Castle Snowmobiling Area Closed after this year.

[pano-dude]

Up to castle? Then id be from Mexico! Exactly the problem, nobody is going to see Castle from now on unless you can walk a 1000 square km.....isn't it funer to troll the "to can or not to can" thread?

There are hundreds if not thousands of visitors to the national parks and yes they all walk....

 

[Eldereldo]

If enough rules and regulations and areas are effected ... Yes , I think people will slow down or stop .
We are ruled and regulated to death .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This reminds me of the arguments professional sports teams use when they want governments to pay for a new arena so they won't pack up and go somewhere else. People will spend their money, if they don't spend it on camping and quads they will spend it on something else, you want to argue that it is unfair to target OHVs that's fine, but trying to turn it into an economic argument is bogus.

 

[Skegmeister]

This may throw gas on the fire, so here is my Sunday morning rant, but... consider this as a thought.
In the US, the population is 10 times what it is in Canada, with 20 times more ATV's in areas that is 100 times less than what we have in Canada.
How they came to terms with the Governments and special interest land user groups is land management and permits.
As much as I support our OHV (sled and ATV's) populations, we have a lot really ignorant people out there that have not kept up with the times. Even I have had to adjust my attitude about things, because I can see we are gonna lose doing it the old way.
Epic battles are fought by Clubs and our provincial associations to keep riding areas. Meanwhile memberships drop, volunteering minimal and still they fight the battles that in some cases look like '300'. In the end they lose areas like Castle, Bruderheim, Lakeland, etc with others coming up.
In the US, they give the Clubs more clout. You can't ride areas without a membership and there is a limited number of memberships allowed. The areas are managed very well and the members book in advance to ride the areas in controlled numbers.
The old days of towing out trailers, quads and monster bonfires with music pounding all night long (yeah I was that guy) in some muddy parking lot or tucked away in the bush are going away.
Times are changing and we need to adjust our tactics on how to keep our riding areas and we need to show the others that we are willing to change.

 

[rzrgade]

This reminds me of the arguments professional sports teams use when they want governments to pay for a new arena so they won't pack up and go somewhere else. People will spend their money, if they don't spend it on camping and quads they will spend it on something else, you want to argue that it is unfair to target OHVs that's fine, but trying to turn it into an economic argument is bogus.

Honestly ,I could not disagree any more ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rzrgade]

This may throw gas on the fire, so here is my Sunday morning rant, but... consider this as a thought.
In the US, the population is 10 times what it is in Canada, with 20 times more ATV's in areas that is 100 times less than what we have in Canada.
How they came to terms with the Governments and special interest land user groups is land management and permits.
As much as I support our OHV (sled and ATV's) populations, we have a lot really ignorant people out there that have not kept up with the times. Even I have had to adjust my attitude about things, because I can see we are gonna lose doing it the old way.
Epic battles are fought by Clubs and our provincial associations to keep riding areas. Meanwhile memberships drop, volunteering minimal and still they fight the battles that in some cases look like '300'. In the end they lose areas like Castle, Bruderheim, Lakeland, etc with others coming up.
In the US, they give the Clubs more clout. You can't ride areas without a membership and there is a limited number of memberships allowed. The areas are managed very well and the members book in advance to ride the areas in controlled numbers.
The old days of towing out trailers, quads and monster bonfires with music pounding all night long (yeah I was that guy) in some muddy parking lot or tucked away in the bush are going away.
Times are changing and we need to adjust our tactics on how to keep our riding areas and we need to show the others that we are willing to change.

By in large I agree with what you say .However your information on riding south of the border is completely inaccurate...
I have ridden down there ... And they support random camping & and the OHV community tremendously ...
In short , they realize the $$$ it generates and regulate it fairly and accordingly .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pano-dude]

Here is an example of how Canadians will not get involved until there is a threat of losing recreation area.

In 2007 myself and 4 friends saw the need to organize a cycling society to get official use of trails used by local cyclists. We struggled to get members, many locals said there are lots of trails, criticized us for going public etc and refused to look into the future.
Then a couple years ago one of the unsanctioned trails was targeted by wildlife biologists as a sensitive area and wanted it closed period.

Big uproar by locals who were not wanting to be involved with the society in the past. They wanted the society to fight the battle. The society got involved, hired a biologist of their own, wrote letters to the right government officials and the trail is still open for business. Now they see the benefits to being organized and secure areas BEFORE they are closed.

So if you want to keep closing your eyes and complain there are to many rules well you are part of the problem. Get involved, call out other users who are making poor choices when you see them and join clubs. The days of the wild west are gone regardless of who is in power.

 

[rzrgade]

They already stated it will create 44 jobs......and guess what?!? It's tax payers paying it.

Yup 44 jobs ... NDP economics at its best here ...lmao


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rzrgade]

This reminds me of the arguments professional sports teams use when they want governments to pay for a new arena so they won't pack up and go somewhere else. People will spend their money, if they don't spend it on camping and quads they will spend it on something else, you want to argue that it is unfair to target OHVs that's fine, but trying to turn it into an economic argument is bogus.

Have you driven trough Rocky Mountain house ( as just one example )on a summer weekend ....? Just curious ...

If you think Rocky has no economic spinoff because of OHV & camping .. You are not really living in the real world !lol
Do you think the dozens of multi million $ RV dealerships scattered along The QE 2 are there by chance ?

If you are being serious here , you really fail to understand the economic infrastructure intertwined throughout all of Alberta ...
It has been suggested that the spin off is over the two BILLION a year mark from OHV buisness , Alberta wide ...!

Only an NDP economist would call that bogus ...LOL

 

[Stockorwalk]

Buddy of mine is SRD, he says their budget has been increased like 10 fold, and one of the directives from up top is be harder on all ohv. He told us to be carefull riding any ohv because there's SRD guys who are purposely looking to ticket ohv. Buddy was sledding in ditch, pulled over by srd and threatened with some sort of ticket for distracting driver's on the highway? Let off but told to load up and go home.

 

[Stockorwalk]

Srd followed him to truck.....

 

[Skegmeister]

By in large I agree with what you say .However your information on riding south of the border is completely inaccurate...
I have ridden down there ... And they support random camping & and the OHV community tremendously ...
In short , they realize the $$$ it generates and regulate it fairly and accordingly .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Down there is a pretty big area, just saying.
In California where there is a huge population and not much area to free ride, the permits, parks and population controls exists.
Other areas of the US maybe different.

 

[KatMan]

They already stated it will create 44 jobs......and guess what?!? It's tax payers paying it.

Good of paying union jobs I bet.

Funny how she found money to ensure her non OHV plan gets enforced when they couldn't find resources/money to enforce the restriction that were already in place.

 

[pano-dude]

Have you driven trough Rocky Mountain house ( as just one example )on a summer weekend ....? Just curious ...

If you think Rocky has no economic spinoff because of OHV & camping .. You are not really living in the real world !lol
Do you think the dozens of multi million $ RV dealerships scattered along The QE 2 are there by chance ?

If you are being serious here , you really fail to understand the economic infrastructure intertwined throughout all of Alberta ...
It has been suggested that the spin off is over the two BILLION a year mark from OHV buisness , Alberta wide ...!

Only an NDP economist would call that bogus ...LOL

In 5 minutes I found out in 2014 Alberta's total tourism economic value was 8.3 billion. So you figure ohv is worth 25%?
Red Deer area was loaded with people who had high incomes thus dealerships set up in the area. Not because Rocky Mountain house is an RV destination. Many RV people do not even use quads or bikes so your argument is weak.

 

[DRD]

In 5 minutes I found out in 2014 Alberta's total tourism economic value was 8.3 billion. So you figure ohv is worth 25%?
Red Deer area was loaded with people who had high incomes thus dealerships set up in the area. Not because Rocky Mountain house is an RV destination. Many RV people do not even use quads or bikes so your argument is weak.

I guess you have never seen the endless wagon train Shiite show on a long weekend heading west?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rzrgade]

It's obvious that your support of the NDP skews your vision of what is really happening . You can debate the # s forever ....
The point is they never even bothered to consult with the volunteers who have spent countless hours formulating a plan that works for all stake holders !
What good is asking for public input , if you won't even take it into consideration ?

Surely you must see a pattern , as Bill 6 was done in the same manner . The coal / electric issue is decided without input .
As we'll as this job killing idiotic carbon tax .
Can you not see a pattern here ? Loss of jobs , competitiveness and more provincial debt with a shrinking taxpayer base!

The only solution is to get them out of power ASAP , would you not agree ? Or do you think they are doing great things for our province ?
In terms of the castle area ( and soon others ) I would suggest not only completing the survey , but sending a copy to the opposition MLAs in order to start to gather their support ...
And make them aware of the issues ...
I am of the opinion that this should be made into much more of an economic issue than it has been , looked at !
Next time a person stops in woody s RV .. Mention why would I buy a 70000$ toy hauler , when i will have No place to ride ?
Get the buisness people on side ...Again this is a much bigger DEAL than just a place to ride a sled or a quad or whatever for a few days a year ...!
But this is only my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bobsledder]

There are hundreds if not thousands of visitors to the national parks and yes they all walk....

On the paved walking paths!

 

[KatMan]

while updating their status using the park WIFI. just like mother earth intended

 

[Ramjet15x]

Typical S+M post, gets corrupted and in fighting!!

What the hell, you guy missing the point , they are closing yet another area!!!

This in turn will create more pressure on other areas, then they will say there is too much pressure on the next area and close it too.

They said last year that this will be all good and OHV will continue to be allowed, then boom, OOPS we are going to close the area this year after all.
The questions in the survey are, as usual, skewed to get the answers wanted without any true objectivity of all requested. The questions are written in such a manner if you disagree with the question you are not agreeable to protection of the environment, not on how all effected groups can work together to better the protection of the area.
I for one do not want to see all the damage done to creek crossing etc. but do want to use the trails to ride bikes and sleds and to have responsible free range camping. (Where there isn't paved trails and signs board to explain the obvious, that's what the national parks have been changed into already, for what appears to be mainly foreign tourists).

It seems as soon as there is motor involved it is bad...

There is already enough area excluded for the back country hikers et al already

We need to work together to stop this, now!

 

[rzrgade]

Don't really see a lot of corrupted or infighting ...
Just various opinions on on why / how / this measure was taken ...
And various opinions on how to prevent or even reverse future land use issues ....
I really don't think making more people aware on "our "side is a bad idea ...

We all want to have & keep present areas open .. But there are different opinions as to the best way to go about doing this ...
None the less we are all on the same side ,I would suggest...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[team dirt]

She says she will be creating 40 jobs. Goverment paid jobs I'm assuming. Has she taken into account the loss of jobs and businesses for that matter in pincher and blairemore. The leaf licking crew that will now be visiting the area come with all their food pre packed and vacuum sealed. They will park their cars and not spend any money or time in either of these community's. I know myself I have in the past spent at least 10,000 per year in that region taking my family camping and going sledding. Places like the rum runners and pure country will for surely feel the hit. The loss of thunder in the valley and run runner days was already a huge hit. This is going to be the nail in the coffin unless they turn the whole area into another Banff or Waterton. I hope that doesn't happen because that's the complete opposite of good for the environment.