Indigenous

Abenaki chief says Canadian tribes’ criticism tied to land claims, resources

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

By Guy Page

Nulhegan Abenaki Chief Don Stevens is pushing back against Canadian Abenaki tribes questioning the identity of Vermont’s state-recognized Abenaki tribes, arguing the real issue is not who the “real Abenakis” are, but why Canadian Abenaki tribes are challenging Vermont tribes now.

“The title of this piece is misguided,” Stevens wrote in an online comment to the VDC news story by Timothy Page headlined “Who are the REAL Abenaki?”. “Who are the real Abenaki is not the question because traditionally there were almost 20 Abenaki Tribes or ‘family bands’ that lived throughout our Western Abenaki Territory.”

Stevens said the dispute is driven by potential financial interests tied to land claims and natural resources.

“The real question is, ‘Why are the Canadian Tribes attacking Vermont Tribes now?’ It is easy to understand why; it is potential money and resources,” he said.

Stevens pointed to documents posted on the Abenaki Alliance website that he says show lawyers representing the Odanak First Nation in Quebec concluded in 1997 that Vermont tribes could complicate any future land claims in the United States.

According to Stevens, Odanak and the related Wolinak First Nation recently received a Canadian land claims settlement worth more than $300 million and are now focusing attention on Vermont. He also linked the controversy to Hydro-Québec’s 2022 acquisition of 13 New England hydroelectric dams, arguing that Canadian Indigenous communities receive compensation for projects crossing their territories.

Stevens said similar arrangements have occurred elsewhere, citing a recent power agreement involving Canadian Mohawk communities and New York.

He also defended his own genealogy and the Nulhegan Band’s claims to Abenaki ancestry, saying documentation supporting his family history has long been available on his personal website. Stevens criticized research by Canadian academic Darryl Leroux, whose work has questioned the ancestry claims of many people identifying as Indigenous in eastern Canada and New England.

Stevens asserted that Leroux’s research is flawed and noted the scholar was recently found liable for defamation in a Canadian court, although he did not provide additional details.

Stevens said Vermont’s Abenaki tribes have no objection to Odanak or Wolinak members sharing their culture in the United States.

“We have no issue with Odanak or Wolinak teaching their lived experiences in the U.S. We have no issue with them promoting their cultural practices,” Stevens wrote. “The only issue we have is that they are trying to take control of everything, which is neither acceptable nor traditional practices.”

He added, “We are not claiming to be Odanak Abenaki and don’t want to be. We are Nulhegan Abenaki and will continue to celebrate who we are as a people.”

Stevens also emphasized that the Nulhegan Band and Vermont’s other state-recognized tribes have what he described as a federal settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of the Interior recognizing the tribe and his role as chief. He acknowledged that the agreement does not constitute full federal recognition, which carries broader legal status and eligibility for federal tribal programs.

The dispute over the identity and recognition of Vermont’s Abenaki communities has been the subject of years of debate involving Vermont’s state-recognized tribes, First Nations in Quebec, historians and genealogists. 

Critics have argued that Vermont’s tribes lack sufficient historical and genealogical evidence of continuous Indigenous community, while Vermont tribal leaders maintain they are descendants of Western Abenaki families who remained in the region despite centuries of displacement and assimilation.


Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories: Indigenous

2 replies »

  1. The United Methodist Church is certainly not afraid to get into politics, that is for sure. Some might suggest this is cultural marxism at its peak, a display of virtue signaling, why not give back all the property to their former owners?

    People of the church had given the church land to foster and develop Christ’s church, and now the church has decided to give the land back to the Indians. And know people are embroiled and fighting over money and was it legit.

    Sadly, everyone is missing the boat. Jesus is the one that heals, not the trees, not the rocks, not our political persuasion nor the group or tribe of people we hang out with.

    People within the church, farmers in particular are very disturbed about the entire event, because they gave their life savings for the benefit of the church, thinking it would be to prosper and spread the Good News of Jesus Christ.

    Should Vermont give back our lands to Britian? We did take it without their permission, some might say we stole it in our revolution, which was a British civil war.

    The UMC budget for New England has about 1.9% going back to the churches for their development and prosperity, the other 98% go to; salaries 55%, Africa 24%, some cultural marxism training 8% and training for the trainers and pastors.

    Why not give back all the property and all the insurance proceeds people paid for? Give back the buildings people paid for and maintained for 100+ years? Why not? Our church paid for the salaries of the bishop, of the Superintendent’s, of the mission shares that covered all the salaries and items above for 100+ years. Then when our church burnt to the ground, when we found out how truly excellent our insurance policy was……we were denied our right to build.

    As a member of the church said, “I think they knew what they were going to do before the fire trucks left”.

    They refused to let us build. They refused to let us use the $2,000,000 policy. They refused to let us build a multi-use property, with Day Care and church. Contractors, Day Care providers were left hanging in the cold.

    Give away a multi-million-dollar property and stiff the local church $2,000,00, it’s a tough thing to wrap one’s head around.

    As I write this, I’m thinking, so here we are, stripped of our property, just like the Indians! So, what now?

    Do we need a property to be a Christian? Should we adopt the ways of the UMC or Christ? This is much like the Indians, should we adopt the ways of the white man or keep our traditions? Which one speaks of Truth and Love? What ideology best portrays God’s vision for mankind? What works? Should I worship the creation or the creator? Should I worship Karl or Jesus? Support and institution or my neighbor? What spirit should I foster in my heart?

    And with this we step forward, having no idea what is before us, knowing his plans for us are good. Knowing his ways are higher than ours. Knowing a lot can change in 3 days. TGBTG

    https://www.wcax.com/2026/07/06/middlesex-church-struggles-rebuild-5-years-after-fire/

All topics and opinions welcome! No mocking or personal criticism of other commenters. No profanity, explicitly racist or sexist language allowed. Real, full names are now required. All comments without real full names will be unapproved or trashed.