The true value of creation and the hidden cost of its destruction

Michelle Cyca, The Narwhal — Via BC Assembly of First Nations

[Michelle Cyca] “The latest power struggle over the future of the Canadian economy — a hypothetical new pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast — has devolved into a rote debate: are First Nations blocking economic progress?

Coastal First Nations — an alliance of nine First Nations along the north coast of B.C. — have reiterated their strong support for the oil tanker ban the federal government put in place in 2019. It prohibits tankers carrying more than 12,500 metric tons of oil from travelling through their waters but is threatened by the pipeline proposed by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and endorsed nominally by Prime Minister Mark Carney. B.C. Premier David Eby has pointed out the project has “no proponent, no route, no money.”

Such a pipeline would offer “unprecedented opportunities for Indigenous ownership, partnership, economic benefits, as well as substantial economic benefits for the people of British Columbia,” Carney has said, suggesting that the right incentives might change Indigenous opponents’ tune. But Marilyn Slett, elected chief of Heiltsuk Nation and president of Coastal First Nations, told APTN in a recent interview that it “isn’t about money in this situation.”

“It’s about the responsibility of looking after our territories and nurturing the sustainable economies that we currently have here.”

It’s easy to file this away as more evidence of a familiar narrative: that First Nations are opposed to the economic progress that Canada needs to grow. In 2026, that narrative includes Canada’s need to protect itself from increasingly unpredictable threats (we all know from who) and attain true security and sovereignty as a nation.

This is a tired line of argument. The Canadian economy does not depend on an imaginary pipeline, nor on just its oil and gas, logging and mining companies (many of which don’t mean much for Canadian sovereignty, as they are foreign-owned). They are pieces of the economic puzzle, but far from the only ones; mining and oil and gas make up around seven per cent of the national GDP.

The marine ecosystems Coastal First Nations are fighting to protect are also part of the economy, and it’s time we started considering their values too.

Undermining legitimate territorial interests is a lazy argument against conservation

Let me get another tired trope out of the way: the attempt to weaken conservation and protection arguments by challenging who is Indigenous enough to have them. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and others have painted Coastal First Nations as an “anti-pipeline group” that “doesn’t speak for” Indigenous communities. This is demonstrably untrue — its members are chief and council members of represented First Nations along the north coast.

While it’s true there are dozens of First Nations with territorial interests along the full coast of B.C., the members of Coastal First Nations are speaking for what happens in their specific marine territories. We’ve seen this kind of argument before, as when Coastal GasLink proclaimed its agreements with 20 First Nations as sufficient proof of Indigenous support — even though none of those nations had territory that intersected with the pipeline.

But what a First Nation along the southern coast or elsewhere in the province might hypothetically think about the oil tanker ban matters less than those whose territories are actually impacted — though groups that represent far more B.C. First Nations, including the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs and the B.C. Assembly of First Nations, have also called to uphold the tanker ban.

On to what matters: shortsighted discussions of the economy in Canada that begin and end with the resource sector.

Part of the animosity towards First Nations’ opposition to resource projects is the belief that consultation and consent slows down projects and adds to their costs. But breaching or ignoring Indigenous Rights generally results in expensive lawsuits for Canadian governments — time and again, courts across the country have affirmed that territorial rights exist, and awarded Indigenous communities sizable settlements when they are breached. And nothing slows down a project like a long court battle.

That doesn’t mean projects aren’t still proposed, started and completed without consent, but politicians are beginning to understand that working with First Nations (rather than losing to them repeatedly in court) has economic advantages. In B.C. Eby has championed deals in Nisga’a Nation for the Ksi Lisims LNG project and Tahltan Nation for mining — even as he vows to revise the province’s landmark Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.

What Eby hasn’t mentioned lately is one of B.C.’s most economically beneficial agreements to date: the Great Bear Rainforest, a protected area created in partnership between Coastal First Nations, Nanwakolas Council and the province, which has generated $1.77 billion in economic activity for B.C. since its inception in 2008, according to a November 2025 report. According to 2025 figures, for every dollar of direct investment, the protected area has generated $5.61 in revenue in sectors like eco-tourism, fisheries and manufacturing.

So why do we hear so much about resource industries — and so little about the other facets of our economy, particularly those that protect our environments rather than degrade them? One reason could be the enormous sums spent by the oil and gas industry on lobbying politicians and advertising to the public — often with misleading claims that downplay the incontrovertible links between fossil fuels and the climate crisis. (And Canada just made it easier for them to greenwash their activities.)

Upholding First Nations rights within their own territories is worth doing for its own sake. But we should also remember a functional economy requires a functional environment.

Floods, wildfires, droughts and heat waves cause preventable deaths and hundreds of millions in damages, hospital visits, evacuation costs and soaring insurance premiums. These events are not random; they are caused by climate change and the destruction of our landscapes. To protect and restore these ecosystems requires, in part, respecting and upholding the rights of the First Nations who look after them.

In B.C. alone, Indigenous tourism generates more than $1.1 billion in economic activity each year, driven by Canadians and international visitors who value time in nature and want to experience the lands and waters stewarded by First Nations. Every year, over 1.2 million people visit Tofino, B.C., in Tla-o-qui-aht territory, many to explore the shaded old-growth forest trails and shorelines of the Tla-o-qui-aht Tribal Parks. In Tofino, 127 businesses have signed on to voluntarily share revenue with the Tribal Parks stewards to support activities like Guardians programs and trail maintenance, in recognition of the economic value of a flourishing, protected ecosystem.

Each decision made by governments, industry and individuals is shaping the future of the Canadian economy every day. It’s worth remembering we all have a stake in it. First Nations rejecting oil tankers in their waters are not hindering the national economy, but arguing for a different balance of priorities. There’s more than one way to build an economy.

We overvalue resource projects and underestimate their costs.

Despite this, Canada’s vision for economic development seems narrow in scope; a selection of energy and natural resource projects. These tend to be pitched as windfall scenarios, but the economic benefits often fall far short of what’s promised. A 2024 study in the journal Facets, which analyzed the 27 mines in B.C. granted permits since 1997, found that 13 never began operating at all. Only 12 per cent of promised jobs ever materialized, and less than a quarter of predicted ore was actually mined.

Eby announced on Jan. 21 the continuation of mining activities at Mount Milligan near Fort St. James, trumpeting the 574 “good, family-supporting jobs” that will be extended until the mine closes in 2035. But mining jobs, even “good” ones, end eventually, and all Canadians are often left to bear clean-up costs — which can range into the billions for mines like B.C.’s Elk Valley coal mine.

Meanwhile, the Great Bear Rainforest has been supporting 373 full-time jobs for 17 years, with no end in sight, while also protecting the environment.

Which sounds like the better economic bargain? Environment aside, a catastrophic spill prompted by lifting the oil tanker ban could threaten those jobs and destroy a profitable, sustainable piece of our economy. Is it really worth the risk?”

Visit the takenote.ca HOME page for a colourful display of hundreds of other blogs which may interest or inspire you