- Home
- Deceptions
- Solar
- Thermal Audit
- Ventilation
- Sensors
- Governance
- Environment
- Reference
- Contact
- News
Land Ownership Reform
for Newfoundland and Labrador
Most land area in Newfoundland is owned by the Government of Newfoundland (Crown). With a population of 514,000 people and a vast area of 405,212 square kilometers, there is certainly enough land to allow family homesteads for those that want them. According to Statistics Canada 2011 Census, there were 159,385 families in private households.
Unencumbered land ownership (title free and clear) of sufficient size is fundamental for any family that wants to be independent and secure. This should be a basic right in a free society where there are about 20 million acres of vacant land.
The standard land parcel size when much of North America was planned was a 1/4 mile square or 160 acres. This was considered large enough to support a farming family, while having enough left over for trade. Settlers to Newfoundland were primarily fishermen and not farmers so their land needs were small. Many squatted on costal land and cleared enough land for a vegetable garden, sometimes a pasture for livestock and fire wood was cut in winter from unowned common areas. Many of these settlers were granted deeds later under the doctrine of squatters rights. Others, received outright land grants.
The fishery in Newfoundland has been largely destroyed, and will change significantly in future decades due to the warming of the ocean. This will result in a change in the mix of fish species, and affect yields in unpredictable ways. If marine preserves are implemented, there could be good fishing again someday, but this is at least 30 years away, especially since there is no serious marine fisheries management underway or even planned.
This means that the size of a block of land required for a stable family homestead needs to be significantly larger than the original Newfoundland homesteads because the livelihood isn't arriving from the ocean via a boat to a wharf nearby the property, but must be generated on the land itself. It is also unreasonable to expect that neighbors will let you cut their trees for firewood either -- every plot needs enough area for the rotation of 30 years of lumber and firewood.
As a starting point, we should consider a plot size of 160 acres since it has a well established historical precedence. Contrast this with the small cabin lots that are currently available. In November 2012, there was a draw for cabin lots in Salmonier. These ranged from $33,000 to $78,000 and most plots were about 4500 square meters which is approximately an acre. You can't do much with an acre other than to have a well and septic system.
Remote recreational cottage lots that are inaccessible via road are available for rent and renewable every five years, and no size is specified. It is unclear what reaction you'd get for applying for a 160 acre block nor is there any way to gain clear title to the land.
The following two paragraphs was taken from gov.nl.ca
Residential grants are available in communities where the land is zoned for residential use under an approved municipal plan or, if no municipal plan exists, where the land is located within the community infilling limits, and no land use conflicts exist
- Unserviced lots; 1860 square meters (30 meters frontage)
- Lots with one service (water or sewer); 1400 square meters (23 meters frontage)
- Serviced lots 650 square meters (20 meters frontage)
- Or as specified under an approved municipal plan
This is problematic. 1860 square meters is less than half an acre which is vastly too small for anything productive and it has to be zoned residential and be in a municipality and would be subject to taxation. Even if a group of people were to create a brand new municipality, and develop a municipal plan similar to the old rules, the plot sizes are useless.
So given that there is absolutely no way for a person with, say $30,000 cash and lots of skills to legally acquire the right to live on a piece of empty land, build a home and support his family without getting hauled off to jail - a sad state of affairs - we need change the status quo and implement some reforms.
Issues to Resolve
Sanitation. The province used to suffer from water borne diseases when outhouses were the norm and drinking water was contaminated. Every homestead would have to have a sanitation plan which would be a traditional septic tank system or alternate technology like composting or incinerating toilets. This would put them far ahead of the residents of St. John's that still dump raw sewage into the harbor due to inadequate treatment facilities.
Drinking water. Some areas of the province don't have an aquifer so when you drill a well, you are getting surface water entering via cracks in the rock. These can't be too close to neighboring wells or they can drain each other because of interconnecting cracks. Other times, there is no water in the well at all. There are areas in Central Newfoundland where the well water is high in arsenic. Therefore, every property would have to have a drinking water analysis and perhaps a test well drilled to ensure that fresh water was available to support future residents. An alternate would be a plan to catch rain water from roofs like they do in Bermuda.
Division of land. Since the purpose would be to support extended family homesteads that could be handed down from generation to generation, it should be indivisible and protected from bankruptcy. You should be able to trade land blocks, but not subdivide them.
Electricity. These communities would be off-grid unless power lines were already nearby. The goal should be to have low energy homes where the combination of solar passive techniques and some solar PV (electric) and hot water panels could operate the well pumps, refrigeration, basic electronics and provide LED lighting.
Access to land and protected blocks. A master plan for the homestead blocks should contain right-of-ways as well as park areas which would be strategically placed to protect native plants and animals. Areas which aren't suitable for trees, farming, pasture (steep slopes and bogs for example) would be protected. Rivers and ponds would also be protected along with public access routes to ponds, rivers and beaches.
Road Access. To prevent a proliferation of trails, a road to service the lots needs to be constructed. This could be a trail suitable for ATV, hiking and snow mobiles. The provincial government would not be expected to build a full sized road at enormous cost. A one time fee could be collected from each land owner to construct a single lane dirt road with passing sections and culverts as necessary. Afterwards, it would be up to individual land owners to contribute to road maintenance.
Policy Items
- Implement a pilot project where a block of crown land is divided into common area to be persevered, and blocks of land of approximately 160 acres that are adjusted to have a mix of flat land for farming and homestead as well as areas that can support forrest.
- Offer the plots by lottery because thousands will apply.
- Offer clear title after 5 years if the new owners build a year-round residence and comply with water and sanitation requirements. Otherwise continue as an annual rental for 10 years, after which it would be offered to someone else by lottery. If the homestead is abandoned for more than 5 years, heirs have first preference in the lottery to reallocate it.
- Provide exemption from building code to allow non-standard construction and materials.
- Exempt from bankruptcy (a homestead exemption) and cannot be used for bank collateral.
- Strict regulations on things that can harm others - sewage runoff for example.
- No municipal taxation allowed. If land owners want to cooperate and fund road maintenance for example, it should be voluntary and up to them. There will be freeloaders in any system, but this is the lesser of the evils.
Miscellaneous Items for Discussion
- Environmental Impact - this could be a net positive. The roads can be routed around sensitive areas, large areas of green common park could be left, homes would dump no sewage into waterways, off grid living consumes far less energy than our current lifestyle. Environmental groups could get involved with the layout of the green areas and ensure habitats for berries, small animals, birds are properly chosen and that land erosion is minimized.
- Only crazy people would do this - Maybe -- but why not let them lead the way and show you what is possible?
- It might open the flood gates to full scale land reform
- It might be abandoned - nothing ventured, nothing gained, plus land would revert to the crown in the event people lost interest.