SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A 2006 photo of the Grassy Narrows blockade to stop logging on their traditional lands (Credit: flickr/cc/Howl Arts Collective)
First Nation Suffers Defeat in Court, Vows to Continue Fight for Land
Supreme Court of Canada rules provincial government does not need federal approval to issue land use licenses
Jul 11, 2014
The Grassy Narrows First Nation suffered a defeat on Friday when the Supreme Court of Canada upheld a lower court ruling that the provincial government of Ontario has the right to issue logging licenses on their traditional lands.
While Friday's ruling was in reference to the 141-year-old treaty, known as Treaty 3, between the Crown and Ojibway Indians, it will likely influence how Canadian courts and natural resource companies approach lands under treaty nationwide.
"I agree with the Ontario Court of Appeal that Ontario and only Ontario has the power to take up lands under Treaty 3," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in the unanimous decision.
The Grassy Narrows' appeal of the lower court's ruling argued that because the treaty was made with the federal Crown the provincial government should be forced to receive federal approval before issuing licenses for land use like logging and mining.
"The promises made in Treaty 3 were promises of the Crown, not those of Canada," according to the court. "Thus, when the lands covered by the treaty were determined to belong to the province of Ontario, the province became responsible for their governance with respect to matters falling under its jurisdiction."
However, the court also made it clear that the provincial government's rights for development are not absolute. A "harvesting clause" in Treaty 3 gives the First Nation the right "to pursue their avocations of hunting and fishing throughout the tract surrendered," meaning that "if the taking up leaves the Ojibway with no meaningful right to hunt, fish or trap in relation to the territories over which they traditionally hunted, fished, and trapped, a potential action for treaty infringement will arise."
But according to CTV News, the Grassy Narrows people say there is already scientific evidence that recent clearcut logging in their territory has worsened the impact of mercury poisoning that began in the 1960s when a paper mill upstream polluted their territory, and that the recent logging has raised mercury levels in fish above the Health Canada limit for safe human consumption.
The Grassy Narrows are known for maintaining the longest protest blockade in Canadian history as a method of stopping logging on their land, and leaders are making it clear after the loss in court that the fight is not over.
"We believe Ontario and industry are morally and politically obliged to seek our consent before logging our lands. Our people will ensure that the government, public, corporations, and courts never forget the terrible effect that industrial logging has had on the health and welfare of our people," J.B. Fobister, a Grassy Narrows hunter who helped initiate the case, said in a statement. "While we are disappointed in today's outcome we will be continuing to fight to protect the health, welfare and culture of the people of Grassy Narrows using all the tools available to us."
"This isn't going to change who we are - a land based people that relies on our forests and our water," Judy Da Silva, Lynx Clan mother, said in a statement. "We will continue to sing our songs, practice our ceremonies, use our land, and heal our people."
Leaders and supporters of the Grassy Narrows are planning a protest walk in Toronto for July 31.
_____________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Max Ocean, Editorial Intern
Max Ocean was an editorial intern at Common Dreams in 2014. He now is Vice President at Subversive Malting & Brewing in Ithaca, NY.
The Grassy Narrows First Nation suffered a defeat on Friday when the Supreme Court of Canada upheld a lower court ruling that the provincial government of Ontario has the right to issue logging licenses on their traditional lands.
While Friday's ruling was in reference to the 141-year-old treaty, known as Treaty 3, between the Crown and Ojibway Indians, it will likely influence how Canadian courts and natural resource companies approach lands under treaty nationwide.
"I agree with the Ontario Court of Appeal that Ontario and only Ontario has the power to take up lands under Treaty 3," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in the unanimous decision.
The Grassy Narrows' appeal of the lower court's ruling argued that because the treaty was made with the federal Crown the provincial government should be forced to receive federal approval before issuing licenses for land use like logging and mining.
"The promises made in Treaty 3 were promises of the Crown, not those of Canada," according to the court. "Thus, when the lands covered by the treaty were determined to belong to the province of Ontario, the province became responsible for their governance with respect to matters falling under its jurisdiction."
However, the court also made it clear that the provincial government's rights for development are not absolute. A "harvesting clause" in Treaty 3 gives the First Nation the right "to pursue their avocations of hunting and fishing throughout the tract surrendered," meaning that "if the taking up leaves the Ojibway with no meaningful right to hunt, fish or trap in relation to the territories over which they traditionally hunted, fished, and trapped, a potential action for treaty infringement will arise."
But according to CTV News, the Grassy Narrows people say there is already scientific evidence that recent clearcut logging in their territory has worsened the impact of mercury poisoning that began in the 1960s when a paper mill upstream polluted their territory, and that the recent logging has raised mercury levels in fish above the Health Canada limit for safe human consumption.
The Grassy Narrows are known for maintaining the longest protest blockade in Canadian history as a method of stopping logging on their land, and leaders are making it clear after the loss in court that the fight is not over.
"We believe Ontario and industry are morally and politically obliged to seek our consent before logging our lands. Our people will ensure that the government, public, corporations, and courts never forget the terrible effect that industrial logging has had on the health and welfare of our people," J.B. Fobister, a Grassy Narrows hunter who helped initiate the case, said in a statement. "While we are disappointed in today's outcome we will be continuing to fight to protect the health, welfare and culture of the people of Grassy Narrows using all the tools available to us."
"This isn't going to change who we are - a land based people that relies on our forests and our water," Judy Da Silva, Lynx Clan mother, said in a statement. "We will continue to sing our songs, practice our ceremonies, use our land, and heal our people."
Leaders and supporters of the Grassy Narrows are planning a protest walk in Toronto for July 31.
_____________________
Max Ocean, Editorial Intern
Max Ocean was an editorial intern at Common Dreams in 2014. He now is Vice President at Subversive Malting & Brewing in Ithaca, NY.
The Grassy Narrows First Nation suffered a defeat on Friday when the Supreme Court of Canada upheld a lower court ruling that the provincial government of Ontario has the right to issue logging licenses on their traditional lands.
While Friday's ruling was in reference to the 141-year-old treaty, known as Treaty 3, between the Crown and Ojibway Indians, it will likely influence how Canadian courts and natural resource companies approach lands under treaty nationwide.
"I agree with the Ontario Court of Appeal that Ontario and only Ontario has the power to take up lands under Treaty 3," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in the unanimous decision.
The Grassy Narrows' appeal of the lower court's ruling argued that because the treaty was made with the federal Crown the provincial government should be forced to receive federal approval before issuing licenses for land use like logging and mining.
"The promises made in Treaty 3 were promises of the Crown, not those of Canada," according to the court. "Thus, when the lands covered by the treaty were determined to belong to the province of Ontario, the province became responsible for their governance with respect to matters falling under its jurisdiction."
However, the court also made it clear that the provincial government's rights for development are not absolute. A "harvesting clause" in Treaty 3 gives the First Nation the right "to pursue their avocations of hunting and fishing throughout the tract surrendered," meaning that "if the taking up leaves the Ojibway with no meaningful right to hunt, fish or trap in relation to the territories over which they traditionally hunted, fished, and trapped, a potential action for treaty infringement will arise."
But according to CTV News, the Grassy Narrows people say there is already scientific evidence that recent clearcut logging in their territory has worsened the impact of mercury poisoning that began in the 1960s when a paper mill upstream polluted their territory, and that the recent logging has raised mercury levels in fish above the Health Canada limit for safe human consumption.
The Grassy Narrows are known for maintaining the longest protest blockade in Canadian history as a method of stopping logging on their land, and leaders are making it clear after the loss in court that the fight is not over.
"We believe Ontario and industry are morally and politically obliged to seek our consent before logging our lands. Our people will ensure that the government, public, corporations, and courts never forget the terrible effect that industrial logging has had on the health and welfare of our people," J.B. Fobister, a Grassy Narrows hunter who helped initiate the case, said in a statement. "While we are disappointed in today's outcome we will be continuing to fight to protect the health, welfare and culture of the people of Grassy Narrows using all the tools available to us."
"This isn't going to change who we are - a land based people that relies on our forests and our water," Judy Da Silva, Lynx Clan mother, said in a statement. "We will continue to sing our songs, practice our ceremonies, use our land, and heal our people."
Leaders and supporters of the Grassy Narrows are planning a protest walk in Toronto for July 31.
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.