The LAT66 Controversy: Environmental and Community Impact in Kuusamo, an Essay

An essay: The LAT66 (DCX/LAT) mining project, which is planned in the Kuusamo area of Finland, a region known for its pristine wilderness and vibrant nature tourism. This area is uniquely positioned in the middle of a triangle formed by three national parks: Oulanka, Riisitunturi, and Salla, which are crucial to the local tourism industry that attracts more and more visitors from across Europe and the United States.

The LAT66 project, primarily marketed to investors as a gold mine and locally as a cobalt project under the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA), raises significant environmental and social concerns. The potential mining site is uncomfortably close to these national parks, and the impact of mining operations could be directly visible on the routes used by tens of thousands of nature & wilderness tourists each year. This visibility is compounded by the presence of over 3,000 holiday homes in the northern Kuusamo region alone, which rely on the area's pristine waters & fishing and unspoiled natural environment in the national parks.

LAT66 is strategically leveraging the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) to expedite the project, primarily marketing it locally as a cobalt project. This strategic positioning under the CRMA is crucial as it allows the project to potentially fast-track through various regulatory and environmental hurdles. It's essential to understand that the extraction of cobalt, is secondary to the primary goal of gold mining according to shareholder info material & sessions by the company. The cobalt extraction is not just a byproduct but a necessary step to comply with CRMA status, which the company is keen to utilize in trying to expedite the permission process.

This dual approach raises concerns about the transparency and environmental implications of the project. The local community may not be fully aware that the primary intent of the mine is gold extraction, with cobalt and uranium also playing significant roles but framed differently for strategic reasons. Finlands GTK geological organization has stated ever since 80’ties the status of uranium in the LAT66 prime area, yet no mention of it by the company.

Furthermore, LAT66's approach to comparing its project with other tourism and mining locations, like the ski resorts in Ruka and Levi, is notably misleading. Levi is primarily known as a party-centric ski resort and lacks the national parks that contribute to the broader appeal of the Ruka area. Ruka is cherished for its wilderness and year-round tourism that extends beyond skiing to include activities in the nearby national parks.

The proposed mining site in Kuusamo is in direct proximity to key tourism infrastructures and national parks, using the very roads that wilderness tourists travel. This proximity poses a significant threat not only to the environment but also to the local economy, which is heavily reliant on tourism and the natural appeal of the region. Any visible sign of mining activities, as proposed in several of LAT66's site plans, would be likely disastrous for this delicate balance.

It’s important to note that there is not much wilderness left in Europe, which is a key reason for the large and growing tourism in Kuusamo. As climate change makes southern Europe uncomfortably hot during summers and central Europe struggles with rain and heat, more tourists are turning north. Kuusamo’s tourism infrastructure is primed for this influx, offering a refuge with its cooler climate and abundant clean water.

The local community and stakeholders in Kuusamo, including professionals from southern cities who own property in the area, are not universally opposed to mining. However, they are vehemently against initiating any mining projects in this particular region. The area's rich history, reputation, and the volume of visitors make it particularly unsuitable for mining under the current lax regulatory framework by the Finnish government that LAT66 also mentions as “extremely mining friendly” in their shareholder info sessions.

This organized resistance (ProKuusamo) is unique to Kuusamo and reflects the community's deep ties to the region's natural resources, which support not only tourism but also traditional reindeer livelihoods. They are well-connected and prepared & willing to take legal action to protect their environment and livelihoods. The concerns are compounded by the government's insufficient regulations on mining waste and water pollution, which are notably lenient compared to the standards for other waste management areas. This discrepancy has led to environmental damages in similar contexts, notably in northern Sweden.

In response, numerous citizen initiatives are actively demanding a comprehensive overhaul of mining laws to ensure stricter oversight and enforcement of regulations concerning clean water and proper waste ground structures for mine waste areas. These initiatives are not aimed at halting any specific project but are advocating for a broader legislative reform to prevent any mining activity until these stricter regulations are in place. They emphasize that the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) does not overrule local implementation laws, and thus, local environmental standards must be upheld.

This growing opposition highlights the community's commitment to preserving the integrity of their local environment and their readiness to challenge any developments that threaten it, advocating for a halt to mining activities until laws are appropriately amended.

Additionally, it's crucial to understand the contextual differences between the Finnish and Swedish approaches to natural resource management, particularly in Lapland. In Sweden, tourism is concentrated much further south, with their mountains and other attractions, while Lapland is often viewed primarily as a resource pool. This is evidenced by the CRMA application in Sweden near Gränna, close to a significant lake in the southern part of the country, which has faced substantial opposition. This situation mirrors the controversy in Kuusamo, where the proposed mining site is similarly ill-suited for such development due to its environmental and tourism value.
Finland's approach to its Lapland region differs significantly. Unlike Sweden, Finland does not have mountains but - Lapland is closest to that with the fjells and it is diverse natural landscapes that support ski centers, nature tourism, and the forest industry. This area is more populated and culturally integrated with nature-based activities, making any disruptive activities like mining more contentious and impactful.

The local organization of LAT66 is aware of these nuances but continues to promote a different narrative of there not being any effect to other livelihoods if there would be a mine. This is particularly concerning given the organization's financial status and the significant gaps in their preparation for mining operations, such as yet to be seen submission of the required environmental analysis package for obtaining a mining permit. These factors raise serious questions about the viability and integrity of LAT66's operations. The juxtaposition of their underpreparedness with the strategic misrepresentation of the project's impacts suggests that the operation may not be as feasible or imminent as projected, leading stakeholders to question the real intentions behind LAT66's persistent push in this region.

Yet, this is exactly where LAT66 plans to establish what they dubiously promote as a cobalt mine to locals and the EU, and a gold mine to investors. The irony of this dual narrative does not escape those who see the clear misalignment between the company’s statements and the stark environmental and economic realities of the area.

LAT66, a junior company, has shown potential signs of financial instability and a lack of readiness for the extensive requirements of mining operations. Notably, the company has not submitted any environmental analysis package that is crucial for acquiring a mining permit. This omission is a significant red flag as it questions the company's preparedness and commitment to complying with environmental regulations.

The local narrative presented by LAT66 contrasts starkly with these operational shortcomings. The company has been spinning a different version of events to the local community, suggesting a disconnect between their public statements and their actual operational capacity. This discrepancy raises concerns about the genuineness of the project. Is LAT66 merely stringing along the Kuusamo story to maintain investor interest while scrambling to find viable opportunities elsewhere?

Moreover, the involvement of what some might describe as 'cowboy-like funders'—investors known for high-risk ventures—adds another layer of complexity and uncertainty. The strategic use of a top lobbyist in Finland to handle a project in a small northern village further amplifies the skepticism regarding the project's legitimacy and feasibility.

For stock owners and potential investors in LAT66, these factors are critical. They paint a picture of a company that may be overpromising while underdelivering.