Bristol residents concerned about the future of a large municipal property in Pontiac Station filled Bristol’s town hall at the Feb. 2 council meeting to make their opinions heard. 

In the fall of 2025, Bristol council received an offer of purchase from the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) for a 95-hectare piece of land near chemin de Pontiac Station. The lot has been owned by Bristol since 1994, but the municipality has not done much with the land aside from some minor logging activities. 

Since late January, Bristol councillor Greg Graham has been urging council to refuse the offer in the hopes of someday creating a park. Graham cited the beach access and historical and potential archaeological value of the land as reasons why the municipality should keep the land. 

Some members of the packed crowd at Monday’s meeting agreed with Graham’s appraisal. One woman was concerned for the future of recreation for the next generations of the community, and felt that the municipality would be in the best position to ensure access to the land. 

“If it’s not costing, I think we should take time in my opinion,” she said. 

Others welcomed the possibility of the NCC managing the land, adding that people in the community already use NCC-owned lots in Bristol for recreational purposes such as hiking, snowshoeing and birdwatching. 

“The NCC have been very good stewards of that land. They have been very responsive with any concerns respecting the use of their lands,” said resident Cathy Collins.  “Where is the stewardship of the land better placed? Could the municipality do as good a job as the NCC would do with that land, while keeping it open for public use?”

Some in attendance were concerned the municipality would use the land for development, but Graham responded that is not the council’s intention. Much of the lot is designated wetland, and the municipality is still awaiting new flood maps and wetland maps.

“Development [ . . . ] was not in the plan of Bristol, and at this point I think I can safely speak for everyone to say that that hasn’t been discussed or contemplated,” Graham said.

He said if there was to be some sort of historical or archaeological site on the property, the NCC would not allow the construction of even a simple structure. 

Bristol mayor Valerie Twolan-Graham said the meeting was productive and that the council will take the feedback under consideration. She said the council only just sat down with the NCC earlier on Monday night to look at the offer of purchase, and council members had the chance to ask their own questions about the offer. 

“It was just a chance for us to look in an organized way all together at this offer, and it didn’t even get into the fine print of the offer. It really had to do with why the NCC would be interested in the land and why councillors might be interested in Bristol not selling the land,” said Twolan-Graham. 

She added that the NCC representative could return at a future date to give a more in-depth presentation and discuss the offer in more detail. But first, she said her council must figure out what its priorities are for the property. She said some concerns the council has is the access that residents will still have to do things such as hunt, snowmobile, walk and other things. 

“We have an opportunity to negotiate [ . . . ] can we do this? And [would] the NCC still find the property attractive and be interested in it?”  

Graham said he remains unconvinced council should sell the lot. He said while the NCC is an admirable conservation organization, he feels that Bristol can better ensure that residents get to enjoy the land. 

“We’re in a far better place to balance public enjoyment with conservation,” he said. 

Twolan-Graham said that the council does not feel pressed to make a decision, but added that the NCC representative told them the project funding could be withdrawn for another project. 

“We’re going to make a decision in a way where I think all sides are considered and a public forum is held, but I don’t think we have a long period of time,” she said. 

“I think there’s just a belief that we need to consider this carefully and that we want to make sure that future generations can use this piece of property.”