Shoreline Protection: Done Right

I will not support this draft proceeding to first reading. Here's why: The process has moved without genuine community input, and a 30-metre rule applied uniformly ignores the reality that every property is different—a dock on a steep rocky bluff faces different challenges than one in soft sediment. I'm committed to redesigning this with real public engagement, scientific rigour, and respect for the practicalities of living on water-access-only properties.

I oppose blanket prescriptions that don't capture particular environmentally sensitive areas alongside the real needs of residents across our communities. Environmental solutions should be based on specific, current science, and community members should have access to it. Community response and my own assessment tell me the present draft doesn't do this, so a new draft with more meaningful public engagement and scientific rigour is necessary.

There is nuance here. I want to see a balance between protecting the biodiversity of our foreshore ecosystems and recognizing that waterfront owners use this area for practical, important purposes. I don't think this proposal was presented well to Gambier's communities, or that the survey was well designed or carried out. Many property owners feel unheard, even ambushed. That's a disconnect in engagement, and it needs fixing.

There are also questions to ask about how existing regulations are working: enforcement, the application process, and how accessible it is, including the cost. All of that is open for engagement and revision before anything moves forward.

I want to honour the work that went into this draft by staff, the Local Trust Committee and community volunteers on the Advisory Planning Committee, many of whom were paid little or nothing. But the feedback is clear: the communities of Gambier are largely not supportive of this moving forward as it stands. I want to know what matters to the people here so I can serve the overall consensus, and in this case that means not supporting it.

Absolutely. The challenge is HOW, not WHETHER. Good shoreline protection means fewer emergency stabilization works later, less erosion, fewer sea-walls. It's about doing it right—with science and community input, not top-down rules that ignore local knowledge.

These aren't opposites. Good design does both. People who own waterfront property often know their land better than any policy maker. When we listen to that knowledge and pair it with scientific understanding, we get better outcomes for both the shoreline and the community.

Restart the process with genuine engagement. Bring property owners, conservationists, scientists, and community members to the table—and listen. Build a shoreline protection approach that works for Gambier specifically, not a one-size-fits-all template.

Doing it right takes time, but it results in stronger community buy-in and better policy. A process rushed through without trust breeds conflict. A process built on listening builds lasting protection.

I agree that residents largely value and know how to steward the ecosystems they live in. I hear that all the time.

Islands Trust policies and guidelines exist so that reasonable, appropriate standards apply to everyone, including new development. The trick is making them fit the real conditions on each part of the island.

I've heard a lot of people say overreach, and I understand why. Too much regulation can undervalue residents' commitment to protecting the places they live. I won't support regulation that ignores the particular needs of property owners, or that rests on science that is lacking or ignores the diversity of ecosystems within an island.

To be clear, I will not support this draft proceeding to its first reading. I would call for a reassessment of its assumptions, how it engaged with communities and organizations, and where and how any changes to the existing DPA are justified.

At the same time, without the Islands Trust the islands would fall under much more generalized regional or provincial guidelines that don't take island living into account. The Islands Trust exists so that island voices, realities and needs are reflected in land governance. That's often why you don't see things on the islands, like mines or fish farms. As your Trustee, I'll fight to make sure that layer of governance serves that purpose.

The Islands Trust website has the draft document and background materials. I encourage you to read it, attend community meetings, and share your thoughts. Questions? Email me—I want to hear what matters to you.

Islands Trust website (opens in a new tab)