Its an interesting decision, and I should have clarrified that it was a unamimous BC Appeals Court decision, upholding a BC Supreme Court decision from 2007. Its narrow in scope, and does not affect provincial resource legislation. Nonetheless, yesterday's decision could signal a move to more narrowly define aboriginal treaty rights vs title.

-The Tsilhqot'in Nation was declared to have hunting and trapping rights, the right to capture wild horses, and the right to trade skins and pelts as required to secure a moderate livelihood; those rights were declared to have been unjustifiably infringed by the provincial forestry and land use planning regimes.

First Nation expectations with respect to the extent of aboriginal title lands in B.C. were heightened significantly by the 2007 decision, which ironically made the negotiation of treaties much more difficult. The Appeals Court clarrification yesterday has taken the wind out of the sails of those who had aspirations to establish aboriginal title to all these lands. I would think that a broad view across Canadian First Nations is that it must be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, and not allowed to stand.

lakeside