Corvus Gold Announces Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) Results for the North Bullfrog Project, Nevada

June 16, 2015


Highlights (all figures in constant 2015 US dollars)

  • Pre-Tax Total Cash Flow: $479M at $1,200 gold, IRR of 53%
  • NPV(5% post-tax): $246M at $1,200 gold, IRR of 38%
  • Projected average annual production: 149 k ounces gold per year for first 6 years dropping to 68.5 k ounces gold per year for the remaining 4 years
  • Project silver production of 2.49 M ounces LOM
  • Cash Cost per gold ounce: $635
  • Project Total  Capital Cost per gold ounce: $206
  • Initial Capex: $175M (life of mine sustaining Capital $83M)
  • Strip ratio of 0.6-1 (waste to ore)
  • Gold recoveries of 87% mill and 74% heap leach
  • $900 gold WhittleTM pit used for base case production for PEA analysis 
  • Mill resource grade increase of +100% to 2.1g/t gold
  • YellowJacket/mill resource confidence increased significantly with 91% in Measured & Indicated category up from <20% in 2014 resource

Vancouver, B.C.  Corvus Gold Inc. (“Corvus” or the “Company”) - (TSX: KOR, OTCQX: CORVF) announces a new Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) and a mineral resource update incorporating all drill results through 2014 from the newly discovered YellowJacket high-grade gold deposit (Table 1 and 2) at its North Bullfrog project.  The PEA results have outlined a potential robust, high margin, oxide mining project with low development/capital cost projections (Figure 1 and 2) in the current gold price environment.

Jeff Pontius Corvus Gold CEO states… “The results from this initial analysis of the North Bullfrog deposits have clearly illustrated the economic potential of this new and emerging Nevada Gold District.  The unique mix of a high-grade vein/stockwork deposit surrounded by oxide heap leach deposit has resulted in a potentially exceptional, low strip, open pit, mining project in one of the best jurisdictions in the world.  By using a conservative US$900 gold price driven WhittleTM pit to define the PEA base case pit design the project demonstrates potential to perform well in the current gold price environment.  The existing project infrastructure and advanced permitting work linked with simple oxide processing offers the opportunity for a low Capex, high margin operation with near term production potential. Utilizing the new high-grade YellowJacket deposit as our proof of concept, we have begun a District wide exploration and development program to identify other large vein systems as well as follow-up resource expansion drilling of the YellowJacket deposit, both of which could add significant potential to the North Bullfrog project and Corvus as a whole.”

The PEA is based on the North Bullfrog resource model (as at June 16, 2015) which consists of material in the measured, indicated and inferred classifications.  Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves and there is no certainty that the PEA will be realized.

Table 1
North Bullfrog Project - PEA SummaryResults
(values in 2015 US$ based on $1,200 gold price, mining recoverable resources defined by pit shells and 0.52 g/t gold mill breakeven grade and 0.15 g/t gold heap leach breakeven grade)

Parameter Summary Data
Mineral resource - Measured Au and Ag 4.04 M t at 2.43 g/t  Au for 316.2 kozs and at 18.89 g/t Ag  for 2.46 Mozs
Mineral resource - Indicated Au and Ag 22.14 M t at 0.41 g/t Au for 289.6 kozs  and at 1.18 g/t Ag for 0.84 Mozs
Mineral resource - Inferred Au and Ag 137.09 M t at 0.21 g/t Au  for 926.2 kozs and at 0.75 g/t Ag for 3.32 Mozs
Pre-Tax Total Cash Flow; IRR at  US$ 1,200* per Au oz US$ 479 M;  53%
Post-Tax NPV(5%) ; IRR at US$ 1,200* per Au oz US$ 246 M;  38%
Overall Strip Ratio 0.6 to 1 (overburden to mined mineral resource)
Average Annual Gold Production Years 1-6* 154 k Au Eq oz/year
Average Annual Gold Production Years 7-10* 69 k Au Eq oz/year
Average Gold Recovery - Mill 86.8%
Average  Gold Recovery – Heap Leach 73.9%
Average Cash Cost US$ 635/Au oz
Average Silver Recovery - Mill 71.4%
Average Silver Recovery – Heap Leach 6%
Average Total Mining Rate 69.7 k tonne/day
Average Mineralized Material Mining Rate 44.4 k tonne/day

* - Silver:Gold price ratio = 73.7

Table 2
Base Case Gold Price Sensitivity Analysis – North Bullfrog Project
(cash basis, all values in constant 2015 US$)

Gold Price
Total Cash Flow ($M)
NPV5% ($M)  Post-Tax* IRR
$1,000 234.7 $102.9 20.5 3.0
$1,100 356.7 $174.9 29.6 2.5
$1,200 478.7 $245.9 37.9 2.2
$1,300 600.8 $317.4 45.8 1.9
$1,400 722.8 $387.6 53.2 1.8

* - considers production royalties, Nevada mineral net proceeds and US Federal Income Tax

North Bullfrog PEA

Figure 1:   Projected life of mine North Bullfrog Project gold production profile

PEA Results

The PEA assumes development of a conventional drill and blast, surface mine using haul trucks and front end loaders, milling of higher grade mineralization with gravity-cyanide leaching, of the YellowJacket mineral resource, and heap leach processing of low grade mineralized material from the Sierra Blanca, Jolly Jane, and Mayflower mineral resources .  Mineralized material from the YellowJacket vein and stockwork mineral resource would be delivered to a processing plant incorporating a gravity concentration circuit with intense cyanide leaching of the gravity concentrate followed by cyanide leaching of the gravity tail product. Tail materials would be stored in a conventional, lined tailing storage facility (TSF). Lower grade disseminated mineralization would be processed by heap leaching of run of mine (ROM) material. Ultra-high intensity blasting would be performed to minimize particle size for enhanced heap leach recoveries and would allow transport and stacking on a heap leach pad using a feeder/conveyor/stacker system.  Gold and Silver in leachate solutions would be recovered from carbon from both process plants and a doré would be produced in a refinery located in the Mill.  Sensitivity of the projected financial performance of the North Bullfrog project is listed around the Base Case assumption of a constant gold price of US $1,200 per ounce in Table 2.

The PEA uses gold and silver recoveries for a gravity-cyanide leach mill that are estimated from two sets of metallurgical composite samples developed from PQ core materials generated in YellowJacket drilling programs during 2013 and 2014. Gravity concentrate samples were developed using a KnelsonTM concentrator. The KnelsonTM feed was ground to P80 -0.21mm (-65 mesh). The produced gravity concentrate was then re-ground to P80 -0.044mm (-325 mesh), and subjected to intense cyanide leaching. The leached concentrate was then re-combined with the gravity tail product and ground to P80 -0.074mm (-200 mesh) before the final cyanide leach to maximize gold and silver recovery. Average recoveries of 86.8% for gold and 71.4% for silver were assumed for the mill process plant.

Heap leach metallurgical recovery estimates are based on column leach testing data for composite samples constructed from Mayflower, Jolly Jane, and Sierra Blanca 2012 PQ core drilling. A total of 23 column leach tests have been run at McClelland Laboratories at a particle size of 80% passing -19 mm (-3/4 inch) for the four resource areas. The process recovery assumptions reflect consideration of particle size resulting from ultra-high intensity blasting with a particle size of P80 -84mm (-3.3 inch), similar to a primary crushing product, scaling for the effects of vertical lift heights of > 10m (30 ft) and a leach time of 1000 days. The leach pad production model predicts an average gold recovery of 74%, and an average silver recovery of 6% of the fire assay grade.

A summary of the PEA results for the base case gold price assumption of US $1,200 is listed in Table 3. Working capital and initial fills, which are recovered at the end of year 1 and at the end of the project respectively, were estimated to be US $16.4 M.  Operating costs included in the PEA were based on mining, processing, administration and reclamation, and are listed in Table 4, where they are normalized to process tonnage and recovered gold ounces.  Total LOM cash operating costs are projected to be US $635 / produced Au oz and LOM capital cost (adjusted for recovery of pre-strip mining, working capital recovery and initial fills recovery) was estimated to be an additional US $206 / produced Au oz.

The Company cautions that the PEA is preliminary in nature, and is based on technical and economic assumptions which will be further evaluated in more advanced studies.  The PEA is based on the North Bullfrog resource model (as at June 16, 2015) which consists of material in the measured, indicated and inferred classifications.  Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves.  The current basis of project information is not sufficient to convert the mineral resources to mineral reserves, and mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.  Accordingly, there can be no certainty that the results estimated in this PEA will be realized.  The PEA results are only intended as an initial, first-pass review of the potential project economics based on preliminary information.

Table 3
PEA Key Physical Data - North Bullfrog Mill & Heap Leach Project

Key Physical Data Units Value
Heap Leach Feed Mined M tonnes 156.8
Mill Feed Mined M tonnes 7.1
Overburden Mined M tonnes 95.8
Total Material Mined M tonnes 259.7
Mine Life* Years 10
Contained Gold Mozs 1.53
Recovered Gold Mozs 1.19
Contained Silver Mozs 6.61
Recovered Silver Mozs 2.49
Average Strip Ratio Overburden/Process Feed 0.60
Average Diluted Gold Grade Heap Leach g/t 0.22
Average Diluted Gold Grade Mill g/t 1.92
Average Gold Recovery % 78%
Annual Process Feed Mined M tonnes/yr 16.2
Average Annual Gold Produced Au kozs/yr 117.0

*-excludes leach pad rinse period at end of mine life

Table 4
Operating Costs - North Bullfrog Mill & Heap Leach Project

Cost Cost per Process tonne
Cost/Recovered Gold Oz
Mining $2.41 $332
Processing $1.65 $227
Administration $0.43 $ 60
Reclamation $0.12 $17
Total Operating Cost $4.62 $635


Estimated capital costs are listed in Table 5, where they are divided between initial and sustaining capital.  The initial capital is estimated to be US $175.4M which includes equipment and construction, EPCM and Contingency. Sustaining capital includes leach pad expansions, mobile equipment purchases and rebuilds. Life of mine sustaining capital is estimated to be US $83.3 M.

Table 5
PEA Initial Capital Estimate - North Bullfrog Project

Capital Area Estimated Capital Cost (US $M)
Initial Capital $129.8M
EPCM $19.1M
Contingency $26.5 M
Total Initial Capital Cost $175.4M
Sustaining Capital 83.3 M
Total LOM Capital Cost 258.7M


Scheduled resource and mining geometries for the PEA were defined by Lerch Grossman optimization using a US $900 gold price, current prevailing mining costs, and the latest metallurgical data for the project.

Corvus Land Position at North Bullfrog

Figure 2: Corvus land position at North Bullfrog with mineral resource areas shown.

Cash Flow Model Inputs and Assumptions

Mineral Resources - The analysis included measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources in the mining and economic study.  Measured and indicated mineral resources make up 91% of the mill gold production plan and 17% of the heap leach production plan with the remainder being inferred mineral resource.  

Project Schedule- The project schedule assumed a one (1) year period for construction of the mine infrastructure, and the initiation of mining at the YellowJacket and Sierra Blanca mineral resources. Mining was assumed to start at Mayflower in year 4 and at Jolly Jane in year 7.  Production from the four mineral resources was blended to level the required number of haul trucks with a peak mining rate of 89,300 tonnes per day.

Mining Method - A standard surface mine using a drill, blast, load, and haul mining plan was used for the study, assuming a 50 degree pit slope.  The mine volume was defined by Lerchs-Grossman optimization methods and the resulting mining volumes were used to develop a production plan that would be robust in a declining price market. Heap leach mineralization was assumed to be blasting using new, ultra-high intensity blasting to improve fragmentation for higher ROM leach recoveries without crushing. Within the mining shapes indicated by the WhittleTM analyses, a processing cut-off grade of 0.1 g/t gold was used for selection of mineralized material to be sent to the heap leach processing facility and 0.372 g/t for mineralized material to be sent to the mill processing facility.  Conceptual locations for the crusher, heap leach feeder/conveyor, and overburden dumps were used to estimate truck haulage cycles, and the production schedule was constrained by the truck fleet capacity.

Processing Methods - A conceptual heap leach model was developed for the northern area of North Bullfrog to be operated at a peak placement rate of 58,000 tonnes (average rate of 44,400 tonnes) of mineralized material per day, with all material assumed to be blasted to 80% - 84mm (-3.3 inch), and transported and placed by a conveyor/stacker system. The higher grade, YellowJacket vein and stockwork mineralization was assumed to be crushed and milled at a rate of 3,000 tonnes/day with a final grind size of 80% -0.074mm (-200 mesh). Gold would be recovered by intense cyanide leaching of a gravity concentrate and a final cyanide leaching of tail products. Both of these processing approaches are supported by metallurgical test data.

Gold Recovery Model - Mill process recoveries were estimated from metallurgical testing of gravity concentration, intense cyanide leaching of the gravity concentrate, and final cyanide leaching of the tail products. A total of six different sample composites were created from PQ core developed in 2013 and 2014 drilling programs, and were tested to characterize the variation of vein and vein stockwork materials. Heap leach process recoveries were estimated based on the results of column leach testing of composite samples created from the 2012 PQ core metallurgical drilling program.  A total of 23 sample composites from the 3 current resource areas were prepared from 2012 PQ core and used to create duplicate column tests at a nominal crushed size of 80% -19 mm (-3/4 inch).  The column leach test data was used with recovery models that simulated the ROM particle size gradation, the effects of time for 1000 days leaching and leach pad loading geometry to project the produced gold and silver. The recovery model predicted LOM average gold recovery to be 74% of contained gold content and 6% of contained silver content.

Operating and Capital Cost Estimates - Preliminary capital and operating costs were developed using information available from other Nevada milling and heap leach operations, a commercially available mining and development cost database, plus all available project technical data and metallurgical/process related test work.  Detailed design work, used to assess the potential for a smaller scale start up mine, has been used to refine the capital cost estimate.  Preliminary configurations of the site infrastructure alternatives (mill, heap leach pad, tailing storage facility, overburden storage facility, roads, shops, offices, etc.) have been evaluated and an arrangement was defined as the basis of capital cost estimates.  Capital costs were developed based on a nominal mining rate of 44,400 tonnes of mineralized material per day. Total processed material would be 163.7 M tonnes.  Major mobile equipment was assumed to be financed over the first five years of life.  All costs are in constant US$ from Q2 2015. No escalation was applied in the financial model.

Taxes and Royalties - Taxes and royalty charges were included in this PEA.  Taxes included the Nevada Mineral Net Profit tax at the maximum rate of 5% of cash flow net of operating costs, depletion and depreciation of capital costs. US Federal taxes were 26% of cash flow net of operating costs, depletion and depreciation of capital costs. Net smelter return (NSR) royalties apply to about 15% of the projected gold production with a 4% NSR on the Mayflower production and a 1-4% NSR on a portion of the Jolly Jane production (the Company has buy-out rights on all royalties).

Revenue - Revenue was determined in the base case financial model assuming a constant US $1,200 per gold ounce gold price. All sensitivities to gold price assumptions were assessed using constant US$ prices.

New Resource Calculation

The new mineral resource calculation reflects the benefits of the detailed 2014 infill drilling program leading to better defined vein/stockwork zone (Table 6 & 7).  The high average grade of the YellowJacket deposits along with its simple, oxide, high gold silver recoveries and open pit mining potential has produced an attractive near-term mining target.  In addition the new mineral resource has been calculated at a lower base case resource price of US $1,200 (April 1, 2014 resource used US $1,300 gold price), which has produced a more robust project.  The insight gained from the new detailed drilling of YellowJacket has been instrumental in defining and prioritizing Corvus’ 2015 new discovery high-grade vein system exploration targets where drilling will begin this month.

Table 6
Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Mineral Resource Estimate for the North Bullfrog Project Defined by Whittle TM pit volumes, including both the YellowJacket Vein/Stockwork and Disseminated Oxide Mineralization at $1,200 Gold Price
Click here to view table on our website.

  Yellowjacket (milling) Disseminated (heap leach) Total
WhittleTM Pit Gold Price* Resources Category Cutoff**
(Gold g/t)
Tonnes (Mt) Gold (g/t) Silver (g/t) Cutoff**
(Gold g/t)
Tonnes (Mt) Gold (g/t) Silver (g/t) Strip Ratio Contained Au kozs Contained Ag kozs
$1,200 Measured 0.52 3.86 2.55 19.70 0.15 0.30 0.25 2.76 0.70 318.9 2,471.5
Indicated 1.81 1.53 10.20 22.86 0.30 0.43 308.9 911.1
Total M & I 5.67 2.22 16.67 23.15 0.30 0.46 627.7 3,382.6
Inferred 1.48 0.83 4.26 176.35 0.19 0.67 1,132.2 4,005.0

* - Analysis assumes a fixed ratio of the gold to silver prices of 73.7
**-Breakeven grade derived from Whittle input parameters at US$1,200/oz gold price and Gold:Silver price ratio of 73.7
***- See Cautionary Note to US Investors below on page 12
****-The Mineral Resources above are effective as of June 16, 2015.
*****-Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

The Resource estimation is based on 280 drill holes with 41,314 gold composites. Geologic volumes were defined and used to constrain the estimation. Heap leach resources were estimated by regular Kriging. The YellowJacket vein and stockwork were estimated using Inverse Distance Cubed calculations.  To define the reasonable prospect of economic extraction, Metal Mining Consultants Inc. confined the resources to mining volumes defined by Whittle TM analysis. There are no known legal, political or environmental risks that could materially affect the potential development of the mineral resources.

YellowJacket High-Grade Resource

The YellowJacket mineral resource area is immediately east of the Sierra Blanca deposit and was modeled as a specific zone within the greater Sierra Blanca open pit deposit.  The zone has a North-Northwest trend and is currently defined by the Josh Vein on the west and the Liberator Fault on the east. This zone includes vein and stockwork vein type mineralization which remains open along strike and at depth.  In addition the 2014 drilling found several parallel, splay veins to the main Josh Vein which needs further drilling to assess their potential to expand the YellowJacket deposit.  Follow-up resource expansion drilling on the YellowJacket deposit is scheduled to follow the first two phases of District “new discovery” exploration drilling. 

Exploration Implications of the New YellowJacket Model

The new YellowJacket mineral resource model and its exceptional continuity and structural association is an important “proof of concept” for the occurrence of other large, high-grade, vein systems in the North Bullfrog project area.  This new detailed understanding of the deposit has formed the basis for an expanded new discovery exploration initiative in the District which started in May of this year.   One of the fundamental understandings gained for the 2014 infill drilling of the YellowJacket has been the timing and orientation of structural activity that created openings for high-grade vein/stockwork formation.  This knowledge linked with new property wide, detailed mapping, and age dating information has outlined a number of similar settings to the YellowJacket deposit which hold promise for other future high-grade discoveries.  Corvus’ 2015 District–wide exploration drilling program is focused on testing up to 10, new high priority, high-grade vein targets this year in its effort to discover a new Bullfrog or YellowJacket type deposit.      

Mineral Resource Modeling Results

The North Bullfrog district-wide mineralization inventory includes four deposit areas, YellowJacket, Sierra Blanca, Jolly Jane, and Mayflower (Figure 1).  Mineralization occurs in two primary forms: (1) broad stratabound bulk-tonnage gold zones such as the Sierra Blanca, Mayflower, and Jolly Jane systems; and (2) moderately thick zones of high-grade gold and silver mineralization hosted by vein and stockwork vein zones dominantly at the YellowJacket deposit. 

Table 7
North Bullfrog Mineral Resource at $1,200 Gold Price and Sensitivity of Mineral Inventory to Gold Prices for YellowJacket Vein/Stockwork and Disseminated Oxide Mineralization

YellowJacket (milling)
Disseminated (heap leach)
WhittleTM Pit Gold Price*
Resources Category
Gold g/t)
Tonnes (Mt)
Gold (g/t)
Silver (g/t)
Gold g/t)
Tonnes (Mt)
Gold (g/t)
Silver (g/t)
Strip Ratio
Contained Au kozs
Contained Ag kozs
Total M & I
Total M & I
Total M & I

* - Analysis assumes a fixed ratio of the gold to silver prices of 73.7
**-Breakeven grade derived from Whittle input parameters and Silver:Gold ratio of 73.7
***-The Mineral Resources above are effective as of June 16, 2015.
****-Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

Table 8
WhittleTM Input Parameters used for the North Bullfrog Mineral Resource Estimation

Parameter Unit Mayflower* Jolly Jane* Sierra Blanca* YellowJacket**
Mining Cost US$/total tonne 1.64 1.42 1.62 1.62
Au Cut-Off*** g/tonne 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.56
Processing Cost US$/ process tonne 1.72 1.72 1.27 11.57
Au Recovery % 70.0 72.0 74.0 86.8
Ag Recovery % 8.0 8.0 0 71.4
Administrative Cost US$/process tonne 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40
Refining & Sales US$/tonne 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.11
Au Selling Price US$/oz 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
Slope Angle Degrees 50 50 50 50

*  - assumes heap leach processing of disseminated mineralization
** -  assumes Gravity - CIL mill processing of YellowJacket mineralization
*** - break-even grade derived from Whittle input parameters at US$1,200 per ounce gold price, and Gold:Silver price ratio of 59.2 for Mayflower and Jolly Jane, and of 73.7 for Sierra Blanca and YellowJacket

The structurally controlled vein and stockwork mineralization in the YellowJacket Deposit was modelled separately to prevent smearing of high-grade mineralization into the surrounding blocks. Based on the metallurgical data on YellowJacket mineralization, it has been assumed that this material will be processed through a separate milling circuit and thus carries different processing costs and recoveries, resulting in cut-off grades different than the heap leach processing.  These additional costs and recoveries have been accounted for in the WhittleTM pit analysis.

The disseminated mineralization at Sierra Blanca was also modeled in a series of discrete volumes to prevent grade smearing across certain important grade-controlling faults. The disseminated oxide mineralization has been modeled based on our current metallurgy for run of mine heap leach processing with each resource area having an estimated heap leach recovery.  The heap leach feed then carries the costs associated with heap leach processing as reflected by the cut-off grade.

The Company will file an updated National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”) technical report (the “Report”) to be prepared by independent qualified persons, which will include the results of the mineral resource update and PEA discussed herein, on SEDAR within 45 days, and investors are urged to review the Report in its entirety.

About the North Bullfrog Project, Nevada

Corvus controls 100% of its North Bullfrog Project, which covers approximately 75 km² in southern Nevada.  The property package is made up of a number of private mineral leases of patented federal mining claims and 814 federal unpatented mining claims.  The project has excellent infrastructure, being adjacent to a major highway and power corridor as well as a large water right position.

The North Bullfrog project includes numerous prospective gold targets at various stages of exploration with four having the following modeled mineral resources (Sierra Blanca, Jolly Jane, Mayflower, and YellowJacket).   The project contains a measured and indicated oxide mill mineral resource of 5.67 Mt at an average grade of 2.22 g/t gold, and 16.67 g/t silver, containing 405.6 k ounces of gold and 3,038.5  k ounces of silver, and an inferred mineral resource of 1.48 Mt at an average grade of 0.0.83 g/t gold and 4.26 g/t silver, containing 39.4 k ounces of gold and 203.4 k ounces of silver.  In addition the project contains a measured and indicated, oxide, run of mine, heap leach resource of 23.15 Mt at an average grade of 0.30 g/t gold and 0.46 g/t silver, containing 221.1 k ounces of gold and 344.1 k ounces of silver, and an inferred mineral resource of 176.3 Mt at an average grade of 0.19 g/t gold and 0.67 g/t silver, containing 1,092.8 k ounces of gold and 3,801.7 k ounces of silver.

Qualified Person and Quality Control/Quality Assurance

Jeffrey A. Pontius (CPG 11044), a qualified person as defined by NI 43-101, has supervised the preparation of the scientific and technical information that form the basis for this news release and has reviewed and approved the disclosure herein.  Mr. Pontius is not independent of Corvus, as he is the CEO and holds common shares and incentive stock options.

Carl E. Brechtel, (Nevada PE 008744 and Registered Member 353000 of SME), a qualified person as defined by NI 43-101, has coordinated execution of the work outlined in this news release and has reviewed and approved the disclosure herein. Mr. Brechtel is not independent of Corvus, as he is the COO and holds common shares and incentive stock options.

The work program at North Bullfrog was designed and supervised by Mark Reischman, Corvus’ Nevada Exploration Manager, who is responsible for all aspects of the work, including the quality control/quality assurance program.  On-site personnel at the project log and track all samples prior to sealing and shipping.  Quality control is monitored by the insertion of blind certified standard reference materials and blanks into each sample shipment.  All resource sample shipments are sealed and shipped to ALS Chemex in Reno, Nevada, for preparation and then on to ALS Chemex in Reno, Nevada, or Vancouver, B.C., for assaying.  ALS Chemex’s quality system complies with the requirements for the International Standards ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 17025:1999.  Analytical accuracy and precision are monitored by the analysis of reagent blanks, reference material and replicate samples.  Finally, representative blind duplicate samples are forwarded to ALS Chemex and an ISO compliant third party laboratory for additional quality control.

The Qualified Persons, Scott E. Wilson, Stephen Batman and William J. Pennstrom have visited the North Bullfrog site during 2014 and 2015. Mr. Wilson has performed data verification by examining core materials at the site, and has selected quarter core samples to develop independent verifying assays of intervals by the ALS Chemex laboratory in Reno, NV. Geologic data development processes were reviewed and observed during the site visit. All drilling geologic description, assaying data and geochemical data have been provided in a database format to Metal Mining Consultants Inc. for the purpose of estimating the resource.  All Qualified Persons have reviewed the News Release and approve its publication.

Mr. Scott E. Wilson, CPG, President of Metal Mining Consultants Inc., is an independent consulting geologist specializing in Mineral Reserve and Resource calculation reporting, mining project analysis and due diligence evaluations.  He is acting as the Qualified Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the overall technical report, and the Mineral Resource estimate.  Mr. Wilson has over 26 years experience in surface mining and is a Registered Member (#4025107RM) of Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc.  Mr. Wilson and Metal Mining Consultants, Inc. are independent of the Company under NI 43-101.

Mr. Stephen Batman, Principal Engineer at SBB Mining Solution LLC, is an independent consulting mining engineer specializing in mine design, production scheduling, pit optimization and equipment specification. He is acting as the Qualified Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the mining methods section of the technical report. Mr. Batman has over 29 years of experience in the mining industry and is a Registered Member (#181580RM) of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc. Mr Batman and SBB Mining Solution LLC are independent of the Company under NI 43-101.

Mr. Herbert Osborne, SME, a consulting metallurgist, has acted as the Qualified Person, as defined by NI 43-101, for evaluation of the metallurgical testing data and estimation of the process metallurgical recoveries. He has over 50 years of experience in mineral process design and operations. He is a Registered Member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration (#2430050 RM). Mr Osborne is independent of the Company under NI 43-101.

Registered Member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration (#2430050 RM). Mr Osborne is independent of the Company under NI 43-101.

Mr. William J. Pennstrom, Jr., a consulting process engineer and President of Pennstrom Consulting Inc., has acted as the Qualified Person, as defined by NI 43-101, for process operating cost estimation, project capital cost estimation and evaluation of the financial performance for the PEA. He has over 30 years of experience in mineral process design and operation, and has been an independent process and metallurgical consultant for the mining industry for the last thirteen years.  He is a Registered Member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration (#2503900RM).  Mr. Pennstrom and Pennstrom Consulting Inc. are both independent of the Company under NI 43-101.

About Corvus Gold Inc.

Corvus Gold Inc. is a North American gold exploration and development company, focused on its near-term gold-silver mining project at North Bullfrog, Nevada.  In addition the Company controls a number of other North American exploration properties representing a spectrum of gold, silver and copper projects.  Corvus is committed to building shareholder value through new discoveries and the expansion of those discoveries to maximize share price leverage in a recovering gold and silver market.

On behalf of
Corvus Gold Inc.

(signed) Jeffrey A. Pontius
Jeffrey A. Pontius,
Chief Executive Officer

Contact Information: Ryan Ko
  Phone: 1-888-770-7488 (toll free) or (604) 638-3246 /Fax: (604) 408-7499


Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements and forward-looking information (collectively, “forward-looking statements”) within the meaning of applicable Canadian and US securities legislation. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words such as: believe, expect, anticipate, intend, estimate, postulate and similar expressions, or are those, which, by their nature, refer to future events.   All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included herein including, without limitation, statements regarding projected economics of the mine plan contained in the PEA, including mine development and operating costs and potential future productions, estimates of mineral resources, the anticipated content, commencement and cost of exploration programs, anticipated exploration program results, the discovery and delineation of mineral deposits/resources/reserves, the potential to expand the existing estimated mineral resource at the North Bullfrog project, the potential for the North Bullfrog system to continue to grow and/or to develop into a major new higher-grade, bulk tonnage, Nevada gold discovery, the potential for any mining or production at North Bullfrog, the potential for the identification of multiple deposits at North Bullfrog, the potential for the existence or location of additional high-grade veins, the potential for the Company to secure or receive any royalties in the future, business and financing plans and business trends, are forward-looking statements.  Although the Company believes that such statements are reasonable, it can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. Certain material assumptions regarding such forward-looking statements are discussed in this news release and the Company’s annual and quarterly management’s discussion and analysis filed at In addition to, and subject to, such assumptions discussed in more detail elsewhere, the forward-looking statements in this news release are also subject to the following assumptions: (1)the price of gold and silver being consistent with the prices used herein; (2) the ability to develop the North Bullfrog project in accordance with the terms of the PEA; (3) the timing of the receipt of regulatory and governmental approvals, permits and authorizations necessary to implement and carry on the Company’s planned exploration and potential development programs; (4) the Company’s ability to attract and retain key staff, (5) the timing of the ability to commence and complete the planned work at the Company’s projects, and (6) the ongoing relations of the Company with its underlying property lessors and the applicable regulatory agencies. The Company cautions investors that any forward-looking statements by the Company are not guarantees of future results or performance, and that actual results may differ materially from those in forward looking statements as a result of various factors, including, but not limited to, variations in the nature, quality and quantity of any mineral deposits that may be located, variations in the market price of any mineral products the Company may produce or plan to produce, the Company's inability to obtain any necessary permits, consents or authorizations required for its activities, the Compa