labradore

"We can't allow things that are inaccurate to stand." — The Word of Our Dan, February 19, 2008.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Zone 19 nord

As already patiently explained in small words that even morons can understand (but won’t), the Labrador boundary cannot be changed without the consent of the House of Assembly in St. John’s. End of story. But that’s just the beginning.

There’s an easy way for Sue Kelland-Dyer, or Carl Powell, or any other delusional Newfoundland nationalist, to prove this, or, in the alternative, to prove that they aren’t delusional. But first, the geography and history lesson.

Having been first placed under the jurisdiction of Newfoundland in 1763, then back to Quebec in 1774, Labrador was re-annexed to Newfoundland in 1809:

Be it therefore enacted, That such Parts of the Coast of Labrador from the River Saint John to Hudson's Streights and the said Island of Anticosti, and all other smaller Islands so annexed to the Government of Newfoundland by the said Proclamation of the Seventh Day of October One thousand seven hundred and sixty-three, (except the said Islands of Madelaine) shall be separated from the said Government of Lower Canada, and be again re-annexed to the Government of Newfoundland; any thing in the said Act passed in the Thirty-first Year of His present Majesty's Reign, or any other Act, to the contrary notwithstanding.
In 1825, the part of what was then (and long after) referred to as Labrador, what we would today call the Lower North Shore, was re-annexed to Lower Canada in the following terms:

Be it therefore enacted, that so much of the said coast as lies to the westward of a line to be drawn due north and south from the bay or harbour of Ance Sablon, inclusive, as far as the fifty-second degree of north latitude, with the island of Anticosti, and all other islands adjacent to such part as last aforesaid of the coast of Labrador, shall be and the same are hereby re-annexed to and made a part of the said province of Lower Canada
The effect of the 1825 act, read together with that of 1809, was, according to the 1927 Labrador boundary decision, that the boundary generally followed the crest of the watershed, except in the south, where, commencing at Blanc Sablon, the boundary followed a meridional line north to latitude 52, then followed that parallel as far as the Romaine River. Or, in the immortal words of the Law Lords themselves:

For the above reasons, their Lordships are of opinion that, according to the true construction of the statutes, Orders in Council, and Proclamations referred to in the Order of Reference, the boundary between Canada and Newfoundland in the Labrador Peninsula is a line drawn due north from the eastern boundary of the bay or harbour of Ance Sablon as far as the fifty-second degree of north latitude, and from thence westward along that parallel until it reaches the Romaine River, and then northward along the left or east bank of that river and its head waters to their source, and from thence due north to the crest of the watershed or height of land there, and from thence westward and northward along the crest of the watershed of the rivers flowing into the Atlantic Ocean until it reaches cape Chidley
This means that there is a portion of southern Labrador which is politically and legally within the Labrador boundary, but, viewed by a hydrologist or cartographer, drains into Quebec. The National Atlas of Canada drainage map shows the largest of the boundary-crossing watersheds which drain into the North Shore. The Labrador portion of these watersheds is highlighted here in purple; the boundary, where it doesn’t coincide with the watershed, is shown as a dotted line. (The border is also formed, in part, by the Romaine River itself):


In addition to the four shown above, there is one other largish river (St. Paul’s) and two smaller ones (Napetipi and Coxipi) which drain into the Gulf but have their headwaters on the Labrador side. These river systems are shown here highlighted in yellow, red, and orange respectively:


On some Quebec-issued maps, all of Labrador is shown as if it is part of Quebec. On others, the Labrador boundary is shown in its correct and legal form. And in many, the Labrador portion of the south-draining watersheds is shown as part of Quebec, or with some notation or legend suggesting that the boundary is “non-définitif”.

(Not that it matters in any case: all the maps in the world cannot change the boundary. That can only be done by a constitutional amendment approved by the House of Assembly in St. John’s.)

This last type of map is the case, for example, with this map from Quebec’s Ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune:


And here’s where Sue Kelland-Dyer’s crack research skills should come in handy. You see, the Labrador part of the St. Lawrence watershed, for sport fishing purposes in Quebec, is euphemistically referred to as Zone 19 nord. And, according to Quebec’s regulations, the sport fishery is closed, for all species, in Zone 19 nord. That’s right: under Quebec law, you cannot fish in southern interior Labrador!

All Sue needs to do is go fishing in this area, maybe a quiet tributary of the St. Paul, or a secluded valley of the Natashquan, or a pool on the Mecatina. Somewhere in the Labrador portion of one of the seven boundary-crossing rivers’ watersheds.

Document your trip, your location, your activity, your catch. Record everything on paper, video, and GPS logs.

Put together a nice package, and send it, registered mail, to the MRNF.

If they don’t prosecute, there you go: Quebec doesn’t claim jurisdiction in “Zone 19 nord”. And if they do, well, the paranoid Newfoundland nationalists were right, after all, and can gloat.

Alternatively, or, better still, in addition to this test case, Sue could establish a permanent residence somewhere in the headwaters. (This suggestion has already been made on her blog, but, true to Sue, she refused to post it.)

Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Sue, like every other Canadian citizen:

has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

Furthermore, the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms provides:

22. Every person legally capable and qualified has the right to be a candidate and to vote at an election.

So, having established her home in her, supposedly, beloved Labrador, somewhere on the banks of the St. Augustin, or on the Labrador shore of Burnt Lake, Sue can then apply to the Directeur-général des élections du Québec to register as an elector, heck, even to run as a candidate, in the Quebec provincial district of Duplessis.

If they grant her that registration, she has again proven that she is right, and can accordingly gloat.

If they don’t, she can bring a case under the Canadian and Quebec charters. If she wins, again, she can gloat.

But if she loses… then the courts will have, once again, upheld the Labrador boundary as defined in 1927. She will have lost the battle for the right to gloat, but won the war.

So, how about it?

2 Comments:

At 4:24 PM, July 20, 2007 , Blogger Liam O'Brien said...

Well said. The first test case might actually be something someone could/should try if things ever did heat up. The second one is one I'd donate to for the ameliorative and entertainment value . . . a "sabbatical" if you will. .

Only conditions: Find somewhere where even a satellite phone wouldn't work and save at least one fraction of the mass contrivance of vocm and she should run for the marxists.

My only other caution -- please don't lump all NL nationalists together on this.

 
At 4:39 PM, July 20, 2007 , Blogger WJM said...

He lives!

Too bad there's not a coastal island in "dispute"; I'd gladly be the test guinea-pig in that case.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home