Interestingly, the company did not appeal the TSX’s decision, and is now trading on what is known as the Pink Sheets (Over the Counter Bulletin Board). This is the least prestigious place for companies to trade their shares, since it is a completely unregulated marketplace (much, much less so than even the barely regulated TSX). Most companies here either are pirate companies, or are very close to bankruptcy (and/or were unable to comply with regulations in other stock exchanges). In other words, unsavory, high-risk enterprises.

In real terms, what this means that it’s all over for Copper Mesa. They will not be able to raise capital, and will likely soon file for bankruptcy. For us it means they will not be able to keep funding the social havoc in our communities, nor violate our rights anymore. On a more general note, it sends a powerful message to other communities fighting mining projects that a delisting like this is indeed possible.

In spite of such fantastic outcome, we are concerned by the presence of a pseudo agricultural company using a couple of the company’s properties within the mining concession. The company, Schwarz and Drouet, offers services to the oil industry, and has hired a few of Copper Mesa’s old employees, plus has been given away some small gifts to the locals. Their presence is probably meant to keep a low-profile presence in case the mining project is reactivated. In such scenario, they’ll be able to sell their land to the new company. The use of the land by this company also makes it harder for the communities to invade it, or the local government expropriate it.

Thank you again for the role you played in helping us achieve this amazing, and transcendental victory.

Carlos Zorrilla
DECOIN

FIN DE COPPER MESA (Ascendant Copper)
El día viernes 19 de febrero fue el último día que la empresa minera Copper Mesa Mining Corporation cotizó sus acciones en la Bolsa de Valores de Toronto. La bolsa tomó la decisión el 19 de enero del año en curso de prohibir la cotización de las acciones de la empresa canadiense, supuestamente por incumplimir con requisitos de la bolsa. Una de las consecuencias de este singular triunfo es que se la hará imposible para la empresa captar más dinero en dicha bolsa. En la actualidad, las acciones están siendo negociadas en lo que se denomina los “Pink Sheets” (o: over the counter), un tipo de mercado donde cualquier empresa puede negociar sus acciones sin el más mínimo control de parte de entidades gubernamentales. Estos espacios son la última opción para empresas que están en vía de bancarrota, o que fueron expulsadas de otras bolsas de valores. Por ende, ningún inversionista serio va a invertir en una de estas empresas. Es más que probable que en pocos días se declare en bancarrota. En la práctica, este hecho marca el final de Copper Mesa Mining Corporation.

Para las comunidades de Intag, lo que esta decisión significa es que sin dinero Copper Mesa no podrá seguir violentando nuestros derechos, ni financiando el caos social en nuestra zona, tal como lo ha venido haciendo desde mayo del 2004 cuando conocimos la existencia de la empresa en Intag. Ésto a pesar que la empresa sub-contrató a una empresa supuestamente agrícola (Schwarz y Drouet) para no perder su presencia en la zona (contrata a ex-funcionarios de la empresa minera). Dicha empresa está calificada para brindar servicios a la industria petrolera.

Hasta lo que sabemos, la decisión de la Bolsa de Valores de Toronto es única en la historia de luchas comunitarias en contra de empresas transnacionales mineras.

Trascendencia.
Sesenta por ciento de las empresas mineras del mundo están inscritas y cotizan sus acciones en las bolsas de valores canadienses, siendo la Bolsa de Valores de Toronto la que más aglutina (1410 empresas mineras). Una de las razones por esta anomalía es la casi total falta de regulación por parte del gobierno, juntamente con la facilidad para inscribir empresas en las bolsas canadienses. La industria minera es excepcionalmente poderosa en Canadá, y pocas veces la Bolsa se ha atrevido a tomar una medida como esta..

Aunque sabemos que la decisión se basó en una o más violaciones de los reglamentos de la bolsa, pesamos que las verdaderas razones son otras (las empresas mineras canadienses constantemente violan dichos reglamentos). Una fue la presión creada por el juicio planteado en Canadá por tres compañero/as inteños en contra de la empresa y la bolsa de Toronto, que creo que fue clave. Las constantes denuncias realizadas por la DECOIN a la Comisión de Valores de Columbia Británica desde 2005, las cuales señalaban manipulaciones fradulenta de la información por parte de la empresa sobre sus proyectos mineros en Intag seguramente fueron claves. Pensamos también que los artículos últimamente publicados en diarios canadienses (en primera plana) sobre el juicio y el asalto de los paramilitares jugaron un papel importante. Y, por último, los documentales sobre la lucha en favor de la vida en Intag que se han presentado en Canadá y varios otros países del mundo, seguramente también ayudaron.

Ahora esperemos que este gobierno de turno no se le ocurra meterse donde dos empresas transnacionales han fracasado.

Pinetree and Copper Mesa Mining Corporation’s Latest Bullish Report

If the quote: -You can never underestimate the intelligence of the American Public- is true, then it is even more true to hold that You can never overestimate the idiocy of the Canadian investment firms.

Yeah, I’m thinking of Pinetree’s latest latest brilliant move to take over Copper Mesa.

Who are these guys anyway, and why would they want to throw away more money into the bottomless pit that is Copper Mesa? (Pinetree had invested several millions from squeaky-clean Canadians in the past in this shipwreck)

HERE IS A MINING COMPANY WITH NO CONCESSIONS, heavily in debt, facing a multi-million dollar lawsuit in Canada, hated by local communities, and without any future whatsoever. I wonder how many of Pinetree’s investors have an inkling of what the hell their investment firm is up to.

I guess we could say that Pinetree is the proud owner of Copper Mesa’s Flotsam (see my previous blog for details) But wait, there just HAS to be much more behind this idiotic move than meets the eye. Is it back-scratching time for the Ol’ boys?

Anyway, back to the company’s second quarter Fantasy Report (they’ve yet to publish their 3rd quarter fiction on their web site, but it’s available at sedar.com and it’s equally enGrossing)….. I have to admit that I always look forward to reading the company’s financial and Management, Discussion and Analysis reports. It’s highly entertaining. The information used here is based on their 2nd quarter financial and Management Discussion and Analysis reports posted on their web site.

The company, according to the reports:
- Had $ 1500 in the bank and owes almost millions of dollars in debt as of June 30th
- Cannot prove their mining titles in Junin are valid, but affirms it wants to develop its “properties” in Ecuador, implying and denying it still owns the JUNIN and Chaucha mining concessions (IN DEC 2009 CODELCO REPORTED THAT IT HAD BEEN DRILLING IN CHAUCHA FOR MONTHS AND THAT IT DID NOT FIND ENOUGH COPPER TO SATISFY THEIR NEEDS.
See:
http://www.vistazo.com/ea/pais/?eImpresa=1014&id=2938
Another google result on a prestigious magazine from August of 2009
http://www.americaeconomia.com/321753-Codelco-explora-yacimiento-de-cobre-en-Ecuador.note.aspx
You do not need to be fluent in Spanish to get get that the Chaucha concession has been explored by Codelco (you can also translated them using the google translation tool)

Just what is up for grabs?

In spite of what Copper Mesa claims in page one of the latest Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the three months ending March 31, 2009, the company no longer has concessions in the Intag area. It lost its most “valuable” concessions- including the Junín mining concession, and Chaucha. The Junin concessions Copper Mesa permanently lost in November 2008 and January 2009. These concessions are in the hands of the government and, according to the new mining law, can only be exploited by a national mining company.

The company list as one of its most important assets the properties in the Junin area. However, Copper Mesa does not have nearly as many legal land titles in the Junin mining site as they claim, ever since the government took away 17 of them away after discovering illegal procedures in their transactions (an additional 15 properties are being looked at for irregularities).

They are certainly not buying a viable company. Copper Mesa’s stocks have lost more than 98% of their value in the last few years (and the slide continues). They are also quite a bit in debt- to the tune of more than three million dollars, and in debt with a community development organization, renters and employees.

The Junin mining site, to list just some of the insurmountable obstacles faced by any mining company idiotic enough to want to resume this project,:

1) Is located in primary cloud forests harboring dozens of endangered species of mammals and birds (including Jaguars, Brown-faced Spider Monkeys, and Spectacled Bears)
2) Has several pre-Incan archeological sites within its boundaries
3) Its “inferred” mineral deposit is several times larger than what was inferred by Bishimetals in the 1990’s after year of exploration.
4) Has aroused unparalleled local government and community opposition
5) Sits wholly within a newly created Municipal 18,000 hectare protected area
6) Since the passing of the new mining law, the concession can only be exploited by the national government.
(For a complete list of obstacles, see the blog, Nineteen Obstacles to Mining Development in the Intag Region of Ecuador

Whoever buys this outfits, also buys a company that has experienced very grave problems with communities and government officials, and has lost around 30 million dollars without anything to show. Certainly the company never drilled within the infamous Junin mining concessions.
What is up for grabs is a legacy of irresponsible administration (not to say lunatic), human rights abuses, violent conflicts, plus a major lawsuit in Canadian courts against the company and the Toronto Stock Exchange. It’s a business bogged down by a huge debt, ridiculously high office rent, astonishingly high wages (especially considering the lack of results), no real assets on the ground, and very negative perception by all involved in this business in Ecuador.

Chaucha and Telimbela. Is Chaucha a real asset? Even if it were, it is very likely no longer in the company’s hands. This mining concession was not picked up by any mining companies for about 10 years after a Mitsubishi Subsidiary finished exploring the site. If it was worth anything, someone would have snapped it up long before Copper Mesa. Antofagasta, a Chilean mining company, pulled out of a partnership with Copper Mesa to develop this site after seeing the poor results of a few months of exploration.

Telimbela is an interesting case in what could be seen as insider trading. The Telimbela concession legally belongs to Ecuagold, which at the time of the exploration deal, was headed by one of Copper Mesa’s ex directors.

In short, the company is selling a business that has, not only no future, but no mining concessions in its name of any worth in Ecuador- with zero chance of ever getting the concessions back- an unsavory local reputation, and the rejection of the local communities where it has worked, plus a multi-million dollar lawsuit against it in Canadian courts.

What a deal!

- Confirms the loss of its Zonia and Emerald Isle mining projects in Arizona to a debtor for 1.7 million bucks. The report didn’t dare specify how many millions it lost in the deal, but there was a transfer of more than 30 million shares of CMMC as part of the deal
http://www.coppermesacorp.com/_resources/news/ACX0808AcquisitonofSGVcloses.pdf
- Suffered 31 million dollars in losses to date
- Failed, again, to mention the loss of 17 properties within the Junin mining concessions, and to notify investors that a new protected area was created right over the mining site.
- Did not mention the multi-million dollar lawsuit presented in Canada against Copper Mesa Mining Corporation plus two of its directors, and the Toronto Stock Exchange (see http://www.ramirezversuscoppermesa.com/)

To start, they lost their US mining interest to the investor who lent them 1.7 million back in 2008 to get them out of financial straits. This is what the company said in their corrected news release, released October 2nd:
Copper Mesa Mining Corporation (“Copper Mesa” or the “Company”) (TSX:CUX) today announced the transfer of Redstone Resources’ properties to the lender of a bridge loan facility, negotiated on September 10, 2008. This transfer is the result of a non-payment by the Company in June 2009. http://www.stockhouse.com/News/CanadianReleasesDetail.aspx?n=7473301

Redstone controlled the Emerald Isle and Zonia mines in Arizona. The previous release had said the company had sold Redstone. STREEEETCH.

Interesting about the correction… Could it be that maybe someone in the BC Securities Commission is finally checking to see what the company is saying? If so, it may be because on September 11th, the company was put on a de-listing track by the TSX.
http://www.tmx.com/en/news_events/news_releases/9-11-2009_TSX-ReviewCUX.html

So, ONWARDS in the stretching department. In the latest release (Oct 3) correcting the earlier release about the so-called sale of Redstone Resources, the company asserts the following:

The Company will continue to focus its efforts on the advancement and/or sale of its properties in Ecuador.
http://www.stockhouse.com/News/CanadianReleasesDetail.aspx?n=7473301

This is rich! Advancement and/or sale of what? If by properties they mean their concessions, they are misleading investors big time. The company definitely lost the Junin mining “properties” to the government in November 2008. You can only develop or sell what you own, not what you hope to own, or imagine you own (see the Losing the Junin Concessions section).

Whopperville. Here’s what the company says on its latest Management,Discussion & Aanlysis report
Also included as part of the 2009 Law was a stipulation, Article 24, that the government had the right to revert to the State any mineral concession on which it had previously conducted any exploration or exploitation. In late April, the MMP issued an internal request for a review and list of any concessions to which Article 24 might apply. On the subsequent list as prepared by the technical group within the MMP were the Junin, Chaucha and Telimbela properties. Although the Company has received no notification from the government that it intends to revert any of the properties under this Article of the 2009 Law, this has nevertheless served to cast a cloud of doubt over the Company’s tenure of title to these properties. In fact, essentially every mineral concession has had some prior exploration done on it by the government in Ecuador and is therefore subject to such potential reversion (emphasis mine).

The concessions are not “subject” to such potential reversion- the concessions were reverted back to the state almost a year ago. Here’s additional news to any investor concerned about what is left of their diminishing investment with CMMC and in uncovering lies – The government of Ecuador has carried out exploration on a very few mining concessions in the country and not in “every mineral concession” as the report claims. This is one of the biggest lies yet. Unfortunately for CMMC, the government did invest in exploration in the JUNIN mining concessions (Golden 1, Golden 2), plus Chaucha and Telimbela in the south of the country.

LOSS OF THE JUNIN PROPERTIES. The MD&A report states the following
In November 2008, the Company received notices from the Ecuadorian Regional Director of Mines again nullifying the Company’s title to the Junin concessions on the basis that the Company did not file an environment impact study for drilling. Management believes that there are several irregularities in this notice and again they intend to vigorously defend their rights and will take appropriate action to contest this nullification in the Ecuadorian legal system. (See “Measurement uncertainty of the Junin property interest”.)

A bit further down the report, the CMMC goes on to assert that:
The Company has been unable to receive confirmation of title to its Junin concessions for the year ended December 31,2008 and 2007.

Scrolling down the report a little bit more you can find this gem:
If the Company is determined to not hold title to the Junin concessions, the impact on the Company would be material.

So, you might wonder, how can the company maintain that its mining concessions were nullified in

one page, then go on to imply, on a different page, that company may yet have title to the land, then say that intends to develop or sell a property when it doesn’t own anything? Unless, that is, they are thinking of developing a Kentucky Fried Chicken in one of their properties in rural Imbabura (average population density in Intag is about 10 persons per square kilometer). They’ll have a hell of a time selling enough greasy chickens to stay in business. Oh, they better not build it on one of the 17 properties that were reverted back to the state in 2008.

Another mini gem: even though the company lost its concessions in Junin, the company still has the “mining property” as an asset in their balance sheets (to the tune of millions).

The fact is that in 2008 the National Assembly issued the famous Mining Mandate that reverted thousands of mining concessions back to the state, particularly those having no active exploration at the time of the proclamation. This included Copper Mesa’s Junin mining concessions. Just in case you are wondering, the National Assembly’s mandate is above all laws in the country. Further, the mandate included several other provisions meant to restrict or prohibit mining, and it does not allow compensation for the loss of concessions. One of the reasons the National Assembly took this measure was to try to curb the speculation with concessions, and the violent conflicts the presence of mining companies had generated in the countryside (including Copper Mesa’s). Since Copper Mesa had been unable to start exploration in Junin (Golden 1 and Golden 2) due to widespread opposition when the National Assembly issued the Mandate, the company lost the Junin mining concessions. It’s that simple.

Miscellaneous Bullish.
The company still reports this piece:
The Junin project hosts an inferred mineral resource of 982 million tonnes grading 0.89% copper, 0.04% molybdenum and 1.9 glt of silver, or 1.21 % copper equivalent at a 0.4% economic copper cut-off grade (see Micon’s Junin Report).

If you’ve read some of my previous blogs you’d know that Micon International, the company responsible for coming up with those impressive resources at Junin later publicly admitted they could not confirm the data due to, among other things, termite damage to the core samples (no, I am not making this up). In fact, after years of exploration, the Japanese only inferred the possible existence of 318 million tons at only %0.7 copper (total 2.2 million tons of copper). This is almost four times less than what Micon’s over optimistic estimate, which cannot even be verified.

So much for even inferring the Junin site has so much copper. What is truly amazing to me is how Canadian regulatory entities allow the company to continue to report such garbage and in the process help investors lose billions every year. But what am I saying, this is Canada we are talking about, speculator heaven.

So, to recap, as of October 2009 is: Copper Mesa lost their concessions in Ecuador,, it is millions in debt (but did have $ 1500 in cash at the end of June); it also lost their US mining projects,, in September TSX placed it in the delisting track; has all kinds of financial commitments to fulfill (including 1.17 million termination benefits for two officers and an employee; has over $ 100,000.00 in future rent commitments, and so on and forth (the very latest is that the TSX just denied the company’s request to postpone the upcoming shareholder meeting)

Fire Sale…. AND, I found this at the end of the Interim Financial Statement:
Sale of Excel! Resources Corporation
In August 2009, the board of directors approved the sale of 100% of the shares of Excell Resources Corporation to an officer of the Company for $50,000, the deemed fair value as of the date of sale..

Fifty thousand dollars for a company on which there is preciously little information about on the Web, except that it may be an employment agency based in Salt Lake City.

And, lastly, Copper Mesa, apparently has sold, or is about to sell, their land in and around the Junin mining concession to a third party that is telling the locals they are interested in agriculture (we have been unable to confirm if the land has been sold, leased, or rented). Needless to say, very few people are swallowing that lie. The company supposedly buying the land has no connection with agriculture projects whatsoever (it’s called Druoet Schwarz), with interest in WATER (the company was found in 2008 and one of the partners is an ex army colonel) What everyone is worried about is that the presence of this company will spark yet another round of confrontations and divisions. At least three of the employees of this company are ex- Copper Mesa Corporation.

I could go on, but why? You get the point. But do the Canadian regulators get it?

sources: Management’s Discussion and Analysis For the six months ended June 30,
INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS -UNAUDITED
JUNE 30, 2009
http://www.coppermesacorp.com/_resources/unaudited_financials/2009_2Q_Unaudited_Interim_Financials_MDA.pdf

Apparently Nortec Ventures decided not to buy Copper Mesa’s Ecuadorian flotsam. But the company’s debris is still for sale.

Just what is up for grabs?

In spite of what Copper Mesa claims in page one of the latest Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the three months ending March 31, 2009, the company no longer has concessions in the Intag area. It lost its most “valuable” concessions- including the Junín mining concession, and Chaucha. The Junin concessions Copper Mesa permanently lost in November 2008 and January 2009. These concessions are in the hands of the government and, according to the new mining law, can only be exploited by a national mining company.

The company list as one of its most important assets the properties in the Junin area. However, Copper Mesa does not have nearly as many legal land titles in the Junin mining site as they claim, ever since the government took away 17 of them away after discovering illegal procedures in their transactions (an additional 15 properties are being looked at for irregularities).

They are certainly not buying a viable company. Copper Mesa’s stocks have lost more than 98% of their value in the last few years (and the slide continues). They are also quite a bit in debt- to the tune of more than three million dollars, and in debt with a community development organization, renters and employees.

The Junin mining site, to list just some of the insurmountable obstacles faced by any mining company idiotic enough to want to resume this project,:

1) Is located in primary cloud forests harboring dozens of endangered species of mammals and birds (including Jaguars, Brown-faced Spider Monkeys, and Spectacled Bears)
2) Has several pre-Incan archeological sites within its boundaries
3) Its “inferred” mineral deposit is several times larger than what was inferred by Bishimetals in the 1990’s after year of exploration.
4) Has aroused unparalleled local government and community opposition
5) Sits wholly within a newly created Municipal 18,000 hectare protected area
6) Since the passing of the new mining law, the concession can only be exploited by the national government.
(For a complete list of obstacles, see the blog, Nineteen Reasons Why Nortec Should Stay out of Intag

Whoever buys this outfits, also buys a company that has experienced very grave problems with communities and government officials, and has lost around 30 million dollars without anything to show. Certainly the company never drilled within the infamous Junin mining concessions.
What is up for grabs is a legacy of irresponsible administration (not to say lunatic), human rights abuses, violent conflicts, plus a major lawsuit in Canadian courts against the company and the Toronto Stock Exchange. It’s a business bogged down by a huge debt, ridiculously high office rent, astonishingly high wages (especially considering the lack of results), no real assets on the ground, and very negative perception by all involved in this business in Ecuador.

Chaucha and Telimbela. Is Chaucha a real asset? Even if it were, it is very likely no longer in the company’s hands. This mining concession was not picked up by any mining companies for about 10 years after a Mitsubishi Subsidiary finished exploring the site. If it was worth anything, someone would have snapped it up long before Copper Mesa. Antofagasta, a Chilean mining company, pulled out of a partnership with Copper Mesa to develop this site after seeing the poor results of a few months of exploration.

Telimbela is an interesting case in what could be seen as insider trading. The Telimbela concession legally belongs to Ecuagold, which at the time of the exploration deal, was headed by one of Copper Mesa’s ex directors.

In short, the company is selling a business that has, not only no future, but no mining concessions in its name of any worth in Ecuador- with zero chance of ever getting the concessions back- an unsavory local reputation, and the rejection of the local communities where it has worked, plus a multi-million dollar lawsuit against it in Canadian courts.

What a deal!

In the midst of Copper Mesa and Nortec Venture’s deal, and not mentioned in the company’s latest creative reports, is the implication of the Ecuadorian government’s intention of taking over as many old mining concessions- including Copper Mesa’s ex JUNIN concessions, which the company lost in November of 2008

As recent as May 24 of this year, the government publicly said that it intends to nationalize the mining sector (http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSTRE54N03020090524?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews.

Article 24 of the recently approved mining law calls for the government to take back all mining concessions in which in the past it invested in exploration and geological investigation. The application of this article will directly affect all three of the company’s ex-concessions in Intag: Golden 1, Golden 2 and Magdalena 1, plus Chaucha (in the south) since the Ecuadorian government, through its national mining company, Codigem, directly took part in, and helped fund exploration activities in all of these ex-concessions during the 1990′s.

This is a material as it gets, and it was not reported in the company’s latest year end 2008, and first quarter 2009 reports. But this is a little bit like saying the company will lose something they don’t even own, since the company lost all of its concessions in the JUNIN area starting November 2008. Yet in parts of the its latest financial and analysis reports, it claims to own them….*see below)

(Taken from p. 1 of Management and Discussion Analysis)
Overview
During the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company acquired all of the common shares of Redstone Mining Corporation (formerly St. Geneviève Resources Ltd.) (“RMC”) and its United States’ properties – the historical past-producing Zonia and Emerald Isle copper mines as well as an exploration prospect in Arizona and other exploration projects in Nevada, thus broadening the Company’s horizons by diversification in the Americas.

In Ecuador, the Company holds a 100% interest in both the Chaucha(1) copper molybdenum porphyry property and the Junin(1) copper-molybdenum, gold-silver porphyry property;

Interestingly enough, later on the report the company says it hasn’t received confirmation it owns the concessions since 2007
(The Company has been unable to receive confirmation of title to its Junín concessions for the year ended December 31, 2008 and 2007.”- p. 11 of the Management’s Discussion and Analysis For the Year Ended December 31, 2008)

The company also claims that it lost its concessions in Junin because it didn’t have an EIS-, implying that by fulfilling this criterion it may reclaim its concessions. This is a lie. The company lost its Golden 1 and Golden 2 concessions due to the application of the Mining Mandate, which reverted back to the state all concessions that at that time did not comply with a number of criteria, only one of which was not having an EIS. In the case of Copper Mesa, the main reason the company lost its Golden 1 and Golden 2 concessions was because the company never properly consulted with the communities- a Constitutional issue. In any case, Article 24 of the mining law makes this a moot issue, since it forces the government, through the National Mining company, to assume ownership of these and other mining concessions.

Keep tuned for a detailed anaylisis of Copper Mesa’s recent financial and Management Discussion and Analysis reports- including the company’s doubtful reporting regarding the real amount of metals at the company’s ex JUNIN mining concessions.

See the previous blog for another 19 reasons why this is a REALLY BAD DEAL!

Carlos Zorrilla

According to Reuters’s November 10th article, Correa’s government is trying to revive the mining sector in the South of the country (with very little luck by the way), but the government is explicit that the nation’s mining plans do not include the Intag area, where Copper Mesa use to have the Junin concessions (the government permanently took the company’s concessions in November of 2008).

On the 17th of March, CONAIE, Ecuador’s powerful indigenous federation, made up by several other indigenous organizations, presented a lawsuit against Ecuador’s new mining law, for violating the Constitution. The lawsuit argues the law violates Indigenous rights to Free, Prior and Informed Consent.

The Shuar Federation, which has communities in the vicinity the Ecuacorrientes’ El Mirador mine, has said that they will not allow any mining companies into their territories.

So, while the government wants to push mining development in the south of the country, the country’s indigenous movements prepare to give battle. And Intag and Junin are, for now, out of the picture as far as mining development goes.

Reuters’ article below

cz

Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:39pm EDT

UPDATE 2-Ecuador lifts ban on miners, sees them as priority

Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:10pm EDT

By Alonso Soto

QUITO, March 10 (Reuters) – Ecuador will immediately lift a mining ban on Kinross and Corriente, two companies that are part of a handful of projects considered “priority” by the Andean nation, a top mining official told Reuters on Tuesday.

Deputy Mining Minister Jose Serrano said the government planned to start individual negotiations with miners to ink new deals and set the base price for a windfall tax he says will be fair for both sides. A new mining law allows the state to opt for service contracts, but Serrano said Ecuador wants extraction deals.

“The rules of the game are clear for everyone now,” Serrano said. “The mining decree has been fulfilled… it can’t be revived.”

Still, analysts worry the cash-strapped government could seek much better contractual terms in tough negotiations with miners. The global crisis has hit key oil exports and severely curtailed the OPEC nation’s income.

Serrano said the government “wants companies to keep a reasonable profit when prices climb, but share it with the state.” The windfall tax has worried investors seeking capital in an industry hit hard by the global crisis.

Mining companies and investors have grown wary of the leftist government of President Rafael Correa, which set a tax on extra revenues from high metal prices and banned mining to end what he called speculation and tame mounting protests from environmental groups.

“We are in a show-me period were investor have to see if Ecuador is serious about restarting mineral exploration,” said Michael Gray, an analyst with Genuity Capital Markets in Vancouver. “Its a wait-and-see approach for the industry.”

“INVESTMENT PRIORITIES”

Serrano said the government considers Kinross (K.TO), Corriente (CTQ.TO), IamGold (IMG.TO) and International Minerals (IMZ.TO) as investment priorities for the country.

Correa, a U.S.-educated economist, is seeking investment ranging from Canada to China and Iran, to compensate for dwindling oil revenue that had been financing multibillion-dollar infrastructure projects.

Still, the president, who faces reelection on April 26, has hardened his rhetoric against foreign companies that many Ecuadoreans regard as pillagers.

In January, Ecuador approved a new mining law that boosted governmental control over an industry that in recent years had attracted dozens of companies exploring for precious metals.

Ecuador has no large-scale mining. Some companies have found big deposits of copper, gold and silver in its southern and Amazon regions.

Environmental and Indian groups have threatened to resume street protests to demand communities have veto powers over local large-scale mining. Violent demonstrations could pose a risk to the nascent industry.

Serrano said the government had no plans to auction the Junin copper project, which was taken over by the government from Ascendant Copper on charges the Canadian miner illegally acquired the concession. The project was marred by sometimes violent clashes between anti-and-pro mining communities and private security guards. (Editing by David Gregorio)
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN1154076920090310
__________________________________________________________________________

Artículo de Reuters avisando el levantamiento de la prohibición de actividades mineras en el Ecuador, pero no para Copper Mesa ni el proyecto JUNÍN. La empresa definitivamente perdió las concesiones de su proyecto JUNÍN el 12 de Noviembre del 2009.

Por otro lado el 17 de Marzo la CONAIE presentó un recurso legal para declarar la nueva Ley minería inconstitucional por violar varios derechos constitucionales, incluyendo el derecho al Consentimiento Libre, Previo e Informado. Mientras tanto, representantes del pueblo Shuar han dicho que rechazarán la presencia de cualquier empresa minera dentro de sus territorios. El proyecto de El Mirador de Ecuacorrientes (Corrientes Resources) podría ser afectado.

Actualización 2-Ecuador levanta la prohibición sobre los mineros, los ve como prioridad
Jue Mar 10, 2009 6:10 PM EDT

Por Alonso Soto

QUITO, 10 de marzo (Reuters) – Ecuador levantará de inmediato una prohibición de actividades mineras en contra de Kinross y Corriente, dos empresas que forman parte de un puñado de proyectos considerados “prioritarios” por la nación andina, un alto funcionario del gobierno le dijo a Reuters el martes.

El Subsecretario de Minería, José Serrano dijo que el gobierno tiene previsto iniciar las negociaciones con las empresas para consolidar nuevos negocios y establecer el precio base para los impuestos extraordinarios, que aduce ser justo para ambas partes. La nueva ley le permite al estado optar por contratos de servicios, pero Serrano afirmó que el Ecuador quiere contratos de explotaciones.

“Las reglas del juego son claras para todos ahora”, dijo Serrano. “El Mandato Minero se ha cumplido … no puede ser reactivado”.

Sin embargo, los analistas se preocupan que el régimen, con escasa reservas en efectivo, podría insistir en duras condiciones en las negociaciones con los mineros. La crisis mundial ha afectado a las exportaciones claves de petróleo y severamente restringido los ingresos de la nación, perteneciente a la OPEC.

Serrano dijo que el gobierno “quiere que las empresas se quedan con de un beneficio razonable cuando los precios suban, pero que compartan con el Estado.” El impuesto por ganancias extraordinarias tiene preocupado a inversionistas en búsqueda de capital en una industria duramente golpeada por la crisis mundial.

Empresas mineras e inversionistas han sido cauteloso del gobierno izquierdista del presidente Rafael Correa, quien estableció un impuesto sobre los ingresos extraordinarios de los altos precios de los metales y prohibió la minería para poner fin a lo que él llamó la especulación y calmar las crecientes protestas de grupos ambientalistas.

“Estamos en un período de espera donde los inversores tienen que ver si el Ecuador esta serio para reiniciar la exploración de minerales”, dijo Michael Gray, analista de Genuity Capital Markets en Vancouver. “Es una estrategia de esperar y ver de la industria.”

“PRIORIDADES DE INVERSIÓN”

Serrano dijo que el gobierno considera Kinross (K. A), Corriente (CTQ.TO), IamGold (IMG.TO) y la Internacional de Minerales (IMZ.TO) como las prioridades de inversión para el país.

Correa, un economista educado en los Estados Unidos, busca inversiones desde Canadá, a China e Irán, para compensar la disminución de los ingresos provenientes del petróleo, los cuales han estado financiando multimillonarios proyectos de infraestructura.

Sin embargo, el presidente, quien se enfrenta a la reelección el 26 de abril, ha endurecido su retórica contra las empresas extranjeras que muchos ecuatorianos consideran saqueadores.

En enero, Ecuador aprobó una nueva ley de minería que impulsó el control gubernamental de una industria que en los últimos años ha atraído a decenas de empresas para la exploración de metales preciosos.

Ecuador aún no cuenta con minería a gran escala. Algunas empresas han descubierto grandes yacimientos de cobre, oro y plata en el sur del país y la Amazonía.

Grupos ambientales e indígenas han amenazado con reanudar las protestas callejeras para exigir el poder de veto que las comunidades tienen sobre la minería a gran escala. Manifestaciones violentas podría plantear un riesgo para la naciente industria.

Serrano dijo que el gobierno no tenía planes para subastar el proyecto de cobre de Junín, el cual fue asumido por el gobierno de Ascendant Copper debido a acusaciones que la minera canadiense adquirió ilegalmente la concesión. El proyecto en ocasiones se vio empañado por violentos enfrentamientos entre comunidades anti y pro-minería por un lado, y las comunidades y guardias de seguridad privada. (Edición de David Gregorio)

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN1154076920090310

© 2009 Thomson Reuters Todos los derechos reservados
English

1. Q. Does the company have legal title to its much-touted JUNIN mining concessions in Ecuador?
A. NO. On November 12th, the government annulled the titles to the company’s Junin mining concessions as part of the government’s plans to recuperate thousands of mining concessions.. The company also lost titles to other
concessions in other parts of the country. The decision cannot be appealed.
http://www.minasypetroleos.gov.ec/mmp-portwar/faces/indexMinas.jspx
http://www.minasypetroleos.gov.ec/mmp-portwar/face/index.jspx;jsessionid=81f6cd11d6c990fafdc30340e691

2. Q. Does the company have as much copper and molybdenum at its Junin site as it claims it has on its web page?
A. NO. In 2007, Micon International, the company responsible for the inflated estimates of copper and molybdenum at the company’s Junin site, admitted it could not confirm its own estimates due to, among other factors, termite damage to the original core samples taken in the 1990’s by a Japanese firm. The company, however, still has this much higher figure on its web site.

3. Q. Has the company undertaken exploration activities in its JUNIN concessions?
A. NO. In spite of the millions of dollars the company claims it has spent on exploration at JUNIN, Copper Mesa Mining Corporation has not been able to undertake any exploratory activities whatsoever at its JUNIN mining concessions. The last exploration undertaken within the Junin mining concessions was in 1996 by Bishimetals. Bishimetals’ INFERRED Cu and Mo resources are a fraction of what Copper Mesa claims to have.

4. Q. Does the company have a valid Environmental Impact Study for exploration at its JUNIN site?
A. NO. The government refused to even process the company’s 2006 environmental study due to gross inadequacies Since then, the company has not presented a new study. But that hasn’t kept it from spending millions of dollars.

5. Q. Does the project have support from the local communities and government?
A. NO. There is no mining project in all of Latin America that has galvanized so much local government and community opposition. The communities have for years physically blocked access to the concessions, presented several lawsuits and constitutional injunctions to stop the project, and in 2005, burned down the company’s camp. In 2008, the County government of Cotacachi (where the Junin mining project is found) created an 18,000 hectare 45,000 acres) protected area which coincides with the area of the mining concessions.

6. Q. Is it true that the area where the minerals were found is rich in primary forests, harbors dozens of endangered animal species and is rich in archeological sites?
A. Yes. The area where Bishimetals discovered copper is covered in some of the most biologically diverse and threatened forest in the world, which is the habitat for jaguars, spectacled bears, the brown-faced spider monkey and over a dozen other protected species in facing extinction. Additionally, the area is extremely rich in pre-Incan archeological sites.

7. Q. Is it true the current national government is pro-mining?
A. NO. There are officials within the government, including President Correa, who have expressed openness to what he’s called “responsible mining”. However, many within the government are vehemently opposed to large-scale mining.

8. Q. Is it true the new mining legislation will make it easier for the company to reactivate its projects?
A. NO. The new mining legislation currently being debated in the equivalent of Congress contains higher than usual royalties, a 51% tax on profits, and tough social and environmental regulations. The law also will create a National Mining Corporation, which will undertake some of the more lucrative projects. Additionally, the law is more geared to supporting small-scale, and artisanal miners than the large transnational mining companies

9. Q. Is it true the company and/or its directors are being sued in Canada?
A. Good question for to ask the directors

10. Q. Do you really want to own shares of a company with this record?
A. ______________________

More Bad News for Copper Mesa: Company loses all of its Intag mining concessions.
- The Mining Mandate also abolished hundreds of other concessions affecting many Canadian mining companies in Ecuader.

Close to 2,300 mining concessions affecting a total of 3.3 million hectares have been extinguished in Ecuador since the Mining Mandate went into effect more than six months ago (see original government news release below). This includes all of Copper Mesa Mining Corporation’s concessions in Intag, according to information published by the Ministry of Mines and Energy.

The December 4th government news release reports 335 additional concessions affecting over 500 thousand hectares being abolished, and the government’s willingness to keep applying the Mining Mandate to the rest of the country’s mining concessions.
http://www.minasypetroleos.gov.ec/mmp-portwar/faces/index.jspx;jsessionid=81f6cd11d6c990fafdc30340e691

The mining concessions were extinguished, according to the information, because either they did not have their Environmental Impact Studies in order, or the companies never undertook the previous community consultation processes as specified in Ecuador’s Constitution.

Copper Mesa’s Intag mining concessions, and specifically Golden 1, Golden 2 and Magdalena 1 were the jewel in the company’s crown. They, along the company’s other concessions in the region, are now in the government’s hands. The new law will put into play a whole new series of regulations, which will bring in much higher royalties, firmer environmental controls, and much more significant taxation for mining companies doing business in Ecuador. The measures affecting the concession is also seen as part of the government’s plan to institute the total or partial nationalization of the mining sector.

(original news release)
En el marco del cumplimiento del Mandato Minero, expedido por la Asamblea Nacional Constituyente en abril pasado, el Ministerio de Minas y Petroleos extinguió 514 855 nuevas hectáreas mineras, correspondientes a 335 concesiones, por no haber presentado estudios de impacto ambiental o no haber cumplido con el proceso de consulta previa.

Cincuenta y seis concesiones habían sido otorgadas a la empresa All Metals, 18 a la compañía Curimining , entre otras, las mismas que no cuentan con los términos de referencia ni los estudios de impacto ambiental para su aprobación.

El ministro de Minas y Petróleos, Ing. Derlis Palacios Guerrero, senialó que “conforme a lo dispuesto por la Asamblea Constituyente continuamos cumpliendo el Mandato Minero. Queremos que a la vigencia de la nueva Ley Minera tengamos ordenado y regularizado todo lo concerniente a las concesiones vigentes”.

El Secretario de Estado dijo ademas: “estamos determinando una serie de arbitrariedades en el otorgamiento de las mismas; no podemos seguir con el caos actual. Definitivamente este proceso, sumado a la aprobación del proyecto de la nueva Ley de Minería, nos va a permitir a los ecuatorianos y ecuatorianas tener una mineria que se inserte en el desarrollo economico y social del país; seguiremos rindiendo cuentas de nuestra gestion”.

De lo que va del proceso de reversion, el Gobierno de la Revolución Ciudadana ha extinguido y caducado cerca de 2 300 concesiones, con un total de 3 300 000 hectáreas.

El ministro Palacios Guerrero afirmó que el Mandato Minero continúa en vigencia y que su cumplimiento está en proceso.
http://www.minasypetroleos.gov.ec/mmp-portwar/faces/index.jspx;jsessionid=81f6cd11d6c990fafdc30340e691