Bighorn Public land to Parks land proposal

[Douglas N]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

So does that mean they are front for Y2Y or just an organization with aligned interests on one particular issue? I mean I am still wading through all this before I form my opinion, but it certainly seems ignorant at best or misleading at worst to suggest that a hunting based conservation group with as much prominent support as what BHA appears to have is merely front for this y2y outfit.

That’s for you to decide. There’s lots of info out there. I brought that up wth a quick good search.

There are a lot of Green Decoy groups out there that look like they support hunting, fishing, etc, but have other agendas.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Douglas N

There are a lot of Green Decoy groups out there that look like they support hunting, fishing, etc, but have other agendas.

Bingo!

And Y2Y is most certainly anti hunting, if any of you don’t believe it, dig deeper. And yes, BHA is affiliated with Y2Y.

[urban rednek]

Originally Posted by Douglas N

There are a lot of Green Decoy groups out there that look like they support hunting, fishing, etc, but have other agendas.

They also like to insert moles to monitor relevant discussions by non-member organizations. If the "sheep" show any inclination to organize against the Greens agenda prior to implementation, the infiltraitors initiate seemingly innocent discussion using subversive statements that are intended to cause confusion and dissension. Keeps people off balance and unsure of their position.
Go look up the BHA podcast thread from last year for further details.

As for the Bighorn Public Land Proposal? It is going to happen as fast as the existing government can push it through; the survey is a waste of time, our opinion doesn't matter.

[Douglas N]

Originally Posted by urban rednek

They also like to insert moles to monitor relevant discussions by non-member organizations. If the "sheep" show any inclination to organize against the Greens agenda prior to implementation, the infiltraitors initiate seemingly innocent discussion using subversive statements that are intended to cause confusion and dissension. Keeps people off balance and unsure of their position.
Go look up the BHA podcast thread from last year for further details.

As for the Bighorn Public Land Proposal? It is going to happen as fast as the existing government can push it through; the survey is a waste of time, our opinion doesn't matter.

Don’t give up yet. Once it’s gone, it may never be back and you will kick yourselves later. The statements earlier by some folks about access to our Backcountry by the ultra fit or rich is very valid. I’m one of those guys that NEEDS to use an OHV to get to places where I can stage and walk from. My knee currently won’t likely allow me to backpack a full camp in 30 kms anymore. I can do 10 though, so quadding in part way keeps my dreams to continue mountain hunting alive. I’m working on getting that fixed, but it’s not a given. I’ve always been against this proposal, but it sure opened up my eyes to what we are up against as we age. Our health is fickle and one injury will change your perspective on how bullet proof you really are. Not many folks have the resources to keep or have access to a string of horses- they aren’t cheap and it’s not that simple. Don’t forget our seniors and disabled- who is fighting for them? Should they have to hire an outfitter or helicopter to access the Backcountry?

From an environmental protection standpoint, this is totally unnecessary. The current designated trails in the PLUZ are very restrictive now, all we need is more enforcement to ensure there is not abuse. Don’t fall for the talk about this being the next Willmore. That’s not what their end game is. At best, it would be “Edmonton’s Kananskis”. I for one don’t want to see this area commerciallized to that extent. If you complete the survey, you will get a feel for what they are targeting.

Email your MLA, Jason Kenny, Shannon Phillips and keep the emails. Attend the “consultation” meetings, and for sure fill out the survey! The data will always be there whether the current government uses it or not. At that very least it will be of use for the UCP if they are elected in 2019, and will be key data in the case of a court challenge. I believe there is a precedent now for a challenge. The Northern Gateway Pipeline was stalled due to lack of consultation with stakeholders (Indigenous groups). This process is more rushed and very obviously excluding some key stakeholders. This one affects many industries and many user groups now and the motivation and backing exists for a court challenge to this. It’s well beyond restricting OHV use now.

On Facebook, there are two groups dedicated to sharing info on the current situation. Look up “This is my Nordegg- Advocating for the continued Public Land Use Zone”, and “Coalition of Albertans for Pubkic Land Access- CAPLA”. Check them out.

Our opponents also have Facebook pages, seek them out and share your views with them too.

[Joe Black]

your opinions on their facebook pages will last about 10 minutes, be deleted, then you will be blocked from posting anything further.

bin der don dat

just another example of who we are dealing with

if you don't believe me, go to shanon phillips facebook page and try to post anything that does not fall in line with her propaganda

[Abe89]

Originally Posted by Douglas N

Don’t give up yet. Once it’s gone, it may never be back and you will kick yourselves later. The statements earlier by some folks about access to our Backcountry by the ultra fit or rich is very valid. I’m one of those guys that NEEDS to use an OHV to get to places where I can stage and walk from. My knee currently won’t likely allow me to backpack a full camp in 30 kms anymore. I can do 10 though, so quadding in part way keeps my dreams to continue mountain hunting alive. I’m working on getting that fixed, but it’s not a given. I’ve always been against this proposal, but it sure opened up my eyes to what we are up against as we age. Our health is fickle and one injury will change your perspective on how bullet proof you really are. Not many folks have the resources to keep or have access to a string of horses- they aren’t cheap and it’s not that simple. Don’t forget our seniors and disabled- who is fighting for them? Should they have to hire an outfitter or helicopter to access the Backcountry?



From an environmental protection standpoint, this is totally unnecessary. The current designated trails in the PLUZ are very restrictive now, all we need is more enforcement to ensure there is not abuse. Don’t fall for the talk about this being the next Willmore. That’s not what their end game is. At best, it would be “Edmonton’s Kananskis”. I for one don’t want to see this area commerciallized to that extent. If you complete the survey, you will get a feel for what they are targeting.



Email your MLA, Jason Kenny, Shannon Phillips and keep the emails. Attend the “consultation” meetings, and for sure fill out the survey! The data will always be there whether the current government uses it or not. At that very least it will be of use for the UCP if they are elected in 2019, and will be key data in the case of a court challenge. I believe there is a precedent now for a challenge. The Northern Gateway Pipeline was stalled due to lack of consultation with stakeholders (Indigenous groups). This process is more rushed and very obviously excluding some key stakeholders. This one affects many industries and many user groups now and the motivation and backing exists for a court challenge to this. It’s well beyond restricting OHV use now.



On Facebook, there are two groups dedicated to sharing info on the current situation. Look up “This is my Nordegg- Advocating for the continued Public Land Use Zone”, and “Coalition of Albertans for Pubkic Land Access- CAPLA”. Check them out.



Our opponents also have Facebook pages, seek them out and share your views with them too.

I agree. This was helpful, thanks.
Reading through the survey was certainly eye opening for me...Ya-Ha tinda into a provincial park for instance, Complete with lodges, cabins, and bed and breakfast. As well as Camping limited to designated areas. That is just the ya-ha...... should I mention the zip line proposed in another area? There are a lot of provincial park and wildland proposals that really threaten the wild life styles many of us enjoy in these areas.
For a proposal all wrapped up in environmental language there is an awful lot in the survey about infrastructure to encourage tourism.
Don’t get me wrong I am all for tourism within reason, and people enjoying the outdoors. But part of what makes the wilderness so inviting is it requires a certain amount of skill and expertise and the freedom to get away. Sounds like in a lot of these areas getting away would be limited to back country cabins and guided tours. Sounds like it would simply abuse The areas where tourism is encouraged by sheer numbers, and limit the freedom to truly enjoy the wild. Not to mention place extra pressure on emergency services with all the inexperienced, the world is my amusement park, people who would now have access to places they may be shouldn’t have access to without having the right experience or expertise. They can now just drive up to it and step off with their tennis shoes. Just read some of the stories fish and game deal with in Banff; not to mention the sheer number of problem animals they have to put down because by and large people don’t obey the law to not feed wild life on the roads.
This isn’t the only area that this government has quietly made decisions behind closed doors and shoved down our throat’s, but as far as I can tell this one could really change places that have a lot of history as being a proud an wild Alberta.
Anyway that’s my rant. Check out the survey, email, make a fuss. If nothing else at least we didn’t just lie down



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Abe89

I agree. This was helpful, thanks.
Reading through the survey was certainly eye opening for me...Ya-Ha tinda into a provincial park for instance, Complete with lodges, cabins, and bed and breakfast. As well as Camping limited to designated areas. That is just the ya-ha...... should I mention the zip line proposed in another area? There are a lot of provincial park and wildland proposals that really threaten the wild life styles many of us enjoy in these areas.
For a proposal all wrapped up in environmental language there is an awful lot in the survey about infrastructure to encourage tourism.
Don’t get me wrong I am all for tourism within reason, and people enjoying the outdoors. But part of what makes the wilderness so inviting is it requires a certain amount of skill and expertise and the freedom to get away. Sounds like in a lot of these areas getting away would be limited to back country cabins and guided tours. Sounds like it would simply abuse The areas where tourism is encouraged by sheer numbers, and limit the freedom to truly enjoy the wild. Not to mention place extra pressure on emergency services with all the inexperienced, the world is my amusement park, people who would now have access to places they may be shouldn’t have access to without having the right experience or expertise. They can now just drive up to it and step off with their tennis shoes. Just read some of the stories fish and game deal with in Banff; not to mention the sheer number of problem animals they have to put down because by and large people don’t obey the law to not feed wild life on the roads.
This isn’t the only area that this government has quietly made decisions behind closed doors and shoved down our throat’s, but as far as I can tell this one could really change places that have a lot of history as being a proud an wild Alberta.
Anyway that’s my rant. Check out the survey, email, make a fuss. If nothing else at least we didn’t just lie down



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Were you this concerned when the castle was the big issue? Porcupines and Livingstone?

[dicknormal]

Originally Posted by crazy_davey

Were you this concerned when the castle was the big issue? Porcupines and Livingstone?

There in lays one of the biggest problems. It was only the Castle so it didn't effect anybody else's outdoor pursuits north of the Castle. Next lets take a chunk of south central east slopes. Wait the guys in the south say sucks to be you because you never supported us fully and the north are not effected yet so fight it yourself. Now with only a very small bunch at the top of the Alberta Fish and Game on our side they are being held back from voicing concern for the Alberta outdoor recreation community by the majority of the upper crust within the organization that doesn't want to jeopardise their positions or the relations they have with the Alberta Government.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by dicknormal

There in lays one of the biggest problems. It was only the Castle so it didn't effect anybody else's outdoor pursuits north of the Castle. Next lets take a chunk of south central east slopes. Wait the guys in the south say sucks to be you because you never supported us fully and the north are not effected yet so fight it yourself. Now with only a very small bunch at the top of the Alberta Fish and Game on our side they are being held back from voicing concern for the Alberta outdoor recreation community by the majority of the upper crust within the organization that doesn't want to jeopardise their positions or the relations they have with the Alberta Government.

Was not my point but nice try...

[Abe89]

Originally Posted by crazy_davey

Were you this concerned when the castle was the big issue? Porcupines and Livingstone?

I’m sorry but I fail to see why this should be relevant. Whether I was or was not, I am now. Does what happened in the past suck? Absolutely. If it could be changed would I join to do it? Yes. Does what happened and my level of involvement with the castle change my involvement now? No. Be thankful I care, whether I’ve come late or early. Use it, move on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Klondike]

Came across this on a facebook group. https://www.facebook.com/groups/462816510578276/

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Abe89

I’m sorry but I fail to see why this should be relevant. Whether I was or was not, I am now. Does what happened in the past suck? Absolutely. If it could be changed would I join to do it? Yes. Does what happened and my level of involvement with the castle change my involvement now? No. Be thankful I care, whether I’ve come late or early. Use it, move on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice to know you care now, now it’s affecting a place you enjoy. The Bighorn area has been a serious issue for a very long time. Great time to jump in and rally the troops! You are twenty years too late... I was at meetings with Cal when all this crap started.

Read my above quote of Cals post. He isn’t bull*****ting you or anyone else. Take all the surveys you want, it isn’t going to help or make a difference. Period!

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Abe89

I’m sorry but I fail to see why this should be relevant.

And yes, it’s very relevant, you started to care once it affected an area you frequent, a place you didn’t spend time(Castle/Livingstone) you didn’t give a $H!t.

[agentsmith]

Originally Posted by urban rednek

They also like to insert moles to monitor relevant discussions by non-member organizations. If the "sheep" show any inclination to organize against the Greens agenda prior to implementation, the infiltraitors initiate seemingly innocent discussion using subversive statements that are intended to cause confusion and dissension. Keeps people off balance and unsure of their position.
Go look up the BHA podcast thread from last year for further details.

I presume you've seen the website GreenDecoys.com, which claims that the BHA, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and other similar conservation groups are all "green decoys". Be aware this site is run by the Environmental Policy Alliance, which is a front group for a PR firm called Berman & Co., owned by the notorious lobbyist Rick Berman, who was nicknamed "Dr. Evil" by his critics. They operate dozens of such "astroturf" (meaning fake grass-roots) groups on behalf of their corporate masters.

In other words, if you "follow the money" as BHA haters like to say, you'll quickly find that GreenDecoys.com is nothing but corporate lobbyist propaganda. So who's the sheep now?

[Abe89]

Upcoming rally in Rocky Mt. House Jan 26 at 1:30 51 st in front of gov building. Media will be there so numbers are needed!

[2 Tollers]

An odd thing -- I wrote a letter to CPAWS on concerns I have with the lack of openness for consultation and speed that this is being pushed through at. The response came from the office of the Premier and a follow up invitation from Shannon Phillips to dial in to a an upcoming conference call. I did not realise that CPAWS was joined at the hip with the current Alb government.

[Cal R.]

...wait..what..? If you still have those letters send them over to the Love Your Trails folks.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Cal R.

...wait..what..? If you still have those letters send them over to the Love Your Trails folks.

Nothing like a broad FOIP request to root out collusion.

[Denali Dave]

Originally Posted by 2 Tollers

An odd thing -- I wrote a letter to CPAWS on concerns I have with the lack of openness for consultation and speed that this is being pushed through at. The response came from the office of the Premier and a follow up invitation from Shannon Phillips to dial in to a an upcoming conference call. I did not realise that CPAWS was joined at the hip with the current Alb government.

Can you post the letter somewhere? This is interesting.

[Abe89]

Info Meetings RE-scheduled with 2 days notice....I was really hoping government tune would've changed a bit, but, a well....it's something. https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...23893B46516A31