SERVED PAPERS FROM DWA !!! !

[EMan]

Steve, I know you are burdened enough with this BS, but I wish the public could see at a minimum a summary of the complaint in all it's absurdity.

And BTW, Patrick's approach to a limited "season" with mandatory wag bag compliance makes a great deal of sense. Naturally, I won't bet on its adoption.

[tinaballina]

TINA- Where are you

If i chime in it will get me in trouble.

[lilbitmo]

If you wish to let your opinions be known to the Board of Directors of the Desert Water Agency (remember that a well thought out reasonable communication will always accomplish more), their E-mail addresses are-

Patricia Oygar POygar@dwa.org
F. Thomas Kieley III TKieley@dwa.org
James Cioffi JCioffi@dwa.org
Ronald E. Starrs RStarrs@dwa.org
Craig A. Ewing CEwing@dwa.org

That's the point Nick, they should have let their wishes be known as stand up people, instead they monitor these web sites and allow sting operations and are now going after members of this board through court action, instead of trying to work with people that want to do the right thing - stay off their property and go around. Funny you would say that, I'll bet even money that they will try to serve me and that they already have a copy of this message. Would you consider their action "Up and Up"? Well thought out and reasonable was "Wally" coming down to Snow Creek Road to suggest an alternative route and not intimidating people even on the PCT which they have done to me and others on more than one occasion. You are welcome to forward this to them, I just don't want to make it that easy for them to harras me through my email address.

Thanks

[OtherHand]

There are two separate issues there. Travel across DWA property, and travel around it.

As to travel on the DWA property, as annoying as it might be, they have the right to prohibit trespassing. It's their property, it's not public (despite it being a public agency). The only way to get this to change is to persuade their board it's a good thing to do. This would probably involve the saying of nice things to them and engaging in reasonable discourse.

In regards to trespassing on their property, such a citation would only stick if the property is correctly posted per the Penal Code, and it's very specific. Most public agencies know how to do this right, but there's always the chance a podunk outfit will get it wrong. Someone might want to have a look at their property lines and see if it is in fact correct (but I suppose DWA will read this and do so anyway).

As for travel NOT on DWA property, well, there's just no discussion. Do it. Do it all you want. Stand there an make obscene gestures if you wish. Holler and draw their attention. Drop your drawers and moon them. Public land is public and you have every right to be there. If they were foolish enough to attempt to cite or otherwise detain you on public land....well let's just say a veritable crap-storm could be rained down upon them. It would be fun!

I suppose it could be possible that some sort of mickey mouse citation could be put against someone for "befouling the watershed" or some other such nonsense, but it would be very difficult to prove in the absence of any violation not being directly observed. What someone may post on an internet forum would hardly constitute evidence. That's not to say the DWA wouldn't try something like that to intimidate, but it wouldn't hold up. They have demonstrated a certain level of cluelessness as to just who might also be reading this forum and what sorts of talents they could bring to any such "discussion".

I, for one, would be interested to hear more details of what is being meant by "being served with papers". Is there a citation, or is it just a warning made up to look ominous and thus to intimidate?

And the previous posters are correct....The press would greatly enjoy a story where clean cut (sorta) outdoorsy hikers are being harassed by a public agency for travel on public land.

[Rick Kent]

This action by the DWA is appalling! I haven't been on this message board for some time and don't know the extent of what has occurred but so far what I've seen is disturbing. I sure hope this blows up in their face. The DWA clearly has no right to harrass hikers outside their own property. As mentioned by others these actions really make no sense. I really hope the media picks up on this at some point.

-Rick

[lilbitmo]

I, for one, would be interested to hear more details of what is being meant by "being served with papers". Is there a citation, or is it just a warning made up to look ominous and thus to intimidate?

And the previous posters are correct....The press would greatly enjoy a story where clean cut (sorta) outdoorsy hikers are being harassed by a public agency for travel on public land.

They have served four individuals from this board with a lawsuit or at the very least the papers to get one started. Those individuals have expressed that they do not want to make the matter worse.

I would only hope that the DWA and it's governing board would want to set the record straight at a bare minimum, why did they authorize "gorilla tactics" (Ninja style catch and release rent-a-cops, letting hikes go without citations, while hiding in the bushes tactics with masks and full blacked out, outfits) when the property is not correctly marked onsite, I repeat not marked properly - you would have thought that hikers/climbers were trying to get into a nuclear powerplant or into area 51 in Nevada.

Can anyone say "Hit a Fly with a sledgehammer"? They are using the court system to inimidate these individuals - it's wrong, they don't want comprimise they want complete control on the north face of San Jacinto.

What will it take to get their "clear cut response" to why they are so protective of the property that is outside the 1 mile square - the crossing of snow creek is so limited in it's time and disturbance to the natural setting to be absurd to make their point. The amount of human contact (actual contact) is so "finite" that there has to be more to the picture than meets the eye.

If anyone has access to a "investigative reported" by all means, let's have them jump in with both feet.

[bluerail]

Im starting to feel bad guys....all this posting got kinda busy this afternoon, and Fern and I were enjoying a 4 hour trip in the sunshine on skyline.
actually, it was kinda hot, but we weren't on snowcreek.

I really appreciate everyones concern, everyones. even our family at the tram has been following all of this.

Ernie I will try to get this scanned and online for people to read in the next couple of days.

Getting in touch with the media is a great idea, and if anyone has any personal contacts I would greatly apreciate any help there. Even suggesting someone who you think might take an interest in this case, and then I can go from there.

one last thing, any of you guys out there that are lawyers that would be interested in taking a look at this whole thing and giving advice, or more, Fernando and I would really appreciate. We could pay with guided trips up Snowcreek next spring ( the legal route) and I bet we can even get Fern to carry your gear.

Thanks once again to all of you.

Patrick, call me tomorrow if you get a chance, would you.

[tinaballina]

Yeah, i tried here...editor hasn't gotten back to me. You would never know i work for a newspaper.

[halhiker]

The reason for the closure as it was explained to me had to do with the EPA and protection of the watershed. If the DWA could show that there was no threat to the watershed they could pipe the water directly to customers after filtration without any further processing or treatment. I don't know how true this is but it's what I was told.

Unfortunately, most agencies do these things the wrong way. Instead of talking to people and creating friendships based on trust and respect they get all Gestapo as we've seen here. They exert their power rather than work with the community. It's the history of water agencies in California.

Even if they have no leg to stand on it is more an annoyance for those involved in this and a message sent. They can afford it while most of those served can't. Word will get around to Snow Creek climbers to avoid the area... or at least be more clandestine.

The Access Fund or American Alpine Club should be contacted. They have experience with this sort of thing and might be helpful.

[Cy Kaicener]

Steve - A good person to contact is Kurt Wedberg who has climbed Snow Creek I believe. We did Skyline a ways back.
He is a professional guide.
http://sierramountaineering.com
http://sierramountaineering.com/contactus.html

http://americanalpineclub.org