Bighorn Public land to Parks land proposal

[Denali Dave]

There a video in this thread of the meeting in Rocky last night. Looked like a good turn out and no hands raised for the proposal. https://www.facebook.com/groups/4628...4572323402690/

[Denali Dave]

Sorry. Bad link here is the right one.
https://www.facebook.com/1182379071/...5289467808278/

[Denali Dave]

Just saw this today. The NDP has released their interim protection

https://talkaep.alberta.ca/6512/docu...12761/download

Sounds like more signs have been going up. There’s a guy heading out on a scout this weekend to gather pictures of any new signage.

[Bush Critter]

Anything east of Abraham lake should be free for OHV... There is all really too many parks in this province. Respect the land and leave it As is...

[Abe89]

Thanks for the info. For a government that’s supposed to be a democracy it sure isn’t acting like one. Gotta be someway to hold them accountable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abe89]

I talked with a friend from nordegg area...there is A Lot of frustration over this. Especially since they had 40million from the government to improve their inadequate hospital...it gets pulled and suddenly theres 40mill for this land proposal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[59whiskers]

The Bighorn meeting was just a chance for user groups to vent but have no high profile officials at the meeting to answer questions. The next stop for the NDP is everything west of Grande Prairie. They do more than what they say they will do and the end result is less input and reduced opportunity. Elections for federal and provincial governments cannot come soon enough.

[mgh]

After reading the full proposal for Bighorn, which took about 2 full hours, all I can see is this is an attempt to re- create K-country in central Alberta. Hidden behind all the double speak the word “development” appears more than any other: tourism development, economic development, etc.

Then I heard from reliable sources within the civil service that the Environment Minister sees this as her legacy project and has hired 50 people for the project- despite a hiring freeze due to the lack of revenue.

This is bad policy and bad politics: a “greenwash” of hiding a massive development project (think hotels etc as per k-country village) behind supposed environmental protection. If they want to protect the environment, keep people out by lack of development (yes that means limiting some of the ohv access to stop the worst offences) but not banning free camping and then building massive pay campsites.

This proposal needs to get killed and a real consultative process held that I think will show most people support the status quo but with real enforcement of the existing regulations (so don’t hire 50 paper pushers, save us $39 million and hire 10 new Conservation Officers and maybe build a few more outhouses and install more garbage bins)!

[Albertadiver]

Government just cancelled all remaining info sessions under the guise of fear of bullying. Hmmm.....

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Albertadiver

Government just cancelled all remaining info sessions under the guise of fear of bullying. Hmmm.....

I hope they get bullied and harrased a whole bunch more! I certainly think it’s more than acceptable in this case! *#$& them!!!!!

[Abe89]

Thr Facebook page “coalition of albertans for public land “ has a lot of good information on it.....there is a rally in Drayton on the 7th...check it out, good information.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[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.

[Pekan]

Originally Posted by nimrod

From the y to y website

https://cpawsnab.org/loveyourheadwaters/


Not good for Us back country hunters

Cut and pasted from the link you posted:
Just as beautiful and exciting as nearby Banff and Jasper National Parks, the Bighorn provides stunning recreational opportunities including hiking, camping, climbing, horse-riding, fishing and hunting.

They mention hunting as a recreational opportunity.
Sounds like it's going to be a lot like Kananaskis country. So what's the problem? I don't get it.

[Joe Black]

Yes. Would be great if all big game hunting opportunities would be through draws, just like kananaskis.

No problem or change from how it is now, right?

[MountainTi]

[QUOTE=Pekan;3907703
Sounds like it's going to be a lot like Kananaskis country. So what's the problem? I don't get it.[/QUOTE]

We already have a Kananaskis. Don't need another one

[ecsuplander]

Not sure a change in government is the answer. The other option politically has traditionally put environmental concerns far behind economic ones. May not be any habitat left to hunt and fish if oil/gas/mining and lumber are given free reign.

[Joe Black]

May not be the answer, but a good start.

[Abe89]

This proposal and its problems are really starting to get some media coverage. I’ve heard nixon on am770 a few times now, (catch them on coalition of albertans for public land fb page) couple news articles out; and it’s not all in support of this thing. Seems the shutdown of the meetings by the government because of fear of threats and harassment (which the rcmp has no record of) was the final catalyst. Nice to see. Not out of the woods yet though. Do the survey, make sure you state clearly why you don’t support this....if they ram this through it will severely limit our backcountry usage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matt1984]

Originally Posted by Pekan

They mention hunting as a recreational opportunity.
Sounds like it's going to be a lot like Kananaskis country. So what's the problem? I don't get it.

Only 2 of Alberta's 75 Provincial parks allow hunting, with a large range or restrictions. Also, the original Castle plan called for allowing OHV's but once the park was formed they changed the rule. Who's to say that doesn't happen with hunting.

[matt1984]

I also noticed that Stephen Legault, who is leading the Y2Y push for the parks in Alberta shared this on his Facebook page....

"there is a push by some hunting organizations to get hunting and trapping opportunities increased in this new protected area......I am not in favour ...and want to ensure that this area is protected so that wildlife on the boundaries of Banff and Jasper have some buffer zones that protect them from hunting and trapping"

[CF8889]

Originally Posted by matt1984

I also noticed that Stephen Legault, who is leading the Y2Y push for the parks in Alberta shared this on his Facebook page....

"there is a push by some hunting organizations to get hunting and trapping opportunities increased in this new protected area......I am not in favour ...and want to ensure that this area is protected so that wildlife on the boundaries of Banff and Jasper have some buffer zones that protect them from hunting and trapping"

I'm trying to find this but can't. Can you post a link or date to this?

[oiler_nation]

I also noticed that Stephen Legault, who is leading the Y2Y push for the parks in Alberta shared this on his Facebook page....

"there is a push by some hunting organizations to get hunting and trapping opportunities increased in this new protected area......I am not in favour ...and want to ensure that this area is protected so that wildlife on the boundaries of Banff and Jasper have some buffer zones that protect them from hunting and trapping"
I would be interested in seeing it as well. I would not be surprised that Stephen Legault holds such a view privately, but would be a bit surprised he would share it in a public forum.

[matt1984]

Originally Posted by CF8889

I'm trying to find this but can't. Can you post a link or date to this?

He shared the post on December 7. It was originally written by John Marriott who has over 100,000 followers to encourage his followers to fill out the Bighorn Survey. If you read the comments they are mainly crazy wolf loving Americans who he was encouraging to fill out the Bighorn survey.


In my mind this is proof that the Y2Y concerns are more than just “conspiracy theories”. It’s scary to see some of the comments left by people that he is getting to fill out the survey, including one comment “hunting is murder!”

[oiler_nation]

I look at the whole Y2Y anti-american intervention speak, as sort of irrelevant, and it reads as a bit of a political smear tactic to discount the proposal without having to really engage or familiarize yourself with it. Undoubtedly there are always going to be folks that would love to eliminate hunting altogether (Stephen Legault given his profession and past history could be one of those people...although I still can't see the post), but does that mean that the Wildland Park is a bad idea full-stop? I know that the avid quad and RV guys are certainly saying that, but truthfully I am not sure. At this point, not enough information has been provided to really form any sort of an informed opinion on the proposal. That is the real issue.

Call me crazy, but I like to gather as many facts as I can before I form an opinion.

There was talk earlier in the thread that you cannot backcountry camp in the Castle Wildland. I phoned and asked the local office and this is completely bogus. Having said this, I am still concerned that they are developing the 3 backcountry huts in the Castle Wildland and preventing other users from camping within a km of each. It seems disingenuous that the government is saying we are protecting the Bighorn for environmental purposes, while at the same time saying that huts are on the table. In a provincial park? Sure. But a wildland park has different goals and backcountry huts are inconsistent with those goals. That battle appears to have been lost in the castle, but I hope this can be prevented in the Bighorn.

What I have found so frustrating throughout this process is having to listen to one side (the government) tell me don't worry just "trust us" we will sort the details out later (despite some concerning precedents set in the Castle Wildland), while the other side spreads misinformation (often deliberately) to try and garner support for the status quo. We are dealing with politicians on both sides and what is being lost is nuance and critical thought. I frankly don't know how any hunter can be ardently for or against the proposal, when there are so many unknowns. Personally, I need to know more before I can confidently weigh in, and the government isn't given us the necessary information. That is my issue. The anti-Y2Y stuff, the deliberate misinformation coming from "advocates" for our public lands just feels like unproductive noise.

[Joe Black]

in the castle area remember, their is the "wildland" and there is the "park"

two totally different management plans. down there the park(provincial) is about the same size as the wildland. the park is much more restrictive vs the wildland. when i saw the bighorn proposal, i was surprised they didn't do the same.

they probably figured way to much to ram down Albertan throats this close to the election, wanting to fly under the radar.

wonder how that's working out for you so far shannon?

[oiler_nation]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

in the castle area remember, their is the "wildland" and there is the "park"



two totally different management plans. down there the park(provincial) is about the same size as the wildland. the park is much more restrictive vs the wildland. when i saw the bighorn proposal, i was surprised they didn't do the same.



they probably figured way to much to ram down Albertan throats this close to the election, wanting to fly under the radar.



wonder how that's working out for you so far shannon?

Of course, and had the huts been placed in the provincial park I would have no objections. Provincial parks are tourism based, Wildland's are designated for conservation and rustic recreation. 700,000 worth of backcountry hut does not strike me as rustic.

You sort of make my point though. I know that there is a wildland and a park in the castle, and you know it, but when the castle is being referenced by you and others there is a tendency to speak in generalities and not clarify whether we are talking about the wildland or the park. It confuses the issue to try and sell the point to other folks on here. Are there valid grievances? Certainly. So why not stick with those and be upfront, rather than try to make misleading statements? The only way I can interpet it is that the goal is to conflate backcountry hunting with ATV/RV use in hopes of generating more support for the cause. Smokem if ya gottem I guess, but it doesn't strike me as particularly credible.

Again we need more information to weigh in with an informed opinion, but

Sent from my SM-N9200 using Tapatalk

[CF8889]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

in the castle area remember, their is the "wildland" and there is the "park"

two totally different management plans. down there the park(provincial) is about the same size as the wildland. the park is much more restrictive vs the wildland. when i saw the bighorn proposal, i was surprised they didn't do the same.

they probably figured way to much to ram down Albertan throats this close to the election, wanting to fly under the radar.

wonder how that's working out for you so far shannon?

Pretty sure the the Castle PP and Castle WPP are not "about the same size"

Edit: Just googled it... the WPP is over 100,000acres larger then the PP...

[Joe Black]

Originally Posted by CF8889

Pretty sure the the Castle PP and Castle WPP are not "about the same size"

Edit: Just googled it... the WPP is over 100,000acres larger then the PP...

Yes.100000 acres of unaccessable mountains. Nice. Some real good accces on trails there. Right. All the accessible areas are in the park.

No problem. If Shannon and her crew though that bighorn was gonna be a cakewalk,,, surprise. Start warching the news. There’s a sh$#*#*storm blowing in Randy,,,,

[SnipeHunter]

A few thoughts -

First, just joined BHA. I'm in favour of a wilder Alberta. This is great for the future of hunting in Alberta.

Second, the best way for hunters to have a greater voice is to encourage the province to increase licensing fees. There are reasons why they are looking at other revenue options.

Third, looks like there are some increased restrictions for horseback but the accessibility offered is a lot more than by ATV. Something to think about.