Exhibit 96.1

SEC Technical Report Summary

Initial Assessment of the

Johnson Tract Polymetallic (Gold, Zinc, Copper,

Silver, Lead) Project, Alaska

Effective Date: May 12, 2025

Report Date: May 6, 2025

Report Prepared for

Contango ORE, Inc.

516 2^nd Avenue, Suite 401

Fairbanks, Alaska

99701

Report Prepared by

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

2A – 69 Young Street

Sudbury, ON P3E 3G5, Canada

SRK Project Number: CAPR003429

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Date and Signature Page

S-K 1300 SEC Technical Report Summary Initial Assessment of the Johnson Tract Polymetallic (Gold, Zinc, Copper, Silver, Lead) Project, Alaska.

Prepared for: Contango ORE, Inc.

Report Date: May 6, 2025

Prepared by the following firms:

 

QP Firm		Responsibilities/ Contributions		Signature		Date
SRK Consulting		1.5,1.6,1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24		“signed”		May 6, 2025
International Metallurgical & Environmental Inc		1.7, 10, 14, 22, 23		“signed”		May 6, 2025
Advantage Geosciences		1.4, 11, 8, 9, 22		“signed”		May 6, 2025
Stantec		16		“signed”		May 6, 2025
Contango Ore		1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2-9, 20, 21, 24		“signed”		May 6, 2025

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 2 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Contents

 

1		Executive Summary				19
		1.1		Property Description and Ownership		19
		1.2		Geology and Mineralization		19
		1.3		Status of Exploration		21
		1.4		Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates		21
		1.5		Mining Developments		25
		1.6		Mine Operations and Infrastructure		33
		1.7		Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing		34
		1.8		Capital and Operating Costs		34
		1.9		Capital Cost Estimate		35
		1.10		Operating Cost Estimate		36
		1.11		Economic Analysis		37
		1.12		Permitting Requirements		39
		1.13		Conclusions and Recommendations		40
2		Introduction				45
		2.1		Registrant for Whom the Technical Report Summary was Prepared		45
		2.2		Terms of Reference and Purpose of the Report		45
		2.3		Sources of Information		45
		2.4		Details of Inspection		46
		2.5		Report Version Update		46
		2.6		Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Definitions		46
3		Property Description				49
		3.1		Land Status		50
		3.2		Land Status History		52
		3.3		Johnson Tract Lease Agreement		54
		3.4		Permitting		54
		3.5		Project Land Use Requirements and Plans		58
		3.6		Port and Transportation Easements		58
		3.7		Natural Hazards		60
		3.8		Environmental Liabilities		61
		3.9		Land Title Risks and Designation		62
		3.10		Social Or Community Risks		62
4		Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography				63

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 3 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

		4.1		Accessibility			63
		4.2		Climate			63
		4.3		Local Resources			63
		4.4		Infrastructure			64
		4.5		Physiography			66
5		History					68
		5.1		Work Prior to Anaconda Minerals (1966-1980)			68
		5.2		Anaconda Minerals (1981 – 1985)			68
		5.3		Hunt, Ware, and Profett (1985 – 1993)			72
		5.4		Westmin Resources (1993 – 1997)			72
		5.5		CIRI (1997 – 2018)			73
		5.6		HighGold Mining Inc (2018 – 2024)			73
6		Geologic Setting, Mineralization and Deposit Model					105
		6.1		Regional Geology			105
		6.2		Local Geology – Johnson Tract Deposit Area			106
		6.3		Main Stratigraphic Units – Johnson Tract Deposit Area			109
		6.4		Structure			114
		6.5		Alteration			119
		6.6		Mineralization			122
		6.7		Hydrogeology			124
		6.8		Deposit Model			128
7		Exploration					132
		7.1		Surface Exploration			132
		7.2		Drilling			135
		7.3		Core Handling and Transport			140
		7.4		Core Logging and Processing			140
		7.5		Hole Closure			141
		7.6		Core Storage			141
8		Sample Preparation, Analysis and Security					143
		8.1		Overview			143
		8.2		Sample Collection			143
		8.3		Sample Preparation and Security			143
		8.4		Analytical Technique			143
		8.5		Specific Gravity Testing			144

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 4 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

		8.6		Twin Drillhole Comparison			146
		8.7		Assaying Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA-QC)			150
9		Data Verification					157
		9.1		Site Visit			157
		9.2		Drillhole Database			158
		9.3		Drillhole Collar Surveys			158
		9.4		Drillhole Downhole Surveys			159
		9.5		Drillhole Geological Logging			159
		9.6		Drillhole Assays			159
		9.7		Analytical Quality Control Data			160
10		Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing					161
		10.1		Prior Metallurgical Testwork Programs (1983-1994)			161
		10.2		Blue Coast Research Metallurgical Testwork Program (2021-2022)			162
		10.3		Ore Sorting			169
		10.4		Conclusions			170
		10.5		Recommendations			170
11		Mineral Resource Estimates					172
		11.1		Introduction			172
		11.2		Available Drill Data and Model Setup			172
		11.3		Geologic Model			173
		11.4		Grade Capping			178
		11.5		Assay Compositing			180
		11.6		Variography			183
		11.7		Grade Interpolation			184
		11.8		Density Assignment			185
		11.9		Model Validation			185
		11.10		Resource Classification and Tabulation			189
12		Mineral Reserve Estimates					194
13		Mining Methods					195
		13.1		Geotechnical			195
		13.2		Hydrogeology			203
		13.3		Cut-off Value Calculations			204
		13.4		Mine Design			205
		13.5		Production & Development Schedule			213

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 5 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

		13.6		Mine Operations and Infrastructure			219
14		Processing and Recovery Methods					226
15		Infrastructure					227
		15.1		Aviation Facilities			227
		15.2		Port Facilities			227
		15.3		Roads			227
		15.4		Buildings			228
		15.5		Storage Areas			228
		15.6		Stockpiles			228
		15.7		Power Supply			229
		15.8		Water Management			229
		15.9		Sources of Construction Materials			229
		15.10		Infrastructure Layout Map			229
16		Market Studies					231
		16.1		Lead Concentrate			231
		16.2		Copper Concentrate			231
		16.3		Zinc Concentrate			232
		16.4		Pyrite/Gold Concentrate			232
		16.5		Summary			233
17		Environmental Studies, Permitting and Plans, Negotiations or Agreements with Local Individuals or Group					234
		17.1		Environmental Studies			235
		17.2		Environmental Study Results			239
		17.3		Subsistence Activities			249
		17.4		Cultural Resources and Traditional Use			249
		17.5		Land Use			250
		17.6		Socioeconomics			253
		17.7		Environmental Justice			255
		17.8		Permitting Requirements			256
		17.9		Requirements and Plans for Waste and Tailings Disposal, Site Monitoring, and Water Management During Operations and After Mine Closure			261
		17.10		Post-Performance or Reclamation Bonds			262
		17.11		Negotiations or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups			263
		17.12		Mine Closure			263
		17.13		Reclamation Plan Approval			263

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 6 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

		17.14		Adequacy of Plans		264
		17.15		Commitments to Ensure Local Procurement and Hiring		264
		17.16		QP’s Opinion		264
18		Capital and Operating Costs				265
		18.1		Introduction		265
		18.2		Capital Cost Estimate		266
		18.3		Operating Cost Estimate		268
19		Economic Analysis				270
		19.1		General Description		270
		19.2		Results		271
		19.3		Sensitivity Analysis		276
		19.4		Payback		277
20		Adjacent Properties				279
21		Other Relevant Data				280
22		Interpretation and Conclusions				281
		22.1		Mining Methods		281
		22.2		Infrastructure		281
		22.3		Environmental, Permitting, and Social Impacts		282
		22.4		Capital and Operating Costs		282
		22.5		Economic Analysis		283
23		Recommendations				284
		23.1		Work Programs		284
		23.2		Other Recommendations		285
24		References				289
25		Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant				293

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 7 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

List of Figures

 

Figure 1-1		Johnson Tract Drilling, Mineralized Zones and Block Model Extents (view to ESE)			22
Figure 1-2		Johnson Tract 2022 Resource Classification (view to ESE)			24
Figure 1-3		Geotechnical domains cut in cross section normal to the strike of the mineralized zone looking northeast			27
Figure 1-4		Plan View (Top) and Long Section Looking Northwest (Bottom) of the Johnson Tract Project			30
Figure 1-5		Isometric View of Production Mining Area (Looking Northwest)			31
Figure 1-6		Typical Level Layout (Plan View)			32
Figure 3-1		Location of the Johnson Tract Project			50
Figure 3-2		Claim Map of the Johnson Tract Project			52
Figure 3-3		Johnson Tract Easements			60
Figure 4-1		Map of Southern Project area with Johnson Camp and the Airstrip			65
Figure 4-2		Project Overview and Layout of the Johnson Camp			66
Figure 4-3		View of Bear Creek Valley looking east toward Cook Inlet			67
Figure 5-1		Compilation Map of 1988 & 1992 Aerodat Survey Results – Apparent Resistivity. Note that low resistivity (high conductivity) zones correlate well with known areas of alteration and mineralization			71
Figure 5-2		Map showing surface rock sample location by year from 2019 to 2024			76
Figure 5-3		Map showing stream sediment and soil sample locations by year from 2019 to 2024			77
Figure 5-4		Long section of the Johnson Tract Deposit looking southeast. Significant intercepts in callouts			78
Figure 5-5		Compilation Map of 2020 and 2021 DCIP Survey Results – 100m Depth Resistivity; the data highlight zones of alteration, similar to but in greater detail than the historic airborne apparent resistivity data. The DC area in particular shows a large area of conductivity			80
Figure 5-6		Map showing historic property-scale geophysical survey extents			83
Figure 5-7		Merged 2021-2022 Airborne Magnetic Surveys – Total Field Magnetics			84
Figure 5-8		Merged 2021-2022 Airborne Magnetic Surveys – First Vertical Derivative			85
Figure 5-9		Simplified geology map of the Johnson Tract Deposit area showing projected drillhole traces			87
Figure 5-10		Outline of 2022 Airborne Lidar and Imagery Survey			89
Figure 5-11		Plan Map of MobileMT airborne geophysical survey showing 3D inversion results at 200m below surface. Higher conductivity areas highlighted in reds and fuchsia (low resistivity)			93

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 8 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Figure 5-12		Map showing all Johnson Tract Property drill traces by year from historic to 2023			97
Figure 5-13		Ellis Zone DDH Plan Map showing 2023 Hole Locations and Key Results			98
Figure 5-14		Ellis Zone Schematic Cross-Section showing 2023 Hole Locations and Key Results. 200m window			99
Figure 6-1		Regional Geology of the Johnson Tract Project			106
Figure 6-2		Schematic cross-section of the regional geology of Johnson Tract (Modified from Proffett, 2021)			107
Figure 6-3		Geologic Map of the Johnson Tract Project Area			108
Figure 6-4		Key stratigraphic units at the Johnson Tract Deposit			114
Figure 6-5		Geology Map of the Johnson Tract Project with Major Faults			118
Figure 6-6		Examples of the typical alteration assemblages and styles found at the Johnson Tract Deposit			121
Figure 6-7		Johnson Tract Deposit Zoned Alteration Model			122
Figure 6-8		Cross-Section of the Deposit showing Main Mineralized Zones with Significant Drill Intersections			123
Figure 6-9		Piezometric Data from GT23-004 (Source: Piteau, 2023a)			125
Figure 6-10		Hydrogeological cross section along Adit (Source: Piteau 2023a)			126
Figure 6-11		Hydrographs for VWPs equipped drill holes (Source: compiled from Piteau 2023a). Note: VWP #1 deepest in series, with ascending sensors higher ID number			127
Figure 6-12		Genetic model of the hydrothermal system at the Johnson Tract Deposit from Steefel (1087)			129
Figure 6-13		Johnson Tract Deposit Model -Epithermal/VMS Hybrid			130
Figure 6-14		from de Ronde, C.E.J., et al., 2014 showing two distinct stages of development for a volcanic edifice pre and post caldera formation along with the interaction of porphyry related hydrothermal fluids and seawater			131
Figure 7-1		Map showing surface rock samples collected by Contango Ore in 2024			133
Figure 7-2		Map showing surface soil and stream sediment (silt) samples collected by Contango Ore in 2024			134
Figure 7-3		Plan map showing location of 2024 drilling			136
Figure 7-4		3D view of 2024 drillholes. Infill holes are shown in green and Hydrogeologic holes in purple. The 2022 block model shows indicated blocks in green and inferred blocks in blue			137
Figure 7-5		Hy-Tech’s TECH5000 Drill Rig			139
Figure 7-6		Core Yard at Johnson Camp			142
Figure 8-1		Histogram and Box and Whisker plots showing all Lab and Field SG Data			146
Figure 8-2		Plan view map showing collar locations of twinned holes in 2019 drilling			147
Figure 8-3		Cross-sectional view of Hole JT19-082 twinning historic hole JR93-05			148

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 9 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Figure 8-4		Cross-sectional view of Hole JT19-085 twinning historic hole JR 87-031			149
Figure 8-5		Control charts for high-grade gold standard CDN-GS-37. Mean value is plotted as green lines, second standard deviations are yellow, and third standard deviations are red			152
Figure 8-6		Control charts for low-grade polymetallic standard ME-1704. Mean value is plotted as green lines, second standard deviations are yellow, and third standard deviations are red			153
Figure 8-7		Control charts for low-grade polymetallic standard ME-1414. Mean value is plotted as green lines, second standard deviations are yellow, and third standard deviations are red			154
Figure 8-8		Control charts for low-grade polymetallic standard ME-1802. Mean value is plotted as green lines, second standard deviations are yellow, and third standard deviations are red			155
Figure 8-9		Control charts for blanks. For Au and Ag, LLD is green, warning level of 5x LLD is red. For Cu, Zn, and Pb mean is green, second standard deviation is yellow, third standard deviation is red			155
Figure 8-10		1:1 plots of duplicate assay pairs. Linear regression equations and R2 values are shown on the plots			156
Figure 9-1		2018 Resampling Program – 1:1 plots of Historic vs. Resampled Assay Pairs			160
Figure 10-1		Selected Intervals for Master Composite JTMET-001			163
Figure 10-2		Johnson Tract Gravity Recoverable Gold by Size Fraction			165
Figure 10-3		LCT-1 Flowsheet			166
Figure 11-1		Johnson Tract Drilling, Mineralized Zones and Block Model Extents (view to ESE)			173
Figure 11-2		Johnson Tract Drilling, Mineralized Zones and Block Model Extents (view to SW)			177
Figure 11-3		Example Histogram & Probability Plot: JT HG Domain – Au Assays			180
Figure 11-4		Example Section - Model Column 41: Resource Class, Block Estimate and Composite Grades			187
Figure 11-5		Example Swath Plots Comparing OK, ID and NN Models in Johnson Domain			188
Figure 11-6		Johnson Tract 2022 Resource Classification (view to ESE)			192
Figure 13-1		Geotechnical domains cut in cross section normal to the strike of the mineralized zone looking northeast.			197
Figure 13-2		Representative core box photos for each geotechnical domain			198
Figure 13-3		Stope stability chart for given stope dimensions			200
Figure 13-4		ELOS chart for given stope dimensions			201
Figure 13-5		Ground Support Chart			202

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 10 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Figure 13-6		Drillhole data around portal and access decline with lithology and RQD as bar graphs along drillhole alignment			203
Figure 13-7		Development schedule used for in flow calculations			204
Figure 13-8		Estimated inflow rates vs time			204
Figure 13-9		Plan View (Top) and Long Section Looking Northwest (Bottom) of the Johnson Tract Project			207
Figure 13-10		(a & b) Isometric View of Production Mining Area			208
Figure 13-11		Typical Level Layout (Plan View)			211
Figure 13-12		LOM Development Meters by Cost Type			214
Figure 13-13		LOM Ramp & Lateral Development Advance			215
Figure 13-14		LOM Capital Development Advance			215
Figure 13-15		Annual Resource Production and NSR Values			216
Figure 13-16		General Ventilation System Layout			221
Figure 13-17		General Airflow Requirement			222
Figure 13-18		Main Exhaust Fan Power Requirement			223
Figure 15-1		General Site Plan – Source: SRK, 2025			230
Figure 17-1		Mine Area (South Tract) and Easement Locations			235
Figure 17-2		Critical Habitat and Seabird Use Areas in the Project Vicinity			246
Figure 19-1		Spider Diagram - NPV Sensitivity			276
Figure 19-2		Spider Diagram – IRR Sensitivity			277
Figure 19-3		Johnson Tract Project Payback Period			278

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 11 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

List of Tables

 

Table 1-1		Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate (3.0 g/t AuEq Cut-off)			24
Table 1-2		Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate by Domain (3.0 g/t AuEq Cut-off)			25
Table 1-3		Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Estimate at Range of AuEq Cut-off Grades			25
Table 1-4		Johnson Tract Project LOM Capital Cost Estimate (US$M)			36
Table 1-5		Johnson Tract Project - LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$M)			36
Table 1-6		Financial Model Summary			38
Table 1-7		NPV Sensitivity to Au Price			44
Table 2-1		Site Visit			46
Table 3-1		Johnson Tract Properties			51
Table 3-2		Johnson Tract Authorizations			56
Table 5-1		Summary of Historic Geophysical Surveys at Johnson Tract			69
Table 5-2		Total Drilling by All Operators			74
Table 5-3		Significant Johnson Tract Deposit Intersections			99
Table 5-4		Significant Ellis Zone Intersections			103
Table 5-5		Significant intercepts from other prospects			104
Table 6-1		Legend to Geological Map of the Johnson Tract Project			109
Table 6-2		Local Stratigraphy (From Proffett, 2022) with units known to host mineralization at the Deposit highlighted in red			113
Table 7-1		Significant Assay Intersections from 2024 Drill Program at the Johnson Tract Project			138
Table 8-1		Comparison of JT19-082 assay and intersections with historic drillhole JR93-065			148
Table 8-2		Comparison of JT19-085 assay and intersections with historic drillhole JR87-031			149
Table 8-3		Certified mean values for standards used at the Johnson Tract Project			151
Table 10-1		Johnson Tract Master Composite Head Assays			163
Table 10-2		Grindability Results Summary			164
Table 10-3		LCT-1 Projected Metallurgy Based on Cycles 5-6			166
Table 10-4		LCT-1 Concentrate Minor Element Analysis			167
Table 10-5		Estimated Overall Gold Recovery			168
Table 10-6		Johnson Tract Variability Head Assays			169
Table 10-7		Overall Gold Recovery on Variability Composites			169
Table 11-1		Block Model Setup			173
Table 11-2		Geologic Model Volume and Support			178
Table 11-3		Grade Capping Levels			179
Table 11-4		Composite Grade Statistics			181

 

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 12 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Table 11-5		Johnson Tract LG & HG Domain Variogram Models			184
Table 11-6		Grade Estimation Parameters			185
Table 11-7		Resource and Validation Grade Models by Domain			186
Table 11-8		Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate (3.0 g/t AuEq Cut-off)			192
Table 11-9		Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate by Domain (3.0 g/t AuEq Cut-off)			193
Table 11-10		Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Estimate at Range of AuEq Cut-off Grades			193
Table 13-1		Q parameter (length weighted) by zone			199
Table 13-2		Total Operating Cost Estimation for Stope Optimization (US$/t)			205
Table 13-3		Lateral and Ramp Development Dimensions			208
Table 13-4		Vertical Development Dimensions			209
Table 13-5		LOM Development Summary per Annum (m)*			217
Table 13-6		LOM Material Movement Summary (kt)*			217
Table 13-7		Total Resource Material Movement Over the LoM (Production Phase only)*			218
Table 16-1		Commercial terms used in economic analysis for Pb concentrate			231
Table 16-2		Commercial terms used in economic analysis for Cu concentrate			232
Table 16-3		Commercial terms used in economic analysis for Zn concentrate			232
Table 16-4		Commercial terms used in economic analysis for Pyrite/Gold concentrate			233
Table 17-1		Project Environmental Baseline Needs for Permitting			236
Table 17-2		Population in the Area of Analysis			253
Table 17-3		2022 Racial and Ethnicity in Census Tract 1			254
Table 17-4		2022 Labor Force and Unemployment			254
Table 17-5		2021 Median Household Income and Poverty Rate of Individuals in the Area of Analysis			255
Table 17-6		Existing Permits			256
Table 18-1		Johnson Tract Project LOM Capital Cost Estimate (US$M)			267
Table 18-2		Johnson Tract Project - LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$M)			269
Table 19-1		General Input Parameters			270
Table 19-2		Financial Model Summary (Indicated + Inferred Resources)			272
Table 19-3		Financial Model Summary (Indicated Resources Only; Excludes Inferred)			274
Table 19-4		Sensitivity Analysis - NPV (%)			276
Table 19-5		NPV Sensitivity to Au Price			277
Table 19-6		Sensitivity Analysis - IRR			277
Table 23-1		Summary of Costs for Recommended Work			284

 

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 13 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

List of Abbreviations

All currency is in U.S. dollars (US$) unless otherwise stated.

 

Abbreviation		Unit or Term
%		percent
°		degree (degrees)
µm		micron or microns
2D		two dimension
3D		three-dimensional
AA		atomic absorption
AAC		Alaska Administrative Code
ABA		acid-base accounting
ADEC		Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADFG		Alaska Department of Fish and Game
ADNR		Alaska Department of Natural Resources
AES		Alaska Earth Sciences
Ag		silver
AHRS		Alaska Heritage Resource Survey
Ai		Bond Abrasion Index
Al		aluminum
ANCSA		Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act
ANILCA		Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
APMA		application for permits to mine in Alaska
ARD		acid-rock drainage
ATF		Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Au		gold
AuEq		gold equivalent grade
Ba		barium
BBFZ		Bruin Bay fault zone
BCR		Blue Coast Research Ltd.
BWI		ball mill work index
CIF		cost insurance and freight
CIRI		Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
cm		centimeter
CN		cyanide
CORS		continuously operating reference stations
CPG		certified professional geologist
CRIRSCO		Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards
Cu		copper
CV		coefficient of variation

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 14 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Abbreviation		Unit or Term
CWA		clean water act
DC		Difficult Creek
DCIP		direct current resistivity and induced polarization
DFGT		dark fine-grained tuff
DLT		dacite quartz-eye lapilli tuff
dmt		dry metric tonne
DOI		United States Department of Interior
DSM		digital surface model
Dwi		drop weight index
EA		environmental assessment
EDC		East Difficult Creek
EED		environmental evaluation document
E-GRG		extended gravity recoverable gold
EID		environmental information document
EIS		environmental impact statement
EM		electromagnetic
EPSG		European Petroleum Survey Group
ESA		endangered species act
F		Fahrenheit
Fe		iron
FONSI		finding of no significant impact
ft		foot (feet)
FWCZ		footwall copper zone
g		gram
g/t		grams per tonne
GCP		ground control points
GIS		geographic information system
GNSS		global navigation satellite system
GPS		global positioning system
gpt		grams per tonne
GRG		gravity recoverable gold
HG		higher grade
HGM		HighGold Mining
Hz		hertz
IA		Initial Assessment
ICP		induced couple plasma
ICP-AES		inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry
ID		identification
ID		Inverse Distance
IFSAR		interferometric synthetic aperture radar

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 15 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Abbreviation		Unit or Term
in		inch
IP		induced polarization
IR		infrared
Ja		alteration of joints
Jn		number of joint sets
Jr		roughness of joints
JT		Johnson Tract
JT Ext		Johnson Tract Extension
kg		kilograms
km		kilometer
koz		thousand troy ounce
kt		thousand tonnes
kV		kilovolt
kW		weight
kWh		kilowatt-hour
kWh/t		kilowatt-hour per metric tonne
L		liter
lb		pound
LCNPP		Lake Clark National Park and Preserve
LCT		locked cycle test
LG		lower grade
LiDAR		light detection and ranging
LoM		life-of-mine
m		meter
m3		cubic meter
Ma		mega annum (million years)
mi		mile
Mia		The coarse tumbling particle coefficient for a Morrell power equation, kWh/t.
Mic		The crushing coefficient for a Morrell power equation, kWh/t.
Mih		The high pressure grinding roll coefficient for a Morrell power equation, kWh/t.
ML		metal leaching
mm		millimeter
MOU		memorandum of understanding
Moz		million troy ounces
Mt		million tonnes
MW		million watts
MWMP		meteoric water mobility procedure
NAD83		North American datum of 1983
NAVD88		North American vertical datum of 1988
NEPA		National Environmental Policy Act

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 16 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Abbreviation		Unit or Term
NHPA		National Historic Preservation Act
NI 43-101		Canadian National Instrument 43-101
NMFS		National Marine Fisheries Service
NN		nearest neighbor
NOAA		National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
non-PAG		non-potentially acid generating
NPS		National Park Service
NSR		net smelter return
OK		Ordinary Kriging
oz		troy ounce
P80		particle size at which 80% of the material processed is below that size
PA		programmatic agreement
Pb		lead
PL		public law
ppb		parts per billion
PPK		post-processed kinematic
ppm		parts per million
QA/QC		quality assurance/quality control
QFP		quartz feldspar porphyritic dacite
QPC		quartz pebble conglomerate
R2		coefficient of determination
RAA		Resource Associates of Alaska
RC		refining charge
Re-Os		rhenium–osmium
ROD		record of decision
RoM		Run-of-Mine
RoRo		roll on, roll off
RQD		Rock Quality Description
RWCA		right of way certificate of access
S		sulfur
SCSE		AG/SAG mill specific energy
SEC		U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
sec		second
SG		specific gravity
SGS		SGS Natural Resources
Si		silicon
SME		Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration
SUP		special use permit
t		tonne (metric ton) (2,204.6 pounds)
t/d		tonnes per day

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 17 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Abbreviation		Unit or Term
t/h		tonnes per hour
t/m3		tonnes per cubic meter
t/y		tonnes per year
TC		treatment charge
TDS		total dissolved solids
TK		traditional knowledge
TMS		trace mineral search
TTB		“terrazzo” tuff breccia
TWUA		temporary water use authorization
UAV		unmanned aerial vehicle
US		United States of America
USA		United States of America
USACE		United States Army Corps of Engineers
USDI		U.S. Department of the Interior
USEPA		U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USGS		United States Geological Survey
UTM		universal transverse mercator
V		volts
VAT		value-added tax
VMS		volcanogenic massive sulfide
VTEM		versatile time domain electromagnetic
WOTUS		waters of the U.S.
wt.		weight
XRF		x-ray fluorescence
XRT		x-ray transmission
Zn		zinc

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 18 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

1	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report was prepared as an Initial Assessment Technical Report Summary in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) S-K regulations (Title 17, Part 229, Items 601 and 1300 until 1305) for Contango ORE, Inc. (Contango Ore) by SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc. (SRK) on the Johnson Tract Polymetallic (Gold, Zinc, Copper, Silver, Lead) Project (the Project).

 

1.1	Property Description and Ownership

The Johnson Tract Project (the Project) is located in southcentral Alaska, 15 km west of Tuxedni Bay, along the west side of Cook Inlet approximately centered at a longitude of 152 58’ 40” West and latitude of 60 07’ 00” North. The Project is within the Chigmit Mountains along the southern margin of the Alaska Range. Elevations range from 90 m (197 ft.) to 1,200 m (3,937 ft.). The Project is located at a surface elevation of 535 m (1,755 ft.).

The Project area covers 8,513-hectares (21,036 acres) of land owned by Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI) as private inholdings within the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve (LCNPP). The Project area is divided into two blocks; the south block is held as fee simple land with CIRI owning both surface and subsurface mineral rights, whereas in the north block CIRI only owns the subsurface mineral estate and is guaranteed access. Contango Ore, through its wholly owned US subsidiary J T Mining, Inc. (J T Mining), holds a Lease Agreement with CIRI with an effective date of May 17, 2019. The Lease Agreement is for an initial 10-year term (Initial Term), followed by a five-year term (Development Term) to achieve a mine construction decision, and a production term that will continue for so long as operations and commercial production are maintained.

 

1.2	Geology and Mineralization

Regionally, the Project is hosted by the Talkeetna Formation of the Alaska Peninsular Terrane, a 3,280 – 8,202 ft. thick assemblage of Early Jurassic, intermediate volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks (age based on the abundance of fossil megafauna, Detterman et al., 1996). Plutonic rocks of the Alaska-Aleutian Range Batholith which are characterized locally by quartz diorite, quartz monzonite and tonalite phases with U-Pb zircon ages of 183 - 164 Ma (Rioux et al., 2007) are thrust onto the western edge of the Talkeetna Formation. These intrusive rocks are interpreted to be the contemporaneous, plutonic equivalent of the adjacent Talkeetna Formation, and together make up the Talkeetna Arc.

Locally, the Talkeetna Formation and intrusive rocks to the west are divided by the north-south striking Bruin Bay fault, a regional, transpressional fault system which was likely active

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 19 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

in Early Paleogene time (Betka et al., 2017) and may have been responsible for the unroofing of the Talkeetna Arc as early as the Middle-Late Jurassic (cf. Wartes et al., 2013). Most of the work on the Talkeetna Arc has focused on the section exposed northeast of Anchorage, in the Chugach and Talkeetna mountains, where geochemical and isotopic analysis of intermediate to felsic plutonic rocks suggest an intra-oceanic island arc setting (Clift et al., 2005, Rioux et al., 2007) with little to no input of continental crust material. However, a lack of evidence for mid-ocean ridge lavas, and thermobarometry requiring crustal thicknesses in excess of 30 km (Hacker et al., 2008) suggest that the Talkeetna Arc was likely a ‘mature’ island arc.

Mineralization is hosted within southeast dipping volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks of the early Jurassic Talkeetna Formation, overlain by middle to late Jurassic sedimentary rocks of the Tuxedni, Chinitna and Naknek formations. The mineralization forms a steeply southeast dipping, tabular silicified body that contains a stockwork of quartz-sulfide veinlets and brecciation, cutting through and surrounded by a widespread zone of anhydrite alteration (Proffett, 1993). Drilling has defined silicification and mineralization from surface to a vertical depth of approximately 350 m (1,150 ft.), over a total strike length in excess of 600 m (1,970 ft.), and to a maximum true width of 55 m (180 ft.). The main body of mineralization is bound on the east by the southeast dipping Dacite fault.

The Deposit consists of a complex stockwork system of high-angle, 1-10 cm wide veins and breccia zones containing quartz, sphalerite, chalcopyrite, galena, anyhydrite, barite, Fe chlorite and native gold (Steefel, 1987). In addition to veins and diffuse breccias, mineralization is also characterized by massive structureless intergrowths of quartz and sulfides, commonly with very coarse-grained sulfide mineralogy. Veins show characteristics associated with epithermal styles of mineralization. Open-space fill texture is common and breccias consist of subrounded fragments hosted within a sulfide-silica matrix. Early and relatively minor base metal mineralization (sphalerite) formed with the pervasive anhydrite-chlorite-sericite alteration. Later base (sphalerite-galena-chalcopyrite) and precious metal mineralization formed over several mineralizing events within the silicified stockwork vein zone. Re-Os dating of a bulk-sulfide separate, containing both chalcopyrite and pyrite from the footwall zone produced an age of 186 ± 6Ma for mineralization. This suggests that mineralization was contemporaneous with Talkeetna Arc volcanism and the deposition of Talkeetna Formation host rocks (earliest Jurassic, Detterman et al. 1996), and is consistent with shallow sub-seafloor setting for mineralization proposed by Steefel (1987).

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 20 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

1.3	Status of Exploration

The Johnson Tract Project has been subject to several historic drilling campaigns (1981-1997) with the most recent drilling campaigns occurring between 2019 and 2024. To date, 82,978 m of exploration drilling has been carried out, distributed in 269 drill holes, of which 120 NQ and HQ sized diamond drill holes were used to generate the geologic model for the Deposit.

The Authors are confident that the resulting data was acquired using adequate quality control procedures that meet industry best practices for a drilling-stage exploration project, and the data are adequate for purposes of mineral resource estimation.

 

1.4	Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

The mineral resource estimate documented herein is an update of the initial Johnson Tract Deposit (the Deposit) Resource dated June 15th, 2020. New geologic domains were created in 2022 using Seequent Leapfrog Geo^® software. Gold, silver, copper, lead and zinc grades were estimated using Geovia GEMS^® software within interpreted mineralized zones. Modeled domains include the Johnson Tract Deposit domain (JT domain), the Footwall Copper Zone (FCZ) domain, and the Johnson Tract Extension (JT Ext) domain. The JT and FCZ domains are subdivided into ‘higher grade’ (JT HG and FCZ HG) and ‘lower grade’ (JT LG and FCZ LG) subdomains. Along strike to the northeast, the JT Ext domain consists of six distinct thin tabular wireframes The largest of these, the Johnson domain, contained a sufficient number of samples to allow meaningful spatial analysis and grades to be estimated by ordinary kriging. Grades in the other, smaller domains were estimated by inverse distance weighting. Drill density of the Johnson domain is high, allowing the categorization of an Indicated Mineral Resource in that zone. All other estimated mineralized material has been classified as Inferred. Figure 1-1 illustrates drill hole locations, the extents of the resource block model and the interpreted zones of mineralization.

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 21 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

 

Figure 1-1

Johnson Tract Drilling, Mineralized Zones and Block Model Extents (view to ESE)

The majority of the mineral resource is contained within the JT HG domain. The JT HG domain consists of a single solid that is a steeply dipping, 25 to 70 m (82 to 233 ft.) thick, and extends 125 to 200 m (410 to 656 ft.) along strike and 250 m (820 ft.) vertically, with a moderate to steep plunge to the northeast. This domain was defined using logged heavily veined and brecciated silicified intervals and refined using a 2 g/t AuEq cut-off. The volume includes any internal waste that would likely be mined. The Leapfrog Geo Indicator Interpolant and the Economic Composite tools were also used as guides at a 3 g/t AuEq cut-off.

The resource estimate for the Deposit is reported in both Indicated and Inferred categories. There is no portion of the mineralized zones that is considered to comprise measured resources at this time. The resource block model was classified in accordance with the SEC S-K 1300.

This Johnson Tract Deposit resource estimate is based on assay data available as of April 6th, 2022. A total of 120 NQ and HQ sized diamond drill holes (42,575m; 139,678 ft.) were used to generate the new geological model for the Deposit, 75 of which intersected the interpreted mineralized zones in 7,633 m (25,042 ft.) of core with a total of 5,078 assays inside the mineralized solids.

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 22 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

Estimated blocks were initially classified based on spatial parameters related to drill spacing and configuration – namely calculated drill density and the distance to the closest composite. Blocks were initially assigned as inferred if drilled at a maximum spacing of 100 m (328 ft.) or within 30 m (98 ft.) of the closest sample. Within that volume, blocks having a maximum drill spacing of 40 m (131 ft.) were initially classified as Indicated Mineral Resource. Measures were then taken to assess the contiguous nature of classified blocks at a range of cut-off grades, such that the resource has reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction by underground mining methods.

Sources of uncertainty associated with the collection of geologic and analytical information (sampling or drilling methods, data processing and handling) have largely been dealt with during exploration and drilling activities as described in later sections of this report. Uncertainty associated with geologic modeling are reflected in the lesser drill density (higher uncertainty) supporting the Inferred Mineral Resource. The Indicated Resource, in the JT Main zone, is supported by drilling at a minimum 40 m (131 ft.) spacing. Uncertainty attributable to estimation methodology is again largely a function of the density of available drill information. Areas with lower drill density have been estimated by geometric methods (inverse distance weighting) as opposed to geostatistical methods. Once in-fill drilling is available, that uncertainty will be reduced.

The contiguous, classified volume was further checked to manually include or exclude blocks that could not be practically handled in an underground mining scenario (pillars above and below cut-off). The resulting classified volumes are shown in Figure 1-2 and totalled in Table 1-1.

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 23 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

 

Figure 1-2

Johnson Tract 2022 Resource Classification (view to ESE)

 

Table 1-1

Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate (3.0 g/t AuEq Cut-off)

 

Category		Tonnes (000s)		Au (g/t)		Ag (g/t)		Cu (%)		Pb (%)		Zn (%)		AuEq (g/t)
Indicated		3,489		5.33		6.0		0.56		0.67		5.21		9.39
Inferred		706		1.36		9.1		0.59		0.30		4.18		4.76
Contained Metal
Category				Au (K oz)		Ag (K oz)		Cu (M lb)		Pb (M lb)		Zn (M lb)		AuEq (K oz)
Indicated				598		673		43.1		51.5		400.8		1,053
Inferred				31		207		9.2		4.7		65.1		108

Notes

 

1.	Includes all drill holes completed at Johnson Tract Deposit, with drilling completed between 1982 and most recently as October 2021

 

2.	Assumed metal prices are US$1650/oz for gold (Au), US$20/oz for silver (Ag), US$3.50/lb copper (Cu), US$1/lb lead (Pb), and US$1.50/lb for zinc (Zn). Metal prices were established considering the review of three-year averages of published monthly values.

 

3.	Gold Equivalent (AuEq) is based on assumed metal prices and payable metal recoveries of 97% for Au, 85% for Ag, 85% Cu, 72% Pb and 92% Zn from metallurgical testwork completed in 2022.

 

4.	AuEq equals = Au g/t + Ag g/t × 0.01 + Cu% × 1.27 + Pb% × 0.31 + Zn% × 0.59

 

5.	An average bulk density value of 2.84 used as determined by conventional analytical methods for assay samples

 

6.	Capping applied to assays to restrict the impact of high-grade outliers

 

7.	Preliminary underground constrains were applied, including the elimination of isolated or scattered blocks above cut-off grade to define the “reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction” for the Mineral Resource Estimate

 

8.	Mineral resources as reported are undiluted

 

9.	Mineral resource tonnages have been rounded to reflect the precision of the estimate

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 24 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025

SRK Consulting (Canada), Inc.

 

10.	Readers are cautioned that mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability

The Indicated Mineral Resource is entirely within the JT Domains. Small volumes of the JT Extension and Footwall Copper Domains are included in the Inferred category. Table 1-2 provides domain breakdown of the 2022 resource by domain.

 

Table 1-2

Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate by Domain (3.0 g/t AuEq Cut-off)

 

						Indicated																Inferred
Domain		Tonnes (1,000s)		Au (g/t)		Ag (g/t)		Cu (%)		Pb (%)		Zn (%)		AuEq (g/t)		Tonnes (1,000s)		Au (g/t)		Ag (g/t)		Cu (%)		Pb (%)		Zn (%)		AuEq (g/t)
JT Main		3,489		5.33		6.0		0.56		0.67		5.21		9.39		405		1.86		4.5		0.32		0.35		4.29		4.94
JT Ext'n																167		1.15		6.1		0.31		0.38		5.50		4.96
Copper																134		0.14		26.5		1.74		0.08		2.20		3.95
Total		3,489		5.33		6.0		0.56		0.67		5.21		9.39		706		1.36		9.1		0.59		0.30		4.18		4.76
Contained Metal
								Indicated														Inferred
Domain				Au (K oz)		Ag (K oz)		Cu (M lb)		Pb (M lb)		Zn (M lb)		AuEq (K oz)				Au (K oz)		Ag (K oz)		Cu (M lb)		Pb (M lb)		Zn (M lb)		AuEq (K oz)
JT Main				598		673		43.1		51.5		400.8		1,053				24		59		2.9		3.1		38.3		64
JT Ext'n																		6		33		1.1		1.4		20.2		27
Copper																		1		115		5.2		0.2		6.5		17
Total				598		673		43.1		51.5		400.8		1,053				31		207		9.2		4.7		65.1		108

Contango Ore has elected to report this mineral resource at a higher cut-off grade of 3.0 g/t Au, given the high-grade nature of the Deposit. To illustrate sensitivity to AuEq cut-off, a range of cutoff grades are included in Table 1-3.

 

Table 1-3

Johnson Tract Deposit Mineral Estimate at Range of AuEq Cut-off Grades

 

COG						Indicated																Inferred
AuEq (g/t)		Tonnes (1,000s)		Au (g/t)		Ag (g/t)		Cu (%)		Pb (%)		Zn (%)		AuEq (g/t)		Tonnes (1,000s)		Au (g/t)		Ag (g/t)		Cu (%)		Pb (%)		Zn (%)		AuEq (g/t)
2.5		3,608		5.19		5.9		0.55		0.66		5.14		9.18		934		1.13		9.3		0.59		0.26		3.74		4.27
2.75		3,557		5.25		5.9		0.56		0.66		5.16		9.27		800		1.24		9.3		0.60		0.28		3.99		4.53
3.0		3,489		5.33		6.0		0.56		0.67		5.21		9.39		706		1.36		9.1		0.59		0.30		4.18		4.76
Contained Metal
COG								Indicated														Inferred
AuEq (g/t)				Au (K oz)		Ag (K oz)		Cu (M lb)		Pb (M lb)		Zn (M lb)		AuEq (K oz)				Au (K oz)		Ag (K oz)		Cu (M lb)		Pb (M lb)		Zn (M lb)		AuEq (K oz)
2.5				602		684		43.7		52.5		408.8		1,065				34		279		12.2		5.4		77.0		128
2.75				600		675		43.9		51.8		404.6		1,060				32		239		10.6		4.9		70.4		117
3.0				598		673		43.1		51.5		400.8		1,053				31		207		9.2		4.7		65.1		108

 

1.5	Mining Developments

The Johnson Tract Project (the Project) is amenable for extraction via underground mining methods. Consideration of suitable mining methods for the Project was based on the Deposit size, geometry (e.g., thickness, continuity), average grade, desired production rate,

 

Contango ORE, Inc. – Johnson Tract Project		Page 25 of 293
Technical Report Summary – May 2025