BHA Alberta Chapter

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by fargineyesore

Anyone that thinks a quad trail in the bush is ruining the environment, is an extremist.

Or anyone that thinks there should be no rules in place and it should a free for all also qualifies as an extremist? Why don't you go down to Hawrelak Park and go for a quad ride, that should make sense right?

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by sledn

Can't support any group with this attitude. Quads and random camping will become a thing of the past. Only allowed in approved compounds and trails... Not the way I want to enjoy the outdoors. Can't stand how much we are being stripped of our lives with these people and the new rules.

I just don't know how we survived all these years without these environmental regulations, because the water should have killed us and the fish many many years ago.

[SlimChance]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

So tell me how many trail crossing go through active redds as apposed to people wading through them.

I think you missed my point regarding wading/quadding and redds.

It was simply:
- We know, through research, that walking on active redds is extremely detrimental.
-Therefore, we regulate to try to avoid having people walk on redds.

- We also know, through research, that quads cause significantly more issues with regards to soil loss than does hiking.
- Why would we make no effort to regulate where and when quads operate.

Originally Posted by sledn

Can't support any group with this attitude. Quads and random camping will become a thing of the past. Only allowed in approved compounds and trails... Not the way I want to enjoy the outdoors. Can't stand how much we are being stripped of our lives with these people and the new rules.

Do you have any evidence that banning of ATV's has led to limited off trail access anywhere else?

Originally Posted by ram crazy

I just don't know how we survived all these years without these environmental regulations, because the water should have killed us and the fish many many years ago.

A fair number of us didn't. We also nearly wiped out most of the major game species in North America.


This case is worth reading, as regulations regarding the contamination of heavy metals in Japanese soil resulted directly from a bunch of dead people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itai-itai_disease


More relevant to us. We, as hunters, should probably be more thankful that a few people had the foresight a century and a half ago to push for some regulation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_...e_Conservation

[Echo-Gecko]

Can't support any group with this attitude. Quads and random camping will become a thing of the past. Only allowed in approved compounds and trails... Not the way I want to enjoy the outdoors. Can't stand how much we are being stripped of our lives with these people and the new rules.

I'm sure that you have heard the old saying "Leave only your footprints" Had we abided by that in the past we would not have needed all of the new rules.

Be honest how many times have you found piles of chit-tickets in the woods?
If I have a dollar for every spent shotgun shell, beer can, burned out trailers or wrecked cars that I have seen in the woods I'd be rich.

Few years ago on a bear hunt my buddy and I found two garbage bags worth of that red wrapping paper that butchers use to wrap meat in. There were a number of other wrappers there too, which led me to believe that some bloody arse dumped his freezer burned food out onto our public land.

People have proven themselves to be pigs and as such can not expect to be allowed to continue on this way.
On top of that the population of Alberta has grown exponentially in the past 20 years. Can our public lands sustain random camping, and a general free for all attitude in the long run given that the population will likely continue to increase?

[Myles]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

I just don't know how we survived all these years without these environmental regulations, because the water should have killed us and the fish many many years ago.

Wildly untrue. Both Bull trout and cutthroat trout are species at risk.

http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/...-A-Mar2013.pdf

http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/...gementPlan.pdf

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Myles

Wildly untrue. Both Bull trout and cutthroat trout are species at risk.

http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/...-A-Mar2013.pdf

http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/...gementPlan.pdf

And the reason they are at risk has not been proven to be OHVs.

[Echo-Gecko]

And the reason they are at risk has not been proven to be OHVs.

Thats besides the point, are we going to wait for proof until there are none left?
Not a biologist so I am speculating here but I'd wager that there likely is not a single cause, probably a number of issues. You have to start somewhere don't you?

Hypothetically:
If you told me that there was a 10% chance that fishing my favourite river or stream is contributing to the decline of the Southern Alberta Jackalope and that I can never fish that stream again in my lifetime, I'd find a new place to fish. I'd rather have my grand kids have those species around in their lifetimes than selfishly continuing to fish that water.

I'd have to think that all of us would do whatever it takes to keep species at risk around?

[Jimbob.303]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

Not totally true!! Cause back in the day people used to pound trucks deep into the back country and if you don't think that happened you are only fooling yourself.

4 guys , 1 truck, not 4 guys, 4 quads.
Duh

[Myles]

Originally Posted by Newview01

And the reason they are at risk has not been proven to be OHVs.

Actually, that's untrue too. Both reports identify sedimentation caused by OHVs as a contributor to their decline. Right from the report:

"A more recent source of sedimentation is the result of OHV trail crossings and traffic along and within streambeds. In the most extreme cases, streambeds are used as travel routes. This activity erodes banks and disturbs the streambed, causing elevated levels of suspended sediment, often at times of the year when sediment transport is normally low and bull trout eggs are in the gravel (Fontana 2003, Eisler 2003)."

[fargineyesore]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

Or anyone that thinks there should be no rules in place and it should a free for all also qualifies as an extremist? Why don't you go down to Hawrelak Park and go for a quad ride, that should make sense right?

Yes because riding a quad in Hawrelak Park is the same as riding on Public Lands.

Who said anything about no rules??

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by Jimbob.303

4 guys , 1 truck, not 4 guys, 4 quads.
Duh

4 guys in one regular cab truck, two must have been *****. Used to be two per truck, and a floatation tire does a lot less damage than truck tire. Duh

[Bill_K]

You will see one or two guys per truck, especially if they're hauling a camp into the back woods.

However, there will be a smaller percentage of trucks going out of their way to go mudding, compared to the percentage of ATVs/OHVs going out of their way to go mudding.

[boah]

Originally Posted by Bill_K

You will see one or two guys per truck, especially if they're hauling a camp into the back woods.

However, there will be a smaller percentage of trucks going out of their way to go mudding, compared to the percentage of ATVs/OHVs going out of their way to go mudding.

Not true. Before the invention quads, you should have seen the a7/ bobs creek area. Truck on every hill and 2 or 3 heading for the same hills. They called the camping area "little Chicago". Damage? Pretty much nil.

[alta270]

Good podcast on the Alberta Highlander Hunting with Neil Keown Chair of the Alberta Chapter of Backcountry Hunters. I think most, but not all, here would support most of what was presented.

podcast URL is:

https://highlanderhunting.podbean.com/