Drivers charged $20 'toll' after deadly crash forces detour through First Nation

[Minnie]

I am mildly amused at the fuss about the livestock and litter since livestock roam freely on the reserve land that 1A runs through. No one seems to get all that fussed about that, not even after numerous accidents (some fatal) involving band members and the general public. And the whole litter thing....well...

[MelBridgeman]

capitalism!

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

If this is true, I respectfully change my tune a little bit. One day is nothing, but daily disruptions would be annoying for sure.

When I was driving back from the mountains on the weekend Google maps was saying I should take the dirt road through the reserve; at the time they had a couple of people on bikes blocking the access. So I suspect a lot of people have been cutting through the reserve as a shortcut.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I think respect for treaty land goes both ways. Driving on their roads does have consequences. It's wear and tear on the road, dust, litter, annoyance to people and animals. Accepting $20 is basically selling out everyone on your reservation. It's not what treaty land is intended for.

This would not even be a story if the road was closed to outsiders as it normally is or if a few people got trespassing tickets as they normally do. It's the $20.

That's an issue between the members and their band. The band leader is quoted in the article saying he didn't think they did anything wrong.

The issue is the motorists think they have a right to use the reserve roads as they see fit, which they do not. I 100% see the reserves position. If all the cars used their roads as a detour it would create havoc. If they want to allow a limited amount of cars through at a fee, that's their choice. The band leader is aware of it and can put a stop to it if they want.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

capitalism!

entrepreneurial!

[Ducay]

Time to park my bus across the Grey Eagle entrance and charge them for coming onto our sovereign lands

[GP_Matt]

I really can't understand how people are upset about this. I can understand a band member being upset that he/she didn't get a cut, but how on Earth can anyone else be upset.

You guys are arguing that you would be fine if it was band sanctioned but the chief says that he is happy with the outcome. There really isn't an issue here, a bunch of people were given a choice and decided to spend money to save time. Now if you are upset because you didn't have cash then we may be on to something to complain about.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Time to park my bus across the Grey Eagle entrance and charge them for coming onto our sovereign lands

The road is public property, the reserves aren't. I don't agree that it was moral for them to do what they did but not a great analogy.

[Red Ice Player]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Time to park my bus across the Grey Eagle entrance and charge them for coming onto our sovereign lands

"Them" would be Canadian citizens having free access to Canadian sovereign lands.

[Harju]

I can't help but think that Frank Fencepost and Silas Ermineskin were the ones out there on the road collecting money.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

The road is public property, the reserves aren't. I don't agree that it was moral for them to do what they did but not a great analogy.

The reserves aren't private property either.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Red Ice Player

"Them" would be Canadian citizens having free access to Canadian sovereign lands.

Although I would tend to agree with your statement . I will play devils advocate . I would say they are Canadian Citizens myself but each band has their own opinion if they are sovereign or not.

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blo...elf-governance

When asked by authorities to declare his citizenship at the Canada-U.S. border in Ontario, Leroy Hill will say, “North American Indian.” When pressed and asked where he resides, the sub-chief of the Iroquois Confederacy will point across the Niagara River and say, “I live on that side of your line,” and then submit his Iroquois passport.

Neither the words “Canadian” nor “American” will cross his lips. Never have, he said. Never will.

“We’ve never relinquished our sovereignty, we’ve been our own nation for centuries,” said Mr. Hill, of the Six Nations of Grand River, Canada’s largest band of 23,000, with more than half living on a reserve near Brantford, Ont. “We were raised that we’re not Canadian and we’re not American…. I would never carry a Canadian passport.”

I also remember.when Idle No more where blocking public lands all across the country aswell.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Although I would tend to agree with your statement . I will play devils advocate . I would say they are Canadian Citizens myself but each band has their own opinion if they are sovereign or not.

I don't think any Devil's advocacy is necessary. I worked in Bragg Creek a long time ago and more often than not First Nations refused to pay the GST on a their tab. It was an on going fight.

[polak]

Moral of the story? Abolish the two tiered citizen system!

South Africa was able to figure it out...

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by polak

Moral of the story? Abolish the two tiered citizen system!

South Africa was able to figure it out...

We really need to start working towards that. The current system does nobody any good.

[Voodooman]

Originally Posted by polak

Moral of the story? Abolish the two tiered citizen system!

South Africa was able to figure it out...

This. Couldn't agree more. The treaty and reservation system has failed both parties miserably, and a select few have lined their pockets in a system that seems to breed corruption.

Abolish the reservations, these people are Canadians and deserve equal rights as any of the rest of us. Other cultures find ways to preserve their identity after emigrating here, and there's a way for First Nations peoples to do so as well. The living conditions on some of these reserves are abhorrent, and you can't tell me that the standard of living for many of these people would not be greatly improved by integration into the societal whole.

I'm an advocate of a fair deal to abolish the treaty system, ensure those currently living in poverty are taken care of, and given the opportunity to prosper going forward. Simply continuing on the status quo is a terrible option for all involved.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by polak

Moral of the story? Abolish the two tiered citizen system!

South Africa was able to figure it out...

Abolishment of the reserve system would result in cultural genocide. It's the natural progression for a dominant culture to assimilate a smaller one.

In South Africa, you have a situation where the numbers are reversed and white people only make up about 10% of the population. Even then, they are largely being pushed out.

By saying getting rid of reserves would fix aboriginal issues, you're essentially saying that getting rid of aboriginals would fix aboriginal issues. Although technically correct, it's not the way forward.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by blankall

By saying getting rid of reserves would fix aboriginal issues, you're essentially saying that getting rid of aboriginals would fix aboriginal issues. Although technically correct, it's not the way forward.

People don't like reserves because they're visual representations of the problems aboriginals have to deal with. It's easier to ignore when they're mixed in with the general population. It's not like aboriginals who leave the reserves necessarily go on to better lives. Take a walk through downtown Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, etc. Look at the women who go missing when they head to Winnipeg. Removing the reserves does nothing unless there's actually some kind of support in place to deal with the fallout.

[polak]

Originally Posted by blankall

Abolishment of the reserve system would result in cultural genocide. It's the natural progression for a dominant culture to assimilate a smaller one.

In South Africa, you have a situation where the numbers are reversed and white people only make up about 10% of the population. Even then, they are largely being pushed out.

By saying getting rid of reserves would fix aboriginal issues, you're essentially saying that getting rid of aboriginals would fix aboriginal issues. Although technically correct, it's not the way forward.

Yes forcing them to live in terrible poverty without water or proper healthcare in order to preserve the idea of their "culture" makes total sense.

I'm sure that the people living in the 3rd world conditions on the reserves find solace in their "culture" being protected over their health and well being.

That makes more sense then fixing their quality of life and worrying about how to preserve their culture as a secondary concern.

Originally Posted by rubecube

People don't like reserves because they're visual representations of the problems aboriginals have to deal with. It's easier to ignore when they're mixed in with the general population. It's not like aboriginals who leave the reserves necessarily go on to better lives.

Yes they do. Like, substantially. Especially economically speaking.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by polak

Yes they do. Like, substantially.

Source? Or is it anecdote time?