Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Messages

Deep Creek Hot Springs

The Moon is Waxing Crescent (21% of Full)


Advanced

Re: Unwanted attention

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.

August 12, 2002 04:57PM
This is amazing, so many questions and wild statements. Where do I even begin?

Remember that I posted on the website that I had contacted Barbara Boxer's Office in Washington, D. C. concerning the proposed bill concerning the designation of "wild and scenic" for Deep Creek? I posted what the person told me concerning my inquiry.

I strictly focused on the recreational aspect the fact that there was no recreational designation being proposed for Deep Creek and how may this affect the access to Deep Creek Hot Springs. I inquired that if the human use impacted the stream, the toads, or the Indian cultural sites, could our recreational use of the area be restricted?

Should a recreational designation for Deep Creek be part of the proposed bill due to the long history of recreational use of this area?

She referred me to the California Wild Heritage Campaign and Friends of the River to receive more details of the impact on recreation.

Mike Castro's name was never mentioned, not even once to the representative at Barbara Boxer's Office. This conversation was focused on the proposed bill and the impact on the recreation.

When I make these types of calls, I am very diplomatic and factual about my inquiries. I realize that Deep Creek and the clothing optional aspect is controversial, therefore, that is never brought into my conversations with the Government Agencies. It is irrelevant. If the lady at Barbara Boxer's office developed any negative impression of Deep Creek, it was not through my conversation with her because I did not mention anything except the proposed bill.

I met Joyce Burk and Terry Wold, members of the Sierra Club at a Forest Service meeting several years ago. Terry Wold and I talk on a regular basis and have a good rapport. Joyce Burk, on the other hand, turned 360 degrees towards me after speaking to Tim Reid and Ranger Barry Nelson from the BLM. I know that Ranger Barry Nelson slandered me by making false statements to Joyce Burk. I called Joyce Burk immediately after receiving her email to inform her that Ranger Nelson's statements were false. Joyce Burk emailed these false and slanderous statements to several members of the Sierra Club.

There has to be something else going on between the BLM and Joyce Burk. I do not know exactly what that may be, however, Joyce Burk's behavior was erratic and illogical. At first Joyce Burk said she knew people in the Sierra Club who were afraid of Mike Castro and afraid to go up to Deep Creek. Joyce Burk said she knew of Mike Castro's pay for protection racket. Joyce Burk called someone while I was there at the Victorville Library that day and spoke to this person about me and having me come to some of their meetings. In other words, there are independent witnesses to her behavior.

Do you really think that if we are just silent while the future of Deep Creek is planned by the public agencies that we are safe from scrutiny? Deep Creek Hot Springs is on the U. S. Forest and BLM maps. Do you really think they have no knowledge about Deep Creek Hot Springs?

The reality is that they do know about Deep Creek Hot Springs. They are discussing all areas of the San Bernardino National Forest right now in developing their management plans. I am positive that other people, including members of the Sierra Club who are discussing Deep Creek Hot Springs. Because the people who enjoy Deep Creek Hot Springs have not been involved in the planning process, other interested people are planning the future of Deep Creek.

Members of the Sierra Club have been actively involved in the proposed designation of Deep Creek as "wild and scenic". Joyce Burk and I talked about that possibility and that she would eventually like to have the area designated as "wilderness".

The planning process involves participation from the public who utilizes the area. We are a group who have an interest in the Deep Creek area. We have a right and have an interest in taking part in deciding the future of Deep Creek.

Is it because we are naturists that we are to remain silent? Is there something wrong with the clothing optional aspect of Deep Creek that we do not want to call attention to our activities?

I have encouraged the public to participate in the management of public lands. This is normal acceptable activity, which is part of the public process. I have encouraged the public to express their views (whatever those views may be) to the appropriate public agencies. This is how the normal planning process is done.

The new group (name to be determined) will need to be actively involved with these public agencies if the group is to accomplish their goal of preserving public access to Deep Creek Hot Springs, the family atmosphere and clothing optional aspect into the future.

Success has to include the participation and cooperation of the appropriate public agencies. The group, by itself, has no authority over the management of Deep Creek Hot Springs.

I realize that my position concerning Mike Castro and the Bowen Ranch has made me too controversial a person to appropriately represent Deep Creek Hot Springs to these agencies. That is why when I attended these public meetings, it was as a silent witness to the proceedings. That is why I am very happy that the new group is being formed. Deep Creek needs to have a strong group of people who care about the future of the area and will represent its best interest to these agencies.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

Unwanted attention

Laughing Bear 836August 09, 2002 04:11PM

Re: Unwanted attention

Wizard 504August 09, 2002 09:02PM

Re: Unwanted attention

Laughing Bear 534August 10, 2002 06:27AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Paul P. 554August 10, 2002 09:56AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Arizona Mike 501August 10, 2002 10:20PM

Re: Unwanted attention

Kary 607August 10, 2002 11:32AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Wizard 546August 11, 2002 09:34AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Wizard 557August 11, 2002 09:42AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Paul P. 564August 11, 2002 10:07AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Sycamore Laughing 524August 11, 2002 10:40AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Arizona Mike 531August 11, 2002 10:41AM

Re: Unwanted attention

DCR 540August 11, 2002 02:51PM

Re: Unwanted attention

Wizard 565August 11, 2002 08:59PM

Re: Unwanted attention

Az. Mike 522August 12, 2002 01:19AM

Re: Unwanted attention

Laughing Bear 914August 12, 2002 05:24PM

Re: Unwanted attention

katrina 1347August 12, 2002 04:57PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login