RE:RE:fyi Crooks, your last post confuses me. Surely you know the difference between mineral claims/licences/tenures and surface rights (whether owned privately or by the crown). In that context, who do you think owns the "ground" you are referring to? I'm not quite sure you, yourself, "get it now".
Further you've made comments about eviction etc. From the Tahltan spring 2021 newsletter itself:
"....Sheslay is known as the Hat Property and is made up of 10 mineral tenures on 6,308 hectares. The Province granted the company permits to drill at 45 sites, valid until 2025.
Gavin Smith, a lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law, told The Narwhal that B.C.’s Mineral Tenure Act does not consider Indigenous Rights and Title and allows any individual or company to purchase a tenure without consultation or consent."
Hopefully you are following along, and now understand that the resolution to the issue at hand isn't as simple as you make it out to be - "Evicted".
Disclosure : I am a shareholder. I don't work for the company, nor have I ever met anyone at DBG or the Tahltan FN.
I hope that the issue of consultation with the Tahltan can be resolved for the benefit of all stakeholders, including shareholders and the First Nation itself. 6,308 hectares (63 square miles) is a large acreage position. Surely, sacred burial grounds etc can be identified and properly avoided as is typical in these situations throughout the world, without either side flexing its muscles too much.