The Metis people of Canada are fighting for aboriginal hunting rights in two cases before the Supreme Court this week. The opposition, including province governments and powerful hunting groups, says that the term “aboriginal” means “from the beginning”, and argues that the Metis - people of mixed aboriginal and European descent - did not exist before European contact. No other country offers distinct constitutional rights for people of mixed descent, so a positive ruling would be a landmark. The Metis hunters who brought the cases hope a ruling in their favor will open the door to new and broader recognition of their resource rights, and stronger assertion of their cultural identity.
Their rights to pursue game without a license in the forests of Ontario and Manitoba will be decided by the nine judges of the Canadian Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will hear two cases involving Metis hunting rights, one brought over ten years ago by Steve and Roddy Powley in Ontario, and another by Manitoba Metis leader Ernie Blais, seeking confirmation of his people’s hunting rights under an existing treaty. The Canadian Press reports that the lead attorney for the government of Ontario in the first case, Lori Sterling, claims that the Constitution does not allow the Metis the same rights as the first aboriginal inhabitants of Canada. According to current laws, legal Indians are allowed to hunt for food without a provincial license, and can hunt out of season.
If Metis people are given the same right, opponents argue, the increased number of people hunting both in and out of season could seriously impair conservation efforts. Sterling claims the Metis were recognized by the Constitution in order to protect pre-existing and future treaties and allow participation in constitutional conferences, not to give them rights equal to those of the people of First Nations.
But this narrow view of Metis rights is being questioned by some of the justices. Justice Ian Binnie has stated that the people who drafted the Constitution wanted certain rights to be given to the Metis. Justice Charles Gonthier has noted that the Metis created a new culture that was established before Euro-Canadians took over the region, and in this sense they are aboriginal.
Steve Powley is a disabled Metis hunter from Saulte Ste. Marie, Ontario. Steve and his son Roddy were charged in 1993 for killing a bull moose while hunting without a license. They successfully argued their first case in 1998, claiming that as Metis they have constitutional right to hunt for food without licenses. The Ontario Court of Appeals upheld the ruling in February 2001, but the Ontario government was allowed to appeal to the high court. The results of a Supreme Court decision will affect dozen of illegal hunting charges. But questions remain about how Metis settlements should be defined. The Metis National Council requires documented proof that at least one parent had ancestral ties to a Metis community, but there are many competing definitions regarding the qualities a person must have to be Metis. Granting special hunting rights to Metis people could make 300,000 or more new people eligible, potentially causing significant problems in resource management.
The other case in the Supreme Court pits the province of Manitoba against Metis leader Ernie Blais. According to the Globe and Mail, Blais contends that the Metis right to hunt has not been extinguished by treaty, as attorneys for the opposition argue. Blais has lost at each level of the court system. A ruling on both cases is not expected for several months.
