Resource Estimates were initially reported by Dupere, Eggers and Dean (2024) with an effective date of May 10, 2024.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(2) The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as current by the Qualified Person, Ms. Valerie Doyon P. Geo,* Senior Project Geologist of the Company*.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(3) The classification of the current Mineral Resource Estimate into Measured, Indicated and Inferred has been completed in accordance with the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with current 2014 CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(4) All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(5) The mineral resources are presented undiluted and in situ, constrained by continuous 3D wireframe models, and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(6) Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that most Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **72** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(7) The Project mineral resource estimates are based on a validated database which includes data from 1202 surface diamond drill holes totalling 406,431 m, and 426 surface channels (Eau Claire deposit) for 1,345 m. The resource database totals 273,402 drill hole assay intervals representing 267,721 m of data and 2,254 channel assays for 1,316 m.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(8) The MRE for the Eau Claire deposit is based on 280 three-dimensional ("3D") resource models representing the 450, 850 and hinge zones. The MRE for the Percival deposit is based on 29 3D resource models representing high grade and lower grade halo zones.* 

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(9) Grades for Au were estimated for each mineralization domain using 1.0 metre capped composites assigned to that domain. To generate grade within the blocks, the inverse distance cubed (ID*<sup>*3*</sup>*) interpolation method was used for all domains of the Eau Claire deposit and ID*<sup>*2*</sup> *for Percival deposit. An average density value was assigned to each domain.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(10) Based on the location, surface exposure, size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using open-pit mining methods. In-pit mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 0.5 g/t Au. The in-pit resource grade blocks are quantified above the base case cut-off grade, above the constraining pit shell, below topography and within the constraining mineralized domains (the constraining volumes).*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(11) The pit optimization and base-case cut-off grade consider a gold price of $1,900/oz and considers a gold recovery of 95%. The pit optimization and base case cut-off grade also considers a mining cost of US$2.80/t mined, pit slope of 55⁰ degrees, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(12) The results from the pit optimization, using the pseudoflow optimization method in Whittle 4.7.4, are used solely for the purpose of testing the "reasonable prospects for economic extraction" by an open pit and do not represent an attempt to estimate mineral reserves. There are no mineral reserves on the Property. The results are used as a guide to assist in the preparation of a Mineral Resource statement and to select an appropriate resource reporting cut-off grade. A Whittle pit shell at a revenue factor of 0.52 was selected as the ultimate pit shell for the purposes of this mineral resource estimate.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(13) Based on the size, shape, general true thickness, and orientation, it is envisioned that parts of the Eau Claire and Percival deposits may be mined using underground mining methods. Underground mineral resources are reported at a base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au. The mineral resource grade blocks were quantified above the base case cut-off grade, below surface/pit surface and within the constraining mineralized wireframes (considered mineable shapes). Based on the size, shape, general thickness, and orientation of the mineralized structures, it is envisioned that the deposits may be mined using a combination of underground mining methods including sub-level stoping (SLS) and/or cut and fill (CAF) mining.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(14) The underground base case cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t Au considers a mining cost of US$65.00/t mined, and processing, treatment, refining, G&A and transportation cost of USD$19.00/t of mineralized material.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*(15) The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **73** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm016.jpg)

**Figure 11: Plan View: Eau Claire Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 0.52 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18)**

![](exhibit15-2xm017.jpg)

**Figure 12: Isometric View Looking North: Eau Claire Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 0.52 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18)**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **74** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm018.jpg)

**Figure 13: Plan View: Percival Inferred Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 1.0 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18)**

![](exhibit15-2xm019.jpg)

**Figure 14: Plan View: Percival Inferred Mineral Resource Blocks by Grade and Revenue Factor 1.0 Pit Surface (dark grey) (NAD83 UTM Zone 18)**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **75** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**11.12 Model Validation and Sensitivity Analysis**

Visual checks of block grades against the composite data and assay data on vertical section showed good correlation between block grades and drill intersections.

A comparison of the average capped composite grades and average assay grades by domain with the average grades of all the blocks in the block model at a 0.00 g/t Au cut-off grade was completed and is presented in Table 17.

For comparison purposes, additional grade models for the Eau Claire and Percival deposits were generated using a varied inverse distance weighting (ID<sup>2</sup>) and nearest neighbour (NN) interpolation methods. The results of these models are compared to the chosen models (ID<sup>3</sup>) at various cut-off grades in a grade/tonnage graph shown in Figure 15 and Figure 16. In general, for the Eau Claire deposit the ID<sup>2</sup> and ID<sup>3</sup> models show similar results, and both are more conservative and smoother than the NN model. For models well-constrained by wireframes and well-sampled (close spacing of data), ID<sup>3</sup> should yield very similar results to other interpolation methods such as ID<sup>2</sup> or Ordinary Kriging.

For the Percival deposit, the ID<sup>2</sup>, ID<sup>3</sup> and NN models show similar results, likely due the limited drilling and available data.

**Table 17 Comparison of Average Assay and Composite Grades with Global Block Model Grades**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Deposit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Variable** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au g/t** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Eau Claire Deposit | &nbsp;&nbsp;Assays | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.01 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Eau Claire Deposit | &nbsp;&nbsp;Composites Capped | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.08 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Eau Claire Deposit | &nbsp;&nbsp;Blocks | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.30 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival Deposit | &nbsp;&nbsp;Assays | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival Deposit | &nbsp;&nbsp;Composites Capped | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.23 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Percival Deposit | &nbsp;&nbsp;Blocks | &nbsp;&nbsp;0.98 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **76** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

![](exhibit15-2xm020.jpg)

**Figure 15 Comparison of ID<sup>3</sup>** **(MRE), ID<sup>2</sup>** **& NN Models for the Eau Claire Deposit**

![](exhibit15-2xm021.jpg)

**Figure 16: Comparison of ID3 (MRE), ID2 & NN Models for the Percival Deposit**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **77** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

11.12.1 ***Sensitivity to Cut-off Grade***

The Eau Claire and Percival deposit MREs have been estimated at a range of cut-off grades to demonstrate the sensitivity of the resources to cut-off grades. For the Eau Claire deposit the current in-pit MREs are reported at a base-case cut-off grade of 0.50 g/t Au (highlighted) within conceptual pit shells, and the current underground MREs are reported at a base-case cut-off grade of 2.50 g/t Au (Table 18). For the Percival deposit the current in-pit MREs are reported at a base-case cut-off grade of 0.50 g/t Au (highlighted) within conceptual pit shells, and the current underground MREs are reported at a base-case cut-off grade of 2.50 g/t Au (Table 19).

Values in these tables reported above and below the base-case cut-off grades for in-pit MREs and for underground MREs should not be misconstrued with a Mineral Resource statement. The values are only presented to show the sensitivity of the block model estimates to the selection of the base case cut-off grade. All values are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add due to rounding.

**Table 18: Eau Claire In-Pit and Underground Mineral Resource Estimate, at Various Au Cut-off Grades**

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **In Pit** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **Cut-off (Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Contained<br>Au (oz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Contained<br>Au (oz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **Contained<br>Au (oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; 0.30 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1204000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 194000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1358000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 175000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 70000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.32 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; 0.40 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1183000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 193000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1329000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.08 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 174000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 70000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.32 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; **0.50** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **1157000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **5.19** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **193000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **1291000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **4.19** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **174000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **69000** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **4.39** | &nbsp;&nbsp; **10000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; 0.60 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1125000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.32 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 192000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1258000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.28 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 173000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 69000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.40 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; 0.70 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1096000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.44 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 192000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1212000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.42 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 172000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 68000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.42 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp; 1.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 995000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 5.91 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 189000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 1084000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.84 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 169000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 66000 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 4.52 | &nbsp;&nbsp; 10000 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **78** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

---

| | | | | | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Measured** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cut-off (Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained<br>Au (oz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained<br>Au (oz)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained<br>Au (oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;638000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.51 | &nbsp;&nbsp;113000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5423000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.66 | &nbsp;&nbsp;813000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4073000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.55 | &nbsp;&nbsp;596000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;538000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.24 | &nbsp;&nbsp;108000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;4288000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.43 | &nbsp;&nbsp;749000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3194000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.33 | &nbsp;&nbsp;547000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**2.50** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**455000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**6.90** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**101000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**3490000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**6.17** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**692000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2566000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**6.08** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**502000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;397000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.52 | &nbsp;&nbsp;96000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2861000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.92 | &nbsp;&nbsp;637000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2068000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;6.89 | &nbsp;&nbsp;458000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;4.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;293000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9.02 | &nbsp;&nbsp;85000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2001000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.41 | &nbsp;&nbsp;541000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1372000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.64 | &nbsp;&nbsp;381000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;5.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;232000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.19 | &nbsp;&nbsp;76000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1492000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;9.76 | &nbsp;&nbsp;468000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1036000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;333000 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **79** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 19: Percival In-Pit and Underground Mineral Resource Estimate, at Various Au Cut-off Grades**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**In Pit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**In Pit** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cut-off (Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained Au<br>(oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.30 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3375000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.34 | &nbsp;&nbsp;146000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.40 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2752000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.57 | &nbsp;&nbsp;139000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**0.50** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2253000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**1.81** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**131000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.60 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2008000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1.97 | &nbsp;&nbsp;127000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;0.70 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1798000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.12 | &nbsp;&nbsp;123000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1351000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2.55 | &nbsp;&nbsp;111000 |

---

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Underground** |
|  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cut-off (Au g/t** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au (g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained Au<br>(oz)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;1.50 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1273000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.05 | &nbsp;&nbsp;125000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;2.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;859000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.69 | &nbsp;&nbsp;102000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**2.50** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**557000** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**4.47** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**80000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;3.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;381000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;5.31 | &nbsp;&nbsp;65000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;4.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;145000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.58 | &nbsp;&nbsp;40000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;5.00 | &nbsp;&nbsp;97000 | &nbsp;&nbsp;10.58 | &nbsp;&nbsp;33000 |

---

**12 Mineral Reserve Estimates**

Due to the early stage of the Project there are no mineral reserve estimates.

**13 Mining Methods**

Due to the early stage of the Project no studies regarding mining methodology have been completed.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **80** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**14 Processing and Recovery Methods**

Due to the early stage of the Project no studies regarding recovery methods have been completed.

**15 Infrastructure**

Due to the early stage of the Project no studies regarding the required infrastructure for future development have been completed.

**16 Market Studies**

Due to the early stage of the Project no Market studies have been completed.

**17 Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups**

Due to the early stage of the Project this section is not applicable.

**18 Capital and Operating Costs**

Due to the early stage of the Project this section is not applicable.

**19 Economic Analysis**

Due to the early stage of the Project this section is not applicable.

**20 Adjacent Properties**

None of the adjacent claims are known to host mineralized zones comparable to the Eau Claire deposit. No reliance was placed on any information from adjacent properties in the estimation and preparation of the resources reported in this technical report. Adjacent properties are therefore not deemed material to this report.

**21 Other Relevant Data and Information**

Ms Doyon is not aware of any additional data or information available for disclosure.

**22 Interpretation and Conclusions**

The Project is located in the La Grande volcanic subprovince (2800 to 2738 Ma), east the Opinaca metasedimentary subprovince (2703 to 2674 Ma) and lies within the Eastmain Greenstone Belt (2752 to 2696 Ma). The Eau Claire gold deposit and the Percival Prospect occur within a few kilometres of the Cannard Deformation Zone, a crustal scale structural break and is hosted in the Natel Formation (2739 to 2720 Ma), which is made up of komatiites, komatiitic basalt, massive to pillowed basaltic and andesitic flows of tholeiitic affinity (magnesian tholeiites and iron tholeiites), with interbedded sequences of mudstone, wacke and iron formation.

The majority of the gold mineralization identified to date at Eau Claire occurs as stacked late quartz tourmaline veining (VQTL) within interbedded mafic volcanics and volcaniclastic sequences proximal to regional D2 shear zones. Gold mineralization also occurs within altered host rock without veining occurring as centimetre to several metre wide tourmaline-actinolite ± biotite ± calcite replacement zones around vein selvages. A third style of gold mineralization recently identified in silicified breccias and quartz veins hosted in sediments and volcanic rocks proximal to iron formation on the eastern side of the Project. Eau Claire hosts over 12 showings, the most advanced being the Eau Claire deposit and the Percival prospect.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **81** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

Since acquiring the Project, Fury has initiated systematic exploration programs consisting of geological mapping, biogeochemical sampling, reinterpretation of historical geophysical data, ground based geophysical studies and diamond drilling. Drilling has focussed on exploring for extensions to the known gold mineralization at the Eau Claire deposit, and the Snake Lake and Percival prospects. Large stepout drilling in 2022 increased the mineralized footprint of the Eau Claire deposit by over 450m to the west. At Percival Fury intercepted 13.5 metres (m) of 8.05 g/t gold (Au) outlining a 500x100x300m zone of gold mineralization.

Drilling at the Eau Claire deposit has identified gold mineralization with suitable continuity, grade and size to be potentially economically extracted.

The 2028 Mineral Resource Estimate (2024 MRE) follows the 2019 CIM Best Practice Guidelines for mineral resource estimation. The wireframe grade shell models represent the drilled mineralization and are suitable for use in block model estimations. The Eau Claire and Percival deposits meet the criteria of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction in the combined open pit and underground portions of the MRE.

The 2024 Eau Claire Mineral Resource Estimation is representative of the known mineralization. No additional drilling or work has been carried out within the defined resource area. From 2020 through to 2024, Fury completed a total of 120 diamond drill holes for approximately 75,651.3 m on the Project. The drill program consisted of i) an extension phase focused on extensions to the known vein corridors along strike from the current resource ("Extension Program"); ii) an exploration phase designed to test targets along the 4.5km long deposit trend ("Exploration Program") and iii) an exploration phase of drilling designed to test targets at the Percival and Serendipity prospects 14km east and 20km northeast of the Eau Claire Deposit respectively.

The Mineral Resources at the Eau Claire Deposit are estimated to be approximately 1.61 Mt of Measured Mineral Resources grading 5.67 g/t Au containing 294,000 ounces gold, Indicated Mineral Resources of 4.78 Mt grading 5.64 g/t Au containing 866,000 ounces gold and 5.44 Mt of inferred Mineral Resources at an average grade of 4.13 g/t Au containing 723,000 ounces gold.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **82** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

The preliminary metallurgical work completed to date indicates that gold can be recovered using conventional methods utilizing combined gravity followed by a cyanide leach.

The Author considers that the Project has potential for delineation of additional Mineral Resources and that further exploration is warranted. Given the prospective nature of the Property, it is the Author's opinion that the Property merits further exploration and that a proposed plan for further work by Fury is justified. The Author is recommending Fury conduct further exploration, subject to funding and any other matters which may cause the proposed exploration program to be altered in the normal course of its business activities or alterations which may affect the program as a result of exploration activities themselves

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **83** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**23 Recommendations**

Fury's intentions are to continue exploration on the Property in 2025 and onwards. The proposed work program consists of a regional portion focused on refining known gold occurrences within the Percival - Serendipity trend, 14km to the east of Eau Claire, and attempting to define new prospects in areas with favourable geological and structural settings. In addition to the regional program, a drill program focused on the Eau Claire deposit is planned to tie-in the mineralization identified 450m west of the current resource with the aim of updating the current mineral resource. Additional drilling would focus on the Percival prospect and other nearby geochemical anomalies to determine the continuity and scale of gold mineralization.

Fury has gained a better understanding of the combination of pathfinder elements and structural controls on the gold mineralization at Percival. The broad low-grade gold mineralization occurs along a well-defined east-west trending structural splay of the Cannard Deformation Zone. Certain elemental associations, most notably Arsenic, Bismuth, and Tungsten, are proving to be important pathfinders for the gold mineralization. Higher-grade gold within the broader corridor is controlled by secondary shearing and is identified by the high degree of silicification. With this knowledge, the Company has refined their targeting along the Percival to Serendipity Trend identifying ten priority targets for 2024. These identified targets lie within the same stratigraphic package as Percival Main and have undergone varying degrees of deformation. The proximity of the main Cannard and Hashimoto Deformation Zones varies from one target to the other and may have a significant impact on the gold mineralization. Fury believes the varying degrees of deformation are an important control on both gold mineralization and the potential preservation of a sizeable, mineralized body.

The proposed work program is anticipated to include the collection of 15,000 infill till and biogeochemical samples and 30,000 m of diamond drilling. Drilling would be allocated with 2,000 m to 7,500 m focused on testing biogeochemical anomalies within the Percival - Serendipity trend, approximately 20,000 m at the Eau Claire deposit for resource expansion, and 2,500 m to 8,000 m at Percival for resource expansion. Subsequent to the completion of additional drilling on the Property, updated MREs are planned which will form the basis of an updated engineering study in the form of an updated Preliminary Economic Assessment.

The total cost of the planned work program by Fury is estimated at $14.2 M (Table 20).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **84** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Table 20: Eau Claire Project Exploration Budget**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Item** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cost (C$)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Labour | &nbsp;&nbsp;Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | &nbsp;&nbsp;1750000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Assaying | &nbsp;&nbsp;Sampling and Analytical | &nbsp;&nbsp;750000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Drilling | &nbsp;&nbsp;Diamond Drilling (30,000m at $175/m) | &nbsp;&nbsp;5250000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Till Sampling | &nbsp;&nbsp;Detailed sampling program | &nbsp;&nbsp;1500000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Land Management | &nbsp;&nbsp;Consultants. Assessment Filing, Claim maintenance | &nbsp;&nbsp;750000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Community Relations | &nbsp;&nbsp;Community Tours, Outreach | &nbsp;&nbsp;75000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Information Technology | &nbsp;&nbsp;Remote site communications and IT | &nbsp;&nbsp;35000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Safety | &nbsp;&nbsp;Equipment, Training and Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;75000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Expediting | &nbsp;&nbsp;Expediting | &nbsp;&nbsp;150000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Camp Costs | &nbsp;&nbsp;Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;250000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Freight and Transportation | &nbsp;&nbsp;Freight, Travel, Helicopter | &nbsp;&nbsp;450000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Fuel |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;1200000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;General and Administration | &nbsp;&nbsp;General and Administration | &nbsp;&nbsp;100000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Update MRE and PEA | &nbsp;&nbsp;Update MRE and PEA | &nbsp;&nbsp;600000 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Sub-total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**12935000** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;Contingency (10%) | &nbsp;&nbsp;Contingency (10%) | &nbsp;&nbsp;1293500 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**14228500** |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **85** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**24 References**

Armitage, A.E., and Hafez, S.A., 2017, Technical Report on the Updated Mineral Resource Estimate for the Eau Claire Gold Deposit, Clearwater Project, Québec, Canada dated October 25, 2017 for Eastmain Resources Inc., 156 p.

Dubé, B. and Gosselin, P. 2007. Greenstone-hosted quartz-carbonate vein deposits. In Goodfellow, W.D., ed. Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of Major Deposit-Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and Exploration Methods. Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special Publication No. 5, pp.49-73.

Dupere, M., Eggers, B., Dean, S., 2024, Mineral Resource Estimate Update for the Eau Claire Project, Eeyou Istchee James Bay Region of Quebec, Canada dated June 25, 2024 with an effective date of May 10, 2024 for Fury Gold Mines Ltd., 167p.

Frappier-Rivard, D., Dupéré, M., 2023, Technical Report on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada dated August 30, 2023 for Fury Gold Mines Ltd.

Puritch, E., Yassa, A., Bradfield, A. and Armitage, A., 2018, Technical Report, Updated Mineral Resource and Preliminary Economic Assessment on the Eau Claire Gold Deposit, Clearwater Property, Quebec, Canada dated July 3<sup>rd</sup>, 2018 for Eastmain Resources Inc., 298 p.

SGS Mineral Services, 2010. An Investigation of The Recovery of Gold and Tellurium from Clearwater Project Samples, prepared for Eastmain Resources Inc. Project 12228-001 - Final Report October 4, 2010, 102 p.

SGS Mineral Services, 2017. An Investigation into Gold Recovery from Clearwater Project Samples, prepared for Eastmain Resources Inc. Project 15524-001 - Final Report September 27, 2017, 133 p.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **86** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc., 2017. Technical Report for the Eau Claire Gold Deposit, Clearwater Project, Quebec, Report Prepared for Eastmain Resources Inc. June 11, 2015, 143 p.

**25 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant**

Ms Doyon as a full time employee of the Registrant, Fury, does not claim reliance on any other party with respect to the information provided or the opinions expressed herein, having reviewed, and found satisfactory such corporate and other documentation as deemed necessary to assume responsibility for such information and opinions as are expressed herein.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **87** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**26 DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE**

This report entitled "*S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada*" with an effective date of December 31, 2023 was prepared and signed by:

Signed: <u>/s/ Valerie Doyon</u> 

**Valerie Doyon, P. Geo.**<br>**Senior Project Geologist, Fury Gold Mines Limited**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **88** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada

**Appendix 1 - Eau Claire Claims List**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 19, 2025** | **89** |
| ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-2xm004.jpg) |

---

------

## Exhibit 15.4

------

**CONSENT OF EXPERT**

June 25, 2025

VIA EDGAR

**UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION** 

**Re: Fury Gold Mines Limited (the "Company")**<br>**Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2024 (the "Form 20-F/A")**

I, Bryan Atkinson, P. Geo, Senior Vice-President, Exploration of the Company, in connection with the Form 20-F/A, hereby consent to:

* the public filing by the Company and the use of the revised technical report titled "*S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada*, with an effective date of December 31, 2023 and an issue date of March 13, 2024 (the "**Technical Report Summary**") that was prepared in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K ("**S-K 1300**") promulgated by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "**SEC**"), as attached as Exhibit 15.8 to and as referenced in the Form 20-F/A;

* consent to the incorporation by reference of the Form 20-F/A and references to the Technical Report Summary and to my status as "qualified person" in the registration statement on Form F-10 of the Company (333-272658) (the "**Form F-10**");

* the use of and reference to my name, including my status as an expert or "qualified person", as defined in S-K 1300 in connection with the Form 20-F/A, the Form F-10 and the Technical Report Summary; and

* any extracts from or a summary of the Technical Report Summary included or incorporated by reference in the Form 20-F/A and the Form F-10 and the use of any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the Technical Report Summary included or incorporated by reference in the Form 20-F/A and the Form F-10.

Yours truly,

---

| |
|:---|
| /s/ Bryan Atkinson |
| Bryan Atkinson, P.Geo |
| Senior Vice-President, Exploration of the Company |

---

------

## Exhibit 15.5

------

**CONSENT OF EXPERT**

June 25, 2025

VIA EDGAR

**UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION** 

**Re: Fury Gold Mines Limited (the "Company")**<br>**Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2024 (the "Form 20-F/A")**

I, Valerie Doyon, P. Geo, Senior Project Geologist of the Company, in connection with the Form 20-F/S, hereby consent to:

* the public filing by the Company and the use of the revised technical report titled "*S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary on the Eau Claire Project, Quebec, Canada*, with an effective date of December 31, 2024 and the technical report titled "*S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary on the Eleonore South, Quebec, Canada*, with an effective date of December 31, 2024 (together the "**Technical Report Summary**") that was prepared in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K ("**S-K 1300**") promulgated by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "**SEC**"), as attached as Exhibit 15.2 to and as referenced in the Form 20-F/A;

* consent to the incorporation by reference of the Form 20-F/A and references to the Technical Report Summary and to my status as "qualified person" in the registration statement on Form F-10 of the Company (333-272658) (the "**Form F-10**");

* the use of and reference to my name, including my status as an expert or "qualified person", as defined in S-K 1300 in connection with the Form 20-F/A, the Form F-10 and the Technical Report Summary; and

* any extracts from or a summary of the Technical Report Summary included or incorporated by reference in the Form 20-F/A and the Form F-10 and the use of any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the Technical Report Summary included or incorporated by reference in the Form 20-F/A and the Form F-10.

Yours truly,

---

| |
|:---|
| /s/ Valeria Doyon |
| Valeria Doyon, P.Geo |
| Senior Project Geologist of the Company |

---

------

## Exhibit 15.8

------

<u>**S-K 1300 TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY ON THE COMMITTEE BAY <br>PROJECT, NUNAVUT TERRITORY, CANADA**</u>

**Prepared By Fury Gold Mines Ltd.**

![](exhibit15-8xm001.jpg)

**Qualified Persons:** 

**Bryan Atkinson, P. Geo.**<br>**Senior VP Exploration, Fury Gold Mines Limited**

Effective as of: December 31, 2023

Issue Date: March 13, 2024 <br>

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Contents**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| 1 Executive Summary | 6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.1 Overview | 6 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.2 Conclusions | 8 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.3 Recommendations | 9 |
| 2 Introduction | 11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.1 Sources of Information | 11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.2 Personal Inspection | 11 |
| 3 Property Description | 11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.1 Location | 11 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.2 Project Ownership | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.3 Mineral Tenure | 12 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.4 Royalties and Encumbrances | 13 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.5 Permitting | 13 |
| 4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.1 Accessibility | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.2 Climate | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.3 Local Resources & Infrastructure | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.4 Physiography | 16 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.5 Conclusions | 17 |
| 5 History | 17 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.1 The Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) Studies | 17 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.2 Base Metal Focused Exploration (Prior to 1992) | 18 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.3 Gold Focused Exploration (Post 1992) | 19 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4 Previous Resource Estimates | 20 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.1 2004 MRE | 21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.2 2008 MRE | 21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.3 2009 MRE | 21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.4 2012 MRE | 21 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.5 2013 MRE | 22 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.6 2017 MRE | 22 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.7 Discussion on Previous Resource Estimates | 22 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.5 Historical Drilling | 22 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.6 Past Production | 22 |
| 6 Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit | 23 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.1 Geology | 23 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.2 Structure | 24 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.3 Mineralization | 26 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.4 Deposit Types | 26 |
| 7 Exploration | 28 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.1 Till Sampling | 28 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.1.1 Methodology | 28 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2 Mapping and Rock Sampling | 29 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2.1 Methodology | 29 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3 Geophysical Surveys | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.1 2016 Airborne Survey | 32 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **2** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.2 2016 and 2017 Ground Magnetics Surveys | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.3 2015 Induced Polarization Ground Geophysical Survey | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.4 2019 Induced Polarization Ground Geophysical Survey | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.4.1 Methodology | 32 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.4.2 Results | 33 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.4 Aerial Drone Surveying | 33 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.5 AI Techniques | 34 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.6 Drilling | 36 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.7 Historical Drilling | 40 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.8 1997 Drilling | 40 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9 2003-2008 | 40 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.1 2003 Drilling | 40 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.2 2004 Drilling | 41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.3 2005 Drilling | 41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.4 2006 Drilling | 41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.5 2007 Drilling | 41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.6 2008 Drilling | 41 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.10 2010-2011 | 42 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.10.1 2010 Drilling | 42 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.10.2 2011 Drilling | 43 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.11 2012 Drilling | 43 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.12 Discussion on Drilling Completed Prior to 2015 | 45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13 Drilling Completed by Fury | 45 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13.1 RAB Drilling | 46 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13.1.1 RAB Drilling Methodology | 46 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13.2 Diamond Drilling | 49 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13.2.1 Methodology | 50 |
| 8 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security | 52 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.1 Detailed Till Samples | 52 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.2 Rock Samples | 52 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.3 RAB Drilling | 53 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.4 Diamond Drilling | 53 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.4.1 QC Sampling | 58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.5 Summary | 58 |
| 9 Data Verification | 58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.1 Database Verification | 58 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.2 2015 through 2021 Quality Assurance and Quality Control | 59 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.2.1 Certified Reference Material | 59 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.3 Conclusions | 60 |
| 10 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing | 60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.1 2003 | 60 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.2 2008 | 61 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3 2009 | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.1 Mineralogy | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.2 Comminution | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.3 Gravity Recovery | 62 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **3** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.4 Flotation | 62 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.5 Gravity-Flotation Batch Testing | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.6 Gravity-Flotation Locked-Cycle Testing | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.7 Flotation Batch Testing | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.8 Leaching | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.8.1 Concentrate Cyanide Leaching | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.8.2 Whole Ore Leaching | 63 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.4 Conclusions | 64 |
| 11 Mineral Resource Estimate | 65 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.1 Summary of the 2013 and 2017 MRE | 66 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.2 APEX Validation of the 2017 MRE | 67 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.3 Cutoff Grades | 74 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4 Mineral Resource Reporting | 74 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.1 Search Strategy | 75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.2 2023 Mineral Resource Estimates Classification | 75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.3 Open Pit Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction | 76 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.4 Underground Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction | 76 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.5 Classification Definitions | 81 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.6 Committee Bay Gold Project Mineral Resource Statements | 81 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.5 Risks and Uncertainties | 83 |
| 12 Mineral Reserve Estimates | 83 |
| 13 Mining Methods | 83 |
| 14 Processing and Recovery Methods | 83 |
| 15 Infrastructure | 84 |
| 16 Market Studies | 84 |
| 17 Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups | 84 |
| 18 Capital and Operating Costs | 84 |
| 19 Economic Analysis | 84 |
| 20 Adjacent Properties | 84 |
| 21 Other Relevant Data and Information | 84 |
| 22 Interpretation and Conclusions | 85 |
| 23 Recommendations | 86 |
| 24 References | 89 |
| 25 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant | 90 |
| 26 DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE | 91 |
| **Tables** |  |
| Table 1: NCGC Permits and Licences | 6 |
| Table 2: Three Bluffs Mineral Resource Effective as of December 31, 2023 | 7 |
| Table 3: Recommended Work Programs for 2024 and beyond | 10 |
| Table 4: Drilling by Year and Type | 36 |
| Table 5: Select pre 2015 Drilling Highlights | 44 |
| Table 6: Summary of Drilling Completed by Fury | 45 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **4** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Table 7: Fury Internal CRMs for Diamond Drilling | 59 |
| Table 8: Fury Internal CRMs for RAB Drilling | 60 |
| Table 9: 2008 Gold Recovery Results | 62 |
| Table 10: Gold Variogram Parameters. | 72 |
| Table 11: Composite Gold (ppm) Statistics for (Note: statistics consider declustering weights, capping, and exclude orphans) | 73 |
| Table 12: Parameters Used for Open Pit Resource Estimate (Ross, 2017). | 76 |
| Table 13: Summary of Current Committee Bay Gold Project Mineral Resources. | 82 |
| Table 14: Phase 1 Recommended Work Program | 87 |
| Table 15: Phase 2 Recommended Work Program | 88 |

---

**Figures**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Figure 1: Property Location and Claims | 15 |
| Figure 2: Composite Stratigraphic Column of the Prince Albert Group in the Committee Bay Area. | 23 |
| Figure 3. Regional Geology | 25 |
| Figure 4: Surficial Geology | 31 |
| Figure 5: 2019 IP Survey Cross Section with Interpretation. Line SH-09 | 33 |
| Figure 6: AI Derived Targets. | 35 |
| Figure 7: Drilling by Type | 39 |
| Figure 8: 2015 - 2021 Drilling Completed by Fury | 47 |
| Figure 9: Fury RAB Drilling Methodology Flow Sheet | 48 |
| Figure 10: 2021 Three Bluffs Drilling | 49 |
| Figure 11: Fury Diamond Drilling Methodology Flow Sheet | 51 |
| Figure 12: RAB Drilling Sample Preparation and Analysis Flow Sheet | 56 |
| Figure 13: Diamond Drilling Sample Preparation and Analysis Flow Sheet | 57 |
| Figure 14: Interval lengths of raw assays within the OP and UG domains. | 68 |
| Figure 15: Lengths of missing sample intervals within the OP and UG domains. | 69 |
| Figure 16: Lengths of calculated composites within the OP and UG domains. | 70 |
| Figure 17: The probability plots used to evaluate potential outliers and capping levels. | 71 |
| Figure 18: Gold Variograms | 72 |
| Figure 19: Cumulative distribution functions of the final capped and declustered composites, excluding orphans. | 73 |
| Figure 20: View of the Committee Bay Deposit Illustrating Grade Continuity of Resource Blocks Above Cutoff (≥ 4.0 g/t Au) and Potential Mineable Shapes. | 78 |
| Figure 21: View of the Committee Bay Deposit Illustrating Grade Continuity of Resource Blocks Above Cutoff (≥ 4.0 g/t Au) and Potential Mineable Shapes. | 79 |
| Figure 22: View of the Committee Bay Deposit Illustrating Grade Continuity of Resource Blocks Above Cutoff (>4.0 g/t Au) and Potential Mineable Shapes. | 80 |

---

**Appendices**

Appendix 1 - Committee Bay Claims and Leases AT END

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **5** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**1 Executive Summary**

**1.1 Overview**

Fury is a Vancouver based Canadian public company involved in mineral exploration and development. Fury is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the NYSE American Stock Exchange.

This Technical Report Summary (TRS) conforms to United States Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Modernized Property Disclosure Requirements for Mining Registrants as described in Subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K, Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations (S-K 1300) and Item 601 (b)(96) Technical Report Summary. The purpose of this TRS is to support the disclosure of the Committee Bay Property mineral resource estimates with an effective date of December 31, 2023.

The Committee Bay Project (CBP), 100% held by Fury, comprises 156 claims and 57 crown leases, totalling 254,623.05 hectares (ha). located in 1:250,000 scale NTS map sheets 56J, 56K, 59O and 56P, approximately 430 km northwest of the town of Rankin Inlet. Annual holding costs for the Project amount to $156,998.03. The Project is accessible only by air.

The CBP is made up of mineral claims and leases located on Crown Land and surface and sub-surface Inuit Owned Lands (IOLs) which are subject to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NLCA). See Table 1 for NCGC permits and licences for advanced exploration activities on the CBP.

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Organization** | **Description** | **Permit/Licence #** |
| Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) | Project Reference Number | 07EN021 |
| Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) | Land Use Permit (Bullion camp) | N2021C0002 |
| Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) | Land Use Permit (Hayes camp) | N2021C0001 |
| Kitikmeot Inuit Association | Land Use Licence for IOL (Ingot/Crater camps) | KTL314C003 |
| Nunavut Water Board (NWB) | Water Licence | 2BE-CRA2025 |
| Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) | Commercial Leases | Lease 056J/11-1-2 |
| Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) | Commercial Leases | Lease 056J/12-1-2 |

---

**Table 1: NCGC Permits and Licences**

The CBP is underlain by Archean and Proterozoic rocks extensively covered by Quaternary glacial drift in the northern part of the Churchill Structural Province (Heywood and Schau, 1978). The focus of gold exploration in the area has been the granite-greenstone terrane of the Archean Prince Albert group (PAg).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **6** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The Committee Bay area comprises three distinct Archean-aged subdomains including the PAg, Northern Migmatite subdomains and the Walker Lake intrusive complex. The PAg subdomain contains abundant supracrustal rocks of the lower and middle Prince Albert group. The lower PAg comprises basalts, komatiites and 2732 Ma rhyolite while the middle PAg consists of a sequence of iron formation, psammite, semipelite and <2722 Ma quartzite. The middle PAg is overlain by a 2711 Ma dacite while both the lower and middle PAg were cut by 2718 Ma synvolcanic intrusions and post-volcanic intrusions aged 2610 to 2585 Ma.

The majority of the gold mineralization identified to date within the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt (CBGB) is hosted in silicate, oxide, and/or sulphide facies iron formation. Gold mineralization has also been identified in shear hosted quartz veins in sediments and volcanic rocks throughout the belt. The CBGB hosts over 40 showings, the most advanced being the Three Bluffs deposit.

Since acquiring the Project in 2015, Fury has initiated a comprehensive exploration programs consisting of geological mapping, till sampling, aerial drone imagery, a combined airborne magnetic gradiometer and electromagnetic survey, and rotary air blast (RAB) and diamond drilling. In 2021 Fury intercepted 10m of 13.93 g/t Au within a crenulated meta-sediment 120m outside of the defined Three Bluffs resource.

The 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate is summarized in Table 2. Mineral Resources have been classified in accordance with the definitions for Mineral Resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves dated May 10, 2014 (CIM (2014) definitions).

**Table 2: Three Bluffs Mineral Resource Effective as of December 31, 2023**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Classification** | **Mining**<br>**Scenario** | **Au Cutoff**<br>**(g/t)** | **Tonnes**<br>**(000 t)** | **Average Gold**<br>**(g/t)** | **Contained Au**<br>**(troy ounces)** |
| **Indicated** | OP | 3.0 | 1761.9 | 7.72 | 437467 |
| **Indicated** | UG | 4.0 | 313 | 8.57 | 86368 |
|  | **Total** |  | **2075** | **7.85** | **523835** |
| **Inferred** | OP | 3.0 | 592.4 | 7.57 | 144126 |
| **Inferred** | UG | 4.0 | 2342 | 7.65 | 576238 |
|  | **Total** |  | **2934** | **7.63** | **720364** |

---

*Notes:*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*1. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves as they do not have demonstrated economic viability, although, as per S-K 1300 requirements, which are consistent with CIM requirements, the Mineral Resources reported above have been determined to have demonstrated reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*2.* The Mineral Resources were estimated in accordance with the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions (2014) and Best Practices Guidelines (2019) prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council*.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **7** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*3. The Mineral Resources Committee Bay Gold Project was initially reported in Ross (2017) - QP David A. Ross, M.Sc., P.Geo, effective date of May 31, 2017.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*4. The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as current by the Qualified Person, Mr. Bryan Atkinson, P. Geo,* Senior Vice-President, Exploration of the Company*.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*5. The Cutoff grades were determined using average block grade values within the estimation domains and an Au price of US$1,200/oz, and Process Recovery of 93%, Open Pit mining costs of C$10.00/t, Underground mining costs of C$70.00/t, Process and G&A costs of approximately C$75/t and an exchange rate of 1.25 US$/C$.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*6. A bulk density values value of 3.15 t/m*<sup>*3*</sup> *was assigned based on available SG measurements.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*7. Differences may occur in totals due to rounding.*

The 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate (2023 MRE) has been prepared in accordance with the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with the 2019 CIM Best Practice Guidelines for mineral resource estimation. The wireframe gradeshell models represent the drilled mineralization and are suitable for use in block model estimations. The Three Bluffs deposit meets the criteria of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction in the combined open pit and underground portions of the MRE. Relatively high cut-off grades of 3.0 g/t Au for the open pit and 4.0 g/t for the underground resource were selected for reporting the Three Bluffs MRE due to the modelled mineralization showing reasonable continuity at higher grades. The remote nature of the Three Bluffs deposit lends itself to economic extraction through a low tonnage high grade scenario as assumed by the current MRE.

The author is of the view that there are no environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political, or other relevant factors applicable to the Project that could be seen as precluding mineral production once compliance with the many environmental and other governmental requirements are met. Accordingly none of the foregoing are such that they could be said to materially adversely affect the 2023 Mineral Resource estimate.

**1.2 Conclusions**

Drilling at Three Bluffs has outlined mineralization with three-dimensional continuity, and size and grades that can potentially be extracted economically. Project geologists have a good understanding of the regional, local, and deposit geology and controls on mineralization. The geological models are reasonable and plausible interpretations of the drill results.

There has been no new drilling in the immediate area of the resources which were last calculated in 2013 and restated in 2017, and the long-term average metal price and operating cost assumptions used herein are appropriate.

Mineral Resources for the Three Bluffs deposit were estimated assuming combined open pit and underground mining methods. At cut-off grades of 3.0 g/t Au for open pit and 4.0 g/t Au for underground, Indicated Mineral Resources are estimated to total 2.07 Mt at an average grade of 7.85 g/t Au containing 524,000 ounces gold. At the same cut-off grades, Inferred Mineral Resources are estimated to total 2.93 Mt at an average grade of 7.64 g/t Au containing 720,000 ounces gold. The open pit resources were constrained by a preliminary pit shell generated in Whittle software. Underground resources are reported at the high cut-off grade outside of the pit shell.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **8** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The limited metallurgical testwork conducted so far suggests that the gold can be recovered by conventional means, such as a combination of gravity and flotation followed by cyanide leaching of the concentrate. Additional metallurgical testwork will be warranted if further exploration increases the size of the resource.

In 2021, significant gold mineralization associated with crenulated metasediments within a regional shear zone running sub-parallel to the iron formation host of the Three Bluffs deposit was identified. Shear zone hosted gold mineralization represents a style of gold mineralization that has been historically under explored within the Project. Exploration historically has focussed on magnetic iron formation stratigraphy up ice of gold in till or gold bearing boulder occurrences. Across the Committee Bay supracrustal belt there are several significant gold in till anomalies that have yet to be explained and do not appear to be sourced from nearby iron formation units. There is good potential to discover additional mineralization and to add to the resource base within the Project.

**1.3 Recommendations**

Future exploration efforts should focus on shear zones in proximity to regional gold in till anomalies as it has been shown these can host significant gold grades over width. The recommended Phase 1 work program consists of a regional portion focussed on under explored shear zone hosted gold as well as a drill program focussed on the Three Bluffs deposit to determine the continuity of the shear zone hosted mineralization immediately adjacent to the resource. The Phase 1 program will consist of a desktop analysis of the known gold in till anomalies to identify those not linked to iron formation. The field portion of Phase 1 will consist of boulder mapping, and infill till sampling to identify the highest probability targets to be drill tested along shear zones with known regional gold anomalies.

The Phase 1 program is anticipated to include collection of 15,000 infill detailed till samples and 7,500 m of Diamond drilling along the shear zone sub-parallel to the Three Bluffs deposit. The Phase 1 program is estimated to cost approximately $5 million (Table 2).

A Phase 2 exploration program will be drill intensive. An additional 10,000 - 15,000m of diamond drilling should be completed at the Three Bluffs deposit to explore the down dip potential of the limb mineralization as well as tying in the newly identified shear zone hosted mineralization with the ultimate goal of updating the Mineral Resource Estimate. An additional 10,000m of drilling should be allocated to regional targets defined from the Phase 1 program. The Phase 2 program is estimated to cost between $15 and $20 million (Table 3).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **9** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 3: Recommended Work Programs for 2024 and beyond**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **Phase 1** | **Phase 1** | **Phase 1** |
| **Type** | **Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 350000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 150000 |
| Drilling | Three Bluffs Diamond Drilling (7,500 meters at $220/m) | 1650000 |
| Till Sampling | Detailed sampling program | 120000 |
| Land Management | Consultants. Assessment Filing, Lease Payments | 250000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 30000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 35000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 15000 |
| Expediting | Expediting (Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Churchill) | 150000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter, Fixed Wing | 450000 |
| Fuel |  | 1000000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 100000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **4550000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 455000 |
| **Total** |  | **5005000** |
| **Phase 2** | **Phase 2** | **Phase 2** |
| **Type** | **Details** | **Cost Estimate (C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | 1750000 |
| Drilling | 20,000 - 25,000 m Diamond Drilling at Three Bluffs and regional | 6500000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | 750000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | 50000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | 150000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | 75000 |
| Expediting | Expediting (Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Churchill) | 550000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | 1250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Freight, Travel, Helicopter, Fixed Wing | 1950000 |
| Fuel |  | 2750000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | 400000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | **16175000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | 1617500 |
| **Total** |  | **17792500** |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **10** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**2 Introduction**

This Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project (the Project), located in Kitikmeot Region, northeastern Nunavut Territory, Canada is authored by Bryan Atkinson, SVP Exploration at Fury. The purpose of this summary report is to document the current Mineral Resource estimate of the Three Bluffs deposit and to outline the work completed by Fury on the Project. The Report is prepared for Fury Gold Mine Ltd. (Fury) a Vancouver-based exploration company formed in June 2008. Fury is engaged in acquiring, exploring, and evaluating natural resource properties in Canada. It is a reporting issuer in British Columbia whose common shares trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX: FURY) and the NYSE-American (NYSE: FURY). Fury is under the jurisdiction of the British Columbia Securities Commission.

Since 2015 the Company has pursued a comprehensive exploration program consisting of geological mapping and sampling, till sampling, high resolution drone imagery, ground and airborne geophysical surveying as well as both rotary air blast and diamond drilling.

The Project represents a strategic land position covering prospective lithologies and structures for gold deposits. The Project hosts the Three Bluffs deposit, which is at the resource definition stage, as well as a large land position, which merits additional exploration.

**2.1 Sources of Information**

The Committee Bay Project has been the subject of several NI 43-101 Technical Reports. The most recent prepared by Bryan Atkinson of Fury and Andrew Turner, P.Geol., of APEX Geoscience Ltd. entitled "Technical Report on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada" dated September 11, 2023 with an effective date of July 22, 2023.

The Project and work documentation reviewed in the preparation of this Report, and other sources of information, are listed in Section 24.

**2.2 Personal Inspection**

Mr. Atkinson has been involved in all exploration programs on the Project since 2015 and was last on site from July through to August 2021 when the project was last active. As Senior VP Exploration and in earlier roles with Fury or its predecessors, Mr Atkinson has been intermittently involved with the Committee Bay project since 2003.

**3 Property Description**

**3.1 Location**

The Project consists of 156 claims and 57 crown leases covering 254,623.05 ha, (Figure 1, Appendix 1) located in eastern part of the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut, approximately 430 km northwest of the town of Rankin Inlet. The Project is only accessible by air. Fixed-wing and helicopter charters may be arranged from Baker Lake or Rankin Inlet, Nunavut.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **11** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The claims are aligned over a distance of approximately 280 km in a northeast-southwest direction. The approximate centre of the Project is located at Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) co-ordinates 7,400,000m N and 570,000m E (NAD 83, Zone 15N). The approximate UTM co-ordinates for the centre of the currently defined Three Bluffs deposit are 7,393,600m N and 568,000m E. The Project is located within National Topographic System (NTS) 1:250,000 scale map-areas; 56J (Walker Lake), 56K (Laughland Lake).

**3.2 Project Ownership**

On March 20, 2015, Fury entered into a definitive joint venture agreement with North Country Gold Corp. (NCG) whereby it could earn a 51% interest in the Project but later acquired all the NCG shares that it did not already own in exchange for 13.8 million shares of Auryn valued at approximately $20.4 million resulting in NCG becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fury.

The Project consists of seven non-contiguous blocks totaling 154 claims and 57 crown leases totaling approximately 254,623.05 ha (Figure 1). Appendix 1 lists all of the claims and leases along with the relevant tenure information including their designation number, registration and expiry dates, area, assessment work credits and work requirements for renewal.

Under the current Nunavut Mining Regulations claims are valid for thirty years. Annual work requirements are based on the number of map units included in each claim and increase from $45 per unit in year one to $270 per unit in years 21 through 30. The Project claims currently cover 12,271 map units.

Lease payments of $2.50/ha, totalling $146,724.24 annually, are required to maintain the 57 Project leases in good standing.

Several claims have the full 30 years worth of assessment expenditure work filed and no longer require additional expenditures for their maintenance. All crown leases were legally surveyed and registered by Ollerhead and Associates of Yellowknife, NWT with the Mining Recorder's and Surveyor General's offices in Iqaluit, Nunavut. Crown leases and mineral claims are shown in Figure 1.

**3.3 Mineral Tenure**

Crown Lands in Nunavut are managed pursuant to the Territorial Lands Act and its related Regulations, including the Nunavut Mining Regulations. Sub-surface lands include hard-rock minerals, precious gems, and coal. The rights to these materials are administered through the Nunavut Mining Regulations and the Territorial Coal Regulations. There is a distinction between sub-surface minerals and surface mineral substances that have specific purposes such as carving stone and building materials. These special use surface minerals are administered through the Territorial Quarry Regulations. The Nunavut Mining Recorder's office is responsible for sub-surface rights administration of Crown Land. The Mining Recorder's office is responsible for administering the Nunavut Mining Regulations which entered into force on March 31, 2014 and last amended on January 30<sup>th</sup>, 2021.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **12** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The Project is in part, situated on Inuit Owned Lands (IOL) wherein the Inuit control surface rights but not subsurface or mineral rights. There are no annual fees for the IOL and no claims in the Three Bluffs area are located on IOL.

**3.4 Royalties and Encumbrances**

Several claims comprising the Project are subject to royalties. Terracon Geotechnique Ltd. (Terracon) and a group formerly of Apex Geoscience Ltd. (Apex) each hold a 0.5% net smelter return (NSR) royalty on the property and the area of interest referenced Appendix 1 (denoted CBJV AOI). Effective May 30, 2011, Apex transferred 51% of its 0.5% NSR to a private party, Oar-Rock Geoscience Ltd., and the remaining 49% interest to two companies: 677081 Alberta Ltd. and 678119 Alberta Ltd.

Maverix Metals Inc. holds a 1% gross override diamond royalty on the area denoted in Appendix 1 (GFJV AOI).

Bruce Goad holds a 1.5% NSR on the following claims (Appendix 1):

• Wren 1 to 5 claims, inclusive (claim tag F60231 to F60235, inclusive)

• Pick 2 and 3 claims (claim tags F54798 and F54760)

• West claim (claim tag F60212)

The Goad NSR royalty can be bought down for $2 million for each 0.5% NSR.

Gold production from the Three Bluffs deposit would only trigger the royalty due under the CBJV AOI.

**3.5 Permitting**

Land use permits are required to conduct exploration on both IOL and Crown owned lands. The IOL parcels in the Committee Bay area are administered by the Kitikmeot Inuit Association (KIA). Land use permits for non-Inuit owned lands (Federal lands) are obtained from Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. A water permit from the Nunavut Water Board, for any and all uses of water, including camp and drilling, is also required in order to conduct exploration work in Nunavut. The permitted camp and work sites are subject to inspection by the administrators of various permits as well as representatives of the Workers Safety and Compensation Commission.

The following is a list of permits and licences acquired and maintained in good standing by Fury:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Commercial Leases: 056J/11-1-2, 056J/12-1-2

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Land Use Permits: N2021C0002 (Bullion Camp), N2021C0001 (Hayes Camp)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Kitikmeot Inuit Association Land Use Permit: KTL314C003 (Ingot and Crater Camps)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Nunavut Impact Review Board Project Reference Number: 07EN021

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **13** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;• Nunavut Water Board Licence: 2BE-CRA2025

Based on personal visits and given that the Project is exploration stage, the author is of the view that other than camp site rehabilitation there are no material environmental liabilities associated with the Project. Fury has all required permits to conduct the proposed work on the Project. The author is of the view there are no factors, subject to customary compliance with governmental regulatory permitting that would impede or impair access, title, or the right or ability to perform the proposed work program on the Project.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **14** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm004.jpg)

**Figure 1: Property Location and Claims**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **15** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.1 Accessibility**

The Project is only accessible by air, best serviced from Baker Lake, Rankin Inlet or Yellowknife. All camp sites within the Project include unprepared esker airstrips accessible by Twin Otter or Turbine Otter fixed-wing aircraft on oversized tires from June through September. Parts of the Hayes River area (and south) are accessible to float-equipped fixed-wing aircraft by late June, however, Sandspit Lake at the Hayes Camp is not normally free of ice until mid to late July and there are very few float equipped aircraft based in the eastern arctic. During the winter and early spring months (December through May), landings may be achieved either on flat esker tops where snow does not accumulate or on frozen lakes by fixed-wing aircraft equipped with ski or wheel-ski landing gear. Fixed-wing and helicopter charters may be arranged either from Baker Lake or Rankin Inlet, located approximately 330 km and 430 km, respectively, southeast of the Hayes Camp, or from Yellowknife, located approximately 1000 km west southwest of Hayes Camp.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.2 Climate**

The climate in the Project area is typical of the eastern arctic/sub-arctic, being cold in the winter (-20 to -45<sup>◦</sup>C) and mild in the summer (+5 to +15<sup>◦</sup>C). Precipitation is low throughout the year, but drifting snow in the winter can result in considerable localized accumulations, particularly on the sides of hills. Fog is often a problem near the coast and at higher elevations particularly during the late spring to early summer and the fall months. Snow covers most of the Committee Bay region until early June and most large lakes are icebound until about mid-July.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.3 Local Resources & Infrastructure**

Fury through its NCGC subsidiary, maintains four camps to support seasonal exploration campaigns in various portions of the Project, namely Hayes Camp (100 person capacity), Bullion Camp (20 to 40 person capacity) Ingot Camp (currently not in use) and Crater Camp (20 to 40 person capacity). The Project also benefits from a 914 m, graded, esker airstrip at Hayes Camp, a permitted, seasonally prepared 1,580 m winter ice airstrip, which is constructed on the adjacent Sandspit Lake, and 320 m tundra airstrip at Bullion Camp. A drill water system is maintained at the Three Bluffs site.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**4.4 Physiography**

The Laughland Lake - Ellice Hills area lies within the Wager Plateau, which is an elevated region within the Precambrian Canadian Shield of Nunavut. The area lies well above the tree line and is thus characterized by typical tundra flora and fauna. This area has been modified by continental glaciation, and comprises numerous glacially sculpted hills, which rise above boulder fields, till moraines and sand plains. Elevation ranges from 200 m to about 560 m above sea level. Relief along the belt ranges from relatively flat plains with less than 50 m relief in the Laughland Lake area in the southwest to quite hilly areas with greater than 200 m of relief in the Kinngalugjuaq Mountain and Curtis River areas to the northeast. Glacial erosional and depositional features indicate paleo-ice flow directions to the north-northwest. Drainage is via the Brown, Hayes and Quoich rivers in the southwestern portion of the Committee Bay region, and the Kellett, Atorquait and Curtis Rivers in the northeast.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **16** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

Rock exposure in the Laughland Lake - Ellice Hills region is generally about 10-20% as either rock outcrop or, more frequently, as felsenmeer. In a few places, rock exposure may reach up to 70%, however there are also extensive areas in which rock exposure is minimal or non-existent. Extensive felsenmeer is developed in most areas of rock exposure, forming large boulder fields that consist mainly of in situ frost-heaved blocks.

**4.5 Conclusions**

The Committee Bay Project is a remote greenfields site with no existing roads, power or water. Development of the project will require:

* Upgrading of the current tundra airstrip at Hayes camp to allow for fly in / fly out operations on a scale suitable to development.

* Installing local solar, wind or diesel power

* Upgrading of the current 100 person Hayes camp

* Development of local water resources for potable and non-potable water consumption.

In the opinion of the Author, the Committee Bay Project site offers, subject to customary environmental and other regulatory compliance, adequate surface rights and land suitable for the construction of a processing plant, tailings facility, waste rock dumps, and mining camp. The project site has several suitable sources of water pending the necessary approvals.

Winter conditions are expected to prevail from September through to the following June, and this may impair year-round operations if the property were to be placed in production.

**5 History**

The following describes work completed in the general vicinity of the Project prior to 2015.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.1 The Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) Studies** 

The GSC initially mapped the Laughland Lake-Ellice Hills area at a scale of 1:506,880 in 1961 and 1967. Detailed re-mapping (1:250,000) and airborne magnetic surveys were completed between 1972 and 1977. A geological re-assessment of the mineral potential of Prince Albert group (PAg) rocks within the then proposed Wager Bay National Park, was performed by the GSC in 1992. Between 1999 and 2002, the GSC, through the Canada-Nunavut Geoscience Office, performed a multi-disciplinary study of the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt (CBGB) that included geological (bedrock) mapping (1:100,000 scale), Quaternary surficial mapping, regional till sampling, airborne magnetic surveying, and some rock sampling.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **17** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.2 Base Metal Focused Exploration (Prior to 1992)**

Prior to 1992, historical assessment reports indicate that most exploration in the area was focused on the identification of base metals in PAg rocks after reconnaissance mapping by the GSC identified several serpentinized ultramafic intrusions within what was referred to as the "Precambrian metasedimentary belt".

In 1970, King Resources Company (KRC) performed a base metal exploration program in the Laughland Lake (NTS 56K) and Ellice Hills (NTS 56P) areas. Reconnaissance geological mapping and sampling concentrated on the delineation of ultramafic bodies. Ground geophysical surveys followed the reconnaissance mapping to further delineate the ultramafic zones. The third phase of its exploration consisted of detailed geological mapping, detailed geophysical surveying, trenching, and sampling. From their field work it was concluded that the Project area contained a distinctive linear metasedimentary belt into which ultramafic rocks had been intruded. It was further concluded that the ultramafic rocks contained the nickel content typically seen on other ultramafic orogenic belts worldwide. KRC concluded that the area was favourable for continued nickel exploration.

The Aquitaine Company of Canada (Aquitaine) conducted base metal exploration on its Har claims (NTS 56K), Heb claims (NTS 56J), and the now expired Prospecting Permits 231 to 234 (NTS 56J and 56K) in 1971. Aquitaine completed a 2,556 line-mile airborne electromagnetic and magnetic survey over the area. The survey resulted in the identification of 18 conductive zones, 47 isolated anomalies, and several areas with good conductivity parametres coupled with coincident magnetic responders. Further ground geophysical and geological follow-up work over the anomalous zones was recommended.

Cominco Limited (Cominco) conducted reconnaissance and detailed geological mapping, ground geophysical surveys and sampling in the Hayes River area (NTS 56J) in 1970 and between 1974 and 1976. This work suggested that the Hayes River area was underlain by predominantly granitic and paragneissic rocks with minor metavolcanics and small zones of komatiitic rocks. Cominco concluded that there was a limited potential on its properties for identifying large ultramafic bodies capable of carrying significant amounts of sulphides and did not recommend further work.

After a number of radiometric anomalies were discovered by the Federal Uranium Reconnaissance Program, Urangesellschaft Canada Ltd., in 1979, performed reconnaissance airborne radiometric surveys and follow-up prospecting for uranium within NTS 56K in the Laughland Lake area. These anomalies were found to have been caused by areas of elevated background radioactivity in gneissic and granitic rocks and were not considered significant. No other work was recommended.

During 1986, Wollex Exploration, a division of Comaplex Minerals Corp., performed reconnaissance geological mapping at 1:20,000 and 1:60,000 scales in a portion of the West Laughland Lake area (NTS 56K). A number of north-northwest trending quartz veins were discovered that returned anomalous silver, lead, and zinc values. Other shear zones were found that carried anomalous gold and arsenic. One magnetite sample and 65 rock samples were collected; however, results were not encouraging enough to recommend further work.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **18** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**5.3 Gold Focused Exploration (Post 1992)**

Between 1992 and 2002, CBR Gold Corp. (CBR), the predecessor company to NCGC performed reconnaissance and detailed exploration for gold within the CBGB region. Work included prospecting, rock grab and rock chip sampling, frost boil sampling, gridding, staking, airborne and ground geophysical surveying, geological mapping, and diamond drilling.

Gold Fields Limited (GFL), through a subsidiary, entered into an option agreement with CBR in 2003 to acquire up to 55% interest, exclusive of diamond rights, in the CBGB properties by spending $7.5 million over four years. The agreement stated that GFL could earn an additional 10% interest by expending another $7.5 million. The diamond rights were subsequently optioned to Indicator Minerals Inc. (Indicator) in 2004.

Exploration in 2003 comprised 1,388.5 line-km of time domain electromagnetic (EM) and magnetic airborne geophysical surveys over 11 targets. Diamond drilling comprised 15 holes (totalling 1,480 m) at the Three Bluffs, Koffy and Inuk prospects, reconnaissance and detailed prospecting (resulting in 530 rock samples collected), and regional geological mapping. The final three holes at Three Bluffs encountered gold mineralization with intersections up to 27.41 g/t Au over 9.44 m.

In 2004, aggressive exploration continued which comprised 6,781 m of diamond drilling, in 47 holes, over five CBGB prospects (Four Hills, Cop, Ledge, Prospector, and Three Bluffs), with the majority of the work being conducted at Three Bluffs (31 holes totalling 5,355 m). Drilling at Three Bluffs aimed to expand upon the gold mineralization found in 2003. The results from the 2004 drilling were used to model the mineralization and produce the Project's maiden Mineral Resource estimate. Other work completed in 2004 included lake water geochemical sampling (519 samples), reconnaissance to detailed prospecting (1,639 rock grab samples collected), and regional mapping.

Having met its initial expenditure threshold to acquire 55% of the Project, GFL elected not to expend the additional funds to acquire the additional 10% interest. In 2005, an agreement was reached that provided CBR the opportunity to return to full ownership by spending $10 million. The 2005 program, funded entirely by CBR, included airborne geophysical surveys, mapping and prospecting, and diamond drilling (2,619 m in seven holes at Three Bluffs and 643 m in three holes at Anuri) that totalled C$8.5 million in expenditures.

In 2006, GFL allowed its option to lapse and returned 100% ownership to CBR. The 2006 exploration program comprised 3,503 m of drilling at Anuri and West Plains in addition to the collection of 579 rock samples and 175 till samples (Blakley and Rennie, 2008).

The 2007 field program consisted of 5,669 m of diamond drilling at Three Bluffs and Inuk along with the collection of 876 rock grab samples and 687 till samples across the CBGB, focussing on areas that had seen limited previous exploration (Turner, 2010). Of the rock samples collected, 28 returned values greater than 1.0 g/t Au and, of these, three were considered to be new prospects. The remaining 25 samples expanded and confirmed the extent of mineralization at Ghost, Muskox, Maro, Shamrock, Betwixt, and Ridge (Turner, 2010).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **19** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The 2008 program consisted of prospecting, rock and till sampling, and diamond drilling. A total of 2,678 m of diamond drilling was completed along with the collection of 662 grab samples and 1,170 till samples. The rock and till sampling programs were designed to follow up past anomalous results as well as to test previously underexplored sections of the CBGB. Only five of the grab samples returned values greater than 1.0 g/t Au (Turner, 2010).

The 2009 exploration program consisted of rock and till sampling; no drilling was undertaken. A total of 666 rock grab samples and 61 till samples were taken (Turner, 2010). Fieldwork in 2009 concentrated on areas away from known occurrences and, as a result, only two of 666 grab samples returned values greater than 1.0 g/t Au (Turner, 2010).

Exploration activity conducted by NCGC in 2010 comprised additional diamond drilling, the completion of a Titan 24 Induced Polarization (IP) survey over Three Bluffs and along strike to the southwest, and a concurrent field-based prospecting and assessment of the company's regional mineral properties. Drilling was focussed on the Three Bluffs-Antler-Hayes corridor and comprised 54 drill holes for an aggregate of 5,749 m. Quantec Geoscience Ltd. conducted a Titan Direct Current (DC)/IP survey on twelve lines, spaced 420 m apart, over the Three Bluffs area and covered from 4.5 km east of Three Bluffs to the Hayes occurrence. The survey identified conductive bodies that correlated with known gold mineralization locations at Three Bluffs as well as new anomalies located at Antler and Hayes. The survey identified new areas of potential gold mineralization along the mostly untested Walker Lake trend.

The 2011 exploration program comprised 187 drill holes for 28,644 m split between 95 RC holes for 10,148 m and 92 diamond drill holes for 18,496 m. This drilling was largely focused along the Three Bluffs-Antler-Hayes corridor for resource delineation whilst 4 holes were drilled at West Plains.

In March 2012, NCGC completed a 16 hole diamond drill program for 7,005.7 m and a 116 line-km ground magnetic geophysical survey over the area covering the strike extension of the Three Bluffs stratigraphy to the northeast of the main deposit and infilled areas covered by the 2004 geophysical survey. The results indicate linear "magnetic highs" extending from the main linear anomaly of the Walker Lake trend eastward. These magnetic highs were interpreted to represent iron formation stratigraphy.

No work was performed on the Project in 2013 and 2014.

**5.4 Previous Resource Estimates**

The Historical Resource Estimates discussed below have not been sufficiently reviewed by the author to be deemed current mineral resources. Fury does not treat these historical resource estimates as current. Current Mineral Resource Estimate for the Project is discussed in Section 11 of this report.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **20** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.1 ***2004 MRE***

In 2004, RPA completed a Technical report on the Three Bluffs area which included a Mineral Resource estimate for the Three Bluffs Deposit. The 2004 historical resource estimate used a block model method constrained by wireframe grade-shell models, with Inverse Distance Squared (ID2) weighting. A bulk density of 3.1 t/m3 was used and individual assays were capped at 60 g/t Au prior to compositing. At a cut-off grade of 3 g/t Au, the Inferred Mineral Resources at Three Bluffs were estimated to be 1.9 million tonnes grading 8.0 g/t Au, for 488,000 contained ounces of Au (Rennie and Wallis, 2004).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.2 ***2008 MRE***

In 2008, Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. (Scott Wilson RPA), a predecessor company to RPA, updated the Three Bluffs Mineral Resource estimate using a block model method constrained by wireframe grade-shell models, with Inverse Distance Cubed (ID3) weighting. The grade estimation was constrained using wireframe models, which were constructed by Committee Bay personnel using a 2 g/t Au grade cut-off and a nominal minimum width of 1.5m. The database contained records for 84 holes, totaling 13,304 m of drilling. Scott Wilson RPA estimated Indicated Resources totaling 2.45 million tonnes grading 5.94 g/t Au for 468,000 contained ounces of gold and Inferred Resources of 1.34 million tonnes grading 5.34 g/t Au for 230,000 contained ounces of gold (Blakley and Rennie, 2008).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.3 ***2009 MRE***

In 2009, Scott Wilson RPA completed an update to the Three Bluffs mineral resource model using a block model constrained by three-dimensional (3D) wireframes of the principal mineralogical domains. Grade for Au was interpolated into the model using ID3. Scott Wilson RPA estimated Indicated Resources totalling 2.70 million tonnes grading 5.85 g/t Au for 508,000 contained ounces of gold and Inferred Resources of 1.27 million tonnes grading 5.98 g/t Au for 244,000 contained ounces of gold (Scott, Rennie and Lambert, 2010).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.4 ***2012 MRE***

In 2012, RPA prepared an updated Mineral Resource estimate for the Three Bluffs Project using a block model method constrained by wireframe grade-shell models, with ID3 weighting, with an effective date of December, 2011. A gold price of $US1400 per ounce was used in the estimation. Two sets of wireframes and block models were employed: one which contemplated open pit mining and the other underground mining. A lower set of cut-off criteria were used for the open pit, 1.35 g/t Au, versus the underground, 2.50 g/t Au. A pit shell was generated from the open pit model and blocks from the open pit model captured within this shell were considered eligible for reporting as open pit resources. The same pit shell was applied to the underground model, except that blocks were included only if they were outside of the shell. RPA estimated Indicated Resources of 4.30 million tonnes grading 4.90 g/t Au for 678,000 contained ounces of gold and Inferred Resources of 4.53 million tonnes grading 5.69 g/t Au for 829,000 contained ounces of gold (Rennie and McDonough, 2012).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **21** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.5 ***2013 MRE***

In 2013, RPA updated the 2011 estimate to include the results of an additional 7,005.7 m in 16 holes with an effective date of April 2013. The estimate was carried out using a block model constrained by wireframe grade-shell models. Estimated gold grades were interpolated into the blocks using ID3 weighting. Two sets of wireframes and block models were employed: one which contemplated open pit mining and the other underground mining. A lower set of cut-off criteria were used for the open pit, 1.35 g/t Au, versus the underground, 2.50 g/t Au. A gold price of $US1400 per ounce was used in the estimation. A pit shell was generated from the open pit model and blocks from the open pit model captured within this shell were considered eligible for reporting as open pit resources. The same pit shell was applied to the underground model, except that blocks were included only if they were outside of the shell. RPA estimated Indicated Resources of 4.31 million tonnes grading 4.90 g/t Au for 680,000 contained ounces of gold and Inferred Resources of 5.53 million tonnes grading 5.69 g/t Au for 938,000 contained ounces of gold (McDonough, 2013).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.6 ***2017 MRE***

In 2017 an Updated Mineral Resource Estimate with an effective date of May 31, 2017 was prepared by David Ross of RPA. The mineral resources in that report are the same as the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimation herein.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.4.7 ***Discussion on Previous Resource Estimates***

The historical Mineral Resource Estimates summarized above are superseded by the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimation. Additional drilling, interpretation and modeling has been completed subsequent to the historical resource estimates. The historical resource estimates summarized above show a linear progression through time as more data and information was added at the Three Bluffs Deposit and in Mr. Atkinson's opinion were reasonable with the information available at the time the resource estimates were completed. The only current mineral resource estimate for the Committee Bay Project is Mr. Atkinson's 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate discussed in Section 11 of this report.

**5.5 Historical Drilling**

Drilling completed prior to 2015 supports the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate and is described in Section 7 of this report. Drilling since 2015 was conducted outside of the resource area and does not impact the estimate.

**5.6 Past Production**

There has been no previous production from the Project.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **22** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**6 Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.1 Geology**

The Committee Bay area is underlain by Archean and Proterozoic rocks extensively covered by Quaternary glacial drift in the northern part of the Churchill Structural Province (Heywood and Schau, 1978). The focus of gold exploration in the area has been the granite-greenstone terrane of the Archean Prince Albert group (PAg) (Figure 2). Correlative rocks to the PAg, spanning over 2000 km, have been identified as the Murmac Bay group in Saskatchewan (Hartlaub et al., 2001), the Woodburn Lake group northeast of Baker Lake (host to the Meadowbank deposit; Zaleski et al., 2001) and the Mary River group on Baffin Island (Bethune and Scammell, 1997).

![](exhibit15-8xm002.jpg)

**Figure 2: Composite Stratigraphic Column of the Prince Albert Group in the Committee Bay Area.**

The Committee Bay area comprises three distinct Archean-aged subdomains including the Prince Albert group and Northern Migmatite subdomains and the Walker Lake intrusive complex (Skulski et al., 2003). The PAg subdomain contains abundant supracrustal rocks of the lower and middle Prince Albert group. The lower PAg comprises basalts, komatiites and 2732 Ma rhyolite while the middle PAg consists of a sequence of iron formation, psammite, semipelite and <2722 Ma quartzite. The middle PAg is overlain by a 2711 Ma dacite while both the lower and middle PAg were cut by 2718 Ma synvolcanic intrusions and post-volcanic intrusions aged 2610 to 2585 Ma (Skulski et al., 2003) (Figures 2 and 3).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **23** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The Arrowsmith River shear zone separates the Prince Albert group and Northern Migmatite subdomains. The Northern Migmatite subdomain is composed of metsedimentary rocks with lesser mafic and ultramafic rocks from the upper PAg, bracketed to <2691 Ma. These high-grade metamorphic rocks are cut by variably composed 2580 Ma plutonic rocks. Rocks of the Walker Lake intrusive complex are in faulted contact with the Prince Albert group subdomain proximal to the Walker Lake shear zone but are in intrusive contact with the Prince Albert group subdomain elsewhere. The Walker Lake intrusive complex comprises 2610 Ma granodiorite to monzogranite that is cut by late- to post-tectonic 1821 Ma monzogranite (Skulski et al., 2003).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.2 Structure**

Two major fault systems in the central portion of Committee Bay Greenstone Belt cut Prince Albert group rocks. These are: (a) the northeasterly-striking Kellett Fault; and (b) the northwesterly-striking Hayes River Fault. Several other north-, northwest and easterly-striking faults occur within the Laughland Lake - Ellice Hills area (Heywood and Schau, 1978). Geological and geophysical evidence indicates easterly-striking dextral shearing and northeasterly-striking sinistral shearing components exist and cut or deform rocks of the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt. These shear zones may have acted as conduits for gold bearing fluids, as most of the gold occurrences discovered to date appear to be spatially related to the major shear systems and their kinematically related sub-structures. The northeasterly shears, which are generally parallel to the strike of the rock units, may be part of a conjugate shear set that is related to the easterly-striking Walker Lake and Amer Shear Zones, indicating that the principal component of regional pure shear is oriented north-northwesterly in the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt.

Three phases of ductile deformation are recognized in the rocks of the Committee Bay greenstones. The S<sub>1</sub> foliation is typically recognized in komatiitic and plutonic rocks, in particular, as a northwest striking fabric parallel to bedding in the komatiites. Axial planar folds from the first deformation phase are locally recognized. The dominant fabric throughout the Committee Bay region is the northeasterly striking S<sub>2</sub> foliation which is axial planar to regional F<sub>2</sub> folds. This regional foliation is interpreted to represent a composite S<sub>2</sub>+/-S<sub>1</sub> fabric. D<sub>3</sub> structures include northeast trending F<sub>3</sub> folds and S<sub>3</sub> fabrics that overprint D<sub>2</sub> fabrics (Skulski et al., 2003).

Metamorphic grade increases northeasterly to a metamorphic culmination near Committee Bay (Schau, 1982). The southwestern part of the Committee Bay region displays metamorphic grades of upper greenschist to upper amphibolite facies, whereas the metamorphic grade of the northeastern part of the region generally ranges from upper amphibolite to granulite facies. Most porphyroblasts seem to be pre- to syn-kinematic relative to the main (S<sub>2</sub>+/-S<sub>1</sub>) fabric development (Skulski et al., 2003). Schau (1982) have discovered evidence of a possible retrograde metamorphic event, superimposed upon the initial regional metamorphism.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **24** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Figure 3. Regional Geology**![](exhibit15-8xm005.jpg)

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **25** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**6.3 Mineralization**

The majority of the gold mineralization throughout the CBGB is hosted in silicate, oxide, and/or sulphide facies iron formation. Gold mineralization has also been identified in shear hosted quartz veins in sediments and volcanics throughout the belt (Blakely and Rennie, 2008). The CBGB hosts over 40 known gold occurrences. Most developed is the Three Bluffs deposit discussed in Section 11 of this report.

Pyrite and pyrrhotite are the most common sulphides and occur as fine-grained disseminations or irregular patches along quartz vein margins in iron formations and chlorite-epidote-amphibole alteration zones in mafic to ultramafic rocks, and as semi-massive bands parallel to bedding in both oxide and silicate facies iron formations.

Arsenopyrite occurs locally as disseminations, individual euhedral acicular crystals, semimassive bands, and clots. At Three Bluffs, arsenopyrite occurs in sedimentary units adjacent to mineralized/altered iron formation. At the Raven occurrence, arsenopyrite has a strong association with gold mineralization where it occurs as fine to medium grained euhedral disseminations with tourmaline and quartz.

Chalcopyrite occurs mainly as disseminations associated with pyrite at Anuri and Three Bluffs but has been observed at other locations within the CBGB. Galena was observed south of Kinngalugjuaq Mountain in two localities, one of which was associated with silver mineralization. Sphalerite has been identified in several locations, most notably at the Burro occurrence where coarse black iron-rich sphalerite comprises up to 5% of an auriferous quartz vein.

Elevated gold grades correlate to the presence of arsenopyrite, pyrite, and pyrrhotite bearing iron formation, metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks, no consistent positive correlation has been found between the highest-grade gold grades and the overall volume percentages of these sulphide minerals. The most important characteristic common to the majority of the high-grade gold occurrences appears to be the overall degree of silicification.

**6.4 Deposit Types**

The primary deposit type of interest in the CBGB is gold within silicate, oxide, and sulphide iron formation mainly of orogenic origins.

Iron formation hosted deposits consist mainly of sulphidic replacements of Fe-rich layers in magnetite or silicate banded iron formation (BIF), adjacent to variably developed quartz veins and veinlets. The intensely mineralized central parts of some deposits consist of nearly continuous wallrock replacements, which can obscure their epigenetic character and can lead to ambiguities about the timing of mineralization (Caddy et al., 1991; Kerswill, 1996).

BIF-hosted deposits occur in greenstone belts that are either volcanic-dominated or sediment-dominated, where they are located stratigraphically near regional volcanic-sedimentary transition, as is the case at Homestake and Morro Velho. A few deposits, like Lupin, also occur near the edges of large clastic sedimentary basins, in absence of significant mafic volcanic rocks. Magnetite BIF is the dominant host in greenschist grade rocks, whereas silicate BIF prevails at mid-amphibolite grade or higher (Kerswill, 1996). At the local scale, BIF-hosted deposits are commonly associated with the hinges of folds, anticlines or synclines, and intersections of shear zones and faults. As a consequence, the deposits are commonly stratabound and plunge parallel to their host fold hinge or to the line of intersection of controlling shear zones with the BIF unit. In greenstone belts, many BIF-hosted deposits also contain concentrations of intermediate to felsic porphyry stocks and dykes.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **26** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

Kerswill (1996) has divided iron formation-hosted gold deposits, based on the dominant style of gold distribution, into two principal varieties; stratiform and non-stratiform (or vein type). Some deposits have characteristics of both varieties.

In the vein-type deposits, gold hosted by iron-formation is restricted to late structures (quartz veins and/or shear zones) and/or iron sulphide-rich zones adjacent to such structures. Ore is confined to discrete, commonly small shoots separated by barren (gold- and sulphide-poor) iron formation, typically of oxide facies. These non-stratiform ores are essentially a variety of the mesothermal quartz-carbonate vein deposits.

Deposits of the stratiform type can be subdivided into those occurring within sediment-dominated settings and those within mixed volcanic-sedimentary settings. In the former, gold is uniformly disseminated in thin, but laterally extensive units of cherty pyrrhotite-rich iron formation that are conformably interlayered with sulphide- and oxide-poor iron formation and pelitic sedimentary rocks in portions of turbidite basins relatively distant from felsic volcanic centers. In the deposits within mixed settings, gold is uniformly disseminated in thin, but laterally extensive units of cherty sulphide iron formation that are associated with carbonate iron formation and black carbonaceous shale relatively close to volcanic centres.

Work carried out by Fury and its predecessors has identified that gold associated with quartz veins occurs in most localities and is present throughout the belt in anomalous concentrations in nearly all lithologies, so there exists the possibility for shear zone-hosted deposits.

Elevated amounts of gold generally exist in arsenopyrite, pyrite, and pyrrhotite bearing iron formations, metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks. Despite gold occurrences across the belt displaying macroscopic differences in geology and mineralogy, one or more of these sulphide minerals, in varying proportions, accompany silicification and chloritization in samples that have high amounts of gold mineralization. The most important common characteristic appears to be silicification.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **27** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7 Exploration**

From 2015 to 2021, Fury Gold has completed extensive regional and infill till geochemical campaigns, ground and airborne geophysical surveying as well as aerial drone surveying. The Company has incurred approximately $60M in expenditures exploring the Project and intends to continue its exploration with the continued testing of regional targets and expansion of the Three Bluffs deposit.

**7.1 Till Sampling**

The till sampling program was designed to develop robust and repeatable gold vectors over targets identified in NCGC's prospectivity analysis. A total of 6,951 regional and 10,769 detailed till samples have been collected by the Company.

The regional till sampling was the first systematic geochemical sampling to cover the entire Project area. Regional till sampling identified 20 priority gold in till anomalies for follow up in addition to highlighting all but two previously know gold occurrences along the CBGB.

Detailed till sample grids were completed over all 20 priority regional anomalies in order to develop robust and repeatable gold vectors.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.1.1 ***Methodology***

Regional till samples were collected approximately every 500 m, over 1-km spaced traverse lines. This grid size was established from previous industry and government prospecting and till sampling at known deposits and showings. High-resolution till samples were collected approximately every 50 m, over 100 m spaced traverse lines. The sampling grids were oriented perpendicular to predominant local ice flow directions.

For the regional till samples three to four kilograms of till matrix was sampled at each site from surface boils or till pits dug using a short-handled shovel to depths of 10-50 cm below the thin Arctic soils. The matrix material was placed in a heavy duty (8 X 14 inches) plastic bag after removing large pebbles and secured with plastic cable ties. Waterproof, coded tags were placed in the bag and outside secured with the zip-tie.

Another shovel full of till was sieved on site through a 10-mesh screen (4 mm) to remove pebbles for visual identification (i.e. quartz pebbles-sulphides) and a ~1 kg subsample of pebbles was bagged for later examination. Surficial and sample site data from each site were entered in field computers and 2 photos were taken of each site, one of the terrain and one of the sampling site with sample matrix and pebbles displayed.

Detailed till samples were collected approximately every 100 m or 200 m, along 100 m or 200 m spaced traverse lines. The sampling grids were oriented perpendicular to predominant local ice flow directions. 500 g of fine-grained till was collected at each sample site using a shovel. Samples were collected preferentially from frost boils, in the absence of frost boils samples were collected from holes that were dug through the soil. All visible pebbles were removed from the sample before it was placed in a numbered Kraft soil bag, with a sample tag placed inside the bag. The bags were closed with a zip-tie. Sample data was recorded in field data loggers.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **28** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.2 Mapping and Rock Sampling**

The company completed extensive boulder and surficial mapping programs in conjunction with rock sampling to refine drill targets. A total of 19,721 boulder mapping points were recorded along with 737 rock grab samples collected. The boulder mapping and rock sampling notably led to the discovery of a high grade boulder train at Anuri Lakes that's source is as of yet unidentified.

Stea Surficial Geology Services (Stea) was engaged to produce and interpret a surficial geology map over the Property area to aid in exploration planning. Subsequently, Stea interpreted sampling results in the context of glacial dispersal theory and surficial mapping to evaluate the regional and local Au anomaly patterns.

Stea divided the surficial deposits of the CBGB into four exploration-relevant units glaciofluvial (GF, eskers, channels), till blanket, (Tb, drumlins, crag and tails, moraines), till veneer (Tv), and rock areas (R, strike ridges) (Figure 4). The surficial geology was mapped at 1:15,000-1:20,000 scales with unit polygons and landform symbol modifiers. Landforms identified using the drone imagery formed the basis of unit classification, and selective ground truthing occurred as till sampler training was performed. Sites visited during sampler training confirmed the efficacy of unit classification using the drone imagery.

Till covered areas were identified as most suitable for sampling and interpretation because till is considered a "first derivative" of bedrock - essentially crushed and transported local rock. Till veneer (Tv) regions are best as these regions have a simple and shorter transport history and feature abundant outcrop to verify possible lode sources. Glaciofluvial sediments have a more complex depositional history than tills and can essentially mask local bedrock geochemical responses. Ice flow directional indicators were compiled in rose diagrams for each mapping area to better evaluate the major flow events affecting the various regions. Crag and tail hills are perhaps the most common directional landform in the region and are identified by an isolated resistant rock outcrop or area of thin till over rock trailed by a thick, streamlined till "tail" oriented in the direction of ice flow. The CBGB can be divided into three broad regions with differing "predominant" flow patterns.

Predominant flows are defined as the direction of the modal ice flow vector and presumed to reflect the net dispersal directions for mineralized sources. In the southwest portion of the CBGB the predominant flow is northwestward (345°), in the central portion northward (355°) and in the NE portion northeastward (035°).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2.1 ***Methodology***

Rock samples were generally selected based on favorable lithology and mineralization. A total of 80 rock samples were collected in 2019 and 2021 (Figures 5 and 6). Samples were collected using a hammer and placed in a poly ore bag with the sample number written on both sides in permanent marker. A sample tag marked with the unique sample number was placed inside each sample bag and sealed with a cable tie. The geological information and location were entered into an ArcGIS based application via Apple iPad devices.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **29** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

All the rock sample bags are packaged in double bagged 20" x 40" polywoven rice bags (for added protection), labelled with the laboratory address, shipment number, bag number and shipper details. Prior to sealing the rice bags, a sample submittal form is be placed within the first bag of the sample shipment. The rice bags are sealed with security tags, which are scanned for the corresponding bag.

The boulder mapping program was completed using traverses over prospective areas identified from the high resolution drone imagery.

Boulders were mapped based on lithology, mineralization, sulphide content, and magnetic susceptibility. The geological information and location was entered into an ArcGIS based application via Apple iPad devices. Magnetic susceptibility readings were collected using handheld KT-10 devices. Boulders were selected for sampling based on favorable lithology and mineralization and collected using a hammer. Samples were placed in a poly ore bag with the sample number written on both sides in permanent marker. A sample tag marked with the unique sample number was placed inside each sample bag and sealed with a cable tie. The site position was recorded using Apple iPad devices.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **30** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm003.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm010.jpg)

**Figure 4: Surficial Geology**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **31** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.3 Geophysical Surveys**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.1 ***2016 Airborne Survey***

A combined airborne magnetic gradiometer and electromagnetic (Resolve) survey was flown between April 12 and June 12, 2016. A total of 6,584.8 line-km were flown including 5,979.3km of traverse lines at 50 m to 200 m line spacing and 605.5 km of tie lines at 500 m to 2,000m line spacing. The survey data was utilized as part of the overall belt wide prospectivity analysis in conjunction with the geochemical sampling and mapping data.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.2 ***2016 and 2017 Ground Magnetics Surveys***

A total of 2,930.71 line-km of ground magnetics surveying along 50m spaced grid lines was completed across nine prospects during the 2016 and 2017 field programs. The magnetics data was utilized for identifying magnetic iron formation stratigraphy as well as for developing a structural model to further direct drilling which in 2017 was following immediately behind the surveying.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.3 ***2015 Induced Polarization Ground Geophysical Survey***

Between July 6th and August 6th, 2015, 11.4 line-km of 2D pole-dipole Direct Current Induced Polarization (DCIP) was collected by Aurora Geosciences. The survey was done over a total of six NW-SE lines, approximately 2 km in length, equally divided into two blocks of 3 survey lines, within claims F95268 and F95270. IRIS/IP-10 receivers and GDD instrumentation transmitters were used to conduct the survey. The data show that the resistivity across lines is well correlated whereas the chargeability information has a more nebulous signature, without any clear correlation between lines.

The resistivity data and subsequent inversions agreed well with known structures across all the lines, and helped map with more confidence the location of several conductive units such as faults, shear zones and various lithologies like banded iron formations (BIFs). The chargeability data was much noisier, and the correlation in the inversions to mapped structures is not clear. The chargeability data was often noisy distorted by the permafrost, especially in conductive areas where the signal strength is low.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3.4 ***2019 Induced Polarization Ground Geophysical Survey***

During 2019 24 line-km of Induced Polarization (IP) ground geophysical surveying was completed at the Aiviq prospect targeting linear conductors using a pole-dipole array with 25, 50 and 100 m dipole spacing (Figure 4). The 25 and 50 m data were acquired using 10 measuring dipoles (n = 10) while 6 dipoles (n = 6) were measured for the 100 m survey.

**7.3.4.1 Methodology**

During 2019 24 line km of Induced Polarization (IP) ground geophysical surveying was completed using a pole-dipole array with 25, 50 and 100 m dipole spacing (Figures 7). The 25 and 50 m data were acquired using 10 measuring dipoles (n = 10) while 6 dipoles (n = 6) were measured for the 100 m survey. Survey lines were established by the geophysical crew under direction from North Country Gold's geological team. The easting, northing and elevation of each station was measured and recorded using a Garmin handheld GPS. The complete logistics report for the 2019 IP survey is included as Appendix 3a.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **32** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.3.4.2 Results**

The data was QA/QC'd and processed by Computational Geosciences Inc. The data were inverted in both 2D pseudo sections and 3D meshes. The IP survey targeted linear conductors at the Aiviq showing. In total 11lines of 50m and 100m dipole data were acquired with an N-spacing of 1:10, including one line (SH-08) of 25m, 50m and 100m dipole data. The 50m and 100m dipole combination was chosen as the preferred survey geometry after comparing various inversion results on SH-08. The 50m and 100m combination proved quicker to acquire compared to 25m dipole data and provided much better depth resolution compared to 25m dipole data without sacrificing too much resolution near the surface. Figure 5 shows line SH-09 with inversions and interpretation.

![](exhibit15-8xm016.jpg)

**Figure 5: 2019 IP Survey Cross Section with Interpretation. Line SH-09**

**7.4 Aerial Drone Surveying**

Approximately 4,750 km2 of aerial drone surveying was completed in 2015 and 2016 using hand launched unmanned aerial vehicles. Detailed imagery in the visible spectrum as well as relative digital elevation data was collected at 10cm resolution.

Both visible spectrum imagery and relative digital elevation information were collected at high resolution to aid in the interpretation of surficial geology and in logistical drill planning; imagery resolution of <10 cm per pixel was maintained throughout. A desktop study of the drone imagery included mapping of landforms indicating glacial ice-flow direction (e.g. drumlins, crag-and-tails, etc.) and the classification of surficial geology into 4 exploration relevant units using landforms associated with each unit. Proposed drill collar locations were also reviewed using the imagery to avoid boulder fields or otherwise unsuitable terrain and could be moved as needed while ensuring intersection of the planned drill target.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **33** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The drone imagery was also used to locate gossanous boulder zones for mapping and sampling. A colour filter was applied to the imagery to highlight rusty orange-red-purple material that simplified the identification and recording of gossanous boulders. Gossanous boulder trains delineated as part of this desktop study were the focus of subsequent field mapping and sampling activities.

The survey was conducted using senseFly eBee drones. The eBee drone has a wingspan of 96cm, weighs less than 1kg including battery and camera, and has a nominal flight time of up to 50 minutes. A 20.9 Megapixel Canon G9X camera was mounted in the drone, and images were stored in the JPEG file format. Planned flight paths and georeferencing of images may be based in any known local or global coordinate system, or even using an arbitrary local system, and for this survey were recorded in the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) with a specified accuracy of 1-5m.

Drone imagery was post processed completely within PostFlight Terra 3D software. This software is customized to accept Sensefly eBee images and flight data automatically. Images are imported as geotagged JPEGs and are converted to georeferenced orthomosaic geoTIFFs during processing.

**7.5 AI Techniques**

In 2019 an artificial intelligence (machine learning) desktop analysis was completed using the extensive existing exploration database for the Project. The AI targeting program was trained using data from the Three Bluffs deposit and was then deployed to look for similar geological, geophysical and geochemical associations within a 1600 km2 area. A total of twelve targets were generated (Figure 6) based on this work and warrant follow-up.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **34** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm017.jpg)

**Figure 6: AI Derived Targets.**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **35** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.6 Drilling**

Drilling throughout the Committee Bay Project area has taken place intermittently from 1997 through to 2021, in total 130,440.99m of drilling was completed in 754 drill holes through this time period (Table 4 and Figure 7). In 2011 95 reverse circulation (RC) drill holes for a total of 10,148m were completed in the western portion of the Three Bluffs area. From 2015 through 2018 regional exploration drilling was completed using Rotary Air Blast (RAB) drilling. In total 271 RAB holes for 47,194.49m were completed. The balance of meterage, 73,098.5m in 388 drill holes, was completed using diamond drilling (DD) methodologies spanning mineralized prospects across the Project from West Plains in the SW to Inuk in the NE.

**Table 4: Drilling by Year and Type**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Prospect** | **Number** <br>**of Holes** | **Metres** <br>**Drilled** | **Year** |
| Antler DD | 2 | 121.36 | 1994 |
| Three Bluffs DD | 6 | 695.28 | 1994 |
| Three Bluffs DD | 6 | 781 | 1996 |
| Inuk DD | 6 | 776.6 | 1997 |
| Inuk DD | 5 | 537.41 | 2003 |
| Koffy DD | 3 | 246.28 | 2003 |
| Three Bluffs DD | 6 | 694.43 | 2003 |
| Cop DD | 3 | 256.52 | 2004 |
| Four Hills DD | 7 | 623.73 | 2004 |
| Ledge DD | 2 | 261.75 | 2004 |
| Prospector DD | 3 | 292.7 | 2004 |
| Three Bluffs DD | 31 | 5354.23 | 2004 |
| Antler DD | 4 | 643.43 | 2005 |
| Anuri DD | 4 | 692.21 | 2005 |
| Raven DD | 9 | 1669.16 | 2005 |
| Three Bluffs DD | 7 | 2618.68 | 2005 |
| West Plains DD | 5 | 617.95 | 2005 |
| Anuri DD | 9 | 1462.53 | 2006 |
| West Plains DD | 14 | 2046.48 | 2006 |
| Inuk DD | 9 | 1124.55 | 2007 |
| Thee Bluffs DD | 28 | 4632.23 | 2007 |
| Bluff 7 DD | 3 | 964 | 2008 |
| BRR DD | 5 | 1646 | 2008 |
| Ledge DD | 1 | 159.84 | 2008 |
| Three Bluffs DD | 7 | 1285.68 | 2008 |
| Antler DD | 14 | 1735.6 | 2010 |
| Hayes DD | 3 | 433.39 | 2010 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **36** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Prospect** | **Type** | **Number <br>of Holes** | **Metres <br>Drilled** | **Year** |
| Three Bluffs | DD | 37 | 3676.91 |  |
| Antler | DD | 31 | 5050.6 | 2011 |
| Antler | RC | 8 | 949.45 | 2011 |
| Hayes | RC | 26 | 2830.37 | 2011 |
| Three Bluffs | DD | 61 | 13443.35 | 2011 |
| Three Bluffs | RC | 61 | 6368.18 | 2011 |
| West Plains | DD | 4 | 426.11 | 2011 |
| Three Bluffs | DD | 16 | 7005.67 | 2012 |
| Four Hills | RAB | 4 | 345.95 | 2015 |
| West Plains | RAB | 29 | 2734.06 | 2015 |
| Antler | DD | 2 | 891.48 | 2016 |
| Anuri | RAB | 34 | 5701.28 | 2016 |
| Muskox | RAB | 7 | 1257.3 | 2016 |
| Three Bluffs | DD | 4 | 2823.97 | 2016 |
| West Plains | RAB | 19 | 2883.41. | 2016 |
| Aarluk | RAB | 12 | 2337.84 | 2017 |
| Aiviq | RAB | 13 | 2423.18 | 2017 |
| Anuri | RAB | 15 | 3017.55 | 2017 |
| Castle Rock | RAB | 18 | 3485.42 | 2017 |
| Four Hills | RAB | 4 | 726.95 | 2017 |
| Inuk | RAB | 11 | 2124.47 | 2017 |
| Kinng Au | RAB | 2 | 402.34 | 2017 |
| Koffy | RAB | 11 | 2121.43 | 2017 |
| Kalulik | RAB | 19 | 3564.67 | 2017 |
| Kinng Mountain | RAB | 6 | 1207.02 | 2017 |
| Mist | RAB | 4 | 687.33 | 2017 |
| Quartzite Ridge | RAB | 6 | 1181.11 | 2017 |
| Tuugaalik | RAB | 4 | 804.68 | 2017 |
| Tulugaq | RAB | 7 | 1408.19 | 2017 |
| Three Bluffs Extension | RAB | 6 | 1173.49 | 2017 |
| West Plains | RAB | 6 | 1053.09 | 2017 |
| Ziggy North | RAB | 3 | 603.51 | 2017 |
| Ziggy South | RAB | 9 | 1810.53 | 2017 |
| Aarluk | RAB | 7 | 1319.98 | 2018 |
| Aiviq | DD | 16 | 5002.39 | 2018 |
| Aiviq | RAB | 7 | 1217.81 | 2018 |
| Kalulik | RAB | 8 | 1601.87 | 2018 |
| Kalulik | DD | 1 | 430.07 | 2019 |
| Aiviq | DD | 4 | 1475.62 | 2019 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **37** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

---

| | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| **Prospect** | **Type** | **Number <br>of Holes** | **Metres <br>Drilled** | **Year** |
| Shamrock | DD | 1 | 425.81 | |
| Three Bluffs Extension | DD | 1 | 377.04 | |
| Raven | DD | 5 | 1422.1 | 2021 |
| Three Bluffs | DD | 3 | 1157.8 | 2021 |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **38** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm009.jpg)

**Figure 7: Drilling by Type**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **39** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.7 Historical Drilling**

Logging and sampling protocols for drilling have remained generally consistent throughout all of the Committee Bay Project drilling campaigns. The holes were quick-logged by a geologist. The quick logs included a brief description of lithology, alteration and mineralogy, as well as a description of any significant structural characteristics. The core was photographed and stored pending more detailed logging.

Detailed core logging included description of lithology, mineralization, type and intensity of alteration, vein mineralogy and component percentage, silicification intensity, fracture intensity and structural components such as faults, fractures, contacts, bedding, cleavage (primary and secondary) and veining, measured relative to the core axis. Geotechnical logging includes recovery, rock quality designation (RQD) and, occasionally, specific gravity.

Generally, core recovery was observed to be very good, and in the Qualified Person's opinion there are no drilling, sampling or recovery factors that could materially impact the accuracy and reliability of the results.

**7.8 1997 Drilling**

In 1997 six diamond drill holes for 776.6m were completed at the Inuk prospect in the far NE extent of the Committee Bay Project. The 1997 drilling was conducted by Connors Drilling Ltd. (Connors) of Kamloops, British Columbia. The standard core size drilled was NQ2 (50.6 mm diameter).

Drill hole 97I003 intercepted 39.04m of 2.71 g/t Au including 11.20 g/t Au over 5.97m.

**7.9 2003-2008**

From 2003 to 2008, diamond drilling at the Three Bluffs Project was conducted by Connors . The standard core size drilled at Three Bluffs at the time was NQ2 (50.6 mm diameter).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.1 ***2003 Drilling***

In 2003, a total of six holes for 694 m were completed at Three Bluffs and an additional nine holes (786 m) were drilled on other prospects in the NE portion of the Project, including Koffy and Inuk, for a total of 1,480 m. Drill hole collars, including the historic 1994 to 1996 holes, were surveyed using a total station GPS system. Downhole dips were measured at 30 m intervals using a Roto-dip mechanism.

The first three holes at Three Bluffs, tested the down plunge extent of known high-grade gold mineralization that had been identified at surface. The intent of the remaining three drill holes was to test the strike extent of gold mineralization and iron formation to the east of the surface expression of a broad fold flexure approaching a large intrusive body mapped grid east/northeast of the Three Bluffs occurrence. Significant sulphide iron formation and greywacke were intersected in all six holes including 44.6m of 7.99 g/t Au in drill hole 03TB006 and 44.47m of 8.97 g/t Au in drill hole 03TB006 .

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **40** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.2 ***2004 Drilling***

In 2004, the drilling was carried out by Connors in two programs using three different drills. The drilling totaled 5,355 m in 31 holes at Three Bluffs (6,781 m in 47 holes overall). Drill hole collars were located on the ground using differential GPS and downhole surveying was done with EZ-Shot or Maxibor instruments. Oriented core was marked to help interpret the true orientation of the quartz veins and foliations.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.3 ***2005 Drilling***

In 2005, a program of 2,619 m of drilling in seven holes was conducted at the Three Bluffs Project to explore the down-dip potential of the zones. An additional 643 m were drilled at Anuri in three drill holes.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.4 ***2006 Drilling***

There was no diamond drilling conducted at Three Bluffs, while 3,503 m were drilled at Anuri and West Plains in 2006.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.5 ***2007 Drilling***

Drilling in 2007 totaled 5,669 m of which 4,546 m were drilled in 28 holes at Three Bluffs and 1,123 m were completed in nine holes at the Inuk prospect, located approximately 147 km northeast of Three Bluffs. Drilling at Three Bluffs was intended to infill on previous drilling to provide additional confidence on the continuity of the mineralization. Drilling at Inuk was designed to expand the zone of known mineralization.

The 2007 program at Three Bluffs confirmed the continuity of mineralization in the limbs for the anticlinal structure and in the high-grade hinge zone.

Gold mineralization at Inuk occurs as high-grade, sulphide-bearing silicified zones hosted within a low-grade envelop of mineralization contained within a folded iron formation that can be up to 60 m thick in the hinge of the fold. Mineralization in this hinge was confirmed by the 2007 program with an intersection of 13.56 g/t Au over 5.44 m. Another intersection of 11.18 g/t Au over 11.0 m was encountered on the north limb of the Inuk fold structure.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.9.6 ***2008 Drilling***

Drilling in 2008 was carried out by Refined Energy based in Edmonton, Alberta and focused on the stratigraphy in the west portion of Three Bluffs and on regional anomalies east and northeast of Three Bluffs. Sixteen holes were cored for a total of 2,678 m. Seven holes were drilled at Three Bluffs for an aggregated depth of 1,286 m, including one hole drilled immediately to the north on the Ledge iron formation unit (160 m). An additional eight holes for 1,228m tested along strike of Three Bluffs. These include five "Bluff Regional" holes, drilled along strike to the east, one of which was lost before intersecting its intended target, and three at the BLUFF 7 prospect to the northeast.

Three of the holes at Three Bluffs were intended to test an anomalous gold intersection that was encountered in 2003. The intersection, within altered dacite with quartz veining north of the Three Bluffs iron formation. The drill holes did not encounter gold mineralization within the dacite, however the holes were extended into the iron formation and returned 11.4 g/t Au over 3.2 m. The remaining four holes tested on-strike stratigraphy to the west of Three Bluffs. Significant gold of 13.97 g/t Au over 23.53 m, was intersected 400 m west of the previous drill limit in hole 08TB077. Additional mineralization was intercepted in drill holes 08TB075 (2.46 g/t Au over 15.36 m) and 08TB076 (1.39 g/t Au over 4.22 m). The single drill hole completed at the Ledge prospect did not intercept any significant gold mineralization.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **41** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

Along strike to the east of Three Bluffs, four geophysical anomalies were tested with five holes. One hole was lost in overburden and the remaining four did not intersect any anomalous mineralization.

Three holes were completed on the BLUFF 7 prospect 13 km to the northeast of Three Bluffs. Drill hole 08BL001, intersected 4.00 g/t Au over 3.60 m in highly altered and mineralized iron formation.

**7.10 2010-2011**

The 2010 and 2011 diamond drilling programs were conducted by Phoenix Energy Services Corp. of Calgary, Alberta and Bodnar Drilling Ltd. of Ste. Rose du Lac, Manitoba, using a combination of contract equipment and drills owned by NCG. Drilling for these two programs was concentrated west of Three Bluffs in an effort to expand the known mineralization.

Drill holes were located a Trimble R8 GNSS (global navigation satellite system) instrument. Drill casings were removed but anchors were left in the ground. Readings taken of the drill rods were done using a total station electronic transit.

Downhole surveys were taken approximately every 30 m using a Reflex EZ-Shot survey tool with a magnetic susceptible reading taken with each survey. Reflex readings were then corrected for declination and magnetic susceptibility. Final down hole surveys were completed every 3m using a Reflex Maxibor or Icefield Gyro instrument.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.10.1 ***2010 Drilling***

In 2010, a total of 54 NQ (47.6 mm diameter) holes were completed for 5,749 m. The shallow, structurally thickened portion of the hinge zone of Three Bluffs was tested by 15 holes that intersected variable widths of structurally disturbed silica, and locally sericite altered, sulphidized iron formation with associated gold mineralization.

Another 16 holes were drilled along a 500 m corridor immediately west of the Three Bluffs resource area. This drilling identified gold mineralization associated with either altered, sulphidized iron formation or altered, sulphidized and crenulated greywacke.

Seventeen holes were drilled at Antler as a series of two hole set-ups on 60 m spaced sections. Sixteen of the 17 holes intersected variable widths and of gold mineralization associated with altered iron formation, greywacke, and felsic volcanics.

Four holes, completed as two two-hole fences 120 m apart, were drilled 1.5 km west of Antler (four kilometres west of Three Bluffs) in the Hayes area where a high-grade surface sample had been found. Two of the four holes intersected mineralized iron formation while the other holes intersected localized late-stage pegmatite dykes that crossed the mineralized trend at a shallow angle.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **42** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.10.2 ***2011 Drilling***

A total of 187 holes were drilled at Three Bluffs for 28,640 m. The drilling comprised 10,148 m in 95 RC holes and 18,496 m in 92 NQ diameter diamond drill holes.

Drilling concentrated on delineating gold mineralization along the main Walker Lake trend from Three Bluffs in the west to Hayes to the east. Drilling was carried out near existing holes that had returned high-grade results, in an effort to expand the resource. Two additional deep holes were drilled to test grade at depth. An additional two diamond drill holes and 55 RC holes were drilled to the north and south of Three Bluffs to test stratigraphic and magnetic anomalies. The data from 33 of the RC drill holes was used in the estimation of Mineral Resources.

A four-hole drill program was carried out on the West Plains prospect late in the 2011 field season totaling 426 m. These holes were drilled to better define stratigraphic controls on the known mineralization.

**7.11 2012 Drilling**

Sixteen NQ-size diamond drill holes totaling 7.005.7 m were completed on the down-dip projection of the principal zones at Three Bluffs.

Drilling intercepted vertically dipping mineralized bodies at an oblique angle so that true thicknesses averaged approximately 40% less than the downhole intersection lengths.

Select drilling highlights from pre- 2015 are presented in Table 5.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **43** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 5: Select pre 2015 Drilling Highlights**

![](exhibit15-8xm006.jpg)

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **44** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.12 Discussion on Drilling Completed Prior to 2015**

It is the opinion of Mr. Atkinson that the diamond and RC drilling conducted prior to 2015 at the Committee Bay Project meets or exceeds current industry best practices. The author is unaware of any drilling or recovery issues that may impact upon the accuracy and reliability of the results. The author was part of the geological team at the Project seasonally from 2003 through to 2008. In Mr. Atkinson's opinion the results generated from the pre 2015 drill programs are suitable for use in a Mineral Resource Estimation.

**7.13 Drilling Completed by Fury**

From 2015 to 2021, Fury has completed a total of 52,178.56 m of rotary air blast (RAB) drilling in 284 drill holes as well as 9,003.82 m in 22 diamond drill holes (Table 6 and Figure 8).

**Table 6: Summary of Drilling Completed by Fury**

![](exhibit15-8xm007.jpg)

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **45** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13.1 ***RAB Drilling***

RAB drilling was utilized as a low impact prospecting tool to quickly and cost effectively test drill targets being generated in real time by the concurrent exploration programs. RAB drilling was limited to 200m in depth. Twenty-one prospects across the entire Project were tested with RAB drilling.

In 2017 the RAB drilling program resulted in the discover of the Aiviq showing (12.2m of 4.7 g/t Au in 17RGR003) as well as significant intersections at Aarluk (4.57m of 2.52 g/t Au), West Plains (9.15m of 3.48 g/t Au in 17WPR055 and 62.48 m of 4.23 g/t Au) and Inuk (25.91m of 1.15 g/t Au in 17INR003).

RAB drilling intersected wide low to moderately anomalous gold at Aarluk, Kalulik, Aiviq and Mist East.

**7.13.1.1 RAB Drilling Methodology**

RAB holes are planned (location, azimuth, dip, length) by the supervising geologist. The drill hole azimuth is established in the field by aligning the drill rig frame or mast with front and back sight pickets. The dip is checked by the geologist prior to collaring the hole.

Drill cuttings were sampled every 5 feet, corresponding to the length of individual drill rods. A poly bag was attached from the cyclone to the bucket and secured with a bungee cord to create a seal and prevent excessive dust in the work area. Upon completion of a drill rod the driller would stop the drill feed and ensure all sample reached the cyclone and blew the hole clear. The bucket of sample was then poured evenly through the riffles of the splitter and collected into a 12"x20" clear plastic sample bag. The sample bag was barcoded with depth and 3 digits of hole number and zip tied. Sample information was put into Fulcrum data logger. Samples were then submitted to the lab for analysis.

Following the completion of each sample (and duplicate every 10<sup>th</sup> sample) the bulk sample from the Rubbermaid bin was used to collect a representative sample for the chip tray and XRF analysis. A chip tray sample was collected by inserting the 50 mm sampling spear through the Rubbermaid bin to collect the entire vertical distribution of the sample. This spear sample was then placed in the dry sieve and the fine material removed by shaking the sieve. A representative sub sample was collected from the washed chips and placed in the correct position (corresponding with the drill depth) of the chip tray. A second sample was then collected using the spear. This sample was not sieved and a representative amount was collected in a small zip lock bag for XRF analysis. The sample ID and drilling interval was clearly marked on the bag. XRF analysis, quick and detailed geological logging was performed using the chip trays and representative samples.

Figure 9 depicts the flow sheet for Fury's RAB drilling methodology.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **46** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm008.jpg)

**Figure 8: 2015 - 2021 Drilling Completed by Fury**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **47** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm011.jpg)

**Figure 9: Fury RAB Drilling Methodology Flow Sheet**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **48** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.13.2 ***Diamond Drilling***

Diamond drilling was completed by the Company at Committee Bay in 2016, 2018, 2019 and 2021. A total of seven prospects were tested in the 38 drill holes. Significant intercepts were returned from Aiviq, 13.5 m of 1.54 g/t gold (including 6 m of 3.3 g/t gold); 4.5 m of 2.93/t Au; 1.5 m of 8.95/t Au and; 10.5 m of 1.22 g/t Au as well as from a 120m stepout from the Three Bluffs resource in 2021, 10.0m of 13.96 g/t Au; 3.0 m of 18.67 g/t Au and; 1.0 m of 23.2 g/t Au in drill hole 21TB152. Broad low-grade mineralization was intercepted at Shamrock in 2019 Diamond Drilling.

The 2019 diamond drilling identified a new gold-bearing hydrothermal system and made significant progress in geophysical targeting. At the Shamrock target drill hole 19SH001 intersected 30 meters of 0.67 g/t gold, including 1.5 m of 5.03 g/t gold in, which is characterized by quartz veining within gabbroic rocks. The Shamrock target is located 2.5 kilometers to the southwest of the Aiviq target where the Company drilled 6 meters of 0.48 g/t gold in drill hole 19RG019. Figures 10, 11 and 12 show the completed drill holes with results and interpretations.

The 2019 program also tested the machine learning platform prior to a more expansive drill program. The technology proved to be a useful tool and with further refinements it could become increasingly helpful in future targeting.

The 2021 diamond drilling program at the Three Bluffs deposit targeted a prominent geophysical conductor 120 m down dip from the currently defined resource. The hole intersected three discrete zones of high-grade gold mineralization over a 30 m drill width, including 10.0 m of 13.93 g/t gold, 3.0 m of 18.67 g/t gold and 1.0 m of 23.2 g/t gold (Figure 10). Importantly, these intercepts are associated with a deformation zone within a meta-sediment unit that was not expected to be encountered in this location. These intercepts likely significantly increase the resource expansion potential in the western region of the deposit.

![](exhibit15-8xm018.jpg)

**Figure 10: 2021 Three Bluffs Drilling**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **49** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**7.13.2.1 Methodology**

Diamond drilling was contracted to Cyr Drilling International Ltd. (Cyr) from Winnipeg, MB. Cyr used helicopter portable A-5 hydraulic drills manufactured by Zinex Mining Corp. to produce NQ2 (50.6 mm diameter) core. The drills were moved between drill sites and supported by Astar 350 B3 helicopters provided by Kitikmeot Helicopters from Yellowknife, NT.

The locations of drill hole pads were initially marked using a handheld GPS instrument and the azimuth of the holes was established by compass. Once the pad was built and the drill moved onto it, an Azimuth Aligner instrument manufactured by Minnovare Pty. Ltd. was used to establish the azimuth. An inclinometer was used to establish the dip.

The attitude of the hole with depth was determined using a DeviShot instrument manufactured by Devico AS in single shot mode with readings taken by the drillers. The initial reading was taken at 6 m past the casing with subsequent readings taken nominally at 50 m intervals. An NCGC geologist checked the core before making the decision to terminate the holes. Upon completion of the hole, the casings were pulled and the location of a hole marked with a picket. Subsequently all hole locations were surveyed with differential GPS.

Drill core was placed sequentially in wooden core boxes at the drill by the drillers and sealed with top covers and ties before transport. The core boxes were transported by helicopter on a twice daily basis to the camp where depth markers and box numbers were checked and the core was carefully reconstructed in a secure core facility. The core was logged geotechnically on a 3 m run by run basis including, core recovery, RQD, and magnetic susceptibility.

The core was descriptively logged and marked for sampling by NCGC geologists paying particular attention to lithology, structure, alteration, veining/brecciation, and sulphide mineralization.

Logging and sampling information was entered into MX Deposit cloud-based core logging application by MINALYTIX INC. which allowed for the integration of the data into the project acQuire database.

The core was photographed both wet and dry after logging but prior to sampling.

Figure 11 depicts the flow sheet for Fury's Diamond drilling methodology.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **50** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm012.jpg)

**Figure 11: Fury Diamond Drilling Methodology Flow Sheet**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **51** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**8 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security**

Since acquiring the Project, Fury adopted the Sample Preparation, Analytical and Security protocols established by previous operators.

**8.1 Detailed Till Samples** 

Completed sample shipments were flown out of Hayes camp by fixed wing charter either to Baker Lake or Rankin Inlet where they were forwarded on commercial cargo flights to ALS Laboratory in Vancouver, BC for preparation and analysis. Sample preparation consisted of being weighed, recorded, then screened to 180 µm with both sizes being kept (ALS preparation method Prep-41).

The analysis carried out by ALS Laboratory was a 50 g low level gold and multi-element assay for soils and sediments (ALS analysis method AuME-TL44). This method utilizes aqua regia digestion followed by ICP-MS and can detect 51 elements. This method of analysis is excellent for regolith, where gold anomalies indicating mineralization below surface are well-characterized. Aqua regia dissolves native gold as well as gold bound in sulfide minerals; however, depending on the composition of the soil, gold determined by this method may or may not match recovery from fire assay methods (ALS Global, 2018).

**8.2 Rock Samples**

Rock samples were sent to ALS Lab in Yellowknife for preparation and then forwarded on to ALS in Vancouver, BC for and analysis. All samples are assayed using 30 g nominal weight fire assay with atomic absorption finish (Au-ICP21) and multi-element four acid digest ICP-AES/ICP-MS method (ME-MS61). Samples returning > 10 ppm Au or 1000 for Au-ICP21 method a prepared sample is fused with a mixture of lead oxide, sodium carbonate, borax, silica and other reagents as required, inquarted with 6 mg of gold-free silver and then cupelled to yield a precious metal bead. The bead is digested in 0.5 mL dilute nitric acid in the microwave oven. 0.5 mL concentrated hydrochloric acid is then added and the bead is further digested in the microwave at a lower power setting. The digested solution is cooled, diluted to a total volume of 4 mL with de-mineralized water, and analyzed by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry against matrix-matched standards. Lower detection of 0.001 g/t and upper detection of 10 g/t are achieved using this method. Samples are analyzed via (Au-Gra21) should they return assays greater than 5 g/t Au, where then a prepared sample is fused with a mixture of lead oxide, sodium carbonate, borax, silica and other reagents in order to produce a lead button. The lead button containing the precious metals is cupelled to remove the lead. The remaining gold and silver bead is parted in dilute nitric acid, annealed and weighed as gold. silver, if requested, is then determined by the difference in weights.

For ME-MS61 method, a prepared sample (0.25 g) is digested with perchloric, nitric, hydroﬂuoric and hydrochloric acids. The residue is topped up with dilute hydrochloric acid and analyzed by inductively coupled plasma- atomic emission spectrometry. Following this analysis, the results are reviewed for high concentrations of bismuth, mercury, molybdenum, silver and tungsten and diluted accordingly. Samples meeting this criterion are then analyzed by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Results are corrected for spectral interelement interferences. For silver values greater than 100 ppm, samples are then analyzed using Ag-OG62 where a prepared sample is digested with nitric, perchloric, hydroﬂuoric, and hydrochloric acids, and then evaporated to incipient dryness. Hydrochloric acid and de-ionized water is added for further digestion, and the sample is heated for an additional allotted time. The sample is cooled to room temperature and transferred to a volumetric ﬂask (100 mL). The resulting solution is diluted to volume with de-ionized water, homogenized and the solution is analyzed by inductively coupled plasma - atomic emission spectroscopy or by atomic absorption spectrometry.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **52** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**8.3 RAB Drilling**

RAB recoveries were generally very good to excellent, allowing for representative samples to be taken and accurate analyses performed. Representative splits at five foot intervals were collected over the entire length of each hole.

RAB samples were sent to ALS laboratories in Yellowknife, NWT, Vancouver BC and Thunder Bay ON for preparation with analysis being carried out in Vancouver. Individual samples were analyzed using fire assay of a 30 g sample followed by atomic absorption spectroscopy (Au-AA25) and by a multi-element inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry or mass spectrometry (ICP-AES/ICP-MS) package following a four acid digestion of a one gram sample (ME-MS61).

Figure 12 depicts the Sample preparation and analyses undertaken by Fury for RAB drill samples.

**8.4 Diamond Drilling**

Core arrives in camp at the end of each drill shift where geological technicians check and correct and downhole distance discrepancies. Technicians record core recovery, fracture density and orientation, magnetic susceptibility, and overall RQD. Geological logging follows, comprising measurement and descriptions of geological units and the collection of semiquantitative data such as the number of visible gold occurrences, volume percent sulphide minerals, volume percent of alteration minerals, volume percent vein quartz, etc. Sample intervals are then designated by the logging geologist focusing on sulphide bearing and/or silicified intervals that are well bracketed by apparently unmineralized rock. Protocols limit sampling intervals between 0.75 m and one metre in length with a minimum length of 0.3 m and a maximum length of 1.5 m so long as geological boundaries were honoured.

Drill core is photographed and core samples are marked for sawing. Sampling intervals, geological boundaries, and a "saw line" are marked by the logging geologist and the core is sawed in half longitudinally by technicians. One half of the core is placed in a sample bag with a uniquely numbered tag and secured with plastic cable ties. Each batch of 20 field samples contain a blank and one of four commercial CRMs. The remaining half core is returned to the core box for reference. The majority of the reference core has been taken to Edmonton, Alberta to allow for year round access. Individual sample bags are placed inside a larger bag which is closed with a security seal for shipment to the laboratory.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **53** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

Core recovery is generally very good to excellent, allowing for representative samples to be taken and accurate analyses to be performed. Half-core samples, two metres long, were taken along the entire length of each hole.

Assaying procedures are generally similar to those used in all drilling campaigns to date with only minor modifications.

All iron formation intercepted from 1994 through 1996 was logged and split by hand on site. Sample lengths were generally less than 1m with wall rock samples ranging from 0.5 - 1m. These samples were analyzed at Bondar-Clegg in Vancouver using one-assay tonne (1AT) (29.16 g) fire assay fusion (FA) with an Atomic Absorption (AA) finish on a sub-sample from a 150 mesh pulp. It is not known if any quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) protocols were in place but it is reported that any erratic assay results were re-assayed (Blakley and Rennie, 2008). Bondar-Clegg, an ISO 9002 certified laboratory, was acquired by ALS Laboratory Group (ALS) in 2001.

Analytical samples from 2003 and 2004 were submitted to TSL laboratories (TSL), an ISO/IEC 17025 accredited facility, in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Sample shipment receipts were confirmed via fax by TSL. Samples were prepared and a 50 g (increased to 58.32 g in 2004) aliquot was subjected to FA with AA finish. Metallic screen fire assays were conducted for samples containing visible gold, high sulphide content or significant silicification as identified by the logging geologist. Any samples with results exceeding 7.5 g/t Au were re-assayed using a 50 g aliquot and FA with a gravimetric finish. Samples with results exceeding 20 g/t Au were re-assayed using a metallic screen fire assay. A sample of the pulp, created from each sample, was forwarded in 2003 to the Geoanalytical Laboratory of the Saskatchewan Research Council in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan where they were subjected to a 30 element ICP analysis using Aqua Regia (partial) digestion. In 2004 the pulp sample was sent to Acme Analytical Laboratories (Acme), an ISO/IEC 17025 accredited laboratory for standard 30 element ICP analysis using a three-acid digestion.

During the 2007 and 2008 drill programs, the Easy-mark core orientation system was used. Geotechnical loggers were responsible for reconstructing the orientation of the core and marking the "keel line" using the Easy-mark system. Structural measurements were made, at the discretion of the logging geologist, on the oriented core using the "alpha-beta" method. Magnetic susceptibility was then measured using a kappameter at 0.5 m intervals along the core in iron formation units and one metre intervals along the core in other units.

The 2007 and 2008 protocol for regular (i.e., non-high-grade) core comprised crushing to ~70% passing 10 mesh (1.7 mm) and the storage of the remaining material as a "coarse reject". Approximately 1,000 g of the crushed sample was pulverized to ~95% passing 150 mesh (106 µm). A 2AT aliquot was taken from the pulverized sample (pulp) and analyzed by standard FA with gravimetric finish. As in previous years, the threshold for re-analysis by metallic screen assay was 20 g/t Au or the presence of visible gold (i.e., high grade core samples). The metallic screen fire assay procedure comprised the sieving to completion of the 1,000 g pulp, analysis by FA with gravimetric finish of the entire coarse fraction, duplicate 2AT gravimetric fire assays on the minus fractions, and the averaging of the three results, by weight, to produce the final assay result. A small sub-sample from each pulp pulp sample was sent to Acme Analytical Laboratories (Acme), an ISO/IEC 17025 accredited laboratory for standard 30 element ICP analysis using a three-acid digestion.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **54** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

From 2010 through to 2021 completed sample shipments were sent to ALS Lab in either Yellowknife, Vancouver of Thunder Bay for preparation and then forwarded on to ALS in Vancouver, BC for and analysis. Once received at the lab the samples are logged into ALS's sample tracking system, dried and fine crushed to better than 90 percent passing 2 mm. The sample is then split using a riffle splitter and a 250 g portion is pulverized to better than 85 percent passing 75 m (ALS Sample Preparation Code Prep-33D). The pulverized samples were forwarded to ALS's analytical facility in Vancouver for analysis. ALS is an accredited laboratory, recognized under accreditation No. 579, and conforms with requirements of CAN-P-1599, CAN-P-4E (ISOMEC 17025-20905)).

In Vancouver, each sample was assayed for gold and analysed for a multi-element suite. Gold was determined by fire assay on a 30 g sample with an Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) finish (ALS Code Au-AA23). Samples assaying greater than 5 g/t Au were re-assayed with a gravimetric finish (ALS Code Au-Grav21). One kilogram of pulverized material from samples assaying greater than 20 g/t Au were re-assayed by screened metallics fire assay (ALS Code Au-SCR21).

A one-gram sample of pulverized material was analysed for a 48-element suite, including silver and copper, by ICP-MS after a four-acid digestion (ALS Code ME-MS61). Samples yielding analyses of silver greater than 100 ppm Ag were re-analyzed by HCl leach with AAS finish after a three-acid digestion (ALS Code Ag-OG62). Thirty grams of material yielding analyses of silver greater than 1,500 ppm Ag were fire assayed with a gravimetric finish (ALS Code Ag-GRA21).

Figure 13 depicts the Sample preparation and analyses undertaken by Fury for Diamond drill samples.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **55** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm019.jpg)

**Figure 12: RAB Drilling Sample Preparation and Analysis Flow Sheet**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **56** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm020.jpg)

**Figure 13: Diamond Drilling Sample Preparation and Analysis Flow Sheet**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **57** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.4.1 ***QC Sampling***

QC protocols were established in 2003 and carried through with minor refinements through the 2021 drilling program. CRMs were not introduced into rock grab or till sampling streams.

During the 2003 exploration program field blanks and CRMs representing 10% of the material assayed were inserted into the sample stream. The 2003 CRMs were internally developed with values established through round robin assaying at various laboratories.

In 2004 commercial CRMs were added in addition to the internal standards.

Quality Control (QC) samples were introduced into the sample stream at a rate of 5% for both blank samples and CRM samples. Field duplicates in the form of quarter sawn core samples, were introduced into the sample stream at a rate of 1 in 50 samples.

**8.5 Summary**

In the opinion of Mr. Atkinson the logging, sampling, assaying, and chain of custody protocols practiced through the history of the Project meet or exceed industry standards. The drill programs have been configured and carried out in a manner that is appropriate for the geometry of the deposit. Drill holes are oriented perpendicular to strike and aimed to intersect the zones at an angle generally greater than 45°. As such, the samples should be representative of the deposit as it is presently known, and suitable for use in Mineral Resource estimation.

Mr. Atkinson has reviewed the QC reports and files, as well as the laboratory procedures undertaken and concludes that the QC program for the Project is sufficient to support a Mineral Resource estimate. QC sample failures were dealt with on a case by case basis and were documented with commentary in the Dispatch Returns table within the database.

**9 Data Verification**

**9.1 Database Verification**

Comprehensive data verification was performed by David Ross, P.Geo, with RPA (now part of SLR Consulting Ltd.), as part of the 2017 Mineral Resource Estimate as outlined in supporting NI43-101 reports (Ross, 2017). These included checks against original data sources, standard database checks such as from/to errors and basic visual checks for discrepancies with respect to topography and drillhole deviations.

Mr. Atkinson has been personally involved in the integration and merging of the historical drill data into the current database. This work included relogging of historical holes in order to provide consistency of logging codes across all generations of drilling, as well as spot checks of drill core versus drill logs to verify the geologic model. During this process sample intervals were verified. Lastly, the assay database was compared to original assay certificates. No errors were found within the geologic or assay databases.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **58** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**9.2 2015 through 2021 Quality Assurance and Quality Control**

Fury's internal QA/QC procedures include the insertion of Certified Reference Materials (CRMs), field blanks and duplicates representing a minimum of 10% of samples assayed. When visible gold was observed additional CRMs and blanks were inserted immediately following the suspected high-grade to test lab contamination.

No blank material submitted returned assay values above the gold detection limit of the analytical methodology.

Analytical results for duplicate samples were reviewed and compared for any extreme outliers. Given the highly variable nature of gold mineralization duplicate analyses were used qualitatively in order to determine the degree of variance within the particular prospect being drilled.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.2.1 ***Certified Reference Material***

Internal Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) were inserted into the sample stream at a rate of 3%. The tolerance limits for accuracy were considered to be two standard deviation above or below the expected value. CRMs returning values outside of the defined tolerance limits were marked as failed and Fury requested the analytical laboratory to reassay the entire analytical batch that contained the failed standard. Tables 5 and 6 summarize the CRMs utilized during Fury's drilling programs.

**Table 7: Fury Internal CRMs for Diamond Drilling**

![](exhibit15-8xm013.jpg)

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **59** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 8: Fury Internal CRMs for RAB Drilling**

![](exhibit15-8xm014.jpg)

**9.3 Conclusions**

In Mr. Atkinson's opinion the data verification and QA/QC procedures being implemented by Fury meet or in most cases exceed industry best practices. The Committee Bay Project has seen consistent implementation of these practices from early on in the Project's history.

Since acquiring the Project, Fury has implemented strict scrutiny of the QA/QC results and has dealt with any notable issues directly with the analytical laboratory in a timely fashion.

The geological and assay databases are well maintained and the current protocols in place should ensure the database remains reasonably error free. The database in its present form is suitable for use in a Mineral Resource Estimation.

**10 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing**

The following summarizes the limited metallurgical testwork undertaken in 2003, 2008 and 2009 on material from the Three Bluffs deposit.

**10.1 2003**

Dawson Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc. (Dawson) of Salt Lake City, Utah, was commission in 2003 to conduct metallurgical tests on Three Bluffs mineralized material. Twelve drill core samples, eight high-grade and four low-grade, totalling approximately 20 kg were used. The resulting test specimens ranged in grade from 4.5 g/t Au to 5.6 g/t Au and testwork consisted of:

* Direct cyanide leach,

* Carbon-in-leach (CIL) cyanide leach of whole ore,

* Diagnostic sequence of amalgamation, magnetic separation and flotation,

* Diagnostic sequence of gravity concentration and flotation,

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **60** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

* Mineralogical examination.

The mineralogical study reported the principal sulphide minerals as pyrrhotite with minor pyrite. No reference was made to any deleterious elements in the samples.

The test indicated that 92% gold recovery could be achieved with cyanidation but the presence of pyrrhotite would result in high cyanide consumption.

Mercury amalgamation recovered 63% of the gold (i.e., the free gold). Magnetic separation of the pyrrhotite concentrate from the amalgamation tail recovered an additional 12.5%. The remaining material, when subjected to bulk sulphide flotation, yielded an additional 22% of the gold for a total recovery of 97.5%.

Gravity separation using a Knelson concentrator yielded 62% recovery. Bulk flotation of the gravity tail recovered an additional 28% for a total recovery of 90%.

The grade ranges and sulphide composition of the test samples were representative of the mineralization found at Three Bluffs. These preliminary tests suggest gold at Three Bluffs can be recovered using conventional methods.

**10.2 2008**

Mineral processing testwork comprising exploratory gravity concentration, cyanide leaching, and froth flotation studies were undertaken by Process Research Associates under the guidance of Scott Wilson RPA. The sample used was a 110 kg composite of drill core samples from the 2007 exploration program with an average estimated grade of 4.3 g/t Au and 7.5%S.

Additional gravity recovery testwork on Three Bluffs mineralization was performed by Knelson Research Technology Centre. An 18 kg sample, taken from a composite of coarse rejects sample material from 2007 drill core samples, was subjected to multi-pass testing utilizing a bench-scale enhanced gravity concentrator. The tests were designed to examine recovery trends for gold and gold-bearing sulphides.

The gold recovery results are summarized in Table 9. Based on the composite sample tested it was expected that Three Bluffs ore could be processed by various standard beneficiation steps to recover approximately 93% of the gold. The metallurgical test results indicated that a combination of gravity and flotation followed by cyanide leaching of the concentrate is likely the most suitable processing option.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **61** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm015.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 9: 2008 Gold Recovery Results**

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Process** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mass<br>(%)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Grade<br>(g/t Au)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Gold<br>Recovery<br>(%)** |
| Gravity Flotation (Locked Cycle) | &nbsp;&nbsp;18 | &nbsp;&nbsp;30.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;95.8 |
| Rougher Flotation Only | &nbsp;&nbsp;15 | &nbsp;&nbsp;60.5 | &nbsp;&nbsp;97.2 |
| Gravity Only | &nbsp;&nbsp;7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;47.7 | &nbsp;&nbsp;77.9 |
| Cyanide Leaching (72 hours) |  |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;94.6 |

---

**10.3 2009**

Follow-up work in 2009 was undertaken by PRA to look specifically at a flowsheet consisting of gravity recovery followed by cyanidation. These results were reported by PRA on May 6, 2009 and summarized below.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.1 ***Mineralogy***

Petrographic and X-ray diffraction analysis indicated the presence of sulphide minerals including mainly pyrrhotite and lesser pyrite. Thin section analysis indicated that some pyrite was contained within pyrrhotite fractures and some magnetite was intergrown in the pyrite which also contained some chalcopyrite and galena inclusions.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.2 ***Comminution***

PRA determined a grind size P80 of 75 μm is considered the most suitable grind. The Bond Ball-Mill Work Index determination indicated a moderately hard ore of 18.7 kWh/tonne.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.3 ***Gravity Recovery***

Gravity testing completed at the Knelson Research and Technology Centre (KRTC) yielded good results on a sample ground to a P80 of 141 μm. The gravity gold recovery from the multi-ass test was 77.9% in 7.0% concentrate mass, with 69.4% of the gold recovered in the initial pass containing 1.4% of the mass. The initial pass Knelson concentrate was 212 g/t Au and concentrating this by pan yielded 40 % of the total gold to a pan concentrate of 4,500 g/t. The calculated gold head grade was 4.3 g/t Au with a corresponding tailings grade of 1.0 g/t Au. The recovery to mass yield curve for gold and sulphur indicated that sulphur was upgraded very little initially but showed moderate upgrading at relatively higher concentrate yield from 4 % to 7 %. This indicated that gold bearing sulphides are not amenable to enhanced gravity separation and that batch concentration and not continuous gravity concentration should be utilized.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.4 ***Flotation***

PRA assembled a single composite sample from the 45 individual samples obtained from three drill holes from the 2007 drilling campaign: 07TB046, 07TB048, and 07TB054. The holes are all located in the central part of the hinge zone. The blended composite assayed: 4.3 g/t Au, <0.5 g/t Ag, 17.2% Fe, and 7.5% S. The composite sample is considered to be reasonably representative of the Life of Mine (LOM) production head grade. The calculated gold head-grades from the various tests showed considerable fluctuation from a low of 2.9 g/t Au to a high of 11.8 g/t Au, with an average calculated head grade of 5.6 g/t Au, 1.1 g/t Ag, and 7.8% S. This variation is likely attributable to the presence of coarser gold particles, indicating a significant nugget effect for Three Bluffs.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **62** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.5 ***Gravity-Flotation Batch Testing***

At a primary grind size P80 of 74 μm, gold was effectively extracted by gravity and flotation, with 96% of the gold recovered. Coarser grinding at a P80 of 103 μm and 135 μm showed that gold recovery was reduced.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.6 ***Gravity-Flotation Locked-Cycle Testing***

In a single Locked-Cycle test, a gravity circuit recovery of 60.5% gold in 0.22% of mass, followed by a cleaner flotation recovery of 35.3% gold in 17.7% of the mass, was obtained. Thus an overall gold recovery of 95.8% in 17.9% of the mass was shown to be possible. The gravity concentrate assayed 1,750 g/t Au, while the flotation concentrate assayed 11.4 g/t. Flotation provided significant sulphide concentration with sulphur recovery at 90.6% to a 35.7% S grade in the cleaned concentrate.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.7 ***Flotation Batch Testing***

Flotation recovery without gravity scalping was reasonably successful. Rougher flotation produced concentrate grades up to 60 g/t Au at 97.2% recovery at a primary grind size P80 of 74 μm. Tailings grades of 0.2 g/t Au were consistently obtained. Flotation testing was carried out using only xanthates and MIBC in roughing and with no pH modification. It is expected that future testing could further optimize the flotation circuit.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.3.8 ***Leaching***

**10.3.8.1 Concentrate Cyanide Leaching**

Flotation concentrate was subjected to cyanide leach test work. A total of eight concentrate leach tests were performed. After 120 hours of leaching at starting NaCN concentration levels of 1 g/t, gold extraction was typically >98%. In general, leaching kinetics were slow, although more favorable results were obtained with pre-aeration followed by continuous aeration. The best concentrate leach test provided 81% recovery after 48 hours and 89% recovery after 72 hours. Intensive cyanide leaching of concentrates at cyanide concentration levels in the order of 20 g/t should be investigated in future test work.

**10.3.8.2 Whole Ore Leaching**

A single whole ore cyanide leach test obtained 79.2% gold extraction after 48 hours and 94.6% after 72 hours. The cyanide consumption rate was high at 2.0 kg/t feed but was considerably lower than that observed in the Dawson work. Dawson obtained 91.8% recovery after 48 hours, but at a NaCN concentration of double that used by PRA.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **63** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The same composite sample from the 2008 test work was ground to a P80 size of 75 μm and subjected to cyanide leaching for 120 hours at a base concentration of 1.0 g/L NaCN. A series of diagnostic tests were conducted to see how varying conditions might impact on gold recovery results. Gravity gold recovery was fairly consistent with recoveries averaging 48.8% in approximately 0.14 of the mass after panning of Knelson concentrates. This falls along the same curve as produced from the KRTC test work. The gold grades of these concentrates are typically 1,300 g/t Au to 2,200 g/t Au. The cyanide leach extraction was significantly improved with aeration, with recoveries of 42% to 43% after 48 hours. The cyanide leach recovery after 72 hours was 47% to 48% in these two tests. The overall gold recovery can be increased to approximately 98.5% with leach times extended to 120 hours.

The lower cyanide concentration had only a minor impact on gold extraction. Finer grinding resulted in higher gravity gold recovery, but overall recovery was not significantly impacted. The cyanide consumption in the two tests with aeration was 1.83 g/t to 2.04 g/t after 48 hours and 2.38 g/t to 2.58 g/t after 72 hours. With lower cyanide concentration, the rates were reduced to 1.63 g/t after 48 hours. Lime consumption ranged from 0.12 kg/t to 0.31 kg/t to maintain a pH between 10 and 10.5.

**10.4 Conclusions**

The limited metallurgical testwork conducted to date suggests that a high proportion of the gold can be recovered by conventional means and the Three Bluffs material is relatively free-milling. Additional metallurgical testwork is recommended particularly to resolve the high cyanide consumption linked to the high pyrrhotite content.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **64** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**11 Mineral Resource Estimate**

Andrew J. Turner, B.Sc., P.Geol. Senior Geologist at APEX Geoscience Ltd. completed a review of the current MRE at Fury's Committee Bay Gold Project as part of the September 11, 2023 Technical Report (Atkinson and Turner, 2023). The below is a direct excerpt from the current NI43-101 Technical Report.

Mr. Turner was assisted by and directly supervised the work of Mr. Warren E. Black, M.Sc., P.Geo., a Resource Geologist and Geostatistician with APEX. Mr. Turner has reviewed the historic MRE at the Property and has evaluated and conducted new evaluations of their respective reasonable prospects for future economic extraction (RPEEE). After careful review of the work supporting the 2017 RPA report Mr. Turner has estimated mineral resources at the Three Bluffs deposit which are herein the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate.

Mr. Atkinson has been involved in the exploration programs at Committee Bay intermittently since 2003 and has reviewed and audited the resource models and resulting Mineral Resource Estimate included within the September 11, 2023 NI43-101 compliant technical Report and has concluded they meet the requirements set out in SK-1300 and as such takes responsibility for the resource statement.

There are three (3) previous MRE technical reports for the Committee Bay Gold Project, which are referred to or discussed and summarized in this Technical Report, which comprise:

* In 2012, RPA published an MRE based on the 2011 drilling program, with an effective date of December 31, 2011 (McDonough and Rennie, 2012) on behalf of North Country Gold (NCG).

* In 2013, RPA revised the 2012 MRE to incorporate data from a 2012 drilling program consisting of sixteen diamond drill holes that tested the down-dip extensions of the Three Bluffs zones. The effective date for this update was April 2013 (Rennie and McDonough, 2015) on behalf of NCG.

* In 2017, RPA updated the MRE using new cutoff grades, influenced by changes in metal prices, exchange rates, and operating costs, with an effective date of May 31, 2017 (Ross, 2017) on behalf of Fury. The 2017 update retained the database, estimation domains, and block model from the 2015 MRE because the drilling conducted by Fury post-2015 MRE was outside the resource area.

* In 2023, Fury and APEX reviewed and updated the 2017 MRE with an effective date of July 22, 2023 (Atkinson and Turner, 2023). The 2023 update retained the database, estimation domains and block models from the 2017 MRE as all exploration completely subsequent to the effective date of that report was outside of the resource area.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **65** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**11.1 Summary of the 2013 and 2017 MRE**

The following is a summary of the database, estimation domains, geostatistics, and gold estimation strategy described by Rennie and McDonough (2015):

* The drilling database (DHDB) comprised 353 holes, 58,222.9 meters, and 32,047 assays.

* Fury delineated 17 estimation domains within three areas: Hinge Zone, Antler Gap, and Antler. The mineralization occurs in east-west, nearly vertical, sulphide-rich iron formations. Three domains (North Limb, South Limb, Hinge) form a tight, east-plunging anticline in the Hinge Zone. Additional, less consistent zones parallel the main structure on both the north and south sides. Antler Gap and Antler feature steeply dipping mineralized planes.

* Two sets of estimation domains were utilized: one with a cutoff grade of 0.5 g/t Au (OP domains) and another with 1.0 g/t Au (UG domains). The former is used for open-pit mining with a minimum width of five meters, and the latter for underground mining with a two-meter constraint. The OP domains fully encapsulate the UG domains.

* There are 4,819 assays within UG domains.

* Raw assays have cap limits of 75 g/t Au within the hinge domain (code 103), , 50 g/t within the limb domains (north-101, south-102), and 30 g/t Au within the remaining domains.

* The treatment of missing intervals in the assay database is not specified.

* The authors composited raw assays to 1.5 m lengths, excluding orphan samples shorter than 0.5 m from estimations. It is not clear if two different composites were created for each of the domain sets or just one.

* Variography used all composite data within the UG estimation domains. Rennie and McDonough (2015) described attempts to establish robust variography using correlograms and pairwise relative variograms. Ultimately, the authors settled on 40 x 10 x 5 ranges with the following directions of continuity: 284/-35 (major), 277/54 (minor), and 012/03 (vertical).

* The block model dimensions were 10 m (X) by 2 m (Y) by 10 m (Z) and followed the property survey grid without rotation. Any block within the defined grid that touched the estimation domain wireframes was included within the model. The percentage of each block's volume within the wireframes was calculated.

* The percent block model dimensions were 10m (X) x 2m (Y) x 10m (Z) and aligned with the property survey grid. Any block that touched the wireframe estimation domains was included.

* A 3-pass ID3 method estimated gold grades using domain-specific composites. Two separate block models were created for both OP and UG domains. Estimation of the Hinge domain could consider composites from the limb domains.

* The density used was 3.15 g/cm³, which was derived from 6,426 density measurements collected from core samples.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **66** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

* Blocks within 75m of a composite are inferred, while those within 25m of a composite with 3 drill holes are indicated. Indicated blocks are manually grouped in areas of consistent drilling density.

* A Whittle Pit was constructed to establish RPEEE for OP resources using a gold sale price of $1,500/oz, 50-degree overall pit slope, 93% gold recovery rate, $5/ton mining cost, and $60/ton for processing and G&A. Blocks from the OP model within the pit shell with an estimated grade above the cutoff of 1.35 g/t Au were reported as OP resources.

* Blocks from the UG model below the pit shell with an estimated grade above the 2.5 g/t Au cutoff were reported as UG resources. The higher cutoff grade was derived by adding an increment of $50/t to the mining costs used in the pit optimization to account for the additional underground mining cost.

The following is a summary of the grade cutoffs established by Ross (2017):

* The reporting cutoff grades were updated to 3.0 g/t Au for open-pit and 4.0 g/t Au for underground mining. Assumptions included a gold sale price of $1,200/oz, 93% process recovery, open-pit mining cost of C$10/t, underground mining cost of C$70/t, process and G&A costs of C$75/t, and an exchange rate of 1.25 US$/C$.

* Ross (2017) did not update the approach used to establish RPEEE for both the OP and UG resources from the 2015 MRE. The same pit shell used for the 2015 MRE was used to constrain the 2017 MRE.

**11.2 APEX Validation of the 2017 MRE**

Mr. Turner reviewed the drilling database and mineral resource estimate for the Committee Bay Gold Project MRE, as stated in Ross (2017). The following is a summary of those validations.

**Drillhole Database**

The Drillhole database provided by Fury to APEX comprises 266 drillholes with 7,847 assays within the OP domains, totalling 7,124.58 m. Most sample intervals are less than or equal to 1.5 m in length (Figure 14).

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **67** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm022.jpg)

![](exhibit15-8xm023.jpg)

**Figure 14: Interval lengths of raw assays within the OP and UG domains.**

A total of 10 intervals in the OP estimation domains and 4 intervals in the UG domains were not sampled, totalling 21.89 m and 18.53 m, respectively, comprising only 0.3% and 0.43% of all drillhole intersections in OP and UG domains (Figure 15). Mr. Turner assumes these unsampled intervals are due to recovery issues; however, if they are selective sampling, their treatment, or lack there of, would not materially affect the MRE.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **68** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm024.jpg)

![](exhibit15-8xm025.jpg)

**Figure 15: Lengths of missing sample intervals within the OP and UG domains.**

**Compositing**

Composites with a length of 1.5 m were calculated using the OP domains, and each was flagged according to the domain its centroid lies within. Because the OP domains fully encapsulate the UG domains, composites within the OP domains include all composites used for UG resource estimation. The lengths of the final composites and the percentage of orphans (composites with a length of less than 5 m) are illustrated in Figure 16**.**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **69** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm026.jpg)![](exhibit15-8xm027.jpg)

**Figure 16: Lengths of calculated composites within the OP and UG domains.**

**Capping**

Mr. Turner used a different capping approach than Ross (2017), preferring to cap composites instead of raw assays. Mr. Turner used probability plots to determine outlier values (Figure 17) and found that high-grade samples in the hinge and south limb domains behaved similarly and could be grouped, leading to a 50 g/t Au cap. Due to insufficient composites or similar behavior in high-grade samples, a cap of 15.5 g/t Au was deemed suitable for the remaining domains.

The impact of the different capping approaches needs to be evaluated in the context of declustering, to be discussed later. That said, the capping levels used by Ross are reasonable, given that Ross capped raw assays and that higher capping levels could be justified by the data illustrated in Figure 17.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **70** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm028.jpg)

![](exhibit15-8xm029.jpg)

**Figure 17: The probability plots used to evaluate potential outliers and capping levels.**

**Variography**

Experimental semi-variograms for each domain are calculated along the major, minor, and vertical principal directions of continuity that are defined by three Euler angles. Euler angles describe the orientation of anisotropy as a series of rotations (using a left-hand rule) that are as follows:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. Angle 1: A rotation about the Z-axis (azimuth) with positive angles being clockwise rotation and negative representing counter-clockwise rotation;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2. Angle 2: A rotation about the X-axis (dip) with positive angles being counter-clockwise rotation and negative representing clockwise rotation; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3. Angle 3: A rotation about the Y-axis (tilt) with positive angles being clockwise rotation and negative representing counter-clockwise rotation.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **71** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

APEX personnel calculated standardized experimental correlograms using composites, without orphans, flagged within the OP domains. APEX's variogram analysis yielded similar ranges to Ross (2017). However, APEX utilized the orientation of the hinge plunge 084/20 to define the major direction of continuity, with the third rotation angle being defined by the dip of the limbs. APEX's variography is detailed in Table 10 and Figure 18.

![](exhibit15-8xm030.jpg)

**Figure 18: Gold Variograms**

**Table 10: Gold Variogram Parameters.**

![](exhibit15-8xm031.jpg)

**Declustering and Final Composite Statistics**

The original methodology used for declustering in Ross (2017) was not explicitly stated. Therefore, APEX independently evaluated declustering and calculated weights for each composite using cell declustering with a cell size of 120 m. When comparing the final capped and declustered summary statistics, minor differences were observed between those calculated by APEX, summarized in Table 11 and Figure 19, and those presented in Ross (2017). The differences are not considered materially significant despite these discrepancies, which are likely due to differences in the capping strategy, declustering technique, and software used to generate the composites.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **72** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 11: Composite Gold (ppm) Statistics for (Note: statistics consider declustering weights, capping, and exclude orphans)**

![](exhibit15-8xm032.jpg)

![](exhibit15-8xm033.jpg)

**Figure 19: Cumulative distribution functions of the final capped and declustered composites, excluding orphans.**

**Estimation Strategy Review**

The Ross (2017) MRE utilized the ID3 algorithm with static search orientations tailored to each domain. The three-pass strategy was restrictive regarding the number of composites that could be utilized during estimation, which would help control grade smoothing during estimation. APEX's variography assessment validates that the search ranges utilized are within reason.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **73** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

In summary, while the estimation strategy appears adequate, the approach could be further optimized. Incorporating robust variography and kriging methods, along with locally varying anisotropy, could enhance the precision and reliability of future MRE assessments.

**Visual Validation**

Visually, the block model grades align well with the drill hole assays, capturing local high-low grade zones and varying mineralization orientations.

**MRE Table Reproduction**

APEX reproduced the OP and UP resources reported by Ross (2017) with a margin of less than 1%, utilizing the block model and open pit shell calculated during the 2015 MRE.

**Conclusion**

Based on Mr. Turner's validation, the Ross (2017) estimation methodology adequately defines the amount of ore tonnes and contained metal within the deposit; therefore, the differences in approaches explored by APEX would not result in any material change in the reported MRE. After careful review of the work supporting the 2017 RPA report Mr. Turner has estimated mineral resources at the Three Bluffs deposit which are herein the 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate.

**11.3 Cutoff Grades**

The Ross (2017) Three Bluffs MRE was calculated and reported using cutoff grades of 3.0 g/t Au for the open pittable portion of the deposit and 4.0 g/t Au for the underground portion of the deposit. The following economic assumptions were reported:

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameters** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Unit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Value** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Gold Price | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/oz | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1500 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Exchange Rate | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/C$ | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Process Recovery | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;% | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;93 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mining Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/t mined | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Processing + G&A Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/t | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Overall Pit Slope Angles | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;degrees | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;50 |

---

**11.4 Mineral Resource Reporting**

The following section discusses an examination of the RPEEE of the Committee Bay Gold Project MRE and the resource statements. The resource estimates are stated following the S-K 1300 rules for disclosure, which are consistent with the CIM "Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines" dated November 29, 2019, and CIM "Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves" dated May 10, 2014.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **74** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.1 ***Search Strategy***

The grade interpolation was run in three passes using search ranges that were derived primarily from the ranges of the variogram model. The across-strike search distance (i.e. the 5 m distance) was deliberately made longer than the variograms would dictate in order to better cope with small-scale inflections in the zone orientations. The orientation of the search ellipsoid was dictated by the interpreted local strike and dip of the wireframe models. Three different orientations were used: 100°/-80°NE, 090°/-90°, and 075°/-80°SE.

The first pass used an ellipsoid measuring 15 m x 15 m x 5 m, which was approximately half of the range of the variogram model. The interpolation required a minimum of two composites and a maximum of six, with no more than two composites from any one drill hole.

The second pass was carried out at a maximum range of 30 m x 30 m x 10 m. This is roughly equivalent to the variogram model range, except in the across-strike direction, which was deliberately exaggerated. The same composite selection constraints were applied for the second pass as for the first pass.

The range for the third pass was slightly more than double the variogram range. This was done in order to capture at least two drill holes for the interpolation. The drill section spacing is approximately 50 m to 60 m for most of the deposit. In the more densely drilled Hinge area, the spacing has been reduced to a nominal 25 m. A 75 m search tends to conveniently capture two drill holes in those portions of the deposit drilled at the 60 m spacing.

For the third pass, a minimum of two and maximum of 12 composites were required, with a maximum of two composites from a single drill hole.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.4.2 ***2023 Mineral Resource Estimates Classification***

Resource blocks were classified as Indicated, or Inferred, depending on the confidence level of the estimate. There were no Measured Mineral Resources. The classification criteria are as follows:

* All blocks that were captured in the search and received an estimate during the grade interpolation were assigned to at least an Inferred category (maximum of 75 m from the nearest composite).

* Blocks estimated by at least three drill holes and located less than 25 m from the nearest composite were nominally assigned to the Indicated category.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **75** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The blocks were then inspected in section views in order to define reasonably coherent volumes of Indicated blocks with a more or less uniform density of drilling. Wireframe models were constructed to capture the Indicated blocks. Isolated blocks, with the preliminary Indicated classification but located outside of these volumes, were manually reclassified to Inferred. Similarly, a few Inferred blocks contained within the Indicated volumes were reclassified to Indicated.

11.4.3 ***Open Pit Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction***

To demonstrate that the Committee Bay Gold Project MRE has Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction (RPEEE) in an open pit mining scenario, the MRE block model was subjected to pit optimization by Ross (2017). Pit optimization was completed using the parameters detailed in Table 12.

**Table 12: Parameters Used for Open Pit Resource Estimate (Ross, 2017).**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Parameters** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Unit** | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;**Value** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Gold Price | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/oz | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1500 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Exchange Rate | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/C$ | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.75 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Process Recovery | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;% | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;93 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mining Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/t mined | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Processing + G&A Cost | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;US$/t | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;60.00 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Overall Pit Slope Angles | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;degrees | &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;50 |

---

As discussed in section 11.3 above, the economic parameters and assumptions used in the evaluation of the open pittable resource at Three Bluffs are in line with other such recently reported assessments for comparable projects in Nunavut. As a result, APEX (QP Mr. Turner, B.Sc., P.Geol.) considers the parameters presented in Table 12 appropriate to evaluate the reasonable prospect for eventual economic extraction of the open pittbale portion of the Three Bluffs MRE at the Committee Bay Gold Project.

11.4.4 ***Underground Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction***

To demonstrate that the Committee Bay Gold Project MRE has RPEEE in an underground mining scenario, APEX personnel evaluated the UG domain thicknesses and considered the blocks' continuity above the 4 g/t Au underground cutoff to ensure that the reported resources are within minable shapes.

APEX personnel evaluated the block model to examine the continuity of blocks over an assumed 1.5 m minimum mining width. Although some discontinuous blocks were observed, most mineralized blocks above cutoff grade were found to be continuous within potentially mineable stope shapes with minimum thicknesses ≥ 1.5m.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **76** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The mining method was assumed to combine shrinkage or long-hole stoping for steeper dipping zones and cut and fill mining for flatter-lying portions of the deposits.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **77** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm034.jpg)

**Figure 20: View of the Committee Bay Deposit Illustrating Grade Continuity of Resource Blocks Above Cutoff (≥ 4.0 g/t Au) and Potential Mineable Shapes.**

Note: Orientated along A-A' looking 52 degrees Northeast. Black outlines illustrate potential minable shapes.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **78** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

3![](exhibit15-8xm035.jpg)

**Figure 21: View of the Committee Bay Deposit Illustrating Grade Continuity of Resource Blocks Above Cutoff (≥ 4.0 g/t Au) and Potential Mineable Shapes.**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **79** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

![](exhibit15-8xm036.jpg)

**Figure 22: View of the Committee Bay Deposit Illustrating Grade Continuity of Resource Blocks Above Cutoff (>4.0 g/t Au) and Potential Mineable Shapes.**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **80** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

Mr. Turner, B.Sc., P.Geol. considers the minimum thickness of the UG estimation domains and the continuity of the estimated blocks above the UG cutoff grade of 4.0 g/t Au sufficient to establish potential mineable shapes. Isolated blocks outside of the potential minable shapes outlined in Figures 20 through 22 do not constitute a material change to the reported resources.

11.4.5 ***Classification Definitions***

A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the application of modifying factors to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to confirm geological and grade or quality continuity between observation points. A measured mineral resource has a higher level of confidence than that applying to either an indicated mineral resource or an inferred mineral resource. It may be converted to a proven or probable mineral reserve.

An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between observation points. An indicated mineral resource has a lower confidence level than a measured mineral resource and may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve.

An inferred mineral resource is part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade, or quality are estimated based on limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity. An inferred mineral resource has a lower confidence level than an indicated mineral resource and must not be converted to a mineral reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of inferred mineral resources could be upgraded to indicated mineral resources with continued exploration.

11.4.6 ***Committee Bay Gold Project Mineral Resource Statements***

The current Committee Bay Gold Project MRE is tabulated below. The resource estimates are stated following the SEC's S-K 1300 rules for disclosure which are consistent with the CIM "Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines" dated November 29, 2019, and CIM "Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves" dated May 10, 2014. The effective date of the resource is December 31, 2023.

As discussed above, Mr. Atkinson has completed a review of the Committee Bay Gold Project MRE concerning their specific estimation parameters and assumptions and their (current) reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. As a result of this review, the authors of this Report accept the Committee Bay Gold Project MRE tabulated below as current.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **81** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 13: Summary of Current Committee Bay Gold Project Mineral Resources.**

---

| | | | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Classification** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Mining<br>Scenario** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Au Cutoff**<br>**(g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Tonnes**<br>**(000 t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Average Gold**<br>**(g/t)** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Contained Au**<br>**(troy ounces)** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;OP | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;1761.9 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.72 | &nbsp;&nbsp;437467 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Indicated** | &nbsp;&nbsp;UG | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;313 | &nbsp;&nbsp;8.57 | &nbsp;&nbsp;86368 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2075** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**7.85** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**523835** |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;OP | &nbsp;&nbsp;3.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;592.4 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.57 | &nbsp;&nbsp;144126 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Inferred** | &nbsp;&nbsp;UG | &nbsp;&nbsp;4.0 | &nbsp;&nbsp;2342 | &nbsp;&nbsp;7.65 | &nbsp;&nbsp;576238 |
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**2934** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**7.63** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**720364** |

---

*Notes:*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*8. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves as they do not have demonstrated economic viability, although, as per S-K 1300 requirements, which are consistent with CIM requirements, the Mineral Resources reported above have been determined to have demonstrated reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*9. The Mineral Resources were estimated in accordance with* the definitions for mineral resources in S-K 1300, which are consistent with *the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions (2014) and Best Practices Guidelines (2019) prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*10. The Mineral Resources Committee Bay Gold Project was initially reported in Ross (2017) - QP David A. Ross, M.Sc., P.Geo, effective date of May 31, 2017.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*11. The resources reported above are reviewed in detail within this Report and are accepted as current by the Qualified Person, Mr. Bryan Atkinson, P.Geo, Senior Vice-President, Exploration of the Company.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*12. The Cutoff grades were determined using average block grade values within the estimation domains and an Au price of US$1,200/oz, and Process Recovery of 93%, Open Pit mining costs of C$10.00/t, Underground mining costs of C$70.00/t, Process and G&A costs of approximately C$75/t and an exchange rate of 1.25 US$/C$.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*13. A bulk density values value of 3.15 t/m*<sup>*3*</sup> *was assigned based on available SG measurements.*

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;*14. Differences may occur in totals due to rounding.*

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **82** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**11.5 Risks and Uncertainties**

Metallurgical characterization has not yet been definitively established at any of the deposits on the Committee Bay Gold Project. Further metallurgical test work is recommended to increase the understanding of the mineralization and to better delineate any zones with low (poor) recovery that would help increase confidence in the resources for the Committee Bay Gold Project.

Modelling gold deposits in greenstone belts, such as Committee Bay's project, inherently carries geological risks. Given the complexity related to geological and mineralization continuity, these risks are heightened when dealing with BIF-hosted gold. Generally, broader zones with dense vein networks and structural features conducive to mineralization are easier to map, thus lessening uncertainty. Making sense of sporadic drillhole intercepts from discrete veins or vein zones poses a more significant challenge.

For open-pit resources, like some found at Committee Bay, the risk is lower than underground operations. Less selectivity in mining reduces the overall geological risk. Effective de-risking involves rigorous interpretation.

Modern, multi-orientation drilling supports current interpretations of mineralization domains, which is vital for BIF-hosted gold. However, some areas with sparse drilling could impact these interpretations upon further exploration.

Mr. Turner is unaware of any other significant material risks to the MRE besides the inherent risks to mineral exploration and development in general. The authors of this Report are not aware of any specific environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political or other relevant factors that might materially affect the results of this resource estimate, and there appear to be no apparent impediments to developing the MRE at the Committee Bay Gold Project.

**12 Mineral Reserve Estimates**

Due to the early stage of the Project there are no mineral reserve estimates.

**13 Mining Methods**

Due to the early stage of the Project no studies regarding mining methodology have been completed.

**14 Processing and Recovery Methods**

Due to the early stage of the Project no studies regarding recovery methods have been completed.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **83** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**15 Infrastructure**

Due to the early stage of the Project no studies regarding the required infrastructure for future development have been completed.

**16 Market Studies**

Due to the early stage of the Project no Market studies have been completed.

**17 Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups**

Due to the early stage of the Project this section is not applicable.

**18 Capital and Operating Costs**

Due to the early stage of the Project this section is not applicable.

**19 Economic Analysis**

Due to the early stage of the Project this section is not applicable.

**20 Adjacent Properties**

None of the adjacent claims are known to host mineralized zones comparable to the Three Bluffs deposit. No reliance was placed on any information from adjacent properties in the estimation and preparation of the resources reported in this technical report. Adjacent properties are therefore not deemed material to this report.

**21 Other Relevant Data and Information**

Mr. Atkinson is not aware of any additional data or information available for disclosure.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **84** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**22 Interpretation and Conclusions**

The Project covers the Committee Bay Greenstone Belt which hosts a regionally significant and highly prospective corridor for gold. The CBGB is part of the Archean Prince Albert Group within the Western Churchill geologic Province. The majority of the gold mineralization identified to date within the CBGB is hosted in silicate, oxide, and/or sulphide facies iron formation. Gold mineralization has also been identified in shear hosted quartz veins in sediments and volcanic rocks throughout the belt. The CBGB hosts over 40 showings, the most advanced being the Three Bluffs deposit. Gold mineralization has also recently been identified within deformed meta sedimentary rocks in shear zones sub-parallel to iron formation hosted mineralization.

Drilling at the Three Bluffs deposit has identified gold mineralization with suitable continuity, grade and size to be potentially economically extracted. High-grade mineralization at the deposit is associated with two distinct styles of mineralization; intense sulphidization and silicification of banded iron formation as well as within sericite altered highly sheared meta-sediments. The two styles of mineralization are sub-parallel with the sheared metasediments defining a regional shear zone. The sheared metasediment hosted gold mineralization represents and underexplored style of mineralization within the entire CBGB.

The 2023 Mineral Resource Estimate (2023 MRE) has been prepared in accordance with S-K 1300 standards, which are consistent with the 2019 CIM Best Practice Guidelines for mineral resource estimation. The wireframe grade shell models represent the drilled mineralization and are suitable for use in block model estimations. The Three Bluffs deposit meets the criteria of reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction in the combined open pit and underground portions of the MRE. Relatively high cut-off grades of 3.0 g/t Au for the open pit and 4.0 g/t for the underground resource were selected for reporting the Three Bluffs MRE due to the modelled mineralization showing reasonable continuity at higher grades. The open pit portion of the Mineral Resource is constrained within a conceptual pit shell. The underground portion of the resource is constrained within a 1.0 g/t grade shell wireframe constructed with a minimum 2m width in mind. Both the conceptual pit shell and underground grade shell wireframes represent potentially mineable shapes. The remote nature of the Three Bluffs deposit lends itself to economic extraction through a low tonnage high grade scenario as assumed by the current MRE. By way of comparison, Agnico Eagles Amaruq Nunuvut project is in production and is estimated to contain open pit proven and probable mineral reserves of 1.4 million ounces of gold (12.4 million tonnes grading 3.56 g/t gold) (Website Source: <u>Agnico Eagle Mines Limited - Operations - Operations - Meadowbank Complex</u>)

The current Three Bluffs deposit Mineral Resource Estimate is reported at cut-off grades of 3.0 g/t Au for open pit and 4.0 g/t Au for underground. Combined open pit and underground Indicated Mineral Resources are estimated to total 2.07 Mt at an average grade of 7.85 g/t Au containing 524,000 ounces gold. At the same cut-off grades, the combined open pit and underground Inferred Mineral Resources are estimated to total 2.93 Mt at an average grade of 7.64 g/t Au containing 720,000 ounces gold. The open pit resources were constrained by a preliminary pit shell generated in Whittle software. Underground resources are reported at the high cut-off grade outside of the pit shell.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **85** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

The preliminary metallurgical work completed to date indicates that gold can be recovered using conventional methods utilizing combined gravity and flotation followed by a cyanide leach.

There are numerous known gold occurrences along the CBGB all within the current Project area. Several of these occurrences have returned broad anomalous zones of gold mineralization from limited drilling. In addition to the known gold occurrences their remain several regional gold in till and boulder anomalies that have not been linked to a bedrock source. There is potential to discover additional gold mineralization while building on the known occurrences and the Three Bluffs deposit to add to the current resource base on the Project.

**23 Recommendations**

Based on the results presented in this report, follow up of several of the anomalies (geochemical, geophysical) is warranted. Further work is recommended at the Three Bluffs Deposit aimed at defining the importance of the newly identified gold mineralization hosted in deformed metasediments. Additionally, gold mineralization hosted within metasedimentary rocks has not been a target of previous exploration activities and needs to be looked at from a regional sense. Several unexplained gold in till anomalies could potentially be sourced from metasedimentary lithological units proximal to shear zones. The extensive systematic regional exploration database compiled through work completed by Fury should be revisited as a priority to identify potential areas that were previously overlooked due to the focus being on iron formation hosted gold mineralization. Phase 1 of the recommended work program will include a desktop review of the regional dataset with a focus on mapping out shear zones and highlighting unsourced regional geochemical anomalies. The field component of the Phase 1 program will consist of drilling at the Three Bluffs deposit, detailed till sampling and mapping at the targets identified from the desktop work.

The Phase 1 program will result in the collection of approximately 15,000 detailed till samples as well as 7,500m of diamond drilling at the Three Bluffs deposit following up on the 2021 drilling in an effort to tie it back into the resource as well as continued stepouts along the mineralized metasedimentary unit. The Phase 1 program is estimated to cost approximately $5 million dollars (Table 18). The estimated costs of the recommended work program are derived from the Authors extensive knowledge of working in Nunavut gained over the past 20 years with upward adjustment for the current supply and labour markets.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **86** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 14: Phase 1 Recommended Work Program**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cost<br>Estimate<br>(C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | &nbsp;&nbsp;350000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | &nbsp;&nbsp;150000 |
| Drilling | Three Bluffs Diamond Drilling | &nbsp;&nbsp;1650000 |
| Till Sampling | Detailed sampling program | &nbsp;&nbsp;120000 |
| Land Management | Consultants. Assessment Filing, Lease Payments | &nbsp;&nbsp;250000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | &nbsp;&nbsp;30000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | &nbsp;&nbsp;35000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;15000 |
| Expediting | Expediting (Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Churchill) | &nbsp;&nbsp;150000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Fright, Travel, Helicopter, Fixed Wing | &nbsp;&nbsp;450000 |
| Fuel |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;1000000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | &nbsp;&nbsp;100000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**4550000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | &nbsp;&nbsp;455000 |
| **Total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**5005000** |

---

A Phase 2 exploration program will be drill intensive. An additional 10,000 - 15,000m of diamond drilling should be completed at the Three Bluffs deposit to explore the down dip potential of the limb mineralization as well as tying in the newly identified shear zone hosted mineralization with the ultimate goal of updating the Mineral Resource Estimate. An additional 10,000m of drilling should be allocated to regional targets defined from the Phase 1 program. The Phase 2 program is estimated to cost between $15 and $20 million (Table 19). The estimated costs of the recommended work program are derived from the Authors extensive knowledge of working in Nunavut gained over the past 20 years with upward adjustment for the current supply and labour markets.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **87** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Table 15: Phase 2 Recommended Work Program**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp;**Type** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Details** | &nbsp;&nbsp;**Cost<br>Estimate<br>(C$)** |
| Labour | Staff Wages, Technical and Support Contractors | &nbsp;&nbsp;1750000 |
| Drilling | Diamond Drilling at Three Bluffs and regional | &nbsp;&nbsp;6500000 |
| Assaying | Sampling and Analytical | &nbsp;&nbsp;750000 |
| Community Relations | Community Tours, Outreach | &nbsp;&nbsp;50000 |
| Information Technology | Remote site communications and IT | &nbsp;&nbsp;150000 |
| Safety | Equipment, Training and Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;75000 |
| Expediting | Expediting (Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Churchill) | &nbsp;&nbsp;550000 |
| Camp Costs | Equipment, Maintenance, Food, Supplies | &nbsp;&nbsp;1250000 |
| Freight and Transportation | Fright, Travel, Helicopter, Fixed Wing | &nbsp;&nbsp;1950000 |
| Fuel |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;2750000 |
| General and Administration | General and Administration | &nbsp;&nbsp;400000 |
| **Sub-total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**16175000** |
| Contingency (10%) | Contingency (10%) | &nbsp;&nbsp;1617500 |
| **Total** |  | &nbsp;&nbsp;**17792500** |

---

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **88** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**24 References**

Atkinson, B., and Turner, A. (2023): Technical Report on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada. A technical report prepared by Fury Gold Mines Ltd. and APEX Geoscience Ltd. for Fury Gold Mines Ltd.

Bethune, K, M, and Scammell, R.J.M. (1997): Precambrian geology, Koch Island area, District of Franklin (part of NTS 37C), Northwest Territories. Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 3391, 4 sheets (including marginal notes), 1:50,000 scale.

Bilodeau, D. P., Badiu, R., McMullen, P., & Leetmaa, K. (2018). Technical Report on the Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves at Meadowbank Gold Complex including the Amaruq Satellite Mine Development, Nunavut, Canada as of December 31, 2017. Agnico Eagle Mines Limited.

Blakley, I., and Rennie, D., 2008, Technical Report on the Mineral Resource Estimate for the Three Bluffs Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada, Prepared by Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates Inc. for Committee Bay Resources Ltd., 98 p.

Hartlaub, R.P., Heaman, L.M., Ashton, K.E. and Chacko, T., 2001: The Murmac Group, Rae Province: record of a giant Archean rift? In 4th International Archean Symposium 2001, Extended Abstracts, K.F. Cassidy, J.M. Dunphy and M.J. van Kranendonk (eds.); Australian Geological Survey Organization - Geoscience Australia, Record 2001/37, pp. 317-318.

Heywood, W.W., and Schau, M., 1978: A Subdivision of the Northern Churchill Structural Province. Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 78-1A, pp. 139-143.

Larouche, J., Caron, D., Connell, L., Laflamme, D., Robichaud, F., Petrucci, F., & Proulx, A. (2015). Updated Technical Report on the Meliadine Gold Project, Nunavut, Canada. Agnico Eagle Mines Limited. February 11, 2015

Lawson, G., King, D., Redmond, D., Barron, B., and Raponi, T.R. (2015). NI 43-101 Technical Report On The Hope Bay Property, Nunavut, Canada. Prepared by TMAC Resources. Effective date: March 30, 2020.

Rennie, D.W., and McDonough, B., 2015, Technical Report on the Three Bluffs Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada. A technical report prepared by RPA Inc. for North Country Gold Corp.

Rennie, D. W., and McDonough, B., 2012, Technical Report on the Three Bluffs Projects, Nunavut Territory, Canada. A technical report prepared by RPA Inc. for North Country Gold Corp., 163 p.

Ross, D.A., 2017, Technical Report on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada. A technical report prepared by RPA Inc. for North Country Gold Corp., 161p.

Schau, M. (1982) Metamorphism of the Prince Albert Group, District of Keewatin; Geol. Surv., Canada, Paper 78-10, pp. 203-213.

Skulski, T., Sanborn-Barrie, M., MacHattie, T., Young, M., Carson, C., Berman, R., Brown, J.,Rayner, N., Panagapko, D., Byrne, D., and Deyell, C., 2003: Bedrock geology of the Ellis Hills map area and new constraints on the regional geology of the Committee Bay area, Nunavut; Geological Survey of Canada, Current Research 2003-C22, 11p.

Thibodeau, D., Shannon, J.M., Nussipakynova, D., Klabenes, J., Mostert, M., Farmer, N., Freudigmann, S., Peacock, B., Cook, R., Blackwell, A., Dawson, M., Benjamin, V., Kurylo, J., and Teymouri, S. (2021). National Instrument (NI) 43-101 Technical Report: 2021 Updated Feasibility Study for the Goose Project at the Back River Gold District, Nunavut, Canada. Prepared for Sabina Gold & Silver Corp. Effective date: January 15, 2021.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **89** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

Turner, A.J., 2010, Technical Report on 2007-2009 Exploration at the Committee Bay Project, Kitikmeot Region, Nunavut Territory, Canada. A technical report prepared by APEX Geoscience Ltd. for CBR Gold Corp., 182 p.

Zaleski, E., Davis, W.J., and Sandeman, H.A., 2001: Continental extension, mantle magmas and basement cover relationships, in International Archean Symposium 2001, Extended Abstracts, K.F. Cassidy, J.M. Dunphy and M.J. van Kranendonck (eds.): Australian Geological Survey Organization - Geoscience Australia, Record 2001/37, pp. 374-376.

**25 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant**

Mr. Atkinson as a full time employee of the Registrant, Fury, does not claim reliance on any other party with respect to the information provided or the opinions expressed herein, having reviewed, and found satisfactory such corporate and other documentation as deemed necessary to assume responsibility for such information and opinions as are expressed herein.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **90** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**26 DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE**

This report entitled "*S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavat, Canada*" with an effective date of December 31, 2023 and an issue date of March 13, 2024 was prepared and signed by:

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
|  | ![](exhibit15-8xm037.jpg) |
| Signed: |  |

---

**Bryan Atkinson, P. Geo.**<br>**Senior Vice-President, Exploration, Fury Gold Mines Limited**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **91** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------

Technical Report Summary on the Committee Bay Project, Nunavut Territory, Canada

**Appendix 1 - Committee Bay Claims and Leases**

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| **March 13, 2024** | **92** |
| ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) | ![](exhibit15-8xm021.jpg) |

---

------