Ethnic mobility resulting in the growth in the numbers of Registered Indians has been fostered by adoption of equality rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982); court decisions such as Lovelace (1981), McIvor (2009), and Gehl (2017); statutes such as Bill C-31 (1985) and Bill C-3 (2011); and the recognition by order-in-council of landless bands such as the Qalipu Mi’kmak First [...] The land reserves were to be owned by the federal Crown under section 91(24) of the Constitution (BNA) Act, 1867, and managed under the Indian Act, 1876, for the use and benefit of the bands to which they were assigned. [...] Combining Clatworthy’s formal estimate of the impact of C-31 with less formal estimates of C-3, the increase by the end of 2016 must be at least 40% even without including any possible impact of the Gehl appeal.1 The second effect has been to increase the percentage of Registered Indians who live off reserve. [...] The Indian Register always shows a higher total of status Indians than the census because of under-enumeration of First Nations in the census and pos- sible lags in reporting of deaths to the Indian Registrar. [...] After 1985, there was a small increase in the rate of growth of the on-reserve population but a sharp jump in the rate of growth of the off-reserve population, as many formerly enfranchised women and their children regained Indian status.