Melvin Creek/Cayoosh Mountain Resort Proposal (Project).

The Melvin Creek/Cayoosh Mountain Resort Proposal

by NGR (Nancy Greene Raine)Resorts Consultants Inc.

has been rejected by the BC Environment Assessment Office.

Press Release

St'át'imc Territory

May 15, 2020

“To our friends and allies, our hearts are filled with deep gratitude,” stated Qwalqwálten (Garry John), who is spokesperson for Sútikalh. He spoke from his home in Tsal’álh of St’át’imc Territory. Qwalqwálten has served as the former Chair and Spokesperson for the St'at'imc Chiefs Council and has also filled the role as elected Chief for Tsal’álh. He described how the St’át’imc learned yesterday of the decision by the BC Provincial Assessment Office to cancel the certificate of Al Raine and Nancy Greene-Raine for their proposed ski resort at Sútikalh (Melvin Creek) in the middle of St’át’imc Territory. 

The move to protect this sacred area known as Sútikalh, home of the Winter Spirit, from the proposed development began over twenty years ago. A small group of St’át’imc people began the work of protecting Sútikalh with the placement of tobacco into a sacred fire which has been kept burning since that day.

The St'át'imc Nation supported the movement as word spread around the world and as allies and advocates answered the call for providing support on this critical concern. “After twenty years of extensive efforts, to the Province of British Columbia and the Canadian Government, we can only ask why it has taken so long for the message to be heard?” said Qwalqwálten. In the Declaration of the Lillooet Tribe, May 10, 1911, our St’át’imc Chiefs stated, "We claim that we are the rightful owners of the territory and everything pertaining thereto". Our St’át’imc people and leadership have continuously upheld our unceded title to our territory and this is the basis of our position in relation to all lands in the territory including Sútikalh.

The gratitude we hold for all of the people that have supported our cause is immeasurable and there are so many individuals and groups to whom we extend our heartfelt gratitude to for their support, tireless efforts, and commitment. Over these two decades, we have laid many strong warriors and supporters to rest. They did not live to see the results of their good work on this struggle and we continue to keep all of them in our prayers to this day. We have made it this far because of the deep resolve of so many toward saving these sacred lands from destruction. 

For further information, please contact:

Rosalin Edmonds (604) 894-2400

Garry John (250) 256-9022

We want to say "Thank You" to everyone who supported us in our efforts to ensure Sutikalh remains in a pristine condition for generations into the future.

Stephen O'Neill Former Ontario Superior Court Judge, speaks to CBC regarding his study of the Delgamuukw v. British Columbia Supreme Court Case

Link to the Supreme Court Case Delgamuukw v. British Columbia

AFN News Conference on Wet'suwet'en Territory

AFN National Chief Perry Bellegarde holds a news conference to discuss the protests against the natural-gas pipeline that crosses Wet'suwet'en territory in northern British Columbia.

The Wet'suwet'en, Aboriginal Title, and the Rule of Law: An Explainer By First Peoples Law

Photo by Mike Graeme

The Wet'suwet'en, Aboriginal Title, and the Rule of Law: An Explainer

February 13, 2020

By Kate Gunn & Bruce McIvor

The RCMP’s enforcement of the Coastal GasLink injunction against the Wet’suwet’en has ignited a national debate about the law and the rights of Indigenous people.

Unfortunately, misconceptions and conflicting information threaten to derail this important conversation. Below, we attempt to provide clear, straightforward answers to address some of these fundamental misunderstandings.

What about support for the project from the Wet’suwet’en elected Chiefs and Councils?

 Media outlets across the country have repeatedly reported that First Nations along the pipeline route, including the Wet’suwet’en, have signed agreements in support of the project.

Underlying this statement are several key issues that require clarification.

First, the Wet’suwet’en, like many Indigenous groups in Canada, are governed by both a traditional governance system and elected Chiefs and Councils.

The Chief and Council system exists under the Indian Act, a piece of federal legislation. It was introduced by the federal government in the 19th century as part of Canada’s attempts to systematically oppress and displace Indigenous law and governance.

The Wet’suwet’en hereditary governance system predates colonization and continues to exist today. The Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs, not the Indian Act Chiefs and Councils, were the plaintiffs in the landmark Delgamuukw-Gisday'way Aboriginal title case. They provided the court with exhaustive and detailed evidence of the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan governance system and the legal authority of Hereditary Chiefs.

Unless otherwise authorized by the Indigenous Nation members, the authority of elected Chiefs and Councils is limited to the powers set out under the Indian Act. The Indian Act does not provide authority for a Chief and Council to make decisions about lands beyond the boundaries of the First Nation’s reserves.

By contrast, the Hereditary Chiefs are responsible under Wet’suwet’en law and governance for making decisions relating to their ancestral lands. It is these lands that the Hereditary Chiefs are seeking to protect from the impacts of the pipeline project, not Indian Act reserve lands.

Second, Indigenous peoples hold rights to lands in Canada which extend far beyond the boundaries of Indian Act reserves, including Aboriginal title and rights to the lands they used and occupied prior to the arrival of Europeans and the assertion of Crown sovereignty. Aboriginal title and rights are protected under the Constitution Act, 1982 – the highest law in Canada’s legal system.

Third, the fact that First Nations have signed agreements with Coastal GasLink does not, in itself, mean that its members support the project without qualification.

Across the country, Indian Act band councils are forced to make difficult choices about how to provide for their members – a situation which exists in large part due to the process of colonization, chronic underfunding for reserve infrastructure and refusal on the part of the Crown to meaningfully recognize Indigenous rights and jurisdiction.

The fact that elected Wet’suwet’en Chiefs and Councils have entered into benefit agreements with Coastal GasLink should not be taken as unconditional support for the project.

Finally, similar to how Canada functions as a confederation with separate provinces with their own authority, First Nation decisions on major projects are not simply a matter of majority rules.

The Quebec provincial government made it clear that it was opposed to and would not sanction the proposed Energy East pipeline. The federal government and other provincial governments respected Quebec’s right to make this decision. Similarly, First Nations often disagree about major projects. One cannot speak for another and the majority cannot simply overrule the minority or individual First Nations.

Please Read the rest of the Article here  The Wet'suwet'en, Aboriginal Title, and the Rule of Law