You are referring to one location? Was this location actually protected or was it a place of consideration, never established as a protected land? What is the name of this place so I can check it out?

There are 10 specific areas in Southern California fully protected, and over 100 being considered with many organizations working diligently to protect these areas. This does not include Northern California. The coastal Southern California has already lost this battle for the most part, except so far Camp Pendleton is doing this in a catch 22. Hard to protect land already owned by thousands of different people, but maybe Pendleton will one day be this preserved land. Small areas in the coast are protected but small so not a significant land.

I hope you don't believe it is ok to let reptiles go in this land, do you? Do you believe it is already dead still? Take your time, go do some research then get back to me. A lot of this land was protected in 2002, so look for new information. Also don’t forget the state parks not referred to in my count.

[ Hide Replies ]

• What I should have originally posted - casichelydia, Tue Mar 14 22:24:07 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - FR, Tue Mar 14 23:16:07 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - phantasticus, Wed Mar 15 21:54:08 2006
• RE: How naive the young are - FR, Wed Mar 15 22:22:25 2006
• RE: How naive the old are - phantasticus, Thu Mar 16 19:42:01 2006
• RE: sir, your missing the point - FR, Thu Mar 16 21:57:23 2006
• actually you are changing the point - phantasticus, Fri Mar 17 01:31:20 2006
• RE: Whooooooo hahahahahaha - FR, Fri Mar 17 13:07:15 2006
• RE: Whooooooo hahahahahaha - phantasticus, Fri Mar 17 14:51:10 2006
• Wow - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 12:06:33 2006
• RE: Wow / there is growth no doubt - phantasticus, Thu Mar 16 19:23:57 2006
• Good point - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 20:24:24 2006
• ONE? - phantasticus, Sat Mar 18 15:02:19 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - groundskeeper24, Thu Mar 16 03:28:32 2006
• Exactly - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 12:13:44 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - wstreps, Tue Mar 14 23:51:37 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - casichelydia, Wed Mar 15 21:03:59 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - wstreps, Thu Mar 16 11:21:57 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 13:12:19 2006
• RE: What I should have originally posted - casichelydia, Thu Mar 16 15:00:43 2006
• Man eating??? - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 15:38:34 2006
• Knew a guy who knew a guy who got ate up - casichelydia, Thu Mar 16 16:15:02 2006
• RE: Knew a guy who knew a guy who got ate up - wstreps, Thu Mar 16 18:22:55 2006
• RE: Knew a guy who knew a guy who got at - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 18:50:50 2006
• RE: we already have permits in place - JPsShadow, Thu Mar 16 19:12:26 2006
• RE: we already have permits in place - RobertBushner, Thu Mar 16 22:36:12 2006
• RE: nope - JPsShadow, Thu Mar 16 23:33:23 2006
• About monitors and appetites.. - SHvar, Fri Mar 17 01:44:57 2006
• RE: About monitors and appetites.. - casichelydia, Fri Mar 17 12:47:27 2006
• The basic idea is that even under.. - SHvar, Sun Mar 19 12:24:25 2006