Food security of Indigenous Peoples in Canada

[jacee]

Indigenous Peoples in Canada did not give up their traditional ways of life voluntarily: Rather, the natural resources that sustained them we're destroyed by our industries, leaving them without safe local food sources and dependent on government 'handouts'.

This is a story not well known by Canadians. I hope this investigation by the United Nations will improve the quality of the national conversation about the factors contributing to impoverishment of Indigenous communities across Canada.

This is only one story ...

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/touch/business/story.html?id=6614807

The Grand Chief of the Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations opened consultations on food security at the Alexis Nakota Sioux Community School by talking about the nearby body of water elders called “God’s Lake.”

They would drink its waters, set nets for its six species of fish, and hunt the waterfowl and moose along its edges. But seepage from the small valley surrounding it — filled in recent decades with gas and agriculture, not far from enormous power plants — has changed that.

“As First Nations people, our lives have been altered because of industry,” Alexis said. “The lake is contaminated, although it looks beautiful so much so that the fish and wildlife officers have told our elders that we can only eat one fish a week from the lake.

Alexis’s comments on Sunday morning — about a growing economy, changing relationships with the land, and an epidemic of diabetes — opened a meeting between local aboriginal communities and the United Nations Specia Rapporteur on the right to food. It’s the first time since the office’s 2000 inception that a developed country has had its food security scrutinized, provoked in part by a group of Canadian chiefs and elders who presented concerns about food security to a UN panel in Geneva, Switzerland, in February.

...

Ottawa, Montreal, and Winnipeg.“This right (to food) today is under very severe threats with respect to the First Nations of this country,” De Schutter said. “My report will be useful, not only if it’s discussed at an nternational level, but also if it’s used to launch a national conversation on these issues, if the Canadian public opinion can be led to better understand what the situation is, what its responsibilities are.”

The independent expert’s final report — to be presented to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in March 2014 — will also form part of Canada’s official international human rights record.

Before a series of other witnesses stood up to speak, De Schutter outlined three “concerns” he hopes his work will address: supports for traditional aboriginal diets harvested through hunting, fishing and gathering, the health consequences of replacing those traditi na foods, and the impact of development projects without consultation of indigenous peoples, as promised under the UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Canada has a wealth of 'natural resources' on which our economy heavily depends. Unfortunately, the extraction of those resources has catastrophic effects on local Indigenous populations. In the last two decades, the Supreme Court of Canada has produced rulings that identify the responsibility of "the Crown" (provincial and federal) to consult with affected Indigenous communities about new development/industry, and to accommodate their rights.

With this UN review of food security of Indigenous communities, it's perhaps more clear to Canadians that their struggle isn't for wealth, but for the fundamentals of life itself.

More ...

http://m.interlakespectator.ca/articledisplay.aspx?e=3562127

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/05/13/edmonton-un-aboriginal-food-study.html

http://www.montrealmirror.com/ARCHIVES/2003/032003/news3.html

Edited May 15, 2012 by jacee

[eyeball]

With this UN review of food security of Indigenous communities, it's perhaps more clear to Canadians that their struggle isn't for wealth, but for the fundamentals of life itself.

Actually our struggle is still for even more fundamental things - justice and democracy.

As First Nations people, our lives have been altered because of industry,” Alexis said. “The lake is contaminated, although it looks beautiful so much so that the fish and wildlife officers have told our elders that we can only eat one fish a week from the lake.

The problem in this statement also contains the solution. In most indigenous societies councils of elders form the backbone of their governments and it is they who should have been telling the community's fish and wildlife officers how much industry could be allowed to alter the lake.

Little fishing communities...like little canaries in a coal mine - dying all over the same planet for the same reasons, the absence of the fundamentals of life starting with justice and democracy.

[Michael Hardner]

jacee - thanks for posting this.

While the story is, IMO, more complex but not any happier.

I do believe that western technology and immigration destroyed their culture, and that they can't be blamed at all for that happening but in fact all parties to the destruction were unaware of the long term effects of the 'discovering' of America.

We know so much more now, and I think it's incumbent on all peoples to create new agreements that are configured for mutual prosperity and positive communication as well.

[Topaz]

I saw watching one of the senate committee hearings where they had the FN before them and they said that the FN health didn't start the down hill until they were forced to eat "white man's" food and then they start with Diabetes. The destroying of the FN food base is still going on from what I've heard in the House with the pollution of rivers in northern Alberta from the oil sands. Now, that being said, the non-native community can't say we didn't know, because each day someone in the House is reminding the Alliance/Tories of the toxins in the water.

[Michael Hardner]

Now, that being said, the non-native community can't say we didn't know, because each day someone in the House is reminding the Alliance/Tories of the toxins in the water.

Nobody should suggest that we walk away from such problems. We couldn't if we wanted to, because they are our problems - problems with health and issues that concern us not only from conscience but because we're bound to help with them.

I think that such discussions need to focus on solutions, though, rather than the easy road of talking about politics. My two cents.

[TimG]

I do believe that western technology and immigration destroyed their culture

It also dramatically raised their standard of living. The complaints about adequate housing on reserves are a good example: natives used to live hand made shelters heated by wood fires. Now they expect properly constructed homes with electric or gas heating and complain when they don't have them. That is why I have no patience for whinging about technology "destroying" aboriginal culture. It is complete nonsense. Technology changes cultures - if a culture cannot adapt to changing technology then the problem is the culture - not the technology.

[Topaz]

The housing problems was not using the right building materials for their areas. Granted, building materials have improved over the years and this is what they need and the cost will probably be more to build but last longer.

[TimG]

The housing problems was not using the right building materials for their areas. Granted, building materials have improved over the years and this is what they need and the cost will probably be more to build but last longer.

Fine. But don't try to argue that 'technology has destroyed aboriginal culture'. Aboriginals want the new technology as much as anyone else.

[Michael Hardner]

It also dramatically raised their standard of living.

I wouldn't try saying that to a First Nations person.

In doing so, you're basically telling them that a destroyed culture, the loss of history is "worth it" in exchange for living in shacks, and any other subsistence benefits that they receive from the world today.

The complaints about adequate housing on reserves are a good example: natives used to live hand made shelters heated by wood fires. Now they expect properly constructed homes with electric or gas heating and complain when they don't have them. That is why I have no patience for whinging about technology "destroying" aboriginal culture. It is complete nonsense. Technology changes cultures - if a culture cannot adapt to changing technology then the problem is the culture - not the technology.

Does that mean that if I enslaved you in a gold castle with as much TV and cocaine as you could want you would have nothing to complain about ? I'm being ridiculous but you're grafting another culture onto theirs and declaring them better off. It's offensive, actually, though I'm not personally offended by it.

[Smallc]

I wouldn't try saying that to a First Nations person.

Well, that's rather irrelevant.

In doing so, you're basically telling them that a destroyed culture, the loss of history is "worth it" in exchange for living in shacks, and any other subsistence benefits that they receive from the world today.

Most aboriginal people don't live in shacks. Many cultures have been lost over time, because they don't function well in modern societies. It's the way it is.

I'm being ridiculous

Yes.

[Michael Hardner]

Many cultures have been lost over time, because they don't function well in modern societies. It's the way it is.

That being said, most cultures hold their identity in high esteem. Saying that the destruction of their culture is a fair trade-off for material well-being is crass at best.

[Smallc]

That being said, most cultures hold their identity in high esteem. Saying that the destruction of their culture is a fair trade-off for material well-being is crass at best.

It's not just material well being. You're failing to see the entire picture. Modern society, medicine, etc. is about far more than material goods, it's about living as we want for far longer. Even though aboriginal people tend to live shorter lives than others, they are still doing far better than they were in the past.

Cultures are always changing with time and occurrence. As Canadians, that should be especially evident.

[TimG]

I wouldn't try saying that to a First Nations person.

Why? Because they are completely clueless and don't understand that they are much better off today thanks to technology?

In doing so, you're basically telling them that a destroyed culture, the loss of history is "worth it" in exchange for living in shacks, and any other subsistence benefits that they receive from the world today.

Like I said: cultures need to adapt to changing technology. We used to have a farm centered culture in most of this country. That culture is dead and gone. The only remnants are a 2 month summer break at schools. Should we learn about it to better understand our history? Yes. Should we care that the 'farm culture' was destroyed by technology. Not at all. Natives need a culture that is relevant to the 21th century and that is going to be found be remembering their past (good and bad) and embracing the future. Whining about 'destroyed cultures' is a defeatist attitude. Edited May 15, 2012 by TimG

[Guest Peeves]

I wouldn't try saying that to a First Nations person.

In doing so, you're basically telling them that a destroyed culture, the loss of history is "worth it" in exchange for living in shacks, and any other subsistence benefits that they receive from the world today.

Does that mean that if I enslaved you in a gold castle with as much TV and cocaine as you could want you would have nothing to complain about ? I'm being ridiculous but you're grafting another culture onto theirs and declaring them better off. It's offensive, actually, though I'm not personally offended by it.

It may not be accurate, but it's called progress. Natives could not expect to live in a rudimentary world forever. It happened pretty much every where, world wide. Not saying it's right, only that it's commonplace and inevitable. They often bought into the changes.

They took the things offered. The horse and whiskey. The wheel and dispersal. Written language and forgotten traditions.

They got a raw deal.

But so did other millions- slaves historically, Jews historically, for , and women and child workers and Incas and Aborigines in other countries, and many peoples that have disappeared from the sands of time.

First nations peoples in my opinion, following their path often as wards of the government are sometimes their own worst enemy, and as in the West of Canada, it's killing them. Surely the status quo is unacceptable, but are the First Nations ready to accept they live for the now or die in the past?

Quotation:

bullet The "profile of mental disorders among Aboriginal people is primarily a by-product of our colonial past with its layered assaults on Aboriginal cultures and personal identities." Royal Commission on Aboriginal People 10

horizontal rule

Canadian suicide data:

Canada's overall suicide rate is typically about 14 per 100,000 people; the U.S. rate is consistently slightly lower, at about 12 per 100,000. 1 These values are heavily influenced by the economy: they drop as economic conditions improve, and rise during recessions. Females are more likely to attempt suicide than males. However, males are about four times as likely to successfully commit suicide than females. This is because males typically use more reliable methods.

Average figures hide the existence of certain population groups which are at extremely high risk for suicide: including prison inmates, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender persons, transsexuals, persons with certain mental health problems, and Natives.

horizontal rule

Government activities during the 1990s:

The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care organized a task force to study the prevention of suicide in Canada. 2 In their 1994-MAR report, they mentioned the high suicide rate among Aboriginals in Canada. They stated that:

bullet Suicide rates in the Canadian Native population are more than twice the sex-specific rates, and three times the age-specific rates of non-Native Canadians (56.3 per year per 100,000 persons for Native males and 11.8 for Native Females).

bullet Among Aboriginal males, the rate for the 15-24 year age group was 90.0. This is more than double that for all Aboriginal males: 39.0.

bullet Suicide among northern Native youth has reached epidemic proportions. In Alberta the rate in the northern region was 80; in the central region, 71.2, and in the southern area, 35.3.

bullet An extremely high overall rate of 80.2 has been found for 10 - 19 year-old Native males living on the northern coast of Labrador.

bullet The 1991 Aboriginal Peoples Survey indicated that 41% of Inuit, and 34.5% of Native Indians on reserves, report that suicide is a problem in their community.

The task force made seven specific recommendations to reduce suicide rates. However, none were specifically targeted to the native communities.

According to the report issued in 1995 by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples:

bullet The rate of suicide among Native youth is five to six times higher than the Canadian average. 9,10

Facts cited in an essay by Glen Coulthard of the University of Alberta indicate:

bullet 60% of all Aboriginals who commit suicide are acutely intoxicated at the time. This compares to 24% during non-Aboriginal suicides.

bullet Native communities which have retained some of their historical traditions have lower suicide rates.

bullet Communities which have less seriously affected by the government's paternal goals of "protection, civilized and assimilation" and remained partly isolated from the government's acculturation processes tend to have lower suicide rates.

bullet The Native suicide rate may be much worse than the statistics indicate, because they typically do not include non-status Indians, Métis and Natives living off the reservation. 9

In contrast, one source indicates that: "Not all Native groups have high rates of suicide. Many Native communities have suicide rates equal to or lower than the general population. 1

[Fletch 27]

This is one-hundred percent BS! I have fished Gods lake many times and can tell you this is untrue when it comes to the "health" of the lake and surrounding areas. The local tribe(s) are very accomodating and benefit greatly from the tourism.

"Gods Lake features hundreds of islands, bays and reefs loaded with fish. Many Canadian lodges offer walleye and pike - Gods Lake offers you a Canadian "Grand Slam" of Trophy Lake Trout and Brook Trout as well as the famous Walleye and Pike.

Olafson's Gods Lake Lodge's slogan is "Where the Fish Are". Why? Because we are located on a prime section of the lake where shallows meet main lake depths. Our guests won't have to spend all day running around in search of fish. Most of our Trophies are caught within a short boat ride of the lodge"

[Michael Hardner]

It's not just material well being. You're failing to see the entire picture. Modern society, medicine, etc. is about far more than material goods, it's about living as we want for far longer. Even though aboriginal people tend to live shorter lives than others, they are still doing far better than they were in the past.

Cultures are always changing with time and occurrence. As Canadians, that should be especially evident.

Dismissive, at best. If I promised to let you live to 200 years old, would you agree to spend it in a prison ?

[Michael Hardner]

Why? Because they are completely clueless and don't understand that they are much better off today thanks to technology?

No, because it's insulting.

Like I said: cultures need to adapt to changing technology. We used to have a farm centered culture in most of this country. That culture is dead and gone. The only remnants are a 2 month summer break at schools. Should we learn about it to better understand our history? Yes. Should we care that the 'farm culture' was destroyed by technology. Not at all.

Should "we" ? You're speaking for others here, in your cultural carelessness. The Soviets were also very functional about things, bulldozing centuries old buildings to put up efficient cement apartment towers.

There's more to being human than numbers.

Natives need a culture that is relevant to the 21th century and that is going to be found be remembering their past (good and bad) and embracing the future. Whining about 'destroyed cultures' is a defeatist attitude.

It's not an either/or proposition. They can be native and have the trappings of technology. They can have those things and still lament what happened to their people, too.

[Michael Hardner]

It may not be accurate, but it's called progress. Natives could not expect to live in a rudimentary world forever. It happened pretty much every where, world wide. Not saying it's right, only that it's commonplace and inevitable. They often bought into the changes.

Of course they bought into them. But it's another thing to say you're better off today. That just doesn't sound good.

They got a raw deal.

But so did other millions- slaves historically, Jews historically, for , and women and child workers and Incas and Aborigines in other countries, and many peoples that have disappeared from the sands of time.

First nations peoples in my opinion, following their path often as wards of the government are sometimes their own worst enemy, and as in the West of Canada, it's killing them. Surely the status quo is unacceptable, but are the First Nations ready to accept they live for the now or die in the past?

There's no going back, of course.

[TimG]

No, because it's insulting.

All that response means is you don't understand the point I am making.

It's not an either/or proposition. They can be native and have the trappings of technology. They can have those things and still lament what happened to their people, too.

Where did I say they could not be native? What I said is the culture they had 200 years ago is dead and gone and they are much better off. What they should be focused on is defining a native culture that makes sense for the 21th century. This culture would obviously retain some aspects of the old but it is quite ridiculous to suggest that the original culture should have been preserved.

[Michael Hardner]

All that response means is you don't understand the point I am making.

Ok - let's try again. What am I not getting ? That they are better off in terms of life expectancy, material comfort and so on ? I think I acknowledged that I got that, what else ?

Where did I say they could not be native? What I said is the culture they had 200 years ago is dead and gone and they are much better off. What they should be focused on is defining a native culture that makes sense for the 21th century. This culture would obviously retain some aspects of the old but it is quite ridiculous to suggest that the original culture should have been preserved.

Nobody is suggesting that. What I am saying is that flippant suggestions that "they are better off" are not sensitive to the great loss that they experience when our cultures clashed. If you want them to stop lamenting the past, then you should stop bringing their past into it too by saying "they're better off".

[TimG]

Nobody is suggesting that. What I am saying is that flippant suggestions that "they are better off" are not sensitive to the great loss that they experience when our cultures clashed.

This is Internet forum. I say what I think. There is no need to be sensitive. I was at a social event I would much more restrained in my language. But would it help if I said I don't expect natives to assimilate and adopt European/Canadian culture and that attempts to assimilate them were wrong? They need to define a new culture that allows them to co-exist within the society that exists today and we should not mourn the passing of a culture that is irrelevant in today's world. Edited May 15, 2012 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

This is Internet forum. I say what I think. There is no need to be sensitive.

I suppose there isn't a need to be sensitive. The statement is still wrong, though, because you're stating your values on others as an absolute advantage.

Ever hear of 'Live Free or Die' ?

But would it help if I said I don't expect natives to assimilate and adopt European/Canadian culture and that attempts to assimilate them were wrong?

Doesn't help me any.

[Smallc]

Dismissive, at best. If I promised to let you live to 200 years old, would you agree to spend it in a prison ?

I have a better question. If I buy you a purple dinosaur, will you name it Barney?

Edited May 15, 2012 by Smallc

[TimG]

The statement is still wrong, though, because you're stating your values on others as an absolute advantage.

Do you defend honour killings? If not why not since they are a part of some people's cultural heritage? No one pretends to accept all other cultures unconditionally. The debate is only about where to draw the line between collective values and individual values. It is my opinion that whining about lost culture is counter productive and defeatist. Edited May 15, 2012 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

I have a better question. If I buy you a purple dinosaur, will you name it Barney?

Depends. Is he furry and huggable ?