[  ]         ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

[X]        TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the issuer was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes [X]  No [  ]

Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers pin response to Item 405 of Regulation S-B contained in this form, and no disclosure will be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-KSB or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB. [X]

Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes [  ]  No [X]

__________

Statements made in this Form 10-KSB that are not historical or current facts are "forward-looking statements" made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). These statements often can be identified by the use of terms such as "may," "will," "expect," "believe," "anticipate," "estimate," "approximate" or "continue," or the negative thereof. We intend that such forward-looking statements be subject to the safe harbors for such statements. We wish to caution readers not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. Any forward-looking statements represent management's best judgment as to what may occur in the future. However, forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and important factors beyond our control that could cause actual results and events to differ materially from historical results of operations and events and those presently anticipated or projected. We disclaim any obligation subsequently to revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statement or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events.

Uranium Energy Corp.. files annual, quarterly, current reports, proxy statements, and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission"). You may read and copy documents referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB that have been filed with the Commission at the Commission's Public Reference Room, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the Commission at 1-800-SEC-0330. You can also obtain copies of our Commission filings by going to the Commission's website at http://www.sec.gov.

This Form 10-KSB/A Amendment No. 3 of Uranium Energy Corp. (the "Company") amends the Company's Form 10-KSB for the period ended July 31, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on October 29, 2007, as amended by Form 10-KSB/A filed February 8, 2008 and by Form 10-KSB/A filed February 29, 2008. This Form 10-KSB/A is being filed to include the Company's restated audited financial statements for the period ended July 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, and to disclose Management's Consideration of the Restatement and the resulting conclusions regarding internal controls over financial reporting.

At each reporting period we performed an impairment analysis of any capitalized acquisition costs of our mineral properties. As none of our properties contained proven and probable reserves that were independently quantified and valued, management assessed that future cash flows could not be determined and, accordingly, we wrote down the carrying value of the capitalized acquisition costs of our mineral properties as of the end of each reporting period. The capitalized costs of mineral rights and properties were acquisition costs that were accounted for as tangible assets pursuant to EITF 04-02, Whether Mineral Rights are Tangible or Intangible Assets. The capitalized costs of databases were acquisition costs that were accounted for as intangible assets. The allocation to tangible assets as a result of the acquisition included economic value beyond the acquired assets proven and probable reserves. In carrying out our subsequent impairment tests, we did not consider data beyond proven and probable reserves and did not consider the information and data used in determining the initial capitalization of acquisition costs. Pursuant to EITF 04-03, Mining Assets: Impairment and Business Combinations, we have reconsidered our impairment analysis and have now included the cash flows associated with value beyond proven and probable reserves in estimating future cash flows (both undiscounted and discounted) used for determining whether mining assets were impaired under SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. We have re-evaluated the impairment analysis performed at each respective period using all historical information including value beyond proven and probable reserves and have determined the capitalized costs of mineral properties should not have been written off.

Additionally, in reviewing the database related transactions we identified the following errors: (i) cash and stock based expenditures which were initially capitalized with other acquisition costs were not capital in nature and should have been charged to mineral property expenditures, (ii) cash and stock based proceeds from the sale of a portion of one of our database acquisitions was initially recorded as a reduction of capitalized costs and should have been recognized as an asset sale transaction, and (iii) depreciation was not recorded on capitalized database acquisitions. Accordingly, the financial statements have been restated to correct for the errors outlined above.

ii

For the convenience of the reader, this Form 10-KSB/A Amendment No. 3 sets forth the entire Form 10-KSB, as amended by the Company's Form 10-KSB/A, which was originally prepared and filed with the SEC but reflects amendments only to those items affected by the matters described above. It does not update other disclosures presented in the originally filed Form 10-KSB, as amended. Accordingly, this Form 10-KSB/A Amendment No. 3 does not reflect any events subsequent to the date of the originally filed Form 10-KSB (other than the amendments set out in the Form 10-KSB/A). The amendments described above are reflected in certain disclosures within Item 6, Management's Discussion and Analysis, Item 7, Financial Statements including Note 13 Subsequent Events, and Item 8A, Controls and Procedures.

__________

iii

__________

iv

Uranium Energy Corp. was incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada on May 16, 2003 under the name "Carlin Gold Inc." During 2004 we changed our business operations and focus from precious metals exploration in the State of Nevada to the exploration for economic reserves of uranium throughout the United States. On January 24, 2005, we filed an amendment to our Articles of Incorporation changing our name to "Uranium Energy Corp."

After the effective date of our initial registration statement which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (December 5, 2005), we commenced trading on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol "URME:OB". Please note that throughout this Annual Report, and unless otherwise noted, the words "we", "our", "us", the "Company", "UEC" or "Uranium Energy," refers to Uranium Energy Corp.

On February 14, 2006, our Board of Directors, pursuant to minutes of written consent in lieu of a special meeting, authorized and approved a forward stock split on a 1.5 new for one old basis of our total issued and outstanding shares of common stock (the "Forward Stock Split").

The Forward Stock Split was effectuated based on market conditions and upon a determination by our Board of Directors that the Forward Stock Split was in our best interests and of the shareholders. In our judgment the Forward Stock Split would result in an increase in our trading float of shares of common stock available for sale resulting in facilitation of investor liquidity and trading volume potential. The intent of the Forward Stock Split was to increase the marketability of our common stock.

The Forward Stock Split was effectuated with a record date of February 28, 2006, upon filing the appropriate documentation with the NASD. The Forward Stock Split increased our issued and outstanding shares of common stock from 14,968,222 to approximately 22,452,338 shares of common stock. The common stock continued to have a $0.001 par value after the Forward Stock Split.

On February 6, 2006, we filed an amendment to our Articles of Incorporation with the Nevada Secretary of State. The amendment revised Section 3 of our Articles of Incorporation increasing our authorized capital stock from 75,000,000 shares of common stock, at a $0.001 par value, to 750,000,000 shares of common stock with the same par value of $0.001. See "item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders."

Our transfer agent is Transfer OnLine, Inc., of 317 S.W. Alder Street, Portland, Oregon 97204.

We are a natural resource exploration company engaged in the exploration of properties that may contain uranium minerals in the United States. Our strategy is to acquire properties that are prospective for uranium exploration, and have undergone some degree of uranium exploration but have not yet been mined. To date we have acquired interests in 58,343.09 gross acres of leased or staked mineral properties, consisting of claim blocks located in the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. In the remainder of 2007 and 2008 we have plans to acquire further acres of mineral properties subject to adequate funding being completed. Other mineral property acquisitions are contemplated in states of interest that include Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. These potential acquisition properties have not yet been specifically identified. Our ability to complete these acquisitions will be subject to our obtaining sufficient financing and our being able to conclude agreements with the property owners on terms that are acceptable to us.

1

As of the date of this Annual Report we have interests in an aggregate of 58,900.91 gross acres (51,204.71 net mineral acres) of properties that have been either leased or staked, which we intend to explore for economic deposits of uranium. Some of these leases are subject to 5.0% to 15.25% net royalty interests. These properties consist of claim blocks located in the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. Each of these properties has been the subject of historical exploration by other mining companies, and provide indications that further exploration for uranium is warranted.

Our properties do not have any reserves. We plan to conduct exploration programs on these properties with the objective of ascertaining whether any of our properties contain economic concentrations of uranium that are prospective for mining. As such, we are considered an exploration, or exploratory stage company. Since we are an exploration stage company, there is no assurance that a commercially viable mineral deposit exists on any of our properties, and a great deal of further exploration will be required before a final evaluation as to the economic and legal feasibility for our future exploration is determined. We have no known reserves of uranium or any other type of mineral. Since inception we have not established any proven or probable reserves on our mineral property interests.

The United States is the largest consumer of uranium in the world and consumed approximately 55 million pounds of uranium in 2006. Production of uranium in the United States in 2006 was approximately four million pounds. Nuclear power supplied approximately 20% of the electricity consumed in the United States in 2006.

The price for uranium is generally determined by supply and demand. Over the past five years the price for uranium has been gradually increasing and, on October 18, 2007, the spot price for uranium was approximately $78 per pound. We believe that there is potential for further increases in the price for uranium based upon an expected decrease in the available supply for uranium in 2008 and 2009.

Between 1960 and 1985 a significant amount of exploration work was conducted in the United States for uranium. A large number of these exploration projects were not pursued, however, these projects accumulated a significant amount of exploration data.

We have acquired a significant amount of this exploration data and have acquired interests in properties that we believe warrant further exploration for uranium based upon the exploration data we have acquired. Our properties do not have any reserves. We plan to conduct exploration programs on these properties with the objective of ascertaining whether any of our properties contain economic concentrations of uranium that are prospective for mining. We are also reviewing the exploration data we have acquired to determine other properties that we believe warrant further exploration for uranium and plan to acquire interests in such properties. We have identified a number of low grade projects that we believe we can fast-track to production by conducting a number of different exploration and permitting activities at that same time, particularly in the State of Texas. Currently, most of our exploration activity is focused in the State of Texas. Subject to many factors outside the control of the Company and including, without limitation, further exploration and development work and the completion of an acceptable feasibility study, we are currently targeting the third or fourth quarter of 2009 to begin production. However, there can be no assurance that we will achieve our objectives in this regard within the time frames targeted or at all.

We plan to utilize the in-situ recovery method ("ISR") when mining for uranium, which is an alternative to conventional mining. We believe that this method of mining requires lower capital expenditures and has less impact on the environment, as well as a shorter lead time than conventional mining with respect to beginning production. ISR mining of uranium involves pumping oxidized water through an underground uranium deposit, dissolving it and then pumping it to surface for further processing. Monitor wells on sides of the deposit assure none of the uranium-rich waters leak away from the production zone. We plan to offer our ISR recovery engineering services as third party expertise to our peers as well.

2

According to a survey by the U.S. Department of Energy, in 1979 there were over 20,000 people employed in the uranium mining industry, compared to just over 400 people in 2004. We believe that there is a shortage of human resources in the uranium mining industry currently which acts as a barrier in respect of the exploration for uranium. We have a team of 15 highly experienced uranium mining professionals, comprised primarily of geologists and engineers, which we believe is a competitive advantage for our company. These persons are involved in the review of the historical exploration data we have acquired in order to determine projects that warrant pursuing, as well as the exploration of our properties.

We have acquired historical exploration data that may provide indications of locations that warrant further exploration for uranium. This prior exploration data consists of management information and work product derived from various reports, drill hole assay results, drill hole logs, studies, maps, radioactive rock samples, exploratory drill logs, state organization reports, consultants, geological study and other exploratory information.

The following provides information relating to our database:

The Jebsen database covers territory in Wyoming and New Mexico, including some of our existing properties. The database belonged to a pioneering uranium developer and represents work conducted from the 1950s through to the present.

This database adds over 500 drill holes and over 500,000 feet of drilling data results to the Company's existing library of 4.6 million feet. Other than logs, the data set consists of volumes of maps, lithographic logs, geologic reports, and feasibility studies, and many other essential tools for uranium exploration and development.

Our geologists have linked contents of the database to some of our existing properties, specifically pertaining to our projects in the Shirley Basin and Powder River Basin of Wyoming, and in the Grants Uranium District of New Mexico.

We have exclusive ownership of this database.

The Paul Pierce database covers the 6,700 acre Cebolleta property located in the Grants Mineral District, New Mexico, and consists of 601,486 feet of drill logs from 996 holes, drill hole location maps, geological and mine planning maps, various geological and mining reports, and surface and underground mine facility designs that were related to the past-producing JJ Number 1/L-Bar uranium mining and milling complex. The locations of multiple pre-existing mine shafts and underground access ways to uranium mineralized zones are also detailed.

This database was complied by the Standard Oil Company of Ohio ("SOHIO") during the course of their development and production at JJ Number 1/L-Bar. We acquired the database from Paul Pierce, the Company's Manager of Mine Production. Mr. Pierce was employed by SOHIO from 1981 to 1986 as Senior Mining Engineer and Resource Development Specialist at the L-Bar operations.

We and our joint venture partners of Cibola Resources, LLC ("Cibola Resources") which shares exclusive ownership of this database.

The Halterman database consists of exploratory and development work compiled during the 1970s and 80s, including extensive data on significant prospects and projects in the following known uranium districts in the States of Colorado, New Mexico and Utah: Grants, San Juan Basin, Chama Basin, Moab, Lisbon Valley, Dove Creek, Slick Rock and Uravan.

3

This database includes drilling and logging data from over 200,000 feet of uranium exploration and development drilling, resource evaluations and calculations, drill-hole locations and grade thickness maps, competitor activity maps as well as several dozen geological and project evaluation reports covering uranium projects in New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Texas and California. These reports will be used by our geologists to assess uranium potential in various districts and to identify key land parcels for acquisition.

We have exclusive ownership of this database.

The Brenniman database includes drilling and logging data from over 2 million feet of uranium exploration and development drilling, resource calculation reports and various other geological reports, drill hole location maps and other mapping. This database includes approximately 142 drill hole gamma and E-logs. The data was originally compiled from 1972 to 1981 by various exploration companies, and covers over 100 uranium prospects in 15 southern US states. This library will be used by our technical personnel to determine locations of where drill-indicated uranium may exist.

We have exclusive ownership of this database.

We have acquired copies of uranium drill logs from previous uranium exploration drilling projects covering a large area in the South Texas uranium trend. The data consists of approximately 150,000 feet of drill logs from 366 drill holes. This drill data provides regional geologic information and will be used to locate possible mineralized zones within the area of the South Texas uranium trend.

The data was acquired from Nueces Minerals Company, a privately-held oil and gas production company which owns the mineral rights to 72,000 contiguous acres covering portions of four counties in south Texas.

We do not have ownership or exclusive rights to this data.

We acquired a database of uranium exploration results covering an area of approximately 13,000 acres within the uranium zone known as the Poison Spider area, in central Wyoming. The area covered includes property already held by us, as well as by other publicly-traded uranium exploration companies. The database was compiled by William Kirkwood of North American Mining and Minerals Company ("NAMMCO"), a significant participant in the uranium, coal, gold and oil and gas industries in the western United States since the 1960s. The data acquired was generated from exploration originally conducted by companies such as Homestake Mining, Kennecott Corp, Rampart Exploration, as well as Kirkwood Oil and Gas, largely between 1969 and 1982. The database consists of drill hole assay logs for 470 holes, including 75,200 feet of drilling, 22,000 feet of gamma logs, drill hole location maps, cross sections, geological maps, geological reports, and other assay data and will be used to locate possible mineralized zones in the Poison Spider area in central Wyoming.

We have exclusive ownership of this database.

We acquired the exclusive rights to a uranium database consisting of 40 years worth of uranium exploration results, gathered largely from the South Texas uranium trend, where we have already been actively acquiring interests in land on the basis of the data, and will be used to locate possible mineralized zones.

The rights to this exploration database were provided to the Company by James A. Knupke, Consulting Geologist of Corpus Christi, Texas. Under terms of an agreement Mr. Knupke provided consulting services to the Company, which included the review of his database. Upon review of the database we acquired several prospective properties. We have terminated the agreement as we had substantially exhausted our review of Mr. Knupke's data.

4

We do not own or have exclusive rights to this database.

We acquired the rights to a database containing over 50 years of uranium exploration data for the State of Wyoming.

This database consists of 315,000 feet of drill logs, over 400 maps, copies of all US geological survey uranium publications dating back to 1954, and geological reports on uranium ore bodies throughout Wyoming. The database will be used to locate possible mineralized zones. The database is made available to the Company by Robert Odell, the compiler and publisher of the Rocky Mountain Uranium Minerals Scout since 1974.

We have not acquired ownership of this database, but rather the exclusive use of it as long as the owner remains our employee. Should he resign we would be required to negotiate an agreement to acquire ownership.

We acquired a database of US uranium exploration results from Moore Energy Corporation ("Moore Energy"), a private Oklahoma-based uranium exploration company.

The Moore Energy US uranium database consists of over 30 years of uranium exploration information in the States of Texas, New Mexico and Wyoming, originally conducted during the 1970s, 80s and 90s. It includes results of over 10,000 drill holes, plus primary maps, and geological reports. It covers approximately one million acres of prospective uranium claims, in the South Texas uranium trend, New Mexico, and Powder River Basin, Wyoming, as well as zones in Texas, and will be used to locate possible mineralized zones.

The database also provides the Company with exploration data about its Goliad Project in south Texas, including 250,000 feet of drill logs and further delineates zones of potential uranium mineralization. It also contains drilling results from properties that are being developed by other uranium exploration companies, and also widespread regional data from throughout the South Texas uranium trend.

We have exclusive ownership of this database.

Additional information is set out in the discussion of our properties below.

Our plan of operations for the next 12 months is to conduct further exploratory drilling at the Goliad Project in Goliad County, Texas, as described under "Plan of Exploration - 2007/2008" under the discussion relating to the Goliad Project below.

We may also plan to undertake the exploration work programs described below under "Mineral Exploration Properties" in the next 12 months.

We also plan to acquire further acres of mineral properties in the states of interest that include Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. Our ability to complete these acquisitions will be subject to our obtaining sufficient financing and our being able to conclude agreements with the property owners on terms that are acceptable to us.

The Goliad Project in Goliad County, Texas, and the Cebolleta Project, in Cibola County, New Mexico, are our principal mineral properties.

None of our other properties are currently considered material properties, however we may plan to conduct further exploration to determine if economic deposits of mineralization exist on these properties..

5

The following provides information relating to our principal mineral properties:

The Goliad Project property is located in south Texas near the northeast end of the extensive South Texas Uranium trend. The Goliad Project consists of multiple contiguous leases that would allow the mining of uranium by ISR methods while utilizing the land surface (with variable conditions) as needed, for mining wells and aboveground facilities for fluid processing and ore capture during the mining and groundwater restoration phases of the project. The UEC Goliad Project area is about 14 miles north of the town of Goliad and is located on the east side of US route 77A/183 (Figure 4-1), a primary highway that intersects with US 59 in Goliad and IH-10 to the north. The approximate center of the project area is 28 d 52' 7" N latitude, 97 d 20 36" W longitude. Site drilling roads are mostly gravel based and allow reasonable weather access for trucks and cars. Four-wheel drive vehicles may be needed during high rainfall periods.

Virtually all mining in Texas is on private lands with leases negotiated with each individual landowner/mineral owner. Moore Energy obtained leases for exploration work in the project area in the early 1980s and completed an extensive drilling program resulting in a historic uranium mineral estimate in 1985. We obtained mining leases by assignment from a private entity in 2006.

6

The current leases range in size from 14 acres to 331.98 acres. Most of the leases have starting dates in 2005 or 2006 with term periods of five years with a five-year renewal option (Figure 4.2). The various lease fees and royalty conditions are negotiated with individual lessors and conditions may vary from lease to lease. Because the leases are negotiated with individual private land and/or mineral owners and none of the properties are located on government land, the details of the lease information and terms are considered confidential.

No historic uranium mining is known to have occurred on any of the Goliad Project lease properties and only state permitted uranium exploration drilling has taken place. There are believed to be no existing environmental liabilities at the property leases. Prior to any mining activity at the Goliad Project, we are required to obtain a Radioactive Materials License, a large area Underground Injection Control ("UIC") Mine permit and a Production Area Authorization (PAA) permit for each wellfield developed for mining within the Mine Permit area. In addition, a waste disposal well will, if needed, require a separate UIC Permit. These permits will be issued by Texas regulatory agencies. The current drilling and abandonment of uranium exploration holes on any of the leases is permitted by the Texas Railroad Commission. Potential future environmental liability as a result of the mining must be addressed by the permit holder jointly with the permit granting agency. Most permits now have bonding requirements for ensuring that the restoration of groundwater, the land surface and any ancillary facility structures or equipment is properly completed.

7

The Goliad Project area is situated in the interior portion of the Gulf Coastal Plain physiographic province. The area is characterized by rolling topography with parallel to sub-parallel ridges and valleys. There is about 130 feet of relief at the site with ground surface elevations ranging from a low of 150 to a high of 280 feet above mean sea level. The leased property for the Goliad Project is used mostly for livestock grazing pasture and woodland. The overall property area is shown as having a Post Oak Woods, Forest, and Grassland Mosaic vegetation/cover type.

The site property is accessed from combined route US 77A / 183 that trends north-south to the west of the property. Highway FM 1961 intersects with 77A-183 at the crossroad town of Weser. Highway FM 1961 to the east of the intersection trends along the south side of the property. Access from either of these roads into the property is via vehicular traffic on private gravel roads.

The property is in a rural setting at the north end of Goliad County. The nearest population centers are Goliad (14 miles south), Cuero (18 miles north) and Victoria (about 30 miles east). While Goliad and Cuero are relatively small towns, they provide basic needs for food and lodging and some supplies. Victoria is a much larger city and provides a well-developed infrastructure that has resulted from being a regional center to support oil and gas exploration and production. The Goliad Project site area has generally very good accessibility for light to heavy equipment. There is an excellent network of county, state and federal highways that serve the region and the moderate topography, with dominantly sandy, well-drained soils, provides good construction conditions for building gravel site roads necessary for site access.

The climate in Goliad County is mild with hot summers and cool to warm winters. The moderate temperatures and precipitation result in excellent conditions for developing an ISR mine. Periods of freezing temperatures are generally very brief and infrequent. Tropical weather from the Gulf of Mexico can occur during the hurricane season and may affect the site area with large rain storms. The periodic freezing weather and abnormally large rainfalls are the primary conditions that can cause temporary shutdowns. Otherwise there is not a regular non-operating season.

The necessary rights for constructing needed surface processing facilities are in-place on selected lease agreements. Sufficient electric power is believed to be available in the area, however, new lines may be needed to bring additional service to the plant site and wellfields. We believe that within a 30 mile radius of the planned Goliad Project facility there is located sufficient population to supply the necessary number of suitable mining personnel.

The Goliad Project site is located in the north-central portion of Goliad County to the east and north of the intersection of U.S. Routes 77A/183 and Farm to Market Route 1961. There has been a long history of oil and gas exploration and production in the area and oil and gas is still a primary part of the economy for the relatively lightly populated county. In the period from October 1979 to June 1980, as a part of a large oil, gas and other minerals lease holding (approximately 55,000 acres), Coastal Uranium utilized the opportunity to drill several widely spaced exploration holes in the region. There were reported to be eight holes drilled at or near the Goliad Project area.

In the early 1980s Moore Energy obtained access to review some of the Coastal States wide-spaced drilling exploration data. The review resulted in Moore Energy obtaining several leases from Coastal Uranium, including several of the current Goliad Project leases. During the period from March 1983 through August 1984, Moore Energy conducted an exploration program in the Goliad Project area.

No further drilling was done at the Goliad Project area until we obtained the leases through assignment from a private entity. During the period from May 2006 to present we began and are continuing an extended drilling program at the site.

8

This description of previous exploration and development work undertaken at the Goliad Project is based primarily on electric logs and maps produced by Moore Energy during the period 1983 to 1984. Moore Energy completed 479 borings on various leases. Eight widespread exploration borings were completed by Coastal Uranium in 1980. We obtained leases from a private entity in 2006 and began confirmation drilling in May 2006. To date, approximately 424 confirmation-delineation holes totaling 137,842 feet have been drilled by us to confirm and expand the mineralization base at the Goliad Project with the intention of permitting the project as an ISR mining and recovery facility.

All of the exploration holes (Coastal Uranium, Moore Energy and the Company) have been drilled using truck-mounted drilling rigs contracted with various drilling companies. The holes were drilled by conventional rotary drilling methods using drilling mud fluids. All known uranium exploration or confirmation drilling at the Goliad property has been by way of vertical holes. Drill cuttings were typically collected from the drilling fluid returns circulating up the annulus of the borehole. These samples were generally taken at 10-foot intervals and laid out on the ground in rows (10 cuttings piles per 100 feet of drilling) by the driller for review and description by a geologist. At completion the holes were logged for gamma ray, self potential and resistance by contract logging companies. The logging companies utilized by both Coastal Uranium and Moore Energy provided and primarily analog data. No down-hole deviation tool was available at the time. In contrast, the Company has utilized a company (Century Geophysical) that has provided digital log data along with downhole deviation. In an effort to be cost effective we have recently purchased and had built our own logging truck.

Historical mineral estimates were prepared by Moore Energy from 1983 through 1985. For each drill hole, a grade thickness (GT) was determined. GT is the product of the average equivalent uranium mineral grade, as determined by eU3O8 gamma ray readings, and the thickness of the mineralized zone. An outline contouring all of the drill holes with intercepts meeting these criteria was produced and the area within the outline was determined using a planimeter. The average GT of the holes within the contoured outline was then used to estimate the mineralization meeting the specified criteria.

During the field investigation by Moore Energy a prompt fission neutron ("PFN") specialty logging unit was used to determine the disequilibrium factor ("DEF") in the four different mineralized zones identified at the site. The logging unit was designed to determine the grade of uranium only while excluding the daughter products that develop over time from the half-life decay rates. The unit utilized by Moore Energy was provided by Princeton Gamma Technologies ("PGT"). A total of 30 boreholes were logged with the PFN unit by Moore Energy during the field investigation. The log output data is on a printout with one-foot values for the logged mineralized intercepts. Numerical values of the PGT uranium were assayed in %U₃O₈, the gross gamma equivalent e%U₃O₈, and the unit calculated the DEF. The log header contains logging unit factors and location and hole identification data. The log output also provides a calculation of the thickness, average grade, starting depth, grade thickness and DEF. A review of the historic data and discussion with the Moore Energy geologist shows that DEF data from PGT logged holes were sorted by intervals according to what zone that interval was situated. The DEF values from each zone were then averaged if there were enough values and those values used to adjust the historical estimate of Moore Energy.

The Goliad Project area is situated in the Texas Gulf Coastal Plain physiographic province that is geologically characterized by sedimentary deposits that typically dip and thicken toward the Gulf of Mexico from the northwest source areas. Additionally, the regional dip generally increases with distance in the down dip direction as the overall thickness of sediments increase. The sedimentary units are dominantly continental clastic deposits with some near shore and shallow marine facies. The uranium-bearing units are virtually all sands and sandstones in Tertiary formations ranging in age from Eocene (oldest) to Upper Miocene (youngest).

9

The surface of the property is all within the outcrop area of the Goliad Formation (Figure 4.3). The mineralized units are sands and sandstone within the Goliad Formation and are designated by us as the A through D sands from younger (upper) to older (lower), respectively. The sand units are generally fine to medium grained sands with silt and varying amounts of secondary calcite. The sand units vary in color depending upon the degree of oxidation-reduction and could be from light brown-tan to grays. The sands units are generally separated from each other by silty clay or clayey silts that serve as confining units between the sand units.

10

11

The Goliad Formation at the project site occurs from the surface to a depth of about 500 feet. Depending upon the land surface elevation, groundwater occurs in the sands of the formation below depths of about 30 to 60 feet. The four sand/sandstone zones (A-D) designated as containing uranium mineralization at the site are all considered to be a part of the Gulf Coast Aquifer on a regional basis. At the project area, however, each zone is a hydrogeologic unit with similar but variable characteristics. The A zone is the uppermost unit and based on resistance logs, groundwater in this unit may be unconfined over portions of the site. The three deeper zones are confined units with confining clays and silts above and below the water-bearing unit.

Groundwater from sands of the Goliad Formation is used for water supplies over much of the northern portion of Goliad County. Water quality in the Goliad Formation is variable and wells typically can yield small to moderate amounts of water.. Data indicates an approximate average hydraulic conductivity of the water-bearing zones of the Goliad Formation in Goliad County is 100 gallons per day per square foot. Based on this value, a 20 foot sand unit would have an approximate transmissivity of 2,000 gallons per day. With sufficient available drawdown properly completed ISR wells could have average yields in the range of 25 to 50 gallons per minute.

The hydrogeologic characteristics of the water-bearing sands at the Goliad Project have not been determined yet, but aquifer tests are required prior to submitting a mining permit application. Hydrogeologic tests will determine the hydraulic character of the sands and the confining beds separating the individual sand zones.

The site area structures include two faults that intersect and offset the mineralized units. These faults are normal, with one downthrown toward the coast and one downthrown toward the northwest. The fault throws range from about 40 to 80 feet.

The Goliad uranium project is characteristic of other known Goliad sand / sandstone deposits in south Texas. The mineralization occurs within fluvial sands and silts as roll front deposits that are typically a "C" or cutoff "C" shape. The roll fronts are generally associated with an extended oxidation-reduction boundary or front.

The other Goliad projects in the region include the Mt. Lucas mine at Lake Corpus Christi, the Kingsville Dome mine southeast of Kingsville, the Rosita mine west of Alice and the Mestena mine in Brooks County. These mines are all located south of the Goliad Project from about 60 to 160 miles. The average tons and uranium grade information for these mines is not known, but all these ISR projects mining Goliad Formation sand units have been very successful with the following characteristics in common: excellent leaching characteristics rate, favorable hydraulic conductivity of host sands, mineral resources have DEF mostly above 1.0 and mineral resource mining recoveries of 80-100 percent.

At the Goliad Project there are four (A-D) stacked mineralized sand horizons that are separated vertically by zones of finer sand, silt and clay. Deposition and concentration of uranium in the Goliad Formation likely resulted due to a combination of leaching of uranium from volcanic tuff or ash deposits within the Goliad Formation or erosion of uranium-bearing materials from older Oakville deposits. The leaching process occurred near the outcrop area where recharge of oxidizing groundwater increased the solubility of uranium minerals in the interstices and coating sand grains in the sediments. Subsequent downgradient migration of the soluble uranium within the oxygenated groundwater continued until the geochemical conditions became reducing and uranium minerals were deposited in roll front or tabular bodies due to varying stratigraphic or structural conditions.

There are at least two northeast-southwest trending faults at the Goliad property that are likely related to the formation of the Goliad Project mineralization. The northwesterly fault is a typical Gulf Coast normal fault, downthrown toward the coast, while the southeastern fault is downthrown to the northwest, forming a graben structure. Both faults are normal faults. Throw on the northwest fault is about 75 feet and the southeast fault has about 50 feet of throw. The presence of these faults is likely related to the increased mineralization at the site. The faulting has probably served as a conduit for reducing waters-gases to migrate from deeper horizons as well as altering the groundwater flow system in the uranium-bearing sands.

12

The Goliad Project uranium-bearing units occur as multiple roll-front type structures in vertically stacked sands and sandstones. Groundwater flowing from northwest to southeast in the Goliad sands likely contained low concentrations of dissolved uranium resulting from oxidizing conditions and the relatively short distance from the recharge area. The geochemical conditions in the sands near our property changed from oxidizing to reducing due to an influx of reductants. Hydrogen sulfide and/or methane dissolved in groundwater are likely sources of creating a reduction-oxidation boundary in the area with consequent precipitation and concentration of uranium mineralization.

Specific identification of the uranium minerals has not been done at the Goliad Project. The very fine uranium minerals found coating quartz grains and within the interstices in most south Texas sand and sandstone roll-front deposits has generally been found to be dominantly uraninite. No uraninite has been identified on the Goliad Project and the presence of uraninite on other properties does not mean that such mineralization will be found on the Goliad Project. Detailed petrographic examination of disseminated uranium mineralization within sands/sandstones is generally not suitable for identification of the specific uranium minerals. Laboratory equipment such as x-ray diffraction units may be used to identify the minerals, however the specific mineral species typically found in reduced sands are generally similar in south Texas ISR projects and leaching characteristics are also similar. Based on the experience of the ISR mines throughout south Texas, the use of gamma-ray logging with a calibrated logging probe has become the standard method to determine the thickness and estimated grade of uranium bearing minerals.

At the project site the Goliad Formation is exposed at the surface and extends to depths exceeding 500 feet. Uranium mineralization occurs in four sand/sandstone units that are all below the saturated zone. The zones are designated A to D from the top to the bottom of the sequence. The sands are fluvial-deltaic in origin, and thicken and thin across the project site. Each Zone is hydrologically separated by 10 to 50 feet or more of clay or silty clay. The uranium deposits are tabular in nature and can range from about one foot to over 45 feet in thickness. The "C"-shaped configuration is typically convex in a downdip direction with leading edge tails on the upper end. Most of the exploration and delineation holes with elevated gamma ray log anomalies are situated within a southwest-northeast trending graben and most of the gamma ray anomaly holes are situated along the northernmost of the two faults comprising the graben. This northernmost fault is downthrown to the southeast, which is typical for the majority of faults along the Texas coastal area.

The A and B gamma ray anomaly zones are continuous, tabular bodies which extend for over 2000 feet along trend. The A Zone mineralized body ranges from about 100 feet to over 600 feet in width and the B Zone ranges from about 50 feet to over 300 feet in width. The D Zone gamma ray anomaly extends for over 5,000 feet along trend and appears to be comprised of extensive, isolated pods of high grade gamma anomalies which range from 50 feet to over 500 feet in width. Confirmation drilling, however, has shown high-grade gamma ray anomaly connections between some of the pods. The C Zone is the least extensive of the four gamma anomaly zones.

A review of the available records for the Goliad Project indicated that approximately eight holes were drilled by Coastal Uranium on or near the current Goliad Project leases. This original exploration program resulted in the original find of gamma ray logging responses indicating potential low grade uranium as a part of a very wide spaced preliminary exploration program by Coastal Uranium during the period from October 1979 through June 1980.

Records indicate that Moore Energy obtained leases from Coastal Uranium for properties in the current Goliad Project area and conducted a thorough exploration program that consisted of drilling 479 exploration holes from March 1983 to August 1984. The program utilized gamma ray, resistance and self-potential logging of each hole and a geologic description of the lithology from five to 10-foot interval drill cuttings. In addition to gamma logs, several holes were also logged with a Princeton Gamma Tech Geophysical Services PFN type tool. This logging tool was used to differentiate gamma radiation from uranium and daughter products, and determine a DEF for the mineralization intervals. The Moore Energy exploration program provided the geological basis for the Goliad Project.

13

Current (2006-2007) drilling at the property has been to confirm the geological details of the uranium mineralization at the property. The Goliad property work by our geologists is not exploration but confirmation-verification drilling. Additionally, our staff has continued peripheral as well as internal drilling to expand the historical mineralization.

Drilling for the Goliad Project has been conducted by truck-mounted rigs drilling vertical holes ranging from about four to six inches in diameter. After reaching the designated total depth, the hole is circulated from bottom to clear the heavy cuttings from the hole and condition the hole for logging with a specialized calibrated tool that recorded resistance, spontaneous potential and gamma ray. The gamma ray probe on each logging truck working on uranium drilling projects has to maintain calibration by regular cross checking the probe at a US Department of Energy test pit near George West, Texas. The pit is set up for logging units to calibrate the gamma probe with a known radioactive source. This method has been successfully used in Texas since at least the mid-1970s. The available data indicate that the logging companies contracted for this project have maintained industry standard calibration procedures for their probes.

Based on a review of drilling records and discussions with former Moore Energy and our current employees, previous drilling on the property was conducted using rotary mud drilling and truck-mounted drilling rigs. Cuttings are typically taken at 10-foot intervals and placed in piles on the ground for a geologist to review for lithology and alteration. The drill holes were completed at various depths depending on which of the four sand units may have been mineralized in the vicinity location. Once completed, the drill holes were logged by a contract logger using a probe with gamma ray, self-potential and single point resistance capability. Drift tools for bottom hole deviation were not used by Coastal Uranium nor for the vast majority of Moore Energy holes. We have utilized the digital logging capability of Century Geophysical Corp. and have downhole deviation records for these holes. The drill hole collar location was used to position the hole location for map locations of individual holes. Although several boreholes had no deviation records, all drilling to date has been set up to be vertical drilling. At the depth range (300-500 ft) of most Goliad Project drilling, measured bottom hole deviations from vertical are generally less than 10 feet.

Initial exploration drilling in the general areas was conducted by Coastal Uranium in 1980. Some scattered low level gamma ray anomalies were noted in the geophysical logs that indicated potential low grade uranium mineralization was possible in three of the eight Coastal drill holes. Moore Energy established leases in the area in 1982 and began an exploration program in early 1983. Between 1983 and August 1984 Moore Energy completed 479 borings by mud rotary methods on several of their leases. We obtained leases at the property by assignment from a private entity in 2006 and began confirmation drilling in May 2006. 360 holes have been completed by us so far.

At the time when we received a report of data for this disclosure, the report indicated that we had drilled a total of 360 confirmation holes. Of the total 360 holes, 32 were strongly mineralized.

All uranium grades have been determined from evaluation (manual calculations or computerized logging equipment) of gamma logs of the drill holes. The resulting grades are designated as equivalent percent uranium that have not been corrected or verified by chemical assay. Because there has not been sufficient verification of the gamma log and PFN log data to arrive at a validated resource or reserve classification, the following data in Table 2 cannot be used to define a resource at this time.

18

Mineral processing or metallurgical testing was not reported as being conducted on any of the samples drilled or recovered during the Moore Energy exploration in the mid-1980s. We submitted selected core samples from our core hole # 30892-111C to Energy Laboratories, Inc. in Casper, Wyoming, in January 2007. These samples from the Goliad Project were sent to the laboratory for leach amenability studies intended to demonstrate that uranium mineralization at the property was capable of being leached using conventional in situ leach chemistry. The tests do not approximate other in-situ variables (permeability, porosity, and pressure) but provide an indication of a sample's reaction rate and the potential chemical recovery.

Split sections of core were placed in laboratory containers and a lixiviate solution with 2.0 grams per liter HCO₃ (NaHCO₃) and either 0.50 or 0.25 g/L of H₂O₂ (hydrogen peroxide) was added to each test container. The containers were then rotated at 30 rpm for 16 hours. The lixiviate was then extracted from each test container and analyzed for uranium, molybdenum, sodium, sulfate, alkalinity (bicarbonate, carbonate), pH and conductance. A clean charge of lixiviate was added and the container rotated another 16 hours. Each sample rotation and lixiviate charge cycle was representative of 5 pore volumes with chemical analyses after each cycle. The cycle was repeated for a total of 6 cycles or the equivalent of 30 pore volumes.

The four core samples subjected to the leach amenability tests were determined to contain from 0.04% to 0.08% cU₃O₈ before testing_. Leach tests conducted on the core samples from the A Zone indicate leach efficiencies of 60 to 80% U₃O₈ extraction, while the tails analyses indicate efficiencies of 87-89%. The differences between the two calculations involve the loss of solid clay based materials during multiple filtrations. Based on post leach solids analysis, the core intervals were leachable to a very favorable 86 to 89%. After tests the tails were reanalyzed for uranium concentration to determine the recovery, which ranged on the 4 samples using 2 methods from 60% to 89%.

Laboratory amenability testing of the cores samples indicated the uranium (dissolved elemental U) recoveries ranged from 86.4% to 88.9% in the four tests. These results show that the mineralized intervals at the Goliad Project are very amenable to ISR mining even when exposed to only one-half of the oxidant concentration normally used in the Leach Amenability test. Based on the Company's experience with ISR mining of Catahoula and Oakville uranium deposits, as well as discussions with other Goliad deposit mining personnel, the geologically younger deposits in Texas (Goliad formation) have been the most amenable to in situ leaching. The uranium recovery is generally more complete (% recovery) and occurs in a shorter time period. Both of these factors are important for ISR mine development economics. Table 16-1 provides data on the weight of each sample, the depth from which each sample was taken, the chemical uranium grade of each sample and sample-by-sample uranium recovery results.

Based on the amenability test results, the size of the mineral resource at the Goliad Project, the geologic setting and the current and projected future demand and price of uranium, the most feasible and cost effective mining method for the Goliad property uranium is by ISR. This method is most suitable for the size and grade of the deposits in sands that are below the water table and situated at depths that would be prohibitive for open pit or underground mining.

The amenability testing described above was conducted on core recovered from four depth intervals from one boring. While this was a limited sampling for this property, the samples are believed to be generally representative of the characteristics of the mineralized intervals and the determined recovery ranges for these intervals is considered to be reliable. Two of the four samples tested contained approximately 0.08% cU₃O₈ and two contained lower grades of uranium (~0.04% cU₃O₈). Energy Laboratories, Inc. in Casper, Wyoming, conducted the laboratory testing for this project. The laboratory has been in business since 1952, is fully certified, but not ISO certified. Certifications include the US Environmental Protection Agency, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the following US states: AZ, CA, CO, FL, ID, NV, OR, SD, TX, UT and WA.

19

The Goliad Project appears to be most suitable for mining as an ISR (in-situ recovery) project. Although leach and permeability tests are still being conducted, south Texas uranium deposits in permeable sands situated below the groundwater table are generally favorable to ISR production.

We have completed a number of required environmental baseline studies and have other studies either underway or in near term planning. Completed studies include: cultural resources (including archaeology), socioeconomic impact and soils mapping. Flora and fauna studies are approximately 50% completed and background radiation surveys will commence shortly. The cultural resources study found no adverse impacts to the site and socioeconomic impacts are projected to be positive for the community

The geotechnical engineering study for the proposed plant site has been completed and mine planning, including engineering design for the proposed plant site, is in progress. 20 Regional Baseline water quality wells have been installed for monitoring the aquifer within the mineralized zones and pump tests on the aquifer are planned. Laboratory testing has indicated 86-89% leachability of tested core samples and the results indicate that the mineralization is amenable to in situ leaching with an oxygenated bicarbonate lixiviant.

A geotechnical engineering report was completed for us on June 18, 2007. The study was a subsurface investigation and foundation recommendation report for the proposed location of a processing facility pad for a future Goliad Project uranium recovery facility. The field investigation consisted of drilling five soil borings to a depth of 25 feet below ground to determine the shallow soil materials and conditions and provide foundation recommendations.

Soils in the upper 25 feet at the proposed site are variable with dominantly brown to light brown sandy silty clay in the upper 4 to 6 feet. Soils grade to tan sandy clayey silt that is generally present to depth of the investigation (25 feet). The shallow clayey soils have relatively high plasticity indices (PI) with lower PIs in the silty soils below. Groundwater was not encountered while drilling the borings.

The primary recommendation in the report is to construct a reinforced concrete mat type foundation sized for a uniform allowable loading of 2,000 pounds per square foot.

The report and recommendations indicates there are no apparent problem soils and the recommended slab and foundation should be suitable for the intended use of the slab.

Our company completed the planned 32,000-foot drilling program during the fourth quarter of 2006. Based on encouraging results, a two-fold, follow-on program was designed to be performed during 2007 to support mine permitting, mine planning and expansion of existing mineralizations. All 2007 drilling at the Goliad Project will be carried out under our approved Texas Railroad Commission Exploration Permit No. 123 dated February 3, 2006. The Permit has been extended for an additional year (until February 3, 2008).

The first phase of the new program will be to support ongoing environmental permitting. An additional 216 holes will be drilled. Total drilling footage for this part of the program will be approximately 75,840 feet.

20

The first phase will also involve a total of five core holes averaging 300 feet in depth. The cores will be collected and sent to an analytical laboratory to have agitation leach analyses run to best determine the composition of the mine lixiviant amenable to in-situ recovery methodology.

Following the coring program at total of five cased holes will be installed and utilized as groundwater monitor wells. Groundwater will be sampled and analyzed as part of the ongoing environmental mine permitting application process. These monitor wells will be drilled and cased to an average depth of 300 feet below ground surface. The entire cost of this first phase program will be approximately $595,000. The first phase drilling program was completed during the second quarter of 2007.

The second phase of drilling planned at the Goliad Project will be designed to explore additional acreage acquired during our company's 2006 - 2007 leasing program. It is anticipated that at least 500 exploratory holes will be required to adequately define the presence or absence of mineralization on the newly acquired acreage. The 500 holes will account for an approximate total of 227,250 feet of drilling and cost $1,500,000. This drilling program should be initiated during the second quarter of 2007 and extend into the first quarter of 2008.

Geologists and engineers performing work at the Goliad Project have developed a timetable of forecasted workflow, which includes the forecasted completion dates of various tasks which have been assigned to various personnel. The workflow has been broken down into two broad categories, which have then been further broken down into individual tasks, many of which can be performed contemporaneously. The two major categories of work relate to radioactive materials licenses and mine permits.

Within these two broad categories of work are included the following tasks, many of which are required by the regulatory bodies to whom the Company is subject to oversight for its exploration activities. The forecasted dates of completion of these tasks is also indicated. These are internal forecasts only, and the actual dates of the beginning or completion of these tasks may differ materially from the forecasts:

21

Upon the satisfactory completion of these tasks, and with approval of all applicable regulatory agencies involved in these tasks, the Company may then proceed with uranium extraction, provided that this exploration property can establish economic uranium reserves.

The permitting process is well underway and the Company has accomplished the following key elements to that end:

The Cebolleta Project is situated in the eastern-most portion of Cibola County, New Mexico. It is located approximately 45 air miles (72 kilometres) west-northwest of the City of Albuquerque, and approximately 10 miles (16 kilometres) north of the town of Laguna. Three small villages, Bibo, Moquino and Seboyeta, are located a short distance west and northwest of the project area.

22

Nuclear Energy Inc ("NEI"), the manager of Cibola Resources, obtained a lease from the Board of Trustees of the Cebolleta Land Grant Board for an area of the land grant covering approximately 6,700 acres (2,994 hectares) of mineral rights. The majority of the leased mineral rights are covered by the surface estate held by the Cebolleta Land Grant, and surface use and access rights are included as provisions of the lease. A portion of the leased mineral rights are covered by surface rights held by a third party, and are not leased by NEI. NEI has assigned the lease to Cibola Resources, of which, Uranium Energy owns 49% of the shares.

The leased lands are part of a land grant that was made to certain individuals by the King of Spain prior to the inclusion of the State of New Mexico as part of the United States.

When the territory of New Mexico was acquired by the United States, the rights and title first conveyed by the creation of the Cebolleta Land Grant were honoured by the United States Senate through the ratification of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Although the area of the Cebolleta Land Grant, including a portion of the Cebolleta project, was never surveyed into the US Section-Township-Range system, the property has been legally surveyed by a registered land surveyor and the appropriate monuments have been put in place.

Cibola Resources has accepted assignment of the Cebolleta Land Grant mineral lease from NEI. The lease, which has an initial term of ten years, may be extended beyond the initial term by Cibola Resources by undertaking mineral exploration, mine development and mining and/or mineral processing activities. The lease agreement requires Cibola Resources to make periodic (annual) advance royalty payments to the Cebolleta Land Grant, pay a sliding scale production royalty (based upon the sales price of U3O8) on any mine production from the property and provide employment opportunities and job training programs for the members of the Cebolleta Land Grant. Cibola Resources is required to complete an independent "third-party" feasibility study within six years of the effective date of the lease, and make a "reserve bonus" payment of US$1 per pound of U3O8, within the "Measured" or "Proven" reserve category and determined to be recoverable by a feasibility study. All annual payments made to the Cebolleta Land Grant prior to the completion of a feasibility study are to be deducted from the "reserve bonus" payment. The lease agreement conveys the rights to explore for, mine and process uranium deposits present on the leased lands. A "Short Form Memorandum of Uranium Mining Lease and Agreement" has been filed and recorded with the offices of the County Clerk and Recorder for Cibola County, New Mexico.

23

A portion of the leased properties are subject to a pre-existing 1/48th (2.08%) royalty on a "Uranium Value". This third-party royalty is deductible from production royalties payable to the Cebolleta Land Grant, and does not represent a further economic burden to Cibola Resources or the project.

The leased property was formerly the site of several underground uranium and open pit mines and processing plant (uranium mill). Open pit and underground mines in the St. Anthony area of the Cebolleta Land Grant lease are currently being reclaimed by the former operators of those mines, UNC Resources (a subsidiary of General Electric). The L-Bar mine and uranium mill were reclaimed by the successor to Sohio Western Mining Company ("Sohio"), Kennecott Energy Company ("Kennecott"), and the mill site has been transferred to the US Department of Energy for long-term monitoring and management. The former L-Bar mill site is not a part the lease from Cebolleta Land Grant. An examination of the files of the State of New Mexico Environment Department and the New Mexico Energy and Minerals Department indicates that Kennecott has some limited reclamation obligations relating to subsidence associated with several ventilation holes for the former JJ #1 underground mine. UNC Resources has obligations to reclaim portions of the former St. Anthony mine area, and they are currently undertaking a comprehensive restoration program in accordance with the directives of the State of New Mexico. Cibola Resources and its members, NEI and Uranium Energy, have not assumed any reclamation liabilities for the properties.

As with all drilling projects proposed in the State of New Mexico, Cibola Resources will be required to obtain permits from the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. Cibola Resources is currently preparing an application for drilling on the project. Mining and milling operations will require additional permits from the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, the New Mexico Environment Department, as well as the US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. At this time Cibola Resources does not hold permits for any activities for the Cebolleta project.

The Cebolleta project is situated on the southern margin of the San Juan Basin of west-central and northwestern New Mexico. The project area adjoins Mesa Chivato, a broad volcanic capped mesa that surrounds Mount Taylor, a dormant volcano that is a prominent landmark. Elevations within the project area range from 6,400 feet to 7,100 feet above sea level (1,950 metres to 2,164 metres). Topography is typical of the mesa-and-canyon landforms that dominate this portion of New Mexico, with sharp local variations in elevation, on the order of 200 to 400 feet (61 metres to 122 metres) over short distances. A series of rounded hills, raising 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 metres) above the surrounding landscape, are present in the vicinity of the former L-Bar uranium mine (in the western part of the project area). A prominent canyon, developed along Meyer Draw and Arroyo Pedro Padilla, cuts the southern part of the project area.

24

In spite of these local variations in topography, access to nearly all of the project area is good. Access to the project is over a paved state-maintained highway to the village of Seboyeta (a distance of approximately 10 miles, or 16 kilometres). One all-weather graded gravel road, maintained by Cibola County, and several private roads of varying quality, cross the project lands and provide access to nearly all parts of the project area. Rail service is available from the BNSF Railroad at the towns of Grants and Milan, and scheduled air service is available in Albuquerque.

25

26

The area is populated with sparse mixed grasses, with very limited stands of mesquite and pinion pine trees, typical of a semi-arid high desert climate. Temperatures at Grants (the nearest town with meaningful weather records) range from lows of approximately 50° to 80° Fahrenheit (9.9° to 26.6° Celsius) in the summer season, and 10° to 40° F (-12.2° to 4.4° Celsius) in the winter. The area receives approximately 11 inches (279 millimetres) of precipitation annually. Much of this precipitation comes in the form of afternoon thundershowers during the months of July and August, and as much as 13 inches (330 millimetres) of snow during the winter months. Winter snows and summer thunderstorms may create temporary muddy ground conditions that interrupt access for short periods of time. Other than these short periods of muddy ground conditions, mineral exploration and mining activities normally can be conducted without interruption throughout the year.

The project area has sufficient surface resources to support mining and processing operations, tailings ponds, and mine waste dumps. There are numerous sources of water, electricity, and fuel in the area. Personnel experienced in open pit and underground mining, construction and mineral processing are available in Grants (40 miles, or 64 kilometres, to the southwest of the project area) and at the town of Laguna. Two high voltage electrical transmission lines cross the region several miles north of the project area, and electrical lines have been constructed to the sites of the former Sohio L-Bar uranium mine.

The Cebolleta project is located in the northern portion of the Laguna mining district, the eastern-most portion of the Grants mineral belt. The first discovery of uranium mineralization in the Laguna district was made by geologists and engineers of the Anaconda Copper Company in late 1951. The identification of strong uranium mineralization resulted in the discovery of the Jackpile-Paguate uranium mine. Anaconda also undertook an exploration program on the nearby Evans Ranch, located northeast of the Jackpile mine, in 1955 and this program continued until 1957. During this period of exploration more than 350 holes were drilled in the area of the Cebolleta project by Anaconda.

Climax Uranium, a subsidiary of American Metals Climax, obtained a lease from the Cebolleta Land Grant for the St. Anthony area and subsequently discovered several uranium deposits on the leased properties. Climax operated a series of small-scale open pit and underground mines, commencing in 1953 and ending in 1960, when the lease was acquired by United Nuclear Corporation (later to become UNC Resources, now a subsidiary of General Electric). During the period of Climax's operations the company produced 320,942 pounds of U3O8. UNC's mining activities are reported to have commenced in 1977. Production rates for the last two years of production at St. Anthony (1979 and 1980) were 1.134 million pounds of U3O8 from stockpiles at the mine site.

Reserve Oil and Minerals, a publicly-traded resource development company, purchased the Evans Ranch (surface and mineral rights) in 1968. Reserve sold an undivided 50 percent interest in the ranch, including the mineral rights, to Sohio (then a subsidiary of the Standard Oil Company of Ohio) in 1969 and formed a joint venture to explore for and develop uranium deposits on the Evans Ranch. Sohio operated the joint venture and discovered extensive uranium mineralization on the property prior to the construction of an underground mine and uranium mill complex (the L-Bar mine and mill). Sohio acquired Reserve's interests in the property in 1982, and subsequently deeded their property interests in the area to the Cebolleta Land Grant in 1989.

Areas I and II were considered to be open pit development targets by Sohio, while the remaining deposits were considered to be underground mining targets only.

Mining at the Cebolleta project removed, prior to shut-down of mining operations due to depressed commodity prices, only a portion of the previously identified mineral resources in place at the project.

This work verified earlier studies by Sohio, based upon 150 core samples, that the deposits were generally in radiometric equilibrium.

The staff of Sohio Western Mining Company updated the historical resources periodically based upon mine production, cut-off grade changes, additional drilling results, underground long-hole drilling and underground sampling of mine workings and muck-piles. Underground sampling was undertaken with the aid of underground probes for muck-pile sampling, while grades of hauled muck were determined by the use of a scanner, with both methods yielding radiometric assays (%eU3O8). Sohio based the 1981 estimate, along with the 1982 and 1984 updates on the following criteria:

27

The Cebolleta project is situated at the eastern end of the prolific Grants mineral belt, which is located on the southern and south-eastern margins of the San Juan Basin and the northern margin of the ancestral Mogollan Highland. The geology of the region is dominated by a thick sequence of sedimentary rocks ranging from Triassic to Late Cretaceous in age. This sedimentary sequence is overlain by volcanic rocks (basalt) that were erupted from the Mount Taylor volcanic center, which is located a short distance to the northwest of the project area. Additionally, isolated basalt plugs and diabase dikes have been intruded into Cretaceous-aged rocks immediately north and southwest of the project area.

A thick sequence of sedimentary rocks, ranging in age from Triassic through upper Cretaceous is present within the immediate project area. Of particular importance is the Jurassic-aged Morrison Formation, which is the host unit for nearly all of the significant uranium deposits in the Grants mineral belt. The Morrison Formation has been subdivided by various workers into three principal units (in ascending order) in the southern portion of the San Juan Basin: the Recapture unit, the overlying Westwater Canyon Member, and the upper-most Brushy Basin Member. The Morrison Formation is unconformably overlain by the Cretaceous-aged Dakota Sandstone, which in turn is overlain by the Mancos Shale.

Regionally, the Recapture Member of the Morrison Formation ranges from 50 to 600 feet (15 to 183 metres) in thickness, and is about 50 feet (15 metres) thick in the project area. It is comprised of interbedded mudstones, siltstone, sandstones, and occasional limestone. Historic reports indicated that the unit was normally greyish-red on surface exposures, while fresh exposures of the various lithologies were grey (limestone), greyish-green (mudstone), or greyish-yellow (sandstone).

The Westwater Canyon Member ranges from 10 to 90 feet (three to 27 metres) in thickness in the project area. While the Westwater Canyon conformably overlies the Recapture Member there is evidence, on a local scale, for Westwater Canyon channels having "scoured" into the uppermost parts of the underlying Recapture Member. The Westwater Canyon, which is the principal host for uranium mineralization throughout the Grants mineral belt, is a greyish-yellow to pale orange sandstone. The sandstones are poorly sorted, range from fine to coarse-grained, and are sub-arkosic to arkosic in composition. In the Marquez Canyon area, approximately 15 miles (24 kilometres) north of the project area, the Westwater is comprised of several sandstone lenses that are separated by thin lenses of mudstone and siltstone.

28

The uppermost unit of the Morrison Formation is the Brushy Basin Member, a thick unit comprised primarily of variegated mudstones and claystones, which range in thickness from 220 to 300 feet (67 to 91 metres) in the vicinity of the project. The mudstone and claystone units are greyish-red, greyish-green to greenish-grey in color and form distinctive rounded outcrops. Several sandstone beds are present within the Brushy Basin throughout the Grants mineral belt, and certain of these sandstones have economic significance for hosting uranium deposits. Several of the sandstone units are similar in character to the Westwater Canyon sandstone.

The Jackpile sandstone is a distinct, yet local, unit that is in the uppermost part of the Brushy Basin Member. This unit is the host for the significant uranium deposits at the Jackpile - Paguate, St. Anthony, and L-Bar mines. The Jackpile sandstone extends in a north-easterly-trending belt that may be as much as 13 miles (21 kilometres) wide and more than 65 miles (105 kilometres) long. The unit may achieve a thickness of 200 feet (61 metres). In the St. Anthony mine complex the Jackpile ranges from 80 to 120 feet (24 to 37 metres), while at the adjoining L-Bar mine it ranges from 80 to 100 feet (24 to 30 metres) in thickness.

Thick, essentially uninterrupted, sequences of sandstone are characteristic of the Jackpile. Shale or mudstone beds are not totally absent but they are reported to be rare. The unit is a fine to medium-grained feldspathic sandstone, which is often cemented with clay. It is composed of 60 to 90% quartz, with clay and feldspar making up the remainder. Rock fragments are present, but are minor constituents. Clays occur as kaolinite, and more importantly, montmorillonite, and often serves as cement in the sandstone. Locally, the Jackpile has also been cemented with calcite.

The Dakota Sandstone, of Cretaceous age, unconformably overlies the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation throughout the project area. It is tan, orange, and white, well cemented sandstone that has minor interbeds of black shale. It averages about 50 feet (15 metres) in the project area. The Mancos Shale, also of Cretaceous age conformably overlies the Dakota Sandstone and is the uppermost sedimentary rock unit in the project area. It attains a thickness of approximately 400 feet (122 metres) in the area. It is comprised of grey to black friable shale with various interbedded sandstones that range from five to 30 feet (1.5 to nine metres) in thickness (Schlee and Moench, 1963).

Sedimentary rocks in the project area dip gently to the northwest, into the San Juan Basin, at less than two degrees. Several small scale dip-slip faults, generally down-dropped to the west, have been mapped on the surface several miles north of the project, and two similar structures, down-dropped to the east, have been mapped northeast and southwest of the immediate project area. No major faulting has been recognized in the area.

Several small-scale high-angle faults were observed in the workings of the JJ #1 underground mine, but these structures do not appear to have disrupted uranium mineralization in the mine and do not appear to have influenced the localization of mineralization.

Throughout the Grants mineral belt sandstones of the Morrison Formation, particularly the Westwater Canyon, and the Dakota Sandstone are aquifers. Various reports for the L-Bar mine, groundwater inflows from the Jackpile sandstone member of the Morrison Formation range from 25 to 100 gallons per minute (113 to 454 litres). Water wells capable of producing between 25 and 35 gallons per minute (113 and 159 litres) were completed into the Jackpile sandstone at L-Bar, and wells capable of producing between 35 and 50 gallons per minute (159 and 227 litres) from the Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation (Geo-Management, 1972). Although pumping data is not available to determine the ability of either aquifer to provide sustained water supplies considerable water is known to exist in the Westwater Canyon in the vicinity of the Cebolleta project.

29

At the L-Bar deposits carbonaceous material, which was the reductant for the precipitation of uranium occurs in two forms, as detritus, and as humate. No significant uranium mineralization occurs where carbonaceous material is absent.

As previously noted, the uranium mineralization is hosted (primarily) in porous and permeable sandstones within the Jackpile unit of the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation. This type of uranium deposit generally occurs at several different levels in the host, and a group of deposits may extend along an ill-defined "trend", which may reflect channel facies of the host, for a distance of several miles. This style of uranium deposit is very well known in the Grants mineral belt where it is the dominant mode of uranium occurrence.

Uranium minerals at the Cebolleta project are reported to be Coffinite [U(SiO4)1-x(OH04x)], Uraninite [UO2], organo-uranium complexes, and unidentified oxidized uranium complexes.

The six known uranium prospects located on the Cebolleta project share a common set of geological controls;

At the L-Bar complex, mineralization occurs in tabular bodies that may be more than 1,000 feet (305 metres) in length, and attain thicknesses of 6 to 12 feet (1.8 to 3.7 metres). The upper and lower boundaries of these mineralized bodies are generally quite abrupt. There is some tendency for individual prospects to develop in clusters. Locally, these clusters may be related to the coalescence of separate channel sandstone bodies. In this instance, mineralization is often thicker and higher grade than adjoining areas.

30

Cibola Resources has not carried out any drilling on the subject properties.

The drilling data that served as the basis for the historical mineral resources for the Cebolleta project includes more than 1,500 conventional (open-hole) rotary and core holes (totaling in excess of 600,000 feet [182,880 metres]) that were drilled between the late 1950's and the early 1980's. All drill holes were logged with truck mounted surface recording gamma/Self-Potential/single point resistivity logging units, which is a standard method of determining the presence and magnitude of subsurface uranium mineralization. This method of "sampling" provided a continuous record of the intensity of uranium mineralization in each drill hole. Cibola Resources has a significant number of the gamma/S-P/resistivity logs for holes at the Cebolleta project, and this data effectively defines the nature and extent not only of the subsurface uranium mineralization in the project areas, but also the thickness and lateral extent of the host rocks within the areas of drilling.

Drill holes were generally drilled on a square grid pattern, with holes spaced at 100 feet (30.48 metres), although some drilling at the "Area III" uranium deposit was spaced at 200 foot (60.96 metres) intervals. All drill holes were drilled vertically (-90 degrees) and intersected the generally flat-lying host rocks in a manner that gave an accurate depiction of the true thicknesses of the host rocks and the mineralized horizons.

Samples collected from the conventional rotary and core holes have not been available for examination, and likely no longer exist.

All of the historical drill holes drilled at the Cebolleta project were logged with truck-mounted continuous surface recording natural gamma-ray/S-P/resistivity probe units. This process provided a continuous reading of gamma radioactivity through the entire length of the drill hole. Gamma-ray log values were then used to calculate radiometric grades from all of the mineralized holes. Most of the gamma logging was done by Dalton Well Logging and Geoscience Associates, Inc., both of whom were competent, experienced and independent geophysical logging contractors, on behalf of Reserve Oil and Minerals, Sohio and United Nuclear/UNC Resources. The gamma logging equipment was periodically calibrated at "test pits" of the US Atomic Energy Commission (now US Department of Energy) near Grants, New Mexico and Grand Junction, Colorado, in accordance with the standard operating procedures utilized in the industry at the time.

Radiometric assays, calculated from gamma ray logging of the exploration drill holes at the Cebolleta project, were checked by the then project operators, Sohio and United Nuclear, by drilling core holes at selected locations. Sohio collected more than 150 samples that were analyzed by chemical and radiometric assay methods. Samples were collected from drill holes in several areas of the project area. Analytical results tabulated by Geo-Management show minor differences between radiometric and chemical assays, with general pattern of chemical assays being slightly higher than radiometric assays, especially at grades in excess of 0.20% U₃O₈.

Cibola Resources has no information regarding the preparation of samples for chemical assay, methods of determination of the uranium content of these samples or the security of those samples. The methods of sampling of the uranium prospects at the Cebolleta project were standard operating procedures utilized throughout the US uranium industry during the time that the project was active.

The Cebolleta project is situated in the Laguna mining district, and adjoins the former Jackpile-Paguate open pit and underground uranium operations of Anaconda. At one time the Jackpile-Paguate mine was the largest uranium mine in the United States, and is reported to have produced more than 80 million pounds of U₃O₈ prior to its shut-down in the early 1980's.

We are not aware of any current uranium mining or exploration on properties adjoining the Cebolleta project.

31

Cibola Resources has not carried out any metallurgical test work on the mineral deposits at the Cebolleta project. An audit of several former uranium mills, including the former Sohio L-Bar processing facility, outlines the general process design for the mill. The mill included conventional SAG mill grinding, CCD liquid/solid separation and an acid leach-solvent extraction process. The mill operated from late 1976 through mid-1981 and processed approximately 2.5 million short tons of feed material.

Cibola Resources has not examined any metallurgical test work that led to the development of process design criteria or any mill performance and recovery data.

We are participating in our mineral properties in the States of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and Colorado by way of mining claims and mineral leases. The mining claim properties were staked and claimed by us and registered with the US Bureau of Land Management ("BLM"). There are claim blocks acquired in this manner in Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico. We have surface access and complete mineral rights to an unlimited depth below surface. The claims are in effect for an indefinite period provided the claims are kept in good standing with the BLM and the counties. The claims were entered into between November 4, 2004 and July 2007. Annual maintenance fees to be paid to the BLM are relatively nominal. We will also be required to remediate the land upon release of the claim - bringing the land back into the state it was originally in prior to the commencement of our exploration activities. These costs are determined by the BLM and bonded accordingly.

In the States of New Mexico, Utah and Texas we are participating in our mineral properties by way of property lease directly from the owners of the land/mineral rights. As of this date we have executed one lease in Utah and further leases in New Mexico and Texas. These leases give us similar access and privileges as described above, however with some important differences. Although we will have access to the surface, the mineral rights below surface are restricted to uranium and associated fissionable minerals only, with any other minerals and hydro carbons, including, for example, petroleum, retained by the lessor. The lease terms are for five years, and include five-year renewal periods. After the expiration of the second five-year term the leases will be either held by production or the leases will be terminated. Royalty payments must be made to the lessor in event that we extract uranium ore from the properties. Royalty payments vary from 6.25% to 15.25%, or based on a sliding scale tied to the price of uranium. All royalties are based on the gross sales revenue less certain charges and fees.

We have the following gross and net acre mineral property interests in states indicated below under lease:

32

We plan to conduct exploration programs on these properties with the objective of determining the existence of any economic concentrations of uranium.

Since inception we have not established any proven or probable reserves on our mineral property interests.

On October 11, 2005, we entered into a Mineral Asset Option Agreement (the "Option") with Brad A. Moore giving us the option to acquire certain uranium leases from Mr. Moore in the State of Texas. In consideration for the Option we have paid Mr. Moore a cash payment of $50,000 and issued 1,000,000 shares of our restricted common stock. The Option, if exercised, will require the further issuance of 2,000,000 restricted common shares in varying share installments over the three, six month intervals following the effective date of the Option (October 11, 2005). A further payment of $150,000 has been paid under the Option on February 1, 2006. Title to the properties to be acquired will transfer upon payment of all remaining stock required under the Option, the timing of which may be accelerated at our discretion. During the Option term we have the right as operator to conduct or otherwise direct all the exploration on the properties to be acquired. As of this date all cash consideration and share issuances required pursuant to the terms of the Option have been completed.

On May 1, 2007, we entered into a joint venture with NEI, a Wyoming corporation, in connection with the exploration of a property covering approximately 6,700 acres located in Cibola County, New Mexico, for uranium resources. In connection with the joint venture, Cibola Resources, a limited liability company under the laws of the State of Delaware, was formed to undertake the exploration activities contemplated by the parties. NEI acquired the mining lease to the property from La Merced del Pueblo de Cebolleta ("Ceboletta"), a private entity that has the authority over the natural resources of the property, pursuant to a letter agreement between Cebolleta and NEI dated January 27, 2007, and has contributed the lease to Cibola Resources. In connection with the acquisition of the lease, NEI has made cash payments to Cebolleta of $3,000,000 to date. The Company has reimbursed an aggregate of $1,470,000 to NEI to date. As a result, NEI and the Company hold a 51% and 49% interest, respectively, in Cibola Resources.

All of our Arizona claims were previously the subject of exploration drilling for the incidence of uranium by companies such as Noranda, Inc., Uranerz Energy Corp., Homestake Mining Co. and Oklahoma Public Services. We have acquired a 1979 Oklahoma Public Services ("OPS") geologic report contiguous to our claims (Artillery Peak) that indicates the possibility of incidence of uranium. OPS drilling continued on to our claims as evidenced by drill holes verified on the ground, and such drill cuttings were found to be radioactive. Close spaced developmental drilling is indicated on our claims located at Artillery Peak.

Other claims staked by us (Esther Basin, Crow Canyon and Dry Mountain) in Arizona were staked on known uranium occurrences as shown on Arizona State publication, "Occurrences of Uranium in Miscellaneous Sedimentary Formations, Diatremes and Pipes and Veins". Additionally, these claims were previously drilled by companies including Homestake Mining Co., Uranerz Energy Corp. and Noranda, Inc. in the 1970's uranium boom. Our management has confirmed prior claim ownership as verified with the US Department of Interior - BLM. In addition, ground surveys completed by us have located various previous drill locations and radioactive anomalies as evidenced in ground and drill cuttings. We confirm that as of this date our Arizona located claims contain no uranium reserves, and require extensive exploration by us.

The following provides information relating to such claims:

33

Claims acquired by us in Colorado have historical production tonnages and grades published in the Colorado Geological Survey, Bulletin 40 - "Radioactive Mineral Occurrences of Colorado". Additionally, a third party consulting miner/engineer was utilized by us for his first hand knowledge of the Colorado properties acquired. Also, our Chief Geologist previously evaluated and acquired a portion of the claims currently owned by us (the Carnotite Mine) while consulting for another company, International Texas Industries, Inc. We confirm that at the current date, our Colorado located claims contain no uranium reserves and require extensive exploration by us.

The following provides information relating to such claims:

The West Ranch Project consists of approximately 7,000 acres made up of lode mining claims and private leases in northwestern New Mexico, on the northwest end of the historically uraniferous Ambrosia Lake trend of the Grants Uranium District. The property was drilled by United Nuclear Corporation and, more recently, by Kerr McGee. Historical wide-spaced drilling across the property indicates the presence of several northwest-southeast trending uranium mineralized zones within the Morrison Formation at average depths of 800 feet.

Our Laguna Trend Project consists of approximately 800 acres of lode claims on Bureau of Land Management land in northwestern New Mexico. The claim block is on-trend and several miles northeast of the historically-producing St. Anthony, Jackpile Paguate, and L-Bar uranium deposits, mined by Anaconda Minerals and Sohio. Northeast of the Company's claim block is Kerr McGee's (now Anadarko Petroleum's) uranium deposit, Rio Puerco, and Conoco's Bernabe uranium deposit. Both of these deposits are yet to be developed.

34

Acquisition of the Laguna Trend claim block by Uranium Energy was driven by intense analysis of the Morrison Nuclear database, which includes drilling data indicating significant uranium mineralization in the Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation. This property was most recently held by Kerr McGee. We will initiate exploration permitting during the fourth quarter of 2007.

We have recently signed a letter of intent with Spider Rock Mining Co., of Dove Creek, Colorado to acquire 479 claims, covering 13 sections within the Ambrosia Lake Valley. These claims encompass a total 9,896.14 acres, and include such historic mines as the Ann Lee and Sandstone. These claims are located in Township 14 North, and Ranges 9 West and 10 West, which encompasses the heart of the Ambrosia Lake Mining District, and is home to the mines of the district historically operated by Kerr McGee, Homestake, United Nuclear, Phillips and Dysart. This claim block which may be acquired by our company is contiguous to the current mineral resource holdings of BHP Billiton.

We currently own nine leases located in a South Texas uranium trend that have been the subject of substantial historical exploration by Wold Nuclear Corporation ("Wold Nuclear") in the 1970s and 1980s, and constitute some of our most prospective exploration targets. Wold Nuclear was a private uranium exploration company based in Casper, Wyoming, and owned by former Wyoming U.S. Congressman, John S. Wold. Wold Nuclear discovered a number of large uranium deposits in Wyoming which were later acquired and put into production by major uranium production companies. Wold Nuclear's Texas operations were a joint exploration venture with Cotter Corporation. Our Chief Geologist was employed by Wold Nuclear as district and chief geologist of its Texas based operations.

Wold Nuclear's previous work conducted on and around our exploration targets located in South Texas (Zavala County) is in a certain formation that was not the focus of uranium exploration in previous uranium booms (the "New Formation"). The New Formation represents a new "out of traditional trend" host rock for possible uranium mineralization. We have acquired a number of drill hole gamma logs, as well as one drill core, whose chemical analysis supports the indication of uranium, along with lease and drill hole location maps. Insufficient drilling in past exploration programs did not quantify any reserves for Wold Nuclear.

The expected mineralized area comprising the New Formation has been defined in the geological area by our own work product. The New Formation host rock is up to 250 feet thick and has the potential for uranium mineralization similar to Wyoming's Powder River Basin. As of this date we have acquired two leases (473.06 gross acres) in an area where previous drilling and coring indicated uranium mineralization.

35

The following provides information relating to such leases:

Our Utah properties (Crain Lease) were the subject of prior exploration drilling conducted by Pioneer-Uravan, Inc. and Truchas Limited in the 1970s to search for uranium indications. We have acquired gamma drill log interpretation worksheets from work previously conducted by Pioneer-Uravan, Inc. In addition, drill hole location maps have been obtained from work conducted for Pioneer-Uravan, Inc. and Truchas Limited. Further assay reports on core samples from exploration drilling previously conducted by Pioneer-Uravan, Inc., as verified by that company's commissioned assay report, have also been obtained, as well as certain drill indicated uranium findings that provide the basis for preliminary mineralization information as previously conducted and defined in a Truchas Limited summary and report (1979). As at this date our Utah located claims contain no uranium reserves that we have independently verified, and require extensive exploration by us.

The following provides information relating to such claims and leases:

36

The Burnt Wagon project, located 35 miles west of Casper, Wyoming, was acquired from NAMMCO (Kirkwood) in 2006. The 200 mining claims and 3 state leases total about 4,000 acres. Current staking work will not be complete until November 2007.  Previous operations defined shallow uranium mineralization in the Wind River formation of early Eocene age, at 50 to 200 foot depths, from 500 drill holes and 16,000 feet of electric logging data.

Situated in the Lower Eocene Wasatch formation of the southwest Powder River Basin, our Powder River Basin LO-Herma uranium property exploration data was acquired from H. Brenniman as a part of the Pioneer Nuclear, Inc., package in 2006.  The 305 mining claims total 5,948.76 acres and are contiguous to the Energy Metals Corp. (Uranium One) property.

Our DL, 1,275 acre, property is being reassessed by using Pioneer Nuclear, Inc., 1970 uranium exploration data from the H. Brenniman database.

Our Chief Exploration Officer, Clyde Yancey, a Certified Professional Geologist, based on historical data previously outlined and our own work product, has developed exploration programs unique to each state and claim block with the intent of proving or disproving the existence of uranium on these prospects. In order to carry out these exploration programs, $7,500,000 and approximately twelve months will be required, according to the exploration budget and schedule recommended by our Chief Exploration Officer. Additional capital for possible future uranium exploration property related acquisitions will be funded through additional offerings of debt and equity on an as required basis.

The total cost of expected Phase II exploration on all mineral properties contemplated at this time is equal to $2,000,000 inclusive of a contingency cost allowance. Additional costs for Phase II exploration work and for further lease and land acquisitions are expected to be funded by future financings from debt and equity sources. See "Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operations."

The work program that has been recommended for the mineral properties is dependent on the nature of the exploration conducted prior to our acquisition. The intended Phase I work programs will be on the claims located in both New Mexico, Utah, Arizonaand Colorado.

During Phase I work programs on these particular mineral claims we plan to review and analyze all historical exploration data available to us in our current possession, acquire additional acreage as available, obtain exploration permits through state and federal agencies and to probe existing drill holes with gamma probes, with a strategy that attempts to confirm historical drill results. Costs have been estimated at $14,500 per claim block.

37

Based on exploration databases acquired during 2006 we were able to establish six separate lease positions with the South Texas uranium trend. Four of these lease positions are within Goliad County and would compliment our existing Weesatche project. One of the positions was heavily drilled by Mobil Oil during the 1970s and 1980s. The three remaining Goliad County lease positions are highly encouraging prospects that we plan to drill during 2008 to prove or disprove the occurrence of uranium resources. The fifth lease position is within Duval County and falls within the Catahoula Formation, an historic uranium host formation of South Texas. The sixth lease position is with Karnes County and covers a property heavily drilled by Conoco Petroleum in the 1970s. As previously stated, these lease position were developed by the Company during 2006 from historic databases. Land acquisition costs for these five prospects total $381,000 excluding the value of any stock based expenditures, and drilling costs are approximated to be $562,000.

The exploration databases used to develop the five lease positions described above were obtained during the acquisition of the Moore Energy information and the acquisition of the Knupke database. Both databases consist primarily of numerous geophysical logs with corresponding maps, field reports and regional maps. The Moore Energy database was developed over a period of approximately 10 years and consists of a compilation of their exploration projects and prospects and is quite reliable. This database will be used to guide in the development of the Weesatche Project and to develop additional projects and prospects. It is exclusively used by the Company. The Knupke database was developed by an individual over a period of approximately 20 years and consists of past project information, map and logs and potential prospects developed through analysis of regional geology. This database was used exclusively by the Company during 2006.

During the Phase I work program geologic information pertinent to the six lease positions noted above will be gathered and analyzed by Company geologists in order to develop additional lease plays, setup drilling programs and develop exploration drilling permits.

The total cost of Phase II exploration on all mineral properties contemplated at this time is equal to $2,000,000 including contingency cost allowance. Additional costs for Phase II exploration work and for further lease and land acquisitions are expected to be funded by future financings from debt and equity sources. We expect minimal effect on our ability to proceed with Phase II exploration should they be required in conjunction with further lease and land acquisitions as the amounts projected for Phase II exploration costs are not substantial in relation to budgeted total annual capital and operating expense expenditures. If, however, additional land and lease expenditures during the next twelve months create a lack of capital for Phase II exploration costs beyond that anticipated in relation to available capital, we may not be in a financial position to conduct Phase II exploration if required.

In all cases, results from Phase I of exploration on our properties will determine whether we proceed to Phase II of the exploration program or discontinue exploration on a particular property. Phase II costs, if any, will be incurred in the subsequent 12-month period, and would require additional financing.

We have acquired a dual wheel truck on which we have installed logging equipment.. We further expect to purchase a PFN assay tool for the logging truck. Total aggregate cost of approximately $294,000, net of taxes and applicable fees is budgeted for the aforementioned. A PFN logging truck will enable Company geologists to directly read uranium values in a borehole under "real time" conditions. A standard logging truck, running a gamma ray probe, reads all radioactive emitting elements in the hole and does not discriminate uranium. In the past a core sample would need to be collected and sent to a laboratory for analysis of uranium before a geologist would know the exact uranium concentration in a bore hole. A PFN logging truck provides this information in the field and saves considerable time and money. We expect completion and delivery of this equipment in December 2007.

38

Our operational business plan calls for the acquisition of further uranium exploration properties in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. We have developed detailed exploration programs for each claim block area of interest based on historical data derived from past uranium exploration by other companies with a mandate to prove or disprove the existence of uranium resources.

We operate in a highly competitive industry, competing with other mining and exploration companies, and institutional and individual investors, which are actively seeking uranium minerals exploration properties throughout the world together with the equipment, labour and materials required to exploit such properties. Many of our competitors have financial resources, staff and facilities substantially greater than ours. The principal area of competition is encountered in the financial ability to cost effectively acquire prime minerals exploration prospects and then exploit such prospects. Competition for the acquisition of uranium minerals exploration properties is intense, with many properties available in a competitive bidding process in which we may lack technological information or expertise available to other bidders. Therefore, we may not be successful in acquiring and developing profitable properties in the face of this competition. No assurance can be given that a sufficient number of suitable uranium mineral exploration properties will be available for acquisition and development.

On October 11, 2005, we entered into an Option agreement with Brad A. Moore giving us the option to acquire certain uranium leases from Mr. Moore in the State of Texas. In consideration for the Option, to date, we have paid Mr. Moore cash payments totaling $200,000 and issued 3,000,000 post-forward split shares of our restricted common stock. On April 11, 2007, we issued the remaining 750,000 post-forward split shares of our restricted common stock under the terms of the agreement. Title to the properties to be acquired transfered upon payment of all remaining stock required under the Option.

On February 15, 2006, our Board of Directors authorized and approved the execution of the "Anthony Employment Agreement". On July 1, 2006, our Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Anthony Employment Agreement extending the initial term to July 1, 2008. Pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Anthony Employment Agreement, as amended: (i) Mr. Anthony shall provide duties to us commensurate with his executive position as our Chief Operating Officer and he will also become a member of our Board of Directors; (ii) we shall pay to Mr. Anthony a monthly fee of $10,000 to October 1, 2006, when the monthly fee paid to Mr. Anthony increased to $12,500 through February 28, 2007, when an additional increase to $13,750 was approved by our Board of Directors; (iii) we granted an aggregate of 250,000 pre-forward split stock options to Mr. Anthony to purchase shares of our restricted common stock at $0.50 per share for a ten-year term; and (iv) the Anthony Employment Agreement may be terminated without cause by either of us by providing prior written notice of the intention to terminate at least 90 days (in the case of our company after the initial term) or 30 days (in the case of Mr. Anthony) prior to the effective date of such termination. See "Item 9. Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters, Control Person and Corporate Governance; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act", "Item 10. Executive Compensation" and "Item 12 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence."

On July 1, 2006, our Board of Directors authorized and approved the execution of the "Adnani Executive Services Agreement", which was extended by way of letter agreement dated July 1, 2007. The initial term of the agreement is now two years expiring on July 1, 2009. Pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Adnani Executive Services Agreement: (i) Mr. Adnani shall continue to provide duties to us commensurate with his current executive positions as our President and Chief Executive Officer; (ii) we shall pay to Mr. Adnani a monthly fee of $10,000 to December 31, 2006, when the monthly fee paid to Mr. Adnani increased to $12,500 through June 30, 2007, when an additional increase to $13,750 was approved by our Board of Directors; (iii) we confirmed the previous granting of his existing pre-forward split stock options; and (iv) the Adnani Executive Services Agreement may be terminated without cause by either of us by providing prior written notice of the intention to terminate at least 90 days (in the case of our company after the initial term) or 30 days (in the case of Mr. Adnani) prior to the effective date of such termination. See "Item 9. Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters, Control Person and Corporate Governance; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act", "Item 10. Executive Compensation" and "Item 12 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence."

39

On July 27, 2006, we entered into an option to purchase assets (the "Option") with High Plains Uranium Inc. ("High Plains"), pursuant to which we agreed to sell a portion of our unencumbered database which consisted of 813 mobile drill logs (e-logs and lithlogs), 242 Moore Energy logs and certain drill hole location maps, reserve calculations, survey data and core analyses (collectively, the "Cadena Database"). In accordance with the terms and provisions of the Option: (i) High Plains shall within 30 calendar days (the "Option Period") pay us a non-refundable cash payment in the aggregate amount of $150,000, with an initial option payment of $25,000 which was received on the date of execution of the Option and the final option payment of $125,000 on or before the end of the Option Period, which $125,000 we have received as of the date of this Annual Report; (ii) High Plains shall issue to us 333,333 shares of their common stock; and (iii) High Plains shall pay a 1.0% royalty to the Company of the gross proceeds from the sale of uranium or substance derived from a specified area within the Option.

On January 19, 2007, High Plains Uranium Inc. ("HPU") completed a business combination agreement with Energy Metals Corp. ("EMC"), a listed Canadian reporting company. As a result, the 333,333 shares of HPU were exchanged for 53,763 shares of EMC. On August 10, 2007 Uranium One Inc. ("UOI"), a Canadian based public company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, completed an acquisition of all of the issued and outstanding shares of Energy Metals Corporation ("EMC"). As a result, the 53,763 shares of EMC were exchanged on a 1.15:1 basis and the Company received 61,827 shares of UOI. As of the date of this report the 61,827 shares of UOI had a fair market value of $690,608.

On March 28, 2007, we entered into the Holley Option granting us the option to acquire certain mineral property leases, which are located in the States of Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah, together with certain historical database records for total consideration of $1,594,690. Under the terms of the Holley Option, and in order to maintain our option to acquire the assets, we are required to make the following option price payments totaling $1,500,000 to the order and direction of the Holley Option holders in the following manner:

Upon execution of the Holley Option we also reimbursed the Holley Option holders approximately $95,000 for prior regulatory property payments having been made to the New Mexico Bureau of Land Management. In addition, we will be required to pay a royalty of 2% or 3% of the gross proceeds received from the sale of any uranium or vanadium produced in relation to any mineral claim covered under the Holley Option and, at any time during the option period or thereafter, we may elect to purchase the royalty interest at a base cost of $300,000 for each 1% royalty interest we wish to acquire.

40

On April 27, 2007, with a reference date of April 26, 2007, the Company entered into a joint venture with NEI, a Wyoming corporation, in connection with the exploration of a property covering 6,717 acres located in Cibola County, New Mexico (the "Property"), for uranium resources. In connection with the joint venture, Cibola Resources, a limited liability company under the laws of the State of Delaware, was formed to undertake the exploration activities as contemplated by the parties.

NEI acquired a ten year mining lease (the "Lease") to the Property from La Merced del Pueblo de Cebolleta, a private entity that has the authority over the natural resources of the Property, pursuant to a Mining Lease and Agreement between Cebolleta and NEI effective April 6, 2007 (the "Mining Lease Agreement"), and has contributed the Lease to Cibola Resources. Terms of the Lease provide for:

We are required to contribute 49% of the aforementioned payments in order to retain our interest in the joint venture.

On August 15 2007, with an effective date of July 1, 2007, our Board of Directors authorized and approved the execution of the "Obara Builders Executive Services Agreement". The initial term of the agreement is two years expiring on July 1, 2009. Pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Obara Builders Ltd. Consulting Services Agreement: (i) Mr. Obara shall continue to provide duties to us commensurate with his current executive positions as our Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer; (ii) we shall pay to Obara Builders Ltd., a private company controlled by Pat Obara, a monthly fee of CAD $10,000; (iii) we approved the granting of stock options from time to time at such fair market exercise price or prices per Option Share as may be determined by our Board of Directors; and (iv) the Obara Builders Ltd. Consulting Services Agreement may be terminated without cause by either of us by providing prior written notice of the intention to terminate at least 90 days (in the case of our company after the initial term) or 30 days (in the case of Mr. Obara) prior to the effective date of such termination. See "Item 9. Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters, Control Person and Corporate Governance; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act", "Item 10. Executive Compensation" and "Item 12 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence."

On March 29, 2007, we entered into a consulting services agreement for a period of six months (the "Consulting Agreement"). In accordance with the terms and provisions of the Consulting Agreement: (i) the consultant will provide advice on public and investor relations related matters and will arrange to generate a substantial interest for the Company in major European equity markets, specifically in Germany and Switzerland as well as provide introductions to the consultant's investor's network, potential private investors and investment advisors and various journalists of leading press agencies in Germany; (ii) we paid a retainer of approximately €209,000 ($286,644 US); and (iii) we will pay a final installment of approximately €91,178 ($125,050 US) due 90 days from the date of execution of the Consulting Agreement.

41

On April 6, 2007, we entered into a 12-month consulting services agreement valued at $10,000 per month. The consultant will provide representation before the executive and legislative branches of the federal government and state governments in addition to providing consulting services on political matters.

Amir Adnani is our President and Chief Executive Officer, Pat Obara is our Chief Financial Officer and Harry L. Anthony is our Chief Operating Officer. These individuals are primarily responsible for all our day-to-day operations. Other services are provided by outsourcing to consultants with special purpose contracts. We currently employee 23 persons on a full time basis and contract with approximately twelve individuals on a full time basis for ongoing services provided to us.

An investment in our common stock involves a number of very significant risks. You should carefully consider the following risks and uncertainties in addition to other information in evaluating our company and its business before purchasing shares of our common stock. Our business, operating results and financial condition could be seriously harmed due to any of the following risks. The risks described below are all of the material risks that we are currently aware of that are facing our company. Additional risks not presently known to us may also impair our business operations. You could lose all or part of your investment due to any of these risks.

42

We will require significant additional financing in order to continue our exploration activities and our assessment of the commercial viability of our mineral properties. Furthermore, if the costs of our planned exploration programs are greater than anticipated, we may have to seek additional funds through public or private share offerings or arrangements with corporate partners. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in our efforts to raise these require funds, or on terms satisfactory to us. The continued exploration of our mineral properties and the development of our business will depend upon our ability to establish the commercial viability of our mineral properties and to ultimately develop cash flow from operations and reach profitable operations. We currently are in the exploration stage and we have no revenue from operations and we are experiencing significant negative cash flow. Accordingly, the only other sources of funds presently available to us are through the sale of equity. We presently believe that debt financing will not be an alternative to us as all of our properties are in the exploration stage. Alternatively, we may finance our business by offering an interest in our mineral properties to be earned by another party or parties carrying out further exploration and development thereof or to obtain project or operating financing from financial institutions, neither of which is presently intended. If we are unable to obtain this additional financing, we will not be able to continue our exploration activities and our assessment of the commercial viability of our mineral properties. Further, if we are able to establish that development of our mineral properties is commercially viable, our inability to raise additional financing at this stage would result in our inability to place our mineral properties into production and recover our investment.

As our mineral properties do not contain any reserves or any known body of economic mineralization, we may not discover commercially exploitable quantities of ore on our mineral properties that would enable us to enter into commercial production, achieve revenues and recover the money we spends on exploration.

Our properties do not contain reserves in accordance with the definitions adopted by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and there is no assurance that any exploration programs that we out will establish reserves. All of our mineral properties are in the exploration stage as opposed to the development stage and has no known body of economic mineralization. The known mineralization at these projects has not yet been determined to be economic ore, and may never be determined to be economic. We plan to conduct further exploration activities on our mineral properties, which future exploration may include the completion of feasibility studies necessary to evaluate whether a commercial mineable orebody exists on any of our mineral properties. There is a substantial risk that these exploration activities will not result in discoveries of commercially recoverable quantities of ore. Any determination that our properties contain commercially recoverable quantities of ore may not be reached until such time that final comprehensive feasibility studies have been concluded that establish that a potential mine is likely to be economic. There is a substantial risk that any preliminary or final feasibility studies carried out by us will not result in a positive determination that our mineral properties can be commercially developed.

Our long-term success depends on its ability to establish commercially recoverable quantities of ore on our mineral properties that can then be developed into commercially viable mining operations. Mineral exploration is highly speculative in nature, involves many risks and is frequently non-productive. These risks include unusual or unexpected geologic formations, and the inability to obtain suitable or adequate machinery, equipment or labor. The success of uranium exploration is determined in part by the following factors:

Substantial expenditures are required to establish proven and probable reserves through drilling and analysis, to develop metallurgical processes to extract metal, and to develop the mining and processing facilities and infrastructure at any site chosen for mining. Whether a mineral deposit will be commercially viable depends on a number of factors, which include, without limitation, the particular attributes of the deposit, such as size, grade and proximity to infrastructure; metal prices, which fluctuate widely; and government regulations, including, without limitation, regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties, land tenure, land use, importing and exporting of minerals and environmental protection. We may invest significant capital and resources in exploration activities and abandon such investments if it is unable to identify commercially exploitable mineral reserves. The decision to abandon a project may reduce the trading price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise future financing. We cannot provide any assurance to investors that we will discover or acquire any mineralized material in sufficient quantities on any of our properties to justify commercial operations. Further, we will not be able to recover the funds that we spend on exploration if we are not able to establish commercially recoverable quantities of ore on our mineral properties.

43

In considering whether to invest in our common stock, you should consider that our inception was May 16, 2003 and, as a result, there is only limited historical financial and operating information available on which to base your evaluation of our performance.

We have a history of operating losses, expect to continue to incur losses, and may never be profitable, and we must be considered to be in the exploration stage. Further, we have been dependent on sales of our equity securities and debt financing to meet our cash requirements. As of July 31, 2007 (as restated), we had an accumulated deficit of $21,163,764 and had incurred losses of approximately $8,044,743 during the seven months ended July 31, 2007 (as restated). Further, we do not expect positive cash flow from operations in the near term. There is no assurance that actual cash requirements will not exceed our estimates. In particular, additional capital may be required in the event that: (i) the costs to acquire additional uranium exploration claims are more than we currently anticipate; (ii) exploration and or future potential mining costs for additional claims increase beyond our expectations; or (iii) we encounter greater costs associated with general and administrative expenses or offering costs.

The uncertainty and factors described throughout this section may impede our ability to economically discover, acquire, develop and/or exploit uranium prospects. As a result, we may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability or positive cash flows from operating activities in the future.

The financial statements for seven months ended July 31, 2007 have been prepared "assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern," which contemplates that we will realize our assets and satisfy our liabilities and commitments in the ordinary course of business. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on raising additional capital to fund our operations and ultimately on generating future profitable operations. There can be no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient additional capital or eventually have positive cash flow from operations to address all of our cash flow needs. If we are not able to find alternative sources of cash or generate positive cash flow from operations, our business and shareholders will be materially and adversely affected. See "Item 6. Management's Discussion And Analysis or Plan of Operation - Going Concern."

Based upon our historical losses from operations, we will require additional funding in the future. If we cannot obtain capital through financings or otherwise, our ability to execute our exploration programs will be greatly limited. Our current plans require us to make capital expenditures for the exploration of our minerals exploration properties. Historically, we have funded our operations through the issuance of equity and short-term debt financing arrangements. We may not be able to obtain additional financing on favorable terms, if at all. Our future cash flows and the availability of financing will be subject to a number of variables, including potential production and the market prices of uranium. Further, debt financing could lead to a diversion of cash flow to satisfy debt-servicing obligations and create restrictions on business operations. If we are unable to raise additional funds, it would have a material adverse effect upon our operations.

Such acquisitions may pose substantial risks to our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In pursuing acquisitions, we will compete with other companies, many of which have greater financial and other resources to acquire attractive properties. Even if we are successful in acquiring additional properties, some of the properties may not produce positive results of exploration, or we may not complete exploration of such prospects within specified time periods which may cause the forfeiture of the lease of that prospect. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully integrate acquired properties, which could result in substantial costs and delays or other operational, technical, or financial problems. Further, acquisitions could disrupt ongoing business operations. If any of these events occur, it would have a material adverse effect upon our operations and results from operations.

44

Since inception, our activities have been limited to organizational efforts, obtaining working capital and acquiring and developing a very limited number of properties. As a result, there is limited information regarding production or revenue generation. As a result, our future revenues may be limited. The business of minerals exploration and development is subject to many risks and if uranium is found in economic quantities, the potential profitability of future possible uranium mining ventures depends upon factors beyond our control. The potential profitability of mining uranium properties if economic quantities of uranium are found is dependent upon many factors and risks beyond our control, including, but not limited to: (i) unanticipated ground and water conditions and adverse claims to water rights; (ii) geological problems; (iii) metallurgical and other processing problems; (iv) the occurrence of unusual weather or operating conditions and other force majeure events; (v) lower than expected ore grades; (vi) accidents; (vii) delays in the receipt of or failure to receive necessary government permits; (viii) delays in transportation; (ix) labor disputes; (x) government permit restrictions and regulation restrictions; (xi) unavailability of materials and equipment; and (xii) the failure of equipment or processes to operate in accordance with specifications or expectations.

We are not currently engaged in mining operations because we are in the exploration phase and have not yet any proved uranium reserves. We carry property and liability insurance, but cost effective insurance contains exclusions and limitations on coverage and may be unavailable in some circumstances.

The uranium exploration and mining industry is intensely competitive, and we compete with other companies that have greater resources. Many of these companies not only explore for and produce uranium, but also market uranium and other products on a regional, national or worldwide basis. These companies may be able to pay more for productive uranium properties and exploratory prospects or define, evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of properties and prospects than our financial or human resources permit. In addition, these companies may have a greater ability to continue exploration activities during periods of low uranium market prices. Our larger competitors may be able to absorb the burden of present and future federal, state, local and other laws and regulations more easily than we can, which would adversely affect our competitive position. Our ability to acquire additional properties and to discover productive prospects in the future will be dependent upon our ability to evaluate and select suitable properties and to consummate transactions in a highly competitive environment. In addition, because we have fewer financial and human resources than many companies in our industry, we may be at a disadvantage in bidding for exploratory prospects and producing uranium properties.

The marketability of natural resources which may be acquired or discovered by us may be affected by numerous factors beyond our control. These factors include macroeconomic factors, market fluctuations in commodity pricing and demand, the proximity and capacity of natural resource markets and processing equipment, governmental regulations, land tenure, land use, regulation concerning the importing and exporting of uranium and environmental protection regulations. The exact effect of these factors cannot be accurately predicted, but the combination of these factors may result in us not receiving an adequate return on invested capital to be profitable or viable.

45

If economic quantities of uranium are found on any lease owned by us in sufficient quantities to warrant uranium mining operations, such mining operations are subject to federal, state, and local laws relating to the protection of the environment, including laws regulating removal of natural resources from the ground and the discharge of materials into the environment. Uranium mining operations are also subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations which seek to maintain health and safety standards by regulating the design and use of mining methods and equipment. Various permits from government bodies are required for mining operations to be conducted; no assurance can be given that such permits will be received. Environmental standards imposed by federal, provincial, or local authorities may be changed and any such changes may have material adverse effects on our activities. Moreover, compliance with such laws may cause substantial delays or require capital outlays in excess of those anticipated, thus resulting in an adverse effect on us. Additionally, we may be subject to liability for pollution or other environmental damages which we may elect not to insure against due to prohibitive premium costs and other reasons. To date we have not been required to spend material amounts on compliance with environmental regulations. However, we may be required to do so in future and this may affect our ability to expand or maintain our operations.

Uranium minerals exploration and development and future potential uranium mining operations are or will be subject to stringent federal, state, provincial, and local laws and regulations relating to improving or maintaining environmental quality. Our global operations are also subject to many environmental protection laws. Environmental laws often require parties to pay for remedial action or to pay damages regardless of fault. Environmental laws also often impose liability with respect to divested or terminated operations, even if the operations were terminated or divested of many years ago.

Future potential uranium mining operations and current exploration activities are or will be subject to extensive laws and regulations governing prospecting, development, production, exports, taxes, labour standards, occupational health, waste disposal, protection and remediation of the environment, protection of endangered and protected species, mine safety, toxic substances and other matters. Uranium mining is also subject to risks and liabilities associated with pollution of the environment and disposal of waste products occurring as a result of mineral exploration and production. Compliance with these laws and regulations will impose substantial costs on us and will subject us to significant potential liabilities.

We believe that our operations comply, in all material respects, with all applicable environmental regulations. However, we are not fully insured at the current date against possible environmental risks.

The laws, regulations, policies or current administrative practices of any government body, organization or regulatory agency in the United States or any other applicable jurisdiction, may be changed, applied or interpreted in a manner which will fundamentally alter our ability to carry on business. The actions, policies or regulations, or changes thereto, of any government body or regulatory agency, or other special interest groups, may have a detrimental effect on us. Any or all of these situations may have a negative impact on our ability to operate and/or our profitably.

46

Our extremely limited personnel means that we would be required to spend significant sums of money to locate and train new employees in the event any of our employees resign or terminate their employment with us for any reason. Due to our limited operating history and financial resources, we are entirely dependent on the continued service of Amir Adnani, our President, Chief Executive Officer, Principal Executive Officer and a director, Pat Obara, our Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer, and Harry L. Anthony, our Chief Operating Officer and a director. Further, we do not have key man life insurance on any of these individuals. We may not have the financial resources to hire a replacement if any of our officers were to die. The loss of service of any of these employees could therefore significantly and adversely affect our operations.

Some of our directors serve only part time and are subject to conflicts of interest. Some directors may devote part of his working time to other business endeavors, including consulting relationships with other corporate entities, and has responsibilities to these other entities. Such conflicts include deciding how much time to devote to our affairs, as well as what business opportunities should be presented to us. Because of these relationships, our directors may be subject to conflicts of interest.

Nevada law provides that our officers and directors will not be liable to us or our stockholders for monetary damages for all but certain types of conduct as officers and directors. Our Bylaws permit us broad indemnification powers to all persons against all damages incurred in connection with our business to the fullest extent provided or allowed by law. The exculpation provisions may have the effect of preventing stockholders from recovering damages against our officers and directors caused by their negligence, poor judgment or other circumstances. The indemnification provisions may require us to use our limited assets to defend our officers and directors against claims, including claims arising out of their negligence, poor judgment, or other circumstances.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock into the public market by certain stockholders may result in significant downward pressure on the price of our common stock and could affect your ability to realize the current trading price of our common stock.

As of the date of this Annual Report, we have 37,612,088 shares of common stock issued and outstanding. Of the total number of issued and outstanding shares of common stock, certain stockholders are able to resell up to 3,653,583 shares, 5,091,000 shares, and 8,160,000 shares of our common stock pursuant to three separate SB-2 registration statements declared effective on December 5, 2005, October 20, 2006, and June 15, 2007, respectively. As a result of these registration statements, an aggregate of 16,904,583 shares of our common stock were issued and are available for immediate resale which could have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

As of the date of this Annual Report, there are 17,539,087 outstanding shares of our common stock that are restricted securities as that term is defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. Although the Securities Act and Rule 144 place certain prohibitions on the sale of restricted securities, restricted securities may be sold into the public market under certain conditions. Further, as of the date of this Annual Report, there are an aggregate of 3,832,500 stock options outstanding and an aggregate of 4,009,998 share purchase warrants outstanding. See "Item 5. Market for Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters."

Any significant downward pressure on the price of our common stock as the selling stockholders sell their shares of our common stock could encourage short sales by the selling stockholders or others. Any such short sales could place further downward pressure on the price of our common stock.

47

Our common stock commenced trading on December 5, 2005 on the OTC Bulletin Board and the trading price has fluctuated. In addition to volatility associated with Bulletin Board securities in general, the value of your investment could decline due to the impact of any of the following factors upon the market price of our common stock: (i) disappointing results from our discovery or development efforts; (ii) failure to meet our revenue or profit goals or operating budget; (iii) decline in demand for our common stock; (iv) downward revisions in securities analysts' estimates or changes in general market conditions; (v) technological innovations by competitors or in competing technologies; (vi) lack of funding generated for operations; (vii) investor perception of our industry or our prospects; and (viii) general economic trends.

In addition, stock markets have experienced price and volume fluctuations and the market prices of securities have been highly volatile. These fluctuations are often unrelated to operating performance and may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. As a result, investors may be unable to sell their shares at a fair price and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Our Articles of Incorporation authorize the issuance of 750,000,000 shares of common stock. The Board of Directors has the authority to issue additional shares of our capital stock to provide additional financing in the future and the issuance of any such shares may result in a reduction of the book value or market price of the outstanding shares of our common stock. If we do issue any such additional shares, such issuance also will cause a reduction in the proportionate ownership and voting power of all other stockholders. As a result of such dilution, if you acquire shares of our common stock, your proportionate ownership interest and voting power could be decreased. Further, any such issuances could result in a change of control.

Because the market price of our common stock has fluctuated and may trade at times at less than $5 per share, the common stock may be classified as a "penny stock." SEC Rule 15g-9 under the Exchange Act imposes additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers that recommend the purchase or sale of penny stocks to persons other than those who qualify as an "established customer" or an "accredited investor." This includes the requirement that a broker-dealer must make a determination that investments in penny stocks are suitable for the customer and must make special disclosures to the customers concerning the risk of penny stocks. Many broker-dealers decline to participate in penny stock transactions because of the extra requirements imposed on penny stock transactions. Application of the penny stock rules to our common stock reduces the market liquidity of our shares, which in turn affects the ability of holders of our common stock to resell the shares they purchase, and they may not be able to resell at prices at or above the prices they paid.

A decline in the price of our common stock could result in a reduction in the liquidity of our common stock and a reduction in our ability to raise additional capital for our operations. Because our operations to date have been principally financed through the sale of equity securities, a decline in the price of our common stock could have an adverse effect upon our liquidity and our continued operations. A reduction in our ability to raise equity capital in the future would have a material adverse effect upon our business plan and operations, including our ability to continue our current operations. If our stock price declines, we may not be able to raise additional capital or generate funds from operations sufficient to meet our obligations.

48

A majority of our directors and officers are nationals and/or residents of countries other than the United States, and all or a substantial portion of such persons' assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for investors to effect service of process on our directors or officers, or enforce within the United States or Canada any judgments obtained against us or our officers or directors, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States or any state thereof. Consequently, you may be effectively prevented from pursuing remedies under U.S. federal securities laws against them. In addition, investors may not be able to commence an action in a Canadian court predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States.

We own 15.19 acres of real estate located in Goliad county, Texas. Our registered office is located at 9801 Anderson Mill Road, Suite 230, Austin Texas 78750. We have entered into office rental and service agreements as follows:

Management is not aware of any legal proceedings contemplated by any governmental authority or any other party involving us or our properties. As of the date of this Annual Report, no director, officer or affiliate is: (i) a party adverse to us in any legal proceeding; or (ii) has an adverse interest to us in any legal proceedings. Management is not aware of any other legal proceedings pending or that have been threatened against us or our properties.

During seven months ended July 31, 2007, and through the date of this Annual Report, no matters were submitted to our shareholders for approval.

Shares of our common stock commenced trading on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol "URME:OB" on December 5, 2005. On September 28, 2007 shares of our common stock commenced trading on the American Stock Exchange under the symbol "UEC". The market for our common stock is limited, and can be volatile. The following table sets forth the high and low bid prices relating to our common stock on a quarterly basis for the periods indicated as quoted by the OTC Bulletin Board stock market. These quotations reflect inter-dealer prices without retail mark-up, mark-down, or commissions, and may not reflect actual transactions.

49

As of .the date of this Annual Report we had 64 registered shareholders.

No dividends have been declared or paid on our common stock. We have incurred recurring losses and do not currently intend to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have one equity compensation plan, the Uranium Energy Corp. 2006 Stock Incentive Plan (the "2006 Plan"). The table set forth below presents information relating to our equity compensation plans as of the date of this Annual Report:

On December 19, 2005, our Board of Directors authorized and approved the adoption of the 2005 Stock Option Plan effective December 19, 2005. On October 10, 2006, we adopted the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan (the "2006 Plan") in place of the 2005 Stock Option Plan, under which an aggregate of 10,000,000 of our shares may be issued. All securities issued under the 2005 Stock Option Plan are covered by the 2006 Plan.

The purpose of the 2006 Plan is to enhance our long-term stockholder value by offering opportunities to our directors, officers, employees and eligible consultants to acquire and maintain stock ownership in order to give these persons the opportunity to participate in our growth and success, and to encourage them to remain in our service.

The 2006 Plan is to be administered by our Board of Directors or a committee appointed by and consisting of two or more members of the Board of Directors, which shall determine, among other things: (i) the persons to be granted awards under the 2006 Plan; (ii) the number of shares or amount of other awards to be granted; and (iii) the terms and conditions of the awards granted. We may issue restricted shares, options, stock appreciation rights, deferred stock rights, dividend equivalent rights, among others, under the 2006 Plan.

50

An award may not be exercised after the termination date of the award and may be exercised following the termination of an eligible participant's continuous service only to the extent provided by the administrator under the 2006 Plan. If the administrator under the 2006 Plan permits a participant to exercise an award following the termination of continuous service for a specified period, the award terminates to the extent not exercised on the last day of the specified period or the last day of the original term of the award, whichever occurs first. In the event an eligible participant's service has been terminated for "cause", he or she shall immediately forfeit all rights to any of the awards outstanding. The 2006 Plan is subjective to approval by our shareholders within 12 months from the date of adoption of the 2006 Plan by our Board of Directors.

During seven months ended July 31, 2007 and through the date of this Annual Report, we granted an aggregate of 1,030,000 stock options at exercise prices ranging from $3.30 per share to $5.70 per share. During the same period, a total of 995,000 stock options were exercised at varying exercise prices resulting in the receipt of aggregate proceeds of $745,000.

As of the date of this Annual Report, there are an aggregate of 4,009,998 common stock purchase warrants issued and outstanding. During the seven months ended July 31, 2007, and through the date of this Annual Report, we issued an aggregate 159,998 common stock purchase warrants. The warrants to purchase shares of common stock and the shares of common stock underlying the warrants were issued in private placements, and related to private placements as follows: (i) on January 3, 2007, we issued 100,000 warrants to acquire up to 100,000 shares at an exercise price of $3.00 per share until the latter of (a) 18 months from the date of issuance or (b) nine months commencing from the effective date of the pending Registration Statement (the "January 2007 Warrants"), and (ii) on June 15, 2007, we issued to certain investors an aggregate of 59,998 non-transferable common share purchase warrants to acquire an equivalent number of common shares of the Company pursuant to the investors' respective December 22, 2006 private placement subscription agreements with the Company. See " -- Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities."

Pursuant to the terms of a registration statement filed on Form SB-2, SEC File No. 333-127185 (the "Registration Statement), under the Securities Act, an aggregate of 2,700,000 shares of common stock underlying certain common stock purchase warrants, some of which are described above, were registered with an effective date of June 15, 2007.

During the seven months ended July 31, 2007, a total of 1,283,500 share purchase warrants have been exercised for aggregate proceeds of $2,908,750.

During the seven months ended July 31, 2007, and through the date of this Annual Report, to provide capital, we sold stock in private placement offerings, issued stock in exchange for our debts or pursuant to contractual agreements as set forth below.

On January 3, 2007, we closed a private placement offering (the "January 2007 Private Placement Offering"), whereby we issued an aggregate of 200,000 units at a price of $2.50 per unit (the "January 2007 Units"). Each January 2007 Unit consists of one share of common stock and one-half of one warrant (the "January 2007 Warrant"). We agreed to file a registration statement with the SEC in accordance with the requirements of the Securities Act in order to register the resale by the investors of the shares issued and the shares issuable upon exercise of the January 2007 Warrants. Each whole January 2007 Warrant entitles the holder to purchase one share of common stock at an exercise price of $3.00 per share during the period commencing on the date of issuance and ending on the day which is the latter of: (i) 18 months from the date of issuance; or (ii) nine months commencing from the effective date of the registration statement.

51

The January 2007 Private Placement Offering was completed in reliance of Rule 506 of Regulation D of the Securities Act, with respect to investors in the United States, and in reliance of Rule 903 of Regulation S of the Securities Act, with respect to those investors who were not "U.S. Persons", within the meaning of Regulation S, and who were otherwise outside of the United States. Sales to United States investors pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D were limited to investors who qualified as "accredited investors" within the meaning of Rule 501(a) of Regulation D.

The per share price of these offerings was arbitrarily determined by our Board of Directors based upon analysis of certain factors including, but not limited to, stage of development, industry status, investment climate, perceived investment risks, our assets and net estimated worth. We issued Units to investors who are non-U.S. residents. The investors executed subscription agreements and acknowledged that the securities to be issued have not been registered under the Securities Act, that they understood the economic risk of an investment in the securities, and that they had the opportunity to ask questions of and receive answers from our management concerning any and all matters related to acquisition of the securities.

We have filed a Registration Statement on Form SB-2 under the Securities Act to register an aggregate of 8,100,000 shares of our common stock, of which 2,700,000 are shares underlying the respective warrants. The Registration Statement was declared effective by the SEC on June 15, 2007.

On April 11, 2007, we issued an aggregate of 750,000 shares of our restricted common stock in accordance with the terms and provisions of a mineral asset Option agreement with Brad Moore dated October 11, 2005. The 750,000 shares represented the final obligation due towards the completion of the Option agreement. In accordance with the terms and provisions of the Option agreement, title to the properties to be acquired was transfer upon payment of all remaining stock required under the Option. During the Option term we had the right as operator to conduct or otherwise direct all exploration on the properties to be acquired.

On February 1, 2007, we entered into a consulting services agreement which included an obligation to issue 2,500 shares of our restricted common stock per month. In accordance with the terms and provisions of the agreement, to date we have issued a total of 12,500 shares of our restricted common stock. The issuance of the shares represents the commitment from February 2007 through June 2007.

On June 15, 2007, we issued to certain investors an aggregate of 59,998 non-transferable common share purchase warrants to acquire an equivalent number of common shares of the Company pursuant to the investors' respective December 22, 2006 private placement subscription agreements with us. These warrants were issued as liquidated damages resulting from the Company's delay in not having a registration statement respecting the investors' securities within the Company declared effective by the SEC within four months from the original date of issuance by the Company of the securities underlying the original subscription agreements. This additional warrant issuance was provided for under the terms of the original subscription agreements whereby 1/100 of an additional warrant was issuable to each such investor for each $1.00 in aggregate subscription price funds paid by the investor to the Company under the private placement and in respect of each 30 day period (or partial period thereof) of delay of the aforementioned registration statement effectiveness. Each resulting warrant now entitles the holder thereof to purchase an additional share of our restricted common stock under the same terms as the original warrants issued at the closing of the private placement of December 22, 2006.

52

We are amending our Annual Report for the seven months ended July 31, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on October 29, 2007, as amended by Form 10-KSB/A filed February 8, 2008 and by Form 10-KSB/A filed February 29, 2008. The amendment is a result of restating our audited financial statements for the period ended July 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006. We have not amended and do not intend to amend any of our previously filed Annual Reports or quarterly reports for the periods affected by the restatement other than this Annual Report. Accordingly, our previously issued financial statements, press releases and similar communications affected by the restatement and any related reports of our independent auditors should not be relied upon, in so far as they relate to the periods and items that are the subject matter of the restatement.

At each reporting period we performed an impairment analysis of any capitalized acquisition costs of our mineral properties. As none of our properties contained proven and probable reserves that were independently quantified and valued, management assessed that future cash flows could not be determined and, accordingly, we wrote down the carrying value of the capitalized acquisition costs of our mineral properties as of the end of each reporting period. The capitalized costs of mineral rights and properties were acquisition costs that were accounted for as tangible assets pursuant to EITF 04-02, Whether Mineral Rights are Tangible or Intangible Assets. The capitalized costs of databases were acquisition costs that were accounted for as intangible assets. The allocation to tangible assets as a result of the acquisition included economic value beyond the acquired assets proven and probable reserves. In carrying out our subsequent impairment tests, we did not consider data beyond proven and probable reserves and did not consider the information and data used in determining the initial capitalization of acquisition costs. Pursuant to EITF 04-03, Mining Assets: Impairment and Business Combinations, we have reconsidered our impairment analysis and have now included the cash flows associated with value beyond proven and probable reserves in estimating future cash flows (both undiscounted and discounted) used for determining whether mining assets were impaired under SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. We have re-evaluated the impairment analysis performed at each respective period using all historical information including value beyond proven and probable reserves and have determined the capitalized costs of mineral properties should not have been written off.

Additionally, in reviewing the database related transactions we identified the following errors: (i) cash and stock based expenditures of $171,250 ($138,750 during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 and $32,500 during the seven months ended July 31, 2007) which were initially capitalized with other acquisition costs were not capital in nature and should have been charged to mineral property expenditures, (ii) cash and stock based proceeds of $385,040 ($150,000 cash and $235,040 stock based) from the sale of a portion of one of our database acquisitions was initially recorded as a reduction of capitalized costs and should have been recognized as an asset sale transaction with a resulting gain of $363,757, and (iii) depreciation of $71,713 ($37,135 during the fiscal year year ended December 31, 2006 and $34,578 during the seven months ended July 31, 2007) was not recorded on capitalized database acquisitions. Accordingly, the financial statements have been restated to correct for the errors outlined above.

As a result of the restatement, our net loss for the seven months ended July 31, 2007 and year ended December 31, 2006 decreased by $8,148,632 and $3,210,183 respectively.

As described in further detail on page 85, "Management's Consideration of the Restatement", management has reconsidered its original conclusions on the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting as at July 31, 2007 and has concluded that with the re-evaluation of the impairment analysis performed at each respective period and the correction for errors in recording database related transactions, there was a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2007. Management has also concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of July 31, 2007.

53

We have had in place, since fiscal 2007, an effective asset impairment control to, among other things, detect, value and record indications of impairment that could result in the carrying value of an asset not being recoverable. Additionally, since fiscal 2007 we have had in place effective capital asset transaction controls to, among other things, detect, value and record capital asset acquisitions, disposals and depreciation. Between the filing of the Original Annual Report and the Amended Report, we made improvements to our controls to detect, value and record indications of impairment on long-lived assets as well as controls relating to our capital asset transactions. As a component of our improvements, management has instituted a policy in order to mitigate such future occurrences, whereby we will seek third party independent professional advice when faced with complex accounting issues or where interpretation of policies or regulations is required or warranted.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our audited financial statements as at and for the seven months ended July 31, 2007 and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 and the related notes. The following discussion contains forward-looking statements that reflect our plans, estimates and beliefs. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in the forward looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed above and elsewhere in this Annual Report, particularly in the section entitled "Risk Factors". Our financial statements are stated in United States Dollars and are prepared in accordance with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

We are an exploration stage company and have not generated any revenue and incurred recurring losses to date. Our financial statements have been prepared assuming that we will continue as a going concern and, accordingly, do not include adjustments relating to the recoverability and realization of assets and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should we be unable to continue in operation.

We expect we will require additional capital to meet our long term operating requirements. We expect to raise additional capital through, among other things, the sale of equity or debt securities.

We are an exploration stage company and net production revenues during the seven months ended July 31, 2007, and fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, were $Nil. Our restated net loss for the seven months ended July 31, 2007, was $8,044,743 compared to a restated net loss of $11,608,135 during fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.

Operating expenses incurred during the seven months ended July 31, 2007 (as restated), decreased to $8,571,200 from $12,078,099 incurred during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (as restated). The decrease is primarily due to reduced consulting fees including stock based consulting charges, which is partially offset by the expansion of current operations and the corresponding change in exploration costs associated with the development of our uranium properties and related infrastructure. Significant expenditures and changes are outlined as follows:

54

Of the $8,571,200 incurred as operating expenses during the seven months ended July 31, 2007 (as restated), an aggregate of $302,697 was incurred payable to certain officers and directors in management and consulting fees. Of the $302,697: (i) we incurred to our President and Chief Executive Officer an aggregate of $88,750 in connection with performance of managerial, administrative and business development services; (ii) we incurred to our Chief Operating Officer an aggregate of $93,750 in connection with performance of managerial and operational services; and (iii) we incurred to our Chief Financial Officer an aggregate of $51,707 in connection with performance of administrative and financial services. As of the date of this Annual Report there were no amounts due and owing to our directors and officers. We also paid $20,745 in consulting fees and $11,980 in media and website development and hosting fees to private companies controlled by direct family members of two directors. See "Item 10. Executive Compensation" and "Item 12. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence."

Interest and other income increased to $331,286 during the seven months ended July 31, 2007, from $106,207 during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, due to significantly higher cash balances maintained throughout the current period. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (as restated), we recorded a $363,757 gain on the sale of the Cadena database.

Deferred tax benefit increased to $195,171 during the seven months ended July 31, 2007 from $Nil during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. The deferred tax benefit is calculated on the estimated unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities in the current fiscal period which is reflected in other comprehensive income.

Our net loss during the seven months ended July 31, 2007 (as restated), was $8,044,743 or ($0.22) per share, compared to a net loss of $11,608,135 or ($0.44) per share during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (as restated). The weighted average number of shares outstanding was 36,389,384 for the seven months ended July 31, 2007, compared to 26,342,512 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.

At July 31, 2007, we had $9,083,453 in cash and cash equivalents. Generally, we have financed operations to date through the proceeds of private placements in addition to stock option and warrant exercises.

55

We have not generated positive cash flows from operating activities. For the seven months ended July 31, 2007 (as restated), net cash flows used in operating activities was $5,328,362, compared to $5,603,482 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (as restated). The current period balance consisting primarily of the restated net loss of $8,044,743 adjusted by $2,714,771 to eliminate non-cash stock compensation expense.

We have financed our operations primarily from the issuance of equity. For the seven months ended July 31, 2007, net cash flows from financing activities was $3,712,919, compared to $19,912,749 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. The current period balance consists of proceeds received from the sale of our common stock. We completed a private placement financing in January 2007 whereby we sold an aggregate of 200,000 units at a price of $2.50 per unit for gross proceeds of $500,000. Additionally, during the seven months ended July 31, 2007, a total of 995,000 shares of our common stock were issued pursuant to stock option exercises for aggregate proceeds of $745,000, and a total of 1,297,400 shares of our common stock were issued pursuant to warrant exercises for aggregate proceeds of $2,943,500.

For the seven months ended July 31, 2007 (as restated), our net cash flows used in investing activities was $2,882,481, compared to $835,050 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (as restated). Investing activities consisted primarily of the acquisition of mineral rights and properties, including approximately $1,500,000 for our share of Cibola Resources and approximately $700,000 for the Holley acquisition.

We expect that working capital requirements will continue to be funded through a combination of our existing funds and further issuances of securities. Our working capital requirements are expected to increase in line with the growth of our business.

Our existing working capital is expected to be adequate to fund our operations over the next twelve months. We have no lines of credit or other bank financing arrangements. Generally, we have financed operations to date through the proceeds of the private placement of equity and debt instruments. In connection with our business plan, management anticipates additional increases in operating expenses and capital expenditures relating to: (i) uranium exploration operating activities; (ii) possible future reserve definition; (iii) possible future mining initiatives on current and future properties; and (iv) future possible property acquisitions. We intend to finance these expenses with further issuances of securities and debt issuances. We expect we will need to raise additional capital to meet long-term operating requirements. Additional issuances of equity or convertible debt securities will result in dilution to our current shareholders. Further, such securities might have rights, preferences or privileges senior to our common stock. Additional financing may not be available upon acceptable terms, or at all. If adequate funds are not available or are not available on acceptable terms, we may not be able to take advantage of prospective new business endeavors or opportunities, which could significantly and materially restrict our business operations.

During the seven months ended July 31, 2007, we engaged in a private placement offering under Regulation D and Regulation S of the Securities Act. Pursuant to the terms of the private placements, we issued aggregate amounts of our restricted common stock at subscription prices and under terms as follows:

56

We filed a Form SB-2 Registration Statement under the Securities Act to register an aggregate of 8,100,000 shares, inclusive of the 5,400,000 common shares issued in the respective private placement offerings and the 2,700,000 common shares underlying the respective warrants. The Registration Statement was declared effective by the SEC on June 15, 2007.

We commenced operations on May 16, 2003, and have not realized any significant revenues since inception. As at July 31, 2007 (as restated), we have working capital of $9,593,650 and a restated accumulated deficit of $21,163,764 (December 31, 2006 (as restated) - $13,119,021). Although the existing cash resources are currently expected to provide sufficient funds through the upcoming year, the capital expenditures required to achieve planned principal operations may be substantial. The continuation of the Company as a going concern for a period of longer than the upcoming year is dependent upon the ability of the Company to obtain necessary financing to continue operations. We are in the exploration stage of our mineral property development and to date have not yet established any known mineral reserves on any of our existing properties. Our continued operations and the recoverability of the carrying value of our assets is ultimately dependent upon our ability to achieve profitable operations. To date we have completed private placements and exercised stock options for net proceeds of $24,805,196 from the issuance of shares of the our common stock.

On February 1, 2007, we entered into a financial consulting agreement for a 12 month term. Under the terms of the agreement, the consultant will: (i) disseminate the Company's news releases, investor packages, research reports and corporate and industry sector materials; (ii) promote investor awareness and manage financial public relations to the investment community; and (iii) arrange meetings with industry sector analysts, stock brokers and portfolio managers. We will pay the consultant $6,500 and 2,500 restricted common shares per month.

On March 29, 2007, we entered into a six month consulting services agreement valued at approximately €300,178 ($411,694 US). The consultant will provide advice on public and investor relations related matters and will arrange to generate a substantial interest for the Company in major European equity markets, specifically in Germany and Switzerland as well as provide introductions to the consultant's investor's network, potential private investors and investment advisors and various journalists of leading press agencies in Germany. Under the terms of the agreement we paid a retainer of approximately €209,000 ($286,644 US) and will pay a final installment of approximately €91,178 ($125,050 US) which was due 90 days from the date of the agreement.

On April 6, 2007, we entered into a twelve month consulting services agreement at $10,000 per month. The consultant will provide representation before the executive and legislative branches of the federal government and state governments in addition to providing consulting services on political matters.

We are currently leasing office premises in New Mexico, Texas and Wyoming with total monthly payments of $9,444, with all agreements having a maximum term of no more than three years.

We are also committed to pay our key executives a total of approximately $305,500 per year. See "Item 10. Executive Compensation" and "Item. 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transaction and Director Independence."

Effective May 29, 2007, we committed to spend approximately $140,000 to acquire a PFN assay tool and $120,000 to build a second logging truck which is currently under construction. As of the date of this Annual Report a total of $65,000 has been paid towards these commitments and has been included with vehicles.

57

As of the date of this Annual Report we do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that are material to investors.

Our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes have been prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with US generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods.

We regularly evaluate the accounting policies and estimates that we use to prepare our consolidated financial statements. In general, management's estimates are based on historical experience, on information from third party professionals, and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the facts and circumstances. Actual results could differ from those estimates made by management.

Various federal and state mining laws and regulations require us to reclaim the surface areas and restore underground water quality for its mine projects to the pre-existing mine area average quality after the completion of mining. In August 2001, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations," which established a uniform methodology for accounting for estimated reclamation and abandonment costs.

58

In March 2005, the FASB issued Interpretation 47 ("FIN 47"), "Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations"--an interpretation of FASB No. 143. FIN 47 clarifies that the term "conditional asset retirement obligation" as used in SFAS No. 143 refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity. The obligation to perform the asset retirement activity is unconditional even though uncertainty exists about the timing and/or method of settlement. FIN 47 requires a liability to be recognized for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated.

Future reclamation and remediation costs are accrued based on management's best estimate at the end of each period of the costs expected to be incurred at each project. Such estimates would be determined by our engineering studies calculating the cost of future of surface and groundwater activities.

Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of these assets is measured by comparison of its carrying amount to future undiscounted cash flows the assets are expected to generate.

The fair values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, other current monetary assets, accounts payable and accrued liabilities were estimated to approximate their carrying values due to the immediate or short-term maturity of these financial instruments. Our operations and financing activities are conducted primarily in United States dollars, and as a result we are not subject to significant exposure to market risks from changes in foreign currency rates. Management has determined that we are not exposed to significant credit risk.

On January 1, 2006, the we adopted SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004) (SFAS No. 123R), Share-Based Payment, which addresses the accounting for stock-based payment transactions in which an enterprise receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of the enterprise or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the enterprise's equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of such equity instruments. In January 2005, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 107, which provides supplemental implementation guidance for SFAS No. 123R. SFAS No. 123R eliminates the ability to account for stock-based compensation transactions using the intrinsic value method under Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and instead generally requires that such transactions be accounted for using a fair-value-based method. We use the Black-Scholes-Merton ("BSM") option-pricing model to determine the fair-value of stock-based awards under SFAS No. 123R, consistent with that used for pro forma disclosures under SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. We have elected the modified prospective transition method as permitted by SFAS No. 123R and, accordingly, prior periods have not been restated to reflect the impact of SFAS No. 123R. The modified prospective transition method requires that stock-based compensation expense be recorded for all new and unvested stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units, and employee stock purchase plan shares that are ultimately expected to vest as the requisite service is rendered beginning on January 1, 2006 the first day of our 2006 fiscal year. Stock-based compensation expense for awards granted prior to January 1, 2006 is based on the grant date fair-value as determined under the pro forma provisions of SFAS No. 123.

Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123R, we measured compensation expense for its employee stock-based compensation plans using the intrinsic value method prescribed by APB Opinion No. 25. We applied the disclosure provisions of SFAS No. 123 as amended by SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation - Transition and Disclosure, as if the fair-value-based method had been applied in measuring compensation expense. Under APB Opinion No. 25, when the exercise price of our employee stock options was equal to the market price of the underlying stock on the date of the grant, no compensation expense was recognized.

59

In July 2006 the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, "Accounting for Uncertain Tax Positions". This Interpretation clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise's financial statements in accordance with SFAS Statement No. 109, "Accounting for Income Taxes". This Interpretation prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. This Interpretation also provides guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. We have adopted this Interpretation on January 1, 2007. There is no impact to our financial position as a result of this adoption.

In December 2006 the FASB issued FSP EITF 00-19-02, "Accounting for Registration Payment Arrangements" ("FSP 00-19-2") which addresses accounting for registration payment arrangements. FSP 00-19-2 specifies that the contingent obligation to make future payments or otherwise transfer consideration under a registration payment arrangement, whether issued as a separate agreement or included as a provision of a financial instrument or other agreement, should be separately recognized and measured in accordance with FASB Statement No. 5, "Accounting for Contingencies". FSP 00-19-2 further clarifies that a financial instrument subject to a registration payment arrangement should be accounted for in accordance with other applicable generally accepted accounting principles without regard to the contingent obligation to transfer consideration pursuant to the registration payment arrangement. We have adopted this Interpretation on January 1, 2007. The impact to our financial position and results of operations as a result of this adoption is disclosed in the Notes to our July 31, 2007 Financial Statements.

In February 2007 the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, "The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities". This statement permits entities to choose to measure many financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected are reported in earnings. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We are currently assessing the impact of SFAS No. 159 on our financial position and results of operations.

60

61

62

COMMITMENTS (Notes 5, 6 and 10)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

64

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

65

66