The purpose of the commission is to negotiate or settle land claims with First Nations. An example is the Nisga'a settlement. This is a model that will be used in settling all First Nations claims. If you look at the map the Nisga'a have settled for approximately 1/10th of their territory or the size of King Island. The government tells what areas can be included in any claim. This is to protect third party interests. (eg. Interfor)

In settling their claim the Nisga'a's had to follow a process to reach agreements. For example Interim measures or Co-management agreements in areas like forestry (Silva culture) or fisheries ( Aboriginal Fishing Strategy). Interim measure agreements are short term. Co-management is 50 first nations-50 non aboriginal, decide on how we are going to manage the resources. But during this process other rules are in effect, No economic disruptions or blockading of any type. An example is King Island if we were in the treaty process. We could not defend Ista, our sacred land, we would have to let Interfor log our territory. We would work cooperatively with all third party interests. If it were in fishing or logging or with any government department. This is only part of the treaty process.

Other things we would have to do is in the Social development like mapping out how we are going to solve our social issues, drug and alcohol abuse, sexual abuse. We would have to start the healing process. These are examples of what is in the B.C. treaty process. Why do we need to negotiate away land and resources that we already own or enter into agreements when we already have rights to hunt and fish without government licenses.

If we look at the Nisga'a agreement. Do we want to settle the land question this way or do we want to keep what we have.

More on Treaty:

April 5, 2000 Letter to International Forest Products Ltd. on our stand against Treaties