Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 04-21-2017, 08:39 PM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slickwilly View Post
Willmore is a Wildland Provincial Park, as it the majority of the new Castle. The fact that there is hunting allowed in the portion of the Castle that is a true PP is a step forward in my opinion.
I believe it is called the willmore wilderness park. How do you know what is fact or fiction about the castle area when you can't get the willmore wilderness park area right.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 04-21-2017, 09:03 PM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by takeiteasybird View Post
I can definitely agree with that.
It essentially states that OHV is ok, as long as it doesnt interfere with BHA and affiliates' activities. You can see where it goes from there.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 04-22-2017, 12:15 AM
crazy_davey crazy_davey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Foothills
Posts: 2,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Meredith View Post

Read between the lines all you want, Walking Buffalo, but I look at what is actually being said and done by these organizations. And for me, they are doing much good.
WB is correct Don.

I have been involved with organizations fighting against Y2Y and others in the past. If you believe what they tell you, you are a just another sheep.

Some do the research and investigation into these organizations, some just jump in a follow like good sheep do.

You are a good sheep Don, fall in line. It is really too bad that some actually follow what you say. Sad.

Self proclaimed experts like yourself make me sick.

My suggestion to anyone thinking this organization is good, dig deeper, go further back and dig deeper again.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 04-22-2017, 12:27 AM
crazy_davey crazy_davey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Foothills
Posts: 2,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
Really Don,

Have you forgotten how Mountain Equiptment Coop, the founding financial institution of Y2Y, raised the funds to market the advocacy for the Alberta Grizzly Bear hunt closure campaign?




Y2Y and blood related (financing and sponsorship) organizations learned to clean up their marketing tools of obvious anti-hunting bias, instead promoting the creation of "Sanctuaries" where Aboriginal hunting is allowed, but closed to all else, as happened with the Kluane National park efforts.

Y2Y strongly advocates the elimination of ALL predator hunting.


A person needs to be willfully blind if they research the history and still believe Y2Y is ambivalent towards hunting.


I have heard of the BHA, and first impression was that perhaps it is a group worth supporting. Hearing that BHA is actually aligned with Y2Y, well, that takes them OFF the list.

As an active advocate for maintaining hunting rights for ALL people, there is no way I could suggest anyone support this group.


-------

As to Y2Y policy, a person, and Don SHOULD know, has to read between the lines.


Y2Y Hunting Fishing Policy, between the lines in Red

Y2Y's Hunting, Trapping and Fishing Policy Revised Fall 2012
The Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (Y2Y) is committed to the ecological integrity of, and long term health of habitats and wildlife populations within, the Yellowstone to Yukon region. Within this context, Y2Y recognizes that hunting, trapping, and fishing:

 are indigenous rights;
Y2Y will purport support for hunting, but only for Aboriginal harvest. Everyone else, you WILL NEVER get support from us.

 are part of the cultural heritage and economy of the Yellowstone to Yukon region;
So we will finance non-hunting advocacy groups to replace this heritage and economy with non-consultive uses such as Bear photography.

 are appropriate activities within the Yellowstone to Yukon region, provided that they are
conducted in an ethical manner that includes fair chase principles; and
 may be appropriate means to help maintain or manage fish and wildlife population health.
In saying so, we mean that hunting will only be used when prey species become so over-populated in an area that they become a serious problem and non-human predators are not able to provide the control needed. Remember, we advocate No Predator Hunting, so that only "natural" predators can kill prey species. No predators? Well, we will finance a wolf introduction.


In addition, Y2Y acknowledges the legitimacy of wildlife sanctuaries set aside from hunting, fishin,g or trapping where wildlife populations can recover from the impacts of the developed landscape, to protect wildlife genetics from the impacts of selection from human-caused mortality, and which act as source populations for hunting, trapping, and fishing opportunities outside their boundaries.

Remember the Bighorn and now Thinhorn research claiming hunting induced genetic selection, we helped with that. This is part of the strategy to eliminate hunting from areas within 200 km of National Park boundaries, We got Parks Canada on board, too bad the Alberta Gov. disagreed. Anyways, we will continue to lobby and finance the establishment of more National and Provincial Parks, where NO Hunting will be allowed (baby steps), while marketing to the masses that we Actually support hunting. *****ers!
WB, you really nailed it with that post, thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 04-22-2017, 05:43 AM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Echo-Gecko View Post
If I understand Don's post correct the money stays in the province and that the chapter is autonomous.

Maybe Don can chime in?
When you go through the registration process on the website provided, no where does it say where would you like your registration fee to go. I think it would go right to Missoula to the headquarters. There is quite a few options given for a membership as well anywhere from $25 to $2500
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 04-22-2017, 07:16 AM
Myles's Avatar
Myles Myles is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
And what about the equally vast areas that are not open to quadding, or not accessible to quads but but foot only?

There simply is no reasonable argument for additional OHV bans. More enforcement maybe, but definitely not an outright ban.
Bull trout and cutthroat trout are both threatened species in this province. Sedimentation caused from eroding ATV trails negatively impacts the spawning beds of these fish and destroys their habitat when ATVs are operated in streams. Bull trout have been our provincial fish since the 90's and their population is not recovering. Something needs to change to turn this around.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 04-22-2017, 07:36 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myles View Post
Bull trout and cutthroat trout are both threatened species in this province. Sedimentation caused from eroding ATV trails negatively impacts the spawning beds of these fish and destroys their habitat when ATVs are operated in streams. Bull trout have been our provincial fish since the 90's and their population is not recovering. Something needs to change to turn this around.
That is a pile of crap.

What about sedimentation from spring runoff.
What about sedimentation from other animals.
What about sedimentation from herds of cows.

There are likely even more sources of sedimentation, but you get the point.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 04-22-2017, 08:17 AM
Twobucks Twobucks is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 701
Default

I'd like to point out that BHA is very vocally supported by well-known super-top-secret anti-hunters such as Steve Rinella, Randy Newberg and Clay Hayes.

BHA is an organization by hunters and anglers for hunters and anglers with a track record of keeping public lands open to hunting and fishing in places where those lands are under far more threat than they are in Alberta. For all the "hunters have to stick together" talk, seems like a lot of people here are pretty quick to turn on reputable hunters.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 04-22-2017, 08:38 AM
mickeyjim mickeyjim is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 254
Default

Why does Alberta need a chapter? Aren't most of the 400's Crown land that is open to hunting already?

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 04-22-2017, 08:56 AM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
That is a pile of crap.

What about sedimentation from spring runoff.
What about sedimentation from other animals.
What about sedimentation from herds of cows.

There are likely even more sources of sedimentation, but you get the point.
Awe, come on now Newview none of that matters. It's the OHV's that do all the damage.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 04-22-2017, 09:02 AM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myles View Post
Bull trout and cutthroat trout are both threatened species in this province. Sedimentation caused from eroding ATV trails negatively impacts the spawning beds of these fish and destroys their habitat when ATVs are operated in streams. Bull trout have been our provincial fish since the 90's and their population is not recovering. Something needs to change to turn this around.
Maybe it's the bull trout that are putting the cutthroat trout on the threatened list and the anglers that are putting the bull trout on the threatened list. I can't tell you how many times I have found dead bull trout on banks of rivers and creeks, and I'm pretty sure they don't just jump up on the bank to suntan and then forget to get back into the water after they are done tanning.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 04-22-2017, 09:11 AM
t.tinsmith t.tinsmith is offline
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Elk Valley BC
Posts: 231
Default

I belong to the B.C. Chapter and see few negatives about it. It is operated by locals and has a local agenda. Also,the members I know are very serious hunters,folks.
I belong to both BHA and Boone and Crockett organizations and their credo is similar,imo.In fact if Teddy Roosevelt were alive today he would be a voice for both. I don't see any hidden agenda, any ulterior motive and it is a great voice for hunters and hunting everywhere. Attend the meetings,voice your opinion and you might find it suits your needs .
Frankly,judging this group by heresay remarks ( including mine) is not suffice...attend a meeting. We as hunters need strong ,vocal spokesman for what we do and we need to be unified about this,imo
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 04-22-2017, 09:24 AM
Cal R. Cal R. is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 26
Default

AWA’s map is interesting. I hope you guys see the deception in the map and the error in the 93%.
The map is missing a bunch of parks and protected areas and PLUZ; really doesn’t separate the different land designations very clearly. But to do so would not support the narrative.
On the math: approx. 60% of the province is green zone. At present and depending on who’s count you use; if you the Eco’s number 13% of the province (they do not count federal lands or national parks) or somewhere around 17% if you do, is parks and protected areas. Since all parks and PLUZ happen on public lands (Green Zone) then right off the get-go there is way less than 93% of public lands available.
For the fun of it let’ do some scribbling on the back of an envelope;
Alberta is 255,500 Sq miles, 17% = 43,435 sq mi
60% (Gr. Zone) = 153,300 sq mi therefore the 17% represents 43,435 Sq mi / 153,300 sq mi = 28% of public land is NOT available for OHV use; 72% available. Not looking like 93%
Now let’s take out (and I am too lazy to look up these numbers) grazing leases, forestry operations that wipe out traditional routes, O&G doing the same and the vast tracks of land we’re going to close off for caribou, government biologist closing everything they can, LARP, SSRP, NSRP…. On and on…
Anyone who recreationally rides quads/sleds or hunts many areas in the province knows that trails do not occur everywhere in the Green Zone, actually only concentrated in small regions. There are limited routes beyond these regions but not many of consequence.
So there is one of the Eco-narratives, many seemed to have fallen for it. By all appearances BHA support this narrative.
Choose your friends wisely.
Cal
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 04-22-2017, 10:38 AM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slickwilly View Post
Many hunters also care about preserving wilderness. If the choice comes down to seeing an area remain open to hunting, and be exploited, or be closed to hunting, I think many hunters would be happy to watch wilderness from a distance.

An unwillingness to ever work with a group that doesn't support hunting 100% will see hunting pushed to the fringes. We should be working openly with groups that want to see nature preserved, and working hard to show that hunting is an important part of multiple-use on public lands.

The attitude above appears frighteningly black-and-white. I would hope that our groups are able to take a more nuanced look, since I would hope they would do the same when we approach them with ideas that help hunters.

It appears you decided to ignore my attention to the nuances of Y2Y and financially associated groups.

These groups have put large financial efforts into eliminating hunting.
They are happy to accept reductions in hunting, but NEVER do they lobby for the maintenance or increase in hunting opportunity.

Hunters do not need partners like this. We can lobby for wild places and balanced use of the landscape without having to partner with those that work towards eliminating our heritage and lifestyle.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Meredith View Post
I agree, Willy. I belong to these groups because 1) they do good work for conservation which helps maintain quality fish and wildlife for all, and 2) to keep them informed about the importance of regulated hunting and fishing to those efforts. And guess what, many other members of Y2Y, CPAWS and AWA are also hunters and anglers because they know what needs to be done to preserve quality outdoor experiences.

Read between the lines all you want, Walking Buffalo, but I look at what is actually being said and done by these organizations. And for me, they are doing much good.
So we know where you stand then. You have proven that you are fine with lobby groups that desire to end the hunting of predators, and to end hunting by non-aboriginal peoples.

Thanks for being honest.



Quote:
Originally Posted by alberta_bha View Post
Your interpretation of "reading between the lines" of the Y2Y policy is interesting, but I don't agree with what you are hypothesizing. It may surprise you that Y2Y management are hunters and anglers as well, but, regardless, whether you agree with Y2Y and their policies has very little bearing on this conversation.

If the opinion is that this hunting/angling group should not associate with any conservation group, then I don't agree with you. There is much progress to be made in protecting the wilderness that we all have come to cherish, and enjoy, while working alongside other groups that are just as dedicated to conservation, perhaps for different reasons, but for the same result.

We are demonstrating that hunters and anglers are truly conservationists at heart, as we are working towards preserving what remains of the wilderness, with the sole intent of passing it, and our hunting/fishing traditions, to the next generations, much like what our forefathers did.

I would hope that, at the very least, you would agree that wildlife management and habitat conservation would be something that needs to be supported, while maintaining our shared traditional activities of hunting/angling. This is what the Alberta BHA members align with, and support, as an independent chapter.

Again, the invitation for a pint is always open to all, as I find that it is far more effective venue when discussing things.
There was no Hypothesizing in my commentary.

Mountain Equipment Coop, the mother of Y2Y, funded the Grizzly bear hunt suspension efforts. Y2Y funds and promotes a "Compassionate" wildlife model that dictates the elimination of predator hunting, that hunting is to be done Only for population control measures and Only when natural predation cannot.


That you do not recognize or are not aware of the history of this organization proves either a bias or ignorance.

Nope, I will not support this new group.

I hope no one else does either.
There are better choices for Hunters that want to join a conservation organization.
We do NOT need yet another group dividing the Hunting community.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Twobucks View Post
I'd like to point out that BHA is very vocally supported by well-known super-top-secret anti-hunters such as Steve Rinella, Randy Newberg and Clay Hayes.

BHA is an organization by hunters and anglers for hunters and anglers with a track record of keeping public lands open to hunting and fishing in places where those lands are under far more threat than they are in Alberta. For all the "hunters have to stick together" talk, seems like a lot of people here are pretty quick to turn on reputable hunters.
While strong hunting advocates, these people have likely not experience the Y2Y gang in their backyard.

Take note, my issue is that BHA has aligning itself with this anti-hunting organization, and apparently the new Alberta chapter intends to follow suit.
My position would possibly be quite different if BHA wasn't riding the coat-tails of Y2Y in the desire to achieve their goals.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 04-22-2017, 12:39 PM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twobucks View Post
I'd like to point out that BHA is very vocally supported by well-known super-top-secret anti-hunters such as Steve Rinella, Randy Newberg and Clay Hayes.

BHA is an organization by hunters and anglers for hunters and anglers with a track record of keeping public lands open to hunting and fishing in places where those lands are under far more threat than they are in Alberta. For all the "hunters have to stick together" talk, seems like a lot of people here are pretty quick to turn on reputable hunters.
I don't care who supports BHA, if they are anti-OHV, they are part of the process of removing public access in general.

Some of you don't see the big picture.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 04-22-2017, 12:55 PM
nube nube is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: In a house
Posts: 7,778
Default

A group here a group there. So many groups and in the end they will hurt something. I think I will stick with Dale with this one and see through all the BS. WB seems to find a lot of good solid info in my mind and all this new group is going to do is hurt us. Anyone one wanting to ban ATV's is not hunter friendly.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 04-22-2017, 01:27 PM
Klondike Klondike is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Sherwood Park
Posts: 714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myles View Post
Bull trout and cutthroat trout are both threatened species in this province. Sedimentation caused from eroding ATV trails negatively impacts the spawning beds of these fish and destroys their habitat when ATVs are operated in streams. Bull trout have been our provincial fish since the 90's and their population is not recovering. Something needs to change to turn this around.
You might want to reach past the low hanging"atv's are the problem" fruit you and so many others reach for and educate yourself a little

This paper published in 1196 speaks of the encouraged eradication of the bull trout found in the lakes and steams of the mountainous region.
http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/bookstore_pdfs/18891.pdf


" the harvest of fish from Lac La Biche that supported the westward expansion of the fur trade and settlement in her doctoral thesis. The annual harvest of lake whitefish increased from 85 tons caught in 1800 to over 1,200 tons in 1875. But even subsistence harvest by a relatively small population was not sustainable and the fishery collapsed in 1878."

"Why did historically abundant populations of Arctic grayling (and northern pike, bull trout and mountain whitefish) disappear from the Beaverlodge River? Alberta Fish and Wildlife investigations report a “perfect storm” of cumulative, synergistic causes that resulted in crashes in fish numbers and distribution. The perfect storm came in the form of a series of land use decisions. Forest was rapidly replaced by agricultural fields; riparian fringes were narrowed and often disappeared with the patterns of settlement. Wetlands were drained and now roads interrupt drainage and channel flow. They send water to rivers faster. Both floods and droughts are exacerbated."

" In 2005, Travis Ripley,then a provincial fisheries biologist, extirpation of bull trout, in as little as two decades, from 24 to 43 percent of streams in the Kakwa River Basin subject to logging and road construction"

“Two sportsmen went out after trout at Fish Creek one day last week and
as a result brought back 400 fish.” Yes, anglers were greedy, wasteful, and
even rapacious, but the bigger impacts that destroyed trout populations were the landscape scale impacts on trout habitat: logging, mining, hydropower development, agriculture, and petroleum development.
The combination of overfishing and industrial land uses depleted cutthroat populations"

"It is apparent that perhaps less than five percent of historical habitat is currently occupied by cutthroat in the Bow watershed, somewhat more in the Oldman."

https://albertawilderness.ca/wordpre...sis_lfitch.pdf


"Fitch studied 54 small rivers and streams that flow into the Oldman River and hold bull and cutthroat trout. He found nearly every one of the waterways face multiple pressures: from logging roads to energy development to off-highway vehicle trails.

The banks of Hidden Creek, spawning waters for up to 80 per cent of the Oldman’s bull trout, are weakened by clear-cuts and stream crossings and are falling in on themselves. Cow Creek, with a confirmed cutthroat population, is contaminated by feedlot effluent and is drained for irrigation.

Fitch’s survey notes everything from motorcycle races to washed-out bridges to coal mining affecting creek after creek. Again and again he concludes “long-term cumulative impacts on cutthroat trout and bull trout.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle25477218/



"Most of the lakes in the mountain national parks were fishless before 1900. In a survey of 1464 lakes in Jasper, Banff, Yoho, Waterton, Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks, it was found that over 95% of the lakes did not contain fish until they were stocked in the 20th century"

"Since the early 1900s, nearly forty million fish have been introduced into the Bow watershed of Banff National Park"
"Lake Minnewanka was stocked with fish from 1901 to 1972. It's estimated that over 17 million eggs and fry of lake trout, Atlantic salmon, cisco, brook trout, cutthroat trout, splake, smallmouth bass, lake whitefish and rainbow trout were introduced into the lake's waters"
"This decline is the result of damaged habitat, over-fishing and the introduction of fish species which have displaced it. To protect the remaining populations of bull trout, all mountain national parks have instituted a zero catch and possession limit for the species"

https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/ban...ement-stocking

If you continue to ignore all the other contributing factors, that have greater impact, you will one day find yourself standing in the middle of no where, all alone with no fish to catch. At that point you can either head to the parks and take up fishing watching " One way you can enjoy the fish in Banff National Park is simply by watching them or you can go back to playing Xbox in your mama's basement
__________________
at the end of the day Al Gore will go down in history as the biggest snake oil salesman to have walked the earth

Who are you going to blame when all the ohv's are gone and the fish are still dieing
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 04-22-2017, 03:55 PM
two_ker two_ker is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 45
Default

https://www.greendecoys.com/decoys/b...s-and-anglers/

Yup, they look legit.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:14 PM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by two_ker View Post
But...but... they support hunting and I'm a hunter! [/sarc]

Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:30 PM
CF8889's Avatar
CF8889 CF8889 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 517
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by two_ker View Post
This read cracked me up. Ya'll need to gear down and stop worrying about the leftwing boogyman so much.
__________________
Let er buck!
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:40 PM
slickwilly's Avatar
slickwilly slickwilly is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by two_ker View Post
I think I've said my piece on this topic, I'm excited that we have a BHA chapter in Alberta, as they represent a topic that I am very passionate about. I look forward to getting out to a meeting this summer, and hopefully lots of people that are curious about the group will too.

But, I can't leave this one alone. Green Decoys is a pure dark-money smear campaign, and there is lots of evidence out there about it. BHA publicly disclosed their donors, go check them out. Green Decoys does not, but its founder Richard Berman has started many groups just like this, designed to look grass roots, but really they are lobbying groups for special interest.

http://www.bermanexposed.org/
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Rick_Berman
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Green_Decoys

I hate talking about this stuff, because it makes you come off like a conspiracy theorist, but I want to get something out there countering that post so people can make their own decisions.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:46 PM
pikergolf's Avatar
pikergolf pikergolf is online now
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 11,286
Default

I don't know why people continue to argue about this, most peoples minds were made up long ago. Nobodies convincing anyone. I want to see wild places conserved for my grandchildren, I filled out the SSR plan with that in mind and I send money to groups that represent my interests. Does one group stand for everything I hold dear, no, there is no perfect group for me, but BHA will get a little of my money.
__________________
“One of the sad signs of our times is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.”

Thomas Sowell
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:54 PM
MountainTi's Avatar
MountainTi MountainTi is online now
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Caroline
Posts: 7,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pikergolf View Post
I don't know why people continue to argue about this, most peoples minds were made up long ago. Nobodies convincing anyone. I want to see wild places conserved for my grandchildren, I filled out the SSR plan with that in mind and I send money to groups that represent my interests. Does one group stand for everything I hold dear, no, there is no perfect group for me, but BHA will get a little of my money.
I think the point of a lot of this, particularly WB's post is to let others know what their hidden agendas MAY be. Might just be educational for some. I know any affiliation BHA has with Y to Y concerns me greatly
__________________
Two reasons you may think CO2 is a pollutant
1.You weren't paying attention in grade 5
2. You're stupid
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:55 PM
sjd sjd is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CF8889 View Post
This read cracked me up. Ya'll need to gear down and stop worrying about the leftwing boogyman so much.
ha ha ha. I agree.

I'm glad there are still some hunters who believe in conservation.

So if I understand it right, all hunters have to believe that there should no limits on development on public lands, hate Obama, love ATVs and not believe in global warming. If you have alternative views you are a front for a green conspiracy and not a real hunter. Who's trying to divide who?
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-22-2017, 06:12 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainTi View Post
I think the point of a lot of this, particularly WB's post is to let others know what their hidden agendas MAY be. Might just be educational for some. I know any affiliation BHA has with Y to Y concerns me greatly
No, my posts are absolutely NOT about any perceived hidden agenda by BHA.

I have seen no evidence to suggest so.


My posts have been about Y2Y's substantial efforts to eliminate hunting.

My concern is that BHA is willing to get in bed with this Wretch in an effort to achieve their goals.The concern flows in two directions.

Y2Y will (and is, as shown in this thread) benefit in lobbying and fundraising efforts by association with BHA in a "perceived" support of the hunting community. Y2Y will happily use BHA, then spit on them when it comes time to actually defend hunting.

BHA is an orphan looking for a big brother, willing to accept the direct conflict in end goals for the sake of any short term gain. This association will not end well for those who truly want to protect wilderness areas AND maintain or expand hunting.

Go ahead BHA, show me where Y2Y financed or lobbied tirelessly in an effort to expand hunting opportunities for ALL people regardless of race. I would love to be proven wrong here.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-23-2017, 09:00 AM
Etownguy Etownguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 206
Default

I recently joined the BHA as a member. I care about hunting, fishing, wild spaces, and being able to pass it along to the next generation in better shape than we found it.

I am also an OHV user; I've used OHVs for years for both work and recreation. They are a lot of fun and useful but there is a time and a place for their use and I don't have any issues with having 'no-go' places if it protects habitat.

I am also a member of this forum for several years now although I do not post much.

My point being...there are people like me out there that enjoy hunting, fishing, OHVs, and also care about what we will be passing on to the next generations.

Don't paint this as 'us' versus 'them' issue because there are many of us that don't fall neatly into either camp.

Last edited by Etownguy; 04-23-2017 at 09:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-23-2017, 10:08 AM
t.tinsmith t.tinsmith is offline
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Elk Valley BC
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Etownguy View Post
I recently joined the BHA as a member. I care about hunting, fishing, wild spaces, and being able to pass it along to the next generation in better shape than we found it.

I am also an OHV user; I've used OHVs for years for both work and recreation. They are a lot of fun and useful but there is a time and a place for their use and I don't have any issues with having 'no-go' places if it protects habitat.

I am also a member of this forum for several years now although I do not post much.

My point being...there are people like me out there that enjoy hunting, fishing, OHVs, and also care about what we will be passing on to the next generations.

Don't paint this as 'us' versus 'them' issue because there are many of us that don't fall neatly into either camp.
Many hunters any agree with this. BHA was formed by hunters and for hunters. They are very approachable and would welcome your questions.Give it a chance -you might just like it
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-23-2017, 10:23 AM
Etownguy Etownguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by t.tinsmith View Post
Many hunters any agree with this. BHA was formed by hunters and for hunters. They are very approachable and would welcome your questions.Give it a chance -you might just like it
Yup - that was partly my point - I am a BHA member and support their mission.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-23-2017, 10:44 AM
Auger Auger is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 27
Default

I think that Etownguy stated it quite nicely. I am not against OHV's, and enjoy using them, but I do think certain areas need restrictions on them. And for the statements saying how would you like it if fishing was banned in certain areas? It has already happened for the protection of fish in certain areas. We adapted to the changes. Also, I don't blame OHV's for the destruction of fish habitat. I know forestry regulations need a major enforcement overhaul. I think forestry regulations are part of the BHA's mandate. Please correct me if I'm wrong. One question I have for OHV users, do the groups you are involved with advocate for OHV approved areas? I know there are a few areas that are designated for such use and have trails as well as mud bogging areas set up where they won't impact watershed and headwater areas. I am not a member of the AOHV community but I think they should be advocating for more areas like that if they aren't already. And one final question, for everyone who is against BHA because of who they are affiliated with, what group do you recommend joining that has similar values? Because to me it doesn't sound so much that you are opposed to their stated core values and ideals, just that they are affiliated with y2y and certain individuals.

Sent from my STH100-1 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 04-23-2017, 11:02 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auger View Post
I think that Etownguy stated it quite nicely. I am not against OHV's, and enjoy using them, but I do think certain areas need restrictions on them. And for the statements saying how would you like it if fishing was banned in certain areas? It has already happened for the protection of fish in certain areas. We adapted to the changes. Also, I don't blame OHV's for the destruction of fish habitat. I know forestry regulations need a major enforcement overhaul. I think forestry regulations are part of the BHA's mandate. Please correct me if I'm wrong. One question I have for OHV users, do the groups you are involved with advocate for OHV approved areas? I know there are a few areas that are designated for such use and have trails as well as mud bogging areas set up where they won't impact watershed and headwater areas. I am not a member of the AOHV community but I think they should be advocating for more areas like that if they aren't already. And one final question, for everyone who is against BHA because of who they are affiliated with, what group do you recommend joining that has similar values? Because to me it doesn't sound so much that you are opposed to their stated core values and ideals, just that they are affiliated with y2y and certain individuals.

Sent from my STH100-1 using Tapatalk
Why do you have to belong to a group? Not saying it as a negative thing, but if there is not a group that doesn't align with your views, don't settle.. And of course BHA has some great ideas that we can get behind, but the fact remains they believe that OHV use is not as important.

And I have stated this before, there is a lot of public land in Alberta that you can hunt on, where you will not see or hear any OHVs. I would guess as much as there is where you might see or hear OHVs.

Some questions are, what is BHA's long term plan? Do OHV users have the same rights to public land as backpackers? Who determines who has more rights to public land? Why are questions on lack of enforcement constantly overlooked/ignored?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.