Does a limited hunting restriction on hunting in accordance with the terms of the Agreement?

The question of “limited hunting” or “restrictions” on hunting is important in the present context. If the right of access is only that given to other people, does that take away the right to hunt for food as provided for in the Agreement? In a reference to R. ex rel. Clinton v. Strongquill, 1953 CanLII 206 (SK CA), [1953] 2 D.L.R. 264; 105 C.C.C. 262, the court stated: As I read the judgment . . . if the Indians had the access to hunt, limitation should not be placed on that access. That is to say once any hunting is allowed, then under para. 13 all hunting by Indians is permissible, if hunting for food.