Problems for Berryessa...

[mfrey]

I appreciate your efforts here Abraman. I grew up at the lake...my parents have had a place at Spanish Flat since 1971. I explored every inch of the lake in my 8' mini hydro in the '70s, and have many great memories of my childhood/teen years spending summers there. It's a special place to my three kids too. My parents have been involved in the taskforce, we have supported it financially and have written numerous letters to the powers that be, to do our part to save it. However, things have changed at Spanish Flat over the years, and I am now torn by how I feel about the lake. In the last 10-15 years, the families have moved out, and the "Partiers" and "Dopers" have moved in.
Last weekend, one of the new neighbors (he's a partier and doper) arrived by boat at 2:30 am and decided he would wake up the entire resort with his stero system in his tournament ski boat. He remarked to his buddy that he wanted to "Wake up the Highlands." Confrontation #1 ended with him telling ME to go Fu%& myself and if I didn't like it, I should leave. (He did apologize the next day though.) Confrontation #2 for the weekend occurred after another new neighbor (Partier) was on a jet ski and screaming toward my boat moored along the shore (Sanger hydro) at about 30mph...in the 5mph zone...just when I thought he was going to hit it, he did a 180 and sprayed the hell out of it. I was SOOO pissed that I went down and proceeded to get into a screaming/shoving match with him. I didn't care if his two buddies joined in...I was that mad. Again, I was told to go fu%^ off. Then that night, my new next door neighbor (doper) was having a small party on his deck. At 3 a.m., they turned up the music and he was yelling over the music about how he thought my daughter (15 years) was cute and how he wanted to fu#$ her. That led to confrontation #3. The party then ended and I was THE A##hole again! I'm 44 years old. I used to like to go to the lake to relax, but that just doesn't happen anymore. I think the lake has passed me by, and the partiers and dopers are taking over like a cancer. It seems no one has any family values; they don't respect anything or anyone. Not to mention that the Sheriff's Department arrested approximately 100 people over the 4th of July weekend...endured rocks and bottles thrown at them when responding to a MEDICAL CALL under the bridge when an idiot was injured by jumping off the rock...gang fights...two shootings so far this summer...one at Rancho Monticello last month...MAYBE it is time for a change, no matter how sad that would be for me. I guess we'll soon see.

[abraman1326]

I do agree that the lake has gone through some changes. I am so sorry you had so many problems over the weekend. I can't believe that Spanish Flats would allow that. I've stayed there a few times over the past few years, and have always been told to shut down any noise by 10. Security has alway been constantly coming by to make sure we are abiding by the rules. I can't believe the problems you had. I have always thought that Spanish Flats was one of the premier resorts. I alway knew Putah Creek was a bit dumpy, but Spanish Flats was really nice. Now I'm starting to come to the realazation that Steele Park, and Rancho Montecello are the premier resorts. I have some friends that have places over at Montecello, and even though we are not to happy w/ how strict their securtiy is, we understand that after 10, everyone need to keep it quiet for the sake of others that are up there. I've even been thinking of getting a place over there just b/c I know my 3 and 1 y/o would be safe there.
I know thae lake has changed since we were kids. My dad used to play in a band that played at the little bar at that Spanish Flats strip mall, and we used to have so much fun there as kids. Now though, you are right, there are a lot of hard core partiers and dopers up there. I'm not against someone sparking up a joint to have a good time. I don't do it, but I don't care if someone else does. To each his own. But now I've seen some hard core pot heads and partiers up there ruining it for everyone. We go up there to relax and have a good time, just as I'm sure they do. It's the extreme few that ruin it for everyone. I do think there needs to be some change up there, and I think it's the resorts responsibility to police their property. I have a feeling things have gotten so bad b/c the resorts are assuming that they are going to lose everything, so why sink any more money into a place that they are not going to get the profit off of.
As far as the bridge goes, I do have to say it's my favorite spot on the lake. I love going over there, tying up w/ folks, and meeting new people. There have been so many problems there though. Last year over Labor Day, we were anchored somewhat close to shore and some black guys were throwing rock at us. Now I know they were probably pissed at the HUGE confederate flag my buddie had flying from his boat, but that still isn't any reason to try and destroy someone elses property. They are there just to cause trouble. It's what those thugs do. That, I guess, is how they have a good time. If you are on the water there, it is pretty much a bunch of good folks trying to have a great time, but on shore is a different story. It seems those folks are just there to cause trouble. It seems like they have some huge fight every holiday weekend. I really feel that some of the partiers on shore are just there to cause trouble. But, there are those types everywhere, so I guess it's expected. My dad's neighbor is in the Napa Co Sheriff, and he said they will either close down the parking lot at the end of the bridge, or set up their comand post there. I am all for that. If it helps keep it safer there, they need to do it. SOmething needs to be done to protect the good folks on shore that are there like us to have a good time. I've had friends drive up there and walk down to the shore there to meet us, and now I'm pretty leary about doing that b/c of all the problems.
Ok, so I've kind of gone on a rant. I do agree that there needs to be same changes there, but the g'ovt doesn't need to come in and change the entire place. I believe the resorts can handle themselves and make appropriate changes. They don't want to lose the family vacationers they get. That's their bread and butter. If it becomes unsafe for familys to go up there, they might as well shut down. My fear is that if the BOR get's their way, life at Berryessa as we know it will no longer exist. I am for removing some of the dumpier trailers, and cleaning up the resorts, but I want to see more campsites for overnight campers, I'd like to see more docks for boaters, and I don't want them to hault any boats from getting on the water. Ok, I don't know if this makes sense, so I'm going to end it. Thank you for letting me vent, and I'll keep writing my 1 e mail a day, and making calls to congress men to push our issue...
BRA

[Riverdog1]

I am riverdog on Banderlog but can't seem to log in here. Forgot my login suff. I will definitely be sending letters. I have a great time there. If this happens, this lake will look like Pardee. What a waste. I hate tree huggers.

[058]

Hey now.....ya'll bagging on my resort of choice, Putah Creek Resort. It may be a dump but its my dump It could use some TLC but it is the closest to the bridge, a major consideration when you have a low profile V-drive that only carrys 10 gals of fuel. PCR has a hotel as I don't camp anymore, a restaurant so I don't need to pack in a shit-load of food and have to cook it, it has a bar which really enhances the nite-life and it has a great boat ramp. A pretty good place when you consider what my prioritys are.

[abraman1326]

I use PCR as well. You are right, it has everythying. I just wish they'd clean it up a bit. That place could be so nice, and I think they are now the most expensive place to launch @ $15. My buddie keeps his cabin cruiser docked there, they are really reasonable for that. Maybe we'll see eachother there at the ramp. I've had to use them b/c I've been having some oil pressure problems, but still wanted to get on the water, so launch there, and put over to the bridge and throw anchor...
BRA

[abraman1326]

Here is the e mail I received today. PLease do all you can to help. It's a simple questionare, and it can make a world of difference...
Land Rights Network
American Land Rights Association
PO Box 400 – Battle Ground, WA 98604
Phone: 360-687-3087 – Fax: 360-687-2973
E-mail: alra@landrights.org or alra@governance.net
Web Address: http://www.landrights.org
Legislative Office: 507 Seward Square SE – Washington, DC 20003
Last Big Weekend To Collect Testimony Questionnaires For Congress
You Need To Let Your Congressman Know How You Feel – NOW!
Please send another Testimony Questionnaire even if you have filled one out before.
Below is an unformatted Testimony Questionnaire that you can send by e-mail.
To get a fully formatted copy, got to www.landrights.org It will be right there on the home page.
Print up copies and hand them out to your friends.
*****Please Mail Your Testimony Questionnaire by Friday, September 2nd.
Be sure to send back your Testimony Questionnaire to your Congressman as well as American Land Rights. Call any Congressman at (202) 225-3121. When you call, ask for your Representative’s fax number and e-mail address.
*****Action Items:
-----1 Please return your Testimony Questionnaire today. The deadline is Friday, September 2nd. It’s critical that you get on the record with Congress. Earlier is better.
-----2. Print out a formatted version of the Testimony Questionnaire by going to www.landrights.org It will be right on the home page.
-----3. Please e-mail or fax your Testimony Questionnaire back to American Land Rights. We really want to know how you feel about the questions we’ve asked above, even if you do not agree with us. That is ok. Fax to (360) 687-2973. E-mail to ccushman@landrights.org
-----4. Ask three of your friends to fill out and send in the Testimony Questionnaire.
Fax, E-mail and US Mail Postmark Deadline Friday, Sept. 2, 2005
Congressional Testimony Questionnaire #1
Future Use And Access To Lake Berryessa
Honorable
__________________
US House of Representatives
Below are my concerns and testimony regarding the future use of Lake Berryessa. Please take note of my responses to the statements and my personal comments below. Please share my concerns with the Water and Power Subcommittee of the Resources Committee in the House of Representatives. Please consider a copy of this document as valid as the original.
Dear Multiple-Use and Private Property Advocate:
The Bureau of Reclamation is waging a war against public use at Lake Berryessa. They are trying to make the lake “eco-friendly” by locking out traditional uses. They are destroying forty years of family recreation history by choosing certain approved populations who can stay and forcing other populations to get out. They call it eliminating exclusive use. They forced the Boy Scouts out by calling them an exclusive use. If they get rid of enough exclusive uses, they won’t have to worry about public use. It will be gone.
The Bureau will have to make final decisions on the future of the lake in the next few weeks. Congress and the Bush Administration will be looking at these plans. You have a chance to change the course of history at Lake Berryessa by filling out this Testimony Questionnaire, writing your Congressman’s name in the appropriate place, and mailing it back to the American Land Rights Association ALRA.
Lake user groups are working together to protect your use of Lake Berryessa. Please DO NOT FAIL to fill out and mail back this Testimony Questionnaire. It will be hand delivered to your Congressman as well as key officials in the Bush Administration. Help us save Lake Berryessa for all kinds of users, not just a select few groups “approved” by the Bureau of Reclamation.
Amazing as it sounds, the Bureau of Reclamation is planning to force all 7 present resort owners at Lake Berryessa out by 2009. All the public services they provide will be gone. They plan to eliminate most motorized watercraft and cut total watercraft from over 3,000 to only 700. BOR plans to reduce tent campsites from 504 to 250, dock slips from 1438 to 600, dry boat storage sites from 1068 to 100, and long term trailer sites from 1347 to 0. Their plan will greatly reduce family use and cut accessibility to the handicapped and elderly.
BOR has become anti-people and anti-public use. You can do something about it. Please note that multiple-use and private property advocates AGREE with all the statements below, but you don’t have to. You may edit the following statements. This is your testimony.
Please circle your answer – You may write additional comments by each question or in the comment section on the back. Your personal comments make this document more valuable.
——1. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) should keep the present use of Lake Berryessa at over 3,000 boats rather than reduce the number of boats allowed to only 700 as called for in their Preferred Alternative Plan.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——2. The BOR is restricting the areas best suited for water skiing and boating by designating them as Rural Natural under their plan. This has the effect of eliminating powered water sports on the best water ski lake in Northern California. I believe BOR is biased against water skiing, motorized and personal watercraft use.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——3. BOR appears biased against the current users. They support a more Wilderness like experience. Their plan calls for a reduction of fully developed concession resorts from the current 7 to only 3. They appear to want to get rid of them all eventually. They want to reduce the number of restaurants, snack bars and convenience stores. This can only serve to lock some people out and drive others away. This is clearly an attempt to reduce public use and access.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——4. Concessionaires want to provide more and better services to visitors to Lake Berryessa. BOR only has taxpayer funds to pay for improvements and only if they get money from Congress. Instead of private enterprise, BOR is reverting to the big government, top down, command and control solution. The Bush Administration should not be endorsing this big government plan that will cost taxpayers huge amounts.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——5. The BOR plans to reduce tent campsites at Lake Berryessa from the current 504 to 250. That reduces public access and cuts the number of people who can enjoy the lake. Tent camping should be expanded.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——6. BOR Preferred Alternative plans to reduce the number of rental cabins at Lake Berryessa from the current 57 to 28 and motel rooms from the current 43 to 30. Short-term visitors will be more limited. The lake needs more decent facilities, not less.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——7. The BOR Preferred Alternative reduces the number of Dock Slips at Lake Berryessa from the current 1,438 to 600. They want to reduce dry boat storage sites from the current 1,068 to 100. This appears to be part of the overall plan by BOR to greatly reduce motorized watercraft.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——8. The elimination of long-term sites greatly reduces access by the handicapped and elderly. Instead, BOR should be making lake facilities more user friendly, especially to the elderly and handicapped.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——9. The BOR Preferred Alternative reduces the number of long-term sites at from the current 1,347 to 0. BOR wants largely short term and day use visitors and not very many of them. BOR is opposed to mobile homes and travel trailers even though their rental fees subsidize the short term and day use sites. The end result will be far less people get to use the lake. Keep these sites.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——10. BOR has failed to develop the 50 miles of trails allowed in their plan. Now they say they want to build or maintain 150 miles of trails. Yet they lack the funding to even develop the first 50. It all seems like a smoke screen to suggest they want public use while failing to actually follow through. They cannot get the money they need from Congress, yet they are closing the resorts that can pay them enough rent to maintain roads, facilities and fees to support trails. The BOR needs to go back to the drawing board on its plan.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——11. The BOR Preferred Alternative and current operations reduce access to Lake Berryessa. Turn-outs have been removed. RV’s over 24’ have been banned from BOR facilities. Vehicles towing trailers have been banned from BOR facilities. BOR facilities are closed at 5PM in winter. No parking tow-away signs have proliferated along BOR owned land. All this seems designed to reduce public use and make the lake harder to enjoy. BOR does not seem equipped to deal with the public. Their solution appears to be, get rid of the public.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
——12. The land used by long-term sites is NOT needed for short term expansion. Eighty percent of the land used by long-term sites is too steep and UNUSABLE as short-term sites. Removing long-term users will not increase access. I believe the resorts do not threaten access to the lake, but instead encourages it.
AGREE DISAGREE NO OPINION
(Your written comments here will make this document more valuable)
(If needed, use additional sheets or attach a personal letter)
To validate your comments please fill in completely (PRINT or TYPE) and be sure to sign.
Signature_______________________________Name______ ________________
E-Mail___________________________________ Fax ___________________
Phone ____________________
Address_______________________________ Town______________________
State_____ Zip____________
Please do not fail to send this testimony questionnaire even if you receive it late.
Please return testimony questionnaire to American Land Rights Association, PO Box 400, Battle Ground, WA 98604. Phone: 360-687-3087 — Fax: 360-687-2973 — E-mail: alra@landrights.org — Website: http://www.landrights.org.
Fax, E-mail and US Mail Postmark Deadline Friday, Sept. 2, 2005

[abraman1326]

Here is an article out of the Oakland Tribune. Kind of gives a pretty good overview of what's going on up at the lake. It's a good read...
Is this your lake, or mine?
Federal efforts to open Berryessa's shores to a wider public draw fire from those already there
By Douglas Fischer, STAFF WRITER
Advancing fast is the federal government, owner of both land and reservoir, with plans to open the lake in eastern Napa County to a broader slice of the public. A blueprint mapping that effort is due this fall from the Bureau of Reclamation, and the agency already has taken small steps toward change.
In the trenches are owners of the trailers and mobile homes. They lease the shore-front land beneath their vacation getaways from the bureau under a month-to-month deal that's gone on for 50 years. The bureau would prefer to open that land to a more short-term and public use. The trailer owners and nearby businesses say about 1,200 vacation homes are about to be destroyed for no good reason.
The fight has been brewing for years. The first figurative shots came this summer, when thebureau handed management of one of Berryessa's seven trailer resorts to a new operator with the requirement that all trailers come off the property by mid-December.
A comparison with the opening cannonade at Fort Sumter in 1861 might not be too strong.
"One down; six to go, no time to lose to make sure the (agency's) destruction plan does not include us," proclaimed an e-mail alert to trailer supporters. "WE MUST WIN THE WAR."
Simple question?
On its face, Berryessa's question is simple: how to best use public land. It gets complicated as the government attempts to balance the desires of those who have used the lake for decades against those who insist the lake must be opened to more people.
The bureau created Berryessa 48 years ago by damming Putah Creek and flooding the rugged hollows of Napa County, 30 miles due north of Vallejo. Today, the 21,000-acre reservoir, a two-hour drive from the Bay Area, sports a 165-mile coastline chock-a-block with secluded coves. The lake is considered a top-flight spot for anglers, water-skiers and motor boaters.
But it also has a reputation as a "private" lake, given the trailers and the gated resorts that all but control access to the water. That's what the bureau wants to change.
The private resorts had their start in 1960, after the bureau built the Monticello Dam and walked away, leaving Napa County scrambling to find some level land to accommodate the hordes that descended upon the new reservoir. The lake is three times the size of the Camanche Reservoir in the Sierra foothills and nearly one-fifth the size of Lake Tahoe.
By the time the federal agency resumed control in the mid-1970s, it inherited a network of leases and concessions running counter to the modern bureau's philosophy of short-term, public use of its lands.
The theory is that by opening the lake to as broad a range as possible, more people get to enjoy a public facility — particularly when that facility has precious few flat spots near the shore to pitch a tent or put a trailer or launch a boat.
Limited access
Seven concessionaires manage each of the seven resorts. They lease land to mobile-home and trailer owners who, for $300 and up a month, get what amounts to a private vacation home on the lake. Day users — those without a lease — pay $10 to $15 to launch a boat or camp or picnic on the shore.
The bureau manages 348 reservoirs throughout the West. Of those, 347 have a policy of free access and short-term use.
The exception is Berryessa.
"There's a perception (the lake) is generally not open to the public," said Mike Finnegan, the bureau's area manager for Central California, which includes Berryessa. "The question is ... whether or not people will move to the lake, whether there's a market for the lake. Our guess is 'definitely yes.'"
The bureau is considering four options. One is "do nothing" — a non-starter in the bureau's view, given that concessionaire leases start expiring in 2008 with no option under the law for renewal.
The second option calls for the removal of most, if not all, trailer sites — 1,200 in all. Existing resort areas would be redeveloped as RV parks, campgrounds, picnic areas, all potentially under management of a single company, much the way concessionaire giant Delaware North Cos. manages all lodging in Yosemite National Park.
Moving expenses
Trailer owners would remove mobile homes at their expense. And the lake would be zoned to facilitate different uses, with portions closed to motor boats in favor of kayaks or canoes. Still, 90 percent of the lake would remain open to motorboats.
A third option offers concessions to the pro-trailer faction, keeping some mobile-home sites but retaining an overall emphasis on short-term use. The final option leans more toward environmentalists' demands, further restricting development and boating activities.
Trailer owners say none of those options work. The leases provide year-round stability and an economic base to the region that will disappear once they're gone.
"I don't think any concessionaire would tell you they could make this work without the mobile homes," said Peter Kilkus, editor of the Lake Berryessa News, executive director of the recently revived Lake Berryessa Chamber of Commerce and a mobile-home owner who's serving as a representative for other owners on the lake.
"You'll never get the thousands and thousands of kayakers out here to replace
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the thousands and thousands of boaters."
Glimpse of future
But the future — at least one view — arrived this summer on the lake's south shore, where a finger of the lake stretches deep into what was once Wragg's Canyon.
Earlier this year the Bureau, citing contract violations, stripped the Pleasure Cove Resort concession from operator Steve Petty and opened it for bidding. Arizona-based Forever Resorts Corp. got the contract and arrived with a business model unlike anything the lake has seen.
Forever Resorts say they inherited a shuttered bar, a run-down campground and 79 mobile home sites.
It intends to remake the place as an RV park, with full hookups, cabins for rent, a refurbished lodge and bar. It wants to rent houseboats by the week or weekend, at
$2,800 a pop. Open the area to day users. Create an extended season.
It has no choice. The contract Forever Resorts signed with the bureau requires that the 79 mobile homes and trailers now in Pleasure Cove must be gone by year end.
"It's not us who are trying to get rid of these people," said Pleasure Cove Marina manager Terry Sparkman. "It's the Bureau of Reclamation trying to turn public land back to public use without private property on it."
To those who say such a plan won't pencil out, Forever Resorts points to any number of properties the company manages on reservoirs throughout the West — at Don Pedro, Trinity Lake, Lake Mead, Lake Mojave.
Business models
All are businesses run based on day- and weekend-visitors. None has long-term trailers.
"The model works," said spokeswoman Darla Cook. "We definitely see potential here. This is a beautiful lake."
Not that the company backs everything the bureau is mulling. One proposal being pushed by the Sierra Club would impose a 5 mph, no-wake zone the length of the finger sheltering Pleasure Cove. That would kill the marina, Sparkman said. "It'd take three hours to get up the narrows to the lake."
But Kilkus, the newspaper editor whose son learned how to become a championship jet-skier on Berryessa's waters, doesn't understand why the bureau remains so dead-set against trailers. "Most arguments are set up to lead to a conclusion that you must get rid of mobile homes," he said earlier this month.
"Our goal always has been to be inclusive of all forms of recreation. And mobile homes are a valid use of public land."
Leases are needed
And while Forever Resorts says it can be profitable with a day-use crowd, others with more history at the lake say the slow mid-week and the dramatic drop in visitor numbers once summer ends would make income from the leases invaluable.
"Without those people, we'd be dead," said Yevo Jeworowski, proprietor of Boone's Saloon on the lake's west shore.
"It's not the people who come up here for one weekend, it's the people who come up here every weekend. It's their'hood.'"
The lake's problems — the perception of a party lake, or a members' only place with run-down facilities — result largely from mismanagement by government overseers, opponents say. Concessionaires can't get loans to pay for upgrades with three years left on their lease. The bureau has never really policed the place.
Replace the trailers with rental cabins, Kilkus said, and you eliminate a class of people "who are very family-oriented and very stewardship-oriented."
Hogwash, say those pushing for more access.
"The transition will actually begin, in many ways, as soon as the decision comes down," said Carol Kunze, executive director of Berryessa Trails and Conservation. "There are lots of places on private land, which is where these people should be ... that would give them a place if they wanted to remain a part of the Lake Berryessa community."
Indication of where the bureau is leaning should be out in mid-September. Its final decision won't be known until late October at the earliest. Finnegan, the agency manager responsible for Berryessa, is hopeful all sides will see this as a "balanced decision."
But there's a lot at stake here.
"It's so ludicrous," said Chuck Cushman, executive director of the Battle Ground, Wash.-based American Land Rights Association, which has joined the fray on behalf of the mobile home owners.
"They (the government) may win. They may win. But it's going to be a hell of a fight."

[Thunderbutt]

Follow the money. Who will benefit from this. The land owners 300 feet off of the shore line. Because that is where all of the trailers will have to go.

[abraman1326]

If you are in Congressional District #12 (Tom Lantos), we need you to make a personal call to his office in Washington, D.C. now. If you have family or friends in this district, please have them call also.
This is the situation. The City of Winters took a strong stand against the Bureau of Reclamations' plans to change Lake Berryessa and when their city council realized that half of their sales tax revenue comes from individuals and families coming to the lake between the first of May and Labor Day, they appealed to Congressman Richard Pombo to intervene. In addition, a separate appeal was made on behalf of the Lake Berryessa Chamber of Commerce.
A "good government session" has been promised the City of Winters by Congressman Pombo but it will take place only if Congressman Lantos will co-sign the letter authorizing it.
This is the type of intervention we have prayed for - it's a hearing where congressional staff representatives assemble to listen to all the stakeholders involved in an issue equally and without bias. It's purpose is to determine the facts and whether or not further hearings may be necessary. It could well be our last chance to effect the outcome of the future of the lake.
The session will be held in Winters and conducted by their officials. No specific date has been set, pending a co-sponsor, but they are assured it will be as soon as possible. Here's what to do:
Call Ron Grimes @ 202-225-3531
He is the Legislative Director for Congressman Lantos. If he cannot accept the call, ask for his voice mail and leave a message. Calls must be made NO LATER than first thing Friday morning and be sure to take into account the three hour time difference. Please e-mail us with confirmation of your call - it is important that we know how many of you responded.
Here is the basic message:
You are very concerned about the outcome of the Bureau of Reclamation's plans for Lake Berryessa.
You have learned there will be a "good government session" to be held in Winters, but only if Congressman Lantos will sign as a co-sponsor. You want to encourage him to do so and to have members of his staff attend the session as well.
Please - don't fail us. This is VERY important.
Pat and Peter
I am also putting up a new thread to try to get support...

[Sherpa]

although I'm not a fan of berryessa lake, I did sent a note out on behalf of
boaters........
that being said, why are these punk-azz tards able to run stereo's and party
all through the night without any policing-? even security in the form of
resort/private--??
given the stories, the problems, it doesn't look good for the mobile homes and
trailers..........
I never felt the lake was a "private" environment.......... I just don't like the
blown-out days (seemed like everyday) and the "camping on the face of
the sun" camping environment............
houseboating on berryessa just doesn't compare to shasta, and I grew up
boating on Oroville, so houseboating there isn't a big deal either.
--Sherpa
good luck with the fight.