The assets are in Brazil and the Guiana Shield. The diligence should already be too.

Brazil's mineral ecosystem is administered by the ANM (Agência Nacional de Mineração), which absorbed the former DNPM in 2018. Every tenement moves through a staged pipeline — Requerimento de Pesquisa, Autorização de Pesquisa, Relatório Final de Pesquisa, and Concessão de Lavra — each stage carrying its own disclosure and constraint profile.

For juniors operating in the Legal Amazon and Minas Gerais, the two constraints that most often stall a tenement are FUNAI indigenous territory overlap and state-level environmental licensing (IBAMA or the relevant state agency). Neither shows up in a geological assay — both show up in Imageo's overlay.

Guyana's mineral sector sits under the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC), operating within the Mining Act of 1989. Licensing runs through Prospecting Licences and Permits before graduating to Small, Medium, or Large Scale Mining Permits — each tier carrying different capital and disclosure thresholds relevant to a TSX or ASX listing.

As a frontier jurisdiction within the Guiana Shield, the constraint picture is less about volume of regulation and more about resolution — permit boundaries, Amerindian village land claims, and forestry concessions are not always digitized to a standard a technical report can cite directly.

Suriname's mining sector is regulated by the Geologisch Mijnbouwkundige Dienst (GMD) under the Mijnbouwdecreet E-58, with English-language technical disclosure increasingly expected as more TSX-V and AIM-listed juniors enter the country. Licensing distinguishes exploration rights from exploitation rights, each requiring separate territorial clearance.

Datum inconsistency is a recurring friction point — historic concession data was recorded under older local systems before wider adoption of WGS 84, and reconciling both against current tenement polygons is a step most technical reports skip entirely.