Enhanced Protection For The Castle

[BurningChrome]

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/province-to-announce-enhanced-protection-of-castle-wilderness-area

[ÜberFly]

Yup just saw this on Twitter! I'll becrossing my fingers it's going to be worthwhile!!

 

P

[cheeler]

Proposed map: http://www.albertaparks.ca/media/6372906/castle-proposed.pdf

 

Link to information and public comment:

 

http://www.albertaparks.ca/albertaparksca/about-us/public-consultations/archives/enhancing-the-protection-of-the-castle-area.aspx

[jgib01]

Looks like the Provincial park will encompasses Beaver Mines area, Castle Falls, and most of the Carbondale/Lynx area. That is a lot of random campers who will be "upset". Not saying that's a bad thing, but might be some strong and vocal opposition from those folks. Personally, I think it is pretty awesome, especially if they put some resources into developing some of the exisiting camping areas. Can only be a good thing in terms of restricting OHV to trails too.

 

Edit: Now that I took the survey, it looks like there may be some efforts made to manage random camping, by designating it to specific areas (which by definition will make it no longer truly random). Maybe a good happy medium to satisfy both sides.

[BurningChrome]

Btw, here's a link to the survey for anyone who hasn't found it yet:

http://www.albertaparks.ca/albertaparksca/about-us/public-consultations/archives/enhancing-the-protection-of-the-castle-area.aspx

 

Here's what I wrote for my additional comments:

 

I am an off roader and fly fisher. While it's always difficult to lose access to OHV trails, I believe that the Castle area is too sensitive to support motorized OHV trails. I would rather see the OHV trails closed entirely in the Castle and new, sustainable trails created in a nearby location. If the trails are closed without providing new trails in their stead then OHV users will simply find places to make their own trails in areas that are equally sensitive like along highway 40.

I also feel that unless there is more money put into enforcement that many of the goals of the enhanced protection won't be met. There currently seem to be too few Fish & Wildlife and Conservation officers to cover large regions. Without additional officers to enforce new regulations, people will continue to treat the area like the "wild west" environment that currently exists.

[Spurly]

I agree 100% without more enforcement out there, the problem with ATV's is not going away.In my opinion, without designated trails in this area, we are just pushing the problem somewhere else.I walk a lot of miles of creeks and rivers in a season, and, cannot beleive

The places along the creeks, that I am seeing ATV tracks. These people are showing complete, disrespect, for these river beds.

At the very least we need a ton of signs put up, making these idiots aware of what it will cost them if they are caught destroying, any kind of fish habitat.main trails need to be established, and controlled, as well as enforced. There are lots of responsible riders, who also need to help educate the irresponsible ones, giving all ATV riders a bad name.None of this will happen overnight, but it is good to know it will start happening soon. Forcing some of the random campers into campgrounds may also help, when they check in, theyget a pamphlet with all the do's and dont's.If they don't learn quick, make them pay. Maybe seize a few bikes, word travels quick.

[jpinkster]

I took the link and threw it up on the AB Fly Fisher FaceBook page as well.

 

Here are my expanded comments:
This is a unique opportunity to provide better education and understanding of these incredibly sensitive natural areas. I believe that an information centre (similar to the Icefield Centre in Jasper) could enhance the natural experience in the Castle area. The Castle is home to some of our most sensitive native species in Alberta, and some resources should be used to inform and celebrate that point.

 

It is a shame that this area had to deteriorate this extensively before something like this could be done. That being said, I am very happy this decision has been made. We need to take every precaution necessary to ensure that irresponsible OHV cannot continue to cut a scar through this entire area. OHV use needs to be heavily regulated and enforced if this area is going to make a real difference.

I envision the Castle area again becoming a world renowned trophy fishery for native Cutthroat and Bull Trout, and the only way that happens is if we protect valuable feeding and spawning grounds.

[bcubed]

Have to say, if this happens, and is implemented well, the NDP have been a success.

[jpinkster]

Have to say, if this happens, and is implemented well, the NDP have been a success.

On this file. Tip of the cap to the NDP for giving this some needed attention after decades of neglect. That said, I need to see much more across the board before I'll label them a success.

[pepper]

Kevin Van Tigham posted this information on his FB timeline and asked that it be shared. Kevin is the author of the soon to be released book "Heart Waters: Sources of the Bow River". https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/heart-waters-sources-of-the-bow-river-tickets-18442459894

 

The Alberta government is soliciting planning advice from us for the new protected area in the Castle River, which will continue to have off-road vehicle as a permitted use. If you want to give them your thoughts, you can send an email to LUF@gov.ab.ca with the subject line "Enhancing the Protection of the Castle Area." In case it is helpful, here is what I just sent them and if you like any of it, feel free to cut-and-paste:

 

Hi. Your feedback form asked about point facilities, but not the linear ones (i.e. trails). I think that is a mistake, as one of the most controversial issues in the Castle has been, and for the next while will continue to be, off-road motorized use.

 

Given its culture of vandalism and the serious, accelerating impacts that this activity is causing throughout the foothills region, I oppose any off-road motorized use of the protected area. But since the government has decided that this use will continue, however, I am hoping you will seriously consider these suggestions:

 

1. Trail density. A planning criterion should be linear trail density, and in keeping with the premise that you are enhancing the protection of this area above the status quo, very conservative trail density targets should be established as a planning principle. I would suggest that the linear trail density in the Wildland Park be set at 25% of the density identified for core grizzly habitat in the grizzly recovery plan, and that the density in the Provincial Park be set at 50%. Low trail densities not only minimize wildlife impacts and wear-and-tear on the land, but they enhance the recreational quality of everyone’s experience by making the place feel wilder and less busy.

 

2. Trail standards. One of the big problems with off-road motorized activity is that few, if any, of the trails that off-roaders use are designed and maintained for that purpose. They quickly become rutted, then muddy, then impassable. Two things happen then: many users go around them, creating a braided trail system that disturbs far more land, and some users decide these are places for motor play and start mud bogging in and around the damaged sites. In either case the non-verbal message to subsequent users is that they need not care for the land because it is obvious that nobody else does. So you get a continual lowering of the common denominator for user stewardship and respect for the land. It is essential, if off-road vehicle use is to continue as an accepted use in these parks (given that, strictly speaking, it is not a legitimate activity of a protected area) that trails be built to a much higher standard with drainage diversion bars, hardened bases where they cross soft soils or concave areas, corduroy and bridges to cross wet areas, etc. Users need to have no doubt about where their wheels should be or reluctance to put their wheels there. If you are going to allow off-roading, design for it. If you can’t afford to design for it, prohibit it.

 

3. Restoration. There is extensive and severe landscape damage throughout the Caste region from poorly planned off-road use, deliberate vandalism, motor play and random camping. Much of the damage is in low elevation grasslands, riparian areas and side hills that have very high ecological and watershed values. These sites aren’t going to heal quickly (and are subject to continuing erosion and weed invasion) and as long as the scars are visible they will attract illegal use. The healing process would be accelerated by felling trees into them or finding other ways to get large woody debris onto the erosion spots, planting screening vegetation and transplanting plugs of native vegetation to hasten the revegetation process. Healing is essential not only to prevent future illegal use but to restore ecological communities and to plug all the leaks in the water table that result from shallow ground water draining into trail cuts. I strongly recommend that restoring damaged sites be given a high priority in the capital development program during the next several years. It is more important than building new stuff. One way to reduce the cost to the public Treasury would be to make effective restoration of damaged sites part of the “cost of admission” for off-roaders: adopt an approach whereby the government initially prohibits off-roading and then incrementally opens off-road trails built with public funds as off-road user groups meet targets for restoring the damage users have previously done. This would also go a long way towards addressing the sense of entitlement too many users have been able to develop.

 

4. Enforcement. If there is one subject on which those of us opposed to motorized off-road use and those promoting it agree, it is that a lot of the user conflict and landscape damage would go away if there were better enforcement of regulations. Under the Parks Act, you have the ability to require permits for motorized use off-highway, to set stringent conditions on use, and to confiscate equipment used to violate regulations. I strongly encourage you to use those legal authorities to the maximum, and to ensure a dedicated, on-the-ground enforcement presence with a mandate to ensure that park users are following the regulations.

 

All the above notwithstanding, I am personally of the view that motorized off-road use should be prohibited in the new parks. The Alberta government agencies responsible for land use in our headwaters have demonstrated an appalling lack of competence at managing this activity and as a result the landscape is fragmented, eroding and muddy in many areas we other users remember as healthy, green and well-cared for in the not so distant past. There is a culture of vandalism and entitlement among a significant subset of the users that translates into bullying, aggression and abuse of public servants trying to enforce rules and of other users. This is not the Alberta we should be living in and it is not the kind of ethic that will give us healthy landscapes and secure water supplies into the future. If we can’t send a strong message to motorized vandals by banning them from the new protected area, then at least please use your approach to the planning, construction, maintenance and policing of off-road use to start steering land users back to the stewardship ethic that used to be the standard among those of us whose hearts are torn by what we have seen happen to the places we love best.

 

Thanks

[tika]

Great post Pepper!

Email to LUF@gov.ab.ca sent.

[dalewig]

very well written and informative, email from my way sent as well (copy and pasted)

[BurningChrome]

Kevin Van Tigham posted this information on his FB timeline and asked that it be shared. Kevin is the author of the soon to be released book "Heart Waters: Sources of the Bow River". https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/heart-waters-sources-of-the-bow-river-tickets-18442459894

Can anyone get me in touch with Kevin? The points in that email are almost identical to the responsible off roading plan a group I belong to is trying to promote.