Summa Silver Files Technical Reports for its Two American High-Grade Silver Projects

Rhea-AI Summary

Summa Silver Corp. (SSVR) has filed technical reports for its two 100% owned US silver projects, detailing mineral resource estimates. The Hughes Project in Nevada shows:

• Indicated Resources: 10.26M silver equivalent ounces (5.81M oz silver, 0.05M oz gold) at 333 g/t AgEq
• Inferred Resources: 32.91M AgEq (15.91M oz silver, 0.19M oz gold) at 421 g/t AgEq
• Tailings Resources: 2.74M AgEq (1.79M oz silver, 0.011M oz gold) at 68 g/t AgEq

The Mogollon Project in New Mexico contains Inferred Resources of 32.08M AgEq (12.12M oz silver, 0.24M oz gold) at 367 g/t AgEq. Calculations use silver at $25/oz and gold at $2100/oz, with recovery rates of 90-97%.

Positive

• Large resource base: 75.25M oz AgEq total across both projects
• High-grade deposits: 333-421 g/t AgEq for Hughes, 367 g/t AgEq for Mogollon
• 100% ownership of both projects
• Additional resource potential in tailings (2.74M oz AgEq)

Negative

• Majority of resources (87%) are in inferred category
• Resources not yet classified as reserves - no demonstrated economic viability
• Technical report shows slight decrease in Hughes resource vs. January estimates

Vancouver, British Columbia--(Newsfile Corp. - March 3, 2025) - Summa Silver Corp. (TSXV: SSVR) (OTCQX: SSVRF) (FSE: 48X) ("Summa Silver" or the "Company") is pleased to report that it has finalized technical reports (the "Technical Reports") detailing the mineral resource estimates (each an "MRE"), for the Company's 100% owned projects in the United States - the Hughes Project in Nevada ("Hughes Project") and the Mogollon Project in New Mexico ("Mogollon Project"). The Technical Reports have been prepared for the MREs in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 ("NI 43-101") and are available on the Company's website and filed on SEDAR+.

Hughes Project:

• Indicated Mineral Resources (in-situ) are estimated to include 10.26 million silver equivalent ounces⁽¹⁾ (Moz AgEq) (5.81 Moz silver and 0.05 Moz gold) at a grade of 333 grams per tonne silver equivalent⁽¹⁾ (g/t AgEq) (188.4 g/t silver and 1.59 g/t gold) contained within 0.96 million tonnes (Mt).

• Inferred Mineral Resources (in-situ) are estimated to include 32.91 Moz AgEq (15.91 Moz silver and 0.19 Moz gold) at a grade of 421 g/t AgEq (203.7 g/t silver and 2.41 g/t gold) contained within 2.43 Mt.

• Inferred Mineral Resources in Tailings are estimated to include 2.74 Moz AgEq (1.79 Moz silver and 0.011 Moz gold) at a grade of 68 g/t AgEq (44.0 g/t silver and 0.26 g/t gold) contained within 1.26 Mt.

Mogollon Project:

• Inferred Mineral Resources are estimated to include 32.08 Moz AgEq (12.12 Moz silver and 0.24 Moz gold) at a grade of 367 g/t AgEq (139 g/t silver and 2.72 g/t gold) contained within 2.72 Mt.

Note:
1. Silver Equivalent (AgEq) grade is based on silver and gold prices of $25/oz and $2100/oz respectively, and recoveries for silver and gold of 90% and 97%, respectively for the Hughes Project and 97% and 97%, respectively for the Mogollon Project. AgEq Factor= (Ag Price / Au Price) x (Ag Rec / Au Rec); g AgEq/t = g Ag/t + (g Au/t / AgEq Factor).

Table 1. Summary of Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources for Summa Silver's Projects

Summa Silver Projects	Classification (6)	Cut-off	Tonnes (kt)	Grade			Contained Metal
		Grade (AgEq g/t) (1) (2) (3)		Au (g/t)	Ag (g/t)	AgEq (g/t)(4)	Au (oz)	Ag (oz)	AgEq (oz)(4)
Hughes in situ Mineral Resources	Indicated	190	959	1.59	188.4	333	49,000	5,813,000	10,261,000
	Inferred	190	2,429	2.41	203.7	421	188,000	15,906,000	32,907,000
Hughes Tailings Mineral Resources	Inferred	45	1,264	0.26	44	68	11,000	1,787,000	2,744,000
Mogollon Mineral Resources	Inferred	175	2,716	2.72	138.8	367.4	238,000	12,117,000	32,083,000

 
Notes:
1. Silver Equivalent (AgEq) cut-off grade for the Hughes Project in situ Mineral Resources is based on a silver price of $25/oz, recovery of 90% Ag, and cost assumptions including: USD$88.2/t average mining cost for approximately 70% longhole stoping and 30% cut and fill mining, USD$36.3/t processing cost, USD$9.7/t G&A cost, USD$0.20/oz Ag refining cost for a total mining, processing and G&A cost of USD$134.2/tonne. A 3% royalty has also been applied to the cut-off grade determination.
2. Silver Equivalent (AgEq) cut-off grade for the Hughes Project tailings Mineral Resources is contained within an optimized pit and based on a silver price of $25/oz, recovery of 90% Ag, and cost assumptions including: USD$2.25/t mining cost, USD$21.0/t processing cost, USD$9/t G&A cost, USD$0.50/oz Ag refining cost for a total mining, processing and G&A cost of USD$33.34/tonne. A 3% royalty has also been applied to the cut-off grade determination.
3. Silver Equivalent (AgEq) cut-off grade for the Mogollon Project Mineral Resources is based on a silver price of $25/oz, recovery of 97% Ag, and cost assumptions including: USD$83/t mining cost for longhole stoping, USD$36.3/t processing cost, USD$9.7/t G&A cost, USD$0.20/oz Ag refining cost for a total mining, processing and G&A cost of USD$129/tonne A 3% royalty has also been applied to the cut-off grade determination.
4. AgEq is based on silver and gold prices of $25/oz and $2100/oz respectively, and recoveries for silver and gold of 90% and 97%, respectively for the Hughes Project, and 97% and 97%, respectively, for the Mogollon Project. AgEq Factor= (Ag Price / Au Price) x (Ag Rec / Au Rec); g AgEq/t = g Ag/t + (g Au/t / AgEq Factor).
5. Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent discrepancies between tonnes, grade, and contained metal content.
6. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. There is no certainty that all or any part of the mineral resources estimated will be converted into mineral reserves. The quantity and grade of reported Inferred mineral resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred mineral resources as Indicated mineral resources. It is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to the Indicated mineral resources category.
7. The Mineral Resources were estimated in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions (2014) and Best Practices Guidelines (2019) prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council.
8. There are no known environmental, permitting, legal, or other factors which could materially affect the MREs.

Technical Disclosure

The MRE for both the Hughes and Mogollon projects were prepared under the supervision of Jeffrey Bickel, CPG, an employee of RESPEC. Mr. Bickel has reviewed and approved the technical contents relating to the MREs in this news release.

Summa Silver's exploration activities on the Hughes and Mogollon projects are conducted and supervised by Galen McNamara, P.Geo., the CEO and Director of the Company. Mr McNamara is a Qualified Person as defined under NI 43-101. He has reviewed and approved the contents of this news release.

In the Technical Report prepared for the Hughes Project, the indicated portion of the MRE is 0.21 Moz AgEq lower, and the inferred portion of the MRE is 0.51 Moz AgEq lower than the figures reported in the Company's news release dated January 16, 2025. This amendment is due to regular property boundary confirmation work as part of the preparation of the Technical Reports. There are no other material differences in either Technical Report from those results disclosed in the Company's news release dated January 16, 2025.

About Summa Silver Corp

Summa Silver Corp is a junior mineral exploration company. The Company owns a 100% interest in the Hughes project located in central Nevada and in the Mogollon project located in southwestern New Mexico. The high-grade past-producing Belmont Mine, one of the most prolific silver producers in the United States between 1903 and 1929, is located on the Hughes project. The Mogollon project is the largest historic silver producer in New Mexico. Both projects have remained inactive since commercial production ceased and neither have seen modern exploration prior to the Company's involvement.

Follow Summa Silver on Twitter: @summasilver
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/summa-silver-corp/
Website: https://www.summasilver.com

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

"Galen McNamara"
Galen McNamara, Chief Executive Officer
info@summasilver.com
www.summasilver.com

Investor Relations Contact:
Giordy Belfiore
Corporate Development and Investor Relations
604-288-8004
giordy@summasilver.com
www.summasilver.com

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary note regarding forward-looking statements

This news release contains certain "forward looking statements" and certain "forward-looking information" as defined under applicable Canadian and U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements and information can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as "may", "will", "should", "expect", "intend", "estimate", "anticipate", "believe", "continue", "plans" or similar terminology. The forward-looking information contained herein is provided for the purpose of assisting readers in understanding management's current expectations and plans relating to the future. These forward‐looking statements or information relate to, among other things: the Company's exploration plans.

Forward-looking information is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual actions, events or results to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information, including but not limited to: the requirement for regulatory approvals; enhanced uncertainty in global financial markets; unquantifiable risks related to government actions and interventions; stock market volatility; regulatory restrictions; the ongoing conflict in Ukraine; and other related risks and uncertainties disclosed in the Company's public disclosure documents.

Forward-looking information are based on management of the parties' reasonable assumptions, estimates, expectations, analyses and opinions, which are based on such management's experience and perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, and other factors that management believes are relevant and reasonable in the circumstances, but which may prove to be incorrect.

The Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking information except as required by applicable law. Such forward-looking information represents management's best judgment based on information currently available. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially. Accordingly, readers are advised not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements or information.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/243187

FAQ

What are the total silver equivalent resources reported in Summa Silver's (SSVRF) Hughes Project?

The Hughes Project contains 43.17M silver equivalent ounces total, comprising 10.26M oz indicated resources and 32.91M oz inferred resources, plus 2.74M oz in tailings.

What is the grade of silver and gold in SSVRF's Mogollon Project?

The Mogollon Project has inferred resources grading 139 g/t silver and 2.72 g/t gold, for a combined 367 g/t silver equivalent.

How many ounces of gold were reported in SSVRF's Hughes Project mineral resource?

The Hughes Project contains 0.05M oz gold in indicated resources and 0.19M oz gold in inferred resources, plus 0.011M oz in tailings.

What metal prices were used to calculate SSVRF's resource estimates?

The resource estimates used metal prices of $25/oz for silver and $2,100/oz for gold.