Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #211  
Old 12-30-2007, 07:33 PM
dbllung dbllung is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chaos river
Posts: 273
Default

Vindalbakken

Some may not have lived here!! Others may not have been hunters then!! What importance is that, if people want to be involved now??
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 12-30-2007, 07:46 PM
Duk Dog Duk Dog is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rust View Post
Could you explain a little better please? Has this idea been proposed before or something? Cause the very first time I have ever heard about anything close to this is when this thread was started.
Thanks
Rust
x 2
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 12-30-2007, 08:23 PM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

The beginning was when they put exclusive guiding rights on private land. Those lobbying against the formation of the system as we have it now forecast the chain of events and were branded as Chicken Little. The same type of branding is going on now over this issue in this very thread.

There will be paid access on private land in Alberta, and probably sooner than later - as in our lifetime - because not even the Hunting Community is united against the concept.

There is no place in Alberta for payment for hunting access in any guise because it is the only way to preserve the hunting tradition as we know it. The first step was when we gave away the right to control the entry of out of province hunters - allowing them to pay for privileged access to our game. The only way to prevent it is to eliminate the system of exclusive guiding rights and privilege on private lands. Put the non-resident and non-resident alien licenses on an open draw system and let the non-resident aliens contract with an outfitter or guide when they have the license in hand. The govt. does not need an intermediary agent to sell licenses for them.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 12-30-2007, 08:37 PM
lurch
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by lurch; 01-22-2008 at 01:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 12-30-2007, 08:54 PM
bruceba bruceba is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,803
Default

So the next question would seem to be. Who was privy to putting the pilot project together? There must be many more names on that round table than Ted Morton's. Were there any reps from AFGA, AHEIA, APOS or other groups. I know some of these groups say they knew nothing of the proceedings but were there insiders from these groups at work against what they stand for publicly?
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 12-30-2007, 09:08 PM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,777
Default

deleted

Last edited by Pathfinder76; 01-02-2008 at 06:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 12-30-2007, 09:12 PM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,777
Default

deleted

Last edited by Pathfinder76; 01-02-2008 at 06:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 12-30-2007, 11:12 PM
TreeGuy's Avatar
TreeGuy TreeGuy is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 11,576
Default

First, I have ZERO affiliations to any group. Just playing devil's advocate, I guess.

I understand where you guys are coming from based on the majority of user-pay systems in the States. There are flaws for sure, and I respect your efforts to shed some daylight on this important issue. Thanks.

With that being said, I'm a bit mystified in regards to the multiple 'Chicken Little' scenarios being put out there.

While you are condeming the fact that MAYBE after the next 5 years landowners will be allowed to sell tags for their OWN land, but at the same time most will acknowledge that illegal payments are being made now! Did you ever once stop to consider that this may be an attempt by the government to stop illegal activities? Did you ever once stop to think that this could be a move AGAINST the outfitters and landowners who are breaking the law? Did you ever once stop to think that with the stroke of a pen, 95% of those tags could be designated 'Resident Only' or outfitting deemed illegal on private land? Do you really believe that outfitters aren't guiding on private land in Saskatchewan already?

We are NOT going to know how this works until the trial period is up. To say that paid hunting in Alberta is not happening right now is naive. Lets put a light on it and see if we can't find a way to manage it in a manner that best suits the habitat, the wildlife, the landowners and the resident hunters.

Tree
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 12-30-2007, 11:32 PM
Rust's Avatar
Rust Rust is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 609
Default

Tree, Does it not bother you that WE as Resident Hunters have been kept in the Dark? I have not heard anything anywhere in any public form. Or I haven't anyways.

This is from an e-mail from APOS (i believe it is posted a few pages back in whole)

QUOTE "There are many details to be worked out and the pilots will be judged, in large part, on resident satisfaction."

So if we are really to have a LARGE PART to say in the program in the end. WHY NOT FROM THE START TOO??????

Now maybe there will be pro's to this program too, but are they not just as much speculations as the con's? Is this not a matter worth looking into?

Yeah we might get a little excited from time to time, but if we keep sharing info we might learn something too.

Rust
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 12-30-2007, 11:44 PM
TreeGuy's Avatar
TreeGuy TreeGuy is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 11,576
Default

Hey Rust. I agree. The fact that this has been kept quiet is very disconcerting. I am glad that the folks on here like Lurch and Bruceba are fighting and bring things to light. I salute them, and sincerly hope that they are wrong (a good thing). I'm an optimistic person by nature, and am really trying to see the bright side of this. However, I am not so naive to think that our governments will always get things right. That's why I can't pass a final judgement until all of the facts are in, which is going to take 5 years. I for one will not make my decision until then.

Tree
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 12-31-2007, 12:02 AM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

Tree, this thing is a bad deal right from the start. It is philosophically wrong. You don't need to wait five years to find that out. You know it right now. Giving exclusive rights to the people's game to a percentage of the population so they can turn around and sell them for a profit is wrong. It was wrong when they did it for the outfitting industry, and it is wrong if they do it for the agricultural industry. It is even more wrong if they select specific individuals to receive this benefit to the exclusion of others - there will be no reasonable way to deny all farmers across the province of the same privilege.
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 12-31-2007, 12:07 AM
Rust's Avatar
Rust Rust is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 609
Default

Tree, No worries, Glad to hear you are a glass half full kinda guy. And I have no issues with wanting to wait tell all the facts are in to pass judgement. I just hope that you are also asking some of these stake holders and/or our gov some questions bout this too. A voice does not have to be judgemental, but one more voice out there asking a few questions is not going to hurt things either.
Take It Easy,
Rust
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 12-31-2007, 12:26 AM
TreeGuy's Avatar
TreeGuy TreeGuy is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 11,576
Default

Vin, anything that threatens my chances to hunt, I am fundamentally against. Perhaps I'm being argumentative for agrument's sakes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vindalbakken View Post
Tree, this thing is a bad deal right from the start. It is philosophically wrong. You don't need to wait five years to find that out. You know it right now. Giving exclusive rights to the people's game to a percentage of the population so they can turn around and sell them for a profit is wrong. It was wrong when they did it for the outfitting industry, and it is wrong if they do it for the agricultural industry. It is even more wrong if they select specific individuals to receive this benefit to the exclusion of others - there will be no reasonable way to deny all farmers across the province of the same privilege.
1.) Are you saying that profit is bad? So does Jack Layton.

2.) Would you prefer that a pilot project be more widely tried? Maybe every landowner in 20 wmu's should be given tags, and we'll figure it all out later?

3.) Do you feel that the 'people's game' is more important than the rights and interests of the person who owns the land?

I feel that paid hunting has been going on for a long time in this country, and maybe this project is an attempt to take a shot at those who may be the biggest violators. That's the optimist in me. If I were a pessimist, I'd say that the landowners who qualify for the project were major conservative donars.

Tree
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 12-31-2007, 04:36 AM
russ russ is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Coronation
Posts: 2,529
Default

Tree,

Accusing someone of being a socialist is quite a stretch. Read Vindalbakken's position more carefully. He's reflecting a set of values that we or I would hope we have held as a hunting population since the start of hunting in this province. A far more conservative age than now. Making the accusation that someone is a "socialist" based on the fact the person doesn't agree with a point of view isn't exactly debating the facts.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 12-31-2007, 04:45 AM
russ russ is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Coronation
Posts: 2,529
Default

Deep knowledge is to be aware of disturbance before disturbance, to be aware of danger before danger, to be aware of destruction before destruction, to be aware of calamity before calamity.

Sun Tzu, The Art of War
I think people that understand human nature aren't so quick to declare the reaction of resident hunters as being chicken little, more like Sun Tzu.
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 12-31-2007, 06:49 AM
209x50's Avatar
209x50 209x50 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,412
Default

What if the majority of Alberta hunters think this is a great program?
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 12-31-2007, 07:53 AM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,777
Default

deleted

Last edited by Pathfinder76; 01-02-2008 at 06:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 12-31-2007, 08:06 AM
Chung66's Avatar
Chung66 Chung66 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Blackfalds
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 209x50 View Post
What if the majority of Alberta hunters think this is a great program?
Then it is time I hang up the rifle and teach my kids to fish. What is next, fences and heated stands with satelite television? Time to write some letters.
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 12-31-2007, 08:06 AM
LongDraw LongDraw is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,707
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 209x50 View Post
What if the majority of Alberta hunters think this is a great program?
What if???

209x50,

Go through the 8 pages on this topic and do a straw poll, this should give you an indicaton of what Alberta hunters think of this program.

Last edited by LongDraw; 12-31-2007 at 08:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 12-31-2007, 08:22 AM
honda450's Avatar
honda450 honda450 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6,952
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chung66 View Post
Then it is time I hang up the rifle and teach my kids to fish. What is next, fences and heated stands with satelite television? Time to write some letters.

I will go with the heated stands with satelite.
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 12-31-2007, 08:59 AM
lurch
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by lurch; 01-22-2008 at 01:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:02 AM
lurch
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by lurch; 01-22-2008 at 01:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:11 AM
209x50's Avatar
209x50 209x50 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,412
Default

Just a simple observation folks no need for name calling. There are less than 1/2 of a percent of Alberta hunters registered on this board. How would any of you know what the majority wants?
By all means write your letters and demand the Alberta government stops trying to get hunters access to private lands.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:12 AM
340wtby
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 209x50 View Post
What if the majority of Alberta hunters think this is a great program?
If this were true this thread wouldn't be 8 pages long.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:14 AM
340wtby
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 209x50 View Post
Just a simple observation folks no need for name calling. There are less than 1/2 of a percent of Alberta hunters registered on this board. How would any of you know what the majority wants?
By all means write your letters and demand the Alberta government stops trying to get hunters access to private lands.
Have you done your own poll with the Alberta hunters? If so, could you please enlighten us on what the majority wants.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:24 AM
209x50's Avatar
209x50 209x50 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch View Post
I fully believe are not representing their membership.
Or perhaps just not representing your opinion.

Quote:
As for your comments
1 - I am not against profit. But i sure am when the resource is public and the ability to make profit is limited to the few and large - which are targeted to receive the spoils.
Like oil and gas, timber, coal.. hmmm maybe Jack Layton wasn't that far off.

Quote:
3. Yes I do. That is the fundamental issue here. And for the record, I am a land owner and would stand to possibly benefit from this down the road. I just have a fundamental issue with this.
I too am a land owner and I will never give up the right to decide who hunts or accesses my land. I will never profit from this plan as I can't see it being worth it. I can't see how the piddly amounts of potential revenue would entice anyone to allow access to their land. Just my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:27 AM
209x50's Avatar
209x50 209x50 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 340wtby View Post
Have you done your own poll with the Alberta hunters? If so, could you please enlighten us on what the majority wants.
No I haven't. Please tell me what the results of YOUR poll is.
Yeah I thought so. Look I'm just pointing out that none of us know what Joe Hunter thinks of this.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:29 AM
lurch
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by lurch; 01-22-2008 at 01:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:33 AM
lurch
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by lurch; 01-22-2008 at 01:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 12-31-2007, 09:46 AM
lurch
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by lurch; 01-22-2008 at 01:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.