Bubba’s take on the meeting is pretty close as I remember it.

I did have a conversation with the ranch manager from Deseret (whose name is eluding me right now). I most say I was impressed with his openness to answer questions and his wanting to know how a lot of hunters feel. Now if the people that were present during this conversation remember this better please correct me. I thought he was somewhat surprised when I told him that as someone that has hunted in the area my whole life it wasn’t that big of a deal that I can’t get on there and I have lots of access on other ranches with good hunting. He thought that was the big push from the hunters; to open access. I suggested that it would be nice but it is a landowners right to close access and if they need hunters then it is available to them as well. He passed on his reasoning for his support, and it has to do that he can’t just let guys run around out there unsupervised and that means he has to pay someone to “hold there hand” my words. It is a financial issue for them at least this way they do get compensated for the guy that he’ll have to pay to monitor and check on the hunters. He did mention that the elk on the ranch are a fairly new thing and that has him concerned but they do have a guide that is helping them with this. I don’t know the dynamics of this that well but Sonny on a previous post seems to have some first hand knowledge of it. Considering the management technique by SRD that has been used up until now (reducing the cows) compared to what they are proposing it would seem that there is some interaction between these two parties. He also invited me to phone him up anytime to clarify anything and I do intend to do that next week.

Just a couple of additions the study that they will use to support the demands on the land is called The Southern Alberta Foothills Study by Brad Stelfox and it really does look alarming when you put all those big dots and lines and areas for wind generation on a small map. Not to minimize this study but the demands on the land will still be there if this project is implemented.

I found it interesting when Blaine Marr spoke about how there are already some rather shady things going on in the neighbour hood with guides paying for exclusive access, and how in this latest cold spell how the elk would be coming to his hay stacks this morning. The funny part is that the APOS member took exception to the guide statement and the last time I was that way I’m sure I saw a high fence around his stacks which I’m sure if you approach SRD they’ll pay for. He also tried to say that the value of the land is such that long time landowners like him are being pressured to sell there land to the highest bidder and this would be bad for the hunters suggesting that these new recreational buyers would close access. But when asked later he would not say that with this added compensation that he wouldn’t sell anyway and I know at least one new landowner down that way that if you aren’t a total dud will let you on. It’s also interesting that whenever there is a landowner issue down that way that the same names come up time after time.

Another thing that bothered me with the meeting was that other than the project as the committee had come up with there was very little flexibility to hear options. I will say that one committee member did say that a lot of work had gone into what they have up to this time and it would be a shame to scrap it there was some analogy of a ladder and we’re just on the first or second step. I still like Bull Shooters analogy that if it looks and sounds and smells like a duck it probably is. To emphasize this Cormack brought up the ALUS program endorsed by Delta for another purpose early in the meeting. When the idea of paying directly for habitat retention rather than hunting came up it was roundly rejected, when I asked Mr. Burton his comment was that they didn’t like the idea of taking land out of production. Another point that I asked was where is the balance, are you a rancher or a game keeper. The response was that given the financial realities of the times if it would pay better he would become a trophy producer.

I've looked for the third principle but can't find it in anything I have, but I remember being surprised by it when I saw it at the meeting.

After that meeting and everything else that has gone on, my personal thoughts are that this has to become a media issue there is already a fair bit of resistance to this whole project that none of the committee has had to face in the last 12 months. The last three weeks for these guys must have been a bit of a blow. If anyone feels strong enough about it I would suggest sending letters to the editor of your favourite paper. The timing is ripe and we have to act quickly as the election could be called as early as Monday.