I read over the Elmer /Webgogs interview a couple of times. Good stuff. Thanks Web for putting in the effort and laying it out there. 11 pages of text and summary is a big effort. Unfortunately, you are discovering that sharing DD is a bit of a one way street and largely a thankless job.

I can't get my head around the issue of the road access and Paget. I dont' understand why the Paget claims are so important in this regard. I've said why a few times previously (ie. mineral tenure does not give you road access).

If anything, the fact that Paget may need the road to explore and develop any projects in the western portion of their claim means that road construction or - at least - maintenance costs - could be shared similar to how costs are shared on BC forestry roads.

The fact that Roca Mines does not come up in the same road access discussion is telling. Roca has the mineral claims under the most important and critical points of both the Galore road AND the proposed Schaft Creek road.

These Roca claims cover the portion of the Galore & SC roads in the high mountain pass leading into Mess Creek. Only an expensive and tricky by-pass could get around the more practical road alignment proposed for the location of the SC road junction.

Roca was (is?) in pretty rough shape due to problems at its mine. I would think that their claims in the area would be easier to take off of their hands than taking all of PGS out.

Whatever problem one could envision having with Paget owning the claims under our future road is present or vastly compounded in the Roca claims area. Yet Roca is not mentioned. That leads me to discount the importance of the Paget ownership of our road right of way.

If TCK or... wanted to take out Paget, it would be for their mineral potential relative to their market cap and the nice fit of their claims with ours.

JMHO

The Wg/ES interview: http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28077204