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

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd T.NDM

Alternate Symbol(s):  NAK

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. is a Canada-based mineral exploration and development company based in Vancouver. The Company’s principal business activity is the exploration of mineral properties. The Company’s principal asset, owned through its wholly owned subsidiary, Pebble Limited Partnership, is a 100% interest in a contiguous block of about 1,840 mineral claims in Southwest Alaska, including the Pebble deposit, located about 200 miles from Anchorage and 125 miles from Bristol Bay. The Pebble Partnership is the proponent of the Pebble Project. The deposit lies entirely within the Lake and Peninsula Borough, approximately 23,782 square miles of land. The deposit is a Copper-Gold-Molybdenum-Silver-Rhenium project. Its subsidiaries include 3537137 Canada Inc., Northern Dynasty Partnership, U5 Resources Inc., Pebble West Claims Corporation, and others.


TSX:NDM - Post by User

Comment by zentrarianNZon May 02, 2017 5:16pm
237 Views
Post# 26194862

RE:Pebble could shape arctic mineral development.

RE:Pebble could shape arctic mineral development. Good artcile for anyone who doesn't know the regulatory backstory, but besides being dated, it's clearly biased. (Not surprising, considering the source.)

It virtually ignores the two main points of contention: Did the EPA illegally or unethically intervene in the regulatory process by colluson with opponents of the mine?...And, more important in the grand scheme of things, should the Federal Government have the authority to preemptively veto a project on State-approved land without the developer having the opportunity to submit a proposal that potentially mitigates the negative impacts?

This is in large part an issue of State's Rights. If the EPA is going to have this preemptive power, it should draw up a comprehensive map of no-go zones and instruct the States not to allow development there, and do it before companies come in and spend hundreds of millions of dollars advancing projects that are - unbeknownst to them - doomed from the start.

As others here have pointed out, if the EPA ban is upheld, it will cast a chill (pun intended) over development in the State of Alaska for decades, assuming it hasn't already. That's why even some opponents of the project are concerned about the precedent set by the effort to stop it.
Bullboard Posts