Source: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
The Honourable John Duncan, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, and Joseph Riche and George Rich, Grand Chief and Deputy Grand Chief of the Innu Nation of Labrador, announced today the signing of a financial agreement. The Government of Canada is currently in land claim negotiations with the Innu of Labrador and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
From: Indigenous Peoples Issues and Resources – March 22, 2011
Today, the Assembly of First Nations will mark World Water Day.
AFN National Chief Shawn A-in-chut Atleo stated: “World Water Day is an opportunity to make a national commitment to ensuring that First Nations families have safe and clean drinking water. For many First Nations families, it is a daily struggle to get access to clean and adequate supplies of potable water and basic sanitation.”
Aubri Golsbury has published “The McCarren Amendment and Groundwater: Why Washington State Should Require Inclusion of Groundwater in General Stream Adjudications Involving Federal Reserved Water Rights” in the Washington Law Review.
Here is the abstract:
All water is connected through the hydrologic cycle.1 When a farmer pumps water from an underground aquifer to irrigate crops, that act may affect a family relying on a nearby surface water stream for its water supply. Despite the scientific link between surface and groundwater, 2 the law often treats the two separately.3 The legal choice to ignore the interaction of surface and groundwater is particularly notable in “general stream adjudications.” States file these large-scale lawsuits against users in a particular stream or waterbody to determine, in a single lawsuit, all the rights existing in that water source.4 In 1952, Congress passed the McCarran Amendment, which allows states to adjudicate federal reserved water rights in state court in general stream adjudications.5 The United States Supreme Court has interpreted the Amendment as requiring that adjudications be “comprehensive” of all of the rights in a given water source, but has not yet ruled as to whether this requires inclusion of groundwater users.6 The Amendment itself is equally vague on this point. This Comment argues against Ninth Circuit precedent and asserts that for a general stream adjudication to be “comprehensive” under the McCarran Amendment, it must include users of hydrologically connected surface and groundwater.
Here is that pleading:
Karuk Motion for Summary Judgment
The case is captioned Karuk Tribe v. Kelley (N.D. Cal.).
A 6.2 billion dollar “hydroelectric megaproject” is possibly in danger as the NunatuKavut Community Council says that Nalcor Energy (a Crown corporation) and the province have shirked their duty to consult the group and should compensate it. It claims that their Aboriginal rights will be harmed if the environmental hearings continue.
Here is the opinion in Southern Ute Tribe v. King Consolidated Ditch Co.
The court’s syllabus:
The Supreme Court affirmed the water court’s ruling that the application in this case, which was filed to determine whether an adjudicated priority decreed in a prior case encompasses wintertime stockwater use, qualifies as a determination of a water right under CRS § 37-92-302(1)(a) and was properly published via the résumé notice procedures of CRS § 37-92-302(3). Publication of the résumé gave notice of the application to the Southern Ute Tribe, along with the holders of all other water rights on the stream. The late-filed verification of the application related back to the date of the original application pursuant to C.R.C.P. 15(c), and the water court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing the Tribe’s untimely statement of opposition and denying the Tribe’s motion to intervene.
In Adams Lake Indian Band v. British Columbia (Lieutenant Governor in Council), [2011] B.C.J. No. 363, the British Columbia Supreme Court allowed a petition by the Adams Lake Indian Band, which was resisting the actions of a ski resort seeking status as an incorporated municipality.
The Band claimed that the area in question is part of their traditional territory and that the provincial government failed to adequately consult it about the formation of a new municipality.
The province maintained there was adequate consultation and accommodation of the Band’s concerns and interests. The court disagreed.
Kyle Whyte has posted his paper, “An Environmental Justice Framework for Indigenous Tourism,” published in the Journal of Environmental Philosophy.
Here is the abstract:
Environmental tourism is a growing practice in indigenous communities worldwide. As members of indigenous communities, what environmental justice framework should we use to evaluate these practices? I argue that, while some of the most relevant and commonly discussed norms are fair compensation and participative justice, we should also follow Robert Figueroa’s claim that “recognition justice” is relevant for environmental justice. I claim that from Figueroa’s analysis there is a “norm of direct participation,” which requires all environmental tourism practices to feature a forum for meaningful representation and consideration. This claim motivates a distinction between practices that should be termed “mutually advantageous exploitation” and those that should be termed “environmental coalition development.” We need to ask ourselves whether we should continue to tolerate mutually advantageous exploitation and how we can increase the number of practices that develop coalitions.
A recent appeal by the Nlaka’pamux Nation (in the B.C. Court of Appeal) was upheld because it was determined that British Columba did not adequately meet its duty to consult requirements. The appeal was in regard to the extension of a landfill over land which the First Nation claimed Aboriginal rights and title.
Here’s the decision . Below is an excerpt.
Here is the information on the Black Ash Symposium which will be held April 6th at the Comfort Inn Conference Center in Plainwell, MI. The registration materials are here and schedule is here.
This Conference will bring together Native Nations from the North Eastern US and Canada to discuss what is happening in their communities and what we can do to work together to sustain the tradition of Black ash basketry for all of our people for centuries to come.
Black ash basket weavers from Native communities in Michigan, Maine, Minnesota, New York and Canada will present important information and share what work their communities have been doing to prepare for EAB, and preserve basketry in their communities. Working together we can make a difference!
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.