Bighorn country park

[marky_mark]

In case anyone was wondering

https://trib.al/Z891YbY

[JDK71]

great news

[Scott N]

I sure hope they roll back some of the changes the NDP made to the Castle region.

[nimrod]

Originally Posted by Scott N

I sure hope they roll back some of the changes the NDP made to the Castle region.

Yes lets hope, contact Jason Nixon to get this done

[Huk]

You'll have to forgive my vehement disagreement.

I hate the NDP probably more than most but that was good work they did in the Castle. It was Yahoo city in the summer and during hunting season. OHV nutbars chasing animals all over the place. I would even say there are too many trails that still allow OHV use.

Heaven forbid we have a few places where it takes a little bit of exercise to get into where you can actually interact with nature without hearing the whine of a dirt bike or have trails rutted up everywhere.

And let me point out, you go north across highway 3 and there is basically unlimited quad access in good country still available.

[Scott N]

Originally Posted by Huk

You'll have to forgive my vehement disagreement.

I hate the NDP probably more than most but that was good work they did in the Castle. It was Yahoo city in the summer and during hunting season. OHV nutbars chasing animals all over the place. I would even say there are too many trails that still allow OHV use.

Heaven forbid we have a few places where it takes a little bit of exercise to get into where you can actually interact with nature without hearing the whine of a dirt bike or have trails rutted up everywhere.

And let me point out, you go north across highway 3 and there is basically unlimited quad access in good country still available.

I think the bottom line for the problem in this area has always been enforcement, or more specifically, lack of. I've spent a lot of time in that area going back to the early 80s, and rarely, if ever, is law enforcement present. 99% of the time that I've seen enforcement in the area has been at Beaver Mines Lake, checking for fishing licenses.

[RZR]

Originally Posted by Huk

You'll have to forgive my vehement disagreement.

I hate the NDP probably more than most but that was good work they did in the Castle. It was Yahoo city in the summer and during hunting season. OHV nutbars chasing animals all over the place. I would even say there are too many trails that still allow OHV use.

Heaven forbid we have a few places where it takes a little bit of exercise to get into where you can actually interact with nature without hearing the whine of a dirt bike or have trails rutted up everywhere.

And let me point out, you go north across highway 3 and there is basically unlimited quad access in good country still available.

That's funny I spend a lot of time in 400 and have hardly ever seen anybody back in there. As far as going north of highway 3 the trails have all been closed there as well. That was a bang up job that Phillips did, sure glad she's gone. There was still great hunting in 400 when the trails open.

[jednastka]

Originally Posted by Huk

You'll have to forgive my vehement disagreement.

I hate the NDP probably more than most but that was good work they did in the Castle. It was Yahoo city in the summer and during hunting season. OHV nutbars chasing animals all over the place. I would even say there are too many trails that still allow OHV use.

Heaven forbid we have a few places where it takes a little bit of exercise to get into where you can actually interact with nature without hearing the whine of a dirt bike or have trails rutted up everywhere.

And let me point out, you go north across highway 3 and there is basically unlimited quad access in good country still available.

Could not agree more.

[katts69]

Windsurf,
Your telling me a horse or group of horses does the same damage as a guy with big lugged tires in 4 wheel drive OHV??
I don’t own horses but have done a few trips with them. Besides where the trail is a little soft you can hardly tell a horse was there.
I do agree that there is to many people
And no matter what happens the guys that don’t like to walk are not going to be happy.

[st99]

Originally Posted by katts69

Windsurf,
Your telling me a horse or group of horses does the same damage as a guy with big lugged tires in 4 wheel drive OHV??
I don’t own horses but have done a few trips with them. Besides where the trail is a little soft you can hardly tell a horse was there.
I do agree that there is to many people
And no matter what happens the guys that don’t like to walk are not going to be happy.

What I suggested at the AFGA meetings is to regulate ATV tire size and lug depth. As expected most users are too selfish to be pro active and the government isn't smart enough to act before it's too late and end up banning things as last resort, everyone loose in the long run.

[Smoky buck]

Restrictioning large parts of the backcountry doesn’t solve the problems it only moves it to another area. Education and enforcement is how you solve issues

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

Restrictioning large parts of the backcountry doesn’t solve the problems it only moves it to another area. Education and enforcement is how you solve issues

Why does it have to be a choice between restricting access or enforcement?

What is so wrong with increasing enforcement in the areas ATV's are allowed, while at the same time creating a few more areas set aside for rustic recreation where a guy can hike or ride or bike without the constant whine of engines?

Leave certain areas for guys like you and Mark who like to ride around looking for animals and leave other areas accessible to non-motorized users. You could even choose to park the quad and hunt those too if you wanted. I don't judge a guy for wanting to legally hunt from his ATV (I own one too), but the reality is that unlike horses, foot access, paddlers, etc. motorized users effect everyone else's experience in a way that other users don't simply by the noise they make. I believe in a multiple use concept, but that does not mean that reasonable restrictions cannot be established. There are more and more people in the province every decade and many of us own ATVs. As development and access is opened up the ability to access formerly remote country will become easier (it already has). Whether you are young, old, fat, healthy, fit, lazy, disabled etc. everyone will be able to get back there. That may sound egalitarian, but it comes with many unintended consequences (habitat destruction, tag allocations etc.). I disagreed with much of the NDP proposal (particularly back-country development in the Castle and Bighorn), but I hope the Conservatives don't throw the baby out with the bath water either. The status quo is not sustainable, and I often question the agendas of individuals (pro or con ATV restriction) who can't take a nuanced approach to a nuanced issue.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

Why does it have to be a choice between restricting access or enforcement?

What is so wrong with increasing enforcement in the areas ATV's are allowed, while at the same time creating a few more areas set aside for rustic recreation where a guy can hike or ride or bike without the constant whine of engines?

Leave certain areas for guys like you and Mark who like to ride around looking for animals and leave other areas accessible to non-motorized users. You could even choose to park the quad and hunt those too if you wanted. I don't judge a guy for wanting to legally hunt from his ATV (I own one too), but the reality is that unlike horses, foot access, paddlers, etc. motorized users effect everyone else's experience in a way that other users don't simply by the noise they make. I believe in a multiple use concept, but that does not mean that reasonable restrictions cannot be established. There are more and more people in the province every decade and many of us own ATVs. As development and access is opened up the ability to access formerly remote country will become easier (it already has). Whether you are young, old, fat, healthy, fit, lazy, disabled etc. everyone will be able to get back there. That may sound egalitarian, but it comes with many unintended consequences (habitat destruction, tag allocations etc.). I disagreed with much of the NDP proposal (particularly back-country development in the Castle and Bighorn), but I hope the Conservatives don't throw the baby out with the bath water either. The status quo is not sustainable, and I often question the agendas of individuals (pro or con ATV restriction) who can't take a nuanced approach to a nuanced issue.

Rarely use an atv out side of plowing snow. I think I have used an atv for hunting under a dozen times. For hunting I prefer to be on foot in the bush and have done my fair share of backpack hunts

I am far from an atv guy but I respect the responsible use of ATVs. I only have issues with those who tear up streams and off trail areas. Laws and enforcement to protect habitat from ATV abuse I am 100% behind

But to push out ATV users because you don’t like the noise and the affect your experience I will not support. It is no different then the hiker or bird watchers that want hunters out because we impact thier experience I will not support them either

Really think about it when you point a finger at another saying you want them out of the bush because they affect your experience because there is others out there that can do the same to you.

Outdoorsman need to learn to get along or there won’t be anyone to stand behind you when you need it

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

Why does it have to be a choice between restricting access or enforcement?

What is so wrong with increasing enforcement in the areas ATV's are allowed, while at the same time creating a few more areas set aside for rustic recreation where a guy can hike or ride or bike without the constant whine of engines?

.

There is a ton of "rustic" areas where ATV's are not allowed. Look at a map

[RZR]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

Why does it have to be a choice between restricting access or enforcement?

What is so wrong with increasing enforcement in the areas ATV's are allowed, while at the same time creating a few more areas set aside for rustic recreation where a guy can hike or ride or bike without the constant whine of engines?

Leave certain areas for guys like you and Mark who like to ride around looking for animals and leave other areas accessible to non-motorized users. You could even choose to park the quad and hunt those too if you wanted. I don't judge a guy for wanting to legally hunt from his ATV (I own one too), but the reality is that unlike horses, foot access, paddlers, etc. motorized users effect everyone else's experience in a way that other users don't simply by the noise they make. I believe in a multiple use concept, but that does not mean that reasonable restrictions cannot be established. There are more and more people in the province every decade and many of us own ATVs. As development and access is opened up the ability to access formerly remote country will become easier (it already has). Whether you are young, old, fat, healthy, fit, lazy, disabled etc. everyone will be able to get back there. That may sound egalitarian, but it comes with many unintended consequences (habitat destruction, tag allocations etc.). I disagreed with much of the NDP proposal (particularly back-country development in the Castle and Bighorn), but I hope the Conservatives don't throw the baby out with the bath water either. The status quo is not sustainable, and I often question the agendas of individuals (pro or con ATV restriction) who can't take a nuanced approach to a nuanced issue.

Have you heard of kananaskis country or wilmore. They are already restricted

[Reinchampion]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

Why does it have to be a choice between restricting access or enforcement?

What is so wrong with increasing enforcement in the areas ATV's are allowed, while at the same time creating a few more areas set aside for rustic recreation where a guy can hike or ride or bike without the constant whine of engines?

Leave certain areas for guys like you and Mark who like to ride around looking for animals and leave other areas accessible to non-motorized users. You could even choose to park the quad and hunt those too if you wanted. I don't judge a guy for wanting to legally hunt from his ATV (I own one too), but the reality is that unlike horses, foot access, paddlers, etc. motorized users effect everyone else's experience in a way that other users don't simply by the noise they make. I believe in a multiple use concept, but that does not mean that reasonable restrictions cannot be established. There are more and more people in the province every decade and many of us own ATVs. As development and access is opened up the ability to access formerly remote country will become easier (it already has). Whether you are young, old, fat, healthy, fit, lazy, disabled etc. everyone will be able to get back there. That may sound egalitarian, but it comes with many unintended consequences (habitat destruction, tag allocations etc.). I disagreed with much of the NDP proposal (particularly back-country development in the Castle and Bighorn), but I hope the Conservatives don't throw the baby out with the bath water either. The status quo is not sustainable, and I often question the agendas of individuals (pro or con ATV restriction) who can't take a nuanced approach to a nuanced issue.

My thoughts exactly. "The status quo is not sustainable, and I often question the agendas of individuals (pro or con ATV restriction) who can't take a nuanced approach to a nuanced issue.[/QUOTE]" X 2

[Buckhorn2]

To me if your hearing atvs you are not very far from an atv trail. Which means you didnt hike very far. I dont go hunt in waiparous or ghost area then get all riled up when i hear a quad. Its all about enforcement. If i were actually 4-5kms away from an “approved” trail and see an atv come breaking trail, then id be a bit cranky. Alot of guys think they hike a long ways from a “trail” but in reality you need to hike pretty far to get away from “easy access” in majority of the areas around. For those saying the game are being pushed? Go hunt where the game are pushed to. Let the quad guys ride they may not even be hunters but as long as they are on approved areas they have every right to be there just like you have every right to hunt there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk