[N_Fiddledog]

Knowing only what we know it seems more like those people who have houses downtown who rent parking during the exhibitions, doesn't it?

[Public_Domain]

[Khar]

fifeboy fifeboy:

llama66 llama66:

Its a highway. dude, did you read what I posted?

(iii) a highway that is located on an Indian reserve where the title to the highway is vested in the Crown in right of Alberta;

Native land, provincial road.

And I suspect (but, not being a lawyer...) that this the relevant clause:

$1:

(iii)where the title to the highway is vested in the Crown in right of Alberta;

in Saskatchewan, reserves are private property and a non reserve member can be asked to leave.

As an aside, "vested in the Crown" indicates the crown is in "ownership" of the highway, and hence has a duty to take care of it. The roads on a native lands are not, first of all, a highway; these are dirt/gravel roads. The distinction is somewhat important as highways are created by the provincial government and have a separate set of care and laws. Secondly, most were made by the Natives themselves for private use, rather than by the government using government resources. Many end at someone's home.

If you were driving on a provincial highway through a Native reserve, and you were stopped, then the RCMP can step in, as that is vested in the government of Alberta and clear access and use of those roads is in the provincial interest. Since these roads are not vested in the the care of the government, are mostly used only by locals, and are private property as stipulated by treaty or law, local residents do have leeway in how those roads can and cannot be used.

Frankly, I view it the same as people who liked to use dirt roads on farms to get turned around when I was a kid. Sure, go ahead, if it's not gated, you can use it, but don't be assholes or you'll get run off.

[DrCaleb]

Khar Khar:

The roads on a native lands are not, first of all, a highway; these are dirt/gravel roads. The distinction is somewhat important as highways are created by the provincial government and have a separate set of care and laws. Secondly, most were made by the Natives themselves for private use, rather than by the government using government resources. Many end at someone's home.

The definition of 'Highway' in Alberta law, as it is in most Provinces:

$1:

(g) "highway" means any thoroughfare, street, road, trail,
avenue, parkway, driveway, viaduct, lane, alley, square,
bridge, causeway, trestleway or other place, whether
publicly or privately owned, any part of which the public
is ordinarily entitled or permitted to use for the passage or
parking of vehicles, and
(i) includes
(A) a sidewalk (including the boulevard portion of
the sidewalk),
(B) if a ditch lies adjacent to and parallel with the
roadway, the ditch, and
(C) if a highway right of way is contained between
fences or between a fence and one side of the
roadway, all the land between the fences, or all
the land between the fence and the edge of the
roadway, as the case may be,
but
(ii) does not include a place declared by the Lieutenant
Governor in Council not to be a highway;

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/stat/ ... c-h-8.html

Dirt and gravel roads are 'highways', as are private driveways. Unless the Lt. Governor says they aren't.

Most roads in the Province, including those running through reserves, are 'Public Highways'.

[Winnipegger]

The article says this is a private road. And it isn't land ceded to the crown, it's an actual reserve. That gives the reserve the right. The public has the right to use any provincial highway or provincial road, but this isn't. The article says it's a private road.

Part of treaties with first nations gave them very strong control over the reservation in exchange for ceded the rest of their lands to the crown. Treaties were signed at a time when Canada was still a colony of Britain, so "the crown" means to the government. Actually that term is still used. I object when first nations make claims on land that has been ceded, but this isn't. This is the reservation itself.

[Winnipegger]

No portion of any reservation can be taken. No provincial government has the right. Even the Prime Minister or federal cabinet ministers do not have the right to take any land from a reservation. It would take an act passed by federal parliament to take any land from a reservation. So no, provincial law does not overrule rights granted to reservations.

There are cases where a provincial road runs through a reservation. A provincial road requires a right-of-way that is owned by the provincial highways department, and that provincial department has responsibility to maintain it. Ontario has at least one such provincial road. I don't know what agreements were made to permit this, but once done the Aboriginal people cannot restrict access along that road. But this is not that case. It's a private road.

[DrCaleb]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

The article says this is a private road. And it isn't land ceded to the crown, it's an actual reserve. That gives the reserve the right. The public has the right to use any provincial highway or provincial road, but this isn't. The article says it's a private road.

And reporters are always right?

Even if it's a private road, it's still subject to the Highway Traffic Act, unless certain conditions are met. Just being on a reserve isn't one of them. One of the conditions is that the public must be blocked by a fence that stops them from entering the private road. (this is how race tracks exist!)

Unless these people had to get out and open a gate to use the road, they were on a "public highway".

[Winnipegger]

I don't have the ability to check if that's a provincial road. News articles often make mistakes. But assume for the sake of this debate that it is a private road. And unless the province has made a special agreement with the reservation, then it's not a provincial road. If the road was built and paid for by the reservation, and on reservation land, then it's treated as a private road. And federal laws regarding reservations overrule any provincial laws. So no, a gate isn't necessary.

And I've seen a road in Ontario, somewhere west of Sault St. Marie, that was marked by a sign as a private road. It was also marked on my map as a private road. That's all it takes. I didn't drive there because I didn't know what the consequences would be for a private road.

[martin14]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

I don't have the ability to check if that's a provincial road.

You need more google.

It's easy.

From here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/d ... -1.3204233

The main road through Morley to get From Highway to Highway 1A, is known as Alberta 133 X.

You must use this road to cross the river.

[DrCaleb]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

And unless the province has made a special agreement with the reservation, then it's not a provincial road. If the road was built and paid for by the reservation, and on reservation land, then it's treated as a private road. And federal laws regarding reservations overrule any provincial laws. So no, a gate isn't necessary.

And I've seen a road in Ontario, somewhere west of Sault St. Marie, that was marked by a sign as a private road. It was also marked on my map as a private road. That's all it takes. I didn't drive there because I didn't know what the consequences would be for a private road.

As Martin points out, it's a provincial highway. As you and I point out, there are methods for designating a road as 'private'. None of these were followed before this band decided to collect their 'taxes'.

But the major flaw in your argument is that Federal law overrides Provincial. It doesn't! Federal and Provincial jurisdictions are enumerated in the Constitution. They don't generally overlap. Provinces each have the right to make traffic laws in accordance with a Highway Traffic Act.

As well, there is always a clause in First Nation Treaties that local laws are always in effect. Just because a band has a treaty does not mean they are exempt from Provincial laws, but the Constitution forbids Provinces from making any laws that directly affect Natives on Treaty land. The treaties don't override Federal or Provincial law, they are separate from them.

A 'Treaty' is more like a contract not a 'law'.

[Winnipegger]

And you wonder why we're having trouble with aboriginals.

The federal government has jurisdiction over aboriginal affairs. The Indian Act lays out laws, and no provincial law can overrule it. Treaties have to be treated with respect, regardless of legal trickery, or we'll have more trouble with aboriginals.

And no, my driveway is not a public highway just because it doesn't have a gate. My property is my property. It starts at the property line designated by the land title registered with the Property Registry of Manitoba.

Perhaps I should explain where I'm coming from. A few years ago there was debate where to run the next power transmission line in Manitoba. Everyone wanted to run it along the east side of Lake Winnipeg, but some native groups wanted a royalty fee per kilowatt-hour of electricity for the line run through "their traditional resource area". But that land is covered by numbered teaties. That means the land has already been ceded to the crown. They can't demand anything. But the NDP provincial government was afraid it would get held up in court for years, and millions of dollars in legal expenses, so chose to reroute to the west side of Lake Manitoba. That's much longer, so much more power loss, and greater expense to build. Very bad. And I have to emphasize, this is land already ceded under treaties. The line would have gone through land covered by treaty #1, #3, and #5. How can we expect them to honour and obey the treaty if we don't?

[BeaverFever]

llama66 llama66:

I did, believe it or not. And then I posted what the law actually states. Which is that vague jumble of legaleese above.

Roadways in IR's are bound by the Traffic Safety Act, like every road in Alberta, this means they have to adhere to the rules of the road like everyone else, these are not driveways, they are roadways hence they are provincially regulated, reserve land or not.

The RCMP are generally considered to be useless at the best of times (unless you need someone tased in an airport)

So they can't do whatever they want.

Pronvincial legislation such as HTA doesn't apply to FN territory.

[BeaverFever]

Thanos Thanos:

It's private property, as the signs say at pretty much every entrance to every reserve in this country. They have the right to keep any outsiders off their land if they choose to do so. There is no legal dispute here at all because long-standing precedents have established the Native right to do this if they want to. They are not obligated under any circumstances, just like every other private property holder in this country, to provide open access to their land for the convenience of others if they don't want to. Case closed.

.

Case closed indeed!

[OnTheIce]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

llama66 llama66:

I did, believe it or not. And then I posted what the law actually states. Which is that vague jumble of legaleese above.

Roadways in IR's are bound by the Traffic Safety Act, like every road in Alberta, this means they have to adhere to the rules of the road like everyone else, these are not driveways, they are roadways hence they are provincially regulated, reserve land or not.

The RCMP are generally considered to be useless at the best of times (unless you need someone tased in an airport)

So they can't do whatever they want.

Pronvincial legislation such as HTA doesn't apply to FN territory.

The HTA does apply on FN territory/reserves. I have seen the OPP do speed enforcement on Native land and issue tickets for other HTA offences.

This was native land that was completely closed off to the general public. It was on an island.

[BeaverFever]

Well perhaps that's an agreement with that particular band. But at any rate a reservation is not open to the general public and outsiders have no right of passage on or through a Reservation.