What part of 'not enough' don't people get?

Brian Lewis, The Province

Published: Thursday, August 30, 2007

You'd think that the dramatic decline in this year's sockeye migration up the Fraser River would have major stakeholders such as the commercial, aboriginal and recreational fishing sectors united to save a dwindling resource.

While the fish swim together in their annual return to spawning grounds, swimming together isn't happening among those who harvest this resource.

Amazingly, as only about 30 per cent of the expected 6.4 million sockeye are actually returning from the ocean this summer, the stakeholders -- the First Nations and recreational fishing sectors, in particular -- are pounding one another over who should or shouldn't be fishing and what they should be allowed or not allowed to catch.

Here's a simple question: What part of "there are not enough sockeye" don't they understand?

The First Nations have a solid legal right to fish for cultural, ceremonial and food purposes and consequently they have the first call on sockeye.

Whether you agree or disagree doesn't alter that fact, but it's also common knowledge that some of these aboriginal-caught fish are indeed sold to non-aboriginals.

As for the recreational sector, it's a very big business on the lower Fraser.

When the sockeye have been in full migration in previous years, anywhere between 3,000 and 5,000 anglers have been counted on the river by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans -- on a daily basis.

However, as the weekly counts of returning sockeye continued to worsen this summer, tensions between the stakeholder groups on the river have increased accordingly.

Several weekends ago, some aboriginal groups took part in a protest fishery despite a DFO-decreed river-wide ban on sockeye fishing for all sectors. One of their complaints was that DFO was too slow in shutting down access to the fishery by the recreational sector. This protest resulted in federal fisheries officers charging 35 people.

However, as some First Nations groups were quick to point out, simply closing the lower Fraser between Mission and Hope to sockeye fishing wouldn't offer complete protection for the species.

It meant that those fishing for chinook or pink salmon in the river were also catching or snagging sockeye in the process.

So at midnight, Sunday, Aug. 19, the entire Fraser River sports salmon fishery between Mission and Hope was closed.

Now the recreational sector -- particularly those who run the fishing-guide and tackle shops -- was up in arms. Last weekend, on Island 22 in the river near Chilliwack, they held their own protest with an estimated 40 boats and about 120 people urging DFO to re-open the lower Fraser to pink and chinook salmon fishing.

They charged that DFO was not being fair. But as of yesterday, DFO doesn't appear ready to change its position. It remains concerned that, in fishing for pinks and chinook, recreational angers are taking too many sockeye, either by accident or intentionally.

After all, under its mandate DFO's top priority is conservation, so instead of fighting among themselves, the stakeholders should take a lesson from the fish -- swim together by co-operating with one another to protect the resource.

If you have a story idea or item about anything in the Fraser Valley, you can e-mail Brian via blewis@png.canwest.com

UBC Reports | Vol. 53 | No. 9 | Sep. 6, 2007

By Julie-Ann Backhouse

In Haida Gwaii, off British Columbia’s remote northwest coast, teachers are exploring connections between oral stories and mathematical problem solving.

“How might we teach math so that all students, particularly Aboriginal, are more interested, more engaged and ultimately successful?” asks Cynthia Nicol, UBC Associate Professor, Department of Curriculum Studies and former math teacher in Haida Gwaii. One answer is connecting math teaching to culture and place.

Teachers have used stories like Raven Steals the Light -- in which Raven-the-trickster steals a light from three nested boxes to create the sun and stars -- to prompt students to build box paper models that helps them learn about surface area, perimeter and volume.

“For students, it shows that we can see math in what is around us,” says Nicol. “For teachers, it is clear that from an early age students understand math concepts and have a strong, emotional connection with community.”

In British Columbia, provincial assessments have consistently shown a significant number of Aboriginal students (44 per cent at Grade 10) are not meeting grade-level expectations in school mathematics. UBC researchers are helping address a fundamental need to find news ways to teach math in Aboriginal communities.

For the past two years, Nicol and a team of UBC education scholars have been collaborating with the Haida Gwaii and Nisga’a nations to transform the teaching and learning of mathematics for Aboriginal school students. Cultural values are at the heart of this long-term study.

“A culturally responsive approach to teaching involves respecting community values and views, and honouring traditional knowledge that may have been lost, or never valued, in our school system,” says Nicol.

This study has involved Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal teachers, parents, school administrators, elders, and scholars, to bring people together to think holistically about math. As Nicol notes, it takes time to develop respectful, responsive and reciprocal relationships, and that has been a large part of the project.

Teachers -- both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal -- are examining their understanding of how students learn math, of culture and its role in the math classroom, and of math as a way of seeing the world.

This is one of a few studies in the world examining Aboriginal mathematics education. According to the researchers, studies in Alaska, Australia, New Zealand and Brazil have looked at specific elements of indigenous mathematics education, yet this is a unique initiative for its collaborative approach, rooted within First Nations communities, and its focus on culture and place.

Nicol and faculty members Jo-ann Archibald, Heather Kelleher and Lee Brown view the partnership with the Haida Gwaii and Nisga’a nations, Haida Gwaii and Nisga’a school districts, and the Vancouver School Board as a long-term commitment.

Funding for this study has been received from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Canadian Council on Learning, and The Vancouver Foundation.

More information is available at www.cust.educ.ubc.ca/team.

Last reviewed 05-Sep-2007

to top | UBC.ca » UBC Public Affairs

UBC Public Affairs

310 - 6251 Cecil Green Park Road, Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z1

tel 604.822.3131 | fax 604.822.2684 | e-mail public.affairs@ubc.ca

© Copyright The University of British Columbia, all rights reserved.

By Robert Freeman

The Progress

Sep 21 2007

Cheam elder Eleanor Stephenson fled in tears from a ceremony Monday night honouring Chief Sid Douglas and his council for their fight against drugs after learning they had banished her son from the community.

Stephenson is the chief’s sister.

Denise Douglas, another sister, also refused to stay for the ceremony, saying it was more about politics than real progress in the fight against drugs on the reserve located near Rosedale.

She said the band needs a “new recipe” for the fight – with healing, not banishment – among its ingredients.

“I’ve never seen drugs work on our people like they have in this (council’s) regime,” she said.

Another sister of the chief, June Quipp, stayed for the ceremony, but spoke out against banishing band members struggling with drug addiction.

They need a helping hand from the band leadership, she said, who should “pick them up every time they fall, rather than banish them.”

The tears and the bitter rift in the family are stark examples of the challenge Chief Douglas – and other native leaders in the Fraser Valley – face in cleaning drugs out of their close-knit communities.

Douglas and councillors Joe Aleck, Rick Quipp, Chester Douglas and Sandra Victor were honoured at the “standing up” ceremony for their aggressive stance against drugs, which is being touted as a model for other Sto:lo communities.

Grand Chief Clarence Pennier, president of the Sto:lo Tribal Council, and Cpl. Chris Gosselin, with the RCMP’s aboriginal policing section, were also “stood up” for their contribution to the fight.

“We wanted to stand up some people who have had the courage to take their community back, to take it away from those people who would have our children become addicted to drugs,” Grand Chief Douglas Kelly said at the ceremony. “Sometimes that means we have to confront our own family. Sometimes that means we have to deal with our own hurt and make difficult decisions.”

Alcohol was once the “plague” of native communities, he said, but now it’s drugs that hook native people trying to escape the “grief and sorrow” of racism and residential school abuse.

“We have enough hurt,” he said. “It’s really important ... to put that away in a good way” that doesn’t hurt families or communities.

“Most importantly, that we don’t hurt our future, the little ones, our children,” he said.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs president, said it’s always the children that suffer from their parents’ addiction.

Fighting his own addiction to alcohol for 22 years was a struggle, he said, “but I always knew in my heart the ones who suffered were my children.”

“That’s always the case with addictions,” he said. “It’s the children who are neglected, who are abandoned.”

He praised the Cheam people and their leadership in the fight to keep drug dealers off the reserve. Drug dealers are now being seen as the modern version of the white whiskey fur traders who wreaked such havoc on Canada’s native peoples.

“Cheam people are very special people,” Phillip said. “The Cheam people are in many ways leaders in terms of our struggle for our rights and in terms of” the fight against drugs.

B.C.’s newly appointed lieutenant governor, Steven Point, the former leader of the Sto:lo Nation, spoke about the importance of self-reliance and self-government in restoring dignity to aboriginal people.

“You can’t break a man’s legs one day, and blame him for limping the next - and that’s what’s happened to aboriginal people in this country,” he said. “We have to stand up and take government away from the people who have been doing it for us and start doing it for ourselves.”

The answer to the drug problem on native reserves lies in creating jobs and restoring pride in aboriginal culture, he said.

“Once in a while, you’ve got to do what (the Cheam) are doing now – stand up and draw the line,” he added. “The difficult part about leadership is when you have to make difficult decisions ... that are not necessarily popular, that are not necessarily going to make people happy, but you know have to be made.”

Point, who was also a provincial court judge before his appointment as lieutenant governor, took note of the RCMP officers, including Upper Fraser Valley Supt. Dale McGowan, who attended the ceremony.

“It’s nice to see cops sitting with the people, not just faces driving by” in patrol cars, he said.

Former Tzeachten Chief Ken Malloway spoke about the difficulty band leaders face when their decisions affect family members.

“When you’re dealing with your own family, it’s tough,” he said. “They get angry with you. You really don’t know what to do but keep talking to them – and keep on trying to look out for our kids.”

“I think it’s time for the rest of us to have a look at what Cheam is doing, and do the same,” he said.

rfreeman@theprogress.com

By Jennifer Feinberg The Progressjfeinberg@theprogress.com

Sep 18 2007

Sto:lo Tribal Council grand chief Doug Kelly wasn’t impressed with the rationale offered by federal officials after Canada voted against the United Nations declaration on aboriginal rights.

The UN regularly passes similar declarations, on the environment, children’s health or poverty in an attempt to create a better world for everyone, he said.

“So how does it make any sense at all to vote against such a declaration?” Kelly asked. “I don’t know how anyone could speak against an improved world for indigenous and aboriginal people around the world.”

But the Harper government made it clear beforehand they weren’t going to support the declaration, so the voting results came as no real surprise in Sto:lo circles, Kelly said.

Canada opposed the declaration because officials felt they couldn’t support the wording in the final text.

“It is fundamentally flawed and lacks clear, practical guidance for implementation,” according to the rationale offered in a joint news release from Minister Strahl and Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier. The UN declaration contained provisions that are “fundamentally incompatible” with Canada’s constitutional framework.

The final vote at the UN saw 143 countries in favour, 11 abstentions and 4 against, including a no vote from Canada.

“So it was thoroughly disappointing, but not surprising,” said Kelly.

For Tzeachten chief Joe Hall, Canada’s no vote was of great concern and brings into question the government’s commitment to making real progress.

“We’re elated that the declaration passed anyway,” he said. “It’s more than symbolic, it sends a clear message that times are changing.”

Now there’s keen interest in Sto:lo communities to find out why precisely why Canada did not support the declaration, which according to the native leader, resulted in a “black eye” for the country’s record on human rights.

“There’s no doubt we would have preferred to see Canada sign on to the document, which offers some indication that they were serious about dealing with longstanding issues,” Hall said. “I find it shameful that Canada chose to align with New Zealand, Australia and the U.S. on this one, which are nations with poor records of their own in terms of their own aboriginal peoples.”

A “resounding vote in favour” has been a long time coming, he remarked. “It was a very clear and concise statement made by countries around the world that it’s time these situations are corrected.”

Canada’s native people are still 63rd on the United Nations international living index, while Canadians enjoy being the ninth richest country in the world.

Grand Chief Kelly said the Conservatives’ efforts to rationalize the decision after the fact were “asinine and ridiculous,” pointing out that aboriginal case law studies have repeatedly called for real accommodation and consultation when it comes to the government’s approach to First Nations.

“The government has no problem ignoring those types of findings, so I don’t understand the logic they’re using that some sort of international document that sets out goals can undermine Canada or its constitution,” he said.

“I have to say I was pleased to see the UN declaration was passed, but I laughed when I heard quotes attributed to (Indian and Northern Affairs Minister) Chuck Strahl suggesting that signing it would have meant the government would require the blessing of the 605 First Nations in Canada before any legislation could be passed.”

“I laughed even louder when he said the declaration would threaten the rights of everyone else,” he said, referring to the argument put forth by the Tories that it “does not recognize Canada’s need to balance indigenous rights to lands and resources with the rights of others.”

One of the sticking points for the government was Article 26, which states: “Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.”

The concern, according to the Tories’ press release, was that “this could be used by Aboriginal groups to challenge and re-open historic and present day treaties and to support claims that have already been dealt with.”

But Kelly argued the role of the Indian affairs minister is to “stand up and advocate” for First Nations and aboriginal peoples.

“That’s his job, and he’s not doing that,” he added.

The native leader described the no vote as the “third misstep” for Canada’s new government, in the wake of the PM’s threat last summer to put an end to “racially divided fisheries” on the West Coast and then the promise and subsequent failure to “put wheels on the Kelowna Accord.”

But government officials insist they have acted decisively on the domestic front to improve quality of life and promote a prosperous future for all aboriginal people.

“This agenda is practical, focuses on real results, and has led to tangible progress in a range of areas including land claims, education, housing, child and family services, safe drinking water and the extension of human rights protection to First Nations on reserve,” according to the release.

Yakweakioose Chief Frank Malloway said the ‘no’ vote does not bode well for a positive atmosphere for re-invigorated treaty talks.

"We're very disappointed, especially right in the middle of treaty negotiations," he said. "It's not a very good situation. I would have preferred that they signed it. That would have made our struggles easier."

Sandra Mcculloch, Times Colonist

Published: Sunday, September 23, 2007

First Nations leaders and treaty negotiators say public education and support is key to firing up stalled treaty negotiations and settling more treaties across the province.

A public forum in Duncan yesterday brought together politicians, aboriginal representatives and the public to share views on the murky topic of treaty negotiations.

The event, held at the Duncan Christian Reformed Church, was organized by the Aboriginal Neighbours, a group that includes the Anglican Diocese of B.C. and the United Church.

The turnout of more than 100 people was encouraging and showed First Nations people have support, said Dan Smith of the Kwakuitl band of Campbell River.

"What we need are the messengers, the power of the one individual who will go out and talk to their friends and relatives and say, 'Let's do something right. Let's make it right, talk with the First Nations and see what their issues are.'"

The first treaty in Canada was signed in 1647 on the basis of friendship between East Coast aboriginals and European immigrants, said Smith in an address to an audience of mixed races. "We opened our arms and embraced the newcomers and look what we got in return -- you know the history."

Aboriginal people were relegated to reserves, faced abuse under the residential school system and lost much of their language and culture.

Smith said his own people originally roamed a territory spanning 28,000 square kilometres, which he described as bigger than Prince Edward Island. "And yet the Campbell River Indian band right now has maybe 300 acres reserved for them ... half the size of Stanley Park."

Robert Morales, a Cowichan Tribes' treaty negotiator, said the event was about reaching out to non-First Nation people and trying to educate them about the issues and why the process is taking so long.

The Hul'qumi'num Treaty Group, of which Cowichan Tribes is a member, has firmed up two-thirds of the treaty package but big issues remain unresolved.

"We need to get the right people in

the room because the negotiators at the table currently do not have the mandate or the authority to go beyond their marching orders," said Morales, a lawyer with 14 years' experience in private practice.

Public support is critical, said Morales, who called for more such public forums.

"I think that governments operate

on the prospect of re-election, they operate on being able to maintain a public image and I think that public opinion is pretty important if we expect the government to move off of these outdated colonial policies that are driving their mandates."

Campbell tolerates honesty, as long as it agrees with his policy

Michael Smyth, The Province

Published: Sunday, September 23, 2007

Gordon Campbell brags about the free speech he tolerates within the Liberal caucus, where several MLAs have voted against government bills without sanction.

That stands in contrast to NDP Leader Carole James's policy of "whipped votes," starkly illustrated by her recent decision to kick MLA Michael Sather out of the caucus simply for threatening to vote against the Tsawwassen treaty.

But Campbell's free-speech policy is shot with loopholes: No Liberal MLA is allowed to vote against the throne speech, the budget or -- and this is the big one -- any bill giving force to a Liberal election promise.

Given that Campbell has made literally hundreds of promises, that doesn't leave a lot of wriggle room.

Why, then, is Campbell allowing a free vote on the Tsawwassen treaty? In 2005, he specifically promised in the Liberal election platform to "negotiate affordable treaty settlements under the B.C. Treaty Commission Process."

Allowing his own MLAs to vote against his own election promise flies in the face of Campbell's own complicated rules on free votes. (This convenient free vote is less about genuine free speech and more about embarrassing the divided NDP.)

Here's another loophole: Liberal cabinet ministers are not allowed to have free votes in the legislature. And more than half of the Liberals' 46 MLAs are in Campbell's cabinet.

That means the free-speech bubble inside the Liberal caucus applies only to backbenchers and only on a narrow range of mostly meaningless issues.

And any backbencher who does dare to speak out against Campbell's agenda is basically asking to ride those cold and drafty backbenches for the remainder of their careers.

Case in point: West Vancouver MLA Ralph Sultan. Here's a guy who was once the chief economist at the Royal Bank and who holds a PhD from Harvard, where he used to be a professor.

But he's still getting splinters on the backbenches after six years in the legislature. Why?

Perhaps because he has an annoying habit of speaking his mind. I was reminded last week of Sultan's gutsy decision to criticize his own government's decision to build B.C.'s new ferries in Germany.

On Friday, B.C. Ferries flew a platoon of politicians, bureaucrats, chefs and entertainers to Flensburg, Germany, to throw a party for the government-subsidized German workers building our ferries.

The party cost an estimated $60,000 to reward foreigners constructing ships that could have been built right here in British Columbia, creating 3,500 jobs.

I had to laugh when I read Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon's comment to reporters at the German celebration: "Nothing like this could have been built in Canada."

What a joke! Of course we could have built those ships right here. We've built even bigger ferries in the past. But Falcon must now prove to Ottawa that they could not have been built in Canada to avoid paying $80 million in import duties.

Sultan had the guts to speak out against this madness three years ago. But in Campbell's version of free speech, it means this highly qualified MLA will likely never crack the cabinet ranks.

E-mail: msmyth@direct.ca

© The Vancouver Province 2007

Ads by Google

By Phil Melnychuk

Staff Reporter

Sep 22 2007

For the first year of their childhood spent in an institution, away from parents and family, they'll get $10,000. For every year after that, $3,000.

Katzie band members who were sent to residential schools can now apply for that as part of the recently announced residential schools settlement.

Band administrator Coleen Pierre-Sam expects between 15 to 20 will qualify.

"I pretty well have all my elders covered here," she said of the Pitt Meadows reserve.

The band also has reserves on Barnston Island and in Langley.

The payment is the major part of the federal government's Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, announced Wednesday and available to those sent to the church-run, government-funded schools, as late as the 1970s.

The deadline to apply isn't until Sept. 19, 2011.

"They have up to five years … but how long has this been going on?" asked Pierre-Sam.

Coleen's mom, Agnes Pierre, who was sent to Kuper Island Residential School near Nanaimo, was one of those who applied for an advance payment under the program. She didn't receive it. She died in March 2006.

Band chief Diane Bailey's father and father-in-law were both sent to Sechelt Residential School, run by the Roman Catholic church.

She says going to the school played a big role in the loss of their language.

"I think if they weren't made not to speak their language in school they would have carried it on to their offspring."

Her dad never talked about his experiences too much, however.

Bailey said the second generation, the children of those sent to the schools, suffered as well.

"There's a lot of negative stuff that happened to the second generation. I don't know if money can repair that, but it should be mentioned."

Those who spent their childhood institutionalized had to start families without learning parenting skills from their families.

Bailey noted not all native kids were sent away and doesn't know why some went and some didn't. Her mom didn't get sent away, though she used to threaten to send her kids when they weren't behaving.

"Some of the things … even the food in the places was terrible."

She remembers a friend at St. Mary's school in Mission always craving fresh fruit and fish during her absences from the school.

Bailey said even the third generation is struggling because it's hard to recover when the effects are so strong.

She says her kids could have gone to a religious school, but "when our oldest turned six, there was no way he was going to St. Pat's. We sent him to Pitt Meadows school."

The announcement of the settlement was made Wednesday by Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl.

Applications for the Common Experience Payment, available to all those who attended residential schools, will be mailed to all former students who requested one.

An independent assessment process also is available for claims of sexual or serious physical abuse.

Iain Hunter, Citizen Special

Published: Saturday, September 22, 2007

My country, once considered the most enlightened in promoting universal human rights, is being pilloried in the world's press for voting against the long-awaited UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples this week.

At home it's the minority Conservative government that's getting the heat.

"A stain on the country's international reputation," declared National Chief Phil Fontaine of the Assembly of First Nations with a bitterness that's been mounting recently. "A slap in the face for all indigenous peoples." "The Conservative government has signalled to aboriginal Canadians that their rights aren't worth defending," said Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, with customary hyperbole.

Fontaine probably knows what he's talking about, having followed the process over most of the 20 years it has taken to produce the declaration, and is using Canada's negative vote for his own political purposes.

God knows what Dion is talking about. It sounds as if he hasn't even read the text or, if he has, figures he'd never have to deal with it if Canada had supported it, because he'll never be prime minister.

The declaration calls on member states to do some very worthwhile things such as granting indigenous groups control over their own institutions, cultures and spiritual traditions, even managing their own education systems.

It also demands that states not discriminate against aboriginal minorities, force their migration or seize their lands.

But it doesn't take a redneck reformist-blinkered view to see that some of this stuff, as Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl has said, is inconsistent with our rewritten Constitution, the Supreme Court of Canada's direction that what native rights mean must be negotiated, and with the discussions that have taken place, and are taking place, between First Nations and governments.

And it doesn't require much foresight to see that the UN declaration could be used to undo much that has been done by treaty.

One of the articles that has made it impossible for this country, quite properly, to subscribe to this declaration is that national governments shall obtain the consent of aboriginal people "before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that affect them."

What about measures that are designed to apply to all Canadians -- are First Nations expected to be able to opt out, possibly with some kind of fiscal compensation as Quebec so often enjoys? Another article found objectionable by Canada's representatives says indigenous peoples have the right to "lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired." If this isn't encouragement to First Nations to rip up treaties, defy the courts or abandon the negotiating table for the roadblock, I don't know what else it is.

I'm a little uneasy about some of the other articles, too, such as those presuming to give First Nations rights "to freely determine their relationship with States," "to freely determine their political status," or "to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic and cultural life of the State." It's pretty clear to me that, as Strahl noted, the rights of other Canadians would have been threatened had Canada signed on, or, as the New Zealand minister responsible for Maori affairs said, different classes of citizenship are implied by the declaration.

New Zealand, Australia and the U.S. joined Canada in voting against the document, no doubt because these countries have more indigenous populations than other countries.

Britain had no problem with the declaration, and the BBC lamented what Canada's no vote does for the rights of "the Innu tribe." I suppose the Picts and Scots, if there are any left, aren't considered indigenous.

African states were only able to sign on after securing acknowledgment that government troops often have to occupy traditional lands, and recognition that all people in some African states are indigenous, so nothing need change.

Email to a friend

Printer friendly

Font: ****And this argument, that the declaration is just that, and is non-binding on member states, is used by human rights groups to say that Canada had nothing to lose by voting yes.

"The declaration is not a document that creates new rights but one that would actually help clarify Canada's existing obligations under domestic and international law," Ontario's chief commissioner of human rights says.

"It ... is specifically required to be interpreted in light of existing laws, standards and the rights of non-aboriginal populations," Barbara Hall wrote in the Toronto Star this week.

Well, I'm sorry, but I've looked at the text and can find no such statement. It's a mischievous document full of the woolliness typical of UN declarations.

Dion may not think so, but I think Canadians themselves are quite capable of demanding that their governments make real changes to combat the poverty, poor health and education and disproportionate imprisonment of their aboriginal fellow citizens, and settle historical grievances.

All Canadians have rights, regardless of heritage. The charter, for what it's worth, affirms them.

Fatuous declarations by foreigners about invented rights aren't really very helpful.

Iain Hunter is a columnist with the Victoria Times-Colonist.

Indigenous group challenges B.C.’s authority; motor users say Sea to Sky plan ‘devastating’

  By 

  Reporter

  David Burke

Dburke@whistlerquestion.com

Indigenous people from the Mount Currie/D’Arcy area last week challenged the provincial government’s authority to make land-use decisions at an open house for the Sea to Sky Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP).

Proponents of motorized recreation in the corridor, meanwhile, said the needs of their sector have been largely overlooked in the latest draft of the plan, with one avid snowmobiler calling the plan “devastating” to the area’s many motorized recreational users.

“People are going to start moving away if this goes ahead,” said D’Arcy resident Grant Campbell.

Officials with the Ministry of Agriculture and Land’s Integrated Land Management Bureau (ILMB), who organized last Thursday’s (Sept. 13) open house at Whistler’s Pan Pacific Hotel, said they doubted whether the jurisdictional issue could be dealt with in the current forum.

It’s also not clear whether, at this late stage in the LRMP process — bureaucrats hope to present the plan, which has been in the works for five years, to the legislature for adoption by next spring — the government has the ability or the political will to make the sort of changes the motorized users want to see.

One government fact sheet given out at the forum described the current stage of public consultation as “an opportunity for the public to view (the current draft) and ask questions of various staff members,” with no promise that input would be used to help shape the final plan.

“The public phase of the LRMP is complete,” said Tracy Ronmark, ILMB planning officer. “We wanted to go out and share the draft with the public. We’re in the later stages of the process, for sure.”

Added Arlette Malcolm, ILMB planning team leader, “Overall the intent is to make any changes reflect, as much as possible, what happened in the (earlier) public forum.”

Senk’lip, one of five members of a group of indigenous people who attended the open house, said the Government of Canada has made no treaties with his people and that neither Canada nor B.C. has the right to impose land-use decisions on them.

“We have no treaty with Canada,” he said, speaking not for any First Nation but for the people he claims are the land’s original owners. “For them to state that we want to have… anything, they need to come to us and make a treaty.”

He said B.C. is a division of Canada, not a sovereign nation. He added that what most Canadians now as First Nations never agreed to the Indian Act of 1874 or any of its provisions. “Right now they (Canada and B.C.) have the onus of proving jurisdiction,” he said.

James Lee Louie, an elder from Mount Currie, showed off legal documents he said aim to prove that senior levels of government have no authority to issue proclamations such as the LRMP.

“When reparations for land claims, residential schools… and violations of our rights are met, then we may enter into treaty negotiations,” he said.

Senk’lip said he was unhappy that the governments of Canada and the United States on Thursday had failed to sign the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. They didn’t vote in favour of the declaration, he said, “because it would show that they don’t have legitimate governments.”

Of the LRMP, he said, “It looks good. I told them (officials) that they did an excellent job. But where are the (land) owners, and who is claiming jurisdiction?”

The indigenous people’s issues are “kind of beyond the scope of what we’re dealing with,” Ronmark said.

Campbell and Pemberton resident Don Gamache both said that in a number of areas, the draft LRMP designates corridors that are currently multi-use as being for non-motorized use.

Campbell, a member of the Pemberton Snowmobile Club, said he has been involved in discussions surrounding motorized recreational access since 2000. He was a regular member of the Backcountry Forum, which hammered out a consensus agreement that was then presented at the LRMP multi-stakeholder panel during its more than two years of discussions.

However, “Everything from the Backcountry Forum was basically ignored,” Campbell said.

He said Phelix Creek near D’Arcy, which is often used by snowmobilers as a route to Bralorne and Gold Bridge, is just one of the corridors for which snowmobile access is currently allowed but are proposed in the draft LRMP for non-motorized access in the winter. Other, similar areas include Noel Creek, Face Mountain and Pebble Glacier.

“Everybody in D’Arcy has a quad, snowmobile or motorbike. It’s devastating,” Campbell said.

Gamache said he’s also upset that no motorized access the Pemberton Icefield is provided through the Callaghan Valley. He said that backcountry recreation was represented at the LRMP table. However, those with direct economic interests such as forestry and mining could afford to send a paid representative to the discussions whereas others could not, he said.

“The whole process was flawed,” Gamache said. “As much as they tried to do a good job, they didn’t get enough consistent representation of the various recreational groups — both motorized and non-motorized — to get a decent consensus.”

Campbell said that if the plan goes ahead as is, a significant economic contributor to the Sea to Sky corridor — both from residents and from those who come here for motorized recreation — will suffer.

This past summer, officials announced land-use agreements with the In-SHUCK-ch and Squamish Nations. Negotiations with the Lil’wat, which early this year unveiled their own land-use plan, are ongoing. An agreement is needed before the final LRMP can be presented to the legislature for adoption.

Comment forms may be sent to Ronmark at (604) 586-4434 (fax) or by mail to her at the ILMB, No. 200-10428 153rd St., Surrey V3R 1E1.

By VictorBowman

Sep 14 2007

On October first, Steven Point becomes the Lieutenant Governor of the Province of British Columbia, succeeding Iona Campagnolo. He is the first individual of aboriginal decent to be chosen for this post in any of the 10 provinces of Canada. The media cannot seem to make this announcement without mentioning his aboriginal ancestry. An outstanding citizen, such as judge Steven Point, being appointed to this position probably has little to do with his ancestry.

There will be many who believe that he was appointed as our next Lieutenant Governor because he is an aboriginal. That is just not true. The honour of this position goes to individuals who have served this province and the people of the province in an outstanding manner. Being of aboriginal ancestry is no more a factor than being female was to our current Lieutenant Governor, Iona Campagnolo. Nor did the Chinese ancestry of her predecessor, David Lam, affect his appointment to this position. The reality is that those chosen for this post are selected for their involvement and contribution to the province and the country. Every individual chosen to fill this position has earned that honour.

Steven Point has had a long career in law and most recently, has served as the Chief Commissioner of the British Columbia Treaty Commission. Taking on that task by itself is proof that he is a courageous and honourable individual.

He has been outstanding in his efforts to search out that elusive middle ground that will enable lasting, fair treaties for all. Prior to taking on this most difficult task, he served as a provincial court judge with dignity and honour.

He must be admired for leaving that comfortable world of interpreting law to take on the task of treaties, where there is little precedent and many critical opinions.

While generally viewed as a titular position, the Lieutenant Governor, both in law and in fact, is not without considerable influence. His understanding of history, as well as future desires of our aboriginal citizens, promises to help us sort through the complex question of settling aboriginal claims in a fair and just manner. Point’s perspective can offer recognition of the positive impact that our aboriginal citizens may have upon the future of our province. It is time that we had an individual of this calibre and knowledge take up this challenging position.

Steven Point, in a recent interview on CBC, commented that his plan for the future was to return to the bench. That would have been the easy way out.

After several years working with the Treaty Commission, it would have been relaxing, and probably much more enjoyable than taking on the task of being the Lieutenant Governor of the province.

Being the first individual of aboriginal heritage to be appointed to this position, there will be expectations of performance that other Lieutenant Governors have not been subjected to. His challenge is a large one, but seeing the person he is, that is a challenge he will meet head on.

Steven Point, I wish you the best of terms. You have a large role to fill, and I am sure that you and your wife Gwen will do a great job. I sincerely hope that all citizens of the province will take pride in, once again, having a great citizen taking on the challenges of this tough job.

Victor Bowman was born in Prince George and raised in Vanderhoof. He returned to Prince George 32 years ago and currently operate a consulting business. Please direct comments c/o editor@pgfreepress.com

Sep, 13 2007 - 3:40 PM

VANCOUVER/CKNW(AM980) - While BC aboriginals are celebrating the adoption of the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples, they say Canada’s vote against it is a stain on the country's international reputation.

The US, New Zealand, and Australia were the other three countries who voted against adoption.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the union of BC Indian chiefs says it's ironic that four first world countries that have become prosperous through the exploitation of indigenous lands and resources chose to oppose the declaration.

Regional chief Shawn Atleo with the BC assembly of first nations calls Canada’s lack of support for today's declaration 'shocking.'

Up until a year ago, he says it appeared the government was in full support.

"It really does isolate Canada I think globally, coming from having a history right, of being a champion of human rights, I think now that those that are involved in advancing basic human rights of people and in this case, indigenous people form around the world are really questioning the actions of Canada."

Atleo says the Conservative government’s claims that the declaration goes against the constitution are baseless.

He says today's vote underscores the gap the government and first nations have yet to travel.

Wants farmland to be preserved

Brian Lewis, The Province

Published: Thursday, September 13, 2007

This isn't the first time that Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows MLA Michael Sather has come face-to-face with a touch of trouble.

He's the chap who was tossed out of the NDP caucus by leader

Carole James last Friday because he has pledged to vote against the Tsawwassen First Nation treaty in the legislature later this fall.

His stance has caused James's shaky leadership some trepidation since the New Democratic Party decided -- after much waffling -- to support the treaty.

However, in meeting the man behind the recent headlines, you find a fellow who holds no regrets in making a decision that could put his political career in jeopardy.

In fact, it quickly becomes obvious that Sather puts principles before politics -- even though his family's political roots stretch far back, to the founding of the NDP's forerunner, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, in Calgary in 1932.

The first-term MLA says he has no problem in the TFN settling its treaty with the B.C. and federal governments. Nor does he object to the band receiving Crown lands as compensation.

"What I do have a problem with is that under this treaty proposal those lands [roughly 200 hectares, currently in the Agricultural Land Reserve] will be transferred into commercial use [likely for container storage]," he says.

"We know that climate change is going to affect our food security," adds Sather, who was raised on a farm in B.C.'s Peace River country.

"Our breadbaskets in California and Mexico are already having major water-table problems, but unfortunately we haven't yet figured out just how important our local farmland is."

He's concerned that the TFN treaty will set a dangerous precedent.

"This is the first time we've included agricultural lands in a treaty settlement, but I don't know if it'll be the last," he warns.

As well, Sather maintains that a significant element in the Tsawwassen settlement was a desire on Victoria's part to expedite Deltaport's expansion.

By Tom Fletcher

Black Press

Sep 07 2007

VICTORIA – Steven Point, the Sto:lo chief and provincial court judge who has led the B.C. Treaty Commission for the past two years, has been appointed B.C.’s 28th Lieutenant-Governor.

The mainly ceremonial job as the Queen’s representative in B.C. is picked by the prime minister. Point replaces Iona Campagnolo, the Trudeau-era cabinet minister who has served as B.C.’s head of state since 2001.

“Steven Point’s contributions as a provincial court judge, the Chief Commissioner of the British Columbia Treaty Commission and elected chief of the Skowkale First Nation speak to his commitment to the people of British Columbia,” Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in announcing the appointment. “I am certain he will continue to serve his province and his country well.”

Point’s new job comes at a breakthrough point for the treaty commission, which has been criticized for more than a decade of costly and inconclusive negotiations with dozens of aboriginal groups.

That era is expected to end this fall with the adoption of a new treaty with the Tsawwassen First Nation and the expected ratification of a second one by members of the Maa-Nulth First Nations group on Vancouver Island.

As Lieutenant Governor, Point will give “royal assent” to the treaties and other legislation after it is passed in the B.C. legislature this fall.

The Chilliwack-born Point was appointed to the provincial court in 1999, sitting most recently in Abbotsford.

He served 15 years as elected chief of the Skowkale First Nation, and is a grand chief of the Sto:lo Tribal Council in the Fraser Valley.

In his latest report as chief commissioner last fall, Point predicted the tide was turning in favour of treaties.

“There have been days when I’ve really questioned the wisdom of my decision to accept this job,” he wrote. “I am happy to report those days have been fewer than those that have been very rewarding.”

Sep 12, 2007

VICTORIA (CP) — Ratification of a controversial treaty will be the No. 1 item on the agenda when British Columbia politicians return to the legislature in a little over a month.

Liberal house leader Miike de Jong said Wednesday the government is excited about reconvening the legislature Oct. 15 to ratify the first treaty produced by the B.C. Treaty Commission process.

In late July, members of the Tsawwassen First Nation, located south of Vancouver, ratified the deal that involves nearly $14 million in cash and the transfer of more than 700 hectares of land.

It is that land transfer that has made the deal controversial, because it involves removing about 200 hectares from the province's agricultural land reserve.

The issue has sparked dissension within the ranks of the opposition New Democrats.

Opposition Leader Carole James suspended Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows MLA Michael Sather from the NDP caucus last week over his outspoken opposition to the treaty.

De Jong said he is amazed at what has been happening within the New Democrat caucus over this, the first urban treaty in modern times.

"It's bordering on the bizarre," he said. "Just to see the manner in which Ms. James purports to be able to dictate or intimidate members of the legislature - tell them what they can say, what they can't say, what they can say - hardly seems democratic."

He said it's remarkable that James has been able to take an issue that from nearly every perspective should be a "good news" story and turned it into a political minefield.

"She's found just about every mine," he said.

De Jong said MLAs will also vote on reforms to the Greater Vancouver Transit Authority and there is a chance they may be asked to ratify a second treaty involving a group of five Vancouver Island native bands known collectively as the Maa-nulth.

One of the five bands, the Huu-ay-aht First Nation, voted to approve a final agreement earlier this summer.

De Jong is hopeful the other four may give their approval in time to bring that treaty to a vote in the legislature as well.

He said at this stage it's hard to say how long the fall session may last.

It depends on how long the opposition wants to spend on the treaty legislation and whether there is a chance to introduce bills left over from the spring session.

"The priority, however, will be the treaty ratification," he said.

The New Democrat caucus is on a retreat in Prince George, B.C., and no one was available to comment on the scheduling of the fall session.