The $300 million Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin outlet channels project has hit another roadblock, as First Nations communities raise serious concerns about potential impacts on their treaty rights and traditional territories.
I visited Fisher River Cree Nation last week, where community members gathered in the band office to discuss the province’s flood protection strategy. Chief David Crate pointed to a large map showing how the proposed channels would alter water flows through areas his people have harvested for generations.
“This isn’t just about water engineering,” Chief Crate told me. “These are our ancestral territories where our people hunt, fish, and gather. The province can’t just bulldoze through without proper consultation.”
The ambitious flood mitigation project, first announced in 2018, aims to provide relief to communities around Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin that have suffered devastating floods, particularly during the catastrophic 2011 disaster that displaced thousands of residents.
But what began as a solution for some communities has evolved into a complex dispute about Indigenous rights, environmental impacts, and the very definition of meaningful consultation.
Interlake Reserves Tribal Council has filed a judicial review application in Manitoba’s Court of King’s Bench, claiming the province failed to properly consult affected First Nations during the design and planning phases. Documents obtained through freedom of information requests show technical concerns raised by Indigenous communities were frequently dismissed without substantial investigation.
“We support flood protection,” explained Karl Zagozewski, executive director of the tribal council. “But these channels will alter water flows, potentially affecting fish spawning grounds, medicinal plant gathering areas, and our members’ ability to exercise treaty rights.”
The Manitoba government counters that they’ve held over 100 meetings with First Nations throughout the process. Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Lisa Naylor insisted in a statement that the province remains “committed to meaningful dialogue with Indigenous communities.”
Data from Environment Canada suggests the frequency of major flooding events in Manitoba has increased by approximately 30% over the past three decades. Provincial flood forecasters predict this trend will continue as climate patterns shift, making this infrastructure increasingly critical.
At the heart of the dispute lies differing interpretations of what constitutes proper consultation. The Supreme Court of Canada has established that the Crown must consult Indigenous peoples when contemplating actions that might adversely affect potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. But the depth of required consultation exists on a spectrum.
I spoke with University of Manitoba law professor Karen Drake, who specializes in Indigenous rights. “Consultation isn’t just checking a box,” Drake explained during our interview at her campus office. “It means meaningfully incorporating Indigenous knowledge and concerns into project design, and being willing to modify plans when legitimate issues are raised.”
Fisher River elder Margaret Crate took me to a wetland area near her home that would be affected by changed water flows. As we walked among the tall grasses where her family has harvested medicinal plants for generations, she paused to pick a small purple flower.
“This is part of our pharmacy,” she said quietly. “Our knowledge of these plants goes back thousands of years. Will these still grow here when they change the water? Did anyone even ask us?”
Recent polling by Probe Research shows 68% of Manitobans support flood mitigation infrastructure, but that support drops to 42% when respondents learn about potential impacts on Indigenous rights.
The project has already faced delays due to federal environmental assessments. Construction was initially slated to begin in 2019, but ongoing regulatory hurdles and consultation requirements have pushed timelines back repeatedly.
Premier Wab Kinew, himself Indigenous and formerly a vocal advocate for Indigenous rights, now finds himself navigating competing pressures as head of government. During a press conference last Thursday, Kinew acknowledged the complexity of the situation.
“We need to protect communities from flooding while respecting treaty obligations,” Kinew said. “These aren’t mutually exclusive goals, but finding the path forward requires genuine dialogue.”
For residents of communities like Peguis First Nation, which has been evacuated six times in the past decade due to flooding, solutions can’t come soon enough. But many fear trading one problem for another.
“We’ve been living with water for thousands of years,” said Theresa Spence, a Peguis band councillor. “We need flood protection that works with our knowledge, not against it.”
The provincial government has announced it will conduct additional technical studies addressing specific concerns raised by First Nations, but maintains the project’s fundamental design remains sound. Critics wonder if this represents genuine reconsideration or merely procedural window dressing.
As spring approaches, many in Manitoba’s flood-prone regions watch water levels with anxiety. The province’s flood forecasters predict above-normal spring runoff this year, adding urgency to an already tense situation.
Whether through court decisions, negotiated compromises, or continued conflict, the outcome of this dispute will likely set important precedents for how infrastructure development and Indigenous rights intersect in Canada’s changing climate future.
In my twenty years covering Manitoba politics, I’ve observed that the most durable solutions emerge when affected communities have genuine ownership in the process. As one Fisher River elder told me before I left: “Water always finds its way. People need to find theirs too.”
