I have often thought about sending some questions directly to Elmer via email (I'm in a completely different time zone so phone is a bit harder to do. Furthermore I'm not a native english speaker so there a bigger chance of being caught off guard on phone).
After some on the board posted his personal email (and not just the INFO one) I finally did so.
I know many of the questions have already been asked but it was important for me to get a confirmation send directly from Elmer to me.

Questions are listed below in random order and Elmer's Answers are in BOLD and BRACKETS:

1) Are you concerned about the day to day share price especially at the moment with the down trend we're in? (The entire market has been in a down turn for approximately 12 months, I am of the opinion that this down turn in the general market should start to turn around. As for the daily trading price of the shares, would I like to see the price higher, the answer is yes, but the market (the buyers and sellers ) appear to want to trade in this range)

2) If Teck was to buy "us" out wouldn't it be a problem with the current low share price as most buyouts are at a 50-100% premium of share prices? (Normally that is one of the methods used to purchase properties. However, that is the purchasers starting position and requires the acceptance by the Company being sold. However recent market purchases have been completed at higher premiums to market price. There are other methods that can be used to value companies.)

3) Unless you have some very long summers in Canada I'm kind of disappointed at the missed MID to LATE SUMMER BFS release date. (The work required to complete the Feasibility Study has been completed by a number of independent engineering companies, over which Copper Fox has limited control. These engineering companies provide estimated dates when they would completed their work and that is what is provided to and used by the main contractor Tetra Tech to estimate when they would be completed. In addition to delays encountered by these companies, the work completed by the various contractors have to be reviewed by competent persons internal to those engineering companies and then passed on to Tetra Tech. If on review Tetra Tech has questions or issues that have to be resolved before that information would be used to move to the next stage/phase of the feasibility study. The cumulative effect of this process has led to delays (which were unexpected). Please keep in mind that five independent contractors were involved in providing information to the feasibility study. Also a number of Tetra Tech’s people were hired away by other companies during this process.)

How come we have yet again missed a deadline. One would initially think you have run into problems with the BFS or (as I hope) it's Teck slowing the process down? (Teck is not slowing down the process. We need to make sure that all data used in completing the feasibility study is correct and meets the level of detail and quality required to meet the standards expected in a feasibility study. We have taken the position that due to the importance of the delivery of the feasibility study, that we do not want to give Teck any reason whatsoever to challenge the feasibility study. As you know the delivery of the feasibility study triggers a period of time in which Teck has to either elect to earn-back and interest in the project or they can opt to walk away. Clearly Copper Fox does not want any delays when the feasibility study is delivered to Teck which would prolong the time period in which Teck has to make their election with regards to the Schaft Creek project)

4) How do you personally feel about the many missed deadlines and the possible loss of credibility going forward? (I am not happy with the delays incurred regarding completion of the feasibility study but as indicated above the recent delays are beyond the control of Copper Fox. However Copper Fox needs to make sure that when Teck is delivered the feasibility study, that the feasibility study is accepted by Teck and that starts the 120 day period. You may be aware of project in Panama where Teck has an interest in a copper project. Teck objected to the feasibility study (not sure of the reasons) and held up that process for I believe; 6 month. Copper Fox is trying to avoid this situation in the event that Teck wants more time to make their election (for whatever reason.)

That said I think you and the rest of the management have done a great job so I don't hope you will get insulted by that question. (Thanks you, we are all shareholders)

5) If Teck is opting NOT to back-in etc. - do you have other interested parties in you project or are we "lost"? (If Teck elects not to earn-back then Copper Fox would approach other companies. However before Teck makes their election, other companies would not spend much time looking/working on Copper Fox simply because they are not sure what percentage interest of the project would be available)

I mean it IS a large CAPEX project so potentially interested companies MUST be very limited or...? (The number of companies would be limited, however large companies like large projects. With the current resources at Schaft Creek, the results of the 2012 exploration program (i.e. the Discovery Zone) and other features of the project such as environmental footprint would/should make this project of interest to other companies)

6) Are Mr. Ernesto Echavarria and Mr. David M. Macdonald blacked out at the moment and how much are they actually involved in the current BFS-process? (Only the management and legal counsel are involved in the BFS process, external directors will be appraised of the BFS when a draft news release is prepared and forwarded to them for review and discussion)

7) The Northwest Power Line - is that a private or government build project? (Government built, under construction, a substantial amount of the work (slashing line, footings for towers etc.) required on the northern portion of the NTL is underway.)

I think it's a very positive sign in regards to our EA that the government has decided to build this power line. (Very positive)

Would they do this if they didn't intended to approve most of the mines' EA's incl. SC? Just wondering... (This may have been a part of the decision, but the published reason is for a move to clean energy to remove the diesel power generators now used to generate electrical power in the northern communities)

7A) How many mines (approx.) will the power line serve when completed? (Three)

7B) Will it deliver power to private households and businesses as well or only mines? (Also to the town of Iskut)

8) The Port of Steward's facility agreement - was that also part of/included in the 2008 study? (Yes it was contemplated to use the Port of Stewart)

8A) In the 2008 study what source of energy was chosen for the SC project (Electrical power) and how much money will be saved with the NTL supplying us now (if you can tell)? (Cannot say)

9) You have previously stated that CUU is in control of the BFS but with Teck looking over your shoulders. (Teck have the right pursuant to the option agreement executed in 2002 to review all data from the Schaft Creek project, Copper Fox has adopted a transparent process regarding the Schaft Creek project with Teck, regulators and First Nations Groups)

Can Teck "force" CUU to delay the release of the BFS even if it is finished? (The news release is prepared by Copper Fox, Teck has the right to make comments on the news release, Copper Fox has the final say on if Copper Fox wants to accept Teck’s comments)

This could explain the latest missed BFS date... (No)

10) How complete is the BFS approx. in %? (We are in the final stages of completing the feasibility study)

4) How do you see Teck's High Valley project compared to SC? (Essentially the same size of operation, similar metallurgical process, SC has more gold and molybdenum than reported from HV, logistical support would be different due to locations)

The are both low grade. Ours even more low grade. (HV now lower grade and Teck are posting good margins and bottom line results)

High Valley though still seems to be a very profitable project. (I would agree)

5) Finally - now where Teck has acquired most of the land between Galore and SC do they need major infrastructure at Galore (tunnel etc) to possibly transport high grade material from Galore to SC or can it be done "just" by road? (I am not sure what Teck’s plans are with respect to northern BC. In my opinion moving the material from Galore Creek to Schaft Creek for processing would not make economic senses due to the cost incurred in transportation. Also to use a common mill facility would require that the mineralization in both deposits are similar and respond the same to the milling process. Also there is the issue with tailing disposal, combining the two operations would make this an issue with the regulators.)

I know it's pure speculation but maybe Teck would be interested in feeding some high grade material into the SC project to make it even better. AND - as a stand alone project Galore doesn't work out that well atm. Any comments? (High grading a deposit can cause serious economic issues at a later date and in some cases renders the deposit uneconomic especially if substantial capital expenditures are required to commence production at a later date. Also as stated above the metallurgy response of the two mineralization would need to be the same for this to work efficiently)

Investorish