When I refer to "environmental risks", I'm including financial...

When I refer to "environmental risks", I'm including financial risks associated with people's perceptions of effect on the environment...whether or not those perceptions are valid, overstated or wrong.

VMS may choose not to engage with people or organisations holding environmental concerns.  That's their choice over strategy.  However, the fact that the exploration area sat within the Emergency National Heritage area listed in 2009 and that the company chose not to communicate that fact and the associated risk to shareholders is certainly a valid criticism.  It was a real risk to share value that did not become apparent to the market until after the listing lapsed and it started to appear in the media early 2011.  No thanks to directors, who had been busy spruiking the company through 2010 with zero mention of the listing.
eg http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=01101585

The listing boundaries were never shown on maps.  They had roads, powerlines, railway, tenament boundary... but no National Heritage boundary.  Crucial information for investors.
They either had their heads in the sand or were intentionally silent.  You only have to look at the chart since Feb 2011 to see how real the financial risk was in practice for sh's.