San Carlos Apache Tribe requests tighter group home regulations after teen death
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
Manitoba Indigenous groups agree to work together on major infrastructure projects
WINNIPEG — Two Indigenous groups in Manitoba have agreed to work together on major infrastructure and development projects. It comes as the federal government looks to fast-track projects across the country. The Southern Chiefs' Organization, which represents 32 Anishinaabe and Dakota First Nations in the province, and the Manitoba Métis Federation have signed a five-year agreement. It outlines their shared commitment to ensure First Nations and Red River Métis voices are included in the approval of any project proposed by the Manitoba government and supported by federal legislation. A new federal law gives Ottawa sweeping powers to speed up permits for what it calls "nation-building projects." The controversial legislation has faced pushback from Indigenous groups that argue elements of it could be used to undermine their rights. The Southern Chiefs' Organization and the Manitoba Métis Federation say they'll work together to pursue Indigenous-led developments in areas including forestry, harvesting and traditional economies. The Manitoba government is also exploring how it would create and operate a proposed Crown-Indigenous corporation. "This agreement sends a message to all governments, partners and industry that First Nations and the Red River Métis are working together to shape a future that is led by Indigenous nations," Grand Chief Jerry Daniels of the Southern Chiefs' Organization said Wednesday. "We are forging a path towards economic independence and sustainability, ensuring the voices of First Nations and Red River Métis are integral to the design, approval and implementation of nation-building projects across this province." Prime Minister Mark Carney has said the legislation is needed to shore up Canada's economy during the trade war with the United States. Ottawa has also promised to build up northern infrastructure, in part, to meet a NATO military alliance spending target for critical infrastructure. It's unknown which projects could be fast-tracked, but the government has pointed to ports, railways and pipelines. Carney recently met with First Nations, Inuit and Métis groups to discuss how best to build projects in partnership with Indigenous Peoples. The Manitoba Métis Federation turned down Carney's invitation to discuss the legislation, after Ottawa invited another Métis group the federation claims has no reason to exist. Other Métis groups and First Nations say communities represented by the Métis Nation of Ontario have no claim to Métis heritage and that Ottawa and Ontario have no right to recognize them. Manitoba Métis Federation president David Chartrand said the legislation must move forward, as Canada deals with ongoing threats from U.S. President Donald Trump. "There's not a doubt it must arrive, because the danger that Trump imposes on all of us is very scary ... this is an economic war, and people should not take it lightly," he said Wednesday. He added any nation-building projects approved in Manitoba must be done in collaboration with Indigenous Peoples in the province. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 13, 2025. Brittany Hobson, The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Takeaways from AP's reporting on armed groups recruiting children in Colombia
Takeaways from AP's reporting on armed groups recruiting children in Colombia CALDONO, Colombia (AP) — When the armed groups that operate in Colombia's drug trade need new recruits, they are increasingly turning to the children of the regions where they are active. Confronting the problem often falls to Indigenous groups, who blame the government for doing too little to stop it. In Cauca, an impoverished department in southwest Colombia, a coalition of Indigenous groups has documented more than 900 cases of Indigenous youth recruited since 2016, including some as young as 9. And the groups say the pace of recruiting has quickened as armed groups have expanded crops like the coca that is used to make cocaine. Here are takeaways from The Associated Press' reporting on the child recruitment: Colombia's violent past is not past Colombia has endured more than half a century of internal conflict that continues today. Leftist guerrillas, right-wing paramilitaries and criminal groups have fought for control of territory. A 2016 peace deal ended the war with the country's largest rebel group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, but violence never fully stopped. FARC dissident groups rejected the peace process. The ELN, a Marxist guerrilla force active since the 1960s, and the Clan del Golfo, Colombia's largest drug-trafficking gang, are also active. All the groups recruit children. Where the dissidents are active, residents complain that they control everything. A schoolteacher at a village near Caldono, surrounded by dense forest and coca fields planted and patrolled by armed groups, said their presence in and around the school is constant. She described several former students, some as young as 11, now in the groups. One group confronting the recruiting The Indigenous Guard of the Nasa people formed in 2001 to protect Indigenous territories from armed groups and environmental destruction such as deforestation and illegal mining. Since 2020, they've seen armed groups amp up their recruiting of children to coincide with the guerrillas' expanded operations in growing drugs like coca. Guard members have stepped up patrols at schools like the one near Caldono to try to discourage recruiting. But they have also undertaken rescue missions to bring back children. One Guard member, 39-year-old Patricia Elago Zetty, told the AP of trekking across mountainous terrain when her own 13-year-old son went missing three years ago to confront the guerrillas suspected of taking her boy and another teenager. She said she and her unarmed comrades were stopped at gunpoint and spent tense moments before the boys were returned to them. But not all such missions are successful, with some groups refusing to return recruits above a certain age. What is the government doing? Scott Campbell, the United Nations human rights chief in Colombia, said the government's response has been 'ineffective and untimely.' He noted a lack of consistent state presence and failure to partner with Indigenous authorities on prevention. The Indigenous Councils Association of Northern Cauca, or ACIN, said the government has left armed groups to fill the void by providing roads, food and other basic services in remote and neglected areas. Colombia's Family Welfare Institute, or ICBF — the main agency protecting children — said it funds community programs and Indigenous‑led initiatives that have contributed to 251 children leaving armed groups in the first half of 2025. The ICBF insists it is working with Indigenous authorities and pressing armed groups to uphold a ban on recruiting minors. A recruit who fled and now tries to stop others from going One young woman who recently fled FARC dissidents, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation, said she joined the armed group at 16 not because she was forced but to escape family problems. She said she mainly cooked, organized supplies and cleaned weapons. She was afraid at first but was not mistreated. She eventually fled after a change in commanders left her fearing harsher treatment, or being moved to a faraway region with an increased threat of combat. Now she works with a local initiative that supports families trying to prevent their children from being recruited. She warns teens about the risks of joining armed groups. As for the parents, she said: 'I tell families they need to build trust with their children." ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Steven Grattan, The Associated Press
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
How a Musqueam court case in B.C. inspired a fight for fishing rights on the other side of Canada
Indigenous rights and title cases, including the renowned Sparrow and Marshall decisions of the 1990s, are top of mind for many Indigenous people as federal Bill C-5 — which took only a few weeks to pass through Parliament — aims to fast-track certain infrastructure and energy projects. The Building Canada Act grants the Carney government, and future governments, the ability to bypass certain laws and environmental regulations if a project is deemed in the national interest. Indigenous people across the country are warning that the bill's provisions could wind up violating their rights — rights that were affirmed after long battles in court. Under section 35 of the Canadian Constitution, Indigenous people have the right to be consulted and, where applicable, accommodated if government action is going to infringe on any "Aboriginal and treaty right," as stated in the document. But with Prime Minister Mark Carney using "shovels in the ground" language for the fast-tracking of Canadian build projects, many Indigenous people say they are worried about transparency and the potential erosion of consultation, in particular around mining projects and pipeline development. Coastal First Nation rights Hunting, gathering and fishing are integral parts of Indigenous cultures across Canada, with fishing especially important for those near a coastline. The Sparrow and Marshall cases were initiated in response to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) arrests of two Indigenous fishermen. The arrests were for different reasons, and while they both contributed to Indigenous rights in Canada, they led to different outcomes. The right to harvest seafood for consumption and as part of cultural traditions is what a Coast Salish First Nation in B.C. was trying to protect 35 years ago when Musqueam fisherman Ronald (Bud) Sparrow — who has since died — took the province to court. LISTEN | Marking 35 years since the Sparrow decision: The Sparrow case went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 1990, Sparrow won, affirming for the first time that Indigenous people in B.C. who didn't sign a treaty have the legal right to hunt, gather, and fish in their traditional territories for food, social, and ceremonial purposes. Sparrow's victory inspired other Indigenous groups to pursue their own cases — including one on the other side of Canada, where Mi'kmaq fishermen in Nova Scotia launched their own court case and also won at the Supreme Court of Canada. The Marshall case took Indigenous fishing rights a step further, expanding them to allow for "moderate livelihood" fishing, allowing Indigenous people to sell their harvest to make a living. The Mi'kmaq, citing Sparrow, argued that their right to make a moderate livelihood from fishing and hunting was derived from the Peace and Friendship Treaties that they signed in the 1700s. Sparrow decision Sparrow was arrested by DFO for fishing using an illegal net. In his fight against the charges, Sparrow argued that under section 35, Musqueam members have the right to fish on their traditional territory and any infringements on that right are invalid unless intended to protect fish populations. "We had the whole country's attention, and there were a lot of people concerned that this was not the case to run, that we could set a bad precedent," Aaron Wilson, a Musqueam lawyer and a relative of Sparrow's, told CBC's The Early Edition. "This was the very first time that the Supreme Court of Canada was interpreting section 35, so it really was something people were watching," he said, adding that the case inspired him to study law. Despite the win in 1990, the struggle for fishing rights persists. Wilson, who says he does not speak on behalf of the Musqueam Nation, says that a core lingering problem following the Sparrow decision is that, due to declining fish populations and conservation measures, members of the nation rarely get to fish. Similar sentiments are shared on the East Coast, where some First Nations say that hydroelectric dams are infringing on their right to fish because the dams are harming a traditional food source — eels. Marshall case In Nova Scotia, Mi'kmaq fisherman Donald Marshall was arrested by DFO in 1993 for using an illegal net and for fishing and selling eel out of season. Marshall and his nation took Nova Scotia to court. The case went to the Supreme Court of Canada, where Marshall was successful in arguing that he had the right to fish and make a moderate living from his harvest due to the Sparrow decision, section 35 and the nation's rights and title derived from the Peace and Friendship Treaties. The Peace and Friendship Treaties were signed by the M'ikmaq, Wolastoqey and Passamaquoddy First Nations in Atlantic Canada between 1725 and 1779 with the British Crown, and state that signatories have the right to make a moderate livelihood from fishing and hunting. Kerry Prosper, who was chief of the Paqtnkek M'ikmaw First Nation at the time that Marshall was arrested, remembers pursuing the case. "DFO would be harassing us, we would see them coming and pack up our gear," Prosper told CBC News. He says that the Sparrow decision had created controversy in B.C. and that non-Indigenous B.C. fishermen had travelled to Nova Scotia to warn of possible impacts on commercial fisheries. "A wave of people came from B.C. to warn the non-native fishing groups that the M'ikmaw are going to be able to fish lobster and ruin their commercial fisheries," he said. During the Sparrow case, Musqueam proved their right to fish for social purposes, Prosper said. This sparked questions about what "social fishing" meant, and if it included economics or a moderate livelihood. "Years later, here you have one of the biggest rulings in Canada, the Marshall case, that we have a right to make a moderate livelihood." Struggle to exercise rights Both Wilson and Prosper say that even though the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Indigenous rights, Musqueam and M'ikmaq peoples still struggle to exercise those rights. In B.C., Wilson says Musqueam members aren't able to harvest fish as much as they want to due to declining fish populations and conservation regulations. "Sparrow isn't just about harvesting salmon; it's also about stewardship and responsibility, the responsibilities that come with the rights we continue to exercise," he said. "That is sometimes overlooked when it comes to what Sparrow is about, and that's the heart of what a lot of First Nations are thinking about when they move to advance and defend their Aboriginal and treaty rights, it's because there is a responsibility to be stewards over the territories and resources." Prosper says that in Nova Scotia, hydro-dams are placed in the migration path of eels both up and downstream, and eels are cut into pieces when trying to migrate into the Sargasso Sea in Atlantic Canada, where they spawn. "Eels are in trouble and there's no real talk about protecting what's left," he said. Eels are a traditional food source, and he wants designers and developers to change hydroelectric dam technology to better support eel migration. Doing so could mean that the M'ikmaq can continue to exercise their culture, traditions, and rights. Prosper is also urging better regulation of commercial fisheries to support fish populations. He says that under Sparrow, commercial fisheries are supposed to be regulated to maintain fish populations, but instead, Indigenous food and recreational fisheries are regulated — and that's an underlying issue in exercising rights. Prosper says that he grew up eating eel, but hardly sees anyone fishing for food anymore. "Nobody wants to listen to what Sparrow is about, protecting food for generations to come." Wilson says that it's time for Indigenous rights and title recognition to be put into action, highlighting the government's duty to consult with Indigenous people.
