Nisga'a treaty template won't fly in Sto:lo land

Page 5

More than 125 years after the first Sto:lo land claim petition, negotiations have barely begun between the Indigenous peoples of the Fraser River and the governments of British Columbia and Canada. The Sto:lo Nation, representing 17 bands, formally entered the BC Treaty Process (BCTP) in October 1995. Two months after the Sto:lo voted to continue with the process in a December 1996 referendum, the BC Treaty Commission announced that the Sto:lo treaty table was ready to enter Stage Three, in which a framework agreement for treaty negotiations is outlined. Three years later, little progress has been made. Only recently has there been any serious attempt to restart negotiations. At a main table session held in Chilliwack on May 26, the new chief provincial negotiator, Katherine Gordon, pledged both governments would engage in a new relationship with the Sto:lo upon the basis of "mutual respect and openness." However, these friendly words could not conceal the chasm of disagreement that blocks the signing of a treaty settlement.

The key stumbling block is the substance of certainty sought in a future treaty. Similar to other Native participants in the BCTP, the Sto:lo oppose the government's promotion of a Nisga'a certainty model, whereby Natives relinquish any future claims to land and resources. At the May main table session, the Sto:lo chiefs' representative, Lester Ned, was adamant that the Sto:lo would not accept an extinguishment of their inherent rights.

"We congratulate the Nisga'a for their treaty. But it is not a template for the Sto:lo people. We will not water down our Aboriginal rights just to get a treaty."

Directly tied to the question of certainty is the status of lands and resources in Sto:lo territory. According to Grand Chief Clarence Pennier, the executive director of the Sto:lo Aboriginal Rights and Title department and an advisor to the negotiating team, the type of certainty desired by the Sto:lo would involve a retention of rights to their entire traditional territory with a negotiated agreement of where those rights could be exercised and in what fashion. This would require a clear delineation of jurisdiction over lands and resources, including areas of shared responsibility.

Taxation and Native fishing and hunting rights are also contentious issues. In a personal interview, Pennier stressed that the Sto:lo are unlikely to give up the tax exemption rights extended to first peoples in treaties outside British Columbia. Nor will the Sto:lo agree to the confinement of a Native fishery within the Department of Fishery and Oceans licensing system.

Referring to the recent Marshall decision, Pennier refuted the government position by asking, "why should we accept less in negotiations than our legal rights?"

Aggravating the divide over treaty ssues are the problems with the negotiation process. Despite the rhetoric of mutual respect, the governments have insisted upon preconditions such as the non-negotiable status of privately owned land. The province's encouragement of development in contested areas has not helped to convince the Sto:lo that their best interests lie in negotiations. More explosive in consequence has been the government's sale of Crown land and the unilateral extension of park space in Sto:lo territory. The latter has provoked divisions within the Sto:lo Nation itself, as the recent inclusion of Ferry Island, adjacent to the Cheam band reserve, in a new Fraser River parks system has provoked that band's exit from the BCTP. The Cheam have blockaded access to the island, which they use for fishing, and have future plans to utilize the area's gravel resources.

The governments' response to the Cheam action was to cancel an April meeting with the Sto:lo Nation. During the May main table meeting, the Cheam chief, June Quipp, stated her disgust at the governments' negotiating positions, saying that they verged on dictating what rights the government would allow the Sto:lo to have.

The Sechlt band's rejection of a signed agreement-in-principle on May 31, has spurred the First Nations Summit to call for province-wide protests against the governments' negotiating stance in the BCTP. As part of this broader effort, the Sto:lo Nation has participated in these days of action, which took place on July 4 and August 8, by organizing a highway information line near Hope and a march in Chilliwack that targeted the offices of both the DFO and the Canadian Alliance MP Chuck Strahl.

In commenting on the Sto:lo protests, Pennier noted that the need for community action flows from the deep flaws of the BCTP. These problems have made it necessary for the Sto:lo to keep their options open.

"We are not putting all our eggs in this treaty basket." At the same time, Pennier emphasized the necessity of participating in the BCTP for as long as there are still avenues to explore within it. Even if the process fails to yield any rights, Pennier explained, the information gathering necessary to participate in the BCTP, i.e. to construct the validity of the Sto:lo claims, will be an asset for future generations. The fruits of this research has, in the last few weeks, been assembled and readied for publication in a historical atlas which is due to be published next year.