Before colonization, First Nations were self-governing, self-sustaining nations, with legal, administrative and diplomatic systems that owned and managed their lands and resources. At the time of contact, relationships between First Nations and European explorers and traders ranged from mutually beneficial relationships to violent encounters. Relationship patterns changed dramatically, however, when a colonial European infrastructure was established and settlement by Europeans and Americans was promoted.

Indian Reserves did not exist in British Columbia until shortly after the region became an official British colony. Before this time, First Nations had no colonial restrictions as to where they lived on the land or how they used the resources that the land and water provided.

Once the colonial powers claimed sovereignty over the land and its resources, Aboriginal Title and Rights became a very controversial issue.

Sir James Douglas, Chief Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company and governor of the colonies, recognized that in order to promote settlement he would have to extinguish Aboriginal Title and stabilize the relationship between First Nations and settlers. Douglas negotiated fourteen agreements for the cession of Title on Vancouver Island from 1850-1854. This process was intended to extinguish Title through treaty. These fourteen treaties along with Treaty 8 and the Nisga'a treaty, finalized in the year 2000, are the only treaties that have been signed in British Columbia.

After the fourteen Douglas Treaties, the Colonial office in Ottawa stopped funding efforts for the extinguishment of Title in British Columbia. However, the British Colonial office still expected Douglas to proceed with extinguishing Indian Title, but at the Colony's own cost. Although the Royal Proclamation of 1763 required the negotiation of treaties to extinguish Title and claim Aboriginal lands for settlement, Douglas created reserves throughout the colony without either negotiating nor extinguishing Aboriginal Title.

Joseph Trutch became governor of the colony in 1864 and while in power, reduced existing reserves and was unwilling to allot new reserves or add to pre-existing reserves. Trutch refused to recognize Aboriginal Title and, like Douglas, acted without any formal policy. Trutch's reductions to Indian reserves were the first of many "adjustments" or "cut-offs" that have been made to reserves.

When British Columbia joined Canada in 1871, the terms of union detailed the ways the two levels of government would divide jurisdiction and authority. Under Article 13 of the terms, the Dominion government held jurisdictional responsibility for Indians and the trusteeship and management of lands reserved for Indians. The provincial government retained a 'reversionary interest' in Indian lands, meaning that any lands removed from Indian reserves were to become Provincial crown land. It was at this time that the dispute between the Provincial and Dominion governments over Indian land policy began. The governments argued over control of reserve lands and the Provincial government's refusal to commit to a formal Indian policy or to recognize and deal with existing Aboriginal Title.

Both Dominion and Provincial governments held substantially different opinions regarding reserve size. The land surveyed in the province amounted to less than one acre per Indian (settlers were receiving 320 acres per family) although Aboriginal Title had neither been recognized nor extinguished. In the other provinces, the Dominion government implicitly acknowledged Title by signing treaties for land surrender, giving between 160 and 640 acres per Indian family. The province refused a Dominion government proposal to increase Indian reserves to 80 acres per family. The two governments temporarily agreed to 20 acres per family.

Ongoing disputes resulted in the establishment of the Indian Reserve Commission in 1876 (first called the 'Joint Indian Reserve Commission') to determine Indian reserves in British Columbia. The reserve commission was authorized to create reserves to be used for the benefit of First Nations. Dominion crown lands were to be used to add land to reserves while any land removed became Provincial land. The decisions of the Joint Reserves Commission were made without consent from First Nations, disregarding Aboriginal Title and Rights.

When Sir Richard McBride was appointed premier in 1903, the Province was growing rapidly and the government's economic plan for growth had little or no regard for First Nations or their land. Upset with the state of the Indian land policy in the province, First Nations delegates took their concerns to McBride. When they were dismissed by the Provincial government the delegates took their concerns to the Dominion government. Sir Robert Borden's Conservative Dominion government response to the delegation was that they were also growing increasingly frustrated with British Columbia's Indian policy. The Dominion government, seeking a final solution to the dispute, proposed the creation of a joint Dominion-Provincial commission to resolve British Columbia's Indian land policy issues.

In 1911, Dr. J. A. J. McKenna was appointed special commissioner by the Dominion government to negotiate with the Provincial government. To appease the Provincial government, the issue of Aboriginal Title was removed early on from the negotiations. Finally, in September 1912, an agreement was reached. The McKenna McBride Agreement laid down the terms for a joint Dominion-Provincial Royal Commission to settle the problems of reserve size and reversionary interest.

When the Dominion and Provincial governments Commission members in session at Victoria approved the terms of the McKenna McBride Agreement in 1913, the members of the Royal Commission on Indian Affairs in British Columbia were appointed. The McKenna McBride Commission as it is commonly called, was composed of four Commissioners, (two representatives from the Provincial Government and two representatives from the Dominion Government), and one chairman appointed by the four Commissioners. The Commission had many tasks:

• To study all the relevant materials pertaining to reserve size, resource management, etc.
• Gather evidence and testimonies from First Nations, Indian Agents and other Government officials, Settlers, and Religious Representatives.
• Travel throughout British Columbia in order to make recommendations on Indian reserve sizes.
• Conduct meetings with all of the different Bands from the fifteen designated Indian Agencies.

The minutes from these and other meetings are referred to as "Evidence". Through interpreters, the Commissioners conducted meetings with chiefs, sub-chiefs, and band members. According to the Commission's guidelines, the Commissioners were required to explain the scope and purpose of the  Commission at each meeting. They were also required to listen to the Indians and take evidence under oath. The Commissioners reassured the Indians that no 'surrender', or reduction, of any reserve land would occur without their consent, as required by Dominion law. The meetings were generally arranged by the Indian Agents as the Commissioners accepted them to be the local authority on issues concerning the needs and requests of the Indians. The Agents' evidence and testimonies were influential in the Commission's decision making especially in circumstances where band members refused to meet with the Commission. When this occurred, testimony given by the Indian Agent was the only evidence used to inform the Commission's decisions about First Nations' needs. The Commission refused to meet any organized body of Native representatives, such as the Indian Rights Association, although the request was made by First Nations.

Transcripts of these meetings offer insight into the interests of the Commission and highlight the concerns raised by the Indians. They reveal how the Commission believed that Indians could not manage their own affairs. Indian evidence was seen as secondary to statements from other sources such as municipal councils, boards of trade, railway companies, and government departments. Through Interim Reports, the Commission had the authority to speed up the granting of land for specific reasons such as railway rights-of-way. Although compensation was to be made for Interim Report cut-offs, for the 98 Interim Reports issued, it is not known what compensation was given.

• Aboriginal Title to land
• Fishing, hunting, trapping, mineral, timber and water rights
• Settler encroachment on Indian reserve lands and lack of compensation
• Difficulties with agricultural production
• Additional reserve land for uses such as villages, gravesites, and fishing stations
• Government services, such as health care and education

Many of these concerns were outside the powers of the Commission. However, the information was gathered and published in a report in 1916. This "Confidential Report" included First Nations' concerns as well as recommendations, most of which were disregarded.

In 1916, after three years of gathering evidence, the McKenna McBride Commission collected one volume of evidence from each of the Agencies and four volumes of statistics from the entire Commission. The Royal Commission Report was then published to present a detailed account of the work.

The Report recommended that cut-offs be made from 54 reserves, totalling 47,055.49 acres. At the time, the land cut off had an assessed value of between $1,347,912.72 and $1,533,704.72, with the average acre valued at $26.52 to $32.36. The Report also recommended that 87,291.17 acres be added to reserve land. The added land had an assessed value of only $444,838.80, with the average acre valued at $5.10. Although the acreage of the added reserve land was nearly double that of the cut-off land, the value of the land added was approximately one-third the value of the land cut off. Only 45% of the land applications put forward by Indians were granted, in whole or in part.

The Commission recommended allocating an average of approximately 150 acres per Native family based on a registered Indian population of 24,000. However, the reserve land was not distributed equally; while some Bands were to receive nearly 700 acres per family, others were to receive less than one-tenth that amount. Coastal reserves, for instance, were to be smaller as it was assumed First Nations would have access to the ocean and its resources.

Before the recommendations could become official or be implemented they had to be approved by both governments, which proved to be a difficult process. The Provincial government complained that too much land was allocated for the Indian reserves despite the fact that they stood to gain financially from the sale of better quality cut-off lands. The province also objected to the requirement of First Nations' consent for cut-off lands despite the legal requirement for such consent. The testimonies and subsequent meetings also show First Nations' rejection of the Commission's authority to reduce reserve sizes.

The Dominion Indian Affairs Settlement Act of 1919 and the British Columbia Indian Lands Settlement Act of 1920 were passed in an attempt for both governments to claim the power to adopt the recommendations of and make changes to the Royal Commission Report. Through these Acts, the Governments also claimed the power to cut off lands without consent, in opposition to the existing laws requiring consent and ignoring Aboriginal Title.

The Dominion and Provincial government were at odds again. Duncan Campbell Scott, Deputy Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, recommended a joint review of the Royal Commission Report. W. E. Ditchburn, Dominion appointee, and Col. J.W. Clark, Provincial appointee, were given this responsibility along with anthropologist James Teit, was appointed to represent the interests of the First Nations.

Between 1920 and 1924 Ditchburn and Clark jointly reviewed the Royal Commission Report and gathered additional evidence and testimony. Teit died in 1922, leaving First Nations without any representation. Ditchburn and Clark made amendments and adjustments to some of the original recommendations including further reductions to reserves amounting to approximately 10,000 acres and reductions to the amount of land for new reserve acreage. Notably absent from their final report was the issue of Aboriginal Title. The Ditchburn-Clark Report was stepping-stone toward an agreement that was acceptable to both the Dominion and Provincial governments, without consideration of First Nations interests. On July 19, 1924 the McKenna McBride Commission, with the recommendations from the Ditchburn-Clark Report, was finally adopted. In total 35 cut-offs were made from 23 Bands belonging to 15 Agencies.