Re: AZ Mike

Hello Ron:
As always, I liked your post and agree with what you are saying. Forgive me for the way I put it; I did not mean to imply that the group itself wanted to have a prerequisite of hatred, or of supporting predators. The statement about hatred of Mike Castro was, of course, directed towards Wizard, as he rightly ascertained. True, he hasn't said that one must hate Mike, but he has taken me to task, and in my opinion in a very unfriendly way, because he couldn't think of anything negative that I have said about anyone who enters through the Bowen Ranch. So, that is a personal issue now between Wizard and myself, and hopefully separate from the issues he has with Paul or with anyone else. In my mind, there is no reason why I could not still work with Wizard, but that choice is his.
Ron, if you have read the post I just made to Katrina as well as the one I started this thread with, then you can probably see why I made such statements, and especially concerning predators. See, I've brough up issues now that no one has responded to. That's o.k., no particular person has to, but eventually the group has to discuss and decide on them, and I need to know what the group feels about them. The post on this thread is not the first one in which I've raised these questions.
I do believe that most or all of the people who have expressed interest in working with this group have all of the good objectives that you described above. However, I have read things in posts from a few people that seem to me to indicate that what should be preserved is not the springs but access to the springs. I of course believe in public access, and since the springs are located on the pct, there is public access. I do not, however, support the idea that anyone can and should be able to access from any and all directions whether on a trail or not. It's not that I believe everyone "should" pay Mike C. to park at Bowen Ranch; it is just exactly as I stated: that I would work with the group if preservation OF THE SPRINGS is the main focus, and I will not work to secure "rights" to blaze new and shorter trails which, I feel, will only hasten the closure of DCHS. (Of course, this should not be a problem, since our flyer will be presented to the ranger and I know that encouraging people to use only marked trails is a part of the Forestry's agenda in the interests of preservation.)
I also asked a hypothetical question some time back that relates to my statement about predators, but that question was met with silence. Again, this shows me that there is an issue that must be addressed. I realize that the brochure says nothing about rights for predators and I am quite sure that you personally want a more wholesome family atmosphere. (I liked your reference to coyotes, by the way) My question may have been unanswered because it was originally posed as a hypothetical situation. Sorry, but I cannot be more clear than that without violating one of my own policies regarding what kinds of things I will or will not say on a public forum when it involves an individual (THIS INDIVIDUAL IS NOT WIZARD), but perhaps I can explain it better in person. I will bring up any potential issues at our meeting this Sunday and, as I indicated to Katrina, I will be posting what I gather from the discussion and hopefully others will do the same.

I apologize for the length of this post and hope that I have clarified my statements for you. If you have any remaining questions, please ask.