Wizard,

Let me CLARIFY my statement about Mike: "I like Mike" AS OWNER OF THE BOWEN RANCH.

To tell the truth, I hardly know Mike. We've talked only a few times, shared a cup of coffee or two.

But I like the way Mike greets me at I enter the Ranch. I'm totally OK with paying $4 to get to park there. Occasionally I bring others and still gladly pay $4 a head to get in. I've never had problems with vandalism on his property. He helped me when I ran out of water. He's helped me help others with their car problems. I've heard numerous stories about how he's helped others as well. I wouldn't want the Ranch to change hands. I like things just the way they are.

When 'DCHS, Inc' starts talking about taking Mike's property, that kinda upsets me because it's not a credible claim. And with some background in Real Estate, it looks like a very weak case at best to me.

I think POSSESSION is the operative concept here. Mike is in POSSESSION of the Ranch and buildings and has been for some time prior to Katrina's claim. Mike's been a long-time owner/occupant of the Ranch and paid a considerable sum to own it. Katrina is merely a 3rd party -- a 'stranger' to any and all transactions of real property in the area. It's difficult to see it any other way.

All this ownership stuff seems to REALLY be about adding more fuel on the fire of the feud started by DCHS, Inc regarding the closing of the Moss Mill Road while a rightful property owner was trying to exercise his property rights of NO TRESSPASSING.