BHA Alberta Chapter

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

So the OHV guys can't police themselves, but the gov. should police it. Where are these resources going to come from. It's a huge area, impossible to police effectively, the best way to save the area will happen. I'm good with that. At least the next few generations will have something. One of the few things the NDP has done right.

While the areas are huge, the majority of offenses are related to random camping and garbage, vandalism etc. These offenses occur in relatively concentrated areas. The policing would absolutely pay for itself. It is just not an option the government wants to consider.

[3blade]

My 2 cents: I've been following BHA on Facebook since the beginning. They have been an instrumental voice in several huge wins for public land hunting in the western states. They have done well and indeed shown themselves to be solid advocates for hunting and public access.

Sadly, the association with Y2Y ecoterrorists is a huge miscalculation (as WB has already posted about). I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think it's a new group that has not fully hatched yet, let alone had the time to review all the ongoing issues in Alberta. Hopefully this is rectified sooner than later as I had intended to join.

Regarding OHVs: the quad ban is going to happen because of the damage (real or perceived) done. So I'd rather have a park with hunting than without. I'd suggest it's the other way around, groups like BHA can leverage hunting into the plan where the NDP/y2y would ban it outright under normal provincial park rules. You guys that think you're going to stop a majority government, especially with an environment minister with ecoterrorist ties, from doing anything in the castle are uriniting into the wind while swimming upstream.

[boah]

Originally Posted by Newview01

While the areas are huge, the majority of offenses are related to random camping and garbage, vandalism etc. These offenses occur in relatively concentrated areas. The policing would absolutely pay for itself. It is just not an option the government wants to consider.

I agree, pretty easy to police this.

Originally Posted by 3blade

My 2 cents: I've been following BHA on Facebook since the beginning. They have been an instrumental voice in several huge wins for public land hunting in the western states. They have done well and indeed shown themselves to be solid advocates for hunting and public access.

Sadly, the association with Y2Y ecoterrorists is a huge miscalculation (as WB has already posted about). I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think it's a new group that has not fully hatched yet, let alone had the time to review all the ongoing issues in Alberta. Hopefully this is rectified sooner than later as I had intended to join.

Regarding OHVs: the quad ban is going to happen because of the damage (real or perceived) done. So I'd rather have a park with hunting than without. I'd suggest it's the other way around, groups like BHA can leverage hunting into the plan where the NDP/y2y would ban it outright under normal provincial park rules. You guys that think you're going to stop a majority government, especially with an environment minister with ecoterrorist ties, from doing anything in the castle are uriniting into the wind while swimming upstream.

You do realize that there are 2 distinctly different parks in the works for the castle area??? One is a provincial park, meaning NO HUNTING.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by boah

You do realize that there are 2 distinctly different parks in the works for the castle area??? One is a provincial park, meaning NO HUNTING.

Yes, and I also realize the whole east slopes from the US border to Hinton could be a provincial park next Friday if they so wanted it. You do realize we are dealing with a hostile MAJORITY government? They do not even have to pretend to listen to you, me, or anyone else.

[sjd]

Originally Posted by 3blade

My 2 cents: I've been following BHA on Facebook since the beginning. They have been an instrumental voice in several huge wins for public land hunting in the western states. They have done well and indeed shown themselves to be solid advocates for hunting and public access.

Sadly, the association with Y2Y ecoterrorists is a huge miscalculation (as WB has already posted about). I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think it's a new group that has not fully hatched yet, let alone had the time to review all the ongoing issues in Alberta. Hopefully this is rectified sooner than later as I had intended to join.

Regarding OHVs: the quad ban is going to happen because of the damage (real or perceived) done. So I'd rather have a park with hunting than without. I'd suggest it's the other way around, groups like BHA can leverage hunting into the plan where the NDP/y2y would ban it outright under normal provincial park rules. You guys that think you're going to stop a majority government, especially with an environment minister with ecoterrorist ties, from doing anything in the castle are uriniting into the wind while swimming upstream.

You know what a terrorist is right? Don't cheapen victims of violence and embarrass yourself by comparing the work of conservation groups that work legally on land use planning to achieve goals different to yours. You know the government follows these pages right? Keep undermining the cause!

[alta270]

Originally Posted by 3blade

Yes, and I also realize the whole east slopes from the US border to Hinton could be a provincial park next Friday if they so wanted it. You do realize we are dealing with a hostile MAJORITY government? They do not even have to pretend to listen to you, me, or anyone else.

Not a supporter of this government, but they did in fact listen to hunter concerns and changed the draft policy whereby we could now use OHVs to retrieve game. I would call that listening.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by sjd

You know what a terrorist is right? Don't cheapen victims of violence and embarrass yourself by comparing the work of conservation groups that work legally on land use planning to achieve goals different to yours. You know the government follows these pages right? Keep undermining the cause!

http://www.albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/arc...s-july-08.html

Well you can take that up with Rob then, if you think the both of us are "undermining the cause".

Re Y2Y: They are exactly what I called them. Terrorists. They try to get their way through political channels as well as frequently threaten, harass and attack anyone who disagreees with them. Walk through Canmore during archery season wearing a camo shirt and see what happens.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by alta270

Not a supporter of this government, but they did in fact listen to hunter concerns and changed the draft policy whereby we could now use OHVs to retrieve game. I would call that listening.

That is called damage control, not listening.

[alta270]

Originally Posted by Newview01

That is called damage control, not listening.

I'm not so closed minded not to give credit where credit is due, even if otherwise I would not support this government.

[sjd]

Re Y2Y: They are exactly what I called them. Terrorists. They try to get their way through political channels as well as frequently threaten, harass and attack anyone who disagreees with them. Walk through Canmore during archery season wearing a camo shirt and see what happens.[/QUOTE]

Huh, you've been violently harassed by employees of Y2Y in Canmore? Did you call the RCMP? You've been "threatened and attacked" by conservation organizations.

Seems like this Snowflake disease is spreading.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by sjd

Huh, you've been violently harassed by employees of Y2Y in Canmore? Did you call the RCMP? You've been "threatened and attacked" by conservation organizations.

Seems like this Snowflake disease is spreading.

Haha nice how you ignored the top part, right about where you got called on your bs. Think we know who the snowflake is.

And yes I had some douchebag hipster in a MEC shirt (same funding, same people) try to start a confrontation. No, I'm don't need the jackboots to look after me.

You obviously don't like the spotlight on your precious group of envirothugs and their lying about supporting hunting. So keep it up, every swing you take proves exactly what I've been saying.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by alta270

I'm not so closed minded not to give credit where credit is due, even if otherwise I would not support this government.

So if someone threatens to cut both of your legs off, but only cuts one off, you thank them?

[tonnage]

Here's a little history of Y2Y that Rob Miskosky wrote a few years ago called "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing. It's a four part story well worth the read. Each link is a part.

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...ts-may-08.html

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...s-june-08.html

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...s-july-08.html

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...ts-aug-08.html

[alta270]

Originally Posted by Newview01

So if someone threatens to cut both of your legs off, but only cuts one off, you thank them?

The fact remains that the Dippers did listen to hunters and revised the plan to allow for retrieval of game by OHVs.

[sjd]

Originally Posted by tonnage

Here's a little history of Y2Y that Rob Miskosky wrote a few years ago called "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing. It's a four part story well worth the read. Each link is a part.

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...ts-may-08.html

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...s-june-08.html

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...s-july-08.html

http://albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archive...ts-aug-08.html

Ironic that the story glorifies the Willmore as a huntable park with no ATVs and no industry. Just like the Castle will be.

It was the foresight of making that area a park decades ago that kept it wild and made it the amazing huntable place it is today. If that hadn't been done it would have long ago been trashed too.

[boah]

Originally Posted by sjd

Ironic that the story glorifies the Willmore as a huntable park with no ATVs and no industry. Just like the Castle will be.

It was the foresight of making that area a park decades ago that kept it wild and made it the amazing huntable place it is today. If that hadn't been done it would have long ago been trashed too.

If anyone is naive to think that the dippers have no plans for any type of industry in the castle area ........

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Guys, the Castle changes are a huge issue in Alberta right now. Probably the biggest access issue in a generation.
So, in the interest of making sure people understand we invited the BHA's Alberta Chairmen to sit down with us and have a chat on our podcast.

We talked for about an hour. In that time we talked a lot about the Castle, Y2Y, where BHA see's themselves fitting in at the stakeholder table here in Alberta.

So, it's been recorded and as soon as our Producer (Mike's wife) can do what she does it will be up for free download.
I'll make a fresh post letting people know when it's up, should be next week sometime.

We look forward to hearing feedback both positive and negative.

Thanks.
Highlander Hunting Podcast
highlanderhunting.podbean.com
On ITunes and Google Play

[alta270]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Guys, the Castle changes are a huge issue in Alberta right now. Probably the biggest access issue in a generation.
So, in the interest of making sure people understand we invited the BHA's Alberta Chairmen to sit down with us and have a chat on our podcast.

We talked for about an hour. In that time we talked a lot about the Castle, Y2Y, where BHA see's themselves fitting in at the stakeholder table here in Alberta.

So, it's been recorded and as soon as our Producer (Mike's wife) can do what she does it will be up for free download.
I'll make a fresh post letting people know when it's up, should be next week sometime.

We look forward to hearing feedback both positive and negative.

Thanks.
Highlander Hunting Podcast
highlanderhunting.podbean.com
On ITunes and Google Play

I listened to these guys podcasts (all 3 of them so far), and am impressed with what is a great beginning. Just two guys, family guys, talking about hunting and conservation values. Great to see this from a these Calgarians. Worth the listen. I've subscribed to their channel.

[Don_Parsons]

Question time of history playing out !!!

The Castle Area Park idea started with the SSRB, 5 ish yesrs ago too a point that many active user groups were welcome too share in put on what "all" user groups wanted to see,,, the word "trust" was part of it from Shannon Phillips. Not really as OHV use will be allowed for a few more years, but will come to an end over 3 too 5 years... Perversion will allow OHV use beyond that, but many of us here on the AO FOURM know that the trails will over grow too the point that OHV use, no trail maintance will slowly block off access too areas peace by peace till there is no trail at all. One only needs too go the Siffluer Falls too see the trails are all faded away with no humans walking past the falls. Can't be done as the old growth forest blocks off the foot trails past these falls.

So,,,,, with the stroke of a pen with out fair consultation this same thing "could" happen again later on down the road.

Don't Know as we wait and see I'm guessing.

Time ticks by as the next generation "might" want more limited restrictions put onto crown lands, but we can assure our selves some things from the past.

Once lands become protected, there is no going back.
It has never happened in North America nor in the United States and in Eroupe.

Time ticks by as humans find less and less freedoms which might be good or not so good depending what fence line you stand at.

Optimistic, pessimistic or realistic

I'm in neither of these categories since I'm not from this planet, but many of my human friends are.

Coffee time as I dream about our crown lands for "all" users too share today, tomorrow and long after I'm gone.
My faith in "trust" is very limited with Governments and groups now days.

Just me I guess as I respectfully sight see the free lands till they are off limits piece by piece year by year.
I only hope I'm wrong as time will tell.

Don Parsons

PS: This is a IMO only thought that "could" be subject to change in years too come as age changes ones thoughts going forward.

[elkmakemecrazy]

Originally Posted by alta270

Not a supporter of this government, but they did in fact listen to hunter concerns and changed the draft policy whereby we could now use OHVs to retrieve game. I would call that listening.

So a hunter can quad in to retrieve game but a person who wants to get to the exact same spot to say fish or take pictures can't?

[alta270]

Originally Posted by elkmakemecrazy

So a hunter can quad in to retrieve game but a person who wants to get to the exact same spot to say fish or take pictures can't?

I think that the hunter needs to advise F&W and get permission. From the Draft Management Plan on hunting:

Review best practices and develop guidelines for the responsible use of OHVs for the purposes of retrieving game. Guidelines for Park staff and users will address various management issues including the potential of permitting mechanisms, hours and seasonal limitations, code of conduct for users, etc.

There is no reason to need an OHV to retrieve fish... they don't get that big back there. Limited use, and frankly, this policy makes sense and is a result of actually listening to hunters' legitimate concerns.

We have to walk back there to hunt. Why can't those that fish or take pictures do the same? It is ONLY for retrieval that a mechanism will be set up.

[elkmakemecrazy]

Originally Posted by alta270

I think that the hunter needs to advise F&W and get permission. From the Draft Management Plan on hunting:

Review best practices and develop guidelines for the responsible use of OHVs for the purposes of retrieving game. Guidelines for Park staff and users will address various management issues including the potential of permitting mechanisms, hours and seasonal limitations, code of conduct for users, etc.

There is no reason need an OHV to retrieve fish... they don't get that big back there. Limited use, and frankly, this policy makes sense and is a result of actually listening to hunters' legitimate concerns.

We have to walk back there to hunt. Why can't those that fish or take pictures do the same? It is ONLY for retrieval that a mechanism will be set up.

Interesting. You say there is no reason or need of an OHV to retrieve fish. Well let me flip that. There is no reason or need of an OHV to retrieve big game either. People have been doing and will continue to do it for years myself included.

How about this for the plan:

Review best practices and develop guidelines for the responsible use of OHVs. Guidelines for Park staff and users will address various management issues including the potential of permitting mechanisms, hours and seasonal limitations, code of conduct for users, etc.

Why does one interest group get special treatment?

[alta270]

Originally Posted by elkmakemecrazy

Interesting. You say there is no reason or need of an OHV to retrieve fish. Well let me flip that. There is no reason or need of an OHV to retrieve big game either. People have been doing and will continue to do it for years myself included.

You won't get an argument from me, as I agree, one doesn't need an OHV to retrieve game. We've all done that in the past, but the uproar from the OHV crowd was so loud, the plan was altered.

How about this for the plan:

Review best practices and develop guidelines for the responsible use of OHVs. Guidelines for Park staff and users will address various management issues including the potential of permitting mechanisms, hours and seasonal limitations, code of conduct for users, etc.

I personally would prefer no OHV use, as the OHV users have proven that they can not act responsibly, nor police their own, nor stay on trails, nor use bridges made for crossing streams. What's wrong with keeping OHVs out of sensitive headwaters and wetlands?

Why does one interest group get special treatment?

OHV users ARE a special interest group. Most Albertans' who use the Eastern Slopes are not OHV owners. I agree, why should one interest group, a small interest group, get special treatment.

Best quads to use are the ones you were born with.

[fargineyesore]

Hunters also leave garbage in the bush, poach, trespass and discharge firearms unsafely. It's not just a few either.

Why do you not support a ban on hunting then? Same reasoning as a ban on OHVs.

Hypocrites of the first degree.

When the same people try to shut down hunting in the area hunters may find the ****ed off OHV crowd may just lend their voice to the antis to get YOUR pursuit shut down as well.

[alta270]

Originally Posted by fargineyesore

Hunters also leave garbage in the bush, poach, trespass and discharge firearms unsafely. It's not just a few either.

Why do you not support a ban on hunting then? Same reasoning as a ban on OHVs.

Hypocrites of the first degree.

When the same people try to shut down hunting in the area hunters may find the ****ed off OHV crowd may just lend their voice to the antis to get YOUR pursuit shut down as well.

SOME hunters leave garbage in the bush, poach, etc. etc. Most of us will report them. But even so, if those hunters are walking, they are not making semi-permanent or permanent damage to habitat, streams, wetlands and soil, are they?

I have no problem with OHV being used in areas where they do not impact the landscape negatively in a significant way... the headwaters of our streams is not that area. I'm sorry you can't see that, and I suspect nothing will change your mind, but I would rather have a Willmore situation, which has worked out great, than something like the Goat or Siffleur.

I support the ban of OHV's in the Castle. I also support their use for game retrieval.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by alta270

SOME hunters leave garbage in the bush, poach, etc. etc. Most of us will report them. But even so, if those hunters are walking, they are not making semi-permanent or permanent damage to habitat, streams, wetlands and soil, are they?

I have no problem with OHV being used in areas where they do not impact the landscape negatively in a significant way... the headwaters of our streams is not that area. I'm sorry you can't see that, and I suspect nothing will change your mind, but I would rather have a Willmore situation, which has worked out great, than something like the Goat or Siffleur.

I support the ban of OHV's in the Castle. I also support their use for game retrieval.

This is where you are wrong. Fishermen and hunters are disturbing the headwaters as well, any time you step in a creek to fish it or cross a creek you are disturbing and damaging the habitat. Leaving garbage in the forest is just as bad.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by fargineyesore

Hunters also leave garbage in the bush, poach, trespass and discharge firearms unsafely. It's not just a few either.

Why do you not support a ban on hunting then? Same reasoning as a ban on OHVs.

Hypocrites of the first degree.

When the same people try to shut down hunting in the area hunters may find the ****ed off OHV crowd may just lend their voice to the antis to get YOUR pursuit shut down as well.

2x...

[nube]

I always hear this talk of OHV disrupting fish while people ride through a creek. I find this BS. How many times does it rain and leak mud into a creek a year? More so than any quad crossing a stream. I don't buy it.
Some say it may be the oil or gas washing off the quad..... if that were the case the North Saskatchewan river would be void of any fish.
There are no more fish in any stream now that has been shut down than there has been in past days when you could cross the odd stream here and there.

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by Newview01

BHA Alberta is a detriment because it promotes the rights of one group of hunters over another.

I don't this the use of a OHV as a "right." Everyone has to play by the same rules for a specific area. No different than the bow zones, blackfoot reserve, OHV before noon in specified WMU...etc. So they are restricting the use of OHV as a tool for hunting in that area. Everyone plays by the same rule, so in theory no one is having their individuals "rights" infringed upon. The back-packer also can not use a OHV if all of sudden he feels lazy that day.

[Taco]