logo
'Someone's starting to listen,' says Abenaki chief, applauding defeat of New Hampshire bill

'Someone's starting to listen,' says Abenaki chief, applauding defeat of New Hampshire bill

CBC13-04-2025
The chief of the Abenaki of Odanak is celebrating a victory in his nation's campaign against state-recognized tribes in New England, many of which he says are illegitimate.
In a news release, Rick O'Bomsawin says a New Hampshire bill — which lawmakers killed last month — would have given too much power to what he calls "self-proclaimed" Abenaki groups in Vermont.
"I think someone's starting to listen," he said.
The Abenaki of Odanak and W8linak say four Abenaki tribes recognized in Vermont are among those that are not really Abenaki, yet state law permits them to sell artwork, access funding for social programs and receive free hunting and fishing licences.
Leaders in Quebec took identity fraud concerns to the United Nations last year.
But more recently, Bill 161, titled "Changing the membership of the New Hampshire commission on Native American affairs," would have extended the groups' influence in New Hampshire, says O'Bomsawin.
"I think New Hampshire was watching what's going on and saying, 'oh, before we get into this mess, let's stop this right in the beginning,'" he said.
Odanak and W8linak, located near Trois-Rivières, Que., have historically clashed with groups in the U.S. regarding legitimacy. O'Bomsawin and some researchers contend that many of the Vermont-recognized Abenaki groups aren't Indigenous at all.
Attempt to put in place state-recognized process
Darryl Leroux says these New England groups have refused to do verification "that they're well able to do."
An associate professor in the school of political studies at the University of Ottawa who has studied transformations in white identities and settler colonialism, Leroux found that the majority of members of the tribes had no Abenaki ancestry, but rather are descendants from French-Canadian immigrants.
He published his findings in a peer-reviewed article "State Recognition and the Dangers of Race Shifting" in the American Indian Culture and Research Journal in 2023. The genealogy has not been independently verified by CBC News.
"They've chosen to believe the family lore," said Leroux. "One's responsibility when it makes these types of claims is [at] the very least to verify the claims."
He says states can establish their own process to recognize tribes, often for "political reasons." Currently, New Hampshire has no state recognition process.
"This bill was trying to put [one] in place," said Leroux.
To get U.S. federal status, groups, also known as tribes, must demonstrate compliance with seven mandatory criteria, including a continuous history as an American Indian entity since 1900. In 2005, one of the four Vermont-recognized groups, the Abenaki Nation of Missisquoi, failed to meet some criteria.
Donald Stevens, chief of the Nulhegan Band of the Coosuk Abenaki Nation in Vermont, says his tribe hasn't felt the need to seek federal recognition.
"It's not because we can't or don't want to," said Stevens, whose tribe is recognized in Vermont. "It costs a lot of money and a lot of time."
Stevens supported Bill 161 in New Hampshire because he saw it as a means to help "consolidate," better represent interests and help set up ways to establish recognition processes in New Hampshire, if desired.
He says every tribe has the right to determine their own citizenship and contests Leroux's findings. He says his family is "well documented as being Indian and being gypsies who travelled from place to place."
"It's sad when people are trying to put out false narratives," he said.
But many of these state-recognized groups would never qualify for federal recognition, says Kim TallBear, professor in the faculty of Native studies at the University of Alberta.
"It is a very rigorous process," said TallBear, who is also the Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Peoples, Technoscience, and Society.
'A real serious form of theft'
A citizen of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate in present day South Dakota, TallBear says state-recognition standards are "pretty appalling." She's among those saying something needs to change.
"We're really advocating that states get out of the business of doing this," she says.
"Leave this to nation-to-nation conversations, which are between tribal governments and the federal government."
While TallBear says "pretendianism" can sometimes be put on the back burner, there's been recognition that it's a growing problem — as some groups misrepresent and overshadow history.
"Those groups now are vying with recognized tribal groups for resources and recognition," she said.
"I'm seeing the tide turning … we are making progress in terms of getting people to understand that this is a real serious form of theft."
Chief in Odanak denounces exclusion
Due to colonization and war, Abenaki were forced north of their homelands and settled in what is now Odanak and W8linak.
Right now, O'Bomsawin says self-identified groups in the U.S. outnumber his community and live on the ancestral territory which stretches from southern Quebec to northern Massachusetts, spanning Vermont and New Hampshire.
Despite its ties to the region, O'Bomsawin's community does not have a say over membership regulations or requirements of groups that bear its name and live in areas it considers traditional territory.
"They never even contacted us on anything," said O'Bomsawin.
"If you are truly, truly Abenaki, would you not want to fight to make sure no one is stealing your culture and your language? Would you not want to know who your family members are? That's all I'm trying to do," he said.
What particularly hurts is not having recognition in the States, despite being federally recognized in Canada, he says.
"Not only do you want to steal my identity … but you also want to steal my pain," said O'Bomsawin. "And that's really sad."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Opinion: Did government pull its punches in the Cowichan Tribes court case?
Opinion: Did government pull its punches in the Cowichan Tribes court case?

Vancouver Sun

time22 minutes ago

  • Vancouver Sun

Opinion: Did government pull its punches in the Cowichan Tribes court case?

Last week, the B.C. Supreme Court issued what has been called a bombshell decision, finding that fee simple title (private ownership) in certain land in Richmond is 'deficient and invalid' because of a finding of Aboriginal title. Attorney General Niki Sharma jumped immediately to announce an appeal after considering the nearly thousand-page decision 'over the weekend.' While many are quick to question the judgment, precious little attention is being given to what positions government actually took in the case. So while the attorney general said in a media release that 'we disagree strongly with the decision' and are '…committed to protecting and upholding private property rights,' this issue warrants a close look. A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. One of the most important issues in this case was whether Aboriginal title was 'extinguished' when the fee simple title (private ownership) was created over the lands by the Crown in the 1800s. Yet the court expressly noted B.C. did not argue this, stating: 'B.C. does not argue extinguishment. Rather, B.C. says the content of any Aboriginal title rights that the Cowichan may have today is necessarily limited by the fee simple interests.' Similarly, the federal government also backed off this issue. The court stated: 'Canada initially pled extinguishment but abandoned its reliance on this defence in its amended response to civil claim filed Nov. 22, 2018.' If B.C. and Canada are in support of protecting private property rights, one may ask why they would pull their punches on this key legal issue. To answer that question, one should look at the little known 'civil litigation directives' that both governments have established to guide their lawyers in court cases involving Indigenous groups. The B.C. version of the directives was established by Premier David Eby when he was attorney general. They state : '… the attorney general of British Columbia has developed these directives on civil litigation involving Indigenous Peoples (directives), to ensure government lawyers take an approach to litigation that upholds the honour of the crown and crown obligations to Indigenous peoples and seek negotiated resolutions that uphold Indigenous human rights and Aboriginal rights … unilateral extinguishment is not consistent with the honour of the crown or with the UN Declaration (see Articles 8 and 28). The province will not advance arguments based upon the unilateral extinguishment of Aboriginal rights.' B.C. is not alone on this. The corresponding federal directives state : 'The principles discourage certain long-standing federal positions, including relying on defences such as extinguishment, surrender, and abandonment.… Reconciliation is generally inhibited by pleading these defences. 'When considering pleading these defences, counsel must seek approval from the assistant deputy attorney general.' There are various reasons why the court reached the conclusions it did in the Cowichan Tribes case, and one of the six defendants (the City of Richmond) did argue extinguishment of Aboriginal title (which was rejected). But one may also wonder what would have happened if the two senior levels of government had in fact stepped up to make similar arguments. In any case, before anyone gets too critical of the decision, they should understand that the court can only work with the arguments advanced. And when governments choose to self-limit arguments they are otherwise fully entitled to make, they should be extra cautious about criticizing the decision after the fact. Robin Junger is a former chief provincial treaty negotiator, former deputy minister of energy and is now a lawyer with McMillan LLP.

50 years after it closed, the Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation honour the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School
50 years after it closed, the Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation honour the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School

Cision Canada

timean hour ago

  • Cision Canada

50 years after it closed, the Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation honour the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School

This commemoration is an important part of the Government of Canada's response to Call to Action 79 in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report. PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, MB, Aug. 14, 2025 /CNW/ - The Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School was part of a system of residential schools for Indigenous children officially established by the federal government in the 19 th and 20 th centuries. Born of colonial policies in Canadian history, this system removed Indigenous children from their families and communities, not only denying them their traditions, language and culture, but also exposing children to grievous harm and even death. The residential school system is a tragedy that has adversely affected generations of Indigenous people and the Government of Canada is committed to reconciliation and renewed relationships with Indigenous peoples, based on a recognition of rights, respect, collaboration, and partnership. Today, Ginette Lavack, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services and Member of Parliament for St. Boniface—St. Vital, Manitoba, on behalf of the Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, and Minister responsible for Official Languages, and Long Plain First Nation commemorated the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School with a special ceremony to unveil three plaques at the National Indigenous Residential School Museum of Canada. Built in 1914-1915, the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School is located on Keeshkeemaquah Reserve, part of the reserve lands of Long Plain First Nation. This building was nominated for designation by Long Plain First Nation who worked collaboratively with Parks Canada to identify the historic values of this Former residential school. This large, three-storey brick building is a rare surviving example of residential schools that were established across Canada. The school closed in 1975, and six years later, the building and its surrounding lands were transferred to Long Plain First Nation to fulfill part of their treaty land entitlement. Since that time, the building has been given new meaning by the community as a site of commemoration and resilience that keeps the legacy of the residential school era alive and educates the public. The Government of Canada, through the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, recognizes significant persons, places, and events that shaped our country as one way of helping Canadians and youth connect with their past. The designation process under Parks Canada's National Program of Historical Commemoration is largely driven by public nominations. To date, more than 2,270 designations have been made nationwide. Quotes "Fifty years ago, the Portage la Prairie Residential School closed its doors, ending a painful chapter in our shared history. Yet, the harm caused by the residential school system is still felt today by families in Portage la Prairie and in communities across Canada. As we mark this anniversary, we honour the strength and resilience of Survivors, mourn those who never came home, and recommit ourselves to continuing the journey toward Truth and Reconciliation together." The Honourable Rebecca Alty, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations "Today, we take time to acknowledge the painful legacy of the Former Portage La Prairie Residential School and the harmful and lasting impact that this institution, and many others like it under the residential school system, had on generations of First Nations, Inuit and Métis families and communities. We hope this commemoration allows Canadians to reflect on this tragic history, acknowledge the past, honour missing children and recognize the extraordinary strength and resilience of the survivors and all Indigenous peoples. The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that the voices of Indigenous peoples are heard, and that this history is never forgotten." Ginette Lavack, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services and Member of Parliament for St. Boniface—St. Vital, Manitoba "Today, we pay tribute to Indigenous residential school survivors of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School that operated from 1915 - 1975. The plaques are symbols of resilience, strength and a place where stories are embedded in truth and the spirits honored. These memorials acknowledge their legacy of pain and injustices endured with courage and dignity. Their lives matter. Their voices matter. Their healing matters. We are still here." Lorraine Daniels, Second generation survivor Executive Director National Indigenous Residential School Museum of Canada Inc. Quick Facts Children who were sent to the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School came from many First Nations and other Indigenous communities within Manitoba and elsewhere. There, they faced severe discipline and abuse, harsh labour, emotional neglect, the attempted suppression of their language and cultures, and isolation from their families and communities. The Former Portage La Prairie Residential School now houses the National Indigenous Residential School Museum which was created as "a place where people can learn, share, heal and move forward with a greater understanding of the forces that shaped and forever changed multiple generations of First Nations people." Parks Canada and Long Plain First Nation worked collaboratively to identify the historic values of this former residential school, and the report on the building prepared for the Historic Sites and Monuments Board was co-authored by members of the First Nation and Parks Canada. The plaques are written in Anishinaabemowin, Anishinaabemowin syllabics, Cree, Cree syllabics, Dakota, English and French. Created in 1919, the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada advises the Minister responsible for Parks Canada regarding the national historic significance of persons, places, and events that have marked history in Canada. Together with Parks Canada, the Board ensures that subjects of national historic significance are recognised, and these important stories are shared with Canadians. The vast majority of nominations brought forward for the consideration of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada originate from members of the public. To nominate a person, place or historical event in your community, please visit the Parks Canada website for more information: Indian Residential Schools Resolution Health Support Program Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada Parks Canada Long Plain First Nation National Indigenous Residential School Museum of Canada Framework for History and Commemoration SOURCE Parks Canada (HQ)

/R E P E A T -- Media Advisory - The Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation recognize the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School/ Français
/R E P E A T -- Media Advisory - The Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation recognize the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School/ Français

Cision Canada

time4 hours ago

  • Cision Canada

/R E P E A T -- Media Advisory - The Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation recognize the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School/ Français

PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, MB, Aug. 12, 2025 /CNW/ - Ginette Lavack, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services and Member of Parliament for St. Boniface—St. Vital, Manitoba, on behalf of the Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, and Minister responsible for Official Languages, along with Long Plain First Nation, will participate in a Parks Canada and Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada plaque unveiling ceremony to commemorate the historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School. Built in 1914-1915, the former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School functioned within the residential school system whereby the federal government and certain churches and religious organizations worked together to assimilate Indigenous children as part of a broad set of efforts to destroy Indigenous cultures and identities and suppress Indigenous histories. The building has been given new meaning by the community as a site of commemoration and resilience that keeps the legacy of the residential school era alive and educates the public. The details are as follows: SOURCE Parks Canada (HQ)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store