[dshaw]

Originally Posted by oiler_nation

I look at the whole Y2Y anti-american intervention speak, as sort of irrelevant, and it reads as a bit of a political smear tactic to discount the proposal without having to really engage or familiarize yourself with it. Undoubtedly there are always going to be folks that would love to eliminate hunting altogether (Stephen Legault given his profession and past history could be one of those people...although I still can't see the post), but does that mean that the Wildland Park is a bad idea full-stop? I know that the avid quad and RV guys are certainly saying that, but truthfully I am not sure. At this point, not enough information has been provided to really form any sort of an informed opinion on the proposal. That is the real issue.

Call me crazy, but I like to gather as many facts as I can before I form an opinion.

There was talk earlier in the thread that you cannot backcountry camp in the Castle Wildland. I phoned and asked the local office and this is completely bogus. Having said this, I am still concerned that they are developing the 3 backcountry huts in the Castle Wildland and preventing other users from camping within a km of each. It seems disingenuous that the government is saying we are protecting the Bighorn for environmental purposes, while at the same time saying that huts are on the table. In a provincial park? Sure. But a wildland park has different goals and backcountry huts are inconsistent with those goals. That battle appears to have been lost in the castle, but I hope this can be prevented in the Bighorn.

What I have found so frustrating throughout this process is having to listen to one side (the government) tell me don't worry just "trust us" we will sort the details out later (despite some concerning precedents set in the Castle Wildland), while the other side spreads misinformation (often deliberately) to try and garner support for the status quo. We are dealing with politicians on both sides and what is being lost is nuance and critical thought. I frankly don't know how any hunter can be ardently for or against the proposal, when there are so many unknowns. Personally, I need to know more before I can confidently weigh in, and the government isn't given us the necessary information. That is my issue. The anti-Y2Y stuff, the deliberate misinformation coming from "advocates" for our public lands just feels like unproductive noise.

You may be able to backcountry camp for now in the castle wildland, but once the huts are in i'm sure things will change. You certainly can't random camp in the castle wildland area. We were kicked out of the base of Blue Canyon for camping there with our scout groups. Problem is between fish and wildlife and parks canada they don't know all the rules either. They want us to camp in their made campsites in the future. Don't trust what the government is telling you about the Bighorn. When the castle was originally proposed it was about half the size of what the final boundaries are now. They originally had from midway up the mountain sides off limits. Then when the final plan rolled out it included 90 percent of the forest reserve boundary. We were also promised that our OHV designated trails that had been there for years would be left as is (ie Blue lake trail) they took most of those away too and slowly will phase out more. I used to be able to get firewood to heat my house in the castle but now that has been taken away. I also can't sight in my rifle in the Wildland, and my dogs have to be on a leash at all times. I can see all this for a provincial park but not a wildland. Hard to hunt birds with a dog on a leash. I'm glad you guys up north are getting heard and putting up a fight, our hope here in the south is a new government will reverse some of these rules and actually have a consultation process and listen to what we actually would like to see.