Open Collections

Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1989-09-06] British Columbia. Supreme Court Sep 5, 1989

Item Metadata


JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018415.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0018415-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0018415-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018415-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0018415-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0018415-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0018415-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

 19255  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  THE  THE  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  Vancouver, B. C.  September 6, 1989.  REGISTRAR:  In the Supreme Court of British Columbia, this  6th day of September, 1989.  In the matter of  Delgamuukw versus Her Majesty the Queen, my lord.  May I remind you, sir, you are still under oath?  WITNESS:   Yes.  REGISTRAR:  Would you state your full name, please?  A   James Douglas Steventon.  COURT:  Yes, Mr. Grant, whenever you're ready.  GRANT:  Yes.  Before commencing, my lord, I received a --  just before court this morning, Ms. Sigurdson  delivered to me copies from the general correspondence  files of these documents, and I will want to -- I  understand that there is duplication from some of the  previous exhibits.  I will obviously want time to look  at these before I complete this cross.  But I think  there will be a way of doing that without wasting  court time.  It may require the witness to stand down  and come back tomorrow morning.  The second point is this morning I was delivered a  letter, again by Ms. Sigurdson, listing six documents  for which privilege is claimed, and the privilege is  with respect to communications between the defendant  or its agents and the defendant's professional --  communications between the defendant's professional  legal advisors, made for the purposes of litigation.  And it refers to six letters.  To the extent that this witness, and -- four of the  six relate to this witness or the other witness, one,  it's -- it is to the superior of this witness.  To the  extent that this witness has given evidence relating  to Exhibit 24-A and 24-B, and this correspondence may  relate to the creation of that.  My friends may be  under a misunderstanding that any correspondence  relating to the litigation is, per se, privileged.  There is only six pieces of correspondence.  I would  ask my friends to produce them for your lordship for a  ruling, because if they do relate to 24-A there may be  something further that I would like to examine on.  COURT:  Are the documents conveniently available?  WILLMS:  My lord, the copies are here in court.  I don't  understand, yesterday I said -- I suggested that if it  didn't relate to 24-A it was irrelevant.  I never  suggested that if it didn't relate to 24-A it was  privileged.  And these are, we say, privileged 19256  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  correspondence back and forth. 24-A is prepared long  before this series takes place, but the documents are  here.  THE COURT:  I gather what your friend is saying in part is that  the privilege, by operation of law, may be waived by  the witness giving the evidence that he gave  yesterday.  MR. GRANT:  That's correct.  And one of the letters is pre,  certainly pre my understanding of 24-A. But I may be  wrong.  THE COURT:  Well, the documents wouldn't be privileged unless  they were written for the purpose of obtaining or  communicating legal advice.  MR. WILLMS:  It's the work product, my lord.  It's — for  example, you sit down for the very first time and  interview a lay witness to determine what a lay  witness may have to say.  Notes are made, for example,  of what the witness says.  The witness is asked to  look at those and, later on, for completely different  reasons, for example, then experts who are paid  witnesses, for completely different reasons, portions  of the evidence is not led and it's not where someone  is offering an opinion to the court, it's just for one  reason or another the evidence is not led.  That's one  item.  Another item is that we need documents, for  example, to cross-examine Mr. Brodie, the documents  are in Smithers.  A letter goes up saying "We need  documents that fit this category.  Can you find them?"  Or "are there any?"  It's that type of correspondence  which is, as we submit, and we suggested in our claim,  it's privileged.  It's part of the work product of the  preparation, legal strategy, trial strategy in the  case.  THE COURT:  Yes.  Well, is there any objection to my looking at  them to see if they are produceable?  MR. WILLMS:  I don't have any objection to that, my lord.  If  this is what's going to happen from now on with every  lay witness, this is going to take a long time.  But  there is no difficulty.  I have them here, my lord.  THE COURT:  What is your view, Mr. Grant, that I should look at  them now or at some later time?  MR. GRANT:  Well, I would like -- I am prepared to cross-examine  without you looking at them immediately.  And if my  friend could provide them to you, and you have dealt  with this matter in the past, and there is not that  many, and I think it's -- as I say, I think that I  may -- I am going to need time to look at what was 19257  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  MR.  COURT  GRANT  cross-  think as e  35 Gitksan  just delivered to me as well.  But that, as I say, I  can proceed with my cross.  Just as a simplification point, my lord, I have not  got it in court, but I expect to have this morning, to  use Mr. Willms' model, an empty binder, and that would  be useful to put in the documents, some of which I  tendered yesterday and the others under tabs, and I  would just reserve the next exhibit number for the  binder, then I will be setting -- I would be  proceeding with some of these documents and we could  put them as tab numbers within the binder.  I don't think you put any documents in in  examination yet, have you?  I haven't, because I had this in mind.  I  matter of convenience, the February 19th, '?  and Wet'suwet'en blanket trapline proposal, which is  already an exhibit, could be remarked, just for  convenience.  Is that Exhibit 631?  Or 633-A, rather?  One of  them?  Just a moment.  It was Exhibit 631, that's right.  So I am not sure what the next exhibit number is.  REGISTRAR:  It's 1121.  COURT:  Yes.  GRANT:  So maybe the binder could be 1121 and that could be  Exhibit 1121, bracket 1, Exhibit 1121, tab 1.  (EXHIBIT 1121-1: BLANKET TRAPLINE PROPOSAL DATED  FEBRUARY 19, 1985)  And tab 1 is what?  The February 19th, 1985, blanket trapline proposal.  All right.  It's already an exhibit?  Yes, it's already Exhibit 631.  Thank you.  That will be 1121-1.  I think the reporter handed me back the one the  witness was looking at yesterday.  And the July 11th,  '85, letter, which was Exhibit 633-A, could be Exhibit  1121-2.  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE  THE  MR.  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE COURT:  MR. GRANT:  What is 1121-2, what is it again  July 11th, 1985 letter from Mr.  Steventon.  9  Sterritt to Mr.  (EXHIBIT 1121-2:  TO STEVENTON)  LETTER DATED JULY 11, 1985 - STERRITT  THE REGISTRAR:  Could you provide me with tab 1? 1925?  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  MR. GRANT:    At the break I will give you that tab 1.  THE REGISTRAR:  All right.  WILLMS:  My lord, my friend also referred to an extract from  the Praxl file to the witness and I wonder if he is  going to mark that too?  Yes.  I think that would be appropriate.  I have got  copies of that.  And that could be tab, Exhibit 1121.  Tab 3?  Tab 3.  MR.  MR. GRANT:  THE COURT:  MR. GRANT:  (EXHIBIT 1121-3:  EXTRACT FROM PRAXL FILE)  JAMES DOUGLAS STEVENTON, Resumed:  CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GRANT:  (Continued)  MR. GRANT:  Q   Mr. Steventon, I want to understand something quite  clearly that you, I believe you explained yesterday.  If I can refer you to Schedule "A" to the Notice to  Admit, the first volume of these three volume binders.  That was an exhibit number, I believe, 1120?  THE REGISTRAR:  Yes.  MR. GRANT:  Exhibit 1120, volume 1.  Could you put that in front  of the witness?  Q   And if you could just turn, I think we have used -- my  friend used tab 3 and it will suffice for what we --  just turn to tab 3.  A   Yes.  Q   This is the document you had identified and there is  others in here interspersed?  A   That's correct.  Q   Now, tab 3 has a four page -- it's five pages, but it  has a four page list with your signature on the  bottom?  A   That's correct.  Q   Now, if I understand your evidence correctly, what you  had to work with was this list; is that right?  A   That's correct.  Q   And you were given the list by Mr. Willms or Mr.  Mackenzie, and you went into your files to see if the  documents in this list were in your files?  A  Well, the -- this represented a file folder by this  title, the file number the trapline number --  Q   Because you had the trapline file number, 604-T010,  you only had to go to one file, and I said files, I 19259  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 understand what you're saying?  2 A   That's correct.  3 Q   So you went to one file, in this indicate, 604-T010,  4 and what you did, you went and looked at this list to  5 see if documents matching this description were in the  6 file; is that right?  7 A   Their staff had made up this list and I compared that  8 list to the contents of that file, yes.  9 Q   You never went to photo reproduction of documents  10 given to you by Mr. Mackenzie, you never went to the  11 black binders of documents?  12 A   No, I didn't.  13 Q   You don't know whether this list reflects that black  14 binder or not?  15 A   No, I don't.  16 Q   And you don't know whether the documents in the black  17 binder that match this description -- whether the  18 documents in the blank binder are the same as the  19 documents in your file?  20 A   No, I don't.  21 Q   For example, remember yesterday I showed you the Praxl  22 document which have you found was illegible?  23 A   Yes.  24 Q   You don't know whether the document is better in the  25 black binder or whether you have a better copy in your  26 file?  2 7 A   No, I don't know.  28 Q   If you just look over to the last page of that, you  29 see page five, this is a certification of Mr. Marshall  30 of April 26th of '88th, application for registration  31 dated April 30th, '74, if you could just put tab 3 --  32 Exhibit 1121-3 to the witness.  That's right in there.  33 You, I understand this is Mr. Marshall and this is  34 where I didn't see it on your list yesterday and I  35 didn't understand but I see now that is Mr. Marshall's  36 certification at the end of this tab.  But you could  37 not determine, let's say, that you dealt with an  38 application for registration such as this one of your  39 certifications that you were looking at?  40 A   Yes.  41 Q   The copy in your file may have been legible or may  42 have been not legible or any other number of things?  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   But all you would do is from this description you  45 could tell that this was an application for  46 registration of a trapline dated August 30th, '74 and  47 that's all you can tell from that description? 19260  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  6  A  7  Q  8  A  9  Q  10  11  A  12  Q  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  A  28  Q  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  THE COURT  39  MR. GRANT  40  THE COURT  41  MR. GRANT  42  Q  43  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  Q  That's correct in this case, yes.  For example, the metes and bounds or geographical  description of the traplines in your files could be  different from the one referred to here, you wouldn't  know?  To this particular one you handed me?  No, from the one listed.  Well, I don't think I quite understand the question.  Well, let's go back -- let's turn back a page, put  aside 1121-3.  Go to the first page.  Number two.  Yes.  Blue copy of application for registration of a  trapline dated December 8, 1979, right?  Yes.  So what you're saying is that you know in your file  there is a blue copy of such a document?  Yes.  You made no comparison of the geographical description  of that document or whether it had a geographical  description or not?  That's correct.  So, for example, in that case, in none of these  applications could you tell us whether or not the  applications had legal descriptions or didn't have --  I am sorry, when I say legal, I mean metes and bounds  descriptions. You understand that?  Yes.  You can't say that?  Not without referring back to the file, right.  And you never made notations of those when you --  No, I didn't.  So what you basically did was do a quick run-through  of this, see, okay there is a blue copy of that date  and you checked it off?  That's correct.  Fair enough.  While I am on this topic, can you go to  tab 66 in this big red or -- Exhibit 1120.  Is that volume one?  Yes, it is, my lord.  All right.  Now, this, if I recall correctly, is another one that  you have signed at the back, right on page ten?  Yes, that's correct.  152 entries?  Yes.  Well, number two, it's a handwritten note from Moses 19261  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 David dated October 19th, 1980, that wasn't a document  2 prepared by a government official, was it?  3 A   No, that would have been written by Moses David.  4 Q   And you don't know what that document says or whether  5 it has anything --  6 A   No, I don't.  7 Q   Whether it has anything to do with your business?  8 A   It would have had to do with traplines to be in that  9 file.  I don't know the specific contents of that  10 letter.  11 Q   Did you read each of the handwritten notes that you  12 found in the files as matching this list, did you read  13 them to be sure they did relate to traplines?  14 A   No, it did not.  15 Q   Number eight, handwritten note by Diane, re Moses  16 David, you don't know who Diane is do you, or do you?  17 A   In this case I do, it's one of our secretaries.  18 Q   You don't know whether that was some business note  19 made by her, you don't know what it had to do with it  20 at all, do you?  21 A   No, I don't.  22 Q   Who is Mr. Guay, G-U-A-Y, for the record, I am  23 referring to number 15 on your list?  24 A   I believe he was a conservation officer in Prince  25 George at that time.  26 Q   Number 32, you have indicated a correction there, it's  27 a photocopy of a handwritten note, not a handwritten  28 note, it's a photocopy, right?  29 A   Yes.  30 Q   Now that -- you have no knowledge of whether that was  31 some business, something -- some business record or  32 who authored it, do you?  33 A   No, not without referring back to it, no.  34 Q   Before I go any further, just so that I understand,  35 Mr. Steventon, did you check to determine whether or  36 not these lists covered every document in your file?  37 A   Yes.  38 Q   Or these are lists of documents in the files?  39 A   Correct.  40 Q   Are they a list of every document in these files?  41 A   Yes, they are.  If there was something missing I would  42 have indicated it on the list prior to signing.  43 Q   Okay.  Do you recall if on any of them there were  44 things missing?  45 A   I don't recall for certainty but there were very few,  46 if any.  47 Q   Look at number 33 on that list, a crime report re 19262  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 Moses David dated November 8, '77?  2 A   Yes.  3 Q   That wasn't a business record of your office, was it?  4 A   Yes, I actually recall that document was a crime  5 report on a case of trapping on someone else's  6 trapline.  7 Q   I understand what you're saying it is, and I know what  8 it is too, but I am saying it wasn't -- do you  9 remember if it was generated from your office?  10 A  As I recall -- I don't recall, no.  11 Q   You don't know?  12 A   No.  13 Q   Well, let me say this, it's not the practice to keep  14 in your trapline files, crime reports as a matter of  15 course, is it?  16 A   Not as a matter of course.  17 Q   You don't usually do that?  18 A   Not usually.  19 Q   And 35 and 36 you can't recall who authored those and  20 you didn't make reference to an author for either of  21 those?  22 A   That's correct.  23 Q   Number 52, this isn't part of your usual business  24 records and trapline files, is it, a photocopy of a  25 report entitled A Brief History of Game Administration  26 in B. C?  You don't keep those in your traplines  27 files, do you?  28 A   You wouldn't find those in most trapline files.  29 Q   Number 81, there is a typewritten letter from Johnny  30 David dated April 4th, '75 and, once again, this  31 wouldn't be a document generated by your ministry,  32 obviously, it's not a document created by a government  33 official?  34 A   No.  35 Q   And it's not a document created by a trapper as  36 required under the regulations, is it?  37 A  As required under the regulations?  3 8 Q   Hm-hmm, or --  39 A   I don't know the contents of that letter.  It must  40 have been written to us.  41 Q   Trappers file annual returns, right?  42 A   Not any more.  They used to.  43 Q   Yes.  Fair enough.  And when did that stop?  44 A   I believe that stopped with the '82, or in that --  45 around that time.  4 6 Q   Around those amendments?  47 A   Yes. 19263  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 Q   So there may be pre-1982 returns of trappers that are  2 documents that they required, were required to file,  3 they may be located in some of these files, do you  4 agree with that?  5 A   That's correct.  6 Q   Other than those returns of trappers and other than  7 applications for registration of traplines signed by  8 trappers, there are no other documents to your  9 knowledge that trappers were required or obligated to  10 produce to your ministry?  11 A   That's correct.  12 Q   That would be fair to say, eh?  13 A   Hm-hmm.  14 Q   Remember yesterday I showed you the letter of -- I  15 think it's Exhibit 1121, tab 2, the letter of Mr.  16 Sterritt of July 11th, '85, expressing concern over  17 the implementation of the A.T.N, system?  18 A   Yes.  19 Q   If I remember your evidence correctly, you indicated  20 that this -- that you passed this on to your superior,  21 it was beyond your responsibility or your authority?  22 A   That's correct.  23 Q   Now, what is -- that was in 1985, and I take it it's  24 the same scope of authority you have had from '84 to  25 the present; is that right?  It hasn't changed, your  26 job hasn't changed?  27 A   That's correct.  28 Q   By the way, did you replace somebody?  29 A   No, my position was a new position in 1984.  30 Q   And it was a new position because of the implementing  31 of the A.T.N, system; is that correct?  32 A   That may have been part of it, but it was a general  33 increase in staffing for the region.  34 Q   What other duties did you have besides the trapline  35 administration?  36 A   I do a wide range of duties regarding advising on  37 hunting regulations, trapping regulations, conducting  38 wildlife inventories.  39 Q   Stop at those, if you can.  Mr. Van Drimmelen was also  40 involved in those tasks, was he not?  41 A   Yes.  42 Q   He was a wildlife biologist in place at the same time  43 you were, wasn't he?  44 A   He was my immediate supervisor.  45 Q   Has he been replaced?  46 A   Yes, he has.  47 Q   Who is your supervisor now, immediate supervisor? 19264  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 A  Allan Edie, E-D-I-E.  2 Q   Well, what percentage of your work was relating to  3 trapline administration in the 1984-1985 period?  4 1984-1986 period, let's say,  5 A   I would say roughly 50 percent.  6 Q   What about today?  7 A   It would be close to the same.  Maybe somewhat less,  8 30 to 35 percent.  9 Q   Okay.  Relating to trapline administration, and if we  10 look at the -- I interrupted you, you were saying what  11 other tasks you do, trapline administration, you deal  12 with wildlife inventory, advising on hunting  13 regulations, what else?  14 A   Devising wildlife habitat enhancement programmes,  15 dealing with public groups.  16 Q   Sorry, devising them?  17 A   Yes.  Dealing with public groups on wildlife. Quite a  18 wide variety.  19 Q   What do you mean, like, what kinds of public groups?  20 A   For instance, hunting clubs, guide outfitters, general  21 public.  22 Q   Do you administer the guide outfitting aspects of your  23 region as well?  24 A   Not directly, no.  25 Q   Who is in charge of that?  26 A   That would be, well primarily Allan Edie, I gather the  27 ultimate authority is with the regional manager.  28 Q   When you received Mr. Sterritt's letter of July 11,  29 '85, you passed it on because it was beyond the scope  30 of your authority?  31 A   Yes.  32 Q   What is the scope of your authority relating to  33 traplines?  You agree that letter relates to  34 traplines?  35 A   Yes.  Essentially my authority is to conduct the day-  36 to-day administration according to the normal policies  37 and procedures.  In this case this was something that  38 was obviously outside the normal scope of our policy  39 and procedures so I had to refer it.  40 Q   And if I understand correctly -- so at this time, in  41 1985, above you was Mr. Van Drimmelen?  42 A   Yes.  43 Q   And above him ultimately was Mr. Willett at that time?  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   And below you was Mr. Marshall?  46 A   Correct.  47 Q   What about circumstances where Indian people asked 19265  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  A  7  8  9  Q  10  A  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Q  19  20  A  21  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  27  Q  28  29  A  30  31  Q  32  33  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  MR. WILLM  39  40  41  42  43  MR. GRANT  44  Q  45  46  47  A  that their traplines be registered but not in what we  consider the normal descent pattern, when I say we, I  mean non-natives, consider the normal descent pattern,  that is, on a patrilineal basis, was that beyond your  scope of authority?  No.  The present procedures or policies say that --  are you speaking like in the instance of a deceased  trapper?  Yes.  Yes. The present policies allow most extended family  relations to be eligible, such as cousins, uncles,  nephews, et cetera.  The only time we had any  difficulty, we have had difficulty with that is with,  in cases of conflicting applications.  So if there was  no conflicting application, we would have no problem  with registering it to a nephew or some other extended  relative.  Were you aware of a policy change in 1981 with respect  to that?  That would have been, 1981 would have been prior to  our current policy or procedure.  Do you know Mr. Akerman?  Yes, I do.  Who is he?  In 1981, he would have been the regional conservation  officer in Smithers.  And would he have been in charge of trapline  administration?  Yes, at that time it was still under the  administration of the conservation officer service.  Why was that change made?  You indicated that it went  from the conservation officer's administration to the  regional office, in other words the trapline  registration in a way became more centralized, you  would agree with me?  In a way, yes.  That is —  3:  My lord, I take my friend's question as what's his  understanding.  I don't object to that.  But obviously  the policy of the government wasn't set by this  witness.  He can certainly ask what his understanding  of it was, of the change was.  Well, let me go back a bit.  As part of your functions  when you took over, were you trained as to what the  policies were with respect to trapline administration?  Yes, through my supervisor. 19266  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  A  3  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  A  10  11  Q  12  13  14  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  A  21  22  Q  23  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  35  A  36  37  38  Q  39  40  MR. WILLMS  41  42  43  44  MR. GRANT:  45  Q  46  47  Mr. Van Drimmelen?  When I first started that would have been in Fort St.  John and then when I came --  Who was that your administrator there, supervisor?  My supervisor there was Fred Harper.  And -- but you also became familiar with the previous  policies relating to traplines in order for you to  carry on your own functions; is that right?  I did not spend a lot of time reviewing the past  policies, no.  In four years of trapline administration for the  Skeena region, you have become familiar with the  history of the policy of trapline administration,  haven't you?  I have some feeling for it, yes.  And you would agree with me that you were aware that  there was a policy within the Skeena region that  allowed for an effort to protect and keep Indian  traplines in Indian hands?  I am not sure in that was a regional policy or not.  It wasn't clear to me.  Have you reviewed any of the documents -- in the  preparation of the A.T.N, system, have you reviewed  any of the historical documents with respect to the  registration of the -- of specific trapline files?  Yes, we did.  I did.  And you have looked at correspondence that was in  those files, that is, earlier historical  correspondence?  Some of it, yes.  And did you not get a sense that there was -- you are  aware that the Department of Indian Affairs was  actively involved in the administration of traplines  within the Skeena region in earlier days?  Yes, a lot of the older registrations were signed by  the Indian agent at that time on behalf of somebody,  yes .  And you wouldn't be surprised if I told you that  the —  :  I object to that, my lord.  Whether the witness is  surprised or not is neither here nor there.  If my  friend has a proper question he can ask a proper  question.  Wait until I finish.  You know that the Indian agent actively worked with  the game department to protect and keep traplines held  by Indians in Indian hands, you are aware of that? 19267  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 A   I have seen some correspondence to that effect, yes,  2 old files.  3 Q   Yes.  How do you decide when you get a letter such as  4 Mr. Sterritt's of July 11th, '85, Exhibit 1121-2, how  5 do you decide whether it's within or beyond your scope  6 of authority?  7 A  Well, that's a judgment.  In that case he was  8 questioning the entire policy and procedure, so it was  9 quite clear.  10 Q   Is there any written statements of the policy as to  11 your -- the scope of your authority?  12 A   No, other than my job description includes such  13 administrative duties.  14 Q   Does your -- and your job description is reduced to  15 writing and that's the basis upon which you do your  16 work?  17 A   That and with the advice and direction of my superiors  18 and the policy procedure manual.  19 Q   I would just like to touch on briefly this  20 correspondence files, I will come back to them, you  21 agree with me that these general miscellaneous  22 correspondence files, which your counsel has now  23 produced, include files relating to different topic  24 areas?  25 A  Well, they generally refer to trapping but many topics  26 within trapping.  27 Q   Well, let me give you an example, and as I haven't had  28 a chance to look at these in detail, the document  29 delivered this morning, one body of it is labelled  30 "Native Indian Traplines"?  31 A   Yes.  32 Q   Another is "Inquiries, 1987"?  33 A   Yes.  34 Q   Another us "Trapping, 1987"?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   And that's separate from Inquiries, 1987?  37 A   Yes, those files are somewhat overlapping in -- the  38 lines of division between those files are somewhat  39 blurred.  40 Q   There is another file, "Trapline Registrations, 1987",  41 volume one?  42 A   Yes.  43 Q   Then it goes to -- then there is a file policy?  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   And then they have Trapline Registration, 1988,  46 Trapping, 1985.  Now, just to be clear on that,  47 trapline registration file and trapping files are two 1926?  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 separate components that you try to keep separate; is  2 that right?  3 A   Yes.  But those -- there is a lot of overlap in  4 content between those files.  5 Q   Right, I understand that.  There is one, Cabin  6 Registration, that's a separate file category?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   And Native Indian Traplines, 1988, that's a separate  9 category?  10 A   Yes.  11 Q   Inquiries, 1984.  So, what I am saying, you agree that  12 these general miscellaneous correspondence files re  13 trapping, which is the generic grouping, are  14 categorized in different groups?  15 A   Yes, they are.  16 Q   Now, do you know where the policies would be filed  17 previous to 1983?  18 A   No, not that -- I would have to look in our files.  19 Q   But they would be filed somewhere?  20 A   They may be archived.  21 Q   When you say archived, what are you referring to?  22 A  Well, some old files have been sent either to the  23 ministry headquarters in Victoria for storage, older  24 files that we felt we didn't need in the office or  25 some of the very old ones are in the provincial  26 archives.  27 Q   I am talking about, let's say, 1982, they wouldn't be  28 archived that recently, would they?  29 A   I am not sure.  There was around that time, previous  30 files were sent or files previous to that time were  31 sent to Victoria for keeping at headquarters.  32 Q   When?  33 A   There were some sent down approximately a year ago, a  34 general file housekeeping done in our ministry office.  35 Q   So these are in the ministry -- some of these files  36 may be in the ministry office in Victoria?  37 A   That's quite possible.  38 Q   Where would you keep the inquiries before 1983?  39 A   They would have been in some file.  40 Q   And the native Indian traplines would have been in  41 some file?  42 A   If there was a heading of that at that time.  43 Q   Right.  But when you reviewed the files with the  44 listing provided to you by Mr. Willms' office, you  45 didn't find all -- you didn't find all correspondence  46 in -- correspondence in all files such as the tab 66  47 that I referred you to, did you? 19269  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  A   I am not sure I understand you.  Q   Well, what I am saying is that you're not satisfied  that all of the correspondence relating to traplines  is contained in those files that you reviewed for the  listing of Mr. Willms?  A   The ones I reviewed were the trapline specific files  or for the specific traplines, not the general  correspondence.  Q   Right.  And I understand you have made, at Mr. Willms'  request, you were making inquiries as to location of  other files, correspondence files?  A   He hasn't made that request yet.  MR. WILLMS:  The witness was under cross-examination.  MR. GRANT:  I thought you talked to him before he started his  cross.  Q   What's the status of the A.T.N, system in other  regions?  A   The system is in place province-wide.  Q   Well, is it completed?  A   The applying of numbers is completed, the revision on  to base maps, I don't think that has been fully  completed province-wide.  Q   It would be fair to say that the Skeena region was the  first one to complete the mapping?  A   I believe -- well, some of the sub regions of  Omineca/Peace were first.  It was around the same  time.  Q   Have you received correspondence relating to logging  impacts on registered traplines since you have been  administering traplines?  A   Yes, we have.  Or I have.  Q   And would you agree with me that there is concern  expressed by trappers about the impact of logging on  their traplines in your region?  A   No.  MR. WILLMS:  I object, my lord.  That's hearsay.  Unless my  friend wants to point to a document that he is  tendering as evidence, that's hearsay.  THE COURT:  Well, unless it goes to the state of mind of the  witness.  But I don't know -- I should add, if that is  a relevant consideration.  Is the state of mind of the  witness relevant, Mr. Grant, on this issue?  Or the  state of his knowledge?  MR. GRANT:  Basically this question was introducing him into the  area, my lord, and the state of mind of the witness is  certainly collateral.  Q   When you received such inquiries or correspondence 19270  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 relating to concerns about logging on traplines, did  2 you take any steps?  3 A   Specifically?  Like for a particular piece of  4 correspondence?  5 Q   Well, what was your practice, what did you do?  6 A   Our practice -- well, it would be to give some sort of  7 response to the trapper, and in some -- quite a few  8 cases we referred his -- if it was a specific  9 complaint we would refer to the Ministry of Forests,  10 and what we refer to the habitation protective staff  11 that deal with the logging plans.  But our ability to  12 solve those problems is limited.  We don't have  13 responsibility for logging.  14 Q   It's -- in other words, I take it that your experience  15 while you have been in is that your department could  16 not stop logging in a particular area because it was  17 adversely impacting trapping?  18 A   That's correct.  19 Q   And in no case have you been able to do that, stop  20 logging since you have been in there?  21 A   That's correct.  22 Q   And is there any written policy with respect to that?  23 A  With respect to --  24 Q   How to deal with complaints concerning logging and the  25 impact of logging on traplines?  26 A   No, there is no written policy, no.  27 Q   Has there been any change in the policy of how to deal  28 with that from your department since you have been in  29 place, '84 to now?  30 A  Well, the only policy is that we try to make available  31 to Ministry of Forests the trapline maps and a list of  32 registered holders so that they or the forests  33 licensees, can at least advise the trapper of any  34 imminent logging activity.  35 Q   Right.  But, in fact, I take it then, having done  36 that, that's really the limit of what you do, they  37 send a letter, if the trapper writes to you and say  38 they are going to log, there is nothing you do because  39 there is nothing you can do?  40 A  Well, we try, in a lot of cases we try to support the  41 trappers in that but there is not a lot concrete we  42 can do, no.  43 Q   What do you mean, what do you do when you try to  44 support them, what do you do to support the trapper?  45 A  Well, we try to impress upon the logging interests the  46 potential impacts that they can have on fur bearers  47 and try to advise them on ways that they can reduce 19271  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  Q  3  4  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  A  14  Q  15  16  A  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Q  25  26  27  A  28  Q  29  A  30  Q  31  32  33  34  A  35  MR GRANT:  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  MR. GRANT  43  Q  44  45  46  A  47  that impact.  You indicated that as a result of the -- of your  delivery of the 1985 letter on the A.T.N, system that  trappers -- I believe there were two disputes, one  where you went into the field up by Iskut, do you  remember that, yesterday you were talking about this?  Two disputes in total?  That's what I am going to come to.  There were two  disputes you went out in the field on, one there and  one up in Terrace as I recall?  Correct.  There were several other disputes, were there?  There were other disputes, yes.  What how did you -- what did you do when you received  disputes relating to your maps?  We would research the particular boundary in question  on the C. 0. working maps and also go into the files  in terms of metes and bounds or other maps that might  exist in files and would attempt to get that  background and then meet with the trappers involved  and hopefully come up with a resolution that way.  If  not, we generally would refer it to our regional  manager.  Are you familiar with a trapline that was formally  named under the head of Edward Wesley & Company?  Does  it ring any bell?  The name Wesley rings a bell.  Herb Wesley rings a bell?  Herb Wesley rings a bell, yes.  Does that document, and I am not asking if you  remember you have seen this exact document, because I  am not going to ask you to exhaust your memory on it,  but it looks familiar to you?  Yes.  This could be the next tab and it would be the  Edward Wesley & Company application for registration  of a trapline dated April 5th, 1955.  (EXHIBIT 1121-4: EDWARD WESLEY APPLICATION FOR  TRAPLINE REGISTRATION DATED APRIL 5, 1955)  Now, I am going to show you another document, do you  recognize this document?  Maybe you could -- do you  recognize this document?  It would appear to be an excerpt from one of the C. 0.  working maps. 19272  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  A  13  Q  14  15  A  16  17  Q  18  A  19  MR. GRANT  20  21  22  A  23  24  25  MR. GRANT  26  27  A  28  29  30  31  Q  32  33  A  34  Q  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  A  44  45  Q  46  47  A  Right.  Now I am going to show you another one.  Keep  that other map there as well.  And I am sorry, you  will need Exhibit 1121-4, the application.  Now can  you put both those maps beside each other.  First of  all, let us identify them.  The third one, would you  agree, the cover, there is a letter with it and that's  similar to the letter that's already been marked, I  think it's 1119 or 1120.  That's your letter that you  sent out in the summer of '85 to different trappers?  Yes.  You sent such a letter to Herbert Wesley, didn't you?  I would presume so, yes.  He was a registered trapper at that time, you remember  his name?  I have talked to Herbert Wesley as recently as a month  ago, so I know him.  You know him?  Yes.  :   Now, I would ask that the 1121-5 be the extract  from the C. 0. working map, that's the one that has  Edward Wesley & Co. and Herbert Wesley on it?  Correct.  (EXHIBIT 1121-5: EXTRACT FROM CO. WORKING MAP -  HERBERT WESLEY AND EDWARD WESLEY & CO.)  :    And 1121-6 be the map -- your letter together with  the A.T.N, map, if I may call it, the A.T.N, map?  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 1121-6: LETTER AND A.T.N. MAP)  And that would be a reproduction from the mylar; is  that correct?  It appears to be, yes.  Now, can you take a look at -- on the Exhibit 1121-6,  the A.T.N, map, you see under the larger 609-TO39, you  see Gitseguekla Lake?  Yes.  There is a little lake beside that, can you read that?  Taltzen Lake.  And would it be right to say that from this map that  Taltzen Lake would be included in the 609-T039  registration?  Yes, it would appear that the boundary falls along the  east shore of the lake.  Right.  And if you look at the C. 0. working map, this  would be the map that preceded the mylar map, right?  Correct. 19273  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  A  3  4  5  6  Q  7  8  A  9  Q  10  11  12  13  14  A  15  16  THE  COURT  17  18  MR.  GRANT  19  20  THE  COURT  21  A  22  23  24  THE  COURT  25  A  26  MR.  GRANT  27  28  29  30  31  32  THE  COURT  33  MR.  GRANT  34  35  THE  COURT  36  A  37  MR.  GRANT  38  Q  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  A  Would you agree with me that Taltzen Lake is excluded?  Well, the maps that they drew then as you see has a  double line so that lake is right on -- in the middle  of that double line between that trapline and the  other.  Okay.  But there is a very black line on the west side  of Taltzen Lake there, you would agree with me there?  Yes, it cuts through the west end of the lake.  I mean, as a relative novice in this area, it looks to  me that Taltzen Lake is excluded there, am I wrong?  Would you agree that somebody who didn't know about  the complexity of your mapping or the C. 0.'s mapping  would assume that Taltzen Lake is excluded?  He could presume that, it's sort of in that in between  position between the traplines.  :  I am sorry, it looks like it's included in, part of  it's included in the copy I have, in the A.T.N, map.  :  Well, there is a creek that goes down below it, you  see the circle to the right of the line?  :  No, I don't see a circle to the right of the line.  I believe part of the lake, the very east or, sorry,  west end of the Taltzen Lake would appear to be  underneath the dark black line.  :  Where is north on this map?  North would be -- as you would read the writing.  :  My lord, I see, now I see what you're looking at.  You're looking at the A.T.N, map with the numbers on  it, and that's quite correct, it appears on that map  and the witness agrees that Taltzen Lake is included  on that map.  But if you look at the C. 0. working  map, it appears that it is excluded.  :  Yes.  :  I just realized the one you were looking at.  I  could see why you said what --  :  It's a very small lake I gather, is it?  Yes, your lordship, it is.  Do you know what the trapping conditions are at that  time at Taltzen Lake?  I am familiar with the lake and the surroundings, yes.  Now, have you done a comparison of the C. 0. working  maps and the matching of those maps to the mylars that  were produced from them?  Not every one, no.  There can be these kinds of disparities between the  two, there may well be several; is that right?  This is an example of one of the practical 19274  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 difficulties of the mapping.  And this is one of the  2 reasons why there are some minor interpretive things  3 with these boundaries and why I sent them out to the  4 trappers.  5 Q   You would agree with me that lakes and shores of lakes  6 are important in certain cases for trappers?  7 A   Quite a few of them are, yes.  8 Q   Because they are good trapping areas?  9 A   They quite often are, yes.  10 Q   So the inclusion or exclusion of the shores of a lake  11 may in some cases be quite important for a trapper?  12 A   It could be, yes.  13 Q   I am showing you a map labelled 93 L NE-SE, so I think  14 that we could interpret that as 93 L, east side?  15 A   Yes.  16 Q   And this, I understand, is what you would call a C. 0.  17 or conservation officer working map?  18 A   Correct.  19 Q   You have seen this before?  20 A   I believe so -- yes, I have.  21 Q   This is one of the documents that's in your custody?  22 A   Yes.  23 Q   And would this have been a document that was  24 maintained in the Smithers office in the C. 0. days?  25 A   Yes, it would be.  26 Q   Now, I am going to show you a photo reproduction of  27 the mylar kindly provided by Mr. Willms, and this you  28 would agree, covers the same area?  29 A   Yes, it does.  30 Q   Okay.  Now, I would like to show you -- and as I  31 understand the process, before we go any further, the  32 mylars were taken from the C. 0. working maps; is that  33 right?  34 A   Yes, with, as I said, with feedback from trappers, and  35 cross-referenced to metes and bounds.  36 Q   But the feedback from trappers was post summer of '85,  37 the feedback was as a result of your letter?  38 A  Mostly, yes.  39 Q   But at the time you delivered your letters, you had  4 0 done mylars, hadn't you?  41 A   Yes, that's correct.  42 Q   Because like with Mr. Wesley's letter, you sent a copy  43 of a map with every one which was your mylar?  44 A   That's correct.  45 Q   But you didn't send a copy of the C. 0. working map  4 6 with them?  47 A   That's correct. 19275  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 Q   And if you had, as we find with Mr. Wesley's there, is  2 that there may have been, as you say, minor  3 discrepencies?  In other words, they weren't exactly  4 the same, you agree with me about that?  5 A   Yes, like in that instance you indicated there is that  6 double line which makes it ambiguous, although the  7 metes and bounds did match that trapline description.  8 Q   With respect to that lake?  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   Well, let's look at your C. 0. working map and you  11 look up here -- now, my lord, I am using the originals  12 of these because the pencil didn't come through in  13 many cases on the print of the C. 0. working maps.  14 You see a line, again you see with this thick red  15 line, two red lines, south of Lagopus Mountain, W. A.  16 Fletcher, old res, R-E-S, check mark, do you see that?  17 A   Yes.  18 Q   Now, you see just below that there is this -- there is  19 a space with a single line on this, I would say on the  20 southern side of Fletcher's trapline, there is a  21 single line and then there is a line straight across.  22 There is a gap there that doesn't refer to anybody,  23 you would agree with that?  24 A   I would agree, yes.  25 Q   Now, when we look at your mylar, that gap appears to  26 be incorporated into what becomes 608-T017?  27 A   Yes, that's correct.  28 Q   Now, do you know or have any idea what the scale of  29 these two would be?  30 A   The size of the area?  31 Q   What size that area would be in the C. 0. working map?  32 A   These maps are two miles to the inch so that's  33 approximately three miles by three quarters of a mile,  34 roughly.  35 Q   So, there is a change, another change like we find  36 with Wesley's trapline here, where an area seems to be  37 incorporated into what was on the C. 0. map described  38 as Clara Baptiste & Company?  39 A   Yes.  40 Q   And I say Clara Baptiste & Company because it's  41 written new, and John Baptiste & Company is crossed  42 off?  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   And it's new, Clara Baptiste & Company, 17-2-84.  45 Now, if you look to, again, on the working map,  46 Fulton River, coming out of Fulton Lake I would  4 7 presume? 19276  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   And on the C. 0. working map you see a George Willie  3 there, with a little notch in there, right?  4 A   Yes.  5 Q   And you would agree with me when you look at the  6 mylar, 608-T084, that's expanded, that area is larger?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   These are the same base maps that we are looking at?  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   When you see something larger on the mylar it's  11 actually a greater area, because you have got the same  12 area that you are working as a base?  13 A   That's correct.  14 Q   Now, when you look at the -- just going down here, on  15 the C. 0. working map, take this out of your way for a  16 moment, you see southeast of Gilmore Lake on the  17 working map as Marcel Rondeau, do you see that?  18 A   Yes.  19 Q   And then you see again on the -- would you agree with  20 me, and then there is a Fontaine there as well?  21 A   Yes.  22 Q   And then you see on the mylar, 609-T002, that both of  23 those are encompassed within one, it appears?  24 A   Yes, if my memory serves me correctly, those were  25 amalgamated on application of those trappers.  26 Q   Do you recall when?  27 A   In the last, I don't recall exactly, in the last few  28 years.  I believe the one marked as Rondeau was  29 transferred to another Fontaine and the two Fontaines  30 amalgamated them, I believe.  I am not positive on  31 that.  32 Q   Now once again, the area of Tom Seymour, do you see  33 that on the map, on the C. 0. working map, Tom Seymour  34 and Co., old region, check?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   By the way, what do those checks mean, they are all in  37 pencil on the working maps?  38 A   I am not sure what the checkmark refers to.  39 Q   You didn't put them on?  40 A   I did not, no.  41 Q   And they weren't put on under your direction?  42 A   Not on my direction.   Mr. Marshall might have put  43 them there, it may have been the CO. prior.  44 Q   Now you see when you look up towards Alwyn Lake and  45 then moving west, you would agree with me that the Tom  46 Seymour & Company trapline has changed, it goes  47 further north of Lars Lake on the mylar? 19277  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  A  2  3  Q  4  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  9  10  11  12  Q  13  14  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  A  28  29  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  35  THE COURT  36  MR. GRANT  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  again, you are in the middle of that double  a mile wide I  It's  line.  And that double line is about half  gather, is it, or quarter mile?  It would be less than that, perhaps a quarter mile.  So, you don't agree that that boundary was changed?  Not substantially.  When we redrafted the maps, we  were using single lines and also, as I believe was  pointed out in the letter of 1985, if it were -- if  there was a zone like that, a band rather than a line,  we went to the height of land.  These descriptions -- for a trapper, these -- it's not  even -- you would agree with me it's not that easy  when you take samples of these, takes even you  sometime to see whether or not the old map description  matches the mylar; is that right?  Yes.  And you would agree with me that if we examine  throughout the C. 0. maps and compare them to the  mylars there would be these kinds of changes, not  necessarily on every trapline, but there would be  these kinds of changes throughout the maps?  You would find those kinds of things, yes.  And you didn't report any specific changes that you  made to the trappers, except by sending them a copy of  the mylar?  In general, yes, unless we had one that we were in  great confusion about.  There are a few cases that we  did write specifically to trappers.  Do you recall who those cases were?  No.  Are they reflected in your correspondence files?  They would probably be, I would expect them to be in  the individual trapper file.  :  Shall we adjourn?  :  It may be a convenient time, my lord.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR SHORT RECESS)  I hereby certify the foregoing to be  a true and accurate transcript of the  proceedings herein to the best of my  skill and ability.  Wilf Roy  Official Reporter 1927?  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  THE  MR. GRANT  THE COURT  MR.  THE  THE  MR.  THE  (PROCEEDINGS RECOMMENCED AFTER BRIEF ADJOURNMENT)  REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  COURT:  Mr. Grant, do you have any more of these instances  where there may be some discrepancy between the  conservation officers' maps and the mylars?  I am not going to lead them in evidence, if that's  what you are leading to. I just wanted to exemplify  the point, that's all.  All right.  Because I am in some doubt, and I  would -- if you are going to pursue the witness about  it much further, I would want to know where it's  leading.  If it's going to be a matter you are going  to bring up in argument, we can talk about it then.  Certainly.  That's all I wanted to -- I would like  to have marked the -- because they are not  conveniently put in the book, and I do have the --  I've got a document book binder for Your Lordship now.  COURT:  All right.  Yes.  All right.  Well, they've all been  marked as exhibits already, have they not?  GRANT:  The specific documents have been marked as exhibits  that go into that binder and with the dash number.  I  would just ask that the next exhibit be the photo  reproduction of the mylar of 93 L East.  And that  would be a separate exhibit number.  MR. GRANT  THE  MR.  THE COURT  Yes  East?  GRANT:  Yes.  COURT:  All right.  REGISTRAR:  No.  GRANT:  I would ask  copies of it,  COURT:  All right.  Just a moment.  It's a photo of mylar, 93 L  That will be 1121-5?  it be 1122, My Lord,  and my friends --  1122.  I don't have five  (EXHIBIT NO. 1122 - PHOTO REPRODUCTION OF  THE MYLAR 93L NESE)  MR. GRANT:  And that was the mylar I referred the witness to.  Q   The photo reproduction, that was the one you were just  examining?  A   Yes.  MR. GRANT:   And 1123 would be the CO. working map for 93 L  East.  THE COURT:  For what number?  MR. GRANT:  Exhibit 1123.  (EXHIBIT 1123 - CO. WORKING MAP 93L NESE) 19279  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  5 THE COURT  6 MR. GRANT  7 THE COURT  1  2 THE COURT:  That's the CO. working map for 93 L East?  3 MR. GRANT:  Yes.  And, My Lord, it's labelled 93 L NESE.  So  4 northeast and southeast.  That's how it's labelled.  Not L East, it's NESE instead of —  93 L NESE.  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  8 MR. WILLMS:  Now, My Lord, I would just at that point — I  9 haven't talked to the witness about the map to the  10 extent that it may still be used for some reason, the  11 day-to-day administration.  I may seek leave to have  12 it withdrawn and brought back, if it's ever necessary.  13 THE COURT:  Yes.  You can speak to that if you find it  14 necessary.  15 MR. GRANT:  Yes.  16 Q   This Exhibit 1123 that I have tendered, this is the  17 one you were referring to just before the break?  18 A   That's right.  19 Q   Which is the parallel conservation officer working map  20 for Exhibit 1122?  21 A   That's correct.  22 THE REGISTRAR:  That's 1123?  2 3 MR. GRANT:  Yes.  24 THE REGISTRAR:  Did you say 93 L NESE?  2 5 MR. GRANT:  Yes.  26 THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you.  27 MR. WILLMS:  Perhaps, My Lord, just before my friend continues,  28 we talked about the privileged documents, and I  29 neglected to hand it up.  Perhaps I can do it now, so  30 I don't forget to do it later.  The list of privileged  31 documents and the copies.  32 THE COURT: Thank you.  33 MR. GRANT:  34 Q   Mr. Steventon, you were describing that in the  35 implementation of the A.T.N, system, if you -- if a  36 dispute arose and you could not resolve it through  37 discussions with the trapper or trappers, that you  38 would ultimately refer to the regional manager?  39 A   Yes.  40 Q   Now, do you recall -- and I don't -- do you have any  41 idea how many persons reacted negatively to the A.T.N.  42 system?  43 A   I couldn't give you a number.  It was certainly a  44 small proportion of the total traplines.  45 Q   Okay.  Did you keep any records of that?  46 A   Yes, generally in the -- yes, in the trapline files.  47 Q   Okay.  And if any member of the public wanted to find 19280  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 out who was disputing about traplines, would you give  2 them those files?  3 A   No, I don't believe that would be -- I would refer  4 that to the regional manager.  That's not normal  5 information we just hand out to the public.  6 Q   Right.  And similarly letters such as Mr. David's  7 letter in that file that you referred to, you wouldn't  8 normally give that to any member of the public?  9 A  Which letter is that?  10 Q   Remember the one in 1975 that you referred to in your  11 certificate from his file?  12 A   The -- the item that is indicated is a letter from  13 Moses David.  14 Q   From Johnny David?  15 A   From Johnny David, most likely not.  16 Q   And the crime report you wouldn't give to any member  17 of the public?  18 A   No.  19 Q   Now, if you had to take these disputes to refer them  20 to the regional manager, would you just give him the  21 file, or would you meet with him and discuss it with  22 him?  23 A   No, usually he would have myself and/or Rick Marshall  24 research the issue from the trappers in the files,  25 provide him with a summary as much as we could of what  26 the -- of the facts of the issue.  27 Q   And make recommendations?  28 A  And in some cases, yes.  Some cases we didn't do that,  29 and some cases we just gave him the facts.  We didn't  30 have a recommendation to make.  Some cases we did.  31 Q   And would you be present at any meetings between him  32 and the trappers?  33 A   Usually I was, yes.  34 Q   Yes.  Now, I would like to just be clear about the  35 impact of the new system, and I am talking about the  36 post-1982 A.T.N, system.  37 A   Yes.  38 Q   And not only -- I am not just referring to the number,  39 although that's a component.  40 A   Okay.  41 Q   This was -- you say this was a -- you may not have  42 said this, so I'll ask you.  Would it be fair to say  43 that it's a reorganization of the trapline  44 administration system?  45 A   Yes, it was a change in the mechanics of how we  46 administered it, yes.  47 Q   Right.  But it was a little bit more than that, wasn't 19281  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 it?  Because the requirements changed as well.  2 A   Requirement for -- I'm not sure.  3 Q   The obligation and responsibilities of the trapper  4 changed as well?  5 A   Yes, in the sense they were no longer required to make  6 an annual report to us.  7 Q   Okay.  But -- let me just refer you to something which  8 may make this easier for you.  9 Now, I think, My Lord, that in fact this document,  10 which is quite thick, there may be two copies of the  11 attachments photocopied on it.  I think I have taken  12 it from one.  That's why -- now, first of all you know  13 who Frank Guillon is?  14 A   Yes, I do.  15 Q   And this letter is dated March 14th, '84, conservation  16 officer, New Hazelton.  And at that time he was the  17 conservation officer in New Hazelton; is that right?  18 A   That's right, yes.  19 Q   Now, in this letter -- My Lord, to my recollection,  20 and I could not locate the exhibit number, this letter  21 has been marked as an exhibit in the examination of  22 Mr. Sterritt, but there were no attachments with it,  23 and I believe either Mr. Goldie -- I can't recall  24 which side tendered the letter, but I think Mr. Goldie  25 asked that the attachments be referred to -- now, what  26 I would like to ask you -- you see his letter, March  27 14, '84.  28  29 "Attached for your information are three new  30 policies of the Ministry of Environement".  31  32 Do you see that?  33 A   Yes.  34 Q   Now, would you just confirm for me that those policies  35 that are attached, the first one is one of three, page  36 one -- it's three pages, "Management of Traplines on  37 Crown Land and Private Property", dated January 25th,  38 1984 is the date effective by D.J. Robertson, that  39 that was one of the new policies implemented around  4 0 that time.  41 A   Yes, that's correct, or the new manual anyway.  42 Q   Yes.  And then if you go to the fourth page over you  43 see "Granting Trapline Privileges" dated February 7th,  44 1984.  45 A   Granting trapping privileges.  46 Q   I'm sorry, yes.  You have that?  47 A   Yes. 19282  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  THE  COURT  5  MR.  GRANT  6  THE  WITNE  7  MR.  GRANT  8  Q  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  22  A  23  Q  24  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  THE  COURT  32  MR.  GRANT  33  THE  COURT  34  MR.  GRANT  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  41  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  And that's a ten page document?  That's correct.  Now --  :  Three pages are only attached.  :  I see that.  3S:  Not all ten pages are there.  :  I see that.  I see.  This may explain it, My Lord.  Let's go -- I think we'll come back to that as we go  through.  There is three pages attached to that.  And  that -- again you would agree with me that that  procedure manual granting trapping privileges was a  new one implemented in February of 1984?  That's correct, yes.  It would have been one of the ones -- if Mr. Guillon  was referring to new policies relating to trapping in  March of '84, this is one of the ones he would have  been referring to?  Yes.  Then you see the next one is "Cancellation of Trapping  Privileges on Crown Land for Inactivity" dated January  25th, 1984, one of three pages?  Yes.  And that again was one of the new policies that was  implemented?  Yes.  Okay.  And then you see "Management of Furbearers",  five pages, and this is dated January 25th, 1984, and  this is again one of the new policies implemented at  that time?  Yes.  Only four pages.  Yes, I see that, My Lord.  All right.  But that procedure manual, that would be again one of  the new policies, I think you have said?  Correct.  Now, if you go on after that, I think you have again  the granting trapping privileges, the ten page memo,  and you have eight of those pages.  But again you have  confirmed that that is one of the policies that would  have been dealt with?  Yes.  You see after that a different type of form.  It looks  like a copy of one of these.  "Management of Traplines  on Crown Land and Private Property", and it's dated  November 28th, '83.  And earlier -- these appear to be 19283  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 all dated November of '83.  And would they be  2 different policies, or are they -- are you familiar  3 with why they would have those?  4 A   There are some dated '84 as well at the end.  5 Q   Yes.  January 4th, '84.  6 A   Those would appear to be the actual policy statements  7 from which the procedures are derived.  8 Q   So those would be the policy statement, and then it  9 was put into the policy manual, which was the earlier  10 form?  11 A   Procedure manual.  Separate policy manual and  12 procedure manual.  13 Q   Does the policy manual, does it refer to trapping as  14 well?  15 A   Yes, it does, as indicated on these forms.  16 Q   I see.  Okay.  So what you're saying is that these --  17 these secondary forms are -- would come out of the  18 policy manual?  19 A   These last ones you referred to appear to be from the  20 policy manual.  21 MR. GRANT:   Okay.  I would ask that this document be marked as  22 the next exhibit and attachments, My Lord.  23 THE REGISTRAR:  1121-7.  24  25 (EXHBIT NO. 1121-7 - LETTER DATED MARCH 14,  26 1984 WITH ATTACHED POLICIES RE TRAPLINES)  27  2 8    THE COURT:  Yes.  All right.  29 MR. GRANT:  Thank you.  30 Q   Now, what I would like to -- you have already referred  31 to one change.  Trappers did not have to file annual  32 returns.  This was one change as a result of the 1984  33 changes and the adoption of the A.T.N, system, right?  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   Of course that had nothing to do with remapping, the  36 fact of no requirements for returns?  It didn't have  37 anything to do with that, did it?  38 A   Sorry, I don't see your connection there.  39 Q   Well, in other words, the fact that trappers didn't  40 have to make returns had nothing to do with the new  41 mapping of the trapping grounds?  42 A   Not with the mapping, no.  43 Q   Okay.  But trappers, all trappers -- let me ask you  44 this.  Prior to 1982 is it correct to say that Indian  45 people were not required to file returns?  46 A   I am actually not sure on that.  47 Q   Okay. 19284  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  THE  COURT  2  3  4  MR.  GRANT  5  THE  COURT  6  MR.  GRANT  7  THE  COURT  8  9  MR.  GRANT  10  THE  COURT  11  MR.  GRANT  12  Q  13  14  15  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  28  29  30  Q  31  32  33  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  A  Well, this item, "Cancellation of Trapping Privilege  in Crown Land", certainly suggests there has got to be  some reporting.  This is post-1984, My Lord.  This is the new policy.  Yes.  But it suggests --  Which one, cancellation?  "Cancellation of Trapping Privileges on the Crown  Lands for Inactivity".  Yes.  And I am going to come to that.  All right.  I'll leave it 'til you get to it.  I'm sorry, My Lord.  This was one of the other factors, wasn't it, which  was a use it or lose it policy that was implemented at  this time?  That is, if you did not use your trapline  for one year and take $200 worth of game off it, or  show that you made an effort to do so, you would lose  it?  From '84?  Yes.  That's correct.  And prior to that there was not a use it or lose it  requirement?  I am not sure.  You have no knowledge of the policy beforehand  relating to this?  Well, I have only seen references in the files to  cancellations of traplines for non-use.  I have seen  some of those.  But I am not sure what the policies as  such were prior to that.  But in terms of the disputes and the issues that were  raised with you by trappers, wasn't this one of the  big issues that was raised, that if they left their  trapline, let it lie for two years, they could lose  it?  Wasn't that an issue that was raised with you?  In conjunction with the procedures today, yes.  Right.  But didn't you understand that that was a  change?  No.  You were unaware -- you don't know what the policy was  beforehand?  I don't know what the official policy was on use of  traplines prior.  Okay.  But at least in post-'84 you agree with me that  the regulations required this?  That was in the regulations, yes.  And it wasn't beforehand to your knowledge?  I don't know what the regulations said prior to the 19285  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 new Wildlife Act.  I haven't looked at them.  2 Q   You never looked at them?  You never referred to the  3 use it or lose it policy before 1984?  4 A   No, I haven't.  5 Q   Wasn't that raised with you by Indian trappers as a  6 concern they had?  7 A   It was -- the use provision was raised as a concern  8 today, but it was not raised as a concern from some  9 prior time.  10 Q   Well, wasn't it raised as a concern -- wasn't it  11 raised with you that this was a concern of Indian  12 trappers, because they were -- because it was a  13 change?  14 A   I don't recall it being an issue in terms of a change.  15 Some trappers raised it with me as an issue -- just as  16 an issue.  17 Q   And you never investigated whether it was a change?  18 A   No, I didn't.  19 Q   Okay.  But there is another requirement, another  20 impact of the A.T.N, system, and that was that all  21 trappers had to have an A.T.N., right, assigned  22 trapper number?  23 A   That's the form of identification of the trapline,  24 yes.  25 Q   But they all had to have that number to sell their  26 furs?  27 A   That's correct, yes.  2 8 Q   And that's a change?  29 A   Yes, that's correct.  30 Q   They didn't have to do that before?  31 A   They had to -- not the assigned trapper number as  32 such.  They had to identify themselves when they sold  33 fur.  34 Q   But the purpose of the assigned trapper number to fur  35 buyers was so you can determine if a trapper with a  36 particular number is actually getting furs, right?  It  37 rationalizes your system?  38 A   That's correct, it allows us to monitor harvest on a  39 geographical basis rather than a provincial basis.  40 Q   And you were not aware that before this change, one of  41 the concerns expressed and one of the concerns -- I'm  42 sorry.  I won't phrase the question that way.  Before  43 that change your department could not monitor returns  44 on a geographic basis?  You would agree with that?  45 A   Not nearly as effectively.  46 Q   Right.  And one reason it could not be monitored was  47 because Indian people were not required to file 19286  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 returns before this change, Indian trappers?  2 A   I'm actually not sure on the requirement.  You know,  3 if you look through the files, there are some returns,  4 there are some that are not.  So I'm not sure whether  5 it was a requirement or not.  6 Q   There was also a requirement of the -- of registering  7 cabins on traplines, which was a new policy?  8 A   That was a change of administrative procedure, in that  9 prior all cabins had to be licensed through or somehow  10 permitted through the Ministry of Crown lands.  There  11 was a change to -- in the processing of those  12 applications to go through our Ministry to Crown  13 lands, rather than directly to Crown lands, and that  14 was 1985 actually.  15 Q   Okay.  And that was opposed by Indians within your  16 region, to your knowledge, wasn't it?  17 A   By some.  I don't recall an official -- any kind of  18 official opposition to that from an organization as  19 such.  20 Q   You don't recall any official opposition by the  21 Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en chiefs?  22 A   I don't recall.  23 Q   Okay.  24 A   I know some individuals objected, yes.  25 Q   Was Michael Whatly the regional manager of the Fish  26 and Wildlife branch in 1983?  27 A   I believe -- I actually wasn't there at that time, but  28 I believe he was acting for a short period.  2 9 Q   You know him?  30 A   I know him, yes.  31 Q   And he was -- was he a biologist?  32 A   He was a Regional Fisheries Biologist.  33 Q   I have got a letter I would like to show you, dated  34 August 22nd, 1983, and the top is cut off.  This is a  35 letter to the Gitanmaax Band, and it appears to be  36 signed by Mr. Whatly, W-h-a-t-1-y, the Regional  37 Manager of the Skeena Region, copy to Rick -- R.  38 Marshall.  And this would be a letter coming from your  39 department?  40 A   Yes.  41 Q   Now, in this letter Mr. Whatly states on page 2, and  42 this is a letter to the band, and he describes the  43 A.T.N, system.  He states in the second paragraph --  44 I'm sorry, at page 1.  I should start there.  45  46 "At the present time the compilation of  47 fur-trader returns is the only method available 19287  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 to allow us to obtain fur harvest statistics on  2 a province-wide basis.  That information is not  3 useful in detecting local furbearer population  4 changes and does not assist us in promoting the  5 use of traplines.  It is our opinion that  6 existing populations of furbearers are  7 sufficient to maintain an annual commercial  8 production many times greater than the present  9 level.  It is our intentoin, therefore, to  10 promote trapping activities in the Skeena  11 region.  12 A significant portion of the traplines in  13 the Skeena Region are or were trapped by  14 natives.  Because natives are not required to  15 annually re-register their traplines,  16 information pertaining to who is presently  17 trapping what area is extremely poor.  In many  18 instances traplines have been passed from one  19 person to the another without records being  20 kept.  Trapline boundaries are very  21 inaccurate."  22  23 Now, I would like to stop there.  When you came  24 into the Skeena region to administer the traplines,  25 would that statement in that last paragraph be  26 consistent with what you found, that is the last  27 paragraph?  28 A  When I came in '84, of course the new policies were in  29 effect, so --  30 Q   I am talking about the last paragraph, the state of  31 the trapline registration system.  32 A   For the most part, particularly in terms of updating  33 the current holders of the traplines.  34 Q   Okay.  But also the trapline boundaries, you would  35 agree with that statement, were very inaccurate at  36 that time?  37 A   I'm not sure of the context of that statement there.  38 If it's in the context of the metes and bounds, that  39 could have -- I would agree with that, the metes and  40 bounds are very difficult to understand.  41 Q   And the metes and bounds was the system in place until  42 you did the mylar system?  43 A  Well, in conjunction with those working maps that  44 represented visual image of where the traplines were.  45 Q   The working maps were an effort to visualize what the  46 metes and bounds said?  47 A   That's correct, yes. 192?  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  MR.  GRANT  13  14  THE  COURT  15  16  17  18  19  MR.  WILLM  20  21  MR.  GRANT  22  23  Q  24  25  A  26  MR.  GRANT  27  28  29  THE  COURT  30  MR.  GRANT  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  36  Q  37  A  38  Q  39  40  A  41  42  43  Q  44  A  45  Q  46  47  A  But the metes and bounds, I think you said yesterday,  was the legal -- was what you went to as the --  Yes, that was the fall back, yes.  Wasn't it the --  That was the official registration.  Official registration?  Yes.  Now, then he goes on to describe the system on page 2.  And that first paragraph is a fair summary of what you  in fact became involved in doing?  Yes, that's correct.  :  I would ask that that be marked as the next exhibit  in the document book.  :  1121-8.  (EXHIBIT NO. 1121-8 - LETTER DATED AUGUST  22, 1983 TO GITNAMAAX BAND RE TRAPLINES)  3:  My Lord, perhaps my friend could identify, just for  the record, the handwriting on it.  :  Yes.  I would ask the Court to -- this is a letter  that was sent to the Gitanmaax Band.  The handwriting on the bottom, you don't recognize  that handwriting, do you?  No, I don't.  :   That handwriting is a -- is written by a staff -- a  former staff person at the Gitanmaax Band, My Lord,  and I ask you to disregard it.  :  Thank you.  :  Just who the letter was sent to, that's all.  When were you first contacted about providing maps of  the registered traplines for the purpose of this  litigation?  The first contact.  I believe that would be the phone  call from Dr. Bandy, as I would recall.  And when did you say that was?  That was in January of '86, I believe it was.  Okay.  The mapping was not completed, I think at that  time, if I remember your evidence rightly.  The mapping -- we had done the mapping.  We were in  the process of asking for input back from the trappers  at that stage.  They weren't official yet.  Okay.  In the legal and the --  And prior to that time you had no knowledge that these  maps would be required?  That's correct. 19289  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 Q   Had you been contacted prior to that time with --  2 about the existence of this litigation?  3 A   No, I don't recall any contact prior to that.  4 Q   Thank you.  Or informed by your superior about it?  5 A   No, I don't believe so.  6 Q   Okay.  Do you remember -- do you know the name  7 David -- do you remember David Blackwater?  8 A   I recall the name.  I believe he is one of the  9 trappers.  10 Q   Do you remember the circumstances surrounding the  11 transfer of a trapline of Charlie Sampson to David  12 Blackwater?  13 A   I don't remember the particulars, no.  14 Q   Do you recall that Mr. Marshall was involved in that?  15 A   I believe he was, yes.  16 Q   Okay.  Without reviewing all the correspondence, you  17 don't remember anything about him?  18 A   No, I don't recall the circumstances.  19 Q   Were you involved in the decision relating to it, to  20 the transfer?  21 A   I don't recall specifically, other than perhaps -- I  22 believe Rick Marshall, I think, was handling --  23 getting together the information on that.  I may have  24 conferred with him on it.  I don't recall.  25 Q   You do recall Charlie Sampson's name?  26 A   The name rings a bell, yes.  27 Q   And he had a relative, Perry Sampson, to whom Fish and  28 Wildlife wanted that trapline transferred to?  Does  29 that help refresh your memory?  30 A   I'm sorry, I don't recall the circumstances.  31 Q   Okay.  The decision with respect to the transfer of  32 that trapline to David Blackwater, did you participate  33 in that decision?  34 A   I likely could have.  I don't specifically recall.  35 Q   Well, it's my understanding that what -- and just to  36 refresh your memory, if this helps you, that Perry  37 Sampson was the son of Charles Sampson, and that your  38 department wanted to pass the trapline to the son.  39 The band council resolution was sent -- or there was  40 correspondence to you, to your department, to you or  41 Mr. Marshall relating to this, and saying that it  42 should be passed to David Blackwater.  43 A   I recall in general terms something to that effect,  44 although I would say we don't want to transfer a  45 trapline to anybody that wouldn't have been -- there  46 would have been an application from somebody for a  47 trapline. 19290  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  Q  12  THE  COURT  13  14  15  16  MR.  GRANT  17  THE  COURT  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  MR.  GRANT  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  THE  COURT  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  MR.  GRANT  44  45  46  47  When a person dies?  Uh-huh.  Then you want to get a successor on the line?  Correct, yes.  And any successor, as far as you are concerned, as  long as the line isn't left vacant, would do?  As long as that person qualifies.  By qualifying, meaning the right age and citizen and  those kinds of requirements?  That's correct.  Right.  :  Mr. Grant, sorry to interrupt, but I am having  trouble understanding what this is all about.  Surely  I am not here to determine the rights and wrongs of  trapline disputes.  :  No.  :  That doesn't seem to me to be the issue.  As I see  it, the Province is adducing evidence of a trapline  management system for the purpose, I suppose, of  showing how jurisdiction has been exercised or -- and  reducing it to its most simplistic terms, perhaps, in  support of a plea of extinguishment, something of that  order.  How does the operation of that system in  relation to individual cases advance or detract from  that issue?  Or is there some issue that I haven't yet  attached to or associated with this part of the case?  :  Well, it may well be the Province is relying on what  you're saying.  There are also, of course, pleadings  with respect to acquiescence.  And the issue that I am  illiciting through this witness relates to the  maintenance of -- by the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en of  their system, and their efforts to maintain that  through the dealings with this department relating to  traplines here, of course, specifically.  :  Well, I must say I am trying to follow the evidence,  but I don't recall, at least in your cross-examination  to date, anything that would advance or detract from  whatever position your evidence has shown regarding  the maintenance of the Indian system, and how this  department dealt with individual cases seems to me to  be beside the point.  Perhaps I am looking at it in an  overly technical way or overly simplistic way.  :  The difficulty I have with it, My Lord, is that the  individual cases are reflected in these 20 volumes of  paper that the defendants are tendering through this  witness, which includes much more than what you have  now become accustomed to as -- and what we have 19291  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  admitted as business records, that is applications and  renewals.  It deals with -- as the example --  THE COURT:  All it shows is there is a system in place.  It may  not be a very good one.  It may be a perfect one.  Your clients may or may not think much of it, but  what -- how does it advance anything to know about  these individual cases?  MR. GRANT:  If my friends are only tendering these 20 volumes to  show that there is a system in place, then I -- then  that may well be the case, but I suspect more, and  maybe I'm wrong on that, but I suspect that my friends  will go to specific -- they want these documents  tendered, My Lord.  They clearly want all of this  material tendered, and have gone to great lengths to  do so, and I understand that they want to do that to  rely on the written documents that are there, and at  that point --  THE COURT:  I think they want to show that the Indians  participated in the operation of the system.  It's not  a system that is not operational.  I think that's what  they are putting all these documents in for.  But it  seems to me that you would have to show that the  system isn't operational, that these are not genuine  documents and that sort of thing.  But to show that --  how a particular dispute was resolved, as I have said,  I find at the moment unhelpful.  I am not going to  stop you, Mr. Grant.  You are well into it, and I am  certainly prepared to allow you to proceed.  I just  think that I should alert you the concern I have in  finding a reason for what we are doing.  MR. GRANT:  Yes.  Well, My Lord, the question is that — with  respect to this system, is the view from which one  approaches this system.  And I think you have heard  lots of evidence from the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en as to  what they understood was going on.  There's been  evidence given on commission by Mr. Boyes as to what  he was trying to do, and this is now the Provincial --  the voice of the Provincial Game Branch through Mr.  Steventon as to what they were trying to do.  THE COURT:  Well —  MR. GRANT:  Not -- but what they understood was going on.  I  shouldn't say what they were trying to do.  What they  understood was happening.  THE COURT:  I am not sure I care what they understood was  happening.  What I am hearing is simply that they had  a system, and they made these changes, and this was  their policy, and presumably the documents would show 19292  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  MR. GRANT  10  11  12  THE COURT  13  MR. GRANT  14  Q  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  32  33  34  35  36  Q  37  38  39  40  A  41  42  Q  43  44  45  A  46  Q  47  that it was an operating system which succeeded a  previously operating system.  As I say, all I am  raising is this concern I have about these individual  pieces.  But you go ahead, and it may be that you  think that this is what you ought to do anyway, or you  may over the course of this go well -- decide that  there is not much point pursuing too many of these  instances.  :  I am certainly not going to canvass -- I had some  specific examples, but -- trying to approach the merit  of this issue.  :  Thank you.  Was there a -- was the policy pre the A.T.N, system,  including -- did it include the use of company  traplines?  You know what I mean by company traplines?  Yes.  There were earlier company traplines, yes.  And there were -- I would suggest to you that a vast  majority of the Indian traplines were company  traplines.  There were a lot of them that were, yes.  And the vast majority of traplines within your region,  before the A.T.N, system, were Indian traplines?  Still are, yes.  I was going to come to that.  Yes.  And the company traplines --  of the system into the A.T.N.  to cut back on the utilization of company traplines?  Really the company thing doesn't relate to the  assigned trapper number as such.  It relates to the  wording of the 1982 Wildlife Act.  It says a trapline  has to be registered to persons rather than -- does  not allow, to my understanding, the registration of a  trapline to an organization "company".  But the trapline could be registered -- have you, when  you dealt with the succession of traplines, tried to  get it focused on one person rather than a group of  people as part of your --  No, we have -- we have made many registrations to  multiple persons.  And you understand why company traplines were -- are  of significance to Indian people?  You have maintained  that for a reason, right?  Yes.  Its been advocated -- I mean, people have requested it  that way to you?  And they still are?  in your transference over  , system, have you tried 19293  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  THE COURT  6  7  8  9  10  MR. GRANT  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  A  21  22  Q  23  24  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  32  Q  33  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  40  A  41  42  43  44  Q  45  46  47  Yes, that's correct.  Now, I would like to refer you to exhibit -  provide another copy.  It's Exhibit 993-45.  this could be marked as the next tab.  1129-9.  and I'll  Maybe  (EXHIBIT NO. 1129-9 - LETTER DATED DECEMBER  10, 1981 RE TRANSFER OF TRAPLINES)  :  And it was also Exhibit 993-45.  It would be 1121-9.  Have you seen this document before?  I appreciate it  occurred before your time.  I don't recognize it.  Have you had a moment to read it?  I may have seen it, but I am not sure.  Okay.  Now, from your review and your knowledge of the  files, do you know that prior -- that the files  indicate that the policy was not to transfer traplines  to -- Indian traplines to non-Indians?  I am not aware if there was a policy, other than what  you have placed in front of me here.  When you say policy, I mean what actually happened.  I  am not talking about necessarily a written piece of  paper with policy on top of it.  I am not familiar with what went on in '81 in Skeena.  Okay.  Were you aware that in January of '81 the  Skeena -- after January of '81 this policy was  implemented, that an Indian could transfer to a  non-Indian?  I am not aware if there was a change of policy at that  time or not.  Okay.  In the files you would agree with me that in  certain cases where succession occurs there are band  council resolutions?  Do you know what I mean by band  council resolutions?  I have seen such, yes.  And when an Indian person dies, do you request the  band, which that person is a member, to send you a  band council resolution to confirm the successor?  No, we haven't asked for a band council resolution.  We have on several occasions written to bands or  tribal councils asking for their advice or assistance  in determining the succession.  Okay.  And the band council resolutions that are in  the files are indicative -- are generally referred to  so and so is a successor to so and so relating to  traplines? 19294  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 A   I have seen some of those, yes.  That's the nature of  2 them, yes.  3 Q   That's the nature of the band council resolutions that  4 you found in the files?  5 A   Yes.  6 Q   So they are guidance to you?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   Or to whoever it was, the predecessor?  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   And you continue to correspond with band councils and  11 tribal councils to seek their advice as to who the  12 successor should be?  13 A   Yes.  14 Q   And that's part of how you -- of your management of  15 the traplines?  That is one of the procedures you do  16 when you are dealing with an Indian trapline?  17 A   Yes.  18 MR. GRANT:  Just a moment, My Lord.  19 Q   I am showing you a letter dated July 9th, 1985 from  20 Mr. J.H.C. Walker to Mr. Ralph Michell.  Mr. Walker  21 was the director of the Wildlife Branch at that time;  22 is that right?  23 A   Yes, he still is.  24 Q   And in Victoria?  25 A   Correct.  26 Q   And a copy of this letter was sent to your superior,  27 Mr. Willett.  And this is a letter, and just so that  28 you know, it's a letter in response to Exhibit 1121-1,  29 the February 19th, '85 trapline proposal?  30 A   Correct.  31 Q   And you have seen this letter before?  32 A   Yes, I have.  33 MR. GRANT:   Okay.  That could be marked as the next exhibit.  34 THE COURT:  Yes.  1121-10?  35 THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, My Lord.  36  37 (EXHIBIT NO. 1121-10 - LETTER DATED JULY 9,  3 8 1985 TO MICHELL FROM WALKER RE BLANKET  39 TRAPLINE PROPOSAL)  40  41 Q   This letter -- as far as your knowledge is concerned,  42 this letter ended the blanket trapline discussions; is  43 that right?  This was the last stage of it?  44 A   To my knowledge.  45 Q   Now, if you look at the last page, the last paragraph  46 Mr. Walker states:  47 19295  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  MR. GRANT  10  11  12  13  THE COURT  14  MR. GRANT  15  16  Q  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  22  A  23  24  25  Q  26  27  A  28  Q  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Q  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  A  "Thank you for submitting your proposal.  I  regret that legislative limitations prevent  implementation of your blanket trapline concept  at this time.  However, regional staff are  prepared to meet with you to explore other  options for improved trapline management."  :  My Lord, of course it goes without saying that  tendering this as an exhibit is not an acknowledgement  that the conclusions there are true, but it's the  statement of what --  :  This is already in somewhere, isn't it?  :  I think it's already in, yes, if I remember rightly.  It's in Mr. Sterritt's —  Now, did you -- you would have been part of the  regional staff that's being referred to there, right?  Correct.  Did you meet with Mr. Michell to explore other options  for improved -- an improved trapline management after  this letter?  I did speak with Ralph Michell, but I don't recall  whether it was after we see this letter or prior.  I  did speak to him on this topic.  Okay. Did you explore other options, either with Mr.  Michell or with the Tribal Council after this letter?  I believe.  For improved trapline management?  Yes, I believe I did.  What other options were you looking at?  The other options were, for instance, the -- under the  current provisions at the time it was possible, for  instance, for one registered trapper to grant  permission to some other trappers as an assistant.  So  I suggested that might be one way that they could, in  effect, manage their traplines cooperatively, without  one blanket trapline.  And I also suggested, if they  had adjoining traplines, they may wish to make a  proposal to adjust boundaries, if they preferred  different boundaries, and we could entertain that.  There is provisions and there were provisions to  amalgamate traplines --  Yes.  -- by boundaries?  Okay.  So -- adjoining traplines --  could have been put into one trapline.  There is no  difficulty with that?  Well, there is no legal difficulty, to my knowledge. 19296  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  32  33  Q  34  35  A  36  Q  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  44  45  46  A  47  THE COURT  Yes.  In fact you gave me an example on the map?  That's correct.  Of the Fontaine where that happened around this same  period of time?  That's correct, yes.  I had already referred you to Tab 66 of your book.  You don't have to go back to it.  That related to the  Johnny David trapline.  And you were familiar with  the -- you have reviewed that file?  Yes.  You certified those documents were in that file that  are listed there?  Correct.  You would agree with me that it's one of the larger,  not necessarily the largest or the only one that size,  but it is an exceptionally large file?  That's correct.  And you were aware that there was a -- you saw the  crime report, and you were aware that there was an  appeal on a trapline boundary previous to your time?  Correct.  Relating to that trapline?  Correct.  And that related between Mr. David and Mr. Baggerman,  B-a-g-g-e-r-m-a-n; is that right?  I believe that was the other trapper, yes.  That's -- and -- did you discuss that with your -- the  circumstances surrounding that boundary at the time  that you had it put on the A.T.N, system?  No, I don't believe we did.  We took the boundary as  was a consequence from that, I suppose, was an  existing boundary.  Did you discuss the circumstances around that dispute  with Mr. Cox?  No, I didn't.  You said that you had -- you know Mr. Cox now?  Yes.  You met him.  Do you know him socially?  I just know him casually.  But you have talked with him?  I have met him.  Okay.  These documents that you refer to in your  certifications, they -- those files that you have  reviewed for those are not generally open to the  public, are they?  No.  :  What do you think, Mr. Grant? 19297  Proceedings  1 MR. GRANT:  I think that we could stop now, My Lord.  2 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  2:00 o'clock please.  3 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court stands adjourned until  4 2:00 o'clock.  5  6 I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE  7 A TRUE AND ACCURATE TRANSCRIPT OF THE  8 PROCEEDINGS HEREIN TO THE BEST OF MY  9 SKILL AND ABILITY.  10  11    12 LORI OXLEY  13 OFFICIAL REPORTER  14 UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47 1929?  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED AT 2:00 O'CLOCK P.M.)  2  3 THE COURT:  Mr. Grant?  4 MR. GRANT:  Firstly, I have a letter from Mr. Rush to the court  5 clerk and copies have been delivered to my friend,  6 requesting the reduction of Exhibit 1111, I think it  7 is, the Moricetown tribe.  This was the photograph put  8 to Mr. Shelford you may recall.  9 THE COURT:  Yes.  10 MR. GRANT:  Now, affixed to the back of the enlarged photograph,  11 and I -- the evidence is clear, affixed to the -- is  12 this listing of names.  It was glued on the back.  It  13 was reproduced as well.  I wish to tender it all.  My  14 friends, I believe, may have some concern, but as far  15 as I am concerned, it was part of the document.  I  16 don't believe that I put it to the witness and I am  17 not saying it carries any weight.  I mean, in terms of  18 that -- if it hadn't been reproduced, it would have  19 been part of the same document, that's all.  I am in  2 0 your lordship's hands regarding that.  But madam  21 registrar wanted to get the exhibit and there is no  22 disagreement about the photograph.  My friends have  23 received copies.  And my friend is getting ready to  24 read the excerpt.  I concur that I didn't put these  25 names on the back to the witness, there was no  26 discussion, there is not need to --  27 THE COURT:  I am almost guessing, but did he not say something  28 about his personal knowledge of these people, either  29 that he thought he recognized some of them or that he  30 didn't know any of them or something like that?  What  31 did he say?  32 MR. GRANT:  That's right.  I myself read some of these names and  33 asked him if he knew these people were so and so.  He  34 didn't know them.  35 THE COURT:  He didn't know them?  36 MR. GRANT:  No, he didn't know who they were.  37 MR. WILLMS:  And if I can help my friend, because this has  38 already been dealt with, exactly what should happen,  39 your lordship said that a photographic reduction could  40 be put in for the purpose of the regalia, which is  41 just the photograph.  But there was no mention by my  42 friend at the time of a list of names or tendering a  43 list of names.  However, he did ask Mr. Shelford  44 whether or not he recognized the individuals and Mr.  45 Shelford said he did not.  It's my submission, my  46 lord, that you have already ruled on this.   My friend  47 is entitled to put in the photograph reduction for the 19299  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE  THE  THE  purpose of indicating the regalia.  He is not entitled  to put in the list of names.  It doesn't seem to me, Mr. Grant, that it can have  any evidentiary value, unless you can bring it to  within some category, not much point --  Earlier, what I had done done is said, do you know  the person on the extreme right as Jimmy Michell.  This list, which was glued to the back, is what I was  referring to.  In any event, I am not here -- I am not  really pressing the point --  If you have read the names out, the names are  already in the record.  So I don't think this needs to  go in.  That's fine.  Then the photograph I have for madam  registrar.  REGISTRAR:  It was reserved for identification, my lord.  COURT:  It will now be that number.  REGISTRAR:  1111.  (EXHIBIT 1111:  PHOTOCOPY OF PHOTOGRAPH MORICETOWN  TRIBE IN REGALIA - 1937)  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  MR. GRANT  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  A  Q  A  And it is an Exhibit proper.  For the purposes described.  I am referring you to a document entitled Application  for Registration of a Trapline, Johnny David &  Company, and it's two pages, and under remarks it's  "December 2nd, 1931, C. D. Muirhead, recording  officer."  Now, have you seen that document before?  I believe I have.  Or a copy of it?  I believe I have, yes.  In fact, this is one of the documents that you  certified was in your files?  Do you recall that?  I don't recall specifically certifying this particular  document, no.  Now, when you look at that, you see that on the first  page and on the second page of that document -- my  lord, I don't have other copies of this at this time,  but I will arrange to make copies for the next exhibit  in the document book.  You see on the first page on the top of the second  page there is a metes and bounds description?  Yes.  Have you reviewed that metes and bounds description?  I may have reviewed it earlier in the course of our 19300  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 business.  2 Q   You don't remember?  I want to be fair to you --  3 A   I don't recall for sure if I reviewed this particular  4 description.  5 Q   Okay.  From your examination of that description now,  6 could you plot that description?  7 A   I could try, without actually doing it, I probably  8 could, but without doing it it's hard to say for sure.  9 Q   Okay.  Well, take a look at the description.  I am  10 just asking you from your examination of the document  11 itself.  12 A   This one looks fairly straightforward and it makes  13 reference to a lot of lot numbers which are generally  14 easy to find on the map.  15 Q   When you say this one is fairly straightforward, you  16 may well be able to plot this description, but those  17 that do not have so many lot references would be much  18 harder to plot?  19 A   Some descriptions are more difficult, yes.  20 Q   And I take it that some of the descriptions were not  21 possible to plot from the metes and bounds description  22 from what you described yesterday?  23 A   There are some like that, yes.  24 Q   Okay.  Were you aware that in the Johnny David file,  25 that is, file 66, the one that you certified, there --  26 do you recall seeing a map which had overlays with  27 different versions of trapline registrations on it?  28 A   I do not specifically recall that, no.  29 Q   Do you remember seeing this map, or a copy of it?  30 A   I believe I have seen this map before but I couldn't  31 say for sure whether it was in the file at the time  32 that I did the certification.  33 Q   Well, assuming that those straight lines on this map  34 are metes and bounds of trapline registrations, okay,  35 you see the straight lines going -- one going up  36 northeast of McKillikan Creek and up and across the  37 the other going down by lot 332 and then down towards  38 Bob Creek, you see that?  39 A   Yes, I do.  40 Q   Do you see that this -- that between those straight  41 lines there is a gap, that is, there is no line  42 between them, or is that line following the dotted  43 line the southern boundary or do you know?  44 A   It would appear to follow this dotted line here on the  4 5 map.  46 MR. WILLMS:  For the record, my lord, the bottom of the document  47 contains the stamp, "Exhibit 5, Regina versus Moses 19301  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2    ]  MR. GRANT  3  Q  4  5  6  A  7  Q  8  A  9  10  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  34  A  35  36  37  Q  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  A  43  44  Q  45  A  46  Q  47  A  David, 19 September, 1977."  :  That's right.  And it's in -- it's a map in tab 66.  The mylars that you have brought down, and your  counsel has provided to me, you would agree that those  mylars do not match Exhibit 24-A?  This exhibit here?  Yes.  For the most part, they do.  There have been some  amendments to those maps since the creation of the  exhibit.  So they don't match because there have been  amendments?  In their entirety, no, I guess.  Who did you say drew the mylars, was it Mr. Marshall?  Primarily Mr. Marshall, yes.  You weren't involved in drawing the mylars at all?  I did not actually draw the mylars.  Would you agree with me that the registration of  traplines is -- has been, from your experience, that  is, registration of Indian traplines, okay?  Yes.  Has been a confusing process?  In some senses, yes.  And I believe I asked you this morning about the  comments made by your predecessor or by your -- your  predecessor, Mr. Whatly, or your superior's  predecessor, about the state of those traplines in  1983?  Yes.  And you found the same situation when you were there?  I am not sure which situation --  You found that trapline boundaries were confused when  you were there?  We had some confused trapline boundaries, we had some  confused registrations, as to deceased registrations  and that sort of thing.  You had people that were deceased and nobody else  registered, you had boundaries that weren't clear,  that's the sort of problems you had to face?  We had some of those kinds of problems, yes.  Have you heard of a Kitselas tribal line?  I believe I have heard reference to, I believe I was  the Kitselas.  Tribal line?  Yes.  Yes, I believe I have.  And what is that?  I believe there is a reference to a multiple 19302  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 registration trapline in the Kitselas area.  2 Q   For the people of the Kitselas Tribe?  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   It's referred to on your own C. 0. working maps?  5 A   Yes.  6 MR. GRANT:  My lord, I -- yes, my friends have provided me and  7 maybe -- I don't know if they provided madam registrar  8 with the exhibit, the Bandy cross-examination of  9 February 11, 1988.  And that would be exhibit --  10 THE REGISTRAR:  1114-A.  11 MR. GRANT:  — 1114-A.  And I believe there is a copy.  12 MR. WILLMS:  A copy for your lordship, we have written in red  13 pen in the upper right corner on Exhibit 1114-A.  14 THE COURT:  Thank you.  15 MR. GRANT:  My lord, on page one, the third line from the  16 bottom, there is a transposition of "yours" and I am  17 not certain about that.  It was on the copy of the  18 provincial defendant.  It's not on my copy and I can't  19 really answer to that, although I think it's clear  20 from the rest of it that that was a correction.  On  21 page 2, question 8, the answer halfway down, you see I  22 and E?  23 THE COURT:  Yes.  What does that mean, I and E, what does that  24 mean?  25 MR. GRANT:  I am not sure what that means.  I don't know.  26 Q   Do you know what I and E means, in reference to the  27 Fish and Wildlife?  28 A   That refers to Information and Education section.  29 Q   So that should be there.  And page 11, the third line  30 from the bottom, I am not certain about that one.  Mr.  31 Crane conducted this cross-examination and I haven't  32 reviewed this corrected one with him.  33 I would just like to refer you, you have that in  34 front of you -- you don't have to read it right now,  35 just a couple of places I would like to refer you to.  36 Page 15, question 58:  37  38  39 "Q   The certificate says that the map shows the  40 status of traplines on or about January of  41 1986, that again I take it is something you  42 were told rather than something you have  43 personal knowledge of?  44 A   That's correct.  45 Q   And again the person who would have told that  46 to you is the person who is referred to in your  47 statement of procedures, either Rick Marshall 19303  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 or Doug Steventon."  2  3 Q   Did you tell Mr. Bandy that?  4 A   I would have in that telephone conversation regarding  5 the mylar maps.  6 Q   In other words, you were the one that communicated  7 with Mr. Bandy or did both you and Mr. Marshall  8 communicate with him?  9 A   I am not sure if Mr. Marshall communicated with him as  10 well.  11 Q   Fair enough.  Would it be correct to say that just as  12 the mylars we have today, that is the ones you brought  13 down with you, are different than Exhibit 24-A,  14 because there have been amendments and modifications?  15 You have alread explained that.  16 A   Yes.  17 Q   So that 24-A would be different than the traplines as  18 of October 28th, '84 or as of October 22nd, '84,  19 around the time when you started your work with Fish  20 and Wildlife in Smithers?  21 A   They should be, essentially, I believe they would be  22 the same because the mylars were meant to reflect the  23 status at that time.  24 Q   Except for amalgamations which we discussed this  25 morning, such as the Fontaine one?  26 A   I don't recall the date of the Fontaine one but  27 possible.  28 Q   Except for that little gap south of the Fletcher line  29 that was put in to the Baptiste line, except for all  30 these modifications that we have talked about --  31 A   That modification like in terms of the -- some of  32 those areas, that was in the process of transcribing  33 the maps and using the metes and bounds, we were  34 trying to reflect the status of the maps at that time  35 or, sorry, the traplines at that time.  36 Q   If somebody applied to amalgamate their trapline  37 between '84 and '86, that change would be reflected on  38 24-A, would it, because it's as of January of '86?  39 A   If there were, I don't know if there were any  40 transfers in that time without checking.  41 Q   But you have no reason to say there were not?  42 A   I don't know.  43 Q   You don't know.  So you don't know whether 24-A  44 reflects the status of registered traplines in October  45 of '84 or not, you can't say?  You do know it reflects  46 it in '86?  47 A   I know they reflect it at the time they were made. 19304  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  Q  6  A  7  Q  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  A  20  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  28  MR. GRANT  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  MR. WILLM  40  41  42  MR. GRANT  43  44  45  46  47  Around January of '86?  They with were made between '83 and '86.  And there were no changes in that period of time?  I can't state definitively.  Right.  And you live in Smithers, Mr. Steventon?  That's correct.  And you have lived there since you took up your  employment in October of '84?  That's correct.  And you have heard of this land claims action of the  Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en before you were called to  give evidence, obviously?  Yes, I have.  You heard of it before you received Mr. Sterritt's  letter in response to your 1985 series of letters?  Yes, I had.  And you, I -- would it be fair to say you heard about  it soon after you moved to Smithers?  Yes, I couldn't say for sure when I first heard of it,  but —  You heard of it when -- soon after you arrived and  took up your new position though?  Yes, soon after the litigation was begun, yes.  Okay.  And did you hear of it through your employment  or through the media?  I really don't recall where I first heard it.  Could  very well have been the media.  :  Now, my lord, I, as I indicated to you, I have not  had an opportunity to review this correspondence that  was delivered to me this morning.  My friends have  indicated that Mr. Marshall is present and available  and I have no doubt -- well, I will insure to review  that correspondence this evening, and I may have  further questions of this witness out of that  correspondence.  Now, of course, it appears now that  from this witness, that there is other correspondence,  although he doesn't know where it is.  That matter my  friends are investigating. That is, the pre-19 --  3:  I disagree, my lord, that is not what the evidence  is that there is correspondence.  I wish my friend  wouldn't say that.  :  My recollection of the evidence this morning is that  this witness did say that there were files previous to  1983, but he doesn't know where they are or whether  they are categorized in the same way or a different  way.  It would encompass, for example, policy and  these other matters.  My friends are investigating 19305  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 that.  I would ask, my lord, that we proceed -- well,  2 I understood that the direction yesterday -- my friend  3 has indicated to me just now that he is not looking  4 for it.  This morning he told me out of court -- I  5 understood what he said was that he was making those  6 inquiries.  7 MR. WILLMS:  My lord, if I can clarify my friend's thinking  8 here, or try to, yesterday my friend made the point  9 that the miscellaneous files started in 1983, that's  10 the file that we have disclosed to him.  And he said  11 that the first document that he saw on that disclosure  12 was dated sometime in 1983.  I told my friend that, to  13 my understanding, from what we have been told, that  14 there were no pre-1983 miscellaneous fur trapping  15 files, trapping files, but that we would try to see if  16 there were pre-1983 miscellaneous files.  And I did  17 tell my friend that and we will look, and if there are  18 any, we will let him have them.  The second point that  19 my friend just raised is the speculation that my  20 friend made this morning with respect to this witness  21 about some other files, which the witness quite  22 properly agreed maybe there are some files that I  23 haven't seen.  Now, under that category, we are not  24 looking for maybe there are some files which the  25 witness hasn't seen.  So I hope that helps my friend.  26 THE COURT:  Well, on either basis, you may turn something up?  27 MR. WILLMS:  Well, we may turn something up and if we do, we  28 will be pleased to give it to my friend.  29 MR. GRANT:  Well —  3 0 THE COURT:  What do you want to do, Mr. Grant, do you want to  31 stand the witness down?  32 MR. GRANT:  I want to stand the witness down so that I can  33 review these files.  34 THE COURT:   And your friends can proceed with Mr. Marshall?  35 MR. GRANT:  Yes.  My friends can proceed with Mr. Marshall  36 today, and I would be in a position to ask any further  37 questions tomorrow morning or after the direct of Mr.  38 Marshall or after the cross tomorrow.  39 THE COURT:  What do you say, Mr. Willms?  40 MR. WILLMS:  Well, my lord, as my friend said earlier today, the  41 documents that we gave him this morning contained a  42 lot of duplicates that he has already soon.  There is  43 very little new in there.  And if my friend only needs  44 maybe half an hour, which is all it would take to read  45 them -- I thought he might do it over the lunch hour.  46 But to keep the witness overnight again -- right now,  47 the two people who are in charge of the section up 19306  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  there are both down here.  I am not saying that there  is nobody running the shop but both Mr. Marshall and  Mr. Steventon, who are in this section, are down here.  THE COURT:  Can you conveniently complete Mr. Marshall in two  days, Thursday and Friday?  MR. WILLMS:  My lord, we may be able to complete the direct  evidence of Mr. Marshall in half a day.  I don't know  how long the cross will be.  THE COURT:  So there should be no difficulty in completing the  whole of his evidence in two days?  MR. WILLMS:  None whatsoever.  THE COURT:  Do you think there is any advantage, Mr. Grant, in  adjourning now and you taking whatever time you need  to look at the documents and even if we have to stay a  little late this afternoon to finish the witness?  Well, my lord if my friend -- well, I can do that,  if that's what you wish, but my friends -- what they  did was this morning at two minutes to ten --  I have been hearing this since the start of the  trial. I can't --  They are mixed.  I don't know which of the documents  that I have got today or how many of them are ones  that I have already received.  COURT:  How big a pile of documents is it?  GRANT:  I'd say an inch.  COURT:  Well, with your speed reading, Mr. Grant, why don't  we take half an hour or three quarters of an hour,  whatever you need, and get the witness finished with.  If it can save a witness from being kept overnight, I  think we should do that, if we are not going to  jeopardize our overall schedule.  So let's adjourn and  I will be ready to proceed when you are, Mr. Grant.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR SHORT RECESS)  I hereby certify the foregoing to be  a true and accurate transcript of the  proceedings herein to the best of my  skill and ability.  MR. GRANT  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE  MR.  THE  Wilf Roy  Official Reporter 19307  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  2  3  THE REGIS1  4  THE COURT  5  MR. GRANT  6  Q  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  17  Q  18  19  A  20  21  Q  22  23  24  25  A  26  27  Q  28  29  A  30  Q  31  32  A  33  Q  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  (PROCEEDINGS RECOMMENCED AFTER A BRIEF RECESS)  PRAR:  Order in court.  :  All right.  Mr. Grant.  :  Thank you.  Mr. Steventon, did you recall whether or not you saw a  transcript of the hearing regarding the Johnny David  trapline in your files?  That was on January 26th,  1982.  I don't recall for certain if I saw the transcript.  Did you ever review what Les Cox described about that,  the history of that trapline?  The Johnny -- that's the Johnny David trapline?  Yes.  I have reviewed the file, the Johnny David trapline,  yes .  Have you reviewed what Les Cox has said about that  trapline?  I don't specifically recall what Les Cox said about  the trapline.  When you say whether you reviewed -- do you recall  reviewing a transcript of Les Cox's description of the  trapline -- the history of the -- that trapline and  his trapping policies in general?  I could have, but I don't specifically recall that  document.  Fair enough.  Do you remember being at a meeting on  July 24th, 1987 at Lake Babine at Granisle?  I did not attend that meeting.  You were listed as attending, but you didn't attend  the meeting?  I didn't actually attend.  I am showing you a letter dated August 19th, '88 to  District Conservation Officers from J.D. Steventon.  Is that a memorandum from yourself?  Yes, it is.  And this was in your file relating to trapping in  1987?  I assume that's correct, the date of the letter.  Well, the letter is actually 1988, but it was  encompassed within those documents.  In any event, I  asked you this morning about status Indians, and your  last paragraph of this letter you state:  "Status Indians do not require a licence."  Now, what are you referring to there?  Which 1930?  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 licence are you referring to?  2 A  A trapping licence, annual trapping licence.  3 Q   Now, the point of this memo was about trapping licence  4 issuance and the requirement to have the A.T.N, on the  5 trapping licence, instructing District Conservation  6 Officers in that procedure; is that right?  7 A   That's correct.  8 Q   But of course status Indians did not need a licence,  9 so they didn't need a reference to an A.T.N.?  10 A  Well —  11 Q   For that purpose.  12 A   They don't require a licence.  13 Q   I mean, in other words, what you describe earlier  14 doesn't apply to status Indians, in terms of the  15 licensing requirement?  16 A  Well, in terms of when selling fur to a fur buyer they  17 have to refer to their trapline number.  18 Q   And that's where you say:  19  20 "They must be authorized to trap, i.e., hold a  21 registered line or have permission of the  22 registered trapper, and they need an A.T.N, to  23 sell furs.  We can issue an A.T.N, card from  24 this office in lieu of a licence."  25  26 That's -- I am quoting from it.  That's what your  27 statement and your policy was and is?  28 A   Yes.  2 9 Q   And the A.T.N, card was something you evolved so that  30 Indians would have an A.T.N, number for the sale of  31 their furs?  32 A  Well, we had enquiries from different people as to  33 what the A.T.N, would be.  Sometimes we simply gave  34 them over the phone, or if they -- that was something  35 we could give them so they could keep a reference to  36 their A.T.N.  37 Q   Okay.  I am referring you to a letter dated February  38 2nd, 1987 to the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council  39 with your signature.  Do you recognize this -- the  40 signature on this letter?  41 A   Yes, I do.  That's myself.  42 Q   That's your signature?  43 A   Yes, it is.  44 Q   And this relates to concerns of Mr. Delbert Turner,  45 Mrs. Fanny Williams and others relating to the Josiah  46 Bright and Company trapline, saying it was incorrectly  47 assigned in 1986 to Mr. Bruce Jackson of Hazelton? 19309  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 A   Yes, that's the topic of the letter.  2 Q   And do you remember dealing with this trapline around  3 that time?  4 A   Yes, I do.  5 Q   And the final sentence of the letter -- you don't  6 address this to the attention of anyone, but you say:  7  8 "If you can shed any further light on the  9 inheritance of the line, it would be helpful in  10 my examination of the problem."  11  12 Has that been your practise since you have been  13 administering traplines, that when these kinds of  14 issues arise relating to inheritance of traplines, you  15 would go to a group such as the Tribal Council or  16 bands or Indian people that you could contact for  17 information to assist you in resolution of those  18 inheritance questions?  19 A   Yes, it has been.  20 Q   January 19th, '87, a file note.  And this file note is  21 copied to yourself, as well as Mr. Walker and Mr.  22 Willett.  Do you recognize that?  23 A   Yes.  24 Q   January 26th of '87.  It appears -- it's only in  25 initials, but P.J.B., would that be Mr. Bandy, or was  26 that someone from your office?  27 A   There was no P.J.B. in our office.  I believe it would  28 be Peter Bandy.  29 Q   Now, in the last paragraph in the bottom he said:  30  31 "I asked Doug if it is possible to identify  32 changes in traplines."  33  34 Now, here he is referring to map 24A.  35  36 "Between the date of issuance of the writ,  37 October 23rd, '84 and the period when the maps  38 were provided for copying, June or July of '86,  39 he responded that he could provide this  40 information but only by review of each and  41 every file."  42  43 Now, does that assist you in remembering the only  44 way you could determine whether this map, the June,  45 July, '86 map, matched the '84 trapline, would be a  46 review of every file?  47 A   I believe, as I stated before, there was a possibility 19310  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 there could have been some changes to registrations or  2 whatever.  3 Q   And you --  4 A   Prior to 1986.  5 Q   Between '84 and '86?  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   And what you advise Mr. Bandy was the only way you  8 could tell that would be to review all of your  9 trapline files, each file to check for changes, right?  10 A   Yes, to be certain, that's correct.  11 Q   And then he goes on to say that he didn't ask you to  12 do this at this time.  And of course you haven't done  13 that?  14 A   That's correct.  15 Q   And that's why, of course, you don't know the extent  16 of the difference?  17 A   That's correct.  18 Q   I would like to show you a letter of January 12th,  19 '87.  And that's your signature on the bottom of that  20 letter?  21 A   Yes, it is.  22 Q   Addressed to Northwest Trappers' Association?  23 A   Yes, it is.  24 Q   And -- but attached to that is -- it looks like a c.c.  25 to the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, North Coast  26 District Council, Haida Tribal Council, Nishga Tribal  27 Council, Tahltan Tribal Council and  28 Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council?  29 A   Can I take a closer look at that please.  30 Q   Uh-huh.  31 A  What's your question on this?  32 Q   Well, my question to you was, was it is c.c.ed on the  33 next page to the Tribal Council which I have just  34 named?  35 A   Yes.  Not a 100 percent sure it was sent to them,  36 because it doesn't actually specifically say c.c. on  37 there.  38 Q   There is no room on the bottom for it.  That's what  39 I -- well, that's why I am asking you, because if you  40 think that it's —  41 A   It could very well have gone to them.  I don't recall  42 for sure.  43 Q   And then there is a c.c. to a large number of bands?  44 A   Uh-huh.  45 Q   Starting with Hartley Bay and including Gitanmaax,  46 Gitwangak, Kitwanga, Glen Vowel, Hagwilget, Kispiox,  47 Kitsegukla, Kitwancool, Moricetown, right? 19311  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   This is how this was presented to me.  It's part of  3 this file, and I assume from reading it that it was  4 copied to those.  5 A   I believe it was.  The only thing that confused me  6 about it is there is no specific c.c. on there.  7 Q   It seems to have an "X" or something.  8 MR. WILLMS:  If I can help my friend, that's a usual computer  9 designation for plunking in a new addressee, running  10 the same body of a letter off and just replacing the  11 addressee with all of the people that are listed.  12 That may be why the witness can't say it's a c.c.  13 They may have got a real letter.  14 THE WITNESS:  That's quite possible, yes.  15 MR. GRANT:  16 Q   Do you recognize this kind of listing from your  17 office, that this happens when you send letters to  18 different people?  19 A   That's an address file on the word processor.  20 Q   Right.  Can you say that that -- this letter here was  21 sent to these other tribal councils and bands?  22 A   I believe it was, but I can't say for certainty.  23 Q   Okay.  What you state in this letter is that this  24 letter -- I'm sorry.  There is only one copy right  25 now, but -- that another -- you talk about:  26  27 "The main point of importance is that the  28 conversion of the metes and bounds descriptions  29 to official working maps is now nearly  30 complete.  These maps will form the basis for  31 dealing with traplines."  32  33 And then you go on in the next paragraph.  34  35 "Another important point is the annual use  36 requirement.  Fur returns of the last few years  37 indicate little use of many traplines, some of  38 which may be registered to members of your  39 group.  We need to encourage a reasonable level  40 of use of traplines if the benefits of the  41 resources are to be gained for the region."  42  43 And then you -- you are not certain if this  44 January 12th, '87 letter went out to the Tribal  45 Council's organizations, including the Gitksan and  46 Wet'suwet'en?  47 A   I believe it did. 19312  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1  Q  2  3  4  5  6  7  THE  COURT  8  MR.  GRANT  9  THE  COURT  10  MR.  GRANT  11  12  13  14  15  16  MR.  GRANT  17  Q  18  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  A  33  Q  34  A  35  Q  36  37  38  39  40  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  A  47  Q  It's my understanding that it did, and that's what  that second page is, as my friend indicates.  Maybe the next number -- I only have one copy.  The next number in that document book could be  reserved, and I will arrange for copies tomorrow, My  Lord, the January 12th, 1987 letter.  Yes, that's number 11, January 12th, '87.  Yes.  It would be what number.  11.  1121-11.  (EXHIBIT NO. 1121-11 - LETTER DATED JANUARY  12, 1987 TO NORTHWEST TRAPPERS ASSOCIATION  FROM J.D. STEVENTON)  :  And I'll arrange for copies of it tomorrow.  Referring to a memorandum dated July 2nd, 1985 re  handling of trapline disputes, to Skeena Wildlife  staff, signed by Doug over your name.  That's a  memorandum that you sent out; is that right?  That's correct.  At the end -- you describe how to handle trapline  disputes, and at the end of it you say:  "Maintain a separate dispute file for each case  being received.  Pass these along to either  myself or Rick for completion to maintain  consistency."  Did you maintain separate dispute files for each  case being received?  Yes, until the dispute was resolved.  And then where did the documents for that file go?  To the individual trapline file.  So, for example, this is in July, let us say  hypothetically in August of 1985 there is a dispute,  and it was then relating to one of the traplines that  you ultimately certified the file, and then that  dispute was resolved.  What you're saying is the  contents of that dispute would now be in that file?  Yes, they should be in the file, yes.  That is an individual trapline file?  That's correct.  But it would relate to two traplines.  Would you put  one in each file?  Most likely.  I can't say that would be in every case.  So you do not have separate dispute files relating to 19313  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 traplines within the Gitksan territory that are open  2 today?  3 A   No, we don't.  4 Q   Okay.  I am referring you to a memorandum dated  5 January 20th, 1988 from yourself "Re Fur Trapped on  6 Indian Reserves" to the District Conservation  7 Officers.  That's your signature?  8 A   Yes, it is.  9 Q   Okay.  Now, in this case you are dealing with the  10 issue of the application of A.T.N.'s to furs that were  11 caught on reserve?  12 A   That's correct.  13 Q   Okay.  And of course you were not -- are you  14 suggesting that you had -- that you had authority over  15 the registration of licence trapping on reserve, but  16 only what was to be done with the fur after it was  17 caught?  18 A   That's correct.  19 Q   And once again you had to deal with it now under the  20 new system by giving A.T.N.'s to the person who  21 trapped the fur?  22 A   That's correct.  23 Q   And you resolved that by saying it would be treated as  24 though it came from private land?  25 A   That's correct.  26 Q   So, for example, if a person owns a piece of private  27 land or an Indian person lives on reserve, they trap  28 fur, they can do so, of course, without a licence; is  29 that what you're saying?  30 A   The -- a person with private land would require a  31 licence.  An Indian living on reserve would not  32 require a licence.  33 Q   So it couldn't be dealt with the same, could it,  34 because the person on the private land -- the  35 non-Indian on private land would require the licence.  36 A   By the same -- I am referring there just to the  37 mechanics of determining what number to apply to that  38 fur.  Just the mechanics, so we didn't have  39 overlapping numbers.  40 Q   Let us say a person catches fur on the Gitanmaax  41 reserve.  42 A   Okay.  43 Q   You know where Gitanmaax is located?  44 A   Okay.  45 Q   What are you saying?  Did they get a separate number,  46 or did they get the same number as somebody else?  47 A   No, that would be a separate number, so as not to be 19314  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 confused with some other fur coming from some other  2 total area.  3 Q   It wouldn't be the same number as the person with the  4 trapline off the reserve that is closest to them?  5 A   No, it wouldn't be.  6 Q   I am referring you from the same file to a letter of  7 February 17th, 1988, to Mr. Reynold Samuel Williams by  8 Mr. Marshall.  Now, that's a letter from Mr. Marshall  9 to Mr. Williams?  You recognize Mr. Marshall's  10 signature?  11 A   Yes.  Yes, I do.  12 Q   And he states here:  13  14 "At the present time the trapline is registered  15 in Mr. Skulsh's name only and the boundaries  16 may be in error.  I would be very interested in  17 obtaining more up-to-date information so that  18 our files and maps are more correct."  19  20 My question to you was that a -- in other words,  21 is this problem about the boundaries an ongoing  22 problem post-completion of the mylars, or is this a  23 unique situation?  24 A   No, that is not a unique situation.  We still have  25 problems cropping up or disputes as to boundary.  26 Q   Referring you to a letter dated December 13th, '85,  27 addressed to the Ministry of Environment from Mrs. Pat  28 Simon, Head of Reserves & Trust of Indians Affairs of  29 Northern Canada.  Do you recognize that letter as  30 being one that you have seen?  31 A   I believe I have seen this one, yes.  32 Q   And you had made enquiries around this same period of  33 time to the Department of Indian affairs relating to  34 Indian traplines.  This is around the time that you  35 are rationalizing or implementing the A.T.N, system?  36 A   That's correct.  37 Q   And she states at the end that:  38  39 "The Tribal Council is handling all inquiries  40 regarding traplines in this area."  41  42 And you have subsequently acted on that and dealt  43 through the Tribal Council on these matters, rather  44 than the Department of Indian Affairs?  45 A   Yes, we have, for the most part, yes.  46 Q   Okay.  I would ask that that number 12, I think of  47 Exhibit 1121, be reserved for that, and that's the 19315  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  THE COURT  MR. GRANT  December 13th letter from Mrs. Pat Simon to the  Ministry of Environment.  The date again please?  December 13th, 1985, My Lord.  Thank you.  I will arrange copies tomorrow.  THE REGISTRAR:  1121-12.  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  (EXHIBIT NO. 1121-12 - LETTER DATED DECEMBER  13, 1985 TO MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FROM PAT  SIMONS RE TRAPLINE BOUNDARIES)  Q   I would just like to refer you to a document entitled  "Trapping Administration in British Columbia", dated  December, 1981, contained in your policy file.  You're  familiar with this document, aren't you?  A   I have seen that before, yes.  Q   You have read it?  A   Yes.  Q   This policy manual, "Trapping Administration in  British Columbia", was a pre -- was a predecessor to  the implementation of the A.T.N, system?  A   I would have to look on the date.  Q   The date is December, '81.  A   Yes, it would be just -- that would be just before.  I  believe that was a summary done of the history, I  believe.  Q   And -- well, there is a brief history, but then the  current status was also described.  Now, it states here -- it describes that:  "Registered traplines are granted to an  individual and are generally renewed annually  in favour of the original trapper.  At present  each registered trapline is recorded with a  'metes and bounds' description."  Metes and bounds is in quotes.  "This procedure is time consuming and subject to  errors as all traplines are re-registered  annually."  You would agree that that's an accurate  description of the problem with the metes and bounds  system?  A  Well, metes and bounds are difficult to follow in some 19316  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Grant  1 cases.  2 Q   And also it's subject to errors as all traplines are  3 re-registered annually?  4 A   I wasn't involved with the annual re-registration of  5 traplines at that time.  6 Q   No, but you had to deal with -- you had to deal with  7 the results of that system, didn't you?  8 A   That's true, yes.  9 Q   And that was your experience, what you are still  10 facing in terms of the problems?  11 A   Yes, sir, there are some problems with differing metes  12 and bounds.  13 Q   There is a memorandum relating to trapline use issue  14 from yourself to Mr. Edie, E-d-i-e, dated June 15th,  15 '89.  I just want to read this to you.  It says -- you  16 remember this memorandum?  17 A   Yes, I do.  18 Q   Okay.  It says:  19  20 "Re:  Trapline Use Issue  21 With the discussion currently ongoing about the  22 trapline use provisions and procedures related  23 to natives, I have assembled a few hard  24 statistics to illustrate the magnitude of the  25 'problem'."  26  27 What is the discussion that you are referring to  28 there?  29 A  Well, the Ministry was trying to determine how we  30 could handle the question of non-use of traplines, how  31 to best approach it administratively.  32 Q   Of non-use of native traplines?  33 A   Yes.  As to whether to go to the tribal councils or  34 bands and ask them to try to update those idle  35 traplines.  36 Q   Mr. Steventon, there is a memorandum dated May 6, 1985  37 from yourself to District CO. 's re trapline  38 registrations and assigned trapper numbers.  And it's  39 a two-page memorandum signed by yourself.  You agree?  40 A   That's correct.  41 Q   And you state -- you talk about trapline  42 registrations, and then you say -- you describe the  43 process of:  44  45 "Shortly we will begin sending draft maps to  46 registered trappers ..."  47 19317  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  And you go on to explain it, and you enclose a  copy of your draft letter which has been marked as an  exhibit.  And then you say:  "As a further means of correcting the records,  please check with trappers as they come in for  licenses to update full name, address,  partners, etc. and indicate such on the  listing."  Then you say:  "I expect a lot of this, particularly who holds  certain native lines, will take some time  further to resolve.  We will just have to keep  picking away at it."  That was your conclusion at that time, from your  review of the files and the state of affairs in --  between 1984 and May, 1985 when you were involved; is  that right?  A   Yes, with the -- not having -- since the Indian  trappers don't have to come in for an annual  licence -- annual trapping licence, dates got out  of -- addresses became out of date, and some of the  trapline registrations were very old.  Q   Yes.  And that's what you are still picking away at?  A   That's correct.  MR. GRANT:   Okay.  My Lord, except for — I don't know — mean  to press you, except for those correspondence, I am  not sure --  THE COURT:  No, I haven't.  I didn't take them with me, as a  matter of fact.  I will certainly look at them  overnight, and we can -- I'll give you an answer first  thing in the morning.  MR. GRANT:  That would be fine.  MR. WILLMS:  I have some short re-examination.  THE COURT:  All right.  Yes.  Thank you.  RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. WILLMS:  Q   Could Exhibit 1121 be put before Mr. Steventon please.  Could you turn to Tab 3.  And this was the document  that my friend put to you and described as coming out  of the last page of exhibit -- or what we have  reserved as 995-41A.  And I have a copy of the whole  book for Your Lordship, but I only have one other 1931?  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1 book.  2 THE COURT:  That's all right.  3 MR. WILLMS:  I can hand it up to Your Lordship.  4 THE COURT:  All right.  5 MR. WILLMS:  6 Q   If you just look, you will see at Tab 3, as my friend  7 indicated to you yesterday, the last page in the tab,  8 if you can compare Exhibit 1121 tab dash 3, you can  9 see that the page is the same?  10 A   Yes, it is.  11 Q   Now, I am just going to flip back for you to earlier  12 pages at the -- and, My Lord, I just flipped back two  13 earlier pages in the big black book.  14 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  15 MR. WILLMS:  I am in Tab 3 at the very end.  16 THE COURT:  Yes.  17 MR. WILLMS:  And the document that my friend put to the witness  18 is the last page with writing on it in the big black  19 book at Tab 3.  20 Q   I am now showing you, and you can identify that the  21 document that I am showing you is the -- the white  22 copy of the application for registration of a trapline  23 for Kurt Praxl.  24 A   Yes, it is.  25 Q   Now, if you turn three pages back in 995-41A, can you  26 compare the front page of the original application  27 with the third photocopied page back from the end of  28 Tab 3?  Can you confirm that it appears to be a  29 photocopy of that front page of the application?  30 MR. GRANT:  Well —  31 THE WITNESS:  Yes, it would appear to be a photocopy of that  32 application.  33 MR. WILLMS:  34 Q   Now, turning in 995-41A, Tab 3 to the next page.  Can  35 you turn over the original white copy of the  36 application for registration of trapline and confirm  37 that the next photocopied page appears to be the back  38 of the original registration?  39 A   Yes, it does.  40 Q   Okay.  Now, turning to the last page, and the page  41 that my friend put to you and marked as Exhibit  42 1121-3, you will see that there appears to be an onion  43 skin paper taped on the original application.  44 A   Yes, there is.  45 Q   And can you confirm to me that when you flip the onion  46 skin up, that the tab that my friend put to you and  47 marked as Exhibit 1121-3 appears to be a photocopy of 19319  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1  2  A  3  Q  4  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  THE  COURT:  12  MR.  WILLMS  13  THE  COURT:  14  MR.  WILLMS  15  THE  COURT:  16  MR.  WILLMS  17  Q  18  19  20  21  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  A  28  Q  29  30  31  32  33  A  34  Q  35  36  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  A  the original registration with the onion skin up?  It could very well be, yes.  All right.  Could Exhibit 1120, volume 1 -- you may  have it in front of you.  It's the first volume of  Schedule A, Notice to Admit.  My friend referred you  to a number of documents in the list at Tab 66.  Yes.  All right.  And asked you about how they -- or why  they were in the file.  And once again, My Lord, I  have for Your Lordship so that you can follow along --  Thank you.  :  Twelve pages in, My Lord, from the beginning.  Which tab?  :  At Tab 66.  Twelve pages in?  :  Twelve pages in.  And if you turn at the same time, Mr. Steventon, in  Exhibit 1120-66 to the description of item 81, you  will see my friend asked you about 81, the photocopy  of a typewritten letter from Johnny David dated April  4th, 1975?  Yes.  And you see that at the tab?  Yes, I do.  And you recall my friend asked you about whether you  knew how that got into the file?  Yes, he did.  All right.  Now, My Lord, if you just turn seven more  pages, My Lord, there is a letter from Mr. Grant,  dated February 18th, 1980.  And, Mr. Steventon, you  will see that that is a letter that you have numbered  54, letter to Dave Spalding from Peter Grant?  Yes.  And I am just directing you to the third page of that  letter from Mr. Grant.  And you see the reference is  the dispute of the Johnny David trapline.  You see  that?  Yes, I do.  And on the third page -- the third to the last --  fourth to the last paragraph you see Mr. Grant says:  "I am enclosing a letter of Johnny David's,  signed April 4th, 1975 with his mark."  Does that help you in determining how that got  into that file?  Well, that obviously would have been relating to that 19320  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1 trapline, the file --  2 Q   From Mr. Grant —  3 MR. GRANT:  Wait a minute.  The witness has answered.  Don't  4 lead.  5 MR. WILLMS:  6 Q   You will see Mr. Grant also enclosed with that letter  7 a list of the documents that he was enclosing?  8 A   Yes.  9 Q   And item number 9 on that list is the April 4th, 1985  10 letter of Johnny David?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   And my friend also, he didn't mark it, but you recall  13 he put to you a map with some straight lines on it  14 with an exhibit mark in the lower right-hand corner as  15 an exhibit from the trial of Johnny David?  16 A   Yes —  17 MR. GRANT:  No, that's incorrect, My Lord.  18 MR. WILLMS:  Moses David.  19 Q   And you will see that item ten, Mr. Grant has sent you  20 Exhibit 5 from the trial of Regina and David?  21 A   Yes.  22 Q   Does that assist you in determining how it got into  23 this file?  24 A  Well, presumably all those items accompanied Mr.  25 Grant's letter at that time.  26 Q   Could you turn in Exhibit 1121, my friend's binder, to  27 Tab 5.  And you will recall that my friend put to you  28 the suggestion that the Tab 5 was a photocopy of the  29 working map?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   Now, I am showing you the working map covering the  32 area set out at Tab 5.  And you will see for part of  33 the area, at least down near Taltzen Lake, if you  34 could compare the top of the map and especially the  35 area around Taltzen Lake.  You can compare the two  36 maps.  And in particular could you just describe where  37 the red lines on the original working map go in  38 relation to Taltzen Lake?  39 A   There is two red lines.  One which cuts through  40 approximately the centre of the lake, and the other  41 line which comes up near the east end of the lake, and  42 then it goes off to the boundary to the adjacent  43 trapline.  44 Q   All right.  And is there anything in Exhibit 1121-5 —  45 are there any lines on that exhibit which are not on  46 the working map?  47 A   There is a dark black line on the exhibit that is not 19321  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1 on the working map.  2 Q   Thank you.  Now, if you could just turn now to Tab 6,  3 which my friend -- the letter, and my friend suggested  4 the copy of the mylar.  And I am showing you a  5 blueprint of the mylar.  And if you could look in the  6 same area, that is at the north end of the blueprint  7 of the mylar to the trapline 0609T039, and look at the  8 same time to the map attached to the document at Tab  9 6.  Is there a line on the document attached at Tab 6  10 that is not on the mylar, or a copy of the mylar?  11 A   There is a dark, thick dark black line on the exhibit  12 that is not on this paper copy of the mylar.  13 Q   Finally my friend referred you to a memo of June 15th,  14 and he read you -- it's a memo from yourself to Mr.  15 Chamberlain, and I read to you the first paragraph.  16 Can you confirm that the document that I just put  17 before you is the document that he read to you from?  18 A   Yes, it is.  19 Q   Can that be the next exhibit, My Lord.  20 MR. GRANT:  I object, My Lord.  There is other material in that  21 document that is not -- I did not put to the witness.  22 The only issue I raised with the witness is what  23 discussion it was he referred to, and I would submit  24 that it's improper for my friend to try to put his own  25 document in this way, which refers to other  26 information that was gathered by this witness, and he  27 had the opportunity to lead it on direct.  2 8 THE COURT:  How long a document is it?  29 MR. WILLMS:  That's it, My Lord.  It's one page.  There are two  30 more paragraphs.  I suppose I could read it to the  31 witness.  32 MR. GRANT:  I would object as well if he read it.  It's not  33 related to the issue.  The issue was the discussion.  34 It wasn't —  35 THE COURT:  Mr. Willms, do you agree that the matter that was  36 put to the witness in cross-examination is all  37 contained within one paragraph?  38 MR. WILLMS:  I don't agree with that.  I agree that the extract  39 that was read to the witness is in one paragraph, but  40 my friend put the discussion and the problem and kept  41 referring to the problem to the witness.  The balance  42 of the memo describes the problem, and so "problem" is  43 undescribed as Mr. Steventon described it at the time,  44 without the balance of the memo going in.  So that the  45 first paragraph does not say what the problem is.  46 THE COURT:  I think, with respect, that this issue can only  47 properly be argued in -- with the assistance of a 19322  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  THE  MR.  THE COURT  THE  MR.  THE  COURT:  GRANT:  COURT:  MR. GRANT  transcript, in order to know precisely what it was  that was put to the witness in cross-examination.  WILLMS:  I am content.  COURT:  The witness —  WILLMS:  I am content to do that at some convenient time  tomorrow, My Lord.  Yes, I am much happier to have the argument based  upon what was actually put to the witness in  cross-examination.  All right.  Now, is the witness needed tomorrow  then, or does that --  My only problem is some of that correspondence  directed to you were related --  I am going to release the witness, if he wants to  go.  It wouldn't be the end of the world if he has to  come back.  It may be that if I decide that these  documents are not privileged, that the evidence that  will result from that can be the subject of an  agreement or a letter.  And if that can't be done,  then, of course, we will just have to come back.  There is one other outstanding matter which I --  with respect to my friend's suggestion.  My  understanding of the witness's evidence on  cross-examination was that there were -- there was  correspondence relating to policy, there was  correspondence relating to enquiries, there was this  correspondence.  His problem was not such  correspondence did not exist, and he made it clear it  was not, and these registered trapline files, the  question was the trapline files -- he says the  pre-1983 policies, documents were filed.  He said they  may be archived.  I asked him what he meant by  archived.  He said they may be sent to ministerial  headquarters in Victoria, and around that time he said  there was a clearing out, that was about a year ago up  to 1982.  Well, if they are in the ministerial files  in Victoria, I have no greater access than I do if  they were into the ministerial files in Smithers.  And  my friend said well, I made some hypothesis.  I  asked -- I understood your ruling yesterday, My Lord,  to deal with all documents that were non-archival in  the legal sense.  If they are in the P.A.B.C, of  course I have access to them, and that's not a  problem, but I do not believe, from the research we've  gathered, that documents as recent as 1982 are in the  P.A.B.C.  Those documents certainly exist.  I find it extraordinary that all of a sudden there 19323  J.D. Steventon (for Province)  Re-exam by Mr. Willms  1 is correspondence relating to policy in all of these  2 things that no such correspondence existed.  It may  3 not be in the files under that name.  I understand  4 that.  But I ask my friend to make the enquiries to  5 produce those documents.  6 THE COURT:  Are you familiar with that, Mr. Willms?  7 MR. WILLMS:  My Lord, I don't understand what the request is.  8 THE COURT:  The problem is that these files started in 1983, and  9 the question is what went -- what was done with the  10 same kind of subject matter before these files were  11 started.  They are obviously in some different filing  12 sequence.  13 MR. WILLMS:  My Lord, as I understand it with respect to the  14 traplines, they went into the files.  Now, I don't  15 know what happened in 1983, and if there are any  16 trapping documents pre-1983 which have been sent  17 elsewhere.  I will try to locate them.  It is my  18 understanding that we disclosed everything that we  19 have been able to find.  I'll certainly make enquiries  20 in Victoria about whether there were 1983 trapping  21 documents from Smithers sent there.  22 THE COURT:  Pre-1983.  23 MR. WILLMS:  Pre-1983.  24 THE COURT:  Well, I think —  25 MR. WILLMS:  That are not in the public archives.  26 THE COURT:  I think that's as far as Mr. Grant expects you to  27 go.  All right.  Resume then until ten o'clock  2 8 tomorrow morning.  29 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court stands adjourned until  30 ten o'clock tomorrow.  31  32 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 4:05 P.M.)  33  34 I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE  35 A TRUE AND ACCURATE TRANSCRIPT OF THE  36 PROCEEDINGS HEREIN TO THE BEST OF MY  37 SKILL AND ABILITY.  38  3 9    4 0 LORI OXLEY  41 OFFICIAL REPORTER  42 UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  43  44  45  46  47


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items