Fisherman Rob
Well-Known Member
Is the land below the high water crown land where there is waterfront First Nations lands, or is it treated differently?
Below high water in First Nations lands
- Thread starter Fisherman Rob
- Start date
spring fever
Well-Known Member
Depends on who you ask-First Nations or the government-but the First Nations are likely on scene-so guess what!!
Rum Buddies
Well-Known Member
I think it's considered common land, but FN will tell you it's theirs, if they decide they don't want you there.
Most land in BC is either fee simple private land or Provincial crown lands wrt "owned" property vis-a-vis deeds from Colonial governments - and typically administered under the Provincial Lands Act. There is also federal Crown lands which is where things like "Indian reserves", and often military bases - have been placed.
Typically, while surveying for the past colonial government after BC joined the union - but sometimes even before when BC was a colony of Britain - in those surveys - "land" surveyed for the "Indian reserves" between the high and low water marks is also federal crown land. Those surveys (and the so-called "meets" and "bounds") can be found online in the Library of Canada http://collectionscanada.gc.ca/databases/indian-reserves/index-e.html - as many surveys have been digitized now. Very occasionally, they have surveyed across a bay or river - and those federal crown lands also include subtidal areas. The water column itself (and not the bottom - with the exception of any federal crown Lands) is federal responsibility. There is a public, common-law right to navigation on the water column itself - but that does not include access to the "bottom".
Then there is the "asserted" Traditional territories of unceded and non-treaty FN in Canada - particularly in BC (Treaty Lands are detailed in the appropriate Treaty - where they exist). Those rights include access and co-management of natural resources - and as far as Provincial Crown Land - actual "ownership" of that land. See the fairly recent Chicotin decision in order to see how the court came to that conclusion: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/06/26/supreme-court-decision-bc-first-nation_n_5533233.html
Typically, while surveying for the past colonial government after BC joined the union - but sometimes even before when BC was a colony of Britain - in those surveys - "land" surveyed for the "Indian reserves" between the high and low water marks is also federal crown land. Those surveys (and the so-called "meets" and "bounds") can be found online in the Library of Canada http://collectionscanada.gc.ca/databases/indian-reserves/index-e.html - as many surveys have been digitized now. Very occasionally, they have surveyed across a bay or river - and those federal crown lands also include subtidal areas. The water column itself (and not the bottom - with the exception of any federal crown Lands) is federal responsibility. There is a public, common-law right to navigation on the water column itself - but that does not include access to the "bottom".
Then there is the "asserted" Traditional territories of unceded and non-treaty FN in Canada - particularly in BC (Treaty Lands are detailed in the appropriate Treaty - where they exist). Those rights include access and co-management of natural resources - and as far as Provincial Crown Land - actual "ownership" of that land. See the fairly recent Chicotin decision in order to see how the court came to that conclusion: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/06/26/supreme-court-decision-bc-first-nation_n_5533233.html
Last edited by a moderator:
S
steelmadness
Guest
That would get me laughing too ! Only time I've had any trouble was on the the beach,far below high water mark, at the mouth of the Big Qualicum. I was in the wrong, it's legally their land. Maybe trouble is to strong a word. I was politely ask to leave and why.
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
Cut to the chase---- Dont push your luck.......
Fisherman Rob
Well-Known Member
Do you have a source for this? I tried searching the database for Chatham Islands Reserve No. 4, but it didn't have any results. Wikipedia states "Chatham Islands foreshore - defined as the land between low tide and the beginning of land based vegetation - is provincial Crown Land." Not that Wikipedia is an authoritative source on this, but it shows there is some confusion. I suppose many of these surveys have never been agreed to with a treaty, which is why FN will claim the land.
Sorry, not sure what you mean by this?
I see what you mean, FR. You USED TO be able to pull this stuff up online. Can't seem to be able to now. Although I haven't yet found where on the website - that it is now stashed, here's some other contacts and info that may lead you to the maps/info in question (eventually):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_Islands_(British_Columbia)
http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/RVDetail.aspx?RESERVE_NUMBER=06841&lang=eng
http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/lac-bac/re...rces_3=genapp&Sources_4=web&soundex=&cainInd=
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_Islands_(British_Columbia)
http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/RVDetail.aspx?RESERVE_NUMBER=06841&lang=eng
http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/lac-bac/re...rces_3=genapp&Sources_4=web&soundex=&cainInd=
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
If the First Nation is adamant that the land and subtidal area is theirs ,recent events have shown that neither the Provincial nor the Fed govt have to will to argue with them. Reference the private island that the guy was building a house on near Ganges.... and what the RCMP did in interior BC when First Nations put up illegal road blocks.. or even the confrontations back east.... Is it worth it ???????
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
If the First Nation is adamant that the land and subtidal area is theirs ,recent events have shown that neither the Provincial nor the Fed govt have to will to argue with them. Reference the private island that the guy was building a house on near Ganges.... and what the RCMP did in interior BC when First Nations put up illegal road blocks.. or even the confrontations back east.... Is it worth it ???????
Fisherman Rob
Well-Known Member
Is what worth it? Asking?
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
The implication I get from some of the posts is that some would want to challenge the FN on who owes what and who can access the areas in question. If someone is eager to start a challenge, I dont think they will win with the present government we have. if I misread you question, sorry...............carry on !
In the building area of case law - based primarily on Section 35 of the 1982 repatriated Constitution Act - it is apparent that FN are developing and will continue to develop their own forms of governance for their asserted Traditional Areas. In addition to that - there are also past, current and future Treaties that dictate where core areas are - and who gets to have what say in how those areas are governed.
I know there are many fears about these processes - especially how non-aboriginals factor in. It is a work in progress - and we are all living and making history here. We are de-volving (slowly) from a colonial government. Change is inevitable - and we can either embrace it or fight it.
The fight to exclude aboriginals from their own form of governance and from real co-management of the resources has been going on for several hundreds of years (depending upon what part of the country you are from) - and hasn't been a terribly successful strategy IMHO.
In the courts in BC in the past 15-20 years - the federal and provincial governments have lost like 90-95% of the court cases brought forth by First Nations against them. I would say whether you like change or not - it is happening - and will continue to happen.
Given how badly this Conservative government has slashed most environmental safeguards and lined their own pockets - I would say that having a neighbour worry about the future and the future of the resources locally - is not a bad thing when compared to the lack of real representation and governance we have seen from Ottawa, Stevie Wonder and his band of Con men. I don't think FN are the "enemy".
Just look at what is leaking out of the Duffy trial. A complete sense of entitlement and acceptance of corruption is being laid out. This is not only limited to the Senate. The Senate is staffed with old boys who licked the shoes of the PM - and got paid off. The Parliament - specifically the Cabinet and the PMO - is where the real corruption lies. Look at the unconstitutional omnibus bills. Look at the vendetta against anyone who disagrees.
The only ones who have the legal opportunity to offset this corruption, collusion, and lack of representation in Ottawa and provide safeguards against this sheer unchecked greed - are the FN. I don't see this change as a bad thing - against this backdrop. No - I don't think it will all be sunshine and roses, and easy - but I think we need to find ways to work together - and I think that is already happening in some areas - slowly - but it is.
my thoughts and $0.02 worth.
I know there are many fears about these processes - especially how non-aboriginals factor in. It is a work in progress - and we are all living and making history here. We are de-volving (slowly) from a colonial government. Change is inevitable - and we can either embrace it or fight it.
The fight to exclude aboriginals from their own form of governance and from real co-management of the resources has been going on for several hundreds of years (depending upon what part of the country you are from) - and hasn't been a terribly successful strategy IMHO.
In the courts in BC in the past 15-20 years - the federal and provincial governments have lost like 90-95% of the court cases brought forth by First Nations against them. I would say whether you like change or not - it is happening - and will continue to happen.
Given how badly this Conservative government has slashed most environmental safeguards and lined their own pockets - I would say that having a neighbour worry about the future and the future of the resources locally - is not a bad thing when compared to the lack of real representation and governance we have seen from Ottawa, Stevie Wonder and his band of Con men. I don't think FN are the "enemy".
Just look at what is leaking out of the Duffy trial. A complete sense of entitlement and acceptance of corruption is being laid out. This is not only limited to the Senate. The Senate is staffed with old boys who licked the shoes of the PM - and got paid off. The Parliament - specifically the Cabinet and the PMO - is where the real corruption lies. Look at the unconstitutional omnibus bills. Look at the vendetta against anyone who disagrees.
The only ones who have the legal opportunity to offset this corruption, collusion, and lack of representation in Ottawa and provide safeguards against this sheer unchecked greed - are the FN. I don't see this change as a bad thing - against this backdrop. No - I don't think it will all be sunshine and roses, and easy - but I think we need to find ways to work together - and I think that is already happening in some areas - slowly - but it is.
my thoughts and $0.02 worth.
Last edited by a moderator:
sly_karma
Crew Member
Generally agree with agentaqua, . The good news is our courts have finally understood that native title exists unless expressly extinguished. That is a platform for moving forward fairly, as no meaningful relationships can be established or sustained with indigenous people without this. The bad news is things are going to get worse before they get better - much confusion around the implications of native title, and, as always, innate human resistance to change.
Similar threads
