Indigenizing Water Governance within Treaty Lands and ...

Indigenizing Water Governance within Treaty Lands and Territory

Development of Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation Water

Framework

by

Reneeacute Joy Goretsky

A Thesis

presented to

The University of Guelph

In partial fulfilment of requirements

for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in

Rural Studies

Guelph Ontario Canada

copy Reneeacute Goretsky May 2021

ABSTRACT

INDIGENIZING WATER GOVERNANCE WITHIN TREATY LANDS AND TERRITORY DEVELOPMENT OF MISSISSAUGAS OF THE CREDIT FIRST NATION WATER

FRAMEWORK

Reneeacute Goretsky

University of Guelph 2021

Advisors

Dr Sheri Longboat

Dr Kim Anderson

Professor John FitzGibbon

This research asked lsquohow can water governance be Indigenized within a social justice

frameworkrsquorsquo in response to Canadian water governance injustices for Indigenous

peoples It applied this question to the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nationrsquos (MCFN)

need for developing a water framework to Indigenize water governance within its treaty

lands and territory as a partial resolution to its 2016 Water Claim (Aboriginal Title Claim

to Waters within the Traditional Lands of the Mississaugas of the New Credit)

Through an emergent MCFN context-specific research methodology adapted from

Kovachrsquos Indigenous research framework this research explored MCFNrsquos water values

and how they related to MCFNrsquos Water Claim to develop a water framework and it aimed

to decolonize constructs of social justice and western water governance

Using qualitative community-based participatory research methods the key findings

underpinned by a literature-based conceptual framework were 1) MCFNrsquos water values

were multi-faceted and interdependent within plural and intersecting Indigenous identities

shaped by historical and contemporary colonial influences and Indigenous resistances

2) The meanings of MCFNrsquos Water Claim correlating to their water values were Healing

Ourselves by reconnecting with our Anishinaabe culture Protecting the water having a

say and Sustaining Ourselves by reclaiming our inherent Aboriginal title and treaty

rights 3) MCFNrsquos multi-dimensional Water Framework based on the Water Claim

meanings centralizes Water is Life and embraces principles objectives and suggested

actions for MCFNrsquos implementation 4) MCFNrsquos Water Framework as social justice for

reconciliation related to MCFNrsquos agency in reclaiming and reconstituting its rights culture

and voice within respectful relationships and social transformations rather than Fraserrsquos

model of economic (re)distribution political representation and cultural recognition and

5) MCFNrsquos Water Framework supports the reconceptualization of the resource-based

Canadian water governance to values of interconnectedness respect and

responsibilities This is how MCFN sees itself Indigenizing water governance within its

treaty lands and territory and contributing to the larger water governance Indigenizing

movements

The research was significant because it directly addressed a community need expanded

on Indigenous research methodologies and decolonized western constructs to shift the

power hierarchy between the colonizer and Indigenous peoples towards respectful

relationships

iv

DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis to my husband best friend and love of my life Allen Goretsky

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I acknowledge Niibi as life the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation for welcoming me

into their community and participating in this research and the Water Committee for

contributing and being involved in all aspects of this research A special thank you goes

to Darin Wybenga and Mark La Forme for steering the project forward Also thank you to

Chief and Council for endorsing this research

A huge thank you goes to my supervisor Dr Sheri Longboat and my PhD Advisory

Committee members Dr Kim Anderson and Professor John FitzGibbon who provided

endless advice and guidance throughout my doctoral research and Professor John

FitzGibbon who provided funding for my research activities

I thank my family who provided support and encouragement especially my husband

Allen and my sister Lorna who assisted me during challenging times

I acknowledge the following funding support for my doctoral degree

The University of Guelph School of Environmental Design and Rural Development and

the South African National Research Foundation

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ii

Dedication iv

Acknowledgements v

Table of Contents vi

List of Tables x

List of Figures xi

List of Images xiii

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms xiv

List of Appendices xv

1 Introduction 1

Research Problem 1

MCFNrsquos Research Need 3

Research Question and Objectives 7

Thesis Organization 8

Notes on Terminology 8

2 Literature Review 10

Governance and Water 10

Indigenous Identities 20

Indigenous Peoples in Canada 30

Canadian Water Governance and Indigenous Peoples 34

Indigenous Peoplesrsquo Responsibilities and Water Rights 36

Social Justice 43

Chapter Conclusions 49

vii

3 The Research Collaboration and MCFNrsquos Context 52

Establishing a Research Collaboration 52

MCFN Today 55

MCFNrsquos History Related to the Water Claim 58

MCFNrsquos Historical and Contemporary Contexts in Relation to its

Creation Story 65


4 Methodology Framework and Methods 70

Self-location 70

Research Framework and Principles 72

A MCFN Research Framework 76

Co-engagement 76

From a relational paradigm to a multiple-research paradigm approach 77

From Indigenous values and ethics to community values and ethics 81

From Indigenous cultural protocols to community protocols 82

From gathering knowledge to a Community-Based Participatory

Research 84

Making meanings of knowledge gathered from Indigenous to multiple

perspectives 85

Research Methods 88

Participants and selection 88

Research phases activities and timeframes 89

Knowledge gathering activities 92

Analysis of Knowledge Gathered 102

viii

Knowledge gathered from conversations group discussions youth

group and LSK Elementary School students 102

Knowledge gathered from the survey 104

Interviews with conservation agencies 104

Research Integrity Robustness and Credibility 104

Research Ethics and Data Management 106

Research Methodsrsquo Limitations 108

5 MCFN Water Values 110

The Importance of Water to MCFN and Why 110

Historical and Contemporary Contexts Shaping MCFNrsquos Identities and

Water Values 124

MCFNrsquos physical separation from water bodies 126

MCFNrsquos cultural and spiritual disconnections from water 128

Relating MCFNrsquos water values to identities embedded in historical and

contemporary contexts 131

MCFNrsquos water values for future generations 132


6 The Meaning of the Water Claim to MCFN 138

The Meanings of the Water Claim 138

Healing Ourselves 143

Protecting the water 145

Sustaining Ourselves 149

ix

Relating the Meanings of the Water Claim to MCFNrsquos Multi-dimensional

Water Values and Plural and Intersectional Identities 153


7 MCFNrsquos Water Framework 160

MCFNrsquos Water Framework 161

MCFNrsquos Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance within Treaty

Lands and Territory 168

MCFNrsquos Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance within a

Social Justice Framework 173

Canadarsquos Water Governance Authoritiesrsquo Reflections on the Water Claim 179

MCFNrsquos Reflections on Canadian Water Governance 183


8 Thesis Conclusions and Implications 188

81 Main Findings Summary and Conclusions 189

82 Research Contributions 194

821 Theoretical Contributions 194

822 Methodological Contributions 195

823 Empirical Contributions 196

83 Research Strengths and Challenges 198

84 Future Opportunities and Research Questions 200

85 Self-reflection and closing 203

References 205

Appendices 238

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 21 Water governance definitions by Bakker (2003) Rogers and

Hall (2003) and OECD (2015) 15

Table 22 Connections between the three main Indigenous constructs to

terms used by Benjamin (2017) and Frideres (2008) 28

Table 31 Treaties between MCFN and the Crown leading to MCFNrsquos

land cessations 62

Table 41 Detailed summary of research phases activities and timeframes 91

Table 42 Groupsrsquo discussions and number of people attending each group 95

Table 61 Percentage of survey and key-informant responses by gender age

and onoff reserve locations to each of the Water Claimrsquos three topics 155

Table 71 MCFNs Water Framework actions arranged by objective 167

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 11 MCFNs treaty lands and territory 4

Figure 21 Western water governance as a system (adapted from Meadows

2008 systemrsquos thinking) 18

Figure 22 Fraserrsquos (2009) three-dimensional theory of justice expanded by

Lukasiewicz and Baldwin (2014) conceptions of social justice 47

Figure 23 Linking the four conceptual framework tenets to the

research objectives 51

Figure 31 Relief map of Ontario showing southern Ontario in relation to the

Great Lakes 53

Figure 32 Map of First Nations communities in southern Ontario 54

Figure 33 Geographic location of the New Credit Reserve in relation to

MCFNs treaty lands and territory 56

Figure 41 Research framework reflective of a research team being

co-researchers Adapted from Kovach (2009) 75

Figure 42 An emergent MCFN context-specific research framework

Adapted from Kovach (2009) 87

Figure 43 Research phases activities and timeframes 90

Figure 44 Students at LSK Elementary School creating their artworks 98

Figure 51 Poster notes from all the adult group discussions except Chief

and Council in relation to the importance of water to MCFN members 115

Figure 52 Youth groups artwork in relation to the importance of water

to MCFN members 116

Figure 53 Artwork from LSK Elementary School students in relation to

the importance of water to MCFN members 117

Figure 54 Summary of the five themes emerging from the key-informants

adult groups and youth related to the importance of water 118

xii

Figure 55 Percent of survey responses from MCFN adults on the

importance of water to MCFN members 118

Figure 56 MCFNrsquos water values as they interconnect with each other 122

Figure 61 Framing the meanings of the Water Claim from the

key-informants and group discussions 143

Figure 62 Example of an artwork by a LSK Elementary School student

(Grade 8) on protecting the water 147

Figure 63 Artwork by MCFN youth group on protecting the water 148

Figure 64 The meanings of the Water Claim to the survey respondents 153

Figure 65 Relating Water Claim meanings to MCFN participantsrsquo water

values and Indigenous identities 154

Figure 66 MCFN participantsrsquo connections to each of the three Water

Claim topics by intersectional identities of gender age and

onoff reserve locations 156

Figure 71 MCFNs Water Framework principles based on the meanings

of the Water Claim to Indigenize water within their treaty lands

and territory 163

Figure 72 Percent of survey respondents indicating their support for

the proposed MCFN Water Framework goals 164

Figure 73 MCFNs Water Framework objectives associated to the principles 166

Figure 74 A reconceptualization of western water governance based on


Figure 75 MCFN survey participants responses to the Water Claim as

a reconciliation process 174

Figure 76 The range of Conservation Authoritiesrsquo representatives

understandings of their water management roles 180

Figure 81 Examples of specific future research questions for implementation

research arising from this research 202

xiii

LIST OF IMAGES

Image 1 The pair of moccasins gifted to me by the Water Committee 198

xiv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

DOCA Department of Consultation and Accommodation

ILO International Labour Organization

MCFN Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation

MNCFN Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation

OCAP Ownership Control Access and Possession

OECD Organization for Economic Co-operations and Development

RCAP Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples

TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission

UN United Nations

UNDRIP United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization

UoG University of Guelph

xv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Summary of institutional water governance arrangements in Canada 238

Appendix 2 MCFNrsquos Creation Story - Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin 241

Appendix 3 University of Guelph Research Ethics Board Approval 243

Appendix 4 Information Letter and Informed Consent Form for Key Informant

Conversations 245

Appendix 5 Schedule One-on-One Key-Informant Conversations Schedule with

MNCFN Adult members 251

Appendix 6 Information Letter and Informed Consent Form for Adult Group

Discussions 253

Appendix 7 Group Discussion with MNCFN Adult members Guiding Probes 259

Appendix 8 Information Letter and Informed Consent Form MNCFN Youth Group 260

Appendix 9 Group Activity Schedule with MNCFN Youth Group 265

Appendix 10 Parental Information Letter Class Lesson on Water at

Lloyd S King Elementary School 266

Appendix 11 LSK Elementary School Class Lesson Script (35 minutes) 268

Appendix 12 MNCFN Water Framework Survey 270

Appendix 13 Information Letter and Consent Form Interviews with Conservation

Authorities 278

Appendix 14 Semi-structured Interview Schedule - With Canadian Water

Management Authorities 282

Appendix 15 Research Team Agreement 284

1

1 Introduction

Research Problem

Indigenous peoples1 in Canada assert their rights2 to self-determination through

international ie the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

(UNDRIP 2007) and national ie section 35 part II of the Canadian Constitution Act

(1982) section 25 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) the Royal Commission

on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP 1996) and the Truth and Reconciliation Commissionrsquos

(TRC) Calls to Actions (2015a) efforts Included in these rights Indigenous peoples in

Canada emphasize their rights to be responsible to protect and care for water given

the central role of water for Indigenous peoples (McGregor 2009 2014 2015 2016

2018a Anderson et al 2013 Longboat 2015 Arsenault et al 2018) as stated in the

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organizationrsquos (UNESCO) 2003

Indigenous Peoplesrsquo Kyoto Water Declaration and the Tlatokan Atlahuak Declaration in

2006 and local actions such as the First Nationsrsquo Water Declaration by the Chiefs of

Ontario (2008)

However Indigenous peoples in Canada are unable to protect and care for water because

of three interrelated Canadian water governance injustices These three injustices are

constrained self-determination (White et al 2012 Norman and Bakker 2015) imposed

colonial frameworks (von der Porten and de Loeuml 2013 2014 Simms et al 2016

Castleden et al 2017 Arsenault et al 2018 Daigle 2018) and restricted legal notions of

water rights (Borrows 2017) The unresolved question is lsquohow can Indigenous peoples

implement their own ways of knowing3 being4 and doing5 ie Indigenize in relation to

1 ldquoIndigenous peoples is a collective name for the original peoples of North America and their descendantsrdquo (Government of Canada 2017a para 1) For legal and policy purposes the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 (section 35) recognizes three groups of Indigenous peoples termed ldquoAboriginal peoples Indians (referred to as First Nations) Meacutetis and Inuitrdquo (clause 2) 2 Inclusive of inherent (Aboriginal rights) Aboriginal title and treaty rights (Craft 2013) 3 How do we learn our ontologies ie to be (Martin and Mirraboopa 2003) 4 lsquoHow do we live and exist in our ontologiesrsquo which is driven by our ways of knowing (Martin and Mirraboopa 2003) 5 How do enact our ways of knowing and being (Martin and Mirraboopa 2003)

2

water in meaningful ways (McGregor 2014) in dominant western governance systems

which regard water as a resource or commodity (Bradford et al 2016 Castleden et al

2017 Bakker et al 2018 Wilson and Inkster 2018)

The transformation of dominant western water governance where Indigenous

responsibilities to water would be considered mainstream pathways is challenged by

embedded ldquopower and knowledge hierarchiesrdquo (Arsenault et al 2018 p 14)

Disengaging these hierarchies requires a social justice approach to dismantle dominant

water governance (Franco et al 2013 Zwarteveen and Boelens 20146 Jackson 2016)

Social justice is seen as distributive justice (Doorn 2013 Neal et al 20147 Bakker et al

2018) cultural recognition (Joy et al 2014 Patrick et al 2014 Perreault 2014 Bradford

et al 2016) and political representation (Tisdell 2003 Bakker 2007 Perreault 2014

Bakker et al 2018)

The overarching research question that guides this thesis is lsquoHow can water

governance be Indigenized within a social justice frameworkrsquo It directly responds

to the unresolved issue on how Indigenous peoples can Indigenize water governance in

meaningful ways It adopts Fraserrsquos (2009) three-pronged approach to social justice as

economic redistribution cultural recognition and political representation because of its

multi-lens framework However the intention is to apply a decolonizing lens (see p 29)

to deconstruct western literature8 on social justice Fraserrsquos (2009) approach has been

applied in very few water governance studies mainly within the Australian context

(Jackson and Barber 2013 Lukasiewicz and Baldwin 2014 Jackson 2016) and none

in Canada were found that adopted this multi-lens social justice approach

6 They use the term water justice as an alternative to social justice 7 Neal et al (2014) also refer to procedural and interactive justice as part of distributive justice 8 McGregor (2018a) maintains that Indigenous peoples must develop alternative frameworks to justice that

reflect Indigenous principles and practices

3

This thesis explores the overarching research question in the context of a First Nations

community Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (MCFN) MCFN is officially regarded

by Canada as an Indian Band Number 120 (Government of Canada 2013c) Since 1848

when relocating to the New Credit Reserve (see p 63) it adopted the name of the

Mississaugas of the New Credit (MNCFN) Today it has reverted to its original name of

the Mississaugas of the Credit9 (Water Committee personal communication November

2018) MCFN identified a research need of lsquoDeveloping a MCFN Water Framework to

Indigenize Water Governance on Treaty Lands and Territoryrsquo as a partial resolution10 to

its lsquoAboriginal Title Claim to Waters within the Traditional Lands of the Mississaugas of

the New Creditrsquo11 (herein referred to as the Water Claim)

MCFNrsquos Research Need

MCFN is asserting its unextinguished Aboriginal title to all water beds of water and

floodplains which contain approximately four (4) million acres of land (MCFN nd-a)

within its treaty lands and territory in southern Ontario shown in Figure 11 A list of

relevant treaties is also shown in the map legend these are later discussed in chapter 3

The Water Claim is supported by a study by Holmes and Associates (2015) who

examined 11 ldquopre-Confederation Upper Canada land cessions (dating from 1781 to 1820)

to which MCFN were signatoriesrdquo (p 3) The studyrsquos purpose was ldquoto determine whether

9 Hence you will see both the use of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation and the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation in this thesis MNCFN is mainly used if cited 10 The doctoral student was asked by MCFN legal counsel to use the words lsquopartial resolutionrsquo The Water Framework was regarded as a partial resolution to the Water Claim because MCFNrsquos legal counsel Kim Fullerton indicated that it will be used in their negotiations with Canadian governments to resolve the Water Claim however it was not the only resolution that they will be exploring with Canada (personal communication November 2017) The Chief at a Water Committee meeting in October 2018 confirmed that the Water Framework will directly support his negotiations on the Water Claim with Canadian governments (personal communication October 2018) 11 To view the Title Claim see httpmncfncaabout-mncfnland-and-water-claimstitle-claim-to-water-

within-traditional-lands-of-mncfn

4

any waters were specifically included or excluded from those cessions to assist MCFN

with the documentation of treaty rights with respect to water resourcesrdquo (Holmes and

Associates 2015 p 3) The study concluded that MCFN retains Aboriginal title to the

waters within its treaty land and territory because there is no mention of water in any of

the treaties (Mississaugas Treaty at Niagara Treaties rsquos 38131419 and 22) between

MCFN and the Crown but for 23 (Holmes and Associates 2015) MCFN alleges that

23 is nonetheless invalid (MCFN nd-a) because of differences in interpretations and

understandings between MCFNrsquos ancestors and the Crown (Holmes and Associates

2015 see p 61) MCFN is therefore declaring that water within its treaty lands and

territory has never been lawfully surrendered to the Crown by MCFN or its ancestors

(MCFN nd-a)

Figure 11 MCFNs treaty lands and territory Source MCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation 2015

Subsequent to the Holmes and Associates (2015) findings in September 2016 MCFN

filed the Water Claim as a Special Claim to assert its Indigenous rights and not as a

wrongdoing against them (typical of a Specific Claim) or unfinished treaty-making process

5

(the basis of a Comprehensive Land Claim)12 Kim Fullerton MCFNrsquos legal counsel

commented that MCFN had written proof from the Crown that waters within its territory

and treaty lands were never ceded to the Crown

They have written evidence that demonstrates that water within their territory was

discussed with representatives of the British Crown and that their ancestors were

told that the Crown was not interested in their water only their land Their

ancestors understood and were led to believe by the British that the treaties dealt

only with their land (personal communication May 2017)

The separation between land and water in this Water Claim although incongruent with

MCFNrsquos ancestorsrsquo beliefs is MCFNrsquos way to emphasize that their ancestors would not

have knowingly and conceivably surrendered something that was not theirs to give

(MNCFN nd) Craft (2014a) emphasizes that the language in the treaties must be

understood within the context of the cultural intent Simpson (2011) as part of her

reconnection with her Indigenous ancestors regards all of creation as interconnected and

Indigenous peoples have unique and reciprocal relationships with water ldquoWater is the

lifeblood of the landrdquo (Walkem 2007 p 311) and ldquowater nourishes and purifies Mother

Earthrdquo (Benton-Banai 2010 p 2) Indigenous peoples have a deep spiritual relationship

12 It is listed as a Special Claim on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights Information System (ATRIS) which

according to The Westway Law Group (2018) is a ldquoprocess by which Meacutetis and non-status First Nations can submit claims to the Government of Canada relating to their Indigenous rights including rights to self-determination or to titlerdquo (para 5) First Nations usually submit Specific Claims or Comprehensive Land Claims However Specific Claims ldquodeal with past wrongs against First Nations These claims (made by First Nations against the Government of Canada) relate to the administration of land and other First Nations assets and to the fulfilment of historic treaties and other agreementsrdquo (Government of Canada 2020a section 3) Comprehensive Claims or modern treaties ldquodeal with the unfinished business of treaty-making in Canada These claims generally arise in areas of Canada where Aboriginal land rights have not been dealt with by treaty or through other legal means In these areas forward-looking agreements (also called lsquomodern treatiesrsquo) are negotiated between the Aboriginal group Canada and the province or territoryrdquo (Government of Canada 2015a para1)

6

with water as life and specifically Indigenous women see it as their responsibility to protect

the water (Cave and McKay 2016)

Through the Water Claim MCFN expects the Government of Canada to engage with

them as a First Nations and uphold its 2011 Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation

Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfil the Duty to Consult with Aboriginal Peoples

ldquowhere it contemplates decisions or actions that may adversely impact either asserted or

established Aboriginal or treaty rightsrdquo (Holmes and Associates 2015 p 3) Examples of

engagements for the consultation and accommodation processes include ldquodiscussion

groups and formal dialogue sharing knowledge and seeking input on activities such as

policy legislation program development or renewalrdquo (Government of Canada 2011 p

61) The Water Claim however goes beyond the Crownrsquos obligation to consult and

accommodate because MCFN is claiming lsquoownership13rsquo of water including the waterbeds

floodplains and resources in water within MCFN treaty lands and territory (MCFN nd-

a)

In response to the Water Claim a MCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee

(herein referred to as the Water Committee) was constituted by Chief and Council It was

mandated to consult and engage with MCFN members14 about the Water Claim and its

envisaged outcomes (personal communication Water Committee April 2017) Given the

Water Committeersquos mandate and the academic research interest to contribute to

knowledge on Indigenizing water governance a mutually beneficial research project

emerged Development of Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation Water Framework to

Indigenize Water Governance within Treaty Lands and Territory The projectrsquos mandate

was to create a MCFN Water Framework as a partial resolution to MCFNrsquos Water Claim

13 The meaning of ownership was explored through this research 14 MCFN was aware that the Canadian government may require them to show that their members had been consulted on the Water Claim because this was part of the current requirements by the Government of Canada for the Aboriginal Title Claims process (Kim Fullerton personal communication November 2018)

7

that was representative of membersrsquo values worldviews needs and aspirations The

development of the Water Framework was therefore primarily bounded to engagement

with the MCFN community to relate community perspectives on how members value

water what the Water Claim means to them and what would they want to see from the

Water Claim

Excluded from this doctoral study were the procedural aspects of the Water Claim which

were outside of the Water Committeersquos mandate Also excluded were the legal economic

political and environmental parameters of Canadian water governance within MCFNrsquos

treaty lands and territory to contain the research focus to be feasible within the timeframe

of a doctoral degree An exception was made for consultations with local water authorities

on MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory as a start to explore opportunities for implementing

the Water Framework

Research Question and Objectives

This research addresses the question How can water governance be Indigenized within

a social justice framework Five primary research objectives guided this community-

engaged research

1 To identify MCFN water values and to explore their relationships to historical and

contemporary contexts shaping them

2 To identify the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN members and to relate these

meanings to MCFN membersrsquo water values as shaped by historical and

contemporary contexts

3 To develop a conceptual MCFN Water Framework based on the meanings of the

Water Claim and to explore possible opportunities barriers and challenges for

the Water Frameworkrsquos implementation

4 To examine western constructs of social justice and to deconstruct social justice

from MCFN ways of knowing being and doing and

8

5 To deconstruct the concept of western water governance based on MCFNrsquos Water

Framework and to relate how MCFNrsquos Water Framework contributes to

Indigenizing water governance within their treaty lands and territory

Thesis Organization

The thesis is structured into eight chapters including this introductory chapter Chapter 2

provides a literature review to develop a conceptual framework that guided answering the

research Chapter 3 explains the MCFN research collaboration and MCFNrsquos context for

the research study Chapter 4 discusses the researcher positionality of the doctoral

student explains the emergent research methodology based on context and describes

the multiple research methods employed Chapter 5 reports on MCFNrsquos water values and

their relationships to historical and contemporary contexts shaping them Chapter 6

explains the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN members and relates these meanings

to MCFN membersrsquo water values as shaped by historical and contemporary contexts

Chapter 7 presents the MCFN Water Framework relates how MCFNrsquos Water Framework

supports a deconstruction of western water governance to Indigenize water governance

within their treaty lands and territory decolonizes western framings of social justice from

MCFNrsquos agency and analysis potential opportunities barriers and challenges for

implementing MCFNrsquo Water Framework Chapter 8 summarizes the conclusions

presents the main research contributions and deliberates on the research strengths and

challenges future research opportunities and self-reflections in the research

Notes on Terminology

lsquoAboriginalrsquo is mainly used in response to Canadian law policies and structures

Deconstruct is used to refer to decolonizing western knowledge (Simpson 2004)

Derrida (1976) coined the term in the context of the relationship between text and

meaning In applying the term to the relationship between justice and law Turner (2016)

says it is about interrogating the relationship between the concept and meaning and

formulating alternatives to the dominant meaning in a system of difference

9

Indigenous Indigenous peoples and peoples who are Indigenous in Canada are

interchangeably used to be inclusive of Indigenous identities as socio-political entities

socio-relational and collectives for social-political-economic movements

Indigenous community or communities are used to signify the idea of lsquogroup

belongingrsquo The concept of community itself is recognized as a social construct which is

co-created between personal and community identities (Wiesenfeld 1996)

Indigenize is used to mean from Indigenous ways of knowing being and doing15

MCFN is used to be inclusive of MCFN Band members

15 The definition and use of the term Indigenize are further discussed under section 22

10

2 Literature Review

This chapter includes a review of six key literature areas as related to concepts in the

overarching research question lsquoHow can water governance be Indigenized within a social

justice frameworkrsquo and within the context of Canada where the research was

undertaken These key areas include 1) governance and water 2) Indigenous identities

3) Indigenous peoples in Canada 4) Canadian water governance and Indigenous

peoples in Canada 5) Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities and water rights and 6) social

justice Through this review a conceptual framework is developed that was used to guide

answering the overall research question in the context of developing a MCFN Water

Framework

Governance and Water

First Nationsrsquo governance in Canada follows multiple models either as separate or mixed

forms of traditional systems with hereditary Chiefs responsible to their territories andor

elected Chief and Council to oversee their reserve lands (Lightfoot 2019) As such

Indigenous peoples are operating in imposed and adapted governance systems that may

not be their own through colonial structures and processes (Watts 2018) The elected

Chief and Band Council system operating under the Indian Act (1876)16 adopts an

Eurocentric electoral process which forces First Nations to elect their own government

structures but which are accountable to the Canadian federal government (Indian Act

1876 clauses 61 and 62) First Nations can also opt for self-governance which is

practiced under the Canadian system

16 The Indian Act (1876) a constitutional document pertains to First Nation rights inclusive of status bands

reserve lands and enfranchisement It is a brutally paternalistic and oppressive piece of legislation to control and eliminate First Nations (RCAP 1996) The controls of this Act apply to First Nations political social and cultural practices and these controls although amended over time eg the 1951 revisions to reduce federal authority expropriation power and prohibition of cultural practices and Bill C-31 in 1985 to remove the gender bias remain intrusive (RCAP 1996) Even though this Act is a highly controversial and abusive legislation First Nations resist its abolishment because 1) it is a symbol of Canadarsquos embarrassment and 2) it is indicative that First Nations have distinctive rights (RCAP 1996)

11

First Nations can make their own laws and policies and have decision-making

power in a broad range of matters This includes matters internal to their

communities and integral to their cultures and traditions Under self-government

First Nations move out from under the Indian Act and chart their own course toward

a brighter future (Government of Canada 2020b para 12)

First Nations interpret self-governance though as an ldquoinherent right pre-existing in

Aboriginal occupation and government of the land prior to European settlementrdquo

(Indigenous Corporate Training Inc 2015a para 4) Self-governance as an inherent

Indigenous governance system is practiced on a spectrum from the old ways (traditional

system) to adapting to modern ways (Von der Porten 2012) Ladner (2003) explains that

in

Indigenous thought governance is the way in which peoples live best together

[and]or how peoples have structured their society in relationship to the natural

world It is an expression of how they see themselves fitting in that world as a part

of the circle of life not as superior beings who claim dominion over other species

and other humans (p 125)

Traditional governance systems in First Nations are based on a clan system to order

intra and inter-social relations (McGuire 2008 Craft 2017a) According to Watts (2013)

society is inclusive of all of creation including non-human beings who are considered to

be important members Humans in society therefore organized themselves according to

their relationships with these important non-human beings which form the basis of the

clan system (Watts 2013)

12

The clan system is an egalitarian political organization and restorative justice system

(McGuire 2008) It is Indigenous constitutional order (Ladner 2006) bestowed by the

Creator (Gibbons 2006 McGuire 2008) For First Nations from Anishinaabe

understandings ldquonindoodem (clan) identitiesrdquo (Bohaker 2010 p 11) provide social and

family ties and each clan has different physical responsibilities17 and are given separate

spiritual gifts18 from the Creator (McGuire 2008)

The clan system responds to the realities and needs of a peoplesrsquo territory (Ladner 2006)

and operate through relationships that are respectful consensual and inclusive to all

(Ladner 2006 Watts 2018) This Indigenous system is embedded in ldquonatural lawsrdquo (p

71) based on relationships and interconnectedness for the co-existence between all of

creation for a sustained future (McGregor 2015) Natural laws derived from creation

stories are grounded in ldquostewardship principles of acknowledgement accomplishment

accountability and approbationrdquo (Borrows 2010 p 79) Natural laws should govern our

behaviour towards water (McGregor 2015) within reciprocal (Kimmerer 2013) and co-

existence relationships (Borrows 1997a) Simpson (2011) relates this as mino-

bimaadiziwin (see p 65 for further discussion) for living the good life which Craft (2015

2017a) connects with our collective well-being

Arsenault et al (2018) drawing from multiple contexts describe this relationship as water

relations in terms of the spiritual and cultural identities and connections to water which

emphasize ldquointerdependency reciprocity respectful conduct and the aliveness of waterrdquo

17 The crane and loon clans play the balancing leadership roles the fish clan in the best interest of the

people has the dispute resolution role the bear clan has peacekeeping and healing roles the martin clan are the defenders and warriors the bird clan maintains spirituality and the deer clan instills calmness and peace (McGuire 2008) 18 In Ojibway teachings the gifts that we have are our ldquofive basic human senses intuition and seeing into

the futurerdquo (Gibson 2006 centre insert)

13

(p 2) McGregor (2015) explains that for Anishinaabe and especially for women water is

about ldquonotions of love mutual respect and responsibility towards waterrdquo (p 71) Daigle

(2018) a Cree scholar similarly articulates that our relationship to water (nipi in Cree) is

our kin and we have a responsibility to care for water according to our Indigenous laws

Anderson et al (2013) provide further insights into the centrality of water in the lives of

Indigenous women They relay through conversations with Indigenous women that water

gives life water is life and spirit and water is healing and in return through a reciprocal

relationship we have a responsibility to water and to be thankful to water for being and

giving life (Anderson et al 2013) Similarly McGregor (2014) relates that for Anishinaabe

peoples ldquowater is life in that water is life itselfrdquo (p 501) As an Indigenous scholar person

woman and in all her identities she expresses that

Indigenous peoples have responsibilities and obligations to protect water These

responsibilities extend to all of Creation the spirit world the ancestors and those

yet to come and all must be considered when contemplating actions that will affect

water Such considerations are an essential part of behaving ethically with respect

to water (McGregor 2014 p 501)

Longboat (2015) re-emphasizes this ethical and reciprocal relationship by reporting that

Anishinaabe knowledge of water management

helliptells us that water security or the delicate balance between sustainable use and

resource protection is ultimately achieved when water institutions that structure our

relationship with nature are designed to support the security of water for Mother

Earth If we respect Mother Earth to fulfill her role in turn her natural character will

provide secure water for all of creation (p 12)

14

McGregor (2015) and Anderson et al (2013) stress that Indigenous women understand

their role in caring for our water which is a shared responsibility we have to ourselves now

as much as to our future generations They understand that if they cannot care for our

waters that they will not have physical social cultural and spiritual sustainability

(Anderson et al 2013) These responsibilities are also adeptly transcribed by Hallenbeck

(2017) in stories by Dorothy Christian in which she voices her water ethics morals

When I think about ethics for me itrsquos a right relationship with the water For me to

be in right relationship with the water is to be sure that I am taking care of it as it

will take care of merdquo (Water Ethics minute 104) Engaging in participatory water

ethics is about visiting where the water we drink comes from understanding its

flow and acknowledging how it has been cared for (p 316)

These relationships are what guide Indigenous principles for the care protection and

respect of water according to natural laws done through ceremony song and prayer

(Arsenault et al 2018) McGregor (2014) says that it is more than just ldquoknowing but

actually doing being and acting responsibly towards waterrdquo (p 495) and all of creation

must act respectfully and ethically towards each other (McGregor 2009)

Yazzie and Baldy (2018) from an Indigenous feminism lens call for radical relationality

which advocates for resistance and struggles against ongoing colonialism that violates

Indigenous peoplesrsquo relationships to the land and water for mino-bimaadiziwin Radical

relationality is intersectional between critical consciousness19 as presented by Smith

(2012) to discard colonial ways and embrace relational Indigenous ontologies and

participation in liberation movements against hegemonic structures (Yazzie and Baldy

19 ie decolonization ldquomust occur in our own mindsrdquo (Waziyatawin and Yellow Bird 2005 p 2 Dei and Jaimungal 2018)

15

2018) Hence radical relationality is intersectionally healing and liberating (Yazzie and

Baldy 2018)

In contrast to Indigenous water relations colonial governance from western perspectives

espouses authority (United Nations Development Program 1997)20 in participatory and

collaborative systems (Hania 2013)21 They are entrenched in the protection of private

property and individual rights (Craft 2015 2017a) Ladner (2003) maintains that western

governance is founded on ideologies of superior human beings who claimed dominion

over the earth and the right to rule other forms of creation This line of western governance

thinking is adopted in the context of water governance definitions (Table 21)

Table 21 Water governance definitions by Bakker (2003) Rogers and Hall (2003) and OECD (2015)

Source Water governance definitions

Bakker (2003) ldquoThe range of political organizational and administrative processes through which communities articulate their interests their input is absorbed decisions are made and implemented and decision makers are held accountable in the development and management of water resources and delivery of water servicesrdquo (p 4)

Rogers and Hall (2003)

ldquoThe range of political social economic and administrative systems that are in place to develop and manage water resources and the delivery of water services at different levels of societyrdquo (p 7)

2015 Organization for Economic Co-operations and Development (OECD)

ldquoWater governance encompasses political institutional and administrative rules practices and processes (formal and informal) through which decisions are taken and implemented stakeholders can articulate their interests and have their concerns considered and decision-makers are held accountable in the management of water resources and the delivery of water servicesrdquo (p 5)

20 ldquoThe exercise of economic political and administrative authority to manage a countryrsquos affairs at all levelsit comprises the mechanisms processes and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests exercise their legal rights meet their obligations and mediate their differencesrdquo (The United Nationrsquos Development Program 1997 p 12) 21 Hania (2013) drawing from the work of Lobel describes governance as ldquoA socially constructed participatory activity that relies upon the collaborative and deliberative engagement of state and non-state actors with a responsive dynamic and iterative policy-making process It moves away from a prescriptive command and control regulatory regimerdquo (p 184)

16

Three components emerge from these definitions 1) water governance is an interacting

system of the institutional political economic social and administrative rules and

participatory and collaborative processes and practices 2) Human beings make

accountable decisions over water and 3) Water is regarded as a resource for human use

(adapted from Bakker 2003 Rogers and Hall 2003 OECD 2015) These latter two

components are where western and traditional Indigenous governance thoughts diverge

In expanding on water governance as an interacting system systems thinking from

western perspectives is readily accepted ldquofor studying complexity dynamics and

adaptation in various areas of societyrdquo and it emerged in the early 1900s as criticisms of

the reductionist approach22 (Van der Heijden 2020 para 19) The renowned systems-

thinking approach of Meadows (2008) drawn from multiple-disciplines and thinkers

describes a system as ldquoan interconnected set of elements that is coherently organized in

a way that achieves something Hence a system consists of elements

interconnectedness and a function or purposerdquo (Meadow 2008 p 11) The elements

both tangibles and intangibles constitute the stocks ie ldquothe present memory of the

history of changing flows within the systemrdquo (Meadow 2008 p 18) The flows are the

interconnected relationships that ldquoallow one part of the system to respond to what is

happening in another partrdquo (Meadow 2008 p 13) A feedback loop is ldquoformed when

changes in a stock affect the flows into or out of that same stockrdquo (Meadow 2008 p 28)

whilst a reinforcing feedback loop ldquoenhances whatever direction of change is imposed on

itrdquo (Meadow 2008 p 31)

Meadowrsquos systems thinking approach can be adopted to water governance to understand

how the water governance components interconnect and interact For this thesis it is

suggested that in western systems as illustrated in Figure 21 the stocks in the system

22 ldquoReductionism is applied to understanding system complexity by reducing parts and then reconstructing them to lead to new insights (Hantula 2018)

17

are represented by the institutions23 (ie laws policies rules structures) the economic

systems political authority societal interests and environmental parameters 2) the flows

in the system are the processes and practices as well as the values and ideologies

represented as stakeholder interests Together these interconnected stocks and flows

shape the decisions about water as a resource ie the purpose of the system (adapted

from Bakkerrsquos 2003 Rogers and Hall 2003 OECD 2015 water governance definitions)

Feedback and reinforcement loops although part of the system are dependent on the

context and nature of the system An example of a feedback loop is the policy process

through development practice evaluation and refinement An example of reinforcement

loop is when values of economic efficiency are to the detriment of the environment

Western systems are assumed to be working in balance if the decisions align to their

purpose (Meadows 2008)

23 Hassenforder and Barone (2018) define institutions ldquoas normative and cognitive frames formal or

informal which concern actors when they are engaged in collective actionrdquo (p 1) They describe ldquonormative frames as the rules norms and proceduresrdquo whilst ldquocognitive frames include identity culture representations and beliefsrdquo (Hassenforder and Barone 2018 p 7) They claim that these frames are self-perpetuated through ldquosocial and political self-maintained and routinized mechanismsrdquo (Hassenforder and Barone 2018 p 7)

18

Figure 21 Western water governance as a system (adapted from Meadows 2008 systemrsquos thinking) The eight outer segments represent the stocks in the system The white shape in the middle is superimposed on the outer segments to illustrate the interacting flows which are centered around the systemrsquos purpose including accountability Feedback and reinforcement loops are placed in the lower right corner because of their context specificity

The purpose of framing western water governance as a system in this thesis was to

understand that the system operates as a whole and that we need to strategically

understand what would drive change This is in line with Foster-Fishman et al (2007)

who state that for change we must target the parts of the system that can transform the

system as a whole Meadows (2008) asserts that a system may respond considerably

towards the desired state if the change intervention occurs at the interconnection (ie

flows) between stocks or if the function or purpose of the system is inherently altered by

the system actors Therefore to Indigenize western water governance the change

intervention has to occur at the flows which in this system as per Figure 21 are values

19

ideologies processes and practices The intervention could also involve system actors

altering the systemrsquos purpose

Brisbois and de Loeuml (2016) argue that stakeholder interests drive the purpose of western

water governance and that stakeholdersrsquo interests in water governance are controlled by

inclusion and exclusion based on power dynamics Perreault (2014) claims that the role

of power and rights is political and Mitchell (2003) asserts that ldquorights are at once a means

of organizing power a means of contesting power and a means of adjudicating power

and these three roles are frequently in conflictrdquo (p 22) These competing power claims

are embedded in varying values (Roncoli et al 2016) Hence it is argued in this thesis

that values are the underlying drivers of both power and rights As shown in Figure 21

values are identified as flows in the system and as affirmed by Meadows (2008) effective

change interventions should focus on the flows in the system Schwartz and Bilsky (1987

1990) characterize values as 1) internalized beliefs 2) desirable goals 3) guiding

principles rather than specifics 4) shaping choices and 5) setting priorities

Values in western water governance regard water as a resource (Bradford et al 2016

Castleden et al 2017 Bakker et al 2018 Wilson and Inkster 2018) ranging from water

as an economic good underpinned by individualism within neoliberalismliberal capitalism

to water as a public good24 (Perreault 2014) from a rights-based collective ideology (Le

Grand 2003)

In conclusion it is important to understand that water governance is driven by values

which represents the first conceptual tenet Water governance is shaped by

competing values of water as a resource in western governance (Bradford et al 2016

Castleden et al 2017 Bakker et al 2018 Wilson and Inkster 2018) and values of

24 which is defined by White (2015) as both ldquonon-rival and non-excludablerdquo (para 17)

20

ldquointerdependency reciprocity respectful conduct and the aliveness of waterrdquo (Arsenault

et al 2018 p 2) within natural laws in traditional Indigenous water governance

(McGregor 2015) Indigenous peoples are operating in imposed and adapted systems

(Watts 2018) In the next sections questions are unpacked around lsquoWho are Indigenous

peoples and who are Indigenous peoples in Canadarsquo Both questions are necessary

questions to explore because values relate to both personal and social identities (Hitlin

2003)

Indigenous Identities

The term lsquoIndigenousrsquo remains complex and multi-faceted (Goodall 2008 Trigger and

Dalley 2010) Two separate yet independently overlapping constructions by Benjamin

(2017) and Frideres (2008) succinctly synthesize three multi-facets of lsquoIndigenousrsquo

Benjamin (2017) constructs the term as 1) Indigenous peoples 2) Indigeny and 3)

Indigenism Indigenous peoples refer to socio-political entities embedded in ethnicity and

linked to genealogy (Benjamin 2017) Indigeny is used as social-relational identities

(Benjamin 2017 and also see Garcia 2008 Trigger and Dalley 2010 Postero 2013)

and Indigenism is used when Indigenous peoples are resisting external structural forces

for autonomy (Benjamin 2017 and also see Quijano 2000 Garcia 2008 Andolina 2012

and Jones 2012) Frideresrsquo (2008) theorizations on Indigenous suggests three general

theories of nested identity formation First Frideres (2008) drawing from discourses on

conscious liberation struggles for cultural restoration and sovereignty (Fanon 1963)

suggests that Indigenous identity is psychiatricpsychoanalytical producing a self-

affirming culture in resistance to domination by colonial forces Second Frideres (2008)

drawing from the works of Clifford Geertz on primordialism25 suggests that Indigenous

identity is constructed through social bonding26 from sharing commonalities eg space

25 Geertz (2001) defines primordialism as blood connection as well as been born into and following a particular culture inclusive of religion language and social practices 26 Hirshirsquos (1969) social control theory in the context of delinquency characterizes social bonding as attachment to others commitment to conform involvement in conventional activities and belief in social norms

21

culture ancestors Third Frideres (2008) drawing from the works of Goffman (1959) on

the personality-interaction-society continuum Yancey et al (1976) on emergent ethnicity

as social interactions and Gans (1991) on symbolic ethnicity relates that Indigenous

identity is constructed from symbolic interaction Social bonding such as social

interactions and communication making identity formation constructed in space and time

ie context (Frideres 2008) In symbolic interaction individual identity is related to the

larger group ie it is ldquoactively shaped and reshapedrdquo (Frideres 2008 p 316) and it is not

a property of individuals but of social relationships and institutional structures

Benjaminrsquos (2017) and Frideresrsquo (2008) independent constructions can be said to overlap

as follows First Benjaminrsquos (2017) construct on Indigenism and Frideresrsquo (2008)

construct on Indigenous as psychiatricpsychoanalytical both position Indigenous as

resistance to colonial dominant forces for Indigenous self-determination Second both

Benjaminrsquos construct of Indigenous peoples as a socio-political entity and Frideresrsquo (2008)

reflections that Indigenous identity is formed through social bonding from sharing

commonalities are positioned within Indigenous peoples as physical entities Third

Benjaminrsquos (2017) term of Indigeny relating to socio-cultural identities and Frideresrsquo

(2008) suggestion that Indigenous identity is formed through symbolic interaction in

relation to the larger group overlap because they both recognize that Indigenous identity

is social relational embedded in culture

The Indigenous constructs by Benjamin (2017) and Frideres (2008) are now discussed in

detail using the terms proposed by Benjamin (2017) Indigenous peoples Indigeny and

Indigenism because these terms phonetically includerelate to Indigenous A description

of Indigenous peoples as a socio-political entity is provided and next criticisms on this

view are presented which led to the emergence of Indigeny and Indigenism constructs as

social-relational identities and resistance movements against structural forces

respectively This is important because it will show how Indigenous constructs have co-

22

evolved in relation to Indigenous peoplesrsquo strives for cultural recognition and struggles

against marginalization

The United Nations (UN) define and bound Indigenous peoples in terms of a socio-

political entity

Indigenous peoples are inheritors and practitioners of unique cultures and ways of

relating to people and the environment They have retained social cultural

economic and political characteristics that are distinct from those of the dominant

societies in which they live Despite their cultural differences Indigenous peoples

from around the world share common problems related to the protection of their

rights as distinct peoples (UN nd-a para 1)

Indigenous peoples have sought recognition of their identities way of life and their

right to traditional lands territories and natural resources for years yet throughout

history their rights have always been violated Indigenous peoples today are

arguably among the most disadvantaged and vulnerable groups of people in the

world The international community now recognizes that special measures are

required to protect their rights and maintain their distinct cultures and way of life

(UN nd-a para 2)

Four aspects emerge from the UNrsquos definition of Indigenous peoples 1) peoples with

genealogical descent to prior occupancy peoples 2) peoples who practice preserved and

intact customs and traditions of their ancestors 3) peoples reduced to subserviency or

23

unequal power relations by people with different worldviews and 4) peoples embedded

in controlling external structures other than their own

The Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 1989 (No 169) of the International

Labour Organization (ILO) defines Indigenous peoples in a way that alludes to Indigenous

as a way of living orand genealogy

(a) tribal peoples in independent countries whose social cultural and economic

conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community and

whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or

by special laws or regulations

(b) peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account

of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country or a

geographical region to which the country belongs at the time of conquest or

colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who irrespective

of their legal status retain some or all of their own social economic cultural and

political institutions (Article 1 para 1)

Self-identification as indigenous or tribal shall be regarded as a fundamental

criterion or determining the groups to which the provisions of this Convention

apply (Article 1 para 2)

The World Bank (2020) expands on the UNrsquos and ILOrsquos definitions of Indigenous peoples

by including

Indigenous Peoples are distinct social and cultural groups that share collective

ancestral ties to the lands and natural resources where they live occupy or from

24

which they have been displaced The land and natural resources on which they

depend are inextricably linked to their identities cultures livelihoods as well as

their physical and spiritual well-being (World Bank 2020 para 1)

The UN ILO and World Bank definitions or attempts to characterize Indigenous peoples

are much debated in academic and political spaces The notion of prior occupancy is

criticized in terms of diaspora which contests claims of firstness and identity rootedness

(Beacuteteille 1998 Clifford 2007 Schein 2007) However Karlsson (2001) maintains that

prior occupancy should not be to taken too literally and Stavenhagen (1994) claims that

what is more important is that Indigenous peoples should be seen as the descendants

of the peoples that occupied a given territory when it was invaded conquered or colonized

by a foreign power or population (p 15)

Ingold (2000) asserts that genealogical descent is derived from anthropological and

colonial value systems which according to Canessa (2008) is embedded in racialism The

question is whether people who share bloodlines will also have a shared identity and

descent (Canessa 2008) A shared descent is inherited in different ways through shared

lived experiences ways of life traditions and beliefs and ldquopolitical positions in terms of

historical injusticerdquo (Canessa 2008 p 355) Furthermore the concept of ethnic

homogeneity is unrealistic given historical and contemporary migration and mixing

(Karlsson 2001)

With the UNrsquos position on Indigenous peoplesrsquo entitlements Mamdani (2001) says that

it now converts ethnicity into a political identity Indigenous becomes an issue of rights

albeit within a political system designed by the colonialsettler (Mamdani 2001) This is

where Indigenous becomes a response to external structural forces or Indigenism as

defined by Benjamin (2017) So what does Indigenism and rights entail Jones (2012)

25

argues using Taylor et alrsquos (1994) paper on the Politics of Recognition as a point of

departure that Indigenism is about group identities and not individualism He calls it a

ldquopolitics of differencerdquo whereby ldquoan individualrsquos identity is maintained by protecting the

grouprsquos culturerdquo (Jones 2012 p 626) He advocates for a ldquohuman rights discourse which

recognizes Indigenous peoples who also identify themselves by reference to identities

pre-dating historical encroachment by other groups and the ensuing histories that have

challenged their cultural survival and self-determination as distinct peoplerdquo (Jones 2012

p 626) Jones (2012) goes further and claims that Indigenism movements are lobbying

for political economic and social rights in their quest for cultural recognition and justice

within contemporary locations given that notions of preserved premodern cultures are

archaic De la Cadena and Starn (2007 p 11) argue that ldquoIndigenous identities are a

process ndash a matter of becoming not a fixed state of beingrsquorsquo Nothing is static traditions

are dynamic in relation to their past and future (Mamdani 2001) thus making Indigenous

identifies relational and emergent in response to an ever-evolving world (Postero 2013)

Quijano (2000) and Jones (2012) maintain that post-colonial systems continue to

reproduce social differences for Indigenous peoples in terms of the political-economy

Escobar (2008) contends that alternatives to the dominant discourses of modernity

especially economic approaches such as neoliberalism must be recognized Andolina

(2012) maintains that Indigenous movements can only flourish if systems transform away

from orthodox neoliberalism towards systems of social neoliberalism Corntassel and

Bryce (2012) call for moving away from a rights-based discourse towards cultural

responsibilities Sen (1999) on the other hand promotes building social capital and he

maintains that economic growth is not the defining end of development but rather

capabilities27 which he says resonate better with non-Western cultures and perceptions

of development

27 ldquopower to do somethingrdquo and ldquoto be responsible and accountable for the things emanating from this powerrdquo (Sen 2009 p 19)

26

Both Escobar (2008) and Dei and Jaimungal (2018) call for a decolonization that fosters

transformative change Dei and Jaimungal (2018) reinforce that hegemonic practices

need to be dismantled and that colonial supremacy needs to be resisted Indigenous

identity must be a process where Indigenous peoples ldquodefine their own collective agenda

for a new futurerdquo and it seeks an anti-colonial lens for emancipatory action-orientated

engagements against imperialism (Dei and Jaimungal 2018 p 1)

Coulthard (2014) in support of the Indigenous peoplesrsquo calls for a resurgence (ie social-

relational identity termed Indigeny by Benjamin 2017) positions Indigenous political-

economies within relationships to the land Sylvain (2002) says that forced

disenfranchisement from the land political-economy forces as well as assimilation may

have blurred Indigenous peoplesrsquo relationship to the land Indigenous political-economies

could be achieved through Indigenous peoples reconnecting with land-based knowledge

and sustainable practices for eventual economic self-sufficiency and independence within

systems of traditional governance (Coulthard 2014) This will require Indigenous peoples

and allies to dismantle current institutional political economic and social blockages in the

colonial system through ongoing activism and simultaneously construct alternative

pathways indicative of Indigenous economies (Coulthard 2014)

Lewallen (2003) argues for a cultural relationship where Indigenous worldviews of holism

and collectivism versus western values of appropriation and individualism are what make

lsquoIndigenyrsquo (Lewallen 2003) Dei and Jaimungal (2018) explain that land is ldquosocial

physical and cultural as well as spiritualrdquo (p 5) In these relationships Indigeny defines

a sense of identity manifested from Earthrsquos teachings (Dei and Jaimungal 2018)

Simpson (2014) relates that Indigeny is relational and based on principles of ldquoreciprocity

humility honesty and respect with all of creationrdquo (p 10) including ldquolandforms elements

plants animals spirits sounds thoughts feelings energies and all of the emergent

systems ecologies and networks that connect these elementsrdquo (p 15) In addition

27

Indigeny stresses ldquocommunity building appreciation sharing and social responsibilityrdquo

(Dei and Jaimungal 2018 p 2)

Being able to live their own ways of knowing being and doing represent the core struggles

of Indigeny (Canessa 2008) Indigenous peoples are continually embedded in controlling

external structures other than their own which is attributed to the neocolonial statersquos

ongoing sovereign perception of itself in relation to Indigeny (Canessa 2008) Karlsson

(2001) working in India states that ldquoself-determination is the driving force and goal of most

contemporary Indigenous peoplesrsquo movementsrdquo (p 16) There is a distinction though

between self-determination and self-governance - the former being advocated for by the

UN Gordon (2007) explains that self-governance is ldquoexistent within and under the

sovereignty28 of a larger political bodyrdquo whereas self-determination ldquoexists on par with the

sovereignty29 of other political bodiesrdquo (p 4) Wilson (2014) criticizes the role of present

state sovereignty for Indigenous peoples stating that it perpetuates colonial relations and

it impedes the recognition of Indigeny alternatives

So what makes a lsquoself-determining people a nationrsquo Karlsson (2001) argues that it is if

ldquoa sufficient number of people regard themselves as a people-nation and in some ways

act according to that ideardquo (p 34) The core here he says is the ldquocollective selvesrdquo within

ldquopluri-ethnic multinational or federative political structurerdquo (Karlsson 2001 p 35)

Castells (1997) within an information-age context and Appadurai (1996) on transnational

anthropology advocate for a post-nationalist world or as Hannerz (1996) puts it - perhaps

an imagined community Bauman (1998) maintains though that despite increasing

globalization emphasis is placed more on the territorial principle which necessitates

rather than diminishes the role of people nations Arguably this makes Indigenous

peoplesrsquo claims for nationhood even more relevant

28 Sovereignty is used here to mean supreme power (Merriam-Webster dictionary) ie Crown sovereignty 29 Sovereignty is used here to mean controlling influence and autonomy (Merriam-Webster dictionary) ie Indigenous sovereignty

28

These above multi-lens debates have led to the push for self-identification of Indigenous

as adopted by Article 33 in UNDRIP (2007) Burger (1990) indicates that this criterion is

self-advocated by Indigenous peoples who ldquoclaim the right to define what is meant by

Indigenous and to be recognized as such by othersrdquo (pp 16-17) Garcia (2008) points

out that there are ldquomany ways of knowing and practicing Indigenyrdquo (p 224) encountered

on a daily basis Perhaps according to Kingsbury (1998) the best way forward is to adopt

a constructivist approach to allow for flexibility Indigenous pitched within the ambit of

international criteria should be interpreted through ldquothe dynamic processes of negotiation

politics legal analysis institutional decision making and social interactionsrdquo (Kingsbury

1998 p 457) to construct context specific meanings

In conclusion what is important to note is that the three constructs of Indigenous peoples

Indigeny and Indigenism although distinct from each other as summarized in Table 22

interact and should be viewed as dynamic in space time and the social (Postero 2013)

Hence the call for peoples to self-identify as Indigenous (Burger 1990 Kingsbury 1998

Garcia 2008 Postero 2013)

Table 22 Connections between the three main Indigenous constructs to terms used by Benjamin (2017) and Frideres (2008)

Indigenous Constructs Term used by Benjamin (2017)

Term used by Frideres (2008)

Socio-political entities genealogy linked to prior occupancy cultural distinctiveness derived from their ancestors including relationships with the land and peoples who have been and remain forcefully colonized (UN (nd-a) ILO (1989) World Bank 2020)

Indigenous peoples

Primordialism

Social-relational identities principles of reciprocity with all of creation (Simpson 2014) and collectivism (Lewallen 2003 Dei and Jaimungal 2018 p 2)

Indigeny Symbolic interaction

Mobilizations for self-determination against colonial hegemonies of political economic and social institutional forces (Escobar 2008 Dei and Jaimungal 2018)

Indigenism PsychiatricPsychoanalytical

29

Indigenizing is used in this thesis to mean from Indigenous ways of knowing being and

doing (see footnotes 3 4 and 5 p 1) In this thesis from here on it is used to be inclusive

of Indigenous peoples Indigeny and Indigenism identities and the terms will be used

where applicable The term Indigenize has been applied to ldquorecognize the validity of

Indigenous worldviews knowledge and perspectives as equal to other viewsrdquo and to

identify opportunities for Indigenous peoples to express their own ways of ldquoknowing and

doingrdquo (Indigenous Corporate Training Inc 2017 para 7) Arrows (2019) expands on this

definition by saying that to Indigenize promotes Indigenous sovereignty by bringing forth

Indigenous worldview From another perspective Hogan and McCracken (2016) describe

Indigenization as the ldquointegration of Indigenous cultures heritage and knowledgerdquo (para

4) The term decolonize has also been used as a way to advocate for Indigenous peoples

to express their own ways of knowing and doing (Chilisa 2012 Smith 2012 Tuck and

Yang 2012 Datta 2018 McGregor 2018b) Rice (2016) refers to it as the

ldquorevalorization recognition and re-establishment of Indigenous cultures traditions and

values within the institutions rules and arrangements that govern societyrdquo (p 223) From

an anti-colonial lens decolonization is viewed as ldquoopen defiance an outright opposition

and a clear declaration of an lsquoagainstrsquo stance toward colonizationrdquo (Dei and Jaimungal

2018 p 2) It is about transforming the dominant institutional arrangements that govern

society (Dei and Jaimungal 2018) Hence the key difference between Indigenize and

decolonize is that decolonize is mainly used to signify the struggles against how Canadarsquos

colonial history disempowered Indigenous peoples and how it continues to repress

Indigenous peoplesrsquo sovereignty (Indigenous Corporate Training Inc 2017)

Decolonization calls for Indigenizing the processes that perpetuate colonial structures

(Simpson 2017 McGregor 2018b) which Yazzie and Baldy (2018) say starts with

conscientization but needs dynamic and radical struggles Hill (2012) criticizes calls to

always Indigenize when used in ways to inform and educate non-Indigenous peoples on

Indigenous ways which she claims are futile if we do not first decolonize the systems

Gaudry and Lorenzrsquos (2018) three-part conceptual model to Indigenization based on their

study in the higher education sector with Indigenous academics attempts to address this

criticism by Hill (2012) Their model calls for 1) decolonial Indigenization requiring the

dismantling of current colonial dominant systems for new systems which equally respect

30

Indigenous and colonial systems 2) Indigenous inclusion where Indigenous peoples are

specifically targeted to be included in the current colonial systems and 3) reconciliation

Indigenization where both Indigenous and colonial systems can be negotiated for a

common ground (Gaudry and Lorenz 2018) This research purposefully adopted the

word Indigenize in the overarching research question to emphasize Indigenous

sovereignty It acknowledged though that decolonization and Indigenization are

reinforcingly intertwined and that decolonization is needed for Indigenization to

proliferate Hence either of these terms are used in this thesis where applicable

It is critical that we understand the constructs of Indigenous in relation to identity

especially given that values relate to identity (Hitlin 2003) and that water governance is

driven by values (tenet 1 of the conceptual framework section 21) Indigenous peoples

in Canada are now discussed

Indigenous Peoples in Canada

Indigenous peoples in Canada are the fastest growing population in Canada (by 425

from 2006-2016) with 167 million self-identifying as Indigenous of which 44 is youth

under the age of 25 (Government of Canada 2017a) Although the Canadian government

groups peoples who are Indigenous in Canada into three distinct socio-political groups

First Nations Inuit and Meacutetis (Canadian Constitution Act section 35 2) Indigenous

peoples in Canada continue to advocate for their differences Frideres (2008) and Dyck

and White (2013) locate these differences as plural identities within interweaving

historical social political economic and cultural contexts Coates (1999) claims that First

Nations identity is personal at the individual level embedded in genealogy andor cultural

acceptance at the band level and for unity and solidarity at the national and international

levels His claims align to the three constructs of Indigenous peoples Indigeny and

Indigenism as summarized in Table 22

31

Watts (2013) understands Indigenous identity from an Anishinaabe (a First Nations)

perspective as being shaped in place and time For her Indigeny is embedded in

unification and a relationship with all of creation through place-thought cosmologies

(Watts 2013 see chapter 4 p 78) Frideresrsquo (2008) theorizing on symbolic and

primordial termed IndigenyIndigenous claims that symbolic identity is now emerging to

a greater extent in peoples who are Indigenous in Canada due to past assimilative and

disenfranchisement colonial intentions as well as contemporary urbanization As an

example Christensen (2012) in her five-year study in Canadian North contends that

Indigeny homelessness transcends the literal (in the material sense) to the spiritual

Historical and contemporary colonial effects ldquodisplace people from their land disrupting a

sense of belonging and connection to place and detachment from family the land and

independencerdquo (Frideres 2008 p 822) A-spatial Indigeny in the form of symbolic

expressions is more reflected under these circumstances including in urban-based

peoples who are Indigenous in Canada (Frideres 2008) It helps to alleviate Indigeny

homelessness through cultural-rooted expressions (Frideres 2008)

Many peoples who are Indigenous in Canada also traverse and maneuver through time

between the three worlds of Indigeny symbolism Indigenous primordialism and the

dominant Canadian culture (Frideres 2008) Peoples who are Indigenous in Canada may

also not necessarily see themselves as Canadian (Gordon 2007) Manzano-Munguiacutea

(2011) illustrates through an analysis of Aboriginal-related policies that despite

aggressive historical legislation30 and interventions31 to assimilate peoples who are

Indigenous in Canada as per colonial values both pre-and post-confederation the

persistence and survival of Indigenous identities prevail

30 These legislations included the 1763 Royal Proclamation the Indian Act Treaties including the Robinson and Douglas Treaties The Numbered Treaties and the ongoing Modern Treaties since 1975 (Government of Canada 2020c) ndash see chapter 3 31 ie the ldquoresidential school system and the reserve systemrdquo (Manzano-Munguiacutea 2011 p 404)

32

Borrows (2003) through the lenses as related to Indigenism relates that the Indian Actrsquos

(1876)32 assimilative intentions were incongruent with ldquoIndian ancient teachings and

traditionsrdquo (p 259) Through stories told by his grandparents he knew that lsquoIndiansrsquo had

not passively accepted the colonial structures and that they used their agency to actively

resist these impositions (Borrows 2003) However dominant colonial laws and

bureaucracy impeded their efforts forcing Indigenous peoples to adhere to colonial

legislation such as the Indian Act for their treaty rights to be recognized (Borrows 2003)

Coulthard (2014) explains that despite this Indigenous peoples have continued to resist

ldquooppressive policies and practicesrdquo (p 4) Of note three significant activist events

occurred in the 1960s and 1970 1) The strong opposition to Canadarsquos 1969 White Paper

which further attempted to assimilate and deal with the Indian Problem 2) The recognition

of Aboriginal title through the Supreme Court of Canadarsquos decision to uphold the Calder

case and 3) Anti-energy development across Northern Canada protests (Coulthard

2014) These events fueled and mobilized Indigenism and continued calls for Indigenous

self-determination and rights (Coulthard 2014)

Indigenous peoples in Canada remain to be consulted rather than drivers in Canadian

Aboriginal policy design and implementation (Borrows 2003) Herein though lies the very

tension in Canada because Indigenous peoples in Canada continue to unite through

Indigenism and claiming rights to self-determination as confirmed in the UNDRIP

Indigenous peoples in Canada are claiming nationhoods (Gordon 2007) Yet Indigenous

claims for nationhoods continue to be undermined by the Canadian government (Brock

1991 Alcantara and Spicer 2016) This is evident in Canadarsquos ongoing paternalistic

32 The Indian Act (1876) identifies who is a registered Indian (ie status Indian) and who does not qualify as a registered Indian ie a non-status Indian (Sections 6 and 7) Peach (2012) says that there is ldquouncertainty about the constitutionality of distinctions between Aboriginal peoples made by non-Aboriginal governmentsrdquo (p 104)

33

approach to Indigenous peoplesrsquo inherent right of self-government33 in 1995 and more

recently the Supreme Courtrsquos ruling against the Albertarsquos Mikisew Cree First Nation

lawsuit filed in 2013 in favour of Canada34 (Bronskill 2018) These policies and practices

contradict Canadarsquos 10 principles35 to guide ldquorenewed nation-to-nation government-to-

government and Inuit-Crown Indigenous relationshipsrdquo (Government of Canada 2018a

p 3) as Canadarsquos ongoing commitments to reconciliation which are entrenched in section

35 of the Canadian constitution RCAP and the TRCrsquos Calls to Actions (Government of

Canada 2018a) McGregor (2014) asserts that contemporary colonialism continues to

undermine Indigenous self-determination and the struggle continues for them to live their

ldquorelationships responsibilities and obligations to creation to ensure a sustainable futurerdquo

(p 496)

In conclusion it is argued as the second conceptual tenet that Indigenous peoplesrsquo

identities in Canada are plural dynamic and interwoven within self-identifying constructs

of Indigenous peoples Indigeny and Indigenism (see Table 22 p 28)

33 In response to section 35 of the Canadian Constitution Act the federal government launched the Inherent

Right to Self-Government Policy in 1995 which is intended to provide a vehicle for lsquoAboriginal peoplesrsquo to achieve self-government arrangements suited to their specific contexts (Government of Canada 2020b) 34 This court ruling decision allows governments drafting legislation to be released from their duty to consult when drafting legislation even if the legislation impinges on the treaty rights of Indigenous peoples (Bronskill 2018) 35 These principles in summary relate to ldquo1 Indigenous peoplersquos inherent right to self-determination

including the inherent right of self-government 2 reconciliation as institutionally entrenched 3 mutually respectful partnerships based on honouring the Crown 4 embedding Indigenous self-government within Canadarsquos evolving political and governance systems 5 agreements between Indigenous peoples and the Crown as reconciliation efforts 6 free prior and informed consent by Indigenous peoples on actions that affect them 7 promoting mutually beneficial economic and resource development partnership 8 dealing with infringement of section 35rsquos Indigenous peoplesrsquo rights 9 Ongoing reconciliation within evolving Indigenous-Crown relationship and 10 acknowledging affirming and implementing the cultural and context uniqueness and specificity within First Nations the Meacutetis Nation and Inuitrdquo (Government of Canada 2018a pp 5-17)

34

Canadian Water Governance and Indigenous Peoples

Canada confederated in 1867 (Government of Canada 2015b para 28) presently

consists of 10 provinces and three territories (Government of Canada 2017b) with a total

population of 375 million people in 2019 (Statistics Canada 2020 Table 17-10-0005-

01) Canadarsquos political-economy ranges across provinces and territories from strong

neoliberalism to social-markets which are embedded in historical legacies since the

1970s (Evans and Smith 2015) It is very much embedded in ethics of individualism

rights property and ownership (Christie 2012) The protection of the environment in its

own right is not constitutionally recognized or provided for (Boyd 2013) It is important

to recognize that water governance in Canada is housed within these institutional ethics

and settings

At present water in Canada is considered a public good (Barlow 2012) However

growing water challenges have urged sectoral interests mainly the private sector to

lobby for water to increasingly become a commodity (DrsquoSouza 2017) Although water is

still not a commodity in Canada36 a small number of municipal governments have started

to experiment on their water services becoming privatized primarily through public-private

partnerships (Bertels and Vredenburg 2004 Shapiro 2018) for economic efficiency and

delivery effectiveness despite threats to social welfare (Bertels and Vredenburg 2004)

Anti-water privatization activists like Maude Barlow argue that ldquoCanadarsquos freshwater

heritage is a commons a public trust a public service and a human right and that it

should not be allowed to become a market-based commodityrdquo (Barlow 2012 p 3)

With Canada as a federation water is managed through models ranging from

jurisdictional responsibilities for federal provincial and municipal governments to shared

responsibilities between them (Government of Canada 2016) and in ldquosome cases the

territories37 and Aboriginal governments under self-government agreementsrdquo

36 It could be argued that water bottling (Jaffee and Newman 2012) and the trading of water licenses in Alberta (Christensen and Lintner 2007) indirectly renders water as a commodity 37 through the Devolution Transfer Agreements (Government of Canada 2013a b)

35

(Government of Canada 2016 para 1) As a result water governance institutional

arrangements in Canada have been described as fragmented which makes it more

challenging to manage water (Sproule-Jones et al 2008 Bakker and Cook 2011) A

summary of institutional water governance arrangements in Canada is provided in

Appendix 1

Nowlan and Bakker (2010) make the case that Canadian governments have realized that

sole and shared water governance jurisdictions between the federal and

provincialterritories governments and delegated responsibilities to the municipalities are

inadequate to address wicked38 and complex water management issues These issues

and increasing expectations for public participation in decision making have led to

collaborative water governance (Nowlan and Bakker 2010)39 Ansell and Gash (2007)

state though that not all collaborative governance actions are successful in achieving

effective water governance because they are embedded in context and rely on

relationship building Context includes the ldquonature of prior engagements (adversarial or

co-operative) motivations for participation power dynamics and the value ethics and

culture of the collaborative effortrdquo (Ansell and Gash 2007 p 543) Relationship building

includes ldquoin-person engagements trust commitment and shared understandingsrdquo (Ansell

and Gash 2007 p 543) As an example in Canada Brisbois and de Loeuml (2016) show

using a cross-study empirical analysis that power imbalances between state and non-

state actors negatively impacted on the intended collaborative outcomes of social and

environmental benefits The reality is that despite strides made towards collaborative

water governance in Canada significant challenges remain inclusive of fragmentation

limited resources ineffective change management and conflicting values (Simms and de

Loeuml 2010)

38 Rittel and Weber (1973) define wicked problems as open-ended problems which in themselves change through implementation 39 In theory collaborative water governance encompasses 1 state and non-state (both public and private) actors 2 collectively engaging in forums 3 for decision-making that are based on consensus processes and 4 rescaling the decisions but not exclusively to a watershed scale (Ansell and Gash 2007 and Nowlan and Bakker 2010)

36

In summary Canadarsquos democratic political neoliberal to social-market political-

economies and individualistic social systems create a water ethics of human rights

Water is regarded as a public-good resource to be managed Water governance in

Canada is in theory multi-tiered with mixed models of differentiated and shared

responsibilities It has a tendency towards collaborative governance which is not always

conducive and effective in managing wicked and complex water management issues It

is within this context that Indigenous peoples in Canada must find their space and place

It is within this context that Indigenous water relations must contend and that Indigenous

peoplesrsquo rights to water are viewed within the Canadian system

Indigenous Peoplesrsquo Responsibilities and Water Rights

Indigenous peoples across Turtle Island continue to fulfill their inherent responsibilities to

water mainly outside of formal water governance and have long histories of activism for

the protection of water (McGregor 2012) These include both resistance movements

against colonial systems and resurgence of Indigenous ways Examples of resistance

movements across Turtle Island are Indigenous activism against the construction of

pipelines eg the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline and Energy Transfer Partnerrsquos

Dakota Access Pipeline (Hinzo 2018) the Winnemem Maidu and Pit River tribes in

California resisting state and federal water projects including dams and developments for

energy generation (Middleton-Manning et al 2018) and the Heiltsuk First Nation and

other Indigenous communities in British Columbia successes in protecting the fish against

commercial fishery (Todd 2018) Examples of resurgence on Indigenous ways across

Turtle Island are The Honour Water project as part of a wider action enables Indigenous

women across the world to lead their responsibilities to water by remotely sharing water

songs and teachings (LaPenseacutee et al 2018) California Indians reimagining human

relationships to reconnect to land and waters (Sepulveda 2018) the Mushkegowuk Cree

nation in northern Ontario reclaiming their life-ways through community paddles on

regional waterways (Daigle 2018) the Mother Earth Water Walks around the Great

Lakes led by the late Grandmother Josephine Mandamin since 2003 to conduct water

ceremony and raise collective consciousness to heal the water a Womenrsquos Water

37

Commission established in 2007 by the Anishinaabe Nation in Ontario and a Water

Declaration by the Chiefs of Ontario in 2008 (McGregor 2014)

The rights-based discourse to water is affirmed by the 1982 Canadian Constitutional Act

(Section 35 part II) and Section 25 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which

recognize and uphold existing 1) Aboriginal rights (Brock 1991) Aboriginal rights are

inclusive of both Aboriginal inherent rights which are those ldquorights bestowed upon them

by the Creator who placed them on Turtle Island and provided them with instruction on

how to liverdquo (Indigenous Corporate Training Inc 2015b para 1) and Aboriginal title rights

rooted in prior occupation of lands (Craft 2013) and 2) treaty rights Indigenous peoplesrsquo

treaty rights are interpreted through the understanding that ldquotreaties recognized that

Aboriginal people lived off the land and its watersrdquo (Phare 2009 p 9)

First Nations affirm their inherent rights to water in the Assembly of First Nations National

Water Declaration (nd-a) and the Water Declaration of the Anishinaabek Mushkegowuk

and Onkwehonwe in Ontario (Chiefs of Ontario 2008) From a Canadian judicial

understanding inherent rights are commonly referred to as the ldquofreestanding rights to

manage and control activities that occur within First Nations territoriesrdquo (Phare 2009 p

12) For inherent rights to be recognized by the Canadian Crown Indigenous peoples

have to ldquodefine specific rather than general rights and to illustrate that the specific right

was an integral activity to your distinctive culture pre-colonial contact (Phare 2009 p

12) The definition of Aboriginal rights was not clear until the Supreme Court of Canada

(1996) in R v Van der Peet defined Aboriginal rights as ldquocollective rights deriving their

existence from the common laws recognition of [the] prior social organization of

aboriginal peoplesrdquo (para 41) that is subject to the ldquointegral to the distinctive culture testrdquo

(para 46) What is meant by lsquointegral to the distinctive culturersquo remains a challenge

especially with regards to water given its centrality in Indigeny (Walkem 2007)

38

Aboriginal title rights to water are usually located within the right to control or use the

water because water is regarded as a public good (Phare 2009) Aboriginal title is based

on long-term and exclusive use and occupancy of the property pre-sovereignty and is

based on unsurrendered Aboriginal property In 1997 in response to the Delgamuukw v

British Columbia decision the ldquoSupreme Court recognized that Aboriginal title to land

includes a right to exclusive use and occupation that encompasses natural resourcesrdquo

(McNeil 2001 p 328) The right to and use of natural resources were not subjected to

the Van der Peetrsquos lsquointegral to the distinctive culturersquo test (McNeil 2001) Phare (2009)

proposed that as a result of the Delgamuukw case Aboriginal title could include the water-

related rights in terms of controlling access to use water regulating use managing

consumptive use of water protecting water quality including pollution) and quantity

overseeing the use of Indigenous knowledge in water management protecting

Indigenous cultural sites spiritual cultural practices (including to hunt fish and navigate

waters) and recreational activities with respect to water controlling water diversion and

generating and controlling economic benefits from water

Further progress on clarifying Aboriginal title was made in 2014 when the Supreme Court

of Canada found in favour of the Tsilhqotrsquoin Nation in the Aboriginal Title Claim Tsilhqotrsquoin

Nation v British Columbia (Supreme Court of Canada 2014) The court ruled that the

province has ldquobreached its duty to consult when it made land use planning decisions and

issued forestry licenses over the lands where Aboriginal title was claimed by the

Tsilhqotrsquoin First Nationrdquo (Abouchar et al 2014 p 1) This decision sets a precedent for

natural resource management in Canada by sending a strong message that Aboriginal

title must be upheld and respected in decision making (Abouchar et al 2014)

According to Phare (2009) treaty rights are embedded in three principles 1) Aboriginal

peoples had the right to live off their lands and the resources and that alternatives would

be provided for their ongoing sustenance 2) Indigenous peoples have rights to water

unless it is ldquoproved that they knowingly intended to relinquish their rights or that the Crown

39

expressed clear and plain intent to extinguish rightsrdquo (p 10) and 3) Indigenous peoplesrsquo

rights to ldquogovern (control manage and use) the land and water was not ceded but that

the ceded rights only refer to the land and waters themselvesrdquo (p 10)

Today Aboriginal treaty water rights are usually located within land claim agreements

(Sproule-Jones et al 2008) and Craft (2014a) argues that ldquocultural social and linguistic

perspectivesrdquo are important for understanding treaties (p 15) In Craftrsquos (2014b)

interpretations her Anishinaabe ancestors understood treaties in terms of sharing the

land and resources with the newcomers in a relationship of being responsible to the land

and living mino-bimaadiziwin (ie the good life) as Indigenous law On the other hand

the Crown understood treaties in terms of ownership and surrender which are used by

Canadian courts today to resolve Aboriginal treaty rights (Craft 2011 2014a b) Craft

(2014a) maintains that the ancestors regarded treaties as sacred living agreements and

we cannot neglect to equally apply Indigenous law when interpreting treaties for

resolutions

Despite Indigenous peoplesrsquo actions in enacting their Indigenous laws through their

responsibilities to water and having water rights water safety and quality issues

especially on First Nations reserves are increasingly becoming a concern in Canada

(White et al 2012) These include drinking water safety (see Lui 2015 White et al

2012) the duration of drinking water advisories especially on First Nations reserves40

(Longboat 2012) and the health of Indigenous communities due to poor water quality

40 ldquoPotable drinking water supply and wastewater management are shared between First Nationsrsquo band councils and the federal departments of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and Health Canada including an advisory role to INAC by Environment and Climate Change Canadardquo (Government of Canada 2020d para 25) Water management is the responsibility of the governments of Yukon and the Northwest territories through the Devolution Transfer Agreements in 2003 (Government of Canada 2013ab) and 2014 (Government of Canada 2013b) respectively The federal government remains to oversee water management in Nunavut until a devolution agreement is formalized in line with the 2008 Lands and Resources Devolution Negotiation Protocol and the 2019 agreement-in-principle (Government of Canada 2019)

40

(Arquette et al 2002 and Mascarenhas 2007) Lukawiecki (2017)41 as well as Castleden

et al (2017) report that the Canadian government continues to apply predominantly

financial technical and scientific fixes to drinking water safety despite cries for more

holistic approaches White et al (2012) likewise made this case by maintaining that

ongoing vulnerabilities to poor water quality on Aboriginal lands are not only a result of

adjacent economic activities but also the removal and relocation of Aboriginal peoples to

degraded lands by European settlers and an erosion of traditional practices due to

colonial interferences

Murdocca (2010) voices that these water issues are but mere symptoms of the colonial

systems and structures in which they are embedded The government of Canada

continues to perpetuate the colonial system through its response to water issues on

Indigenous lands and peoples ie ldquothrough legal and perceived moral frames of

compensation humanitarianism and responsibilityrdquo (Murdocca 2010 p 388) This is

despite Indigenous peoplesrsquo calls and desires to assert their rights as voiced in UNDRIP

(White et al 2012) UNESCOrsquos 2003 Indigenous Peoplesrsquo Kyoto Water Declaration42 and

the Tlatokan Atlahuak Declaration in 200643 (McGregor 2012) These international

movements assist peoples who are Indigenous in Canada to advocate for Indigenous

water rights and relations and to mobilize actions (McGregor 2014)

41 This report calls for an enabling institutional environment whereby ldquofederal capital investment processes are simplified a collaborative drinking water governance framework for First Nations is developed adequate infrastructure support is provided equal decision-making power between First Nations and the federal government is recognized and transparent processes are implementedrdquo (Lukawiecki 2017 pp 7-9) 42 In this declaration the inherent and spiritual relationship between Indigeny and water is clearly articulated which reaffirms ldquoIndigenous relationship to Mother Earth and responsibilities to future generationshelliprdquo it ldquorecognizes honors and respects water as sacred that sustains all liferdquo and it ldquoasserts the role of indigenous peoples as caretakers with rights and responsibilitieshellipto follow and implement traditional knowledge and traditional laws and to exercise their right of Self-determination to preserve water and to preserve liferdquo (UNESCO 2003 p 1) 43 This declaration states ldquofor all Indigenous peoples of the world water is the source of material cultural and spiritual liferdquo (Item 1)

41

Moreover there are legal regulatory triggers through the Canadian Constitution Act of

1982 (section 35) and the Impact Assessment Act (2019) which require Indigenous

peoples to be consulted on matters that may impact known or asserted Aboriginal and

treaty rights Canadarsquos duty to consult and accommodate is mandated through its 2011

Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfil the

Duty to Consult Although good in intention it has varying levels of application (Boutilier

2017)

There are examples where Indigenous principles for water protection water have been

incorporated into water governance eg the 2012 Canada-United States Great Lakes

Water Quality Agreement as well as the Ontario Governmentrsquos Great Lakes Strategy

(McGregor 2014) Norman (2014) indicates that Indigenous peoples are explicitly

included in transboundary water boards which can be viewed as a move towards a post-

colonial era However transboundary agreements between Canada and USA are still bi-

national rather than multinational and Indigenous peoples are considered as stakeholders

to be consulted and not sovereign nations (Norman and Bakker 2015) White et al

(2012) also show that despite rejection of the process for addressing safe drinking water

in First Nations reserves the federal government passed the Safe Drinking Water for First

Nations Act (Bill S-11) and later a revised version Bill S-8 was enacted in 2013 The

Chiefs of Ontario rejected these Bills on multiple grounds based on inadequate

consultation which infringed on their treaty rights as well as the Government of Canadarsquos


Duty to Consult (White et al 2012) The Chiefs of Ontario claimed that engagement often

precedes formal consultation hence the Bill was imposed on First Nations (White et al

2012) von der Porten and de Loeuml 2013 2014 Simms et al 2016 contend that despite

Indigenous peoplesrsquo strides made with regards to nationhood and self-governance in

British Columbia the consultation and shared decision-making water governance

practices remained housed within colonial frameworks and limited effort was made to

meaningful engage Indigenous laws and knowledges Similarly Arsenault et al (2018)

maintain that both federal and provincial official water governance documents do not

42

address Indigenous water relations Instead they remain entrenched within Canadarsquos

water governance regimes to which Indigenous peoples must comply (Arsenault et al

2018)

Simms et al 2016 ask Can and how can Canada move towards a water governance

approach that is collaborative which involves Indigenous peoples as central to the

decision-making processes As argued before (see p 35) collaborative processes are

shaped by context and relationships which could be conducive or unfavourable to

collaboration (Ansell and Gash 2007) Moreover Indigenous knowledge has often been

extracted and analyzed within western science and not interpreted from Indigenous

lenses (McGregor 2004) So how can we move towards an approach where

constitutionally recognized Indigenous peoplesrsquo water rights and their inherent

responsibilities to water (as supported through international declarations) are driving and

leading water governance This question aligns to McGregorrsquos (2014) thinking where she

says that water issues will not only continue in First Nations reserves but also globally

unless Indigenous water relations to water are respected and upheld Approaches where

Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities and relations to water are leading will lead to

Indigenous peoples being ldquoself-determining nations rather than one of many collaborative

stakeholders or participantsrdquo (von der Porten et al 2015 p 134) and one which is

transformed into a truly meaningful system (von der Porten and de Loeuml 2014)

In conclusion it is argued as the third conceptual tenet that a power-laden Canadian

water governance dominates Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities and water

rights This leads into the next section which makes the case for transforming western

water governance within a social justice framework

43

Social Justice

The report on lsquoWhat We Have Learned Principles of Truth and Reconciliation (2015b)

states

Without truth justice and healing there can be no genuine reconciliation

Reconciliation is not about lsquoclosing a sad chapter of Canadarsquos pastrsquo but about

opening new healing pathways of reconciliation that are forged in truth and justice

(p 117)

Following this TRC report Finegan (2018) calls for ways forward where reconciliation

should be ldquoappropriate restorative Indigenous-centered and community-designed forms

of justicerdquo (p 4) Specifically related to Indigenous environmental justice McGregor et al

(2020) state that Indigenous conceptions of justice must be grounded in ldquoIndigenous

philosophies ontologies and epistemologiesrdquo (p 35) for decolonization Simpsonrsquos

(2004) paper on anticolonial strategies for the recovery of traditional knowledge systems

stresses that decolonization requires a deconstruction of the colonial and its relationships

Before deconstruction can occur there is a need to understand what is being

deconstructed As advocated in chapter 1 a social justice approach is needed to

dismantle dominant water governance (Franco et al 2013 Zwarteveen and Boelens

2014 Jackson 2016) Hence in this thesis context we need to understand western

constructs of social justice

Social justice is not merely an extension of justice but it addresses society as a whole

rather than from an individual justice perspective (Burke 2011) Burke (2011) describes

justice as law and its requirements to live according to societal norms not to inflict harm

on each other and to bestow each person their rightful belongings Individuals who

44

contravene these laws are ldquoviewed as responsible for their actions and therefore it is

believed that they deserve to be punishedrdquo (Burke 2011 p 10)

Burke (2011) says that since the mid-20th century scholars were hesitant to define

universal rights from wrongs and instead they shifted the traditional concept of justice

towards a more socially-orientated position ie social justice In 1971 Rawls shifted the

focus away from the individualrsquos action towards ldquothe basic structure of societyrdquo and he

claimed that ldquojustice demands equality of power in societyrdquo (Rawls 1971 p 3) He counter

argued the moral-defining philosophies of justice and claimed as a social ideal justice

as fairness (Rawls 1971) He claimed that the core purpose of justice as fairness was to

shift the justice paradigm from the individual and utility criteria to the social and what we

recognize as reasonable (Rawls 1971)

Sen (2009) criticizes Rawls for his justice as fairness theory which he claims espouses

ideal behaviour of equality and just institutions Instead he advocates for a focus on the

actual behaviour of people which is pivotal for justice (Sen 2009) He highlights this

difference as the ldquodichotomy between an arrangement-focused view of justice and a

realization-focused understanding of justicerdquo (Sen 2009 p 10) Sen (2009) in adopting

a transnational perspective claims that the question of justice begets plurality competing

values and choice ldquonot only of the things we do but also in the freedoms that we actually

have to choose between different kinds of livesrdquo (p 18)

Fraser (2009) synthesizes the various principles emerging from different philosophies and

theories of social justice She postulates a three-dimensional theory of justice to answer

the question of the lsquowhat and who of social justicersquo (Fraser 2009) Her three independent

yet interwoven spheres partially drawing from her previous theorizations consist of the

economic dimension of (re) distribution the cultural dimension of recognition and the

political dimension of representation (Fraser 2009)

45

For the economic dimension of social justice Fraser (1995) drew from egalitarian theories

including theory of capitalist exploitation (Marx and Engel 1967) John Rawlsrsquo (1971)

account of justice as fairness in the distribution of primary goods Senrsquos (2009) view that

justice requires ensuring that people have equal capabilities to function and Ronald

Dworkinrsquos (1981) view that it requires equality of resources She recognized that these

theorists have different viewpoints but to her the pivotal and overriding issue was that

socio-economic injustice requires a commitment to egalitarianism (Fraser 1995)

Woodburn (1982) defines egalitarianism as a ldquosocial organization of asserted near-equals

given that equality is not neutralrdquo (p 431)

Her second dimension of social justice draws from critical theorists and is in response to

rising identity and difference claims in a post-colonial society (Fraser 1995) Calls for

recognition of identity and self-determination by the marginalized and excluded render

social justice or injustice as cultural or symbolic (Fraser 1995) Premdas (2016) claims

that ldquoall systems of justice articulate values of distribution that are peculiar to a societyrdquo

(p 450) Cultural social justice is therefore only achieved once recognition is given to

cultural diversity and recognition of cultural plurality (Markle 2004 Joy et al 2014

Patrick et al 2014 Perreault 2014)

Both economic and cultural justices are embedded within social ldquoprocesses and practices

that systematically disadvantage some groups of people vis-agrave-vis othersrdquo (p 72) which is

referred to as the redistribution-recognition dilemma (Fraser 1995) To Fraser ldquocultural

norms that are unfairly biased against some are institutionalized in the state and the

economy meanwhile economic disadvantage impedes equal participation in the making

of culture in public spheres and in everyday liferdquo (Fraser 1995 p 72) Furthermore

redistribution calls for equality and non-specificity whereas recognition begets specificity

(Fraser 1995) This dilemma brings forth a third dimension of social justice that is of

ldquoparity of participationrdquo (Fraser 2009 p 16) which facilitates lsquowhose voices are heardrsquo

Termed lsquorepresentationrsquo Fraser (2009) claims that in addition to redistribution and

46

recognition justice can only be achieved if full participation is obtained through enabling

economic (ie if people have the resources to participate) and institutional structures

(ie decolonizing institutionalized obstacles in social interaction)

This third dimension is political in nature although it is acknowledged that all three spheres

are inherently political in that they are entrenched in power contestations (Fraser 2009)

Nonetheless Fraser (2009) maintains that representation is about inclusion and exclusion

for ldquojust distribution and reciprocal recognitionrdquo (p 17) lsquoWho countsrsquo is seen both in terms

of boundaries of social belonging and the decision-rules and procedures that shape

power relations (Fraser 2009)

Lukasiewicz and Baldwin (2014) in adopting Fraserrsquos (2009) construct of social justice in

a water governance context expand on the principles in terms of 1) ldquoDistributive Justice

Principles Equity Equality Need Efficiency and Self-interest 2) Procedural Justice

Principles Representativeness Level of Power Transparency Accuracy Consistency

Neutrality Correctability of Errors Ethics Timelines Accountability and Accessibility and

3) Interactive Justice Principles Trust Respect Recognition of stakeholders social

standing Truthfulness and Proprietyrdquo (p 3 Figure 1) This overlap is presented in Figure

22

47

Figure 22 Fraserrsquos (2009) three-dimensional theory of justice (redistribution representation recognition) expanded by Lukasiewicz and Baldwin (2014) conceptions of social justice (distributive procedural interactive justices)

The principles of social justice for Indigenous peoples have been applied within

environmental including water management (Bowie 2013) although the term may not

have necessarily been used or defined Its contexts of use advocate for 1) transformative

collaborative efforts (OrsquoFlaherty et al 2008 Berkes 2009 Jones et al 2010 Maclean

and The Bana Yarralji Bubu Inc 2015 Rice 2016 Berry et al 2018) 2) as resistance

movements to colonial powers and structures (Castleden et al 2009 Hanrahan et al

2016 Hanrahan 2017 Berry et al 2018) and 3) a hybrid model of collaboration and

resistance (Hanrahan 2017) Ricersquos (2016) analysis of the Nunavut Indigenous co-

governance model shows that Indigenous peoplesrsquo authority and agency can be obtained

by adopting and adapting the colonial system from within for transformative change

Similarly Latta (2018) asks if multi-level governance ldquowhere Indigenous government is

another layer in state institutionsrdquo (p 14) may be a path towards self-determination and

nation-to-nation relationships for Indigenous peoples in Canada On the other hand

Berry et al (2018) report that Indigenous water values in Brazil were only recognized

through political opposition to state regimes Hanrahan (2017) relates how the Mirsquokmaq

Rights Initiative spearheaded by the Mirsquokmaq Chiefs of Nova Scotia dually and

strategically work within and outside of Canadarsquos colonial systems for self-determination

48

Within these three non-exclusive models Indigenous peoples use their agency for social

justice

Human agency from a western philosophical perspective signifies the individualistic

(Kuchinke 2013) and socialistic (Ratner 2000) qualities of human beings (individuals or

groups) to make choices act independently according to these choices and to pursue

interests that are self-determined (Helm 2012 Kuchinke 2013) Bandurarsquos (2001) model

of emergent interactive agency subscribes to the idea that human minds are generative

creative proactive and reflective and not just reactive Intentionality forethought self-

(social) reactiveness self (social)-reflectiveness are core features of human agency at

different levels (Bandura 2001) Departing from this mind-set one can ask what makes

agency a lived experience which allows for plurality and embeddedness Is it about free

and rational persons (Rawls 1971) the freedom to choose and enjoying this freedom in

line with Senrsquos (2009) concept of capability (see p 25) self-determination (Markle 2004

Fraser 2009) andor actions and a willingness to take risks of foreseeable value

(Gheaus 2013) From an Indigenous place-thought cosmology (see chapter 4 p 78) all

of creation has agency because to be ldquoanimate goes beyond being alive or acting it is to

be full of thought desire contemplation and willrdquo and lsquonon-humansrsquo express these forms

of consciousness with all of creation (Watts 2013 p 23) Horn Miller (2013) also relates

that for the Kahnawagraveke community (Mohawk of the Haudenosaunee Nation) agency is

not for individualistic gain but for holistic community interests She maintains that

colonization has and continues to erode communal value systems in many Indigenous

communities especially where the Band Council system is adopted as a manifestation of

ongoing colonial influences (Horn Miller 2013) These principles revert to the meaning of

water relations in which water is life and water as life and the reciprocal responsibility

we have to care for the water (Anderson et al 2013 Longboat 2015 McGregor 2015

Arsenault et al 2018)

49

McGregor et al (2020) emphasize that Indigenous justice must be centralized for

ldquoIndigenous-determined futuresrdquo (p 37) They ask the question ldquoHow do Indigenous

peoples themselves envision their future in the face of ongoing injustice and lack of vision

around the called-for transformationrdquo (McGregor et al 2020 p 37)

In conclusion it is argued as the fourth conceptual tenet that to Indigenize water

governance requires agency within a social justice framework but that western

constructs of social justice need to be deconstructed from Indigenous ways of knowing

being and doing

Chapter Conclusions

In reviewing the literature on 1) governance and water 2) Indigenous identities 3)

Indigenous peoples in Canada 4) Canadian water governance and Indigenous peoples

in Canada 5) Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities and water rights and 6) social justice

four key conceptual tenets and their significance for the research emerged as follows

Tenet 1 Water governance is a system driven by stakeholder values indicates

that before water governance can be Indigenized within a social justice framework

there is a need to identify and understand the context-specific values of the water

governance

Tenet 2 Indigenous peoplesrsquo identities in Canada are plural dynamic and

interwoven within self-identifying constructs of Indigenous peoples Indigeny and

Indigenism signifies a need to understand context-specific Indigenous identities

to explain what is meant by Indigenizing (ie from Indigenous ways of knowing

being and doing) and to relate how these identities shape water values

Tenet 3 Canadian water governance dominates Indigenous peoplesrsquo

responsibilities and water rights beckons the need to dismantle Canadian water

governance by developing alternative Indigenous water governance approaches

within context

50

Tenet 4 Indigenizing water governance requires agency within a social justice

framework advocates that Indigenous peoples need to assert their water rights

and responsibilities recognition and representation within context Through their

agency they need to deconstruct from their own ways of knowing being and

doing western concepts of social justice

These four tenets present the conceptual underpinnings for the research design analysis

and interpretations They are used as a guide to answer the overall research question

lsquoHow can water governance be Indigenized within a social justice frameworkrsquo within the

context of developing a MCFN Water Framework in support of their Water Claim as

discussed in chapter 1 (see p 3) Specifically these tenets link to the research objectives

as indicated in Figure 23

51

Figure 23 Linking the four conceptual framework tenets to the research objectives

52

3 The Research Collaboration and MCFNrsquos Context

This chapter explains the research collaboration with MCFN and provides context for the

research study as it relates to MCFN

Establishing a Research Collaboration

The decision to engage with First Nations communities in southern Ontario was based on

three reasons Foremost First Nations were selected where a previous relationship

existed Dr Longboat a faculty member at the University of Guelph (UoG) and supervisor

of this doctoral thesis had relationships with First Nations communities in southern

Ontario and access to communities was an important factor for consideration Second

southern Ontario was selected because of its geographical location in bordering the

Great Lakes Basin (Figure 31) which comprises about nearly one-fifth of the worlds

freshwater supply (Hildebrand et al 2002)

Water governance of the Great Lakes is complex and fragmented (Clamen and

Macfarlane 2015 Jetoo et al 2015) and as explained previously (see p 41) although

Indigenous peoples are explicitly included in transboundary water issues (Norman 2014)

they are considered stakeholders to be consulted rather than sovereign nations (Norman

and Bakker 2015) This was seen as an ideal location to investigate concepts around

Indigenization of water governance Third the location within 250km from Guelph was

selected so that that the community could be visited frequently to develop and maintain

strong relationships which was also a critical factor From the basis of these three factors

13 potential First Nations communities were identified (Figure 32) Websites of these 13

First Nations were examined for evident water security issues Based on these findings

six First Nations communities were identified as possible research partners

53

Figure 31 Relief map of Ontario showing southern Ontario in relation to the Great Lakes Source Adopted from Natural Resources Canada 2002 httpsftpmapscanadacapubnrcan_rncanrasteratlas_6_edreferencebilingualont_relief_newpdf

54

Figure 32 Map of First Nations communities in southern Ontario Source Adopted from Ontario 2011 httpsfilesontariocapicturesfirstnations_mapjpg

Initially a watershed-based approach for this research was considered for engaging with

First Nations but it was excluded because it would dilute research depth and context

specificity of First Nations communities It was decided with the PhD Advisory Committee

that three communities would be the maximum number to feasibly engage in a meaningful

way Identified were MCFN Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation and

Aamjiwnaang First Nation Each community was approached through an identified

contact person via email The research was explained and their potential interest in

engaging in collaborative research was sought Two communities MCFN and Chippewas

of Georgina Island First Nation responded with positive interest and further discussions

were held via telephone After further consideration a decision was made to focus on one

First Nations community It was believed that in doing so the project would generate a

deeper and richer understanding of one community

55

A research collaboration was pursued with MCFN because they communicated that they

were engaged in a current active and political water governance claim (see p 3) which

aligned well with UoGrsquos researchersrsquo interests in social justice and water governance

Through six joint brainstorming meetings between April and November 2017 the

collaborative research project on the lsquoDevelopment of Mississaugas of the Credit First

Nation Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance within Treaty Lands and

Territoryrsquo emerged This project was seen to be mutually beneficial in that it addressed

the Water Committeersquos mandate (see p 6) while contributing to academic interests of

deconstructing western concepts of water governance and social justice from Indigenous

lenses The project proposal was approved by Chief and Council in October 2017 This

proposal included details on 1) background and research approach research goals

research objectives guiding research questions research methodology and methods

informed consent confidentiality privacy and conflict of Interests knowledge ownership

usage and management logo usage a high-level project plan and a list of forms and

schedules to be used

MCFN Today

MCFN is part of the Anishinaabe Nation44 (MNCFN nd) The word lsquoAnishinaabersquo from

a colonial lens means lsquofirst manrsquo (Gibson 2006) From an Ojibway45 lens by Benton-Banai

(2010 p 3) it means ldquoANI (from whence) - NISHINA (lowered) - ABE (the male of the

species) It is interpreted that man (the origin of the Anishinaabe people) was the last

form of life created from the four sacred elements of Mother Earth as a woman (Benton-

Banai 2010)

44 The Anishinaabe Nation is a collective name for groups of Indigenous peoples who live in the United States of America and Canada (Sawe 2017) 45 The Ojibway is a part of the larger Anishinaabe Nation (Bishop 2008)

56

MCFN is an ldquoOjibwa Nation in the Algonquian language familyrdquo (Heritage Mississauga

2018 para 1) There are three possible interpretations of the name lsquoMississaugarsquo

(MNCFN nd) It can refer to 1) ldquothe Eagle Clan of the Ojibway Nationrdquo 2) ldquothe mouth of

the Mississagi Riverrdquo which was their traditional fishing ground and 3) departing from an

ldquoOjibway word meaning - people living at the mouths of many riversrdquo (MNCFN nd p 3)

MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory (see Figure 11 p 4) consist of approximately four

million acres in southern Ontario (MCFN nd-a) However today MCFNrsquos jurisdiction is

restricted to the New Credit Reserve in southern Ontario (Figure 33) which is formally

known as New Credit (Part) 40A (Statistics Canada 2017) It is 20 km2 in size and is

located near Hagersville (Haldimand County) adjacent to the Six Nations of the Grand

River Reserve (Statistics Canada 2017) Its geographical co-ordinates are Latitude

42999 and Longitude -80097 (Government of Canada 2013c)

Figure 33 Geographic location of the New Credit Reserve in relation to MCFNs treaty lands and territory Source (left map) Statistics Canada 2016 New Credit (Part) 40A httpswww12statcangccacensus-recensement2016dp-pdprofsearch-rechercheresults-resultatscfmLang=EampTABID=1ampG=1ampGeo1=ampCode1=ampGeo2=ampCode2=amptype=0ampSearchText=New+CreditampSearchType=Beginsampwb-srch-place=search (accessed April 4 2020) Source (right map) MCFN 2015 httpmncfncaabout-mncfntreaty-lands-and-territory

57

As of 2018 the MCFNrsquos band membership number was approximately 2500 (Wybenga

and Dalton 2018) Demographic data on the full band membership were unavailable A

total of 740 residents lived on-reserve of which 695 people were of Indigenous identity

and 680 were registered as a treaty Indian ie status (Statistics Canada 2018) About

315 were children and the average age was 32 years (Statistics Canada 2018) A total

of 485 residents identified as First Nations only 155 residents identified as mixed

Indigenous and non-Indigenous and 30 residents identified as mixed Indigenous

ancestry (Statistics Canada 2018) First Nations ancestry included Algonquin (10)

Blackfoot (15) Cayuga (50) Cree (10) Iroquois (70) Mohawk (265) Ojibway (555) and

Oneida (45) (Statistics Canada 2018) A total of 685 residents regarded English as their

first official language and only 10-15 residents spoke Ojibway as their mother tongue and

75 residents had knowledge of Ojibway (Statistics Canada 2018) No data on gender or

further age breakdown were available for on-reserve residents

In 2016 192 private dwellings existed on the New Credit Reserve (Statistics Canada

2018) The reserversquos infrastructure facilities include ldquoThe New Credit United Church

(previously the Methodist church) a strip mall a school a modern community center a

daycare a social services building a library an administrative building and a scattering

of band-owned small businessesrdquo (Wybenga and Dalton 2018 p 6)

MCFN currently operates under the Indian Act46 and is governed by a Chief and Council

(MCFN nd-b) which is elected every two years as per the Indian Act There are seven

council portfolios of ldquo1) inclusive prosperity economic growth and job creation 2) nation

well-being and wellness 3) environment and sustainability stewardship for land air

water and natural resources 4) education and awareness 5) cultural awareness

communications and outreach 6) infrastructure and community development and 7)

46 MCFN is advocating for its own MCFN-specific and self-determining election lawcode outside of the Indian Act (MCFN nd-c)

58

inclusive leadership and governancerdquo (MCFN nd-b para 12) Chief and Council are

supported by 10 Band Administration Departments related to housing public works47

education consultation and accommodation media and communications social and

health services sustainable economic development childcare and land memberships

and research (MCFN nd-d)

MCFNrsquos History Related to the Water Claim

Before European contact (pre-1600) and up to the late 1600s MCFNs ancestors

occupied the area ldquoinland from the north shore of Lake Huron just to the west of

Manitoulin Island and east of Sault Ste Marierdquo (MNCFN nd p 3) This is known as the

Mississaugi River Location (Wybenga nd) and the first written record found to confirm

their occupancy was by the French Jesuits in 1640 (MNCFN nd) Here the Mississaugas

are identified as the Oumisagai (MNCFN nd) While living along the north shore of Lake

Huron MCFNrsquos ancestors followed a life involving ldquomobility and recurring shifts of

resource harvestingrdquo (p 4) life in harmony with the natural cycles and laws of the earth

(MNCFN nd) This included hunting fishing harvesting horticulture and limited

agriculture ((MNCFN nd)

Post-European contact in the 1600s resulted in Indigenous peoples in North America co-

operating with France or England as the two rival European colonial Nations (MNCFN

nd) Anishinaabe Nations in the Upper Great Lakes region allied with the French whilst

the Five Nations Iroquois Confederacy living south of Lake Ontario sided with the English

(MNCFN nd) These Nations engaged in warfare from early to the mid-1600s (MacLeod

1992) often in response to the competing fur trade (MNCFN nd) Circa 1680 - after the

Five Nations Iroquois destroyed the Huron Neutral and Petun villages and occupied and

47 MCFN has a lagoon system for waste-water management but no secondary treatment systems and obtains its water supply from municipal water lines for most dwellings although some members still retain their water tank systems (Craig King personal communication 7 March 2018)

59

used most of southern Ontario as hunting grounds - the Anishinaabe in this region formed

a political and military alliance as a defense against the Five Nations Iroquois (MNCFN

nd) This was known as the Three Fires Confederacy who through successive defense48

efforts forced the Five Nations Iroquois to retreat south of Lake Ontario into their original

territory (MNCFN nd) The Mississaugas as Ojibway were pivotal to these efforts which

dates their ascendency in southern Ontario in the 1700s (Wybenga nd) This is

confirmed by Osborne and Ripmeester (1997) who report that ldquofrom 1700 to 1783 the

Mississaugas were the most powerful nation occupying the region north of Lake Ontariordquo

(p 259) After negotiating a peace treaty with the Mohawk Nation they travelled to Lake

Simcoe where a main group continued east to the Bay of Quinteacute (MNCFN nd) A second

group travelled south and finally settled in an area between Toronto and Lake Erie

(MNCFN nd) The territory (Figure 11 p 4) of this group in ldquosouth-western Ontario

throughout the 1700s and into the 1800s extended from the mouth of the Rouge River to

its source then westerly along the dividing ridge between Lake Huron and Ontario to the

head waters of the Thames moving south to Long Point on Lake Erie and then down to

Lake Erie Niagara River and Lake Ontario to the place of the beginningrdquo (MNCFN nd

p 10) Here they followed similar lifestyles and cycles to those which they lived on the

north shore of Lake Huron (MNCFN nd)

Throughout the 1700s the French established fur trade posts in southern Ontario and by

the mid-1700s a post was established in Fort Rouille located in present-day Toronto

48 ldquoThe Ojibway Odawa and Potawatomi Nations formed the Confederacy of the Three Fires of peoples for cultural and political purposes Each Nation had their role in that Confederacy The Ojibway were the providers the Odawa were the warriors and the Potawatomi were the firekeepers Although wars would prevail this international relation was a peaceful co-existencerdquo (Union of Ontario Indians 2020 paras 5-6 httpswwwanishinabekcawho-we-are-and-what-we-do) ldquoBy the mid 1700s the Council of Three Fires became the core of the Great Lakes Confederacy The Hurons Algonquins Nipissing Sauks Foxes and others joined the Great Lakes Confederacy and after the Treaty of Niagara of 1764 which marked the formal beginning of the peaceful relations with Great Britain this powerful body provided the British with important allies in times of war and a balance to the Iroquois Confederacy to the south and eastrdquo (Union of Ontario Indians 2020 paras 7-8)

60

(MNCFN nd) The Mississaugas living in this area were active participants in the fur

trade (MNCFN nd) A practice emerged in which the colonial fur traders extended credit

to the Mississaugas living near a certain river (MNCFN nd) Consequently this ldquoriver

became known as the Credit River and by association these Mississaugas became

known to Europeans as the Mississaugas of the Creditrdquo (MNCFN nd p 9) By the end

of the 18th century it was evident that ongoing colonial influences despite efforts to resist

negatively constrained the Mississaugas of the Creditrsquos ability to sustain themselves from

the land and waters (MNCFN nd)

With the continuous expansion of colonial settlement in the Toronto area in the 1800s

forced the Mississaugas of the Credit in 1829 to seek exclusive rights to its salmon

fishery on the Credit River (MNCFN nd) These rights were confirmed through an Act of

Parliament (with the government of Upper Canada) and reconfirmed in 1835 (MNCFN

nd) Despite these interventions though the Mississaugas of the Credit fathomed that

its survival on the Credit River remained in jeopardy (MNCFN nd)

Eberts (2013) highlights that these colonial influences were the start of Imperialism which

are still practiced by Canada today These influences are characterized by inherent

unequal powers and physical social cultural and political displacements of Indigenous

peoples from their traditional territories knowledge values and systems Treaty-making

the Royal Proclamation in 176349 and the Indian Act in 1876 (see footnote 13 p 10) were

considered to be ldquolegislated dispossessionsrdquo by the Crown (Eberts 2013 p 128) in two

ways assimilation andor extinction of Indigenous peoples and extinguishing Indigenous

peoplesrsquo rights and their self-determination (Eberts 2013) The use of treaties as land

49 Borrows (1997b) explains that this proclamation was consensually entered into by the Crown (King

George III) and First Nations in 1763 with competing and different understandings eg on First Nations sovereignty Although the Royal Proclamation upholds Aboriginal title rights it also contradictorily and manipulatively moved towards the cessation of land by treaty to claim power control and authority over the lands that First Nations occupied (Borrows 1997b)

61

cessations for Indigenous peoples in Upper Canada between 1763 and 1812 resulted in

the Crown securing ldquoall the land along the Great Lakes and other boundary waters in

southern Ontariordquo (Eberts 2013 p 131) From 1815 to 1827 further treaties enabled the

Crown to acquire the ldquoremaining arable land in southern Ontariordquo (Eberts 2013 p 131)

It is important to emphasize that according to MCFN its ancestors had different

understanding of these treaties compared to the colonial governments (MNCFN nd)

MCFN is therefore claiming that validity of the early land surrenders by its ancestors are

invalid (MNCFN nd) MCFN uphold that its ancestors would not have knowingly and

conceivably surrender something that was not theirs to give (MNCFN nd)

Yet it was within this treaty-making period that the Crown began purchasing large tracts

of land from the Mississaugas of the Credit for the incoming Loyalists starting in 1781 and

ending in 1820 (Heritage Mississauga 2018) Table 31 provides a summary of these

treaties which are described in detail by Holmes and Associates (2015) as the basis for

MCFNrsquos Water Claim (see chapter 1)

The colonialsrsquo strategies to remove the lsquoIndian problemrsquo through land cessations (Eberts

2013) and resource appropriation by the colonials (Osborne and Ripmeester 1997)

required MCFN to seek and adapt to alternative andor sustainable pathways These

included ldquotrade with the colonials for food and manufactured goodsrdquo (MNCFN nd p 10)

adoption of the Methodist faith and integration into a resource-based economy or the

overt rejection and resistance of European value systems with a centering towards

traditional Anishinaabe ways (Osborne and Ripmeester 1997)

62

Table 31 Treaties between MCFN and the Crown leading to MCFNrsquos land cessations

Treaty Name

Treaty details and significance

Mississaugas Treaty at Niagara (1781)

In 1781 the Crown purchased land ldquofour miles wide along the west bank of the Niagara River from Lake Ontario to Lake Erierdquo from the Mississaugas of the Credit (MCFN nd-e)

Between the Lakes Treaty No 3 (1792)

ldquoIn 1784 the Crown annexed three million acres of land between Lakes Huron Ontario and Erie from the Mississaugas of the Credit for pound1180 of trade goods About 550000 acres were granted to the Six Nations (for supporting the British during the American Revolutionary War) in the Haldimand Proclamation of October 25 1784 and the remainder was allocated to the incoming Loyalists Due to different understandings of geographical boundaries of the Between the Lakes Purchase a confirming document was signed in 1792rdquo (MCFN nd-f paras 1-3)

Brant Tract Treaty No 8 (1797)

In recognition of Mohawk Chief Joseph Brantrsquos contributions to the British during the American Revolutionary War the British Crown purchased additional land from the Mississaugas of the Credit (a tract of land containing 3450 acres ie present day Burlington in Ontario for pound100) in 1797 (MCFN nd-g)

Toronto Purchase Treaty No 13 (1805)

The ldquoToronto Purchase in 1787 and the Gunshot Treaty in 1788 dealt with the Mississaugas of the Credit lands north of Lake Ontariordquo (MNCFN nd p 12) were controversial because the boundaries were not clearly delineated and agreed upon (MNCFN nd) The 17878 Toronto Purchase was renegotiated by the British government in 1805 (MNCFN nd) As a result the Mississaugas of the Credit retained some of its territory ldquoone mile adjacent to both sides of the Credit River adjacent land on both sides of the Twelve and Sixteen Mile Creeks and the interior of the lsquoMississauga Tractrsquo north of Eglinton Avenuerdquo (Heritage Mississauga 2018 para 3) This retention (Heritage Mississauga 2018) as well as its petitions to secure exclusive rights to key fisheries in lsquoland surrenderrsquo agreements (MNCFN nd) enabled them to retain some of its traditional ways of living (Heritage Mississauga 2018) In fact the text of the 1805 Toronto Purchase ldquodefined specific exclusive rights to fisheries for the Mississaugas of the Credit in the Twelve Mile Creek the Sixteen Mile Creek the Etobicoke River and the Credit Riverrdquo (MNCFN nd p 12) MCFN lodged claims against the Government of Canada for Treaties No 8 and 13 which were settled in 2010 for a sum of $145 million (MCFN nd-h paras 1-3)

Head of the Lake Treaty No 14 (1806)

Soon after the Toronto Purchase agreement was settled the Mississaugas of the Credit were asked to cede its remaining lands west of the Toronto Purchase lands (MCFN nd-i)

Ajetance Treaty No 19 (1818)

In 1818 the Crown acquired the remaining land of the Mississaugas tract through Treaty 19 (Heritage Mississauga 2018)

Treaty 22 (1820)

The Crown despite resistance from the Mississaugas of the Credit annexed the remaining lands adjacent to the Credit River and the Sixteen and Twelve Mile Creeks for the operation of mills (MCFN nd-j) Treaty 23

(1820)

63

In 1848 one and half centuries after entering into a peace treaty with the Mohawks of the

Five Nations Iroquois (MNCFN nd) the Mississaugas of the Credit accepted a land offer

from the Six Nations to rebuild its village in the southwest corner of the Six Nations

Reserve (MNCFN nd) Their decision to relocate to this tract of land was shaped by

several factors 1) the tract being within its traditional territory and being relatively close

to the Credit River 2) the land was more arable compared to other options 3) its proximity

to the Six Nations given familial integration over the years and 4) the influence of Peter

Jones (MNCFN nd) Peter Jones a missionary and an elected Chief of the New Credit

Band in 1829 had a profound influence in shaping MCFNrsquos history towards colonial ways

in two ways First he established a mission station on the Credit River in 1826 and in

1848 he led the Mississaugas of the Credit to the New Credit Reserve50 (MNCFN nd)

Second for his perceived contributions as a missionary and advocate for the

Mississaugas of the Credit and the broader Indigenous peoples in Canada he was

elected as a Chief of the New Credit Band (MNCFN nd) Wyatt (2009) argues based

on his analysis of Peter Jones writings that Peter Jones who was of mixed European and

Anishinaabe descent and who was also known by this Ojibwe name lsquoKahkewaquonabyrsquo

had knowingly and intentionally adopted the Christian-based Methodist faith practice

Peter Jones in his roles as an advocate and then Chief during his visits to the Crown

land between 1831 and 1845 ldquoadvocated for the Mississaugas of the New Credit lands

claims raised funding for Methodist missionary projects and promoted the founding of

residential schools51 in Upper Canadardquo (Wyatt 2009 p 158) Peter Jones died in 1856

(Wyatt 2009)

50 Although they were referred to the Mississaugas of the New Credit when they moved to the New Credit Reserve its name was never legally changed 51 In Prime Minister Harperrsquos offer of full apology on behalf of Canadians for the Indian Residential Schools

system on 11 June 2008 Ottawa Ontario he said that ldquoThe treatment of children in Indian Residential Schools is a sad chapter in our history For more than a century Indian Residential Schools separated over 150000 Aboriginal children from their families and communities In the 1870s the federal government partly in order to meet its obligation to educate Aboriginal children began to play a role in the development and administration of these schools Two primary objectives of the Residential Schools system were to remove and isolate children from the influence of their homes families traditions and cultures and to assimilate them into the dominant culture These objectives were based on the assumption Aboriginal cultures and spiritual beliefs were inferior and unequal Indeed some sought as it was infamously said lsquoto kill the Indian in the childrsquo Today we recognize that this policy of assimilation

64

For MCFN its post 1848 move to New Credit under Peter Jones was met with the

confederation of Canadarsquos authority claims over lsquoIndians and Lands reserved for Indiansrsquo

which was relegated to the Canadian government by section 91 of the Constitution Act

1867 (Eberts 2013 p 132) According to the Indian Act (1876)

reserves are held by Her Majesty for the use and benefit of the respective bands

for which they were set apart and subject to this Act and to the terms of any treaty

or surrender the Governor in Council may determine whether any purpose for

which lands in a reserve are used or are to be used is for the use and benefit of

the band (section 18(1))

The Mississaugas of the Creditrsquos land tract was formally confirmed as a reserve in 1903

which remains to this day (MNCFN nd) Since 1848 MCFN began to rebuild its agrarian

livelihoods and revived its community systems and structures (eg the church built in

1852 and a Council House in 1882) despite numerous physical and political obstacles

(Wybenga and Dalton 2018) By the late 1880s its population number was just over 250

band members the highest in over 50 years (Wybenga and Dalton 2018) In the 1900s

they shifted from small-scale farming to ldquotrades in the nearby urban centres of Brantford

and Hamilton or occupations in the mining sector specifically the quarry and gypsum

mines of Hagersvillerdquo which were located just outside of its reserve (Wybenga and Dalton

2018 p 5) In the late 1900s education opportunities enabled many band members to

find lucrative employment off-reserve (Wybenga and Dalton 2018)

was wrong has caused great harm and has no place in our countryrdquo (Government of Canada 2010 para 1)

65


Creation Story

It is important to position MCFNrsquos contemporary and historical contexts within MCFNrsquos

creation story because as Simpson (2011) says there is no one way of being Anishinaabe

and being Anishinaabe is personal and stems from their creation story Each personrsquos life

is reflected within their understood creation story There are many different creation

stories told by various Anishinaabe Elders and each one is valid in themselves (Simpson

2011)

The Anishinaabe creation story told by MCFN Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin (Appendix 2) is

reflected in a mural at the Lloyd S King (LSK) Elementary School Library on MCFNrsquos

reserve This mural was researched designed and created by Cote et al (2002) and

published by Gibson (2006) A brief summary of Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin provides a spiritual

and historical account of MCFN leading to their contemporary placing in the world today

Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin begins with the seven fires52 of creation which tell us that everything

is interconnected as intricate systems (Gibson 2006) This principle forms the guiding

and fundamental basis of Anishinaabe law in which we have to respect all of creation

because of our interconnectedness (Cathie Jamieson personal communication

November 2018) This principle informs the seven Anishinaabe teachings (also referred

to as fires) reflected in Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin The teachings are 1) that the Creator in the

moon will protect us 2) we must maintain balance in ourselves and everything we do 3)

help each other and learn together 4) struggle sacrifice and reflect within ourselves for

resurgence and transformation 5) follow the natural cycles 6) live in peace and 7) not

disturb the natural cycles of life (Gibson 2006) This is the good life mino-bimaadiziwin

(Simpson 2011 Kindle location 95) The Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin prophecies tell us of times

52 Here lsquofiresrsquo allude to stages of Creation

66

when the western world will interfere with mino-bimaadiziwin ie MCFNrsquos migration from

east to west coming of the colonists the loss of land altered and oppressive relations

and MCFNrsquos relocation to the current land base The prophecies in Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin

however indicate a time when the Anishinaabe nation will resurge to reclaim their rights

responsibilities and natural ways These prophecies of interferences with mino-

bimaadiziwin and MCFNrsquos ultimate resurgence are summarized by the Seven Fires53

Prophecy

Ojibwe elders tell of seven major prophets that visited the Anishinaabe long ago

with predictions of the future The time shown in each prediction is known as a fire

The first prophet told that the Anishinaabe would follow the sacred Megis shell in

the time of the first fire The second prophet told of a time when the Anishinaabe

would live by a huge body of water The third prophet told of a time that the

Anishinaabe families must move west to a land where food grows on water The

fourth fire is a time when light skinned people would come They may wear the

face of brotherhood but beware of the face of death The fifth prophet told of a time

of great struggle and of a promise of joy and salvation In time the struggle did

happen as Nations lost their land and their freedom The sixth prophet described

a time when the Anishinaabe would realise that the promise of salvation was false

This prophecy also came true when our children were taken away from their

teachings and placed in strange schools To protect the ceremonies sacred

bundles were buried One day a boy will have a dream that will show him where to

find the Hidden messages The seventh prophet told about the coming of a new

people These people would retrace their path and pick up the teachings left along

53 Here Fire is used as a prediction

67

the way If these new people stay strong the sacred fire will be lit again (Gibson

2006 centre insert)

The vision of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation is one where people

are thriving and are living a joyful celebration of their culture and heritage The

youth are on top of the world as they receive love and guidance from the adults

and elders The people will be living in harmony with all of creation (Gibson 2006

centre insert)

According to an Anishinaabe Elder Edna Manitowabi this resurgence is vital for our

healing She says that we must reconnect to Mother Earthrsquos sacred teachings for our

healing and as an Elder it is her duty to pass on these teachings

We need to pass on the teachings of the sacredness of the water that sustains us

the air that we breathe and the fire within us so that our next generation of women

have an understanding of what is happening to them during this powerful transition

Through these teachings they will then come to understand the Earth as their

Mother Through these teachings they will then come to understand the Earth as

themselves They will understand her seasons her moods and her cycles They

will understand that she is the Mother to all of Creation They will understand that

she takes care of herself They will see that she is beautiful sacred and that she

was created first They will know that she holds a special place in our hearts

because she is our Mother They will understand that our people connect to this

land as their Mother We need to help our young people maintain this relationship

and these teachings because that connection is the umbilical bond to all of

68

Creation When our young women understand this they will understand their own

seasons cycles and moods They will understand that they are sacred and

beautiful They will understand that they must take care of themselves and that

they are the mothers to generations yet to be born We do this for our young

women so they will be guided by our Motherrsquos wisdom and so they will model

themselves after this Earth So they might grow up to be good and kind

compassionate Anishinaabekwewag So they might know how to look after their

children and their grandchildren So that together we might be a strong nation

again That is my dream That is why I keep working We do this work because we

love our children This is my purpose in life as a Grandmother and a Great

Grandmother This is my purpose in life as a Kobaade (Simpson 2011 Kindle

location 515)

For MCFN today this resurgence is seen in terms of its resilience and it claims that

we are no strangers to change and are adept at transitioning ourselves to meet the

challenges of the times As we make our way through the 21st century there is little

doubt that we will be required to transition ourselves again and there is little doubt

that we will be able to meet the challenge (Wybenga and Dalton 2018 p 6)

Chapter Conclusions

Today MCFN is shaped by its colonial history and in part acceptance of colonial ways

Consequently not all its members may subscribe to principles of social-relational

Indigeny and its resurgence ie Kiinwi Dabaadjmowinrsquos underlying principle teachings

and prophecies Understandings of how MCFNrsquos history created divergent MCFN

69

identities emerged throughout the research interactions with the MCFN community rather

than being evident upfront This is perhaps indicative of community-based research

Nonetheless an understanding MCFNrsquos historical and contemporary contexts in relation

to its creation story was of utmost relevance for the co-development of an appropriate

MCFN research framework for co-engaged community action-research (see chapter 4)

and appropriate meaning making of the research to develop a MCFN Water Framework

(see chapters 5-7)

70

4 Methodology Framework and Methods

This chapter begins with researcher positionality of the doctoral student Next the

research methodology is explained through an emergent research process followed by

a detailed description of the research methods Last the research analyses integrity

ethics and data management and methods limitations are presented

Self-location

Wilson (2001) says that doing Indigenous research is not just about being accountable in

terms of ldquovalidity reliability or making value judgementsrdquo but it is about asking ldquoHow am I

fulfilling my role in the relationshiprdquo (p 177) For this purpose the doctoral student in

respecting the principles of Indigenous research self-located herself in the research

relationship as follows

I am African born and bred I am a mixed blood person so-called coloured in

South Africa African blood runs through my veins My mother talked about our

ancestry in terms of its European origin and briefly mentioned our Indigenous

heritage I think that I am Xhosa but I am not sure From my paternal side we

assumed that we are descendants of the French-Huguenot because of our

surname We heard about our connections to people from St Helena Bay bringing

in Indian blood But never was I connected to my Indigenous ancestors That was

the intention of the apartheid government ndash to brainwash the so-called coloured

people into thinking that they were not Black not part of being Indigenous I could

say So what I have Indigenous blood and ask Does that make me Indigenous

In my belief I am Indigenous not because Xhosa blood runs through my veins but

because I know that I am part of this universe because it allows me to BE Hence

71

I chose to live by respecting all of creation in all its forms - including the life of

water

By being coloured or I prefer black I have experienced marginalization and

injustice And I ask what right does someone else have to deny me the respect to

BE just like all other creation It is with these values and experiences that I entered

and continued with this research as the doctoral student on the research team

(Reneeacute Goretsky)

This positionality ie with anti-oppression and relational lenses shaped how the doctoral

student approached the research and analysed and interpreted the findings However

the research team also comprised of MCFN Water Committee members Darin Wybenga

(Chair Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Coordinator Department of Consultation

and Accommodation Kim Fullerton (Legal Counsel) Cathie Jamieson (Band Councilor)

Fawn Sault (Consultation Manager Department of Consultation and Accommodation)

Margaret Sault (Director Department of Lands Research amp Membership) and Caron

Smith (Environmental and Regulatory Officer DOCA) Dr Sheri Longboat who is a

Haudenosaunee Mohawk from Six Nations of the Grand River was the doctoral studentrsquos

supervisor and represented UoG School of Environmental Design and Rural

Development Their positionalities although not described here further shaped how the

research was approached and how the knowledge was interpreted These are explained

in section 43

72

Research Framework and Principles

The research draws from Kovachrsquos (2009) research framework which aligns to a

qualitative research design developed to accommodate the cultural epistemology54 of the

Necirchiyaw Kiskecircyihtamowin First Nation Kovachrsquos framework is explained in terms of

a) relational epistemology (p 47)

b) decolonizing aims towards ldquopraxis and social justicerdquo (p 47) for Indigenous

peoples and embedded within tribal ethics

c) ldquoresearcher preparationrdquo (p 49) of self-locating one-self ongoing reflection

and experiential learning

d) ldquoresearch preparationsrdquo (p 51) involving who what how and when

following Indigenous protocols

e) gathering knowledge and

f) making meaning of the knowledge gathered using culturally appropriate

and acceptable ways

In selecting an appropriate qualitative Indigenous research methodology the works of 1)

Dionrsquos (2009) Braiding Histories Learning from Aboriginal Peoples Experiences and

Perspectives 2) Kovachrsquos (2009) Indigenous Methodologies Characteristics

Conversations and Contexts and 3) Chilisarsquos (2012) Indigenous Research

Methodologies were considered55 They all espoused principles of Indigenous research

which according to Drawson et alrsquos (2017) systematic review of Indigenous research

methods can be summarized into four primary principles

1 Research must be done in collaboration with Indigenous peoples by building

relationships and partnerships (Drawson et al 2017) Indigenous peoples are seeking

mutual respect and are meaningfully contributing to research processes from their

own worldviews as part of their struggle for self-determination (Debassige 2010)

54 ldquothe nature of knowledge and truthrdquo (Chilisa 2012 p 21) 55 In this consideration works where the focus was solely on research methods and not on methodologies were excluded Also excluded were works where the focus was knowledge areadiscipline specific for broader applicability

73

2 Research must be done with Indigenous peoples as equal participants (Drawson

et al 2017) The research must be completely and explicitly reciprocal in knowledge

decision making and benefits (Debassige 2010 Le and Gobert 2015 Riddell et al

2017)

3 Researchers must prioritize Indigenous ways of knowing being and doing in the

research process (Drawson et al 2017) Brant-Castellano (2000) describes different

types of Indigenous knowledges processes inclusive of ldquoteachings empirical

observation and revelationsrdquo (p 23) Lavalleacutee (2009) says that all these forms of

Indigenous knowledges must be respected as such and incorporated into the

research

4 Research must be developed organized conducted and interpreted within

context (Drawson et al 2017) King 2015 and Riddell et al 2017 both emphasize

that research always occurs within historical and socio-cultural contexts and is only

meaningful if interpreted from these perspectives

These principles underlie the guidelines set out in the document by The First Nations

Information Governance Centre on Ownership Control Access and Possession

(OCAPtrade) The Path to First Nations Information Governance (2014)

Ownership control access and possession means that 1) First Nations control

data collection processes in their communities 2) First Nations own protect and

control how their information is used and 3) Access to First Nations data is

important and First Nations determine under appropriate mandates and protocols

how access to external researchers is facilitated and respected (The First Nations

Information Governance Centre 2014 p 1)

Kovachrsquos (2009) framework was suggested by UoG researchers to the Water Committee

over Dionrsquos (2009) work because Dionrsquos braiding histories project suggested an

74

ethnographic56 approach An ethnographic approach although appropriate for

Indigenous research requires in-depth fieldwork and continuous participant engagement

over a time period in their natural environment (Jones and Smith 2017) This was not the

intent of this cross-sectional research Kovachrsquos (2009) framework was also selected over

Chilisarsquos (2012) methodology because it was developed within the Canadian context and

was specific to First Nations

The research team supported the adoption of Kovachrsquos (2009) framework as a departure

point for a MCFN context-specific research framework In doing this the research team

started by adapting Kovachrsquos (2009) framework to be more reflective of research team

members being co-researchers through co-engagement Hence the language used in the

adapted research framework was altered from an outside-in to one that reflected the

involvement of the MCFN Water Committee (Figure 41)

The adapted framework centered co-engagement at the core and it involved five cyclical

interacting and reflexive principles of a) relational paradigm b) Indigenous values and

ethics c) Indigenous cultural protocols d) gathering knowledge and e) making meanings

of knowledge gathered from Indigenous perspectives (Figure 41)

56 ldquoWith its origins in anthropology ethnography is the study of social interactions behaviours and perceptions that occur within groups organisations and communitiesrdquo (Reeves et al 2013 p e 1365)

75

Figure 41 Research framework reflective of a research team being co-researchers Adapted from Kovach (2009) See p 72

It differed from Kovachrsquos (2009) original framework in four ways First the relational

epistemology was modified to relational paradigm because the broader term paradigm

reflects the shared and accepted yet open-ended beliefs that research practitioners use

to engage and resolve problems in their field (Kuhn 1970) Second the ldquodecolonizing

aims towards tribal ethicsrdquo (Kovach 2009 p 47) were replaced with lsquoIndigenous values

and ethicsrsquo because MCFN was not decolonizing its own practices Third ldquoresearcher

preparationsrdquo (Kovach 2009 p 49) were removed and incorporated into the co-

engagement process The doctoral student on the research team acknowledged upfront

that she was the outsider and her lack of knowledge understanding and experience

should be part of the co-engagement process where she was learning growing and

transforming as the research unfolded Last ldquoresearch preparationsrdquo (Kovach 2009 p

51) were replaced with lsquoIndigenous cultural protocolsrsquo because the MCFN Water

Committee was steering its own protocols

76

It was recognized that although this framework would guide the research the research

methodology itself was an emergent co-engaged learning process This is indicative of

wicked research problems (Rittel and Weber 1973 see footnote 38 p 35)

Consequently space was provided for research methodology reflexivity ie to recognize

that the research process and outcomes are interrelated through the researchersrsquo

subjective involvements and interpretations (Finlay 1998)

A MCFN Research Framework

The research team that included UoG researchers and the MCFN Water Committee

discussed and grappled with interpreting conceptual expressions of co-engagement

relational paradigm Indigenous values and ethics Indigenous cultural protocols and

Indigenous meaning making because of different meanings and understandings

associated with being Indigenous A shared understanding of Kovachrsquos (2009) adapted

research framework within the context of MCFN only emerged over time as the research

proceeded Throughout this time the research teamrsquos discussions around these

conceptualizations further shaped Kovachrsquos (2009) adapted research framework (Figure

41) to be MCFN context-specific (Figure 42 see p 87) What follows below is a

description of the emergence of this MCFN-context specific framework through an

interactive and reflexive process Each framework component is described in terms of

how it was interpreted and then how it differs to Anishinaabe understandings from the

literature including why and where applicable The manifestation of the MCFN context-

specific research framework could hence only be described in its entirety at the end of

the research

Co-engagement

In this research the term co-engagement was used to convey collaborative values of

mutual benefit and equal participation The research (as mentioned in Chapter 1 p 3)

was in direct response to a MCFN need All research team members and research

participants were equally situated

77

MCFN members were placed in the centre of this research as the knowledge holders and

the producers for social change The doctoral student was the facilitator and conduit for

this research Throughout this research there was co-engagement between the research

team members and with the broader MCFN members

The MCFN Water Committee initially met bi-weekly from May to December 2017 and then

monthly from January to October 2018 For all meetings that the doctoral student

attended draft documents for input discussion and revision as needed were prepared by

the UoG researchers The research was discussed with MCFN members at two open

community meetings held in November 2017 and 2018 which saw approximately 20 and

30 members attend respectively The research proposal and final Water Framework were

approved by MCFNrsquos Treaty and Aboriginal Rights Committee before being endorsed by

MCFNrsquos Chief and Council

From a relational paradigm to a multiple-research paradigm approach

This research team adopted a multiple qualitative research paradigm approach which

allowed it to respect a relational research paradigm enable plural understandings to

emerge through the constructivism paradigm and hear the voices of the marginalized to

transform dominant Canadian water governance through an action inquiry paradigm

A multiple-research paradigm differs from a mixed-methods paradigm which is described

by Johnson et al (2007) as the

type of research in which a researcher or team of researchers combines elements

of qualitative and quantitative research approaches (eg use of qualitative and

quantitative viewpoints data collection analysis inference techniques) for the

purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration (p 123)

78

Three research paradigms were adopted in an effort to accommodate heterogeneity in

the research team

First a relational research paradigm is advocated by many scholars such as Wilson

(2001) Borrows (2003) Hart (2010) McGregor (2018a) when doing Indigenous research

The MCFN Water Committee members however had different levels of understanding

accepting and practicing a relational research paradigm For this reason the research

team although respecting this paradigm did not assume that all MCFN members were

departing from an internalized relational paradigm Hence this paradigm was allowed to

emerge from the participants through the research process

Watts (2013) explains that Indigenous relational ways of knowing being and doing (which

she refers to as cosmology57 and not a paradigm with lsquoontology58 and epistemologyrsquo) are

embedded in place-thought processes that cannot be situated into abstraction In

Anishinaabe culture Watts (2013) relates place-thought to the Anishinaabe creation story

of the Seven Fires of Creation as told by Simpson 2011 She specifically connects it the

Fifth and Sixth Fires ldquoIn the Fifth Fire Gizhe-Mnidoo (the Creator) placed hisher thoughts

into seeds In the Sixth Fire Gizhe-Mnidoo created First Woman (Earth) a place where

these seeds could root and growrdquo (Watts 2013 p 21) In this understanding it connects

the ldquofemale animal spirit mineral and plant worldsrdquo (Watts 2013 p 21) as being one

equal and interrelated in contrast to the western world where humans are dominant and

seen as superior (Watts 2013) Place-thought is expressed as a unison functioning and

beating as one There was is and never will be a separation because it cannot separate

(Watts 2013) It is based on the premise that ldquoland is alive and thinking and that humans

and non-humans derive agency through the extensions of these thoughtsrdquo (Watts 2013

57 She uses cosmology because she embeds this relationship within the creation story 58 Ontology is the ldquoessential characteristics of what it means to existrdquo (Chilisa 2012 p 20)

79

p 21) With the dominance and imposition of colonial thought embedded in positivism59

hence dualism60 in post-contact Indigenous peoplesrsquo societies place-thought was eroded

and weakened but not obliterated (Watts 2013) For MCFN members colonial Christian-

based faith through the influences of Peter Jones (see p 63) shaped the beliefs

knowledge practices and acceptance of place-thought cosmologies (see Chapter 3 p

48) Watts (2013) says though that we are now in a mode of resurgence to reclaim our

connections to the non-human world We as humans are dependent on Earth and all of

creations should function in balance association and with respect to each other (Watts

2013)

Second in response to different acceptance levels of place-thought cosmologies this

research also adopted a constructivist paradigm to allow for social pluralism

According to Patton (2015) the worldview of constructivists is that

we as humans have developed the ability to interpret and construct reality - the

world of human perception is not real in an absolute sense but is made up and

shaped by cultural and linguistic constructs Things do not and cannot have

essence because they are defined interpersonally and intersubjectively by people

interacting in a network of relationships Reality is socially constructed Truth is

59 According to Comte in Mill (1965) positivism embodies two main tenets 1 Phenomenalism -ldquothat facts are the bedrock of science that they are based on pure observation and that the connections between them - without benefit of abstract entities such as accrued in metaphysics constitute scientific lawsrdquo (Heidtman et al 2000 p 11) and 2 Universal laws - ldquoa social universe is amenable to the development of abstract laws that can be tested through the careful collection of data these abstract laws will denote the basic and generic properties of the social universe and they will specify their natural relations and such laws will not be overly concerned with causality or functionsrdquo (Heidtman et al 2000 p 11) 60 According to Descartes in Capra (1983) dualism follows that the ldquomind and matter were separate and fundamentally different Thus he concluded that there is nothing included in the concept of body that belongs to the mind and nothing in that of the mind that belongs to the bodyrdquo (p 59)

80

constructed Phenomena are context based and cannot be generalised (chap 3

p 55)

Kanselaar (2002) states that constructivism is both cognitive ie from an individualistic

perspective following the thinking of Piaget and it is also social-cultural following the

thinking of Vygotsky Kanselaar (2002) in explaining Piaget says that cognitive

constructivism is where the human mind proceeds through adaptation (ie thoughts are

assimilated and accommodated into the mind) and organization (thoughts are developed

into complex and integrated ways to produce the adult mind)

Leeds-Hurwitz (2009) defines social-cultural constructivism as

the processes by which people jointly construct their understandings of the world

Advocates assume that meanings are developed in coordination with others rather

than separately within each individual or in the world of things making social

interaction the loom upon which the social fabric is woven (p 893)

The ontology of cognitive constructivism is idealism ie ldquowhat is real is in the minds of

the individualrdquo (Schwandt 1994 p 243) and relativism ie ldquolocal and specific constructed

and co-constructed findingsrdquo for social constructivism (Guba and Lincoln 2005 p195)

Their epistemology is ldquosubjectivism ie created findingsrdquo (Guba and Lincoln 2005 p

195) They are both pluralist in nature in that there are multiple often conflicting

constructions and all are meaningful (Schwandt 1994) Social constructivism although

relational differs from a place-thought cosmology in that social constructivism remains

embedded in the human mind

81

Third this research in advocating for social justice adopted an action inquiry paradigm

(which includes both Action Research and Participatory Action Research) which like

critical theory61 is focused on social change (Tripp 2005) However action inquiry takes

a step further by including participants in knowledge making thereby shifting the

boundaries of knowledge production (Tripp 2005) The ontology of action inquiry is

participative reality ie subjective-objective reality co-created by mind and given cosmos

(Guba and Lincoln 2005 p 195) and its epistemology is pragmatism62 (Oquist 1978)

Given the adoption of a multiple-research paradigm approach the lsquorelational paradigmrsquo

component in Figure 41 was replaced with lsquomultiple research paradigmsrsquo in Figure 42

to accommodate different beliefs in the research team

From Indigenous values and ethics to community values and ethics

Within MCFN members knowledge understanding and acceptance of being Anishinaabe

varied and there was no one set of values and ethics The Water Committee agreed

though that for this research it would be guided but not limited by the Seven Grandfathersrsquo

teachings These Anishinaabe teachings also seen as life principles included ldquoHumility

Honesty Respect Courage Kindness Truth and Loverdquo (Lavalleacutee 2008 p 69) These

61 Critical Theory according to Horkheimer (1972) is defined as both in terms of 1 emancipatory acts from

slavery for human beings and 2 Transforming dominant systems that marginalise human beings in all its forms ie against injustices through feasible solutions Its ontology is materialism ie ldquophenomena and problems not in terms of absolute ideas and predetermined societal development but in terms of resource distribution social struggles power resource controlrdquo (Fuchs and Sandoval 2008 p 114) Its epistemology is dialectical realism ie dialectical meaning subjective ldquocomplex dynamic thinkingrdquo and ldquorealism an analysis of real possibilities and a dialectic of pessimism and optimismrdquo (Fuchs and Sandoval 2008 p 114) In all critical approaches it is believed that social struggles (which have the potential to rise from the inside of systems) should radically transform oppressive structures to produce a socially-just system for the oppressed or exploited (Fuchs and Sandoval 2008) 62 Pragmatism according to Oquist 1978 (p 152) is ldquoscience that consists of action guided by instrumental idea The justification of knowledge is judged by the consequences of an operation If action fulfils the predictions of the directive idea maximizes the appropriate values and resolves the problematic situation that gave rise to the research in the first place then it is justified as knowledge The only goal of knowledge is the solution of problematic situationsrdquo Basically it subscribes to the question ldquoWhat are the practical consequences and useful applications of what we can learn about this issue or problemrdquo (Patton 2015 Chap 3 p 105)

82

principles are not contradictory to what Simpson (2011) relays as Anishinaabe values and

ethics which are entrenched in mino-bimaadiziwin the good life Simpson (2011) explains

that living the good life is a lifelong way of living and there is no one way of living the good

life The foundation of living the good life is ldquogood relationships as individuals as families

as communities as nationsrdquo (Kindle location 1715) and between all of creation (Simpson

2011) Language and culture unify these diverse relationships and Anishinaabe peoples

need to know this diversity to resist ongoing colonial assimilation andor influence

lsquoIndigenous values and ethicsrsquo in Figure 41 were replaced with lsquoCommunity members

values and ethicsrsquo in Figure 42 to reflect MCFNrsquos specific context

The research ethics were also guided by the 2018 Canadian Tri‐Council Policy

Statement Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans Chapter 9 Research

involving the First Nations Inuit and Meacutetis Peoples in Canada (Government of Canada

2018b) The research ethics was first approved by the MCFN Water Committee and then

the UoG Research Ethics Board (REB 17-10-043) see Appendix 3

Ethical considerations included informed and voluntary consent for participants over the

age of 12 maintenance of confidentiality and privacy where feasible and required

research participant benefits reduced risks for the research participant rights of the

research participant to withdraw if feasible clear articulations of the analyses use and

dissemination of knowledge gathered community ownership and management of

knowledge gathered All principles were discussed and revised by the MCFN Water

committee where appropriate to ensure that they aligned to the protocols and language

used and understood by MCFN members

From Indigenous cultural protocols to community protocols

Within the Water Committee there were different cultural perspectives ranging from

traditional Anishinaabe cultures to more influenced Euro-Western cultures Hence the

83

Water Committee members had different understandings on what lsquocultural protocolsrsquo

would be followed After in-depth discussions the research team agreed to incorporate

two cultural protocols in the research

First water would be present during the research activities and it would be acknowledged

as life Simpson (2011) refers to Anishinaabe cultural protocols as the ldquooriginal

instructions passed down from the Ancestorsrdquo (kindle location 1807-08) She talks about

dreams revealing ceremonies through song and dancing the ldquoLittle Boy water drumrdquo

(kindle location 489-90) and fasting However the research team agreed that

Anishinaabe water ceremonies would not be performed which was considered to be

lsquoneutralrsquo yet respectful to water The doctoral student was also aware that water

ceremonies are spiritual and should be performed by those chosen to do so by the

Ancestors (Simpson 2011) It would therefore be inappropriate for her as non-

Anishinaabe but more importantly as a non-practitioner to perform water ceremonies It

was not the Water Committeersquos expectation though that the doctoral student would be

conducting water ceremonies

Second the research team agreed that all adult research participants would be offered a

gift63 of harvested traditional tobacco but it was up to the participant to accept the gift or

not In relating the use of tobacco ties as a research methodology Wilson and Restoule

(2010) explain that tobacco is of prime essence for traditional Indigenous peoples in North

America and ldquoit is used as an offering for everythingrdquo (p 35) The sacredness of traditional

tobacco is often expressed through the creation and creator stories and it is used to

connect with the spirit world (Wilson and Restoule 2010) Simpson (2011) relays that for

traditional Anishinaabe the giving of tobacco is a reciprocal relationship For research

purposes Indigenous knowledge is derived through the teachings of tobacco and

63 Tobacco as a gift was not offered as an incentive in this research

84

recreating this sacred space in research provides an acceptance of Indigenous ways

(Wilson and Restoule 2010) Often the acceptance of tobacco as a gift by an

Anishinaabe person can be construed as consent to participate in the research (Wilson

and Restoule 2010) For this research acceptance or refusal of tobacco ties was not

automatically interpreted as agreement or not to participate in the research process This

was because the offering and receiving of tobacco as an Anishinaabe protocol was not

practiced by all MCFN members For activities with minors the gift of tobacco was offered

to the water

Hence lsquoIndigenous cultural protocolsrsquo in Figure 41 were changed to lsquocommunity

protocolsrsquo in Figure 42

From gathering knowledge to a Community-Based Participatory Research

The research team adopted the Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR)

approach as recommended by Drawson et al (2017) through their systematic review of

64 relevant articles because it epitomizes ldquocollaboration research equality and

community controlrdquo (p 8) CBPR departs from Participatory Action Research (PAR) and

Action Research (AR)64 but it places the decision-making within the community (Drawson

et al 2017) The researcher does not prioritize herhis own academic interests or

identified social problem but acts as a conduit for the research identified by the community

(Drawson et al 2017) Further rather than involving the community co-researchers

through a learning and empowering process all researchers and participants are

regarded as equal knowledge holders and sharers throughout the research process

(Drawson et al 2017)

64 PAR and AR under the general ambit of the western Action Inquiry paradigm (Tripp 2005) aim to

improve situations of humans through a systematic knowledge production process of action (Reason and Bradbury 2008) PAR overlaps with AR but PAR is an emergent process rather than planned (Greenwood et al 1993)

85

In this research the MCFN Water Committee was the decision-making body and was

seen to be self-determining for social change Hence lsquogathering knowledgersquo in Figure 41

was changed to be more specific as lsquocommunity-based participatory researchrsquo in Figure

42


perspectives

Kovach (2009) claims that the research epistemology underlies the interpretative lens

through which researchers make meaning of their research Given that a multiple

research paradigm approach was adopted the lenses of place-thought cosmology

constructivism and action inquiry for social change were used to make meanings of the

knowledge gathered as described in chapters 5-7 The meaning making process of the

knowledge gathered through different western and Indigenous paradigms was not

conceptualized to be necessarily intersecting except for the western paradigms which are

congruent Making meaning of the knowledge gathered from an Indigenous relational

paradigm was used to provide an alternative cosmology allowing the research team to

interpret the knowledge through different lenses

Specifically this research employed the thematic analysis methodology to analyze the

qualitative knowledge shared As suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) and Evans

(2017) thematic analysis provides understandings of the research participantsrsquo

worldviews and opinions based on their lived experiences within context which was the

purpose of this community-engaged research

Although thematic analysis is meant to identify patterns within the data collected (Braun

and Clarke 2006) all knowledge shared in this research was included as themes whether

it was one individualrsquos idea or shared ideas from more than one person This approach is

justified in that the frequency of ideas is not indicative of the significance of ideas (Braun

86

and Clarke 2006) Outliers cannot be ignored because they may be manifestations of

heterogeneity within your population (Bazeley 2009) Conformity theories eg normative

social influence (Asch 1956) social influence (Asch 1956) and social norms (Deutsch

and Gerard 1955) dictate that as humans we are socialized in our thinking towards norms

(Kahneman and Miller 1986) Often it is the outliers in a community who will offer voices

of dissent difference and creativity However these outliers are usually marginalized and

their voices remain unheard (Foster-Fishman et al 2007) This was not the intent of this

research and in living this intent all Indigenous knowledge shared was considered as

ldquoreliable and valid forms of authored research (Riddell et al 2017) This approach is

strongly supported by The Ontario Federation of Indian Friendship Centres (2012) which

calls for

hellipa collaborative process of research education and action that recognizes

plurality of knowledge which is generated by and inherent in many places spaces

and people All forms of knowledge are valid All voices even those deeply

marginalized colonized and silenced have the power to articulate to express to

declare and to tell ldquothe storyrdquo All knowledge leads to action and transformations

All knowledge and all the resulting action give people power and competence to

define their own world (p 7)

For these reasons quantitative analysis was not included for the thematic analysis

lsquoMaking meaning of knowledge gathered from Indigenous perspectivesrsquo Figure 41 was

replaced with lsquoMaking meaning of knowledge gathered from multiple perspectivesrsquo in

Figure 42

87

In summary a MCFN context-specific research framework adapted from Figure 41

(see p 75) to Figure 42 is indicative of plural MCFN ways of knowing being and doing

which are embedded in its historical and contemporary context as illustrated in chapter

3

Figure 42 An emergent MCFN context-specific research framework Adapted from Kovach (2009)

In departing from these methodology principles the specific methods employed for

gathering knowledge are now described

88

Research Methods

Participants and selection

At the onset of the research project the MCFN Water Committee wanted to engage all

interested MCFN members across all demographics and locations in this research so

they agreed to

1) 20 semi-structured face-to-face conversations with MCFN adult key-informants Open

story-telling was not the preferred way because the research was guided by questions

Participants were however provided with the option for story-telling should that be their

preferred communication mode

2) six group discussions with MCFN adults It was agreed that sharing circles would not

be used Rather the Water Committee agreed that the concept and process of focus

group discussions were more appropriate and currently conventional within the

community Sharing circles and focus groups are similar however sharing circles provide

the space for participants to holistically convey ldquoemotional mental spiritual and physical

aspectsrdquo in relation to the topic as part of the knowledge sharing in the research process

(Lavalleacutee 2009 p 29 and Nabigon et al 1999)

3) eight artwork activity sessions with MCFN youth group and Lloyd S King (LSK)

Elementary School students For this we adapted the photovoice technique but replacing

photography with artwork Sutton-Brown (2014) describes photovoice as an

ldquoethnographic technique that uses visual images (usually photographs) its associated

meanings for social action and changerdquo (p 169)

4) one MCFN semi-structured survey with adults Initially the Water Committee was

planning to conduct a survey as the only knowledge gathering activity However there

was concern that the response rate to a survey may be too low and there was no prior

community consultation on the Water Claim to inform a survey We decided to employ a

semi-structured survey using preliminary conversation and group discussion findings

5) two MCFN community meetings for input and feedback at the beginning and end of the

research

89

In anticipation that the Water Claim would be upheld by Canada the Water Committee

agreed that it would be beneficial to initiate preliminary discussions as a starting point

with relevant Conservation Authorities Seven Conservation Authorities were identified

for semi-structured interviews The purpose of these interviews was to ascertain

Conservation Authorities views on the MCFN Water Claim and draft Water Framework

The reason why Conservation Authorities were selected was because the Conservation

Authorities Act 1990 (amended 2017) mandates Conservation Authorities to ldquoprovide in

the area over which it has jurisdiction programs and services designed to further the

conservation restoration development and management of natural resources other than

gas oil coal and mineralsrdquo (Part V Item 20 (1) MCFN acknowledges that all three levels

of government as well as other stakeholders inclusive of industry etc will have to be

engaged as the next stage in this project ie to advocate and position the MCFN Water

Framework to Indigenize water governance within treaty lands and territory The MCFN

Water Committee will lead this objective as part of its ongoing discussions with Canadarsquos

federal government and possibly with the government of Ontario and other Indigenous

peoples sharing the treaty lands and territory

These methods subscribed to MCFN community norms and are commonly used as non-

experimental qualitative research tools in CBPR (Hacker 2013) Hammarberg et al 2016

suggest that qualitative methods are not meant to be used as ldquofactual data required to

answer the research questionrdquo (p 498) Instead Hammarberg et al (2016) suggest that

qualitative methods are employed ldquoto answer the research question in terms of

participants experiences beliefs opinions meanings and perspectivesrdquo which are

context specific (p 499)

Research phases activities and timeframes

The CBPR approach with the community was divided into four phases with activities

occurring over the period April 2017 to November 2018 Figure 43 provides a high-level

graphic presentation of the four phases which are summarized in Table 41

90

Figure 43 Research phases activities and timeframes

91

Table 41 Detailed summary of research phases activities and timeframes

Phase 1 ndash Project Development and Design

April to November 2017

Phase 2 ndash Knowledge Gathering (conversations group discussions

and artwork activities) December 2017 to April 2018

Six joint meetings were held with the Water Committee to develop the research proposal and protocols for the research with MCFN adults which were endorsed by Chief and Council and the PhD Advisory Committee in September October 2017 In October 2017 research ethics was obtained from UoG for the MCFN adult research which was initiated in November 2017 Relationships with the Water Committee members were developed during Phase 1 In November 2017 the research team presented the proposed research to MCFN members for input and discussion

Knowledge gathering occurred and progress was discussed with the Water Committee in January and April 2018 Research ethics approval was obtained from UoG for the MCFN artwork activities with minors in FebruaryMarch 2018 Throughout Phase 2 the knowledge gathered was transcribed checked for integrity and analysed which were discussed and approved by the PhD Advisory Committee in May 2018

Phase 3 ndash Knowledge Gathering (survey and interviews with Conservation Authorities)

May to August 2018

Phase 4 ndash MCFN Water Framework Development

September to November 2018

The research team developed the survey in May 2018 based on emergent themes from Phase 2rsquos preliminary analysis Research ethics approval for the survey and CA interviews was obtained from UoG in early June 2018 and the survey was distributed from mid June until mid August 2018 At the same time six interviews with CAs were conducted In late July 2018 the research team discussed the rationale and process for the development of MCFN Water Framework

Further data analyses were conducted from September-October 2018 to include the survey data and CA interviews Based on this research analyses a draft MCFN Water Framework was developed by the research team in September-November 2018 and the PhD Advisory Committeersquos and MCFN membersrsquo inputs were obtained at the end of November 2018 for further refinement The final framework was endorsed by Chief and Council in early 2019 for MCFNrsquos implementation

92

Knowledge gathering activities

The knowledge gathering activities with MCFN members sought views on their water

values Water Claim and the development of the Water Framework The gathered

knowledge fed directly into the research objectives on 1) identifying MCFN water values

2) identifying the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN members and 3) developing a

conceptual MCFN Water Framework which informed research objectives 4 and 5 ie the

deconstruction of social justice and water governance constructs from MCFNrsquos ways of

knowing being and doing as inferred by the doctoral student

Each activity except for the Chief and Council meeting started by acknowledging water

as life and the research participants were offered a gift of tobacco or tobacco was offered

to water in the case of the youth activities Thereafter the research project and researcher

were introduced (the doctoral student self-located herself in the research) Participants

were given an opportunity to read through and complete the Informed Consent document

where applicable

4431 Semi-structured face-to-face conversations with key-informants

The research team acknowledged heterogeneity within the MCFN community across

demographic factors such as gender age lifestyle and belief systems hence they formed

the basis of the key-informant participant inclusion criteria The inclusion criteria were 1)

adult MCFN members across age ranges ie young adults middle-aged adults and

elders 2) persons who were knowledgeable on the topic of water 3) gender

representivity 4) occupationallifestyle backgrounds representivity (economic cultural

environmental social focus) and 5) worldviews representivity An exclusion criterion was

MCFN non-members In purposive non-probabilistic sampling often theoretical saturation

is used which is reached after about 12 interviews (Guest et al 2006) although Kuzel

93

(1992)65 suggests 12-20 interviews to account for heterogeneity In this research

conversations were conducted with 20 key-informants which were sufficient to account

for diversity

Key informants were identified based on the inclusion criteria by the Water Committee

The doctoral student was not part of this process except for two suggestions made by key

informants In these two cases the doctoral student passed these names to the Water

Committee Chair to confirm eligibility as per the inclusion criteria and to obtain approval

The Water Committee contacted members to ascertain their willingness to participate in

conversations Once they agreed they were contacted by the doctoral student to arrange

the logistics At that time they were provided the information letter and informed consent

form (Appendix 4) and the conversation schedule (Appendix 5)

In opening the conversations participants were asked to either respond to the probes or

to tell hisher story The specific probes explored with key-informants were

1 How important is water to you and why

2 What does the Water Claim mean to you

3 What does ownership of water within your Treaty Lands and Territory mean to you

4 How are MCFNrsquos water values and rights centrally included (ie Indigenized) in water

decision-making processes (termed water governance)

5 How do you think that MCFNrsquos water values and rights can be centrally included (ie

Indigenized) in water decision-making processes (termed water governance) and

6 What you want to see in the Water Framework

65 Although Kuzel (1992) cites Lincoln and Guba (1985) McCracken (1988) Marshall and Rossman (1989) and Patton (1990) as sources of this information none of them confirmed these numbers except McCracken (1988) who refers to eight as a sufficient sample size

94

The conversation either proceeded with an interactive discussion or engaging in

storytelling Notes were taken and conversations were audio recorded with the

participantsrsquo permissions Interviews ranged between 20 and 90 minutes depending on

the discussion or story

4432 Group discussions with MCFN adults

In wanting to open the research to all MCFN members the participant inclusion criteria

for the group discussions were all MCFN adults who showed an interest in participating

in the research including Chief and Council members An exclusion criterion was MCFN

non-members although flexibility was allowed to accommodate familial ties not

accommodated through band membership This emerged at one group meeting where

some participants were Six Nations and not MCFN band members but they associated

and identified themselves with MCFN through familial ties

Recruitment for the adult group discussions was done 1) as part of existing MCFN group

activities and 2) as stand-alone meetings As part of existing MCFN group activities the

Womenrsquos Menrsquos and Eldersrsquo Groups and a Chief and Council meeting were targeted

Invitations to contact persons for each target group were sent by the Department of

Consultation and Accommodation and Water Committee members Once the target

groupsrsquo contact persons agreed to host a group discussion as part of their existing

activities they were contacted by the doctoral student to determine the appropriate

procedures to follow in preparation for the discussion For each group the information

letter and informed consent form (Appendix 6) and the group discussion schedule

(Appendix 7) were sent to the groupsrsquo contact persons for distribution to the group For

the stand-alone meetings ie a MCFN administration group the invitations were

managed by MCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation For the

Aboriginal Health Centre in Hamilton as a stand-alone meeting open invitations were

95

sent via its Facebook page and posters on its notice boards A total of 27 MCFN

members participated in the adult group discussion (Table 42)

Table 42 Groupsrsquo discussions and number of people attending each group

Groupsrsquo discussions Number of people attending each group

MCFN Womenrsquos group 10

MCFN Menrsquos group 3

MCFN Elders Group 7

MCFN Band Chief and Council 8

MCFN Band administrative staff

5

Aboriginal Health Centre in Hamilton

0

Note some people participated in more than one group discussionresearch activity but each individual

was only counted once

Participants were given an opportunity to read through and complete the informed

consent document Except for the Elders groups discussion the four main probes were

introduced as follows



3 What does ownership of water within your treaty lands and territory mean to you

and


All participants were asked to write responses (one per sticky note but as many as

heshe liked) to each of the four probes They were given 10 -15 minutes for this The

purpose was to allow participants to reflect on the probes especially if this was their first

introduction to MCFNrsquos Water Claim and the research project Thereafter the sticky notes

were collected and as a group the responses were arranged into themes for each probe

on poster boards At the end the themes were reviewed to identify missingadditional

ones

96

A similar process was followed for the Elderrsquos group except that the individual writing of

responses on sticky notes was replaced with the brainstorming of

ideasthoughtsresponses as a group The doctoral student made sticky notes during

brainstorming session

These group discussions ranged between 60 and 90 minutes

For the Chief and Council group discussion each member was offered a gift of tobacco

before the meeting commenced because it was limited to 30 minutes Only two of the

four probes were posed

1 What does the Water Claim mean to you and


A general table discussion was held facilitated by the meeting Chair and the doctoral

student recorded the main points raised

4433 Artwork activity sessions with MCFN youth group and LSK Elementary

School students

For MCFN youth the participant inclusion criterion was MCFN members between the

ages of 12-18 years attending the weekly MCFN Youth Group meetings and the exclusion

criterion was MCFN members over the age of 18 or younger than 12 The research activity

formed part of an existing scheduled meeting so the recruitment took the form of an

information letter (Appendix 8) and not an invitation MCFN youth could decide if they

wanted to participate in the research activity by attending the meeting Only three MCFN

members participated in the youth group activity

Participants were given an opportunity to read through and complete Appendix 8 Two

main probes were introduced

97

1 Why is water important to you and

2 What would you do to care forprotect water for now and in the future

Participants were asked to create artwork as a group or individually by drawing writing

andor creating a collage in response to the two probes They were provided with poster

boards artwork materials and supplies and were given 30-45 minutes to complete this

task Thereafter the ideasthoughts that surfaced from the artworks in response to each

probe were discussed and captured on poster boards grouped into themes

As another approach to include the youth voice the LSK Elementary School participated

in this knowledge gathering activity through MCFN protocols ie approval was obtained

from the Director of Education and then the School Principal who assisted in the activityrsquos

conceptualization Based on the Director and Principalrsquos active involvement it was agreed

that the students need not be invited to participate in this activity because it would form

part of their class-lesson curriculum However a parental information letter was

distributed via the schoolrsquos administration office to the parents (Appendix 10) The

participant inclusion criterion was students from Grades K to 8 who were in attendance

at LSK Elementary School on the day of the research activity MCFN students not

attending LSK Elementary School were excluded

This activity was conducted in one-school day 7 classes of 35 minutes each with a total

of 136 persons during their music lesson The schedule is included in Appendix 11

Two main probes displayed on poster boards were explained to the students as follows

1 Why water is important to you and

2 Protecting and caring for water

98

Participants (see Figure 44) were asked to create individual artwork by drawing andor

writing in response to the two questions Each student was provided with an art sheet

pre-printed with the two probes and some artwork materials and supplies for this

purpose The students were given 10 minutes for this Thereafter they discussed as a

group the ideasthoughts that emerged from the artworks in response to each question

which were captured on flipchart paper grouped into themes Students could keep their

artwork and remaining supplies after the class lessons The artworks were photographed

before they were returned to the students

Figure 44 Students at LSK Elementary School creating their artworks (Photo taken on April 5 2018 by Renee Goretsky) Consent provided by the LSK Elementary School as per Appendix 10

4434 MCFN semi-structured survey with adults

The purpose of the survey was to obtain larger input from MCFN members Survey

participants were asked to rate their agreement with the preliminary findings from the key-

informant conversations and group discussions on

The importance of water to you

The meaning of the Water Claim to you and

The goals of the Water Framework

They were also provided with an opportunity to add their own input

The participant inclusion criterion was all interested MCFN adult band members

Exclusion criteria were 1) MCFN non-band members 2) MCFN band members under

99

the age of 18 and 3) MCFN members who already participated in the research as key

informants or group participants The semi-structured survey was designed both as a

paper-based and e-survey (via Qualtrics)

The paper-based survey (Appendix 12) was distributed on the MCFN reserve at

community meetings and placed at the library MCFN administration offices Department

of Consultation and Accommodation and Social and Health Services offices Return

boxes were also placed at these offices Surveys with self-addressed and prepaid stamp

envelopes were also sent to MCFN members with their regular newsletter The e-survey66

was distributed via MCFNrsquos email distribution list website page and MCFNrsquos Facebook

page by MCFNrsquos Communications Department The deadline of 31 July 2018 was

extended to 15 August 2018 due to the low response level By the extended deadline

date 30 surveys responses were submitted The research team decided to provide an

incentive (CAD 500 cash gift card draw entry) for the survey to encourage more off-

reserve MCFN members to participate in the research project This presented a challenge

because incentives were not provided to the MCFN members who participated in the key-

informant conversations and adult group discussions and they were excluded from the

survey because their views were already recorded

To be fair and inclusive key informantsrsquo names were entered into the draw provided they

agreed For the draw purposes survey respondents were asked to provide their names

and contact details The names of the key informants and adult group discussion

participants were already known The names of research participants (marked with

confidential where required ie for those who declined for their names to be made public

in the informed consent form) who consented to the draw entry were placed into a box

66 the same content as Appendix 12

100

The Chair of the Water Committee drew the name of the winner at a community dinner in

September 2018 and the name of the winner was only publicized if the person provided

prior consent to hisher name being made public

4435 Semi-structured interviews with identified Conservation Authorities

The interviews with the Conservation Authorities sought to explore possible opportunities

barriers and challenges for the Water Frameworkrsquos implementation within the

Conservation Authorities mandates and operational approaches (Research Objective 3)

The participant inclusion criterion was those Conservation Authorities whose watersheds

are within the boundaries of MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory These included

Conservation Halton Credit Valley Conservation Hamilton Conservation Agency Long

Point Conservation Agency Grand River Conservation Agency Niagara Peninsula

Conservation Agency and Toronto and Region Conservation Agency Conservation

Authorities with watersheds outside of MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territories area were

excluded Requests for interviews with the information letter and informed consent letter

(Appendix 13) and the interview schedule (Appendix 14) were sent to relevant67 senior

managers Four Conservation Authorities representatives agreed to in-person interviews

two Conservation Authorities representatives responded to the interview probes via email

and one Conservation Authorities representative declined to participate At the in-person

interviews the research project and researcher (the doctoral student self-located herself

in the research) were introduced Participants were given an opportunity to read through

and complete the Informed Consent document and they were provided with a summary

67 This non-specific word was intentionally used to protect the identity of the interviewees especially where consent was not granted to share hisher name Providing the specific management focus in the CA would be an indirect identifier

101

of the draft Water Framework findings available at that time as a partial resolution to the

Water Claim The probes were sequentially discussed as follows

1 What are the water governance principlesframeworks within your organizationrsquos

jurisdiction on MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory

2 What are the water governance structures within your organizationrsquos jurisdiction on

MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory

3 How does your organization currently consult with and accommodate First Nations

and

4 What do you see as foreseeable challenge areas and transformation opportunities

with regards to MCFNrsquos Water Claim

Written and audio recordings were made of these discussions with the participantsrsquo

permission Interviews ranged between 30 and 90 minutes depending on the discussion

level

4436 MCFN community meetings for input and feedback

Two MCFN community meetings held in November 2017 and 2018 were organized by

MCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation About 20 to 30 people

attended each meeting respectively The meetings started with formal presentations on

the Water Claim by MCFNrsquos legal councillor Kim Fullerton and on the Water Framework

research project by the UoG doctoral student (an introduction in 2017 and a summary of

the findings in 2018) followed by a Q amp A session and ending with a community dinner

All research participants were invited via email to the November 2018 feedback meeting

102

Analysis of Knowledge Gathered

The knowledge gathered was transcribed and analysed by the doctoral student and

presented to the Water Committee and PhD Advisory Committee for discussion as

explained below The units of analyses for the knowledge gathered were the MCFN Band

participants and Conservation Authority representatives

Knowledge gathered from conversations group discussions youth group

and LSK Elementary School students

All audio recordings from the key informants were verbally transcribed verbatim using

Dragon Professional Individual by Nuancecopy into MS Word documents Manual corrections

were made for accuracy Written notesposter notes from the adult group discussions and

youth artwork activities were transcribed into MS Word documents These MS Word

documents were imported into NVivo version 11 (and later updated to version 12) as

cases68 Each casersquos references69 were coded into nodes70

Evans (2017) explains that when using semi-structured interviews your research

questions should guide your thematic analyses and interpretation because themes should

respond to your overarching research focus Bazeley (2009) concurs that ldquoa priori

categories or themesrdquo (p 9) can be used in data analysis (deductive) provided that they

are reflected in the data and that researchers examine the data for differences and

relationships through inductive analysis This approach is also supported by Fereday and

Muir-Cochrane (2006) who claim that a hybrid deductive-inductive coding approach is

needed to balance philosophical framings and empirical evidence

68 Unit of gathered knowledge ie individual key informants (20 individuals in this unit) group discussions (five groups in this unit) school children (7 classes in this unit) youth group (1 group in this unit) and Conservation Authorities (6 representatives in this unit) 69 Comments made by a unit 70 The themes ideas concepts experiences opinions that emerged from the knowledge shared

103

Following Fereday and Muir-Cochrane (2006) Bazeleyrsquos (2009) and Evans (2017)

reasoning initial deductive coding was structured into five broad areas for each case as

per the five overarching probes (derived from research objectives aligned to the

conceptual framework see Figure 23 p 51 except for research objective 5 on

decolonising social justice which was extrapolated from the knowledge gathered) in the

activitiesrsquo schedules viz

1 The importance of water

2 The meaning of the Water Claim

3 The meaning of water ownership

4 How should the water framework lookWhat should go into it (The probe on ldquoWhat

can you do to protect waterrdquo for the school and youth group activities was slotted

into this broad node and

5 Central inclusion of MCFNrsquos water values and rights and current water

governance

A second level of inductive coding within each of the five broad areas was undertaken by

creating sub-nodes (ideas) from the references within each broad area by case to look

for differences In this way different sub-nodes were built based on empirical knowledge

shared A third coding step merged similar sub-nodes into nodes (themes) by case for

meaning making and merged sub-nodes by case to remove duplication A fourth coding

step either merged nodes across cases for the creation of super nodes (topics) where

there was congruency or created stand-alone topics where there was divergence A

reference was coded more than once if relevant to more than one sub-node or node The

preliminary data analysis was presented to the Water Committee for discussion at a

meeting in May 2018

104

Knowledge gathered from the survey

Online survey responses were automatically recorded in Qualtrics and survey responses

completed in hardcopy were inputted into Qualtrics by the doctoral student Not

completed online survey responses (ie questionnaire generated but no data were

captured N = 6) were discarded Partially completed online survey responses (ie some

data captured) were included in the final survey analysis where N = 24

Data were processed and analysed quantitatively by Qualtrics in percentages Qualitative

knowledge gathered in the form of additional comments by MCFN members were coded

in Excel for additional new or modified themes The preliminary analysis was presented

to the Water Committee for discussion at a meeting in September 2018

Interviews with conservation agencies

Written notes were transcribed into MS Word documents then imported into NVivo version

12 as cases Each case was initially coded into four broad nodes as follows

1 Water governance frameworks within their jurisdiction

2 Water governance structures within their organisation

3 Accommodating First Nations in water governance and

4 Responding to MCFNrsquos Water Claim

Further coding was conducted within each broad node based on respondentsrsquo answers

to develop themes The preliminary analysis was presented to the Water Committee for

discussion at a meeting in September 2018

Research Integrity Robustness and Credibility

Leininger (1994) maintains that qualitative research methods are not intended to provide

for data reliability and validity for replication but they are rather used to provide for

research integrity in terms of trustworthiness Hammarberg et al 2016 refer to this as

105

procedural robustness and credibility ie the findings being a true reflection of the

knowledge gathered

In this research procedural robustness was ensured through developing and following

written research protocols and schedules which were approved through UoGrsquos REB

process and by the Water Committee (see Appendices 4-14) Flexibility was allowed if

required by the specific context

Research credibility was ensured in different and multiple ways Adult MCFN key-

informants were re-contacted to review and approve their typed transcripts for clarity and

accuracy The Conservation Authorities participants were not asked to review their

responses post interview because 1) two interviews were via email and 2) the other four

respondents indicated that they were very busy However throughout the in-person

interviews understandings of their responses were summarized and communicated or

questions asked for clarity For the adult group discussions youth group and LSK school

students poster boards were created with their responses and themesideas were agreed

at the knowledge gathering activity which were used verbatim in the research analyses

In addition the draft Water Framework was presented based on the research findings to

the MCFN community for further input at a meeting in November 2018 Many adult

research participants attended this meeting and agreed with the research findings

As mentioned under section 431 co-engagement drove this research The research

protocols and processes were developed by the research team The data analysis and

preliminary data analysis across all the knowledge gathering activities although initially

conducted by the doctoral student were discussed with the Water Committee at every

stage to ensure that appropriate and meaningful interpretations were made of the

findings

106

Research Ethics and Data Management

To ensure that all adult participants were able to understand and respond to the activity

schedules the research team designed them to be simple and as plain as possible The

school staff (principal and teachers) and the youth group facilitator assisted in co-

designing the minorsrsquo group activities with the doctoral student to the level of their

comprehension Different approaches inclusive of verbal explanations writing and

drawings were used to accommodate for a range of different literacy levels

For participants over the age of 12 informed consent inclusive of confidentiality and the

use of individual stories and direct quotes were sought at the first engagement process

through different modes inclusive of signing a hard copy form providing verbal consent

(if asking someone to sign a form was inappropriate) and assumed consent by

completing an electronic survey For participants under the age of 12 the research activity

was incorporated into the school curriculum as a class lesson and hence informed

consent for their participation in the activity was not required by the parents Consent to

take photos was provided by the school principal and consent to use the taken photos of

the students in publications followed the schoolrsquos approval process This was

communicated to the parents in the information letter (see Appendix 10)

The consent process for participants over the age of 12 was ongoing throughout the

research by encouraging participants to ask questions throughout the research and

allowing them to withdraw up to a certain point in the research process The information

letter and informed consent forms are attached as Appendices 46810 13)

In addition the research team members were required to sign a research team agreement

(Appendix 15) This required members to inform the team of all possible conflicts of

interest in a timely manner so that they could be appropriately managed Team members

107

were also required not to use their position for the benefit of themselves and their family

or any other beneficiary of the research

According to the guidelines set out in OCAP (2014) MCFN owned the collective

knowledge shared by the community All collective intellectual property resided with

MCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation (DOCA) which was responsible

for knowledge storage usage and management The research team agreed that a sole

property clause would be included in all documents71 which limited citation use or

reproduction of the information contained therein and which was permissible only with

the written consent of MCFN UoG researchers were given permission by DOCA to use

the research to produce academic outputs including this thesis The research team also

agreed that academic publication co-authorship would be considered over sole

authorship if feasible and that MCFN membersrsquo contributions were to be acknowledged

in all publications These principles align to the concept of ldquoSelf-Voicing which affirms that

communities must be fully recognized as authors and knowledge holdersrdquo (Riddle et al

2017 p 7) The use of the MCFN logo was obtained through the community approval

process

No translation was required because all MCFN members were able to communicate in

English Two key-informants related their stories in Ojibway during the conversations and

they translated them into English as part of the conversation ie they would say

something in Ojibway and then immediately relate it in English

71 academic publications that have been endorsed by the Water Committee or MCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation were excluded

108

Research Methodsrsquo Limitations

The term lsquoresearch methods limitationsrsquo is used as those aspects that the research team

could not control or intentionally controlled in the research design which influenced the

findings described in chapters 5 to 7 Other broader research challenges outside of the

researchersrsquo control are discussed in Chapter 8 The word lsquocontrolrsquo is cautiously applied

because it implies a power hierarchy in the research and all research team members and

research participants were equally situated Four research methodsrsquo limitations were

identified as follows

1 Except for the key-informant conversations and artwork activities with the LSK school

students the number of MCFN members who participated in the research was based

on MCFN membersrsquo interests in participating and not on a pre-determined

expectation For this reason only a limited number of off-reserve MCFN member

participated despite proactive efforts eg contacting the Friendship centres in

Hamilton and Niagara for group discussions the Water Committee identifying key-

informants off reserve and the e-survey distributed to all MCFN members on MCFNrsquos

distribution lists This limitation has important implications for the unit of analysis which

is the MCFN Band For this research it would not be appropriate to claim that the

findings are indicative of all MCFN Band members This was acceptable given that

quantitative data validity methods were not considered to be suitable for this research

(see p 104)

2 This research approach was specific to MCFNrsquos context hence the research findings

and conclusions are not transferable to another context nor can they be used for

generalizations

3 The doctoral student who was the facilitator and conduit for this research remained

mindful yet an outsider Her interactions in conducting the knowledge gathering

activities own assessments in coding the knowledge gathered and analysis72

72 Usually data coding is undertaken by multiple researchers to account for divergent perspectives (Fereday and Muir-Cochrane 2006) however for doctoral degree purposes the doctoral student was the only researcher

109

although presented to the Water Committee the PhD Advisory Committee and the

MCFN community for credibility were embedded in her own inherent and explicit

biases as voiced in her research self-location on p 70

4 Academic research interests although of relevance were not the sole drivers of this

research The research guides were co-developed with the Water Committee and the

primary aim was to ensure that the research probes and questions were

comprehendible to the community This was a research strength but at the same time

academic research interests in deconstructing social justice and to some extent

Indigenizing water governance had to be extrapolated Simple questions were used

to probe and in this way key themes in relation to academic interests were gained

110

5 MCFN Water Values

This chapter addresses the first research objective which was to identify MCFN water

values and to explore their relationships to historical and contemporary contexts shaping

them as discussed in chapter 3 It ends with the MCFNrsquos visions for water for future

generations It draws on the knowledge gathered from the key-informant conversations

with adults interactive activities with elementary school students and youth adult focus

groups and the survey

The Importance of Water to MCFN and Why

The knowledge gathered from all the different methods revealed that water was very

important to MCFN participants for multiple reasons The central topic that emerged

across all knowledge gathering activities was that lsquowater is lifersquo However the meaning of

lsquowater is lifersquo varied among individuals and groups

Six themes emerged from the key-informant conversations in response to the

importance of water These themes were related to cultural use spiritual health

environmental and economic water values The emergence of these six themes are

supported by selected key-informant quotes

Key-informantsrsquo cultural water values pertained to their ancestorsrsquo ways of living with

and by the water to provide for their sustenance (food) and well-being

Our great grand fathers they lived by the water they fished in water and grew their

food- wild rice in the water Now we have no water to grow wild rice So we canrsquot

redeem our way of life (Mark Sault)

111

hellipas a community we have that disconnect because we do not have access to the

water In this role (work) is to reconnect us to water To give us back paddling the

canoes I feel really strong about the benefits of water for healing ourselves

personally and healing us as a community and returning us to our culture I think

that it is vital and I think it is part of our struggle as New Credit because we do not

have accessibility to water (Andrea Dalton King)

For the use water value key-informants identified the importance of water in terms of its

recreational food production drinking cooking cleaning and gardening uses

I am a hunter myself so I utilize the water for fishing I fish out of Lake Ontario and

Lake Erie Predominantly we travel down to Toronto like annually I will be there

all of next month Just for recreation and sports and stuff like that I do recreational

fishing (Craig King)

First and foremost nobody would be alive without water I think every living thing

both human animals and plants we would cease to exist if there wasnt water (Jai

King Green)

I garden a little bit and I use the water in that way and if I farmhellip animals use water

too Yes water is there to use I am not a recreational user of water I swim a little

bit but I dont from outside of the pool So yes water is for living gardening

agricultural uses (Anonymous)

112

Key-informants identified with the spiritual water values in terms of water being alive and

a spirit and water through ceremonies and prays cleansing us spiritually and emotionally

It is important to me because hellip what came to me spiritually was to start doing the

water ceremonies in 1995 about 25 years ago So I started doing water

ceremonies just like once a month and to bring this to women about our

responsibilitiesin a spiritual way I started to do the teachings and then songs

So to me water is everything (Anonymous)

It has spirit it has energy it has movement There is so much to water that is

beyond our physical self There so much more to the physical sense of water (Jai

King Green)

To me another important factor would be with regards to the ceremonies of the

water we are learning our ceremonies we are learning our language that is within

those ceremonies so that we can talk with water Because it is a spirit so that it will

want to survive and it will want to keep the stories It will continue to clean itself

and do the natural order that it should be (Anonymous)

Key-informants also indicated that water was important for our present physical health

and well-being and damaging water has significant detrimental implications not only for

the continued existence of future generations but also their physical health

113

Our bodies are made up of water It keeps us hydrated to stay healthy It is a basic

need for our physical bodiesrdquo and ldquoWe need water for our well being It sustains

the health of communities (Pat Mandy)

hellip water is life before we come here we grow in water in our momrsquos belly So just

thinking how important is if we donrsquot have water Our water sources are running

out or are being polluted If we are running out of our natural resources what does

that mean to our future generations or future if we are going to carry babies

where are you going to get that natural water What is that going to mean for

developing babies and health problems That is what I was touching on earlier on

about water being lifehellip That is what our bodies are made up of so if we donrsquot have

access to the water in the future (Anonymous)

The environmental water values related to water being important for sustaining animals

and plants

hellipbut also for the life within the water itself The fish and wildlife The habitats of

water are very important in itself and are important to the sustenance of

communities (Mark Sault)

Last key-informants indicated that water has an economic value for MCFN in terms of

MCFN community benefiting financially from current for-profit water uses and from

potential community-owned water-based businesses

114

Its again going back to water as a commodity Well there is no getting around it

today Water is a commodity so why have we not being in a position to reap the

benefits of the commercialization of that commodity Because in the claim we are

claiming Aboriginal title to the waters First which means ownership and why are

people making money off of something that we own And we are not benefiting

(Mark La Forme)

I can definitely see the benefits some financial benefits Because we can reinvest

the programs that we are offering now can be enhanced if we have more dollars

Because if we dont we have to apply for grants and access funds to actually have

meaningful and active programs If we had a funding source that could actually be

self-funding I feel though it is a double-edged sword because this cannot be

about personal gain So why do we want economic development is it for

individuals to have their own sustainability or looking for sustainability for the

community And I think that we need to be community focused (Andrea King

Dalton)

Through the adult group discussions MCFN members viewed water as a subsistence

resource for living cooking drinking cleaning and for providing energy and food Water

was also seen as cultural and spiritual and it was important for environmental

sustainability and economic growth The emergence of these five themes are supported

by examples of the poster notes included in Figure 51

115

Figure 51 Poster notes from all the adult group discussions except Chief and Council in relation to the importance of water to MCFN members Group discussions held over the period January to March 2018 at New Credit Reserve

The youth group and elementary school students related to water for our health ie

mainly for our survival as a resource for subsistence use purposes (cooking cleaning

drinking gardening growing food providing energy) and for recreation and for

environmental sustainability in terms of keeping animals and plants alive for rain and to

116

cleanse earth Only the youth group associated with the spiritual relationship to water for

ceremonies and self-growth Figure 52 and Figure 53 show the emergence of the four

themes ie health use environmental and spiritual values as supported by the youthrsquos

artwork activities

Figure 52 Youth groups artwork in relation to the importance of water to MCFN members Artwork created on March 20 2018 at New Credit Reserve

117

Figure 53 Artwork from LSK Elementary School students in relation to the importance of water to MCFN members Artwork created on April 5 2018 at New Credit Reserve

Based on the three knowledge gathering activities with key informants adult groups and

youth five broad water values (themes) emerged 1) its use value for everyday living 2)

cultural connections to water eg fishing hunting and canoeing 3) spiritual relations to

water 4) environmental sustainability and 5) economic value (Figure 54)

118

Figure 54 Summary of the five themes emerging from the key-informants adult groups and youth related to the importance of water

The survey respondents rated all five themes as being important (Figure 55) Ninety-

six percent considered water to be most important for use and environmental

sustainability followed by economic benefits (71) spiritual meaning (67) and cultural

connections (58)

Figure 55 Percent of survey responses from MCFN adults on the importance of water to MCFN

members N = 24

96

96

71

58

67

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

I use it eg to drink to cook to clean forrecreation and gardening

It keeps plants animals and humans alive

It has economic benefits eg energy industrialand food productions

It is part of our culture I use it for canoeingfishing hunting etc

It has spiritual meaning to me I see water asspirit and water has life

of Survey Respondents (N= 24)

Important In between Unimportant I dont knowNot applicable

119

These water value themes were not always seen as being separate Elder Garry Sault

explained how water interconnects73 everything through the water cycle and how water

sustains earth and all its beings

water is the blood of our mother earth And it flows all over us And it interacts

with the air When the sun hits it it starts to evaporate and it goes into a different

shape And when it comes down it comes down as rain that turns back into the

water So it goes through a cycle that helps to get rid of some of the heavier

particles that were inside and that would have been harmful It puts it into the trees

and the trees transform it into oxygen So the oxygen then feeds our bodies We

rely on all the trees Its like the lungs of southern Ontario And it can do that

because of the water that comes down But the trees dont get the water that they

need and they cant put out the oxygen that we need to breath So it is imperative

that they start to recognize that cycle of life is all connected and that water is one

of the main ways that connection flows in between all living creatures And we

depend upon that There is no way that we cannot say that if we dont have water

for the cows we will have no milk If we dont have water to wash our dishes the

bacteria will kill us So when you ask me about the importance of water it is all

connected (Garry Sault)

73 the theme of interconnectedness was coded from the key-informant conversations as a separate theme under water values

120

Garry Sault further emphasized that this interconnection extends to our spiritual self in

that water teaches us to reflect on and be mindful of our relationships to all of creation on

earth

So it is like in a lot of our stories water is a teacher It teaches us that when you

look inside of the water you see your reflection and when you see your reflection

then it helps you to look inside of yourself To see how you are towards the things

on the earth because everything is connected So water does that (Garry Sault)

The healing nature of water from a cultural and spiritual lens was also seen to connect to

water values across its health use and environmental values

for when babies are sick people are sick I have held workshops every year

community workshops on the importance of water From the point of view of a

pregnant mom from the gardener from the people who work with trees from the

environmental and stories of healing that has happened about water And ways

to work with the healing of water I am involved in all kinds of stuff (Anonymous)

To close off the findings on the importance of water to MCFN a key-informant expressed

that our (all of humanity) wellness is dependent on the interconnectedness of water ie

the natural cycle If we reconnect and live according to this natural harmony we will

achieve wellness

hellip that is the part of water where we are unhealthy because we donrsquot even have

water We go we have to travel to waterhellip we go to those ceremonies we go to

that water The natural cycle is part of our wellness and it is part of all human

wellness whether they know it or not If we build everything around the natural

121

cycle we are connected in that way then there will be wellness The energies of

the world will be reconnected to it instead of opposing it causing harm Instead

of getting spirit from alcohol or drugs if we could reconnect to the natural flow

and spirit of the world It is a big part of our water ceremonies and our people

knew that not just our people but a lot of people who are connected spiritually to

nature They knew that they lived that way (Anonymous)

To make meaning of the findings on interconnectedness Figure 56 shows that four of

the five MCFN water values of use environmental cultural and spiritual are separate yet

interconnected This interconnectedness was mainly seen in terms of a) linking water for

the health of all of creationrsquos survival (human use values and environmental values) b)

linking water to healing through our cultural and spiritual values on water c) linking the

healing nature of water across its use health and environmental values and d) our holistic

well-being at the intersectional balance of these four water values Economic values were

excluded from the interconnectedness because they were mainly interpreted from a

western perspective ie financial benefits and resource extraction

122

Figure 56 MCFNrsquos water values as they interconnect with each other

The findings of this study on MCFN participantsrsquo water values were not unique MCFNrsquos

subsistence use environmental sustainability and economic values of water are widely

accepted The UN (nd-b) claims that

Water is essential for life No living being on planet Earth can survive without it It

is a prerequisite for human health and well-being as well as for the preservation of

the environment Beyond meeting basic human needs water supply and sanitation

services as well as water as a resource are critical to sustainable development74

(paras 1-2)

74 Mitchell (2020) and Simpson (2011) explain that Indigenous understandings are not synonymous with

sustainable development principles ie ldquoDevelopment that meets the needs of the present without

123

The spiritual and cultural connections to water have also been described by many

scholars (see McGregor 2009 2014 2015 2016 2018a Anderson et al 2013 Joy et

al 2014 Patrick et al 2014 Perreault 2014 Wilson 2014 Longboat 2015 Craft

2017a Daigle 2018 Arsenault et al 2018 Wilson and Inkster 2018)

Specific to MCFN Baird et al (2015) conducted research on the perceptions of water

quality in three First Nations (Six Nations of the Grand River Oneida Nations of the

Thames and MCFN) communities through document analysis and a survey Through

their document analysis they found that for Anishinaabe (which they equated with MCFN)

water was one of the elements that connects the circle of life and therefore had a strong

cultural meaning In their survey they asked residents living on the New Credit reserve

to rate the importance of water for cultural purposes (Baird et al 2015) They found that

from 101 responses (58 women) which were statistically analyzed that the cultural

importance was ldquoequally not important and important resulting in a mean neutral

responserdquo (Baird et al 2015 p 237) They further report that 1) there was a split in the

respondents perceptions on how water was a source of community conflict (what this

meant by community conflict was not explained in detail) with females indicating this to a

greater extent than males 2) respondents (24) considered federal government to have

more responsibility for water governance as opposed to individual citizens and the

community but that 3) respondents over 60 years and females indicated that individual

citizens should have greater responsibility for water issues (note though that the

terminology switched here from governance to issues) and 4) respondents between the

ages of 18-39 felt less connected to New Credit yet females felt strongly connected to

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needsrdquo (WCED 1987 Chap 2 1) From Indigenous lenses sustainability means to ldquorepair strengthen and adhere to natural laws to enable the flourishing of future generations of multiple life formsrdquo (Mitchell 2020 p 911)

124

New Credit (Baird et al 2015) The interpretation of these findings was integrated across

all their three case studies and was not specific to MCFN It was done through

extrapolation based on the literature rather than meaning within context and Baird et al

(2015) recognize this limitation and call for context-specific studies However of

relevance in their interpretation for this doctoral research was that MCFNrsquos level of

cultural importance was found to be lower than the other two First Nations that they

researched (Baird et al 2015) They attributed this to the physical separation from an

immediate water resource (Baird et al 2015) They claimed that this outcome is

consistent with studies by Blackstock (2001) and Castleden et al (2009) that have shown

that First Nations spirituality and cultural connections are largely dependent on their ability

to physically interact with land and water resources

Taking these claims by Blackstock (2001) and Castleden et al (2009) into account and

to further make meaning of the knowledge shared during this research the question is

How have MCFNrsquos historical and contemporary contexts shaped their water values This

question is analyzed and interpreted in response to the knowledge gathered primarily

from the key-informant conversations (and partially from the focus groups) where and

when MCFN members were willing to share knowledge

Historical and Contemporary Contexts Shaping MCFNrsquos

Identities and Water Values

In presenting these results it is shown how history has shaped and constructed MCFNrsquos

participantsrsquo contemporary identities and water values

Carolyn King a former MCFN Chief clearly summed this relationship between their

history and MCFNrsquos identities and water values today in her quotes below She

125

emphasized two aspects in relation to MCFNrsquos history due to colonial influences First

MCFN has been physically separated from water

Individually we need water to live Water is life It is part of humankind As a First

Nations we have been away from water for a long time hence our relationship with

water is not part of our life From a traditional sense it has not been part of our life

but we are getting there now (Carolyn King)

Second MCFN has been disconnected from their Anishinaabe spiritual relations to water

It is written in documents that we didnrsquot give up our water My upbringing was not

with water in the traditional sense We only have a few creeks here I remember

playing in water a farm pond as a child In that way water was part of our life We

were born and raised as Christian and water was regarded as sacred by taking

communion But that is another context But now we are looking to get our ways

back so I have started to relate to water But due to colonialism we as First

Nations have been separated from water yet our name means water In 1847 we

moved here from Credit That was our way of living on the Credit River Then we

moved to New Credit As Mississauga People we didnrsquot know our history (Carolyn

King)

MCFNrsquos physically separation from water bodies and MCFNrsquos Anishinaabe spiritual

disconnection to water are now discussed

126

MCFNrsquos physical separation from water bodies

MCFN was physically separated from water bodies when they relocated from the Credit

River to the New Credit Reserve in 1848 (see chap 3 p 63 for further details) As a result

MCFN is the only First Nations who does not have a major water body on their reserve

as relayed below

I think to me it goes to our name the Mississauga People it means water people

and we are starting to realize that we are probably the only First Nations who is

not situated around water But that is not by choice I always tell that to people

(Anonymous)

This leads to the question of lsquoWhat does this mean for MCFNrsquos water valuesrsquo In locating

and tracing the importance of water for key-informants in terms of the past and present

it was clear that water bodies and their resources were more integral to their ancestorsrsquo

existence than they were today Quotes by two key-informants illustrate this point 1) ldquoFor

our great grandfathers it was probably more important to them because they used it for

transportation fishing and hunting It was used for feeding peoplerdquo (Pat Mandy) and 2)

ldquoWhen I was growing up for my grand-parents water bottles were not a staple They had

a well and used spring-fed water They fished but they stayed localthey fished in the

local streams springs and the Grand Riverrdquo (Carla Campbell)

MCFN participants indicated that their physical disconnection from water limited their

ability to continue the practices of their ancestorrsquos cultural relationships with water which

has impacted on their current water values

Our role on earth is not recognizable from what it was before We look at it from

the Anishinaabe People we are fishermen Basically that is what we do - fish

Now we cant We lost that part of our culture and our identity to the waters to the

streams that we once owned Because it is not available to us now (Garry Sault)

127

We have lost that connect to water So you are right the kids dont know that water

is important and why it is important And why we are disconnected from it is

because we do not have it (Andrea Dalton King)

Although MCFN has the right to access water and its resources (as affirmed in section

35 of the Canadian Constitution 1982 and reaffirmed again in the 1997 Delgamuukw v

British Columbia Supreme Court ruling McNeil 2001) often this is not the reality Caroyln

King relayed a story about being stopped by a Conservation Authority when fishing in the

Great Lakes despite her inherent rights treaty and Aboriginal title rights to fish and hunt

because authorities are not properly trained

Andrea Dalton King explained that according to her experiences she needs lsquopermission75rsquo

to access the Grand River to teach people how to canoe

So it is about access Even to get to the Grand you need to get permissions to be

there We dont just have the freedom to just go We dont need permits but for me

to go and teach through the programhellip to teach people how to canoe I need to be

able to access water So I need permission to access the water So now we are

third party There are a lot of good people who have access to water who have

75 Unfortunately this required permission to access the water was not further explained Access to the

Grand River does require permission if launching pads are located on privately-owned land Access to launching pads within conservation parks requires permission to enter through the payment of entrance fees but there are municipal launching pads that do not require payments (Grand River Conservation Authority nd)

128

programs going that are willing to open that up for us But still we have to pay a

fee for their service That is we have to pay them to allow us on the water or to

use their canoes or to teach us (Andrea Dalton King)

MCFNrsquos cultural and spiritual disconnections from water

MCFNrsquos cultural and spiritual disconnect from water was explained through two lenses

First in terms of colonial assimilation and missionization which have resulted in MCFN

as Anishinaabe People not knowing what it means to be Anishinaabe

They need to be revitalizing those teachings and putting it back in the people They

got to reverse what the missionization and assimilation did they have to reverse

I say we cannot make an informed decision if we dont have our teaching You

canrsquot stand up there and call yourself Anishinaabe and say we are doing this as

Anishinaabe People when you dont even know what Anishinaabe is (Nancy

Rowe)

Second some members maintain that they lost their culture by choices they made by

being in the world This is illustrated in the quote below

With the change we lost our traditional system- our culture and language I will

say that we were influenced but not assimilated As Indigenous peoples we made

choices I think that we are different because we realised that we are - lsquoI would say

not pro-developmentrsquo- practical people We need to survive in this world and under

the Indian Act forced upon us Would we have been different if we didnrsquot have all

these limitations I donrsquot think so not in terms of how we developed I donrsquot think

129

that we would be different too had we not been influenced We are practical people

(Carolyn King)

Desiree Webb in responding to the question on the importance of water to your ancestors

versus today explained that MCFN members made choices in the world which shaped

their identities

I would say for my grandparents It was probably because they came from more

of a cultural background per se And with my parents not so much it wasnt

pushed on them That is when everything started to go lsquoyou go your way or you

can continue to do thisrsquo Teachings didnt necessarily get lost People went out in

the world to define themselves That is when commodity comes in and everything

starts to play a big role So I would just say is as they got older they lost it but

when theyre still around it they are reminded of it every day of the importance of

it And that is when it hits them (Desiree Webb)

The important point to note is that assimilation missionization and relocation whether by

choice or force shaped MCFNrsquos ideologies and their spiritual and cultural connections to

water This assertion is supported by Cave and McKay (2016) who note that

disenfranchised strategies by Canada eroded ldquoIndigenous womenrsquos roles and

responsibilities to waterrdquo (p 65) In Chapter 3 p 63 the central role that Peter Jones

played in MCFNrsquos historical locations both physically and culturally and spiritually is

explained Some MCFN members are in the process of revival as part of the larger

Indigenous peoplesrsquo resurgence (see discussion on p 36) to reclaim their connections to

place-thought cosmologies as called for by Watts (2013) These MCFN members

130

asserted that they were now in the era of lsquoreconnection to waterrsquo and water relations were

being lived

Kaytee Lee Dalton powerfully linked the relationship between reconnecting with water

and reclaiming her culture for her to heal from the injustices of colonialism

One of the important things that I really believe it has been ingrained in me that

our community as native people we really cant heal from the past until we have

reconnected with our culture And we cannot reconnect with our culture until we

are able to reconnect with the water That is kind of the one missing puzzle piece

So I think that will make a profound difference as a community (Kaytee Lee

Dalton)

To end off these findings it was suggested that MCFN must first educate themselves on

their own Anishinaabe ways of knowing being and doing as part of the larger resurgence

movements before making decisions on the water

I am saying to decide on it that we have to be educated To decide on the

decisions to make the decisions Otherwise any reference to traditional

Anishinaabe and all that needs to be taken out Because it is being humoured and

it is being used All decisions regardingon water must come from Anishinaabe

teachings and we need to revitalize them We need to be taught This is the

reverse of missionization and assimilation For the last 20 odd some years I have

chased elders across this this country on my dollar okay to get those teachings I

brought back it is in me I brought back home for my family Its only been within

131

the last couple years where Ive stood up and asked to share with community and

they are going through Anishnaabeg protocols Our way of doing things mothers

who are well-versed in Anishinaabe way or well-versed in water (Nancy Rowe)



MCFN participantsrsquo interconnected water values of use cultural connections spiritual

relations environmental sustainability as well as water economic values were related to

their present-day identities as shaped by past and present contexts

Not all and only some MCFN participants identified themselves as being part of the larger

Anishinaabe nation Nancy Rowe emphasized that ldquohellipthe Mississaugas of the New

Credit are not a First Nation The First Nation is a larger body of people the Anishinaaberdquo

Similarly Andrea King Dalton explained that MCFN is part of the larger Anishinaabe

nation however she recognized the subgroupings of peoples within this nation ldquohellip we are

Anishinaabe Ojibwe Mississaugas People we were always on the Credit River we are

water peoplerdquo

In addition another member distinguished between a MCFN identity and the New Credit

Band identity ldquoI am a Mississauga of the Credit but I live here on New Credit so there is

a differencerdquo (Garry Sault)

These two findings of Anishinaabe and MCFN identities or lack thereof versus New Credit

identities were important to understand MCFNrsquos water values As per the second

132

conceptual tenet in chapter 2 p 49 it is argued that there is no one collective of being

Indigenous Indigenous peoplesrsquo identities in Canada are plural dynamic and interwoven

within self-identifying constructs of Indigenous peoples Indigeny and Indigenism (see

Table 22 p 28) and these identities shape water values In MCFNrsquos participantsrsquo context

where they were reconnecting due to colonial practices with their Anishinaabe identity

and culture ie Indigeny as a social relational identity water has spirit and there was a

strong need and desire to live the Anishinaabe in terms of water relations as called for by

Watts (2013) Other MCFN participants saw themselves as a social-political entity an

Indigenous band under the Indian Act and water was regarded as sustaining life for its

environmental and use values For MCFN participants who were responding to external

structural forces ie Indigenism the political value of water was an economic means to

sustain themselves into the future The multi-faceted and interdependent water values of

MCFN participants correlated with plural Indigenous identities that have been shaped

and will remain to be shaped and dynamic in time and space for future generations

MCFNrsquos water values for future generations

MCFNrsquos participants regarded their Indigeny cultural and spiritual water values and

Indigenous peoplesrsquo environmental and use water values as important for their

responsibilities to future generations ie seven generations into the future

The elementary school students and youth group clearly voiced the need to protect and

conserve water in response to lsquoWhat would you do to care forprotect water - now and in

the futurersquo However only the youth group related to water as spirit and Carla Campbell

explained that ldquoWe teach our kids to conserve water it is in our school curriculum But we

can do morerdquo

133

Key-informants in response to the research schedule probe on lsquoHow do you want your

grand and great grand-children (seven generations into the future) to think about and see

waterrsquo indicated that they want future generations to have 1) clean available and

accessible water for future generations and 2) to know and live their Anishinaabe culture

Two selected quotes from key-informants clearly illustrate the sentiments related to clean

available and accessible water ldquoI want my grandchildren to have water Accessible and

clean water Not to waste water How do we see water being wasted eg these great

big pools Water is also being pollutedrdquo (Anonymous) and ldquoFor the future generations

they should have access and availability and cleanlinessrdquo (Craig King)

Currently MCFN is connected to a municipal water source hence clean and accessible

water is not a major cause of concern However this was not always the case and Jai

King Green commented that she was privileged to have clean available and accessible

water compared to her grand parents

hellipThe thing is that they didnt have access to clean waterhellip But access to clean

water drinkable water tap water potable water was different for them because

they had to go out to the well and bring back water The relationship is different

than my relationship to water in terms of access and availability Back then they

couldnt just turn on the tap in their house I can So having to work for water myself

is different but for them they had to work for it So I think that goes back to what I

was saying earlier I am very privileged in comparison to my grandfather and my

grandmother (Jai King Green)

134

Some respondents indicated that polluted water was not a problem for their ancestors but

certainly became a problem with time

Back in those days it wouldnt have been something that stepped to the forefront

in their minds because there wasnt as much pollution And they couldnt conceive

of there ever coming a time when they wouldnt have fresh clean water

Preindustrial I dont know how far back you are thinking my grandparents would

certainly not want to see the water polluted but they may not have seen it as such

a big problem (Anonymous)

I remember as a child we were always told Dont drink out of that stream When

I was 12 years old and I went to Manitoulin Island where my aunt lives up there

and she said XXX you want to go to out to the dock and get us a pail of water

I said sure I come back with a bucket of water and I ask lsquowhat is this water forrsquo

and she says its our drinking water XXX no big deal I said are you telling me that

we drink right out of the Lake Manitowaning and she said Yes we always have

And I dont know if she knew any better She is a trained nurse and we never got

sick off it That was a different mentality up there maybe it was still clean enough

to do that I dont know if it is now but thats something that is always stuck in my

mind Down here that went away a lot earlier (Anonymous)

Selected quotes from key-informants who wanted future generations to know and live

their Anishinaabe culture are

135

I think for my great-grandchildren I want them to know the importance of water

That it has spirit that it has energy and movement Not just my grandchildren and

my communities and my families (Jai King Green)

And certainly when it comes to my grandchildren and great-grandchildren

absolutely I want them to have to respect water and embrace water for what it

is Being a giver of life Something that should be respected and held sacred To

not only Indigenous peoples but to all people on earth There is not at awful lot of

fresh water on earth so we better treat it respectfully and do our best to maintain

the water while we still have the chancehellip (Mark LaForme)

Garry Sault related that as an Elder it is his responsibility through songs and language

to ensure that the spiritual teachings of the water are not lost to the youth even if they

resist so that balance can be retained for future generations

They are losing it because the respect wasnt there and I think because it is a new

thing to them They are starting to utilize it but sometimes when you look at young

people they dont always want to be like their parents They want to be something

else They want to make their own life But the teachings of water cant escape

them because everything is connected Because of me they will look at their

connection to the earth to the water The language binds that connection So it

has to be maintained If it is maintained in that respect for everything in Creation

will never be lost Because the words are in our songs I give thanks to the Creator

for that life So so when you call to that water it is life It is like in our songs it

136

calls for balance So if we do not balance things in a good way then there will be

nothing for the future generations to come (Garry Sault)

Carolyn King related her vision for future generations in terms of them making choices

based on them knowing and understanding their Anishinaabe history and ontology

The story of our mural Our history and creation story are illustrated in the school

mural We live in this modern world but we have to know our history

Understanding what that is and going out into this modern world and making

choices (Carolyn King)

Based on these finding it was clear that present-day MCFN wants to protect the water

for the physical spiritual and cultural well-being of future generations

Chapter Conclusions

For MCFN water is life defined in various ways in terms of its use value for everyday

living cultural connections to water (eg fishing hunting and canoeing) spiritual relations

to water environmental value and economic value These values were not mutually

exclusive but were rather interdependent because water interconnects everything

MCFNrsquos historical and contemporary colonial influences of relocation assimilation and

missionization shaped participants water values through their plural Indigenous identities

Some MCFN members were in the process of revival to reclaim what Watts (2013) calls

reconnections to place-thought cosmologies as part of the larger Indigenous resurgence

137

For these MCFN members Indigeny76 identity related to cultural and spiritual water

values and they advocated that MCFN must first reconnect with this identity before

making decisions on the water MCFNrsquos identity as Indigenous peoples ie a socio-

political group regarded water for its environmental and use values MCFNrsquos identity as

Indigenous to strategically respond to political and economic external structural forces

was positioned within Indigenism and this identity related to economic water values

MCFN participants unanimously agreed that water must be protected for seven

generations into the future Future generations must have not only clean available and

accessible water but must also be culturally and spiritually connected to water as

Anishinaabe and it is now the responsibility of present-day MCFN members to ensure

this

Tenet 1 in the conceptual framework maintains that water governance is a system driven

by values and ideologies Before water governance can be Indigenized to achieve social

justice for Indigenous peoples there is a need to identify and understand the context-

specific values and ideologies of water governance In this study water governance is

viewed from the lenses of MCFN and the question now is How do MCFNrsquos plural water

values rooted in multiple identities define the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN

participants

76 ie social-cultural

138

6 The Meaning of the Water Claim to MCFN

This chapter addresses the second research objective which was to identify the meanings

of the Water Claim to MCFN members and to relate these meanings to MCFN membersrsquo

water values as shaped by historical and contemporary contexts It draws on the

knowledge gathered from the key-informant conversations with adults interactive

activities with elementary school students and youth adult focus groups and the survey

The Meanings of the Water Claim

The central theme that emerged by MCFN participants on the meaning of the Water Claim

was that water was their responsibility they need to respect water care for the water and

be stewards of the water This sentiment is captured in the quotes ldquoPrimary is our

responsibility to water That people understand the importance of water and why it is

important to us as New Creditrdquo (Pat Mandy) and ldquohellip we are stewards not only over the

land but also our water And we have responsibilitiesrdquo (Anonymous) Similar views were

conveyed by Elders in a study by Wilson and Inkster (2018) with four Yukon Nations

These Elders expressed that respecting water had different social-context meanings

which included not hurting water eg through pollution extractive use caring for the

water and being responsible to the water through a mutual and reciprocal relationship

(Wilson and Inkster 2018)

This central theme was moreover emphasized by MCFN participants when interpreting

their Aboriginal title inherent and treaty rights in response to the research question on

lsquoWhat does water ownership mean to yoursquo There was unanimous agreement by the key-

informants and group discussion participants that we donrsquot own the water because you

cannot own the water Rather than owning the water it was felt that we were stewards

and keepers of the water and that we are responsible to the water

139

Water ownership is a concept that I canrsquot understand We donrsquot own the water it

is our responsibility Even 100 years ago they didnrsquot make decisions about the

water It is about stewardship So it is not my water but my responsibility

Ownership is embedded in capitalism and we canrsquot change it but we need to try

(Eric Sault)

I dont like the word ownership either because as Anishinaabe People we dont

own anything We are stewards of it and keepers It is for everyone to use That is

a hard issue to say that we own the water we own the land around it We never

felt that way (Andrea Dalton King)

Water owns us Even thinking about our creation story and even in the Bible God

or the Creator used the water to purify the earthhellipso at any time with these floods

these storms and these hurricanes I donrsquot say that we can own the water We are

less than water (Anonymous)

As a separate issue some MCFN members voiced concerns that the Water Claim was

still housed within a colonial framework It was not MCFNrsquos Aboriginal and treaty right to

lodge this claim because MCFN was not a nation but a colonial structure operating within

the federal guidelines

I know that they are forming the Mississauga Nation and that is great but there is

no such thing as the Mississauga Nation The Anishinaabe Nation is the Nationhellip

This is a reservation it is not a First Nations but were acting as though and

140

everybody knows it is an implanted colonial structure and the duty to consult is

falling on that structure So we are not consulting outside of the federal

structurehellip So the whole thing is veryhellip because people dont know I think we

are not being afforded free prior and informed consenthellip (Nancy Rowe)

It is got to go beyond New Credit it is got to be with the rest of the Anishinaabe

We have connections We canrsquot just be looking after ourselves and for money We

go after a claim and say what you owe us for all these years making money from

hydro We have to talk to the other native people That is part of our agreement

and accepted that any legal suit by a native has got to be paid out of money made

by natives They have to pay it not hydro Ontario Hydro ainrsquot going pay New Credit

all the money that they made all those years They are making the native people

pay for it Thatrsquos just not righthellip If you look at our migration story we all are one

We moved and we separated into different geographical locations But we are all

one With this water too we all carry parts of the teachings (Anonymous)

Not to ignore the participants who voiced their dissent of MCFNrsquos Water Claim Andrea

King Dalton concurred that the Water Claim should ideally be made by the Anishinaabe

nation She explained that as a way forward all Anishinaabe bands should take the lead

with respect to their identified yet shared traditional territories

Somebody has to take the leadership role And we have established our Traditional

Territory as Mississaugas of the Credit And we talk about Anishinaabe People

compared to Haudenosaunee People where their Traditional Territory was below

141

the lakes So when we look at where the Mississaugas of the New Credit are in

relation to the other Anishinaabe People we know where we are we were in this

corridor So we are only talking about access to our main corridor right down to

Lake Erie When we are talking about that water yes then somebody has to take

a lead in it We have already established our Traditional Territory so it makes

sense for us to be stewards of that water I feel as Anishinaabe that the other

Anishinaabe bands they should be the stewards to their Traditional Territory And

we will have that shared relationship if we want to go there it is a back-and-forth

just like it was We would be fluid We were a very fluid society as Anishinaabe

and we shared (Andrea Dalton King)

When probing further into what MCFN members wanted to see from the Water Claim the

responses were multi-faceted During the key-informant conversations MCFN members

identified nine themes in relation to the meaning of the Water Claim These were that

MCFN 1) has to protect the water 2) could reclaim their cultural connections as stewards

of the water 3) needs to have access to water 4) needs to have a say in water

governance 5) would have their treaty rights upheld 6) would have recognition 7) could

benefit economically 8) sustain themselves now and into the future and 9) could have

political leverage when engaging with governments of Canada

The adult group discussion participants identified six themes similar to the key-informants

These were 1) having a say in water governance 2) protecting the water for future

generations 3) benefiting economically from the use of water 4) reconnecting to water as

142

part of their culture 5) ensuring that their inherent and Aboriginal title rights are upheld

and 6) having access to water

Three overall topics emerged from the key-informant and group discussion participantsrsquo

meanings of the Water Claim As a reminder inductive coding was undertaken to develop

nodes (themes) within cases (eg interviews group discussions) and super nodes

(topics) across cases where there was congruency andor divergence (see p 102 for

further information)

These topics (Figure 61) were Topic 1 Healing Ourselves by reconnecting with our

culture including have access to water bodies and recognition including through treaty

and Aboriginal title rights Topic 2 Protecting the water by having a say and through

political leverage and Topic 3 Sustaining Ourselves through economic benefits political

leverage access to water and reclaiming our treaty and Aboriginal title rights Each topic

is explored below

143

Figure 61 Framing the meanings of the Water Claim from the key-informants and group discussions

Healing Ourselves

The first emergent topic related to lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo for recognising and reconnecting

with being Anishinaabe - their relationship to water and living their culture according to

natural laws which have been eroded due to colonial influences

To me it means getting back that relationship to water and that we can influence

protection of water People do this through the water walks It is about reclaiming

all that we have lost - our history our language It is all connected As I said we

are different in how we raise our kids develop land or not But this is not a money

claim It is a jurisdiction claim to protect water Recognising that we have an

important role to play It is about bringing water into our lives It is about moving

from lsquoAfraid to be an Indianrsquo to being lsquoProud to be an Indianrsquo (Carolyn King)

144

Yes it is because of the disconnect from our culture That is part of that but the

strongest reconnecting with our culture in my opinion is the value of water And

so not having that But it is part of our healing and when we have ceremonies

water is a really big part of our ceremonies The sharing of water allowing

especially as women our tears to flow which is very therapeutic and very healing

Getting rid of that dirty water in our systems and knowing that we need to replenish

it with clean water And even just to be able to go to the water and be in water to

be floating in the water to have freedom it is very peaceful to sit by water Since

we dont have access to it we have to drive a far distance to go and connect with

water (Andrea Dalton King)

I want to see more of our traditional practices within the water framework

continuously and not just words I want it in the practice of it To uphold it and then

that spiritual component will be in there and it will bind it It binds it and it is just

not words Just like when I said we need to say a prayer or sing a song to the

waterrdquo and ldquoI started doing water ceremonies just like once a month and to bring

this to women about our responsibilitiesin a spiritual way I started to do the

teachings and then songs So to me water is everything Even today we are

talking to the trees and that is part of the water And I want my kids to know They

know the importance of water They know the ceremonies about water Is not just

a moon ceremony it is about the water the connection to the moon sky the

people Water is first and foremost acknowledged in everything that we do It is

145

life It is about life So the word Niibi talks about life We look at water as we are

supposed to look at ourselves (Anonymous)

In summary to MCFN lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo in relation to the Water Claim was intertwined

within recognising themselves as Anishinaabe and reconnecting with being Anishinaabe

through revitalising rediscovering and reclaiming their cultural and spiritual relations to

water There was no one way of healing and different people would enter this journey

along different points

Protecting the water

The second emergent topic was lsquoProtecting the waterrsquo This topic strongly incorporated

the theme of lsquohaving a sayrsquo in terms of regulating water policies processes and decisions

to protect the water ie a say in water governance

I want us to have input into everything For example reduction of pollution land

development and so on Ideally we should have equal voice I am not sure about

veto rights Canada will be resistant to that and we will have backlash I am

socialized into modern paradigms and I see it as being Nation to Nation But do

we have the resources for a representative voice Do we have the infrastructure

and capacity in terms of knowledge and number of people (Eric Sault)

I want us to have control of and have a say in industrial developments I mean

industrial uses of water are important I recognize that they cant be abused They

cant be turned into a corporate thing they cant make a huge profit I would hate

to see the day come when we dont have any rights to water as humans because

146

some corporate entity has somehow convinced people that it is something that

they need to pay for If you dont have it you dont get a drink That is ridiculous

and I dont think that it is a stretch that it could go that way someday if we are not

careful Having a say having them required to consult us over the water It is

about taking care of the water for everyone (Anonymous)

MCFN participants couched protecting the water within environmental protection

The only thing that comes to my mind is the ability to stop and force them to give

it up We basically want to stop something that is really horrible We want to be

able to work with others and groups We wouldnt be the only ones because we

are natives Other groups environmental groups that are certainly behind

protecting the water Because it is about protecting the water I dont know much

about frameworks what should be all laid out But there has to be a way that we

can put the brakes on something that is detrimental to the environment and not

just have the court or somebody saying well industry wins out (Anonymous)

MCFN participants also positioned protecting the water within holistic and inherent

responsibilities to water ldquoMaybe we have to give MNR [Ministry of Natural Resources]

over to the native people (laugh) The laws of the water to be handed over to the native

people Or have the principles that govern based on natural laws that come from our

creation storyrdquo (Anonymous)

147

Irrespective of the purpose for protecting the water what was clear as relayed at the

Chief and Council discussion session was that MCFN must write their own regulations

and processes based on their own standards to protect watersheds in treaty lands and

territory The primary school students and youth group through interactive art activities

similarly advocated for laws and environmental control to keep our water clean Their

concerns were that the water was being polluted and that it needs to be protected (Figure

62 and Figure 63)

Figure 62 Example of an artwork by a LSK Elementary School student (Grade 8) on protecting the water Artwork created on April 5 2018 at New Credit Reserve

148

Figure 63 Artwork by MCFN youth group on protecting the water Artwork created on March 20

2018 at New Credit Reserve

In summary MCFN wanted to protect and conserve the water because water is and has

life They wanted clean and safe water for seven generations to come To do this they

recognised that they needed to have a say and authority in the decision-making

processes about the water and ensure that water is managed according to their laws and

ways of life

Garry Sault compellingly articulated that we donrsquot own the water but we have a

responsibility to protect the water for future generations just as our ancestors have

149

protected the water for us If the only way that we can protect the water is through the use

of the word lsquoownershiprsquo then it is our responsibility to own the water to protect it

Well it is like a community thing How can you own anything It doesnt belong

to you It belongs to the children yet unborn But if we dont take the initiative to

protect the waters the way that the ancestors left the responsibility to us then we

are falling away from the things and the responsibilities that were given to us So

if that is the only way that they will leave the waters alone then we have to take full

ownership and the responsibilities that come with it to ensure that we have water

(Garry Sault)

Sustaining Ourselves

The third topic of lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo emerged in response to MCFN reclaiming their

treaty and Aboriginal title rights Mark LaForme poignantly explained that pragmatism

required MCFN to adapt and respond to todayrsquos world in order to sustain themselves for

survival through economic benefits

We have to use those waters to sustain ourselves We are no longer able to do

that because of encroachment So how then do we take our sustenance from the

land and the water For generations ago and we translate that into a modern

context we dont have access to those things that sustained us in the past The

salmon in the Credit River or hunting deer around Toronto or where-ever it was

There has just been too much developments and too much encroachment for us

to continue to rely on the land for our sustainability So there has to be a modern

alternative Allowing us to use that land in whatever way it is going to be used to

continually sustain ourselves But that means that if it can only come through

150

economic and business development opportunitiesthen so be it But we still have

to sustain ourselves

For MCFN the Water Claim for lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo was also explained in terms of

positioning themselves politically through advocacy and influence for their self-

determination MCFN is claiming ownership of the water as a leverage to ensure that their

voices are heard when they may or are being impacted and to ensure that water is

respected for sustainability

It means so many things how do I articulate that Well first of all the water claim

means that as far as I am concerned we are still the rightful owners of the water

if you are going to look at it as if it can be owned We never felt that we can own

the water and we have no concept of ownership Not the land it was there to share

for everybody well and that is true for water But given how the governments

operate we have been forced to put forward and submit our claim for ownership of

the water because all of our treaties are silent on the waters with the exception of

one So in our opinion we never did give up our rightful ownership of the waters

and we have documentation from the British Crown saying in as much So from

that perspective yes I do believe that we could maintain ownership of the water

That does not necessarily put us on equal footing with the government but it

definitely gives us an advantage when it comes to negotiations and discussions of

our Aboriginal treaties rights The water claim to me means that I can use it as a

leverage particularly when I am dealing with proponents when doing

developments They have to remember that anything done to the water has a

151

potential impact on the Mississaugas of New Credit so they have to be consulting

with us to ensure (I keep saying ownership but I prefer the word stewardship over

the waters) that where we feel we have fundamental responsibility that the waters

are dealt with respectfully and are maintained sufficiently so that they can continue

to sustain life Again not only Indigenous but globally So in that sense I see the

water claim as giving us some leverage when it comes to negotiating with the

Crown whether it be the provincial or the federal governments (Mark LaForme)

lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo was further constructed in terms of cultural and social meanings

and it was emphasized if not implored by participants that economic development should

not be considered a priority over cultural values and social community development In

addition it was suggested that any economic gains must be channelled to community

developments and not for individualpersonal gain ldquoIf people are going to be financially

gaining not necessarily something coming back to the band eg Coca-Cola donating to

shelters schools and hospitals etc that is a social responsibility Stuff that will be used

by allrdquo (Craig King)

Physical access to water as a treaty and Aboriginal title right was also identified by

MCFN for sustaining themselves culturally and spiritually Specifically MCFN participants

felt that through the Water Claim they should be provided with unhindered physical

access to water for cultural and spiritual purposes eg ceremonies ldquoI wouldnrsquot be

participating if I didnrsquot think it would lead us to water because that is the part of water

where we are unhealthy because we donrsquot even have water We go we have to travel to

water we go to those ceremonies we go to that waterrdquo (Anonymous)

152

Last Andrea King Dalton went further and suggested that access to water for cultural and

spiritual reasons could also have economic benefits for the community In her optimistic

thinking she strategically foresaw potential synergistic opportunities between unhindered

access and water-based community businesses

Even if you think about what kind of businesses that individuals could have if we

had access to water We dont even have anybody in our First Nations who has an

out-tripping business for educationhellip again it is about accessibility I would love

to have a personal business where I am teaching canoeing and kayaking and

reconnecting kids to water But then I dont have access to water (Andrea King

Dalton)

In summary lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo for MCFN was about reclaiming their treaty and

Aboriginal rights so that they cannot only survive in our contemporary world ie economic

benefits and political leverage but it was also about their right to have unhindered access

and to use the water for their cultural and spiritual well being

The survey respondents identified with the three topics of the Water Claim in terms of

reclaiming our rights (ie Topic 3 Sustaining Ourselves) having a say (ie Topic 2

Protecting the water) and reconnecting with our culture (ie Topic 1 Healing Ourselves)

Figure 64 shows that 83 (20) of participants agreed that the Water Claim was about

reclaiming their rights 54 (13) agreed that it was about Having a say and 33 (8)

agreed that it was about rediscovery and reconnecting with their culture The lsquoOtherrsquo

category of 5 consisted of comments to affirm the three identified Water Claim

meanings

153

Figure 64 The meanings of the Water Claim to the survey respondents (N=24)

Relating the Meanings of the Water Claim to MCFNrsquos Multi-

dimensional Water Values and Plural and Intersectional Identities

The three separate yet interrelated topics of the Water Claim ie 1 lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo

2 lsquoProtecting the water Having a Sayrsquo and 3 lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo relate to MCFNrsquos

plural water values embedded in their multifaceted and intersecting identities

Summarised in Figure 65 lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo strongly related to the cultural and

spiritual connections to water as embedded in social-relational identities of Indigeny77

lsquoProtecting the water by having a sayrsquo connected to environmental and use water values

in terms of lsquohaving a sayrsquo as a socio-political Indigenous peoples78 entity (MCFN) as well

77 In Table 22 Indigeny refers to social-relational identities principles of reciprocity with all of creation (Simpson 2014) and collectivism (Lewallen 2003 Dei and Jaimungal 2018 p 2) 78 In Table 22 Indigenous peoples refer to socio-political entities genealogy linked to prior occupancy cultural distinctiveness derived from their ancestors including relationships with the land and peoples who have been and remain forcefully colonized (UN (nd) ILO (1989) World Bank (2020)

2

8

13

20

- 5 10 15 20 25

Other

Rediscovering and Reconnecting withour culture

Regulating-having a say voice anddecision-making authority

Reclaiming our Treaty Inherent andAboriginal Title Rights

Number of Survey Respondents (N=24)

154

for spiritual and cultural water values in terms of having a say for Indigeny lsquoSustaining

Ourselvesrsquo within water values of use and political-economic leverages were located

within identities of Indigenous peoples and Indigenism79 respectively

Figure 65 Relating Water Claim meanings to MCFN participantsrsquo water values and Indigenous identities

These three Water Claim topics were not mutually exclusive and MCFN participants

(based on survey and key-informant responses the group discussion responses were

excluded because they were collectively recorded) identified with one or more of these

topics First MCFN participants by demographic identifies of gender age and onoff

reserve locations had varying levels of connection to each of the Water Claimrsquos topics

(Table 61)

79 In Table 22 Indigenism refers to mobilisations for self-determination against colonial hegemonies of political economic and social institutional forces (Escobar 2008 Dei and Jaimungal 2018)

155

Table 61 Percentage of survey and key-informant responses by gender age and onoff reserve locations to each of the Water Claimrsquos three topics

Demographics N Topic 1 Healing Ourselves

Reconnecting with our culture

Topic 2 Protecting the water having a

say

Topic 3 Sustaining Ourselves

Female 30 63 63 63

Male 14 14 64 64

18-35 7 86 71 43

gt35lt55 18 39 72 83

gt55 19 42 53 58

On reserve 32 47 69 66

Off reserve 12 50 50 67

Of note in Table 61 were 1) females participants related to a greater extent to lsquoHealing

Ourselvesrdquo compared to men (63 versus 14) 2) Younger participants (ages 18-35

years) related to a greater extent to lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo and lsquoProtecting the water having

sayrsquo whilst middle aged (gt35lt55 years) and older (gt55 years) participants related to a

greater extent to lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo and lsquoProtecting the water having a sayrsquo than

lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo and 3) on-reserve participants related more (69) to lsquoProtecting the

water having a sayrsquo than off-reserve participants (50)

Second Figure 66 shows that MCFN participants connected at varying levels with all

three Water Claim topics by intersectional identities80 of age gender and residential

location An exception was male participants between the ages of gt35 and lt55 years On

reserve participants in this grouping connected to lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo and lsquoProtecting

the water having a sayrsquo whilst off-reserve participants in this grouping only connected to

80 Crenshaw (1989) first coined the term intersectionality to describe the interactivity between race and

gender identities of black woman This concept was subsequently expanded to include the interfaces between all social identities especially between privileged and subjugated identities (Gopaldas 2013)

156

lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo During the key-informant conversations all males in this age

group who lived on reserve indicated that they value water because they use it and that

water needs to be protected One key-informant indicated that he was mindful but not

grounded in the spiritual relationship to water

Figure 66 MCFN participantsrsquo connections to each of the three Water Claim topics by intersectional identities of gender age and onoff reserve locations

The importance of water to females was evident from these study findings which align

with the central role that water plays in the lives of Indigenous women (Anderson et al

2013 McGregor 2014 2015 and Cave and McKay 2016) Young and middle-aged adult

females (gt18 to lt55 years) specifically connected to water as lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo which

was explained by Garry Sault (personal communication December 2018) that ldquowomen

are water and men are firerdquo However as advocated by Jai King Green water is the

25

67

100

100

67

75

40

73

50

100

33

100

50

100

60

55

50

100

67

67

75

40

45

50

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

18-35 male on reserve

18-35 male off reserve

18-35 female on reserve

18-35female off reserve

gt35-55 male on reserve

gt35-55 male off reserve

gt35-55 female onhellip

gt35-55 female offhellip

gt 55 male on reserve

gt55 male off reserve

gt 55 female on reserve

gt 55 female off reserve

Responses for each Water Claim Topic

Sustaining Ourselves Protecting the water having a say Healing Ourselves

157

responsibility of everyone and that men and women have complementary roles in

maintaining the balance emphasizing the importance of two-spirited peoples

And for women especially we are so connected to the water we are I think

sometimes we dont even realize how connected we are I think That is one of

the things that I was taught the roles and responsibilities as man and woman and

two-spirited people Men have a connection to the fire and women have a

connection to water It is interchangeable for sure I think two-spirited people play

a very very clear role in being interchangeable between fire and waterrdquo But ldquoWater

isnt just a womans responsibility Because we all need water to survive We are

made of 88 of water It is not like men survive on drinking fire So it is the

responsibility of everybody

For on-reserve respondents lsquoProtecting the water having a sayrsquo was important because

of their connection to the land and environment

It is about us going back to protecting the water and back to the environment

People donrsquot understand we canrsquot drink oil or money They are destroying the

lakes because of pollution (Mark Sault)

Although not directly explicit from this research study nor postulated in the literature these

research findings (ie varying levels of overlapping Water Claim meanings by

demographic identities of age gender and residential location and their intersections)

may be a reflection of Anishinaabe prophecies MCFN members only recently

reconnected with their Anishinaabe culture

158

Our community only really got back our culture about 23 years ago within the

community So I didnt really grow up with it My mom either Neither did my

grandfather So my mom has worked really hard and my grandfather who passed

away a few years worked really hard as well to teach us as much as they knew

My Anishinaabe culture that I love (Kaytee Lee Dalton)

The Seven Fires Prophecy in Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin (see chapter 3 p 65) relate the

attempts by colonial settlers to destroy the Anishinaabe nation but they also show that

through resurgence the Anishinaabe nation will regain their ways and teachings through

the water drum clan systems peace pipe sacred water ceremonies and ultimately as

Youth on Top of the World (Gibson 2006) Given that young adults females in this

research (Figure 66) strongly connected with the lsquoHealing Ourselves topicrsquo was

indicative of this resurgence However only the youth and not the school students (see

chapter 5 p 116) could connect to the spiritual relationship with water and Nancy Rowe

a key-informant advocated that ldquoMCFN must educate themselves on being Anishinaaberdquo

if the youth is ultimately to be lsquoon top of the worldrsquo as reflected in Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin

Chapter Conclusions

Overall there was general agreement between MCFN members who participated in this

research that their Water Claim was about their responsibility to water within topics of

lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo by reconnecting with their Anishinaabe culture lsquoProtecting the water

having a sayrsquo and lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo in terms of their inherent Aboriginal title and

treaty rights These topics related to MCFNrsquos water values and their plural Indigenous

identities These topics were also not mutually exclusive within MCFN participants but

were intertwined within intersecting and plural demographic identities of age gender and

residential location The importance of these research findings ie the centrality of

159

MCFNrsquos responsibility to water plural Water Claims themes and their correlations to

demographic identities (Table 61) and by intersecting demographic identities (Figure 66)

in addition to their plural Indigenous identities (Figure 65) illustrated that the meanings of

the Water Claim to MCFN were embroiled in layered and textured complexity This

complexity was embedded within MCFNrsquos historical and contemporary contexts as

reflected in Kiinwi Dabaadjmowinrsquos prophecies As such the resolutions to the Water

Claim including a Water Framework as discussed in the next chapter must be multi-

dimensional

160

7 MCFNrsquos Water Framework

This chapter is divided into two main sections First it integrates the research findings on

the importance of water (Chapter 5) and the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN

(Chapter 6) to present the MCFN Water Framework Second it answers the overarching

research question lsquoHow can water governance be Indigenized within a social justice

frameworkrsquo This section relates how MCFNrsquos Water Frameworkrsquos core value and

principles contribute to deconstructing western concepts of water governance It then

explains how MCFNrsquos participants related to social justice and why Fraserrsquos (2009) social

justice concept is then deconstructed as it relates to MCFNrsquos agency illustrated through

the Water Framework It further begins to explore potential opportunities barriers and

challenges for implementing MCFNrsquos Water Framework by analysing the responses from

a select group of Canadarsquos water governance representatives (local conservation

authorities) on MCFNrsquos Water Claim in general and specifically MCFNrsquos Water

Framework as a partial resolution to this Water Claim Last it highlights MCFNrsquos

participants reflections on the way forward to working within Canadian water governance

To circle back to the focus of the research collaboration (see section 12 for full details)

in summary MCFN filed an lsquoAboriginal Title Claim to Waters within the Traditional Lands

of the Mississaugas of the New Creditrsquo81 ie the Water Claim in September 2016 (MCFN

nd-a) Through this Water Claim MCFN is asserting its unextinguished Aboriginal title to

all water beds of water and floodplains which contains approximately four (4) million

acres of land (MCFN nd-a) within its treaty lands and territory in southern Ontario In

response to this Water Claim a MCFN Water Committee was mandated to consult and

engage with MCFN members about the Water Claim and their envisaged outcomes

(personal communication Water Committee April 2017) The Water Committeersquos

81 To view the Title Claim see httpmncfncawp-contentuploads201702MNC-Aboriginal-Title-

Reportpdf

161

mandate together with the academic research interest of UoG researchers on

Indigenizing water governance resulted in a project focused on creating a MCFN Water

Framework as a partial resolution to MCFNrsquos Water Claim that was representative of

membersrsquo values worldviews needs and aspirations This project was titled the

lsquoDevelopment of Mississaugas of the Credit First Nations Water Framework to Indigenize

Water Governance within Treaty Lands and Territoryrsquo

MCFNrsquos Water Framework

The research team developed the Water Framework over the period from September to

November 2018 (see Figure 43) through a joint and reflexive process The research

team agreed that the research findings were not applicable for developing water laws and

regulations82 but were more appropriate for developing a Water Framework of change

and actions A Framework for ActionFramework of Change aligns to Rothmanrsquos revised

models of community development of ldquo1 locality development 2 social planning policy

and 3 social actionrdquo (Rothman 1996 p 72) It is based on a lsquoTheory of Changersquo as

suggested by Weiss (1995) for effective evaluation of community initiatives Theory of

Change describes and illustrates how and why a desired change is expected to happen

in a particular context it starts with what is and what should be in the long-term it fills

gaps and identifies success conditions it is focused on outcomes (and not outputs) based

for achieving the long-term goal and it facilitates evaluation of progress towards the

achievement of longer-term goals (Centre for Theory of Change website 2019) Often

the Theory of Change is applied through a logic model83 however after drafting a

preliminary logic model based on actions inputs outputs outcomes and impacts the

82 eg such as Yinke Dene in BC who developed the lsquoYinka Dene lsquoUzarsquohneacute Surface Water Management Policyrsquo (Yinke Dene 2016a) and the lsquoYinka Dene lsquoUzarsquohneacute Guide to Surface Water Quality Standardsrsquo (Yinke Dene 2016b) to support policy implementation ndash on their Territory 83 McLaughlin and Jordon (1999) explain a logic model as ldquothe logical linkages among program resources

activities outputs customers reached and short intermediate and longer-term outcomes Once this model of expected performance is produced critical measurement areas can be identifiedrdquo (p 65)

162

research team agreed that this was premature and that a higher-level framework for

action and change was required This led the research team to formulate the Water

Framework in terms of principles objectives and suggested implementation actions in

relation to the frameworkrsquos purpose and intended use

The Water Frameworkrsquos principles (Figure 71) were based on the research findings from

the importance of water and the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN and included the

following

Our core relationships with water ie respecting and caring for water as life being

responsible to water and being stewards for the water form the basis of three

fundamental principles

1) Healing Ourselves as a nation by rediscovering and reconnecting with our

cultural and spiritual relations to water

2) Protecting the water by asserting our voice and authority in regulating water

decisions policies and processes and

3) Sustaining Ourselves (and seven generations into the future) by reclaiming our

treaty and Aboriginal title water rights (Draft MCFN Water Framework A

Framework for Water Governance on MCFN Treaty Lands and Territory

unpublished p 6)

163

Figure 71 MCFNs Water Framework principles based on the meanings of the Water Claim to

Indigenize water within their treaty lands and territory

The Water Frameworkrsquos objectives were based on coded themes from the key-informant

conversations and adult group discussions responses to the question on lsquoWhat do you

want to see in the Water Frameworkrsquo More than 80 (N = 24) of the survey respondents

related to these objectives (Figure 72)

164

Legend

Goal 1 For us to have unhindered (free easy and rightful) access to water bodies on our treaty lands and territory Goal 2 For all people to meaningfully acknowledge and recognize water and our water values on our treaty lands and territory Goal 3 For us to strategically advocate lobby and position our treaty and inherent rights to water Goal 4 For us to be directly actively and seriously consulted and accommodated on all activities relating to water on our treaty lands and territory Goal 5 For all people to be actively and respectfully involved in the protection conservation and remediation of the water Goal 6 For us to vibrantly live and have knowledge about our responsibilities to the water based on our Anishinaabe teachings Goal 7 For us to revive and integrate Anishinaabe teachings and traditions in our community Goal 8 For us to benefit economically so that we can sustain ourselves into the future Goal 9 To have sufficient and appropriate resources (eg people and funding) and structures (eg committees task teams) in place to manage implement and evaluate the Water Framework Goal 10 To have appropriate and ongoing education awareness and communication activities about the Water Framework Figure 72 Percent of survey respondents indicating their support for the proposed MCFN Water Framework goals Note Goals 9 and 10 were merged in the final Water Framework

96

92

96

96

83

79

79

88

92

96

0 20 40 60 80 100

Goal 1

Goal 2

Goal 3

Goal 4

Goal 5

Goal 6

Goal 7

Goal 8

Goal 9

Goal 10

of Survey Respondents

Agree

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Dont knowNot applicable

Left Blank

165

A total of nine separate but interlinked objectives were identified for the Water Framework

Five objectives were in support of the principle on lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo in relation to

access to water educating people on MCFNrsquos water values reclaiming MCFNrsquos rights

and responsibilities to water through advocacy and lobbying MCFN being consulted and

accommodated regarding waters on their treaty lands and territory and for MCFN to

benefit economically An objective in support of the principle on lsquoProtecting the waterrsquo

evolved around encouraging people to conserve and protect the water actively and

respectfully Two objectives in support of the principle on lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo focused on

reviving the Anishinaabe ways in the community and to live their responsibilities to water

based on these Anishinaabe ways The last objective related to the framework

management in terms of appropriate resources structures education and

communication and awareness Figure 73 illustrates the association between the Water

Frameworkrsquos principles and objectives

The Water Frameworkrsquos actions were based on coded themes from the key-informant


want to see in the Water Frameworkrsquo The Water Frameworkrsquos actions presented in Table

71 are arranged by objective

166

Figure 73 MCFNs Water Framework objectives associated to the principles

167

Table 71 MCFNs Water Framework actions arranged by objective

Water Frameworkrsquos Objective Suggested action(s)

To have unhindered (free easy and rightful) access to water bodies

Obtainexercise rights ie a blanket exemption to use water for recreational cultural and spiritual practices Develop processes for these rights Educate people about these rights

To educate people to meaningfully acknowledge and recognize water and our water values

Develop and implement an awareness and education campaign strategy Erect acknowledgement and recognition plaques for the respect of water at all major and minor water bodies

To strategically advocate lobby and position our rights and responsibilities to water

Advocate for water having rights in the Canadian constitution Develop processes for members to be protected and heard during lobbying actions Provide funds for members to participate in lobbying actions

To be directly actively and seriously consulted and accommodated on all activities relating to water

Provide informed prior and free consent on activities affecting our waters Participate in relevant decision making Develop clear processes and standards of practice for Consultation and Accommodation Facilitate and contribute to collaborative actions

To benefit economically so that we can sustain ourselves into the future

Develop ways to obtain compensation from for-profit companies for their water use Reinvest economic benefits into social and environmental programs Create opportunities for band members to develop water-related businesses

To encourage all people to be actively and respectfully involved in water protection conservation and remediation

Halt undesirable actions Monitor and evaluate current water governance Advocate for the allocation of capacity to enforce current conservation efforts Rebuild water governance based on our ways and (re) educate society

To revive and integrate our Anishinaabe teachings and traditions in our community

Practice Anishinaabe teachings and traditions in the community Organize community events Support programs to reconnect the children and youth to the water Conduct ceremonies with the water

To vibrantly live and have knowledge about our responsibilities to the water based on our Anishinaabe teachings

Educate ourselves on our Anishinaabe teachings Educate MCFN members that this claim is not about ceding our water rights for money Educate ourselves on traditional governance

To have appropriate resources structures education awareness and communications for Water Framework management

Constitute structures to oversee and implement the water framework Appoint qualified and committed people to manage actions Source and allocate sufficient resources for implementation Develop and implement appropriate inclusive and ongoing education awareness raising and communication channels

168

The Water Frameworkrsquos purpose and intended use as presented to the MCFN community

at the end of November 2018 and endorsed by Chief and Council were

This framework is based on our foundational beliefs and provides principles for

transformative and strategic engagements as part of the Water Claim and other

broader applications The intention is to expand on these principles to develop and

implement programs for community action and development The long-term goal

of this framework is that it will contribute to reconciliation and our self-

determination (Draft MCFN Water Framework A Framework for Water

Governance on MCFN Treaty Lands and Territory 2018 p 6)

Suggestions around implementation of the Water Frameworkrsquos objectives and suggested

actions (Table 71) are offered in Chapter 8 as part of considerations for future research

MCFN Water Framework principles are aligned with McGregorrsquos (2014) findings based

on knowledge shared by Elders who advocate for ldquoIndigenous peoplesrsquo rights to be

decision-makers in protecting the water on a nation-to-nation basis and meaningful and

respectful recognition of Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities to water within current water

governance based on an ethic of responsibilityrdquo (p 501)

MCFNrsquos Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance

within Treaty Lands and Territory

In Chapter 2 Literature Review Tenet 1 of the conceptual framework (see p 49)

contends that water governance is a system driven by values which indicates that before

water governance can be Indigenized within a social justice framework there is a need

169

to identify and understand the context-specific values of water governance It is also

argued in Tenet 2 as per the conceptual framework (see p 49) that Indigenous peoplesrsquo


of Indigenous peoples Indigeny and Indigenism This signifies a need to understand

context-specific Indigenous identities to explain what is meant by Indigenizing (ie from

Indigenous ways of knowing being and doing) and to relate how these identities shape

water values MCFNrsquos Water Framework presented as principles objectives and

suggested actions in support of the frameworkrsquos purpose and intended use responds to

both Tenets 1 and 2 in that it is based on MCFN participantsrsquo water values embedded in

their plural yet intersectional identities (see p 155)

It is further argued in the conceptual framework Tenet 3 (see p 49) that Canadian water

governance dominates Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities and water rights which

beckons the need to dismantle Canadian water governance by developing alternative

Indigenous water governance approaches within context MCFNrsquos Water Framework

contributed to such a reconceptualization of water governance within their treaty lands

and territory Two questions emerged 1) How can this Water Framework be applied to

transform dominant resource-based water governance within MCFNrsquos treaty lands and

territory and 2) What does MCFNrsquos Water Framework mean for water governance within

their treaty lands and territory

In answering the first question on transforming Canadian water governance on MCFNrsquos

treaty lands and territory water governance was conceptualized as a system (see chapter

2 section 21 and Figure 21) It was argued that to transform a system strategic change

interventions are required at the interconnections ie flows andor systemrsquos purpose

(Meadowrsquos 2008) In Canadian water governance stakeholder interests represented

through values as flows in the system drive this system (Tenet 3) Hence a

170

reconceptualization of Canadian water governance towards an Indigenous water

governance approach based on MCFNrsquos Water Framework departs from

Being responsible to water caring for water respecting water and being stewards of

the water - and not making decisions about water

Following natural laws to heal ourselves - and not authoritative and human-centred

institutions

Moving towards systems of collectivism for sustaining ourselves - and not

perpetuating individual rights-based socio-political-economic systems and

Protecting water for being life - instead of continuing to regard water as a resource

By applying this thinking based on MCFNrsquos Water Framework principles and circling back

to the question on lsquoHow can we Indigenize water governancersquo a reconceptualization of

water governance within MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory should

Centralize water is life (the systemrsquos purpose) and

Embed values of interconnectedness respect and responsibilities to the water (as

flows in the system)

In turn these values will shape our practices and processes (as flows in the system) and

why water is important to us The systemrsquos purpose and flows will shape how our socio-

political-economic-ecological systems and institutional arrangements (systemrsquos stocks)

are transformed

A water governance approach departing from such a purpose and values will lead our

decisions to Water for seven generations into the future This reconceptualization as a

deconstruction of western water governance concepts is depicted in Figure 74

171

Figure 74 A reconceptualization of western water governance based on MCFNrsquos Water Framework Water is life is the central inner blue circle (the systemrsquos purpose) The values represented by the second inner circle and practices and processes in the second outer circle flow throughout the system and the flows are represented by black arrows The importance of water (use environmental economic spiritual and cultural importance) is represented by the second outer circle and the water laws policies rules structures society economy and political authority (stocks in the system) are represented by the outer circle This aligned system steers our decisions to water for seven generations into the future which are represented by the outside parenthesis

Calls for centralizing lsquoWater is Lifersquo in water governance is similarly espoused by Wilson

and Inkster (2018) who promote legal pluralism to transform dominant western

governance systemsrsquo institutions processes and values through decentering human

agency and recentering the spirituality of water Their case study with Elders in four Yukon

First Nations shows that although water was acknowledged for providing for humanrsquos

physical needs it was moreover seen as a living spirit to be treated as sacred and with

respect (Wilson and Inkster 2018) Craftrsquos (2017b) worldview likewise is that Indigenous

laws of relationships between humans and the natural world based on responsibilities

rather than rights must be central in water governance Chapter 2 section 21 (see p

12) strongly emphasizes this centrality of Indigenous spiritual connectedness to water

172

ie water relations as expressed by Anderson et al 2013 McGregor 2014 2015

Longboat 2015 Hallenbeck 2017 Arsenault et al 2018 Daigle 2018

McGregor (2014) too urges for alternatives to the dominant Canadian water governance

which prevent Indigenous peoples from living their responsibilities to water through mino-

bimaadiziwin Yazzie and Baldy (2018) further advocate for radical relationality which they

explain in terms of resistance and struggles against ongoing colonialism that violates

Indigenous peoplesrsquo relationships to the land and water for mino-bimaadiziwin Chapter

2 section 25 (see p 36) details examples of existing and larger Indigenous peoplesrsquo

movements to reclaim their responsibilities to water

MCFNrsquos Water Framework centralizing lsquoWater is Lifersquo supported Indigenous alternatives

to dominant Canadian water governance However it only partially followed the larger

Indigeny84 resurgence movements to Indigenize water governance in Canada because it

was built on plural and interdependent water values of cultural spiritual use

environmental and economic importance Yet despite these plural constructs of water

values embedded in multiple and intersectional identities shaped by historical and

contemporary colonial contexts MCFN member participants intrinsically understood that

they had a responsibility to the water This context specific MCFN Water Framework

which supports a reconceptualization of western water governance within MCFNrsquos treaty

lands and territory is a formidable example of how Indigenous peoples in Canada

inherently know that they are connected to the land and waters and are continuing to

reclaim their own ways of knowing being and doing This is despite Canadarsquos attempts

to destroy MCFN as Indigenous peoples through colonialism (see discussion on p 60)

84 ie social-cultural identity

173

In returning to the question on lsquowhat does MCFNrsquos Water Framework mean for water

governance within treaty lands and territoryrsquo as supporting Indigenous alternatives in a

reconceptualization of Canadian water governance If Canada truly wants to reconcile

with Indigenous peoples as entrenched in 1) section 35 of the Canadian Constitution 2)

RCAP and 3) the TRCrsquos Calls to Actions then upholding Indigenous ways of knowing

being and doing as reflected in MCFNrsquos Water Framework is a positive way forward This

will require the consideration of the Water Frameworkrsquos nine objectives and suggested

actions which broadly include 1) MCFN having access to water bodies 2) educating both

MCFN members and Canadian society on Anishinaabe water relations 3) political

leveraging 4) advocating socio-economic community development 5) protecting the

environment and 6) Water Framework implementation (see Table 71)


within a Social Justice Framework

In Tenet 4 of the conceptual framework (see chapter 2 p 50) it is claimed that

Indigenizing water governance through agency within a social justice framework requires

that Indigenous peoples need to self-assert their water rights and responsibilities

recognition and representation within context

MCFN participants could not directly identify with the construct of social justice However

15 of the key informants (N=20) associated the Water Claim with reconciliation without

any prompt In response to the survey question on How much do you agree that the

Water Claim is about reconciliation 42 of the survey respondents (N = 24) agreed that

the Water Claim was about reconciliation 37 of the survey respondents indicated that

174

they neither agreed or disagreed 13 indicated they did not know but no survey

respondent disagreed that the Water Claim was about reconciliation (Figure 75)

Figure 75 MCFN survey participants responses to the Water Claim as a reconciliation process (N=24)

Mark La Forme stated that reconciliation is an ongoing process which is complex with

unknown meanings in terms of MCFNrsquos Water Claim

This Water Claim is not going to be resolved It has to be implemented and

negotiated between us and the government in a way that allows for continual

reconciliation processes to occur Whatever that means at the end of the day Who

really knows what reconciliation is

At the end of the research (November 2018) the MCFN Water Committee MCFN

members who attended the community meeting in November 2018 and Chief and

Council affirmed though that the Water Framework was a way to ldquocontribute to

reconciliation and our self-determinationrdquo (Draft MCFN Water Framework A Framework

for Water Governance on MCFN Treaty Lands and Territory unpublished p 6)

42

38

12

8

Agree In Between Dont know No answer

175

The next section briefly discusses the construct of reconciliation and how it relates to

social justice before deconstructing social justice from MCFNrsquos lenses

The concept of reconciliation is widely and commonly used in Canada today within the

discourse of Indigenous peoples and Canadarsquos colonialism (Wyile 2017) It is strongly

reflected in Canadarsquos commitment to renewed nation-to-nation relationships with

Indigenous peoples which espouses the spirit of ldquoUNDRIP and the TRCrsquos Call to Actionsrdquo

(Government of Canada 2018a para 5)

In the TRCrsquos Principlesrsquo Report (TRC 2015b) reconciliation is defined as an

ongoing process of establishing and maintaining respectful relationships A critical

part of this process involves repairing damaged trust by making apologies

providing individual and collective reparations and following through with concrete

actions that demonstrate real societal change Establishing respectful

relationships also requires the revitalization of Indigenous law and legal traditions

It is important that all Canadians understand how traditional First Nations Inuit

and Meacutetis approaches to resolving conflict (p 121)

From this definition it is clear that reconciliation is an ongoing process about respectful

relationships and about societal change including upholding Indigenous laws and legal

traditions Craft (2017b) strongly supports this definition and argues that reconciliation

must be grounded within Indigenous orders principles teachings and practices

stemming from respectful relationships with all of creation to live the good life

176

The term remains contentious though within the academy and is used to mean different

things within different contexts (Wyile 2017) Constructs of reconciliation through different

lenses locate reconciliation as addressing the impacts of historical justice (Little and

Maddison 2017) healing processes (Borton and Paul 2015) ongoing struggles of the

marginalized (Corntassel 2009 Verdeja 2017) educating those who continue to benefit

from oppressive systemic structures (Eisenberg 2018 Koggel 2018) engaging

transformation processes (de Costa 2017) and renewal of Indigenous ways of knowing

being and doing (Corntassel 2009 Craft 2017b) MCFNrsquos Water Framework principles

objectives and community-suggested actions aligned to the multiple meanings of

reconciliation lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo and lsquoProtecting the waterrsquo emerged in terms of

dismantling oppressive structures which perpetuate settler colonialism today (Corntassel

2009 de Costa 2017 Little and Maddison 2017 Verdeja 2017 Eisenberg 2018

Koggel 2018) whilst lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo pertained to restorative justice (Borton and Paul

2015) which is about healing within (Corntassel 2009) and about healing outwards

(Koggel 2018)

There are three mainstream reconciliation theories that provide understandings on how

these reconciliation constructs can be achieved These theories are 1) Communitarianism

based on restorative justice practices (Verdeja 2017) allowing for healing processes

(Borton and Paul 2015) 2) Agonistic contestations providing the space for contentious

engagements and for differences to surface for discussions and negotiations within a

critical theory paradigm (Little and Maddison 2017 Verdeja 2017) and 3) The centrality

of mutual respect acknowledging and recognizing that multiple and varied value systems

exist and that each one is valid and has a right to be lived (Verdeja 2017) Daigle (2016)

adds that the concept of lsquomutual recognitionrsquo which she says continues to be based on

assimilative practices in Canada will only be lived if Indigenous self-determination is

recognized

177

Verdeja (2017) in drawing from the three reconciliation theories considers mutual respect

and recognition to be inclusive of 1) ldquocritical reflectionrdquo of past injustices and their ongoing

manifestations in contemporary social and institutional arrangements premised on

democratic principles of equality 2) ldquoCollective symbolic and material recognitionrdquo for

rectifying the past through socio-economic and cultural restitution and 3) ldquoPolitical

participationrdquo giving agency self-determination and power to Indigenous peoples in

decision-making processes (Verdeja 2017 pp 232-237) This approach to reconciliation

as mutual respect by Verdeja (2017) is reflective of Fraserrsquos (2009) concept of social

justice as economic redistribution cultural recognition and political representation

However as indicated previously Simpson (2004) and McGregor et al (2020) advocate

for decolonizing western constructs of justice and reconciliation from Indigenous ways of

knowing being and doing Tenet 4 in the conceptual framework posits that Indigenizing

water governance requires agency within a social justice framework where Indigenous

peoples are asserting their water rights and responsibilities from their own ways of

knowing being and doing

In using MCFNrsquos Water Framework as a basis Fraserrsquos (2009) western construct was

deconstructed MCFNrsquos Water Framework illustrates MCFNrsquos agency in the form of

intentionality and forethought as per Bandurarsquos (2001) agency perspective Intentions are

ldquoplans of actionrdquo (p 3) and forethought is formulating direction and goals as desired

outcomes (Bandura 2001) MCFNrsquos Water Framework captures MCFNrsquos choices and

independent actions for their self-determination (also see definition of agency on p 48)

It is recognised here that Indigenous conceptions of agency differ to human agency in

that all of creation has agency in Indigenous place-thought cosmology (see Watts 2013

p 48 for more details) However MCFNrsquos participantsrsquo agency was shaped by their plural

and intersecting identities as illustrated in chapters 5 and 6 MCFNrsquos participantsrsquo agency

178

was perceived from Indigenous place-thought cosmologies and from human agency

perspective

This analysis of MCFNrsquos agency perspectives offers a lens on Fraserrsquos (2009) three-prong

approach to social justice as embedded within a dominant-subjugated relationship

MCFNrsquos Water Framework is saying that lsquothrough this Water Claim we arersquo

Not asking to be given rights through redistribution but rather reclaiming our

Indigenous rights to sustain ourselves

Not asking for Canada to recognise our culture but by rediscovering and reconnecting

with our culture we will live our Anishinaabe culture as justice for healing ourselves

and

Not asking to be represented in decision making but rather asserting our voices and

authority in regulating water decisions to protect the water

In summary MCFNrsquos Water Framework was not about [economic] (re)distribution but

about reclaiming their inherent Aboriginal title and treaty rights to lsquosustainrsquo themselves

Furthermore social justice was also not merely being politically represented but about

MCFN lsquohaving a sayrsquo to assert their voices and authority in regulating water decisions

policies and processes Last social justice was more than cultural recognition but rather

MCFN reclaiming their Anishinaabe ways of knowing being and doing

These principles of MCFNrsquos Water Framework ie reclaiming rights asserting authority

in water governance and reclaiming the Anishinaabe way of life and not Fraserrsquos (2009)

constructions of social justice perceivably represented what Indigenizing water

governance within a social justice framework meant to MCFN with respect to their Water

Claim This is what social justice as reconciliation meant to MCFN

179

MCFNrsquos perceived understandings of reconciliation based on their Water Framework

aligned to the TRCrsquos definition of respectful relationships and societal change (TRC

2015b) However MCFN fist needed to heal within ie educate themselves on being

Anishinaabe before being able to heal outward to uphold Indigenous laws and legal

traditions

Canadarsquos Water Governance Authoritiesrsquo Reflections on the

Water Claim

This section analysis and reports on the responses from local Conservation Authorities

who were asked to explain their 1) water governance principles and structures within their

organizationrsquos jurisdiction 2) organizationrsquos current consultations and accommodations

with First Nations and 3) foreseeable challenge areas and transformation opportunities

with regards to MCFNrsquos Water Claim At the in-person interviews participants were

presented with the draft research findings for MCFNrsquos Water Framework as a partial

resolution to the Water Claim

Chapter 4 explained that all Conservation Authorities are mandated by the Conservation

Authorities Act 1990 (amended 2017) to ldquoprovide in the area over which it has

jurisdiction programs and services designed to further the conservation restoration

development and management of natural resources other than gas oil coal and

mineralsrdquo (Part V Item 20 (1) In achieving this mandate Conservation Authorities

research participants communicated different understandings of their roles One

Conservation Authority representative mainly saw its Conservation Authority role in terms

of managing the review process of development applications and floodwater and

stormwater management A representative from another Conservation Authority

considered its Conservation Authorityrsquos role to be inclusive of stewardship policy

planning promoting recreational use and playing an advisory and commenting role The

180

range of roles as communicated by the participants and the occurrence of roles across

Conservation Authorities (N = 5) are depicted in Figure 76

Figure 76 The range of Conservation Authoritiesrsquo representativesrsquo understandings of their water management roles (y-axis) and the occurrence of each role across Conservation Authorities within their mandates as defined by the Conservation Authorities Act 1990 (amended 2017) N = 5 one representative did not comment on its Conservation Agencyrsquos roles

Conservation Authority participants also communicated that they operated their

governance structures in different ways A few Conservation Authorities operated from

Strategic Business and Watershed Plans whereas others although acknowledged as

important were still in the process of developing these plans mainly due to resource

constraints While they all operated under a governing lsquoBoardrsquo according to the

Conservation Authorities Act (1990) the models for their constitutions varied in terms of

membership and representation Boards either consisted entirely of constituent

municipalities or a combination of constituent municipalities and citizens However there

was agreement that no formal mechanism existed for Indigenous peoplesrsquo representation

on Conservation Authority Boards One Conservation Authority representative suggested

that the Ontario Province could direct the Conservation Authorities to appoint an

- 1 2 3 4 5 6

Review applications for development

Regulations

Land ownership

Flood and storm-water management

Stewardship

Restoration

Strategic and watershed plans

Revenue

Recreational use

Water quality

Source water protection

Policy planning

Monitoring

Advisory and commenting

Number of Consevation Authorities

Wat

er M

anag

emen

t R

ole

s

181

Indigenous representative to their Boards However this suggestion was acknowledged

by this representative to be neither possible nor applicable because the Ontario Province

had no 1) voice or 2) representation on these Conservation Authority Boards since the

1990s due to their withdrawal of their financial support to Conservation Authorities

In terms of First Nations inclusion in current water governance some Conservation

Authorities representatives viewed all Indigenous peoples as one entity This meant that

Indigenous peoplesrsquo plurality was not recognized or Indigenous peoples were not

acknowledged as self-determining Nations There were a few exceptions where the

Conservation Authorities were working with the individual First Nations communities As

examples The Credit Valley Conservation Authority was working with MCFN on the

Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project which aimed to restore habitat in the south-

eastern of Mississauga in Lake Ontario as well as on the Credit Valley Trail Project The

Grand River Conservation Authority has a 20-year notification agreement in place with

MCFN and Six Nations has worked with both MCFN and Six Nations in the development

of the 2014 Grand River Watershed Water Management Plan and has MCFN and Six

Nations representation of their Lake Erie Region Source Protection Committee The other

Conservation Authorities had no engagement with First Nations however the

representatives communicated openness to exploring opportunities provided that the

what and how were clearly devised In other words clear terms of reference and

operational approaches for working together Moreover certain Conservation Authorities

although receptive to First Nations inclusion in water governance commented (N = 4)

that inclusion must operate within Ontario governance rules

182

All Conservation Authorities representatives indicated that prior to this interview they

were aware of MCFNrsquos Water Claim85 however they were unsure of its meaning and the

implications for them When asked to comment at this interview on the MCFNrsquos Water

Framework as a partial resolution to MCFNrsquos Water Claim Conservation Authorities

representatives regarded the lsquoProtecting the waterrsquo aspect as complementary to their

mandates and were keen to build and strengthen partnerships with MCFN once the

Water Claim was legally recognized Their key concern was the implications of MCFNrsquos

lsquowater ownershiprsquo if understood as a western concept but they supported MCFN instilling

responsibility and respect to water

The Conservation Authority representatives identified both social challenges (eg

changing societal behaviour and perceptions) and institutional challenges (eg

developing doable and collaborative processes standards of practice) to upholding and

implementing a legally recognised MCFN Water Claim They indicated that a directive

from the Ontario Province may facilitate MCFN representation on their Boards but

ultimately any successes would be achieved through relationship building As a start

where there are no partnerships MCFN and the Conservation Authorities should engage

to develop small and practicable collaborative projects

In summary there were opportunities for the implementation of MCFNrsquos Water

Framework through existing collaborations with the Credit Valley and Grand River

Conservation Authorities and potentially new partnerships The challenges were to find

workable modalities of engagement and mind-set shifts A significant barrier was that

Conservation Authorities were not obligated and in some cases not open to respond to

85 They had received a copy of the Water Claim from MCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation

183

MCFNrsquos Water Framework until their Water Claim was legally upheld which could be a

lengthy process

MCFNrsquos Reflections on Canadian Water Governance

From MCFNrsquos key-informants and group discussion participantsrsquo perspective working

within Canadian water governance was seen to be fraught with challenges and polar

When these participants were asked lsquoHow do you think that MCFNrsquos water values and

rights can be centrally included (ie Indigenized) in water decision-making processes

(termed water governance)rsquo their responses ranged from lsquowe have to collaborate with

Canadarsquo through to lsquowe need veto rightsrsquo to lsquoperhaps we have to have veto rights so that

we can collaboratersquo

MCFN participantsrsquo responses in support of collaborating with Canada were

contextualized in terms of we are a diverse yet one human race and we have to live

together as one

Im not a fatalist I always think that there is hope And when I look at hope I look

at it this way When you look at the Indian corn The Indian corn has all of the

colors of the races of people on the earth If we canrsquot start to grow together like on

the Indian corn there will be no humanity Because we have to pray and prayer

is one of the main things that is going to save us I look at it that way Because its

one of our prophecies (Garry Sault)

On the other hand MCFN participants felt that MCFNrsquos rights to live their responsibilities

to water were blocked by the dominant Canadian water governance MCFN needed to

184

have rights to veto as resistance movements for them to be responsible to the water

based on their own values

hellip international law even domestic law through duty to consult says we have a

right to veto They should be using it they should sayhellipwe have the water leave

it alone because my great-great grandchild needs that water Reneeacute How do we

do it in the current system where it is so dominated by the Canadian system We

canrsquot do it in the current system We got to get it outside of the current system

(Nancy Rowe)

I think it has to be veto because collaborative decision-making hasnt got us

anywhere It takes forever to get somewhere and it is based on their values They

dont see us as an equal Even our justice system it doesnt matter how long They

still see us as inhumane and non-distinct (Anonymous)

Given the current realities of MCFN not having a say in water governance some

participants suggested that it should be a phased approach starting with MCFN having

veto rights with an eventual evolution towards collaboration with Canada

Perhaps we need to start off with veto rights so that we can lsquotighten the reinsrsquo and

as we go along we can move towards co-management We must use the Duty to

Consult to ensure that our principles are upheld (Pat Mandy)

As described above in exercising their inherent constitutionally protected and

internationally recognized rights MCFN participants suggested both 1) transformative

185

collaboration and 2) resistance movements to colonial powers and structures This

approach follows the hybridization model as suggested by Hanrahan (2017 see chapter

2 p 47)

Indigenous peoples have long considered treaties to be based on principles of

relationships and co- existence (Chiefs of Ontario 2008) Whyte (2013) advocates for a

social learning approach which promotes mutually respectful knowledge-sharing

collaborations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples The goal to working

together should be a commitment to building relationships achieving harmony and

respecting differences (Bowie 2013) This view was supported by the late

GrandmotherElder Josephine Mandamin who maintained that Indigenous knowledge is

equal to western science and a balance is required to respect both

Traditional Knowledge is a way of life for the Anishinabek peoples and is handed

down to us from our ancestors Our knowledge is being misused abused and

misunderstood Science does not respect traditional knowledge We need to come

together as one Scientists need to sit down with us and to understand where we

come from We have intricate knowledge of medicine animals and flow

Anishinabek peoples live in the environment know the elements and know how

to take care of ourselves Many scientists have come to terms that traditional

knowledge is as important as science and there needs to be a balance between

science and traditional knowledge We have to work together towards balance

(Anishinabek Ontario Resource Management Council 2009 p 13)

186

While Indigenous peoples may be cautiously willing to share knowledge within the spirit

of true partnerships and respect through collaboration (McGregor 2014) Canadian water

governance will first require decolonizing processes (Bowie 2013) Dei and Jaimungal

(2018) assert that this decolonization will involve deconstructions of ldquomind body spirit

and soulrdquo (p 1) before transformations will occur Until such a time Indigenous peoples

including MCFN as evidenced by their Water Claim will continue to resist colonial powers

and structures

Chapter Conclusions

MCFNrsquos Water Framework using a Theory of Changefor Action conceptual

underpinning centralizes lsquoWater is Lifersquo and provides supporting principles objectives

and some initial suggested actions for transformative and strategic engagements as part

of their Water Claim This Framework provides core values and principles to support a

deconstruction of western water governance for a reconceptualization towards an

Indigenized water governance Such a reconceptualization of water governance is

established on water values of interconnectedness respect care responsibilities and

stewardshipkeepers All the systemrsquos parts of water governance ie laws policies rules

structures society economy and political authority and the processes and practices in

water governance will be shaped by these values Such a reconceptualization of water

governance will steer decisions to water for seven generations into the future because

we as all of creation will holistically relate to water to sustain ourselves to heal ourselves

and to protect water as life This is how MCFN sees itself Indigenizing water governance

on its treaty lands and territory should their Water Claim be upheld by the Canadian

government as part of the reconciliation process MCFNrsquos Water Framework partially

follows larger Indigeny resurgence movements despite their plural constructs of water

values as shaped by colonialism indicating their intrinsic connection to the water

187

Through MCFNrsquos Water Framework MCFN illustrated their agency (both human-centric

and relational) for social justice Indigenizing water governance within a social justice

framework was about MCFN reclaiming rights asserting authority in water governance

and reclaiming the Anishinaabe way of life and not Fraserrsquos (2009) dominant-subjugated

approach of economic redistribution political representation and cultural recognition

This is what social justice as reconciliation meant to MCFN

This deconstruction of social justice built on respectful relationships aligns to the TRCrsquos

reconciliation definition For social transformation MCFN first needed to heal within as an

Anishinaabe community before being able to heal outward to uphold Indigenous laws and

legal traditions

As a starting point there were opportunities for implementing elements of MCFNrsquos Water

Framework through building new and strengthening existing local relationships and

collaborations with the Conservation Authorities who are mandated to manage

jurisdictional waters At the same time there were challenges identified in terms of mind-

set shifts and modalities for workable engagements and legal recognition constraints

MCFN acknowledged that their Water Claim and adoption of this Water Framework will

be a lengthy process which will require engagements with multiple levels of government

through both collaborative and resistance mechanisms as advocated through treaties and

calls for decolonization respectively

188

8 Thesis Conclusions and Implications

Highlighted in chapter 1 Indigenous peoples in Canada have internationally recognized

Indigenous rights and constitutionally protected Aboriginal and treaty rights (Canadian

Constitution Act 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982 RCAP 1996 UNDRIP

2007 TRC 2015a) which include their right to be responsible to protect and care for water

(McGregor 2009 2014 2015 2016 2018a Anderson et al 2013 Longboat 2015

Arsenault et al 2018) However Indigenous peoples in Canada are unable to live their

responsibilities to water due to Canadian water governance injustices of constrained self-

determination (White et al 2012 Norman and Bakker 2015) imposed colonial

frameworks (von der Porten and de Loeuml 2013 2014 Simms et al 2016 Castleden et

al 2017 Arsenault et al 2018 Daigle 2018) and restricted legal notions of water rights

(Borrows 2017) These injustices embedded in power and knowledge hierarchies

(Arsenault et al 2018) continuously marginalize Indigenous peoplesrsquo rights in Canada

Values of water as a resource or commodity to be used (Bradford et al 2016 Castleden

et al 2017 Bakker et al 2018) dominate Canadian water governance over Indigenous

peoplesrsquo rights to protect and care for the water This begets the unresolved question

lsquohow can Indigenous peoples implement their own ways of knowing being and doing ie

Indigenize in relation to water in meaningful waysrsquo (McGregor 2014) Transforming

dominant water governance for the marginalized in this context Indigenous peoples

requires a social justice approach (Franco et al 2013 Zwarteveen and Boelens 2014

Jackson 2016) which adopts the multi-lens three-prongs of economic redistribution

cultural recognition and political representation (Fraser 2009) In response this research

addressed lsquohow can water governance be Indigenized within a social justice frameworkrsquo

This research was undertaken in the context of MCFNrsquos identified need for lsquoDeveloping a

MCFN Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance on their Treaty Lands and

Territoryrsquo as a partial resolution to the lsquoAboriginal Title Claim to Waters within the

Traditional Lands of the Mississaugas of the New Creditrsquo

189

In this chapter the main research findings are summarized as conclusions according to

the five research objectives and conceptual framework which guided this community-

engaged research as per Figure 23 (see p 51) Next the main research contributions

(theoretical methodological and empirical) the research strengths and challenges future

research opportunities and self-reflections in the research are presented

81 Main Findings Summary and Conclusions

Research Objective 1 To identify MCFN water values and to explore their

relationships to historical and contemporary contexts shaping them

Tenet 1 of the conceptual framework contends that water governance is a system driven

by stakeholder values Before water governance can be Indigenized within a social justice

framework there is a need to identify and understand stakeholdersrsquo water values In this

study water governance is viewed from MCFNrsquos multi-faceted yet interconnected water

values of use for living cultural connections spiritual relations environmental

sustainability and economic development MCFNrsquos water values were embedded in

plural identities (Conceptual Framework Tenet 2 Indigenous peoplesrsquo identities in

Canada are plural dynamic and interwoven within self-identifying constructs of

Indigenous) shaped by historical and contemporary colonial influences of relocation

assimilation and missionization as voiced by key-informant conversation participants

Some MCFN members as part of larger Indigenous resurgence movements were in the

process of revival to reclaim their Indigeny ie social-cultural identity related to cultural

and spiritual water values MCFNrsquos identity as Indigenous peoples ie a socio-political

group regarded water for its environmental and use values MCFNrsquos identity as



These findings are supported by Hitlin (2003) who says that values are linked to personal

and social identities MCFN participants unanimously agreed that water must be

190

protected for seven generations into the future and that it was their inherent responsibility

to ensure this

Conclusion 1 MCFNrsquos water values of use for living cultural connections spiritual

relations environmental sustainability and economic development were multi-faceted

and interdependent within plural Indigenous identities shaped by historical and

contemporary colonial influences and Indigenous resistances

Research Objective 2 To identify the meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN

members and to relate these meanings to MCFN membersrsquo water values as shaped

by historical and contemporary contexts

MCFN members who participated in this research regarded the Water Claim as their

responsibility to water within inter-related topics of lsquoHealing Ourselvesrsquo by reconnecting

with their Anishinaabe culture lsquoProtecting the water having a sayrsquo and lsquoSustaining

Ourselvesrsquo in terms of their inherent Aboriginal title and treaty rights These topics which

were not mutually exclusive for MCFN participants were informed by MCFNrsquos multiple

water values shaped by plural Indigenous identities and intersecting demographic

identities of age gender and residential location These research findings were critical for

the development of a MCFN Water Framework which had to consider the layered and

textured complexity of a heterogenous MCFN community

Conclusion 2 The meanings of the Water Claim to MCFN ie Healing Ourselvesrsquo by

reconnecting with its Anishinaabe culture lsquoProtecting the water having a sayrsquo and

lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo in terms of its inherent Aboriginal title and treaty rights correlated

to MCFNrsquos multi-faceted water values embedded in plural and intersecting Indigenous

and demographic identities As such the resolutions to the Water Claim including a Water

Framework had to be multi-dimensional

191

Research Objective 3 To develop a conceptual MCFN Water Framework based on

the meanings of the Water Claim and to explore possible opportunities barriers

and challenges for the Water Frameworkrsquos implementation

MCFNrsquos Water Framework based on the meanings of the Water Claim ie Healing

Ourselvesrsquo lsquoProtecting the water and lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo centralizes lsquoWater is Lifersquo It

provides supporting principles objectives and some initial suggested actions for

transformative and strategic engagements as part of their Water Claim This Water

Framework supports Indigenizing water governance on MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory

which is dominated by Canadian water governance (Tenet 3 in the conceptual

framework)

Through interviews with Conservation Authorities who are mandated by Ontario to

manage jurisdictional waters both opportunities and barriers were identified to

implementing MCFNrsquos Water Framework Some initial opportunities included building

new and strengthening existing local relationships and collaborations between MCFN and

Conservation Authorities Identified challenges were mind-set shifts deciding on

modalities for workable engagements and legal recognition constraints MCFN

recognized that their Water Claim and adoption of this Water Framework will be a lengthy

process involving multiple levels of government and requiring hybrid strategies of

collaborative and resistance mechanisms

Conclusion 3 MCFNrsquos Water Framework ie Healing Ourselvesrsquo lsquoProtecting the water

and lsquoSustaining Ourselvesrsquo which centralizes Water is Life will contribute to Indigenizing

water governance as new arrangements on their treaty lands and territory which will

require varied approaches of collaboration and resistance movements with multiple levels

of Canadian governments given the overlapping jurisdictions

192

Research Objective 4 To examine western constructs of social justice and to

deconstruct social justice from MCFNrsquos ways of knowing being and doing

Tenet 4 of the conceptual framework posits that Indigenizing water governance should

be through agency within a social justice framework by Fraser (2009) as Indigenous

peoplesrsquo water rights and responsibilities recognition and representation within context

Based on the research findings MCFN related to the Water Claim as part of the

reconciliation process From the emergent principles of MCFNrsquos Water Framework

MCFN illustrated their agency for social justice Indigenizing water governance within a

social justice framework is about MCFN reclaiming rights asserting authority in water

governance and reclaiming the Anishinaabe way of life and not Fraserrsquos (2009)

dominant-subjugated approach of economic redistribution political representation and

cultural recognition This is what social justice as reconciliation meant to MCFN This

aligns to the TRCrsquos definition of reconciliation which calls for respectful relationships and

social transformations

Conclusion 4 MCFNrsquos Water Framework as social justice couched within the

reconciliation process is about their agency in reclaiming and reconstituting their rights

culture and voice within respectful relationships and social transformations

Research Objective 5 To deconstruct the concept of western water governance

based on MCFNrsquos Water Framework and to relate how MCFNrsquos Water Framework

contributes to Indigenizing water governance within treaty lands and territory

Tenet 3 of the conceptual framework argues that Canadian water governance dominates

Indigenous peoplesrsquo responsibilities and water rights which beckons the need to

dismantle the dominant system by developing alternative Indigenous water governance

approaches within context

193

MCFNrsquos Water Framework supported a reconceptualization of Canadarsquos water

governance towards an Indigenous water governance approach to meet MCFNrsquos needs

This Water Framework centralizes lsquoWater is Lifersquo supported by water values of

interconnectedness respect care responsibilities and stewardshipkeepers of water

rather than dominant resource-based water governance in Canada MCFNrsquos alternative

water governance approach will steer our responsibilities to water for seven generations

into the future because we will holistically relate to water to sustain ourselves to heal

ourselves and to protect water as life

MCFNrsquos Water Framework supports larger Indigeny resurgence movements to Indigenize

water governance in Canada However it only partially followed these resurgence

movements because it was built on multiple and interdependent water values shaped by

plural Indigenous identities influenced by colonialism Yet despite Canadarsquos attempts to

destroy MCFN as Indigenous peoples MCFN participants knew that they were inherently

connected to the waters and were responsible to the water

Conclusion 5 MCFNrsquos Water Framework supports the reconceptualization of Canadian

water governance towards an Indigenous water governance approach on MCFNrsquos treaty

lands and territories This alternative water governance approach is based on values of


rather than dominant resource-based water governance in Canada This is how MCFN

sees itself through its Water Claim Indigenizing water governance on its treaty lands and

territory as part of the reconciliation process with the Canadian governments MCFNrsquos

Water Framework further supported the larger Indigenous resurgence movements to

Indigenize water governance in Canada

194

82 Research Contributions

821 Theoretical Contributions

The theoretical contributions of this research were two-fold First it deconstructed

western concepts of social justice and second it contributed a context-specific

reconceptualization of Canadian water governance approaches to support Indigenizing

water governance on MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territory as part of the reconciliation

process The theoretical contributions are discussed in section 81 research objectives

4 and 5 respectively In brief Fraserrsquos (2009) concept of social justice synthesizes various

principles emerging from different western philosophies and theories of social justice This

research provided an Indigenous context-specific agency perspective of social justice in

water governance which was about reclaiming Indigenous rights reconnecting with

culture and regulating water decisions This form of social justice rather than Fraserrsquos

(2009) facets of economic redistribution recognition of culture and political representation

was what MCFN considered as self-determination for reconciliation This theoretical

contribution is significant because it alters the power hierarchy between the colonizer and

Indigenous peoples towards respectful relationships

In supporting a reconceptualization of Canadian water governance towards a MCFN

water governance approach this research shifted the central premise of western water

governance from an ethics of rights property and ownership (Christie 2012) which frame

water as a resource and a commodity to be bought sold or traded (Bradford et al 2016

Castleden et al 2017 Bakker et al 2018) to one which centralizes lsquoWaterrsquo as the core

lsquostakeholderrsquo in water governance because lsquoWater is Lifersquo This reconceptualization see

Figure 74 (p 171) while MCFN context-specific builds on embodiments of Indigenous

water relations (see Anderson et al 2013 Longboat 2015 McGregor 2015 Arsenault

et al 2018 Daigle 2018 Wilson and Inkster 2018) This is an important theoretical

contribution because it supports Indigenous cosmologies that Water together with Air

195

Fire and Earth are the core interconnected spiritual beings in all systems and should be

respected (Assembly of First Nations nd-b)

822 Methodological Contributions

This research adapted Kovachrsquos (2009) Indigenous research framework in two ways

First it was adapted to be more reflective of research team members role as co-

researchers rather than a project conducted from an outside researcherrsquos perspective

This adapted framework can be transferrable to guide the emergence of context-specific

Indigenous research frameworks in other co-engaged community action-research

studies

Second Kovachrsquos (2009) framework was adapted to be an appropriate research

framework for co-engaged community action-research within MCFNrsquos historical and

contemporary contexts This is an important methodological contribution because it

shows that Indigenous community-engaged research must be emergent and community-

specific and as such a research approach cannot merely be transferable between

communities

Both these adaptations subscribe to best practices when doing research with

Indigenous peoples in that it must be collaborative and developed organized

conducted and interpreted within context (Drawson et al 2017) These adaptations

expand on these best practices by adding that Indigenous research should be

emergent and located within historical and contemporary contexts

196

823 Empirical Contributions

This research documented Indigenous peoplesrsquo ie MCFNrsquos member participants from

a range of age groups (youth to elders) water values and related them to Indigenous

identities within historical and contemporary context Indigenous water values as water

relations have been well documented by Anderson et al (2013) Longboat (2015)

McGregor (2015) Arsenault et al (2018) Daigle 2018 and Wilson and Inkster (2018)

Specifically MCFNrsquos cultural water values have been surveyed by Baird et al (2015)

This research however fills a gap by documenting that MCFNrsquos member participantsrsquo

water values go beyond water relations and cultural values It showed that water values

and identities were plural and intricately related shaped by historical and contemporary

colonial influences and Indigenous resistances It also revealed that although some

MCFN participants were disconnected from their Indigeny identity therefore their spiritual

connections to water they inherently knew that they were connected to the water This

is a significant finding that further illustrates Canadarsquos failed attempts to destroy

Indigenous peoples through colonialism

These findings were important because they defined MCFNrsquos multi-dimensional Water

Framework as a partial resolution to their Water Claim which was formally lodged with the

governments of Canada as their Aboriginal and treaty rights These findings also informed

new conceptual understandings as already described in section 821

Moreover in defining the meaning of the Water Claim by MCFN member participants this

research directly responded to a MCFN identified research need of developing a Water

Framework for reconciliation and MCFNrsquos self-determination (Draft MCFN Water

Framework A Framework for Water Governance on MCFN Treaty Lands and Territory

unpublished) The meaning of the Water Claim as lsquoHealing Ourselves Protecting the

water and Sustaining Ourselvesrsquo (Figure 71 p 163) formed the basis of the Water

197

Framework which MCFN will use in their negotiations and authority with Canadarsquos

governments and water agencies as a partial resolution to their Water Claim

Indigenous peoples have already made strides in developing frameworks to Indigenize

water governance in their own contexts As an example the Yinke Dene in BC developed

the Yinka Dene Uzarsquohneacute Surface Water Management Policy (Yinke Dene 2016a) and the

Yinka Dene Uzarsquohneacute Guide to Surface Water Quality Standards (Yinke Dene 2016b) to

support policy implementation ndash on their Territory The enactment of the the Yarra River

Protection (Wilip-gin Birrarung murron) Act 2017 (Vic) in Australia illustrates another

example where the role of Aboriginal People in the management and protection of the

Yarra was recognised and ldquothe river was given an independent voicerdquo to be represented

by the Birrarung Councilrsquo (OrsquoBryan 2017 p 48) Examples of other Indigenous

resurgence movements are also described on p 36

The development process and content of MCFNrsquos Water Framework although specific to

MCFN can be considered by other Indigenous peoples in Canada and beyond within

similar contexts as a departing but not transferable model for developing their own water

frameworks to contribute to Indigenizing water governance within their treaty lands and

territory Andrea King Dalton agreed that all Anishinaabe peoples should continue to be

stewards of water on their territories and share

hellip we have already established our traditional territory so it makes sense for us to

be stewards of that water I feel as Anishinaabe that the other Anishinaabe bands

they should be the stewards to their traditional territory And we will have that

shared relationship if we want to go there it is a back-and-forth just like it was We

would be fluid We were a very fluid society as Anishinaabe and we shared

198

The sections below are reflected and narrated from my perspectives as the doctoral

student For this purpose I will write in the first person where appropriate

83 Research Strengths and Challenges

Research strengths and challenges are often two sides of the same coin The greatest

research strength of this community-engaged project was that it directly responded to a

community identified need and it was co-led by the community as co-researchers

Regular meetings were held with the MCFN Water Committee as community research

team members to develop the research and protocols which were endorsed by MCFNrsquos

Chief and Council which facilitated access into the community At the same time this

presented challenges because first it took time for me to develop relationships with the

Water Committee members and at the beginning of our partnership I was very mindful

that I was an uninformed outsider Fortunately our relationship evolved into trust and

mutual respect as the research proceeded At the end of the research in May 2019 the

Water Committee gifted me with a beautiful and priceless pair of deer-skin hand-made

moccasins with embossed water drops (Image 1) I also had to develop relationships with

the broader MCFN community For this I attended community events eg I handled the

Water Committeersquos booth at MCFNrsquos Annual Historical Meeting held in February 2018

and MCFN research participants also invited me into their homes for the key-informant

conversations

Image 1 The pair of moccasins gifted to me by the Water Committee

199

The second strength of this research was that it provided a platform for diverse views

personal stories voices of dissent and support and power relations and heterogenous

identity contexts to unfold in multiple ways ie through individual conversations group

discussions a survey and artwork activities MCFN members were engaged across

socio-demographic factors of age gender as well as lifestyles and worldviews This was

important to understand MCFN members realities and heterogeneities for the

development of a Water Framework that was reflective of the MCFN members who

participated in this research Although implicit research participants felt comfortable to

share their realities in the research As examples one key-informant conversation lasted

30 minutes however the off-the-record casual chat continued for two hours and one

MCFN participant expressed thanks at the November 2018 meeting for ensuring that their

voices were heard and reflected in the Water Framework

There were logistical challenges beyond the research teamrsquos control including broken

internal communication leading to cancelled events engaging limited off-reserve MCFN

members despite proactive efforts low participation in certain MCFN scheduled events

for the adult group discussions low participation in the e-survey which is not the ideal

survey delivery mode because more people responded to in-person survey approaches

at community events and an interview decline by a relevant Conservation Authority

operating within MCFNrsquos treaty lands and territories because it purely regarded the Water

Claim as a legal process outside of its jurisdiction

There was also a general low awareness of the Water Claim in the MCFN community

which was not totally unexpected In preparation the Water Claim was introduced at the

start of the research engagements and materials on the Water Claim prepared by the

Water Committee were distributed

200

The learnings from these challenges were that these issues were not necessarily

attributable to inappropriate research approaches but rather the challenges of doing

community-engaged research My advice is that meaningful community-engaged

research must be flexible and accommodating of these unknowns which may not be

resolved but rather accepted as part of the research process

Finally the academic ethics process as a challenge is briefly discussed Although the

universityrsquos Research Ethics Board (REB) process was accommodating of Indigenous

research and protocols a REB process was not readily accepted by the Water

Committee Perhaps my approach was misplaced but the Water Committee was not

pleased with an academic-led requirement Especially identifying issues of risks and

discomforts in the consent form were considered to be daunting and potential

impediments for community participation After a few iterations a consent form was

developed using language that was acceptable to the research team and defendable in

the REB application

84 Future Opportunities and Research Questions

In the spirit of community-engaged research the opportunities that emanated from this

research should be centered on the implementation of the Water Frameworkrsquos identified

objectives and suggested actions by MCFN member participants This calls for

implementation research which is identified by Peters et al (2013) in the health sciences

as ldquothe scientific inquiry into questions concerning implementation mdash the act of carrying

an intention into effect helliprdquo and ldquoImplementation research can consider any aspect of

implementation including the factors affecting implementation the processes of

implementation and the results of implementation helliprdquo (p1) Future research questions

based on the Water Frameworkrsquos nine objectives and associated suggested actions

should focus on three aspects 1) the development of appropriate interventions within

201

context 2) implementation of interventions and 3) the monitoring and evaluation of

interventions86 These aspects are in line with the high-level steps proposed by

Fernandez et al (2019) as a systematic process for implementation science albeit for

health innovation Some examples of specific research questions that could be posed in

relation to these three high-level steps are summarized in Figure 81

From a conceptual perspective future Indigenous research in its ongoing efforts to build

a critical body of alternative academic literature needs to persistently ask How can we

continue to deconstruct colonial systems in all its realms from Indigenous agency At the

time of starting my doctoral research in April 2017 I opted to depart from a western social

justice framing with the intention of applying a decolonising lens to contribute to

decolonising western literature Through my research I was enlightened by the works of

Indigenous scholars including Deborah McGregor who powerfully advocates that the

Anishinaabe mino-bimaadiziwin or more broadly water relations as shared by many

Indigenous peoples should be a more fitting expression of justice (McGregor 2018a) I

strongly contemplated this stance but at the end of my doctoral research I opted to retain

the original social justice framing because of MCFNrsquos multiple Indigenous identities and

relations to water which emerged through this research As explained in chapter 4 p 78

the Water Committee agreed that a relational research paradigm although

acknowledged would not frame the research but rather emerge from the research

process

86 Adapting the World Health Organizationrsquos definition an intervention is an act performed for with or on behalf of an [individual] or [community] whose purpose is to assess improve maintain promote or modify [community] functioning or [community] conditions (para 1 nd) Hawe et al (2009) emphasize that interventions occur within systems and are dynamic in time and space Interventions range in scale eg policies strategies programs projects activities events

202

Figure 81 Examples of specific future research questions for implementation research arising from

this research

203

Last future research should continue to build on and adapt current Indigenous research

methodologies within context In doing Indigenous research as an emergent process the

central research question should be around How do historical and contemporary contexts

shape Indigenous identities today and into the future If we acknowledge plural

Indigenous identities as a process of being within the past present and future ndash the

research approach will be relevant appropriate and meaningful

85 Self-reflection and closing

I entered this research with the experiences of a marginalized person with fervent anti-

oppressive and anti-colonial lenses I was ready to tackle and dismantle power

hierarchies molded by and entwined into western systems I will state upfront that this

standing influenced my choice of the overarching research question my interpretation of

the knowledge gathered and the research conclusions

As an ardent environmentalist I respect all of creation and I have a shared commitment

to Indigeny ie a social-relational identity As such I was surprised perhaps from a

romanticized position how colonization strongly shaped Indigenous identities I

anticipated although not rigid in my thoughts that the research would involve water

ceremonies sharing circles and storytelling but the research team rather agreed to

traditional western research methods However I attempted to retain language

throughout the research which was reflective of Indigenous community-engaged

partnerships As examples I used conversations rather than interviews group

discussions rather than focus groups knowledge sharing rather than data collection and

making meaning of the knowledge gathered rather than data analysis In this way I

wanted to convey that we were not extracting information from MCFN members for pure

research purposes but rather to develop something that MCFN will own and use for their

self-determination Perhaps this was partially an idealistic intention on my part but a

204

mindful one nonetheless In some of my interactions with MCFN members especially

during the adult group discussions there remained a power hierarchy between me as the

researcher and the MCFN members as research participants I was expected to lead and

not facilitate these group discussions I had to adjust my role depending on the nature

and dynamics of the group The one-on-one conversations were however more conducive

to equal partnerships and key-informants wanted to lsquotell their storiesrsquo rather than merely

respond to key probes (even though they generally spoke to the conversation schedule

probes) Perhaps my learning is that the nature of one-on-one interactions is more

appropriate for equal participation because I could adapt to the specific context of the

person that is being engaged

As the research unfolded my PhD became my secondary focus and to me it was about

MCFNrsquos rights and responsibilities to water in all their identities Perhaps this is why I

persevered in the writing of my doctoral thesis (despite working full time) because it is a

cause that I believe in

Last this research was healing for me As a newcomer to Canada I was hurting from the

unpleasant nature of capitalism an individualistic and competitive society who has so

much materially yet has the essence of expectation and privilege Even though I

remained an outsider to MCFN I am not Canadian and my life context similar but not the

same to Indigenous peoples in Canada gave us a sense of joint understanding I found

that our language was similar we had a sense of sharing and giving I felt that I was

accepted into the community and developed friendships The schoolrsquos music teacher

asked me to return because the students enjoyed our interactions

A MCFN member said to me this research partnership was meant to be I thank Niibi as

the healing spirit that led me to this research and for guiding me throughout the research

205

REFERENCES

Aboucher J amp Donihee J (2014) Supreme Court of Canada Grants Tsilhqotrsquoin Aboriginal

Title in William ndash Implications for Resource Development in Canada Willms amp Shier

Environment Aboriginal Energy Law

Alcantara C amp Spicer Z (2016) A new model for making Aboriginal policy Evaluating the

Kelowna Accord and the promise of multilevel governance in Canada Canadian Public

Administration 59(2) 183ndash203

Anderson K Clow B amp Haworth-Brockman M (2013) Carriers of water Aboriginal

womenrsquos experiences relationships and reflections Journal of Cleaner Production 60

11ndash17

Andolina R (2012) The values of water Development cultures and indigenous cultures in

highland Ecuador Latin American Research Review 47(2) 3ndash26

Anishinabek Ontario Resource Management Council Water Working Group (2009)

Anishinabek Traditional Knowledge amp Water Policy Report Anishinabek Ontario

Resource Management Council

Ansell C amp Gash A (2007) Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice Journal of

Public Administration Research and Theory 18(4) 543ndash571

httpsdoiorg101093jopartmum032

Appadurai A (1996) Modernity at Large Cultural Dimensions of Globalization University of

Minnesota Press

Arquette M Cole M Cook K LaFrance B Peters M Ransom J Sargent E Smoke

V amp Stairs A (2002) Holistic risk-based environmental decision making A Native

perspective Environmental Health Perspectives 110 Suppl 2 259ndash264

Arrows F (2019) The Indigenization controversy For whom and by whom Critical

Education 10(18) 1ndash13

Arsenault R Diver S McGregor D Witham A amp Bourassa C (2018) Shifting the

Framework of Canadian Water Governance through Indigenous Research Methods

Acknowledging the Past with an Eye on the Future Water 10(49) 1ndash18

httpsdoiorg103390w10010049

206

Asch S E (1956) Studies of independence and conformity I A minority of one against a

unanimous majority Psychological Monographs General and Applied 70(9) 1ndash70

httpsdoiorg101037h0093718

Assembly of First Nations (nd-a) National Water Declaration

httpswwwafncauploadsfileswaternational_water_declarationpdf

Assembly of First Nations (nd-b) Honouring earth httpswwwafncahonoring-earth

Baird J Plummer R Dupont D amp Carter B (2015) Perceptions of water quality in First

Nations communities Exploring the role of context Nature and Culture 10(2) 225ndash249

Bakker K (2003) Good governance in restructuring water supply A handbook Federation

of Canadian Municipalities Ottawa

Bakker K (2007) The ldquocommonsrdquo versus the ldquocommodityrdquo Alter-globalization anti-

privatization and the human right to water in the global south Antipode 39(3) 430ndash455

Bakker K amp Cook C (2011) Water governance in Canada Innovation and fragmentation

Water Resources Development 27(02) 275ndash289

Bakker K Simms R Joe N amp Harris L (2018) Indigenous Peoples and Water

Governance in Canada Regulatory Injustice and Prospects for Reform In R Boelens

T Perreault amp J Vos (Eds) Water Justice (1st ed pp 193ndash209) Cambridge

University Press httpsdoiorg1010179781316831847013

Bandura A (2001) Social cognitive theory An agentic perspective Annual Review of

Psychology 52(1) 1ndash12

Barlow M (2012) Paying for Water in Canada in a Time of a Austerity and Privatization A

Discussion Paper The Council of Canadians

Bauman Z (1998) Globalization The Human Consequences Columbia University Press

Bazeley P (2009) Analysing Qualitative Data More Than lsquoIdentifying Themesrsquo The

Malaysian Journal of Qualitative Research 2(2) 1ndash18

Benjamin G (2017) Indigenous Peoples Indigeneity Indigeny or Indigenism In C Antons

(Ed) Routledge Handbook of Asian Law (1st ed pp 362ndash377) Routledge

Benton-Banai E (2010) The Mishomis Book The Voice of the Ojibway The University of

Minnesota Press

207

Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management Role of knowledge generation bridging

organizations and social learning Journal of Environmental Management 90(5) 1692ndash

1702 httpsdoiorg101016jjenvman200812001

Berry K A Jackson S Saito L amp Forline L (2018) Reconceptualising Water Quality

Governance to Incorporate Knowledge and Values Case studies from Australian and

Brazilian Indigenous Communities Water Alternatives 11(1) 40ndash60

Bertels S amp Vredenburg H (2004) Broadening the Notion of Governance from the

Organisation to the Domain The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 15 33ndash47

Beteille A (1998) The idea of indigenous people Current Anthropology 39(2) 187ndash192

Bishop C A (2008 August) Ojibwe The Canadian Encyclopedia

httpswwwthecanadianencyclopediacaenarticleojibwa

Blackstock M (2001) Water A First Nationsrsquo spiritual and ecological perspective BC

Journal of Ecosystems and Management 1(1) 1ndash14

Bohaker H (2010) Reading Anishinaabe Identities Meaning and Metaphor in Nindoodem

Pictographs Ethnohistory 57(1) 11ndash33 httpsdoiorg10121500141801-2009-051

Borrows J (1997a) Living between Water and Rocks First Nations Environmental

Planning and Democracy The University of Toronto Law Journal 47(4) 417ndash468

httpsdoiorg102307825948

Borrows J (1997b) Wampum at Niagara The Royal Proclamation Canadian Legal History

and Self-Government In M Asch (Ed) Aboriginal and Treaty Rights in Canada

Essays on Law Equality and Respect for Difference (pp 155ndash172) University of British

Columbia Press

Borrows J (2003) Indian Agency and Taking Whatrsquos Not Yours Windsor Yearbook of

Access to Justice 22 253ndash264

Borrows J (2010) Canadarsquos Indigenous constitution University of Toronto Press

Borrows J (2017) Challenging Historical Frameworks Aboriginal Rights The Trickster and

Originalism Canadian Historical Review 98(1) 114ndash135

httpsdoiorg103138chr981Borrows

208

Borton I M amp Paul G D (2015) Problematizing the healing metaphor of restorative

justice Contemporary Justice Review 18(3) 257ndash273

httpsdoiorg1010801028258020151057704

Boutilier S (2017) Free Prior and Informed Consent and Reconciliation in Canada

Western Journal of Legal Studies 7(1) 1ndash22

Bowie R (2013) Indigenous Self-Governance and the Deployment of Knowledge in

Collaborative Environmental Management in Canada Journal of Canadian Studies

47(1) 91ndash121 httpsdoiorg103138jcs47191

Boyd D R (2013) The Status of Constitutional Protection for the Environment in Other

Nations David Suzuki Foundation httpsdavidsuzukiorgscience-learning-centre-

articlestatus-constitutional-protection-environment-nations

Bradford L E A Ovsenek N amp Bharadwaj L A (2016) Indigenizing Water Governance

in Canada In S Renzetti amp D P Dupont (Eds) Water Policy and Governance in

Canada (Vol 17 pp 269ndash298) Springer International Publishing

httpsdoiorg101007978-3-319-42806-2_15

Brant-Castellano M (2000) Updating aboriginal traditions of knowledge In G Dei B Hall

amp D Rosenberg (Eds) Indigenous knowledges in global contexts (pp 21ndash36)

University of Toronto Press

Braun V amp Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology Qualitative Research

in Psychology 3(2) 77ndash101

Brisbois M C amp de Loeuml R C (2016) Power in Collaborative Approaches to Governance

for Water A Systematic Review Society amp Natural Resources 29(7) 775ndash790

httpdxdoiorg1010800894192020151080339

Brock K L (1991) The politics of aboriginal self-government A Canadian paradox

Canadian Public Administration 34(2) 272ndash285

Bronskill J (2018 October) Canada Supreme Court says they have no duty to consult

Indigenous groups on federal law-making The Canadian Press The Toronto Star

httpswwwthestarcomnewscanada20181011supreme-court-says-they-have-no-

duty-to-consult-indigenous-groups-on-federal-law-makinghtml

Burger J (1990) The Gaia Atlas of First People Gaia Books

209

Burke T P (2011) The Concept of Justice Is Social Justice Just Continuum Studies in

Political Philosophy

Canadian Environmental Law Association (2012) Fact Sheet What is the provincial legal

structure around water in Ontario httpscelaca (accessed in January 2019)

Canessa A (2008) The past is not another country Exploring Indigenous histories in

Bolivia History and Anthropology 19(4) 353ndash369

Capra F (1983) The Turning Point Bantam Books

Castells M (1997) The Power of Identity Vol II The Information Age Economy Society

and Culture Blackwell Publishers

Castleden H Garvin T amp Nation H F (2009) ldquoHishuk Tsawakrdquo (Everything Is

OneConnected) A Huu-ay-aht Worldview for Seeing Forestry in British Columbia

Canada Society amp Natural Resources 22(9) 789ndash804

httpsdoiorg10108008941920802098198

Castleden H Hart C Cunsolo A Harper S amp Martin D (2017) Reconciliation and

Relationality in Water Research and Management in Canada Implementing Indigenous

Ontologies Epistemologies and Methodologies In S Renzetti amp D P Dupont (Eds)

Water Policy and Governance in Canada (Vol 17 pp 69ndash95) Springer International

Publishing 101007978-3-319-42806-2

Cave K amp McKay S (2016) Water Song Indigenous Women and Water Solutions 7(6)

64ndash73 httpsthesolutionsjournalcomarticlewater-song-indigenous-women-and-

water

Center for Theory of Change (2019) What is Theory of Change Setting Standards for

Theory of Change httpswwwtheoryofchangeorgwhat-is-theory-of-change

Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) Part 1 of the Constitution Act 1982 httpslaws-

loisjusticegccaengconstpage-15html

Chiefs of Ontario (2008 October) Water Declaration of the Anishinaabek Mushkegowuk

and Onkwehonwe in Ontario

httpsstatic1squarespacecomstatic54ade7ebe4b07588aa079c94t54ea50c2e4b0fe

aa4772eaaf1424642242464COO-water-declaration-revised-march-2010pdf

Chilisa B (2012) Indigenous research methodologies SAGE Publications

210

Christensen J (2012) Telling stories Exploring research storytelling as a meaningful

approach to knowledge mobilization with Indigenous research collaborators and diverse

audiences in community-based participatory research The Canadian GeographerLe

Geacuteographe Canadien 56(2) 231ndash242

Christensen R amp Lintner A M (2007) Trading Our Common Heritage The Debate Over

Water Rights Transfers in Canada In K Bakker (Ed) Eau Canada (pp219-241) UBC

Press

Christie N (2012) From Interdependence to lsquoModernrsquo Individualism Families and the

Emergence of Liberal Society in Canada Families and the Emergence of Liberal

Society History Compass 10(1) 81ndash104 httpsdoiorg101111j1478-

0542201100815x

Clamen M amp Macfarlane D (2015) The International Joint Commission water levels and

transboundary governance in the Great Lakes Review of Policy Research 32(1) 40ndash

59

Clifford J (2007) Varieties of Indigenous Experience Diasporas Homelands

Sovereignties In M de la Cadena amp O Starn (Eds) Indigenous Experience Today

Berg

Coates K (1999) Being Aboriginal The cultural politics of identity membership and

belonging among First Nations in Canada Canadian Issues 21 23ndash41

Conservation Authorities Act no RSO 1990 c C27

httpswwwontariocalawsstatute90c27

Conservation Ontario (2020a) Homepage httpsconservationontarioca

Conservation Ontario (2020b) History of Conservation Authorities

httpsconservationontariocaconservation-authoritiesabout-conservation-

authoritieshistory-of-conservation-authorities

Constitution Act 1867 (UK) 30 amp 31 Vict c 3 httpslaws-loisjusticegccaengconstpage-

1html

Constitutional Act Section 35 part II (1982) httplawsjusticegccaengConstpage-

15htmldocCont

211

Corntassel J (2009) Indigenous Storytelling Truth-telling and Community Approaches to

Reconciliation English Studies in Canada 35(1) 137ndash159

httpsdoiorg101353esc00163

Corntassel J amp Bryce C (2012) Practicing sustainable self-determination Indigenous

approaches to cultural restoration and revitalization Brown J World Aff 18 151ndash162

Cote P Baird R Anthony T LaForme E King R amp Hill J (2002) Kiinwi

Dabaadjmowin ldquoOur Story Art Muralrdquo [Wall mural in the library of the Lloyd S King

Elementary School New Credit Reserve]

Coulthard G S (2014) Red skin white masks Rejecting the colonial politics of recognition

University of Minnesota Press

Craft A (2011) Treaty interpretation A tale of two stories

httpsssrncomabstract=3433842

Craft A (2013 December) Reading Beyond the Lines Oral Understandings and Aboriginal

Litigation Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice Conference How Do We

Know What We Think We Know Facts in the Legal System Winnipeg Manitoba

Craft A (2014a) Living Treaties Breathing Research Canadian Journal of Women and

Law 26(1) 1ndash22

Craft A (2014b) Anishinaabe Nibi Inaakonigewin Report Reflecting the Water Laws

Research Gathering conducted with Anishinaabe Elders June 20-23 2013 at Roseau

River Manitoba University of Manitobarsquos Centre for Human Rights Research and the

Public Interest Law Centre

httpspapersssrncomsol3paperscfmabstract_id=3433235

Craft A (2015 October 14) Kirsquoinaakonigewin Reclaiming Space for Indigenous Laws The

Canadian Administration of Justice Conference Aboriginal Peoples and Law ldquoWe Are

All Here to Stayrdquo

Craft A (2017a) Giving and receiving life from Anishinaabe nibi inaakonigewin (our water

law) research (Chapter 9) In J Thorpe S Rutherford amp L A Sandberg

Methodological challenges in nature-culture and environmental history research (pp

105-119) Routledge

212

Craft A (2017b) Broken Trust Finding Our Way Out of the Damaged Relationship Through

the Rebuilding of Indigenous Legal Institutions pp 379-393 In Special Lectures 2017

Canada at 150 The Charter and the Constitution The Law Society of Upper Canada

Crenshaw K (1989) Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex A Black Feminist

Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics

University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989(1 Article 8) 139ndash167

httpchicagounbounduchicagoeduuclfvol1989iss18

Daigle M (2016) Awawanenitakik The spatial politics of recognition and relational

geographies of Indigenous self-determination The Canadian Geographer 60(2) 259ndash

269 httpsdoiorg101111cag12260

Daigle M (2018) Resurging through Kishiichiwan The spatial politics of Indigenous water

relations Decolonization Indigeneity Education amp Society 7(1) 159ndash172

Datta R (2018) Decolonizing both researcher and research and its effectiveness in

Indigenous research Research Ethics 14(2) 1ndash24

httpsdoiorg1011771747016117733296

de la Cadena M amp Starn O (2007) Introduction In M de la Cadena amp O Starn (Eds)

Indigenous Experience Today (pp 1-30) Berg

Debassige B (2010) Re-conceptualizing Anishinaabe Mino-Bemaadiziwin (the Good Life)

as Research Methodology A Spirit-centered Way in Anishinaaabe Research Canadian

Journal of Native Education 33(1) 11ndash28

Dei G J S amp Jaimungal Christina S (2018) Indigeneity and Decolonial Resistance

Alternatives to Colonial Thinking and Practice (Kindle Edition) Myers Education Press

Derrida J (1976) Of grammatology Translated by Spivak GC 1st American ed

Baltimore Johns Hopkins University Press

Deutsch M amp Gerard H B (1955) A study of normative and informational social

influences upon individual judgment The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology

51(3) 629ndash636 httpsdoiorg101037h0046408

Dion S (2009) Braiding Histories Learning from Aboriginal Peoplersquos Experiences and

Perspectives UBC Press Kindle Edition

213

Doorn N (2013) Water and Justice Towards an Ethics of Water Governance Public

Reason 5(1) 97ndash114

Drawson A S Toombs E amp Mushquash C S (2017) Indigenous Research Methods A

Systematic Review The International Indigenous Policy Journal 8(2 Article 5) 1ndash25

httpsdoiorg1018584iipj2017825

DrsquoSouza I (2017) Water Wisdom Maude Barlowrsquos Clarion Calls to Action Herizons 16ndash

19

Dworkin R (1981) What is Equality Part 2 Equality of Resources Philosophy amp Public

Affairs 10(4) 283ndash345

Dyck V amp White L E (2013) ldquoThe people who own themselvesrdquo Recognition of Meacutetis

identity in Canada Canada Parliament Senate Report of the Standing Senate

Committee on Aboriginal Peoples

Eberts M (2013) Still colonizing after all these years University of New Brunswick Law

Journal 64 123ndash158

Eisenberg A (2018) The challenges of structural injustice to reconciliation Truth and

reconciliation in Canada Ethics amp Global Politics 11(1) 22ndash30

httpsdoiorg1010801654495120181507387

Escobar A (2008) Development transmodernities and the politics of theory Focaal

2008(52) 127ndash135

Evans B M amp Smith C W (2015) Introduction Transforming Provincial Politics The

Political Economy of Canadarsquos Provinces and Territories in a Neoliberal Era In B M

Evans amp C W Smith (Eds) Transforming Provincial Politics The Political Economy of

Canadarsquos Provinces and Territories in the Neoliberal Era (pp 3ndash18) University of

Toronto Press

Evans C (2017) Analysing Semi-Structured Interviews Using Thematic Analysis Exploring

Voluntary Civic Participation Among Adults SAGE Publications Ltd Research Methods

Datasets 1ndash6

Fanon F (1963) The Wretched of the Earth Grove Press

Fereday J amp Muir-Cochrane E (2006) Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis A

Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development

214

International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5(1) 80ndash92

httpsdoiorg101177160940690600500107

Fernandez M E ten Hoor G A van Lieshout S Rodriguez S A Beidas R S Parcel

G Ruiter R A C Markham C M amp Kok G (2019) Implementation Mapping Using

Intervention Mapping to Develop Implementation Strategies Frontiers in Public Health

7 158 httpsdoiorg103389fpubh201900158

Finegan C (2018) Reflection Acknowledgement and Justice A Framework for

Indigenous-Protected Area Reconciliation The International Indigenous Policy Journal

9(3) Article 3 httpsdoiorg1018584iipj2018933

Finlay L (1998) Reflexivity An Essential Component for All Research British Journal of

Occupational Therapy 61(10) 453ndash456 httpsdoiorg101177030802269806101005

Foster-Fishman P G Nowell B amp Yang H (2007) Putting the system back into systems

change A framework for understanding and changing organizational and community

systems American Journal of Community Psychology 39(3ndash4) 197ndash215

Four Directions Teachingscom (2006 2012) Ojibwe Powawatomi (Anishinaabe)

Teaching Elder Lillian Pitawanakwat

httpwwwfourdirectionsteachingscomtranscriptsojibwehtml

Franco J Mehta L amp Veldwisch G J (2013) The global politics of water grabbing Third

World Quarterly 34(9) 1651ndash1675

Fraser N (1995) From redistribution to recognition Dilemmas of justice in a rsquopost-socialistrsquo

society New Left Review 212 68ndash93

Fraser N (2009) Scales of justice Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World

Columbia University Press

Frideres J (2008) Aboriginal identity in the Canadian context The Canadian Journal of

Native Studies 28(2) 313ndash342

Fuchs C amp Sandoval M (2008) Positivism Postmodernism or Critical Theory A Case

Study of Communications Studentsrsquo Understandings of Criticism Journal for Critical

Education Policy Studies 6(2) 112ndash141

215

Gans H J (1991) Symbolic Ethinicity The Future of Ethnic Groups and Cultures in

America In N R Yetman (Ed) Majority and Minority The Dynamics of Race and

Ethnicity in American Life (5th ed pp 430ndash443) Allyn and Bacon

Garcia M E (2008) Introduction Indigenous Encounters in Contemporary Peru Latin

American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies 3(3) 217ndash226

Gaudry A amp Lorenz D (2018) Indigenization as inclusion reconciliation and

decolonization Navigating the different visions for indigenizing the Canadian Academy

AlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples 14(3) 218ndash227

httpsdoiorg1011771177180118785382

Geertz C (2001) The Integrative Revolution Primordial Sentiments and Civil Politics in the

New States In V P Pecora (Ed) Nations and Identities (pp 279ndash291) Blackwell

Gheaus A (2013) The feasibility constraint on the concept of justice The Philosophical

Quarterly 63(252) 445ndash464

Gibson M M (2006) In the Footsteps of the Mississaugas (1st ed) Mississauga Heritage

Foundation Inc

Goffman E (1959) The Presentation of the self in everyday life Doubleday Anchor Books

Goodall H (2008) Riding the tide Indigenous knowledge history and water in a changing

Australia Environment and History 14(3) 355ndash384

Gopaldas A (2013) Intersectionality 101 Journal of Public Policy amp Marketing 32(Special

Issue 2013) 90ndash94

Gordon C (2007) Aboriginal Nationhood and the Inherent Right to Self-Government

National Centre for First Nations Governance

Government of Canada (2010 September) Indian Residential Schools Statement of

ApologymdashPrime Minister Stephen Harper httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng11001000156771571589339246

Government of Canada (2011) Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation Updated

Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfill the Duty to Consult Minister of the Department

of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada httpswwwaadnc-

aandcgccaDAMDAM-INTER-HQSTAGINGtexte-

textintgui_1100100014665_engpdf

216

Government of Canada (2013a June 4) Yukon devolution httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng13524709940981535467403471

Government of Canada (2013b July24) Northwest Territories devolution Northwest

Territories Devolution Agreement httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng13523984331611539625360223

Government of Canada (2013c February6) Mississaugas of the CreditmdashConnectivity

Profile httpswwwaadnc-aandcgccaeng13578409420941360164261110

Government of Canada (2015a July13) Comprehensive Claims httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng11001000305771551196153650wbdisable=true

Government of Canada (2015b October26) Canadarsquos History Discover Canada -

Canadarsquos History

httpswwwcanadacaenimmigration-refugees-citizenshipcorporatepublications-

manualsdiscover-canadaread-onlinecanadas-historyhtml

Government of Canada (2016 January 7) Water governance and legislation Shared

responsibility httpswwwcanadacaenenvironment-climate-changeserviceswater-

overviewgovernance-legislationshared-responsibilityhtml

Government of Canada (2017a December4) Indigenous peoples and communities

httpswwwrcaanc-cirnacgccaeng11001000137851529102490303

Government of Canada (2017b July12) Get to know CanadamdashProvinces and territories

httpswwwcanadacaenimmigration-refugees-citizenshipservicesnew-

immigrantsprepare-life-canadaprovinces-territorieshtml

Government of Canada (2018a February14) Principles respecting the Government of

Canadarsquos relationship with Indigenous peoples httpswwwjusticegccaengcsj-

sjcprinciples-principeshtml

Government of Canada (2018b) Tri-Council Policy Statement Ethical Conduct for

Research Involving Humans (TCPS2-2018) Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and Social Sciences

and Humanities Research Council httpsethicsgccaengdocumentstcps2-2018-en-

interactive-finalpdf

217

Government of Canada (2019 August) Nunavut devolution httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng13524717707231537900871295

Government of Canada (2020a July30) Specific Claims Righting past wrongs and building

for the future Specific Claims httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng11001000302911539617582343

Government of Canada (2020b) Self-government httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng11001000322751529354547314

Government of Canada (2020c July30) Treaties and agreements httpswwwrcaanc-

cirnacgccaeng11001000285741529354437231

Government of Canada (2020d January 6) Water governance Federal policy and

legislation httpswwwcanadacaenenvironment-climate-changeserviceswater-

overviewgovernance-legislationfederal-policyhtmlSection1

Grand River Conservation Authority (nd) Routes and access points

httpswwwgrandrivercaenoutdoor-recreationRoutes-and-access-pointsaspx

Greenwood D J Foot Whyte W amp Harkavy I (1993) Participatory Action Research as a

Process and a Goal Human Relations 46(2) 175ndash192

Guba E G amp Lincoln Y S (2005) Paradigmatic Controversies Contradictions and

Emerging Confluences In N K Denzin amp Y S Lincoln (Eds) The Sage Handbook of

Qualitative Research (3rd ed pp 191ndash215) SAGE Publications

Guest G Bunce A amp Johnson L (2006) How Many Interviews Are Enough An

Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability Field Methods 18(1) 59ndash82

httpsdoiorg1011771525822X05279903

Hacker K (2013) Community-Based Participatory Research SAGE Publications httpsdx-

doi-orgmyaccesslibraryutorontoca1041359781452244181

Hallenbeck J (2017) Water Ethics Think Like a Watershed (Creative Intervention) Studies

in Social Justice 11(2) 316ndash317

Hammarberg K Kirkman M amp de Lacey S (2016) Qualitative research methods When

to use them and how to judge them Human Reproduction 31(3) 498ndash501

httpsdoiorg101093humrepdev334

218

Hania P (2013) Uncharted waters Applying the lens of new governance theory to the

practice of water source protection in Ontario Journal of Environmental Law and

Practice 24(2) 177ndash221

Hannerz U (1996) Transnational connections Culture people places Taylor amp Francis

US

Hanrahan M (2017) Water (in)security in Canada National identity and the exclusion of

Indigenous peoples British Journal of Canadian Studies 30(1) 69ndash89

httpsdoiorg103828bjcs20174

Hanrahan M Sarkar A amp Hudson A (2016) Water insecurity in Indigenous Canada A

community-based inter-disciplinary approach Water Quality Research Journal 51(3)

270ndash281 httpsdoiorg102166wqrjc2015010

Hantula D A (2018) Editorial Reductionism and Holism in Behavior Science and Art

Perspectives on Behavior Science 41(2) 325ndash333 httpsdoiorg101007s40614-018-

00184-w

Hart M A (2010) Indigenous Worldviews Knowledge and Research The Development of

an Indigenous Research Paradigm (No 1) 1(1) 1ndash16

Hassenforder E amp Barone Sylvain (2018) Institutional arrangements for water

governance International Journal of Water Resources Development 1ndash25

httpsdoiorg1010800790062720181431526

Hawe P Shiell A amp Riley T (2009) Theorising Interventions as Events in Systems

American Journal of Community Psychology 43(3ndash4) 267ndash276

httpsdoiorg101007s10464-009-9229-9

Heidtman J Wysienska K amp Szmatka J (2000) Positivism and Types of Theories in

Sociology Sociological Focus 33(1) 1ndash26

httpsdoiorg10108000380237200010571154

Helm B W (2012) Accountability and some social dimensions of human agency

Philosophical Issues 22(1) 217ndash232

Heritage Mississauga (2018) The Mississaugas httpsheritagemississaugacomthe-

mississaugas

219

Hildebrand L P Pebbles V amp Fraser D A (2002) Cooperative ecosystem management

across the CanadandashUS border Approaches and experiences of transboundary

programs in the Gulf of Maine Great Lakes and Georgia BasinPuget Sound Ocean amp

Coastal Management 45(6) 421ndash457

Hill E (2012) A Critique of the Call to ldquoAlways Indigenizerdquo

httpsjournalsuviccaindexphppeninsulaarticleview115133212

Hinzo A M (2018) ldquoWersquore not going to sit idly byrdquo 45 Years of Asserting Native

Sovereignty Along the Missouri River in Nebraska Decolonization Indigeneity

Education amp Society 7(1) 200ndash214

Hirschi T (1969) Causes of Delinquency University of California Press

Hitlin S (2003) Values as the Core of Personal Identity Drawing Links between Two

Theories of Self Social Psychology Quarterly 66(2) 118


Hogan S-S amp McCracken K (2016 December 12) Doing the Work The Historianrsquos Place

in Indigenization and Decolonization httpsactivehistoryca201612doing-the-work-

the-historians-place-in-indigenization-and-decolonization

Holmes J amp Associates (2015) Aboriginal Title Claim to Water within the Traditional

Lands of the Mississaugas of The New Credit The Mississaugas of the New Credit

httpmncfncawp-contentuploads201702MNC-Aboriginal-Title-Reportpdf

Horkheimer M (1972) Critical Theory Seabury Press reprinted Continuum New York

1982

Horn-Miller K (2013) What Does Indigenous Participatory Democracy Look Like Kahnawa

Kersquos Community Decision Making Process Rev Const Stud 18 111

Impact Assessment Act 2019 (SC 2019 c 28 s 1) httpslawsjusticegccaengactsI-

275indexhtml

Indian Act RSC 1985 c I-5 httpswwwcanliiorgencalawsstatrsc-1985-c-i-

5160991rsc-1985-c-i-5html

Indigenous Corporate Training Inc (2015a February 26) Why do Aboriginal Peoples want

self-government httpswwwictinccablogwhy-do-aboriginal-peoples-want-self-

government

220

Indigenous Corporate Training Inc (2015b July 24) What are First Nation inherent rights

httpswwwictinccablogwhat-are-first-nation-inherent-rights

Indigenous Corporate Training Inc (2017 March 29) A Brief Definition of Decolonization

and Indigenization httpswwwictinccabloga-brief-definition-of-decolonization-and-

indigenization

Ingold T (2000) The perception of the environment Essays on livelihood dwelling and

skill Routledge

International Labour Organization (1989) C169mdashIndigenous and Tribal Peoples

Convention

httpwwwiloorgdynnormlexenfp=NORMLEXPUB121000NOP12100_INSTRU

MENT_ID312314

Jackson S amp Barber M (2013) Recognition of indigenous water values in Australiarsquos

Northern Territory Current progress and ongoing challenges for social justice in water

planning Planning Theory amp Practice 14(4) 435ndash454

httpsdoiorg101080146493572013845684

Jackson S Brandes O M amp Christensen R (2012) Lessons from an Ancient Concept

How the Public Trust Doctrine will meet obligations to protect the environment and the

public interest in Canadian water management and governance in the 21st century

Journal of Environmental Law and Practice 23(2) 175ndash199

Jackson S (2016) Indigenous Peoples and Water Justice in a Globalizing World In K

Conca amp E Weinthal (Eds) The Oxford Handbook of Water Politics and Policy (online)

Oxford University Press 101093oxfordhb97801993350840135

Jaffee D amp Newman S (2012) A Bottle Half Empty Bottled Water Commodification and

Contestation Organization amp Environment 26(3) 318ndash335

httpsdoiorg1011771086026612462378

Jetoo S Thorn A Friedman K Gosman S amp Krantzberg G (2015) Governance and

geopolitics as drivers of change in the Great LakesndashSt Lawrence basin Journal of

Great Lakes Research 41 108ndash118

221

Johnson R B Onwuegbuzie A J amp Turner L A (2007) Toward a Definition of Mixed

Methods Research Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(2) 112ndash133

httpsdoiorg1011771558689806298224

Jones J amp Smith J (2017) Ethnography Challenges and opportunities Evidence Based

Nursing 20(4) 98ndash100 httpsdoiorg101136eb-2017-102786

Jones P S (2012) Powering up the people The politics of Indigenous rights

implementation International Labour Organisation Convention 169 and hydroelectric

power in Nepal The International Journal of Human Rights 16(4) 624ndash647

Jones R Rigg C amp Lee L (2010) Haida Marine Planning First Nations as a Partner in

Marine Conservation Ecology and Society 15(1) 1ndash16 httpsdoiorg105751ES-

03225-150112

Joy K J Kulkarni S Roth D amp Zwarteveen M (2014) Re-politicising water governance

Exploring water re-allocations in terms of justice Local Environment 19(9) 954ndash973

httpsdoiorg101080135498392013870542

Kahneman D amp Miller D T (1986) Norm Theory Comparing Reality to Its Alternatives

Psychological Review 93(2) 136ndash153

Kanselaar G (2002) Constructivism and socio-constructivism

httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication27690037_Constructivism_and_socio-

constructivismreferences

Karlsson B G (2001) Indigenous politics Community formation and indigenous peoplesrsquo

struggle for self-determination in northeast India Identities Global Studies in Culture

and Power 8(1) 7ndash45

Kimmerer R W (2013) Braiding Sweetgrass Indigenous Wisdom Scientific Knowledge

and the Teaching of Plants (Kindle Edition) Milkweed Editions

King M (2015) Contextualization of socio-culturally meaningful data [Letter to the Editor]

httpsdoi1017269CJPH1065328

Kingsbury B (1998) ldquoIndigenous peoplesrdquo in international law A constructivist approach to

the Asian controversy American Journal of International Law 92 414ndash457

Koggel C M (2018) Epistemic injustice in a settler nation Canadarsquos history of erasing

silencing marginalizing Journal of Global Ethics 14(2) 240ndash251

222

Kovach M (2009) Indigenous Methodologies Characteristics Conservations and

Contexts University of Toronto Press Inc

Kuchinke K P (2013) Human Agency and HRD Returning Meaning Spirituality and

Purpose to HRD Theory and Practice Advances in Developing Human Resources

15(4) 370ndash381

Kuhn T S (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed) The University of

Chicago Press

Kuzel A J (1992) Sampling in qualitative inquiry In B F Crabtree amp W L Miller (Eds)

Research methods for primary care (Doing qualitative research Vol 3 pp 31ndash44)

Sage Publications Inc

Ladner K L (2003) Governing Within an Ecological Context Creating an AlterNative

Understanding of Blackfoot Governance Studies in Political Economy 70(1) 125ndash152

httpsdoiorg10108007078552200311827132

Ladner K L (2006) Indigenous Governance Questioning the Status and the Possibilities

for Reconciliation with Canadarsquos Commitment to Aboriginal and Treaty Rights National

Centre for First Nations Governance

LaPenseacutee E (2018) Honour water Gameplay as a pathway to Anishinaabeg water

teachings Decolonization Indigeneity Education amp Society 7(1) 115ndash130

Latta A (2018) Indigenous Rights and Multilevel Governance Learning from the Northwest

Territories Water Stewardship Strategy International Indigenous Policy Journal 9(2) 1ndash

25 httpsdoiorg1018584iipj2018924

Lavalleacutee L F (2008) Balancing the Medicine Wheel through Physical Activity Journal of

Aboriginal Health 4(1) 64ndash71

Lavalleacutee L F (2009) Practical application of an Indigenous research framework and two

qualitative Indigenous research methods Sharing circles and Anishinaabe symbol-

based reflection International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8(1) 21ndash40

Leeds-Hurwitz W (2009) Social Construction of Reality In S W Littlejohn amp Foss KA

Encyclopedia of Communication Theory (Vol 1 pp 892ndash894) Sage Publications Inc

Le Grand J (2003) Motivation Agency and Public Policy Of Knights and Knaves Pawns

and Queens Oxford University Press

223

Le T N amp Gobert J M (2015) Translating and Implementing a Mindfulness-Based Youth

Suicide Prevention Intervention in a Native American Community Journal of Child and

Family Studies 24(1) 12ndash23 httpsdoiorg101007s10826-013-9809-z

Leininger M (1994) Evaluation criteria and critique of qualitative research studies In J M

Morse (Ed) Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods (pp 95ndash115) SAGE

Publications Inc

Lewallen A E (2003) Strategic lsquoIndigeneityrsquo and the Possibility of a Global Indigenous

Womenrsquos Movement Michigan Feminist Studies 17 105ndash139

Lightfoot S (2019 January) Elected vs Hereditary chiefs Whatrsquos the difference in

Indigenous communities CTV Vancouver News httpsbcctvnewscaelected-vs-

hereditary-chiefs-what-s-the-difference-in-indigenous-communities-14247466

Lincoln Y S amp Guba E G (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry Sage Publications Inc

Little A amp Maddison S (2017) Reconciliation transformation struggle An introduction

International Political Science Review 38(2) 145ndash154

httpsdoiorg1011770192512116681808

Longboat S (2012) First Nations Water Security and Collaborative Governance

Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation Ontario Canada Wilfrid Laurier

University

Longboat S (2015) First Nations Water Security Security for Mother Earth Canadian

Woman Studies 30(2ndash3) 6ndash13

Lui E (2015) ReportmdashOn Notice for a Drinking Water Crisis in Canada The Council of

Canadians httpscanadiansorgdrinking-water

Lukasiewicz A amp Baldwin C (2014) Voice power and history Ensuring social justice for

all stakeholders in water decision-making Local Environment 1ndash22

Lukawiecki J (2017) Glass Half Empty 1 Year Progress Toward Resolving Drinking Water

Advisories in Nine First Nations in Ontario (ISBN 978-1-988424-03-3) David Suzuki

Foundation and partners httpsdavidsuzukiorgscience-learning-centre-articlereport-

glass-half-empty-year-1-progress-toward-resolving-drinking-water-advisories-nine-first-

nations-ontario

224

Maclean K amp Bana Yarralji Bubu Inc (2015) Crossing cultural boundaries Integrating

Indigenous water knowledge into water governance through co-research in the

Queensland Wet Tropics Australia Geoforum 59 142ndash152

MacLeod D P (1992) The Anishinabeg Point of View The History of the Great Lakes

Region to 1800 in Nineteenth‐Century Mississauga Odawa and Ojibwa Historiography

Canadian Historical Review 73(2) 194ndash210 httpsdoiorg103138CHR-073-02-03

Mamdani M (2001) Beyond settler and native as political identities Overcoming the

political legacy of colonialism Comparative Studies in Society and History 43(04) 651ndash

664

Manzano-Munguia M C (2011) Indian policy and legislation Aboriginal identity survival in

Canada Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism 11(3) 404ndash426

Markle G (2004) From struggles for recognition to a plural concept of justice An interview

with Axel Honneth Acta Sociologica 47(4) 383ndash391

Marshall C amp Rossman G B (1989) Designing Qualitative Research Sage Publications

Martin K amp Mirraboopa B (2003) Ways of knowing being and doing A theoretical

framework and methods for indigenous and indigenist re‐search Journal of Australian

Studies 27(76) 203ndash214 httpsdoiorg10108014443050309387838

Marx K amp Engels F (1967) Capital A Critique of Political Economy (Vol 1) International

Publishers

Mascarenhas M (2007) Where the waters divide First Nations tainted water and

environmental justice in Canada Local Environment 12(6) 565ndash577

McCracken G (1988) The long interview Sage Publications

MCFN (nd-a) Title Claim to Water within Traditional Lands of MCFN

httpmncfncaabout-mncfnland-and-water-claimstitle-claim-to-water-within-traditional-

lands-of-mncfn

MCFN (nd-b) Chief amp Council httpmncfncachief-council-profiles-2

MCFN (nd-c) MCFN Election Code httpmncfncamcfn-election-code

MCFN (nd-d) MCFN Department Contacts httpmncfncamncfn-department-contacts

225

MCFN (nd-e) Mississaugas Treaty at Niagara (1781) httpmncfncamississauga-

cession-at-niagara-1781

MCFN (nd-f) Between the Lakes Treaty No 3 (1792) httpmncfncatreaty3

MCFN (nd-g) The Brant Tract Treaty No 8 (1797) httpmncfncatreaty8

MCFN (nd-h) The Toronto Purchase Treaty No 13 (1805)

httpmncfncatorontopurchase

MCFN (nd-i) Head of the Lake Treaty No 14 (1806) httpmncfncahead-of-the-lake-

purchase-treaty-14

MCFN (nd-j) 12 Mile Creek 16 Mile Creek and Credit River Reserves ndash Treaty Nos 22

and 23 (1820) httpmncfncatreaty2223

MCFN (unpublished) Draft MCFN Water Framework A Framework for Water Governance

on MCFN Treaty Lands and Territory

McGregor D (2004) Coming Full Circle Indigenous Knowledge Environment and Our

Future The American Indian Quarterly 28(3) 385ndash410

httpsdoiorg101353aiq20040101

McGregor D (2009) Honouring our relations An Anishinabe perspective on environmental

justice In J Agyeman R Haluza-Delay C Peter amp P OrsquoRiley (Eds) Speaking for

ourselves Constructions of environmental justice in Canada (pp 27-41) University of

British Columbia Press

McGregor D (2012) Traditional knowledge Considerations for protecting water in Ontario

International Indigenous Policy Journal 3(3) 1ndash20

McGregor D (2014) Traditional knowledge and water governance The ethic of

responsibility AlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples 10(5) 493ndash

507

McGregor D (2015) Indigenous Women Water Justice and Zaagidowin (Love) Canadian

Woman Studies 30(23) 71ndash78

McGregor D (2016) Living well with the Earth In C Lennox amp D Short (Eds) Handbook

of Indigenous Peoplesrsquo Rights (1st ed pp 167ndash180) Routledge

httpsdoiorg1043249780203119235-12

226

McGregor D (2018a) Mino-Mnaamodzawin Environment and Society 9(1) 7ndash24

httpsdoiorg103167ares2018090102

McGregor D (2018b) From ldquoDecolonizedrdquo to Reconciliation Research in Canada Drawing

from Indigenous Research Paradigms ACME An International Journal for Critical

Geographies 17(3) 810ndash831

McGregor D Whitaker S amp Sritharan M (2020) Indigenous environmental justice and

sustainability Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 43 35ndash40

httpsdoiorg101016jcosust202001007

Mcguire P D (2008) Restorative Dispute Resolution in Anishinaabe Communities ndash

Restoring Conceptions of Relationships Based on Dodem National Centre for First

Nations Governance

McLaughlin J A amp Jordan G B (1999) Logic models A tool for telling your programs

performance story Evaluation and Program Planning 22(1) 65ndash72

httpsdoiorg101016S0149-7189(98)00042-1

McNeil K (2001) Aboriginal rights in transition Reassessing Aboriginal title and

governance American Review of Canadian Studies 31(1ndash2) 317ndash329

Meadows DH (2008) Thinking in Systems- A Primer (ed Wright D) Chelsea Green

Publishing

Merriam-Webstercom Dictionary Sovereignty Merriam-Webster httpswwwmerriam-

webstercomdictionarysovereignty

Middleton-Manning B R Gali M S amp Houck D (2018) Holding the Headwaters

Northern California Indian Resistance to State and Corporate Water Development

Decolonization Indigeneity Education amp Society 7(1) 174ndash198

Mills J S (1965) Auguste Comte and Positivism University of Michigan Press

Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (2015) Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation Land

Cessations 1781-1820 and Rouge Tract Claim 2015 [Map] httpmncfncaabout-

mncfntreaty-lands-and-territory

Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation (nd) The Mississaugas of the Credit

Historical Territory Resource and Land Use Mississaugas of the New Credit First

227

Nation httpmncfncawp-contentuploads201808The-Mississaugas-of-the-Credit-

Historical-Territory-Resource-and-Land-Usepdf

Mitchell A (2020) Revitalizing laws (re)-making treaties dismantling violence Indigenous

resurgence against lsquothe sixth mass extinctionrsquo Social amp Cultural Geography 21(7) 909ndash

924 httpsdoiorg1010801464936520181528628

Mitchell D (2003) The Right to the City Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space

Guilford Press

Murdocca C (2010) ldquoThere Is Something in That Waterrdquo Race Nationalism and Legal

Violence Law amp Social Inquiry 35(2) 369ndash402

Nabigon H Hagey R Webster S amp MacKay R (1999) The learning circle as a research

method The trickster and windigo in research Native Social Work Journal 2(1) 113ndash

137

Natural Resources Canada (2002) Relief Map of Ontario [Map]

httpsftpmapscanadacapubnrcan_rncanrasteratlas_6_edreferencebilingualont_r

elief_newpdf

Neal M J Lukasiewicz A amp Syme G J (2014) Why justice matters in water governance

Some ideas for a lsquowater justice frameworkrsquo Water Policy 16(S2) 1ndash18

httpsdoiorg102166wp2014109

Norman E S (2014) Locating the Border in Boundary Bay Non-point pollution

contaminated shellfish and transboundary governance In Reece Jones amp C Johnson

(Eds) Placing the Border in Every day Life (pp 67ndash92) Ashgate Press

Norman E S amp Bakker K (2015) Do good fences make good neighbours Canadandash

United States transboundary water governance the Boundary Waters Treaty and

twenty-first-century challenges Water International 40(1) 199ndash213

Nowlan L amp Bakker K (2010) Practising shared water governance in Canada A primer

UBC Program on Water Governance

Nussbaum M (2003) Capabilities as fundamental entitlements Sen and social justice

Feminist Economics 9(2ndash3) 33ndash59

OrsquoBryan K (2017) Giving a voice to the river and the role of Indigenous people Australian

Indigenous Law Review 20(1) 48ndash77

228

OrsquoFlaherty RM Davidson-Hunt IJ amp Manseau M (2008) Indigenous Knowledge and

Values in Planning for Sustainable Forestry Pikangikum First Nation and the

Whitefeather Forest Initiative Ecology and Society 13(1) 1ndash6

httpwwwecologyandsocietyorgvol13iss1art6

Ontario (2011) First Nations Map [Map] httpsfilesontariocapicturesfirstnations_mapjpg

Ontario (2020) Provincial Policy Statement 2020 Under the Planning Act Ontario

httpsfilesontariocammah-provincial-policy-statement-2020-accessible-final-en-2020-

02-14pdf

Oquist P (1978) The Epistemology of Action Research Acta Sociologica 21(2) 143ndash163

httpsdoiorg101177000169937802100204

Organization for Economic Co-operations and Development (OECD) (2015) OECD

Principles on Water Governance httpwwwoecdorgcferegionaldevelopmentOECD-

Principles-on-Water-Governance-enpdf

Osborne B amp Ripmeester M (1997) The Mississaugas Between Two Worlds Strategic

Adjustments to Changing Landscapes of Power The Canadian Journal of Native

Studies XVII(2) 259ndash291

Patrick M J Syme G J amp Horwitz P (2014) How reframing a water management issue

across scales and levels impacts on perceptions of justice and injustice Journal of

Hydrology 519 2475ndash2482

Patton M Q (1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed) Sage

Publications

Patton M Q (2015) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods Integrating Theory and

Practice (4th ed) SAGE Publications Inc

Peach I (2012) Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of the Future

of Federal Regulation of Indian Status UBC Law Review 45(1) 103ndash144

Peacock T D (2020 July 21) The Ojibwe Our Historical Role in Influencing Contemporary

Minnesota httpswwwmnopediaorgojibwe-our-historical-role-influencing-

contemporary-minnesota

Perreault T (2014) What kind of governance for what kind of equity Towards a

theorization of justice in water governance Water International 39(2) 233ndash245

229

Peters D H Adam T Alonge O Agyepong I A amp Tran N (2013) Implementation

research What it is and how to do it British Journal of Sports Medicine 1ndash7

httpsdoiorg101136bmjf6753

Phare M-A S (2009) Aboriginal Water Rights Primer Created for Assembly of First

Nations of Quebec and Labrador Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Atlantic Policy Congress

of First Nation Chiefs of Ontario In Response to INAC Engagement Sessions on the

Development of a Proposed Legislative Framework for Drinking Water in First Nation

Communities Phare Law

Postero N (2013) Introduction Negotiating Indigeneity Latin American and Caribbean

Ethnic Studies 8(2) 107ndash121

Premdas R (2016) Social justice and affirmative action Ethnic and Racial Studies 39(3)

449ndash462

Quijano A (2000) Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America International

Sociology 15(2) 215ndash232

Ratner C (2000) Agency and culture Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 30(4)

413ndash434

Rawls J (1971) A Theory of Justice (Original) Belknap Press of Harvard University Press

Reason P amp Bradbury H (2008) Introduction In P Reason amp H Bradbury (Eds) The

SAGE Handbook of Action Research Participative Inquiry and Practice (2nd ed) Sage

Publications

Reeves S Peller J Goldman J amp Kitto S (2013) Ethnography in qualitative educational

research AMEE Guide No 80 Medical Teacher 35(8) e1365ndashe1379

httpsdoiorg1031090142159X2013804977

Rice R (2016) How to Decolonize Democracy Indigenous Governance Innovation in

Bolivia and Nunavut Canada Bolivian Studies Journal 22 220ndash242

Riddell J K Salamanca A D Pepler D J Cardinal S amp McIvor O (2017) Laying the

groundwork A practical guide for ethical research with Indigenous communities The

International Indigenous Policy Journal 8(26) Article 2 httpsdoiorgDOI

1018584iipj2017826

230

Rittel H W J amp Webber M M (1973) Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning Policy

Sciences 4(2) 155ndash169

Rogers P amp Hall A W (2003) Effective Water Governance (Vol 7) Global Water

Partnership httpswwwgwporgglobalassetsglobaltoolboxpublicationsbackground-

papers07-effective-water-governance-2003-englishpdf

Roncoli C Dowd-Uribe B Orlove B West C T amp Sanon M (2016) Who counts what

counts Representation and accountability in water governance in the Upper Comoeacute

sub-basin Burkina Faso Natural Resources Forum 40 6ndash20

Rothman J (1996) The Interweaving of Community Intervention Approaches Journal of

Community Practice 3(3ndash4) 69ndash99 httpsdoiorg101300J125v03n03_03

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) (1996) The Report of the Royal

Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) Canada Communication Group

httpswwwbac-lacgccaengdiscoveraboriginal-heritageroyal-commission-aboriginal-

peoplesPagesfinal-reportaspx

Sawe B E (2017 August) Who are the Anishinaabe People

httpswwwworldatlascomarticleswho-are-the-anishinaabe-peoplehtml

Sax J L (1970) The public trust doctrine in natural resource law Effective judicial

intervention Michigan Law Review 68(3) 471ndash566

Schein L (2007) Diasporic Media and HmongMiao Formulations of Nativeness and

Displacement In M De La Cadena amp O Starn (Eds) Indigenous Experience Today

(chapter 8) Berg

Schwandt TA (1994) Constructivist Interpretivist Approaches to Human Inquiry In

Denzin NK amp Lincoln YS (Eds) The Landscape of Qualitative Research Theories

and Issues (pp 221ndash240) Sage Publications

Schwartz S H amp Bilsky W (1987) Toward A Universal Psychological Structure of Human

Values Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53(3) 550ndash562

Schwartz S H amp Bilsky W (1990) Toward a Theory of the Universal Content and

Structure of Values Extensions and Cross-Cultural Replications Journai of Personality

and Social Psychology 58(5) 878ndash891

Sen A (1999) Development as Freedom Anchor Books

231

Sen A (2009) The Idea of Justice Harvard University Press

Sepulveda C (2018) Our Sacred Waters Theorizing Kuuyam as a Decolonial Possibility


Shapiro A (2018 February 13) Privatization Risk and Rewards

httpswwwwatercanadanetfeatureprivatization-risk-and-rewards

Simms G amp de Loeuml R C (2010) Challenges for Water Governance in Canada A

Discussion Paper (Governance for Source Water Protection in Canada Report No 2)

Water Policy and Governance Group

Simms R Harris L Joe N amp Bakker K (2016) Navigating the tensions in collaborative

watershed governance Water governance and Indigenous communities in British

Columbia Canada Geoforum 73 6ndash16

Simpson L B (2011) Dancing on Our Turtlersquos Back Stories of Nishnaabeg Re-Creation

Resurgence and a New Emergence (Kindle Edition) Arbeiter Ring Publishing

Simpson L B (2014) Land as pedagogy Nishnaabeg intelligence and rebellious

transformation Decolonization Indigeneity Education amp Society 3(3) 1ndash25

Simpson L B (2017) As We Have Always Done Indigenous Freedom through Radical

Resistance University of Minnesota Press httpsdoiorg105749jctt1pwt77c

Simpson L R (2004) Anticolonial Strategies for the Recovery and Maintenance of

Indigenous Knowledge American Indian Quarterly 28(34) 373ndash384

Smith L T (2012) Decolonizing Methodologies Research and Indigenous Peoples (2nd

Kindle edition ed) Zed books

Sproule-Jones M Johns C M amp Heinmiller B T (2008) Canadian Water Politics

Conflicts and Institutions McGill-Queenrsquos University Press

Statistics Canada (2016) New Credit (Part) 40A (Indian reserve) Ontario [Map]

Statistics Canada (2017) Focus on Geography Series 2016 Census Statistics Canada

Catalogue no 98-404-X2016001 Ottawa Ontario Data products 2016 Census

httpswww12statcangccacensus-recensement2016as-safogs-spgFacts-csd-

engcfmLANG=EngampGK=CSDampGC=3529021

Statistics Canada (2018) Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation [First NationIndian

band or Tribal Council area] Ontario (table) Aboriginal Population Profile (2016

232

Census Statistics Canada Catalogue no 98-510-X2016001 Ottawa) Released July

18 2018 httpswww12statcangccacensus-recensement2016dp-

pdabpopprofdetailspagecfmLang=EampGeo1=ABampCode1=2016C1005158ampData=Cou

ntampSearchText=Mississaugas20of20the20New20Credit20First20NationampSe

archType=BeginsampB1=AllampGeoLevel=PRampGeoCode=2016C1005158ampSEX_ID=1ampAGE

_ID=1ampRESGEO_ID=1

Statistics Canada (2020) Table 17-10-0005-01 Population estimates on July 1st by age

and sex httpsdoiorg10253181710000501-eng

Stavenhagen R (1994) Indigenous Rights Some Conceptual Problems In W J Assiens amp

A J Hoekema (Eds) Indigenous Peoplersquos Experience with Self-Government Vol

IWGIA Document No 76 (pp 9ndash30) IWGIA

Supreme Court of Canada (1996) R v Van der Peet No 23803 (August 21 1996)

httpsscc-csclexumcomscc-cscscc-cscenitem1407indexdo

Supreme Court of Canada (2014) Tsilhqotrsquoin Nation v British Columbia No 34986 (June

2014) httpsscc-csclexumcomscc-cscscc-cscenitem14246indexdo

Sutton-Brown C A (2014) Photovoice A Methodological Guide Photography and Culture

7(2) 169ndash185 httpsdoiorg102752175145214X13999922103165

Sylvain R (2002) ldquoLand water and truthrdquo San identity and global indigenism American

Anthropologist 104(4) 1074ndash1085

Taylor C Appiahk AK Habermas J Rockefeller S Walzer M amp Wolf S (1994)

Multiculturalism Examining the Politics of Recognition (Kindle) Princeton University

Press

The First Nations Information Governance Centre Ownership Control Access and

Possession (OCAPTM) The Path to First Nations Information Governance May 2014

(nd) Ottawa The First Nations Information Governance Centre May 2014

The Ontario Federation of Indian Friendship Centres (2012) USAI Research Framework

Utility Self-Voicing Access Inter-Relationality (1st edition) Ontario Federation of Indian

Friendship Centres

233

The Westway Law Group (2018) Specific Claims and Special ClaimsmdashJustice Hennessy

Restoule v Canada (Attorney General) httpswestawaylawcaspecific-claims-and-

special-claims

Tisdell J G (2003) Equity and social justice in water doctrines Social Justice Research

16(4) 401ndash416

TLATOKAN ATLAHUAK DeclarationmdashDeclaration of the Indigenous Peoples Parallel Forum

of the 4th World Water Forum (2006)

httptribalinknewsblogspotcom200609tlatokan-atlahuak-declaration-4thhtml

Todd Z (2018) Refracting the State Through Human-Fish Relations Fishing Indigenous

Legal Orders and Colonialism in NorthWestern Canada Decolonization Indigeneity


Trigger D S amp Dalley C (2010) Negotiating indigeneity Culture identity and politics

Reviews in Anthropology 39(1) 46ndash65

Tripp D (2005) Action research A methodological introduction Educacao e Pesquisa

31(3) 443ndash466

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015a) Truth and Reconciliation

Commission of Canada Calls to Action Truth and Reconciliation Commission of

Canada httpwwwtrccaassetspdfCalls_to_Action_English2pdf

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015b) What We Have Learned

Principles of Truth and Reconciliation

Tuck E amp Yang K W (2012) Decolonization is not a metaphor Decolonization

Indigeneity Education amp Society 1(1) 1-40

Turner C (2016) Jacques Derrida Deconstruction

httpscriticallegalthinkingcom20160527jacques-derrida-deconstruction

Union of Ontario Indians (2020) Anishinabek Nation httpswwwanishinabekcawho-we-

are-and-what-we-do

United Nations (nd-a) Indigenous Peoples at the United Nations Department of Economic

and Social Affairs Indigenous Peoples

httpswwwunorgdevelopmentdesaindigenouspeoplesabout-ushtml

234

United Nations (nd-b) International Decade for Action ldquoWater for Liferdquo 2005-2015 United

Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs (UNDESA)

httpswwwunorgwaterforlifedecadebackgroundshtml

United Nations (2008) United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

United Nations httpswwwunorgesasocdevunpfiidocumentsDRIPS_enpdf

United Nations Development Program (1997) Governance for sustainable human

development A UNDP policy documentmdashGood governance ndash and sustainable human

development United Nations Development Programme

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (2003) Indigenous

Peoples Kyoto Water Declaration Third World Water Forum Kyoto Japan

Van der Heijden J (2020 January) Systems thinking and regulatory governance (2) The

evolution of systems thinking From the Regulatory Frontlines Mapping Exploring and

Interrogating the State-of-the Art in Regulatory Practice

httpsregulatoryfrontlinesblog20200105systems-thinking-and-regulatory-

governance-2-the-evolution-of-systems-thinking_ftn5

Verdeja E (2017) Political reconciliation in postcolonial settler societies International

Political Science Review 38(2) 227ndash241 httpsdoiorg1011770192512115624517

von der Porten S (2012) Canadian Indigenous Governance Literature A Review


httpsdoiorg101177117718011200800101

von der Porten S amp de Loeuml R C (2013) Collaborative approaches to governance for

water and Indigenous peoples A case study from British Columbia Canada Geoforum

50 149ndash160

von der Porten S amp de Loeuml R C (2014) Water policy reform and Indigenous governance

Water Policy 16(2) 222ndash243

von der Porten S de Loeuml R amp Plummer R (2015) Collaborative Environmental

Governance and Indigenous Peoples Recommendations for Practice Environmental


235

Walkem A (2007) The Land Is Dry Indigenous Peoples Water and Environmental

Justice In K Bakker Eau Canada The future of Canadarsquos water (pp 303ndash324) UBC

Press

Watts B (2018) Governance In The Royal Canadian Geographical SocietyCanadian

Geographic (Ed) Indigenous Peoples Atlas of Canada Canadian Geographic

httpsindigenouspeoplesatlasofcanadacaarticlegovernance

Watts V (2013) Indigenous place-thought amp agency amongst humans and non-humans

(First Woman and Sky Woman go on a European world tour) Decolonization

Indigeneity Education amp Society 2(1) 20ndash34

Waziyatawin A W amp Yellow Bird M (Eds) (2005) For Indigenous eyes only A

decolonization handbook School of American Research Press

Weiss C H (1995) Nothing as Practical as Good Theory Exploring Theory-based

Evaluation for Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families In J P

Connell A C Kubisch L B Schorr amp C H Weiss New Approaches to Evaluating

Community Initiatives Concepts Methods and Contexts (pp 65-92) The Aspen

Institute

White C (2015) Understanding water markets Public vs Private goods Global Water

Forum httpsglobalwaterforumorg20150427understanding-water-markets-public-

vs-private-goods

White J P Murphy L amp Spence N (2012) Water and Indigenous peoples Canadarsquos

paradox International Indigenous Policy Journal 3(3) 1ndash25

Whyte K P (2013) On the role of traditional ecological knowledge as a collaborative

concept A philosophical study Ecological Processes 2(7) 1ndash12

httpsdoiorg1011862192-1709-2-7

Wiesenfeld E (1996) The concept of ldquowerdquo A community social psychology myth Journal

of Community Psychology 24(4) 337ndash346

Wilson D D amp Restoule J-P (2010) Tobacco Ties The Relationship of the Sacred to

Research Canadian Journal of Native Education 33(1) 29ndash45

Wilson N J (2014) Indigenous water governance Insights from the hydrosocial relations of

the Koyukon Athabascan village of Ruby Alaska Geoforum 57 1ndash11

236

Wilson N J amp Inkster J (2018) Respecting water Indigenous water governance

ontologies and the politics of kinship on the ground Environment and Planning E

Nature and Space 1(4) 516ndash538 httpsdoiorg1011772514848618789378

Wilson S (2001) What Is an Indigenous Research Methodology Canadian Journal of

Native Education 25(2) 175ndash179

World Bank (2020 October) Indigenous Peoples

httpswwwworldbankorgentopicindigenouspeoples

Woodburn J (1982) Egalitarian Societies Man New Series 17(3) 431ndash451


Wyatt K C (2009) ldquoRejoicing in this unpronounceable namerdquo Peter Jonesrsquos authorial

identity Papers of the Bibliographical Society of Canada 47(2) 153ndash176

Wybenga D (nd) Rights Responsibility and Respect MIssissaugas of New Credit First

Nation

Wybenga D amp Dalton K (2018) Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation Past and

Present Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation httpmncfncawp-

contentuploads201810MississaugasoftheNewCreditFirstNation-PastPresentBooklets-

PROOFv4-1pdf

Wyile H (2017) Towards a Genealogy of Reconciliation in Canada Journal of Canadian

Studies 51(3) 601ndash635

Yancey W L Ericksen E P amp Juliani R N (1976) Emergent Ethnicity A Review and

Reformulation American Sociological Review 41(3) 391


Yarra River Protection (Wilip-Gin Birrarung Murron) Act 2017 (No 49 Of 2017)mdashSect 73

httpwww5austliieduauaulegisvicnum_actyrpbma201749o2017600s73html

Yazzie M K amp Baldy C R (2018) Introduction Indigenous peoples and the politics of

water Decolonization Indigeneity Education amp Society 7(1) 1ndash18

Yinka Dene (2016a) Yinka Dene lsquoUzarsquohneacute Surface Water Management Policy (version 41)

httpwwwcarriersekanicaimagesdocsYinka20Dene2027Uzah27ne20Surfa

ce20Water20Management20Policy20(March2018202016)20(00303183x

C6E53)pdf

237

Yinka Dene (2016b) Yinka Dene lsquoUzarsquohneacute Guide to Surface Water Quality Standardsrsquo

version 41)

httpwwwcarriersekanicaimagesdocsYinka20Dene2027Uzah27ne20Guid

e20to20Surface20Water20Quality20Standards20(March2018202016)

20(00303157xC6E53)pdf

Zwarteveen M Z amp Boelens R (2014) Defining researching and struggling for water

justice Some conceptual building blocks for research and action Water International

39(2) 143ndash158

238

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Summary of institutional water governance arrangements in Canada

The Canadian constitution gives the federal government jurisdictional powers over water

resources with regards to fisheries (section 9112) navigation (section 9110) federal

lands (Section 108) and international boundary waters (section 132) (Sproule-Jones et

al 2008) Federal water legislation including the Canada Water Act the Federal Water

Policy the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the Impact Assessment Act all

provide for formal consultation and agreements between different departments and levels

of government (Sproule-Jones et al 2008 and Government of Canada 2020d) The

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) currently provides an annual

forum for federal and provincial Environmental Ministers to engage on environmental

policy issues inclusive of water resource management (Sproule-Jones et al 2008)

CCME activities related to water management are primarily achieved through multilateral

or bilateral agreements87 between provincial governments andor federal and provincial

governments (Sproule-Jones et al 2008)

Water located in the 10 provinces other than on federally owned land or subject to

Aboriginal rights falls under the constitutional authority of the provinces de jure of the

Canadian Constitution Act 1982 section 109 (Sproule-Jones et al 2008) and for Yukon

and the Northwest Territories through the Devolution Transfer Agreements (Government

of Canada 2013a b)

87 eg Canada Ontario Great Lakes agreement with regards to boundary waters the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines in 1987 which are applied according to provincial water quality standards The Canada Wide Accord on Environmental Harmonization the Master Agreement on Apportionment for the Prairie waters and the Mackenzie River Basin Trans-boundary Waters Master Agreement (Sproule-Jones et al 2008)

239

Provincial-specific water legislation which evolved since the 1950s views water as a

resource to be protected for economic growth human health and environmental

sustainability (Sproule-Jones et al 2008) In Ontario specifically the context of this

doctoral research relevant legislations include the Ontario Water Resources Act Ontario

Environmental Protection Plan Nutrient Management Act Safe Drinking Water Act

Clean Water Act Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act Lakes and Rivers

Improvement Act Ontariorsquos Environmental Assessment Act the Environmental Bill of

Rights (Canadian Environmental Law Association 2012) and the Provincial Policy

Statement (PPS) under the Planning Act (Ontario 2020) Ontario also enacted since

1946 36 Conservation Authorities which are ldquolocal watershed management agencies

mandated to ensure the conservation restoration and responsible management of

Ontarios water land and natural habitats through programs that balance human

environmental and economic needsrdquo (Conservation Ontario 2020a para 1) They

currently operate under Conservation Ontario and are largely responsible to their

jurisdictional municipalities within their watershed boundaries (Conservation Ontario

2020b)

The role of municipalities in water is not constitutionally defined (Simms and de Loeuml 2010)

yet many provinces delegated their water pollution managements function in response to

the Environmental Protection Act to municipalities (Sproule-Jones et al 2008)

Water allocation rights88 are included under the provinces domain and since the 1970rsquos

introduced water-taking and diversion regulations and established water licensing and

88 Water allocation rights used in this context refers to the ldquolegal permission to withdraw or divert water Withdrawing water refers to the water taking where the water is returned to or kept within the same watershed whereas water diversion is used when water is transferred from a watershedrdquo (Christensen and Lintner 2007 p 220)

240

monitoring regimes (Sproule-Jones et al 2008) The operation of these water allocation

rights by the provinces follows three allocation approaches the prior allocation system89

riparian rights90 and the Civil Code Management system91 (Christensen and Lintner

2007) All of these regimes are not inclusive of Aboriginal rights (Christensen and Lintner

2007) The territories operate under the public authority management regime

(Christensen and Lintner 2007) in alignment with their devolution agreements if

applicable (Government of Canada 2013a b) Jackson et al (2012) explain that reform

of these very disparate water allocation systems brings to fore the public trust doctrine

which is based on Roman law This doctrine ldquoholds that certain interests are so

intrinsically important to every citizen that their free availability tends to mark the society

as one of citizensrdquo and that ldquocertain uses have a peculiarly public nature that makes their

adaptation to private use inappropriaterdquo and control of these interests are usually

assigned to the state ldquofor the general benefit of the communityrdquo (Sax 1970 p 485)

89 The prior allocation system is primarily based on the principle of first-in-time first-in-right (Christensen and Lintner 2007) 90 Riparian rights based on the British common law entitles the owner of land that borders on a surface water source to water access and use Traditionally this principle has applied to Ontario and the maritime provinces ndash Newfoundland and Labrador New Brunswick Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island (Christensen and Lintner 2007) 91 The Civil Code Management is based on the French common law which establishes the use of all water resources (surface and groundwater) as ldquocommon to allrdquo This practice is only applied in Quebec (Christensen and Lintner 2007)

241

Appendix 2 MCFNrsquos Creation Story - Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin

Seven Fires of Creation

The seven fires92 of Creation tell us that everything is interconnected as intricate systems

In this story Creation birthed life through the projection of first thought and heartbeat The

seven fires ie the stars the sun the moon movement seeds of life Earth and human

being grew in succession

The first Fire of Creation According to the Ojibwe Story the ldquoCreator made our world

from the darkness and our story is called the Seven Fires of Creation The first fire is the

first thought Creatorrsquos thoughts and heartbeat formed the starsrdquo (Gibson 2006 centre

insert)

The second Fire of Creation ldquoThe second fire of the Creation is the first fire -

Grandfathers Sunrdquo (Gibson 2006 centre insert)

The third Fire of Creation ldquoThe third fire of Creation is Twinness - Grandmother Moon-

giving us two sides to all thingsrdquo (Gibson 2006 centre insert)

The fourth Fire of Creation ldquoThe fourth fire of Creation is the First Movement-

Movement of our world is balanced by the four directionsrdquo (Gibson 2006 centre insert)


242

The fifth Fire of Creation ldquoThe fifth fire of Creation is the First Seed Seeds of life were

made from the basics of the first four stages of Creationrdquo (Gibson 2006 centre insert)

The sixth Fire of Creation ldquoThe sixth fire of Creation is the Earth the first woman to

birth the seeds of liferdquo (Gibson 2006 centre insert)

The seventh Fire of Creation

The seventh fire of Creation is the First Human Being - an image of the Creator

himself The Creator made man from the four parts of the Earth and gave him life

by blowing his breath into man through a Megis shell Creator lowered man to earth

along the Atlantic coast of North American then asked him to walk the earth and

to name all things Man learned of the physical and spiritual powers in things The

wolf later walked with original man and they learned the meaning of brotherhood

which exists among all of creation When man and wolf were asked to separate

Creator told them their lives would be similar (Gibson 2006 centre insert)

Based on the seven fires of Creation in Kiinwi Dabaadjmowin the guiding and

fundamental principle of Anishinaabe law is that MCFN as an Anishinaabe Nation are to

respect all of creation because everything is interconnected as intricate systems (Cathie

Jamieson personal communication November 2018)

243

Appendix 3 University of Guelph Research Ethics Board Approval

RESEARCH ETHICS BOARDS Certification of Ethical Acceptability of Research

Involving Human Participants

APPROVAL PERIOD November 10 2017

EXPIRY DATE November 9 2018

REB G

REB NUMBER 17-10-043

TYPE OF REVIEW Delegated

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Longboat Sheri

DEPARTMENT School of Environmental Design and Rural

Development

SPONSOR(S) NA

TITLE OF PROJECT Development of Mississaugas of New Credit

First Nation (MNCFN) Water Framework to

Indigenize Water Governance within Treaty

Lands and Territory

CHANGES

Type Date

Amendment 5-Mar-18

Amendment 11-Jun-18

The members of the University of Guelph Research Ethics Board have examined the protocol which describes the participation of the human participants in the above-named research project and considers the procedures as described by the applicant to conform to the Universitys ethical standards and the Tri-Council Policy Statement 2nd Edition

The REB requires that researchers

bull Adhere to the protocol as last reviewed and approved by the REB bull Receive approval from the REB for any modifications before they can

be implemented bull Report any change in the source of funding bull Report unexpected events or incidental findings to the REB as soon

as possible with an indication of how these events affect in the view of

the Principal Investigator the safety of the participants and the

continuation of the protocol

244

bull Are responsible for ascertaining and complying with all applicable

legal and regulatory requirements with respect to consent and the

protection of privacy of participants in the jurisdiction of the research

project

The Principal Investigator must

bull Ensure that the ethical guidelines and approvals of facilities or

institutions involved in the research are obtained and filed with the REB

prior to the initiation of any research protocols

bull Submit an Annual Renewal to the REB upon completion of the project

If the research is a multiyear project a status report must be submitted

annually prior to the expiry date Failure to submit an annual status

report will lead to your study being suspended and potentially

terminated

The approval for this protocol terminates on the EXPIRY DATE or the term of your appointment or employment at the University of Guelph whichever comes first

Signature Date June 11 2018

Stephen P Lewis

Chair Research Ethics Board-General

245

Appendix 4 Information Letter and Informed Consent Form for Key Informant Conversations

Information Letter and Informed Consent Form for Key Informants

Research Project Title Development of Mississaugas of New Credit First Nation

(MNCFN) Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance within Treaty Lands

and Territory

1 Background and purpose

In September of 2016 MNCFN filed an Aboriginal Title Claim to Waters within the

Treaty Lands and Territory of the Mississaugas of the New Credit (hereafter referred

to as the Water Claim) In response to this Water Claim a MNCFN Ganawenjigejik

Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) was constituted The purpose of

this joint research project between the MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin

Committee (Water Committee) and the University of Guelph is to engage with

MNCFN members about the Water Claim It aims to explore how members value

water and what would ownership of water within these lands entail The envisaged

outcome is the development of a MNCFN Water Framework as a possible and partial

Water Claim resolution

2 Joint research team

University of Guelph

Sheri Longboat (PhD Faculty)

Reneeacute Goretsky (PhD Candidate)

Should you have any questions

related to the research project please

246

Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee

(Water Committee)

Darin Wybenga (Chair Traditional

Knowledge and Land Use Coordinator

Department of Consultation and

Accommodation)

Kim Fullerton (Legal Counsel)

Cathie Jamieson (Band Councilor)

Fawn Sault (Consultation Manager


Accommodation)

Margaret Sault (Director Department of

Lands Research amp Membership)

Caron Smith (Environmental and Regulatory

Officer DOCA)

feel free to contact any of the

researchers below

Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga

(DarinWybengamncfnca)

Sheri Longboat

(slongboatuoguelphca)

3 What are you expected to do

It is expected that you as a research participant will contribute by sharing your

views on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework

You will be asked to respond to five conversation probes on

How important is water to you and why

What does the Water Claim mean to you

What does ownership of water within your Treaty Lands and Territory mean to

you

How are MNCFNrsquos water values and rights centrally included in water decision-

making processes ANDOR How do you think that MNCFNrsquos water values and

rights can be centrally included in water decision-making processes

247

What you want to see in the Water Framework

It is anticipated that this conversation would last about one hour

4 Benefits of participating

There will be no direct benefit to participants other than the opportunity to provide

valuable input into the development of the water framework

5 Possible discomforts due to this research project

We do not foresee any major discomforts resulting from this research project However

as a participant you may experience some emotions eg being worried anxious or upset

about sharing your views We will respect multidimensional views and all knowledges

shared are considered to be equally important

6 Voluntary participation and confidentiality

Your participation in the research is completely voluntary and you may stop participating

in the conversation at any time by letting the researcher know

Your name and other direct identifiable information (eg community positions titles) will

be held in confidence by the research team and will not appear in any research findings

unless you give us prior permission to do so

7 What will happen to the knowledge shared

Individual stories and direct quotes (indirect identifiable information) will be used and

acknowledged with your permission as the knowledge sharer Otherwise the shared

knowledge will be put together with other peoplersquos knowledge to look for common

meanings and interpretations (ie themes) ndash for your feedback

The research findings will be disseminated via community feedback theses reports and

publications

8 Withdrawal of your knowledge from the research project

You may choose to withdraw your knowledge from the project In the event that you

withdraw from the research you can opt to have all your knowledge shared to be

immediately removed before knowledge meaning and interpretation have begun (ie

before April 2018) If a request to remove knowledge shared occurs after the data analysis

started non-identifiable data and themes from your one-on-one conversation may remain

248

in the analysis and findings To withdraw your knowledge from the research please

contact Reneeacute Goretsky (rlerouxuoguelphca) or Darin Wybenga


9 Recording of activities

This activity will be audio recorded andor recorded in writing upon your consent and only

the research team members and the MNCFN Department of Consultation and

Accommodation will have access to these recordings The recordings will be transcribed

into typed format

10 Knowledge Usage and Storage

The knowledge shared by you will only be used for this research project All original

written typed and audio recordings will be stored in locked cabinets or on password

secured computers at the MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation

They will be retained until the end of the research project (estimated for September 2019)

after which they will be destroyed unless you grant your approval for the MNCFNrsquos

Department of Consultation and Accommodation to securely retain all original written

typed and audio recordings in perpetuity for future research and decision making Should

you want to withdraw these recordings from the Department of Consultation and

Accommodation in the future please contact Darin Wybenga


11 Questions about the Research

If you have questions about the conversation andor research in general or about your

role in it please feel free to contact Reneeacute Goretsky (rlerouxuoguelphca 647

9737754) or Darin Wybenga the MNCFN Traditional Knowledge and Land Use

Coordinator (DarinWybengamncfnca)

12 Ethics Endorsements

This project has been reviewed by the

MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) for

acceptable MNCFN research protocols Any queries can be directed to Darin

249

Wybenga the Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Coordinator


And

Research Ethics Board of the University of Guelph for compliance with federal

guidelines for research involving human participants If you have any questions

regarding your rights and welfare as a research participant in this research (please

quote REB 17-10-043) please contact the Director Research Ethics University of

Guelph rebuoguelphca 519-824-4120 ext 56606

13 Legal rights

You do not waive any legal rights by agreeing to take part in this research

14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality

Do you grant the research team permission to use your

direct identifiable information (eg names community

positions titles) in community feedbacks theses

reports and publications

Use of Individual Stories and Direct Quotes (Indirect

Identifiable information)


individual stories and direct quotes in community

feedbacks theses reports and publications

Recording of activities

Do you grant the research team permission to record the

activity through

Audio modes

Written modes

Knowledge Usage and Storage

250

Yes No

Do you grant the MNCFNrsquos Department of Consultation

and Accommodation to securely retain all original

written typed and audio recordings of the knowledge

you shared with the research team in perpetuity for

future research and decision making

Permission to (re)contact you

Do you grant the research team permission to

re(contact) you for transcript accuracy and should

further clarity be required

Do you grant MNCFN Department of Consultation and

Accommodation permission to contact you should future

related projects emerge

15 Agreement to participate

You are agreeing to participate in this research as outlined above by signing this hard

copy informed consent form

Participantrsquos Details

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

Assumed consent (oral or through culturally accepted ways) will be recorded by the

researcher should it not be appropriate or possible for you to sign this document

251

Appendix 5 Schedule One-on-One Key-Informant Conversations Schedule with MNCFN Adult members

The conversation will follow an engaged approach There are five guiding probes with

some possible expanding probes

Guiding probe 1 How important is water to you and why

Possible expanding probes

What are your wants and needs in relation to water

How do your life principlesvalues affect the way you see and think about water

In your parents and grandparents time how did they think aboutsee water (ie was

it different then to now)

How do you want your grand and great grand-children (seven generations into the

future) to think about and see water

Guiding Probe 2 What does the Water Claim mean to you

Guiding Probe 3 What does ownership of water within your Treaty Lands and

Territory mean to you


If so what does the word ownership mean to you and why

What would ownership of water imply

Are there other expressions that we could use and what would those be

Guiding Probe 4 How are MNCFNrsquos water values and rights centrally included (ie

Indigenized) in water decision-making processes (termed water governance)

These decisions affect the way that water is managed used and protected etc on

your Treaty Lands and Territory

ANDOR

252

If you agree that it should be how do you think that MNCFNrsquos water values and

rights can be centrally included (ie Indigenized) in water decision-making

processes (termed water governance)


If you do what do you think ofhow do you understand the terms water governance

and Indigenize

The use of language can sometimes be confusing and ambiguous Are there

alternative wayswordslanguages that you (would rather) use to think about

How decisions are made about water

Should we make decisions about water and

How you see MNCFNrsquos water values and rights regarded as being central on your

Treaty Lands and Territory

Given that our intention is to develop a Water Framework which is a possible resolution

as part of the Water Claim

Guiding Probe 5 What you want to see in the Water Framework

Possible expanding probe

What other resolutions do you think are possible

253

Appendix 6 Information Letter and Informed Consent Form for Adult Group Discussions

Information Letter and Informed Consent Form for Adult Group Discussions


(MNCFN) Water Framework to Indigenize Water Governance within Treaty Lands and

Territory


In September of 2016 MNCFN filed an Aboriginal Title Claim to Waters within the Treaty

Lands and Territory of the Mississaugas of the New Credit (hereafter referred to as the

Water Claim) In response to this Water Claim a MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi

Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) was constituted The purpose of this joint

research project between the MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee

(Water Committee) and the University of Guelph is to engage with MNCFN members

about the Water Claim It aims to explore how members value water and what would

ownership of water within these lands entail The envisaged outcome is the development

of a MNCFN Water Framework as a possible and partial Water Claim resolution





Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin

Committee (Water Committee)

Should you have any questions related to

the research project please feel free to

contact any of the researchers below

Reneeacute Goretsky

rlerouxuoguelphca

Darin Wybenga

DarinWybengamncfnca

254




Accommodation)



Julie LaForme (Acting Director

Department of Lands Research amp

Membership)



Accommodation)

Margaret Sault (Band Councilor)

Caron Smith (Environmental and

Regulatory Officer DOCA)

Sheri Longboat



It is expected that you as a research participant will contribute by sharing your views in

a group setting on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework

The group will be asked to respond to four discussion probes on



What does ownership of water within your Treaty Lands and Territory mean to you


It is anticipated that this discussion would last about one hour and 30 minutes


There will be no direct benefit to participants other than the opportunity to provide input

255








in the group discussion at any time by leaving the room




By participating in this activity you agree to keep these discussions and participant

information confidential You acknowledge and accept that the research team cannot

guarantee that your confidentiality will be retained because you will essentially be

speaking in public







publications


Unfortunately knowledge shared during group activities cannot be withdrawn due to the

integrated nature of discussions


This activity will be audio recorded ONLY if all the participants agree to this recording

Only the researchers and the MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation

will have access to this recording Written recordings (eg poster notes) will be made of

the discussions The recordings will be transcribed into typed format

256


The knowledge shared by the MNCFN members will only be used for this research

project All original written typed and audio recordings will be stored in locked cabinets

or on password secured computers at the MNCFN Department of Consultation and

Accommodation They will be retained until the end of the research project (estimated for

September 2019) after which they will be destroyed unless you grant your approval to the

MNCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation to securely retain all original

written typed and audio recordings in perpetuity for future research and decision making

Should you want to withdraw these recordings from the Department of Consultation and




If you have questions about the group discussion andor research in general or about

your role in it please feel free to contact Reneeacute Goretsky (rlerouxuoguelphca 647









And






257

13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality












activity through audio modes









re(contact) you should further clarity be required




258





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________



Researcherrsquos Details if not signed by participant (ie verbal consent provided or

culturally accepted consent provided)

Notes

_________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

259

Appendix 7 Group Discussion with MNCFN Adult members Guiding Probes

Guiding Probe 1 How important is water to you and why




Possible expanding probes to consider






Guiding Probe 4 What do you want to see in the Water Framework

Possible expanding probe to consider


260

Appendix 8 Information Letter and Informed Consent Form MNCFN Youth Group

Information Letter and Informed Consent Form

MNCFN Youth Group



Territory




Water Claim- see enclosed factsheet for more information) In response to this Water

Claim a MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) was

created The purpose of this joint research project between the MNCFN Ganawenjigejik

Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) and the University of Guelph is to

engage with MNCFN members about the Water Claim It aims to explore how members

value water and what would ownership of water within your lands entail The envisaged


Water Claim resolution Although there will be no direct benefit to you for being part of

this group activity you will have the opportunity to provide valuable input into the

development of this Water Framework


The joint research team is comprised of the following people

261





Committee




Accommodation)





Accommodation)








Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga

(DarinWybengamncfnca) and

Sheri Longboat




a group activity which will be led by Mrs Reneeacute Goretsky (a PhD candidate at the

University of Guelph)

You will be asked to illustrate through joint artwork your responses to two questions

Why is water important to you

What would you do to protect water for now and in the future

We will then discuss this artwork and as we go along poster notes will be made of these

discussions which will be converted into typed format

262

4 Informed Consent

With your permission photos of this group activity may be taken Your name will be

held in confidence by the joint research team and will not appear in any research

findings Photos will be identified by age group Given this and that you will be

participating in an open group activity the research team cannot guarantee that your

confidentiality will be retained

The artwork and shared knowledge will be analysed for common meanings and

interpretations (ie themes) by the group Your contributions to the artwork created

and knowledge shared during the group activity cannot be withdrawn due to the

combined nature of these interactions The research findings will be made available

via community feedbacks including displays theses reports and publications

You will be given an opportunity to ask any questions throughout this activity Your

participation in this group activity is completely voluntary Should you wish to stop

participating in this group activity at any time you can do so by leaving the room

We do not foresee any major discomforts resulting from you participating in this group

activity However as a participant you may experience some emotions eg being

worried anxious or upset about sharing your views There are no right or wrong

answers and that different ideas are important and to be respected We may also stop

the group activity at any time if we perceive it is in the grouprsquos best interest

The knowledge shared and the artwork created by this group will only be used for this

research project All original written and typed recordings photos and digital copies

of the artworks will be stored in locked cabinets or on password secured computers

at the MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation They will be retained

until the end of the research project (estimated for September 2019) after which they

will be destroyed unless you grant your approval to the MNCFNrsquos Department of

Consultation and Accommodation to securely retain all original written and typed

recordings photos and digital copies of the artwork in perpetuity for future research

and decision making Should you have any concerns about this policy please contact

263

the Department of Consultation and Accommodation Mr Darin Wybenga


If you have questions about the overall research please feel free to contact Mrs Reneeacute

Goretsky (rlerouxuoguelphca 647 9737754) or Mr Darin Wybenga the MNCFN

Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Coordinator (DarinWybengamncfnca)






And



regarding your childrsquos rights and welfare as a research participant in this research

(please quote REB 17-10-043) please contact the Director Research Ethics

University of Guelph rebuoguelphca 519-824-4120 ext 56606


5 Prior Consents

Yes No

Permission to take and use photos for this research

project

Do you grant the research team permission to take and

use photos of you participating in this group activity in

dissemination materials (ie community feedbacks

including displays theses reports and publications) of

this research project




264

Yes No

written and typed recordings photos and digital copies

of the artworks of the knowledge you shared with the

research team in perpetuity for future research and

decision making





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

Oral consent will be recorded by the researcher should it not be appropriate or possible

for you to sign this document

Researcherrsquos Details if not signed by participant (ie oral consent provided)

Notes -

______________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

265

Appendix 9 Group Activity Schedule with MNCFN Youth Group

Reneeacute will start the group activity with a water acknowledgement

Reneeacute will explain the projectrsquos purpose the informed consent process and what is

about to happen in this group activity

Reneeacute will facilitate the discussions on simple and related probesquestions as follows



The scholars will be asked to do artwork in relation to the two questions above They will

then participate in a group discussion where they will be asked to talk about their artwork

in relation to water

266

Appendix 10 Parental Information Letter Class Lesson on Water at Lloyd S King Elementary School

Contacts for queries Reneeacute Goretsky (rlerouxuoguelphca 647 9737754) Dr Sheri Longboat (slongboatuoguelphca) or Darin Wybenga (DarinWybengamncfnca)

Parental Information Letter Class Lesson on Water at Lloyd S King Elementary

School

Dear ParentLegal Guardian

Your child(ren) will be participating in a class lesson on (date) which forms part of a joint


(Water Committee) and the University of Guelph This research project aims to look at

MNCFNrsquos water rights and water values needs and aspirations in support of a MNCFN

filed Aboriginal Title Claim to Waters within the Treaty Lands and Territory of the

Mississaugas of the New Credit (see enclosed factsheet) Although there will be no direct

benefit to your child(ren) for being part of this class lesson heshethey will have the

opportunity to provide valuable input into the development of a Water Framework as a

possible Water Claim resolution

This class lesson led by Reneeacute Goretsky (a PhD student) and co-facilitated by the

class teacher will acknowledge lsquoWater as Lifersquo After the lesson is explained to your

child(ren) heshethey will be involved in creating artwork in relation to two questions 1)

Why is water important to you and 2) What would you do to care forprotect water for

now and in the future A sharing circle will follow which will be captured on poster notes

Principles to be followed for this lesson include

Photos may be taken but will only be used where parents have granted the school

prior permission to disseminate their child(ren)rsquos photos Your child(ren)rsquos name will

not be disseminated in any research findings There is a risk though of your child(ren)

being identified by name because of the use photos in research findings and that your

child(ren) will be participating in an open class lesson

Given the combined nature of these interactions you cannot withdraw your child(ren)rsquos

contributions and the shared knowledge will be analysed for common themes by age

267

group which will be made available via community feedback and academic

publications

Your child(ren) will be given an opportunity to ask any questions throughout this

lesson

Although we do not foresee any major discomforts resulting from this class lesson

your child(ren) may experience some emotions eg being worried about sharing

hishertheir views Reneeacute will explain that there are no right or wrong answers Reneeacute

may also stop the class lesson at any time if she perceives it is in the classrsquo best

interest

The classrsquo contributions will only be used for this research project All original written

and typed recordings photos and digital copies of the artwork will be stored in

perpetuity in locked cabinets or on password secured computers at the MNCFN

Department of Consultation and Accommodation for future research and decision

making

If you have any questions about this class lesson and your child(ren)rsquos participation in

it please contact the school principal H Danielle MacDonnell OCT at Tel 905-768-

3222

This project has been reviewed by the MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin

Committee and the Research Ethics Board of the University of Guelph for compliance

with federal guidelines for research involving human participants If you have any

questions regarding your child(ren)rsquos rights and welfare as a research participant in

this research (please quote REB 17-10-043) please contact the Director Research

Ethics University of Guelph rebuoguelphca 519-824-4120 ext 56606

Sincerely

Darin Wybenga

Water Committee Chair

268

Appendix 11 LSK Elementary School Class Lesson Script (35 minutes)

Time allocation 1 5-8 minutes

Reneeacute will introduce herself I am Reneeacute and I am studying Water Management at

the University of Guelph I am from South Africa and I have been in Canada for just

over 25 years (so you will hear a funny accent)

Reneeacute will acknowledge Water as Life by having water present in a glass bowl

Reneeacute will explain the Water Claim purpose The purpose of this class lesson today

is for you to share your ideasthoughts for your rights and the importance of water on


Reneeacute will explain what is expected of the class

o I am asking you to think about two questions Why is water important to you

And What would you do to care forprotect water for now and in the future

[She will have these two questions on poster boards so that the students can

clearly read the questions in addition to her reading them aloud]

o What we are asking you to do is to create art on how you think about these

questions ie create a drawing use some of the stickers etc that I have

provided here [She will hand out prepared sheets with both questions spatially

separated to the scholars and have available a variety of artwork supplies for

each child in bags] You can work alone or in pairshellip you can decide

o We will then allow you share something about your artwork if you feel

comfortable

o We will also be taking photos Reneeacute will introduce a photographer (Allen

Goretsky her husband who is a professionally trained photographer) or she will

take the photos herself if this is not approved by the school or UoG REB

o At the end we will collect the artwork to take photos of them but we will return

them to you so donrsquot forget to write your name on the back of the sheet

o Please let me or your teacher know if you have any questions throughout this

class lesson

269

Time allocation 2 10 minutes

The scholars will be given the opportunity to create their artwork

Reneeacute will remind the scholars to write their names on the back of the sheets so that

they can be returned to them


Reneeacute will ask the scholars to form a circle on the floormats in the classroom if

appropriate

She will say

If you feel comfortable you can say something short (one sentence) about your artwork I

will make poster notes as you go along

o We are all here to learn and experience so remember that there are no wrong or

right answers just share what you think and feel if you want

Sharing circle held

Reneeacute will end the class lesson by thanking the scholars and the school teachers

270

Appendix 12 MNCFN Water Framework Survey

Information and Informed Consent Letter

As an adult (over the age of 18) band member of the Mississaugas of New Credit

First Nation (MNCFN) you are invited to participate in a survey as part of a joint research

project on the lsquoDevelopment of MNCFN Water Framework to Indigenize Water

Governance within Treaty Lands and Territory In September of 2016 an Aboriginal Title

Claim to Waters within your Treaty Lands and Territory was filed (hereafter referred to as

the Water Claim) The purpose of this joint research project between the Ganawenjigejik


obtain your valuable input into the development of this Water Framework as a possible

and partial Water Claim resolution Respondents who submit survey responses will be

entered into a random draw for a chance to win a C$500 visa gift card Only one entry is

allowed per respondent into the draw and the probability of winning is dependent on the

number of survey responses received The draw will take place on Friday 21 September

2018 and only the winner will be notified

This survey will take you approximately 20 minutes to complete Your participation

in this survey is completely voluntary you can skip any question you would prefer not to

answer and you may stop at any time It is based on preliminary research findings

emerging from interviews and focus group discussions with a small number of MNCFN

members Hence these members are asked NOT to complete the survey because your

views are already recorded

We ask you to rate these findings with regards to


The meaning of the Water Claim to you


271

The survey also provides you with an opportunity to submit your own views and

understandings There are no right or wrong answers Different and multidimensional

views will be respected with equal importance

We request some basic demographic information which will allow us to obtain a

broad profile of respondents and to contextualize your survey responses Towards the

end of the survey we request your name and contact information for entry into the random

draw and to confirm your band membership Your name and contact details will be held

in confidence by the research team unless you give us prior permission to use your name

in the research findings Direct quotes will be used and acknowledged with your

permission as the knowledge sharer The shared knowledge will be put together with

other peoplersquos knowledge to look for common meanings and interpretations (ie themes)

The research findings will be disseminated via community feedback (scheduled for late

2018) theses reports and publications

You may choose to withdraw your knowledge from the project In the event that

you withdraw from the research you can opt to have all your knowledge shared to be


before August 2018) If a request to remove knowledge shared occurs after the data

analysis started non-identifiable data and themes from your survey response may remain





survey responses will be stored in locked cabinets or on password secured computers at

the MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation (DOCA) They will be

retained until the end of the research project (estimated for September 2019) after which

they will be destroyed unless you grant your approval for DOCA to securely retain your

survey response in perpetuity for future research and decision making Should you want

to withdraw your survey response from DOCA in the future please contact Darin Wybenga



272

MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) for acceptable

MNCFN research protocols Any queries can be directed to Darin Wybenga the


And

Research Ethics Board of the University of Guelph for compliance with federal guidelines

for research involving human participants If you have any questions regarding your rights

and welfare as a research participant in this research (please quote REB 17-10-043)

please contact the Director Research Ethics University of Guelph rebuoguelphca

519-824-4120 ext 56606

You do not waive any legal rights by agreeing to take part in this research You are

agreeing to participate in this research as outlined above by completing and submitting

the survey

The surveyrsquos closing date is Tuesday 31 July 2018 at 5pm

Prior Consents

Yes No

1 Do you grant the research team permission to use your name ie direct identifiable information in community feedbacks theses reports and publications

o o 2 Do you grant the research team permission to use your direct quotes in community feedbacks theses reports and publications o o 3 Do you grant the MNCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation to securely retain all original survey responses of the knowledge you shared with the research team in perpetuity for future research and decision making

o o

4 Do you grant MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation permission to contact you should future related projects emerge

o o

273

Demographics Your age in years is

o Under 18

o 18 - 35

o 36 - 55

o 55 or older

o Prefer not to say

o Not sure With which gender do you identify

o Male

o Female

o Transgender

o Two-Spirited

o Other _____________________________________________________

o Prefer not to say Where do you live Indicate where you live for more than 50 of your time You can select more than one option if the choices are equally weighted

On New Credit Reserve

On another First Nation Reserve

Off reserve

Other

274

Questions 1 How would you rate the following five statements on the importance of water to you

Important In between

Unimportant I dont knowNot applicable

1) I use it eg to drink to cook to clean for recreation and gardening o o o o 2) It keeps plants animals and humans alive o o o o 3) It has economic benefits eg energy industrial and food productions

o o o o 4) It is part of our culture I use it for canoeing fishing hunting etc o o o o 5) It has spiritual meaning to me I see water as spirit and water has life

o o o o Do you have any other reasons for the importance of water to you Please expand

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

2 What does the Water Claim mean to you Select all the options that apply These options are based on preliminary research findings

Reclaiming our Treaty and Inherent rights

Regulating-having a say voice and decision-making powers

Rediscovering and Reconnecting with our culture

Other (please expand below) Do you have any other options to addsuggested changes to make to these options

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

275

3 Based on your response(s) to the previous question how much do you agree that the Water Claim is about reconciliation

o Agree

o In between

o Disagree

o Dont knowNot applicable Do you have any suggestions for what the Water Claim could mean

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

4 How strongly do you agree that the following 10 goals should be included in the Water Framework A Water Framework will be developed based on this research as a possible and partial Water Claim resolution

276

Do you have any other goals to addsuggested changes to the above goals

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

5 Are there any specific implementation actions that you would like to see in the Water Framework

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

Agree Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree Dont knowNot applicable

1) For us to have unhindered (free easy and rightful) access to water bodies on our Treaty Lands and Territory

o o o o 2) For all people to meaningfully acknowledge and recognize water and our water values on our Treaty Lands and Territory

o o o o 3) For us to strategically advocate lobby and position our Treaty and Inherent rights to water o o o o 4) For us to be directly actively and seriously consulted and accommodated on all activities relating to water on our Treaty Lands and Territory

o o o o 5) For all people to be actively and respectfully involved in the protection conservation and remediation of the water

o o o o 6) For us to vibrantly live and have knowledge about our responsibilities to the water based on our Anishinaabe teachings

o o o o 7) For us to revive and integrate Anishinaabe teachings and traditions in our community o o o o 8) For us to benefit economically so that we can sustain ourselves into the future o o o o 9) To have sufficient and appropriate resources (eg people and funding) and structures (eg committees task teams) in place to manage implement and evaluate the Water Framework

o o o o

10) To have appropriate and ongoing education awareness and communication activities about the Water Framework

o o o o

277

________________________________________________________________ 6 Do you have any general comments

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

Name and Contact Details Compulsory fields for your entry into the random draw and to confirm your band membership Your name and contact details will be held in confidence by the research team unless you give us prior permission to use your name in the research findings Name ________________________________________________ Email ________________________________________________ Telephone number ________________________________________________ Band registry number ________________________________________________

Thank you for completing the survey Please enclose your completed survey into the self-addressed and pre-paid envelope provided and post it to MNCFNrsquos Department of Consultation and Accommodation by the closing date (31 July 2018)

278

Appendix 13 Information Letter and Consent Form Interviews with Conservation Authorities

For any questions please contact University of Guelph researchers Reneeacute Goretsky (rlerouxuoguelphca) and Dr Sheri Longboat (slongboatuoguelphca) MNCFN Darin Wybenga

(DarinWybengamncfnca) Information Letter

In September 2016 the Mississaugas of New Credit First Nation filed an Aboriginal

Title Claim to Waters within their Treaty Lands and Territory (hereafter referred to as the

Water Claim) In support of this Water Claim a joint research team consisting of the

MNCFN Ganawenjigejik Niibi Bimaadiziwin Committee (Water Committee) and the

University of Guelph engaged with MNCFN members to develop a Water Framework as

a possible and partial Water Claim resolution This Water Framework is based on MNCFN

values needs and aspirations to water

The purpose of this engagement with you is to understand current water governance

policies processes and practices on MNCFN Treaty Lands and Territory (see enclosed

map) You will be asked questions relating to three core areas on

bull Water governance principles and structures within your organizationrsquos jurisdiction

bull Your organizationrsquos current consultations and accommodations with First Nations

bull Foreseeable challenge areas and transformation opportunities with regards to

MNCFNrsquos Water Claim

It is anticipated that this interview would last about one hour

Informed Consent Form

Your participation in the research is completely voluntary and you may stop

participating in the interview at any time by letting the University of Guelph researcher

(Reneeacute) know

There will be no direct benefit to you as a participant other than the opportunity to

provide valuable input into the feasibility of implementing this Water Framework

279

Your name and other direct identifiable information (eg job positions titles) will be

held in confidence by the University of Guelph researchers (Reneeacute and Sheri) and will

not appear in any research findings unless you give them prior permission to do so

Should you provide the University of Guelph researchers with permission to use your

identifiable information and you share critical contentious and diverse opinions it

could cause the risk of social conflict

If you wish to remain confidential the University of Guelph researchers will attempt to

reduce any risk of your confidentiality and privacy being breached by codifying the

knowledge you share with them immediately after the knowledge collection

You may also feel some emotional discomforts due to sensitive and conflictual topics

discussed We will respect multidimensional views and all knowledges shared are

considered to be equally important The main purpose is to find ways to move forward

for reconciliation




meanings and interpretations (ie themes) if applicable

The research findings will be disseminated via MNCFN community feedback theses






analysis started non-identifiable data and themes from your interview may remain in

the analysis and findings To withdraw your knowledge from the research please

contact Reneeacute (rlerouxuoguelphca)

This activity will be audio recorded andor recorded in writing upon your consent and

only the University of Guelph researchers will have access to these recordings The

recordings will be transcribed into typed format

280


written typed and audio recordings will be stored in locked cabinets or on encrypted

computer drivers in the office of Dr Sheri Longboat University of Guelph They will be

retained until the end of the research project (estimated for September 2019) after

which they will be destroyed

This component of the project has been reviewed by the Research Ethics Board of

the University of Guelph for compliance with federal guidelines for research involving

human participants If you have any questions regarding your rights and welfare as a

research participant in this research (please quote REB 17-10-043) please contact

the Director Research Ethics University of Guelph rebuoguelphca 519-824-4120

ext 56606


Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality

Do you grant the University of Guelph researchers

permission to use your direct identifiable information

(eg names positions titles) in MNCFN community





permission to use your individual stories and direct

quotes in community feedbacks theses reports and

publications



permission to record the activity through

Audio modes

281

Yes No

Written modes



permission to re(contact) you for transcript accuracy and

should further clarity be required

Agreement to participate




Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

282

Appendix 14 Semi-structured Interview Schedule - With Canadian Water Management Authorities

Question 1

What are the water governance principlesframeworks within your organizationrsquos

jurisdiction on MNCFNrsquos Treaty Lands and Territory

Probes

What laws policies and regulations exist that you are bounded by with regards to

water quantity and quality management

Question 2

What are the water governance structures within your organizationrsquos jurisdiction on

MNCFNrsquos Treaty Lands and Territory

Probes

What are the high-level and decision-making water governance structures within your

organizationrsquos jurisdictional area

Question 3

How does your organization currently consult with and accommodate First Nations

Probes

Do you consult with all First Nations bands within your organizationrsquos jurisdictional

area

To what extent does your organization consult with First Nations

To what extent does your organization accommodate First Nationsrsquo needs

Reneeacute will explain the meaning of the Water Claim to the Canadian water

governance authorities (ie the interviewees) based on the preliminary research

findings as per Fig 1 below

283

Fig 1 Meaning of the Water Claim based on preliminary research findings with

MNCFN community

Question 4

What do you see as foreseeable challenge areas and transformation opportunities with

regards to MNCFNrsquos Water Claim

Probes

The MNCFN Water Claim is claiming ownership of the water its waterbeds and

resources within the water How do you see their claim of water ownership

What do you think that their water claim would mean for the provincial

Ministryconservation authorities

How can the laws policies and regulations be modified to accommodate the needs of

MNCFN and First Nations

How can MNCFN be beneficiaries of the water economy

How can MNCFNrsquos water values be central in decision making

284

Appendix 15 Research Team Agreement

Research Team Agreement for the Research Project on the

lsquoDevelopment of a Mississaugas of New Credit First Nation Band Water Agenda to

inform Indigenous Water Governance Frameworksrsquo93

I ___________________________________________________________________

the undersigned

of _______________________________________________________ (affiliation ie

UoG or MNCFN Water Committee) agree to

Retain the privacy and confidentiality of all research participants by not revealing

anyonersquos name or personally identifying information to third parties unless prior

permission is granted

Not use the knowledge gathered in the research for any reason other than for the

purpose of this research project unless prior permission is granted

Inform the team of all possible conflicts of interest in a timely manner so that they can

be appropriately managed and

Not use my position as a research team member for the benefit of myself and my family

or any other beneficiary who is not part of the research

THUS DONE AND SIGNED AT

________________________________________________ on this

________________ day of _________________________________________2017

______________________________________________

SIGNATURE

93 The agreements were signed in early October 2017 The project title was slightly modified since then but the agreements were still valid

ABSTRACT

INDIGENIZING WATER GOVERNANCE WITHIN TREATY LANDS AND TERRITORY DEVELOPMENT OF MISSISSAUGAS OF THE CREDIT FIRST NATION WATER

FRAMEWORK

Reneeacute Goretsky

University of Guelph 2021

Advisors

Dr Sheri Longboat

Dr Kim Anderson

Professor John FitzGibbon

This research asked lsquohow can water governance be Indigenized within a social justice

frameworkrsquorsquo in response to Canadian water governance injustices for Indigenous

peoples It applied this question to the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nationrsquos (MCFN)

need for developing a water framework to Indigenize water governance within its treaty

lands and territory as a partial resolution to its 2016 Water Claim (Aboriginal Title Claim

to Waters within the Traditional Lands of the Mississaugas of the New Credit)

Through an emergent MCFN context-specific research methodology adapted from

Kovachrsquos Indigenous research framework this research explored MCFNrsquos water values

and how they related to MCFNrsquos Water Claim to develop a water framework and it aimed

to decolonize constructs of social justice and western water governance

Using qualitative community-based participatory research methods the key findings

underpinned by a literature-based conceptual framework were 1) MCFNrsquos water values

were multi-faceted and interdependent within plural and intersecting Indigenous identities















movements




relationships

iv

DEDICATION


v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS















vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ii

Dedication iv

Acknowledgements v


List of Tables x

List of Figures xi

List of Images xiii



1 Introduction 1

Research Problem 1











Social Justice 43


vii



MCFN Today 55



Creation Story 65



Self-location 70



Co-engagement 76





Research 84


perspectives 85

Research Methods 88





viii











Water Values 124












ix






















References 205

Appendices 238

x

LIST OF TABLES


Hall (2003) and OECD (2015) 15




land cessations 62






xi

LIST OF FIGURES









Great Lakes 53













to MCFN members 116





xii

















and territory 163












xiii

LIST OF IMAGES


xiv










UN United Nations




xv

LIST OF APPENDICES





Conversations 245




Discussions 253









Authorities 278




1

1 Introduction

Research Problem













Ontario (2008)









2












Bakker et al 2018)













3





















4











(MCFN nd-a)





5




















6














a)











7





Water Claim







the Water Framework




engaged research











8




Thesis Organization
























9










10

2 Literature Review









Framework














11











in












12
























13
























14
























15


Baldy 2018)
















16


























17















18











19



















Grand 2003)






20







2003)



















21



























22




political entity













(UN nd-a para 2)




23




















by including



24



















(Karlsson 2001)






25

























of development


26



























27


























28




















Indigenous peoples

Primordialism





29
































30


























31

























32
























33











(p 496)







34











and settings
















35





Appendix 1



















Loeuml 2010)


36






























37


























38




























39














resolutions








40




















41







2017)























42



2018)





















43

Social Justice


states




(p 117)

















44


























45




























46

















22

47



















48


justice

























49








being and doing

Chapter Conclusions








governance









within context

50












51


52
























53


54














55
















MCFN Today






Banai 2010)


56














57


























58

























59






















60

























61






















62


Treaty Name














Treaty 22 (1820)


(1820)

63






















(Wyatt 2009)



64






















65


Creation Story






2011)


















66







Prophecy


















67


2006 centre insert)





centre insert)
















68












location 515)






Chapter Conclusions





69







(see chapters 5-7)

70






Self-location


















71


water


















in section 43

72














and acceptable ways













73




2017)






research
















74


















75















76






















the research

Co-engagement





77
























78


the research team























79









2013)










80


p 55)




















81



















82


























83


























84








to the water

















85




42


perspectives




















86











calls for











Figure 42

87




3




88

Research Methods




they agreed to























research

89




























90


91









May to August 2018





92














where applicable











93



for diversity




















94


























95







MCFN Elders Group 7



5


0









and








ones

96














School students










97























98




















99

























100























101








and





level









102























103














governance










meeting in May 2018

104

























105


knowledge gathered






















findings

106

























107
















process






108




















(see p 104)



generalizations





109











110

5 MCFN Water Values





















111















King Green)





112










King Green)









113













and plants







114






(Mark La Forme)









Dalton)






115






116




artwork activities


117






118





connections (58)


members N = 24

96

96

71

58

67

0 20 40 60 80 100 120








119




















120



earth















achieve wellness





121
















122









(paras 1-2)



123
























124
























125

















King)



126





as relayed below




(Anonymous)

















127



















128













Rowe)









129


(Carolyn King)



their identities


















130


being lived








Dalton)












131















water peoplerdquo






132























can do morerdquo

133






















134





















135






















136











Chapter Conclusions









137











this







participants


138

























139





(Eric Sault)
















140






















141






















142













is explored below

143


Healing Ourselves











144






















145






















146




















147







62 and Figure 63)


148







ways of life



149









(Garry Sault)















150























151























152










Dalton)












meanings

153












2

8

13

20

- 5 10 15 20 25

Other





154










(Table 61)


155





say


Female 30 63 63 63

Male 14 14 64 64

18-35 7 86 71 43

gt35lt55 18 39 72 83

gt55 19 42 53 58

















156












25

67

100

100

67

75

40

73

50

100

33

100

50

100

60

55

50

100

67

67

75

40

45

50

0 50 100 150 200 250 300















157






















158
















Chapter Conclusions









159








dimensional

160


























Reportpdf

161

























162







following











unpublished p 6)

163







164

Legend


96

92

96

96

83

79

79

88

92

96

0 20 40 60 80 100

Goal 1

Goal 2

Goal 3

Goal 4

Goal 5

Goal 6

Goal 7

Goal 8

Goal 9

Goal 10


Agree

Disagree



Left Blank

165


















166


167





















168






















169


























170






institutions













are transformed




171












172
























173























174















42

38

12

8


175





















176















(Koggel 2018)











recognized

177


























178


perspective








and














179





traditions


Water Claim



















180















- 1 2 3 4 5 6


Regulations

Land ownership


Stewardship

Restoration


Revenue

Recreational use

Water quality


Policy planning

Monitoring



Wat

er M

anag

emen

t R

ole

s

181























182
























183


lengthy process











together as one









184








(Nancy Rowe)













185



2 p 47)



















186







and structures

Chapter Conclusions


















187










legal traditions










188




























189



























190


to ensure this























191










framework)















192

























193
























194



























195









studies






communities






196


























197
























198



















conversations


199

























200














the REB application












201




















process


202


this research

203


























204

























205

REFERENCES









11ndash17










Minnesota Press










206





























Minnesota Press

207






















Columbia Press







208



httpsdoiorg1010801028258020151057704












httpsdoiorg101007978-3-319-42806-2_15








httpdxdoiorg1010800894192020151080339








209













httpsdoiorg10108008941920802098198





Publishing 101007978-3-319-42806-2



water










210







Press




0542201100815x



59



Berg










1html


15htmldocCont

211

















Law 26(1) 1ndash22












105-119) Routledge

212















httpsdoiorg1011771747016117733296















213







19










httpsdoiorg1010801654495120181507387


2008(52) 127ndash135





Toronto Press



Datasets 1ndash6




214


httpsdoiorg101177160940690600500107



























215









httpsdoiorg1011771177180118785382






Foundation Inc










cirnacgccaeng11001000156771571589339246






216


cirnacgccaeng13524709940981535467403471



cirnacgccaeng13523984331611539625360223

























217


cirnacgccaeng13524717707231537900871295



cirnacgccaeng11001000302911539617582343


cirnacgccaeng11001000322751529354547314


cirnacgccaeng11001000285741529354437231













httpsdoiorg1011771525822X05279903








218





US









00184-w





httpsdoiorg1010800790062720181431526



httpsdoiorg101007s10464-009-9229-9



httpsdoiorg10108000380237200010571154




mississaugas

219





















1982




275indexhtml


5160991rsc-1985-c-i-5html



government

220





indigenization


skill Routledge


Convention


MENT_ID312314




httpsdoiorg101080146493572013845684










httpsdoiorg1011771086026612462378




221



httpsdoiorg1011771558689806298224








03225-150112



httpsdoiorg101080135498392013870542

















222





15(4) 370ndash381


Chicago Press






httpsdoiorg10108007078552200311827132


















223






Publications Inc









httpsdoiorg1011770192512116681808



University











nations-ontario

224









664










Publishers






lands-of-mncfn




225








purchase-treaty-14
















507





httpsdoiorg1043249780203119235-12

226











Nations Governance



httpsdoiorg101016S0149-7189(98)00042-1




Publishing












227





924 httpsdoiorg1010801464936520181528628


Guilford Press





137



elief_newpdf
















228








02-14pdf


httpsdoiorg101177000169937802100204











Publications










229












449ndash462




413ndash434




Publications



httpsdoiorg1031090142159X2013804977






1018584iipj2017826

230





















(chapter 8) Berg










231































232






_ID=1ampRESGEO_ID=1
















Press






Friendship Centres

233



special-claims


16(4) 401ndash416










31(3) 443ndash466











are-and-what-we-do




234




















httpsdoiorg101177117718011200800101



50 149ndash160






235



Press













Institute



vs-private-goods





httpsdoiorg1011862192-1709-2-7







236













Nation




PROOFv4-1pdf













C6E53)pdf

237


version 41)



20(00303157xC6E53)pdf



39(2) 143ndash158

238

APPENDICES



















of Canada 2013a b)


239
















2020b)







240















241










insert)








242


















243






REB G





Development

SPONSOR(S) NA




Lands and Territory

CHANGES

Type Date

Amendment 5-Mar-18

Amendment 11-Jun-18








244




project









terminated



Stephen P Lewis


245





and Territory


















246


(Water Committee)




Accommodation)





Accommodation)




Officer DOCA)


researchers below

Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga


Sheri Longboat




views on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework





you




247























publications







248








into typed format





















249



And






13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality












activity through

Audio modes

Written modes


250

Yes No

















Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________



251























ANDOR

252






and Indigenize












253





Territory




















Reneeacute Goretsky

rlerouxuoguelphca

Darin Wybenga

DarinWybengamncfnca

254




Accommodation)





Membership)



Accommodation)




Sheri Longboat




a group setting on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework









255















speaking in public







publications









256























And






257

13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality

























258





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________





Notes

_________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

259















260



MNCFN Youth Group



Territory
















261





Committee




Accommodation)





Accommodation)








Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga


Sheri Longboat











262

4 Informed Consent




























263











And







5 Prior Consents

Yes No


project









264

Yes No




decision making





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________




Notes -

______________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

265











266




School
























267


publications


lesson





interest





making



3222







Sincerely

Darin Wybenga


268





















comfortable







class lesson

269







appropriate

She will say





Sharing circle held


270


























271































272




And





519-824-4120 ext 56606



the survey


Prior Consents

Yes No



o o


o o

273


o Under 18

o 18 - 35

o 36 - 55

o 55 or older

o Prefer not to say


o Male

o Female

o Transgender

o Two-Spirited

o Other _____________________________________________________




Off reserve

Other

274







________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________






________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

275


o Agree

o In between

o Disagree


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


276


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________









o o o o


o o o o

277


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________



278






















(Reneeacute) know



279













for reconciliation

















280











ext 56606


Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality










publications




Audio modes

281

Yes No

Written modes









Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

282


Question 1



Probes



Question 2



Probes



Question 3


Probes


area






283


MNCFN community

Question 4



Probes









284





I ___________________________________________________________________

the undersigned













________________________________________________ on this

________________ day of _________________________________________2017

______________________________________________

SIGNATURE
















movements




relationships

iv

DEDICATION


v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS















vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ii

Dedication iv

Acknowledgements v


List of Tables x

List of Figures xi

List of Images xiii



1 Introduction 1

Research Problem 1











Social Justice 43


vii



MCFN Today 55



Creation Story 65



Self-location 70



Co-engagement 76





Research 84


perspectives 85

Research Methods 88





viii











Water Values 124












ix






















References 205

Appendices 238

x

LIST OF TABLES


Hall (2003) and OECD (2015) 15




land cessations 62






xi

LIST OF FIGURES









Great Lakes 53













to MCFN members 116





xii

















and territory 163












xiii

LIST OF IMAGES


xiv










UN United Nations




xv

LIST OF APPENDICES





Conversations 245




Discussions 253









Authorities 278




1

1 Introduction

Research Problem













Ontario (2008)









2












Bakker et al 2018)













3





















4











(MCFN nd-a)





5




















6














a)











7





Water Claim







the Water Framework




engaged research











8




Thesis Organization
























9










10

2 Literature Review









Framework














11











in












12
























13
























14
























15


Baldy 2018)
















16


























17















18











19



















Grand 2003)






20







2003)



















21



























22




political entity













(UN nd-a para 2)




23




















by including



24



















(Karlsson 2001)






25

























of development


26



























27


























28




















Indigenous peoples

Primordialism





29
































30


























31

























32
























33











(p 496)







34











and settings
















35





Appendix 1



















Loeuml 2010)


36






























37


























38




























39














resolutions








40




















41







2017)























42



2018)





















43

Social Justice


states




(p 117)

















44


























45




























46

















22

47



















48


justice

























49








being and doing

Chapter Conclusions








governance









within context

50












51


52
























53


54














55
















MCFN Today






Banai 2010)


56














57


























58

























59






















60

























61






















62


Treaty Name














Treaty 22 (1820)


(1820)

63






















(Wyatt 2009)



64






















65


Creation Story






2011)


















66







Prophecy


















67


2006 centre insert)





centre insert)
















68












location 515)






Chapter Conclusions





69







(see chapters 5-7)

70






Self-location


















71


water


















in section 43

72














and acceptable ways













73




2017)






research
















74


















75















76






















the research

Co-engagement





77
























78


the research team























79









2013)










80


p 55)




















81



















82


























83


























84








to the water

















85




42


perspectives




















86











calls for











Figure 42

87




3




88

Research Methods




they agreed to























research

89




























90


91









May to August 2018





92














where applicable











93



for diversity




















94


























95







MCFN Elders Group 7



5


0









and








ones

96














School students










97























98




















99

























100























101








and





level









102























103














governance










meeting in May 2018

104

























105


knowledge gathered






















findings

106

























107
















process






108




















(see p 104)



generalizations





109











110

5 MCFN Water Values





















111















King Green)





112










King Green)









113













and plants







114






(Mark La Forme)









Dalton)






115






116




artwork activities


117






118





connections (58)


members N = 24

96

96

71

58

67

0 20 40 60 80 100 120








119




















120



earth















achieve wellness





121
















122









(paras 1-2)



123
























124
























125

















King)



126





as relayed below




(Anonymous)

















127



















128













Rowe)









129


(Carolyn King)



their identities


















130


being lived








Dalton)












131















water peoplerdquo






132























can do morerdquo

133






















134





















135






















136











Chapter Conclusions









137











this







participants


138

























139





(Eric Sault)
















140






















141






















142













is explored below

143


Healing Ourselves











144






















145






















146




















147







62 and Figure 63)


148







ways of life



149









(Garry Sault)















150























151























152










Dalton)












meanings

153












2

8

13

20

- 5 10 15 20 25

Other





154










(Table 61)


155





say


Female 30 63 63 63

Male 14 14 64 64

18-35 7 86 71 43

gt35lt55 18 39 72 83

gt55 19 42 53 58

















156












25

67

100

100

67

75

40

73

50

100

33

100

50

100

60

55

50

100

67

67

75

40

45

50

0 50 100 150 200 250 300















157






















158
















Chapter Conclusions









159








dimensional

160


























Reportpdf

161

























162







following











unpublished p 6)

163







164

Legend


96

92

96

96

83

79

79

88

92

96

0 20 40 60 80 100

Goal 1

Goal 2

Goal 3

Goal 4

Goal 5

Goal 6

Goal 7

Goal 8

Goal 9

Goal 10


Agree

Disagree



Left Blank

165


















166


167





















168






















169


























170






institutions













are transformed




171












172
























173























174















42

38

12

8


175





















176















(Koggel 2018)











recognized

177


























178


perspective








and














179





traditions


Water Claim



















180















- 1 2 3 4 5 6


Regulations

Land ownership


Stewardship

Restoration


Revenue

Recreational use

Water quality


Policy planning

Monitoring



Wat

er M

anag

emen

t R

ole

s

181























182
























183


lengthy process











together as one









184








(Nancy Rowe)













185



2 p 47)



















186







and structures

Chapter Conclusions


















187










legal traditions










188




























189



























190


to ensure this























191










framework)















192

























193
























194



























195









studies






communities






196


























197
























198



















conversations


199

























200














the REB application












201




















process


202


this research

203


























204

























205

REFERENCES









11ndash17










Minnesota Press










206





























Minnesota Press

207






















Columbia Press







208



httpsdoiorg1010801028258020151057704












httpsdoiorg101007978-3-319-42806-2_15








httpdxdoiorg1010800894192020151080339








209













httpsdoiorg10108008941920802098198





Publishing 101007978-3-319-42806-2



water










210







Press




0542201100815x



59



Berg










1html


15htmldocCont

211

















Law 26(1) 1ndash22












105-119) Routledge

212















httpsdoiorg1011771747016117733296















213







19










httpsdoiorg1010801654495120181507387


2008(52) 127ndash135





Toronto Press



Datasets 1ndash6




214


httpsdoiorg101177160940690600500107



























215









httpsdoiorg1011771177180118785382






Foundation Inc










cirnacgccaeng11001000156771571589339246






216


cirnacgccaeng13524709940981535467403471



cirnacgccaeng13523984331611539625360223

























217


cirnacgccaeng13524717707231537900871295



cirnacgccaeng11001000302911539617582343


cirnacgccaeng11001000322751529354547314


cirnacgccaeng11001000285741529354437231













httpsdoiorg1011771525822X05279903








218





US









00184-w





httpsdoiorg1010800790062720181431526



httpsdoiorg101007s10464-009-9229-9



httpsdoiorg10108000380237200010571154




mississaugas

219





















1982




275indexhtml


5160991rsc-1985-c-i-5html



government

220





indigenization


skill Routledge


Convention


MENT_ID312314




httpsdoiorg101080146493572013845684










httpsdoiorg1011771086026612462378




221



httpsdoiorg1011771558689806298224








03225-150112



httpsdoiorg101080135498392013870542

















222





15(4) 370ndash381


Chicago Press






httpsdoiorg10108007078552200311827132


















223






Publications Inc









httpsdoiorg1011770192512116681808



University











nations-ontario

224









664










Publishers






lands-of-mncfn




225








purchase-treaty-14
















507





httpsdoiorg1043249780203119235-12

226











Nations Governance



httpsdoiorg101016S0149-7189(98)00042-1




Publishing












227





924 httpsdoiorg1010801464936520181528628


Guilford Press





137



elief_newpdf
















228








02-14pdf


httpsdoiorg101177000169937802100204











Publications










229












449ndash462




413ndash434




Publications



httpsdoiorg1031090142159X2013804977






1018584iipj2017826

230





















(chapter 8) Berg










231































232






_ID=1ampRESGEO_ID=1
















Press






Friendship Centres

233



special-claims


16(4) 401ndash416










31(3) 443ndash466











are-and-what-we-do




234




















httpsdoiorg101177117718011200800101



50 149ndash160






235



Press













Institute



vs-private-goods





httpsdoiorg1011862192-1709-2-7







236













Nation




PROOFv4-1pdf













C6E53)pdf

237


version 41)



20(00303157xC6E53)pdf



39(2) 143ndash158

238

APPENDICES



















of Canada 2013a b)


239
















2020b)







240















241










insert)








242


















243






REB G





Development

SPONSOR(S) NA




Lands and Territory

CHANGES

Type Date

Amendment 5-Mar-18

Amendment 11-Jun-18








244




project









terminated



Stephen P Lewis


245





and Territory


















246


(Water Committee)




Accommodation)





Accommodation)




Officer DOCA)


researchers below

Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga


Sheri Longboat




views on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework





you




247























publications







248








into typed format





















249



And






13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality












activity through

Audio modes

Written modes


250

Yes No

















Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________



251























ANDOR

252






and Indigenize












253





Territory




















Reneeacute Goretsky

rlerouxuoguelphca

Darin Wybenga

DarinWybengamncfnca

254




Accommodation)





Membership)



Accommodation)




Sheri Longboat




a group setting on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework









255















speaking in public







publications









256























And






257

13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality

























258





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________





Notes

_________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

259















260



MNCFN Youth Group



Territory
















261





Committee




Accommodation)





Accommodation)








Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga


Sheri Longboat











262

4 Informed Consent




























263











And







5 Prior Consents

Yes No


project









264

Yes No




decision making





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________




Notes -

______________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

265











266




School
























267


publications


lesson





interest





making



3222







Sincerely

Darin Wybenga


268





















comfortable







class lesson

269







appropriate

She will say





Sharing circle held


270


























271































272




And





519-824-4120 ext 56606



the survey


Prior Consents

Yes No



o o


o o

273


o Under 18

o 18 - 35

o 36 - 55

o 55 or older

o Prefer not to say


o Male

o Female

o Transgender

o Two-Spirited

o Other _____________________________________________________




Off reserve

Other

274







________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________






________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

275


o Agree

o In between

o Disagree


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


276


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________









o o o o


o o o o

277


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________



278






















(Reneeacute) know



279













for reconciliation

















280











ext 56606


Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality










publications




Audio modes

281

Yes No

Written modes









Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

282


Question 1



Probes



Question 2



Probes



Question 3


Probes


area






283


MNCFN community

Question 4



Probes









284





I ___________________________________________________________________

the undersigned













________________________________________________ on this

________________ day of _________________________________________2017

______________________________________________

SIGNATURE


iv

DEDICATION


v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS















vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ii

Dedication iv

Acknowledgements v


List of Tables x

List of Figures xi

List of Images xiii



1 Introduction 1

Research Problem 1











Social Justice 43


vii



MCFN Today 55



Creation Story 65



Self-location 70



Co-engagement 76





Research 84


perspectives 85

Research Methods 88





viii











Water Values 124












ix






















References 205

Appendices 238

x

LIST OF TABLES


Hall (2003) and OECD (2015) 15




land cessations 62






xi

LIST OF FIGURES









Great Lakes 53













to MCFN members 116





xii

















and territory 163












xiii

LIST OF IMAGES


xiv










UN United Nations




xv

LIST OF APPENDICES





Conversations 245




Discussions 253









Authorities 278




1

1 Introduction

Research Problem













Ontario (2008)









2












Bakker et al 2018)













3





















4











(MCFN nd-a)





5




















6














a)











7





Water Claim







the Water Framework




engaged research











8




Thesis Organization
























9










10

2 Literature Review









Framework














11











in












12
























13
























14
























15


Baldy 2018)
















16


























17















18











19



















Grand 2003)






20







2003)



















21



























22




political entity













(UN nd-a para 2)




23




















by including



24



















(Karlsson 2001)






25

























of development


26



























27


























28




















Indigenous peoples

Primordialism





29
































30


























31

























32
























33











(p 496)







34











and settings
















35





Appendix 1



















Loeuml 2010)


36






























37


























38




























39














resolutions








40




















41







2017)























42



2018)





















43

Social Justice


states




(p 117)

















44


























45




























46

















22

47



















48


justice

























49








being and doing

Chapter Conclusions








governance









within context

50












51


52
























53


54














55
















MCFN Today






Banai 2010)


56














57


























58

























59






















60

























61






















62


Treaty Name














Treaty 22 (1820)


(1820)

63






















(Wyatt 2009)



64






















65


Creation Story






2011)


















66







Prophecy


















67


2006 centre insert)





centre insert)
















68












location 515)






Chapter Conclusions





69







(see chapters 5-7)

70






Self-location


















71


water


















in section 43

72














and acceptable ways













73




2017)






research
















74


















75















76






















the research

Co-engagement





77
























78


the research team























79









2013)










80


p 55)




















81



















82


























83


























84








to the water

















85




42


perspectives




















86











calls for











Figure 42

87




3




88

Research Methods




they agreed to























research

89




























90


91









May to August 2018





92














where applicable











93



for diversity




















94


























95







MCFN Elders Group 7



5


0









and








ones

96














School students










97























98




















99

























100























101








and





level









102























103














governance










meeting in May 2018

104

























105


knowledge gathered






















findings

106

























107
















process






108




















(see p 104)



generalizations





109











110

5 MCFN Water Values





















111















King Green)





112










King Green)









113













and plants







114






(Mark La Forme)









Dalton)






115






116




artwork activities


117






118





connections (58)


members N = 24

96

96

71

58

67

0 20 40 60 80 100 120








119




















120



earth















achieve wellness





121
















122









(paras 1-2)



123
























124
























125

















King)



126





as relayed below




(Anonymous)

















127



















128













Rowe)









129


(Carolyn King)



their identities


















130


being lived








Dalton)












131















water peoplerdquo






132























can do morerdquo

133






















134





















135






















136











Chapter Conclusions









137











this







participants


138

























139





(Eric Sault)
















140






















141






















142













is explored below

143


Healing Ourselves











144






















145






















146




















147







62 and Figure 63)


148







ways of life



149









(Garry Sault)















150























151























152










Dalton)












meanings

153












2

8

13

20

- 5 10 15 20 25

Other





154










(Table 61)


155





say


Female 30 63 63 63

Male 14 14 64 64

18-35 7 86 71 43

gt35lt55 18 39 72 83

gt55 19 42 53 58

















156












25

67

100

100

67

75

40

73

50

100

33

100

50

100

60

55

50

100

67

67

75

40

45

50

0 50 100 150 200 250 300















157






















158
















Chapter Conclusions









159








dimensional

160


























Reportpdf

161

























162







following











unpublished p 6)

163







164

Legend


96

92

96

96

83

79

79

88

92

96

0 20 40 60 80 100

Goal 1

Goal 2

Goal 3

Goal 4

Goal 5

Goal 6

Goal 7

Goal 8

Goal 9

Goal 10


Agree

Disagree



Left Blank

165


















166


167





















168






















169


























170






institutions













are transformed




171












172
























173























174















42

38

12

8


175





















176















(Koggel 2018)











recognized

177


























178


perspective








and














179





traditions


Water Claim



















180















- 1 2 3 4 5 6


Regulations

Land ownership


Stewardship

Restoration


Revenue

Recreational use

Water quality


Policy planning

Monitoring



Wat

er M

anag

emen

t R

ole

s

181























182
























183


lengthy process











together as one









184








(Nancy Rowe)













185



2 p 47)



















186







and structures

Chapter Conclusions


















187










legal traditions










188




























189



























190


to ensure this























191










framework)















192

























193
























194



























195









studies






communities






196


























197
























198



















conversations


199

























200














the REB application












201




















process


202


this research

203


























204

























205

REFERENCES









11ndash17










Minnesota Press










206





























Minnesota Press

207






















Columbia Press







208



httpsdoiorg1010801028258020151057704












httpsdoiorg101007978-3-319-42806-2_15








httpdxdoiorg1010800894192020151080339








209













httpsdoiorg10108008941920802098198





Publishing 101007978-3-319-42806-2



water










210







Press




0542201100815x



59



Berg










1html


15htmldocCont

211

















Law 26(1) 1ndash22












105-119) Routledge

212















httpsdoiorg1011771747016117733296















213







19










httpsdoiorg1010801654495120181507387


2008(52) 127ndash135





Toronto Press



Datasets 1ndash6




214


httpsdoiorg101177160940690600500107



























215









httpsdoiorg1011771177180118785382






Foundation Inc










cirnacgccaeng11001000156771571589339246






216


cirnacgccaeng13524709940981535467403471



cirnacgccaeng13523984331611539625360223

























217


cirnacgccaeng13524717707231537900871295



cirnacgccaeng11001000302911539617582343


cirnacgccaeng11001000322751529354547314


cirnacgccaeng11001000285741529354437231













httpsdoiorg1011771525822X05279903








218





US









00184-w





httpsdoiorg1010800790062720181431526



httpsdoiorg101007s10464-009-9229-9



httpsdoiorg10108000380237200010571154




mississaugas

219





















1982




275indexhtml


5160991rsc-1985-c-i-5html



government

220





indigenization


skill Routledge


Convention


MENT_ID312314




httpsdoiorg101080146493572013845684










httpsdoiorg1011771086026612462378




221



httpsdoiorg1011771558689806298224








03225-150112



httpsdoiorg101080135498392013870542

















222





15(4) 370ndash381


Chicago Press






httpsdoiorg10108007078552200311827132


















223






Publications Inc









httpsdoiorg1011770192512116681808



University











nations-ontario

224









664










Publishers






lands-of-mncfn




225








purchase-treaty-14
















507





httpsdoiorg1043249780203119235-12

226











Nations Governance



httpsdoiorg101016S0149-7189(98)00042-1




Publishing












227





924 httpsdoiorg1010801464936520181528628


Guilford Press





137



elief_newpdf
















228








02-14pdf


httpsdoiorg101177000169937802100204











Publications










229












449ndash462




413ndash434




Publications



httpsdoiorg1031090142159X2013804977






1018584iipj2017826

230





















(chapter 8) Berg










231































232






_ID=1ampRESGEO_ID=1
















Press






Friendship Centres

233



special-claims


16(4) 401ndash416










31(3) 443ndash466











are-and-what-we-do




234




















httpsdoiorg101177117718011200800101



50 149ndash160






235



Press













Institute



vs-private-goods





httpsdoiorg1011862192-1709-2-7







236













Nation




PROOFv4-1pdf













C6E53)pdf

237


version 41)



20(00303157xC6E53)pdf



39(2) 143ndash158

238

APPENDICES



















of Canada 2013a b)


239
















2020b)







240















241










insert)








242


















243






REB G





Development

SPONSOR(S) NA




Lands and Territory

CHANGES

Type Date

Amendment 5-Mar-18

Amendment 11-Jun-18








244




project









terminated



Stephen P Lewis


245





and Territory


















246


(Water Committee)




Accommodation)





Accommodation)




Officer DOCA)


researchers below

Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga


Sheri Longboat




views on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework





you




247























publications







248








into typed format





















249



And






13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality












activity through

Audio modes

Written modes


250

Yes No

















Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________



251























ANDOR

252






and Indigenize












253





Territory




















Reneeacute Goretsky

rlerouxuoguelphca

Darin Wybenga

DarinWybengamncfnca

254




Accommodation)





Membership)



Accommodation)




Sheri Longboat




a group setting on

your water values

the Water Claim

the Water Framework









255















speaking in public







publications









256























And






257

13 Legal rights


14 Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality

























258





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________





Notes

_________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

259















260



MNCFN Youth Group



Territory
















261





Committee




Accommodation)





Accommodation)








Reneeacute Goretsky

(rlerouxuoguelphca)

Darin Wybenga


Sheri Longboat











262

4 Informed Consent




























263











And







5 Prior Consents

Yes No


project









264

Yes No




decision making





Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________




Notes -

______________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

265











266




School
























267


publications


lesson





interest





making



3222







Sincerely

Darin Wybenga


268





















comfortable







class lesson

269







appropriate

She will say





Sharing circle held


270


























271































272




And





519-824-4120 ext 56606



the survey


Prior Consents

Yes No



o o


o o

273


o Under 18

o 18 - 35

o 36 - 55

o 55 or older

o Prefer not to say


o Male

o Female

o Transgender

o Two-Spirited

o Other _____________________________________________________




Off reserve

Other

274







________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________






________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________

275


o Agree

o In between

o Disagree


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


276


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________









o o o o


o o o o

277


________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________



278






















(Reneeacute) know



279













for reconciliation

















280











ext 56606


Prior Consents

Yes No

Confidentiality










publications




Audio modes

281

Yes No

Written modes









Name ______________________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

282


Question 1



Probes



Question 2



Probes



Question 3


Probes


area






283


MNCFN community

Question 4



Probes









284





I ___________________________________________________________________

the undersigned













________________________________________________ on this

________________ day of _________________________________________2017

______________________________________________

SIGNATURE


Indigenizing Water Governance within Treaty Lands and ...

Documents