08.04.2013 Views

Fort Chipewyan Métis Local 125 Métis Nation of Alberta PO Box 306 ...

Fort Chipewyan Métis Local 125 Métis Nation of Alberta PO Box 306 ...

Fort Chipewyan Métis Local 125 Métis Nation of Alberta PO Box 306 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Local</strong> <strong>125</strong><br />

<strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Nation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong><br />

<strong>PO</strong> <strong>Box</strong> <strong>306</strong>, <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong><br />

<strong>Alberta</strong> T0P 1B0<br />

______________________________________________________________________________<br />

August 11, 2012<br />

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency<br />

Jill Adams, Panel Manager<br />

160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor<br />

Place Bell Canada<br />

Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 Sent via email: Shell.Reviews@ceaa-acee.gc.ca<br />

Re Statements <strong>of</strong> Concern on both<br />

Jackpine Oil Sands Mine Expansion - Reference number: 59540<br />

Pierre River Mine - Reference number: 59539<br />

A Information about <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong><br />

We wish to provide the Joint Panels with the following information for their consideration and for the<br />

Record.<br />

1. <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> is the oldest community in <strong>Alberta</strong> and it was formed in 1788.<br />

2. Confederation occurred in 1867.<br />

3. The Northwest Territories entered confederation on July 15, 1870.<br />

4. In 1871, British Columbia became the sixth province.<br />

5. Treaty 8 was not enacted until 1899.<br />

6. <strong>Alberta</strong> and Saskatchewan become provinces in 1905.<br />

7. The <strong>Métis</strong> have been in <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> since 1788 and it is very well documented (P. A.<br />

McCormack, <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> and the Shaping <strong>of</strong> Canadian History , 1788-1920)<br />

8. That Wood Buffalo <strong>Nation</strong>al Park was created in 1922 and expanded in 1926.<br />

The only entity able to lawfully engage in ‘Capital C’ constitutional consultation for the <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong><br />

<strong>Métis</strong> is <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Local</strong> <strong>125</strong>. We do NOT recognize Region 1 or the <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Nation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong><br />

(at the provincial level) as having the ability to sign <strong>of</strong>f on consultation, impacts or infringement <strong>of</strong> our<br />

Aboriginal rights.<br />

B <strong>Métis</strong> Rights & <strong>Alberta</strong>’s <strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting Policy<br />

In 2003, the Supreme Court <strong>of</strong> Canada recognized that Section 35 was not empty for us. The Court held<br />

that we had constitutionally recognized and protected rights. More specifically but not exclusively, the<br />

case dealt with harvesting rights. (R. v. Powley, 2003 SCC 43. enclosed). As a result, all the case law<br />

regarding Aboriginal rights applies to our community, including the ‘duty to consult’. The High Court<br />

SOC Shell Projects August2012 (CAB) 1


established the constitutional test <strong>of</strong> ‘effective control by the Crown’ as the time at which <strong>Métis</strong> rights<br />

were crystallized, years later than the Van der Peet ‘contact test’ applicable to First <strong>Nation</strong>s.<br />

18 ... We accept Van der Peet as the template for this discussion. However, we modify the<br />

pre-contact focus <strong>of</strong> the Van der Peet test when the claimants are <strong>Métis</strong> to account for the<br />

important differences between Indian and <strong>Métis</strong> claims. Section 35 requires that we recognize<br />

and protect those customs and traditions that were historically important features <strong>of</strong> <strong>Métis</strong><br />

communities prior to the time <strong>of</strong> effective European control, and that persist in the present day.<br />

This modification is required to account for the unique post-contact emergence <strong>of</strong> <strong>Métis</strong><br />

communities, and the post-contact foundation <strong>of</strong> their Aboriginal rights. (R. v. Powley ,203 SCC<br />

43, para. 18, p.15)<br />

What is obvious from both the chronology and the legal dissertations, <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> are vested<br />

with both Aboriginal and constitutionally protected rights:<br />

whose origins predate Canadian confederation and the creation <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong>, British Columbia,<br />

Saskatchewan and Northwest Territories; and,<br />

that are larger in scope and more robust than First <strong>Nation</strong>s’ rights because <strong>of</strong> the adaptive<br />

Powley ‘effective control test’.<br />

Based on ‘oral testimony’ <strong>of</strong> my people, our traditional territory extends beyond <strong>Alberta</strong>’s borders into<br />

multiple Canadian jurisdictions. In their wisdom, the Canadian Courts have dictated that our perspective<br />

<strong>of</strong> our rights and the exercise <strong>of</strong> those rights is the guiding principal for interpretation because <strong>of</strong> our<br />

unique relationship with the Crown.<br />

Factually,<br />

the Powley decision was released in 2003,<br />

<strong>Alberta</strong> had a negotiated an Interim <strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting Agreement with the <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Nation</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>Alberta</strong> in 2004 (enclosed), and<br />

since terminating the 2004 agreement, <strong>Alberta</strong> developed and imposed a unilateral Harvesting<br />

Policy in 2010 (enclosed).<br />

Via its June 2010 <strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting Policy, <strong>Alberta</strong> acknowledges the <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> as ‘both a<br />

historic and contemporary rights-bearing community’. In the absence <strong>of</strong> any traditional land use or<br />

occupancy studies, <strong>Alberta</strong> creates a notional ‘deemed traditional territory’ <strong>of</strong> 160 km (enclosed map).<br />

The <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> are taking a new approach to the regulatory area that is critically impacting<br />

our rights and way <strong>of</strong> life.<br />

C Consultation Policies<br />

<strong>Alberta</strong> has NO <strong>Métis</strong> Consultation Policy, but they have a First <strong>Nation</strong> Consultation Policy. So what is<br />

the effect <strong>of</strong> not having a <strong>Métis</strong> Consultation Policy? <strong>Alberta</strong> will not be able to say they have consulted<br />

with us as a rights-bearing people or even credibly assert that proposition.<br />

Canada has developed the words <strong>of</strong> a <strong>Métis</strong> Consultation Policy but has not made it real. <strong>Métis</strong> capacity<br />

building and meaningful <strong>Métis</strong> consultation are inextricably linked. There is a fairness principal that is<br />

NOT being met. The Crown cannot say that they have consulted and accommodated <strong>Métis</strong> rights when<br />

SOC Shell Projects August2012 (CAB) 2


our organization has no capacity to address the impacts <strong>of</strong> policies, developments, land use or proposed<br />

project developments. We cannot give informed consent without the means to become informed.<br />

Canada’s actions will not meet the tests developed by Canadian Courts regarding the principals and<br />

elements <strong>of</strong> legitimate Aboriginal consultation.<br />

There is no hierarchy <strong>of</strong> s. 35 Aboriginal rights so <strong>Alberta</strong>’s and Canada’s unequal treatment <strong>of</strong> rights<br />

bear-bearing Aboriginal peoples will not stand. First <strong>Nation</strong>s receive some <strong>of</strong> the following capacity<br />

support that we are denied.<br />

federal basic per capital support to their organizations and community<br />

both federal and provincial program funding far in excess <strong>of</strong> what is available to us<br />

<strong>Alberta</strong> Industry have supported the development <strong>of</strong> Industry Relations Corporation (IRCs ) in<br />

every First <strong>Nation</strong> to enable their capacity (people, <strong>of</strong>fices, studies, etc) to meaningful engage in<br />

consultation<br />

<strong>Alberta</strong> now funds basic organizational support to First <strong>Nation</strong>’s IRCs, so the First <strong>Nation</strong> IRCs are<br />

getting support from Canada, <strong>Alberta</strong> and Industry now<br />

there is no funding for us to commission baseline information or TLU studies, again unlike First<br />

<strong>Nation</strong>s.<br />

Everything we have set out establishes that <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Local</strong> has absolutely NO capacity to<br />

be able to support any kind <strong>of</strong> engagement, consultation, or mitigation discussion with either<br />

governments or industry.<br />

D Impacts<br />

We assert that both the Jackpine and Pierre River Projects will have SERIOUS ADVERSE and<br />

PERMANENT IMPACTS on our both acknowledged or credibly asserted, constitutionally protected rights<br />

to:<br />

harvest for subsistence, cultural and commercially in , on and under the lands & waters<br />

navigate the waters & lands for commercial, recreational and cultural reasons<br />

exercise <strong>of</strong> our spiritual and cultural practices<br />

protect and allow our <strong>Métis</strong> way <strong>of</strong> life to survive and thrive<br />

Barb Hermansen has a publication called,” Barb Hermansen, The Last Woman to Raise Children on the<br />

Athabasca River” (June 2011). Barb and her grandchildren are members <strong>of</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Local</strong> <strong>125</strong>. Barb’s oldest<br />

grandson is supposed to inherit the trap line she raised both her children on. That trap line is on Shell’s<br />

Pierre River Mine. Barb tells many wonderful stories about her strong and knowledgeable mother, who<br />

harvested many things, including bitumen. As with other <strong>Métis</strong> in Northern <strong>Alberta</strong>, we harvested<br />

bitumen to seal boats or ro<strong>of</strong>s. Barb’s mother would de-bark a tree to make shingles for her cabin. The<br />

bitumen was used to seal the joints between the bark shingles. Her grandson inheritance will be<br />

worthless. A way <strong>of</strong> life and their rights are being completely abrogated.<br />

Everyone <strong>Métis</strong> in <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> is a harvester <strong>of</strong> some kind, out <strong>of</strong> both choice and necessity. <strong>Fort</strong><br />

<strong>Chipewyan</strong> is a fly in community. Our <strong>Métis</strong> way <strong>of</strong> life has changed little since the early 1800s. Almost<br />

everyone in <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> owns a boat or has access to one. These boats are used for recreation,<br />

harvesting , travel to <strong>Fort</strong> McMurray and commercial endeavours, like barging.<br />

SOC Shell Projects August2012 (CAB) 3


We notice that both Mikisew and the Athabasca <strong>Chipewyan</strong> First <strong>Nation</strong>s have filed a 208 Page<br />

submission on Shell’s Jackpine Project. We draw the Joint Panels consideration to their well funded<br />

submissions We entreat the Joint Panels to note that we all live in the same isolated , beautiful<br />

community. If they have well documented impacts, then logically those impacts apply to us.<br />

We have been exercising our rights in our traditional territory since we first settled in <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong>,<br />

long before Canada was Canada and long before British Columbia, <strong>Alberta</strong>, Saskatchewan and the NWT<br />

existed (P. A. McCormick, Ft <strong>Chipewyan</strong> and the Shaping <strong>of</strong> Canadian History, 1788-1920).<br />

E Role <strong>of</strong> the Regulatory Bodies<br />

The case <strong>of</strong> Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. and BC Hydro and Power Authority v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2010<br />

SCC 43, (2010) 2 S.C.R.650 provides that in some cases a regulatory authority may be tasked with the<br />

role <strong>of</strong> consultation or may in fact be responsible for ruling on the adequacy <strong>of</strong> the consultation that has<br />

transpired. <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Local</strong> <strong>125</strong> has written to both the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) and<br />

the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) to ask them to rule pre-emptively on the<br />

‘adequacy <strong>of</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> consultation’. We tried this approach because our organization receives no<br />

government funding. We have no ability to bring legal actions to protect ourselves. On the advice <strong>of</strong> our<br />

advisor, we wrote to you seeking to trigger the honour <strong>of</strong> the Crown and resulting duties that I was told<br />

about in the Supreme Court case law. I was told about how we are supposed to be treated “with the<br />

utmost good faith”. We received your response dated July 31, 2012, and not surprisingly you are forcing<br />

us into litigation.<br />

G Conclusion and Requests<br />

We are corresponding with Governments about <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong>’s new approach to protecting our<br />

rights. We have indicated that if they are slow to address the issues we raise in this correspondence,<br />

justice will not be done – delay will in fact constitute denial <strong>of</strong> justice. The amount <strong>of</strong> development<br />

taking place in northern Canada is both significant and severely impacting our way <strong>of</strong> life (see enclosed<br />

map). We corresponded with <strong>Alberta</strong> and Canada asking to be engaged and resourced on an urgent<br />

basis to deal with all these regulatory matters (see included letter to Canada and <strong>Alberta</strong>). First <strong>Nation</strong>s<br />

have been in consultation processes for over 10 years. It is going to take awhile for <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong><br />

<strong>Métis</strong> to document our baseline information and commission Traditional Land Use and Occupancy<br />

Studies.<br />

Please continue to notify us regarding the Joint Panels activities, but note ‘on the record’ that we<br />

believe notification or participation does NOT fulfill either Canada’s or <strong>Alberta</strong>’s consultation<br />

obligation for the reasons we set out in this letter.<br />

SOC Shell Projects August2012 (CAB) 4


<strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting in <strong>Alberta</strong><br />

July 2007 – Updated June 2010<br />

In the case R. v. Powley (September 19, 2003), the Supreme Court <strong>of</strong> Canada<br />

found that members <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Métis</strong> community in and around Sault Ste. Marie,<br />

Ontario have, under s. 35(1) <strong>of</strong> the Constitution Act, 1982, an aboriginal right to<br />

harvest for food that was infringed without justification by the Ontario hunting<br />

legislation. In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court set out a number <strong>of</strong><br />

criteria for <strong>Métis</strong> people in establishing their right.<br />

Some <strong>Métis</strong> in <strong>Alberta</strong> are the beneficiaries <strong>of</strong> constitutionally protected<br />

harvesting rights as described in Powley. Three elements are essential to<br />

government <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong>’s recognition <strong>of</strong> those rights:<br />

Determining who are <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters;<br />

What comprises <strong>Métis</strong> harvesting rights; and<br />

Where those rights can be exercised.<br />

Who is a <strong>Métis</strong> Harvester?<br />

A person who asserts a constitutionally protected <strong>Métis</strong> harvesting right<br />

has the onus to prove that assertion.<br />

A person who wishes to fish using a net must have a <strong>Métis</strong> Domestic Fishing<br />

Licence; an individual’s eligibility for that licence must be established before the<br />

licence is issued. A person who wishes to fish by any other legal means must<br />

have a sportfishing licence. A person who wishes to hunt must be able to<br />

demonstrate that he/she is a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester as described below. If checked<br />

while hunting, the person will be given 60 days to produce evidence <strong>of</strong> their<br />

status as a harvester, and, if unable to do so, may be charged with an <strong>of</strong>fence.<br />

If an individual is uncertain whether they will be able to prove that they possess<br />

an aboriginal right they should seek legal advice, as you may be required to<br />

prove the existence <strong>of</strong> such a right in court if you are charged with an <strong>of</strong>fence.<br />

Alternatively, individuals may wish to purchase the necessary licences in order to<br />

avoid uncertainty.<br />

A person is a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester only if he or she meets the test set out in the<br />

Powley case.<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting in <strong>Alberta</strong> – July 5, 2007 - Updated June 2010 Page 1 <strong>of</strong> 5


To demonstrate that you are a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester, you must provide evidence that<br />

you meet the Powley test. You should be prepared to produce evidence that you<br />

satisfy the following criteria:<br />

That you self-identify as <strong>Métis</strong>, and for how long you have self-identified<br />

as <strong>Métis</strong><br />

o membership in the <strong>Métis</strong> <strong>Nation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong> or a <strong>Métis</strong> Settlement or<br />

a statutory declaration confirming self identification would assist in<br />

demonstrating self identification,<br />

o membership in either <strong>of</strong> these organizations, or a Statutory<br />

Declaration, is not sufficient to meet the Powley test;<br />

That you have an ancestral connection to an historic <strong>Métis</strong> community 1 in<br />

<strong>Alberta</strong>;<br />

o genealogical history, including where ancestors lived and when<br />

they lived there,<br />

o please go back in time as far back as possible, and in any event,<br />

back to the late 1800's;<br />

That you belong to a contemporary <strong>Métis</strong> community in <strong>Alberta</strong>.<br />

o name that community and demonstrate acceptance by and<br />

involvement in that community;<br />

That you are a resident <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong>.<br />

Thorough information will help make the decision-making process efficient.<br />

At this time, <strong>Alberta</strong> is prepared to consider for the purposes <strong>of</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> harvesting<br />

the eight <strong>Métis</strong> Settlements and the following 17 communities as both historic<br />

and contemporary <strong>Métis</strong> communities: <strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong>, <strong>Fort</strong> McKay, <strong>Fort</strong><br />

Vermilion, Peace River, Cadotte Lake, Grouard, Wabasca, Trout Lake, Conklin,<br />

Lac La Biche, Smoky Lake, St. Paul, Bonnyville, Wolf Lake, Cold Lake, Lac Ste.<br />

Anne and Slave Lake.<br />

When Hunting Can Take Place<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> harvesters may hunt for food at all times <strong>of</strong> the year.<br />

1 In light <strong>of</strong> the unique history <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong>’s eight <strong>Métis</strong> Settlements, an ancestral connection to a <strong>Métis</strong><br />

Settlement can be established by demonstrating a pre-1900 ancestral connection to the general geographic<br />

area <strong>of</strong> the settlement, or a pre-1900 ancestral connection to a recognized <strong>Métis</strong> community within <strong>Alberta</strong><br />

from which an individual or their family migrated when the settlement was established. Again, when<br />

submitting documentation, please go back in time as far as possible, and in any event, back to the late<br />

1800s.<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting in <strong>Alberta</strong> – July 5, 2007 - Updated June 2010 Page 2 <strong>of</strong> 5


Where Hunting Can Take Place<br />

A <strong>Métis</strong> harvester may hunt for food only within the community harvesting area 2<br />

<strong>of</strong> his or her community. Within that harvesting area, a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester may hunt<br />

on:<br />

unoccupied Crown land; and<br />

other land to which they have a right <strong>of</strong> access for hunting (e.g., privatelyowned<br />

lands if they have first obtained the landholder’s permission to<br />

enter for the purpose <strong>of</strong> hunting).<br />

The Recreational Access Regulation applies to <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters.<br />

Where Hunting Can Not Take Place<br />

A <strong>Métis</strong> harvester may not hunt on land that is being put to any other use that is<br />

visibly incompatible with hunting. This determination must be made on a case-bycase<br />

basis. The safety <strong>of</strong> other persons, livestock and domestically raised<br />

animals is <strong>of</strong> primary importance. The presence <strong>of</strong> fences, signs, fields, buildings,<br />

domesticated animals or indications <strong>of</strong> farming or industrial activities all suggest<br />

uses that are visibly incompatible with hunting. For example, unless permission<br />

has first been obtained for hunting on such lands, <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters may not hunt<br />

on lands:<br />

being actively used for mining, lumbering or other industrial purposes;<br />

that are fenced, posted, or cultivated;<br />

that contain buildings that may be used or occupied;<br />

on which livestock or other domestically raised animals may be present.<br />

A <strong>Métis</strong> harvester may not hunt in:<br />

provincial parks, recreation areas, ecological reserves or other similar<br />

lands where no hunting is allowed;<br />

wildlife sanctuaries, including road corridor wildlife sanctuaries.<br />

Laws that Apply to <strong>Métis</strong> Harvesters<br />

Safety – laws dealing with hunting safety apply to <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters. For<br />

example, a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester is not permitted to hunt in a dangerous manner,<br />

illegally discharge a weapon or firearm (such as from a primary highway, or<br />

within 200 yards <strong>of</strong> an occupied building, or at night), discharge a weapon from a<br />

vehicle or have a loaded firearm in a vehicle. <strong>Local</strong> municipal bylaws that<br />

prohibit the discharge <strong>of</strong> weapons in some areas may also apply.<br />

2 In the absence <strong>of</strong> a more definitive description <strong>of</strong> a community’s historical harvesting area, <strong>Alberta</strong><br />

presently considers a harvesting area to comprise the area within 160 kilometres <strong>of</strong> a community.<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting in <strong>Alberta</strong> – July 5, 2007 - Updated June 2010 Page 3 <strong>of</strong> 5


Wastage <strong>of</strong> Meat – laws that require that the edible meat <strong>of</strong> any game animal or<br />

bird not be wasted, destroyed, spoiled or abandoned apply to <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters.<br />

Sale <strong>of</strong> Wildlife (Trafficking) – selling, buying, bartering, soliciting or trading in<br />

wildlife or wildlife parts, and <strong>of</strong>fering to do so, are activities governed by the<br />

Wildlife Act and Regulations. Many <strong>of</strong> these activities are strictly prohibited,<br />

while others are regulated. Hunting for the purpose <strong>of</strong> unlawful trafficking in<br />

wildlife, including parts such as meat, trophy heads, antlers, horns, or skins, is<br />

prohibited. However, the incidental sale <strong>of</strong> skins from deer, elk, moose or<br />

pronghorn antelope that were lawfully hunted (including by a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester) is<br />

permitted under the Wildlife Act.<br />

Registration – for the purposes <strong>of</strong> conservation and management <strong>of</strong> the following<br />

species, all persons, including <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters, must register the kill <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong><br />

these animals in person and submit certain parts:<br />

bighorn sheep over the age <strong>of</strong> one year must be registered within 30 days<br />

<strong>of</strong> the kill (hunter must submit the complete and unaltered skull with horns<br />

and eyes intact);<br />

mountain goat must be registered within 30 days <strong>of</strong> the kill (hunter must<br />

submit the incisor bar);<br />

grizzly bear must be registered within 4 business days <strong>of</strong> the kill (hunter<br />

must submit the skull and skin, and evidence <strong>of</strong> sex must be attached to<br />

the skin and visible);<br />

cougar must be registered within 2 business days <strong>of</strong> the date <strong>of</strong> the kill<br />

(hunter must submit the skull and skin, and evidence <strong>of</strong> sex must be<br />

attached to the skin and visible).<br />

Trapping – the right <strong>of</strong> <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters to hunt for food does not include the right<br />

to trap animals for the purpose <strong>of</strong> selling their fur.<br />

Export <strong>of</strong> Wildlife from <strong>Alberta</strong> – the export <strong>of</strong> wildlife from <strong>Alberta</strong> is governed by<br />

both federal and provincial laws. Certain types <strong>of</strong> wildlife and certain wildlife<br />

parts cannot be exported from <strong>Alberta</strong> by any person, including a <strong>Métis</strong><br />

harvester; this includes bear paws and bear gall bladders.<br />

Migratory Birds – certain federal laws including the Migratory Birds Convention<br />

Act and the Migratory Birds Regulations apply to all hunters, including <strong>Métis</strong><br />

harvesters. A <strong>Métis</strong> harvester may hunt migratory game birds at all times <strong>of</strong> the<br />

year, however bag limits, permit requirements and other laws concerning<br />

migratory game bird hunting do apply. Sustainable Resource Development<br />

defers to the Canadian Wildlife Service to provide details <strong>of</strong> the application <strong>of</strong><br />

these laws to <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters.<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting in <strong>Alberta</strong> – July 5, 2007 - Updated June 2010 Page 4 <strong>of</strong> 5


Fishing<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> harvesters must abide by all regulations pertaining to fishing, including<br />

holding applicable fishing licences.<br />

Sportfishing licences – these licences authorize fishing by means <strong>of</strong> angling and<br />

other methods permitted by the regulations.<br />

This licence is available to any resident <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alberta</strong>.<br />

A person who is under 16 years <strong>of</strong> age or over 65 years old does not<br />

require a licence to fish in this manner.<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> domestic fishing licences – these licenses authorize fishing for food in a<br />

specified water body with one gill net that is not over 100 yards in length and <strong>of</strong> a<br />

minimum mesh size. The licenses are issued to <strong>Métis</strong> harvesters based on the<br />

following criteria:<br />

the person must be eligible as a <strong>Métis</strong> harvester in accordance with the<br />

criteria set out by the Supreme Court in the Powley case (Note: in<br />

addition, pursuant to the <strong>Métis</strong> Settlements Act, a member <strong>of</strong> a <strong>Métis</strong><br />

Settlement is eligible for a licence to fish in a lake that is within or<br />

bordering the <strong>Métis</strong> Settlement in which he or she lives);<br />

licences are issued only for those waters identified by fisheries managers<br />

as supporting domestic fishing; an eligible applicant may be considered for<br />

a <strong>Métis</strong> domestic fishing licence authorizing fishing only in waters that are<br />

within their community harvesting area.<br />

<strong>Métis</strong> Harvesting in <strong>Alberta</strong> – July 5, 2007 - Updated June 2010 Page 5 <strong>of</strong> 5


6,600,000<br />

6,500,000<br />

6,400,000<br />

300,000<br />

300,000<br />

<strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> 160 km Buffer<br />

400,000<br />

400,000<br />

^<br />

500,000<br />

500,000<br />

600,000<br />

600,000<br />

700,000<br />

700,000<br />

Ü<br />

6,600,000<br />

6,500,000<br />

6,400,000<br />

Legend<br />

PREPARED FOR<br />

SPATIAL REFERENCE<br />

PROJECT<br />

DRAWN BY<br />

IS<br />

^<br />

1:1,467,832<br />

<strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong><br />

Use and Occupancy Study<br />

<strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong><br />

160 km Buffer<br />

0 25 50<br />

<strong>Fort</strong> <strong>Chipewyan</strong> <strong>Métis</strong><br />

UTM Zone 12<br />

APPROVED BY<br />

124910221 SL<br />

DRAFT DATE REVISED BY<br />

2012 June 14<br />

Kilometers<br />

Base Data: © Department <strong>of</strong> Natural<br />

Resources Canada. All rights reserved.<br />

PREPARED BY<br />

DATUM<br />

NAD 83<br />

IS

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!