These quotes illustrate two truths. The first eloquently outlines the reality of the deep connection between Indigenous Peoples and their traditional lands. The second reveals the stark despair felt when Indigenous Peoples feel that connection slipping away into the control of forces that do not honour their sacred connection to traditional lands.

There are two other truths that are part of this discussion. One truth is that the natural resources on traditional lands could mean very positive changes to First Nations communities. Many Indigenous leaders agree that their communities’ struggles with employment, health care, safe drinking water, housing, and mental health could benefit from an improvement in their economic circumstances. Many leaders are anxious, if not desperate, to make this happen. Nonetheless, these same leaders are painfully aware that the sacred bond between their peoples and their traditional lands has been broken many times over by governments, mining and forestry companies, and other for-profit organizations that have sought to exploit the natural resources on those traditional lands.

These two truths, then, are opportunity and risk: the opportunity for economic benefits weighed against the risk of damage and destruction to lands, food and water sources, and the very ecosystems that Indigenous Peoples feel part of.

Key Players in Disputes over Traditional Lands and Natural Resources

Indigenous Peoples

The Indigenous Peoples who are the traditional land users are central to any negotiation about land use.

Federal, Provincial, and Territorial Governments

Federal, provincial, and territorial governments may all have a role to play in negotiations and consultation.

While some argue that the Canadian federal government has been reasonably progressive in recognizing Indigenous land and resource rights, such recognition has often come only after lengthy court battles and relentless pressure by Indigenous communities (Anderson, Schneider, & Kayseas, 2008). Unfortunately, when governments must be forced by the courts to honour Indigenous land rights, one cannot expect these same governments to intervene fairly when private sector organizations wish to profit from resources on traditional lands.

Private Sector Industries

When natural resources such as lumber, minerals, or fossil fuels become a focus for industry, companies that stand to gain economically from the development of such resources are key participants in negotiations.

In November 2014, First Peoples Worldwide released its report on the tension between “extractive industries” and Indigenous land rights. The Indigenous Rights Risk Report studied 52 oil, gas, and mining companies undertaking 330 projects worldwide. The study found that 92 percent of the companies (48 out of 52) “do not address community relations or human rights at the board level in any formal capacity” (Adamson, 2014).

The Ring of Fire

Students are encouraged to explore examples of how Indigenous Peoples have advocated – with a wide range of outcomes – for full consultation, economic benefit–sharing, and protection of traditional lands through the summaries in the sidebars.

One story, the Ring of Fire, is examined here in more detail. The outcome is not yet known as events are ongoing at the time of writing.

The Ring of Fire is the common reference for a section of Northern Ontario, roughly 240 kilometres west of Attawapiskat, covering almost 10,000 square kilometres and containing some 5300 mining claims as of mid-2016. Over 24,000 Indigenous Peoples call these their traditional lands. These communities “depend on wild fish and animals for food and have inherent [treaty] rights to the land. This wilderness of trees, wetlands, lakes and rivers is part of the planet’s largest intact forest. It supports hundreds of plant, mammal and fish species, most in decline elsewhere, and is the continent’s main nesting area for nearly 200 migratory birds” (Wildlands League, n.d.).

Matawa First Nations Management

The First Nations of these traditional lands are largely, but not exclusively, represented by Matawa First Nations Management (MFNM), also known as the Matawa Tribal Council. MFNM was established in 1988 as a tribal council with nine member Ojibway and Cree Nations. While each of these nine First Nations retain the right to negotiate with industry and governments independently, they also understand the power of solidarity in negotiations with the Ontario government (Freeman, 2013b). The nine member Nations are: Aroland First Nation, Constance Lake First Nation, Eabametoong First Nation, Ginoogaming First Nation, Long Lake #58 First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation, Neskantaga First Nation, Nibinamik First Nation, Webequie First Nation.

Complex Negotiations

The Matawa Tribal Council has been involved in high-stakes negotiations regarding the development of this region since approximately 2010. These “First Nations are under pressure from mining companies and the province to consent to complex agreements to move the project forward” (Freeman, 2013b).

Three of these First Nations – Webequie, Marten Falls, and Neskantaga (also known as Lansdowne House) – have overlapping claims to land they each consider their traditional territory. Knowledge keepers tell tales of how the area has been an ancient meeting ground for members of neighbouring bands. For the first time in generational memory, there is a need to define borders around “traditional territory that was once seen as shared land” (Freeman, 2013b).

Indigenous representatives are well aware of the disastrous history of for-profit organizations attempting to strike it rich by exploiting natural resources on traditional lands. The damage to lands, food sources, community health, and communities in general has been extreme. (See sidebars.)