Cedar Glen

LindenGirl the last link you gave us has nothing to do with this, it is talking about The Beach. Tide Lands is the beach. Just because you can see the lakes from your lot isn't a reason why you should have lake rights. Enjoy the view & give it up I/we don't really want to hear about it. You should have bought something in the woods with lake rights since you seem to want them so bad.

i have lake rights and i don't even want them.why buy into a drought with LACSD? I still believe that there is a lot of water under hook creek.Just because the county says that their wells aren't producing,doesn't mean that the water does not exist.If anything nowdays I would have to guess that this statement is evidence that the wells actually show future potential.We can not trust any entity at this point.also,ronccp is probably accurate in his perception.Good job amigo,that's one I never considered.

Check out CPP and see what fun they are having over there with their MUTUAL WATER COMPANY.

As for the water in Hook Creek it really does not look like there is what has been assumed. The four property owners that drilled got various gpm - from 5 go 25. There is lots of water between us and Highway 18 but unfortunately we do not own that land. If I were the County I would make a deal with the LAASC (Scouts) to drill on their land. I think we all over estimated what water was available in Hook Creek. There are some springs around but too close to septic systems for commerical wells and springs do not mean that there is deep ground water. Time will tell. According to the Engineer for Special Districts - he said the next well was going to be drilled in the National Forest by the first cabin across Hook Creek. Who knows? They would never allow anything like that before plus how much would that cost to pump the water out of there??

Hey um "other" Lindy ...
"LindenGirl the last link you gave us has nothing to do with this, it is talking about The Beach. Tide Lands is the beach." Sorry, you are not correct here. There is MUCH more to it than the beach; it goes to several legal issues including "navigable waters," water at the time of statehood, public use prior to privatization, or water simply used for commerce prior to "rights" agreements such as mountain creeks/streams. There is a multitude of information on the post, the links and elsewhere that is way beyond the beach. (Almost too much to "wade" through.) (I have found what I believe may be commerce related use of the creek in the Little Bear valley from long ago. Also the current law on maintaining public rights to CA H20 can overturn past legal assumptions.) I appreciate that you think yours is the "right" opinion due to the tone of your remark to me about "go buy lake rights" or whatever. Sure when I win the lottery I'll let you know. This is mostly a moral and legal issue to me. The more people fight me in a personal tone on this, the more I research and write about privately. I am willing to agree with your stance if research shows me it is so. So far it hasn't. I'm researching my own questions quite deeply on this, beyond any knee jerk reactions. I'd rather wait until my research and opinions are well formulated and written down, because I'm tired of the accusations on ROTW for having an alternative set of questions to the staus quo, and the fighting that quickly ensues. I'm just interested in learning the truth about it Lindy. Until I feel my opinion is firmly rooted though, I've decided I'm going dark on the topic, so throw a party everyone who's sick of someone with questions to ask the world. I too am glad I'm not dealing with AW issues ... the lake does need H20 at a correct level, and they'll have to deal with the problems created by an over reliance on the lake as a source for endless building.

Lindegirl just keep on w/your research find the truth for yourself. I don't have a problem with that just tired of you whining about "lake rights". Seems that you mention "lake rights" in most of the threads you post in. The law's & rules (so to speak) have changed/ been rewritten over the years since Lake Arrowhead was built.

Actually I've been posting here for years and it only came up on occasion, most notably when others discussed it during the state ruling "era" and some did agree with the notion prior to me mentioning it by the way. This thread is heavy with it, true. Thanks though for bringing this back to a more neutral state with me. Cheers.

How to Win Friends and Influence People. Lindengirl?

Actually, I have a hard time understanding what it is that you are researching and why? We just had a lawsuit and it was settled regarding the lake. Some of your issues were brought up and were thrown out. Just have a good time researching!

BTW- LindyM has a lot of knowledge and has all the information from the time the Lake was formed at her fingertips. Her connections are class A. In fact, I was just reading about her family in a recent published book on Lake Arrowhead!

Great I may ask her for help if she is willing in the future.
This particular issue was not brought up at the state hearing I've read "the documents." I may win friends who are interested in the rights of the people of California wherever the road may lead and/or I may figure out once and for all that the status quo is right and those are the correct "rights." It's funny Coral, for you should give me a "how to win friends and influence people" line. It seems you feel free to express yourself here. Obviously I know it is a point of contention and I don't care for that aspect.

GOING DARK ON SUBJECT as long as personal attacks are set aside. Freedom of speech, remember? There's a reason for it.

Start another thread on Lake Rights or whatever it is that you want? What do you want, Lindengirl? Why is it that I am making a personal attack when I ask you questions as to your purpose? I get plenty of those kind of questions, don't take them personally. So you are in Colorado now? A long way away.
I am sure you can ask Lindy questions but she is not going to do research for you.

"Start another thread on Lake Rights or whatever it is that you want?" I've never started a thread on Lake Rights Coral.

"What is it you want?" To let the subject go dark, remember?

"Why is it that I am making a personal attack when I ask you questions as to your purpose?" Your tone has been personal with me for quite some time, and your comment about "winning friends" is as well. That's a separate issue from questions of purpose ...

"I get plenty of those kind of questions, don't take them personally." You always tell me you don't understand, I respond with more detail, you point out that I'm posting about the subject after I expound to explain to you, then you go back to step A, what are you talking about ... there's no point any longer in it.

"So you are in Colorado now? A long way away." Your point here? True, and MY property is less than a mile from yours. Does the fact that I am not there full time bother you? Is that the only person who's allowed to have input? Are you there full time? Aren't you the one who has said so many non positive things about CG including property value (which some newbies may read and never choose to visit our area when looking for real estate), giving up on the area all together, etc? I know you've been through a lot with it, but so have I and I don't slam the area I love.

"I am sure you can ask Lindy questions but she is not going to do research for you." We'll let Lindy decide on her own if I ever do ask, at least I'm inclusive with my intention. If I ever did ask, it would be privately.

LindyM - I got a big sack of apples today. There are a lot more and all on the ground but in fine shape. I was going to get a couple more bags full but we planted daffodils and started putting things away for winter so I was worn out. It really turned into a nice day.

Since this thread was about the Mutual Water Company - I am curious as to how their meeting in CPP will turn out tonight.

And the beat goes on in CPP..... a must read!

http://rimoftheworld.net/discuss/25/57782

And Darel Davis is still in our community doing foundation clean up.

From the sound of Breezy's post on CPP it looks like the Attorney General needs to look into CPP's wonderful Mutual Water Company.

As far as I know Darel Davis did not run Cedar Glen into the ground. As I understand, it was an investor owned utility owned by a single source. Darel was a paid contractor hired to take care of the system and fix leaks.
All the power was from a single source.

MostlySunny- you must be a relative.
Who said that DD ran CG into the ground? Me? I looked back but didn't see that? Maybe I missed it? Or was it you just thinking it?

Hmmmm....