Bighorn Public land to Parks land proposal

[Abe89]

I know this has been discussed s little on here but thought I”d try to bring it back to the forefront.
Am I right in understanding this would severely limit the available land that we hunters, trappers, and fishermen would have access to?
I am all for the stewardship, conservation, and protection of Wild land and wildlife (as I’m sure everyone on this forum is), And I’m all for efforts and regulations to mitigate those who abuse the land...... but I am not a fan of this.
I posted a link to one article, there are a bunch of meetings being held around the province as well and I’ve posted a picture of when and where those are.
Heres the news article:
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thes...ecreation.html




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abe89]

Another take
https://www.backcountryhunters.org/livingstone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bluetick]

I really see no use in attending such meetings , the stakeholders are a one sided group , hug a tree and save a politician , we as recreational users have no input whatsoever .
I'm sorry to be doubtful but I have yet to see anything happen ,except for what has been proposed by the government and the indigenous stakeholders .
Give up and just take it for what it is .
Your words are not heard like a silent fart in the wind ,raise a stink but after the smell is gone its a faded memory .
It has been argued in all proposed areas and yet they exist and are regulated to death .

[JDK71]

sorry but I think it is a waste of time they are going to push it thought no matter what

[Scopithorne]

The really sad part is they have already started putting signs up so much for there public consultations

[R3illy]

ive found the facebook group capla- coalition of albertans for public land access has been pretty good for info on this subject.

[bluetick]

Originally Posted by Scopithorne

The really sad part is they have already started putting signs up so much for there public consultations

exactly ,. all of this was set in stone before any public notices were posted ot the general public was involved .
Our words are useless.

[Joe Black]

Originally Posted by Abe89

Another take
https://www.backcountryhunters.org/livingstone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

backpack hunters association. BHA

AKA. front-men for Y2Y

[59whiskers]

Be prepared to lose access to alot of this area. Hunters in zone 400 lost access to 80% of this area in a few short years that is now the so called Castle Park. Hunters are squeezed in a small areas that are crowded. If you have access to horses it is okay, if not your lifestyle will change. More change coming. Local users groups had no input. Need to get NDP gone.

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by 59whiskers

Be prepared to lose access to alot of this area. Hunters in zone 400 lost access to 80% of this area in a few short years that is now the so called Castle Park. Hunters are squeezed in a small areas that are crowded. If you have access to horses it is okay, if not your lifestyle will change. More change coming. Local users groups had no input. Need to get NDP gone.

Are you saying that 80% of the area is now no hunting or are you saying 80% is no ATV's? I live near and spend a significant amount of time hunting in the proposed park, so I am very interested.

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

backpack hunters association. BHA

AKA. front-men for Y2Y

What is Y2Y?

[Douglas N]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

What is Y2Y?

Yellowstone to Yukon. Foreign based and funded with a goal to keep you out of your own backyard.

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Douglas N

Yellowstone to Yukon. Foreign based and funded with a goal to keep you out of your own backyard.

And Back Country Hunters and Anglers is a front for this organization?

[Abe89]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

What is Y2Y?

Y2Y, yellow stone to Yukon, is an organization fighting for untouched protected unfenced land for animals to use/migrate from yellow stone to yukon....so far as I understand it. There is a pretty good podcast episode Highlander Hunting does, interviews a BHA guy...fairly informative. From what I understand and read BHA does a fair bit to keep land protected but public, ie, open for hunters and anglers.
I simply wanted to post this as I have barely heard/seen anything about this...maybe I’ve been living with my head in the sand but to find out now; I’m pretty frustrated (and as I figured I’m not alone. ) most I’ve heard or read is from the none-hunting crowd who are in favour of it. They have nothing to lose.
I agree there’s little that we (average joeor jill) can change, no matter how many things you sign...but is there someone more knowledgeable and connected that has a better answer or idea?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Douglas N]

Here is some info on Y2Y

http://caapla.weebly.com/articles/who-is-y2y-the-truth

[Douglas N]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

backpack hunters association. BHA

AKA. front-men for Y2Y

Yup!!! Backcountry Hunters and Anglers= Green Decoys!

[Abe89]

There is a video on the BHA Facebook Page right now, this issue is being taken up in legislation. Can’t figure how to share it here. It’s worth the watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abe89]

Kinda derailed a touch...the issue is Alberta losing tons of available hunting access to parks. Is there anything to be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[landowner]

Good Luck with this ... As long as the NDP are in control locals and stakeholders will have very little input . Your best hope is that the park gets stalled until aUCP government gets in. Castle park was one of the first items on the NDP agenda , the Bighorn might be one of the last .

[landowner]

Originally Posted by landowner

Good Luck with this ... As long as the NDP are in control locals and stakeholders will have very little input . Your best hope is that the park gets stalled until aUCP government gets in. Castle park was one of the first items on the NDP agenda , the Bighorn might be one of the last .

This

[Denali Dave]

I strongly urge people to goto Shannon Phillips Facebook page and seek the letter she released regarding the cancelation on the remaining public town halls. PLEASE voice your opinions with a level head as any and all opposition is being called threatening, intimidating, and bullying. I also recommend taking screen shots as they have been deleting numerous posts with a strong voice and censoring the thread.

We all know the area could use some help, the opposition is against the way the NDP is conducting its business. Let’s do this right, take the time, and not force the proposal before election just so they can have their mark in politics.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Abe89

Kinda derailed a touch...the issue is Alberta losing tons of available hunting access to parks. Is there anything to be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From what we saw with the Castle $?&@ show I would say no.

[slough shark]

Anyone know what they’re proposing for random camping in the new area? I’m kinda concerned about what is actually coming as I spend a lot of time in the area and the bordering areas which I suspect will be overrun. Here’s hoping this all get delayed until the election

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Abe89

Kinda derailed a touch...the issue is Alberta losing tons of available hunting access to parks. Is there anything to be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have found it really hard to separate the fact from fiction. I did carve out some time to read the proposal when they released it a few weeks back, and I know that the majority of the area is PLUZ and Wildland Park with several smaller provincial parks included. You mentioned that we as hunters are losing a vast area, are you saying that we will not be able to hunt and fish in the Park? I had just assumed it would be a new Wilmore, have you heard anything different? I have mixed feelings about it, I own a quad, but living here and seeing the issues created by random RV camping and areas of unfettered quad access I do think something has to change. My take has always been that if I can fish, hunt, and back-country camp I am tentatively in favour, but if you are saying those are being eliminated I have some serious concerns. Just trying to wrap my head around this thing while the consultation period is still open.

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I have found it really hard to separate the fact from fiction. I did carve out some time to read the proposal when they released it a few weeks back, and I know that the majority of the area is PLUZ and Wildland Park with several smaller provincial parks included. You mentioned that we as hunters are losing a vast area, are you saying that we will not be able to hunt and fish in the Park? I had just assumed it would be a new Wilmore, have you heard anything different? I have mixed feelings about it, I own a quad, but living here and seeing the issues created by random RV camping and areas of unfettered quad access I do think something has to change. My take has always been that if I can fish, hunt, and back-country camp I am tentatively in favour, but if you are saying those are being eliminated I have some serious concerns. Just trying to wrap my head around this thing while the consultation period is still open.

One of the biggest issue with closing the bighorn to random camping and atv usage is any remaining areas will be flooded with people and the few remaining areas in southern Alberta will end up getting trashed from being way overused. Have you tried to get into campgrounds recently? Most campgrounds you need to book months in advance and hope you’re able to go when the time comes or you end up driving up to drop the trailer on Wednesday and hope you can get a spot. Closing those areas will mean hundreds or thousands of people will be trying to get into crowded campgrounds as they won’t have access to areas they’ve camped for years

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by slough shark

One of the biggest issue with closing the bighorn to random camping and atv usage is any remaining areas will be flooded with people and the few remaining areas in southern Alberta will end up getting trashed from being way overused. Have you tried to get into campgrounds recently? Most campgrounds you need to book months in advance and hope you’re able to go when the time comes or you end up driving up to drop the trailer on Wednesday and hope you can get a spot. Closing those areas will mean hundreds or thousands of people will be trying to get into crowded campgrounds as they won’t have access to areas they’ve camped for years

I guess I look at it from the perspective of a guy that likes to hunt and fish more than anything else. In my experience hunting other wildland areas (assuming I can still hunt in this one) I think the quality of habitat and the hunting and fishing opportunities will likely be enhanced. If that is the case then that is my number 1 priority. My hope is that some balance is struck similar to the model used in a few other wildland park areas I have hunted where there is some limited quad access for those that choose to do it that way. On a personal level, I have seen so many issues (Jeeps crossing the south ram, unattended fires along the trunk road, tons of garbage left behind) that I don't think the status quo is going to be sustainable as our population continues to increase. I am not sure that it is a valid arguement to say ATVs and random rv camping cause damage, so we shouldnt change anything because that just focuses the damage on other areas. I think I would rather have a few Mclean creeks if that means I can also have a few Willmores.

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I guess I look at it from the perspective of a guy that likes to hunt and fish more than anything else. In my experience hunting other wildland areas (assuming I can still hunt in this one) I think the quality of habitat and the hunting and fishing opportunities will likely be enhanced. If that is the case then that is my number 1 priority. My hope is that some balance is struck similar to the model used in a few other wildland park areas I have hunted where there is some limited quad access for those that choose to do it that way. On a personal level, I have seen so many issues (Jeeps crossing the south ram, unattended fires along the trunk road, tons of garbage left behind) that I don't think the status quo is going to be sustainable as our population continues to increase. I am not sure that it is a valid arguement to say ATVs and random rv camping cause damage, so we shouldnt change anything because that just focuses the damage on other areas. I think I would rather have a few Mclean creeks if that means I can also have a few Willmores.
Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

I like you mainly like to hunt and fish those areas, I don’t even own a quad. However I do like to go camping out in that area so that I can go hunting and fishing which means bringing my family which means pulling the trailer, like most people I clean up after myself. A lot of my camping as well is done just east of the area which will now be overrun as people with quads will want to quad which is worrisome to me as realistically most of these issues could be solved with some simple enforcement. My main concern is simply getting out is getting more difficult in southern Alberta as campgrounds are perpetually full and they keep closing down areas where a person is able to go out and go camping and fishing. There are very few campgrounds in that area to begin with and the number of spaces that will be opened up won’t come close to approaching the number of people that would like to use the area. It also gets expensive when you pay $30+ a night and get virtually nothing for it other than being crowded in with everyone.

[bitterrootfly]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I guess I look at it from the perspective of a guy that likes to hunt and fish more than anything else. In my experience hunting other wildland areas (assuming I can still hunt in this one) I think the quality of habitat and the hunting and fishing opportunities will likely be enhanced. If that is the case then that is my number 1 priority. My hope is that some balance is struck similar to the model used in a few other wildland park areas I have hunted where there is some limited quad access for those that choose to do it that way. On a personal level, I have seen so many issues (Jeeps crossing the south ram, unattended fires along the trunk road, tons of garbage left behind) that I don't think the status quo is going to be sustainable as our population continues to increase. I am not sure that it is a valid arguement to say ATVs and random rv camping cause damage, so we shouldnt change anything because that just focuses the damage on other areas. I think I would rather have a few Mclean creeks if that means I can also have a few Willmores.

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

Well said

[Douglas N]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I guess I look at it from the perspective of a guy that likes to hunt and fish more than anything else. In my experience hunting other wildland areas (assuming I can still hunt in this one) I think the quality of habitat and the hunting and fishing opportunities will likely be enhanced. If that is the case then that is my number 1 priority. My hope is that some balance is struck similar to the model used in a few other wildland park areas I have hunted where there is some limited quad access for those that choose to do it that way. On a personal level, I have seen so many issues (Jeeps crossing the south ram, unattended fires along the trunk road, tons of garbage left behind) that I don't think the status quo is going to be sustainable as our population continues to increase. I am not sure that it is a valid arguement to say ATVs and random rv camping cause damage, so we shouldnt change anything because that just focuses the damage on other areas. I think I would rather have a few Mclean creeks if that means I can also have a few Willmores.

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

Wouldn’t more enforcement of the current laws work? $40mm would go a long way towards enforcement, among other things.

Making things illegal on several levels doesn’t mean it will stop.

[Abe89]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I have found it really hard to separate the fact from fiction. I did carve out some time to read the proposal when they released it a few weeks back, and I know that the majority of the area is PLUZ and Wildland Park with several smaller provincial parks included. You mentioned that we as hunters are losing a vast area, are you saying that we will not be able to hunt and fish in the Park? I had just assumed it would be a new Wilmore, have you heard anything different? I have mixed feelings about it, I own a quad, but living here and seeing the issues created by random RV camping and areas of unfettered quad access I do think something has to change. My take has always been that if I can fish, hunt, and back-country camp I am tentatively in favour, but if you are saying those are being eliminated I have some serious concerns. Just trying to wrap my head around this thing while the consultation period is still open.

I have the same stance as you.
What I’ve read so far has led me to understand we could lose the opportunity to hunt/fish...it would be another provincial park. I could be very wrong but that’s what I’ve understood. Trying to read up more on it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk