Yet, there has been much adverse change. As with many other Indigenous Peoples in Canada and elsewhere, the Tsilhqot’in were subjected to assimilation pressures by the government and the church and to the abuse carried out in residential schools, where Tsilhqo’tin children were barred from using their language and performing their cultural traditions. The Tsilhqot’in strongly resisted those pressures and have been able to continue living in their traditional territory. Even so, they have suffered ever-increasing encroachment, especially from large-scale logging, ranching, and mining, which have left scars in the landscape and disrupted people’s lifeways.
These and other pressures have been placing the Tsilhqot’in language and culture at risk. Today, while many adults are still fluent in the Tsilhqot’in language and culture, and a few are completely monolingual, intergenerational transmission has been largely interrupted. Most fluent speakers are over 50 years old, and many of the most knowledgeable elders are advanced in age. Parents of young children mostly do not use Tsilhqot’in at home. Most of this profound transformation has happened in only a couple of decades, and it correlates with a growing incidence of social problems in the communities, especially among youth. Some community members, such as Tsilhqot’in linguist and language and culture champion Linda Smith, are concerned that if that trend continues the language may be on its way out within a generation.
Nabas is found within the traditional caretaking area shared by the Yunesit’in and Xeni communities, who have had a long-term cultural association with it, as attested by documented burial sites, sacred sites, and historic cabins, as well as by an abundance of related oral history. Fishing, hunting, and gathering are still practiced in the Nabas area.
At the same time, the Tsilhqot’in were also pursuing a lengthy land title and rights case in the Canadian courts for the recognition of their ancestral title to a significant portion of their traditional territory. Centering around self-determination on their traditional territory, the case was relevant to their ability to stop commercial logging on their lands.