In a significant development for Rise Gold Corp., legal efforts are underway to secure the operational rights to the company’s Idaho-Maryland Mine (I-M Mine), a historically productive site that yielded approximately 2.4 million ounces of gold from 1862 to 1957. The focus of these efforts follows a complex legal landscape, particularly regarding the mine’s vested rights in relation to Nevada County’s zoning regulations enacted in 1954.
The County’s comprehensive zoning ordinance requires a permit for underground mining activities, but the I-M Mine was operational prior to this regulation, which leads to the assertion of vested rights allowing the mine to continue operations without a permit. Despite this claim, the County Board of Supervisors rejected Rise Gold’s petition on December 14, 2023, stating that mining operations at associated sites had ceased by 1956, thus invalidating any vested rights.
This rationale echoes a precedent set in the 1990s when the County had previously denied a similar petition regarding the Bear’s Elbow Mine, claiming that vested rights expire upon ceasing operations. However, the California Supreme Court in the 1996 case Hansen Bros. Enter., Inc. v. Nevada County Board of Supervisors determined that cessation does not inherently equate to abandonment of vested rights. The court specified that abandonment is contingent on a conjunction of intentions and acts that clearly demonstrate a lack of interest in maintaining the right to operate.
In response to the County’s decision, Rise Gold submitted a Writ of Mandamus to the Superior Court of California in May 2024, challenging the Board’s ruling and seeking recognition of its vested rights. In the litigation process, the Company has faced challenges, including a motion from the County asserting that Rise had lost standing to pursue its claims due to the sale of three non-core surface parcels. However, a ruling on August 8, 2025, upheld Rise’s interest in the mine property, affirming its right to proceed with the case.
The current legal schedule includes brief submissions and oral arguments, with Rise set to file an initial brief on September 15 and oral arguments scheduled for January 9, 2026. Rise’s legal counsel has emphasized the constitutional aspect of the case, arguing that rights cannot simply expire and that the County has the burden of proof to establish abandonment.
Comments from the County’s Board of Supervisors indicated a lack of legal expertise on the matter, with various members openly expressing discomfort with the complexities involved in the case. Rise Gold’s CEO, Joe Mullin, expressed concern over the County’s choice to revisit established legal precedents, emphasizing the Company’s expectation of a favorable ruling that recognizes its rights to operate the I-M Mine.
The stakes are high, as a denial of mining rights could result in the County owing compensation to Rise under the Fifth Amendment, with the fair market value of the mineral estate potentially exceeding $400 million based on historical yields. Should the Company lose its case at the state level, it is prepared to escalate the matter to a federal court to ensure proper compensation for what they classify as a taking.
