Negative Impacts in the Aftermath of the Nisga’a Treaty
Following the decision of the signing of the Nisga’a Treaty with the Nisga’a Nation on April 13, 2000, a great number of Final Agreement provisions were fulfilled, including the transfer of nearly 2,000 (1) square kilometers of Crown land to the Nisga’a Nation, the establishment of a 300,000 (2) cubic decameter water reservation, the establishment of an aboriginal self-government, and a cash payment/compensation of 190 (3) million to the Nisga’a Nation. Since then, things took drastic changes in BC, both in terms of its economy, and the land claims. The leaving behind of a great number of essential issues unsolved in the final draft of the agreement also caused controversies and problems in the post-treaty period. Although the treaty aimed to benefit Canada’s economy and to work out mutually acceptable relationships between Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal people, the number of negative impacts during the six years of post-treaty period by far outnumbered the positive ones.
Despite the fact that several industries benefited somewhat over the six years of post-treaty period, the treaty has financially burdened, not only the Canadian Government and the British Columbians, but as well as the Nisga’a first nations themselves. With regards to the fish industry, Eric Grandison as the communications coordinator of the Nisga’a Lisims government pointed out that, as of October 2004, hundreds of Nisga’as are now managing to make $6,000 to $20,000 (4) a season, fishing or collecting mushrooms and qualifying for employment insurance over the winter. However, as the communication coordinator of the Nisga’a Lisims government, Grandison must have purposely neglected the decrease in house income after the Nisga’a government made decision to restrict the annual allowable catch in the Nass River to 600 (5) fish per household. As a fearless Nisga’a first nation, Gerald Clayton responded with opposition, saying that he preferred it before the Nisga’a government restricted the amount of salmon he could catch and sell. From this, one could clearly tell that the fishing industry had been better off before the treaty. Equally as important was the fact that $175.5 (6) million was generated from the federal government to the Nisga’a Nation in which $14.5 (7) was generated from the province of BC. Although one may certainly say that BC was getting more of its taxation money back from the federal government since the treaty because the federal would now have to make the same amount of distribution it used to give to BC plus another significant amount to the Nisga’a. Although the Nisga’a Nation gained a great deal of money from this treaty, closer scrutiny revealed the limits of Nisga’a financial freedom. For one, there is the cost of negotiations-a $51.3 million loan to be repaid to the federal government within fifteen years. From here, one could clearly see the burden the Nisga’a Nation carried upon receiving the loan of $51.3 from the federal government. There was also the cash payout of $4.5 million as each of the three hundred Nisga’a elders, sixty years or older, receives a one-time $15,000 payment. Worse still, the Liberals later on also admitted to have had a budget of spending $30 (8) million to build a road from Lakalzap to the isolated village of Ginglox at the mouth of the Nass-something not mentioned in the treaty-on top of the $41 (9) million upgrade of the Nisga’a Highway, which was included. The pro-Nisga’a advertising budget which increased from the initial $2.3 (10) million to more than $7 (11) million had further burdened the economy of BC. The forest industry production represented about 34 (12) cents of every dollar of income in Nisga’a. Since the transition period, about fifty or so full-time contracting positions originally held by non-aboriginals on their lands, were filled in by the formerly unemployed Nisga’a people. Of course one could say that after all the job employment rate of the Nisga’as has increased. But this only resulted in a greater loss in forestry revenue due to the Nisga’a workers’ lacking of proficiency in operating machines during the transition period. Some might argue that this was just an act of justice for the Nisga’a right after some 103 years of endeavoring to gain justice. However, overall, Canada’s economy was burdened after the signing of the Nisga’a Treaty since 1998, resulting in loss of revenue for the country.
