Several Gi’gigamae (hereditary chiefs) from Wei Wai Kum and We Wai Kai spoke of protective actions during a protest in Campbell River on Wednesday.
The hereditary chiefs and council members are calling on the province to pause Bill 20, the K’ómoks Treaty Act, until meaningful consultation, accommodation and dispute resolution takes place. Their concern is that the treaty claims close to 80 per cent of Wei Wai Kum territory with, they say, no basis under Canadian or Indigenous law.
The Nations say that if the K’ómoks Treaty takes effect, they stand to lose the Salmon River Reserve along with seats of chieftainships, gravesites and Gukwdzi (Bighouse) sites. They also say the treaty would extend rights to areas where K’ómoks has no historic presence, including Heydon Bay and Loughborough Inlet.
Hereditary Chief Jim Henderson said K’ómoks and the province have refused to engage on the issue.
“K’ómoks and B.C. have refused to come and meet with us in our Gukwdzi to discuss rights, territory and family connections under Indigenous laws and to try and find solutions,” he said.
Wei Wai Kum leadership has repeatedly raised concerns about B.C.’s push to ratify the legislation. The province’s own govTogetherBC engagement site acknowledges that Crown consultation with neighbouring Nations “remains ongoing” and is a condition of ratification — yet Wei Wai Kum and allied Nations say that consultation has not been meaningful. Several Nations formally requested a 180-day pause to address overlapping claims. The legislation continued to advance.
Wei Wai Kum says the province has “completely failed to meaningfully consult and address the many potential infringements of the K’ómoks Treaty on the rights, title and territory of the Wei Wai Kum and the broader Liǧʷiłdax̌ʷ Nations.” The Nation also claims B.C. has broken three separate promises not to ratify the treaty without deep consultation and full communication with Wei Wai Kum. Over the past four years, the Nation says, attempts to meet and propose solutions have been repeatedly refused.
K’ómoks Chief Nicole Rempel offered a different account, saying her Nation has “spent many years attempting to work collaboratively with Wei Wai Kum through protocol discussions and facilitated meetings, while also continuing to participate in good faith treaty negotiations.”
“Despite ongoing disagreements, K’ómoks remains open to respectful dialogue and future discussions,” she said.
Hereditary Chief and elected councillor Tony Roberts said the responsibility to protect Liǧʷiłdax̌ʷ lands is not taken lightly.
“We support fair treaties. Our chiefs and war chiefs fought, protected and managed our lands, waters and resources under our Liǧʷiłdax̌ʷ law. That responsibility was passed down to us,” he said.
Roberts was direct about the Salmon River Reserve specifically. “Some of our chieftainships come from our historic village at Xwesam (Salmon River). There is not a chance in hell that we are going to just let B.C. give our village to K’ómoks, who have no title there.”
The Gi’gigamae and Wei Wai Kum members have warned that ratifying the treaty without meaningful engagement will likely lead to litigation and direct action to protect sites throughout Liǧʷiłdax̌ʷ territory.
The protest began at the Bighouse within Liǧʷiłdax̌ʷ territory, where drummers and singers led the group to the B.C. Ferries terminal and back. Participants carried signs reading “Protect our territory for future generations” and “B.C. needs proper treaties. Eby grant the pause — let’s do this right!”
Rempel however says the K’ómoks First Nation, “respectfully disagrees with Wei Wai Kum First Nation’s request to pause the treaty process and believes further delays are unfair to its members and Elders, many of whom have spent decades working toward a modern treaty. The Nation remains committed to moving forward peacefully, respectfully, and in a way that honours both reconciliation and the rights of neighbouring Nations.”
The Hereditary Chiefs said they have not given up on a negotiated solution. “We remain hopeful that respectful dialogue and meaningful engagement can still occur before further escalation becomes necessary.”