Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post Reply
User avatar
Dawnland
Board Meister
Posts: 399
Joined: Aug 13th, 2009, 10:38 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by Dawnland »

LANDM wrote:To be accurate, I do not believe anyone lit pitchforks. I believe they lit torches and carried pitchforks during the time of Dr. Frankenstein. And, I also believe you are mixing the Middle Ages with southern KKK-speak and cockney.. But, your intent is clear.

I love you
dontrump
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2623
Joined: Feb 20th, 2016, 10:39 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by dontrump »

yes intent is very clear here women feels people are trespassing on her land and she wants it to stop.
will be interesting to see what the new survey shows. hard to figure out till we get a secondary article as the only other one seems to prove her case especially with the cement walls on her property
As all fair and open minded people know this has been made into a bit of a race war issue but its not at all
I see zero evidence of this other than the odd extremely biased poster saying inflammatory things but that happens on most all threads these days
User avatar
GordonH
Сварливий старий мерзотник
Posts: 38864
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by GordonH »

Looking for some clarification:
What route are those who are fishing using to get to that spot.

Added: remember waterway to the high water mark is crown land.
I don't give a damn whether people/posters like me or dislike me, I'm not on earth to win any popularity contests.
dontrump
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2623
Joined: Feb 20th, 2016, 10:39 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by dontrump »

GordonH wrote:Looking for some clarification:
What route are those who are fishing using to get to that spot.

Added: remember waterway to the high water mark is crown land.


If ones owns what is called foreshore rights then your wrong she may very well own these as this property apparently has been in the family for something like a 100 years
User avatar
GordonH
Сварливий старий мерзотник
Posts: 38864
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by GordonH »

GordonH wrote:Looking for some clarification:
What route are those who are fishing using to get to that spot.

Added: remember waterway to the high water mark is crown land.

dontrump wrote: If ones owns what is called foreshore rights then your wrong she may very well own these as this property apparently has been in the family for something like a 100 years


Have a read:
http://pihl.ca/real-estate-law/sitting-dock-bay-not/

From the link wrote:Waterfront owners do not own the foreshore – this is land reserved to the Province by legislation.
I don't give a damn whether people/posters like me or dislike me, I'm not on earth to win any popularity contests.
dontrump
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2623
Joined: Feb 20th, 2016, 10:39 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by dontrump »

From the link wrote:
Waterfront owners do not own the foreshore – this is land reserved to the Province by legislation


I bought some foreshore rights on OK lake in 1996. its was shortly thereafter it was no longer allowed .seeing as the land has been in the family for something like 100 years I suggested perhaps they own those rights?
or as u can see hold a lease that gives them exclusive use
however I don't know exactly where these """fisherman:"" were actually crossing what she considers her property? Do you?
User avatar
SmokeOnTheWater
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10195
Joined: Aug 22nd, 2012, 7:13 pm

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by SmokeOnTheWater »

GordonH wrote:What route are those who are fishing using to get to that spot.

The very first post on this thread. Global News link. 2 videos to view.
Click on the first video. At the end of the video you can see them leaving the spot walking away using the river. Nowhere near the lady's property.
" Nature is not a place to visit. It is home. " ~ Gary Snyder
twobits
Guru
Posts: 8115
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by twobits »



That is only an opinion piece from a Law Corp. There are many examples of fee simple lots that extend far past high water mark. A perfect example is right here in Penticton. All of the Properties on South Beach Drive and the lakeshore lots on Sudbury Ave all have their property pins some thirty feet into Skaha Lake. That is why many of these homeowners have fences that actually go into the lake. The first home at the very west end of Skaha Beach has such a fence. If it were not legal. it would have long ago been required to be removed to allow public access between Skaha and Sudbury beach don't ya think?
It is rare but they do exist and this lady's property could be the same.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
User avatar
GordonH
Сварливий старий мерзотник
Posts: 38864
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by GordonH »

^^^ that link is Law Office, this link is from Province
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/indus ... te-moorage
I don't give a damn whether people/posters like me or dislike me, I'm not on earth to win any popularity contests.
dontrump
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2623
Joined: Feb 20th, 2016, 10:39 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by dontrump »

GordonH wrote:^^^ that link is Law Office, this link is from Province
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/indus ... te-moorage


as I have mentioned to you twice already and another poster has given you an example also. Some of us actually own the foreshore rights as at one time in certain cases you could purchase such. As I also already said not anymore
User avatar
GordonH
Сварливий старий мерзотник
Posts: 38864
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by GordonH »

GordonH wrote:^^^ that link is Law Office, this link is from Province
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/indus ... te-moorage

dontrump wrote:as I have mentioned to you twice already and another poster has given you an example also. Some of us actually own the foreshore rights as at one time in certain cases you could purchase such. As I also already said not anymore


Please post evidence of that exemption within Province of BC.
I don't give a damn whether people/posters like me or dislike me, I'm not on earth to win any popularity contests.
twobits
Guru
Posts: 8115
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by twobits »

GordonH wrote:^^^ that link is Law Office, this link is from Province
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/indus ... te-moorage


Gordo, instead of posting links, how bout you come up with an explanation as to why the property owners I mentioned in my previous post own and exercise their fee simple lot rights. Just like this OK Falls lady might be doing. I say "might" because I would like to see the outcome of a legal survey. I have no doubt however as to the legal status of foreshore rights of my previous example of property owners so until you can prove otherwise, you are just presenting a false presumption without consideration to exemptions or grandfathering.
And to be clear again, I am in favour of FN sustenance fisheries. That in itself is a topic for another thread as everyone knows that with the right contact, many of these fish can be purchased by anyone. I am however also in support of private property rights. I would also reiterate that the location of this historical Native fishery was not at the base of the current flood control dam where the fish conveniently get trapped. It just seems rather opportunistic and convenient to play the rights card to justify trespass. Oh sorry...potential and undetermined trespass.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
Posts: 8115
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by twobits »

GordonH wrote:Please post evidence of that exemption within Province of BC.


How's this for evidence Gord.

https://gis.penticton.ca/arcgis/home/we ... e2490272ce

Zoom in on South Beach Drive and Sudbury Ave. Since you are from Kelowna, I will help you out. They are directly east of where the channel exits into Skaha lake. From this aerial map with property lines overlayed, even you can clearly see the legal lot lines extend well into the lake and if you were local would know they are far past high water mark. You might want to put some humble in your pipe to smoke.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
LANDM
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 11639
Joined: Sep 18th, 2009, 11:58 am

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by LANDM »

Why all of the examination of unrelated possibilities? There is, apparently, a survey that shows a difference from what the landowner claims. It is now up to her to prove otherwise. That is how it works.

In the meantime, the prevailing survey would be considered accurate. Worrying about what could have happened in an entirely different situation is silly.
If we are looking at this specific situation, the most recent survey wins. Surveyors don't just randomly go out and stake a claim. It is possible to get different solutions, dependent on where they survey from but, in the end, it will be accurate.
You and 71 others Like this post
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: Access Dispute Owner Vs Band

Post by maryjane48 »

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/indus ... te-moorage


This is the real explanation . People can rent or lease out into the water but they do not own it .
Post Reply

Return to “South Okanagan”