Author:Lori Barkley (Selkirk College)
Paper short abstract:
In 2016 an expert witness argued an acre of land, a milk cow, and a garden were sufficient to support a family. BC government officials referred to hunting rights as a “pie”, which was insufficient to further share. This paper explores using (in)sufficient foods to limit Sinixt rights in BC.
Paper long abstract:
In the fall of 2016 charges against a Sinixt (Lakes) hunter from the Colville Confederated Tribes in Washington state were heard in BC Criminal court. This case is significant as Sinixt were classified as "extinct" by the Canadian government in 1956. An anthropologist expert witness for the prosecution argued that an acre of land, a milk cow, and a garden were sufficient to support a family, while BC government officials referred to hunting rights as a "pie", which was insufficient to further share. The prosecution proposed hunting was no longer "integral to Sinixt" and that they moved south to "enthusiastically pursue farming" and, by doing so, had given up their rights to Sinixt traditional territory in BC. This paper will explore the use of (in)sufficient foods as justification to limit Sinixt aboriginal rights and title in British Columbia, Canada.
Indigenous movement and anthropologists