To: BC Liberals, Alex Atamanenko, Chief Clarence Louie, Editors of Oliver Chronicle, Osoyoos Times and Oliver Daily News

I am respectfully submitting questions and facts about Haynes Point.

Recently this beautiful provincial park was closed due to the discovery of  “an ancient burial site”. I would like to know what is happening with the investigation into this incident. In May I was at the site when the digging was taking place and I observed for several days as the work progressed.  I spoke to an official working at the site. My first question was, ” how deep was the body found?” The answer was ” about 4 feet down.” My second question was, ” Were there any artifacts found with the body” The answer was “NO.”
I am wondering if any of you are aware of the transformation of Haynes Point that took place in the mid 60’s. Before this peninsula became a camp ground it had a simple dirt road on very low lying land, often inaccessible during high water. When I was a child our family used to access this area by boat as the low rutted road was often awash, and many parts of Haynes Point were also underwater during spring.  When the idea of a provincial camp ground came into being, tons and tons of fill was brought in from the Cawston area and also the gravel pit at the north end of Osoyoos lake. The entire area, the road, the campsites and the huge mound where the original pit toilets were placed, was all land fill brought in. A quick visual survey of the area easily shows that the original land  is far below the level of the current campsites and toilets. Approximately 10 feet or more of fill is piled up to create the campsites, and the land in the middle where “the body” was found was built up even higher, in order to allow for the pit toilets.

“The body”   ….oh, wait a minute, not a body at all!! Not even an entire skull but just a few bones: a lower jaw bone, and a few other bones were found just 4 feet deep. Some sources say 3 feet. By my simple calculations I believe these few bones were found in the fill that was brought in, and I am questioning how this could constitute a ” burial site”, much less an ancient burial site. This leaves me with many questions. Were the bones placed in this fill after the park was created or did they arrive with the fill? I am not in any way saying these are not ancient native bones, however, it is easy to understand how the tons of fill placed there could easily have harbored these few bones without discovery in the days it was hauled in. It was only when recent excavation began right beside this built up toilet site that these few bones were found.

I strongly believe, as do many, many others, that these bones were not originally buried on Haynes Point at all, and for the following reasons. 1) An ancient burial site would constitute a full skeletal body. 2) Ancient artifacts would be present to support the culture 3) An Ancient burial site would be in original soil, far below the level these bones were found.

I trust that a full investigation will be carried out and common sense would also prevail in this situation. Many people feel that the loss of this beautiful provincial park to the public would be a tragedy.

Sincerely, Gail Blidook