Hunt Farms are coming! [Archive] - Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum

View Full Version : Hunt Farms are coming!

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 07:40 AM

It's being discussed in the Hunting Forum. But the time for discussion has passed. Our crippled government is pushing through legislation that defies long standing policies of North American wildlife management and further and permanently damages the image of hunting and hunters in the province. As described by former AFGA president, Randy Collins in the Edmonton Journal (http://bit.ly/dPoZ4T), Bill 11 has passed second reading and is before a legislative committee, starting today, for debate and amendment.

If you don't act now, you will have no one to blame when your image as an outdoors person is further degraded and more restrictions are placed on what you do—all because some rich low-life can shoot a trophy behind a fence.

Here's the offending section of the bill:
Permits - issuance, alternatives and terms and conditions
10.1(1) The minister may issue a permit authorizing a prescribed activity
that would or could otherwise constitute a contravention of this Act

(2) The Minister may, instead of issuing a permit, licence or other kind
of permission under other legislation of Alberta or another jurisdiction as
the authorization for the activity referred to in subsection (1)

(3) Section 6(4) applies with respect to a permit as it applies to a
licence, and a person shall not contravene any terms or conditions of the
permit.

The only reason to put this section in the act is to allow hunt farms, something some long-standing PC supporters having been pushing for decades. They just don't get it! They are out to destroy an important part of our Alberta heritage!

Contact your MLA— http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=mla_home

Jack Hayden, Minister of Agriculture - drumheller.stettler@assembly.ab.ca

Mel Knight, Minister of SRD grandeprairie.smoky@assembly.ab.ca

and your Premier- Ed Stelmach fortsaskatchewan.vegreville@assembly.ab.ca

Rocks

03-17-2011, 07:53 AM

I sent the aforementioned MLA's an email last week, haven't heard anythiing back, hope everyone else fires off a letter or calls their MLA, we need to let these guys know how we feel!!!

mark007

03-17-2011, 07:54 AM

[QUOTE=Don Meredith;871114]all because some rich low-life can shoot a trophy behind a fence.
[/QUOTE

one less rich low-life in the field hunting the real resource!

catnthehat

03-17-2011, 07:56 AM

[QUOTE=Don Meredith;871114]all because some rich low-life can shoot a trophy behind a fence.
[/QUOTE

one less rich low-life in the field hunting the real resource!
The problem is it won't stop here.
Eventually you may just see all crown land "allocated " to hunting leases.
Look at Europe and their hunting systems.
This is "epic bad"!!:angry3:
Cat

Grizzly Adams

03-17-2011, 08:09 AM

Did my bit. Let's see if we can fill their Mail boxes on this subject.:lol: Funny, we haven't heard much from the Opposition on this.

Grizz

BackPackHunter

03-17-2011, 08:28 AM

Please enlighten me.....
First off I would Never use one...
But how would it hurt us as hunters? They are for rich lazy people who want to see the animal "trophy" before they go hunting... A garentee if you will.
I personly don't think it hunting. It's just shooting. They are in a fenched in area then the agreed animal is then released then your so called guide shows you were he is then u shoot... Seen it on YouTube ... The animal don't even seem scared of people... Maybe cause people have been feeding them?
But won't this keep stupid people out of the woods we love?
Won't this keep more real game for us true hunters?
How will this hurt us?
Like I said first .... Please enlighten me
Thanks. W420

sheephunter

03-17-2011, 08:45 AM

BackPackHunter

03-17-2011, 08:46 AM

My phone wouldn't stop going off while I was writing a reply ... Didn't get to read the other reply intill I posted... How and why would they take the crown land? I thought that it was privite land this was done on?
I have lived all over Canada and the USA, i found red deer and love it because the the hunting and fishing in the crown land...when my family asks me when I'm coming home. I tell them "I am home... " But dont know if I could say that if I lost my hunting and fishing spots...
There no place I would rather be then in the Alberta rockys
W420

elkhunter11

03-17-2011, 08:50 AM

How and why would they take the crown land? I thought that it was privite land this was done on?

Have you ever heard of grazing leases, where private individuals lease crown land to graze their cattle? Who is to say that this couldn't eventually happen with elk or deer?

BackPackHunter

03-17-2011, 08:55 AM

greylynx

03-17-2011, 08:59 AM

Where does the Wild Rose Party stand on this issue?

There is a lot of political hay that can be made on this issue.

It is an issue that is factually based, and has an emotional element to it.

BackPackHunter

03-17-2011, 09:00 AM

I see cows on the trunk RD every day in the summer... Bassterds r every where, well I will do my part and send emails ....
Thanks for the enlightening
W420

outlaw'd

03-17-2011, 09:05 AM

Letter sent ..............

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 09:08 AM

Do u really think if we could get everyone together here on the forum and then get are friends together to send some email .... Would it even help?
Big money is what makes the rules, these people are just puppets doin others bidding...
W420

We did it back in 2002 when this issue raised its ugly head the first time. And yes, we stopped it in its tracks by a very concerted campaign waged by an alliance of both conservation and environmental groups that eventually convinced premier Klein to come out against shooting domesticated wildlife behind a fence. What is a shame is that we have to do it all over again.

Unfortunately, it is such attitudes as "would it even help?" that allow these guys to eventually get their way. You don't see that attitude as often with the environmental groups. They know they have to keep fighting to get their goals accomplished!

BackPackHunter

03-17-2011, 09:19 AM

We did it back in 2002 when this issue raised its ugly head the first time. And yes, we stopped it in its tracks by a very concerted campaign waged by an alliance of both conservation and environmental groups that eventually convinced premier Klein to come out against shooting domesticated wildlife behind a fence. What is a shame is that we have to do it all over again.

Unfortunately, it is such attitudes as "would it even help?" that allow these guys to eventually get their way. You don't see that attitude as often with the environmental groups. They know they have to keep fighting to get their goals accomplished!

You are 100% right... My would it even help attitude or question, is the wrong attitude to have Im sending the emails ... If there is anything I can do feel free to pm me or email...like u said, u stoped it once , then we can do it again. I will tell ever hunter I know. I don't know if my " Im home attitude" will remain if this passes...
W420

greylynx

03-17-2011, 09:21 AM

Here are the e-mails for the producers at QR77 in Calgary for the Rutherford and Brenkenridge shows.

Please help and send an e-mail about the importance of this issue.

http://jon.vos@corusent.com

http://lynda.richardson@corusent.com

Ryry4

03-17-2011, 09:26 AM

Where does the Wild Rose Party stand on this issue?

There is a lot of political hay that can be made on this issue.

It is an issue that is factually based, and has an emotional element to it.

I just sent an e-mail to the Wild Rose on this issue.

ishootbambi

03-17-2011, 09:45 AM

i have sent emails to all that are listed here. i also sent a link to the poll rergarding hunt farms in alberta that is over in the hunting section. don, i know you wont mind, but i forwarded a copy of your post here, #1 in this thread to all members of the mhfga. there must be other guys here who have mailing lists for their local clubs, it might be good to do the same. WE MUST ACT NOW guys. if we dont, we will be kicking our own arses for years.

dale

ex811

03-17-2011, 09:46 AM

Thanks Don, EMail sent.

Sounds like another rural/urban issue between the politicians. The rural people feeling it's just another way of making money off their land, while the Starbucks crowd will see it as another reason all hunting is a bad thing.

One way to stop this...elect another party into power (or another Tory leader who opposes the Bill). Hopefully the Wild Rose is more enlightened on Hunt Farms, don't think many board members could stomach the ND's or the Lib's.

MathewsArcher

03-17-2011, 09:57 AM

About hunt farms, the minister had these chilling comments: “cervids belong in agriculture. I have no issue with ‘harvesting’ animals that we raise . . . I am no bleeding heart … I don’t believe Alberta is ready for hunt farms yet, but the issue is not going away . . . We must allow people in that (game ranching) industry to control their own destiny.”

A chilling quote from the minister of agriculture. Bob Scammels complete article is linked below.

http://www.albertalocalnews.com/reddeeradvocate/lifestyles/columnists/The_killing_fields_of_Alberta_118111264.html

nube

03-17-2011, 09:58 AM

Frans

03-17-2011, 10:01 AM

Sent e-mails to the individuals listed in Don's post.

FCLightning

03-17-2011, 10:04 AM

The whole concept of private ownership of native wildlife is wrong. It can only lead in one direction and I most certainly do not want to walk that path.

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 10:19 AM

don, i know you wont mind, but i forwarded a copy of your post here, #1 in this thread to all members of the mhfga.

Don't mind at all, Dale. The more the better!

Neil Waugh

03-17-2011, 10:31 AM

Thanks for setting this up Don. Here's my e-mail to the premier and a bunch of MLAs.

Dear Premier Stelmach

I am shocked and disgusted that you and your government are pushing through with undue haste Bill 11, an unfortunate and sinister piece of legislation that has loopholes buried in it which will inevitably lead to killing domesticated deer and elk in cages for money.

This is a sick and barbaric practice acknowledged as such by your predecessor Ralph Klein that in no way should be equated with hunting – where free-range wild animals are pursued under the principles of “fair chase” by Alberta hunters in order to balance and sustain the province’s animal populations. Something that your own government endorsed with the overwhelming support of the Fishing, Hunting and Trapping Heritage Act.

While there are important health risks attached to game ranching – or why would Alberta Agriculture have initiated a costly head-testing program after chronic wasting disease was detected in a domestic elk herd? – there are serious moral and ethical issues associated with this grisly practice.

Not to mention your own political legacy. Do you really want to go down in history in the minds of thousands of Alberta sportsmen and women who strongly oppose this legislation as the Alberta premier who officially sanctioned these disgusting kill farms?

The deceptive and clandestine way that SRD Minister introduced this bill and is pushing it through the spring legislature session is also totally at odds with your stated and respected policy of consultation, consensus and transparency. As well as your true legacy, the Land Use Framework concept.

As can be seen by the reaction of the executives of the Alberta Fish and Game Association there has been no pre-warning that this legislation was imminent.

If fact when Minister Knight appeared before the AFGA convention at the end of February, he made no mention of the pending legislation.

This is clearly not the Ed Stelmach way of doing it. This honesty and sincerity is something I have always admired and respected.

It also brings into question the province’s expensive re-branding program that was recently conducted by your government. Shooting tame animals behind high fences is clearly not the messaging that you or I want out there about what Alberta really is. Especially when other Canadian jurisdictions have recently banned it as being uncivilized and regressive.

I request that you suspend any further debate on Bill 11 until a full, inclusive and transparent hearing of the legislation and its implications can occur.

If there is, in fact, consensus among a majority of Albertans that slaughtering tame animals in enclosures and pretending it is hunting is the Alberta Way, then leave it to your successor to re-introduce the bill in the 2012 spring session of the legislature. Or better still, either withdraw it or let it die on the order paper in the name of the progressive, humane and ethical society that Albertans truly cherish.

I would very much like to hear your views on my e-mail.

Sincerely

Neil Waugh

Don, by the way, is a long time and hardworking AFGA volunteer.

Albertadiver

03-17-2011, 10:33 AM

According to the other thread, Bell seems to think that we're too late.

Any truth to this?

The most exciting news of the day is the legislation past this morning, so Mr. Grizzly Adams I thought you might like to hear that.

Skinnydipper

03-17-2011, 11:01 AM

Messages sent loud and clear!:argue2:

walking buffalo

03-17-2011, 11:05 AM

According to the other thread, Bell seems to think that we're too late.

Any truth to this?

NO.

Just like the recent Parks Bill, public uproar can kill the bill.

Get busy Outdoorspeople. Round up your troops. Spread the word.

As well as contacting the gov and opposition, Inform the media! Inform all wildlife/nature groups.

This is now about politics. If you feel strongly against "hunt farms", tell your MLA that you WILL NOT VOTE PC if they pass this bill.

Albertadiver

03-17-2011, 11:07 AM

NO.

Good! I was trying to verify online and couldn't find any updates. There's still time.

EDIT: Found a link of status updates. There IS still time.

http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=bills_statusreport

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 11:36 AM

Thanks for setting this up Don.
...
Don, by the way, is a long time and hardworking AFGA volunteer.

Thanks for the kind words, Neil! Great letter!

FWIW, here's a link to the blog I just posted on the issue. Use as you see fit!
http://bit.ly/dTftC0

Don

Neil Waugh

03-17-2011, 11:51 AM

herc

03-17-2011, 12:20 PM

Email sent.... text messages to all my friends and family to follow.

Rather Be Hunting

03-17-2011, 12:20 PM

E-mails sent as well..:snapoutofit:

adaras

03-17-2011, 12:22 PM

this law is like all the othersthat this govermentmakes and theytake the freedom out of us and how they wanna take the land that belong to all of us and make it privet? time to rise up people they always make laws agains our freedoms!

decker

03-17-2011, 12:50 PM

To whom it may concern

The passing of this bill is a violation of Alberta as a Province, not only are game farms a hazard to wildlife in form of diseases but they also cause problems when they escape with property damage.

As a hunter, landowner, farmer I am apauled that this would even be considered. As a hunter being allowed to hunt in our province I feel is a privledge . Hunting is not just going out to kill a animal or to kill a trophy it's about conservation and enjoying the outdoors, shooting a Deer or Elk in a fenced enclosure is not hunting it's killing. To the general public hunters are blood thirsty sadistic killers of wildlife, this is not so. We are outdoorsmen, conservationist and protectors of our land. The publicity of allowing these kill farms is going to tarnish alberta sportmans name even further from who we are. The people who are going to pay money to come and kill a animal on one of these kill farms isn't a real hunter it's going to be someone who has lots of money and is too lazy to put the effort forward to hunt.

To sum up the passing of this bill must be stopped it's un ethical and dangerous to our environment on so many levels.

Yours Truly
Terry Buelow

blackpheasant

03-17-2011, 12:54 PM

E-mails and call sent out to my MLA as well...also sent request to WRA party to see what there position is on this issue....

cover

03-17-2011, 12:58 PM

It boils down to control of the food chain. I hope everyone wakes up.

6.5 shooter

03-17-2011, 01:04 PM

NO to high fence hunting !!!! I will vote Wildrose if you pass this law.

Sent to both the Premier and my MLA. Never bothered to tell them I will be voting Wildrose anyhow .... we need to loss these Clowns.

Mark

03-17-2011, 01:45 PM

Email sent

Ryry4

03-17-2011, 01:57 PM

Just got off the phone with Broyce Jacobs (finally returned one of my calls), he's the MLA for Taber/Warner/Cardston. He said that they are not going to allow hunt farms with this legislation and that the minister is going to amend to legislation pertaining to the following:

Permits - issuance, alternatives and terms and conditions
10.1(1) The minister may issue a permit authorizing a prescribed activity
that would or could otherwise constitute a contravention of this Act

(2) The Minister may, instead of issuing a permit, license or other kind
of permission under other legislation of Alberta or another jurisdiction as
the authorization for the activity referred to in subsection (1)

(3) Section 6(4) applies with respect to a permit as it applies to a
license, and a person shall not contravene any terms or conditions of the
permit.

Knowing these guys' track record I'll believe it when I see it. Keep the pressure on guys.

:test:

Rockymtnx

03-17-2011, 02:38 PM

Thanks for getting the ball rolling today Don. Is there any chance you can talk to Al V and see if he can some sort of message sent to the Alberta OWC members?

Come on guys and gals, see if you can also get your friends and family members to send a email. There is still hope to stomp this!

Grizzly Adams

03-17-2011, 02:51 PM

From my MLA, regarding this matter;

Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills Constituency Office #639 Legislature Annex

# 3 4530--49 Ave. 9718-107 Street NW

Olds, Alberta T4H 1A4 Edmonton, Alberta T5K 1E4

403-556-3132 780-415-0994

FAX: 403-556-3120 FAX: 780-415-0951

oldsdidsbury.threehills@assembly.ab.ca

March 17, 2011

Thanks for your email expressing your concern with the rumor making the rounds that Alberta is going to legalize Hunt Farms by passing Bill 11 legislation. I have consulted with the Honourable Jack Hayden, Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development. He assures me this is not the case. The government does not support the idea of allowing hunting on farms that raise domestic elk and deer.

It was reported by the Alberta Fish and Game Association that Bill 11 would pave the way for hunt farms. This is simply not the case. This bill is a direct transfer of full legislative authority for diversified livestock, including elk and deer, from The Wildlife Act to Agriculture and Rural Development’s responsibility.

In 2002, the Alberta government decided that cervid harvest preserves, otherwise known as hunt farms, would not be allowed in Alberta. This decision was based on a cross-government review, with direct input from the public and stakeholder groups, and consideration of factors such as disease, economics and public support. This decision has not changed and the amendments to the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act do not allow for hunt farms in Alberta.

I do hope this does provide you some clarification on the Bill and peace of mind that Hunt farms are NOT allowed in Alberta, and indeed have been banned through legislation since 2002. If at any time you would like to come and discuss any issue that is of concern, I would be most happy to have you call my office and arrange a time with my staff that would fit our schedules.

Sincerely,

Richard Marz, MLA

Olds Didsbury Three Hills

/sjw

Grizz

Sharyl James-Wright, BSc.HEc.

Assistant to RICHARD MARZ, MLA
Phone: 403-556-3132 Fax: 403-556-3120

Lefty-Canuck

03-17-2011, 02:56 PM

Interesting, I am excited to hear what Mr. Isaac Bell has to say in response to this? He has already claimed victory for his side on 2 threads. Maybe he will choose to selectively read your letter, and twist a new meaning to it?

:)

Lefty

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 03:01 PM

Don, I'm not sure if you are the dreaded Administrator these days, but is there any chance getting this thread posted as a sticky so it stays on the first page?
Although it's probably Rob's call.
We need all the mo we can get on this issue.

I'm no longer an administrator or moderator here, Neil. But I'll pass your suggestion on to the powers that be.

Thanks,

Rockymtnx

03-17-2011, 03:03 PM

I'm no longer an administrator or moderator here, Neil. But I'll pass your suggestion on to the powers that be.

Thanks,

Done!

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 03:05 PM

This decision has not changed and the amendments to the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act do not allow for hunt farms in Alberta.

This is reminiscent of a similar discussion over the Land Stewardship Act, basically saying "trust us." I'm sorry I don't. But I'll believe you when I see it in writing.

Shaggy

03-17-2011, 03:40 PM

He assures me this is not the case. The government does not support the idea of allowing hunting on farms that raise domestic elk and deer.

Whew..... He said it's all good. I'm glad that got straightened up. I guess that's the end of it then.
:thinking-006:

Keep sending your emails guys.

Don Meredith

03-17-2011, 04:06 PM

Thanks for getting the ball rolling today Don. Is there any chance you can talk to Al V and see if he can some sort of message sent to the Alberta OWC members?

I think many of the members are here and are probably aware. But we are having our regional meeting at the EBSS this Saturday and I'm sure it will come up there.

flyguyd

03-17-2011, 07:26 PM

Email sent !!!

bobcatguy

03-17-2011, 10:54 PM

slough shark

03-18-2011, 12:41 AM

It may be a good idea of putting notice of what this bill actually does on facebook, If people actually know that the government is doing this I suspect this legislation won't last very long! oh yes and emails sent too

Rockymtnx

03-18-2011, 02:59 AM

I think many of the members are here and are probably aware. But we are having our regional meeting at the EBSS this Saturday and I'm sure it will come up there.
Don can you say hi to everyone on Saturday. I will be unable to make the meeting do to my imobility.

Don Meredith

03-18-2011, 06:59 AM

Don can you say hi to everyone on Saturday. I will be unable to make the meeting do to my imobility.

Will do!

Neil Waugh

03-18-2011, 07:09 AM

This just in from Wildrose MLA Heather Forsyth.

Hi Neil
I will NOT be supporting Bill 11, I need to say that I do support hunting n fishing though.
Take care

Don Meredith

03-18-2011, 07:21 AM

The following section of Bill 11 was pointed out to me by a colleague. I have to admit that I missed it when I first reviewed the 60 page bill:

Hunting
18.01(1) A person shall not hunt nor permit a person to hunt
(a) a big game or controlled animal within the assigned meanings of the Wildlife Act on any diversified livestock farm, or
(b) a diversified livestock animal.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to any activity
(a) on a farm
(i) that is undertaken for the purpose of the control or prevention of depredation by black bears or cougars, or
(ii) that is specifically authorized by or under a licence under the Wildlife Act authorizing the control of wildlife depredation,
or
(b) that is specifically authorized by or under the Agricultural Pests Act.
(3) A person who is not on a farm but who hunts an animal that is on the farm is to be treated for the purposes of subsection (1) as hunting on the farm.

However, my question is how does this jive with section 10?

10.1(1) The minister may issue a permit authorizing a prescribed activity
that would or could otherwise constitute a contravention of this Act

(2) The Minister may, instead of issuing a permit, licence or other kind
of permission under other legislation of Alberta or another jurisdiction as
the authorization for the activity referred to in subsection (1)

(3) Section 6(4) applies with respect to a permit as it applies to a
licence, and a person shall not contravene any terms or conditions of the
permit.

It seems to me that 10 could trump 18. In my messages to MLAs and ministers, I have asked that that be clarified. The bill is a mismash of tracks and backtracks, and that's where the confusion or obfuscation resides.

MWD 800

03-18-2011, 08:22 AM

Email sent to my MLA.

fisher Gord

03-18-2011, 08:27 AM

thanks Don And Rocky yes section 10 trumps section18 and we know Minister Knight does not have a problem with hunt farms and would not object when the Ag minister gives out a permit.
thanks to all who sent messages to the politicians, we may have won this round again, this is the 3rd time it has been tryed. They will try again. keep the pressure on. we should thank them for helping mobilize the hunting community. we keep the pressure on and get rid of game farms in Alberta.

270WIN

03-18-2011, 09:02 AM

At first I wondered about the need for this thread when there are already 3 of them on the same topic on the Hunting Forum. Now that I have read it I think it is great! Thanks for starting it Don.
I'm also pleased to see that so many have written to the government expressing their oppositon to Bill 11. I would urge anyone out there who is of like mind but hasn't yet written to do so ASAP. The Government can still change its mind before it goes to third reading but the only way that's going to happen is if we apply enough heat.
I'm glad also to see that The Wild Rose Party has stated that they will not support Bill 11. The Conservatives might want to think about the implications that has for them come election time if they do pass Bill 11 in its present form. You may want to mention that in your letters as well. Wish I'd thought of it when I wrote mine.

Grey Owl

03-18-2011, 09:35 AM

My sentiment is that hunt farms in Alberta are completely unnecessary to support the hunting needs of Albertans. If an action has an potential negative impact on 'wild' hunting resources, or does not substantially improve hunting opportunities for average Albertans then it is not needed.

But I must call our memory back to a couple of posters who questioned whether we actually are opposed to hunt farms, or just opposed to hunt farms in our backyard. Many of us dream of hunting Africa.....our dreams are to hunt caged, captive bred animals, in some cases threatened or endangered species (that are classified as private property/livestock due to breeding programs and existing on private lands), and to hunt animals purely as trophies, to feed our ego, our bucketlist and not honour the hunting tradition of feeding our families that we protect in Canada and Alberta.

If we wish to make a coherent argument against hunt farms in Alberta, should we not also be opposed to hunt farms elsewhere? It would seem philosophically inconsistent to oppose it in our own backyard (NIMBYism) yet support it elsewhere.

"The people who are going to pay money to come and kill a animal on one of these kill farms isn't a real hunter it's going to be someone who has lots of money and is too lazy to put the effort forward to hunt." quote from Terry Buelow post aka decker Those who hunt in Africa meet this description.

If we are willing to protest this bill, would we also be willing to support legislation that prohibits the importation of any trophies killed on hunt farms in other parts of the world? We can't stop people from spending their money in manners that are unethical, but we can discourage the display of unethically obtained trophies and the glorification of practices that are unacceptable to the hunting men and women of Alberta. Practices that reflect poorly upon us, and that do not support our values.

In the meantime, thanks to the thread originator, and I'm off to email my representatives, and the opposition parties to indicate my lack of support for this bill.

Ryry4

03-18-2011, 09:41 AM

I sent emails to 6 MLAS 3 days ago with requets for a reply . so far I have got
nothing in responce Has anyone got any replies to there emails during the lasdt 2 o r3 crisis -I at least got acknowledged

Phone them, that's what worked for me. Got a call back in about 10 minutes after I had a heated chat with his assistant.

walking buffalo

03-18-2011, 10:16 AM

Phone them, that's what worked for me. Got a call back in about 10 minutes after I had a heated chat with his assistant.

X2

Light up their phone lines!

It's amazing how well politicians listen when their office phones are inundated with upset voters expressing discontent.

Call the newspapers and radio..... Spread the word...

Redfrog

03-18-2011, 10:17 AM

Neil Waugh

03-18-2011, 11:54 AM

Attention any fellows from the County of Lacombe.
While Bill 11 is coming from Jack Haydon and Mel Knight, the guy the PC caucus nominated to ram it through the legislature is Lacombe Tory Ray Prins.
There a rumour going around that Prins either is or has been in the elk ranching business.
Is that in fact true?
If so maybe it's something that needs to be raised with Ethics Commissioner Neil Wilkinson, who I understand is not a bad fly fisher.
If not, then I guess it's just another bad rumour.
Any help would be appreciated.

ward

03-18-2011, 12:21 PM

"In 1974, Prins bought a farm near Gull Lake, Alberta where he grew grain and hay, and raised cattle, hogs, elk and bison."

Wikipedia

KegRiver

03-18-2011, 12:49 PM

My fingers are tired from writing to politicians.
I think I would rather do anything besides talk to that lot.

Time to take a break and go clean the toilet. At least that will keep me in the proper mood for the task.

ex811

03-18-2011, 02:18 PM

I don't think comparing hunt 'farms' in Africa to Alberta is a good comparison as pointed out by Grew Owl.

I doubt there would be any wildlife left in many parts of Africa, certainly SA, if hunt farms didn't exist. I also use the term 'farm' rather loosely, as the hunting operations there are regulated on tracks of land that can be the size of some small European countries. On these tracks of land the animals bred and live a pretty normal existance, except the only real predator is man, hunting them for trophies. Might not be everyones ideal situation, but these animals can as free ranging as possible, without the threat of poaching, natural predators, overhunting and well managed as one would expect when money is on the line. I can accept that.

Totally different here in Alberta (most other places in all likelyhood). We have abundent populations of wildlife which for the most part are well managed due mostly to our own (us outdoorsman) efforts. Do we need the threat of desease, lost of habitat and access just to accomodate a handfull of individuals (Cdns, American, Europeans...) who wish to make a profit?

So Nova *!%

03-18-2011, 04:41 PM

:snapoutofit:
just hope they listen 'tis a slippery slope and the road to H E double hockey sticks starts with one step

catnthehat

03-18-2011, 05:32 PM

I don't care how anybody spins this, it's not a good thing except for those making money off it.
I could care less about the reasons that are being presented for it - the bottom line is paid big game hunting on a farm is just plain wrong.is just plain wrong.
Cat

Albertadiver

03-18-2011, 05:35 PM

i don't care how anybody spins this, it's not a good thing except for those making money off it.
I could care less about the reasons that are being presented for it - the bottom line is paid big game hunting on a farm is just plain wrong.is just plain wrong.
Cat

yup!

gatorhunter

03-18-2011, 05:43 PM

DON'T LET IT HAPPEN! Crazy, mixed up, pointless exercise that endangers wild animal herds. Manitoba has only a few elk ranches left and hopefully they'll all be gone before long!

Fight this issue every way that you can!:fighting0074:

hardy

03-18-2011, 06:18 PM

Just finished emailing my two cents. Thanks Don for posting those links. Hope we have an impact!

270WIN

03-18-2011, 06:24 PM

Tonight's Red Deer Advocate contains a letter to the editor from Jack Hayden, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Developement. It is a response to the editorial "Go Shoot a Steer Instead" which appeared in the Advocate a few days ago and was very critical of Bill 11. His letter contains, amoung other things, the following statements:
1. "It (The Livestock Industry Diversification Act) is not about hunt farms."
2. "the amendments to the LIDA do not allow for hunt farms in Alberta"
3. "under Section 18 of the amendment, the general prohibition on hunting diversified livestock, big game and controlled animals on diversified livestock farms will continue"

Sounds pretty good, doesn't it?

No not really. Unfortunately he neglects to mention the amendments to section 10 which provide that something which would otherwise be an offense under the Act (for example a violation of the type referred to in section 18) will not be an offense under the Act if the Minister (ie. Minister Jack Hayden at the present time) issues a permit to do that particular thing. The amendments to section 10 also enable the Minister to provide by way of regulation for the issuance of such permits by someone other than the Minister.

Quotation no. 3 is, in fact, true. Insofar as quotation no 1 is concerned, I think most of us know what the purpose of Bill 11 is although that may be difficult to prove. Quotation no.2 however because of Mr. Hayden's failure to mention the amendments to section 10 is, at best, misleading and,at worst, completely false. Mr. Hayden should be ashamed of himself for making that statement.

addictedhunter

03-18-2011, 08:10 PM

270WIN

03-18-2011, 08:35 PM

outfitters in my area have had hunt farms for years less feed for disease.which top outfitter in your area don't own land your not able to hunt?Not supporting hunt farms but you let outfitters and apos do what they want for money.just my 2 cents.

Since you refer to APOS, I assume you are located in Alberta.
I'd be interested in knowing a couple of things:

1. Your definition of the term "hunt farm" as used in your above post.

2. The names of the outfitters you are referring to.

Oh yeah, and a third thing - how much do you think I'd have to pay to get to hunt, without a guide of course, on their land?

I'd sure appreciate any information you can give me. Thanks.

addictedhunter

03-18-2011, 08:48 PM

Ive work in the industry for 10 years and names are not the issue.Its happening.

270WIN

03-18-2011, 09:18 PM

Ive work in the industry for 10 years and names are not the issue.Its happening.

Well I guess that's an answer to my second question (I think) but you didn't answer the first one. And then I added a third question by way of an edit. Is there any more info you're able to provide?

addictedhunter

03-18-2011, 09:18 PM

Not sure where your going 270 as i said MY 2 cents........

270WIN

03-18-2011, 09:25 PM

Just curious, addict,that's all. Thanks for your input.

addictedhunter

03-18-2011, 09:27 PM

Ive had many people kill game ive named like a household pet but its all been good because its free range.U dont have to worry about paying for access if b&c mulie lives there because its already sold.

addictedhunter

03-18-2011, 09:31 PM

270 i do think u r an outfitter which is cool,but dont turn a blind eye.....

Duk Dog

03-18-2011, 11:44 PM

Emails gone. Has anyone contacted any of the newspapers or tv stations?

Winch101

03-19-2011, 07:46 AM

I have sent all the emails ....part of my take on this , what are the conservatives thinking , they already shot themselves in one foot ,
to open the door for the wildrose , this could be the can of worms that tips them over....talk about afloat without a rudder.

Good Job Neil and Rob.... W101..

270WIN

03-19-2011, 08:08 AM

I think you're right winch. If the Conservatives are not concerned about their future, they should be. That's why we can win this thing but we gotta keep the heat on in order to do it.

pattycr125

03-19-2011, 08:18 AM

hunting farms are the stupidest concept ever, its not even hunting anymore the animals have nowhere to run and you don't even have to go looking for them.

Winch101

03-19-2011, 09:54 AM

Just took the dog for his usual sniff and wet....My neighbour 2 doors down started talking to me about the dog ,then hunting etc. He tells me he is on the wildrose party board of directors , so I ask him what he knows about this Bill and he tells me they are doing what they can to get their members and others to come out against this.. I also ask him about the roses policy vis-a vis naturel resources , land use , well of course they are diametrically opposed to everything the conservatives are for ....This latest land use bill
is nothing short of communism .
He is going to get a copy of their policies on all outdoor people related subjects....
He is a x conservative , worked on Ted ' s campaign, and assured me
that this was a man we should keep an eye on.....not to be trusted ....

W101

hillbillyreefer

03-19-2011, 09:57 AM

I sent in my letters of support.

chasingtail

03-19-2011, 10:27 AM

Bring on the hunt farms. In my opinion I support the right to farm, along with as many forms of hunting possible. If Elk and Deer farming is well managed the risk of disease is miniscule and will bring much needed economic benefit to rural areas. If there is a movement from hunters against farmers/land owners perhaps there needs to be a movement from landowners to not allow hunting on there land.

Skinnydipper

03-19-2011, 10:40 AM

An interesting read:

http://www.cwd-info.org/pdf/64ae6457.pdf

Skinnydipper

03-19-2011, 10:58 AM

I find it very interesting that Ralph Klien in his comments herein had a much different view than our current government

"We're losing this game

PUBLICATION GLOBE AND MAIL
DATE: TUE APR.30,2002
PAGE: A17 (ILLUS)
BYLINE: DARREL ROWLEDGE, VALERIUS GEIST AND JIM FULTON
CLASS: Comment
EDITION: Metro DATELINE:
WORDS: 1114

- --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
- ----

We're losing this game
Farming deer and elk spreads diseases that could devastate
wild populations and threaten humans, say wildlife experts
DARREL ROWLEDGE, VALERIUS GEIST and JIM FULTON

- --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
- ----
DARREL ROWLEDGE, VALERIUS GEIST and JIM FULTON For more than two
years,
Alberta game farmers have mounted an intensive lobby to legalize one
of
their primary markets -- penned shooting operations.
The Alberta government had largely refused comment, despite its long
promotion of the industry. That ended this month when Premier Ralph
Klein
said: "I find it abhorrent. . . . I just find it inhumane to have elk
or
wild animals penned and then people being allowed to shoot them."
Premier
Klein's revulsion at the concept of "Bambi in a barrel" may have been
news,
but it misses the real issue, the potentially devastating effect of
game
farms on wildlife.

Similarly, Korea's ban on velvet antler imports because of CWD
(chronic
wasting disease) on North American game farms was grim news to the
industry.
Velvet, sold as an aphrodisiac and traditional remedy, is game
farming's
other main product. CWD was later confirmed in elk imported into
Korea from
Saskatchewan, reinforcing the legitimacy of their concern.

CWD is a sister disease to mad-cow disease, and this family of TSEs
(transmissible spongiform encephalopathies) are chronic, untestable,
untreatable and always fatal. Chronic wasting disease has now been
confirmed
on game farms across North America.

The costs of the epidemic are into the hundreds of millions and
climbing.
More important, the disease has not been contained and is spreading to
wildlife. In fact, our wildlife is facing its greatest crisis in
decades.
Any hope of solving it means focusing on the cause: privatizing,
domesticating and commercializing wildlife.

Game farming, by its very nature, fosters and spreads diseases,
parasites,
genetic pollution and poaching. It denies wildlife their habitat, and
it
contradicts the most basic tenets of wildlife conservation and
resource
economics.

The true scope of this crisis emerges only with perspective and
context:
Wildlife across North America had been all but exterminated by 1900.
Bison,
antelope, elk, deer, predators, song birds, shore birds and migratory
birds
had been decimated.

Thankfully, our governments accepted their responsibility; they
identified
commercial trafficking as the fundamental source of the problem, and
they
banned it. A continental effort over 80 years has seen this precious
public
resource restored -- an achievement that stands as one of the greatest
environmental successes in history.

We defeated this "tragedy of the commons" by making wildlife valuable
only
when alive. The new triumph of the commons resulted in wildlife-
related
industries -- such as camping, <hunting>, fishing and wildlife-
watching --
which now generate $150-billion annually.

Game ranching requires a deliberate and complete reversal in
direction and
purpose -- to establish, develop and promote markets and trafficking
in
private and dead wildlife. Worse, it seeks to domesticate it.

Domestication of wildlife significantly increases exposure and
stress, which
fosters and spreads disease. Over many centuries, cattle, sheep, pigs
and
other domestics have become extremely disease hardy. Scientists knew
that
bringing wildlife into intensive exposure to such diseases, and then
transporting them across the continent, would build disease bridges
into the
wild -- through fences, via escapes, and when wildlife enters game
farms for
feed or sex.

An epidemic of TB on game farms across Canada in the 1990s spread to
cattle,
pigs and people. A number of deer and at least 20 elk remain missing
from
infected or quarantined game farms. The outbreak not only cost
taxpayers
tens of millions, it cost all of Canada TB-free status, valued by
Agriculture Canada at $1-billion. People were alarmed at the news but
they
missed the cause. And the crisis has only gotten worse.

In addition to the recent confirmation of CWD in Alberta, more
infected game
farm herds have been found in Saskatchewan, where 8,000 animals have
already
been destroyed. Officials are scrambling because the new infections
are
supposedly unrelated to the relentless series of outbreaks that began
in
1996. At least 227 elk have proven to be diseased on more than 40 game
farms; the disease has been found outside the fences in two mule
deer.

Chronic wasting disease has also been found on game farms in South
Dakota,
Oklahoma, Montana, Colorado, Kansas and Nebraska, where authorities
were
stunned to find it in 51 per cent of 154 captive whitetail deer. Just
one of
several CWD-infected game farms in Colorado shipped 400 exposed elk
to 15
states. Colorado's governor is voicing concern over the threat to
Colorado's
multibillion-dollar wildlife economy.

Wisconsin, with some of the highest concentrations of deer in North
America,
has found CWD in 14 whitetail deer in the wild, and the state intends
to
test up to 15,000 deer this fall.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman has declared a "state of
emergency" regarding CWD, but this is damage control that misses the
real
issue.

Game farming presents an unprecedented threat to wildlife,
agriculture, our
economies, and potentially to human health. There is no confirmed
case of
CWD infecting a human (it's called Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in
people). We
hope that the species barrier will prevent people from being
infected, along
with the fact that the most likely source of infection (brains, spinal
chord, blood, lymphatic glands, rumen and intestines) are not
typically
eaten from venison (unlike the case with beef in Britain).

But in vitro experiments demonstrate that CWD and BSE (bovine
spongiform
encephalopathy, or mad-cow disease) prions transform healthy human
prions at
the same rate. And in Britain, over 100 people have now died of
variant CJD
from eating BSE-infected beef.

Despite public pleas from the time CWD was first confirmed on game
farms in
1996, antler velvet has continued to be sold for human consumption.
Industry
statements that the heat of drying velvet would sterilize it were
misleading. Prions are extremely resilient, and have remained
infectious
after being reduced to ash at 600 C. Even when it was confirmed that
velvet
was sold from animals proven diseased, neither the industry nor
government
made any attempt to recall it, or even warn customers.

Containing this disaster requires immediate action. We need a national
moratorium on game farming, an immediate suspension on the movement
or sale
of all game farm related products, and a judicial inquiry to
establish the
extent of the problem and how it happened.

This will allow us to examine the entire issue of privatizing and
commercializing wildlife in a comprehensive "environmental assessment
with a
public review," as has been promised by Prime Minister Jean Chretien.

Darrel Rowledge is director of the Alliance for Public Wildlife,
Valerius
Geist is professor emeritus and former head of environmental science
at the
University of Calgary, and Jim Fulton is executive director of the
David
Suzuki Foundation."

chasingtail

03-19-2011, 11:10 AM

walking buffalo

03-19-2011, 12:07 PM

Isn't the farmed elk herd in Alberta now CWD free? If no elk are allowed to be imported into Alberta then the disease argument no longer sticks. As far as it being inhumane, well to a lot of people killing anyhing is inhumane.

It is impossible to know if farmed elk are CWD free. There is no live test for the disease.

Agriculture will have the power to allow elk to be imported if the legislation passes. That's the problem with Sec. 10.1 and reclassifying Wildlife as Livestock.

On the economics side of Elk Farms, they do not create a "profit" for society. The public cost of managing the business due to disease has outweighed any compounded income for the individual businesses.

Compare the economic value to the Canadian economy for farmed elk versus cattle. These figures are from 2009. Elk farming returns a profit of $ 0.008 for every dollar invested. Cattle return $3.08 for every dollar invested.

That's a 38500 % difference. And these numbers do not include the public cost of dealing with CWD outside of Game Farms.

On another note, The US will not allow any export of ANY elk parts (other than hard horn) from within 40 miles of a known CWD occurance. As CWD spreads, the areas of Alberta where "Game Farms" can operate for meat and velvet antler production will decrease.

Without "Hunt Farms", game farming is dead in Alberta, due to disease.

http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/98686/2/PR-10-03.pdf

Elk and deer farming in Alberta generate revenue
through the sale of meat, breeding stock, stock for
hunt farms, and, in the case of elk, velvet from their
antlers. Disease free herds are imperative to the
continuance of the economic viability of these farms.

A $1.00 change in final demand to the cervid and
cattle sectors in Alberta will generate a total
economic impact of $1.003 and $1.89,
respectively. A $1.00 change in final demand to
the cervid and cattle sectors in Canada will
generate a total economic impact of $1.008 and
$3.08, respectively.

270WIN

03-19-2011, 12:47 PM

cover

03-19-2011, 07:31 PM

It is impossible to know if farmed elk are CWD free. There is no live test for the disease.

Agriculture will have the power to allow elk to be imported if the legislation passes. That's the problem with Sec. 10.1 and reclassifying Wildlife as Livestock.

On the economics side of Elk Farms, they do not create a "profit" for society. The public cost of managing the business due to disease has outweighed any compounded income for the individual businesses.

Compare the economic value to the Canadian economy for farmed elk versus cattle. These figures are from 2009. Elk farming returns a profit of $ 0.008 for every dollar invested. Cattle return $3.08 for every dollar invested.

That's a 38500 % difference. And these numbers do not include the public cost of dealing with CWD outside of Game Farms.

On another note, The US will not allow any export of ANY elk parts (other than hard horn) from within 40 miles of a known CWD occurance. As CWD spreads, the areas of Alberta where "Game Farms" can operate for meat and velvet antler production will decrease.

Without "Hunt Farms", game farming is dead in Alberta, due to disease.

http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/98686/2/PR-10-03.pdf

Thanks for making the time ....

:sLo_BigBearHug::sLo_BigBearHug:

Jimboy

03-20-2011, 02:07 AM

landowner

03-20-2011, 09:18 AM

I think they can generate money from licencing both the hunter and the game farm.

Jimboy

03-20-2011, 09:32 AM

I think they can generate money from licencing both the hunter and the game farm.

Well , surly the game farm , but an American hunter only pays the game farm , no govt lic to hunt there.

sdimedru

03-21-2011, 07:48 PM

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/Alberta+says+hunt+farms/4479976/story.html

success? depends how they re-word it I guess. Reading the comments, haha I enjoyed the one about the "meat fairy"

270WIN

03-21-2011, 08:57 PM

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/Alberta+says+hunt+farms/4479976/story.html

success? depends how they re-word it I guess. Reading the comments, haha I enjoyed the one about the "meat fairy"

You're right about the comments. Some of them are priceless. The one I liked best was from some clown who was disappointed because he figured the so-called hunt farms would have provided him with an easy and cheap way to fill his freezer. There are a lot of misconceptions out there.

Anyway, it looks like all the "fan mail" our MLAs got on this issue may have done some good. It will be interesting to see how the ammendment reads. Looks promising but I think it should be carefully scrutinized before we decide for sure.

Sundancefisher

03-21-2011, 09:25 PM

It was reported by the Alberta Fish and Game Association that Bill 11 would pave the way for hunt farms. This is simply not the case. This bill is a direct transfer of full legislative authority for diversified livestock, including elk and deer, from The Wildlife Act to Agriculture and Rural Development’s responsibility.

I am against any attempts to circumvent F&W's authority over the importation and rearing of non native species in Alberta as well as the intensive rearing of native species in Alberta. To give the key to Alberta Agriculture is going to be the kiss of death for they will have no regards for damage to the ecosystem and wildlife resources of Albertans.

Even if this is not to promote private hunts...ALL wildlife issues should be under the jurisdiction of F&W... Otherwise...they should move fish stocking out of F&W's control and I should be allowed to stock anything I please in Lake Sundance. Only seems fair...is it smart for the government to do...no way.

Some semblance of control over the resource needs to be done by biologists...and not agriculture grads.

IMHO

Sun

P.S. I have sent in my email...

Donkey Oatey

03-21-2011, 09:49 PM

I am against any attempts to circumvent F&W's authority over the importation and rearing of non native species in Alberta as well as the intensive rearing of native species in Alberta. To give the key to Alberta Agriculture is going to be the kiss of death for they will have no regards for damage to the ecosystem and wildlife resources of Albertans.
Alberta Ag has been in charge of game farms since the early 90's. They license and inspect. SRD has had nothing to do with them for years.
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/div11774

Even if this is not to promote private hunts...ALL wildlife issues should be under the jurisdiction of F&W... Otherwise...they should move fish stocking out of F&W's control and I should be allowed to stock anything I please in Lake Sundance. Only seems fair...is it smart for the government to do...no way.

Some semblance of control over the resource needs to be done by biologists...and not agriculture grads.

IMHO

Sun

P.S. I have sent in my email...
Alberta Agriculture also licenses and inspects your dugout for trout. So once again F&W have nothing to do with stocking of private "ponds".
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex3487

Not agreeing with bill 11 or anything else said. Just trying to get the information correct.

ishootbambi

03-21-2011, 11:11 PM

^^^ a politician stating clearly that hunt farms will not be allowed. part of me wants to celebrate......but part of me vividly remembers jean the cretin telling us "we will scrap da gst!"

some of the quotes from that article are some ive seen sent in by emails from guys here. well done fellas!

Don Meredith

03-22-2011, 06:12 AM

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/Alberta+says+hunt+farms/4479976/story.html

Good work everyone! Yes, we always have to be vigilant to make sure these guys get it right! But don't ever believe you can't make a difference. You can and we did.

Sundancefisher

03-22-2011, 08:10 AM

Alberta Ag has been in charge of game farms since the early 90's. They license and inspect. SRD has had nothing to do with them for years.
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/div11774

Alberta Agriculture also licenses and inspects your dugout for trout. So once again F&W have nothing to do with stocking of private "ponds".
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex3487

Not agreeing with bill 11 or anything else said. Just trying to get the information correct.

Fish and wildlife controls what fish are allowed to be stocked in which region. For instance in the Calgary area...only rainbows are currently allowed with an exception allowed for grass carp. We had to apply to F&W for the exception for grass carp.

What I am saying is that Fish and Wildlife should be in control of what animals are allowed in what region. Some control is not a bad thing IMHO.

Does F&W have no current say on importation and rearing location for imported wildlife? Can someone get a herd of Elk and set up a fenced operation in the heart of Elk country?

Donkey Oatey

03-22-2011, 08:18 AM

Fish and wildlife controls what fish are allowed to be stocked in which region. For instance in the Calgary area...only rainbows are currently allowed with an exception allowed for grass carp. We had to apply to F&W for the exception for grass carp.

What I am saying is that Fish and Wildlife should be in control of what animals are allowed in what region. Some control is not a bad thing IMHO.

Does F&W have no current say on importation and rearing location for imported wildlife? Can someone get a herd of Elk and set up a fenced operation in the heart of Elk country?

Actually the Fisheries Act controls what species can be stocked. Alberta Agriculture does the licensing and inspections.

As for import and export of game farm animals that is controlled by Alberta Ag but under the Wildlife Act at this time. That is what they are changing. As for setting up an elk farm as long as it is on private land, more than 10 acres fenced, and meets the fencing and handling facilities you can put an elk or deer farm where ever you want. Plenty of elk farms in Spirit River area and you don't get much more elk country than that.

walking buffalo

03-22-2011, 10:51 AM

Keep the pressure on, Write and call again.

According to the government legislative assembly website,

Second reading of Bill 11 will be held on Thursday, March 24.

http://www.assembly.ab.ca/pro/audio/schedule.htm

After Second reading, the bill goes to The Standing Committee on Resources and Environment.

In addition to your own MLA, CALL and Email these MLA's. They are the ones making the changes to Bill 11 before it is brought forward for Third reading.

The Standing Committee on Resources and Environment is an all-party committee consisting of 12 Members of the Legislative Assembly. Its mandate relates to the areas of agriculture and rural development, energy, environment, international and intergovernmental relations, and sustainable resource development.

If your call to your MLA is long distance, please dial 310-0000 then the area code and the phone number you would like to reach in order to receive toll free access.

The Standing Committee on Resources and Environment
COMMITTEE MEMBERS (12)

http://www.assembly.ab.ca/committees/resourcesandenvironment/index.html

Mr. Raymond Prins (Chair) (PC) MLA for Lacombe-Ponoka

lacombe.ponoka@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Toll-Free: 1-800-565-6432
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 422-3353

Ms. Laurie Blakeman (Deputy Chair) (AL) MLA for Edmonton-Centre

edmonton.centre@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 414-0743
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-2292

Mr. Rob Anderson (WA) MLA for Airdrie-Chestermere

airdrie.chestermere@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Toll-Free: 1-888-948-8741
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-0975

Mr. Evan Berger (PC) MLA for Livingstone-Macleod

livingstone.macleod@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Toll-Free: 1-800-565-0962
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-3001

Mr. Guy Boutilier (WA) MLA for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo

fortmcmurray.woodbuffalo@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 790-6014
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-1865

Mr. Kent Hehr (AL) MLA for Calgary-Buffalo

calgary.buffalo@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (403) 244-7737
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-2292

Mr. Broyce Jacobs (PC) MLA for Cardston-Taber-Warner

cardston.taberwarner@assembly.ab.ca

Taber Phone: (403) 223-0001 Toll-Free: 1-888-600-6080
Cardston Phone: (403) 653-5100
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 422-0685

Mr. Richard Marz (PC) MLA for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills

richard.marz@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (403) 556-3132
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-0994

Mr. Brian Mason (ND) MLA for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood

edmonton.highlandsnorwood@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 414-0682
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-1800

Mrs. Diana McQueen (PC) MLA for Drayton Valley-Calmar

draytonvalley.calmar@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 542-3355 Toll-Free: 1-800-542-7307
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-9466

Mr. Leonard Mitzel (PC) MLA for Cypress-Medicine Hat

cypress.medicinehat@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (403) 528-2191 Toll-Free: 1-866-339-2191
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-9590

Mr. George VanderBurg (PC) MLA for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne

whitecourt.steanne@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 786-1997 Toll-Free: 1-800-786-7136
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-9473

walking buffalo

03-22-2011, 10:55 AM

From this link, click on "View this clip" to view or listen to Minister Prins during Second Reading of Bill 11. Forward clip to 2:59:57. The minister speaks for about two minutes.

http://assemblyonline.assembly.ab.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&currentdate=2011-03-10&languagecode=12298&eventid=1357

Ministers Comments.

SRD is "supportive" of this legislation.

The legislation reflects a "Cultural Shift" in Alberta.

In addition to adding "domestic cervids" to the LIDA Act,
ARD seeks to broaden the scope of this act so as to have the future ability to regulate other non-traditional livestock species.

^^^ What does this mean? :scared:

209x50

03-22-2011, 10:58 AM

This might be good news.
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/Alberta+says+hunt+farms/4479976/story.html

Neil Waugh

03-22-2011, 01:01 PM

Nice try, Jack.
Don't believe for a minute that the Ag Minister has backed down. Getting cervids under the control of agriculture is all part of the Elk Commission's sneaky little campaign. (Check out the stuff on deerfarmer.com)
It's a foot in the door. Once they get it they will begin lobbying immediately to have the "hunt" restrictions removed. All you have to do is read Brenda Elkow's comments in the naive EdJournal story.
The pitch is pretty obvious. If the buffalo and wild boar guys can shoot animals in cages for money why shouldn't the elk/whitetail guys get the same deal?
The only satisfactory solution is the Kill the Bill!!!
Keep up the pressure.

Sooner

03-22-2011, 01:10 PM

I thought that too Neil when I read the article. One position is a minister saying its a no go then way down at the bottom is this Glenda woman saying yes we want hunt farms but will go along with it, I dont belive her for a minute. This is the same woman that went toe to toe with Rob after he wrote a differing view then hers isnt it. I dont think its a dead issue yet. More e-mails needed I think to the pc mla's and the committie members.

Duk Dog

03-22-2011, 01:42 PM

Response from the Wildrose Party....take it as an invite to send them your thoughts and ideas.

I would like to thank you for your email on Bill 11. The bill will be coming up in the Committee of the Whole after April 11th. The Wildrose Caucus will be speaking to the bill at that time and tabling any amendments. We would appreciate any thoughts or ideas that you might have. If you could forward them, it would very much be appreciated.

Once again, thanks for sharing your thoughts and ideas with me. Should you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me at my office, (780) 638-3505.

Regards,
Barb Currie
Legislative Assistant
Wildrose Caucus
Barbara.Currie@assembly.ab.ca

827rotax

03-22-2011, 05:15 PM

they have turned down the first reading and there is no second reading on the schedule as of yet.

From the journal
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/Alberta+says+hunt+farms/4479976/story.html

gonefishin

03-22-2011, 06:12 PM

This is what I recieved from the Whitecourt/St Anne MLA, Mr. George VanderBurg:

Not sure where you are getting this stuff from but if you check out the video or hansard recording of my question to Jack Hayden yesterday you will clearly see that cervid hunt farms are not planned for at all.
Check out the web site please.
George

... I never used the term "hunt farm" in my letter at all.

270WIN

03-22-2011, 08:59 PM

This is what I recieved from the Whitecourt/St Anne MLA, Mr. George VanderBurg:

... I never used the term "hunt farm" in my letter at all.

Well you're lucky you at least got a reply from your member. Mine hasn't had the courtesy to reply to the email I sent last week nor to another one I sent him on this subject over a year ago.
That said, Mr VanderBurg's assurance that hunt farms are not "planned for at all" provides very little comfort, I'm afraid.
Our concerns are not about what some MLA or, for that matter, Minister Hayden might decide to tell us today regarding what is or isn't "planned". They are not above saying anything they want if they think it will get us off their backs.
Our concerns are about the fact that Bill 11, if enacted as it now reads, would permit the Minister to allow so-called hunt farms any time he took a notion to do so.
Mr VanderBurg should be told that the Minister's answer to a question in the Legislature about what is "planned" is meaningless as far as we are concerned and that what we want is to see Bill 11 amended so that hunt farms will not be possible or, better yet, simply scrap Bill 11 in it's entirety.

Lefty-Canuck

03-22-2011, 11:47 PM

I seem to think Mr. Vanderburg has a family memeber or a relation thats involved in Elk farms....but I could be mistaken.

Lefty

Elkaholic6

03-22-2011, 11:51 PM

A Facebook group would be a good idea....

Lefty-Canuck

03-22-2011, 11:54 PM

Now I remember....its not Mr. Vanderburg (MLA) who has ties to Elk farms it is Mr. Merrifield (MP) who does....

Copied from a Web search,

"Bill C-470 (Historical)An Act to designate the month of November as Canadian Farm-Raised Deer and Elk MonthThis bill was last introduced in the 37th Parliament, 3rd Session, which ended in May 2004.
This bill was previously introduced in the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session.
SponsorRob Merrifield Canadian Alliance
Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)
StatusFirst Reading in the House of Commons
(This bill did not become law.)
ElsewhereAll sorts of information on this bill—including the full text of the bill—is available at LEGISinfo, provided by the Library of Parliament.
Canadian Farm-Raised Deer and Elk Month Act
Routine Proceedings

November 6th, 2003 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Canadian Alliance
Rob Merrifield Yellowhead, AB

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-470, an act to designate the month of November as Canadian Farm-Raised Deer and Elk Month.

Mr. Speaker, I ask for consideration of this legislation because the animals of 2,000 farmers across the country have been hit by a critical wasting disease. We need to raise awareness of this industry that has great value, not only to Canadians but to international trade as well. It provides nutraceuticalin the way of elk velvet that is very popular in Asian countries as well as in North America. The quality of red deer and elk meat is lower in cholesterol than chicken. It is of very high quality. This industry needs support and awareness brought to it.

I encourage members of the House to consider my bill because it is a very valuable bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)"

He is now a PC........

Interesting.....

Lefty

slough shark

03-23-2011, 12:09 AM

This was the reply I got from mr knight

I have received your recent email regarding hunt farms in Alberta. I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

In 2002, the Alberta government decided that cervid harvest preserves, otherwise known as hunt farms, would not be allowed in Alberta. This decision was based on a cross-government review, with direct input from the public and stakeholder groups, and consideration of factors such as disease, economics, and public support.

The government is in the process of amending the Livestock Industry Diversification Act (LIDA) in order to enable Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) to exercise full legislative authority for diversified livestock as defined in LIDA. Under Section 18.01 of the amendment, the general prohibition on hunting diversified livestock, big game, and controlled animals on diversified livestock farms will continue.

I would also like to clarify that, while there are some statutory exceptions on this ban stated in Section 18.01(1)(2)(3), including activities specifically authorized by the Agricultural Pests Act or by way of license under the Wildlife Act, they do not include the hunting of diversified livestock.

Any illegal activity on farms, including reports of activity contrary to the LIDA, will be investigated by the Inspection and Investigation Branch of ARD, and Sustainable Resource Development will continue to regulate and enforce all matters pertaining to wildlife, including the hunting, possession, transport, import, export, and sale of wildlife.

If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact Cliff Munroe, Executive Director of Regulatory Services Division, at 780-422-7197 or cliff.munroe@gov.ab.ca.

Thank you for taking the time to write.

Sincerely,

Jack Hayden
Minister

cc: Honourable Mel Knight, Minister of Sustainable Resource Development

Cliff Munroe, Executive Director, Agriculture and Rural Development

BlackHeart

03-23-2011, 07:57 PM

We are only one step away from elk hunt farms in Alberta.
There is the current practice of Alberta raised elk being sold based on antler size and how much the hunters are willing to out bid each other to hunt that animal on farms in the US.

Slash8

03-24-2011, 02:38 PM

So now what folks? :angry3:

outlaw'd

03-24-2011, 08:21 PM

I got an email today that is the same form letter as slough shark received. Mine was from the ARD Agriculture Minister.

walking buffalo

03-24-2011, 11:40 PM

Bill 11 remains in Second reading as Prins once again adjourned discussion of the legislation after a 3 minute speach on the importance of LIDA (Livestock Industry Diversification Act) to Agriculture, specifically regarding the "Ownership" of animals, and the possibility to open "New markets".

Prins stated that section 10.1 will be ammended to "clarify" it's intentions regarding "Hunting", to be introduced at the standing committee.

Watch Prins squirm for three minutes here. Click on "View this clip" at this link. He speaks from 1:32:00 - 1:35:00.

http://assemblyonline.assembly.ab.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&currentdate=2011-03-24&languagecode=12298&eventid=1365

The public is being heard in the oppositioon to this bill! The PC's are stalling, and are nervous to avoid debate. :happy0034:

Keep writing and calling. Most importantly, spread the word, get the media involved. Other interest groups are now aware of the legislation, and are starting to speak up against the bill.

Demand that BILL 11 is withdrawn completly!

Duk Dog

03-25-2011, 06:21 AM

Not a word from my MLA, ministers, Premier....

freeones

03-25-2011, 08:04 AM

Not a word from my MLA, ministers, Premier....

Same here.

jacobin

03-25-2011, 10:40 AM

gonefishin

03-25-2011, 11:04 AM

Not a word from my MLA, ministers, Premier....

I've recieved three replies so far... 2 dodged around a proper answer and 1, from the Official Opposition, do not support Bill 11 in its current form and will not support hunt farms in Alberta.

Neil Waugh

03-25-2011, 11:18 AM

This just in from the Elk Commission website:

"The 2011 Alberta Elk Convention is being held at the Kingsway Ramada Hotel & Conference
Centre, in Edmonton, Alberta on March 25 & 26, 2011. This convention really marks a turning point for
our industry with markets rising, legislative changes on the horizon, the future of the elk industry is
looking bright.
The focus of this year’s convention is the future of our industry. Producer input is vital all year long but
particularly at the annual convention and meeting. Our agenda is currently evolving as we book
speakers to address topics of interest such as the development of a live animal cwd test, report from the
Alberta Government of the passage of the Livestock Industry Diversification Act and much more.
The past has taught us a very important lesson. Working hard together to influence the future direction
of our industry will help all of us achieve our goals. The changes our industry needs to continue to grow
and prosper will certainly not come on its own. That’s why AEC has been hard at work in many ways on
behalf of all producers to influence a future of increased prosperity for this industry. It is important that
every producer is aware of what is happening and the important things that AEC is doing. And it is
important that your voice is heard by government who will be presenting their reports and by your fellow
producers, as we come together to plan the next steps we need to take on this journey to achieving
access to all our markets right here in our own province.
We look forward too seeing you there!"

Don't you love that line about the "next steps" on their "journey" which of course ends at pet shoot operations.
Looks like the elk guys feel they have the dumb ass Tories right where they want them. In their hip pocket.
Unbelievable!!!

coreya3212

03-25-2011, 11:58 AM

http://alberta.ca/blog/home.cfm/2011/3/24/Bill-11-amended-There-will-be-no-hunt-farms

Now if you can trust a politician :sHa_sarcasticlol: then it looks like things are going to be made clear in Bill 11 so that hunt farms will not be allowed.....

At least the minister is on verbal record stating that hunt farms will not be allowed. This might make it harder for him to change his mind.:scared0018:

hunting [ˈhʌntɪŋ]
n
(Individual Sports & Recreations / Hunting)
a. the pursuit and killing or capture of game and wild animals, regarded as a sport

What concerns me with all the statements that there will be no hunt farms, is that they are telling the truth. If this bill is passed, and the animals are no longer "wild" doesnt that mean that they cant be hunted, hence the fenced shoots could not be hunt farms?? The politicians are aiming for a loophole in the language are they not? This entire bill must be scrapped, not ammended, or altered.

outlaw'd

03-27-2011, 11:40 PM

Well I just got a letter from the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, the Honourable Ken Kowalksi with a copy of the Alberta Hansard dated March 21, 2011. Mr. Kowalski quotes the Honourable Jack Hayden, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, as saying before the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, " There will absolutely not be hunt farms for cervids". This statement was made in an exchange between Mr. VanderBurg and Mr. Hayden and is highlighted in the copy of the March 21, 2011 Alberta Hansard I received. I googled "cervid" to get a clear definition and this is what I got:

"Science Dictionary
cervid (sûr'vĭd) Pronunciation Key
Any of various hoofed mammals of the family Cervidae, which includes the deer and elk. Male cervids typically grow antlers that are shed yearly."

Modern Language Association (MLA):
"cervid." The American Heritage® Science Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Company. 27 Mar. 2011. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cervid>.

walking buffalo

03-27-2011, 11:47 PM

Possibly part of this battle has been delayed for a while with these possible ammendments.

The reality still is that WE MUST NOT LET AGRICULTURE REDEFINE CERVIDS AS "ALTERNATIVE LIVESTOCK".

The only safe future for wildlife and sport hunting is to keep wildlife WILD!

BILL 11 MUST BE WITHDRAWN!

Redfrog

03-28-2011, 05:18 PM

I just got a call from my MLA. He has assured me hunt farms will never be allowed. It was not the intent of Bill11. There is some disagreement amongst members re: hunt farms and some other issues plaquing outdoorsmen.

It was an enlightening discussion with some insight into the party workings.

I

Rockymtnx

03-30-2011, 02:26 AM

Here is the response that I received from my MLA. Pretty generic response, and obviously he plans on supporting the bill. :(

WB, or anyone for that matter what are the so called amendments they have made that will are suppose to not allow hunt farms?

Dear Mr. XXXXX:

Thank you for writing to express your concern about Bill 11.

I am providing a link to an interview with the Minister of Agriculture, Hon. Jack Hayden that hopefully will clarify the intent of this bill.

A number of issues were raised at the Ministerial Forum of the spring convention of the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties, including internet for rural Alberta and Bill 11, which sees the cervid industry moved totally under Alberta Agriculture from Sustainable Resource Development. I spoke with Agriculture Minister Jack Hayden about this bill and some confusion that has been expressed.

http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/newslett.nsf/all/cotl17813

If you have further questions regarding the bill please feel free to contact our office again.

Thank you for writing.
Verlyn Olson, MLA
Wetaskiwin-Camrose

walking buffalo

03-30-2011, 08:48 AM

Here is the response that I received from my MLA. Pretty generic response, and obviously he plans on supporting the bill. :(

WB, or anyone for that matter what are the so called amendments they have made that will are suppose to not allow hunt farms?

Amendments to Bill 11 won't be revealed until the bill goes to commitee. So at the moment, it is anyone's guess as to what they are. For an update, Bill 11 is still in second reading, it is not schedualed to return to the floor until at least after April 17.

I'm afraid the hunting community and wildlife advocates are falling for the oldest play in the political gamebook, the old Trotsky Two Step.

Agriculture has played us into being worried about hunt ranches while pushing forward to destroying the oldest and most important tenant of North American Game Management. All Wildlife Belongs To The Public.

Many people seem to be content to let wildlife become privatived, only concerning ourselves with how these animals are killed. This is a huge mistake! It's only been a little more than a century since we nearly lost all our big wildlife in N. America. How quickly we forget our mistakes, and how we fixed them.

Teddy Roosevelt was the first prominent politician to value wildlife for what it is, WILD! His work with the efforts of hunters, fishers, and wildlife advocates began the most successful wildlife conservation program in the world,
the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.

If you care about wildlife, please take some time to read these links.

OUTDOOR PURSUITS with Rob Miskosky Conservation's Blight
http://www.albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/archives/outdoor-pursuits-mar-06.html

The North American Wildlife Conservation Model
Triumph For Man and Nature
http://www.rmef.org/NewsandMedia/PubsTV/Bugle/2004/MayJune/Features/NAModel.htm

The Seven Sisters
Pillars of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model
http://www.rmef.org/NewsandMedia/PubsTV/Bugle/2004/SepOct/Features/SevenSisters.htm

I'll continue in the next post with a copy of the The North American Wildlife Conservation Model and some words from Valerius Geist.

Bill 11 will lead to hunt ranches, and most importantly, it will immediately destoy the basic tenants that has been the Foundation of Wildlife Conservation. KILL BILL 11!

walking buffalo

03-30-2011, 09:20 AM

A great education on why we have public hunting in Alberta today. And why we must KILL BILL 11.

What do YOU think?

TRIUMPH OF THE COMMONS
The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation as a Means
of Creating Wealth and Protecting Public Health While Generating
Biodiversity

Dr. Valerius Geist

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation arose at the beginning of the 20th century in response to the virtual decimation of wildlife across most of the North American continent by the end of the 19th century. Garett Hardin’s Tragedy of the Commons had run its course to the bitter end followed by the extermination of “vermin” that interfered with cattle and sheep production, including grizzly bear, wolf and even cougar over wide areas of their range.

Several once spectacularly abundant species went extinct, foremost among them the passenger pigeon, and later, the Eskimo curlew. Waterfowl, shore birds, even songbirds were then severely depleted by market hunting and uncontrolled pot-hunting, while wildlife habitat was converted to ploughed fields for corn, wheat, or cotton; livestock pastures; and urban sprawl.

Yet in these dark hours for wildlife there arose a unique system of wildlife conservation and management that restored wildlife to the North American continent and made wildlife a source of wealth and employment. In a surprising fashion this restoration defeated Garett Hardin’s Tragedy of the Commons, and, contrary to advocates for private wildlife, showed that private ownership of wildlife is not compatible with conservation, which deals with maintaining biodiversity. The return of wildlife and biodiversity to the continent of North America is probably the greatest environmental achievement of the 20th century and the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation one of the great achievements of North American culture.

And yet, ironically, that Model of Wildlife Conservation has only recently been recognized as such. It is very poorly known or understood in North America, it is politically incorrect for much of the urban electorate, and it is opposed by various special interests, including some agricultural and environmental organizations. You will not hear about it on radio or TV, and even a good many wildlife managers must plead ignorance when asked about it.

A close examination of that model is most illuminating, as it is pregnant with tested ideas about how to manage a renewable resource in a sustainable manner. However, it requires certain pre-conditions to flourish, such as acceptance of wildlife as food and ready access by all citizens in good standing to weapons, which raise questions about its universality and transferability.

The North American Wildlife Conservation Model has evolved over nearly a century. It has since been examined by a number of symposia and has been discussed in the popular press and on the Internet. It is continental in scope, encompassing the United States and Canada, as it was formed in close cooperation among leading individuals from both nations. Here Canada, a loyal colony of Great Britain, opted not for the manner of wildlife conservation of the European mother country, but chose instead to unite under new common policies with the United States.

The model is based on raw grassroots democracy and is thus the product of innumerable political discussions – acrimonious or otherwise. Consequently, it is not the product of a single mind but expresses the collective wisdom of nearly a century of continent-wide debate and hard bargaining. It has retained what has worked. It therefore has a deep wisdom and could not have been invented by any single mind. We have before us an eminently successful conservation model, one worthy of scrutiny, regardless of one’s political philosophy.

Successes

The major achievements of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model are, briefly, as follows:

The recovery of wildlife and biodiversity continent-wide. This includes the recovery of species that were at the brink of extinction a century ago, which means most species of wildlife. Some conservation efforts went so well that in the case of the buffalo, the American Bison Society, dedicated to saving the buffalo, voted itself out of existence, considering its mandate fulfilled. Between 1974 and 1999 wild sheep in North America increased in number by almost 50 percent. There are again millions of white-tailed deer in North America, as well as other big game, but the recovery also included waterfowl, shorebirds, and songbirds. Where the recovery is still wanting, concentrated efforts are at work to restore the species, including the much publicized efforts to restore grey wolves and whooping cranes.

The generation of a novel economic use of wildlife. This results in the creation of great wealth and employment while the resource continues to grow and prosper: it is not merely sustained! In 1996 some 77 million US citizens spent in excess of 100 billion dollars on wildlife-related activities, creating about 50,000 jobs per billion dollars (US) in throughput.

There are similar trends for Canada. We can also study the distinction between markets that destroy wildlife, such as markets in dead wildlife, and markets that increase wildlife abundance, such as markets based on encountering living wildlife. Hunting creates public benefits such as the “freedom of the woods” that results from keeping large and potentially dangerous carnivores timid and afraid of humans, as without this we could not use our woods and campgrounds safely. In addition, once wildlife populations expand, hunting keeps in check such wildlife population, which otherwise could expand to cause damage to agriculture, forestry, or the environment at large.

A new uniquely North American profession: the university-trained wildlife biologist or manager. The first notable practitioner among these was Aldo Leopold, who became an idol of not only wildlife biologists, but also the environmental movement at large with his inspiring writing. It insured that North America’s wildlife received well-qualified, professional attention and care in its conservation and management.

Public involvement with wildlife. This is one of the greatest achievements of North American wildlife conservation. The genius of North America’s system of wildlife conservation is that it captured the enthusiasm and support of all strata of society. This includes the whole-hearted participation of the blue-collar segment of society in contrast to a primary involvement of the elite in European societies. This makes for a large volunteer force willing to act on behalf of wildlife.

Outwardly, public involvement takes the form of a large number of conservation organizations, formed at the federal, provincial or state, and local levels. Notable among these are sportsmen organizations supporting single species or related groups of wildlife, such as the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Mule Deer Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Wild Turkey Foundation, etc. There are also effective conservation societies such as the venerable Boone & Crockett Club, the Campfire Club, and the Audubon Society. The volunteers have great achievements to their credit. The Rocky Mountain Elk foundation conserved over 3.8 million acres of elk habitat since its inception. A volunteer force of less than 6,000 Americans and Canadians, uniting biologists, managers, hunters, guides, outfitters, and interested parties in a common cause under the Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, increased the mountain sheep population by almost 50 percent in the last 25 years. These are examples – and there are many others - of what volunteers, irrespective of nationality, in free association, without call for legislation or government funding can achieve under existing legislation.

Taxing for wildlife. North Americans generated a secure funding base for wildlife conservation by adopting the user-pay principle as policy in 1930 by the American Game Conference. Ever since, North Americans have taxed themselves on behalf of wildlife (Migratory Bird Stamp Act 1934, Alberta’s Buck for Wildlife Fund, etc).

Habitat conservation. North Americans created an extensive public system of protected areas for wildlife, including great national parks and monuments, wildlife refuges, provincial parks ,and ecological reserves. Habitat conservation on agricultural land results from initiatives such as the U.S. Conservation Reserve Program. In addition there are significant ongoing private efforts to acquire habitat such as those by the Nature Conservancy or the many foundations dedicated to wildlife. They act continentally, continually acquiring habitat by purchase or gift, or habitat protection through liens on the land. In addition, military reserves, by long tradition, respect wildlife’s presence and contain some of the finest wildlife habitats and populations.

International treaties. North Americans recognized early the need to protect and manage wildlife that cross national borders in their migrations. They negotiated the first and effective international wildlife treaties, such as the 1911 Fur Seal Treaty, but above all the famous1916 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds.

Conservation of large predators. Despite early and continuing sentiments against large predators, such were nevertheless retained or reintroduced as functioning entities of ecosystems. They are controlled, protected, or reintroduced, depending on circumstances. Also, predators are better off under hunting regulations because the kill is very closely controlled and is under constant public scrutiny, and persons are held accountable for each kill. Not so in Canada’s national parks, in which bears have a notoriously very high chance of dying due to concerns for public safety.

Preservation of non-game species. From the very outset the out-of-doors was considered an integrated whole. That is, very early on under the so-called Roosevelt Doctrine, conservation was considered broadly. Consequently, the history of bringing non-game species under the same umbrella as game species has a very long history. However, not all conservation was altruistic; rather, it was usually motivated by utility. This included songbirds, which early in this century were considered effective allies against various crop insect pests. Moreover, the focus on particularly desirable game species casts a broad halo effect from which non-game species benefit. Although specific legislation to save endangered species has been in effect across the continent, such legislation could not succeed in the absence of a hunting culture that had practiced broadly based habitat conservation which simultaneously conserved biodiversity.

Law enforcement. In North America, enforcing conservation law is normally a remarkably civil affair, although it can be as dangerous as its European counterparts when commercial poaching is involved. Because wildlife conservation is broad-based and is an exercise in participatory democracy, much self policing is involved. This differs from European models, in which wildlife is private property and its protection is pursued accordingly.

Foundation Policies of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model

The foundation values on which the North American Wildlife Conservation Model is built are best summarized in a collaborative paper that includes the insights of Shane Mahoney, then Chief of Research of the Newfoundland and Labrador Wildlife Division, and John F. Organ, Wildlife Program Chief of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

1. Wildlife as Public Trust Resources

Wildlife in North America is public property, not merely de jure, but also de facto. Wildlife may be held privately, but only as a trust for the public and at the discretion of the sovereign. The Public Trust doctrine has a long history in the U.S.

Why is public ownership of wildlife so important for wildlife conservation?

Public ownership prevents the inevitable consequences of private ownership, such as the domestication of wildlife, as well its genetic alteration to fit market whims. Domestication systematically diminishes the anti-predator adaptations of a species by making it more tractable and easier to control under conditions of captivity. Domestication has led to severely reduced brain size. Domestication is done so as to serve specific markets and therefore leads to genetic alteration of a species to produce desirable products. Gigantic antlers in deer or horns in buffalo are some examples; the restructuring of bison to assume the carcass confirmation of cattle is another. The latter is done to increase the carcass value, as the carcasses of domestic cattle compared to those of wild bison have a higher proportion of high-priced cuts. Selecting for antler size in deer selects for social incompetence. Domestication is thus the systematic genetic alteration of innate adaptations. Such altered stock can escape into the public domain and pollute public wildlife irreversibly.

Public ownership of wildlife largely prevents the mixing in captivity of many species and thereby prevents what parasitologists have labeled “transporting the zoo” (of pathogens and parasites). Each species carries its contingent of pathogens and parasites, which, when transferred to another species, may mutate into strains dangerous to public health. Transferring wildlife into domestication increases the risk of pathogens escaping into human populations. Private ownership of wildlife generates a disease bridge across which may pass diseases affecting livestock and human health on one hand and public health on the other. Retaining wildlife in strict public trust therefore prevents wildlife farming and the building of a disease bridge between wildlife, livestock, and people. It is good public health policy. The recent SARS epidemic originated in farmed wildlife – namely, in farmed palm civet cats in China. In any confrontation between private agricultural and public wildlife interests, wildlife is inevitably the loser.

Wildlife in public ownership insures the ecological basis for native cultures to continue. One way to diminish native cultures is to make wildlife and their habitat private property.

Because wildlife is in the public domain, it is possible to consider national systems of wildlife sanctuaries and wildlife treaties.

Because the state is ultimately responsible for wildlife, it is possible to hire professionals to do the conservation and management on behalf of the public. Herein lies the origin of the North American profession of wildlife biologists.

Wildlife in the public domain is subject to public scrutiny and concern. The public has a say in how wildlife is to be treated. When grizzly bears become private property, de jure or de facto by virtue of being turned over to owners of private or leased land, their fate is no longer the public’s business.

.. Once wildlife is made private, private wildlife is pitted against public wildlife, a battle in which the latter is the inevitable loser.

2. Elimination of Markets for Wildlife

The elimination of trafficking in dead game animals, or parts and products derived from them, is one of the most effective and important policies of wildlife conservation. Its introduction was revolutionary, as North Americans at the turn of the 20th century were avid consumers and traders of wildlife.

Why is the elimination of markets in wildlife and its parts and products so important to conservation?

The elimination of markets in dead wildlife eliminates a financial incentive for the illegal taking and selling of public wildlife. Where such incentive exists, it promotes illegal markets and encourages the criminal element to enter and ruthlessly exploit wildlife. Law enforcement under such circumstances is hazardous in the extreme and of questionable efficiency.

Eliminating monetary value from wildlife encourages the public to enjoy wildlife for its own sake. A grizzly bear is no longer a walking bank account.

The acquisition of wildlife outside the marketplace is bound to significant private effort. The resulting sweat equity and expenses incurred act as a deterrent to killing wildlife. So does the inability to sell legally killed wildlife.

3. Allocation of Wildlife by Law

Allocation of surplus wildlife for consumption by law, and not by the marketplace, insured an equal allocation of wildlife to citizens irrespective of wealth, social standing, or land ownership. Every citizen in good standing is able to participate in the annual harvest of wildlife within the laws set by legislatures. Aboriginal people are an exemption, as wildlife harvest is also governed by treaty rights.

Why is allocation by law so important to wildlife conservation?

This policy generates a sense of propriety and ownership by those participating in the wildlife harvest and is fundamental to public participation in wildlife conservation, be it directly as volunteers or indirectly via the legislatures.

This policy, by encouraging citizen to regard wildlife as their own, generates large national and continental organizations of citizen who join together into societies on behalf of wildlife. Large foundations dedicated to single species or species cluster are a North American phenomenon. These NGOs organize volunteers and funds toward the maintenance and spread of such wildlife, as well as the acquisition of their habitat.

Because all citizen in good standing have access to wildlife as prescribed by law, wildlife is removed from any image of elitism or of the plaything of the filthy rich, a symbol of privilege. Wildlife controlled privately by an elite can become a symbol of the hated elite and suffer the consequences. This can be particularly tragic when public sentiments against the elite and their symbols are unleashed in revolutions.

Egalitarian allocation provides the basis for an equitable cost of conserving wildlife through a “user pays” principle. Because enough of the public avail themselves of the opportunity to obtain wildlife for private consumption, there is enough funding for conservation. User pay means that hunters are footing most of the bill for wildlife conservation and in so doing provide a benefit to society at large – the maintenance of wildlife and the continent’sbiodiversity.

Egalitarian distribution of opportunities to acquire wildlife also generates indirect public benefits.. One of these is the “freedom of the woods”: for example, the harassment of bears through inefficient hunting conditions bears to avoid humans, allowing safe camping and hiking. Clearly, this depends on reasonably large numbers of hunters going into bear habitat.

4. Wildlife Can Only Be Killed for a Legitimate Purpose

Wildlife can be killed only for cause: that is, for food, for fur, or in self defence or in the protection of property. Wanton waste of hunted wildlife may be considered a felony in some jurisdictions. This policy obliges all hunters to properly make use of animals killed.

Why is killing wildlife for cause only a desirable conservation policy?

This policy outlaws wanton slaughter, which was once a not uncommon practice in market hunting days or a mark of prowess among so-called hunters. It reduces wildlife mortality and questions all killing.

Allocation plus regulation of the taking of wildlife by law is enforced inefficiency. This is a very important point, as it is the enforced inefficiency of harvest that generates wealth and employment. Efficient harvest, by contrast, eliminates wildlife without generating public wealth. Since an animal taken in hunting must not be wasted, it insures that the hunter spends a fair sum of money in transporting, processing, storing, and consuming the animal. This generates a demand for services.

Enforced inefficiency also triggers the invention of gadgetry, a consequence of ingenuity rewarded by the marketplace. North America’s wildlife economy is thus comparable to the automobile industry, where the multiplication of a product that generates convenience, but not transportation efficiency, generated huge wealth.

5. Wildlife Is Considered an International Resource

Wildlife is considered an international resource to be managed co-operatively by sovereign states. This policy is basic to international wildlife treaties, as well as to the broad-based, continental co-operation between professionals and conservation organizations.

Why is wildlife formally considered an international resource conducive to conservation?

This policy brings wildlife to the highest political level as a public good. It insures federal involvement in all nations affected...

This forces – by law – all federal, provincial, state, and municipal jurisdictions affected into active cooperation.

This generates a lasting federal attention to wildlife crossing the borders...

Treaty law is considered strong law that supersedes that of lower national jurisdictions. Thus treaties are effective conservation and management tools.

6. Science Is the Proper Tool for Discharge of Wildlife Policy

Science is considered to be the proper tool for discharging management responsibilities. This is the Roosevelt Doctrine. This is another basic policy that gave rise to science-based wildlife professionals hired by the state to perform wildlife conservation.

Science is by and large our best tool to formulate appropriate management and policy options because it is based on a disinterested pursuit of understanding. It stands apart from political considerations and favours a hands-off policy by elected representatives...

This policy insures that public wildlife is in the hands of exceedingly well-educated individuals and that it is scrutinized continuously.

7. Democracy of Hunting

The concept of “sport hunting” has origins in Europe. The term “sport” as applied to hunting refers to a code of honour, rather than a frivolous recreational pursuit; it was adopted to distinguish hunting under codes of fair chase from market hunting, and it is not an appropriate descriptor of North American hunting.

The European model allocated wildlife by land ownership and privilege, whereas in North America, all citizens in good standing can participate. The European model, a manifestation of class conflict between aristocracy and commoners, often led to wildlife poaching as a means for inflicting revenge on the ruling class. In North America, where all citizens have the opportunity to participate, everyone is a stakeholder, not just the privileged.

Theodore Roosevelt wrote eloquently of the societal gains to be made by keeping land available for hunting by the common people. Hunting as a deep-rooted passion is thus fundamental to wildlife conservation, but only within a framework of honourable, ethical conduct. By adopting a code of “fair chase,” North Americans explicitly opposed the excess of wildlife slaughter, particularly in enclosures.

What can we learn from the North American Wildlife Conservation Model?

Hunters support wildlife conservation because there is something in it for them: a payoff in their annual allocation of wildlife. The motive is selfish, not idealistic. As a profit motive drives a capitalistic economy, so a profit motive drives the North American system of wildlife conservation: the hope for a richer harvest and a richer experience in hunting.

Consequently, with self-interests in wildlife, hunters become concerned, active spokespeople for and supporters of wildlife, and experience shows that wildlife will then flourish. Elevate wildlife against the self-interests of the common person and wildlife will suffer and be destroyed if and when the opportunity arises. Our only hope to retain thriving biodiversity is to embrace a human-centred view for the use of the biosphere, in which wildlife provides for human needs and aspirations and is therefore valued by a broad segment of society. An ecocentric, impersonal view of biosphere management cannot but fail, romanticism not withstanding...

Wildlife must remain a harvestable resource, supplying in the first instance food for our tables. It is an alternative to agriculture generating utility from the land. It must not be viewed as a purely recreational resource, as a source of sport or entertainment. Its first order of utility is the provision of a harvest of unusual food of exceptionally high value. Wildlife thrives with attention and dies from neglect. Utility fosters attention...

We must, therefore, retain the utility of wildlife. For instance, songbirds were historically protected not for moral or ethical reasons, but because they were valued as destroyers of insect pests in fields, forests ,and gardens – not because songbirds were cute and entertaining. Today songbirds have no utility in North America and enjoy little organized public support such as is enjoyed by native game birds like the turkey, ruffed grouse, or waterfowl. Songbirds may have the protection of the law, but they have little in the form of tangible popular support – despite birdwatchers...

We must examine for retention the seven basic conservation policies that have served us so well in bringing back wildlife and retaining continental biodiversity. These contain may counterintuitive lessons about how to maintain and foster a public resource. Would we but dare to manage forests the way we (cheerfully) managed wildlife. Would we but manage marine fisheries the way we manage wildlife – openly, transparently, and with accountability... One must point to the awesome power of the democratic process, in which we set aside willingly our differences and unite in a public cause, fostering the welfare of wildlife and through it of the biosphere as well. One should recognize the power of volunteers as social equalizers, as reciprocal carriers of information and power. In this one retains the accountability and openness that has characterized to date the relationship between wildlife managers and the public. It is essential to establish a partnership between managers and the public and to unlock the spirit to act in the public good... Wildlife conservation in North America suffers from ignorance of the past, be it an uninformed judiciary or uninformed managers of wildlife unable to defend the system. We must buck the trend!

The universality of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model is in doubt, as it is built on some fundamental assumptions, the primary one being that all citizens may participate in both the harvest of wildlife and its management. And that entails the availability of firearms to all citizens, not merely the country’s elite. An armed citizenship, one practiced in the art of grassroots democracy and thus accepting of decisions reached by public debate and compromise, is fundamental.

Therefore, there has to be an acceptance of responsibility for a public resource, despite embracing a capitalistic economy and values. Citizen must see wildlife as a common good and must accept sharing on trust. Even the country’s elite must participate in the processes of wildlife conservation and must not be exempt from such. There must be willingness by the public to privately support wildlife, accepting public efforts at conservation as minimal at best.

The North American Wildlife Conservation Model is openly opposed by some agricultural interests who would like to tie wildlife ownership to land ownership, make wildlife a private resource to be managed according to market demands and sold to the highest bidder. The same goes for companies who, for whatever reason, lease large land areas and are interested in generating revenue by leasing out hunting rights to the highest bidder.

There is support for these efforts by a significant sector of urban-based, affluent hunters who chafe at bag limits, short seasons, and crowded hunting grounds. Their efforts are effectively supported by gun-control advocates who lobby for a disarmed public. In practice, that means disarming the blue-collar segment of society, leaving the elite well armed.

Without effective, egalitarian public hunting there will be little opposition to privatizing wildlife, making it a plaything of the elite as it has been so often in the past. Canada’s most unfortunate gun-control legislation is well on the way to doing just that and is thus in opposition to the North American Wildlife Conservation Model. It is self-evident that in dictatorships, this model is unlikely to be accepted, based as it is on armed civilians who practice effective grassroots democracy.

Redfrog

03-30-2011, 10:01 AM

My MLA told me that bill 11 will be amended so that a minister cannot issue a permit for hunting on a game farm. He fully realizes the concerns and supports them. I asked why have bill11. He explained that as it is now with SRD having oversight, they do not have the power to order a cull if the SHTF. Agriculture can as in cases of BSE. Since farmed deer/elk are not wild they need to be moved to Agriculture.
I asked about doing away with the game farms and compensating farmers.
He thought getting rid of the farms was a good idea but compensation was not.

He also told me that the Cons need a house cleaning and it is coming. Some of the ideas that have us concerned are also of serious concern to many MLAs.

I was surprised at some of the stuff he told me and if what is planned comes to pass, the conservative party will not be the same after the leadership race. The WRA may have to work a lot harder than they think.

270WIN

03-30-2011, 01:06 PM

Duk Dog

04-02-2011, 11:27 AM

Not a word from my MLA, ministers, Premier....

Still nothing....

A-bar

04-06-2011, 05:36 PM

Has anyone gotten a reply from a Wildrose member to see where they stand, I just got a reply today but I'm waiting for her to get back to me to confirm she didn't make an error before I post it.

Till later
A-bar

A-bar

04-07-2011, 08:52 AM

Ok here is the revised reply from Barb Currie Wildrose party.

I really apologize I completely missed a word in writing this email. It was a complete mistake on my part. It should have read:

Thank you for your email on Bill 11. After researching the Bill 11, We had definite concerns about the bill, particular the clause that states “ the minister can override” It is our understanding that the government will be bringing in an amendment to the bill which will delete that clause. The Wildrose Caucus does not believe in hunt farms and if the government does not bring in that clause, the Wildrose Caucus will bring forth the amendment. The government has assured Albertans, the Legislature that they are in no way allowing hunt farms, with that the amendment must passed and the pertinent clause deleted. We look forward to the debate on this bill and bringing Albertans thoughts and views to the legislature.

Again I really apologise for the misunderstanding.

Regards,
Barb

Best A-bar.

510-Gem

04-07-2011, 10:44 AM

As far as I know, the WRA supports a similar cause, wheras a landowner SHOULD be entitled sell hunting access to their land. If that were the case, the best permission would go to the highest bidder. We've already had trophy rams bought in this province for $1M...

A-bar

04-09-2011, 10:13 AM

I am in no way trying to sell the WR party If Barb would have not got back to me I would have posted her original e-mail (total reverse). But I do believe we need to know a lot more about this party before Albertens give them the reins. It could be too late once they're in power.

A-bar

sheephunter

04-09-2011, 11:11 AM

We've already had trophy rams bought in this province for $1M...

Huh?

Duk Dog

04-14-2011, 06:19 AM

Dear:

I have received your recent email regarding hunt farms in Alberta. I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

In 2002, the Alberta government decided that cervid harvest preserves, otherwise known as hunt farms, would not be allowed in Alberta. This decision was based on a cross-government review, with direct input from the public and stakeholder groups, and consideration of factors such as disease, economics, and public support.

The government is in the process of amending the Livestock Industry Diversification Act (LIDA) in order to enable Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) to exercise full legislative authority for diversified livestock as defined in LIDA. Under Section 18.01 of the amendment, the general prohibition on hunting diversified livestock, big game, and controlled animals on diversified livestock farms will continue.

I would also like to clarify that, while there are some statutory exceptions on this ban stated in Section 18.01(1)(2)(3), including activities specifically authorized by the Agricultural Pests Act or by way of license under the Wildlife Act, they do not include the hunting of diversified livestock.

Any illegal activity on farms, including reports of activity contrary to the LIDA, will be investigated by the Inspection and Investigation Branch of ARD, and Sustainable Resource Development will continue to regulate and enforce all matters pertaining to wildlife, including the hunting, possession, transport, import, export, and sale of wildlife. If you have any further questions or concerns about LIDA, please contact Cliff Munroe, Executive Director of Regulatory Services Division, at 780-422-7197 or cliff.munroe@gov.ab.ca.

With respect to your concerns regarding Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD), disease in wildlife falls under the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Division of Sustainable Resource Development. Alberta has several programs in place to protect domestic and wild cervids from CWD. These include the Alberta Mandatory CWD Surveillance Program that requires all cervid farmers to submit the heads of all cervids over one year of age that die for any reason for testing. There are also two cervid import protocols that place restrictions on domestic cervids entering Alberta in order to reduce the chances of CWD and other diseases entering our province. As a result of our efforts in this respect, I can report that there has not been a case of CWD in farmed elk or deer in Alberta since early 2003. Since that time, over 50,000 farmed cervids have been tested for the disease, all with negative results. I assure you that the Government of Alberta will continue to be vigilant in monitoring for this disease.

Thank you for taking the time to write.

Sincerely,

Jack Hayden
Minister

cc: Honourable Ed Stelmach, Premier

Honourable Mel Knight, Minister, Grande Prairie-Smoky

Cliff Munroe, Executive Director, Agriculture and Rural Development

outlaw'd

04-14-2011, 08:58 AM

Hey DD, did Mr.Hayden specify what the exceptions for section 18.01(1)(2)(3) would be? I still smell something fishy ............ Just my $.02

Duk Dog

04-14-2011, 09:04 PM

Hey DD, did Mr.Hayden specify what the exceptions for section 18.01(1)(2)(3) would be? I still smell something fishy ............ Just my $.02

What you see is what I got.

Frans

04-15-2011, 09:32 PM

I got the same response as you did, Duk Dog, sans the CWD paragraph. No response to my follow-up questions regarding section 10.

ishootbambi

04-15-2011, 10:38 PM

i am thinking we all got the same letter from the respective offices. at least they are paying SOME attention to us. walking buff is 100% correct on this. bill 11 is a stepping stone to some very ugly things. an amendment is a very tiny victory, but the truth is, nothing short of killing this bill is going to be in the best interest of wildlife and the future of hunting.

A-bar

04-16-2011, 05:56 PM

Here I came across this in Alberta Farm Express. I sort of think this guy needs a few e-mails and a tuning in. His e-mail address is "will.verboven@fbcpublishing.com". Hopefully this will get it to him. Give him hell guys - I am. He's the editor.

Bill 11 Entrenches Wrong Decision On Hunt Farms
Changed jurisdiction } Domestic elk and deer transferred to agriculture but prohibition remains
By Will Verboven

Alberta Farmer | Editor

View Larger Image

Agriculture Minister Jack Hayden probably thought Bill 11, the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act, would go unnoticed through the legislative process and dodge media scrutiny. That probably would have happened, but for the good old boys at the Alberta Fish and Game Association (AFGA) who quickly sounded the conspiracy alarm. That alerted city media and other critics who couldn’t resist the bait and alleged Bill 11 was just a devious plot to secretly allow hunt farms in Alberta. I wish that were true — it would right an injustice that was created back in 2002, when hunt farms were outlawed under the Klein administration.

Minister Hayden put out the media fire by noting that Bill 11 formally outlaws hunt farms and cervid hunting on licensed operations. Critics questioned why then were domestic deer and elk transferred from the SRD department to Agriculture in the first place if not to facilitate the establishment of hunt farms. Again, I hope that would be true. The government line for the transfer is that domestic elk and deer producers are farmers and ranchers and should come under the jurisdiction of Alberta Agriculture, and not the Wildlife Branch.

Be that as it may, I didn’t detect any groundswell of support, even from the elk industry, for that transfer to occur. Perhaps they know more about the conspiracy, real or imagined.

Just for the record, there is an annoyance that doesn’t help the issue or elk producers. Alberta Farmer reporter Alexis Kienlen was told by Alberta Elk Commission officials to leave a recent public meeting of their organization so they could ask Minister Hayden questions about Bill 11. Such a stunt doesn’t help your organization’s credibility or your cause. The agriculture media is not the enemy, an obvious reality that virtually all agriculture-related organizations understand.

I suspect that unofficially, Minister Hayden and every previous agriculture minister since 2002 knows the prohibition of hunt farms in Alberta is unfair and unwarranted. This is particularly true when such operations are allowed to legally operate in Saskatchewan and a number of American states. In 2002 and now again, the prohibition is a PR reaction to pressure from the urban media and disparate lobby groups. They painted a misleading perception of what hunt farms were deemed to be, that being the infamous “shooting ducks in a barrel” scenario. Squeamish city folks figured that this image was a terrible fate for the noble and majestic elk. Although, indiscriminately killing rats and other less handsome nuisance animals is okay by the public, but I digress.

I suspect that unofficially, Minister Hayden and every previous agriculture minister since 2002 knows the prohibition of hunt farms in Alberta is unfair and unwarranted.

The folly of the prohibition is particularly obvious when Alberta elk ranchers sell prime antlered specimens to hunt farms outside of Alberta. That makes a mockery of the critics and the AFGA position on the hunt farm issue, as it should. The fact is the prohibition does not stop Alberta elk from being used for hunt-farm purposes. It would be better to address that reality and put into place a hunt-farm regulatory regime that serves the best interests of farmed elk and their owners. Hunt farms are a legitimate way to market domestic elk and should be encouraged and not banned by government.

I remain perplexed by the anti-hunt farm position of such groups as the AFGA. They state that elk hunting should involve the “fair chase” principle, the idea being that an animal should have the opportunity to escape the deadly pursuit of the hunter, something they claim can’t be done on hunt farms. I would suggest that is a human perception and not an elk perception. I believe if an elk had to choose its demise, it would probably choose a quick death, something that is likely to occur in an abattoir or on a hunt farm. I do not believe an elk would choose the “fair chase” principle of being relentlessly chased by hunters (perhaps on quads and accompanied by hunting dogs), being shot at a long distance with laser-directed (they now exist) high-powered rifles, perhaps being only wounded and left to die a horrible slow death and even being disemboweled alive by opportunistic predators. Perhaps I exaggerate, but such a possible fate makes a quick demise at an abattoir or hunt farm seem a lot more humane, certainly to the elk.

Besides, hunt farms increase hunting opportunities for those who insist on the “fair chase” in the wild. It would take some hunters out of the wild and onto hunt farms, thereby increasing the number of available wild elk. One might ponder that more wild elk should be a boon to AFGA members. But then maybe there is more to the story, the AFGA is a member of the Alberta Conservation Association which receives a checkoff portion of the hunting licenses issued annually in Alberta. It would seem that perhaps hunt farms are seen as a potential threat to that income, some of which is used for wildlife conservation purposes, sort of like a public hunt farm. I guess there could be a conspiracy with this issue but it all depends on one’s angle.

Thanks A-bar

Pudelpointer

04-17-2011, 12:33 PM

"being relentlessly chased by hunters (perhaps on quads and accompanied by hunting dogs), being shot at a long distance with laser-directed (they now exist) high-powered rifles, perhaps being only wounded and left to die a horrible slow death and even being disemboweled alive by opportunistic predators"

Mr. Verboven is a moron. Glad he knows "what elk want". Sounds like a new Mel Gibson movie.

Pudelpointer

04-17-2011, 12:35 PM

I think the following portion of Dr. Geist's essay is the most critical for everyone to understand when we are talking about cervid farms:

"Why is public ownership of wildlife so important for wildlife conservation?

Public ownership prevents the inevitable consequences of private ownership, such as the domestication of wildlife, as well its genetic alteration to fit market whims. Domestication systematically diminishes the anti-predator adaptations of a species by making it more tractable and easier to control under conditions of captivity. Domestication has led to severely reduced brain size. Domestication is done so as to serve specific markets and therefore leads to genetic alteration of a species to produce desirable products. Gigantic antlers in deer or horns in buffalo are some examples; the restructuring of bison to assume the carcass confirmation of cattle is another. The latter is done to increase the carcass value, as the carcasses of domestic cattle compared to those of wild bison have a higher proportion of high-priced cuts. Selecting for antler size in deer selects for social incompetence. Domestication is thus the systematic genetic alteration of innate adaptations. Such altered stock can escape into the public domain and pollute public wildlife irreversibly.

Public ownership of wildlife largely prevents the mixing in captivity of many species and thereby prevents what parasitologists have labeled “transporting the zoo” (of pathogens and parasites). Each species carries its contingent of pathogens and parasites, which, when transferred to another species, may mutate into strains dangerous to public health. Transferring wildlife into domestication increases the risk of pathogens escaping into human populations. Private ownership of wildlife generates a disease bridge across which may pass diseases affecting livestock and human health on one hand and public health on the other. Retaining wildlife in strict public trust therefore prevents wildlife farming and the building of a disease bridge between wildlife, livestock, and people. It is good public health policy. The recent SARS epidemic originated in farmed wildlife – namely, in farmed palm civet cats in China. In any confrontation between private agricultural and public wildlife interests, wildlife is inevitably the loser. "

Dillbury is a prime example.

walking buffalo

04-18-2011, 12:44 PM

I admit that I am sometimes reluctant to open this thread or review the status of this bill. The thought of Bill 11 makes me sick.

The Alberta Gov. is starting to play dirty in it's attempt to pass Bill 11.

This last week, Bill 11 WAS NOT on the house agenda.

However, on Tuesday, without notification and against House rules, the gov. brought Bill 11 back for second reading. Despite objections from the opposition, the Speaker allowed the bill to be read.

It is immediately clear and indisputable when a government plays these type of games that they are feeling great pressure to ram this bill through despite public opposition.

These three links are written transcripts from the legislature, Tues,Wed, and Thurs, April 12-14.

Tuesday April 12- Bill 11 discussion starts at Sec. 618-627.
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/Documents/isysquery/2673f63d-0ae6-41c1-a021-d7082c566974/5/doc/

Wed April 13 - section 661-662
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/Documents/isysquery/2673f63d-0ae6-41c1-a021-d7082c566974/6/doc/

Thursday April 14 - section 675
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/Documents/isysquery/2673f63d-0ae6-41c1-a021-d7082c566974/7/doc/

The opposition is focused on "hunt farms" and CWD. IMO, they are on the wrong path with this debate. The focus needs to be centered on repealing the bill, to keep ALL native wildlife legislated as WILDLIFE.

There has been no questions regarding what EXPANSION of game farm markets means. The CWD focus is narrowly contained to the history in Alberta. The opposition must introduce Saskatchewan's CWD crisis and it's connection to the future of game farms in Alberta.

And for a moral argument opposing the continuance of Alberta game farms without hunt farms. Why is it acceptable to the government that these elk are being raised for hunt farms in other jurisdictions? How can they say "hunt farms" are not acceptable in Alberta, but it is a valid business to raise the animals here, export them, and have them shot.

This is like growing poppies for heroine export, saying it is wrong for Albertans to shoot it, but it is good business to export the product for others to shoot.

Since this government is adamant that hunt farms are not acceptable, they must continue on this ethical path and prohibit the export of live domestic cervids.

Bill 11 is schedualed to return to the house this Thursday for a continuance of second reading. Please resend your letters and make phone calls to the government and opposition. They need a reminder right now that we are watching.

bruceba

04-19-2011, 06:59 PM

Here's an interesting link. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZnETacpzfQ

qbochar

04-19-2011, 10:14 PM

Bruceba:

Excellent link, I hope people will do something about, maybe media types like Neil Waugh will do something besides complaing about what should be done. Your an outdoor writer Neil, get your peers together and get the campaign rolling. Neil you there? Neil? you there?

bruceba

04-20-2011, 09:19 AM

As walking buffalo has been trying to inform everybody Bill 11 and it's dire consequenses with the total disregard for any sane rational thought process from the Alberta Government is upon us now. :angry3:

heretohunt

04-20-2011, 09:33 AM

This may ruffle a few feathers, but I may be the only person who will admit to trying one of these hunt farms. It was a lot of fun!... No it wasn't a fair chase hunt in the prestine rocky mountains, but it was fun. The area is 2400 acres and the hunt is as easy or as hard as you want it too be. Yes it took me 3 days to kill a 360 bull with a bow and arrow. There were elk bugleing everywhere, fighting and strutting in full rut. If you find this so dispicable then why do all elk hunters drive by the elk farms and stop to admire the big herd bull? It is like disneyland for hunters.
Now you might judge my ethics for doing it but there are other considerations. How many years and dollars would you have to spend in the wild to even see a bull of this caliber? Let alone put one on your wall? You will say what kind of trophy is that? That is up to the individual hunter. What kind of trophy is a bull that is shot on a hay bale in a cold snowy november day when the elk have no choice? Or any of the late season mountain hunts? What about the guy who has exclusive permission on the land we jealously call the "zoo"? I can ethicaly and leagly mount a pair of sheds that I find or have a replica of any massive deer that was shot by someone who died before I was born. We have all fished in a stocked trout pond. If you caught a 12 pound trout would you be proud and consider mounting it and displaying it in your home as an honor to a beautyfull representitive of the species?
Now, after saying all of that, please put the torches and the noose away. A lot of good hunters and outdoorsman have hunted high fence preserves in Alberta(hogs) Texas(everything) Saskatchewan(elk,buffalo) and Africa. Lets not impose our ethics on them. If you want to go to Utah to kill a wild elk in the 400" range guarenteed, it only costs money. Do you think that the legal ,ethical world record holder for elk b&c is some energetic, motivated farm kid with a 30-30 who happened to be in the right place at the right time? That would be a bit niave. Yes, I know it can happen.
The good news is when I did this hunt (is it ok if I call it a hunt now?) I had no idea about cwd or any of the negitive aspects other than some dude who was high and mighty laughing at me for shooting a tied up "caged" elk in 2400 acres. I haven't done it since, but it was fun, no doubt.
As far as "big money" goes, I don't believe that game ranches in Alberta are ever going to make anyone very rich. With our land prices and economy soaring and their potential clients down south having to give a bit more to buy our dollar, the buisness is a difficult one. They also have issues with bringing guns accross the border, so when you add it all up, Alberta hunt farms are going to be priced out of the market. The best reason for someone to get into the buisness in Alberta is because they love elk hunting and would like to make there living at it. This is probably the most likley way to achieve their goal.
If outdoorsman and women ever get their say about this issue I promise I will be on your side. I now know the negative effects are far outweighing the possitive. You must remember that the names that you use to call your fellow outdoorsman who have expirenced a high fence hunt will devide our allready too low numbers. I remember there was a time when "trophy hunters" just "shot the buck and took the head". The "meat hunters" snubbed their nose at them. This also gave hunters a bad name. Little did those high and mightys' realize that trophy animals are also made of meat. Sour grapes...
If it were possible I would love to see those elk farmers paid out for their animals and elk farms in alberta banned for scientific reasons, not emotional, personal reasons.
Fire when ready...?

walking buffalo

04-20-2011, 10:23 AM

Heretohunt,

Thanks for the post. I don't feel that it will put many feathers out of place.

Yes, the vast majority of people are against "shooting preserves" (this is not a hunt, either ethically or by definition), but not just for ethical reasons. The greatest concerns expressed against game farming are based in ecological, social, and management issues.

Game farms are responsible for the introduction and continueing spread of the greatest wildlife disease issue we have ever faced, CWD. Game farms have re-introduced the concept of private ownership of Wildlife. This is the #1 long term issue that the public disagrees with.

Bill 11's attempt to remove native wildlife from the wildlife act goes against the most important tenant in North American Wildlife Management. Wildlife Must belong to the Public! The reason we have wildlife today is because of this principal. See the vid that Bruceba posted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZnETacpzfQ

Redefining "domestic cervids" to "Alternative Livestock" is Agriculture's attemt to circumvent this Tenant. If successful, our grandchildren will experience an Alberta where they do not have the right to access Wild Food without paying the Private Owner.

heretohunt

04-20-2011, 10:28 AM

Then I'm with ya!

heretohunt

04-20-2011, 10:30 AM

Does Texas have a huge cwd problem because there are lots of high fence hunts there?

Duk Dog

04-20-2011, 11:03 AM

Feedback today from Wildrose....

We just got the update Order Paper for today, Bill 11 is coming up for 2nd reading today.

Barb
Legislative Assistant

walking buffalo

04-20-2011, 11:16 AM

Does Texas have a huge cwd problem because there are lots of high fence hunts there?

Almost nothing but fenced properties.

Texas Whitetail's are managed as Wildlife, and import/export of live animals is very tightly controlled.

Link to Map of CWD in Sask. 2008
http://www.bcwf.net/images/stories/Committee/Wildlife/Wildlife_Conflicts_and_Game_Farming/WildFarmedCervidsDec08.pdf

Saskatchewan has recorded 5 more cases of CWD on Game Farms in the last year.

2011 Agriculture Canada
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/disemala/rep/2011cwdmdce.shtml

2010 Agriculture Canada
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/disemala/rep/2010cwdmdce.shtml

If Bill 11 is not killed, Agriculture will have the power to allow the importation of "Alternative Livestock" to resume. The ONLY reason Alberta game farms have not had any recent cases of CWD is due to SSS and the refusal to allow the importation of live cervids. Let Bill 11 pass, and we will have more CWD infected cervids on the game farms.

Map of CWD in North America

http://i772.photobucket.com/albums/yy10/keetspics/cwd_map_NAWildFarmed.jpg

walking buffalo

04-20-2011, 11:37 AM

Feedback today from Wildrose....

We just got the update Order Paper for today, Bill 11 is coming up for 2nd reading today.

Barb
Legislative Assistant

The Gov. is trying to limit opposition questioning of this bill. The public must speak loudly to force the Conservatives to allow Bill 11 to have it's time before the house.

Call your MLA,
MLA CONTACTS
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=mla_home

Nothing gets a politicians attention like hearing they will lose your vote if...;)

avb3

04-20-2011, 01:42 PM

The Gov. is trying to limit opposition questioning of this bill. The public must speak loudly to force the Conservatives to allow Bill 11 to have it's time before the house.

Call your MLA,
MLA CONTACTS
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=mla_home

Nothing gets a politicians attention like hearing they will lose your vote if...;)

Done my part; message left for both my MLA and the neighboring constituency MLA, Doug Horner, who is running for premier. Emails sent also, inviting a personal conversation. Anyone who needs Horner's cell, PM me.

A-bar

04-20-2011, 11:59 PM

Here guys I was sent this from Mr. Masons office ,I must be needing sleep read down can someone tell me witch side of the fence Hinman is on.

Thanks A-bar

(Taken from April 12, 2011 Alberta Legislative Assembly Hansard p.625-627)

The Deputy Speaker: Any other hon. member wish to speak on the bill? The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood.
Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to stand up and talk to Bill 11, the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act, 2011. It’s interesting, the bill number here. It’s often a mark of bad luck on the part of the government to have a bill with the number 11. It goes back over a number of sessions of this Legislature.
Back to Bill 11, which is a lucky one for me, Mr. Speaker, because it was the bill that helped me get elected in the by-election in 2000, following the passage of that bill to deal with private hospitals, just one of many subsequent attempts on the part of the government to bring that type of health care to our fair province. This one I think may be a more lucky number now that it’s been amended or will be amended to eliminate any prospect of the minister approving hunt farms.
I don’t intend to go into the issue of hunt farms as extensively as some others have done. I accept the intention on the part of the government to make sure that hunt farms do not take place in this province. I think that’s only right and proper. Having dealt with this in previous years and raised the issue when, in fact, the government was contemplating that very prospect, the public reaction at that time I think impressed the government so that they’re not going to consider that further.
The purpose of the bill is to amend the Livestock Industry Di-versification Act to enable Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development to exercise full legislative authority for domestic cervids, which creates a single-window approach in order to reduce legislative burden and help improve economic diversity by stimulating the farm raising of diversified livestock animals.
The bill makes a number of amendments that are reordering words and definitions, keeping up with minor changes for clarity, as well as a few substantial changes to the structure of the act. One section sets out new powers of the minister. That’s section 10.1.
The term “domestic cervid” is replaced with “authorized diversified livestock animal” to broaden the prospective livestock animal to potentially more than just cervids.
The bill sets out the power of the minister to issue a permit for authorizing a prescribed activity that would or could otherwise constitute a contravention of the act. This is the piece I think that the government is proposing to amend to preclude hunt farms. The bill adds that the minister may also by regulation provide for permit, licence, or other kind of permission under other legislation of Alberta or other jurisdiction.
The bill would repeal provisions regarding farms, slaughtering, transportation, and importation of animals and replace those provisions with the following proposed sections: hunting regulations forbidding the hunting of controlled animals or big game, with the exception of the hunting of predatory animals for the purpose of prevention or control of depredation authorized by the Wildlife Act.
Permits would be required to possess, transport, import, or export diversified livestock.
The bill would set out clear limitations on prosecution by indicating that a prosecution in respect of an offence against the statute may not be commenced later than two years after the act was committed or when evidence first arose.
The bill would add several additional powers of the minister to create regulations, including regulations regarding the application and provisions in the Livestock Identification and Commerce Act, the Stray Animals Act, or the Wildlife Act.
The Livestock Industry Diversification Act gives authority to farm deer, elk, and moose in Alberta and is administered by Alberta agriculture and food regulatory services division. The Wildlife Act and regulations also apply in some circumstances. They are administered by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, fish and wildlife division, enforcement field services branch and the wildlife management branch.
Currently legislative responsibility for the regulation of farm cervids is shared by Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. This change would see the transfer of that legislative responsibility for farm cervids as identified in the Wildlife Act and wildlife regulation in the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act. Once the transfer is complete, ARD will have full administrative authority to administer and enforce all programs related to farm cervids. By doing this, the government claims it will create a one-window approach to dealing with cervids to streamline processes and reduce unnecessary administrative duplication. The government also has announced that this act would improve the economic diversification of rural Alberta by broadening rural agriculture and livestock-raising alternatives. The cervid livestock industry is often cited as a dying one, but we are led to believe today by the minister of agriculture – and I have no reason to dispute him – that, in fact, the industry is doing very well.
But there is an article I want to bring to members’ attention. The Alberta Wilderness Association claims that the game farming industry is both environmentally and economically unsustainable. It has played a role in infecting North American deer and elk with chronic wasting disease, and that has animated the Alberta Wilderness Association’s consistent opposition to the licensing and support of the industry. Alberta Wilderness Association claims that chronic wasting disease management has already resulted in substantial economic losses to both ranchers and the provincial government, who are forced to eradicate the cervids and compensate the owners. The chronic wasting disease hunters’ surveillance program alone cost half a million dollars in 2009-10.
5:50
Chronic wasting disease was first found in Alberta back in 2002 on a northern elk farm in Federal. Chronic wasting disease eradication measures were introduced immediately. It became a larger problem when it surfaced again in wild deer populations in Alberta in 2005 and has caused concern that this finding would create significant costs related to the farmed elk and deer industry. These potential costs can be used to assess the economic returns from chronic wasting disease containment and eradication programs. Cost estimates of chronic wasting disease to cervid farms range between $12 million for additional farm fencing and, potentially, up to hundreds of millions of dollars in payments by governments to discontinued cervid farming.
Hunt farms were thankfully banned in Alberta back in 2002. The Alberta Elk Commission has expressed strong support for the bill for several reasons related to elk farming. This includes concerns over ownership of elk: whether or not the elk leaves the property of a ranch, it becomes a possession under the Crown. This is going to be fixed in the act, apparently.
Classifying elk as diversified livestock should also help with the labelling of product meat and encourage performance in the marketplace. Simplifying and streamlining the process in obtaining permits and registration would also be of benefit to elk ranchers.
The concerns raised by the Alberta Wilderness Association are several. First of all, they have said that no consultations with the public have taken place about the contents and amendments to the bill, and they are concerned that the act will reclassify wild game as livestock. Because cattle and other classic livestock have been studied and domesticated for decades, or centuries in many cases, the knowledge base and safety concerns, diseases, and population density are much better understood. However, the knowledge base around population density and the carrying capacities of the close-quarter living of elk and deer species is quite limited. For exam-ple, chronic wasting disease has been found in wild deer populations in the province, causing extermination programs to be set in place. The disease could be potentially devastating if there was an outbreak in a localized farming operation.
Finally, the concern that’s been expressed to us is that the amendments place all the power in the hands of cabinet by granting the minister, in section 10.1, the power to remove any legal barriers outlined in this act. The Alberta Wilderness Association believes this amendment is to bypass – well, I think that part has been dealt with.
In a letter to the editor March 14, Mr. Randy Collins, past president of the Alberta Fish and Game Association, also expressed concerns about the legalization of hunt farms. I think that’s a concern that the government has dealt with. The minister of agriculture on March 21 indicated that the province will amend Bill 11 to make certain Alberta does not unwittingly sanction controversial hunt farms and has made a strong commitment, which I appreciate.
I think that, Mr. Speaker, the primary concern with respect to this act has been the question mark around hunt farms, which, as I’ve just indicated and the minister has indicated, is going to be amended. I think that takes away the greatest degree of concern.
I do want to express, though, the importance I see of taking a piece of legislation like this and consulting more broadly than just with the industry. There are others, Mr. Speaker, in this province who have interests that are affected by this industry and by this legislation, including hunters, environmental organizations, and other people involved in agriculture, in regular farming activities. They also ought to be consulted when the government brings forward a piece of legislation like this.
Simply consulting only with the industry and only attempting to reflect the industry’s interests is not good enough. You have to balance these things in government – that’s my view, at least – and make sure that the impacts of a particular industry do not unduly hurt the interests of others or that, at the very least, they know what’s coming and have been given a full chance to consult. I think that it’s regretful that that wasn’t done in this case, Mr. Speaker.
Regardless, I think that the legislation could be supported with the amendments that the minister has proposed, and I will await the passing of those amendments. Thank you.
The Deputy Speaker: Standing Order 29(2)(a). The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo.
Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the very good comments the Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood has made. You made reference to, of course, an amendment on this bill that you’re anticipating to come forward. With that, I guess my question to the member would be that if that amendment was not forthcoming, I’d be very interested, with the bill as it presently exists in this House, in the position that he would take relative to it as it stands right now.
Mr. Mason: Well, Mr. Speaker, going back a number of years, our position has been very strongly against hunt farms. There was a time when, I think because of mismanagement by the government of this particular sector, people were left with large populations of elk that they couldn’t sell, and that was because chronic wasting disease made the markets disappear. The ranchers were desperate for some way to try and realize some return on their investment there, and that’s where the hunt farm idea came from.
The NDP led the charge at that time against hunt farms, and the government backed off that position, which was something they were actively considering at the time. It’s now become a main-stream position, I think, that’s shared on all sides of the House, and I think that that’s indeed progress. If, in fact, the door was left open for that kind of activity by this legislation because the amendments were inadequate or didn’t come forward as promised, then we would certainly take a very different view of support for this act.
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore.
Mr. Hinman: Yes. I always appreciate, again, the research from the NDP caucus and the extra funding that they have, so perhaps they have some of these answers. There are hunt farms in the North American jurisdiction. Could you expand on or do you have knowledge of those areas that are currently there and that have access? One of the provisions or comments that we see in here is that they can export Alberta elk and deer and moose to other jurisdictions that have a hunt farm. Do you know where any of those hunt farms currently exist and if there is any export going on with Alberta cervids?
Mr. Mason: I’m not familiar with the answers to some of those questions, which really speaks to the need for additional research funding for the caucus. I know that there are hunt farms, for ex-ample, in Saskatchewan, I think, and in the United States. I’m not familiar with the situation right across the country. You know, we have been able to over the years learn how to squeeze out every dime that we get, and perhaps we can share some of that with you.
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore.
Mr. Hinman: Yes. The ingenuity of business to jump through loopholes always amazes me. I’m just wondering. Again to the hon. member: from their research what happens if a domesticated deer or elk escapes or breaks through the fence? Is that something that happens? Is it legal then to hunt those animals and to shoot them down? Do you have any knowledge on that direction and on whether we have the possibility of gates being left open and what-not in order to enhance one’s income by then having to hunt down these escaped animals?
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood.
Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, I’m not quite sure about what exactly the member was getting at, but I can tell him that, in fact, the escape of these animals into the wild is quite common. That’s how, for example, chronic wasting disease got out into the native deer population in this province, creating that problem. It came from animals that escaped from farms, and then it began to spread into the general population, which caused a great deal of problems. Again, it goes back to some serious mismanagement of this industry by this provincial government in the early days.
The Deputy Speaker: Hon. member, I hesitate to interrupt you, but it’s 6 o’clock. The Assembly stands adjourned until tomorrow afternoon at 1:30.
The policy field committee will reconvene tonight in this Chamber for consideration of the main estimates of Advanced Education and Technology. Tonight’s meeting will be video streamed. Have a great evening meeting.
[The Assembly adjourned at 6 p.m. to Wednesday at 1:30 p.m.]

walking buffalo

04-21-2011, 12:16 PM

I would say Hinman has brought up some serious issues that are strong arguments AGAINST Bill 11.

Some very important questions regarding Bill 11 have finally been brought to the house. This is not just about hunt farms, but disease issues, escaped farm animals, financial liability for CWD and escapees, and most importantly, removing our NATIVE Wildlife from public ownership.

Once again, this Conservative government is trying to take away the Public's rights to Public resources, WITHOUT PUBLIC CONSULTATION!

Here guys I was sent this from Mr. Masons office ,I must be needing sleep read down can someone tell me witch side of the fence Hinman is on.

Thanks A-bar

(Taken from April 12, 2011 Alberta Legislative Assembly Hansard p.625-627)

The Deputy Speaker: Any other hon. member wish to speak on the bill? The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood.
Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to stand up and talk to Bill 11, the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act, 2011. It’s interesting, the bill number here. It’s often a mark of bad luck on the part of the government to have a bill with the number 11. It goes back over a number of sessions of this Legislature.
Back to Bill 11, which is a lucky one for me, Mr. Speaker, because it was the bill that helped me get elected in the by-election in 2000, following the passage of that bill to deal with private hospitals, just one of many subsequent attempts on the part of the government to bring that type of health care to our fair province. This one I think may be a more lucky number now that it’s been amended or will be amended to eliminate any prospect of the minister approving hunt farms.
I don’t intend to go into the issue of hunt farms as extensively as some others have done. I accept the intention on the part of the government to make sure that hunt farms do not take place in this province. I think that’s only right and proper. Having dealt with this in previous years and raised the issue when, in fact, the government was contemplating that very prospect, the public reaction at that time I think impressed the government so that they’re not going to consider that further.
The purpose of the bill is to amend the Livestock Industry Di-versification Act to enable Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development to exercise full legislative authority for domestic cervids, which creates a single-window approach in order to reduce legislative burden and help improve economic diversity by stimulating the farm raising of diversified livestock animals.
The bill makes a number of amendments that are reordering words and definitions, keeping up with minor changes for clarity, as well as a few substantial changes to the structure of the act. One section sets out new powers of the minister. That’s section 10.1.
The term “domestic cervid” is replaced with “authorized diversified livestock animal” to broaden the prospective livestock animal to potentially more than just cervids.
The bill sets out the power of the minister to issue a permit for authorizing a prescribed activity that would or could otherwise constitute a contravention of the act. This is the piece I think that the government is proposing to amend to preclude hunt farms. The bill adds that the minister may also by regulation provide for permit, licence, or other kind of permission under other legislation of Alberta or other jurisdiction.
The bill would repeal provisions regarding farms, slaughtering, transportation, and importation of animals and replace those provisions with the following proposed sections: hunting regulations forbidding the hunting of controlled animals or big game, with the exception of the hunting of predatory animals for the purpose of prevention or control of depredation authorized by the Wildlife Act.
Permits would be required to possess, transport, import, or export diversified livestock.
The bill would set out clear limitations on prosecution by indicating that a prosecution in respect of an offence against the statute may not be commenced later than two years after the act was committed or when evidence first arose.
The bill would add several additional powers of the minister to create regulations, including regulations regarding the application and provisions in the Livestock Identification and Commerce Act, the Stray Animals Act, or the Wildlife Act.
The Livestock Industry Diversification Act gives authority to farm deer, elk, and moose in Alberta and is administered by Alberta agriculture and food regulatory services division. The Wildlife Act and regulations also apply in some circumstances. They are administered by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, fish and wildlife division, enforcement field services branch and the wildlife management branch.
Currently legislative responsibility for the regulation of farm cervids is shared by Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. This change would see the transfer of that legislative responsibility for farm cervids as identified in the Wildlife Act and wildlife regulation in the Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act. Once the transfer is complete, ARD will have full administrative authority to administer and enforce all programs related to farm cervids. By doing this, the government claims it will create a one-window approach to dealing with cervids to streamline processes and reduce unnecessary administrative duplication. The government also has announced that this act would improve the economic diversification of rural Alberta by broadening rural agriculture and livestock-raising alternatives. The cervid livestock industry is often cited as a dying one, but we are led to believe today by the minister of agriculture – and I have no reason to dispute him – that, in fact, the industry is doing very well.
But there is an article I want to bring to members’ attention. The Alberta Wilderness Association claims that the game farming industry is both environmentally and economically unsustainable. It has played a role in infecting North American deer and elk with chronic wasting disease, and that has animated the Alberta Wilderness Association’s consistent opposition to the licensing and support of the industry. Alberta Wilderness Association claims that chronic wasting disease management has already resulted in substantial economic losses to both ranchers and the provincial government, who are forced to eradicate the cervids and compensate the owners. The chronic wasting disease hunters’ surveillance program alone cost half a million dollars in 2009-10.
5:50
Chronic wasting disease was first found in Alberta back in 2002 on a northern elk farm in Federal. Chronic wasting disease eradication measures were introduced immediately. It became a larger problem when it surfaced again in wild deer populations in Alberta in 2005 and has caused concern that this finding would create significant costs related to the farmed elk and deer industry. These potential costs can be used to assess the economic returns from chronic wasting disease containment and eradication programs. Cost estimates of chronic wasting disease to cervid farms range between $12 million for additional farm fencing and, potentially, up to hundreds of millions of dollars in payments by governments to discontinued cervid farming.
Hunt farms were thankfully banned in Alberta back in 2002. The Alberta Elk Commission has expressed strong support for the bill for several reasons related to elk farming. This includes concerns over ownership of elk: whether or not the elk leaves the property of a ranch, it becomes a possession under the Crown. This is going to be fixed in the act, apparently.
Classifying elk as diversified livestock should also help with the labelling of product meat and encourage performance in the marketplace. Simplifying and streamlining the process in obtaining permits and registration would also be of benefit to elk ranchers.
The concerns raised by the Alberta Wilderness Association are several. First of all, they have said that no consultations with the public have taken place about the contents and amendments to the bill, and they are concerned that the act will reclassify wild game as livestock. Because cattle and other classic livestock have been studied and domesticated for decades, or centuries in many cases, the knowledge base and safety concerns, diseases, and population density are much better understood. However, the knowledge base around population density and the carrying capacities of the close-quarter living of elk and deer species is quite limited. For exam-ple, chronic wasting disease has been found in wild deer populations in the province, causing extermination programs to be set in place. The disease could be potentially devastating if there was an outbreak in a localized farming operation.
Finally, the concern that’s been expressed to us is that the amendments place all the power in the hands of cabinet by granting the minister, in section 10.1, the power to remove any legal barriers outlined in this act. The Alberta Wilderness Association believes this amendment is to bypass – well, I think that part has been dealt with.
In a letter to the editor March 14, Mr. Randy Collins, past president of the Alberta Fish and Game Association, also expressed concerns about the legalization of hunt farms. I think that’s a concern that the government has dealt with. The minister of agriculture on March 21 indicated that the province will amend Bill 11 to make certain Alberta does not unwittingly sanction controversial hunt farms and has made a strong commitment, which I appreciate.
I think that, Mr. Speaker, the primary concern with respect to this act has been the question mark around hunt farms, which, as I’ve just indicated and the minister has indicated, is going to be amended. I think that takes away the greatest degree of concern.
I do want to express, though, the importance I see of taking a piece of legislation like this and consulting more broadly than just with the industry. There are others, Mr. Speaker, in this province who have interests that are affected by this industry and by this legislation, including hunters, environmental organizations, and other people involved in agriculture, in regular farming activities. They also ought to be consulted when the government brings forward a piece of legislation like this.
Simply consulting only with the industry and only attempting to reflect the industry’s interests is not good enough. You have to balance these things in government – that’s my view, at least – and make sure that the impacts of a particular industry do not unduly hurt the interests of others or that, at the very least, they know what’s coming and have been given a full chance to consult. I think that it’s regretful that that wasn’t done in this case, Mr. Speaker.
Regardless, I think that the legislation could be supported with the amendments that the minister has proposed, and I will await the passing of those amendments. Thank you.
The Deputy Speaker: Standing Order 29(2)(a). The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo.
Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the very good comments the Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood has made. You made reference to, of course, an amendment on this bill that you’re anticipating to come forward. With that, I guess my question to the member would be that if that amendment was not forthcoming, I’d be very interested, with the bill as it presently exists in this House, in the position that he would take relative to it as it stands right now.
Mr. Mason: Well, Mr. Speaker, going back a number of years, our position has been very strongly against hunt farms. There was a time when, I think because of mismanagement by the government of this particular sector, people were left with large populations of elk that they couldn’t sell, and that was because chronic wasting disease made the markets disappear. The ranchers were desperate for some way to try and realize some return on their investment there, and that’s where the hunt farm idea came from.
The NDP led the charge at that time against hunt farms, and the government backed off that position, which was something they were actively considering at the time. It’s now become a main-stream position, I think, that’s shared on all sides of the House, and I think that that’s indeed progress. If, in fact, the door was left open for that kind of activity by this legislation because the amendments were inadequate or didn’t come forward as promised, then we would certainly take a very different view of support for this act.
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore.
Mr. Hinman: Yes. I always appreciate, again, the research from the NDP caucus and the extra funding that they have, so perhaps they have some of these answers. There are hunt farms in the North American jurisdiction. Could you expand on or do you have knowledge of those areas that are currently there and that have access? One of the provisions or comments that we see in here is that they can export Alberta elk and deer and moose to other jurisdictions that have a hunt farm. Do you know where any of those hunt farms currently exist and if there is any export going on with Alberta cervids?
Mr. Mason: I’m not familiar with the answers to some of those questions, which really speaks to the need for additional research funding for the caucus. I know that there are hunt farms, for ex-ample, in Saskatchewan, I think, and in the United States. I’m not familiar with the situation right across the country. You know, we have been able to over the years learn how to squeeze out every dime that we get, and perhaps we can share some of that with you.
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore.
Mr. Hinman: Yes. The ingenuity of business to jump through loopholes always amazes me. I’m just wondering. Again to the hon. member: from their research what happens if a domesticated deer or elk escapes or breaks through the fence? Is that something that happens? Is it legal then to hunt those animals and to shoot them down? Do you have any knowledge on that direction and on whether we have the possibility of gates being left open and what-not in order to enhance one’s income by then having to hunt down these escaped animals?
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood.
Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, I’m not quite sure about what exactly the member was getting at, but I can tell him that, in fact, the escape of these animals into the wild is quite common. That’s how, for example, chronic wasting disease got out into the native deer population in this province, creating that problem. It came from animals that escaped from farms, and then it began to spread into the general population, which caused a great deal of problems. Again, it goes back to some serious mismanagement of this industry by this provincial government in the early days.
The Deputy Speaker: Hon. member, I hesitate to interrupt you, but it’s 6 o’clock. The Assembly stands adjourned until tomorrow afternoon at 1:30.
The policy field committee will reconvene tonight in this Chamber for consideration of the main estimates of Advanced Education and Technology. Tonight’s meeting will be video streamed. Have a great evening meeting.
[The Assembly adjourned at 6 p.m. to Wednesday at 1:30 p.m.]

walking buffalo

04-21-2011, 12:25 PM

Bill 11 passed second reading last night. Now it will go before committee.

The gov. is feeling the public opposition to this legislation, Opposition to the bill is getting stronger.
Conservation groups are getting to work to KILL BILL 11.

We helped kill the Parks Act, Bill 29 and stopped the sale of public land in "Potato Gate". We can stop Bill 11 as well.

Contact you MLA and every member on the committee reviewing the Bill. Call the media, write letters to your newspaper. It works!

Keep the pressure on, Write and call again.

After Second reading, the bill goes to The Standing Committee on Resources and Environment.

In addition to your own MLA, CALL and Email these MLA's. They are the ones making the changes to Bill 11 before it is brought forward for Third reading.

The Standing Committee on Resources and Environment is an all-party committee consisting of 12 Members of the Legislative Assembly. Its mandate relates to the areas of agriculture and rural development, energy, environment, international and intergovernmental relations, and sustainable resource development.

If your call to your MLA is long distance, please dial 310-0000 then the area code and the phone number you would like to reach in order to receive toll free access.

The Standing Committee on Resources and Environment
COMMITTEE MEMBERS (12)

http://www.assembly.ab.ca/committees/resourcesandenvironment/index.html

Mr. Raymond Prins (Chair) (PC) MLA for Lacombe-Ponoka

lacombe.ponoka@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Toll-Free: 1-800-565-6432
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 422-3353

Ms. Laurie Blakeman (Deputy Chair) (AL) MLA for Edmonton-Centre

edmonton.centre@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 414-0743
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-2292

Mr. Rob Anderson (WA) MLA for Airdrie-Chestermere

airdrie.chestermere@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Toll-Free: 1-888-948-8741
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-0975

Mr. Evan Berger (PC) MLA for Livingstone-Macleod

livingstone.macleod@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Toll-Free: 1-800-565-0962
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-3001

Mr. Guy Boutilier (WA) MLA for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo

fortmcmurray.woodbuffalo@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 790-6014
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-1865

Mr. Kent Hehr (AL) MLA for Calgary-Buffalo

calgary.buffalo@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (403) 244-7737
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 427-2292

Mr. Broyce Jacobs (PC) MLA for Cardston-Taber-Warner

cardston.taberwarner@assembly.ab.ca

Taber Phone: (403) 223-0001 Toll-Free: 1-888-600-6080
Cardston Phone: (403) 653-5100
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 422-0685

Mr. Richard Marz (PC) MLA for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills

richard.marz@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (403) 556-3132
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-0994

Mr. Brian Mason (ND) MLA for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood

edmonton.highlandsnorwood@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 414-0682
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-1800

Mrs. Diana McQueen (PC) MLA for Drayton Valley-Calmar

draytonvalley.calmar@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 542-3355 Toll-Free: 1-800-542-7307
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-9466

Mr. Leonard Mitzel (PC) MLA for Cypress-Medicine Hat

cypress.medicinehat@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (403) 528-2191 Toll-Free: 1-866-339-2191
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-9590

Mr. George VanderBurg (PC) MLA for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne

whitecourt.steanne@assembly.ab.ca

Constituency Office Phone: (780) 786-1997 Toll-Free: 1-800-786-7136
Legislature Office Phone: (780) 415-9473

The Gov. is trying to limit opposition questioning of this bill. The public must speak loudly to force the Conservatives to allow Bill 11 to have it's time before the house.

Call your MLA,
MLA CONTACTS
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=mla_home

Nothing gets a politicians attention like hearing they will lose your vote if...;)

A-bar

04-21-2011, 02:32 PM

Thanks walking buffalo I reread the post I made and agree with you Hinman is asking Mason because the ND's were around in 2002 for that fight and the PC's don't know the answers and if they did won't disclose.

There is a lot of good info. on here wonder if it may help out to send a link.

Best A-bar

bruceba

04-21-2011, 09:11 PM

Has anybody checked the SRD site on CWD. Scary info on on there.

http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex3594
Is the Disease Transmissible to Domestic Livestock?

Scientific evidence suggests that it is unlikely that CWD can be passed to domestic cattle or bison under natural conditions. To date, research in the United States indicates cattle are not susceptible to oral exposure to CWD. However, the experiments still have some time to run. CWD has been experimentally transmitted by artificial means to mice, ferrets, mink, goats, squirrel monkeys and calves.

And another link.

http://www.stopcwd.org/library/library2.cfm?articleID=13

SO WHERE DID CWD COME FROM? Observational evidence and most theories suggest that CWD, like BSE, originated from the sheep TSE disease, scrapie, which has been documented for over 400 years in Europe and about 60 years in North America. In the 1950's and 1960's, northeastern Colorado, specifically Larimer County, Colorado had a high infection rate for sheep scrapie. Close proximity of wild deer to sheep may have randomly passed the disease, or more logically the human-induced close confinement of deer and sheep undergoing artificial stress events, may have mutated and passed the disease to deer.

My question is;

What's stopping a mutation back to livestock or humans. Unlike BSE, CWD is highly contagious with no know cure.

bruceba

05-02-2011, 09:32 AM

Here's an interesting email I received this morning. We've got heads starting to turn in Ottawa and they are aware of our concerns and the web page.

Our wildlife is at risk. As had been predicted by scientists, Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD), an
elk and deer equivalent of 'mad cow disease' was imported into Canada with game farm animals.
The disease spread beyond the game farm fences and is increasingly threatening the health of
Canada’s wildlife.
Beyond the hundreds of game farm positives, to date 94 cases of CWD have been confirmed in
wild deer in Alberta, as well as 276 deer and 3 elk in Saskatchewan (as of 2009).
As explained on www.ourwildlifeheritage.ca :
Over the last 30 years, despite increasing knowledge about the threats of domestically-fostered
diseases, Canadian public policies in agriculture have allowed or even encouraged increases in
every major factor of influence regarding infectious diseases, from:
• domestication of wild species on game or fish farms
• substantial increases density and stress factors in feedlots and factory farms
• widespread and largely uncontrolled use of medications, supplements, and
treatments in livestock
• increasing frequency, volume, distances, speed, and species of animal/
product movement
"Private ownership of wildlife generates a disease bridge across which may pass diseases
affecting livestock on one hand and public health on the other. Retaining wildlife in strict
public trust therefore prevents wildlife farming and the building of a disease bridge
between wildlife, livestock, and people. It is good public health policy.” Valerius GeistAs soon as the election is over, a Liberal Government will immediately convene a panel of
experts and stakeholders to examine the present threat and make strong recommendations to
preserve the health of our precious Canadian wildlife.
Instead of insisting on proper research and evaluation last year the Harper Government
subsidized the game farm industry with over $1Million.
Canadians need the facts and then action to deal with this vital issue.
DR. CAROLYN BENNETT, M.P., M.D.

ksteed17

05-04-2011, 08:24 PM

I got this reply back from my MLA

Thank you for your recent email regarding hunt farms in Alberta.** I have consulted my colleague, Honourable Jack Hayden, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, for more information.
*
In 2002, the Alberta government decided that cervid harvest preserves, otherwise known as hunt farms, would not be allowed in Alberta.* This decision was based on a cross-government review, with direct input from the public and stakeholder groups, and consideration of factors such as disease, economics, and public support.
*
The government is in the process of amending the Livestock Industry Diversification Act (LIDA) in order to enable Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) to exercise full legislative authority for diversified livestock as defined in LIDA.* Under Section 18.01 of the amendment, the general prohibition on hunting diversified livestock, big game, and controlled animals on diversified livestock farms will continue.
*
Minister Hayden also asked me to clarify that, while there are some statutory exceptions on this ban stated in Section 18.01(1)(2)(3), including activities specifically authorized by the Agricultural Pests Act or by way of license under the Wildlife Act, they do not include the hunting of diversified livestock.

Any illegal activity on farms, including reports of activity contrary to the LIDA, will be investigated by the Inspection and Investigation Branch of ARD, and Sustainable Resource Development will continue to regulate and enforce all matters pertaining to wildlife, including the hunting, possession, transport, import, export, and sale of wildlife.
*
If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact Cliff Munroe, Executive Director of Regulatory Services Division, at 780-422-7197 (toll-free by first dialing 310-0000) or by email to cliff.munroe@gov.ab.ca.
*
Thank you for taking the time to write.
*
Broyce Jacobs, MLA Cardston-Taber-Warner
Parliamentary Assistant - Agriculture & Rural Development
(403) 223-0001 or 1-888-600-6080
(403) 223-0002 (fax)

Donkey Oatey

05-04-2011, 08:32 PM

The amendment has been added and passed by the committee of the whole. Next step is third reading and proclamation.

Here is the amendment to section 10.1

GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT
AMENDMENTS TO BILL 11
LIVESTOCK INDUSTRY DIVERSIFICATION AMENDMENT ACT, 2011
Agreed to April 26, 2011
The Bill is amended as follows:
A Section 12 is amended in the proposed section 10.1 by adding the following after subsection (1):
(1.1) For the avoidance of any doubt, the Minister may not prescribe for the purposes of subsection (1) any activity to which section 18.01 relates.
B Section 30(b) is amended in the proposed section 34(1)(a.3) by adding “by or on behalf of the operators on condition that no consideration is receivable in respect of that activity by an operator or by any person associated with an operator” after “of strays”.

Bill 11 is on the order paper for May 11 and 12 for third reading.

Donkey Oatey

05-10-2011, 06:39 PM

Third reading has occurred yesterday. http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=bills_status&selectbill=011

Looks like a done deal.

walking buffalo

05-11-2011, 09:16 AM

Third reading has occurred yesterday. http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=bills_status&selectbill=011

Looks like a done deal.

Pretty much. Only proclamation to go.

I hope everyone noticed the dates Donkey posted.

Third Reading was schedualed for today and tomorrow, May 11 and 12. The Gov. slipped the bill onto the floor for third reading on MONDAY May 09!

This bill was greased and pushed in HARD. The legislative process and the citizens of Alberta got screwed!

Well, Political Favours have now been Paid.....

This is why Restore Our Wildlife Heritage has been formed. The way to keep Wildlife WILD is through the Federal Government.

Please visit the site and sign the petition.

http://www.ourwildlifeheritage.ca/

cover

05-11-2011, 10:27 AM

UNFREAKINBELIEVABLE............... I would like to start a petition to remove the "honourable" designation from minister's ....because these jokers are anything but ....:angry3:

ishootbambi

05-11-2011, 01:40 PM

only 201 signatures on the petition? cmon guys, there are more than that here. send the link to everyone you know.

bruceba

05-13-2011, 11:21 AM

Totally wrong on so many levels. I only recieved generic email replies from MLA's and one phone call from an MLA that stated to me that the OUR WILD LIFE HERITAGE site was a bunch of radicals looking for attention. WE NEED GARY MAR as the next Priemur of our province. I believe he's about the only man in the running that's not intimadated by the B&*&^rds bullying thier way around our Legislature.:mad0100:

cover

05-13-2011, 01:28 PM

No wonder there is so much voter apathy.....the Gov. does what they want. Hang on to your pictures of big game animals because that is going to be the only thing left to remember them by.

Gust

05-15-2011, 12:29 PM

Loss of habitat available to native wildlife populations, disrupted migration corridors, increased chance of disease spreading are three of my major concerns.

Loss of hunting access to private property is another concern.

The disease factor is my concern. Are the animals raised and released or are they culled/herded/thinned out from the existing "natural" habitat? I haven't hunted in 25 years but I'm always interested in what's going on out there. How did the hunt farm come into being? It's not like we're in Tennessee where there isn't a lot of natural land. How come we can't manage to have our representatives in the Ledge enact true conservation practice yet a few get an anti-conservation move pushed through?:confused:

cmdalexander

06-29-2011, 06:15 PM

Email Sent!

pattycr125

07-05-2011, 03:48 PM

the end of the world as we know it is upon us.

walking buffalo

07-05-2011, 04:05 PM

Email Sent!

Unfortunately the Provincial government rammed this bill through.

Bill 11 has been given Royal Ascent, and will be proclamated in the future, the date has not been released.

Bill 11: Livestock Industry Diversification Amendment Act, 2011 (Prins)
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=bills_status&selectbill=011

Our only recourse is to influence the Federal Government and future Provincial governments to repeal this legislation. Send your letters to your Federal MP and the MP for Agriculture. In particular, we need to inform the Wild Rose party of our concerns. Make Game Farming a provincial election issue.

You can help lobby the governments by signing the petition located at this webpage created by concerned Alberta citizens.

Restore Our Wildlife Heritage

http://www.ourwildlifeheritage.ca/

landowner

07-22-2011, 11:55 PM

Makes RAMP look not so bad , eh

fat cat

08-09-2011, 10:32 PM

Good for you walking, however you people didn't do nothing for the SRD shuting down black bear baiting in certain alberta wmu's. Who cares if there are hunt farms?

Rancher_49

08-12-2011, 10:00 PM

They just go ahead and do what they want, like they are God or something.
Don't inform the public and don't have a free vote in the legislature on issues like this.
Just the chosen few decide what they want to and when to do it! Forget about
public opposition! They don't want to deal with that!
Friends, fisherman and hunters it is time to act. There could be an election coming this fall. The Wildrose will have a candidate in every electoral district.
If we want change and get rid of those goons vote Wildrose.

slimjim

08-25-2011, 08:29 PM

Tezma

09-02-2011, 08:33 PM

sh9683

09-23-2011, 09:17 PM

may i ask why hunt farms are so bad? i don't get it, unless our province is becoming liberal, GASP!

sh9683

09-23-2011, 09:19 PM

if there is a legitamite reason for it not being allowed, then i will support a ban maybe, but if its for selfish gains and your facts are unsupported, then forget it

sh9683

09-23-2011, 09:20 PM

and @slimgim yes that would be a complete nightmare if they come in power. i cannot wait for gun registration to vanish

walking buffalo

10-01-2011, 10:08 PM

Good for you walking, however you people didn't do nothing for the SRD shuting down black bear baiting in certain alberta wmu's. Who cares if there are hunt farms?

I have been putting the same effort into pursuading the government to produce a new Grizzly Bear Census. Have people concerned with Baiting Closures participated in the Alberta Grizzly Bear Sighting Survey? The Survey is one tool that can be used to documant the increasing prevalence of Grizzly Bears, with the intention of delisting these bears from threatened status. The delisting would remove "Baiting" concerns.

If we want change and get rid of those goons vote Wildrose.

That's the only way. Vote the PC party out of power.

Game farming is not the only concern, the Alberta PC government is advancing their desire to introduce paid access to private and PUBLIC land for hunting, as well as privatizing hunting licences for resale to the highest bidder.

If you care at all for public hunting in Alberta, the PC's MUST GO.

if there is a legitamite reason for it not being allowed, then i will support a ban maybe, but if its for selfish gains and your facts are unsupported, then forget it

Did you read any of the links in the thread? The concerns is not ethics, it's disease issues and the privatization of Wildlife.

walking buffalo

10-01-2011, 10:36 PM

We all should see this video produced by the National Wildlife Federation.

Dangers of Canned Hunting
by Indiana Wildlife

http://vimeo.com/5680646

It has the last remaining online clips of "drugged" deer being shot by professional hunters for commercial purposes. "Bellar's Place" owner Russell Bellar was ordered to serve 366 days in prison and pay $575,000 in fines.

While the trial was in progress, Bellar's friend, a state legislator from Macy, Republican William Friend introduced a bill in the General Assembly that would remove operations like Bellar's from Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources regulation and place them under agricultural regulation, thus classifying white tail deer as agricultural animals just like pigs and cows.

The Alberta PC's learned from other governments that to control Wildlife without intrusions relating to the Wildlife Act, the answer is place the animals out of Public ownership and into the Agricultural portfolio. Now AB AG gets to make the rules and decide on punishment for those who break the laws.

It's not too late to reverse the direction of Private Wildlife in Alberta, just do not vote PC.

Trial exposes the sham that is canned hunting

As the canned hunt crowd rallied around its beleaguered hero Russ Bellar last summer, it presented a variety of arguments intended to stick up for the guy after he was hit with a 38-count federal indictment that accused him of running an illegal deer hunting operation.
One of those arguments was that people opposed to canned hunts shouldn’t criticize what they’ve never seen or done. These places are really on the up-and-up, they said.

Well, over the past week the unknowing public got a detailed look at what goes on behind the high fences at one of those operations – Bellar’s Place, a 1,400-acre shooting preserve near Peru.

Witness after witness after witness after witness provided sworn testimony before a federal jury in U.S. District Court in South Bend about their experiences there:

•Country music star Ronnie Dunn testified that Bellar pointed out a deer for him to kill and that he shot it in a fenced-in pen. Under cross-examination by Bellar’s legal team, Dunn characterized the experience as something akin to “slaughtering cattle.”

•Michael Kattawar Jr. of Nashville, Tenn., testified that he paid $25,000 in 2003 to kill five bucks using a bow and a rifle while hunting near bait. Indiana deer-hunting regulations prohibit the use of bait and allow only one buck, but Kattawar said Bellar’s Place was willing to let him take “as many deer as you want as long as you pay for it.”

•Jeff Wickersham, who spent one season in the NFL as a quarterback with the Miami Dolphins, chose the deer he wanted to kill from a magazine.

“They gave me a price and I agreed to it,” he testified. “I was there to hunt that specific deer.”

Wickersham said the price was $20,000, that the deer was drugged and transported to the farm in a horse trailer. The deer was released from the trailer directly into the pen where Wickersham said he killed it in about 30 minutes after employees of Bellar’s Place chased it from the fence line.

•Wickersham’s friend, Tommy Freiman, testified that he didn’t want to “hunt” in a small pen and planned to kill a deer in a larger pen. Crunched for time because of a departing air flight, he ended up shooting one in the smaller pen anyway because he couldn’t wait any longer.

•Ivan Johnson of Jonesboro, Ga., testified he killed two bucks for a video promoting “Rack Attract,” a deer bait developed and owned by Hinds Tom Jones, Bellar’s property manager who pleaded guilty to a single conspiracy count in the federal indictment and is scheduled to take the stand this week. Johnson is an investor in Rack Attract.

•Johnson also admitted to complicity in a scheme to fool another of Bellar’s clients, his friend Roger Torri of Georgia. Torri testified that he wounded a deer at the facility in 2003 but couldn’t find it. A couple of weeks later, a deer Tommy Freiman had picked out died overnight after having been tranquilized. Freiman testified that he told Hinds Jones he no longer wanted a deer that was already dead. Freiman said Johnson began making phone calls to see who wanted the deer, describing the deer to people as if it had been shot. He got a taker on the second call. In separate testimony, Torri testified that Johnson called to say that his wounded deer had been found. In reality, it was the Freiman deer that had died from a tranquilizer overdose. Torri took the antlers.

•Fred Rowan, CEO and chairman of Carter’s Clothing Inc., testified that he shot three bucks in a 3- to 4-hour span with his son, Andy, who shot his buck within an hour in a 5- to 10-acre pen. They didn’t even stay the whole day, but Fred Rowan said he plunked down $20,000 for the biggest of his three deer, and $8,000 to $10,000 for the smaller two.

Many of these and other so-called “hunts” were videotaped by Rusty Camp for sale to the clients or to promote the facility to future clients. Camp said he made between 20 and 30 videos, of which five to 10 were fake.

“The hunts were pretty much done backward,” he told the court.

Camp said clients would shoot deer, then go back and re-enact for the cameras. He testified some clients had a hard time grasping the concept.

Not Sydney Meachum, a friend of Hinds Jones from Mississippi, who testified that he was invited by Bellar and Jones to help them make a video. Meachum said he learned when he got to Bellar’s Place that it was a “fake hunt.”

He then testified that he sat in a tree stand, fired an arrow and acted as if he had killed a deer. The deer was darted by a tranquilizer for the video. Meachum said that he’s left-handed but shot a right-handed bow for the video. He testified that fake blood was applied to the deer.

“I liked that,” Meachum said. “It made it look all real.” Real phony.

About as phony as the defense team’s efforts to portray Bellar as someone confused by the hunting rules and regulations of Indiana as they pertain to his pen-raised deer. That strategy took a blow Wednesday when Bellar’s Web site ( www.bellar.net ) was shown to the jurors. On the site was a statement advising clients “Since there is no exemption for hunting preserves in Indiana, we have to follow the states weapon seasons.”

The Web site that was accessed live in the courtroom Wednesday is no longer available. Someone pulled the plug.

All of this tells us that what went on at Bellar’s Place was a charade. It shouldn’t matter at this point what the jury decides in this case. It shouldn’t matter whether the jury blames Bellar or Jones or both, or neither.

The damage is done. Canned hunting has been exposed.

“It made it look all real.”

Albertadiver

10-01-2011, 11:00 PM

WB, thanks for posting the link.

It's sad that people many love killing. NOT hunting.

johnschmidt

10-16-2011, 01:02 AM

only good i can think of coming from something like this is that maybe it would be safer for real hunters in the woods if the trigger happy fools stayed on hunt farms, wouldn't have to watch my back so much if i knew they were on somebody's farm.

Savage13

12-01-2011, 11:17 PM

someone should send peta a message about this...:scared0018:

Thunder Elk Hunter

01-05-2012, 09:00 AM

This kind of legislation puts us one step closer to Texas style hunting.

Just think in 20 years the whole province will be alloted. If you don't own land you will have to pay to hunt, that is the bottom line.

The way the government is going these will help them cut out the SDR department. Look at all the money they will save. Cut the Wildlife part out of fish and wildlife, there goes all the officers but a very few.

Big timber and Oil companies will have all the crownland and we as hunters will have to pay to access that land.

Just my thoughts on this, let them get a toe hold and we begin our ride down the slippery slope.

Thunder

Clancy

01-10-2012, 04:32 PM

Not really sure what the big deal is, as far as disease goes there have been game farms in alberta already for years. If anything it will give the guys who lost their shoes in the elk and deer buisness before a bit of a chance to make some money off of the facilities that they have. And it may keep some more dough heads out of the field like the guy a saw hunting elk in the ya ha a few years ago from Toronto with his Alberta buddy and his bran new prob only bore sighted gun, loafer shoes and their rental car.:sign0068:

Rocky7

01-16-2012, 06:47 PM

Don't look to the Wild Rose for any help, those girls are anti hunting and anti guns. They (the Wild Rose) will bring to Alberta, firearms registration, if Harper ends the registration. The wild rose party is run by a group of women, and do you think the majority of women like hunting, and the shooting sports. Think before you vote.

Are you on drugs?

Danielle Smith is quite friendly about guns. She's a woman. It's the PC defectors like Rob Anderson who are derailing sound gun policy because he thinks it might reduce his election chances. By my reckoning, that's a woman who would support us and unprincipled men who are chicken.

Here's an article the leader of the WRA wrote before she got into politics:

Half a job no job at all for gun owners
by Danielle Smith

PUBLICATION: Calgary Herald
DATE: 2006.07.04
EDITION: Final
SECTION: The Editorial Page
COLUMN: Danielle Smith
BYLINE: Danielle Smith
SOURCE: For The Calgary Herald

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day called me last week to say I got it wrong in my last column, which accused his government of breaking its promise to "Scrap Bill C-68."

I wrote the government has betrayed gun owners because Day's initiative will only scrap the gun registry -- which requires gun owners to register every single gun they own. However, it will not scrap the registry of gun owners -- the law requiring every gun owner to have a licence and continue to be registered and tracked in a central database.

Gun owners asked for an end to both. After all, everyone knows criminals aren't going to register their guns. Well, they aren't going to rush out and get licences, either.

But, in his letter to the editor yesterday, the minister confirmed his government would kill the gun registry but keep on registering gun owners. They plan for "a more efficient licensing system without the costly and burdensome five-year renewal requirement."

Why does this matter?

When a firearms licence expires after five years, it renders a gun owner a criminal merely for failing to have a piece of paper. So, the new law will require owners to get a licence just once. Since it will last a lifetime without the need for renewal, the Tories say, it will get rid of one of the problems of the registry.

Unfortunately, since the Tories are not making good on their promise to return the gun laws to the way they were before, many gun owners will continue to face jail time for a paper crime.

Just last week in Barrie, Ont. a gun owner who accidentally let his licence expire in December 2003, was in a courtroom facing 28 criminal charges, mainly for unauthorized possession under section 91 of the Firearms Act.

He is not covered by Day's amnesty.

And what about the estimated one million to three million gun owners who so object to the Liberal gun control scheme, they don't intend to get a licence at all?

These gun owners purchased guns under the old system. Prior to 1995, a person simply needed a Firearms Acquisition Certificate if they wanted to buy a gun. They needed to take a firearms safety course and submit to a criminal background check to make the purchase. Once they owned it, that was it.

But when Bill C-68 passed, it made gun ownership illegal. A gun owner who had acquired his guns legally with an FAC, now has to jump through new hoops to get a licence in order to be permitted to keep them.

This happened to Bruce Montague, a gunsmith in Dryden, Ont., who is a member of the Canadian Unregistered Firearm Owners Association. Montague does not have a licence, and he now faces 53 charges for unauthorized possession after his home was raided in September 2004. He is scheduled to go to trial this year -- again for little more than a paperwork crime.

For a first-time gun owner, it may seem like there is no difference between the old system of getting a certificate and the new system of getting a lifetime licence. But to a person who has owned guns for decades, they feel it is unnecessary red tape -- which the Conservatives promised an end to. These gun owners think we should be tracking the 200,000 criminals who are prohibited from owning firearms, not law-abiding target shooters and duck hunters.

I agree.

If both licensing and registering were completely dismantled, as the Tories promised, no government would dare the wrath of taxpayers by trying to implement the costly scheme again.

However, if the Conservatives don't repeal the licensing laws, when the Liberals get back in power (one day, they will,) they could easily bring the whole system back.

If the government maintains the centralized list of gun owners -- which is responsible for the bulk of the $1 billion gun registry cost so far - -- all the Liberals would have to do is convert Day's lifetime licences to five-year licences and pass a law requiring guns to be registered once again.

The ease with which the laws could be changed back may be the primary selling feature to pass the bill in a minority Parliament, but it is no comfort to gun owners.

Unless the licensing is abolished, too, law-abiding gun owners know they will be back in the sights of lawmakers the next time the government changes hands.

Rugerlover

01-30-2012, 06:23 PM

Damn Antis and their ideas

Gunny

02-29-2012, 06:36 AM

all those things are for are the hunters that live in citys and arent real hunters theres no sport in that and sure you can say you shot a big buck or bull elk/ moose and you will impress some of your friends that are form the city too but if you tell any real hunter that is how you got it they will just make fun of you or feel shame in knowing you did that