Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Curis Resources Ltd PCCRF



GREY:PCCRF - Post by User

Comment by erinGon Jan 03, 2012 5:15pm
177 Views
Post# 19366927

RE: RE: ERIn G

RE: RE: ERIn G

elgin,  Yes - If there was a monetary benefit then the risk would be worth it.  Any reasonable town would do this with todays economic condtions.  Arizona being a desert, precipitation is almost nil in the region of the mine making water a non renewable resource.  Because towns/cities in Arizona are required by law to ensure adequate water supply for possible future growth, it makes for a logical argument.  The Town does know that the operation could be safe (granted all enviromental permits are approved).

Again the Town does not stand to gain monetarily.  The operation has not been proven to be 100% safe concerning the ground water.  Considering these two facts it's a smart move for the Town to protect it's future water supply.

The report (prepared by Montgomery & Associates) you mention did not in fact say that the ICR operation would be safe.  The report is very specific and requires that the town take measures to ensure protection of potable groundwater supply.  What seems to have been taken out of context by Curis is the statement that the operation could be consitent with the goals of the Towns General Plan.

As for that monkey wrench you mention - there really is'nt one.  I find it quite ludicris that Curis's original plan called for building homes on the site after mining was completed.  Again it points to the lack of vision by the decision makers.  The archaeological resources mentioned in the letter prepared by the State Land Department are on State Trust Land and on Curis property.  Why would anyone believe you could possibly build homes on top of a former ICR mine and propertyl scattered with archaeological rescources ?  Because the former owners were experts at building homes and not mines it was the smartest thing to do with the property - sell it.

I have actually visted the area and can tell you that this area will continue to grow at a better pace than most areas of the state.  I admit growth in the area it is slow but it is still growing.  This is amazing when you consider the fact that new homes are still being built vs surronding areas where builders have gone belly up and left behind a wreck of unfinished master planned communities.  Not only are homes being built, they just built a new hospital within the Town and is slated to open very soon.  A 275 sq mi area just to the norht of the town has been approved for planned development. Studies are being done for a (long term) possible new major roadway corridor through the Town.  This area is going to boom with growth in the future.  This does'nt mean that an ICR operation is bad for the town, just that they have to weigh the pros/cons and go with whats best.

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>