Only a handful of people could be seen enjoying Three Mile Beach Tuesday afternoon, July 7, without any naturists in view of the public section of the beach. Steve Arstad

Court case could determine naturist use of Three Mile Beach

PENTICTON – The impasse over naturist use of Three Mile Beach could be decided by the courts with Penticton RCMP recommending public nudity charges.

RCMP Staff Sergeant Kurt Lozinski says police responded to a public nudity complaint at the beach on July 1. They arrested an individual for obstruction and public nudity after the person failed to identify themselves. Lozinski says the person was later identified, charged and then released on a promise to appear in court on July 29. Part of the release conditions include a ban from Three Mile Beach.

Lozinski says police are developing a file to advance to Crown for charge approval.

“We advance cases to provincial Crown, whose responsibility is to assess paperwork and approve charges,” Lozinski says, adding Crown should receive the package this week and make any recommended charges, if any.

Lozinski says some determination needs to be made for this area, adding Supreme Court decisions from all over Canada will be taken into account when determining the matter.

“I think everyone needs a definitive answer on the direction that needs to be taken, on all parties, whether that be the city, the police, the Crown, the naturists or the homeowners in the area,” Lozinski says.

He adds Crown would have to make a determination in this case in order to determine the direction the police would be going.

Controversy over public nudity at the beach arose last summer when a private landowner on the beach voiced objections to naturists using his property. Police fielded numerous calls to the beach for public nudity complaints last summer, but did not lay charges.

Earlier this spring, the matter was brought before city council in an attempt by both residents of the area and naturists using the beach to have the city sanction their side of the argument. The city refused to take sides in the matter, leaving the question of naturist use of the public beach as a legitimate use in limbo, potentially for another summer.

Lozinski says calls for public nudity at Three Mile Beach have been on the rise in the last couple of weeks. He says the issue of trespassing on the private property of Carey Pinkowski seems to have been resolved following the placement of a sign along the property’s edge earlier in the year, but beach area residents continue to be upset at naturist use of the public portion of the beach.

Lozinski says the Penticton detachment is already dealing with high call volumes and tight staffing levels, and calls for complaints of public nudity at the beach often took time to investigate. He says he understands the frustration of Three Mile Beach residents, but notes although nudity is the number one issue for the residents, it isn't  for the police.

To contact the reporter for this story, email Steve Arstad at sarstad@infonews.ca or call 250-488-3065. To contact the editor, email mjones@infonews.ca or call 250-718-2724.

Tags
Steve Arstad

I have been looking for news in the South Okanagan - SImilkameen for 20 years, having turned a part time lifelong interest into a full time profession. After five years publishing a local newsletter, several years working as a correspondent / stringer for several local newspapers and seven years as editor of a Similkameen weekly newspaper, I joined iNFOnews.ca in 2014. My goal in the news industry has always been to deliver accurate and interesting articles about local people and places. My interest in the profession is life long - from my earliest memories of grade school, I have enjoyed writing.
As an airborne geophysical surveyor I travelled extensively around the globe, conducting helicopter borne mineral surveys.
I also spent several years at an Okanagan Falls based lumber mill, producing glued-wood laminated products.
As a member of the Kaleden community, I have been involved in the Kaleden Volunteer Fire Department for 22 years, and also serve as a trustee on the Kaleden Irrigation District board.
I am currently married to my wife Judy, of 26 years. We are empty-nesters who enjoy living in Kaleden with our Welsh Terrier, Angus, and cat, Tibbs.
Our two daughters, Meagan and Hayley, reside in Richmond and Victoria, respectively.

Steve Arstad's Stories

More Articles

Related Articles

16 Comments

Leave a Reply

  2. Barbara Carruthers : Okay, you don’t wish to see people laying around in the buff. Well, there are lots of other things that the rest of us don’t like to see — but we don’t presume to outlaw them just because we have personal hang-ups about them. For example, I don’t like seeing people wearing religious symbols — they remind me of how irrational and mean-spirited many religious people are. But I recognize that people should have a right to wear whatever religious symbols they please, even if many of us are repulsed by them. Why is that neurotic prudes are so arrogant that they think the legal system should turn their personal preferences into law, criminalizing whole groups of people who are harming nobody?

  3. Aaron, I take it from your post that you’re tiked off.And that’s great.If it wasn’t for people ticked of a lot of changes in our country as well as the US would have never happened.However, in order to suceed, we have to team up as the Pro coalition, come up with the facts, the figures, the arguments, the proof that were are just as entitled as everyone else to have that space.Being vulgar, angry, and protagonistic has never accomplished anything.We have to show that we are the bigger people in this and remain calm and present our point of view logically, legally and calmly.Trust me – with the business experience I have, this is one of the first lesson I’ve learned.so, Aaron, if you want to join the pro-beach movement – GREAT just don’t give them any reason to think we are a bunch of hotheads with the comments we make.In many cases the judges take the workd of the majority UNLESS the minority makes a good case.Calling people names and degrading them doesn’t help the cause. So, please stay calm and work with us(. Okanagan Naturist Association) thank you.

  4. If I remember correctly the municipality &/or Provice owns all shore rights in the province.Which mans that you have to apply to the city for the rights to put in a dock, a marina, etc.Also, there is a law somewher that there is a 300 yard setback from the beachline to the property line that is the property of the province.So, if someone really wanted to challlenge this thing, I’m sure enough legal arguements could be made.However, I would have to do a Lot more research on the civil, provincial and federal legislatation regarding that first as well as whether there are grounds to dispute an antiquated law in Canada.It should be interesting reading – love doing this kind of reaearch!

  5. OK, here’s my take on this controversy.Cordon off a section of the beach with fencingand you have to be clothed to get to the beach if you are walking through a public beach.Once you pass through those gates it’s their option.There would have to be signs that clearly outlines this is a clothing optional beach.Now, we’re in the day and age of trying to get our kids back to being proud of their bodies (no I’m NOT saying let kids go to the beach!) but to have this much controversy of this simple issue to me is adding to that by saying nudity is wrong, that we arrest people for being nude on a private beach.The beach has been there for 50 years, and has been functioning fine.A new owner takes over and we have a controversy.I have been to three mile beach and 90% of the time just people wanting to enjoy the water, the beach and meet like minded people in the nude.I feel we should give a section of the beach just for them and put up a fence with a gate that no one can see over or through, and anyone who passes through that gate, does so at their own risk.To me it’s no different that strip clubs or for that matter people posting nude pictures on their facebook pictures – so why are we going back to the 50’s mentality now?Think proactive city council and “grandfather “at least a section of that beach to the nudist and perhaps work with them to put up visual protections.I realize that the thought of this might be offensive to some people, but please – we are asking for a small stretch of a beach by Naramata.Put some fences up, some over hangs so you can’t see from above and let them enjoy an hour or two of true freedom!Just my thoughts….

  6. why? nudist should have our own place!Nudism is natural and healthy. Are you Single and a Nudist?Meeting nudists? Try Quality Nudist Singles to give yourself a better chance by meeting nudist singles who enjoys the same nudist lifestyle that you do!

  7. Barbara Carruthers : Nudity is fully acceptable everywhere in the world EXCEPT Canada and the U.S.. Children see nudity all the time all over the world and accept that it’s just human bodies. Seeing nudity actually helps protect them from early/teen pregnancies and molestation as well. When everything is open and aboveboard, they know what’s wrong a lot sooner and are better able to protect themselves.

  8. The foreshore and up to the high water mark in federal crown land. Every person has the right to access that area of land. Any person who owns waterfront property will tell you the same thing. Water and the shore is NEVER private property. Additionally, the naturists never trespassed once he made his wishes known.

  9. I am not a “neurotic prude” but I sure as heck( for want of a better word) do not wish to see people laying around in the buff, if you feel you have the need to do that GO DO IT IN THE SANCTUARY OF YOUR OWN BACK YARD. Not everyone wishes to see you letting it all hang out, especially those with young children.

  10. If this beach is private property doesn’t THAT give the owner the RIGHTS TO SAY WHO COMES AND GOES ON HIS PROPERTY, whether it was excepted in the past or NOT , IF he OWNS THIS LAND and HE PAYS THE TAXES on it , he has the rights to say enough is enough, GET DRESSED OR GET OUT.

  11. continued…It appears the attitude of judges reflects the increasing tolerance of Canadians toward public nudity. A 2013 Expedia poll found 59% of Canadians are comfortable with seeing nudity at the beach and a 2014 fcn.ca poll found 1 in 4 Canadians have been naked at the beach or plan to be in the future.Also, each year, with the full knowledge and support of police and city councils: – World Naked Bike Rides throughout Canada. – Naked Polar Bear swims countrywide. – Official clothing optional beaches in Vancouver ( Wreck Beach ), White Rock ( Crescent Beach ) and Toronto ( Hanlan’s Point ) plus hundreds of unofficial beaches throughout Canada. – Naked Gay Pride parades. – Nude swim nights at public pools in Kelowna, Vancouver, Victoria, Ottawa, Edmonton, Drumheller, Toronto and many others. – Special events such as naked bungee jumping, zip-lining, etc.And finally, Penticton city councillors are on record acknowledging the decades old traditional naturist activities here at 3-Mile. The clothing optional aspect of this beach was also an official part of the City of Penticton tourism literature until recently.We believe in healthy, family friendly public nudity. Our principles include respectful and non-sexual social nudity that is safe for families and welcomes all shapes and sizes. We promote non-judgemental acceptance of our bodies with all their flaws, bulges and sags and reject the impossible standard of beauty we are exposed to daily in the media.We invite all people of goodwill to join us, with or without swimsuits. http://www.okanagannaturistassociation.ca

  12. Quote from the article above: “Lozinski says some determination needs to be made for this area, adding Supreme Court decisions from all over Canada will be taken into account when determining the matter.”.Judges have been redefining the 80 year old laws regarding public nudity / indecency and dismissing cases where the nudity is non-sexual. Here are a few of their comments…Justice Stuard… public nudity by itself is not an indecent act. To be an offence… the unclad person must act in a base or shameful manner… R. v. HeckerJustice Carole Baird Ellan… the actions of the accused were void of sexual content in that she did not act in a sexually provocative manner… R. v. SinclairJustice Gould… mere nude sunbathing is not of sufficient moral turpitude to support a charge for doing an indecent act… R. v. BeaupréJustice Coulter Osborne… found that baring her breasts was not harmful to anyone and noted there was nothing degrading or dehumanizing in what the appellant did. The scope of her activity was limited and was entirely non-commercial. No one who was offended was forced to continue looking at her… R. v. JacobsJudge Eugene Lewchuk… their behavior did not violate community standards… R. v. Godron & Rice.The above rulings are called ‘case law’. These rulings take precedence over the literal interpretation of the criminal code. Essentially judges are modifying the law to allow public nudity so long as it is non-sexual.

  13. Quote from the article above: “Lozinski says some determination needs to be made for this area, adding Supreme Court decisions from all over Canada will be taken into account when determining the matter.”.Judges have been redefining the 80 year old laws regarding public nudity / indecency and dismissing cases where the nudity is non-sexual. Here are a few of their comments…Justice Stuard… public nudity by itself is not an indecent act. To be an offence… the unclad person must act in a base or shameful manner… R. v. HeckerJustice Carole Baird Ellan… the actions of the accused were void of sexual content in that she did not act in a sexually provocative manner… R. v. SinclairJustice Gould… mere nude sunbathing is not of sufficient moral turpitude to support a charge for doing an indecent act… R. v. BeaupréJustice Coulter Osborne… found that baring her breasts was not harmful to anyone and noted there was nothing degrading or dehumanizing in what the appellant did. The scope of her activity was limited and was entirely non-commercial. No one who was offended was forced to continue looking at her… R. v. JacobsJudge Eugene Lewchuk… their behavior did not violate community standards… R. v. Godron & Rice.The above rulings are called ‘case law’. These rulings take precedence over the literal interpretation of the criminal code. Essentially judges are modifying the law to allow public nudity so long as it is non-sexual.