I can appreciate the guy's position, to some extent. He's probably holding out for a load of money... but after all, why shouldn't the property owner get a load of cash for the gold underneath his house? Say, 50% after cash costs?

I don't want to go all libertarian about "sovereign rights of the individual", but really, does the government have a right (beyond what they steal for themselves) to say that he doesn't own the gold on his property?

It's awfully convenient that the government gives his gold away to Osisko.