Squamish Nation says it will defend title rights after Musqueam deal with Canada

The Squamish Nation says it’s prepared to challenge any agreement between the federal government and other First Nations that could extend into its territory.

The remarks come in response to agreements Canada signed with the Musqueam Indian Band recognizing Aboriginal rights and an increasing role in fisheries and marine emergency management in an area that encompasses Greater Vancouver.

The Musqueam have overlapping and shared territory with the Squamish, Tsleil-Waututh, Tsawwassen and Kwikwetlem First Nations in an area that includes Vancouver, the North Shore, Richmond, Burnaby and parts of Surrey, Delta, and Coquitlam.

In a statement posted on its website to its members , Sxwíxwtn (Wilson Williams), the chairperson of the Squamish Nation, said the council was deeply concerned by publicly circulating materials, including maps, that appear to depict areas within the Squamish Nation’s traditional territory.

He said the Squamish Nation was not consulted or meaningfully engaged by the federal government before the announcement of the agreements on Feb. 20.

“Let us be clear: The Squamish Nation government will defend and uphold our inherent Aboriginal rights and title. Any implication that another Nation’s agreement could extend into Squamish Territory will be challenged,” said Williams.

The Squamish Nation said it has requested an urgent meeting with federal officials to obtain full transparency on the agreements, including their scope, intent, and any implications for its territory and interests.

The First Nation did not immediately respond Wednesday to questions, including whether they had succeeded in setting up a meeting. Its statement says a comprehensive legal review of the agreements and its potential impacts is now underway.

“While the federal government has stated that this agreement does not affect the rights of other First Nations, we are independently verifying that claim and will take all necessary steps to protect Squamish Nation’s rights and title,” said Williams.

The Squamish Nation said it hopes to continue to have a positive relationship with the Musqueam.

The Musqueam, Squamish and Tseil-Waututh First Nations formed a joint-venture company in 2014. The MST Development Corp. owns or co-owns six prime pieces of property in Vancouver, West Vancouver and Burnaby valued at more than $2 billion. The lands were mostly formerly held by the federal or provincial governments.

In a statement on Wednesday , the Tsawwassen First Nation said it acknowledged the significant milestone of the Musqueam agreements and respected other communities decision making, but noted publicly available materials appear to show territory overlapping parts of their treaty lands at Brunswick Point on the south arm of the Fraser River in Delta.

The Tsawwassen said they obtained copies of the agreements from Canada and are reviewing them to understand their meaning and possible implications.

“We approach our relationships with neighbouring Nations with respect and care. At the same time, we have a clear responsibility to uphold and protect our treaty rights, including our rights at Brunswick Point and in the Fraser River,” said Tsawwassen Chief Laura Cassidy.

The Tsleil-Waututh and Kwikwetlem First Nations did not immediately respond Wednesday to questions on whether they had concerns over the Feb. 20 agreements.

The Musqueam agreements have garnered significant public interest, in part because of concerns they may impact private lands. It became a major flashpoint in B.C. after a precedent-setting B.C. Supreme Court ruling last year granted the Cowichan Tribes Aboriginal title rights to about half the 7.5 square kilometres it had claimed, including over private properties in Richmond, including homes, farms and businesses.

Disputes between First Nations over land claims of overlapping traditional territory are not unusual in B.C.

For example, the Musqueam and Tsawwassen First Nations are appealing the Cowichan Tribes ruling because they believe their rights in Richmond have been infringed.

In an interview, Dwight Newman, a law professor at the University of Saskatchewan , said overlapping claims can be a big challenge for these types of agreements and may give rise to legal issues.

“The Squamish might have an argument that they should have been consulted about this before there was entry into the agreement if it has a possible impact on their rights,” said Newman, a Canada Research Chair in rights, communities, and constitutional law.

Newman has read the Musqueam rights agreement and also heard comments from Chief Wayne Sparrow, and written about it on his online newsletter.

He said the agreement aims to set up a process for continuing negotiations, so in that sense, it has not done anything in final terms or transferred any land.

Newman said one can infer the federal government will be making some type of accommodations for the Musqueam beyond what it has done so far, which is not insignificant.

But he said reports that the federal government had just given away all of Vancouver are not correct.

Newman noted that the rights agreement is silent on private land — it does not include it but it also does not exclude it

He said that means the current agreement doesn’t really the status of private land in Metro Vancouver for the benefit or detriment of private landowners.

Newman added supporters of these agreements might argue they slightly lessen the risk for private landowners in Metro Vancouver because it does commit the Musqueam and the federal government to trying to negotiate and resolve the issue.

Newman noted the agreement hasn’t created Aboriginal rights,; they already exist from a series of court decisions and rights embedded in the Constitution.

Newman said it is possible the new agreement could constrain arguments the federal government could make in any court cases, perhaps restricting the federal government from arguing against Musqueam claims in Metro Vancouver.

There are clauses that say those constraints aren’t there, but the agreement might still make restrictions possible, he said.

ghoekstra@postmedia.com

x.com/gordon_hoekstra

Related

• Musqueam say only federal lands in play under rights agreement with Canada
• Will First Nations seek Aboriginal title to more privately held lands in B.C.?