3-0 appeals court decision overturning trial court.
https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/docu ... 303494.PDF
Summary: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/secon ... s-1697468/
The only thing left is to stop the bungee operation...which they filed for that.
The biggest losers are latinos..man, they must be hated with a passion.
The decision stated that this plan is for "higher quality" recreation...and if you dont like it, drive 25 miles away.
Whats 25 miles away driving?....its meant as the crow flies. Just keep on driving, and Ill tell you when.
So whats next for every area in California? You have to read my book, the rise of barbarism! For sale now on Amazon, get your copy!
East Fork land grabbers get the go-ahead
I might need a summary of a summary. From what I think I just read:
- This is about East Fork Rd, from the confluence, all the way to Heaton Flat
- There are 48 official parking spots, with total room for ~417 cars, in the official spots and along the road
- People are gross, and make a huge mess. So the forest wants to develop the area a bit more, add official parking, add trails, trash cans and such. The plan would change the parking situation to 270 official spaces, 3 bus spaces and 0 unofficial spaces. I.e. the total parking capacity will be reduced.
- The latest ruling says this plan can proceed
Am I reading this right? If so, why are we upset about this? We all see what a shitshow that place is on the weekends. This might help. Besides, this limits the space for CARS, so I have a very hard time being upset. And if the bungee jumping were to disappear, I wouldn't shed any tears. Change my mind!
- This is about East Fork Rd, from the confluence, all the way to Heaton Flat
- There are 48 official parking spots, with total room for ~417 cars, in the official spots and along the road
- People are gross, and make a huge mess. So the forest wants to develop the area a bit more, add official parking, add trails, trash cans and such. The plan would change the parking situation to 270 official spaces, 3 bus spaces and 0 unofficial spaces. I.e. the total parking capacity will be reduced.
- The latest ruling says this plan can proceed
Am I reading this right? If so, why are we upset about this? We all see what a shitshow that place is on the weekends. This might help. Besides, this limits the space for CARS, so I have a very hard time being upset. And if the bungee jumping were to disappear, I wouldn't shed any tears. Change my mind!
Methinks the only solution is to start charging for road access to San Gabriel Canyon on the weekends. Keep raising the fee until the shitshow gets tamed. You can improve the parking areas and block off illegal spots all you want, but people will simply cruise around and cause traffic seizures on the weekends when parking is full, and it'll be a nightmare especially on holidays. The park managers need to generate income from the river's popularity and use that money for cleanup.
Fine by me. I get all the arguments about this being a public forest, and that limiting the public is thus wrong. But there's clearly too much demand here, and the forest service should be doing SOMETHING (this sorta thing is why we have a forest service; if there was infinite forest, it wouldn't need managing). Charging for the road is more fraught politically that the current proposal, probably.