Western Copper and Gold outlines timeline and transport options for Casino project

Western Copper and Gold representatives detailed the scope, permitting timeline and transportation options for the proposed Casino copper–gold–molybdenum mine in west-central Yukon during the Jan. 14 Ports and Harbors Advisory Board meeting in Skagway.

Sheena Shaw, vice president of environmental and community affairs for Western Copper and Gold, said the company expects a 4‑year construction period and a 27‑year operating life. "The cost to build the project is $3,600,000,000," Shaw said. She described an estimated construction workforce of about 1,400 and an operations workforce of "about 600 or 700 employees." Shaw said the project would require a new approximately 200‑kilometer road connecting the Freegold Road to the deposit and a power solution; the current design under assessment is a 200‑megawatt LNG‑fired plant with an expected steady draw around 30 megawatts for the mill.

The company is in Yukon’s panel review stage of environmental assessment, a level of review Western Copper and Gold described as unprecedented in that jurisdiction. Shaw said the firm plans to submit its environmental statement in summer 2025 and estimated a panel decision in late 2027 under the company’s timeline assumptions, but cautioned the schedule does not account for potential court actions, unanticipated information requests or other external delays.

Jeff Eng, vice president of projects, led the discussion of a draft transportation study assessing how concentrate would move from the mine to Skagway and be transferred to vessels. Eng said the study models 12 scenarios that vary whether material is moved in bulk or containerized form, where re‑handling would occur (mine side, outskirts of Skagway or at the Ore Peninsula), and the type of ship‑loading equipment (ship‑mounted cranes, mobile or permanent dock loaders). The study reports an annual average concentrate production of about 301,000 metric tons, which the company translates into an average ship‑loading interval of roughly 12.1 days.

Eng said the study converts those production figures into vehicle movements. "In the various scenarios we range from about 16 trucks per day up to about 18 and a half," Eng said, referring to the typical B‑train truck combinations modeled. He and Shaw emphasized that the numbers presented are averages and that the company is asking the study team to include peak and valley throughput figures to show variability.

Both presenters acknowledged a long‑standing Skagway municipal ordinance that restricts bulk handling of concentrate at the port. Eng said several bulk scenarios were modeled “for completeness” but were marked in the draft report as noncompliant with the ordinance; containerized scenarios that include re‑handling outside the downtown dock area were described as the options most consistent with the ordinance as currently understood.

Board members and other local officials focused questions on seasonal constraints in Skagway. Several board members and Yukon liaison Bridal Aubrey emphasized the town’s cruise‑season dock occupancy and local highway congestion as central constraints; one board member said the operation would likely only work in the evenings during the summer cruise season. Shaw confirmed the project team has already met with border‑crossing officials and anticipates moving concentrate outside of cruise‑peak hours. "We did meet with the border crossing officials here, and they gave us the same feedback ... it only works during the evenings," Shaw said.

Shaw and Eng said the transportation study is still in draft form. Cost estimates for the different scenarios were not yet finalized and several inputs remain outstanding; the company said it would share an updated slide deck and the draft report with municipal staff for review. Shaw said the company plans further targeted outreach in Skagway, refinement of the scenarios to those that are more palatable to local stakeholders, and later community engagement once a preferred approach is identified. She also said the company would include local economic‑impact modelling for Skagway after the transportation study is finalized.

Board members asked about energy alternatives. Shaw and a Yukon staff speaker noted ongoing work by Yukon entities on grid connection options and pre‑feasibility studies funded through the Canadian Critical Minerals Infrastructure Fund. The company representatives said alternatives to LNG are being explored but that the assessment filing assumes a self‑contained generation plan because the project proponent must demonstrate a stand‑alone project for the environmental assessment.

The presentation closed with the company inviting local stakeholders to follow up on the draft study and stating that the company would resume in‑person engagement when local events (for example, school activities) allow. The company also offered summer site visits and career‑day programming for youth at its camp.

The presentation generated detailed questions from board members about timing, truck volumes, docking logistics, re‑handling locations and energy options; no formal municipal actions or approvals were taken at the meeting.