There is not a single mine in all of British Columbia that did not begin as a gamble of some sort.
Long before Centerra, Seabridge and other mining giants deployed teams of geologists and engineers on massive payrolls to launch sophisticated, press-release-worthy processing operations, a prospector or junior mining company shouldered the risk and broke new ground.
Mineral explorers spend seasons in the field, hoping to find tomorrow’s superstar deposit or at least earn a livable return on their investment. Junior mining companies both explore and build on discoveries after they are made. These days, prospectors and juniors have more technological advantages than ever, with far less certainty. Striking it rich was never a sure bet, but today’s mineral entrepreneurs can’t even rely on being able to take part in prospecting and mining.
Increasingly, they discover they can’t afford to search for deposits, let alone mine them, in an industry environment complicated by DRIPA-related legislation, consent-based decision-making, and court rulings.
By no means is the mining industry in B.C. closed for business, but the price of entry as a mineral prospector or junior mining company has skyrocketed and is often administratively prohibitive. Everything from registering tenure, to conducting consultation to gaining approvals now costs more and takes longer. The changes dramatically skew the system towards established mining corporations with the deepest pockets, all but eliminating the explorers and juniors that often find the deposits the heavyweights rely on for the major projects the provincial and federal governments are now championing.
In 2023, the BC Supreme Court Gitxaała decision ruled that the provincial Mineral Tenure Act breached the Crown’s duty to consult First Nations. In response, the BC NDP government replaced automatic claim registration last year with an application process requiring Crown consultation with Indigenous communities before a claim can be registered.
The NDP set a target of 90 to 120 days for the new process. While making consultation a prerequisite for tenure can clear up concerns or potential mishaps early on to reduce future conflict, it means an explorer must wait months before beginning the field work necessary for his future business. And while the Crown may now have a clearer legal duty regarding Indigenous consultation, the implementation appears anything but straightforward and the explorers are left footing the bill. Prior to the 2023 ruling, a claim could be registered online within minutes without Indigenous consultation.
Smallest operators are hardest hit by consultation confusion
A review commissioned by the BC Mineral Exploration Association based on public data, counted 5,893 applications in the first year. Just 1,427 had been approved, while 4,325 remained pending. The median decision time was 149 days, and fewer than 15 per cent were decided within the 120-day target set by the NDP.
The review found that there were no denials for consultative reasons, but numerous mineral exploration companies report permitting processes with no limits or closure on Indigenous consultations and government decision-makers who appear confused about whether “consultation” or “consent” is required. The result is systemic backlog, uncertainty and few decisions being made.
For a junior company burning cash and credit waiting for the government’s go-ahead, it’s immaterial why they are languishing in processing limbo, it only matters that they are.
“Many of our smallest members are hit the hardest and are seeing their way of life disappear. Reconciliation cannot work when only a few bare the gains,” Association for Mineral Exploration CEO, Todd Stone, wrote in a letter to B.C. Premier David Eby last January.
The association has recommended amendments to DRIPA that take public interest into account and include compensation to those who are negatively affected by legislative requirements.
Stone warned if junior prospecting and mining declines, “there will be no mines coming in behind those that may be getting close to the finish line today. There won’t be another wave of mines coming in … 10 years from now.”
There is nothing neutral about delay in the mining economy. An established, wealthy producer can afford to retain legal teams and a wide array of specialists for consultation and environmental issues, and it can maintain them across several projects at once.
A junior typically doesn’t have the financial capacity or flexibility to absorb costs associated with a stalled timeline. Operating revenue is often nil and may depend entirely on future development of a property. Months of delay mean more overhead, a missed mining season, and the loss of investors to other jurisdictions or competitors. These are regressive, fixed-cost rules.
Eskay Creek is no model for future success
Already, the province has extended a pause on new claims in northwest and north-central B.C. January 31, 2027, to support land-use planning in partnership with First Nations, guided by the promise to “co-develop” a plan that aligns with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as well as B.C.’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, along with the province’s commitments to reconciliation and “a shared approach to land stewardship.”
The B.C. government says existing mineral tenures remain unaffected, but the pause effectively reduces competition, increases the value of land packages already secured and will likely hinder the permitting processes that follow the staking of a claim. In the northwest, critics allege the planning process co-led by the Tahltan First Nation and the B.C. government has resulted in an amateur, ineffective process, biased against all but those with pockets deep enough to participate in a pay-to-play system, operating in the name of reconciliation.
For example, Skeena Gold & Silver’s Eskay Creek mine project reached the construction stage after more than four years of environmental assessment work, more than 100 engagement sessions, and hundreds of meetings. The province says the formal permitting period from application submission to decision took nine months, more than 40 per cent faster than previous processes.
Eskay is an advanced redevelopment project backed by a company able to raise large and decisive sums of capital. Skeena raised its capital-cost estimate from US$560 million to US$659 million, citing final permit conditions and updated benefit-agreement commitments, along with inflation, engineering refinements, scope changes, and timing.
And to lock down consent of the Tahltan Nation—a requirement stipulated by the B.C. government through a consent-based decision-making agreement under DRIPA— Skeena committed nearly $2 billion in cash, wages and other benefits to Tahltan members over the 12-year-life of the mine.
How can a grassroots junior possibly hope to match that? That target is neither fair nor realistic.
B.C. can and should prevent mining exploration from being transformed into a privilege for big mining conglomerates and a punishing crucible for smaller players dreaming of competing with them. Juniors and prospectors play an integral role in exploration, tilling the ground for future mining development. They are the de facto research-and-development department of the mining economy, and they accept geological risks that governments and major producers avoid.
If legal uncertainty, administrative fog, unreasonable delays, and an unpredictable process continue to consume explorers’ limited capital, fewer targets will be tested with fewer deposits found. The domino effect will shrink public revenues and hurt the communities where mining is crucial for local growth.
The B.C. government trumpets Eskay Creek as a resounding provincial success story, and maybe it is in some ways, but it is not a sensible template going forward. The true test of sound mining policy is whether a junior company today can afford to break new ground and find the next Eskay Creek.