Ann: Trading Halt, page-105

The fear of becoming trapped and/or being on the wrong end of the trade could well influence what some write here on HC. We're all pedalling different opinions and I suggest that truth lies somewhere in between.

For mine I'm going to stick to dealing with the facts, we can assume anything but there has been absolutely nothing to suggest that these guys have been meticulous nor is there anything that categorically states that adequate water bore modelling and associated drawdown has been completed (or is currently in progress) in regard to Stirling and Mud Hut.

Additional monitoring will not stop the project from going ahead but it adds yet another unknown. Stirling Swamp I have no problem with, the proximity of Mud Hut to the pit and the CLC's focus on this particular geological feature doesn't sit well for me.

Will major stakeholders (financiers, project partners, traditional owners, the NT and Fed Gov) be comfortable with the mere assumption that drawdown will not negatively affect Mud Hut Swamp or are they going to be waiting until the data is collected, analysed and collated?

I see this unknown as a risk no matter what slant we put on it. I want to hear from management exactly what is going to be done, when it is going to be completed and what progress can be made while we're waiting on MMP approval and a permit to extract. I'll be waiting for TNG's response and making up my own mind.