The EPAPOWL (Enhanced Public Access to Privately Owned Wild Lands) was written by the University of Victoria Law clinic in 2016 to inform the public and landowners about this access problem. In this document section 2.3, pages 8 though 11 deal with the landowners concerns around public access to the land. These 4 pages clearly demonstrate that there is not enough concern to warrant locking the public out of recreating on these vast natural lands. Here are excerpts from these 4 pages:
< LIABILITY
page 8: “In 1998, the BC legislature amended the Occupiers Liability Act (“OLA”).”
“Under the amendments, s.3 of the OLA now establishes that persons who trespass or enter for the purpose of a recreational activity onto certain types of lands are generally deemed to have willingly assumed all risks.”
< FIRE SUPPRESSION
page 10: “However as will be shown later, there are ways of dealing with this concern, short of cutting off all public access.”
The fire problem isn’t near what the landowners claim it to be. “. . . many instances of public exclusion occur outside these windows (the published fire season). These statistics indicate that actual fire risk from public users of private land may be less than perceived. In any case, there are ways of managing fire risk to reduce landowner concerns, as discussed below.”
< VANDALISM
page 10: “As we will see, effective measures can be taken to deter potential vandalism. It should also be noted that we have not seen evidence that vandalism is more likely than in the past when landowners allowed much freer access.”
< OTHER CONCERNS
page 11: “These concerns can be assessed and managed, as you will see below. Similar concerns have not stopped other jurisdictions from ensuring public access to wild private lands.”
- garbage dumping
- theft
- etc.