VICTORIA – In 2017, Cory Pahl was a candidate for the Cascadia Party of British Columbia, whose official goals included the creation of a provincial assembly that would assert the sovereign rights of “British Columbians, Canadians and Cascadians.”
Cascadia, the concept of commonality between British Columbia and U.S. states in the Pacific Northwest, has roots dating back to the 19th century and beyond. It has sometimes been expressed as a desire for nationhood — although Pahl said the party never campaigned for the creation of a Cascadian nation, with British Columbia as part of it.
While he acknowledged the “separatism kind of discussion” surrounding the idea of Cascadia, he wanted nothing to do with a new expression of B.C. separatism, fuelled by anti-Ottawa sentiments, alienation from mainstream politics, and a sense of allegiance with similar movements in Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Pahl said the Cascadian movement “came from a very different perspective.”
“The goal of the party was really just to bring awareness of the unique challenges facing B.C. and the Pacific Northwest from an environmental and industrial development standpoint,” Pahl said in an interview from Qualicum Beach, B.C., on Vancouver Island.
“It’s alarming to see the separatism that’s kind of happening now, and it’s in a very different spirit than any discussion than we ever had around Cascadia or a potential separation from Canada.”
The new movement, the B.C. Prosperity Project, has taken root not far from Pahl, on Vancouver Island.
The group’s name echoes that of the Alberta Prosperity Project, whose separatist members were recently accused of treason by B.C. Premier David Eby for having met members of the U.S. administration of Donald Trump. But it’s not clear if there is an official connection. The B.C. group’s organizer, Peter Letourneux, declined an extensive interview.
He said in a brief exchange on social media he was “aware of the negative posture of the legacy media,” but said the movement was growing fast, and people should “hang on.”
The group held its inaugural, in-person organizational meeting in Campbell River, B.C., on Feb. 2.
Its Facebook page has more than 14,000 followers. Letourneux says on the page that “Alberta and Saskatchewan will soon enough become independent of Canada,” thus leaving B.C. as the only “western province left to feed Ottawa and pay for Quebec.”
British Columbia, he says, will be left in a “difficult position,” because it will be “subservient” to a federal government thousands of kilometres away.
“We are far better to join (Alberta) and (Saskatchewan) in establishing a new country free from the chains of Ottawa and many hundreds of special interest groups and lobbyists.”
The group’s meeting drew protesters, including former NDP legislature member Michelle Babchuk. She said in a social media post shared by Eby that Campbell River will not be “ground zero” for “anti-Canadian separatism.”
Stewart Prest, a political science lecturer at UBC, said alienation from the rest of the country is a” fundamental part” of B.C.‘s identity, making it “a province unto itself in many ways.”
Prest questioned whether B.C. separatism would enjoy much support, calling the concept of a B.C.-Alberta-Saskatchewan breakaway nation a “blue-sky” exercise. He predicted in the event that Alberta broke off from Canada, it would be quickly absorbed by the United States.
“But honestly, if we look at political ideologies and expressions of values … B.C. as a province has much more in common with the rest of Canada than it would with separate Prairie provinces,” he said.
He said B.C. separatism oriented toward Western Canada was a shift away from the Cascadia concept, not a recurrence.
Separatists in Alberta and their supporters elsewhere are more comfortable with the idea of Trump as leader than Mark Carney as prime minister, he said.
“So that is a distinct kind of realignment of politics related to this polarization of politics and the growth of a populist reaction that we have been talking about for the last number of years,” Prest said. “Cascadia is different. It’s in some ways, an almost more romantic concept, an idea of an alternate history.”
There might be pockets of British Columbia that found common cause with Alberta separatists, he said. But recent developments under the second Trump presidency “have, if anything, reinforced British Columbians’ identity as Canadians,” Prest added.
Michael Henshall is among the supporters of the B.C. Prosperity Project. He disagrees with Eby’s characterization that the group’s Albertan allies were treasonous, saying Eby and Carney “are the treasonous ones.”
A former candidate for the Social Credit party and the Conservative Party of B.C., Henshall said there was no time to lose when it came to B.C. separatism, citing poverty, homelessness and policies such as the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.
He said he believed a “global economic meltdown” was on the way and questioned the sincerity of recent announcements by Victoria and Ottawa to speed up resource projects.
“It’s too late and people are fed up,” he said. “They are done, and I don’t think that we can delay the direction of independence again, because over the next year or two years, we are going to see some pretty hard times in Canada.”
There are massive hurdles to separation. Canada’s Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that neither Canadian nor international law permits provinces to unilaterally secede, although Canada would have to enter negotiations with any province where a clear majority supported a “clear question” on separation.
A poll from Pollara Strategic Insights published last month suggested 11 per cent of British Columbians were likely to support secession.
There would also likely be economic costs, with various research showing that Britain’s exit from the European Union has hurt the British economy.
Henshall acknowledged some initial “transitional” costs. “But I think the federal government and our provincial government in B.C. have been hindering our resource sector for some time now, stopping pipelines, not allowing permits — that’s in forestry, mining, oil and gas, you name it,” he said.
Once freed from Ottawa, Henshall predicts B.C. could become one of the wealthiest jurisdictions in the world based on its natural resources.
And once independent, B.C. would eventually join Alberta and Saskatchewan, and not the United States, he said.
‘ARBITRARY LINES ON A MAP’
A map from the non-profit Cascadia Department of Bioregion based in Seattle shows Cascadia running from Northern California to Alaska and from the Pacific to the Continental Divide, including most of British Columbia.
The group sketches out Cascadia as a bioregion including British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, Idaho and parts of southeast Alaska and Northern California, based on “natural features such as mountain ranges, and rivers as the basis for political and cultural units, rather than arbitrary lines on a map.”
But it also depicts Cascadia as a “popular grassroots” movement that “seeks to further local autonomy, empower individuals and communities to better represents their own needs, and create sustainable economies through bioregional planning.”
“We are the thin green line between resource extraction in the east and booming global markets in Asia, an epicentre that is home to the wealthiest corporations and individuals while others struggle, starve and die in our streets due to poverty in an increasingly globalized market,” it says.
Those views, which place B.C. in the context of an ecological barrier against harmful capitalism, put it squarely at odds with development-friendly views among the newer crop of western separatists.
Elements of Cascadian ideas have their roots in political history. U.S. founding father Thomas Jefferson once envisaged an “independent empire” on the western side of the continent, based around the coastal trading post of Fort Astoria in what is now Oregon, while Prest said areas north and south of the 49th parallel were once under joint American and British control.
Other elements of Cascadia draw inspiration from literature. In the 1975 book “Ecotopia,” the late American author Ernst Callenbach describes a future in which the Pacific Northwest has seceded from the U.S.
But the origins of the modern Cascadia movement date back to 2005, when Brandon Letsinger, who is also involved with the Cascadia Department of Bioregion, founded the non-profit organization CascadiaNow!
An independent coastal state would be an economic powerhouse, say its advocates. The Cascadia Department of Bioregion says that excluding California, Cascadia would have the world’s ninth-largest economy, roughly on par with that of Canada.
The Cascadia movement even boasts its own flag — a Douglas fir silhouetted against three horizontal bars of white, blue and green. It can frequently be seen at sporting events across the Pacific Northwest, especially at home games of Major League Soccer teams like the Vancouver Whitecaps, Seattle Sounders and Portland Timbers. The three compete for a fan-created trophy — the Cascadia Cup.
There are more substantial ties. Politicians from British Columbia, Washington state, Oregon and California have a history of discussions on regional issues such as transportation and the environment.
Last month, Washington Lt.-Gov. Denny Heck and B.C. legislature Speaker Raj Chouhan signed an agreement to establish an interparliamentary working group to deepen relations between British Columbia and Washington, B.C.‘s largest trading partner, with 32 per cent of exports going to the state.
During his visit to the B.C. legislature in 2025, Heck professed his state’s love for Canada — a counterpoint to annexation threats from Trump.
Prest also points to cultural similarities. “You can move from Vancouver to Seattle to Portland, and feel like you are moving through different variations of what is in some ways a similar culture,” Prest said. And Vancouver is a frequent cinematic body double for Seattle and other Pacific Northwest cities.
Prest noted Vancouver, Seattle and Portland are known for their “progressive views of politics and inclusive community making.”
But Pahl of the Cascadia Party is doubtful an orchestrated movement is capable of making the concept of Cascadia a reality. A “catastrophic” environmental or political scenario would more likely be required, he said.
“I would be happy to see it (Cascadia), but like I say, it’s a good time to be a Canadian,” Pahl said.
“So it’s probably not top of mind this moment, but as things change, we could potentially be closer to see a version of Cascadia — at least on the American side — than we have in the past.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 8, 2026.
