Introducing Right to Roam legislation in British Columbia
Today in the legislature I introduced a private member’s bill entitled Bill M223 — Right to Roam Act. This Bill reestablishes the rights of British Columbians to access public lands, rivers, streams, and lakes, and to use these spaces to fish, hike and enjoy outdoor recreation.
Increasingly, British Columbians are being fenced out of wild areas that have been enjoyed by the public for generations. One particularly high profile example involves public access to Minnie, Stoney and other lakes surrounded by Douglas Lake Ranch spread out over more than 500,000 acres. Approximately 365,000 acres are already crown land with full public access. But concern over access to several lakes was raised when Stoney Lake Road was suddenly gated in the late 1970s and subsequently locked in the early 1980s.
Below I reproduce the text and video of the speech I gave as I introduced the bill. I also include the accompanying media release.
Text of my Introduction
A. Weaver: I move that a bill intituled the Right to Roam Act, 2017, of which notice has been given, be introduced and read a first time now.
Motion approved.
A. Weaver: I’m pleased to be introducing a bill intituled the Right to Roam Act, 2017.
The ability to access and experience nature is a right for all British Columbians, and we must protect it. This bill will re-establish the rights of British Columbians to access public lands, rivers, streams and lakes and to use these spaces to fish, hike and enjoy outdoor recreation.
Hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation are a pivotal part of British Columbia’s heritage and form an important part of the fabric of present-day life in British Columbia. They are also vital to the understanding, conservation and management of fish and wildlife in our province.
Increasingly, however, British Columbians are being fenced out of wild areas that have been enjoyed by the public for generations.
One particularly high profile example involved public access to Minnie, Stoney and other lakes surrounded by Douglas Lake Ranch, spread out over more than 500,000 acres. Public access was prevented when Stoney Lake Road was suddenly gated in the 1970s and subsequently locked in the 1980s. This bill, which is built on a combination of B.C.’s existing Hunting and Fishing Heritage Act and Nova Scotia’s Angling Act, aims to address and prevent such conflicts.
I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Bill M223, Right to Roam Act, 2017, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Video of my Introduction
Media Release
Weaver introduces Right to Roam Act
For immediate release
February 27th, 2017
VICTORIA B.C. – Locked gates on back roads are increasingly restricting access to wild lands in the province, making it harder for outdoors people to go hunting, fishing or hiking. A new bill tabled Monday by Andrew Weaver, Leader of the B.C. Green Party, would put a stop to that practice.
“British Columbians are increasingly being fenced out of the province’s wild lands. The ability to access and experience nature is a public right, and we must protect it,” says Weaver, who is the MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head. “Free public access to the outdoors is vital to people’s health and well-being, but it is also vital to the health and well-being of our environment. People protect what they know and love. If we become disconnected from our environment we risk disengaging with the fight for its future.”
In many regions of the province, the only way to access wild Crown lands is via logging roads, public back roads, or across privately owned forests and uncultivated areas. While casual public use of these accessways has not been an issue in the past, there is a growing trend of neighbouring landowners and forestry companies locking people out. Some are building fences and installing locked gates to block access altogether, others are implementing strict schedules or access fees. In extreme cases, British Columbians are getting arrested for trespassing while walking to public lakes they have been fishing for generations.
The Nicola Valley Fish and Game Club, a non-profit association dedicated to the local preservation and management of habitat and wildlife, for example, has spent years in a legal battle with the owner of the Douglas Lake Ranch over the public right to fish in public lakes..
“The Right to Roam Act aims to address and prevent conflicts like the Douglas Lake Ranch case. Nature in British Columbia should be open to all, not to just the privileged few,” says Weaver.
This Act was built off the existing BC Hunting and Fishing Heritage Act and the Nova Scotia Angling Act. It includes a few additional amendments, made with reference to a UVic Environmental Law Clinic report about enhancing public access to wild lands.
“By allowing people to cross uncultivated wild land to access public lands, rivers, streams, and lakes, the Right to Roam Act aims to re-establish the rights of British Columbians and to use these spaces to fish, hike and enjoy outdoor recreation.”
– 30 –
Media contact
Mat Wright, Press Secretary
+1 250-216-3382 | mat.wright@leg.bc.ca
Latest Posts
Recent Comments
- on The Paris Agreement is in trouble: UNFCCC needs to ratchet up their climate efforts
- on How can BC’s environmental organizations be more effective?
- on How can BC’s environmental organizations be more effective?
- on How can BC’s environmental organizations be more effective?
- on How can BC’s environmental organizations be more effective?
88 Comments
While I support the spirit of this bill, I feel that “lawfully walking, hiking, or roaming as recreation” is too limited a definition of recreation. Skiing, climbing, biking and other such forms of recreation should be protected as well. However, I do think that certain protections need to be in place against motorized vehicle access with the understanding that vehicle access is required to support the aforementioned activities. We need a better recreation land management plan to address the stresses induced on the environment by the increasing popularity of outdoor recreational activities.
That was the spirit of the bill. Only motorized vehicles were excluded.
This Bill MUST not be allowed to pass. Where Private Property is involved it is an infringement on Private Property Rights. For many years the government has been slowly eroding away these rights. This bill would open a can of worms for liability and damage (on private property ) issues also.
Most of the public are “good” people. However it is the bad apples that spoil it for everyone. They have a “sense of entitlement” an a total disregard for the environment and no respect for private property. As far as enforcing laws on crown (or private) land— that is JUST a pipe dream
I understand your concern, however by not letting a bill like this pass you are allowing those bad apples to spoil it for everyone. I have walked many footpaths in the UK that pass right through peoples back yards, through churchyards, and farmyards. Now I’m not saying it is perfect, or that there are no issues along the way, but they are few and far between.
We should allow the law-abiding majority to rise to the top, and deal with any issues from the bad apples along the way, not the other way around.
Hi Carl,
Unfortunately it is left up to the land owners to clean up the mess that is made by the ‘bad apples’. When you (the good apples) are enjoying a hike through private lands, you may not realize the extra care that falls into the shoulders of the land owner to keep that land clean, free of noxious weeds, gates and fences in good order, etc. I do not support this bill. 95 % if BC should be plenty to hike and explore.
I have no problem with placing restrictions on motorized access to preserve habitat integrity and ensure that there are places for solitude, however, there is no reason whatsoever that British Columbian’s should be prevented from being free to roam on foot. This does no harm and is the right of every British Columbian.
good job…the island is covered with gates owned by the logging firms.
The issue is actually of Copyright of MAPS.
The underlying map data (the GIS shape files used to make the maps) should be given away for free and available to all map makers.
Yes, the printed/digital map is still copyrighted, but the DATA used to create the maps should be free (unrestricted use – just like the Federal Data).
The problem is that property boundaries data is not freely available (the GIS data) making maps more expensive to make, is the map creator needs to buy the licence (from the Government or private sector) to make the map.
If all map data (property boundaries) were made free (unrestricted use) then all maps could be showing the same information.
Davenport Maps should NOT hold the data HOSTAGE, as the maps should be free. Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland all have free maps available, but BC doesn’t (this is because of copyright).
The public should have a right to know where the property boundaries are, regardless of which maps they use.
I have enjoyed the back country of vancouver island over 20 year now. I take my kids out to spend time in woods we truly enjoy hunting,exploring,gold panning . There are a lot more locked gates in.last few years. From what I see is that some of the tfl holders are trying to keep pepole out from seeing the devistation in certain areas. Almost appears as if the wolf is I charge of the hen house. No government regulator enforcement
Thank you for proposing this. I have spent 40 years on the wilderness of BC and have seen more and more areas closed off to the public. I have also spent many years fishing the lakes of Douglas lake area and to be suddenly shut out was extremely disheartening.
I sure hope you are successful inyour efforts to allow us the use of Our Province for all outdoor enthusiasts.
Congratulations to the MLA for bringing forward this motion!
Well presented!
I am glad someone raised the question about First Nations traditional territories in B. C. B.C. has a unique relationship in that the settlement population lives and does business on unceded First Nations lands. It is important if settlers want to experience freedom on the land they must work in a collaborative way with First Nations Peoples so that traditional First Nations rights and history of existence in the traditional territories are not extinquished. Andrew Weaver is a very smart person so possibly this push will help facilitate a reasonable dialogue.
Environment -> First Nations -> Settlers -> Government -> Corporations
This should always be the order of priorities.
To do other: what justification can there be in an open forum devoid of graft?
Not every damn thing has to involve the natives and I really resent being called a settler.
Descendant of settlers then
I fully support this but not just gated areas but with forest management of logging roads as well. I have spent all of my life hunting and fishing in BC. I am 43 years old now and started in the bush when I was big enough to hold the easy and stand on the seat. Hunting and fishing with my father and grandfather we used old bush and mine roads from back when they were children, most roads still fine few washed away by mother nature but not many. Well around 25 years ago some how by someone road deactivations and cross ditching came into play to preserve habitat and protect the forest. Well I believe this has done absolutely the opposite. Cross ditching does not work to preserve any roads ever, it is plain ridiculous. Dectivations…Why places I’ve gone my entire life are now not accessible or when your done raping it you get to close it. If mining or logging companies get the right to go in and rape the resources then rather then having to destroy the road it could be used for all of us to see our country. I’m not saying make it perfect for everyone in there kias just realustic like it used to be. By gating, blocking or digging up everything pressure and activity are forced into only the main access. These policies are devastating the lakes rivers and forest areas that people are concentrated to. Leave us the people more access, let us spread out let us explore with far less harm. Every little puddle back in the day if a logging road came anywhere near it ended up with a lakeside landing, a sign and a picnic table if not 3 or 4. This doesn’t happen anymore, the forest isn’t managed, it’s raped and blocked and we don’t have any choice…
This bill won’t give you any access to gated lands that you don’t already have. Weavers bill is for FOOT access. It won’t open up any gates on the Island, or prevent any roads from being deactivated.
It will merely allow random individuals to walk around on private property.
When I was a teenager 14 years young my buddy and I bought a 41 ford pick up and drove that all over the logging roads in the interior of B.C. to fish and camp. never any gates and no problems. Older as a scout leader we camped over most of Vancouver Island and the west coast trail. still no problems.Now at age 70 I still like to get out in the back country on my quad .Gates every where , and deep cross ditches a real hazard. I know dumping of garbage can be a problem but that can also be fixed. The people that travel the back roads to enjoy the wilderness are not the ones destroying anything.It is time that B.C. got the country we own back.
Well said!
I think that there should only be one fishing license for the province. That license should include all salt water and all fresh waters in the province. Very few people that fish salt water do not get salmon endorsements, so include that in the licence as well. Every land locked province gives you a license to fish the entire province, why should we have to buy two separate ones!
And this should include any road that has been subsidized by stumpage dollars.
It is crown land and we are the crown we the public have a right to enjoy all crown lands leased or not. We are losing our rights to enjoy our wonderfull province. Logging and Mining need to be allowed access but the public does too.
Very good bill has my vote
Robert Loewen
Well done! The best bit of legislation to come forth in years for the outdoor lovers of British Columbia, MLAs please support!
i think public roads should not be gated for anyone and yes i have been on both sides of the fence (logging , backcountry traveling ,hunting and fishing)i love all the outdoors exploring and i would love my kids and grandkids to see it all as well , not worry about tresspassing on public land . dave keep up the good work and get this bill passed
If its not stopped now…imagine what it will be like for future outdoor enthuisists. Extremely Limited back country adventures…would not be right.
Awesome move…
Does a gate have to be open to provide access? Or can you just throw your bike over, or just walk around the gate and go hunting or hiking or camping?
I have zero affiliation with any land owners, but in every situation where a gate is unlocked there is always a pile of trash. That trash doesn’t get there without vehicle access.
Of course, if we didn’t have to pay for non-commercial dumping…
I totally agree with this bill! We have a cabin in the okanagen and the amount of locked gates on completely public lands is shocking! If the land is truely public please leave it open for public access!
Glad to see this bill! Too many great hunting spots being bullied away from hunters and hikers by private land owners.
Nice work.
What you don’t understand is ranchers own these private lands, and yes there may be a few upstanding people that would be respectful of livestock, but for the most part there’s going to be people leaving gates open and livestock will get out, trash left on native pastures, and what about careless people camping? What if their fire gets out of control? How would you like a fire on your private property? How would you feel if I came into your backyard and started messing around with your animals? How would you feel if I came into your back yard and seen game birds and just started shooting? The answer is you wouldn’t. Ranchers work their butts off for what they have, they are stewards of the land and take great pride in what they do, all this bill does is infringe on personal rights, and it’s not private land owners bullying hunters, it’s ranchers that don’t want to see the work he/she’s put in ruined by an ignorant hunter leaving open gates or cutting fence or leaving ruts in the grass from their trucks, or some crappy shooter accidentally hitting one of their animals. So ya just because it benefits your sightseeing or hunting (I’m a hunter and rancher btw) or any other personal enjoyment, you don’t see that it could ruin someone else’s livelihood
One reason why having access to wild land is important is that human need interaction with the wild for their development and maturity. From years of facilitating connection to nature for all age we can see 8 attributes of connection emerging reliably happiness of a child , vitality, deep listening, empathy and caring for nature , truly helpfulness, full aliveness and in touch with preciousness of life , love and forgiveness and access to the quiet mind . those qualities are increasingly getting rare and it is directly related to the lack of free play in nature. the consequences for the respect for life are enormous. people in their formative years especially need to receive feedback from something “other” they can’t control to mature fully to a sense of “we “. also for people to connect with their “vision and gifts ” traditionally people were asked by their culture to spend time alone in the wild … i will be happy to explain more … nature is essential for connection…. as a wilderness school we are presented with more and more difficulty accessing the wild .. thank you for presenting that bill and the debate have to go further than recreation in nature.
the same situation is happening just west of lilloet on the schulaps range large areas are being denied to the public. only open to horseback and hiking. trails that used to connect the yallacom valley over to the west and north to the gang ranch
the logging company’s have cut off many established trails by gating or blocking accesses roads a good example is father and son lakes on Vancouver island there is a good trail to the lakes and I have seen many family’s hike to these lakes but recently the road has been cut off for the normal family by digging a ditch across the road as there is nothing between the main road and the accesses to the established trail why not block it after the trail access
I moved to Scotland from Vancouver about a year and a half ago. They have a similar law in place, which works amazingly well and has allowed for numerous long distance trail networks
It is based on mutual respect of the landowner to allow others to enjoy natural beauty and the hikers or bikers to pass through without altering the space in anyway. Good luck!
thanks for all the good efferts
How would this apply to Grazing Leases, that for decades were accessible. I totally agree with motorized restrictions, when damage is being done to grasslands or what have you, but total loss of access, by foot, to hunters, hikers, etc.
Hi Andrew, first off David and myself think you have been doing an amazing job advocating for the environment, for science and peoples best interest in general. I think this proposition could be good too to open access to areas that are locked up by tree farms and other companies but will this give people the right to trespass through private lands to access crown land? My husbands family owns land in the interior and we don’t want hunters on it or other people who are not part of the neighborhood. So far I have heard of hunters, trespassers, and someone growing dope on it. Another excuse for people to feel my mother in laws land is accessible to them is not something we really want. I am sure you can imagine it can be a bit scary to come across people who shouldn’t be on your land, How do you propose protecting the landowners and people living on land by crown land and waterways from unwanted activities?
At Peter Hope lake the road on the west side is a public road that provides access to recreation site land now has a sign on it that claims it is private access. .this road is a public road ..the Peter Hope Strata council has been trying to discourage the public from using this area for recreational purposes. .this area is mapped as Peter Hope north recreation site..the caretaker of PHSC..H as been yelling at public visitors on crown land..this is how it starts
I have been fishing and exploring the back roads of Vancouver Island for 23 years, and more and more I am denied access by gates, I love to get out where there are rivers and lakes not only to explore but to get away from the stresses of every day life…I battle depression without medication and being in the wilderness is my release, my medication, it relaxes me! so if more and more wilderness is taken away how will I continue to maintain this depression with out having to turn to medication!?…please pass above bill so I do not have to take medication with many side
effects, thank you
I too have traveled Washington State logging roads without finding a locked gate. Spurs are deactivated with a ditch. For these companies to keep us out of what has always been public land is a bloody disgrace. Thank you for your efforts.
Thank you so much! Unbelievable! I have been saddened by this for years. Thank you for making a difference. Keep up the great work!!
Would this apply to logging companies that have put up gates denying access to lakes and areas for hunting, fishing and hiking?
Yes
I believe that access was not an issue for the large logging companies for years but then vandalism of company property forced them to gate areas. Also active logging roads are dangerous places. I am all for this bill but I am sure the above will be deemed public safety in those situations.
It is my understanding that these roads are fenced and locked for safety and liability reasons. How would this bill address the issues of liability if the roads become public accessible? Who would fund their care and maintenance? I also wonder how this universal access may infringe upon aboriginal rights and title?
I say yes to this bill! This backcountry belongs to all of us, not just a few select corporations or individuals. Being given a right to harvest lumber is NOT the right to block everyone else’s access.
How would this apply to aboriginal territories?
An excellent question. This would have to be determined via regulation and through extensive consultation with First Nations. I hope to start such consultations should we form government.
I agree with this, except there really is no need for hunting on these lands. I prefer to hike where I am not going to be shot at.
How many people have been shot at or killed by hunters in BC?
You should be more afraid of your fridge falling over and smothering you.
So you would suggest that hunters should in someway have less rights than that of a non-hunter? That is a clearly irrational fear you are displaying. Attacks by wild animals are far and away more common than any hunting incidents involving firearms, yet you do not argue for the removal of dangerous animals. Sounds to me like you may be a hoplophobe.
I agree with Dave here! Hunters aren’t in the back country blasting away at everything with their firearms, please rest assured that any legit hunter has went through safety courses to learn the correct measures to handle their firearms. That would be like saying cars aren’t allowed in the roads cause they might hit pedestrians…
In Washington State they support the right to access land for receration .It is amazing how much land that i have traveled there and not see a gate and here we can’t go ten km seeing a bunch of gates.
This legislation would go a long way to ensuring that BC would remain one if not the best places on earth. We must protect our public places and if necessary stand up and demand it from our elected officials.