Tudor Gold confirms scope of 2026 exploration works
TSX-V-listed precious and base metals explorer Tudor Gold has confirmed that planning is well advanced for its 2026 Treaty Creek exploration programme, which will follow up on gold discoveries made near the Goldstorm deposit.
Tudor Gold has claims in British Columbia’s Golden Triangle region, which is known for hosting large mineral deposits. Tudor’s flagship project is Treaty Creek, in which it has an 80% interest for an area spanning 17 913 ha.
The two-phase planned drill programme for the year will include 2 000 m of drilling at the CBZ zone to follow up on drill results from 2021 and 2022, as well as 8 000 m of drilling at the Perfectstorm zone that last had geophysics undertaken in 2022.
The programme will also follow up on higher-grade drill hole intercepts from a 2023 drill programme where one hole intersected 1.23 g/t gold and 3.43 g/t silver over 102 m.
Tudor plans to have two drill rigs mobilised by mid-May and to continue with drilling through late September or early October.
Meanwhile, Tudor confirms that no court dates have been set regarding its legal action against the province of British Columbia over a conditional mineral reserve linked to TSX- and NYSE-listed Seabridge Gold.
Tudor in October 2025 brought an application in the Supreme Court of British Columbia that centres on Seabridge’s copper, gold, silver and molybdenum Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell (KSM) project, which is adjacent to Treaty Creek.
The reserve requires that Tudor not obstruct, endanger or interfere with the construction, operation or maintenance of the Mitchell Treaty Tunnels (MTT) – which are two planned 23-km-long tunnels that will connect the east and west sides of the KSM mine site.
About 12.5 km of the tunnels will pass through mineral claims held by Tudor at Treaty Creek.
In its application, Tudor argued that the province misrepresented its rights as a mineral claims holder and that the reserve amounts to an expropriation of its claims, eliminating any potential economic benefit from them. The company also claims the province lacked the authority to give Seabridge rights to use parts of the Treaty Creek claims.
Tudor is asking the court to declare that the reserve does not apply to it, or alternatively, that the reserve and related approvals exceed the province’s authority. If the court does not grant this, Tudor intends to seek compensation for expropriation or damages for misrepresentation.
Seabridge said in October 2025 that the British Columbia government had, in every instance, reconfirmed its approvals and its understanding of the legal aspects of these matters. “If Tudor were to be successful in certain of its claims, it could have consequences for the KSM project.”
“We are confident that the province acted within the law and that the various authorisations for the MTT are appropriate and reliable,” Seabridge added.
The matter would ultimately have to be resolved between the companies or through a court ruling, Tudor confirmed in its latest statement issued in April 14.
Tudor said to preserve its rights as recorded holder of the mineral claims where Treaty Creek was located, the company filed two proceedings in the British Columbia courts.
The first was a notice of civil claim, filed September 2025 in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, against the province of British Columbia asserting that a conditional registration reserve does not apply to Tudor’s mineral claims and cannot grant rights to third parties that they did not otherwise have and, secondly, Tudor filed a petition in October 2025 in the same court that sought a judicial review of the Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship’s decision to grant Seabridge a licence of occupation covering certain of Tudor claims.
