My potentially incorrect hot take on it is that the proposed indigenous land rights are completely compatible with regular home ownership and property rights; where they conflict is more with surveyor’s rights and municipal rights.
Meaning, the property can still be bought and sold, but they’d have more control over zoning and resource extraction/management.
Did you know that on property you own, if someone else has a mineral claim staked, they currently have the right to access the land under your home to extract the minerals?
And did you know that the government, at any level, can decide to re-zone your property out from under you for whatever purpose it deems fit, resulting in a property that couldn’t be sold for current use?
The new land rights would mean that these types of actions could no longer happen unilaterally but would need a review by a panel set up by the local indigenous people before it could go ahead.
Essentially, they get to have some control back about HOW the land is used that they managed for thousands of years — land management rights that they never gave up when settlers claimed the land for themselves and began arbitrarily deciding what could be done with it.
If someone has more details, please correct me where I’m wrong here.
[edit] Looks like in these cases, I’m partly wrong — they also want control over private land sale in the outlined regions. This still needs to be worked out.
It’s also worth pointing out that the Cowichan are claiming these rights to land that is currently privately owned by the Musqueam AND is also their traditional territory. So there’s lots here to still figure out, and it will likely be in the courts for years to come, depressing property values all the while.
Once this precedent is sorted out by the supreme courts, we’re likely going to see similar cases all across Canada.
On the up side, this might be the solution to the housing crisis — but modern property owners may end up losing some of their traditional rights.