Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 05-10-2011, 05:28 PM
Pudelpointer Pudelpointer is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Back in Lethbridge
Posts: 4,647
Default

Probably a good place to start a new page:

A list of the groups/people involved on the "Working Group"

http://www.castlespecialplace.ca/working-group.html

If you go to this page and look at the links/documents (upper left) you will see "Conceptual Proposal" and "appendix III":

http://www.castlespecialplace.ca/index.html

The proposal is a hefty document and is composed of some 40 pages of information. If you care about the Castle and want to know what was really being proposed, please take the time to read this document. I know it is a lot, but it is important.

After reading it, if you have ANY questions I would be more than happy to do my best to answer them.

Please note that there is some "flowery" language in the document (I tried to convince them to remove all the euphemistic language and "hippy talk", but some did not seem able to clearly state facts without embellishment). Oh well.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-11-2011, 09:01 AM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudelpointer View Post
The Documents WB posted are not connected with the process I was involved in. The survey I am not familiar with - when was it produced WB? The numbers I am familiar with, but not the report format. We did use similar numbers from a survey to guide us. It is the same public survey by the gov., with expanded information. Just released last month.

Please don't think this is what we proposed (the Andy Russel park description). The map of the area is similar, but there was some expansion of Beaver Mines Lake Rec Area. I linked the 2006 version, it seems to be the same plan, before the BM Lake Park expansion.

IIRC The Andy Russel Park proposal was rejected because of a lack of public involvement and groups involved. This was the reason for the citizen's initiative. I will see if I can post a link to the proposal we forwarded. Then at least we can all be talking about the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudelpointer View Post
Probably a good place to start a new page:

A list of the groups/people involved on the "Working Group"

http://www.castlespecialplace.ca/working-group.html

If you go to this page and look at the links/documents (upper left) you will see "Conceptual Proposal" and "appendix III":

http://www.castlespecialplace.ca/index.html

The proposal is a hefty document and is composed of some 40 pages of information. If you care about the Castle and want to know what was really being proposed, please take the time to read this document. I know it is a lot, but it is important.

After reading it, if you have ANY questions I would be more than happy to do my best to answer them.

Please note that there is some "flowery" language in the document (I tried to convince them to remove all the euphemistic language and "hippy talk", but some did not seem able to clearly state facts without embellishment). Oh well.
I read, but did not bookmark another version of the Castle Plan. It was lengthy, but focused, with detailed maps. Still looking for that version.



As long as we can keep a strong Parks Act without ministerial powers to make independant back room deals ( That's why Bill 29 had to die), then I am in favour of Wildland Parks. For example, Bob's Creek Wildland Park. This intact roadless montane region would be a pile of gas wells and access roads if not protected in a Wildland Park. Hunting, Trapping, Fishing, Camping, Horses, OHV access on specified trails, and Grazing are all still allowed.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-11-2011, 09:49 AM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huevos View Post
Just got done reading an article on proposed wildland park for castle river area. No atv, no bikes, restricted horse and mountain bike use, but of course the cattle get to stay cause they don't cause any damage.
Cattle do not belong in parks. Period.

As for the proposed Wildland Park... hey, better than a Provincial Park!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-11-2011, 03:01 PM
landowner landowner is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 981
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
Cattle do not belong in parks. Period.

As for the proposed Wildland Park... hey, better than a Provincial Park!
Its not a park yet. If it becomes a park the cattle will eventually go, along with hunting, random camping, trapping, industry, etc. etc. etc. Do not trust the Sierra club !
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-11-2011, 08:09 PM
silver lab's Avatar
silver lab silver lab is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Stuck between wmu 110, 302 & 305
Posts: 1,023
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
Cattle do not belong in parks. Period.

As for the proposed Wildland Park... hey, better than a Provincial Park!
I take it you never looked at the map. Some of it is provincial park!!!
I will do everything in my power(which may not be much) to stop the tree huggers! And keep the Castle the way it is!!
Reply With Quote
Reply


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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:45 PM.


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