‘No is a valid outcome of consultation,’ groups fighting Taranis’s Thor copper project in B.C. say

A dispute between Taranis Resources (TSXV: TRO; US-OTC: TNREF), the British Columbia government and First Nations groups over the Thor polymetallic project is brewing over long drilling exploration permit delays. 

After waiting more than 14 months for the notice of work permit for the project in the Kootenay mountains to be processed — far longer than the usual 30-day turnaround time — Taranis escalated the battle to the B.C. Supreme Court on Oct. 16.  

The company filed a judicial review petition asking the court to order the province’s chief permitting officer to make a decision on the permit.  

The B.C. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation (EMLI) “is unwilling to do its legal duty here because of First Nation pressure,” Taranis president and CEO John Gardiner told The Northern Miner in an interview. “It is regrettable that we have to apply to court to have our rights respected.”  

Gardiner said the legal action was a last resort. 

“We have tried everything else, including letters to Minister Josie Osborne and Premier David Eby, and we hope the government is asking itself what message this sends to international investors,” he said. 

However, yaqan nuʔkiy, also known as the Lower Kootenay Band, and the Ktunaxa Nation Council (KNC) said in a joint statement on Nov. 1 that Taranis was trying to “cut off [their] voice.” 

“No is a valid outcome of consultation,” the groups said in their statement. 

The Ktunaxa believe that as traditional landholders, their consent is paramount, as underscored by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution. 

Who has the ultimate say?

The belief that First Nations groups should have veto power over land use in B.C. has not been legally established but is deterring exploration investment in the province, Gardiner argues. 

“The government has taken the position that First Nations are the rightful owners of the land,” Gardiner said, suggesting a departure from legal precedent that the Crown holds rights over the vast majority of B.C.’s land. This contentious point is generating significant anxiety within the mining community. 

Taranis argues that while considering Indigenous rights is part of the Crown’s duty to consult, the Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly said that First Nations do not have a veto. 

“So, the government has to follow the law here,” he said. 

The exploration permit application relates to Taranis’s Thor project south of Revelstoke, B.C. The project has been the subject of prior exploration for 16 years, including more than 250 drill holes. 

Taranis has been actively prospecting and undertaking permitted shallow drilling activities at Thor for several years. A Nov. 6 press release reported grab samples grading as high as 14.55 grams gold and 1,705 grams silver per tonne.  

Still, the Indigenous concern arose with its application last year to conduct deep drilling to test its theory that an as-yet undiscovered porphyry intrusion underpins the epithermal Thor mineralization at surface. 

Maintaining the access road to Taranis Resources’ Thor project, B.C. Credit: Taranis Resources

Robin Young, a lawyer at Calgary-based McMillan LLP, said the notion that First Nations hold ownership over the lands in question isn’t supported in law. “The contention, therefore, resides not in the letter of the law, but in its interpretation and the actions that stem from such readings,” he told  The Northern Miner. 

As B.C. grapples with these complexities, the fate of junior miners like Taranis hangs in the balance, Gardiner argues. He suggests the province’s permitting process appears to have been ensnared in a broader debate over Indigenous rights and environmental protection. 

He specifically refers to the early 2023 creation of the Incomappleux Nature Conservancy bordering Thor, which potentially clouds the project’s future development prospects.  

Gardiner alleges these nature reserves were rushed through in record time during the COVID-19 pandemic, with little to no industry or private landholder consultation, suggesting the government prefers conservation partnerships over mining interests. 

A spokesperson for EMLI said the ministry could not comment on a matter before the courts. 

This isn’t the first dispute Taranis has had with the province. The company ultimately won a previous battle regarding a bulk sample application submitted for Thor in 2018. The province was compelled by an independent B.C. Ombudsperson to issue the permit in 2021 and ‘follow its own regulations.’  

’Ktunaxa-led vision’ 

The First Nations’ concerns mainly centre around the potential impact on the region’s ecological and archaeological values, with implications for species at risk, water quality, and Indigenous rights. 

In January, yaqan nuʔkiy and the KNC first learned of Taranis’s intention, prompting immediate letters of opposition citing the need for a Ktunaxa-led vision and plan for the land’s future. The B.C. government’s subsequent commitment to further consultation did little to stall Taranis’s legal action. 

For their part, the yaqan nuʔkiy and Ktunaxa leaders stated their nations are open to mining, but on terms that respect their heritage and ecological concerns. They highlight a long-term perspective over short-term economic gains, seeking projects that can coexist with their vision for the land’s future health. 

As Taranis awaits its day in court, the situation underscores a broader national conversation about the rights of Indigenous peoples, the authority of traditional landholders, and the future of resource development within the framework of Canadian law and Indigenous reconciliation. 

Another recent B.C. Supreme Court decision bears on the issue. In September, the court ruled that the province must consult with Indigenous groups before granting mineral claims, upholding the Crown’s duty to consult. 

The province’s 5,000 member-strong B.C. Association for Mineral Exploration supported the ruling’s exemption of existing claims, and the decision to keep the current claims staking process in place for 18 months. It also said the ruling was an opportunity to modernize the Mineral Tenure Act, ensuring the mineral claim staking process remains competitive, efficient, and respectful of Indigenous peoples’ rights.