HIGH-GRADE NI-CU-PT-PD-ZN-CR-AU-V-TI DISCOVERIES IN THE "RING OF FIRE"

NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)

Free
Message: BC Supreme Court Decision Tsilhqot'in Nation

Well, I fear we are now in unchartered territory with development in the RoF. The layers of complexity in Canada's relationship with our aboriginal neighbours is going to play itself out in Northern Ontario.

The 'duty to consult' established by the Supreme Court has generally not worked to achieve negotiated settlements and been more of a 'discovery' process prior to litigation

Many First Nations are committed to using Treaty language to expand their titles to traditional lands beyond traditional use. A BC Supreme Court decision yesterday in the Tsilhqot'in Nation case seems to put a limit on this; at least within the context of this territory and case in BC. It will likely be appealed. (Justice Groberman dismissed the "territorial theory" of aboriginal title by which a nomadic group could demonstrate title by moving though an area in various patterns at various times.

Aboriginal title was tied to particular occupancy and intensive use of specific sites, he said.

"I see broad territorial claims to title as antithetical to the goal of reconciliation, which demands that, so far as possible, the traditional rights of first nations be fully respected with-out placing unnecessary limitations on the sovereignty of the Crown or on the aspirations of all Canadians, aboriginal and non-aboriginal," Justice Groberman wrote.

The law does not "support the idea that title can be proven based on a limited presence in a broad territory."

However, there are so many layers to this "onion"; historical mistreatment of aboriginal peoples; different Treaty wording/agreements; mismanagement of Canada's relationship with First Nations; a Supreme Court that has pushed for negotiated settlements; past militant action on the part of some First Nations that has achieved results; etc, etc.

The Assembly of First Nations is in election mode, so we can expect to continue to hear the extremes of the arguments. There are many legitimate claims for First Nations, and wrongs to be addressed, but until we get a better framework to resolve these issues, which may mean additional clarrification from the Courts, I expect a lot of posturing from aboriginal leaders.

Lakeside

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply