Frequently Asked Questions

Does this case apply only to Sault Ste. Marie?
No. The Supreme Court set out a test for how a Metis community establishes a s. 35 right to hunt, as well as, who can exercise that right to hunt. This test will be applied to communities throughout the Metis Nation Homeland.

I have a membership card from one of the Metis National Council's Governing Members - can I hunt?
Yes, if you can also provide proof of an ancestral and ongoing connection to a historic Metis community in the territory where you are hunting. However, because the Metis National Council's Governing Members are at different stages in the development of their respective registry systems across the Homeland, a membership card alone may not be sufficient as proof. You must ensure you meet all three elements of the Powley test.

What does "ancestral connection" to the historic Metis community mean?
This means that one of your ancestors was a member of the historic Metis community.

How do we define a Metis community?

This is a difficult question that does not have a straight forward answer. The word "community" can be used in many different ways. It can be used to refer to a collective of individuals in one town or a larger regional collective identity or even the Metis Nation as a whole.

In Powley, the Court said that a "Metis community can be defined as a group of Metis with a distinctive collective identity living together in the same geographic area and sharing a common way of life." The Court found that there is a Metis community in and around Sault Ste. Marie, but it did not deny the possibility that this community may be a part of larger regional community or a distinct Aboriginal people. As well, in Blais, the Court said that Mr. Blais is "a member of the Manitoba Metis community". Issues with respect to identifying the extent of the local and regional communities that make up the Metis Nation will need to be determined through research, consultations with Metis citizens, and discussions with governments.

What is the extent of the territory my Metis community can harvest on?
In Powley, Steve and Roddy were hunting just outside the city of Sault Ste. Marie. They were well within the traditional harvesting territory of this Metis community. Therefore, the Court did not have to decide and did not decide on the exact extent (i.e. specifically how far outside of Sault Ste. Marie) of the traditional hunting territory of this Metis community. Traditional hunting territory usually refers to the area that was historically used and currently used by a Metis community in order to sustain itself. Determining the extent of the traditional hunting grounds of Metis communities will need to be addressed through land use studies, negotiations and agreements and/or litigation.

What other s. 35 rights do the Metis people have?
It is important to remember that the Powley case is only about the Metis right to hunt. However, the Court said that the general purpose of s. 35 for the Metis is to protect the "practices that were historically important features of these distinctive communities and that persist in the present day as integral elements of their Metis culture." Achieving certainty on other Metis rights protected in s. 35 will come through negotiations between the Metis and governments in Canada and/or litigation.

Does this case only have an effect on provincial governments - does the federal government have to do anything?

Yes. The federal government must respond to the Powley decision as well. Regardless of jurisdictional issues, the federal government cannot continue to deny or ignore the existence of Metis rights. All governments in Canada have a constitutional obligation to accommodate Aboriginal rights by ensuring their actions do not unjustifiably infringe on those rights.

Specifically, Metis communities throughout the Metis Nation Homeland may have existing harvesting rights on federal lands (National Parks, Department of National Defence Air Ranges) or on lands and resources shared between federal, provincial and territorial governments. These Metis harvesting rights must be accommodated. As well, existing federal policies, legislation and positions will need to be re-evaluated in light of the Powley decision. With these new realities, the Court's direction on the urgent need to identify Metis right holders engages the federal government as well.

Are there limitations on my harvesting rights?
Yes. Conservation, health and public safety are all possible limitations.

Did the Supreme Court define who the Metis people are?
No, in fact the Court states that it is only speaking of the Metis in s. 35 in general terms. The Court only set out three broad factors (self-identification, ancestral connection and community acceptance) to be used in identifying who can exercise a Metis community's s. 35 right to hunt. It remains the position of the Metis Nation that the right to determine who are members of the Metis Nation can only be exercised by the people themselves; however, in order to exercise a Metis community's s. 35 right to hunt, the Metis identification elements of the current legal test set out by the Supreme Court in Powley, must be met.

We didn't win Blais at the Supreme Court of Canada - does this mean Metis in the Prairie Provinces do not have harvesting rights?
No, Blais does not mean that. The loss in Blais just means that Manitoba Metis and likely Metis in Saskatchewan and Alberta cannot claim the additional constitutional protection for harvesting provided to "Indians" by virtue of the Natural Resources Transfer Agreements. However, based on the Powley test Metis communities in the Prairie Provinces can have harvesting rights protected by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. It is also important to note that the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench (R. v. Morin & Daigneault) has already held that scrip (regardless of its possible effect on Metis land title) did not extinguish Metis harvesting rights.

Is the Metis community at Sault Ste. Marie a "Metis people" by themselves?

No. The Court only decided that the Metis community at Sault Ste. Marie has an existing right to hunt protected by s. 35. In fact, the Court explicitly said that it did not decide "whether this community [Sault Ste. Marie] is also a Metis "people", or whether it forms part of a larger people that extends over a wider area...”.

The Metis Nation maintains its position that it is a distinct Aboriginal people in Canada recognized in s. 35. Sault Ste. Marie and other Metis communities throughout the historic Metis Nation Homeland are a part of the larger Metis Nation. These communities share a common history, language, way of life, culture and kinship connections to form a distinct "people" based on international law standards.

What has the Metis Nation done so far on identifying Metis rights holders?

September 2002, the Metis Nation adopted a national definition of Metis. Since that time, the Metis National Council's Governing Members have been ratifying this national definition in their respective provincial jurisdictions.

The next step for the Metis Nation will be to adopt an acceptance process and build upon or establish standardized and centralized Registries in each provincial jurisdiction based on the national definition of Metis for citizenship with in the Metis Nation. It is envisioned that these provincial Registries will be a part of an eventual national Metis Nation Registry. Governing Members are at different stages and capacities in this initiative and it is hoped that much needed resources will be made available in the near future to undertake this important work.

Are Metis harvesting rights the same as Indian harvesting rights?
In general, yes. Metis and Indians are to get the same priority allocations to the harvest. However, 1 some places Indian harvesting rights have been extinguished or are now set out in a treaty. In such cases, Metis may have harvesting rights that are different. On the Prairie Provinces, Indians may have two layers of constitutional protection - s. 35 rights and the Natural Resources Transfer Agreement (NRTA). Metis in Manitoba and likely Metis in Saskatchewan and Alberta, as a result of the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Blais, cannot claim the additional protection of the NRTA. This does not mean that Metis do not have constitutional protection for their harvesting rights in the Prairies, it simply means that Metis harvesting on the Prairies has only one layer of constitutional protection - s. 35.

What are the Metis National Council and its Governing Members doing following the release of the Powley decision?
Prior to the release of the Supreme Court's decision in Powley, the Metis National Council, on behalf of its Governing Members, had written to Canada requesting that a multilateral meeting involving the Metis Nation, Canada and provincial governments from Ontario westward be convened to discuss Metis harvesting and access to resources related issues. Further, the Metis National Council has made a request to the Federal Interlocutor for Metis to provide immediate resources in order to engage in a series of post-Powley transition initiatives (i.e. consultations with the Metis community, identification of Metis, development of Metis regulatory regimes, etc.). To date, the Federal Interlocutor has not formally responded on behalf of Canada. However, please check the Metis National Council's website regularly at www.metisnation.ca for updates. As well, please contact your respective Governing Member for additional information specific to your province. Finally, each Governing Member is at various stages of discussions and/or negotiations with their respective provincial government on Metis harvesting and access to resource issues. Inquiries on the status of these initiatives should be directed to your respective Governing Member.

Is there anything else I should keep in mind for this fall's harvest?
In line with the Metis Nation's values of conservation and ensuring public safety, please continue to exercise your rights responsibly and respectfully. There is going to be a need for a transition period for governments to come to grips with what the Court has said. This does not mean you should not exercise your community's right to hunt if you meet the Powley test. It just means that until governments sit down with the Metis Nation's governments to negotiate there is going to be some level of uncertainty and we cannot provide definitive answers to all questions. Please continue to be polite, be calm, be respectful and harvest responsibly this fall.