City Demands $123,000 from Expressway Opponents
Hamilton City Council has decided to seek $123,000 in court costs from six citizens who oppose the construction of the Red Hill Creek Expressway. The decision was taken today in Committee of the Whole which authorized the City's lawyers to make a written submission to Superior Court Justice Joseph Henderson.
McMaster professor Jim Quinn, one of the six citizens, called the Council's decision "vindictive" and "an attempt to silence opposition to the expressway and prevent discussion of need and alternatives as they've done since 1985".
The six citizens volunteered to present legal arguments against an application for an injunction made by the City in early August to stop protests at the site of planned construction of the proposed expressway. They were among several hundred people who picketed the site and blocked construction vehicles on August 5, 6 and 7. The protestors believed that the City had not received the permits and approvals required to allow construction to begin. They also pointed out that nesting migratory birds on the site were protected from disturbance by federal law.
After filing the injunction application, the City released letters purporting to show that the three required permits were obtained on July 28, July 30 and August 5. However, they filed a report that migratory birds were still nesting on the site on August 21, thus showing that the protestors had actually saved the City from breaking the federal Migratory Birds Convention Act.
Court evidence also showed that the City still does not have other key approvals for the expressway project, including the authority to re-locate 7.6 kilometres of Red Hill Creek, and a permit to excavate 70,000 tonnes of the toxic Rennie Street dump which lies in the path of the proposed road.
Justice Henderson approved the injunction request in a 23-page decision issued on September 12. Despite this, the City has not started work because the site has been occupied by citizens of the Haundenosaunee (Six Nations) Confederacy. On Friday, the City agreed to begin discussions with the Confederacy about treaty rights and aboriginal burial sites in the valley.
City officials claim they ran up $235,000 in legal expenses in the injunction. The City was represented by the Toronto law firm of Gowling Lafleur Henderson which fielded a team of seven lawyers in the day and a half of court hearings in early September. Court cost awards only allow for reasonable expenses, and make it impossible to recover excessive legal fees.
The six citizens represented themselves and spent less than $500. They each stepped forward voluntarily to argue that the injunction.
For further information:
Don McLean
Chair, Friends of Red Hill Valley
Dr. Jim Quinn
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
Friday, September 12, 2003
injunction function and first nations solidarity
Expressway opponents vow support for Aboriginal rights
Hamilton, Ont. -- Opponents of the Red Hill Creek Expressway expressed support today for members of the Six Nations Confederacy who are continuing to occupy lands in Hamilton's Red Hill Valley, despite a court injunction granted to the City of Hamilton.
"We agree with the Haudenonsaunee people that this decision has no bearing on their rights," said Jim Quinn, a spokesperson for the ShowStoppers Union, a coalition of individuals and groups opposed to the expressway. "We will try to support their struggle in any way we can."
The ShowStoppers expressed disappointment at the decision of Superior Court Judge Joseph Henderson in granting an injunction that allows work to begin on a bridge-ramp at the end of Greenhill Avenue in east end Hamilton.
"We respect the decision of the court but we will continue to oppose the expressway," Quinn said. "There has been a huge outpouring of support since the beginning of August to keep the Red Hill Valley expressway-free."
ShowStopper pickets successfully prevented the beginning of work at the Greenhill Avenue site in early August by Dufferin Construction. The picketing was peaceful and no arrests were made, in spite of police monitoring of the protest.
On August 11, the city applied to the Ontario Superior Court for an injunction to halt the picketing and allow construction to begin. Six individuals acted as defendants in the case and represented themselves in court hearings on September 5 and 8 against a high-powered team of seven lawyers hired by the City.
Justice Henderson's decision, released earlier today, can be read here (pdf).
Hamilton, Ont. -- Opponents of the Red Hill Creek Expressway expressed support today for members of the Six Nations Confederacy who are continuing to occupy lands in Hamilton's Red Hill Valley, despite a court injunction granted to the City of Hamilton.
"We agree with the Haudenonsaunee people that this decision has no bearing on their rights," said Jim Quinn, a spokesperson for the ShowStoppers Union, a coalition of individuals and groups opposed to the expressway. "We will try to support their struggle in any way we can."
The ShowStoppers expressed disappointment at the decision of Superior Court Judge Joseph Henderson in granting an injunction that allows work to begin on a bridge-ramp at the end of Greenhill Avenue in east end Hamilton.
"We respect the decision of the court but we will continue to oppose the expressway," Quinn said. "There has been a huge outpouring of support since the beginning of August to keep the Red Hill Valley expressway-free."
ShowStopper pickets successfully prevented the beginning of work at the Greenhill Avenue site in early August by Dufferin Construction. The picketing was peaceful and no arrests were made, in spite of police monitoring of the protest.
On August 11, the city applied to the Ontario Superior Court for an injunction to halt the picketing and allow construction to begin. Six individuals acted as defendants in the case and represented themselves in court hearings on September 5 and 8 against a high-powered team of seven lawyers hired by the City.
Justice Henderson's decision, released earlier today, can be read here (pdf).
Wednesday, September 3, 2003
Birds By Law
Protestors Prevented City of Hamilton from Breaking Federal Law
City study confirms that construction site occupied by nesting migratory birds
A City of Hamilton study has confirmed that the citizens who successfully stopped the City from beginning construction of the proposed $220 million Red Hill Creek Expressway, also prevented the City from violating the federal Migratory Birds Convention Act.Citizens set up picket lines on August 5 near Greenhill Avenue in east Hamilton, and blocked access to a site slated for construction of part of the controversial expressway. They argued that the City did not have a legal right to begin the construction work, partly because of the presence of nesting migratory birds in the proposed construction site, first reported in an August 4 media release by Friends of Red Hill Valley.
The City is now pursing an injunction to prevent protests at the site. The next court appearance is scheduled for 10 am on Friday, September 5 in the John Sopinka Courthouse at 45 Main Street East in Hamilton.
As part of its court affidavits, the City has released a study conducted by its own consultants which confirms that nesting migratory birds were still on the construction site as late as August 21. The study was conducted by Karl Konze of Dougan and Associates. He says the nests he found may be active until this week and recommends that a further bird survey be carried out prior to any attempt to start construction. A continued 'nest-in' by the birds may result in further postponement of construction.
It is clear, however, that no study was conducted by the City prior to its attempt to start construction in early August. If this construction had been allowed to proceed, the City would have violated the federal Migratory Birds Convention Act which makes it an offence to "disturb, destroy or take a nest, egg, nest shelter, eider duck shelter or duck box of a migratory bird".
The City is responsible for checking details such as these before rushing to start construction work. "In their rush to pave the valley, the City continues to show its lack of care and concern for the environment and the law," said Friends of Red Hill chair Don McLean. "Never mind that if the city gets their road these birds will be homeless next year when they return to find 44,000 trees cut down to make way for pavement."
Far from thanking the protestors from preventing the City from violating federal law, Hamilton has threatened protesters with criminal charges and civil lawsuits including seizing people's homes to cover court costs and any delays to construction.
Mr. Konze's court affidivat also includes a "Red Hill Valley Project - Nesting Bird Survey and Due Diligence Protocol" dated "August 2003" that requires bird surveys to be conducted within four days of the proposed start of construction. It appears this protocol was developed AFTER the nesting birds were pointed out by Friends of Red Hill Valley, and is another positive result of the protestors' actions in stopping the construction work.
An electronic copy of Mr. Konze's affidavit is available on request.
contact Friends of Red Hill Valley for more information
Thursday, August 21, 2003
RED HILL EYE
Save Red Hill Creek
BY GORD PERKS (EYE Magazine, Thursday, August 21, 2003 -ENVIRO)
We must do what we can to stop the construction of the Red Hill Creek Expressway. We must because we treasure important ecosystems, because we oppose sprawling, car-dependent development and because we are contesting what is meant by "democracy." Red Hill is both a precious place and a precious political moment.
The expressway is planned as a 7.5-kilometre highway running through the Red Hill Creek Valley, which snakes down from the Niagara Escarpment to the east end of Lake Ontario. Transportation planners who work from different maps see the expressway connecting the Lincoln Alexander Parkway to the QEW.
Red Hill Creek Valley is made up of over 700 hectares of mostly forested natural area and parkland. It has remarkably diverse plant, mammal, bird, fish and butterfly populations. Over half of the valley is in the United Nations-designated Niagara Escarpment World Biosphere Reserve. Building the expressway would require blowing the biggest man-made hole ever through the escarpment, then rerouting the creek through a new 7.6-kilometre trench, and finally clearing a quarter of the valley and stripping out 41,000 trees. A native band, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, have asserted their inherent rights to camp, hunt and fish in the Red Hill Creek Valley. They have told the city to stop the project and have issued a permit to protesters to occupy the land and frustrate construction efforts. Also at issue are 22 archaeological sites in the valley.
The two purposes of the road are: 1) to add the final link to a trucking route that runs from the American Midwest, across southern Ontario, over to New York state. Some call this the NAFTA highway. It would allow truckers to bypass tolls in the US, and would shave 9 kilometres off the current route; 2) to open up the area south of Hamilton for subdivision development. Hungry developers are already queuing up at the Ontario Municipal Board to win approval for plans to slap sprawl on this spot.
For a visceral understanding of the issues at stake, meditate on two questions: what would Toronto (and Markham) be like if we hadn't built the Don Valley Parkway? What would Toronto be like if the Spadina Expressway hadn't been stopped? Look deeper into the Spadina question. Look beyond the fact that Forest Hill, the Annex and Chinatown would have been blasted to smithereens. Apply the aphorism "to the victor, the spoils."
The Spadina Expressway battle was a watershed moment in the civic life of Toronto. It made heroes of people like Jane Jacobs and the late Colin Vaughn. It emboldened others from the struggle to do still more. They include some of the Toronto School Board trustees who brought in heritage language programs and a host of other progressive reforms that Harrisites haven't been able to completely dismantle. The Spadina struggle made way for the famous "reform councils" at Toronto City Hall, councils that saved and strengthened the neighbourhood character of the city and developed world-renowned programs such as the Healthy City model.
The politics that brought us all of this were legitimized because they triumphed in the Spadina Expressway battle. How different things would be if the other politics had prevailed. Replace protest, street theatre, marches, civil disobedience and an alphabet soup of community organizations with backroom deals, bureaucratic control and growth at any cost. Civic duty in this scenario is reduced to paying taxes on time, following rules and picking a candidate from a ballot just as you would pick a brand of soft drink from a variety store shelf.
Back to the Red Hill battle: the question of which politics will be honoured, legitimized and tolerated is precisely what is in play. Should the expressway be built just because the duly elected Hamilton City Council has decided that it should be? Should protesters back off because Hamilton's city fathers are seeking a court injunction to end the protests and criminalize the native people and activists who have been delaying construction these past three weeks? What is your civic duty?
If you answer this last question the same way that hundreds of anti-expressway Hamiltonians have answered it, and you want to join the battle against the expressway, you can find out what help is needed by going to www.hwcn.org/link/forhv/.
I should acknowledge my friend Don McLean for much of the information above. For well over a decade, Don has been an awe-inspiring researcher and organizer on this issue.
Gord Perks is a campaigner with the Toronto Environmental Alliance. Enviro appears every two weeks.
BY GORD PERKS (EYE Magazine, Thursday, August 21, 2003 -ENVIRO)
We must do what we can to stop the construction of the Red Hill Creek Expressway. We must because we treasure important ecosystems, because we oppose sprawling, car-dependent development and because we are contesting what is meant by "democracy." Red Hill is both a precious place and a precious political moment.
The expressway is planned as a 7.5-kilometre highway running through the Red Hill Creek Valley, which snakes down from the Niagara Escarpment to the east end of Lake Ontario. Transportation planners who work from different maps see the expressway connecting the Lincoln Alexander Parkway to the QEW.
Red Hill Creek Valley is made up of over 700 hectares of mostly forested natural area and parkland. It has remarkably diverse plant, mammal, bird, fish and butterfly populations. Over half of the valley is in the United Nations-designated Niagara Escarpment World Biosphere Reserve. Building the expressway would require blowing the biggest man-made hole ever through the escarpment, then rerouting the creek through a new 7.6-kilometre trench, and finally clearing a quarter of the valley and stripping out 41,000 trees. A native band, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, have asserted their inherent rights to camp, hunt and fish in the Red Hill Creek Valley. They have told the city to stop the project and have issued a permit to protesters to occupy the land and frustrate construction efforts. Also at issue are 22 archaeological sites in the valley.
The two purposes of the road are: 1) to add the final link to a trucking route that runs from the American Midwest, across southern Ontario, over to New York state. Some call this the NAFTA highway. It would allow truckers to bypass tolls in the US, and would shave 9 kilometres off the current route; 2) to open up the area south of Hamilton for subdivision development. Hungry developers are already queuing up at the Ontario Municipal Board to win approval for plans to slap sprawl on this spot.
For a visceral understanding of the issues at stake, meditate on two questions: what would Toronto (and Markham) be like if we hadn't built the Don Valley Parkway? What would Toronto be like if the Spadina Expressway hadn't been stopped? Look deeper into the Spadina question. Look beyond the fact that Forest Hill, the Annex and Chinatown would have been blasted to smithereens. Apply the aphorism "to the victor, the spoils."
The Spadina Expressway battle was a watershed moment in the civic life of Toronto. It made heroes of people like Jane Jacobs and the late Colin Vaughn. It emboldened others from the struggle to do still more. They include some of the Toronto School Board trustees who brought in heritage language programs and a host of other progressive reforms that Harrisites haven't been able to completely dismantle. The Spadina struggle made way for the famous "reform councils" at Toronto City Hall, councils that saved and strengthened the neighbourhood character of the city and developed world-renowned programs such as the Healthy City model.
The politics that brought us all of this were legitimized because they triumphed in the Spadina Expressway battle. How different things would be if the other politics had prevailed. Replace protest, street theatre, marches, civil disobedience and an alphabet soup of community organizations with backroom deals, bureaucratic control and growth at any cost. Civic duty in this scenario is reduced to paying taxes on time, following rules and picking a candidate from a ballot just as you would pick a brand of soft drink from a variety store shelf.
Back to the Red Hill battle: the question of which politics will be honoured, legitimized and tolerated is precisely what is in play. Should the expressway be built just because the duly elected Hamilton City Council has decided that it should be? Should protesters back off because Hamilton's city fathers are seeking a court injunction to end the protests and criminalize the native people and activists who have been delaying construction these past three weeks? What is your civic duty?
If you answer this last question the same way that hundreds of anti-expressway Hamiltonians have answered it, and you want to join the battle against the expressway, you can find out what help is needed by going to www.hwcn.org/link/forhv/.
I should acknowledge my friend Don McLean for much of the information above. For well over a decade, Don has been an awe-inspiring researcher and organizer on this issue.
PERSONAL NOTE
This was written with pencil and paper during the big blackout. For reacquainting me with that pleasure, I want to thank everyone who pushed for deregulation, privatization and free trade in electricity. I also want to thank the energy technocrats who built a big, centralized, brittle power system while pooh-poohing environmentalists who pleaded for conservation and green, small-scale, flexible power systems.Gord Perks is a campaigner with the Toronto Environmental Alliance. Enviro appears every two weeks.
ON RED HILL: NOW
On Red Hill
Hamilton ecologists have re moved their banners and their protest tents from the golden trefoil-dappled meadow at the foot of Greenhill Avenue. Now nothing is left but the rustle of the tall grasses. But after a quarter-century contest over the proposed Red Hill expressway, this silence will clearly be temporary. Last Friday (August 15) an agreement was reached in court whereby environmentalists will leave the site in exchange for a delay in construction of the much-disputed highway that is, until September 3, when court proceedings begin on a city of Hamilton bid to remove anyone blocking construction.
The question is, will the city be able to steamroll over protests from an astounding number of constituencies to legally proceed? The injunction move certainly has an air of desperation about it. The city watched helplessly last week as protest campers stopped construction trucks from beginning a feeder road.
And municipal authorities must know what a legal hornet's nest their bid is sure to stir up, including debates over the Migratory Birds Convention Act, the Fisheries Act, the Planning Act and the Niagara Escarpment Act. Not to mention a 300-year-old treaty between the Iroquois and the British Crown, called a Deed of Trust, which may fundamentally throw into question land tenures for all of southern Ontario.
Indeed, the most sweeping objections in Friday's courtroom drama came from lawyer Paul Williams, representing the Iroquois Confederacy at Six Nations near Brantford. The Red Hill Valley has 22 identified archaeological sites, including an 11,000-year-old site and a native village whose partial excavation has generated over 56,000 artifacts.
It was Williams's treaty claims that shook up the proceedings. Referring to the 1701 treaty, he said it gave the British the obligation to act as an agent of the Iroquois with respect to an area of land reserved for them, "an area which includes southern Ontario and was known as the Beaver Hunting Ground.''
To this, Superior Court Justice David Crane in some degree of shock responded, "Are you saying the city of Hamilton is a hunting ground?"
Answered Williams, "Although our people have not hunted in the Red Hill Valley for many years, it is viewed by our people as a hunting ground, an area where we can gather the fruits of nature. Our role here is as protector of the valley.''
This explains why in April the Confederacy ordered all digging in the valley to cease and then posted no-trespassing signs, making it clear that these were not directed at hikers. Though they denied a permit to the city of Hamilton, the Confederacy gave one to campers protesting the construction. These permits pledged those who entered to abide by the Iroquois Great Law of Peace and to refrain from "violence, verbal and physical, towards any person'' and to "not damage property.''
So now the city is facing the combined opposition of bird watchers, eco activists and a prestigious traditional First Nation government. And while the Friends of Red Hill Valley folk were party to the vacating deal, Six Nations traditionalists who don't recognize the Canadian court system are maintaining their own parallel camp in the black walnut and oak forest that guards the slope of the Red Hill Creek's valley. Deep in these woods, near the centre of the designated construction site, they have built what they call a "round house," an arbour protecting what they say is a sacred fire.
Nature lovers can only hope it keeps on burning.
A quarter-century scrap over controversial expressway opens a legal hornet's nest
By JOHN BACHER, NOW Magazine, Thursday, August 21, 2003Hamilton ecologists have re moved their banners and their protest tents from the golden trefoil-dappled meadow at the foot of Greenhill Avenue. Now nothing is left but the rustle of the tall grasses. But after a quarter-century contest over the proposed Red Hill expressway, this silence will clearly be temporary. Last Friday (August 15) an agreement was reached in court whereby environmentalists will leave the site in exchange for a delay in construction of the much-disputed highway that is, until September 3, when court proceedings begin on a city of Hamilton bid to remove anyone blocking construction.
The question is, will the city be able to steamroll over protests from an astounding number of constituencies to legally proceed? The injunction move certainly has an air of desperation about it. The city watched helplessly last week as protest campers stopped construction trucks from beginning a feeder road.
And municipal authorities must know what a legal hornet's nest their bid is sure to stir up, including debates over the Migratory Birds Convention Act, the Fisheries Act, the Planning Act and the Niagara Escarpment Act. Not to mention a 300-year-old treaty between the Iroquois and the British Crown, called a Deed of Trust, which may fundamentally throw into question land tenures for all of southern Ontario.
Indeed, the most sweeping objections in Friday's courtroom drama came from lawyer Paul Williams, representing the Iroquois Confederacy at Six Nations near Brantford. The Red Hill Valley has 22 identified archaeological sites, including an 11,000-year-old site and a native village whose partial excavation has generated over 56,000 artifacts.
It was Williams's treaty claims that shook up the proceedings. Referring to the 1701 treaty, he said it gave the British the obligation to act as an agent of the Iroquois with respect to an area of land reserved for them, "an area which includes southern Ontario and was known as the Beaver Hunting Ground.''
To this, Superior Court Justice David Crane in some degree of shock responded, "Are you saying the city of Hamilton is a hunting ground?"
Answered Williams, "Although our people have not hunted in the Red Hill Valley for many years, it is viewed by our people as a hunting ground, an area where we can gather the fruits of nature. Our role here is as protector of the valley.''
This explains why in April the Confederacy ordered all digging in the valley to cease and then posted no-trespassing signs, making it clear that these were not directed at hikers. Though they denied a permit to the city of Hamilton, the Confederacy gave one to campers protesting the construction. These permits pledged those who entered to abide by the Iroquois Great Law of Peace and to refrain from "violence, verbal and physical, towards any person'' and to "not damage property.''
So now the city is facing the combined opposition of bird watchers, eco activists and a prestigious traditional First Nation government. And while the Friends of Red Hill Valley folk were party to the vacating deal, Six Nations traditionalists who don't recognize the Canadian court system are maintaining their own parallel camp in the black walnut and oak forest that guards the slope of the Red Hill Creek's valley. Deep in these woods, near the centre of the designated construction site, they have built what they call a "round house," an arbour protecting what they say is a sacred fire.
Nature lovers can only hope it keeps on burning.
Wednesday, August 20, 2003
calling the columnist on colonialism
First Nations have a claim
RE: Six Nations' Red Hill claim defies native history (Aug. 20).
Ignorance of and inaccuracies about First Nations history have once again reared their ugly heads. Andrew Dreschel's commentary about Six Nations' "flim-flammery" not only smacks of colonialism and conceit, but misleads readers to believe in erroneous information.
Dreschel claims that the Five Nations had been driven out of the area north of Lakes Erie and Ontario a decade or so before 1701 by the Ojibwa. For the record, the Five Nations withdrew peacefully and orderly to national territories in present-day upstate New York to provide reinforcements against attacks by the French.
Although the Ojibwa did indeed compete with the Five Nations for rich fur resources, there was no clear victor. In 1700, they eventually entered into a mutually binding treaty to hold in common the hunting grounds north of Lakes Erie and Ontario. This treaty ended the beaver wars between the Five Nations and Ojibwa, and was regularly renewed thereafter.
Dreschel also writes that the English "Crown retained the right to use and develop the land." In actuality, the Five Nations placed their hunting grounds in present-day Ontario under English protection by virtue of the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 to maintain continued and unimpeded access to vital hunting grounds and prevent encroachment by Europeans.
Dreschel implies conservation is incompatible with hunting rights. Indeed, conservation is integral to ensuring a viable hunting ground. The Five (later Six) Nations have always been sensitive to the need to cultivate game, fish and food supplies as well as the relationship between earth and game: the delicate balance of conservation and hunting.
Dreschel questions whether the protection of hunting grounds in the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 extends to the present- day Red Hill valley because provincial laws prevent hunting in densely populated urban areas such as the Red Hill valley. This appears to be based on the erroneous assumption that the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 only protects the right to hunt with firearms, which activity would threaten human life in urban areas. However, the protection of hunting rights in the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 includes a broad range of hunting, trapping, fishing and harvesting activities that do not threaten human life in urban areas. In addition, wherever treaty or aboriginal rights have been asserted by a First Nation, an obligation to consult is imposed. The Crown or third parties who will be using land or resources in such a way as to affect an aboriginal or treaty right must consult in good faith with that First Nation and reasonably accommodate their interests.
Dreschel's commentary is based on contentions demonstrating, at a minimum, historical ignorance. Misguided and erroneous information only furthers the divide between Canadians and First Nations at a time when we urgently need to work together in cooperation. Whitewashing history? To Dreschel, we say: Do your homework.
RE: Six Nations' Red Hill claim defies native history (Aug. 20).
Ignorance of and inaccuracies about First Nations history have once again reared their ugly heads. Andrew Dreschel's commentary about Six Nations' "flim-flammery" not only smacks of colonialism and conceit, but misleads readers to believe in erroneous information.
Dreschel claims that the Five Nations had been driven out of the area north of Lakes Erie and Ontario a decade or so before 1701 by the Ojibwa. For the record, the Five Nations withdrew peacefully and orderly to national territories in present-day upstate New York to provide reinforcements against attacks by the French.
Although the Ojibwa did indeed compete with the Five Nations for rich fur resources, there was no clear victor. In 1700, they eventually entered into a mutually binding treaty to hold in common the hunting grounds north of Lakes Erie and Ontario. This treaty ended the beaver wars between the Five Nations and Ojibwa, and was regularly renewed thereafter.
Dreschel also writes that the English "Crown retained the right to use and develop the land." In actuality, the Five Nations placed their hunting grounds in present-day Ontario under English protection by virtue of the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 to maintain continued and unimpeded access to vital hunting grounds and prevent encroachment by Europeans.
Dreschel implies conservation is incompatible with hunting rights. Indeed, conservation is integral to ensuring a viable hunting ground. The Five (later Six) Nations have always been sensitive to the need to cultivate game, fish and food supplies as well as the relationship between earth and game: the delicate balance of conservation and hunting.
Dreschel questions whether the protection of hunting grounds in the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 extends to the present- day Red Hill valley because provincial laws prevent hunting in densely populated urban areas such as the Red Hill valley. This appears to be based on the erroneous assumption that the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 only protects the right to hunt with firearms, which activity would threaten human life in urban areas. However, the protection of hunting rights in the Nanfan Treaty of 1701 includes a broad range of hunting, trapping, fishing and harvesting activities that do not threaten human life in urban areas. In addition, wherever treaty or aboriginal rights have been asserted by a First Nation, an obligation to consult is imposed. The Crown or third parties who will be using land or resources in such a way as to affect an aboriginal or treaty right must consult in good faith with that First Nation and reasonably accommodate their interests.
Dreschel's commentary is based on contentions demonstrating, at a minimum, historical ignorance. Misguided and erroneous information only furthers the divide between Canadians and First Nations at a time when we urgently need to work together in cooperation. Whitewashing history? To Dreschel, we say: Do your homework.
Chief Roberta Jamieson, Six Nations, Ohsweken.
Sunday, August 17, 2003
Red Hill Rally
SUNDAY RED HILL VALLEY FESTIVAL
SUNDAY, AUGUST 17
1:00 to 5:00 p.m.
Albright Avenue at Harrisford (off Mount Albion Road)
Calling all artists, musicians, poets, writers, performers and nature lovers: come to the Sunday August 17 from 1 - 5 pm. event at Albright Ave. near entrance to the Red Hill Valley (Public Park) off Mount Albion Road. Come join the fun and show your support. There is the sacred flame lodge. Artists come draw paint, sculpt and perform. Musicians are welcome to bring their instrument. We hope there will be a drum circle. Poets and writers can come and do a reading. There will be many activities, e.g., nature walks, workshops, games, ceremonies, possible learning circles, et cetera. It is potluck so please bring food, water, non-alcoholic beverages, et cetera.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)