FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX G.4 Surface Water Quality and Quantity Technical Data Report
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Surface Water Quality and Quantity Technical Data Report
Revision 00
Issued for Use
February 2021
Prepared for:
Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Limitations and Sign-off
This document entitled Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Surface Water Quality and Quantity Technical Data Report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (the “Client”) to support the regulatory review process for its Section 214 Application under the Canadian Energy Regulator Act (the “Application”) for approval to construct and operate the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the “Project”). In connection therewith, this document may be reviewed and used by the Canada Energy Regulator participating in the review process in the normal course of its duties. Except as set forth in the previous sentence, any reliance on this document by any other party or use of it for any other purpose is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The information and conclusions in the document are based on the conditions existing at the time the document was published and does not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by the Client or others, unless expressly stated otherwise in the document. Any use which another party makes of this document is the responsibility and risk of such party. Such party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.
Digitally signed by Penner, Michelle Date: 2021.02.19 08:40:57 -08'00' Prepared by (signature) Michelle Penner, B.Sc., R.P.Bio
Digitally signed by Gail Feltham Date: 2021.02.19 12:24:23 -07'00' Reviewed by (signature) Gail Feltham, B.Sc.
Digitally signed by Justin McKeown Date: 2021.02.19 13:32:26 -07'00' Approved by (signature) Justin McKeown, B.Sc., P.Biol
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS ...... II
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1.1
2.0 SPATIAL BOUNDARIES ...... 2.1
3.0 METHODOLOGY ...... 3.1 3.1 DESKTOP ASSESSMENT ...... 3.1 3.2 IN SITU WATER QUALITY ...... 3.1
4.0 RESULTS ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Surface Water Quality ...... 4.1 4.1.2 Surface Water Quantity ...... 4.10
5.0 REFERENCES ...... 5.1
LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section LAA ...... 4.5 Table 4.2 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section RAA ...... 4.8 Table 4.3 Stream Flow Monitoring Stations in the Elk River Watershed (part of 08NH) and Flathead River Watershed (part of 08NP) ...... 4.10 Table 4.4 Modeled Mean Monthly Discharge at Watercourses and Drainages Crossed by the Elko Section ...... 4.15 Table 4.5 Existing Surface Water Withdrawals in the Elko Section RAA ...... 4.17
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1 Surface Water Overview, Elko Section ...... 4.3 Figure 4.2 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary for Elk River at Fernie (WSC Station No. 08NK002, Elk River Watershed) ...... 4.11 Figure 4.3 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary for Michel Creek Below Natal (WSC Station No. 08NK020, Elk River Watershed) ...... 4.12 Figure 4.4 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary for Elk River at Phillips Bridge (WSC Station No. 08NK005, Elk River Watershed) ...... 4.13 Figure 4.5 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary Flathead River at Flathead Station (WSC Station No. 08NP001, Flathead River Watershed) ...... 4.14
i FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
Abbreviations
ºC degrees Celsius BC British Columbia
CER Canada Energy Regulator
DO dissolved oxygen ECCC Environment and Climate Change Canada
ESA Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment
Foothills Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd.
km kilometre
km² square kilometres
LAA Local Assessment Area
m metre
m³ cubic metres
MFLNRORD Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development
mg miligrams
Misc Miscellaneous
MOE Ministry of Environment
NTU nephelometric turbidity units
PDA Project Development Area
the Project Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project RAA Regional Assessment Area
ROW right-of-way
s second Stantec Stantec Consulting Ltd.
TDR Technical Data Report
TSS total suspended solids
µS/cm microsiemens per centimetre
WSC Water Survey of Canada
ii FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) completed surface water quality and quantity desktop reviews in support of Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) application to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER) for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project). The Project is comprised of the Elko Section.
1.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
1.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Spatial Boundaries February 2021
2.0 SPATIAL BOUNDARIES
The following spatial boundaries are defined for the surface water quality and quantity assessment for the British Columbia Mainline Loop No. 2 Elko Section:
• Project Development Area (PDA) – The PDA is a 75 m wide assessment corridor, which conservatively includes a minimum 32 m wide construction corridor plus up to an additional 43 m for temporary workspace to accommodate construction activities and safe vehicle and equipment movement. For this Project: − The PDA is an approximately 32 km-long and 75 m-wide corridor totaling 236.3 ha in area, consisting of the pipeline right-of-way (ROW) and temporary workspace. • Local Assessment Area (LAA): − The LAA includes the PDA and an area that extends 100-500 m upstream from each watercourse crossing and 300-1500 m downstream from the crossing. − The LAA also includes the PDA and a 100 m buffer for drainages (with no defined channels) and all other surface water bodies (e.g., wetlands). • Regional Assessment Area (RAA): − The RAA includes the PDA and a 15 km buffer around the PDA ending at the upstream watershed boundary if less than 15 km from the PDA.
2.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Spatial Boundaries February 2021
2.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Methodology February 2021
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 DESKTOP ASSESSMENT
A desktop assessment was conducted to review existing water quality and quantity records within the LAA and RAA and surrounding areas. Surface water quality data was searched using the British Columbia Surface Water Monitoring Sites Interactive Map (Province of British Columbia 2020) and Kootenay Boundary Water Tool (Province of British Columbia 2020; British Columbia [BC] Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development [MFLNRORD] 2020).
Water Survey of Canada (WSC) historical hydrometric data (Environment and Climate Change Canada [ECCC] 2019a), specifically monthly discharges at monitoring stations, were reviewed within sub-sub-drainage areas that pertain to the RAA. The WSC Monitoring stations were selected for review based on their proximity to the RAA and connectivity to the LAA (e.g. directly upstream or downstream). Discontinued stations with older data (pre-1990), seasonal stations, or stations that were not directly upstream or downstream of the LAA were not reviewed.
The Kootenay-Boundary Water Tool (BC MFLNRORD 2020) was used to review hydrology modeling at watercourse crossings within the PDA including information on estimated monthly discharges and basin sizes. These datasets were used to approximate the timing of peak flows and low flow conditions within the PDA.
Surface water licence information was obtained from Kootenay-Boundary Water Tool (BC FLNRORD 2020), iMapBC (Government of British Columbia 2019a), and the Water Licences Query tool (Government of British Columbia 2019b).
3.2 IN SITU WATER QUALITY
In situ surface water quality data were collected at each watercourse crossing where water depth at the time of the fish habitat assessment was sufficient to submerge the probe of the water quality meter. In situ measurements were taken between September 19-27, October 23-25, 2019, August 18-25, 2020, and September 27-28,2020. Water quality parameters measured in the field included:
• Specific conductivity (µS/cm) – a function of water temperature and the concentration of dissolved ions in water. • Dissolved oxygen (DO) – the concentration of DO in water (mg/L). • pH – the concentration of H+ ions in water in moles per liter. Water with a low pH is acidic and water with a high pH is basic (or alkaline). • Temperature (°C) • Turbidity – a measurement of water clarity, often measured in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). Turbidity represents the abundance of suspended sediment in the water column.
3.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Methodology February 2021
3.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
4.0 RESULTS
The Elko Section crosses two watersheds (Figure 4.1):
• Elk River • Flathead River
The Elk River is a sixth order watercourse located west of the continental divide with a drainage area of approximately 4,381 km² (BC Ministry of Environment [MOE] 2019; BC MFLNRORD 2020). It flows for approximately 213 km south from its headwaters in the Rocky Mountains before joining the Upper Kootenay River / Koocanusa Lake south of Elko, BC (BC MOE 2019). A portion of the RAA intersects the Elk River. The LAA and PDA are located east of the mainstem of the river, crossing Leach Creek, Bean Creek, Pioneer Creek and several of their tributaries. Leach Creek flows north into Michel Creek, which then flows into the Elk River at Sparwood, BC (BC MOE 2019). Pioneer Creek and Bean Creek flow south into Lodgepole Creek, then the Wigwam River before flowing into the Elk River approximately 6 km south of Elko, BC (BC MOE 2019).
The Flathead River is a sixth order watercourse in the southeast corner of BC with a drainage area of approximately 1,102 km² inside the province (BC MOE 2019; BC MFLNRORD 2020). The Flathead River flows approximately 89 km south from its headwaters in the Rocky Mountains to the US-Canada border. It continues to south into Montana, flowing into the Clair Fork River approximately 4 km southeast of Paradise, Montana (Montana State Library 2019). A portion of the RAA intersects the Flathead River, while the LAA and PDA are located west of the mainstem of the river, crossing several of its tributaries including McEvoy Creek.
4.1.1 Surface Water Quality
In situ surface water quality data were recorded during the fish habitat assessment within the LAA during the 2019 and 2020 assessments (Table 4.1; Appendix G.1). In fall 2019, water temperatures ranged from 1.6 to 8.7°C in all the watercourses. pH, where taken, was generally between 7.8 and 8.3 with an outlier >13. Turbidity in the watercourse was generally low (<2 NTU), except for three sampling points which ranged from 5.97 to 21.59 NTU and were taking during rainy weather. Dissolved oxygen was >9 mg/L in all the watercourses.
In August 2020 temperature and pH measurements were collected at 20 watercourse crossings. Water temperatures ranged from 6.6°C to 16°C and pH ranged from 7.39 to 8.59. Water was visually assessed and was clear. Further measurements were collected in late September 2020 at nine watercourse crossings. Temperatures ranged from 3.4°C to 7°C, pH was between 7.3 and 8.9, and water was visually assessed as clear. Dissolved oxygen ranged from 8.09 mg/L to 10.75 mg/L. Dissolved oxygen was below 9 mg/L in one watercourse.
4.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Limited water quality data have been recorded in watercourses downstream of the Elko Section LAA and within the RAA. Data has been recorded in Leach Creek, Lodgepole Creek, and the Flathead River, generally during the summer months, and in Michel Creek throughout the year, though with very few parameters recorded (Table 4.2; BC MFLNRORD 2020). Turbidity measurements were low (<1 NTU) and dissolved oxygen was >9 mg/L in all the watercourses and pH was generally >8. Because water quality data were only recorded in summer, both during the fish and fish habitat field program and in provincial sources, seasonal variations in water quality in the RAA are not known at this time; however, they are anticipated to be similar to other watercourses in the Elk River and Flathead River sub-sub drainage area, which typically have increases in turbidity during spring freshet (BC MFLNRORD 2020).
4.2 k e e r Cr C $$ ar e adn eek Ll B odi ¯ ar rier Creek B M.D. of ( Sparwood Ranchland
k No. 66
e BRITISH e
r COLUMBIA C
A n
l o l
s i k s ALBERTA o
c n i
r C r
E e e
A k l S ex ulphur a McC nd Creek ool ek er C CHINOOK Su C re re CROWSNEST l r k C ek p e e ir S PROVINCIAL hur e e u PROVINCIAL M k r F m cG C RECREATIONAL AREA il C m l r rt PARK i Robe v e it e ek Su r re s
k C a p L y
m e ak p
C
i
m k
l a
l r | e i ÿ i e
t L snes h row t st River e e k
P n C ke 3 ws E La ro a Isla d C st l n e S k h ulphur C e La ke re c ek e i r dC reek M C k ELK VALLEY n e l a e Whee Is r H PROVINCIAL le r C a r ta L r k S k t PARK C ee e a l re Cr k e ek t e y s r e e UPPER OLDMAN RIVER - C Pto s n lem a H w y i o CROWSNEST PASS v a r C i r r l t C e l e WATERSHED O e k y H ek C os re re me C e Thorne Creekr C rk k C o k re a i Y ee e r M ch Cr k bon k orth York Cree el N B C r k ean a e ree B C ld e C r r k CASTLE WILDLAND x e e n y y ek L C PROVINCIAL PARK
r
e M
e a k rte n C F r a ee ir k h k y c e C a e An dy Goo k r e r d Cree e L ek C M u t z M.D. of Pincher C r Bray Creek Creek No. 9 eek Fernie CASTLE B M PROVINCIAL r C e a t o Liz w h PARK ard e r C e s b ree o k r n i k y Coal Creek n ree C C
C C t r a
re e r
ek o
e e k
e G ost k rth L MOUNT FERNIE No eek PROVINCIAL Cr PARK Cokato Creek ELK RIVER WATERSHED t Creek Los Evoy uth c So ek M Cre hardt Creek ip L orriss ey C M r eek W h im k st e iver er C re R le da McDermi n d C o ree b k Ca r MORRISSEY FLATHEAD RIVER PROVINCIAL WATERSHED PARK r e k v e i e R r ad C e y th e a s k
R E l e C i l F k e i k o e r
a v e
F r C
i e r
t C k h e c
n r i el C e h o k
e n ek l n c l o
s u t a o
s T o r L P B C c i lo r e M E . e t k S
rth C No Lod ole ree g ep k ek re C t f A e b l k o kc e d
oc e k e
R k e Creek e e C le
r o S ELKO e Cr e r p h
t r e Lod ge e C e p s i C H p PROVINCIAL p k a
am n d r C k C o v ree l L e PARK a a y y l k P c e M orr ne i i s P C k ree ee k Harvey Cre k Wigw elCr ee ek am Fu Cr o
Ri o v s er k i e Cate
K re C eek er Cr Fu w L o l F a s B l s ow k H e a e ll C e R t e r h e i e e v a k e r d
k Tw ree entyn C Bigho in bo rnCr e M e ile Creek m
R ek u
ay Creek G mo nd
| 93 ÿ
Water License Dominion Coal Block er Creek reek Pipeline Indigenous Reserve st ie C en esl F L Surface Water Regional Municipal District Assessment Area Protected Area Storm Cree Major Road k Provincial Boundary ionCreek at Railway ol es Waterbody D Watercourse Cabin Cre Watershed Boundary ek
0 3 6 9 12
kilometres 1:200,000 123513444-0007 - RevC NAD 1983 UTM Zone 11N TOBACCO PLAINS 2 Sources: Base Data - Governments of Canada, Alberta, British Columbia Disclaimer: This map is for illustrative purposes to support this Stantec project; questions can be directed to the issuing agency. Thematic Data - Stantec, TC Energy Surface Water Overview Elko Section
Figure 4.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
4.4 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.1 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section LAA
Dissolved Specific Temperature Oxygen Conductivity Turbidity Site ID Watercourse Name Sample Date (ºC) pH (mg/L) (µs/cm) (NTU) WC-002.00 Unnamed Tributary to Leach Creek 9/20/2019 6.3 - 14.01 175 1.39 8/25/2020 6.6 7.66 - 177.8 - WC-004.00 Unnamed Tributary to Leach Creek 9/20/2019 6.8 - 12.32 225 0.39 8/25/2020 8.2 8.59 - 358 - WC-005.00 Unnamed Tributary to Leach Creek 9/20/2019 5.2 - 20.53 176 0.52 09/27/2020 6.1 7.88 8.09 262.5 - WC-006.00 Unnamed Tributary to Leach Creek 9/21/2019 6.7 - 11.54 169 0 08/24/2020 9.1 8.32 - 292 - 09/27/2020 5.7 8.19 10.31 262.5 - WC-007.00 Unnamed Tributary to Leach Creek 9/21/2019 8.1 13.71 10.06 218 1.47 08/24/2020 7.1 7.85 - 236 - 09/27/2020 7.0 7.88 9.72 300.7 - WC-008.00 Leach Creek 9/22/2019 7.9 - 11.25 114 0.54 08/24/2020 8.7 8.33 - 184.3 - 09/27/2020 4.7 7.87 10.56 155.9 - WC-009.00 Leach Creek 9/22/2019 6.7 - 11.21 115 0.61 08/24/2020 9,2 8.3 - 188.7 - 09/27/2020 4.6 7.73 10.27 151.6 - WC-011.00 Leach Creek 9/22/2019 8.0 - 10.60 130 0.82 08/24/2020 7.6 9.16 - 216 - 09/27/2020 3.4 7.31 10.75 186.6 - WC-012.00 Unnamed Tributary to Leach Creek 9/23/2019 8.7 - 9.15 43 21.59
4.5 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.1 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section LAA
Dissolved Specific Temperature Oxygen Conductivity Turbidity Site ID Watercourse Name Sample Date (ºC) pH (mg/L) (µs/cm) (NTU) 08/23/2020 9.9 7.52 - 87.2 - WC-013.00 Unnamed Tributary to McEvoy Creek 9/23/2019 7.4 - 10.55 48 1.2 8/22/2020 9.9 7.64 - 95.7 - WC-014.00 Unnamed Tributary to McEvoy Creek 9/25/2019 8.6 - 9.57 96 0.89 8/22/2020 11.9 8.17 - 222 - WC-015.00 McEvoy Creek 9/24/2019 8.2 - 11.17 34 0 8/22/2020 11.8 7.91 - 68.3 - WC-016.00 Unnamed Tributary to McEvoy Creek 9/25/2019 5.9 - 11.37 53 0 WC-017.00 Unnamed Tributary to McEvoy Creek 9/25/2019 6.3 - 11.10 30 0 WC-018A.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 9/26/2019 4.8 - 11.85 26 17.37 WC-018B.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 8/21/2020 13.7 7.39 - 80.6 - WC-019.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 10/25/2019 1.6 8.12 12.28 10 0.7 8/21/2020 13.1 7.46 - 29.7 - 09/28/2020 6.7 8.86 9.99 25.6 - WC-020.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 10/25/2019 1.7 7.84 12.38 14 0 8/21/2020 10.7 7.79 - 39.7 - WC-021.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 10/24/2019 1.8 8.27 12.80 28 0.7 8/21/2020 9.8 8.2 - 85.8 - 09/28/2020 5.2 8.3 10.02 72.3 - WC-023.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 08/19/2020 15.8 7.51 - 60.6 - WC-024.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 08/19/2020 15.4 7.79 - 86.8 - 09/28/2020 4.5 8.3 10.37 60.0 -
4.6 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.1 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section LAA
Dissolved Specific Temperature Oxygen Conductivity Turbidity Site ID Watercourse Name Sample Date (ºC) pH (mg/L) (µs/cm) (NTU) WC-025.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 9/27/2019 3.5 - 11.08 19 1.4 08/19/2020 12.5 8.3 - 90.8 - WC-026.00 Unnamed Tributary to Flathead River 9/27/2019 4.7 - 11.28 54 0.93 08/18/2020 16.0 7.6 - 109.4 - WC-030.00 Pioneer Creek 10/23/2019 3.4 8.02 11.16 145 1.5 08/18/2020 13.5 7.77 - 344 - WC-033.00 Unnamed Tributary to Pioneer Creek 10/23/2019 3.8 7.93 10.98 11 0.8 WC-034.00 Unnamed Tributary to Bean Creek 9/24/2019 8.3 - 10.88 206 5.97 08/18/2020 13.0 8.06 - 363 -
4.7 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.2 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section RAA
Dissolved Specific Station Temperature Oxygen Conductivity Turbidity Number Station Name Sample Date (ºC) pH (mg/L) (µs/cm) (NTU) E268397 Wig04a Lodgepole Creek 9/19/2007 9.6 8.3 10 270 - E268397 Wig04a Lodgepole Creek 9/22/2015 11 8.23 9.94 273 0.2 E268391 Flto4 Upper Flathead 9/26/2007 4.1 8.2 11 190 - E268391 Flto4 Upper Flathead 9/30/2008 - 8.1 - 170 - E268391 Flto4 Upper Flathead 9/29/2009 8 8.0 11 180 - E255697 Flathead River at McLatchie Rd Bridge 8/18/2006 - 8.3 - 190 0.2 E255697 Flathead River at McLatchie Rd Bridge 7/10/2007 9.3 8.2 - 190 0.2 E206143 Leach Creek near Mouth 5/28/1985 - 7.8 - 65 - E207787 Leach Creek at Mouth 9/24/2006 7.6 8.2 9.7 208 0.1 E206178 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek and above 2/28/1985 - 8 - 127 - Wheeler Creek E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 4/19/1989 - 8.3 - 213 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 5/24/1989 - 8.2 - 157 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 6/21/1989 - 8.3 - 162 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 7/19/1989 - 8.5 - 230 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 8/31/1989 - 8.5 - 259 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 10/18/1989 - 8.4 - 257 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 4/26/1990 - 8.2 - 190 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 5/29/1990 - 8.1 - 158 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 6/20/1990 - 8.1 - 140 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 7/24/1990 - 8.9 - 225 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 9/5/1990 1 - 8.5 - 293 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 10/3/1990 - 8.3 - 340 -
4.8 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.2 Water Quality Data Recorded in the Elko Section RAA
Dissolved Specific Station Temperature Oxygen Conductivity Turbidity Number Station Name Sample Date (ºC) pH (mg/L) (µs/cm) (NTU) E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 11/7/1990 - 8 - 173 - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 5/2/1991 - 8.2 - - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 5/28/1991 - 8 - - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 6/24/1991 - 8.1 - - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 7/24/1991 - 8.3 - - E207789 Michel Creek Below Leach Creek 8/22/1991 - 8.3 - -
4.9 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
4.1.2 Surface Water Quantity
Data from three WSC year-round hydrometric monitoring stations in the Elk River watershed (sub-sub drainage 08NK) and one active year-round monitoring stations are present within the Flathead River watershed (WSC sub-sub drainage 08NP) were reviewed (Table 4.3). None of these monitoring stations are within the LAA or RAA.
Table 4.3 Stream Flow Monitoring Stations in the Elk River Watershed (part of 08NH) and Flathead River Watershed (part of 08NP)
Gross Station Record Length Drainage Area Number Station Name Period of Record (years) (km2) 08NK002 Elk River at Fernie 1919 2019 55a 3090 08NK020 Michel Creek Below Natal 1970 1998 29b 637 08NK005 Elk River at Phillips Bridge 1924 1996 76c 4450 08NP001 Flathead River at Flathead 1929 2019 83d 1110 NOTES: a Data were available from 1925 to 2018 (ECCC 2019b) b Data were available from 1970 to 1996 (ECCC 2019e) c Data were available from 1924 to 1996 (ECCC 2019c) d Data were available from 1929 to 2017 (ECCC 2019d)
Monthly stream flow records from WSC at selected stations in sub-sub drainages 08NK and 08NP were used to estimate long-term mean, maximum, and minimum monthly discharge (Figure 4.2 to Figure 4.5) (ECCC 2019b, 2019c, 2019d, 2019e) within these watersheds. In addition, a summary of modeled mean monthly discharge at watercourse crossings within the LAA is provided in Table 4.4.
Based on WSC data, the Elk River watershed experiences peak flows in June, and low flows from September to March while the Flathead River watershed experiences peak flows in May and low flows from August to March (Figure 4.2 to Figure 4.5; ECCC 2019). Hydrology modelling in the Kootenay-Boundary Water Tool indicates that monthly flow patterns in watercourses crossed by the Elko Section generally experiencing peak flows in May and June and low flows in August until September and January until March (Table 4.4; BC MFLNRORD 2020).
4.10 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Figure 4.2 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary for Elk River at Fernie (WSC Station No. 08NK002, Elk River Watershed)
4.11 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Figure 4.3 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary for Michel Creek Below Natal (WSC Station No. 08NK020, Elk River Watershed)
4.12 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Figure 4.4 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary for Elk River at Phillips Bridge (WSC Station No. 08NK005, Elk River Watershed)
4.13 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Figure 4.5 Historical Monthly Discharge Summary Flathead River at Flathead Station (WSC Station No. 08NP001, Flathead River Watershed)
4.14 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.4 Modeled Mean Monthly Discharge at Watercourses and Drainages Crossed by the Elko Section
Mean Discharge Basin (m3/s) Watercourse Area Site ID Name (km2) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec WC-001.00 Leach Creek 59.8 0.40 0.26 0.16 0.67 4.92 4.40 1.18 1.18 0.40 0.77 0.96 0.61 WC-002.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.12 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leach Creek WC-003.00 Leach Creek 54.0 0.36 0.23 0.14 0.61 4.43 3.91 1.06 0.36 0.34 0.69 0.85 0.55 WC-004.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.82 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.01 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Leach Creek WC-005.00 Unnamed Tributary to 6.4 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.09 0.55 0.39 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 Leach Creek WC-006.00 Unnamed Tributary to 1.33 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.12 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 Leach Creek WC-007.00 Leach Creek 26.7 0.16 0.11 0.07 0.29 2.04 1.82 0.55 0.20 0.17 0.31 0.38 0.45 WC-008.00 Leach Creek 13.2 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.15 1.03 0.93 0.28 0.10 0.09 0.16 0.19 0.13 WC-009.00 Unnamed Tributary to 13.3 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.99 0.88 0.26 0.09 0.08 0.15 0.18 0.12 Leach Creek NCD-005.00 Drainage 0.28 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.02 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 WC-010.00 Leach Creek 9.6 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.09 0.69 0.71 0.23 0.08 0.07 0.11 0.12 0.08 WC-013.00 Unnamed Tributary to 1.16 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.12 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 McEvoy Creek NCD-006.00 Drainage 0.54 0 0 0 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 WC-015.00 McEvoy Creek 12.6 0.09 0.06 0.03 0.12 1.19 1.34 0.32 0.09 0.08 0.18 0.23 0.14 WC-017.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.55 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.07 0.02 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 McEvoy Creek WC-019.00 Unnamed Tributary to 4.76 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.44 0.63 0.14 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.05 Flathead River
4.15 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.4 Modeled Mean Monthly Discharge at Watercourses and Drainages Crossed by the Elko Section
Mean Discharge Basin (m3/s) Watercourse Area Site ID Name (km2) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec WC-021.00 Unnamed Tributary to 4.28 0.04 0.03 0.2 0.04 0.41 0.50 0.12 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.07 0.05 Flathead River WC-023.00 Unnamed Tributary to 1.41 0.01 0.01 0 0 0.10 0.20 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Flathead River WC-024.00 Unnamed Tributary to 2.26 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.23 0.18 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.03 Flathead River WC-025.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.48 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Flathead River NCD-013.00 Drainage 0.29 0 0 0 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 WC-026.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.62 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0.08 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 Flathead River WC-019.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.03 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 Flathead River WC-030.00 Pioneer Creek 1.73 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.02 WC-031.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.72 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Pioneer Creek WC-033.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.61 0 0 0 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 Pioneer Creek WC-034.00 Unnamed Tributary to 0.53 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 0 0.01 0 Bean Creek
4.16 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
The Kootenay Boundary Water Tool indicates that there are no water licence records in the PDA or LAA (BC MFLNRORD 2020). There are 15 active water licences within the RAA, some with several Points of Diversion (32 Points of Diversion in total) (Figure 4.1, Table 4.5). None of these water licences are directly upstream or downstream of the PDA; they are in different drainage areas within the Michel Creek and Flathead River watersheds and are not relevant to the Project. There are no water licences within the RAA in the Wigwam River watershed.
Table 4.5 Existing Surface Water Withdrawals in the Elko Section RAA
Point of Annual Daily Licence Water Source Diversion Licenced Licenced Number Name Code Purpose Volume (m3) Volume (m³) C046054 Tent Creek PD23664 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow C051197 Chaucer Creek PD23783 Irrigation: Private 3,084 - C051198 Chaucer Creek PD23783 Domestic - 2.27 C111632 Gus Spring PD73355 Pond & Aquaculture - 45.5 Irrigation: Private 2,467 - C070987 Corbin Creek PD23760 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Corbin Creek PD23764 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Balzac Creek PD23791 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Bancroft Creek PD23792 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Bandello Creek PD54074 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Bangs Creek PD54067 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Bank Head Creek PD54064 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Ballantyne Creek PD23790 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Ball Creek PD23789 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Baliol Creek PD23788 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Balfour Creek PD23786 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Balfe Creek PD23785 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow PD54071 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow C047084 Corbin Creek PD23763 Land Improvement: General Total Flow C131982 Mountain Spring PD186724 Land Improvement: General Total Flow Scrubby Creek PD23793 Land Improvement: General Total Flow C062529 Corbin Creek PD23766 Land Improvement: General Total Flow Corbin Creek PD23768 Land Improvement: General Total Flow
4.17 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Results February 2021
Table 4.5 Existing Surface Water Withdrawals in the Elko Section RAA
Point of Annual Daily Licence Water Source Diversion Licenced Licenced Number Name Code Purpose Volume (m3) Volume (m³) C060066 Pila Creek PD23781 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Pindus Creek PD23780 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Platte Creek PD23778 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow Ponce Creek PD23775 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow PD23777 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control Total Flow C113668 Pengelly Creek PD74099 Misc. Industrial: Overburden Disposal Total Flow C133299 Corbin Creek PD184555 Mining: Washing Coal - 1,438.4 Misc. Industrial 155,248 - Vehicle & Equipment - 120 C125852 Corbin Creek PD23772 Misc. Industrial: Sediment Control 155,248 - Stream Storage: Non-Power 155,248 - C062568 Corbin Creek PD74505 Misc. Industrial: Overburden Disposal Total Flow C100077 Pincher Creek PD23683 Livestock & Animal: Stockwatering - 15.91 C100075 Squaw Creek PD23684 Livestock & Animal: Stockwatering - 15.91
4.18 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
5.0 REFERENCES
BC MFLNRORD (British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development). 2020. Kootenay-Boundary Water Tool. Available at: https://kwt.bcwatertool.ca/watershed. Accessed January 2020.
BC MOE. 2019. HabitatWizard. Available: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/habwiz/. Accessed: December 2019.
ECCC (Environment and Climate Change Canada). 2019a. Historical Hydrometric Data. Available at: https://wateroffice.ec.gc.ca/mainmenu/historical_data_index_e.html. Accessed November 2019.
ECCC. 2019b. Historical Hydrometric Data: Elk River at Fernie (08NK002) [BC]. Available at: https://wateroffice.ec.gc.ca/report/historical_e.html?stn=08NK002. Accessed November 2019.
ECCC. 2019c. Historical Hydrometric Data: Elk River at Phillips Bridge (08NK005) [BC]. https://wateroffice.ec.gc.ca/report/historical_e.html?stn=08NK005. Accessed December 2019.
ECCC. 2019d. Historical Hydrometric Data: Flathead River at Flathead (08NP001) [BC]. https://wateroffice.ec.gc.ca/report/historical_e.html?stn=08NP001. Accessed December 2019.
ECCC. 2019e. Historical Hydrometric Data: Michel Creek Below Natal (08NK020) [BC]. Available at: https://wateroffice.ec.gc.ca/report/historical_e.html?stn=08NK020. Accessed December 2019.
Government of British Columbia. 2019a. iMapBC. Available at: https://maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/hm/imap4m/. Accessed November 2019.
Government of British Columbia. 2019b. Water Licences Query. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/wtrwhse/water_licences.input. Accessed November 2019.
Montana State Library. 2019. Montana Cadastral Mapping Project. Available at: http://svc.mt.gov/msl/mtcadastral/. Accessed December 2019.
Province of British Columbia. 2020. Surface Water Monitoring Sites. Available at: https://governmentofbc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=0ecd608e27ec45cd9 23bdcfeefba00a7. Accessed January 2020.
5.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
5.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX G.5 Groundwater Quality and Quantity Technical Data Report
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Groundwater Quality and Quantity Technical Data Report
Revision 00
Issued for Use
February 2021
Prepared for:
Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Limitations and Sign-off
This document entitled Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Groundwater Quality and Quantity Technical Data Report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (the “Client”) to support the regulatory review process for its Section 214 Application under the Canadian Energy Regulator Act (the “Application”) for approval to construct and operate the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the “Project”). In connection therewith, this document may be reviewed and used by the Canada Energy Regulator participating in the review process in the normal course of its duties. Except as set forth in the previous sentence, any reliance on this document by any other party or use of it for any other purpose is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The information and conclusions in the document are based on the conditions existing at the time the document was published and does not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by the Client or others, unless expressly stated otherwise in the document. Any use which another party makes of this document is the responsibility and risk of such party. Such party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.
Digitally signed by Lincoln Weller Date: 2021.02.19 14:19:03 -07'00' Prepared by
(signature) Lincoln Weller, B.Sc., P.Geo. Environmental Geologist
Digitally signed by Gail Feltham Date: 2021.02.19 14:21:09 -07'00' Reviewed by
(signature) Gail Feltham, B.Sc.
Digitally signed by Justin McKeown Date: 2021.02.19 14:24:39 -07'00' Approved by
(signature) Justin McKeown, B.Sc., P.Biol FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Table of Contents
1.0 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY ...... 1.1
LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 BCWWS a Water Well Records within 10 km of the PDAb – Elko Section...... 1.2
i FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
ii FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Groundwater Quality and Quantity February 2021
1.0 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
1.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Groundwater Quality and Quantity February 2021
Table 1.1 BCWWS a Water Well Records within 10 km of the PDAb – Elko Section
Screened Groundwater Well Tag Date Depth Lithology Interval Level Location Number Completed Usage Type (mbgs) (Depth shown in mbgs) (mbgs) (mbgs) 11U 108537 2013-08-14 Monitoring New 10.97 0-3.96 sand 7.92-10.97 3.05 659002m E 3.96-5.49 sand & clay 5494066m N 5.49-6.40 clay & silt 6.40-10.97 clay 11U 108538 2013-08-11 Monitoring New 24.99 0-1.49 sand 4.11-5.09 4.75 658988m E 1.49-4.88 gravel 5494621m N 4.88-10.97 sand 10.97-15.85 silt & sand 15.85-18.90 gravel & clay 18.90-24.99 unknown 11U 111516 2015-05-26 Monitoring New 30.78 0-2.44 sand with gravel 27.74-30.78 27.13 659581m E 2.44-13.72 silt 5495537m N 13.72-25.91 clay 25.91-28.96 sand with gravel 28.96-30.78 clay 11U 117519 2019-05-28 Domestic New 37.49 0-36.58 clay sand with gravel silt - 24.38 652148m E 36.58-37.49 sand & gravel 5470363m N NOTES: a BCWWS – BC Water Well Search. b PDA – Project Development Area
1.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX H Greenhouse Gas Technical Data Report
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Greenhouse Gas Technical Data Report
Revision 00 Issued for Use
February 2021
Prepared for:
Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Limitations and Sign-off
This document entitled Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Greenhouse Gas Technical Data Report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (the “Client”) to support the regulatory review process for its Section 214 Application under the Canadian Energy Regulator Act (the “Application”) for approval to construct and operate the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the “Project”). In connection therewith, this document may be reviewed and used by the Canada Energy Regulator participating in the review process in the normal course of its duties. Except as set forth in the previous sentence, any reliance on this document by any other party or use of it for any other purpose is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The information and conclusions in the document are based on the conditions existing at the time the document was published and does not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by the Client or others, unless expressly stated otherwise in the document. Any use which another party makes of this document is the responsibility and risk of such party. Such party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.
Digitally signed by Michelle Xue Date: 2021.02.19 08:16:24 -07'00' Prepared by (signature) Michelle Xue, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Digitally signed by Gail Feltham Date: 2021.02.19 12:26:16 -07'00' Reviewed by (signature) Gail Feltham, B.Sc.
Digitally signed by Justin McKeown Date: 2021.02.19 13:37:24 -07'00' Approved by (signature) Justin McKeown, B.Sc., P.Biol
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... II
ABBREVIATIONS ...... III
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1.1
2.0 SUBSTANCES OF INTEREST ...... 2.1
3.0 GREENHOUSE GAS CALCULATION METHODS ...... 3.1 3.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ...... 3.1 3.1.1 Construction Off-Road Equipment ...... 3.1 3.1.2 Construction On-Road Equipment ...... 3.4 3.1.3 Land Clearing, Burning and Decay ...... 3.6 3.2 OPERATION PHASE ...... 3.6 3.2.1 Fugitive Emissions ...... 3.6 3.3 UPSTREAM EMISSIONS ...... 3.8
4.0 ESTIMATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ...... 4.1 4.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ...... 4.1 4.2 OPERATION PHASE ...... 4.1 4.3 UPSTREAM SCREENING ASSESSMENT ...... 4.2
5.0 CONCLUSIONS ...... 5.1
6.0 REFERENCES ...... 6.1
LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Off-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction ...... 3.1 Table 3.2 Off-Road Diesel and Gasoline Equipment Emission Factors for Construction ...... 3.3 Table 3.3 On-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction ...... 3.4 Table 3.4 On-Road Diesel Equipment Emission Factors for Construction ...... 3.6 Table 3.5 Pipeline Gas Composition ...... 3.7 Table 3.6 Annual Upstream GHG Emission Factors ...... 3.8 Table 4.1 Estimated Direct Project Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 4.1 Table 4.2 Estimated Direct Annual Project Operations Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 4.1 Table 4.3 Estimated Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emissions from 2023 to 2030 ...... 4.2
i FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Executive Summary
Stantec Consulting Ltd. was contracted by Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd (Foothills), a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL), an affiliate of TC Energy Corporation, to complete a quantitative assessment of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions directly related to the construction and operation of the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 (the Project). This technical data report (TDR) has been prepared to support the Project.
The Project consists of the Elko Section. The south end of the proposed pipeline section is located approximately 13.7 km east of the community of Elko, and the north end is located 18.2 km east of the community of Fernie, British Columbia (BC). The proposed Project is 31.3 km long with a Project Development Area of 234.8 ha based on an approximately 31 km-long and 75 m-wide corridor.
The majority of the GHG emissions related to the construction and operation of the Project will result from land clearing. Project construction GHG emissions are estimated to be 147.0 kt CO2e, 135.5 kt CO2e (i.e., 92%) of which are from land clearing. Project operations GHG emissions are negligible (0.0003 kt CO2e/year). A screening assessment of upstream GHG emissions associated with the Project was also undertaken. The Project will result in an incremental increase in throughput of approximately 1,931 e3m3/d (68.2 MMcf/d), which will result in less than 500 kt CO2e of upstream emissions per year.
ii FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Abbreviations
BSFC brake specific fuel consumption
CEPEI Canadian Energy Partnership for Environmental Innovation
CER Canada Energy Regulator
CH4 methane
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
ECCC Environment and Climate Change Canada
EF emission factor
GHG greenhouse gas
GWP global warming potential
HDDV heavy duty diesel vehicle
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
LDAR leak detection and repair
LDDT light-duty diesel truck
N/A not applicable
N2O nitrous oxide
NIR National Inventory Report
NF3 nitrogen trifluoride
PFC perfluorocarbon
ROW right of way
SF6 sulphur hexafluoride
iii FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
iv FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was contracted by Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd (Foothills), a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL), an affiliate of TC Energy Corporation, to complete a quantitative assessment of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions directly related to the construction and operation of the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 (the Project). This technical data report (TDR) has been prepared to support the Project.
The Project consists of the Elko Section. The south end of the proposed pipeline section is located approximately 13.7 km east of the community of Elko, and the north end is located 18.2 km east of the community of Fernie, BC. The proposed Project is 31.5 km long with a Project Development Area of 236.3 ha based on an approximately 32 km-long and 75 m-wide corridor1.
This TDR presents technical details related to GHG quantification for the Project. Information has been generated from existing literature, published technical data sources, engineering calculations and Project -specific emission estimates. The following information is presented within this report:
1. substances of interest (Section 2) 2. a discussion of the GHG calculation methods (Section 3) 3. a summary of GHG releases by Project phase, including construction (Section 4.1) and operation (Section 4.2), as well as an upstream GHG screening assessment (Section 4.3) 4. conclusions (Section 5).
1 Although a 75 m wide construction footprint will not be required for most of the corridor, the Project applied this conservative estimate to facilitate robust spatial analysis and discussion of the maximum potential effects of clearing and ground disturbance.
1.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
1.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Substances of Interest February 2021
2.0 SUBSTANCES OF INTEREST
A GHG can be any atmospheric gas that absorbs and re-emits infrared radiation, thereby acting as a thermal blanket for the planet and warming the lower levels of the atmosphere. GHGs are released to the atmosphere from a number of natural and anthropogenic (human activity) sources (IPCC 2013).
The methods used to estimate GHG emissions from the Project are based on accounting and reporting principles of the GHG Protocol developed by the World Resource Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2015). This protocol is an internationally accepted accounting and reporting standard for quantifying and reporting GHG emissions. The guiding principles of the protocol for compiling an inventory of GHG data are relevance, completeness, consistency, transparency, and accuracy. In cases where uncertainty is high, conservative quantification parameters and assumptions were applied, resulting in an overestimate of the GHG emissions (WCI 2013).
Emissions of each of the specific GHGs are multiplied by their 100-year global warming potential (GWP) from the ECCC website (ECCC 2019) and are reported as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). The GWP of these GHGs are:
• Carbon dioxide (CO2) = 1.0
• Methane (CH4) = 25
• Nitrous oxide (N2O) = 298
GHGs that will not be emitted by the Project are excluded from the assessment. These are sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), hydrofluorocarbon (HFC), and perfluorocarbon (PFC).
Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) for the Project are calculated as:
CO2e = (mass CO2 x 1.0) + (mass CH4 x 25) + (mass N2O x 298).
2.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Substances of Interest February 2021
2.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
3.0 GREENHOUSE GAS CALCULATION METHODS
Direct GHG emissions that will be released as a result of construction and operation of the Project have been calculated. These include emissions released during construction as a result of vehicle and equipment use, and those released during operation as a result of fugitive emissions. Methods described in the following sections are expected to yield conservative results as they are based on engineering estimates. There will be a small change in land use from native vegetation to industrial land, so emissions that will arise as a result of change in land use were included in calculations. As there will be no flaring of gas during operation, emissions related to flaring were not included.
A screening assessment of upstream GHG emissions associated with the Project is also provided.
3.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE
3.1.1 Construction Off-Road Equipment
Off-road sources for construction include equipment, engines or vehicles that are primarily used for construction activities. These emission sources are typically not approved to be driven on highways or public roads. During construction, off-road equipment will be used for activities such as earthworks and construction of infrastructure. The construction equipment is assumed to be diesel-powered.
The equipment quantity and type, operating hours, and engine power of pipeline section construction off- road equipment are based on a standard Foothills pipeline per-kilometer based construction equipment list. The off-road construction equipment list is provided in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Off-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction
Brake Operating Specific Fuel hours per km Consumption Load Engine Power pipeline (BSFC)a Factorb Number of Description Equipment HP BTU/hr hours lb/hp-hr % Clearing Backhoe, Cat 345CL 2 380 967746 8 0.367 0.21 Mulcher 1 1000 2546700 12 0.367 0.43 Tower Light Plant 6 67 170629 8 0.408 0.43 Topsoil & Grade Dozer, D6, LGP 2 200 509340 29 0.367 0.59 Backhoe, 330DL 2 268 682516 19 0.367 0.21 Dozer, D8N, Ripper 2 305 776744 29 0.367 0.59
3.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
Table 3.1 Off-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction
Brake Operating Specific Fuel hours per km Consumption Load Engine Power pipeline (BSFC)a Factorb Number of Description Equipment HP BTU/hr hours lb/hp-hr % Bending and Set-Up Sideboom, 583 2 310 789477 38 0.367 0.59 Bending Machine 48-60 inch 1 142 361631 13 0.367 0.43 Stringing Sideboom, 583K 1 300 764010 5 0.367 0.59 Welding - Auto Mainline Sideboom, 594 5 410 1044147 53 0.367 0.59 Welding - Back End Sideboom, 583K 1 300 764010 18 0.367 0.59 Coating Sideboom, 561 2 110 280137 20 0.367 0.59 Compressor 350 CFM 1 140 356538 10 0.367 0.43 Gensets 2 125 318338 40 0.367 0.43 Ditching Backhoe, Cat 345CL 2 380 967746 31 0.367 0.21 Dozer, D8N, Winch 1 305 776744 10 0.367 0.59 Lowering-in Backhoe, Cat 330 1 268 682516 12 0.367 0.21 Sideboom, 594 4 410 1044147 35 0.367 0.59 Backfilling & Frost Packing Dozer, D8T, Winch 1 310 789477 11 0.367 0.59 Backhoe, Cat 345CL 1 380 967746 21 0.367 0.21 Tie-ins Sideboom, 594 6 410 1044147 26 0.367 0.59 Testing & Support Pump, Centrifugal, 4" G 1 300 764010 42 0.367 0.43 Tower Light Plant 2 67 170629 85 0.408 0.43 Gen Set, 600 KW 1 804 2048284 21 0.367 0.43 Clean-Up Dozer, D6, LGP 2 200 509340 25 0.367 0.59 Dozer, D8N, Winch 2 305 776744 25 0.367 0.59 Backhoe, 330 2 268 682516 15 0.367 0.21
3.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
Table 3.1 Off-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction
Brake Operating Specific Fuel hours per km Consumption Load Engine Power pipeline (BSFC)a Factorb Number of Description Equipment HP BTU/hr hours lb/hp-hr % HDD 66 000 lb HDD rig 2 600 1528020 448 0.367 0.43 Cenrifuge, S/S High Speed 2 8 19100 448 0.408 0.43 Mud Pump 2 1000 2546700 448 0.367 0.43 Zoom Boom 2 110 280137 448 0.367 0.59 Tower Light Plant 6 67 170629 448 0.408 0.43 Backhoe, 330 2 268 682516 897 0.367 0.21 NOTES: a Source: US EPA 2010a. b Source: US EPA 2010b.
Emission factors from the Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) National Inventory Report (NIR) Table A6.1-13 (ECCC 2020) are used to convert fuel combustion totals to GHG emissions. The emission factors used for this activity are presented in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Off-Road Diesel and Gasoline Equipment Emission Factors for Construction
Emission Factor
CO2 CH4 N2O Equipment (g/L fuel) (g/L fuel) (g/L fuel) Off-Road – Diesel (Tier 4) 2,681 0.073 0.227 SOURCE: ECCC 2020.
Total emissions for CO2, CH4, and N2O are calculated using the following equation.
Emissions ( ) Emission Factor g Fuel Usage = litre × 𝑡𝑡 ( ) � (%� ) 0.454 0.85 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ×� 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸Conversio𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃n 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 𝑥𝑥 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑥𝑥 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 �ℎ𝑝𝑝−ℎ𝑟𝑟� 𝑥𝑥 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 � 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � 𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 � 𝐿𝐿 �� 𝑡𝑡 6 �10 𝑔𝑔�
3.3 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
3.1.2 Construction On-Road Equipment
The use of vehicles, buses and trucks for transporting crew and equipment are included in the on-road vehicles category. On-road equipment are mobile sources that are approved to travel on highways and public roads. The on-road equipment is assumed to be diesel-powered.
The equipment type, engine power, and operating hours of pipeline section construction on-road equipment are based on a standard Foothills pipeline per-kilometer based construction equipment list. The on-road construction equipment list is provided in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3 On-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction
Engine Power Operating Fuel Efficiency b hours per km Description (HP) BTU/hr pipeline Vehicle Classa km/L Clearing Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 8 LDDT 8.73 Crew Cab, 4x4 397 1011040 16 LDDT 8.73 Medic Truck 320 814944 4 LDDT 8.73 Line Locate Hydrovac Truck 330 840411 8 HDDV 2.56 Water Truck 330 840411 4 HDDV 2.56 Topsoil & Grade Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 48 LDDT 8.73 Bending/Set-Up Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 53 LDDT 8.73 Crew Cab, 4x4 397 1011040 13 LDDT 8.73 Welding-Auto Mainline Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 3 LDDT 8.73 Welding-Back End Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 44 LDDT 8.73 Crew Cab, 4x4 397 1011040 18 LDDT 8.73 Picker Truck 600 1528020 3 HDDV 1.81 Pickup, 3 ton 330 840411 9 HDDV 2.56 Truck, Weld Rig 300 764010 9 HDDV 3.83 Truck, Mech Rig 300 764010 9 HDDV 3.83 Coating Pickup, 1 ton 397 1011040 20 HDDV 5.32 Coating Truck 330 840411 90 HDDV 2.56 Sandblast Truck 330 840411 20 HDDV 2.56
3.4 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
Table 3.3 On-Road Construction Equipment for Pipeline Construction
Engine Power Operating Fuel Efficiency b hours per km Description (HP) BTU/hr pipeline Vehicle Classa km/L Lowering-in Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 6 LDDT 8.73 Crew Cab, 4x4 397 1011040 12 LDDT 8.73 Truck, 1 ton 397 1011040 17 HDDV 5.32 Backfilling Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 11 LDDT 8.73 Tie-ins Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 26 LDDT 8.73 Testing & Support Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 42 LDDT 8.73 Truck, 1 ton 397 1011040 42 HDDV 5.32 Truck, Weld Rig 300 764010 4 HDDV 3.83 Truck, Mech. Rig 330 840411 4 HDDV 2.56 Clean-Up Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 15 LDDT 8.73 Flat-bed Truck 397 1011040 5 HDDV 2.56 Maintenance (Survey Embedded) Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 2 LDDT 8.73 Flat-bed Truck 397 1011040 2 HDDV 5.32 Fuel Truck 600 1528020 2 HDDV 2.56 Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 126 LDDT 8.73 NDT Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 22 LDDT 8.73 Crew Cab, 4x4 397 1011040 7 LDDT 8.73 HDD Pickup, 4x4 397 1011040 448 LDDT 8.73 Crew Cab, 4x4 397 1011040 448 LDDT 8.73 Hydrovac Truck 330 840411 448 HDDV 2.56 a Source: U.S. EPA 2017. b Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 2016.
3.5 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
Emissions factors from the NIR Table A6.1-13 (ECCC 2020) were used to convert all fuel combustion volumes to GHG emissions. The emission factors used for this activity are presented in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4 On-Road Diesel Equipment Emission Factors for Construction
Emission Factor
CO2 CH4 N2O Equipment (g/L fuel) (g/L fuel) (g/L fuel) Light Duty Vehicles 2,681 0.068 0.22 Heavy Duty Vehicles 2,681 0.11 0.151
Total emissions for CO2, CH4 and N2O were determined using the following equation.
Emissions ( ) Emission Factor g Fuel Usage ( ) Conversion = l × × 𝑡𝑡 6 𝑡𝑡 � � 𝑙𝑙 �10 𝑔𝑔� 3.1.3 Land Clearing, Burning and Decay
To estimate CO2e emissions related to land clearing, burning and decay, factors from the Ministry of Forests, Land and Natural Resources (Dymond 2014) spreadsheet are identified based on ecoregion and salvaging practices. It is assumed that all biomass (including debris, stumps, and unused portions of the salvaged timber) is to be burned. The average emission factor for northeastern BC were assumed to be appropriate for the Project location in BC as they are the most conservative factors that could be utilized from BC’s database of ecoregion-specific emission factors. The average emission factors are applied. The average emission factor for uproot and burning is 349 t CO2e/ha. The average emission factor for decay over 19 years is 278 t CO2e/ha.
Emissions related to land clearing and biomass decay are estimated using the following equation:
( ) = ( ) × . 𝑡𝑡 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑡𝑡 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2𝑒𝑒 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 ℎ𝑎𝑎 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 − 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 � ℎ𝑎𝑎 � 3.2 OPERATION PHASE
3.2.1 Fugitive Emissions
Fugitive emissions originate from involuntary releases of natural gas associated with system components. Fugitive emissions will occur along the pipeline and associated facilities. TC Energy’s Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) Program will be applied to the Project after it goes into operation to manage fugitive emissions. The TC Energy LDAR program involves identifying leaks on the pipeline components (such as valves and flanges), setting priorities and conducting repairs. Therefore, fugitive emissions included in this TDR are conservative, as TC Energy will detect and repair leaks.
3.6 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
The GHG emissions associated with fugitive leaks from pipeline components are calculated using the “Estimation of Air Emissions from the Canadian Natural Gas Transmission, Storage and Distribution System” Methodology Manual (CEPEI Methodology Manual) prepared for the Canadian Energy Partnership for Environmental Innovation (CEPEI) (Clearstone 2018). The CEPEI Methodology Manual (Clearstone 2018) provides methods, emission factors, and equipment schedules recognized by the Government of Canada for GHG reporting purposes. Fugitive emissions are calculated for pipeline sections based on default values of number of leaks identified (0.0007 leaks/km of pipeline length), total 3 equivalent leak ratio (1.42 equivalent leaks/ leak identified), volumetric leak rate (m CH4/hour/leak), and soil oxidation factor (Clearstone 2018). Fugitive emission calculations conservatively assume leaks occur 8760 hours per year, i.e., for the entire year.
The expected natural gas composition (Table 3.5) is used in conjunction with CEPEI emission factors to calculate fugitive GHG emissions for the Project based on the following equations:
4 𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆=𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 � ( � ) × 8760 × 0.0007 × 1.42 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 ℎ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 × 0𝑃𝑃.𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃07 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿ℎ× 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 � � � � � � 3 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑚𝑚 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶4 � � 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶4 ℎ𝑟𝑟 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
2 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆=𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 � ( � ) × 8760 × 0.0007 × 1.42 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 ℎ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 × 0𝑃𝑃.𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃07 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿ℎ× 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘0.03 � � � � + � � 3 3 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑚𝑚 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶4 𝑚𝑚 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶4 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 × � � � 3 � ℎ𝑟𝑟 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑚𝑚 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶4 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶4 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 2 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
Table 3.5 Pipeline Gas Composition
Elko Section Component mol %
Methane (C1H4) 93.51
Ethane (C2H6) 4.23
Propane (C3H8) 0.63
Iso-butane (C4H10) 0.06
Normal-butane (C4H10) 0.08
Iso-pentane (C5H12) 0.01
Normal-pentane (C5H12) 0.01
Hexane (C6H14) 0.01
Heptane (C7H16) + 0.003
3.7 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
Table 3.5 Pipeline Gas Composition
Elko Section Component mol % Helium (He) 0.02
CO2 0.66
Nitrogen (N2) 0.77 Total 100.00
3.3 UPSTREAM EMISSIONS
Upstream GHG emissions are associated with the production, gathering, and processing of the additional volume of natural gas corresponding to the increase in total system capacity due to the Project. Upstream is defined as all-natural gas sector stages undertaken before gas arrives at the gas transmission system – that is, natural gas production, gathering and processing (ECCC 2017).
Upstream emissions are estimated using the ECCC published GHG emission factors from the NGTL Towerbirch Expansion Project (ECCC 2017). For calculation purposes, it was assumed that the source of the gas would originate from the same upstream sources, and gas specifications used in the Towerbirch Expansion remain unchanged. Emission factors for the upstream screening assessment are provided in Table 3.6.
Table 3.6 Annual Upstream GHG Emission Factors
Production Gathering Processing 3 3 a 3 3 a 3 3 a Year t CO2e/ e m t CO2e/MMcf t CO2e/ e m t CO2e/MMcf t CO2e/ e m t CO2e/MMcf 2018 0.1091 3.09 0.0014 0.04 0.1229 3.48 2019 0.1088 3.08 0.0014 0.04 0.1222 3.46 2020 0.1088 3.08 0.0015 0.04 0.1218 3.45 2021 0.1088 3.08 0.0014 0.04 0.1204 3.41 2022 0.1088 3.08 0.0014 0.04 0.1197 3.39 2023 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1197 3.39 2024 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1194 3.38 2025 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1190 3.37 2026 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1190 3.37 2027 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1190 3.37 2028 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1180 3.34 2029 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1165 3.30 2030 0.1088 3.08 0.0013 0.04 0.1151 3.26 NOTE: a 3 3 EFs include a correction of the t CO2e/MMscf to t CO2e/e m conversion provided in ECCC 2017. SOURCE: ECCC 2017. NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Towerbirch Expansion Project.
3.8 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
Estimated upstream GHG emissions are based on the following equation:
( 2 ) = × × 3 3 𝑒𝑒 𝑚𝑚 𝑡𝑡 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2𝑒𝑒 ( ) 3 3 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑒𝑒 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 � 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦. � 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 �𝑒𝑒 𝑚𝑚 � 1 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 3 𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 10 𝑡𝑡
3.9 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Greenhouse Gas Calculation Methods February 2021
3.10 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions February 2021
4.0 ESTIMATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE
GHG emission sources include combustion of fossil fuel in vehicles and equipment used in pipeline construction as well as activities associated with land clearing such as burning and decay. The estimated direct GHG emissions from Project construction are 147.0 kilotonnes (kt) CO2e (Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 Estimated Direct Project Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions (kt) a a a b Source CO2 CH4 N2O Total CO2e On-road and off-road 11.25 0.00031 0.00093 11.5 construction equipment Land clearing, burning and - - - 135.5 decay (ROW) c Total 11.25 0.00031 0.00093 147.0 NOTES: a Based on ECCC emission factors provided in Table A6.1-13 of the NIR (ECCC 2020). Emission factors depend on vehicle type and emission control technology. b Values for CO2e may not exactly match the breakdown to CO2, CH4 and N2O, as values are rounded for presentation in this summary table. c Total area of land clearing is based on 235 ha for the Elko Section.
- No emission factor is available. Total CO2e emissions are calculated based on CO2e emission factors described in Section 3.1.3.
4.2 OPERATION PHASE
The estimated direct annual Project operations GHG emissions are from pipeline component fugitive leaks, and are estimated to be 0.0003 kt CO2e per year (Table 4.2).
Table 4.2 Estimated Direct Annual Project Operations Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emission Rate (kt/y)
a Source CO2 CH4 N2O Total CO2e Fugitive Emissions 0.000001 0.00001 0 0.0003 NOTE: a Values for CO2e may not exactly match the breakdown to CO2, CH4 and N2O, as values are rounded for presentation in this summary table.
4.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions February 2021
4.3 UPSTREAM SCREENING ASSESSMENT
The NGTL Westpath Delivery 2023 Project (Turner Valley Section, Longview Section and Lundbreck Section) and this Project will result in an incremental increase in throughput of approximately 4,300 e3m3/d (151.9 MMcf/d). Prorating the throughput by the length of the pipeline section, the Project will result in an incremental increase in throughput of approximately 1,931 e3m3/d (68.2 MMcf/d). The Project will not be sourcing gas supply from a specific location or play, but rather will provide transportation access to supply sources from unconventional and tight conventional plays in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (WCSB). The Project will result in an overall increase in the reliability of the NGTL system. The incremental increase in throughput may not be directly related to increased upstream development.
Nevertheless, the upstream assessment conservatively assumes the incremental increase in throughput for the Project is directly attributed to an increase in upstream development. Using the emission factors provided in the ECCC Assessment of Upstream Emissions related to the Towerbirch Expansion Project (ECCC 2017), the annual upstream GHG emissions from 2023 to 2030 are estimated for the Elko Section; results are presented in Table 4.3. Upstream emissions are expected to mainly come from production and processing with a lower contribution from gathering activities. Annual estimated upstream emissions for the Project are estimated to be between 159 and 162 kt CO2e per year.
Table 4.3 Estimated Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emissions from 2023 to 2030
a Annual Upstream Emissions (kt CO2e) Year Production Gathering Processing Total 2023 77 0.9 84 162 2024 77 0.9 84 162 2025 77 0.9 84 161 2026 77 0.9 84 161 2027 77 0.9 84 161 2028 77 0.9 83 161 2029 77 0.9 82 160 2030 77 0.9 81 159 NOTE: a Based on emission factors provided in ECCC 2017.
Assuming there are incremental upstream emissions associated with the Project, estimated annual upstream GHG emissions (Table 4.2) are less than the 500 kt CO2e/year threshold using the emission factors published in ECCC’s NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. – Towerbirch Expansion Project Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimates Report (ECCC 2017). As annual upstream emissions are estimated to be below 500 kt CO2e per year, and in accordance with the Filing Manual (CER 2020), no further assessment of upstream GHG emissions is required.
4.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Conclusions February 2021
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Key findings of the GHG TDR are:
• Project construction GHG emissions are estimated to be 147.0 kt CO2e, 135.5 kt CO2e (i.e., 92%) of which are from land clearing activities.
• Project operation GHG emissions from fugitive emissions are 0.0003 kt CO2e per year.
• Project annual upstream emissions are estimated to be below 500 kt CO2e per year; no further assessment of upstream GHG emissions is required to address the CER’s Filing Manual (CER 20202).
5.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Conclusions February 2021
5.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
6.0 REFERENCES
CER (Canada Energy Regulator). 2020. Filing Manual. Available at: https://www.cer- rec.gc.ca/en/applications-hearings/submit-applications-documents/filing-manuals/flngmnl-eng.pdf. Accessed August 2020.
Clearstone. 2018. Estimation of Air Emissions from the Canadian Natural Gas Transmission, Storage and Distribution System - Methodology Manual (CEPEI Methodology Manual) prepared for the Canadian Energy Partnership for Environmental Innovation (CEPEI) Clearstone, 2018.
Dymond, C. 2014. Deforestation Emissions for BC by Region. Ministry of Forests, Land and Natural Resources Operations and Rural Development. Competitiveness and Innovation Division. Email correspondence, June 2019.
ECCC (Environment and Climate Change Canada). 2017. NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Towerbirch Expansion Project – Review of Related Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emission Estimates. Available at: http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p80106/118038E.pdf. Accessed October 2019.
ECCC. 2019. Global warming potentials. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate- change/services/climate-change/greenhouse-gas-emissions/quantification-guidance/global- warming-potentials.html. Accessed: October 2019.
ECCC. 2020. National Inventory Report 1990-2018: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada. Canada’s Submission to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Part 2. Available at: https://unfccc.int/ghg-inventories-annex-i-parties/2020.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.- K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 2016. 2016 Vehicle Technologies Market Report. Prepared for the U.S Department of Energy.
US EPA. (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2010a. Exhaust and Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Engine Modeling - Compression Ignition. Assessment and Modelling Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S.
US EPA. 2010b. Median Life, Annual Activity, and Load Factor Values for Nonroad Engine Emissions Modelling. EPA-420-R-10-016. Assessment and Standards Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality. U.S. EPA, July 2010.
6.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
US EPA. 2017. Vehicle Weight Classifications for the Emission Standards Reference Guide. February 2017. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/emission-standards-reference-guide/vehicle-weight- classifications-emission-standards-reference-guide.
WCI. 2013. WCI Quantification Method 2013 Addendum to Canadian Harmonization Version. Western Climate Initiative. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/climate- change/ind/quantification/wci-2013.pdf. Accessed: September 2019.
World Resource Institute & World Business Council for Sustainable Development. 2015. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol. A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard. Revised Edition. Available at: https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/ghg-protocol-revised.pdf. Accessed: April 2019.
6.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX I Rights of Indigenous Peoples Technical Data Report
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Rights of Indigenous Peoples Technical Data Report
Revision 00
Issued for Use
February 2021
Prepared for:
NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Limitations and Sign-off
This document entitled Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Rights of Indigenous Peoples Data Report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (the “Client”) to support the regulatory review process for its Section 214 Application under the Canadian Energy Regulator Act (the “Application”) for approval to construct and operate the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the “Project”). In connection therewith, this document may be reviewed and used by the Canada Energy Regulator participating in the review process in the normal course of its duties. Except as set forth in the previous sentence, any reliance on this document by any other party or use of it for any other purpose is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The information and conclusions in the document are based on the conditions existing at the time the document was published and does not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by the Client or others, unless expressly stated otherwise in the document. Any use which another party makes of this document is the responsibility and risk of such party. Such party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.
Digitally signed by Poletto, Christina Date: 2021.02.19 12:42:16 -07'00' Prepared by
(signature) Christina Poletto, MA
Digitally signed by Gail Feltham Date: 2021.02.19 12:38:31 -07'00' Reviewed by
(signature) Gail Feltham, B.Sc.
Digitally signed by Justin McKeown Date: 2021.02.19 13:39:45 -07'00' Approved by
(signature) Justin McKeown, B.Sc., P.Biol FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS ...... III
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1.1
2.0 PURPOSE AND METHODS ...... 2.1 2.1 INDIGENOUS ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM ...... 2.1 2.1.1 Traditional Knowledge Studies ...... 2.5 2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 2.5 2.3 SPATIAL BOUNDARIES ...... 2.6
3.0 INDIGENOUS RIGHTS ...... 3.1 3.1 INDIGENOUS RIGHTS ...... 3.1 3.2 MÉTIS RIGHTS ...... 3.2 3.3 EXERCISED OR PRACTICED INDIGENOUS RIGHTS ...... 3.2 3.3.1 Blood Tribe ...... 3.3 3.3.2 British Columbia Métis Federation ...... 3.9 3.3.3 Ktunaxa Nation Council ...... 3.10 3.3.4 Akisq’nuk First Nation...... 3.14 3.3.5 Lower Kootenay First Nation ...... 3.16 3.3.6 St. Mary’s Indian Band ...... 3.18 3.3.7 Tobacco Plains Indian Band ...... 3.20 3.3.8 Métis Nation British Columbia ...... 3.21 3.3.9 Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 ...... 3.23 3.3.10 Piikani Nation ...... 3.25 3.3.11 Qwelminte Secwepemc ...... 3.28 3.3.12 Adams Lake Indian Band ...... 3.30 3.3.13 Shuswap Indian Band ...... 3.32 3.3.14 Samson Cree Nation ...... 3.34 3.3.15 Siksika Nation ...... 3.38 3.3.16 Stoney Nakoda Nations ...... 3.41 3.3.17 Tsuut’ina Nation ...... 3.44 3.4 CONTEXT FOR THE EXERCISE OR PRACTICE OF INDIGENOUS RIGHTS ...... 3.47
4.0 SUMMARY ...... 4.1
5.0 REFERENCES ...... 5.1
i FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Indigenous Groups Engaged Currently on the Project ...... 2.1 Table 3.1 Distance from Indigenous Lands to Elko Sectiona ...... 3.48
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Location of Nearest Populated Land Base of Engaged Indigenous Groups, Foothills West Path 2023 Project ...... 2.3
LIST OF APPENDICES
ATTACHMENT A PROJECT-RELATED ISSUE SUMMARIES
ATTACHMENT B BC MÉTIS FEDERATION TERRESTRIAL STUDY FINAL REPORT – JUNE 2020
ATTACHMENT C MÉTIS NATION BRITISH COLUMBIA. LITERATURE REVIEW – FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT
ii FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Abbreviations
ALR Agricultural Land Reserve
ASL Above sea level
ATV all-terrain vehicle
CER Canada Energy Regulator
CER Act Canadian Energy Regulator Act
EAS Environmental Alignment Sheet
ESA Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment
EPP Environmental Protection Plan
Foothills Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd
G2G Government 2 Government
LAA local assessment area
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NEB National Energy Board
NPS nominal pipe size
PDA Project development area
RAA regional assessment area
ROW right-of-way
SCT Specific Claims Tribunal
SCC Supreme Court of Canada the Project Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project
TDR Technical Data Report
TLRU traditional land and resource use
VC valued component
iii FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
iv FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills), a wholly owned subsidiary of TC Energy Corporation, is applying to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER) under section 214 of the Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CER Act) for approval to construct and operate the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project). The Project is comprised of the British Columbia Mainline Loop 2 Elko Section (Elko Section).
The Filing Manual (CER 2020) requires Foothills to provide information regarding the following new assessment factor under the CER Act:
“The effects on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982” (CER 2020).
The Project is located within the areas of interest of 17 potentially affected Indigenous groups and within the boundaries of Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4. Based on its scope, setting and scale, the Project has the potential to impact the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 (herein referred to as the “rights of Indigenous peoples”).
1.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Introduction February 2021
1.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Purpose and Methods February 2021
2.0 PURPOSE AND METHODS
In accordance with the Filing Manual (CER 2020), this report provides information on:
• the asserted or established Indigenous rights of the potentially affected Indigenous peoples in the Project area • the ways in which Indigenous rights may be exercised or practiced in the Project area • the context for the practice or exercise of Indigenous rights in the Project area
Foothills’ understanding of these asserted or established Indigenous rights and their exercise or practice is guided by relevant case law, including Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decisions, publicly available literature, and the perspectives of the potentially affected Indigenous groups.
Information from Foothills’ Indigenous Engagement Program, traditional knowledge (TK) studies, and literature review is presented in Section 3.0 for each Indigenous group, where available.
This report provides baseline information regarding traditional land and resource use (TLRU) and the rights of Indigenous peoples based on information available at the time of writing. This information is used in the TLRU and rights of Indigenous peoples sections of the ESA to identify potential Project interactions and assess potential effects. The assessment of Project effects on TLRU is provided in Section 11 of the ESA, while the assessment of effects on the rights of Indigenous peoples is provided in Section 14 of the ESA. This report also informs the assessment of related environmental and socio-economic valued components, such as, wildlife and wildlife habitat (Section 7 of the ESA), vegetation and wetlands (Section 6 of the ESA), and social and cultural well-being, human health, employment and economy, and infrastructure and services (Section 13 of the ESA).
2.1 INDIGENOUS ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM
The potentially affected Indigenous groups engaged on the Project are provided in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Indigenous Groups Engaged Currently on the Project
Elko Indigenous Group Province Section Treaty 6 First Nations Samson Cree Nation AB X Treaty 7 First Nations Blood Tribe AB X Piikani Nation AB X Siksika Nation AB X Stoney Nakoda Nations (Bearspaw, Chiniki, and Wesley) AB X Tsuut’ina Nation AB X
2.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Purpose and Methods February 2021
Table 2.1 Indigenous Groups Engaged Currently on the Project
Elko Indigenous Group Province Section First Nations Adams Lake Indian Band BC X Akisq’nuk First Nation BC X Lower Kootenay First Nation BC X Shuswap Indian Band BC X St. Mary’s Indian Band BC X Tobacco Plains Indian Band BC X First Nation Ktunaxa Nation Council BC X Organizations Qwelminte Secwepemc BC X Métis Organizations British Columbia Métis Federation BC X Métis Nation British Columbia BC X Métis Nation British Columbia – Region 4 BC X
Overviews for the Indigenous groups engaged on the Project can be found in Section 3.3 and community locations are shown on Figure 2.1. The Project is not located within a reserve under the Indian Act, Treaty Land Entitlement, comprehensive or specific claims, or other lands to which a First Nation seeks reserve designation under the Policy on Additions to Reserve and Reserve Creation, or Métis settlement lands. Figure I.1 presents the nearest populated land base of each group engaged on the Project (where applicable), while Table 3.1 in Section 3.4 provides a complete land listing.
As available at the time of writing, issues and concerns raised through the Indigenous Engagement Program have been included in this TDR report and incorporated throughout the ESA, as appropriate.
Through Foothills’ engagement activities, potentially affected Indigenous groups have been requested to provide feedback with respect to potential impacts of the Project on the rights of Indigenous peoples. The outcomes of this engagement are incorporated in this report and throughout the ESA, as appropriate (see Application for more detail).
2.2 |
64 ÿ M.D. of Northern Cr Fairview Sunrise ee U elin k $$ m t Ha e No. 136 County i
k k ¯
a
er Peace R L Kim iv iver a u a (
Saddle Hills ituan R c m L Ks M L
ag n
l ake
o i County i a re w
| c
ÿ i r an l | ve Birch Hills ÿ Lac Ho i e u R se ) P t County 49 L La Biche R n a 88 r iv S u k County e a e
d dle (B M.D. of r
land | Is ÿ
M.D. of Lesser Slave Rock
ke Lesser River No. 124 La 63 | ÿ Smoky River
E ake e
a ave L k
No. 130 Sl a 59 s | ÿ L
t tt
B P awce Ca le ea ra Big Lakes F ll Ly | ÿ r i r i 2A n ake
S r g L L S a e ke
k t i County a e Grande n D L u e
r v 43 i R i r i
g p f R t
Prairie i p u e e a
ve i o w
r l e u R n L iti i ver L ta a
Wap ak R w
L e O re
i n a
v La c k
k
e e
ke ee e
e r r e |
k ÿ h C a c | ÿ L i B e a n on 55
p i r a B
40 t P r l is a
r t c
G e e h iv L R a
o n t C a e a e
o Sw L
k a k s k k
e e Riv l r e a M r e e L a e e e F r v M.D. e n el L
C i kw a Ste e R l
s a m e
l k o of Greenview p e
L e La Athabasca County e
N a r I k F
ankR n No. 16 o e
C utb iv r s
er r e o
e t g | r ÿ | v a e u ÿ i iv n L R R e S a tt m L 44 w e o a 36 k n k k
a o e e
K L Woodlands Thorhild
im ak al Westlock S e o County | Smoky ÿ Sh e County
r ver ak County
ve Smok y Ri L Lake
Ri ttle 28 i | y L ÿ ok r County of Red County m ve w S i Barrhead at R 18 er d R o No. 11 iv Lamont
e er
ek L
e c County |
Cr er Lac Ste. Sturgeon B ÿ M | p iv ÿ ea Shee R ve County rh d Anne County i 29 n 15 ll C a E Fort Saskatchewan
l d L
Be r ac re
s St e
on Riv e. k | e ÿ k |
r ver An St. Albert ÿ e Ri Ch e ne WILLMORE n e k i ÿ
i to C p k | l
P r c a l i L r 32 a L 16 i WILDERNESS r e W t k le e s h v s e v I e
Ri i o r R l b e k
PARK y f u e 16A n v
a a m La k a h C o ba
d c a a L l | i ÿ |
L ÿ s W Spruce e
W a r
ab e B | h e Grove ÿ t 47 k 14 A R Beaver
akeIn a 19
Sn d t C Leduc
ia r r County n e Yellowhead eek B e iv |
ÿ i k D
R R g
Leduc County a L u
i s County H
v L a a s a |
e a ÿ t
r Brazeau 39 k y k y r r e e ay L | a iver C ÿ
b C County W
R l iza o m
aring R m a r eek rd Lak 21
Sn iv a m e a
E l e n s Pig L r i i eo B De 26 | n ÿ b D e a m B L k JASPER e uck B ak a Camrose P at e L r e
L tl a h e 13 i
NATIONAL a L k l
ak e l
ke e s |
PARK Braze ÿ Camrose
au River
|
20 ÿ County
MOUNT ROBSON Me | e er ÿ ti PROVINCIAL gg R iv 2 ng M rde C a o r PARK l 53 e ig N Ponoka County ek
n L SAMSON 137 e G
L a u
k l County | a ÿ
k e l ffalo |
e ÿ Lacombe Bu of Stettler |
ÿ 50 ke La No. 6 ÿ 12 Lacombe County | K 11
in Fo Sylv
b rtress an r L a L e 21A | ÿ ake s C a v Lak L i
k e m o k
e a R E a Ra w e Red Deer
t th m River k r w 5 h r e
e o e L i | a k r e ÿ ng
WHITE GOAT r N e ake
b a v D
i | L ÿ
M A A d
u R h d L WILDLAND e 42 g | B e R ÿ u L m iv r T o e ak CUMMINS LAKES AREA Ra R 54 Red Deer k e E Clearwater n h G R e a PROVINCIAL C B v r 56 L R T County a County e e O R e PARK I A h
k L T i G
a U I ll h
L S s o M C s SIFFLEUR | H ÿ t p
m r r B
e in e u I WILDLAND t A e e v 27 k i m AREA C u R r Starland d T e a Kneehill e r Mountain View R k County M e v o County R i se L County b e R ud er v a K
v e k y n i l r R k T s e r eehills Cre e
s R t e iv i o owni b k r e e | D e C ÿ w k C a YOHO ro r u l BANFF s L u e re sf o B
C NATIONAL ie e a s e l k t k NATIONAL M.D. of d 10 u m
k e o C m y PARK k
e l r ee
a u PARK Rocky View S m Bighorn
L b
i M s County |
L ÿ
a GLACIER i a No. 8 Airdrie
m R n k
a n e |
i NATIONAL KOOTENAY e ÿ
d v w B 9 Wheatland e a | o D A ÿ w
r e n |
PARK ÿ
Sp NATIONAL k 1A R ad
ek illi a iver County ho | rs
re ma PARK ÿ 1 L e C p ch 1X ak
a e e
h e MOUNT e lbow R tc n E iv |
w k R ÿ 68 er ÿ o s |
a REVELSTOKE Dunc i SIKSIKA 146
c u a v
S L e s h n r e | S NATIONAL PARK 95 ÿ k R a r 22X
i L i
v BUGABOO y o
e v
93 ra r
r e
p |
SWITSEMALPH 6 PROVINCIAL S es ÿ R | a PARK ÿ r M e TSUU T'INA 24 a l k e 7 c
Salmon M a b T G a r NATION 145
L e r F r k o e e
M a u r g
Arm t v a Vulcan
L L i M.D. of n o
Enderby a k r
k R L L County e | ÿ r ÿ
| ise Foothills
ll a a SHUSWAP a
k k
P No. 31 e e | 31 r ÿ
97APopulated Indigenous D e reek u v n i Land Base C c 23 x a R a n e
an L t usk a i k h Elko Section K GOAT RANGE e COLUMBIA EDEN
W
PROVINCIAL LAKE 3 F VALLEY 216
! Populated Centre PARK o r | ive d ÿ
|
ÿ R
ÿ | r ul B R PURCELL WILDERNESS r l i
e n |
g ÿ
i i M.D. of M.D. of Willow
s v |
ÿ Major Road CONSERVANCY 25 R
6 s e
31A PROVINCIAL PARK u r Ranchland 22 Creek No. 26 i L 97 v e
Railway VALHALLA r No. 66 BLOOD Lethbridge TOP OF THE
PROVINCIAL PIIKANI 148 County
Watercourse PARK WORLD
RESERVE r
KOKANEE PROVINCIAL PARK ive ÿ
Agriculture Land Reserve | R Lethbridge
y | GLACIER ÿ
ll
e |
ÿ PROVINCIAL PARK Kimberley 95A B
|
Green Area, Alberta ÿ 4 | 33 ÿ 3A Municipal District Elko Section r M.D. of 52 Cranbrook e
K Fernie v i
o Nelson R Pincher Creek No. 9
Protected Area o
t k
e l
n CASTLE | a E ÿ Provincial Boundary y CASSIMAYOOKS 5 WILDLAND
L
a PROVINCIAL PARK 62
k
|
Waterbody ÿ e TOBACCO
| WATERTON 0 20 40 60 80 3B ÿ CRESTON 1 PLAINS 2 Cardston LAKES 3 County kilometres NATIONAL PARK 1:2,185,000 Trail 123513444-0009 - RevC NAD 1983 UTM Zone 11N UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Sources: Base Data - Governments of Canada, Alberta, British Columbia Disclaimer: This map is for illustrative purposes to support this Stantec project; questions can be directed to the issuing agency. Thematic Data - Stantec, TC Energy Location of Nearest Populated Land Base of Engaged Indigenous Groups Foothills West Path 2023 Project
Figure 2.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Purpose and Methods February 2021
2.4 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Purpose and Methods February 2021
2.1.1 Traditional Knowledge Studies
Through its Indigenous Engagement Program, Foothills has engaged potentially affected Indigenous groups to collect traditional knowledge (TK) and to incorporate this information into Project planning, as appropriate. Through the collection of TK with potentially affected Indigenous groups, Foothills aims to:
• identify and consider potential effects of the Project on the exercise or practice of Indigenous rights and current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes • incorporate TK in Project planning • identify concerns about the Project • propose measures to avoid, mitigate or otherwise manage potential adverse Project effects on Indigenous interests, and support or provide benefit to the exercise of Indigenous rights
Foothills provided participating Indigenous groups the opportunity to collect Project-specific TK independently or with the support of an environmental consultant to meet a group’s specific needs. Protocol agreements for the collection of TK are developed between Foothills and each participating Indigenous group with consideration to the guidance provided in the Filing Manual (CER 2020) and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Considering Indigenous Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Assessments Conducted under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEA Agency 2015).
At the time of filing, Project-specific TK study reports have been completed by Blood Tribe and Siksika Nation. Foothills will continue to engage potentially affected Indigenous groups, and information provided by Indigenous groups following submission of the ESA, including Project-specific TK studies, will be reviewed in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate.
The status of the TK studies for the Project is provided in the Application.
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
A literature review was conducted to provide an overview of existing publicly available information for Indigenous groups engaged on the Project.
The literature review focused on information related to the availability of traditionally harvested resources, access to traditional resources and areas, and locations of cultural importance that support the exercise of rights as described by Indigenous groups. The literature review considers information from the following sources:
• studies previously completed by the engaged Indigenous groups for other development projects • regulatory filings for similar types of resource development projects (e.g., pipelines, compressor stations) • government reports and databases
2.5 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Purpose and Methods February 2021
• historical and ethnographic literature • relevant internet sources (e.g., Indigenous group websites)
Information was drawn from sources relevant to the locations of the Project components and to the Indigenous groups engaged on the Project.
As part of ongoing Project engagement, the results of the literature review, including source information, were shared with Indigenous groups. Indigenous groups were invited to review and provide Foothills with feedback and additional sources of information so that Foothills can incorporate the information into the TK and ESA. Some groups provided feedback on the literature review, while other groups did not provide a response. Where feedback has been received by Indigenous groups, these responses have been summarized in Section 3.0.
2.3 SPATIAL BOUNDARIES
Information obtained from the Indigenous Engagement Program, TK studies, and literature review was considered primarily in relation to the Project. The following spatial boundaries are defined for the assessment of potential effects on TLRU:
• Project Development Area (PDA) – Consists of the anticipated area of physical disturbance associated with the construction and operation of the Project. For this Project, the PDA of the Elko Section is approximately 32 km long and 75 meter (m) wide corridor totaling 236.3 ha in area, including the pipeline right-of-way (ROW) and temporary workspace. • Local Assessment Area (LAA): The TLRU LAA includes the PDA and a 1 km buffer around the PDA. The LAA of these supporting VCs (aquatic resources, soil capability, vegetation and wetlands, and wildlife and wildlife habitat) are the areas in which direct (e.g., habitat loss) and indirect (e.g., sensory disturbance) effects of the Project on TLRU can be predicted with a level of confidence that allows for assessment and there is reasonable expectation that those potential effects will be of concern. This LAA definition does not preclude consideration of interactions beyond the LAA, as identified. • Regional Assessment Area (RAA): The TLRU RAA includes a 15 km buffer around the PDA, which represents the maximum combined extent of the RAA for aquatic resources, soil capability, vegetation and wetlands, and wildlife and wildlife habitat boundaries. The RAA of these supporting VCs provide the regional context for the predicted effects of the Project on TLRU.
The TLRU RAA was selected for the purpose of identifying existing conditions related to the exercise or practice of Indigenous rights because it represents the combined extents of potential effects on the environmental valued components that directly and indirectly support the exercise or practice of Indigenous rights in the TLRU RAA (e.g., wildlife, vegetation, etc.).
This report also considers the considered the Project’s potential to influence the activities of Indigenous rightsholders associated with socio-economic VCs, such as, employment and economy, infrastructure and services, social and cultural well-being and health.
2.6 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.0 INDIGENOUS RIGHTS
Section 35 rights are understood to be those practices, traditions and customs integral to the distinctive culture of the Indigenous group claiming the right (SCC 2003, 1996). Foothills understands that, generally, these rights are fact and site-specific (AANDC 2011).
Sections 3.1 to 3.2 provide information on the asserted or established Indigenous rights of the potentially affected Indigenous peoples in the TLRU RAA. Summaries specific to each Indigenous group follow in Section 3.3. The context for the practice or exercise of Indigenous rights in relation to the Project are provided in Section 3.4. Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes and affirms existing Indigenous rights (SCC 2016).
3.1 INDIGENOUS RIGHTS
The Project is located within unceded lands not subject to treaty with the Crown. Based on their known areas or interests, the following Indigenous groups have asserted section 35 rights in the Project area:
• Adams Lake Indian Band • Akisq’nuk First Nation • British Columbia Métis Federation • Ktunaxa Nation Council • Lower Kootenay First Nation • Métis Nation British Columbia • Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 • Qwelminte Secwepemc • Shuswap Indian Band • St. Mary's Indian Band • Tobacco Plains Indian Band
Although the Project is not located within boundaries of Treaty 6 and Treaty 7, based on their known areas of interest, the following First Nations have also asserted section 35 rights in the TLRU RAA.
Treaty 7:
• Blood Tribe • Piikani Nation • Siksika Nation • Stoney Nakoda Nations • Tsuut’ina Nation
3.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Treaty 6:
• Samson Cree Nation
Through engagement with Foothills on the Project, Blood Tribe identified that due to the amount of large development projects that include metallurgical coal mines they are requesting that the federal government approve a Regional Impact Assessment for the entirety of the land area that may be potentially impacted, which includes this Project.
Additionally, through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe and Siksika Nation stated they do not agree with the approach taken for literature reviews and Foothills’s request for information on the requirements of the CER’s Interim Filing Guidelines are invalid and fundamentally flawed. Blood Tribe and Siksika Nation noted that, based on their interpretation of the CER’s Interim Filing Guidelines (now CER Filing Manual), Foothills is required to take an approach that is more involved and requires a more in-depth analysis of impacts on Blood Tribe’s and Siksika Nation’s Rights than in the former National Energy Board process. Blood Tribe and Siksika Nation reported that although the Project footprint is small relative to the extent of footprint in the region, it will contribute to cumulative impacts by adding disturbance to the landscape. The geographic extent of the cumulative impacts is both site-specific and regional, the timing and duration of the cumulative impacts will be long-term and permanent, the cumulative impacts will be irreversible, and the cumulative impacts to cultural wellbeing will be high, or significant (IEGAG 2020a,b; Attachment A).
Foothills will continue to work collaboratively with each engaged Indigenous group to respond to Project- related concerns and provide updates based on outcomes of Foothills engagement including how their input influenced Project planning.
3.2 MÉTIS RIGHTS
The Métis Nation British Columbia and the Government of Canada signed a Memorandum of Understanding in 2018 to enhance government-to-government relationships based on the recognition of rights, respect, co-operation and partnership (MNBC 2018). The Métis Nation Relationship Accord II was signed by the Métis Nation British Columbia and the Province of British Columbia, with the goal of reconciliation between the Province and the Métis people (MNBC 2018) in addition to recommitting to acknowledging reconciliations connection to the “constitutionally protected rights of Métis protected by Section 35” (Isaac 2016).
3.3 EXERCISED OR PRACTICED INDIGENOUS RIGHTS
The following provides information on the ways in which Indigenous rights are exercised or practiced in the TLRU RAA, and includes, as available:
• the quality, quantity or distribution of resources involved in or required for exercise of rights • access to the resources used or required to exercise the rights
3.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
• locations or areas of cultural importance where rights are exercised • timing and seasonality of the exercise of rights • cultural traditions, laws and governance systems that inform the manner in which Indigenous groups may exercise their rights
Information contained in this section is presented with a focus on the Project and is not meant to reflect the entirety of Indigenous groups’ exercise of Indigenous rights within a given traditional territory or occupancy area, nor is it a complete depiction of the dynamic way of life and systems of knowledge maintained by Indigenous groups engaged on the Project.
3.3.1 Blood Tribe
Blood Tribe (Band No. 435), also known as Kainai First Nation, is a part of the Blackfoot Confederacy along with Piikani Nation and Siksika Nation (INAC 2020a). A Blackfoot speaking community, the Blood Tribe’s traditional territory extends from the Rocky Mountains to the west; the Sand Hills to the east; the North Saskatchewan region to the north, and the Yellowstone region to the South (Blood Tribe 2019a). Blood Tribe entered into Treaty 7 in 1877 with the understanding that all parties would “share the grass of the Earth” (Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council 1997). Blood Tribe believed and understood that through the treaty the territory would be shared and promises made through the treaty would improve their way of life, as their former way of life was no longer viable (Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council 1997). Blood Tribe covers a land area of approximately 136,264 ha and includes two reserves (INAC 2020a):
• Blood 148 • Blood 148A
As of December 2020, Blood Tribe had a registered population of 12,724 Individuals. Of the 8,532 living on reserve, 4,274 were male and 4,258 were female; of the 216 living on other reserves, 116 were male and 100 were female; of the four living on Crown land, one was male and three were female; and of the 3,972 living off reserve, 1,885 were male and 2,087 were female (INAC 2020a). Blood Tribe is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and 12 Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020a).
Blood Tribe has an active Treaty Land Entitlement. A June 2019 Federal Court ruling on the Blood Tribe Big Claim, found that Canada was in breach of Treaty 7 and that Blood Tribe was entitled to an additional 258 square kilometers of Reserve land. Negotiations to determine appropriate compensation continue (INAC 2020p; CBC 2019).
The Blood Tribe Administration has several departments, including those responsible for housing, public works including water treatment and road maintenance, and land management (Blood Tribe 2019b). Employment and skills training is offered through the Blood Tribe Economic Development Department. The Economic Development Department is organized into the Business Development and Corporate Development areas, providing small business support, training, and other services (Blood Tribe 2019c). Blood Tribe health services are available at the Standoff and Levern Clinics, as well as the Dental Clinic,
3.3 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
and all operate in collaboration with both western and traditional medicinal practices (Blood Tribe 2018). The Kainai Board of Education presides over a high school, a middle school, an elementary school, as well as the Saipoyi Community School and the Kainai Alternate Academy (Kainai Board of Education 2019). Red Crow Community College is also a post-secondary education option in the community (RCC n.d.).
The draft overview of desktop material provided for Blood Tribe’s review included only publicly available materials. As per its letter to Foothills dated March 18, 2020 for the proposed Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2022 Project and through follow-up engagement with Foothills for this Project, Blood Tribe has requested Foothills consider the following additional reports for Project planning:
• IEG Consulting Group [IEG]. 2018. Cumulative effects assessment for Kainai Nation. Prepared for: Kainai First Nation and JFK Law. Prepared By: M. Catlson, K. Berg, T. Dyke, B. Stelfox & J. Straker, Integral Ecology Group and ALCES Group. Accessed March 2020. • Oak Road Concepts Inc. 2018a. Blood Tribe / Kainai Traditional Knowledge & Use Assessment. Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Author: Dermot O’Connor. Accessed March 2020.
Foothills understands that the sources listed above are confidential documents and includes them here at the direction of Blood Tribe with the understanding that this information may in future form part of the public record.
Blood Tribe’s nearest populated land base, Blood 148 Reserve, is located 86 km east of the Elko Section.
Blood Tribe completed two Project-specific studies that provided information about the exercise or practice of their rights in or near the Project areas (IEGAG 2020b, Oak Road Concepts 2020b). The results of these studies are incorporated below. Foothills’ responses to the concerns raised by Blood Tribe are provided in Attachment A.
3.3.1.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise Rights
Wildlife
Blood Tribe is reliant on numerous wildlife species for food and clothing, including bison, cougar, coyote, elk, pronghorn antelope, white-tailed and mule deer, moose, mountain sheep (big horn), mountain goat, ruffed and sharp-tailed grouse, Canada goose, mallard duck, merganser duck, turkey, and wolves (AMEC 2009; Oak Road Concepts 2020b, 2018a, 2018b; Attachment A). Blood Tribe reported that trapping is an important cultural activity and targeted species include wolf, red fox, coyote, muskrat, beaver and mink for hides. They also harvest golden eagles, grizzly bear, black bear, beaver, hawk, and osprey for ceremonial purposes, and noted these species are of cultural significance (Oak Road Concepts 2018a, Riversdale 2015). Other harvested animals include rabbit, squirrel, duck, goose, partridge, and swan as well as bighorn sheep in the winter months (Riversdale 2015). Blood Tribe historically supplemented diets by making pemmican from bison meat and dried berries (Riversdale 2015). Hunting is an important part of
3.4 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Blood Tribe’s heritage, and Blood Tribe stated that all parts of an animal killed were used (Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council 1997).
Through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe stated that hunting may occur in the TLRU RAA as it is within the historical range for Blackfoot hunters (Oak Road Concepts 2020b; Attachment A). Blood Tribe has previously reported concerns that chemicals, pollutants, noise, vehicle traffic, and construction work associated with development projects will negatively impact animal health and availability (AMEC 2009, Alberta Government 2020a). Blood Tribe previously indicated concerns for impacts to beaver and their habitat which would impact the overall ecosystem health and biodiversity (Oak Road Concepts 2019).
Through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe expressed concern about decreased quality of wildlife species harvested for consumption in the Study Area1 and a general decline in hunting success (IEGAG 2020b; Attachment A).
Blood Tribe notes that increased conversion of the regional landscape to anthropogenic cover types, such as farmland, has created an increase in hunting pressure and has affected wildlife habitat, putting elk and mule deer at risk (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe has observed that habitat loss has negatively affected the moose, elk and mule deer populations and increased their mortality risk, and that a high density of linear footprints negatively affects elk and mule deer populations (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe has previously indicated that a decrease in effective habitat for elk and mule deer due to expansion and development activities will decrease their ability to procure mule deer for traditional purposes (IEG 2018).
Blood Tribe has previously reported concerns that there will be a negative cumulative effect on wildlife due to habitat quality, climate change, and multiple sources of mortality including regulated hunting, Indigenous hunting, poaching, noise displacement, and vehicle collisions (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe has also noted a decrease in populations of eagles, geese, ravens, crows, and white swans, and indicated that they no longer see white swans or cranes (Oak Road Concepts 2018a). Indirect effects from the industrial development on wildlife was also previously noted as a concern as it would affect Blood Tribe’s hunting practices, which have a protected status since hunting is an Aboriginal and Treaty right (Alberta Government 2020a). The ability to continue hunting is a concern that was previously reported by Blood Tribe, so the cumulative effect of land loss from multiple projects needs to be considered (Alberta Government 2020a).
Vegetation
Through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe reported that plants, including roots, stems, leaves, and berries, are harvested for medicinal and subsistence purposes (Oak Road Concepts 2020b; Attachment A). Blood Tribe reported gathering berries and plants to supplement their diets and using lodgepole pine for making tipis and travois (AMEC 2009). Other plants gathered include alpine fir, juniper, fireweed, bearberry, and spike moss (Riversdale 2015). Berries gathered include Saskatoon berries, chokecherries, and silverberries (AMEC 2009). Additionally, plant species such as sage, cactus, sweet
1 In their Project-specific study, Blood Tribe defined the Study Area as an area that covers a landscape of 175,250 km2 in southern Alberta and southeastern BC, encompassing the Project.
3.5 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
grass, and old man’s whiskers are gathered and used for food, ceremony, and medicinal purposes (AMEC 2009). Blood Tribe Elders have noted the importance of berries, and that they are often stored for use in the winter months and are a staple (Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council 1997). Blood Tribe has previously indicated that reclamation could encourage the regrowth of non-native species, contributing to a loss of local plant diversity (Oak Road Concepts 2019).
Blood Tribe has indicated that species of subsistence use include blueberries. gooseberries and huckleberries, wild licorice, horsetail, dry tree moss, moist ground moss, yarrow, rosehip, raspberries, thimbleberries and mushrooms; willow branches, tamarack, birch logs, poplar, aspen and cottonwood are used for fuel and construction material (Oak Road Concepts 2018a, 2018b). Species of medicinal use include those mentioned above and lodgepole pine, willow bark, sweet pine, pine sap, evergreen, licorice, cow parsnip (Indian rhubarb), bear root, “laydown root”, and birch and poplar bark (Oak Road Concepts 2018a). Tobacco is used for ceremony by Blood Tribe (Oak Road Concepts 2018a). Blood Tribe has indicated that lodgepole pine is harvested continually for tipi poles, log cabins, fences, corrals, and that the sap and resin is used as glue in construction and can be chewed for medicinal use (Oak Road Concepts 2018a). Harvesting of medicinal plants implies particular customs and protocols, including timing and method of use. Blood Tribe members undergo guidance and training from Elders prior to the harvest of some plants (Oak Road Concepts 2018a).
Blood Tribe has previously expressed concern about the lack of their involvement in vegetation, reclamation and monitoring programs, and that reclamation plan objectives are not always met (Alberta Government 2020a). Additionally, it was previously mentioned that loss of ecosites through the removal of old growth forest, rare plants, wetlands and lands with high traditional use potential would negatively impact the quality and quality of traditional resources available for harvest by Blood Tribe. The removal of vegetation also allows opportunities for non-native vegetation to invade the area, which could cause irreversible changes to the native flora and fauna and increase the risk for forest fires (Alberta Government 2020a). Blood Tribe has previously expressed concern about the timing of harvesting medicinal and ceremonial plants prior to industrial development construction or impacts (Alberta Government 2020a).
Fish
Blood Tribe historically fished for trout using traditional tools such as wire and sticks (Riversdale 2015). Through engagement with Foothills and in previous studies, Blood Tribe expressed their right to fish cutthroat trout, brook trout, bull trout, and rainbow trout as well as burbot, longnose dace, mountain whitefish, perch, northern pike, and walleye for subsistence purposes (Oak Road Concepts 2020b, 2019; Attachment A). Blood Tribe previously raised concerns over the health of fish populations and members having to travel further to fish (Oak Road Concepts 2018b).
Through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe expressed concern about decreased quality of fish species harvested for consumption in the Study Area and a general decline in fishing success (IEGAG 2020b; Attachment A).
3.6 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Blood Tribe notes that there has been increased pressures to fish and fish habitat due to the conversion of the regional landscape to anthropogenic cover types such as farmland (IEG 2008). Blood Tribe has indicated concern regarding fish and fish habitat, noting an increased risk to populations due to linear edges, stream fragmentation (including those fragmented by culverts), climate change, and increased access to anglers (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe also previously expressed concerns regarding the potential impact of industrial development on traditional fishing (Oak Road Concepts 2018a), and that chemicals and pollutants used during an industrial development’s life will impact fish health (Alberta Government 2020a). Blood Tribe has previously expressed concern for the following species: westslope cutthroat trout, brook trout, rainbow trout, mountain whitefish and bull trout (Alberta Government 2020a).
Water
Waterways are used as drinking water sources, and Blood Tribe has previously expressed concerns for the impacts of development on water sources and water quality, especially because polluted water would negatively impact the health of animals, fish and birds (Oak Road Concepts 2018b, Alberta Government 2020a). Blood Tribe has noted that due to development in the Grassy Mountain area, there has been an increase in concern regarding potential water contamination (IEG 2018).
Blood Tribe has noted that natural spring features are part of sites or areas of current use for ceremonial, spiritual, cultural, educational or historic value, or unique ecological characteristics which are of interest to the Blood Tribe (Oak Road Concepts 2018a). In particular, Blood Tribe identified a sulphur spring, located to the northwest of Turtle Mountain in Alberta which was used for healing (Oak Road Concepts 2018a).
3.3.1.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Blood Tribe utilizes rivers as travel corridors, to travel between the plains and mountains (Oak Road Concepts 2018b). Blood Tribe historically would move through the prairies to the treed rivers during the winter, travelling to shelter from the cold winter (Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council 1997). Blood Tribe continues to practice in seasonal rounds through their territory to hunt and gather (Riversdale 2015). In their signing of Treaty 7, Blood Tribe understood it to include the promise of access to wildlife and the freedom to roam and acquire food and clothing (Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council 1997).
Through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe reported that access to the Elko Section is possible via logging roads in the Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and Morrissey Creek valleys, however some roads may not permit vehicle access in all seasons (Oak Road Concepts 2020b; Attachment A). The Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and Morrissey Creek valleys are located within the TLRU RAA. Blood Tribe stated that development in the Study Area has led to a decline in average forest age by around 27% since pre-settlement, has converted 32% to development footprint, and has reduced intact landscapes to only 22%. Accessibility for traditional uses in the Study Area has declined by almost two thirds due to land conversion and the establishment of protected areas that restrict accessibility. Blood Tribe members have experienced reduced access to traditional land use areas in the region and overall reduced opportunities to hunt and fish due to increased private land ownership, increased competition from recreational users, and changes to and enforcement of hunting and fishing regulations.
3.7 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Blood Tribe has indicated that hunting in remote locations requires increased time and resources that some members can not afford; success in unfamiliar locations is not guaranteed and reduces the opportunity for Blood Tribe (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe expressed that the conversion of traditional land use (TLU) suitable Crown lands to private property and other restricted land uses (e.g., parks and ecological reserves) has been a primary driver of decreased access to TLU suitable lands (IEG 2018; Oak Road Concepts 2018a). Crowsnest Pass has seen an increase in settlement and industrial expansion, and Blood Tribe has indicated that this has created a constraint on hunting (Oak Road Concepts 2018a). Blood Tribe has indicated that provincial parks and ecological reserves such as Beauvais Lake, Castle Provincial Park, Plateau Mountain, Westcastle Wetlands Ecological Reserve, among others have restricted where Blood Tribe is able to practice their TLU activities (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe has indicated that negotiating access to Crown land and maintaining access to continue to hunt in the future is a priority for Blood Tribe (Oak Road Concepts 2018a).
Blood Tribe previously indicated that if they can no longer hunt or fish, then their Treaty rights are negatively impacted (Government of Alberta 2020a). Blood Tribe has previously indicated concerns regarding loss of access to areas traditionally used on Crown land and restricted access to private lands (Alberta Government 2020a). They have also previously indicated concerns regarding access to hunting and gathering areas due to construction, noise, and traffic and seasonal access restrictions associated with development projects (Oak Road Concepts 2019). Loss of access has been previously attributed to difficulties to obtain elements important to cultural and spiritual practices involved in the maintenance and replenishment of the Beaver Bundle (Oak Road Concepts 2019). Blood Tribe has previously expressed concern for high density linear footprints, which provided increased hunting access (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe has previously indicated that if access restrictions are put in place there would be a possibility for effects to be felt by plant harvesters during the spring and summer with high levels of frequency (Oak Road Concepts 2018a).
No specific trails and travelways that provide access to the resources used or required for Blood Tribe to exercise rights were identified within the Elko Section TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.1.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Blood Tribe noted that their right to hunt, trap, and fish for food are guaranteed by Treaty 7 and the Constitution Act, and that these rights are exercised on available lands within their traditional territory (Oak Roads Concepts 2019). Blood Tribe has cultural and spiritual sites throughout their traditional territory, including sweat lodges, burials, rock art locations, and bison jumps (NGTL 2018). Blood Tribe has previously noted that changes to local wildlife, vegetation, water, and air in addition to sensory disturbances reduces the viability of the area for traditional activities including hunting, fishing, gathering, travel, occupancy, and spiritual or ceremonial uses (Oak Road Concepts 2019). Blood Tribe previously conveyed that they do not hunt or fish in national parks, provincial parks and ecological reserves. Hunting and fishing, in addition to the aforementioned sites, does not occur in close proximity approximately 500 m to well sites and other industrial sites; within 500 m of settlements, rural residences, and other
3.8 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
features (e.g., airports, highways, etc.) that are used by people for non-TLU activities; and hunting does not occur adjacent (approximately 100 m) to all roads (IEG 2018). Blood Tribe has previously expressed concern about effects on their members’ psychological wellbeing and sense of connection to their traditional territory should known, or undiscovered, sites of archaeological, cultural or historical importance be destroyed or disturbed, even accidentally (Alberta Government 2020a).
Through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe stated that Crowsnest Pass and the East Kootenays are medicinal and subsistence plant harvesting areas used by Blackfoot people (Oak Road Concepts 2020b; Attachment A). The East Kootenays and Crowsnest Pass are located outside the TLRU RAA. Additionally, Blood Tribe identified Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and McEvoy Creek as waterbodies with traditional use fish species (Oak Road Concepts 2020b; Attachment A). McEvoy Creek is crossed by the Project, while Coal Creek and Michel Creek Valley are located in the TLRU RAA.
Also, through engagement with Foothills, Blood Tribe explained that the area between the Flathead River watershed and the Elk River watershed has historical zones of encounter between Blackfoot and Ktunaxa and Flathead peoples. Blood Tribe reported that there is the potential for discovery of sites of historical, archaeological, or cultural interest to the Blackfoot in this area (Oak Road Concepts 2020b; Attachment A). The area between the Flathead River watershed and the Elk River watershed is within the PDA.
3.3.2 British Columbia Métis Federation
The British Columbia Métis Federation is a non-profit association that works with Métis communities to ensure the wellbeing of its members. The British Columbia Métis Federation strives to build relationships with Métis communities and service delivery organizations throughout British Columbia. They respect and honour eight core values in recognition of their grassroots Métis culture. These values include trust, honesty, integrity, accountable leadership, support for Métis Elders and youth, commitment, vision and empowerment of each Métis person (BCMF 2016).
The organization consists of seven board members, four economic development board members, three British Columbia Métis Federation staff, one economic development staff, one president, and two contracting companies (BCMF 2016).
The British Columbia Métis Federation operates the Economic Development Corporation, with the goal of promoting self-sustainability for the Federation and supporting Métis-owned businesses (BCMF 2016).
Through engagement with Foothills on the Project, the British Columbia Métis Federation identified the communities in Victoria, the Lower Mainland, Kelowna, Kamloops, Clearwater, Prince George, Hudson Hope, Fort Nelson, and Terrace as partner communities.
Distance of the Project to British Columbia Métis Federation was not calculated because there is no unique land base attributed to this group.
3.9 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
On December 14, 2020, in response to feedback sought by Foothills, the British Columbia Métis Federation shared additional information for review and incorporation to the ESA. Foothills advised the British Columbia Métis Federation that in keeping with the intent of the British Columbia Métis Federation’s request, this information would be appended to the Application, as provided in Attachment B, and includes an overview of Métis historical and contemporary occupation, cultural customs, practices, and land use relative to the Trans Mountain Expansion Project corridor.2 Foothills notes that the additional information provided in Attachment B will be reviewed in the context of the ESA for incorporation into Project planning. If identified, traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS) filed prior to construction.
3.3.2.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise of Rights
The literature review and engagement with Foothills did not identify available information regarding the quality, quantity or distribution of resources involved in or required for the exercise of rights associated with British Columbia Métis Federation.
3.3.2.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
No specific current trails or travelways that provide access to resources used or required by the British Columbia Métis Federation to exercise rights were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.2.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where British Columbia Métis Federation rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.3 Ktunaxa Nation Council
Ktunaxa Nation Council, also identified as Ktunaxa Nation Council Society by Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada/Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, is the governing body of the Ktunaxa Nation and is comprised of the elected council of each of the four bands located in British Columbia (Ktunaxa 2019a). The four bands are Akisq’nuk (?Akisq’nuk) First Nation, Tobacco Plains Indian Band (ʔakink̓ umǂasnuqǂiʔit), St. Mary’s Indian Band (?aq’am), and Lower Kootenay First Nation (yaqan nuykiy) (Ktunaxa 2019b). Ktunaxa Nation Council originated in the 1970s to promote the political and social development of the Nation. In 1991 the Council’s name was changed to Ktunaxa/Kinbasket
2 The BC Metis Federation Terrestrial Land Use Study Final Report – June 2020 is available at: http://bcmetis.com/2020/07/terrestrial-land-use-study-final-report/. The views expressed in the Terrestrial Land Use Study Final Report belong solely to British Columbia Métis Federation and do not necessarily represent those of Foothills.
3.10 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Tribal Council to reflect the origins of the two language groups (Ktunaxa and Secwepemc) of the communities that were represented by the Council. In 2005, following the departure of the Shuswap Indian Band (Kinbasket), the Council’s name was changed to Ktunaxa Nation Council. The Ktunaxa Nation Council is made up of the Chiefs and Council of the Ktunaxa Nation (Ktunaxa 2019a). The Ktunaxa Nation Council’s goals include “preservation and promotion of Ktunaxa traditional knowledge, language, and culture, community and social development and wellness, land and resource development, economic investment, and self-government”, and the Council is accountable to the Chiefs and Council of the four Ktunaxa Nations (Ktunaxa 2019a).
The Ktunaxa Nation3 signed a Rights Recognition and Core Treaty Memorandum of Understanding with Canada and British Columbia in 2018, wherein the Ktunaxa is acknowledged to have existing Indigenous rights, including Indigenous title, as per section 35 of the Constitution Act, and that all three parties are now engaged in “substantive discussions to explore a rights recognition approach to treaty” (Ktunaxa Nation Rights MOU 2018).
Ktunaxa Nation Council has filed a protective writ in the Supreme Court of British Columbia with respect to their asserted Indigenous title, in order to protect their right to claim damages within statutory limitation periods (Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society 2003).
Ktunaxa Nation Council offers a wide range of training and employment related services, including individual training programs, workshops and funded training programs and employment development support. The Ktunaxa Nation Council Employment and Training is one of 14 Indigenous groups with an Indigenous Skills and Employment Training/Aboriginal Skills and Employment Training Strategy agreement funded by Service Canada (Ktunaxa 2019c). Ktunaxa Nation Council also has social sector services including health initiatives, the Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Child and Family Services Society, kinship care, employment services, urban centres, and Street Angel (a justice service for youth and adults who need legal assistance) (Ktunaxa 2019d). The Paqmi Nuqyuk is an early year program offered through the Ktunaxa Kinbasket Child and Family Services Society to provide services including education, culture and language, health and nutrition, drop-in parenting groups, and infant and child development services (Ktunaxa 2019e).
On January 11, 2021, in response to feedback sought by Foothills, Ktunaxa Nation Council related their concerns regarding the literature review conducted for the Project as it gives the reader the impression Ktunaxa Nation Council had input into the Project, whereas the view of Ktunaxa Nation Council is that engagement has only begun with Foothills. Ktunaxa Nation Council requested that the literature review not be used to guide the work for the Project. In response to this concern, Foothills communicated the intent of the literature review as one of several sources used to inform Project planning and re-confirmed its commitment to a Project-specific TK study with Ktunaxa Nation Council for incorporation to Project planning, in alignment with Ktunaxa Nation Council’s recommended engagement protocol with Foothills.
3 Ktunaxa Nation as represented by the Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council
3.11 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.3.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise Rights
Wildlife
Members of the Ktunaxa Nation Council have identified grizzly bear, black bear, mule deer, whitetail deer, elk, moose, caribou, beaver, wolverine, marten, muskrat, weasel, duck, American coot, and Canada geese as traditionally hunted species, with deer, elk and sheep hunting taking place in the spring (Riversdale 2015; Birdstone 2010; Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020a). Ktunaxa Nation Council members have previously expressed concerns about the effects of development on terrestrial ecosystems and wildlife (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010). Ktunaxa Nation Council and affiliated members previously noted concerns regarding industrial contaminants, dust, and other impacts to traditional food resources (VAST 2016). Ktunaxa Nation Council previously indicated that contamination associated with industrial development would decrease their confidence in the quality of traditional foods (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020b).
Vegetation
Ktunaxa Nation Council have identified western red cedar, black cottonwood, whitebark pine, pacific yew, beaked hazelnut, kinnikinnick, high-bush and low-bush cranberry, devil's club, Oregon grape, red osier dogwood, currants and gooseberries, wild potatoes, wild onions, wild tobacco, and cow parsnip as traditionally important plants (Riversdale 2015; Birdstone 2010; Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020a). Plants are used for sustenance and medicine, as well as crafting tools and canoes. Canoes are constructed with western white pine, birch, cedar and maple sap, or pitch from coniferous trees (Riversdale 2015). Choke cherry bark is used in crafting wooden tools (Riversdale 2015). Ktunaxa Nation Council members have expressed concerns about the introduction of noxious weeds and impacts to the terrestrial ecosystem (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010). Ktunaxa Nation Council and affiliated members previously noted concerns regarding industrial contaminants, dust, and other impacts to traditional food resources (VAST 2016).
Fish
The Ktunaxa Nation Council’s important fish species include kokanee, chinook, rainbow trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, sturgeon, burbot, cutthroat trout, northern pike, minnow and sucker (Riversdale 2015). Fishing is a valued activity and the Columbia River and its tributaries are identified as important fishing areas for members of the Ktunaxa Nation Council (Paskin 2009). Ktunaxa Nation Council members have previously expressed concerns about the effects of development on fish habitat and populations (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010).
3.12 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Water
Ktunaxa Nation Council and affiliated members note that water is respected and treated as sacred and central to life within Ktunaxa tradition and worldview (VAST 2016). Water and waterways are important to Ktunaxa Nation Council as fishing and plant-gathering sites are identified near water sources within their traditional territory (Riversdale 2015, Paskin 2009). Ktunaxa Nation Council has previously expressed concerns about the effects of industrial development on riparian habitats and water quality (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010; Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020a).
3.3.3.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Ktunaxa Nation Council historically used mountain passes and trails throughout their traditional territory (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010). These trails were used for travel and for hunting (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010). Waterways were frequently accessed for travel, with portages connecting water travel routes to land-based trails (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010). Traplines, hunting areas, and cultivation areas were located along these waterways and tributaries (Birdstone 2010). Ktunaxa Nation Council and affiliated members have expressed concerns regarding other projects about the disturbance effects of noise and the impacts on Ktunaxa sense of place in areas, specifically cultural-spiritual areas associated with nearby pictographs and trails and travelways (VAST 2016).
An archival trail exists near Michel Creek and parallels the modern Corbin Road. Michel Creek and Corbin Road is within the TLRU RAA (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020b).
3.3.3.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
For members of the Ktunaxa Nation Council, their territory is divided into six distinct districts (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2010):
• ʔaknuqǂuǂaḿm ʔamakʔis (Land of the Eagle) • Qukin ʔamakʔis (Land of the Raven) • ₵aḿna ʔamakʔis (Land of the Wood Tick) • ʔa₵pu ʔamakʔis (Land of the Wolverine) • Miƈqaqas ʔamakʔis (Land of the Chickadee) • Kyawac ʔamakʔis (Land of the Spruce)
Ktunaxa Nation Council and affiliated members note that they regard themselves as stewards of the land with responsibility for ancestral and archaeological sites and related values within the Ktunaxa traditional land (VAST 2016). Ktunaxa oral history and worldview recognizes the lands and waters of the Ktunaxa territory as alive, evolving, and the home of powerful forces whose travels, battles, and lives have left, and continue to leave, marks and remains across the Ktunaxa landscape. Ktunaxa Nation Council notes that the Rocky Mountains themselves are the living remains of a giant being who is one of the driving forces of Ktunaxa creation (VAST 2016). Ktunaxa Nation had identified that land use occurs within
3.13 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
streams, rivers, creeks, valley, and along higher elevation valleys and slopes with south and east-facing slopes (North Coal 2019). Ktunaxa Nation Council has identified traplines and hunting areas along tributaries of the Columbia River (Birdstone 2010). Areas along the tributaries of the Columbia River as well as mountain ranges have been identified as being used for subsistence food gathering and as cultivation areas (Birdstone 2010; Paskin 2009). Ktunaxa Nation Council previously stated that the use of trails and travelways is not limited to actual travel, but is included in teaching, conveying oral histories and as commemorative features that are known and pointed out as people travel through the area (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020a).
After the time of European contact, an ancestral group of the Ktunaxa Nation occupied the Elk River Drainage, and Ktunaxa Nation settled seasonally in the Elk River Valley (North Coal 2019). The Elk River Valley was also relied upon for resources such as fish, elk, berries, and deer (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020b). The Elk River Valley is located within the TLRU RAA.
It was also reported that camping occurs near rivers and lakes within their traditional territory (Birdstone 2010). Mountainous areas are used for the collection of medicines (Paksin 2009). Ktunaxa Nation Council identified that camping used to take place in the Elk River area (Birdstone 2010). The Elk River is within the TLRU RAA.
Ktunaxa Nation Council has also previously identified a number of activities that occur within the Sparwood Ridge, including cultural activities, habitation areas, subsistence gathering, transportation areas, and areas of environmental importance (Ktunaxa Nation Council 2020b). Sparwood Ridge is within the TLRU RAA.
3.3.4 Akisq’nuk First Nation
Akisq’nuk First Nation (Band No. 604), also known as ʔakisq̓ nuk, is an Indigenous group located in south- eastern British Columbia near Windermere. Akisq’nuk First Nation is one of the four First Nations that make up the Ktunaxa Nation Council along with St. Mary’s Indian Band, Lower Kootenay First Nation, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (Ktunaxa 2019a). Akisq’nuk First Nation are people of the Ktunaxa Nation, and their traditional territory extends through British Columbia, Alberta, Montana, Washington, and Idaho (Akisq’nuk 2017a). People of Akisq’nuk First Nation speak the Ktunaxa language, a language isolate not related to any others in the world (Akisq’nuk 2017a). The Akisq’nuk First Nation Columbia Lake 3 reserve covers a land area of approximately 3,273 ha (INAC 2020b). Additionally, the St. Mary’s 1A reserve is shared by Akisq’nuk First Nation, St. Mary’s Indian Band, Lower Kootenay First Nation, Shuswap Indian Band, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (INAC 2020q).
As of December 2020, Akisq’nuk First Nation had a registered population of 278 individuals. Of the 99 living on reserve, 54 were male and 45 were female; of the 56 living on other reserves, 30 were male and 26 were female; and of the 123 living off reserve 60 were male and 63 were female (INAC 2020b). Akisq’nuk First Nation is governed under a custom electoral system, with one Chief Councillor and four Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020b).
3.14 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
The Ktunaxa Nation4 signed a Rights Recognition and Core Treaty Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Canada and British Columbia in 2018, wherein the Ktunaxa is acknowledged to have existing Indigenous rights, including Indigenous title, as per section 35 of the Constitution Act, and that all three parties are now engaged in “substantive discussions to explore a rights recognition approach to treaty” (Ktunaxa Nation Rights MOU 2018). Akisq’nuk First Nation is in the process of developing a land code to assume legal authority over its reserve land (Akisq’nuk 2017a). Akisq’nuk First Nation, as an affiliate of the Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society, filed a protective writ of summons in the Supreme Court of British Columbia with respect to their asserted Indigenous title, in order to protect their right to claim damages within statutory limitation periods (Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society 2003)
Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council5 is negotiating with the Government of Canada and the Government of British Columbia in the B.C. treaty process on behalf of Akisq’nuk First Nation and three other bands of the Ktunaxa Nation. Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is in Stage 5 of the six-stage Treaty process, wherein technical and legal issues are resolved and the relationship among the parties within the agreement has been reached in principle (British Columbia n.d.-a; BC Treaty 2019). Akisq’nuk First Nation has filed a claim, indicating that the lands of Elkhorn Ranch were part of its traditional village and should have been reserved. This claim is active with the Government of Canada (INAC 2020p).
Akisq’nuk First Nation offers several services through its committees and administration offices, including housing, economic development, a recreation centre, and operates a recreation centre. Akisq’nuk First Nation provides elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education, language and (Akisq’nuk 2017b). The community has a health centre with programs to support wellness and general health, as well as care aide workers and community support (Akisq’nuk 2017b). Akisq’nuk First Nation owns and operates several businesses including the Akisq’nuk Natural Resources Corporation, Guide Outfitting Territory, Indian Beach Estates, and Lakeshore Resort and Campground (Akisq’nuk 2017c).
Akisq’nuk First Nation’s nearest populated land base, Columbia Lake 3 Reserve, is located 120 km northwest of the Elko Section.
3.3.4.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, the quality, quantity or distribution of traditional resources involved in or required for the exercise of rights by Akisq’nuk First Nation is discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.4.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, access to resources used or required by Akisq’nuk First Nation to exercise rights are discussed in Section 3.3.3.
4 Ktunaxa Nation as represented by the Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council 5 Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is a division of the Ktunaxa Nation Council created by the members of the Ktunaxa Nation to negotiate a treaty with the governments of Canada and British Columbia
3.15 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.4.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, locations or areas of cultural importance where Akiq’nuk First Nation exercise their rights are exercised are discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.5 Lower Kootenay First Nation
Lower Kootenay First Nation, also known as yaqan nuʔkiy, meaning “where the rock stands”, is an Indigenous group located in southeastern British Columbia near Creston. Lower Kootenay First Nation is one of the four First Nations that make up the Ktunaxa Nation Council along with St. Mary’s Indian Band, Akisq’nuk First Nation, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (Ktunaxa 2019a). Their traditional territory extends throughout British Columbia, Alberta, Montana, Washington, and Idaho (Lower Kootenay Band 2019a). People of the Lower Kootenay First Nation speak the Ktunaxa language, a language isolate not related to any others in the world (Lower Kootenay Band 2019a). Lower Kootenay First Nation reserves cover a land area of approximately 2,455 ha (INAC 2020c) and comprise the following reserves:
• Creston 1 • Lower Kootenay 1A • Lower Kootenay 1B • Lower Kootenay 1C • Lower Kootenay 2 • Lower Kootenay 3 • Lower Kootenay 4 • Lower Kootenay 5
Additionally, the St. Mary’s 1A reserve is shared by Akisq’nuk First Nation, St. Mary’s Indian Band, Lower Kootenay First Nation, Shuswap Indian Band, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (INAC 2020q).
As of December 2020, Lower Kootenay First Nation had a registered population of 246 individuals. Of the 110 living on reserve, 52 were male and 58 were female; of the 12 living on other reserves, nine were male and three were female; and of the 124 living off-reserve, 55 were male and 69 were female (INAC 2020c). Lower Kootenay First Nation is governed by a custom electoral system with one Chief and four Councillors elected to a three-year term (INAC 2020c).
The Ktunaxa Nation6 signed a Rights Recognition and Core Treaty Memorandum of Understanding with Canada and British Columbia in 2018, wherein the Ktunaxa is acknowledged to have existing Indigenous rights, including Indigenous title, as per Section 35 of the Constitution Act, and that all three parties are now engaged in “substantive discussions to explore a rights recognition approach to treaty” (Ktunaxa Nation Rights MOU 2018). Lower Kootenay First Nation, as an affiliate of the Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal
6 Ktunaxa Nation as represented by the Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council
3.16 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Council Society, filed a protective writ of summons in the Supreme Court of British Columbia with respect to their asserted Indigenous title, in order to protect their right to claim damages within statutory limitation periods (Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society 2003).
Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council7 is negotiating with the Government of Canada and the government of British Columbia in the British Columbia Treaty Process on behalf of Lower Kootenay First Nation and three other bands of the Ktunaxa Nation. Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is in Stage 5 of the six-stage Treaty process, wherein technical and legal issues are resolved and the relationship among the parties within the agreement has been reached in principle (British Columbia n.d.-b; BC Treaty 2019).
Lower Kootenay First Nation has three active Specific Clams in which they assert that there were statutory and fiduciary duties that Canada breached as a result of transfer of lands from a reserve to British Columbia for road purposes in the 1930s and 1950s (INAC 2020p).
Lower Kootenay First Nation offers a range of programs and services, including social and economic development, housing, public works, land and resources, and alcohol and drug services (Lower Kootenay Band 2019b). The Band provides health services which includes a nurse practitioner, a community health nurse, a dietitian, a community support worker, and a drug and alcohol worker (Lower Kootenay Band 2019c). Lower Kootenay First Nation has post secondary education assistance program students who wish to pursue post-secondary education (Lower Kootenay Band 2019d).
Lower Kootenay First Nation’s nearest populated land base, Creston 1 Reserve, is located 119 km southwest of the Elko Section.
3.3.5.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise Rights
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.3, Lower Kootenay First Nation noted that the numerous streams and springs within the area were accessed frequently for domestic use of water (Lower Kootenay Band 2019a). Flooding of the Kootenay River and silt deposition on the valley floor and wetland replenishing is important to the Lower Kootenay First Nation (Lower Kootenay Band 2019a).
3.3.5.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, access to resources used or required by Lower Kootenay First Nation to exercise rights is discussed in Section 3.3.3.
7 Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is a division of the Ktunaxa Nation Council created by the members of the Ktunaxa Nation to negotiate a treaty with the governments of Canada and British Columbia
3.17 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.5.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, Lower Kootenay First Nation identified the same locations or areas of cultural importance where Lower Kootenay First Nation exercise rights are discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.6 St. Mary’s Indian Band
St. Mary’s Indian Band (Band No. 602), also known as ?aqam, is an Indigenous group located in southeastern British Columbia. St. Mary’s Indian Band is one of the four First Nations that make up the Ktunaxa Nation Council along with Lower Kootenay First Nation, Akisq’nuk First Nation, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (Ktunaxa 2019a). Their traditional territory extends through British Columbia, Alberta, Montana, Washington, and Idaho (Aqam 2019a). People of St. Mary’s Indian Band speak the Ktunaxa language, a language isolate not related to any others in the world (Aqam 2019a). St. Mary’s Indian Band is comprised of five reserves that cover approximately 7,927 ha (INAC 2020d). The five reserves are as follows:
• Bummers Flat 6 • Cassimayooks (Mayook) 5 • Isidore’s Ranch 4 • Kootenay 1 • St. Mary’s 1 Additionally, the St. Mary’s 1A reserve is shared by Akisq’nuk First Nation, St. Mary’s Indian Band, Lower Kootenay First Nation, Shuswap Indian Band, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (INAC 2020q).
As of December 2020, St. Mary’s Indian Band had a registered population of 395 individuals. Of the 193 living on reserve, 97 were male and 96 were female; of the 25 living on other reserves, 11 were male and 14 were female; and of the 177 living off reserve, 87 were male and 90 were female (INAC 2020d). St. Mary’s Indian Band is governed under a custom electoral system, with one Chief and four Councillors, elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020d). The Ktunaxa Nation8 signed a Rights Recognition and Core Treaty Memorandum of Understanding with Canada and British Columbia in 2018, wherein the Ktunaxa is acknowledged to have existing Indigenous rights, including Indigenous title, as per section 35 of the Constitution Act, and that all three parties are now engaged in “substantive discussions to explore a rights recognition approach to treaty” (Ktunaxa Nation Rights MOU 2018). St. Mary’s Indian Band, as an affiliate of the Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society, filed a protective writ of summons in the Supreme Court of British Columbia with respect to their asserted Indigenous title, in order to protect their right to claim damages within statutory limitation periods (Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society 2003).
8 Ktunaxa Nation as represented by the Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council.
3.18 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council9 is negotiating with the Government of Canada and the Government of British Columbia in the B.C. treaty process on behalf of St. Mary’s Indian Band and three other bands of the Ktunaxa Nation. Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is in Stage 5 of the six-stage Treaty process, wherein technical and legal issues are resolved and the relationship among the parties within the agreement has been reached in principle (British Columbia n.d.-c; BC Treaty 2019).
St. Mary’s Indian Band has two claims in active negotiations with the Government of Canada, asserting that steps were not taken to prevent the alienation of St. Eugene Mission Farm Lands and that the sale of timber on Kootenay Indian Reserve No. 1 was without a proper surrender or consent from the band (INAC 2020p).
The Operations and Community Services Department of St. Mary’s Indian Band administers health services, income assistance, education and employment services, and other programs. ?aqamnik’ School is an elementary school serving kindergarten through grade 6 students located in the community, and assistance is provided to those who pursue post-secondary studies (Aqam 2019b). The Community Health Representative Team, led by a registered nurse, offers physical and mental health services, diabetes care and information sessions, and other wellness initiatives (Aqam 2019b). The community’s Economic Development Strategy aims to create a self-sufficient economy, and the ?aqam Community Enterprises corporation generates revenue and business opportunity for the community (Aqam 2019b).
St. Mary’s Indian Band’s nearest populated land base, Cassimayooks (Mayook) 5 Reserve, is located 50 km west of the Elko Section.
3.3.6.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise of Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, the quality, quantity or distribution of traditional resources involved in or required for the exercise of rights by St. Mary’s Indian Band is discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.6.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, access to resources used or required by St. Mary’s Indian Band to exercise rights is discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.6.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, locations or areas of cultural importance where St. Mary’s Indian Band exercise rights are discussed in Section 3.3.3.
9 Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is a division of the Ktunaxa Nation Council created by the members of the Ktunaxa Nation to negotiate a treaty with the governments of Canada and British Columbia.
3.19 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.7 Tobacco Plains Indian Band
Tobacco Plains Indian Band, also known as Yaq̓ it ʔa·knuqⱡi’it, is an Indigenous group located in southeastern British Columbia near Grasmere. Tobacco Plains First Nation is one of the four First Nations that make up the Ktunaxa Nation Council along with St. Mary’s Indian Band, Akisq’nuk First Nation, and Lower Kootenay First Nation (Ktunaxa 2019a). The traditional language of the Tobacco Plains Indian Band is Ktunaxa (TPIB 2018a). Their traditional territory extends approximately 70,000 square kilometers within the Kootenay region of British Columbia (southeastern corner) and includes areas in Alberta, Montana, Washington and Idaho (TPIB 2018a). The Tobacco Plains Indian Band (Band No. 603) Tobacco Plains 2 reserve covers a land area of approximately 4,277 ha. Additionally, the St. Mary’s 1A reserve is shared by Akisq’nuk First Nation, St. Mary’s Indian Band, Lower Kootenay First Nation, Shuswap Indian Band, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (INAC 2020q).
As of December 2020, Tobacco Plains Indian Band had a registered population of 218 individuals. Of the 78 living on reserve, 45 were male and 33 were female; of the 16 living on other reserves, 12 were male and four were female; and of the 124 living off reserve, 56 were male and 68 were female (INAC 2020e). Tobacco Plains Indian Band is governed under a custom electoral system with one Chief and four Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020e, TPIB 2018b).
Tobacco Plains Indian Band is a First Nation recognized under the Indian Act and holds rights, as per section 35 of the Constitution Act (Ktunaxa Nation Rights MOU 2018). Tobacco Plains Indian Band filed a protective writ of summons in the Supreme Court of British Columbia with respect to their asserted Indigenous title, in order to protect their right to claim damages within statutory limitation periods (Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society 2003).
Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council10 is negotiating with the Government of Canada and the Government of British Columbia in the BC treaty process on behalf of Tobacco Plains Indian Band and three other bands of the Ktunaxa Nation. Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is in Stage 5 of the six-stage Treaty process, wherein technical and legal issues are resolved and the relationship among the parties within the agreement has been reached in principle (British Columbia n.d.-d; BC Treaty 2019).
Tobacco Plains Indian Band has a claim active with the Specific Claims Tribunal asserting a breach of duties in the expropriation of a portion of Tobacco Plains 2 (INAC 2020p).
Tobacco Plains Indian Band offers a variety of services through several departments including social and education, health and wellness, housing and infrastructure, land and resources, and economic development. Tobacco Plains Indian Band education department aims to create to gain education and provide funding for education initiatives (TPIB 2018c). The Health and Wellness department offers basic health care and wellness services and providing access to specialized services for the community (TPIB 2018d).
10 Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council is a division of the Ktunaxa Nation Council created by the members of the Ktunaxa Nation to negotiate a treaty with the governments of Canada and British Columbia.
3.20 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Tobacco Plains Indian Band’s nearest populated land base, Tobacco Plains 2 Reserve, is located 27 km southwest of the Elko Section.
3.3.7.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise of Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, the quality, quantity or distribution of traditional resources involved in or required for the exercise of rights by Tobacco Plains Indian Band is discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.7.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, access to resources used or required by Tobacco Plains Indian Band to exercise rights is discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.7.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
As members of Ktunaxa Nation Council, locations or areas of cultural importance where Tobacco Plains Indian Band exercise rights are discussed in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.8 Métis Nation British Columbia
Métis Nation British Columbia is recognized as the Governing Nation for Métis in British Columbia by the Métis National Council, the Provincial Government of British Columbia and the Federal Government of Canada. Métis Nation British Columbia represents thirty-nine Métis Chartered Communities in the province and nearly 90,000 self-identified Métis people in the province, with 20,000 provincially registered as Métis Citizens. Métis Nation British Columbia has a vision to build a proud, self-governing, sustainable Nation in recognition of Inherent Rights for Métis citizens, and a mandate to continually enhance and develop opportunities in those communities through culturally relevant social and economic programs and services (MNBC n.d.).
The Métis Nation British Columbia operates under the mandate to develop and enhance opportunities for the Métis Chartered Communities and Métis people in British Columbia. The Métis Nation British Columbia is governed by a Board of Directors, which consists of eleven members including the President, Vice President, Women’s Provincial Chair, Youth Provincial Chair, and seven Regional Directors (MNBC 2020).
Métis Nation British Columbia provides various social and economic programs and services to its Chartered Communities (MNBC 2019a). The Nation works to create viable Métis businesses and job opportunities and sharing information and expertise between existing businesses through their Economic Development Strategy and online portal. Métis Nation British Columbia connects communities with their school districts and develops educational resources and provides health documents and resources (MNBC 2019a). Also offered are the Employment and Training Funding Programs to build employable skills in the community (MNBC 2019b).
3.21 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Distance of the Project to Métis Nation British Columbia was not calculated because there is no unique land base attributed to this group.
On January 8, 2021, in response to feedback sought by Foothills, Métis Nation British Columbia shared additional information for review and incorporation to the ESA. In keeping with the intent of Métis Nation British Columbia’s request, permission was sought by and granted to Foothills to append this information (Attachment C), which includes an overview of Métis historical context and land use relative to the Project area. Foothills notes that the additional information provided in Attachment C will be reviewed in the context of the ESA for incorporation into Project planning. If identified, traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and EAS filed prior to construction.
3.3.8.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise of Rights
Métis Nation British Columbia citizens who reside in southeastern British Columbia exercise their section 35 right to harvest in and around the Kootenay region, including hunting, trapping, fishing, and gathering plants (Stantec 2018). Traditional resources include ptarmigan, grouse, moose, caribou, elk, mountain goat, fisher, badger, wolverine, lynx, trout, grayling, and berries (CEA Agency 2016; MNBC 2010). Traditional harvesting occurs within the region, accessing resources for sustenance, social, and ceremonial purposes (MNBC 2016). Moose are considered a culturally significant and valuable sustenance species to the Métis (MNBC 2010).
Métis Nation British Columbia harvests materials such as firewood and drinking water. Predominately harvested berries include blueberries, cranberries, huckleberries, soapberries (hoshum), chokecherries, raspberries, strawberries, Saskatoon berries, and bilberries (kinnikinnick). Plants harvested for food purposes include mushrooms (i.e., chanterelles, pine and morels, etc.), wild potatoes, stinging nettle, rosehips, fireweed, dandelion (roots and greens), old-man’s beard (usnea), spruce chips, onions, wild asparagus, cattails, fiddleheads, puffballs, birch and saw-grass. Medicinal and ceremonial plant species include devil’s club, sage, cedar, wild mint, diamond willow fungus, red willow, peppermint, rat root, caribou weed, poplar bark, yarrow, goldenrod, bedstraw, red clover, juniper berry, plantain flowers, balsam pitch and dandelion root (PRGT 2014).
Concerns have arisen from previous development over the potential effect construction and operation of projects has in an area. Emphasis is placed by the Métis Nation British Columbia on the sustainable use of natural resources, “…stewardship of natural resources based on an ethic of respect for the land; balancing economic, productive, spiritual, ecological, and traditional values…and conserving biological diversity, soil, water, fish, wildlife, scenic diversity, and other natural resources” (MNBC 2016).
3.22 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.8.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Métis Nation British Columbia citizens previously noted that the Métis have a history of use throughout British Columbia, including the Columbia River system and the interior of British Columbia within the Kamloops and Nicola regions (MNBC 2014).
No specific trails or travelways that provide access to resources used or required for Métis Nation British Columbia to exercise rights were identified within the TLRU RAA through review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.8.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Métis Nation British Columbia citizens undertake current use activities within the Kootenay Region, including hunting, fishing, and plant gathering (Stantec 2018). Métis Nation British Columbia has previously identified that camping areas, cultural sites, and areas for spiritual practices are within the Kootenay Region (MNBC 2014).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Métis Nation British Columbia rights are exercised were identified within TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.9 Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4
Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 is one of the seven Métis Nation British Columbia regions. Region 4, or the Kootenay Region, encompasses the southeastern portion of the province, spanning west from the provincial border to Castlegar and north from the international border to Revelstoke and the edge of Glacier National Park of Canada. The Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 is comprised of six chartered communities (MNBC 2019a). The head office is in Surrey, BC (MNBC 2019c).
The Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4, as a member of the Métis Nation British Columbia, operates under the mandate to develop and enhance opportunities for the Métis Chartered Communities and Métis people in British Columbia. The Métis Nation British Columbia is governed by a Board of Directors, which consists of eleven members including the President, Vice President, Women’s Provincial Chair, Youth Provincial Chair, and seven Regional Directors (MNBC 2020).
Distance of the Project to Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 was not calculated because there is no unique land base attributed to this group.
3.23 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.9.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
As a region of chartered communities under Métis Nation British Columbia, Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 citizens who reside in southeastern British Columbia exercise their right to harvest, hunt, trap, fish, and gather plants. Traditional harvesting occurs within the region, accessing resources for sustenance, social, and ceremonial purposes (MNBC 2016). Traditional resources include ptarmigan, grouse, moose, caribou, elk, mountain goat, fisher, badger, wolverine, lynx, trout, grayling, and berries (CEA Agency 2016; MNBC 2010). Moose are considered a culturally significant and valuable sustenance species to the Métis (MNBC 2010).
As a member of Métis Nation of British Columbia, Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 harvests materials such as firewood and drinking water. Predominately harvested berries include blueberries, cranberries, huckleberries, soapberries (hoshum), chokecherries, raspberries, strawberries, Saskatoon berries, and bilberries (kinnikinnick). Plants harvested for food purposes include mushrooms (i.e., chanterelles, pine and morels, etc.), wild potatoes, stinging nettle, rosehips, fireweed, dandelion (roots and greens), old-man’s beard (usnea), spruce chips, onions, wild asparagus, cattails, fiddleheads, puffballs, birch and saw-grass. Medicinal and ceremonial plant species include devil’s club, sage, cedar, wild mint, diamond willow fungus, red willow, peppermint, rat root, caribou weed, poplar bark, yarrow, goldenrod, bedstraw, red clover, juniper berry, plantain flowers, balsam pitch and dandelion root (PRGT 2014).
Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 has expressed concerns in relation to previous development over the potential effect construction and operation of projects has in an area. Emphasis is placed by the Métis Nation British Columbia, which Region 4 is a branch of, on the sustainable use of natural resources, “…stewardship of natural resources based on an ethic of respect for the land; balancing economic, productive, spiritual, ecological, and traditional values…and conserving biological diversity, soil, water, fish, wildlife, scenic diversity, and other natural resources” (MNBC 2016).
3.3.9.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Métis Nation British Columbia citizens previously noted that the Métis have a history of use throughout British Columbia, including the Columbia River system and the interior of British Columbia within the Kamloops and Nicola regions (MNBC 2014).
No specific trails or travelways that provide access to resources used or required for Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 to exercise rights were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.24 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.9.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 citizens undertake current use activities within the Kootenay Region, including hunting, fishing, and plant gathering (Stantec 2018). Métis Nation British Columbia has previously identified that camping areas, cultural sites, and areas for spiritual practices are within the Kootenay Region (MNBC 2014).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4 rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.10 Piikani Nation
Piikani Nation (Band No. 436) signed Treaty 7 in 1877 and is a part of the Blackfoot Confederacy along with Siksika Nation and Blood Tribe. A Blackfoot speaking community, located near Pincher Creek Alberta, Piikani’s traditional territory extends from the Foothills to the west, east across the Prairies, and south into Heart Butte Montana (Dempsey 2018). Piikani Nation reserves cover a land area of approximately 45,677 ha (INAC 2020f) and are comprised of the following reserves:
• Piikani • Peigan Timber Limit ‘B’
As of December 2020, Piikani Nation had a registered population of 3,917 individuals. Of the 2,435 living on reserve, 1,211 were male and 1,224 were female; of the 38 living on other reserves, 20 were male and 18 were female; and of the 1,444 living off reserve 679 were male and 765 were female (INAC 2020f). Piikani Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and eight Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020f).
Piikani Nation Administration provides many services through various departments in the community. Departments include Employment Services, Public Works, Social Development (including literacy and income support), Counselling, Day Care, and Child and Family Services (Piikani Nation n.d.). The community operates several small businesses, as well as Piikani Resource Development Ltd., which manages various economic development projects and programs (Piikani Nation n.d.). The Peigan Board of Education is responsible for the community’s education and runs an elementary and a secondary school (Piikani Nation n.d.). Health services are offered at various facilities through the Aakom Kiiyii Health Department (Piikani Nation n.d.).
Piikani Nation’s nearest populated land base, Piikani Reserve, is located 70 km east of the Elko Section.
3.25 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.10.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
Piikani Nation has a strong history of reliance on animals for sustenance and clothing, originating from their nomadic history of following herds of bison (AMEC 2010; Riversdale 2015). Today, hunting remains an important activity. Piikani Nation reported harvesting a variety of wildlife species including deer, elk, moose, badger, mountain sheep (big horn), mountain goat, rabbit, squirrel, black bear, grizzly bear, beaver, coyote, weasel, owl and porcupine. Animals are hunted for subsistence, medicinal and ceremonial purposes (AMEC 2010; Riversdale 2015; Piikani Nation 2018). Piikani Nation previously expressed concerned about effects to traditional resources, such as, animal health, noting that disturbances such as construction activities may reduce animal habitat, increase habitat fragmentation and cause animals to avoid certain areas (AMEC 2010; Piikani Nation 2018, Alberta Government 2020b). Piikani Nation previously stated construction and development may also cause sensory disturbance and mortality risks through increased vehicle collisions with wildlife, and contaminated water sources may impact wildlife health (Alberta Government 2020b). This potential impact to wildlife health causes community members to rely more on store-bought foods (Alberta Government 2020b).
Vegetation
Piikani Nation reported gathering plants for nutritional, medicinal, and ceremonial purposes. Piikani Nation harvests plants for medicinal and ceremonial purposes (AMEC 2010), Traditional plant resources include chokecherries, wild roses, Saskatoon berries, wild turnips, pin cherries, red osier dogwood, spruce, wild onions and camas (wild asparagus) (AMEC 2010; Piikani Nation 2018; Taylor and Dempsey 1999).
Piikani Nation reported concerns regarding the impact of a previous pipeline project on plants growing near waterways (Piikani Nation 2015). Piikani Nation reported that plants are important to both humans and animals and indicated that protocols must be followed when gathering plants (Riversdale 2015). Piikani Nation previously reported concerns regarding impacts to culturally or traditionally important plant species including impacts from clearing, herbicide use, changes in species composition and the introduction of non-native species (Piikani Nation and SVS 2020). Piikani Nation has previously indicated concerns related to reclamation programs that do not achieve their objectives, revegetation and seed mixes and had requested that rare plants be identified and revegetation seed mixes include species of importance to both Piikani Nation and other Indigenous groups (Piikani Nation 2018, Alberta Government 2020b).
Fish
Piikani Nation engages in fishing activities, but has concerns related to water quality of the streams and lakes near the reserve (Riversdale 2015). Piikani Nation has previously expressed concern about the following species: westslope cutthroat trout, cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, mountain whitefish, bull trout, brown trout, brook trout, and lake trout (Alberta Government 2020b).
3.26 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Water
Piikani Nation has expressed water quality and quantity concerns in relation to other development projects (Piikani Nation 2015; Riversdale 2015; Alberta Government 2020b). Piikani Nation has also previously expressed concerns regarding impacts to water resources including sedimentation, contamination, and disruption of natural surface drainage patterns especially in wetlands (Piikani Nation and SVS 2020), and how to best mitigate water pollution (Alberta Government 2020b). Piikani Nation has previously indicated concern regarding the water quality of the alluvial springs associated with the Elbow River, and the potential for development projects to affect the availability of groundwater for domestic use (Piikani Nation 2018).
3.3.10.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Piikani Nation uses trails and travelways throughout their traditional territory to connect harvesting areas across the region extending to the Rocky Mountains (Riversdale 2015; AMEC 2010). Piikani Nation’s vast hunting grounds ranged along the foothills of the Rocky Mountains from Rocky Mountain House, Alberta to Heart Butte, Montana. The Piikani people travelled throughout their territory using horse, travois and dogs, or by foot (Dempsey 2001; Riversdale 2015).
No specific trails or travelways that provide access to resources used or required for Piikani Nation to exercise their rights were identified in the TLRU RAA in the review of the publicly available literature.
3.3.10.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Piikani Nation holds sweat lodges and practices Sundance within their traditional territory (Piikani Nation 2015). Piikani Nation reported that members seek out rock formations for potential Sundance sites, noting that water and trees are often proximal to these formations (Piikani Nation 2015). The rock formations themselves are culturally important, and Piikani Nation explained that the formations contain meaning, as “some of them tell of battles that took place of massacres or of tribes winning a battle or great chiefs being buried on the hilltops and the markings of their stories” (Piikani Nation 2015). Sundance sites are sacred, and the areas where they are hosted must contain rocks, willow, and poplar trees, and be suitable for setting up camp. Accessing traditional areas, such as buffalo jumps, and rock formations known to be spiritually significant, remains important to Piikani Nation and concerns regarding the destruction of cultural and archaeological sites that are connected to ancestors were reported (AMEC 2010; Piikani Nation 2018). Piikani Nation has previously indicated that iniskims are fossils which are culturally significant and incorporated into bundles; arrow heads and other ceremonially significant items are also placed into the bundles (Piikani Nation 2018). Piikani Nation noted that they hunt, fish, trap, harvest, and practice important cultural and spiritual activities in their traditional territory (Piikani Nation and SVS 2020). Piikani Nation has previously expressed concerns regarding the protection, and potential loss and destruction of cultural and archaeological sites (Piikani Nation 2018, Alberta Government 2020b). When natural springs are located near development, Piikani Nation has previously expressed concern regarding whether the natural springs are culturally important (Alberta Government 2020b). Piikani Nation has previously expressed concern that new projects are not always confined to existing
3.27 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
disturbance areas, and therefore introduce new disturbances, which when on Crown land, will result in the loss of access to, and use of, traditional land (Alberta Government 2020b).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Piikani Nation rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.11 Qwelminte Secwepemc
Qwelminte Secwepemc (commonly cited as Qwelminte-Secwepemc Government 2 Government [G2G]) is a collective of seven Secwepemc signatories working collaboratively and committed to engage across a spectrum of land and resources. The seven signatories include Adams Lake Indian Band, Little Shuswap Lake Indian Band, Shuswap Indian Band, Simpcw First Nation, Skeetchestn Indian Band, Splatsin Indian Band, and Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc, The Qwelminte-Secwepemc G2G aims to be a hub of leadership and technical expertise to share knowledge between signatories and provide details and insights with the Province of British Columbia decisions (Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G 2019a).
This group is a collaboration between the Secwepemc and the Province of British Columbia aimed at creating an agreement between both groups to establish a long-term relationship, including an agreement between the two parties to make progress towards developing a shared path to a long term reconciliation agreement (Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G 2019b).
Through engagement on the Project with Foothills, Qwelminte Secwepemc noted that its signatories are composed of four regions (i.e., campfires) and each region has their respective communities. Engagement with the regions and respective communities is encouraged regarding specific actions or activities on the lands and territories of the signatories.
3.3.11.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
The seasonal round of the Eastern Secwepemc peoples, of which many signatories are a part, places ungulate hunting season, particularly for deer, elk, moose, and caribou, at certain points in the year (Secwepemc 2017). In particular, there are fall hunting and winter trapping rounds that would last weeks at a time (Secwepemc 2017). Smaller game of interest to the Secwepemc include grouse, pheasant, and trapping for beaver. Meat is collected and preserved for the winter months, and hides, leather, bone, and other animal materials were used for clothing, tools, and products for trade (Secwepemc 2017). Habitat features such as salt licks are recognized as areas of hunting opportunity (Secwepemc 2017).
3.28 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Vegetation
To this day, a major component of the diet of Secwepemc peoples consists of berries and roots, and plant materials are dried and preserved regularly (Secwepemc 2017). Traditionally, families would move between river and upland gathering locations according to the seasons. Plants served medicinal purposes as well, such as those collected from forests near Secwepemc territories, and plant materials such as bark and roots were used to create baskets (Secwepemc 2017). The process of harvesting medicines is a spiritual practice and is of great cultural importance to the identity of the Secwepemc peoples (Secwepemc 2017). Mushroom and boxwood picking are commercial pursuits undertaken by many Secwepemc groups.
Fish
Traditionally, fishing was one of the largest sources of food for Secwepemc communities and remains an important resource. Fishing for trout also occurs on inland lakes (ERM 2015b). Upland hunting is alternated with river fishing at different times of the year (Secwepemc 2017). Secwepemc communities reported that ice fishing in the winter is a traditional practice that continues to this day (ERM 2015b).
Although sturgeon was once fished by Secwepemc communities, they are no longer captured due to their endangered status (Secwepemc 2017). Salmon have been extirpated from some systems where they were also once collected due to the development of dams and hydroelectric facilities (Secwepemc 2017). Secwepemc groups have expressed concerns regarding other industrial development projects, such as impacts to fish passage and potential entrainment, genetic diversity maintenance and food-web dynamics (Secwepemc 2017).
Water
To Secwepemc peoples, the collection of drinking water is a valued practice, as is maintaining healthy water for future generations (Secwepemc 2017). Water is the essence of all life and is a sacred component of Secwepemc culture and worldview (Secwepemc 2017).
3.3.11.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
All signatories of Qwelminte Secwepemc make use of similar networks of travelways throughout the traditional territories (ERM 2015a). Travelways such as roads, trails, snowmobile routes, old wagon roads, footpaths, waterways, and other transportation routes are all valued by the Secwepemc communities (Secwepemc 2017). The regional trails and waterways connect key cultural nodes across the landscape for the groups associated with Qwelminte Secwepemc (Secwepemc 2017).
No specific trails or travelways that provide access to the resources used or required for Qwelminte Secwepemc to exercise rights were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.29 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.11.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Areas such as habitation sites, gathering locations, and spiritual locations, among others, are of cultural importance to Secwepemc communities such as Adams Lake Indian Band and Shuswap Indian Band (Secwepemc 2017). Other sites such as cabins, campsites, and other habitation areas, represent an opportunity to be present on the land and continue and transmit their cultural practices (Secwepemc 2017).
Spiritual and ceremonial sites are of great importance to the Secwepemc, and some may be of greater importance than others. According to the Secwepemc groups, impacts to these sites extend beyond physical alteration, and changes such as increased noise levels can make a spiritual site no longer usable (Secwepemc 2017).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Qwelminte Secwepemc rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.12 Adams Lake Indian Band
Adams Lake Indian Band, also known as Sexqeltain, is an Indigenous group and a Secwepemctsín-speaking community located near Kamloops, British Columbia. Adams Lake Indian Band is a member of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, a political alliance established in the 1980s, consisting of nine Secwepemc Bands: Adams Lake Indian Band, Bonaparte First Nations, Neskonlith Indian Band, Shuswap Indian Band, Simpcw First Nation, Skeetchestn Indian Band, Splatsin Indian Band, Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc, and Whispering Pines/Clinton Indian Band (INAC 2020g). Adams Lake Indian Band is also affiliated with Qwelminte Secwepemc (Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G 2019b), which is a collective of seven Secwepemc signatories working collaboratively and who are committed to engage across a spectrum of land and resources. Traditional territory of the Secwepemc peoples covered a large region from west of the Fraser River to east of the Rocky Mountains, and from the northern limit at the upper Fraser River to south of the Arrow Lakes (TRU 2010). Adams Lake Indian Band, and other bands of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council are not part of the British Columbia treaty process (TRU 2010). Adams Lake Indian Band (Band No. 684) is comprised of seven reserves totaling approximately 2,910 hectares (INAC 2020g) as follows:
• Hustalen 1 • Sahhaltkum 4 • Squaam 2 • Stequmwhulpa 5 • Switsemalph 6 • Switsemalph 7 • Toops 3
3.30 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
As of December 2020, Adams Lake Indian Band had a registered population of 815 individuals. Of the 360 living on reserve, 186 were male and 174 were female; of the 62 living on other reserves, 35 were male and 27 were female; and of the 393 living off reserve, 176 were male and 217 were female (INAC 2020g). Adams Lake Indian Band observes a custom electoral system, with a Chief and five Councillors elected on a three-year term (INAC 2020g; ERM 2015b).
The Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, of which Adams Lake Indian Band is a members, are currently engaged with the Province of British Columbia in discussions related to land and resource use within asserted traditional territories outside of the British Columbia Treaty Process (British Columbia n.d.-f). As Adams Lake Indian Band and other Nations of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council are not part of the treaty process (TRU 2010). A letter of commitment created by Qwelminte – Secwempec G2G has been signed by the Skt’emlupsemc te Secwepemc nations, including Adams Lake Indian Band, with the province of British Columbia to develop a path to long term reconciliation (Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G 2019a).
Chief Atahm School, located on reserve, is an immersion school at which students are instructed in Secwepemc language (Yellowhead Mining Inc. 2012). Public school education in Secwepemc traditional territory is governed by School District No. 73 (Kamloops/Thompson) (Yellowhead Mining Inc. 2012). Several organizations in the area provide training and employment services (Yellowhead Mining Inc. 2012). Adams Lake Indian Band also provides other standard services, including administration such as community planning and accounting, public works such as a recreation and conference center, infrastructure and housing (ALIB 2019a). Health and wellness services provided for those on and off reserve at the Sexqltqin Health Center include nursing, home care, and diabetes care (ALIB 2019b). The Adams Lake Development Corporation oversees two businesses – ALDCO Homes and ALDCO Woods, a covered sawmill in Chase, British Columbia (Yellowhead Mining Inc. 2012).
Adams Lake Indian Band’s nearest populated land base, Switsemalph 6 Reserve, is located 348 km northwest of the Elko Section.
3.3.12.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Adams Lake Indian Band reported harvesting a variety of wildlife species, including moose, deer, elk, caribou, marmot, sheep, hare, beaver, grouse, bear, duck, goose, crane, squirrel, porcupine, and turtles (ERM 2015b). Hunting areas located near Adams Lake Indian Band reserves are frequented and used collectively with members from Shuswap Lakes Division communities (ERM 2015b).
Adams Lake Indian Band previously raised concerns about the effects of industrial noise and light on wildlife (ERM 2015b). Adams Lake Indian Band has previously expressed concerns related to cumulative effects on grizzly bear mortality (Trans Mountain 2020).
3.31 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Vegetation
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Adams Lake Indian Band has reported that they harvest several species of plants and berries. Various parts of the plants can be used for subsistence, medicinal, ceremonial and cultural purposes (ERM 2015b). Cedar roots, birch bark, huckleberries, spring beauties, and avalanche lilies were targeted species for which Adams Lake Indian Band would travel and camp to harvest (ERM 2015b). Continued access for plant gathering purposes and the restoration of non-timber resources have been concerns of Adams Lake Indian Band regarding other projects in the past (ERM 2015b).
Fish
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Adams Lake Indian Band uses gill nets from fishing boats, as well as dip nets, gaffs, beach seines, and spears on rivers. All species of Pacific salmon are primary species of interest to the community, particularly sockeye and chinook salmon (ERM 2015b).
Water
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Adams Lake Indian Band has indicated that effects to water quality in watersheds within their traditional territory is a concern (ERM 2015b).
3.3.12.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Adams Lake Indian Band has previously expressed concerns about maintaining access to culturally important areas (ERM 2015b).
3.3.12.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
As members of Qwelminte Secwepemc, locations or areas of cultural importance where Adams Lake Indian Band exercise rights are discussed in Section 3.3.11.
3.3.13 Shuswap Indian Band
Shuswap Indian Band (Band No. 605), also known as the Secwepemc People, are an Indigenous group located in southeastern British Columbia. The official language of the Secwepemc is the Secwepemctsin language, and their traditional territory spans from west of the Fraser River, east to the Rocky Mountains, north to the upper Fraser River, and as far south as Arrow Lakes (TRU 2010). Shuswap Indian Band is affiliated with the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, along with eight other bands (INAC 2020h). Shuswap Indian Band is also affiliated with Qwelminte Secwepemc (Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G 2019b), which is a collective of seven Secwepemc signatories working collaboratively and who are committed to engage across a spectrum of land and resources. The Shuswap Indian Band Shuswap reserve covers an area of 1,075 ha. Additionally, the St. Mary’s 1A reserve is shared by Akisq’nuk First Nation, St. Mary’s Indian Band, Lower Kootenay First Nation, Shuswap Indian Band, and Tobacco Plains Indian Band (INAC 2020q).
3.32 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
As of December 2020, Shuswap Indian Band had a registered population of 270 individuals. Of the 83 living on reserve, 44 were male and 39 were female; of the 32 living on other reserves, 15 were male and 17 were female; and of 155 living off reserve 69 were male and 86 were female (INAC 2020h). Shuswap Indian Band is governed by the First Nations Elections Act electoral system, with one Chief and two Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020h).
The Shuswap Nation Tribal Council member First Nations are currently engaged with the Province of British Columbia in discussions related to land and resource use within asserted traditional territories outside of the British Columbia treaty process (British Columbia n.d.-b). However, Shuswap Indian Band, and some other Nations of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council are not part of the British Columbia treaty process (TRU 2010). A letter of commitment created by Qwelminte – Secwempec G2G has been signed by the Skt’emlupsemc te Secwepemc nations, including Shuswap Indian Band, with the province of British Columbia to develop a path to long term reconciliation (Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G 2019a).
The Shuswap Indian Band administration office provides various services. The Social Development Program assists persons living on reserves maintain a basic standard of living, and housing assistance is available for those in need (Shuswap Indian Band 2019). Health services offered through the community include nursing, diabetes care, medical transportation, referrals, and fitness program (Shuswap Indian Band 2019). The Shuswap Reserve borders the Town of Invermere where the youth attend school, facilitated by the community’s Education Coordinator. Other training opportunities for the workforce and post-secondary assistance are provided through the community as well (Shuswap Indian Band 2019).
Shuswap Indian Band’s nearest populated land base, Shuswap Reserve, is located 140 km northwest of the Elko Section.
3.3.13.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, traplines, apart from their benefits for sustenance, were identified by Shuswap Indian Band as important for transmitting historical knowledge and practices (VAST 2016).
Additionally, the impacts of increased noise, dust, and traffic in areas of wildlife habitat have previously been identified as a concern related to industrial development. Hunting areas located near Adams Lake reserves are frequented and used collectively with members from Shuswap Indian Band (ERM 2015a).
Shuswap Indian Band has previously reported a concern regarding cumulative impacts to the ecosystem, including impacts to soil, wildlife, plants and water. They noted that previous industrial and residential development has directly impacted their community’s ability to exercise their stewardship role and care for their land properly (Shuswap Indian Band 2020).
3.33 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Vegetation
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Shuswap Indian Band has previously reported on the importance of continued gathering of food and medicinal plants, as well as the possible rehabilitation of areas damaged from harvesting and roadbuilding (VAST 2016).
Fish
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, Shuswap Indian Band has previously expressed the importance of maintaining high water quality in watercourses to ensure healthy fish populations are present and fishing opportunities are available within their traditional territory (Secwepemc 2017).
Water
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, certain bodies of water within Shuswap Indian Band traditional territory, member are concerned about the impacts of increased siltation from development and groundwater flow (VAST 2016).
3.3.13.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
In addition to the data provided in Section 3.3.11, the ability to maintain trails and travelways for accessing waterbodies, harvesting, hunting, and areas for other cultural purposes has been previously reported as important to Shuswap Indian Band, especially in development areas as it is necessary for the protection of their rights and way of life (Secwepemc 2017, Shuswap Indian Band 2020).
Shuswap Indian Band previously noted that the Rocky Mountains and Crowsnest Pass route were historically used to access harvesting areas, cross-cultural events, and trading with neighbours to the east, and is still an important travel corridor currently used by Shuswap Indian Band (Shuswap Indian Band 2020). The Project lies within the Rocky Mountains of British Columbia.
3.3.13.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
As members of Qwelminte Secwepemc, locations or areas of cultural importance where Shuswap Indian Band exercise rights are discussed in Section 3.3.11.
3.3.14 Samson Cree Nation
Samson Cree Nation (Band No. 444) is located in central Alberta. Samson Cree Nation is a member of the Four Nations of Maskwacis along with Louis Bull Tribe, Ermineskin Cree Nation, and Montana First Nation (INAC 2020i). As noted by Samson Cree Nation through engagement with NGTL on the proposed NGTL West Path Delivery 2022 Project, in 2016 the Maskwacîs Cree adopted the Maskwacîs Nehîyawewin Declaration that proclaims Cree as the official language (Maskwacîs Cree Language Declaration 2016). Their traditional territory spans much of central and southern Alberta, extending into
3.34 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
the southeastern corner of British Columbia and into northern Montana (SCN and Firelight 2020). A signatory of Treaty 6 (SCN 2013a), Samson Cree Nation reserves cover a land area of approximately 15,607.5 ha (INAC 2020i) and are comprised of the following reserves:
• Samson 137 • Samson 137A • Pigeon Lake 138A11
As of December 2020, Samson Cree Nation had a registered population of 9,085 individuals. Of the 6,302 living on reserve, 3,182 were male and 3,120 were female; of the 537 living on other reserves, 249 were male and 288 were female; of the 24 living on Crown land, 13 were male and 11 were female; and of the 2,222 living off reserve 1,090 were male and 1,132 were female (INAC 2020i). Samson Cree Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and 12 Councillors elected to a three- year term (INAC 2020i).
Samson Cree Nation offers several services and programs. Programs include the Nipisihkopahk Wellness and Social development, Community Planning and Development, legal assistance (Nipisihkopahk Pamihowin), and tribal support (SCN 2013c). As noted by Samson Cree Nation through engagement with NGTL on the proposed NGTL West Path Delivery 2022 Project, education programs and services include primary through secondary schools, an Outreach School, and a headstart program (MESC 2020; SCN 2013c). Samson Cree Nation established the Peace Hills Trust in 1980 and opened the Peace Hills General Insurance Company in 1982 (Peace Hills Trust 2019; Peace Hills Insurance 2019).
Samson Cree Nation’s nearest populated land base, Samson 137 Reserve, is located 372 km northeast of the Elko Section.
3.3.14.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for the Exercise of Rights
Wildlife
Trading and sharing meat with friends and family is important to Samson Cree Nation, and an ethic of sharing is fundamental to the traditional economy (EEP 2016a). Samson Cree Nation hunts year-round, sharing meat with family and community for daily consumption and for inclusion at ceremonial feasts (TMP 2013). As noted by Samson Cree Nation through engagement with NGTL on the proposed NGTL West Path Delivery 2022 Project, the Community Freezer Program is a community hunting program that provides wild meat for Elders and low-income families in the community (SCN 2019). A variety of species are hunted, including grizzly bear, elk, moose, deer, sheep, rabbit, skunk, lynx, cougar, wolf, and wolverine (Riversdale 2015). Samson Cree Nation also hunts a variety of birds that include sage grouse, swan, duck, and geese (SCN 2012a). Samson Cree Nation engages in trapping, and takes species such as beaver, muskrat, rabbit, lynx, prairie chicken, bush chicken, prairie grouse, mountain grouse, weasel,
11 Reserved for the exclusive use as a fishing station for those of the Hobbema Agency (now shared by Samson Cree Nation, the Montana Cree Nation, the Louis Bull Tribe, and the Ermineskin Cree Nation) (SCN 2013b; INAC 2020r)
3.35 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
mink, and squirrel (SCN 2012a; SCN 2012b). Wildlife is also important to Samson Cree Nation for ceremonial reasons (SCN 2014; SCN 2015c). Important ceremonial animals include wolf, coyote, bear (black and grizzly), lynx, and caribou (SCN 2015c; SCN and Firelight 2020).
Samson Cree Nation expressed several concerns relating to the potential effects of development on traditionally important wildlife. Concerns include the disruption of wildlife migration, and habitat, hunting blinds, mineral licks, kill sites, game trails, moose breeding grounds, grizzly habitat and water holes. There are also concerns regarding reclamation efforts, lack of adequate compensation for interruption or destruction of traplines, impacts on wildlife trails and cumulative effects on wildlife (SCN 2012a; SCN 2015a; SCN 2015b; Riversdale 2015).
Vegetation
Plant harvesting is important to Samson Cree Nation, as plants provide sustenance, sustain cultural practices and knowledge, and nurture the health and spiritual lives of Samson Cree Nation (SCN and Firelight 2020). Samson Cree Nation gathers berries and medicines within their traditional territory, including low bush and high bush blueberries, huckleberries, bitter berries, blackberries, moose berries, highbush and low bush cranberries, raspberries, Saskatoon berries, strawberries, gooseberries, and chokecherries (SCN 2012a). Medicinal plants gathered include high bush cranberry, black root, Labrador tea, muskeg leaves, spruce gum, juniper, mint, rabbit root, sweetgrass, cloudberry, sage, and willow fungus (SCN 2012a; SCN 2015c; TMP 2013). Samson Cree Nation also gathers wild rice, white birch, prairie sage, bush sage, rat root, horse grass, wild onion, and sweet pine leaves (SCN 2012a; SCN 2012b). Samson Cree Nation practices plant cultivation, and has identified areas within the traditional territory where sage, sweetgrass, and tumbleweed are cultivated and gathered (Riversdale 2015). Plants are also used for ceremonial uses (SCN 2014).
Samson Cree Nation expressed concerns relating to development, including contamination of plant gathering locations (EEP 2016a; SCN 2012a; SCN 2014), reclamation and the replacement of native plant species (Riversdale 2015), the cumulative effects on plants (SCN 2015b), and a general decline in plant populations available for harvest, including sweetgrass (SCN 2012a).
Fish
Samson Cree Nation has a history of fishing and continues to pursue fishing with nets and traps (EEP 2016a). Fishing is also important as a source of sustenance for Samson Cree Nation. Fishing is often done with family, and the activity provides teaching opportunities for traditional knowledge and culture (SCN and Firelight 2020). Species that are fished include whitefish, jackfish (northern pike), perch, trout (rainbow), pickerel, and suckers (SCN 2012a). As noted by Samson Cree Nation though engagement with NGTL on the proposed NGTL West Path Delivery 2022 Project, Pigeon Lake was a Maskwacîs’ Fishing Station, but due to the health of the lake, members are having to travel to find fish now. Samson Cree Nation has previously expressed concerns regarding impacts to fish and habitats and the impacts this has on their section 35 rights (SCN 2018).
3.36 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Water
Access to clean water is important to Samson Cree Nation, and is a primary source of life (SCN 2014). As such, waterways, including streams and swamps, are understood as markers of environmental health, and key indicators, such as an abundance of algae on a lake, lets the Nation know that a fishing source will soon die out (SCN 2014; SCN 2015a). Wetlands, rivers, and riparian areas are culturally important to Samson Cree Nation as they harvest plants, fish, and wildlife in those areas (SCN and Firelight 2020).
Samson Cree Nation has expressed concerns regarding the impacts of development on waterways located within Samson Cree Nation traditional territory, including the potential for contamination of bodies of water traditionally used as drinking, food gathering, and recreation sources (EEP 2016a; SCN 2012a; SCN 2015a; TMP 2013).
3.3.14.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Samson Cree Nation often uses trunk roads and forestry roads to access harvesting sites within their traditional territory (SCN and Firelight 2020; TMP 2013). Samson Cree Nation is mindful of impacts of development and are concerned that continued developments will result in reductions in access to important cultural and spiritual sites (SCN 2015a). Continued access is important for Samson Cree Nation because it enables stronger ties to their cultural and spiritual past, and helps maintain their understanding and connection to land, water, and animals (SCN 2012a). Trails and travel routes are an important cultural feature for guiding on the land and teaching younger generations (SCN and Firelight 2020).
No specific trails and travelways that provide access to the resources used or required for Samson Cree Nation to exercise rights were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.14.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Samson Cree Nation continues to hunt, trap, fish and gather plants throughout their traditional territory (SCN 2015b). Samson Cree Nation reported hunting, trapping, fishing and gathering plants west of Rocky Mountain House and in a large area extending from Rocky Mountain House to Banff (SCN 2012b). Hunting, trapping, fishing and plant gathering also occurs in an area southwest of Drayton Valley (SCN 2012b).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Samson Cree Nation rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.37 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.15 Siksika Nation
Siksika Nation (Band No. 430) is a signatory of Treaty 7 and a part of the Blackfoot Confederacy along with Blood Tribe and Piikani Nation (INAC 2020j). A Blackfoot speaking community, Siksika Nation’s traditional territory extends to the Rocky Mountains to the west; the Sand Hills to the east; the North Saskatchewan region to the north, and the Yellowstone region to the South (Siksika Nation 2019a). Siksika Nation has one reserve (Siksika 146) which covers a land area of approximately 71,087 ha (INAC 2020j).
As of December 2020, Siksika Nation had a registered population of 7,560 individuals. Of the 4,129 living on reserve, 2,088 were male and 2,041 were female; of the 198 living on other reserves, 96 were male and 102 were female; of the nine living on Crown land, six were male and three were female; and of the 3,224 living off reserve, 1,570 were male and 1,654 were female (INAC 2020j). Siksika Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and 12 Councillors elected to a three-year term (INAC 2020j).
Siksika Nation has a Specific Claim in active negotiations related to expropriation of reserve land for CP Railway (INAC 2020p).
Siksika Nation offers a variety of services, including corporate services, family services, land claims, public works, community support, justice, housing, and land claims (Siksika Nation 2019a). Family Services include day care, social development, a youth independence program, and the FCSS White Buffalo program centered on life skills (Siksika Nation 2019b). Siksika Board of Education offers a variety of services to youth, including the Siksika Outreach School and the Old Sun Community College (Siksika Outreach n.d.; Old Sun College n.d.).
Siksika Nation’s land base, Siksika 146 Reserve, is located 179 km northeast of the of the Elko Section.
Siksika Nation completed two Project-specific studies that provided information about the exercise or practice of their rights in or near the Project areas (IEGAG 2020a, Oak Road Concepts 2020a). The results of these studies are incorporated below. Foothills’ responses to the concerns raised by Siksika Nation are provided in Attachment A.
3.3.15.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
Siksika Nation has traditionally relied on large animals such as bison (buffalo), cougar, coyote, elk, deer, antelope, mountain (big horn) sheep, turkey, and wolves for sustenance and clothing, supplementing diets with ducks, geese, swans, and grouse (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A; Riversdale 2015). Siksika Nation has identified the above wildlife species within their traditional territory that are important for the practice of treaty rights (Riversdale 2015).
3.38 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Through engagement with Foothills, Siksika Nation stated that hunting may occur in the TLRU RAA as it is within the historical range for Blackfoot hunters (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A). Through engagement with Foothills at the time of filing, Siksika Nation expressed concern about decreased quality of wildlife species harvested for consumption in the Study Area12 and a general decline in hunting success (IEGAG 2020a; Attachment A).
Siksika Nation previously expressed concerns about effect of development projects on the homes of animals, such as beaver (Piikani Nation 201813) and about how increased noise due to construction of various development projects would impact wildlife (Alberta Government 2020c). Siksika Nation previously indicated concerns about impacts to beavers and their habitat which would impact the overall ecosystem health and biodiversity (Oak Road Concepts 2019).
Vegetation
Through engagement with Foothills, Siksika Nation reported that plants, including roots, stems, leaves, and berries, are harvested for medicinal and subsistence purposes (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A). Siksika Nation traditions include plant harvesting and cultivation for subsistence, medicinal, and ceremonial purposes (Riversdale 2015). Siksika Nation reported gathering Saskatoon berries, wild turnip, sweetgrass, sage, chokeberries, and bearberry (Riversdale 2015).
Siksika Nation expressed concern regarding the impact of development on vegetation, including the identification of important plants within proposed development areas and the timely harvest of ceremonial plants (Riversdale 2015, Alberta Government 2020c). Siksika Nation has previously indicated that reclamation could encourage the regrowth of species that are not traditionally used (Oak Road Concepts 2019).
Fish
Through engagement with Foothills and in previous studies, Siksika Nation expressed their right to fish cutthroat trout, brook trout, bull trout, and rainbow trout as well as burbot, longnose dace, mountain whitefish, perch, northern pike, and walleye for subsistence purposes (Oak Road Concepts 2020a, 2019; Attachment A).
Through engagement with Foothills, Siksika Nation expressed concern about decreased quality of fish species harvested for consumption in the Study Area and a general decline in fishing success (IEGAG 2020a; Attachment A).
12 In the Project-specific study, Siksika Nation defined the Study Area as an area that covers a landscape of 175,250 km2 in southern Alberta and southeastern BC, encompassing the Project. 13 Piikani Nation 2018 is a report compiled by Piikani Nation that also includes information provided by Kainai First Nation, Siksika Nation, Stoney Nakoda Nations, and Tsuut’ina Nation.
3.39 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Water
Siksika Nation reported concerns regarding the effects of other infrastructure projects on the water quality of streams and waterways (Piikani Nation 2018). Siksika Nation previously expressed concerns regarding clean drinking water for animals, and contamination of water sources (Alberta Government 2020c).
3.3.15.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Siksika Nation previously expressed concerns about the accessibility of land for traditional activities and the ongoing loss of habitat and associated opportunities for traditional land use (Riversdale 2015). Siksika Nation has previously indicated concerns regarding access to hunting and gathering areas due to Project construction, noise, and traffic and seasonal access restrictions (Oak Road Concepts 2019). Loss of access has been previously attributed to difficulties to obtain elements important to cultural and spiritual practices (Oak Road Concepts 2019).
Through engagement with Foothills, Siksika Nation reported that access to the Elko Section is possible via logging roads in the Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and Morrissey Creek valleys, however some roads may not permit vehicle access in all seasons (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A). The Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and Morrissey Creek valleys are located within the TLRU RAA. Blood Tribe stated that development in the Study Area has led to a decline in average forest age by around 27% since pre-settlement, has converted 32% to development footprint, and has reduced intact landscapes to only 22%. Accessibility for traditional uses in the Study Area has declined by almost two thirds due to land conversion and the establishment of protected areas that restrict accessibility. Siksika Nation members have experienced reduced access to traditional land use areas in the region and overall reduced opportunities to hunt and fish due to increased private land ownership, increased competition from recreational users, and changes to and enforcement of hunting and fishing regulations.
3.3.15.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Siksika Nation expressed concern about loss of spiritual connection to ancestors due to destruction of cultural sites, and of archaeological mitigation practices focused on removal rather than preservation or protection. Siksika Nation noted that mitigation measures that only address the physical component of a site do not mitigate effects on spiritual aspects of these locations and associated cultural practices (Stantec 2018). Siksika Nation has previously noted that changes to local wildlife, vegetation, water, and air in addition to sensory disturbances reduces the viability of the area for traditional activities including hunting, fishing, gathering, travel, occupancy, and spiritual or ceremonial uses (Oak Road Concepts 2019).
3.40 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Through engagement with Foothills, Siksika Nation stated that Crowsnest Pass and the East Kootenays are medicinal and subsistence plant harvesting areas used by Blackfoot people (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A). The East Kootenays and Crowsnest Pass are located outside the TLRU RAA. Additionally, Siksika Nation identified Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and McEvoy Creek as waterbodies with traditional use fish species (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A). McEvoy Creek is crossed by the Project, while Coal Creek and Michel Creek Valley are located in the TLRU RAA.
Also, through engagement with Foothills, Siksika Nation explained that the area between the Flathead River watershed and the Elk River watershed has historical zones of encounter between Blackfoot and Ktunaxa and Flathead peoples. Siksika Nation reported that there is the potential for discovery of sites of historical, archaeological, or cultural interest to the Blackfoot in this area (Oak Road Concepts 2020a; Attachment A). The area between the Flathead River watershed and the Elk River watershed is within the PDA.
3.3.16 Stoney Nakoda Nations
Stoney Nakoda Nations, known as Ĩyãħé Nakoda, meaning “mountain people” or “those without blemish”, is located in western Alberta along the Rocky Mountains. Their traditional territory extends as far north as the Smoky River, south to the tobacco plains in Montana, as far east as the Cypress Hills, and west towards the Columbia River (Rocky Mountain Nakoda 2018a; Rocky Mountain Nakoda 2018b). The name Stoney was affixed to Ĩyãħé Nakoda following early European explorers observing the traditional cooking process with stones (Rocky Mountain Nakoda 2018a). Stoney Nakoda Nations speak a northern dialect of the Dakota language, and are culturally and linguistically allied to the Plains Assiniboine (Getty 2015). Stoney Nakoda Nations signed Treaty 7 in 1877. Stoney Nakoda Nations is comprised of three bands: Bearspaw First Nation (Band No. 473); Chiniki First Nation (Band No. 433); and Wesley First Nation (Band No. 475). The federal government is currently working with the Stoney Tribal Chiefs in sovereign recognition discussions to reflect the three Stoney Nakoda Nations that signed Treaty 7 in 1877 (INAC 2020k.) These Nations have four reserves that cover approximately 48,775 ha (INAC 2020k). The four reserves are as follows:
• Big Horn 144A • Eden Valley 216 • Stoney 142 143 144 • Stoney 142B
Bearspaw First Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and four Councillors elected to a three-year term (INAC 2020l). As of December 2020, Bearspaw First Nation had a registered population of 2,089 individuals. Of the 1,863 living on reserve, 913 were male and 950 were female; of the 65 living on other reserves, 22 were male and 34 were female; one living on Crown land was male; and of the 169 living off reserve 86 were male and 83 were female (INAC 2020l).
3.41 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Chiniki First Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and four Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020m). As of December 2020, Chiniki First Nation had a registered population of 1,746 individuals. Of the 1,540 living on reserve, 782 were male and 758 were female; of the 51 living on other reserves, 21 were male and 30 were female; one member living on Crown land was male, and of the 154 living off reserve 69 were male and 85 were female (INAC 2020m). Chiniki First Nation is affiliated with the Treaty 7 Management Corporation and the Stoney Nakoda – Tsuut’ina Tribal Council Ltd. (INAC 2020m).
Wesley First Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and four Councillors elected to a four-year term (INAC 2020n). As of December 2020, Wesley First Nation had a registered population of 1,848 individuals. Of the 1,587 living on reserve, 809 were male and 778 were female; of the 58 living on other reserves, 33 were male and 25 were female; of the five living on Crown land two were male and three were female; and of the 198 living off reserve 101 were male and 97 were female (INAC 2020n).
Stoney Nakoda Nations has a claim in active negotiations before the Specific Claims Tribunal, alleging that they were provided with less land than owed under the terms of Treaty 7 (INAC 2020p). Although Stoney Nakoda Nations is based in Alberta, they have filed a writ with the Supreme Court of Canada with respect to their traditional territory that falls within British Columbia (Ĩyãħé Nakoda 2003). Stoney Nakoda Nations currently has a Treaty Land Entitlement claim before the Specific Claims Tribunal (SCT). NGTL understands that Stoney Nakoda Nations is in active negotiation with Canada and that no specific Treaty Land Entitlement lands have been yet identified or selected through that process (Stoney Nakoda Nations and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2020).
The Stoney Nakoda Nations own and operate the Stoney Nakoda Resort and Casino in Alberta (Stoney Nakoda Resort and Casino n.d.). The Stoney Education Authority has four schools in Alberta, the Morley Community School, Nakoda Elementary School, Ta-Otha School, and Chief Jacob Bearspaw School (Stoney Education Authority n.d.). The Chiniki Community College offers basic education and academic upgrading classes to Chiniki First Nation (Chiniki College n.d.) The Stoney Health Services offer a variety of programs, including community health programs, dental services, a diabetes clinic, home and community care, medical transportation, mental health services, optometry, pharmacy services, and school health programs (Stoney Health 2017).
Stoney Nakoda Nations’ nearest populated land base, Eden Valley 216 Reserve, is located 100 km northeast of the Elko Section.
3.42 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.16.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
Stoney Nakoda Nations has traditionally been reliant on buffalo (bison), deer, duck, elk, moose, bighorn sheep, and wood buffalo (bison), as well as beaver and muskrat, and currently hunts elk and deer (Riversdale 2015; MNP LLP 2020a; MNP LLP 2020b; MNP LLP 2020c). Stoney Nakoda Nations use wildlife species for subsistence, utilitarian, and ceremonial purposes (SNN 2019). Stoney Nakoda Nations also has a history of trapping fur-bearing animals and expressed concerns regarding the impact of development on wildlife and migration patterns, particularly those of the grizzly bear population (Piikani Nation 2018).
Stoney Nakoda Nations have previously expressed concerns that development projects could create barriers and decrease the availability of birds and wildlife (Piikani Nation 2018).
Vegetation
Stoney Nakoda Nations noted that in the past fruit and vegetables were eaten when meat sources were in low supply (Riversdale 2015). Willow branches, spruce bark and branches, poplar leaves, cedar needles, huckleberries, blueberries, raspberries, and sweet grass were also identified as harvested plants (Riversdale 2015; MNP LLP 2020a; MNP LLP 2020b; MNP LLP 2020c).
Fish
Fish were identified as an important component of Stoney Nakoda Nations diets, and harvesting methods included hook, arrows, spears, bone and willow lines, and traps (Riversdale 2015). Numerous fish were identified as harvested species, including Dolly Varden, rainbow trout, whitefish, pike, walleye, burbot, grayling, goldeye, and sucker (Parlee 2011). Stoney Nakoda Nations has previously expressed concerns that development projects could create barriers and decrease the availability of fish (Piikani Nation 2018).
Water
Stoney Nakoda Nations has previously expressed concerns about potential effects to underground streams in relation to another project. Stoney Nakoda Nations explained that they used to listen to bison moving by listening to the vibrations of underground streams; "the oral history told us about the water table and flood plain" (Stantec 2018).
3.43 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.16.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Stoney Nakoda Nations has previously expressed concern regarding effects on the ability to continue exercising Treaty rights because local wildlife may be driven away, resulting in the community having to travel further to fish, trap, and hunt local wildlife or practice ceremonies (Stantec 2018).
No specific trails or travelways that provide access to resources used or required to exercise rights for Stoney Nakoda Nations were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.16.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Stoney Nakoda Nations reported undertaking cultural practices including hunting, fishing, trapping, plant gathering, and camping throughout their traditional territory which spans into southeastern British Columbia (SNN 2019; Stoney Nakoda Nation and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2020). The natural resources found in their traditional lands, which Stoney Nakoda Nations note are enjoyed in their natural state, are used to create utilitarian items while also being used to educate children about the natural resources (SNN 2019). There is a spiritual and cultural relationship with the traditional use lands for the Stoney Nakoda Nations (SNN 2019).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Stoney Nakoda Nations rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.17 Tsuut’ina Nation
Tsuut’ina Nation are an Athabaskan (Dene) people located near Calgary, Alberta (Cook 2015). The name Tsuut’ina means “many people” or “every one (in the Nation)” (Cook 2015). Oral tradition indicates that the Tsuut’ina likely split from a northern nation, probably the Dane-zaa, and moved into the Plains where they adopted the Plains culture but retained their Athabaskan Language Tsuut’ina (Cook 2015). Tsuut’ina Nation (Band No. 432) has one reserve, Tsuut’ina Nation 145 that totals 29,417 ha (INAC 2020o).
As of December 2020, Tsuut’ina Nation had a registered population of 2,439 individuals. Of the 2,091 living on reserve, 1,016 were male and 1,075 were female; of the 134 living on other reserves, 47 were male and 87 were female; of the two living on Crown land, both were male; and of the 212 living off reserve 85 were male and 127 were female (INAC 2020o). Tsuut’ina Nation is governed under a custom electoral system with a Chief and 12 Councillors elected to a two-year term (INAC 2020o). Tsuut’ina Nation is a member of Treaty 7 and is affiliated with the Treaty 7 Management Corporation and Stoney Nakoda – Tsuut’ina Tribal Council along with Stoney Nakoda Nations (INAC 2020o).
3.44 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Tsuut’ina Nation has settled three claims related to land and the surrender of lands with the Government of Canada (INAC 2020p). Tsuut’ina Nation and the Government of Alberta have signed an agreement where a portion of the Tsuut’ina Nation 145 reserve has been transferred from Canada to Alberta in consideration of payments and other consideration to be paid or delivered by Alberta (Tsuut’ina Nation - Government of Alberta 2013).
Tsuut’ina Nation offers a variety of programs and services, including fire and rescue and police emergency services, income support, off reserve residency programs, and public works including housing (Tsuut’ina 2017a). The Tsuut’ina Health Centre focuses on community health, home care, family child outreach programs, health education programs, Tsuut’ina non-insured health benefits, and medical transportation (Tsuut’ina 2017b). The Tsuut’ina Education Department provides education programs for elementary to high school students and offers a post-secondary program to assist in pursuing degrees and training and development for adults entering the workforce (Tsuut’ina 2017c, 2017d). Tsuut’ina Nation owns and operates both the Grey Eagle Resort and Casino, and the Redwood Meadows Gold and Country Club, among other businesses (Tsuut’ina 2017e). Tsuut’ina Nation has previously expressed concerns about access to training and employment during all phases of development projects. They have indicated the need for meaningful consultation regarding all phases of project development, such as, planning consultation activities, monitoring, reviews, engagement, and reporting (Alberta Government 2020d). Tsuut’ina Nation has previously expressed concern about how important it is for development projects to incorporate long-term monitoring within their traditional territory so that related impacts and benefits can be recorded (Alberta Government 2020d).
Tsuut’ina Nation’s land base, Tsuut’ina Nation 145 Reserve, is located 157 km northeast of the Elko Section.
3.3.17.1 Quality, Quantity or Distribution of Resources Involved in or Required for Exercise Rights
Wildlife
Tsuut'ina Nation reported hunting many large animals, for both food sources and to be used in traditional ceremonies, including buffalo (bison), deer, elk, antelope, mountain (big horn) sheep, and mountain goat, with porcupine, rabbit and squirrel, ducks, geese (and their eggs), and swans also consumed (Riversdale 2015). Tsuut’ina Nation continues to hunt throughout the traditional territory, although the disturbance from development projects has impacted success (Riversdale 2015). Tsuut'ina Nation previously expressed that they must travel further to access their food and medicines, feeling that they must now ‘chase’ their harvest (Louis Bull Tribe, Tsuut’ina Nation, Driftpile Cree Nation, and Whitefish Lake First Nation 2019). Tsuut’ina Nation has previously expressed concern about how development projects can directly and indirectly impact the health and wellness of wildlife and birds, for example, through decreased access to drinking water if animals no longer have access to ponds that are fenced off or increased collisions with vehicles (Alberta Government 2020d).
3.45 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Vegetation
Many species of plants and berries were reported to be used by Tsuut’ina Nation for sustenance and medicinal purposes, including prairie turnips, service berries (Saskatoon berries), blueberries, chokecherries, sweet pine, lodge pole pine, juniper, bear root, muskeg tea, shrubs, fungus, willow, poplar, raspberry, bearberry, sweetgrass, subalpine fir, and lingon berry (Riversdale 2015; NGTL 2018; Alberta Government 2020d). Tsuut’ina Nation indicated that important medicinal plants often grow in sensitive riparian areas (Stantec 2018). Tsuut'ina Nation previously expressed concern with the impacts of continued development, indicating that development can impact plant harvesting in sensitive regions of traditional territory (Stantec 2018) , and of the need for the environment to be returned back to its natural state following project closures because of the various vegetation Tsuut'ina Nation relies on (Alberta Government 2020d).
Fish
The community continues to depend on waters of Tsuut’ina traditional territory to support fishing activities. Various trout species, particularly bull trout, have been identified as of interest to the community (Stantec 2018).
During the development of other projects, impacts to critical fish migration and habitat such as overwintering locations and gravel for trout spawning beds has been a concern expressed by Tsuut’ina Nation (Stantec 2018). Changes to watercourses, such as altered water temperatures and diversions, have been identified by Tsuut’ina Nation as a potential threat to fish health and mortality (Stantec 2018).
Water
Clean and accessible water sources are important to Tsuut’ina Nation, both for survival and identity, and for ceremonies, songs, stories and connection to traditional culture (Tsuut’ina 2013). Community members expressed concern for disturbance to wetlands (NGTL 2018). Tsuut’ina Nation has previously expressed concerns about the contamination of water, specifically, contamination of groundwater, groundwater aquifers, and surface water quality of the water sources on and near development. They were also concerned about water management and water sources, such as Blairmore Creek and Gold Creek (Alberta Government 2020). Blairmore Creek and Gold Creek are outside of the TLRU RAA.
Water is medicine to Tsuut’ina Nation members, and it has ceremonial purposes. As such, Tsuut’ina Nation has previously identified the importance of being involved in Environmental Monitoring Programs and have expressed concerns over limited funding for their involvement in such programs (Alberta Government 2020).
In addition to the four resources mentioned above, Tsuut’ina Nation has also previously expressed concerns about how waste is dealt with and if there are chemicals in the waste that goes to designated waste areas (Alberta Government 2020).
3.46 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.3.17.2 Access to the Resources Used or Required to Exercise Rights
Tsuut’ina Nation has expressed concerns with development, and report that access to and use of traditional trails, plant gathering areas, and hunting areas has decreased (Riversdale 2015).
No specific trails and travelways that provide access to the resources used or required for Tsuut’ina Nation to exercise rights were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.3.17.3 Locations or Areas of Cultural Importance where Indigenous Rights are Exercised
Tsuut’ina Nation use the land and resources within their traditional territory for hunting, fishing, and plant gathering (Stantec 2018). The community expressed concern with the impacts of continued development, indicating that development can impact plant harvesting in sensitive regions of traditional territory (Stantec 2018).
No specific locations or areas of cultural importance where Tsuut’ina Nation rights are exercised were identified within the TLRU RAA through the review of publicly available literature or through engagement with Foothills.
3.4 CONTEXT FOR THE EXERCISE OR PRACTICE OF INDIGENOUS RIGHTS
The Project is located entirely in British Columbia. The south end of the proposed pipeline section is located approximately 13.7 km east of the community of Elko, and the north end is located 18.2 km east of the community of Fernie. The proposed pipeline parallels existing disturbance, including the Foothills British Columbia Mainline ROW for 78% of the route (Midwest 2020). The Project traverses lands that are used for commercial forestry, oil and gas activities, recreation (e.g., hunting, fishing, ATV/snowmobile use) and trapping.
The Project is located predominantly on accessible federal land (90%) as well as provincial Crown land (2%) and private lands (8%), within the Regional District of East Kootenay. The route does not intersect Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) lands, but there is ALR land within 1 km of the Project.
The PDA intersects two Access Management Areas, Wigwam Flats (5.5 km) and Upper Flathead (17.3 km). Both Access Management Areas are established by the Motor Vehicle Prohibition Regulations under the BC Wildlife Act, which prohibits all motorized vehicles, including ATVs and snowmobiles, in prescribed areas with specific exceptions (Section 10.2.2).
3.47 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
The Project lies within the Engelmann Spruce Subalpine Fir biogeoclimatic zone with a smaller portion of Cedar Hemlock in the southern end of the section below 1650 m Above Sea Level (ASL) and Montane Spruce in the northern and southernmost ends below 1500 m ASL and 1300 m ASL. The route predominantly traverses upland vegetation with communities of native coniferous forest, herb and shrublands accounting for most of the coverage. The Project has 30 watercourse crossings including the following named watercourses: Leach Creek, McEvoy Creek and Pioneer Creek
The Project overlaps an Ungulate Winter Range (UWR-u-4-006) for moose and the Flathead Grizzly Bear Population Unit. There are no caribou ranges, natural areas, wildlife sanctuaries or Important Bird Areas intersecting with the route. Table 3-1 outlines distances from the Elko Section to the land bases of each potentially affected Indigenous group, which might include: reserves under the Indian Act, Treaty Land Entitlement, comprehensive or specific claims, or other lands to which a First Nation seeks reserve designation under the Policy on Additions to Reserve and Reserve Creation.
Table 3.1 Distance from Indigenous Lands to Elko Sectiona
Land Distance (nearest Direction from Indigenous Group Land Description km) Project Adams Lake Indian Band Hustalen 1 Reserve 378 NW Sahhaltkum 4 Reserve 378 NW Squaam 2 Reserve 393 NW Stequmwhulpa 5 Reserve 373 NW Switsemalph 6 Reserve 348 NW Switsemalph 7 Reserve 346 NW Toops 3 Reserve 380 NW Akisq’nuk First Nation Columbia Lake 3 Reserve 120 NW St. Mary’s 1A Reserve 67 W Blood Tribe Blood 148 Reserve 86 E Blood 148A Reserve 86 SE Lower Kootenay First Nation Creston 1 Reserve 119 SW Lower Kootenay 1A Reserve 120 SW Lower Kootenay 1B Reserve 120 SW Lower Kootenay 1C Reserve 121 SW Lower Kootenay 2 Reserve 121 SW Lower Kootenay 3 Reserve 122 SW Lower Kootenay 4 Reserve 122 SW Lower Kootenay 5 Reserve 121 SW St. Mary’s 1A Reserve 67 W Piikani Nation Piikani Reserve 70 E Peigan Timber Limit 'B' Reserve 62 E
3.48 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
Table 3.1 Distance from Indigenous Lands to Elko Sectiona
Land Distance (nearest Direction from Indigenous Group Land Description km) Project Samson Cree Nation Samson 137 Reserve 372 NE Samson 137A Reserve 372 NE Pigeon Lake 138A Reserve 387 N Shuswap Indian Band Shuswap Reserve 140 NW St. Mary's 1A Reserve 67 W Siksika Nation Siksika 146 Reserve 179 NE St. Mary's Indian Band Bummers Flat 6 Reserve 64 W Cassimayooks (Mayook) 5 Reserve 50 W Isidore’s Ranch 4 Reserve 54 W Kootenay 1 Reserve 60 W St. Mary’s 1A Reserve 67 W St. Mary’s 1 Reserve 67 W Stoney Nakoda Nations Big Horn 144A Reserve 330 NW Eden Valley 216 Reserve 100 NE Stoney 142 143 144 Reserve 170 NE Stoney 142B Reserve 195 NE Tobacco Plains Indian Band St. Mary’s 1A Reserve 67 W Tobacco Plains 2 Reserve 27 SW Tsuut'ina Nation Tsuut'ina Nation 145 Reserve 157 NE NOTE: a Distances for British Columbia Métis Federation, Ktunaxa Nation Council, Métis Nation British Columbia, Métis Nation British Columbia Region 4, and Qwelminte Secwepemc were not calculated because there are no unique land bases attributed to these groups. SOURCE: NRCAN 2019
3.49 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Indigenous Rights February 2021
3.50 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Summary February 2021
4.0 SUMMARY
Foothills seeks to work collaboratively with Indigenous groups to respond to Project-related concerns, and provide updates based on outcomes of Foothills engagement including on how their input influenced Project planning. The mitigation measures planned for the Project as described in the EPP (Appendix A of the ESA), were developed in consideration of any available engagement information provided by potentially affected Indigenous groups. Consideration of this information includes evaluating whether Foothills’ planned mitigation would effectively manage the identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted.
Foothills will continue to respond to questions and concerns from Indigenous groups through its ongoing engagement efforts and information provided following submission of the ESA, including Project-specific TK studies, will be reviewed in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. If identified, traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and EAS filed prior to construction.
In the event that traditional use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan (Appendix 1E of the EPP, Appendix A of the ESA) will be implemented.
4.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Summary February 2021
4.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
5.0 REFERENCES
AANDC (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada). 2011. Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation – Updated Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfill the Duty to Consult – March 2011. Available at: http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100014664/1100100014675. Accessed September 2019.
Akisq’nuk. 2017a. Land Code. Available at: http://www.akisqnuk.org/content/land-code. Accessed November 2019.
Akisq’nuk. 2017b. Member Services. Available at: http://www.akisqnuk.org/content/member-services. Accessed November 2019.
Akisq’nuk. 2017c. Businesses. Available at: http://www.akisqnuk.org/content/business. Accessed November 2019.
ALIB (Adams Lake Indian Band). 2019a. Departments. Available at: http://adamslakeband.org/departments/. Accessed November 2019.
ALIB. 2019b. Sexqeltqin Health & Wellness. Available at: http://adamslakeband.org/departments/healthwellness/. Accessed November 2019.
Alberta Government. 2020a. ACO Report for Benga Mining Ltd. (Benga) - Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Blood Tribe. October 23rd, 2020. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/136440E.pdf. Accessed October 2020.
Alberta Government. 2020b. ACO Report for Benga Mining Ltd. (Benga) - Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Piikani Nation. October 23rd, 2020. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/136442E.pdf. Accessed October 2020.
Alberta Government. 2020c. ACO Report for Benga Mining Ltd. (Benga) - Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Siksika Nation. October 23rd, 2020. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/136443E.pdf. Accessed October 2020.
Alberta Government. 2020d. ACO Report for Benga Mining Ltd. (Benga) - Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Tsuut'ina Nation. October 23rd, 2020. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/136444E.pdf. Accessed October 2020.
AMEC (AMEC Earth & Environmental). 2009. Kainai First Nation Traditional Land Use and Occupancy Study Summary report for the Montana Alberta Tie Ltd. International Power Line Project. Available at:: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll- eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90548/389473/389474/513982/580805/A1Q5V3_- _Kainai_First_Nation_Traditional_Land_Use_and_Occupancy_Study_Summary_Report.pdf?nod eid=580602&vernum=-2. Accessed November 2019.
5.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
AMEC. 2010. Piikani First Nation Traditional Land Use and Occupancy Study Supplemental Environmental Impact Assessment for the Montana Alberta TIE LTD. International Power Line Project. Available at: https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/628492. Accessed November 2019.
Aqam. 2019a. History. Available at: https://www.aqam.net/about/history. Accessed November 2019.
Aqam. 2019b. Operations & Community Services. Available at: https://www.aqam.net/services. Accessed November 2019.
BC Treaty. 2019. Negotiations – Six Stages. Available at: http://www.bctreaty.ca/six-stages. Accessed November 2019
Birdstone, V. 2010. Columbia Valley Transmission Corridor Supplemental Ktunaxa Nation Oral History and Traditional Use Information. Available at: https://www.bcuc.com/Documents/Proceedings/2010/DOC_25494_C7-4_KNC_Written- Evidence.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Blood Tribe. 2018. Blood Tribe Department of Health. Available at: http://btdh.ca/. Accessed November 2019.
Blood Tribe. 2019a. Home Page. Available at: http://bloodtribe.org/. Accessed November 2019.
Blood Tribe. 2019b. Public Works. Available at: http://www3.telus.net/public/kane11/index.html. Accessed November 2019.
Blood Tribe. 2019c. Blood Tribe Economic Development. Available at: https://www.btecdev.org/. Accessed November 2019.
British Columbia. n.d.-a. ?Akisq'nuk First Nation (Columbia Lake Indian Band) . Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/first-nations-negotiations/first-nations-a-z-listing/-akisq-nuk-first-nation-columbia-lake- indian-band. Accessed November 2019.
British Columbia. n.d.-b. Yaqan nu?kiy (Lower Kootenay Band). Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/first-nations-negotiations/first-nations-a-z-listing/yaqan-nu-kiy-lower-kootenay- band?keyword=lower&keyword=kootenay. Accessed November 2019.
British Columbia. n.d.-c. ?Aq'am (St. Mary's Indian Band). Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/first-nations-negotiations/first-nations-a-z-listing/-aq-am-st-mary-s-indian-band. Accessed November 2019.
5.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
British Columbia. n.d.-d. Tobacco Plains Indian Band. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/first-nations-negotiations/first-nations-a-z-listing/tobacco-plains-indian- band?keyword=Tobacco&keyword=Plains&keyword=Indian&keyword=Band. Accessed November 2019.
British Columbia. n.d.-e. Adams Lake Indian Band. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/first-nations-negotiations/first-nations-a-z-listing/adams-lake-indian-band. Accessed November 2019.
British Columbia. n.d.-f. Shuswap Band. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/first-nations-negotiations/first-nations-a-z-listing/shuswap-band. Accessed November 2019.
BCMF (British Columbia Métis Federation). 2016. About the BC Métis Federation. Available at: http://bcmetis.com/about/. Accessed November 2019.
CEA Agency (Canada Environmental Assessment Agency). 2015. Reference Guide Considering Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Assessment Conducted under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2019. March 2015. Available at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2015/acee-ceaa/En106-124-2015-eng.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
CEA Agency. 2016. Murray River Coal Project Environmental Assessment Report. Available at: https://apps.cer-rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/3541885. Accessed November 2019.
CER (Canada Energy Regulator). 2020. Filing Manual. Available at: https://www.cer- rec.gc.ca/en/applications-hearings/submit-applications-documents/filing-manuals/filing- manual/filing-manual.pdf. Accessed October 2020.
CBC. 2019. Blood Tribe wins massive land claim battle in Federal Court. Written by: Meghan Grant. Available at: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/blood-tribe-big-land-claim-federal-court- decision-1.5172198. Accessed November 2019.
Chiniki College. n.d. Mission Statement and Vision. Available at: https://chinikicollege.wixsite.com/chiniki/aboutus. Accessed November 2019.
Cook, Eung-do. 2015. Tsuut’ina (Tsuu T'ina, Sarcee). The Canadian Encyclopedia, Historica Canada. Available at: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/sarcee-tsuu-tina. Accessed November 2019.
Dempsey, Hugh A. 2001. “Blackfoot” in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 13, Plains, Part 1 and Part 2. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
5.3 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Dempsey, Hugh A. 2018. Piikani. In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. Article published February 07, 2006; Last Edited October 05, 2018. Available at: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/piikuni-peigan-pikuni. Accessed November 2019.
EEP (Energy East Pipeline Ltd.). 2016a. Energy East Project Consolidated Application Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Volume 25, Binder 2: Mitigation Tables - Prairies Region Traditional Land and Resources Use Information and Mitigation Tables Métis Nation of Alberta Region 3. Available at: https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/2969586. Accessed November 2019.
EEP. 2016b. Energy East Project Consolidated Application Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Volume 25, Binder 2: Mitigation Tables – Prairies Region Traditional Land and Resource Use Information and Mitigation Tables Samson Cree Nation. Available at: https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/2969378. Accessed November 2019.
ERM (Environmental Resources Management). 2015a. Chapter 22 – Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes Effects Assessment in Harper Creek Mine Project Environmental Impact Statement. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p61898/100973E.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
ERM. 2015b. Assessment of Effects on Aboriginal Rights and Related Interests. In: Harper Creek Mining Corporation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate / Environmental Impact Statement. Available at: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p61898/100971E.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Getty, Ian A.L. 2015. Stoney-Nakoda. In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. Article published February 07, 2006; Last Edited October 16, 2018. Available at: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/stoney-nakoda. Accessed November 2019.
IEGAG (Integral Ecology Group and ALCES Group). 2020a. Assessment of Cumulative Effects for Siksika Nation: TC Energy Agreement.
IEGAG. 2020b. Assessment of Cumulative Effects for Káínai Nation: TC Energy Agreement.
IEG (IEG Consulting Group). 2018. Cumulative effects assessment for Kainai Nation. Prepared for: Kainai First Nation and JFK Law. Prepared By: M. Catlson, K. Berg, T. Dyke, B. Stelfox & J. Straker, Integral Ecology Group and ALCES Group. Accessed March 2020.
INAC (Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada). 2020a. First Nation Detail: Blood Tribe. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=435&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
5.4 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
INAC. 2020b. First Nation Detail: Akisq’nuk First Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=604&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020c. First Nation Detail: Lower Kootenay. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=606&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020d. First Nation Detail: ?aqam. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=602&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020e. First Nation Detail: Tobacco Plains. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=603&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020f. First Nation Detail: Piikani Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=436&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020g. First Nation Detail: Adams Lake Indian Band. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=684&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020h. First Nation Detail: Shuswap Indian Band. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=605&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020i. First Nation Detail: Samson Cree Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=444&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020j. First Nation Detail: Siksika Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=430&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020k. First Nation Detail: Stoney Nakoda Nations. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=471&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020l. First Nation Detail: Bearspaw First Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=473&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
5.5 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
INAC. 2020m. First Nation Detail: Chiniki First Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=455lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020n. First Nation Detail: Wesley First Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=475&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020o. First Nation Detail: Tsuut’ina Nation. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=432&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020p. Status Report on Specific Claims. Compiled 2019/10/30/ Available at: http://services.aandc- aadnc.gc.ca/SCBRI_E/Main/ReportingCentre/External/externalreporting.aspx. Accessed February 2020.
INAC. 2020q. Reserve/Settlement/Village Detail: St. Mary’s 1A. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/RVDetail.aspx?RESERVE_NUMBER=07437&lang=eng. Accessed January 2021.
INAC. 2020r. Reserve/Settlement/Village Detail: Pigeon Lake 138A. Available at: http://fnp-ppn.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/RVDetail.aspx?RESERVE_NUMBER=06660&lang=eng. Accessed February 2020.
Ĩyãħé Nakoda. 2003. In the Supreme Court of British Columbia between members of the Bearspaw Band, members of the Chiniki Band, members of the Ĩyãħé Nakoda, and the Stoney Indian Band vs. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of British Columbia and The Attorney General of Canada. Writ of Summons. Submitted to the Supreme Court of British Columbia December 10, 2003. Action No. S036666. Available at: https://sidait-atris.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/atris_online/Content/DocumentContentViewer.aspx?id=3100A18DF867431294F0C5 8D7F094E85. Accessed November 2019.
Isaac, Thomas. 2016. A Matter of National and Constitutional Import: Report on the Minister’s Special Representative on Reconciliation with Métis. Section 35 Métis Rights and the Manitoba Métis Federation Decision. Available at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/aanc- inac/R5-123-2016-eng.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Kainai Board of Education. 2019. Our Schools. Available at: https://kainaied.ca/our_schools. Accessed November 2019.
5.6 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Ktunaxa Nation Rights MOU. 2018. Ktunaxa Nation Rights Recognition & Core Treaty Memorandum of Understanding. Between Her Majesty The Queen In Right of Canada, And: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia, and: Ktunaxa Nation. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/consulting-with- first-nations/agreements/ktunaxa_rights_recognition__core_treaty_mou_-_dec_2018.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa. 2019a. Ktunaxa Nation Council. Available at: http://www.ktunaxa.org/governance/ktunaxa- nation-council/. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa. 2019b. Ktunaxa Communities. Available at: http://www.ktunaxa.org/who-we-are/ktunaxa- communities/. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa. 2019c. Employment Training and Job Search Available at http://www.ktunaxa.org/careers/training-job-search/. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa. 2019d. Social Sector. Available at: http://www.ktunaxa.org/four-pillars/ktunaxa-kinbasket-child- family-services/. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa. 2019e. Paqmi Nuqyuk. Available at http://www.ktunaxa.org/paqmi-nuqyuk/. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society. 2003. In the Supreme Court of British Columbia between Ktunaxa Nation and the Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council Society vs. Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Attorney General of Canada and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of British Columbia. Writ of Summons. Submitted to the Supreme Court of British Columbia December 11, 2003. Action No. L033900. Available at: http://sidait-atris.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/atris_online/Content/DocumentContentViewer.aspx?id=0E333B23C98A4A788E4D2 FEF4E1B84F5. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa Nation Council. 2010. An Application by British Columbia Transmission Corporation for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Columbia Valley Transmission Project (Project No. 3698591): Written Evidence of the Ktunaxa Nation Council. Available at: http://www.bcuc.com/Documents/Proceedings/2010/DOC_25494_C7-4_KNC_Written- Evidence.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Ktunaxa Nation Council. 2020a. Proposed Information Requests on the Sufficiency and Technical Merit of the Grassy Mountain Coal Project's Environmental Impact Assessment - Addendum 11. Available at https://registrydocumentsprd.blob.core.windows.net/commentsblob/project-80101/comment- 47433/From%20the%20Ktunaxa%20Nation%20Council%20to%20the%20Joint%20Review%20P anel%20re%20%20Comments%20on%20the%20Grassy%20Mountain%20Coal%20Project%20 %E2%80%93%20Eleventh%20Addendum.pdf. Accessed October 2020
5.7 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Ktunaxa Nation Council. 2020b. Grassy Mountain Coal Project Joint Review PANEL - Written Submission of the Ktunaxa’s Nation Council. September 25, 2020. Available at https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/136145E.pdf. Accessed October 2020
Louis Bull Tribe, Tsuut’ina Nation, Driftpile Cree Nation, and Whitefish Lake First Nation. 2019. Argument in Chief. Filed with the National Energy Board on January 22, 2019. Hearing order MH-052-2018; Board file OF-Fac-Oil-T260-2013-03 59. In the matter of NEB reconsideration of aspects of its OH-001-2014 Report. Available at: https://docs2.cer-rec.gc.ca/ll- eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90552/548311/956726/2392873/3614457/3615225/3646251/374 7796/A97534-1_36835176v1_-_Argument-in-Chief_of_the_Nations_- _A6R3V9.pdf?nodeid=3747346&vernum=-2. Accessed January 2020.
Lower Kootenay Band. 2019a. Our History Available at: http://lowerkootenay.com/our-community/our- history/. Accessed November 2019.
Lower Kootenay Band. 2019b. Departments. Available at: http://lowerkootenay.com/departments/. Accessed November 2019.
Lower Kootenay Band. 2019c. Health Services. Available at: http://lowerkootenay.com/departments/health-services/. Accessed November 2019.
Lower Kootenay Band. 2019d. Post-Secondary Education. Available at: http://lowerkootenay.com/post- secondary-education/. Accessed November 2019.
Maskwacîs Cree Language Declaration 2016. Available at: https://creeliteracy.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/Maskwacîs-Cree-Language-Declaration.pdf. Accessed May 2020.
MESC (Maskwacîs Education Schools Commission). 2020. About Us. Available at: https://www.maskwacised.ca. Accessed May 2020.
MNBC (Métis Nation British Columbia). n.d. About MNBC. Available at: https://www.mnbc.ca/about. Accessed October 2019.
MNBC. 2010. Submission to the BC Utilities Commission - Columbia Valley Transmission Line Project. Exhibit C9-2. Available at http://www.bcuc.com/ApplicationView.aspx?ApplicationId=265. Accessed November 2019.
MNBC. 2014. Hearing Order OH-001-2014 Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Application for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project Written Evidence. Available at https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/2786546. Accessed November 2019.
MNBC. 2016. Métis Nation British Columbia’s review and comment on the draft Environmental Impact Statement guidelines for the proposed Amisk Hydroelectric project. Available at : https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p80112/113043E.pdf. Accessed October 2019.
5.8 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
MNBC. 2018. Recognition of Indigenous Rights and Self-Determination Discussion. From: Metis Rights & Reconciliation Community Engagement Session. Available at: https://www.mnbc.ca/app/webroot/uploads/CES_2018/RIRSD_Sheet_002.pdf. Accessed October 2019.
MNBC. 2019a. Directory. Available at: https://www.mnbc.ca/directory-nav. Accessed October 2019.
MNBC. 2019b. Employment & Training Funding. Available at: https://www.mnbc.ca/directory/view/342- ministry-of-employment-training. Accessed October 2019.
MNBC. 2019c. R4 - Kootenays. Available at: https://www.mnbc.ca/regional-contacts/r4-kootenays-1. Accessed November 2019.
MNBC. 2020. MNBC At a Glance. Available at: https://www.mnbc.ca/about/mnbc-at-a-glance. Accessed April 2020.
Midwest (Midwest Surveys Inc.). 2020. Parallel Analysis and Crown vs Private Tables - BCML Loop No.2 Elko Section Document # 80306-MSI-G-RP-0001. November 11, 2020.
MNP LLP. 2020a. NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Edson Mainline Expansion Project: Bearspaw First Nation Section 35 Rights Impact Assessment Report. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/View/3896708. Accessed January 2020.
MNP LLP. 2020b. NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Edson Mainline Expansion Project: Chiniki First Nation Section 35 Rights Impact Assessment Report. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/View/3897010. Accessed January 2020.
MNP LLP. 2020c. NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Edson Mainline Expansion Project: Wesley First Nation Section 35 Rights Impact Assessment Report. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/View/3897103. Accessed January 2020.
NRCAN (Natural Resources Canada). 2019. Aboriginal Lands Feature Catalogue Edition 1.1. Available at: http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/geobase_al_ta/doc/GeoBase_al_en_Catalogue. pdf. (Part 1); http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/geobase_al_ta/kml_eng/ (Part 2). Accessed November 2019.
NGTL (NOVA Gas Transmission). 2018. 2021 NGTL System Expansion Project Traditional Knowledge Report, Appendix K. Available at: https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/3580186. Accessed November 2019.
North Coal. 2019. North Coal Draft Valued Components. Michel Coal Project. July 2019. Available at: https://www.projects.eao.gov.bc.ca/api/public/document/5d2cc6284de65d00218f4e84/download/ North%20Coal_VCs_DRAFT_20190702_ver5d_public_comment_.pdf
5.9 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Oak Road Concepts Inc. 2018a. Blood Tribe / Kainai Traditional Knowledge & Use Assessment. Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Author: Dermot O’Connor. Accessed March 2020.
Oak Road Concepts. 2018b. Blood Tribe / Káínai Traditional Knowledge, Land, and Resource Use Study. Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir Project & Use Assessment. Author: Dermot O'Connor. June 2018.Available at: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80123/123692E.pdf. Accessed March 2020.
Oak Road Concepts. 2019. Blood Tribe/Káínai & Siksika Nation Traditional Knowledge & Use Study. Edson Mainline Expansion Project. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/View/3896699. Accessed February 2020.
Oak Roads Concepts, Dermot O’Connor. 2020a. Siksika Nation Traditional Knowledge, Land and Resource Use Baseline Study for TC Energy (Foothills Foothills).
Oak Roads Concepts, Dermot O’Connor. 2020b. Blood Tribe/Káínai Traditional Knowledge, Land and Resource Use Baseline Study for TC Energy (NGTL Foothills).
Old Sun College. n.d. Old Sun College Homepage. Available at: http://oldsuncollege.ca/. Accessed November 2019.
Parlee, B. 2011. Traditional Knowledge Overview for the Athabasca River Watershed. Available at: http://www.awc- wpac.ca/sites/default/files/Athbasca%20River%20Watershed%20SOW%20Phase%201%20TK% 20report_FINAL_20110603.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Paskin, Craig. 2009. Ktunaxa Nation Traditional Use in the Upper Columbia River Watershed: A Review of the 1996 –akis“nuk Traditional Use Study Documenting Ktunaxa Activities in the Columbia River Watershed and within the Columbia Valley Transmission Corridor. Report prepared for BC Hydro Mica 5/6 Project Environmental Overview Assessment and Columbia Valley Transmission Corridor Environmental Overview Assessment. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/documents/p320/1290707417724_1be656d57c392eeb3fd44 3d6fa1aa80c1ecbac1467c4b358b3594364f15c6303.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Peace Hills Insurance. 2019. About Peace Hills Insurance. Available at: https://peacehillsinsurance.com/about-us/. Accessed November 2019.
Peace Hills Trust. 2019. About Us. Available at: https://www.peacehills.com/Personal/AboutUs/. Accessed November 2019.
Piikani Nation and SVS (Piikani Nation & Shared Value Solutions Ltd.). 2020. NGTL Edson Mainline Expansion Project Written Evidence Submission. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/View/3896697. Accessed February 2020.
Piikani Nation. n.d. Piikani Nation: A Proud Member of the Blackfoot Confederacy. Available at: http://piikanination.wixsite.com/piikanination/health. Accessed November 2019.
5.10 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Piikani Nation. 2015. Application to Participate in the Energy East Pipeline Project. Available at: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll- eng/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2704580&objAction=browse&viewType=1. Accessed November 2019.
Piikani Nation. 2018. Alberta Transportation Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir Project Environmental Impact Study. Available at: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80123/123629E.pdf. Accessed March 2020.
PRGT (Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project). 2014. Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project: Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate, Section 33 Aboriginal Consultation. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/html/deploy/epic_document_403_37577.html.
Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G. 2019a. Letter of Commitment. Secwepemc - BC Government to Government (Qwelminte). Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural- resource-stewardship/consulting-with-first- nations/agreements/secwepemc_g2g_loc_with_iea__signed.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Qwelminte - Secwepemc G2G. 2019b. Community Update. Available at: http://adamslakeband.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/QS-G2G-Community-Notice- Update.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
RCC (Red Crow College). n.d. Red Crow Community College. Available at: http://www.redcrowcollege.com/. Accessed November 2019.
Riversdale (Riversdale Resources). 2015. Benga Mining Ltd. Grassy Mountain Coal Project, Section H: Aboriginal Groups Consultation and Assessment. Available at: https://www.ceaa- acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/103920E.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Rocky Mountain Nakoda. 2018a. Who We Are. Available at: https://www.rockymountainnakoda.com/who- we-are. Accessed November 2019.
Rocky Mountain Nakoda. 2018b. Our Lands. Available at: https://www.rockymountainnakoda.com/our- lands. Accessed November 2019.
SCN (Samson Cree Nation). 2012a. Oral statement at public hearing for the Enbridge NGP, Northern Gateway Pipelines Inc. Hearing Order OH-4-2011. Joint Review Panel Hearings. Samson Cree Nation. Held January 24, 2012. Edmonton, Alberta. Available at: https://apps.neb- one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Search?txthl=A2L4K8. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2012b. Written evidence submitted to the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, Northern Pipelines Inc. Samson Cree Nation. Hearing Order OH-4-2011. Available at: https://www.ceaa- acee.gc.ca/050/documents/57405/57405E.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2013a. About Us. Available at: http://samsoncree.com/aboutus. Accessed November 2019.
5.11 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
SCN. 2013b. History Timeline. Available at: http://samsoncree.com/historytimeline. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2013c. Departments. Available at: http://samsoncree.com/departments. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2014. Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Hearing Order OH-001-2014: Volume 3, Oral Presentations: Samson Cree Nation and Michel First Nation. International Reporting Inc. Ottawa, Ontario. Available at : https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/View/2504110. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2015a. Interim Report for Samson Cree Nation's Traditional Land Use Study for Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain Expansion Project. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/2785055. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2015b. Samson Cree Nation Written Evidence for the 2017 NGTL System Expansion Project. Available at: https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/2812154. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2015c. National Energy Board Hearing Order GH-002-2015 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Volume 3: Samson Cree Nation Oral Traditional Evidence. Available at: https://apps.neb- one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/2897116. Accessed November 2019.
SCN. 2018. Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir Project Written Submission. Without Prejudice. Endorsed and Approved by Samson Cree Nation Consultation Committee and Samson Cree Nation Chief & Council. June 25, 2018. Available at: https://registrydocumentsprd.blob.core.windows.net/commentsblob/project-80123/comment- 29780/123697E.pdf. Accessed April 2020.
SCN. 2019. Oral Indigenous Knowledge for the NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Edson Mainline Expansion Project. Hearing Order GH-001-2019. Samson Cree Nation. Held February 26, 2020. Edmonton, Alberta. Available at: https://docs2.cer-rec.gc.ca/ll- eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90550/554112/3742312/3760382/3891054/3910345/C04846- 1_20-02-26_-_Volume_5_-_A7D6J4.pdf?nodeid=3910346&vernum=-2. Accessed April 2020.
SCN and Firelight (Samson Cree Nation and Firelight Group). 2020. Samson Cree Nation Cumulative Effects Assessment: Updated Analysis for Selected Valued Components Specific to the Edson Mainline Expansion Project. January 9, 2020. Available at: https://apps.cer- rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/File/Download/3890518. Accessed January 2020.
Secwepemc. 2017. Part C – Secwepemc. Prepared by: Adams Lake Indian Band, Nekonlith Indian Band, Splatsin, Simpcw First Nation, Shuswap Indian Band, and Little Shuswap Lake Indian Band in Revelstoke Unit 6 Environmental Assessment Certificate Application. Available at: https://projects.eao.gov.bc.ca/api/document/595fb3b73fdcd0001d9f4858/fetch/5%20Rev6_Vol4_ Part%20Cc_Secwepemc.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
5.12 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Shuswap Indian Band. 2019. Shuswap Indian Band Administration. Available at: http://www.shuswapband.net/education-training/. Accessed November 2019.
Shuswap Indian Band. 2020. Shuswap Indian Band Request for Participation in the Grassy Mountain Coal Project's Impact Assessment Process. July 9, 2020. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80101/135342E.pdf. Accessed October 29, 2020.
Siksika Nation. 2020a. Siksika Nation Homepage. Available at: http://siksikanation.com/wp/admin/. Accessed November 2019.
Siksika Nation. 2019b. Siksika Family Services. Available at: http://siksikanation.com/wp/family/. Accessed November 2019.
Siksika Outreach. n.d. Siksika Outreach About Us. Available at: https://www.siksikaoutreach.ca/about-us. Accessed November 2019.
Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd.). 2018. Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir Project Environmental Impact Assessment. Volume 3A: Effects Assessment (Construction and Dry Operations). Section 14 - Assessment of Potential Effects on Traditional Land and Resource Use. Available at: https://ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p80123/122395E.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Stoney Education Authority. n.d. About Us. Available at: https://www.stoneyeducation.ca/About.php. Accessed November 2019.
Stoney Health. 2017. Stoney Health Services. Available at: https://stoneyhealth.com/services/. Accessed November 2019.
Stoney Nakoda Resort & Casino. n.d. About Us. Available at: https://www.stoneynakodaresort.com/about. Accessed November 2019.
SNN (Stoney Nakoda Nations). 2019. NGTL 2021 SNN OTE Question 1, W. Snow Response. Filing ID: A99585-1. Available at: https://docs2.cer-rec.gc.ca/ll- eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90550/554112/3422050/3575553/3575436/3614473/3782525/A9 9584-1_SNN_NGTL_OTE_Question_1__W.Snow_Response_-_NGTL_2021_- _A6U7D5.pdf?nodeid=3782526&vernum=-2. Accessed April 2020.
Stoney Nakoda Nations and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. 2020. Specific Claims Tribunal. Endorsement. File No.: SCT-6001-12. Heard: February 20, 2020. Filed: March 2, 2020. Available at: https://www.sct-trp.ca/apption/cms/UploadedDocuments/20126001/138-SCT-6001-12- Doc57(typed).pdf. Accessed: March 11, 2020.
SCC (Supreme Court of Canada). 1996. Judgements of the Supreme Court of Canada. R. v. Badger. Available at: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1366/index.do. Accessed November 2019.
5.13 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
SCC. 2003. Judgements of the Supreme Court of Canada. R. v. Powley. Available at: https://scc- csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2076/index.do. Accessed September 2019.
SCC. 2016. Judgements of the Supreme Court of Canada. Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northers Development). Available at: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc- csc/en/item/15858/index.do. Accessed November 2019.
Taylor, C. F. and H. Dempsey. 1999. The Blackfoot: A Brief History; Material Culture and Lifestyle of the Blackfoot. In: With Eagle Tail: Arnold Lupson and 30 Years Among the Sarcee, Blackfoot and Stoney Indians on the North American Plains.
TRU (Thompson Rivers University). 2010. A Handbook for Educators of Aboriginal Students. Available at: https://www.tru.ca/__shared/assets/albaa_hb_1_2023446.pdf. Accessed November 2019. ,
TPIB (Tobacco Plains Indian Band). 2018a. About Us. Available at: http://www.tobaccoplains.org/about- us. Accessed November 2019.
TPIB. 2018b. Chief and Council. Available at: http://www.tobaccoplains.org/governance/chief-council. Accessed November 2019.
TPIB. 2018c. Social and Education. Available at: http://www.tobaccoplains.org/social-education. Accessed November 2019.
TPIB. 2018d. Health and Wellness. Available at: http://www.tobaccoplains.org/health-wellness. Accessed November 2019.
TMP (Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC). 2013. Trans Mountain Expansion Project. Volume 5D: Socio-economic Technical Reports: Traditional Land and Resource Use Technical Report. Available at: https://apps.neb-one.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Search?dn=A3S2G9. Accessed November 2019.
Trans Mountain. 2020. Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC ("Trans Mountain") Trans Mountain Expansion Project ("Project) Condition 6(a) and (b)(ii): Commitments Tracking Table. NEB File: OF-Fac-Oil- T260-2013-03 61. October 7th, 2020. Available at: https://docs2.cer-rec.gc.ca/ll- eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90552/548311/956726/2392873/3781699/3972759/Condition_6_ Commitment_Tracking_Table_October_7%2C_2020_-_A7J1W3.pdf?nodeid=3973043&vernum=- 2. Accessed October 2020.
Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council. 1997. The True Spirit and Original Intent of Treaty 7. With: Walter Hildebrandt, Dorothy First Rider, and Sarah Carter. McGill-Queen’s University Press; 405 pp.
Tsuut’ina Nation. 2013. Presentation to Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. Available at: http://www.afn.ca/en/policy-areas/water/resources-updates/current- bill-s-8-standing-committee-on-aboriginal-affairs-and-northern. Accessed November 2019.
5.14 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
Tsuut’ina Nation. 2017a. Tsuut’ina Nation – Homepage. Available at: https://tsuutinanation.com/. Accessed November 2019.
Tsuut’ina Nation. 2017b. Tsuut’ina Health Centre. Available at: https://tsuutinanation.com/tsuutina-health- centre/. Accessed November 2019.
Tsuut’ina Nation. 2017c. Tsuut’ina Education Department. Available at: https://tsuutinanation.com/tsuutina-education-department/. Accessed November 2019.
Tsuut’ina Nation. 2017d. Training and Development. Available at: https://tsuutinanation.com/training-and- development/. Accessed November 2019.
Tsuut’ina Nation. 2019e. Tsuut’ina Owned Companies. Available at: https://tsuutinanation.com/business- directory/wpbdp_category/tsuutina-owned-companies/. Accessed November 2019.
Tsuut’ina Nation - Government of Alberta. 2013. Final agreement between: Tsuut’ina Nation, as represented by the Chief and Council (the "Nation") and Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Alberta, as represented by the Minister of Transportation, the Minister of Infrastructure and the Minister of Aboriginal Relations ("Alberta"). Available at: https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/fdb8b705- 89c3-4625-938c-356dfd99d556/resource/75f9c018-4ac8-40fa-ab46- 0fdddfb0b195/download/agreement.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
VAST. 2016. First Nations Consultation Report. Prepared for the Environmental Assessment Office. Report prepared by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. Cranbrook, BC on behalf of CertainTeed Gypsum Canada Inc. Available at: https://projects.eao.gov.bc.ca/api/document/5c1146a90a8c690024d5265f/fetch/KWM_First%20N ations%20Consultation%20Report_4Jan2017%20FINAL.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
Yellowhead Mining Inc. 2012. Socio-Economic Assessment Report – First Nations Overview, and Socio- economic Baseline Reports for the Pimpcw First Nation, Adams Lake Indian Band, Nekonlith Indian Band, and Little Shuswap Indian Band. Prepared by Laurie McNiel & Associates in Harper Creek Mining Corporation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate / Environmental Impact Statement Appendix 23-B. Available at: https://iaac- aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p61898/100969E.pdf. Accessed November 2019.
5.15 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
References February 2021
5.16 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Attachment A Project-Related Issue Summaries February 2021
Attachment A PROJECT-RELATED ISSUE SUMMARIES
A.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Attachment A Project-Related Issue Summaries February 2021
A.2 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY PROJECT 2023 KÁÍNAI NATION/BLOOD TRIBE
Káínai Nation/Blood Tribe (BT) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project BT Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential cumulative effects and Elko Section Project BT noted that development in the Study Area2 has led to a decline in average forest age by around 27% since presettlement, has converted 32% to development footprint, Section 14.6 resulting potential effects on the Development Area (PDA), Local and has reduced intact landscapes to only 22%. BT reports that the geographic extent of the cumulative impacts is both site-specific and regional, the timing and duration of exercise of treaty and Indigenous Assessment Area (LAA), the cumulative impacts will be long-term and permanent, the cumulative impacts will be irreversible, and the cumulative impacts to cultural wellbeing will be high, or Sections 4.0 to 9.0 of rights Regional Assessment Area significant. BT reports that although the Project footprint is small relative to the extent of footprint in the region, it will contribute to cumulative impacts by adding disturbance the Environmental (RAA) to the landscape. Protection Plan (EPP) In their report, BT discussed their experience of reduced access to traditional land use areas in the region and overall reduced opportunities to hunt and fish due to increased private land ownership, increased competition from recreational users, and changes to and enforcement of hunting and fishing regulations. BT reports that although the Project footprint is small relative to the extent of footprint in the region, it will contribute to cumulative impacts by adding disturbance to the landscape. Accessibility for traditional uses in the Study Area2 has declined by almost two thirds due to land conversion and the establishment of protected areas that restrict accessibility. The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which considered the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the Project’s contribution to those effects. The cumulative effects assessment methodology follows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Technical Guidance for Assessing Cumulative Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the CER Filing Manual. The ESA assumes that other companies and other TC Energy projects and activities considered in the cumulative effects assessment will employ similar mitigation measures as this Project to control effects on the environment. Potential Project-related cumulative effects are minimized with the implementation of the mitigation measures in the EPP including the following design and construction measures: • maximizing the use of adjacent existing right-of-way and reduce the width of additional clearing as much as possible; • avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows when feasible; and • adhering to the approved construction footprint and access. The ESA assessed potential Project effects on the exercise or practice of Indigenous and treaty rights in the Project area in accordance with the CER Filing Manual. In addition to the resource-specific mitigation identified in this table, the following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on the exercise or practice of Indigenous and Treaty rights in the Project area: • Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. • All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. • Provide all workers orientation and information materials regarding environmental, health, safety expectations and cultural awareness and sensitivity • Provide potentially affected Indigenous groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, Foothills will implement the Cultural Resources Discovery Contingency Plan, as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. Foothills has been engaging with BT since November 6, 2019 and has offered opportunities to collect and submit Project-specific information that would inform its understanding of potential Project effects on Indigenous and treaty rights and traditional uses. Foothills will continue to engage BT and remains committed to sharing Project information and receiving feedback from BT for the purpose of identifying potential Project-related impacts on the exercise of rights within BT’s traditional territory and to identify appropriate measures to avoid or reduce adverse effects and/or support, improve or provide benefit to the rights of Indigenous peoples. Information gathered through ongoing engagement is considered for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate.
Page 1 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY PROJECT 2023 KÁÍNAI NATION/BLOOD TRIBE
Káínai Nation/Blood Tribe (BT) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project BT Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential effects on traditional land Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA BT has indicated that access to the Elko Section is possible via logging roads in the Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and Morrissey Creek valleys, however some roads may not Sections 10 and 11 and resource use, including: permit vehicle access in all seasons. BT also notes the use of the area for harvesting plants and animals and notes the historical importance of the area between the Traditional land and resource Flathead River watershed and the Elk River. Sections 5.0 and 9.0 of • Impacts to hunting, fishing, use location within the Elko the EPP harvesting, and ceremonial and Section PDA: The Project has been designed to parallel 80% of existing disturbances. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e.,
spiritual sties expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on • Between KP 008+472 and • Accessibility of areas for the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent KP 031+548 (area between traditional use land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. Flathead River watershed and the Elk River If information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental watershed) Alignment Sheets, as appropriate. Traditional land and resource Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether Foothills’ planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional use locations within the Elko or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets filed Section RAA: prior to construction. • 2.81 km northwest The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on traditional land and resource use: from KP 015+935 • Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. (Morrisey Creek • Valley) Provide potentially affected Indigenous groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • • 5.6 km northwest from Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint. • KP 014+535 (Coal Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. Creek Valley) • Prior to the start of construction activities, clearly mark all sensitive resources, including identified traditional use trails that intersect the Footprint. Following clearing, re- mark all sensitive resources as necessary and supplement markings with signage. • 6.17 km northeast from • Leave gaps in windrows (i.e., grubbing piles, strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at identified trails. These gaps should align. KP 000+000 (Michel • Take reasonable measures to control construction-related noise near residential areas. Creek Valley) • Reduce idling of equipment, where possible. Traditional land and resource • Where practical and applicable, use multi-passenger vehicles for the transport of crews to and from job sites. use locations outside the Elko If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, Foothills will implement the Cultural Resources Discovery Section RAA: Contingency Plan as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from • 15.85 km northeast from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. KP 000+000 (Crowsnest Traditional access to the Project Footprint may be temporarily affected by construction to mitigate safety concerns. Where there is no active construction or other identified Pass) safety risk (e.g., open trench or excavations), traditional users will not be restricted from accessing the Project area. Foothills will provide Indigenous groups with the • 17.99 km northwest from proposed construction schedule and maps prior to the start of construction to avoid potential conflicts between construction crews and traditional users. Foothills will KP 000+351 (Fernie) implement the Traffic Control Management Plan which includes access control measures (such as, signage, road closures, restrictions, and access control) to manage and • 24.57 km northwest from control Project-related construction traffic and to reduce unauthorized motorized access. Following construction, Foothills will implement access management measures KP 000+000 (Sparwood) where applicable to deter an increase in motorized public access along new pipeline rights-of-way, on new temporary construction access, and into existing linear disturbances that intersect the Project right-of-way. This is in keeping with commitments to mitigate the potential for new access as a result of the Project.
The Project will follow Foothills’ Post-Construction Monitoring (PCM) program as outlined in the ESA and/or other Project-specific environmental documents, which ensures compliance with specific reclamation performance expectations and applicable regulatory requirements. Mitigation methods will be based on the principle that success of land reclamation is measured against adjacent representative site conditions while taking into consideration the status of reclamation of the time of assessment. Through Foothills’ adaptive management approach to reclamation, if PCM indicates a project is not on a trajectory to reach reclamation goals, active reclamation may be considered as one potential mitigation measure to ensure reclamation goals are achieved.
Page 2 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY PROJECT 2023 KÁÍNAI NATION/BLOOD TRIBE
Káínai Nation/Blood Tribe (BT) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project BT Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential effects on wildlife and Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA In their report, BT has indicated that there is likely ongoing hunting in the area, as it is within the historical range for Blackfoot hunters. Species include bobcat, cougar, Sections 7 and 11 wildlife habitat and resulting effects coyote, wolf, deer, grouse, turkey, mule deer, moose, and bighorn sheep. BT noted that access to hunting in the area is possible by way of forest service roads and logging on hunting, including: Hunting locations within the roads in Michel Creek, Coal Creek and Morrissey Creek valleys, but that some of these roads may not permit vehicle access in all seasons. Within the Study Area2, BT Section 6 of the EPP Elko Section RAA: reported concerns about decreased quality of consumable wildlife species in the region, as well as a general decrease in hunting success. • Impacts of the Project on • animal habitat important for 2.81 km northwest from KP As stated above, the Project has been designed to parallel 80% of existing disturbances which reduces footprint and helps to minimize fragmentation of the landscape. hunting 015+935 (Morrisey Creek Valley) Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • Impacts on BT’s ability to hunt • 5.6 km northwest from KP • Impacts to the quality of • Locate log deck sites in previously disturbed areas, wherever practical. 014+535 (Coal Creek consumable wildlife species • Valley) Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. hunted by BT • • 6.17 km northeast from KP Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the 000+000 (Michel Creek appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • Valley) Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Hunting locations outside the Inspector(s). These gaps should align. Elko Section RAA: • Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. • Minimize the removal of vegetation in wetlands to the extent possible. • 15.85 km northeast from • KP 000+000 (Crowsnest Do not harass or feed wildlife or livestock. Firearms are not permitted in Project vehicles or on the construction footprint, or at associated facilities. • Pass) Prohibit the recreational use of all-terrain vehicles or snowmobiles by construction personnel on the construction footprint. • • 17.99 km northwest from Ensure that noise abatement equipment on machinery is in good working order. KP 000+351 (Fernie) • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Where natural recovery is not preferred, 24.57 km northwest from seed disturbed areas as per site requirements and as specified by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). KP 000+000 (Sparwood) • If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g. dens, nests) are identified during construction of the Project, report to the Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. See above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resources use, including hunting.
Potential effects on vegetation and Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA BT stated that the East Kootenays and the Crowsnest Pass are used by Blackfoot people to harvest a variety of food and medicinal plants, including the roots, stems, Sections 6 and 11 resulting effects on plant gathering, leaves, and berries. including: Plant gathering locations Sections 8.2, and 8.8 of outside the Elko Section RAA: As stated above, the Project has been designed to parallel 80% of existing disturbances which reduces footprint and helps to minimizes fragmentation of the landscape. EPP • Impacts to vegetation of Project-related clearing of forest and vegetation will result in the temporary loss of 177.2 ha of land with traditional resource use potential (native vegetation, including • medicinal and traditional use 15.71 km southeast from forested uplands and wetlands) in the Elko Section PDA. value KP 008+971 (East Kootenays) Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on vegetation: • 15.85 km northeast from • Limit the disturbance to vegetation (i.e., native vegetation) to the extent practical. KP 000+000 (Crowsnest Pass) • If previously unidentified rare plants or rare ecological communities are found on the construction footprint prior to or during construction, implement the Plant Species and Ecological Communities of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan (EPP, Appendix 1E in Appendix A). Plant gathering locations • Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. outside the Elko Section RAA • Locate deck sites in previously disturbed areas, wherever practical. • • 17.99 km northwest from Invasive species will be managed according to TC Energy’s Integrated Vegetation Management Plan for Southeast BC. KP 000+351 (Fernie) • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non- • 24.57 km northwest from agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. KP 000+000 (Sparwood) • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Where natural recovery is not preferred, seed disturbed areas asper site requirements and as specified by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Avoid disturbance to environmentally sensitive features during clearing as identified by the appropriate signage and/or fencing. The Environmental Inspector(s) and appropriate Resource Specialist will determine the size of avoidance buffer surrounding these features, if appropriate.
Page 3 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY PROJECT 2023 KÁÍNAI NATION/BLOOD TRIBE
Káínai Nation/Blood Tribe (BT) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project BT Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Same as above Same as above Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on wetlands: • Foothills will obtain regulatory approval for construction activities occurring within wetlands, as required. Construct the wetland crossings in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. • Minimize the removal of vegetation in wetlands to the extent possible. • Conduct ground level cutting/mowing/mulching of wetland vegetation instead of grubbing. The method of removal of wetland vegetation is subject to approval by Foothills. • Direct grading away from wetlands. • Minimize grading within wetland boundary. Do not use temporary workspace within the boundaries of wetlands, unless required for site specific purposes. Temporary workspace within the boundary of a wetland must be approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • The Contractor will use berms, cross ditches, sediment fencing and/or other appropriate measures to prevent erosion and siltation into adjacent wetland areas, unless otherwise directed by Foothills. Refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan for additional measures. • If ground conditions are encountered that create potential for rutting, admixing or compaction on the workside, minimize ground disturbance by using a protective layer such as geotextile and fill, rig mats, swamp mats or access mats between wetland root/seed bed and construction equipment. • Replace trench material as soon as feasible and re-establish pre-construction contours within wetland boundary to ensure facilitate cross right-of-way drainage. • Where there are permanent or temporary access roads, maintain cross-drainage to allow water to move from one side of the access road to the other. • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in wetlands. Do not seed wetland areas unless otherwise directed by Foothills. Foothills notes cleanup and reclamation are implemented across the entire construction footprint, excluding any permanent above ground facilities such as valves. Foothills promotes the natural regeneration of native vegetation to encourage early successional species consistent with the surrounding vegetation community. Please see the row above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource use, including plant gathering.
Potential effects to fish and fish Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA BT noted the presence of bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout, mountain whitefish, sculpin, and long-nosed dace within the Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and McEvoy Creek. Sections 8 and 11 habitat and resulting effects on Within the Study Area2, BT reported concerns regarding decreased quality of consumable fish species in the region, as well as a general decrease in fishing success. fishing, including: Fish habitat identified within the Sections 8.4 and 8.8 of Elko Section PDA: The Project will cross Leach Creek, McEvoy Creek, and Pioneer Creek as well as unnamed tributaries to Leach Creek, McEvoy Creek, Flathead River, Pioneer Creek and EPP • Impacts of Project on habitat Bean Creek. The Pacific populations of both bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout have occurrences within watercourses crossed by the PDA. • important for fishing Within PDA at KP 011+205 (McEvoy Creek) Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on fish and fish habitat: • Impacts on BT’s ability to fish • Impacts to the quality of Fish habitat identified within the • In the channel, the trench will be backfilled by placing only imported clean coarse material (i.e., gravel or rock), or native material removed from the trench, as the final consumable fish species Elko Section RAA: 0.5 m of backfill. Imported backfill material must be obtained from a Company approved off-site facility or source. • Return the bed and banks of each watercourse as close as feasible to their original preconstruction contours. • 5.6 km northwest from KP • 014+535 (Coal Creek Implement permanent bank reclamation measures to re-establish riparian vegetation and fish habitat as a part of backfill operations (Refer to Appendix 1D, Dwgs. Valley) STDS-03-ML-05-601, STDS-03-ML-05-602, STDS-03-ML-05-603, STDS-03-ML-05-604, STDS-03-ML-05-606 and STDS-03-ML-05-608). Biodegradable materials shall be utilized unless otherwise specified by the Company. • 6.17 km northeast from KP • 000+000 (Michel Creek Seed disturbed banks and riparian areas with an approved native seed mixture and/or cover crop as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Valley) Conduct all hydrostatic testing activities in accordance with all applicable federal and/or provincial legislation and approval conditions, including handing, containment and disposal of all test and drying mediums used. • Complete watercourse crossings in a timely manner. Before the installation of the watercourse crossing and the commencement of instream activity, the Contractor will ensure that all necessary equipment and materials are available and are onsite. • Develop water quality monitoring plans to monitor for sediment events during instream construction activities, at all S1 to S4 watercourses. If monitoring reveals sediment values are approaching threshold values, the water quality monitors will alert the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s) and work with them to develop corrective actions. If corrective actions are not successful, construction activities will be temporarily suspended until effective solutions are identified. • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan
Page 4 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY PROJECT 2023 KÁÍNAI NATION/BLOOD TRIBE
Káínai Nation/Blood Tribe (BT) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project BT Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Same as above Same as above Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality and quantity during construction: • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working condition shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refueling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30 m of watercourses or waterbodies. • Preserve water quality, including preventing the introduction of foreign material (debris, sediment, etc.) into the receiving waterbody/watercourse. Please see above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource use, including fishing.
Potential effects on heritage Elko Section PDA, LAA RAA In their report, BT notes the area between the Flathead River watershed and the Elk River watershed were historical zones of encounter between Blackfoot and Ktunaxa Section 12 resources, including: and Flathead peoples. BT indicated that there is the potential for discovery of sites of historical, archaeological or cultural interest to the Blackfoot. Cultural location within the Elko Appendix A of EPP • Impacts of the Project on sites Section PDA: In all jurisdictions where TC Energy builds and operates, adherence to heritage legislation and guidance is a fundamental environmental requirement. TC Energy engages of cultural, historical and qualified heritage consultants who undertake the necessary pre-construction desktop and field investigations as required by the provincial Ministry that has jurisdiction for • archaeological interest Between KP 008+472 and the Project area. Foothills completed a desktop screening of historic conditions for the Project PDA; an archaeological impact assessment will be undertaken to identify KP 031+548 (area between potential sites prior to construction. Flathead River watershed and the Elk River If information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental watershed) Alignment Sheets, as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether Foothills’ planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets filed prior to construction. These efforts, in conjunction with traditional knowledge shared by Indigenous groups, reduces the likelihood that a previously unidentified heritage site will be encountered during construction. In the event of unanticipated discovery during construction, Foothills will implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan, as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. Please see the row above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource.
NOTES: 1 Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP (Appendix A of the ESA) 2 BT defines the Study Area as an area that covers a landscape of 175,250 km2 in southern Alberta and southeastern BC
SOURCES: Dermot O’Connor. Oak Roads Concepts. August 2020. Blood Tribe/Káínai Traditiona Knowledge, Land and Resource Use Baseline Study for TC Energy (NGTL Foothills). Integral Ecology Group and ALCES Group. August 2020. Assessment of Cumulative Effects for Káínai Nation: TC Energy Agreement.
Page 5 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT SIKSIKA NATION
Siksika Nation (SN) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project SN Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential cumulative effects and Elko Section Project In their report, SN noted that development in the Study Area2 has led to a decline in average forest age by around 27% since presettlement, has converted 32% to Section 14.6 resulting potential effects on the Development Area (PDA), development footprint, and has reduced intact landscapes to only 22%. Accessibility for traditional uses in the Study Area has declined by almost two thirds due to land exercise of treaty and Indigenous Local Assessment Area conversion and the establishment of protected areas that restrict accessibility. Sections 4.0 to 9.0 of rights (LAA), Regional Assessment the Environmental Area (RAA) The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which considered the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the Project’s Protection Plan (EPP) contribution to those effects. The cumulative effects assessment methodology follows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Technical Guidance for Assessing Cumulative Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the CER Filing Manual. The ESA assumes that other companies and other TC Energy projects and activities considered in the cumulative effects assessment will employ similar mitigation measures as this Project to control effects on the environment. Potential Project-related cumulative effects are minimized with the implementation of the mitigation measures in the EPP including the following design and construction measures: • maximizing the use of adjacent existing right-of-way and reduce the width of additional clearing as much as possible; • avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows when feasible; and • adhering to the approved construction footprint and access. The ESA assessed potential Project effects on the exercise or practice of Indigenous and treaty rights in the Project area in accordance with the CER Filing Manual. In addition to the resource-specific mitigation identified in this table, the following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on the exercise or practice of Indigenous and Treaty rights in the Project area: • Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. • All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. • Provide all workers orientation and information materials regarding environmental, health, safety expectations and cultural awareness and sensitivity • Provide potentially affected Indigenous groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, Foothills will implement the Cultural Resources Discovery Contingency Plan, as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. Foothills has been engaging with SN since November 6, 2019 and has offered opportunities to collect and submit Project-specific information that would inform its understanding of potential Project effects on Indigenous and treaty rights and traditional uses. Foothills will continue to engage SN and remains committed to sharing Project information and receiving feedback from SN for the purpose of identifying potential Project-related impacts on the exercise of rights within SN’s traditional territory and to identify appropriate measures to avoid or reduce adverse effects and/or support, improve or provide benefit to the rights of Indigenous peoples. Information gathered through ongoing engagement is considered for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate.
Potential effects on traditional land Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA In their report, SN discussed their experience of reduced access to traditional land use areas in the region and overall reduced opportunities to hunt and fish due to Sections 10, 11 and 14 and resource use and the exercise increased private land ownership, increased competition from recreational users, and changes to and enforcement of hunting and fishing regulations. SN reports that of Indigenous rights, including: although the Project footprint is small relative to the extent of footprint in the region, it will contribute to cumulative impacts by adding disturbance to the landscape. The Sections 5.0 and 9.0 of the EPP Access routes identified geographic extent of the cumulative impacts is both site-specific and regional, the timing and duration of the cumulative impacts will be long-term and permanent, the • Impacts to hunting, fishing, within the Elko Section RAA: cumulative impacts will be irreversible, and the cumulative impacts to cultural wellbeing will be high, or significant. SN has indicated that access to the Elko Section is harvesting, and ceremonial and possible via logging roads in the Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and Morrissey Creek valleys, however some roads may not permit vehicle access in all seasons. spiritual sites • 2.81 km northwest from • Accessibility of hunting areas KP 015+935 (Morrisey The Project has been designed to parallel 80% of existing disturbances. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., Creek Valley) expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on
• 5.6 km northwest from the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent KP 014+535 (Coal Creek land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. Valley) If information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets, as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether Foothills’ planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets filed prior to construction.
Page 1 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT SIKSIKA NATION
Siksika Nation (SN) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project SN Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Same as above Access routes identified Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether Foothills’ planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional Same as above within the Elko Section RAA or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets filed (cont’d): prior to construction. • 6.17 km northeast from The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on traditional land and resource use: KP 000+000 (Michel • Creek Valley) Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. • Provide potentially affected Indigenous groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint. • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. Prior to the start of construction activities, clearly mark all sensitive resources, including identified traditional use trails that intersect the Footprint. Following clearing, re-mark all sensitive resources as necessary and supplement markings with signage. • Leave gaps in windrows (i.e., grubbing piles, strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at identified trails. These gaps should align. • Take reasonable measures to control construction-related noise near residential areas. • Reduce idling of equipment, where possible. • Where practical and applicable, use multi-passenger vehicles for the transport of crews to and from job sites. If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, Foothills will implement the Cultural Resources Discovery Contingency Plan as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. Please see the above row for mitigation measures regarding the exercise or practice of Indigenous and treaty rights.
Potential effects on wildlife and Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA In their report, SN indicated that there is likely ongoing hunting in the area, as it is within the historical range for Blackfoot hunters. Species include bobcat, cougar, coyote, Sections 7 and 11 wildlife habitat and resulting effects wolf, deer, grouse, turkey, mule deer, moose, and bighorn sheep. Within the Study Area2, SN reported concerns about decreased quality of consumable wildlife species in on hunting, including: the region, as well as a general decrease in hunting success. Section 6 of EPP • Impacts on SN’s ability to hunt As stated above, the Project has been designed to parallel 80% of existing disturbances which reduces footprint and helps to minimize fragmentation of the landscape. • Impacts to the quality of Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: consumable wildlife species hunted • Locate log deck sites in previously disturbed areas, wherever practical. • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). These gaps should align. • Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. • Minimize the removal of vegetation in wetlands to the extent possible. • Do not harass or feed wildlife or livestock. Firearms are not permitted in Project vehicles or on the construction footprint, or at associated facilities. • Prohibit the recreational use of all-terrain vehicles or snowmobiles by construction personnel on the construction footprint. • Ensure that noise abatement equipment on machinery is in good working order. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Where natural recovery is not preferred, seed disturbed areas as per site requirements and as specified by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g. dens, nests) are identified during construction of the Project, report to the Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan.
Please see the row above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource use, including hunting.
Page 2 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT SIKSIKA NATION
Siksika Nation (SN) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project SN Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential effects on vegetation and Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA In their report, SN stated that the East Kootenays and the Crowsnest Pass are used by Blackfoot people to harvest a variety of food and medicinal plants, including the Sections 6 and 11 resulting effects on plant gathering, roots, stems, leaves, and berries. including: Plant gathering locations Sections 8.2, and 8.8 of identified outside the Elko As stated above, the Project has been designed to parallel 80% of existing disturbances which reduces footprint and helps to minimizes fragmentation of the landscape. EPP • Impacts to vegetation of food Section RAA: Project-related clearing of forest and vegetation will result in the temporary loss of 177.2 ha of land with traditional resource use potential (native vegetation, including
and medicinal use forested uplands and wetlands) in the Elko Section PDA. • 15.71 km southeast from KP 008+971 (East Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on vegetation: Kootenays) • Limit the disturbance to vegetation (i.e., native vegetation) to the extent practical. • 15.85 km northeast from • KP 000+000 (Crowsnest If previously unidentified rare plants or rare ecological communities are found on the construction footprint prior to or during construction, implement the Plant Species Pass) and Ecological Communities of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan (EPP, Appendix 1E in Appendix A). • • 17.99 km northwest from Restrict all construction activities to the approved construction footprint. All construction traffic will adhere to safety and road closure regulations. KP 000+351 (Fernie) • Locate deck sites in previously disturbed areas, wherever practical. • 24.57 km northwest from • Invasive species will be managed according to TC Energy’s Integrated Vegetation Management Plan for Southeast BC. KP 000+000 (Sparwood) • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non- agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Where natural recovery is not preferred, seed disturbed areas as per site requirements and as specified by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). Avoid disturbance to environmentally sensitive features during clearing as identified by the appropriate signage and/or fencing. The Environmental Inspector(s) and appropriate Resource Specialist will determine the size of avoidance buffer surrounding these features, if appropriate. Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on wetlands: • Foothills will obtain regulatory approval for construction activities occurring within wetlands, as required. Construct the wetland crossings in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. • Minimize the removal of vegetation in wetlands to the extent possible. • Conduct ground level cutting/mowing/mulching of wetland vegetation instead of grubbing. The method of removal of wetland vegetation is subject to approval by Foothills. • Direct grading away from wetlands. • Minimize grading within wetland boundary. Do not use temporary workspace within the boundaries of wetlands, unless required for site specific purposes. Temporary workspace within the boundary of a wetland must be approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • The Contractor will use berms, cross ditches, sediment fencing and/or other appropriate measures to prevent erosion and siltation into adjacent wetland areas, unless otherwise directed by Foothills. Refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan for additional measures. If ground conditions are encountered that create potential for rutting, admixing or compaction on the workside, minimize ground disturbance by using a protective layer such as geotextile and fill, rig mats, swamp mats or access mats between wetland root/seed bed and construction equipment. • Replace trench material as soon as feasible and re-establish pre-construction contours within wetland boundary to ensure facilitate cross right-of-way drainage. • Where there are permanent or temporary access roads, maintain cross-drainage to allow water to move from one side of the access road to the other. • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in wetlands. Do not seed wetland areas unless otherwise directed by Foothills. Foothills notes cleanup and reclamation are implemented across the entire construction footprint, excluding any permanent above ground facilities such as valves. Foothills promotes the natural regeneration of native vegetation to encourage early successional species consistent with the surrounding vegetation community. Please see above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource use, including plant gathering.
Page 3 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT SIKSIKA NATION
Siksika Nation (SN) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project SN Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential effects to fish and fish Elko Section PDA, LAA, RAA SN noted the presence of bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout, mountain whitefish, sculpin, and long-nosed dace within the Michel Creek, Coal Creek, and McEvoy Creek Sections 8 and 11 habitat and resulting effects on leading to the Flathead (North Fork) River. Within the Study Area, SN reported concerns regarding decreased quality of consumable fish species in the region, as well as a fishing, including: Fish habitat identified within general decrease in fishing success. Sections 8.4 and 8.8 of the Elko Section PDA: EPP • Impacts of Project on habitat The Project will cross Leach Creek, McEvoy Creek, and Pioneer Creek as well as unnamed tributaries to Leach Creek, McEvoy Creek, Flathead River, Pioneer Creek and • important for fishing Within PDA at KP Bean Creek. The Pacific populations of both bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout have occurrences within watercourses crossed by the PDA. 011+205 (McEvoy • Impacts on SN’s ability to fish Creek) Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on fish and fish habitat: • Impacts to the quality of consumable fish species Fish habitat identified within • In the channel, the trench will be backfilled by placing only imported clean coarse material (i.e., gravel or rock), or native material removed from the trench, as the final the Elko Section RAA: 0.5 m of backfill. Imported backfill material must be obtained from a Company approved off-site facility or source.
• Return the bed and banks of each watercourse as close as feasible to their original preconstruction contours. • 5.6 km northwest from • Implement permanent bank reclamation measures to re-establish riparian vegetation and fish habitat as a part of backfill operations (Refer to Appendix 1D, Dwgs. KP 014+535 (Coal STDS-03-ML-05-601, STDS-03-ML-05-602, STDS-03-ML-05-603, STDS-03-ML-05-604, STDS-03-ML-05-606 and STDS-03-ML-05-608). Biodegradable materials Creek) shall be utilized unless otherwise specified by the Company. • 6.17 km northeast from • Seed disturbed banks and riparian areas with an approved native seed mixture and/or cover crop as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). KP 000+000 (Michel • Conduct all hydrostatic testing activities in accordance with all applicable federal and/or provincial legislation and approval conditions, including handing, containment Creek) and disposal of all test and drying mediums used. Fish habitat identified outside • Complete watercourse crossings in a timely manner. Before the installation of the watercourse crossing and the commencement of instream activity, the Contractor will the Elko Section RAA: ensure that all necessary equipment and materials are available and are onsite. • Develop water quality monitoring plans to monitor for sediment events during instream construction activities, at all S1 to S4 watercourses. If monitoring reveals • 386.13 km northwest sediment values are approaching threshold values, the water quality monitors will alert the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s) and work with them to develop from 000+000 (Elk River) corrective actions. If corrective actions are not successful, construction activities will be temporarily suspended until effective solutions are identified. Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan. Foothills will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality and quantity during construction: • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working condition shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refueling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30m of watercourses or waterbodies. • Preserve water quality, including preventing the introduction of foreign material (debris, sediment, etc.) into the receiving waterbody/watercourse. Please see above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource use, including fishing.
Page 4 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT SIKSIKA NATION
Siksika Nation (SN) Project-Related Issues Summary for the Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project (the Project)
Where Addressed in Environmental and Community Issue/Concern Approximate Location Socio-economic Identified Relative to Project SN Overview and Foothills Pipe Lines (South BC) Ltd. (Foothills) Response / Proposed Mitigation Measures 1 Assessment (ESA)
Potential effects on heritage Elko Section PDA, LAA RAA SN notes the area between the Flathead River watershed and the Elk River watershed were historical zones of encounter between Blackfoot and Ktunaxa and Flathead Section 12 resources, including: peoples. SN indicated that there is the potential for discovery of sites of historical, archaeological or cultural interest to the Blackfoot. Appendix A of EPP • Impacts of the Project on sites In all jurisdictions where TC Energy builds and operates, adherence to heritage legislation and guidance is a fundamental environmental requirement. TC Energy engages Cultural location within the of cultural, historical and qualified heritage consultants who undertake the necessary pre-construction desktop and field investigations as required by the provincial Ministry that has jurisdiction for Elko Section PDA: archaeological interest the Project area. Foothills completed a desktop screening of historic conditions for the Project PDA; an archaeological impact assessment will be undertaken to identify • potential sites prior to construction. Between KPs 008+472 and 031+548 (Area If information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental between Flathead River Alignment Sheets, as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether Foothills’ planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified and Elk River potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the watersheds) EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets filed prior to construction. These efforts, in conjunction with traditional knowledge shared by Indigenous groups, reduces the likelihood that a previously unidentified heritage site will be encountered during construction. In the event of unanticipated discovery during construction, Foothills will implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan, as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. Please see the row above for mitigation measures regarding traditional land and resource use.
NOTES: 1 Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP (Appendix A of the ESA). 2 SN defines the Study Area as an area that covers a landscape of 175,250 km2 in southern Alberta and southeastern BC.
SOURCES: Dermot O’Connor. Oak Roads Concepts. July 2020. Siksika Nation Traditional Knowledge, Land and Resource Use Baseline Study for TC Energy (Foothills Foothills). Integral Ecology Group and ALCES Group. August 2020. Assessment of Cumulative Effects for Siksika Nation: TC Energy Agreement.
Page 5 of 5
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Attachment B BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report – June 2020 February 2021
Attachment B BC MÉTIS FEDERATION TERRESTRIAL STUDY FINAL REPORT – JUNE 2020
B.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Attachment B BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report – June 2020 February 2021
B.2 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report – June 2020
Joe Desjarlais - Project Facilitator and Author Dr. Bruce Shelvey - Academic Facilitator and Author Drake Henry - Project Assistant and Contributing Author Angel Fisher - Project Assistant
Acknowledgements
The project team acknowledges the traditional First Nations lands upon which this project was conducted and the First Nations leaders and community members who came out to attend some community events. The team would first of all like to express very great appreciation to the community liaisons who were willing to share their knowledge, time and resources and relationship building in the completion of this project. Community Liaisons included Marie March from Kamloops, Earl Belcourt from Duncan on Vancouver Island, Cindy Wilgosh from Clearwater, and Elizabeth Pearce from Terrace, and for a portion of the project, Derrick Whiteskycloud from the lower mainland. Deep gratitude must be expressed to the elders, knowledge keepers and many community members who came out to community meetings, engaged the team and were willing to share their incredible knowledge and wisdom about their lives in relation to connections to land and water. Thanks to BC Métis Federation board and staff who partnered with the project team to make this study a reality and, most importantly, create opportunities to go into the communities, to meet people, share information, and listen and learn from them. Finally, the team would like to extend thanks to Natural Resources Canada for the funds to make this knowledge partnership project possible.
3 Contents
Acknowledgements...... 3 Executive Summary...... 8 Introduction...... 12 Methodology...... 24 Section I: Planning (Recognition)...... 34 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)...... 54 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)...... 72 Section IV: Knowledge Partnerships (Investment/Reconciliation)...... 92 Conclusion: Métis Land and Life...... 98 Bibliography...... 108
4 Appendix 1: General Operational Team Roles and Responsibilities...... 140 Appendix 2: Initial Correspondance to Community Leaders...... 142 Appendix 3: Métis Land and Life Project Press Release...... 143 Appendix 4: BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study...... 144 Appendix 6: Project Brief...... 146 Appendix 7: Métis Land and Life Study Map...... 148 Appendix 8: Long Form Map Questions...... 149 Appendix 9: Research Agenda...... 153 Appendix 11: Summary Report...... 156 Appendix 12: Project Lead Report...... 158 Appendix 13: Jack Land Use Interview Transcript...... 160 Appendix 15: Consent Form...... 169
5 6 Executive Summary
7 Executive Summary
The BCMF Terrestrial Study is a community-based, community-led, and community-owned project facilitated by the BCMF “Land and Life Team”. Our work could not have been completed without the invaluable contributions of Community Liaisons Earl Belcourt (Vancouver Island), Marie March (BC Interior East), Cindy Wilgosh (BC Interior Central), and Elizabeth Pearce (BC Coastal), the BCMF leadership and board, and the individual elders and knowledge keepers within each community. While the specific task of the BCMFTS was to assess the immediate and ongoing impact of the construction, operation and maintenance of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Extension (TMX) corridor on Métis land and resource use, its broader objective was to establish a relational framework that will be applied to future interactions between the Crown and BCMF’s membership. As a reference study, it provides the justification for long-term and sustainable relations with self-determining BCMF member communities, especially as it relates to the negotiation with the Crown of economic opportunities around resource opportunities that impact historical and contemporary Métis lifeways. It is important to note from the outset that our working definition of “community” reflects the reality of different forms of self-determination that are not necessarily congruent with First Nations (land and resource rights), national Métis organizations (rights bearing citizens) or liberal (social contract around Crown and private property) forms of sovereignty and collective political action. Our (re) definition accounts for the context within which Métis peoples functioned (and continue to function) within the overlapping and complicated world of indigenous/ aboriginal, Crown/colonial and National/Provincial authority. Therefore, our developing understanding of “self-determining Métis communities” considers expansive, dynamic and mobile kinship networks that operated within and between political, economic and social and cultural boundaries and allowed for a flexible and adaptive community “identity” that is as easily “hidden” as it is “expressed.” The BCMFTS establishes the following: » Recognition: Self-determining Métis peoples and communities have been a consistent, persistent and integral part of the history and memory of the Pacific Northwest (PNW). The presence of “halfbreed” or “mixed-ancestry” peoples and communities, the result of the coming together of two historically distinct cultures and societies, both in the PNW and diaspora from outside of the region, is evident in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the province.
8 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
» Kinship Relations: Within the later colonial and early provincial period, there was a systemic denial of Métis historical reality, which included informal erasure of mixed-ancestry people’s contributions to the pre- and post-colonial era and formal discrimination that prohibited their full participation in an evolving social order. The exclusion of “halfbreed” peoples from the political, economic, social and cultural life of First Nations and Euro-Canadian lifeworlds, including denial of existing and ongoing land and resource rights, effectively marginalized Métis communities within BC. Faced with systemic discrimination, racism and prejudice Métis peoples responded and adapted their lived-experience in a variety of ways, including but not limited hiding or denying their mixed-ancestry, fitting in with the new economic and social order, and avoiding state censure and control in order to maintain their lifeway. Métis peoples and self-determining communities maintained an interest in the TMX corridor; even though it may have become “invisible” to the traditional historical “eye” or unindexable to the mainstream economy, ongoing Métis agency was not inconsequential nor can it be ignored. » Repatriation: Métis peoples maintained culture and traditions within their kinship networks despite state control and denial. The result, however, was increasing fracturing of communities into smaller and more flexible/adaptive “family” units that maintained self-determined futures. Pan-métisism (ie: Métis identity associated with cultural affiliations such as hunting, jigging, beading, wearing a sash, etc.) may have developed as a strategy to bring some kind of collectivity to the mixed-ancestry shared experience in BC and Canada, but it is not necessarily a historical condition of being “Métis” in BC. Economic opportunities, like the TMX partnership, offer the opportunity to reintroduce the many different ways of being Métis in BC and our unique historical contributions to BC, reboot the relationship between self-determining Métis communities and the Crown, and reinstate Métis peoples and self-determining communities into the economic order. » Knowledge Partnership: Reviving the collective imagination of the many ways of being Métis in BC requires the creation and maintenance of knowledge partnerships within BCMF’s member communities and between BCMF and the Crown. Knowledge partnerships are relational and therefore include ongoing financial support and academically rigorous studies that build capacity in our member communities so that they are able to offer their informed consent to social, political and economic opportunities. The TMX accommodations as represented in this Final Report offer a model for how we together might work towards justice for past wrongs, reparations that support the rebuilding of our communities today, and commitment to coexistence for a brighter future.
9 10 Introduction
11 Introduction
The British Columbia Métis Federation (BCMF) is on the forefront of Métis resurgence in Canada. The Federation’s representative and member communities seek to increase awareness of the many ways Métis are connected to the land and resources in British Columbia. Empowering Métis self-determining communities by acknowledging our historic ties to specific geographies strengthens our ability to relate well to the Crown, provincial and local governments, and corporations, as we together come to recognize the necessity of engaging Métis as partners in Canada’s future. The BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study, hereafter ‘BCMF Terrestrial Study (BCMFTS)’ or the ‘Métis Land and Life Project (MLLP),’ engaged BCMF member communities who have had past and present land-use history within the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) corridor in order to lay the foundation for more expansive land and resource use studies that highlight Métis historic and contemporary lived experience in this area. As a reference study, it sets out the broad context that requires the participation of BCMF membership communities in the ongoing mitigation and monitoring of the construction, operation and maintenance of the TMX pipeline. This baseline report, which is also informed by research in secondary and primary historical sources, affirms the Crown’s commitment to informed decision-making within the resource development sector. It signals the Government’s willingness to fulfil its obligations to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (TRC) recommendations on proper and appropriate Indigenous-Crown relations and to satisfy the requirements of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Recognizing and affirming self-determining Métis communities, which desire to work with the Crown on these important economic initiatives, is evidence of the intention of governments, corporations and individuals to decolonize past economic policies and practices. The BCMF Terrestrial Reference Study is part of a larger government program known as the Terrestrial Studies Initiative (TSI), which supports Indigenous-led studies to better understand the project’s potential impacts and cumulative effects of construction, operation and maintenance of the project on Indigenous people, their lands and the resources that they rely upon to sustain their ways of being. The Métis Land and Life project is foundational for other pending accommodation measures associated with the TMX, such as the Terrestrial Cumulative Effects Initiative. The knowledge and experience gained from this initial report enables BCMF member communities to produce informed responses to concerns regarding
12 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
the cumulative effects from development — including the impacts of this project. As a baseline of community engagement, knowledge partnerships and historical research, the Land and Life Project empowers our membership to meaningfully participate in the co-development of a cumulative effects framework focused on understanding the current state of the environment and monitoring changes in response to natural processes. Focused follow-up studies on Métis land-use and harvesting practices, for example, will be important when considering how to mitigate and manage wildlife patterns, restore fish habitats in local watersheds, and protect gathering grounds and sacred spaces. The BC Métis Federation is a non-profit association that was incorporated in 2011. It works with Métis communities throughout British Columbia to support, foster and encourage grassroots Métis culture. The BC Métis Federation is governed by a president and a board of directors elected by BCMF members. The BC Métis Federation’s mandate is to advance the culture and the rights of Métis people and to work with Métis communities to ensure the wellbeing of all our members. The BC Métis Federation fulfills its mandate by organizing and participating in cultural events, festivals, language initiatives, work experience placement programs and advocacy efforts on behalf of Métis people in British Columbia. The BC Métis Federation currently represents approximately 7500 Métis people throughout British Columbia. Of these members approximately 3000 are card carrying members and we work and connect with the remainder through Métis partner organizations throughout the province. We are a relatively young and small organization. Over the last number of years, we have focused on developing our governance infrastructure and establishing our policies, protocols and procedures as we slowly, but surely, find our collective voice and assert our inherent rights. The BC Métis Federation has a history of advocacy work, of engaging community groups, conducting meetings, facilitating cultural events, conducting information gathering and writing reports to satisfy project work plans. In 2018 BC Métis Federation partnered with the Province of British Columbia to do a Knowledge Partnership Project, (KPP) and this important research formed the basis for where we are today with the Land and Life project. The BC Métis Federation Knowledge Partnership Project data suggested that clearly defined Métis communities existed, and continue to exist in British Columbia, and recognizing these communities requires a flexible and expansive definition of Métis to account for their diversity.1 The BC Métis Federation recommended that government fund a BCMF knowledge division with clear objectives: » To assist communities to repatriate members back into diverse communities. » To reconnect Métis peoples to their knowledge and traditions.
1 http://bcMétis.com/2018/12/bc-Métis-federation-releases-knowledge-partnership-project-report/?- doing_wp_cron=1589394903.8101019859313964843750
13 Introduction
» To build capacity for self-determining communities to generate and share their own knowledge. » To assist in resource management and other activities through an ongoing knowledge partnership protocol.
Although not supported by the Province of British Columbia to date, the KPP laid the foundation for current work at the federal level, particularly after the Supreme Court of Canada Daniels ruling opened up a national conversation on “the many ways of being Métis.” The BCMF Terrestrial Study is part of re-initiated TMS phase three consultations flowing from the Trudeau government’s decision to reconsider their consultation process in renewed phase three consultations. The BCMF attended meetings with the Department of Natural Resources beginning in November, 2018 and made the case that our members would be impacted by the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion project but that its full significance would not be known without further study. Minister Sohi stated at the time that that building Crown-Indigenous relationships was important, and acknowledged that past governments had fallen short of meaningful consultation. In a second meeting with Minister Sohi on July 23, 2018 the Minister reinforced ideas of strong relationship building and meaningful partnership and stated that relationships must go beyond a single project and that trust is built through lasting relationships. Based upon the Minister’s commitment to meaningful dialogue, extensive consultation and commitment to common solutions, the BCMF put together a team in late 2018 and in the Spring of 2019, engaged their members and communities on the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, hosted an economic form, and then submitted a Final Report released June 27 entitled “Trans Mountain Expansion Project Phase II Engagement.” BCMF began Phase Three Crown consultations in the Spring of 2019 with the Office of the Minister of Natural Resources, the Crown consultation team and Trans Mountain Corporation by pressing for a Federally funded land use assessment. After the Government of Canada purchased Trans Mountain it opened the way for negotiations from January to April of 2019 wherein the BCMF partnered with the Department of Natural Resources (NRCAN) to produce the Summary of 2019 Crown Consultations on the Trans Mountain Expansion Project. The work by BC Métis Federation representatives led to inclusion of BC Métis Federation into the Trans Mountain accommodations, including this current baseline land-use study, with future potential for a multi-year cumulative terrestrial study. The BC Métis Federation’s advocacy in Phase III Crown consultations called for local Métis communities to control their own community knowledge through clear negotiated knowledge partnerships and aimed to ensure that local community knowledge be taken into consideration in an ongoing way in accommodations. The Federal government’s support for the completion of this terrestrial study to establish reference points or a baseline for consultation was consistent with the BCMF’s desire to facilitate the recognition and restoration of self-determining Métis communities in British Columbia. In building capacity through knowledge partnerships, our member communities are better able to assert their own interests
14 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
and to gather, produce and disseminate information and traditional knowledge that adequately responds to challenges, needs, demands of all proponents. The idea of “locally grounded community-led knowledge partnerships” as a foundation for proper consultations revealed that a one-size-fits-all Métis nationalism could not adequately represent the diversity of Métis kinship/communities within the province of British Columbia. The grassroots approach to political action meant that “the many ways of being Métis” needed to be embedded right into our research protocols and practices as we engaged with communities and accessed their local knowledge with ethical standards that would not allow for the appropriation of knowledge or the diminishment of an other’s knowledge. In this way, we hoped to avoid the cultural wars and identity politics that have characterized provincial and national discussions about being Métis. The BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study team, known to our members as the “Land and Life Team,” which includes Joe Desjarlais, project facilitator and author, Bruce Shelvey (Ph.D.), academic lead and author, Drake Henry, project assistant and contributing author, Angel Fisher, project assistant, Sherry Daniels, administrative support, Keith Henry, BCMF President, and Betty Fisher, Finance, knew from the outset that we had to create opportunities that would allow people and communities to tell their stories as it related to “lives lived” on the land (and water). We committed ourselves to a responsible process, a research protocol for Métis communities and self-determining nations to follow, that would allow us to effectively fulfill our responsibility to our membership. The approved work plan objective from the statement of work is as follows: “The objective of this approved work plan is to facilitate Indigenous participation in dialogues relating to natural resource development by supporting the review and update of a traditional land use study.” The approved work plan description states: “The recipient will identify the location of historic and contemporary Métis fishing, hunting and gathering territories through a knowledge partnership model; explore seasonal movements and yearly patterns of wildlife and considering strategies that limit the impact of construction and maintenance of the pipeline on Métis kinship networks. This will be done through community meetings, land research, interviews, information sessions and creating a repository of information that will be held at the BC Métis Federation head office.” It is noteworthy that the idea of “knowledge partnership” is clearly stated in the statement of work for the Land and Life project. The BCMF Terrestrial Study offers a unique Indigenous perspective premised upon building meaningful partnerships that are characterized by mutual respect and shared benefit. This foundational report identifies past and present Métis knowledge networks and establishes relational principles that will benefit all Métis self-determining communities in BC. Furthermore, the Final Report sets out an action plan that can move the BCMF’s relationship with the Crown forward so that our member communities are resourced with the appropriate knowledge capacity
15 Introduction
to meaningfully participate in on-going, shared decision-making with respect to the TMX. By exploring the context of Métis land-use practices as a precursor to a more extensive terrestrial study, the potential cumulative impacts on Métis land and resource use that may result from the planning, construction, operation, and maintenance of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, will be better understood and mitigated. Given the historic and continual marginalization of Métis self-determining communities in BC wherein the knowledge has been hidden or the collective memory has been lost, the BCMF Terrestrial Study concentrated on investigating and establishing knowledge partnerships with communities, individuals and institutions. The Final Report fulfills the following expectations: » It explores the possibility of Knowledge Partnerships with Métis communities and kinship networks that are impacted by the TMX. » It identifies key Métis elders, knowledge keepers and leaders who hold vital information on the location of historic and contemporary Métis fishing, hunting and gathering territories. » It employs and practices an Indigenous Research Methodology, which supports knowledge repatriation for the purposes of self-determination. » It reveals the deep historic ties that Métis have to the land, resources and economic development within the TMX corridor and summarizes the systemic racism and prejudice that marginalized Métis communities and peoples. » It shows, in general terms, the historic and on-going seasonal movements of Métis wildlife harvesting, yearly patterns of their ground gathering, and the importance of their sacred or culturally significant sites as they relate to the pipeline corridor. » It clearly establishes the need for future terrestrial studies to build knowledge capacity for self-determining Métis communities in order to assist them in mitigating and monitoring TMX corridor developments.
In summary, the BCMFTS Final Report highlights the responsibility of the Government of Canada to provide the resources for the BCMF to gather, produce and disseminate information and traditional knowledge so that all proponents can adequately respond to challenges, needs, demands of the laws, regulations, and rights associated with TMX developments. In many ways, the report is a tutorial on how to facilitate the ongoing repatriation of Métis-specific knowledge back to the land, to reconnect the specific geographic locations with Métis knowledge and traditions, and to enable self-determining Métis to generate and share their own knowledge to assist in resource management and other activities, knowledge and connections that were lost, in part, due to specific government policies and actions. Future historical and scientific terrestrial studies flowing out of the BCMFTS will allow all proponents of the TMX to incorporate Métis knowledge and traditions when shaping policy and programs, understanding potential land and cumulative development decisions, and contributing to co-management plans that impact Métis self-determination and ways of being.
16 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
In recovering, recording, and acknowledging diverse and dynamic Métis practices and land-use patterns, we are able to establish important principles, revive Indigenous protocols, and provide a roadmap for the acknowledgement of Métis community knowledge and historical traditions as they relate to the construction, operation and maintenance of the TMX. In equipping BCMF member communities along the TMX corridor with the background knowledge necessary to carry out extensive terrestrial and scientific studies, a foundation is laid that will enable them to meaningfully engage with the Crown, government, corporations, and companies. In addition, as the basis for subsequent studies, the Report acknowledges the need to build strong partnerships with First Nations, especially in areas where there is overlapping interests and/or sharing of land and resources. The BCMF Terrestrial Study establishes a baseline or point of reference upon which to build a relationship with the Federal government. The funds the BC Métis Federation, acting on behalf of its membership, received from Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN) to study and report back on the short and long-term impacts of the pipeline construction and on-going operation gave us the resources necessary to invite people to share their knowledge about land use in the Trans Mountain corridor. The report clearly shows that BC Métis Federation members have an on-going interest in using the lands and resources along the TMX corridor. The Final Report includes four main sections that illustrate how the BCMF fulfilled or exceeded the Work Plan Tasks as negotiated with NRCAN for the BCMFTS.
Section I: Planning Researching the historical and contemporary lived-experience of the many ways of being Métis in BC established that self-determining mixed-ancestry communities in BC existed prior to any assumption of administrative control by the British Crown. Preliminary exploration of archives, repositories and on-line databases and in published primary and secondary sources reinforce what we heard in community meetings and from knowledge keepers and elders: the historical and contemporary record shows that self-determining Métis have longstanding relationships with land and resources even though much of this history has been ignored by the academy and dismissed by nationally sanctioned Métis organizations. To be clear, the research presented in this report represents the opportunity to recover and repatriate Métis history and memory on the land and water on or around the Trans Mountain pipeline corridor and beyond. Our initial research shows an extensive historical record of the existence of many Métis communities in the Pacific Northwest, distinct populations across the Province of British Columbia and in fact the entire north-south corridor into Washington and Oregon, but specific research on these fluid and complex Métis (mixed-ancestry, halfbreed) identities, kinship networks and communities have yet to be fully explored and appreciated.
17 Introduction
Section II: Identification of Key Sites Self-determining Métis communities utilized the land and resources along the TMX corridor, and their lived-experience informs the province’s history. Key actors were involved in the region’s early economic and political development as illustrated by many geographical locations and place names that are associated with mixed-ancestry influence. Métis working in and through personal and corporate kinship networks shaped the fur trade, mineral development, water resources, ranching and farming, and the logging industry, to name a few examples, before, during and after the colonial period in BC. Métis kinship relations to peoples and place within British Columbia persisted throughout the Pacific Northwest and along the TMX corridor even after systemic political racialization, social discrimination, and economic marginalization negatively shaped Métis lived-experience and shut them out of the growing economy of the province. The maps and associated knowledge of contemporary land and resource use reveals that Métis social mobility and cultural adaptability made it possible for mixed-ancestry communities to maintain their traditional locations despite being dispersed across the province. It was possible for mixed-ancestry peoples and communities to live in one space and harvest in another, thereby maintaining an intimate knowledge of people and place.
Section III: Community Engagement Métis peoples and communities in BC have been the target of racialized political systems, discriminatory social practices, exclusionary economic practices, and assimilationist cultural pressures for over a century in British Columbia. The residual impact of these harmful forces have shattered any cohesive sense of collective identity and severely disrupted kinship networks in the TMX corridor and beyond. At this crucial juncture in our history, the BCMFTS highlights the need for the Crown to fund the repatriation efforts of Métis self-determining peoples. To accomplish this task, we adopted an Indigenous research methodology in order to not only gain access to community knowledge in an ethical way, but also to build capacity within each community as they begin to restore their sense of people and place. The BCMFTS recognized and affirmed the diversity of Métis lived-experience in BC by visiting their members in their own places of belonging and respecting the confidentiality and integrity of each story and land-use designation. This relational approach began a process of establishing mutual trust, which hopefully leads to an increasing willingness to share family stories and histories. Despite encountering almost insurmountable obstacles in our community engagements, including lingering social stigma, political divisions and infighting, economic protectionism, and fear of cultural appropriation, we were encouraged that Métis peoples and self-determining communities along the TMX corridor want to make their existence
18 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
known. The outcomes from community engagement came as an outworking of strong relationships and the respect for local protocol, our knowledge of which was greatly enhanced by Community Liaisons, many of whom had relationships and trust with local knowledge keepers, elders and leaders. Listening and learning from and within local Métis communities brought new impetus and meaning to the need to push forward with our shared goal of repatriation of communities, recovery of land, and reclaiming of resources.
Section IV: Knowledge Partnership The legitimacy and efficacy of relationships within our various BCMF member communities are guided by local protocols that are developed to show respect for difference and diversity, mutually beneficial partnerships that celebrate the many lifeways of Métis peoples, and the culture, customs and traditions that accounts for the fluidity of Métis ways of being. In acknowledging that past discrimination, marginalization and subjugation has led to fear, shame and suspicion, the BCMFTS team worked diligently to establish an on-going, consistent and respectful dialogue from the inception of the research process to its final conclusion, and from within the BCMF’s membership with intimate meetings and educational sessions to large public audiences through social media blasts that reached thousands of people. At every step, community members, elders, knowledge keepers, elected and appointed leaders were integral to knowledge-transfer and proprietors of how their knowledge was articulated. The Final Report is evidence that if meaningful knowledge partnerships are established that locally owned and led studies can (and must) benefit Métis people and communities. The BCMFTS is a representation of a very different kind of relationship, one that deserves ongoing government encouragement, support and funding. In the midst of political and even pandemic challenges, we have come to realize that knowledge partnerships, whether between Métis communities or between the Crown and the BCMF, are vital for present and future Métis-settler society relations in British Columbia. In giving all Métis people a voice in BC economic development projects and the governments development plans, we can begin to participate as equals, especially as our self-determining member communities reconnect with their historic kinship patterns. We believe that the BCMFTS is the beginning of empowering our communities, wherein local members can be free to fully express Métis life-ways Métis, assert their own interests, and live within their traditions as self-determining communities. The BCMF is confident, therefore, that it has met or exceeded all of the performance indicators set out in the Work Plan.
19 Introduction
Number of Meetings and Interviews
In Phase I of the project we identified key knowledge-based resources, including academic experts, archivists and community liaisons, and utilized them to understand the broad parameters of historical and contemporary Métis land use in, around and along the TMX corridor. Furthermore, we adopted an Indigenous research methodology that included specific ethical and practical guidelines for gathering, storing and sharing information with the express goal to manage and protect Métis knowledge for the benefit of Métis member communities. Research in regional and local archives, historic sites and repositories, digital and physical databases, and primary and secondary sources gave us confidence that Métis land-use, kinship patterns, and mobility networks within BC had a deep significance that has not been well understood. Phase II, III and IV all included extensive meetings within local communities, mapping inventories with individual knowledge keepers, and in-depth interviews with key elders and leaders.
Maps and Sources of Traditional Knowledge
We have only just begun to understand the historical and contemporary land-use, including hunting and harvesting practices, residential and migratory patterns, and spiritual and emotional connections, of self-determining Métis peoples in BC. The BCMFTS provided the funding and support necessary to begin structuring an inventory of Métis land-use and life-ways within and alongside the TMX corridor. Our bibliography includes relevant academic and popular literature, identifies academic experts and community knowledge keepers, and catalogues primary document collections in local, regional and national archives and we have monitored social, institutional and news media and attempted to map kinship relations. However, while the current research provides a snapshot of some of the major economic, social and cultural considerations that may require mitigation and ongoing management, a much more robust inventory of knowledge is required for our member communities to produce informed consent.
Community Involvement and Dialogue Around Resource Development
The BCMFTS combined relational research, community engagement and education into a single comprehensive exercise. We have a renewed appreciate and respect for depth of knowledge and understanding that our member communities have for the histories and geographies of Métis/mixed-blood peoples who had lived-experience along the TMX corridor. Our organization and its members have used this opportunity to build our relational and knowledge capacity so that we not only understand past and present Métis land-use practices but are able to represent those in ways that allow for informed consent when negotiating with the Crown over the
20 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
impact of the TMX on Métis communities and the mitigation of its effects on Métis land-use. Much more work needs to be done in order to build the capacity of our member communities so that they can fully enjoy the benefits of economic developments like the TMX as self-determining partners. BCMF leadership was heartened at the outset of our negotiations with Minister Sohi’s commitment to on-going consultation and his response to our request for a Terrestrial Study: “You asked about land-use studies? That’s a commitment we will deliver.” The Minister’s openness to an initial study in Phase Three and his assurance that our partnership would continue in Phase Four consultation mean that we can continue our fruitful work and continue to strengthen our member communities. Minister Sohi reflected on his social media after our meeting: “Though Phase III consultations on #TMX have successfully concluded, we will continue to work together with Indigenous communities to implement accommodations. The hard work and our partnership continues.” We agree with him when he stated: “trust is built on ongoing relationship.” The BCMF respectfully submits this Terrestrial Study as evidence that we can and will be good partners in the process of reconciliation.
21 22 Methodology
23 Methodology
Right relations within the context of the TMX construction and operation cannot be achieved without hearing and affirming all indigenous voices. The BCMF Terrestrial Study (BCMFTS) is a forward-thinking project that has specific, achievable outcomes with wide-ranging and significant implications for Métis/mix-blood communities and peoples in BC. The study has been conducted upon the foundation of an Indigenous Research Methodology (IRM) that has as its primary aim indigenous self-determination. In this regard, it is consistent with the most current trends in collaborative research that intend to establish good relations within indigenous communities and between indigenous nations and settler-society. We hope that the cooperative approach practiced in this study will be a model in Canada for civil dialogue within indigenous communities and an illustration of how to create a shared history while negotiating each other’s distinctive pasts with honour and respect. The BCMFTS represents a knowledge partnership between historically marginalized Métis/mixed-ancestry communities and the Government of Canada in a movement towards restitution and repatriation. For settler-society, the study provides an opportunity to recognize how they have contributed to a century-long history of injustice and an inviation to come into meaningful and lasting relations with all the different Métis self-determining communities in BC. For self-determining Métis nations in BC, the BCMFTS is a way of repatriating their presence on the land and reestablishing a physical and spiritual connection to their traditional territories and resources, both of which have been identified as goals of reconciliation in Canada. Establishing the many different ways Métis people contribute to the historical and contemporary fabric of the region along the TMX corridor amounts to a political objective and a social benefit in that it allows major economic trans-national developments to serve as opportunities to learn of each other and to establish a shared sense of belonging where communities all along the corridor feel “at ease” and “at home”. As knowledge partnerships established in a cooperative and collaborative Indigenous Research Methodology employed in this report are disseminated in their various forms – academic publications, cartography, oral presentations, community celebrations, government reports, social media blasts – it will enhance societal relations with diverse Métis communities as represented by BCMF’s membership, make known the diverse and dynamic past, present and future of mixed-ancestry self-determining communities, and open up avenues of learning about Métis ways of being. At the risk of sounding too ambitious, the BCMFTS has
24 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
the potential to be the seed project that leads to a significant reconsideration of and transformation in Métis–settler society relations along the TMX corridor and beyond. This terrestrial study presents narratives about Métis peoples’ relationship to the land. In British Columbia, the denial and ignorance of Métis lived-experience on the land and with the resources represents 150 years of colonization and dispossession. The erasure of Métis history and memory along the TMX corridor amounts to a convenient forgetfulness, a misappropriation of the past, and a willful ignorance of Métis contributions to the political, economic and social context of the Province. Therefore, this study is part of Canada’s attempt to “reconcile” with indigenous peoples through repatriation, a process that starts with the recognition of their centuries-old relations with the land, their intimate knowledge of local geography, and their spiritual connection to place. While the objective of this study is simple -- to facilitate indigenous participation in dialogues relating to natural resource development by supporting the review and update of a traditional land use study -- the application of an Indigenous Research Methodology allows for a more integrated approach to knowledge. Its application within resource development has broad-ranging implications that include: » creating positive, lasting and significant relations between the BCMF and its members, especially elders, knowledge keepers, and community leaders. » educating British Columbians along the TMX corridor, and in broader Canadian society, about the ongoing history of Métis-settler society relations in BC. » communicating the importance of co-existence between historically marginalized Métis communities in BC in a time of national ‘reconciliation’. » fulfilling the Government Canada’s obligations to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 2015 recommendations on rebuilding nation-to-nation relations with self-determining indigenous peoples and including indigenous peoples as partners in national economic development. » modelling the intention to honour the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) by giving expression to calls for justice for indigenous peoples, specifically its directive to repudiate concepts, such as the Doctrine of Discovery and terra nullius, that justify European sovereignty over indigenous lands and peoples. » encouraging a sense of identity and belonging for all Métis peoples and communities in British Columbia who can see their cultures linguistically and geographically represented on the land.
By adopting an Indigenous research methodology for this study, we take seriously our work to indigenize Canadian political systems so that economic development, like that of the TMX, can lead to a model of co-existence that is recognized on the land itself. British Columbia lags behind other western provinces in Canada in its appreciation for and understanding of the diversity of Métis knowledge and ways of being. Throughout the region there are few visible representation of the many
25 Methodology
unique expressions of Métis culture and no symbolism that might suggest how these diverse Métis communities shaped its early character and development. Even within our formally recognized national historical sites, the appreciation for Métis history and culture is limited to borrowed representations from Red River and stereotypes of sashed voyageurs, ox-pulled carts, and country marriages. There is little attempt to understand the deep Métis memories and histories that grew out of each unique location within a broader network of kin that stretched throughout the Pacific Northwest. The deficit is particularly troubling considering that these kinds of specific denials can reinforce the cultural genocide that is identified in Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Assisting in the recovery and repatriation of Métis terrestrial imprint along the pipeline corridor is an acknowledgment of indigenous self-determination. Multiple diverse and dynamic communities of Métis peoples can only become known in and through local knowledge partnerships with communities as is required by Indigenous Research Methodology. As will be shown in Section I of this report, only in recent years have scholars considered the existence of self-determining Métis communities in BC, people groups that had little or no reference or connection to mixed-blood communities east of the Rocky Mountains. Overcoming the stereotypes and caricatures and normative narratives is a major challenge that can only be addressed with purposeful research that is directly connected to the local populations of Métis peoples. Even though the historical record, including government publications, diaries and personal records, newspaper reports, and local histories, is replete with references to the presence and significant influence of Métis communities throughout the region, little effort has been made to research and recover the specific past associated with centuries of Métis use and occupancy. To be clear, the knowledge of Métis pasts along the TMX corridor does exist. The BCMF, a relatively small and young organization, is committed to engaging the Federal Government within the framework of cooperative, community-based research in order to make these histories known. Therefore, BCMFTS research is, by its very nature, collaborative, ongoing, and relational. While the archival records of the Hudson Bay Company or Northwest Company (eg: fur trade journals, fort ledgers, company directives, maps and charts, personal diaries), the Federal and Provincial governments (eg: Colonial land and gold rush registries, Provincial records of Fish and Wildlife branch), corporations (eg: Canadian Pacific Railway) and anthropologists (Franz Boas, Charles Hill-Tout, Diamond Jenness, Wayne Suttles) provide a rich source of information and possibly yield clues to the resource use and land occupancy of Métis along the TMX corridor, these findings must be brought into dialogue with localized Métis oral history and traditions. Métis knowledge keepers and elders, who have a vested interest in geographic and linguistic recovery of their past, partnered with the BCMFTS research team, which facilitated the necessary relationships that lead to knowledge sharing, recovery and repatriation. These knowledge partnerships between BCMF and the various member communities is the beginning of lasting good relations as we practice and model co-existence.
26 Community Liaison Marie March wears her sash with pride along with interview participant Karen Andrews.
Updating leaders, staff and elders about the project!
27 Methodology
Built right into the research process as outlined in the Agreement between the Crown and the BCMF is the ongoing consent of indigenous community leaders, elders and knowledge keepers, regardless of external conditions including deadlines, institutional requirements, and funding guidelines. Gone are the days when research is done “on” or “for” indigenous peoples. As Linda Tuhiwai Smith points out in her seminal study Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (2012) at the very centre of any proper Indigenous Research Agenda is self-determination through processes that are characterized by healing, decolonization, mobilization and transformation (121). Research conducted by representative indigenous organizations all too often mimics the homogenization, totalization and objectification of government authorities. The results are profoundly problematic. Our study consistently aligned the Federation’s objectives with the relational goals of our membership so as not to appropriate their knowledge for our own use and purpose. From the outset, we envisioned the BCMFTS as a collaborative, cooperative and collative exercise where each community’s ownership, control and expression of their own knowledge was never in question. In short, de-colonization is an expectation that defines the terrestrial study because the knowledge that has been generated, managed, and owned by community members is for their own use and purposes. As Smith points out, “By ‘naming the world’ people name their realities.” (159) Therefore, the BCMFTS honours and respects the oral histories of knowledge keepers and elders while bringing it into an on-going conversation with settler society historical and archival research. Bringing Métis peoples who have had kinship relations to land now occupied by the TMX corridor together to share their understanding and meaning of place provides the opportunity to dialogue about the archival research and meld what is often understood as competing or separate forms of knowledge. This “networking” was facilitated by Project Lead, Joe Desjarlais and Academic Consultant, Bruce Shelvey, along with their team of researchers, including Drake Henry and Angel Fisher, to build relationships, share knowledge, and disseminate information. As facilitators, we coordinated knowledge, rather than “authored” it by negotiating institutional, academic and indigenous frameworks and protocols, a highly politicized activity that demanded constant communication and compromise as we explored new and exciting ways of representing co-existence and navigate through the challenges of realizing an Indigenous Research Agenda. Indeed, this whole project amounted to an on-going exploration of how a collaborative Indigenous Research Agenda that at its core affirms the self-determination of indigenous peoples can be negotiated and managed within a representative organization like the BCMF. One of the key elements of a cooperative, collaborative and collative research plan is building the capacity of the indigenous peoples who are sharing their knowledge. Early on we identified key leaders within each community and recruited them as “Community Liaisons” to assist us with establishing contacts within the community, arranging community meetings with traditional leaders, knowledge-keepers and elders, providing advice on appropriate community protocol, acting as facilitators and recorders for oral testimony, and assisting in the interpretation, translation
28 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
and linguistic representation of specific locations along the TMX corridor see( Appendix 10). Community Liaisons connected the knowledge back into their own communities, gave culturally appropriate direction to knowledge-keepers, elders and academics, and re-established normative pathways for knowledge acquisition, transmission and preservation. In effect, being involved in the BCMFTS empowered these local leaders to recognize, renew, and repatriate their own histories, traditions and geographies. Even though this was a terrestrial study of Métis land and resource use within the TMX corridor we faced a general challenge that characterizes research on Métis peoples, making research ethics particularly important. Métis/mixed blood peoples in BC have been told for so long that their communities did not exist that some of our resources had to be allocated to re-educate communities about their rich history and to provide confidence to those that have hidden the knowledge away in family stories and memories that their narrative mattered and would be honoured and respected. The systemic denial of the many ways of being for self-determining Métis communities in BC has undermined the ability of BCMF members to envision their past and present practice as anything but marginal or peripheral to other more dominant narratives, whether from established Canadian historians, or from nationally sanctioned Métis organizations, or from government officials. Trust had to be established between individual elders, knowledge keepers and community leaders through clearly established research procedures, including abiding by the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada’s guidelines for Indigenous Research and agreeing to full disclosure of knowledge partnerships with signing of a consent form (see Appendix 15). Furthermore, we guaranteed the appropriate representation of individual and community knowledge with a feedback loop that requires the Final Report was vetted back through the communities through the community liaisons. In short, the final report was completed with the consultation and full permission of elders, knowledge keepers and community leaders. Any further publication or representation of specific community knowledge that is owned by an individual will only be accomplished through on-going dialogue and appropriate permissions. The BCMFTS provides many opportunities to build lasting good relations within our Métis communities. The Final Report, therefore, is an initial expression of self-determining Métis communities whose lived histories and experiences intersect and overlap with the economic developments associated with the TMX. Our goals in adopting an indigenous research methodology are more than that of a cultural club or another expression of diversity in Canada; we desire to be partners in Canada’s future. The BCMFTS is a single reference point for three basic objectives: » the recognition of historic and contemporary self-determining Métis communities in BC. » the repatriation of the many ways of being Métis in all of its expressions, including self-governance and self-sufficiency. » the reconstitution of Crown-Métis relations in BC through a nation-to-nation negotiation.
29 Planning session with leaders and knowledge keepers.
Research Trip to the University of Washington.
30 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
In working together to build a stronger economic future for self-determining BCMF member communities, we acknowledge that there is no single roadmap or guide but we do know that any pathway forward must be based in locally-based, grassroots knowledge systems. We are committed to responsible, relevant, respectful and non-coercive research that decolonizes relations within our own communities and between our organization and other governments and corporations. The Final Report is evidence that research is a relationship and that knowledge is formed out of community. And, if “our doing is intricately related to our knowing”, then the Report is a practice for expressing our freedom to be Métis (Kovach, 40). The exercise in Métis self-determination along the TMX corridor is grounded in three principles: 1. Partnerships with Land, Resources and Peoples: We are accountable to all of our relations and our belonging is dependent upon each other. The relations expressed within the BCMFTS are fiduciary, not reciprocal (ie: a give and take), meaning that trust, good faith and honesty are essential for cooperative and collaborative outcomes. In practical terms, we know that partnerships within our membership must be grounded in kinship knowledge of place and kinship networks of people. The research conducted and presented in this Final Report is evidence that these relations exist and that they need to be encouraged and nurtured. 2. Protocol for Right Relations: The BCMFTS aimed to establish practices and procedures, some of which may become formalized in ceremony, that ensure accountability and responsibility. Knowledge in relation is always directed towards some purpose and therefore it is important to recognize the importance of representing knowledge in ways that are consistent with each Métis communities’ values. Protocols are expressed in cultural metaphors of sharing, humour or teasing, in stories that are passed through kinship networks, and in Michif names and language fragments, all of which depend upon good relations. 3. Planning and Platforms for Sustainable Futures: To respect the knowledge transfer represented in the Final Report is to create responsible knowledge networks that have the capacity to negotiate a future that is in each community’s own self-interest. The Final Report establishes a baseline, a reference point, from which the Government of Canada can determine the kind of investment needed to honour their commitment to an ongoing partnership with Métis communities in BC, which includes economic viability, political legitimacy, cultural revitalization, language recovery, community repatriation, and land regeneration, to name a few examples. In practical terms, the approval, construction, operation and maintenance of the TMX pipeline offers all parties an opportunity to negotiate socially intelligent, economically sustainable and culturally sensitive platforms (ie: knowledge partnerships) that can facilitate peaceful co-existence. For our BCMF member communities, the TMX accommodations allow us to make known the unique ways in which Métis in BC reclaim our rightful place in BC’s history and to reconstitute our relations with other indigenous nations and with the Government of Canada.
31 Methodology
Situating our communities, their needs, and their stories as central to the BCMFTS has been accompanied by some significant challenges. Indigenous research methods decolonize traditional power relationships and potentialize self-determination, especially for people groups like British Columbia’s Métis communities who have lacked the resources and capacity to initiate this important work, but in adopting it we realized the enormity of our task. The systematic denial of the existence of Métis communities in BC, the rejection of our uniqueness and ways of being from national indigenous organizations and their provincial affiliate, the isolation and marginalization from not having official political standing, the lostness and forgetting within our community from centuries of forced assimilation and involuntary integration, the breakdown and disintegration of generational kinship networks that tie our people to the land and resources, the ignorance of Métis mobility patterns and the implications of this for extended territoriality, and fears and suspicions of other indigenous nations who see our memories and histories as a threat to their own interests, all have made our task more difficult. Nevertheless, all of this has brought to the forefront the importance of this work and the witness it provides to the relationality of Métis in BC, which explicitly destabilizes simplistic national historical narratives and reductionist indigenous identity politics. It has been our task to bead together, to use a Métis metaphor, all of the ways in which Métis communities have related to land, water, people and resources along the TMX corridor to create a coherent meaningful pattern that disrupts and intervenes into commonly held narratives that dominate settler-indigenous relations in Canada. As a reference study, it is a site that makes inter-indigenous and Métis-Crown relations in BC a possibility.
32 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
33 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
Research on the historical lived-experience of the many ways of being Métis in BC reveals that self-determining mixed-blood communities existed in “British Columbia” prior to any assumption of administrative control by the British Crown. In our preliminary exploration of archives, repositories and on-line databases and in published primary and secondary sources indicate that self-determining Métis communities have longstanding kinship relations with the region’s First Nations, its lands and waters, and its resources. Our preliminary survey suggests that there is an extensive historical record of the existence of many Métis communities in the Pacific Northwest, a distinct population across the entire north-south corridor stretching from Oregon, to Washington, to the Province of British Columbia and beyond. Specific research on these fluid and complex mixed-ancestry/half breed identities, kinship networks and communities that impressed their memory on the land and water on or around the Trans Mountain pipeline corridor and beyond have yet to be fully explored and appreciated. The scholarly and popular historical literature on what became known as the Province of British Columbia has paid scant attention to the existence of Métis communities. Jean Barman, a leading scholar on the region’s history, summarized the willful ignorance of Métis peoples in her text The West Beyond the West: “generations of (mixed blood) men and women were simply erased from a provincial history [that was] being constructed in line with society’s aspirations for it.” The omission hides over a hundred years of partnerships formed in and through the interaction of newcomers and indigenous peoples, the product of which was a unique, pluralized, integrated society, because mixed-ancestry communities did not fit in progressive Canadian historical accounts, which were premised on a singular, pure and segregated Anglo-white narrative. A simple story of unoccupied and unused “virgin lands,” “old growth forests,” “pristine waterways,” and “uncharted territory” replaced the recognition of pre-existing aboriginal title and an act of “discovery” undermined indigenous agency. The frontiers, which became the location of transportation and resource corridors, made homelands inconsequential and settler-society ingenuity and technology became the means through which the region’s wealth was realized. Self-determined
34 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Métis communities, which had placed an integral role in the region’s early history of European contact, could be in the background of history as representatives of a weaker race or as the servants of heroic explorers or traders, but in official histories they quickly fade from the “official record” after the fur trade or gold rush. In this erasure, the rich histories, traditions and practices of Métis communities both past and present are ignored, forgotten or lost on mainstream British Columbian society. When penned by settler society historians, the ethnically diverse and indigenized world of the Hudson Bay Company employee or the early colonial official, became a society emerging from the core of a “fortification.” In the place of complicated and flexible kinship relations that dominated the partnerships of indigenous newcomer interaction, they constructed a relatively simplistic narrative that centred around the fort and ignored indigenous territory filled with a shared economic, political and social history. Later, as miners and settlers arrived the bias easily translated into the idea that a relatively empty land that earlier Newcomers had discovered was free to possess, and this justified, by its very telling, the exclusion of any “others,” especially the Métis self-determining peoples and communities that occupied the land and utilized the resources but did not fit into polarized categories of Anglo-Canadian or Indigenous. The established historical narrative clearly illustrates that settler society believed in the superiority of their perspectives and in their authorization of a past that legitimized their so-called “natural right” to the ownership of indigenous land and resources. Officers of the colony and the Crown, social pundits, priests and pastors, and businessmen employed a non-indigenous, and an openly hostile anti-Métis, history as a kind of weapon to regulate, dispossess and subjugate Métis peoples. Replacing Métis topologies with settler society geographies, substituting liberalisms laws and conventions for partnerships built on oral traditions and indigenous lifeways, and exchanging settler society cultural patterns for customary Métis ways of being led to the marginalization of Métis self-determining communities. Furthermore, settler society authors, politicians and officials imposed foreign, artificial and arbitrary identities on Métis peoples. It became possible for BC’s official history to ignore the reality that the fur trade existed only so long as indigenous societies, including a growing Métis community, functioned to accommodate it. As historian Jean Barman reminds us, the trading posts in the area now known as BC were “isolated dots within an aboriginal world.” Although some of this non-indigenous narrative has been increasingly contested within the academy, there are still very few that help us to understand the role of expansive and extensive Métis kinship networks in the economic and political context of colony and provincehood. Therefore, little is known of the self-determined Métis communities that occupied the spaces and places along the TransMountain pipeline corridor, although it is clear from the archival record that they did occupy and use the land in many different ways. Indeed, one of the great difficulties in identifying Métis communities is that their very way of being, including their mobility, adaptability and diversity, precludes simplistic genealogical, geographical or ethnogenetic origins. Self-determined Métis communities could be found in a specific location within a clearly defined boundary,
35 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
but others could not be exclusively determined by a geographical location or a specific relation to a land base. In any case, it appears that Métis fought to maintain their unique identity despite clear attempts by the settler society to use geographical intolerance, racism, ethnic bigotry, regional and national control, limitations on economic opportunity, and discriminatory policies to marginalize or exclude or eliminate them from an emerging homogeneous British/Canadian society. Métis peoples increasingly existed in what historian Daniel Francis reminds was “a society shot through with snobbery and bigotry” and what Patricia Roy describes in the context of Asian immigration as “a white man’s province.” Métis found themselves “betwixt and between” indigenous and newcomers social, political and economic orders and had to choose various strategies to adapt to a new reality. Research for the Terrestrial Study aims to directly address the shortcomings of the current established historical record. Although our funding limited our efforts to a reference study dedicated to locating potential sources of historical information on Métis peoples and communities along the TMX corridor, the BCMFTS research team was amazed by the richness of the past and surprised by the depth of information, both of which showed that Métis people and their communities have a long history and memory in British Columbia. We also become increasing aware that Métis connections are diverse, and not fixed to a place and time. Métis concepts of history, identity and territory made it a challenge to locate Métis people and their kinships networks across the whole of the Pacific Northwest. And, as Métis did not often preserve or record their own history in the written documents, we had to recognize how others, including fur traders, anthropologists, priests, government officials, public figures, bureaucrats, and newspaper editors, to name a few examples, viewed them and shaped their remembrance. Métis signifiers and identity markers changed over time, especially in the late 19th and 20th century, when national, provincial and local governments used the force of law and racialized policies to diminish Métis existence, ignore their rights, dispossess them from their land, limit their access to resources, restrict their mobility, and separate them from their kinship networks. As a result, we encountered many different ways and combinations that the contemporary general term “Métis” has been recorded in the historical literature in BC. Before the mid-19th century, it appears that mixed-blood peoples, either the product of immigration to or ethnogenesis in the region, self-identified by using the term “half-breed.” The term, with significant variations and hyphenations, seems to have been in popular usage as well. There were general descriptors like half-breed, mixed-blood, half-white, half-blood, breed, Métis, Métis, Metif, Les Bois Brule, Canadian, French Canadian, Canadian Métis, Sitcum-Siwash, Chocta, freemen, and creole but more often these terms included specific ethnic, occupational or geographical qualifiers. Ethnic designations include terms like French Half-breed, French Canadian Half-breed, French-Shawnee Half-breed, English-Speaking Half-breed, Scotch Half-breed, Iroquois Half-breed, Chinook Half-breed, half-breed Blackfoot, half-breed Indian, Montagnais half-breed, Cree Half-breed, Ojibway Half-breed, Swampy Half-breed, to name a few. Geographical descriptions included half-breeds at Sumas, Kamloops, Victoria, Langley, Willamette Valley, Colville, Frenchtown, Garden River, or Jasper House, Saskatchewan half-breed, Columbia half-breed, and half-breed from French Village, and occupational identifiers included
36 Vice President Rene Therrien, Secretary Joe Desjarlais, board member Earl Belcourt, board member Angel Fisher, Treasurer Betty Fisher and operational staff members Sherry Daniels and Drake Henry met with Honourable Minister Amarjeet Sohi.
Angel Fisher and Drake Henry at the map table.
37 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
half-breed voyager, farmer, rancher, hunter, trapper, interpreter, guide, boatman, explorer, miner, fishermen, loggers, official, officer, land owner and squatter. While this is not an exhaustive list, the many different ways that mixed-blood peoples and communities were represented and how they often self-identified speaks to the diversity of their self-determination and the nuance required to place them in a social, political or economic context because of their mobility, kinship networks and sense of place. By the late-19th and early-20th century, however, many of these terms had taken on a negative connotation and more racialized language is utilized with terms such as half-breed Indian, half-savage, destitute half-breeds, pagan half-breed, immoral half-breed, illegitimate half-breed, and dangerous half-breed. The predominant portrayal in late 19th century/early-mid 20th century popular settler society accounts, whether in newspapers, books, novels or in public correspondence depicted “halfbreeds,” mixed bloods or Métis as exotic, deficient, and even inherently deviant and criminal. Métis people and communities had to adjust to multiple, intersecting social positionalities and appear to avoid “either-or” or “both-and” binary identity markers as labels like “mixed-race” or “mixed-blood” or “halfbreed” compelled them to negotiate and navigate multiple identified at different times and for different peoples. As their adaptive options became more restricted, they chose responses within a narrow range of options consistent with Métis fluid social positioning and adaptive cultural mechanisms, often either integration (fit in where allowed within the social framework), assimilation (hide Métis identity, especially if closer to the “white” spectrum) or separation (i.e.: existed on the economic, political and economic margins). The BCMFTS bibliography represents sources of information that help us to better understand the economic, political, social and cultural context of the Métis lived-experience in the Pacific Northwest and along the TM pipeline corridor. While not an exhaustive list of archives, historic sites, experts, organizations, primary sources and published literature, the citations contain evidence of the many ways in which Métis peoples and communities existed in the Pacific Northwest, the Province of BC, and along the TMX corridor. The bibliography contains the relevant, and growing, body of published literature on the Métis experience in BC. In the last decade more attention has been placed on the uniqueness of the province’s “half-breed” populations as they formed out of the early explorations and economic exchange, participated in early colonial political and economic development, and adapted to their marginalization in the Provincial period. Much of this focus, including that of mainstream academics and reports of the Canadian Senate, have resulted from a corresponding resurgence of Métis peoples within the region but the full extent of self-determining Métis communities in BC is just beginning to be known. The bibliography also includes primary documents, the content of which have not been placed into any broader interpretive framework. An index of more readily accessible published primary sources, usually in the form of an edited volume of period-specific documents, includes journals from persons engaged in trade and commerce, reports from government officials and bureaucrats, Hansards from colonial and provincial legislatures, databases of statistical information, and studies of anthropologists, ethnologists, archaeologists and linguists. Primary
38 Section I: Planning (Recognition) BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
documents that contain valuable insights into the Métis experience in BC also exist within repositories such as private and public archives, academic special collections, government historic sites and personal family collections. The bibliography identifies physical and digital locations where the BCMFTS research team could confirm specific references were made to historic Métis peoples and communities. Repositories of primary documents include historical databases of newspapers and collections of government documents, personal papers of activists, community organizations and individuals, public archives and libraries such as the Library and Archives of Canada (LAC) and the BC Archives (BCA) and community-based institutions such the Glenbow Library and Archive and numerous smaller repositories in Prince George, Merritt, Peace River District, Kamloops, Kelowna and Fort Langley, to name a few locations. Special collections at the University of British Columbia, Washington State University, and the University of Victoria, to select only a few examples, also have document collections containing information on Métis history and memory. Indigenous organizations, such as the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, the Rupertsland Centre for Métis Research, the Gabriel Dumont Institute, and corporations, such as the Hudson’s Bay Company, Northwest company and Canadian Pacific Railway, and have also collected and preserved a record of Métis peoples and communities. Within each of these locations there are hundreds of specific fonds (collections of documents) and hundreds of thousands specific documents (letters, reports, diaries, recollections, etc.) that need to be identified and interpreted. The bibliography also begins to establish an inventory of experts, knowledge keepers, elders and indigenous leaders who have personal knowledge of Métis history and memory. Academic specialists, such as Jean Barman, Mike Evans, and Kerry Sloan, Métis historians, such as George (and Terry) Goulet and Don Woodcock, legal experts, such as John Borrows, Jean Teillet, and Bruce McIvor all have valuable contributions to make to our research. In addition, Métis community organizations in BC, including the BC Métis Federation, the Métis Nation of BC, NOVA of Surrey, Kelly Lake Métis Nation, and numerous other community-based non-profit cultural associations have members who hold essential information. Finally, a less reliable, but nevertheless important, source of information is personal entries on popular media outlets like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, the newsfeeds, blogs and posts from National, provincial and local governments, indigenous organizations, corporations and companies, universities and public policy and research centres, and reports and articles in national, regional and local newspapers, and radio and television stations. Monitoring and validating the information coming from these ephemeral sources is an almost insurmountable task. In compiling this bibliography, we realized some of the major challenges that we face as we move ahead with this important research. First, the nomenclature used to describe mixed-blood communities is extremely diverse and that multiplicity changes over time. Tracking different terminology in each era was an education in racialization, especially when newspapers tended to report on a Métis presence when they supplied alcohol to “Indians,” were charged with criminal acts, or became the victim of unfortunate events like murder, mischief or drowning.
39 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
Second, information on Métis peoples and communities is dispersed across time and geographies, a reflection of how they operated in the margins and the in-between spaces of social, economic and political structures. We were more likely to find a major source of information in a local archive like the Rocky Mountain Rangers Museum and Archives in Kamloops as were in the fonds of the Library and Archives of Canada. These local sources, including initiatives like the Rossland Heritage Commission, are key to identifying material culture and physical locations that have historical significance to Métis ways of being in British Columbia. Third, the historical record is filled with misinformation on Métis communities and misrepresentation of mixed-blood peoples whether they are put in a positive or negative light. It is difficult to separate fact from fiction when novels and dime novels written about significant Métis places, events and people along the TMX corridor become part of local legend, whether talking about Métis locations like Tête Jaune Cache and other areas like Valemount or specific historical figures like “Yellowhead” are reflected in the historical record and popularized. Howard O’Hagan’s 1939 novel, Tay John or popular local histories like Harold Kingsmill’s A History of Rossland and the Trail Creek District and Ron Walker’s Old Glory are examples of how Métis memory and history can be distorted or warped into a pan-Métism that slips into cultural appropriation. Worse, perhaps, are “historical” novels, plays, and forms of popular culture that depict “halfbreeds” as mysterious, uncategorical, wild and of questionable repute. In these scenarios, Métis are often dupes in a familiar settler society plotline that sees any “in-between” as a kind of heresy or their mystic uninhibited characteristics are used as a critique of settler society but always ends up being a kind of blaspheme. Fourth, there is a significant degree of protectionism and secrecy within different Métis organizations and communities in BC, the product of over a century of persecution and, more recently, the politicization of Métis identity. Gathering knowledge about the many different ways of being Métis is often challenging when the over 90,000 self-identifying Métis people in BC can find a sense of belonging in a nationally affiliated organization that ties its legitimacy to “homeland Métis,” in one of the many Métis local cultural organizations across the province, or in an “independent” family unit that is free from representation. Fifth, Métis peoples and communities have faced systemic racism and continue to persist alongside bigotry and therefore they are hesitant and fearful to come “out of the background” of history. There are few places where Métis peoples and communities have felt the freedom to represent themselves in all of their diversity; it is telling that one of the few Métis newspapers that claimed to be “The Voice of the Métis Community in British Columbia” was the now defunct “Whispering Winds.” Perhaps the hesitancy to share their memory and history on the land in BC and with the resources along the TMX corridor is one of the reasons why there has been no systematic research guide that can bring some coherence to the many lived experiences. To our knowledge, our bibliography is the first attempt to create a relatively complete accounting of the Métis experience in BC. Sixth, Métis histories in BC have been compromised by ethnic, and in particular religious, prejudice. In the late-19th and the long 20th century, Métis peoples in primarily Anglo-protestant municipalities lived in the shadows of their communities, often being labelled as French-Canadian or marginalized for being Catholic. From national
40 Section I: Planning (Recognition) BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
historical sites to city web-pages, the traditional celebration of BC’s past eschews any accurate depiction of Métis influence or agency. If one wishes to discover how Métis were grounded in their community, you have to visit the local cemetery where grave markers provide clues to place-based identity and kinship. Church records, particularly the baptismal records of Catholic diocese, also provide clues, although little has been done to access and interpret this important document base. Finally, we realized early on that our research methodology needed to account for the adeptness of Métis adaptations to changing circumstances. Métis peoples acting in their own self-interest could participate in enforcing a normative colonial order in the 1850s as Victoria Voltigeurs, or have their activities recognized in sessional papers in the early provincial period, or be a part of a labour movement in the mid-20th century that advocated for “half-breed” concerns and issues. It is important to note, however, that they defied simple categorization or interpretation because Métis peoples and communities acted out of their own self-interest. Self-determination defined their lived-experience in British Columbia. The research agenda for the BCMF Terrestrial Study focused on identifying relevant sources that would enable us to accurately determine the many different ways in which Métis peoples and communities utilized the land and resources along the TMX corridor. The results of our work is largely represented in the bibliography but in many ways that does not accurately reflect the benefit we received from interviewing experts in the field, physically visiting public and personal historical repositories and engaging archivists and reference librarians and scouring historical databases and on-line primary source indexes. Our examination of the archival record as found in fur trade documents, journals of forts, colonial reports and papers, legal rulings, scientific and resource inventories, diaries and private papers, family correspondence, church records, ethnological studies, Royal Engineer records, among other sources, reveals a rich trove of knowledge that is waiting to be accessed and interpreted. In using self-determined Métis communities as the focus of our historical lens, we came to recognize how their memory and lived-experience punctuates the archival record. Recent scholarship by leading academic experts on Métis history in BC such as Jean Barman, Kerry Sloan, and Resina Mawani validated many of the conclusions that we found emerging from the primary sources that we uncovered. The general conclusions about Métis peoples and communities occupying and utilizing the land along the TMX corridor that follow below reinforce our understanding that Métis or “half-breed” people knew who they were and to whom they were related, and they expressed their unique relationship to land, resources and other people groups in ways that reflected their own autonomy and independence. For the sake of simplicity, we will summarize our findings around four periods that define the Métis lived-experience in BC: A time of self-determination when Métis peoples and communities co-existed alongside First Nations and developed kinship clusters out of the unique cross-cultural economic, cultural and political exchanges between indigenous and newcomer associations; a stage of adaptation when self-determining Métis communities responded to the imposed and increasingly restrictive social, political and economic orders of British colonization and early Canadian nationalism; a phase of discrimination when Métis
41 Community meeting in Duncan.
Community Liaison Earl Belcourt and the project team enjoying stories from knowledge keepers in Victoria!
42 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
self-determination came under systemic attack by settler society governments, organizations and citizens, leading to their marginalization and destruction; and, finally, an on-going period of resurgence wherein Métis communities and peoples are reclaiming their history, reconstituting their communities, and reconciling their relations with the Crown. Throughout all of these four periods, we found that Métis self-determining communities and peoples actively managed their life-ways, identities and kinship relations to maintain their autonomy, sometimes in the face of much adversity and opposition. While we are still learning about many of the strategies and tactics that they employed to preserve their ability to be Métis in British Columbia, based upon our preliminary research and initial reading of some of the material history we can conclude the following with a high degree of confidence. All of these interpretations deserve more study and analysis in the process of reconstituting Métis memory and history along the TMX pipeline corridor.
Period I - Self-Determination Pacific Northwest Métis Province: In the late 18th and 19th century, the Pacific Northwest functioned as a north-south corridor because of its marine and river geography, extensive indigenous trading networks, and inter-kinship relations between First Nations. Communities or kinship clusters of Métis peoples came out of the dynamic interaction of this established indigenous system through ethnogenesis, the result of intermarriage between newcomer men and indigenous women, or through immigration, the consequence of Métis communities entering from outside of the region. By the late 1700s there are reports of half-breed populations and by the early 1800s numerous “half-breed” peoples and communities were engaged on the land and water. The kinship networks that developed stretched from California to the Alaska because of the constant reciprocity of people, supplies and ideas moving up and down the corridor in response to economic opportunity or need. Complexity, fluidity, and mobility characterized these clusters, although Frenchtown in the Willamette Valley in Oregon Territory appears to have been somewhat of a cultural and political epicenter. Mixed-ancestry kinship communities cut across the political boundaries established by First Nations and economic lines imposed by corporations like the Hudson Bay Company. “Half-breed” extensive knowledge of the region, their rights to access the land and resources as the result of their relations with First Nations, their talents as interpreters, linguists, and diplomats enabled them to extend their influence (and, in some cases, their control) across the whole of the region. In sum, the preponderance of evidence from the historical record shows that self-determining Métis peoples helped to shape the economic, social, cultural and political life of the whole of the Pacific Northwest, including land and resources now occupied by the TMX corridor, prior to any declaration of authority or control by the British Crown or the American government. 43 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
“… in 1837 the British possessions on this continent consisted of four provinces in the East... the remainder of the mainland was terra incognita to all but the savages, the Métis and the Hudson’s Bay Company’s officers.” The Victoria Daily Colonist. June 20, 1897. The Daily Colonist. Internet archive, http://archive.org/stream/daily- colonist18970620uvic/18970620#page/n0/mode/1up
Collectives of Métis Kinship Clusters: “Halfbreed” peoples in British Columbia constituted a heterogeneous collective of self-determining communities that were connected through biological (direct descent) and familial (marriage, adoption or association) kinship networks. Early settler society sources and Métis self-descriptions identify these populations as “Indian” and the original inhabitants of the region but separate and distinct from specific indigenous nations. In the fur trade society, they appear to have occupied a middle ground between the company and indigenous communities wherein their role as translators of ideas, languages and cultures was valued, a status that they transferred into prominent roles in early British colonial society. Mixed-ancestry clusters acted in their own self-interest and founded towns and cities, owned estates, ranches and farms, discovered minerals and facilitated their development, moved people, resources, material and vital information throughout the broad Pacific Northwest corridor, and provided a vital source of skilled labour for a developing industrial economy. The historical record is clear: Métis self-determining communities were not sidekicks or assistants to European agents of change. They asserted their own self-interest as freemen, families and broader kinship networks and attempted to secure a future in the political, economic, social and cultural transformation of the region. While historical analysis has concentrated on ethnogenesis from fur trade families around principal posts such as Fort Victoria and Fort Rupert on Vancouver island, Fort Langley in the Fraser valley, Fort Okanagan and Thompson River/Fort Kamloops in the southern interior, and Stewart’s” Lake/Fort St. James and Fort Alexandria in the northern interior, our research shows that the footprint of Métis communities may have been more expansive. Connections to the Red River or to Iroquois-French Canadian company men were certainly present, a long-distant network that many worked hard to maintain through trading communication channels, and yet complex, dynamic inter-relationships in specific locations created a very strong place-based sense of belonging. In sum, these adaptive and strategic kinship clusters allowed “half-breeds” to hold multiple identities at the same time, a personal and corporate mobility that they could attach to a place in order to make it their home and shape it to suit their needs. By necessity, research into kinship networks and clusters along the TMX corridor will include a broad inventory of genealogies and associations throughout the whole of the Pacific Northwest. Scholars like Kerry Sloan and Jean Barman have proven the effectiveness of tracing kinship structures, but cataloguing these intimate connections across time and space remains one of the most challenging, yet promising, future areas of research.
44 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Period II: Adaptation Self-sufficient Métis communities: Autonomous Métis communities, grounded in place and determined by kinship, interacted with land and resources in what is now the TMX pipeline corridor and developed it to suit their own self-interest. The historical records show that the agency of these peoples and communities was key to almost every economic activity in the 19th and early 20th century. In the early exchange, these fluid and complex local family networks enabled Métis to assume roles as militia, labourers, boatmen, hunters, guides, interpreters, trappers and cultural and local knowledge translators, diplomats, traders and administrators. Once established, “halfbreed” kinship clusters developed or assisted in the development of mines, ranches, farms, water resources, commercial fisheries, traplines, logging and sawmill operations, and tourism. They adapted to early resource capitalism and industrialism so well that by 1891 the census identified over 1500 mixed-race households throughout the province, despite the growing prejudice and discrimination against indigenized peoples. While it appears that the international border, colonial and provincial policies, and regional and municipal regulations increasingly restricted their mobility, up until the turn of the 20th century Métis from across the province continued to maintain their kinship networks. In some cases, whether in the lower mainland or in Jasper, Métis kinship clusters claimed territorial or land rights based upon their occupation prior to any declaration of the Crown and their ongoing and interrupted use. Other kinship clusters did not advance their “land rights,” perhaps not wanting to be as “tied down” to a specific location and thus restrict their ability to practice their traditional lifestyles and ways of being. Métis kinship communities exercised their self-determination by navigating between and through different life-worlds, thereby enabling them to avoid colonial mechanisms or settler-society authority through strategies of withdrawal (peripheral regions), amalgamation (joining with other Métis or First Nations communities), and assimilation (fitting in). Much more research needs to be done on the kinds of adaptations and techniques were utilized to maintain their sense of belonging and attachment to place.
Period III: Discrimination Racialization and Marginalization: The scholarly community has only recently become aware of some of the ways that Métis self-determining communities were specifically targeted by settler-society governments in order to marginalize within and then remove them from the social, political, economic and cultural order in British Columbia. While racial discourse seems to have been a prevalent part the early exchanges between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples, evidence of the racialization of society in British Columbia can be found soon after Crown made
45 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
colonial declarations with the intent of bringing the region under British control. By 1862, colonial bureaucrats charged with the responsibility of bringing the region into conformity with British standards felt free to characterize “halfbreeds” as deceitful, treacherous, and despicable and described them as “animals” in the public record. Thereafter, and especially after achieving provincehood in 1871, various forms of racial profiling became the norm as politicians and pioneers, editors and educators, lawyers and laymen, pollsters and priests, attempted to undermine the place of Métis peoples in BC society. While it is clear that mixed-ancestry communities continued to exist and thrive even in growing metropolitan areas like “Moodyville” or “Granville,” making clear distinctions between “Indians” and a developing Anglo-Canadian community became a necessity for establishing white superiority and protecting their economic privilege and their private property. Research shows that national, provincial and municipal settler society governments took specific action to assume complete control over self-determining, self-sufficient and self-governing Métis communities. A turning point came in 1892, when the Federally appointed Superintendent for Indian Affairs in BC, Arthur Vowell, tabled his “Report on Halfbreeds” which identified them, established legal mechanisms to separate them from their indigenous kinship networks, and implemented measures force them to the margins of the province’s economy by disregarding their territory and regulating their labour. As Miwani states: “the Federal government’s decision to legislate the “halfbreed” as a separate legal and racial category translated into an erasure of identity, rights and territorial claims.” (Miwani, In Between and Out of Place, 69) Systemic racism and discrimination directed towards mixed-ancestry peoples and communities became the norm in BC.
In 1873 Alexander G. Anderson (a concerned “private individual”) wrote a letter alerting the Province to the ‘serious question of the intercourse subsisting between certain of the settlers in the Province and the native women.” He explained that “a system of concubinage is openly carried on, unrestrained by any law. Hence a class of half-breed children is rapidly increasing in numbers, who, under the hand of illegitimacy, and deprived of all incentives to self-respect, will in course of time become dangerous members of the community.” (Hayter, Jennifer. 2017. “University of Toronto TSpace.” Racially “Indian,” Legally “White”: The Canadian State’s Struggles to Categorize the Métis, 1850-1900. November. Accessed September 21, 2019. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/80832, P. 164)
Dispossession and Erasure: It is essential that more research be completed on the ways in which all levels of government specifically targeted and attacked self-determining “halfbreed” communities in BC. A general pattern emerges from the examples we did find: Once established Métis communities were racialized, their legitimacy and place in society was questioned and their rights and title undermined, then their life-ways and livelihoods were systematically marginalized and eventually, settler society refused to even recognize or acknowledge their existence. As Miwani, Hayter and Mather have illustrated in their studies of
46 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
mix-ancestry communities in BC, the implications of this systemic racial profiling of “half-breeds,” whether in Stanley Park or Grand Cache, meant loss of life, status, livelihoods and property. Jennifer Hayter summarizes it in this way: “the Métis and people of mixed ancestry were frequently connected, in official discourse, to illegitimacy, danger, and trouble. Perhaps it was because the state found them so difficult to categorize” (Hayter, 2017, p. 165). While we have only begun to understand the full scope of the government’s efforts to suppress Métis community knowledge and to quash complex kinship networks, we do know that these measures, both formal and informal, were designed to divide, destroy and dispossess a self-determining peoples in a region that, as characterized by one scholar, had transitioned to “a white man’s province.”
“My substantive focus is two trials that took place between 1923 and 1925 and which centered on competing territorial claims to Stanley Park, an urban park in Vancouver, British Columbia. The cases involved eight mixed-race families of Aboriginal and European ancestry who had lived on the land in question for three generations, and whose ancestors had been there since time immemorial. A central question that emerged throughout the juridical and extra-juridical discourse is if these people were “Indians” (or ‘squatters”) and whether they could make territorial claims through Native title. Through these cases I suggest that the current controversies over Aboriginality evident in Gladue and Powley are deeply rooted in colonial legal processes and practices that require some historical analysis.” (Renisa Mawani, Genealogies of the Land: Aboriginality, Law, and Territory in Vancouver’s Stanley Park. First Published September 1, 2005 accessed Dec 1, 2019) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/ abs/10.1177/0964663905054907
Period IV: Resurgence Agency, Modification and Resistance: “Métis” peoples may have been erased from the chronicles of BC’s history and, when mentioned, were lumped into a single signifier with all of its negative implications, but they did not disappear despite being targeted by discriminatory laws, evicted from their homes, and marginalized from the economic life of the Province. Initial indications from our research shows that self-determining Métis communities throughout the province and along the TMX corridor acted in their own interests and, as they had always done, and used their mobile livelihoods, fluid life-ways and nuanced lived-experiences to modify their new (racialized) reality. They directly resisted by fighting for their land and
47 Community Liaison Marie March with others in Kamloops.
Interview participant Dale Haggerty with other leaders and knowledge keepers at the annual general meeting.
48 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations) BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
rights in court and through petitions to the government, they practiced a form of relocation by moving into low populated regions in the province (now labelled “Crown land”) in order to continue their way of life, and they became invisible by adopting Anglo-Canadian norms in order to “fit in” to workplaces, neighborhoods, churches and schools. It is this ability to move across boundaries and borders in order to keep practicing their unique ways of being, a practice which enabled them to survive in an antagonistic setting, that makes research during this period so challenging as often the preservation of Métis self-determination depended upon its secrecy and hiddenness. Often, the systemic racism experienced by Métis peoples and the corresponding shame and humiliation felt within mixed-ancestry communities resulted the strategy of resistance we will call “doubling,” where individuals split their “life” in the city from their “home” in the bush. We are just beginning to understand the ways in which self-determining Métis peoples used their cultural practices and norms to evade government control and subjection and all of the many ways that they exercised the choice to assert their (traditional) ways of life.
“It is important to recognize that this perceived authenticity is premised on an inauthenticity: on a singular, homogenized, and fixed Aboriginal identity that does not adequately capture the complicated and diverse histories and experiences of First Nations communities in the province of British Columbia (BC).” (Mawani, Renisa. “From colonialism to multiculturalism? Totem poles, tourism and national identity in Vancouver’s Stanley Park.” ARIEL, vol. 35, no. 1-2, 2004, p. 31+. Accessed Dec 1, 2020) https://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=- GALE%7CA148138175&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkac- cess=abs&issn=00041327&p=LitRC&sw=w
Unlikely Allies, Unexpected Foes: Interestingly, the consequences of racialized government policies for Métis peoples in BC, such as systemic poverty, inadequate housing, and employment insecurity, made it possible for these communities to cooperate with others to fight against their comparative marginalization. Inclusive indigenous organizations like the Native Council of Canada (now the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples) and the Committee for Original People’s Entitlement (COPE) in the NWT, had a consolidating effect on Métis protest and resistance. Collaboration with national leaders, like Tommy Douglas, led to the support of Métis rights in BC at conferences, in research articles, and in the popular media. And, advocacy from labour organizations on Métis issues in BC, including the International Longshoreman’s and Warehouseman’s Union, ranged from flashpoints such as poverty to assertions of sovereignty. But despite calls from indigenous leaders such as Bill Wilson to “blaze new trails of cooperation” between all indigenous self-determining communities, the federal and provincial government, continued to deny the existence of self-determining Métis communities in BC. The resurgence of Métis self-determining peoples in BC surged with the repatriation of the Canadian constitution in 1982 where Métis were identified as aboriginal right-bearing citizens, because it provided the impetus for many Métis families/persons who had remained
49 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
hidden within the historical record to come “out of the background.” The Powley (2003) and Willison (2005) cases raised the profile of Métis rights in Canada and Métis history went from a niche academic study to a genre dominated an entire research agenda, but the dominant academic paradigm known as the “ethnogenesis” thesis, which applied genealogical criteria and economic categories to show a unique culture emerging in the 19th century out of the context of the Red River fur trade, did not align with the lived-experience of other self-determining Métis communities in British Columbia. And, although the Daniels decision (2013) opened up the possibility for other forms of Métis recognition, the politicization of Métis identity turned Métis history in BC into a polarized debate about identity politics. Outfitted with a formidable toolkit that includes “homeland” historical associations and archives, university endowed research Chairs, Louis Riel commemorations, and membership in exclusive Red River Métis political organizations, the defenders of the Métis homeland identity adopted exclusive terminology, restrictive definitions, and even geographies of erasure to limit access to “being Métis.” Over the past decade, academic advocates, assertive organizations, and activist lawyers have mobilized to restrict historical narratives that suggest the possibility of any other way of being Métis because they fear, as Métis activist and law professor, Paul Chartrand, put it in 2001, that the “new “Métis” identity reflecting a convergence around newly emerged interests, an identity that was formerly recognized as a “pan-Indian” identity … will submerge Riel’s people”
“ I had noticed that most BC residents didn’t know Métis people lived in the province. Until recently, even I, as a Métis person from British Columbia, was unaware of the long history of Métis communities in the Lower Mainland where I grew up, on Vancouver Island where I lived, or in the Thompson/Shuswap and Okanagan, where I have many relatives. ” – Kerry Sloan
Moving Forward: Based upon our research, it is no longer tenable to deny forms of Métis self-determination in British Columbia simply because they do not conform to the essentialism of homeland ethnogenesis and the originalism of Red River diaspora. Our conclusions call for a decolonized, broader, more generous, definition of Métis self-determination that matches the lived-experience of “halfbreed” communities in BC. The presenting of many ways of being Métis in the literature of British Columbia requires a new historical narrative of partnership that enables these unique communities to build the knowledge capacity to defend their uniqueness and renew their historical connection to the Crown, First Nations, and other self-determined Métis communities. In our Knowledge Partnerships, Métis belongingness takes its frame of reference from the diverse and dynamic nature of the Métis community itself and positively constructs relationships out of the dynamic past experiences of self-determined peoples. Because mixed-ancestry peoples and communities lived in shared and overlapping territory their “identity” was based in a self-determination that necessarily changed over time, something that was recognized in what one Canadian scholar has called a “chain of continual intercultural negotiations” that were dependent upon the “convention of consent.”
50 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations) BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
The reconstitution of these knowledge networks has the potential to transform the national historical imagination and bring lasting and sustainable change to Métis relations with the Canadian government, settler society, and other indigenous nations.
“The diversity of experiences identifying as Métis demonstrate that there are distinct differences between the rigid identities that are constructed and expected by decision-makers and the fluid realities of Métis identities, thereby undermining assumptions of Métis identities as fixed, instrumental, passive, and power-neutral in lieu of poststructuralist notions of identity as constructed, fluid, incomplete, and thus, continuously evolving.” Gabrielle Monique Legault, ‘stories of contemporary Métis identity in British Columbia: “troubling” discourses of race, culture, and nationhood” PH. D Thesis, THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Okanagan) November 2016, Abstract. https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/ items/1.0339946
Conclusion This reference study lays groundwork for a more expansive study that explores the historical and contemporary land use and resource rights of self-determining Métis in BC. The academic research calls for the recovery and repatriation of Métis history and memory on the land and water, on or around the Trans Mountain pipeline corridor and beyond. Fluid and complex Métis (half breed) identities, kinship networks and communities evolved in British Columbia and into the US corridor and were based on place, geography, and response to local experiences. We conclude based upon an initial exploration of relevant primary and secondary sources that: » clearly identified and defined mixed-blood/halfbreed/Métis communities (plural) existed, and continue to exist, in BC. » self-sufficient, self-governing and self-regulating Métis communities actively participated in the early development of the industrial economy in BC. » contested identities, loss of culture and personhood, systemic discrimination and persistent racism, and erasure in the official historical record contribute to the difficult task of recognizing, reconstituting and repatriating Métis peoples. » recognizing these self-determining communities within the historical record and affirming them in their current contexts requires a flexible and expansive categorization that account for the many ways that they represent themselves.
51 Section I: Planning (Recognition)
The absence of Métis communities in the official historical record is not due to a lack of agency, of a legitimate past, or of self-awareness but rather the product of a prominent racial historical discourse that has ignored, misrepresented and misunderstood Métis self-determination. Accessing, cataloguing and inventorying the collective experiences of self-identified Métis peoples as it is recorded in the archival documents is essential as all Métis self-determining communities in British Columbia are to provide informed consent during the construction and ongoing operation and maintenance of the TMX pipeline. The historical record can help us build a solid foundation upon which to appropriately understand Métis self-identity and the careful balance needed for mutual recognition. Most importantly, if knowledge-based partnerships govern Métis engagement with the natural resource development sector, it would reinforce and allow for the appropriate organic expansion of existing Métis kinship networks and provide pathways to repatriation. On-going colonial violence, internal divisions within and between Métis communities, and competition between indigenous nations (First Nations, Inuit and Métis) all have the potential disrupt the obligation for recognition (Constitution Act of 1983, s.35), redress, (SCC’s Powley decision, 2003), repatriation (SCC Daniel’s decision, 2013), and reconciliation (Truth and Reconciliation Commission Final Report, 2015). However, knowledge partnerships that inform the interpretation of solid and reliable archival research has the potential to produce consistent and sound data from which to implement the commitments made by Canada as a signatory in 2016 to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
“ In British Columbia… Métis people are still largely ‘forgotten’ in public discourse. This may seem curious, given that primary sources (e.g. explorers’ diaries, church records, fur trade company records, oral histories) suggest Métis have had a presence in BC for at least 200 years, and the most recently published national census (2006) documents over 59,000 people in the province who identify as Métis. ” – Kerry Sloan
52 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
53 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
Self-determining Métis communities utilized the land and resources along the TMX corridor and their lived-experience informs the province’s history. The maps and associated knowledge of contemporary land and resource use reveals that Métis social mobility and cultural adaptability made it possible for mixed-ancestry communities to maintain their traditional locations despite being dispersed across the province. It was possible for Métis peoples and communities to live in one space and harvest in another, thereby maintaining an intimate knowledge of people and place. The community gatherings, knowledge-keeper mapping exercise, and elder interviews provide only a fragment of the kind of lived-experience that is held by our membership but they do illustrate well that Métis peoples have an intimate knowledge of the land, utilize the resource on the land to sustain traditional ways of life, understand yearly patterns and seasonal movements and of wildlife, and maintain kinship networks that pass knowledge across generations. Specific harvesting grounds, place names, geographic regions, family narratives, physical artefacts like traplines, cabins and trails, all speak to Métis agency along the corridor. While persistent social marginalization, systemic political racialization and damaging cultural discrimination has shuttered most of these histories behind windows of secrecy, Métis peoples, whether from established kinship networks in BC or from extended families from the Prairies, use their mobility, anonymity, and adaptability to maintain their traditional locations and lifeways.
Community Knowledge
Métis stories and traditions are at the heart of our community’s agency and as they are shared with each other they empower us to understand the layers of meaning associated with our place and purpose in British Columbia. Although our history and memory has often been associated with shaming, deprivation, ostracism, and/or deficiency, we witnessed a reawakening of our collective confidence as we gathered in community meetings across the province to tell our place-based stories and share our rich and diverse lifeways. In allowing space for our oral traditions to be exercised
54 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations) BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
and practiced, we come to understand again that we belong in this province, that we have an extensive lived-experience in the region, and that for generations we have formed deep kinship relations with the land. Our stories disrupt standard Canadian metanarratives that assert Métis peoples did not exist in BC, or, if they did exist, that we were “interlopers” or “squatters” in an otherwise First Nations or settler society. The inclusion of the stories of self-determining Métis communities make claims upon the land and resources by providing empirical “evidence” for use and occupation, and, more importantly, by culturally constituting the past in a way that intimately connects Métis peoples to their traditional territories along the TMX corridor and beyond. The meetings illustrated well the considerable challenges that need to be managed in order access Métis history in BC. Our community members have experienced marginalization within settler society and aggressive repudiation by First Nations, both of which have led to insecurity, confusion, and fear. We applaud those courageous members who exercised their agency and, even with a highly politicized environmental issue like pipeline development, willingly shared their stories, songs and traditions, reminding us of the possibility of a richer, culturally-layered and nuanced historical representation of British Columbia. As Métis names are recognized on the land, as specific geographical locations over a broad region are connected to Métis stories and song, and as Métis perceptions and meanings inform documented events, the Land and Life team began to appreciate the depth and breadth of our kinship relations along the TMX corridor. Community meetings in Kelowna (October 7, 2019) led by Project Lead, Joe Desjarlais, Terrace (November 4, 2019 and February 8, 2019) organized by Elizabeth Pearce, Clearwater (November 16, 2019) facilitated by Liaison Cindy Wigosh , Victoria (November 23, 2019) with the help of Liaison Earl Belcourt, Surrey (December 7, 2019 and February 29, 2020) organized by Liaison Derrick Whiteskycloud and Joe Desjarlais, Duncan (February 15, 2020) planned by Earl Belcourt, and Kamloops (March 7, 2020) coordinated by Liaison Marie March, gave hundreds of our members and their kinship relations a supportive environment within which they could recognize the wealth of their stories, share their knowledge with others, and to celebrate their culture. Notwithstanding the protests and picketing by environmental groups, the worries about personal confrontations from other Métis organizations, and rejections and rebukes from First Nations, members genuinely engaged with the Land and Life Study and offered their insights on Métis activities along the corridor. From all of our conversations, we learned that kinship networks with people and land existed and continue to exist throughout the province. It also seems that tight-knit kinship clusters of the 19th and early 20th centuries were replaced by more “ethnic-based” relations in the mid to late 20th and 21st century, although the former relational structures have never been completely erased. In recent years, accessing “Métis” harvesting grounds has become a matter of knowing a mixed-ancestry individual who had familiarity with a region or resource, and often includes asking permission from a local First Nation. Loose kinship clusters continued to function but they were broadened to include mixed-ancestry diaspora from all over Canada and the Pacific Northwest. Particularly problematic for some traditional family groupings in BC
55 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
has been the imposition of a single definition of “homeland” Métis whereby their history and memory is systematically excluded and not recognized. Thus, the extent to which self-determining Métis communities continue to exercise their rights to their traditional hunting and gathering grounds along the TMX corridor is often determined by political, social, economic and cultural factors that are beyond the control of self-determining communities.
Mapping Exercise
Representing Métis land-use and resource harvesting as detailed by participants meant providing a spatially intelligent, yet visceral, recording system. Our “hands-on” approach suited the desire of many of the elders to interact with a topographical map of the TMX corridor and also to view their information as it appeared on the map. Encouraging knowledge-keepers to pin-point regions on a physical map proved to be an engaging way to elicit history and memory, and gathering qualitative data to support these specific identifiers invited informants to consider a variety of ways in which they had interacted with the land, water and resources. Our data collection amounted to a rudimentary Geographic Information System where community members would examine large-scale maps of each segment of the TransMountain Expansion Project (TMX) pipeline and physically mark specified areas of interest using push pins. By using the community meetings as a launching pad for this exercise, the Land and Life team were able to assist participants, especially elders, plot the map by working through a short questionnaire (see Appendix 7), with specific people, places and purposes being identified. For example, hunting was labelled as activity (A), and fishing would be labelled as (E). Each participant was assigned a number so that their specific identity could remain separate from the activity and locations as required by our ethical guidelines for oral history research. The short forms were collected by the research assistants after the map interaction and were transferred onto larger electronic maps, which are included in this report below. We did have some prior knowledge of Métis activity along the corridor but all of the locations on the knowledge-keeper map, including 43 hunting areas, 24 fishing sites, 41 gathering regions, and numerous cultural and sacred locations, had not been previously catalogued. It is also important to note that in the short, anonymous summaries below that the maps represent only contemporary community knowledge; future studies could include historical geographical information system maps that identify use and occupancy as found in the archival record. Segment 3 of the Trans Mountain pipeline crosses over from Alberta into the eastern part of British Columbia. Most certainly, the provincial border is an artificial division and Métis land use was not restricted to one side or the other but for the purposes of this study we limited our presentation of data to BC. Around the Valemount area, activities such as hunting, large animal habitats, gathering, spiritual sites, and camping areas were identified. Hunters would typically gather moose or elk during the fall and winter seasons. Interestingly, wild or feral horses roamed in this area near Logan Lake but sightings have not been as frequent over the past few
56 TransMountain Expansion Project Segment 3.
TransMountain Expansion Project Segment 4.
57 TransMountain Expansion Project Segment 5.
TransMountain Expansion Project Segment 6.
58 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
years. Some Métis community members would gather apples, saskatoon berries, and salmon berries in the Valemount and Albreda areas. One member described how they would gather timber all the way from Cedarside and move south along highway 5 and would stay in shared logging cabins or camp along the way. One spiritual site was described by a community member near Rearguard station. From the members that participated in the mapping exercise, Segment 4 of the TMX pipeline corridor is the most active region for Métis land and resource use. According to our findings, well over 40 community members identified key sites and resources utilized by Métis people and communities, including hunting, fishing, large and small animal habitats, trap lines, gathering grounds, medicines, camping, landmarks, and spiritual sites. The Blue River and Avola areas were identified as having key gathering, hunting, and fishing sites. Some of the materials gathered were Saskatoon berries, chokecherries, and blackberries, traditional medicines such as “hooshum” and wild mushrooms, as well as wood and spring water. A specific Métis gravesite was identified near Avola. Trout fishing and salmon harvesting as well as berry and root gathering grounds were mentioned around McMurphy and Vavenby. In the Clearwater district, one of the most active areas in this study, Métis actively hunt elk, moose and deer, and one trap line is in existence. Regarding animal habitats, one bird watching site was identified and a few salt licks that were used by elk were pointed out by community members. Many community members also fish in the river that runs through Clearwater, and some spawning areas were found. The Clearwater area saw a lot gathering activity; many members of the community rely on the land to gather foods, medicines, and other resources. Métis people from the Clearwater area frequently travel into the Wells Gray Provincial park, or just locally known as “the Park.” Hunting usually occurs in the late Fall and winter and gathering happens throughout the entire year, although most berries are gathered in the spring and summer and are baked into pies, or preserved to make jams, or frozen for consumption later in the year. Métis community members camp, hunt, and fish northwest from the Clearwater area near Mahood Falls and Clearwater Lake. One cabin was identified as a type of “shared” living space that was used years ago when hunting was more popular and necessary for survival in the area. Métis hunters could hunt either near Mahood Falls or in the northern areas of “the Park” and could spend the night in a hidden cabin that only the hunters knew about. The older members that described this cabin do not know if it is in use anymore or if it has been destroyed over the years. The Blackpool area contains an archaeological site, a cave with paintings or old aboriginal artifacts that may also be related to Métis, according to a community member. At Little Fort, Métis peoples harvest large and small animals, including deer, foxes and coyotes. Birds, especially eagles, are “counted” in February, while grouse are harvested in winter. A cultural site known locally as “Indian Rock” is a place of self-reflection, meditation, and cultural connection.
59 TransMountain Expansion Project Segment 7.
The Land and Life team sharing information in the lower mainland (Surrey) community.
60 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Darfield-Black Pines Segment
The Darfield map did not receive a lot of land use information in this survey, however some areas including gathering sites, cabins, and gravesites were recognized. South of Little Fort, a camping site was identified along Dunn Lake. One gathering site of spring water was found near Darfield. There is a gravesite south of the Darfield area near Chinook Cove. Segment 5 covers such a large area of BC and contains many active Métis harvesting and land-use sites. In the Black Pines area, a participant described where they collected traditional medicines, but the specific plants were not named. Going south towards Kelowna, a lot of fishing sites were identified along the Thompson river and hunting activity is common. The fishing would usually occur in the summer, as described by a participant, and common fish caught were rainbow trout and whitefish. Gathering is commonplace with Métis peoples harvesting berries, vegetables, mushrooms, and rocks. One member harvested small “spiritual animals” and wood in this region for use in healing ceremonies. Similarly, Métis are active hunters, fishers and gatherers in the Kamloops region. A cultural site was also found on the outskirts of Merritt and all along Highway 5 to Hope Métis people actively fish for rainbow trout and sockeye salmon and hunt for deer, elk, moose and bear. Around Wahleach, Métis gathered berries and hunted and one informant identified a prominent fishing site. The lower mainland had few Métis harvesting regions, although one fishing hole was mentioned in Mission and pathways and trails were identified in Richmond and on the coast near Horseshoe Bay. There was a surprising lack of Métis land use and harvesting recorded for Segment 6 and Segment 7 of the TMX corridor. Although it appears that hunting and gathering grounds, fishing holes and cultural sites were present, the members that participated in the study did not identify a large number of places in this region. Activities like fishing near Burrard Inlet, gathering in New Westminster, and culturally significant sites at Burnaby Lake populate the map.
Elder/Knowledge Keeper Interviews The mapping exercise provided a broad overview of some of the Métis activity on the land along the TMX corridor but it is important to note that a deeper history and memory also exists. The ten elder and knowledge keeper interviews that we conducted out of the mapping exercise illustrate, in ways that pins on a map do not, that Métis oral histories can help us to learn about self-determined Métis communities in British Columbia and how they continued to function in a variety of forms. These interviews empower Métis peoples to tell their story in their own right and yet one can easily see their reticence to or inexperience in identifying
61 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
their unique “ways of being” in their everyday life. When asked to focus on the TMX corridor, for example, some elders struggled to recognize the connection between their own Métis personhood and a story of earlier connections to a community, a way of life, or an expression of identity (say a particular harvesting technique). Some themes that ran through most of the interviews include: continued use and occupancy of land and resources; mobility and a vast mental geography; economic integration and vital role within BC’s resource economy; importance of hunting territory and gathering grounds; the organic, family practice of Métis ways of being, and the loss of or limitations on harvesting methods, techniques and traditions. This small sampling of the oral history of elders provides a meaningful starting point for us to set out our own priorities and to tell our own stories in ways that assert our self-determination. It is important to note that the data collected in the mapping exercise is consistent with the more detailed oral testimony of the elders. A list of the elders who participated in this study includes: » Karen Andrews of Prince George, BC interviewed on March 8, 2020. » Frank Desjarlais of Maple Ridge, BC interviewed on March 5, 2020. » Paul Gilles of Kamloops, BC interviewed on May 7, 2020. » Dale Haggerty of Vavenby, BC interviewed on April 18, 2020. » Doug (Bud) Jenkins of Clearwater, BC interviewed on April 22, 2020. » Reo Joubert of Clearwater, BC interviewed on April 21, 2020. » Dan LaFrance of Duncan, BC interviewed on April 7, 2020. » Jack McDonald of Victoria, BC interviewed on April 8, 2020. » Sheila Nyman of Clearwater, BC interviewed on April 24, 2020. » Charles Henry Pollard of Vavenby, BC interviewed on April 20, 2020.
Most of the elders talked about Métis ways of life as being defined by continued use and occupancy of the land and resources in, along and around the TMX corridor. It is clear that an ongoing connection to the land is important for sustaining Métis traditions and lifeways. A few examples are:
“ … there’s Métis families all along that corridor that continue to hunt and harvest, but myself I have my own trap line very close to that corridor. We harvested moose, deer, fish, it was north of Kamloops. In the historical sense, up in the Jasper area, a very dear friend of mine, Frank Camp, he was born and raised in that area. It was close to the Jasper/ Banff National Park area. I spent a lot of time with Frank, and he told me a lot of oral history of gathering food and hunting moose, deer, goats, elk, fishing. He used to gather most of his fish in that part of the country. As the corridor comes down, I know numerous Métis families that continue to this day that gather their sustenance. ” – Dan LaFrance “ Wherever there’s a watershed there’s fish. And where there’s fish, Métis are going to fish there, they’ve done it for years … It’s for sustenance and
62 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
commercial. It’s also spiritual in a sense, and how they [Métis] relate food bearing sustenance that they gather … some of them for reasons are kept secret. There’s quite a few. These spawning area locations have been passed down for ages. ” – Paul Gilles “ In that corridor I’ve hunted in Williams Lake for moose. I’ve hunted in Quesnel for moose, I mostly hunt moose I don’t hunt deer anymore. I’ve hunted for elk in the Princeton area, in my younger days I used to hunt as far up as Pink Mountain way up near the Alaska highway, 90 miles north of Fort St. John, used to hunt there a lot. Uncle Jerry and I would hunt in Cranbrook, we hunted near that area in 1971 for elk, moose, and deer then, and were very successful there until about 10 years ago. After that everyone ‘petered’ off or past on, we don’t go there anymore. ” – Frank Desjarlais “ The Tête Jaune Cache was a Métis settlement years and years ago. Tête-Jaune was an Iroquois Métis person that opened up the Yellowhead Trail. He had a cache there to store his food safely. Eventually it was a thriving community since paddlers would come up the river there … In our particular family, we’re related to the ‘Caraguntys,’ and Louis Caragunty was known as Tête Jaune Cache. So, a lot of my family members lived in that area since it was a big Métis settlement. They helped a lot with the HBC and the Northwest Company, and everyone there worked for them. Just look at who was named after Tête Jaune Cache, who our family says was a part of our family heritage … If you look at the Yellowhead Trail where it opens up. He traveled down that Fraser River all the way from Jasper House to Tête Jaune Cache, where he stored his cache. After they opened up Yellowhead Pass. That was a very wide corridor that was used by fur traders and Métis explores coming down that corridor, of which was opened up by Tête Jaune Cache. So that whole corridor, from Jasper House to Mount Robson to Tête Jaune Cache to Valemont, that was where all the traders and shipping lanes were used … to us and our particular family Tête Jaune Cache is a very sacred place for us. Our ancestors played a large role in the fur trade in BC. So for us it means a lot, and we consider that a spiritual place. If you’ve ever been up there, you’re surrounded by beautiful trees and animals and that’s where our spirit and cultural comes from. ” – Jack McDonald “ … some people [Métis] hunt from Jasper to Kamloops to Williams lake, even to Salmon arm. That’s their traditional hunting grounds. ” – Doug Jenkins
The elders valued mobility but at the same time their vast knowledge of the land along the corridor enabled them to read the land in order to harvest resources effectively. A few examples:
63 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
“ I paid really close attentions to animals that were to my personal benefit of the trapping. But they’re also a feed source, down to the small rabbits and squirrels. So, what we found was that between North west of little fort down towards Kamloops, something that was essential to small animal life were beaver ponds. The animals seem to move on and into different areas, but I was very well a where of my surroundings to make sure I knew what I was doing and what I was gathering. So we paid close attention to that. There were certain areas that the animals would gravitate to lower elevations if there was a large snow that year and cause the animals to move further into the lower parts of the TMX corridor. Again there were other things that came into play. Logging increased the rabbit population, which would bring more lynx into the area. So you had to pay attention to what was going on … As a Métis trapper, I’d really monitor everything, right down to the squirrels. That way you could adjust your activities according to the seasons. ” – Dan LaFrance “ When I lived there [North of Kamloops], I was 28 years old then. I moved there with the family, and we used to go up there in the wintertime and we would encounter all these animals, moose and deer, that would migrate through the corridor. ” – Frank Desjarlais “ I’ve never hunted in the Park [Wells Gray Park] since I had no intentions of going there. I’ve hunted everywhere in BC, and looking the map you gave me. I hunted moose from 1972-1999 in the North Thompson. I trapped in ‘Atlen’ BC in 1954-55. In Prince George, I hunted in ‘54-59, mainly moose and bear. I covered this province pretty well from one end to the other in terms of hunting. ” – Chuck Pollard “ My grandmother used to collect mosses and herbs for medicines and knew all the locations up between Jasper, the Cache, and Valemount. She also collected wildflowers, things like that … Yeah, so a lot of the medicinal stuff, she used herbs for that. If you took the pebbles off the flowers she would use those for artistic design on her moccasins. She would sometimes brew herbal teas for us. She would gather dandelions, wildflowers, grass stems, bark; yeah, she used everything. ” – Jack McDonald “ … we pick a lot of berries along the Wells Grey Park road, and we go up to camp ‘two road’ and we pick in there. Around Blue River there’s some blueberries down there … [we use them] For fruit and for filling pies mostly. We also can some and during the winter we freeze some. We also freeze and store hooshum berries and juice them in the winter. And there’s some cherries around here, we make boil the cherries and make them into a syrup, same with the Saskatoon berries too. ” – Doug Jenkins
Most of the elders talked about their integration into BC’s economy and the vital role that Métis people played in the natural resource sector.
64 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
“ Both of my great, great, great grandfathers were wagon masters, and would carry supplies. They would also carry people. I remember one story, a German person moved to the Okanagan area and married an Indian woman. This couple were hired by my great, great grandfather and that’s how he would transport kids and teachers to and from schools. My great grandmother would also deliver babies all throughout the province. There’s lots of little stories like that. ” – Sheila Nyman “ So what happened to our particular family is that once the hunting and fishing dried up they lost those cultural skills. So, then they started logging and harvesting trees to making a living and support their families … The whole Valemount-Cache area was very popular for logging and the logging companies hired a lot of Métis people. You needed the wood to keep your home warm from burning it … the Cache was a very popular place. It had a population of about 3000 people and a lot of the people there were Métis but they worked for different companies and also hunting and trapping. Of course, Valemount, families lived there as well because of the logging and the big money they could make. So a lot of Métis live there now. ” – Jack McDonald “ In our family we moved along where the work was. We moved from the Valemount and Cache area down the highway to Kamloops looking for logging work. Eventually moving down to Fort Langley and New Westminster and then of course to the island here; all related to the forestry industry since you moved where the employment was. But everywhere you went there were Métis people. I lived in Port Alberni here for a number of years and there’s a strong community there, even some from the Prairies. They all came here for the forestry industry opportunities as well. And they had dances, parades, a lot of cultural activates. A lot of Métis communities on the Island here continue to thrive. I know it’s not on the corridor but we all ended up here. ” – Jack McDonald “ In the old days in Barriere, a Métis guy started his own lumber mill. He actually even wrote a book about it. There’s a lot of people that go in the back and go get their own wood, though now a days you give most of it to the government. But there’s some people up there that are entrepreneurs, but not in the mining industry because of the regulations. I think I have the book of that gentleman somewhere here but that’s all I know about that. Again though, a lot of the Métis people don’t go into other people’s business because they don’t want things to change and are scared of change. He could have possible First Nation’s status, but he probably was a half breed logger. Here’s the book, it’s called ‘[Chiefly Logger:] The Warm and Witty Story of a British Columbia Half-Breed Logger’. He talks about himself and all the rivers and the Canadian Pacific Railway. ” – Dale Haggerty
65 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
While many elders and their families had moved away from their primary, traditional harvesting territories they continue to reference the TMX corridor as an important harvesting and gathering territory. Some examples:
“ The loggers started taking away winter grounds, and the animals would need those grounds for minerals. You could almost set your clock on when they would start to migrate, and there’s be a point where a certain amount of those animals would head from the higher points to the Thompson river, or they would move towards the Fraser river. Interestingly the majority of the deer seemed to move more towards the Fraser, and the moose seemed to gravitate toward a specific plateau near the Fraser river at first. Then the moose would head towards the Thompson river. ” – Dan LaFrance “ But for myself, just being on the land is very spiritual for me and it’s how I connect to my culture. As for other families, they all have their own beliefs and practices, but that’s not to say there’s no similarities between everyone. I know that for my family I’ve handed down my practices down to my boys, which came from myself and my father. And they’re now in their early 40’s and handing down my knowledge to them. Being connected to the land is very important … It’s hard to explain because it’s in you. ” – Dan LaFrance “ Well they would hunt moose, deer, and at one time my mom told me they would hunt elk. They would hunt for food and would harvest hides to make garments and clothing. Mom remembers garments and moccasins being made with tanned moose hide. ” – Sheila Nyman “ So we also do a lot of grouse hunting in the Valemount area. There’s tons of birds around there; but we only harvested grouse. If you go anywhere along that corridor, there’s tons of places along the river to see animals feeding and nesting … A lot of the trapping we did would’ve been in the Valemount area and the Tête Jaune Cache, which is about 20 km away from Valemount because of all the mountains around there. My uncle had a trapline out there and my dad would go up with him and trap. The other thing is that we had some conflict with the local north Thompson Indian band as they claimed that land but we only used that land to collect food for our families, so we didn’t have a lot of issues with them. ” – Jack McDonald
The oral history of elders stressed the personal responsibility of Métis peoples to each other, even if these kinship relations have lessened over time. Sharing, generosity, collective obligations, all point towards the various ways in which the accessing the resources of the TMX corridor is an extension of “family.”
“ We would harvest our moose and divide it up between different families. So if you wanted to call it a collective it kind of was, but it wasn’t really
66 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
advertised … The last moose we took off my trapline in that area, we donated the moose to the First Nations and in turn would give it to the elders that would make moccasins and all that. None of the animals that I know of were wasted, we would try to use all of the animal that we harvested. In that respect I guess it was honoring the animal as it gave its life to sustain you. ” – Dan LaFrance “ The Métis are really resourceful at using what they have before them; we’re adaptable people. I was very fortunate to have a trap line in northern BC, and my family and I would fly into north of Smithers and use it. Moose was a very sustainable animal for us to make moccasins and things like that. Further south where I had a trapline on the Bonaparte, I leased a trap line off the First Nations, the historic Creek Indian band. It was a great trap line and we raised a family out there. The main animal for us was moose, one moose could feed your family and then some. And that was culturally important for me. The moose to my family is a well-respected cultural animal. Some people might not understand this, but even when I harvest a moose, I will be eating its last meal. I’ll eat it and thank the creator for that animal giving its life to sustain my family. The last moose I took off my trapline fed 7 families, so moose are very significant to me. ” – Dan LaFrance “ My grandmother taught us how to use every part of the animal that we hunted and harvested. We used the hide and ate the meat. We used everything together, we never believed in wasting any part of the animals. The ladies would tan the hides, we did everything. ” – Jack McDonald “ A lot of people say that Métis have rights to go fish for harvesting anytime they want, but I don’t think that’s the case up here. I think people mainly follow the regulations; people usually fish around September, they don’t go during spawning times. I’ve been up fishing for a while but people follow the rags usually. If it’s from September to February, then that’s the time people would do their harvesting. First Nations people though.. I’m not too sure about how it works for them. If you have your card, then you can go hunt and fish in the back. And I know they do because they’ve invited me to go with them and harvest with them. And that’s the important thing. People are hunting to survive and not for trophy hunting. Hunters here are getting frustrated over the regulations over the game, they they’re going up north to Prince George and 100-mile house to hunt. ” – Dale Haggerty
In the oral interviews, most of the elders relayed stories about or commented on the loss of traditions or the negative impact of restrictions on their ways of life. Examples from the interviews are:
“ And the TMX corridor runs very, very close to Bonaparte lake. It runs east-west and loaded with tons of fish. But there’s hundreds of little lakes
67 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
and ponds. That’s one of the challenges though. A logging or a mining company might come in and not pay attention to the environment and how things are working together. Such as the wildlife and the fish. If they took away a food source from the beaver, well then, the beaver doesn’t dam up there and that impacts every species out there. ” – Dan LaFrance “ My great great grandmother, my great grandmother and my grandmother were alive when I was born. I’m told that my relatives had been evicted from Jasper area many many years ago. ” – Karen Andrews “ In the old days, berries were used as a dye; they used to make it for pemmican or make jams. Berries are often overlooked. They’re also very important for birds and other small animals. ” – Paul Gilles “ Oh all along the entire corridor, there’s soap berries, ‘soapallalys.’ They are medicines but it’s also a treat. There’s Huckleberries, Saskatoon berries too … Soap berries are canned, and having them fresh is more of a modern thing. Now a days were freezing them, making pies and jams … All the way through where it grows in the corridor, there’s something called ‘Labrador tea.’ Métis make a medicine tea out of that plant. Juniper, cedar, and pitch from pine trees. There’s also certain ferns and ‘Chaga,’ it’s a type of mushroom. There’s also a ‘pine tree mushroom’ that’s used as a medicine, and as a protectant in homes. I don’t know as much as medicines as I’d like to know; my aunts knew more. ” – Sheila Nyman “ Back in the 60’s, people didn’t want to admit they were Métis. Then some years back they found out they could hunt using their status cards without buying a license. All of a sudden, all these Métis come out of the woodwork. They didn’t want to admit it until they got something for free. And, when that happened, I was really pissed off. I would always admit I was a Métis and never ashamed of it. ” – Chuck Pollard “ I’m going to be honest, a lot of people don’t talk about their practices because they’re scared of persecution from others. And, a lot of the older people are starting to die off so some of them are talking more … you talk to some Métis families out here, once they get to know you, they’ll start to tell you how they would berry pick or how they would gather herbs. But people don’t want to talk openly anymore. They discovered a village that had been moved, and arrowheads and artifacts were found back there. That village was told to move because they don’t want that stuff near their towns. ” – Dale Haggerty “ As far as I know, Métis were trying to hide from the persecution of the governments … If you were called a half breed or had ties to them, then you weren’t welcome. They would just assimilate with the community and if they had a family talent, like beading, they kept it within their families. In my area, if people agreed to say it’s ok to practice Métis culture, at least 50 families would come forward. But no one wants to admit it. The Métis
68 We were having our breakast and 2 grizzlies decided to come in our camp. I had shot a deer the night before, hung it on a hangpole, and without even noticing that we were there, they walked right by us and went right for the deer and ripped the deer in half and took it away! – Frank Desjarlais, interview participant.
69 Section II: Sites (Kinship Relations)
families here were also all here way before I came to the area … My mom never told us stories to be honest. She was in residential schools, so she never wanted to talk about her past. We were assimilated kids, the stories we grew up with were never told to us by our mother. I grew up in Burnaby, and she never told us that we were Métis. She used to make bannock and we thought it was an olden Prairie thing. But she didn’t call it that, she called it baking powder biscuits. She would also fry up fry-bread but called it doughnuts. That’s the way we grew up. We just never knew. My uncle Joe, who was Métis, he lived in Kamloops. We never heard stories about what was going on in the Prairies, things were always hush hush. I wish my mom could reveal some of the stuff we went through, but mom’s gone now. And she took all of her secrets with her. ” – Dale Haggerty
Conclusion The research that came out of the community meetings, the mapping exercise and the elder interviews is an indication of the rich Métis history along the TMX corridor. As we continue to establish trust through the knowledge partnerships, especially with the invaluable work done by the Community Liaisons, we anticipate that we will come to understand better the expansive kinship networks that shaped Métis lifeways. It is evident that much more research and scholarship needs to be done on the oral traditions of Métis peoples in order to reveal how they maintained their sense of belonging during the 20th century and into this new century. As the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples report in 2013 entitled “The People Who Own Themselves”: Recognition of Métis Identity in Canada” stated: “Despite their rich history, the committee heard that official records of Métis in the Pacific Northwest are few compared to other parts of Canada.” Their recommendation: In light of the evolving understanding of the Métis and their relationship to the Crown in BC, Métis organizations and communities should be empowered to identify relevant historical documentation on the Métis, including documents held by government departments, and to make this data readily accessible. In addition, the report proposes an appropriately resourced research program to support Métis communities and organizations in gathering information on the development of their historic communities, including written documentation and oral histories. The BCMFTS is the beginning of this process as it directly relates to resource development and the impact of the TMX pipeline on self-determining Métis peoples in BC. When knowledge capital is produced “by Métis, for Métis and others” it can be utilized to negotiate productive and healthy relations in ways that supports the vitality of local self-determined Métis communities and the well-being of repatriating self-identified individuals.
70 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
71 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
Community engagement is the act of building capacity within each Métis community by providing each self-determining community with the opportunities and tools to shape their own future in ways that suit their own needs and interests. Although the basic intent was to gather information from our members regarding their historic and contemporary use of land and resources along the TMX corridor, the BCMFTS invested resources back into each participating community with skill-acquisition activities, workshops, educational sessions, cultural events and leadership opportunities. What became known in our member communities as the “Métis Land and Life Study” utilized an indigenous research methodology that is thoroughly committed to community owned knowledge and the use of that knowledge for the good of each community member. Community engagement for research, therefore, is only possible as consistent, trusting and long-term relationships are nurtured in ways that encourage awareness, solidarity, and greater levels of participation. The ideal is that the knowledge partnerships between the BCMF and its member communities develop out of the diverse kinship clusters that have defined the Métis experience in BC. The goal of community engagement is to support and encourage the ongoing repatriation of Métis self-determining communities across the province. The Land and Life Study evolved as the project moved through its successive stages where changes resulted from archival research and community feedback. Although many different distinct elements formed the entire process of community engagement, for simplicity our activities are summarized here into four parts.
72 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Setting the stage and laying down a good foundation that was consistent with the principles of an Indigenous Research Methodology shaped the first part of the study. Once confident of a firm basis upon which to move forward, the project gathered strength by drawing in the BCMF leadership and inviting in key liaisons from each community so that together we would decide how we would form a knowledge partnership. The direct linkages into each community provided the means through which we were able to share testimonials about Métis lived-experience within the TMX corridor. A final stage honoured the knowledge partnerships and closed the loop by receiving feedback from the liaisons and then reconnecting the final report back to the community before it was finalized. Throughout the whole process of community engagement, the Land and Life team understood that their role as facilitators required right relationships and appropriate protocol. Even though we faced challenges when attempting to identify and access the knowledge within kinship clusters, we believe the introduction and practice of principles, procedures and protocol are the staging ground that make possible more in-depth study.
Stage I: Setting the Stage Project Parameters/Team Building
Our mandate for community engagement had been clearly stated in the approved application: “The objective of this approved work plan is to facilitate Indigenous participation in dialogues relating to natural resource development by supporting the review and update of a traditional land use study” and this was to be accomplished through “community meetings, land research, interviews, information sessions and creating a repository of information that will be held at the BC Métis Federation head office.” However, the specific parameters of the project had yet to be fully established around a knowledge partnership, which meant that the communities themselves would determine the extent to which we would be able to manage some form of a knowledge transfer. Building a strong research team that could negotiate differences of opinion and translate between administrative goals and community desires became a top priority for Project Lead and Facilitator, Joe Desjarlais. On July 29, he convened Academic Lead, Dr. Bruce Shelvey, Project Assistants, Drake Henry and Angel Fisher, BC Métis Federation President and CEO, Keith Henry, Project Administrator, Sherry Daniels, and BCMF Treasurer, Betty Fisher to discuss how the BCMF Terrestrial Study would differ from a technical traditional land use study in that it would be premised on relationships we established with each individual Métis community that was represented in
73 Discussing the project with leaders and knowledge keepers.
Research trip to Victoria.
74 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
the organizations membership. Because each community would determine through their connections how they would relate with the project team, knowledge buried or hidden in kinship networks would have to be teased out through establishing trust, and this might require us to temper our expectations and tweak the outcomes of the approved work plan. As Dr. Bruce Shelvey stated, “research for the BCMFTS would happen at the speed of relationship building” and the relationships had to be formed from the ground up. An important early step for our operational team was to discuss the research methodology with the Academic Lead and partner to educate the operational team and others. The “Métis Research Relationality Seminar” held on August 8 explored how we would apply Indigenous Research Methodology to the BCMF Terrestrial Study, which was renamed the “Land and Life Study” to reflect its unique expression for BC’s Métis communities. Strategizing how to formally launch the program meant clarifying and setting out the roles and responsibilities of the operational team (see Appendix 1) and beginning to identify key people in communities across the province. Sherry Daniels, who had extensive knowledge of BCMF members, assisted the team with tips and strategies of how to identify community leaders who would be willing to partner with the Land and Life team. We engaged over twenty people by phone and email and extended an invitation to attend the initial information meeting where we would convey the spirit and intent of the project (see Appendix 2). In addition, we initiated communication plan and awareness campaign that included social media blasts, targeted email and phone messaging, and Land and Life posters (see Appendix 3). Community awareness had to be supported by a solid research and academic plan that was well understood by the Land and Life team and the broader community. As a baseline or reference study, the Land and Life project needed a flexible mechanism to gather information, transfer knowledge, and store it responsibly in anticipation of future comprehensive reports that would follow. A Research and Design Seminar set out clear expectations for the creation of an expansive bibliography (see Section I) and guidelines for gathering and storing oral evidence were reviewed (see Appendix 9). To support the mapping exercise (see Section II), descriptive handouts were created and short and long form questionnaires were designed (see Appendix 7 and Appendix 8). In anticipation of the cross-fertilization between the archival and oral evidence, Desjarlais and Shelvey conducted two research trips from September 11-13 to the British Columbia archives in Victoria and from October 23-24 to Ellensburg, WA to visit retired scholar and Métis borderlands expert, Dr. Don Woodcock, and conduct research in his substantial home library consisting of hundreds of books and Seattle, WA and the University of Washington’s Special Collections. Unfortunately, other scheduled research trips to the Glenbow Museum and Archives in Calgary, AB and to the Manitoba Public Archives in Winnipeg, MB had to be cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the initial days of the project, we became keenly aware that this reference study would only be the beginning of the hopeful process of developing long term
75 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
respectful relationships that could lead to people, families and communities sharing their knowledge. Knowledge gleaned would come out of relationship building and that kind of effective community interaction would require time and effort. As we gathered names and identified willing participants it was imperative that our interaction with each individual proved we could listen well, show compassion, and exercise patience. There was a sense from initial contact that Métis people are all in different places, with different perspectives. Some people were excited about the political possibilities, others were passionate about wellness and connections to the land and water, while some expressed their opposition or strong reservations to any involvement in the pipeline’s construction and operation. Establishing knowledge partnerships, based upon an Indigenous Research Methodology, however, provided us with the theoretical framework to reach out to people organically, one person at a time, and begin to find pathways to mutually beneficial relationships. Although mindful of the specific project goals when working with our members, we wanted our research to come from partnerships in the hope that this could lead to new possibilities. It was essential, therefore, that any knowledge transfer from the communities to the Land and Life team be completed within a clear, ethical framework so that elders, knowledge keepers, community leaders and individual informants had confidence in the process. Our members all had different reasons for engaging in the project, many of which went beyond the mandate of this study. Complex factors, such as politics, history, personal preferences, geography, social stigmatization, and kinship affiliations, often formed the context of our conversations. Before we could access the history and memory, we had to deal with deep dissatisfaction with the status quo and a profound distrustful of representative organizations and government. Having a research methodology premised on indigenous ways of being helped us deal with the hurt and pain associated with experiences of colonialism, marginalizing government policies, siloed indigenous organizations, and aggressive political partisanship. Nevertheless, challenges persisted as geographical and social isolation, structural deficiencies within communities, competition between political affiliations and memberships, and literacy and educational disparities often made the novel concept of research by Métis people and for the benefit of their own communities difficult to believe. Indeed, the idea that their own indigenous communities owned knowledge and had the right to benefit from it presupposed a right to choose, as individuals, in kinship networks and with communities if their history would be shared and how it would be represented. With the indigenous research methodology we employed we were responsible for respecting the knowledge, understanding how it was being told, and ensuring any retelling referenced back to the original source. Our commitment to listen and learn flipped the research paradigm in such a way that it enabled our people, elders, knowledge keepers and practitioners to tell us what is worth knowing. In short, the research process itself became a practice of self-determination. The Land and Life team recognized that research through relationships would not be possible at a distance, nor could we use impersonal surveys to gather the information we needed. With the privilege of being invited into our member
76 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity) BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
communities came the responsibility to acknowledge appropriate protocol. Protocol, or the right way of conducting relationships, had to be intentional even if unique Métis ways of interacting had been lost or forgotten because of factors such as political infighting and cultural wars, dysfunctional community representation, lack of recognition of jurisdiction by governments and institutions, and generational ignorance of Métis people and culture. While some communities, such as Clearwater, had more formal procedures for welcoming us (land acknowledgment) and conducting a meeting (permissions to speak), others were less regulated. We were encouraged, however, to see the emergence of a common structure, especially by the second time we engaged a community. As we continue to evolve in our relations we know that informal processes between persons will become formalized and this accountability will transform protocol into ceremony. In this way, self-determining Métis peoples and communities can have confidence that their stories will be known in ways that accurately represent their connections to people and place.
“ At community meetings people spoke to me out of their passion; their stories were embedded in real life issues. One person spoke of her battle with cancer and her desire to connect back to land so she could collect traditional medicines. Another wanted to create a specific space that would promote healing by educating people about land-based wellness. All Métis people want to share what they know and tell about their relation to land. The Land and Life Project gave our member communities an opportunity to tell their stories. ” – Joe Desjarlais, Project Lead
Stage II: Gathering Strength The “Strength” of the Collective
The success of the Land and Life Study would be measured by our ability to gather the collective strength of our member communities. After dialoguing with key people from across the province, we prioritized the design of communication materials that could effectively convey the intent and importance of this opportunity to the whole of our membership. The publication of the Métis Land and Life Project Description, which described a ten-month community-led and community-based land use study that would explore some of the long-standing kinship relationships that Métis peoples have had with each other and with the land, especially as they relate to the Trans Mountain Pipeline Extension corridor, provided the basis for any future communication (see Appendix 4). Follow up phone calls, email communications and social media interactions culminated in August 24-25 when community representatives from across the province joined
77 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
the Land and Life team and the BCMF board for the unofficial launch of the study. A general introduction of the project was followed up with break-out sessions so that specific feedback could come from the key leaders, board members, operational team (see Appendix 5). We immediately saw the benefit of the Indigenous Research Methodology: Baillie Redfern, a Board member, recommended we use a large physical map and a “pin system” to gather and record land-use information from each informant, with each “pin” visually representing a specific story; and, a couple of the community leaders recommended a more practical approach when describing the project in the form of a Question and Answer handout (see Appendix 6). Our focus after this encouraging meeting shifted to the official launch of the study and its introduction to the BCMF membership at the 2019 BC Métis Federation Annual General Meeting.
“ There is Métis history and memory as well as contemporary use by our Métis people along the project corridor and we need to account for it. ” – Joe Desjarlais, Project Lead
The AGM, held in Kelowna on October 4-5, gave the Land and Life team the opportunity to clearly outline the scope and intent of the Métis Land and Life Project and establish ways in which the BC Métis Federation and its member communities in BC could cooperate to acknowledge and represent Métis land-use along the Trans Mountain Pipeline Extension corridor. However, one of our main tasks at the AGM was to establish partnerships with at least one liaison from each member community so that they could invite us to enter into right relations at the local level. After dialoging with over fifteen prospective community liaisons, the Project Lead had secured the commitment of five people, Cindy Wilgosh from Clearwater, Elizabeth Pearce from Terrace, Marie March from Kamloops, Earl Belcourt from Vancouver Island, and Derrick Whiteskycloud from the Lower Mainland, who were willing to take on the responsibilities of a Community Liaison (see Appendix 10). As vital links into the local communities, these leaders agreed to mediate between the Land and Life operational team and BCMF members by assisting with planning and attending meetings, communicating with members, coordinating opportunities within communities to gather information, and providing the team with community feedback and suggestions. Liaisons, who represented their community, understood its nuances, and had direct access to elders, knowledge keepers, and land based experts, would help us to understand what knowledge was important to share and how they would like it to be made known. Even though the role was new to most of them, over the course of the project these community liaisons established meaningful relationships, listened and learned from elders and knowledge keepers, and used the Land and Life project to build up their community capacity. With the funding, education and support in place, the Land and Life team witnessed these leaders taking ownership of their own community’s knowledge. Marie March from Kamloops, for example, connected with local First Nations, dialogued with service organizations about Michif language revitalization,
78 Celebrating culture in community!
Community Liaison Cindy Wilgosh (R).
79 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
and conducted historical research in regional and local archives and heritage sites. Derrick Whiteskycloud from the Lower Mainland used his extensive reach on public radio to share important information and host the Project Lead. Earl Belcourt from Vancouver Island worked to develop good relations and build bridges between peoples and organizations. Cindy Wilgosh from Clearwater leveraged her deep roots in the community to dialogue with First Nations and to create opportunities for community solidarity, such as a weekly meeting one of the elders called “Meeting of the Métis Minds.” Most importantly, these community liaisons began the process of repatriating their history, their relations to other indigenous peoples, and their connections to the land in a movement towards self-determination as it relates to natural resource development in the province.
Stage III: Networks of Knowledge Coming to an initial understanding of the impact that the TMX pipeline construction, operation and maintenance would have on our community members required the Land and Life Team to get into the communities. With invitations from the Community Liaisons, we were granted permission to access networks of knowledge that were community-based, community-led, and community-owned. Because the community research came as an outworking of strong relationships, the whole process became an organic exchange of information and on-going feedback, each one unique to each local setting. We had the privilege of attending meetings in Surrey, Terrace, Clearwater, Kamloops, Victoria, and Duncan where project lead Joe Desjarlais and the Land and Life team connected with community members, described the project in relational language, and encouraged attendees to share their knowledge by filling out a survey and placing a corresponding pin on the large maps of the TMX corridor. (see Appendix 7). We asked informants to identify general reference points based upon people (who interacted with the land), place (where, in general, did this occur), and purpose (what kind of activities were performed). People enjoyed the visual and hands-on aspect of the information and mapping exercise, specifically the way they could engage each other and then see their agency represented on the maps. The Land and Life team enjoyed the hospitality of liaison Elizabeth and the members of the Skeena River Métis Community Association in Terrace on November 2, the generosity of liaison Cindy and members from the North Thompson Valley including Kamloops, Kelowna, Barriere, Clearwater, Vavenby on November 16, the warm welcome of liaison Earl and members of the Victoria Métis community at the beautiful Songhees Wellness Centre on November 23rd, and the cordiality of members of the Surrey Métis community on December 7. At all of these meetings the team members explained the parameters of the project and initiated conversations around Métis history and current practices, specifically as they related to their connection with the land, air and water within the TMX pipeline corridor.
80 Appendix 7
Métis Land and Life Study Map P:______
Name:______Date of Birth: ______(YYYY/MM/DD)
On the map identify any of the following land-use locations by placing a pin with the appropriate reference label attached:
Specific Harvesting Locations (Red Flagged Pins):
� Hunting: ______(A)
� Large Animal Habitat: (breeding, birthing, licks, grazing, shelters) ______(B)
� Small Animal Habitat: (nesting, breeding, hibernating, migrating, staging) ______(C)
� Trapping Grounds/Lines: ______(D)
� Fishing Sites: ______(E)
� Fish Habitat (spawning areas, migration route) ______(F)
� Berry/Root/Vegetable Gathering Grounds ______(G)
� Traditional Plants (medicine, crafts, materials, fuel, food, spices) ______(H)
� Other Resources (rocks, minerals, timber, spring water) ______(I)
Physical Locations and Places
� Cabins or Camping Areas ______(J)
� Trails and Pathways (Mark trailheads) ______(K)
� Gravesites and Burial Grounds ______(L)
� Archaeological Sites ______(M)
� Cultural or Spiritual Sites ______(N)
� Special Areas or Landmarks ______(O)
Métis Land and Life Study Map short form.
81 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
“ This was a great start to community engagement! These projects are community-led and supported. We have been clear that organizations and projects exist to serve the community. The communities tell us what is important to them. Communities own this knowledge and the knowledge has to benefit members in their local contexts. ” – Joe Desjarlais, Project Lead, November 4 on BCMF Social Media
These community meetings were essential for members to recognize their community’s wealth and begin to build their capacity to repatriate their histories, identities and self-determination. Hundreds of one-on-one interactions with the project team during this first round of meetings revealed that Métis people and communities valued the project and wanted their voices to be heard. The Community Liaisons did an outstanding job of creating a positive and open environment, preparing their communities, and facilitating good discussion. At the end of December, the Land and Life team was gratified to receive the unqualified support of the BC Métis Federation board and to hear the many good reports coming from each community (see Appendix 11). It is apparent that Métis self-determining communities in BC want to see positive outcomes from knowledge-transfer so that they might participate in and benefit from economic development, including the TMX project.
“ Community members showed their hospitality and people were excited in sharing their knowledge and participating in activities. The feedback received from members about the day’s event was absolutely amazing. There were positive comments and lots of interest to continue future Métis project and cultural conversations. ” – Cindy Wilgosh, Community Liaison, Clearwater
A second part of our community engagement that flowed out from the general mapping exercise included identifying key elders and knowledge keepers that could provide more comprehensive and detailed information about past and present Métis land use along the TMX pipeline corridor. We did not wish to make this a comprehensive survey but rather provide case studies of the kind of knowledge held by our community members. The Land and Life Community Liaisons approached people in their respective communities and provided them with the opportunity to share: Earl Belcourt, the liaison from Vancouver island, facilitated the knowledge-transfer of Jack McDonald and Dan LaFrance; liaison Marie March from Kamloops assisted with the interviews of Paul Gillis and Karen Andrews from Prince George; Cindy Wilgosh, liaison from the Clearwater area made it possible to gather information from Dale Haggerty, Doug (Bud) Jenkins, Chuck Pollard, Sheila Nyman, and Reo Jubert; and Joe Desjarlais, the Project Lead, gathered stories from Frank Desjarlais, who lives in the Lower Mainland. These ten elders, knowledge keepers and community leaders completed an interview using a long-form questionnaire as a guideline (see Appendix 8). Not unlike what we experienced with the results from the general mapping exercise, these longer interviews included important
82 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
insights and supported the substantial research coming to light from the historical record! (see Appendix 13 and Appendix 14). Transcriptions and even some short-film productions of the interviews will most certainly inspire other Métis community members to share their own stories of historic and contemporary land-use along the TMX corridor. On March 16 the BC Métis Federation discontinued public meetings in response to the COVID-19 virus and the health directives coming from BC’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Bonnie Henry. The limitations placed on travel and gatherings severely impacted the ability of the Land and Life team to continue the process of community meetings and of conducting individual interviews. While some of the interviews had been completed in-person prior to mid-March, we switched to a format mediated by email and phone in order to continue the knowledge-transfer. While everyone involved understood the necessity for physical distancing, lost was the rich interchange of an in-person interview where an elder or knowledge keeper could hover over a physical map and point to places of interest during questions, which often prompted further responses. In any case, we learned that when information and knowledge is “drawn out” in a relational context that it creates more opportunities for community engagement. And, when this knowledge-transfer is located within kinship networks it effectively restores and repatriates Métis memory and history within the broader community. Communicating the vision and purpose of the Land and Life project, announcing important milestones and sharing specific research results has been facilitated through BC Métis Federation media outlets. We engaged the BCMF membership, Métis peoples across Canada, and mixed-ancestry peoples across the globe with our social media and Facebook presence, the Federation’s website, and our email distribution lists. In addition, Métis Matters cooperative radio, hosted by Derrick Whiteskycloud, a BCMF member and Community Liaison, provided an outlet for announcements, updates and information to people across the province. Interestingly, a lengthy interview on Métis matters radio with Project Lead, Joe Desjarlais, received over 800 views locally in the Lower mainland region, provincially, and across Canada. In some instances, liaisons such as Cindy in the Clearwater community also shared information in the local newspaper. More content was produced in early March, including pictures and several short videos of stories from knowledge keepers. Opinion pieces, such as an article entitled, “Métis Belong in British Columbia” written by Joe Desjarlais, are designed to further educate members about the broad reaching impact of this research that speaks to the mainstream British Columbia community’s involvement in the process and an increased capacity for members to participate in these conversations about land, its use, and relevancy for Métis.
The Land and Life team shared information on social media about the Jasper house Indians:
83 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
“The Jasper house Indians range within a radius of 150 miles from that point north to the Smoky and South to the Brazeau, coming east to trade at Lake St. Anne or going to the west side of the mountains at Tete Jaune Cache (Valemount). They number about 40 tents or perhaps 400 souls. They are not Indians properly speaking being descended from Iroquois brought from eastern Canada many years ago by the Hudson’s Bay Company to act as hunters and voyageurs. These Iroquois intermarried with the white and half breed employees of the same service, and their offspring have since intermarried to some extent with the Crees and Stonies. But the present band are still called Iroquois. They do not consider themselves Indians however, the present generation all having more or less white blood. their territory is covered by Indian treaty, and they therefore claim to be entitled to receive scrip as half breeds. Although leading an Indian life they have never come into the Indian treaty and say they will not, as they prefer to stand upon their rights as half breeds.” (Source, An Unusually Mild Winter, The Miner. Nelson BC, January 17, 1891) Notice the complexity of “being Métis” in BC in 1891, as in this Jasper house kinship cluster, with mobility into BC, who lived an “Indian life” called themselves Iroquois, shared kinship with halfbreed, Cree and Stonies, yet identified as “halfbreed” seeking halfbreed scrip! A Facebook reply from Karen included, “Jasper house was where my ancestors settled until they got kicked out. Two Iroquois brothers and a cousin ‘Wanyandi’.”
Stage IV: Closing the Loop At every phase in the project, a mandated “feedback loop” provided opportunities for the Land and Life Team to gain from the experience and expertise of each Community Liaison and to learn of any concerns from our BCMF membership. Many points of contact were established to ensure that knowledge partnerships, and not simple information gathering, remained the focus of our study. As point persons for their communities, liaisons met with the Land and Life team before their community meeting and in post-meeting debriefings, attended specific feedback seminars in September, December and January, and had the responsibility to vet the Final Report and request revisions, additions or edits (see Appendix 12). Open and de-centred community meetings provided BCMF members with ample opportunity to directly interact with the project, and break-out sessions, shared meals and cultural events set the context for many informal conversations. In addition, Project Lead Joe Desjarlais made himself available to anyone who wanted to learn more about the project, contribute to our understanding, or to offer suggestions
84 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
or criticisms. A final place of engagement occurred on the BCMF’s social media sites where BCMF members, people from the larger indigenous community, and the general public could interact and engage with some of the findings from the academic research and from our community meetings.
The Land and life team has had hundreds of interactions, (face to face meetings, phone meetings, large information sharing events, one-on-one informal meeting times) between operational team, between team and liaisons, and between liaisons and community members. In one seven-week snapshot between Dec 1, 2019 and January 24 2020, there were 107 engagements and meetings by electronic format alone. Of these interactions, there were over 23 interactions/meetings between the Land and Life project lead and the local community liaisons and 104 engagements/meetings between Land and Life Project Lead and the operational team! And, these interactions do not include multiple face to face and team meetings!
Most of the interactions regarding the Land and Life Project, whether with BCMF leadership, the Community Liaisons, or BCMF membership, remained constructive and positive. We did experience some challenges at the local level with unresolved longstanding grievances, a lack of trust for representative organizations and people, some apathetic members who are unwilling to engage, and contests to control Métis identity. Whether as individuals or as locals, Métis all seem to be in different places of repatriation: some locals have a collective identity, other regions are more decentralized; while many regions have strong leadership, usually associated with a non-profit cultural organization, others are fragmented and disengaged. There is little doubt that past projects where Métis communities have been the object of ‘study’ have been characterized by inadequate accountability to the community and the people themselves feel ignored, bypassed or disregarded and their information appropriated or stolen. Adding to this sense of dispossession is an increasing awareness of Canada’s colonial past that has long denied Métis communities a voice and a role in economic development plans and processes. Especially difficult is the familiar refrain that Métis do not ‘belong’ in British Columbia, but are really only stragglers from the prairies; this marginalization by other indigenous organizations and people comes out in conversations about identity, usually on social media sites or public forums, where anonymous comments can label Métis in BC “lazy refugees” and “Fétis” (ie: Fake Métis). Despite these challenges, the Land and Life project hoped to create space for relationship building and knowledge partnerships that benefited all Métis in BC and also each specific unique and independent community. We refused to reduce the study to that of a simple information conduit that pleased industry leaders or met the demands of government. The Indigenous Research Methodology that we adopted to guide our actions reminded us often that community engagement was our primary aim. Therefore, as we learned together as a collection of self-determining
85 Community Liaison Elizabeth Pearce (R).
Meeting together in Kamloops.
86 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Métis communities, we adjusted our expectations, adopted different strategies, or shifted our priorities in order to facilitate strong, trusting relationships. While each local community was unique and at a different place in their evolution as peoples and organizations, the feedback we received enhanced our ability to carry out the goals of our study. Together, here is some of what we learned: » Clear, careful and concise information-sharing is paramount and knowledge should be communicated in a variety of ways and through as many outlets as possible. Accuracy and transparency go a long way to building trust and reinforcing legitimacy. » Ensuring multi-access points into the each community removes barriers, including that between “official” history and “vernacular” history, that have often limited participation and commitment. » Being Métis in BC is complicated and difficult and so representative organizations, leaders, and community members need to take every opportunity, including studies like Land and Life, to build bridges, one relationship at a time. » The Land and Life study, and others like them, require specific guidelines that show how it will benefit the community and specific regulations on its intent and scope. » Meeting people in their own communities and their familiar spaces is the best way to establish connections, create a collective awareness, and encourage partnerships » Full participation can only happen when we recognize that things like poverty, literacy, language, etc. contribute to isolation, stigmatization and intolerance. » Métis Peoples desire to establish good relations with First Nations through proper protocol, shared-history and mutual recognition so that our right to access land and resources is uncontested. » Creative thinkers who have a passion for Métis youth need to establish pathways to repatriation for those in the next generation who have become disenfranchised from their communities.
The community engagement event in Surrey on December 7 provided opportunity for its community liaison to broadcast via Facebook Live to hundreds of people in the lower mainland and across the province. Derek reported that a total of 933 people viewed the archived session and 359 tuned in to watch the event. It confirmed to us that the interest we see in our community meetings is only a small representation of the level of interest in the Land and Life Project. Our ongoing challenge is to utilize technology to engage, all the while understanding that technology has limitations. A long-time Surrey resident and Métis elder commented on Facebook, “It was a great meeting, thanks so much to all for inviting us out. You have definitely given me something to chew on in the days ahead.”
87 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
“ After touching bases with the South Island Métis Association they are very excited with the future of this program and look forward to participating. Many of the Associations members are disappointed that they did not participate in the last meeting but are excited to the future meetings. It also appears that as the word is getting out other Métis are beginning to ask questions. The future looks good on Vancouver Island.” – Earl Belcourt, Community Liaison, Vancouver Island “ I would like to say that I’m pretty amazed at the turn out that day, also the support and enthusiasm of my community. ” – Cindy Wilgosh, Community Liaison, Clearwater
The feedback loop for the Land and Life Study consisted of hundreds of interactions between the Team itself, between the Team and the Liaisons, and between Liaisons and their communities. Face-to-face encounters, intimate feedback seminars, large informational meetings, personal phone calls, and internet dialogue all contributed to our understanding of each other and of the various outcomes that we all desired from the project itself. The Project Lead consistently reminded participants that this community-led and locally-based study existed to serve each community and to meet their needs and that they empowered their community when they used their voice. It was our hope that in establishing knowledge sharing protocol designed to open up creative avenues for relationship building that disillusioned or discouraged leaders would be reinvigorated, and apathetic or indifferent community members would re-engage. To make this happen, permanent mechanisms need to be established so that information flows between the BCMF and its member communities in ways that build the capacity of the locales themselves.
Questions for Future Community Engagement: » What can we do to assist each liaison to follow-up with members after meetings given the limitations? » What can we do to encourage people to connect and build relationship with community liaisons? » What work can we do to further explain to members how the information will be used arising from feedback? » As the Land and Life project is relational, how can we equip liaisons with funding and capacity to build informal relationships and break down barriers? » How can we provide structure and support so that knowledge is captured from these grassroots conversations and sharing times? » How can we support members with resources so youth and others can learn their Métis culture as asked in feedback?
88 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
“ Folks stepped away from the responsibility of caring for the Métis organizations from past histories they once were members of whom the board showed no care but themselves. Earning their trust in us with the BC Métis Federation because we are not like the other organizations. So to ask the Métis community to come down to our meetings gives them hope. This is what they have asked for many years & we are now doing what they’ve always looked forward to do. ” – Derrick Whiteskycloud, Community Liaison, Surrey
Conclusion Capacity in self-determining communities in BC will lead to the repatriation of our people, of our place on the land and our interaction with resources, and of our purpose within the social, political and economic order. The Land and Life Study, therefore, signals not only a new way of engaging with Métis communities, it also suggests a new era of cooperation and coexistence between self-determining Métis communities and settler society governments, businesses and individuals. Métis people in BC are proud of their history and culture and want to share their knowledge of the past and present land and resource use along the TMX corridor. We witnessed Métis peoples recognizing and celebrating their place and their purpose when our communities came together in meetings focussed on the mapping exercise and a cultural event. And, as we learned from each other, we recognized how much knowledge is hidden away and buried in local family, kinship and community settings. The dominant national or provincial narratives have yet to comprehend the complexity, nuance and fluidity of these Métis identities that have a long lived-experience along the TMX corridor. Community engagement provided opportunities for our member communities to draw out the distinctions between their understanding of “self-determination” and that of settler society with its stringent definition of “nationhood,” its restrictive linear progressions, and its inflexible notion of community. To potentialize this capacity to represent our own histories and memories we must continue to equip our communities and knowledge keepers with the resources necessary to continue on with this important research.
“ There is not one Métis nation.. there are various mixed-blood Métis communities... I’m hoping there is research to show this. ” – Keith Henry, BCMF CEO and President
89 Section III: Community Engagement (Repatriation through building capacity)
90 Section IV: Knowledge Partnerships (Investment/ Reconciliation)
91 Section IV: Knowledge Partnerships (Investment/ Reconciliation)
Knowledge partnerships create a hopeful future for self-determining Métis communities in BC. The BCMF Terrestrial Study adopts an indigenous research methodology that points a way forward by grounding all knowledge, including that of the impact of the construction, operation and maintenance of the TMX pipeline, in the authenticity and worth of relationships that are premised upon trust, commitment, and responsibility. We have attempted to illustrate that this kind of mutuality, whether between Métis communities, between member communities and the BCMF, or between the BCMF and the Crown, must be established upon a very different foundation than that of dependency, discrimination or dispossession. It took 150 years to destroy self-determining “halfbreed” communities in BC; it will take 50 years of careful investment and planning to reconstitute them and restore Métis peoples to their rightful place in Canadian society. First, local protocols that reflect Métis ways of being and respect the difference and diversity of Métis communities must be established and practiced if there is any hope at all for repatriation. Second, governments and representative organizations need to look for ways to create mutually beneficial connections that result in self-sufficiency. Third, capacity within each community must be developed so that the unique customs, culture and traditions can emerge and become the basic mechanisms for self-government. And, finally, honouring Métis nations, communities and persons will require an on-going financial commitment that supports reconciliation, which is an implicit recognition of the responsibility of settler society for past discrimination, marginalization and subjugation. The TMX accommodations present an opportunity to reset the relationship between Métis communities in BC and the Crown based upon mutual recognition and the appropriate protocol that flows from that acknowledgement. In the long history of
92 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
the suppression of Métis self-determination in BC, the most recent challenge to the way in which Métis think about their citizenship, their collective identity, and their sense of place, has been a number of key court rulings. While there is no consensus on how these national rulings have shaped, and will continue to set the framework for, Métis existence in British Columbia, in the Powley,2 Manitoba Métis Federation,3 and Daniels4 cases, in particular, the Supreme Court of Canada has called for the
2 In Powley v. Canada (2003) the SCC ruled that individuals claiming rights under s. 35 must verify, as summarized by Métis Lawyer, Jean Teillet, that “they belong to an identifiable Métis community with a sufficient degree of continuity and stability to support a site specific aboriginal right.” The “Powley Test” created the legal definition of Métis as a person who self-identified as being Métis, had an ancestral connection to a historic Métis community, and has some form of membership or acceptance into that community. In its application, however, it appears as though Powley has become less about establishing Métis collective rights and more about refining processes for establishing which individuals can exercise their s. 35 rights under the Canadian constitution. And, the Test has been as difficult to satisfy as it is to apply and has induced many individual Métis to bring rights cases before the court in places like New Brunswick, Ontario and Alberta, BC, all with varying degrees of success. Teillet praises Canada for being the only country in the world to recognize a “mix-race” culture as a “rights bearing aboriginal peoples” but criticizes “The post-Powley search for stable, small, continuous Métis communities” because it “resulted in a proliferation of litigation as governments and court try to put geographical boundaries on these fictional, individual Métis communities.” 3 The MMF (Manitoba Métis Federation) Case (Manitoba Métis Lands Case) decided by the Supreme Court of Canada on March 8, 2013 extended the court’s reach into the Métis collective right to self-determination. It ruled that Métis interests in the so-called Child’s Land Grants, which were (fraudulently) administered by the Métis Lands Commission, were limited to “personal history, not their shared Métis identity” and because of that the Federal government has no “fiduciary” responsibility to Métis collective self-determination. In the blunt words of the court: “It was up to the Métis to prove that they held an Aboriginal interest in land prior to the Manitoba Act, and they have not done so … Canada acknowledges that individual Métis people held individual parcels of land, but it denies that they held the collective Aboriginal interest necessary to give rise to a fiduciary duty.” By not arguing Aboriginal right to self-determination and self-government as the basis for their land claim, the MMF gave the court no alternative but to establish Métis legal identity as an individual’s ability to access the rights of a disadvantaged ethnic group. 4 The Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Development) decision, rendered on April 4, 2016, significantly altered the legal landscape of Métis collective rights in Canada. In short, it extended the legal definition of Métis beyond the Powley Test and defined Métis as British North America Act s.91 (1867) Indians, or as collectives who have a direct Constitutional relationship with the Crown. Daniels brings Métis communities into conversation with broader legal discussions on the nation-to-nation relationship as defined in the historical treaty process. While the full importance of the decision has yet to be fully appreciated, response from the various Métis communities in Canada has been mixed. For example, Jean Teillet responded by stating that the Federal Court’s use of “Indianness” based on self-identification and group recognition to define Métis is “brutal and wrong in every way.” She goes on to say that the Federal Court’s judgment, which was upheld and extended by the SCC to include non-status and Métis who did not meet the Powley test, “virtually erased the Métis nation.” Others, however, criticized the court for not going far enough in recognizing Métis self-determination. Métis lawyer Bruce McIvor, for example, argued that “the decision is out of step with the aspirations of most Indigenous Peoples in Canada and around the world. Rather than seeking confirmation of the Crown’s jurisdiction over them, Indigenous Peoples are striving to achieve recognition of their own jurisdiction. In the end, I’m left wondering what the Métis who fought and died resisting Canada’s exercise of jurisdiction over them would make of the Daniels decision.” Still others, such as Métis academic and Eastern Métis advocate Sebastian Malette, lauded the decision by summarizing the implications of the decision in this
93 Section IV: Knowledge Partnerships (Investment/Reconciliation)
Crown to satisfy their obligation to Métis peoples as rights bearing self-identified indigenous Canadians. The application of these rulings for Métis in BC, however, has been anything but clear. As legal academic scholar, Kerry Sloan recently stated: “Métis ideas of territory are complex, varied and often not well understood. Métis perspectives on intersections of territory and community are likewise not appreciated by Canadian courts. This is evident in the difficulties of Métis rights claimants in British Columbia, where misconceptions about Métis history and traditional use areas have resulted in courts questioning the existence of historic Métis communities in the province.” The BCMF Terrestrial Study proves that the Crown can and must move way from any denial of historic Métis communities in British Columbia and it offers a model for how respectful and supportive relations can be developed with self-determining Métis peoples. With mutual recognition comes the opportunity to problematize Métis identity as only that of a “rights bearing citizens” and the possibility of nurturing self-sufficient Métis communities in BC. As “Canada’s forgotten peoples” forced to live within the restrictive political, legal and societal context created after the passage of the so-called Indian Act of 1876, Métis people should no longer be coerced to give up their collective identity in order to participate in Canadian society. As Prime Minister Macdonald reminded the House of Commons in 1885, “Now, the half-breeds must be considered either as white men or as Indians.” Because there was no legal category that would protect the unique indigenous territories and rights of “half-breed” peoples, Métis communities were encouraged to assimilate into either “white” or “Indian” society. As Section I of this report showed, self-determining Métis communities in BC were punished by the force of law for claiming a communal existence. Even though Métis kinship clusters exercised their self-determined agency in the late 19th and in the 20th century in the many forms of resistance and acts of survivance, including feigned assimilation or “fitting in,” sheltering cultural norms and customary laws in land-use and harvesting practices, and “living free” on margins of Canadian society, a century and a half of systemic subjugation and ignorance now requires redress. Métis communities bring their cultural resources of mobility, adaptability, and integration, all strategies that by necessity make Métis self-determined communities difficult to define and, therefore, to control, to the negotiation table in the hopes that the TMX pipeline accommodations will open the way for an economic partnership with the Crown. Building capacity through knowledge capital is the only way for Métis self-determined communities to better understand how their laws are rooted in community belonging and inter-societal traditions, kinship networks and extended relationships with the environment. In this the Métis of BC can join
way: “In other words … a Métis person is free to choose the communal organization that best represents his or her interest from a regional perspective (based upon mutual acceptance), and should not be pressured at the expense of losing the recognition of their Indigenous identity to join the membership of any external political organization that could trump the ability of local communities to control and exercise their self-determination rights.”
94 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
other indigenous nations and work to establish Métis self-governance as they articulate their own legal practices and principles. Through knowledge partnerships Métis communities in BC can get to the enhancing work of reclaiming their jurisdictions and building economic, social and cultural competence that will serve future generations. This study and the potential partnership that it represents, demonstrates that there can be a shift in the political, legal and historical imagination of Métis peoples and settler society governments. The “either all” or “nothing but” colonialism that is so prevalent in Canada’s past and present, a regime supported by national Métis organizations that draw maps that exclude the possibility of even the existence of self-determined Métis in BC, does not have to be part of the future. Self-governing Métis nations in BC can negotiate their way into Confederation if the Crown invests in reconstituting the unique customs, cultures and traditions that are embedded in kinship clusters. It appears the time has come for the Government of Canada to take a fundamentally different approach and partner with self-determining Métis communities. Together we can realize the hope for a civil society based on the principles of respect for historical difference and of trust in a transparent process of mutual recognition if we commit to move from coercion to negotiated consent founded in the rule of law. However, given the long history of racism, discrimination and marginalization, the government’s first obligation is to protect vulnerable Métis communities from government’s own self-interest and the polemics of identity politics. As the BCMF Terrestrial Study has shown, when local Métis communities have a secure environment to reconstitute their laws, a safe space to practice their customs, and a welcoming place to celebrate their culture, they will to repatriate their personal and corporate histories. In establishing a knowledge partnership that works in the best interests of all Métis in the province, Canada can live up to its commitments when it signed onto the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to provide the appropriate resources for reconciliation. Mutually beneficial partnerships that celebrate the many life-ways of Métis peoples in BC need to be guided by local protocols that are developed to show respect for difference and diversity. We can no longer live under the fear, shame and suspicion that hovers over the Métis community in BC; knowledge partnerships coming out of on-going, consistent and respectful dialogue can lead to the repatriation of self-determining kinship networks all across BC. We hope that the BCMFTS, from the inception of the research process to its final conclusion, is a model for reconciliation and peaceful co-existence. Community members, elders, knowledge keepers, elected and appointed leaders had a hand in knowledge-transfer at every step in this project, and Community Liaisons worked with the BC Métis Federation Land and Life Team to build capacity in their own regions. The Final Report is evidence that if meaningful knowledge partnerships are established that locally owned and led studies can (and must) benefit Métis people and communities. The BCMFTS is a representation of a very different kind of relationship, one that deserves ongoing government encouragement, support and funding. In the midst of political and even pandemic challenges, knowledge partnerships are vital for present and future Métis-settler society relations in British Columbia. In building
95 Section IV: Knowledge Partnerships (Investment/Reconciliation)
up local communities, the BC Métis Federation aspires to represent communities of self-determining Métis communities that have an informed voice in BC economic projects and the governments development plans. Therefore, the study of Métis agency along the TMX corridor is more than just a land-use study; it is an on-going project that empowers local members and communities to celebrate all that it means to be Métis, to have the capacity to give informed consent to economic development that is in their own interests, and to live within their traditions as self-determining communities.
96 Conclusion: Métis Land and Life
97 Conclusion: Métis Land and Life
With the submission of the BCMFTS Final Report, the BCMF and its member communities call on the Crown to take ownership of its past and to partner with the BCMF in order to work towards a reconciled future. This reference study sets out a roadmap that can be used by the BCMF to gather, produce and disseminate information and traditional knowledge so that as one of the partners in Canada’s economic future, our member communities can adequately respond to challenges, needs, demands of the laws, regulations, and rights associated with developments like the TMX. Repatriating Métis-specific knowledge back to the land, reconnecting the specific geographic locations with Métis knowledge and traditions, and enabling self-determining Métis peoples to generate and share their own knowledge to assist in resource management and other activities, can only happen when we together take responsibility for the loss of community capacity and take action to reclaim our rightful place as a partner in Confederation.
“ First of all it was great working with you, A lot of work and research had to be done to put this all together. Want to say thank you for all the phone calls and patience you have shown through this project. I want to say I enjoyed reading the research paper work and interviews well done. ” – Elizabeth Pearce, Community Liaison, Terrace
The conclusions coming from this Final Report are clear: » self-determining Métis or ‘halfbreed’ communities existed in BC prior to any declaration of sovereignty by the Crown. These self-governing communities acted in their own interest by supporting existing economic activity and by creating new business enterprises, a pattern that continued into the colonial and early Provincial period. Their occupancy and use had a significant impact on the land and resources currently within the TMX corridor. » beginning in the 1880s, these historically unique mixed-ancestry peoples were subject to systemic government discrimination, incessant cultural racialization, and wide-spread social prejudice, which resulted in their marginalization, dispossession and deprivation. The impact of settler-society’s actions limited, but
98 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
did not eliminate, Métis influence on the land and resources currently within the TMX corridor. » for 100 years, the Crown has ignored and/or denied the existence of historically constituted Métis communities even though they have survived and have been protected through the maintenance and ongoing functioning of kinship clusters, a reality that we are only now beginning to understand. The mutual recognition of these kinship clusters will continue to reveal the ongoing interests that Métis self-determining peoples have in the resource developments within and beyond the TMX corridor. » given the longstanding negligence towards and oppression of self-determining Métis peoples, the Crown has a fiduciary obligation to support the ongoing work of the BCMF that includes the recognition, repatriation and reconstitution of its member communities. The informed consent of these historically unique peoples for developments like the TMX pipeline depends upon rebuilding their community capacity through continuous and open dialogue on co-existence, providing core funding to build knowledge partnerships, and initiating economic enterprises for future self-sufficiency.
The report clearly shows that BC Métis Federation members have an on-going interest in using the lands and resources along the TMX corridor. And, as a baseline or point of reference upon which to build a relationship with the Federal government, it reports on the short and long-term impacts of the pipeline construction and on-going operation on our people and represents a functioning knowledge partnership, a “living document“ where many people took ownership over the gathering, recording and sharing of their community’s memory and history. As a pathways going forward, The BCMFTS provides the framework for diverse and dynamic Métis peoples to make themselves known in British Columbia and beyond. The collective responsibility to understand the Métis lived-experience in BC started with our commitment to an Indigenous Research Methodology and continued with relational research structures that encouraged positive friendships with individuals and lasting bonds with local communities. A love for Métis culture, a passion for Métis history, and a concern for Métis collective vitality gave liaisons, elders and members the impetus to work tirelessly at the grassroots level.
“ Outcomes will happen at the speed of relationship building. ” – Bruce Shelvey, Academic Lead “ I see from the report that we are a long way to solving the establishment of the Métis in BC and a lot more work will need to be done to accomplish this. We have not only scratched the ground in the work that needs to be done. ” – Marie March, Community Liaison, Kamloops
Throughout the project duration there was an ongoing sense of responsibility from the BCMF Land and Life team to accurately convey the voices of community members. It was very rewarding to see our overall vision for the project match
99 Conclusion: Métis Land and Life
up with the practical concerns and needs of each community. In particular, the feedback loops at each stage of the knowledge-transfer process showed us that this project, which was guided by the challenging principles of an indigenous research methodology, could indeed become a reality if relationships were the priority. We appreciated the support for the project, especially early on in the process as we met with valued liaisons and knowledge keepers; their role in developing rapport with community members gave the project legitimacy, not to mention its reach and scope. And, the validation of the Final Report by the community liaisons, Earl Belcourt, Marie March, Cindy Wilgosh, and Elizabeth Pearce, confirmed our appreciation for the reciprocal nature of our work. In particular, in the final editing process comments by Cindy Wilgosh and Marie March provided a valuable corrective that caused us to return to the voices of the community in a more direct way throughout the report, a demonstration of our role as facilitators of the knowledge transfer that occurred over the past ten months in so many conversations, cultural events, mapping exercises, elder interviews, and writing of reports.
“ We belong here, we need to be recognized ” – Earl Belcourt, Community Liaison, Vancouver Island
Centering the BCMFTS around knowledge transfer that was community-led, community-planned, and community-owned caused us to shift the traditional research agenda of gathering information that satisfied a particular ‘outcome’ to that of a frame that celebrated relationship building, sharing food, and common love for music and culture! Witnessing the transformative impact that our cooperative research plan had on our own practices as a Land and Life Team and the positive outcomes for each community exceeded any expectation laid out in our initial ‘work plan’. But, the project also revealed the deficits that self-determining Métis communities across BC deal with on an continual basis including a lack of capacity, with lack of office space and lack of funding to meet the needs of people who live far away from one another, as well as liaisons who serve for many hours “on their own dime”. With these challenges, how do communities grapple with the need for knowledge capital that will enable them to properly respond to economic development and resource management issues as various projects come along? The BCMF and its member communities recognize that greater awareness and healing from past intergenerational trauma can be a reality for us if we leverage the accommodations from projects like the TMX pipeline to strengthen our resolve, demand recognition, and engage in relations of respect.
“ Need capacity dollars in order to bring people together, I need to let people know that we are willing to work with them…we need their knowledge … the next study will be finding new people to talk to, getting different ideas … ” – Earl Belcourt, Community Liaison, Vancouver Island
100 Project team members Angel Fisher and Joe Desjarlais in Terrace along with BC Métis Federation Vice President Rene Therrien, BCMF board members JJ Lavallee and Greg Mazure, MLA Ellis Ross along with others present.
Métis music and culture with the Duncan community!
101 Conclusion: Métis Land and Life
The work of recognition our history and repatriation of our memory is vital to the next generation of self-determining Métis. As Earl Belcourt, a longtime Métis activist stated, “Since 1992 until 1998 we did all the work on our own to bring people together and we can do it again … We have all kinds of youth and they don’t know where to go, who to talk to”… We need to create opportunities to meet more people separately … there’s dozens more we can interview but we don’t have the time and resources and people to do more interviews.” But our collective task is urgent. Marie March, Community Liaison from Kamloops, relayed this sad story from a 12 year old girl: “I was in my classroom and my teacher asked for those who were Métis to raise their hands. When I did this I was informed by my teacher to put my hand down as I did not look Métis and should not be reporting false hoods”. Marie went on to say “She was very upset when telling me this. I told her that we need to educate more of these educators that we may not look Métis and best ask her in return as to what does she feel a Métis look like … I also informed her that to be proud of her heritage.” Knowledge partnerships that build community confidence and equip our people to respond with courage are surely a solution to the ongoing systemic exclusion that our children have to continually endure.
“ I agree we need a lot more research done in all areas of BC to have all Métis history brought forth in the school as well. ” – Elizabeth Pearce Community Liaison, Terrace “ Given what you had for a time line & number of interviews - good job. ” – Karen Andrews, interview participant
But even when our Métis local communities face insurmountable challenges as they seek proper recognition, respect and affirmation from other Métis organizations, Canadians, governments and institutions, the movement towards repatriation is hopeful. A few closing quotes from the Land and Life Study team members reflect this sentiment well. Next generation leaders and project assistants Angel Fisher and Drake Henry embody the incredible transformation that can take place as the lived-experience of Métis is learned and understood. Angel reflects back on the whole of the project: “It has been a wonderful journey travelling to the different communities and connecting with Métis people from around British Columbia. The work that has been completed from the Land & Life team is of great value and importance.” Drake summarized his experience in this way: “The Land and Life project has truly opened my eyes to my Métis culture. From listening to our elders and attending community gatherings across BC; this study has genuinely culturally educated me in ways I would have never imagined. It was a pleasure working on the Land and Life project, and I hope those who read the report will gain new insight into Métis Land use in BC.” The final word goes to Project Lead, Joe Desjarlais: “The presentation of the Final Report to Natural Resources Canada represents the collective effort of so many people and I was honored to facilitate the project! I wish to convey my appreciation to our liaisons, elders, knowledge keepers, and community leaders who bring closure to the Métis Land and Life Study through this final phase and feedback loop. I am grateful for the operational
102 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
team, BC Métis Federation board, staff, community liaisons, elders, and community members over the course of this project that worked with me tirelessly to build community relationships that are crucial to the success of this project. The need for properly instituted local knowledge partnerships and the protocol to maintain right relationships is made all the more urgent with the loss of elder Bud Jenkins, who passed away not long after I interviewed him for this project. When we lose elders we lose valuable knowledge. May you rest in peace, Bud.”
“ Wonderful writeup. ” – Paul Gillis, interview participant “ I have read through all the attachments you sent … Great job! Well done to all the team. ” – Cindy Wilgosh, Community Liaison, Clearwater
The BCMF Terrestrial Study Final Report is an assertion of our on-going self-determination as Métis peoples in BC. For too long our history and memory has been denied; this project provided the opportunity for our member communities to come together to recall our storied pasts and to begin to shape informed opinions about economic development projects and the governments development plans that will impact our future. If we are going to become valued partners in the decision-making processes that include the necessity of our informed consent we must continue to build our capacity so that we can responsibly respond to the demands of industry. We have the right to act within our own interests. And, because there are many ways of being Métis, any reconciliation with the Crown must take into account the nuance and complexity of our lived-experience in this province. We can participate best when our historic kinship patterns are recognized and affirmed and our right to self-determination is understood within our own cultural context. Future environmental impact assessments that come out of this study will provide an additional platform for the self-determining Métis communities in BC to challenge the colonial understandings of our history and to advance our land and harvesting rights.
“ I have not much more to report to enhance the amount of work that you put into this huge report. I believe that you covered all the items that came from the submission of the surveys from our meetings. I truly enjoyed the information from the interviews, and even from the number of people talked to at the meetings were actually were spoken to me meeting our Métis community. The sentiments were recounted as the same messages as those who you interviewed .” – Marie March, Community Liaison, Kamloops “ You guys did a great job… I’ll help you out the next time ” – Earl Belcourt, Community Liaison, Vancouver Island
We call on the Federal Government to make an on-going investment in knowledge partnerships, as represented by this report, so that the BCMF can continue the essential work of enabling our unique Métis communities to build the capacity
103 Project Lead Joe Desjarlais discussing the project in the community.
104 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
to defend their distinctiveness and renew their historical connection to the Crown, First Nations, and other self-determined Métis communities. Knowledge partnerships carried out in a transparent and open forum based upon mutual recognition through careful research and data collection is a wise investment into our collective futures. At a time when international pressure is exerted upon the Government of Canada through the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and national opinions are shifting as a result of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, it is imperative that good faith measures be taken by the Crown to enhance peaceful coexistence. Building this capacity into existing and future Métis self-determined communities in BC will build public trust in a process that is just, fair and equitable and based on the principles of respect for historical difference.
105 106 Bibliography
107 Bibliography
Adese, Jennifer. “Spirit Gifting: Ecological Knowing in Métis life narratives” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education and Society. Vol. 3: No. 3 (2014): 84-66. Ahearne, Suzanne. 2019. UVic News. June 27, accessed September 7, 2019, https:// www.uvic.ca/news/topics/2019+borrows-molson-prize+news. Allard, E. 1929. “Notes on the Kaska and Upper Liard Indians,” in Primitive Man 2, accessed May 19, 2020, https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.student.twu.ca/login. aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.63290848&site=eds-live&scope=site. Allard, Jason O. and B.A. McKelvie. 1929. “Before B.C. was born. First of a series of articles narrating the romantic experiences of a pioneer who has seen a great provineemerge from the wilderness.” MacLeans Magazine. Allen, Miss A. J. 1848. “Ten Years in Oregon.” Andersen, Chris, ed. Aboriginal Policy Studies, 6, No 2 2017, https://journals. library.ualberta.ca/aps/index.php/aps/issue/view/1940. Andersen, Chris. ‘Métis’: Race, Recognition, and the Struggle for Indigenous Peoplehood. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2014. Archives of the Archdiocese of Vancouver. Archdiocese of Vancouver, http://rcav. org/. Bancroft, Hubert Howe. 1887. The University of British Columbia - The works of Hubert Howe Bancroft. Volume XXXII. History of British Columbia, accessed April 13, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0222112. Bancroft, Hubert. 1887. The University of British Columbia - The works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcbooks/items/1.0222112#p403z-4r0f:%22half-breed%22. Barber, Katy and Melinda Marie Jetté. n.d. Rethinking Oregon Settlemen. Barman Jean. “What a Difference a Border Makes: Aboriginal Racial Intermixture in the Pacific Northwest,” Journal of the West 38, 3 (July 1999): 14-20.
108 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Barman, Jean and Mike Evans. “Reflections on Being, and Becoming, Métis in British Columbia,” 161 BC Studies (2009): 59-84. http://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/ bcstudies/article/viewFile/559/603. Barman, Jean and Mike Evans. “Reflections on Being, and Becoming, Métis in British Columbia,” BC Studies: The British Columbian Quarterly 161 (Spring 2009): 59-91. Barman, Jean, and Bruce Watson. “Fort Colville’s Fur Trade Families and the Dynamics of Aboriginal Racial Intermixture in the Pacific Northwest,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 90, 3 (Summer 1999): 140-53. Barman, Jean. The West Beyond the West: A History of British Columbia. Revised edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996, orig., 1991. Barman, Jean. “Aboriginal Women on the Streets of Victoria: Engendering transgressive sexuality during the gold rush,” 205-27 in Myra Rutherdale and Katie Pickles, ed., Contact Zones: Aboriginal and Settler Women in Canada’s Colonial Past. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2005. Barman, Jean, “Invisible Women: Aboriginal Mothers and Mixed-Race Daughters in Rural British Columbia,” 159-79 in R.W. Sandwell, ed., Beyond the City Limits: Rural History in British Columbia. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1999. Barman, Jean. “Lost Okanagan: In Search of the First Settler Families” 60 Okanagan History (1996): 8. Barman, Jean. 1986. “Neighbourhood and Community in Interwar Vancouver: Residential Differentiation and Civic Voting Behaviour.” In Vancouver past: essays in social history : Vancouver centennial issue of BC studies, by R.A.J. McDonald, 97-114. Vancouver. Barman, Jean. 1996 original 1991. “The West Beyond the West: A History of British Columbia.” University of Toronto Press. Barman, Jean. 1996. “Aboriginal Education at the Crossroads: The Legacy of Residential Schools and the Way Ahead.” In Visions of the Heart: Canadian Aboriginal Issues, by David Alan Long and Olive Patricia Dickason. Toronto. Barman, Jean. 1996. “I walk my own track in life & no mere male can bump me off it’: Constance Lindsay Skinner and the Work of History.” UBC Press 129-163. Barman, Jean. 1996. “Lost Okanagan: In Search of the First Settler Families.” Okanagan History 8-20. Barman, Jean. 1996. “New Land, New Lives: Hawaiian Settlement in British Columbia.” Hawaiian Journal of History 1-32. Barman, Jean. 1997-1998. “Whatever Happened to the Kanakas.” The Beaver 12-19.
109 Bibliography
Barman, Jean. 1997/1998. “Taming Aboriginal Sexuality: Gender, Power, and Race in British Columbia, 1850-1900.” The British Columbian Quarterly 115-116. Barman, Jean. 1998. “Families vs. Schools: Children of Aboriginal Descent in British Columbia Classrooms of the Late Nineteenth Century.” Family Matters: Papers in Post-Confederation Canadian Family History 73-89. Barman, Jean. 1998. “Vancouver’s Forgotten Entrepreneurs: Women Who Ran Their Own Schools.” British Columbia Historical News 21-29. Barman, Jean. 1999. “Family Life at Fort Langley.” British Columbia Historical News 16-23. Barman, Jean. 1999. “Invisible Women: Aboriginal Mothers and Mixed-Race Daughters in Rural British Columbia.” UBC Press 159-79. Barman, Jean. 1999. “What a Difference a Border Makes: Aboriginal Racial Intermixture in the Pacific Northwest.” Journal of the West 14-20. Barman, Jean. 2019. Indigo - Iroquois In The West. March 4, accessed January 17, 2020, https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/iroquois-in-the- west/9780773556256-item.html. Barman, Jean. 2019. Iroquois in the West. Barman, Jean. 2019. Iroquois in the West. Montreal. Barman, Jean. At the Edge of Law’s Empire: Aboriginal Interraciality, Citizenship, and the Law in British Columbia (2006). Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, Vol. 24, No. 1 (2006), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1815342. Barman, Jean. Lost Nanaimo—taking back our past, SHALE 8, pp.16–26, June 2004, accessed March 15, 2020, https://www.nickdoe.ca/pdfs/Webp2103c.pdf. Barman, Jean. Stanley Park Secrets: The Forgotten Families of Whoi Whoi, Kanaka Ranch, and Brockton Point. Madiera Park: Harbour, 2005. Barman, Jean. Still a Legal Quagmire: Two Centuries of Being Métis in British Columbia. McLean Lecture in Legal History, University of Victoria, October 15, 2007. Barman, Jean. “Families vs. Schools: Children of Aboriginal Descent in British Columbia Classrooms of the Late Nineteenth Century,” 73-89 in Edgar-Andre Montigny and Lori Chambers, ed., Family Matters: Papers in Post-Confederation Canadian Family History. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press, 1998. Barman, Jean. “Family Life at Fort Langley,” British Columbia Historical News 32, 4 (Fall 1999): 16-23. Barman, Jean. “Island sanctuaries–Early mixed race settlement on Gabriola and nearby coastal islands,” Shale 2 (March 2001): 1-13. Barman, Jean. “Lost Nanaimo—taking back our past.” Shale 8, 2004.
110 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Barman, Jean. “Lost Okanagan: In Search of the First Settler Families” (1996) 60 Okanagan History 8. Barman, Jean. “Race, Greed, and Something More: The Erasure of Urban Indigenous Space in Early Twentieth-Century British Columbia,” in Tracey Banivauna-Mar and Penelope Edmonds, ed., Making Space: Settler-Colonial Perspectives on Land, Place and Identity. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), 155-73. Barrett-Lennard, Charles Edward. n.d. Travels in British Columbia. 1862: Hurst & Blackett. BC Legislative Library and Archives. Legislative Library of British Columbia, https://www.leg.bc.ca/content-leglibrary/Pages/Library-History.aspx. BC Métis Mapping Research Project. 2010. Accessed September 6, 2019, http:// document.bcmetiscitizen.ca/index.php. BC Provincial Archives and Library. Royal BC Museum, http://search-bcarchives. royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/. Beaulieu, Rejean. 2020. The Orca. February 1, accessed February 2, 2020, https:// theorca.ca/visiting-pod/modest-beginnings/. Beaulieu, RÉjean. 2020. The Orca. February 1, accessed April 15, 2020, https:// theorca.ca/visiting-pod/modest-beginnings/. Belcourt, Tony. “FOR THE RECORD … On Métis Identity and Citizenship Within the Métis Nation.” Aboriginal Policy Studies Vol 2: No 2 (2013): 128-141. Bella Coola Courier. 3 March 1917. University of British Columbia, accessed April 4, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xbellacoo/ items/1.0170082#p4z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. Binnema, Ted. 2014. “Protecting Indian Lands by Defiing Indiann: 1850-76.” Journal of Canadian Studies 5-39. Black, S. 1955. A Journal of a Voyage From Rocky Mountain Portage in Peace River to the Sources of Finlays Branch and North West Ward in Summer 1824. The Hudson’s Bay Record Society. Blanchet, Francis Norbert. 1878. Historical Sketches of the Catholic Church in Oregon, during the last forty years. Portland. Borrows, John (Kegedonce). Drawing Out Law: A Spirit’s Guide. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2010. Borrows, John. Canada’s Indigenous Constitution. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2010. Borrows, John. “Wampum At Niagara: The Royal Proclamation, Canadian Legal History, and Self-Government” in Michael Asch, editor. Aboriginal and Treaty
111 Bibliography
Rights in Canada: Essays on Law, Equity, and Respect for Difference. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press, 1997: 169-172. Bowsfield, Hartwell, Editor. Louis Riel: Rebel of the Western Frontier or Victim of Politics and Prejudice? Issues in Canadian History Series, J. L. Granatstein, General Editor. Toronto, ON: The Copp Clark Publishing Company, 1969. Bradley, Patrick. n.d. University of Victoria - Average mail ... Lots of routine, accessed May 2020, https://dspace.library.uvic.ca › handle › Bradley_Patrick_ MA_2015. Bridgeman, Lisa Shepherd & Kristi. 1806-1886. Métis Trade Routes of the Pacific Northwest. Mixed media Poster: glass beads, porcupine quills, sepia ink, watercolour, stroud. Brode, Howard S. 1940. DIARY OF DR. AUGUSTUS J. THIBODO OF THE NORTHWEST EXPLORING EXPEDITION, 1859. Brown Jennifer S. H., “The Métis: Genesis and Rebirth,” in Bruce Alden Cox, editor. Native People, Native Lands: Canadian Indians, Inuit and Métis. Carlton Library Series No. 142. Ottawa, ON: Carleton University Press, 1988: pp. 136-147. Bryce, George. n.d. The Remarkable History of the Hudson’s Bay Company Including That of the French Traders of North-Western Canada and of the North-Wes, accessed October 20, 2019, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcbooks/items/1.0224052. Bumsted, J. M. The Red River Rebellion. Winnipeg, MB: Watson & Dwyer Publishing, Ltd., 1996. Campbell, Albert Henry. 1858. Report upon the Pacific Wagon Roads. Washington : Government Printing Office. Campbell, R. Seattle. Two Journals of Robert Campbell. 1958. Campbell, Susan and Thomas Dapp. “Whose Side Are You On?” Left History (1991): 134-139. Carlson, Keith. 2010. “The Power of Place, the Problem of Time: Aboriginal Identity and Historical Consciousness in the Cauldron of Colonialism.” University of Toronto Press. Cascade Record. 8 June 1901, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/cascade/ items/1.0067535. CBC. 2018. Indigenous community divided over who tells their stories, accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1310970435940. CBC. 2019. ‘Proud to wear it’: PhD student earns Trudeau foundation grant to study Indigenous clothing. June 1, accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.cbc.ca/news/
112 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
canada/thunder-bay/indigenous-clothing-trudeau-foundation-scholar-1.5158050?c- mp=rss. Census. 1973. Archive - The Daily Colonist. September 2, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19730902#page/n66/mode/1up/search/ mixed+blood. Chartrand, Larry, (Research chair). Métis Treaties Research Project, http://www. metistreatiesproject.ca/. Chartrand, Paul L. A. H. “Confronting the “Mixed-Blood Majic’: Towards a definition of ‘Métis’ for the purposes of section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982. A Paper prepared for the Canadian/Indigenous Studies Association Conference, Saskatoon, SK, (June 2, 2001): p. 6. http://www.metismuseum.ca/resource.php/06517. Chartrand, Paul. “The Other Side of the Métis Story” Winnipeg Free Press (03/12/2013); Opinion Section: The View from the West, http://www. winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/the-other-side-of-the-Métis- story-197265771.html. Chartrand, Paul. “Manitoba Métis Lands Case: Now What?” Eagle Feather News p. 6. Also, Paul Chartrand. Manitoba’s Métis Settlement Scheme of 1870. Saskatoon, SK: University of Saskatchewan Native Law Centre, 1991. Cipolla, Craig N. “Native American Diaspora and Ethnogenesis.” Oxford Handbooks Online. 15 Mar. 2018. City of Vancouver Archives. City of Vancouver, Vancouver http://vancouver.ca/ your-government/city-of-vancouver-archives.aspx. Coast News. 18 April 1969. University of British Columbia, accessed 2020, https:// open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xcoastnews/items/1.0175407. Coleman, Arthur. 1911. The Canadian Rockies: new and old trails, accessed April 29, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0343630#p351z- 5r0f:%22half-breed%22. Comprehensive Claims. 1981. Canada, Indian Affairs and Northern Development, In All Fairness: A Native Policy – Ottawa. Cronon, William. 1992. “A Place for Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative.” The Journal of American History 1347-1376. Crosby, Thomas. n.d. Among the An-Ko-Me-Nums or Flathead Tribes. Toronto: William Briggs. Cruikshank, Julie. 1990. “Life Lived Like a Story: Life Stories of Three Yukon Native Elders.” (UBC Press). Cruikshank, Julie. 2005. “Do Glaciers Listen? Local Knowledge, Colonial Encounters, and Social Imagination.” UBC Press.
113 Bibliography
Daily Colonist. 12 November 1907, accessed April 27, 2020, https://archive.org/ stream/dailycolonist19071112uvic/19071112#page/n4/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. Daily Colonist. 12 November 1907, accessed December 26, 2019, https://archive.org/ stream/dailycolonist19071112uvic/19071112#page/n4/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. Daniels, Harry. “Testimony before the Special Joint Committee on the Constitution of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 1980: http://www.metismuseum.ca/browse/index. php/995. Davidson, Gordon Charles. n.d. The North West Company, accessed October 20, 2019, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0222787. Dawson, George Mercer. 1888. Report on an Exploration in the Yukon District, NWT and Adjacent Northern Portion of British Columbia. Montreal: Dawson Brothers. Devine, Heather. “The Indian-Métis Connection, James McMillan and His Descendants,” http://www.electricscotland.com/history/canada/vol2/glengarry8.pdf p. 99. Devine, Heather. n.d. The Indian-Métis Connection, James McMillan and his descendents, accessed September 19, 2019, https://www.electricscotland.com/ history/canada/vol2/glengarry8.pdf. Diangelo. Robin. White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk about Racism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2018, p. xvii). Digital Archives Database Project. http://dadp.ok.ubc.ca/ View thousands of Métis historical documents, genealogical information, Hudson’s Bay Company records, Church missionary records, and personal Métis accounts. Dolha, Lloyd. 2005. First Nations Drum - BC Métis Seek Strategic Connections with First Nations. December 29, accessed March 16, 2020, http://www.firstnationsdrum. com/2005/12/bc-metis-seek-strategic-connections-with-first-nations/. Duncan, Sinclair Thomson. 1911. Scotland to British Columbia, Alaska, and the United States. Dunn, John. 1844. History of the Oregon Territory and British North-American Fur Trade. London. Eagle, Lardeau. 1901. University of British Columbia. April 13, accessed April 3, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ardeau/ items/1.0082224#p0z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. Evans, Jean Barman and Mike. n.d. Reflections on Being, and Becoming, Métis in British Columbia. Evans, Mike and Jean Barman and Gabrielle Legault. “Métis Networks in British Columbia: Examples from the Central Interior,” in Nicole St-Onge, Carolyn
114 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Podruchny & Brenda Macdougall, eds, Contours of a People: Métis Family, Mobility, and History. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2012. Evans, Mike, et al., with the Prince George Métis Elders Society (PGMES), A Brief History of the Short Life of the Island Cache (Prince George, BC: PGMES, CCI Press, and Alberta Acadre Network, 2004) Evans. n.d. “Métis Networks in British Columbia: Examples from the Central Interior.” Federal Court of Canada. Daniels v. Canada, Reasons for Judgment: https://scc-csc. lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/15858/index.do Fine, Sean. “University of Victoria to launch first-of-its-kind Indigenous law program.” Globe and Mail, https://www.theglobeandmail.com//canada/article-uni- versity-of-victoria-to-launch-first-of-its-kind-indigenous-law/?click=sf_globe. Fischer’s David Hacket. Champlain’s Dream: The European Founding of North America. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 2008. Fisher, Robin. 1975. “An exercise in futility: the joint commission on Indian land in British Columbia.” 79-94. Fisher, Robin. 1992. Contact and Conflict: Indian-European Relations in British Columbia. Vancouver: UBC Press. Fitzhugh. Our Jasper Stories: Métis of Jasper. 14 January 2020. Accessed March 23, 2020, https://www.fitzhugh.ca/our-jasper-stories-metis-of-jasper/. Flanagan, Thomas. “The Case Against Métis Aboriginal Rights”. Canadian Public Policy 9 (3): 314–325. Flanagan, Thomas. “The History of Métis Aboriginal Rights: Politics, Principles and Policy”. Flanagan, Thomas. Métis Lands in Manitoba. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary Press, 1991. Flanagan, Thomas. Riel and the Rebellion: 1885 Reconsidered. Saskatoon, SK: Western Producer Prairie Books, 1983. (a 2nd edition was released by University of Toronto Press in 2000). Flanagan, Thomas. “Aboriginal Orthodoxy in Canada,” in Gary Johns, editor. Waking Up to Dreamtime: The Illusion of Aboriginal Self-Determination. Australia: Quadrant Online (2012): 1-14. http://www.quadrant.org.au/Johns%20Waking%20 up%20to%20Dreamtime.pdf. Fort George Herald. 13 September 1913, University of British Columbia, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/fgherald/ items/1.0344742.
115 Bibliography
Friesen, Joe. “Defining Who Is Indian: A Confusing Question of Identity and Belonging,” The Globe and Mail (January 11, 2013), http://www.theglobeandmail. com/news/national/defining-who-is-indian-a-confusing-question-of-identity-and- belonging/article7282445/. Gabrielle Legault. Changing in Place: A Generational Study of an Indigenous Family in the Okanagan MA thesis, University of British Columbia, 2008. Ghostkeeper, Elmer. Spirit Gifting: The Concept of a Spiritual Exchange. Raymond: Writing on Stone Press Inc., 2007. Gibson, James R. n.d. “Opposition on the Coast”: The Hudson’s Bay Company, American Coasters, the Russian-American Company, and Native Traders on the Northwest Coast. https://champlainsociety.utpjournals.press/doi/ book/10.3138/9780772764430. Gibson, James R. The Lifeline of the Oregon Country: The Fraser-Columbia Fur Brigade System, 1811–47. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1997. Gibson, James. 1985. Farming the Frontier: The Agricultural Opening of the Oregon Country. Vancouver. Giraud, Marcel. The Métis in the Canadian West. Edmonton, Alta: University of Alberta Press, 1986. Translated by George Woodcock from the original French version Marcel Giraud, Le Métis Canadien (1945). Glenbow Museum and Archives. Glenbow, http://www.glenbow.org/index.cfm Gosnell, R.E. 1903. The year book of British Columbia and manual of provincial information, accessed April 30, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcbooks/items/1.0355322#p422z-3r0f:%22half-breed%2. Gosnell, R.E. et al. “Immigration as affecting Canada and her constituent provinces,” 1908, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 10, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0388852. Gosnell, R.E. et al. “Immigration as affecting Canada and her constituent provinces,” 1908, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0388852#p44z- 3r0f:%22half-breed%22. Goulet, George R.D. 2008. The Métis in British Columbia: From Fur Trade Outposts to Colony. Calgary: FabJob. Goulet, George, and Terry Goulet. The Métis in British Columbia: From Fur Trade Outposts to Colony. Vancouver: FabJob, 2008. Grant, Walter. Description of Vancouver Island by Its First Colonist. London: 1857. UWSC N979.525 G767d.
116 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Grimshaw, Patricia. “Interracial Marriages and Colonial Regimes in Victoria and Aotearoa/New Zealand,” Frontiers 23, 3 (2002): 12-28. Haig-Brown. 2006. “With Good Intentions Euro-Canadian and ., accessed May 2020, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edshbz&AN=edshbz. DE.605.HBZ01.018216957&site=eds-live&scope=site. Hamilton, Scott. 2000. “Dynamics of Social Complexity in Early Nineteenth-Century British Fur-Trade Posts.” International Journal of Historical Archaeology 4 217-273. Hamon, M. Max. 2020. The Audacity of His Enterprise: Louis Riel and the Métis Nation That Canada Never Was. Harmon, D. W. Sixteen Years in the Indian Country, The Journal of Daniel Williams Harmon 1800-1816. W. K. Lamb, Editor. Toronto, ON: MacMillan of Canada, 1957. (UWSC). Harrap, Liam. 2020. Reveltoke Review. January 16, accessed January 17, 2020, https://www.revelstokereview.com/community/new-book-released-on-the-un- told-indigenous-history-of-revelstoke/#. Harris, Cole. 2002. Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance, and Reserves in British Columbia. Vancouver: UBC Press. Hawley, Robert Emmet. Skqee mus, or Pioneer Days on the Nooksack. Bellingham: Miller & Sutherlan, 1945. N979.731 H316s. Hayter, Jennifer. 2017. University of Toronto - Racially “Indian”, Legally “White”: The Canadian State’s Struggles to Categorize the Metis. November, accessed September 21, 2019, https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/808832. Hayter, Jennifer. 2017. “University of Toronto TSpace.” Racially “Indian”, Legally “White”: The Canadian State’s Struggles to Categorize the Métis, 1850-1900. November, accessed September 21, 2019, https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/ handle/1807/80832. Hayter, Jennifer. n.d. https://utoronto.academia.edu/JenniferHayter. Helm, J. The Lynx Point People: The Dynamix of a Northern Athapaskan Band. Bulletin #176. Ottawa, ON: National Museum of Canada, 1961. (UWSC). Hildebrandt, Walter. The Battle of Batoche: British Small Warfare and the Entrenched Métis. Revised Edition. Studies in Archaeology, National Historic Parks and Sites. Ottawa, ON: Environment Canada, 1986. Honigmann, John Joseph. 1946. “Ethnography and Acculturation of the Fort Nelson Slave.” Yale University Publications. Honigmann, John Joseph. 1949. “Culture and Ethos of Kaska Society.” Yale University Publications in Anthropology.
117 Bibliography
Honigmann, John Joseph. 1954. “The Kaska Indians: An Ethnographic Reconstruction.” Yale University Press. Honigmann, John Joseph. 1956. “Are the Nahani Indians.” 35-38. Honigmann, Jon Joseph. 1965. “Social Disintegration in Five Northern Canadian Communities.” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 199-214. http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935413.001.0001/ oxfordhb-9780199935413-e-69. http://www.pstlaw.ca/resources/Powley%20summary-final.pdf. https://iportal.usask.ca/index.php?sid=858759130&id=6184&t=details. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1474474010376012. https://search.library.utoronto.ca/details?4691950. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives. Archives of Manitoba, https://www.gov.mb.ca/ chc/archives/hbca/. Hume, David. 2008. “Victoria Voltigeurs Protected Settlers.” Times Colonist. Hunn, Eugene S., E. Thomas Morning Owl, Phillip Cash Cash, Jennifer Karson Engum, Daniel B. Haug, Roberta Conner, Bruce Rigsby, John M. Chess, and Modesta J. Minthorn. 2015. Čáw Pawá Láakni: They Are Not Forgotten : Sahaptian Place Names Atlas of the Cayuse, Umatilla, and Walla Walla. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Hyde, Anne. 2011. “Empires, Nations, and Families: A History of the North American West.” University of Nebraska Press. Hyde, Anne. 2012. “Empires, Nations, and Families: A New History of the North American West, 1800-1860.” 2019. Iceton, Glenn William. 2017. “Trapped by Geography in the BC-Yukon Borderlands.” Historical Geography 45 113-116. Iceton, Glenn William. 2019. “Defining Space: How History Shaped and Informed Notions of Kaska Land Use and Occupancy.” University of Saskatchewan, Department of History. Innis, Harold. 1967. “The Fur Trade in Canada.” University of Toronto Press. Ireland, B. A. McKelvie and W. E. 1956. “The Victoria Voltigeurs.” British Columbia Historical Quarterly 228. Iseke-Barnes, Judy. 2009. “Grandmothers of the Métis Nation: A Living History with Dorothy Chartrand.” Native Studies Review 18, no. 2 69-104. Jackson, John C. Children of the Fur Trade, Forgotten Métis of the Pacific Northwest. Missoula: Mountain Press, 1995.
118 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Jackson, John. 1996. “A little war of destiny: the First Regiment of Oregon Mounted Volunteers and the Yakima Indian War of 1855-56.” Ye Galleon Press. Jamie Brown, Laurie J. Cooke, Carolyn Franklin, Carmen Merrells, Helen Paramonov. 2014. Surrey Libraries, accessed January 18, 2020, https://www. surreylibraries.ca/sites/default/files/CanadianFamilyHistoryResources.pdf. Jamie Brown, Laurie J. Cooke, Carolyn Franklin. 2014. Surrey Libraries, accessed April 27, 2020, https://www.surreylibraries.ca/sites/default/files/CanadianFamilyHis- toryResources.pdf. Jenness, D. The Indians of Canada. Anthropological Series No. 15. Bulletin No. 65. Ottawa, ON: National Museum of Canada, 1932. Jenness, D. The Sekani Indians of British Columbia. Anthropological Series No. 20. Bulletin No. 84. Ottawa, ON: Department of Mines and Resources, 1937. Jette, Melinda Marie. 2006. “Beaver Are Numerous, but the Natives . . . Will Not Hunt Them.” The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 3-17. Jette, Melinda Marie. 2007. “we have almost Every Religion but our own” - French-Indian community initiatives and social relations in French Prairie.” Oregon Historical Society 222-245. Jette, Melinda Marie. 2010. “Betwixt and Between the Official Story: Tracing the History and Memory of a Family of French-Indian Ancestry in the Pacific Northwest.” Oregon Historical Quarterly. Jette, Melinda Marie. 2015. “At the Hearth of the Crossed Races: A French-Indian Community in Nineteenth-Century Oregon.” Oregon State University Pres. John McLeod fonds. 1823-1849. British Columbia Archives - code: MS-2715. Kane, Paul. Wanderings of an Artist Among the Indians of North America: From Canada to Vancouver Island and Oregon Through the Hudson’s Bay Company’s Territory and Back Again. London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans, and Roberts, 1859. Keith, G. 2020. UFV Today. January 30, accessed February 11, 2020, https://blogs. ufv.ca/blog/2020/01/historian-jean-barman-to-speak-about-abbotsford-legend- irene-kelleher-oct-22/. Keith, G. “Letters to Mr. Roderick McKenzie” in Les Bourgeois de la Compagni du North-Ouest. L. R. Mason, Editor. New York, NY: Antiquarian Press, 1960. Volume II. Kelleher, Irene. 2020. UFV Today. January 30, accessed February 11, 2020, https:// blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2020/01/historian-jean-barman-to-speak-about-abbotsford-leg- end-irene-kelleher-oct-22/.
119 Bibliography
Kelowna Record. 14 March 1912, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 6, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xkelownarec/items/1.0180748#p2z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. Klippenstein, Frieda Esau. 1992. Canadian Heritage Park, accessed March 15, 2020, http://www.parkscanadahistory.com/series/mf/526.pdf. Kootenay Mail. 31 August 1895, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xkootmail/ items/1.0181229#p0z0r0f:%22half-breed%22. Lamb, W.K. “The Founding of Fort Victoria,” BC Historical Quarterly, Vol 7 (1943), 71-92. Lamers, Frans Anton. 1974. “Are the Kaska and Slave Aboriginal. An Ecological and Ethnohistorical Study.” Lang, George. 2009. “Making Wawa: the Genesis of Chinook Jargon.” UBC Press, October 2. LaRocque, Joe. 1960. Archive - The Daily Colonist. January 8, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19600108#page/n5/mode/1up/ search/mixed+blood. Lawrence, Austin. 2018. Department of Justice - Canada. September 26, accessed March 1, 2020, https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jr15/p5.html?fb- clid=IwAR04fJTIJsBbeUfihRKNoWNgc0n0qHZ_yjyWLjZGco0mTK9bhWyQSPoTd6E. LcLeod, John. 1823-1849. “British Columbia Archives.” John McLeod fonds. Lee, Daniel. Ten Years in Oregon. New York: J. Collard Printer, 1844. UWSC N979.5 L51t. Legal Services Society. 2017. Accessed September 17, 2019, https://legalaid.bc.ca/ publications/pub/guide-aboriginal-harvesting-rights. Legault, Gabrielle Monique. 2016. University of British Columbia - Stories of contemporary Métis identity in British Columbia : ‘troubling’ discourses of race, culture, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/ items/1.0339946. Legault, Gabrielle. 2016. “Stories of Contempory Métis Identity in British Columbia: Troubling discourses of race, culture, and nationhood.” Library and Archives Canada. Ottawa: Ontario, http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/ Pages/home.aspx. Lord, John Keast. The Naturalist in Vancouver Island and British Columbia. London: R. Bentley, 1866. Louis, Shirley. We Heard It in the Bushes: The Story of the McDougalls. Calgary: Word Is Out Press, 1996.
120 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Lutz, John Sutton. 2007. “Myth & Memory: Stories of Indigenous-European Contact.” UBC Press. Macdonald, John A., “Speech before the house of commons, July 6, 1885.” Library and Archives Canada, http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/2/4/h4-4090-e.html. Macdougall, Brenda. One of the Family: Métis Culture in Nineteenth-Century Northwestern Saskatchewan. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press, 2010. Mackenzie, A. Alexander Mackenzie’s Voyage to the Pacific Ocean in 1793. Chicago, IL: Lakeside, 1931. Mackenzie, A. Voyages from Montreal Through the Continent of North America to the Frozen and Pacific Ocean in 1789 and 1793. New York, NY: New Amsterdam, 1902. Volume I. Mackenzie, J. “Extracts from His Journal, 1799-1800,” in Les Bourgeois de la Compagni du North-Ouest. L. R. Mason, Editor. New York, NY: Antiquarian Press, 1960. Volume. Mackie, Richard. 1984. “Colonial land, Indian Labour and Company Capital: The Economy of Vancouver Island.” MacLaren, Ian S. Culturing Wilderness in Jasper National Park: Studies in Two Centuries of Human History in the Upper Athabasca River Watershed. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 2007. Maclaughlan, Morag. Fort Langley Journals: 1827-1830 (Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 1998). Main, Leslie. 2010. Trail of Story, Traveller’s Path: Reflections on Ethnoecology and Landscape. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press. Marshall, Daniel Patrick. n.d. Collections Canada - Claiming The Land Indians, Goldseekers and the rush to British Columbia, accessed March 14, 2020, https:// www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp02/NQ48669.pdf. Martin, Robert M. Hudson’s Bay Territories & Vancouver’s Island. London: T & W Boone, 1849. UWSC N979.5 M36. Mather, Susan. 1998. One of Many Homes, Stories of Dispossession from Stanley Park. January, accessed Deccember 1, 2019, https://iportal.usask.ca/index. php?sid=858759130&id=6184&t=details. Mather, Susan. “One of Many Homes: Stories of Dispossession from Stanley Park.” 1998. iPortal, accessed April 27, 2020, https://iportal.usask.ca/index. php?sid=858759130&id=6184&t=details.
121 Bibliography
Mawani, Renisa. 2002. “In and Out of Place: Mixed-Race Identity, Liquor, and the Law in British Columbia.” In Race, Space and the Law: Unmapping a White Settler Society, by Sherene H. Razack, 21-46. Toronoto: Between the Lines. Mawani, Renisa. 2004. From colonialism to multiculturalism? Totem poles, tourism and national identity in Vancouver’s Stanley Park. January-April, accessed November 30, 2019, https://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA148138175&sid=google- Scholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00041327&p=LitRC&sw=w. Mawani, Renisa. 2004. Gale Literature Resource Centre, accessed December 1, 2019, https://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA148138175&sid=googleSchol- ar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00041327&p=LitRC&sw=w. Mawani, Renisa. 2005. Sage Journals - Genealogies of the Land: Aboriginality, Law, and Territory in Vancouver’s Stanley Park. September 1, accessed December 1, 2019, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0964663905054907. Mawani, Renisa. 2010. Sage Journals - ‘Half-breeds,’ racial opacity, and geographies of crime: law’s search for the ‘original’ Indian, accessed April 27, 2020, https:// journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1474474010376012. Mayne, Richard Charles. Four Years in British Columbia and Vancouver Island. London: John Murray, 1862. UWSC N979.524 M45f. McAdam, J.T. 1882. The University of British Columbia - Canada; the country, its people, religions, politics, rulers, and its apparent future, being a compendium, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/ items/1.0222419. McDonald, Robert A. J. 1994. “Lumber Society on the Industrial Frontier: Burrard Inlet, 1863-1886.” 69-96. JSTOR. Spring, accessed December 1, 2019, https://www. jstor.org/stable/25143789?seq=1. McDonnel, J. “Some Account of the Red River (About 1797). in Les Bourgeois de la Compagni du North-Ouest. L. R. Mason, Editor. New York, NY: Antiquarian Press, 1960. Volume I. McIvor, Bruce. “What Does the Daniels Decision Mean?” First Peoples Law, https:// www.firstpeopleslaw.com/index/articles/248.php. McNabb, David and Ute Lischke. The Journey of a Forgotten People: Métis Identities and Family Histories. Waterloo, ON: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2007. Merk, Frederick. Editor. Fur Trade and Empire: George Simpson’s Journal...1824-25 (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1968). Meyer, Melissa L. “Dispossession and the White Earth Anishinaabeg, 1889-1920,” in Albert L. Hurtado and Peter Iverson, editors. Major Problems in American Indian History: Documents and Essays. Toronto, ON: D. C. Heath and Company, 1994: pp. 391-404.
122 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Michel Reporter. 4 December 1909, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/michelr/items/1.0344552#p10z-7r0f:%22half-breed%22. Michel Reporter. 4 December 1909, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 27, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/michelr/items/1.0344552. Milton, W. et. al. “The North-west Passage by land. Being the narrative of an expedition from the Atlantic to the Pacific,” 1865, The University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 13, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcbooks/items/1.0222200. Moberly, Walter. The Rocks and Rivers of British Columbia. London: H Blacklock & Co., 1885. UWSC N979.524 M71r. Molyneaux, St. John. The Sea of Mountains: An Account of Lord Dufferin’s Tour Through British Columbia in 1876. London: Hurst and Blackett, 1877. UWSC N979.524 St2s. Moreton-Robinson, Aileen. The White Possessive: Property, Power, and Indigenous Sovereignty. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2015. Morice, A. G. The Great Dene Race (Vienna, AT: Press of the Mechitharistes, n.d.). Morice, A. G. “Notes, Archaeological, Industrial and Sociological on the Western Denes, with an Ethnographic Sketch of the Same.” Reprinted from Transactions of the Canadian Institute Session, 1892-93 (Toronto, ON: Canadian Government, 1893?). Morrison, James. The Robinson Treaties of 1850: A Case Study. S.l. : Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Treaty and Land Research Section, 1996. Moser, Charles. Reminiscences of the West Coast of Vancouver Island. Victoria: Acme Press Ltd., 1926. UWSC N979.524 M85r. Munnick, Harriet Duncan. n.d. Hathi Trust - Catholic Church records of the Pacific Northwest, accessed January 23, 2020, https://catalog.hathitrust.org/ Record/000631128. Métis Genealogical Centre of Canada. Canadian Métis Council, http://www. metisgcc.com/about-us.html. Métis Nation BC. 31 March 2009. Accessed September 6, 2019, https://dadp.ok.ubc. ca/index.php/dvd/12. n.d. accessed April 27, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ cranherald/items/1.0068534#p0z-2r0F. n.d. accessed May 4, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/ items/1.0388616#p327z-5r0f:%22half-breed%22.
123 Bibliography
n.d. Archive - The Daily Colonist. accessed April 27, 2020, https://archive.org/ stream/dailycolonist18811119uvic/18811119#page/n1/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. n.d. Canada, Dominion of Canada, Annual Report of the Department of Indian Affairs. Ottawa. n.d. City Of Rossland, accessed April 3, 2020, https://www.rossland.ca/history. n.d. Gale Primary Sources - As Long as Buffalo Meat Lasts Alberta Métis Welfare Cut, accessed 2020, https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Newspapers&a mp&&&&&&&&&&&& &resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&searchType=Ba- sicSearchForm¤tPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CLZJBJU431743568&doc- Type=Essay&sort=Rele. n.d. Gale Primary Sources - Land Restored to Métis in Alberta as Their Right to Have Place to Live, accessed 2020, https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Newspa- pers&&&&&&&&&&&&&a mp&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=Ba- sicSearchForm¤tPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CPKJRFU433363712&doc- Type=Article&sort=R. n.d. http://themossback.tripod.com/pioneers/rriverset.htm. n.d. http://www.oregonpioneers.com/bios/JohnFlett_1841.pdf. n.d. https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0340046#p10z- 5r0f:%22half-breed%22. n.d. https://stolonation.pastperfectonline.com/library/A07FC155-A095-4CEE-A609- 759303106405. n.d. Métis Nation BC, accessed September 18, 2019, https://www.mnbc.ca/directory/ view/345-bcmanr. n.d. Point Elliott Treaty, accessed May 1, 2020, http://themossback.tripod.com/ treaties/treatype.htm. n.d. Report of the Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. Victoria: Acme Press Limited. n.d. Revelstoke Review, accessed April 27, 2020, https://www.revelstokereview.com/ author/liam-harrap/. n.d. Simon Fraser University, accessed August 5, 2019, http://www.sfu.ca/ dean-gradstudies/events/dreamcolloquium/DreamColloquium-making-knowl- edge-public/john-borrows.html. n.d. The Colonial Despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871. https://bcgenesis.uvic.ca/index.html.
124 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Narine, Shari. 2019. Windspeaker - Region 1 Métis locals object to actions of provincial organizations. April 9, accessed September 7, 2019, https://winspeaker. com/news/windspeaker-news/region-1-metis-locals-object-actions-provincial-orga- nization. Nelson, Jay. n.d. UBC Press, accessed September 18, 2019, https://www.ubcpress.ca/ asset/12458/1/9780774808866.pdf. Nelson, Jay. n.d. “A Strange Revolution In The Manners Of The Country.” UBC Press 1-39. Nelson, R. K. 1973. Hunters of the Northern Forest. Chicago : Hunters of the Northern Forest. Nicola Valley Archives Association. “The Garcia Story,” 6:4 Nicola Valley Historical Quarterly (1984). Nunatsiaq News. 2019. Library and Archives Canada offers funds for Indigenous digitization projects. May 15, accessed August 5, 2019, https://nunatsiaq.com/ stories/article/library-and-archives-canada-offers-funds-for-indigenous-digitiza- tion-projects/. Ouellet, Richard. 2016. University of British Columbia - The life and death of the Council of Elders of the Descendants of Jasper Park, accessed March 17, 2020, https:// open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0306444. O’Toole, Darren. “Flanagan on the Stand: Revisiting Métis Land Claims and the List of Rights in Manitoba,” International Journal of Canadian Studies 41 (2010): 137-177. Patton, Vince. 2020. Eastman’s Online Genealogy Newsletter. January 22, accessed January 22, 2020, https://blog.eogn.com/2020/01/22/genealogical-forum-of-ore- gon-objects-to-seattle-national-archives-closure/?fbclid=IwAR2q_MMJ2yHrisGRpb- bI5R2PeAyWGHFtW7hiOUJzLtDSSRmZcoen73TjXA. Peers, Laura, and Carolyn Podruchny. “Introduction: Complex Subjectivities, Multiple Ways of Knowing”, Heather Devine, “Being and Becoming Métis: A Personal Reflection” and Theresa Schenck, “Border Identities: Métis, Halfbreed, and Mixed-Blood,” as found in Carolyn Podruchny and Laura Peers, editors. Gathering Places: Aboriginal and Fur Trade Histories. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press, 2010. Perry, Adele. 2001. Google Books - On The Edge Of Empire, accessed January 5, 2020, https://books.google.ca/books?id=76RL8xgUAicC&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&d- q=adele+perry+on+the+edge+of+empire&source=bl&ots=MWHBA_z6o6&sig=AC- fU3U1pEs77RLjNLIVoSXnoQMVgqJaWqw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjN1uPgiu- 7mAhU5GDQIHSv3C8E4ChDoATADegQIDhAB#v=onepage&q=adele%20perry%20. Perry, Adele. 2015. “The Douglas-Connolly Family and the Nineteenth-Century Imperial World.” Cambridge University Press.
125 Bibliography
Perry, Adele. n.d. On The Edge Of Empire, accessed April 27, 2020, https:// books.google.ca/books?id=76RL8xgUAicC&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&dq=adele+per- ry+on+the+edge+of+empire&source=bl&ots=MWHBA_z6o6&sig=ACfU3U1pEs77RL- jNLIVoSXnoQMVgqJaWqw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjN1uPgiu7mAhU5GDQI- HSv3C8E4ChDoATADegQIDhAB#v=onepage&q=adele%20perry%20. Perry, Adele. On the edge of Empire: Gender, Race, and the Making of British Columbia 1849-1871. Toronto: Toronto of University Press, 2001. Perry, Kenneth E. 2006. Forts and Posts of the Hudson’s Bay Company. Vancouver: Hancock House Publishers. Peterson, Jacqueline, and Jennifer S. H. Brown, editors. The New Peoples: Being and Becoming Métis in North America. Winnipeg, MB: The University of Manitoba Press, 1985. Pim, Bedford. Midshipman’s Diary: A Few Notes Extracted from the Cockpit Journal of a Man- Of-War: London: J.D. Potter, 1862). Pollard, Juliet Thelma. 1990. “The Making of the Métis in the Pacific Northwest Furtrade Children: Race, Class, and Gender.” British Columbia: The University of British Columbia. Pollard, Juliet Thelma. 2011. UBC Library - “The making of the Métis in the Pacific Northwest: fur trade children: race, class, and gender.”. January 14, accessed September 18, 2019, http://hdl/hdl.handle.net/2429/30632. Pollard, Juliet Thelma. The making of the Métis in the Pacific Northwest fur trade children: race, class, and gender. Ottawa: National Library of Canada, 1991. Pratt, Yvonne Poitras. 2019. Digital Storytelling in Indigenous Education: A Decolonizing Journey for a Métis Community. Prince Rupert Journal. 1 November 1910, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 3, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/prj/items/1.0311884#p1z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. Prince Rupert Journal. 27 June 27 1913, University of British Columbia, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/prj/items/1.0311968. R v Willison. [2005] BCJ No 924 (BCPC) [Willison]. Raffan, James. 2007. Emperor of the North: Sir George Simpson and the Remarkable Story of the Hudson’s Bay Company. Toronto: Harper Collins. Ray, Arthur J. 1991. Emperor of the North: Sir George Simpson and the Remarkable Story of the Hudson’s Bay Company. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press. Razack, Sherene H. n.d. Race, space, and the law : unmapping a white settler society.
126 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Razack, Sherene H. n.d. University of Toronto - Race, Space and the Law, accessed January 5, 2020, https://search.library.utoronto.ca/details?4691950. Reid, Jennifer. Louis Riel and the Creation of Modern Canada: Mythic Discourse and the Postcolonial State. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 2008. Renisa Mawani. ‘Half-breeds,’ racial opacity, and geographies of crime: law’s search for the ‘original’ Indian, accessed Jan 5, 2020. Internet document. Report. Hudson’s Bay Company. 1857. The University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 13, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/ items/1.0221786. Report. Hudson’s Bay Company. 1857. The University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/ items/1.0221786#p392z-4r0f:new%20caledonia. Report. Hudson’s Bay Company. 1857. The University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 27, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/ items/1.0221786. Research Resources. Langley Centennial Museum, http://museum.tol.ca/Research/ Research-Resources. Resina Mawani. “In Between and Out of Place: Mixed-Race Identity, Liquor, and the Law in British Columbia, 1850-1913.” In Sherene H. Razack (ed.), Race, Space, and the Law: Unmapping a White Settler Society (Toronto: Between the Lines), 47-69. Revelstoke Herald. 12 May 1904, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xrevherald/items/1.0187373#p2z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. Revelstoke Herald. 12 May 1904, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 27, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xrevherald/items/1.0187373. Revelstoke Herald. 12 May 1904, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 27, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xrevherald/items/1.0187373. Rich, E. E. 1967. The Fur Trade and the Northwest to 1857. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. Rivard, Étienne. “‘Le Fond de l’Ouest’: Territory, Oral Geographies, and the Métis in the Nineteenth-Century Northwest,” St-Onge, Podruchny & Macdougall, supra note 6, 143. Roulston, Tom. 2019. Global News - University of Lethbridge to formally recognize its place on Indigenous territory. June 25, accessed August 5, 2019, https:// globalnews.ca/news/5431127/university-lethbridge-recognize-indigenous-territory/.
127 Bibliography
Roulston, Tom. 2019. Global News BC - “University of Lethbridge to formally recognize its place on Indgenous territory.”. June 25, accessed September 7, 2019, https://globalnews.ca/news/5431127/university-lethbridge-recognize-indige- nous-territory/. Sandlos, John. 2007. Hunters at the Margin: Native People and Wildlife Conservation in the Northwest Territories. Vancouver: UBC Press. Sandlos, Liza Piper and John. 2007. “A Broken Frontier: Ecological Imperialism in the Canadian North.” Environmental History 12 759-795. Saul, John Ralston. A Fair Country: Telling Truths about Canada. Toronto, ON: Viking Canada, 2008. Scott, James C. 1999. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press. Sealey, Bruce, and Antoine S. Lussier. The Métis: Canada’s Forgotten Peoples. Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Métis Federation Press, 1975. Seb Malette, Open Letter to the ECMA.” Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/ phoebos.eromenon/posts/10155587921901379?pnref=story Secaira, Manola. 2019. Abigail Echo-Hawk on the art and science of decolonizing data. May 3, accessed May 31, 2019, https://crosscut.com/2019/05/abigail-echo-hawk- art-and-science-decolonizing-data. Secaira, Manola. 2019. Crosscut - Abigail Echo-Hawk on the art and science of ‘decolonizing data’. May 31, accessed August 5, 2019, https://crosscut.com/2019/05/ abigail-echo-hawk-art-and-science-decolonizing-data. Seeman, Berthold. Narrative of the Voyage of H.M.S. Herald During the Years 1845-51, Under the Command of Captain Henry Kellett, R.N., C.B. (London: Reeve and Co.: 1853). Select Archives holding historical records of Métis in BC. Senate Canada. Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, Issue No. 34., “Legal and Political Recognition of Métis Identity in Canada”. (March 20, 2013): 42. http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenCommitteeBusiness/ CommitteeTranscripts.aspx?parl=41&ses=1&Language=E&comm_id=1. Senate Canada. “Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, Issue No. 34., “Legal and Political Recognition of Métis Identity in Canada”. (March 20, 2013): 20-42. https://sencanada.ca/en/Content/Sen/Committee/411/ APPA/34ev-50030-e. SFU News. 13 May 2019. Accessed September 7, 2019, https://www.sfu.ca/sfunews/ stories/2019/05/decades-of-indigenous-collaboration-lead-to-governor-gener- al-award.html.
128 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Short, Amanda. 2019. Saskatoon Star Phoenix - $43 million Indigenous health research plan prioritizes community involvement. June 28, accessed August 5, 2019, https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/43-million-indigenous-health-re- search-plan-prioritizes-community-involvement/. Short, Amanda. 2019. Saskatoon Star Phoenix. June 27, accessed September 6, 2019, https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/43-million-indigenous-heath-re- search-plan-prioritizes-community-involvement. Similkameen Star. 8 December 1900, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ similkameen/items/1.0365444#p2z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. Simon Fraser University. 2019. Decades of Indigenous collaboration lead to Governor General’s Innovation Award. May 13, accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.sfu.ca/sfunews/stories/2019/05/decades-of-indigenous-collabora- tion-lead-to-governor-general-award.html. Simon Fraser’s Journal - Vernon Llewellyn Denton records. 1808. Simpson, Sir George. Narrative of a Journey Round the World, During the years 1841 and 1842. London: H. Colburn, 1847. UWSC N979.511 Si51n v. 1 and 2. Simpson, Thomas. Narrative of the Discoveries on the North Coast of America; affected by the officers of the Hudson’s Bay Company. London: R. Bentley, 1843. UWSC N979.511 Si5. Sismey, Eric D. 1960. Archive - The Daily Colonist. accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19601009#page/n38/mode/1up/search/ mixed+bloods. Sloan, Karen [Kerry]. The Community Conundrum: Métis Critical Perspectives on the Application of R v Powley in British Columbia (PhD dissertation, University of Victoria, 2016) [unpublished]. Sloan, Kerry. “Aboriginal Rights Litigation and Negotiation among the Métis of BC: Community Perspectives on Creating Legal Change”. For the conference Reconciliation and the Métis in Canada, Ottawa, October 23-25. http://www.metistreatiesproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/ Aboriginal-Rights-Litigation-and-Negotiation-among-the-Metis-of-BC.pdf. Sloan, Karen. 2016. “The Community Conundrum: Métis Critical Perspectives on the Application of R V Powley in British Columbia”. May 9, accessed September 1, 2019, http://dspace.library.uvic.ca//handle/1828/7295. Sloan, Kerry. ‘“Lost Okanagan’ No More: How I Discovered My BC Métis History,” 78 Okanagan History, 8 (2013). Sloan, Kerry. “Always Coming Home: Métis Legal Understandings of Community and Territory,” The Windsor Yearbook of Access for Justice. Vol 33, No 1 (2016), https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/WYAJ/article/view/4814
129 Bibliography
Sloan, Kerry. “Always coming home: Métis legal understandings of community and territory.” Vol 33, No 1 (2016), The Windsor yearbook of access for justice, https://ojs. uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/WYAJ/article/view/4814. Smet, Pierre-Jean de. 1801-1873. “Voyages dans l’Amérique Septentrionale, Oregon.” BC Historical Books. 1874. Last modified 1874, accessed October 20, 2019, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0304631. Spitale-Leisk, Maria. 2019. North Shore News - Boundary students strengthen bond through Indigenous art project. June 7, accessed August 5, 2019, https://www. nsnews.com/lifestyle/boundary-students-strengthen-bond-through-indigenous-art- project-1.23848484. Sproat, Gilbert Malcolm. Scenes and Studies of Savage Life. London: Smith, Elder, 1868. St-Onge, Nicole. and Carolyn Podruchny, and Brenda Macdougall, editors. Contours of a People: Métis Family, Mobility and History. Forward by Maria Campbell. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2012. Stanley, George F. G. The Birth of Western Canada: A History of the Riel Rebellions. Toronto, ON: Longmans, Green and Co, Ltd., 1936. Statistics Canada. 2016. Accessed 2020, https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/ census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CS- D&Code1=5933067&Geo2=PR&Code2=59&SearchText=Clearwa- ter&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=Ethnic%20origin&T ABID=1&type=0. Statistics Canada. 2016. Accessed 2020, https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/ census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CS- D&Code1=5953007&Geo2=PR&Code2=47&SearchText=- Cariboo&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=Ethnic%20o- rigin&TABID=1&type=0. Stavenhagen, Rodolfo. 2013. “The Emergence of Indigenous Peoples.” Stern, Theodore. 1965. The Klamath Tribe: A People and Their Reservation. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Stern, Theodore. 1992. Chiefs and Chief Traders. Oregon State University Press. Stern, Theodore. 1996. Chiefs and Change in the Oregon Country: Indian Relations at Fort Nez Perces. Oregon: Oregon State University Press. Stevenson, Allyson. 2009. “Men of their own blood”: Métis Intermediaries and the Numbered Treaties.” Native Studies Review 18 67-90. Supreme Court of Canada. “MMF v Canada, Reasons for Judgment.” The MMF (Manitoba Métis Federation) Case (Manitoba Métis Lands Case), Supreme Court
130 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
of Canada. March 8, 2013. http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/ item/12888/index.do. Supreme Court of Canada. “Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Development), 2016 SCC 12.” First Peoples Law,https://www.firstpeopleslaw.com/ database/files/library/Daniels_SCC.pdf. Supreme Court of Canada. “MMF v Canada, Reasons for Judgment, paragraph 56.” http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12888/index.do. Susan Mather. One of many Homes, Stories of Dispossession from Stanley Park. MA History thesis 1998. Simon Fraser University. Swagerty, William R. “Marriage and Settlement patterns of Rocky Mountain Trappers and Traders,” Western Historical Quarterly, 11,2. Taylor, Kate. 2018. The Globe and Mail - Jesse Wente on Indigenous stories through a different lens. November 4, accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.theglobeandmail. com/arts/film/article-jesse-wente-on-indigenous-stories-through-a-different-lens/. Teillet, Jean Teillet. “R v. Powley: A Summary of the Supreme Court of Canada Reasons for Judgment.” Vancouver, BC: Pape & Salter Barristers and Solicitors, 2013. Teillet, Jean. “Métis Law in Canada, 2013. Vancouver, BC.” Pape, Salter and Teillet, 2013 edition, http://www.pstlaw.ca/resources/Metis-Law-in-Canada-2013.pdf. Teit, J.A. “Field Notes on the Tahltan and Kaska Indians: 1912–15,” Anthropologica (1956): 40–170. The British Columbia Labor News. 4 November 1921. University of British Columbia, accessed April 7, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/bcln/items/1.0309320#p0z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The British Columbia Labor News. 4 November 1921. University of British Columbia, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/bcln/ items/1.0309320#p0z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The British Columbian. 17 April 1889, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ dbc/items/1.0347092#p6z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Cariboo Sentinel. 25 June 1870, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 4, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/xcariboosen/items/1.0170947#p2z-5r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Centre du patrimoine. Collections and research, http://shsb.mb.ca/en/ Collections_and_Research. The Cranbrook Herald. 16 January 1902, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed December 29, 2019, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/cranherald/items/1.0068534#p0z-2r0F.
131 Bibliography
The Cranbrook Herald. 20 February 1902, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 10, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/cranherald/items/1.0068577. The Cranbrook Herald. 20 February 1902, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 15, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ bcnewspapers/cranherald/items/1.0068577#p1z-1r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Daily British Columbian. 19 March 1889, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ dbc/items/1.0346753#p3z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Daily Colonist Archive. 1 February 1866, accessed December 26, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18660201uvic/18660201#page/n2/mode/1up/search/ halfbreed. The Daily Colonist Archive. 4 October 1885, accessed April 27, 2020, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18851014uvic/18851014#page/n2/mode/1up/search/ halfbreeds. The Daily Colonist Archive. 12 November 1864, accessed April 27, 2020, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18641112uvic/18641112#page/n2/mode/1up/search/ halfbreed. The Daily Colonist Archive. 12 November 1864, accessed December 26, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18641112uvic/18641112#page/n2/mode/1up/ search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist Archive. 14 October 1885, accessed December 26, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18851014uvic/18851014#page/n2/mode/1up/search/ halfbreeds. The Daily Colonist Archive. 19 November 1881, accessed December 27, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18811119uvic/18811119#page/n1/mode/1up/ search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist Archive. 21 June 1866, accessed April 27, 2020, https://archive. org/stream/dailycolonist18660621uvic/18660621#page/n2/mode/1up/search/ halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 4 August 1912, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 27, 2020, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist57200u- vic#page/n25/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 4 August 1912, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonis- t57200uvic#page/n25/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 4 August 1912, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonis- t57200uvic#page/n25/mode/1up/search/halfbreed.
132 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
The Daily Colonist. 5 October 1932. Archive, accessed December 25, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist193unse_iuj#mode/1up/search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 8 September 1960. Archive, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19600108#page/n5/mode/1up/search/ mixed+blood. The Daily Colonist. 9 October 1960. Archive, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19601009#page/n38/mode/1up/search/ mixed+bloods. The Daily Colonist. 14 April 1968. Archive, accessed December 26, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19680414#page/n57/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 15 September 1975. Archive, accessed April 27, 2020, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19750915#page/n3/mode/1up/search/halfbreeds. The Daily Colonist. 16 September 1894, accessed April 27, 2020, https://archive.org/ stream/dailycolonist18940916uvic/18940916#page/n4/mode/1up/search/halfbreeds. The Daily Colonist. 16 September 1894, accessed December 26, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist18940916uvic/18940916#page/n4/mode/1up/search/ halfbreeds. The Daily Colonist. 2 September 1973. Archive, accessed December 24, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19730902#page/n66/mode/1up/search/ mixed+blood. The Daily Colonist. 5 October 1932. Archive, accessed December 25, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist193unse_iuj#page/n14/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 14 April 1968. Archive, accessed December 26, 2019, https:// archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19680414#page/n57/mode/1up/search/halfbreed. The Daily Colonist. 15 September 1975. Archive, accessed December 25, 2019, https://archive.org/stream/dailycolonist19750915#page/n3/mode/1up/search/ halfbreeds. The Economist. 3 December 1904, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 8, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xnelsonecon/items/1.0184316#p0z-5r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Grand Forks Sun. 21October 1927. University of British Columbia, accessed April 3, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xgrandforks/ items/1.0341357#p0z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Hedley Gazette. 28 November 1907, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xhedley/items/1.0180166.
133 Bibliography
The Islander. 14 January 1911, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 10, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ cumberlandis/items/1.0342369#p3z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Ledge. 2 December 1897, University of British Columbia Open Collection, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xnakledge/ items/1.0182077#p1z-1r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Mail Herald. 15 October 1910, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 4, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ mherald/items/1.0310479#p1z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Miner. 2 January 1897, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 10, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/ xminer/items/1.0183012#p0z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Miner. 17 January 1891, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xminer/ items/1.0182516#p1z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Miner. 28 February 1891, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 9, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xminer/ items/1.0182521#p7z-2r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Prospector. 6 July 1900, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed April 2020, 3. https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/proslill/ items/1.0212449#p0z-4r0f:%22half-breed%22. The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. “The People Who Own Themselves”: Recognition of Métis Identity in Canada,” https://sencanada.ca/ content/sen/Committee/411/appa/rep/rep12jun13-e.pdf. The Western Call. 18 July 1913. University of British Columbia, accessed April 6, 2020, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xwestcall/ items/1.0188633#p7z-3r0f:%22half-breed%22. Thompson, Duane. 2016. “The Ethno-Genesis of the Mixed-Ancestry Population in New Caledonia.” BC Studies 57-84. Tod, John. Journal of John Tod, Chief Trader in Charge of Fort Kamloops. n.p, n.d. UofW SC N979.524 T565j. Tully, James. Strange Multiplicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Tully, James. Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Tully, James. “Aboriginal Property and Western Theory: Recovering a Middle Ground.” Property Rights 11, no. 2 (Summer 1994): 153-180.
134 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Turkel, William J. 2007. The Archive of Place: Unearthing the Pasts of the Chilcotin Plateau. Vancouver: UBC Press. UNBC Press 148. 1999. “Prince George Métis Elders Society, What is it to be a Metis: The stories and recollections of the elders of the Prince George Métis Elders Society.” Union of BC Indian Chiefs Library and Archives. Union of BC Indian Chiefs. https://www.ubcic.bc.ca/library. United Church Archives. BC Conference, https://bc.united-church.ca/bob-stew- art-archives-bc-conference/. University of BC Archives and Special Collections. University of British Columbia, https://archives.library.ubc.ca/. University of Victoria Archives. University of Victoria Libraries, https://www.uvic. ca/library/locations/home/archives/index.php. University of Victoria. 27 June 2019. Accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.uvic.ca/ news/topics/2019+borrows-molson-prize+news. UWSC N979.511 Se3n v.1, 2. Van Kirk, Sylvia. “Colonized Lives: The Native Wives and Daughters of Five Founding Families of Victoria” in Mary-Ellen Kelm & Lorna Townsend, eds, In the Days of Our Grandmothers: A Reader in Aboriginal Women’s History in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006 170. Van Kirk, Sylvia. Many Tender ties: Women in Fur-Trade Society 1670-1870. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980. Van Kirk, Sylvia. “Colonized Lives: The Native Wives and Daughters of Five Founding Families of Victoria,” in Mary-Ellen Kelm & Lorna Townsend, eds, In the Days of Our Grandmothers: A Reader in Aboriginal Women’s History in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006). Vancouver Island Exploration Committee. Vancouver Island: Exploration. Victoria: Harries & Co., 1864. UWSC Microfiche M-2501 no. 28110. Victoria Daily Colonist. 20 June 1897, University of British Columbia Open Collections, accessed September 10, 2019, http://archive.org/stream/dailycolo- nist.18970620uvic/18970620#page/n6/mode/1up/search/metis. Wallace, W. Stewart. Editor. Documents Relating to the North West Company. Volume 22. The Publications of the Champlain Society. 2013. 9781442618282. Walter Cheadle, Viscount, William Fitzwilliam Milton. 1865. The University of British Columbia - The Northwest Passage By Land, accessed April 15, 2020, https:// open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcbooks/items/1.0222200#p294z-5r0f:%22half- breed%22.
135 Bibliography
Watson, Bruce Macintyre, “Family Life at fort Langley.” British Columbia Historical News 32, 4. Watson, Bruce McIntyre. 2010. Lives Lived West of the Divide: A Biographical Dictionary of Fur Traders Working West of the Rockies, 1793-1858. Kelowna: University of British Columbia. Watson, Bruce McIntyre. Life Lived West of the Divide: A Biographical Dictionary of Fur Traders Working West of the Rockies, 1793-1885. Kelowna, BC: The Centre for Social, Spatial and Economic Justice, 2010. This a key resource and has a cheap downloadable pdf version. Watson, Jean Barman and Bruce. 1999. “Fort Colville’s Fur Trade Families and the Dynamics of Aboriginal Racial Intermixture in the Pacific Northwes.” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 140-53. Weinstein, John. Quiet Revolution West: The Rebirth of Métis Nationalism. Toronto, ON: Fifth House, 2007. White, Bruce M., “The Woman Who Married a Beaver: Trade Patterns and Gender Roles in the Ojibwa Fur Trade.” Ethnohistory Vol. 46, No. 1 (Winter, 1999), 109-147. White, Richard. 1980. Land Use, Environment, and Social Change: The Shaping of Island County, Washington. Seattle. Wilkes, Charles. Narrative of the United States Exploring Expedition. Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1845. UWSC N979.5 W65n 1845 v. 4, 5, 6. Windspeaker. 2019. Region 1 Métis locals object to actions of provincial organization. April 9, accessed August 5, 2019, https://windspeaker.com/news/ windspeaker-news/region-1-metis-locals-object-actions-provincial-organization. Wooley, R. A. Ruttan and D. R. 1974. Studies of Furbearers associated with Proposed Pipeline Routes in the Yukon and Northwest Territories. Calgary: Arctic Gas, Biological Report Series, Volume 9. Work, John. Journal of John Work, Victoria, C.F. Banfield, 1945. UWSC N979.524 AR no. 10.
Select Examples of Government Documents
» BC Hansard (Journals of the Legislative Assembly of BC) » Journals of House of Commons » Government Reports (McKenna-McBride Commission) » Papers Relating to the Indian Land Question » Senate or House Committee Records
136 BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Final Report
Select Bibliography of Primary Sources
Barman Jean. Beyond the City Limits, Rural History of British Columbia, Editor, RW Sandwell, UBC Press, Vancouver, 1999, 159-179. Internet Archive. “Report of the Select committee on the causes of the difficulties in the North-West territory in 1869-70.” Journals of the House of Commons 8 http:// archive.org/stream/reportselectcom00geofgoog#page/n218/mode/2up. Library and Archives Canada. “Speech before the house of commons, July 6, 1885.” http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/2/4/h4-4090-e.html. Maclachlan, Morag, ed. Fort Langley Journals, 1827-30. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1998. McKay, Harvey J. St. Paul. Oregon 1830-1890. Portland: Binford and Mort., 1980. Senate Canada. Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, Issue No. 34., “Legal and Political Recognition of Métis Identity in Canada”. (March 20, 2013): 42. http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenCommitteeBusiness/ CommitteeTranscripts.aspx?parl=41&ses=1&Language=E&comm_id=1. The Children of Fort Langley A genealogical listing of 100 men who worked at Fort Langley and links to their modern-day descendants. http://www. fortlangley.ca. Watson, Bruce McIntyre. Life Lived West of the Divide: A Biographical Dictionary of Fur Traders Working West of the Rockies, 1793-1885. Kelowna, BC: The Centre for Social, Spatial and Economic Justice, 2010. This a key resource and has a cheap downloadable pdf version.
Select Theoretical/Methodological Texts
Sandi Wemigwase and Eve Tuck. “Research Before and After the Academy: Learning Participatory Indigenous Methods,” 76-85. B. Brayboy. “Toward a tribal critical race theory in education,” in The Urban Review 37: 5 (2006): 425-446. Catherine Bell and David Kahane, editors. Intercultural Dispute Resolution in Aboriginal Contexts. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2004. Dylan Robinson and Keavy Martin, editors. Arts of Engagement: Taking Aesthetic Action In and Beyond the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Waterloo, ON: Wilfred Laurier Press, 2016. Elsie Paul (with Paige Raibmon and Harmony Johnson). Written as I Remember It: Teachings from the Life of a Sliammon Elder. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2014.
137 Bibliography
Eva MacKey. Unsettled Expectations: Uncertainty, Land and Settler Decolonization. Winnipeg, MB: Fernwood Publishing, 2016. Homi Bhabha. The Location of Culture. New York, NY: Routledge, 1994. Jo-ann Archibald and Amy Parent. “Hands back, Hands forward for Indigenous Storywork as Methodology,” pp. 3-20. John Borrows (Kegedonce). Drawing Out Law: A Spirit’s Guide. Toronto, ON: UTP, 2010. John Borrows and Michael Coyle, editors. The Right Relationship: Reimagining the Implementation of Historical Treaties. Toronto, ON: UTP, 2017. Leanne Betasamosake Simpson. As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom Through Radical Resistance. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2017. Linda Tuhiwai Smith. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Second Edition. New York, NY: Zed Books, 2012. M. Kovach. “Conversation method in Indigenous Research” First Peoples Child and Family Review 5: 1 (2010): 40-48. Paul Ricoeur. On Translation. Translated by Eileen Brennan. New York, NY: Routledge, 2006. Paulette Regan. Unsettling the Settler Within: Indian Residential Schools, Truth Telling, and Reconciliation in Canada. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2010. Shauna MacKinnon, editor. Practicing Community-Based Participatory Research: Stories of Engagement, Empowerment, and Mobilization. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2018. Sweeney Windchief and Timothy San Pedro, editors. Applying Indigenous Research Methods: Storying with Peoples and Communities. New York, NY: Routledge, 2019. Yvonne Poitras Pratt. Digital Storytelling in Indigenous Education: A Decolonizing Journey for a Métis Community. New York, NY: Routledge, 2020.
138 Appendices
139 Appendix 1: General Operational Team Roles and Responsibilities
Appendix 1
Métis Land and Life Project: General Operational Team Roles and Responsibilities
Project Lead
Ø Project lead (PL) leads and executes the project workplan in collaboration with the team
Ø Project lead establishes and maintains relationship with community liaisons.
Ø Reports to BCMF board at board meetings and annual general meetings
Ø Information sharing to the broader community.
Ø Executes the research agenda in partnership with academic lead
Ø Establishes contact with politicians, Indigenous groups, agencies, archives, Universities, Institutes.
Ø PL communicates with team to clarify deliverables
Ø PL assists academic lead to educate operational team on the research agenda
Ø Facilitate progress on academic plan as supported by the academic lead
Ø Travel into communities and leads meetings, interviews, information sessions
Ø Co-authors the final narrative report
Academic Lead
Ø Guides the research agenda in partnership with project lead.
Ø Suggests potential contacts or knowledge sources to PL for initial followup.
Ø Assists with content for marketing, website, academic information, eg. surveys etc.
Ø Communicates with project lead to ensure reporting deliverables and academic research agenda
Ø Monitors research tasks in collaboration with team
Ø Attends meetings at the request of the project lead. AGMs, etc.
Ø Co-authors the final narrative report
140
Project Administrator
Ø Communicates regularly with CEO and financial officer as needed and reports to PL
Ø Identifies and books meetings, large or small and set itineraries for community members and project team within budget.
Ø Work with team to ensure process for reimbursement and release cheques.
Ø As part of team ensure project data and financial records are stored appropriately.
Ø Communicates with team on budget and works with BCMF staff
Ø Refers questions about research to academic lead and project lead
Ø Travel into communities for meetings, interviews, info sessions as required
Project Assistants
Ø Takes direction from project lead, academic lead and manager
Ø Familiarize with overall research agenda and the work plan and all information and handouts.
Ø Assist with research in accordance of main areas of research in the research agenda at the direction of senior team members. (refer to Research agenda)
Ø Documenting available primary or secondary sources according to proper citations.
Ø Travel into communities to assist at meetings, interviews, and information sharing sessions.
Ø Processing information collected at meetings, interviews and information sessions
Ø As part of team ensure project data and financial records are stored appropriately.
Ø Editing and formatting
141 Appendix 2: Initial Correspondance to Community Leaders
Appendix 2: Initial correspondence to community leaders
Hi ______
It was great to connect with you by phone and introduce you to the BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Reference Study, a traditional land-use study to identify Métis connections to land. I am the project facilitator.
This is a 10 month study and will support increased awareness of traditional knowledge and community perspectives, increased communication, community self determination and the ability to identify and understand impacts of resource development on traditional land.
We have a unique approach - this project is grounded in protocol, relationship building and community self determination.
As part of the protocol of identifying key people I invited you to forward names of those who may be able to attend a meeting on the August 24 weekend in Vancouver.
If people can't travel in August we want to make plans to come to your community!
As well we seek to establish community liaisons and there is some funding for these roles. I invite you to forward names of those interested in connecting with people in this important role to get the stories heard. Perhaps you may be interested in becoming a liaison!
I value your feedback and look forward to an ongoing conversation!
Regards
Joe Desjarlais Project Facilitator BC Métis Federation Métis Terrestrial Reference Study
142 Appendix 3: Métis Land and Life Project Press Release
Appendix 3
Métis Land and Life Project press release
Wednesday, August 14th, 2019
For Immediate Release Via email and BCMF website BC Métis Federation announces a ground-breaking “Métis Land and Life Project”
(Vancouver, BC) BC Métis Federation is pleased to announce a ground breaking traditional land use study. The ten-month Métis community-led and community-based study will explore the long-standing relationships that Métis peoples have had with each other, with Canadian society, and with the land. Project facilitator Joe Desjarlais states, "Métis have been largely invisible in BC and many people assume we didn't use or currently do not use the land. This exciting study sets the stage for bringing our history and memory out of the background of Canada's past and, in the process, position us to establish a very different kind of relationship with Canada, one that is grounded in respect and recognition!"
The Métis Terrestrial Reference Study is entitled, “The Métis Land and Life Project” which will explore how to recognize existing Métis practices along the TransMountain Pipeline Extension corridor and how to appropriately protect existing Métis harvesting and living patterns. The project's goal is to better understand how we can know Métis relationships to the land.
Project leader Desjarlais concludes, "There is Métis history and memory as well as contemporary use by our Métis people along the project corridor and we need to account for it. Métis want to be recognized and respected by Canadian society, they want proper relationships with all levels of government, and, perhaps most importantly, they want to express who they are and their connections to land and place. The project is about understanding connections to the land and empowering individuals and communities so that they can share their knowledge in ways that benefit their long-term well being."
Watch for ongoing updates including community meetings about this project and how you can become involved! For more information please contact Joe Desjarlais - Project facilitator at 778-892-0095 BC Métis Federation thanks the Government of Canada, Natural Resources Canada, for the support of this important project. For more information about the BC Métis Federation go to www.bcMétis.com.
Media Inquiries: Keith Henry, President BC Métis Federation #300-3665 Kingsway Vancouver, BC V5R 5W2 Office 1-604-638-7220 Cell 1-778-388-5013 Email [email protected]
143 Appendix 4: BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study
Appendix 4
Métis Land and Life Project
BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study
Description: The Métis Land and Life Project is a ten-month community-led and community-based land use study that will begin to uncover the long-standing kinship relationships that Métis peoples have had with each other and with the land, especially as they relate to the TransMountain Pipeline Extension corridor. Facilitated by the BCMF’s Métis Land and Life team led by Joe Desjarlais, the study will explain how we can recognize existing connections to the land through harvesting activities such as hunting, fishing and gathering, and through historical experience and spiritual exercises. In short, the Métis Land and Life Project's goal is to better understand how our member communities understand and represent the practice of being Métis.
While some of this information is apparent in the current cultural or economic practices of Métis in BC, much of our ways of living are buried in family stories or lost in individual memory. The Land and Life Project team hope to assist Métis community leaders and individual BCMF members in bringing their contemporary and historical connections to the land into focus. This is very important work: Understanding and affirming the land- use practices of individual Métis communities in BC is necessary in order to appropriately protect Métis harvesting and living patterns, and it is an important step in the journey towards establishing a very different kind of relationship with Canada, one that is grounded in respect and recognition.
As Métis Land and Life Project leader Desjarlais has stated, "There is Métis history and memory as well as contemporary use by our Métis people along the project corridor and we need to account for it. Métis want to be recognized and respected by Canadian society, they want proper relationships with all levels of government, and, perhaps most importantly, they want to express who they are and their connections to land and place.”
At today’s meeting, we will outline the scope and intent of the Métis Land and Life Project and establish ways in which the BCMF and its member communities in BC can cooperate to acknowledge and represent Métis land-use along the TransMountain Pipeline Extension corridor. You will learn how a partnership between the Métis Land and Life team and individual Métis communities through “Community Liaisons” is meant to strengthen and energize our collective understanding of who we are as Indigenous Peoples and to empower individuals to share their knowledge in ways that benefit their community’s long-term wellbeing.
144 Appendix 5: Innaugural Information Session Agenda
Appendix 5
Métis Land and Life Project
BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Inaugural Information Session Element Vancouver Metrotown 5988 Willingdon Ave Burnaby, BC Sunday, August 25th, 2019 1:00 PM – 4:00 PM
Agenda
1. Welcome and Opening Remarks - Keith Henry 1:00 PM 2. Prayer - Local Elder 1:10 PM 3. Establishing Good Relations - Joe Desjarlais 1:15 PM a. Métis Protocol b. Métis Practices 4. The Métis Land and Life Project - Drake Henry and Angel Fisher 1:45 PM a. Project objectives b. Project description (phases, activities, and deliverables) 5. Open Dialogue - Led by Joe Desjarlais 2:00 PM 6. Coffee Break: 2:30 PM 7. Community-based, Community-led research - Dr. Bruce Shelvey 2:45 PM a. Role of the community liaison 8. Break Out Session – Joe Desjarlais, Drake Henry, Angel Fisher 3:00 PM a. Individual Q&A 9. Wrap Up - Joe Desjarlais 3:50 PM 10. Farewell Prayer - Community Elder 3:55 PM Dinner and Ongoing Dialogue 5:00 PM
145 Appendix 6: Project Brief
Appendix 6
Métis Land and Life Project Project Brief
What is the purpose of this land-use study you call the “Métis Land and Life Project”? The Métis Land and Life Project will gather knowledge about contemporary and historical Métis land use in, around, and along the TransMountain Pipeline Extension (TMX) corridor in B.C. The TMX is owned by the Canadian government and they are required to consult with all Indigenous Peoples and to consider the impacts that the project will have on their way of life. The BC Métis Federation, on behalf of its membership, received funds from Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN) to study and report back on the short and long-term impacts of the pipeline construction and on-going operation. Our goal is to clearly show that BC Métis Federation members have an on-going interest in using the lands and resources along the TMX corridor.
Where is the TMX corridor and how will it impact me? Here is a map of the proposed corridor:
BC Métis Federation members and local communities should have a say in how the Canadian government develops land and resources, especially when these plans have a direct impact on Métis economic (hunting, fishing, gathering), cultural (historical or contemporary practices) or spiritual (gathering locations, burial sites) activities. It does not matter whether you live directly in the path of the corridor. Any BC Métis Federation member who has family connections, prior use history, or seasonal activities within this area is qualified to participate. By showing that the TMX is going to impact some or all of these Métis activities, the BC Métis Federation can negotiate on your behalf to lessen the impact and to seek compensation for lost opportunities.
Why should I participate in the Métis Land and Life Project? The Métis Land and Life Project is an opportunity to introduce your unique Métis perspective directly into the Canadian government’s
146 economic development plans. NRCAN is acknowledging Métis land-use along the TMX corridor in British Columbia, but at this point there is little hard evidence to support how and to what extent we utilize the land and resources. This land-use study may well be the first opportunity that Métis peoples in BC have had to make our way of life known in order to influence the development of natural resources in BC!
What is unique about the Métis Land and Life Project and how can I be involved? The BC Métis Federation understands this land-use study as a way to build lasting relationships through gathering and sharing our knowledge and history. Community Liaisons will be an important link between the Métis Land and Life Project team and individual Métis peoples in BC. We seek to establish a Community Liaison from your own region because we want to make sure that the information that is gathered and reported is by your community and for your community. Over the next few months, liaisons will identify storytellers, elders, knowledge keepers, and hunters, trappers, fishers and gatherers in each community, organize community meetings in your area to gather members who want to be more informed of or participate in the project, and arrange for one-on-one information sharing sessions with key people. Our team will come to your community, participate in community events, build relationships, and record any information that you have about Métis land-use in the TMX corridor.
What will happen with the information that I share with the Métis Land and Life Team? Together the BC Métis Federation Métis Land and Life Project team, the Community Liaison, and you as individual Métis member have the opportunity to show the government of Canada that Métis continue to use the land and resources along the TMX corridor. The BC Métis Federation is committed to sharing information with the government that is relevant to this aim but will do so in a way that respects your local community and protects individual members. Simply stated, the knowledge from the Métis Land and Life Project is owned by the diverse communities in cooperation with the BC Métis Federation. We commit to working with the BC Métis Federation members in order to produce a report that is a reflection of our shared values and goals.
Is this going to be cost me time and money? What am I going to get out of it? The Métis Land and Life Project team wants to establish good relations with you and your community. We will fund community events so that we can meet to undertake this project. Because the communities own their own knowledge and have the right to benefit from it, our goal is to draw the knowledge out of the community by building strong relationships! Governments and industry have long denied or ignored Métis history and existence in BC. In an age of reconciliation in Canada, we hope to empower you in your community to fully express and exercise your right to be Métis. When you take the time to share what you know about Métis land- use along the TMX corridor, you enable the BC Métis Federation to represent your interests and move us towards a proper relationship with the rest of Canadian society. The Métis Land and Life Project is about the ability of Métis people to live within their traditions, connected to land and culture. You can be part of a renewal led by communities themselves!
Where else can I be involved in shaping a new future for Métis in BC? In addition to the knowledge you share with us, the Métis Land and Life Project team will collect historical and contemporary Métis land- use information from relevant social, institutional and news media outlets as well as from other potential sources like libraries, archives, and special collections. If you know of relevant information please let one of the Métis Land and Life Project team know! It is our hope that this project will lead to the recognition and renewal of Métis practices, to the reformation and restoration of strong friendships, and to the exercise and extension of proper relationships, based upon what is the best for one another!
For further information contact Project Leader Joe Desjarlais - 778-892-0095 or j.desjarlais@bcMétis.com
147 economic development plans. NRCAN is acknowledging Métis land-use along the TMX corridor in British Columbia, but at this point there is little hard evidence to support how and to what extent we utilize the land and resources. This land-use study may well be the first opportunity that Métis peoples in BC have had to make our way of life known in order to influence the development of natural resources in BC!
What is unique about the Métis Land and Life Project and how can I be involved? The BC Métis Federation understands this land-use study as a way to build lasting relationships through gathering and sharing our knowledge and history. Community Liaisons will be an important link between the Métis Land and Life Project team and individual Métis peoples in BC. We seek to establish a Community Liaison from your own region because we want to make sure that the information that is gathered and reported is by your community and for your community. Over the next few months, liaisons will identify storytellers, elders, knowledge keepers, and hunters, trappers, fishers and gatherers in each community, organize community meetings in your area to gather members who want to be more informed of or participate in the project, and arrange for one-on-one information sharing sessions with key people. Our team will come to your community, participate in community events, build relationships, and record any information that you have about Métis land-use in the TMX corridor.
What will happen with the information that I share with the Métis Land and Life Team? Together the BC Métis Federation Métis Land and Life Project team, the Community Liaison, and you as individual Métis member have the opportunity to show the government of Canada that Métis continue to use the land and resources along the TMX corridor. The BC Métis Federation is committed to sharing information with the government that is relevant to this aim but will do so in a way that respects your local community and protects individual members. Simply stated, the knowledge from the Métis Land and Life Project is owned by the diverse communities in cooperation with the BC Métis Federation. We commit to working with the BC Métis Federation members in order to produce a report that is a reflection of our shared values and goals.
Is this going to be cost me time and money? What am I going to get out of it? The Métis Land and Life Project team wants to establish good relations with you and your community. We will fund community events so that we can meet to undertake this project. Because the communities own their own knowledge and have the right to benefit from it, our goal is to draw the knowledge out of the community by building strong relationships! Governments and industry have long denied or ignored Métis history and existence in BC. In an age of reconciliation in Canada, we hope to empower you in your community to fully express and exercise your right to be Métis. When you take the time to share what you know about Métis land- use along the TMX corridor, you enable the BC Métis Federation to represent your interests and move us towards a proper relationship with the rest of Canadian society. The Métis Land and Life Project is about the ability of Métis people to live within their traditions, connected to land and culture. You can be part of a renewal led by communities themselves!
Where else can I be involved in shaping a new future for Métis in BC? In addition to the knowledge you share with us, the Métis Land and Life Project team will collect historical and contemporary Métis land- use information from relevant social, institutional and news media outlets as well as from other potential sources like libraries, archives, and special collections. If you know of relevant information please let one of the Métis Land and Life Project team know! It is our hope that this project will lead to the recognition and renewal of Métis practices, to the reformation and restoration of strong friendships, and to the exercise and extension of proper relationships, based upon what is the best for one another!
For further information contact Project Leader Joe Desjarlais - 778-892-0095 or j.desjarlais@bcMétis.com
Appendix 7: Métis Land and Life Study Map
Appendix 7
Métis Land and Life Study Map P:______
Name:______Date of Birth: ______(YYYY/MM/DD)
On the map identify any of the following land-use locations by placing a pin with the appropriate reference label attached:
Specific Harvesting Locations (Red Flagged Pins):
� Hunting: ______(A)
� Large Animal Habitat: (breeding, birthing, licks, grazing, shelters) ______(B)
� Small Animal Habitat: (nesting, breeding, hibernating, migrating, staging) ______(C)
� Trapping Grounds/Lines: ______(D)
� Fishing Sites: ______(E)
� Fish Habitat (spawning areas, migration route) ______(F)
� Berry/Root/Vegetable Gathering Grounds ______(G)
� Traditional Plants (medicine, crafts, materials, fuel, food, spices) ______(H)
� Other Resources (rocks, minerals, timber, spring water) ______(I)
Physical Locations and Places
� Cabins or Camping Areas ______(J)
� Trails and Pathways (Mark trailheads) ______(K)
� Gravesites and Burial Grounds ______(L)
� Archaeological Sites ______(M)
� Cultural or Spiritual Sites ______(N)
� Special Areas or Landmarks ______(O)
148 Appendix 8: Long Form Map Questions
Appendix 8
Long form Map Questions for BCMF Métis Terrestrial Reference Study (Métis Land and Life Study)
Date: Location of Interview: Interviewer:
Name of Interviewee (include Métis name if known): Date of Birth:
Kinship Network (if known):
Connection to Place (if known):
Reference Number (Initials and Year of Birth): - example: John Doe, November 1, 1950 = JD50
Section One: General Land-use Questions:
Do you have any general memories or family stories of Métis living in BC?
Show them a map of the TMX Corridor with common city names and broad “band” along the TMX corridor:
We are going to ask you about your knowledge of any Métis historical or contemporary use in or around the area included in the TMX corridor. It would be most useful if you can point out specific locations on the map and provide some contextual information for each one. These questions are meant to prompt your memory about Métis land use in this region.
Section Two: Specific Harvesting Questions
1) Do you know where Métis hunt in the TMX corridor? If yes, please: a) Mark locations and species on the map, with time of year. - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(1): ______
b) Are there any cultural uses for particular species?
149 2) Do you know where are special areas for large animals in the TMX corridor (eg., birthing areas, mineral licks, migration routes, feeding areas, shelter areas, breeding areas, etc)? If yes, please: a) Mark locations and species on the map, and time of year. - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(2): ______
b) Is there a specific time of year associated with these specific areas/activities?
3) Do you know where are the special areas for small animals, birds, reptiles, insects, or anything, in the TMX corridor (eg., nesting, breeding, hibernating, migrating, staging, etc areas)? If yes, please: a) Mark locations and species on the map, and time of year. - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(3): ______
b) Do you know any seasonal patterns for these activities?
4) Do you know where Métis trap in the TMX corridor? If yes, please: a) Mark locations of traplines and species trapped on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(4): ______
b) Are there special habitats for trapped species? Do any furbearing animals have specific cultural importance?
5) Do you know where Métis fish in the TMX corridor? If yes, please: a) Mark locations and species on the map, and time of year. - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(5): ______
b) What, if any, are the cultural uses for particular species, whether subsistence and/or commercial?
6) Do you know where there are special areas for fish in the TMX corridor (eg., spawing areas)? If yes, please: a) Mark locations and species on the map, and time of year. - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(6): ______
b) Are there any specific seasonal patterns associated with these activities?
7) Do you know where Métis collect berries in the TMX corridor? If yes, please: a) Mark locations and berry species on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(7): ______
b) How are these berries used? (eg., domestic or commercial consumption, dyes, medicines,)
8) Do you know where Métis collect other traditional plants in the TMX corridor? If yes, please:
150 a) Mark locations and species collected on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(8): ______
b) What are specific traditional plants used for (eg., medicines, crafts, building materials, heat, commercial or personal consumption, mushrooms, etc.)?
9) Do you know if Métis gather or harvest any other resources in the TMX corridor? (eg: Rocks, minerals (gold mining), timber, spring water, etc) a) Mark locations and species collected on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(9): ______
b) What are the specific uses of these materials (eg., crafts, building materials, income, medicinal effects, culture, etc)?
Section Three: Physical Locations and Places
A) Do you know where there any Métis cabins or camping areas in or around the TMX corridor? If yes, please: a) Mark locations on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(A): ______
b) Are they abandoned or still in use? What were/are they used for? c) Are there any historic, heritage or cultural values associated with the sites.
B) Do you know of any Métis trails that cross through or near to the TMX corridor? If yes, please: a) Mark them on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(B): ______
b) Are they abandoned or still in use? What were/are they used for?
C) Do you know of any Métis gravesites or burial grounds within the TMX corridor region? If yes: a) Mark them on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(C): ______
b) What are the identifying features of these sites? (ie: gravestones, crosses, etc)
D) Do you know of any sites with archaeological significance for Métis within the TMX corridor region? If yes: a) Mark locations on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(D): ______
b) To the best of your knowledge, what might be found at these sites?
151
E) Do you know of any special cultural or spiritual sites for Métis within the TMX corridor region? If yes: a) Mark locations on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(E): ______
b) Describe the importance of these kinds of sites:
F) Are there any special features or landmarks within the TMX corridor that are important because they are associated with Métis oral tradition, stories, songs or material culture (beading, weaving, art, etc)? If yes: a) Mark locations on the map - Reference: Initials/YofB/Question number: ex: JD50(F): ______
b) Can you describe why the location is important?
152 Appendix 9: Research Agenda
Appendix 9
Métis Land and Life Project
BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study
Research Agenda
Purpose: To identify key resources that will assist the BCMF in gathering knowledge about historical and contemporary Métis land use in, around and along the TMP-X corridor. To establish information system to manage and protect Métis knowledge for the benefit of Métis member communities. To identify specific repositories that hold knowledge of Métis land-use, kinship patterns, and mobility networks within BC.
Scope: Historical and contemporary land-use, including hunting and harvesting practices, residential and migratory patterns, and spiritual and emotional connections. Research on these economic, social and cultural considerations will require an inventory of sources including reviewing relevant academic and popular literature, identifying academic experts and community knowledge keepers, monitoring of social, institutional and news media, mapping kinship relations, and cataloguing primary documents in local, regional and national archives.
Outcome: To understand the knowledge-based resources relevant to Métis histories and geographies that are available to the BCMF. The capacity to know and understand past and present Métis land-use practices will enable the BCMF to effectively represent its members when negotiating with the Crown over the impact of the TMP-X on Métis communities and the mitigation of its effects on Métis land-use.
Main Areas of Research:
Bibliography of Relevant Secondary/Published Sources - this includes academic literature and popular works - research includes early fur trade, colony, provincialism, and contemporary land-use
Index of Relevant Published Primary Sources/Government Reports - early fur trade journals (Fort Langley, etc.) - journals/reports of government officials (Boundary Commission) - Papers Relating to the Indian Land Question - the McKenna-McBride Report - other contemporary studies, statistical databases, gov’t reports
153
Inventory of Experts and Organizations (websites/resources) - Evans (UBCO), Barman (UBC), Goulet, Sloan (UVic), McCormick (TRU), etc. - BCMF, MNBC, Nova, Kelly Lake, UBCIC - knowledge keepers, elders and community/family historians
Monitoring of Media - Social: FB, Twitter, Instagram - Institutional: National, provincial and local governments, Indigenous organizations, corporations and companies, universities and public policy and research centres - News: CBC, Global, etc.
Identify Holdings in Archives and Special Collections - newspapers (inventory of historical databases or collections) - personal papers (Métis individuals, communities, activists) - government documents (RG10) - Possible Archives include: - BC Provincial Archives - University of Washington - UBC Archives and Special Collections - Local archives in Prince George, Merrit, Peace River district, etc. - HBCo Archives in Winnipeg (On-line) - Rupertsland Centre for Métis Research (RCMR) – UofA - Gabriel Dumont Institute - see exhaustive list of archives and repositories - http://www.metismuseum.ca/moccasin_telegraph.php - Glenbow Archives (Calgary)
Mapping of Métis Kinship and Mobility Networks - family and community connections with specific reference to their practice, operation and function within BC
154 Appendix 10: Community Liason Roles and Responsibilities
Appendix 11
“Métis Land and Life Project” BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study
“Connect with People, Land and Place”
Community Liaison Role and Responsibilities
Thank you for your interest in becoming a Community Liaison or, if you are not able to fulfill the role, your suggestion of others who may be interested! Liaisons are community champions who are willing to partner with the BCMF Métis Land and Life team. Liaisons represent their individual Métis community in order to build capacity and empower people to share their knowledge about the land in ways that benefit their community’s long-term wellbeing.
The Land and Life team will work with Community Liaisons to carry out this land-use study in a good way and in the process build sustainable, long-term relationships with members and communities. As part of the good practices that are guided by Métis principles, we believe that knowledge is owned by communities and individuals. Therefore, appropriate access to community knowledge will only come out of relationship building. In other words, the Métis Land and Life team do not pretend to be experts that know your community. We rely on your knowledge of where to meet, how and where best to facilitate local meetings, and who to invite. You know your community, its nuances, the elders and knowledge keepers, and your land-based experts!
For this land-use study to be successful, the Community Liaison will assume specific responsibilities. Although not a nine-to-five job, there is an expectation that you will build positive relationships with the Métis Land and Life team as we together do the exciting work of renewing our collective memory. Your work will be to bring people together in meetings and to inspire local community members to get excited about sharing their local knowledge and ways of knowing! The primary function of a Community Liaison is to mediate between the Land and Life team and your local community. This includes: • Coordinating opportunities within communities to gather information. • Assisting with planning and attending meetings. • Communicating with local people. • Listening to and learning from people. • Providing the Métis land and Life team with community feedback and suggestions about where to draw out community knowledge. Eg. Events, local archives, universities.
We want your local community to take ownership of this project. This means “knowledge by Métis, for Métis and others!” Knowledge must benefit members in your local community.
To this end we thank you for your willingness to participate!
155 Appendix 11: Summary Report
Appendix 13
Métis Land and Life Project - BC Métis Federation Terrestrial Study Summary Report
The Métis Land and Life Project is a Métis land-use study, with a specific focus on the TMX corridor. The team invites community members to share their knowledge about land use with the objective of finding out who holds the knowledge about Métis connections to place. We ask the questions of Métis in various communities across BC like: “Do you have any historical and current connections with this region?” “What is the past and present Métis presence on the land and water”? We want to know the Métis connection to place, the person(s) who made these connections, and the purpose for their interaction with land or natural resources. The Land and Life team includes: Joe Desjarlais as project lead; Drake Henry and Angel Fisher are project assistants; Dr. Bruce Shelvey is academic lead; and Sherry Daniels provides administrative support.
There are four phases to this project. The First Phase, completed between July to September (2019), included initial planning, launching the program, identifying community liaisons, and developing the academic plan. The Second Phase, undertaken between October and December included communicating and training community liaisons, meeting with liaisons and community members in regions like Kelowna, Terrace, Clearwater, Victoria and the Lower Mainland. In this initial engagement, the team continued to identify and catalogue general reference points along the TMX corridor, with an emphasis on place, people, and purpose. Using an Indigenous research methodology, the Land and Life team gathered information from community members on topics ranging from hunting, fishing and gathering sites to sacred spaces, burial grounds and harvesting camps. A large map was used to visually represent not only the TMX corridor, but also the information gathered from the memory and history of Métis peoples across BC.
This project is community led, community based, and knowledge is owned by the local community. The Indigenous Research Methodology relies upon community liaisons to make vital links to the local community. The team relies on their knowledge and advice to know where to meet, how and where best to facilitate local meetings, and who to invite. Liaisons assist by coordinating opportunities within communities to gather information, assisting with planning and attending meetings, communicating and building relationships with local people, and providing the team with community feedback and suggestions about where to draw out community knowledge including oral testimony, government reports, and local archives. The information coming out of community research has been priceless and the team is excited to see what else is uncovered in community-based research.
Dr Shelvey has assisted with implementing an academic plan to gather and store information from the historical record and from community knowledge. To date the team has conducted two academic research trips to significant archives in Victoria and Seattle. Research is ongoing and includes the
156 creation of an expansive bibliography that will identify key primary and secondary sources that contain useful information on historic and contemporary Métis presence in BC. The purpose of the bibliography is to understand how Métis memory has been systematically denied and how Métis communities today can regain control over their own history. The right to celebrate being Métis in BC means leveraging the reality of a longstanding presence on the land in the province in order to gain a voice in BC’s economic development projects and the government’s development plans. Armed with the knowledge of a sustained and dynamic history that included kindship networks that spanned the Pacific Northwest, this project empowers local members and communities to be fully Métis and encourages them to assume their rightful place as partners in the future plans of the province.
The land and life team will be completing initial community engagements in January and thereafter will work with the liaisons to gather feedback and suggestions as we begin to analyze and interpret the data. The next phase (January to March) can include further information sharing as well as sitting down with elders and knowledge keepers and talk about specifics, identifying key people in a ‘case study’ format that can provide the team with more specific information. The last phase (April-June) includes completion of community meetings, maintaining a feedback loop with the community liaisons, and writing a final report based upon feedback from communities.
157 Appendix 12: Project Lead Report
Appendix 15
Report on the Métis Land and Life Project January 24 -25, 2020
By Project Lead Joe Desjarlais
Welcome to the Planning meeting! This meeting also fulfils information sharing and engages community members in the process
My name is Joe Desjarlais and I am the project lead for the Métis Land and life project (TSI)
Context for the project
1. The Terrestrial Studies Initiative (TSI)
2. The Terrestrial Cumulative Effects Initiative
3. The approved TSI work plan objective: “to facilitate Indigenous participation in dialogues relating to natural resource development by supporting the review and update of a traditional land use study.”
4. Approved work plan description: “The recipient will identify the location of historic and contemporary Métis fishing, hunting and gathering territories through a knowledge partnership model..”
5. What is the project? At its core this is a land use study. We invite people to share their knowledge about land use in the Trans Mountain corridor.
6. Phases and project timeframe: There are 4 phases
7. The knowledge partnership model and Indigenous methodology is key to the success of this study and community liaisons are vital.
8. Progress in achieving project outcomes
9. General reflections from feedback
158 10. Why is this project important going forward?
11. General observations about feedback from project lead
12. Reflections on liaison feedback
13. Questions to consider going forward
A. How can we equip liaisons to build strong local community relationships and break down barriers and support local community cohesion?
“Outcomes happen at the speed of relationship building.”
B. Ongoing plan - How can this study translate into the cumulative study and beyond?
C. Building on our current work - a BC Métis Federation knowledge division
14. Planning for current community engagement – Action items
159 Appendix 13: Jack Land Use Interview Transcript
Appendix 16
Transcript of Jack
Jack Land Use Interview
Joe: Good afternoon Jack, I’m going to ask you some specific harvesting questions regarding the Métis land and life study. Do you know where Métis hunt in the Trans Mountain corridor? If yes, please help me locations and species on the map and time of year.
Jack: Sure, a lot of our family lived in the Jasper area, and later moved into the Valemont area which is right where the pipeline goes through. We did a lot of moose hunting, some trapping for animals, and fishing along the Fraser river down there. Growing up that’s what we learned what to do, hunt moose and bear.
Joe: Would you associate any of these activities with a time of year?
Jack: Oh of course, we did most of our moose hunting in the Fall and in the spring we would go and hunt bear. We did some elk hunting too.
Joe: Just to reiterate, we’re talking about the Jasper area and down into the Valemount area.
Jack: Yes we are.
Joe: Are there any specific cultural uses for these species?
Jack: Well my grandmother taught us how to use every part of the animal that we hunted and harvested. We used the hide and ate the meat. We used everything together, we never believed in wasting any part of the animals. The ladies would tan the hides, we did everything.
Joe: Do you know of any special areas for large animals in the TMX corridor? Including birthing areas, breeding areas, salt licks, feeding areas, migration patterns. And if yes, can you mark them on the map?
Jack: Yes, so as I said we went through the Jasper area through into the Valemont area. Along the corridor near Valemont there’s plenty of good moose hunting around there. Everything along the Fraser river was a wonderful corridor for wildlife that we harvested.
Joe: Is there a specific time of year again that’re associated with these activities?
Jack: Well most of our harvesting was done in the fall, from September to November.
160 Joe: Do you know where there are any special areas for small animals, birds, reptiles, insects or anything in the TMX corridor that is related to nesting, breeding, hibernating, staging, feeding. And if so, can you point it out?
Jack: So we also do a lot of grouse hunting in the Valemont area. There’s tonnes of birds around there; but we only harvested grouse. If you go anywhere along that corridor, there’s tonnes of places along the river to see animals feeding and nesting.
Joe: Again, would you say that the seasonal activities are also held in the Fall?
Jack: Yes.
Joe: Do you know where Métis trap in the TMX corridor? If yes, can you mark locations the map?
Jack: A lot of the trapping we did would’ve been in the Valemont area and the Tête-Jaune Cache, which is about 20 km away from Valemont because of all the mountains around there. My uncle had a trapline out there and my dad would go up with him and trap. The other thing is that we had some conflict with the local north Thompson Indian band as they claimed that land but we only used that land to collect food for our families, so we didn’t have a lot of issues with them.
Joe: can you elaborate on the Tête-Jaune area?
Jack: Sure, The Tête-Jaune Cache was a Métis settlement years and years ago. Tête-Jaune was an Iroquois Métis person that opened up the yellow head trail. He had a cache there to store his food safely. Eventually it was a thriving community since paddlers would come up the river there.
Joe: Are there any special habitats for trap species?
Jack: Well I think that whole corridor, if you go down the Fraser, there’s tonnes of species there. Bears, deer, elk, everything you can imagine. That’s why we went there, it was very bountiful for us.
Joe: Do you know where Métis fish in the TMX corridor? If so, can you indicate them on the map?
Jack: Well the Fraser River had lots of fish in it. We didn’t eat much fish, but you had to eat some in the winter if you needed food and couldn’t hunt. Mainly trout in there.
Joe: What if any are the cultural uses for the fish? Be it for sustenance or commercial?
Jack: Well we mainly just ate what we caught, trout or salmon.
161
Joe: Do you know where there are special areas for fish? For instance, spawning areas?
Jack: Oh yes, near the Cache there’s a salmon spawning area in there. Joe: Are there any specific seasonal patterns associated with these activities?
Jack: Well the salmon would always come up in the early fall or late summer to spawn. It was easiest to catch them there since they’re waiting around to spawn.
Joe: Do you know where Métis collect berries along the TMX corridor? If yes can you point them out on the map?
Jack: Sure. So in the early summer time my mother and aunt would go out and get berries near Valemont and the Cache and collect lots of berries for us. We would come home after being out all day and we’d have fresh pies.
Joe: How else are these berries used?
Jack: Well, there were blackberries, wild berries, blueberries. And they’d harvest them to put in different foods. My mom used to put blueberries in pemmican, or make them into pies, or preserve them for us.
Joe: Do you know where Métis collect other traditional plants in the TMX corridor? If yes can you mark locations and species?
Jack: My grandmother used to collect mosses and herbs for medicines and knew all the locations up between Jasper, the Cache, and Valemont. She also collected wildflowers, things like that.
Joe: What are specific traditional plants used for? Medicines, building materials, etc.?
Jack: Yeah. So a lot of the medicinal stuff, she used herbs for that. If you took the pebbles off the flowers she would use those for artistic design on her moccasins. She would sometimes brew herbal teas for us. She would gather dandelions, wildflowers, grass stems, bark; yeah she used everything.
Joe: Do you know if Métis gather or harvest any other resources in the TMX corridor? For instance rocks, timber, spring water. If so, can you mark locations and species.
Jack: Sure; so what happened to our particular family is that once the hunting and fishing dried up they lost those cultural skills. So, then they started logging and harvesting trees to making a living and support their families.
162 Jack: Some are abandoned but some are in use. Because of modern technology, people drive along those corridors now. A lot of people hunt on those old trails near Valemont.
Joe: Do you know of any Métis gravesites or burial grounds in the TMX corridor? If so can you mark them on the map?
Jack: I know in Valemont some of our relatives are buried there. I’m not sure of Tête-Jaune Cache was buried there or if there’s a gravesite there. I’m not exactly sure where.
Joe: Are there any identifying features of these sites? Or are they mostly unmarked graves?
Jack: Some of the graves in Valemont have their traditional Métis names on the headstones. I know in Tête-Jaune Cache there would be unmarked graves up there.
Joe: Do you know of any sites of any archeological significance to the Métis? If so can you mark any on the map?
Jack: Well in Tête-Jaune Cache for sure, it’s a pretty prominent place since it played a significant role in the early development of BC. I’d imagine there was some type of markings there.
Joe: To the best of your abilities, could you describe what could be found in these places?
Jack: Well if you know the history of Tête-Jaune Cache. A lot of the area was destroyed by flooding and fires. But a lot of our people and family members lived there. Every year we try to get the grandkids up there and let them know that their past relatives lived there. I think its historically significant to the Métis people since Tête-Jaune Cache was one of the first earliest Métis explorers to open up a passage for other explorers and traders.
Joe: Do you know of any special cultural or spiritual sites for Métis within the corridor?
Jack: As I said, to us and our particular family Tête-Jaune Cache is a very sacred place for us. Our ancestors played a large role in the fur trade in BC. So for us it means a lot, and we consider that a spiritual place. If you’ve ever been up there, you’re surrounded by beautiful trees and animals and that’s where our spirit and cultural comes from.
Joe: Are there any special features or landmarks within the TMX corridor that are important because they are associated with Métis oral traditions, stories, songs, or material cultural such as beading or weaving?
Jack: Well I know of some of our family in Valemont get together often and did jigging, dancing, beading when they’d meet together. So mainly in that area they celebrate being Métis.
Joe: The last question I have is just a general land use question and its more open ended. Do you have any general memories or family stories of Métis living in BC?
163 Appendix #: Knowledge Partnerships (Investment/Reconciliation)
Jack: Well, in our family we moved along where the work was. We moved from the Valemont and Cache area down the highway to Kamloops looking for logging work. Eventually moving down to Fort Langley and New Westminister and then of course to the island here; all related to the forestry industry since you moved where the employment was. But everywhere you went there were Métis people. I lived in Port Alberni here for a number of years and there’s a strong community there, even some from the prairies. They all came here for the forestry industry opportunities as well. And they had dances, parades, a lot of cultural activates. A lot of Métis communities on the island here continue to thrive. I know it’s not on the corridor but we all ended up here.
Joe: Thank you very much Jack for your time.
164 Appendix 14: Sheila Land Use Interview Transcript
Appendix 17
Transcript of Sheila
Land and Life Project- Sheila Interview
Joe: Hi Sheila, thank you for assisting with this interview. I’m going to begin with specific harvesting questions. Number one, do you know where Métis hunt in the trans-mountain corridor? If yes, can you help me mark locations, species, and perhaps time of year?
Sheila: They hunt all along the waterways, rivers and parks. They would hunt up near those areas.
Joe: Which rivers are those?
Sheila: I think it was the North Thompson River, and the raft river.
Joe: Are there any cultural uses for particular species, if so could you describe the species of animals.
Sheila: Well they would hunt moose, deer, and at one time my mom told me they would hunt elk. They would hunt for food and would harvest hides to make gauntlets and clothing. Mom remembers gauntlets and moccasins being made with tanned moose hide.
Joe: Number two, do you where are any special areas for large animals? Such as mineral licks, migration routes, feeding, or breeding areas?
Sheila: Up around Star Lake. There’s an area called the “Wilds Grey area.” Also all up in Blue river, but my family did not go past Blue River.
Joe: Any particular or time of year?
Sheila: Would be in the fall, and my family would hunt during that time.
Joe: Number three, do you know of any special areas for small animals? Including birds, reptiles, insects; in relating to breeding, nesting, migrating?
Sheila: I remember grouse were hunted while my family did other hunting. In the summer my family did rabbit snaring. They would follow areas around lakes and rivers mainly.
Joe: Are there any particular seasonal patterns for these activities?
Sheila: I’m unsure. They did hunt at a particular time in the fall normally, if their food stocks were ruined they would have to hunt in the spring. But typically it would be in the fall.
165 Appendix 17 Joe: Number four, do you know where Métis trap in the TMX corridor? Transcript of Sheila Sheila: No I don’t. Land and Life Project- Sheila Interview Joe: Number five, do you know where Métis fish in the TMX corridor? Joe: Hi Sheila, thank you for assisting with this interview. I’m going to begin with specific Sheila:harvesting Oh everywhere, questions. where Number there’s one, creeks do you or know lakes. where There’s Métis plenty hunt of introut the totrans-mountain catch. corridor? If yes, can you help me mark locations, species, and perhaps time of year? Joe: Can you think of any specific fishing areas that would relate to yourself or your specific family?Sheila: They hunt all along the waterways, rivers and parks. They would hunt up near those areas. Sheila: In the Well’s grey park and Star Lake, also up north near Valemont. I think there’s loggingJoe: roadsWhich and rivers pathways are those? for people to get around to the rivers and streams.
Joe:Sheila: Are there I think any it particular was the North seasonal Thompson patterns River, associated and the with raft fishing river. activities?
Sheila:Joe: Not Are really, there fishingany cultural is always uses great. for particular Plenty of species, ice fishing. if so could you describe the species of animals. Joe: Do you know where Métis collect berries around the TMX corridor? Sheila: Well they would hunt moose, deer, and at one time my mom told me they would hunt Sheila:elk. Oh They all wouldalong thehunt entire for food corridor, and would there’s harvest soap berries, hides to “soapallalys”. make gauntlets They and are clothing. medicines Mom but remembersit’s also a treat. gauntlets There’s and huckle moccasinsberries, being saskatoon made berrieswith tanned too. moose hide.
Joe:Joe: How Number are these two, berries do you used? where are any special areas for large animals? Such as mineral licks, migration routes, feeding, or breeding areas? Sheila: Dried typically. Soap berries are canned, and having them fresh is more of a modern thing.Sheila: Nowadays Up around we’re Star freezing Lake. them,There’s making an area pies called and the jams. “Wilds Grey area.” Also all up in Blue river, but my family did not go past Blue River. Joe: Number eight, do you know of any other Métis that collect plants in the TMX corridor? Joe: Any particular or time of year? Sheila: All the way through where it grows in the corridor. There’s something called “Labrador tea,”Sheila: Métis Would make abe medicine in the fall, tea and out my of thatfamily plant. would Juniper, hunt during cedar, thatand time.pitch from pine trees. There’s also certain ferns and “Chaga”, it’s a type of mushroom. There’s also a “pine tree mushroom”Joe: Number that’s three, used doas youa medicine, know of and any asspecial a protectant areas for in small homes. animals? I don’t Includingknow as muchbirds, as medicinesreptiles, as insects; I’d like into relatingknow, my to auntsbreeding, knew nesting, more. migrating?
Joe:Sheila: Any other I remember ideas on grouse what traditional were hunted plants while might my befamily used did for? other Including hunting. medicines, In the summer crafts, my commercial,family did personal rabbit snaring. consumption? They would follow areas around lakes and rivers mainly.
Sheila:Joe: Willow Are there is used any toparticular build flats, seasona the rootsl patterns are used for thesefor weeding. activities? You can also use the roots from cedar trees for weeding. Up all the way through the corridor, and a lot in Grey Wells park is lavaSheila: rock. I’m It’s unsure. a volcanic They area, did sohunt lava at rocksa particular are used time for in sweat the fall lodges normally, and camp if their fires food since stocks theywere can absorbruined theya lot wouldof heat. have to hunt in the spring. But typically it would be in the fall.
166 Appendix 17 Joe: Number nine, do you know if Métis or gather any other resources in the TMX corridor? Transcript of Sheila Including minerals, gold, timber, water?
Land and Life Project- Sheila Interview Sheila: There’s artisan water that comes out from the grounds, and when you come across some you want to gather as much as you can. Back to the medicines though, we harvested Joe: Hi Sheila, thank you for assisting with this interview. I’m going to begin with specific horsetail from swampy areas and cat tails. We used those for medicines and cooking. Getting harvesting questions. Number one, do you know where Métis hunt in the trans-mountain back to the minerals, my family used to pan for gold. They collected quartz rocks, since there’s corridor? If yes, can you help me mark locations, species, and perhaps time of year? plenty of rocks in Grey wells park. Lots of quartz I remember, so that’s one of them.
Sheila: They hunt all along the waterways, rivers and parks. They would hunt up near those Joe: Any specific uses for these materials? areas. Sheila: I’d say mostly trinkets and were sometimes used in altars. Our spirituality is Roman Joe: Which rivers are those? Catholic, there’s lots of members of my family that integrated Indigenous spiritual traditions. My great grandmother was a traditional knowledge person, she would conduct sweat lodges, Sheila: I think it was the North Thompson River, and the raft river. she delivered babies, and counselled and helped people.
Joe: Are there any cultural uses for particular species, if so could you describe the species of Joe: Section three, physical locations and places. Do you know where are any Métis cabins, animals. camping areas, in or around the corridor?
Sheila: Well they would hunt moose, deer, and at one time my mom told me they would hunt Sheila: I don’t know. However, my mom spoke of some in Grey Wells park and along the elk. They would hunt for food and would harvest hides to make gauntlets and clothing. Mom corridor. When people would go to certain lakes, there’s specific cabins around lakes for remembers gauntlets and moccasins being made with tanned moose hide. hunters and fishers to stay in. Although my mom is 80 now and hasn’t hunted for years, so I’m unsure of their condition or usage in the last 20 years. Joe: Number two, do you where are any special areas for large animals? Such as mineral licks, migration routes, feeding, or breeding areas? Joe: Are there any related cultural values associated with these sites?
Sheila: Up around Star Lake. There’s an area called the “Wilds Grey area.” Also all up in Blue Sheila: I think the cabins were just used as places to stay, say in the Fall when it gets cold since river, but my family did not go past Blue River. it was a place to shelter.
Joe: Any particular or time of year? Joe: Do you know of any Métis trails that cross near or across the corridor?
Sheila: Would be in the fall, and my family would hunt during that time. Sheila: I don’t. Except for the trails they would have followed along waterways to reach various lakes. Joe: Number three, do you know of any special areas for small animals? Including birds, reptiles, insects; in relating to breeding, nesting, migrating? Joe: Do you know of any Métis grave sites or burial grounds around the corridor?
Sheila: I remember grouse were hunted while my family did other hunting. In the summer my Sheila: I do know of some in the Okanagan but not around that area no. family did rabbit snaring. They would follow areas around lakes and rivers mainly. Joe: Do you know of any archeological sites of significance associated with the Métis. Joe: Are there any particular seasonal patterns for these activities? Sheila: I don’t, no. Sheila: I’m unsure. They did hunt at a particular time in the fall normally, if their food stocks were ruined they would have to hunt in the spring. But typically it would be in the fall. Joe: Do you know of any special cultural or spiritual sites within the TMX Corridor?
167
Sheila: The Helmaken or Wells Grey park, is that area?
Joe: Wells Grey is north from the corridor, but its running parallel to the corridor.
Sheila: Right, well where waterfalls are or certain bodies of water contain spiritual sites. Many spiritual ceremonies would happen along water.
Joe: One last question here, are there any special features or specific land marks within the TMX corridor that are important and associate with Métis history, culture or oral tradition?
Sheila: I don’t know. But I’ve spent a lot of time in the Okanagan areas myself.
Joe: One more question, can you think of any memories or family stories of Métis living in BC that you might be willing to share?
Sheila: Any stories? Well just in my own family. Both of my great-great-great grandfathers were wagon masters, and would carry supplies. They would also carry people. I remember one story, a German person moved to the Okanagan area and married an Indian woman. This couple were hired by my great-great grandfather and that’s how he would transport kids and teachers to and from schools. My great grandmother would also deliver babies all throughout the province. There’s lots of little stories like that.
Joe: Fascinating, I’m going to conclude the taping of the meeting. Thank you for participating.
Sheila: My pleasure.
168 Appendix 15: Consent Form
Appendix 18
CONSENT FORM
BCMF Métis Land and Life Study
Principal Investigator: Joe Desjarlais, Project Lead, BC Métis Federation, (Cell) 778-892-0095
Purpose: The BCMF Métis Land and Life Study (MLLS) seeks to understand and record the historic and contemporary land and resource use of Métis peoples along the Trans Mountain Extension (TMX) corridor. The results of this initial reference study will be used to inform the BCMF and the Government of Canada about some of the ongoing impacts of the TMX, the compensation that is required to lessen the impact on Métis land and resource use, and the mitigation measures that are required to maintain the Métis way of life.
Procedures: As a participant in the MLLS you will provide personal oral accounts of Métis land and resource use along and around the TMX corridor. All information will be coded to protect the informant and the locations of their land and harvesting areas and no specific personal details will be provided in the Final Study. All records will be kept in a secure location either on a password protected computer or in paper form in a secured location at the BCMF offices. Information sessions may last between 30 minutes and 2+ hours, depending on the informants’ level of knowledge and experience. Participants will have an opportunity to review and revise the research findings.
Potential Risks and Discomforts: There is no foreseeable risks, discomforts, inconveniences (including, for example, physical, psychological, emotional, financial and social), resulting from a participant’s information sharing.
Potential Benefits to Participants and/or to Society: The MLLS is a part of an ongoing accommodation negotiation with the Federal Government of Canada, specifically around the planning, construction and operation of the TMX. It is understood that the participant may benefit from sharing their information in the form of compensation, mitigation or regulation/monitoring.
Confidentiality: Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. All documents will be identified only by code number and kept in a locked filing cabinet or on password secured computers. Research participants will not be identified by name in any reports of the completed study. Data will be stored for future use.
Contact for information about the study: If you have any questions or desire further information with respect to this study, you may contact project lead Joe Desjarlais at (778) 892- 0095.
169 Consent: Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary and you may refuse to participate or withdraw from the study at any time without jeopardy to your membership or standing in the BCMF. If you wish to withdraw from the study you should provide your written intention to the Project Lead no later than April 30, 2020.
Note: Restrictive measures around travel, movement, gatherings, and schools were implemented between March 12 and 16, 2020 as the result of COVID-19. In light of the travel restrictions and social distancing measures, conducting individual interviews by internet or phone is the only means to collect information for this research study.
Signatures
Your signature releases the MLLS team to conduct a distance format interview.
Your signature below indicates that you have had your questions about the study answered to your satisfaction.
Your signature indicates that you consent to participate in this study and that your responses may be put in anonymous form and kept for further use after the completion of this study.
______Research Participant Signature Date
______Printed Name of the Research Participant
170 Appendix 16: Terrace Community Meeting Agenda
Appendix 12
Terrace- Community Meeting
11: 15 (15 min) Pre-Meeting: Community Liaison with Metis Land and Life Team
11:10 (20 min) Registration and refreshments
11:20 am (10 min) Opening Prayer- Elizabeth
11:30 am (15 min) Opening Remarks about the day and what BC Metis Federation is looking to accomplish- Shauna
11:45 a.m (1 Hour) Coast Guard Project- Angel - What it is this project - What needs to be done - How will it need to be communicated? - Point person for the community
12:45 (1 Hour) Michif Language project- Rene - What is the project? - Starting with a solid base - Needing input from Members and Community o Survey 1:45 (15 min) Health Break- with refreshments
2:00 (1.5/2 Hours) Métis Land and Life Project – Joe Desjarlais and Dr. Bruce Shelvey - Brief project explanation and purpose. o Time line and phases - Breakout into groups for information gathering
4:00 pm Closing – Elizabeth
171
FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Attachment C Métis Nation British Columbia. Literature Review – Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project February 2021
Attachment C MÉTIS NATION BRITISH COLUMBIA. LITERATURE REVIEW – FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 PROJECT
C.1 FOOTHILLS ZONE 8 WEST PATH DELIVERY 2023 RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
Attachment C Métis Nation British Columbia. Literature Review – Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project February 2021
C.2
January 8, 2021
Literature Review – Foothills Zone 8 West Path Delivery 2023 Project
Table of Contents
Métis Nation British Columbia ...... 1 Legal Background ...... 3 Constitutional Definition of Métis ...... 3 Métis Rights are Collective Rights ...... 5 The Honour of the Crown and the Duty to Consult ...... 5 The Daniels Decision...... 6 UNDRIP ...... 7 Metis Nation British Columbia Consultation Guidelines ...... 8 Metis Historical Context ...... 9 History: Region 4 - Kootenays ...... 10 Métis Land use ...... 13 Métis Mobility ...... 13 Métis Community ...... 13 Métis Traditional Knowledge (MTK) ...... 13 Current Métis Land Use ...... 14
1. Métis Nation British Columbia
Métis Nation British Columbia (“MNBC”), is the section 35, Constitution Act, 1982, (“Section 35”) rights representative and government of the Métis in British Columbia. MNBC was formally incorporated in 1996 under the Métis Provincial Council of British Columbia (MPCBC). In 2003, the Métis leadership ratified the Métis Nation British Columbia Constitution and, in so doing, established the new Métis Nation governance structure that persists today.1 MNBC represents over 22,500 citizens in 38 Métis Chartered Communities from seven regions in the Province. Since ratifying the Constitution in 2003, MNBC has developed laws, regulations, and policies for maintaining, protecting, and furthering the Aboriginal rights of its citizens in this province.
1 For a full description of this governance structure see http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.mnbc.ca/pdfs/constitution_metis_nation_bc.pdf 1
Figure 1: Maps of MNBC Chartered Communities.
MNBC has a duty to advocate for consultation with government and industry where actions and activities on provincial and federal crown land (or towards crown resources) have the potential to infringe on Métis rights and traditional land-uses. MNBC’s Consultation Guidelines state that [t]he MNBC Ministry of Natural Resources will advocate and manage, where applicable, the consultation process and, where necessary consult directly with the Métis Chartered Communities where land management and resource development on provincial or federal crown land may infringe Métis rights and traditional land-use.
MNBC’s Ministry of Natural Resources (the “Ministry”) is mandated to address natural resource issues on behalf of MNBC’s Métis citizens.2 The BC Métis Assembly of Natural Resources (BCMANR) is a branch of the Ministry and is comprised of representatives of the each of the MNBC regions to represent the natural resources needs in that region.3 Eight non-political regional Captains of the Hunt form the BCMANR, with one of the regions split in two and having two Captains.
MNBC and the Government of British Columbia signed a 2006 Métis Nation Relationship Accord “to signify a positive working relationship” with all the self-identifying Métis in BC and set out a number of objectives
2 Métis Nation British Columbia, Ministry of Natural Resources: Strategix Plan (August 2010), online: Ministry of Natural Resources https://www.mnbc.ca/pdfs/ministry%20of%20natural%20resources%20october%2012,%202010%20edit.pdf. 3 Métis Nation British Columbia, “BCMANR (BC Métis Assembly of Natural Resources)”, online: https://www.mnbc.ca/directory/view/345-bcmanr. 2
address a number of concerns of the Métis community.4 British Columbia and MNBC signed a further a 2016 Métis Nation Relationship Accord II on Louis Riel Day (November 16) “to renew the commitment to work together for the betterment of Métis people throughout BC”.5 These accords show a cooperate approach between the Métis and the Government of British Columbia on certain issues.
As a Governing Member of the Métis National Council, MNBC also signed the Canada-Métis Nation Accord with Prime Minister Trudeau in April of 2017. The accord details a number of agreements regarding Métis issues, addresses the need to strengthen the government-to-government fiscal relationship, and established a permanent bilateral forum chaired by the Prime Minster that is meant to commence negotiations on shared priorities.
The MNBC, as the government of the Métis Nation in British Columbia, is mandated to engage in reconciliation between the Crown and the Métis and to assert and protect Métis rights and outstanding claims.
2. Legal Background
Constitutional Definition of Métis
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 asserts the Métis are one of three Aboriginal groups whose rights are recognized by Canada.6 It states “[t]he existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed”.7 In this Act, ‘aboriginal peoples of Canada’ includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.”8
R. v. Powley notes with regard to Aboriginal rights that “[t]he inclusion of the Métis in s. 35 is based on a commitment to recognizing the Métis and enhancing their survival as distinctive communities”.9 A key part of this decision articulates who the Métis are under s. 35. As Jean Teillet notes:
The Court said that the term “Métis” in s. 35 refers to distinctive Métis peoples who, in addition to their mixed ancestry, developed their own customs, way of life, and group identity – separate from their Indian, Inuit or European forebears [. . .]. The Court said that the term “Métis” does not include all individuals with mixed Indian and European heritage.10
4 Métis Nation British Columbia, “Métis Nation Relationship II Accord”, online: < https://www.mnbc.ca/about/metis-nation-relationship-accord>. 5 Ibid. 6 Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act, 1982(U.K.), 1982, c. 11. 7 Supra, s. 35(1). 8 Supra, s. 35(2). 9 R. v. Powley (“Powley”), 2003 SCC 43, at para. 13. 10 Jean Teillet, Métis Law in Canada (2013), online: Pape Salter Teillet at 11-106-11-107 < http://www.pstlaw.ca/resources/Metis-Law-in-Canada-2013.pdf>. 3
The Supreme Court of Canada in Powley stated that Métis claimants must establish that they belong to an identifiable Métis community, which they defined as “a group of Métis with a distinctive collective identity, living in the same geographic area and sharing a common way of life”.11 Furthermore, it went on to state that the criteria for establishing Métis identity for the purpose of claiming Métis rights under Section 35 include self-identification as a member of the Métis community, evidence of an ancestral connection to an historic Métis community; and a demonstrated acceptance into a modern Métis community.12 The Métis Nation Council and it Governing Members had adopted this test for citizenship since 2002.13
For an individual to exercise s. 35 rights as a Métis person, they and their activity must pass what is now known as the Powley Test. The following ten criteria make up this test: (1) Characterization of the right; (2) Identification of the historic rights bearing community; (3) Identification of the contemporary rights bearing community; (4) Verification of membership in the contemporary Métis community; (5) Identification of the relevant time; (6) Was the practice integral to the claimant’s distinctive culture; (7) Continuity between the historic practice and the contemporary right; (8) Extinguishment; (9) Infringement; and, (10) Justification. 14
It is important to note that Section 35, as well as all existing Canadian law, indicates that treaty rights do not “trump” Métis rights, and there is no hierarchy of rights under Section 35.15 One of the principles that Thomas Isaac underscores in his report is the principle that “Métis rights are protected equally along with First Nations (Indian) and Inuit Section 35 rights”, as such a principle is “unassailable and fundamental in nature”.16
11 R. v. Powley, supra, at para. 12. 12 Supra, at para. 31-33. 13 Métis Nation, “Métis Nation Citizenship”, online: < http://www.metisnation.ca/index.php/who-are-the- metis/citizenship>. 14 Métis National Counsel, Fulfilling Canada’s Promise. Métis Rights. Recognized and Affirmed: R. v. Powley A Case Summary and Frequently Asked Questions, online: Métis National Council at 4-5 < http://www.metisnation.org/media/51918/r_v_powley.pdf>. 15 Thomas Isaac, A Matter of National and Constitutional Import: A Report of the Minister’s Special Representative on Reconciliation with Métis: Section 35 Métis Rights and the Manitoba Métis Decision (June 2016), online: Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada at 12 < https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-HQ- AI/STAGING/texte-text/report_reconciliation_1471371154433_eng.pdf>. 16 Ibid, at 33. 4
Métis Rights Are Collective Rights
For the purposes of this discussion, verification of membership in the contemporary Métis community is particularly important. This criterion depends on the understanding that “Aboriginal rights are collective rights”.17 They belong to the collective but are exercised by individual members of the collective. The MNBC, as the government of the Métis Nation in British Columbia, is mandated to advance Métis rights, self-government, and self-determination in British Columbia.
Additionally, a resolution was passed at the 2020 Métis Nation Governing Assembly affirming that “Métis Nation British Columbia is the recognized Métis Government of the Self-Governing British Columbia Métis Community. We are the only Métis s.35 rights representative body in BC.
Lastly, all citizens of MNBC sign an oath of citizenship and further acknowledge:
I, ______, agree to the Métis Nation’s Bylaws and policies, as amended from time to time, and, voluntarily authorize the Métis Nation to assert and advance collectively-held Métis rights, interests, and claims on behalf of myself, my community and the Métis in British Columbia, including negotiating and arriving at agreements that advance, determine, recognize and respect Métis rights. In signing this oath, I also recognize that I have the right to end this authorization, at any time, by terminating my Citizenship within the Métis Nation.
The Honour of the Crown and the Duty to Consult
The implication of collectively embodied rights extends to the Crown’s duty to consult, which it must oblige when it “contemplates conduct that might adversely impact potential or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights”.18 Since Aboriginal rights are collective rights, it follows that under this duty the Crown, which can be the Provinces or Territories and/or proponents, consults with leaders who represent the interests of a rights-bearing Aboriginal community. Thomas Isaac states that “there is no doubt, at law, the Crown’s duty to consult Aboriginal peoples applies to Métis”.19
For First Nations under the Indian Act this is usually the Chief and Council of a Band. The community in this case is understood as the collective or group governed by the Chief and Council. Through the reserve system, these communities are geographically bound. The Métis, however, do not have a Chief and Council to represent their collective interests. Instead, the Métis are governed by provincially based organizations called Nations. These Nations are members of the Métis National Council. Métis Nations are
17 Teillet, ibid at 9-13. 18 Government of Canada, Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation: Updated Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfill the Duty to Consult (March 2011), online: Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada at 6 < http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-HQ/STAGING/texte- text/intgui_1100100014665_eng.pdf>. 19 Thomas Isaac, ibid, at 16. 5
governed by democratically elected officials who represent the interests of localized Métis communities and the Powley-compliant citizens within those communities who have membership in the Nation. Unlike the Chief and Council of a First Nation, Métis Nations govern and represent the interests of a geographically dispersed group of people(s), which is a point that speaks to the mobility of the Métis and to the fact that, as a collective, the Métis were not forced onto reserves.20
Additionally, if provinces conduct Crown-related consultations with provincially created public governments rather than clearly identifiable Métis rights holders in the same geographic area there is no case law that states that the Crown has satisfied its duty to consult, even if that public government contains Section 35 rights holders.21
The Daniels Decision22
The Supreme Court of Canada in Daniels et. al. v. Canada23 was a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court of Canada where the Court ruled that Canada has a constructional and jurisdictional responsibility for Métis under s. 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867. This decision was celebrated by Métis who felt the decision forced the government to now negotiate with the Métis in good faith. The Métis believed that jurisdictional uncertainty around this issue had been used by the government of Canada to avoid dealing with Métis rights, interests and needs. This decision ended that uncertainty.
The plaintiffs in Daniels originally requested that the Court make the following three declarations pertaining to Métis and non-status Indian people in Canada: recognition and inclusion as “Indians” in s. 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867; that the Queen (in right of Canada) owes a fiduciary duty to Métis and non-status Indians as Aboriginal people; and the Métis and non-status Indian people of Canada have a right to be consulted and negotiated with by the federal government on a collective basis through representatives of their own choice. Since previous Supreme Court decisions already settled and affirmed the latter two matters, the Court ruled it would be redundant to rule on them again.
20 This is worth bearing in mind for project-specific Métis Use and Occupancy studies. In order to accurately capture and begin to understand Métis land-use, UOSs must consider the high mobility of Métis harvesters. Relative to a project-specific First Nations TUS, the study sample of a Métis UOS on such a project requires the participation of harvesters from all over the province who travel to the Study Area to hunt and gather resources. Industry proponents and government representatives should consider that it may be more cost-effective and efficient in the long-run to fund a single province-wide Métis UOS, independent of the Environmental Impact Assessment process (and its attendant timelines). Once a comprehensive dataset is established, it would require only maintenance and strategic updates. 21 Isaac, ibid, at 12. 22 Information in this section was taken from: Métis Nation British Columbia, “Daniels Decision”, online: < https://www.mnbc.ca/documents-resources/daniels-decision>; as well as Métis Nation British Columbia, “Frequently Asked Questions: Daniels Decision”, online: < https://www.mnbc.ca/faq/frequently-asked-daniels- decision>. 23 Daniels et. al. v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Development) (“Daniels”), 2016 SCC 12. 6
UNDRIP
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples “UNDRIP” sets out how governments should respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples and serves as an agreement on how to treat Indigenous peoples. The UNDRIP is especially relevant to the Métis Nation. It establishes the minimum standards for Indigenous peoples’ survival, dignity and well-being and includes 46 articles that describe specific rights, as well as actions governments are required to take to respect these rights.
The provincial government passed legislation in November 2019 implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The B.C. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act aims to create a path forward that respects the human rights of Indigenous peoples while introducing better transparency and predictability in the work we do together. The legislation sets out a mandate for government to align B.C. law with the UN Declaration. It requires development of an action plan to achieve this alignment over time – providing transparency, accountability, and regular reporting to the Legislature to monitor progress. In addition, the legislation allows for flexibility for the B.C. Government to enter into agreements with a broader range of Indigenous governments. Finally, it provides a framework for decision-making between Indigenous governments and the B.C. Government on matters that impact their citizens.
As the “Indigenous governing body” defined in the DRIPA legislation, the MNBC Board of Directors are authorized to enter into negotiations with the Government of Canada and B.C. Government to develop and sign intergovernmental agreements setting out the fiscal arrangements including other transitional requirements to support the British Columbia Métis Community as it exercises its inherent rights, authorities, and jurisdictions, and as it maintains, strengthens, and develops its distinct political, legal, economic, social, and cultural institutions of self-government. This also applies to project proponents.
Relevant UNDRIP Articles:
Capacity: Article 39 as previously stated and Article 19: “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.” Self-Governance: Articles 3-6, 9, 14, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 32-37, 40: “Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination… have the right to autonomy or self- government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.” – Articles 3 and 4 “Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social, and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the State” – Article 5 Land base: Articles 9-11, 25-29, 32:
7
“Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories, and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied, or otherwise used or acquired. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the Indigenous peoples concerned.” Article 26
Consultation: Articles 19, 28, 29, 31, 32, 37, 38, 40: “Indigenous peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent” Article 28 Cultural Protection and Promotion: Articles 8, 11, 12, 13, 16, 20, 24, 31: “Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest, practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of their ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of their human remains.” Article 12(1) “Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions…” Article 31
3. Métis Nation British Columbia Consultation Guidelines
The MNBC “Consultation Guidelines” establishes a “one window approach” consultation process and set of standards for governments, businesses, project proponents, and individuals to fulfill their obligation to consult and accommodate MNBC’s interests in projects impacting Métis rights and land use for federally designated projects in BC. MNBC describe four principles for ensuring that consultation is meaningfully conducted, these include: • Acquiring informed consent; • Legally satisfying the government’s obligation to consult and accommodate; • Conducting consultation in good faith; and, • Ensuring the involvement of MNBC and British Columbia Métis Assembly of Natural Resources (BCMANR) in the process.
Importantly, meaningful accommodation requires that MNBC are involved in the process as early as possible throughout the planning and decision-making phases. Meaningful accommodation requires a process to address Métis interests relating to (not limited to): • Economic accommodation • Cultural accommodation 8
• Social accommodation • Stewardship accommodation • Métis health and wellbeing accommodation
MNBC’s Consultation Guidelines acknowledge that there is a government-to-government relationship between MNBC and the regulator through the project review and approval processes. This relationship is predicated on several elements, including early involvement in developing scope of assessment documents, voluntary involvement in ‘round table’ processes with stakeholders, and ‘end of process’ decision forums to ensure sufficient consideration of Métis concerns and suggestions.
The proposed Foothills West Path 2023 Project is being constructed in MNBC’s Region 4 – Kootenay region. MNBC’s Chartered Community, Elk Valley Métis Association (EVMA) is found directly in the proposed project footprint. However, the construction and/or operations may impact other communities in the area, Rocky Mountain Métis Association, Columbia Valley Métis Society, Kootenay South Métis Society, Métis Nation Columbia River Society, and West Kootenay Métis Society. MNBC believes it is important to work strategically within regulatory processes and to speak with “one voice” for the BC Métis Nation. We want to ensure there is transparency and consistency in the consultation process for all MNBC Citizens. Engagement with the project proponent and regulators should be conducted through the Nation’s legal counsel. As the government of the Métis in British Columbia, it is important to follow these steps to ensure accountability and transparency in the consultation process for MNBC Citizens. Citizens expect a consistent approach to engaging in consultation initiatives. These guidelines create that approach for the Métis government.
By following MNBC’s guidelines, Métis can ensure their rights are protected, and they realize as many benefits as possible from proposed projects including financial payments, employment and training, and economic development for Métis owned businesses.
4. Métis Historical Context
Like other Aboriginal peoples, the Métis existed prior to Canada’s inception as a Nation. However, the Métis emerged out of relationships between First Nations women and European men. Thus, the Métis are a mixed-race people, but not any mixed-race people, with their own unique government, culture, language, communities, and history. The ethnogenesis or birth of the Métis as a distinct people is connected to the fur-trade. As recognized by the Métis National Council (MNC), their kinship networks past and present span from Ontario in the east to British Columbia in the west.
While the ethnogenesis of the Métis is clearly linked to the fur-trade, tracking the historical movement of Métis individuals or collectives, particularly in British Columbia, proves difficult for several reasons:
9
Primary historical documents, such as fur-trade and oblate letters and journals, were written by non- Aboriginal travelers who were generally not interested or otherwise aware of the Métis as a distinct peoples;
• Métis were often misidentified in the written accounts, for example as “Frenchmen” or “Indian;” • When the authors of these journals and letters incidentally identify Métis individuals and families, they do so using a number of monikers, including “half-breed,” “breed,” “country- born,” “bourgeoisie,” “cors du bois,” “bois brûlé,” and “voyageurs,” to name a few. Monikers such as “voyageur” were not used exclusively for Métis; • During the late nineteenth-century, the Half-Breed Scrip Commission was not allowed to operate within the Colony, and later the Province of British Columbia. The extant records of the Scrip Commission in other provinces are vital sources of information regarding the Métis. These are missing for BC; • Métis peoples intermarried with First Nations and Europeans; • There were other mixed Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal peoples in the area; • Métis individuals and families blended into the dominant culture around them, in order to avoid overt racism, especially after the late nineteenth-century.24
According to the Final Report for the Alaska Pipeline Project Métis Traditional Land Use Study, “The Métis that accompanied early explorers and remained in BC were only fleetingly named. Because these men kept no writings of their own, many have been omitted from the historical record. As a result, Métis use of the land captured in the historical record may be incomplete”25. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that, in keeping with the findings of the Court in Powley, “the difficulty of identifying members of the Métis community must not be exaggerated as a basis for defeating their rights under the Constitution of Canada”26. This applies as much to the present members of the Métis community in BC as it does to their forebears.
History: Region 4 – Kootenays
The Métis, during the late 18th and early 19th centuries, solidified their political identity as a distinct Nation on the plains of Western North America. The first political collective action taken by the Métis Nation to assert their national identity was in 1816 during the battle of Seven Oaks. In addition, the first Métis National song was written by Pierre Falcon, “Chanson de le Grenouillere” to commemorate the Métis victory at Seven Oaks. The Métis during this period codified one of the earliest animal conservation doctrines in the Northwest, “the Laws of the Hunt.” Métis kinship networks reached through the Kootenays to the Pacific. This is what BCMANR is based off of in current times.
24 As Jean Barman et al. state, Métis “families, clusters, and communities melded into the shadows” (78). 25 Niché Environmental Ltd. The Final Report for the TransCanada Alaskan Pipeline Project Métis Traditional Use Study, March 2012. Salmon Arm: Niché Environmental Ltd., 2012 at 15. 26 Jean Teillet, ibid, at 2-12. 10
As the fur trade expanded westward, early Métis Communities developed along the fur trade routes used by the North West Company (NWC) and the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC). The Métis historically established their properties as river lots. Red River, at the junctions or the Red and Assiniboine rivers, had both NWC and HBC trade posts. Isle a la Cross, located in the English River District (Churchhill River) of northern Saskatchewan, served as a major trade route between the Northwest Territories and the Hudson’s Bay. Fort des Prairies, located on the Saskatchewan River served as the main trading area of the Athabasca, connecting what would become Alberta with what would become B.C.
Métis had a lot of employment opportunities during this early period. Both the NWC and the HBC relied on the Métis to keep the fur trade operational. The Métis were the largest suppliers of pemmican to the fur trade and were relied on for their skills as traders, guides, and linguists. Métis served in all ranks of both fur trade companies, from general labourers up to post-masters and clerks. The Métis community at Fort des Prairies, during the late 18th and early 19th centuries, were largely North West Company employees and seasonal freemen. Freemen typically lived within the area with their Métis or First Nations families and were contract employees.
Jaques “Jacco” Raphael Finlay along with Nicholas Montour Jr. were the two Métis directed by David Thompson to cut the trail through the Rocky Mountains in the 1806-1807 season. Jacco Finlay was also responsible for constructing Kootenae House (near Invermere, BC) and Spokane House (Washington State.) Nicholas Montour Jr., “Chief of the Fort des Prairies Halfbreeds,” served at Kootenae House and throughout the Columbia River area between 1806 and 1842. Nicholas Montour Jr. was married to the Suzanne Umpreville, the daughter of Columbia River guide and boatman Canote Umpreville.
In 1811, The Hudson’s Bay Company granted Thomas Douglas, the Earl of Selkirk, land within the Red River for the purpose of establishing an agricultural settlement to supply the expanding fur trade with provisions. However, the influx of settlers disturbed the traditional lifestyle of the Métis, specifically their harvesting and commercial practices. Within five years of their arrival, in 1816, armed conflict erupted between Selkirk’s colonists and the Métis then under the leadership of Cuthbert Grant [Jr.] This battle has become known as the Battle of Seven Oaks, or the Battle of Frog Plains, and it was the first time that the Métis Nation flag was flown. Both Nicholas Montour Jr. and Thomas McKay participated in this battle. To avoid further conflict within the fur trade, the NWC and the HBC merged into a single company in 1821.
Kootenay National Park is an important location for Métis within BC. The importance derives not from Métis settlement, but because of the significant expeditions that travelled through the area during the early and mid-19th century. As mentioned above, in 1807, David Thompson established Kootenae House near present-day Invermere. Several Métis families associated with Thompson’s expedition remained within the Kootenay/Columbia region (Humpherville, Lussier, Piche, Cardinal, Morigeau, Berland) and at least two Métis families (Montour and Finlay.) Although Thompson’s expedition did not formally enter
11
what would become Kootenay National Park, several of the Métis families remained in the region and familiarized themselves with the local geography.
This familiarization was a benefit to Sir George Simpson who hired Pichee, a Métis, to guide his party from Edmonton through the Rockies in 1841. On the western side of the Rockies, Simpson met Edouard Berland (c.1800-1853,) a Métis interpreter, who operated west of the Rockies between the years 1828 and 1853. He worked primarily within the Columbia Department, at both Fort Colvile and at Fort Kootenay. He supplied HBC Governor, Sir George Simpson with horses after Simpson crossed the Rockies in 1841. Berland is also credited with showing Governor Simpson the location of three hot springs, which he used in 1838-1839 “while suffering from a severe illness made a bathing-place of these springs…”27 Simpson’s account of the Hot Springs is the first recorded visit by non-First Nations – he credits Berland with showing him the location. Edouard Berland is immortalized by Mount Berland (located between Radium Hot Springs and Sinclair Pass).
Travelling through what would become Kootenay National Park within weeks of Sir George Simpson was James Sinclair, Red River Métis. Sinclair guided two groups of Métis from the Red River to Fort Walla Walla, on the Columbia, in 1841 and 1854. Sinclair brought both groups through the Sinclair Pass. It is recorded that in 1841 Sinclair brought from Red River 21 mostly Métis families comprised of “23 men, 22 women and 75 children. Sinclair brought 28 families, 65 mostly Métis individuals from Red River during his 1854 expedition. Sinclair Pass, Sinclair Creek, and Mount Sinclair are named for Métis James Sinclair.
In addition, the noted Priest of the west, Father Pierre De Smet observed the mosaic of mixed Aboriginals in 1846 along the Columbia living communally; he had engaged “Two half breeds [who] served as...guides and escorts” while he travelled within the Columbia.28 Within a Ktunaxa village, he observed a Métis woman described as the “wife of an Iroquois, who had resided for thirty years with this tribe. The Iroquois and a Canadian occupy themselves in the absence of a priest... I left the Kootenay [sic.] village about 12 o’clock, accompanied by twelve of these warriors and some half-blood Crees.”i In addition, De Smet noted the Métis family of Francois Morigeau “on the eastern shore of Columbia Lake” and after having baptized “the [Morigeau] mother, surrounded by her children…a large cross was erected in the plain, which from that time is called the Plain of the Nativity.”29
27 Pierre Jean De Smet, Letters and Sketches: with A Narrative of a Year’s Residence among the Indian Tribes of the Rocky Mountains (Philadelphia: M. Fithian, 1843), 357. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/aeu.ark:/13960/t51g1hg81 28 De Smet, Pierre, Letters and Sketches, 358. 29 J. U. Terrell, Black robe: The life of Pierre-Jean de Smet, missionary, explorer & pioneer, (Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1964,) 202-203. 12
5. Métis Land Use
Métis Mobility
One of the distinctive features of the Métis is their mobility. As Jean Teillet notes, “historians and experts all agree that the mobility of the Métis, based on spatially extensive family networks and economies, was the foundation of their culture”30. Mobility continues to be important for many Métis peoples today who rely on the kinship networks of their forebears to travel for the purposes of harvesting or cultural and social events. Jean Teillet’s analysis of the 2006 Census which found that “Métis migration rates tend, with the exception of the Province of Saskatchewan, to be higher than those of the overall aboriginal population in all of the regions, especially in British Columbia, Alberta and the Northwest Territories”31. Métis mobility is purposeful, not haphazard. It follows kinship networks which were established during the earliest days of the fur trade and which persist to this day.
This mobility is an important consideration during the consultation process and speaks to the importance of collective rights and the MNBC as the proper rights representative. Only MNBC can ensure that mobility is taken into consideration and those who utilize an area along kinship and familial ties are properly recognized and engaged.
Métis Community
Kinship networks are the foundation of the historic and contemporary Métis communities. Métis scholar Mike Evans states, “[t]his history, along with the enduring family ties and distinctive culture of the Métis, lies at the heart of the persistence of Métis communities in spite of attempts to render those communities invisible after 1885”32. The Métis were not collectively forced onto reserves. As such, they were and are dispersed across the Historic Métis Nation Homeland, including British Columbia.
Métis Traditional Knowledge (MTK)
MNBC’s Consultation Guidebook (2010) defines Métis Traditional Knowledge (“MTK”) as knowledge, values, beliefs, and practices that are derived from aboriginal and non-aboriginal cultures that inform the identity, culture, and heritage of the Métis people and their respect for the land and its resources.33 MNBC is currently updating the Guidebook and will be creating an updated MTK Policy. MNBC’s definition is adapted from Berkes et al.’s (2000) description of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (“TEK”).
30 Jean Teillet, ibid, at 1-11. 31 Ibid, at 1-13. 32 Evans et. al., “Métis Networks in British Columbia: Examples from the Central Interior.” Contours of a People: Métis Family, Mobility and History. Ed. Nicole St-Onge, Carolyn Podruchny, and Brenda Macdougall. Oklahoma: U of Oklahoma P., 2012. (331-391) at 332. 33 Métis Nation British Columbia, Consultation Guidebook, online: Métis Nation British Columbia at 12 < https://www.mnbc.ca/media/attachments/view/doc/final_consultation_guidelines/pdf>. 13
…a cumulative body of knowledge, practice, and belief, evolving through adaptive processes and handed down through generations by cultural trans-mission, about the relationship of living beings (including humans) with one another and with their environment.34
MTK represents the Métis fundamental connection to the land. The foundation of Métis identity and survival, MTK is passed from generations orally and through land-based experience. Métis Traditional Knowledge continues to have relevance in current times and draws its strength from being used, adapted, and continuously updated to integrate new knowledge.
The historically continuous, yet adaptive, nature of this knowledge is the lifeblood of the Métis peoples and the foundation informing their valuation of ecological and cultural components.
Current Métis Land Use
Through preliminary Metis Traditional Knowledge research, and utilizing the MNBC Traditional Harvesting Database, we have confirmed that MNBC Citizens from adjacent Chartered Communities, Elk Valley Metis Association (EVMA), and nearby smaller communities are exercising their Aboriginal right to harvest in the proposed Project’s footprint. This includes, hunting, fishing, trapping, plant gathering, and use for cultural purposes. The construction and operation of the Project could put local, regional, and provincial Métis Aboriginal rights and traditional land use at risk. Métis harvesters who rely on the direct and surrounding area for sustenance, social and ceremonial purposes could see negative impacts from the construction and operation of the proposed Project. MNBC will need to conduct further research and land use studies to document this land use.
When trying to understand the reasons why harvesting is integral to Métis culture, it is important to look at the matter in terms of the Métis conceptualization of health and wellness. The Métis understanding of health is different from biomedical models, which often describe health as an absence of disease. For Métis people, the idea of health and wellness is derived from the Cree miyopimatisiwin, which means living well, or being alive well. Miyopimatisiwin is a way of life; in fact, it is the Métis way of life. The Métis harvest their own food because they need the sustenance that the food provides, and harvesting their own food is less expensive than buying it. Métis report a higher rate of obesity, heart disease and diabetes than the general population, generally tied to socioeconomics. Harvesting their own food helps cut down on the intake of food that is high in calories, and low on nutrients and also contain a lot of fat and sugar. Métis also appreciate the natural quality of harvested foods. This is closely related to health, but also captures ideas about tradition, purity or organic virtues, and nutritional value, and warrants a separate acknowledgement. Métis also like the taste of harvested food compared to the taste of food bought in
34 Berkes et. al., “Rediscovery of Traditional Ecological Knowledge as Adaptive Management.” Ecological Applications,10(5). (1251-1262) at 1252. 14
stores. The activities surrounding the harvesting of food, including scouting, searching, and tracking, is also something that Métis enjoy that they would not get by simply buying food in a store.
It is important to first note that the detailed Use-and-Occupancy Mapping (UOM) research study for the propped project area has not occurred yet. MNBC has not had the opportunity to conduct this research but is currently seeking financial support to reach these goals. Secondly, it is important to also note that map survey data for UOM research demonstrates the extent of Métis respondents’ use and occupancy (extensivity) in the Study Area. Extensivity differs importantly from intensivity in several ways. Where extensitvity aims to capture the “geographic extent of use and occupancy”, intensivity is a “depiction of various measures of the relative importance and value of different areas for use and occupancy”.35 A map survey designed to document extensivity will not adequately capture intensivity, likewise, a survey designed to capture Métis land-use intensivity will not necessarily accurately reflect the extensivity of the land-use. These different methodological design approaches also extend to the interpretation of UOS data.
The challenge of interpreting extensivity and intensivity of land use is compounded by sample size. Data from a single study alone may indicate areas of high use36, and other areas that appear to be unused. Combining datasets can help offset limitations in respondent sample size or help to extend the geographical range of the available data to account for harvesting activity in the study corridor. The ‘blank- spaces’ that appear on a land-use map may be explained by the limitations inherent in the interview questionnaire, or by restricted respondent sample size. While the questionnaire is designed to collect data pertaining to the acquisition of specific resources, it is not exhaustive. For example, many questionnaires do not capture travel routes, for instance, and do not capture the use of land for recreational purposes in cases where no resources were harvested.
35 Terry Tobias states:
Intensivity mapping demands exceptional attention to methodology for three reasons: (1) difficult technical challenges; (2) research contexts in which findings regarding relative value of land can play pivotal roles in communities’ access to resources; and (3) an inclination by some external audiences to incorrectly assume that a single measure can reflect value of land to a culture. Practitioners of intensivity mapping have an ethical obligation to do everything possible to safeguard against misinterpretation of the findings, and to ensure that the community’s interpretation of findings plays a prominent role in the development of policy decisions.
Terry Tobias, Living Proof: The Essential Data-Collection Guide for Indigenous Use-and-Occupancy Map Surveys. Vancouver: Union of BC Indian Chiefs and Ecotrust Canada, 2009 at 440. 36 High-use refers to (1) numbers: several respondents use the area for harvesting and for cultural purposes; (2) variety: within this group, individual respondents use the land to harvest several different resources; (3) frequency: individual respondents frequently return to use the area. 15
Often, Métis families have specific harvesting areas. Although other Métis harvesters may know these areas, unless members of that family are recruited to participate in a UOM study, this use and occupancy will not be represented in the dataset. The lack of overlap in study sample populations results in an assembly of datasets that reflect the harvesting patterns of particular kinship networks, rather than the broader Métis population. ‘Blank-areas’ should be scrutinized carefully, especially those surrounded by use and occupancy sites, as these areas are likely also in use by Métis families. At the very least, these ‘blank-areas’ indicate that the UOM dataset is incomplete. These ‘blank-areas’ merit further investigation before determining their use status.
While informative, UOM’s of this minute scale are merely suggestive of the extensivity and intensivity of Métis land use in a given region.
16