Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Part 11. Post-Treaty Events 192A. Yeah, I think there was a general government tendency to frown upon any activities that wereconsidered to be pagan, because they were an impediment to the civilization program they werepushing.Q. Right. Those activities tended to keep the Indian Indian rather than getting out of the way ofthem becoming white, so to speak?A. Yes.Q. And so again, those occasions would provide less of an opportunity for the passing on of oraltraditions; is that fair?A. I think for the most part, you're correct in suggesting, if I hear you correctly, that the impositioneither through coercion or subtle manipulation by -- on the part of the government of a certaincivilization program, I think, contributed to an overall reduction in the ability for Aboriginal peoplesto transmit their traditional knowledge from generation to generation.[995] Lovisek gave evidence on October 20, 2009 about the effect of the diminishment of thesturgeon fishery caused by commercial fishing in the Lake of the Woods and Rainy River areasand the introduction of the potlatch laws, at p. 71Q. Now, what ultimately happened to the Midewiwin society and to the Grand Council?A. … [S]everal things happened. In… the mid-1880s … a clause was inserted into the Indian Actwhich forbade ceremonials, especially ceremonials that involved dancing or giving away things. Andalthough it was directed initially at the potlatch and the sun dance, it seemed to have captured theMidewiwin as well since the Indian agents were enforcing that in the Treaty 3 area. …this…restricted the Ojibway from gathering in the usual areas that they would for the Midewiwin.2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)The second thing that happened was that their sturgeon fisheries were subject to depletion as a resultof the introduction of commercial fishing in the 1880s, particularly by American commercialfisheries. And this affected the Lake of the Woods runs and those that ran into the Rainy River.So this reduced the necessity on the part of many to come to the Rainy River to engage in ceremonieswhich they could no longer engage in and also to participate to the same extent in the sturgeonfishing.[996] Whether or not it is of marginal relevance to understanding and intent in 1873, evidenceof developments in the late nineteenth and the twentieth century is relevant to other issues here,including the continuing importance of Harvesting Rights to the Ojibway and the content of theobligations inherent in the Honour of the Crown.[997] 1888. As noted earlier, Dawson, by this time a federal MP for Algoma, pointed out in aspeech in the House of Commons in May 1888 that "it was stipulated that the Indians shall havethe right of fishing all over the territory as they formerly had … that they were to be at liberty tohunt and fish in every direction." Prime Minister Macdonald promised to have his "Minister ofFisheries" look after this matter.[998] In his post-Treaty recollections of discussions concerning the Harvesting Clause, Dawsonmade no mention of any limitations on Harvesting, either by regulation or "taking up" byCanada. Although Dawson was specifically referring to fishing, allusions to harvesting includedhunting, fishing, trapping and wild rice harvesting.