dickie Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 They lay claim to the land and they suckered a group to manage it. At our expense of course. That mean we have to replace trees in the case of them wanting to do a little logging? How about fish stocks? Do we re-stock on our dime once they've emptied the bowls? On second thought it is Racism. Reversed Racism. Difference is we won't fight back. You want examples of land claims, there are plenty on the books, past present and more coming down the pipe. Racist??? The natives don't want this land. The only thing they want is MONEY. 15-20 years ago the natives wanted ipperwash provincial park and the army land. The gov't gave it back to them and they absolutly trashed the whole area. They were dissappointed that they did not get a money settlement. When is enough enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Nelson Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 I certainly do not know a lot of the details but a lot of you guys are coming across racist in my view. Just my two cents. Stating facts isnt racist... Do your homework Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twocoda Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Dennys Dam is in need of repair and maintenance...contractors were hired to perform the tasks and the natives put a stop on the project because they werent notified...a detailed description and prints were to be sent to them for "review" at a cost of 20 thousand per day....when asked how long the "review" would take to perform the reply up to three or four months....so the Dam sits with no structural repairs or improvements....We can learn alot from the natives by standing up to OUR government instead of being led around like sheep and accepting the Cow Paddys they dish out for us to eat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 By offering crown land to the First Nations the govt has essentially paid for the treaty. The newly acquired land will be sold for cottaging. Wonder if the natives get the taxes? Seems yes. All utilities and right of ways also will have to pay the self-governing band. They would fully control the lands. Public parks and designated areas will remain public use.It would be a full transfer of land from Canada/Ontario to the Algonquins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskieman Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 This is a hot topic amongst most of my family , our great uncle was partly responsible for founding ad setting aside land for Algonquin Park , Alexander Swebert Kirkwood is surely spinning in his grave . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 The natives don't want this land. The only thing they want is MONEY. 15-20 years ago the natives wanted ipperwash provincial park and the army land. The gov't gave it back to them and they absolutly trashed the whole area. They were dissappointed that they did not get a money settlement. When is enough enough? I hear you on the enough is enough. They want both and will piss both away just like they do with just about everything else. Extortion comes in many forms. The most unfortunate aspect is and has always been that any benefits derived from such settlements rarely trickles down to the people that need it most. Their people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 and the count down begins... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskieman Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishindevil Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Well the thread will get locked because you can't speak the truth and that's sad !! Sometimes it needs to be said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerritt Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 I hope we can keep it together..... This is an important subject, a lot will be affected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushart Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm familiar with some of this I wonder if the "Wagons in a Circle gang" will be around when the truth comes out. Man some of what I read here is out there. Oh well passes the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskieman Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskieman Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 8,7,6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishindevil Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Both sides have valid points and issues but there is no way to discuss them without offending one side or the other !!!! There is too many unknown facts about this massive claim and I'm sure it will drag out forever anyways but like most big govt deals we need more info period not speculation!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushart Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Both sides have valid points and issues but there is no way to discuss them without offending one side or the other !!!! There is too many unknown facts about this massive claim and I'm sure it will drag out forever anyways but like most big govt deals we need more info period not speculation!!!! Bingo---voice of reason---Info will not be released for some time yet and right now it's "Speculation" and the more this pot gets stirred--the more it will stink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 actually, it shows how folks really feel about the issue. if that means it stinks, well, then that should tell you how folks feel about it. not that if folks dont agree, then their opinion, or feelings, stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookslav Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 (edited) Well that seems insane! Best quote of the thread LOL... It was the first thought that crossed my mind word for word Now this is a rather uninformed opinion here but I'll lay it out anyway. I don't get how these claims hold any merit anymore... Most were written, signed Bartered for or accepted LONG before I was born. Some if not most were agreed upon before my parents were born and yes even before our grand parents were born. I fail to understand how it is acceptable to NOW come out of the crowd, step forward and proudly lay claim to agreements that have been long past due or out dated by generations? Sure some of these deals were forced through, and some were simply bummed deals that natives accepted for menial things like whisky....so not to argue semantics but what’s come to pass is the past so let it go. If not we're opening Pandora’s box.... Maybe I should lay claim to property my family once owned in Poland which we lost when Germany occupied Europe? Sure I wasn't alive, my parents were not born yet but it was taken from my Grandparents under tyranny which they didn't agree to....so ya...I should be given back the land that now houses a city and make a mint off of some lease because its my birthright? If it sounds ridiculous thats because it is... This Particular claim is kinda Ludicrous in my opinion The basis of the claim is that they never ceded their rights through treaty and never sold or lost their territory through war. It was simply taken as part of Canadian territory when we were conceived....welcome to Canada eh? These claims were brought to the crown as being their territory since apparently 1772 via a petition...which the crown has denied being there is no documentation supporting the claim outside of the actual petitions. So its not a deal gone south, its not an agreement past due...its a simple claim for land not allowcated, given, settled, or occupied by the Algonquin band as home since Canada was a nation. Its simply a claim to past lands once occupied many generations ago. I guess thats fair? I say if one single person from 1772 can come out and raise their hand....well I guess I'd be inclined to support their claim. Maybe even some one from 1872???....what about say 1900??? no...maybe 1925....1930? Anyway you get my point C'mon now....enough is enough. Edited December 18, 2012 by Cookslav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oggie Posted December 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 I can see this landclaim being accepted in some form or another. I would likely accept the landclaim but as a taxpayer I'd want this agreement water tight. No more subsidies to the treatied group (or anyone claiming to be wronged by the treatied group). The Province of Ontario doesn't have the money to buy out the claim so they are going to offer high priced real estate as compensation. I just don't think ANY agreement can be watertight with the Court system we have. You never know how they're going to rule in First Nation cases. One of the problems will be who are the Algonquins? I know for a fact people who were card carrying status Algonquins are now being disqualified as Algonquins as the Land Claim comes to fruition. ie. they're cutting they're own people out of the pot of money! The idea being if you can disqualify half of the people on the First Nation list then you double the windfall for those that remain. Dan O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumma Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Let's get back to facts and not speculations on what is going to happen. Thanks Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskieman Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oggie Posted December 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 So let's sum it up! There WILL be a Landclaim Treaty. What we're trying to do is suggest how the Agreement can be most palatable. If you have a chance take a look at the various maps and information by following the link in the first post. Commenting here won't likely make too much difference. Writing your MP and MPP will make a difference. Talk to other outdoors people and make them aware of the proposed changes. This is a proposal so they are looking for adjustments/modifications etc. Thanks for any input you can provide. Dan O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRIFTER_016 Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Both sides have valid points and issues but there is no way to discuss them without offending one side or the other !!!! There is too many unknown facts about this massive claim and I'm sure it will drag out forever anyways but like most big govt deals we need more info period not speculation!!!! Been going on up here since the 70's and it's still no where near being resolved. And yes the claim area has been out and published that long too!!! I'm sure the claim there in Ontario's North East will be settled about the time, time travel becomes possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Worst countdown ever Randy haha Fact is, IF this proposal passes, probably not exactly as proposed, these lands will be fully in the Algonquin's control. In the proposal's document, "Canada and Ontario will be transferring land". Roads and some parks and publicly used areas will likely stay the same, but they will have sole jurisdiction over their land. It'll essentially be a country within a country. Interesting stuff. Like Dan said, if this concerns you, read the executive summary and review the maps. http://www.aboriginalaffairs.gov.on.ca/english/negotiate/algonquin/preliminary-draft-aip.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookslav Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Ya I read it...and then some...its lot of legal mumbo jumbo and jargin. Unfortunatly the bigger picture for me is the "right" of the claim and most other claims of this nature as well. It'll essentially be a country within a country. This pretty much sums it up and bothers me on many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 (edited) Keep in mind that this is only an Agreement-in-principle potentially going up for Ratification by the Algonquins in 2013. From the document: "Upon a successful Algonquin ratification vote, the final draft Agreement-in-Principle would be submitted to the Governments of Ontario and Canada for approval. Following such approval and signature, the Agreement-in-Principle would be a non-binding statement of the main elements of a settlement of the Algonquin Land Claim that would form the framework for future negotiations towards a Final Agreement. Negotiations leading to a Final Agreement could then begin. A Final Agreement would also need to be approved by the Algonquin of Ontario and by the Legislature of Ontario and the Parliament of Canada." Basically, this is the review process for the framework of the final proposal, with no set date. Lots of paperwork before this one gets completed. Now is the time to send in your comments to the negotiation teams... no matter where you stand on this issue. Edited December 18, 2012 by Rod Caster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts