Activists exploiting First Nations hereditary leadership to derail resource projects in B.C.

From aquaculture to forestry and pipeline construction, activists are cloaking their ideological campaigns in hereditary authority to block resource projects in British Columbia, warns an Indigenous resource-development advocate.

By Fabian Dawson
SeaWestNews

Activist groups opposing resource projects in British Columbia are increasingly invoking First Nations hereditary authority to frame their campaigns as Indigenous-led, even where elected band councils have approved those developments to support economic self-sufficiency.

This is fuelling conflict between hereditary and elected governance systems within First Nations, which activists are exploiting to stall or derail forestry, aquaculture, and other resource projects, warns Dallas Smith, a leading advocate of sustainable Indigenous resource development.

“The activist community has really linked on to the fact that they have more credibility if they have hereditary indigenous leadership within their realm of what they’re trying to achieve,” Smith said during an interview on the Power Struggle Podcast.

Smith is president of the Na̲nwak̲olas Council, an alliance of six First Nations in British Columbia that works collectively on rights, title, and resource governance. He described the activist approach as deliberate and increasingly sophisticated.

“It’s definitely a tool in the activist playbook now to bring hereditary standing to validate their cause,” Smith told podcast host Stewart Muir.

The tactic, he said, creates division inside communities and muddies public understanding of consent, authority, and accountability.

Smith noted that hereditary chiefs historically played a largely cultural role, focused on preserving language, ceremony, and traditions.

“Hereditary chiefs, you know, in the 80s and 70s, 60s before we really got involved in substantive negotiations were really more cultural leaders and they made sure that the culture didn’t die,” he said.

As modern treaties, land claims, and large-scale resource agreements emerged, Smith said many Indigenous communities were forced to reassess how decision-making authority should function, particularly where agreements carry financial risk and long-term responsibility.

He said many Nations are now working toward hybrid governance models, with elected councils managing agreements and accountability, while hereditary leaders provide cultural direction. That transition period, he warned, has created openings for activist campaigns to amplify selective voices in order to oppose projects.

Smith’s comments come as conflicts continue to play out across British Columbia over forestry operations, pipeline infrastructure, and salmon aquaculture, where internal First Nations governance is often portrayed as unified in public debate despite significant differences between hereditary and elected roles.

That pattern has surfaced repeatedly in recent resource disputes.

At the Fairy Creek old-growth logging protests on southern Vancouver Island, activist groups framed their opposition as Indigenous-led, even as the elected Pacheedaht First Nation council publicly asked protesters to leave and reaffirmed its authority to manage forestry and revenue-sharing agreements within its territory.

A similar fault line has appeared in opposition to the Coastal GasLink natural gas pipeline. Environmental and activist groups aligned themselves with Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs opposing the project, despite all elected band councils along the route having signed benefit agreements and endorsed construction.

Those same governance tensions, Smith said, are now most visible in the debate over salmon aquaculture.

“In salmon aquaculture, we’ve seen a lot of hereditary chiefs play roles with the activist community in trying to shut fish farms down,” Smith said.

Smith also speaks on behalf of the   Coalition of First Nations for Finfish Stewardship (FNFFS), a group of Indigenous rights holders whose territories host salmon farms. The coalition has warned that federal plans to phase out open-net pen salmon farming in British Columbia by 2029, driven by activist pressure, risk undermining Indigenous-led economies across the coast.

The Trudeau-era phase-out plan has been championed by activist groups claiming First Nations support, despite years of government and independent research finding minimal impacts from salmon farming on wild stocks.

Salmon farming generates approximately $1.17 billion annually in economic activity in British Columbia and supports about 4,560 full-time jobs, including more than 500 Indigenous positions, many in remote coastal communities with limited alternative employment.

All salmon farming in British Columbia now operates through formal partnerships with First Nations, based on long-standing agreements that emphasize consent, stewardship, scientific oversight, and self-determination.

Industry and First Nations leaders have argued that a stable, evidence-based federal and provincial aquaculture policy framework could allow the sector to expand, generating up to $2.5 billion annually in economic activity, $930 million in GDP, and roughly 9,000 Canadian jobs.

Smith said First Nations are often left absorbing public backlash and political pressure generated by activist campaigns driven largely from outside their communities.

“We we’re in a point in British Columbia where reconciliation is being blamed for the shortcomings in resource development,” he said.

“And it’s unfortunate that First Nations are bearing the brunt of the lack of progress in those discussions because of the success of some activist communities involvement with hereditary leaders,” Smith said.

He said many Nations are now working to keep governance debates internal, while setting clearer expectations for governments, companies, and advocacy groups seeking to engage.

“We’re trying to figure out what the rules of engagement are internally so we can work with governments, companies and conservation groups on what the rules of engagement with us are going to be outwardly,” Smith said.

Smith said resolving those questions will be critical as British Columbia faces ongoing pressure over resource development decisions that directly affect Indigenous economies, housing, and long-term self-sufficiency.

Main image shows (r) Dallas Smith, president of the Na̲nwak̲olas Council with Stewart Muir, host of the Power Struggle Podcast.