The local Bureau of Land Management has been intricately involved with the Public Officials of San Bernardino County for decades. 75% of the land area in San Bernardino County is managed by Federal government agencies. There is a huge Federal influence within the county through Federal funding and power.

Tim Salt has been Regional Manager for approximately three years. During this time, the Bureau of Land Management has been involved in the Molycorp Mine operation where nuclear waste was spilled onto public land (an environmental crime). This was nicely settled for $1 million and the mine is continuing to store nuclear waste in plastic lined pools with no environmental impact report with an elementary school nearby.

You said in 20 words or less and I seem to have already exceeded that amount. Suggestion: You could read only 20 of the words. LOL

What I am trying to tell you is that this particular Bureau of Land Management has not conducted it's self with concern for the environment.

The Plaintiffs, Southwest Center for Biodiversity, etal. must have had the Bureau of Land Management by the short hairs for this settlement agreement.

However, my personal concern about Tim Salt concerns the Moss Mill Road issue. The last letter from Tim Salt was a request for a Solicitor's (lawyer) opinion on Moss Mill Road May 12, 2000. The Bureau of Land Management have yet to respond with an answer on Moss Mill Road.

The Moss Mill Road issue has caused violent conflict in the area and concern for public safety. I allege that this conflict was created by the BLM's misrepresenting the facts about the easement and allowing the criminal destruction of government property and ongoing violence.

The information about Moss Mill Road is now available at the new link: <A HREF="http://www.deepcreekhotsprings.org/smokinggun.html
<A HREF="BLM Smoking Gun: Moss Mill Road"></A>

More information will be added to document the BLM's numerous statements concerning Moss Mill Road and the related violence. Why would the Bureau of Land Management conceal the existence of this easement? Especially when they knew that the issue had created ongoing violence in the area? Aren't they supposed to reduce conflict? be concerned for public safety? provide reasonable public access to public lands?

Please excuse me Paul P. for using too many words. These issues are sometimes not that simple to explain.