FREE ESSAY ON THE MARSHALL DECISION

THE MARSHALL DECISION

Who: Donald Marshall (a Mikmaq fisherman), Native and non-native fisherman,
Supreme Court of Canada and Herb Dhaliwal (minister of Fisheries and ocean).
Where: Burnt Church, Miramichi Bay
Issue: Donald Marshall, a mikmaq fisherman took a case to the Supreme Court of
Canada arguing that a treaty from 1760 gave him aboriginal fishing rights and he won the
trail justifying three conviction he had on fishing with out a license, fishing off
season
and fishing with illegal nets. After the Court ruled in Marshalls favor, many native
fisherman started fishing off season as well. The Minister of Fisheries and Ocean, Herb
Dhaliwal, than banned fishing from the Miramichi Bay to conserve the sea life, which is
being endangered by the off season fishing. The Minister of Fisheries and Ocean
explained that the lobster are being caught before they have time to reproduce
themselves,
but aboriginal fisherman fought that the federal fishing regulations did not apply to
them
and that they would continue fishing. Also that they had their own way of conserving and
keeping track of the lobster in the Miramichi bay. Non- native fisherman, angry with the
choices currently made destroyed and vandalized native fishing traps to prevent them
from fishing. The Indigenous people concerned with the safety of their people put native
warriors at the bay to protect any native traps or native fisherman from being harmed.
There still continues to be violent confrontation and threats between native and
non-native fisherman over the Marshall decision till this day. The question asked by
many is which is more important, the right of aboriginal people or the conservation of
Canadas natural resources. The Supreme Court of Canada and the Minister of Fisheries
and Ocean continue to look for a solution that will satisfy all parties involved in this
matter.
Bibliography
1. www.newsworld.cbc.ca
This site had reliable news coverage and facts. The information was non based and there
many in-depth
stories involving the Marshall decision. The site was very high quality and
professionally organized.
From this site I managed to get the basics on the Marshall Decision and with a little
searching I found some
information on Donald marshalls past. I. would give this site a very good rating probably
nine out of ten.
2. www.arcbc.tripod.com 
This site had lots of information and some history on aboriginal rights. the problem was
that it was
extremely biased. I wouldn't say that all the information was reliable though because of
the biased in it. The
information made it appear as if the aboriginal fisherman were victimized and that the
law was unfair to
them. It seemed more like an opinion than facts. I would give this site probably a five
out of ten.
3. www.picpress.com
This site was not biased, but it was very criticizing. I liked what the writer thought of
the situation, but It
probably isn't very accurate. I seemed more like an opinion as well, but with an
interesting way of looking
at things. I would give this site a 7 out of ten.
4. www.southam.com
This site was also biased, against Donald Marshall. It had a story on one of Marshalls
other victories
in with Marshall won the metis people the right to hunt moose in the off season in New
Brunswick. He
described how metis people started over killing the moose in that location and that soon
moose with be a
rare in New Brunswick. I thought this story was similar to the fishing issue. The story
probably would not
be that reliable since it an opinion. I would give this site an 6 out of ten.
5. www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
This site had lots of information on the issue. It also had some informative diagrams on
the area closure
and lobster life cycle explaining why the bay should be banned from fishing. The
information wasn't biased
and the facts were reliable. I would rate this site a nine out of ten.