jpinkster

I'm going to do a little bit of work on this in the next week or two. I'm hoping we can pull together a bunch of guys and a press release, maybe in conjunction with TUC, and get some real exposure on this one. This is a fantastic way to show that we are paying attention and that we care about this stuff.

It's a head scratcher to me as well. I'm pestering F&W on their FaceBook page to get some clarification on this. It made sense when the CO was explaining it to me, but your quote from the Public Lands Act is clear as day. We issued an administrative inquiry in July asking what the City is planning to do about this. Admin works at the speed of government on some of this stuff, and I've been told we will need to await their response. If I don't have something closer to the end of the month, I'll start getting a little pissy. The City of Calgary could turn the entire area into a Loading Zone as I mentioned before. To me that would be a pretty simple solution and shouldn't actually be that difficult to do. Once we get our reply from Administration I'll push back and ask if they could turn the area into a Loading Zone with designated parking only at the lot.

She said there isn't sadly. They could charge them with a number of things, but they would never get a conviction. She did say that the City could decide to turn these areas into Loading Zones. Essentially you could drop off gear or launch a boat, but you would be forced to park up at the parking lot. Not a bad idea...

Had a lengthy chat with the CO. She confirmed that while the vehicles are certainly stradling the line of what is acceptable, but it isn't illegal. You could argue that they are disrupting/damaging the bank, but that is really hard to prove. A little frustrating that there isn't much that could be done, but it was good to understand the legislation a little better.

There are 6 or 7 trucks parked on the gravel bar this evening under Graves Bridge. I called RAP, but I know the rules around trucks on the bar are a little ambiguous. Hopefully the CO gets there.

This is always a risk.. I just think a pile of us respectfully showing up "in uniform" would send a huge message. If we could get enough confirmation ahead of time I could also draft a press release and see if it might get some media attention.

I think having folks from different areas in the province makes the biggest statement. Do we all wear waders?

Folks, Some confirmation on the court case for the Gap poachers from this thread: The Court proceedings will take place on September 29, 10:00 am in Pincher Creek. This is an opportunity for anglers to show up strong and show some solidarity against this kind of garbage.

Check out this article: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fish-habitat-protection-waning-under-harper-government-analysis-finds-1.3212403 Lowering the environmental bar could have very serious consequences.

This is my huge frustration with the sling. The only thing that is readily available is forceps on the front strap, otherwise you need to constantly flip the thing around.

Just my fiance. I'm clearly not trying anymore.

I went full red neck this weekend on the Oldman and wore my sling pack with no shirt on underneath. It was a gorgeous sight.

I know it doesn't answer your questions at all, but check the video that Humble did a few years back.

This entire debacle was very personal for me and my fishing buddies. We routinely fish the Oldman upstream from 22, and it is depressing to think that fish we may have encountered on a regular basis have been poached. A truly sad situation.

From My Wild Alberta: Waterbody Closures Fishing Effective August 21, 2015 all previously closed areas have reopened, with the exception of the St. Mary River downstream of the St. Mary Reservoir and its tributaries. This will remain closed until further notice. Remember folks, just because the closure is lifted doesn't mean the fish are out of the woods yet. Be respectful out there.

I appreciate your exaggeration. I'm not just talking to members of Council, I'm the direct adviser to one of them. This is what I do for work, and I get the time to interact with these folks on a daily basis. Are there some bad apples? Sure there are. For as many bad apples as there are, there are just as many who are just trying to make a positive difference. I look at work being done on the Green Line LRT for instance. Lots of political skin put in the game there, and it won't be privately benefiting any specific member of Council. There will likely be some public money spent on this project. That being said, I don't think anyone on that Council feels strongly about the first crack at it.

Folks, Fabulous debate here, great to see so many informed perspectives. We released some details from our office about CalgaryNEXT today. For those of you who live in Calgary it is CRITICALLY important that you let your Councillor know where you stand on this issue. From walking the halls here at City Hall I can tell you that there is very little appetite on Council to support the current proposal as it stands. If public money is going to be dedicated to a project, it is important that we find corresponding public benefit. Right now there are so many questions that still need to be answered. If the Flames are going to make an ask of public funds, we need to be transparent about the dollar figure. The price tag is not just the $200 million, it would be drastically higher. http://shanekeating.ca/calgarynext-whats-next/

We aren't facing the exact same circumstance here, but Oliver hits hard on this issue.

Development would not be allowed without remediation of the contaminated land.

There is a small portion of the Oldman is closed. From Highway 22 down to 510.

The City of Calgary already has plans to build a Field House. The public Field House would cost $200M. In this case, the only City contribution would be to cover the costs of a facility they were already planning. The entire facility would be on City land and the state of the art facility would be a City owned asset which the Flames would be leasing. I'm still uneasy about the public burden on this, especially since there are some serious concerns about the remediation of the land.

Today the Calgary Flames unveiled plans for the new stadium plans: http://globalnews.ca/news/2171041/calgary-flames-arena-announcement-expected-tuesday/ The public burden on this is incredible. To recap: - $240M Community Revitalization Levy. This is a burden on tax payers, as this is valuable tax base that could be used on something that contributes to a greater public need. - $200M City of Calgary Field House. Direct burden on the tax payer. Sure we need the public field house, but is it worth $200M? - $250M ticket tax. Who is going to pay this tax? The consumer. Great vision, horrid funding model.

Yup. Thanks for tipping me off that they had a FB page. Glad to see they at least responded with some action.

Sounds like an amazing trip! Looks like my blog has some competition

A closure is a closure. Just because some people may disagree with it, doesn't change the fact that the river is closed.