Author Topic: OHV regulation (Read 11254 times)

Paul · « **Reply #20 on:** February 10, 2013, 09:52:00 AM »

Everyone is entitled to their opinion here, name calling and fighting isn't acceptable though. This ****ing thread looks like that other forum, not good. If you have your ideas on it say it, but no name calling or insulting others please.

walleyes · « **Reply #21 on:** February 10, 2013, 10:55:16 AM »

Quote from: Paul on February 10, 2013, 09:52:00 AM

Everyone is entitled to their opinion here, name calling and fighting isn't acceptable though. This ****ing thread looks like that other forum, not good. If you have your ideas on it say it, but no name calling or insulting others please.

Yup your right Paul..

I appoligise to all for my rant..

Stuff like this just proves we all care a great deal about what happens in this province to something we all care about deeply. We continualy sit back and watch this province botch things over and over and when we get a chance to voice an opinion on it do to frustartion its easy to get overly excited..

Justin and I have had our conversation about it,, its over,, never happened..

bigbore444 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 10, 2013, 12:50:08 PM »

I welcome the change if and when it happens. Yes I am a quad owner and hunter. I quad in where I want to hunt, stash the quad in the bush and set out on foot to my blind or just walk around. I usually hunt alone so a quad is a great asset to me if I am lucky enough to bag something. Yes, I have seen the weekend warrior types ripping up the landscape, watersheds and it pisses me off too.

I am a fourth generation Albertan. This province just has so many people now. Many areas I used to hunt as a youngin you wouldn't see a soul all day, not like that no more. It saddens me.

The cattle on the eastern slopes pisses me off more than the quads. But that is a topic for another day.

deerman · « **Reply #23 on:** February 10, 2013, 09:23:56 PM »

Quote from: JustinC on February 10, 2013, 08:23:57 PM

The resolution I am speaking of is an ALBERTA FISH AND GAME ASSOCIATION resolution. And it has to go to the conference to be discussed and voted on.

What happens with AGMAG is a separate thing.

deerman · « **Reply #24 on:** February 11, 2013, 09:45:38 AM »

Quote from: JustinC on February 10, 2013, 10:34:51 PM

No agmag is not a seperate thing. It is were all stakeholders (afga is a stakeholder) sit and discuss these proposed changes and managment tactics. This was already discussed and was voted on. If you dont believe me contact your club. ABA has it written in there newsletter already. It was part of the last AGMAG meeting.

I am aware that the AF&GA has a rep sitting on AGMAG. However the "suggestions" or what ever they call them, that AGMAG puts forward are that groups "suggestions"

AF&GA has for many many years had its own set of "suggestions" that they put forward to Fish & Wildlife for changes. These are based on the resolutions discussed and past at Conference.

They are SEPERATE from AGMAG.

I was under the impression that AGMAG recomendations had to have total agreement from all the members. I find it hard to believe that the AF&GA rep. would agree to this OHV recomendation, knowing it would be on the floor at conference and there it may be voted down.

340 · « **Reply #25 on:** February 11, 2013, 01:33:17 PM »

Not sure what all the fighting is about over this resolution. It will probably be passed at conference then quickly brushed aside by SRD.

walleyes · « **Reply #26 on:** February 11, 2013, 06:11:02 PM »

Yah I won't hold my breath over it.. If it goes through,,, bonus if not,, no big deal..

Titanium · « **Reply #27 on:** February 12, 2013, 12:13:40 AM »

Quote from: JustinC on February 09, 2013, 10:25:55 AM

I hope this never happens. I for one am against them is the areas I hunt. They wreck the landscape. Look at places that allow them to be used. Miles upon miles of destroyed contry side. Also when I am in the mountains walking in for sheep or elk or whatever I am hunting I don't wan to see or here those Dam things.

You should start hunting K-country then you wouldn't have to look at them or listen to them.

deerman · « **Reply #28 on:** February 13, 2013, 10:42:13 PM »

Our local F&G club voted on the resolutions tonight and we voted against this one. So three voting delegates will be going to Conference and voting against it.

Lurch · « **Reply #29 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:13:47 AM »

I have no ill felling toward Quads - they are an inanimate object. To suggest so would be as ridiculous as the gun lobby and their hatred to firearms.

The behaviour on them is quite another thing.

I always tell folks who are ardent supporters of their use that they really need to start educating their group - because they themselves are causing more of a threat to their chances of continuing to use them than anyone.

I agree with things the way they are - but may even look to change things a bit. I would like to see more "able bodied" folks use their legs to get around. Use your quad to pack in camps, extract downed game etc. I think they are a great tool, and see their value to hunters with impairments.

The problem is a few are quite lazy - any many of us that try to do the right thing are getting tired of the rule breakers.

I would even support opening it up a bit more - but add regulation for the rule breakers that had teeth - like if you ride in closed zones you lose your quad. Might start to make some think twice.

340 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:43:57 AM »

Quote from: Lurch on February 14, 2013, 07:13:47 AM

I have no ill felling toward Quads - they are an inanimate object. To suggest so would be as ridiculous as the gun lobby and their hatred to firearms.

The behaviour on them is quite another thing.

I always tell folks who are ardent supporters of their use that they really need to start educating their group - because they themselves are causing more of a threat to their chances of continuing to use them than anyone.

I agree with things the way they are - but may even look to change things a bit. I would like to see more "able bodied" folks use their legs to get around. Use your quad to pack in camps, extract downed game etc. I think they are a great tool, and see their value to hunters with impairments.

The problem is a few are quite lazy - any many of us that try to do the right thing are getting tired of the rule breakers.

I would even support opening it up a bit more - but add regulation for the rule breakers that had teeth - like if you ride in closed zones you lose your quad. Might start to make some think twice.

That's just it right there. Unfortunately, the powers that be find it much easier to punish the equipment rather than the person.

deerman · « **Reply #31 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:55:44 AM »

Quote from: 340 on February 14, 2013, 07:43:57 AM

That's just it right there. Unfortunately, the powers that be find it much easier to punish the equipment rather than the person.

?? The rule is you cannot carry a firearm on an OHV before noon. That is a behaviour. There is not a rule against OHVs just carrying a firearm on one.

340 · « **Reply #32 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:07:04 AM »

Quote from: deerman on February 14, 2013, 07:55:44 AM

?? The rule is you cannot carry a firearm on an OHV before noon. That is a behaviour. There is not a rule against OHVs just carrying a firearm on one.

I think you need to look at the bigger picture here.

Guido · « **Reply #33 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:38:16 AM »

Quote from: deerman on February 14, 2013, 07:55:44 AM

?? The rule is you cannot carry a firearm on an OHV before noon. That is a behaviour. There is not a rule against OHVs just carrying a firearm on one.

It is completely within the law to carry a firearm on your OHV 24 hours a day.

Tuc · « **Reply #34 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:41:16 AM »

Quote

I always tell folks who are ardent supporters of their use that they really need to start educating their group

I suppose they will make a law soon requiring all ATV users to pass a course. However this will not fix things related to ATV's and the environment or a rider ruining another's hunt at prime time. It's all about one's ethics....you have the good guys out there and you have the bad guys.

Unfortunately we all get painted with the same brush and the restrictions apply to all of us. I hope the ATV in the morning rule is thrown out. WTS, pressure on government from land owners and the haters could sure bring it back again.

Lurch · « **Reply #35 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:26:03 AM »

Quote from: Tuc on February 14, 2013, 08:41:16 AM

I suppose they will make a law soon requiring all ATV users to pass a course. However this will not fix things related to ATV's and the environment or a rider ruining another's hunt at prime time. It's all about one's ethics....you have the good guys out there and you have the bad guys.

Unfortunately we all get painted with the same brush and the restrictions apply to all of us. I hope the ATV in the morning rule is thrown out. WTS, pressure on government from land owners and the haters could sure bring it back again.

I think a course would be good to bring the lowest common denominator up a notch. Most of the guys I know have enough common sense - but there is the odd wing nut that just doesn't get it. A short piece on environmental impact would be good. And like I said - you get caught off the trail - you forfeit your quad to the crown.

And I am not a hater - spent a good amount of time in a Jeep doing the same thing.

Tuc · « **Reply #36 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:06:42 AM »

Hey Lurch, I agree with the course, we need all the education we can get on how ATV's impact the environment. Some will pay attention to it and some....well, in one ear and out the other.

Quote

you get caught off the trail - you forfeit your quad to the crown.

You might be onto something there but I doubt if that would happen right away. I suppose there would be warnings and fines, repeat offenders, ya why not, time to learn the hard way.

My comment about the 'haters' wasn't directed towards anyone, was using it as a general figure of speech.

It will be interesting to see how this new reg plays out.....

deerman · « **Reply #37 on:** February 14, 2013, 12:25:07 PM »

Quote from: Guido on February 14, 2013, 08:38:16 AM

It is completely within the law to carry a firearm on your OHV 24 hours a day.

Where and when?

Hunting with Motorized Vehicles
It is unlawful to

discharge a weapon at antelope from within 46 m (50 yards) of a vehicle;

use motorized travel within Willmore Wilderness Park; and

carry a weapon (see definition) on an OHV between 1 hour before sunrise and the following noon during an open season for big game* on public land in the following WMUs: 102-166, 200-260, 300-351, 354-360, 400-446, 507, 508, 514, 521, 522, 526 and 841. This does not apply to a person who is traveling on a direct route to or from a location accessible by vehicles designed for highway travel and his or her isolated campsite, and the weapons and ammunition are carried out of view in separate locked containers (and remain locked during the trip). Also, the restriction does not apply in a WMU when the only big game season open is a spring black bear season.
* this restriction applies to all hunters (including bird game hunters).

deerman · « **Reply #38 on:** February 14, 2013, 12:27:50 PM »

Quote from: 340 on February 14, 2013, 08:07:04 AM

I think you need to look at the bigger picture here.

Give me a hint, what does the "big picture" look like?

340 · « **Reply #39 on:** February 14, 2013, 12:32:33 PM »

Quote from: deerman on February 14, 2013, 12:27:50 PM

Give me a hint, what does the "big picture" look like?

No OHV's, anywhere on public lands.

Author Topic: OHV regulation (Read 11254 times)

walleyes

340

walleyes

340

340

Guido

Tuc

Tuc

340