Canada’s Crown lands — including parks, forests, public spaces, and land covered by water — are essential to our economy and our collective way of life. More than 95% of British Columbia is Crown land and people find real meaning in these places through recreation, business, and cultural connection.
“All Crown land is owned by the Province of British Columbia.”
British Columbia Land Use Policy
Responsible management of public land is a core government responsibility—not a privilege or special favour. Access to Crown land is essential for outdoor enthusiasts, small businesses, and major industries, including tourism, forestry, mining, energy, agriculture, and food production.
These sectors are key drivers of economic development in British Columbia. Without reliable access to public land, both the provincial economy and recreational opportunities for individuals and communities will be at risk.
What Activities Can You Do on Crown Land?
British Columbia’s Crown land system is built on a foundation of public access. Government policy affirms that individuals have the right to use public land for a wide range of non-commercial and recreational purposes without needing to ask for permission, pay a fee, or provide notice. These rights are foundational to outdoor recreation, cultural practices, and everyday life in B.C.
The British Columbia Land Use Policy states, “Any person may use Crown land (including aquatic Crown land) for transitory activities” with an expansive list that includes:
- hiking,
- rock climbing,
- boating,
- water skiing,
- swimming,
- snow skiing,
- noncommercial filming/photography (location scouting is acceptable),
- bird watching,
- horseback riding,
- caving,
- snowmobiling,
- dirt biking,
- biking,
- use of all-terrain vehicles,
- landing of aircraft,
- and other similar activities.
Under separate regulations and conditions, Crown land can also be used for:
- hunting,
- fishing,
- fossil collecting,
- camping,
- bee keeping,
- investigative activities,
- organized events,
- and more.
Many informal activities—like foraging, rock collecting, and panning gold—aren’t specifically listed in regulations, but Crown land and private land (with the owner’s permission) are currently the only places in B.C. where it is legal to forage mushrooms and wild plants.
How Can You Access Public Land?
Although more than 95% of B.C. is Crown land, less than 55% is reasonably accessible. That number is shrinking due to road deactivations, seasonal closures, politically driven restrictions, legislative and policy uncertainty, and shifting government priorities. In many cases, Forest Service Roads — the primary gateways to recreation sites, hunting and fishing areas, and rural communities — are being decommissioned or left impassable. Meanwhile, new restrictions are being introduced without clear criteria, timelines, or public consultation.
Access isn’t just about what’s on a map — it’s about whether people can actually get there.
If a trailhead is blocked by a deactivated road, or if public use is suspended without notice, the land may be “public” in name only.
What’s at Stake
Across British Columbia, restrictions on both authorized and low-impact activities on Crown land are increasing. Advocacy groups and industry leaders are raising the alarm about growing threats to public land use and access from numerous government ministries, particularly through secretive agreements and the delegation of provincial authority. These undisclosed agreements grant “exclusive decision-making powers” over Crown land, reducing public oversight and transparency.
At the heart of the issue is a lack of openness. The Government of BC is now negotiating the future of land use behind closed doors, eroding public trust in the process. This approach creates confusion, uncertainty, and inequality in how public lands are managed and how British Columbians are informed.
The consequences on people’s rights and privileges, habitat protection, conservation, waterfront access, and more—are widespread and significant.
Visit our News and Media where we cover legal petitions, constitutional challenges, and media reports concerning the infringement on people’s rights and privilege of access to crown land, as well as potential impacts on private property rights.
These closures are part of a broader pattern of unilateral actions that go beyond policy changes or temporary measures — they are increasingly imposed without a clear legal basis. In some cases, they directly conflict with existing provincial or federal jurisdiction, amounting to unlawful restrictions on public land use.
Public Land Conflicts
PLUS tracks and responds to actions that unlawfully restrict public access to British Columbia’s Crown lands and resources. These incidents often involve unilateral closures, moratoriums, or consent requirements imposed outside of proven legal authority. They create uncertainty, undermine lawful access, and can put public safety at risk. This section provides documented examples of such incidents, with supporting evidence, jurisdictional analysis, and updates on PLUS’s response.
Joffre Lakes Park Closure
One of the most prominent examples is the extended closure of Joffre Lakes, a beloved provincial park. Initially closed for 15 days in 2023, the seasonal shutdown was lengthened to 100 days by 2025. The Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship publicly opposes the closure but enforces it regardless, raising serious questions about provincial control and accountability over public parks.
Botanical Beach Closure
The Province recently restricted non-Indigenous visitors from Botanical Beach Provincial Park on Vancouver Island. Following the precedent set by Joffre Lakes, this signals a worrying trend toward longer and more widespread public access closures without clear legal justification.
Aviation Restrictions and Airspace Interference
Indigenous groups in some regions have issued “consent” demands and safety warnings restricting flights over their asserted territories, despite federal authority over Canadian airspace under the Aeronautics Act. Such unilateral attempts to control airspace create legal conflicts and operational safety risks for aviation operators.
Haida Gwaii Title Agreement
The April 2023 Haida Agreement recognizes Aboriginal title over Haida Gwaii’s million-hectare archipelago. Approved via a referendum open only to Haida Nation voters — excluding half of the residents — it imposes new restrictions affecting private property rights and limits future provincial government authority. Premier David Eby has indicated intent to replicate similar agreements province-wide, raising concerns about democratic representation and public interest.
shíshálh Foundation Agreement
Covering 1.2 million acres on B.C.’s Sunshine Coast, this agreement grants the shíshálh Nation significant decision-making powers over Crown land use. All Land Act applications require shared or exclusive consent from shíshálh, effectively giving them veto power even over projects in the broader public interest. The province has acknowledged potential moves toward exclusive decision-making authority for the shíshálh, which would sideline provincial governance entirely.
Tahltan Joint Land Use Planning
In 2025, the province announced a land use planning partnership with five Indigenous groups covering an area larger than England in northwest B.C. While promoted as consent-based, this grants Indigenous groups decision-making authority over a vast and economically vital region impacting millions of British Columbians who have no democratic representation in the process.
Teẑtan Biny Gagaghut’i Agreement
A recent agreement requires the Tŝilhqot’in Nation’s consent for any mine in the Teẑtan Area subject to environmental assessment. Much of this 740,000-acre area lies outside the Tŝilhqot’in’s Supreme Court–recognized title lands, remaining public Crown land. This arrangement effectively grants a veto to a body that non-Indigenous residents cannot vote for, undermining provincial responsibilities.
Squamish Nation Agreement
Building on a 2007 deal, this agreement imposes Squamish Nation control over 33 new cultural sites—including parts of Gambier Island, Cat Lake Recreation Site, and Whistler Olympic Park. Forestry and development are effectively banned in these areas unless the Nation approves them.
It also designates six special cultural sites and large “Outstanding” areas like Cheakamus Lake to be managed primarily for the Nation’s cultural and spiritual uses, sidelining broader public interests.
This means a huge swath of public land, including popular recreation sites, is now under the exclusive control of an unelected Indigenous body. The government released this 106-page agreement quietly, without public consultation, marking another step in the provincial government’s ongoing abdication of authority over public lands. Many more high-value sites remain on the table for similar deals.
Transparency and Reconciliation
Public Land Use Society fully supports reconciliation with First Nations and respects Indigenous rights. We recognize the importance of upholding rights and title through the BC Treaty Commission and acknowledge that British Columbia’s Land Use Policy states, “Nothing in this policy is intended to infringe on aboriginal rights, treaty rights or aboriginal title.
However, when “exclusive decision-making agreements” are negotiated behind closed doors, the process lacks fairness and transparency—not only for other First Nations but also for all British Columbians. Such agreements exclude public input and collaboration, failing to consider the broader needs of the province.
The Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed aboriginal groups do not have a veto over asserted rights and title. However, the implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) and the alignment of key policies with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) Seem to conflict with Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
Restrictive policies implemented in secrecy, without public consultation or awareness, fail to fulfill the Government of B.C.’s duty of administrative fairness. This kind of policy development not only threatens individual and business access to public lands but also jeopardizes the economic future of entire communities that rely on these resources, as well as the financial stability of the province.
Without fair, balanced, and transparent decision-making processes, industries that support thousands of jobs face uncertainty, impacting the livelihoods of people and local economies across the province.