Snow Creek

[KathyW]

http://www.summitpost.org/phpBB3/desert ... 95-75.html

Don't forget to comment.

[OtherHand]

Well this is an interesting turn of events. Be sure and read the Nonexclusive Use condition on page 4 of the "Proposed Action" document.

And this is probably a more direct link to the meat of the matter than the post above.

[Norris]

I sent the following email to Ms Hoggan:

Dear Ms Hoggan:
The DWA has for many years harassed and intimidated hikers and climbers attempting to access the north face of San Jacinto for purposes of climbing it.
The so-called “Snow Creek” route on Mt San Jacinto is a very old climbing route which predates any permit to the DWA or its Palm Springs predecessor agency. It is a route of special importance to area climbers. Accessing this route requires passage through sections 28 and 33.

Note that the PCT (Pacific Crest Trail) also passes through this area, but the PCT is not the only hiking/climbing trail. There has been an established use trail for many years used by climbers wishing to climb the North Face of San Jacinto. I have personally wanted to climb this route for many years, but have been unable to because of the DWA. The DWA has employed tactics bordering on paramilitary to intimidate and drive off climbers. If you have not already reviewed it, please be sure to read the following threads on climbing message boards which document some of the recent problems:

viewtopic.php?p=18604

http://www.summitpost.org/phpBB3/dwa-il ... 52729.html

I would like to be assured that the proposed action regarding the DWA permit renewal will allow climber access to the Snow Creek climbing route, which passes through sections 28 and 33. The proposed action document contains language which appears to support this, but more specific language is necessary to ensure public access to the North Face of San Jacinto, and to dissuade DWA from employing the kind of heavy-handed tactics it has used in the past.

Sincerely,
Norris R Merritt

[guest]

Hi,
Thanks for posting this Kathy, as I was going to put the word out here too.
I have spoken with Heidi Hoggan, Lands, Specials Uses and Mineral Administrator for SBNF re. this permit renewal for the DWA.
She assured me that the public has full access to the public lands in this area, including section 28, (north of 33), including the paved rd. leading from just outside Snow Creek Village, to the DWA's boundary, which goes PAST the PCT.

I also discussed the climber's having to divert around sec 33, she is aware of the difficulty of this. So, I asked if she new if DWA had clearly marked at the very least, the corners of their prop, let alone areas where climbers might go, and she wasn't sure, but didn't think so.
I think the responsibility should be on the DWA to mark their property, (I'm aware they have done this is some areas. Sure, some can carry GPS & get fairly accurate readings, but some of us don't use these.

I let her know there have been cases of strong-arming, posting their security guard at the PCT, (even though it's perfectly LEGAL for the public to continue on that part of the PUBLIC land. Heck, we can work out way up those boulder laden drainage's north of DWA's prop legally, (this seems to be an area where the infamous
"Sting" took place on the climbers. We're also legal above DWA's prop.

I also asked about all the camera's DWA has, including the one at the power station, where people used to park, but now are harassed. Of course, they are in their rights to have those on their property, (and hopefully these are helpful in deterring pot growers, the REAL polluters of the water). Heidi thought DWA had a "permit" for the one on public land, but I'd like to find the legality of photographing the public on public land, especially right on the PCT.

Let the San Berdu Nat'l Forest here from you, if you have any interest in this area, it's magical, rugged, amazing, and most of it OURS!
I have pdf's detailing the permit, land area, conditions, (which are interesting), etc. but don't know how to include these here, (can sent via e-mail, is anyone wants to PM me).

I don't know the deadline to renew this permit, but it's happening fairly soon.

ss

[bluerail]

there are markers for 33, theyre just hard to spot

[zippetydude]

I sent her a letter as well. Her background is pretty impressive - she's not from "city hall", she's a former animal trainer and wildlife biologist. I'm hoping that her position grants her the power to make things happen as it seems she is most likely already on the side of those who love nature. How refreshing!

z

[guest]

That's impressive Zip, I did not know that, (she's an infiltrator for wilderness!).
She was kind enough to spend a good 15-20 min. with my questions / comments, and encouraged me to spread the word.

Also, the the forest service wants to know if there have been any cases of harassment of the public on public land. This is considered in the permit process.

Now, if we can get a kick-ass winter on the mountain, it will be will be great.

[KathyW]

It's interesting that they she wants to know about any cases of harassment. I recall a day when the sheriff was sent out to Snow Creek to catch climbers at the bottom and Rangers were sitting on top of Mount San Jacinto waiting to catch the climbers who got past the sheriff at the bottom. They were going to issue citations to the climbers for not having permits, which is all they could do. I guess the problem is that you have three agencies involved - USDA, the State, and DWA. I can't recall if the rangers were state or federal, but I'd assume they were state based on where they were sitting.

[dstine2]

Photo link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/89761925@N03/15040765221/

I find it strange that there is no reference to the buildings shown in this screen shot. No wonder DWA has been protecting their facilities by excluding the public from this area of National Forest. Was there any reference to the buildings on National Forest land in the 1937 Special Use Permit to Palm Springs Water Company, or 1968 Special Use Permit to Desert Water Agency, or 1978 Special Use Permit to Desert Water Agency? GIS and GPS cannot be substituted for a Record of Survey to administer the National Forest Boundary. Managers cannot manage the boundary by drawing a line on a 1:24000 USGS quad map. That line is 80' wide when you zoom in on it! There is a gross failure in Lands and Special Uses at the Forest level management. At least in 1982 when a Record of Survey was done by the Forest Service on the North line of Section 28, the found encroachment in Snow Creek was resolved with The Small Tracts Act. Any posting of No Trespassing Signs on sectional boundary without a Record of Survey should be prohibited in the new Permit. The controlling corners of section 33 were set in 1896 with no record of having been recovered since.

DWA T3SR3ES33SBM

SE S33
3S3E400100 V407 P6 & 7 5/23/1896 Pearson 80.00 Set a granite stone 20x10x6 ins. 15 ins. in the ground for the corner of sections 3, 4, 33 and 34 marked with 3 notches on the E. and 3 notches on the W. edges and raised a mound of stone 4 feet base 2 feet high W. of corner.

S 1/4 S33
3S3E340100 V407 P7 5/23/1896 Pearson 40.00 Set a granite stone 18x10x8 ins. 12 ins. in the ground for quarter section corner marked 1/4 on the N. face and raised a mound of stone 3 1/2 feet base 2 feet high N. of corner

SW S33
3S3E300100 V407 P7 & 8 5/23/1896 Pearson 80.00 The point for the section corner falls on top of a granite boulder in place 3x3x2 feet above ground on which I cut a cross (+) at exact corner point for the corner of sections 4, 5, 32 and 33 marked with 4 notches on the E. and 2 notches on the W. edges and raised a mound of stone 4 feet base 2 feet high 4 feet S. of corner

E 1/4 S33
3S3E400140 V407 P36 6/1/1896 Pearson 40.00 Set a granite stone 20x10x5 ins. 15 ins. in the ground for quarter section corner, marked 1/4 on the W. face and raised a mound of stone 3 feet base 2 feet high W. of corner

WP NE S33
3S3E400162.5 V407 P37 6/1/1896 Pearson 62.50 I set a granite stone 16x10x6 ins. 12 ins. in the ground for witness point, marked W.P. on W. face and raised a mound of stone 3 1/2 feet base 2 feet high W. of corner

WC NE S33
3S3E407.5200 V407 P37 6/1/1896 Pearson 80.00 The true point for the corner of sections 27, 28, 33 and 34. Set a granite stone 12x10x8 ins. 8 ins. in the ground for the witness corner to the corner of sections 27, 28, 33 and 34, marked W.C. on N.E. face with 1 notch on the S. and 3 notches on the E. edges and raised a mound of stone covered with earth 4 feet base 2 feet high W. of corner.

WP W 1/4 S33
3S3E300132.4 V407 P46 & 47 6/3/1896 Pearson 32.40 Set a granite stone 12x10x8 ins. 8 ins. in the ground for witness point, marked W.P. on W. face and raised a mound of stone covered with earth 3 1/2 feet base 2 feet high W. of corner

WC W 1/4 S33
3S3E300147 V407 P47 6/3/1896 Pearson 47.00 Set a granite stone 20x14x15 ins. 15 ins. in the ground for the witness corner to quarter section corner, marked W.C. 1/4 on the W. face and raised a mound of stone 4 feet base 2 feet high W. of corner

NW S33
3S3E300200 V407 P47 6/3/1896 Pearson 80.00 The point for the section corner 150 feet above gulch falls on flat top of boulder in place 40 feet N. and S. boundary 40 feet E. and W. on which I cut a cross (+) at exact corner point for the corner of sections 28, 29, 32 and 33 marked with 1 notch on the S. and 4 notches on E. sides and raised a mound of stone 4 feet base 2 feet high 4 feet W. of corner.


WP NE S33
3S3E369200 V407 P48 6/3/1896 Pearson 11.00 Set a granite stone 15x10x8 ins. 12 ins. in the ground for witness point, marked W.P. on N. face and raised a mound of stone covered with earth 3 1/2 feet base 2 feet high N. of corner

N 1/4 S33
3S3E340200 V407 P48 6/3/1896 Pearson 40.00 Set a granite stone 20x10x8 ins. 15 ins. in the ground for quarter section corner marked 1/4 on the N. face and raised a mound of stone 4 feet base 2 feet high N. of corner

[Hikin_Jim]

For what it's worth, here's my letter to the USFS:

To: Heidi Hoggan, USFS Project Lead, Desert Water Agency Reissuance <hhoggan@fs.fed.us>
Subject: Scoping -- Desert Water Agency Reissuance
Date: 28 Aug 2014

I. It has come to my attention that the lease held by the Desert Water Agency (hereinafter referred to as the DWA) of the National Forest lands in Township 3 South, Range 3 East, Section 28 (hereinafter referred to as simply "Section 28") is currently in the process of being renewed.

II. I have examined the DWA's application for renewal, and I find that it is substantially incomplete. To wit:
A. Structures. Those structures operated by the DWA which can be clearly seen in a satellite photograph of Section 28 are not enumerated in the DWA's application for renewal. Inasmuch as those structures are not listed in the renewal application but do constitute land use and may have substantive environmental and other impacts on the public lands in Section 28, the DWA's application for renewal cannot be considered complete. The observable structures have been labeled for references as follows: Structure 1, Structure 2, Structure 3, and Structure 4. Note that structure 3 may or may not be completely within the confines of Section 28. For further discussion of this point, see section IV of this communication, below. The approximate latitude and longitude of each of the structures is as follows:
33.87508441, -116.6811803, Structure 1
33.87364470, -116.6814083, Structure 2
33.87347795, -116.6815880, Structure 3
33.87360572, -116.6816993, Structure 4
B. Residential use. At least one of the structures operated by the DWA appears to be a residence. Residential use is not described in the permit application. The permit application cannot be considered complete until all uses are listed.
C. Electronic surveillance. The DWA has placed electronic devices on the lands contained within Section 28. The use and location of these devices are not described in the permit application. The permit application cannot be considered complete until all uses are listed.

III. Inasmuch as the DWA's application for renewal is substantially incomplete, I urge the US Forest Service to suspend consideration of renewal until an amended application, one that is complete, is received from the DWA.

IV. The precise location of the boundary between Township 3 South, Range 3 East, Section 28 and Township 4 South, Range 3 East, Section 33 is not clear. The last known Survey of Record of this boundary occurred in 1896, according to records publicly available. Without a proper Survey of Record, it is impossible for the public to reasonably understand what is contained in Section 28 and therefore impossible for the public to have a reasonably informed opinion concerning the DWA's application for renewal.

V. Inasmuch as the public does not have the information necessary to form a reasonable opinion regarding the DWA's application for renewal, I urge the US Forest Service to suspend consideration of renewal until such time as a Survey of Record of Township 3 South, Range 3 East, Section 28 and Township 4 South, Range 3 East, Section 33 can be completed.

VI. Regardless of whether the renewal process for Section 28 proceeds or is suspended, I urge the US Forest Service to write specific provisions into any lease for Section 28 that guarantee non-motorized public access to the land within Section 28 with only very limited, specific exclusions such as the interior of buildings, structures, storage tanks, pipelines, and similar directly operated by the lease holder. The current provisions in the Proposed Action in the section entitled "Non-Exclusive Use" should be expanded to expressly allow non-motorized recreational activities including but not limited to: photography, hiking, picnicking, and bird-watching, The "Non-Exclusive Use" section should specifically state that public passage on foot on the lands in Section 28 is permitted. These additions to the are necessary due to the DWA's long standing practice of forbidding any and all public access to Section 28.

HJ