Karl Darwin and Craig McFeely used to play in and around Tucker Bay when they were children. Decades before that, the bay was the hub of activity on Lasqueti Island, the site of the post office and government dock — the close-knit community’s school was also on Tucker Bay Road.
Darwin still believes Tucker Bay is the Island’s best deep port and important to the future of the 420 people who live there now and those who come in the future.
Thirty-eight acres of land at the end of the road near the waterfront were purchased in 2014 by a company called Tucker Bay Holdings Ltd. Eventually, signs went up asking people to stay away and boulders blocked access to the roadway that carried every Islander, every provision, in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
An unknown Lasquetian took matters into his/her own hands — the boulders were mysteriously moved. Now, the Lasqueti Ratepayers Association is taking a more aggressive, if less physical, approach to their fight for access to Tucker Bay — they have hired a lawyer.
The focus of the ratepayers’ efforts is not exclusively pointed at Tucker Bay Holdings. In fact, as Darwin explained, they are more upset with the provincial government’s Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (the vernacular is “Highways”), which the ratepayers say is contravening its own policies about road access.
The NEWS has a copy of a ministry memo from July of 2003 entitled: Policy on Closure of Rights of Way that provide Access to Water. The policy, authorized by the deputy minister, states: “Exisiting rights of way that provide public access to water are to be retained for public use.”
McFeely waves that memo with passion, despite battling a horrible cold.
“They (Highways) are in flagrant contradiction of their own policy,” said McFeely. “Aside from the legality of the thing, it’s like they just put on blinders.”
Darwin, 70, was ‘medivaced’ off Lasqueti when he was 15 from Tucker Bay, “my first flight in a plane.” While the ferry from French Creek arrives at False Bay, and has for decades, Darwin believes access to Tucker Bay remains important, and not just for its historic value.
“We want to maintain the public access here because this is the only other public road we have to water deep enough to put another dock in (aside from False Bay),” said Darwin.
Tucker Bay Road is like many other roadways on Lasqueti. It’s not paved, but it’s smooth and wide enough and has ditches and culverts on the sides. Darwin said the land beside it, the 38 acres now owned by Tucker Bay Holdings, also has a political connection. he said it was owned by the Brown family at one time, as in Rosemary Brown, an MLA from the Lower Mainland (1972 to 1986) and the first black Canadian woman to be elected to a provincial legislature.
Darwin said he believes Tucker Bay Road was surveyed in the 1970s, “but strangely enough (Highways) didn’t register the survey.” It’s a constant theme in the conversation with these men about this issue: a mistrust of the Ministry of Transportation.
“From Highways, there is no transparency at all — they have stonewalled us the whole way,” said Darwin. “My guess is they just don’t care. They are bureaucrats in a rarified atmosphere and they talk to each other and they really don’t want to be disturbed.”
The Lasqueti Ratepayers Association — Darwin and McFeely are both officers of that society — has hired a lawyer and aren’t about to let this issue go. The focus seems to be on Highways, but the ratepayers expect Tucker Bay Holdings may have to be part of any legal proceedings, too.
“Tucker Bay Holdings bought (the land) and they decided they were going to contest the public access,” said Darwin. “They just put up signs and put up a string of boulders (across the road).” Darwin said the boulders were removed by “persons unknown.”
In December of 2014, Darren Cichy of Tucker Bay Holdings had a 2,700-word message to residents posted on lasqueti.ca. The note makes reference to signs about guns that had upset residents and it also seemed to indicate Cichy was not opposed to some access along Tucker Bay Rod.
“We figured that if people read our signs posted along the road they would understand and respect the property had changed hands and was no longer to be what we viewed as basically a bit of a ‘free-for-all’ now that new owners were present,” said the note.
What seems to be in dispute is how long the public road goes into the property. Cichy suggested 800 metres, which means public access ends before the clearing where the old post office sits and where the government wharf used to be.
“Everything in our knowledge and research clearly indicates to us that the area beyond 0.80 km is not public property,” Cichy wrote. “We are exceptionally comfortable with our legal position in relation to this issue. As such, we will not tolerate such behaviour as has been suggested, for example occupying the area, bringing chainsaws and having fires or cleanups on our property, etc.”
Cichy continued: “We are not disputing this road or its distance, and Tucker Bay Holdings Ltd. has made no attempts to remove it from the public road inventory as people have suggested.”
This week, Cichy responded by email to questions from The NEWS.
“When we purchased this property at the end of Tucker Bay Rd. we received a full disclosure statement from the previous owners of the property stating that there was no public access on the property,” Cichy wrote.
“Shortly after purchasing the property with the understanding of it being clear title with no easements or public access through it or on it, we posted signs stating ‘private property no entry without permission’ a couple hundred yards past our lot line where we had assumed to the best of our understanding to be the approximate end of the road on our property.”
“Apparently the property had been left mostly vacant since the early 1990s and several locals had been trespassing, using the property fairly respectfully, but as somewhat of a park where they would hike, walk dogs, camp, launch boats, go swimming, have parties etc.,” Cichy continued. “The owners of Tucker Bay Holdings Ltd. have young families and children and we were under the impression that this would be a private spot for our children to play safely and enjoy.”
McFeely, who lives just around a rocky bend of shoreline from Tucker Bay, was asked what he would say to Cichy if he had a meeting with him without lawyers or politicians or reporters within earshot.
“I would say look, you can’t win, let’s settle it, or if you don’t want to settle, it will never be settled and you can’t have it anyway because this area will always be in contention.”
The issue might be heating up politically. In the Island’s January newsletter, The Isle and Times, both of Lasqueti’s Islands Trust representatives mentioned Tucker Bay in their reports. Susan Morrison said she asked for an Islands Trust executive committee meeting on Tucker Bay Road “due to the fact we have a letter of agreement with Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure that is not being adhered to.”
In his report in the same publication, Lasqueti’s other Islands Trust rep, Tim Peterson, said he met with MLA Michelle Stilwell in December to discuss Tucker Bay Road and Peterson said Stilwell’s office was “trying to get us a meeting with Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Todd Stone in February.”
For his part, Darwin didn’t sound too convinced the ministry will help the people of Lasqueti who want continued access to the water on Tucker Bay Road.
“One of the things Highways has told us from the start is they are going settle this in the public’s interest, but they’ve done everything but,” said Darwin.
The NEWS asked the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure for comment on the situation and/or a clarification of Tucker Bay Road’s status.
“Ministry staff understand that some Lasqueti Island residents are concerned about maintaining public access to the water through 365 metres of private property beyond the end of Tucker Bay Road,” said a ministry spokesperson through an email to The NEWS just before press time Wednesday. “At this time these conversations are ongoing, and Minister (Todd) Stone plans to meet with the community in February to discuss the matter further.”
