Green Tec Recycling
Hockey Pick 'Em

Twice As Nice Thrift Store
Eco-Superior
Gore Motors
News
Click here to see more
Subscribe
Community Calendar
Click here for full listings.
Poll
There are now plans for at least four new hotels in Thunder Bay. Do you feel we need that many?



Total Votes: 268
View Results Past Polls
Survey
Surveys are not available.
Email
2012-01-06 at 17:34

NAN says no to nuclear waste storage

By tbnewswatch.com
Brake Repairs! Front Ends! Mufflers! Shocks!Not just mufflers - MINUTE MUFFLER, 677 Memorial Avenue. Open Monday-Saturday. Email: tminutemuffler@shaw.caClick here for details.

The Nishnawbe Aski Nation is standing firm on its position that NAN territory is a nuclear waste free zone.

NAN Grand Chief Stan Beardy is reiterating that message. Recently, the townships of Ignace and Schreiber have moved on to step three of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization's nine-step site selection process. 

That process will determine the best place for an underground repository to store Canada's used nuclear waste. 

There are six Northern Ontario communities being considered as possible sites, including the township of Hornepayne, which sits on traditional NAN territory. 

While the NWMO insists the practice is completely safe, Beardy disagrees with using the North as a nuclear dump site.

When asked what he thinks should be done with the nuclear waste, Beardy said he trusts other jurisdictions will come up with a solution that works for them. 
 

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.

Click here to report a typo or error

Tbnewswatch.com(20)

Comments

We've improved our comment system.
Delbert Grady says:
Is there some magical map somewhere that defines all these "traditional territories"?
1/6/2012 5:50:19 PM
tsb says:
Their traditional lands is, according to the treaties, everything. They are basically saying, "nuclear waste shouldn't exist".

NAN territory is concurrent to the land subject to Treaty Nine, which is described in that treaty. You can find the text of it online. There are 11 numbered treaties and about a dozen named one. You can find a list of them on-line.

I have yet to find a document on-line that plots all of the treaty areas on a single map, yet.
1/6/2012 9:14:06 PM
Marak says:
There is no such thing...according to Treaty 9 (also known as the James Bay Treaty)

"the said Indians do hereby cede, release, surrender and yield up to the government of the Dominion of Canada, for His Majesty the King and His successors for ever, all their rights titles and privileges whatsoever, to the lands"

Treaty 9 also says “And His Majesty the King hereby agrees and undertakes to lay aside reserves for each band, the same not to exceed in all one square mile for each family of five, or in that proportion for larger and smaller families; and the location of the said reserves having been arranged between His Majesty's commissioners and the chiefs and headmen”.

Treaty 3 is similar and it ceded a vast tract of Ojibway territory, including large parts of what is now northwestern Ontario and a small part of eastern Manitoba, to the Government of Canada.

So aside from the reserves, they have no say by law on Crown lands. I do believe they should have input but no veto.

1/7/2012 8:19:29 AM
crazyforweed says:
It seem's to be everywhere now a days ! better watch what your doing with your compost in your back yard might be traditional land..
1/7/2012 9:25:16 AM
Prothunderbay says:
The Feds are preying on economically depressed regions and towns to deal with the GTA's problems. Hats off to mr. Beardy and NAN. One would think they can engineer a solution at the source of the waste for 20B instead of trucking it through our cities and environment.
1/6/2012 8:26:03 PM
dynamiter says:
Not on NAN territory - Not in Canada - This is not the first time that this type of discourse has come out of First Nations representatives! I wonder why this particular issue is there - I wonder because there are other more environmentally risky things that go on all the time - from major things such as the damming of rivers and lakes to create power which puts mercury into the water and daily shipments of much more dangerous stuff that is on our roadways each and every minute of every day, to minor but nonetheless environmentally insensitive things such as 2 stroke outboards on the lakes and rivers and pollution from poorly or improperly maintained sewage treatment systems on reserves. Or is this just another we want consultation ( and therefore the funding that needs to be provided to us so that we can provide you with our advice). Oh Canada!!
1/6/2012 10:49:35 PM
wayne says:
Delbert, it's part of the nine-step program...I believe that step 2 involves recognizing a higher power that can give strength. step 9 involves making amends with taxpayers by getting more money for not allowing the waste disposal on traditional lands
1/6/2012 10:59:36 PM
dying2know says:
The land belongs to all of us Delbert. NAN just happens to show teeth when someone comes calling to mess with it. Good for you NAN! Schreiber and Ignace will hopefully chase them away too.
1/7/2012 12:21:52 AM
hockeyskates says:
Thank you NAN.

Delbert : When you have lived in the neighbourhood for 20,000 years or so, you tend to take a longer view on the future.
1/7/2012 7:03:46 AM
SomeGuy says:
I think it's defined has their hunting areas, probably the area around a river or lakes watershed. But most likely it will be everywhere could be defined as traditional lands.
1/7/2012 9:00:49 AM
shake'n'myhead says:
Why are you's knocking the natives when they say they don't want Nuc waste on their lands? Do any of you want that disaster waiting to happen in your part of the world? I for one say leave it in Southern Ontario where it is today. As someone said before "If there were gonna be good jobs related to storing Nuc waste, the jobs would be in Southern Ontario." They are trying to push their garbage on us again.
1/7/2012 2:46:36 PM
Nitesky says:
As sure as our power cannot be sent down east, their power cannot come here.
Whether or not I agree with all aspects of existing treaties, I agree without reservation (pun intended) that the nuclear waste should stay where it was made.
Bravo to NON and Grand Chief Stan Beardy far standing up and being counted.
1/7/2012 2:47:49 PM
animiki says:
Trouble is, the waste is currently in temporary storage in areas that are seismically active e.g. the St. Lawrence/lower Great Lakes. Leaving the stuff there just isn't feasible. If there was a serious accident in the Toronto area, related to Pickering, for example, the immediate damage might not affect Thunder Bay, but the long-term economic damage certainly would. The province's economy could be devastated, resulting in a huge disruption to stability, security and standards of living.

The fact is that the geological environment of northern Ontario (ALL of northern Ontario, mind you, not just the NW) is far more stable and far better suited to the long-term storage of nuclear waste. The question becomes what degree of risk you're prepared to accept, because one way or another, you're accepting some...
1/7/2012 10:48:48 PM
tbayguy009 says:
There would absolutely no risk if some idiot looked at a map of Canada, and put a dot at it's farest northern land mass. Put it there, where no one cares or no one would be hurt if an accident happened.

Maybe the world should vote on using some place like Greenland for glabal storage solution. Protected by the UN.

This stuff is not that bulky, and if they can import wind mills from Denmark across on ocean, they sure the heck could fly spend fuel pellets (in suitable containers) as far north as they possilbly could and put them into some rock that no one cares about.
1/8/2012 3:19:02 PM
young&concerned says:
Everything that comes out of Stan Beardy's mouth is "nuclear waste"!
1/7/2012 5:29:08 PM
Dr. Double Double says:
Will the racists criticizing the Natives for not wanting nuclear waste on their lands please raise their hands to volunteer to host the nuclear waste in THEIR homes?

Right. Thought not.
1/7/2012 8:05:12 PM
SG says:
Second comment from you about 'racists'. What's up with that? I'm not seeing any racist comments. I see comments that are just like calling 'NIMBY'.
1/8/2012 11:47:52 AM
animiki says:
NAN territory is defined as that portion of the province covered by the Arctic watershed; it includes Treaty 9 and its various "adhesions", and Treaty 5 (which is mostlly in Manitoba, but has some land in Ontario). The area of the Atlantic watershed is Treaty 3 (generally, the area west of Thunder Bay) and the Anishnabeg Nation, aka the Union of Ontario Indians, that includes the Robinson-Superior and Robinson-Huron Treaties (generally, the area of Thunder Bay and eastward). Schreiber actually doesn't fall in NAN territory; Ignace does.

The Aboriginal apsect of this is an interesting one. It has been established by the SCC that governments have a "duty to consult" with Aboriginal peoples in matters that relate to their inherent and Treaty rights under Section 35 of the Constitution. Needless to say, there's differing opinions on what such "consultation" means.
1/7/2012 10:40:45 PM
jimmyboy says:
Here is the Treaty Map some of the posters were looking for.
Tbnewswatch.com

1/8/2012 2:01:24 PM
bonzo says:
the nuke dump nwo plan will only cost money, as it will drag on and on for years without happening due to public and/or organized dislike.
1/9/2012 10:54:05 AM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Forgot password?
Log In
 
 
© 2012 Dougall Media.