No Trespassing signs on CMHC lands and trails

One thing that gets me, is that CMHC, a tax funded entity, " bought" the land from other tax funded entities. They are playing with our money with our land but not letting us play on our land. I get that CMHC are managing that land for us and have a duty to see that the public owned land is protected from abuse and lawsuits if that's their concern. But we get ignored for years despite attempts to contact them for permission and all of a sudden out of the blue CHMC has signs put up. If they are worried about lawsuits, get better lawyers. Fight all frivolous suits. If you loose appeal as high as you need to go. Might cost a bunch at first but pretty soon the plaintiffs bar figures out that only really big and solid cases are worth taking on. That is what Surrey did a number of years ago. Probably mindless Vogon like bureaucrats not able to think outside their box.

…. it's becoming more normal to accommodate rather than totally kick out. I would suggest in that regard the CMHC is pretty out of step of what has become more the status quo in the region, in attempting to totally stop the use of the land in this manner.

Had to quote. This seems important.

[QUOTE=cerealkilla';2930113]Had to quote. This seems important.[/QUOTE]

It is. And how can they possibly police that? The sign should more to the effect of you ride here at your own risk. Riding is risky so don't blame us if you get hurt. Have fun.

point of order, Stonebridge developers are huge assets to WORCA and have created right of ways for pretty much all the trails through their property in addition to providing funding for further trail development in the area as they realize the value of the trails.

Fair enough. I'm just talking generally, and as an ignorant outsider to the potential of the Flank area and how it's now peppered by stupid (and seemingly empty) McMansions and a road to nowhere.

Or perhaps Vancouver already gets enough tourists otherwise so they don't care… and I guess anyone coming to this region specifically for mountain biking would probably go to Whistler (and squamish/pemberton) instead. I can't really picture someone staying at the Shangri-La for a week and driving to and from the North Shore with their dirty mountain bike everyday to ride our trails.

I know numerous people, even groups of riders who have. Well not the Shangri La but B[HTML_REMOVED]B's. As we all know the Shore has history and people want to ride it and Squamish/Whistler/Pemby. The days of people coming over from Europe etc and just riding the Park are over I think. Partly thanks to the super capable yet pedal-able bikes we're all riding.

Anyway that's enough of a hijack.

Vogon like bureaucrats .

Sweet……..

It is. And how can they possibly police that? The sign should more to the effect of you ride here at your own risk. Riding is risky so don't blame us if you get hurt. Have fun.

Asked some associates who happen to be lawyers and showed the pics of the signs. And according to them the signs are written based on Ontario Trespass Laws

Asked some associates who happen to be lawyers and showed the pics of the signs. And according to them the signs are written based on Ontario Trespass Laws

Makes sense…
There's been a big deal out east regarding private and public lands access (among others, recall the teenage girl who was clothesline'd with a wire when she was cutting through private land on a atv).

While it doesn't explain why the CMHC operated within a silo, it may explain some of the motivation for the signs.

Makes sense…
There's been a big deal out east regarding private and public lands access (among others, recall the teenage girl who was clothesline'd with a wire when she was cutting through private land on a atv).

Yeah, out here Crown land is minimal vs Private Land so the way it works out here is different.

While it doesn't explain why the CMHC operated within a silo, it may explain some of the motivation for the signs.

It is not surprising that they do. Hell dealing with a Federal agency for the last 12 months on a project. It is unbelievable how even with in it's own agency that so much is silo mentality.

Asked some associates who happen to be lawyers and showed the pics of the signs. And according to them the signs are written based on Ontario Trespass Laws

Makes sense as well. This all has probably more to do with Ontario pushing forward with Bill 100. The CMHC is probably operating in a national mentality based on a piece of legislation that has proven to be incredibly unpopular with private land holders in Ontario. The bruce trail crosses my dad's farm and for a stack of Montana's gift cards and a hand shake he let's the snowmobiling club cross his farm every winter. Now with Bill 100 a lot of farmers like my dad are threatening to close that access because the government is going to force them to sign easements that will give trail users 12 month access to their farm for eternity. To the farmers it sounds like they are taking your land away from them for $0. Not even a Montana's gift card. And if you know any farmers if they even get wind of the government trying to take their land the hackles go up. All and all bill 100 has been a communication night mare for the Ontario government and turned trail access into a huge debate back east.

http://blackburnnews.com/midwestern-ontario/2016/02/06/private-property-owners-concerned-over-bill-100/

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en[HTML_REMOVED]BillID=3338

Footnote: it makes sense because they passed the Ontario trails act June 1st and within a few weeks cmhc officials were inspecting mount Seymour.

so now the trails are so far dumbed down we cant ride them!

Asked some associates who happen to be lawyers and showed the pics of the signs. And according to them the signs are written based on Ontario Trespass Laws

Could be right, the capitalization of "Owner" on the sign suggests that the sign-writer believes that this is a defined term of some sort, and/or the text is cut/pasted out of a source document.

One thing that is confusing is why new trails have been built on CMHC land. I thought the builders and associations were working with the land owners. Is this not the case?

One thing that is confusing is why new trails have been built on CMHC land. I thought the builders and associations were working with the land owners. Is this not the case?

^^^
Wondering this too…not just regarding new trails, but any old trails too, agreement must have been there somehow for the the past 20 ish years.

CMHC is an Ontario based organization. It could be sued in British Columbia, or Ontario (or in Federal court for that matter).

The signs are NOT boiler-plate CMHC signs from Ontario. Remember those of us originally from Ontario….CMHC signs there are in English and French :-)

Uhmm…are you actually a lawyer?

And since you brought up Ontario, to bad you aren't in Ontario where you could get your way.,Eh? Pull the same thing here MTBers shout and yell the cave in. BC they actually organize and do shit.