Publication - OKB5azEUNHSRyl0fzQNcRd0ZsYD2

The article is titled “ ‘Cows and plows:’ The settlement over a broken Indigenous treaty shows the urgent need for more transparent governance.” It was originally published on May 22, 2025 and is authored by Jas M. Morgan, Assistant Professor of Indigenous Communication, Identity and Community, Simon Fraser University.

Members of the Tootinaowaziibeeng Treaty Reserve (TTR) in Manitoba recently voted to ratify the Treaty 4 Agricultural Benefits Settlement Agreement.
Commonly known as the “cows and plows” settlement, the agreement aims to address longstanding, unmet promises made by the British Crown in 1874 to TTR and other Indigenous communities in several treaties, including Treaty 4.
This settlement compensates Indigenous communities for agricultural support that was promised but never delivered.
When the British Crown signed Treaty 4 in the 1800s, it committed to providing Saulteaux peoples with farming equipment, livestock and enough seed to cultivate the lands they were assigned.
Canada’s push to teach Prairie Indigenous Peoples how to farm was part of a broader colonial project to settle so-called “nomadic” communities.
Yet despite these historical promises, many communities received little or none of the support. The cows-and-plows settlement is a step toward rectifying historical wrongs.
The process has also highlighted several ongoing governing challenges. This includes exposing a flawed Crown/Indigenous consultation process as well as the need for trust-building with Indigenous leadership.
Flawed consultations
At an April community town hall on Tootinaowaziibeeng Treaty Reserve (TTR) held in advance of the vote, TTR member Eileen Lynxleg described how her father was forced to hand over his income from farming to an Indian agent during the cows-and-plows era.
The Treaty 4 Agricultural Benefits were intended to support Indigenous farmers. But stories like the one Lynxleg told reveal how the system was often used to exploit and control rather than empower Indigenous Peoples.
From the perspective of many Indigenous Peoples, the harms and damages caused by broken treaty promises go far deeper than what a one-time payout can address. Monetary compensation alone does not equitably fulfil historic treaty obligations — especially when measured and assessed through Indigenous world views rather than Canadian legal frameworks.
At the TTR town hall, what was meant to be a democratic consultation instead exposed tensions between TTR leadership and members.
A dynamic of distrust
When TTR reaches a settlement with Canada over treaty rights, a portion of the funds are invested in the TTR Sovereign Wealth Fund, managed by the Band Council.
Across southern Manitoba, First Nations are using ratification vote forums as opportunities to confront a deep history of mistrust between Band Councils and the communities they represent.
Some community members argue that the fund lacks sufficient transparency. They are calling for greater accountability, regular consultation and more open communication about the fund’s management.
TTR has not submitted financial statements to the federal government since 2021.
As Lynxleg emphasized during the TTR town hall, the success of the cows-and-plows settlement hinges on community trust in the Chief and Council system. But this trust, in many southern Manitoba communities, has eroded. These concerns have been raised across the Treaty 4 region. Community members have expressed frustration with how consultation processes around cows-and-plows claims are being handled.
Maurice Law, the firm representing TTR in its cows-and-plows negotiations, has come under scrutiny and faced criticism and litigation from other First Nations over issues like legal fees, transparency, outcomes and retainer agreements.
At the TTR town hall, community members questioned whether the firm was more interested in settling quickly than in negotiating firmly based on treaty rights.
Members also questioned how much the firm would earn from the settlement. The firm said at the meeting that it would receive four per cent of the total payout following ratification.
Restoring trust
The dynamic of distrust between communities and First Nation governing structures in southern Manitoba is not unique to TTR. It reflects a broader crisis of governance and fiduciary responsibility on many reserves.
Much of the distrust in southern Manitoba stems from what appears to be systemic misogyny embedded in the Chief and Council system.
Tréchelle Bunn, the first woman elected Chief of Birdtail Sioux First Nation, said in an interview with APTN news she was elected on a platform of transparency and accountability. She said her mandate is to ensure her community has a voice, while also addressing past challenges and restoring trust.
Fiona Moar, an independent Indigenous policy analyst, noted in an Instagram post in December 2024 that members of Lake St. Martin First Nation have voiced serious concerns about their leadership.
This includes high-profile altercations, such as the alleged actions of Southern Chiefs’ Organization Grand Chief Jerry Daniels at the Assembly of First Nations in December 2024, financial mismanagement — like the failure to file financial statements since 2019 — and accusations of criminal behaviour as a former chief was charged with sexual assault.
Meanwhile, Daniels remains Lake St. Martin Grand Chief and there have been no visible efforts to rebuild trust or foster healing with communities.
Until the gendered imbalances within both the Chief and Council structure — and within associated Canadian legal systems — are meaningfully addressed, many Indigenous people in the region will continue to question whether their leaders, or any “Indigenous” law firm, can truly represent their interests in cows-and-plows negotiations.
Future of treaty rights
The recent ratification vote consultations in southern Manitoba reveals a breakdown in equitable and fair Indigenous governance.
Although the vote at TTR passed, many members felt pressured by a flawed and inadequate process. Some questioned whether Maurice Law and the TTR Chief and Council truly acted in the community’s best interest.
Financial desperation, caused by both systemic neglect from Canada along with the mismanagement of funds within communities, leaves many with little choice but to accept inadequate compensation packages, often without clear information on long-term rights or responsibilities.
All of this calls into question the performative nature of Indigenous consultation in Canada’s policy processes.
Communities like TTR are left with grim choices. They can choose between poverty, or opaque agreements that risk further eroding their treaty rights. This is not just a local governance issue. It reflects a national crisis in terms of Indigenous policy.
Too often, Indigenous policy research focuses on central, densely populated provinces like Ontario. This leaves Prairie communities overlooked. Even where research exists in Canadian universities, it frequently lacks the critical gendered analysis and unbiased research governance urgently needed to support the future well-being of Indigenous communities.
Cows and plows — and the crisis of governance it exposes — remains under-reported and under-analyzed. Yet it represents one of the most significant treaty rights issues in recent Canadian history. It has deep implications and potential to set precedent for the future of Indigenous rights and healing in Canada.

‘Cows and plows:’ The settlement over a broken Indigenous treaty shows the urgent need for more transparent governance

May 22, 2025 • My Project Name

Read Article

About My Project Name

https://www.mygroup.com