Here is what I wrote on January 22 when we were having the same discussion:
I think there is a more prosaic reason for Teck not yet including the SC reserves. The 43-101 regulations might consider them as historical estimates since the FS was produced before Teck acquired an interest in the project.
Apparently 'historical' doesn't mean old.
The definition of historical estimate has changed under New NI 43-101. It now means “an estimate of the quantity, grade, or metal or mineral content of a deposit that an issuer has not verified as a current mineral resource or mineral reserve, and which was prepared before the issuer acquiring, or entering into an agreement to acquire, an interest in the property that contains the deposit.”
"Furthermore, an issuer will be considered to be treating the historical estimate as a current estimate if it:
- incorporates the historical estimate into a disclosed economic evaluation or uses it for a production decision, or
- states that it will be adding to the historic estimate as this would imply that it is a current estimate.
These actions could trigger a technical report requirement. In no situation should a historic estimate be added to a current mineral reserve or resource estimate.
--http://agoracom.com/ir/CopperFoxMetals/forums/discussion/topics/632796-whistler-conference-teck/?message_id=1985039#message_1985039
