Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-03-2008
bubbasno1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Organized Opposition to OSA

Yes another new thread on OSA.

I believe we have all seen and analyzed/discussed enough of the facts involving the OSA pilot project to form an opinion. I now believe we need to come up with an organized plan of attack to oppose this. I do not think we can rely on AFGA or any other current organization to save us on this one. I know the "radicals" in the south are going to try and form a strategy but if this could be done on a provincial level it would be even better. Anyone with any ideas, suggestion or expertise could post them here or PM me. For all of the people who are not registered members of this forum but are still concerned they can send an email to opposeosa@yahoo.ca with your input or request for information.

Bubba
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-03-2008
duffy4 duffy4 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rocky Mountain House
Posts: 5,325
Default

Why do you think the AF&GA will not be effective in this matter? What makes you think you can through together some kind of organization in a short time that could possibly be as effective as Alberta's largest and oldest hunter, angler and conservation organization????

Robin in Rocky
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-03-2008
340wtby
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by duffy4 View Post
Why do you think the AF&GA will not be effective in this matter? What makes you think you can through together some kind of organization in a short time that could possibly be as effective as Alberta's largest and oldest hunter, angler and conservation organization????

Robin in Rocky
How long has AFGA known about this? And they just tell us about it now! They wouldn't even have put anything on their site if people hadn't raised any questions about it.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-03-2008
bingo1010's Avatar
bingo1010 bingo1010 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: where the wind always blows
Posts: 835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 340wtby View Post
How long has AFGA known about this? And they just tell us about it now! They wouldn't even have put anything on their site if people hadn't raised any questions about it.
my feelings exactly!!!, even though it is the largest and the oldest organization of it's kind in the province it is full of outfitters and the like which are, by the way, in favor of the OS program.
__________________
God Hates a Coward
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-03-2008
Duk Dog's Avatar
Duk Dog Duk Dog is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AB
Posts: 3,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by duffy4 View Post
Why do you think the AF&GA will not be effective in this matter? What makes you think you can through together some kind of organization in a short time that could possibly be as effective as Alberta's largest and oldest hunter, angler and conservation organization????

Robin in Rocky
When people on the AO board first started to hear about OS the AF&GA was very much still in the dark about things. There is no question that AF&GA does a lot of great things in our province and I hope they will continue to do so in the future. I hope this will also include doing an effective job of fighting OS.
It is pretty hard to argue with why people were concerned that an organization such as AF&GA, that also I believe had a seat at the OS table, had so little knowledge of things until they started getting flooded by phone calls and e-mails from concerned Albertans. Believe me I feel strongly about the roll of F&G clubs in the provinces, but I was surprised to find their (AF&GA) initial lack of knowledge of OS when it first came to light.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-03-2008
bingo1010's Avatar
bingo1010 bingo1010 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: where the wind always blows
Posts: 835
Default

[QUOTE Believe me I feel strongly about the roll of F&G clubs in the provinces, but I was surprised to find their (AF&GA) initial lack of knowledge of OS when it first came to light.[/QUOTE]

lack of knowledge or choice to ignore and let it slide through and then voice up after the decisions are made?? i too think we need this type of a group representation (afga), but i fear that it has been infiltrated by the very groups that we are battling against and what they want ..OS
__________________
God Hates a Coward
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-03-2008
SNIPER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If you read a copy of the AFGA resolutions for the meeting at the end of this month, you will know why we can't depend on the AFGA executive.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-03-2008
SNIPER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by duffy4 View Post
Why do you think the AF&GA will not be effective in this matter? What makes you think you can through together some kind of organization in a short time that could possibly be as effective as Alberta's largest and oldest hunter, angler and conservation organization????

Robin in Rocky
I am still trying to figure out what you have to gain from this duffy?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-03-2008
qbochar qbochar is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 80
Default RE: opposition to OSA

Let me ask you this:

If the resolution you are quoting goes to the delegates on the floor and gets defeated, then is this not the purpose of a group like the AFGA?

Remember resolutions are always written in the affirmative, so when they get defeated the message is even more clear.

Q
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-03-2008
SNIPER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by qbochar View Post
Let me ask you this:

If the resolution you are quoting goes to the delegates on the floor and gets defeated, then is this not the purpose of a group like the AFGA?

Remember resolutions are always written in the affirmative, so when they get defeated the message is even more clear.

Q
Ok, I can agree with that.
What about the brief? Has it really gone out to the hunting public?
And is it true that AFGA is already supporting "Open Spaces" by being one of the leads in the development of an application to the Rural Alberta Development Fund for RAMP landowner payments and administration costs.
I have sent e-mails asking this same question to you. I have yet to receive an answer.
AFGA is a huge voice for Alberta outdoors people, I'm hope my information is false.

Last edited by SNIPER; 02-03-2008 at 10:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-03-2008
bubbasno1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Robin, First let me thank you for hijacking the thread. Secondly thank you again for misunderstanding the original post.

I never said I wanted to create an organization. I just want organized opposition. I for one hope this does include AFGA. Unfortunately the AFGA AGM is not for nearly a month and the executive has stated they will not do anything on this issue before then. This needs to be done now.

I fully believe that Brad Fenson took direction and reported to somebody in AFGA. That "somebody" decided not to inform their members. I believe this person also directed Mr. Fenson on his direction. I unlike some do not have any ill will towards Mr. Fenson. He is an employee and he does what his employer asks him to do. I blame the person that he was supposed to report to for not informing the members (Mr. Nadeaua/Mr. Bochar as the president/Vice President are you listening ultimately this is your responsibility). This is another reason I do not think AFGA will be of any help.

qbochar, I find it interesting that the only person speaking on this at the AGM is one of the chairs (pretty sure this is going to be Cormack Gates) of the project. I feel we who oppose this need someone to speak on our behalf as well but I do not think this will happen. This will part of my recommendations on how to fight this.

Now back to the original intent of this thread. I believe the next step is to get the media involved. If anyone has any recommendations on a good way to start with this please let me know.

Bubba
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-04-2008
Dick284's Avatar
Dick284 Dick284 is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dreadful Valley
Posts: 6,580
Default

Steady Eddie is going to drop the Writ today.
Make this an issue for the election.
Get in the face of all the PC candidates over this, go to the public forums and debates and bring it up asking where they stand, and push hard for answers.
Write letters to the editor of the major reads, as well as the local weekly papers.
I agree this is nothing more than political pandering, and catering to the $$, we have to sound like a bunch of Lefty twits (I shiver), to get heard. I's the have' aginst the have not', plain and simple. Now how this proceeds without it self distructing because of the apperant Leftist overtones is gonna be the real task at hand.
__________________
There are no absolutes

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-04-2008
chevy427
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by chevy427; 01-06-2009 at 11:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-04-2008
chevy427
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.

Last edited by chevy427; 01-06-2009 at 11:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-04-2008
lazy ike's Avatar
lazy ike lazy ike is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 531
Default

Duffy, here's a link to some questions and responses for you on that thread you started.

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...t=11046&page=4


Given the serious nature of this subject, it appears very irresponsible on your part to engage in "sound bite" style posting, that you are neither willing to explain coherently or defend.
__________________
"you truly are the horse's patoot everyone told me you were! "
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-04-2008
MathewsArcher MathewsArcher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary,Alberta
Posts: 497
Default

Looks like you can add the Alberta Bowhunters Association to the growing list of groups against Open Spaces.

A big thank you to the ABA for taking a stand and looking after the interests of its membes. Time for AFGA to get of the pot so to speak.




January 31, 2008

420 Legislature Building
10800 97 Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada T5K 2B6

Dear Mr. Morton:
As you are probably aware, the recent announcement of the Open Spaces Pilot Program and the Hunting For Habitat concept have certainly gotten the attention of the hunters and fishermen, the outdoor recreationists of the province. Our membership and executive have looked over the documents outlining these two projects, we have read and participated in several web forums, we have debated very vigorously and passionately about the issues, we have attended outdoor group meetings and government sponsored meetings, we have tried to get answers to many questions. It seems that those answers are very vague or not even available. There seems to be a great deal of reluctance from government/department personnel to even talk about these programs. It seems like the participants in the process are even tight lipped and can’t share any information or opinions.
We certainly agree that some sort of “habitat retention benefit” program needs to be developed where all landowners are rewarded (tax wise being a great way) for acreage left for wildlife. On the surface, these programs may have some benefit but the more we analyze them, the more we learn about them, the more they scare the hell out of us. Will this be the thin part of a wedge that becomes a cancer and spreads throughout the province? Will paid hunting, paid access be a reality across the province?
This may start out as a pilot project in a couple of areas in southern Alberta. How does your department think the rules, the guidelines, the process as it is outlined now, will stay that way? Landowners who do not currently qualify will lobby your government to take advantage of this “cash cow” and you can’t blame them. There are far too many questions, so few answers, and so much room for disaster, that the people of Alberta who will be affected most are starting to stand up and make their concerns known. You can add the Alberta Bowhunters Association to that list.
I have listed an array of questions that we would like answered so that we can further develop an opinion as to these programs and their validity, to their very real threat to access and hunting as we now know it. Your response is very much appreciated and we welcome the chance to review your answers.


1. If the property in question (either held by one landowner or as a business unit) be broken into separate blocks and access restricted to those blocks/areas or will the resident, non-paying hunter be allowed to access all the property in this “business unit” as a whole? If the landowner registers all his land does he have to grant access to all his land? Are the vouchers landowner specific within a business unit?
2. What are the specifics of the access management plan? What is to prevent the landowner from only granting access through the RAMP program to residents on land that is less likely to hold game, and the voucher holder getting the exclusive access to the premier areas? Concern is that the good habitat, big buck areas will be held for the paying tag holders.
3. Do the properties (if more than on landowner is involved) have to be connected in any way or can these business units have properties spread out all over a WMU? Would general access to a “business unit” allow access to all those properties included in that business unit?
4. Can the landowner sell ALL of his tags to say one outfitter and leave none left over for a resident to buy? Have there been thoughts of maintaining a certain number of the landowner/business unit tags for residents to purchase? If they are sold to an outfitter, the tags should not come from our resident base. Maybe they should come from his outfitter allocation base of that WMU.
5. Is there a limit to how much can they sell these tags for?
6. It is mentioned that the plan calls for “landowners participating in the HFH program to allow for free access to public draw hunting”. Should this not include general public hunting – for those tags not requiring a SRD draw? Coyotes, upland game birds, whitetails (in many WMUs) would be an example. What about Pre-season hunting (bow) when you do not need the draw? How will this affect the Archery seasons/pre-seasons within this pilot project?
7. The “Draw” mentioned – is that for those species that residents currently have to draw for in that WMU? Or would there be some separate draw for that “business unit” for each species concerned.
8. What are the specifics of the appeal process? What are the penalties for non-compliance? Concern is that a lot of time will be wasted by a resident hunter traveling to one of these WMUs/business units only to get the run around when he gets there. By the time the appeal process has done it’s work, his hunt may be over – great deal of time and money wasted.
9. Who will police and enforce the rules and guidelines?
10. Is the voucher program also applicable on Lease land (Agricultural Disposition)? Grazing leases should NOT be considered part of the business unit/land base calculation?
11. Is the RAMP program also applicable on Lease land (Agricultural Disposition)?
12. What properties and area of the province are the pilot projects being done in? What time frame are they for?
13. Will the landowner vouchers be subtracted from the available resident permits? We do not like the idea of taking tags away from the existing resident draw pool. It would be better if they are opening up new lands that have not allowed hunting that SRD should increase the total Alberta tags available for draw.
14. Are there vouchers granted for Antlered and Antlerless? It should not be just a “trophy” hunt concept.
15. Has there been discussion expanding this to other WMU’s? Province wide? Any timelines established? It is inconceivable that other landowners who do not qualify under these current guidelines/rules will be lobbying the govt to get in on this type of cash cow.
16. With this only being implemented in the two southern WMU’s (108 and 300) this sets a very scary precedent for all private land Alberta. Why should only landowners in these zones get the privilege of vouchers? Especially since the landowners in these zones have had a history of not allowing access? Now he can sell you a voucher and profit from it, yet the landowner in another WMU or the same WMU (neighbors even) who has granted access gets no financial reward? This is a very slippery slope!!
17. Are there a minimum/maximum number of hunter days that the “business unit” managers can impose?
18. From the outside looking in, there is now a legal conduit for landowners to receive payment for access via the voucher program. What is the difference if the landowner is granted the privilege to charge for access or if he sells me a voucher?
19. If a landowner wants to maximize the value of his voucher he will now have more of an incentive to limit access to the best habitat on his land because of the HFH program. It is contradictory to the spirit of the whole program to me. It uses a well thought out program (RAMP) as smoke and mirrors, and as a trade-off for the voucher program (HFH). Simply put the RAMP program was conceived to legitimize the HFH program, or so it seems. These programs are so different in spirit and function, yet the same steering committee is overseeing and implementing both?
20. There is a very real fear that after the initial five-year pilot program is over, that the landowner participants will lobby hard to keep it in place as they are going to be financial winners. Other landowners will see the dollars available and want a piece of the action. The resident hunter will be powerless to stop it.
21. If allowed to escalate and expand to all private land regardless of size, hunter numbers could plummet as many have little or no access to “free” crown land now. What crown land there is would also see an increase in hunter pressure.
22. What would stop landowners who have the resources and inclination from high fencing their land to keep this money making wildlife on their property?

I do hope that you take our concerns seriously. Providing answers to our questions will give us an opportunity to get the facts and make an informed opinion on these issues. As you can see, these programs are in need of a great deal of work and this pilot project needs to be stopped now to make sure that the people of Alberta have all had meaningful input as this may well become the biggest blemish on hunting/fishing/trapping on private lands we have ever seen. We need to get it right. Thanking you in advance.

Yours truly



BRENT WATSON
2008 ABA President

10238-110 Ave.
Grande Prairie, Alberta
T8V 1S7
bcwatson@telusplanet.net
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-04-2008
duffy4 duffy4 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rocky Mountain House
Posts: 5,325
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lazy ike View Post
Duffy, here's a link to some questions and responses for you on that thread you started.

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...t=11046&page=4


Given the serious nature of this subject, it appears very irresponsible on your part to engage in "sound bite" style posting, that you are neither willing to explain coherently or defend.

lazy ike, In the thread you refer to I simply wanted to give my definition of "payed hunting" in relation to the other thread dealing with the gov'ts interpretation of weather or not the OS plan was against the law.

Then as often happens the posters got off onto a "bigger picture" of the topic. I tryed to answer some of their "questions and comments" but it seemed obvious that most people have there "arms crossed" accross their chest and are not willing to look at another view point. They want to push their stance until they are declared the victor.

I saw no need for me to engage in further banter on that thread.

SNIPER

Quote:
Originally Posted by duffy4
Why do you think the AF&GA will not be effective in this matter? What makes you think you can through together some kind of organization in a short time that could possibly be as effective as Alberta's largest and oldest hunter, angler and conservation organization????

Robin in Rocky

I am still trying to figure out what you have to gain from this duffy?

Not sure what you mean here? Are you trying to figure out what I wll gain by supporting the AF&GA as an organization with a lot of influence with the gov't??? As that is what I posted about here.

(Actually I do not look at "what I have to gain" as a reason to post on here or to support or not support any issue)

Robin in Rocky
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-04-2008
Waxy Waxy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by duffy4 View Post
I saw no need for me to engage in further banter on that thread.
Of course not.

Hopefully you'll see no need to "engage in further banter" on this thread either.

Waxy

P.S. My arms are currently resting comfortably at my side.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-04-2008
bruceba bruceba is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,367
Default

I'd also add The Honourable Guy Boutilier our Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations to the main list of questioning.
How could SRD not inform Mr. Boutilier about the OSA and not have Aboriginal representation at the table.

Last edited by bruceba; 02-04-2008 at 12:50 PM. Reason: added a couple words
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-04-2008
340wtby
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceba View Post
I'd also add The Honourable Guy Boutilier our Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations to the main list of questioning.
How could SRD not inform Mr. Boutilier about the OSA and not have Aboriginal representation at the table.
I wonder if they would like some tags to sell too?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-05-2008
Duk Dog's Avatar
Duk Dog Duk Dog is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AB
Posts: 3,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathewsArcher View Post
Looks like you can add the Alberta Bowhunters Association to the growing list of groups against Open Spaces.

A big thank you to the ABA for taking a stand and looking after the interests of its membes. Time for AFGA to get of the pot so to speak.




January 31, 2008

420 Legislature Building
10800 97 Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada T5K 2B6

Dear Mr. Morton:
As you are probably aware, the recent announcement of the Open Spaces Pilot Program and the Hunting For Habitat concept have certainly gotten the attention of the hunters and fishermen, the outdoor recreationists of the province. Our membership and executive have looked over the documents outlining these two projects, we have read and participated in several web forums, we have debated very vigorously and passionately about the issues, we have attended outdoor group meetings and government sponsored meetings, we have tried to get answers to many questions. It seems that those answers are very vague or not even available. There seems to be a great deal of reluctance from government/department personnel to even talk about these programs. It seems like the participants in the process are even tight lipped and can’t share any information or opinions.
We certainly agree that some sort of “habitat retention benefit” program needs to be developed where all landowners are rewarded (tax wise being a great way) for acreage left for wildlife. On the surface, these programs may have some benefit but the more we analyze them, the more we learn about them, the more they scare the hell out of us. Will this be the thin part of a wedge that becomes a cancer and spreads throughout the province? Will paid hunting, paid access be a reality across the province?
This may start out as a pilot project in a couple of areas in southern Alberta. How does your department think the rules, the guidelines, the process as it is outlined now, will stay that way? Landowners who do not currently qualify will lobby your government to take advantage of this “cash cow” and you can’t blame them. There are far too many questions, so few answers, and so much room for disaster, that the people of Alberta who will be affected most are starting to stand up and make their concerns known. You can add the Alberta Bowhunters Association to that list.
I have listed an array of questions that we would like answered so that we can further develop an opinion as to these programs and their validity, to their very real threat to access and hunting as we now know it. Your response is very much appreciated and we welcome the chance to review your answers.


1. If the property in question (either held by one landowner or as a business unit) be broken into separate blocks and access restricted to those blocks/areas or will the resident, non-paying hunter be allowed to access all the property in this “business unit” as a whole? If the landowner registers all his land does he have to grant access to all his land? Are the vouchers landowner specific within a business unit?
2. What are the specifics of the access management plan? What is to prevent the landowner from only granting access through the RAMP program to residents on land that is less likely to hold game, and the voucher holder getting the exclusive access to the premier areas? Concern is that the good habitat, big buck areas will be held for the paying tag holders.
3. Do the properties (if more than on landowner is involved) have to be connected in any way or can these business units have properties spread out all over a WMU? Would general access to a “business unit” allow access to all those properties included in that business unit?
4. Can the landowner sell ALL of his tags to say one outfitter and leave none left over for a resident to buy? Have there been thoughts of maintaining a certain number of the landowner/business unit tags for residents to purchase? If they are sold to an outfitter, the tags should not come from our resident base. Maybe they should come from his outfitter allocation base of that WMU.
5. Is there a limit to how much can they sell these tags for?
6. It is mentioned that the plan calls for “landowners participating in the HFH program to allow for free access to public draw hunting”. Should this not include general public hunting – for those tags not requiring a SRD draw? Coyotes, upland game birds, whitetails (in many WMUs) would be an example. What about Pre-season hunting (bow) when you do not need the draw? How will this affect the Archery seasons/pre-seasons within this pilot project?
7. The “Draw” mentioned – is that for those species that residents currently have to draw for in that WMU? Or would there be some separate draw for that “business unit” for each species concerned.
8. What are the specifics of the appeal process? What are the penalties for non-compliance? Concern is that a lot of time will be wasted by a resident hunter traveling to one of these WMUs/business units only to get the run around when he gets there. By the time the appeal process has done it’s work, his hunt may be over – great deal of time and money wasted.
9. Who will police and enforce the rules and guidelines?
10. Is the voucher program also applicable on Lease land (Agricultural Disposition)? Grazing leases should NOT be considered part of the business unit/land base calculation?
11. Is the RAMP program also applicable on Lease land (Agricultural Disposition)?
12. What properties and area of the province are the pilot projects being done in? What time frame are they for?
13. Will the landowner vouchers be subtracted from the available resident permits? We do not like the idea of taking tags away from the existing resident draw pool. It would be better if they are opening up new lands that have not allowed hunting that SRD should increase the total Alberta tags available for draw.
14. Are there vouchers granted for Antlered and Antlerless? It should not be just a “trophy” hunt concept.
15. Has there been discussion expanding this to other WMU’s? Province wide? Any timelines established? It is inconceivable that other landowners who do not qualify under these current guidelines/rules will be lobbying the govt to get in on this type of cash cow.
16. With this only being implemented in the two southern WMU’s (108 and 300) this sets a very scary precedent for all private land Alberta. Why should only landowners in these zones get the privilege of vouchers? Especially since the landowners in these zones have had a history of not allowing access? Now he can sell you a voucher and profit from it, yet the landowner in another WMU or the same WMU (neighbors even) who has granted access gets no financial reward? This is a very slippery slope!!
17. Are there a minimum/maximum number of hunter days that the “business unit” managers can impose?
18. From the outside looking in, there is now a legal conduit for landowners to receive payment for access via the voucher program. What is the difference if the landowner is granted the privilege to charge for access or if he sells me a voucher?
19. If a landowner wants to maximize the value of his voucher he will now have more of an incentive to limit access to the best habitat on his land because of the HFH program. It is contradictory to the spirit of the whole program to me. It uses a well thought out program (RAMP) as smoke and mirrors, and as a trade-off for the voucher program (HFH). Simply put the RAMP program was conceived to legitimize the HFH program, or so it seems. These programs are so different in spirit and function, yet the same steering committee is overseeing and implementing both?
20. There is a very real fear that after the initial five-year pilot program is over, that the landowner participants will lobby hard to keep it in place as they are going to be financial winners. Other landowners will see the dollars available and want a piece of the action. The resident hunter will be powerless to stop it.
21. If allowed to escalate and expand to all private land regardless of size, hunter numbers could plummet as many have little or no access to “free” crown land now. What crown land there is would also see an increase in hunter pressure.
22. What would stop landowners who have the resources and inclination from high fencing their land to keep this money making wildlife on their property?

I do hope that you take our concerns seriously. Providing answers to our questions will give us an opportunity to get the facts and make an informed opinion on these issues. As you can see, these programs are in need of a great deal of work and this pilot project needs to be stopped now to make sure that the people of Alberta have all had meaningful input as this may well become the biggest blemish on hunting/fishing/trapping on private lands we have ever seen. We need to get it right. Thanking you in advance.

Yours truly



BRENT WATSON
2008 ABA President

10238-110 Ave.
Grande Prairie, Alberta
T8V 1S7
bcwatson@telusplanet.net
Good to see.

Other than the little blurb on the AFGA website has there been anything further from them to their membership?

http://www.afga.org/index.html?func=news&articleID=24
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-05-2008
MathewsArcher MathewsArcher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary,Alberta
Posts: 497
Default

Not that I've seen.

Was going to renew my Sarcee F&G membership so e-mailed them and received a reply that the executive was opposed to OS but they were taking it to the membership at the next meeting.

Will be renewing.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-05-2008
bowchaser bowchaser is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbasno1 View Post
Robin, First let me thank you for hijacking the thread. Secondly thank you again for misunderstanding the original post.

I never said I wanted to create an organization. I just want organized opposition. I for one hope this does include AFGA. Unfortunately the AFGA AGM is not for nearly a month and the executive has stated they will not do anything on this issue before then. This needs to be done now.

I fully believe that Brad Fenson took direction and reported to somebody in AFGA. That "somebody" decided not to inform their members. I believe this person also directed Mr. Fenson on his direction. I unlike some do not have any ill will towards Mr. Fenson. He is an employee and he does what his employer asks him to do. I blame the person that he was supposed to report to for not informing the members (Mr. Nadeaua/Mr. Bochar as the president/Vice President are you listening ultimately this is your responsibility). This is another reason I do not think AFGA will be of any help.

qbochar, I find it interesting that the only person speaking on this at the AGM is one of the chairs (pretty sure this is going to be Cormack Gates) of the project. I feel we who oppose this need someone to speak on our behalf as well but I do not think this will happen. This will part of my recommendations on how to fight this.

Now back to the original intent of this thread. I believe the next step is to get the media involved. If anyone has any recommendations on a good way to start with this please let me know.

Bubba
He is an employee and he does what his employer asks him to do. I blame the person that he was supposed to report to for not informing the members (Mr. Nadeaua/Mr. Bochar as the president/Vice President are you listening ultimately this is your responsibility). This is another reason I do not think AFGA will be of any help.

I have heard from a few sources that Morton told Nadeau about this program coming down, and was asked to keep quiet. Explains how the project has gotten so far along without a peep from AFGA. Maybe they were asked to leave it until the AGM, by then the gov could get it passed through with little opposition.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-05-2008
Duk Dog's Avatar
Duk Dog Duk Dog is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AB
Posts: 3,607
Default

Despite all the good that the AFGA does, perhaps their silence to their membership on this critical issue will become an issue in future AFGA membership drives. Communicating on this issue is very time sensitive and waiting until after the AGM will likely be too late. Regardless of whether OS is good or bad for the province there has been too little public response to their membership by AFGA. It is a key issue, and people (read membership) should be kept, or made, aware of it.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-08-2008
bubbasno1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

To whomever wanted to know show the AFGA rep was

Brad Fenson Habitat Coordinator for AFGA.

Bubba
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-08-2008
SNIPER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Where did all the posts go?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-08-2008
Rob Miskosky's Avatar
Rob Miskosky Rob Miskosky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,055
Default

Where did all the posts go?

Listen, we're tired of trying to keep up with all the false accusations and flaming that has been taking place regarding OS and other issues. If we can't have civil discussion then posts will be removed, end of discussion! To be taken seriously, you have to act responsibly.

This board is monitored on a regular basis by SRD and others. To read some of the rediculous accusations and flaming that takes place makes everybody in these discussions look like a bunch of fools.

The moderators have been instructed to remove all posts, regardless of who posts them, that even so much as borderline flaming or make false accusations.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-08-2008
SNIPER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Miskosky View Post
Where did all the posts go?

Listen, we're tired of trying to keep up with all the false accusations and flaming that has been taking place regarding OS and other issues. If we can't have civil discussion then posts will be removed, end of discussion! To be taken seriously, you have to act responsibly.

This board is monitored on a regular basis by SRD and others. To read some of the rediculous accusations and flaming that takes place makes everybody in these discussions look like a bunch of fools.

The moderators have been instructed to remove all posts, regardless of who posts them, that even so much as borderline flaming or make false accusations.
Good rule, but there was some posts that were removed that were legit.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-08-2008
Brady's Avatar
Brady Brady is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Miller's Lake
Posts: 874
Default

Sniper, if a post is referencing another that needs to be deleted.....what is the sense of keeping it on. Simply....none.
__________________
Brady
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-08-2008
SNIPER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Brady p.m. sent
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 07:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.