6… [T]he proper rights holder, whether for Aboriginal title or Aboriginal rights, isthe community of Tsilhqot’in people. Tsilhqot’in people were the historiccommunity of people sharing language, customs, traditions, historicalexperience, territory and resources at the time of first contact and at sovereigntyassertion. The Aboriginal rights of individual Tsilhqot’in people or any other subgroupwithin the Tsilhqot’in Nation are derived from the collective actions, sharedlanguage, traditions and shared historical experiences of the members of theTsilhqot’in Nation. 54D. The Xeni Gwet’in23. The Xeni Gwet’in community of Tsilhqot’in people is the most remote and isclearly situated on historical Tsilhqot’in territory. 5524. The Xeni Gwet’in are viewed amongst Tsilhqot’in people as the caretakers of thelands in and about Xeni (the Nemiah Valley), including Tachelach’ed. 56 As noted by theTrial Judge, “Xeni Gwet’in people (people of the Nemiah Valley) are charged with thesacred duty to protect the nen (land) of Tachelach’ed and the surrounding nen on behalfof all Tsilhqot’in people”. 5725. The anthropologist Livingston Farrand, and others, referred to the ancestors ofthe Xeni Gwet’in as the “Stone Chilcotin”. 58 The Stone Chilcotin lived in communitiesaround various lakes, including Tsilhqox Biny (Chilko Lake). At the time of sovereignty,the Stone Chilcotin made their winter headquarters along both sides of the Tsilhqox(Chilko River) corridor up to and including Tsilhqox Biny, and extending through thelakes, rivers and streams to the south, east and west (including the Nemiah Valley). 5926. Even today, the community of Xeni Gwet’in can be characterized as remote. Itwas not until 1973 that the Xeni Gwet’in region of Tsilhqot’in territory was finallyconnected by road to the outside world. Installation of the first telephone system in the54 Trial Decision, para. 470 [underscore added].55 Trial Decision, para. 31.56 Trial Decision, para. 468.57 Trial Decision, para. 24.58 Trial Decision, paras. 337, 446. The “Stone Chilcotin” were also referred to as “Stick Chilcotin”.59 Trial Decision, para. 337.
7Nemiah Valley began in December 2000. Electricity from the public grid has not arrivedin the Valley and the entire community relies upon generators for power. 60E. The Claim Area27. The Claim Area consists of Tachelach’ed and the Trapline Territory. These twoareas are delineated on Map 2, included in Appendix A to the Reasons for Judgment. 61Map 3 locates Tsilhqot'in sites inside and outside the Claim Area. 6228. The Claim Area excludes Indian Reserves. 63 The Trial Judge further excludedprivate lands and submerged lands from the relief sought by the Plaintiff, on thegrounds that no infringements to private or submerged lands had been pleaded. 64 ThePlaintiff/Appellant does not appeal from that ruling. Accordingly, private lands andsubmerged lands in the Claim Area are not at issue in this proceeding.29. The boundaries of the Claim Area are “artificial” in the sense that, for example,“[n]o one would suggest that the resource harvesting activities of Tsilhqot’in people everstopped at the rivers” that mark the defined boundaries of Tachelach’ed. 65 Tsilhqot’inpeople used some lands as intensively outside the Claim Area boundaries as inside. 6630. However, as recognized by the Trial Judge, the Plaintiff was required to postulateartificial boundaries to advance his claim, even if these boundaries carried littlerelevance for the Tsilhqot’in. 67 The boundaries of the Claim Area crystallized inresponse to the threat of logging; first in the Trapline Territory and then in Tachelach’ed.Defined in this manner, the Claim Area offered “convenient boundaries” of relevance tocontemporary survival. 6860 Trial Decision, para. 339.61 Trial Decision, para. 46, Appendix A, Map 2.62 Trial Decision, paras. 46, 650, Appendix A, Map 3.63 Trial Decision, paras. 44-45.64 Trial Decision, paras. 991-93, 1000, 1051-52.65 Trial Decision, para. 641.66 Trial Decision, para. 642, 643-44, 950, 958.67 Trial Decision, para. 645-46, 648-49.68 Trial Decision, para. 645.
- Page 1 and 2: JUN 04 * u|UCOURT OF APPEALCourt of
- Page 3 and 4: C. Alternative Argument: The Trial
- Page 5 and 6: DateDecember 18,1998October 14,1999
- Page 7 and 8: OPENING STATEMENT1. The Tsilhqot’
- Page 10 and 11: 2then Chief of the Xeni Gwet’in,
- Page 12 and 13: 414. The Tsilhqot’in people inhab
- Page 16 and 17: 8F. Tsilhqot’in Territory and the
- Page 18 and 19: 10bounding the Claim Area. For them
- Page 20 and 21: 12…I am satisfied Tsilhqot’in p
- Page 22 and 23: 1452. The Trial Judge summarized th
- Page 24 and 25: 16records document numerous situati
- Page 26 and 27: 18days, Tsilhqot’in warriors also
- Page 28 and 29: 20declaration because of the manner
- Page 30 and 31: 22• On the west, from Xeni across
- Page 32 and 33: 24part of their oral traditions, pr
- Page 34 and 35: 26declaration of title in accordanc
- Page 36 and 37: 28would have cross-examined witness
- Page 38 and 39: 30circumstances of the case, which
- Page 40 and 41: 32111. In a subsequent motion, the
- Page 42 and 43: 34by the evidence, then the Court c
- Page 44 and 45: 36exactly what declaration he seeks
- Page 46 and 47: 38declaration should be granted”.
- Page 48 and 49: 40occupation sufficient to ground t
- Page 50 and 51: 42(a) The Plaintiff was not require
- Page 52 and 53: 44process and the legal requirement
- Page 54 and 55: 46157. Proof of an ancestral and mo
- Page 56 and 57: 48uncertainty”. 272 The meaning o
- Page 58 and 59: 50therefore, of opinion, that all n
- Page 60 and 61: 52land regularly used by the Tsilhq
- Page 62 and 63: 54stated that it depends on the fac
- Page 64 and 65:
56the lands in question. At common
- Page 66 and 67:
58193. Moreover, the Trial Judge’
- Page 68 and 69:
60PART 4 - NATURE OF THE ORDER SOUG
- Page 70 and 71:
62R. v. Marshall; R. v. Bernard, [2