Alberta Fish & Game Prostitute Thousands of Gun Owners

[Gifted Intuitive]

Gun owners are coming to a new level of understanding of what Allan Rock intended, or the CFO intended with the 'Backdoor Gun' registry. Now you can buy bumper/window posters that say FIRE CFO WYATT, the CFO in Ontario accused of implimenting restrictions beyond his powers. Who would guess the Alberta Fish and Game (AFGA) would deal a crippling blow to Gun Owners.

Guns that live in Cities need a shooting range. Guns that live on acreages need a Shooting range. Guns that live wherever they can not be fired , need a Shooting Range. But the Sherwood Park Fish and Game Range can now be closed and they may not be able to relocate.

The Sherwood Park Fish and Game range was founded by shooters. Urban prawl forced them to leave a property close to Sherwood Park and move to a property 1 hr east. This is why it still retains the name Sherwood Park but is in Beaver County, on the east side of Strathcona County.

The Executive at that time established a undertaking to buy adjoining lands to establish a buffer zone. To help pay for this buffer area the executive obtained financial support from various conservation organizations. The range property and the buffer area have a market value of around $2.5 million. This is a substantial sum, attributable to the intentions of the Executive that founded the range. This is a unique windfall as most shooting ranges don't own the land they occupy.

In 2012 the Conservation partners decided to take on another partner called the Natures Conservancy. The Shooting Range Executive, the AFGA, and the other conservation groups, agreed to sell an interest to the Natures Conservancy in the Buffer lands for $300,000 (exact amount unknown).

The agreement stipulated that the buffer lands can not be sold. The land the range is located on is not part of this arrangement.

The land the shooting range is located on has debatable value. If it were to be sold, the cost to recover the bullet contamination and relandscape to other uses would give it minimal value. The cost of buying a new property, developing the roads, benches, burns and utilities, could easily exceed the net sale value of the existing property. Getting County approval at another location is another challenge.

Gun owners have been prostituted. If the range were to be closed there would not be sufficient funding to establish a new range, especially a range convenient to Edmonton and area shooters. The range and buffer area if sold would be able to finance a world class shooting facility and conservation area for all Albertans.

Why would the AFGA not side with Gun Owners ? Why would the conservationists want to exchange $2,000,000. for $300,000.

The AFGA would not return my calls when I left this question on voice mail.

Who owns the $300,000 is not being disclosed. Is it Range money or Conservationist money ? The AFGA is not disclosing any details of the change in ownership structure and its impact on gun owners. I know the shooter members have been hosed. The Range Executive is saying the partnership with the Natures Conservancy will ensure that the property will stay in its existing state. This is deception as it does nothing to ensure the shooters will have a shooting range. It does not address the millions of dollars the shooters had a right to.

Trap shooters have asked for a new trap machine for about 5 years now. The Trap Range contributes a financial benefit to the club. Installing a new Trap machine would cost the Club about $10,000. The range Executive has denied this request annually. The range executive has no problem trading $2M for $300K. Get the picture. When I asked the Range president about this logic I was told that the range is contolled by a Conservation organization not a Shooting organization.

Range closure is not a distant reality. About 10 years ago a candidate running for Council said that if elected they would undertake to stop the shooting. That candidate only lost by 2 votes. There are 100's more houses in that area now.

Why do shooters keep funding the AFGA ?

[Big Daddy Badger]

I wouldn't call that prostituted... they get paid when people...cough them.
Makes you wonder about that executive though... seems like they are prone to keeping secrets.

Might be worth having a third party take a look at the books.

Its only a matter of course that the range had to move the first time... as towns grow the ranges become problemetic but this seems to be a process of nibbling away at the new range until it to will become un-usable.

[BuckCuller]

I suggest that if you are not getting answers that you contact every shooter you know of and go to the clubs monthly meeting and ask them face to face, every club has a monthly meeting and any member of the AFGA can go to them. You will be harder to avoid in person.

[catnthehat]

Is the Sherwood park club owned by the AFGA?
I know ours is not, we are affiliated with them , but that's all.
I would be asking the question of the SPFGA not the AFGA.
Cat

[260 Rem]

I am involved with SPFGA, but not an Exec member, and am having a difficult time following GI's version of events. If there is a short answer the OP, it involves saying:
1) that SPFGA is not "owned" by AFGA.
2) that SPFGA made an agreement with NCC involving the administration of land outside the Range area involving SPFGA land that is dedicated in perpetuity as "conservation" property.
* funds generated from the NCC agreement will be managed by the SPFGA Executive in an appropriate manner which could include the purchase of a neighboring down-range quarter section that would provide added long term security for range operations.
3) a new trap machine was purchased and installed in the spring of 2012.
4) SPFGA is certainly "conservation" minded, but make no mistake... the club understands the importance of the Range as the single most important source of revenue...
5) SPFGA is in absolutely no danger of shutting down.
6) SPFGA is like any other non-profit registered under the Societies Act and as an organization, does not provide accumulated asset shares to members....(is it a share of the 300K you are looking for?)
Sounds like the OP is having an issue and is looking for some "web" support? How about taking your concern to the Club? Sorry, but I'm just a bit suspicious of the motivation behind this second time poster.

EDIT: Thought I recognized you GI..so searched your other post and seems you tried some similar sniping when you joined the AO Forum in May, 2012. The sky was not falling then, and it is not falling now.

[260 Rem]

Timed out my Edit window as I was reading GI's diatribe from this past May, at which time he was upset the Exec did not agree with his recommendation to set up a "benchrest range" among other things...I don't feel so bad now that I've figured out your identity. Try talking to the club again GI, if your ideas have merit, I'm sure they will be considered. (I would have thought you knew we had installed the new trap machine as it sits not far from the electronic thrower you use on Sundays?)

[Gifted Intuitive]

pesky672, Buckcaller, catnthehat, please ask 260Rem , 'Where is the new trap machine worth about $10,000 ?.'

After we get this resolved we will proceed further.

[avb3]

GI, your casting aspersions on one of the premier F&G clubs in the province, one that has a great balance on hunter and angler advocacy, conservation ethic and practice, and a strong firearm program.

Your whining, and it does not come across as genuine nor credible.

[super7mag]

You have good reason to be concerned, Nature Conservacy of Canada is a major anti hunting organization . Just look at the tv adds they put out, the best way to shut down hunting is to shut down shooting. They are well funded and target 90% of the ads are targeted at kids 12 and under. I despise them and there adds they are huge in Ontario, wish they'd stay there.

[Sundancefisher]

Sounds like the group wanted to get some money out of their sunk capital by finding someone that want to conserve habitat.

To get full money out you would need to sell to a full usage outfit which would go against the mandate of creating a buffer.

These partnerships are not uncommon and groups like ducks unlimited partner up the same way. They can't afford to pay full price often but do chip in some skin to find a win/win.

Sounds like OP just needs some educating on the decision process.

The option was to have no money back and look for funds elsewhere. As an association they will have a yearly year end summary and financials to look at.

[super7mag]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Sounds like the group wanted to get some money out of their sunk capital by finding someone that want to conserve habitat.

To get full money out you would need to sell to a full usage outfit which would go against the mandate of creating a buffer.

These partnerships are not uncommon and groups like ducks unlimited partner up the same way. They can't afford to pay full price often but do chip in some skin to find a win/win.

Sounds like OP just needs some educating on the decision process.

The option was to have no money back and look for funds elsewhere. As an association they will have a yearly year end summary and financials to look at.

If you need to recover capital it should have been discussed at meetings and membership should be notified. The last thing you do is sell to an anti organization. This will eventually come back and bite the club in the arse.

[Matt L.]

Sounds like the OP needs to come to terms with the fact a club is not going to acquiesce to his every whim.

[avb3]

Nature Conservancy is not anti-hunting. In fact, they have partnered with the AFGA, DU, ACA and others on purchases where hunting is specifically part of a conservation goal.

Those are the facts, so please stop spreading rumours. Rumours are for old grannies, right?

[super7mag]

BS

[blackpheasant]

http://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/
Sure doesn't seem like a hunter/shooter friendly Org. to me...

[260 Rem]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

pesky672, Buckcaller, catnthehat, please ask 260Rem , 'Where is the new trap machine worth about $10,000 ?.'

After we get this resolved we will proceed further.

They don't need to ask, you can do so directly as you did in this post. Not everything needs drama. As you are well aware, the Club has two trap machines, one perfectly functioning electronic thrower housed in the "thrower shed" and another..the spring loaded thrower that sits on top a concrete barrel base approximately 15 M from the thrower shed. The spring loaded thrower was purchased in the spring of 2012 and installed by the Shotgun Chair, Les Berry, and myself. Les was very ill with cancer so I finished the installation. Les died a few months later. I do not know the cost of either thrower, but do know that both machines are relatively new. I assume you know the elecronic thrower was replaced about 5 yrs ago.
About the same time Les purchased the "new" electronic thrower, he also purchased a towed unit that threw rabbits and pheasants. It never seemed to catch on, did not work like Les wanted..and the Club authorized him to sell it a couple of years ago. Not sure who bought it...maybe Narrow lake or Tofield?
Les also had plans for improvements to the 5 Stand set up and we discussed the concrete and ground work before his passing. The club was prepared to fund his proposal (probably still is), but Les passed before he submitted any plans. Bring your concerns up with the new Shotgun Chair. He may also have plans for improvement? The club is progressive and spends a lot of money on keeping current. It is a well run facilty that is probably one of the largest, most popular faciliies in Western Canada. In spite of GI's whinning about how the club does not cater to members (meaning what he thinks members want)...he never gets involved in solutions...volunteers...etc ---- just shoots shotgun and complains on the internet.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by super7mag

BS

Originally Posted by blackpheasant

http://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/
Sure doesn't seem like a hunter/shooter friendly Org. to me...

Show us exactly how and where the NCC is anti-hunting.

The proof is in the pudding... in EVERY case where the NCC has partnered with the AFGA, ACA or DU in Alberta, hunting is part of the management of the lands.

Quit spreading rumours that are not born by facts. Talk to DU, talk to the ACA, talk to the AFGA's Brad Fenson.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Well said 260....

If someone has an issue with how the club is run they could approach the executive. If they do not like the solution or outcome then no one is forcing them to be a member....

LC

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by super7mag

If you need to recover capital it should have been discussed at meetings and membership should be notified. The last thing you do is sell to an anti organization. This will eventually come back and bite the club in the arse.

I have been on many association boards before and we all vote the board in to do the right thing. Hopefully they did think it through and have appropriate details in the agreement to protect members rights. Not sure if these guys don't allow hunting...some groups like Duck Unlimited do.

I agree...there should be greater discussion if the group is small enough...otherwise you have to vote in the right people.

I would think you all need all the facts before jumping to conclusions...and I hope the homework was done on the decision.

[260 Rem]

Originally Posted by blackpheasant

http://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/
Sure doesn't seem like a hunter/shooter friendly Org. to me...

For a bit of clarity regarding the agreement with SPFGA -- the property covered by the NCC/SPFGA agreement lays outside the range area quarter. Each of these adjoiing properties already had conservation easments registered against the titles, so were already controlled in terms of development and shooting. SPFGA members will never notice any difference to the range operation...except, perhaps there is now money available to purchase any property that may come available directly down-range.
The Exec did due diligence. The Exec has a proven record of anticipating future requirements...hard to argue with a club that has expanded from under 700 members to 3500 in ten years ---and had through out the years since its inception, accumulated over 700 acres of land ...built a great shooting facility. Detractors and armchair managers are arround in every organization. GI reminds me of the guys who were criticizing Gretzky for his inability to shoot

[super7mag]

Originally Posted by avb3

Nature Conservancy is not anti-hunting. In fact, they have partnered with the AFGA, DU, ACA and others on purchases where hunting is specifically part of a conservation goal.

Those are the facts, so please stop spreading rumours. Rumours are for old grannies, right?

I am off to work so I can't sit around and dig up all the crap on them. But there was a 3 page thread on CGN 2 years ago touting all the virtues of this Org. There end goal is to stop hunting , by what ever means . To them keep your friends close and enemy s closer is a philosophy to live by.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by blackpheasant

http://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/
Sure doesn't seem like a hunter/shooter friendly Org. to me...

http://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/w...agreement.html

Got to read the whole thing. The shooting range can put in the Conservation Agreement that the habitat will be protected and that the hunters will still have access. I know of one that is like this currently. Just need to call them for access permission.

If the original owner gifted it or sold it...it may be to protect habitat or rare species. Often the biggest problem is cattle...not hunters when it comes to protecting habitat.

These guys are not radical environmentalists...they are normal.

Some of their biggest contributors are hunters and sportsmen...that should speak volumes.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

pesky672, Buckcaller, catnthehat, please ask 260Rem , 'Where is the new trap machine worth about $10,000 ?.'

After we get this resolved we will proceed further.

I have no affiliation with the SPFGA , so will not ask the question as it does not concern me.
My original question ( and suspicion) was asked and answered.
the AFGA does not own the SPFGA range, and the questions should be posed to the SPFGA executive, not here where the discussion does not belong.
Cat

[BigJon]

Originally Posted by super7mag

I am off to work so I can't sit around and dig up all the crap on them. But there was a 3 page thread on CGN 2 years ago touting all the virtues of this Org. There end goal is to stop hunting , by what ever means . To them keep your friends close and enemy s closer is a philosophy to live by.

I'd love to see some facts to back this one up...

[avb3]

Originally Posted by BigJon

I'd love to see some facts to back this one up...

Me too, because right now it seems like this is a case if one repeats a mistruth enough, it will be believed.

The NCC has never been opposed to hunting in any of its collaborations with the AFGA, DU or the ACA.

Those ARE the facts.

[blackpheasant]

Originally Posted by avb3

Me too, because right now it seems like this is a case if one repeats a mistruth enough, it will be believed.

The NCC has never been opposed to hunting in any of its collaborations with the AFGA, DU or the ACA.

Those ARE the facts.

Kinda wierd that there website doesn't mention hunting anywhere.

[Dadirk]

They are a conservation group but if you look at there history since the first piece of property they took over in Alberta the Wagner Bog which is now an ecological reserve no hunting at all and there are several other AB projects that slowly got turned into game preserves and eco areas. On the east coast they have made several land purchases for the protection of wildlife. There is an email address to get access in the fall of the year just sent them a email about access for hunting cant wait to see if they respond. We had dealings with them in Northern Sask where they turned a chunk of very remote land into a eco reserve and we had to stop Bear hunting in that area 150 miles from no where but they made it a reserve.

[Winch101]

I know first hand how the NC works ....They bought two huge

Tracks of land in SW Manitoba which we always had permission on .

NC posted it and we never gained access again ,nobody farmed this ,

Or pastured .....just sat there . We tried all the channels. No luck

So we trespassed ......2hrs ...the CO s were there .there isn't

Anyone living within 10 miles of this land . We got a warning .

We found out who was the registered owner and got a lawyer

To write them a letter.....response. Hunting does not configure

To their land use program...period ....The Nature Conservancy of Canada

Is a cancer ,that should be stopped . Do what you can to deter them.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Winch101

I know first hand how the NC works ....They bought two huge

Tracks of land in SW Manitoba which we always had permission on .

NC posted it and we never gained access again ,nobody farmed this ,

Or pastured .....just sat there . We tried all the channels. No luck

So we trespassed ......2hrs ...the CO s were there .there isn't

Anyone living within 10 miles of this land . We got a warning .

We found out who was the registered owner and got a lawyer

To write them a letter.....response. Hunting does not configure

To their land use program...period ....The Nature Conservancy of Canada

Is a cancer ,that should be stopped . Do what you can to deter them.

Likely simple. If they buy the land they keep it simple. If someone givess them land that stipulates hunting is allowed they allow hunting. If you buy the land you can do with it what you want. They have private ownership rights like any other farmer etc does.

They are not taking public land just to be clear.

Trespassing on private land is very unsportsmanlike like is it not?

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by blackpheasant

Kinda wierd that there website doesn't mention hunting anywhere.

Actually they do, From their Canadian website,

Hunting

NCC recognizes the important role hunters play in maintaining the healthy balance of wildlife populations in settled landscapes. In the fall of 2011, NCC opened several Norfolk County properties to hunting through an application and permission letter system. Public response has been very positive.