April 2026 – Market Update

April Smiles Hello

By Li Read, Salt Spring — April 2026

Spring Arrives

Spring arriving on Salt Spring IslandAn interesting month…it starts with continuing March weather vagaries, bare tree branches, buds tightly furled, Spring’s promise still uncertain.

At the close of the month, the eruption of growth is everywhere, and it’s suddenly almost May. That surprise of real Spring in just mere days brings with it a renewal of energy everywhere, not just in gardens. Enjoy!

The Real Estate Market

Salt Spring Island real estateWhat about that ever interesting real estate market? The Spring season also brings with it a restless desire for change.

For some substantial time, both locally and Canada-wide, perhaps from 2022 to 2025, inventory remained low and prices remained relatively stable…but outcomes with offers written/presented were very slow. Buyers remained interested, did reply to marketing pieces, did make solid inquiries, did sometimes turn up to view, but final action did not result. Uncertainty prevailed.

It does take time to sell properties in secondary home/recreational areas: no local market means discovery, observation, thoughtfulness, and then activity. Time is always a component of sales on Salt Spring and the Gulf Islands.

Currently, there are around 117 listings on Salt Spring…that would take in residential, land, commercial. In a steady market, there might be around 382 to 400. There is not a lot of choice in either type or price, for a buyer. Most owners do not want to be sellers.

All levels of government (municipal, provincial, federal) have been singing the song of affordability, and for some time, but nothing coherent has emerged to create this. Low inventory continues.

Title & DRIPA

Spring blooms on Salt Spring IslandThe reasons for hesitations in activity in the past have varied. In this 2026 year, one of the concerning issues is about title…indigenous vs fee simple. It may be that the remainder of the provincial Spring legislature sitting will finally see this being addressed.

The process of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) has been underway with current provincial government since 2019, although this was not shared with the rest of B.C. population. It’s important to understand what this all means for owners of property in B.C. Be informed.

Seasonal Inspiration

Salt Spring Island oceanfront propertyMeantime, it’s energetic April, the explosion of Spring’s amazing beauty will be fully evident by the 26th, and it’s time to be part of this seasonal adventure. Open windows and doors, patio dining beckons, markets are there to welcome, movement is the suggestion of the season, and remember to be inspired.

The message of the season: no matter the global or local concerns, Spring remains a generous annual gift. Enjoy!

Salt Spring Island spring scenery

B.C. Mulls Changes to Weaken DRIPA

B.C. Mulls Changes to Weaken DRIPA, Shares Secret Document with First Nations Leaders

By Alessia Passafiume, The Canadian Press • March 24, 2026

Following two recent court decisions siding with First Nations under British Columbia’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, Premier David Eby is considering amendments that would weaken the legislation.

First Nations leaders have called on Eby to leave the bill alone.

The bill, known as DRIPA, requires B.C. to take “all measures” to align the rights of Indigenous Peoples with existing provincial legislation. Amendments proposed in a confidential letter sent to some First Nations leaders in B.C. on Monday say the government is looking to amend the bill to promise “ongoing processes” to align select legislation with DRIPA. The provincial Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, or DRIPA, was passed in 2019.

It’s based on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which requires free, prior and informed consent from Indigenous Peoples on matters affecting their rights, lands, territories and resources.

The federal government has similarly adopted the UN principle and is working toward its implementation, though its view is it does not constitute a veto on development.

Court Decisions and Government Response

Eby told reporters last week his government is trying its best to work with chiefs across the province to address concerns about the court decisions. They both cited DRIPA and sided with First Nations on mining and property rights, which the provincial government has said isn’t the intention of the law.

One found the provincial mineral claims regime is “inconsistent” with DRIPA, and another recognized the Cowichan Tribes’ Aboriginal title on land along the Fraser River, with titles held by Canada and the City of Richmond deemed “defective and invalid.”

In response to the mineral claims case, Eby has said it’s “crucial that it is British Columbians through their elected representatives that remain in control of this process, not the courts.”

“Too much rides on it in terms of our province’s prosperity and certainty going forward.”

— Premier David Eby

Economic and Relationship Implications

If the amendments are passed, it could complicate relationships between Indigenous Peoples and Eby’s government as it looks to get major projects built to boost its economy in the face of trade threats from the United States.

Eby has been facing growing questions over the future of the legislation, and has been criticized over the process in which changes are being discussed.

Confidential Proposals

The proposed changes have remained out of the public eye. The letter sent to First Nations leaders on Monday, which included a link to a document with details of the proposed amendments, said it was “subject to cabinet confidence” and was shared under a confidentiality agreement, which some leaders agreed to in order to allow for consultations.

The Canadian Press has viewed both documents.

Some First Nations leaders have told media they have yet to see the proposed amendments themselves, despite signing that confidentiality agreement.

The province is scheduled to host a briefing about the proposed changes with First Nations leaders on Wednesday, and those leaders are asked to provide feedback by 4 p.m. on Friday. A one-hour meeting for those leaders has also been set for April 1 with Eby, Attorney General Niki Sharma and Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation Minister Spencer Chandra Herbert.

The letter says the government is open to changes and acknowledges the “compressed timelines.”

Proposed Legislative Text Changes

The government document shows the existing wording of some sections of the law crossed out, with the proposed text of the changes underneath for First Nations leaders to review.

The “Purpose of the Act” section, as currently written in the law, says it is “to affirm the application of the Declaration to the laws of British Columbia.”

The proposed change for that section change instead says the government will “provide for the ongoing processes of the government working, in consultation and co-operation with the Indigenous peoples in British Columbia, towards aligning enactments with the declaration.”

The document also shows the provincial government is looking to replace a clause that says the government “must take all measures necessary to ensure the laws of British Columbia are consistent with the Declaration,” and instead says the provincial government will work toward aligning specific laws “identified as priorities.”

It continues that the province “may prepare a new action plan” for implementing DRIPA “at any time.”

Reactions

First Nations have said they do not support any changes to the legislation, while some B.C. Conservative MLAs have called for the law to be scrapped altogether.

The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, which advocates on behalf of more than 100 First Nations in the province, passed a resolution in February calling on the government to publicly commit to keeping the law as is currently written.

The Law Society of British Columbia has decried Eby’s intent to change the legislation in response to court rulings. In a statement released in February, the group said “politicians must take great care when commenting on judicial decisions and must avoid asserting or implying that courts are not properly playing their role.” Doing so, the group said, decreases confidence in the justice system.

“The Law Society urges the B.C. government to reconsider making any proposed legislative changes that would limit access to independent courts,” their statement reads.

— Law Society of British Columbia

Source: The Canadian Press • By Alessia Passafiume • March 24, 2026

With files from Wolfgang Depner in Victoria and Chuck Chiang in Vancouver

Shared by Li Read, Re/Max Salt Spring

Some B.C. appraisers adding land-claims clause after Aboriginal title court case

Some B.C. appraisers adding land-claims clause after Aboriginal title court case

By Ashley Joannou, The Canadian Press — Published March 12, 2026

The president of the B.C. branch of the Appraisal Institute of Canada says the recent Cowichan Aboriginal title court ruling is contributing to speculation that private property rights could be affected.

An organization representing about 1,200 appraisers in British Columbia says some of its members are adding clauses to their reports noting that current, past, and potential future land claims have not been considered in their valuations.

Appraisal Institute of Canada — B.C. Branch

Allan Beatty, president of the B.C. branch of the Appraisal Institute of Canada, says in a statement that the recent Cowichan Aboriginal title court ruling in B.C. is contributing to speculation that private property rights could be affected.

Beatty says the organization is preparing advice for its members on the appropriate limitation clauses, but discourages the use of “unsubstantiated adjustments that do not reflect the most relevant market data.”

Beatty says up-to-date market data is the most effective way to incorporate all relevant influences on value of a property.

The Cowichan Ruling

In an August 2025 ruling, a B.C. Supreme Court judge confirmed the Cowichan Tribes hold Aboriginal title over about 300 hectares of land on the Fraser River in Richmond, B.C.

The Cowichan Tribes did not seek to have private titles invalidated, but the ruling says it creates precedent that sections of law establishing private fee-simple ownership as indefeasible do not apply to Aboriginal title.

The provincial government and the Cowichan have begun negotiations on the claim even as the original decision is being appealed.

Looking Ahead

“Additional court rulings on this topic are expected to continue to shape markets throughout B.C. and beyond.”

“(The institute) is confident that its members, as the professionals of choice in real estate valuation and consulting, will continue to adapt to the dynamic nature of real property markets and provide appropriate advice to all stakeholders.”

Provincial Response

B.C.’s Minister of Indigenous Relations Spencer Chandra Herbert said Thursday that the government’s position is that it is not negotiating private property unless there’s a willing seller and a willing buyer.

“I think nations actually have been quite vocal recently to be clear that they’re not coming after people’s private property, that’s not their intention, and that we all have to live here together.”

“Certainly they don’t want to do to people what was done to them, where they were evicted from villages, had villages burned down and things like that.”

B.C. Conservative MLA Scott McInnes said there needs to be clarity.

“We need a path forward here for private property in this province, because people are scared.”

— With files from Wolfgang Depner in Victoria

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 12, 2026.

Aboriginal Title Agreements Threaten Property Rights Across Metro Vancouver

By Niels Veldhuis, President, Fraser Institute & Jason Clemens, Executive Vice President, Fraser Institute

B.C. Business Examiner

March 3, 2025

Aboriginal Title Agreements Threaten Property Rights Across Metro Vancouver

Premier David Eby’s quiet push to effectively grant Aboriginal title over large swaths of British Columbia, coupled with a landmark B.C. Supreme Court decision in 2025 granting Aboriginal title to the Cowichan Tribe over land around Richmond (a suburb of Vancouver), has significantly increased public anxiety in the province. And if property owners in Vancouver, and indeed the entire province, weren’t yet in a state of panic over the threats to their property, recent agreements between the Carney government and the Musqueam Indian Band might be the final straw on the proverbial camel’s back.

On Friday, Feb. 20, the federal government quietly issued a news release with the headline: “Musqueam and Canada Sign Historic Agreements Recognizing Rights, Stewardship, and Fisheries.”

What the Musqueam Claim as Their Territory

For context, it’s important to understand exactly what the Musqueam claim as their territory. According to the Musqueam website, “Today, portions of Musqueam’s territory are called Vancouver, Burnaby, Richmond, New Westminster, Delta, North Vancouver, West Vancouver, Surrey, UBC Endowment Lands, YVR Airport and Coquitlam.” In other words, nearly every square inch of Metro Vancouver. And according to the Musqueam, it holds “Aboriginal title to our land, and Aboriginal rights within that territory occupied.”

And now apparently our own federal government—without consultation, transparency, a vote by the public or any publicity—has agreed with, and essentially granted, the Musqueam’s claims.

Of the three “Historic Agreements,” the most worrying for Vancouverites should be the Rights Recognition Agreement, which, according to the government’s news release, “recognizes that Musqueam has Aboriginal rights, including title, within their traditional territory and establishes a framework for incremental implementation of rights.”

Don’t worry, Vancouverites, your property rights won’t be eroded in a single stroke. They will be eroded through “incremental implementation.” The federal government won’t use a bulldozer to level your property rights—it will use a sledgehammer repeatedly over time.

Out of Touch with Reality

Ottawa, of course, doesn’t see it that way. It claims the agreements “represent a major step forward towards reconciliation.” How out of touch are our politicians that they can’t see that this type of “reconciliation” has the potential to be a disaster for our province?

At best, it will create uncertainty for years, perhaps decades. And uncertainty is detrimental to private-sector business investment, which is essential to improve productivity and living standards. What company or entrepreneur would invest in a province that does not guarantee property rights?

According to the vast majority of scholars who study why some places prosper while others stagnate or fail, private property is a necessary condition for prosperity. Only countries with private property can flourish. In fact, the 2024 Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded to three economists who conducted empirical research on the institutions that shape prosperity, and found that property rights are essential.

And it’s quite possible, even likely, that as people realize their property is under threat, the laudable goal of reconciliation will become more difficult to achieve. Of course, you’d never get that impression reading the more than half-dozen quotes in the news release from ministers of the federal government.

The Government’s Own Words

For example, the Honourable Rebecca Alty, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations Canada, notes that “Our government was elected to meet a generational challenge: to strengthen Canada’s economy and deliver results… Reconciliation is not just words, but action—where Musqueam and Canada are working to incrementally implement Musqueam’s Aboriginal rights within their territory.”

The Honourable Steven MacKinnon, leader of the government in the House of Commons, added that: “Today’s announcement marks a meaningful step forward in reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples and in recognizing their historic contributions to the economic development of the region and of Canada.”

Prosperity and stability cannot exist without the bedrock of clear predictable property rights. Unfortunately, the federal government has joined the provincial government and the courts to undermine and indeed threaten property rights in B.C.

Niels Veldhuis is President of the Fraser Institute and Jason Clemens is Executive Vice President. Originally published in the B.C. Business Examiner , March 3, 2025.

March 2026 – Market Update – Salt Spring Island


March, 2026

Spring Arrives

Salt Spring Island

It’s March…and meteorological Spring starts on March 1st. Will it come in like a lion and go out like a lamb…or vice versa?

March can deliver bursts of winter, can enjoy soft spring, can showcase budding trees amid orchards, and begin the welcome rhythm of early Spring. Every day is seconds longer and with Daylight Saving Time arriving on March 8th, the great Pacific Northwest Coast will be enjoying later sunsets.

March Break & the Gulf Islands

Salt Spring Island

March Break in B.C. falls between the 16th and the 27th. Time to seek out a retreat experience? Salt Spring and the Gulf Islands offer the discovery of the natural world. Savour the trails and parks, walking/hiking pleasures, try ocean kayaking, enjoy the gallery openings, discover the artistic heart of the islands.

Alternative health options will soothe and regenerate…take part as we peel off winter’s cocooning. Hastings House reopens on March 19th. Time to appreciate the beauty of this graceful opportunity…the best of country hotel lifestyle. Breathe.

Market Reality

Salt Spring Island

The real estate market on Salt Spring and the Gulf Islands continues to follow the path of low inventory, relatively stable pricing, and no local market. Time lags remain a part of all sales. First, a potential buyer has to discover a marketing piece on a Gulf Island and be attracted by it. Then they research each of the islands, visit one, may or may not view properties, then will mull over impressions. If they reacted positively on that first discovery visit, they will return to view available options. It usually takes a third visit to clarify interest and also pricing…then the offer process begins.

Salt Spring Island

For several years, most buyers of Gulf Islands properties have come from Vancouver/Lower Mainland areas, and for the most part they need to sell to buy and are seeking a rural lifestyle opportunity. They are looking to be self-sufficient. A flight from urban to rural works well with that internet opportunity to work from anywhere. Ease of communication allows choice.

An Era of Profound Change

In an era of continuing profound change (impact of AI, global concerns, serious political upheavals), resulting in a time of hesitation in action, it’s difficult at this very beginning of March to suggest a developing trend. It may take until late April to understand the tone of the 2026 marketplace. Patience, resilience, opting for new over established, might be a plan. Important to listen and to practice periphery vision. In change, lies opportunity.

The Salt Spring Advantage

Salt Spring Island

It’s interesting that Salt Spring enjoys service from three ferry terminals…that it has easy proximity to Vancouver Island…that it’s possible to benefit from a year-round lifestyle (whether January or July), that one is able to be a part of an energizing community and can also commute to be elsewhere…there is a lot of choice in how one lives (as long as one remembers the Islands Trust form of governance. “To preserve and protect….” was put in place in 1974. The Trust information is online and one needs to read it before buying a property. The Trust applies to all Gulf Islands).

As we ease into Spring, keep informed…many shifts have been forecast for this 2026 year. Stay tuned might be the mantra?

Meantime, it’s March. Smile.

B.C. Government Continues to Fundamentally Change Control of Property

From the Fraser Institute

By Jason Clemens and Tegan Hill

February 2026

B.C. Government Continues to Fundamentally Change Control of Property

The Quiet Erosion of Property Rights

While the Cowichan court decision, and to a lesser extent the more recent mineral rights court decision, have dominated discussions on how property rights are being eroded in British Columbia, the Eby government quietly signed yet another land-use agreement with an Indigenous group on Vancouver Island that fundamentally changes property rights and decision-making in the area.

As the premier himself has recognized, the erosion and uncertainty of private property in the province is imposing huge costs on average British Columbians, and will continue to do so until the government shows genuine leadership and provides clarity on this issue. The premier and his government cannot simultaneously oppose the recent court decisions while negotiating bilateral agreements with Indigenous groups that effectively have similar results as the court cases.

The Cowichan Decision: A Turning Point

The stability of private property in the form of fee simple ownership, which is what most homeowners and businesses maintain, was called into question in a 2025 court case recognizing the Cowichan Tribe’s Aboriginal title over 800 acres of Crown and private land in Richmond, a suburb of Vancouver. The judge found that where Aboriginal title is deemed to exist, it is “prior and senior” to fee simple property rights.

This has thrown the status of more than 150 private property owners into turmoil and forced the provincial government to establish a $150 million-plus fund to support loan guarantees and other measures as property owners struggle with uncertain property rights, in some cases an inability to renew mortgages and the potential for real declines in their property value.

Premier Eby heavily criticized the decision and indicated his government would support the appeal of the Cowichan case on several fronts, even though the government did not contest the case originally. Premier Eby also promised to enact changes to the legislation involved in the mineral rights case — legislation which he helped enact.

DRIPA and the Legislative Framework

The B.C. Court of Appeals recently found the province’s reformed mineral claims system violated its own law. In 2019, the B.C. legislature unanimously passed DRIPA, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, which requires the province to “bring provincial laws into alignment with the UN Declaration.”

The UN’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted in 2007, states that Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired — including the right to own, use, develop and control these lands, as well as the right to redress through either restitution or just, fair and equitable compensation.

Moreover, DRIPA requires the provincial government to develop and implement an action plan, in consultation and co-operation with Indigenous Peoples, to meet the goals of the UN Declaration. B.C. is the only province to adopt such a law requiring provincial laws to align with the UN Declaration.

Premier Eby was not only part of the cabinet that supported and passed DRIPA but was the attorney general who provided the clarifications on the implementation guidelines for the Act. While the Premier stated the government will amend DRIPA to scale back the power courts have, he hasn’t reversed his support for the mandate that DRIPA provides to the government to recognize Aboriginal title and provide management rights to Indigenous groups that erode private property in the province.

Bilateral Agreements: The Growing Patchwork

Consider the various bilateral agreements the Eby government has concluded with Indigenous groups across the province:

Haida Gwaii

Title and control of the Queen Charlotte Islands (now Haida Gwaii) transferred to the Haida Council — the most sweeping change to date.

shíshálh Nation — Sunshine Coast

Title over 100 hectares of Crown land, acquisition of private land, and management power over water access and docks in the Sunshine Coast region.

Squamish Nation

33 Indigenous cultural sites north of Vancouver now off limits for development. The Nation also has the ability to close provincial parks for non-Aboriginal use.

T?ilhqot’in Nation — Fish Lake

Power to veto mining projects in the Fish Lake (Te?tan Biny) area.

Latest: ‘Na?mg?is First Nation — Nimpkish Valley

The province announced an agreement to co-manage approximately 166,000 hectares of land (roughly 11 times the size of the City of Vancouver) in the Nimpkish Valley in the northern region of Vancouver Island. The agreement covers a wide range of land use issues, including control over forestry.

Economic Implications

These bilateral agreements are largely being negotiated covertly, without much public scrutiny, if any at all. Most British Columbians are not aware of their far-reaching and long-lasting consequences.

These agreements will continue to impose enormous uncertainty in the province, which affects business investment, discourages entrepreneurship and generally depresses economic growth.

At a time when the province is struggling with anemic economic growth, a near crisis in government finances, people voting with their feet and leaving the province, and a continued lack of private-sector investment, clarity and certainty regarding property is needed immediately as one step in reversing the province’s decline.

This report is intended for informational purposes and does not constitute legal or financial advice.