One dead duck leads to test case

Page 10

In October 2004, Will Goodon, a Manitoba Metis, walked into a provincial conservation office to discuss Metis hunting rights, produced a duck that he admitted to shooting, and was promptly charged with possession of a migratory bird without a provincial license.

The event was part of a plan to bring to a head the issue of Metis hunting or harvesting rights in Manitoba, and to challenge the Manitoba government's authority to determine who is Metis.

Goodon's test case will rely heavily on the Supreme Court of Canada Powley decision, in which the court recognized the right of Metis to hunt and fish. Goodon's lawyer is Jean Teillet, who was instrumental in putting the Powley case before the court.

Teillet said the government of Manitoba respects the Powley decision, but takes issue with how Metis are defined or identified by it. "The Manitoba government takes the position that only specific settlements, like a little town, or a village, or a city that are historic Metis communities, can have the right to harvest," she said. "If you have moved anywhere, theoretically even 10 miles away, then you would no longer have the right."

She said the Manitoba Metis Federation (MMF) takes issue with that very strongly.

"Metis have always been very mobile. The idea that their rights only exist in certain settlements, some of which have changed or moved, that cannot be right."

Teillet said the Manitoba government also insists Metis rights were extinguished by the Manitoba Act of 1870, and the Dominion Lands Act that came in 1885.

"Essentially, the Manitoba government is taking the position that not all Metis in Manitoba have harvesting rights because of basic extinguishment. This to me flies in the face of the existing law."

The lawyer said the Manitoba government is taking a very 'unhelpful' position as far as Aboriginal people are concerned.

Goodon, who works for the MMF, described the disconnect between what the provincial government is saying and what conservation officers are doing to Metis harvesters. Goodon said Premier Gary Doer attended a MMF assembly last year and said he recognized and supported Metis rights. Goodon said a letter sent to MMF President David Chartrand from Manitoba Minister of Conservation Stan Struthers states the government would work towards recognizing Metis rights.

Goodon says that the MMF has done its part by developing the Metis harvester card system, which identifies Metis rights holders for harvesting or hunting purposes on government land. The process for getting a harvester card is based on genealogy and community acceptance of the applicant. Goodon was in possession of a harvester card at the time he was charged, but the Manitoba government has not recognized the card system.

When Goodon went into the conversation office, he said he was intending to discuss the discrepancy between what's being said and what being done by conservation officers, which is to charge Metis who had a harvester's card but no provincial license.

"I went into the office and after our discussion I asked 'What if I had a duck in the back of my truck, would I be charged?'" said Goodon.

The conservation officer told Goodon he would be charged, so he said, 'Let's get this over with,' and went to the truck and got his duck.

Goodon then called MMF President David Chartrand, who had pledged to help any Metis charged with illegal hunting while in possession of a harvester card.

Chartrand said that Manitoba is trying to set a dangerous precedent with their narrow definition of who is entitled to exercise Metis rights, because Metis people will never allow anyone but themselves to decide who they are.

"One thing that I am so appreciative of is the recognition from the First Nations that we as a people have always owned ourselves and always controlled our destiny. It is paramount that it stays that way, and we never give up on that," he said.

"What is interesting about this whol issue and the fight that is taking place in Manitoba [is] we have a government, an NDP government who claim to always be fighting for minorities, and having social conscience, and social groups, and people who are in need," he said. "Yet they are the first government to come and oppose the essence of the highest court in the land."