rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Media Advisory: Supreme Court hears Grassy Narrows' legal case for Treaty rights and against clearcut logging

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca in its summer fundraiser today for as little as $1 per month!

RELEASE May 15, 2014

Supreme Court hears Grassy Narrows' legal case for Treaty rights and against clearcut logging

ON's new plan for clearcut logging at Grassy Narrows looms

Ottawa - Today the Supreme Court of Canada will hear Grassy Narrows' legal case for Treaty rights and against clearcut logging. The case challenges Ontario's jurisdiction to unilaterally award logging and mining licenses on a vast tract of Treaty 3 lands north of the English River (the Keewatin Lands). The case, called Keewatin v. MNR, has been winding its way through the courts for fourteen years.

In Treaty 3, signed in 1873, Canada promised to respect the right of the Ojibway to hunt and fish in their territory.

However, Ontario continues to plan for clearcut logging throughout Grassy Narrows' Territory that will seriously limit Grassy Narrows' rights, and has finalized a new 10 year Forest Management Plan for Grassy Narrows' Territory that includes numerous large clearcuts permitted by Ontario against Grassy Narrows' will.

The new plan was scheduled to take effect in April 2014, but has been delayed due to a request for environmental assessment and widespread opposition including by grassroots Grassy Narrows youth and Ontario Regional Chief Beardy.

"We hope the Supreme Court will agree that the original intent of our Treaty with Canada must be upheld to protect our way of life," said Chief Roger Fobister Sr. of Grassy Narrows.

Scientific studies indicate that clearcut logging in boreal watersheds often raises mercury levels in fish above the World Health Organization's advisable limit for human consumption.

Recent clearcut logging in Grassy Narrows' territory has likely deepened and prolonged the terrible impacts of mercury poison that began when a paper mill upstream in Dryden dumped 9,000 kg of mercury into Grassy Narrows' river between 1962 and 1970.

"Our community has suffered for too long from the impacts of industry imposed by Ontario on our people," said Joseph Fobister, one of the Grassy Narrows trappers who initiated the case. "We cannot allow industry to further damage our way of life and our health by poisoning our water and destroying the forests that we depend on."

In her 2011 ruling in favour of Grassy Narrows, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sanderson had harsh words for Ontario's approach to Treaty rights: "Ontario's approach to this litigation, while pleasantly civil, was strongly adversarial. Always focusing on its own proprietary rights, it downplayed the plain and clear reference in the Harvesting Clause to Canada. It characterized as a 'mistake' what I have found to be [the Treaty Commissioners'] deliberate attempt to protect the Harvesting Rights of the Ojibway..." [1603]

On March 18, 2013 The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned Justice Sanderson's ruling.

"The Supreme Court has an opportunity in this case to give the people of Grassy Narrows a real say in their future and breathe life into the promises made by the Crown in 1873," said Robert Janes, lawyer for Grassy Narrows. "All we are asking is that the courts recognize and affirm the duty that the federal government has to ensure that the promises it made to make peace with the Ojibway are truly honoured."


Joseph Fobister: 807-407-2745

Ramsey Hart: 613-298-4745

Robert Janes: 250.888.5269

More information: http://freegrassy.net/2014/05/11/grassyscc/


Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.