Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada's Assumption Based Version

Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada found the above map in the Baldwin Room of the Toronto Reference Library and became very excited. They thought that they had found conclusive evidence that the Saugeen Reserve's northern boundary should have been plotted at the mid point of lot 31.

Illustration A is a blown-up section of the map where the green dotted line ends at the arrows point. At this point there is a notation which reads NE < Ind. Res. and this is what caught the eye of INAC. They immediately assumed that it was a notation to mark the NE boundary position of the Saugeen Reserve.There is what appears to be a post marker right beside the notation and at first glance the assumption made by INAC seems reasonable.

Illustration B is the red dotted line which represents the area the Saugeen band is claiming.

• The red solid line with the arrow on the map represents the 9 1/2 mile measurement as seen on every map Rankin produced to show the northern boundary of the Saugeen Reserve. Even on this map! 

• The green dotted line with the arrow on the map represents the measurement that INAC claims Rankin should have made based on the notation at mid lot 31 (NE < Ind. Res.). 

To properly understand their thinking let's refer to the wording in Treaty 72:

"For the benefit of the Saugeen Indians we reserve all that block of land bounded on the west by a straight line running due north from the River Saugeen, at the spot where it is entered by a ravine immediately to the west of the village, and over which a bridge has recently been constructed, to the shore of Lake Huron; on the south by the aforesaid northern limit of the lately surrendered strip; on the east by a line drawn from a spot upon the coast at a distance of about (9 ½ ) nine miles and a half from the western boundary aforesaid, and running parallel thereto until it touches the aforementioned northern limits of the recently surrendered strip; and we wish it to be clearly understood that w wish the Peninsula at the mouth of the Saugeen River to the west of the western boundary aforesaid to be laid out in understood that our surrender includes that parcel of land which is in continuation of the strip recently surrendered to the Saugeen River."

Perhaps we should investigate this map further to see what else it shows. Perhaps, rather than getting excited which leads to making assumptions we should make sure we fully grasp what the NE < Ind. Res. notation is referring to.


UPDATE NOTICE November 9/17: Originally it was thought that INAC was supporting the belief that the 9 1/2 mile measurement was taken in a straight line from the original NW boundary to the NE < Ind. Res. notation. There were some opposing views that the measurement was most likely taken in a straight line from the SW boundary to Lot 25/26 (Main Street). Both of these conclusions were unresearched speculation as to how the "about 9 1/2 mile" measurement was achieved. As my research continued, it became obvious that neither of these methods are correct, however the SW to Main Street measurement does measure to 9.12 miles; a reasonable contender, but very unlikely. All experts agree the measurement was taken along the shoreline.

Although the Treaty is somewhat ambiguous in its description, the measurement along the shoreline from the original NW boundary to the NE < Ind. Res. notation appears to be the original intention as INAC/Saugeen Band contend. However, there is a significant problem with this method of measuring the distance, particularly where it applies to the distance between Lot 25/26 (Main Street) to Lot 31. I discuss this problem in detail in four, more recent blog postings, that relate to the Copway Road Amendment. A substantial amount of evidence conclusively proves that the Copway Road Amendment was put in place to correct the problem created by the original 9 1/2 mile NW boundary to NE < Ind. Res. notation measurement.

INAC have concluded that since evidence suggests that the original description of the NW boundary from the treaty was 9 1/2 miles along the shoreline from the NE < Ind. Res. notation, this obviously marks the northern position of the Saugeen Reserve. An easy assumption to make, but further investigation proves that this assumption is wrong.

Please refer to the postings from November 2017 to December 2017 that relate to the Copway Road Amendment plus the postings that relate to the 9 1/2 mile measurement for an explanation.


I invite your comments or arguments, but please, let's be respectful of one another. I understand that this is a heated debate, but derogatory remarks toward anyone are not welcome.

Thank you.