Chatham Rock Phosphate - CRP

[percy]

Old age and cunning aye ???

Always wins out..

More like I have gone through the investment cycle;
young punter,
silly punter.
dilly punter.
very poor punter,
careful punter,
Percy a lot wiser punter.Still learning,but learnt a lot from my mistakes.
W69.I may have time to check out the Regina factory store tomorrow.Last time I checked them out they only made soft chewy lollies.

[Joshuatree]

[QUOTE=croesus;558436]another cheap shot, from the do nothing brigade.... ( do you not wonder why you got modded last time ? )

less then 1 % of the Chatham Rise, what about the low run off, low carbon footprint, low cadmium, jobs for NZ ers, ...

If i have contributed to anyone saving moneys that would be a feelgood buzz. BFG put up a brilliant piece re Management and their track records and alignments with shareholders (or not) on the VML thread. Suggest that applies here too in similar way; check track records payments etc out.Its a very good read; thanks BFG

[MAC]

I see Odyssey (OMEX) are down 26% over the last few days, given their loss of 7% in CRP and possible governmental contagion risk to their Oceanica (Don Diego) marine phosphate application.

They are pretty damn quick now to distance themselves given they were a founding shareholder in CRP !

----------------------------------------------------------

Odyssey Update: Chatham Rock Phosphate News

Late yesterday afternoon, Odyssey learned that the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) rejected the Chatham Rock Phosphate (CRP) application seeking permission to mine phosphate from the Chatham Rise off New Zealand. The CRP deposit and the Don Diego deposit in Mexico have entirely different characteristics including the grade and geology of the respective deposits, as well as differences in the environmental and ecological settings of the prospective mining areas and the potential environmental impacts of the two projects are dramatically different.

Odyssey remains extremely confident in the extensive ground-breaking scientific analysis, fieldwork and conclusions contained in the Don Diego environmental impact statement, but as Mark Gordon stated in the November conference call, "The potential size, quality, and strategic significance of this resource . . . has drawn the interest of strategic investors who understand the phosphate industry and the significance of this deposit to the Mexican economy." The statement from the November call remains relevant and Odyssey expects to provide an update shortly.

The environmental impact statement analysis (EIA) in Mexico is progressing and Odyssey expects that documentation addressing the current iteration of the review process overseen by the Mexican government's SEMARNAT[Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources]to be filed in line with government requirements. The Don Diego scientific team has taken exceptional care to address the questions raised by SEMARNAT and the environmental community, and we believe that the EIA is the most comprehensive and detailed study of its kind every completed for an ocean mineral project.

As stated, differences between the proposed Chatham Rock Phosphate and Don Diego projects exist. Key differences include:

Water Depth: The Don Diego deposit exists at an approximate water depth of 80 meters while the CRP deposit lies up to 250- 450 meters water depth. The decision to refuse the application cited that this project would be the first seabed mining project undertaken at these depths anywhere in the world. The use of the proposed dredging technology in waters up to 450 meters depth is untried; therefore management techniques proposed to minimize environmental impacts for the Chatham project are untested.

In contrast, the depth of the Don Diego deposit means the phosphate can be extracted with existing, proven dredging technology. Its impacts have been widely studied and carried out for many years in coastal waters, including Mexico.

Concentration of Deposit and Footprint of Operational Impact: The CRP deposit averages less than 1 meter thickness. The Don Diego deposit averages ~3 meters thickness with many areas shown to be of greater thickness. As such, a fraction of seabed surface area needs to be disturbed to recover the phosphate in the Don Diego as compared to the CRP proposal. (The CRP application proposed to mine 30 km2 per year anticipating that the initial 15 years an area of 450 km2 would be mined. Over 35 years a total mined area of 1050km2 was envisioned. The Don Diego application calls for dredging in an area smaller than 2 km2 per year.

Benthic Population: The CRP deposit is an area considered an important nursery for the fishing industry. In denying CRP's application, the EPA stated that mining would be largely occurring in an area where the seabed is currently protected from trawling and dredging by the Mid Chatham Rise Benthic Protection area. The CRP proposal included areas of seabed that had been specifically set aside as conservation areas to protect the benthic communities from extensive damage that had occurred elsewhere in the area from the use of heavy bottom gear from trawling. The EPA also stated the project would destroy "rare and vulnerable ecosystems" including communities dominated by the protected stony corals (a species potentially unique to the Chatham Rise) while also causing "permanent and adverse effects" to the nearby marine ecosystem.

In contrast, extensive surveys and environmental tests of the Don Diego area show remarkably low biodiversity in the proposed dredging zone and are not known to be a nursery ground for commercial fish species. In addition, the ecosystem components are not unique in the region of the project as the seabed deposits at the Don Diego site do not support any species which are not represented in greater abundance in the surrounding areas of the Bay of Ulloa.

The comparatively small seabed surface area to be dredged each year combined with the rapid re-colonization and recovery of biologic communities in benthic settings similar to the Don Diego site indicate minimal or no permanent impacts will result from the project. Extensive sound propagation modeling and sediment dispersion models, demonstrate little or no anticipated impact and toxicology testing conducted with Don Diego geologic samples demonstrated no impact to the biological community of the proposed Don Diego project site as a result of project activities.

Economic Impact and Government: The New Zealand EPA concluded that the economic benefit to the nation from the proposed project would be "modest at best". The economic and strategic benefit to Mexico from the Don Diego project is significant, potentially allowing Mexico to halt foreign phosphate dependence while transforming into a phosphate-exporting nation. The resource tonnage of CRP of ~25 million ore tonnes represents a small fraction (<10%) of the total ore tonnage from Don Diego

It is interesting to note that the report issued by the New Zealand EPA stated that "given their highly mobile behavior, it was unlikely they would sustain any significant direct, physiological impacts even with frequent encounters" in reference to noise effects on ten internationally or nationally threatened marine mammals sighted in the proposed area. It was also reported that "suspended sediment plumes of concentrations predicted are unlikely to cause impacts on whales and that in any case, plumes could be easily avoided" and "it was unlikely collisions or harmful interaction with a cetacean would occur."

For more information, please visit the Don Diego project website at:
http://www.dondiego.mx

[Crystal Ball]

[QUOTE=Joshuatree;558441]

another cheap shot, from the do nothing brigade.... ( do you not wonder why you got modded last time ? )

less then 1 % of the Chatham Rise, what about the low run off, low carbon footprint, low cadmium, jobs for NZ ers, ...

If i have contributed to anyone saving moneys that would be a feelgood buzz. BFG put up a brilliant piece re Management and their track records and alignments with shareholders (or not) on the VML thread. Suggest that applies here too in similar way; check track records payments etc out.Its a very good read; thanks BFG

Well I for one, am learning a lot from trawling through the various threads , even on companies that I am not going to invest in. Learning lots thanks to all! Again it all comes down to individual thresholds of risk and there is no right or wrong, as always , one has to always DYOR ...

[Balance]

another cheap shot, from the do nothing brigade.... ( do you not wonder why you got modded last time ? )

less then 1 % of the Chatham Rise, what about the low run off, low carbon footprint, low cadmium, jobs for NZ ers,

Very disappointing... and the trawlers have almost free reign all over our seabed, ?

Like Chris said, this country is closed for over seas investment

Yes, and Chris would also say that he has made billions of dollars of gains for his legion of investors.

[youngatheart]

Chris certainly isn`t giving up...http://www.odt.co.nz/news/business/3...-phosphate-bid

''We're not going to die and go away. We'll cut our cloth to suit,'' Mr Castle said.

[Kees]

Chris certainly isn`t giving up...http://www.odt.co.nz/news/business/3...-phosphate-bid

''We're not going to die and go away. We'll cut our cloth to suit,'' Mr Castle said.

He certainly is a trier ;

[Balance]

He certainly is a trier ;

Consultancy fees, directors' fees, management fees totaling $727,000 in 2013.

Office and travel expenses a further $283,000.

Consultancy fees to Chris Castle via AOR $669,000 in 2012 and 2013.

He tries very hard indeed!

[Kees]

Consultancy fees, directors' fees, management fees totaling $727,000 in 2013.

Office and travel expenses a further $283,000.

Consultancy fees to Chris Castle via AOR $669,000 in 2012 and 2013.

He tries very hard indeed!

Makes you wonder why people would invest with him, good job if you can get it by the look of it. ( no offence to backers)

[whatsup]

Consultancy fees, directors' fees, management fees totaling $727,000 in 2013.

Office and travel expenses a further $283,000.

Consultancy fees to Chris Castle via AOR $669,000 in 2012 and 2013.

He tries very hard indeed!

I guess that he will be very keep to "invest" more $ into this dead duck via a 10 for 1 nonrenounceable rights issue at .01