Alberta Fish & Game Prostitute Thousands of Gun Owners

[blackpheasant]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

Actually they do, From their Canadian website,

Thanks Keg, should have dug a little deeper...

[super7mag]

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.

Thank you for backing me up , this is thier MO according to alot of Ontario boys . Like I said there was a 3 page thread on this a few years ago. I know they support Y2Y and have shut down most of the hunting in the Darkwoods area of BC although they allow acsess to a couple small areas of the Darkwoods , but for how long. I know if you google NCC and the Suzuki foundation the seem to support the same causes. I have also had e-mail correspondence with the bring back the wild campaign , I don't like people telling my kids that grizzly bears are your friend and that they are endangered species . So if you others that don't believe me want to stick yer tongue in the NCC'S ear dough ahead I will not support them.

[Gifted Intuitive]

The discussion has strayed away from what matters most. The range was founded for the shooting sports. Intensive housing now surrounds the range. Intensive housing brings votes and votes close shooting ranges. This is election year. My concern is the new arrangement where the buffer lands cannot be sold. My concern is why there was a need to segregate the Range from the entire property.


My concern is that this segregation leaves the range no opportunity to relocate.


Relocation requires major money.


My concern is why would the AFGA support this arrangement.

[Matt L.]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

The discussion has strayed away from what matters most. The range was founded for the shooting sports. Intensive housing now surrounds the range. Intensive housing brings votes and votes close shooting ranges. This is election year. My concern is the new arrangement where the buffer lands cannot be sold. My concern is why there was a need to segregate the Range from the entire property.


My concern is that this segregation leaves the range no opportunity to relocate.


Relocation requires major money.


My concern is why would the AFGA support this arrangement.

We are not the SPFGA, to get those answers talk to them. And it might be a good idea to quit throwing out baseless accusations against AFGA.

[260 Rem]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

The discussion has strayed away from what matters most. The range was founded for the shooting sports. Intensive housing now surrounds the range. Intensive housing brings votes and votes close shooting ranges. This is election year. My concern is the new arrangement where the buffer lands cannot be sold. My concern is why there was a need to segregate the Range from the entire property.


My concern is that this segregation leaves the range no opportunity to relocate.


Relocation requires major money.


My concern is why would the AFGA support this arrangement.

SPFGA is in no danger of needing to relocate...regardless, SPFGA did not "sell" the land to NCC.... SPFGA retains ownership.
EDIT: If SPFGA took GI's advice and relocated to Bruce (about 100KM from Edm), it would not sell enough memberships to pay for the fuel to mow the grass.
Time for me to abandon ship in this thread, don't have time to feed the troll when I have more important "Challenges" on which to focus.

[Gifted Intuitive]

The discussion has digressed away from what matters most. The land in question, both the buffer area and the Range area was establised to be a Shooting Facility.

For some reason it became necessay to separate the land in the buffer area and the Range.

The said lands are located in a densely populated area and voters have the final say in whether the shooting continues.

The separation of Buffer area and Range greatly reduces the possibility of relocating the Range.

What would the AFGA put the Range in this predicament ?

[Dick284]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

The discussion has digressed away from what matters most. The land in question, both the buffer area and the Range area was establised to be a Shooting Facility.

For some reason it became necessay to separate the land in the buffer area and the Range.

The said lands are located in a densely populated area and voters have the final say in whether the shooting continues.

The separation of Buffer area and Range greatly reduces the possibility of relocating the Range.

What would the AFGA put the Range in this predicament ?

Huh, you do realize that the buffer exists to provide the necessary and mandated fallout region. Without the buffer a lot of sanctions would be brought against the range. One way of ensuring the buffer isn't compromised is by declaring it sensative, protected or something like that.

As far as the AFGA goes the SPFGA is only an associated club, much of what the range does is of no business of the AFGA, let alone any of their concern.

Instead of slagging and griping about the range in public, why not buck up and sit on the executive and get your taste of reality.

In closing I ponder if the SPFGA has a behavior or moral terpitude clause in their bylaws or constitution?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

The discussion has digressed away from what matters most. The land in question, both the buffer area and the Range area was establised to be a Shooting Facility.

For some reason it became necessay to separate the land in the buffer area and the Range.

The said lands are located in a densely populated area and voters have the final say in whether the shooting continues.

The separation of Buffer area and Range greatly reduces the possibility of relocating the Range.

What would the AFGA put the Range in this predicament ?

GI, you're trying to ride a pony that does not exist.\

The AFGA does NOT control the affiliated clubs. You knew that right?

The range in question was started back in the 1980's, when there were no residential developments in the area. I understand the first quarter was purchased by the SPFGA when a developer wanted to build there. Funding came from a number of groups to facilitate that.

The SPFGA is a premier example of a club that serves its members over many decades.

Go get involved and improve it and help it maintain that stature.

But quitcher whining and sniveling, because it sounds like sour grapes.

[Pudelpointer]

This is a weird thread.


I am still not clear how (if at all) the AFGA is involved? Are they part owners in the surrounding conservation properties? Did the SPFGA buy the range property and all surrounding lands outright, and then sold them to conservation partners (AFGA, ACA, NCC?)

If the SPFGA sold surrounding lands to raise capital, then how is that AFGAs fault / problem?

Either explain clearly (and factually) how the AFGA is involved, or this thread should be removed.

As for the NCC, it is true that on many (most, all?) properties that have been purchased solely by the NCC (no DUC, ACA, or AFGA partnerships) there is no hunting allowed. They bought it, their choice. When they first started partnering in AB with other organizations there was a property that was purchased where someone (ACA or AFGA) failed to do their due diligence, and hunting access was left in control of the original landowner (who didn't let people hunt). This caused a huge rift between hunters and sportsmen in AB and the NCC.

However, since that time, land purchases made in partnership with the NCC and ACA, AFGA and DUC have hunting clearly identified in the agreements as allowed activity, and access is mostly open, save for a few exceptions.

[purgatory.sv]

Go to a meeting?

[Gifted Intuitive]

Shooting Ranges need a relocation plan. A relocation plan would include a budget.

Relocating with a $2.0 million budget is alot different than a $0.00 budget.

Relocating with a $0.00 budget is the only option for most ranges as they do not own the land they occupy.

If the range owns the land they occupy they should be able to make public their contigency fund.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

Shooting Ranges need a relocation plan. A relocation plan would include a budget.

Relocating with a $2.0 million budget is alot different than a $0.00 budget.

Relocating with a $0.00 budget is the only option for most ranges as they do not own the land they occupy.

If the range owns the land they occupy they should be able to make public their contigency fund.

I am really missing your point here...why do they need a relocation plan? I thought the idea was to establish and build a range to use for many many years. The cost of reclamation is way to high to keep switching locations after establishment.

What is the real reason? You live too far from the range and want it to be closer? If the range moved to Bruce they would lose me as a member....

LC

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Gifted Intuitive

Shooting Ranges need a relocation plan. A relocation plan would include a budget.

Relocating with a $2.0 million budget is alot different than a $0.00 budget.

Relocating with a $0.00 budget is the only option for most ranges as they do not own the land they occupy.

If the range owns the land they occupy they should be able to make public their contigency fund.

GI, it sounds like you should hire yourself out as a range consultant.


Afterall, you seem to have all the answers.

[Gifted Intuitive]

The agreement with the NCC came with a restriction that the surrounding lands could not be sold. I contacted the the AFGA to suggest that the surrounding land and the range property if sold as a unit would be able to relocate to a property that would be a world class shooting facility and conservation area.

Relocating the range 45 minutes east of the current location with a 2.5 million budget could purchase about 20 quarters (20 X 160 acres) or 3200 acres as compared to the 700 acres at the current location. This is an area sufficient for all shooting sports, conservation projects, and still leave a sizeable development fund.

I discussed this with one member of the AFGA Executive and was told to pursue this with another member who was overseeing the NCC project. My voice mail was not returned.

I have discussed this option at a SPFGA meeting.

[260 Rem]

SPFGA does not need a "relocation plan" period. Consequently, there is no budget line specifically for "relocation contingency". A non-profit like SPFGA carrying a 2 million relocation contingency...get real! SPFGA owns the land it occupies. Is there one Range in Canada that has a has such a fund for relocation? SPFGA budget is open to all members, and if GI is a member, he can get that info and post it on the net and on his gate if he chooses.
GI, I think the Range in most danger of being shut down would be the one a couple of miles west of the SPFGA property.... better check to see if the owner has a contingency fund.
Yes, SPFGA has a "contigency" budget line, but the purpose is to insure there are some funds available for "legal" fees. My bet is that not many clubs have that kind of line.
EDIT: GI, your ideas have been shut down by AFGA and SPFGA. Sounds like you have made yourself enough of a PIA that people don't return your calls? Get it!!!

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by 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.

All Hunters (and all pro shooting/ hunting groups) should realize by now that any organization with David Suzukis name attatched to it is definately not on our side. Period ! NC being only one of many. What next ?

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I am really missing your point here...why do they need a relocation plan? I thought the idea was to establish and build a range to use for many many years. The cost of reclamation is way to high to keep switching locations after establishment.

What is the real reason? You live too far from the range and want it to be closer? If the range moved to Bruce they would lose me as a member....

LC

What is the real reason? that is a good question.What is the root of all evil?

[greylynx]

A very interesting situation.

Remember "The Edmonton Gun Club"? Nobody is talking.

Remember " The Strathcona Range"? Nobody is talking.

[Dick Bitchko]

I think what Gifted Intuitive is saying is beginning to make sense. The SPFGA should sell all the land, I know there is an agreement between the NCC and the SPFGA but that is only on paper. Paper never stopped me from doing anything ever. You know what else is made of paper? Kleenex. I don't care how much Kleenex or paper you put in front of me I will walk right through it. I'm not kidding. Now if we sell the range and move it 50km East that would help other things such as the pesky membership cap. Once the drive from Edmonton exceeds one hour, there would only be a handful of members. The payoff would be a world class shooting center and only a few members. Talk about heaven! I cannot find any holes in GI's argument. I'm not sure about the fellow known as 260 Rem as he keeps trying to back up his arguments using facts. Do you know who is responsible for creating "facts"? The Gestapo. If we quit using their facts they will lose power and the gun owners will win.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Dick Bitchko

I think what Gifted Intuitive is saying is beginning to make sense. The SPFGA should sell all the land, I know there is an agreement between the NCC and the SPFGA but that is only on paper. Paper never stopped me from doing anything ever. You know what else is made of paper? Kleenex. I don't care how much Kleenex or paper you put in front of me I will walk right through it. I'm not kidding. Now if we sell the range and move it 50km East that would help other things such as the pesky membership cap. Once the drive from Edmonton exceeds one hour, there would only be a handful of members. The payoff would be a world class shooting center and only a few members. Talk about heaven! I cannot find any holes in GI's argument. I'm not sure about the fellow known as 260 Rem as he keeps trying to back up his arguments using facts. Do you know who is responsible for creating "facts"? The Gestapo. If we quit using their facts they will lose power and the gun owners will win.

Dick Bitchko aka Gifted Intuitive ?

LCD

[Dick Bitchko]

Nope. I really am Dick Bitchko as my mother named me. I am not hiding behind a pseudonym and I do not believe in posting from multiple usernames. I can understand why GI has a secret identity as his idealisms and thoughts are precious and his true identity should never be compromised to protect his plans.

[Dick Bitchko]

Here is a thought. If we purchase a high speed train to go from Edmonton to a new range further East we could increase our membership. I found this little beauty online.

http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-...h-speed-trains

[pikeslayer22]

Originally Posted by Dick Bitchko

I think what Gifted Intuitive is saying is beginning to make sense. The SPFGA should sell all the land, I know there is an agreement between the NCC and the SPFGA but that is only on paper. Paper never stopped me from doing anything ever. You know what else is made of paper? Kleenex. I don't care how much Kleenex or paper you put in front of me I will walk right through it. I'm not kidding. Now if we sell the range and move it 50km East that would help other things such as the pesky membership cap. Once the drive from Edmonton exceeds one hour, there would only be a handful of members. The payoff would be a world class shooting center and only a few members. Talk about heaven! I cannot find any holes in GI's argument. I'm not sure about the fellow known as 260 Rem as he keeps trying to back up his arguments using facts. Do you know who is responsible for creating "facts"? The Gestapo. If we quit using their facts they will lose power and the gun owners will win.

There already is ranges 50 km east of Sherwood...don't need anymore ranges or people in the area...than you!

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Dick Bitchko

Nope. I really am Dick Bitchko as my mother named me. I am not hiding behind a pseudonym and I do not believe in posting from multiple usernames. I can understand why GI has a secret identity as his idealisms and thoughts are precious and his true identity should never be compromised to protect his plans.

I am trying to understand your and GI's point in selling and moving the range....I know personally if the range moved further out, then I would not retain a membership....I know many others who feel the same way.

As it stands now I am 25-30 mins from the range and on slow mornings I can sneak out there for an hour before work.....move it another 50 km and that is not possible.

So if you could explain without a bunch of fluff why the range needs to be moved maybe your thoughts would be more clear....

.....so here is an idea, you have heard "build it and they will come".....if your range out by Bruce is such a great idea, then build it and see how many memberships you gain from the existing ranges.....if your ideas ring true then you should be overflowing with members.....or do you hope to cash in on the sale of certain lands and ride the coat tails of the existing SPFGA Range?

LC

[Dick Bitchko]

I see your wisdom Lefty Canuck. I know the agreement with the SPFGA and the NCC is a legal document. I know the transaction has been completed. I know all of the actions of the document are registered with the Province of Alberta. I am just wondering if GI is onto something and we don't have to really honor the agreement and the NCC may simply not notice if we sell the land. The NCC is really really really big and has many many many tracts of land. Would they even notice if one went missing? I also agree with pikeslayer22, there is no need for a range East of SPFGA, how about North by Lamont? The soil up there is sandy and no good for farming so we could have a range to look like Operation Desert Storm. I would have to buy a new camo range outfit as the current ghillie suit is matched to the SPFGA fauna and I will stick out like a sore thumb at a sand range. Oh how my brethren would laugh! Anyways time to clean the SKS.

[Lefty-Canuck]

I am truly trying to understand what you are asking for but with all the fluff about gillie suits and desert storm, I will disregard the post as an attempt to further troll along....sell the land for what reason? Where do the funds go and how much do you think the land sale would fetch?

You realize the point in trying to make a point is to have a point in the first place

Factor in reclamation costs in the plus minus column etc.....

Edit.....I can now see the reverse psychology of your post

LC

[Dick Bitchko]

My apologies LC. You are right. The reclamation cost for a quarter section of land would completely wipe out the profit made by selling the land. I dunno if its the Hoppes 9 fumes or cosmic radiation getting through the ol' tinfoil hat but I think the NCC would notice the land being sold. I hope GI rings in with some information as he appears to have many of the wrinkles we see worked out.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Dick Bitchko

My apologies LC. You are right. The reclamation cost for a quarter section of land would completely wipe out the profit made by selling the land. I dunno if its the Hoppes 9 fumes or cosmic radiation getting through the ol' tinfoil hat but I think the NCC would notice the land being sold. I hope GI rings in with some information as he appears to have many of the wrinkles we see worked out.

I agree....this GI fellow must have this situation all figured out, apparently I should invest in some stronger coffee before engaging in Sunday morning discussion....I guess you can bull$@&? A bull$&@?er

LC

[Dick Bitchko]

If anyone else would like some clarity in their thoughts this is a great product.
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/
This is where I purchase my Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie's from. Once you put it on and reduced the mind control effects of the Gestapo, you can see the world in a different light. I would like to think this is how GI lives. He don't need no Aluminum hat, he is a seer, a visionary and a sharp dresser to boot! Check out the hats, by cat Mr. Pickles (who is a seer himself) jumped on the keyboard thus directing me to this product. Please reply with any other metallic hat success stories.

[catnthehat]

Gun club issues should be discussed by gun club members as far as I am concerned.
Cat