I hope the crow was done tastefully since it just happened on the menu. I have to say that I was quite surprised to read these latest developments. I guess it just took Mike Castro revving up his dirt bike and expanding his territory to include your neighborhood for you to see more clearly.

Since Mike Castro and Ranger Barry Nelson have a very close relationship, one should look at what Mike Castro is doing that the BLM want to have happen in the Juniper Flats area. Mike Castro has had a long relationship with the BLM.

As to what Mike Castro accomplished near the Bowen Ranch, he was allowed to close a public road, create dangerous conflicts over access, increase paying visitors and divide the hotsprings community. Now it seems that in your neighborhood, he is again creating dangerous conflict over access. In other areas, private land owners have received assistance with OHV riders who trespass on private land. Why are you left to your own devices? This is a very dangerous situation and a threat to public safety.

These routes or single track trails designated as J1021 and J1299, the question is were these routes or single track trails in existence on the topo map of 1976 which is reflected at topozone? Were these routes ever on official maps as open routes? If these were existing open routes, then in order to close them the BLM are supposed to go through a NEPA process. If J1299 was an existing open route, then it should have been included in the public comment process when discussing the route designation for the area. All interested members of the public should have been able to comment on these routes. Have you checked the minutes to the meetings to ascertain if J1299 was in the public discussion?

If J1299 was in existence on the topo map of 1976, it could be subject to being claimed as an open route by the County under RS2477. If someone just created a trail across private lands that is trespassing and vandalism of private property.

I believe that the BLM did not notify the private land owners of these meetings that would affect their property so that the private land owners could be part of the decision process. I repeatedly requested to be on their mailing or notification list so that I could notify people of these meetings and attend some myself. The BLM intentionally did not inform me of these meetings until near the end when most everything had been decided. In addition, I requested that the BLM notify private land owners in the area of these meetings.

If J1299 was an existing route or single track trail and if it supplies a major connection between public lands, then the rights of the private land owners, the rroutes? If these were existing open routes, then in order to close them the BLM are supposed to go through a NEPA process. If J1299 was an existing open route, then it should have been included in the public comment process when discussing the route designation for the area. All interested members of the public should have been able to comment on these routes. Have you checked the minutes to the meetings to ascertain if J1299 was in the public discussion?

If J1299 was in existence on the topo map of 1976, it could be subject to being claimed as an open route by the County under RS2477. If someone just created a trail across private lands that is trespassing and vandalism of private property.

I believe that the BLM did not notify the private land owners of these meetings that would affect their property so that the private land owners could be part of the decision process. I repeatedly requested to be on their mailing or notification list so that I could notify people of these meetings and attend some myself. The BLM intentionally did not inform me of these meetings until near the end when most everything had been decided. In addition, I requested that the BLM notify private land owners in the area of these meetings.

If J1299 was an existing route or single track trail and if it supplies a major connection between public lands, then the rights of the private land owners, the rights of the recreational public, the concern for the Indian cultural artifacts, would all need to be weighed in on in reaching a decision on the route. The route could be designated as nonmotorized as a solution.

The BLM have been paid to protect the Indian Cultural Artifacts. They were paid to erect a large fence around one such area (the fence was never put in) and they were paid to place gravel caps on top of the artifacts that were in places near or on a road. The BLM were budgeted annual funding for monitoring these Indian Cultural sites. I think that an examination of their funding versus their records of billing for these purposes would be very interesting. Did they in fact monitor these sites?