Native Hunting and the Migratory Birds Convention Act: Historical, Political and Ideological Perspectives

Abstract

In the last twenty years restriction of native hunting of migratory birds under international wildlife law has been a source of conflict between the Canadian government and native peoples. It has been assumed by jurists, scholars and native groups that key provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty and the Migratory Birds Convention Act (1918) were not intended to apply to native hunters when originally drafted—that violations of aboriginal and treaty hunting rights were simply overlooked by policymakers during the negotiation and legislative drafting process. This article reassesses the intentions, attitudes and motives of Canadian and American wildlife conservation policy-makers with respect to native hunting and wildlife destruction. First, the political history of the Migratory Bird Treaty is outlined, the roles played by American special-interest groups and Canadian policy-makers are defined, and the treaty negotiations are scrutinized for evidence of ‘intent.’ Second, attitudes toward native hunting and wildlife destruction held by the elite group of Canadian civil servants that lobbied for and negotiated the Treaty and drafted the Act are evaluated to clarify ‘intent’ further. Third, administrative and legislative precedents for restricting native hunting in Canada are identified and the perceptions of native hunting that underwrote them are defined. Finally, the question of ‘intent’ is explored by evaluating wildlife conservationists’ perception of native hunting against their ideology of wildlife conservation—an ideology which primarily served the economic interests and psychological needs of men in industrialized liberal-capitalist society.