Taking Stock 9 October 2025

IF READERS of Taking Stock are investors in a listed mining company, such as OceanaGold or an aspiring mining company like Santana Minerals, Manuka Resources or Chatham Rock Phosphate, this newsletter should be relevant.

Towards the end of the newsletter there will be discussion of Santana, in which many clients have an interest.

Metaphorically, we as a nation are watching two teams build for a tug-of-war that will be visible over the next few months, as two groups seek to control the debate. 

The debate will be whether NZ wants to return to the status quo that presided in the recent past or wants to re-energise our economy to create a new status quo that can provide for those whose circumstances need a hand-up. Effectively the debate is whether to mine, or not.

Pulling in one direction is a group of passionate, sincere environmentalists who work quietly to be effective.  Alongside them are a number of less worthy activists who believe that any misinformation will help their cause. Both groups are assisted by many, perhaps almost all, of the media, which fail to fact-check nonsense. They love the clickbait.

On the other end of the rope is a mix of the private sector, aspirational people, investors and the current government.

Fairly clearly the “other end” is the majority, as illustrated, for example, by radio stations’ admittedly unscientific polls, and by the responses we collect.

The first group want our buried mineral wealth to be left alone, enabling the contours of nature to be preserved.

As a generalisation they want to accommodate the needy and rebuild our nation by introducing super taxes on those who have grown their wealth. They foresee job creation as having no reliance on buried wealth. They do not accept that the mining of minerals that occurs in most countries will be necessary to NZ’s planning.

Those on that side of the tug-of-war also contains a small number of effective people who seek to influence the country with science, believing that demand for careful mining is best effected quietly, by reasonable discussion behind the doors of the powerful.

Those people know that the worst way to influence a vastly bigger crowd is to shout out what are demonstrably untruths, to glue their hands to highways, to barricade roads, in effect to be the streakers at the rugby ground.

Unlike the respected “anti”, this other component of the opposition harms its cause by making obviously ridiculous claims, perhaps understandably reacting to their realisation that passion and emotion will not be comparable with quiet, cold science, or simple economics, and will not be offered a seat at the table.

Fish and Game, Forest and Bird, and the Environmental Defence Society will be far smarter than the attention seekers, who mix nonsense with platitudes, and bombard infantile social forums.

Their sane views should not be mixed up with slogans such as you might read on the latter pages of Animal Farm.

The debate cannot be decided solely by the promise of more taxes.

Obviously the largely new vineyards in the hills five kilometres away from the proposed Santana mine protest on the basis of fear of any environmental accident that cannot be remedied.

Wisely they do not speak of their very modest economic contribution, collectively far less than a million per year of taxes (compared to $200 million) and a handful of jobs (compared to several hundred).

You would expect careful science will demonstrate that their fears are unnecessary.

No consent would be forthcoming if the mining plan was reckless, poured acid into rivers or poison into vineyards, farms or orchards. The fear will be addressed by the consenting process.

The activists who fill the social media with slogans seek to persuade their followers that a well-run mine is similar to an open, uncontrolled sewer.

I will record some of these mistruths later in this newsletter, but it needs to be said that use of unedited media or social forums, with what is clearly nonsense, gets traction only with those who will never be effective; that is other unthinking protesters.

This topic has grown in significance following the last election when the three parties now in a coalition built their case to be elected on reforms that included making mining an accepted, even desirable activity. The current coalition craves the new revenue and jobs, preferring more corporate tax sources, to higher tax rates.

I list below the following projects seeking a licence to begin mining with the combined objective of contributing at least a billion dollars of new tax revenue each year, and of providing thousands of well-paid regional jobs, many to iwi, if statistics are an indication.

Various miners now seek a consent from a new process where an application is first seen by the Environmental Protection Agency. It judges whether the application is complete and then passes it on to be arbitrated by a small group of experts randomly selected from a large panel of balanced, competent, independent people, appointed by the Crown to measure economic benefit against any environmental risks or cost, without heed to emotion or hyperbole.

The consent process is underway, as I write. Projects will include:

a) The development of underground mining by OceanaGold at Palmerston and Waihi.

b) Mining of rare metals by Manuka Resources in the seabed 22 kilometres off the Taranaki coast.

c) Alluvial gold mining at Waikaka, on private land.

d) Rock mining at Reefton by the ASX-listed company, Federation.

e) Mining for phosphate pebbles in the seabed between Chatham Island and New Zealand, by Chatham Rock Phosphate.

f) Potentially, rock mining near the Karangahape Gorge near Waihi by New Talisman Mining (NZX-listed). 

g) Open-pit and tunnel mining for gold by the NZX and ASX-listed company Santana Minerals, on privately owned land near Cromwell.

Note, the Waikaka application may not need to reach the Fast-track process, perhaps decided by an appointed commissioner, and the New Talisman project is not yet on the formal fast-track list.

The OceanaGold projects have been producing gold for decades. In both cases OceanaGold needs permission to extend its operations for many years to come.

Some years ago, as part of my due diligence before buying into the Bendigo project, I visited Waihi, and in the early evening sought out the locals by entering a hotel bar/dining room which was clearly heavily patronised.

I joined different tables for three hours, kindly allowed to divert the conversation to the impact of mining in the small town.

The response was loud praise for the mine, from men and women, and acknowledgment that it had greatly enhanced life in Waihi, providing jobs and other economic benefits which had enriched the town.

I have no doubt that the vote in Waihi would heavily favour more mining. There will be sincere environmental objection, but the local supporters are adamant.

The Manuka Resources project is more controversial. It wants to hoover up rare metals from the sea floor 22 kilometres off the Taranaki coast, outside NZ’s territorial waters but inside the country’s economic zone.

The issue is the degree of effect of the plume created by the process, and the effect, if any, on fishing rights, on the normal passage of sea life - perhaps dolphins, whales etc - and on a claim that it might affect the coastal environment.

These will be measured against a 20-year project that would produce many billions of dollars-worth of rare metals needed to support modern applications and modern life.

Manuka’s project was once in the name of Trans Tasman Resources. Manuka has spent $85 million on developing the application. That is not a chickenfeed sum. Arguably, Manuka’s project is the biggest decision of Fast-track.

Waikaka is a relatively vanilla alluvial gold project, led by many of the same people who have previously mined and then restored privately owned farm paddocks, extracting gold by the sifting of shingles.

It involves no toxic materials and appears to have communicated effectively with all interested groups.

A Commissioner will hold a hearing in coming months. It seems an unlikely project to cause genuine controversy.

It does need to temporarily alter the direction of a stream, but as it has shown at Waikaia and Millers Flat, it is highly competent at remediating any groundwork. Indeed, its previous mining has left behind paddocks that the farmer owners would applaud as being in better condition than ever. Coincidentally, the expert miner responsible for Waikaka, Waikaia and Millers Flat was Warren Batt, the joint discoverer with Kim Bunting, of the project at Bendigo.

The rock mining planned at Reefton by Federation seeks to use modern methods to extract more gold from the underground passages from which vast amounts of gold were mined more than 100 years ago. It should not be controversial.

This plan seems unobtrusive and would give a mighty hand-up to locals in the quirky West Coast town, where local cafes still serve fabulous vegetable soup in the winter, the dining tables circling a coal fireplace.

The Chatham Rock Phosphate project seeks to hoover up phosphate pebbles from the seabed somewhere between the Chathams and NZ.

The phosphate pebbles there are non-carcinogenic, unlike the phosphates imported from Morrocco or Russia. They are slow-releasing, close to home (much lesser carbon footprint), and they are much cheaper to deliver to NZ farmers. They are abundant and sitting idle on the sea floor.

Chatham Rock Phosphate plans to deliver a large hand-up (new wharf etc.) to the Chatham Island people. This project has previously been declined by an Environmental Protection hearing which made inadequate effort to measure perceived environmental risk with projected economic benefits, in my opinion.

The Karangahape Gorge was long ago the centre of mining activity. The gorge runs between Waihi and Paeroa.

The project seeks to perform rock mining. Gold deposits are accessible by tunnels. Gold levels are rich. Mining that rock would be expensive but New Talisman is confident there would be a significant economic benefit in both jobs and taxes paid.

The current elephant in the room is the Santana project at Bendigo, near Cromwell, and some twenty kilometres from Tarras where there is a tiny settlement of farms and bachs owned by out-of-town enthusiasts, with a love of tramping, hiking and possibly fishing, total population perhaps 250.

Many there support the project and have applied for jobs at Bendigo. Others bang drums through the night, protesting.

The Tarras town years ago made an effective case against a plan to build an international airport on farmland near the village. I suspect most towns in New Zealand would have opposed an airport in the centre of a peaceful rural hamlet.

Tarras is at least twenty kilometres from Santana’s proposed mine, which in every respect will be irrelevant to the Tarras cows, sheep, petrol station and coffee bar, unlike an airport right in the midst of life there.

As far as I can discern the Tarras objectors should have no bearing on the Fast-Track decision, and will not be asked for their opinion.

Its drummers have produced objections related to the virtual invisibility of the mine, its ugliness if seen from an aircraft on route to Queenstown, and have made the untrue claim in a press release that “all” New Zealanders oppose the desecration of a distant, barren, rabbit-infested valley in the Dunstan ranges.

Any of the media that has acted as cheerleaders for this group reveal the lack of depth of fact checking.

Equally, the strategy of bombing kindergarten-standard social media platforms is hardly likely to persuade even a late-night public bar audience.

As an aside, these social media forums desperately need fact checkers to counter remarks so patently untrue, such as the dishonest chant that Santana’s people have no experience of mining or have not engaged with the local community.

If the combined experience of executives and directors does not exceed two centuries of such work I would be surprised. Such false claims undermine any credibility.

I do wonder how social media forums printing juvenile contributions can earn enough respect to attract informed debate.

My belief is that if every person with a device had to open their account by proving they were a genuine person with a real name, then the forum could refuse to publish anything from anyone whose real name and hometown was not on display alongside the comments submitted.

Anonymity allows the crass and the empty-headed to declare whatever nonsense they choose. The forums publish it, debasing whatever value there might be in such forums.

(How much pain for teenage victims of social media garbage might be avoided if the crass comments came under a real name from a real address.)

Occasionally a concerned client sends me screenshots of garbage written about me on such platforms.

The nonsense equates with children pulling faces at the window on Halloween night. They inspire derision, maybe laughter but certainly not respect.

I expect Santana to file its consent application this month, judging by the words of its Chairman Peter Cook in Santana Minerals’ annual report, who stated that the application is at the “threshold of submission”.

Will it publish its 1000-page (plus) of detailed information, or will it restrict its audience to the formal panels and only those who could be described as an adult audience?

I guess we will find out. Santana would be extraordinarily generous and inclusive if it shared its plans with those who have displayed ignorance and rudeness, constantly misrepresenting any information that had been provided out of courtesy, not obligation.

The tug-of-war should be decided by science and economics, in each of the seven applications referred to above.

Every responsible New Zealander will want an outcome that is responsible, measuring environmental cost, if any, against economic benefit.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

THE Crown now guarantees retail depositors for up to $100,000 per person, per deposit-taker, including those who deposit in grossly undercapitalised, privately-owned finance companies. 

It is now considering allowing such high-risk deposit-takers to describe themselves as a bank.

Imagine it. Hanover Bank. Money Managers Bank. Lombard Bank. Bridgecorp Bank.

I wonder who imports straitjackets to constrain people with barmy ideas.

It seems we may need a decent supply in The Terrace in Wellington.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Travel

21 October – Lower Hutt – David Colman

22 October – Wellington – Fraser Hunter

22 October – Blenheim – Edward Lee

24 October – Nelson – Edward Lee (Full)

29 October – Auckland (Ellerslie) – Edward Lee (Full)

30 October – Auckland (Albany) – Edward Lee

31 October – Auckland (CBD) – Edward Lee

Chris Lee

Chris Lee & Partners