The District of North Vancouver (DNV) will amend its regulatory bylaw to increase the maximum fine in a court prosecution of its bylaw to $50,000. As of now, the limit is $10,000 for prosecutions that happen in provincial court for violation of a DNV bylaw.
For a very long time, the maximum fine for a regulatory bylaw infraction under an Offence Act prosecution had been $10,000. However, in March of 2020, a legislative change raised the maximum fine for a regulatory bylaw infraction under an Offence Act prosecution to $50,000.
All DNV regulatory bylaws that make reference to a maximum fine of $10,000 will need to be changed to take advantage of this increased maximum fine amount, says a staff report to Council. If DNV doesn’t change its bylaw, the judges will be constrained to impose a fine of $10,000.
“In many enforcement scenarios, such as tree protection or other environmental matters, the District likely will want the possibility for a significant fine in egregious circumstances,” the report notes. The amendments will set the maximum fine at the highest amount permitted to allow a judge maximum latitude. The bylaw also sets a minimum fine of $1,000.
DNV will amend 35 regulatory bylaws with new wording that reflects the new $50,000 fine. These bylaws range from blasting, construction noise, fireworks and firearms to graffiti, rodent control and tree protection.
“Amending the bylaws as recommended will raise the maximum fine to the highest limit to allow a judge greater discretion when imposing a fine, particularly in egregious circumstances,” the staff recommends to Council in this report.
This is disgusting!
Once again Gov at all levels is exerting it’s ability to force people to do as “it” wants, but not take into account the freedom to choose how to live. (Think Covid vaccine if you want another example)
This raising of a potential fine is clearly directed at people cutting down trees. Trees that are on a person’s personal property! (if not on their personal property, they should get permission) There are millions of trees in our City and up the sides of our mountains. If someone wants to cut a tree on their own property, they should be able to do so without the heavy-hand of Gov getting involved.
Personally, I like to have sun in my backyard, but if I’m not able to cut the trees in the yard, this impedes my enjoyment of the property and my freedom to live in a manner of my personal choice!
NV City is massively expanding it’s “canopy” of trees. Great, more dreary darkness when we mainly have cloud-cover and rain. These “measures” in the name of minimizing greenhouse gasses are ridiculous!
I say if a person wants to cut a tree in their own property, they should be able to so. (just like I’m about to do – but I’m not going to say where – we must not let Gov take away more freedom from us)
But remember, it’s perfectly okay to clear cut an entire forest and not leave any old growth as long as you are a large, powerful corporation.
Agree/disagree with you Tony. On the issue of cutting down trees, DNV should first look at its own record before pointing regulatory fingers at DNV residents. My guess is that an inventory check would reveal dozens (hundreds?) of overgrown, dead and dying trees on District land allowances, especially in areas with no sidewalks. When residents ask to have them pruned or removed, the answer is often that the resident is free to get a permit to take down a nuisance tree, but must then replace them, all at the resident’s own cost.
Then, when it comes to a resident like yourself preferring to remove a tree to get more sunshine, each case must be judged on its own merit. In the City, accelerated by Councils from Mussatto onwards, far too much natural habitat has been removed to make way for glass and concrete towers, only to be “replaced” with a meagre strip of lawn and excuses for flower-beds that often get trodden out of existence.
You and many others may not be interested in watching what’s left of our essential wildlife – twohees, robins, crows, black-capped and other chickadees, etc. – but, for people like myself they are pretty much all that’s left of what used to make North Vancouver the wonderful community in harmony with nature that it oncewas.
What’s desperately needed here of course is a unified North Vancouver that is home to people determined to care for it…but then, many (most?) of those people have already been forced off the North Shore to go live in the Fraser Valley and beyond.
I appreciate your point of view and I grew up and have lived in NV pretty much all my life. So specifically, I know what it’s like to have bears, skunks, rabbits, raccoons, deer and other wildlife in my yard and/or walking down my street. I LOVE that about NV.
However, there are tons of trees all around the City/District and up our mountains. There are plenty of wild parks and enough trees for the critters to live in. This is partially about the bigger picture called freedom of choice or freedom of domain.
I appreciate nature as much as most, but also the sunshine we so rarely see, especially in the winter. I still do not feel that Gov should be dictating the type of number of trees in my yard. 🙂
What about the big tree beside Black Bear Pub?
It’ll about money – District WILL allow as long as it is for their benefit – not environment!
Yes, I agree. Gov and politicians tend to be very opportunistic.
I think the tree’s they are talking about are a particular circumference ? Let me know the new bylaw
Checks and balances are needed by our Municipal Government . I agree totally with their current efforts to enforce bylaws an d increase fines.
I also feel too many trees are being sacrificed to make way for density development.
When I was growing up in North Vancouver District we did not see bears , cougars etc. roaming through neighbourhoods. I suspect I am of a different generation than Tony.
The wild life was on the mountains.
In recent years, recreational use of our mountains has increased significantly – animals are timid and do not
like their environment compromised.
Trees are essential to our well being, they shelter us from winds, shade us from extreme heat
and act as carbon filters to purify the air.
In my view , I feel grateful to be able to live on a property that has several trees.
Louise