Mi’kmaq fighting centuries-old fight
In what has seemingly become Canadian routine, Canadian institutions and organizations are involved in yet another conflict with an Indigenous community whose rights are not being respected. In Nova Scotia, the Mi’kmaq First Nation’s right to hunt and fish in their traditional manner is being threatened by non-Mi’kmaw fishermen.
Following the opening of a self-regulated lobster fishery launched outside of the commercial fishing season in mid-September, Mi’kmaq fishermen have been attacked by non-Indigenous fishermen on multiple occasions. Traps have been sabotaged, boats have been lit on fire, and two lobster pounds have been burned and ransacked.
As a response, a group of citizens held a small demonstration in downtown Abbotsford on Oct. 30 expressing solidarity with the Mi’kmaw nation. They were holding signs, encouraging discussion, and accepting donations that were sent to Indigenous frontline protestors in Nova Scotia. Being conscious of COVID-19 guidelines, the protestors made it clear that, aside from a few core individuals, staying to demonstrate was not encouraged, and that if people did choose to do so, social distancing measures and masks were strictly enforced.
Ariel Dennison-Hardy, one of the organizers, explained that their purpose was to show support for the Mi’kmaq.
“[The Treaty of 1752] acknowledges the Mi’kmaq right to fish for lobsters,” she said. “Unfortunately this fight has been going on for years. There’s no reason for these attacks, other than unchecked racism.”
Dennison-Hardy encouraged Abbotsford citizens to take action, stating that residents should “educate themselves by reading the news, donate to [Indigenous] causes when they are able, and listen to people.”
The Mi’kmaq right to hunt and fish in the traditional way is upheld by the 1752 Peace and Friendship Treaty. An article from APTN National News states: “What the non-Mi’kmaw fishers don’t seem to know, or refuse to accept, is that the Mi’kmaq are the only people with an inherent right to fish the waters off Nova Scotia. It’s a privilege for everyone else.”
Let’s be clear on one more thing: Indigenous people have sustainably hunted and fished on this land since time immemorial.
Mi’kmaq fishermen have been fighting for their rights since the arrival of European colonizers. A significant event surrounding this conflict happened in the ‘80s, when Mi’kmaw hunter James Simon was charged for hunting in the offseason. He took this charge to the Supreme Court, arguing that the 1752 Peace and Friendship Treaty stated that the Mi’kmaq “shall not be hindered from, but have free liberty of hunting and fishing” — and he won. Again, in 1993 Mi’kmaw fisherman Donald Marshall was arrested for catching and selling eels during the offseason, and again, he challenged it, eventually winning a Supreme Court case reaffirming the 1752 treaty. This is known today as the Marshall decision. This treaty is backed by the Canadian constitution, under section 35 on fishery rights, which recognizes and affirms Aboriginal rights — including the 1752 Peace and Friendship Treaty right to hunt and fish as usual, for a moderate livelihood. Problems, however, continually arise because the definition of a “moderate livelihood” is unclear, leaving it open to multiple interpretations.
In an article from The Narwhal, Dalhousie University professor Megan Bailey states that “There has been no clarity on what ‘moderate livelihood’ means, nor how implementation of the treaty right should unfold.” This means that section 35 has been left open to debate, and Indigenous treaty rights are therefore not strongly backed by Canadian law.
This issue is central in the Mi’kmaq conflict. On Sept. 20, when a flotilla of non-Indigneous fishermen floated out into St. Mary’s Bay and removed Indigenous fishermen’s traps, no one stopped them. While RCMP were present, they claimed to be outnumbered. The First Nation’s director of operations, Rhonda Knockwood stated that law enforcement were documenting the incident. Neither the Coast Guard nor the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) came to the scene.
In an email statement from RCMP shared in a CP24 news article, RCMP said that they had received reports of theft and mischief. Part of the statement reads: “All reports are being investigated. We will remain in the area to ensure public and police safety and keep the peace.”
While RCMP may have been present but outnumbered, it is questionable and concerning that no attempt was made to stop the non-Indigenous fishermen from sabotaging the traps. Although the removal of the traps is a violation of Indignenous treaty rights, the fishermen felt justified in their actions because it is illegal under Canadian law to fish during the offseason.
In reference to this incident, Colin Sproul, the president of the Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen’s Association is quoted in a CTV article stating “There’s nothing more to show that [non-Indigneous] fishermen have the true, just, lawful position here than the fact that we conducted that activity yesterday and nobody stopped us.”
In a more recent article from CBC, Sproul condemned the violence toward the Mi’kmaq lobster fishers, and said that it isn’t “Indigenous versus non-Indigenous,” but reiterated non-Indigenous fishermen’s concerns about sustainability. He called out Ottawa for not handling the situation well and stated that it isn’t in his power to resolve the conflict.
“Our issues are all with the [fisheries] minister and her lack of action, and the result is the chaos that we’ve seen this week in Nova Scotia,” he said.
When it comes to issues of sustainability, the Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen’s Association claims that its members’ catches have decreased by 68 per cent since 2016, and that fishing in the summer — the practice that provoked the attacks on the Mi’kmaq — is unsustainable because the lobster are in their molting season. This makes them especially vulnerable because if they are too small, or are females bearing eggs, they will need to be thrown back — increasing their post-release mortality.
Sproul told CBC’s Mainstreet: “It’s not appropriate for anybody to fish in a lobster molting breeding ground during the closed season. We have seasons for a reason.”
Others say that sustainability isn’t a concern with the Mi’kmaq fishery. Bailey of Dalhousie University also spoke to Halifax Today, explaining that the Mi’kmaq aren’t fishing enough to make a dent in lobster stocks. In fact, they only hold seven licenses that manage 350 traps — the equivalent of about one non-Indigenous commercial fishing license. At the end of 2018, there were 979 commercial licenses active in the same area of St. Mary’s Bay.
Additionally, Bailey wrote her own piece for The Conversation explaining the science behind why conservation shouldn’t be a concern when it comes to the small Mi’kmaq lobster fishery. She calls the concerns “unfounded” and says that “There is no reason, no science, to suggest that the equivalent of one or two commercial vessels fishing in St. Mary’s Bay will be problematic.”
Using catch per unit effort (CPUE), a measure that represents the abundance of lobster in a given area, Bailey explains that although the CPUE is on the lower end of the healthy range, it doesn’t necessarily indicate an unhealthy or endangered lobster population. The health of lobster stocks in the Maritimes has been confirmed by the DFO.
So, while the opposition group says that Indigneous fishermen are depleting lobster stocks, scientists and ecological regulators disagree; but it is no wonder people are confused about the situation. If non-Indigneous people want to talk about sustainability, they should take a closer look at their own practices of large-scale commercial fishing. Overfishing is a concern when it comes to sustainability, and the climate crisis gives rise to conversations about asserting Indigneous peoples as stewards of the land, as their traditional knowledge may be helpful in developing solutions to this growing, global issue. This could be the key to sustainability in the long term as, according to the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), Indigneous people have spiritual connections to the land, and a deep understanding of the environment that stretches back before European colonization.
In a statement on “Honouring Earth” released by the AFN, a national advocacy organization representing Indigenous people in Canada, it was stated that traditional knowledge can be used to promote the health and well-being of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.
“First Nations peoples can demonstrate how, in asserting their land use and rights, economic initiatives can be both profitable and sustainable for future generations. First Nation traditional knowledge has provided our people with the tools to care for Mother Earth and our sacred sites. This knowledge can be shared with industry for the betterment and survival of all peoples,” the statement reads.
In fact, more and more researchers are turning to Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) to better inform their understanding about ecosystems. TEK is defined in a publication from Yale University as “deep knowledge of a place that has been painstakingly discovered by those who have adapted to it over thousands of years.”
According to the publication, “[TEK] has gotten more attention from mainstream scientists lately because of efforts to better understand the world in the face of climate change and the accelerating loss of biodiversity.”
In a recent positive development, it was announced on Monday, Nov. 9 that the Mi’kmaq First Nations acquired 50 per cent of the commercial seafood company Clearwater. Clearwater is North America’s biggest shellfish producer, so this puts Indigenous stakeholders in powerful positions within the commercial fishery industry. This is an exemplar of what stewardship could be like moving forward on a wider scale, as it puts Indigenous people in decision-making positions where they can actualize their desire to preserve the land and uphold their own rights.
The chair of the board of directors of Clearwater, Colin MacDonald, stated that this purchase would advance reconciliation.
“I am confident that this transaction will enhance the culture of diversity and sustainable seafood excellence that exists at Clearwater,” said MacDonald to the CBC.
Though this is a positive step forward for the Mi’kmaq, it still does not address the issue of backlash against sustainable livelihood fishing performed in the offseason. In order to remedy this, Canadian laws need to be clear on Indigenous treaty rights.
As it is now, there has been a national failure to reconcile Indigenous treaties and rights with provincial and national laws. This isn’t rare and was seen earlier this year in B.C. when the Wet’suwet’en tried to exert their right to access their traditional land in northern B.C. but were violently pushed out by the provincial government, who wanted to build a pipeline through the territory. The violation of these rights sparked massive, global protests in support of the Wet’suwet’en, but also represented another example of a constant battle by a First Nations group to have their rights respected and upheld.
The Wet’suwet’en had already been to court in the ‘90s during the historic Delgamuukw case, over the same issue of land rights, and won their case yet ended up in the same position as the Mi’kmaq in Nova Scotia, once again facing a legal battle. The Wet’suwet’en eventually signed a deal with the federal and provincial government to start negotiating their rights to the land, but it has not come without hardship on the community. When asked about the impact that the Delgamuukw case had on the Wet’suwet’en community, Mike Goold, a member of the nation stated that court cases tear communities apart.
“It’s an example of the toll [it takes] when First Nations are faced with legal challenges over decades. … It divides us and it weakens us,” he stated.
Until laws and treaties are actually reconciled, Canadians — both citizens and government institutions — will be able to violate treaty rights and get away with it under Canadian law.
Nova Scotia Premier Stephen McNeil stated in a CTV interview that the province recognizes the right of the Mi’kmaq, but that “many of the details surrounding the nature and extent of those rights are not clear.” But Indigenous rights are as clear as they can be. It’s Canadian law that is confusing. We must remember that reconciling laws and rights is the bare minimum. These treaties are colonial constructs as well, and as such, uphold colonial ways of life; they are not designed to uphold the rights of Indigenous peoples, and are therefore not suited to reconciliation.
Canada has had hundreds of years to fix this, and at this point the neglect of these rights constitutes gross negligence and an act of cultural genocide. For any politician to talk about reconciliation without talking about how Canadian laws fail to protect Indigenous rights is to only blow smoke.
First Nations groups across our entire country should not have to fight so hard, bringing case after case to the Supreme Court just to have their rights upheld. Those in the Trudeau administration say they want reconciliation, but for reconciliation to happen we must see meaningful action. Without clear action from the government affirming that First Nations treaty rights are enforced by Canadian law and that Indigenous groups are autonomous, racism is going to slide by unpunished.
By educating oneself and listening to the concerns of Indigenous people in Canada we can better identify systemic forms of oppression and racism, and to be frank, they’ve been laying these problems out for decades. Systemic racism allows individual and overt racism to occur — this includes the legislative neglect of Indigenous treaty rights. Dismantling the systems that allow racism to continue will be key to moving forward in reconciliation. If not, it makes it okay for citizens to burn fishing equipment, desecrate lobster, destroy land, and threaten people with racist language. Until this is remedied, Canada will continue to be a nation that upholds colonial genocide.
Illustrations: Shara Hamed/The Cascade
Darien Johnsen is a UFV alumni who obtained her Bachelor of Arts degree with double extended minors in Global Development Studies and Sociology in 2020. She started writing for The Cascade in 2018, taking on the role of features editor shortly after.
She’s passionate about justice, sustainable development, and education.