Quote:
Originally Posted by foshizzle11
How can this keep going, on and on for decades. Will they ever stop if the government says that it will not ever happen? Maybe the surveyors were wrong back in 1880s. If a judge determines they are not entitled to the land, is this over? Why would we continue to pay for this through our taxes for it to just be an ongoing issue? I don't know what is right, but I think it might be too late to claim this land back.
What do you do with the towns that are in there? What about the people who have owned farms and land in that area? You just take their home away from them? What do they get?
I understand preserving the environment, preserving culture. I have driven through a few reserves and preserving the environment doesn't seem like a pressing issue within their own reserves in some instances.
I think they need to start focusing on fixing the issues on their reserves and helping their people. Seems like a lot of time is spent on these sorts of issues instead of what should be important to them or any other culture. Take care of your people first. Money isn't always the answer.
|
It's usually a settlement of land and cash in lieu of land based on the value of the land today plus its economic value for the past 100 years under the lands "Best use"
The argument in this case is much simpler than the BC cases where there are claims based on traditional grounds. This case is essentially in 1883 the government did a survey based on the population of the reserve and the rules in treaty 7. in I think 1887 they did a second survery based on a later population after starvation and small pox wiped a lot of the population out.
This case will center around which survey met the legal requirements of treaty 7.