Hello goldhunter11,

The two routes described within ORDER NO.W-TB-106/13, the application petitioned by Noront, are very slight variations of the same east west transportation route.

On the other hand, ORDER NO. W-TB-172/11 or the north south all-seasonal road, the application made by Cliffs, remains in force but has been rendered mute by the OMLC's easement decision upholding KWG Resources prior rights to surface rights, unless the Divisional Court of Appeals weighs into the mining tribunal's ruling, which is highly doubtful.

Section 35 of the Mining Act deals with withdrawal of Crown lands. The Ontario-Cliff "good faith" conundrum would be found in 35(2)(a) in relation to subsections 35(3) and 30(b), direct public benefit on The Claims and the Commissioner's question, "Where is the Crown?"

If an application is received for public lands which is not on a staked mining claim, it is unnecessary to withdraw the lands from staking as the application for public lands disposition take priority over the subsequent recording of a mining claim in respect of priority to the mining rights, if applicable (authority - clause 30(b), The Mining Act).

The MNR has learnt lessons from previous unrelated cases where the OMLC has assessed it fines and/or costs for not issuing timely withdrawal orders for legitimate applications. The Mining Recorder should also be advised of any pending dispositions as soon as possible.

A loving heart is the beginning of all knowledge.
Yet, a little learning is a dangerous thing;
drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
and drinking largely sobers us again.

Regards,
LB