Announcement PDF ASX Announcement | 11 May 2026 Variscan Mines Limited (ASX:VAR) HIGH-GRADE HISTORIC SURFACE DRILLING RESULTS ON THE NOVALES ZINC TREND Highlights • Recent exploration has focused on two historical mines; Emilia and Margarita, which are situated 2.3 km North-East from the San Jose mine • Acquisition of 109 historic drillholes for 6,720 metres, delivering multiple +20% zinc (Zn) and lead (Pb) intercepts at the Emilia mine, including: o S-37: 2.00m @ 11.29% Zn; 1.50m @ 6.27% Zn; o S-50: 0.85m @ 23.47% Zn; 0.90m @ 17.43% Zn o S-60: 1.50m @ 14.22% Zn; 3.00m @ 4.46% Zn • High-grade sample results from drives and faces at the Emilia mine include: o Sample Z-3: 2.85m @ 33.50% Zn, 0.52% Pb o Sample Z-7: 2.75m @ 22.50% Zn, 0.31% Pb o Sample Z-9B: 2.00m @ 28.00% Zn, 1.52% Pb • High-grade sample results from drives and faces at the Margarita mine include: o Sample D-M1: 3.55m @ 26.50% Zn, 2.99% Pb o Sample D-M2: 3.85m @ 24.50% Zn, 11.76% Pb o Sample D-M3: 3.30m @ 16.20% Zn, 14.07% Pb Variscan Mines Limited (ASX:VAR) (“Variscan” or the “Company”) is pleased to publish previously unreported assay results from historical underground drilling and face sampling at the former producing Emilia and Margarita mines, situated within the Novales-Udias Project, located in Cantabria, northern Spain. • Newly acquired, historic drilling results and face samples are outside the current Mineral Resource Estimate of the Novales-Udias Project supporting a larger, longer-term, district-scale Zinc exploration and development opportunity along the ‘Novales Zinc Trend’ • 3D survey of underground workings at Emilia and Margarita also completed • Newly integrated historic drilling data provides significant time and cost saving • Project drilling database now consists of 1,484 drillholes for 113,733 m • Total batch of 70 face samples compiled over distance of nearly 1 km • Drilling results and sampling will support and guide the definition of high-priority targets for forthcoming surface drilling over step-out areas to be conducted in 2026 2 Exploration Manager Dr Mike Mlynarczyk beside a large mineralised lens in the Emilia mine. Acquisition of Historic Surface Drilling Data at the Emilia Mine The Emilia Mine is located 2.3 km from the portal of the San Jose Mine,on the high-grade San Jose-Udias zinc trend which runs SW-NE for over 12 km. Variscan has conducted a thorough review of historical data at the School of Mines and Energy Engineering at Torrelavega (University of Cantabria) and compiled an extensive batch of historical underground drilling and face sampling assay results, which were subsequently surveyed in the field by Variscan geologists and precisely located on the newly obtained high-resolution 3D laser surveys of the Emilia and Margarita mine workings. 3 This newly documented area is mostly undeveloped, which is very promising considering that historical drilling, as well as Variscan’s previously completed surface drilling in this area (refer ASX Announcement 2 March 2023) has yielded significant zinc intercepts confirming the overall continuity of mineralization along trend. The zinc-dominant character of mineralisation intercepted together with the textures and geological structures observed underground confirm that this area is an integral part of the San Jose-Udias mineral system. Importantly, this high-grade zinc mineralisation is very shallow, occurring at depths between 0 and 105 m. The area was intermittently explored by the Real Compania Asturiana de Minas (RCAM) from the late 1950s to the early 1980s. Variscan have compiled drill collar and assay data from historical drilling conducted at the Emilia Mine between 1957-1962 by RCAM. Based on the historical records, it appears that there were well in excess of one hundred underground holes drilled, however, the drill collar records are incomplete and the assay data were only preserved for the “higher grade” mineralisation, with low-grade and trace zinc assay results not located in the archives (see tables in Appendices 1 and 2). There is evidence of limited mining operations within the historical mines targeting shallow zinc non- sulphidemineralisation inthelate 19th and early 20th century.Historicalsources report adozenartisanal mines, which Variscan has verified and located on the ground; all but Emilia and Margarita were very small. The acquisition of the historic drilling data saves significant time and financial resources for Variscan and provides valuable data to support and guide future drilling programmes over these licence areas more efficiently and effectively. The area in question straddles the San Jose mining permit and the Buenahora and Esperanza exploration permits, all of which are in good standing. 4 Figure 1. Map of historical mines and historical surface drilling results reported along the north-east extension of the Novales-Udias zinc trend overlain on Variscan Mines land tenure in Cantabria (refer also ASX announcements 2 March 2023 and 16 September 2025). Figure 2. Simplified geological cross-section showing connectivity and continuity between the San Jose mine and the Margarita and Emilia mines to the northeast. 5 Figure 3. Plan view of historical underground drilling and face sampling results from the upper levels of the Emilia mine. High grade sampling results from the Emilia and Margarita Mines Batches of 35 face sampling assay results dating from 1983 conducted by RCAM have been identified for each of the Emilia and the Margarita mines. The underground Emilia and Margarita mines have both recently been surveyed by Variscan with a high-resolution 3D laser. Drill collars and face samples were inspected and located in situ. The inspection of historical drives and stopes confirm the past exploitation of calamine ores and the presence of very high-grade zinc sulphide mineralisation, which owing to the lack of suitable ore processing technology pre-1930 was subject to only very limited mining activity. Variscan is in the processof conducting its own channel sampling at the Emilia mine, in order to confirm these excellent historical results. 6 Figure 4. Vertical section of the 3D laser survey model of the Emilia mine. District Scale Opportunity The Cantabria region is a proven multi-deposit zinc district. So-called ‘Mississippi Valley Type’ (MVT) zinc-lead deposits usually occur in extensive districts consisting of several to as many as 400 deposits1. The newly acquired drilling results add scale and upside with mineralisation identified stepping out from the San Jose Mine in a northeasterly direction on the 12 km mineralised ‘Novales Zinc Trend’, which hosts multiple zinc ore deposits. This presents a district-scale advanced exploration and development opportunity over multiple mines and proven mineralised areas which are typically high-grade, as well as very prospective under- explored targets. Future drilling will test step-out targets NE of San Jose Mine The highly encouraging drilling and sampling data reported in this announcement is augmented by historical surface drillhole data already compiled and reported by Variscan for the area north-east and south-west of Novales. The drilling and the sampling indicate that there is excellent continuity of mineralisation extending, along strike, in a broad north-easterly direction from the San Jose mine for over 4 km and linking with the Emilia and Margarita mines. 1 US Geological Survey (2010) ‘A Deposit Model for Mississippi Valley Type Lead-Zinc Ores’ Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5070-A 7 Figure 5. High-level plan view of future surface and underground drilling and survey priority areas. The style of zinc mineralisation is identical to that found at the San Jose Mine and consists of multiple stacked lenses of high-grade zinc sulphide mineralization that occur at a consistent elevation (i.e., with very little vertical offset). Furthermore, the area hosts the thickest dolomitisation of the whole district (200-350m in the vertical dimension) a feature that in most MVT zinc districts exhibits a strong positive correlation with the grade and tonnage of associated zinc mineralisation, making it Variscan’s prime exploration target for future drilling. Variscan continues to acquire and review historic data to refine planning of the forthcoming surface drilling in the area north-east of the San Jose mine, with drilling permits for the San Jose and Buenahora mineral permits already in hand, and that for the Esperanza mineral permit being processed. This area has not yet been drill-tested by Variscan and is expected to contribute significantly to the Project’s growing Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE). 8 Next Steps & Way Forward The San Jose/Novales-Udías Project continues to progress, with the following primary activities: • Assay results from underground drilling • Continuation of underground drilling program at Udias • Development of an expanded Surface drilling program ENDS To ask questions directly to the Variscan management team and access media content, visit our interactive investor website at: https://variscan.com.au/s/aa7e61 This ASX announcement has been approved by the Board and authorised for issue by Tony Wehby, Chairman, Variscan Mines Limited For further information, please contact: Variscan Mines Limited (ASX:VAR) Tony Wehby Chairman E: info@variscan.com.au Media & Investor Enquiries Jane Morgan Management Chloe Hayes / Jane Morgan E: chloe@janemorganmanagement.com.au / jm@janemorganmanagement.com.au P: + 61 (0) 458619317/ +61 (0) 405 555 618 About Variscan Mines Limited (ASX:VAR) To learn more, please visit: www.variscan.com.au For more information Follow us on LinkedIn Follow us on Twitter Visit our investor website: www.variscan.com.au We encourage all investors to share questions on this announcement via our interactive investor hub: [https://variscan.com.au/s/8fe6d0] Or scan the QR code. Subscribe to our news alert service: https://variscan.com.au/s/8d46e7 9 Project Summary The Novales-Udias Project is located in the Basque-Cantabrian Basin, some 30 km southwest from the regional capital, Santander. The project is centred around the former producing San Jose underground mine with a large surrounding area of brownfield exploration opportunities which include a number of satellite underground and surface workings and areas of zinc anomalism identified from recent and historic geochemical surveys. Variscan has delineated a significant 9km mineralised trend and a sub-parallel 3km trend from contemporary and historical data across both the Buenahora exploration and Novales mining permits. The San Jose Mine is nearby (~9 km) to the world class Reocin mine which is the largest known strata-bound carbonate-hosted Zn-Pb deposit in Spain2 and one of the world’s richest MVT deposits3 . Further, it is within trucking distance (~172 km) from the San Juan de Neiva zinc smelter operated by Asturiana de Zinc (100% owned by Glencore). Significantly, the Novales-Udias Project includes a number of granted mining tenements4. Figure 6. Map of Novales-Udias Project Licence areas. 2 Velasco, F., Herrero, J.M., Yusta, I., Alonso, J.A., Seebold, I. and Leach, D., (2003) ‘Geology and Geochemistry of the Reocin Zinc-Lead Deposit, Basque-Cantabrian Basin, Northern Spain’ Econ. Geol. v.98, pp. 1371-1396. 3 Leach, D.L., Sangster, D.F., Kelley, K.D., Large, R.R., Garven, G., Allen, C.R., Gutzner, J., Walters, S., (2005) ‘Sediment- hosted lead-zinc deposits: a global perspective’. Econ. Geol. 100th Anniversary Special Paper 561 607 4 Refer to ASX announcement of 29 July 2019 10 Figure 7. Map of Novales-Udias Project Licence areas and local infrastructure. 11 Mineral Resource Estimate for Novales-Udias Project JORC Mineral Resource Estimate for San Jose mine and north-eastern Udías by deposit and classification reported above at 2% Zn+Pb cut-off (ASX announcement 9 December 2024) Competent Person Statement The information in this document that relates to exploration results is based on and fairly represents information and supporting documentation compiled and reviewed by Dr. Mike Mlynarczyk, Principal of the Redstone Exploration Services, a geological consultancy acting as an external consultant for Variscan Mines. Dr. Mlynarczyk is a Professional Geologist (PGeo) of the Institute of Geologists of Ireland, and European Geologist (EurGeol) of the European Federation of Geologists, as well as Fellow of the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG). With over 14 years of full-time exploration experience in MVT-style zinc-lead systems in several of the world’s leading MVT provinces, Dr. Mlynarczyk has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the December 2012 edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (‘JORC Code’). Dr. Mlynarczyk consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based upon the information in the form and context in which it appears. Where reference is made to previous releases of exploration results and mineral resource estimates in this announcement, the Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in those announcements and all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the exploration results and mineral resource estimates included in those announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed. Where information in this document relates to previous exploration results that was prepared pre-2012 JORC code. It is the opinion of Variscan that the exploration data is reliable. Although some of the data is incomplete, nothing has come to the attention of Variscan that causes it to question the accuracy or reliability of the historic exploration. Forward Looking Statements Forward-looking statements are only predictions and are not guaranteed. They are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions, some of which are outside the control of the Company. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance and no representation or warranty is made as to the likelihood of achievement or reasonableness of any forward-looking statements or other forecast. The occurrence of events in the future are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company’s actual results, performance or achievements to differ from those referred to in this announcement. Given these uncertainties, recipients are cautioned not to place reliance on forward looking statements. Any forward-looking statements in this announcement speak only at the date of issue of this announcement. Subject to any continuing obligations under applicable law and the ASX Listing Rules, the Company, its directors, officers, employees and agents do not give any assurance or guarantee that the occurrence of the events referred to in this announcement will occur as contemplated. 12 JORC Table 1, Sections 1 and 2 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (e.g., cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representativity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public News release. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g., ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g., submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. • The sample data referenced in this report relates to historical exploration undertaken by Real Compania Asturiana de Minas (RCAM) – one of the mining companies operating the Project from 1855 till 1983, when it was taken over by Asturiana de Zinc SA (AZSA) - previously a subsidiary of Xstrata / Glencore. • The historical underground drilling was conducted in 1957- 1962, whereas the face sampling was conducted in 1983 (the year of change in project ownership), and the data in paper format is held at the School of Mines and Energy Engineering at Torrelavega, a faculty of the University of Cantabria. No drill core has been preserved. • The underground drilling is understood to have been core drilling, with assaying conducted at RCAM´s in-house laboratory in Torres, but it is not known whether full core or half core was assayed. It has been assumed that all reported assays are representative of technology available at the time, but no reliance has been put on it. • Based on historical records, the number of holes drilled at the Emilia mine exceeds one hundred, however only assay data for the “better mineralized” holes have been preserved in the archives, with low-grade and trace zinc / barren assay results missing from the records. Appendix 1 lists drill collar data and Appendix 2 lists all of the available assay results. • Due to the incomplete nature of the historic drill data and records, including procedures, a comment on the samples’ representability or calibration of measurement tools or systems used by historic workers cannot be made. Further comment regarding specific components of the historic drilling is provided in subsequent sections of this table. The data cannot be considered ‘industry standard’ by modern standards. • The underground “face sampling” consisted of a manual collection of rock chips along vertical profiles in the walls of the galleries and stopes of the Emilia and Margarita mines, ranging in length between 28 cm and 3.85 m (average 2.0 m). The sampling was similar to vertical channel sampling, yet the rock chips were not taken continuously along the profile but from multiple spots separated by distances in the order of 10-30cm, and the given profile length corresponds to the distance between the top and bottom sampling spots. 13 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary • Based on the physical review of the underground sampling sites these cannot be considered “true” channel samples and do not fulfil the present-day industry standard requirements for systematic sampling. Nevertheless, they provide very useful, semi-quantitative information on grade distribution over wide areas of the Emilia and Margarita mines. • The sampling sites were marked on the mine walls with yellow paint, highlighting the location of the sampling profiles and the sample number, and they were reported on detailed mine plans available in paper format. A representative number of sampling sites was checked in situ and was found to visually match the metal grades listed in the historical records, both in terms of zinc versus lead content and in terms of sulphide versus non-sulphide mineralogy. • A total of 66 face samples are listed in Appendices 3 (Emilia mine) and 4 (Margarita mine), and the bulk of them have assay data for zinc (sulphide), lead (sulphide), as well as zinc and lead in non-sulphide (‘oxide’) form. The ‘zinc meters-%’ column was added by Variscan Mines, solely as a means of assessing the spatial variation of zinc grade in a very approximative manner, and should ‘not’ be relied on, as these were not ‘true’ channel samples. • Due to the incomplete nature of the historical sampling methodology and historical records, including details of the procedures implemented and QAQC control, a comment on sample representativeness or calibration of measurement systems used by historical workers cannot be made. The historical data cannot be considered JORC- compliant nor ‘industry standard’ by modern standards. It has been assumed that the assays are representative of technology available at the time, but no reliance has been put on it. Drilling techniques • Drill type (e.g., core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g., core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). • The historic underground drilling reported here is understood to be all core drilling. No details of the drilling techniques employed have been identified in the historic data. This includes reference to core diameter, core orientation methods, nor downhole survey data. • Historical drilling referenced within this document refers to 109 underground drillholes from between 1957 and 1962. • It is assumed that no core orientation has taken place for these holes as no structural data exists in the core logs. No records of the type of drill rig used have been identified. 14 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Drill sample recovery • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. • No records of core recovery have been identified from the historic data. Given the absence of core recovery data nor the actual physical drill core, it is not possible to assess the potential of a relationship between sample recovery and grade. • The absence of drill recovery data means that reported grades may be subject to either over or underreporting. No assessment or estimation of these effects has been made due to the lack of data. • Face samples collected at the Emilia and Margarita mines have had no recovery recorded, moreover, the rock chips were not taken continuously along the vertical sampling profiles but from multiple spots separated by distances in the order of 10-30cm, and the given profile lengths correspond to the distance between the top and bottom sampling spots. Therefore, these are not “actual” channel samples and only give a semi-quantitative assessment of zinc and lead distribution along both mines. Logging • Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. • The historical logs available for the underground drillholes are very basic, presumably prepared by the drillers and not geologists. No geotechnical logs have been identified. In the absence of detailed data, no comment on whether the logging, where observed, is qualitative or quantitative has be made. No core photography has been identified. • Of the 109 underground drillholes reported, only 55 have complete drill collar data and of them only 16 have assay data, which are limited to “higher grade” intervals, with low-grade and trace zinc / barren assay results missing from the records. • Regarding face samples, no geological sample descriptions have been identified in the historical records, but in-situ visual inspection of selected sampling profiles matches well the mineralogy and metal grades reported. No logging has taken place along the vertical profiles of face sampling. Only sample intervals were recorded, with the profile lengths corresponding to the distance between the top and bottom sampling spots. Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. • Historic approach to sampling drill core appears selective, guided by geological observation, and no “apparent” waste was sampled (or the records were not preserved). No details of the sub-sampling or sample preparation techniques have been identified from the historic records, and no supporting sampling procedures have been identified. It is not known whether half core or whole core 15 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representativity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. was submitted for analysis. In the absence of this data and other data related to the sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation, one cannot comment on the appropriateness of the sample preparation techniques. • No evidence of Quality Control procedures nor results have been identified for the historical drilling campaign. This includes evidence of field duplicates or other current industry standard quality control procedures, such as Certified Reference Materials and blanks. • In the absence of sample size data, no comment on whether the sample size is appropriate to the grain size of the sampled material can been made. • The historical approach to face sampling cannot be considered ‘industry standard’ by modern standards as the full length of the sampling profiles had not been sampled, instead focusing on a succession of multiple sampling spots, from which larger rock chips were taken. Therefore, there is significant uncertainty over sampling representativeness and any possible bias, and the assay data are semi-quantitative at most and cannot be relied upon. • No details of the sample preparation techniques, sampling procedures, and QAQC measures have been identified so far in the historical records pertaining to the face sampling campaign. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of • No details of Quality Control procedures (such as duplicates, Certified Reference Materials and blanks) and whether they were used at the time of drilling or face sampling have been identified from the historical records, and no supporting sampling procedures have been identified. It is inferred that the techniques used were total and representative of technology available in the late 1950s to early 1980s. No comment can be made on whether acceptable accuracy or precision of results have been established. 16 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. Verification of sampling and assaying • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data. • Due to the historical nature of the results reported and the lack of preserved drill core, it has not been possible to verify significant drilling intersections. It is not known whether verification of intersections was undertaken by previous operators at the time of drilling. • The historical data does not include any twinned holes. It is understood that Variscan may consider twinning historic drill holes as part of the company’s upcoming exploration plans. • No documentation or records of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols have been identified. • Historic records consist solely of handwritten drillhole summaries. This data was identified and transcribed to Microsoft Excel © and then imported into Leapfrog Geo for drill hole database validation, significant intersections, and 3D viewing. Variscan intend to transfer this data to an industry standard drillhole database during the ongoing exploration on the project. • Given the absence of detailed historical information relating to the assay data, no adjustment to the assay data has been made. The data has been reported as it was recorded in the original documentation. Variscan have no reason to disbelieve the data as presented in the historical drill logs, however, understand the limitations of the data for use in reliable and classified mineral resource estimations going forward until assay verification has been achieved to a satisfactory standard. • A representative selection of historical face sampling sites has been reviewed in situ by Variscan Mines geologists and found to visually match the metal grades listed in the historical records, both in terms of zinc versus lead content, and in terms of sulphide versus non-sulphide mineralogy. • Full verification of the sampling representativeness would require executing proper channel sampling at the locations of historical sampling profiles, an exercise that is being planned and will supersede historical data but has not yet been carried out. The principal uncertainty at this stage regards sample representativ