A late November Pitt Lake Weekend

CPS

Paddler
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
84
Location
BC
IMG_20201115_064828617.jpg


Earlier this month I had taken an early morning paddle up Pitt lake. I had the goal of checking out a rumoured campsite on Goose Island. Conditions were good. A slight wind coming from the south sped my crossing to the island. I found the campsite with ease; it turned out to be closer to the water than I had expected.
There's a somewhat rustic firepit, and a nice flat rock to pitch a tent on.
IMG_20201115_081906337.jpg

IMG_20201115_081851389.jpg


Contented with my exploration I sat down to eat lunch. It was then that I realized that I had lost one of my gloves. I looked all over the mossy campsite. I checked my kayak, and looked around the campsite once again. Nowhere was the second glove to be found. I began to question whether I had actually brought it. I could swear I took two out from my under deck bag. The image of two gloves sitting on my seat was fairly clear in my memory. I checked the area where I came ashore. It's a rocky landing, crisscrossed with driftwood logs. Had my glove taken a tumble between these logs? I searched again in vain, my glove was nowhere to be found. One more search around the campsite yielded zero gloves.

I had to make a Zoom meeting in the afternoon and didn't want to be late. I abandoned hope of finding the glove. As I paddled back I entertained the notion that perhaps I had only grabbed one glove off the dresser top that morning. As I loaded the car I was giving more credence to that version of events. As I drove home it seemed evermore likely. As I put the kayak in the garage I was virtually certain that I would find my glove, simply forgotten on my dresser.

But as I entered the bedroom as cast my eyes upon the bare dresser top I knew that glove must be lying on the mossy ground of Goose Island.

When I mentioned this unfortunate blunder to my wife, she reminded me that I would have to break the news of my lost glove to the glove's creator, our knitting needle wielding friend. I imagined myself explaining the carelessness involved in losing a wet-moss coloured glove on a wet, mossy island. No, this simply would not do.

Thusly I found myself paddling to Goose Island on the 28 of November, determined to locate the missing glove. I had a few days off and was thinking of trying to find the pictographs that are farther up the lake, as well as check out a few of the marine sites. As I paddled up the lake I was treated to many rainbows and generally nice conditions.
PXL_20201128_195056835.MP.jpg


It started to drizzle as I crossed to the island, but overall it was quite mild. I got ashore and began to set up camp.
A bit more poking around near camp showed the mossy and overgrown nature of the island's forest. I originally thought of hiking around the island, but decided it was too wet to merit much more exploration.
PXL_20201128_213905201.jpg


I changed out of my dry suit and into my camp clothes. Donning my hiking boots I took two steps before losing all traction on a root and nearly falling flat on my face. I caught myself just before hitting the ground. Sitting squarely in front of my face, completely waterlogged and nearly indistinguishable from the moss around it, was my glove. I have never been as appreciative of excessively worn lugs on my hiking boots. The evening was spent in triumph, eating some rehydrated chicken and rice before going to bed at 6pm.
IMG_20201130_152006_029.jpg


My plan for the next day was to cross to the western shore, and continue north in search of pictographs. Then I would cross to Osprey Creek and make camp. The wind had different plans. I waited to see if it would abate. It did not. Figuring the day was already destined to be windy, I ate baked beans for breakfast. The wind did not show any signs of stopping, but I thought I'd give it a shot and see if it was doable to head up the lake. As I reached the western shore I decided fighting the wind and waves just to commit to a longer crossing was not something I wanted to do. I veered south, remembering Dark Creek marine site was somewhere nearby. With the wind at my back I very quickly scooted behind the point and into more sheltered water. In summer I would perhaps have enjoyed the downwind surfing a bit more.

The campsite at Dark Creek was nicely suited to setting up a tarp, though I was disappointed to see any suitable sites were a bit more concave than I would like given the incoming rain.

PXL_20201129_213258906.jpg


With a view back across to Goose Island I settled in for a wet evening of reading Jack London. Wet weather doesn't seem so bad when reading about murder and frostbite...

The next morning was a very soggy packing up of camp and a swift downwind paddle back to the launch.

My main goal was accomplished, regardless of how silly it seems to go back for a glove. I'll have to make another trip out to check out the pictographs.

Maybe in spring...
 

mick_allen

Paddler & Moderator
Joined
May 15, 2005
Messages
3,266
Unfortunately, Goose Island consists of two private parcels . . .

GooseIs-private.jpg


. . . so even though the camping we do leaves the lightest touch on the land . . .
 

AM

Paddler
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
896
Location
Vancouver
Nice trip report! Camping this time of year has its challenges, but the rewards are real.

Cheers,
Andrew
 
  • Like
Reactions: CPS

CPS

Paddler
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
84
Location
BC
Unfortunately, Goose Island consists of two private parcels . . .

View attachment 9231

. . . so even though the camping we do leaves the lightest touch on the land . . .

Bummer. I guess I'll cross it off the list for future trips.
What are you using to display the ownership? I have tried using iMap BC with more failures than successes. Maybe I just don't what what layers to pick.
 

mick_allen

Paddler & Moderator
Joined
May 15, 2005
Messages
3,266
I guess I'll cross it off

It's an awkward call . . . if it's not posted in any manner, and if you make it cleaner than you found, and make all apologies if confronted, it's maybe going to be possible more times than not.
As well, if you ever get into a situation where the time of day [impending nightfall], the weather, well being, tiredness, or injury affects your ability to continue, it's useful to have the knowledge of locations that you can pull off the water at for your safety.

I use both Imap and FrontCounter BC and they both seem to show the exact same land tenure status [I've compared them over 100s of sites from the border northwards to Powell River]. However, Imap will show much more data - has way more layers that one can easily manipulate.

Fool around with Imap a bit more, it's quite useful. I can't remember exactly what I do, but on the map, dial into your area of interest, choose say a cadastral and then CLICK on the site and I think something like 'display data' comes up and click that it'll show a bunch of alternatives on the left hand side of the display and then successively click on those to get a bunch of differing sets of info on the site or property. The property outline or area usually highlights so you know what you're looking at whether wider region, group of parcels or individual parcel.

However - IT IS FALLIBLE. I repeat, it is fallible - and I have found this out to my bitter dissappointment [from a BC Marine Trail perspective] on many occasions [many occasions but few in comparison to the occasions where the data is good and useful] . This mainly happens in locations that are not fully documented or are 'unassigned' but not always. But for us that don't have access to surveys going back to the 1800's [I have even looked over the shoulder of a crown official with all the gov't layers turned on and even that was not good enough in a specific case] Imap or FCBC are reasonably good enough in most cases.

**

Oh, and I'm sorry to darken your initial post - I think it's great that this paddling area is so close to the lower mainland and your getting out there at this time of year and having such great photos of what you did is a real inspiration for the rest of us to get the heck out too. Thanks so much, it looked like a nice outing and I'm envious.
 

CPS

Paddler
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
84
Location
BC
Yeah. It's a tough one. I feel like the property owner, whoever they are, doesn't care too much as there is so signage or anything. Still, I'll likely avoid recommending it to others

I'll have to play around more with iMap and figure layers out a bit more. Thanks for the pointers.
 

kayakwriter

Administrator
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
985
I use both Imap and FrontCounter BC and they both seem to show the exact same land tenure status [I've compared them over 100s of sites from the border northwards to Powell River]. However, Imap will show much more data - has way more layers that one can easily manipulate.

Fool around with Imap a bit more, it's quite useful. I can't remember exactly what I do, but on the map, dial into your area of interest, choose say a cadastral and then CLICK on the site and I think something like 'display data' comes up and click that it'll show a bunch of alternatives on the left hand side of the display and then successively click on those to get a bunch of differing sets of info on the site or property. The property outline or area usually highlights so you know what you're looking at whether wider region, group of parcels or individual parcel.

However - IT IS FALLIBLE. I repeat, it is fallible - and I have found this out to my bitter dissappointment [from a BC Marine Trail perspective] on many occasions [many occasions but few in comparison to the occasions where the data is good and useful] . This mainly happens in locations that are not fully documented or are 'unassigned' but not always. But for us that don't have access to surveys going back to the 1800's [I have even looked over the shoulder of a crown official with all the gov't layers turned on and even that was not good enough in a specific case] Imap or FCBC are reasonably good enough in most cases.
So for my own personal learning, a query: my layperson's understanding is that in the vast majority of BC, Crown Foreshore (I.E. public land) starts at the higher high tide line. Or, put another way, private property ends at the higher high tide line. There are a few exceptions - generally oyster farm leases and similar where the Crown has leased the beach as well as the seabed to a private company.

But, for example, a few years ago I paddled under a bridge between the mainland and Hamber Island near Belcarra Park. The bridge appears to be privately made, from this listing. That listing also states that "A fourth title was also included in the offering. This final title is actually the sand spit that connects the main property with the island and is covered by water at higher tides." This contradicts my understanding of the general rule of any land that gets covered at high tide being public. Are there exceptions from old titles that were grand-fathered in? Is there a reliable database to check individual places? I remember seeing a couple of signs posted on the beach both on the strip where the bridge was and on the south end of the island. Both were clearly below the higher high tide line and both asserted it was a private beach and forbade trespassing. Anyway of ascertaining whether that was legit or a bluff to keep people off what is actually public access?

And if those signs were in fact on Crown Foreshore, they were illegal structures, no? Who would I report that to?
 

jefffski

Paddler
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
94
The sand spit between Hamber Island and Turtlehead Point on Indian Arm across from Deep Cove is private based on a very old deed.
I spoke to a lawyer about it who explained it to me. I understand it is some type of historical Crown granted waterlot. What's interesting is that when the current owner got permission from the muncipality and the province to build the bridge, the bridge had to be high enough to allow kayaks and canoes to pass under, at high tide. Now, the owners have posted signs that its private property. Go figure.
 

kayakwriter

Administrator
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
985
The sand spit between Hamber Island and Turtlehead Point on Indian Arm across from Deep Cove is private based on a very old deed.I spoke to a lawyer about it who explained it to me. I understand it is some type of historical Crown granted waterlot. What's interesting is that when the current owner got permission from the muncipality and the province to build the bridge, the bridge had to be high enough to allow kayaks and canoes to pass under, at high tide. Now, the owners have posted signs that its private property. Go figure.
Interesting. So that seems to settle it as far as landing on the beaches. But about paddling under the bridge - I'm not even an internet lawyer, but my guess/hope would be that those would be considered "navigable waters". I know over on the My Canadian Canoe Routes site there have been long threads about this, with private landowners being able to deny access to streams that are only seasonally paddleable based on the fact that most of the time those streams are not boatable. But I think it would be hard to make that same argument about waters that become paddleable for several hours each day, twice a day, for most days of the year. Any actual lawyers or people with expertise on the Canadian Navigable waters act care to share their thoughts?
 

mick_allen

Paddler & Moderator
Joined
May 15, 2005
Messages
3,266
the bridge had to be high enough to allow kayaks and canoes to pass under, at high tide. Now, the owners have posted signs that its private property. Go figure.

From the continuing Douglas Lake vs Merritt Fish&Game controversy it appears as if there is some discussion whether public water over private land allows the land owner to post and fence the water. This situation also gave 'rise' to the Cattle Co.'s interesting tactic of raising the lake water levels slightly so that everyone would have to pass over private land in order to access the lake - thereby making the lake barricaded for public entry.

whatever that case rules on in the next while, this is an example of how Imap works for Turtlehead:

1) dial into area of interest and at top lhs hit 'data sources' > 'add provincial layers'

Turtlehead-spit00.jpg



2) on the popup menu dial down to 'land ownership andn status' and click on layer of interest - in this case I chose 'surface ownership - tantalus' > OK - as it'll give a quick access to what's needed.

Turtlehead-spit01.jpg

Turtlehead-spit02.jpg


3)right click on area of interest and on the popup, click on 'find data on the map'

Turtlehead-spit03.jpg



4)On the left hand side, one or several topics come up and click on which seems applicable.

Turtlehead-spit04.jpg


5)Some basic info comes up - hopefully with what one needs. Here's the info from clicking on the point right beside:

Turtlehead-spit05.jpg


several aspects of interest here: there is a parcel id or side, the ownership confidence rating, crown ownership N presumably means NO, the date of ownership, etc
 

mick_allen

Paddler & Moderator
Joined
May 15, 2005
Messages
3,266
hear, hear!: where's the proof?
More likely it's a cynically constructed tale purely submitted to elicit sympathy from the rest of us formerly guant and s-mitten glove-lovers!
 

CPS

Paddler
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
84
Location
BC
Hahaha! I'll try to remember to take a picture of the gloves when I get back home.

Pretty sure they're on the dresser...
 

CPS

Paddler
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
84
Location
BC
PXL_20201205_024938961~2.jpg


Here's the gloves in question. They're a bit greener in person. When dropped on the ground I can assure you they're virtually invisible. Or at least one is.
 

Natasha

New Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2006
Messages
8
In the knitting community we have the concept of whether someone is knit-worthy. I.e. does the person love and care for the hand knit items to be worthy of the time, effort and expense the knitter has invested to make the item. CPS, even if the recovery mission was unsuccessful, have proven yourself knit-worthy. I wish you many more hand knit items in your future.
 

mick_allen

Paddler & Moderator
Joined
May 15, 2005
Messages
3,266
Huh? FAKERY!! A hoax wefted through the very fabric of all of us gullible, warped readers!

The very dangling threads of this tale are sewn with whole cloth fertilized from the imagination of a master manipulater who palms off weak justification for his actions and spins whole cloth while thumbing his hose the hole time. And look at the design: all holes everwhere- wrist, fingers, and thumb: no self-respecting boat owner would have such a thing . . . they’d sink! And there’s more holes between the threads! A truly sopping supposition poking fingers at us all.

Look at the weakly fabricated photo handing us a one mohair wickedly woven proposition: the left side glove is plainly 50% narrower than the right one, OJ would be proud – no aquittal here! And the wool looks like that old ‘wool-over-ice’ variety vainly attempting to knit a cynical, carpal, tunnelling, likely yarn.

Not me!!
 
Top