Maa-Nulth treaty lands devastate kayaking areas

[Kasey]

This thread is not against natives or whether or not they are due their land claims, and it's not against developers or loggers selling to developers. As developer Ilkay said...he was just buying property that was offered up for sale. This thread is against our government giving away coastal lands into private hands that will curtail recreational use of that land....but it's also about kayakers not doing anything about it - I'm sure there probably were meetings open to the public that we could have been at and we weren't - so there's probably no one to blame but ourselves! We were out paddling when we should have been looking to the future! And as John says, if we want to have a say in further land use, we'd better get organized and have our say now! I am on a neighborhood association here that has been instrumental in ensuring that the regional district and developers plan for and build walkways/pathways through and between large developments as permits are handed out and they are all quite happy to do this. There were only 3 active members when I joined and they were still making a difference! There is no reason not to ask that the same be done at the coast - it benefits everyone and hurts no one!
Kathy

 

[Astoriadave]

Speaking from a distance as I must, I agree with Kathy: dispense with the past and deal with the situation as it is now, and attempt to forestall further losses.

Please let US paddlers know how we can help, as non-Canadian citizens.

Examining the partitioning of Barkley Sound which John posted, seems plain there was an effort to avoid moving federal lands into the native sector, but instead provincial lands were moved. Is this because this was a process between the provincial government and the First Nations interests? Or, am I off base, here?

 

[DarrenM]

I too, would like to help out in any way I can.

 

[jk]

I too, would like to help out in any way I can.

Okay, in the last few hours there have been 2 postings of offers to help from regular posters. I'm new to this site, but I'm learning quickly there are a few key posters and a whole bunch of lurkers who may be regulars or may be passing through. Anyway, anyone who is thinking of making the same offer, be you lurkers or active posters, please consider the following:

1. If you are not a member of a paddling group, join immediately.

2. Get the group to form a marine trail committee immediately (even in the U.S. the help would be welcome in drawing upon knowledge to compile the kayak haven list).

3. Have the committee elect or otherwise choose a local chairperson to act as a liase for a yet-to-be-formed umbrella group.

4. Have each local committee/kayaking organization put together a "wishlist" of possible kayak havens.

5. Have the various local paddling groups liase and form an umbrella committee with an overall chairperson and executive to lead the process.

6. Have that chairperson and/or committee assemble the list of possible kayak havens from the various chapters and research which ones are or are not feasible. Pass the shortlist to tourism, forestry and Intregrated Land Management Bureau bureaucrats for comment. Let these gov't agencies know what is being done and what the expected end result will be so no organization is blindsided.

7. Finalize the list of proposed kayak havens. Submit it to the government agencies for approval.

8. Seek a policy statement from the provincial government in support of the marine trail concept and more specifically the document.

9. Have Notice of Interest for Use, Recreation and Enjoyment of the Public (UREP NOI) notations placed on land title at the kayak haven locations.

10. Pursue these sites for recognition as formal recreation sites or better yet pocket provincial parks.

11. Pursue tourism funding to convert these kayak havens to useable campsites.

12. Do all this within 2 years (with #11 an ongoing project, of course).

This is not rocket science, but it has to be grassroots. If every kayak group has this on the agenda for the next meeting, the umbrella group could be formed early in the new year, the wishlist could be compiled by spring and the summer could be spent getting gov't feedback. It could be finalized and subitted to the gov't next fall, with land act notations to follow. The diificult part will be getting the gov't to sign off on anything in the face of land claim negotiations, but let's cross that hurdle when we get there.

So there you go. If you're wondering how to help out, there's the roadmap. Good luck.

 

[fester]

Lighten up Francis

 

[laj]

Hi all, new to this group as a member but have enjoyed many postings in the past. A friend called and alerted me to this situation. I was familiar with it having heard something about it when I was up in Johnstone Strait last August. I usually make 3 BC trips a year.

I'm currently a chair of a kayaking club and have been a committee member of another. I also belong to a couple of other affiliations. I will see what I can do about contacting some of the folks over here in WA state and see what they have to offer.

Can't promise anything but I will try.

Thanks!
Lisa

 

[Astoriadave]

I'm spreading the word down here. Really handy to have the layout Kimantas did, to link to. Still reeling from the impact.

 

[sushiy]

Hi all, new to this group as a member but have enjoyed many postings in the past. A friend called and alerted me to this situation. I was familiar with it having heard something about it when I was up in Johnstone Strait last August. I usually make 3 BC trips a year.

I'm currently a chair of a kayaking club and have been a committee member of another. I also belong to a couple of other affiliations. I will see what I can do about contacting some of the folks over here in WA state and see what they have to offer.

Can't promise anything but I will try.

Thanks!
Lisa

Are you Ms. Lisa Johnson??

 

[GWarner]

In other words we're already too late,

Over a year ago the Victoria Canoe and Kayak Club and West Coast Paddler where approached and asked if they would be interested in lending support to an effort to lobby various governments on behalf of the recreational kayak community. The aim was to put issues of concern from the recreational kayak community before the government.

The kayak guides, instructors, and business community, all with vested interests have voices, but no one was speaking up on behalf of those who simply kayaked. Those of us who don't make money from the sport. The above mentioned groups were all at the Parks Canada table at various times during the planning stages for the new Gulf Island Marine Park.

Two issues where identified to the VCKC and West Coast Paddler. One large impact political issue concerning the Federal Government's plans for the Gulf Island National Park. And a smaller more local item namely getting municipalities to develop facilities around Victoria for the kayaking community. Such things as kayak wash stations (a hose with a spring tap) or maybe even port-a-potties at some of the local launch sites. Simple things mostly when compared to other recreational outlays, such as soccer, baseball, hockey or golf.

Doug Alderson, an influential member of the VCKC club and an official of Paddle Canada shot the proposal down. He said, this was something best left to individuals.

One of the founders of this form declined on behalf of West Coast Paddler. Saying, the form did not want to become political. At that time it was pointed out that a single voice shouting out from a silent crowd does not carry very far. And to be successful we'd have to speak as a group to get the attention of politicians. Oh well.

Now the genie is out of the bottle and the VCKC and members of this form are trying to stuff him back in. You've set yourselves a hard task and I wish you success.

Maybe there's an opportunity here. Look forward it mayhap be that the new (old) stewards of these lands will embrace the kayak community. No one will know with any degree of certainty until a dialogue is established.

 

[Astoriadave]

Gordin wrote: Maybe there's an opportunity here. Look forward it mayhap be that the new (old) stewards of these lands will embrace the kayak community. No one will know with any degree of certainty until a dialogue is established.

That is where I would go first, for sure, to get short-term relief, and to pave the way for access in the future. On a very informal basis, the Ohiats (or however that is spelled now) permit for-fee camping on some of their lands in the Deer Group, albeit perhaps a good bit of that goes directly into the food/accessories fund for the caretakers.

It might turn out we have allies in preserving good stewardship of these lands we did not appreciate or know we had.

No harm in making the overtures, anyway.

 

[jk]

It might turn out we have allies in preserving good stewardship of these lands we did not appreciate or know we had.

No, it's definitely not completely doom and gloom. I'd kayak Kuper Island (a Gulf Islands reserve) over neighbor Thetis (privately owned where you're likely to hear lawnmowers as you paddle by, which in the Gulf Islands is a travesty; having lawns on one of the most beautiful and unique ecologies in Canada should be illegal). But I don't think unoccupied First Nations land where kayakers are tolerated means there isn't less of a need for a marine trail where kayak camping is guaranteed for future generations.

We can't expect the gov't to do it for us. Case in point: I kayaked last summer to Octopus Islands Marine Park and landed at the first suitable beach I saw, and was surprised to see a "private property" sign. I looked at my map and sure enough the two largest islands in the group were privately owned. I kayaked all the surrounding islets looking for a beach and found only difficult rock ledges to land on. The kayak campsite I did find was on Francis Island, outside the park boundary. Here's the BC Parks info, still on the website today: "Octopus Islands is part of the BC Marine Trail Association network – a series of campsites, resting areas and safe havens designed and cared for by recreational boaters and paddlers. Once connected, this marine trail will extend from Vancouver to Prince Rupert and down into Puget Sound."

Safe haven? How? Why they left out the only accessible Crown island in a park billed as part of a marine trail is beyond me (who from the marine trail association gave this the thumbs up I'd like to know). Could you imagine the province creating a provincial park to protect a safe anchorage and the only safe anchorage is actually the next cove over? The gov't be chased out of office by the yachters. Meanwhile, I haven't heard a peep from any kayakers about the Octopus Islands. In fact, I often hear kayakers praise the islands.

Another case in point: Dionisio Provincial Park on Galiano Island. There used to be camping around the sandy, sheltered lagoon. They closed those sites for ecological reasons (fair enough) and instead created the Sandstone campsite farther down the coast. The problem: it's rock ledge. I visited it last summer and with a six-inch swell (which is minor) would not land my kayak there. This is billed as a marine-access-only campsite, and every time I have been there (3-4 times now), the only visitors besides me, were cyclists. So here we have a marine campsite created for paddlers that's essentially unusable and best suited for bicycle camping.

Imagine a similar scenario for yachts, let's say boats were shooed out of the anchorage at Pirate's Cove and they were told instead to anchor in the channel outside the cove. There's no way they'd put up with it; the yacht clubs would storm gov't offices. So why have kayakers so quietly tolerated these unsuitable and potentially unsafe situations?

I can add in the camping on islets taken away in the Gulf Islands National Park (about 6 or so sites) as another example of how kayakers are being squeezed (though it was the right decision). But then at Sandy Spit they chase campers away from the shoreline and push the campsites back into the bushes. Why? To thwart partiers. As if that will work.

Clearly, kayakers are agreeable, self-sufficient non-political and tolerant people who will happily make do with whatever comes their way. Nothing wrong with that! In fact, that's why I like you guys (even you Fester

). But it is time to get political, at least a little bit...

The attached photo is the Sandstone campsite landing.

 

[Dan_Millsip]

Now the genie is out of the bottle and the VCKC and members of this forum are trying to stuff him back in. You've set yourselves a hard task and I wish you success.

Please don't make this sound like something that we had any control over. The issues are now in the open and we will actively persue our options here. Bear in mind also, that while WestCoastPaddler serves the kayaking community with a venue to communicate, we are not representatives for the kayaking community.

*****

 

[Dan_Millsip]

Imagine a similar scenario for yachts, let's say boats were shooed out of the anchorage at Pirate's Cove and they were told instead to anchor in the channel outside the cove. There's no way they'd put up with it; the yacht clubs would storm gov't offices. So why have kayakers so quietly tolerated these unsuitable and potentially unsafe situations?

I think the reason for this is that the majority of kayakers paddle on their own without belonging to clubs and organizations.

Clearly, kayakers are agreeable, self-sufficient non-political and tolerant people who will happily make do with whatever comes their way. Nothing wrong with that! In fact, that's why I like you guys (even you Fester

). But it is time to get political, at least a little bit...

I don't know that it's accurate to say that kayers are non-political or "tolerant" of anything that comes their way but because we're essentially individuals "doing our thing" there is no organization beyond a few local clubs (which as I've mentioned is the minority of paddlers). Perhaps (and hopefully) venues like WestCoastPaddler can assist to change the situation as many who don't belong to clubs now do communicate amongst each other -- as is being done here.

You are correct that this is a time to rally together and be heard.

*****

 

[Astoriadave]

I have firmly resisted joining any paddling clubs, etc. (partly because I am a long ways from any big town), but this has really changed my perspective. I'll probably join OOPS in Portland, OR, because of this.
----------------

As an aside, and not intending to divert the focus of this thread:

We have been fighting similar issues with landowners adjacent to the Columbia River, for many years (no native groups have been involved), and some of the paddling clubs, and similar entities have been pretty effective in preserving what we have.

I suspect one fundamental difference is that treaties were negotiated as Europeans dominated (decimated?) natives during the 19th century down here, and the treaties formed a loose legal basis for adjucating disputes about lands and fishing rights (etc.). IIRC, treaties were not nailed down in BC as Europeans took over, leaving a sort of legal limbo which persists to this day, and which left the settlements up in the air. Who knew?

 

[Paul]

Hi all
I'm new to this group, and have been following this discussion for a few days. I can't help but think that people may be going down the wrong road here. To me it seems that the governments we elected are now trying to make amends for the past when they they either preoccupied with other events, incompentent or too lazy to deal with the issue of land claims. But that is all past, now our government wants to correct all that. I think kayakers have now got to be proactive and approach the First Nations groups, laying out our desires (marine trail, protected developed and undeveloped campsites etc) even before the treaties are voted on. If we are willing to pay to camp in Provincial and private campgrounds, why should we resist paying a First Nations group for the same thing? I have been to the First Nations campground at Pachena Bay, and in some respects it is as good as any other. The website for Pachena Bay seems to indicate that these people are just as interested in developing eco-tourism (of which kayaking is part) as many other groups. Maybe be approaching them quickly, we might be able to get them to agree to all or part of what we would like to see and protect, before developers and hotel chains move in. Part of the discussions would have to deal with access issues - what areas have archeological and religious significance for them. Can a system of passes (by week, month, season) valid for a complete treaty area (or two or more) be set up?
The important thing is to talk to them soon - it is going to be another level of government, that may be established. If we don't, I fear that blockades, evictions etc may become a norm and then we will lose.

Paul

PS - would be interested to know what the SKABC's views are on this, but not being a member...
Should they be the umbrella group to make the approach and should we all join to press them to do so?

 

[sushiy]

I wonder if laj ( Lisa in Wash.) can explain how the Washington Water Trails Association works with Native Americans or the landowners to create the trails like Cascadia Marine trail. Many are owned by Washington Parks and DNR, but some are belngs to individuals. I am not sure if any of the water trails campsite is owned by native americans though...
I can copy some of the line from Cascadia Marine Trail Guide Book.

History;
A group of concerned recreatioalist met in Seattle to discuss a disturbing trend_ the dwindling availability of public access to the water in Puget Sound basin....they decided to take action to preserve access o the prestine places they loved to paddle. ...the participants launched the concept of the Cascadia Marine Trail.....Negotiation began soon after for legislation creating an environmentally-friendly water trail for non-motorized boats. ....Concerned paddlers began to work with State Park and Washington Department of Natural resorces to compile a list of 20 campsite...- and the Cascadia Marine Trail became a reality. ...Cascadia Marine Trail is now considered a model for water trail developing along west coast of North America.

I asume the concerns are about the access to the water and acomodation and preserving the beauty of the nature, rather than who owns the land. I have too little knowledge to make any statement about the Canadian history and treaty issue .
Anyway, to make any water trail, someone have to make effort to negotiate with land owners and we the paddlers owe them big time. Without them, I don't know how many affordable campsites are available to us. Sure it will be nice to just go and camp free, but I would not count on that nowadays specially after knowing how may people spent their effort on it.

 

[Comoxpaddler]

What about seeing if "Wavelength" or "Sea Kayaker" would be interested in an article on this?

Letters to "Beautiful British Columbia" magazine. Might not have the readership of the Times Colonist but would alert more activist types.

 

[laj]

What about seeing if "Wavelength" or "Sea Kayaker" would be interested in an article on this?

I am waiting for a reply from the editor of SK Mag. I will let you know what I find out from WWTA. Thanks, Lisa

 

[laj]

Hello all,

I need to get an individual's contact info rather than continuing to post to this site please. I'm not good with the email system and I need to be able to track what is going on from my own personal email. John K, are you willing to be that person please? Please email me back to: stuff4laj@connectexpress.com.

I sent the original posting along with the suggested plan to Reed Waite, prez of the WWTA. He is going to get some docs together for me in the next 2-3 days.

Please let me know the answers for the questions he has for now:

1. Ownership of land has changed but does this mean the use changes? i.e., has anyone talked with First Nations people?

2. Is the B.C. Marine Trail Association, which got its start about the same time that WWTA did, capable of being the umbrella organization?

His message in part: "...getting kayakers involved at the local level is definitely key, there's not much without local knowledge of the waters and shores, and connections to landowners and political process. The attached plan is aggressive in terms of time. A mere list of safe havens in itself won't get far without a vision/plan. Washington Water Trails Association is now planning an international water trails conference for next September at Port Townsend, just before the West Coast Sea Kayak Symposium. This might be a great opportunity for B.C. folks to learn."

I also still need to connect with the presidents of the clubs that I'm associated with. I'll let you know how things go as I get more info from them. Thanks! Lisa

 

[DarrenM]

I have firmly resisted joining any paddling clubs, etc. (snip) but this has really changed my perspective.

Me too.
But as per GWarner's post above, the VCKC doesn't seem too interested in this issue.

Would joining the SKABC make more sense?