Robin Ganev
Recently the government of Saskatchewan strengthened existing trespassing law to the benefit of farmers and to the detriment of Indigenous people. The new laws took effect on Jan. 1, 2022. Under previous legislation, land owners had an obligation to put up posting if they wanted to limit access to their land. Now it is the responsibility of “trespassers” to ensure they are not on the wrong land, by obtaining permission from landowners to use their land for activities such as hunting, fishing, or hiking. The Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations has objected to the new laws, on the grounds that they violate treaty rights, which allow Indigenous people to live off the land. The fact that these laws were passed in the wake of the 2016 Colten Boushie shooting makes them all the more egregious and sends the message that the Saskatchewan government condones Gerald Stanley’s right to protect his private property.
Indigenous advocates have pointed out the irony of charging Indigenous hunters with trespassing upon land that was taken away from them. Converting previously accessible “public” land to strictly controlled private property has a parallel in the history of enclosure and resistance to it in England. Revisiting this history can help us rethink notions of “private property” and who the land belongs to. It also allows us to reflect on how private property rights became much stronger in Canada than in the United Kingdom, where rights of way (England) and right to roam (Scotland) customs and laws prevent rural landholders from restricting access for recreation.
The English Village Before Enclosure
The pre-enclosure English village comprised the lord of the manor, tenant farmers with different leases, cottagers or commoners – defined as small owners or occupiers with enough land and common rights to feed themselves – and squatters, who lived upon the land but had no ownership.[i] Continue reading