Opposition from ATAC and some residents, but Interlake Offroad Club in favour
Gimli’s Active Trails Advisory Committee (ATAC) said it was thrown for a loop after it recently discovered a proposal to let offroad vehicles (ORV) drive on the Rail Trail, north of Gimli.
Gimli council had introduced a new Traffic Bylaw (bylaw # 24-0005) in May that proposes to make the Rail Trail an officially sanctioned ORV corridor. The new bylaw will repeal former bylaw 18-0022, which prohibits ORVs on the trail.
The new bylaw passed first reading (resolution No. 2024 206) at council’s May 22 meeting. In order to pass, the bylaw must be approved with second and third reading, which has not yet been scheduled by council.
Although ORVs are currently prohibited from the RM-owned Rail Trail, people drive various motorized vehicles on it, including ATVs, golf carts and dirt bikes. The RM does not carry out enforcement actions.
For about 10 years, use of the trail has been hotly contested by groups and residents who oppose ORVs using it and those who are in favour of them.
A spokesperson for ATAC said the committee found out about the new bylaw “in the past few weeks.” ATAC doesn’t want to be “antagonistic” with regard to the ORV issue, but it is respectfully opposed to having any motorized summer traffic on it.
“We really believe the Rail Trail is a unique resource and we do not want it to change. There are other options for ATV/ORV trails and this is not one of them,” said the spokesperson. “We were surprised that council had started a bylaw change process without letting us know and without letting us be part of it. The Rail Trail was gifted to the community with certain stipulations, and the RM should honour the gifting agreement. The fact this keeps coming up is really disappointing.”
The committee was a delegation at council’s Sept. 11 regular meeting so that it could “protect this trail’s integrity as it is.” The delegation expressed its “surprise” by the introduction of the new bylaw and outlined its concerns about allowing ORVs on the trail.
RM OF GIMLI
A map from Bylaw 18-0022 (left), currently in effect, shows the Rail Trail between Diageo (Seagram Road) and Boundary Road as being off limits to ORVs. The map from proposed bylaw 24-0005 (right) shows a designated ORV corridor on the Rail Trail. About 12 subdivisions run along the corridor
Those concerns include threats to pedestrian safety on the trail, noise pollution, a reduction in property values among those living in numerous subdivisions along the trail and the degradation of the natural space with threats to plants, birds and other animals. ATAC has hosted active adventures to encourage outdoor physical pursuits and to draw tourism to the RM. ATAC noted that a public survey on RM trails completed in 2021 showed a majority of respondents commenting that they were “adamant that the [Rail] trail remain for active transportation [i.e., human-powered activities].”
ATAC was formed through a RM bylaw in 2019 and has appointed and volunteer members. The committee presented an in-depth strategic plan in 2022 that was adopted by council. It outlines goals and actions and long-term plans to promote active outdoor activities in a natural setting and draw more tourist dollars to the RM.
The Rail Trail is a former CPR rail line that was gifted by formal agreement to the municipality by Trans Canada Trails (TCT) with the stipulation that it accommodates activities such as hiking, cycling, horseback riding, cross-country skiing and snowmobiling. The 2004 gifting agreement states:
“Please note the Trans Canada Trail does not endorse any form of motorized activity on the trail in the summer months. As eventual owner of the corridor, the rural municipality will be free to choose whatever activities it deems appropriate.”
The phrase “free to choose whatever activities” could be interpreted as having direct reference to the activities sanctioned by TCT rather than interpreted as giving the RM free reign to allow motorized activity.
The Rail Trail is 36.2 kilometres long and starts at the Diageo distillery just north of Gimli and runs north alongside PR 222 to Boundary Road (Road 123N). Parts of the trail are gravel and parts are grass. The trail supports activities such as hiking, jogging, wheelchairs, cycling and birdwatching. In winter the trail supports hiking, skiing, snowshoeing and snowmobiling – the only motorized activity that’s allowed on the trail as snow cushions the trail bed and prevents damage. ORVs can rip up the bed and create ruts.
The ATAC spokesperson said its delegation was told by council during the Sept. 11 meeting that it could not ask council questions. And there was no question period at the end of the meeting.
“We were told at the beginning there will be no questions allowed; council were the only ones that could ask questions of us, but we could not ask questions of them. And neither could the public,” said the spokesperson. “Council didn’t ask any questions of us.”
The spokesperson said as an advisory body to council, it has been “on hold” because council said it would hire a consultant to review the issue. ATAC had wanted the RM to apply for a $2,000 grant to develop trail activities but was told “we have to wait.”
“We approached this council at the start of its term and we asked them if we could apply for grants. We can apply for Trails Manitoba or Trans Canada Trail grants or look at other granting bodies but we’ve been told to hold off. We did all the legwork then we asked the RM to apply for the grants and they said, ‘Nope,’” said the spokesperson. “But the RM had a meeting with an ORV group [in May] which told them they want to access funding for the Rail Trail from the [ATV Association of Manitoba]. But the thing is they didn’t have to change the bylaw to do that because there are other places where trails can be developed for ORVs, not this particular trail that already has a bylaw covering it as an active trail and that prohibits motorized vehicles on it except for snowmobiles in the winter.”
In addition to ATAC opposing ORVs on the Rail Trail, some residents and resident groups don’t want to see ATVs or other motorized vehicles on the trail.
Camp Morton-area resident Steve Peltier wrote to council and Interim CAO Jim Fenske expressing his concern with the new bylaw that will make the Rail Trail an ORV trail. He shared his letter with the Express.
He and other residents in the Lake Forest Estates subdivision and people who are part of the subdivision’s residents’ association “do not support” and “do not want” ORVs on the Rail Trail, which runs past their homes, he said.
Council’s new bylaw introduced in May came with “no prior public notice” yet became a draft proposal, which he feels goes against council’s code of ethics, he said. Although allowing ORVs on the Rail Trail will be to the detriment of those residents who oppose them, it may benefit businesses in the local area that sell and service ORVs.
“It is quite obvious that a change such as this would most certainly have a financial impact of some businesses within the community more tha[n] others, including the sales and servicing of any offroad vehicles,” wrote Peltier. “However, this submission appears to be a repeat of similar denied requests brought forward to a number of past Gimli councils, all which agreed on those occasions that this change does not serve the best interests of the Gimli community as a whole. It has also been recognized in the past that by allowing off road vehicles on this trail in no way supports any effort on the part of the RM of Gimli to encourage an eco-friendly approach to active transportation for community members or area tourism in general.”
Resident Judy Inglis, who said she uses the Rail Trail regularly, sent a submission to council registering opposition to allowing ORVs on it. She noted that the Trans Canada Trail’s gifting agreement with the RM “does not endorse any form of motorized activity” in the summer months.
“All surveys, consultants reports and public consultations that have been done since decommissioning the rail line have indicated that the majority of residents clearly support the development and use of the Rails to Trails for active transportation only,” Inglis wrote. “This was imbedded in the Traffic Bylaw in 2019. We see absolutely no reason or rationale for changing this in 2024.”
The intent of active transportation trails is to encourage residents to pursue physical activity, minimize pollution and preserve the environment, among other things, and ORVs “compromise all of these objectives,” she wrote. ORVs will deter pedestrian users, cause noise pollution and negatively affect soils, vegetation, watersheds, water quality, air quality and wildlife habitats.
“The Rails to Trails is regularly used by walkers, runners and cyclists. It is a safe, accessible and peaceful place for children, pets and older adults,” wrote Inglis. “It’s not uncommon to see multigenerational groups out for a walk and cyclists using it as a route to and from town. It’s a unique asset to the RM used by tourists and permanent residents, and should be further developed, enhanced and promoted as a green corridor for active transit.”
Interlake Offroad Club (IOC) president Calvin Sedleski said he and other ATV supporters attended council’s Sept. 11 meeting. The meeting also saw active trails supporters attending and residents attending for other matters.
Sedleski, who served a term on ATAC, said the IOC wants to see the Rail Trail become a multi-use trail that would include ORVs. That’s defined in IOC’s bylaw as “three or more low-pressure tires.” And the IOC wants to use funding that’s available through a Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI) program to develop the Rail Trail for ORVs and resident safety.
That funding would go towards maintenance of the trail, the installation of bridges over sensitive habitat such as garter snake dens, the erection of signage, ORV speed limits and driver safety and etiquette courses.
“As of this year, Manitoba Public Insurance is adding $25 to all registered ORVs in Manitoba and giving a portion of the money to the ATV Association of Manitoba, which is our governing body, to disburse to the [ORV] clubs which maintain trails, offer safety courses and development connectivity. We just received a little bit of funding for the trails [select trails that permit ORVs] in the RM of Gimli this year.”
The new MPI program would provide funding based on the number of kilometres of trails, and RM of Gimli taxpayers would not be paying to maintain the Rail Trail, he said.
He has spoken with residents along the Rail Trail to understand the issues and knows there are “some bad apples” out there that may not have their ORVs registered and know that they’re not allowed to drive on the trail, he said. Interlake Offroad Club members do not drive on the Rail Trail.
On the other hand, there are ORV drivers who are frustrated by not being allowed on the trail because they want a route to Gimli. The number of ORVs has tripled since the COVID pandemic when people couldn’t travel and there’s a need for a place to ride.
“We’ve talked to many residents up there and they’re frustrated because they’re not allowed to use this corridor to Gimli. Where else would you put ORVs but on a rail bed?” he said. “I have also reached out to the campgrounds up there and their summertime residents would like to use [ORVs on] the Rail Trail and have that connectivity to the communities north and south of them.”
To try to reach a compromise on making the Rail Trail multi-use, Sedleski said the IOC broached the idea of trail-sharing in which ORVs could be restricted to one side of the trail and pedestrians to the other side, like dedicated cycling lanes in the city.
“We’ve said in years past that the Rail Trail is wide enough for a [dedicated ORV] trail on it. But we were told the machines were too loud and people who want to birdwatch don’t want us there,” said Sedleski.
Trails such as the Interlake Pioneer Trail on the west side of the Interlake and trails in Belair on other side of Lake Winnipeg have been successfully made multi-use trails that support a range of users including pedestrians and ORVs.
And the IOC could easily reach out to its members and advise them to abstain from using the Rail Trail if special events are planned. For example, Belair’s ORV club has alerted its members when horseback riding is scheduled for their trail.
As far as speed limits go, Sedleski said if Gimli council’s new bylaw is passed, the IOC would assess the entire length of the trail and determine which parts of it would require slower speeds (through subdivisions) and which parts (open areas) could sustain higher speeds. Then the club would put up speed signs.
“The biggest thing would be the education piece,” he said. “If council’s new bylaw gets implemented, we would offer sessions at the start of the year on driving etiquette because there hasn’t been any of that. Our club is sending its riders to safety courses this year and next year. We can incorporate safety training into the funding we get from Manitoba Public Insurance.”
As far as enforcement would go, Sedleski said safety rules, signs and responsible ORV drivers on the trail would weed out bad drivers.
“When you put good drivers on the trail, it will limit the bad drivers. Everybody has a camera and a lot of the cowboys won’t go on the trail because they know they’ll get caught,” said Sedleski.
The IOC is planning to send another delegation to council in order to make people aware of what the club’s intentions are with regard to developing the Rail Trail and making it safe for everyone.
Gimli councillor Thora Palson spoke with the Express about the new bylaw to allow ORVs on the Rail Trail.
When asked why council didn’t consult residents living along the Rail Trail about its proposal to allow ORVs on it before the creation of the new traffic bylaw, Palson said she has been considering the views of proponents on both sides of the ORV debate, including the ATAC, and has yet to respond to about 15 people who reached out to her by email to express their concerns.
She said there was no second and third reading of the new Traffic Bylaw scheduled for the Sept. 11 meeting. That will be scheduled for a future date.
In the meantime, there will be an open house in October and residents are invited broach their concerns on various RM matters, including the potential change to the Rail Trail.
“There will be an open house on Oct. 12 for residents, and they can ask questions and share feedback on any municipal issue,” she said.
With regard to the ATAC delegation not being allowed to ask council questions, Palson said the format of a delegation is for presentations rather than for open dialogue. Public hearings on the other hand are structured in such a way that require questions and answers.
That said, she’s not altogether happy about the way council meetings have been structured with in-camera sessions coming at the end of the public portion of the meeting and residents are asked to leave council chambers. Residents are, however, free to ask questions after in-camera sessions end and the council meeting is declared officially over.
“The mayor said questions can be asked after the meeting, but that would make it a long meeting,” said Palson. “We used to do in camera before a council meeting but now we do it at the end. This does create a barrier in a sense. I liked it better the other way around. I’m not really thrilled about the format. I think questions are good.”
