All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion and not fact until verified independently.

June 26, 2002 12:18PM
EAST BAY wrote: "I cannot believe that people are actually concerned that, with a new, completely legal access trail to the spring that does not go through Mike Castro's toll road, riff raff will actually enter the springs!"

Maybe I missed something. Is there someone checking on every person who enters the Springs by way of JF3? I didn't think so. "Riff-raff" can indeed enter thru the JF3 route, TOTALLY UNCHECKED. Notice, I didn't they they HAVE, I just say IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE AND LIKELY TO HAPPEN, just as you accuse Mike of doing or at least implying somehow it's his fault that roudies come in thru the Bowen Ranch.

If you're going to imply that somehow Mike has done a less-than-adequate job of screening people, then what of the TOTALLY UNCONTROLLED JF3 entry point? Would you not apply the same criteria to that entry point? Aren't those who make that entry point more accessible also responsible for who gets in that way? Maybe they are. I'd certainly feel some responsibility for that. Or perhaps you just shrug it off and say, well, everyone's got a right to go to the Springs, so it's not my fault that I opened the door to let them all in. And who am I to say who gets in and who does not? Well, there IS a thing called "personal responsibility". I think it's an appropriate concept here.

But really, the topic has more to do with the VANDALISM that's occurring AT the JF3 parking lot rather than what those same people may be doing at the Springs themselves. Get the idea? "If you build it, they will come." Seems appropriate to point out that little reality. You should be thankful we have Mike turning down at least SOME of the people who flood into his property.

And sure, it appears he has a conflict of interest. Let's see. A carload of roudies shows up and Mike now has a moral dilema: Do I take the $4 and then deal with the possible consequences? Or do I turn them away? The fact is that Mike does indeed turn SOME people away.

$4, $8, or $12, or $16 [for a carload of 4 people] hardly makes a difference to Mike's budget, and presents no "conflict of interest" for him, in light of the possible negative consequences that COULD result in much greater damages. Gimme a break from any suggestion that Mike couldn't turn down a measily 4 bucks.

DCR --- I don't think YOU "get it". You said, among other things: "...if we had car trouble back on those routes we would hike out to make a phone call to someone that could help us. After all, we are there for hiking ... why would we call Mike Castro?"

No one was talking about YOU specifically, DCR. The FACT is that Mike receives requests for help CONSTANTLY. When was the last time YOU jumped someone's dead battery at the Springs? Or the last time you were awakened in the middle of the night cuz some silly hiker "lost" their car and you had to drive them back to JF3 to find it? Just because YOU would never call upon Mike (and I'm not referring to a phone call - you could WALK to his front door), doesn't mean that others have not. Indeed, this is the fact. Mike has done so on many occasions.

To be continued...
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

Shot in the hills

Wizard 1235June 20, 2002 08:55PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 722June 20, 2002 09:00PM

Re: Shot in the hills

mp 688June 21, 2002 12:23AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 758June 20, 2002 09:46PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 764June 21, 2002 09:39AM

Re: Shot in the hills

mp 826June 22, 2002 08:30PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 829June 23, 2002 06:42AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Arizona Mike 728June 24, 2002 07:34PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 692June 25, 2002 12:31PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 698June 25, 2002 04:11PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 696June 24, 2002 11:25PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Arizona Mike 789June 25, 2002 11:50AM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 722June 25, 2002 07:44AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Arizona Mike 748June 25, 2002 11:54AM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 746June 25, 2002 12:00PM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 728June 25, 2002 12:54PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 1408June 25, 2002 01:20PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 908June 25, 2002 01:34PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Free our Forests 1373June 25, 2002 01:52PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 764June 25, 2002 02:39PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Free our Forests 749June 25, 2002 04:30PM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 782June 25, 2002 06:36PM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 785June 25, 2002 07:07PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 756June 25, 2002 08:44PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 745June 25, 2002 08:58PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 749June 25, 2002 09:27PM

Re: Shot in the hills

laughing bear 707June 26, 2002 08:13AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 747June 26, 2002 11:43AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 824June 26, 2002 08:28AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 675June 26, 2002 08:50AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 678June 26, 2002 08:53AM

Re: Shot in the hills

EastBay 730June 26, 2002 10:50AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 652June 26, 2002 12:18PM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 645June 26, 2002 11:25AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 886June 26, 2002 11:28AM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 676June 26, 2002 11:59AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 782June 26, 2002 12:28PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Naked Man 735June 26, 2002 01:49PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 648June 26, 2002 12:09PM

Re: Shot in the hills

DCR 732June 26, 2002 12:40PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Free our Forests 745June 26, 2002 02:09PM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 750June 26, 2002 07:02PM

Re: Shot in the hills

EastBay 810June 27, 2002 11:23AM

Re: Shot in the hills

Wizard 1153June 27, 2002 08:03PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login