I did say "future" drinking water, possibly a mistake, maybe I...

I did say "future" drinking water, possibly a mistake, maybe I should have just said "future water issues", which includes removing ground water for mineral processing, and storing contaminated water in tailings dams. Dont expect local farmers to be a push over, they are competing for the same water resources. In any event, water issues will probably be the most protracted argument against any planned mine.

Does CHN mention water as part of the scoping study?

Take a look at Boddington, bring it up on Google in the same screen as Julimar, you can easily see the pits and tailings storage, and then transpose that image in your mind to Julimar. (The Boddington footprint is about 11km from North to South) Any new mine would have at least a similar footprint, a new tailings dam alone would take up all the private land they own. . One of the reasons I have mentioned in previous posts that any new mine utilizing all the known "resouces" is just not on. The so called "starter pit" option may be the only option, for more than just reasons of mining and processing economics.

The only "positive" for CHN that I can see is that they should be able to pick up farm land cheaply on the periphery of their largest footprint. I wouldn't want to be farming within 20km of them when they start mining.