OHV & Random Camping Ban - What you can do !!

[arff]

Great information. Let's get the paperwork done,,,,

 

[Ron H]

Great information. Let's get the paperwork done,,,,

I found this "survey" pretty much designed to set us up for failure, So i pretty much disagreed with everything except questions 4 & 5 which there was no possible answer unless you are in agreement with shutting it down...

 

[arff]

I found this "survey" pretty much designed to set us up for failure, So i pretty much disagreed with everything except questions 4 & 5 which there was no possible answer unless you are in agreement with shutting it down...

Yes. I answered 4 and 5 in the comments.

It's a tricky worded plan by them


Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359

 

[Oilerfan99]

I am an avid atv rider and have been for over 20 years, right back to the trike days. I will admit I have not ridden in the Castle Area but if this area is being torn apart like the area we camp in near Lac La Biche I can totally understand the Goverment's position (I am definitely NOT an NDP supporter) We pay an annual fee to park our 5th wheel and are fortunate enough to be able to ride our quads from the campground to the trails. 5 years ago you hardly saw anyone on the trails but in the last 5 years more and more people are coming there and random camp, or as some have called it "Public camping", probably because they have been kicked out of somewhere else. I am certainly not an enviro but I am disgusted with the damage done to the trails, the trails were wide enough for quads but now with the wider side by sides people are still going down the same trails but just mowing down the trees. If their ride does not fit between two trees a new trail is made, when this "new trail" is made it is not with a chain saw and done neatly it is done with the front bumper. There are a few mud holes on the trails that at one time were fun to go through but are now impassible due to groups spending their entire day there going back and forth ripping up the mud hole so others cannot get through and I have 28" tires on my quad. There are also those who cut or pull down green trees to use for firewood and do not have a chainsaw so a 20 ft tree is laid across the fire and left behind along with burned lawn chairs, couches, barbecues, coolers, broken glass, beer cans, garbage and then there are those who empty their septic tanks on to the ground and leave a mess. There are also those who bag their garbage nice and neat and leave it behind only to have the bears or coyotes tear it apart, there is no garbage collection in the bush! Not all users are like this but everyone has to admit they have seen what I have described. I will sign the petition for 3 reasons. 1. Because there are responsible riders out there and I would not like to see them lose this area to ride in as I am sure it is beautiful. 2. I don't like enviros or the NDP Government and the way they are handling this. 3. Our area cannot handle any more people that have been kicked out of somewhere else as it will eventually lead to our area being closed.

 

[lilduke]

Yeah I hear you man. Go out west on a long weekend and it looks like an episode of trailer park boys. Then again, I dont want to lose access though.


Catch 22

 

[arff]

It's true some people leave trash and also cut new trails.

Building bridges for sxs's and quads to cross creeks etc will help a lot.

Designated trail system in sensitive areas will help.

Closing an area just pushes people into another area causing way too much use in one spot.

Educating riders is key and tough to do.

Last year I had the 2016 Trail Repair Thread so riders can show they clean up trails and trash

I started a 2017 Trail Repair Thread with a prize for who does the most or best trail clean up..

 

[Cklink69]

I notice a lot of comments made in the social media & papers always showing the pic of the quad in skeg hole, or some trashed unmaintained bush/cutline/survey trail, justifying or stating it’s deserved/expected to ban “sustainable designated user trails” maintained by the countless hours of club/association volunteers in Castle. It’s painting all OHV users & trails with the same brush, without respect to what this is about. Castle if you have never been, is one of the most scenic areas I have ridden in Alberta. Pushing people out of well maintained area’s like this will only make the problem of other areas larger.


The ENGO’s & GoA use a fear-mongering “end of the world environmental impact” due to OHV’s in Castle. Well here’s what they aren’t showing you. This is the real Castle. This is the trails. It’s an incredible privilege to enjoy this area with my family & friends here, and should remain multi-use for all Albertan’s to enjoy. Educate & Enforce - Not Eliminate.

G

 

[oldrzr]

This is truly a beautiful area. We have never been there before but Kind of ironic my wife and I were going to try for a week down there this year. Hope we can change the gov't ruling on this.

 

[arff]

AOHVA - COHV Advisory: March 1, 2017
View this email in your browser




The following appeared in the Calgary Herald, Calgary Sun, Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun and the Lethbridge Herald
Be sure to share this information with your family and friends
AOHVA’s Environmentally Responsible Solution
The Government of Alberta is currently enacting the biggest change to land use in the province in 30 years. Quite likely, it will impose a significant reduction or the complete elimination of motorized recreation in our parks and public lands.

The Alberta Off-highway Vehicle Association (AOHVA), representing 165 000 users and their families, welcomes the development of a Land Use Framework for the respectful enjoyment of Alberta’s back country on the clear understanding that it is there to protect the environment and wilderness FOR the people and not to keep it FROM the people.

It is important for you to know that AOHVA supports a solution that strikes a balance between environmental stewardship and recreation opportunities. We have worked with non-motorized and motorized groups and we have worked in collaboration with the Government for many years to ensure that the tens of thousands of people who use OHVs have access to ride, fish, hunt and camp responsibly.

Our proposed solution is comprehensive and actionable, inclusive and environmentally, socially, and financially responsible. By incorporating best practices from across North America and by implementing innovative approaches to developing, managing and sustaining shared trail networks we can make Alberta the model for conflict-free recreational trail development and management.

The AOHVA has a 4-point plan to ensure that past damage is corrected and not repeated in the future. We are committed to:

Working with the Government of Alberta, Land Use Framework staff and our own experts in designing and developing trails that are sustainable and environmentally-sound and repairing damaged trails. We support the establishment of a shared use park in the Castle region so let’s get this right and move on to building proper trails for all Albertans to enjoy.
Dedicating 100% of an increase in OHV registration fees to tackling important issues like habitat protection and proper trail construction and maintenance in partnership with government under an accountable, transparent and arms-length management structure.
Giving law enforcement agencies the tools and mandate to fully enforce the law on anyone who violates the new trails management framework for the Castle and for other parts of Alberta as they are developed.
Building a better environmental and trail experience. Alberta can lead the way in OHV trail development by putting the onus on organizations like the AOHVA and its like-minded partners to be responsible for environmental stewardship as a means of eliminating improper use of the back country.
Our plan will work because it can be funded by OHV users, not taxpayers. We are stepping up and putting our money where our mouth is.

Personally, I have attended more than a hundred meetings with Government of Alberta ministers and staff over the years…and while there have been different ministers and staff, AOHVA was a constant at the table.

We are prepared to work together. Now we need the Government to step up and work with us. Please join us in making Alberta better for all Albertans.

Sincerely,

Brent Hodgson, President
Alberta Off-highway Vehicle Association (AOHVA)
WRITE THE MINISTER SIGN A PETITION COMPLETE THE SURVEY
Be informed. Get engaged. TAKE ACTION!


Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359

 

[arff]

1. Working with the Government of Alberta, Land Use Framework staff and our own experts in designing and developing trails that are sustainable and environmentally-sound and repairing damaged trails. We support the establishment of a shared use park in the Castle region so let’s get this right and move on to building proper trails for all Albertans to enjoy.

2. Dedicating 100% of an increase in OHV registration fees to tackling important issues like habitat protection and proper trail construction and maintenance in partnership with government under an accountable, transparent and arms-length management structure.

3. Giving law enforcement agencies the tools and mandate to fully enforce the law on anyone who violates the new trails management framework for the Castle and for other parts of Alberta as they are developed.

4 Building a better environmental and trail experience. Alberta can lead the way in OHV trail development by putting the onus on organizations like the AOHVA and its like-minded partners to be responsible for environmental stewardship as a means of eliminating improper use of the back country.
Our plan will work because it can be funded by OHV users, not taxpayers. We are stepping up and putting our money where our mouth is.


Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359

 

[arff]

Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359

 

[Cal Rakach]

Hey folks, keep those pictures of our great trails coming in.
We have far more trails in great condition than we have mud holes.
A picture of a mud hole is too easy. We always miss the photo of great trail because we are having too much fun riding it.
Great shots Val
Cal

 

[arff]

OHV & Random Camping Ban - What you can do !!

Cal check the 2016 and the new 2017 Trail repair thread.

I started these to show responsibility riding and the riders do extra clean up and repairs.

2017 best clean up repair person gets prize too.

Val advertises I post for her. Lol


Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359

 

[Stg2Suby]

Re: OHV & Random Camping Ban - What you can do !!

Just finished the survey, takes awhile but worth the effort. Be sure to comment on the misleading question 4.

 

[whoDEANie]

Re: OHV & Random Camping Ban - What you can do !!

Just finished the survey, takes awhile but worth the effort. Be sure to comment on the misleading question 4.

Be careful all!

Question 4 and 5 are both misleading. One is regarding OHV's and one is regarding random camping. Both these questions should be answered "Neither agree nor disagree" if you are in support of OHV use and random camping. Be sure to fill in the comments to explain that you do not support elimination of these activities.

 

[arff]

Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359

 

[Stg2Suby]

Here's questions 4 and 5 from the email confirmation I received after filling out the survey:

<p>4. In order to minimize negative environmental impacts ofrecreational off-highway vehicle use, page 102 of the Management Plan statesthat:</p> <p>“The Castle Provincial Park and Castle WildlandProvincial Park have high levels of biodiversity, important headwaters that arehighly susceptible to damage and critical habitat for species at risk, includinggenetically pure westslope cutthroat trout (a species that is subject to afederal critical habitat order). To protect these ecosystems, landscapes andwater resources, recreational off-highway vehicle use will not be permitted inthe Castle Provincial Park and Castle Wildland Provincial Park.” As such,recreational off-highway vehicle use will be phased out over a three to fiveyear period to allow for adequate off-road opportunities to be developed onnearby public lands.</p> <p>To what extent do you agree or disagreethat a transition period is necessary for the elimination of recreationaloff-highway vehicle use in Castle Provincial Park and Castle WildlandProvincial Park to adjacent public lands?</p> <ul><li>See:<a href="/CastleManagementPlan/documents/5326/download"style="color:#0E82AC;" target="_blank">ManagementPlan</a>: Section 1 (page 19); Section 2 (pages 32 – 35); Section 6(pages 102 & 103)</li></ul>
Neither agree nor disagree
<p>5. As these lands are managed under the <em>ProvincialParks Act</em>, automobile accessible random camping is not a permissibleactivity. In order to continue to provide rustic group camping opportunitieswhile minimizing negative environmental impact, page 89 the Management Planstates:</p> <p>“…rustic group camping areas will be identified anddesignated in the provincial park. These sites will be reviewed and may berelocated as the long-term strategy is developed…”</p> <p>To whatextend do you agree with the designation of rustic group camping areas in theprovincial park?</p> <ul><li>See: <ahref="/CastleManagementPlan/documents/5326/download"style="color:#0E82AC;" target="_blank">ManagementPlan</a>: Section 6 (pages 88 & 89); AppendixD</li></ul>
Disagree

Question 4 didn't allow for comments (no surprise), can't recall if 5 did or not. But there is a chance to add general comments at the end. Too bad one has to deal with the smoke and mirrors bullsh!t

 

[TylerG]

Here's questions 4 and 5 from the email confirmation I received after filling out the survey:

<p>4. In order to minimize negative environmental impacts ofrecreational off-highway vehicle use, page 102 of the Management Plan statesthat:</p> <p>“The Castle Provincial Park and Castle WildlandProvincial Park have high levels of biodiversity, important headwaters that arehighly susceptible to damage and critical habitat for species at risk, includinggenetically pure westslope cutthroat trout (a species that is subject to afederal critical habitat order). To protect these ecosystems, landscapes andwater resources, recreational off-highway vehicle use will not be permitted inthe Castle Provincial Park and Castle Wildland Provincial Park.” As such,recreational off-highway vehicle use will be phased out over a three to fiveyear period to allow for adequate off-road opportunities to be developed onnearby public lands.</p> <p>To what extent do you agree or disagreethat a transition period is necessary for the elimination of recreationaloff-highway vehicle use in Castle Provincial Park and Castle WildlandProvincial Park to adjacent public lands?</p> <ul><li>See:<a href="/CastleManagementPlan/documents/5326/download"style="color:#0E82AC;" target="_blank">ManagementPlan</a>: Section 1 (page 19); Section 2 (pages 32 – 35); Section 6(pages 102 & 103)</li></ul>
Neither agree nor disagree
<p>5. As these lands are managed under the <em>ProvincialParks Act</em>, automobile accessible random camping is not a permissibleactivity. In order to continue to provide rustic group camping opportunitieswhile minimizing negative environmental impact, page 89 the Management Planstates:</p> <p>“…rustic group camping areas will be identified anddesignated in the provincial park. These sites will be reviewed and may berelocated as the long-term strategy is developed…”</p> <p>To whatextend do you agree with the designation of rustic group camping areas in theprovincial park?</p> <ul><li>See: <ahref="/CastleManagementPlan/documents/5326/download"style="color:#0E82AC;" target="_blank">ManagementPlan</a>: Section 6 (pages 88 & 89); AppendixD</li></ul>
Disagree

Question 4 didn't allow for comments (no surprise), can't recall if 5 did or not. But there is a chance to add general comments at the end. Too bad one has to deal with the smoke and mirrors bullsh!t

you need to answer questions 4 & 5 in the general comments at the end......

 

[whoDEANie]

Here's questions 4 and 5 from the email confirmation I received after filling out the survey:

<p>4. In order to minimize negative environmental impacts ofrecreational off-highway vehicle use, page 102 of the Management Plan statesthat:</p> <p>“The Castle Provincial Park and Castle WildlandProvincial Park have high levels of biodiversity, important headwaters that arehighly susceptible to damage and critical habitat for species at risk, includinggenetically pure westslope cutthroat trout (a species that is subject to afederal critical habitat order). To protect these ecosystems, landscapes andwater resources, recreational off-highway vehicle use will not be permitted inthe Castle Provincial Park and Castle Wildland Provincial Park.” As such,recreational off-highway vehicle use will be phased out over a three to fiveyear period to allow for adequate off-road opportunities to be developed onnearby public lands.</p> <p>To what extent do you agree or disagreethat a transition period is necessary for the elimination of recreationaloff-highway vehicle use in Castle Provincial Park and Castle WildlandProvincial Park to adjacent public lands?</p> <ul><li>See:<a href="/CastleManagementPlan/documents/5326/download"style="color:#0E82AC;" target="_blank">ManagementPlan</a>: Section 1 (page 19); Section 2 (pages 32 – 35); Section 6(pages 102 & 103)</li></ul>
Neither agree nor disagree
<p>5. As these lands are managed under the <em>ProvincialParks Act</em>, automobile accessible random camping is not a permissibleactivity. In order to continue to provide rustic group camping opportunitieswhile minimizing negative environmental impact, page 89 the Management Planstates:</p> <p>“…rustic group camping areas will be identified anddesignated in the provincial park. These sites will be reviewed and may berelocated as the long-term strategy is developed…”</p> <p>To whatextend do you agree with the designation of rustic group camping areas in theprovincial park?</p> <ul><li>See: <ahref="/CastleManagementPlan/documents/5326/download"style="color:#0E82AC;" target="_blank">ManagementPlan</a>: Section 6 (pages 88 & 89); AppendixD</li></ul>
Disagree

Question 4 didn't allow for comments (no surprise), can't recall if 5 did or not. But there is a chance to add general comments at the end. Too bad one has to deal with the smoke and mirrors bullsh!t

See, they got you! They aready state that random camping is not a permisible activity. By disagreeing to the actaul question, you are telling them you don't want managed rustic camping sites either.

 

[arff]

I answered mine in the comments 4 and 5


Val Senio
Royal LePage
780-405-9359