Alberta govt deal that allows Metis to hunt without licences not enforceable



EDMONTON (CP) - The Alberta government's deal that allows Metis people the right to hunt and fish without licences is not legally enforceable, a judge has ruled.
Justice Gerald Verville of Court of Queen's Bench also set aside the conviction of Kipp Kelley, a Metis hunter who was convicted last year of illegal trapping. "I have found that the Interim Metis Harvesting Agreement is not legally enforceable," Verville wrote in a judgment obtained by The Canadian Press.

The trial judge who convicted Kelley last year said that the Metis man could not use the Alberta deal as a defence because he had not shown that he had the right to trap under a Supreme Court ruling on Metis hunting rights.

But Verville said that because Alberta signed the Interim Metis Harvesting Agreement in 2004 with Metis leaders, most ordinary people would be under the impression that it was legal to trap without fear of being convicted of an offence.

"In these circumstances, I find a conviction would shock the conscience of the community and bring the administration of justice into disrepute," he wrote.

"I therefore set aside the conviction."

Thomas Rothwell, a lawyer who represented the Alberta government in court, called Verville's findings "serious." He said the province may launch an appeal.

"The finding is clear that the agreement is legally unenforceable," Rothwell said Tuesday. "The government is going to review the decision and provide a response."

Audrey Poitras, president of the Metis Nation of Alberta, said while the agreement might be legally unenforceable in its current form, the province should make regulatory changes to make it lawful.

She said negotiations with the government are already underway for a better Metis Harvesting Agreement.

"I believe this decision is not just significant for Alberta," she said. "It is saying to all provinces, 'sit down and negotiate accommodation agreements with the Metis people.' "

In 2003 the Supreme Court ruled that Metis living near Sault Ste. Marie, Ont, have the right to hunt and fish for food without a licence.

Since then, provincial governments with Metis communities have been grappling with the implications of the so-called Powley decision.

Metis hunting rights cases will be before the courts this winter in Ontario and Manitoba.

A major Alberta hunting and fishing group applauded Verville's ruling.

Randy Collins, president of the Alberta Fish and Game Association, said the judgment will help ensure that wildlife is properly managed in the province.

Collins said the hunting agreement was also not fair to people who are not Metis.

"I take that the ruling that happened today basically says that the Metis hunting agreement is null and void," Collins said.

He said if the government and the Metis want to reach a better agreement, they should include hunting and conservation groups in the negotiations.

"They have to go back to the drawing board. Try to hammer something out that would be acceptable to all instead of doing it behind closed doors like it was done the first time."

© The Canadian Press, 2007

WWOOOOOOOOO HHHOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! JUSTICE!
I was worried that crap would eventually end up in BC! Now it won't!!!!!!!!!!!

Personally, I feel if the native peoples wish to hunt and fish under their "given right" by a treaty signed over 100 years ago, they should have to use the tools they possessed back then. Perhaps they should live as they did back then too. In tents and cabins in the bush without the whiteman's social assistance or luxuries. Seems to me we won the war with the natives back then. Why are we getting the raw end of the deal. I would be greatly surpised if this post is not deleted, but I wanted to have my say anyway.

I would like to see pictures of some beautiful aboriginal women.

I would gladly hunt with a spear and a rock to keep my rights, but i guess you guys would hit us with some sort of "unethical" charge and keep us from hunting at all

I sure don't begrudge any man killing a deer or moose to feed his family .. but killing off trophy bighorns in their wintering range (while they are vulnerable during the rut ... ) I wish that they would leave the big rams alone. That isn't subsistence.

Its not that we dont want native peoples to "hunt at all". But think about it. My ancestors hunted and fished as they wished 100 years ago too. Why do we have to abide by laws and you dont?

quote:

Originally posted by j/4:
I would gladly hunt with a spear and a rock to keep my rights, but i guess you guys would hit us with some sort of "unethical" charge and keep us from hunting at all

When your "rights" are something that you acquired by virtue of genetics, then those rights do not have any validity in fact.

Aboriginals from most of the worlds societies may have had some cause to ask for certain priviledges to get up to speed with immigrant influences, but there is no justification for priviledges or special consideration after more than a century. You wanted to be equal? Be equal.

As it is, aboriginals in Canada are granted interest free and/or non-repayable loans, special tax status, special hunting priviledges, free (or heavily subsidised) housing, and they continue to apply pressure for more. Now even Metis are trying to use their status as "I have a wee bit of aboriginal blood in my veins" to milk the system. In three more generations of intermarriage we'll all be Metis - what do we do then? Throw the book out the window, and we'll all just kill everything we see? It seems like the most dominant of all genes is the Freeloader gene - it makes its way to the top every chance it gets.

By all means, hunt. But don't ask for special priviledges. You do NOT have that right, morally, ethically, or legally.