Nature Conservancy Canada adds another parcel to Waterton Park Front
 

More land protected from future commercial development.
Anybody familiar with their MO care to comment Pros vs. Cons?

Look up what happened to the Waldron.

It’s no secret these guys are working with Y2Y to eliminate all non-treaty hunting. Alberta is their focus because the canmore ecoterrorists (aka KVT and his BHA cult disciples) give them a launch point

NCC M.O. - At first hunting is acceptable, then there’s access restrictions “to protect sensitive whatever”, then game restrictions, then time of year restrictions, then they lock the gates and stop answering the phone or emails.

The flip side of your concern is that it is private land and you are never allowed to go there anyway.
Furthermore it could be subdivided into a bunch of mini-mansions with all kinds of habitat perturbations that are not in the best interests of wildlife.

NCC would like to maintain large pieces of habitat with minimal disturbance. Doesn't seem like a bad thing.

Lots of hunting on NCC lands, just have to book a time

This

Bit of a mixed message there: saving the forage for wild ungulates but letting Cattle graze it off?

Got no one to blame but the land owners for allowing this to happen. Sell to the highest bidder instead of to a neighbor for a bit less.

Why do the neighbors refuse to pay market value?

Who's saying they won't, but when the nature conservancy comes and pays over market, greed is a wonderful thing!

A lot of the puchases are easements, which your neighbors would never do. The way they get people to sell, is to buy the land, but nothing changes for 30 years. So in the landowner’s lifetime nothing changes and they get their money upfront and live out their lives in their own homes. It’s great for the landowner but screws their kids down the road, ask me how I know! This set up is how they have convinced so many to sell to them. Nobody else can buy land that way.

I dunno man... Nature Conservancy is trying to buy the land my mom's fellow owns and they straight won't pay even close to market value. In fact they want it as a virtual donation with the caveat that they can live in the house for free until he passes.

I think the idea they always pay over value is not accurate. Not saying it maybe never happens, but it isn't just the norm.

Farmers won’t sell land to government so they use fronts like the Nature Conservancy and Ducks Unlimited to buy it up with tax free and tax payers money.

Could you explain this to me? Sounds like a load of bunk. Wouldn’t government money be tax payers money?

Non profit - that is - funded by government, staffed by former government, given “easements” by the government, enforcing unofficial policies of the government or associated NGOs.

Government in this case being the federal liberals and dipps, provincial dipps, Parks Canada, and some AEP bios. NGOs - Y2Y and CPAWS.

The dipper environment minister was a psycho Y2Y member. She pushed a lot of this crap.

Best way to get rid of gun owning white people, take away their places to hunt. Then you don’t “need” your guns and can depend on the government for food.

Ok Kevin, go don’t kill another sheep

I’m fine with land owners controlling access to their own property.

I’m absolutely opposed to hunting being limited by race, by an NGO.

When did Waterton become too small?

Hunting NCC property has become almost impossible. But there is guiding happening on it if that is any consolation.

Sometimes the only choice is between an urban billionaire who doesn’t allow agriculture or wildlife hunting vs NCC. As flawed as NCC is, there are situations where they are the better choice.

Agreed, they do allow public use.

Grizz

The deals between some previous landowners/leaseholders and NCC enabled the landowners to maintain control of hunting permission. This was done so those guys could maintain their guiding operations. It is not the best plan, but that was what was agreed to. Not sure any of those folks were too excited about letting joe public on their land in the first place.
So did anything really change as far as access is concerned then?

3blade: Can you show me which NCC property limits access by race as you state?

The Government of Canada’s Natural Heritage Conservation Program (NHCP) is a unique partnership that supports the creation of protected and conserved areas through the acquisition of private land and private interest in land. To date, the Government of Canada has invested more than $440 million in the Program, which has been matched with more than $870 million in contributions raised by Nature Conservancy of Canada, Ducks Unlimited Canada, and the country’s land trust community, leading to the protection and conservation of more than 700,000 hectares of ecologically sensitive lands.
---------------------

So most of the money is coming from donations from private Canadian citizens who would like to see some big spaces left undeveloped.

If you are so worried about lost hunting areas I hope you are speaking out about habitat destroyed by clear cutting, coal mining and any other development that is harming the carrying capacity for game populations. Perhaps you could complain about the pollution of the waterways impacted as well.
It would seem that some big NCC lands would act as a refuge for wildlife populations to restock neighboring lands. Many NCC lands are open to hunting so that is a bonus

Somewhat off topic; I hear that tired old argument used often by people who fail to understand that our mature mono culture forests don't support anything larger than red squirrels and pine martins.
At least clear cutting provides a temporary opportunity for ungulate forage.

OT- Interesting to hear that land owners can negotiate to retain some time limited control over the property. I can see the appeal of knowing the property will remain unavailable for commercial or industrial development in perpetuity, while having the funds to enjoy life now.
That's the real estate equivalent of having your cake, and eating it too. :sHa_shakeshout:

Sidetrack... I have never understood this saying. I mean who wants cake if you can't eat it? :confused:

I've always wondered who wants the cake after it has been eaten?

ARG

Y2Y policy is no white people hunting or fishing. NCC is working with Y2Y.

You can’t hide behind the screen or the paperwork anymore, we know how ecoextremists operate.

Curious as I have personally killed lots of game on NCC properties along with many others.
I guess your info hasn't filtered down to reality yet

Urban redneck: Good point about the succession that happens after a clear cut. New browse is a good thing. It will be interesting to see what recent research shows about the use of glyphosphate after cutting.
I wish companies would leave larger buffer zones along streams (especially important spawning streams) to decrease sedimentation and gravel impaction.

How has round up effected wildlife numbers in farming lands? They seem to thrive in it with many more applications too.

Exactly! This seems often forgotten when the logging conversations come up. There are far worse chemicals sprayed on agricultural land than roundup yearly. At times 2 or 3 applications including pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides

That makes two of - one of the most used, yet unexplainable sayings ..... like seriously, what's the point of cake if you can't eat it?:)

Once you eat your cake, it's gone....