Bighorn Public land to Parks land proposal

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

It's comments like this that make it easy for the government to close areas down. I don't quad so I'm ok with the closures, but by God if they close the hunting and fishing down I will scream and holler bloody murder. There are many user groups that use the outdoors and all of us should be banding together to fight the lose of areas that users like to use. Don't kid yourself there are a lot in individuals right here on the forum that quad, camp and hunt and fish that cause a lot of the problems with destroying areas, nobody is perfect. I spent a considerable amount of time in the castle area this past fall and hardly seen a sole in the area. Where did all these hardcore backpack hunters go. You see the government is getting exactly what they want, less users and that includes hunters and fishermen.

Don’t get carried away I was arguing for continuing atv usage albeit I think it should have more enforcement and fixed trails. There’s a happy medium on usage, the park is way too far but overusing our western lands to death without enforcement shouldn’t continue.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by caddisfly7

I'll get a little worried and active if a more liberal state/province would ever ban all hunting across the board, which is unlikely. The likelihood of hunting ever being banned in Alberta for myself, my children or my grandchildren, is low.

LOL! Keep dreaming!

At the rate we are losing access yearly, hunting in Alberta as we know it will be gone before you know it. Your grand kids will likely not be allowed to own a firearm...

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

No need to ban hunting. Just stop reasonable access and ability to random camp and it will stop occurring. Then be prepared to step over each other in the accessible areas left

I guess it is where we may differ is what is defined as "reasonable access". Quading is allowed in much of the province. It appears that quading on designated trails will continue to be allowed in the proposed PLUZ and the proposed Wildland Park. Backcountry camping appears to also be included in the PLUZ and the Wildland Park. I just don't see the anti-hunting boogey-man here. Many of the other Wildland Parks strike a reasonable balance between multi-use stakeholder groups....including guys like you that love to quad. I have seen what unfettered access looks like, and I do think some restrictions, providing they are reasonable could strike a good balance.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I guess it is where we may differ is what is defined as "reasonable access". Quading is allowed in much of the province. It appears that quading on designated trails will continue to be allowed in the proposed PLUZ and the proposed Wildland Park. Backcountry camping appears to also be included in the PLUZ and the Wildland Park. I just don't see the anti-hunting boogey-man here. Many of the other Wildland Parks strike a reasonable balance between multi-use stakeholder groups....including guys like you that love to quad. I have seen what unfettered access looks like, and I do think some restrictions, providing they are reasonable could strike a good balance.

That's exactly what was thought when the castle plan was coming in, but the trails a slowly getting closed off every year and is back country camping allowed in the castle still?

[Dmedlicott1]

The problem being there is no real solid info on this from the government. They say one thing and do another... look into castle. Y2y is pushing this in the states in alberta and in bc. One common thing in all areas is that they try to push it through as quickly and quietly as possible. There are leaked e mails that say to keep this quiet from the stake holders. This is wrong! They are trying to separate and divide atvers, hunters anglers, hikers...ect. if we don't band together as outdoorsmen and fight this we will eventually lose it all. As one big group we have a stronger voice then if we separate ourselves in to small groups. Im not saying there can't be changes but i do believe these people work for us and should be doing what the majority want ( pretty hard to find that out without asking or manipulating your survey to ask certain people). It's hard to ignore the proposed Yellowstone to Yukon agenda when it's happening in three different governments and all looks the same. Hard to believe there is not some kind of outside influence here.

Here's some places to find info on this.

Facebook:
Coalition of albertans for public land access
Love your trails
Concerned citizens for caribou recovery

https://friresearch.ca/news/preparin...regional-plans

https://landusehub.ca/bighorn-country-consultations/

[Dmedlicott1]

What are you willing to lose. Your favorite hunting spot, fishing spot, quadding spot, your trapline?

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

That's exactly what was thought when the castle plan was coming in, but the trails a slowly getting closed off every year and is back country camping allowed in the castle still?

Are we talking about the wildland park or the provincial park? My understanding is that the Wildland park allows back country camping. Is that correct?

[59whiskers]

The NDP has all but shut down input from local user groups like Alberta Fish and Game and Crowsnest Quad Squad. Other groups will have major future in put on fish and wildlife resources, media anouncements were made about 2 weeks ago. Have not heard a peep about former user groups involved with the South Saskatchewan River Regional Plan through the media. This is real threat to our outdoor persuits. The same is coming to the Bighorn.

[Joe Black]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I guess it is where we may differ is what is defined as "reasonable access". Quading is allowed in much of the province. It appears that quading on designated trails will continue to be allowed in the proposed PLUZ and the proposed Wildland Park. Backcountry camping appears to also be included in the PLUZ and the Wildland Park. I just don't see the anti-hunting boogey-man here. Many of the other Wildland Parks strike a reasonable balance between multi-use stakeholder groups....including guys like you that love to quad. I have seen what unfettered access looks like, and I do think some restrictions, providing they are reasonable could strike a good balance.

As mentioned already, the same bait and switch occurred with castle and Livingston’s/porcupine final plan.

It’s up to you. Make a decision on how things will shake out via a jumbled hard to navigate proposal, or what they have already done in the slopes south of Calgary.

Fool Me once shame on you, fool me twice( three times) shame on me.

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

As mentioned already, the same bait and switch occurred with castle and Livingston’s/porcupine final plan.

It’s up to you. Make a decision on how things will shake out via a jumbled hard to navigate proposal, or what they have already done in the slopes south of Calgary.

Fool Me once shame on you, fool me twice( three times) shame on me.

You and few others have made reference to the Castle area, but I am not particularly familiar with the issue other than to know it was contentious and was clearly not handled well by the NDP. So what was the bait and switch?

There was a post earlier that suggested back country camping is currently not allowed in the Castle. Is this true for the Provincial Park and the Wildland? If there is no back country camping in the Castle Wildland, then I obviously have some real concerns over what that means for the Bighorn Wildland.

I certainly don't want to be duped by an NDP government that is trying to sell a false bill of goods by getting hunters and anglers on side just to betray us when the final plan is released. At the same time, I also don't want to fall victim to propaganda that might be put out by special interests groups that have a vested interest in conflating the interests of hunters and fisherman with unfettered quading and rv access.

[ram crazy]

Be prepared to be duped then. Shannon has her own agenda and trust me it doesn't have our best interest in any of it. Only a fool would believe a politician.

[Joe Black]

What stuns me is that there are still those out there that do not know what was promised and what actually happened in the foothills south of Calgary over the last 4 years. Just Hard to believe not everybody is aware. Huge case of “if it doesn’t affect me, no problem.”

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

As mentioned already, the same bait and switch occurred with castle and Livingston’s/porcupine final plan.

It’s up to you. Make a decision on how things will shake out via a jumbled hard to navigate proposal, or what they have already done in the slopes south of Calgary.

Fool Me once shame on you, fool me twice( three times) shame on me.

There hasn’t been anything officially happening to the porkies/Livingston area yet has there? I was really hoping all this would take too long and they’d be distant the election and those changes would simply not happen or at least in a better manner where stakeholders actually had input.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by slough shark

There hasn’t been anything officially happening to the porkies/Livingston area yet has there?

Yes, already done.

[FinnDawg]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

What stuns me is that there are still those out there that do not know what was promised and what actually happened in the foothills south of Calgary over the last 4 years. Just Hard to believe not everybody is aware. Huge case of “if it doesn’t affect me, no problem.”

Why are you avoiding his question? What was the bait and switch?

[Joe Black]

Sorry for not getting right back. I do have a life.

Others can feel free to chime in on what I missed.

1)Start with a signed letter from Shannon to the crowsnest quad squad promising that no radical plans are in the works for castle and that all the work they put into bridges,et (now in the park) has shown their stewardship and she would appreciate them supporting the draft. They did, as the draft allowed for permannaet quad trails in the now park area. When the final plan came out, after they supported the draft, the park excluded any permanent quad trails. Ok,ok, Shannon said, there will be. A gradual phase out in 1-5 years. Guess what. 1 year later. All gone.

2). Let’s talk about the promise she made to the the AFGA and local hunting/fishing clubs that designated trails would remain open in the park for hunting/game retrieval. Trust me, you will have this. So they did. They gave the draft their blesssing. And do I need to tell you what happened to that promise? Broken as welll after they received the endorsement from the AFGA on the draft. Google the AFGA on what their official stance is now after that con job.

3). Go to the porky/Livingston plan. Don’t worry she said after closing 80 % of the castle area. We will ensure you have ample area to take your OHV use. So what does she do? Close 80-90 % of the usable trails in the Livingston’s and porky. They could easily all be designated. Trails. No. She just closed them..

Just remember this is a DRAFT and they have the ability to put whatever they want into the FINAL plan without any further consultation. So go ahead. Fill your boots. Trust her. Don’t come crying on here after the dust settles.

[Joe Black]

Ps. Forgot to mention how she totally screwed everybody who ever wants to random camp in the areas I mentioned above. She thought of that one her self. Let’s make it illegal to set up a tent in the bush on public land. Let’s make them all tent in one or two desigated spots amidst thousands of open area. It sounds insane when you say it out loud doesn’t it. Again, no mention in the draft, put in the final plan. Now it’s spoken word.

[NUK SOO KOW]

Wow. I hate to say I told you so but... I tried to warn people about Bighorn years ago. No one listened. I didn’t want to happen to the people that use that area the same outcome as us down south with the castle. Like was said earlier it’s s case of “ not my area don’t care”.
Folks... this year my family lost our open camping spots in castle that we stayed at over 40 years. I’m a third generation user of that area...I started my young family, my 2 year old and newborn boys will never be able to have the experiences that I was able to have.
Those areas are now closed to open camping indefinatley...Thanks Shannon.
My father is now 70... he can’t walk far anymore... he will now never see areas that his dad took him, he took me as a child. I have a sxs that I used to get him near our favourite areas to fish. He’s crushed he will never see them again.
Think of what you wish about atvs... but they do provide access for many people of age, health, disabilities.
The NDP fed us lie after lie over the castle. So many people were happy about the new park... keep it wild they say... now they have new paved roads, running gas/sewer lines all over, fast food trucks, infrastructure, and proposal to build a year round mega resort at castle. Also investors pondering beaver mines town building hotels and resorts. Possible new construction at the intersection of the beaver mines lake/castle falls turnoffs.

I have never seen more garbage and litter along the river banks and barnaby lakes as I have since it became a park. Thanks tourists.

I spent my whole life fishing, hunting, hiking, rv camping, back country camping, atv riding, harvesting firewood, in that area. Makes me want to puke what shannon did to that place.

All the laws for protection were already in place... enforcement is what we needed.

These groups behind the NDP are bad news... for everyone. I have been keeping up and researching this for three years now. It’s process of elimination. Different user groups. Start with the easiest to pint fingers at(Atv/campers) and go from there.
Soon... no more fishing, cutties an bulls protected. No more hunting.., disturbing the bears. No more walking off the trails... rare flora and fauna.

It’s coming.

Folks fight hard for Bighorn. Keep it public. We have/will have nothing left south of red deer for public land in the eastern slopes.

Whatever outdoor activities you partake in... remember we all enjoy different things. Just cause your happy atv are gone and your an angler... what about when they close fishing... or hunting...

Do your research. Plenty of info out there.

For certain though... Shannon Phillips does have an agenda... it does not include YOU whatsoever.

She and here NGOs need to be stopped... now.

We all want protected land... but we all want to be able to enjoy it too.

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

Ps. Forgot to mention how she totally screwed everybody who ever wants to random camp in the areas I mentioned above. She thought of that one her self. Let’s make it illegal to set up a tent in the bush on public land. Let’s make them all tent in one or two desigated spots amidst thousands of open area. It sounds insane when you say it out loud doesn’t it. Again, no mention in the draft, put in the final plan. Now it’s spoken word.

Are you saying that you can't camp in the Wildland except in designated areas?

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

[2 Tollers]

Originally Posted by caddisfly7

I'll get a little worried and active if a more liberal state/province would ever ban all hunting across the board, which is unlikely. The likelihood of hunting ever being banned in Alberta for myself, my children or my grandchildren, is low.

I have had direct conversations with people in the current government that see nothing wrong with banning of sport hunting as in their opinion it is some thing that society should move away from. So our opinion on the level of risks differ.

Rather than an outright ban how about we just make it more and more difficult over time and eventually you will quit on your own.

[Joe Black]

Read the draft. You tell me.( pertaining to specific allowances for camping in wildling vs PLUZ vs provincial parks.)

All I know is that for all of porkies and Livingston random camping is out, designated areas only. I’ve seen the signs posted of the main roads.

But go ahead. Believe that everything that is written in the draft won’t change in the final plan.

Im done now. You say it can’t be. Oh, it can and will be. Don’t get pizzed off at me. The only thing that keeps my sanity about what is happening is what a change of government can do to undo the damage.

[Buckhorn2]

What I dont understand with all these changes is, it was already against the rules to quad off designated trails. Take the 40million dollars and spend on enforcement. There should be no development of these areas to allow easier access for motorhomes etc (ya ha tinda i read) i am ok with no new atv trails. Leave the ones that are here now. Do we think after ya ha tinda is developed we will be allowed to hunt in there? They say we are not following the atv rules causing all the damage to the area. How do they fix it? Make more of the rules we are already not following?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CF8889]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

Read the draft. You tell me.( pertaining to specific allowances for camping in wildling vs PLUZ vs provincial parks.)

All I know is that for all of porkies and Livingston random camping is out, designated areas only. I’ve seen the signs posted of the main roads.

But go ahead. Believe that everything that is written in the draft won’t change in the final plan.

Im done now. You say it can’t be. Oh, it can and will be. Don’t get pizzed off at me. The only thing that keeps my sanity about what is happening is what a change of government can do to undo the damage.

You do understand the Random Camping (parking an RV off the side of the road) and Backcountry Camping (pitching a tent in the bush) are different things right? There are designated spots now for parking giant RVs, and Backcountry Camping is allowed in Castle WPP, Porkies, and Livingston.

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by CF8889

You do understand the Random Camping (parking an RV off the side of the road) and Backcountry Camping (pitching a tent in the bush) are different things right? There are designated spots now for parking giant RVs, and Backcountry Camping is allowed in Castle WPP, Porkies, and Livingston.

Exactly. Some of these boys are harder to nail down than a politician. There appears to be a real desire to merge issues like the above to garner support from hunters and fisherman. They talk about Green Decoys, but what do we call them...Truck Blinds?

If you want to win hearts and minds then be upfront and honest, don't try and muddy the waters with manipulations and half truths.

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

Are you saying that you can't camp in the Wildland except in designated areas?

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

That’s exactly what he’s saying, and soon there will be three huts that cost us tax payers $70000. You can only camp at one of these three spots, so your hunting opportunities are limited unless you can get to these sites before dark. You can’t just pitch a tent wherever you like. The bighorn area will be full of these surprises as well

[Joe Black]

Missed a zero. Cost will be over 700,000.00 for. Three backcountry huts in the castle park.

[CAC255]

As a public land owner we hunters, fishers, hikers, off roaders, bird watchers, photographers, etc, should be proud and hopeful that we can ensure these public lands remain in public hands. All of the places in question are currently heavily regulated by the Province by way of the PLUZ ( Public. Land use regulation).
If we allow Parks to take our public land, it is no longer public as the Provincial Parks act and associated regulation is enacted. Parks these days seem to be trying to mirror National parks and are more protected than for the people they serve.
As an example, I used to cherish spending thanksgiving weekends up the Syncline in the Castle area with our camp and walking for miles looking for a deer and showing the kids about tracks, bear rubs, scrapes etc and coming back to dry our gear and have turkey supper. We did that for 10 years or so.
Since the Castle has become a Park, our spot is no longer a random camping area and we cannot camp there.
I have tried to go back a few times and every time have been checked by park
rangers, one time three times in one day. It is no longer enjoyable so I do not take my kids hunting there anymore.

If we want more regulation- getting discharge permits, registration on harvests, less OHV access(designated trails are a great idea), more commercialism, more regulation, providing firearm information on permit, then fine,
I want our public land public and unfettered by parks. Let Forestry and Public lands do what they are obligated to do.Keep our land public.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

Exactly. Some of these boys are harder to nail down than a politician. There appears to be a real desire to merge issues like the above to garner support from hunters and fisherman. They talk about Green Decoys, but what do we call them...Truck Blinds?

If you want to win hearts and minds then be upfront and honest, don't try and muddy the waters with manipulations and half truths.

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

It’s going to happen know matter what any of us think...

Manipulations and half truths, believe what you want I guess. You will find out soon enough.

[landowner]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

That’s exactly what he’s saying, and soon there will be three huts that cost us tax payers $70000. You can only camp at one of these three spots, so your hunting opportunities are limited unless you can get to these sites before dark. You can’t just pitch a tent wherever you like. The bighorn area will be full of these surprises as well

I believe you can still “primitive “ camp in the wild land portion of the Castle park. Last meeting I was at with Park planners I was told the huts are being re-examined. They will be managed by the Alpine club , not sure if hunters will be allowed to use them . Firearms might not be allowed in them.

[Abe89]

So to summarize,
There is information out there but it’s fairly convoluted and we have to do our due diligence and go looking for it...although I’ve still found its hard to find and very one sided. government has not made a huge effort to make information known and is pushing their agenda regardless.

While there might be some disagreements on certain issues (which might just be differences of interpretation) there is at least agreement of there being a lot of apprehension/fear about what this might actually mean about our lifestyles

So the question I’m spinning my wheels on...how do we fight this tooth and nail? Letters and phone calls to area reps? I’ve never known a petition to do anything...I’m really drawing blanks. Sure the agenda might get pushed anyway but I’d at least like to have a slim fighting hope. Any ideas? Connections in high places? Have I only found out about this too late to do much? It’s often said we need to band together...how? How do we move to action beyond this forum?
As for me I will start with emails letters and phone calls. Heck I’ll even connect with Randy Newberg. I bet he has ideas.

I spend my valuable time in those woods (as do many on here)...my valuable time is worth giving to keep spending my time in those woods.

Lastly; I’m blown away. This conversation has been incredibly respectful and engaging, even in its disagreements. I for one have learned a lot. I’m very sorry about the castle, I simply never really understood what was/has happened.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk