Aboriginal Issues in Canada

[darkendless]

That being said, sometimes issues do slip through. Earlier, I mentioned a project I was on where a geotechnical crew stumbled upon artifacts that ended up being the remains of a First Nations village.

That must have been difficult, they were surely excavating test pits? There would be very little chance of finding such artifacts from vertical boring. If there are concerns with this sort of thing (buried villages etc), you'd think they'd mandate a sub-surface survery. I know that when we can't penetrate high strength rock with coring we sometimes have to get the geoscientists out to map the rock. So i'm sure they'd be able to pick up an inconsistency like a village down there.

 

[darkendless]

We're not just talking about "some bones", though. That's an over-simplification of the issue. We're talking about up to fifteen thousand years of human history, much of which is completely shrouded in mystery, and the significance of which we only know from charred fragments of an oral history decimated by violence, sickness, Residential schools and substance abuse. Whenever a project stumbles on human remains it's going to grind to a halt. If it isn't an aboriginal historical site it could be the scene of a murder, or the remains of someone reported missing. Either way the area has to be processed. If it does turn out to be a site of historical significance, it's possible the first nations didn't know about it, or had stories about it but didn't know exactly where it was. In Alberta they have discovered a site where a fire pit was built in the exact same spot for five thousand years. No doubt it would be profitable to hand over the area to the oil companies for a tar sands project, but I'd much rather use the opportunity to learn something about the history of this country and the people who first settled it.

Thats fair enough but gosh, i'd hate to see professional insurance costs over there for engineering firms/project management firms.

What is more concerning given mr Penguins post above yours is that geotechnical firms uncovered remains of an old village. The issue is that much vertical boring is carried out using 100mm diameter drills on the back of 4X4's and as a result it would be extremely difficult to determine what you've hit. Therefore some of the most important history could have big concrete piles through the middle of it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That must have been difficult, they were surely excavating test pits? There would be very little chance of finding such artifacts from vertical boring.

Sounds plausible. I got the information third-hand long after my involvement in the project ended, so I don't have all the details.

If there are concerns with this sort of thing (buried villages etc), you'd think they'd mandate a sub-surface survery.

For most projects here, the normal process for archaeology in an environmental assessment goes something like this:

- Phase 1 is a "paper review": archaeologists review the are that would be disturbed by each alternative and compare it against known archaeological finds and historical records. They also use their professional judgement to identify locations where archaeological features are potentially present - for instance, if the project is in the traditional territory of a First Nations group that used rivers as transportation and trade routes, a location on the bank of one of these rivers might be identified for more scrutiny. (Note: I'm not an archaeologist, so I'm probably horribly simplifying the process) They also look at the surface geology of the area and identify where artifacts, if originally present, would have been preserved.

- Phase 2 is a field review: once the sites with a high archaeological potential have been identified, they do various forms of field reviews, like surface surveys, test pits, and trenches to see if they can locate anything of archaeological significance.

The archaeologists won't just arbitrarily dig up a whole project site, especially not the whole area flooded by a dam or the entire right-of-way of a freeway that's 100 km long. They use the Phase 1 review to target their efforts. However, on rare occasions, there are archaeological finds in areas that weren't identified as "high potential".

I know that when we can't penetrate high strength rock with coring we sometimes have to get the geoscientists out to map the rock. So i'm sure they'd be able to pick up an inconsistency like a village down there.

Only when it's identified as a location to do a subsurface survey like that. As I said, they typically won't do a detailed survey of the entire project area.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What is more concerning given mr Penguins post above yours is that geotechnical firms uncovered remains of an old village. The issue is that much vertical boring is carried out using 100mm diameter drills on the back of 4X4's and as a result it would be extremely difficult to determine what you've hit. Therefore some of the most important history could have big concrete piles through the middle of it.

The event I mentioned is very rare. I've worked in transportation engineering for a decade and I've only heard of something like this happening once on a project that I was associated with.

The archaeologists that work on these projects are very good on the whole. And when you think about it, it's very rare to get an isolated find that nobody knew about. These archaeological sites are the products of cultures that interacted with each other and passed down stories to today - they and the archeological information that has already been found give a very good picture of the cultures that lived here historically as well as where they settled and what they did. The oral history and artifacts that we already have give a good picture of what's out there and what we should expect to see that we haven't already.

 

[painted wolf]

Ok... first things first... I am biased.

Now, having gotten that out of the way... I think the Ojibwe nation has the absolute right to determine to what use their land is put.

wa:do

 

[Alceste]

Ok... first things first... I am biased.

Now, having gotten that out of the way... I think the Ojibwe nation has the absolute right to determine to what use their land is put.

wa:do

I agree with you.

 

[croak]

1992's quite a while ago. Why now?

Aha, it was on CBC! How Do You Want to Live? | Tapestry with Mary Hynes | CBC Radio

I rather don't like how it's worded.

Anyway, looking at the article in the Canadian Journal of Archaeology (PDF) on the matter:

The dam project has been the subject of a protracted dispute between the Poplar Point First Nation, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), and the Nipigon Hydro Corporation. The Band has consistently maintained that High Falls is a sacred place, and that human burials are located in the immediate area of the falls. The recent disturbance and discovery of human skeletal remains escalated this tension, and led to further legal confrontations.

Because of their uncertain legal status, Poplar Point was not consulted when the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and the Nipigon Hydro Company began planning the construction of the power generating station at High Falls. Instead, only "officially recognized" First Nations in the area were consulted. To add to the controversy, the company sought and received an exemption from conducting an environmental assessment for the project.

So, aboriginal issues. Dem's issues, all right.

 

[croak]

A similar situation is occurring in my hometown of Thunder Bay, Ontario. Just south of the city there is a "mountain range" (they're really just very large hills and cliffs) that's sacred to the local Ojibwe. They've been performing sacred rituals like the powwow on these mountains for centuries, if not millennia. There's a proposed wind farm to be set up on this mountain and they're using the argument that the mountain is important to their culture in order to halt the project.

Are you taking about the Nor'Wester Mountains? Looks like lots of people who aren't Ojibwe aren't happy about it either: Nor'Wester Mountain Escarpment Protection Committee

Ontario Wind Resistance I'm assuming these groups are for the most part Euro-Canadian. I could be wrong, though.

 

[Vile Atheist]

Are you taking about the Nor'Wester Mountains? Looks like lots of people who aren't Ojibwe aren't happy about it either: Nor'Wester Mountain Escarpment Protection Committee

Ontario Wind Resistance I'm assuming these groups are for the most part Euro-Canadian. I could be wrong, though.

Sorry, I tend to post on RF for quite a while and take long breaks. I'm not sure why. But, yes. That's exactly it. Pretty much all are Euro-Canadian in that group. They're a bunch of loons, though. Some of the people leading the anti-wind charge are the owners of nearby businesses (the ski hill and a restaurant on the nearby highway).

You also have to understand the demographics of this area. The turbines would be facing an area that's populated mostly by the wealthier people in town. Granted, it's a beautiful view of the cliffs and hills and I'm unsure how wind turbines would look on them. They're worried about their property values. Nothing more.

Their positions are highly inconsistent. There was another windfarm set up 30 minutes north of the city. First they claimed that both projects were horrible. Then they claimed that the project north of the city was okay, but the one on the Nor'Westers was horrible. Then when the people who live north of the city had no complaints about the wind farm, they changed their song from "adverse health effects" and "deafening noise" to "the Ojibwe don't want it there".

That all goes back to my original point. If we are to accept the Ojibwe claim that the mountain is sacred to them and therefore no development can proceed, I'm perfectly willing to accept that argument so long as it's reconciled with the current development on and around the mountains that was allowed to take place (with their consent). In fact, much of the land surrounding the portion of the Nor'Westers in question is Fort William First Nation territory of which they have direct control.

The entire project isn't on FWFN land, though. If I recall correctly, only one or two of the turbines will be on FWFN land (and these will likely be moved if they haven't been already). So it makes the local Ojibwe case rather weak. If they use the "traditional land" argument, if it is accepted, it sets a precedent for Fort William First Nation to be able to dictate to the City of Thunder Bay what development it can and cannot allow (a city of ~125,000 metro population).

Thunder Bay and FWFN have a generally co-operative relationship, so any argument FWFN makes that undermines Thunder Bay's control over its own city limits makes for a more hostile relationship. Aboriginal issues are sticky and important in northern Ontario. It's unfortunate it doesn't receive the attention it deserves in Canada.