April 2008

Cautionary Notice
This presentation contains certain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, such as
statements of Skye’s plans, objectives, strategies, expectations and intentions. The words “may”, “would”,
“could”, “will”, “intend”, “plan”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect” and similar expressions, as they
relate to Skye, or its management, are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Many factors could
cause Skye’s actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results,
performance or achievements that may be expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Forward-
looking statements may include mineral reserve and resource estimates, commodity prices, estimates of future
production, unit costs, construction schedules and construction cost estimates, costs of capital projects, credit
market conditions and timing of commencement of operations and are based on current expectations and beliefs
concerning future developments and their potential effects on Skye. Factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from any forward-looking statement include, but are not limited to failure to construct the
Fenix project in the time frame and within estimated costs as currently planned; variations in capital and
operating costs from estimated costs; unavailability of key personnel, skilled labor, supplies, equipment,
machinery, parts, contractors and necessary components of Skye’s project; variations in the grade and recovery of
ore from estimated amounts; fluctuations in global demand, supply of and price for nickel; inability to obtain
financing on commercially suitable terms; delays in obtaining or failures to obtain required governmental,
environmental or other project permits, licenses or approvals; failure to build and maintain good relationships
with the local community; illegal land occupations; civil disturbances; changes in the regulatory and political
environment; unforeseen geological, physical or meteorological conditions; natural disasters; labor shortages,
stoppages or disputes; industrial disputes; inflation; changes in exchange rates; political factors; fluctuations in
commodity prices; and other factors including those described under the heading “Risk Factors” in Skye’s most
recent Annual Information Form filed on Sedar. The forward-looking statements included in this presentation
represent Skye’s views as of the date of this presentation. While Skye anticipates that subsequent events and
developments may cause its views to change, it specifically disclaims any obligation to update these forward-
looking statements. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing Skye’s views as
of any date subsequent to the date of this presentation. All subsequent written and oral forward-looking
statements attributable to Skye or persons acting on its behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by this
notice. See “Supplementary Information” at the end of this presentation for additional information.

2
Share Information(1)

Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) Symbol- SKR

Market Capitalization C$385 million

Share Price C$7.75

52 week high/low C$19.34/C$3.85

Ownership:

Amber Capital 18%

Vale Inco(2) 11%

BHP Billiton(2) 9.5%

(1) As at April 11, 2008.
(2) Based on Vale Inco March 6, 2007 public filing and BHP Billiton June 22, 2006 public filing.

3
Fenix Project Highlights

‣ World class brownfield nickel laterite project

‣ Low risk ferro-nickel production using conventional smelting

technology

‣ All major permits received, site preparation underway

‣ Basic Engineering complete

‣ Additional resources beyond planned 30 year mine life and

considerable exploration potential
‣ Opportunity for growth through hydromet expansion(1)

(1) See Supplementary Information at the back of this presentation for important information regarding the Hydrometallurgical
Expansion Preliminary Assessment.

4
Fenix Location

MEXICO
BELIZE

FENIX
Sto Tomas

GUATEMALA Lake Izabal

HONDURAS

Guatemala City

Puerto Quetzal

EL SALVADOR

5
Fenix Project - Well Situated

PUERTO
RIO DULCE BARRIOS

EL ESTOR

Lake Izabal

MARISCOS

120km

6
Brownfield Plant and Mine

7
Guatemala: Political & Economic Situation
‣ General Climate
• Conservative fiscal and monetary policies
• Free trade treaty with US
• Continued strong economic growth and low tax ratio to GDP

‣ Recent Changes of Government

• New administration focused on social investment, human security and
investment promotion
• Anticipate continuity in policies and support of project
• Consistent and conservative foreign policy emphasizing
solid ties with North America

‣ Community Relations
• Significant community support for project and CGN
• Ongoing dialogue with illegal occupiers of CGN properties
• Illegal land occupations ongoing issue in Guatemala

8
Reserve Areas

Fenix Exploitation License – 248 km2

Area 215

Area 217
Area 212
Cahaboncito Norte Property

Area 213
Area 251 Plant

Lake Izabal

Chichipate Limestone License

9
Additional Fenix Resource Areas

Fenix Exploitation License

Area 255 Area 216

Area 255

Area 211

Area 210
Area 219 Area 218
Cahaboncito Norte Property

Plant
Area 214
Lake Izabal
Area 245
Area 256

Area 260

10

10
La Gloria Mine
Cover

Limonite

Transition

Saprolite

Bedrock

11
World’s Largest New Laterite Projects 2008-2011
Project/Company Annual First Project Type Grade % Ni Reserves
Capacity Production (million
(mlbs) tonnes)

Goro, New Caledonia

132.3 2009 Greenfield PAL 1.48% 120.0
Vale Inco

Ambatovy, Madagascar
132.3 2010 Greenfield PAL 1.04% 125.0
Sherritt/Sumitomo/Korean

Koniambo, New Caledonia Greenfield

132.3 2011 2.40% 62.5
Xstrata Ferro-Nickel

Onca Puma, Brazil Greenfield

125.7 2009 1.80% 78.0
Vale Inco Ferro-Nickel

Ravensthorpe, Australia
99.2 2008 Greenfield PAL 0.67% 238.0
BHP Billiton

Barro Alto, Brazil Greenfield

77.2 2009 1.75% 40.4
Anglo American Ferro-Nickel

Ramu River, Papua N.G.

72.8 2010 Greenfield PAL 0.91% 75.7
CMCC/Jinchuan/Jien/JISCO

Fenix, Guatemala Awaiting Brownfield

48.5 1.63% 41.4
Skye Resources Financing Ferro-Nickel

Source for slides 12 and 13: CRU Strategies, August 2007 updated to January 2008, Firm and Probable Projects and public company filings.

12
 US$/lb Nickel Capacity
Ko

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
ni
am
bo

Go
ro
Am
ba
to
Ra vy
ve
ns
t ho
rp
e
Ba
r ro
Al
Fe to
ni
x
Ph
as
e
1
Ra
m
u
Ri
ve
r
Capex for 2008-2011 Laterite Projects

On
ca
Pu
m
a
13
Fenix Operating Cost Comparison
Cash operating costs for primary nickel after by-product credits, c/lb contained Ni, 2012

1000
1st Quartile 2nd Quartile 3rd Quartile 4th Quartile

800
USc/lb

600
Fenix, Years 6-10 Fenix, Years 1-5
(power self-generated) (power purchased)
400

200

0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Cumulative % share of production
Data: Technical Report on an Update to the Fenix Project, Izabal, Guatemala, dated September 15, 2007 and its Addendum Report
dated October 25, 2007 (collectively, the “September 2007 Technical Report”) filed at www.sedar.com on September 18, 2007 and
October 26, 2007, respectively and CRU Strategies.

14
Historic Nickel Prices
2007 $
$18.00 Nominal Price
Market Price (LME Cash primary Ni) Broker Consensus Estimate

$16.00
2008 YTD
$14.00 1970-2007
Avg. Price Long Term
2007$/lb Nickel Broker
$12.00 Consensus

$10.00

$8.00

$6.00

$4.00

$2.00 Fenix Yr. 1-5 Avg.

Cash Cost $3.47(1)
$0.00
1970 1977 1984 1991 1998 2005 2011 2015
Est.

(1) Based on September 2007 Technical Report.

15
Ferro-Nickel Project Description(1)

‣ Phase I – Refurbish and expand mine and process plant

• Re-open and expand mine, including new mining equipment and support
facilities
• Double capacity of existing process plant:
- New dryer
- Second kiln
- Rebuilt furnace with increased power
- New ferro-nickel refinery
• Upgraded environmental controls
• Road transport to/from trans-shipment facilities at the Port of Santo Tomas de
Castilla
• Power transmission line (by power supplier) and substation
‣ Phase II – Construction of on-site solid fuel power plant

(1) Based on September 2007 Technical Report.

16
Existing Infrastructure

Mine Road

Mine Office
Highway

Warehouse
Water Pumps
Power Plant
Shops

To Dock General Office

Oil Storage

17
Hydromet Project Summary(1)

‣ Construct hydromet plant to process limonitic and transitional

material
‣ Produce a nickel/cobalt hydroxide intermediate
‣ Re-configure mine plan so that transition material is processed by
hydromet rather than smelting

Hydromet Project Status

‣ Leach test work complete
‣ Initial pilot plant completed
‣ Next steps pre-feasibility and feasibility studies

(1) See Supplementary Information at the back of this presentation for important information regarding the Hydrometallurgical
Expansion Preliminary Assessment.

18
Ferro-Nickel Project Parameters(1)

Capital – Phase I $ Million 640

Capital – Phase II $ Million 344

Sustaining capital $ Million 245

Ore feed tpa (avg.) 1,378,000

Strip ratio 1.1

Recovery % 89.6

Ni in ferro-nickel product % 35.2

(1) Based on September 2007 Technical Report.

19
 Ferro-Nickel Project Parameters(1)

Years 1-5 Years 6-20 30 year mine life

Ore grade Ni % 1.94 1.70 1.64

Avg Ni
Million lb/year 46.2 47.6 44.4
production
Avg cash cost $/lb Ni 3.47 2.34 2.66

Avg royalties * $/lb Ni 0.27 0.51 0.49

(1)Based on September 2007 Technical Report.
* Assuming $6.50/lb Ni prices

20
Ferro-Nickel Summary of Economics(1)

$ Millions

NPV 10% ($6.50 lb. Ni) 275

NPV 10% ($8.00 lb. Ni) 667

IRR ($6.50 lb. Ni) 14.3

IRR ($8.00 lb. Ni) 19.8

$1.00/lb increase in nickel prices during first 5 years
of production increases NPV by $94 million

(1) Based on September 2007 Technical Report.

21
Agreements with Vale Inco

‣ Sales Agency Agreement

• For finished products such as ferro-nickel Vale Inco will act as sales agent for
2.75% commission

‣ Royalties
• Vale Inco receives a Production Interest based on tonnes mined and a NSR on
ferro-nickel

‣ Certain Other Rights

• Nominate one Skye director
• Limited right to participate in financings
• If Skye unable to finance by early 2010, Vale Inco has right to provide funds and
assume management
• Right to acquire if abandoned
• ROFR in certain circumstance on sale of project

22
Ferro-Nickel Project Milestones

Mine EIA Approval January 2006

Fenix Exploitation License April 2006

Feasibility Study Complete September 2006

Plant EIA Approval June 2007

Construction Permit, Equipment/Materials Tax
July 2007
Exoneration and Resolution of Gov’t Ownership
Basic Engineering Complete August 2007

Technical Report on Update Filed September 2007

Power Purchase Agreement Signed October 2007

EPCM Contract Awarded and Power Grid
November 2007
Interconnection Approved

23
Project Status

‣ Debt market conditions caused deferral of financing

‣ As a result construction ramp up is being delayed
‣ In discussion with vendors to preserve value
‣ Engineering work continuing
‣ Continuing site preparation
• Construction camp refurbishment
• Electrical and other demolition
• 617 people working on site
• Continuing to recruit owners team

24
Financing

‣ Reviewing opportunities to finance the project

‣ Continuing process to identify potential partners

‣ Debt financing option

• Documentation prepared

• Rating agencies completed their work

• Would require improved debt market conditions

‣ Cash balance $74 million (as of April 11)

25
Highlights

‣ World-class, high grade, low capital project

‣ Well maintained plant and infrastructure
‣ Proven management and construction team
‣ Government and community support
‣ Major permits in place
‣ Engineering well advanced
‣ Substantial future expansion potential

26
Saprolite Reserves(1) 30 yr. mine life

Tonnes Contained
% Ni
Millions Ni Tonnes

Proven 8.7 1.81 157,000

Probable 32.7 1.58 516,000

Proven and Probable 41.4 1.63 673,000
(1) Based on September 2007 Technical Report.

27
Fenix Resources(1) (Reserves Excluded)

Tonnes
Saprolite(2) % Ni % Co
Millions
Measured 8.7 1.79 *
Indicated 35.2 1.75 *
Measured + Indicated 43.9 1.76 *
Inferred 70.3 1.59 *
Limonite(3)
Measured 51.7 1.11 0.11
Indicated 13.2 1.16 0.10
Measured + Indicated 64.9 1.12 0.11
Inferred 48.6 1.10 0.09
* Not reported. Co is not recovered from the ferro-nickel.
(1) Based on the September 2007 Technical Report and news release dated February 13, 2008, updating the Fenix resource estimates. See
“Supplementary Information” at the end of this presentation for further information related to the preparation of resource estimates.
(2) 1.25% Ni cut-off grade used for inferred saprolite in Fenix Feasibility Study deposit areas. 1.25% and 1.60% Ni cut-off grade used for Measured
and Indicated saprolite contained in other area Resources not included in Feasibility Study and 1.00%, 1.25% and 1.60% Ni cut-off grade use for
Inferred saprolite contained in other area Resources not included in Feasibility Study.
(3) 1.00% Ni equivalent cut-off used for limonite, where Ni equivalent = Ni + 3 Co.

28
Ferro-Nickel Production Schedule(1)
70 3.0%
Estimated Fenix Production

60
2.5%

50
2.0%

40
1.5%
30

1.0%
20

0.5%
10

0 0.0%
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28
Year

Ni Mlbs/yr Grade %Ni

(1) Based on September 2007 Technical Report.

29
Proven Project Team

Hugh Duncan – Project Director, Fenix

40 years experience with a significant leadership role in several Falconbridge projects, in
particular the development of the Koniambo ferro-nickel project in New Caledonia and the EPCM
implementation of the Collahuasi copper project in Chile. Formerly Sr. VP and Operations Director
of Jaguar Nickel.

David Arana – Director, Construction and Operations

34 years experience, led commissioning and ramp-up for smelter operations including Mineracao
Serra de Fortaleza, Kennecott Utah Copper and Mexicana de Cobre.

John Scott – Engineering Manager

30 years experience during which he was the Director of Operations for Minco plc (Minera Orca
S.A. de C.V.) with focus on the Laguna Pedemalillo Silver/Mercury Project. Senior Project Manager
at Micon International Limited and 15 years as Senior Project Manager for SNC Lavalin Engineers &
Construction Inc.

30
Experienced Management Team

C.K. Benner Vice Chairman and CEO

D. Huggins Chief Operating Officer

K. Service Chief Financial Officer

J. Bracale President of Compañía

Guatemalteca de Níquel S.A. (CGN)

D. Bryson VP Finance and Treasurer

D. Neudorf VP Technology & Development

R. Killam VP Environment, Health & Safety

B. Macdonald VP Legal Affairs

31
Board of Directors

Dr. Wm. Gordon Bacon, P. Eng., Chairman(1),(2)

Colin Benner, P. Eng., Vice Chairman
Ian Austin
Jean-Sebastien Blanchette
Robert (Bob) Horn, P. Geo.(2),(3)
Terrence (Terry) Lyons(1),(3),(4)
David McIntyre, LL.B.
Sheila O’Brien(3),(4)
Ron Simkus, P. Eng., FAusIMM, CIM(2),(4)
David Smith, CPA (1), (3)

Member of Following Committees: (1) Audit (2) Technical (3) GHRC (4) Environment, Health & Safety

32
Capital Structure(1)
Security symbol TSX:SKR
52-Week High/Low C$19.34/C$3.85
Shares outstanding
- basic 51,035,637
- fully diluted 58,630,660
Warrants – C$15.13 expiring 01/2009 3,105,000
Stock options – av. C$6.96 3,643,900
DSUs and PSUs 846,123
Management and board ownership – shares 1,352,169
Amber Master Fund (Cayman) ownership
- shares 9,179,600
- warrants 270,000
Vale Inco ownership – shares (2) 5,615,714
BHP Billiton Group ownership – shares (2) 4,846,400
April 11, 2008 cash balance US$73,900,000
(1) As at April 11, 2008.
(2) Based on Vale Inco March 6, 2007 public filing and BHP Billiton June 22, 2006 public filing.

33
Supplementary Information
The independent Qualified Persons (QP) (for the purpose of National Instrument 43-101, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects)
are:
a.for the ferronickel project Feasibility Study dated September 25, 2006: (i) Andrew F. Ross FAusIMM (CP) and P. Geo. (mineral resource
estimates), of Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty. Ltd., Perth, WA, and Phil Morriss MAusIMM. (mining reserve estimates, mine
plan, mine capital and operating costs); (ii) Mark Sucharda, P. Eng., of Hatch Ltd. of Mississauga, ON (process and infrastructure
engineering and cost estimation); (iii) Dr. J. Paul Golightly, P. Geo., of Golightly Geosciences Ltd. of Sudbury, ON (property description
and location, accessibility, history, geological setting, deposit types, mineralization, exploration, drilling, sampling method and sample
preparation, analyses and security, data verification); (iv) S. Gonsalves, P.Eng., President of Trow International Ltd. (geotechnical
assessment); and (v) Brian Krysa P. Eng., of Hatch Ltd. of Mississauga, ON (mineral processing and metallurgical testing);
b.for the Hydrometallurgical Expansion Preliminary Assessment dated September 25, 2006: (i) Andrew F. Ross FAusIMM (CP) and P. Geo.,
of Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Inc. of Vancouver, BC (mineral resource estimates); (ii) Brian Krysa, P. Eng., of Hatch Ltd. of
Mississauga, ON (process and infrastructure engineering and cost estimation); (iii) Jan Sajer, P Eng. of J. Sajer Engineering Services Inc.
of Burlington, ON., (mining study); and (iv) Dr. Paul Golightly, P.Geo., of Golightly Geosciences Ltd. of Sudbury, ON (property
description and location, accessibility, history, geological setting, deposit types, mineralization, exploration, drilling, sampling method
and sample preparation, analyses and security, data verification);
c.for the portion of the mineral resource estimates that is based on the technical report dated July 4, 2006 filed at www.sedar.com
August 17, 2006 entitled “Mineral Resource Estimate, Fenix Project, Izabal, Guatemala, July 4, 2006”, Andrew F. Ross FAusIMM (CP) and
P. Geo. and Dr. J. Paul Golightly, P. Geo., of Golightly Geosciences Ltd. of Sudbury, ON;

34
Supplementary Information (cont.)
d. with respect to the NI 43-101 technical report updating the Project Feasibility Study entitled “Technical Report on an Update to the
Fenix Project, Izabal Guatemala,” dated September 15, 2007 and filed on SEDAR on September 18, 2007, and the addendum report
to such technical report, dated October 25, 2007 and filed on SEDAR on October 26, 2007 (collectively, the “2007 Technical
Report“): (i) Andrew F. Ross, FAusIMM (CP), P.Geo. M.Sc. (mineral resource estimates), and Richard A. Matthews, MAusIMM (mining
reserve estimates, mine plan, mine capital and operating costs), both of Snowden; (ii) Mark Sucharda, P.Eng. (process and
infrastructure engineering and cost estimation) of Hatch; (iii) Dr. J. Paul Golightly, P.Geo. (property description and location,
accessibility, history, geological setting, deposit types, mineralization, exploration, drilling, sampling method and sample
preparation, analyses and security, and data verification) of Golightly Geoscience; (iv) Stan Gonsalves, P.Eng. (geotechnical
assessment) of Trow International; (v) Brian Krysa, P.Eng. (mineral processing and metallurgical testing) of Hatch and (vi) Jan
Sajer, P.Eng. of Sajer Engineering;

e. for the portion of the mineral resource estimates (re-classification of historic mineral resource estimates) that is based on the
technical report dated August 5, 2005 filed at www.sedar.com on August 9, 2005 entitled “Fenix Nickel Project: Nickel Laterite
Deposits of the Lake Izabal Region, Guatemala”, Dr. J. Paul Golightly, P. Geo., of Golightly Geosciences Ltd. of Sudbury, ON.

f. the mineral resource estimate for Area 216 was prepared under the supervision of Mr. Alex Trueman, P.Geo., Divisional Manager for
Resource Evaluation in Snowden's Vancouver office. Verification of Area 216 drillhole and assay data was performed by Dr. P.
Golightly, P.Geo. of Golightly Geoscience Ltd.

Dr. Paul Golightly, P. Geo., of Golightly Geosciences Ltd. of Sudbury, ON is the independent QP, as defined under NI 43-101,
responsible for the quality control and verification of the drill hole data used by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Inc. in the
resource estimates. Details of the procedures for logging, sampling, density determinations, assaying and quality control measures
are given on Skye’s website: www.skyeresources.com.

35
Supplementary Information (cont.)
The Canadian Securities regulatory Authorities provided exemptive relief from certain provisions of National Instrument 43-101 with
respect to the filing of the Technical Report dated July 4, 2006 entitled “Mineral Resource Estimate, Fenix Project, Izabal, Guatemala,
July 4, 2006”, and required that any other disclosure supported by the Technical Report include the following statements:
The Preliminary Assessment entitled “Hydrometallurgical Expansion Preliminary Assessment, FENIX Project, Izabal, Guatemala” and as
summarized in the Technical Report includes an assumption concerning the upgrading of inferred resources, but such 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 projections for these inferred mineral resources will be realized. The
Preliminary Assessment is preliminary in nature and assumes that some inferred mineral resources can be used in the ferro-nickel process
to replace the measured and indicated resources re-assigned to the hydro-metallurgical process. Skye estimates that it will take a
minimum of three to four years to construct and evaluate a pilot plant and complete a pre-feasibility study and a feasibility study,
within the meaning of those terms in NI-43-101, before Skye can make any decision to implement the hydro-metallurgical process
outlined in the Preliminary Assessment and the Preliminary Assessment assumes that the hydro-metallurgical process will not commence
until year four of the operations of the ferro-nickel process. The hydro-metallurgical process outlined in the Preliminary Assessment and
the ferro-nickel process outlined in the Fenix Feasibility Study dated October 2006 are at this stage separate, stand-alone mineral
processing scenarios, and the mine plan and schedule in the Fenix Feasibility Study would have to be revised if a decision were made to
combine the two processes; therefore the results of the economic analyses on the two processes are not additive.
Since the hydromet expansion project Preliminary Assessment was completed in October 2006, the ferro-nickel project scope and cost
estimates have been updated, as described in this presentation. Some of these scope and cost estimate changes would impact the
hydrometallurgical expansion. For example, project operating supplies, mainly elemental sulphur, would no longer be shipped to site by
a combination of trucking and barging. They would be shipped by an all-truck method, as in the ferro-nickel project. Updates to unit
prices of fuel oil and also unit labour costs would also apply to the hydromet expansion project. None of such scope and unit cost
changes have been included in the analysis in this presentation, as no further work has been done on the hydromet expansion project
since the Preliminary Assessment was completed in October 2006. In addition, the nickel price forecast was updated for the financial
analysis of the ferro-nickel project. The update was not taken into account in the hydromet expansion financial analysis.
All $ amounts for the ferro-nickel project are in 2007 US Dollars. All $ amounts for the hydromet project are in 2006 US Dollars. IRR &
NPV calculations are calculated on a real after tax basis to CGN for its 100% ownership interest (and therefore before Canadian taxes, if
any) assuming all-equity financing.
The estimates, projections and conclusions summarized in this presentation, are subject to important qualifications, assumptions and
exclusions, all of which are set out in a Technical Report on an Update to the Fenix Project, Izabel, Guatemala, dated September 15,
2007 and its Addendum Report dated October 25, 2007, filed at www.sedar.com on September 18, 2007 and October 24, 2007
respectively. To fully understand the summary information contained in this presentation, the Technical Report should be read in its
entirety.

36
Cautionary Note to Investors
Mineral resources and mineral reserves referred to in this presentation are reported in accordance
with the Guidelines of the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (“CIM”), required for
Canadian resource issuers under National Instrument 43-101 (Standards of Disclosure for Mineral
Projects) of the Canadian Securities Administrators (“NI 43-101”). NI 43-101 establishes standards
for all public disclosure a Canadian issuer makes of scientific and technical information concerning
mineral projects. Unless otherwise indicated, all reserve and resource estimates contained in this
presentation have been prepared in accordance with NI 43-101 and not the SEC’s Industry Guide 7.
These standards differ significantly from the requirements of the SEC (including under its Industry
Guide 7), and reserve and resource information contained in this presentation may not be
comparable to similar information disclosed by U.S. companies subject to the reporting and
disclosure requirements of the SEC. One principal difference between NI 43-101 and the SEC’s
requirement under Industry Guide 7 is the absence under Industry Guide 7 of any provision for the
reporting of estimates other than proven (measured) or probable (indicated) reserves. There is,
therefore, no equivalent for “mineral resources” under the SEC’s Industry Guide 7.

37