Residents voice Treaty Land Sharing concerns at Special Committee of the Whole meeting

FORT ST. JOHN, B.C. — Peace region landowners and residents were given the opportunity to voice their concerns about Treaty Land Sharing Networks at a Special Committee of the Whole Meeting hosted by the Peace River Regional District (PRRD) on Wednesday. 

The special meeting was scheduled after the initial meeting on June 8th was deferred due to overcrowding at the Pomeroy Hotel and Conference Centre.

Dale Bumstead of Scion Strategies Ltd initially presented the concept of Treaty Land Sharing to the PRRD in January. At the time, 11 out of 12 regional board members voted in favour of writing a letter of support for the concept on behalf of the PRRD. 

The purpose of Treaty Land Sharing is to honour the intent of the original Treaties by sharing the land for mutual benefit while connecting farmers and ranchers with Indigenous people by providing safe and respectful access to their land.

Treaty Land Sharing is a voluntary process with the sole intention of building relationships between local First Nations and landholders who choose to participate. 

Earlier this month, the spread of misinformation on social media surrounding the concept of Treaty Land Sharing prompted hundreds of Peace region residents and landowners to attend the June 8th Committee of the Whole meeting.

The meeting was deferred before Scion Strategies Ltd had a chance to fully explain the concept. 

The general concern surrounded the idea of granting First Nations people access to private land without permission and the regional board making private decisions about Treaty Land Sharing with no public input. It is important to note that not all residents who attended the meeting shared these views.

Following the backlash at the June 8th meeting, the PRRD voted to withdraw their letter of support for Treaty Land Sharing Networks.

Hundreds of  Peace region residents and landowners attended the Special Committee of the Whole meeting at the North Peace Arena on Wednesday, despite the PRRD’s decision to withdraw their letter of support. 

The main concern from both the scheduled speakers and the gallery was the alleged lack of transparency on the PRRD’s part regarding the Treaty Land Sharing concept. 

Jill Copes of the Landry Women’s Institute and Nor’ Pioneer Women’s Institute, Jim Little, a member of the public, and Helen Harris of the Regional Cattlemen’s Association were all scheduled to speak at the initial meeting on June 8th but didn’t get that opportunity due to it being stopped and deferred. During the special meeting on Wednesday, each speaker had the opportunity to speak before the regional board before gallery comments from the public. 

Harris asked the regional board to “please contact the leaders of the local and regional associations and speak to them directly.”

“If the proponents would be open and honest with the landowners, taxpayers, and people in the treaty region, we can move forward collaboratively on these initiatives,” said Harris.

“We must trust now that you will consult with our representatives in the future and include us in the initiatives involved in any way involving us in any way. Truthful dialogue and civilized debates are the bones of democracy, and we must be consulted to have true collaboration on these initiatives. There’s no agreement if only one party is not invited to the table.”

After Copes, Harris, and Little spoke, members of the public were invited to line up and take turns saying their piece. Each person had two minutes to talk within the total allotted time of 15 minutes. 

A wide range of concerns were voiced during the gallery portion of the meeting, all of which were met with applause and cheers from the crowd in attendance. One man echoed Harris’s concerns, stating he “does not have a problem with First Nations people coming onto his land and doing things” as long as it’s discussed beforehand “as neighbours.”

“We need to do this neighbour-to-neighbour,” he said. “We do not need a government program to do it. All this is doing is driving a wedge between us and Indigenous people, which the government is really good at.”

Many community members shared the belief that the concept of Treaty Land Sharing would create division between local First Nations and landowners. 

“If you go through with this, you are going to have division like you’ve never seen before, and that is never good for anybody. It’s time to move forward,” one woman said. 

One resident voiced his concern about insurance. 

“Farm insurance is a tough thing to get, and your insurance company isn’t going to keep you as a client if you let people wander around,” he said.

Another resident wrote in with his concerns, claiming Treaty Land Sharing is an attack against private landowners. 

“The act of entering private land and claiming rights over private land is a type of revenge of colonialism, a type of reverse racism against legal private landowners. This looks like First Nations are seeking revenge against one’s neighbours,” he wrote.

Early Wednesday morning, the Doig River, Halfway River, Prophet River, and West Moberly First Nations announced the withdrawal of their request for support of Treaty Land Sharing in a release sent out before the special meeting.

In the release, the First Nations stated the misinformation circulating earlier this month has “raised tensions and divisions in the region and threatened to reverse and tentative progress on reconciliation.” 

The First Nations concluded the release by saying they are hopeful that in the future, members of the public will confirm the accuracy of information being circulated online before acting.

More information about Wednesday’s Special Committee of the Whole meeting, along with the entire video of the meeting, including the gallery commentary, can be found on the Peace River Regional District’s website.