More Berryessa Fun

[MIKE TREMONT]

I just recieved this from a friend that once had a place up there.
Like I've mentioned in past threads, seems like a pretty rotten thing to do, in my humble opinion.

Greetings,

Here's some more news about the chaos being created at Lake Berryessa by the Bureau of Reclamation. See the video on KGO-TV at the link below. The video is much more compelling than the printed version below.

Unfortunately, most people in Napa County have ignored their neighbors at the lake or are generally ignorant of the true nature of what's happening out here. Those of you who are resort owners, business owners, winery owners, or private property owners yourselves would never stand for something like this. Public Law 96-375 was written to prevent this kind of confiscation of private property by the government. See my further comments after the story below.

******************************

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo /story?section=news/local&id =6216744#PTWidget0_Talkback _Bottom

Some Lake Berryessa businesses get evicted
Thursday, June 19, 2008 | 7:37 PM By Wayne Freedman

LAKE BERRYESSA, CA (KGO) -- Folks who enjoy the popular Lake Berryessa vacation site in Napa County, are being forced to leave. The land is owned by the federal government, which is trying to make some money leasing to a higher bidder.

This probably is not the summertime Lake Berryessa you remember. There are sections of the water, mostly empty and boat docks, not like they used to be. Not anymore at the Rancho Monticello Resort. For 50 years, Bob White's family leased the land from the Bureau of Reclamation, a lease he and wife Lucy lost to a corporate bidder from Arizona.

For families that vacationed in trailers on plots of land, the troubles began months ago, when the bureau ordered the property cleared. Many were cheaper to knock down than to move.

"They have taken away the lake. They want to take away the water," said Lucy White.

But now that Bob White has lost his lease, it's not like he can just up and leave. There is still the question of what to do with 50 years worth of improvements to this land. The Bureau of Reclamations says wants him to take everything with him, including the concrete of the boat ramps.

"What did you expect to receive for all of this improvements on the land?" asked ABC7's Wayne Freedman. "We expected to receive somewhere between $16 to $18 million," said Bob White. "You're getting?" asked ABC7's Wayne Freedman. "Zero," said Bob White.

Pete Lucero, who runs this project for the Bureau of Reclamation could not talk on camera, but did defend his position on a statement that said: "Our new designee doesn't want anything. They intend to rebuild the entire resort."

"They're trying to avoid paying for the infrastructure. They're hoping it's too expensive to take it out. And then the government can declare it abandoned," said Bob White.

Meantime, there two suits against the Bureau of Reclamation remain pending in federal court, as it negotiates with the new franchisee and prepares to close other long standing resorts.

At Lake Berryessa, this is shaping up to be one hot, angry summer.

"We had an investment. We built a business. And whatever you have in life, it's against every American principle for them to do what they're doing," said Lucy White.

****************************** **********

None of this had to happen this way.

The BOR could have (and still can) extend the present contracts to allow use of the resorts for the rest of the summer. Why do they continue to deny this when it is part of their own Operation Manual: LND 04-01? See the actual policy on the Lake Berryessa News web site and here:

****************************** ***

LND 04-01 Reclamation Manual: Directives and Standards
Subject: Concessions Management by Reclamation1

(159) 4/29/02 Page 6
Supersedes (74) 4/3/98

D. Contract Terms and Conditions. The following items should be specifically addressed in concession contracts:

(2) Interim Operator. Reclamation may select an interim operator if a contract is not in place at the time the existing contract expires or is terminated. Interim contracts will generally follow the existing contract provisions; however, contract terms and conditions must be modified to reflect current policies and directives and standards. Reclamation may select the existing concessionaire as the interim operator if the existing concessionaire is performing in a satisfactory manner. The interim operation will not exceed 2 years. A new contract must be awarded as expeditiously as possible.

****************************** ****

There were other bids, specifically by the Lago Group (present resort owners and local Napa business owners), which would have allowed a smooth transition and provided everything else the BOR wanted in its proposal. Negotiating a new contract with this local group would have been much simpler. Why did they reject it?

There was an alternative plan, Local Stakeholders' Preferred Alternative Plan for Lake Berryessa: LBVSPT A+, which would have allowed a smooth transition and the same increased facilities as in the present bids. See for yourself on the Lake Berryessa News web site.

There was another alternative plan, Resort Operators' Plan (ROP), which would have allowed a smooth transition and the same increased facilities as in the present bids. See the highlights for yourself on the Lake Berryessa News web site.

And once again, Public Law 96-375, was written to protect the private property of the resort owners, not to allow the government to confiscate it to make the entry costs lower for a new bidder. Read it yourself on the Lake Berryessa News web site.

If you've been to Rancho Monticello, or especially Steele Park, there's no way a reasonable individual would think the facilities have no value and should be destroyed down to and below the ground!




--
Peter Kilkus
1515 Headlands Drive
Napa, CA 94558
415-307-6906
pkilkus@gmail.com


Peter Kilkus
1515 Headlands Drive
Napa, CA 94558
415-307-6906, pkilkus@gmail.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ironmanlu377]

I say we boycott the lake no more fishing ,tournaments ,waterskiing, nothing on the water at all

[JamesH]

This fiasco at Berryessa is a perfect example of what happens when you get a group of Liberals with way too much power.
It's also a great example of how most of us don't get involved because it doesn't "effect" us.
I for one didn't want to believe that this could actually happen and that there would be no legal recourse for those effected.
Not only are they not being compensated for the facilities that they built, they are being told to remove them at their expense. WOW!

James

[FishaHallic]

This fiasco at Berryessa is a perfect example of what happens when you get a group of Liberals with way too much power.
It's also a great example of how most of us don't get involved because it doesn't "effect" us.
I for one didn't want to believe that this could actually happen and that there would be no legal recourse for those effected.
Not only are they not being compensated for the facilities that they built, they are being told to remove them at their expense. WOW!

James

How in the world can you blame anyone for this except the business owners and the people that built weekend homes on something they did not own? And to blame liberals is really funny. They knew they had a lease, they knew it was going to expire and they were told it would not be renewed.

Basically the people were using your and my property and making money with it and now they can't. It is someone elses time to make money and hopefully some improvements also.

To blame liberals is beyond me, if I am not mistaken we have a republican president and California has a republican governor and both of these people put their people into their administration. Nothing last forever and for someone knowing that they built on leased property and then crying when the lease expired is just poor judgement on there part.

[Dan McKenzie]

I think that is exactly what they want, boats, fishermen and skiers "off" the water, make room for paddle boats and canoes, bird watchers and hippies from SF, not that there is anything wrong with that, it just shouldn't be at the expense of all of those who have patronized the lake the past fifty years. Not to mention those who invested there. There are a lot of older people who settled up there for their retirement, now where they going to go, what a shameful act on the part of BOR, our state reps, congress members and all the others who turned a blind eye to this.
It was evident from the start that this was what they intended to do.

[biteme]

I guess we'll have to wait and see. Cant be worse then the 20.00 fee Im paying tomorrow

[MIKE TREMONT]

FishaHallic wrote

How in the world can you blame anyone for this except the business owners and the people that built weekend homes on something they did not own? And to blame liberals is really funny. They knew they had a lease, they knew it was going to expire and they were told it would not be renewed.

Basically the people were using your and my property and making money with it and now they can't. It is someone elses time to make money and hopefully some improvements also.

To blame liberals is beyond me, if I am not mistaken we have a republican president and California has a republican governor and both of these people put their people into their administration. Nothing last forever and for someone knowing that they built on leased property and then crying when the lease expired is just poor judgement on there part.

This all started when your pal slick Willie was in office. I believe that's the statement came from.

This is an honest and sincere question, the last comment was a jab at you, but this is not. My question to you is this. You purchase a lease from the Federal Government. That money you "invest". You put your heart and sweat into something to create(with the feds blessing) an operation that takes constant up keep and hard work, to build a little place in the world for you, your family and friends. When the Feds say, we changed our minds, we want to go in a new direction, so all that you have done needs to be removed(even though they approved or made it mandatory that you do these upgrades), you would say simply "OK"?

If you can answer yes to this, I don't think your being honest. I believe your statement was shallow and a knee jerk reaction to dig at your political party. Put the politics away and look at the human part of this. Big Brothers taken over and selling the lease to a Mega Corp! The lease ain't going to "the people", like a lot of people want to believe.

[JamesH]

How in the world can you blame anyone for this except the business owners and the people that built weekend homes on something they did not own? And to blame liberals is really funny. They knew they had a lease, they knew it was going to expire and they were told it would not be renewed.

Basically the people were using your and my property and making money with it and now they can't. It is someone elses time to make money and hopefully some improvements also.

To blame liberals is beyond me, if I am not mistaken we have a republican president and California has a republican governor and both of these people put their people into their administration. Nothing last forever and for someone knowing that they built on leased property and then crying when the lease expired is just poor judgement on there part.[/quote]

Liberal Democrats are in charge of the agencies who are minipulating the system in order to force changes upon a community that does not want these changes in order to create their own little version of "paradise". You can deny it all you want but the facts are available for anyone to look at. Those business owners are not "squatters" on "your" land. They are people who poured their blood, sweat and tears into a business, some for multiple generations.
They had no reason to believe that their "lease" would not be renewed and invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into improvements over the years.
Why are they doing it? Because they can. Do we get to vote on it? No.....
The really scary thing about this is that we are taking a big ride down the "slippery slope". Their success here is only going to make them bolder in the future to push their neo-nazi "I know what's best for you" agenda to new extremes. Mark my word....This is only the beginning.....

James

[FishaHallic]

I should not have to do your homework but I did. The BOR is part of the Dept. of Interior, the secretary of interior is appointed by your beloved president. So, don't sit here and tell me it is all the liberals fault for the lease not being extended. Let's say Clinton set the wheels in motion for this to happen, let's just say in 1995. The owners or should I say leasees have had 13 yrs to get ready for this.

Your great president has done everything in his power and even things beyond the scope of his power to control this gov't and put his and the republican parties touch on everything. If I was to believe your take on this (and I don't), I would have to believe that somehow Bill Clinton is still pulling the strings after being out of office for over 7 yrs.

Just a few years ago your president had republican and democratic federal attorneys fired because they were not leaning enough to the right for his liking. However at the same time he appoints a liberal leaning person to head a major cabinet post? I think not, and only a fool would believe that. Face it, this is a decision that your beloved GW had 7 years to reverse (and that is if I believe that Clinton started the ball rolling) but he did not. GW as the commander and chief should be blamed if anyone should. It is always easier to blame the other guy but sometimes you need to look in the mirror.

Just recently on another forum we discussed the bailout of home owners who made poor decisions and got in over there heads and now can't afford there house payments. The republican contigent on this forum screamed and cried that we should NOT bail these people out for poor decisions and I agree with them on this issue. But somehow, since this guy runs a marina and these people bought homes on property that was leased things should be different?

Do I feel sorry for these people, yes I do but that does not mean they did not make some serious mistakes in judgement.

[Peter Lloyd]

FishaHallic wrote

How in the world can you blame anyone for this except the business owners and the people that built weekend homes on something they did not own? And to blame liberals is really funny. They knew they had a lease, they knew it was going to expire and they were told it would not be renewed.

Basically the people were using your and my property and making money with it and now they can't. It is someone elses time to make money and hopefully some improvements also.

To blame liberals is beyond me, if I am not mistaken we have a republican president and California has a republican governor and both of these people put their people into their administration. Nothing last forever and for someone knowing that they built on leased property and then crying when the lease expired is just poor judgement on there part.

This all started when your pal slick Willie was in office. I believe that's the statement came from.

This is an honest and sincere question, the last comment was a jab at you, but this is not. My question to you is this. You purchase a lease from the Federal Government. That money you "invest". You put your heart and sweat into something to create(with the feds blessing) an operation that takes constant up keep and hard work, to build a little place in the world for you, your family and friends. When the Feds say, we changed our minds, we want to go in a new direction, so all that you have done needs to be removed(even though they approved or made it mandatory that you do these upgrades), you would say simply "OK"?

If you can answer yes to this, I don't think your being honest. I believe your statement was shallow and a knee jerk reaction to dig at your political party. Put the politics away and look at the human part of this. Big Brothers taken over and selling the lease to a Mega Corp! The lease ain't going to "the people", like a lot of people want to believe.

It seems a lot more liberal, in my mind, to allow the business owners to stay given the lease they signed. These business owners and mobile homeowners knew that their leases would expire; it is no surprise. Now they want a hand-out for dumping money into property they did not own. That is about as liberal as it gets.
I don't agree with what is going on at Berryessa. I just think the liberal argument doesn't fly.

[JamesH]

Do you honestly believe that because the president appointed the head of the department of the interior, that he even knows what is going on at Berryessa. Give me a break. Look at the political leanings of the people actually pulling the strings. Liberalism at its finest. The business owners have been preparing for this day. They were lead to believe they would have an honest shot at renewing their leases and that if they were not able to, that they would be compensated for the improvements done to the resorts that they built.
You call it bad judgement to make improvements on leased land but that is the the way business is done in these types of situations.
Now lets look at how this "bid" process goes for the new lease.
1.) I'm the current owner, I have invested 10 million dollars into improvements my monthly payments on those improvements are about $40,000. I can expect to bring in about $60,000 per month in revenue leaving me about $20,000 to cover overhead and make a living. I "Bid" $8,000 per month to the BOR to renew the lease at my resort, hoping that I can make $100,000 per year from my lifelong investment.
2.) I'm the new guy "bidding" to get the lease at this resort. I have zero investment in the current infastructure. I can expect to bring in $60,000 per month in revenue leaving me $60,000 per month to cover overhead and make a profit. Knowing that the current leesee isn't likely to remove the existing infrastructure, I "bid" $20,000 per month to the BOR because that still leaves me $40,000 per month for overhead and profit.
Now the BOR looks at that and says we'll take the $20k per month, sorry about your luck. You had an equal opportunity to "renew" your lease. The bidding process is fair to everyone, why didn't you just bid higher if you wanted to keep your resort.

Sounds fair to me, what do you think?

James

[FishaHallic]

That is the problem with you republicans, you never want to take the blame for something that happens on your watch. I'm sure it is easier for you to sleep at night thinking that is always the other guys fault but in this case it is not.

Just for your information, I am not blaming the republicans for this fiasco, I am blaming the owners (leasees) for their poor decisions to build on leased land.

To expect to be compensated for improvements on leased land that will have to be torn down is just plain stupid and wishful thinking. A lease is very similar to renting, if you rented a home from someone and made improvements knowing it was a rental you sure would not expect compensation for those improvements.

The leasees made improvements in a attempt to make more money and that is very apparent. They did not make improvements at the urging of the BOR.

Pack up and get out, I am sorry for your losses but hey, I lost money in the stock market last year but I do not see the gov't bailing me out nor would I expect that.

[FishaHallic]

This fiasco at Berryessa is a perfect example of what happens when you get a group of Liberals with way too much power.
It's also a great example of how most of us don't get involved because it doesn't "effect" us.
I for one didn't want to believe that this could actually happen and that there would be no legal recourse for those effected.
Not only are they not being compensated for the facilities that they built, they are being told to remove them at their expense. WOW!

James

Hmmm, liberal leaning?

Time for Public to Comment on New Rules for Guns in National Parks

On April 30th, the U.S. Dept of Interior , through the National Park Service ,issued a proposed rule to ease the current strict regulations on firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges .
The public has until June 30th to comment on the proposal and are urged to file comments in support.
These new regulations ,if approved will provide uniformity across our nation’s federal lands and put an end to the patchwork of regulations that governed different lands managed by different federal agencies .

This proposal rule will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to carry concealed firearms for self-protection (year round and not just during hunting seasons),on most Department of Interior lands ,and will make federal law consistent with the state carry law in which these lands are located.

Comments must be submitted by June 30th 2008 .

To comment on line go to
www.regulations.gov
(search for “RIN1024-AD70â€

[L Dub]

Don't know if it was said (I'm too lazy to read through) but my understanding is that it's FEDERAL land, so the Cali gov't has nothing to do with this. That is what was explained to me when I was u
p there a couple weeks ago.

I see both sides of the argument. I know Lucy and she is a very sweet lady, but without knowing the exact conditions of the contract I don't know. If the new leasee makes serious improvements without significantly increasing costs I'm for it. The other thing I would be interested in would be how the new money is spent. Is it going back into the lake (fish planting or something else)? What is the taxpayers benefit for this? I hear that they want to make it 'Havasu North', what is the environmental impact? If it's like Havasu, there'll be no room for fishing anyways. It could be fun on summer holidays though. (girls gone wild?)

I love the lake. I just hope that we actually see something BETTER, in whatever form in comes.

my $0.02

[Champion Jon]

I say oh well. The facilities on the lake were a rip off! Just cuz you have used them in the past does not make them good. Hopefully somthing better will come.
Do people who rent houses do all kinds of home improvments? Hell no. Its not your house and you would not expect to get paid when that lease expires! This is nothing to complain about. Hopefully we can launch our boats for cheaper.
I don't think this is a plan to get the kayakers onto the lake? Not much backin' that idea!?
Hopefully the lake ends up better.

Jon

[JamesH]

Thanks for proving my point that no one wants to get involved because they think it doesn't effect them......

James

[MIKE TREMONT]

Is it the way we were brought up, or the way we are wired as to what we feel is important?
Putting the political parties aside, I am completely surprised by some of these remarks. I don't get it, nor will I ever be that callous towards another's suffering, even if it were some of you.
James you have made some excellent points and showed a little of what's happening. Unfortunately some heads are buried in the sand, or they are as callous as they post. These and other points have been brought up over the years to the BOR, and we can see how they've responded.
Yes, we will have to wait and see what happens. To you that think the cost will come down ! I think the odds are against it.

[jack65274]

I have never been to Berryessa so can't comment on the quality of the facilities or service there now. One thing I have learned over the years is that when someone automatically blames either the conservatives or the liberals in such a knee jerk fashion it is crystal clear that they don't have any idea what they are talking about. One thing I would think we could all agree on by now is that neither party knows how to govern or, for that matter, really has any interest in governing to the benefit of the people. The only two things they are motivated by is money and staying in power. Other than that I believe that the federal government lurches on under its own inertia with really no one in control of it. My hunch is that someone in the government somewhere along the line will benefit financially from the new lessee and I don't know who that person or persons are or if they are liberal or conservative because they have all proven adept at being dishonest and crooked over the years. Anyone who puts their complete faith in any politcal party is an idiot by definition. The "common enemy" for lack of a better term isn't the liberals or the conservatives but the government as a whole...doesnt matter who is in power at the moment because the motivations are basically the same.

[JamesH]

Yea Mike, I have found the common theme from most of the posts on this thread.
1.) Everyone wants better facilities at Berryessa.
2.)Everyone wants cheaper facilities at Berryessa.
3.)Who cares, as long as I can still put my boat in the water. (Although it would be nice if someone would make it cheaper)

Last I checked, it costs money to improve a facility. That doesn't usually mean a decrease in cost to the end user.

James

[CN]

I have never been to Berryessa so can't comment on the quality of the facilities or service there now. One thing I have learned over the years is that when someone automatically blames either the conservatives or the liberals in such a knee jerk fashion it is crystal clear that they don't have any idea what they are talking about. One thing I would think we could all agree on by now is that neither party knows how to govern or, for that matter, really has any interest in governing to the benefit of the people. The only two things they are motivated by is money and staying in power. Other than that I believe that the federal government lurches on under its own inertia with really no one in control of it. My hunch is that someone in the government somewhere along the line will benefit financially from the new lessee and I don't know who that person or persons are or if they are liberal or conservative because they have all proven adept at being dishonest and crooked over the years. Anyone who puts their complete faith in any politcal party is an idiot by definition. The "common enemy" for lack of a better term isn't the liberals or the conservatives but the government as a whole...doesnt matter who is in power at the moment because the motivations are basically the same.

Very well said.........I could not agree with you anymore.

[JamesH]

Yea, I'm obviously ignorant and don't have a clue what I'm talking about. Thanks for pointing that out.
Oh, yea I almost forgot that I am also a complete "idiot" because your right, I have chosen sides. Although my views are more liberatarian I am also a realist and know that we have to choose between the lesser of two evils.....
Any other names you would like to call me before they lock this thread down?

James

[fish_food]

Although my views are more liberatarian I am also a realist and know that we have to choose between the lesser of two evils.....

Join the "liberatarian" party!

[Ringer]

I told you on another thread about David Mahl-Finch. British guy that has mucho dinero and knows how to use the system. This is an example of David and Goliath and the giant has way more disposable dollars to buy off greedy beaurocrats. Typical example of how our government is putting the jack boot down on people's necks. Let it go and you will end up with two things. A nice new facility and the chance that the same boot will eventually be on your own neck. I think a liberal would be all over this by defending the little guy against the big money boys.

[Steve]

I think many of you are missing a major piece of the puzzle, and one of the primary reasons the Fed's took action.

The original contracts between the Fed's and the resort owners did not include allowing the construction of permananet residences, nor did it allow for people to make their permanent residence within or on any of the lands the resorts leased (which are public lands). The resorts knew this, but they got away with it because for whatever reason the Feds didnt deal with the issue. As the years went on without the Feds coming down on them concerning this, they continued to abuse and take advantage of it. Also, their was not adequate infrastructure to handle the sewage from the permanent or semi-permanent residences so the sewage went into the lake. Anybody ever wonder why that brown goopy stuff is all over the lake?

So, essentially what we had is private entities capitalizing on what really is public lands.

The resort owners mislead those that made their permanent residences within the resorts. I feel very bad for those that were mislead and now have no where to go. I have no compassion for the resort owners.

[MIKE TREMONT]

I was done with this thread, but Steve I have to respond.
First threads go sideways real quick around here, but as far as I'm concerned it more information. Some good and some not so good. Your last sentence stated you don't really care what happened to the resort concessionaires. My experience was only at Putah Creek. My father in law that had to get rid of his place would totally agree with that statement. He felt he was getting gouged.
Now here's where we differ. That brown stuff comes every spring. I believe it's a algae of sorts. I'm not a biologist and I could be wrong. The waste pool over flowed once that I can remember. That was in 98 I believe, when we had that La Nina with record rain fall. A hundred year event. There may have been a few isolated events, but nothing major. There were also many improvements made after that year.
Every person I met there was not a permanent resident, unless they worked for the park. Those folks were allowed to stay year round. I never met anyone that wasn't aware of this. So no one was mislead, from where I'm sitting.
You had to pull a permit to build any type of structure there. Many were not pulled, and you won't get an argument from me, that was wrong. The feds approved many permits, how can you say

The original contracts between the Fed's and the resort owners did not include allowing the construction of permanent residences, nor did it allow for people to make their permanent residence within or on any of the lands the resorts leased (which are public lands). The resorts knew this, but they got away with it because for whatever reason the Feds didn't deal with the issue.

You make it sound like it's all on the shoulders of the resort. The Fed's are just as guilty in my opinion. Lack of enforcement is a crime in itself. There's also a legal name for it, but I ain't a lawyer.
Finally

So, essentially what we had is private entities capitalizing on what really is public lands.

How is that going to be changing with the fed's new direction?

This is over. The feds have made their decision. I don't like what they have done, and It has effected my fishing at Berryessa, as it has others. We can only wait and see how it pans out. I do feel this is just another strong arm take over and there will be more to come. After all, we would be a bunch of aimlessly wandering idiots, if it weren't for guidance of the Government elite.

Good luck, seriously.

[Steve]

What do you think causes algae blooms? Nitrogen and phosphorus. What do you think poo has lots of? Why is the brown goopy stuff disporportionately present on the west side of the lake. Hmmm, what else is on the west side of the lake. If you honestly believe the leaking was a one time event, well everybodys entitled to their opinion. You said it yourself, that stuff shows up every year, I wonder why?

Ever launch at Paradise point and immediately head north up Bishop? Have you noticed that the aquatic vegetation starts getting REAL bad once you get to about telephone cut? Hmmm, I wonder why? Its because the next slough north (it runs east from Whites) has a WWTP at the end of it that pumps huge amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus into the water which causes the algae blooms to be significant in that area. I call that unamed slough poopy slough and I stay as far from it as I can.

Ok, Im getting off my limnological stool.

See you at Clear Lake, but keep your hands out of the water where you see the poo.

[fish_food]

Ok, Im getting off my limnological stool.

Hey, that there's a pun

[Steve]

Glad somebodys paying attention

[Romeo D]

Floating poo in Clearlake? no way.... I have seen some floating stuff most likely from pets, in the backs of coves and then see people swimming right next to them... ew, lol

[MIKE TREMONT]

Now this thread has really taken a crappy turn !

I've always thought that just a natural occurrence, not brought on by man. So I'm wrong ? The predominant wind comes out of the northwest, that would take the poo algae away, wouldn't it?
You make a valid point. I'm not a hard headed stubborn man, so it could be possible, but...

I swear I'm done.

See you at CL.

[FishaHallic]

Steve is a biologist and a mighty fine fisherman and Berryessa is his lake, gotta go with him on this .

[JamesH]

I guess when the poo doesn't come back next year, we'll know he was right
James

[Steve]

Ok, I may have exaggerated the issue just a bit. Several years ago I read the entire EIR/EIS (Im fairly certain thats the document I read) concerning the Berryesssa issue, and the sewage thing is what has stuck with me through the years. I cant be certain that the brown goo is from sewage problems, but I do know that something is causing that stuff to grow and it isnt natural. All the rest I said about algae is true, and its true that the stuff blooms when treated sewage/raw sewage enters waterways. When the algae exhausts the nitrogen and phosphorus, it will die and form clumped goo balls while decaying. The decaying process consumes oxygen and thats where the problems start. The other thing I do know is that alot of things go on that the public will never be aware of, and especially pollution issues/health hazards. Thus, I always assume the worst case scenario because its almost always worse than what is stated in newspapers and government documents.

So I guess we will see in the coming years.

[sTony]

There was a problem with brown water discharges, re: lack of proper facilities on the resort side of the lake. That is a part of the public record. The folks running the resorts can't deny that and can't deny that over the past few decades the use of the land was pushed well beyond what was supposed to ever be allowed up there. In essence they brought this upon themselves in many ways. I feel for them but I don't support their position.

Lake Berryessa is what it is. The problems there were started decades ago and although it may seem callous to some, the folks living there moved in knowing that at some point they might have to move out. If they didn't know that it was the resort owners who mis-informed not BOR. They've had it pretty good there for a long run and now the folks that actually decide what happens or doesn't on the lake have taken a stance to do what they deem necessary to rebuild facilities to appeal to a greater group of Bay Area Californians.

This isn't the only impact that our government can have on our lakes and the businesses that have built up around them. Look at Shasta. The state would like to raise the level of the dam some several hundred feet. In doing so any business that is currently on the water would obviously either have to move to the new water line or move off the lake entirely.

It's called progress and like it or not changes happen. Surely some will be negatively affected whenever there is change. The folks at BOR have taken a lot of grief over the situation at Berryessa. I find it kind of odd as that is what BOR does right, reclaim to restore or rebuild. BOR has a plan and they've invited input into that plan. First thing I found I had to do to honestly evaluate what's going on up there was to turn down the volume of the resident's currently up there. They're a loud group, very vocal, not well represented for the most part and are fighting on a principal that doesn't give them any leverage on this situation at all. They're all on leases that had been renewed prior and they were eventually all notified that those leases would not be renewed again.

So BOR has a plan and they're the custodians of the lake. It'll take years to fully realize that plan. In the mean time it became apparent that as soon as the current resort owners got wind that their run would be coming to an end they immediately jacked up the rates all around the lake. That's their prerogative. It's kept me off the lake for the most part.

sTony

[Steve]

sTony, excellent post. Well thought out and articulated and thats exactly what I was saying (just not as well). You hit the nail on the head with that one.