Perhaps the staking was simply to protect the best possible route for a rail line (and not for mining/geological purposes); from a transportation corridor perspective, the shortest route with minimal engineering or natural challenges (water crossings, valleys, etc). If a competing company decided to stake areas along that route, although they may not have surface rights, what would that mean for the security of the location of a rail line? Would it be possible that any type of mining activity (drilling, digging, access roads, etc.) might prevent that ideal location. So is it possible the staked claims are simply ensuring there aren't any road bumps along the way to developing a rail line along this route?

And they have 2 years for assessment work? Well it is likely that within that time that an agreement or establishment of an ROW along that route could/would be established and any future mining claims would likely (not exactly sure here) have to take the rail line into consideration, and I'm sure they would especially if they had access to the line and could use it to transport materials.

just a thought...

pymmer