Appellants factum - Woodward & Company

3concluded that “all of the witnesses who related oral tradition and oral history evidenceat trial did so to the best of their abilities”. 2110. The Trial Judge affirmed that “many of the Tsilhqot’in personal narratives or oraltraditions are rich in detail and internally consistent with each other”. 22 In his view,Tsilhqot’in oral tradition evidence was “reliable as a record of certain traditional fishingor hunting practices” and assisted in “the construction of a reasonably reliable historicalrecord of the actual use of some portions of the Claim Area at or prior to 1846”. 2311. The Trial Judge also considered a vast number of historical documents andexpert evidence tendered from a wide range of disciplines. 2412. After 339 trial days, with the benefit of extensive oral history evidence, avoluminous documentary record and expert opinion across a range of disciplines, theTrial Judge was well situated to make factual findings. The Plaintiff’s summary of thematerial facts for this appeal, set out below, is based entirely upon the findings of factmade by the Trial Judge.C. The Tsilhqot’in Nation13. The Tsilhqot’in people are a distinctive Aboriginal group with a shared language,customs, traditions, historical experience, territory and resources from a time before firstcontact (in 1793) 25 and sovereignty assertion (1846). 26,27 Neighbouring First Nations 28and European explorers, traders and settlers 29 have consistently recognized theTsilhqot’in people as a distinctive Aboriginal group.21 Trial Decision, para. 196.22 Trial Decision, para. 168.23 Trial Decision, para. 168.24 Trial Decision, Executive Summary.25 Trial Decision, paras. 1211-12.26 Trial Decision, paras. 601-02.27 Trial Decision, para. 470.28 E.g., Trial Decision, paras. 182, 920-21.29 Trial Decision, paras. 460-62.