 |
SPOTLIGHT ON
ABORIGINAL RIGHTS
The BC Treaty Process
Special Rights
Douglas Treaties
............................the right to "carry on their fisheries as formerly."
August 24, 2000
Support for Mi'kmaq fishing rights has spread to Vancouver Island. Members of Scia'new First Nation went fishing to express their support for Mi'kmaq and their own 1850 Douglas Treaty rights.
Chief Burt Charles of Scia'new - Beecher Bay Indian Band went fishing for salmon, ignoring government regulations. But even though they didn't catch any fish, they made their point about treaty rights.
Chief Charles reminds the Canadian government that the Douglas Treaty says his people can fish as they previously did and that includes commercial fishing. If they had caught salmon they had planned to sell it to make their point.
The Federal Fisheries Department disagrees and says the treaty allows for food fish only. In fact, the BC and Canadian governments want to renegotiate the Douglas Treaties through the faltering British Columbia modern-day treaty process that has yet to produce any settlements.
Chief Charles and his fishermen plan to exercise their treaty rights again soon.
June 2, 2000
News and Comment
by Tehaliwaskénhas - Bob Kennedy, Oneida
Southern Vancouver Island First Nations Serve Notice
They will exercise treaty rights again
It's been six months since the first significant signal from members of the Douglas Treaty first nations that they were not going to wash their hands of history. Sure there's a new kid on the block - called the BC Treaty Process. But these people already have their treaties.
Despite the fact they have few words, the terse documents speak volumes about aboriginal rights, according to the First Nations. Any day now they will provide governments with a reminder.
First Nations of the Te'mexw Treaty Association will go fishing this summer based solely on their right to do so under their treaties - no need for Department of Fisheries licenses. After all, if the Supreme Court of Canada in the Marshall Decision affirmed east coast Indian treaty rights, then it affirms these rights too. Perhaps, but you can find as many legal opinions on that as you can sand upon the beach.
However, here's a glimpse of the basic language of these treaties and what seems to me to be basic meaning too - The fourteen Douglas treaties are similar in approach and content. An area of land was surrendered "entirely and forever" in exchange for cash, clothing, or blankets. The signatories and their descendants retained existing village sites and fields for their continued use, the "liberty to hunt over unoccupied lands" and the right to "carry on their fisheries as formerly." - from the British Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs.
I don't know about you, but for me taken at face value - the fisheries part is very straightforward. Perhaps that's why the feds and the province have such a big problem with the language. It says what it says and they just can't handle either the simplicity and/or the implications.
Before the naysayers and right wing anti-Indian types get a hold of this, it's important to note - they promise to be respectful of the fishery - conservation principles will be followed. This comes as no surprise to me. In my opinion - in principle, and given the opportunity to strut their stuff, First Nations can usually 'meet or beat' the non-aboriginal regulations' approach to conservation.
What's to come of this latest exercise of treaty rights? Will conflict and confrontation prevail? Your crystal ball is as good as mine. It's hard to say - but just read below the story I wrote last November and then realize charges have not yet been laid related to that so-called out of season Native fishery.
We can speculate. The political climate has become more heated. The world has changed since last fall. A sizeable difference - like between one of those little rock crabs and their tasty distant cousins the Dungeness.
If we look to Atlantic Canada for inspiration or a clue we can get a good reading on what to expect. Department of Fisheries officers, supported by the Mounties have seized Mi'kmaq lobster traps from First Nation fishermen unwilling to play by the government's rules. They refuse to sign agreements or get licenses because they feel their treaty rights are all they need. Even the seduction of millions of department dollars has not swayed the Burnt Church First Nation in New Brunswick, although many others have opted for a regulated fishery.
As for the Douglas Treaty First Nations on Vancouver Island, the government of Canada has put together a plan to also offer them money, boats and gear - to bring them into the fold to follow Fisheries regulations only.
BACKGROUND
As previously reported by Turtle Island Native Network
NEWS AND COMMENT
by Tehaliwaskénhas - Bob Kennedy
NOVEMBER 4, 1999
"I'm doing what my grandfather taught me to do here."
.............................Jack Planes, T'So-uke Nation
Treaty Showdown on Vancouver Island!
Sockeye, the Chief's faithful dog was there, perhaps hoping for something to eat that resembled his name. Brilliant sunshine filled the fall sky, and there was the feel of something rather bizarre, but of historic significance in the air.
The T'Sou-ke Nation asserted its Treaty rights today by selling crabs to a non-Indian resident of the neighbering town of Sooke. "It's a good day to get arrested", said Chief James Cooper, watching with a smile, as the 'arranged' affair unfolded on the First Nation's dock where the harbour meets the mouth of the Sooke River. Chief Cooper was there to witness his people exercising their rights under their Douglas Treaty, signed in 1850.
Asserting their treaty rights for sure, but it definitely was as cordial as this type of event can be, under the scrutiny of the print and electronic media. Department of Fisheries and Oceans officers were also there --- invited by the First Nation to watch as councillor Jacques(Jack)Planes arrived by traditional carved canoe --- the Elder Spirit, and in front of several fisheries officers deliberately sold crabs to John Haynes, one of the Indian Band's local supporters. As he was approached by Fisheries Officer Stefan Beckmann, Planes told him with great pride wrapped around his words, "I'm doing what my grandfather taught me to do here."
They seized the crabs and money as evidence, asked for identification, wrote down names, and once they got all the proper documentation they needed to lay charges,basically said "You'll be hearing from us". Fishery Officer Beckmann tried to get Planes to make a statement, but he refused, saying "I'm not interested in making any statement without advice from my lawyer".
They will lay charges against Planes and the man who bought the crabs, Haynes. That's precisely what the First Nation wants --- to get their day in court to have their treaty rights affirmed, the same way the Mi'kmaq did in the Marshall case. "We are pre-confederation Treaty Indians, Douglas Treaty Indians", explained T'So-uke Nation treaty negotiator, Andy Planes. He reminds us that their people have always caught fish and sold it and they intend to do it again, to build an economy for their community.
Regarding the issue of conservation and non-aboriginal skeptics,they can rest assured, "Us Coast Salish people have always practiced conservation, and we will bring in higher regulations than DFO", Planes promised.
Since the Supreme Court of Canada's Marshall decision in favour of the Mi'kmaq on the east coast, Vancouver Island First Nations have taken the ruling as a powerful signal their own treaty rights are affirmed. Although BC has a modern-day treaty process, in which the T'Sou-ke Nation participates, there already are fourteen Douglas Treaties in the province, the majority on Vancouver Island.
The Nations are going to begin asserting their fishing rights under those Douglas Treaties, especially since the BC Treaty Process is not producing results fast enough.
back
©All contents are copyright 1998,1999,2000
by INFOCOM Management-
a Native owned and operated company.
