DOCSLIB.ORG

[We Stand on the Graves of Our Ancestors]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
[We Stand on the Graves of Our Ancestors] KEENEBONANOH KEEMOSHOMINOOK KaESHE PEEMISHIKHIK ODASKIWAKH - [WE STAND ON THE GRAVES OF OUR ANCESTORS] NATIVE INTERPRETATIONS OF TREATY #9 WITH ATTAWAPISKAT ELDERS A Thesis Submitted to the Committee on Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Arts and Science TRENT UNIVERSITY Peterborough, Ontario, Canada c Copyright by Jacqueline Hookimaw-Witt 1997 Canadian Heritage and Development Studies M.A. Program May 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale 1*1 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington ûttawaON K1AW OtEawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or seiî reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfom, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/tilm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT Keenebonanoh keemoshominook kaeshe peemishikhik odaskiwakh - [We Stand on the Graves of our Ancestors] Native Interpretations of Treaty #9 with Attawapiskat Eldess Jacqueline Hookimaw-Witt This thesis tries to rnake aware that in relations between people from different cultures 'facts' cannot be interpreted as such by merely referring to a set of values based in one of the two societies. Instead, knowledge and understanding as interpreted by Native societies have to be considered as well. In regards to the interpretations of treaty #9, I present the view of the Cree people of Attawapiskat, gathered in interviews among elders, political leaders and professionals in the community. Using the interpretations of the way of llfe by the elders of the cornmunity as a bridge to the time when the treaty was signed, this thesis explains why the people of Attawapiskat understand that land was never given up with the signing of the treaty, and that a surrender of land could not have happened due to the people's relations to the land that was given to them by Ki tche Mando. TABLE OF CONTENTS - TRADITIONAL HUNTING AND TRAPPING AREAS Attawapiskat-Winisk 1910 ......................... mxm The Problems with Indian Claims to their IJande ............. The Place of Aboriginal mowledge within the academic Context .................................................... Historical Context - What was written about the Treaty and how it was perceived .............. Historical Background ........................... ... ......... Involving the Province - The Struggle for Terms.... ......... Treaty 'Negotiations* in 1905/06 ........................... The Treaty Text The James Bay Treaty - Treaty #9 (1905/06) ............ Adhesion to Treaty #9 (1929/30) ....................... Why did the Government seek Treaty? ........................ What the Natives wanted by signing the Treaty .............. How Treaties are interpreted by Courts ..................... What the Treaty means to me - A Conclusion ................. The modern political Basis - How Native political Organizatfons of the Treaty #9 Region interpret the Treaty The Nishnawbe Aski Nation .................................. 61 Spirit and Intent of the Treaty ....................... 61 Land under Water - A legal Case about a forgotten Clause ................. 68 The Mushkegowuk Council .................... ............... 70 How the Treaty is seen - Spirit and Intent ............ 71 Government Relations - Aboriginal Title and Rights .... 77 Field Research in Attawapiskat - Developing Reaearch Questions and finding a Method to research in a Native Community ..................... 81 Books and Archives - How the Thesis Project developed ...... 82 A joint Venture - Finding Research Questions, struggling with the holistic Approach, and combining several Projects in one .e.........C...C....................... 85 The Conflict - How to approach Elders in an academic mannar that does not interfere with their cultural Understanding of Behaviour ............................ 91 The Words of the People - Analysis of the collected Data and anewering the Reeearch Questions .................................... 96 Relations to the Land - What does Land mean to our Lives? .. 97 Freedom and Peace ..................................... 98 Spirituality .....................................-... 99 Health ............................................. 103 Responsibility ........................................ 106 Harmony, Values, and Relations ........................ 108 iii Land Use . What do we get from the Land. how did we live. where did we live? .................................... 115 Concepts of Land Ownership . Who owns the Land. can Land be owned. can it be given up? ......................... 125 Motives for living on reserve . What did we expect from the treaty? ........................................... 136 The Role of the Government in Relations with Native People . Can the Government control us? ........................ 145 Spirit and Intent The literai Interpretation of the Treaty .............. 155 The Spirit and Intent of the Treaty ................... 157 The Indians' Understanding of Terms and Concepts ........... 158 Land. Land Use. Land Ownership. and 'The Law' .............. 158 Benefits for what? .............................,........... 161 Who owns the Land in the Attawapiskat River Basin? ......... 162 Primary Sources ............................................ 164 Secondary Sources .......................................... 165 Elders Questionnaires (Interviews with Interview Schedule) ........ 169 Intenriews on Video ........................................ 205 Profesaionals and other Community Meabers Interviews on Video ........................................ 219 Setting the Stage - The Problams with Indian Claims to their Lands. During the years at University, having taken Native Studies, 1 always came across discussions about land claims of Indian people who were not covered by a treaty. Negotiations with the Indians were started by the government only when the Natives had signed or agreed to the clause of ceding and surrendering their lands to the governrnent. Being a traditional Native person from Northern Ontario, 1 always shivered hearing these words of surrendering lands, which, in my opinion, was not possible. The other concept that 1 could not relate to was that the government owned the land, or that we had to ask the government for land to live on, which, of course, was the reality on our reserves. Hearing about land claims, 1 saw the chance to maybe get the fndian point of view over in this issue, however, for our people, the Cree of James Bay (on the Ontario side), the possibility of claiming or reclairning anything seemed vexy small, because, as it was pointed out, we had signed a treaty, treaty #9, and by the treaty signing our people had surrendered the land to the government. This was pointed out to me, and the fact that the Indians were just whining to get more out of the government. The r~iationswe had to the government were always interpreted in a way that we just were the takers and the government were the givers. This is, by the way, also the widespread opinion among my non-Native fellow countrywomen and men, as we do not pay taxes etc. The claim that we were 'whiners' could also easily be underlined by the facts, legally and scientifically, that there was indeed a treaty signed, and that we, for giving up our lands, did receive so many benefits, among them the one that actually brought me to post-secondary education, namely my free university education, 'freel here used as free of charge. And the treaty is a fact. There is no doubt about it, as well as the 'benefitsl that came with it. in this regards, it was also referred to me that we could not have it both ways, getting the benefits that came with giving up our lands, and then coming along and 'pretending, that the land was indeed never given up. That this whole thing was a legal matter became obvious once 1 followed reports on T.V. on land claims, and claims by Indians in general, because there were always lawyers involved. Indians who tried to claim lands and their Nationhood were referring to 'laws', like the one called the Royal Proclamation, and for matters concerning Indian claims, court decisions were quoted etc. It is indeed a very complicated matter, and there are always the 'factsf, something that is written dom, like in a treaty, and the Ifact' that there are signatures on it. Naturally, when you get these facts presented al1 the time, you start to believe them. The only possibility for Native people was in the interpretation of these facts, or in finding some legal hop holes. The latter was my first thought when 1 started to think about the treaty. There were, however, other things that finally made me 3 think. Some Native people often refer to the treaties as lmd robbery, that the land was stolen from us, that we were cheated. What were these references based on? The logical
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Treaties in Canada, Education Guide
    TREATIES IN CANADA EDUCATION GUIDE A project of Cover: Map showing treaties in Ontario, c. 1931 (courtesy of Archives of Ontario/I0022329/J.L. Morris Fonds/F 1060-1-0-51, Folder 1, Map 14, 13356 [63/5]). Chiefs of the Six Nations reading Wampum belts, 1871 (courtesy of Library and Archives Canada/Electric Studio/C-085137). “The words ‘as long as the sun shines, as long as the waters flow Message to teachers Activities and discussions related to Indigenous peoples’ Key Terms and Definitions downhill, and as long as the grass grows green’ can be found in many history in Canada may evoke an emotional response from treaties after the 1613 treaty. It set a relationship of equity and peace.” some students. The subject of treaties can bring out strong Aboriginal Title: the inherent right of Indigenous peoples — Oren Lyons, Faithkeeper of the Onondaga Nation’s Turtle Clan opinions and feelings, as it includes two worldviews. It is to land or territory; the Canadian legal system recognizes title as a collective right to the use of and jurisdiction over critical to acknowledge that Indigenous worldviews and a group’s ancestral lands Table of Contents Introduction: understandings of relationships have continually been marginalized. This does not make them less valid, and Assimilation: the process by which a person or persons Introduction: Treaties between Treaties between Canada and Indigenous peoples acquire the social and psychological characteristics of another Canada and Indigenous peoples 2 students need to understand why different peoples in Canada group; to cause a person or group to become part of a Beginning in the early 1600s, the British Crown (later the Government of Canada) entered into might have different outlooks and interpretations of treaties.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples & Traditional Territory
    Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples & Traditional Territory September 2017 CAUT Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples & Traditional Territory September 2017 The following document offers the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) recommended territorial acknowledgement for institutions where our members work, organized by province. While most of these campuses are included, the list will gradually become more complete as we learn more about specific traditional territories. When requested, we have also included acknowledgements for other post-secondary institutions as well. We wish to emphasize that this is a guide, not a script. We are recommending the acknowledgements that have been developed by local university-based Indigenous councils or advisory groups, where possible. In other places, where there are multiple territorial acknowledgements that exist for one area or the acknowledgements are contested, the multiple acknowledgements are provided. This is an evolving, working guide. © 2016 Canadian Association of University Teachers 2705 Queensview Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2B 8K2 \\ 613-820-2270 \\ www.caut.ca Cover photo: “Infinity” © Christi Belcourt CAUT Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples and Traditional Territory September 2017 Contents 1| How to use this guide Our process 2| Acknowledgement statements Newfoundland and Labrador Prince Edward Island Nova Scotia New Brunswick Québec Ontario Manitoba Saskatchewan Alberta British Columbia Canadian Association of University Teachers 3 CAUT Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples and Traditional Territory September 2017 1| How to use this guide The goal of this guide is to encourage all academic staff context or the audience in attendance. Also, given that association representatives and members to acknowledge there is no single standard orthography for traditional the First Peoples on whose traditional territories we live Indigenous names, this can be an opportunity to ensure and work.
    [Show full text]
  • Aboriginal Greeting
    ABORIGINAL GREETING At the beginning of the (insert event name) Ontario Equality Retreat, we acknowledge that we are meeting on aboriginal land that has been inhabited by Indigenous peoples from the beginning. As settlers, we're grateful for the opportunity to meet here and we thank all the generations of people who have taken care of this land - for thousands of years. Long before today, as we gather here, there have been aboriginal peoples who have been the stewards of (insert location specific information). We recognize and deeply appreciate their historic connection to this place. We also recognize the contributions of Métis, Inuit, and other Indigenous peoples have made, both in shaping and strengthening this community in particular, and our province and country as a whole. As settlers, this recognition of the contributions and historic importance of Indigenous peoples must also be clearly and overtly connected to our collective commitment to make the promise and the challenge of Truth and Reconciliation real in our communities, and in particular to bring justice for murdered and missing indigenous women and girls across our country. COPE 343 Guelph, ON – We (I) would like to begin by acknowledging that the land on which we gather is the traditional territory of the Attawandaron (Neutral). This territory is covered by the Upper Canada Treaties. Hamilton, ON – We (I) would like to begin by acknowledging that the land on which we gather is the traditional territory of the Haudensaunee and Anishnaabeg. This territory is covered by the Upper Canada Treaties and directly adjacent to Haldimand Treaty territory.
    [Show full text]
  • ACROSS the GREAT DIVIDE: ANISHINAABEK LEGAL TRADITIONS, TREATY 9, and HONOURABLE CONSENT Andrew Costa*
    ACROSS THE GREAT DIVIDE: ANISHINAABEK LEGAL TRADITIONS, TREATY 9, AND HONOURABLE CONSENT Andrew Costa* CONTENTS I Introduction 1 II The Duty To Consult 3 III “Unlocking” The Ring Of Fire 4 IV Eabametoong First Nation V Minister Of Northern Development And Mines 7 A. Underlying Title And Treaty Rights 8 B. The Judgment 9 V Reconciliation and Unresolved Treaty Rights 12 A. Treaty Interpretation 13 B. Treaty Values 14 VI Reconciliatory Treaty Obligation 16 VII Conclusion 18 I INTRODUCTION The July 2018 Ontario Superior Court judgment in Eabametoong First Nation v Minister of Northern Development and Mines1 involved an Ojibwa First Nation2 challenging an exploratory mining permit issued by the Ontario government to Landore Resource Canada Inc (Landore Canada). The judgment ultimately held that the Crown acted dishonourably in * I would like to acknowledge the influence that Romola Thumbadoo has had in inspiring the completion of this paper. Her guidance and support has been invaluable in researching, presenting, and writing this paper. Furthermore, I sincerely appreciate every panelist and scholar with whom I have presented this work over several months in community discussions. As a non-Indigenous person, I wish to sincerely thank Indigenous writers, activists, and remarkable colleagues as well as the histories and traditions passed down to them. Engaging with their work has been hugely influential in my desire to learn more about the awe-inspiring complexity on which Indigenous legal traditions are based. The research and writing of this article have been completed as a PhD candidate at Carleton University in the Department of Law & Legal Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Examples Where the Supreme Court of Canada Found That the Crown Violated the Treaties
    Recent Examples Where the Supreme Court of Canada Found That the Crown Violated the Treaties The Crown What the Supreme Court of Canada Did About it Violation Found that the Crown violated Treaty 8 by failing to consult with the Mikisew Cree about a road project that would interfere with Treaty rights. Quashed the Minister’s approval order and sent the winter road project back to the Minister to be dealt with fairly, in consultation with the First Nation. Ignored a First Nation’s “The principle of consultation in advance of interference with existing treaty rights is Right to Be Consulted a matter of broad general importance to the relations between aboriginal and non‐ About a Project that aboriginal peoples. …In this case, the relationship was not properly managed. …The Would Interfere with government’s approach did not advance the process of reconciliation but Treaty Hunting Rights undermined it.” “It is not as though the Treaty 8 First Nations did not pay dearly for their entitlement to honourable conduct on the part of the Crown; surrender of the aboriginal interest in an area larger than France is a hefty purchase price.” Mikisew Cree v. Canada [2005] 3 SCR 388 http://canlii.ca/t/1m1zn Found that the Crown violated the Mi’kmaq Treaties of 1760‐61 Wrongfully Arrested and Ordered an acquittal on all charges and found that the prohibitions on fishing Prosecuted First Nations contained in the Maritime Provinces Fishery Regulations and the Fishery (General) Fishermen in Nova Regulations were inconsistent with the treaty rights contained in the Mi’kmaq Scotia Treaties and therefore of no force or effect.
    [Show full text]
  • Nishnawbe-Aski Nation
    Confrontations over Resources Development NAPS Ipperwash Inquiry PART I NISHNAWBE-ASKI NATION FORWARD In 1905, the grandfathers of the Ojibway and Cree Nations in northern regions of Ontario signed a peace Treaty # 9, a treaty of co-existence with Canada and Ontario on behalf of the Queen of England. An adhesion to Treaty # 9 was signed in 1929. In 1875, the Saulteaux-Cree Nations of Manitoba, and what is now referred to as northern Ontario signed Treaty #5 with Canada. Those treaty First Nations within Ontario are part of Nishnawbe-Aski Nation (NAN). Grand Council Treaty # 9, a political territorial organization was established in 1973 to pursue the political governmental rights of the First Nations in northern Ontario. Prior to Grand Council Treaty # 9, the communities were politically represented by the parent organization known as Union of Ontario Indians. In 1977, the Chiefs issue the Declaration of Nishnawbe-Aski outlining their rights and claims to their homelands to Canada and Ontario. In 1981, Grand Council Treaty # 9 organization was replaced by Nishnawbe-Aski Nation representing 49 First Nations. Nishnawbe-Aski Nation covers about two thirds of the province of Ontario. The territory stretches across the north about seven hundreds miles in length and four hundred miles in width; from the Manitoba border on the west to the Quebec border on the east; from the Hudson’s and James Bay watersheds in the north to roughly the Canadian National Railway Line to the south. NAN land mass is equal to the size of France. Treaty # 9 territory encompasses certain parts of the districts of Cochrane, Timiskaming, Sudbury, Algoma, Thunder Bay and Sioux Lookout.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucie Edwards and Ed Chilton, Five Nations Energy Inc
    Five Nations Energy Inc. Presented by: Edward Chilton Secretary/Treasurer And Lucie Edwards Chief Executive Officer Where we are James Bay area of Ontario Some History • Treaty 9 signed in 1905 • Treaty Organization Nishnawbe Aski Nation formed early 1970’s • Mushkegowuk (Tribal) Council formed late 1980’s • 7 First Nations including Attawapiskat, Kashechewan, Fort Albany • Fort Albany very early trading post early 1800’s-Hudson Bay Co. • Attawapiskat historical summer gathering place-permanent community late 1950’s • Kashechewan-some Albany families moved late 1950’s History of Electricity Supply • First energization occurred in Fort Albany- late 1950’s Department of Defense Mid- Canada radar base as part of the Distant Early Warning system installed diesel generators. • Transferred to Catholic Mission mid 1960’s • Distribution system extended to community residents early 1970’s and operated by Ontario Hydro • Low Voltage (8132volts) line built to Kashechewan mid 1970’s, distribution system built and operated by Ontario Hydro • Early 1970’s diesel generation and distribution system built and operated by Ontario Hydro • All based on Electrification agreement between Federal Government and Ontario Provincial Crown Corporation Ontario Hydro Issues with Diesel-Fort Albany Issues with Diesel-Attawapiskat • Fuel Spill on River From Diesel To Grid Based Supply • Early 1970’s - Ontario Hydro Remote Community Systems operated diesel generators in the communities • Federal Government (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada-INAC) covered the cost for
    [Show full text]
  • “The Real Agreement As Orally Agreed To” the James Bay Treaty-Treaty No
    “The Real Agreement As Orally Agreed To” The James Bay Treaty-Treaty No. 9 A Presentation by Grand Chief Dr. Stan Louttit Mushkegowuk Council "THE REAL AGREEMENT AS ORALLY AGREED TO." James Bay Treaty – Treaty No. 9 James Bay Treaty – Treaty No. 9 (1929 -30 & 1905 – 06) "THE REAL AGREEMENT AS ORALLY AGREED TO." James Bay Treaty – Treaty No. 9 The James Bay Treaty Treaty No. 9 The Government’s Pre-Written A Treaty (Protected by Section 35 of the Constitution of James Bay Treaty Document Canada- the supreme law of Canada) Section 35 provides constitutional protection of the Aboriginal and Treaty rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada Involving Canada, Ontario, and the Cree and Ojibway Nations of Northern Ontario Made in 1905 and 1906 With adhesions made in 1929 and 1930 This presentation and movement to get our Oral Treaty Promises and Agreements recognized is dedicated to: ● To the life and spirit of our brave and intelligent Cree and Ojibwa Treaty Makers; ● Our Elders who courageously carried our Treaty Bundle all their life for us to correct the wrong and achieve the Real Agreement as Orally Agreed to; ● Our children and grandchildren. "THE REAL AGREEMENT AS ORALLY AGREED TO." James Bay Treaty – Treaty No. 9 Definition of “Treaty” “A formal agreement between two or more Nations” Definition of “Nation” “A large group of people sharing the same culture, language, or history and in inhabiting a particular state or area.” ☞ Further defined by the Supreme Court of Canada to include the recognition of Oral Promises made during the Treaty Making Process.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty Relations in Ontario
    CHAPTER 3 TREATY RELATIONS IN ONTARIO The events that led to the death of Dudley George arose from a longstanding dispute about treaty and Aboriginal rights. Occupations of land and blockades of transportation facilities by Aboriginal people occur when members of an Aboriginal community believe that governments are not respecting their treaty or Aboriginal rights, and that effective redress through political or legal means is not available. It is typical of these events that governments have failed to respect the rights at issue or to provide effective redress, for a very long time, and a deep sense of frustration has built up within the Aboriginal community. Treaty and Aboriginal rights can only be understood in an appropriate histor- ical and legal context. Building a better relationship with Aboriginal peoples requires that governments and citizens recognize that treaties with Aboriginal peoples are the foundation that allowed non-Aboriginal people to settle in Ontario and enjoy its bounty. Nearly all of the lands and inland waters in Ontario are subject to treaties between First Nations and the British and Canadian governments. Beginning in the late 1700s and continuing right up to the 1920s, it was through treaties that the Algonquin, Ojibwe (or Chippewas, to use the British term), Odawa, Cree nations, and the Haudenosaunee (the Six Nation Iroquois Confederacy) and the governments, first of Great Britain and then of Canada, agreed to regulate their relationships and the terms on which land and resources would be shared. These treaties are not, as some people believe, relics of the dis- tant past. They are living agreements, and the understandings on which they are based continue to have the full force of law in Canada today.
    [Show full text]
  • Response of Canada to The
    RESPONSE OF CANADA TO THE REQUEST BY THE UN SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN RESPECT OF THE HOUSING SITUATION AT THE ATTAWAPISKAT FIRST NATION I. INTRODUCTION By way of letter dated December 19, 2011, the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, James Anaya, brought to the attention of Canada information that he had received concerning the housing situation of the Attawapiskat First Nation, as well as the allegedly poor living conditions on Aboriginal reserves in general. In response to the information received, the Special Rapporteur asked Canada for its cooperation in providing information and observations on: • Measures being taken by Canada to resolve the situation in Attawapiskat, both on a temporary and permanent basis; • General information on the situation in Attawapiskat; and • Measures being taken, generally, to improve the socio-economic circumstances of Aboriginal Canadians. The request for information from the Special Rapporteur raises matters within the competence of both the Government of Canada and the Government of the Province of Ontario. Consequently, this response contains information and observations from both levels of government. II. BACKGROUND The Canadian constitution recognizes three groups of Aboriginal people: Indians (commonly referred to as First Nations), Métis and Inuit. These are three distinct peoples with unique histories, languages, cultural practices and spiritual beliefs. More than one million people in Canada identify themselves as Aboriginal persons, according
    [Show full text]
  • Is There Still “Unceded” Land in Northern Ontario, Canada, with Respect to Treaty No
    The International Indigenous Policy Journal Volume 12 | Issue 1 March 2021 Development on Indigenous Homelands and the Need to Get Back to Basics with Scoping: Is There Still “Unceded” Land in Northern Ontario, Canada, with Respect to Treaty No. 9 and its Adhesions? Leonard Tsuji University of Toronto, Canada, [email protected] Stephen Tsuji University of Waterloo, Canada, [email protected] Recommended Citation Tsuji, L., & Tsuji S. (2021). Development on Indigenous Homelands and the need to get back to basics with scoping: Is there still “unceded” land in Northern Ontario, Canada, with respect to Treaty No. 9 and its Adhesions? The International Indigenous Policy Journal, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2021.12.1.8551 Development on Indigenous Homelands and the Need to Get Back to Basics with Scoping: Is There Still “Unceded” Land in Northern Ontario, Canada, with Respect to Treaty No. 9 and its Adhesions? Abstract Scoping includes the establishment of unambiguous spatial boundaries for a proposed development initiative (e.g., a treaty) and is especially important with respect to development on Indigenous homelands. Improper scoping leads to a flawed product, such as a flawed treaty or environmental impact assessment, by excluding stakeholders from the process. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to gather (and collate) printed and online material in relation to Treaty No. 9 and its Adhesions, as well as the Line-AB. We searched academic databases as well as the Library and Archives Canada. The examination of Treaty No. 9 and its Adhesions revealed that there is unceded land in each of four separate scenarios, which are related to the Line-AB and/or emergent land in Northern Ontario, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Consultation and Participation In
    Effective Consultation and Participation in Environmental Assessment and Land Use Planning: Advancing Sustainable Development in a Remote First Nations Community in Northern Ontario, Canada by Holly L. Gardner A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Social and Ecological Sustainability Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2016 Holly L. Gardner 2016 Author’s Declaration This thesis consists of material all of which I authored or co-authored: see Statement of Contributions included in the thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. ii Statement of Contribution The articles presented in this dissertation are the result of research, which I instigated. I am the first author of each article and was responsible for leading data collection activities, analysis, and preparation of the manuscripts. Below is a summary of the contributions that were made by co-authors in the development of each manuscript. Chapter 2: Gardner, H. L., Tsuji, S. R., McCarthy, D. D., Whitelaw, G. S., & Tsuji, L. J. (2012). The Far North Act (2010) Consultative Process: A New Beginning or the Reinforcement of an Unacceptable Relationship in Northern Ontario, Canada? The International Indigenous Policy Journal, 3(2), 7. Mr. Stephen R. Tsuji assisted with archival searches used to describe the historical context of the region. Remaining co-authors (Dr. D.D. McCarthy, Dr. G.S. Whitelaw, Dr. L.J.S. Tsuji) provided ongoing support regarding the design of the framework and analysis. Review and editorial advice of the final manuscript was provided by all of the co-authors.
    [Show full text]