10/01/2026
***CALL TO ACTION***
We need your help! Reach out to your MLA and all candidates, submit comments, make your voice heard! We need to make this an election issue.
Sitkum Alpine FSR is now in public consultation for deactivation, just like Rady was.
About Sitkum: this is an old road (at least 80 years) that is within 20 minutes of Nelson on the North Shore. The road has several residences in the bottom 1km, and several bike trails in the bottom 3km (as well as much further up a spur road). The road switchbacks up to 6km, rapidly rising in elevation then carrying on up the drainage all the way to a historic mine site in the alpine.
Recent history: M*F removed a bridge and pulled a section of the road approx. 10 years ago. There was no consultation. Recreation lost access to the alpine. The Nelson Sno Goers rallied and helped fund a recreational bridge higher up the creek. The bridge was damaged in subsequent years and then a mineral right holder built a better bridge in the same location (to access their claim). That bridge is still in place and still in use today.
Following the most recent fire on the ridge above the road, M*F, under the guise of slope stability, deactivated a spur road (Upper Sitkum, aka Burn and Beyond) on a rapid decision, without geotechnical review and without public consultation. They removed access for any user that couldn’t walk, bike or ride a motorcycle. Users built a single track trail to bypass the deactivations. The deactivation (much like the original Rady prescription) appears to be designed to limit access, not to mitigate landslide concerns.
Recreation: the area is frequented by mountain bikes, dirt bikes, dual sport bikes, atvs, 4x4s, snowmobiles, skiers, and especially hunters. I personally saw over 20 people during a short ride in the area Sunday.
Liability can’t be a factor, there is none (Occupiers Liability Act).
Maintenance costs can’t be a factor, they haven’t spent anything on the road in decades.
They claim our area is ‘over roaded”, yet this is a short road.
Forestry plans to deactivate above 3km. There is no material difference in the road condition above vs below 3km.
I’d like you to consider the following questions:
Why is this road being targeted for deactivation?
Why is 3km significant?
What policy motivates this decision?
Contacts:
FOR.selkirkdistrictoffice [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
A great article to read about this:
https://backcountry.cx/editorials/sitkum-creek-fsr/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAUrdRZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBwZG9mBWZkaWQWUPdjdUl6f-fkof21lhNOX8erHI3euXNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR6GhwOyiY8RsNK_DO_VHK5YAFdusHV3qd_ZKykXIVkRF5SIL0F9Z5xMmCDIQA_aem_N8BfYreIOXOoSQqZIXTxOQ
