Defending Liveaboard Rights in British Columbia: Salt Spring Island

The Clean and Safe Harbours Initiative (CASHI) is pressuring Salt Spring Island’s officials and the Islands Trust to impose restrictions on at-anchor liveaboard boaters in the waters surrounding the island. Armed with a slide deck rich with polling data responding to leading questions that imply some Salt Spring residents are rather heartless, are displeased that harbours attract people such infrastructure attracts, and generally worried seeing the universal ills of 21st century BC: that some people live in poverty, some people are unwell, some people seem to be in crisis, some people are rude, and some people might even be downright scary.

And this NIMBY campaign has decided the problem is not a shortage of affordable housing throughout BC, or the toxicity of the drug supply, or inadequate boating and waste management infrastructure, or that times have changed and values have changed along with them.

No, according to CASHI the problem is boaters, and specifically households living on boats at anchor. And they are angry and they want Big Daddy the State to do something about it.

In other words, they want households like mine “dealt with”. CASHI blames fear, unsightliness, pollution, and disorder on boaters and is trying to justify Salt Spring Island adding new measures to make it even harder for liveaboards to access safe harbour in the Gulf Islands and the Salish Sea than it already is by disuading liveaboard boaters and summer time cruisers from visiting Ganges, Fulford, or any other harbours around the Gulf Islands.

It’s not yet clear to me if there is more to their advocacy than yet another NIMBY attempt to exclude a longstanding maritime community, but I fail to find one. Yes, they hide behind claims they want to protect the environment or worry about safety, but from what I can see they are mounting a single-minded campaign to protect their bastion from the rest of Canada accidentally using it in a way they, well, Do. Not. Agree. With.

So, let’s take a look at what’s actually happening here shall we?

Liveaboards Are Not the Problem

Liveaboard households benefit from little to no municipal or provincial funding for the taxes that we pay into BC’s economy. Throughout BC’s coastal towns, the same story is playing out: young workers are struggling to establish households because they are being financially displaced by wealthy people taking up all the real estate. This is happening from Pender Harbour to Bowen Island to Salt Spring Island and liveaboard boaters could offer releaf to this if Salt Spring Island was welcoming to alternative forms of housing – including liveaboard households like mine.

Instead of blaming boaters for problems such as pollution and waste which most likely stem more from land-based overdevelopment and land-based boat owers abandoning their boats to the ocean, CASHI should look at the value of nurturing healthy and thriving on-water communities.

I have already written about how liveaboards could help relieve the housing crisis if better supported by the province and municipalities.

Liveaboards, if better supported on Salt Spring Island, could contribute significantly to the year-round economy in multiple ways:

1. Expanding Local Consumer Base

• Increased Spending: Liveaboards purchase groceries, fuel, marine supplies, and other essentials locally, supporting businesses that operate year-round.
• Dining & Retail: Many liveaboards would frequent local restaurants, cafés, and stores if they had better access to docks and services.

2. Strengthening Marine & Tourism Sectors

• Marina Revenue: Encouraging moorage options, dinghy docks, and access to marina services could generate consistent income for the local marine sector.
• Marine Trades & Repair: Liveaboards require boat maintenance, creating demand for skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, and sailmakers.
• Eco-Tourism & Charter Services: Some liveaboards offer charters, guiding services, and local eco-tourism experiences that attract visitors.

3. Workforce & Housing Solutions

• Filling Labour Gaps: Liveaboards can provide a stable workforce for Salt Spring’s businesses, particularly in industries struggling to find year-round employees (e.g., hospitality, retail, and trades).
• Affordable Housing Alternative: Given the island’s housing crisis, recognizing liveaboards as a viable residential community could alleviate pressure on land-based housing.

4. Environmental Stewardship & Sustainability

• Guardianship of the Waterways: Many liveaboards act as caretakers of the marine environment, reporting pollution, illegal dumping, or anchor-dragging hazards.
• Sustainable Living Practices: With the right infrastructure (pump-out stations, composting options), liveaboards can showcase sustainable, off-grid living solutions.

5. Diversifying Community & Cultural Contributions

• Artists & Entrepreneurs: Many liveaboards are creatives, craftspeople, or digital entrepreneurs who enrich the area’s cultural and artistic landscape.
• Volunteer & Community Engagement: With better integration, liveaboards could contribute to local events, emergency response efforts, and community programs.

By improving liveaboard infrastructure (legal anchorage areas, access to moorage, waste management solutions), Salt Spring could harness their economic potential while fostering a thriving, year-round community.

Rather than blaming liveaboards, advocacy should focus on real solutions: better waste facilities, accessible pump-out solutions that meet the needs of all boaters, mooring fields, shelter from winter storms.

Salt Spring Island’s Governance & Jurisdiction

Salt Spring Island lacks a municipal government and is overseen by:

• Federal Government (Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, RCMP) – Regulates navigation and marine safety.
• Provincial Government (BC Ministries, Conservation Officers, Island Health) – Oversees environmental protection and public health.
• Capital Regional District (CRD) – Manages waste services and building permits.
• Islands Trust – Regulates land use but has no authority over navigable waters.

Anchoring is federally protected, and liveaboards contribute to the community through local commerce and taxation.

CASHI’s Advocacy & Legal Context

CASHI seeks new bylaws restricting liveaboards, despite federal protections for anchoring under the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 and the Constitution Act of 1867.

• Salt Spring Island Trust Bylaw 355 bans liveaboards in local waters, except for commercial fishing and security vessels.
• However, municipalities cannot regulate anchoring without federal approval through a Designated Anchorage Area (DAA) or Vessel Operation Restriction Regulation (VORR)—both of which must serve boaters’ interests, not exclusionary policies.
• Efforts to ban liveaboards are illegal and harm local communities and businesses by reducing visitor access.
• No community regulation is legitimate if it ignores that community’s needs.

Instead of displacing boaters, Salt Spring should invest in moorings, waste disposal, and proper marine services.

Boaters’ Legal Rights & Federal Protections

✔ The right to anchor is federally protected and cannot be arbitrarily restricted at the municipal level.
✔ CASHI’s much-repeated assertion that “dwelling on vessels is illegal” is false—Whereas private marinas have some leeway in deciding what services they offer, discriminating against a group as a class is prohibited. Under BC’s and Canada’s human rights laws, either nobody can sleep at a dock or anyone can sleep at a dock. If marinas accept transient overnight guest then they MUST by law accept liveaboards.
✔ Liveaboard households contribute to local economies, pay taxes, and support businesses.
✔ If Salt Spring bans liveaboards from docks, they will live at anchor as is their legal right.

Municipalities should focus on better services, not exclusion.

Addressing Environmental & Safety Concerns

CASHI frames boaters as a problem while ignoring systemic failures in waste management and marine infrastructure.

🔹 Where are Salt Spring’s pump-out stations, mooring fields, and waste disposal sites?
🔹 Why aren’t local authorities investing in marine services instead of blaming liveaboards?
🔹 Why focus on restricting boaters when land-based pollution is a larger issue?

Instead of punitive measures, an equitable solution might include:

✔ Investing in marine waste management infrastructure.
✔ Enforcing existing laws against pollution instead of targeting all boaters.
✔ Ensuring fair access to moorings for all vessels, not just property owners.

A Call for Fair & Inclusive Policies

🔹 Are CASHI’s concerns about harbour management genuine, or are they really just exclusionary?

🔹 Should Salt Spring Island be investing in improving marine infrastructure for on-water communities?

🔹 Should Salt Spring Island cultivating communties instead of restricting boaters?

🔹 If the concern is cleanliness, why are liveaboards being blamed when the solutions to pollution are education, infrastructure, and harm reduction? Land dwellers falsely blaming boaters for marine pollution is not a new narrative in BC. Vancouver endlessly claims boaters poop in the water when in fact it is the city and the geese that overwhelmingly pollute Vancouver waters.

Liveaboard boaters are part of the community—not outsiders. They contribute to local businesses, pay taxes, and participate in the economy.

Any policy affecting liveaboards must include consultation with the community and align with federal law.

✔ The solution is infrastructure, not exclusion.
✔ Liveaboards have every right to be here.
✔ Governments must stop ignoring and restricting boaters while refusing to provide necessary services.

The fight for fair anchoring policies is not just about Salt Spring Island. This affects every liveaboard in BC. It’s time for governments to stop discriminating against those who choose to live on the water, and it’s time citizens throughout BC stand up to those whose advocacy is designed to divide us.

Aren’t we stronger and better together?