This amendment on Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1) amends our quarterly report on Form 10-Q for our fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 11, 2009. This amendment is being filed to amend the disclosure set forth in Part I, Item 4, "Controls and Procedures" under the subheading "Changes in Internal Controls".

1

URANIUM ENERGY CORP.
(An Exploration Stage Company)

CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


APRIL 30, 2009
(Unaudited)

2

URANIUM ENERGY CORP.
(An Exploration Stage Company)

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Notes 4 and 10)

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

3

URANIUM ENERGY CORP.
(An Exploration Stage Company)

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

4

URANIUM ENERGY, CORP.
(An Exploration Stage Company)

All share amounts have been restated to reflect the 2:1 reverse share consolidation in January 2005 and the 1.5:1 forward share split as of the date of record, February 28, 2006.

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

5

URANIUM ENERGY CORP.
(An Exploration Stage Company)

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

6

URANIUM ENERGY CORP.
(An Exploration Stage Company)

Uranium Energy Corp. (the "Company") was incorporated on May 16, 2003 in the State of Nevada. The Company owns a 100% interest in UEC Resources Ltd. ("UEC Resources"), a private company incorporated in the province of British Columbia, Canada on December 21, 2007. Since November 1, 2004, the Company has acquired mineral leases and entered into joint venture agreements, directly or by way of option, for the purposes of exploring for economic deposits of uranium in the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. As at April 30, 2009 the Company has interests in approximately 38,796 net acres of mineral properties which have been staked, leased or optioned.

These consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America.

The Company commenced operations on May 16, 2003 and has not realized any significant revenues since inception. As at April 30, 2009 the Company has working capital of $5,363,130 and an accumulated deficit of $50,566,284. Existing cash resources are currently expected to provide sufficient funds through the upcoming year. 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. The Company is in the exploration stage of its mineral property development and to date has not yet established any proven mineral reserves on its existing properties (refer to Note 2). The continued operations of the Company and the recoverability of the carrying value of its assets are ultimately dependent upon the ability of the Company to achieve profitable operations. As at April 30, 2009 the Company has completed private placements and received funding through the exercise of stock options and share purchase warrants for net proceeds of $46,457,092 from the issuance of shares of the Company's common stock.

The accompanying unaudited interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information. They may not include all information and footnotes required by United States generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements, however, except as disclosed herein, there have been no material changes in the information disclosed in the notes to the audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended July 31, 2008 included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The interim unaudited consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with those consolidated financial statements included in the Form 10-K. In the opinion of management, all adjustments considered necessary for a fair presentation, consisting solely of normal recurring adjustments, have been made. Operating results for the nine months ended April 30, 2009 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending July 31, 2009.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Uranium Energy Corp. (incorporated in the State of Nevada, USA) and its wholly-owned subsidiary, UEC Resources Ltd. (incorporated in the province of British Columbia, Canada). All significant inter-company transactions and balances have been eliminated upon consolidation.

The Company considers all highly liquid instruments with an original maturity of three months or less at the time of issuance to be cash equivalents.

7

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with United States generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expenses during the period reported. By their nature, these estimates are subject to measurement uncertainty and the effect on the financial statements of changes in such estimates in future periods could be significant. Significant areas requiring management's estimates and assumptions are determining the fair value of transactions involving common stock, valuation and impairment losses on mineral rights and property acquisitions, databases, land use agreements, and property and equipment, and the valuation of stock-based compensation. Other areas requiring estimates include allocations of expenditures to resource property interests and depreciation of property and equipment. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

The Company is primarily engaged in the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties.

Mineral property acquisition costs are initially capitalized as tangible assets when purchased. Periodically, the Company assesses the carrying costs for impairment. If proven and probable reserves are established for a property and it has been determined that a mineral property can be economically developed, costs will be amortized using the units-of-production method over the estimated life of the reserve.

Various federal and state mining laws and regulations require the Company 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.

Future reclamation and remediation costs, which include production equipment removal and environmental remediation, 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 the Company's engineering studies calculating the cost of future surface and groundwater activities, current regulations, actual expenses incurred, and technology and industry standards.

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143 "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations," the Company will capitalize the measured fair value of asset retirement obligations to mineral rights and properties. The asset retirement obligations would be accreted to an undiscounted value until the time at which it they are expected to be settled. Actual retirement costs will be recorded against the asset retirement obligations when incurred. Any difference between the recorded asset retirement obligations and the actual retirement costs incurred will be recorded as a gain or loss in the period of settlement.

Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Circumstances which could trigger a review include, but are not limited to: significant decreases in the market price of the asset; significant adverse changes in the business climate or legal factors; accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected for the acquisition or construction of the asset; current period cash flow or operating losses combined with a history of losses or a forecast of continuing losses associated with the use of the asset; and current expectation that the asset will more likely than not be sold or disposed significantly before the end of its estimated useful life. Recoverability of these assets is measured by comparison of its carrying amount to future undiscounted cash flows the assets are expected to generate. An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying amount is not recoverable and exceeds fair value.

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. The Company's operations and financing activities are conducted primarily in United States dollars, and as a result the Company is not subject to significant exposure to market risks from changes in foreign currency rates. Management has determined that the Company is not exposed to significant credit risk.

8

Basic loss per share includes no dilution and is computed by dividing loss attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per share reflect the potential dilution of securities that could share in the earnings (loss) of the Company. The common shares potentially issuable on conversion of outstanding convertible debentures and exercise of stock options were not included in the calculation of weighted average number of shares outstanding because the effect would be anti-dilutive.

The functional currency of the Company, including its subsidiary, is United States dollars. In accordance with SFAS No. 52, "Foreign Currency Translation", the financial statements of the Company's subsidiary is translated into United States dollars using period end exchange rates as to monetary assets and liabilities and average exchange rates as to revenues and expenses. Non-monetary assets are translated at their historical exchange rates. Net gains and losses resulting from foreign exchange translations and foreign currency exchange gains and losses on transactions occurring in a currency other than the Company's functional currency are included in the determination of net income in the period.

The Company follows the liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the consolidated financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax balances. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted or substantially enacted tax rates expected to apply to the taxable income in the years in which those differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the date of enactment or substantive enactment. As at April 30, 2009 the Company had net operating loss carry forwards; however, due to the uncertainty of realization, the Company has provided a full valuation allowance for the potential deferred tax assets resulting from these losses carry forwards.

On January 1, 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004) (SFAS No. 123R), Share-Based Payment, which addresses the accounting for stock-based payment transactions, requiring such transactions to be accounted for using the fair value method. The Company uses the Black-Scholes-Merton ("BSM") option-pricing model to determine the grant date fair-value of stock-based awards under SFAS No. 123R. The fair value is recorded in income depending on the terms and conditions of the award, and the nature of the relationship of the recipient of the award to the Company. The Company records the grant date fair value in income in line with the period over which it was earned. For employees and management this is typically considered to be the vesting period of the award. For consultants the fair value of the award is recorded in income over the term of the service period, and unvested amounts are revalued at each reporting period over the service period. The Company estimates the expected forfeitures and updates the valuation accordingly.

Property and equipment are recorded at cost and are amortized using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives at the following rates:

As at April 30, 2009 the Company has interests in 46,325 gross acres (38,796 net mineral acres) of mineral properties that have been staked, leased or optioned pursuant to agreements by the Company in the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming for the purposes of uranium exploration for a total cost of $12,146,218 including $8,207,500 representing the fair value of non-cash compensation. The totals include 3,291 net acres (6,717 gross acres leased by Cibola Resources LLC of which the Company holds a 49% interest). These leases are subject to varying royalty interests, some of which are indexed to the sale price of uranium. As at April 30, 2009 total yearly recurring maintenance payments of $143,411 are required to maintain existing mineral leases.

On October 11, 2005, the Company entered into a mineral asset option agreement (the "Moore Option") granting the Company the option to acquire certain mineral property leases in the State of Texas for total consideration of $200,000 and 3,000,000 post-split restricted common shares at a fair value of $0.33 per share. In consideration for the Moore Option and its partial exercise over the option term, the Company has made cash payments totaling $200,000 and issued 3,000,000 post-split shares of restricted common stock. Upon completion of the terms of the Moore Option, title to the leases was transferred to the Company.

Acquisition costs for the Moore Option total $8,407,500 as at April 30, 2009 and include the following: (i) cash payments of $200,000, (ii) 750,000 restricted common shares issued on October 11, 2005 with a fair value of $250,000, (iii) 500,000 restricted common shares issued on April 10, 2006 with a fair value of $1,150,000, (iv) 250,000 restricted common shares issued on September 28, 2006 with a fair value of $462,500, (v) 750,000 restricted common shares issued on October 10, 2006 with a fair value of $975,000, and (vi) 750,000 restricted common shares issued on April 11, 2007 with a fair value of $5,370,000. Additionally, the Company has incurred $284,498 in other mineral right and property acquisition charges on the Goliad project, for a cumulative cost of $8,691,998 as at April 30, 2009.

11

On March 28, 2007 the Company entered into a letter option agreement (the "Holley Option") granting the Company 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 its option to acquire the assets, the Company is required to make the following option payments totaling $1,500,000 to the order and direction of the Holley Option holders in the following manner:

1. an initial payment of $25,000 on the execution date (paid);
2. a payment of $100,000 on March 28, 2007 (paid);
3. a payment of $475,000 on or before April 27, 2007 (paid);
4. a further payment of $500,000 on or before April 27, 2008 ($475,000 paid); and
5. a final payment of $400,000 on or before April 27, 2009.

Upon execution of the Holley Option the Company also reimbursed the Holley Option holders with approximately $95,000 in prior regulatory fees and property payments. In addition, the Company 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, the Company may elect to purchase the royalty interest at a base cost of $300,000 for each 1% interest it wishes to acquire. Additionally, the Company has incurred $12,068 in other mineral right and property acquisition charges related to the Holley Option, for a cumulative cost of $1,181,758 as at April 30, 2009.

On April 30, 2009, the Company decided to terminate the Holley Option. Accordingly, $1,176,748 in mineral rights and properties were written down to impairment.

On April 27, 2007, with a reference date of April 26, 2007, the Company entered into a joint venture with Neutron Energy Inc. ("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 LLC ("Cibola"), 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 ("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. Terms of the Lease provide for:

1. initial payments of $3,000,000 (paid by NEI, of which 49% was reimbursed to NEI by the Company);
2. an additional cash payment of $2,000,000 six months from the effective date of the Lease ($980,000 paid, being the Company's 49% portion);
3. every year after April 6, 2007 until uranium production begins, an advance royalty of $500,000 (to be deducted from any royalties paid in that same year);
4. a recoverable reserve payment of $1 per pound of recoverable uranium reserves upon the completion of a feasibility study by an independent mining engineering firm, which will be reduced by all prior payments as described in clause (a) through (c) above;
5. a production royalty of between 4.50% and 8.0% depending upon the sale price of uranium; and
6. the funding of a $30,000 per year scholarship program.

The Company has reimbursed an aggregate of $2,450,000 to NEI (49%) of the capital invested to date. As a result, NEI and the Company hold a 51% and 49% interest, respectively, in Cibola and the Company is obligated to pay 49% of all future commitments under the terms of the Lease. Additionally, the Company has paid $930,593 in exploration costs on behalf of Cibola for a cumulative contribution of $3,417,343. As an exploration stage company, Cibola has no liabilities as at April 30, 2009 and accordingly, $2,450,000 in mineral right and property acquisition costs in addition to $36,750 in database acquisition costs have been capitalized while other contributions of exploration costs have been charged to mineral property expenditures.

In December 2003, FASB issued FIN 46(R) "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities" which requires investors to consolidate the financial information of investees in which they are the primary beneficiary. The Company is not the primary beneficiary in Cibola and accordingly, no consolidated financial information is required.

12

Effective November 1, 2007, the Company entered into a binding letter Agreement to Purchase Assets (the "Agreement") with Melvin O. Stairs, Jr. ("Mr. Stairs"), whereby the Company acquired from Mr. Stairs an undivided 100% legal, beneficial and registered interest in and to a certain mineral exploration claim represented by permit number 08-111678, which is located at T7N R3E, Section 32, in Maricopa County, Arizona (the "Mineral Claim"), together with a certain database containing various material information respecting the subject Mineral Claim (the Mineral Claim and its database, collectively, the "Assets").

On August 25, 2008 the Company entered into an agreement amending the underlying Agreement to Purchase Assets from Melvin O. Stairs, Jr. Under the terms of the Amending Agreement, the Purchase Price Payment has been amended to the following:

Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, in order to secure the complete and timely payment of the Company's purchase price obligations to Mr. Stairs under the Agreement, the Company granted a security interest in and to, a lien upon and a right of set-off against its right, title and interest in and to the Assets.

Additionally, the Company has incurred $13,000 in other mineral right and property acquisition charges on the New River project, for a cumulative cost of $195,070 as at April 30, 2009.

On November 13, 2007, the Company entered into an agreement to acquire certain mineral property leases located in Cibola County, New Mexico for total consideration of $400,000. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid an initial deposit of $100,000 upon closing with the remaining balance due in three installments of $100,000 due on March 31, 2008 (paid), December 31, 2008, and December 31, 2009. At the Company's option, the final two installments may be paid in stock, based on the average trading price of its common stock over the 10 days immediately preceding the due date. On December 12, 2008 the Company entered into an agreement amending the aforementioned underlying agreement to acquire mineral leases to the following: 1) $5,000 on or before December 31, 2008 (paid) and $45,000 on or before December 31, 2009. At the Company's option, the final installment may be paid in stock, based on the average trading price of its common stock over the 10 days immediately preceding the due date.

13

On January, 14, 2009, the Company entered into an option and joint venture agreement (the "Agreement") with Uran Limited ("Uran") of Perth, Australia, in connection with the proposed exploration and development of certain tenements comprising the Company's "Grants Ridge" uranium project located in New Mexico. The Agreement was subject to Uran's satisfactory completion of due diligence work on the Grants Ridge project which was completed in February of 2009 in accordance with terms of the Agreement. Upon completion of the following terms of the Agreement, Uran can earn a 65% interest in the Grants Ridge project by: (a) making an initial cash payment of $75,000 (received); (b) incurring project exploration expenditures of $100,000 in year one, $200,000 in year two, $300,000 in year three, $400,000 in year four and $500,000 in year five, for total aggregate exploration expenditures of $1,500,000 over the 5 year option period; (c) completing a feasibility study; and (d) issuing and delivering an initial 1,000,000 Uran ordinary shares to the Company (received) plus issue a further 750,000 shares staged over the next 3 years for total aggregate issuance of 3,250,000 Uran ordinary shares. Uran can withdraw from the Agreement after expenditures of $250,000.

Additionally, the Company has incurred $90,897 in other mineral right and property acquisition charges on the Todilto project, for a cumulative cost of $295,897 as at April 30, 2009. Pursuant to the Uran joint venture agreement, the Company received a cash payment of $75,000 and 1,000,000 ordinary shares of Uran Limited with a fair value of $17,600 on the date of receipt. Accordingly, cumulative acquisition costs have been reduced by $92,600 as of April 30, 2009.

During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the Company decided not to renew or continue certain lease and option agreements in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. Additionally, the Company decided to terminate the Holley Option. Accordingly, $1,223,038 in mineral rights and properties have been written down to impairment.

Mineral property exploration costs on a regional basis are as follows:

Database acquisition costs consist of the following:

14

Land use acquisition costs, including right-of-way and easement agreements consist of the following:

Property and equipment consist of the following:

During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the Company had transactions with certain officers and directors of the Company as follows:

1. incurred $594,819 in management fees paid to directors and officers during the period, of which $21,818 is outstanding as at April 30, 2009 and reported as due to related parties;
2. incurred $170,250 in stock based compensation for the incremental fair value of options granted to directors and officers that were repriced during the period; and
3. incurred $81,118 in general and administrative costs paid to companies controlled by a direct family member of a current officer.

All related party transactions involving provision of services or tangible assets were recorded at the exchange amount, which is the value established and agreed to by the related parties.

15

On February 14, 2006, the Company's 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 the Company's total issued and outstanding shares of common stock (the "Forward Stock Split"). The Forward Stock Split was effectuated with a record date of February 28, 2006, upon filing the appropriate documentation. The Forward Stock Split increased the Company's 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 August 13, 2008 the Company issued 7,500 restricted common shares pursuant to a financial consulting agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $2.06 per share and $15,450 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees. Additionally, on October 23, 2008 the Company issued 7,500 restricted common shares pursuant to the same agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.53 per share and $3,975 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees.

On October 23, 2008 the Company issued 19,000 restricted common shares pursuant to an asset purchase agreement (refer to Note 4). At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.53 per share and $10,070 was recorded as stock-based mineral rights and properties acquisitions.

On December 5, 2008 the Company issued 25,000 restricted common shares pursuant to a land use agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.21 per share and $5,250 was recorded as stock-based land use agreements.

On February 13, 2009 the Company issued 13,039 restricted common shares pursuant to a financial consulting agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.47 per share and $6,128 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees. Additionally, on April 7, 2009 the Company issued 13,039 restricted common shares pursuant to the same agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.55 per share and $7,171 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees.

On March 17, 2009 the Company issued 29,000 restricted common shares pursuant to a consulting agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.53 per share and $15,370 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees. Additionally, on April 21, 2009 the Company issued 29,000 restricted common shares pursuant to the same agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.65 per share and $18,850 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees.

On March 17, 2009 the Company issued 6,000 restricted common shares pursuant to a consulting agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.53 per share and $3,180 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees.

On March 27, 2009 the Company issued 20,000 restricted common shares pursuant to a consulting agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.56 per share and $11,200 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees. Additionally, on April 27, 2009 the Company issued 10,000 restricted common shares pursuant to the same agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $1.10 per share and $11,000 was recorded as stock-based consulting fees.

During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 a total of 40,000 common stock options were exercised for aggregate proceeds of $14,500.

The December 12, 2007 private placement included a registration rights agreement, requiring 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. Under the terms of the registration rights agreement, the Company shall use its reasonable best efforts to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement for a period of not less than three years from the original date of issuance. If the Company fails to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement for the three year period, additional warrants could be issuable as liquidated damages. Any additional warrant issuance is provided for under the terms of the registration rights agreement 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. As at April 30, 2009 1,349,540 additional warrants could be issuable as liquidated damages through the three year period expiring December 12, 2010.

The July 7, 2008 and July 18, 2008 private placements included a registration rights agreement, requiring a registration statement respecting the investors' securities within the Company declared effective by the SEC by September 25, 2008. Under the terms of the registration rights agreement, the Company shall use its reasonable best efforts to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement for a period of not less than two years from the original date of issuance. If the Company fails to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement for the two year period, additional warrants could be issuable as liquidated damages. Any additional warrant issuance is provided for under the terms of the registration rights agreement 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. As at April 30, 2009 2,331,690 additional warrants could be issuable as liquidated damages through the two year period expiring July 7, 2010 and July 18, 2010.

16

A summary of the Company's common share purchase warrants as at January 31, 2009 and changes during the period is presented below:

The aggregate intrinsic value ("AIV") under the provisions of SFAS No. 123R of the 500,000 compensation warrants previously issued to consultants as at April 30, 2009 was estimated at $160,000.

On December 19, 2005 the Board of Directors of the Company ratified, approved and adopted a Stock Option Plan for the Company in the amount of 5,250,000 options. On April 10, 2006 the Company amended its 2005 Stock Option Plan whereby, subject to adjustment from time to time as provided in Article 11.1, the number of common shares available for issuance under the Plan was increased from 5,250,000 shares to 7,500,000 shares. On October 10, 2006 the Company ratified the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan whereby, subject to adjustment from time to time as provided in Article 18.1, the number of common shares available for issuance under the Plan was increased to 10,000,000 shares.

On October 10, 2006, a total of 650,000 stock options were granted to employees, consultants, directors and officers at an exercise price of $1.30 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $754,000 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 1 year, a risk free interest rate of 4.09%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 264.00%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $1.30 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $31,500 value of the options repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees and management fees.

On January 2, 2007, a total of 565,000 stock options were granted to employees, consultants, and officers at an exercise price of $3.30 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $1,548,100 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 5.22%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 113%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $3.30 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $63,900 value of the options repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees, management fees and wages.

On March 30, 2007, a total of 415,000 stock options were granted to employees, consultants, and officers at an exercise price of $5.70 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $1,962,950 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 5.26%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 116%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $5.70 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $91,554 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees and wages.

On November 1, 2007 a total of 660,000 stock options were granted to employees, consultants and a director at an exercise price of $3.80 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $1,762,200 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 4.33%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 87%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $3.80 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $533,305 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees, management fees and wages.

On January 25, 2008 a total of 100,000 stock options were granted to consultants at an exercise price of $2.45 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $162,000 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 3.50%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 80%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $2.45 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $19,015 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees.

17

On February 11, 2008 a total of 65,000 stock options were granted to consultants at an exercise price of $2.68 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $125,450 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 3.00%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 92%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $2.68 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $11,392 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees.

On April 7, 2008 a total of 1,150,000 stock options were granted to employees, directors and officers at an exercise price of $2.50 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $1,874,500 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 2.23%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 80%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $2.50 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $136,116 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based management fees and wages.

On May 15, 2008 a total of 90,000 stock options were granted to employees at an exercise price of $2.35 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $127,800 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 1.96%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 73%. On November 1, 2008 and December 19, 2008 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $2.35 per share to $0.95 and $0.45 respectively. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $51,399 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based wages.

On November 7, 2008 a total of 240,000 stock options were granted to consultants and an employee at an exercise price of $0.95 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $57,600 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.28%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 105.16%. On December 19, 2008 and January 14, 2009 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options from $0.95 per share to $0.45. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $57,850 value of the options earned and repriced during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees and wages.

On January 14, 2009 a total of 20,000 stock options were granted to a consultant at an exercise price of $0.45 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $7,400 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.10%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 136.59%. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $5,133 value of the options earned during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees and wages.

On November 1, 2008, December 19, 2008 and January 14, 2009 the Company approved the repricing of certain stock options issued to consultants, management and employees. On November 1, 2008 options with exercise prices ranging from $2.35 to $5.70 per share were repriced to $0.95 per share. The fair value of the repricing was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life ranging from 3.2 to 4.6 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.24%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 105%. On December 19, 2008 options with exercise prices ranging from $0.95 to $3.80 per share were repriced to $0.45 per share. The fair value of the repricing was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life ranging from 2.9 to 4.9 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.11%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 117%. On January 14, 2009 options with an exercise price of $0.95 per share were repriced to $0.45 per share. The fair value of the repricing was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 4.8 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.10%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 137%. As at April 30, 2009 the remaining unvested incremental fair value of repriced options issued to employees was $8,940.

On February 5, 2009 a total of 50,000 stock options were granted to a consultant at an exercise price of $0.46 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $18,500 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.23%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 113.08%. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $12,000 value of the options earned during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees and wages.

On March 30, 2009 a total of 25,000 stock options were granted to a consultant at an exercise price of $0.56 per share. The term of these options is ten years. The fair value of these options at the date of grant of $10,750 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with an expected life of 5 years, a risk free interest rate of 0.16%, a dividend yield of 0%, and an expected volatility of 107.02%. During the nine months ended April 30, 2009 the $3,896 value of the options earned during the period has been recorded as stock based consulting fees and wages.

A summary of the Company's stock options as at April 30, 2009 and changes during the period is presented below:

18

The AIV under the provisions of SFAS No. 123R of all outstanding options as at April 30, 2009 was estimated at $4,341,143. The AIV of options exercised during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 was estimated at $32,700.

A summary of stock based compensation expense for the nine months ended April 30, 2009:

On September 6, 2007 the Company entered into an agreement for media distribution services valued at approximately $270,000. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid a retainer of $100,000, with the balance of the agreement due upon completion of the services. For the nine months ended April 30, 2009, services have been provided in the amount of $100,000 and no further amounts are outstanding or will become payable under this agreement.

On November 1, 2007 the Company entered into an asset purchase agreement for a mineral exploration claim and related database information located in Maricopa County, Arizona. On August 25, 2008 the Company entered into an agreement amending the underlying Agreement to Purchase Assets. Under the terms of the Amending Agreement, the Company will pay total consideration of $300,000 including i) a $10,000 deposit upon execution (paid), ii) an installment of $95,000 cash on January 10, 2008 (paid), iii) an installment of $95,000 on August 25, 2008 consisting of $57,000 cash (paid) and the issuance of 19,000 fully paid and non-assessable restricted common shares (issued), and iv) a further installment totaling $100,000 on or before October 31, 2009 consisting of $50,000 cash and the $50,000 balance by way of issuance of an aggregate number of fully paid and non-assessable restricted common shares at a deemed issuance price calculated as the previous five-day trading average immediately prior to October 31, 2009. Additionally, the Company has granted the seller security interest on the acquired assets until the agreement is paid in full.

On November 13, 2007 the Company entered into an agreement to acquire certain mineral property leases located in Cibola County, New Mexico for total consideration of $400,000. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid an initial deposit of $100,000 upon closing with the remaining balance due in three installments of $100,000 due on March 31, 2008 (paid), December 31, 2008, and December 31, 2009. At the Company's option, the final two installments may be paid in stock, based on the average trading price of the Company's common stock over the 10 days immediately preceding the due date. On December 12, 2008, the Company entered into an agreement amending the aforementioned underlying agreement to acquire mineral leases to the following: 1) $5,000 on or before December 31, 2008 (paid) and $45,000 on or before December 31, 2009. At the Company's option, the final installment may be paid in stock, based on the average trading price of its common stock over the 10 days immediately preceding the due date.

The Company is committed to pay its key executives a total of approximately $468,500 per year for management services.

19

The Company is currently leasing office premises in New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming with total monthly payments of $6,321 with all agreements having a remaining term of no more than two years. Additionally, the Company is renting office space in Vancouver, Canada on a month to month basis at approximately $3,631 per month.

The aggregate minimum payments over the next five years are as follows:

Specifically, as the agency noted in an April 2007 letter to the County's attorney, the state agency hydrologist "concluded from the available information that no ground-water contamination has occurred as a result of the drilling activities." The state agency concluded its letter by noting that "[t]o date, the Commission's investigation of your complaint has not revealed any practice or activity within the approved permit area that has adversely affected the wells identified in your complaint or the related aquifer, or is out of compliance with the Texas Uranium Mining Regulations...". Later in a September 2007 letter to the Goliad groundwater district, the agency reiterated its findings stating the agency's "investigation of your complaint has not revealed any practice or activity at UEC's Uranium Exploration Permit No. 123 that is out of compliance... We consider this investigation to be closed."

The Company's Goliad Project has been inspected on a monthly basis since the close of the investigation, and no violations have been noted. In fact, an inspection report from November of 2007 observed that "prompt attention" to site restoration during exploration was apparent and "the area inspected looked very good". The Company is dedicated to full compliance with all aspects of the state regulatory process and will continue to focus its attention and efforts on obtaining all necessary authorizations for its Goliad Project.

The lawsuit, which was commenced by the filing of the plaintiffs' Original Complaint on or about March 17, 2008, follows on a notice of intent to file litigation issued by counsel for Goliad County and an individual landowner which was disclosed in the Company's current report filed with the SEC on Form 8-K on March 3, 2008. The plaintiffs have requested that the Court grant the following relief: (a) that the Court exercise jurisdiction over the lawsuit; (b) an order enjoining the Company from further exploration activities in the Weesatche Project in Goliad County; (c) an order requiring the Company to clean up the alleged contamination of the aquifer; (d) an order enjoining initiation of the aquifer exemption process until the Company has cleaned up the alleged contamination; (e) an order prohibiting the Company from using any water quality data for purposes of establishing baseline water quality if such data was collected after initiation of mining activity (although the Company has not commenced any mining activity); (f) an order granting Goliad County payment of its expert fees incurred in the prosecution of the lawsuit; (g) an order granting Goliad County payment of its attorney fees; and (h) such additional relief as the Court may deem just, proper and equitable, including an award of reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses and costs.

On October 23, 2008 the Company issued 19,000 restricted common shares pursuant to an asset purchase agreement (refer to Note 4). At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.53 per share and $10,070 was recorded as stock-based mineral rights and properties acquisitions.

On December 5, 2008 the Company issued 25,000 restricted common shares pursuant to a land use agreement. At the time of issuance, the shares had a value of $0.21 per share and $5,250 was recorded as stock-based land use acquisitions.

On March 11, 2009 the Company received 1,000,000 ordinary shares of Uran Limited pursuant to a joint venture agreement. At the time of receipt, the shares had a value of $0.0176 per share and $17,600 was recorded as a reduction in stock-based mineral rights and properties acquisitions.

20

On May 1, Craig and Luann Duderstadts voluntarily and unconditionally dismissed all their allegations, claims and causes of actions against the Company. The dismissal was "with prejudice", which means that the Duderstadts may not re-file the claims at a later date. No money or other consideration was paid to the Duderstadts for this dismissal.

On May 28, 2009, the Company and Uran Limited ("Uran") entered into an agreement in respect to the addition of certain surface rights and mineral rights owned by Uran into the joint venture proposed to be formed by the Company and Uran pursuant to the terms of the option and joint venture agreement compromising the Company's mineral claims known and described as the Grants Ridge project located in New Mexico, U.S.A.

Pursuant to the Variation Agreement, the Additional Tenement will form part of the joint venture contemplated by the Joint Venture Agreement on the following terms:

1. the earn-in requirements of the Joint Venture Agreement shall be increased by US$100,000 such that Uran will be required to incur Exploration Expenditure of US$200,000 by March 17, 2010;
2. the cost of the Additional Tenement (being US$100,000) will form part of the Exploration Expenditure required to be incurred as amended by (a) above;
3. the cost of the Additional Tenement or the Exploration Expenditure incurred by Uran on the Additional Tenement will not be included in Uran's commitment to spend a minimum of US$250,000 in Exploration Expenditure on the Tenements prior to termination of the Joint Venture Agreement;
4. Uran will be responsible for paying all Outgoings (that is, rents, rates, survey fees and other fees and charges relating to or in connection with the Additional Tenement) and the maintenance of the Additional Tenement and ensuring that it is kept in good standing until the Joint Venture is formed;
5. if a Joint Venture is formed by Uran earning a 65% Joint Venture Interest, the Company will have an option to acquire a 35% interest in the Additional Tenement by reimbursing Uran the proportionate share of the original cost of the Additional Tenement (that is, US$35,000) plus the proportionate share of any Exploration Expenditure incurred by Uran on the Additional Tenement during the five-year Earn-in Period; and
6. if Uran terminates the Joint Venture Agreement the Additional Tenement will be solely owned by Uran. The Company and the Joint Venture will have no interest in or right to the Additional Tenement or any part of the Additional Tenement.

On June 8, 2009 the Company entered into an option and joint venture agreement with Strategic Resources Inc. ("Strategic"), a TSXV listed company to earn up to a 60% interest in 20 lode mining claims located on Catron County, NM. Strategic Resources Inc. is required to pay the Company $7,500, issue a total aggregate of 2,500,000 shares and complete $825,000 of exploration expenditures to earn a 50% interest in the property according to the following terms:

1. Upon receipt of TSX Venture Exchange approval and formal execution of the Option Agreement, Strategic will make a cash payment of $7,500 and issue an initial 500,000 of its common shares to the Company;
2. On or before the first anniversary of the agreement, Strategic will issue a further 500,000 of its common shares to the Company and complete $25,000 of exploration expenditures on the property;
3. On or before the second anniversary of the agreement, Strategic will issue a further 500,000 of its common shares to the Company and complete $200,000 of exploration expenditures on the property;
4. On or before the third anniversary of the agreement, Strategic will issue a further 500,000 of its common shares to the Company and complete $200,000 of exploration expenditures on the property;
5. On or before the fourth anniversary of the agreement, Strategic will issue a further 500,000 of its common shares to the Company and complete $200,000 of exploration expenditures on the property;
6. On or before the fifth anniversary of the agreement, Strategic will complete $200,000 of exploration expenditures on the property;
7. Upon completing the above share issuances and work commitments, Strategic will then be eligible to earn an additional 10% interest (taking its total interest up to 60%) by issuing an additional 1,000,000 of its common shares to the Company.

The agreement remains subject to TSX Venture Exchange approval and accordingly the Company has not adjusted its consolidated financial statements to reflect any terms of this agreement.

21

On June 5, 2009, the United States District Court issued an order dismissing the lawsuit filed by Goliad County commissioners against the Company. The lawsuit alleged infractions of the Safe Drinking Water Act ("SDWA") nearby to areas where the Company has conducted exploration activities. In his June 5, 2009 order dismissing the case, the Judge stated that the County's case failed to pass the threshold jurisdictional requirements, even when considered in the light most favorable to the County. As the Judge noted, the Texas Railroad Commission stated in an April 2007 letter to the County's attorney that an agency hydrologist "...concluded from the available information that no ground-water contamination has occurred as a result of the drilling activities." The Judge concluded that "...the touchstone of Goliad County's SDWA claim is its allegation that UEC 'converted' the exploratory boreholes into 'injection wells' and/or an 'injection activity,'...the Court has concluded that no such conversion or injection activity took place..."

22

This Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1) for the quarterly period ended April 30, 2009 contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements in this document include, among others, statements regarding our capital needs, business plans and expectations. Such forward-looking statements involve assumptions, risks and uncertainties regarding, among others, the success of our business plan, availability of funds, government regulations, operating costs, our ability to achieve significant revenues, our business model and products and other factors. Any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as "may", "will", "should", "expect", "plan", "intend", "anticipate", "believe", "estimate", "predict", "potential" or "continue", the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology. In evaluating these statements, you should consider various factors, including the assumptions, risks and uncertainties set forth in reports and other documents we have filed with or furnished to the SEC, including, without limitation, our Form 10-K for the period ended July 31, 2008. These factors or any of them may cause our actual results to differ materially from any forward-looking statement made in this document. While these forward-looking statements, and any assumptions upon which they are based, are made in good faith and reflect our current judgment regarding future events, our actual results will likely vary, sometimes materially, from any estimates, predictions, projections, assumptions or other future performance suggested herein. The forward-looking statements in this document are made as of the date of this document and we do not intend or undertake to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform these statements to actual results, except as required by applicable law, including the securities laws of the United States.

As used in this Quarterly Report: (i) the terms "we", "us", "our", "Uranium Energy" and the "Company" mean Uranium Energy Corp. and its wholly owned subsidiary, UEC Resources Ltd., unless the context otherwise requires; (ii) "SEC" refers to the Securities and Exchange Commission; (iii) "Securities Act" refers to the Securities Act of 1933, as amended; (iv) "Exchange Act" refers to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (v) all dollar amounts refer to United States dollars unless otherwise indicated.

The following discussion of our plan of operations, results of operations and financial condition as at and for the nine months ended April 30, 2009 should be read in conjunction with our unaudited interim consolidated financial statements and related notes for the nine months ended April 30, 2009 included in this Quarterly Report, as well as our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2008.

Our company 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.". On December 31, 2007, UEC Resources Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Uranium Energy Corp. was incorporated under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, Canada.

On January 24, 2004, we completed a reverse stock split of our shares of common stock on the basis of one share for each two outstanding shares. Effective February 28, 2006, we completed a forward split of our shares of common stock on the basis of 1.5 shares for each outstanding share to increase liquidity for our shares of common stock. Effective February 28, 2006, we amended our Articles of Incorporation with the Nevada Secretary of State increasing our authorized capital stock from 75,000,000 shares of common stock, with a $0.001 par value, to 750,000,000 shares of common stock with a similar par value.

In June 2007, we determined to change our fiscal year end from December 31 to July 31. Accordingly, on October 29, 2007, we filed a Transition Report on Form 10-KSB for the period year ended July 31, 2007, as subsequently amended, with the SEC and commenced a new reporting period.

Our principal offices are located at 9801 Anderson Mill Road, Suite 230, Austin Texas, U.S.A., 78750, and our telephone number is (512) 828-6980, and our web site address is www.uraniumenergy.com.

23

We are a natural resource exploration and development company engaged in the exploration and development of properties that may contain uranium minerals in the United States. Our strategy is to acquire properties that are thought to contain economic quantities of uranium ore and have undergone some degree of uranium exploration but have not yet been mined. As of the date of this Quarterly Report, we have interests in uranium exploration mineral properties totaling 46,325 gross acres (38,796 net mineral acres) of leased, staked or optioned mineral properties, consisting of claim blocks located in the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming, which we intend to explore for economic deposits of uranium. These properties are subject to varying royalty interests, some of which are indexed to the sale price of uranium. The totals include 3,291 net acres (6,717 gross acres) leased by Cibola Resources LLC in which the Company holds a 49% interest. Many of these properties have been the subject of historical exploration by other mining companies. We believe that our properties are prospective for mineral exploration based on either prior exploration conducted by other companies, or management information and work products derived from various reports, maps, radioactive rock samples, exploratory drill logs, state organization reports, consultants, geological study, and other exploratory information.

Our principal mineral properties are the Goliad project in Goliad County, Texas and the Cibola Resources LLC, Cebolleta joint venture project in Cibola County, New Mexico.

The acreage and location of our mineral properties are summarized as follows:

(*)   Certain of our interests in our mineral properties in Texas and New Mexico are less than 100%. Accordingly, we have presented the acreage of our mineral properties on a net acre basis.

We use our database of exploration data in order to target additional exploration properties for acquisition. For the remainder of the 2009 fiscal year, we may acquire further acres of mineral properties consisting of claim blocks located in, but not limited to the states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. Our ability to complete these acquisitions will be subject to obtaining sufficient financing and being able to conclude agreements with the property owners on terms that are acceptable to us. See "Risk Factors" below. These potential acquisition properties have not yet been specifically identified.

Our properties do not have any known 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.

We are participating in our mineral properties in the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming by way of mining claims and mineral leases. Certain properties were staked and claimed by us and registered with the United States Bureau of Land Management ("BLM"). Claim blocks acquired in this manner exist in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming. 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. 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, prior to the commencement of our exploration activities. These costs are determined by the BLM and bonded accordingly.

24

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. 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. These leases are subject to varying royalty interests, some of which are indexed to the sale price of uranium at the time of production. Royalty payments must be made to the lessor in the event that we extract uranium ore from the properties. All royalties are based on the gross sales revenue less certain charges and fees.

These properties do not have any indicated or inferred minerals or reserves. We plan to conduct exploration programs on these properties with the intent to prove or disprove the existence of economic concentrations of uranium. Since inception, we have not established any proven or probable reserves on our mineral property interests.

As of the date of this Quarterly Report, current drilling is filling in gaps and defining boundaries within the historically delineated ore bodies as originally developed by Moore Energy Corporation in the 1980s based on 190,000 feet of drilling in approximately 450 holes. To date, we have completed a further 901 exploration, confirmation and delineation holes totaling 332,354 feet, 36 new core holes totaling 9,408 feet, 66 monitor wells totaling 13,636 feet and 8 fault pump testing wells totaling 1,702 feet.

We have received an updated technical report (the "Technical Report") in accordance with the provisions of National Instrument 43-101, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101"), of the Canadian Securities Administrators for our Goliad Project located in Goliad County, Texas. The complete Technical Report has been filed under our company's profile on the Canadian Securities Administrators public disclosure website, at www.sedar.com. The Technical Report is authored by Thomas A. Carothers, P.Geo., a qualified person as defined in NI 43-101, who has over 30 years of uranium experience, substantially in the South Texas Uranium trend. His experience includes working directly for two operating ISR mining companies in South Texas, US Steel and Tenneco Uranium, during the 1970s and 1980s.

As required by NI 43-101, the Technical Report contains certain disclosure relating to measured, indicated and inferred mineral resource estimates for the Company's Goliad Project. Such mineral resources have been estimated in accordance with the definition standards on mineral resources of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum referred to in NI 43-101. Measured mineral resources, indicated mineral resources and inferred mineral resources, while recognized and required by Canadian regulations, are not defined terms under the SEC's Industry Guide 7, and are normally not permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the SEC. Accordingly, we have not reported them in this report or otherwise in the United States.

Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral resources in these categories will ever be converted into mineral reserves. These terms have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. In particular, it should be noted that mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of measured mineral resources, indicated mineral resources or inferred mineral resources discussed in the news release and Technical Report will ever be upgraded to a higher category. In accordance with Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources cannot form the basis of feasibility or other economic studies. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of the reported measured mineral resources, indicated mineral resources or inferred mineral resources referred to in the Technical Report are economically or legally mineable.

25

There has been a significant amount of market uncertainty over the past eighteen months, due to a number of factors including changes in the international credit market and the global economic condition. This uncertainty may impact the Company's ability to fund working capital and other capital requirements and accordingly, the Company has implemented a generalized cost reduction program in an effort to preserve its existing working capital. Capital preservation implementations include the closure and downsizing of some regional offices, staff reductions, corporate wide salary reductions, non-core asset reductions, renegotiation of agreements and corresponding property payments and joint venture of projects. The program, which is designed to have a minimal effect on the Company's core operations, is reflected in the changes to cash expenditures from the prior year.

We are an exploration stage company and net production revenues during the three months ended April 30, 2009 and 2008 were $Nil.

Operating expenses incurred during the three months ended April 30, 2009 decreased to $3,627,044 from $6,130,718 over the same period ended April 30, 2008. The decrease is primarily due to a reduction in consulting, administration and exploration costs, in addition to a decrease in stock-based compensation expenses. Significant expenditures and changes are outlined as follows:

• Consulting fees decreased to $52,022 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $110,049 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due primarily to a reduction in the reliance on third party service providers as we reduced some of our operations.
• Consulting fees - stock based decreased to $161,852 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $185,071 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The current and prior period expense consists of the fair value of option grants earned during the period. Additionally, the current period expense includes the fair value of option grants issued to consultants that were repriced during the quarter.

26

• General and administrative costs decreased to $728,883 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $1,474,735 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to the general reduction in some of our operations and personnel, including salary reductions, in the current period as compared to the prior period.
• Impairment loss increased to $1,182,096 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $Nil during the same period ended April 30, 2008. During the quarter, we decided to terminate the Holley Option and accordingly, an impairment loss was recorded as of April 30, 2009 to reflect the change in valuation.
• Interest and finance charges decreased to $Nil during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $25,642 during the same period ended April 30, 2008, due to an expense realized on the issuance of warrants resulting from delays in an S-1 Registration Statement becoming effective that occurred in the prior period.
• Management fees decreased to $145,255 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $190,383 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due primarily to a 20% reduction in executive compensation applicable to all officers and directors during the current period.
• Management fees - stock based decreased to $Nil during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $1,752,250 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The prior period expense consists of the fair value of option grants earned during the period.
• Mineral property expenditures decreased to $951,577 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $1,803,677 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to the reduction in some of our exploration activities over the prior period.
• Professional fees decreased to $62,035 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $190,276 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The decrease results primarily from the reduction in some of our operations over the prior period.
• Wages and benefits - stock based decreased to $211,256 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $275,724 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The current and prior year expenses consist of the fair value of option grants earned during the period. The current period expense also consists of the incremental fair value of option grants issued to employees that were repriced during the quarter.

Loss on sale of assets increased to $14,370 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $Nil during the same period ended April 30, 2008, due to a charge realized on the disposal of property and equipment during the current period.

Gain on sale of investments decreased to $Nil during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $34,168 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. There were no investment related transactions during the current period.

Interest and other income decreased to $3,141 during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $25,983 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to significantly lower investment rates during the current period.

Deferred tax expense decreased to $Nil during the three months ended April 30, 2009 from $69,802 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The deferred tax benefit (expense) is calculated on the estimated unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities in the fiscal period which is reflected in other comprehensive income.

Our net loss during the three months ended April 30, 2009 was $3,638,273 or ($0.08) per share compared to a net loss of $6,140,369 or ($0.15) per share during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The weighted average number of shares outstanding was 46,453,940 for the three months ended April 30, 2009 compared to 39,780,823 for the same period ended April 30, 2008.

Of the $3,627,044 incurred as operating expenses during the three months ended April 30, 2009 an aggregate of $145,255 was incurred payable to certain officers and directors and recorded as management fees. At April 30, 2009 a balance of $21,818 is owing to some of our officers.

27

We are an exploration stage company and net production revenues during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 and 2008 were $Nil.

Operating expenses incurred during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 decreased to $10,203,657 from $14,460,579 over the same period ended April 30, 2008. The decrease is primarily due to a reduction in consulting, administration and exploration costs, in addition to a decrease in stock-based compensation expenses. Significant expenditures and changes are outlined as follows:

• Consulting fees decreased to $170,562 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $412,107 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due primarily to a reduction in the reliance on third party service providers as we reduced some of our operations.
• Consulting fees - stock based decreased to $241,567 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $503,304 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The current and prior period expense consists of the fair value of option grants earned during the period. Additionally, the current period expense includes the fair value of option grants issued to consultants that were repriced during the quarter.
• Depreciation increased to $396,482 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $273,865 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to significant investments in property, equipment and databases during the prior fiscal year that were not subject to amortization in the comparable period.
• General and administrative costs decreased to $2,480,259 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $3,980,742 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to the general reduction in some of our operations and personnel, including salary reductions, in the current period as compared to the prior period.
• Impairment loss increased to $1,223,038 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $Nil during the same period ended April 30, 2008. During the period, we opted not to renew certain mineral claims and leases in the States of Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, and decided to terminate the Holley Option. Accordingly, an impairment loss was recorded to reflect the change in valuation.

28

• Interest and finance charges decreased to $Nil during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $25,642 during the same period ended April 30, 2008, due to an expense realized on the issuance of warrants resulting from delays in an S-1 Registration Statement becoming effective that occurred in the prior period.
• Management fees decreased to $594,819 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $620,536 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to a 20% reduction in executive compensation applicable to all officers and directors during a portion of the current period.
• Management fees - stock based decreased to $170,250 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $2,019,250 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The current period expense consists of the incremental fair value of option grants issued to management that were repriced during the period. The prior period expense consists of the fair value of option grants earned during the period.
• Mineral property expenditures decreased to $3,889,878 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $5,084,304 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to the reduction in some of our exploration activities over the prior period.
• Professional fees decreased to $354,682 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $512,383 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due primarily to the reduction in some of our operations over the prior period.
• Wages and benefits - stock based decreased to $682,120 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $1,028,446 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The current and prior year expenses consist of the fair value of option grants earned during the period. Additionally, the current period expense includes the incremental fair value of option grants issued to employees that were repriced during the period.

Loss on sale of assets increased to $14,370 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $Nil during the same period ended April 30, 2008, due to a charge realized on the disposal of property and equipment during the current period.

Gain on sale of investments decreased to $Nil during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $34,168 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. There were no investment related transactions during the current period.

Interest and other income decreased to $51,631 during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $157,410 during the same period ended April 30, 2008 due to significantly lower investment rates during the current period.

Deferred tax expense decreased to $Nil during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 from $187,681 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The deferred tax benefit (expense) is calculated on the estimated unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities in the fiscal period which is reflected in other comprehensive income.

Our net loss during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 was $10,166,396 or ($0.22) per share compared to a net loss of $14,446,327 or ($0.37) per share during the same period ended April 30, 2008. The weighted average number of shares outstanding was 46,398,960 for the nine months ended April 30, 2009 compared to 38,709,387 for the same period ended April 30, 2008.

Of the $10,203,657 incurred as operating expenses during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 an aggregate of $594,819 was incurred payable to certain officers and directors and recorded as management fees, and $170,250 was recorded as stock based compensation for the incremental fair value of option grants issued to management that were repriced during the period. At April 30, 2009 a balance of $21,818 is owing to some of our officers.

29

Our consolidated 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.

At April 30, 2009 we had $5,693,840 in cash and working capital of $5,363,130. Generally, we have financed our operations through proceeds from the private placement of equity securities and debt instruments and the exercise of stock options and warrants. We used $7,443,478 net cash during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 compared to $6,428,776 net cash during the same period ended April 30, 2008. See "Plan of Operation and Funding" below.

Net cash used in operating activities during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 was $7,596,457 compared to $10,139,312 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. Significant operating expenditures during the current period included mineral property expenditures, and general and administrative costs.

Net cash provided by financing activities during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 was $46,475 compared to $6,691,503 during the same period ended April 30, 2008. During the current period, we received net proceeds of $14,500 from the exercise of stock options. In the prior period, we completed a private placement for gross proceeds of $6,750,000.

Net cash provided by investing activities during the nine months ended April 30, 2009 was $106,504 compared to net cash used of $2,980,967 in the same period ended April 30, 2008. In the current period we recovered $138,658 in restricted cash. Significant investing expenditures during the prior period included mineral property acquisitions, including a $980,000 payment related to the Cibola Resources LLC agreement.

As at April 30, 2009 we had 5,378,000 stock options and 3,873,418 share purchase warrants outstanding. The outstanding stock options have a weighted average exercise price of $0.65 per share and the outstanding warrants have a weighted average exercise price of $2.87 per share. Accordingly, as at April 30, 2009 the outstanding options and warrants represented a total of 9,251,418 shares issuable for proceeds of $14,612,410 if these options and warrants were exercised in full. The exercise of these options and warrants is at the discretion of the holders and, accordingly, there is no assurance that any of these options or warrants will be exercised.

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 and the exercise of stock options and warrants. In connection with our business plan, management anticipates to incur 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 may 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.

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.

30

We commenced operations on May 16, 2003, and have not realized any significant revenues since inception. As at April 30, 2009 we have working capital of $5,363,130 and an accumulated deficit of $50,566,284. Existing cash resources are currently expected to provide sufficient funds through the upcoming year. The continuation of the Company as a going concern for greater than 12 months 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 are ultimately dependent upon our ability to achieve profitable operations. To date we have completed private placements and exercised stock options and warrants for net proceeds of $46,457,092 from the issuance of shares of our common stock. See "Risk Factors" below.

1. an initial payment of $25,000 on the execution date (paid);
2. a payment of $100,000 on March 28, 2007 (paid);
3. a payment of $475,000 on or before April 27, 2007 (paid);
4. a further payment of $500,000 on or before April 27, 2008 ($475,000 paid); and
5. a final payment of $400,000 on or before April 27, 2009.

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 it wishes to acquire.

On April 30, 2009, we decided to terminate the Holley Option. Accordingly, $1,176,748 in mineral rights and properties were written down to impairment.

On April 27, 2007, we entered into a joint venture (the "Joint Venture") with Neutron Energy Inc., a Wyoming corporation ("NEI") in connection with exploration of property covering 6,717 acres located in Cibola County, New Mexico (the "Property") for uranium resources. In connection with the Joint Venture, Cibola Resources LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Cibola"), was formed for purposes of undertaking exploration activities contemplated by the Joint Venture.

On April 6, 2007, NEI and La Merced del Pueblo de Cebolleta, a private entity that has authority over the natural resources of the Property ("Cebolleta"), entered into a mining lease agreement (the "Mining Lease Agreement"), pursuant to which NEI acquired the mining lease to the Property from Cebolleta (the "Lease") for cash payments of $3,000,000. As of June 30, 2007, we have reimbursed NEI an aggregate of $1,470,000. As a result, we have a 49% equity interest in Cibola and NEI has a 51% equity interest in Cibola, respectively. NEI contributed the Lease to Cibola Resources LLC.

Under terms of a Letter Agreement (the "Letter Agreement") between Cebolleta and NEI, further payments to the order and direction of Cebolleta are required as follows:

1. $2,000,000 six months from the effective date of the Letter Agreement (paid $980,000, being the Company's portion);
2. $500,000 representing an advanced royalty, every 12 months from the effective date of the Letter Agreement until uranium production begins (to be deducted from any royalties paid in that same year);
3. $1.00 per pound upon an independent mining engineering firm's completion of a feasibility study, and all prior payments made to Cebolleta will be credited to the recoverable reserve payment;
4. 4.50% to 8.00% production royalty payments depending upon the uranium sale price; and
5. $30,000 per year towards a scholarship fund.

31

We are required to contribute 49% of the aforementioned payments in order to retain our interest in the Joint Venture. Through the date of this Quarterly Report, the Company has paid $2,450,000 in acquisition costs, $36,750 in database acquisition costs, and an additional $930,593 in exploration costs on behalf of Cibola for a cumulative contribution of $3,417,343.

On September 6, 2007 we entered into an agreement for media distribution services valued at approximately $270,000. Under the terms of the agreement, we paid a retainer of $100,000, with the balance of the agreement due upon completion of the services. As of April 30, 2009, services have been provided in the amount of $100,000 and no further amounts are outstanding or will become payable under this agreement.

On November 1, 2007 we entered into a binding letter Agreement to Purchase Assets with Melvin O. Stairs, Jr. ("Mr. Stairs") for a mineral exploration claim and related database information located in Maricopa County, Arizona. On August 25, 2008 we entered into an agreement amending the underlying Agreement to Purchase Assets. Under the terms of the Amending Agreement, the Company will pay total consideration of $300,000 including i) a $10,000 deposit upon execution (paid), ii) an installment of $95,000 cash on January 10, 2008 (paid), iii) an installment of $95,000 on August 25, 2008 consisting of $57,000 cash (paid) and the issuance of 19,000 fully paid and non-assessable restricted common shares (issued), and iv) a further installment totaling $100,000 on or before October 31, 2009 consisting of $50,000 cash and the $50,000 balance by way of issuance of an aggregate number of fully paid and non-assessable restricted common shares at a deemed issuance price calculated as the previous five-day trading average immediately prior to October 31, 2009. Additionally, we have granted Mr. Stairs security interest on the acquired assets until the agreement is paid in full.

On November 13, 2007, we entered into an agreement to acquire certain mineral property leases located in Cibola County, New Mexico for total consideration of $400,000. Under the terms of the agreement, we paid an initial deposit of $100,000 upon closing with the remaining balance due in three installments of $100,000 due on March 31, 2008 (paid), December 31, 2008, and December 31, 2009. At our option, the final two installments may be paid in stock, based on the average trading price of our common stock over the 10 days immediately preceding the due date. On December 12, 2008 we entered into an agreement amending the aforementioned underlying agreement to acquire mineral leases to the following: 1) $5,000 on or before December 31, 2008 (paid) and $45,000 on or before December 31, 2009. At our option, the final installment may be paid in stock, based on the average trading price of its common stock over the 10 days immediately preceding the due date.

We are committed to pay our key executives a total of approximately $468,500 per year for management services.

We are currently leasing office premises in New Mexico and Texas for monthly payments totaling $6,321. All office lease agreements have maximum remaining terms of no more than two years.

As of the date of this Quarterly 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.

32

We are primarily engaged in the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties.

Mineral property acquisition costs are initially capitalized as tangible assets when purchased. At the end of each fiscal quarter end, we assess the carrying costs for impairment. If proven and probable reserves are established for a property and it has been determined that a mineral property can be economically developed, costs will be amortized using the units-of-production method over the estimated life of the reserve.

Mineral property exploration costs are expensed as incurred.

As of the date of this Quarterly Report, we have not established any proven or probable reserves on our mineral properties and incurred only acquisition and exploration costs.

Costs related to internally developed databases are expensed as incurred. Costs of acquired mineral property databases are capitalized upon acquisition. Mineral property databases are tested for impairment whenever events or changes indicate the carrying value amount may not be recoverable. An impairment loss is recognized if it is determined that the carrying amount is not recoverable and exceeds fair value. Mineral property databases are amortized over five years using the straight-line method.

Various federal and state mining laws and regulations require us to reclaim the surface areas and restore underground water quality for our mine projects to the pre-existing mine area average quality after the completion of mining.

Future reclamation and remediation costs, which include production equipment removal and environmental remediation, 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 engineering studies calculating the cost of future surface and groundwater activities, current regulations, actual expenses incurred, and technology and industry standards.

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143 "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations," we will capitalize the measured fair value of asset retirement obligations to mineral rights and properties. The asset retirement obligations would be accreted to an undiscounted value until the time at which it they are expected to be settled. Actual retirement costs will be recorded against the asset retirement obligations when incurred. Any difference between the recorded asset retirement obligations and the actual retirement costs incurred will be recorded as a gain or loss in the period of settlement.

Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Circumstances which could trigger a review include, but are not limited to: significant decreases in the market price of the asset; significant adverse changes in the business climate or legal factors; accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected for the acquisition or construction of the asset; current period cash flow or operating losses combined with a history of losses or a forecast of continuing losses associated with the use of the asset; and current expectation that the asset will more likely than not be sold or disposed significantly before the end of its estimated useful life. Recoverability of these assets is measured by comparison of its carrying amount to future undiscounted cash flows the assets are expected to generate. An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying amount is not recoverable and exceeds fair value.

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.

33

Our functional currency, including our subsidiary, is United States dollars. UEC Resources Ltd. maintains its accounting records in their local currency (Canadian dollar). In accordance with SFAS No. 52, "Foreign Currency Translation", the financial statements of our subsidiary is translated into United States dollars using period end exchange rates as to monetary assets and liabilities and average exchange rates as to revenues and expenses. Non-monetary assets are translated at their historical exchange rates. Net gains and losses resulting from foreign exchange translations and foreign currency exchange gains and losses on transactions occurring in a currency other than our functional currency are included in the determination of net income in the period.

On January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004) (SFAS No. 123R), Share-Based Payment, which addresses the accounting for stock-based payment transactions, requiring such transactions to be accounted for using the fair value method. We use the Black-Scholes-Merton ("BSM") option-pricing model to determine the grant date fair-value of stock-based awards under SFAS No. 123R. The fair value is recorded in income depending on the terms and conditions of the award, and the nature of the relationship of the recipient of the award to us. We record the grant date fair value in income in line with the period over which it was earned. For employees and management this is typically considered to be the vesting period of the award. For consultants the fair value of the award is recorded in income over the term of the service period, and unvested amounts are revalued at each reporting period over the service period. We estimate the expected forfeitures and update the valuation accordingly.

Effective August 1, 2008, we adopted SFAS No. 157 "Fair Value Measurements". In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157-2, "Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, which provides a one year deferral of the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except those that are recognized or disclosed in the financial statements at fair value at least annually. In October 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. SFAS 157-3, "Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When the Market for That Asset Is Not Active," which clarifies the application of SFAS 157 for markets that are not active and illustrates key considerations in determining the fair value of a financial asset when the market for that financial asset is not active. We adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157 on a prospective basis for financial assets and liabilities which require that we determine the fair value of financial assets and liabilities using the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No. 157. The adoption of SFAS No. 157 did not have a material impact on our results of operations and financial condition for the period ended April 30, 2009 however, this change may have an impact on the financial condition and the results of operations in future periods.

We are currently not subject to any material market risks.

Our management, with the participation of our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, including our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based on such evaluation, our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer have concluded that, as of the end of the period covered by this report, our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective in recording, processing, summarizing and reporting, on a timely basis, information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act.

It should be noted that any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions designed to obtain reasonable (and not absolute) assurance as to its effectiveness, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals.

On October 22, 2008 we filed a Form 10-K for the period ended July 31, 2008. In the Form 10-K, management concluded that: (1) inadequate entity level controls due to: (i) weak tone at the top to implement an effective control environment, and (ii) failure in the operation of our whistle blower policy; (2) inadequate segregation of duties consistent with control objectives; (3) insufficient written policies and procedures for accounting and financial reporting with respect to the requirements and application of US GAAP and SEC disclosure requirements; and (4) ineffective controls over period end financial disclosure and reporting processes represented material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as at July 31, 2008. Accordingly, our management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting were not effective as at July 31, 2008.

We are committed to improving our financial organization. As part of this commitment, in August 2008 we hired additional staff and engaged consultants who assisted in the preparation, implementation and monitoring of sufficient written policies and checklists from August 2008 to present, including the redesign of staffing responsibilities, and set forth procedures for accounting and financial reporting with respect to the requirements and application of US GAAP and SEC disclosure requirements. Management believes that the preparation and implementation of sufficient written policies and checklists, including a redesign of staffing responsibilities, and the monitoring of those procedures from September 2008 to present have remedied the weaknesses of inadequate segregation of duties consistent with control objectives, insufficient written policies and procedures for accounting and financial reporting with respect to the requirements and application of US GAAP and SEC disclosure requirements, and ineffective controls over period end financial disclosure and reporting processes.

As described in the immediately preceding paragraph, management believes that it has remediated the deficiencies in our disclosure controls and procedures related to: (1) inadequate segregation of duties consistent with control objectives; (2) insufficient written policies and procedures for accounting and financial reporting with respect to the requirements and application of US GAAP and SEC disclosure requirements; and (3) ineffective controls over period end financial disclosure and reporting processes. In addition, management is in the process of remediating the deficiencies in our disclosure controls and procedures related to inadequate entity level controls. Specifically, in May 2009, the Company appointed a new independent director who also serves on the Company's Audit Committee. The Company has also revised its whistle blower policy to make an independent director the contact person. Management is in the process of monitoring and testing these changes.

There have been no other changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the three months ended April 30, 2009 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

36

We have been informed that counsel for Goliad County, Texas and an individual landowner has issued a notice of intent to file litigation citing us for alleged infractions of the United States Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, in connection with our exploration activities in Goliad County. We believe this proposed claim regarding our exploration activities is without merit and will be vigorously defended by us. The responsible state agency with sole jurisdiction over our exploration activities has already thoroughly investigated the County's complaint and has found us to be in compliance with all applicable regulatory and environmental requirements. Specifically, as the agency noted in an April 2007 letter to the County's attorney, the State agency hydrologist "concluded from the available information that no ground-water contamination has occurred as a result of the drilling activities." The state agency concluded its letter by noting that "to date, the Commission's investigation of your complaint has not revealed any practice or activity within the approved permit area that has adversely affected the wells identified in your complaint or the related aquifer, or is out of compliance with the Texas Uranium Mining Regulations...." Later in a September 2007 letter to the Goliad groundwater district, the agency reiterated its findings: the agency's "investigation of your complaint has not revealed any practice or activity at UEC's Uranium Exploration Permit No. 123 that is out of compliance.... We consider this investigation to be closed." Our Goliad Project has been inspected on a monthly basis since the close of the investigation, and no violations have been noted. In fact, an inspection report from November of 2007 observed that "prompt attention" to site restoration during exploration was apparent and "the area inspected looked very good." We are dedicated to full compliance with all aspects of the state regulatory process and will continue to focus our attention and efforts on obtaining all necessary authorizations for our Goliad Project. On May 1, 2009, individual landowners, Craig and Luann Duderstadt voluntarily and unconditionally dismissed all their allegations, claims and causes of actions against the Company. The dismissal was "with prejudice", which means that the Duderstadts may not re-file the claims at a later date. No money or other consideration was paid to the Duderstadts for this dismissal. On June 5, 2009, the United States District Court issued an order dismissing the lawsuit filed by Goliad County commissioners against the Company. The lawsuit alleged infractions of the Safe Drinking Water Act ("SDWA") nearby to areas where the Company has conducted exploration activities. In his June 5, 2009 order dismissing the case, the Judge stated that the County's case failed to pass the threshold jurisdictional requirements, even when considered in the light most favorable to the County. As the Judge noted, the Texas Railroad Commission stated in an April 2007 letter to the County's attorney that an agency hydrologist "...concluded from the available information that no ground-water contamination has occurred as a result of the drilling activities." The Judge concluded that "...the touchstone of Goliad County's SDWA claim is its allegation that UEC 'converted' the exploratory boreholes into 'injection wells' and/or an 'injection activity,'...the Court has concluded that no such conversion or injection activity took place..."

We were informed that we had been named as a defendant in a claim filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York for $33,000 in legal fees in connection with our prior and amicable settlement of a short-swing profit matter under Section 16(b) of the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, by a non-management shareholder of the Company. The plaintiff acted as counsel for the shareholder. We believe that the legal fees sought were highly unreasonable for the work performed by the plaintiff. As of the date of this Quarterly Report the Company has settled this claim for legal fees in the amount of $13,000 and considers the matter concluded.

As of the date of this Quarterly 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 proceeding. Management is not aware of any other legal proceedings pending or that have been threatened against us or our properties.

Except for the risk factor outlined below, there have been no material changes from the risk factors as previously disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2008 which was filed with the SEC on October 22, 2008.

37

In 2007 and into 2008, the U.S. credit markets began to experience serious disruptions due to a deterioration in residential property values, defaults and delinquencies in the residential mortgage market (particularly, subprime and non-prime mortgages) and a decline in the credit quality of mortgage backed securities. These problems led to a slow-down in residential housing market transactions, declining housing prices, delinquencies in non-mortgage consumer credit and a general decline in consumer confidence. These conditions continued and worsened in 2008, causing a loss of confidence in the broader U.S. and global credit and financial markets and resulting in the collapse of, and government intervention in, major banks, financial institutions and insurers and creating a climate of greater volatility, less liquidity, widening of credit spreads, a lack of price transparency, increased credit losses and tighter credit conditions. Notwithstanding various actions by the U.S. and foreign governments, concerns about the general condition of the capital markets, financial instruments, banks, investment banks, insurers and other financial institutions caused the broader credit markets to further deteriorate and stock markets to decline substantially. In addition, general economic indicators have deteriorated, including declining consumer sentiment, increased unemployment and declining economic growth and uncertainty about corporate earnings.

These unprecedented disruptions in the current credit and financial markets have had a significant material adverse impact on a number of financial institutions and have limited access to capital and credit for many companies. These disruptions have, among other things, made it more difficult for us to obtain, and have increased our cost of obtaining, capital and financing for our operations. Our access to additional capital may not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all.

On February 1, 2007 we entered into a one year consulting services agreement, which was renewed for a second term effective February 1, 2008. In accordance with the terms and provisions of the agreement, on August 13, 2008 we issued 7,500 shares of our restricted common stock, and on October 23, 2008 we issued an additional 7,500 shares of our restricted common stock, pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D to accredited investors.

Effective October 25, 2008 we entered into a consulting services agreement. In accordance with the terms of the agreement on February 13, 2009 we issued 13,039 shares of our restricted common stock, and on April 7, 2009 we issued 13,039 shares of our restricted common stock pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Effective January 29, 2009 we entered into a consulting services agreement. In accordance with the terms of the agreement on March 17, 2009 we issued 6,000 shares of our restricted common stock pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Effective January 29, 2009 we entered into a consulting services agreement. In accordance with the terms of the agreement on March 17, 2009 we issued 29,000 shares of our restricted common stock, on April 21, 2009 we issued 29,000 shares of our restricted common stock, and on May 13, 2009 we issued 29,000 shares of our restricted common stock pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Effective February 9, 2009 we entered into a consulting services agreement. In accordance with the terms of the agreement on March 27, 2009 we issued 20,000 shares of our restricted common stock, on April 27, 2009 we issued 10,000 shares of our restricted common stock, and on May 27, 2009 we issued 10,000 shares of our restricted common stock pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Effective April 21, 2009 we entered into a consulting services agreement. In accordance with the terms of the agreement on May 29, 2009 we issued 23,077 shares of our restricted common stock pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Effective November 1, 2007 we entered into a binding letter Agreement to Purchase Assets, and on August 25, 2008 we entered into an agreement amending the underlying Agreement to Purchase Assets. In accordance with the terms of the amending agreement on October 23, 2008 we issued 19,000 shares of our restricted common stock pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Effective October 13, 2008 we entered into a utility easement agreement. In accordance with the terms of the agreement on December 5, 2008 we issued 25,000 shares of our restricted common shares pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

38

None.

None.

None.

The following exhibits are included with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1):

39

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

40