Post by
Robizounskin on Jul 19, 2023 7:34pm
The two aren't compatible, tunnelling and mining
The two aren't compatible, tunnelling and mining, priority should be given to mining on a mineral claims tenure.
Like I said before Seabridge might have a right of way on Treaty creek but they cannot go trough an ore deposit or interfere in it’s exploration program as this will impact Tudor asset. It’s easier to relocated a road on the surface after fact then to reroute a tunnel after it is built. Now that Tudor as defined a growing deposit going north and north-east, Seabridge as to reroute the tunnel path not to disturb the ongoing exploration of Tudor. Usually, a right of way is for the surface usage of a crown land like for a road, tunnel is a different matter especially on a mineral claims tenure, doing this will void the possibilities of exploration for and exploitation of a potential mine, which is the primary goal of having a mineral claims tenure on a crow land.