Amarc Resources Ltd 6-K, filed Jan 19, 2021
Amarc Resources Ltd (AXREF)
6-K
2021-01-19
For: 2021-01-19
View Original
Added on
April 07, 2026
About this 6-K
Amarc Resources Ltd filed this 6-K on January 19, 2021.
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 6-K
REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR
15d-16
UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
As at
January 19,
2021
Commission
File Number: 000-49869
AMARC RESOURCES LTD.
(Translation
of registrant's name into English)
15th Floor
– 1040 W. Georgia Street
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada V6E 4H1
(Address
of principal executive offices)
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual
reports under cover Form 20-F or Form 40-F.
[X]
Form 20-F [ ] Form 40-F
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper
as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1):
[ ]
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper
as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7):
[ ]
SUBMITTED HEREWITH
Exhibits
|
Press Release dated January 19, 2021 |
Amarc Provides Details of Exceptional Cu-Au Deposit Targets at
Empress and Greater Empress, British
Columbia
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf
by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
Amarc
Resources Ltd.
(Registrant)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: January 19,
2021
|
By:
|
/s/ Trevor
Thomas
|
|
|
|
|
Trevor
Thomas
|
|
|
|
|
Secretary
|
|
Exhibit
99.1
AMARC PROVIDES DETAILS OF EXCEPTIONAL Cu-Au DEPOSIT
TARGETS
AT EMPRESS AND GREATER EMPRESS, BRITISH COLUMBIA
January 19, 2021, Vancouver, BC –
Amarc Resources Ltd. (“Amarc” or the
“Company”) (TSX-V: AHR; OTCBB: AXREF) is pleased to provide details on the expansion potential of the
high grade Empress Cu-Au-Ag deposit, and surrounding Greater Empress area. The
Greater Empress area is a sizable subarea of Amarc’s
extensive 100% owned IKE Cu and Au district, and is located 6 km
north of the Company’s substantive IKE porphyry Cu-Mo-Ag
discovery. A comprehensive review by Amarc’s technical team
of historical data throughout the Greater Empress area (Figure 1)
has unlocked a high potential for the discovery of substantial
intrusion-related replacement and porphyry Cu-Au±Mo-Ag
deposits centered on the Empress deposit.
The 2020 IKE Project Technical Report (the
“Report”) provides additional details on the Empress
Deposit and the entire Greater
Empress area. The Report is available on Amarc’s website at
www.amarcresources.com/ahr/Home.asp
and under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.
The
Empress Cu-Au-Ag replacement deposit is a significant
body of mineralization, characterized from historical drilling by
its common high grade
intersections and relatively good vertical and lateral grade
continuity. These features support the strong potential for
discovery of new high grade extensions to the deposit. Important
potential exits for a well-planned core drilling program to expand
the mineralization which remains open. Table 1 provides selected
historical drill intercepts for the Empress deposit and Figures 3
and 4 show cross sections through the mineralization.
In
addition to the Empress deposit, the 35 km2 Greater Empress area
includes seven identified compelling porphyry and replacement-style
Cu-Au±Mo±Ag deposit and exploration targets. The
deposit targets include, Empress East, Empress Gap, Granite and
Buzzer, and the earlier-stage exploration targets include Empress
West. Each are discussed below with selected historical drill
results provided in Tables 2 and 3. These targets are either not
fully drill delineated or have been tested only by shallow,
widely-spaced historical reconnaissance percussion drilling: and
can with focused exploration be brought to a drill ready status.
Amarc has a permit for up to 300 drill holes for the IKE
Project.
Management is
considering its options to advance this exciting high grade Cu-Au
segment of its extensive overall IKE district mineral
tenures.
-1-
Selected
Drill Intervals from Historical Drilling
|
Drill Hole
|
From (m)
|
To (m)
|
Int. (m)1,2,3
|
Cu (%)
|
Au (g/t)
|
Ag (g/t)
|
Mo (%)4
|
CuEQ (%)5,6
|
|
76-2
|
51.2
|
114.9
|
63.7
|
0.37
|
0.492
|
0.1
|
-
|
0.64
|
|
Incl.
|
60.4
|
72.4
|
12.0
|
0.51
|
0.442
|
-
|
-
|
0.76
|
|
Incl.
|
103.0
|
114.9
|
11.9
|
0.75
|
0.721
|
0.4
|
-
|
1.15
|
|
|
139.6
|
185.3
|
45.7
|
0.42
|
0.350
|
0.6
|
-
|
0.61
|
|
Incl.
|
139.6
|
157.9
|
18.3
|
0.39
|
0.941
|
1.1
|
-
|
0.91
|
|
Incl.
|
173.1
|
185.3
|
12.2
|
0.73
|
0.010
|
-
|
-
|
0.74
|
|
|
209.4
|
215.8
|
6.4
|
0.74
|
0.758
|
-
|
-
|
1.15
|
|
76-3
|
5.2
|
17.7
|
12.5
|
0.23
|
0.162
|
1.6
|
-
|
0.33
|
|
|
26.8
|
102.9
|
76.1
|
0.92
|
1.418
|
4.7
|
-
|
1.72
|
|
Incl.
|
26.8
|
37.6
|
10.8
|
0.49
|
4.244
|
2.3
|
-
|
2.81
|
|
Incl.
|
42.7
|
74.4
|
31.7
|
1.11
|
1.388
|
4.5
|
-
|
1.89
|
|
88-2
|
7.3
|
50.3
|
43.0
|
0.36
|
0.326
|
1.3
|
0.005
|
0.57
|
|
Incl.
|
13.4
|
29.9
|
16.5
|
0.62
|
0.579
|
2.3
|
0.002
|
0.95
|
|
88-7
|
17.7
|
69.5
|
51.8
|
0.47
|
0.457
|
2.4
|
0.002
|
0.74
|
|
Incl.
|
48.4
|
64.6
|
16.2
|
0.98
|
0.741
|
5.7
|
0.001
|
1.43
|
|
89-2
|
21.6
|
123.7
|
102.1
|
0.36
|
0.361
|
2.7
|
0.001
|
0.58
|
|
Incl.
|
26.5
|
37.0
|
10.5
|
0.31
|
0.754
|
3.2
|
0.003
|
0.75
|
|
Incl.
|
60.6
|
78.9
|
18.3
|
0.72
|
0.573
|
3.8
|
0.001
|
1.06
|
|
Incl.
|
99.1
|
118.0
|
18.9
|
0.49
|
0.470
|
4.2
|
0.001
|
0.78
|
|
89-8
|
9.1
|
115.5
|
106.4
|
0.35
|
0.359
|
1.5
|
0.003
|
0.56
|
|
Incl.
|
78.0
|
99.6
|
21.6
|
0.69
|
0.913
|
2.8
|
0.003
|
1.21
|
|
90-17
|
107.6
|
113.4
|
5.8
|
0.55
|
0.446
|
1.6
|
0.010
|
0.84
|
|
|
143.9
|
200.3
|
56.4
|
1.38
|
1.666
|
4.1
|
0.009
|
2.35
|
|
90-18
|
22.6
|
29.3
|
6.7
|
0.15
|
0.300
|
0.7
|
0.008
|
0.35
|
|
|
35.0
|
40.5
|
5.5
|
0.15
|
0.523
|
0.3
|
0.006
|
0.46
|
|
|
47.9
|
74.4
|
26.5
|
0.47
|
0.683
|
3.2
|
0.010
|
0.90
|
|
|
79.9
|
92.7
|
12.8
|
0.15
|
0.254
|
0.4
|
0.003
|
0.31
|
|
|
107.0
|
161.9
|
54.9
|
0.78
|
0.746
|
1.0
|
0.004
|
1.20
|
|
90-21
|
10.4
|
19.5
|
9.1
|
0.31
|
0.336
|
0.5
|
0.011
|
0.53
|
|
|
140.5
|
192.9
|
52.4
|
1.10
|
1.209
|
2.5
|
0.004
|
1.79
|
|
Incl.
|
153.3
|
175.3
|
22.0
|
1.58
|
1.671
|
2.6
|
0.006
|
2.52
|
|
Incl.
|
182.6
|
191.1
|
8.5
|
1.92
|
2.735
|
7.8
|
0.006
|
3.48
|
|
|
198.4
|
218.8
|
20.4
|
0.30
|
0.542
|
1.3
|
0.002
|
0.61
|
|
90-22
|
143.9
|
190.2
|
46.3
|
1.15
|
1.415
|
4.2
|
0.009
|
1.98
|
|
90-29
|
94.2
|
110.6
|
16.4
|
0.43
|
0.171
|
1.3
|
0.003
|
0.55
|
|
|
141.7
|
214.6
|
72.9
|
0.37
|
0.433
|
0.6
|
0.003
|
0.62
|
|
Incl.
|
178.3
|
194.8
|
16.5
|
0.86
|
1.069
|
1.5
|
0.003
|
1.46
|
|
CuEQ%
|
|
>=0.30
& <0.50
|
|
|
>=0.50
|
-2-
Notes
to Table 1
1
Widths reported are
drill widths, such that the thicknesses are unknown.
2
All assay intervals
represent length-weighted averages.
3
Some figures may
not sum exactly due to rounding.
(-)
means not assayed for.
4
Copper equivalent
(CuEQ) calculations use metal prices of: Cu US$3.00/lb, Mo
US$12.00/lb, Ag US$18.00/oz and Au US$1,400.00/oz and conceptual
recoveries of: Cu 90%, Au 72%, 67% Ag and 82% Mo. Conversion of
metals to an equivalent Cu grade based on these metal prices is
relative to the Cu price per unit mass factored by predicted
recoveries for those metals normalized to the copper recovery. The
metal equivalencies for each metal are added to the Cu grade. The
general formula for this is: CuEQ % = Cu% + (Au g/t * (Au recovery
/ Cu recovery) * (Au $ per oz/ 31.1034768) / (Cu $ per lb*
22.04623)) + (Ag g/t * (Ag recovery / Cu recovery) * (Ag $ per oz/
31.1034768) / (Cu $ per lb* 22.04623)) + (Mo % * (Mo recovery / Cu
recovery) * (Mo $ per lb / Cu $ per lb)).
5
The estimated
metallurgical recoveries are conceptual in nature. There is no
guarantee that the metallurgical testing required to determine
metal recoveries will be done or, if done, the metallurgical
recoveries could be at the level of the conceptual recoveries used
to determine the CuEQ.
6
Details of
analysis, QA/QC (where available) and data verification for the
Empress and Greater Empress historical drilling is provided in the
2020 Report which is posted on the Amarc website and the
Company’s profile on SEDAR.
Amarc’s IKE
Cu and Au district is located in a fertile region of south-central
British Columbia (“BC”) that hosts other large
Cu±Au±Mo deposits with similar geological
settings. Like many major
porphyry districts, the IKE district formed in a very active
environment characterised by long-lived, multi-phase
magmatic–hydrothermal-structural activity, resulting in
multiple centers of mineralization. The Au-bearing Empress deposit
and other deposit targets within the Greater Empress area were
formed at about 85-80 Ma and, as such are distinct from the
hydrothermal activity that formed the approximately 46 Ma IKE
porphyry Cu-Mo-Ag deposit that is hosted within the Coastal
Plutonic Complex (“CPC”) (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Location
of the IKE and Empress deposits, the Greater Empress Cu-Au Project
area (“Greater Empress” or “GECAP”), and
other IKE district deposit targets and mineral
occurrences.
-3-
The
Greater Empress area straddles the CPC contact with volcanic rocks
to the north, over a strike length of 15 km (Figure 1). Strong and
widespread alteration with abundant sulphides is associated with a variety of
deposit types including porphyry Cu±Au±Mo±Ag and
high temperature Cu-Au-Ag replacement, as well as Au-Ag high
sulphidation and possibly low sulphidation epithermal systems. The
range of paleodepth indicated by these deposit types increases the
possibility for the preservation of deposits in the IKE district,
so increasing the discovery potential.
Amarc’s
technical team diligently compiled, verified and integrated Greater
Empress area historical information. This compilation of data from
geochemical and geophysical surveys and drilling (including 138
core holes totaling 19,298 m averaging approximately 140 m depth,
and 96 short percussion holes totaling 4,382 m averaging
approximately 46 m in depth for which only Cu and Mo assay data is
available), combined with the geological and geophysical survey
data from the Company’s programs, has permitted a rapid
advancement in the understanding of the high value development
potential in the Greater Empress area.
Empress Cu-Au-Ag Replacement Deposit:
Historical drilling at Empress has indicated a significant body of
good grade Cu-Au mineralization, which remains open to expansion
with a modern core drilling program (Table 1). Mineralization at
the Empress deposit is considered to have formed by the replacement
of previously altered volcanics by a quartz-magnetite-sulphide
assemblage, with higher Cu-Au-Ag grades commonly occurring within
100 m in vertical distance above the CPC’s contact, within
the overlying volcanics (Figures 2 and 3). An initial examination
of historical drill core by the Amarc team recognized the nearby
Granite porphyry Cu-Au-Ag-Mo deposit target, which is shallowly
concealed by overburden (see below). The Granite porphyry deposit
target is considered a possible source of Empress replacement
fluids. The Granite deposit target requires drill
delineation.
Figure 2: Greater Empress historical
shallow percussion and core drill holes in spatial reference to the
northern boundary of the CPC at surface, and both Cu-Au replacement
and porphyry targets. The figure shows concentrations of Cu in the
first 3 samples of bedrock below base of overburden.
-4-
Figure 3: South
to north cross section S-N (see Figure 2 for section location)
through the Empress deposit drilling looking West, showing drill
hole sample bar graphs for Cu-Au grades. The location of the
CPC-volcanic contact is shown by the blue line.
Empress East Cu-Au-Ag Replacement Deposit Target: Located 1
km east of the Empress deposit, limited historical core holes
drilled at the Empress East deposit target intercepted
mineralization similar to that at the Empress deposit in both style
and grade Table 2 and Figures 3 and 4). This drilling together with
moderate to locally strong IP chargeability responses (Figure 5),
magnetic geophysical features, and results from historical Cu and
Au soil geochemistry (>250 ppm Cu and ≥50 ppb Au which
closely reflect the first three historical drill samples results at
the base of overburden, see Report), indicate there is significant
potential with further core drilling to enlarge this body of
mineralization. Notably there is a complete absence of drill holes
in the southern part of this target, which is at a position that is
analogous to shallower, high grade Cu-Au-Ag replacement-style
mineralization at the Empress deposit to the west.
Table 2: EMPRESS EAST DEPOSIT TARGET
Selected
Drill Intervals from Historical Drilling
|
Drill Hole
|
From (m)
|
To (m)
|
Int. (m)1,2,3
|
Cu (%)
|
Au (g/t)
|
Ag (g/t)
|
Mo (%)
|
CuEQ (%)5,6
|
|
91-39
|
9.8
|
37.8
|
28.0
|
0.34
|
0.543
|
1.2
|
0.002
|
0.66
|
|
|
107.6
|
147.5
|
39.9
|
0.40
|
0.332
|
0.8
|
0.004
|
0.60
|
|
Incl.
|
141.4
|
147.5
|
6.1
|
1.23
|
0.928
|
2.2
|
0.009
|
1.78
|
|
91-54
|
73.1
|
85.0
|
11.9
|
0.31
|
0.221
|
0.7
|
0.001
|
0.44
|
|
|
108.2
|
158.2
|
50.0
|
0.46
|
0.304
|
1.0
|
0.002
|
0.64
|
For all
notes to this table refer to Table
1.
-5-
Figure 4: West to east Long Section W-E (see Figure 2 for
section location) through the Empress, Empress Gap and Empress East
drilling, looking north, showing Cu-Au grades. Note the
CPC-volcanic contact as shown by the blue line.
Figure 5: Greater Empress area shallow penetrating
historical IP chargeability combined with Amarc Buzzer North IP
chargeability survey data, showing shallow historical percussion
and core drill holes. Integrated data shows strong IP chargeability
anomalies extending over many square km and generally corresponding
with known soil geochemical anomalies. The presence of
mineralization is confirmed by the widely-spaced historical drill
holes across the Greater Empress.
-6-
Empress Gap Cu-Au-Ag Replacement Deposit
Target: Results from limited historical drilling, comprising
eleven shallow percussion drill holes and three deeper core holes,
in the >1 km long Empress Gap zone located between the Empress
and Empress East suggest a clear opportunity to discover additional
Cu-Au-Ag mineralization in proximity to the volcanic-CPC contact
(Figure 2). Many of the short percussion holes returned anomalous
Cu‐Mo (Au and Ag were not analyzed for), potentially
indicative of higher grade underlying mineralization as at the
Empress deposit (Figure 4). Of the deeper core holes, Cu‐Au
mineralization associated with alteration similar to that at
Empress is also reported, however only two of these holes reached
the volcanic-CPC contact.
Empress
Gap is a significantly underexplored target and drill testing of
areas close to the CPC-volcanic contact is required.
Granite Porphyry Cu±Au±Mo-Ag Deposit
Target: Two zones of porphyry-style mineralization, the
Granite and the Buzzer targets, support the model for derivation of
mineralizing replacement fluids at Greater Empress, from these and
other possible hidden porphyry deposits. Granite porphyry
Cu±Au±Mo-Ag mineralization intersected in limited and
tightly collared historical drill holes is located outboard of the
CPC and directly to the north of the Empress deposit (Figure 1).
Initial relogging by Amarc of selected historical drill core
suggests multiple intrusions hosting Mo-rich and Cu-Au porphyry
style mineralization associated with biotite-magnetite-sulphide
alteration. This mineralization is at shallow depths beneath
glacial overburden. Historical core drill intercepts include hole
91-49 which returned 92 m of 0.38% CuEQ1 @ 0.22% Cu, 0.23 g/t Au, 0.008% Mo and
0.4 g/t Ag. This target has not been adequately tested and mineralization remains open to
expansion. Step-out drilling from the known mineralization is
required (Figure 5).
Buzzer Cu-Au-Ag±Mo Porphyry Deposit
Target: The Buzzer deposit target is located in the eastern
side of the Greater Empress area inboard of the CPC contact)
(Figures 1 and 2). Historical drilling at Buzzer has intercepted
high grade Cu-Au-Ag-Mo porphyry mineralization hosted in biotite
altered intrusions (Table 3). Whether these mineralized intrusions,
are part of a small high level cupola or a large mineralized
intrusive body below, as indicated by magnetic surveys, cannot be
determined from the limited drilling.
The
Granite and Buzzer porphyry systems demonstrate that significant
porphyry-style mineralization is present in the Greater Empress,
and that further exploration surveys and drilling have the
potential to make new porphyry discoveries, both inboard and
outboard from the CPC contact.
Balance at the
beginning of the period (1)
1see
Notes to Table 1 for CuEq calculation
-7-
Table 3: BUZZER DEPOSIT TARGET
Selected Drill Intervals from Historical Drilling
|
Drill Hole
|
From (m)
|
To (m)
|
Int. (m)1,2,3
|
Cu (%)
|
Au (g/t)4
|
Ag (g/t)4
|
Mo (%)
|
CuEQ (%)5,6
|
|
DDH-3†
|
21.3
|
120.4
|
99.1
|
0.43
|
-
|
-
|
0.042
|
0.58
|
|
DDH-4†
|
14.6
|
113.4
|
98.8
|
0.37
|
-
|
-
|
0.037
|
0.50
|
|
X-1
|
0.0
|
5.9
|
5.9
|
0.15
|
0.237
|
5.8
|
0.013
|
0.36
|
|
|
9.5
|
42.5
|
33.0
|
0.26
|
0.175
|
3.4
|
0.042
|
0.53
|
|
Incl.
|
24.7
|
40.8
|
16.1
|
0.40
|
0.268
|
5.0
|
0.064
|
0.81
|
|
X-3
|
0.0
|
44.2
|
44.2
|
0.67
|
0.496
|
5.3
|
0.046
|
1.14
|
|
Incl.
|
10.7
|
38.1
|
27.4
|
0.86
|
0.724
|
6.6
|
0.059
|
1.51
|
|
GC11-74
|
11.4
|
52.2
|
40.8
|
0.28
|
0.210
|
1.8
|
0.012
|
0.44
|
|
Incl.
|
15.0
|
27.0
|
12.0
|
0.41
|
0.281
|
2.6
|
0.021
|
0.66
|
For all
notes to this table refer to Table
1.
† Assay
interval from historically reported composite. Individual assay
results are unknown.
Empress West Cu-Au-Ag Exploration Target: This large target,
which extends more than 2 km to the west of the Empress deposit
along the favorable CPC-volcanic contact, has only been tested by
widely-spaced and shallow percussion holes and a few core holes
(Figures 1 and 2). It exhibits the same geological
setting as the Empress deposit, and the potential
to discover additional Cu-Au-Ag mineralization is indicated by the
results of the historical drilling when combined with magnetic and
IP survey data, and known Cu-Au-Mo anomalies in soils. Modern IP
and drilling are required to test a series of defined targets (see
Report).
About
Amarc Resources Ltd.
Amarc
is a mineral exploration and development company with an
experienced and successful management team focused on developing a
new generation of long-life, high value BC porphyry copper-gold
mines. By combining high demand projects with successful
management, Amarc has created a solid platform to create value from
its exploration and development-stage assets.
Amarc
is advancing the 100%-owned IKE, DUKE and JOY porphyry
copper±gold deposit projects located in different prolific
porphyry districts in southern, central and northern BC,
respectively. Importantly, each of the three projects is located in
proximity to industrial infrastructure – including power,
highways and rail. These projects represent significant potential
for the development of multiple and important-scale, porphyry
copper±gold deposits.
Amarc
is associated with HDI, a diversified, global mining company with a
30-year history of porphyry discovery and development success.
Previous and current HDI projects include some of BC’s and
the world’s most important porphyry deposits – such as
Pebble, Mount Milligan, Kemess South, Kemess North, Gibraltar,
Prosperity, Xietongmen, Newtongmen, Florence, Casino, Sisson,
Maggie, IKE and Pine. From its head office in Vancouver, Canada,
HDI applies its unique strengths and capabilities to acquire,
develop, operate and monetize mineral projects.
-8-
Amarc
works closely with local governments, indigenous groups and other
stakeholders in order to advance its mineral projects responsibly,
and to do so in a manner that contributes to sustainable community
and economic development. We pursue early and meaningful engagement
to ensure our mineral exploration and development activities are
well coordinated and broadly supported, address local priorities
and concerns, and optimize opportunities for collaboration. In
particular, we seek to establish mutually beneficial partnerships
with indigenous groups within whose traditional territories its
projects are located, through the provision of jobs, training
programs, contract opportunities, capacity funding agreements and
sponsorship of community events. All Amarc’s work programs
are carefully planned to achieve high levels of environmental and
social performance.
Qualified Person as Defined Under National Instrument
43-101
Mark Rebagliati, P. Eng., a Qualified Person as defined under
National Instrument 43-101, has reviewed and approved the technical
content in this release.
For
further details on Amarc Resources Ltd., please visit the
Company’s website at www.amarcresources.com or
contact Dr. Diane Nicolson, President and CEO, at (604) 684-6365 or
within North America at 1-800-667-2114.
ON
BEHALF OF THE BOARD
Dr.
Diane Nicolson
President and
CEO
Neither
the TSX Venture Exchange nor any other regulatory authority accepts
responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this
release.
Forward
Looking and other Cautionary Information
This
news release includes certain statements that may be deemed
"forward-looking statements". All such statements, other than
statements of historical facts that address exploration drilling,
exploitation activities and other related events or developments
are forward-looking statements. Although the Company believes the
expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based
on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of
future performance and actual results or developments may differ
materially from those in the forward-looking statements.
Assumptions used by the Company to develop forward-looking
statements include the following: Amarc's projects will obtain all
required environmental and other permits and all land use and other
licenses, studies and exploration of Amarc's projects will continue
to be positive, and no geological or technical problems will occur.
Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those in forward-looking statements include market prices,
potential environmental issues or liabilities associated with
exploration, development and mining activities, exploitation and
exploration successes, continuity of mineralization, uncertainties
related to the ability to obtain necessary permits, licenses and
tenure and delays due to third party opposition, changes in and the
effect of government policies regarding mining and natural resource
exploration and exploitation, exploration and development of
properties located within Aboriginal groups asserted territories
may affect or be perceived to affect asserted aboriginal rights and
title, which may cause permitting delays or opposition by
Aboriginal groups, continued availability of capital and financing,
and general economic, market or business conditions, as well as
risks relating to the uncertainties with respect to the effects of
COVID-19. Investors are cautioned that any such statements are not
guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments
may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking
statements. For more information on Amarc Resources Ltd., investors
should review Amarc's annual Form 20-F filing with the United
States Securities and Exchange Commission at www.sec.gov and its
home jurisdiction filings that are available at
www.sedar.com.
-9-