Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs Newsletter (Spring 1998, June 1998 Edition)

Transcription (Hover to view)

Union of B.C.
Indian Chiefs

NEWSLETTER

"OUR LAND IS OUR FUTURE"
JUNE 1998 EDITION

First Nations ~ Environmental
against Fish Farms

Alliance

Vancouver, B.C. - First Nations and environmentalists underlined their firm opposition to salmon
aquaculture at a rally held this morning outside an industry/government sponsored conference promoting
aboriginal opportunties in aquaculture.
Representatives
from communities throughout
B . C . . some dressed in
regalia and carrying
their drums, gathered
to formally protest
against the conference
organizers' suggestion
that fishfarming is the
answer to First Nations' economic woes.
"The ocean's
wealth belongs to our
people. A s First
Nations' leaders we
have the responsibility
to care for this wealth
and safeguard it for
future generations",
said Ed Neuman,
Hereditary Chief of the
Heiltsuk First Nation.
"Governments have approved permits for activities which harm the environment. This must stop.
C h i e f Bob Joseph,
Chair o f the Musgamagw
Tsawataineuk Tribal
Council and founder o f the

SPRING

1998

Protesters gather outside the Aboriginal Aquaculture in Canada Conference
First Nations Environmental Alliance against
Fishfarming, condemns the
attititude of government
and industry. "They seem
to feel that we'll accept
economic development at
any cost - we won't. This

is not just about aboriginal
rights; there is an environmental ethic here. Since the
farms came to our territory, the Broughton Archipelago is d y i n g . "
Musgamagw territory is
located in the islands of

Johnstone Straight, between
northern Vancouver Island
and the mainland, where
there is a concentration of
salmon farms.

FISHFARMS
(continued on page 4)

1

UBCIC NEWS

Message from the President
P r o p o s a l for an i n d e p e n d e n t , l e g i s l a t e d C l a i m s Commission
and Tribunal with full binding authority to d e t e r m i n e v a l i d a t i o n
a n d c o m p e n s a t i o n faces significant hurdles
the specific claims process could be undertaken. The ISCC
The Joint First Nations/
was fatally flawed. Armed only with the power to make
Canada Task Force on Specific
recommendations, it has not been resorted to by many
Claims is finalizing instructions
communities, and it was not sufficiently empowered to achieve
for drafting federal legislation
many specific claims resolutions. The existing ISCC will be
which sets out a brand new specific
wound down before the start up of the new Commission.
claims policy and process.
The proposal developed by the Joint First Nations/
As currently drafted, this joint proposal calls for the
Canada Task Force directly addresses the major flaws with the
establishment of a First Nations Specific Claims Commission
existing specific claims policy and process. The new
and First Nations Specific Claims Tribunal on April 1, 1999.
Commission will be more independent and powerful than the
Specific claims will be submitted directly to this new
existing ISCC because it is legislated and because the Tribunal
Commission, rather than to the federal government. The
will give it teeth - sharp teeth. The conflict of interest created by
emphasis of the Commission w i l l be to arrive at claims
Canada accepting and judging claims against itself has been
settlements through negotiations or the use of alternative
eliminated. The game rules will be set by the new body, the
dispute resolution methods. It is anticipated that the majority of
claims will be resolved by negotiation,
First Nations Specific Claims
with the facilitation of the Commission,
Commission, and not DIAND.
IN THIS ISSUE...
rather through the Tribunal.
D I A N D will have more
incentive to negotiate claims in
Those claims that cannot be
7. Ts'kw'aylaxw First Nation
good faith, because failure to do
resolved through negotiation at the
so means the First Nation may
Commission level can be taken to the
8. Native Youth Movement
take the claim to the
First Nations Specific Claims Tribunal.
independent Tribunal. The
The Tribunal is a completely separate
9. Fish Farms: Zero Tolerance
Tribunal is like a court. It will
body and process from the Commission.
make final, binding decisions
Information that was shared with the
12. Firearms Act
about the validity and value of a
facilitator or mediator while the
specific claim in the form of
claims file was with the Commission
14. IIG Spring Convocation 1998
written judgments. Only errors
will remain protected. The parties, the
of law will be appealable to a
Band and DIAND, make their cases
15. UBCIC Resource Centre and
higher legal authority (judicial
anew to the Tribunal for a final and
Research Office Update
review).
binding decision on whether the claim
The proposed new
is valid and what the compensation
16 Aboriginal Title Implementation
specific claims process, as
should be. The Tribunal can only make
drafted in the Joint Task Force
cash awards. However, the Tribunal
Guide
document, is more flexible than
is not bound by any financial caps,
the
existing specific claims
and once compensation has been
23. UBCIC: 30 Years of Indian
process with regards to who
determined, the parties are free to
Leadership
may bring a claim and it
negotiate non-cash alternatives.
broadens the spectrum of
Consent orders reflecting the settlement
24. Down from the Shimmering Sky:
grievances which may be
determined by the Tribunal will be
Masks of the Northwest Coast.
submitted to the specific claims
registered in a court of competent
process. However, this new
jurisdiction.
process will not consider
25.
Non
Insured
Health
Benefits
The proposed new independent
questions of Aboriginal Rights
Commission and Tribunal represent a
and
Title, unless agreed to by
significant improvement over the status
27. Multilateral Agreement on
both
parties. For legal reasons,
quo. The existing Indian Specific
Investment
it
may
not be able to deal with
Claims Commission, which was
particular
claims issues which
established without consultation, was
28. Honorariums for Native Band
have
already
been judged before
only intended as a temporary "bandaid" until the major surgery
required for reforming and overhauling

2

Members.

SPECIFIC C L A I M S

(Continued on page 5)

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

Federal Clam Policy Violates
Aboriginal Title, Rights
The federal government has imposed changed in the
clam fishery which are in direct violation of the Aboriginal
Title and Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The new policy is
entitled the Management Reforms in the Clam Fishery (the
"Policy").
On the basis of the Aboriginal Right to the fishery,
alone, the Policy (and the manner i n which it has been
implemented) is in violation of the federal Crown's fiduciary
obligations; However, when considered from the perspective of
the aboriginal title, which Indigenous People' have in the
waters and foreshore which comprise the clam harvesting
grounds, the violation is greater.
Main Points of the Clam Reforms Policy:
The stated purposes of the Policy include
+ conservation of clams and their habitat
+ " t o meet the federal C r o w n ' s obligations
regarding aboriginal fisheries for food, social and
ceremonial purposes";
+ develop partnership and co-management
arrangements with stakeholders to share decision
making, responsibilities, costs and benefits
+ "consider the goals of stakeholders with respect to
social, cultural and economic value of the fishery''
+ to consider possibilities in aquaculture
+ to provide for a recreational fishery
+ to provide a year-round market supply
Licence limitations also form a part of the Policy.
Opportunities in the general commercial fishery for Indigenous
liar esters will only be granted to those individuals who held a
clam licence for five out of six years between 1989-1994.
Communities can apply for Aboriginal Communal Licences
( " A C L ' s " ) and individual communities will be responsible for
assigning these licences to members. The A C L ' s authorize
harvesting of clams on harvesting beds which front reserve
lands and " i n exceptional cases, from traditional harvest sites."
Prior to making any legislation or policy with regard to
the fishery, the Crown has an obligation to fully inform itself of
the aboriginal perspective on the fishery, including the
preferred means of exercising that right. Meaningful
consultation must occur with the aboriginal peoples whose
rights will be impacted. With regards to allocation, this
includes fully informing the aboriginal peoples of the proposed
allocations (to all users, not just to aboriginal groups) and a
meaningful consideration of the concerns expressed by
aboriginal peoples.
The Clam Harvesting Policy shows a desire on the part
of the federal government to create the equivalent of "regional
co-management" forums, which reduce aboriginal rights to
being equivalent of those of other "stakeholders" or "user
groups"

Delgamuukw. The Land & The Clams
In Delgamuukw, the Court recognized an interest in
Land that is greater than the right to practice activities.
Aboriginal title is an interest in "the land i t s e l f and
encompasses the historic relationship of aboriginal peoples to
their title lands, and the peoples' traditions and laws governing
the stewardship, protection, and jurisdiction over the lands.
Aboriginal title lands reflect the relationship of Aboriginal
Peoples to their lands and the manner in which the Peoples'
relationship to the lands sustains their communities and
nations.
The legal purpose of Aboriginal Title is to protect the
relationship of Aboriginal Peoples to their Lands. A t a
minimum, protection of the relationship of Aboriginal Peoples
to their lands has to incorporate a meaningful and real
involvement in the manner in which those lands will be used.
This cannot only include the uses which Indigenous Peoples
themselves use the land for. as the actions of other parties can
severely impact the uses of aboriginal title lands.
It is illegal, in violation of the federal fiduciary
obligation, for the federal government to unilaterally licence
other users access to the clam harvest where the result is that
the clam beds are destroyed and polluted. The relationship of
aboriginal peoples to their lands is obviously infringed, and in
danger of being extinguished, where non-Indigenous clam
harvesters are licensed who deplete to near extinction the clams,
and leave debris (including human waste) on the beaches.
A l l measures regarding the harvesting, allocation and
management of the clam fishery require a significantly greater
involvement in the formulation and implementation of the
Policy. Indeed, the importance of the clam fishery and the title
lands where the fishery occurs suggests that the full consent of
the aboriginal peoples may be required.
How is the Clam Policy in violation of federal fiduciary
obligations?
1.
Aboriginal Title is equal to that of other interests in
Land, including Crown title. In the Policy, the interests of
Indigenous peoples are equated with those of "stakeholders".
The Policy encourages regional co-management agreements
which incorporate non-Indigenous commercial fishery as well
as recreational harvesters. Legally, an aboriginal interest in the
fishery, as well as to title lands, is a superior interest in the land
which is on par with the federal Crown's own interest Any
policy which places an aboriginal title interest on par with a
"stake holder" or "interest group" severely undervalues and
nature of the Aboriginal interest in lands.
2.
The Policy only "allows" a clam harvest on beaches
fronting reserve lands, and, in limited circumstances, to
traditional clam harvesting grounds. Legally, this position
cannot be maintained. In Delgamuukw, the Court recognized
that while reserve lands are definitely aboriginal title lands,
aboriginal title lands extend far beyond reserve boundaries.
From an aboriginal perspective, aboriginal title lands
FEDERAL C L A M POLICY (Continued on page 4)

SPRING 1998

3

UBCIC NEWS
FISHFARMS

(continued from page 1)

Clayoqout Sound is home to 18 active salmon farms,
many of which lie in Ahousat territory. Sidney Sam spoke on
behalf of his Chief, with a message for investors. "We want to
let investors know they'll be in for a fight if they try to bring
new fishfarms to our territory", he said. "We are protecting our
rights". Ahousat First Nations turned out in force last year to
serve notice on the Cypress Bay fishfarm that its poluution of
their fishery resources would no longer be tolerated.
T-souk-e First Nation from Southern Vancovuer Island
has also had its problems with fishfarms. The farm in Sooke
Basin is moored to their burial island. Just last week, T-Souk-e
Nation led a flotilla of war canoes against the Prime Pacific
Seafarm, where Chief Frank Planes served an eviction. "Were
dedicated to getting this polluting thing our of here", said
Planes. "We're going to work together with the 188 First
Nations and our allies in the environmental movement who
oppose lifting the moritorium on salmon farming until we get
these farms our of our territories.
Resolutions expressing zero tolerance for fishfarming
have been passed by Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, First Nations
Summit, the B.C. Aboriginal Fisheries Commission and the
Alliance. Together, these represent the views of nearly all of
the First Nations of B.C. Alliance Chair Bob Joseph said, "We
are here to tell our friends and neighbours - and potentail
investores- what we know. Fishfarms destroy our resources and
our future.

JUST
SAY
NO!
TO
FARMED
SALMON

4

FEDERAL C L A M POLICY (Continuedfrompage 3)
right to harvest clams flows from aboriginal title, this right
encompass all areas where clams were traditionally harvested.
3.
The aboriginal right to fish for "food, social and
ceremonial purposes" is recognized in the Aboriginal Fisheries
Strategy. In Gladstone, the court acknowledged that an
aboriginal right to a commercial fishery may exist. However,
Delgamuukw's recognition of an economic interest in the land
and the fact that the land and its resources sustain the people,
goes beyond a right to a fishery for " f o o d , social and
ceremonial purposes" to encompass the economic interests of
the aboriginal peoples in the fishery.
4.
The objectives of the Policy include providing for a
recreational fishery and a year-round market supply. These
purposes, among others, are not sufficient reason for the federal
government to abrogate aboriginal rights. The aboriginal right
to harvest for "food, social and ceremonial" purposes must be
met first, and not arbitrarily limited in order to allow for these
other uses.
5.
Where individual clam harvesters have an aboriginal
right in the fishery, and in the aboriginal title lands, the
restrictions placed on the granting of general commercial
licences do not fulfill the federal government's fiduciary
obligations to protect aboriginal interests. Aboriginal rights
arise from the relationship that aboriginal peoples have had
with lands, and to the fishery, from time immemorial. To
restrict access based on whether or not a particular harvester
has held of licence for 5 out of the past 6 years invalidates and
ignores the source of aboriginal rights.
Option of Non-Recognition of Federal Clam Policy:
Where it is clear that the federal government intends to
proceed with passing laws and regulations which do not respect
our aboriginal title and rights Indigenous Peoples must re-assert
our own jurisdiction by developing and implementing our own
policies with respect to our lands and natural resources.
Indigenous People hold aboriginal title to all of our
Lands and Resources. This includes both a right and the
responsibility to guard the lands and resources and to use them
to the full benefit of our Peoples.
One option for Indigenous Nations to consider is to
simply re-assert jurisdiction over the calm fishery by reinvigorating traditional laws and developing internal policies
among our nations concerning the management of the clam
harvest. The risk of this plan is that it puts individual clam
harvesters in danger of being arrested and charged under the
Fisheries Act. However, the Supreme Court has recognized that
aboriginal laws, and the historic stewardship of Indigenous
Peoples of the land, are an important component of title and if
individual clam harvesters are acting according to aboriginal
laws (supported by their nations and communities) in a manner
which reflects aboriginal traditions and historic management of
the fishery resource, this will strengthen a legal defence if this
is necessary.

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS
SPECIFIC C L A I M S (Continued from page J)

the courts. DIAND's current annual national claims settlement
budget is only in the $30 million dollar range, and it only has
four full-time negotiators handling the approximately 130
claims files currently in legislation. While exact dollar figures
have not yet been determined, it is understood that significant
increases in resources and funding for operations and claims
settlements will be required to achieve the expeditious and
final claims resolutions the new Commission and Tribunal
are being tasked with.
Although the Joint Task Force is exploring and
preparing recommendations on a number of issues, including
how the Commission should be structured and how it might
want to deal with the existing backlog of specific claims, the
new Commission will be free to proceed as it sees fit, because it
is independent. The draft legislation calls for Commissioners to
be appointed jointly by the A F N and the Federal Government.
Tribunal panelists will be appointed from a roster of individuals
acceptable to the A F N and the Minister of Indian Affairs.
Facilitators and mediators must be acceptable to both parties
First Nations and DIAND) and will be determined by the
Commission.
The draft legislation calls for a comprehensive review of
the Commission and Tribunal by the A F N and the Minister of
Indian Affairs after five years of operation. It also provides for
provincial governments and other third parties to participate in
alternative dispute resolution processes at the Commission
level, with the consent of the Band and Canada.
The Joint Task Force proposal is just that - a proposal. It
lias been set out in the form of legislative drafting instructions,
and the intention is for this to accompany a Memorandum to
Cabinet from the Minister for Indian Affairs sometime after the
summer recess. The memo to Cabinet will also outline other
options for Cabinet to consider. However, the Minister has
indicated she is prepared to support the jointly developed option
worked out by the Joint Task Force. It is intended that the
Cabinet decision and the introduction of the draft legislation to
the House of Commons take place next fall. The hope is that the
legislation can be passed by early 1999, with the start-up of the
new Commission and Tribunal slated for April 1, 1999.
The Joint Task Force proposal, or the completed and
final legislative drafting instructions, will be presented to the
Chiefs in Assembly at the Assembly of First Nations Annual
General Assembly in Toronto in late June. It is anticipated that
regional consultations on the proposal will take place in our
TL'ETINQOX-TIN TITLE TERRITORY
communities throughout the summer.
The Joint Task Force proposal which is about to be
circulated is based on many years of effort to reform the specific
claims policy, particularly since 1990. It represents the "best
efforts'' of a team of First Nations and Government

TL'ETINQOX-T'IN
GOVERNMENT OFFICE
Proclamation of Tl'etinqox-t'in title to the land and
resources historically used and occupied by the people of
Tl'etinqox [Anaham Indian Band] on June 5, 1998 and retroactive to December 11, 1997.
The people of Tl'etinqox as represented by the
Tl'etinqox-t'in hereby proclaim that our territory, resources, and
waterways, are no longer subject to the arbitrary laws and
regulations of Canadian and/or British Columbia Crown Title
or rule.
This declaration is our enactment of directives given by
the Supreme Court of Canada in its Delgamuukw appeal ruling
of December 11, 1997. That historic decision stated clearly that
Crown Title is encumbered by Aboriginal Title which among
other matters conceded that aboriginal Nations that have not
ceded or compromised their lands, resources or jurisdiction
have an economic interest in the land and resources of their
territories. The decision also directed both levels of Crown
government in Canada to immediately enter govemment-togovernment negotiations to resolve ownership/jurisdiction of
Indian tribal territory land/resources, thereby acknowledging
that Indian Nations' sovereignty exists until due process of
treaty making clearly establishes renewed ownership/control/
jurisdiction over Indian lands that were invaded, claimed, and
exploited by the imperial Crown of England and its successor
Crown governments of Canada. The Canadian Crown governments have rejected our calls for such discussions, and continue
to alienate premeditated theft of our land and resources. We
consider this attitude and actions to be premeditated theft of our
land and resources We now formally issue this statement of a
formal complaint of theft and tresspass of our land and resources, and, this day. June 5, 1998 are putting a stop to
removal of our resources and trespass of our land until the
issues of control of the exploitation of our resources, alienations
of our land base by issuing deeds, licenses or other tenures,
compensation for resources removed, jurisdiction sharing, and
work for our people are formally negotiated and agreed upon by
the Tl'etinqox-t'in, Crown Governments, resource exploitation
companies and other stakeholders. Do not trespass on
Tl'etinqox title land or steal our resources.

• No trespassing
• No resource removal
• No land/water disturbances

technicians The work has been directed by the A F N ' s Chiefs Committee on Claims. B C representatives involved i n developing
this particular proposal over the last two years are UBCIC President Saul Terry, Shuswap Nation Tribal Chair and Neskonlith Chief
Arthur Manuel. Kamloops Chief Manny Jules, SNTC Intergovernmental Affairs Director Wayne Haimila, UBCIC Specific Claims
Research Director Leigh Ogston as well as Tzeachten Chief Ken Malloway and Beryl Guerin of the Aboriginal Council of BC.
This is still just a proposal. It will require widespread g r a s s r o o t s s u p p o r t a n d s i g n i f i c a n t l o b b y i n g a n d
communications efforts if it is to go forward as visualized. For more information, please feel free to contact the Union of BC Indian
Chiefs Specific Claims Research Program at 1-604-684-0231 or by e-mail at [email protected]

SPRING 1998

5

UBCIC NEWS

Ts'elcewtqen Clleqmeltn
Chief Atahm School
(Adams Lake Indian Band)

CHIEFS M A S K

BOOKSTORE

VISION
We have a visoin of Secwepemc speaking
community living in balance with the
natural world
Chief Atahm School offers a high quality, immersion
elementary education. The school is located on the Adams
Lake Indian Band community.
This progam has been developed by the Chief Atahm
School parents. A l l instruction and school functions is conducted in Secwepmectsin. Students are taught about balance
and the natural world as they practice the principles of
sustainability.
Rational: Chief Atahm School immersion progam is
founded on the belief that Secwepemctsin embodies the c o l lective knowledge, and beliefs of the Secwepemc natural
world.
We believe that the Chief Atahm School purpose is to:
• Establish and maintain a healthy balanced living environment.
• Help protect the earth for future generations to come
Ph (250) 679-8837

Assembly of First Nations
In 1969 the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
established a unique bookstore. It was to provide a
deeper understanding and appreciation of Native Indian
Peoples It is today as it has been in the past entirely
Indian owned and operated. Offering new titles from such
First Nations publishers as Pemmican, Theytus and Yinka
Dene Language Institute The purpose of the publishers is
to provide opportunities for Metis and Aboriginal people to
tell their own stories from their own perspectives. Also to
depict Metis and Aboriginal historical, social and
contemporary issues W e also carry books published by
non-Aboriginal writers whose works are related to Metis
and Aboriginal issues.
We have gathered over 500 new and recent titles
about Native people from more than 65 publishers. This
way various communities across Canada can participate
m the dialogue that is currently happening in Canada and
alive in these books.
The Chiefs Mask Bookstore also serves the Institute
of Indigenous Government, Canada's first autonomous
indigenous-controlled d e g r e e granting, public postsecondary institution. Students have the opportunity to
obtain required textbooks for c o u r s e s , along with
specialized readings. School supplies are also available.
Mildred Chartrand, Assistant Manager
(604)684-0231

AFN National Chief: Reform Ignores
Rule of Law
Ottawa - The National Chief of the Assembly of First
Nations says the Reform Party is so intent on extinguishing
Aboriginal rights that it is now prepared to ignore the rule of
law.
Phil Fontaine was responding to Reform Party leader
Preston Manning's suggestion that the federal government use
its legislative power to over-ride the Supreme Courts
Delgamuukw decision, which recognized the validity of Aboriginal title.
"The Reform Party just doesn't get it," said the A F N
leader. "They are still preaching the same kind of antiquated
assimilationist doctrine that resulted in the economic and social
problems that are facing First Nations today. The Reform
Party's concept of equality apparently means a Canada in which
the original people have no claim to property rights despite
being here for thousands of generations.
Fontaine said Manning's comments also showed his
party is out of touch with it's own constituents. "Just this week
an Angus Reid poll showed that nine out of ten British
Columbians believe that Aboriginal peoples have legitimate
land claims that should be settled with compensation, and that
78 percent of those polled support cout actions by First Nations
to obtain speedier action on land claims," he said.
Contact: Maurice Switzer (613) 241-6789, ext. 383

6

SPRING

1998

UBCIC NEWS

Ts'kw'aylaxw First Nation
To the Governments & the public

We are the rightful
owners of the Ts'kw'aylaxw
territory and everything
pertaining thereto. Since
time immemorial we
protected and used this
land. Our ancestors were in
possession of our territory long before the arrival of the Europeans We have felt keenly the stealing of our lands and have
always asked by what right people were on our lands, but have
also asked for peaceful settlement through a Treaty.
On December 1 1. 1997, the Supreme Court of Canada
recognized in the Delgamuukw decision what has always been
said by the First Nations in B.C. That the land belongs to the
First Nations. That infringement of the Aboriginal Title means
compensation for First Nations. That the decision effectively
means joint jurisdiction between the Crown and First Nations.
That neither Canada nor B.C. can extinguish Aboriginal title or
Rights
We have always been sought to resolve the 'land question' through a negotiated Treaty with Canada. In 1994 we
entered into the Treaty process to bring finality to this situation.
To date, Ts'kw'aylaxw has borrowed a total of $780,679.20 and
Treaty is going nowhere. Even now. six months after the
Delgamuukw decision, the Crown has not yet recognized our
aboriginal title. For more than 100 years, the people of
Ts'kw'aylaxw have asserted that we are the rightful owners of
the territory in question.
The Law of Canada is on our side. It has become very
e\ idem that the province does not want to operate within the
existing legal framework of Canada. After the events of 1990
we became a hopeful people. We felt and thought the Crown
was coming to the First Nations with an honest intention to
settle the 'land question' in a just and equitable manner. We
finally had a table to negotiate treat)' at. We desired an honourable and just settlement, but eight years later we have not seen
the commitment by the Crown to recognize Aboriginal Title
and Rights Our frustration is almost as high as it was in 1990.
The provincial government appears to be unwilling to
change its existing policies to reflect the legal direction given in
the Delgamuukw Decision, and Ottawa has evaporated. The
Delgamuukw Decision of December 11, 1997 reaffirmed, as our
ancestors of generations past have always said and fought for as
we still do today, that we have Aboriginal Title and Rights to
the land and arc the rightful owners of our land. Our declaration of our Title is not something to fear as we have also always
stated that we arc willing to share and co-exist with all the
people on our lands, but we must have a share of the wealth that
is generated from our lands.

law of Canada and come
to us in an honourable
manner, it leaves the
Ts'kw'aylaxw people in
the unfortunate position
of having nowhere to go.
If we were rich, we could
sue both governments and fight them back to the Supreme
Court of Canada over the next ten years. But we are not the
least bit rich so the only choice left for us is to assume direct
control of the land.

"Ithasbecomev ryevident hat heprovincedoesnotwant ocoperatwithnthexistngframeworkofCanda"- Chief Fred Alec

Even though we have been too patient already and
should take action now. in a spirit of cooperation and conciliation we will delay assuming control and taking direction if the
representatives of the Crown can come to our community and
offer us an effective process in which our Aboriginal Title and
Rights will be recognized.
Failing any action on the part of the Crown, this letter
serves to announce the intention of Ts'kw'aylaxw to begin to
take what action is necessary to bring the Crown back to the
table in a meaningful manner. For greater certainty the purpose
of this action is to encourage the federal and provincial governments to negotiate a fair and just Treaty with our people.
Should there be no meaningful action by the Crown by June 21,
National Aboriginal Day, Ts'kw'aylaxw will begin to take direct
action on that date.
This letter also serves as notice to all of the public,
government and business community, that June 21 we would
also resume jurisdiction over our lands pursuant to Aboriginal
Title as recognized in the Supreme Court of Canada Decision
Delgamuukw v R released December 11. 1997. A l l development would require the consent of Ts'kw'aylaxw to proceed.
This would include but not be limited to mining, forestry,
grazing, hunting, and fishing.
Finally, we have always maintained that we have
Aboriginal Title and Rights, and we will always have them.
Aboriginal Title and Rights are protected in the Canadian
constitution and therefore there is no lawful way either the
federal or the provincial Governments can take these rights
away from us.
As demanded by the people.
Chief Fred Alec. Ts'kw'aylaxw First Nation Treaty
Phone (250) 256-4204

So with Premier Clark's unwillingness to recognize the

SPRING

1998

7

UBCIC NEWS

Native Youth Movement
Chronology
1990 - N Y M organized in Winnipeg,
Manitoba, in 1990 because of the high
percentage of native youth involved in
gang violence.
1995-96 - Another N Y M chapter was
created in Vancouver, B.C. A few
Downtown Eastside youth organized
talking circles to share our thoughts,
concerns and issues.
We begun by taking initiative, by having
N Y M volunteers to do carwashes to
fundraise to travel to different communities and reserves to open communication
lines and do workshops with as many
native youth as possible.
Soon N Y M representatives are speaking
out at different conferences, rallies and
marches, voicing our concerns on
various issues that oppress native youth
and native people in general.
Protested the Standing Steering Committee on the B.C. Treaty Commission with
members of the community. About 100
youth protested the meeting to let the
committee know that there was opposition to the process because of the lack of
informed consent.
N Y M attends "Traditions to Nonviolence" conference held by the Assem¬
bly of First Nations in North Vancouver.
60 Youths addressed the crowd with the
message that the youth would react to the
state violence "By Any Means Necessary." and ]walked out.
1997 - April 17 - N Y M occupies the
B.C. Treaty Commission office in
downtown Vancouver for 40 hours to
protest the exclusion of the urban native
youth in the B.C. Treaty Process.
Support OJ and Wolverine, Defenders of
the Land at Gustafsen Lake Standoff.
We attended court hearings, rallied,
made pamphlets to bring awareness to
the injustices of stolen land.

8

Marched from the Vancouver Eastside to
the Supreme Court houses downtown
with over 100 youth to protest the "Child
Apprehension" case of Baby Ishmael, a
native child being taken from a native
family in Canada to a non-native couple
in the USA. N Y M helped Ishmael
reunite with his family and custody was
given to his biological grandparents.
N Y M fundraises for a conference in May
'98. A food bank has been started, a
childrens toy donation box started, and
donated to the Vancouver Aboriginal
Friendship Centre for X-mas.
December - N Y M co-hosts human right
forum with Kelly White. United Nations
and Amnesty International observers in
attendance.
1998 - N Y M protests the First Nations
Summit meeting on the B.C. Treaty
Process in North Vancouver, publicly
declaring ourselves the "official opposition" to the treaty makers. We voiced
our concerns on the negative affects the
process will have on future generations.
Chiefs and councillors involved in the
Summit attempt to silence us using the
culture against us, and attempt to
"apologize" for our conduct at their
business meeting.
N Y M helped to secure safety and bring
awareness to Port Alberni Residential
School Survivors Forum held at SFU
Harbor Centre, Vancouver, B.C.
April 15-17 N Y M puts on first "Provincial Gathering of Native Youth in
Vancouver Eastside. Approx. 150
youths attended from around the province, representing over 30 Native
nations.
April 17-21 - At the end of the conference the offices of the B.C. Treaty
Commission were again occupied by
approx. 60 youths for 5 days. The
occupation brought provincial and
national attention to our position: This
Land is Not For Sale!

Native Youth Movement
Protest B.C. Treaty Commissions Process -Westbank First
Nation Administration Offices
May 25, 1998
As a result of a four day gathering
of the Native Youth Movement in
Westbank, we the youth of the Okanagan
Nation have decided to stage a protest by
"occupying" the offices of the Westbank
Indian Band, (aka Westbank First
Nation).
We demand that all levels of
government immediately terminate the
fraudulent and illegal British Columbia
Treaty Process!
We young people fully understand
that the B.C. Treaty Process was designed to dispossess us youth of our
aboriginal title to our lands and out
inherent rights to the resources contained
within our territories. The Chief and
Council of the so-called Westbank
First Nation have no right to negotiate
away our aboriginal title and rights.
Our Okanagan Nation Tribal
Lands belongs to us, the youth, and to
the future generations of our Okanagan
People from now until the end of time.
No single "Band" or so-called,
self-appointed "First Nation" has the
right to "sell-out" our inheritance or
birthright. We were put on Mother
Earth to protect the lands and rights of
the people of the entire Okanagan
Nation.
We have called on our Brothers
and Sisters in the Native Youth Movement to support us in our action. Any
attack on our rights is also an attack on
their rights. A l l Native Youth have an
undeniable right to fight to protect their
aboriginal rights from being sold-out by
any and all corrupt Native leaders who,
in return for money, shamelessly collaborate with all levels of government!
We will not stop protesting until
we see an end to the "sell-out" British
Columbia Treaty Process.
Contact: Rose Caldwell, Tori Baptiste,
Shane Kruger @ (250)490-5314

SPRING 1998

FISH FARMS: ZERO TOLERANCE
Salmon are a resource treasured and shared by all Indigenous Peoples within British
Columbia. They are born in one area, grow to maturity in another, and live their adult lives in marine waters,
to return to the place of their birth for their life cycle to continue. Salmon bind all of our Peoples together.
When salmon are threatened, the livelihood and way of life of all Indigenous Peoples are threatened.

W H A T ARE FISH FARMS?
Fish farms are factories where fish are produced in
much the same way that cattle or potatoes are produced on
other farms. Young salmon (smolts) are placed in open mesh
net-cages which are anchored in the ocean. The fish are fed
and kept here until they are harvested and sold at maturity.
For the most part ocean waters flow freely through the net
cages, washing away sewage and other residue of the fish
farming process.
The industry has grown rapidly because it provides a
year round supply of factory fish to supermarkets and restaurants Due to the cutbacks in the wild salmon fishery, as well
as to the seasonal nature of the wild salmon harvest, farmed
salmon has become more and more common in the local
markets. Farmed salmon is now worth approximately three
times more per pound than wild salmon.
HISTORY
Fish farms started appearing in British Columbia
during the 1970s. Initially, local species of fish were farmed.
However, fish farms have overwhelmingly switched to
farming Atlantic salmon because they are easier to farm. By
1995 there were approximately 80 fish farms in operation.
The provincial government placed a moratorium on
fish farms in 1995 following serious environmental and
health concerns. A Salmon Aqualculture Review was
undertaken which gave a cautious "okay" for fish farming to
proceed The Review did not fully investigate the impact that
fish farms have upon wild stocks and the environmental
damage they can create. For example, the Review overlooked
the fact that in some countries wild salmon have been almost
entirely wiped out as a result offish farms.
The Review minimized Indigenous Peoples' interests
to that of being one more "stake holder" (an interest group)
and entirely overlooked the very vital roll that salmon and all
marine life have within Indigenous cultures.
At present, the provincial government is considering
lifting this moratorium on fish farms.

FISH FARMS:

ZERO TOLERANCE

Salmon and all marine life are a vital resource to all
Indigenous Nations. Any actions which threaten salmon or
marine life threaten our well-being and the livelihood of our
Peoples. Fish farms destroy their immediate environment,
and threaten marine life and wild fish stocks.
A l l Indigenous Nations have territories which include
either oceans, rivers, streams or lakes. Each and every
Indigenous Nation will be impacted if the current moratorium
on fish farms is lifted. As Indigenous Peoples, we have a
shared responsibility to work together in order to preserve
and protect the fishery resource.
Fish farms seriously and severely impact Aboriginal
Title Lands and Waters. Water is contaminated, poisoning
salmon, shellfish, and other marine life. The immediate
dangers include disease, destruction of habitat, and escaped
fanned salmon displacing other marine life (such as herring
and oolichan) or colonizing wild salmon stocks.
A l l marine resources, most notably salmon, are
already deeply depleted as a result of mismanagement. Fish
farms only serve to further endanger salmon stocks which are
already fighting for survival.
When our salmon, oolichan. shell fish and other
marine resources die or are attacked, our Peoples are attacked.
The Aboriginal Right to fish is vital to all Indigenous
Nations, and fish farms threaten to destroy that right. We
will not let this happen.
The fishery has sustained our Peoples' for generations.
We were handed this resource which our ancestors held in
trust for us, and we must ensure that the fishery is an inheritance which we pass to our own future generations. Now that
fish farms threaten to destroy the fishery, we have a responsibility to protect and guard this precious natural resource. As
Indigenous Peoples, it is our turn to honour our responsibility
and fight to sustain the future of the fishery. This is our
obligation both to the salmon and all marine life, and to our
future generations.

INDIAN SALMON DON'T DO DRUGS
SPRING 1998

9

UBCIC NEWS
WHO

CONTROLS T H E FISH FARMS?

The federal government has the responsibility
for ensuring that the wild salmon and all other marine
resources are safe. The federal government also has a
fiduciary duty to ensure that Aboriginal Title and Rights are
protected. To date, the federal government has avoided its
responsibilities of ensuring the safety of the wild fishery.
Two provincial ministries are directly involved. The
Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks grants tenure on
Crown aquatic lands for fish farms (including waste discharge permits) These permits can be for up to thirty years.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food grants
annually renewable aquaculture licences.
As part of the process which it must follow before
proceeding with granting or renewing licenences, tenures,
etc. which may impact on Aboriginal Title and Rights the
province has an obligation to ensure that the interests of
Indigenous Peoples are protected and infringed as minimally
as possible.
The province has not met its legal obligations to
Indigenous Peoples. Fish farms have been located on Aboriginal Title lands without the involvement of Indigenous
Peoples, and there has been no broad based consultation with
all of the Indigenous Peoples who will have their right to fish
impacted by fish farms. At the back of this paper we have
included a list of all fish farms licences which are currently
outstanding, and the dates that these are up for renewal.
EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS
Very few people are needed to operate a salmon farm.
In recent years, ownership of fish farms has concentrated in
the hands of a few large corporations. Any jobs produced by
factory-farming salmon are insignificant in comparison to the
jobs lost through the devastation of the wild salmon harvest.
This, in combination with the fact that farmed salmon sell for
a higher price per pound than wild salmon, provides a serious
threat to lndigenous communities which have historically
relied upon the commercial fishery to sustain themselves.
Not only do fanned salmon endanger the existence of
wild salmon and other marine resources, they are replacing
the commercial fishery with factory produced farmed salmon.

"Manufacture
Shoes Not Salmon"

Fish Farms - Just Say No!

As Indigenous Nations
we will honour our
responsibility to guard
the fishery for our future
generations.

ABORIGINAL TITLE
Those nations on whose waters these fish farms are
located experience immediate and destructive impacts.
Traditional harvesting grounds (clam beds, herring spawning
grounds, etc.), as well as the waters and water beds are
destroyed and poisoned.
In some cases, existing fish farms are anchored off of
burial islands sacred to Indigenous Peoples. In all cases, fish
farms were granted licences without the consultation or
consent of the Indigenous Peoples who hold Tide to the
Lands and Waters in question.
Any use of Aboriginal Title Lands (including waters)
for fish farms requires the full consent of the Indigenous
Nation concerned. The provincial government acts illegally
if it proceeds to licence or approve any further expansion or
continuation of fish farms without the full consent of the
Indigenous Nation which holds Aboriginal Title to the Lands
and Waters impacted.

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS
A l l Indigenous Nations who rely upon marine resources
or salmon have their rights jeopardized and threatened by
fish farms. Chemicals and drugs from fish farms poison the
flesh of salmon, diseases weaken wild stock. Escaped farmed
salmon displace wild stock from their traditional habitat
Any threat to marine resources or salmon stocks is a direct
threat to all Indigenous Nations.
The "right to fish" enjoyed by all Indigenous Peoples'
will be hollow and meaningless if there are no salmon or
other fish in our oceans, rivers, lakes and streams. Without
fish, there is no "right to fish'". Fish farms move salmon
away from being a natural resource which is both precious
and sacred to Indigenous Nations, and turn salmon into a
commodity to be manufactured.
The ' 'economic" right of Canadians to factoryproduce salmon cannot override our Aboriginal Right to the
fishery, and cannot erase the relationship we have had with
the fishery for generations. As Indigenous Nations we will
honour our responsibility to guard the fishery for our future
generations.

10

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS
FISH FARMS POSE SERIOUS DANGER TO ALL MARINE LIFE
1. DISEASE
Farmed salmon are fed antibiotics
to fight naturally occurring diseases. The antibiotics cause
diseases to mutate and these mutant
strains are released into the oceans exposing wild stocks.
Viral, fungal and bacterial infections have been passed to wild
stock as a result of fish farms. Shellfish have been found with
concentrations of antibiotics.
Antibiotics increase the likelihood that certain diseases
will mutate and become resistant, and can accumulate in the
food chain.

5. DRUGS A N D CHEMICALS
In addition to antibiotics, fish farms introduce a variety
of other chemicals into the w^ter. These chemicals poison the
water and build up in the food supply. The drugs and chemicals
include colourants (to make the flesh of farmed salmon red)
and fungicides. These chemicals escape into the surrounding
waters, potentially poisoning resident marine life, and eventually poisoning our Peoples.

2. POLLUTION
A fish farm is equivalent to having an untreated
sewage facility on our shores. Pollution and effluent flow
freely from fish pens and cause most resident species of fish
and marine life to disappear from the area.

>

Competition for food and spawning areas. Farmed
salmon can displace and force wild salmon and other fish
from their traditional grounds and waters.

>

Farmed salmon can migrate with wild stocks to inland
spawning areas. In British Columbia, Atlantic salmon
have been found 100 miles up the Skeena River, over
250 miles from the nearest fish farm. On Vancouver
Island, Atlantic salmon have been found in the
Zeballos and Thasis rivers. Bearing in mind that one
spawning Atlantic salmon can produce in excess of 4000
eggs, the dangers are great that Atlantic salmon can
displace our own wild salmon stocks.

6. COLONIZATION
Farmed salmon which escape from their pens pose
significant risks to wild stocks. The dangers include:

3.

PREDATION O N Y O U N G STOCK
Young herring and salmon are drawn to fish pens
because of the lights which they shine at night. These young
herring and salmon are eaten by farmed fish. In some instances, farmed fish eat so many of the young wild stock that
they have little need of additional food.
4. ALGAE
Effluent from fish farms provides ideal conditions for
algae to grow. Algae can kill wild stocks either by poisoning
them (through production of toxins, etc.,) or through the
oxygen deprivation they cause. In addition, shell fish are
vulnerable to the toxins produced by excessive growth of
algae. Toxins from algae can contaminate shellfish making
them unsafe to cat.

7.

D I S P L A C E M E N T OF HERRING

,

OOLICHAN, A N D ROCK C O D
Fish farms located near herring spawning grounds, or
the traditional habitat of oolichan and rock cod have caused
these species to abandon their traditional areas.

Colonization: First Our Peoples;
Now Our Fish
If you would like any further information contact:
UNION OF B . C . INDIAN CHIEFS

MUSGAMAGW TSAWATAINEUK TRIBAL COUNCIL

5th Floor, 342 Water Street
Vancouver. B . C . V 6 B 1B6
Phone. (604)-684-0231
Fax:
(604)-684-5726

P.O. Box 90
Alert Bay, B . C . V O N 1A0
Phone: (250)-974-5516
Fax:
(250)-974-5466

The Federal and provincial governments must take strong action
to protect our coastlines, waters, marine life and salmon stocks.
The current moratorium on new fish farms must continue.
SPRING 1998

11

UBCIC NEWS

War Canoes Lead
Anti-Fish Farm Flotilla

FIREARMS ACT

Thursday.May21. 1998
A

Flotilla of Native war canoes, fish boats and pleasure
craft propelled their way across the waters of the Sooke
Basin today. The flotilla delivered a clear message to the Prime
Pacific Seafarm located in the Basin: "Leave Now!" The crews
for the convoy were made up of members of the T-Sou-ke
Nation, other First Nations, environmental supporters and nonNative neighbours who have formed an alliance to demonstrate
their unified opposition to salmon farms.
"This is our traditional territory. You have been operating here without our permission for 10 years, anchored to our
burial island, polluting our waters, endangering our traditional
food supplies. Your farm is a violation to our territory. We
want you to leave, "Chief Jim Cooper, in the lead war canoe,
told Prime Pacific employees as the paddlers — children, elders,
Native and non-native listened intently.
Among his supporters were members of the Ahousat
Band from Clayoquot Sound who had organized a similar
flotilla last year to a salmon farm in their territory. They
brought their war canoes down to join this protest.
Hereditary Chief Robert Joseph, Chairman of the
Musgamagw Tsawataineuk Tribal Council travelled from his
territory in the Broughton Archipelago on the northern end of
Vancouver Island where the concentration of fish farms has
been studied by the Environmental Assessment Office. After
that office released its report Chief Joseph called a gathering of
First Nations and environmental organizations last September
to fight the environmental destruction done by fishfarms. He
explained, "This isn't just about aboriginal title. Our mandate
as Native leaders is to ensure that our territories and their
resources are in place for our children, grandchildren and for
the next seven generations. That is the higher purpose to which
all of us can agree. We must educate the public on the damages
fishfarms are doing. First and foremost we must protect the
environment. We arc here today to support the T'Sou-ke people
in their actions against this fishfarm because they have the same
mandate — protect the environment for future generations".
Arnie Narcisse. the Interior Co-Chair of the Aboriginal
Fisheries Commission added his support. "We are all working
together to save our wild fish. These salmon net cage factories
put our wild fish at great risk. We have told governments
repeatedly we are opposed to these farms. Now we are showing
them We want these farms gone," he stated. "Farm fish and
wild fish arc not compatible".
After delivering their message to the Prime Pacific
Seafarm. the flotilla returned to the T'Sou-ke Hall where the
T'Sou-ke people and their neighbours had prepared a feast for
the participants They began planning the next event against
salmon farms.
Chief Robert Joseph, M T T C (250) 203-1855
Arnie Narcisse, Aboriginal Fisheries Commission
(250) 378-7196

12

Despite
intense opposition from Indigenous Peoples, the
federal government passed the Firearms Act in 1996.
Recently, a series of regulations was passed which will
bring the Act closer to implementation. Below, we provide a
brief summary of the Act, and how it will impact upon the
practice of the aboriginal right to hunt and trap. These
comments focus on non-restricted firearms, such as rifles and
shotguns, and do not address firearms such as automatic
weapons, handguns, or crossbows.
The Act was intended to address the safety concerns of
the Canadian public. The government of Canada entirely
overlooked the integral role that hunting and trapping play
within Indigenous societies, and the impact that this legislation
will have on aboriginal rights. The result is legislation which
criminalizes Indigenous Peoples in the traditional way of life
which we have practiced since time immemorial.
Aboriginal rights include the historic relationship of
aboriginal peoples to their title lands, and the peoples'
traditions and laws governing the stewardship, protection, and
jurisdiction over the lands and resources, including wildlife.
Aboriginal rights reflect the relationship of Indigenous Peoples
to their lands and resources and the manner in which the
Peoples' relationship to the lands and resources sustains their
communities and nations. The only recognition of aboriginal
rights in the Act or regulations, are provisions which apply to
people who hunt or trap for sustenance purposes, in order to
feed themselves or their families. These provisions apply to all
sustenance hunters equally, both Indigenous and nonIndigenous.
While it is true that aboriginal peoples hunt to sustain
themselves and their communities, the aboriginal rights to hunt
and trap are far broader than a mere right to eat game (and
therefore, the right to hunt it).
This gun control legislation ignores the fact that
Indigenous Peoples have been hunting since time immemorial
and have long and well established laws and traditions
regarding safe hunting practices and the use of firearms. The
right to hunt and trap is fundamental to the cultures and
traditions of Indigenous Peoples, and the Act entirely negates
this fact by empowering a provincial official (the chief firearms
officer) to grant or deny the right to hunt to each and every
Indigenous person.
A right to hunt or trap is meaningless i f it is illegal for
an Indigenous person to possess the tools necessary to hunt or
trap.
Licensing for the Possession, Acquisition and Transport of
Firearms
All individuals require a licence in order to possess,
acquire or transport a firearm.
The Act creates the position of a provincially appointed
chief firearms officer who is responsible for licensing

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS
individuals. The chief firearms officer can deny a licence to any
individual " i f it is desirable, in the interests of the safety of that
or any other person, that the person not possess a firearm..."
In determining an individual's suitability to hold a
licence, the chief firearms officer can conduct an investigation,
including interviewing the neighbours, social workers, spouse,
former spouses, or anyone else whom the chief firearms officer
feels will provide useful information. The Aboriginal Peoples of
Canada Adaptations Regulations (Firearms) (the "Aboriginal
Regulations") require that the chief firearms officer also
"consider any recommendations submitted by the applicant
from an elder or leader of the applicant's Aboriginal community
regarding the importance to the applicant of engaging in
traditional hunting practices."
Canadian Firearms Safety Course Requirements:
In most cases, licencing will require that an individual
pass the Canadian Firearms Safety Course ("C.F.S.C.").
However, sustenance hunters as well as minors who hunt to
support their families, can make special application to receive a
licence without the need to pass the C.F.S.C.
An Indigenous person may not have to pass the C.F.S.C.
where:
1. the applicant is an elder; or
2. the a p p l i c a n t has knowledge of safety
requirements as attested to by an elder or
community leader, sustenance hunting is integral
to the applicants way of life, and not C.F.S.C. is
reasonably available to the applicant (for example,
where to require the C.F.S.C. would cause undue
hardship, the courses are too far away or too
expensive, etc.).
Where these conditions exist, and the chief firearms
officer is satisfied that the applicant has basic safety knowledge
and a general knowledge of the Canadian/provincial laws with
regard to the use. handling and transportation of firearms, the
chief firearms officer may issue a licence.
Fees Waived:
Fees for persons who hunt or trap for sustenance
purposes to provide for themselves, or their families, have been
waived.
Appealing Licencing Decisions:
When a person is either denied a licence, or has their
licence revoked, this decision must be appealed through the
provincial court system. For many Indigenous people the costs
of hiring a lawyer and paying for court costs are prohibitive. It
is illegal to possess a firearm without a licence, therefore, while
a person is waiting for the courts to decide the issue, their
family may well be starving because the Act has made it a crime
to hunt the food necessary to feed themselves and their families.
The ultimate determination of whether a person will
receive a licence - and therefore, be able to practice the

SPRING 1998

right to hunt - rests entirely with the provincial!}' appointed
chief firearms officer.
Creation of a National Firearms Registry:
Eventually, all firearms will need to be registered. The
registration provisions will not be fully in force until January 1,
2003. Exemptions where a person does not have to have
registration certificate are where a person:
1. borrows a firearm, and are under the direct
supervision of a person who has a licence and the
registration certificate; or
2. borrows a firearm to hunt/trap for sustenance
purposes, provided that they have a licence to
possess that type of firearm. In this circumstance,
the lender will not be required to lend their
certificate of registration for the firearm.
Enforcement Provisions:
1.
The Act allows police to enter and inspect any home
where they reasonably believe there is a firearm or ammunition,
even where the person with a firearm in their home is licensed
and the firearm is registered. Although permission of the
owner or occupant of the home is required, the Act allows
police to get a warrant allowing them entry into a home for
purposes of administering the Act or regulations (it is not
necessary for them to establish that they have a reasonable
belief that a violation of the Act has occurred).
The search provisions are particularly troublesome in
light of the often fractured relationship that Indigenous Peoples
have had with police. As an example, where an Indigenous
community organizes a blockade in support of their aboriginal
rights, the police could use this legislation to search the homes
of participants where they have reasonable grounds to believe
that those people possess a firearm in their home. This is the
case even though there may be no suggestion that firearms are
involved in the blockade at all, or, even, that there is any illegal
activity concerning firearms. In this sense, the legislation could
conceivably be used as a harassment tool by police.
2.
The Act creates penalties for violations of its registration
and licensing schemes. For example, the contravention of a
condition of a licence or registration, which can include
traveling outside of an authorized area, or failure to store the
firearm in a manner specified by regulation, are subject to a
penalty of up to two years in prison.
Canadian Criminal Code Amendments:
Some examples which illustrate the broad degree to
which day-to-day activities of Indigenous Peoples will be
criminalized by the Act arc listed below:
_L
Safety of Others: It is an offence for every person who,
without lawful excuse, uses, carries, handles, ships, transports
or stores a firearm without reasonable precautions for the safety
FIREARMS ACT (Continued on page 18)

13

UBCIC NEWS

Institute of Indigenous Government Spring Convocation 1998

I

n celebration of the achievements of the Institute of
Indigenous Government 1997-98 Graduating class,
families, friends, supporters, IIG faculty and staff met to
commemorate this special day at the Sty-Wet-Tan Great Half
UBC First Nations House of Learning on Friday, May 22,
1998. The Academic Procession was led by three First
Nations Veterans followed by the Elders, Graduating students. Board of Governors, the President and the Faculty.
P A - K W A C H - T O N . a.k.a. Grand Chief Bernard Charles
opened the ceremony with a prayer, followed by Chief Saul
T e r n . President of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs who
welcomed everyone to the celebration. Andrew Bear Robe,
President of the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology,
Merritt B.C., then addressed the graduating class as the
ke>nole speaker. The calling of the witnesses were then
called by Bernard Charles. Seven witnesses were called to
witness the ceremony, Mr. & Mrs. Thomas & Mazel Hans,
Mr. & Mrs. Archie & Edna Blankinship, George Blake, A.
George Guerin, and Elder Margaret Harris.
Grand Chief Bernard Charles, President of the IIG,
then conferred the Associate of Arts degrees to five students:
Lillian Mas Mearns, Melissa Ann Meyer, Holly Weget
Robinson. Brenda Faith Wesley and Morgan Elyse Young.
The five students completed a two year (60 credits) Associate
of Arts degree in Indigenous Government Studies. The
president then conferred the Certificate of Indigenous Government Studies, a one year (30 credit) program. The
certificates went to Kathleen Acoby. Neil Kenneth Benson,
Jeremy David Green, Leonard A. Linklater, Adena Lee Marie
M c C a l l u m . Daniel Ian Peters, Holly Weget Robinson,
Catherine Alice Swain, Soma Ann Triebewasser and Morgan
Young Congratulations to all the students and families for
the tremendous accomplishment.
Andres "Lix" Lopez, Faculty & Coordinator of the
International Program, then presented the Dean's Prizes for
outstanding achievements. The ten students whose grade
point averages were at least 3.67 (A-) were Glenna Leanne
Borsuk. Dalyce Ramona Diablo. Petra Angpao Durrance,
Jeremy David Green, Gregory Anthony Guerin, Graham
Inkster, Daniel Ian Peters. Angela Elizabeth Shuter, Floyd
Dean Underwood, and Morgan Elyse Young. A l l your hard
work and persistence paid off, congratulations.
Morgan Elyse Young, IIG's first valedictorian, was
chosen by the graduating students to address the assembly.
Her presentation highlighted the main aspects of the IIG
Academic program. Morgan talked about the struggles as a
student, their future goals and their appreciation of their
families who supported their efforts. Faculty members were
commended for their support, hard work and the impact in
the student's li\-es. Morgan's grade point average is 4.28, one
of our many exceptional students! Congratulations Morgan,
you'll go along way.

14

The Cascade Drum Group then sang an honour song for
the students, families, friends, faculty and staff. This Vancouver
group consists of First nations people across Canada. Their drum
songs draws a crowd at any event. The D A A K ' M H A A S T (The
Raft of the Fireweeds) Dancers then shared their oral history of
the House of H A K B A G W O O T K U in the L I M X A M A L H E I T
(Chiefs Dance), and W A D E T A Y (Survivors Dance). The
closing of the ceremony ended with a prayer song by Seislom,
a.k.a. Glen Williams, followed by the retiring of the colours and
recessional. A feast was then enjoyed by those who wanted to
stay, mingle, visit and enjoy the setting.
Jennie Blankinship. IIG Extension Program Director

CERTIFICATE IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNMENTSTUDIES L-R:
Morgan Young, Sonia Triebwasser, Catherine Swain, Holly
Robinson, Daniel Peters, Adena McCallum, Neil Benson. Missing
are Kathleen Acoby. Jeremy Green and Leonard Linklater

ASSOCIATE OF ARTS DEGREE IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNMENT STUDIES L-R:
Morgan Young, Brenda Wesley, Holly Robinson, Melissa Meyer,
Lillian Mearns

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

UBCIC Research Resources
The UBCIC Research Office has
been researching and developing
claims for Bands around the
province for more than 25 years.
Our policy is that all research
collected is the property of the
Band, and this material is always
forwarded to it. The Research
Office does, however, retain
duplicate copies of all research
reports and documentation. If you
are now unable to locate research
that was undertaken for your
community by the U B C I C in the
past, or if you aren't sure whether or
not the UBCIC ever did any work for your
community, please contact the Research Director (1-604-6840231). Authorized Band researchers are welcome to review
these research files and make copies i f desired.
The UBCIC Resource Centre, located on the fourth floor
at 342 Water Street in Gastown, is a specialized library and
repository for B.C.-related Indian materials. Established
especially for the use of Band researchers, the research collection holdings arc focused on land rights and include many
unique materials. If you are not already acquainted with the
UBCIC Resource Centre, you can arrange for an orientation by
getting in touch with the UBCIC Research Office (1-604-6840231). Band researchers arc always welcome but please call
ahead (1-6O4-602-3433/3434) so reference staff and equipment
limes can be booked for you.
The UBCIC Research Department believes in sharing
research expertise and the teaching of research skills. Several
research workshops arc held every year. The UBCIC will be
publishing a land research manual (written especially for nonprofessional, community-based researchers in B.C.) in the
Summer of 1998 as is supporting a Traditional Use Studies
(TUS) research manual scheduled for late Fall 1998. Both
Publications will be available through the Chiefs Mask Bookstore at the U B C I C s Vancouver office (1-604-684-0231). A
genealogy workshop is planned for Summer 1998, and a
general lands research workshop is planned for the Fall 1998.
Please watch for faxed announcements, or contact the UBCIC
Research Department to request that your fax or e-mail address
be added to the notification list.
With the guidance of the Research Department, the
Resource Centre Research Collection is always being added to
We have recently obtained some very handy lands research
products in C D - R O M format, and we will be expanding our
electronic research holdings in 1998.

SPRING 1998

UBCIC Resource Centre
The UBCIC Resource Centre is a
specialized collection focusing on
B.C. Land rights research and
serving all B.C. Band researchers. The Resource Centre also
serves the Institute of Indigenous
Government, an accredited and
degree-granting post-secondary
organization which offers several
research-related courses. The
Resource Centre is open weekdays. Band researchers are
always welcome but please call
ahead so reference staff and equipment times can be booked for
you. If you or your research team would like to arrange for a
complimentary one-half day orientation to the Resource Centre's holdings, please contact the U B C I C Research Office at
1-604-684-0231 (e-mail: [email protected]). The Resource
Centre holds the following research materials which may be of
interest and assistance to you with your project:
- The most complete collection of RG-10 (Department of
Indian Affairs Records at the National Archives of Canada)
microfilm in B.C.
- The most complete collection of RG-10 finding aids in B.C.
- Federal Minutes of Decisions
- Provinicial Minutes of Decisions
- Department of Indian Affairs Annual Reports (1864-1992)
- Department of Indian Affairs Reserve Schedules
- McKenna-McBride (Ro\-al Commission on Indian Affairs for
the Province of B.C ) materials
- Band Profiles
- Hudson's Bay Company "Post Histories" and finding aids
- Canadian Museum of Civilization Ethnology finding aids
- Church finding aids (Anglican, Oblate, etc.)
- B.C. Surveyor General Reference Plans for B.C.
- The "Colonial Correspondence" on microfilm
- B.C. Archives Newspaper Index & Some B.C. newspapers
- B.C. Statutes
- Journals of the Colonial Legislatures
- General histories of B.C. (including local histories)
- Works relating to Indian Lands policies and issues
- Books relating to B.C. Indian cultures
- General and legal reference works
- Lands research guides
- Census material and some genealogical resources
- Native Studies Journals & theses relating to First Nations
To book a research trip, please call 1-604-602-3433/3434. To
book an orientation, please call 1-604-684-0231. (ask for
Research).

15

UBCIC NEWS

Aboriginal Title Implementation
" Why Are We Waiting For the (Settler) Governments to Say No to
Delgamuukw? We Should Implement Our Original Title."
Chehalis ChiefAlex Paul, April 1998 UBCIC Chiefs Council

»<>« INDIGENOUS REALITY OF ORIGINAL TITLE »<>«
Our Indigenous Peoples, as Nations, hold the
jurisdiction and responsibility to protect, access and use the
resources upon the Land for the benefit of our Peoples, this
is our Original Title.
Nations are comprised of distinct Peoples' who have a
common history, language and culture. Nations have
distinct territories, governed by their distinct social organizations and political, social and economic laws. Indigenous
Nations embrace the complete population of a Peoples,
bound together by common ties of Self Determination. No
individual community or communities have the power to
treaty concerning the collective rights of the Nation. Treaties can be entered into by Nations of Peoples, not fragments
of a Nation.
As the Original Peoples of this Land, we have never
reached any agreement or treaty with Canada concerning the
occupation, settlement, sovereignty and jurisdiction that
Canada claims over Land to which we hold absolute Original Title. Despite federal and provincial assertions of
jurisdiction and sovereignty, our absolute Original Title to
the Lands and Resources and our Right of Self Determination remains strong and unbroken.

Self Determination is our responsibility and right to
practice our traditional forms of government to protect our
Peoples' social, political, economic, and cultural well being.
Our Original Title demands that we practice our
jurisdiction to ensure that our Lands and Resources are
protected, maintained, and used to the full benefit of our
Peoples.
Genocide is the destruction and alteration of the very
existence of a Peoples. Genocide is what the Indigenous
Nations of this Land have been subjected to by the Canadian
State (and the colonial powers which gave birth to Canada)
and its institutions: the forced removal of our Peoples from
their land, the blocking of our Peoples from the use, access
and benefit from our Resources; the theft of our children
through residential schools and child welfare systems; and a
multitude of assimilationist policies aimed at destroying our
cultures, histories, languages, laws and systems of governance.
Despite that we have been ravaged by genocide
through the years, our Original Title remains firmly rooted
and we survive as Peoples and as Nations.

»<>« CANADIAN LEGAL REALITY OF "ABORIGINAL TITLE" »<>«
Canada has refused to acknowledge that Indigenous
Nations have any title to or interest in the Land and its
Resources. The Supreme Court of Canada's decision in
Delgamuukw makes it illegal for Canada to maintain its
policy of non-recognition. For the first time in Canada's
history, the unanimous bench of the Supreme Court affirmed
the existence of aboriginal title, as a "right to the land itself."
Delgamuukw affirms the existence of Aboriginal Title
and demands that the governments of Canada recognize a
meaningful role for Indigenous Nations in all decisions
relating to our Lands and Resources as well as a right to
benefit economically from the use of our Lands and Resources.
There remains a significant difference between what
Indigenous Peoples' see as being our "Original Title" to the
land and its resources, and the Canadian legal notion of
"Aboriginal Title."

Our goal is to move from a formal legal recognition of
Aboriginal Title into a meaningful assertion "on the ground" of
our Original Title. Our "Original Title" to the Lands and its
resources is more often referred to as "Aboriginal Title" as this
is the term that Canadian courts. "Aboriginal Title", as it has
been recognized in the Canadian legal system to date, still must
develop further in order to encompass the full reality of our
"Original Title."
This Discussion Paper suggests some of the ways which
Indigenous Nations car, begin a process of re-discovering and
re-invigorating our own Laws and fully re-asserting our Aboriginal Title and Right of Self-Determination.
We recognize Indigenous Nations are at different stages
in their struggle to decolonize. Some may already have taken
the first steps, while still others have not seen the power of our
own reality.
"TITLE" ( continued on page 11)

16

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

Aboriginal Title Implementation Continued

»<>«

LOCK, STOCK AND BARREL »<>«

We can expect that Canada and B.C. will argue that Aboriginal Title is limited to
specific tracts of Land and does not include all of our traditional territories.
The Supreme Court confirmed our right to assert our authority over the totality of
our traditional territories by incorporating Aboriginal Law, and Aboriginal Peoples'
relationship to the Land, in its definition of Aboriginal Title. Reserve lands were
originally intended to "reserve" lands upon which to confine us to those areas which we
used and occupied most extensively. We must avoid a similar situation from developing
|
with respect to the recognition of Aboriginal Title Lands.
We maintain our position that Aboriginal Title and our relationship to the Land
encompasses all of our traditional territories, and that Self Determination encompasses all aspects of the social,
political, cultural and economic well being of our Peoples.
Recommendations:
1.
Indigenous Nations must aggressively
advance the position that we hold Aboriginal
Title to the totality of our territories, and refuse
to negotiate or discuss Aboriginal Title with
governments on any other basis.
2.
Canada must fully accept the reality of
our status as Nations. Indigenous Nations
must refuse to negotiate or discuss Aboriginal
Title on any other basis.
3.
Despite Canada's historic policies to cut
us off from our Lands, our connection to our
Lands has remained strong. Indigenous
Nations must "re-claim" the Aboriginal Title
Lands which Canada has prevented each
Nation from fully using. Our reclamation of
our Aboriginal Title lands must include a
broad range of activities through which People
re-invigorate their relationships to the Land.
Some examples would be the building of
homes, museums, administration offices, day
care centres, and schools on your traditional

»<>«
Indigenous Nations must de-colonize
our own minds and actions. Indigenous
Nations must stop asking Canada and others
for recognition and begin reasserting our own
Nationhood. This process of decolonization
will involve a fierce struggle to reinvigorate
our own laws and systems of governance, as
well as to plant within the minds of our own
Peoples the seeds of our tomorrows in the
knowledge of our true place among the
Nations of the world.

territories, as well as reviving past uses of the land which
have been interrupted by Canadian law. Reclamation
would require the support and participation of the entire
Nation.
4.
Each Indigenous Nation can issue a declaration of
its Aboriginal Title to the entirety of its traditional territory.
5.
Indigenous Nations must vigorously challenge the
federal and provincial government's claim of title or
jurisdiction over our Lands, Resources and Peoples'.
Declarations and policy statements will be served upon both
the federal and provincial governments, as well as third
party interests, to clarify to all governments, companies or
individuals who seek to use our Lands and Resources, that
Indigenous Peoples will not allow business to proceed as
usual.
6.
Indigenous Nations must serve notice to the public
that the provincial government does not have jurisdiction to
alienate or grant interests to our Lands and Resources.
This could include advertisements in local newspapers
outlining a map of your Nation's traditional territory, as
well as road signs or other public means of education about
the extent of your traditional territories.

INDIGENOUS DE-COLONIZATION FORUMS
Recommendations:

7.
Indigenous Governments must organize De-Colonization forums to educate their citizens about the political
and legal reality which our Nations are facing.
8.
De-colonization forums, ultimately, must embrace
the Peoples' vision of how Indigenous Governments should
proceed to a full recognition of our Aboriginal Title and
Responsibility of Self Determination.

"TITLE"

SPRING 1998

»<>«

(continued on page 12)

17

UBCIC NEWS

Aboriginal Title Implementation continued

»<>«
Each Indigenous Nation must acknowledge and respect the responsibility they have
of ensuring that they guard and protect their
Aboriginal Title for future generations.
Therefore any discussions with any other
government must include the full involvement
of their citizens, the Peoples' who collectively
hold the Aboriginal Title, and will pass this
on.
No one government, band council, or
provincially empowered entity has the power
to determine or define the current or future
collective rights of their Peoples. Aboriginal
Title vests with each member of an Indigenous

NEGOTIATION »<>«

Nation and no negotiation or other
discussions can proceed on any
other basis.
Our Aboriginal Title is an
inherent and inalienable relationship between the Peoples and the
Land.
Recommendation:
9.
Indigenous Nations must set out the principles and
standards by which they will agree to meet with Canada to
fully accept and implement the reality of our Aboriginal
Title.

»<>« B.C. TREATY PROCESS »<>«
There are several key findings of the
Delgamuukw decision which challenge the
current federal and provincial policies within
the British Columbia Treaty Process.
Aboriginal Title is a collective interest,
which means that no individual band or "First
Nation" can treaty for a right held by the
collective Nation. Our Aboriginal Title is held
by all of our Peoples' and not by the individual
"band councils" created under the Indian Act.
The Court's recognition that Aboriginal
Title has an economic component has thrown
the current B.C. Treaty Process loans systems
into question. Canada and the Province have
become wealthy from their use of Indigenous
Nations' Lands and Resources, and their
policies aimed at cutting off Indigenous
Nations' access to our Lands and Resources. It
is morally reprehensible to suggest that our
Nations' should have to borrow from the
wealth created from our Aboriginal Title
Lands in order to "negotiate" for Canada to
recognized Aboriginal Title.
The province is a key player in the
current B.C. Treaty Process. The basis of this
participation was the federal and provincial
governments' position that the province had
"jurisdiction" over many of the areas being
negotiated (lands, resources, social programs,
etc.). The Delgamuukw case has made it very
clear that any title or interest the federal or
provincial governments have in lands and
resources is subject to Aboriginal Title. Only
the federal government has the power or
authority to treaty with Indigenous Nations
with respect to our Aboriginal Title.

Canada has an obligation to negotiate fairly and in
good faith with Indigenous Nation. For those Indigenous
Nation who have remained outside of the current treaty
process, Canada cannot continue to alienate our lands and
resources while insisting that the B.C. Treaty Process is the
only process in which they are willing to discuss questions of
our Aboriginal Title.
Recommendations:
10.
Any agreements made or negotiated with respect to our
Aboriginal Title must be made by our Nations as a whole,
because the title is held by the Nation as a whole. Indigenous
Nations must accept the reality of the full consent of its
citizens and begin to reinstitute their own laws.
11.
Any negotiating funds received can not be construed as
a loan, but as an initial reparation payment against the monies
which Canada and the Province owe to our Nations as a result
of their exploitation of our Lands and Resources.
12.
The Province be removed as a full party to any negotiation regarding treaties of the settling of the Land Question;
However, Nations may choose to enter into government to
government discussion with the province.
13.
Indigenous Nations insist that the federal government
demonstrate its political will to honour the Supreme Court's
direction in Delgamuuwk to enter into Good Faith Negotiations on a Nation-to-Nation basis. The principles of Good
Faith Negotiations must be determined by each individual
Nation.
14.
Each Indigenous Nation must develop its own consent
requirements based upon and fully reflective of their Peoples'
right of Self Determination. These consent requirements
"TITLE"

(continued on page 13)

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

Aboriginal Title Implementation continued

»<>«
must be based on each Nation's own ways of
fully involving their Peoples' in decision
making. The highest form of decision
making for our Nations is consensus and a
mutual agreement amongst all of the people
within a Nation.
15.
Indigenous Peoples must challenge the
minimal "Consent" provisions which are
currently used within the B.C. Treaty Process
(for example, sparsely attended community
meetings, or a simple majority voting procedure) by measuring this "minimum standard
of consent" against their Nation's laws.
16.
Individual communities must accept
the reality that Aboriginal Title is collectively
held by Indigenous Nations. When individual communities participate in processes
designed to extinguish our Aboriginal Title
this will be deemed a breach of our traditional
laws, for which individual communities will
be held fully accountable.
17.
Each individual community within a
Nation holds their portion of the Nation's
territory in protection and trust for the entire
Nation. When individual communities enter
into any extinguishment processes (such as
the B.C. Treaty Process) they are violating
their sacred duty to protect and maintain

»<>«
As Indigenous Peoples we have
always recognized that our oral histories
and cultural heritage form the basis of our
laws and systems of governance. They are
our constitutions, our history books, the
umbilical cord which will sustain the future
of our Peoples.
Historically, our stories have been
disrespected and undervalued in Canadian
courts. Rules of evidence which exclude
oral histories create an impossible situation
for aboriginal litigants who seek to establish
their rights in Canadian courts. In Delgamuukw the court recognized the power and
validity of oral histories and stated that they
must be given the same weight as other
evidence.

TREATY PROCESS Continued »<>«

lands and resources for all of the
Peoples of their Nation. Where an
individual community or communities violates their sacred responsibility
to protect the Lands and Resources
for the collective benefit of their
Peoples, the rest of the Nation must
step in and recover this trust for the
protection of their Peoples' future relationship with the Lands
and Resources.
18.
Where federal and provincial governments continue to
deal with individual communities in an effort to extinguish
our collective Aboriginal Title to the Lands and Resources,
Indigenous Nations must hold these governments fully legally
liable for the breach of their own laws.
19.
As Indigenous Nations we have a responsibility to
reconcile all of our communities in order to realize our full
power as Nations.
20.
Indigenous Nations have the moral obligation to stand
with and support individuals within our own Nations, and in
neighbouring Nations, to defend their Aboriginal Title and
Responsibility of Self Determination against the extinguishment policies of the Canadian and provincial governments.
21.
Indigenous Nations cannot consent to negotiate,
discuss or enter into any agreements until the federal government has rescinded its current extinguishment policies in all
its forms.

ORAL HISTORIES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE »<>«
Recommendations:
22.
Indigenous Nations develop principles on the use and
protection of their oral histories and cultural heritage as
precious resources which sustain our Peoples' and must be
safe-guarded.
23.
Both as a means of reimplementing our traditional
forms of government, as well as establishing an evidentiary
basis where we choose to bring court cases to force the Canadian government to recognize our Aboriginal Title and Rights,
Indigenous Nations must preserve the oral histories and stories
of our Peoples.
24.
Indigenous Nations can compile, for the use and benefit
of their own Peoples', maps of their traditional territories
which reflect the real Indigenous place names.
"TITLE"

SPRING 1998

(continued on page 14)

19

UBCIC NEWS

Aboriginal title implementation continued

»<>« J U R I S D I C T I O N
Our Aboriginal Title forms the basis of
our Peoples' inherent jurisdiction over the air,
waters, forests, marine resources, wildlife,
and all other natural resources.
The full reassertion of our Jurisdiction
must include the development and strengthening of our relationships with neighbouring
Indigenous Peoples and Nations.
Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act,
1867 reserves jurisdiction to the federal
government over the Indians and lands
reserved for Indians. The Delgamuukw
decision has clarified that the federal jurisdiction over Indian lands is not limited to
"reserve" lands but encompasses all Aboriginal Title Lands.
Despite the incorporation of provincial
laws under Section 88 of the Indian Act, the
province cannot intrude upon the federal
jurisdiction over "Indian lands" in a manner
which would fundamentally alter their nature.
Aboriginal Laws and systems of governance
have priority over provincial laws.
Currently, the Province erroneously
assumes full jurisdiction for such diverse
resources as timber, water, range lands,
hunting, fishing, wildlife, social services,
child welfare, etc. The Supreme Court has
clearly stated that any interest that the
Province acquired in our Lands and Resources, is subject to our own Aboriginal
Title. The province's jurisdiction to regulate
or manage our Peoples', resources, or our use
of and access to those Resources, has been
invalidated.
Current policy requires merely that the
province "consult" with Indigenous Nations
prior to taking action which will impact upon
Aboriginal Title or Rights. To date this has
meant that the province will inform us of their
proposed action, and Indigenous Nations will
be given an opportunity - within a limited
time frame and with no financial resources to tell them how we believe this may impact
our Aboriginal Title and Rights. The ultimate
determination of what impact the proposed
action will have on our Title and Rights is left
solely with the province, there is no real or
meaningful involvement of Indigenous
Nations in the actual decision making.
We are told that they are going to build
a house, where they will build the house, and

the plans that they will use to build
the house, and then offered an
opportunity to "consult" on the colour
of the house. Consultation has meant
only superficial and meaningless
involvement in any provincial
decision making processes. Delga¬
muukw's recognition of Aboriginal
Title and the jurisdiction of Indigenous Nations has turned current consultation processes on their head.
The legal duty of the province to consult has been
greatly expanded to require the full consent of Indigenous
Nations where the Self Determination of our Peoples', or our
relationship with the land and its resources will be greatly
impacted.
Recommendations:
25.
Indigenous Nations must begin the process of reinvigorating our laws and systems of governance with
respect to Land management and the access to and use of
resources, by reassuming jurisdiction based on our own laws
and systems of governance. This could mean proceeding
with a logging or marine harvesting operation which was
approved according to each Nation's own laws.
26.
Any plan involving the reassertion of our jurisdiction
will put individual Indigenous People in conflict with federal
and provincial laws. For example, it will be the individual
logger, clam harvester, or hunter who is arrested. As the
reassertion of our jurisdiction is done on a Nation-wide
basis, a political action designed to challenge federal and
provincial jurisdiction must have strong support and participation by members and communities of each Nation.
27.
Emphasis must be placed on the harvesting of a
particular resource to provide an economic basis for advancing other areas of jurisdiction. Each community within your
Nation could commit to logging 10 trees. The profits from
the sale of these trees could form the basis of a legal defence
fund for individuals who are arrested and charged under
Canadian or provincial laws, while acting under authority of
your own law.
28.
Indigenous Nations can enter into joint protocol
agreements with their neighbouring Nations. These agreements would set out Indigenous Nations' joint commitment
and promise to stand together for the protection of their
Aboriginal Title. These relationships between Indigenous
Nations must be in place before any discussions with the
federal and provincial governments occur.

"TITLE"

20

»<>«

(continued on page 15)

SPRING 1998

Aboriginal Title Implementation

continued

»<>«

SPRING 1998

29.
Each Nation advise the Canadian
and provincial government that all development, regulation, land sales, and resource
extraction on so-called "Crown Lands" held
under Aboriginal Title must immediately
cease.
30.
Indigenous Nations notify' Canada
that our Aboriginal Title Lands include all
lands presently designated "Crown Lands"
within British Columbia. These Crown
Lands are held in Trust for Indigenous
Peoples, and must be immediately returned
to the Indigenous Nations who are vested
with the Aboriginal Title.

31.
Where Canada, or third party
interests, fully accept the reality of our
Aboriginal Title. Indigenous Nations
may enter into Interim Agreements to
allow some resource extraction or land
uses to proceed, where such proposals
fully incorporate the involvement and
consent of the Indigenous Nations for the benefit of our
Peoples.
32.
Each Indigenous Nation must take control of the
process of consultation by setting up their own "Settler Claims
Policy" which sets out the process that federal or provincial
governments, and third party interests, must follow if they
wish to use or access our lands or resources.

»<>«

Canada has been built upon the wealth
extracted from our Nations' traditional
territories, and by the imposition of their own
laws to prevent our access to our Lands and
Resources.
"Aboriginal Title" includes an economic interest. Part of the test for governments to meet when justifying an infringement of Aboriginal Title and Rights is to
show that they have provided compensation
to the Indigenous Nation who holds the
Aboriginal Title to the Lands or resources in
question.
Delgamuukw imposes a strong duty on
the part of the federal government to protect
Aboriginal Title Lands. This means that
where governments fail to fully protect our
interests they are legally liable to provide
financial compensation for both the breach of
their fiduciary duty as well as for the economic loss suffered through the damage to
our relationship with our lands.

JURISDICTION

UBCIC NEWS
Continued »<>«

REPARATIONS

»<>«

Governments may attempt to focus on the compensation requirements for infringements, while entirely underplaying the importance of our sacred relationship with the
land, and our position that this relationship is not one which
can ever be sold or severed without destroying us as a
Peoples.
Recommendations:
33.
Canada and British Columbia must be held fully
legally, financially and morally liable for any further or
continued alienation, infringement, or expropriation of our
Lands and Resources without our full consent, and for the
damage brought upon our Peoples' by their continued
implementation of their social policies.
34.
Indigenous Nations must demand an independent
forensic audit for the last 150 years which gives a full
accounting of the profits made by Canadian governments,
individuals and corporations from their use of our lands and
resources. Canada and the province must be billed for these
amounts.

The Delgamuukw case is only a legal decision which does
not acknowledge the fullness of our relationship with the Land or
the complete measure of our inherent jurisdiction over the Lands
and Resources. The power of the Delgamuukw decision will be in
the political will of our Peoples'.

21

UBCIC NEWS
FIREARMS A C T

(Continuedfrompage 9)

of other persons. Persons who commit this offence are liable to
a jail term of up to two years on the first offence, and up to five
years for subsequent offenses.
This section makes it a crime to use, carry or transport a
firearm " i n a careless manner or without reasonable
precautions for the safety of other persons". The provincial
Wildlife Act contains a similar provision and Indigenous people
have been charged for hunting without regard to the safety of
others while they were hunting at night. It is clear that these
provisions do not take into account the traditional hunting and
safety practices of Indigenous Peoples. Traditional activities
and modes of hunting, such as night hunting, are criminalized
under this provision.
2,
Possession without a licence: It is an offence to possess a
firearm without a licence, the penalty is up to five years in jail.
This sweeping provision means that each and every Indigenous
person who does not possess a licence (after the dates at which
the provisions will come fully into force) can be sent to jail.
This means that the majority of Indigenous people in this
country will become criminals as soon as this provision comes
into effect.
3.
Traveling in a motor vehicle without a licence holder:
It is an offence to ride in a motor vehicle where there is a
firearm which is not registered, or where there is no person in
the vehicle who is licenced to possess a firearm. The penalty is
up to ten years in prison.
When applied to Indigenous communities this law has
the potential to be ludicrous in its application. The amount of
hunting and trapping that Indigenous people do means that
people very often have firearms in their vehicles while giving
rides to family members and other community members.
Giving one's Aunt a ride to the grocery store while on the way
to check trapline (assuming neither you, nor your Aunt had a
licence) could conceivably land your Aunt in jail.
Administrative Implementation:

Instead of meaningfully addressing aboriginal rights, and
ensuring that the Act does not infringe upon those rights, the
federal government has suggested that Aboriginal communities
enter into agreements with the federal government to administer
the Act locally. Even if administered by aboriginal
communities, the basic requirements of the Act would not
change; Instead, aboriginal communities would become
responsible for administering legislation which abrogates the
hunting and trapping rights of their members.
Summary:
The right to hunt is an aboriginal and treaty right. The
right to hunt must necessarily include all of the rights
necessarily incidental to the practice of this right, this includes
the right to possess a firearm for hunting purposes. The right to
hunt is a right to a way of life, and is far broader than a mere
"sustenance" right (that is, the right to hunt and eat game).
The Act imposes very serious and significant
infringements upon the aboriginal right to hunt. The

22

requirement of a licence makes the right to hunt entirely
contingent upon the approval of the province (through the chief
firearms officer). This restriction extends to the point of the
practical extinguishment of the aboriginal right to hunt.
The net effect of this legislation is that it criminalizes
being Indian. It represents an unwarranted and unacceptable
intrusion into the day-to-day lives of Indigenous Peoples. The
Act does not constitute a mere infringement, but rather a while
scale criminalization of aboriginal rights, and traditional
hunting and trapping practices.
The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs has published a "Guide
to the Firearms Act and Regulations" which provides more
detailed information. If you would like a copy, please contact
our Vancouver office.

Available from the UBCIC'S
Chiefs Mask Bookstore Summer 1998
Researching the Indian Land Question in B.C.
An introduction to Research Strategies and Archival
Research for Band Researchers. Prepared and published by the
Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs.

Aboriginal Solidarity Day

Come and Celebrate with the

UNION OF B . C . INDIAN CHIEFS
June 20th, 1998: 12:00 Noon to 3:30 p.m.
Information on Land and Aboriginal Rights
Book stall on Aboriginal People and Issues.
Sales: Bazaar, Arts & Crafts
Books, Plants, China, etc.
Tea & Lunch: $4.00

ST. PAULS ANGLICAN

CHURCH

1130 Jervis Street (Westend)
Vancouver, B . C .

Everyone is welcome to share in a
spiritual ceremony
(Donations for sale items welcome. Call UBCIC @ 684-0231)

SPRING

1998

UBCIC NEWS

U B C I C : 3 O Y e a r s of I n d i a n L e a d e r s h i p
1969 - 1972

J982 - 1984:

1992:

Community and political development work
in Indian communities began.

UBCIC actively support Indigenous People of
South Africa

Confederation of Aboriginal Nations
Constitution proposed.

Active opposition to federal government's
White Paper termination policy.

Signed agreement with National Congress of
North American Indians on fishing rights.

Charlottetown Accord results in 70%

1973 - 1974:
UBCIC Resource Centre opened.

J984- 1986:

Successful campaign against
"No" vote in B.C. Aboriginal
communities.

"Indian Polity" a history of Indian/Canada
Relations

UBCIC begins fight against tri-partite BC
Treatv Process.

Edit Aboriginal Title & Rights Position Paper

1993:

Draft Fisheries Treaty

UBCIC celebrates 25 years of Indian
Leadership

1975 - 1976:
Indian Control of Indian Government
movement begins.

Rejection of funds.
World Council of Indigenous Peoples
formed at Port Alberni. BC

Interventions in Guerin and Sparrow court
cases.

Joint Policy Council established with

Province of B.C. to address jurisdiction.
Support for Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en
UBCIC Intervene in Delgamuukw case.

UBCIC attempt to establish
Aboriginal Rights Commission in B.C.

,1986- 1987:
Sovereign Indigenous Nations Territorial

Inter-Tribal (Nation) Treaties

Boundaries of B.C. map published

Chiefs Mask Bookstore established

1994:

"Buffalo Jump of 1980's" assembly and

Federal Government Program Review

1976-1980:
UBCIC reverses government strategy to cut
N.I.H.B

information poster published.

"Fishing War" to assert Aboriginal Rights

1988 - 1990:

"Self-Determination or Self-Termination"
Poster Published

UBCIC celebrates 20th anniversary

1995:

UBCIC assists in establishment of Tribal
Peacekeepers

Gun Control Opposition
Extinguishment re: Fact Finder

Fight against Meech Lake Accord.

Institute of Indigenous Government
Opens

Fishing

Action "Enough is Enough",

Lillooet

Major cuts to UBCIC funding
Central Interior Tribal Councils "'Red
Book" call for change in Administration
Policy

Landmark decision of Regina v. Sparrow.
1996:

1980-1981:
Development and Ratification of Aboriginal
Title and Rights Position Paper

UBCIC holds National Indian lobby to
prelect Aboriginal Rights within Canadian
Constitution
Constitution Express and London court case
against patriation of Canadian Constitution.

UBCIC call for Mohawk-support roadblocks
leads to "Indian Summer" in B.C.

Health Rally to fight N1HB Cuts [?]
Oppose Indian Act changes
1997:

Comprehensive Framework Treaty proposal.

July 30

[July] Voice of The Peoples Gathering @
Cayoose

1991 - 1992:
1998:
Direction to form post-secondary Institution.

Support for Spallumcheen Indian Control of
Indian Child Welfare.

Fight Against Fish Farms
UBCIC sovereignty intervention in
Delgamuukw v. Queen.

Penner Report Released
Constitution Express (European Lobby)

SPRING I 998

UBCIC declines to participate in BC Claims
Task Force.

Challenge of Gun Control Legislation
continues
UBCIC 30th Assembly [October]

13

UBCIC

NEWS

Down From the Shimmering Sky
Masks of the Northwest Coast
(June 04-October 12,

T

1998)
Some o f the 30 artists included are:

he Vancouver Art Gallery's

Robert Davidson, Charles

exciting summer show, Down

From the Shimmering Sky: Masks of

Edendshaw, Richard Hunt, Willie

t h e Northwest Coast w i l l offer a

Seaweed, Art Thompson, and Freda

"once-in-a-lifetime"

Diesing. The exhibition is divided

opportunity to

explore two centuries of mask

into five themes. The first repre-

making by some of the region's finest

sents the Human Face masks from

F i r s t Nations artists. One of the

the 1820's to the present. The four

largest, most ambitious exhibitions

remaining sections depict the

t h e Gallery has every organized, more

dimensions of the cosmos and

t h a n 175 historical and contemporary

perceived by the First Peoples of the

masks will b e displayed from June 4

Northwest Coast: the Sky World,

-October 12,1998.

Mortal World, Undersea World and

Masks are a manifestation of

Spirit World

powerful ancestral spirits and are

D o w n From the Shimmering

used to make the supernatural world

Sky: Masks of the Northwest Coast

visible. Their use in First Nations
dance ceremonies has long played a

Southern Kwakiutl cannibal bird mask, Willie Seaweed

is curated by Robert Joseph, a
Kwakwaka'wakw Chief and advisor

vital role in preserving the stories, values, privileges, and status of

on land claims and Native rights; Peter Macnair, former curator of

their owners. Several of these extraordinary objects were collected

anthropology at the Royal British Columbia Museum; and Bruce

during Captain Cook's early expeditions and will be seen in B . C . for

Brenvill, senior curator of the Vancouver Art Gallery.

the first time in more than 200 years.

Visitors can enhance their understanding of the exhibition by

" I n a world of endless change and complexity, the mask has

attending daily Gallery Talks and visiting the Open Studio for

offered a continuum for native people to acknowledge our connec-

hands-on learning and mask carving demonstrations. There w i l l

t i o n t o the universe. Through masks we identify our humanity.

also be First Nations Dance Performances on selected Friday

Through masks we affirm celestial places that honour the moon and

evenings.

stars. Through masks we conquer our fear of the oceans deep.

A fully illustrated catalogue co-published by Douglas &

Through masks we interact with the spirit world, our final destina-

Mclntyre, and the University of Washington Press, Seattle accompa-

tion."

nies the exhibition. Contact Laura Anderson at (604) 662-4700
-Robert Joseph, co-curator and Kwakwaka'akw Chief

(local 400).

Union of B . C . Indian Chiefs
30th Annual General Assembly
October 20, 21, 22, 1998
Vancouver, B . C .
Look for more details in the next edition of the U B C I C N E W S L E T T E R or contact
Millie Poplar @ (604) 684-023 1

24

SPRING

1998

UBCIC NEWS

Changes and Cutbacks to the
Provision of Non-Insured Health
Benefits
The change to N I H B that w i l l be most noticeable to people
requiring services is the new policy o f replacing brand-name
prescriptions with generic drugs. This cost - cutting scheme orders
pharmacists to replace the drugs prescribed to patients with
cheaper, generic drugs w h i c h do the same thing as the name-brand
prescription. If the doctor specifically requests that the brandname drug not be substituted, the reasons for the request must be
submitted for review to an approval body. The process o f approval
could take anywhere from 48 hours, and is likely to take as long as
two weeks. Tormented by pain or illness, patients w i l l have to
suffer until the brand name drug is approved or accept a substitute
drug, to which they may have adverse reactions, or which may not
provide the necessary relief o f their condition.
There is a push from the Federal government to transfer the
administration o f First Nations health programs to bands and tribal
councils.
M e d i c a l Transportation, the program p r o v i d i n g
transportation to and from the nearest health care facility equipped
to administer appropriate treatment, has already been arbitrarily
transferred out o f the hands o f the Federal government and made
the responsibility o f First Nations communities and tribal councils.
There was no First Nations consultation or acceptance o f this shift
in policy.
Under the Community - Based Health Program Transfer
Process, management o f N1H B is being transferred to First Nations
administration. Communities, tribal councils or other First Nation
representative bodies are being encouraged to assume the
management o f all or some o f the N I H B programs. Transfers w i l l
be funded with lump sums o f money agreed upon for a set period
of 3 to 5 sears. This " e n v e l o p e " funding system does not account
for unforeseen e p i d e m i c s , spurts in p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h ,
administrative errors, or any other natural or man-made disasters.
Because the administration o f First Nations health programs
has for many years remained the responsibility o f the Federal
government. First Nations representative bodies lack experienced
manpower to assume the management o f N I H B . First Nations
should enter into transfer agreements very cautiously and only with
the guarantee that proper instruction, technology and time is
invested by the Federal government into training First Nations
people for the management o f health programs. Training o f staff
and staff salaries, technological equipment and its upgrading and
repairs, and the costs o f administration in general should be funded
based on need and separate from the " e n v e l o p e " funding o f the
transfer agreement.
Further changes to the administration o f N I H B w i l l be made
when the contract o f the Liberty Health Claims Processing System
expires. Liberty Health formerly administered the provision o f
N I H B programs such as Drugs, M e d i c a l Supplies and Equipment
and Dental Services. The Aboriginal Business Procurement
Policy, implemented in A p r i l 1996, mandates that the contract
must be turned over to an Aboriginal business or joint venture when
it expires June 30, 1998. Costs for the new administration, if higher
than before, w i l l come out o f the overall Federal N I H B budget,

SPRING 1998

leaving less money for providing services to First Nations
communities and individuals.

F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t and F i d u c i a r y Duties
The Government o f Canada holds a fiduciary duty to the
First Nations o f Canada, which they appear to be evading in their
urgency to transfer the administration o f First Nations health
programs. Fiduciary duties, especially when it comes to health, are
indisputable obligations o f the Federal government. Although
entrenched in the Indian A c t , Royal Proclamation and the Treaties
signed by some First Nations, these duties can be understood on a
broader moral level when we examine a cause-and-effect dynamic
to First Nations health.
Demographics show that the overall health o f a People is
dependent upon the conditions in which they live. Poor communities
(such as First Nations populations) without access to proper
sanitary facilities, fresh and nutritious food, adequate housing and
social programs run greater health risks than the general populace.
Because these conditions were created and are enforced by the
Federal government, they have a fiduciary duty to provide health
care and social programs in order to rectify the inferior health status
o f the First Nations o f Canada. Only when these obligations are
fulfilled w i l l First Nations have a viable chance o f living and
thriving in the traditions of our nations, ensuring the survival of our
peoples and cultures.
Diabetes and First Nations H e a l t h
The incidence o f diabetes in First Nations communities is
significantly higher than the general Canadian population. N o n insulin dependent diabetes ( N I D D M ) is seriously under diagnosed
in the Canadian population as a whole, with an estimated half o f
N I D D M cases being misdiagnosed. The number o f First Nations
cases o f N I D D M per capita is estimated at being 2 to 5 times the
national average.
Because the effects o f N I D D M , i f left untreated or
undiagnosed, can be severe and debilitating (advanced cases can
result in the loss o f vision or loss of the use o f a l i m b ) , N I D D M poses
a definite threat to the health o f First Nations populations.
Diagnosing N I D D M early in its onset is especially important in the
First Nations population because the disease seems to be occurring
at a younger age than the general Canadian population. N I D D M
is generally found among adult to aging people, but is occurring
among even the very young members o f First Nations communities.
N I D D M is a disease related to the body's inability to
regulate the amount o f sugar released from digesting food into the
bloodstream. Improper nutrition and lack o f regular exercise can
weaken the body's ability to digest sugars properly and result in
N I D D M . One can surmise, therefore, that the high incidence o f
N I D D M among First Nations populations is related to the lack o f
fresh, nutritious foods and proper community exercise programs
available in First Nations communities.
Once diagnosed, N I D D M can be controlled by monitoring
blood glucose(sugar) levels and adjusting one's diet accordingly.
Efforts need to be made in our communities to properly diagnose
cases o f N I D D M before they become detrimental to a person's

25

HEALTH (Continued from page 6)

UBCIC

NEWS

health. Preventing the disease among our people could be as easy
as providing fresh, nutritious foods instead o f the pre-packaged and
non-nutritive foods found at the corner store. Band-subsidized
gardening and preserving programs would improve the community
on a multitude of levels. Involving community members in pursuits
as rewarding as growing crops o f their own fresh fruits and
vegetables and then preserving them for the colder seasons promotes
community solidarity and is a good source o f exercise, fresh air and
personal empowerment.
On an administrative level, First Nations governing bodies
must fight to maintain the standards o f health care available to our
people, keeping in mind the amount o f undiagnosed illnesses
already in our populations. Health Transfers, i f entered into, must
reflect future treatment for the estimated figures o f undiagnosed
N I D D M cases in the funding envelope.

HIV / AIDS in First Nations Communities
Community Health Transfers and other changes to the
provision o f health care to our people should recognize the threat
posed on our communities by H I V / A I D S . H I V , or the Human
Immunodeficiency Virus, is the virus which causes A I D S . H I V is
transmitted through blood contamination and sexual contact, and
is not a highly contagious virus. There is, however, no known cure
for H I V and subsequently no cure for A I D S . It is contracted
through sex without a prophylactic(condom), or by shared
intravenous needles.
The demographics o f the effect o f H I V on First Nations
populations are misleadingly unclear. Because H I V testing is done
confidentially, at least 4 0 % o f the known number o f H I V positive
test subjects are of no known ethnic origin. We could safely say that
at least some o f these subjects are o f First Nations ancestry.
Another factor when studying the H I V - infection rates are called
risk levels. Considered high risk behaviors are intravenous(I.V.)
drug use with shared needles, unprotected sex (considered highest
risk is unprotected solicited sex. followed by unprotected homosexual
male sex, and lastly unprotected heterosexual sex). High - risk
zones include areas like the downtown east side of Vancouver
where there is a high proportion o f unemployment, prostitution and
I V drug use. Increasing the risk levels yet again is the new trend
in the city o f intravenous cocaine injection, where addicts w i l l go
through 20 to 50 needles in a day as opposed to averaging 1 or 2
needles per day with the longer heroin high.
The First Nations population is disproportionately high in
high - risk areas o f big cities. The growing fear is that First Nations
people living in these high - risk zones and participating in high
risk hehavior will introduce the virus into their home communities
when they return. H I V infection is impossible to detect right away
in most cases The virus can be harbored in someone's bloodstream
for seven or more years before any symptoms indicating AIDS
occur. and by that time there would be no telling how many people
that one victim infected. This extreme delay in symptoms could
cause an epidemic web o f infection i f left unchecked. Fortunately,
antibodies produced by the body in defense of the H I V virus can be
detected from six months after the day o f infection in a laboratory.
Anyone who has ever engaged in any risk behavior o f any kind
(including unprotected heterosexual sex) should be advised to go
their local health care provider for a free and confidential blood
test

26

History has shown the devastating effects o f disease on
closed communities such as Indian reserves. Before H I V - infection
reaches epidemic proportions (assuming that it hasn't as yet),
measures must be taken to stop the spread o f the virus. Community
programs aimed at informing members o f the risk o f H I V would
help to dissolve the illusion that H I V does not .pose a threat to
'ordinary' people. Condoms and clean needles should be supplied
free and confidentially to community members, as should H I V
testing. Wide - scale treatment o f I.V. drug users should be put in
place with an emphasis on women's rehab centers (there are very
few beds available for females at most rehab centers, while women
addicts outnumber the men in some zones).
Health care programs, whether administered at the federal
or community level, need to address the threat o f H I V / A I D S on
our peoples. To prevent the onslaught o f another epidemic,
leadership needs to initiate the introduction o f awareness programs
and prevention initiatives.

Useful Telephone Numbers
Health Canada N I H B Directory
(604)666-2083
NIHB Direct Line
(604)666-3331
Reference Canada (phone numbers for every federal
department and resource)
1-800-667-3355
Healing Our Spirit B.C. First Nations AIDS Society
(604)983-8774

UBCIC NEWSLETTER DEADLINE
July 15, 1998- If you have any information that you would like to see in the next
edition of the UBCIC NEWSLETTER, please
forward by mail or fax (604) 684-5726 to the
attention of UBCIC NEWSLETTER.
E-Mail: [email protected]

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

Multilateral Agreement on
Investment

T

he M A I is a treaty about international investments that is currently being negotiated under
the auspices of the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), and
represents a critical element of a larger strategy
to codify the rules upon which a global system of production
and trade depend. While this agenda is fundamentally the
project of the worlds largest corporations, it also enjoys enthusiastic support by many O E C D countries including Canada. This
support appears founded on the faith that sustained marketdriven growth will bring wealth and economic stability to the
world community. In order to achieve this prosperity, governments need only allow market forces to operate unfettered by
regulation or other government "interference".
If this sounds familiar, that's because this global economic model is simply an amplification of the policies that have
guided domestic policy for decades. Absent, as always, is any
notion of ecological limits, or of the need to address how the
proceeds of growth will be distributed. Also missing is any real
evidence to support the grand claims of those promoting
liberalized trade and investment rules. In fact, our experience
with this grow-now, pay later paradigm has been a disaster for
the environment and most of the world's population.
The following briefly describes the four key elements of
the M A I that will have the destructive impact on our prospects
for achieving environmental goals.
National Treatment: A l l of the Rights - None of the Responsibility.
The first principle of the M A I is that of National Treatment,
which demands that foreign corporations be given every right,
concession or privilege that a government may provide local
companies or communities. This MAI would, for example
prohibit:
- policies that favour community land tenure or resource
management rights.
- citizenship requirements for those seeking fishing or woodlot
licenses; or
- subsidies to support community economic development.
It is fundamental to sustainable management that the right to
exploit a resource come with the obligation to ensure its longterm stewardship. The principle of National Treatment would
permanently sever this fundamental relationship.
Investor Rights: Special Status for Foreign Corporations
Under the heading of "Performance Requirements" the MAI
sets out a lengthy list of government measures that cannot be
imposed on foreign corporations, even when these same controls apply to domestic companies and investors. Thus, governments can not require foreign corporations to:
SPRING

1998

- achieve a given level or percentage of domestic content, or to
purchase goods or services locally;
- transfer environmentally sound technology;
- supply local markets or value-added producers;
- achieve a given level or value of production, investment,
employment, or research and development; or even,
- hire locally.
If we are to contain and ultimately reduce rates of
resource exploitation that are seriously damaging once abundant
and diverse ecosystems we must work together to build more
diverse resource economies; promote local economic development; foster environmentally sound technologies; and ensure
"just transitions" for workers. MAI rules will make each and
every one of these goals far more difficult, if not impossible, to
achieve.
Expropriation: Entrenching Private Property Rights in a
Global Constitution
Under the heading of Investor Protection, the M A I provides that
governments:
Shall not expropriate or nationalize directly or indirectly an investment... or take any measure of
measures having equivalent effect (hereinafter
referred to as "expropriation") except... accompanied
by payment of prompt, adequate and effective compensation.
Because the M A I defines "expropriation" in the broadest
terms, its rules may well prohibit any government regulation
that even indirectly reduces the profitability of corporate
investment. In fact, it would be difficult to identify and environmental or conservation initiative that would not have this
effect, at least on some investors. A recent law suit by a US
based transnational corporation illustrates how profound the
impact of this rule may be.
In that case Ethly Corporation, is seeking $325 million
in compensation from the Canadian government because of the
government's decision to band the use of M M T as a fuel
additive in Canadian gasoline. The suit is proceeding under the
investment rules of N A F T A , which serves as the prototype for
die M A I . Ethyl claims that Canada's ban represents an expropriation of its business of manufacturing this neuro-toxic fuel
additive, and that under N A F T A rules it is entitled to compensation.
Here is a list of other environmental measures, that
according to the lawyer representing the Ethly Corporation,
would also be vulnerable to attack (and we quote):
1. Remediation orders to prevent toxic seepage. 2.
Changes to existing concession licenses to protect fisheries,
flora or fauna. 3. Changes to land use regulations that would
reduce the value of property a foreign investor. 4. Preventive
measures taken to protect public safety that caused loss of harm
to foreign investors. 5. Requirements that only environmentally-acceptable resource extraction techniques be used that
would increase the cost of extraction.
MAI

(continued on page 28)

27

UBCIC

NEWS

Honorariums for Native Band
Members
Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) has
recently issued a Notice which confirms that honoraria paid
to council members to cover the expenses they incur during
the course of their duties (travel, meals, parking, etc.)
should not be considered income. If the honoraria provided
is not intended to cover expenses, it will still be considered
earnings and must be declared on the E.I. report cards.
In the past, where Bands paid their members honoraria (not
as a wage, but to cover their expenses) the H R D C has
routinely classified these as "earnings". Council members
have been denied Employment Insurance benefits which
they paid for, or have been assessed heavy penalties when
they did not declare these amounts as "earnings" on
their report cards. The system has served to penalize
individuals who agree to sit on Band Councils on a
voluntary basis. In some cases, insurance officers have
refused to accept letters from Band Councils which clarify
the nature of the honoraria as expense-reimbursement,
leaving no way for individual council members to prove
their innocence.
Hopefully, now that H R D C has clarified that it will no
longer consider honoraria provided to cover expenses as
"earnings" this should ease the problem. In order to avoid
this problem. Band Councils, when issues honoraria to
their members, should clarify where these amounts are
intended to cover the expenses incurred by their members
in the course of their duties. (For example, instead of
calling these amounts "honoraria" they might be better
named "expense reimbursement"). However, if you
continue to have any problems with HRDC please contact
our offices at (604) 684-023 1.

IIG Computer Raffle
Congratulations to Caroline
Moore, from Vancovuer,
whose name was drawn from
the Saanich Extension
Computer Raffle. Caroline,
a First Nations Support
worker for the Vancouver Community College, was thrilled to get the news. To all
sellers and buyers of the tickets, your support is
greatly appreciated. Brenda Wesley, a student at
IIG. sole the winning ticket. Look for upcoming fund
raising events

Institute of Indigenous Government
APPLY TODAY
Applications are now being accepted for the Fall 1998 & the
Winter 1999 semesters. If you would like more information
about obtaining a two year Associate of Arts degree or a one
year Certificate in Indigenous Government Studies, contact
the Registrar's office at (604) 602-3428/29. Or, visit our
campus or write to:
Office of the Registrar
342 Water Street
Vancouver, B.C.
V6B IB6
FREE A C A D E M I C C A L E N D A R S

MAI

(continued)

Investor-State Suits: T h e New S t a r C h a m b e r

Under the M A I , foreign investors have an unqualified
right to sue governments under rules of international arbitration
that are so secretive that they would rival those of the Star
Chamber Court abolished three centuries ago. It's precisely this
process that Ethly Corporation is relying on in its suit against
the Canadian government. That case is now proceeding behind
closed doors without public notice, without access to the
documents filed, and without participatory rights for any other
part).
It is difficult to overstate the seriousness of the challenges posed by this investment regime to environmental and
other societal goals, including that of democratic governance.

28

Internet: http://www.indigenous.bc.ca

LOGO

CONTEST

The 5th Annual
Aboriginal Cultural Festival
"Bringing People Together
We are inviting creative artists to submit your logo
interpretation of the 5th Annual A C F . Judging will take place
on June 21, 1998 at the Vancouver Aboriginal Friendship
Centre. The selected logo will be featured in the program
guide, T-shirts, and other relevant paraphernalia of the A C F .
The winner will receive a free arts/craft booth at this
years A C F which will be held on Squamish Territory, September 1 1-13, 1998. You will need an entry form available at the
V A F S . Contact VAFCS @ (604) 25 1-4844 EXT.307

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

MAP OF THE SOVEREIGN INDIGENOUS NATIONS
TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES: JUNE, 1993
The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs' map of the Sovereign Indigenous Nations Territorial Boundaries is the only contemporary
map thai accurately shows the traditional tribal territories of the 23 Indian Nations in British Columbia. The six colour map measures
28"x36".
The tribal territories are the homelands of distinct Nations, within which their respective peoples share a common language,
culture and traditional forms of political and social organization. These homelands have been occupied by the Indian Nations since
time immemorial. Up to the present, the Indian Nations in British Columbia have never surrendered their ownership of their homelands
(aboriginal title), nor have they surrendered their original sovereignty as nations to govern their homelands (inherent jurisdiction).
Information on the territorial boundaries was compiled by the Union's research portfolio and President's office between July,
1990 and April, 1993 from archival research and information provided by elders, chiefs, and tribal councils. Chief Saul Terry, President
of the Union and a graduate of the Vancouver College of Art (now the Emily Carr College of Art and Design), prepared the working
drafts for the map.

Design and cartography for the June, 1993 map was done by David Sami, chief cartographer of Multi Mapping Ltd. in
Vancouver, B.C., using a 1:2,000,000 scale base-map from the Surveys and Environment Branch of the British Columbia Ministry
of Environment, Lands and Parks. A l l territorial boundaries shown on the map are subject to further revision, as additional information
becomes available. Contact the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs at (604) 684-0231 for ordering information.
28" x

SPRING 1998

36" /

Scale: 1:2 000 000

/ Six

Colours

29

NEWS

UNION OF B. C. INDIAN CHIEFS

ACCEPTED

UBCIC

SUBSCRIPTION FORM

NAME:
F O R O F F I C E U S E ONLY
DATE R E C E I V E D :
CHEQ/M.O. #
EXPIRY D A T E :

ADDRESS :

PROVINCE/STATE/COUNTRY:

POSTAL/ZIP CODE:

1 YEAR

SUBSCRIPTION RATES

NewsLETTER
NewsCLIPPING

Member Bands:

Individual:
$75.00

$35.00
Individual: $100.00

TOTAL AMOUNT ENCLOSED $
Please make cheque or money order payable to: UNION OF B.C. INDIAN CHIEFS. 5TH FLOOR - 342 WATER STREET,
VANCOUVER. B.C.. V6B 1B6

CHIEFS

MASK B O O K S

Owned and operated by the U n i o n o f B . C . Indian Chiefs'- 5th Floor 342 Water Street in Gastown (604) 684-0231
A L S O SERVING T H E INSTITUTE OF INDIGENOUS G O V E R N M E N T

BOOKS

ARTS & CRAFTS
- JEWELLERY

- ABORIGINAL

- POTTERY

ISSUES

- INTERNATIONAL

- PRINTS

CLAIMS

- T-SHIRTS

ACCEPTED

CONSIGNMENTS

- USD

INDIGENOUS

CONSIGNMENTS

- FIRST NATIONS

- LEATHERWORK
- ART
- MASKS
- CHILDREN'S

BOOKS
- BEAD WORK

- POETRY
- POWWOW

CALL, WRITE OR
DROP IN TODAY!

- AND MUCH

MUSIC
MORE!

SPRING 1998


ra BL

‘Our Land is Our Suture”

JUNE 1998 EDITION



First Nations ~ Environmental Alliance
against Fish Farms

Vancouver, B.C. ~ First Nations and environmentalists underlined their firm opposition to salmon
aquaculture at a rally held this morning outside an industry/government sponsored conference promoting
aboriginal opportunties in aquaculture.

L epresentatives
* A fromcommu-
nities throughout
B.C.. some dressed in
regalia and carrying
their drums, gathered
to formally protest
against the conference
organizers’ suggestion
that fishfarming is the
answer to First Na-
lions’ economic woes.

"The ocean's
wealth belongs to our
people. As First
Nations’ leaders we
have the responsibility
to care for thts wealth
and safeguard it for
future generations”,
said Ed Neuman,







Hereditary Chief of the Protesters gather outside the Aboriginal Aquaculture in Canada Conference
Heiltsuk First Nation.
“Governments have ap First Nations Environmen- is not just about aboriginal Johnstone Straight, between
prove jeri emees vt tal Alliance against rights; there is an environ- northern Vancouver Island
ties which harm the envi- Fishfarming, condemns the mental ethic here. Since the and the mainland, where
ronment. This must stop. attititude of government farms came to our terri- there is a concentration of

. Chief Bob Joseph, and industry. "They seem tory, the Broughton Archi- salmon farms.
Chair of the Musgamagw to feel that we'll accept pelago is dying."
Tsawataineuk Tribal economic developmentat Musgamagw territory is FISH FARMS
Council and founder of the any cost - we won't. This located in the islands of (continued on page 4)

TR a a a

UBCIC NEWS

LYVjessage from the President













Chief Saul Terry, X'wisten









Proposal for an independent, legislated Claims Commission
and Tribunal with full binding authority to determine validation
and compensation faces significant hurdles

The Joint First Nations/
Canada Task Force on Specific
Claims is finalizing instructions
for drafting federal legislation

which sets out a brand new specific

claims policy and process.

As currently drafted, this joint proposal calls for the
establishment of a First Nations Specific Claims Commission
and First Nations Specific Claims Tribunal on April 1, 1999.
Specific claims will be submitted directly to this new
Commission, rather than to the federal government. The
emphasis of the Commission will be to arrive at claims
settlements through negotiations or the use of alternative

dispute resolution methods. It is anticipated that the majority of
claims will be resolved by negotiation,



the specific claims process could be undertaken. The ISCC
was fatally flawed. Armed only with the power to make
recommendations, t# has not been resorted to by many
communities, and it was not sufficiently empowered to achieve
many specific claims resolutions. The existing ISCC will be
wound down before the start up of the new Commission.

The proposal developed by the Joint First Nations/
Canada Task Force directly addresses the major flaws with the
existing specific claims policy and process. The new
Commission will be more independent and powerful than the
existing ISCC because it is legislated and because the Tribunal
will give it teeth - sharp teeth. The conflict of interest created by
Canada accepting and judging claims against itself has been
eliminated, The game rules will be set by the new body, the





First Nations Specific Claims

with the facilitation of the Commission,
rather through the Tribunal.

Those claims that cannot be
resolved through negotiation at the
Commission level can be taken to the
First Nations Specific Claims Tribunal.
The Tribunal ts a completely separate

body and process from the Commission.

Information that was shared with the
facilitator or mediator while the
claims file was with the Commission
will remain protected. The parties, the
Band and DIAND, make their cases
anew to the Tribunal for a final and
binding decision on whether the claim
is valid and what the compensation
should be. The Tribunal can only make
cash awards. However, the Tribunal
is not bound by any financial caps,
and once compensation has been
determined, the parties are free to
negotiate non-cash alternatives.
Consent orders reflecting the settlement
determined by the Tribunal will be
registered in a court of competent
Jurisdiction.

The proposed new independent
Commisston and Tribunal represent a
Significant improvement over the status
quo. The existing Indian Specific
Claims Commission, which was
established without consultation, was
only intended as a temporary ‘“band-
aid’* until the major surgery

IN THIS ISSUE...

7. Ts'kw'aylaxw First Nation
8. Native Youth Movement

9. Fish Farms: Zero Tolerance

12. Firearms Act
14. HG Spring Convocation 1998

15. UBCIC Resource Centre and
Research Office Update

16 Aboriginal Title Implementation
Guide

23. UBCIC: 30 Years of Indian
Leadership

24. Down from the Shimmering Sky:
Masks of the Northwest Coast.

25. Non - Insured Hea!th Benefits

27. Multilateral Agreement on
Investment

28. Honorariums for Native Band
Members.









Commission, and not DIAND.
DIAND will have more
incentive to negotiate claims in
good faith, because failure to do
so means the First Nation may
take the claim to the
independent Tribunal. The
Tribunal is like a court. It will
make final, binding decisions
about the validity and value of a
specific claim in the form of
written judgments. Only errors
of law will be appealable to a
higher legal authority (judicial
review).

The proposed new
specific claims process, as
drafted in the Joint Task Force
document, is more flexible than
the existing specific claims
process with regards to who
may bring a claim and it
broadens the spectrum of
grievances which may be
submitted to the specific claims
process. However, this new
process will not consider
questions of Aboriginal Rights
and Title, unless agreed to by
both parties. For legal reasons,
it may not be able to deal with
particular claims issues which
have already been judged before



: ; SPECIFIC CLAIMS
required for reforming and overhauling (Godimedionpsane)
2 SPRING 1998

OO § PBCIC NEWS

Federal Clam Policy Violates
Aboriginal Title, Rights

The federal government has imposed changed in the
clam fishery which are in direct violation of the Aboriginal
Title and Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The new policy is
entitled the Management Reforms in the Clam Fishery (the
**Policy’’).

On the basis of the Aboriginal Right to the fishery,
alone, the Policy (and the manner in which it has been
implemented) is in violation of the federal Crown’s fiduciary
obligations, However, when considered from the perspective of
the aboriginal ttle, which Indigenous People’ have in the
waters and foreshore which comprise the clam harvesting
grounds, the violation 1s greater.

Main Points of the Clam Reforms Policy:

The stated purposes of the Policy include

+ conservation of clams and their habitat

+ ~“*to meet the federal Crown’s obligations
regarding aboriginal fisheries for food, social and
ceremonial purposes’’;

+ develop partnership and co-management
arrangements with stakeholders to share decision
making, responsibilities, costs and benefits

+ ‘consider the goals of stakeholders with respect to
social, cultural and economic value of the fishery”’

+ toconsider possibilities in aquaculture

+ to provide for a recreational fishery

+ {to provide a year-round market supply

Licence limitations also form a part of the Policy.
Opportunities in the general commercial fishery for Indigenous
han esters will only be granted to those individuals who held a
clam hioence for five out of six years between 1989-1994,
Communities can apply for Abonginal Communal Licences
(ACL 's”’) and individual communities will be responsible for
assigning these licences to members. The ACL’s authorize
har esting of clams on harvesting beds which front reserve
lands and “in exceptional cases, from traditional harvest sites.’

Prior to making any legislation or policy with regard to
the fishery. the Crown has an obligation to fully inform itself of
the aboriginal perspective on the fishery, including the
preferred means of exercising that right. Meaningful
consultation must occur with the aboriginal peoples whose
nghtis will be :mpacted. With regards to allocation, this
includes fully informing the aboriginal peoples of the proposed
allocations (to all users, not just to aboriginal groups) and a
meaningful consideration of the concerns expressed by
abonginal peoples.

The Clam Harvesung Policy shows a desire on the part
of the federal government to create the equivalent of *‘regiona!
co-management’ forums, which reduce aboriginal! nights to
being equivalent of those of other ‘‘stakeholders”’ or ‘‘user

groups



Delgamuukw. The Land & The Clams

In DelgamuuAw, the Court recognized an interest in
Land that is greater than the right to practice activities.
Aboriginal title is an interest in “‘the land itself” and
encompasses the historic relationship of aboriginal peoples to
their title lands. and the peoples’ traditions and laws governing
the stewardship, protection, and junsdiction over the lands.
Aboriginal title lands reflect the relationship of Aboriginal
Peoples to their lands and the manner in which the Peoples’
relationship to the lands sustains their communities and
nations.

The legal purpose of Aboriginal Title is to protect the
relationship of Aboriginal Peoples to their Lands. Ata
minimum, protection of the relationship of Aboriginal Peoples
to their lands has to incorporate a meaningful and rea}
involvement in the manner in which those lands will be used.
This cannot only include the uses which Indigenous Peoples
themselves use the land for, as the actions of other parties can
severely impact the uses of aboriginal title lands.

It is illegal, in violation of the federal fiduciary
obligation, for the fedcral government to unilaterally licence
other users access to the clam harvest where the result is that
the clam beds are destroyed and polluted. The relationship of
aboriginal peoples to their lands is obviously infringed, and in
danger of being extinguished, where non-Indigenous clam
harvesters are licensed who deplete to near extinction the clams,
and leave debris (including human waste) on the beaches.

All measures regarding the harvesting, allocation and
management of the clam fishery require a significantly greater
involvement in the formulation and implementation of the
Policy. Indeed, the importance of the clam fishery and the title
lands where the fishery occurs suggests that the full consent of
the aboriginal peoples may be required.

How is the Clam Policy in violation of federal fiduciary
obligations?

L. Aboriginal Title is equal to that of other interests in
Land, including Crown title. In the Policy, the interests of
Indigenous peoples are equated with those of ‘‘stakeholders’’.
The Policy encourages regional co-management agreements
which incorporate non-Indigenous commercial fishery as well
as recreational harvesters. Legally, an aboriginal interest in the
fishery, as well as to title lands. is a superior interest in the land
which is on par with the federal Crown’s own interest. Any
policy which places an aboriginal title interest on par with a
‘“stake holder’’ or ‘‘interest group"’ severely undervalues and
nature of the Aboriginal interest in lands.

2. The Policy only “‘allows’’ a clam harvest on beaches
fronting reserve lands. and, in limited circumstances, to
traditional clam harvesting grounds. Legally, this position
cannot be maintained. In De/gamuukw, the Court recognized
that while reserve lands are definitely aboriginal title lands,
aboriginal title lands extend far beyond reserve boundaries.
From an aboriginal perspective, aboriginal title lands

FEDERAL CLAM POLICY (Continued on page 4)

WRNG TS EE EEE EE Eee

UBCIC NEWS
FISHFARMS (continued from page 1)

Clayoqout Sound is home to 18 active salmon farms,
many of which lie tn Ahousat territory. Sidney Sam spoke on
behalf of his Chief, with a message for investors. "We want to
let investors know they'll be in for a fight if they try to bring
new fishfarms to our territory”, he said. "We are protecting our
rights". Ahousat First Nations turned out in force last year to
serve notice on the Cypress Bay fishfarm that its poluution of
their fishery resources would no longer be tolerated.

T-souk-e First Nation from Southern Vancovuer Island
has also had its problems with fishfarms. The farm in Sooke
Basin is moored to their burial island. Just last week, T-Souk-e
Nation led a flatilla of war canoes against the Prime Pacific
Seafarm, where Chief Frank Planes served an eviction. "Were
dedicated to getting this poiluting thing our of here", said
Planes. "We're going to work together with the 188 First
Nations and our allies in the environmental movement who
oppose lifting the moritorium on salmon farming until we get
these farms our of our territories.

Resolutions expressing zero tolerance for fishfarming
have been passed by Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, First Nations
Summit, the B.C. Aboriginal Fisheries Commission and the
Alliance. Together, these represent the views of nearly all of
the First Nations of B.C. Alliance Chair Bob Joseph said, "We
are here to tell our friends and neighbours - and potentail
investores- what we know. Fishfarms destroy our resources and

JUST

70



TO
FARMED
SALMON







FEDERAL CLAM POLICY (Continued from page 3)

right to harvest clams flows from aboriginal title, this right
encompass all areas where clams were traditionally harvested.

3. The aboriginal right to fish for “‘food, social and
ceremonial purposes’’ is recognized in the Aboriginal Fisheries
Strategy. In Gladstone, the court acknowledged that an
aboriginal right to a commercial fishery may exist. However,
Delgamuukw’s recognition of an economic interest in the land
and the fact that the land and its resources sustain the people,
goes beyond a right to a fishery for ‘‘food, social and
ceremonial purposes”’ to encompass the economic interests of
the aboriginal peoples in the fishery.

4, The objectives of the Policy include providing for a
recreational fishery and a year-round market supply. These
purposes, among others, are not sufficient reason for the federal
government to abrogate aboriginal rights. The aboriginal right
to harvest for ‘‘food, social and ceremonial’’ purposes must be
met first, and not arbitrarily Itmited in order to allow for these
other uses.

5. Where individual clam harvesters have an aboriginal
right in the fishery, and in the aboriginal title lands, the
restrictions placed on the granting of general commercial
licences do not fulfill the federal government’s fiduciary
obligations to protect aboriginal interests. Aboriginal rights
arise from the relationship that aboriginal peoples have had
with lands, and to the fishery, from time immemorial. To
restrict access based on whether or not a particular harvester
has held of licence for 5 out of the past 6 years invalidates and
ignores the source of aboriginal rights.

Option of Non-Recognition of Federal Clam Policy:

Where it is clear that the federal government intends to
proceed with passing laws and regulations which do not respect
our aboriginal title and rights Indigenous Peoples must re-assert
our own jurisdiction by developing and implementing our own
policies with respect to our lands and natural resources.

Indigenous People hold aboriginal title to all of our
Lands and Resources. This includes both a right and the
responsibility to guard the lands and resources and to use them
to the full benefit of our Peoples.

One option for Indigenous Nations to consider is to
simply re-assert jurisdiction over the calm fishery by re-
invigorating traditional laws and developing internal policies
among our nations concerning the management of the clam
harvest. The risk of this plan is that it puts individual clam
harvesters in danger of being arrested and charged under the
Fisheries Act. However, the Supreme Court has recognized that
aboriginal laws, and the historic stewardship of Indigenous
Peoples of the land, are an important component of title and if
individual clam harvesters are acting according to aboriginal
laws (supported by their nations and communities) in a manner
which reflects aboriginal traditions and historic management of
the fishery resource, this will strengthen a legal defence if this
is necessary.

SPRING 1998

ee OOOO PT RCIC NEWS

SPECIFIC CLAIMS (Continued from page I)

the courts. DIAND’s current annual national claims settlement
budect is only in the $30 million dollar range, and it only has
four full-time negotiators handling the approximately 130
claims files currently in legislation. While exact dollar figures
have not vet been determined. it is understood that significant
increases in resources and funding for operations and claims
settlements will be required to achieve the expeditious and
final claims resolutions the new Commission and Tnbunal
are being tasked with.

Although the Joint Task Force is exploring and
preparing recommendations on a number of issues, including
how the Commission should be structured and how it might
want to deal with the existing backlog of specific claims. the
new Commission will be free to proceed as it sees fit, because it
is independent. The draft legislation calls for Commissioners to
be appointed jointly by the AFN and the Federa] Government.
Tribunal panelists will be appointed from a roster of individuals
acceptable to the AFN and the Minister of Indian Affairs.
Facilitators and mediators must be acceptable to both parties
First Nations and DIAND) and will be determined by the
Commission.

The draft legislation calls for a comprehensive review of
the Commussion and Tribunal by the AFN and the Minister of
Indian Affairs after five years of operation. It also provides for
provincial governments and other third parties to participate in
alternative dispute resolution processes at the Commission
level, with the consent of the Band and Canada.

The joint Task Force proposa! is just that - a proposal. It
has been set out in the form of legislative drafting instructions,
and the intention ts for this to accompany a Memorandum to
Cabinct from the Minister for Indian Affairs sometime after the
summer recess. The memo to Cabinet will also outline other
options for Cabinet to consider. However, the Minister has
indicated she is prepared to support the jointly developed option
worked out by the Joint Task Force. It is intended that the
Cabinet decision and the introduction of the draft legislation to
the House of Commons take place next fall. The hope is that the
levislauon can be passed by early 1999, with the start-up of the
new Commission and Tnbunal slated for April 1, 1999.

The Joint Task Force proposal, or the completed and
final legislative drafting instructions, will be presented to the
Chiefs in Assembly at the Assembly of First Nations Annual
General Assembly in Toronto in late June. It is anticipated that
regional consultauons on the proposal will take place in our
conunumucs throughout the summer.

The Jomt Task Force proposal which is about to be
circulated 1s based on many years of effort to reform the specific
class policy, particularly since 1990. It represents the **best
efforts’ of a team of First Nations and Government





TL'ETINQOX-T'IN
GOVERNMENT OFFICE

Proclamation of Tl'etinqox-t'in title to the land and
resources historically used and occupied by the people of
Tl'etingox {Anaham Indian Band] on June 5, 1998 and retro-
active to December | 1. 1997.

The people of Tl'etinqox as represented by the
Tl'etingox-t'in hereby proclaim that our territory, resources, and
waterways, are no longer subject to the arbitrary laws and
regulations of Canadian and/or British Columbia Crown Title
or rule,

This declaration is our enactment of directives given by
the Supreme Court of Canada in its Delgamuukw appeal ruling
of December 11, 1997. That historic decision stated clearly that
Crown Title is encumbered by Aboriginal Title which among
other matters conceded that aboriginal Nations that have not
ceded or compromised their lands, resources or jurisdiction
have an economic interest in the land and resources of their
territories. The decision also directed both levels of Crown
government in Canada to immediately enter government-to-
government negotiations to resolve ownership/jurisdiction of
Indian tnbal terntory land/resources, thereby acknowledging
that Indian Nations’ sovereignty exists until due process of
treaty making clearly establishes renewed ownership/control/
jurisdiction over Indian lands that were invaded, claimed, and
exploited by the imperial Crown of England and its successor
Crown governments of Canada. The Canadian Crown govern-
ments have rejected our calls for such discussions, and continue
to alienate premeditated theft of our land and resources. We
consider this attitude and actions to be premeditated theft of our
land and resources. We now formally issue this statement of a
formal complaint of theft and tresspass of our land and re-
sources, and, this dav, June 5, 1998 are putting a stop to
removal of our resources and trespass of our land until the
issues of control of the exploitation of our resources, alienations
of our land base by issuing deeds, licenses or other tenures,
compensation for resources removed, jurisdiction sharing, and
work for our people are formally negotiated and agreed upon by
the Tl’etingox-t'in. Crown Governments, resource exploitation
companies and other stakeholders. Do not trespass on
Tl'etingox ttle land or steal our resources.

TUetiegeee- Tie Titte Tercera
@® No trespassing





@ No resource removal!

@ No land/water disturbances



technicians The work has been directed by the AFN’s Chiefs Committee on Claims. BC representatives involved in developing
this partcular proposal over the last two years are UBCIC President Saul Terry, Shuswap Nation Tribal Chair and Neskonlith Chief
Arthur Manuel, Kamloops Chief Manny Jules, SNTC Intergovernmental Affairs Director Wayne Haimila, UBCIC Specific Claims
Research Director Leigh Ogston as well as Tzeachten Chief Ken Malloway and Beryl Guerin of the Aboriginal Council of BC.

This is still just a proposal. It will require widespread grassroots support and significant lobbying and
communicauons efforts if it is to go forward as visualized. For more information, please feel free to contact the Union of BC Indian
Chiefs Specific Claims Research Program at 1-604-684-0231 or by e-mail at ubcicres@ web.net

™ ery TUON



UBCIC NEWS

Ts‘elcewtqen Clleqmeltn

Chief Atahm School
(Adams Lake Indian Band)









VISION
We have a visoin of Secwepemc speaking
community living in balance with the
natural world











In 1969 the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
established a unique bookstore. It was to provide a
deeper understanding and appreciation of Native Indian
Peoples Itis today as it has been in the past entirely
indian owned and operated. Offering new titles from such
First Nations publishers as Pemmican, Theytus and Yinka
Dene Language Institute The purpose of the publishers is
to provide opportunities for Metis and Aboriginal people to
tell their own stories from their own perspectives. Also to
depict Metis and Aboriginal historical, social and
contemporary issues We also carry books published by
non-Aboriginal writers whose works are related to Metis
and Aboriginal issues.

We have gathered over 500 new and recent titles
about Native people from more than 65 publishers. This
way vanous communities across Canada can participate
‘n the dialogue that is currently happening in Canada and
alive in these books.

The Chiefs Mask Bookstore also serves the institute
of Indigenous Government, Canada’s first autonomous
indigenous-controlled degree granting, public post-
secondary institution. Students have the opportunity to
obtain required textbooks for courses, along with
specialized readings. Schoo! supplies are also available.

Mildred Chartrand, Assistant Manager
(604) 684-0231











Chief Atahm School offers a high quality, immersion
elementary education. The school is located on the Adams
Lake Indian Band community.

This progam has been developed by the Chief Atahm
School parents. All instruction and school functions is con-
ducted in Secwepmectsin. Students are taught about balance
and the natural world as they practice the principles of
sustainability.

Rational: Chief Atahm School immersion progam is
founded on the belief that Secwepemctsin embodies the col-
lective knowledge, and beliefs of the Secwepemce natural
world.

We believe that the Chief Atahm School purpose is to:

e Establish and maintain a healthy balanced living environment.
e Help protect the earth for future generations to come

Ph (250) 679-8837



Assembly of First Nations

AFN National Chief: Reform Ignores
Rule of Law

Ottawa - The National Chief of the Assembly of First
Nations says the Reform Party is so intent on extinguishing
Aboriginal rights that it is now prepared to ignore the rule of
law.

Phil Fontaine was responding to Reform Party leader
Preston Manning's suggestion that the federal government use
its legislative power to over-ride the Supreme Courts
Delgamuukw decision, which recognized the validity of Abo-
riginal title.

"The Reform Party just doesn't get it," said the AFN
leader. “They are still preaching the same kind of antiquated
assimilationist doctrine that resulted in the economic and social
problems that are facing First Nations today. The Reform
Party's concept of equality apparently means a Canada in which
the origina! people have no claim to property rights despite
being here for thousands of generations.

Fontaine said Manning's comments also showed his
party is out of touch with it's own constituents. "Just this week
an Angus Reid poll showed that nine out of ten British
Columbians believe that Aboriginal peoples have legitimate
land claims that should be settled with compensation, and that
78 percent of those polled support cout actions by First Nations
to obtain speedier action on land claims,” he said.

Contact: Maurice Switzer (613) 241-6789, ext. 383



SPRING 1998

ee TT BCIC NEWS
Ts'kw'aylaxw First Nation

To the Governments & the public

We are the rightful
owners of the Ts’kw'aylaxw
territory and everything Urueilleeis
pertaining thereto. Since
time immtemorial we
protected and used this

land. Our ancestors were in
possession of our territory long before the arrival of the Europe-

ans. We have felt keenly the stealing of our lands and have
always asked by what nght people were on our lands, but have
also asked for peaceful setthement through a Treaty.

On December 11. 1997, the Supreme Court of Canada
recognized in the Delgamuukw decision what has always been
said by the First Nations in B.C. That the land belongs to the
First Nations. That infringement of the Aboriginal Title means
compensation for First Nations. That the decision effectively
means jomt jurisdiction between the Crown and First Nations.
That neither Canada nor B.C. can extinguish Aboriginal title or
Rights

We have always been sought to resolve the ‘land ques-
tion’ through a negotiated Treaty with Canada. In 1994 we
entered into the Treaty process to bring finality to this situation.
To date, Ts’kw'aylaxw has borrowed a total of $780,679.20 and
Treaty 1s going nowhere. Even now, six months after the
Delgamuukw decision, the Crown has not yet recognized our
aboriginal utle. For more than 100 years, the people of
Ts‘kw'aylaxw have asserted that we are the nghtful owners of
the serntory in question.

The Law of Canada 1s on our side. It has become very
evident that the province does not want to operate within the
existing legal framework of Canada. After the events of 1990
we became a hopeful people. We felt and thought the Crown
was coming to the First Nations with an honest intention to
settle the ‘land question’ tn a just and equitable manner. We
finally had a table to negouatc treaty at. We desired an honour-
able and just settlement, but eight years later we have not seen
the commitment by the Crown to recognize Aboriginal Title
and Rights Our fmustrauon is almost as high as it was in 1990.

The provincial government appears to be unwilling to
change its exrsting policies to reflect the legal direction given in
the Delgamuukw Decision, and Ottawa has evaporated. The
Delpamuukw Decision of December 11, 1997 reaffirmed, as our
ancestors of generations past have always said and fought for as
wc sill do today, that we have Aboriginal Title and Rights to
the land and arc the nghtful owners of our land. Our declara-
tion of our Title 1s not something to fear as we have also always
stated that we arc willing to share and co-exist with all the
pceopic on our lands. but we must have a share of the wealth that
is generated from our lands.

So with Premier Clark's unwillingness to recognize the

WILK een a aa area ae iT



"- Chief bred ec



law of Canada and come
to us in an honourable
manner, it leaves the
Ts'kw'aylaxw people in
the unfortunate position
of having nowhere to go.
= meee =f we were rich, we could
sue both governments and fight them back to the Supreme
Court of Canada over the next ten years. But we are not the
least bit rich so the only choice left for us is to assume direct
control of the land.

Even though we have been too patient already and
should take action now, in a spint of cooperation and concilia-
tion we will delay assuming control and taking direction if the
representatives of the Crown can come to our community and
offer us an effective process in which our Aboriginal Title and
Rights will be recognized.

Failing any action on the part of the Crown, this letter
serves to announce the intention of Ts’kw'aylaxw to begin to
take what action Is necessary to bring the Crown back to the
table in a meaningful manner. For greater certainty the purpose
of this action is to encourage the federal and provincial govern-
ments to negotiate a fair and just Treaty with our people.
Should there be no meaningful action by the Crown by June 21,
National Aboriginal Dav, Ts’kw‘aylaxw will begin to take direct
action on that date.

This letter also serves as notice to all of the public,
government and business community, that June 21 we would
also resume jurisdiction over our lands pursuant to Aboriginal
Title as recognized in the Supreme Court of Canada Decision
Delgamuukw v R released December 11, 1997. All develop-
ment would require the consent of Ts'kw'aylaxw to proceed.
This would include but not be limited to mining, forestry,
grazing, hunting, and fishing.

Finally, we have always maintained that we have
Aboriginal Title and Rights, and we will always have them.
Aboriginal Title and Rights are protected in the Canadian
constitution and therefore there is no lawful way either the
federal or the provincial Governments can take these rights
away from us.

L [
| |

As demanded by the people.

Chief Fred Alec, Ts'kw'aylaxw First Nation Treaty
Phone (250) 256-4204

TUNG YOST EEE EE Eee

UBCIC NEWS

Native Youth Movement
Chronology

1990 - NYM organized in Winnipeg,
Manitoba, in 1990 because of the high
percentage of native youth involved in
gang violence.

1995-96 - Another NYM chapter was
created in Vancouver, B.C. A few
Downtown Eastside youth organized
talking circles to share our thoughts,
concems and issues,

We begun by taking initiative, by having
NY M volunteers to do carwashes to
fundraise to travel to different communi-
lies and reserves to open communication
lines and do workshops with as many
native youth as possible.

Soon NYM representatives are speaking
out at different conferences, rallies and
marches, voicing our concems on
Various issues that oppress native youth
and native people in general.

Protested the Standing Steering Commit-

tee on the B.C. Treaty Commission with

members of the community. About 100

south protested the meeting to let the

committee know that there was opposi-

tian to the process because of the lack of
tortned consent.

NYM attends “Traditions to Non-
Violence” conference held by the Assem-
bl» of First Nations tn North Vancouver.
60 Youths addressed the crowd with the
messave that the youth would react to the
state violence "By Any Means Neces-
san.” and walked out,

1997 - April 17 - NYM occupies the
3.C. Treaty Commission office in
downtown Vancouver for 40 hours to
protest the exclusion of the urban native
south in the B.C. Treaty Process.

Support OJ and Wolverine, Defenders of
the Land at Gustafsen Lake Standoff.
We attended court hearings, rallied,
inade pamphlets to bring awareness to
the injustices of stolen land.

Marched from the Vancouver Eastside to
the Supreme Court houses downtown
with over 100 youth to protest the "Child
Apprehension” case of Baby Ishmael, a
native chiid being taken from a native
family in Canada to a non-native couple
in the USA. NYM helped Ishmael
reunite with his family and custody was
given to his biological grandparents.

NYM fundraises for a conference in May
'98. A food bank has been started, a
childrens toy donation box started, and
donated to the Vancouver Aboriginal
Friendship Centre for X-mas.

December - NYM co-hosts human right
forum with Kelly White. United Nations
and Amnesty Internationa! observers in
attendance.

1998 - NYM protests the First Nations
Summit meeting on the B.C. Treaty
Process in North Vancouver, publicly
declaring ourselves the “official opposi-
tion” to the treaty makers. We voiced
our concems on the negative affects the
process will have on future generations.
Chiefs and councillors involved in the
Summit attempt to silence us using the
culture against us, and attempt to
“apologize” for our conduct at their
business meeting.

NYM helped to secure safety and bring
awareness to Port Albemi Residential
School Survivors Forum held at SFU
Harbor Centre, Vancouver, B.C.

April 15-17 NYM puts on first "Provin-
cial Gathering of Native Youth in
Vancouver Eastside. Approx. 150
youths attended from around the prov-
ince, representing over 30 Native
nations,

April 17-2] - At the end of the confer-
ence the offices of the B.C. Treaty
Commission were again occupied by
approx. 60 youths for 5 days. The
occupation brought provincial and
national attention to our position: This
Land is Not For Sale!





Native Youth Movement
Protest B.C. Treaty Commis-
sions Process - Westbank First
Nation Administration Offices

May 25, 1998

As a result of a four day gathering
of the Native Youth Movement in
Westbank, we the youth of the Okanagan
Nation have decided to stage a protest by
“occupying” the offices of the Westbank
Indian Band. (aka Westbank First
Nation).

We demand that all levels of
government immediately terminate the
fraudulent and illegal British Columbia
Treaty Process!

We young people fully understand
that the B.C. Treaty Process was de-
signed to dispossess us youth of our
aboriginal title to our lands and out
inherent rights to the resources contained
within our territories. The Chief and
Council of the so-called Westbank
First Nation have no right to negotiate
away our aboriginal title and rights.

Our Okanagan Nation Tribal
Lands belongs to us, the youth, and to
the future generations of our Okanagan
People from now until the end of time.

No single "Band" or so-called,
self-appointed "First Nation” has the
right to "sell-out" our inheritance or
birthright. We were put on Mother
Earth to protect the lands and rights of
the people of the entire Okanagan
Nation.

We have called on our Brothers
and Sisters in the Native Youth Move-
ment to support us In our action. Any
attack on our rights is also an attack on
their rights. All Native Youth have an
undeniable right to fight to protect their
aboriginal rights from being sold-out by
any and all corrupt Native leaders who,
in return for money, shamelessly collabo-
rate with all levels of government!

We will not stop protesting until
we see an end to the "sell-out" British
Columbia Treaty Process.

Contact: Rose Caldwell, Tori Baptiste,
Shane Kruger @ (250)490-5314



SPRING 1998

WHAT ARE FisH Farms?

Fish farms are factories where fish are produced in
much the same way that cattle or potatoes are produced on
other farms. Young salmon (smolts) are placed in open mesh
net-cages which are anchored in the ocean. The fish are fed
and kept here until they are harvested and sold at maturity.
For the most part ocean waters flow freely through the net
cages. washing away sewage and other residue of the fish
farming process.

The industry has grown rapidly because it provides a
year round supply of factory fish to supermarkets and restau-
rants. Due to the cutbacks in the wild salmon fishery, as well
as to the seasonal nature of the wild salmon harvest, farmed
salmon has become more and more common in the local
markets. Farmed salmon is now worth approximately three
times more per pound than wild salmon.



History

Fish farms started appearing in British Columbia
dunng the 1970s. Initially, local spectes of fish were farmed.
However, fish farms have overwhelmingly switched to
farming Atlantic salmon because they are easier to farm. By
1995 there were approximately 80 fish farms in operation.

The provincial government placed a moratorium on
fish farms in 1995 following serious environmental and
health concerns. A Salmon Aqualculture Review was
undertaken which gave a cautious ‘‘okay’’ for fish farming to
proceed. The Review did not fully investigate the impact that
fish farms have upon wild stocks and the environmental
damage they can create. For example, the Review overlooked
the fact that in some countries wild salmon have been almost
enurely wiped out as a result of fish farms.

The Review minimuzed Indigenous Peoples’ interests
to that of being one more ‘‘stake holder’’ (an interest group)
and enurely overlooked the very vital roll that salmon and all
manne hfe have within Indigenous cultures.

At present, the provincial government is considering
lifliny this moratonum on fish farms.



FISH FARMS: ZERO TOLERANCE



Salmon are a resource treasured and shared by all Indigenous Peoples within British
Columbia. They are born in one area, grow to maturity in another, and live their adult lives in marine waters,
to return to the place of their birth for their life cycle to continue. Salmon bind all of our Peoples together.
When salmon are threatened, the livelihood and way of life of all Indigenous Peoples are threatened.

FisH FARMS: ZERO TOLERANCE

Salmon and all marine life are a vital resource to all
Indigenous Nations. Any actions which threaten salmon or
marine life threaten our well-being and the livelihood of our
Peoples. Fish farms destroy their !mmediate environment,
and threaten marine life and wild fish stocks.

All Indigenous Nations have territories which include
either oceans, rivers, streams or lakes. Each and every
Indigenous Nation will be impacted uf the current moratorium
on fish farms is lifted. As Indigenous Peoples, we have a
shared responsibility to work together in order to preserve
and protect the fishery resource.

Fish farms seriously and severely impact Aboriginal
Title Lands and Waters. Water is contaminated, poisoning
salmon, shellfish, and other marine life. The immediate
dangers include disease, destruction of habitat, and escaped
farmed salmon displacing other marine life (such as herring
and oolichan) or colonizing wild salmon stocks.

All manne resources, most notably salmon, are
already deeply depleted as a result of mismanagement. Fish
farms only serve to further endanger salmon stocks which are
already fighting for survival.

When our salmon, oolichan, shell fish and other
marine resources die or are attacked, our Peoples are at-
tacked.

The Aboriginal Right to fish is vital to all Indigenous
Nations, and fish farms threaten to destroy that right. We
will not let this happen.

The fishery has sustained our Peoples’ for generations.
We were handed thts resource which our ancestors held in
trust for us, and we must ensure that the fishery is an inherit-
ance which we pass to our own future generations. Now that
fish farms threaten to destroy the fishery, we have a responsi-
bility to protect and guard this precious natural resource. As
Indigenous Peoples. it is our turn to honour our responsibility
and fight to sustain the future of the fishery. This is our
obligation both to the salmon and all! marine life, and to our
future generations.

ECO
INDIAN SALMON Don't Do Drucs



OBI NES, eee

Wuo Conrtro_s THE FISH FARMS?

The federal government has the responsibility
for ensuring that the wild salmon and all other marine
resources are safe. The federal government also has a
fiduciary duty to ensure that Aboriginal Title and Rights are
protected. To date, the federal government has avoided its
responsibilities of ensuring the safety of the wild fishery.

Two provincial ministries are directly involved. The
Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks grants tenure on
Crown aquatic lands for fish farms (including waste dis-
charge permits) These permits can be for up to thirty years.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food grants
annually renewable aquaculture licences.

As part of the process which it must follow before
proceeding with granting or renewing licenences, tenures,
etc. which may impact on Aboriginal Title and Rights the
province has an obligation to ensure that the interests of
Indigenous Peoples are protected and infringed as minimally
as possible.

The province has not met its legal obligations to
Indigenous Peoples. Fish farms have been located on Abo-
nginal Title lands without the involvement of Indigenous
Peoples, and there has been no broad based consultation with
all of the Indigenous Peoples who will have their right to fish
impacted by fish farms. At the back of this paper we have
included a list of all fish farms licences which are currently

outstanding, and the dates that these are up for renewal.

EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS

Very few people are needed to operate a salmon farm.
In recent years, ownership of fish farms has concentrated in
the hands of a few large corporations. Any jobs produced by
factor -farming salmon are insignificant in comparison to the
jobs lost through the devastation of the wild salmon harvest.
This, in combination with the fact that farmed salmon sell for
a higher price per pound than wild salmon, provides a serious
({hreat to Indigenous communities which have historically
reised upon the commercial fishery to sustain themselves.

Not onty do farmed salmon endanger the existence of
wild salmon and other marine resources, they are replacing
the commercial fishery with factory produced farmed salmon.



“Manufacture
Shoes --
Not Salmon"





Fish Farms — Just Say No!

As Indigenous Nations
we will honour our
responsibility to guard
the fishery for our future
generations.





ABORIGINAL TITLE

Those nations on whose waters these fish farms are
located experience immediate and destructive impacts.
Traditional harvesting grounds (clam beds, herring spawning
grounds, etc.), as well as the waters and water beds are
destroyed and poisoned.

In some cases, existing fish farms are anchored off of
burial islands sacred to Indigenous Peoples. In all cases, fish
farms were granted licences without the consultation or
consent of the Indigenous Peoples who hold Title to the
Lands and Waters in question.

Any use of Aboriginal Title Lands (including waters)
for fish farms requires the ful! consent of the Indigenous
Nation concerned. The provincial government acts illegally
if it proceeds to licence or approve any further expansion or
continuation of fish farms without the full consent of the
Indigenous Nation which holds Abonginal Title to the Lands
and Waters impacted.

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS

All Indigenous Nauions who rely upon marine resources
or salmon have their rights jeopardized and threatened by
fish farms. Chemicals and drugs from fish farms poison the
flesh of salmon, diseases weaken wild stock. Escaped farmed
salmon displace wild stock from their traditional habitat.
Any threat to marine resources or salmon stocks is a direct
threat to all Indigenous Nations.

The “‘right to fish’’ enjoyed by all Indigenous Peoples’
will be hollow and meaningless if there are no salmon or
other fish tn our oceans, rivers, lakes and streams. Without
fish, there is no ‘right to fish’. Fish farms move salmon
away from being a natural resource which is both precious
and sacred to Indigenous Nations, and tum salmon into a
commodity to be manufactured.

The *‘economic’’ night of Canadians to factory-
produce salmon cannot override our Aboriginal Right to the
fishery, and cannot erase the relationship we have had with
the fishery for generations. As Indigenous Nations we will
honour our responsibility to guard the fishery for our future

generations.



SPRING 1998

MMM § UBCIC NEWS

FisH FARMS POSE SERIOUS DANGER TO ALL MARINE LIFE

1. DISEASE

Farmed salmon are fed antibiotics
to fight naturally occurring dis-
eases. The antibiotics cause
diseases to mutate and these mutant
strains are released into the oceans exposing wild stocks.
Viral, fungal and bacterial infections have been passed to wild
stock as a result of fish farms. Shellfish have been found with
concentrations of antibiotics.

Antibiotics increase the likelihood that certatn diseases
will mutate and become resistant, and can accumulate in the
food chain.

2, POLLUTION

A fish farm is equivalent to having an untreated
sewage facility on our shores. Pollution and effluent flow
freely from fish pens and cause most resident species of fish
and marine life to disappear from the area.

3. PREDATION ON YOUNG STOCK

Young herring and salmon are drawn to fish pens
because of the lights which thcy shine at night. These young
herring and salmon are eaten by farmed fish. In some in-
siances, farmed fish eat so many of the young wild stock that
they have little need of additional food.

4. ALGAE

Effluent from fish farms provides ideal conditions for
algae to grow. Algae can kill wild stocks cither by poisoning
them (through production of toxins, etc.,) or through the
oxygen deprivation they cause. In addition, shell fish are
vulnerable to the toxins produced by excessive growth of
algac. Toxins from algae can contaminate shellfish making
them unsafe to eal.



5. DRUGS AND CHEMICALS

In addition to antibiotics. fish farms introduce a vanety
of other chemicals into the water. These chemicals poison the
water and build up in the food supply. The drugs and chemicals
include colourants (to make the flesh of farmed salmon red)
and fungicides. These chemicals escape into the surrounding
waters, potentially poisoning resident marine life, and eventu-
ally poisoning our Peoples.
6. COLONIZATION

Farmed salmon which escape from their pens pose
significant risks to wild stocks. The dangers include:

> Competition for food and spawning areas. Farmed
salmon can displace and force wild salmon and other fish
from their traditional grounds and waters.

> Farmed salmon can migrate with wild stocks to inland
spawning areas, In British Columbia, Atlantic salmon
have been found 100 miles up the Skeena River, over
250 miles from the nearest fish farm. On Vancouver
Island, Atlantic salmon have been found in the
Zeballos and Thasis rivers. Bearing in mind that one
spawning Atlantic salmon can produce in excess of 4000
eggs, the dangers are great that Atlantic salmon can
displace our own wild salmon stocks.

7. DISPLACEMENT OF HERRING ,

OOLICHAN, AND ROCK COD

Fish farms located near herring spawning grounds, or
the traditional habitat of oolichan and rock cod have caused
these species to abandon their traditional areas.



Colonization: First Our Peoples;
Now Our Fish



If you would like any further information contact:

Union of B.C. INDIAN CHIEFS

Sth Floor, 342 Water Street

Vancouver. B.C. V6B 1B6
Phone: (604)-684-023 1
Fax: (604)-684-5726









A ee a,

Theiteders rf eral and BF aviacial

rare aii = ae pe Se foakied Mere ae



SPRING, 1998

MUSGAMAGW TSAWATAINEUK TRIBAL COUNCIL
P.O. Box 90
Alert Bay, B.C. VON 1A0
Phone: (250)-974-5516
Fax: (250)-974-5466

11

UBCIC NEWS
War Canoes Lead

Anti-Fish Farm Flotilla

JF Fiotilla of Native war canoes, fish boats and pleasure
Pa 4 craft propelled their way across the waters of the Sooke
Basin today. The flotilla delivered a clear message to the Prim
Pacific Seafarm located in the Basin: "Leave Now!" The crew
for the convoy were made up of members of the T-Sou-ke
Nation, other First Nations, environmental supporters and non-
Native neighbours who have formed an alliance to demonstrate
their unifted opposition to salmon farms.

"This is our traditional termtory. You have been operat-
ing here without our permission for 10 years, anchored to our
burial island, polluting our waters, endangering our traditional
food supplies. Your farm is a violation to our territory. We
want you to leave, "Chief Jim Cooper, in the lead war canoe,
told Prime Pacific employees as the paddlers -- children, elders,
Native and non-native listened intently.

Among his supporters were members of the Ahousat
Band from Clayoquot Sound who had organized a stmilar
flotilla last year to a salmon farm in their territory. They
brought their war canoes down to join this protest.

Hereditary Chief Robert Joseph, Chairman of the
Musgamagw Tsawataineuk Tribal Council travelied from his
territory in the Broughton Archipelago on the northern end of
Vancouver Island where the concentration of fish farms has
been studied by the Environmental Assessment Office. After
that office released its report Chief Joseph called a gathering of
First Nations and environmental organizations last September
to fight the environmental destruction done by fishfarms. He
explained, "This isn't just about aboriginal title. Our mandate
as Native leaders is to ensure that our territories and their
resources are tn place for our children, grandchildren and for
the next seven generations. That ts the higher purpose to which
all of us can agree. We must educate the public on the damages
fishfarms are doing. First and foremost we must protect the
environment. We are here today to support the T’Sou-ke people
in thetr actions against this fishfarm because they have the same
mandate — protect the environment for future generations".

Arme Narcisse. the Interior Co-Chair of the Aboriginal
Fishenes Commission added his support. "We are all working
together to save our wild fish. These salmon net cage factories
pul our wild fish at great risk. We have told governments
repeated! we are opposed to these farms. Now we are showing
them. We want these farms gone,” he stated. "Farm fish and
wild fish are not compatible”.

After delivering their message to the Prime Pacific
Seafarm, the flotilia returned to the T'Sou-ke Hall where the
TSou-ke people and their neighbours had prepared a feast for
the parucipanis. They began planning the next event against
salmon farms.

Chief Robert Joseph. MTTC (250) 203-1855
Amc Narcisse, Aboriginal Fisheries Commission
(250) 378-7196

HZ








FIREARMS ACT

espite intense opposition from Indigenous Peoples, the
federal government passed the Firearms Act in 1996.

Recently, a series of regulations was passed which will
bring the Act closer to implementation. Below, we provide a
brief summary of the Act, and how 1t will impact upon the
practice of the aboriginal right to hunt and trap. These
comments focus on non-restricted firearms, such as rifles and
shotguns, and do not address firearms such as automatic
weapons, handguns. or crossbows.

The Act was intended to address the safety concems of
the Canadian public. The government of Canada entirely
overlooked the integral role that hunting and trapping play
within Indigenous societies, and the impact that this legislation
will have on aboriginal rights. The result is legislation which
criminalizes Indigenous Peoples in the traditional way of life
which we have practiced since time immemorial.

Aboriginal rights include the historic relationship of
aboriginal peoples to their title lands, and the peoples’
traditions and laws governing the stewardship, protection, and
jurisdiction over the lands and resources, including wildlife.
Aboriginal rights reflect the relationship of Indigenous Peoples
to their lands and resources and the manner in which the
Peoples’ relationship to the lands and resources sustains their
communities and nations. The only recognition of aboriginal
rights in the Act or regulations, are provisions which apply to
people who hunt or trap for sustenance purposes, in order to
feed themselves or their families. These provisions apply to a//
sustenance hunters equally, both Indigenous and non-
Indigenous.

While it is true that aboriginal peoples hunt to sustain
themselves and their communities, the aboriginal nights to hunt
and trap are far broader than a mere night to eat game (and
therefore, the nght to hunt it).

This gun control legislation ignores the fact that
Indigenous Peoples have been hunting since time immemorial
and have long and well established laws and traditions
regarding safe hunting practices and the use of firearms. The
right to hunt and trap is fundamental to the cultures and
traditions of Indigenous Peoples, and the Act entirely negates
this fact by empowering a provincial official (the chief firearms
officer) to grant or deny the nght to hunt to each and every
Indigenous person.

A right to hunt or trap is meaningless if it is illegal for
an Indigenous person {o possess the tools necessary to hunt or
trap.

Licensing for the Possession, Acquisition and Transport of

Firearms

All individuals require a licence in order to possess,

acquire or transport a firearm.
The Act creates the position of a provincially appointed
chief firearms officer who is responsible for licensing

SPRING 1998

PT BCIC NEWS

individuals. The chief firearms officer can deny a licence to any
individual **if it is desirable, in the interests of the safety of that
or any other person. that the person not possess a firearm...”’

In determining an individual’s suitability to hold a
licence, the chief firearms officer can conduct an investigation,
including interviewing the neighbours, social workers, spouse,
former spouses, or anyone else whom the chief firearms officer
feels will provide useful information. The Aboriginal Peoples of
Canada Adaptations Regulations (Firearms) (the ‘* Aboriginal
Regulations’) require that the chief firearms officer also
‘consider any recommendations submitted by the applicant
from an elder or leader of the applicant’s Aboriginal community
regarding the importance to the applicant of engaging in
traditional hunting practices.’’

Canadian Firearms Safety Course Requirements:

In most cases, licencing will require that an individual
pass the Canadian Firearms Safety Course (“*C.F.S.C.”’).
However, sustenance hunters as well as minors who hunt to
support their families, can make special application to receive a
licence without the need to pass the C.F.S.C.

An Indigenous person may not have to pass the C.F.S.C.
where:

1. the applicant is an elder; or

2. the applicant has knowledge of safety
requirements as attested to by an elder or
community leader, sustenance hunting is integral
to the applicants way of life, and not C.F.S.C. is
reasonably available to the applicant (for example,
where to require the C.F.S.C. would cause undue
hardship, the courses are too far away or too
expensive, etc.).

Where these conditions exist, and the chief firearms
officer is satisfied that the applicant has basic safety knowledge
and a general knowledge of the Canadian/provincial laws with
regard to the use, handling and transportation of firearms, the
chicf firearms officer may issue a licence.

Fees Waived:

Fees for persons who hunt or trap for sustenance
purposes to provide for themselves, or their families, have been
waived.

Appealing Licencing Decisions:

When a person is either denied a licence, or has their
licence revoked, this decision must be appealed through the
provincial court system. For many Indigenous people the costs
of hinng a lawyer and paying for court costs are prohibitive. It
is legal to possess a firearm without a licence, therefore, while
a person is watting for the courts to decide the issue, their
family may well be starving because the Act has made it a crime
lo hunt the food necessary to feed themselves and their families.

The ultimate determination of whether a person will
receive a licence - and therefore, be able to practice the







right to hunt - rests entirely with the provincially appointed
chief firearms officer.

Creation of a National Firearms Registry:

Eventually. all firearms will need to be registered. The
registration provisions will not be fully in force until January 1,
2003. Exemptions where a person does not have to have
registration certificate are where a person:

1. borrows a firearm, and are under the direct
supervision of a person who has a licence and the
registration certificate; or

2. borrows a firearm to hunt/trap for sustenance
purposes. provided that they have a licence to
possess that type of firearm. In this circumstance,
the lender will not be required to lend their
certificate of registration for the firearm.

Enforcement Provisions:

I. The Act allows police to enter and inspect any home
where they reasonably believe there 1s a firearm or ammunition,
even where the person with a firearm in their home is licensed
and the firearm 1s registered. Although permission of the
owner or occupant of the home ts required, the Act allows
police to get a warrant allowing them entry into a home for
purposes of administering the Act or regulations (it is not
necessary for them to establish that they have a reasonable
belief that a violation of the Act has occurred).

The search provisions are particularly troublesome in
light of the often fractured relationship that Indigenous Peoples
have had with police. As an example, where an Indigenous
community organizes a blockade in support of their aboriginal
rights. the police could use this legislation to search the homes
of participants where they have reasonable grounds to believe
that those people possess a firearm in their home. This is the
case even though there mav be no suggestion that firearms are
involved in the blockade at all, or, even, that there is any illegal
activity concerning firearms. In this sense, the legislation could
conceivably be used as a harassment tool by police.

2, The Act creates penalties for violations of its registration
and licensing schemes. For example, the contravention of a
condition of a licence or registration, which can include
traveling outside of an authorized area, or failure to store the
firearm in a manner specified by regulation, are subject to a
penalty of up lo two years in prison.

Canadian Criminal Code Amendments:

Some examples which illustrate the broad degree to
which day-to-day activities of Indigenous Peoples will be
criminalized by the Act are listed below:

L Safety of Others: It is an offence for every person who,

without lawful excuse. uses, carnes, handles, ships, transports
or stores a firearm without reasonable precautions for the safety

FIREARMS ACT (Continued on page 18)

UBCIC NEWS



I n celebration of the achievements of the Institute of
Indigenous Government 1997-98 Graduating class,
families. friends, supporters, IIG faculty and staff met to
commerorate this special day at the Sty-Wet-Tan Great Hall.
UBC First Nations House of Learning on Friday, May 22,
1998. The Academic Procession was led by three First
Nations Veterans followed by the Elders, Graduating stu-
dents. Board of Governors, the President and the Faculty.
PA-KWACH-TON, a.k.a. Grand Chief Bernard Charles
opened the ceremony with a prayer, followed by Chief Sau!
Terry. President of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs who
welcomed everyone to the celebration. Andrew Bear Robe,
President of the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology,
Mert B.C., then addressed the graduating class as the
keynote speaker. The calling of the witnesses were then
called by Bernard Charles. Seven witnesses were called to
witness the ceremony, Mr. & Mrs. Thomas & Mazel Hans,
Mr. & Mrs. Archie & Edna Blankinship, George Blake, A.
George Guerin, and Elder Margaret Harmis.

Grand Chief Bernard Charles, President of the IIG,
then conferred the Associate of Arts degrees to five students:
Lillian May Mearns, Melissa Ann Meyer, Holly Weget
Robinson, Brenda Faith Wesley and Morgan Elyse Young.
The five students completed a two year (60 credits) Associate
of Arts degree in Indigenous Government Studies. The
president then conferred the Certificate of Indigenous Gov-
ernment Studies, a one year (30 credit) program. The
certificates went to Kathleen Acoby. Neil Kenneth Benson,
Jeremy David Green, Leonard A. Linklater, Adena Lee Marie
McCallum. Daniel lan Peters, Holly Weget Robinson,
Cathenne Alice Swain, Sonia Ann Triebewasser and Morgan
Young Congratulations to all the students and families for
ihe tremendous accomplishment.

Andres “Lix" Lopez, Faculty & Coordinator of the
International Program, then presented the Dean's Prizes for
outstanding achievements. The ten students whose grade
point averages were at least 3.67 (A-) were Glenna Leanne
Borsuk, Dalyce Ramona Diablo. Petra Angpao Durrance,
Jererm David Green, Gregory Anthony Guerin, Graham
Inkster, Danicl lan Peters, Angela Elizabeth Shuter, Floyd
Dean Underwood, and Morgan Elyse Young. All your hard
work and persistence paid off, congratulations.

Morgan Elyse Young, liG's first valedictonan, was
chosen by the graduating students to address the assembly.
Her presentation highlighted the main aspects of the [IG
Academic program. Morgan talked about the struggles as a
student, their future goals and their appreciation of their
families who supported their efforts. Faculty members were
commended for thetr support. hard work and the impact in
the student's lives. Morgan's grade point average is 4.28, one
of our many exceptional students! Congratulations Morgan,
you'll go along way.

i+

-_ oe © =
a. “ / ia





ty B eigen US Go Vekument

[YYE

AALTLSo. |
The Cascade Drum Group then sang an honour song for

the students, families. friends, faculty and staff. This Vancouver
group consists of First nations people across Canada. Their drum
songs draws a crowd al any event. The DAAK'M HAAST (The
Raft of the Fireweeds) Dancers then shared their oral history of
the House of HAKBAGWOOTKU in the LIMX_AMALHEIT
(Chief's Dance), and WADE TAY (Survivors Dance). The
closing of the ceremony ended with a prayer song by Seislom,
a.k.a. Glen Williams, followed by the retiring of the colours and
recessional. A feast was then enjoyed by those who wanted to
stay, mingle, visit and enjoy the setting.

Jennie Blankinship, 1[G Extension Program Director



CERTIFICATE IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNMENTSTUDIES LR:
Morgan Young, Sonia Triebwasser, Catherine Swain, Holly
Robinson, Daniel Peters, Adena McCallum, Neil Benson. Missing
are Kathleen Acoby, Jeremy Green and Leonard Linklater



ASSOCIATE OF ARTS DEGREE IN INDIGENOUS GOV-

ERNMENT STUDIES L-R:
Morgan Young. Brenda Wesley, Holly Robinson, Melissa Meyer,

Lillian Mearns

SPRING 1998

Leen a RIC NEWS

UBCIC Research Resources

The UBCIC Research Office has
been researching and developing
claims for Bands around the
province for more than 25 years.
Our policy is that all research
collected is the property of the
Band, and this material is always
forwarded to it. The Research
Office does, however, retain
duplicate copies of all research
reports and documentation. Lf you
are now unable to locate research
that was undertaken for your
community by the UBCIC in the
past, or if you aren't sure whether or

not the UBCIC ever did any work for your
community. please contact the Research Director (1-604-684-
0231). Authorized Band researchers are welcome to review
these research files and make copies if desired.

The UBCIC Resource Centre, located on the fourth floor
at 342 Water Street in Gastown, is a specialized library and
repository for B.C.-related Indian materials. Established
especially for the use of Band researchers, the research collec-
tron holdings are focused on land rights and include many
unique matenals. If you are not already acquainted with the
UBCIC Resource Centre, you can arrange for an onentation by
getting in touch with the UBCIC Research Office (1-604-684-
0231). Band researchers are always welcome but please call
ahead (1-604-602-3433/3434) so reference staff and equipment
limes can be booked for you.

The UBCIC Research Department believes in sharing
tesearch expertise and the teaching of research skills. Several]
research workshops are held every vear. The UBCIC will be
publishing a land research manual! (written especially for non-
professional, community-based researchers in B.C.) in the
Summer of 1998 as is supporting a Traditional Use Studies
(TUS) research manual scheduled for late Fall 1998. Both
Publications will be availabic through the Chiefs Mask Book-
store at the UBCIC'’s Vancouver office (1-604-684-0231). A
gencalogy workshop is planned for Summer 1998, and a
yeneral lands research workshop ts planned for the Fall 1998.
Please watch for faxed announcements, or contact the UBCIC
Research Department to request that your fax or e-mail address
be added to the notification list.

With the guidance of the Research Department, the
Resource Centre Research Collection is always being added to
We have recently obtained some very handy lands research
products in CD-ROM format. and we will be expanding our
electronic research holdings in 1998,







UBCIC Resource Centre

The UBCIC Resource Centre is a
specialized collection focusing on
B.C. Land rights research and
serving all B.C. Band research-
ers. The Resource Centre also
serves the Institute of Indigenous
Government, an accredited and
degree-granting posi-secondary
organization which offers several
research-related courses. The
Resource Centre is open week-
days. Band researchers are
always welcome but please call
ahead so reference staff and equipment times can be booked for
you. If you or your research team would like to arrange for a
complimentary one-half day orientation to the Resource Cen-
tre's holdings, please contact the UBCIC Research Office at
1-604-684-0231 (e-mail: [email protected]). The Resource
Centre holds the following research materials which may be of
interest and assistance to you with your project:




NATIONAL
ABORIGINAL
DAY
06/21/1998





- The most complete collection of RG-10 (Department of
Indian Affairs Records at the National Archives of Canada)
microfilm in B.C.

- The most complete collection of RG-10 finding aids in B.C.

- Federal Minutes of Decisions

- Provinicial Minutes of Decisions

- Department of Indian Affairs Annual Reports (1864-1992)

- Department of Indian Affairs Reserve Schedules

- McKenna-McBnide (Rova!l Commission on Indian Affairs for
the Province of B.C.) materials

- Band Profiles

- Hudson's Bay Company “Post Histories” and finding aids

- Canadian Museum of Civilization Ethnology finding aids

- Church finding aids (Anglican, Oblate, etc.)

- B.C. Surveyor General Reference Plans for B.C.

- The “Colonial Correspondence" on microfilm

- B.C. Archives Newspaper Index & Some B.C. newspapers

- BC. Statutes

- Journals of the Colonial Legislatures

- General histones of B.C. (including local histories)

- Works relating to Indian Lands policies and issues

- Books relating to B.C. Indian cultures

- General and legal reference works

- Lands research guides

Census material and some genealogical resources

Native Studies Journals & theses relating to First Nations

To book a research tnp, please call !-604-602-3433/3434. To
book an onentauon, please call 1-604-684-0231. (ask for

Research).



UBCIC NEWS

Aboriginal Title Implementation

dhe eed VILLE Lm AL a Gavernmentc ta Say No to

ee a ee! 2 a osliD . 7g ee ee ee
Delgamuuk Ma TT VOUT a tea Odi tae ea eee ae 1 oe

Chehalis Chief Alex Paul, April 1998 UBCIC Chiefs Council





rn ts aoe rina ake) er VM Rn hee

Our Indigenous Peoples, as Nations, hold the
jurisdiction and responsibility to protect, access and use the
resources upon the Land for the benefit of our Peoples, this
is our Original Title.

Nations are comprised of distinct Peoples’ who have a
common history, language and culture. Nations have
distinct territories, governed by their distinct social organi-
zations and political, social and economic laws. Indigenous
Nations embrace the complete population of a Peoples,
bound together by common ties of Self Determination. No
individual community or communities have the power to
treaty concerning the collective rights of the Nation. Trea-
ties can be entered into by Nations of Peoples, not fragments
of a Nation.

As the Original Peoples of this Land, we have never
reached any agreement or treaty with Canada concerning the
occupation, settlement, sovereignty and jurisdiction that
Canada claims over Land to which we hold absolute Origi-
nal Title. Despite federal and provincial assertions of
jurisdiction and sovereignty, our absolute Original Title to
the Lands and Resources and our Right of Self Determina-
tion remains strong and unbroken.



Canada has refused to acknowledge that Indigenous
Nations have any title to or interest in the Land and its
Resources. The Supreme Court of Canada's decision in
Delgaumuukw makes it tllegal for Canada to maintain its
policy of non-recognition. For the first time in Canada's
history, the unanimous bench of the Supreme Court affirmed
the existence of aboriginal title, as a "right to the land itself.”

Delgamuukw affirms the existence of Aboriginal Title
and demands that the governments of Canada recognize a
meaningful role for Indigenous Nations in all decisions
relating to our Lands and Resources as well as a right to
benefit economically from the use of our Lands and Re-
SOUTCES.

There remains a significant difference between what
Indigenous Peoples’ see as being our “Original! Title" to the
land and its resources, and the Canadian legal notion of
"Aboriginal Title."

Self Determination is our responsibility and right to
practice our traditional forms of government to protect our
Peoples’ social, political, economic, and cultural well being.

Our Original Title demands that we practice our
jurisdiction to ensure that our Lands and Resources are
protected, maintained, and used to the full benefit of our
Peoples.

Genocide is the destruction and alteration of the very
existence of a Peoples. Genocide is what the Indigenous
Nations of this Land have been subjected to by the Canadian
State (and the colonial powers which gave birth to Canada)
and its institutions: the forced removal of our Peoples from
their land, the blocking of our Peoples from the use, access
and benefit from our Resources; the theft of our children
through residential schools and child welfare systems; and a
multitude of assimilationist policies aimed at destroying our
cultures, histories, languages, laws and systems of govern-
ance.

Despite that we have been ravaged by genocide
through the years, our Original Title remains firmly rooted
and we survive as Peopies and as Nattons.



>><><< CANADIAN LEGAL REALITY OF “ABORIGINAL TITLE” >><><<

Our goal is to move from a formal legal recognition of
Aboriginal Title into a meaningful assertion "on the ground" of
our Original Title. Our "Original Title" to the Lands and its
resources ts more often referred to as "Aboriginal Title" as this
is the term that Canadian courts. "Aboriginal Title", as it has
been recognized in the Canadian legal system to date, stil] must
develop further in order to encompass the full reality of our
“Original Title.”

This Discussion Paper suggests some of the ways which
Indigenous Nations can begin a process of re-discovering and
re-invigorating our own Laws and fully re-asserting our Abo-
riginal Title and Right of Self-Determination.

We recognize Indigenous Nations are at different stages
in their struggle to decoionize. Some may already have taken
the first steps, while still others have not seen the power of our
own reality.

"TITLE" ( continued on page 11)



16

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS

>><><< Lock, Stock AND BARREL >><><<







We can expect that Canada and B.C. will argue that Aboriginal Title is limited to
specific tracts of Land and does not include al! of our traditional territories.

The Supreme Court confirmed our right to assert our authority over the totality of
our traditional territories by incorporating Aboriginal Law, and Aboriginal Peoples’
relationship to the Land, in its definition of Aboriginal Title. Reserve lands were
originally intended to "reserve" lands upon which to confine us to those areas which we
used and occupied most extensively. We must avoid a similar situation from developing
with respect to the recognition of Aboriginal Title Lands.

We maintain our position that Aboriginal Title and our relationship to the Land
encompasses all of our traditional territories, and that Self Determination encompasses all aspects of the social,

political, cultural and economic well being of our Peoples.

fe



mnue

Recommendations:
territories, as well as reviving past uses of the land which

l. Indigenous Nations must aggressively have been interrupted by Canadian law. Reclamation
advance the position that we hold Aboriginal would require the support and participation of the entire
Title to the totality of our territories, and refuse Nation.

to negotiate or discuss Aboriginal Title with

governments on any other basis. 4, Each Indigenous Nation can issue a declaration of
its Aboriginal! Title to the entirety of its traditional territory.
2 Canada must fully accept the reality of
our status as Nations. Indigenous Nations 5. Indigenous Nations must vigorously challenge the
' must refuse to negotiate or discuss Aboriginal federal and provincial government's claim of title or

Jurisdiction over our Lands, Resources and Peoples’,

Title on any other basis.
Declarations and policy statements will be served upon both

fo)

ar

©

rT)

=
a

o.
=

aD

aver

3. Despite Canada's historic policies to cut the federal and provincial governments, as well as third

us off from our Lands, our connection to our party interests, to clarify to all governments, companies or

Lands has remained strong. Indigenous individuals who seek to use our Lands and Resources, that

Nations must "re-claim" the Aboriginal Title Indigenous Peoples will not allow business to proceed as

Lands which Canada has prevented each usual.

| Nation from fully using. Our reclamation of

our Aboriginal Title lands must include a 6. Indigenous Nations must serve notice to the public

broad range of activities through which People that the provincial government does not have jurisdiction to
hed re-invigorate their relationships to the Land, alienate or grant interests to our Lands and Resources.
[pms Some examples would be the building of This could include advertisements in local newspapers

homes, museums, administration offices, day outlining a map of your Nation's traditional territory, as
—s care centres, and schools on your traditional well as road signs or other public means of education about

the extent of your traditional territories.



hunireuni Ly = eae Oe Oe el oe ea



igina

ri
, Indigenous Nations must de-colonize Recommendations:
'@) our own minds and actions. Indigenous
Nations must stop asking Canada and others a Indigenous Governments must organize De-Coloni-
© for recognition and begin reasserting our own zation forums to educate their citizens about the political
= Nationhood. This process of decolonization and legal reality which our Nations are facing,
will involve a fierce struggle to reinvigorate
our own laws and systems of governance, as 8, De-colonization forums, ultimately, must embrace
well as to plant within the minds of our own the Peoples’ vision of how Indigenous Governments should
Peoples the seeds of our tomorrows in the proceed to a full recognition of our Aboriginal Title and
knowledge of our true place among the Responsibility of Self Determination.

Nations of the world.



"TITLE" (continued on page 12)

SPRING 1990 17

UBCIC NEWS



inued

ION cont

| Title Implementat

origina

:





Each Indigenous Nation must acknowl-

_ edge and respect the responsibility they have

of ensuring that they guard and protect their
Aboriginal Title for future generations.
Therefore any discussions with any other
government must include the full involvement
of their citizens, the Peoples’ who collectively
hold the Aboriginal Title, and will pass this
on.

No one government, band council, or
provincially empowered entity has the power
to determine or define the current or future
collective rights of their Peoples. Aboriginal!
Title vests with each member of an Indigenous



pera icons) ay 8) Meet a4

Nation and no negotiation or other
discussions can proceed on any
other basis.

Our Aboriginal Title is an
inherent and inalienable relation-
ship between the Peoples and the
Land.



Recommendation:

9. Indigenous Nations must set out the principles and
standards by which they will agree to meet with Canada to
fully accept and implement the reality of our Aboriginal
Title.



There are several key findings of the

_ Delgamuukw decision which challenge the

current federal and provincial policies within

j the British Columbia Treaty Process.

Aboriginal Title is a collective interest,

1 which means that no individual band or "First
_ Nation" can treaty for a right held by the
_ collective Nation. Our Aboriginal Title is held

by all of our Peoples’ and not by the individual

“band councils” created under the Indian Act.

The Court's recognition that Aboriginal
Title has an economic component has thrown

the current B.C. Treaty Process loans systems

into question. Canada and the Province have

_ become wealthy from their use of Indigenous

_ Nations’ Lands and Resources, and their
policies aimed at cutting off Indigenous
Nations’ access to our Lands and Resources. It

is morally reprehensible to suggest that our
Nations’ should have to borrow from the
wealth created from our Aboriginal Title
Lands in order to “negotiate” for Canada to
recognized Aboriginal Title.

The province ts a key player in the
current B.C. Treaty Process. The basis of this
participation was the federal and provincial
governments’ position that the province had
“jurisdiction” over many of the areas being
negotiated (lands, resources, social programs,
etc.). The Delgamuukw case has made it very
clear that any title or interest the federal or
provincial governments have in lands and
resources is subject to Aboriginal Title. Only

the federal government has the power or

authority to treaty with Indigenous Nations
with respect to our Aboriginal Title.

Canada has an obligation to negotiate fairly and in
good faith with Indigenous Nation. For those Indigenous
Nation who have remained outside of the current treaty
process, Canada cannot continue to alienate our lands and
resources while insisting that the B.C. Treaty Process is the
only process in which they are willing to discuss questions of
our Aboriginal Title.



Recommendations:

10. Any agreements made or negotiated with respect to our
Aboriginal Title must be made by our Nations as a whole,
because the title is held by the Nation as a whole. Indigenous
Nations must accept the reality of the full consent of its
citizens and begin to reinstitute their own laws.

11. Any negotiating funds received can not be construed as
a loan, but as an initial reparation payment against the monies
which Canada and the Province owe to our Nations as a result
of their exploitation of our Lands and Resources.

12, The Province be removed as a full party to any negotia-
tion regarding treaties of the settling of the Land Question;
However, Nations may choose to enter into government to
government discussion with the province.

13. Indigenous Nations insist that the federal government
demonstrate its political will to honour the Supreme Court's
direction in Delgamuuwk to enter into Good Faith Negotia-
tions on a Nation-to-Nation basis. The principles of Good
Faith Negotiations must be determined by each individual
Nation.

14. Each Indigenous Nation must develop its own consent
requirements based upon and fully reflective of their Peoples’
right of Self Determination. These consent requirements



"TITLE" (continued on page 13)
SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS



inued

3
=
<
ag
&
od
c
@
=
o.
E
z
=

a

igina

Abor





must be based on each Nation's own ways of
fully involving their Peoples’ in decision
making. The highest form of decision
making for our Nations is consensus and a
mutual agreement amongst all of the people
within a Nation.

15. Indigenous Peoples must challenge the
minimal “Consent” provisions which are
currently used within the B.C. Treaty Process
(for example, sparsely attended community
meetings, or a Simple majority voting proce-
dure) by measuring this "minimum standard
of consent" against their Nation's laws.

16. Individual communities must accept
the reality that Aboriginal Title is collectively
held by Indigenous Nations, When indi-
vidual communities participate in processes
designed to extinguish our Aboriginal Title
this will be deemed a breach of our traditional
laws, for which individual communities will
be held fully accountable.

17. Each individual community within a
Nation holds their portion of the Nation's
territory in protection and trust for the entire
Nation. When individual communities enter
into any extinguishment processes (such as
the B.C. Treaty Process) they are violating
their sacred duty to protect and maintain







>><><< FREATY PROCESS Continued >><><<

lands and resources for all of the
Peoples of their Nation. Where an
individual community or communi-
ties violates their sacred responsibility
to protect the Lands and Resources
for the collective benefit of their
Peoples, the rest of the Nation must
step in and recover this trust for the
protection of their Peoples’ future relationship with the Lands
and Resources.



18. | Where federal and provincial governments continue to
deal with individual communities in an effort to extinguish
our collective Aboriginal Title to the Lands and Resources,
Indigenous Nations must hold these governments fully legally
liable for the breach of their own laws.

19. As Indigenous Nations we have a responsibility to
reconcile all of our communities in order to realize our full
power as Nations.

20. Indigenous Nations have the moral obligation to stand
with and support individuals within our own Nations, and in
neighbouring Nations, to defend their Aboriginal Title and
Responsibility of Self Determination against the extinguish-
ment policies of the Canadian and provincial governments.

21. Indigenous Nations cannot consent to negotiate,
discuss or enter into any agreements until the federal govern-
ment has rescinded its current extinguishment policies in all
its forms.

>><><< ORAL HISTORIES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE >><><<

As Indigenous Peoples we have
always recognized that our oral histories
and cultural heritage form the basis of our
laws and systems of governance. They are
our constitutions, our history books, the
umbilical cord which will sustain the future
of our Peoples.

Historically, our stories have been
disrespected and undervalued in Canadian
courts. Rules of evidence which exclude
oral histories create an impossible situation
for aboriginal! litigants who seek to establish
their rights in Canadian courts. In De/ga-
muukw the court recognized the power and
validity of oral histories and stated that they
must be given the same weight as other
evidence.



Recommendations:

22. Indigenous Nations develop principles on the use and
protection of their oral histories and cultural heritage as
precious resources which sustain our Peoples’ and must be
safe-guarded.

23. Both as a means of reimplementing our traditional
forms of government, as well as establishing an evidentiary
basis where we choose to bring court cases to force the Cana-
dian government to recognize our Aboriginal Title and Rights,
Indigenous Nations must preserve the oral histories and stories
of our Peoples.

24. Indigenous Nations can compile, for the use and benefit
of their own Peoples’, maps of their traditional territories
which reflect the real Indigenous place names.

"TITLE" (continued on page 1/4)



19

a

| Title Implementat

Abor

UBCIC NEWS

inued

ION cont

r
=
>





Our Aboriginal! Title forms the basis of
our Peoples’ inherent jurisdiction over the air,
waters, forests, marine resources, wildlife,
and all other natural resources.

The full reassertion of our Jurisdiction
must include the development and strengthen-
ing of our relationships with neighbouring
Indigenous Peoples and Nations.

Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act,
1867 reserves jurisdiction to the federal
government over the Indians and lands
reserved for Indians. The Delgamuukw
decision has clarified that the federal jurisdic-
tion over Indian lands is not limited to
"reserve" lands but encompasses all Aborigi-
na! Title Lands.

Despite the incorporation of provincial
laws under Section 88 of the Indian Act, the
province cannot intrude upon the federal
jurisdiction over “Indian lands" in a manner
which would fundamentally alter their nature.
Aboriginal Laws and systems of governance
have priority over provincial laws.

Currently, the Province erroneously
assumes full jurisdiction for such diverse
resources as timber, water, range lands,
hunting, fishing, wildlife, social services,
child welfare, etc. The Supreme Court has
clearly stated that any interest that the
Province acquired in our Lands and Re-
sources, ts subject to our own Aboriginal
Title. The province's jurisdiction to regulate
or manage our Peoples’, resources, or our use
of and access to those Resources, has been
invalidated.

Current policy requires merely that the
province "consult" with Indigenous Nations
prior to taking action which will impact upon
Aboriginal Title or Rights. To date this has
meant that the province will inform us of their
proposed action, and Indigenous Nations will
be given an opportunity - within a limited
time frame and with no financial resources -
to tell them how we believe this may impact
our Aboriginal Title and Rights. The ultimate
determination of what impact the proposed
action will have on our Title and Rights ts left
solely with the province, there is no real or
meaningful involvement of Indigenous
Nations in the actual decision making.

We are told that they are going to build
a house, where they will build the house, and



the plans that they will use to build
the house, and then offered an
opportunity to “consult” on the colour
of the house. Consultation has meant
only superficial and meaningless
involvement in any provincial
decision making processes. Delga-
muukw's recognition of Aboriginal
Title and the jurisdiction of Indig-
enous Nations has turned current consul-
tation processes on their head.

The legal duty of the province to consult has been
greatly expanded to require the full consent of Indigenous
Nations where the Self Determination of our Peoples’, or our
relationship with the land and its resources will be greatly
impacted.



Recommendations:

25. Indigenous Nations must begin the process of re-
invigorating our laws and systems of governance with
respect to Land management and the access to and use of
resources, by reassuming jurisdiction based on our own laws
and systems of governance. This could mean proceeding
with a logging or marine harvesting operation which was
approved according to each Nation's own laws.

26. Any plan involving the reassertion of our jurisdiction
will put individual! Indigenous People in conflict with federal
and provincial laws. For example, it will be the individual
logger, clam harvester, or hunter who is arrested. As the
reassertion of our jurisdiction ts done on a Nation-wide
basis, a political action designed to challenge federal and
provincial jurisdiction must have strong support and partici-
pation by members and communities of each Nation.

27. | Emphasis must be placed on the harvesting of a
particular resource to provide an economic basis for advanc-
ing other areas of jurisdiction. Each community within your
Nation could commit to logging 10 trees. The profits from
the sale of these trees could form the basis of a legal defence
fund for individuals who are arrested and charged under
Canadian or provincial laws, while acting under authority of
your own law.

28. Indigenous Nations can enter into joint protocol
agreements with their neighbouring Nations. These agree-
ments would set out Indigenous Nations' joint commitment
and promise to stand together for the protection of their
Aboriginal Title. These relationships between Indigenous
Nations must be in place before any discussions with the
federal and provincial governments occur.

"TITLE" (continued on page 15)



SPRING 1998

inued

ion <e

5
a |

=
=

UBCIC NEWS



29. Each Nation advise the Canadian
and provincial government that all develop-
ment, regulation, land sales, and resource
extraction on so-called "Crown Lands” held
under Aboriginal Title must immediately
cease.

30. Indigenous Nations notify Canada
that our Aboriginal Title Lands include all
lands presently designated "Crown Lands”
within British Columbia. These Crown
Lands are held in Trust for Indigenous
Peoples, and must be immediately returned
to the Indigenous Nations who are vested
with the Aboriginal Title.





dad
“&
~
i=
a)
£
7)
f=
ry
=
-

igina

Abor



SPRING 1998

Canada has been built upon the wealth
extracted from our Nations' traditional
territories, and by the imposition of their own
laws to prevent our access to our Lands and
Resources.

"Aboriginal Title" tncludes an eco-
nomic interest. Part of the test for govern-
ments to meet when justifying an infringe-
ment of Aboriginal Title and Rights is to
show that they have provided compensation
to the Indigenous Nation who holds the
Aboriginal Title to the Lands or resources in
question.

Delgamuukw imposes a strong duty on
the part of the federal government to protect
Aboriginal Title Lands. This means that
where governments fail to fully protect our
interests they are legally liable to provide
financial compensation for both the breach of
their fiduciary duty as well as for the eco-
nomic loss suffered through the damage to
our relationship with our lands.



a

a eal

‘ TST rors WUE ETUCU

31. Where Canada, or third party
interests, fully accept the reality of our
Aboriginal Title. Indigenous Nations
may enter into Interim Agreements to
allow some resource extraction or land
uses to proceed, where such proposals
fully incorporate the involvement and
consent of the Indigenous Nations for the benefit of our
Peoples.



32. Each Indigenous Nation must take control of the
process of consultation by setting up their own "Settler Claims
Policy” which sets out the process that federal or provincial
governments, and third party interests, must follow if they
wish to use or access our lands or resources.

>><><< (REPARATIONS >><><<



Governments may attempt to focus on the compensa-
tion requirements for infringements, while entirely under-
playing the importance of our sacred relationship with the
land, and our position that this relationship is not one which
can ever be sold or severed without destroying us as a
Peoples.

Recommendations:

33. Canada and British Columbia must be held fully
legally, financially and morally liable for any further or
continued alienation, infringement, or expropriation of our
Lands and Resources without our full consent, and for the
damage brought upon our Peoples’ by their continued
implementation of their social policies.

34, Indigenous Nations must demand an independent
forensic audit for the last 150 years which gives a full
accounting of the profits made by Canadian governments,
individuals and corporations from their use of our lands and
resources. Canada and the province must be billed for these
amounts.

The Delgamuukw case ts only a legal decision which does
not acknowledge the fullness of our relationship with the Land or
the complete measure of our inherent jurisdiction over the Lands
and Resources. The power of the Delgamuukw decision will be in

the political will of our Peoples’.

21

UBCIC NEWS
FIREARMS ACT (Continued from page 9)

of other persons. Persons who commit this offence are liable to
a jail term of up to two years on the first offence, and up to five
years for subsequent offenses.

This section makes it a crime to use, carry or transport a
firearm ‘‘in a careless manner or without reasonable
precautions for the safety of other persons’’. The provincial
Wildlife Act contains a similar provision and Indigenous people
have been charged for hunting without regard to the safety of
others while they were hunting at night. It is clear that these
provisions do not take into account the traditional hunting and
safety practices of Indigenous Peoples. Traditional activities
and modes of hunting, such as night hunting, are criminalized
under this provision.

BE Possession without a licence: It is an offence to possess a
firearm without a licence, the penalty is up to five years in jail.
This sweeping provision means that each and every Indigenous
person who does not possess a licence (after the dates at which
the provisions will come fully into force) can be sent to jail.
This means that the majority of Indigenous people in this
country will become criminals as soon as this provision comes
into effect.

= Traveling in a motor vehicle without a licence holder:

It is an offence to ride in a motor vehicle where there is a
firearm which Is not registered, or where there is no person in
the vehicle who is licenced to possess a firearm. The penaity is
up to ten years in prison.

When applied to Indigenous communities this law has
the potential to be ludicrous in its application. The amount of
hunting and trapping that Indigenous people do means that
people very often have firearms in their vehicles while giving
rides to family members and other community members.
Giving one's Aunt a ride to the grocery store while on the way
to check trapline (assuming neither you, nor your Aunt had a
licence) could conceivably land your Aunt in jail.

Administrative Implementation:

Instead of meaningfully addressing aboriginal rights, and
ensuring that the Act does not infringe upon those rights, the
federal government has suggested that Aboriginal communities
enter into agreements with the federal government to administer
the Act locally. Even if admintstered by aboriginal
communities, the basic requirements of the Act would not
change: Instead, aboriginal communities would become
responsible for administering legislation which abrogates the
hunting and trapping rights of their members.

Summan:

The right to hunt is an aboriginal and treaty right. The
right to hunt must necessarily include all of the rights
necessarily incidental to the practice of this right, this includes
the right to possess a firearm for hunting purposes. The right to
hunt ts a right to a way of life, and is far broader than a mere
‘sustenance’ right (that is, the right to hunt and eat game).

The Act imposes very serious and significant
infringements upon the aboriginal right to hunt. The

7” ©

requirement of a licence makes the right to hunt entirely
contingent upon the approval of the province (through the chief
firearms officer). This restriction extends to the point of the
practical extinguishment of the aboriginal right to hunt.

The net effect of this legislation is that it criminalizes
being Indian. It represents an unwarranted and unacceptable
intrusion into the day-to-day lives of Indigenous Peoples. The
Act does not constitute a mere infringement, but rather a while
scale criminalization of aboriginal! rights, and traditional
hunting and trapping practices.

The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs has published a ‘‘Guide
to the Firearms Act and Regulations’’ which provides more
detailed information. [f you would like a copy, please contact

our Vancouver office. !

Available from the UBCIC's
Chiefs Mask Bookstore Summer 1998

Researching the Indian Land Question in B.C.

An introduction to Research Strategies and Archival
Research for Band Researchers. Prepared and published by the
Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs.



Aboriginal Solidarity Day

Come and Celebrate with the
Union OF B.C. INDIAN CHIEFS

June 20th, 1998: 12:00 Noon to 3:30 p.m.

Information on Land and Aboriginal Rights
Book stall on Aboriginal People and Issues.

Sales: Bazaar, Arts & Crafts
Books, Plants, China, etc.

Tea & Lunch: $4.00

ST. PAULS ANGLICAN CHURCH
1130 Jervis Street (Westend)
Vancouver, B.C.

Everyone 1s welcome to share ina
spiritual ceremony

(Donations for sale items welcome. Cal! UBCIC @ 684-0231)







SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS





Community and political development work
in Indian communities began.

Active opposition to federal government's
White Paper termination policy.

1973-1974:

UBCIC Resource Centre opened.

fnaian Control of Indian Government
movement begins,

Rejection of funds.

World Council of Indigenous Peoples
formed at Port Alberni, BC

U'BCIC attempt to establish
Aboriginal Rights Commission in B.C,

Eee CSS

U'BCIC reverses government strategy to cut
LH LB.

“Fishing War” to assert Aboriginal Rights
bishing Acton “Enough is Enough’,
I silooet

Nlajor cuts fo UBCIC funding

Central Interior Tribal Councils **Red
Book’’ call for change in Administration

Policy

(1980 - 1981: 3

Des clopment and Ratification of Adéoriginal
fitte und Rights Position Paper

{ BCIC hoids National Indian lobby to
neatect Abonginal Rights within Canadian

Constitution,

Consutubon Express and London court case
against patriation of Canadian Constitution.

Support for Spallumcheen Indian Control of
Indian Child Welfare.

Penner Report Released

Consutuuon Express (European Lobby)

SPRING 1998

UBCIC: 30 Years of Iindiam Leadership

1982 - 1984:

UBCIC actively support Indigenous People of
South Africa

Signed agreement with National Congress of
North American Indians on fishing rights.

1984- 1986:

‘Indian Polity’’ a history of Indian/Canada
Relations

Edit Aboriginal Title & Rights Position Paper
Draft Fisheries Treaty

Interventions in Guerin and Sparrow court
cases.

Support for Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en

9 =
Inter-Tribal (Nation) Treaties
Chiefs Mask Bookstore established

"Buffalo Jump of 1980's” assembly and
information poster published.

1988 - 1990:
UBCIC celebrates 20th anniversary

UBCIC assists in establishment of Tribal
Peacekeepers

Fight against Meech Lake Accord.
Landmark decision of Regina v. Sparrow.
UBCIC call for Mohawk-support roadblocks

leads to "Indian Summer" in B.C.

Comprehensive Framework Treaty proposal.
July 30

(ye
Direction to form post-secondary Institution.

UBCIC sovereignty intervention in
Delgamuukw v. Queen,

UBCIC declines to participate in BC Claims
Task Force.



Confederation of Aboriginal Nations

Constitution proposed.

Successful campaign against
Charlottetown Accord results in 70%
"No" vote in B.C. Aboriginal
communities.

UBCIC begins fight against tri-partite BC
Treaty Process.

UBCIC celebrates 25 years of Indian

Leadership

Joint Policy Council established with
Province of B.C. to address jurisdiction.

UBCIC Intervene in Delgamuukw case.

Sovereign Indigenous Nations Territorial
Boundaries of B.C. map published

1994;

Federal Government Program Review

"Seif-Determination or Self-Termination"
Poster Published

Gun Control Opposition
Extinguishment re: Fact Finder

Institute of Indigenous Government
Opens

Health Rally to fight NIHB Cuts [7]
Oppose Indian Act changes

[July] Voice of The Peoples Gathering @
Cavoose

bods
Fight Against Fish Farms

Challenge of Gun Control Legislation
continues

UBCIC 30th Assembly [October]

UBCIC NEWS

Down From the Shimmering Sky
Masks of the Northwest Coast

June 04-October 12, 1998)

he Vancouver Art Gallery's

exciting summer show, Down
From the Shimmering Sky: Masks of
the Northwest Coast will offer a
"once-in-a-lifetime" opportunity to
explore two centuries of mask
making by some of the region's finest
First Nations artists. One of the
largest. most ambitious exhibitions
the Gallery has every organized, more
than 175 historical and contemporary
masks will be displayed from June 4
- October 12, 1998.

Masks are a manifestation of
powerful ancestral spirits and are
used to make the supernatural world
visible. Their use in First Nations
dance ceremonies has long played a



Southern Kwakiut! cannibal bird mask, Willie Seaweed

some of the 30 artists included are:

Robert Davidson, Charles

Edendshaw, Richard Hunt, Willie

Seaweed, Art Thompson, and Freda

Diesing. The exhibition ts divided

into five themes. The first repre-

Bm) sents the Human Face masks from
the | 820's to the present. The four

| remaining sections depict the

dimensions of the cosmos and

perceived by the First Peoples of the

| Northwest Coast: the Sky World,

§ Mortal World, Undersea World and

| Spirit World

Down From the Shimmering
Sky: Masks of the Northwest Coast

is curated by Robert Joseph, a

Kwakwaka'wakw Chief and advisor



vital role in preserving the stories, values, privileges, and status of
their owners. Several of these extraordinary objects were collected
during Captain Cook's early expeditions and will be seen in B.C. for
the first me in more than 200 years.

"Ina world of endless change and complexity, the mask has
offered a continuum for native people to acknowledge our connec-
tion to the universe. Through masks we identify our humanity.
Throuwh masks we affirm celestial places that honour the moon and
stars. Through masks we conquer our fear of the oceans deep.
Through masks we interact with the spirit world, our final destina-
hon.”

-Robert Joseph, co-curator and Kwakwaka'akw Chief

on land claims and Native mghts; Peter Macnair, former curator of
anthropology at the Royal Bntish Columbia Museum; and Bruce
Brenvill, senior curator of the Vancouver Art Gallery.

Visitors can enhance their understanding of the exhibition by
attending daily Gallery Talks and visiting the Open Studio for
hands-on learning and mask carving demonstrations. There will
also be First Nations Dance Performances on selected Friday
evenings.

A fully illustrated catalogue co-published by Douglas &
McIntyre, and the University of Washington Press, Seattle accompa-
nies the exhibition. Contact Laura Anderson at (604) 662-4700
(local 400).





Look for more details in the next edition of the UBCIC NEWSLETTER or contact
Millie Poplar @ (604) 684-023 |

Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs

30th Annual General Assembly
October 20, 21, 22, 1998
Vancouver, B.C.







>4

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS



Changes and Cutbacks to the
Provision of Non-Insured Health
Benefits

The change to NIHB that will be most noticeable to people
requiring services is the new policy of replacing brand-name
prescriptions with generic drugs. This cost - cutting scheme orders
pharmacists to replace the drugs prescribed to patients with
cheaper, generic drugs which do the same thing as the name-brand
prescription. If the doctor specifically requests that the brand-
name drug not be substituted, the reasons for the request must be
submitted for review to an approval body. The process of approval
could take anywhere from 48 hours, and ts likely to take as long as
two weeks. Tormented by pain or illness, patients will have to
sutfer until the brand name drug is approved or accept a substitute
drug, to which they may have adverse reactions, or which may not
provide the necessary relief of their condition.

There is a push from the Federal government to transfer the
administration of First Nations health programs to bands and tribal
councils. Medical Transportation, the program providing
transportation to and from the nearest health care facility equipped
to administer appropriate treatment, has already been arbitrarily
transferred out of the hands of the Federal government and made
the responsibility of First Nations communities and tribal councils.
There was no First Nations consultation or acceptance of this shift
in policy.

Under the Community - Based Health Program Transfer
Process, management of N]HB is being transferred to First Nations
administration. Communities, tribal councils or other First Nation
representative bodies are being encouraged to assume the
management of all or some of the NIHB programs. Transfers will
be funded with lump sums of money agreed upon for a set period
of 310 5 years. This **envelope’’ funding system does not account
tor unforeseen epidemics, spurts in population growth,
administrative errors, or any other natural or man-made disasters.

Because the administration of First Nations health programs
has for many years remained the responsibility of the Federal
zovernment, First Nations representative bodies lack experienced
manpower to assume the management of NIHB. First Nations
should enter into transfer agreements very cautiously and only with
the guarantee that proper instruction, technology and time is
invested by the Federal government into training First Nations
people for the management of health programs. Training of staff
and staff salanes, technological equipment and its upgrading and
repairs, and the costs of administration in general should be funded
based on need and separate from the ‘‘envelope’’ funding of the
transfer azreement.

Further changes to the administration of NIHB will be made
when the contract of the Liberty Health Claims Processing System
expires. Liberty Health formerly administered the provision of
NIHB programs such as Drugs, Medical Supplies and Equipment
and Dental Services. The Aboriginal Business Procurement
Policy, implemented in April 1996, mandates that the contract
miust be tumed over to an Aboriginal business or joint venture when
itexptres June 30, 1998. Costs for the new administration, if higher
than before, will come out of the overall Federal NIHB budget,

SERING LY9S





leaving less money for providing services to First Nations
communities and individuals.

Federal Government and Fiduciary Duties

The Government of Canada holds a fiduciary duty to the
First Nations of Canada, which they appear to be evading in their
urgency to transfer the administration of First Nations health
programs. Fiduciary duties, especially when it comes to health, are
indisputable obligations of the Federal government. Although
entrenched in the Indian Act, Royal Proclamation and the Treaties
signed by some First Nations, these duties can be understood ona
broader moral level when we examine a cause-and-effect dynamic
to First Nations health.

Demographics show that the overall health of a People is
dependent upon the conditions in which they live. Poor communities
(such as First Nations populations) without access to proper
sanitary facilities, fresh and nutritious food, adequate housing and
social programs run greater health risks than the general populace.
Because these conditions were created and are enforced by the
Federal government, they have a fiduciary duty to provide health
care and social programs in order to rectify the inferior health status
of the First Nations of Canada. Only when these obligations are
fulfilled will First Nations have a viable chance of living and
thriving in the traditions of our nations, ensuring the survival of our
peoples and cultures.

Diabetes and First Nations Health

The incidence of diabetes in First Nations communities is
significantly higher than the general Canadian population. Non-
insulin dependent diabetes (NIDDM) is seriously under diagnosed
in the Canadian population as a whole, with an estimated half of
NIDDM cases being misdiagnosed. The number of First Nations
cases of NIDDM per capita Is estimated at being 2 to 5 times the
national average.

Because the effects of NIDDM, if left untreated or
undiagnosed, can be severe and debilitating (advanced cases can
result in the loss of vision or loss of the use ofa limb), NIDDM poses
a definite threat to the health of First Nations populations.
Diagnosing NIDDM early in its onset 1s especially important in the
First Nations population because the disease seems to be occurring
at a younger age than the general Canadian population. NIDDM
is generally found among adult to aging people, but is occurring
among even the very voung members of First Nations communities.

NIDDM is a disease related to the body’s inability to
regulate the amount of sugar released from digesting food into the
bloodstream. Improper nutrition and lack of regular exercise can
weaken the body's ability to digest sugars properly and result in
NIDDM. One can surmise, therefore, that the high incidence of
NIDDM among First Nations populations is related to the lack of
fresh, nutritious foods and proper community exercise programs
available in First Nattons communities.

Once diagnosed, NIDDM can be controlled by monitoring
blood glucose(sugar) levels and adjusting one’s diet accordingly.
Efforts need to be made in our communities to properly diagnose
cases of NIDDM before they become detrimental to a person’s

LS

NLALIO (Conunued from page 0}



UBCIC NEWS
health. Preventing the disease among our people could be as easy
as providing fresh, nutritious foods instead of the pre-packaged and
non-nutritive foods found at the corner store. Band-subsidized
gardening and preserving programs would improve the community
onamultitude oflevels. Involving community members in pursuits
as rewarding as growing crops of their own fresh fruits and
vegetables and then preserving them for the colder seasons promotes
community solidarity and is a good source of exercise, fresh air and
personal empowerment.

On an administrative level, First Nations governing bodies
must fight to maintain the standards of health care available to our
people, keeping in mind the amount of undiagnosed ilInesses
alread. in our populations. Health Transfers, if entered into, must
retlect future treatment for the estimated figures of undiagnosed
NIDDM cases in the funding envelope.

HIV / AIDS in First Nations Communities

Community Health Transfers and other changes to the
provision of health care to our people should recognize the threat
posed on our communities by HIV / AIDS. HIV, or the Human
Immunodeficiency Virus, 1s the virus which causes AIDS. HIV is
transmitted through blood contamination and sexual contact, and
is nora highly contagious virus. There is, however, no known cure
for HIV and subsequently no cure for AIDS. It is contracted
through sex without a prophylactic(condom), or by shared
intravenous needles.

The demoyraphics of the effect of HIV on First Nations
populations are misleadingly unclear. Because HIV testing is done
confidentially, at least 40% of the known number of HIV positive
test subjects are ofno known ethnic origin. We could safely say that
at least some of these subjects are of First Nations ancestry.
Another factor when studying the HIV - infection rates are called
risk levels. Considered high risk behaviors are intravenous(I.V.)
Jrazdse with shared needles, unprotected sex ( considered highest
rik ts protected solicited ses, followed by unprotected homosexual

and lasth unprotected heterosexual sex). High - risk

fones inciude areas like the downtown east side of Vancouver

where there is a high proportion of unemployment, prostitution and

1 \ druzuse. Increasing the risk levels yet again is the new trend

mathe city of intravenous cocaine injection, where addicts will go

ruth 20 to 50 needles ina day as opposed to averaging | or 2
eeedies per day with the longer heroin high.

The First Nations population is disproportionately high tn
havh- risk areas of big cities. The growing fear is that First Nations
people lism in these high - risk zones and participating in high
tisk behav tor will introduce the virus into their home communities
whenthes return. HIV infection is impossible to detect right away
miimustcases The virus can be harbored in someone's bloodstream
ier seven or more vears before any symptoms indicating AIDS

cur, and ’y that time there would be no teiling how many people
one victim infected. This extreme delay in symptoms could
nase uteridemic web of infection ifleft unchecked. Fortunately,
antibodies produced by the body in defense of the HIV virus can be
wclected from six months after the day of infection in a laboratory.
Ansvone who has ever engaged tn any risk behavior of any kind
including unprotected heterosexual sex) should be advised to go
their local health care provider for a free and confidential blood

wl





History has shown the devastating effects of disease on
closed communities such as Indianreserves. Before HIV - infection
reaches epidemic proportions (assuming that it hasn’t as yet),
measures must be taken to stop the spread of the virus. Community
programs aimed at informing members of the risk of HIV would
help to dissolve the illusion that HIV does not.pose a threat to
‘ordinary’ people. Condoms and clean needles should be supplied
free and confidentially to community members, as should HIV
testing. Wide - scale treatment of I. V. drug users should be put in
place with an emphasis on women’s rehab centers (there are very
few beds available for females at most rehab centers, while women
addicts outnumber the men in some zones),

Health care programs, whether administered at the federal
or community level, need to address the threat of HIV / AIDS on
our peoples. To prevent the onslaught of another epidemic,
leadership needs to initiate the introduction of awareness programs
and prevention initiatives.

Useful Telephone Numbers

Health Canada NIHB Directory
(604)666-2083

NIHB Direct Line
(604)666-3331

Reference Canada (phone numbers for every federal

department and resource)
1-800-667-3355

Healing Our Spirit B.C. First Nations AIDS Society
(604)983-8774





UBCIC NEWSLETTER DEADLINE

AT Ag 15, posh) ss If van have anv infarma.

eC Ma ae ee mt oe Tae Te se
Phi ate Mee Meo we Ol Om Da CE ET

sla eles) Mitt Melee d Mt im lt Se Wee mae ait:

Pleccsiis(yrM rate Ott Ow TAL T-) Hee OT a

E-Mail: [email protected]



26

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS



Multilateral Agreement on
Investment



V | he MAI is a treaty about international invest-
ments that is currently being negotiated under
the auspices of the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), and
represents a critical element of a larger strategy
to codify the rules upon which a global system of production
and trade depend. While this agenda is fundamentally the
project of the worlds largest corporations, it also enjoys enthusi-
astic support by many OECD countries including Canada. This
support appears founded on the faith that sustained market-
driven growth will bring wealth and economic stability to the
world community. [n order to achieve this prosperity, govern-
ments need only allow market forces to operate unfettered by
regulation or other government “interference”.

If this sounds familiar, that's because this global eco-
nomic model is simply an amplification of the policies that have
guided domestic policy for decades. Absent, as always, is any
notion of ecological limits, or of the need to address how the
proceeds of growth will be distributed. Also missing is any real
evidence to support the grand claims of those promoting
ltberalized trade and investment rules. In fact, our experience
with this grow-now, pay later paradigm has been a disaster for
the environment and most of the world’s population.

The following briefly describes the four key elements of
the NTAT that will have the destructive impact on our prospects
for achieving environmental goals.







National Treatment: All of the Rights - None of the Respon-
sibility.

The first principle of the MAI is that of National Treatment,
which demands that foreign corporations be given every right,
concession or privilege that a government may provide local
companies or communities. This MAI would, for example
prohibit:

- policies that favour community land tenure or resource
manayvement rights.

- citizenship requirements for those seeking fishing or woodlot
licenses, of

- subsidies (o support community economic development.

It is fundamental to sustainable management that the right to
exploit a resource come with the obligation to ensure its long-
term stewardship. The principle of National Treatment would
permanently sever this fundamental relationship.

Investor Rights: Special Status for Foreign Corporations

Under the heading of "Performance Requirements" the MAI
sets out a lengthy list of government measures that cannot be
imposed on foreign corporations, even when these same con-
trols apply to domestic companies and investors. Thus, govern-
ments can not require foreign corporations to:

SPRING LYYS



- achieve a given level or percentage of domestic content, or to
purchase goods or services locally;

- transfer environmenta/ly sound technology;

- supply local markets or value-added producers;

- achieve a given level or value of production, investment,
employment, or research and development; or even,

- hire locally.

If we are to contain and ultimately reduce rates of
resource exploitation that are seriously damaging once abundant
and diverse ecosystems we must work together to build more
diverse resource economies; promote local economic develop-
ment; foster environmentally sound technologies; and ensure
“just transitions” for workers. MAI rules will make each and
every one of these goals far more difficult, if not impossible, to
achieve.

Expropriation: Entrenching Private Property Rights in a
Global Constitution

Under the heading of Investor Protection, the MAI provides that
governments:

Shall not expropriate or nationalize directly or indi-
rectly an investment... or take any measure of
measures having equivalent effect (hereinafter
referred to as “expropriation") except... accompanied
by payment of prompt, adequate and effective compen-
sation.

Because the MAI defines “expropriation” in the broadest
terms, its rules may well prohibit any government regulation
that even indirectly reduces the profitability of corporate
investment. In fact, it would be difficult to identify and envi-
ronmental or conservation initiative that would not have this
effect, at least on some investors. A recent law suit by a US
based transnational corporation illustrates how profound the
impact of this rule may be.

In that case Ethly Corporation, is seeking $325 million
in compensation from the Canadian government because of the
government's decision to band the use of MMT as a fuel
additive in Canadian gasoline. The suit is proceeding under the
investment rules of NAFTA, which serves as the prototype for
the MAI. Ethyl claims that Canada's ban represents an expro-
priation of its business of manufacturing this neuro-toxic fuel
additive, and that under NAFTA rules it is entitled to compen-
sation.

Here is a list of other environmental measures, that
according to the lawyer representing the Ethly Corporation,
would also be vulnerable to attack (and we quote):

|. Remediation orders to prevent toxic seepage. 2.
Changes to existing concession licenses to protect fisheries,
flora or fauna. 3. Changes to land use regulations that would
reduce the value of property a foreign investor. 4. Preventive
measures taken to protect public safety that caused loss of harm
to foreign investors. 5. Requirements that only environmen-
tally-acceptable resource extraction techniques be used that
would increase the cost of extraction.

MAI (continued on page 28)
L/

UBCIC NEWS



Honorariums for Native Band
Members

Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) has
recently issued a Notice which confirms that honoraria paid
to council members to cover the expenses they incur during
the course of their duties (travel, meals, parking, etc.)
should not be considered income. If the honoraria provided
is not intended to cover expenses, it will still be considered
earnings and must be declared on the E.I. report cards.



In the past, where Bands paid their members honoraria (not
as a wage, but to cover their expenses) the HRDC has
routinely classified these as ‘‘earnings’’. Council members
have been denied Employment Insurance benefits which
they paid for, or have been assessed heavy penalties when
they did not declare these amounts as ‘‘earnings’’ on
their report cards. The system has served to penalize
individuals who agree to sit on Band Councils ona
voluntary basis. In some cases, insurance officers have
refused to accept letters from Band Councils which clarify
the nature of the honoraria as expense-reimbursement,
leaving no way for individual council members to prove
their innocence.





Hopefully, now that HRDC has clarified that it will no
longer consider honoraria provided to cover expenses as
‘earnings’ this should ease the problem. In order to avoid
this problem, Band Councils, when issues honoraria to
their members, should clarify where these amounts are
intended to cover the expenses incurred by their members
in the course of their duties. (For example, instead of
calling these amounts ‘‘honoraria’’ they might be better
numed “expense reimbursement’). However, If you
continue to have any problems with HRDC please contact
our offices at (604) 684-0231.





MAl (continued )

Investor-State Suits: The New Star Chamber

Under the MAI, foreign investors have an unqualified
right to sue vovernments under rules of international arbitration
thal are so secretive that they would rival those of the Star
Chamber Court abolished three centuries ago. It's precisely this
process that Ethly Corporation ts relying on in its suit against
the Canadian government. That case is now proceeding behind
closed doors without public notice, without access to the
documents filed, and without participatory rights for any other
party.

It is difficult to overstate the seriousness of the chal-
lenues posed by this investment regime to environmental and
other societal goals, including that of democratic governance.

IIG Computer Raffle

Congratulations to Caroline
Moore, from Vancovuer,
whose name was drawn from
the Saanich Extension
Computer Raffle. Caroline,
a First Nations Support
worker for the Vancouver Commu-
nity College, was thrilled to get the news. To all
sellers and buyers of the tickets, your support is
greatly appreciated. Brenda Wesley, a student at
IG. sole the winning ticket. Look for upcoming fund



raising events

Institute of Indigenous Government



APPLY TODAY





Applications are now being accepted for the Fall 1998 & the
Winter 1999 semesters. If you would like more information
about obtaining a two year Associate of Arts degree or a one
year Certificate in Indigenous Government Studies, contact
the Registrar's office at (604) 602-3428/29. Or, visit our
campus or write to:

Office of the Registrar
342 Water Street
Vancouver, B.C.

V6B IB6

FREE ACADEMIC CALENDARS
Internet: http://www.indigenous.bc.ca





LOGO CONTEST

The 5th Annual
Aboriginal Cultural Festival
"Bringing People Together

We are inviling creative artists to submit your logo
interpretation of the 5th Annual ACF. Judging will take place
on June 21, 1998 at the Vancouver Aboriginal Friendship
Centre. The selected logo will be featured in the program
guide, T-shirts, and other relevant paraphernalia of the ACF.

The winner will receive a free arts/craft booth at this
years ACF which will be held on Squamish Territory, Septem-
ber 11-13, 1998. You will need an entry form available at the
VAFS. Contact VAFCS @ (604) 251-4844 EXT.307

SPRING 1998

UBCIC NEWS



MAP OF THE SOVEREIGN INDIGENOUS NATIONS
TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES: JUNE, 1993

The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs’ map of the Sovereign Indigenous Nations Territorial Boundaries \s the only contemporary
map that accurately shows the traditional tribal territories of the 23 Indian Nations in British Columbia. The six colour map measures
28" x 36".

The tribal territories are the homelands of distinct Nations, within which their respective peoples share a common language,
culture and traditional forms of political and social organization. These homelands have been occupied by the Indian Nations since
time immemorial. Up to the present, the Indian Nations in British Columbia have never surrendered their ownership of their homelands
(aboriginal title), nor have they surrendered their original sovereignty as nations to govern their homelands (inherent jurisdiction).

Information on the territorial boundaries was compiled by the Union’s research portfolio and President’s office between July,
1990 and April. 1993 from archival research and information provided by elders, chiefs, and tribal councils. Chief Saul Terry, President
ot the Union and a graduate of the Vancouver College of Art (now the Emily Carr College of Art and Design), prepared the working
drafts for the map.

Design and cartography for the June, 1993 map was done by David Sami, chief cartographer of Multi Mapping Ltd. in
Vancouver, B.C., using @ 1|:2,000,000 scale base-map from the Surveys and Environment Branch of the British Columbia Ministry
of Environment, Lands and Parks. All territorial boundaries shown on the map are subject to further revision, as additional information
becomes available. Contact the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs at (604) 684-0231 for ordering information.

28" x 36" / Scale: 1:2 000 000 / Six Colours



























UBCIC NEWS

UNION OF B.C. INDIAN CHIEFS
SUBSCRIPTION FORM





NAME:



FOR OFFICEUSEHIONEM |
DATERECEIVED: =>”
ADDRESS: PAR oe__
EXPIRY.DATES)
AF Lae fe wna














PROVINCE/STATE/COUNTRY: PostaL/Zie CODE:



1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION RATES

NewsLETTER Individual: $35.00

NewsCLIPPING MemberBands: $75.00 Individual: $100.00
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCLOSED §

Please make cheque or money order payable to: UN/ON OF B.C. INDIAN CHIEFS, 5TH FLOOR - 342 WATER STREET.
VANCOUVER, B.C., V6B 1B6

oe ee ee e
CHIEFS MASK BOOKS

Owned and operated by the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs - Sth Floor 342 Water Street in Gastown (604) 684-0231
ALSO SERVING THE INSTITUTE OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNMENT









BOOKS ARTS & CRAFTS
- FIRST NATIONS ~ JEWELLERY
yy cy
< - ABORIGINAL ISSUES - POTTERY S
4 «
J - INTERNATIONAL INDIGENOUS - PRINTS S
= =
x - LAND CLAIMS - T-SHIRTS :
“| we %S cA
= . ~ LEATHERWORK
= - ART
2 - MASKS
= - CHILDREN'S BOOKS
- BEADWORK
- POETRY
- POW WOW MUSIC
CALL, WRITE OR - AND MUCH MORE!
DROP IN TODAY!









SPRING 1998