---

THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY

EVIDENCE

---

OTTAWA, Thursday, February 9, 2023

The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met with videoconference this day at 9 a.m. [ET] to examine and report on the status of soil health in Canada.

Senator Robert Black (Chair) in the chair.

[English]

The Chair: Honourable senators, good morning everyone. Good to see you here. I’d like to begin by welcoming members of the committee, our witnesses that will be joining us online and those watching this meeting on the web. My name is Rob Black. I’m the chair of the committee, and I am from Ontario.

Before we start this next meeting on the status of soil health in Canada, I’d like to start by asking the senators to introduce themselves.

Senator Simons: I’m Senator Simons from Alberta, Treaty 6 territory.

Senator Klyne: Good morning and welcome, Marty Klyne, senator from Saskatchewan, Treaty 4 territory.

Senator Burey: Good morning, Senator Burey from Ontario.

Senator Duncan: Senator Pat Duncan from the Yukon.

Senator Jaffer: Senator Mobina Jaffer from British Columbia.

Senator Cotter: Senator Brett Cotter from Saskatchewan.

The Chair: Should any technical challenges or difficulties arise, particularly related to interpretation, please signal this to the chair or clerk and we’ll work to resolve the issue.

Our witnesses are all joining us via video conference. Today we welcome, in our first panel, Melissa Arcand, Soil Biogeochemist from the University of Saskatchewan, and Candice Pete-Cardoso, Director of Indigenous Land Management Institute at the University of Saskatchewan. I’d invite you to listen to the presentations by Ms. Arcand and Ms. Pete-Cardoso, and then we’ll move into questions.

Melissa Arcand, Soil Biogeochemist, University of Saskatchewan, as an individual: Thank you. Tanisi, Melissa Arcand nitisiyihkâson mahskehko sâkahikan ochi niya.

I’m from the Muskeg Lake Cree Nation, Treaty 6 territory. I’m an associate professor in the Department of Soil Science at the University of Saskatchewan, where part of my research program focuses on evaluating soil health on agricultural lands of First Nations in Saskatchewan.

I teach an environmental science field course to First Nations students, in the Kanawayihetaytan Askiy — which means “let us take care of the land” in Plains Cree — Indigenous land management certificate program. Along with my colleague Candice Pete-Cardoso, I’m the academic director of the Indigenous Land Management Institute at the University of Saskatchewan, soon to be renamed as “kichi okawimaw askiy,” translated to great mother earth knowledge centre.

Thank you to the honourable members of the committee for inviting me to add to this important conversation of soil health in Canada. I’m briefly going to highlight the roles Indigenous people play in protecting and building soil health and where soil health may be at risk, specifically for First Nations in the Prairies, where I live and work.

First, it’s important to state that all soils in Canada are on the traditional territories of Indigenous peoples. The Prairies, which were once home to vast expanses of native grassland, now comprise more than 80% of Canada’s agriculture land base, all of which are on treaty territories.

It’s these rich fertile soils developed over millennia under native grassland, grazed by bison in close relationship with Indigenous peoples, that support agricultural production in this region. And while agriculture has become a dominant land use on most First Nations reserves across the Prairies, the land is primarily farmed by non-Indigenous producers that rent it from the First Nation.

Indigenous people’s agricultural knowledge and traditional Indigenous knowledge have been undermined and marginalized over time, as agriculture management decisions have devolved outside of the community to non-Indigenous producers.

Indigenous peoples have historically been left out of soil science and agricultural education. First Nations students are under-represented in the soil science and agricultural fields at the undergraduate and graduate levels across Canada, and thus Indigenous professionals in these fields are incredibly rare. Mr. Ken Bear, who you’ll hear from in the next hour, he’s one of the exceptions.

Limited soil science and agriculture education of First Nations people poses a risk to soil health on First Nations reserve lands. There’s a need to increase access to soil and agricultural training for First Nations people at all levels of education and for a variety of roles. The most immediate action that could protect soil health is to increase training available to First Nations land managers who are the frontline workers.

In addition to education, First Nations access to soil information is limited even to soil data collected on their own land, which constrains sustainable soil management. Historically, First Nations have not had strong relationships with soil data collectors and holders, such as universities, governments and the agricultural industry. For many First Nations in Saskatchewan, the only soil data they might have access to are 60-year-old soil survey reports, which are useful for land-use planning but not for evaluating changes in soil health.

While many producers who farm First Nations land may be collecting soil data to guide fertilizer applications, results of soil tests are not commonly shared with the First Nation. Resources are needed to support soil data collection and management by First Nations for their own lands. Initiatives and soil data management developed through a national soil health strategy could be modelled and applied for First Nations use.

Also the Indigenous Guardians program may be a potential avenue for training Indigenous soil health monitors. In spite of gaps in soil science knowledge from a western perspective, Indigenous peoples currently protect and maintain soil health on lands they govern. Indigenous values of wahkohtowin respect the kinship between ourselves and the living and non-living members of the ecosystem leading to the careful use of these lands that promote biodiversity and soil protection.

At the global scale, Indigenous-governed lands harbour 80% of biodiversity. On the Prairies, we can plainly see from satellite imagery that perennial land cover on First Nations reserve lands is more dominant than in the surrounding rural municipalities. This existing land stewardship needs to be more recognized, and resources for First Nations to support and expand Indigenous-protected and conserved areas into the Prairies is needed. This could make way for the restoration of marginal cropland for bison rematriation. Indeed, many First Nations are restoring their relationship with the buffalo by returning them to their lands and also becoming signatories to the Buffalo Treaty.

Our knowledge is in the land and languages, and revitalization of this knowledge can protect soil health.

With that I’ll end my remarks, and thank you all for your time. Kininaskomatinawow.

Thank you all.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Candice Pete-Cardoso, Director, Indigenous Land Management Institute, University of Saskatchewan, as an individual: Good morning, Tanisi, Candice Pete-Cardoso nitisiyihkâson, waskichosi ocih niya. I’m from the Little Pine First Nation Treaty 6 territory. I’m the director of the Indigenous Land Management Institute, soon to be renamed the “kichi okawimaw askiy,” great mother earth knowledge centre.

We have spent the last year working with Indigenous peoples from various First Nations and national and provincial Indigenous-led organizations to reimagine what a land-focused centre should look like here at the University of Saskatchewan. The work of the steering committee has resulted in the following vision:

kihci-okâwîmâw askiy (great mother earth) kihmehinan (you have given us) pimâtisiwin (life), poko kwayask manâcihitatân (we are obligated to respect her in the right way).

Our mission is working with and for Indigenous peoples to empower land governance by leveraging the teaching, research and engagement capacity at the University of Saskatchewan.

The centre has a responsibility to advocate for kichi okawimaw askiy, for mother earth, and today we have the responsibility to advocate for the health of the land.

Dr. Arcand mentioned that the relationship that Indigenous peoples have with the land has been damaged by colonization. To expand on this, in a recent presentation by David Nahwegahbow, he spoke to how law is used as a tool of the colonizer, that laws are developed within colonial institutions, and where settlers created and assumed sovereignty over Indigenous peoples, and I will add, over Indigenous territories.

There have been many tools developed in the form of legislation and policy. The Indian Act is just one example of those tools of colonization.

From this legislation was born many policy regimes that resulted in the reserve system, the pass system, residential schools and agricultural policy meant to stop Indigenous peoples’ efforts to engage in the agricultural economy. This included policy that resulted in the loss of the highest quality agricultural reserve land through surrenders. Any conversation about soil health and Indigenous peoples must include the voices of Indigenous peoples at those tables. Conversations must include concepts around Indigenous sovereignty over our lands and Indigenous knowledge.

We have heard from previous witnesses that soils vary in their ability to perform ecosystem services. From an Indigenous world view, we do not commodify the land and we do not solely value the land based on its potential to generate revenue. Land is viewed as a living, breathing ecosystem and territory, a kin connection and a place that we must learn from, nurture and sustain.

First Nations vary widely in the number of and capacity of staff involved in making land management decisions, with implications for caretaking of soil health. For many First Nations across the Prairies, there may be a single land manager who is responsible for an expansive range of duties, one of which may be negotiating and administering permits and leases with producers to rent reserve farmland. However, if the land manager leadership or members of a land advisory committee don’t have a strong foundation in agriculture, including soil management, soils have the potential to be degraded. Current federal government support for the training of First Nation land managers is limited to First Nations under various federal land regimes. Resource allocations for land management should be expanded to all First Nations in Canada, and resource allocation for training should expand beyond the resourcing for one trainee per nation. The current structure of land management regimes is paternalistic and in need of reform. In its current state, it puts soil health at risk.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you for your presentations. We’ll proceed with questions from senators. Before asking and answering questions, I’d like to ask members and witnesses in the room and online to refrain from leaning too close to the microphone or remove your earpiece when doing so. This will avoid any sound feedback that could negatively impact committee staff in the room. As per our previous practice, I’d like to remind each senator that you have five minutes for your questions and answers, and again, I will notify you at one minute.

Senator Simons: Tanisi and hiy hiy to you both. Dr. Arcand, you spoke very eloquently about the difficulty First Nations have in accessing basic data about their own lands. It’s a theme we’ve heard again and again on this committee, the lack of any sort of central reference or pooled knowledge about what carbon loads are or what soil health is. Can you explain to us why it is so particularly difficult for First Nations to access that information?

Ms. Arcand: Thank you for your question. I think the first reason why it’s so difficult is that historical education gap, actually. We’re at a greater deficit in terms of how readily accessible, for example, in the agricultural field, agronomists are. There may be agronomists working for industry or provincial ministries of agriculture, but there is no steady communication line between those parties that could actually provide some advice and help and the First Nation itself. That relationship that exists for non-Indigenous farmers and agricultural advice — that’s 100 years of communication lines, that’s generations of farmers, farm neighbours and people who have been trained in that area that non-Indigenous farmers have access to, that a First Nations land manager or other community members and leadership might not have that same access to.

Senator Simons: I have so many questions, but I’ll have to limit them and ask to go back on second round. The land in Saskatchewan and Alberta, in Treaty 6 and Treaty 7 territory, evolved to be grazed by bison. When the bison left and they weren’t there to do that grazing, it had an impact on the health of the soil. You mentioned something called the Buffalo Treaty, and I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about what that is.

Ms. Arcand: The Buffalo Treaty emerged a few years ago. It is a modern initiative that sprung out across tribal lines and extends beyond Canada and Canadian First Nations into tribes in the U.S. as well. The signatories have committed to restoring that relationship with our relative, the buffalo. There are a number of signatories now, both in the U.S. and in Canada, who have taken that pledge. There are others, even as witnesses, such as myself and others, non-Indigenous people who have also signed on as allies to that commitment to re-establishing that relationship with buffalo. For some of those First Nations who have signed on to the Buffalo Treaty have also physically restored buffalo to their landscapes and to their reserve lands.

Senator Simons: For the health of the soil.

Ms. Arcand: In part, that’s an added benefit. It may not be the reason why the initiative is taking place, but it’s an added benefit.

Senator Simons: Perfect. I should ask a question of our other witness.

I’m really fascinated by the work that you are doing to bring this into the academy. What are some of the challenges in making sure that this knowledge is both captured in the formal academic setting and is getting back to First Nations people on reserve or on the land in other ways?

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: One of the biggest challenges is ensuring that relationships are looked at in a long-term way. Communication is really important and relationship building is really important. I’ll use an example of how we are seeking to address that challenge.

With the work that we are doing in terms of developing an askiy knowledge centre within the University of Saskatchewan, we’re focusing on relationship building. An example is that we’re developing a network of faculty researchers here at the University of Saskatchewan. Our goal is to connect that group with the work of the steering committee, to build relationships and to create that dialogue, conversation and relationship. Thank you.

Senator Klyne: Welcome to our panel guests. My first question is for Ms. Arcand. Based on your research and academic work, can you tell this committee what makes a traditional Indigenous farming practice more sustainable, generally, and specifically the practices aimed at managing soil degradation?

Ms. Arcand: Thanks for the question, Senator Klyne. The first question related to traditional Indigenous agricultural practices. In the Prairies, for example, prior to European settlement and the introduction of western-style forms of agriculture, our agriculture wasn’t like that. In the Prairies, we weren’t like eastern parts of the country where people were growing pretty large fields of corn, beans, squash and other things. We were primarily hunting. We were primarily gathering.

I also understand from hearing from elders and other knowledge keepers that, in spite of that, we were completely aware that this was happening. In fact, there was obviously a lot of trading that was going on and even some growing of some small crops, especially as people moved south where the climate was more conducive to growing corn, for example, as families migrated.

In the Prairies, traditional agriculture doesn’t evoke the same kind of thing as it would in the east or probably in B.C. Having said that, I will answer the second part of your question, which is, generally, even contemporarily today, if you go to any reserve, you’re likely going to find an area where the land has been left in its natural state. There’s the old pasture or an island of grassland in the middle of trees. I think the difference currently, and even in the last 50, 60, 70, 100 years, is that we knew to leave certain lands aside. I think that acknowledgment that not all land needs to be broken is one of those features of what can protect soil health.

As previously mentioned in other hearings, soils vary greatly in their properties and, therefore, how susceptible they might be to degradation. Some soils can be quickly degraded if they are cultivated. They’re better left in their natural state or under a perennial vegetation where they’re able to continue to input and sequester carbon, or they’re able to continue serving as habitat. That’s my kind of Prairie perspective on that. I’m sure others could add to this conversation, if you’re able to speak to other Indigenous experts.

Senator Klyne: Thank you for that. I’m not sure if you can answer this or Dr. Pete-Cardoso. I wanted to hear more about the Indigenous Guardians.

Ms. Arcand: Yes. The Indigenous Guardians program sprung forward as a means to essentially build capacity for First Nations and Indigenous communities to build within community capacity, especially developed around the areas of conservation.

The Indigenous Guardians program is essentially building capacity around internal capacity for conservation. It sprung out primarily in regions in the north, in the boreal forest regions.

I know that one community in Saskatchewan is about to launch their Indigenous Guardians program. They’ll be working closely with Prince Albert National Park and the buffalo herd that is in that southern part of the Prince Albert National Park.

These Guardians get training opportunities, but their primary role is to serve as that conservation person for their community. They’re out on the land anyways. They’re essentially land protectors, land guardians. That is why I suggested that, perhaps through this program, if they also had the tools and resources to do soil health monitoring, that would be a great opportunity.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Senator Cotter: Thank you to each of you for being here and presenting to us on some fascinating dimensions of issues around soil and soil health.

I have two mundane, factual-type questions and then one I think is grander. I could ask the first two.

One of the things that used to happen at the University of Saskatchewan was that the Government of Canada provided funding for a First Nations Land Management program to train First Nations individuals to help care for and manage soil on First Nations. I used to be the Dean of Law for a while in Saskatoon, and I used to lend a couple of faculty members to do the legal dimensions of that and the environmental dimensions.

Is that continuing, or is it continuing under other responsibilities such as your own, Dr. Arcand?

Ms. Arcand: Yes. Thanks for the question. In fact, the program still exists, but it no longer is funded through any federal funds. That funding, I think, ceased in 2012 or so. Candice can correct me on that if I am wrong. In 2012, the funding from the federal government ceased.

The delivery of the program still exists. In fact, Canada spent a lot of time working on evolving that program, which used to be the Indigenous Peoples Resource Management Program, into the Kanawayihetaytan Askiy certificate program, with the addition of more Indigenous studies within the required courses.

Students are still coming. Every year I have the privilege of teaching them a field course every July. We have students from all across Canada.

Senator Cotter: My second question is that, in the 1990s when the Treaty Land Entitlement framework agreement was established, a significant amount of money became available to 29 First Nations to repatriate land that had not been provided to them from the treaties 100 years earlier.

My recollection and understanding is that a significant amount of that money was spent by First Nations to acquire farmland. Do you know whether that has happened and the degree to which First Nations in Saskatchewan in particular have expanded their involvement in farming, or whether they’ve moved away from farming and have bought lands that are more amenable to the kinds of transitions that you’ve described?

Ms. Arcand: Yes, I can. I don’t have the specific statistics in terms of how many acres have been purchased. Certainly, it’s over the million mark; that happened a few years ago.

Candice, you can correct me too, or add to this.

I can speak for my own community, for example; we were one of the early signatories, and we were in a good position to have purchased that land when land prices were still rather low. That’s not the case right now. There are a lot of communities, a lot of First Nations, who still have outstanding Treaty Land Entitlement purchases to make, and they’re no longer in the good position that we were.

We were able to purchase a quarter section or two of land that had been surrendered back in 1919, and this was some of the best agricultural land that was lost. We wouldn’t have been able to afford that land today if we were to purchase it.

Senator Cotter: That’s useful to know.

I have one grander question. This seems to me to be one of the most exciting dimensions of it, which is the merger of traditional knowledge in relation to land and care for land, on the one hand, and let me call it the hard science about soil, soil health and the like, on the other hand.

Can each of you talk about the way in which those get blended together in your work, or need to be blended together?

Ms. Arcand: Sure. Ironically, one of the ways that it’s kind of organically blending together in the agriculture industry is in a lot of these nature-based solutions or agricultural climate solution practices. For example, intercropping is an Indigenous practice. There’s a lot of research in conventional, modern agriculture right now that is looking at that.

It’s interesting that we are now looking at those ecological relationships that contribute to soil health, and that is inherently an Indigenous value: looking at things in terms of their relationship to each other. It’s actually becoming easier to make that bridge between Indigenous knowledge and science and agricultural science and soil science, because soil scientists are looking at soil health from an ecological standpoint now.

The Chair: Ms. Pete-Cardoso, would you like to respond to that question as well, please?

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: Sure. I wanted to talk a bit about traditional ecological knowledge. The question was, how do we incorporate that into what we’re doing today? It is really important, because if I go back to some of my earlier comments, just how we view the land and that the land is important with regard to protecting and conserving. I think I will leave that there. Thank you.

The Chair: Thanks very much.

Senator Jaffer: Thank you for both of your attendance today. I’ve learned a lot from both of you, so thank you.

I have a question, starting with you, Ms. Pete-Cardoso. From your perspective, how well do the needs of Aboriginal communities align with provincial and federal government visions and policies for agriculture? How well are their needs incorporated into government plans, and are there certain provinces better at this than others? What can different provincial governments and other levels of government learn from each other? I know that was a lot of questions.

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: Okay. I will do my best to answer that. You’ve asked the question about how the needs of Aboriginal peoples are aligned with the approach taken by provincial and federal governments. I will start with an example. When we think about the needs of Aboriginal communities, we have to move past some of the current policies that have been put into place by the federal government. I’ll use one as an example. I’ll speak to what I know.

Right now, we have a current land regime called the Reserve Land and Environmental Management Program, which is a policy that sits under the Indian Act. Currently, there are three levels within that policy regime: training and development, operational and delegated authority under sections 53 or 60. If we think about this policy and the needs of Indigenous communities, right now, the communities are resourced for one trainee. In addition to that, if we think about the structure of the policy, any work that the nation does to negotiate leases and permits, when we think about the revenue generated, that revenue is required to be sent to the federal government. The other issue here is that any of the activity and any of the decision-making is still subject to ministerial approval. When we think about the need to progress in this particular area, if we think about the needs of Aboriginal peoples, we need to think about autonomy. We need to think about autonomy with regard decision-making when it comes to lands.

There were a number of questions there, and that was the first part of that one.

Senator Jaffer: The second part was: Are there any provinces better at this than others?

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: When I think about that on a national level, I wouldn’t say that there is any province that is leading the others per se. I will say that when we think about land management within First Nation communities, we have to remind ourselves that it’s the federal government that really establishes the policy for land management within First Nation communities. I’m going to leave that there. Thank you.

Senator Jaffer: What do you think research should be focused on to better understand the intersection of Indigenous land and resource management with soil health and overall sustainability? A certain part of that question was asked earlier, but I wanted you to further expand on it.

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: With regard to research, I am going to ask my esteemed colleague to step in, because this is her particular area of research. Thank you very much.

Ms. Arcand: Sure, Candice. One of the things with respect to soil health on First Nations is that we lack basic demographic data, actually, and land-use data. We don’t even necessarily know the exact extent to which First Nations farmers are farming land versus non-First Nations farmers who are farming land. We don’t necessarily know what the agricultural practices are, how similar they are off versus on reserve. We don’t know the extent to which the terms of these lease and permit agreements influence the practices that are actually playing out on the land and, therefore, their effects on soil health or soil degradation.

Unlike off reserve, where there is quite a lot of information, for example, even with the agricultural census. It was only in the last agricultural census where there was any data whatsoever related to Indigenous people. We’re kind of in a data gap.

The Chair: Thank you.

Senator Duncan: Thank you to both witnesses for appearing before us today. I think there is a bit of a time zone difference, so I appreciate your early-morning attendance.

I would like to follow up on Senator Klyne’s question about the land guardians and also your comments about the bison. Bison were reintroduced in the Yukon. There were 170 bison reintroduced in the late 1980s as part of a national program. Since then, the herd has grown to 1,200 to 1,400 bison and their range includes the Aishihik, Sekulmun and Hutshi lakes. Aishihik is near where the federal government experimental farm was located. There aren’t reserves in the Yukon. We have settled First Nations, and that’s part of the Champagne and Aishihik First Nation land area.

The bison have become a significant food source. There are bison hunts annually as part of the school programs, and they’re licensed hunts. Bison are also prevalent if you drive the Alaska Highway between Fort Nelson and Fort St. John in British Columbia. There are all kinds of bison. I’m not sure of the status of the land claim agreements in that area, but I do know that there is a significant First Nation Indigenous land guardians program.

From the expertise that resides in your area, I’m wondering if there is an intersection in terms of your expertise and a study of the impact of these bison on the soil health. Are you trading knowledge? Are you studying? Are we working together as Canadians?

Ms. Arcand: That’s a really good question. I’m not sure in that region. I imagine that perhaps there may be some biologists or plant ecologists that might be involved in some research. I’m not sure yet. At least down south in the Prairies, there has been a little bit of research that has started, especially looking at grazing effects and the differences between bison and cattle.

There is more research that’s happening in the U.S., where researchers are looking at the impacts of grazing on species diversity and on rare species of birds, for example. What does reintroducing bison do to the ecosystem? The data that is out there so far suggests it does a lot. Bison are our keystone species, meaning that the rest of the ecosystem follows their lead and adjusts and adapts. You see that when buffalo are reintroduced into lands that they haven’t been in for generations, and it completely changes the ecosystem.

As a soil scientist, when I put my soil science hat on, I do get excited about what this means for soil carbon, for example, because my understanding is that bison do graze much differently than cattle do. So what is their grazing behaviour? How does their grazing behaviour influence the inputs of carbon from the plants that they’re growing? Those roots will start sloughing carbon into the soil when they graze. How does that influence soil carbon sequestration, as well as the ecological relationships? For example, the dung beetle that is feeding on the manure of the bison, how does that influence those relationships and the ecological living relationships that influence soil health?

You’ve heard a lot from previous speakers that soil organic matter and soil organic carbon are probably the most important indicators of soil health. Soil organic carbon and organic matter can form and build up through the activity of soil micro‑organisms and other organisms.

I’m very interested how bison change those relationships. There are a lot of research questions. It would be amazing if we had Indigenous students working on those research questions.

Senator Burey: Thank you to our esteemed guests for their presentations and extensive knowledge. I’m learning a lot; I’m a new senator.

I have heard from my colleagues, and from you as well, about the need for research, data, training, education, connection, knowledge exchange and, of course, paying attention to our great mother earth.

I am a pediatrician, so I’m always interested in the connection between soil health and human health. I’m wondering what Indigenous agricultural practices combat — for me, in particular, for kids — food insecurity among Indigenous communities. How can non-Indigenous communities learn from the centuries of knowledge?

Ms. Arcand: Thank you for that question. I’ll speak for my own community and my own experience.

When I was young, my grandparents actually did a lot of gardening. They took up gardening once they were settled onto reserves. I was fortunate in that we always had good, healthy food to eat because we had a full freezer of food that we had harvested from the summertime.

There is a gap that has occurred from my generation to the younger generation, and we’re trying to address that gap. It’s important that you bring up human health and nutrition.

It was about five years ago that our community was able to receive some funding from a non-profit organization to establish a food forest. That has gone a long way to improving access to local, fresh produce. It has integrated closely with the elementary schools. Kids get excited to go and plant. They planted a bunch of fruit trees a few years ago, and now they’re able to harvest the fruit from those trees. There is a young woman from my community who is now employed to process that food. She is making fruit leather that the kids get to eat.

There is a whole cycle. The students, the young people and the elders have an area they can go to in this food forest and come together. They can learn about the soil and about the plants, but then they also get the food that comes out of there.

In addition, I know many in communities at the beginning of the pandemic, food security was a very scary question. We didn’t know whether or not our access to grocery stores would be compromised. So this has spurred a lot of the drive to return bison to our landscapes as a cultural connection but also as an important food source.

All of these pieces are very closely tied together. Soil, nutrition, ecological health and human health are all interrelated. I think we’re getting better at understanding that these things are connected.

I’m happy with the direction that we’re going, but I think we need to move a little more quickly, especially when we know our lands will be further stressed by climate change.

Last year was incredibly dry. We had a huge drought. We need to be able to ensure that we can weather those ups and downs.

Senator Burey: Ms. Pete-Cardoso, do you have anything to add to that?

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: Within my community of Little Pine First Nation, I grew up working in our own family community garden. I remember that when I was around 14 or 15 years old, we were quite active in that particular area. My family was also involved in agriculture and farming.

For whatever reason, for the last 20 or 30 years, our community has been trying to work on revitalizing that. What I will share is that when it comes to the Little Pine First Nation, they are connecting with the University of Saskatchewan. Food insecurity is important to address within our community.

Right now, what we’re doing is connecting the Little Pine First Nation with a group of fourth-year students here at the University of Saskatchewan within the Renewable Resource Management program. They are working with the nation to find suitable land locations within the community where a community garden would thrive, therefore addressing food security. We’re focusing on the elders and trying to move that forward.

The Chair: I have a question for each of you, but on a personal note, I would like to learn more about the food forest. My office colleague will follow up with you to find out more about that, please.

If you were the drafters of our final report, what would be one or two recommendations you would like to see as one of the top four or five in our report, however many we have? What are two recommendations you would like to see included in our report? I would like to hear from both of you.

Ms. Arcand: One would be to address those policy gaps that inadvertently put soil health at risk on First Nations. Specifically, the way that the funding formula works with Indigenous Services Canada to First Nations, it can actually incentivize the breaking of marginal land for crop production, because the band will receive more funding if they’re able to issue more permits or the land base of the permit is larger, and that actually risks soil health. We need to plug that policy gap.

What we should be doing is rather than incentivizing poor soil management, we should be incentivizing or rewarding the soil stewardship that’s happening and make sure that doesn’t come at risk. That would be number one.

Number two is working more effectively on our nation-to-nation relationships with the First Nations and the federal government, as well as provincial governments, in ensuring that we have access to our lands.

As you know, First Nations reserve land bases are quite small. They’re much smaller than what our traditional territories are. The Saskatchewan provincial government is about to start the resale of agricultural Crown land, which is treaty land. The potential sale of that land is a lost opportunity for Indigenous people to govern those lands and to caretake those lands.

Again, I will harp on the idea of bison rematriation. Bison need a lot of land, and we don’t necessarily have the carrying capacity for large herds. That is a low-hanging fruit, in my opinion, that Crown land.

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: Thank you very much. I’m going to go back to some of the things that I’ve stated already. When I think about federal government support for the training of First Nations land managers, it’s limited to First Nations under various — and I’ll emphasize — federal land regimes. Resource allocations for land management should be expanded to all First Nations in Canada, not just those under a particular land regime.

In addition to that — and Melissa has stated this but I’m going to reiterate it — resource allocations for training should expand beyond the resourcing for one trainee. Instead of one trainee per nation, it should be to meet the needs of the nation.

One of the other things I wanted to just touch upon that I wasn’t able to earlier, when we think about the protection of natural lands, many First Nation lands were not cultivated because they were too poor to support crop production. Alarmingly, current reserve land management policy and Indigenous Services Canada funding formulas can incentivize soil health degradation. This is because permits issued for land rentals can be associated with how much funding the First Nation receives.

This can result in decision-making that expands agricultural activity when it is not ideal. What this equates to is marginal lands being cultivated to increase the number of permits issued. Saying all of that, policy reform is required to disincentivize cultivation of marginal lands and, instead, incentivize the protection and conservation of those lands. Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you very much. We’re moving on to round two.

Senator Simons: Following right on from what Ms. Pete-Cardoso was telling us, what percentage of reserve land is under cultivation would you estimate? How is that divided between First Nations doing the farming themselves versus rental?

Ms. Arcand: That’s a good question. I actually wish I could pull up that data. Based on the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Annual Crop Inventory, we can get an estimate of how much land is crop land versus pasture land.

I don’t know off the top of my head what that distribution is. I’d have to take a look. We do know that there are very few Indigenous farmers. I think there were 140 according to the last and only data that was reported for Saskatchewan. I think it’s 150 in Alberta.

In my community, for example, there is only one member farmer who is farming. He is a mixed operation — conventional grain, but he also runs some cattle. Otherwise, the land is leased out to a farmer who farms over 20,000 acres across the region, so not just on my community but on a neighbouring First Nation as well as on private land.

I think I lost your question, sorry.

Senator Simons: If there is a significant number of people renting and leasing, how do we make sure they’re doing that on the best possible land that is fit for purpose?

Ms. Arcand: It really varies from nation to nation. Some First Nations have a really good working relationship with the farmers that lease their land, but I’ve also heard where that’s not the case at all. The history of that paternalistic relationship is still playing out today such that there is almost little that the First Nation can do in terms of directing exactly the kinds of agricultural practices that might be at play. It really varies. The whole spectrum, as you can imagine, is at play.

Senator Cotter: You were discussing the issues of data and the challenges. Does the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations play any role? As a central agency for land uses and land practices that can be shared among First Nations in Saskatchewan, if it had the resources, could it be a source of that kind of information and information sharing?

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: When I think about the FSIN here in Saskatchewan, I would say there is much opportunity for our organizations to play a larger role in this. When I think about the resourcing to our Indigenous organizations, that certainly would help us move into the direction of being actively involved in that type of work.

Ms. Arcand: I do believe that the First Nations Natural Resource Centre of Excellence is doing some of this work. I believe they’re associated with the FSIN.

Ms. Pete-Cardoso: Yes.

Ms. Arcand: But I agree, I think it may help to have a coordinating body in the same way that we’re talking about on a national scale having a coordinated — almost like a national — strategy for soil health. I think First Nations need to be a part of that. I would hate to see it be two parallel processes happening because I think we lose opportunity in terms of the data.

The Chair: Thank you.

Senator Jaffer: My question is to you, Dr. Arcand. There is a significant amount of attention being given now to new technologies and innovations when it comes to agriculture and soil health. However, I was wondering if there are any traditional practices based on Indigenous knowledge that you think we should be considering more carefully. Are there any practices in particular that come to mind? What are their main benefits? Now, that’s a big question. Do any practices come to mind?

Ms. Arcand: There will be region-specific practices across the country that will vary. I say this because, as previous speakers have said before, soils will develop under a certain climate to be unique from one climate to the other, from one region to another. Therefore, the Indigenous practices that would have developed would also vary because of these biogeographic differences that are related to climate. There might be some really unique Indigenous agricultural practices in B.C. that are unique compared to southern Ontario or compared to the Prairie provinces.

If we think about the Prairie provinces, which is where I’m from, traditionally, in terms of agriculture, again, it was that interrelationship between grasslands, bison, other grazers and the harvesting and collection of food plants; that was our agriculture. We weren’t necessarily planting large tracts of land, so it’s regionally different.

Senator Klyne: I want to follow up on Senator Simons’ question about farmed land and then leased land. Typically, some of those leased lands go to corporate farms. You have five or six combines out there and they just go through that. That intensity isn’t good for soil degradation. Are there internal gyrations around the issue that we would like to have the lease land revenues, but that’s not good for our soils and maybe we should leave it?

Ms. Arcand: Absolutely. This is something we’re going to try to address with this Agricultural Climate Solutions Living Lab that Mistawasis Nêhiyawak is leading in Saskatchewan, where we’re going to try to work with the producers to test out and trial more innovative, best management practices that could potentially abate any soil degradation. In fact, the hope is that we can actually build soil health. I think it is important to work with the producers. We don’t have a young population of Indigenous people who are going to enter the farming sector; that’s across the board, non-Indigenous and Indigenous. Our farm population is aging.

We need to look at other ways to work together to ensure that we aren’t degrading our soils and habitat and that the community actually is aware and has input into how the farmer is actually implementing practices on their lands.

One of the things in our community that’s a big concern is the use of aerial spraying close to people’s homes. There needs to be a way for the community to provide feedback on that.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Dr. Arcand and Ms. Pete-Cardoso, for your presentation.

Welcome, and thank you for joining us. Our next panel will consist of Kenneth Bear, First Nation Professional Agrologist, Agriculture Development Manager, Pasqua First Nation Group of Companies; and Jacob Beaton, owner of Tea Creek Training and Employment.

We’d invite you to make your presentations of five minutes. I’ll put my hand up at one minute. At zero minutes, I’ll put both hands up and hopefully you’ll wrap up at that point, and then we’ll move into questions.

With that, I would invite Mr. Bear to make your presentation.

Kenneth Bear, First Nation Professional Agrologist, Agriculture Development Manager, Pasqua First Nation Group of Companies: Thank you, Robert. I was thinking I was going to be last, but that’s okay.

Jacob, I’m going to keep this quick.

I changed my notes. I’m glad I didn’t send any notes because I changed them three or four times.

Thank you for the invite. First, I’ll start by letting you know I’m from the Ochapowace First Nation. I grew up here, in Ochap. I went to the Cowessess residential school, and I graduated from the University of Saskatchewan in May of 2000 with an agronomy degree, specialized in crops.

I started my career off with Farm Credit Canada. From 2001, I worked with First Nations. I don’t know what year it is right now. 2023? For 22 years I worked with First Nations.

Currently, I work with Pasqua First Nation. I’m a registered agrologist with the Saskatchewan Institute of Agrologists. I’m a committee member for the national policy advisory committee for business risk management programs. I’m the president of a federally incorporated non-profit group called the National Indigenous Agriculture Association. That’s the introduction.

When I got the email from the committee clerk last week, I was thinking about soil health. The first thing that popped in my mind, and I’d like to share this story with you, is when I was about 12 or 13, my kokum, she lived with us. She was born in 1900. She lived until she was 98 years old.

We are standing outside on the reserve. When I was about 12 or 13, she said, “Here, eat some dirt.” I was like, okay, kokum was asking me to eat some black dirt here. Should I question kokum? I don’t think I should question kokum. So I grabbed this black dirt and I ate it. I didn’t really ask her why. She said to eat it, so I ate it.

Then I was in the University of Saskatchewan. We looked at some black dirt under a microscope, put some water in it. Then I saw all these bugs, you know, floating around in there and swimming. I thought, oh, gee, was kokum trying to kill me back then? I really wasn’t sure. Then I thought that kokum knew that if I eat this black dirt, it probably was going to boost my immune system.

I started thinking, after this email — and years ago — would kokum ask me to eat dirt in a conventional field? I don’t think kokum would ask me to eat that soil in that farmer’s field.

I wanted to share that story with you. I’m good.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Mr. Beaton?

Jacob Beaton, Owner, Tea Creek Training and Employment: Thank you. Hello, everyone. It is very good to be here. My name is Jacob Beaton. My tribal name is Dzapl Gyiyaawn Sgyiik. I am La̱xsgiik or Eagle clan from the northwest coast here, Tsimshian.

I’m speaking to you from Gitxsan Territory, in between Smithers and Terrace in what is now called British Columbia. I am speaking to you from our training farm. Everyone is still asleep here on the West Coast. I’m really happy to be here. As we would say in our language, my heart is singing to be here and see everyone.

We have a website, teacreek.ca. If you’re curious about anything I’m saying, please feel free to check it out. I’ve been in business as an Indigenous entrepreneur for 20 years. Tea Creek is Indigenous-led at every level. The majority of our decisions every day, at every level, are made by Indigenous people. We’re land-based. We’re not classroom-based. We’re a culturally safe environment. We’re a place where Indigenous people are free to be ourselves as we heal, learn, build skills and reclaim our culture.

We do trades training. We are also an Indigenous food sovereignty movement. Those things go together. Our vision is healthy, resilient communities and economies based around abundant local food. That’s a vision we think everybody can get behind. That is where our ancestors were, and that is what we’re wanting to get back to. That is our vision.

Last year alone, we introduced over 1,200 Indigenous people to agriculture and food systems. Last year we won the B.C. Land Award for best use of food lands.

Last year we were named by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization as Canada’s food hero. Most importantly, we were overwhelmed with participation from Indigenous people who are desperate to return to our lands and produce an abundance of food.

Regarding soil — I know that’s the topic — there’s so much to say. I only have a few minutes at this point. I would defer to Kenneth for specific soil questions; he’s the expert, not me. We know that topsoil degradation is a massive growing problem in the mainstream. Something called regenerative agriculture is about building or rebuilding soil.

What I wanted to say, and you’ve probably heard this, is that Indigenous agriculture is regenerative and more. Indigenous agriculture has always been and is still at the cutting edge of regenerative practices. A previous speaker talked about intercropping. There’s mulching. Biochar is coming into conversations. These are all Indigenous technologies that are thousands of years old.

Our view of the current situation is that farmers are declining in Canada. In British Columbia, we had a 10% decline in farmers. That’s almost 15,000 people lost in the farming industry. Their average age is up — 56 nationally and 59 here in B.C.

Another thing I want to say is that food systems are holistic to us Indigenous people. We can’t create a food system without water, for example. When water disappears, food disappears. The problem is that many mainstream discussions around soil and agriculture exclude topics such as water. We all need water. Topsoil needs water to be alive.

Indigenous agriculture encompasses many things that are siloed. If we want to fix soil, we need to take an Indigenous view to it. We need to look at it like a major infrastructure project that spans many sectors and current government ministries. For us, for example, forests, streams, lakes and oceans are all part of our food systems.

Our knowledge is something we’re working on. It was appropriated and stolen from us, and returning it is a key thing.

To wrap up, I wanted to say a few things about numbers. We heard that 80% of the world’s biodiversity rests in Indigenous-controlled lands, which is 20% of the world’s landmass. Indigenous peoples are currently contributing to 32% of the world’s climate goals on less than 1% of financial resources. One farm loan from Farm Credit Canada has been given to an Indigenous farmer in B.C. ever, so financial resources are a huge barrier for us.

Last year, 1,200 different Indigenous people came to us wanting to participate.

In closing, if we all work together, everybody wins when it comes to food, soil and food systems.

We Indigenous people can get back to our lands. We can regenerate farmers as well as our soils. We can bring that to the table. The planet wins, our economy wins, everybody wins if Indigenous people take a leading role in agriculture and soil.

Thank you so much for inviting me.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Beaton and Mr. Bear.

We’ll start off with questions. There will be five minutes for the questions and answers.

Senator Simons: Thank you very much, gentlemen, especially for getting up so early on the far West Coast.

We just heard from our previous witnesses that there are only 140 Indigenous farmers in Saskatchewan and 150 in Alberta. Maybe this is not a fair question to ask, but do you have any sense about how many Indigenous farmers are actively farming in British Columbia?

Mr. Beaton: Yes. It’s less than 1%, so probably less than 150. My organization is working with the provincial Ministry of Agriculture to map out all Indigenous food projects at every stage, from planning, to start up, to operation, and even through to failure or, as we call it, learning experiences. We’re working through that.

There aren’t a ton, but the grassroots interest is absolutely incredible. The number of First Nations who list food production, agriculture and food security as their number one priority is a large majority here.

Senator Simons: There’s not one First Nations farmer who has been able to get that kind of federal farm financing. Is that because loans have been turned down, or because there are barriers to application — that it’s too hard to do all the paperwork if you don’t have the experience?

Mr. Beaton: That’s a fantastic question. Thank you, senator.

I talked to a large funder here in British Columbia, which is a foundation. They just did an audit of their programs, and they said that Indigenous peoples and programs are required to do 25 times as much paperwork and reporting as non-Indigenous people for the same dollar.

I’ve been actively talking with Farm Credit Canada, or FCC. I approached them a few years ago about farm lending for a few of our First Nation partners who purchased land off reserve — fee simple agriculture land — and want to develop it. I was told a few years ago that they don’t have a policy for lending to First Nations or Indigenous farmers in B.C. They’ve since created a policy, but like I said, there’s only been one loan to a First Nations farmer in B.C. ever through FCC.

So it went from “don’t bother applying because we don’t have a policy” — what I’m saying is that policy shifts are a huge request we’re making here. We don’t even necessarily need legislation. That can help, but policy or stroke-of-a-pen-type solutions are really easy fixes to create, first of all, fair access to resources and then reconciliation on top of that to make the path even easier. Right now, things are certainly not equal, and reconciliation actions are not even making it fair. So we need fair first, then reconciliation on top of that when it comes to access to resources.

Senator Simons: Mr. Bear, your kokum sounds like quite the character. You said as a joke — not a joke, but it was your point — that she wouldn’t let you eat cultivated soil now as opposed to the wild soil, I suppose, of your childhood.

Can you explain to us why you don’t think today’s agricultural soil is worth eating?

Mr. Bear: Thank you for the question.

To go back to that first question, when Jacob mentioned Farm Credit Canada, that was my first job out of university. I was told by professors that I don’t have to look for a job, and I was like, “Oh, okay, cool. So why don’t I have to look for a job?” Well, because I self-identified as First Nation. So I didn’t look for a job, and it was the last month of university, nobody was phoning, and I thought maybe I should have looked for a job. Five different companies phoned me. Farm Credit Canada was one of them out of Yorkton.

And I wanted to move back to Ochap and bring my kids to Ochap. I’m going to take this job at FCC. I got to FCC in Yorkton, and the first thing they did was fly me to Montreal.

Long story short, I don’t think FCC back in 2000 were ready for Indigenous people to actually come in.

To answer the question about my kokum and why she wouldn’t let me eat soil today, it’s because of the chemicals. I’ll stop there.

Senator Simons: I hope I get a question on second round. Thank you both very much.

Senator Klyne: Welcome to our guests.

My first question is for Mr. Beaton. I’ll just cover a bit of your background. Tea Creek is an award-winning Indigenous-led culturally safe land-based Indigenous food sovereignty and training initiative. When you and your family traded suburban life for a 140-acre farm in British Columbia, you relied on YouTube videos to learn how to plant vegetables. Four years and a global pandemic later, you’re growing thousands of kilos and leading a food sovereignty revival in Indigenous communities on the West Coast.

You had mentioned some practices aimed at soil health management, but can you please tell this committee about Tea Creek’s current practices and planned practices aimed at soil management and soil degradation?

Mr. Beaton: Yes, thank you, senator. I’m really glad to hear you did your research on me. That’s so cool.

In terms of the current practices that we have, we teach a wide spectrum. We don’t have what I call a “religious view” on agriculture. We’re a principles-based organization, so just like our ancestors, we’re open to any tool or technology that fits within our culture and principles of food production — Indigenous values.

Here we practise hand farming. That is the entry level, because it’s the lowest-cost, highest-production way to make food. In terms of soil health and regeneration, we focus on minimizing tillage, again, the way our ancestors did it, and doing heavy mulching of organic materials on top of the soil.

We’re in an environmental zone overlap, which is really special, so if you go east, it’s a lot of bacterial activity that you rely upon to make the soil living and feed your plants; to the west, it’s mycorrhizal and it’s fungal. We have both here. That’s one of the ways we measure it. It’s like kokum, right? You pull that soil out and you can taste it. And we do that; that’s why I was laughing when he was telling the story. It tastes sweet when it’s healthy, it’s not stinky or sour, and it holds together, it’s sticky. That’s hand farming.

We also teach tractor farming. The reality is that if we’re going to scale up food production and feed a ton of people, we need to do it with machinery. But that’s more expensive, and a lot of First Nations don’t have that money. We teach it anyway for those who are able to access it, and we teach regenerative practices as much as possible with the tractor. We are trading our plows and tiller for something called a power harrow or a subsoiler, something they use in Europe to try to reduce the soil strata disturbances and produce an incredible amount of food. It’s working very well. Thank you for the question.

Senator Klyne: Thank you, great answer. Ken Bear, I’m sure our paths will cross in Saskatchewan. I’ll tell you a couple stories about my kokum, my grandma. So Pasqua First Nation Group of Companies is a major shareholder in a number of ventures and projects that combine agriculture with other economic activities. Can you speak about the importance of soil health generally, and specifically, soil management and soil degradation in terms of what your oversight is with PFN?

Mr. Bear: Thank you for the question. Currently, 10,000 acres is leased out. I know Richard Missens; he’s the CEO for PFN Group of Companies. I met Richard at the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations, or FSIN. I used to call myself the FSIN agrologist back in 2001. I really liked that. I used to teach agriculture to many First Nations across Saskatchewan. I would always see Robert’s hand pop up right away. I don’t know if I get off track or anything like that, but I’ll answer as quickly as I possibly can.

The best way to learn, for me, is to actually do it. To do it, if you’re looking at grain and oil seed production, look at the risk of doing that in terms of the equipment, in terms of depending on somebody else to do it and in terms of the weather. If you want to learn about how to take care of this land, you need to learn what’s being put on it, what is being taken off it and what its productive capacity is. If a farmer looks at a one- or two-year land lease, the assumption is that we’re going to take as much as we possibly can from this short period of time. In relation to pride in ownership, that pride in ownership means that you want it for generation to generation.

Senator Klyne: Thank you.

Senator Jaffer: Thank you to both of you for your answers and also your introduction. Just your introduction, Mr. Bear, has said everything we need to know, so thank you very much.

I have a question for both of you, but first I’m going to read something to you. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has underlined the importance of including Indigenous voices and Indigenous agriculture practices in policy and planning. In 2021, their report stated: “The world cannot feed itself sustainably without listening to Indigenous Peoples.”

I want to now extend this to say it for soil. What do we need to listen to from both of you or from Indigenous people to improve soil health? What can we learn from it?

Mr. Bear: Thank you for that question. I know that my kokum had this sense; she had this knowledge. When I was going through my university career, I started seeing her as this connection to First Nations, to the elders, to the community. I was like, how come there’s no connection here at the university? With Melissa and Candice being in the university, I see the potential for that connection.

Where the connection dissipates is in the investment in this knowledge. How do you engage a group that don’t trust? They don’t trust this colonialization. There’s a history of mistrust. There’s a history. How do you fix that history? How do you get this information from our elders and from our communities? You have to engage them in terms of getting them to trust.

I haven’t seen, in my professional career, the investment needed to engage First Nations to capture that knowledge and capture that synergy that can help this sector, help the world and help create some cohesive view. It’s always a fight.

Senator Jaffer: This is something very important that you’re saying, Mr. Bear — to engage. We all have different meanings of what it means to be engaged. I come from another country as a refugee, so I have some different ways of how I would have liked to engage with Canadians when I came. I’m sure you also have suggestions on how we should engage with Indigenous people. Can you please tell us, Mr. Bear?

Mr. Bear: Yes, I was waiting for Robert to put his hand up. He’s got his hand up, so I’m going to take another quick answer to your question, because I think your question is so important in terms of how to engage. How do you capture this knowledge?

I’m hearing the words of reconciliation. I’m hearing the words of wrongdoings, so we’re healing from past things that have happened. In this healing process, we still have Treaty Land Entitlement lands; we still have this connection to our communities and to mother earth.

Who is taking that responsibility to gather this information and to say, here is how this portion fits to this portion? It’s like science. That’s why I like the science field, because it’s not really that judgmental. It’s the ideologies of agriculture that have been brought here to make it productive or to create opportunities for settlers. Those opportunities may have been on the backs of First Nations, and if those opportunities still exist, you have to look at ways of eliminating that.

The Chair: Thank you.

Senator Duncan: A special thank you to the witnesses. I do appreciate the early hour that you’ve joined us at.

My question is for Mr. Beaton, and I apologize if I missed this. Can you tell the committee how far north your outreach regarding farming is in British Columbia?

Mr. Beaton: Yes, thank you for the question, senator.

In terms of the Yukon, we’re not that far up north. We’re halfway up the province. I like to remind people of that; we’re not the true North. We’re about as far north as Edmonton, for those who know where Edmonton is.

Senator Simons: So far north.

Mr. Beaton: We are in the largest populated region of the province in terms of how the province breaks it down. The northwest, what they call the Kitimat-Stikine, is about 60% Indigenous. Our immediate area, which is Two Rivers valley, has a population of 10,000 total and about 8,000 of that is Indigenous people. So we had 1,200, like I said, come to our farm.

Senator Duncan: There are significant populations of First Nations further north, and there is also a degree of farming that takes place, particularly if one drives on the Alaska Highway and in the Fort Nelson and Fort St. John region. There are also significant bison populations, and there is also quite an active land guardians program in the Dease Lake and Good Hope Lake area.

My question is: What is the intersection of the farming community with the guardians and First Nations in the area in terms of studying the soil health, in assessing the soil health and working with the provincial-federal government? These are non‑settled First Nations, some of them, I believe. Has there been any sort of assessment or impact of the bison on the soil health?

Mr. Beaton: Great question. I can’t answer about bison because we’re in the northwest where there are no bison. The traditional keystone species here were actually elk and mountain caribou. Those have been both driven out to extinction in our region.

The fascinating fact is that the Indigenous people here, my ancestors, were soil farmers. When settlers first arrived here, they arrived to plains. In fact, there are about 2 million acres of arable land just in our northwest region that has now gone mostly back to forest because of the lack of those grazing indigenous animals and the stamping out of Indigenous land owners.

There were a huge number of First Nations-owned ranches and farms here that were seized over time by Indian agents and provincial police and then auctioned off to non-Indigenous settlers basically. That has been very well documented.

In terms of guardianship programs, a lot of the First Nations — including in the northeast and northwest — are focused on restoring some of those animal populations. The province has just recently come on board, I understand, but up here, the Tahltan for example the Gitwangak First Nations, they have just taken over because the province hasn’t been doing wildlife surveys or soil testing. The First Nations are basically just jumping in and taking that over and doing it themselves and taking over management as well, with or without the province. Thanks.

Senator Duncan: Are the land guardians also undertaking soil health and working with studies or is that the focus —

Mr. Beaton: To the best of my knowledge, not directly, no. In my area, we’re all non-treatied, and the majority of British Columbia is non-treatied unsettled.

Senator Cotter: Thank you to our two presenters today. I have a question for you, Mr. Beaton, in relation to barriers. I spent a fair amount of my personal life in and around Smithers and Hazelton, and I have a real sense of that the imagination and vision of First Nations communities where you now live are sort of driving the future of First Nations and perhaps British Columbia.

You mentioned the issues around Farm Credit Canada and the like. I’m wondering if there is a template of barriers that if they could be addressed would make it possible to get to that level‑playing field that you described fairly visually. You noted FCC and the process, whether FCC also creates barriers by virtue of the communal way in which treaty land First Nations reserves are owned, and therefore are not able to be part of a securitization process, whether those barriers are being addressed by more imaginative ways of thinking about treaty land and First Nation reserves.

Could you identify the kinds of barriers that often governments present to creating opportunities for the First Nations? Mr. Bear, you may have some views on that as well.

Mr. Beaton: Sure, I’ll keep my answer brief. Absolutely, yes, we can identify a number of barriers. I don’t want to just pick on FCC. Chartered banks have a ton of policy barriers as well for Indigenous people.

I will also clarify that a lot of the barriers exist on and off reserve. We operate off reserve. I am a status Indian. I am still rejected for financing just because I’m status and no other reason.

There is a lot of institutionalized racism that definitely does exist. What I’ve been pushing for are policy changes where we can turn those unfair “no” responses into “yes” when they’re challenged. Unfortunately, a lot of that current policy is the opposite, it reinforces the unfair no. That’s it from me.

Mr. Bear: That was a good answer, Jacob. I want to answer quick because Mr. Black is going to put up his hand fairly quick.

The CALA program used to be called the FIMCLA program. It is 95% federal guarantee for farmers. I’ve been talking about that for 21 years, this CALA program; prime plus 1% interest rate, 95% federal guarantee. I don’t know of any First Nation across Canada that is participating under this CALA program offered by institutions other than FCC.

Shaun Soonias and Milton Greyeyes have been brought on to Farm Credit Canada. When I used to work at FCC, I didn’t see a vision that they were going to include and restrict that section 89 of the Indian Act which makes financial institutions say more or less that they’re doing due diligence.

If the Indian Act supersedes the Bank Act and the FCC act, then the security becomes the issue. I could get 1,000 acres leased to me from my First Nation. I go into FCC. If I have no experience farming this thousand acres, if I have no history, no transition of a farm operation, that puts red lights up right away for financial institutions.

Another issue is equity. If you have equity in your land and in your buildings, that helps you with financial institutions. If you’re farming on reserve, where is your equity? Where are your buildings? That’s not a part of the lending practices of FCC. It puts FCC in a position where they do not know how to work with the First Nation. How do they secure? Just a number of different things that I cannot answer in a short period of time, but do I have ideas as to how to fix it? Absolutely. An investment of $5 billion — just kidding.

Senator Cotter: The more that I talk, the more likelihood that Mr. Black will put up both hands.

I do want to end on this point. The more that we know about the barriers to enabling Indigenous communities to participate in farming along the lines that you have talked about, the richer the observations in our study, because they are in that way connected to the future of soil health that you are working so hard on. The more you can share with us, the better.

Senator Burey: Thank you so much to our guests for bringing such levity this early in the morning. It’s waking us up. There are just so many issues that you have touched on, and the richness of your contribution has been outstanding.

I’m going to go back to food insecurity, and I think it was Mr. Beaton who spoke about that and the abundant local food production. Could you speak a little bit more to that and how we can spread these practices across Canada?

Mr. Beaton: Thank you, senator. It’s a fantastic question.

Our vision for Tea Creek is that we become a leadership training centre, because we have so many First Nations that are wanting to work with us and partner, so we need to train our nation champions and leaders who can then come and implement our model and what we are doing within their culture, their territory and their climate environmental zone.

In terms of food security, oh my goodness, what a problem we have. Our median incomes here for Indigenous people are between $13,000 and $19,000 per year. You go into our local cities, and that jumps up to $70,000 and something. What this leads to is massive food insecurity with Indigenous children, youth, adults and elders.

The way I explain this is that we used to all be food sovereign and so money didn’t really matter, but then we were forced off our lands, gradually over time, and marginalized and became hunter-gatherers. So what that looks like in my family is we’re fishermen, and we fish, and we fill our basements with canned salmon. On a low income, you can still have food security.

But what happens when the salmon decline? What happens when the moose are pushed to extinction? What happens when your hunting and gathering no longer fills your basement?

That’s where I’ve been pushing and saying that these impacts that have been pushed onto us, these median incomes are not moving. Food insecurity is getting worse — not better — among our population. It is a huge thing that drives us. So we need to partner. What is the relationship with Canada on correcting and seeing the win-win-win for what it is? Because we need to basically start replacing calories as quickly as possible that used to be there in the salmon and the moose and the berries that are quickly declining and disappearing.

It is very, very urgent for us, and this is why First Nations in B.C. — that I can speak to from our work — have food sovereignty as a number one priority now, because they’re acutely experiencing the decline of affordable, local food that was farm-, field- and ocean-based. We moved to hunter-gathering based on those genocidal, colonial practices that had its impact. Now we’re trying to get back out and become food sovereign again on our own land, and we face a ton of barriers.

Yes, so if we could work together, we could solve a lot of our community, country and national problems, or we can keep going this course. We are definitely at a critical juncture when it comes to food security.

Senator Burey: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much. I have a couple of questions, and I’ll start with Mr. Bear.

Your kokum sounds like a wonderful individual, and I’m sure she is very proud of you. I understand that in 2021, you were the only Indigenous agrologist in Saskatchewan. You produced some very extensive work on soil health, and so my question is: What would you say, in your experience, has been the most effective method of monitoring and maintaining soil health in rural and Indigenous communities? And is it possible, then, to apply those concepts on a broader scale elsewhere across the country?

Mr. Bear: Thank you for the question. I will answer very quickly here.

I used to take out Canadian Agricultural Partnership, or CAP, programs and Growing Forward programs to the First Nations. We used to talk about agricultural stability and agricultural investment. We used to talk about programs and services offered by the provincial government.

The connection to this land, the connection in relation to the majority of First Nations land owned here in Saskatchewan is what that one senator talked about in terms of the Treaty Land Entitlement, the purchase of this TLE land. A lot of it, like Melissa Arcand and Candice Pete-Cardoso have mentioned, has been leased to non-First Nations.

How do you monitor? How do you ensure that a farmer is putting this on and taking that off? You need to actually be out there physically to see what this equipment is set at in terms of what is being put on it. If you want to learn more about the sustainability of your land, farming it, which I did in Ochapowace at 10,000 acres, and encouraging Cowessess to farm their land, and now encouraging Pasqua to farm their land, we know what is going to be put on it, we know the chemicals that are going to be used. We’re looking at organic. We are looking at horticulture. We are looking at the poultry sector in relation to broiler chickens. We are looking at this agricultural sector in relation to the land that Pasqua has and the expansion.

To engage people to talk about agriculture is sometimes a difficult thing, because agriculture is twenty-third on the list in the First Nation. However, Chief Pasqua, Richard Missens, they want agriculture to be a part of their food security here in Pasqua because when the borders closed due to the pandemic, there were issues with food. Now they want to look at sustaining their own population in case another pandemic ever hits. We’ve got the land to do that, and we’re going to gain this knowledge from the experts in the field.

To call me an expert, I really appreciate that, but I learn stuff every single day, and I’ve learned so much from this meeting today that — I don’t know what time it is over there, but I’m sure happy nobody fell asleep. I just about fell asleep earlier.

So thank you.

The Chair: It is actually quarter to eleven here in Ottawa, Eastern Time.

Mr. Beaton, you’ve certainly done a lot of work restoring land-based livelihoods and encapsulating self-sufficient methods of farming and living. I know you’ve touched on hand farming and tractor farming, but specifically what methods or practices have you discovered that will benefit soil health in your area and across Canada?

Mr. Beaton: A specific method for us is just keeping our soil covered. We do cover cropping now and try to, again, minimize soil disturbance. We do a lot of mulching. We see incredible soil microbiology, and the life, just, is so abundant.

We had some award-winning chefs actually come visit our farm and tell us that the vegetables — because that’s something we need to talk about, too, is the micronutrient value of food has been declining since 1960. When your soil is healthy, your food is also healthy, and your people are healthy, and you have water.

Another thing that we do is just try and increase the amount of shrubbery, grasses, things like that, because that not only builds soil, but it also adds water holding. I mentioned that in my opening remarks, but we can’t have food in any system without water. One of the first things we did when we started farming was look at our water situation and how we can build soil that also builds water and gives us a steady supply of water through the year.

I’m sure we could go into all kinds of detail if we had more time, but that’s just a little bit of what we’ve been doing.

Just one more thing, if I can add it, senator, is we need to talk about the lack of inputs that are available for people to do this, like organic-certified composts that are safe and are not contaminated. That’s a challenge, so we actually teach composting here, because a lot of our First Nations — we are not anti-chemical, for example. If a First Nation really wants to learn how to do chemical applications, we can and will teach it in a responsible way, but everyone so far wants to do it naturally. That’s how we teach it, and so we also teach composting here to get a really rich, active compost into the soil and boost soil biology.

The Chair: Thank you.

Senator Simons: I want to pick up right where Mr. Beaton left off. I have to say, I had the privilege of visiting Gitxsan Territory when I was travelling a couple of years ago with the Transportation and Communications Committee, and we travelled from Prince Rupert to Terrace, and I spent some time there.

I wouldn’t have thought that drought was a problem. It seemed like a rainforest to me.

Is it important to have water-retention capacity in the soil not just to safeguard against drought but to safeguard against flooding so that the soil is not eroded if there is a big downpour?

Mr. Beaton: I’ll probably defer to the soil expert here on that specific question. However, just on the drought piece, we have been here for four years, and we have had severe drought in three of those years even though we are in a rainforest zone. It is devastating and is something we have to think about now. Our creek that used to dry up once every 20 years dries up every other year now.

In my opinion, a lot of that is tied to logging practices in our watershed where topsoil has been deeply eroded. We talk about soil and we only talk about farmers, but our logging industry is a huge contributor to loss of topsoil and degradation of topsoil.

As Indigenous people, we look at that. That’s part of our food system. Having a healthy forest, with the grasses and shrubbery that hold water and topsoil, is important. Then you’ve got all these forestry practices where you’re just replanting pine or fir — whatever your marketable crop is — and neglecting any of the substrata in the forest, which then leads to topsoil erosion and flooding. So yes, absolutely.

Senator Simons: Mr. Bear, I don’t know if you want to slip in an answer there since Mr. Beaton threw to you.

Mr. Bear: No, I learned something there, Jacob.

Senator Jaffer: Mr. Beaton, you were talking about food security, and you really gave a very good explanation. I’m going to remember that for a long time.

Then you stopped when you said that we are going to have to — if I remember — going to need help to improve on food security. Can you finish that thought, please?

Mr. Beaton: Yes, absolutely.

Like I said, the biggest two barriers that we faced as Indigenous people to getting into food production are, first, access to land. It’s nearly impossible for us in British Columbia — and I’m just going to speak for my experience and our experience here — to purchase land off reserve.

The second barrier is access to capital and equity — access to money — so that we can do what anyone can do, which is go borrow money and then develop land. It’s the barrier not just to individuals like myself here; First Nations themselves face a lot of those barriers where they have to go and settle with government on a past infraction to get what is called own-source revenue so they can go and buy land.

The First Nations we’re working with that have gone to purchase land off reserve that is fee simple and farmland, they’ve done it with own-source revenue. They have not been able to go and get a bank loan to do that.

A third barrier is education, and we’ve heard that over and over again. You have the land, and now you need someone to work it. Because the residential schools were so incredibly devastating — my ancestors were food sovereign until there were three generations of us in a row who were taken away so that knowledge couldn’t be passed on. That’s really where we saw the land use get absolutely reduced onto these tiny postage‑stamp reserves, but people were still growing an abundance of food on those tiny reserves and were food‑independent and food‑sovereign. Then, bam, we see a desert of knowledge. Bringing that back is the third thing, as well as having adequate support to do that.

Right now, we are very underfunded here at Tea Creek compared to mainstream organizations. Fundraising is our number one problem by far.

I’ll leave it at that.

Senator Klyne: I had a question for Mr. Bear around the 10,000 acres of leased land and what you do to protect it while it’s out to the leasee, but I think you answered that question, so that’s fine.

I wanted to address the whole idea of finding access to capital. A few thoughts come to mind. I know about the concern around security. You should never write a loan just because you’re worried about security. You should do so because it’s a good loan to write. The concern is that any potential collateral might be on reserve and thus is not able to be seized. There are many ways to get around that.

Don’t forget about the First Nations Bank of Canada, Peace Hills Trust and don’t forget about the National Aboriginal Capital Corporations Association. They have 58 Aboriginal financial institutions under their purview, and they’re all developmental lenders, which means they would work with FCC to leverage their dollars. They would postpone their security to FCC — their loan — so they could actually lend some money. They’ll also work with credit unions and the mainstream banks. Those 58 AFIs, Aboriginal financial institutions, are from coast to coast to coast.

I will quickly lay out a few. In B.C., there is TRICORP, which is in Prince Rupert, B.C. There is Burns Lake Native Development Corporation, which is in Burns Lake. Then Haida Gwaii Community Futures is also a source. In Saskatchewan, there is the Beaver River Community Futures Development Corporation in Meadow Lake, and in Saskatoon there is the Saskatchewan Indian Equity Foundation Inc.

They all understand the hurdles you’re looking at, but they can also leverage those other institutions into giving you money. Those are some quick sources for you.

The Chair: We have time for one more question.

Senator Duncan: This is not a quick question, chair. Sorry. I can throw it out there, and perhaps the witnesses —

The Chair: They could respond in writing.

Senator Duncan: Yes. Perhaps Mr. Beaton might want to respond.

This committee did study the flooding issues in British Columbia that occurred — that disastrous situation related to climate change. I didn’t hear you address the issue of climate change in your remarks and how it’s affecting your enterprise. Please comment on that in writing.

On a final note regarding funding, within the last couple of years, the Arctic Inspiration Prize has awarded a significant amount of funding to farming in Dawson City to the Tr’ondek Hwech’in First Nation.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Bear and Mr. Beaton, for your testimonies today. Your assistance and that of the previous speakers is very much appreciated as we move forward with this study. On behalf of the group, I can share that our hearts are singing, as was noted earlier.

I also want to thank the active participation from and thoughtful questions of my senator colleagues. I want to take a moment to thank the folks who support us around this room: the translators, administrative folks, our office colleagues that work with us, the interpreters, the debates team, the transcribing teams — the list is almost endless.

Senators, our next meeting is scheduled for next Tuesday evening, February 14, at 6:30, when we will continue to hear witnesses on this committee soil health study. I also want to remind you that next Wednesday, February 15, is Canada’s Agriculture Day. There are a number of activities taking place in and around Parliament Hill and the precinct. If you get a chance, participate in Canada’s Ag Day.

(The committee adjourned.)