FIRST NATIONS/NATIVE AMERICANS PRESENTATIONS

Rick Peters, EAGLE Project, Assembly of First Nations

Greetings. My name is Rick Peters. I work with the EAGLE project for the Assembly of First Nations. We are the 'other' sector, as referred to in this document, but hopefully after the presentation, you'll get an idea that we are much more than that. I would like to thank everyone for being here. Neutz Wawwa. Thank you. Merci beaucoup. The Commissioners, the individual environmental groups, government agencies, etc. and to acknowledge their collective efforts in restoring the water quality of the Great Lakes basin. Also I would like to thank Great Lakes United for providing us with this opportunity.

At this point I will layout the framework of our presentation and will briefly address the various areas and we'll touch on consultation and participation, human health effects from our point of view, include social, cultural considerations. There's no difference between the two. Water quality, water quantity, persistent organic pollutants, biodiversity, and partner management schemes. We'll be submitting this document to the Commissioners in our request for some formal response on the recommendations in there.

At this time, I will personally address the context of the Boundary Waters Treaty and the GLWQA, briefly. After 25 years, it is time to review our participation (at this point it's not 25 years) but our capacity in these forums is changing. We have to ask ourselves some difficult questions. Does our participation solely benefit the mandate of governments as consultation or political correctness, and does our participation as First Nations and tribes, at the level of 'special interest groups,' or other sectors somehow negate and take away from our sovereign rights, our treaty rights and our aboriginal rights to self-government and self-determination? Does our participation in anyway directly benefit our communities? We raise these questions out of respect and out of our responsibility to our communities to ensure that the rights and obligations of all concerned are fulfilled. I wish to also raise a couple of other questions regarding "Do the Parties of the GLWQA recognize the inherent, sovereign rights, and the treaty rights of the First Nations and tribes and do they place any obligation on themselves not to pollute the boundary waters of First Nations communities? The answer is no. There is no evidence anywhere in the Agreement or the Boundary Waters Treaty. Efforts to preserve the Great Lakes ecosystem, do the Parties or the function of the IJC have they been involved in adopting common objectives, development and implementing cooperative programs and other measures with First Nations and tribal governments? No, there is no evidence anywhere in the reports or the functions of the IJC.

I'll skip through some of these obvious questions and obvious answers and get to the point of 'Has the Parties or the IJC responded to the past two recommendations put forth in Windsor Biennial Meeting in 1993? The Duluth meeting in 1995? To the calling for the appointment of the First Nations and tribal commissioners? No, there's no answer anywhere that the First Nations or tribes were even there. Correction, in 1993 there were some nice native art work on the cover of the Biennial reports. Things looked promising on the surface. Was there any response to the Duluth resolution put forward by the Grand Chiefs of Ontario who represents 134 First Nations governments in the Ontario basin; 63 of which are located directly on the basin? No, there was no evidence that he or any of the other First Nations representatives were there. So, regardless of the obvious answers to these questions, we've come back in the spirit of friendship and cooperation. Our elders have taught us to be patient people. It is through the spirit of friendship and cooperation that we put forward these recommendations. I'm running out of time.

The 1909 Treaty was signed during a period of overcolonization and assimilation of our people, during 1871 roughly through 1930. The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement was signed only three years after the 1969 White Paper Policy; both the GLWQA and the 1969 White Paper Policy were signed by Pierre Trudeau. The White Paper Policy was set forth to assimilate and eradicate the rights of First Nations people. The apparent absence of any meaningful legislative recognition of our inherent rights, treaty rights, and aboriginal rights suggests that this colonial mentality has been institutionalized and prevails in 1997. We do not surrender the care of the plants, the animals, the birds and the fish, or the water to the Canadian and U.S. governments. We do not surrender our right to help the environment within the boundaries of our own lands. We do not surrender the right to harvest healthy fish and wild game for our sustenance. We do not surrender our traditional way of life or the quality of that life to Canadian/U.S. governments. In summary, we do not surrender our lakes, our health or our future.

Pam Sky, member, Six Nations Confederacy, Cayuga Nation

Hello, my name is Pam Sky. I am a member of the Six Nations Confederacy of the Cayuga Nation. Also I am community member on the EAGLE project. My topic today would be human health effects on aboriginals in the Great Lakes basin. The three topics I would touch on today are: environmental contaminants, social/cultural impacts, and my recommendations.

First, I would like to talk about environmental contaminants. Aboriginal people in the Great Lakes basin are exposed to a large number of environmental contaminants which are causing severe health effects. For example, residues of chemicals, such as PCBs, DDT and dioxins have been found in the blood, fat, tissue and mother's breast milk. Also mercury has been detected in hair samples, hair analysis of aboriginal people. Toxic pollutants have been linked to cancers, birth defects, diabetes, reproductive and hormone-based disorders, immunological based disorders, such as asthma, emphysema and allergies, neurological disorders, auto-immune syndromes, and multiple chemical sensitivity. Aboriginal people are at a far greater risk because we rely on fish and wildlife for a large part of our diets, which brings me to my next topic, social/cultural impacts.

In many of our communities, there is a great concern about environmental contaminants and traditional foods. Our people are cutting back and sometimes eliminating the traditional foods -- consumption of fish and wildlife -- this sudden change in diet may be a contributing factor to the increase in diabetes, which in some of our communities has nearly reached epidemic proportions. There has been negative and devastating effects on the quality of life of our people in the sense that it has affected our psychological wellbeing. Therefore it is important that we assess the environmental impacts on the social/cultural being of our people. Now I would like to read off my recommendations to the IJC:

• The IJC should initiate specific research program to assess and monitor how and to what extent aboriginal people are particularly susceptible or exposed to environmental degradation and hazards. These should include, as necessary, research and data collection on specific subgroups of First Nations and tribal communities in the Great Lakes basin.
• The IJC should implement, through national and binational legislation, the protection of indigenous, traditional, ecological knowledge, innovations, practices and skills, including those concerning traditional medicines and biodiversity.
• The IJC should ensure that indigenous knowledge and technologies are protected, preserved and maintained, respected as envisaged in the convention on the biological diversity, safeguard their intellectual property rights, and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from such use of knowledge.
• The IJC should focus on the environmental contaminants that pose a threat to the quality of life in aboriginal communities.
• The IJC should apply a precautionary approach, as agreed to in the Rio Biodiversity Biodeclaration on Environment and Development, adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, and include reporting on aboriginal peoples' health risk related to the environment and monitoring use of Agenda 21.
• The IJC should also recommend to the Parties that amendments be made to the Agreements to ensure that aboriginal people, from both U.S. and Canada, be involved in all levels of decisionmaking regarding the preservation and protection of the Great Lakes ecosystem, including the appointment of two Commissioners to the IJC.

I would like to thank you for listening to me tonight.

Jackie Warledo, Great Lakes Region Indigenous Environmental Network

Greeting, my name is Jackie Warledo. I was born into the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma. I am with the Greenpeace Native Lands Toxics Campaign, and presenting on behalf of Great Lakes Region Indigenous Environmental Network.

In relationship to persistent organic pollutants, I want to address the areas of social/cultural and economic impacts. It has already been established that persistent organic pollutants have been associated with cancers, tumours, reproductive and developmental deficits, learning and behavioural disorders, immune system dysfunction and many other forms of trangenerational injury. We must realize that some regions in human populations are being disproportionately impacted, in particular, human populations that have cultures based upon an interaction and interdependence of its natural surrounding environment. This includes most indigenous peoples in the Great Lakes region. Societies will have to prepare for the growing number of people who will have special needs as a result of persistent organic pollutants, contamination, due to the likelihood of learning disabilities, the education system will have to make adjustments to meet their needs. As behavioural dysfunctions increase, there will be more institutions built to house the impacted. Will there be more medical prescriptions written for the control of behaviour? As immune systems weaken, medical care and treatment of diseases and illnesses will increase. Reproductive problems, birth defects and growing numbers of cancers and tumours will decrease opportunities to maintain a quality and long-term life, especially for our future generations.

There are economic costs to address the impacts that persistent organic pollutants will have on all of our societies. We could have a sick nation with an unemployable workforce. In terms of health costs and impacts, we can be looking at higher medical and life insurance rates. The need for specialized care for disabilities and handicapped persons, the construction and maintenance of health care facilities, health care providers, medicines and home-care programs. Welfare and social-service costs will increase with education and training of teachers, rehabilitation and training programs and special job programs. The question is who addresses the impacts of persistent organic pollutants on society, culture and the economy within our indigenous communities, as well as the broader general population?

First Nations and tribes of the Great Lakes region are affected through a traditional, cultural and religious relationship to the ecosystem in which we live, including subsistence on fish, game and vegetation. This relationship is deeply integrated into religious and cultural beliefs. Any disruption to these beliefs becomes a religious intolerance that violates basic principles of human rights. I have four recommendations:

• The first addresses the question that was raised earlier today. Recommendation #1. The IJC should recommend to the Parties that additional positions to the IJC be created that would be reserved for one First Nations representative from Canada and one Native American from the United States.
• Number 2. The IJC should again request that the governments of Canada and the U.S. live up to their international commitments in the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to virtually eliminate persistent organic pollutants and promote the use of alternatives to persistent organic pollutants that take into account the entire life-cycle of chemicals.
• The IJC and the Parties should be accountable to agreements, legislation, treaties, policies, commitments, executive order and international standards that they have already made or will enter in the future. Amendments should be made that address environmental justice issues.
• The IJC should recommend to the Parties that additional research and monitoring programs be implemented that identify and measure the extent of exposure, as well as sources of persistent organic pollutants in the Great Lakes region. These programs should involve community groups, health and environmental organizations, indigenous peoples and agencies. The results of the findings must also be distributed widely throughout the region.

Again, I ask, who addresses the impacts of persistent organic pollutants on society, culture and the economy within our indigenous communities as well as the broader general populations? Thank you.

Maxine Cole, First Nations

Good afternoon. Saygo. My name is Maxine Cole. I'm from the Mohawk Nation at Akwesasne, part of the Iroquois Confederacy, a mom, and a coordinator for the EAGLE project [Effects on Aboriginals in the Great Lakes Environment]. I would like to thank the Commissioners for providing the opportunity for us to speak to day. Thank you.

So the EAGLE project. Why are we different? I would like to talk about our goal, the approach that we use, the partnership approach, the various research components that we're involved in, the weight-of-evidence that has been gathered and recommendations to IJC.

What makes us different from other science that's out there? The key to the success of the EAGLE project has been its partnership approach which is underpinned by the spirit of respect and cooperation. The goal of the project has been to blend the knowledge, needs and issues of the First Nations people with western scientific methodology to further understand and document the effects of environmental contaminants on health and wellbeing. Presently our partnership includes 45 of the 63 communities in the study area, which is the drainage basin of these Great Lakes. These are active participants and together we have help pioneer a new approach to understanding effects of environmental contaminants on not only the health, but the wellbeing, the quality of life of the First Nations people.

The general approach has been to use the First Nations or tribal concept of health which goes beyond the physical health and includes mental, emotional and spiritual wellbeing also. This is the first research program in the basin of any significant scale that is gathering critical baseline data on the environmental health of First Nations, a population that has been identified as potentially at risk to exposure of environmental contaminants. Three questions have been asked of the project that we've sought and gathered evidence for: Which contaminants? The levels of those contaminants? And are there any health effects to the aboriginal population? Briefly, I will highlight some of our findings:

• The eating pattern survey was carried out to determine rates of consumption of fish and wild game for the aboriginal people within the basin. From that, we have proved that the average First Nation/Great Lakes resident's rate of consumption is on the same level as other high consumers within the basin.
• The data collected also supports and confirms that First Nations people continue traditional ways of life that include fishing for subsistence.
• The Freshwater Fish and Wild Game Program examines levels of contaminants. We cross-correlate the information that we received from the eating patterns survey to identify people at risk within the basin. As a result of identifying those people, we have developed health mechanisms and to communicate potential risk. One of the ways we have done that is to develop an innovative and dynamic software program that calculates individual and communities specific fish consumption guidelines for 34 First Nation communities within the basin.
• We have also collected blood sample for PCBs, organochlorines, heavy metals, toxaphene, and also hair samples for mercury.

Again the focus of our project has been the social/cultural impacts. In that program we have been able to assess the effects of environmental contaminants on the social/cultural wellbeing of First Nation individuals and communities. Evidence that we have gathered from three different perspectives, from three experts in their area of research, and the data have shown that urban industrial development has negatively impacted the traditional homelands of First Nations people in the basin. The result of that is that it has affected the quality of life for First Nations people. We've also found that the majority of our population is female and in the age group of 15 to 44. Therefore, there is significant concern about the transgenerational effects of contaminants.

The following recommendations are based on the weight-of-evidence, the ongoing research being conducted by the EAGLE project, and on the Agreement itself.

• The IJC should recommend that the Parties ensure a process is initiated that recognizes and affirms the inherent right of First Nations and tribal governments, and their role as legitimate parties in carrying out the goals and objectives of the GLWQA. Based on our traditional sustainable relationship with the environment, aboriginal people possess a wealth of information and knowledge which can only enhance the scientific and technical knowledge of existing research methods. The EAGLE project is evidence of that.
• Due to high consumption rates of fish, the average aboriginal person in the basin is on a level of risk that is comparable to other Great Lakes high consumers. Based on a review of current methods, both countries utilize a national average consumption rate of fish which is significantly lower than the average aboriginal consumption pattern. Therefore, the IJC should re-evaluate the water quality standards and develop fish consumption advisories based on the continuing research of the EAGLE project fish consumption guidelines.
• The IJC should include qualitative methods developed by First Nations tribes to measure the social/cultural impacts of environmental contaminants on their homelands.
• The IJC should integrate the weight-of-evidence being gathered in the EAGLE project's social/cultural program into the Commission's monitoring of human activity in the basin.
• The IJC should examine and document the impairment of beneficial use to the First Nations and tribal ecosystems and designate First Nations tribes as populations of concern.
• The IJC should also undertake an evaluation of the environmental health status of First Nations and tribes and recommend to the Parties that homelands of the aboriginal peoples in the Great Lakes ecosystem be designated as additional Areas of Concern.
• The IJC should institute multi-partnerships at all levels with First Nations and tribal governments in the Great Lakes basin from the technical to the political. The Commission should establish a special advisory and/or technical group to deal with First Nations and tribes ecosystems in the basin.
• Based on the existing boundaries, jurisdictions and forms of governments of First Nations and tribes, there are more than two Parties sharing these water of the Great Lakes, therefore, the IJC should insist that Parties recognize the inherent aboriginal rights and treaty rights of First Nations and tribes. There should be THREE Parties to this Agreement, through one of the following procedures: (1) the IJC should designate two of the existing Commissioners' positions for First Nations tribes, one from Canada, one from the U.S., or (2) the IJC should recommend to the Parties that two additional Commissioners positions be created and that they be filled by appointment from First Nations in Canada, and tribes in the U.S.

The scope of these recommendations should be implemented through genuine spirit of friendship and cooperation in protecting and preserving the Great Lakes ecosystem, because that's why we are all here today. Neow. Thank you for listening. Scanow.

Tom Goto, National Coordinator, Indigenous Environmental Network

Greetings. Mawoopada, Great Lakes United, also Woopada to the EAGLE project and this presentation by all of us as well as myself is to the Commissioners that you can convey our voices, our words and our prayers here to the appropriate people that represent the United States and Canada. My name is Tom Goto. I am National Coordinator for the Indigenous Environmental Network. We also are affiliated with the Great Lakes Regional Indigenous Environmental Network. I reside in Minnesota. I am a member of the Obidowaka Dakota Optiye band of eastern Dakota in Minnesota as well as my mom being Navajo from the southwest.

Today I want to put up this symbol here. You can even include New York state on there as well. That provides an example of the differences that we have between our cultures and our populations. We have two sets of laws here. We have the wampum which is the relatives of the longhouse, and underneath there, we have the New York state department, but that symbolizes the other laws that we go by and there is a big difference here.

My presentation is going to be on the biodiversity issue. Native peoples of the Great Lakes region, we are of the water, and the water is of us. It is through this great land that our lifewaves are connected to the spirits of the Great Lakes. We are of the earth, and it is through the water and the earth and the sacred breath of air that makes us able to share the guidance of the sacred fire that enlightens our mind and warms our heart.

This is our circle of life, our biological diversity. It is from this great circle that we are all related and connected to one another. We need each other for survival. This is what modern people call biological diversity. From this circle of life, many of our families are related and related to clans such as through the bear clan, turtle, kingfisher and many others. We have that relationship to the animals and the habitat. As native people of this North America, we understand the concept of the word biodiversity and many of our tribal traditional societies have certain laws given to us by the Creator and sacred spirit that we must follow and are not in the position to break or to negotiate. These certain laws have been passed down from generation to generation and have allowed us to maintain sustainable communities and a harmonious way of life on our earth mother for thousands of years.

The biodiversity of the Great Lakes is strong in cultural and spiritual significance. There's a couple of factors I need to mention. There are special places in the waters and lands that have historical significance to native peoples that can be part of our creation stories. It is part of our genesis. It could be where spiritual beings, significant to our culture, once lived or where they took part in historical moments in time. It could be a place of sacredness where spiritual pilgrimages, where fasting and prayer took place. It could be a place in our aura history that we value in certain ways that are significant to our people that is not valued or understood by the non-native people. These cultural and spiritual concerns are very sensitive resources that are highly valued to our communities. It has been a challenge for over 500 years for the non-native person, their historians, their scientists, their religious and political leaders, to understand and to value and respect those things we hold sacred.

In the areas of risk assessment, we know that risk assessment and risk management is one of the activities that determine environmental policy. And we are very concerned that in the application of use and risk assessment that there is no consultation or reaching out or inclusion of those certain values that are dear to us. It is quite interesting that there's a challenge of how you even begin to quantify those things that are very spiritual in nature to our people. The Creator made this land with certain features and characteristics throughout the many cycles of life and through the continual natural changes of earth mother. The ecological systems were created that support our biodiversity. I am not going to go into some of the issues. A lot of the issues were talked about as far as the impacts, toxic, the whole nuclear fuel chain, those comments have been made in other testimonies. Definitely there is a whole chain of contaminants and pollutants that are impacting our people in the Great Lakes basin. However, I need to mention that when it comes to these developments, there's ecological impacts, we know that there's evidence here that there's toxic impacts, radioactive impacts and when it comes to environmental assessments and environmental impact statements, there aren't any consideration of certain cultural and spiritual values in those assessments and that definitely needs to be done.

The United States has recognized that a disproportionate siting of polluting industries within people of colour and native communities and territories, and developing federal environmental justice policies to address this issue. In our communities a lot of us are just beginning to develop those infrastructures to find and prioritize and address these environmental issues. This is something that the Commission should be very aware of. Another area, biodiversity I'll need t mention, is the area of protection of native ecological knowledge, our traditional knowledge and intellectual property rights. Those were mentioned by one of our other associates here. I won't repeat that, but we are concerned that both federal agencies often fail to regulate whole classes of genetically engineered creatures that could negatively impact the Great Lakes biodiversity.

We do have recommendations. I recommend that the IJC develop an action plan with timelines with the following items:

• an action plan that would create two additional Commission positions that would be reserved for one First Nations representative from Canada, and one Native American representative from United States. This action plan will provide a policy for the process of selection, appointment and maintenance of the positions. This would be consistent with federal mandates of Canada and U.S. to institute collaborative and consultative processes between the two governments, their agencies, and tribal governments and First Nations band councils. This would ensure native participation in the implementation of Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. U.S. tribal governments in the Great Lakes basin are implementing tribal water quality standards and have legal standing on developments in water quality impact activities outside the tribal reservation boundaries. This emerging authority of tribes in water quality standards within state jurisdictions further justifies the need for native representation on the Commission.
• Development and implementation of First Nations tribal task force, within IJC, to collect data, evaluate and make recommendation to the Commission concerning native environmental justice issues, impacted native populations in the Great Lakes basin. Impact areas will include not just rural reserves and reservation areas, but also urban areas with significant native populations, as determined by the task force.

We have further recommendations, but I won't go into that. That's included in the publication you have in hand. But we also want to make sure that it's diversity on there, of traditional leaders and our native people involved with these issues as well as the band councils and tribal council representatives. We do want to request that the development and implementation of a process within the Biennial reporting mechanism, whereby the Commission shall provide an assessment of its development activities and implementation of a native and environmental justice initiative.

Within the interests of protection of the biodiversity of the Great Lakes, the Commission will develop a resolution with recommendations to the Governments of Canada and U.S. to develop biological safety protocols concerning biological experimentation, genetic technology, biological prospecting and the release and transfer of genetically-engineered organisms. Recognition of the collective rights of Native peoples to intellectual property rights and traditional knowledge shall be included as well as benefit-sharing protocols and policies with Native Americans. Consistent with implementation of the GLWQA, international standards are being developed within the United Nations member states and as such as the Convention for Biological Diversity, the Convention on Sustainable Development, Agenda 21, we request that these international instruments be ratified by Canada and U.S. governments and it would provide further support in the implementation of the goals of the GLWQA.

The Commission through its joint relationship between the governments of Canada and the U.S. must develop policies that would recognize and be consistent with the executive order that United States has on environmental justice which is Executive Order 12898, dated February 11, 1994. This order focuses federal attention on environmental and human health conditions of minority communities and low-income communities and calls on agencies to make achieving environmental justice part of their mission. The order requires federal agencies to develop strategies to help bring justice to all citizens who are disproportionately affected by pollution.

At this time, I don't see that IJC has any policy on addressing environmental justice issues, definitely in all decisions that they do make, I would strongly suggest that you consider developing an environmental justice policy because as you look in the audience, there are other populations, people of colour, African American, Mexican American, Asian and we need more of our native people at this table in order assure that environmental justice is being recognized and that all people have equal opportunities to be part of your decisionmaking process. Thank you.

Eric Johnson, Assembly of First Nations

Good afternoon, my name is Eric Johnson. I am with the Assembly of First Nations. My formal training is probably more of being a fisherman from a community on Lake Huron basin.

Aboriginal people have had probably the longest standing conflict over landuse and environmental health. I think a lot of this prevents local people from viewing us as a decent cultured people who could champion the causes of public good. This leaves us to talk about the fundamentals of our relationship with each other. The point I am trying to arrive at is that the IJC mandate does not necessarily have to be limited to the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and the more recent additions to the GLWQA. Aboriginal treaties bring a separate but fundamental and constitutionally recognized personalities to environmental concerns. Aboriginal treaties encircle the Great Lakes systems which strategically places these rights in the centre of freshwater concerns and increases their value in advancing freshwater protection, plus strengthen federal presence in environmental issue as possible through the bilateral relationships and obligations that such treaties have established with aboriginal people. Still aboriginal knowledge have the potential to make significant contributions to future legislation and policy.

The IJC, in addressing freshwater concerns, requires a broad constitutional basis in addition to enabling legal framework that can implement treaty wide and local community environmental protections. If the IJC is to address the magnitude of the environmental damage that is eminent from increased development, it cannot afford to be reduced to managers of crises created by government agencies who are committed to private stakeholder and economic resource partnerships. A significant concern exists with the public representation and democracy in Ontario and the federal government's current approach to private stakeholder management. Ironically, it is the business interests, the private interests that governments have used as the criteria to identify potential partners in management. A shrinking provincial management system questions the ability of Ontario's management agency to represent a collective of interests and actions on question of public health and sustainable resource issues. This conflicts with a larger purpose associated with the IJC.

Leadership in freshwater issues require the ability to negotiate the future compromises needed to implement freshwater protections and the courage to act on behalf of the environmentally disadvantaged. A federation of private interests will lack any incentive as decisionmakers if the only benefit is to be environmental health. Basically, aboriginal people and local communities are forced to surrender the health of future generations if public resources are to be managed under the private sector. The IJC must examine public stakeholders within this brand of corporate management. The IJC should give meaningful participation to aboriginal treaty governments in addition to local community involvement as described under our Article 8J of the Convention on Biological Diversity. In this instance, the Convention's Article provides the fundamental distinguishment required to see the private/public conflict of self interest and public good. Aboriginal people and local communities must be viewed as future managers as opposed to local consumers. Aboriginal people and local communities must be allowed the opportunity to be the public-minded decisionmakers for local environment. The IJC must examine the no-net-loss policy principle as it has no basis within the Canadian Constitution, nor does it provide a basis to reconcile the additional costs of restoring habitat and those costs linked to the health care that are a result of a contaminated environment and big business. This principle with no reference to biodiversity or ecosystem-based management is in reality a corporate model to minimize environmental costs associated to private enterprise. In addition, the IJC must be conscious of the environmental threats represented by the powerful international corporate alliances who have consolidated these interests under the world trade organization. This international organization now seeks on behalf of its membership key concessions as freedom from government regulation through multi-lateral trade agreements. Finally, the federal and provincial governments have diminished protective legislation that was available to local communities and environments. The IJC must acknowledge that this abandonment of responsibilities by crown governments does not diminish the responsibility of aboriginal government to their treaties and the people who inhabit their territories.

The key recommendation that I would have for the IJC is, of course, to consolidate the federal obligation that are available under treaties, in addition to Article 8J and how it describes the participation of local communities in the protection and management of biodiversity ecosystems.

The last comment I would make and recommendation would be that the IJC acknowledge the role that aboriginal fishing communities can offer and monitoring freshwater contamination. This monitoring includes the stocking of exotics and their impacts on biodiversity of natural fish stocks. The IJC must commit to disallowing of such private interests and partnership to define conservation for Canada, Ontario and the local communities that will be impacted by private sector interests and objectives. Thank you.

Walt Bresette, Lake Superior Chippewa

There is an international conspiracy afoot. I had prepared a presentation. I am a visiting professor at Michigan Technological University, and United Airlines picked me up and missed their connecting flight in Chicago, and Air Canada brought me the rest of the way up and lost my luggage, so my presentation is missing! So I have to create as I go along here. I bring some tobacco which I found in my bag as a gift that we must always give.

Who has ever heard of Rodney King? Ever hear of him? He's this guy over in the U.S. Two things of significance, I bring: one is his comments after the fact is that we must all work together. But why did he say that was evident in the video tape. And I am here to suggest that the video tape is before us. The evidence is here. I don't even think the jury is out, I think they are being held hostage. I don't think there is anything new I could say or bring. I don't think there's any profounder research that would augment anything more to suggest that we are under assault. Perhaps bodies is what we need, which will finally move people to action. The body count is indeed growing.

I am going to make up my presentation. I am going to talk about sovereignty and since my bag is missing, I have to create as I go along.

This is sovereignty. Everyone had it. They had a 50-dollar bill and they had four twenties at creation. Yeh, you had it too. Over the course of time, we lost some of our sovereignty, or gave it up, or consolidated it, or we codified it in various forms whether it was the Bible or whether it was the Magna Carta or the British North American Act, or the U.S. Constitution, or the Patriation Initiative in the 80s in Canada. In various ways that sovereignty given by the Creator has been eroded or we by choice, have given up. We've changed our method of communications.

I am here to suggest to the IJC and to others that the remaining sovereignty which exist with native people, particularly as it applies to the sacred waters, where I come from, of Lake Superior and where Eric comes from on Lake Huron and Georgian Bay, is not for you to decide what's to be done about it, it's up to the Creator in that compact and relationship and that agreement and that treaty between us, given to us as aboriginal as indigenous that the sovereignty and the protection of that comes from the Creator and from the Creation. And this last $20 bill represents that long history of sovereignty. And it's up to you to take the last $20 as representatives of the nation states of the United States and Canada, and the subunits thereof, of the province of Ontario, states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and others. It's up to you to take that last piece of sovereignty. It's not for you to give to us. I don't come here asking permission to speak. The Creator gave me permission to speak. I come here to let you know that that's what's going on now. When Tom Gotu talks about environmental justice, the flip side of that is environmental racism. That's really what we are talking about and the policies which are not being implemented, codified in all those agreements that you have signed from the IJC to your Constitution says that you must; you have a fiduciary responsibility. You have a legal obligation to look out for the interests, a legal property trust responsibility to look out for the interest of those you've captured -- meaning indigenous people. It's a legal duty, it's not something that because you're nice people, you must do it. It's a legal obligation.

Now, you've heard of Rodney King, have you heard of Chief Joseph? What did he say? "We will fight no more forever." But he didn't say that he wasn't going to sue. It's that legal standing that Eric talks about that will enable us to eventually come to the place and hopefully, you will come to that place as well -- where we can come together. It becomes tiring being the conscience of the nation's states. We must do it, of course. Eventually, we will come to that place because there's no other choice. The evidence is here. How many more studies do we need on mercury? How many? It's here! We have the video tapes! So, we will continue to be your conscience because in doing so, we defend our sovereignty.

What we need is for you to become our scientists. We need that symbiotic relationship. We need you to once more become our regulators, if that is the role that you continue to choose to elect. But the question is why can't you do that. It has to do with what that other guy said, Bill Clinton, when he said that ". . . it is the economy, stupid!" So, our scientists and our resource managers cannot do their job, or they are being ignored because of political reasons and the reason they are being ignored for political reasons is because the multi-national cartel which is surrounding the Great Lakes and engaged in the body count against indigenous populations and violation of international and national law, is being allowed to go on. There's been a bloodless coup amongst our governments, and native people are dying as a result of it.

I am here before the IJC to say if you need help, if you need bodyguards, if you need someone to mouth off, if you need somebody to point out to your leaders what your scientists and resource managers are telling you and the rest of the world, we can do that for you. We would be willing to do that, but we need to do that together. We need to come to the place where the multi-national cartel which has no national interests but only bottom-line interest needs to be put back in its place so that the citizens, indigenous and otherwise can once more be protected under those codified agreements and constitutions. That's the problem. There has been a dismantling of that balance.

In Ontario this past week, we witnessed the teacher's saying 'no more.' That's not an anomaly. Unless you act, your resource managers and your scientists are going to be the same place where the teachers are. They are going to be finally in the same place where native people have been all this time. That's the coming together that's going to occur on the streets, in the bush, on the lakeshore. I'd prefer it happened in a diplomatic setting, but in order for that to happen, the diplomats need to take action. Native people are, and will, and will continue, and more of your people will join us in that process. We would prefer doing it here and we await the action that you need now to take in order to resolve these issues. Neeg wich! [aboriginal thank you ?]