Mr. Nitah, thank you for joining us again. I really appreciate your focus on those questions. It really helps us direct our line of questioning.
In relation to the Tsilhqot'in decision and your assertion that a new approach toward indigenous protected areas has to reflect a nation-to-nation approach, not a “federal government knows best” approach pursuant to federal legislation and an offer to consult, but rather a negotiation between equals, what would you recommend under circumstances where the indigenous group in question is under-capacitated, has other priorities, and is not really looking at conservation at that particular time? What would you suggest is necessary?
Second, what would you recommend in circumstances—again, given the Tsilhqot'in situation—where title claims are outstanding or where there are overlapping title claims? How can the federal government best encourage a conservation-first approach while respecting overlapping claims and also respecting the realities of certain indigenous communities that are not in a position where that's a priority for them?