Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective  (Read 2313 times)

IronNoggin

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
  • Any River... Any Time....
Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« on: October 16, 2020, 11:39:22 AM »

A long time friend and wonderfully outspoken advocate for wild steelhead, Ehor Boyanowsky, is a man of many and diverse talents. His professional qualifications include graduate degrees in human and social psychology. Until his recent retirement he was a faculty member at Simon Fraser University. He is a past president of the Steelhead Society of BC and now resides on the banks of his all time favourite river, the Thompson, near Ashcroft.

Ehor has never been one to shirk responsibility to say what wouldn’t be said otherwise. He follows (fish and environmental) politics closely and sometimes has views and opinions that don’t survive political filters or conform with the views popularized by mainstream media. Earlier today Ehor forwarded me a copy of a piece he prepared and distributed to a long list of personal contacts. I read it and contacted him immediately to seek approval to share it here. For those who might like to broaden their perspective on where we find ourselves today and what may lie ahead, enjoy.

 “Today’s news that non-aboriginal Nova Scotia lobster fishermen have escalated their protest to destruction of boats and catch against a massive lobster fishery mounted out of season by aboriginal fishermen is heartbreaking, but sadly, expected, even inevitable. Nova Scotia is perhaps the most peaceful idyllic place in Canada, even North America. I found its people welcoming of strangers rather than clannish when I moved there many years ago.  It is why several members of my family moved back there recently to escape the social, political and climatic uncertainties, the turmoil besetting the normally preferred promised lands of BC and California.

Why inevitable? Because as research all over the world, including  some conducted by my colleagues at the University of BC, Hong Kong and by me has repeatedly recorded: when an identifiable minority, often ethnic, is repeatedly awarded special status, privilege or even just preference by government and the courts to compensate for past injustices, it creates resentment and psychic tension.  When the tensions reach breaking point, sometimes over an unrelated issue, the result is violence toward those minority groups seen as privileged.  Accompanying that violence is a growing hatred where none existed before, a psychological phenomenon justifying the violence in the minds of the perpetrators as they witness themselves committing acts they would never before have contemplated.

Witness the slaughter in Rwanda where hundreds of thousands of Tutsis were murdered, cut to pieces with machetes by their once friendly neighbours even though many of them had intermarried with the marauding Hutu majority. Why? Because over the last century, the colonial Belgians had shown preference in treatment, education and government jobs toward the lighter skinned Tutsi minority. But that was in the distant past? No, scarcely 26 years ago while the United Nations, the world stood idly by.

But that was Africa you might argue where the people are traditionally tribal, backward, suspicious of outsiders, believe in witches and demons, even today. As anthropologist Claude Levi-Straus observed, humanity ends at the outskirts of the village. Why almost every tribal group’s name for itself means simply ‘the people’ and so everyone else is a nonperson as the Japanese perceived the Chinese in Nanking during their invasion. Again wanton massacre ensued.

But alas, not just in Africa or Asia. So too in every country on earth. As the ironically, relatively (by comparison to what followed) benign shroud of communistic  equality slid from Yugoslavia, Serbs, and Croats resumed ethnic identities, resurrected old grievances, descended into age old enmity and slaughtered each other and Muslims in their midst. Not simple tribal people but those with PhDs, lawyers, physicians and poets driving BMWs not oxcarts and not worshipping obscure idols.

Judges in Canada have been in a frenzy to promote the welfare of aboriginal people. Alas, there is now a whole generation of judges and lawyers trained very narrowly and badly by crusading law professors, demagogues who do not promote logic and deduction and the serious negative implicatons of favouring aboriginal plaintiffs, but declare by fiat that aboriginals have a special position in society based on ancient treaties or even merely statements made by the colonial English in a time when those governing officials, now foreign to Canada, gave what they saw was a crust of bread to a minority of people: hunting and fishing rights in exchange for their loyalty in conflicts with the Americans.

They did not envision a mosaic of tribal groups that are part of larger Canadian society, the fastest growing sector in Canada, even as they reproduce at the highest rate and incorporate nonaboriginals into their group. Two years of living common law with a status aboriginal makes you eligible for aboriginal status and all of its privileges as my recent mover, a pleasant young man of Russian descent recently joyfully declared: “No more taxes, no more hunting or fishing licences.” I was happy for him but I silently wondered if he knew the societal unrest he was contributing to.

Pierre Trudeau, the elder, in his wisdom, despised by many for being unfeeling, (entirely ‘left brain we say in psychology) was prescient, saw the coming conflict and societal disarray and instructed his apprentice Jean Cretien to patriate the constitution from Britain and with it to eliminate any special status for aboriginal people, for Quebec, for anyone. Today in hindsight it is clear how much conflict, resentment and mistaken reliance on the federal government for bounty at the individual and provincial level that would have avoided. Alas, a national alarm was sounded by men of limited vision with perhaps misguided, kind intentions, personified by Ed Broadbent of the NDP… and Trudeau backed off.

His offspring Justin, now PM in a  confusing frenzy to ‘reconcile’ with aboriginal people has rescinded the aboriginal accountability bill that forced chiefs to show where they are spending taxpayers’ money (hopefully for housing, sewage and health rather than personal condos in the USA), he visited the family of an armed home invader (who had posted his intentions to rob on Facebook) who was shot (but not those innocent ‘settlers’ who were invaded), and he appointed as the leading lawmaker in government an aboriginal lawyer of little experience who had written a long, dense book about how to disassemble Canada and return it to aboriginal ownership.

As a former ten year member of The BC aboriginal treaty negotiation advisory committee I urged the BC government to proffer land, money and administrative expertise to aboriginal groups but not to isolate them nor to perpetuate special rights and privileges. Clearly the federal courts did not follow such a plan and have created a situation that has emboldened aboriginals to undertake untenable lobster fisheries against Federal Fisheries scientists’ recommendations, to allow the killing of endangered species of salmon, eg Thompson River steelhead (and putting the evidence on Facebook without repercussions) and to kill large game, even those endangered, in and out of season.

The result is a widening of distance between status aboriginal people and the rest of Canada that if history repeats itself here, even in “the peaceable kingdom” will lead to hatred and increasing violence. It always has in the past.”

Ehor Boyanowsky
October 15, 2020

https://steelheadvoices.com/?p=2225
Logged

milo

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2029
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2020, 06:57:47 PM »

Great write up.

As for the lobster, why don't they build farms and farm the darn things in their native waters? Have FN-operated farms compete with non-native run farms and leave the wild lobster alone for a while. The Aussies are doing it.
No reason why it wouldn't work in NS. Plenty of lobster larvae over there to successfully operate lobster farms.

Logged

RalphH

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3439
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2020, 07:24:38 PM »

Great write up.

As for the lobster, why don't they build farms and farm the darn things in their native waters? Have FN-operated farms compete with non-native run farms and leave the wild lobster alone for a while. The Aussies are doing it.
No reason why it wouldn't work in NS. Plenty of lobster larvae over there to successfully operate lobster farms.

Absolutely - just look at how wild salmon have benefited from the open pen salmon farming here. They are doing so much better! While they are at they can start a lobster hatchery program and before you know it the North Atlantic will be swarming with lobster just like the ocran off BC is swarming with Coho and Chinook salmon. Thanks Milo you are just about but not quite as logical as Ehor in your reasoning... not like all those narrow minded judges!

IronNoggin

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
  • Any River... Any Time....
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2020, 04:22:32 PM »

The Recipe for Chaos, Coming Soon to Waters Near You

Pull up treaties signed by representatives of the British crown and indigenous people between 1725 and 1779 when the indigenous population of the entire region numbered roughly 3,000. Then apply them to a population 57 times as large today.

Ensure there is no benchmark in terms of indigenous harvest of fish and wildlife species for any period of their history.
   
Ignore the language in any of the treaty documents for more than two centuries.
   
Charge an indigenous fisherman (1993) for fishing out of season, without a license and with an illegal net. (The target of the net was eels. There is no reference to lobster in any of the historic documents referencing indigenous hunting and fishing activity and targeted species.)
   
Dither for six years while the charges are run through contorted court processes at enormous public expense before being dismissed on the basis that the 250 – 300 year old treaties remained valid and confirmed “a treaty right to hunt, fish and gather in pursuit of a moderate livelihood”.
   
Back-pedal on the original court ruling when you discover you may have gone too far. Issue a clarification stating that indigenous treaty rights are not unlimited and can be regulated on “conservation concerns or other important public objectives”……but never clarify how either of those will be defined, when and by whom.
   
Dither for the next 21 years (at inestimable cost) while a rapidly growing indigenous population gains political momentum fuelled by inaction of successive governments, both indigenous and non-indigenous, neither of whose interest is served by agreeing on what moderate livelihood means or how it should be applied.
   
Refuse to apply the regulations that govern non-indigenous fishers to indigenous fishers and ignore growing discontent.
   
Ignore the fact that the technology applied to harvesting all marine species outstrips the ability of target species to withstand it unless increasingly regulated. (Northern cod anyone?)
   
Trot out the other hopelessly ill-defined term, “reconciliation”, and facilitate its application whenever and however it suits the growing demands of the fastest growing population in the country.
   
Support governments that assume no responsibility for having created present circumstances and have no tangible plan or timetable to address them. Instead, blame commercial fishers licensed and regulated by that same government.
   
Target the national police force for failing to control licensed commercial fishers whose season is closed for conservation reasons while FN fishers carry on as usual, claiming their treaty right exempts them from the science and commercial fishing regulations intended to manage a resource sustainably. Send reinforcements, not logic.
   
Blindly accept that our elected representatives are adequately representing the interests of all voters and conservation while negotiating, “government to government”, behind closed doors and never providing any other interests an opportunity to be heard until after agreements are carved in stone.

Three years ago the National Post published a very good summary of the events surrounding the now infamous Mi’kmaq lobster fishery. A friend forwarded it to me this afternoon while I was preparing the above. I include the link here as evidence there are at least some people in the media that “get it”: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-robson-you-cant-give-the-same-fish-to-different-people-but-the-government-tries-to

https://steelheadvoices.com/?p=2228
Logged

milo

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2029
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2020, 11:35:24 PM »

Absolutely - just look at how wild salmon have benefited from the open pen salmon farming here. They are doing so much better! While they are at they can start a lobster hatchery program and before you know it the North Atlantic will be swarming with lobster just like the ocran off BC is swarming with Coho and Chinook salmon. Thanks Milo you are just about but not quite as logical as Ehor in your reasoning... not like all those narrow minded judges!

It is one thing to farm Atlantic salmon in the Pacific ocean; an entirely different one to farm Atlantic lobster in waters where it is native - the Atlantic ocean.
Not as illogical as you think.
Logged

RalphH

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3439
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2020, 06:09:14 AM »

It is one thing to farm Atlantic salmon in the Pacific ocean; an entirely different one to farm Atlantic lobster in waters where it is native - the Atlantic ocean.
Not as illogical as you think.

"Native" Atlantic salmon have been farmed in the European side of the Atlantic with well documented negative results, often quite disastrous for wild trout and salmon populations . If you knew much about it you'd understand that Lobster are pretty much farmed as it is. What is a lobster pound and why do we have live fresh lobster available year round when there is a time limited season?
« Last Edit: October 21, 2020, 07:42:41 PM by RalphH »
Logged

IronNoggin

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
  • Any River... Any Time....
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2020, 10:09:23 AM »

Perry Belgarde, the Grand Chief of FNs has been cited as admonishing the RCMP for "not doing their job". Because they didn't defend the property of the Mi'kmaw fisherman. Ironically when the RCMP were out on the Wetsuweten land in BC, he was "outraged" they were there (doing their job). And with yet another spin, he noted he was "happy" they didn't do their job arresting the Mohawks who were blockading the railroad tracks and burning CN property..

So just as a helpful tip to the RCMP, that Bastian of 'systemic racism': When you are protecting the FN while they are breaking the law, that's your job and it's all good, but when you are actually doing your job upholding the law and it involves FN, that's bad. That is all.

Until very strict regulation of seasons, sizes, quotas, and licensing came in several decades ago and was actually enforced, the fishery and lobster populations were in severe decline, due to over-harvesting and indiscriminate retention. The regulation of this particular fishery has been a rare example of success in producing a sustainable and consistently profitable industry. In fact, these days, the resource is healthier than it's been in generations.

Permitting any harvesting outside the correct seasons, areas, and quotas is bound to be a potential or very real disaster for the industry and local economies. Therein lies the "technical qualifier" as to why the "illegal" fishery should not be occurring:

- The usual reproductive pattern is for the mature female to mate in late summer while in a soft shell condition immediately after moulting. The male transfers a spermatophore into the seminal receptacle at the base of the female’s tail. Over the next year the eggs develop in the female’s ovaries and during the following summer the eggs are extruded and fertilized, then attach to the underside of the tail. The eggs are then carried for 10-12 months and hatch the following July or August.

- The maturity measure used by scientists is the size at 50% maturity, which is the size at which half of the animals are capable of reproducing. Consecutive spawning and multiple fertilizations enable large lobsters to spawn more frequently over the long term than their smaller counterparts. This combined with the logarithmic relationship between body size and numbers of eggs produced, means that large lobsters have a much greater relative fecundity. The advantages of a population that includes a good mix of sizes including very large sizes is well documented (DFO 2009). For lobsters the advantages include higher egg production and different hatching areas and times. This should result in less susceptibility to short term fluctuations in recruitment levels.

- There is a very real conservation issue if traps are set only a few months after hatching season.The commercial season runs from May 15 to June 30 purposely to avoid the hatch-out season. The success of the management of this species has largely been dependent on avoiding fishing through that time period via closures. The Mi'kmaw have chosen to ignore that, and demand to fish through this very critical period.

What is a moderate income today? Donald Marshall was fishing eels and was selling them for about 25 cents a pound. Today it costs over a million dollars to get into the lobster fishery and the present moderate fishery fishers have close to a million more in gear including the boat. Is that part of a "moderate income fishery"?

To become a lobster fisherman, a quota purchase runs between $800,000 to 1.2 million. The boat and gear run an additional $1 million. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) under Trudeau has spent $545 million purchasing licenses, boats and gear, then GIVING it to the Mi'kmaw for free. This for people  who have next to zero history of traditionally harvesting the resource. In fact at this stage, the Mi'kmaw are involved in the commercial fishery to an extent much greater than their population demographics would imply, and includes the leasing out of many of those government paid-for quotas. Their cries that they are simply utilizing smaller boats and therefore "need" access when the larger commercial boats are not active are baseless. They own and operate MANY of the full sized rigs, of which most (if not all)  are attempting to be active in the current controversial fishery.

As for the largely missing in action routine of the liberals: Although they have voters on both sides of the equation, the PMO's office knows that they WILL lose Atlantic votes if they roll over in favor of the Mi'kmaw. As a consequence, don't expect anything more beyond the feigned outrage and condemnation expressed by the drama queen holding the office of PM hostage.

If I was an East Coast fisherman I would want to know exactly what "moderate livelihood". means and who would decide when it was reached. I would also be gravely concerned regarding the fishing through a scientifically determined sensitive time period. Out here we have witnessed major implications to our our salmon fishery via "food, social and ceremonial purposes" with little to no enforcement. I'd be very wary if I was a lobster fisherman.

Nog
Logged

RalphH

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3439
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2020, 09:25:09 AM »

A long time friend and wonderfully outspoken advocate for wild steelhead, Ehor Boyanowsky,..



Pierre Trudeau, the elder, in his wisdom, despised by many for being unfeeling, (entirely ‘left brain we say in psychology) was prescient, saw the coming conflict and societal disarray and instructed his apprentice Jean Cretien to patriate the constitution from Britain and with it to eliminate any special status for aboriginal people, for Quebec, for anyone. Today in hindsight it is clear how much conflict, resentment and mistaken reliance on the federal government for bounty at the individual and provincial level that would have avoided. Alas, a national alarm was sounded by men of limited vision with perhaps misguided, kind intentions, personified by Ed Broadbent of the NDP… and Trudeau backed off.



Ehor Boyanowsky
October 15, 2020

https://steelheadvoices.com/?p=2225

I don't want to comment much on the content of the above opinion piece beyond that much of it is hyperbolic. I do wish to point out that Boyanowski's comments on Trudeau's approach to First Nations issues is historically inaccurate. Trudeau was in fact at first a radical and in 1969 proposed to abolish the Indian Act and bring FNs fully into the mainstream of Canadian Society. However as he served as PM for a few years, met with and had discussions with FN leaders, reviewed important decisions of the Supreme Court his views changed just as radically in a new direction.

If you are interested you can read the linked paper but I'll just add this quote:


Quote
Trudeau, however, is that he sincerely wanted to help Indian people who, as a whole, lived in desperate squalor on a reserve archipelago across Canada.

Trudeau's willingness to act in a positive way on Aboriginal issues became evident again in the wake of the Calder case ruling in 1973. The Supreme Court of Canada had, in a landmark decision, opened the door to the fact that Aboriginal rights to the land might still exist where it had not been officially extinguished. What was Trudeau's reaction to this surprising finding by Canada's highest court? He could have taken a hard-line stance against this quasi-victory for Indian people? (Nisga'a people who had brought the case forward had actually lost the case in a tie decision but the principle of unresolved Aboriginal title remained). Trudeau chose the high road. Recognizing the legal realities of the situation, he opened the Office For Native Claims in 1974. The cornerstone was now in place for a lawful settling of comprehensive and specific Indian land claims across Canada, a process that continues into the new millennium.

Trudeau's "Just Society" included Aboriginal people: https://ammsa.com/publications/windspeaker/trudeaus-just-society-included-aboriginal-people-0

Trudeau was not a single minded ideologue on the issue and when it became clear his proposals were not acceptable legally and socially he changed them. Likewise with Chretien who frequently said his years as Minister of Indian Affairs were the best of his poltical career because he met so many FN people and came to understand their way of life and unique place in Canada.

Also regarding the claim that Trudeau "instructed his apprentice Jean Cretien to patriate the constitution from Britain and with it to eliminate any special status for aboriginal people, for Quebec" is untrue and inconsistent with any account of the final negotiations to repatriate the BNA Act. Chretien was given very wide latitude to reach a deal because during the first Quebec Referendum campaign Trudeau promised it would be done. By the time of the final negotiations it was given the UK House of Lords would only repatriate if the FN rights in the BNA Act were kept completely intact.

Cheers.

wildmanyeah

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1492
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2020, 01:07:47 PM »

The British were smart they knew land ownership was the basis of wealth. Some measly fish and hunting rights were easy to give up.

According to UBC owning your on home is the equivalent to winning the lottery.
Logged

IronNoggin

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
  • Any River... Any Time....
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2020, 09:36:33 AM »

Here's the real back-story to the Maritimes lobster dispute

The recent protests and violence surrounding the Mi’kmaq lobster fishery in the Maritimes has been widely reported as a problem of government inaction coupled with racism by non-Indigenous fishermen.

The truth is nowhere near that straightforward...

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/gunter-heres-the-real-back-story-to-the-maritimes-lobster-dispute
Logged

RalphH

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3439
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #11 on: October 26, 2020, 09:59:00 AM »

Quote
The Marshall decision was an example of judicial bias and pre-conceived judgement.

Hah! Coming from the source such as The Toronto Sun, such as the above. Accusations of "bias and preconception" are usually based on the same.

IronNoggin

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
  • Any River... Any Time....
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #12 on: October 26, 2020, 10:07:35 AM »

Taking the author to task rather than the subject matter is usually a signal that you lack the wherewithal to deal with the latter.

Nog
Logged

RalphH

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3439
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #13 on: October 26, 2020, 10:40:43 AM »

Please note I commented on The Toronto Sun which has a documented reputation for a specific bias. I'd say IronNoggin does as well. In my mind he mostly appears here as a political advocate.

I'd also note Professor Patterson did not testify at the SCOC review of the Marshall conviction. They also  corrected their summary of his testimony at the original Lower Court trial. Neither speaks to an inherent bias.

Any trial present two opposing views. The SCOC reviews deal with points of law not facts. That's true of all appeals. Usually original appellants, defendants and witnesses never appear as witness at an appeal.

Professor Patterson's opinions had to due with what the Mi'kmaq felt and understand in 1760. History generally has found in most cases FNs in all of North America did not understand the full meaning of the treaties they agreed to.

The SCOC disagreed with Professor Patterson's opinions. As a Historian his or any other historians opinions are never definitive. That's not a matter of bias. It's the way it is. The rulings of the SCOC are definitive.

wildmanyeah

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1492
Re: Steelhead Voices: Another and Important Perspective
« Reply #14 on: October 26, 2020, 12:57:15 PM »

Treaty Texts - 1760-61 Peace and Friendship Treaties
1760-61 Peace and Friendship Treaties Between His Majesty the King and the LaHave Tribe of Indians
Layout not exactly like original
Transcribed from R v. Marshall, Supreme Court of Canada, 1999

Treaty of Peace and Friendship concluded by [His Excellency Charles Lawrence] Esq. Govr and Comr. in Chief in and over his Majesty's Province of Nova Scotia or Accadia with Paul Laurent chief of the LaHave tribe of Indians at Halifax in the Province of N.S. or Accadia.

I, Paul Laurent do for myself and the tribe of LaHave Indians of which I am Chief do acknowledge the jurisdiction and Dominion of His Majesty George the Second over the Territories of Nova Scotia or Acadia and we do make submission to His Majesty in the most perfect, ample and solemn manner.

And I do promise for myself and my tribe that I nor they shall not molest any of His Majesty's subjects or their dependents, in their settlements already made or to be hereafter made or in carrying on their Commerce or in any thing whatever within the Province of His said Majesty or elsewhere and if any insult, robbery or outrage shall happen to be committed by any of my tribe satisfaction and restitution shall be made to the person or persons injured.

That neither I nor any of my tribe shall in any manner entice any of his said Majesty's troops or soldiers to desert, nor in any manner assist in conveying them away but on the contrary will do our utmost endeavours to bring them back to the Company, Regiment, Fort or Garrison to which they shall belong.

That if any Quarrel or Misunderstanding shall happen between myself and the English or between them and any of my tribe, neither I, nor they shall take any private satisfaction or Revenge, but we will apply for redress according to the Laws established in His said Majesty's Dominions.

That all English prisoners made by myself or my tribe shall be sett at Liberty and that we will use our utmost endeavours to prevail on the other tribes to do the same, if any prisoners shall happen to be in their hands.

And I do further promise for myself and my tribe that we will not either directly nor indirectly assist any of the enemies of His most sacred Majesty King George the Second, his heirs or Successors, nor hold any manner of Commerce traffick nor intercourse with them, but on the contrary will as much as may be in our power discover and make known to His Majesty's Governor, any ill designs which may be formed or contrived against His Majesty's subjects. And I do further engage that we will not traffick, barter or Exchange any Commodities in any manner but with such persons or the managers of such Truck houses as shall be appointed or Established by His Majesty's Governor at Lunenbourg or Elsewhere in Nova Scotia or Accadia.

And for the more effectual security of the due performance of this Treaty and every part thereof I do promise and Engage that a certain number of persons of my tribe which shall not be less in number than two prisoners shall on or before September next reside as Hostages at Lunenburg or at such other place or places in this Province of Nova Scotia or Accadia as shall be appointed for that purpose by His Majesty's Governor of said Province which Hostages shall be exchanged for a like number of my tribe when requested.

And all these foregoing articles and every one of them made with His Excellency C. L., His Majesty's Governor I do promise for myself and on of sd part -- behalf of my tribe that we will most strictly keep and observe in the most solemn manner.

In witness whereof I have hereunto putt my mark and seal at Halifax in Nova Scotia this day of March one thousand seven hundred sixty.

Paul Laurent

I do accept and agree to all the articles of the forgoing treaty in Faith and Testimony whereof I have signed these present I have caused my seal to be hereunto affixed this day of march in the 33 year of His Majesty's Reign and in the year of Our lord - 1760

Chas Lawrence
Logged