The District of North Vancouver (DNV) is looking to move forward with the removal of the teeter totters from shore trails on lands under their administration.



This is as a result of a sweeping movement due to a death and resulting lawsuit in Ontario surrounding a bike park teeter totter. However here in B.C. the Occupiers Liability Act in doesn't differentiate teeter totters from other woodwork on recreational trails.



The first teeter totter on any biking trail in the world was on Ladies Only (Digger even verified this the other day when I spoke with him) and this is something we as a community need to rally to maintain and protect.



Teeter totters are only found on black diamond and double black diamond difficulty trails on the shore. They are not easily accessible and are rarely the most difficult or most risky feature to ride on these trails.



Please sign this petition and send an email to the DNV at infoweb@dnv.org







Some talking points to consider in your email:

The occupiers liability act in B.C. doesn't differentiate teeter totters from other woodwork, why are teeter totters being targeted now? http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/lc/statreg/96337_01

Why not just initiate signage as a warning for teeter totters on trails?

What about contributory negligence?

When trails are built to the proper specifications and due diligence is taken to maintain features isn't liability minimal for the land administrator at that point?

What will the next thing be that you will remove from sanctioned trails?

Removing more difficult trails/features results in more rogue trail building; have you thought of the environmental impacts, related related stresses on emergency and rescue services and the like in this context?

Teeter totters in playgrounds are accessible by children with minimal motor skills, how does this pose less of a liability issue than the ones on trails?

Why are teeter totters fine in bike parks where any skill level rider can access them but suddenly on more difficult trails they are a liability concern?



