Whose land is it? Nutseni or Unist’ot’en?

Before I get into the next thought provoking article, in the past 18 years almost everything I published was about British Columbia or Canada in general, other than a few articles, so if you’re wondering why suddenly it’s all about one issue, it’s because the attack is on your and my family, and it’s in our back yard, its personal and it needs to stop and I refuse to stand by while anarchists turn our society into a gong show.

Also it’s very important that we continue to show our respect and gratitude to our Wet’suwe’ten neighbors, who worked hard at doing everything legally out of the offices in Witset and other local First Nations communities east of us. We cannot let the anarchist’s destroy the relationships with our fellow communities.

Let us not make the mistake of tarnishing the good reputations of our neighbors on account of what the few do.

This article is an expansion of points I made in the last article, in regards to the legal obligation by the chiefs to prove they owned the land they claim, the continuance of the Delgamuukw claim. The title may well have read “Whose land is it? Gil_seyhu or Nutseni or Gitdumden Clan?” as evidence to follow will show this to be the case.

It’s important we dispel some myths first.

The existence of First Nations on lands did and does not establish the ownership or sovereignty of those lands. For the Unist’ot’en to claim title to the land, it must be done thorough the Wet’suwe’ten nation as a whole, who have failed to date to provide evidence to support that claim in following up the Delgamuukw claim. There is only one path to land claims, and it’s not with fists raised in the streets and blockades.

Another myth is that you can actually get all the land you claim if other First Nations do not claim it, the Delgamuukw case was only landmark in that it ruled the existence of claims and title to be genuine, that is as far as the case went, the rest still needs to be done.

For the Unist’ot’en to claim it’s their land, at best its wishful thinking, but not surprising is that most of the anarchists at the camp do not even belong to the Unist’ot’en clan, in particular leaders like Molly and her husband from Haida Gwaii and Warner Naziel (The self-proclaimed chief Dini Ze Smogelgem).

Anarchists care little about the law, thus it stands to reason that they know very little about the law until they end up in shackles in front of a judge. Canada has and will always retain its sovereignty over both crown lands and negotiated land claims, and likewise over all aboriginal people in Canada.

Freda Huson and many other anarchists  keep repeating quotations without even understanding their meaning. “Because this is our home. Our medicines, our berries, our food, the animals, our water, our culture are all here since time immemorial.”

Yes natural herbs were here, the berries were here, there was a lot of food here, the water was here, but you need to remove the word “our” as you have never proven that it is yours,
in regards to culture, do you even know the meaning of time immemorial.

Let me repeat what I said in the previous article. The dictionary meaning is “used to refer to a point of time in the past that was so long ago that people have no knowledge or memory of it” Do you even understand what you say when you say time immemorial? So in reality your talking about a time before your great grandfather, and not much further back.

“a point of time in the past that was so long ago that people have no knowledge or memory of it”

I am not asking anyone to like the facts, but for their own protection they would be wise to learn them. You will not win if you think anarchists will bring down the government of Canada.

I am going to steal a quote out of the evidence given by Johnny David, a small part of the evidence submitted at what we now refer to as Delgamuukw Evidence. Its ironical how so many anarchist aboriginals keep flaunting the Delgamuukw case as evidence to prove their point of ownership, quite contrary it proves they have no clue what is written in that case.

It does make me have to ask, was Johnny referring to the Unist’ot’en anarchists when he said the following?

“The land of the Wet’suwe’ten and the Nutseni has been talked about for many years, it and its young people and the people that are born and our young people are the ones who are disputing the land, and they will not get the land” Chief Mikhlikhlekh aka Johnny David

We all know First Nations people were the first people here and I think other than the KKK we all respect them for that, and we are all enjoying the culture they can share with Canadians. The problem comes when you mix anarchism with First Nations rights, the mix turns to ugly and full of hateful rhetoric.

The anarchist aboriginals (blockaders) assume they have title over land they failed to claim in court. Most of these anarchists have no clue about land claims, they just know how to look like victims of abuse and market themselves to that part of society looking for something to protest.

As we showed in the last article, part of the Delgamuukw case indicated the lack of evidence regarding who owned, what territory, and further failed to do much more than claim vast tracts of land without proving ownership of that land. Living or traveling over vast tracts of land do not constitute ownership of that land, contrary to their beliefs in mythical justice.

We are going to take a few notes out of that Delgamuukw case to prove our point.

It’s easy to whip up emotions among people who are ignorant of the facts, most of the protestors today like sheep just follow and become an echo chamber for those who manipulate them. It gives them a sense of worthiness when they fight for things they know nothing about.

For those of you seriously seeking the truth, I would highly recommend reading all of the testimony given in the Delgamuukw, yes Canada was guilty of unfair treatment, but the evidence also shows that for the most part First Nations did a lot more in regards to living off the land than enforcing ownership of the land.

For the anarchists to stand up today and start a new claim of ownership of the land their forefathers might or might not have lived on is absolutely ridiculous, they have no evidence of ownership. None of the blockaders lived off the land the way their ancestors did. Most of them could not survive without the intervention of non-aboriginal ways of life, inclusive of food and medicine. They hunt with quads and 4×4’s using scopes on heavy rifles, and call it returning to the ways of their forefathers.

Their claims are akin to suggesting that one owns a lake they fish at because they do not know of anyone else who has fished that lake. Having trapped in a region does not necessarily mean you own the region you trapped in. However they may have claimed trapping rights to that area, again with a different view of ownership.

The camp was built to fight pipelines, it was never built to return to the lands of the so called forefathers. While it may sound very appealing to claim vast tracts of land, the reality of establishing ownership vs living on the land is becoming a near impossible task, all the evidence is dying due to old age, so the longer you wait before returning to the courts, the more elders pass on.

Just reading what Johnny David says about the wars is indicative of facts having disappeared from human memory, it may already be to late. The wise thing to do now is negotiate for as much as you can, before even that becomes to late.

By far the most ridiculous part of the anarchists claim today is that the pipelines threaten their healing center, when the truth is the healing center was intentionally placed on the pipelines path. If there is any threat at all, it is 100% the fault of the anarchists.

Stupid input results in stupid output.

The best advice I can give to those who are at or were part of the anarchist uprising is to head down to Witset, an apology would never hurt, and most certainly it would be respected, apply for help in education, and do something useful with your lives, you have the opportunity of a lifetime here and now, for you to waste or take advantage of.

Best part of all of this opportunity is that it does not surrender any part of the lands you claim, or will be entitled to. Its the same advice I gave to my own children and grandchildren.

As for the Hereditary Chiefs, maybe they forgot they are signatures to ongoing negotiations under the Office of the Wet’suwet’en Society. Have you abolished or abandoned negotiations in exchange for the right to support, protests and illegal blockades? Is that your way to come with fists and demands as public props, while on the other hand you play the civilized card at the negotiating table?

If you stopped negotiation on behalf of the Wet’suwet’en you owe it to your people to tell them.

Added Notes; The Office of the Wet’suwet’en Society is a central office for the Hagwilget, Moricetown, Nee Tahi Buhn, Skin Tyee and Wet’suwet’en First Nations created to offer services in the areas of land and resources, fisheries and wildlife, social services and treaty negotiations. Three of the 5 FNs are in the B.C. treaty process.

The Hagwilget, Moricetown, Nee Tahi Buhn, Skin Tyee and Wet’suwet’en First Nations also have elected offices and there is nothing binding them to only work though the “Office of the Wet’suwet’en Society.” Clearly they are tired of waiting for that office to complete the treaty process.

The Office of the Wet’suwet’en Society are currently at Stage 4 out of 6 stages. This is where substantive treaty negotiations begin. The three parties examine in detail the elements outlined in their framework agreement. The goal is to reach agreement on each of the topics that will form the basis of the treaty. These agreements will identify and define a range of rights and obligations, including: existing and future interests in land, sea and resources; structures and authorities of government; relationship of laws; regulatory processes; amending processes; dispute resolution; financial component; fiscal relations and so on. The agreement in principle also lays the groundwork for implementation of the treaty.

References : Read the following.

UPDATED Click to Read

Added update Mar 1st 2019

In a recently obtained document in regards to land claim’s let me share some of what was said. This is clear evidence of disputed territory in regards to the proposed CGL Pipeline. Clearly they do not want the public to be aware of the great divide in territorial disputes, as well as the rules set by the Office of Wet’suwet’en, in regards to who can be a hereditary chief. My opinion only but the given rule here is pathetically appalling.

Its also important to make you aware  that both John Ridsdale, and Warner Naziel were active participants in this meeting by the Laksilyu Clan on April 26th, 2009.

“We look at all the maps, some of these elders know all the boundary lines, and I heard them say that in the court case, it is all within them.  I felt good yesterday and I know what it is like going to the camp and I felt it by the log cabin.  As a child I spent a lot of time there.  The last thing, with the people in the east, we need to pull evidence that Francois Lake gave.  Put their words on the wall as they discussed the territory and land as Wet’suwet’en.  We do not need to make any reference to Carrier Sekanie.  It is what I learned, our elders only talked about our people. “

“After the clan meetings, what is the plan for all clans to be under one roof as a whole Wet’suwet’en system? 

Judy and I are entrusted to putting together the Wet’suwet’en Summit where all clans meet.  We will meet in Burns Lake, our eastern communities are fearful of what we are doing here.  They have created 6 nations as CSTC.  David was in a meeting last week and they invited everyone onto Carrier Sekanie territory.  David was very upset.  He corrected them and welcomed them to Laksilyu Territory part of 22,000 sq. km. There is an underlying message, we have people from Brohman Lake Band, B/L Band, Skin Tyee, and Nee Tye Bhun.  It is difficult to get them here.  It is a big task as we are faced with INAC system.  They do not participate in feast hall as much.  Immediate families collect money for their dead, not a feast.  They feel disconnected now.  We are working on Unity.  We will pull all clans together.  Next week we will be in Burns Lake as large population are Gil_seyhu at Francois Lake.  We are planning a field trip on those territories.  We will discuss trespass issues and industry on their territory. “

“I’ve been involved in the court case since the 1980’s and saw work done by our ancestors. They laid the road for us.  

We discuss Unity with eastern members; I’ve heard this for past 15 years since we started treaty negotiations.  Those people we talk about are all our relatives, our people, 6 generations back came from Ootsa Lake, Skin Tyee.  There is a big difference between the Carrier Sekanie and the Wet’suwet’en.  They work in Section 38.  Wet’suwet’en are working with maps which outline Wet’suwet’en territory.   

The Carrier Sekanie gave us a map 4 years ago and which was based on Indian Affairs mapping.  It showed trap lines, we are not working on trap lines; we are working on the territories.  Carrier Sekanie has to protect what they claim is theirs.  

In 1993 we met and had a feast at old hall and chief councilor from Burns Lake Robert Charlie said yes, we need to learn about the feast system but we don’t know where we belong here.  None of our elders practice the feast system which is the foundation of Wet’suwet’en government.  He wants to know if there was a chance he could get a name. He was told that in order to get a Wet’suwet’en name you must earn it.  That turned him off, declaring to be part of the Wet’suwet’en Nation.  Several years later he told me he had no place with us. “

Note with care, no mention is made of the word “hereditary” meaning the Office of the Wet’suwet’en now want control of who becomes a hereditary chief and its clear hereditary has nothing to do with getting that status.

 

 

"Now you know the rest of the story"
brought to you by
"Two Feathers"

 

 

 

In the event we are using copyrighted material, we are doing so within the parameters of the Fair Dealing exception of the Canadian Copyright Act.


See our Copyright Notice