Thousands of people have been gathering at Fort Carlton in Saskatchewan for a milestone that reaches far beyond a date on the calendar. August 23, 2026, marks 150 years since Treaty 6 was first concluded there between the Crown and First Nations leaders, beginning a relationship that eventually covered much of present-day central Saskatchewan and Alberta.
The four-day commemoration has mixed ceremony, cultural programming and family activities with harder conversations about promises, rights and responsibilities. As Elders, chiefs, young people, government representatives and visitors return to the treaty-making site, the central question is strikingly current: after a century and a half, what does it actually mean to live by Treaty 6?
Thousands Return to the Place Where Treaty 6 Was Made
Fort Carlton has become the focal point of the 150th anniversary, with the commemorative gathering running from August 20 through August 23. Organizers anticipated at least 1,000 people on individual days and as many as 2,500 for the final Sunday ceremony. By Saturday, local reporting described thousands of attendees arriving from different communities. The program has included traditional ceremonies, a Village of Nations, vendors, hand games, cultural presentations, canoe activities, tours and opportunities to view the original Treaty 6 parchment.
The atmosphere has deliberately combined celebration with education. Families have watched young people line up for cultural activities while Elders and knowledge keepers have participated in discussions about the treaty’s continuing significance. Daily forums have examined Treaty 6 implementation in the past, present and future. Sunday’s program was scheduled to include a Grand Entry, dignitary remarks, a feast and the unveiling of an updated Fort Carlton cairn plaque and a new commemorative monument. Governor General Louise Arbour and Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak were among the prominent participants expected at the gathering.
The 1876 Negotiations Happened During a Period of Enormous Upheaval
Understanding Treaty 6 requires looking at the conditions surrounding its creation. The agreement was concluded at Fort Carlton on August 23, 1876, followed by another agreement at Chief Kamiscowesit’s campsite on August 28 and negotiations at Fort Pitt on September 9. Further First Nations adhered to Treaty 6 over subsequent decades. Canada’s own historical research describes First Nations communities facing the rapid disappearance of the buffalo, disease, economic disruption and mounting pressure as settlement moved westward.
First Nations negotiators were not simply presented with terms and immediately accepting them. Historical records show leaders pushed for changes and additional protections. Requests included livestock, agricultural equipment, assistance for people in need, medicines, education and safeguards during periods of severe hardship. Interpreter Peter Erasmus played an important role during the Fort Carlton negotiations. Treaty 6 ultimately contained provisions not found in exactly the same form in earlier numbered treaties, including the famous medicine chest provision and assistance if Treaty First Nations were overtaken by pestilence or a general famine. Those additions help explain why questions raised in 1876 remain remarkably relevant 150 years later.
The Written Treaty and the Broader Understanding of It Are Still Debated
Few issues are more important to the modern Treaty 6 conversation than the difference between reading the agreement strictly as a written document and understanding the larger treaty-making relationship. The written text contains language about land being ceded to the Crown, while also guaranteeing reserves, annual payments, education provisions, agricultural assistance and continued hunting and fishing subject to stated limitations. For many Treaty First Nations, however, understanding the agreement requires considering oral discussions, ceremony and the promises understood by the people who negotiated it.
This disagreement is not a recent invention. A federal Treaty Six research report acknowledges a clear contrast between the literal wording of the document and interpretations drawn from the negotiations and spoken exchanges surrounding it. Academic scholarship has similarly examined how oral history and written Crown records produced different understandings of the treaty’s spirit and intent. That distinction matters because many First Nations leaders describe Treaty 6 as an agreement to share lands and build an enduring relationship between peoples, rather than simply a historical land transaction. At 150 years, the anniversary has brought that unresolved interpretive divide back into public view.
The Medicine Chest Clause Shows Why an Old Treaty Can Create Modern Questions
One of Treaty 6’s most distinctive provisions is only a short passage in the written agreement: a medicine chest was to be kept at the house of each Indian agent for the use and benefit of First Nations people. Treaty 6 also promised assistance when communities were struck by pestilence or general famine. In 1876, those promises addressed immediate fears about disease, hunger and survival. In 2026, they sit at the centre of a much larger discussion about whether the treaty created an enduring Crown obligation related to health.
The legal and political interpretations are not identical. Indigenous Services Canada has acknowledged that Treaty 6 First Nations have long asserted a broader treaty right to health. Federal briefing material has also noted that Canadian courts have not established the medicine chest wording as a general treaty right to comprehensive health-care services. Yet Canada has previously entered treaty-based health discussions with Onion Lake Cree Nation, explicitly recognizing the historical medicine chest and famine commitments. That tension illustrates the anniversary’s larger challenge: translating nineteenth-century promises into twenty-first-century institutions without pretending the underlying disagreement has disappeared.
Broken Agricultural Promises Have Produced Billion-Dollar Settlements
Treaty implementation is not merely an argument over historical language. It has produced major modern financial settlements because Canada has acknowledged that some specific promises were not fulfilled. Agricultural provisions under Treaty 6 included livestock, farming equipment, seeds and other assistance intended to help First Nations communities adapt economically as the buffalo economy collapsed and settlement expanded. Generations later, First Nations have pursued what are commonly called agricultural benefits or “cows and plows” claims over those unfulfilled commitments.
The scale is substantial. In February 2025, Canada announced settlements involving 14 First Nations under Treaties 4 and 6 that were expected to provide a combined $1.72 billion in compensation once completed. One Arrow First Nation later reached a $124-million Treaty 6 agricultural benefits settlement, while Big River First Nation reached a $208-million agreement concerning agricultural benefits and other treaty entitlements. The federal government was again announcing agricultural benefits settlements involving Treaty 4 and Treaty 6 First Nations during the 150th-anniversary weekend in August 2026. Those figures give practical weight to calls for “implementation”: leaders are discussing obligations with measurable economic consequences, not only symbolic recognition.
Treaty Rights Are Part of Canada’s Constitutional Framework
Treaty 6 predates Alberta and Saskatchewan becoming provinces by nearly three decades, but treaty rights do not exist only as historical promises. Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes and affirms the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada. That constitutional status is one reason disagreements over hunting, land, resources, consultation, health, education and treaty implementation can move from political meetings into courtrooms and negotiations.
Treaty 6 today includes 54 First Nations that agreed to or later adhered to the agreement, according to the Office of the Treaty Commissioner, with communities principally located across Saskatchewan and Alberta and two in Manitoba. This geographical reach also means the treaty relationship intersects with several governments and different policy systems. The anniversary arrives while leaders are openly debating how provincial governments should behave inside treaty territory. Saskatchewan Government Relations Minister Eric Schmalz has pointed to resource extraction and public education as areas requiring collaboration with Indigenous partners. That is an important modern reality: a treaty negotiated before provincial boundaries existed now shapes discussions involving federal, provincial and First Nations governments simultaneously.
Alberta’s Political Tensions Have Made the Anniversary More Than Ceremonial
The 150th anniversary has unfolded against political friction in Alberta. Grand Chief Joey Pete of the Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations criticized the provincial government after its Indigenous Relations minister did not attend a major Edmonton commemoration. Pete said deteriorating relations could leave Treaty 6 leadership looking increasingly toward the federal government when seeking recognition and implementation of treaty commitments. Provincial officials have said they remain committed to their relationship with First Nations.
The disagreement is also connected to Alberta’s larger political debate over provincial sovereignty and a possible separation vote. Treaty First Nations have strongly challenged separatist initiatives, arguing that their relationship with the Crown and their treaty rights cannot simply be treated as subordinate to provincial political decisions. That dispute gives the 150th anniversary unusual immediacy. Discussions about Treaty 6 are therefore not confined to what negotiators intended in 1876; they also involve who possesses authority today, how governments must consult First Nations and what happens when provincial ambitions collide with treaty relationships that predate the province itself.
The Crown Relationship Is Still Being Tested 150 Years Later
Treaty 6 leaders have repeatedly emphasized that their agreement created an enduring relationship with the Crown. That principle took on a visible international dimension earlier in 2026 when Treaty 6 representatives travelled to Britain. Grand Chief Joey Pete and Louis Bull Tribe Chief Desmond Bull met King Charles III at Buckingham Palace on March 11 as part of a Treaty 6 delegation. The meeting followed efforts by First Nations leaders to invite the King to participate in the 150th commemoration and to reaffirm what they describe as a Nation-to-Nation treaty relationship.
King Charles did not attend the Fort Carlton gathering, but the Crown remained prominently represented. Governor General Louise Arbour was scheduled to speak during the August 23 commemorative ceremony, while Saskatchewan’s lieutenant governor was also among the dignitaries associated with anniversary events. For First Nations leaders, these appearances have meaning beyond protocol because the Crown is a party to the original agreement. The question is whether ceremonial recognition is matched by action. Organizers themselves have said the commemoration should help produce substantive political outcomes on outstanding treaty obligations and implementation.
Education May Determine What Treaty 6 Means Over Its Next 150 Years
One of the most striking features of the anniversary has been the number of young people involved. Attendees at Fort Carlton described children waiting to participate in beading and other activities, while schools and communities have spent months creating Treaty 6 learning opportunities. Saskatchewan has required treaty education across kindergarten to Grade 12 since 2008. During the anniversary year, students from the Lloydminster area participated in a 348-kilometre canoe journey connecting Fort Pitt and Fort Carlton, while other school activities have included round dances and treaty-focused programming.
Treaty Commissioner Kathy Walker has argued that greater public understanding remains necessary despite that progress. The Office of the Treaty Commissioner is also supporting work to preserve oral histories and make knowledge from Elders and knowledge keepers more accessible. The original Treaty 6 parchment has become a powerful educational object during the commemoration, with visitors lining up to see the document connected to decisions made 150 years ago. Yet the central lesson emerging from Fort Carlton is that Treaty 6 cannot be understood through parchment alone. Its next chapter will depend on how governments, First Nations and the broader public translate historical promises, oral understandings and constitutional rights into everyday relationships.
