Notley in Pincher 11:00 AM tomorrow for Castle announcement??

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

A small bash.

I brought this up earlier but no seems to have noticed.

Unless camping rules are changed, these trails would potentially (depending on location and density) eliminate ALL viable undesignated backcountry camping (random camping) and greatly reduce area where hunting is allowed.


From the Draft Plan.

"Undesignated backcountry camping within the Wildland Provincial Park allows visitors to enjoy an entirely self-sufficient wilderness experience by camping in desirable undesignated locations. Visitors must camp using “leave-no-trace” principles and in an area prescribed for undesignated camping, or be no closer than 1 kilometre from a designated campground or public roadway."


"Regulations include prohibitions on hunting, weapons discharge and game processing or storage within facility zones (see Section 8.0), game storage within designated camping or day-use areas and includes a 183 metre no-discharge buffer around facility zones, structures, roads and any designated camping or day-use areas that are not already within facility zones."

The proposed rules are designed to pit user groups against each other.
Ex. OHV trails means less camping and hunting....


It is not likely to happen, but the government should go back to the drafting board WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS!

You'd have to make the rather large leap from OHV trail to "public road" in order for this to be an issue. They currently are not the same, and it would require a change in the existing laws for that to be a factor.

I think this is grasping at straws and creating issues where none exist, which is not what we as outdoorsmen should be doing at this point, but given the NDP government in office, nothing is impossible.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

You'd have to make the rather large leap from OHV trail to "public road" in order for this to be an issue. They currently are not the same, and it would require a change in the existing laws for that to be a factor.

I think this is grasping at straws and creating issues where none exist, which is not what we as outdoorsmen should be doing at this point, but given the NDP government in office, nothing is impossible.

Not at all. For an example, look at the recent changes made to McLean Creek.

The government IS rewriting the law for this area. At this point, they can do as they wish in terms of the details.

[NUK SOO KOW]

I have used the castle my whole life. Seen the good. Seen the bad. The few ruin it for the many. Every community(atv, random camp, hunter, fisher, hiker) has people within that do not follow the rules. However turning 150000 hectares of land into a provincial park is not the answer. They are taking the land away from public. I can't believe the focus is purely on atv use right now. Think about it. First draft they said atv use would be allowed. Now it is to be phased out. Now they say hunting is allowed. They will phase that out too. And no one will hunt there. Then it will be fishing. So now the flyfishers lose what they love to do. Think. Curtts and bulls are considered a threatened species. When environment minister gets rolling with this they will shut the rivers down. Then even the back country camping. It's not just about atv use. That's just the first step. They will completely shut down all use of the area. They are already talking about full service campgrounds with amenities. They are going to develop the **** out of this area. Pay to camp. Pay for firewood. Pay to fish. Pay to hunt. Pay to enter the park. Think. 1500000 hectares of land and you can't even walk your dog off leash without penalty now. All groups must stick together and fight to keep the castle. Yes better enforcement and policing was needed. But if you think they are going to stop at atv use you are WRONG!!!! Those in central and northern Alberta think this won't effect you???? Think again. They get away with it in the south they will continue north. It will be one big park from Yukon to waterton off limits. This government want to legalize pot but stop outdoor recreation??? You want my kids to go smoke pot instead of riding atvs, hunting or fishing??camping in the back country learning outdoor skills?Stick together. This is an attack on all outdoorsmen of all communities. Hunters might be happy atvs are gone. But what about when they take the hunting away? Then the fly fishers might be happy. Then they will close the rivers. We are all losing our passions. We need to support every one. Stick together.

[fargineyesore]

Very true. Some of the comments from the anti-quadders on here just show how short-sighted and small minded some people are. Willing to just jump in bed with the NDP and their radical ideology just to **** on another user they don't like.

These anti-quadders remind me of the anti-gun and anti-hunting groups with their "the sky is falling" over sensitization of the OHV issue. They'd never advocate for all hunting or fishing to be banned because of the bad applies in the hunting and fishing community.

Is pathetic and when hunting and fishing is gone there, they'll maybe get their heads out of there behinds and see what is happening, but probably not.

[Albertadiver]

Yellowstone to Yukon wants ZERO public access to these lands. They want it restricted to roadside turnouts and ecological display areas.

If they had their way they'd eliminate hiking even.

They get a foothold and keep pushing for more.

[rugatika]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...hunt-1.3866223

B.C. NDP Leader John Horgan says his party will stop the practice of grizzly bear trophy hunting in the province — if it comes to power in the next provincial election.

Horgan said his party has been in talks with hunting stakeholders to make sure they understand the NDP is not proposing a sweeping hunting ban.

"This is not about being opposed to hunting — this is about being opposed to the grizzly bear trophy hunt and only the grizzly bear trophy hunt." said Horgan

Horgan said his party supports hunting for food, especially for those who use it to survive.

"Especially" now, "exclusively" later.

Notice how they slip the phrase "trophy hunt" in there. I wonder how many people "trophy hunt" or "sport hunt" and how many people "hunt to survive"...as determined by the government of course.

It's one thing to have the wool pulled over your eyes, but it's entirely another thing when you pull it over your eyes yourself.

[NUK SOO KOW]

Please write environment minister Shannon Phillips and let her know how you feel and how this effects you. aep.minister@gov.ab.ca they need to be stopped.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Not at all. For an example, look at the recent changes made to McLean Creek.

The government IS rewriting the law for this area. At this point, they can do as they wish in terms of the details.

Exactly, look at McLean Creek. The limit is within 1 km of the forestry trunk road or other major roadways, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the OHV trails, including the jeep trails. That's a red herring.

Sadly, that's a reality with this NDP government, and all outdoorsmen need to fight against it, not against each other.

[Chuck_Wagon]

Policies can be undone by a later government just as easily as they are done by manipulation under this current government.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

Exactly, look at McLean Creek. The limit is within 1 km of the forestry trunk road or other major roadways, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the OHV trails, including the jeep trails. That's a red herring.

Sadly, that's a reality with this NDP government, and all outdoorsmen need to fight against it, not against each other.

Enjoying the discussion.


McLean Creek exemplifies the government's ability to change firearm discharge laws by simply amending the regulations. As The Castle Parks Act and Regulations is a blank document, there is little legal ink required for the gov to do as they desire.

To your point of variances in types of roadways, it doesn't matter if it is a trail or #1.

From the Traffic Safety Act

"“highway” means any thoroughfare, street, road, trail, avenue, parkway, driveway, viaduct, lane, alley, square, bridge, causeway, trestleway or other place or any part of any of them, whether publicly or privately owned, that the public is ordinarily entitled or permitted to use for the passage or parking of vehicles and includes

(i) a sidewalk, including a boulevard adjacent to the sidewalk,
(ii) if a ditch lies adjacent to and parallel with the roadway, the ditch, and
(iii) if a highway right of way is contained between fences or between a fence and one side of the roadway, all the land between the fences, or all the
land between the fence and the edge of the roadway, as the case may be,
but does not include a place declared by regulation not to be a highway;"


Unless the gov declares these proposed OHV trails to be exempt from being included in the Traffic Safety Act, they will be, and my previous concern stands.

Not including designated OHV trails within the Traffic Safety Act brings up a whole new mess of issues.

As I said, Let's go back and complete the Stakeholder consultation, then write the draft, as promised by the NDP.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by NUK SOO KOW

I have used the castle my whole life. Seen the good. Seen the bad. The few ruin it for the many. Every community(atv, random camp, hunter, fisher, hiker) has people within that do not follow the rules. However turning 150000 hectares of land into a provincial park is not the answer. They are taking the land away from public. I can't believe the focus is purely on atv use right now. Think about it. First draft they said atv use would be allowed. Now it is to be phased out. Now they say hunting is allowed. They will phase that out too. And no one will hunt there. Then it will be fishing. So now the flyfishers lose what they love to do. Think. Curtts and bulls are considered a threatened species. When environment minister gets rolling with this they will shut the rivers down. Then even the back country camping. It's not just about atv use. That's just the first step. They will completely shut down all use of the area. They are already talking about full service campgrounds with amenities. They are going to develop the **** out of this area. Pay to camp. Pay for firewood. Pay to fish. Pay to hunt. Pay to enter the park. Think. 1500000 hectares of land and you can't even walk your dog off leash without penalty now. All groups must stick together and fight to keep the castle. Yes better enforcement and policing was needed. But if you think they are going to stop at atv use you are WRONG!!!! Those in central and northern Alberta think this won't effect you???? Think again. They get away with it in the south they will continue north. It will be one big park from Yukon to waterton off limits. This government want to legalize pot but stop outdoor recreation??? You want my kids to go smoke pot instead of riding atvs, hunting or fishing, camping in the back country learning outdoor skills? Stick together. This is an attack on all outdoorsmen of all communities. Hunters might be happy atvs are gone. But what about when they take the hunting away? Then the fly fishers might be happy. Then they will close the rivers. We are all losing our passions. We need to support every one. Stick together.

That is exactly what is going on. The leftist governments do not want a population that has the skills to survive without being spoonfed.

Proceed with tinfoil related reactions.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Enjoying the discussion.

McLean Creek exemplifies the government's ability to change firearm discharge laws by simply amending the regulations. As The Castle Parks Act and Regulations is a blank document, there is little legal ink required for the gov to do as they desire.

To your point of variances in types of roadways, it doesn't matter if it is a trail or #1.

From the Traffic Safety Act

"“highway” means any thoroughfare, street, road, trail, avenue, parkway, driveway, viaduct, lane, alley, square, bridge, causeway, trestleway or other place or any part of any of them, whether publicly or privately owned, that the public is ordinarily entitled or permitted to use for the passage or parking of vehicles and includes

(i) a sidewalk, including a boulevard adjacent to the sidewalk,
(ii) if a ditch lies adjacent to and parallel with the roadway, the ditch, and
(iii) if a highway right of way is contained between fences or between a fence and one side of the roadway, all the land between the fences, or all the
land between the fence and the edge of the roadway, as the case may be,
but does not include a place declared by regulation not to be a highway;"

Unless the gov declares these proposed OHV trails to be exempt from being included in the Traffic Safety Act, they will be, and my previous concern stands.

Not including designated OHV trails within the Traffic Safety Act brings up a whole new mess of issues.

We aren't discussing "highways" though, we're discussing OFF Highway Vehicles and their designated trails. It's illegal to operate an OHV on a highway, or public roadway.

I did a quick search and can't find any legalese anywhere that clarifies it one way or another, which admittedly, is kinda scary, but I don't really know where to look either. If you're correct that trails = highways, then all recreational trail riding in Alberta on both public and private land is illegal and the government has simply been turning a blind eye to it since forever. I find that kinda hard to believe.

[Klondike]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

We aren't discussing "highways" though, we're discussing OFF Highway Vehicles and their designated trails. It's illegal to operate an OHV on a highway, or public roadway.

I did a quick search and can't find any legalese anywhere that clarifies it one way or another, which admittedly, is kinda scary, but I don't really know where to look either. If you're correct that trails = highways, then all recreational trail riding in Alberta on both public and private land is illegal and the government has simply been turning a blind eye to it since forever. I find that kinda hard to believe.

WRONG!

you need to know where you are and what is in the bylaws. I've interacted with the rcmp/ C.O./ F&W etc while on the roads without issue.


http://www.aohva.com/pdf/OHV_Regulations.pdf

http://www.albertabeach.com/doclibra...20Vehicles.pdf

http://www.mdbiglakes.ca/index.php/s...ghway-vehicles

http://www.leduc-county.com/public/d...ocuments/12199

and on and on and on........

[gbart]

I knew this was going to be bad on election night but I never thought it was going to be this bad this fast.

2, 3 or 4 terms with this government and you will be camping in your back yard with your kids enjoying your nail gun on a 2x4.

We can go on for page after page about the evils of OHV. But lets be real. There is lots of blame to go around and that includes industry, Agriculture and all of the other outdoorsmen activities that all take their toll.

The one thing that MUST be understood is the level of foaming at the mouth RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALIST involvement in the policies of this current government.

It is time for people to start understanding the big picture of what is happening here in Alberta when it comes our public land and the Notley Government.

IE...When a guy like Calgary Alderman Brian Pincott and his radical buddies at the AWA start demanding the closure of the designated OHV trail in Bob Creek on Shannon's Facebook page (and they actually go and do it?)....we are ALL in big trouble. The formation of Bob Creek was a made in Alberta compromise that was not perfect, but it had consultation and some balance for everyone concerned. Ralph Klein is rightfully rolling in his grave.

This is not good.....This Government needs to go and the responsible departments and their key personal need to be purged...and I mean PURGED!

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by Klondike

WRONG!

After looking at the links, and based on my own experience, I don't think it's that black and white. They're designated as Off Highway Vehicles for a reason.

you need to know where you are and what is in the bylaws. I've interacted with the rcmp/ C.O./ F&W etc while on the roads without issue.

http://www.aohva.com/pdf/OHV_Regulations.pdf

http://www.albertabeach.com/doclibra...20Vehicles.pdf

http://www.mdbiglakes.ca/index.php/s...ghway-vehicles

http://www.leduc-county.com/public/d...ocuments/12199

and on and on and on........

I would not advise people to head out onto the highways or public roads on their OHV and think everything is going to be OK. Each county or town does have some leeway in creating local bylaws that give specific exemptions to OHVs and in how they enforce it, but you better be well informed about the laws before you try it. It'll be an expensive lesson otherwise.

My guess is that of the OHV related violations at McLean Creek, other than registration issues, the biggest percentage of tickets are for riding an OHV on the trunk road or the other major roadways.