Babjak 1 With all due respect.

I consider you the best poster on this board. For that reason I hesitate to and will not get into a debate about Treaty Rights and what the actual wording in Treaty 9 means. I am very familar with what all the numbered Treaties say.

I will point out two things.

- Section 35 (1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms says "The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed". The word "existing" is key, it appeared in the first draft was not in the second draft but was again in the third and final draft. It was later determined by many including constitutional expert Professor Peter Hogg that the word existing meant what ever rights they had when it was signed in 1982. This interpetation has meant nothing to the courts and for sure nothing to the supreme court.

- Most of the numbered Treaties state "The said Indians shall have right to pursue their avocations of hunting and fishing throughout the tract surrendered .... subject to such regulations as may from time to time be made...". Despite that, the natives currently enjoy an uncontrolled, unregulated and unreported harvest of fish and wildlife.

So much for what the Treaties say.

I really hope that the various bands in the ROF area understand the importance of developing this area and that their demands are not so excessive that it all comes to a halt.

With the Ontario government negotiator pulling in a salary of $400,000.00 per year I also hope he too does not drag things out.