qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui

opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
Review of Canada's Offer to Settle
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
Castle Mountain & Timber Surrender
Claim - 2016 (amended)
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
Re: Proposed Settlement Agreement Offer
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
2/24/2016

Andrew Bear Robe, Ph.D., www.bearrobeconsulting .com

February 24, 2016

AN OPEN LETTER TO SIKSIKA NATION MEMBERS NO. 2 (amended)
Re: Mii Stukskoo Wa (Castle Mountain) & Timber Surrender Claim on"IR 146C" - A Settlement
Agreement Offer Between Canada and Siksika Nation - 2016
As a follow-up to my first review of Canada's proposed settlement of the above, dated
February 17, 2016, I now submit to you my review of the document entitled: Castle Mountain
Land and Timber Claim Settlement Agreement Between Canada and Siksika Nation, negotiated
between the respective parties since October 28, 2013.
I have read the entire proposed Settlement Agreement of 2016, all 137 pages, that was
distributed publicly, including Appendix A re: Adrian Stimson Sr. v. Attorney General of Canada,
Federal Court Action T-42412-71 filed in 2002 and amended in 2011. This review of such
documents has convinced me beyond a doubt that the entire Agreement favours Canada and
not Siksika Nation. It is a disguised land surrender offer contrary to Treaty 7 of 1877 and
Canadian common law, including section 35 of the Constitution. Here's the reasons why:
1. There are three (3) basic purposes of Canada Settlement Offer of October 28, 2013: (p. 5)
(1) To settle and clear Siksika Nation's rightful title, claim and interests to Timber Limit C
or IR 146C.
(2) To give access to Siksika Nation members to the Mii Stuksoo Wa area on Park
Canada's terms and conditions, i.e., right of entry only similar to any other Canadian or
tourist, but with some special cultural privileges, leases and use with Parks
Canada's permission.
(3) To give to Canada a clear and unfettered title to Mii Stuksoo Wa area forever. This
is otherwise known as Clearing the Plains policy. (See book written by James Daschuk,
Clearing The Plains - Disease, Politics of Starvation, and The Loss of Aboriginal Life.
Regina, University of Regina Press, 2013.)
2. Article 14 re: Release (p. 17)
For those stating or doubting that we will not lose our land, Article 14 re: Release, is
very clear in its intent and effects. It reads as follows:
14.1 In consideration of the Financial Compensation paid by Canada (i.e., $123,585,957)
to Siksika...Siksika acknowledges that all right to and title and interest in the lands
making up Timber Limit "C" is fully released and Siksika agrees:

Andrew Bear Robe, Ph.D.| Bear Robe Management Consulting

14.1.1 to forever release and discharge Canada...from any liability, unknown, in law, in
equity or otherwise, which Siksika or any of it past, present and future members of any
of their respective heirs, descendants, legal representatives, successors and assigns,
including a band, may ever have had, may now have or may in the future have against
Canada and any of its ministers, officials, servants, employees, agents, successors and
assigns...
14.1.2 to not assert any action, cause of action, suit, claim or demand whatsoever,
whether in law, in equity or otherwise, that Siksika and the past, present and future
members of Siksika and any of their respective heirs, descendants, legal representatives,
successors and asigns may ever have had, may now have or may in the future have
against Canada with respect to...
(i) any aspect of the Claim...
The legal effects of Article 14 are clear. Release is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as:
"The relinquishment, concession, or giving up of a right, claim, or privilege, by the
person in whom it exists or to whom it accrues, to the person against whom it might
have been demanded or enforced...it is a contract and must be supported by lawful and
valuable consideration." (p. 1453)
The Article 14 Release is no different than the Treaty 7 (1877) surrender clause that
states: "release, cede, surrender, and yield up to the Government of Canada...all their
rights, titles, and privileges whatsoever to the lands included...". By such release, our
forefathers agreed to sign away 50,000 sq. miles of our traditional territory for $1.00 per
acre by Siksika, Piikani, Akainai & Tsuu T'ina First Nations. (Stoney Nakoda First Nations
were supposed to sign Treaty 6 but were allowed to sign Treaty 7 by the Queen's Treaty
Commissioners: Hugh A. Dempsey, The Great Blackfoot Treaties. Calgary, Heritage
House Publishing, 2015.)
In 1877, our forefathers did the best they could under very difficult circumstances but
they did not speak English nor understood British/Canadian law. Today, it is different.
We now have Siksika Nation members with university degrees, some with Ph.D.s, MBAs,
M.Eds, MAs, and we have our own lawyers and professors. They understand the English
language and the English law, including business & commercial law.
Canada want to "achieve certainty of tenure" or title to Mii Stuksoo Wa area and to get
Siksika Nation out-of-the-way. It is part of Canada's Clearing the Plains policy.
Regarding that policy, Daschuk's book states: "...government action was justified
because First Nations were seen to be on the verge of extinction...The present study
acknowledges the importance of racist ideology in the historical relationship between
First Nations and the Canadian state." (at Introduction, p. x)
Siksika Nation still owns Mii Stuksoo Wa area. We have never signed any Agreement to
release it. It has been confirmed by Canada as being part of Blackfoot Indian Reserve
3

Andrew Bear Robe, Ph.D.| Bear Robe Management Consulting

#146. That is why Mii Stuksoo Wa area is known as IR #146C. When IR 146 (470 sq.
miles) and IR 146C (27 sq. miles) are add up together, they total up exactly to 497 sq.
miles, the amount that Siksika Nation is entitled to under Treaty 7 based on 497 families
existing in 1877. Under Treaty 7, Siksika Nation is entitled to 1 sq. mile per family of five.
As proof of Siksika Nation's continuing ownership, the original survey stakes and cairns
used to demarcate the physical boundaries of Siksika IR 146C can still be seen today:
Adrian Stimson Sr. v. A.G. Canada at p. 6.

IR 146
470
sq.miles

IR 146C
27 sq.
miles

497 sq.
miles

(In 2016 Blackfoot IR 146 @ 270 sq. miles + 1910 surrender @ 180 sq. miles + Castle Mtn. @ 27
sq. miles = 477 sq. miles: Stats Canada 2013)
3. Article 3 re: Additions To Reserve (p. 11)
Canada wants Siksika Nation to release IR 146C (Mii Stuksoo Wa) and buy 27 Sq. Miles
somewhere else outside of Banff National Park from the proposed $123.5 Million Offer
Land in and around Banff National Park is very expensive. In Cochrane area, it costs
$250K per acre; in Canmore area it costs $350K per acre; in Banff Park Corridor area it
costs $400K - $500K per acre. After all costs and PCDs are subtracted, there will not be
much money left over to purchase 27 sq. miles somewhere else in southern Alberta.
4. Article 16, re: Orders Approving Settlement and Discontinuance of Actions. (p, 19)
If we agree to approve Canada's Settlement Offer, we will also agree to discontinue our
right to seek compensation for past harms and damages from Canada forever.
It reads as follows:
16.1 Siksika agrees to abandon and discharge any and all actions relating to the Claim...
(i) ...confirming the discontinuance of all those portions of Adrian Stimson Sr. et al. v.
Attorney General of Canada, Federal Court, Court File No. T-4242-71...and amended and
continued in the Federal Court on July 10, 2002...
4

Andrew Bear Robe, Ph.D.| Bear Robe Management Consulting

The above Adrian Stimson Sr. v. A.G. Canada (2002, 2011) legal claim against Canada is a
very strong legal position taken by Siksika Nation against Canada in defending our land
rights, title and interests in relation to Mii Stuksoo Wa.
That is why the Minister of Indian Affairs, upon reading the Adrian Stimson Sr. v. A.G.
Canada (2002, 2011) legal claim, decided to negotiate a land surrender deal in 2013
with Siksika Nation rather than risking a court battle. Siksika Nation will likely wins its
case against Canada.

5. The Promised Future Economic Opportunities Will Not Generate Any Long Term Revenues
or Employment for Siksika Nation Members
Re: Outlying Commercial Accommodations (OCAs) but within Banff National Park - Special
Leases for $1.00 per year:
(1) Castle Mountain Chalets
(2) Storm Mountain Lodge
(3) Castle Mountain Campground
(4) Castle Mountain Hostel
The "perpetual Head Leases" at a cost of $1.00 annually will all expire after 42 years of
effective date and the lease and any improvements to the properties will revert back to
Canada at the end of 42 years, unless Siksika Nation agrees to purchase the properties.
It reads:
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD for and during the term of forty-two (42) years
commencing on the _____ day of _____________, 20 , and ending on the ____
day of ________, 20, both days inclusive, ("Term"). (page 47)
The question is: Why only 42 years? What is the rational?
Re: Article 2.00 Use of Land (page 51). Parks Canada must approve all Future Economic
Opportunities under the Special Leases for $1.00 per year under the Park Management
Plan, the OCA Guidelines, and all other Park plans, guidelines and regulations.
New buildings or facilities are prohibited such as casinos, restaurants, golf courses, etc.
i.e., those facilities that generate revenue. (p. 51)
6. The $123.5 Million Settlement Offer by Canada Should Be Considered As Compensation
Only For Past Harms and Damages
The initial offer by Canada @ $123.5 million should be considered as compensation only for the
following harms and damages arising from IR 146C and should not be considered in any way as
compensation for certainty of title to the Mii Stuksoo Wa area: (see Adrian Stimson Sr. v. A.G.
Canada (2002, 2011) at pp. 21 - 26)

Andrew Bear Robe, Ph.D.| Bear Robe Management Consulting

Failure by Canada as a Trustee to respect the fact that Siksika IR 146C (Mii Stuksoo Wa)
is a reserve within the meaning of the Indian Act, title to which is vested in Siksika
Nation for its exclusive use and benefit.
Failure by Canada to respect the fact that Siksika Nation's interest in IR 146C is an
"existing" treaty right within the meaning of section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
Failure by Canada as a Trustee to provide accounting of the proceeds from the sale of
timber within IR 146C according to the terms of the Timber Surrender dated December
24, 1892 and failed to apply funds from the sale of the timber to the benefit of Siksika
Nation from 1892 to the present.
Failure by Canada as a Trustee to provide accounting for all rents, taxes, fees and other
monies collected and payable to Siksika Nation in respect of the use and unlawful
occupation of Siksika IR 146C.
Failure by Canada as a Trustee to protect and relinquishment of Siksika Nation's interest
in IR 146C without informing Siksika Nation or obtaining the consent of Siksika Nation or
complying with the Indian Act without proper and adequate consideration of Siksika
Nation's best Interests and without compensation to Siksika Nation.
Failure by Canada as a Trustee to administer Siksika IR 146C as a reserve under the
Indian Act for the exclusive use and benefit of Siksika Nation from 1908 to the present.
Canada misappropriated Siksika IR 146C and revenues generated from the said land for
its own benefit from 1892 to the present.
Canada unlawfully authorized third parties such as the C.P.R., Alberta Highways, timber
companies and current lease holders, i.e., Castle Mountain Chalets, Storm Mountain
Lodge, Castle Mountain Campground and Castle Mountain Hostel, to operate, use and
occupy Mii Stuksoo Wa for its own benefit from 1892 to the present without the
knowledge and consent of Siksika Nation.
Failure by Canada as a Trustee to rectify and restore Siksika Nation's interest in Siksika IR
146C upon receiving notice from Siksika Nation of its interest in Mii Stuksoo Wa.
Canada is in trespass and continues to authorize third parties to trespass on Siksika IR
146C.

Conclusion
Mii Stuksoo Wa is still part of the Blackfoot Indian Reserve #146, set aside by Treaty 7 and
protected by Canadian law, including section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. It is a misnomer
to call Mii Stuksoo Wa "a specific land claim". In effect, we are claiming our own land. It is like
claiming our own reserve at Siksika Nation That makes no sense at all. Siksika Nation can
negotiate a better deal than what is now being offered by Canada but we will need more
time to do just that. The political and legal landscape of Canada has greatly improved to our
benefit and Canada wants what we already have. It is still Clearing the Plains policy.
6

Andrew Bear Robe, Ph.D.| Bear Robe Management Consulting