As related in Vantage Points I, a Dakota band led by H’Damani moved to Turtle Mountain from Minnesota in 1862. The group was one of several Dakota settlements in Manitoba that the Canadian government considered “American Indians” and as such they were not included in the treaty process. That decision continues to be disputed today.
The government did how- ever make special provisions for the Dakota. By 1877 three re- serves were surveyed in Manitoba: Birdtail Creek, now Birdtail Sioux First Nation; Oak River, now Sioux Valley Dakota First Nation and Oak Lake, now Canupwakpa Dakota First Nation. H’Damani and his followers convinced the government to survey a 4th reserve: the smallest in Canadian history, to be established at Turtle Mountain—IR60.
While treaty signatories in western Canada were allocated reserves based upon 160 acres per family, the Dakota reserves were only 80 acres per family. In 1889 Indian Agent J.A. Markle, based in Birtle, raised the possibility of relocating H’damani’s band. He claimed that because the Turtle Mountain location was remote, it didn’t lend itself to “supervision.” The proximity to the US border was also considered to be a problem. The superintendent general agreed and noted that they should be moved to a location “where they would be looked after properly.”
For the next two decades Indian Affairs and their agents did everything in their power to close R60 and H’Damani and his followers resisted. In the end Indian Af- fairs prevailed and IR60 was closed in 1913. On May 11, 2000, the Canupawakpa Dakota First Nation re- quested that the Indian Claims Commission hold an inquiry into the Turtle Mountain IR60 surrender. The Canupawakpa Reserve is home to descendants of H’Da- mani’s band, and were supported in their claim by the Sioux Valley Dakota First Nation. In short, the Canupawakpa claim was that H’Damani and his band were improperly forced out of their home and not fairly compensated.
The commission re- viewed the history of the Dakota and examined the Canupawakpa contention that Indian Affairs had manipulated the process by which band members voted—they had selectively con- ferred eligibility on some and not on others, based on improper evidence of residency. They reviewed evidence of mismanagement and bad faith by Indian Affairs and its agents.
In 2003 The Indian Claims Commission issued their report. They concluded that: “Turtle Mountain IR60 was validly surren- dered in accordance with the pro- visions of the Indian Act and that Canada, as fiduciary in taking this surrender, conducted itself as a reasonable and prudent trustee.”
In effect...they followed the rules that existed at the time. They don’t seem to have addressed the real issue, that the rules themselves were the problem.
The board did recommend that the “Government of Canada recognize the historical connec- tion of the descendants of the Turtle Mountain Band to the lands once occupied by Turtle Mountain IR60 and, in particular, the lands taken up by the burial of their ancestors.”
They further recommended that the Government of Canada acquire an appropriate part of the lands once taken up as Turtle Mountain IR60, to be suitably designated and recognized for the important ancestral burial ground that it is.
Source:
Budd, Brian. “Unist’ot’en and the limits of reconciliation in Canada.” The Conversation. 2019.
Newspaper Clippings:
Nor’wester. Winnipeg. Nov 21, 1864. The Deloraine Times and Star. Deloraine. Jan 22, 1992. Photo: Teyana Neufeldhttp://theconversation.com/ unistoten-and-the-limits-of-reconciliation- in-canada-109704.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)
& Why it Matters
5 years ago Indigenous lead- ers from around the world began meeting to share experiences and embolden each other. What they had (and have) in common is that their human rights were (and are) restricted by colonial powers. In 2007 these meetings resulted in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which Canada re- fused to support for nearly a decade, but finally signed in 2016. UNDRIP set a standard for the treatment of Indigenous people worldwide. It's become a significant tool toward eliminating human rights violations against the planet's 370 million Indigenous People; assisting in com- bating discrimination and marginalization.
This history is important to the IR60 story because of the way the reserve land was annexed. UNDRIP was crafted, in part, to compel a government (whether federal or pro- vincial) to act honourably when negotiating with an Indigenous Nation. Article 10 says: “Indigenous Peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (the F-PIC provision) of the Indigenous Peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.”
