1 The two cases in question—Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), [2004] 3 SCR 511, and Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia (Project Assessment Director), [2004] 3 SCR 550—pertained to First Nations whose rights had not been recognized by treaty. The duty to consult was further elaborated the following year in Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage), [2005] 3 SCR 288, a case that involved a signatory of Treaty 8. For discussion, see Newman 2009.

2 The Powley test is an adaptation of the principles laid out in R. v. Van der Peet for determining what constitutes an Aboriginal right in the case of First Nations and Inuit.

3 I use “Métis” to refer to the peoples who descend from the historic Métis Nation and therefore share a culture and a history. From its beginnings in the Red River settlement, the Métis homeland came to extend across Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and into parts of British Columbia, the Northwest Territories, Ontario, as well as south into Montana and North Dakota. Historically, the Métis spoke many Indigenous languages—such as Cree or Ojibwe or other local Aboriginal languages—but they were associated in particular with the Michif language, a mixture of French and Cree. The Prairie Métis people also used Michif-Cree and Bungee (consisting of Gaelic and Cree mixed with French and Saulteaux).

4 For a useful introduction to Foucault’s ideas on the nexus of knowledge and power, see, especially, “Truth and Power,” in Foucault (1980). See also Arun Agrawal’s “The Politics of Indigenous Knowledge” (2005).

5 Foucault elaborates his concept of an “insurrection” of subjugated knowledges in “Two Lectures” (Foucault 1980, 78–108; see esp. 81–84). For a critique from a feminist perspective, see Sawicki (1991). Foucault, she writes, “never spoke of ‘male domination’ per se; he usually spoke of power as if it subjugated everyone equally” (49).

6 “[…] le « silence » entourant les relations traditionnelles des femmes à la terre pourrait bien servir à les déshériter légalement dans le présent” (81). The translation is mine.

7 On the scrip system, see Tough and McGregor (2007, esp. 36–43). In “I Still Call Australia Home,” Aileen Moreton-Robinson (2003) offers a thoughtful exploration of dispossession and Indigenous concepts of belonging and place.

8 Among Métis living in rural areas, the proportion rose to 41 percent (Kumar and Janz 2010, 64). Although the survey indicated that men and women were equally likely to report having gathered plants, it did not ask whether the plants were intended for food or for medicinal purposes.

9 As settlement progressed, however, efforts were made to suppress the activities of Aboriginal midwives and healers. Such was the case for Métis midwife and healer Marie Rose Delorme Smith. As her daughter, Mary Hélène (Smith) Parfitt, recalled, “Marie Rose had put in many years of midwifery and the doctors were disgruntled at not being called to deliver the babies. Soon Marie Rose had a letter from officials in Edmonton telling her that she must desist from this practice” (quoted in Carpenter 1977, 149). Similarly, Lux (2001, 96) notes that “on reserves where medical missionaries had established hospitals, Native midwives were seen as unwelcome competition.”