KentWilkens wrote: Excellent article Spitfire.
Even if the EA expires, nothing would prevent them from reapplying for one in the future.
This is for certain, TKO will not get approval for NP without an agreement with the first nation.
and this is also certain, that TKO will not give up their mineral rights on the property. They spent 100 million on it and will not just walk away.
Mothball it until the FN needs the jobs.
but mothballing is not an option due to existing mining law, work needs to be done to keep the licences, and that is the crux of the problem with NP and the FN.
The FN has designated the area, after the fact, as park. They are allowed to do so, but once the area has been worked on and licensed, not so much.
If TKO walks, then the FN designates it as park land, and nobody else can come in and stake it.
Because of the way this has transpired, TKO likely argues that it constitutes expropriation, and thus would require appropriate compensation (NPV being the upper limit). For mining leases to work, companies must spend, and to spend there must be a reasonable assurance that if they find something, they can develop it. (assuming EA approvals etc).
TKO argues that the Provincial EA is legit, which it is, and the federal rejection was not based on EA issues, but political.
This is the legal requirements of the land claim
"Government expropriation of licences
Are there provisions in law dealing with government expropriation of licences? What are the compensation provisions?
There are general statutes dealing with expropriation in Canada, which provide for compensation. Mining tenure cannot be expropriated or cancelled unilaterally by governments. Instances of expropriation might include land needed for transportation corridors (road and rail), transmission lines and parkland.
Protected areas Are any areas designated as protected areas within your jurisdiction and which are off-limits or specially regulated?
Responsibility for environmental protection, including setting aside areas as parks and other forms of protection from development, is shared by the federal and provincial or territorial governments. Local governments can also protect certain areas from development by creating parks or specifically protected areas, or by limiting development through the enactment of by-laws and official community plans. Development is restricted according to the level of protection assigned to a protected area.
As of 2016, 10.5 per cent (approximately 1.05 million km2) of Canada’s terrestrial area and 0.96 per cent of Canada’s marine territory is protected. Larger protected areas are typically located in Northern Canada. In the past 20 years, the total area protected has increased by almost 70 per cent, and in the past five years it has increased by almost 8 per cent. Protected areas are lands and waters where development and use is restricted by legal or other means for the conservation of nature. Protection does not always isolate areas from use and development, including limited amounts of industrial activity and harvest of biological resources (Environment and Climate Change Canada)."
The FN did this AFTER TKO had spent 100m on the property, in good faith that a mine could be developed.
So, do not expect TKO to walk away from that expenditure, or proper compensation for that expenditure.
And do not expect the FN to approve of an open pit copper mine in their neighborhood (unless they are properly compensated, generously).
I am looking forward to seeing how this all plays out.
KW
Mining law and leases link