I will start by saying I'm no expert in Indigenous affairs or law, but I know it's especially messy in BC due to the multitude of co-habitating tribes that have lived in the area before, during and after the colonial period.

I get the sense the author is using the findings and jumping to worst case scenario conclusions. Landholders automatically lose all rights and owners interest because Crown title is subordinate and defective, gg no re (despite citing a settled/negotiated case where Crown land was given over and fee-simple landowners retained their interest). And BC's legal losses come out of Canada's budget so our tax money goes to First Nations, and so therefore you're supposed to get angry about it according to the author.

But I don't think most reasonable people in Canada nor the Indigenous see it as the necessary conclusion. Things are in limbo because there's still a lot to be worked out and negotiated.

Something that is on my mind for this case, is that the Cowichan are not the only First Nation claiming historic ownership/usage rights over that area (the Semiahmoo, Tsawwassen of White Rock and Delta or the Musqueam of Vancouver as a few examples). If that area of Richmond is awarded by BC/Canada's courts exclusively to the Cowichan, then other First Nations have their rights and claims effectively abridged as well. Perhaps the author thinks that is irrelevant since all those will be worked out however will fully supersede the current resident rights. I'd disagree, ultimately I expect a conclusion that not everyone is happy about, but at least everyone's modern and historical injuries are considered and recompensed at least partially. I think most Canadians recognize that as a nation we did generational harm to the Indigenous people whose historic lands we live on, but the exact way to recognize, repay and move forward is still far from decided. The author is, in my opinion, getting ahead of themselves assuming the conclusions.

This quote:

Now, the Cowichan Tribes have publicly stated that private owners cannot sell their properties without Cowichan consent,[15] and lenders are refusing to renew mortgages because the collateral is now legally defective.

With this foot note:

[15] conservative.ca/canada-must-de…

“The lead lawyer for the Cowichan Tribes has already stated that private land sales would need the consent of the Cowichan before they could go ahead.

I could only find this in writing.

Vancouver Sun article

He meant if owners of those lands attempted to sell to anyone else. The transaction would need the consent of the Cowichan before it could go ahead, Rosenberg told CKNW host Jas Johal recently.

“I fully anticipate that the seller or vendor will get what they are bargaining for, and the purchaser would also get what they are bargaining for,” said Rosenberg.

“But it would be with the consent of the Cowichan Nation and it would be with some accommodation from the Crown (government) to the Cowichan Nation.”

That is a big change already. No wonder Sharma has been expediting work on the appeal.

I then found this clip for the interview and I'm going have to say getting information from the Conservative.ca is already questionable but the way the author framed it is even worse.

Here's the clip for people who want to hear the entire context of it.

2m21s length.

xcancel.com/search?f=tweets&q=…