Photo: Gagandeep Ghuman
By Gagandeep Ghuman
Published: Sept. 14, 2013
A landowner is closing access to his Brackendale property until he can restore the natural habitat and find a way to relocate the existing trails, he says.
Tom Dowad purchased the 30 acres of land along Judd Beach last year from his father, Wilf Dowad.
The land, located behind Maple Crescent and Eagle Run Drive, is an oasis of tranquility.
Tom Dowad knows that, the reason he also wants to protect it.
Dowad has been posting No Tresspass signs on the property, and asking the public to respect the privacy of his newly acquired lands.
“Use of the area by walkers and cyclists has led to a significant damage to the riparian,” says a notice he has posted in the area.
“Restoration is required and trails need to be relocated to prevent further damage.”
Dowad said he walked down there on two consecutive Sundays and saw the spawning channel being defiled by dogs and kids running amok.
On one occasion, he saw a dog enter into the creek to nab a salmon while his owner looked on.
On another occasion, he saw a child throwing Salmon eggs out of the channel. [manual_related_posts]
“I’ve seen a high incidence of dogs and people in that channel when Salmon were present,” Dowad said.
“It pisses me off.”
A network of bike tracks laid out close to the spawning channels adds to his challenge.
“It’s what brings those kids here,” he said.
“The bridge on the spawning channels isn’t safe, and it will be removed.”
Dowad says he is also concerned about provincial and fisheries regulations, which demand a 30 metre setback from any waterway.
That is not the case on his property, where a bridge on the channel provides ready access from Maple Crescent to an inter-linking network of trails.
“The bridge on the spawning channels isn’t safe, and it will be removed,” he says.
Dowad said he is hoping, with the help of environmentalists and trail advocates, to restore the riparian and reroute the trails away from the spawning channels.
Until then, he wants the public to stay away.
He also envisions a trail pass system in the future, where users can become the monitors of trails and the spawning channels.
“Right now, we are just trying to stem the tide and get some solid support for restoration,” he said.
Allowing access on one’s property is a matter of public interest but also one of personal largesse.
Bob Fast, Merril and Ring, for instance, allow access on private property for recreational use.
Peter Legere in downtown Squamish is proud to have a Tresspassers Welcome sign on his property.
District of Squamish recently purchased a part of Rick Hunter’s property in Valleycliffe to make way for a much-needed trail.
SORCA’s Jeff Cooke said he understood Dowad’s concerns, but also expressed concern over other landowners falling suit.
Cooke said SORCA would be willing to share some ideas and work with Dowad on reorienting some trails.
Whatever Dowad’s intentions, barring people from his property will prove to be a difficult task, as he himself realises.
One of his No Tresspass signs has already been knocked out, while a look of disappointment quickly washes over the faces of those he confronts with the notice.
This Wednesday, he stopped a woman from entering his property on Maple Crescent.
He explained to her that he was restricting access to his property until he has sorted out some of the riparian and trail issues.
“I didn’t even know this was private property,” she said, before turning back.
Another man stopped by Dowad also seemed surprised and disappointed.
“There are thousands of people who are going to be pissed off, inlcuding me,” he said, walking away with his dog.
Michael Lonergan says
I can understand his concerns. Also, if it is privately owned land, what makes people think they can just trespass without the owners consent? If this is Mr. Dowad’s land, he has the right to bar people from trespassing.
Moe says
I too understand his concerns. However, I have been walking my dog there for years. The trails and beaches are very stable, the bike trails/jumps are also very stable, and present no danger to the fish habitat. I have crossed that bridge more times than I can count, it is as far from unsafe as can be. I have seen numerous families and bird watchers enjoying the area as well. The two instances he cites of people being careless in the spawning area are totally anomalous. I’ve never seen behaviour like that in all the time I’ve been down there, yet he sees it immediately? Seems ‘fishy.’ This property owner has an opportunity to make a lot of friends, but he seems to be opting for making sure all of his neighbors dislike him. Be a pain in your neighbors back side, and he’ll be guaranteed to be a pain in yours.
It’s his property and he can 100% do with it as he wishes. He can put up barbed wire fences and keep every last soul out for all eternity. But, he could be the hero of Brackendale instead of the grumpy old man that lives to yell at the kids to get off his lawn. The instances cited in the article of property owner allowing, even encouraging people to enjoy their land is surely something this gentleman should consider, and emulate.
So I guess my question is, what is his motivation? Is he just that grumpy curmudgeon, or is he up to something? Seems to be going way out of his way to protect a spawning channel that is actually not really in any danger and not terribly popular with the salmon.
Michael Lonergan says
Moe… He owns the land. It is his property to do with as he sees fit. If he allows people to walk their dogs on trails, Great! If he choose to NOT allow people on his privately owned land, that is his choice! Deal with it
Tom Dowad says
Moe
You are entitled to your opinion. Your first impression of me is pretty far off the mark though. I think you are assuming all people who put up “no trespassing” signs also conform to a certain personality type. You’ve misinterpreted my goal, which is to allow people to enjoy the place, but with a better design and proper management, as is fitting for sensitive habitat.
Tricia says
Good on you Mr. Dowad! I’m in full support of what you’re trying to do. I’m appalled that some people who come to enjoy Squamish nature are so oblivious (or ignorant) of the result of their actions. Thank you for protecting a piece of precious Squamsh.
Anonymous says
Plain and simple, it’s his own private property to do with what he likes within district confines and none of anyone’s business. So suck it up and move on to other trails.
David Lassmann says
Something odd about the details in this story, I thought Wilf passed away some years ago. Anyhow I am in total agreement with Tim. Sadly, many people are quite inconsiderate and irresponsible when they make use of other people’s property. We often see dogs running loose in sensitive habitat in the Squamish Estuary, around the golf course, and elsewhere. Often people are unaware that the land they are using is actually private property. For example, how many people are aware that much of the land between the Squamish River and Eagle Run Drive is Indian Reservation land? Yet we use this land as though it were public land.
Tom Dowad says
David
Thanks for your support.
About 1/2 of the Judd Beach area is, to my knowledge, Squamish Nation land.
Jeff Cooke says
I met with Mr. Dowad to discuss the situation on behalf of SORCA last week. Although these bike trails are not built by SORCA, we do act as advocates for all mountain bikers in our community. Tom asked that we discuss the situation and accurately understand what he is trying to do. After meeting with Tom, my impression is that he is being very reasonable and wants to find a way to allow access to hikers and bikers while protecting the salmon bearing streams. Many of the trails are right on the streams banks, which is not best practices for trail building. In addition, there is the liability issue of owning a piece of land with advanced level bike jumps on it. I’d be concerned if that was on my property. We identified some ideas that will meet his needs and allow access and we agreed to work co-operatively to find a solution that works. I don’t think it is fair to paint Tom with a ‘grumpy curmudgeon’ paintbrush or with ulterior motives. To me it seems he is simply a guy who wants to preserve a beautiful piece of land.
Jeff Cooke, President, SORCA
Tom Dowad says
Gagan has done a good job of summarizing my goal in a short article.
I don’t blame kids for being kids. I feel though that this area is too important ecologically to not take steps to manage it properly.
If you want to let me know your thoughts, or discuss how to improve the situation, I can be contacted at fishfirst@live.com.
Dave says
If he owns the property, it is his to do with it what he wants. There are liability issues which need not be explained further. It matters not what paths, trails etc. have been established in the past. They are not the property of anyone but him.
Let not any precedent prevail in this regard…leave him alone!
Darren Dawson says
I have known Tom for 25 years and I trust his judgement on any issues…
heather gee says
Appalling that the public is so disrespectful and arrogant as to destroy Tom Dowad,s signs on his own property.
I understand his concern. On recent walks along the Mamquam, River, I’ve picked up so much garbage, fishing hooks and fishing lines that I could open a store supplying fishermen…. Can educated people really be that ignorant about the consequences of their actions? They have strange ways of showing their pride of this community’s natural environment.
Tom Dowad, please take a closer look around at other areas in Squamish and you will notice how the community treats public places. Take good care of your land that you own.
Sharon says
As aproperty owner myself I pay my taxes and a considerable amount of insurance to protect myself and my land. I sympathize deeply with Mr. Dowads invasion of trespassers to HIS LAND!!!! My land is a mere ten acres compared to his thirty and
I had to erect thousands of dollars worth of chain link fencing along with NO TRESSPASSING Signage through- out! My results were only further defecation to
My property! These (so called) LOVERS OF NATURE cut up my chain link fence
In a number of places and burned my signs on my property! In order to properly take care of my property I’d have to pay people in the same way the Cities employ
Their park staff! Simply put, it is impossible for owners such as Mr. Dowad and myself to properly care for our lands when SELF-SERVING people insist they have
A right to be on someone else’s land and blatantly do whatever theyfeel like to the property! After confronting a woman leaving my property having just dumped a wheelbarrow full of dog poop on my property I learned that I was not welcome on her yard as she slammed her gate telling me not to come in to her yard! She laughed when I asked her to remove her dogs poop! I left as she was a disturbing class of a human being!!! Like Mr.Dowad I can appreciate the children wanting to play in and discover nature, however, the children’s parents have a responsibility to teach their children “Right from Wrong” , “What’s yours is yours and what’s mine is mine” and to respect other peoples property!!! My dilemma has been ongoing for decades! Children have been assaulted by other trespassers! There have been
countless bonfires where in the fire department and police are called!!! My thoughts are with you!!! If I can be of any assistance to you you may reach me at the above e-mail address. Good luck to you sir!!!!!!
Eric Andersen says
It is ironic that another current Reporter story (“Kingswood Applies for Scott Crescent Rezoning; Public Meeting on Sept. 25”) is illustrated with a picture of a proposed pedestrian bridge and trail leading directly onto private property — a proposal without property owner consultation.
Dave from Grand Forks says
You can count on a small percentage of folks to attack you and call you down when you try to do the right thing. Looks to me like Tom “Dusty” Dowad is doing the right thing. Just my vote. Still, if any of you know him, “curmudgeon” does kinda fit…(grin)…
Ryan Johnson says
Best that can be done is putting up quality fences with a reasonable setback, along the areas where trails can gain people & especially dogs access to the water, and rerouting some of the most offending trails. This can and I expect will be done with SORCA, the Trails Society, and Fish Habitat Groups.
I’m wondering how it is that this 30 acre piece of land is owned privately, it seems to be 100% riparian and flood risk, and is on the other side of a dike that is a public easement.
Tom Dowad says
Ryan
Yes I agree on your points of management. It won’t be perfect in any case, but it can be improved immensely from the current unmanaged state.
These land titles are original crown grants from 1891, and are defined by a description as opposed to a plan.
Jude Goodwin says
If the object is to keep the salmon streams protected, it might be more constructive to have some signs made up cautioning people, and educating them, about the delicate nature of the area. I’m sure local not-for-profit groups (Squamish Streamkeepers for example) would be a big help in this regard.
I would also like to see a map, outlining where Mr. Dowad’s land extends. I was down on the trails today, as I am every day and have been for 11 years, and I saw no markings or signs.
It’s so important for people, and children, to get out of their buildings and parks and into more natural environments – if this can be accomplished without confrontation but with respect and joy – that would be an awesome thing.
Tom Dowad says
Jude
The approximate boundaries can be seen on the District’s mapping system (available online). The land has not been surveyed, so these boundaries are approximate.
I agree with your ideas. The funny thing is with being a nature lover (as I am) is that our presence in nature tends to destroy it. Funny how that works. The natural system can absorb a certain amount of human activity, but at some point gets overwhelmed by it. I think the use of the area has grown to the point that proper environmental management is now in order. That’s what’s happening here. I want everyone to be able to enjoy the place, but it needs to be done in a fashion that shows respect to the very thing we are all enjoying.
Tom Dowad says
All of these ideas are appreciated. Please send you ideas to fishfirst@live.com.
I hope to hold a public forum soon.
Lisa says
I don’t see how closing trails that have been used for years – safely, respectfully, and in respect of the land & fish – will be of any benefit to anyone except the current landowners pocketbook. If he feels so dramatically about the fish how about working with Fisheries Canada, conservation officers, stream-keepers, SORCA, locals, and anyone else who wants to ensure the fish and humans both have a safe, clean, protected, and still enjoyable land to share. Yes, it is private land. Yes, he can choose to bar people from the land. Yes, people with dogs and kids and those fishing during salmon runs could be more respectful however putting up two tiny signs saying ‘no trespassing’ doesn’t bespeak concern for the salmon, the land or safety…it bespeaks someone wanting money or other land in a trade for land that cannot be developed. Interesting that his dad never seemed to have shared these concerns he has in the years in which he owned it…
Tom Dowad says
Lisa
You are entitled to your opinion.
I am in the process of getting organized with the groups you mention, to create a management plan for the area.
Dave says
Lisa.
Mr. Dowad doesn’t have to justify to anyone about any way he wants to use his land within the Bylaws of this town. The Fish etc. issue is irrelevant. If people have parked on an empty lot for years, does this mean that when that land is developed and a house is built on it, anyone can park in the garage or carport?
Oh too, do children have to mirror their parents lifestyles? All too often they behave in an opposite manner.
The only solution to this kind of situation is to ensure that bylaws are changed regarding the development of riparian land in the future. In this light I do personally think that the river dike should not be private property, but that is “water under the bridge”…so live with it.
Debi says
Unbelievable how many people think that they have rights to private property, just because the owners have been benevolent in the past letting them use it. People should be grateful for the use that they have had of the property to date.
Private citizens don’t have an obligation to the public -the government does. If this is a trail of local interest, the municipality or regional district should offer to purchase or lease and maintain a portion of it from Mr. Dowad. A bigger issue that I would be concerned about if I were Mr. Dowad is liability if someone hurts themselves on his property. Even if he were shielded from liability thru provincial recreational trails legislation, he would have to spend about $50,000 to personally defend himself first before that determination is made by a Court. You are obviously a very community minded kind individual Mr. Dowad, however, I’d be putting up a fence and keeping people out.
If the public want to use the property, they should be directed to the local governments, which, if they deem it a high enough priority in the community, should be seeking solutions and presenting them to you. Not the other way around.