|
Best Bets: Reserve a Revolutionary War Adventure for the Spring! Help Save the Farm |
|||||||||||||
| April 29, 2006 6:29 AM | |||||||||||||
 The
tulips are up and the Irises in the Colonial Chesterfield area.
The General Store will be open today in the
afternoon from 1 to 5 PM. It isn't too early, by
any means, to have your group book a Raspberry
picking field trip from late July through August.
(Raspberry field trip groups of 15 or more get first crack at the crop
every day, a short guided tour of the upper farm area, and 10% discount on
the published prices; book
today! If you have questions ask for Jan or Jim on Monday
909-797-7534) While you're at it, book a Revolutionary War Adventure this summer. These trips will be open to the public from Wednesday through Saturday in July & August.  Raspberries on their way, (picture taken 4-26-2006) |
|||||||||||||
| April 27, 2006 4:21 PM | |||||||||||||
|
Americans Made Here
As I have told dozens of the
teachers who visit our farm, when we first began conducting
Revolutionary War field trips on Riley's Farm, I thought we would
perform--if we were lucky--perhaps 10 or 20 tours a year.
I thought my own passion for 18th century history, and the whole story
of universal human rights on display in the story of Lexington and
Concord, would have--at best--a limited audience.
I thought, in other words, I would be preaching to the choir for a few
kindred souls who knew Sam Adams was more than a beer label.
Americans HATE tyranny and whether
it takes the form of an English aristocrat or a Taliban zealot, they
will--as Jefferson predicted--water the tree of liberty with the blood
of the tyrant every time. Freedom is what
we have in common as Americans, and that is what we teach here.
I'm struck--over and over again--by how completely universal that notion
is. Left, right, or middle of the road-- Americans
lock arms on the story of liberty.
Well, at Riley's Farm, we teach
that story. Along with their teachers, and their
parents, we are happy to be teaching a new generation of children the
most vital of American truths, and in so doing, we are proud to
be, literally, making new Americans every day.
|
|||||||||||||
| April 26, 2006 6:28 AM | |||||||||||||
 We're expecting
some great new Kevin Hauser, Kuffel
Creek Press books and CD-ROMs in the general store beginning May 6th.
Kevin's written a great book on growing apples in the suburbs I'm sure
you'll enjoy. The book, however, is about
more than just backyard growing; it has a treasure of information
about the horticulture of apples themselves and their history, so you are
all on notice now to help make these items country best-sellers.
You see, all of our local British tyrants (above, right) have gone to
apple-red regimentals by way of promoting the book.I taped a radio show yesterday and gave away promotional wheat bread and apple pies. We also had a great meeting with the county water people yesterday. (If we didn't have reasonable civil servants in this county I would have given up years ago.  We
have some county staff here who actually understand and apply the
"servant" part of the "civil servant" label. It's great to
talk to people who want to achieve safety through the application of
reason.)Can you sense it? The topic-magnet drawing me back to the discussion of our troubles again? There were a couple of new developments this week. First, I had a great email chat with a vineyard owner who has been going through the same troubles we face and who emphatically agrees--farmers shouldn't have to endure the cumbersome CUP process just to open to the public. She told me her neighbors don't want to have to smell food cooking at her proposed vineyard restaurant. (This would be the "I didn't move out to the country to smell good country cooking!" objection.) Second, some of you need to be very clear about the threat we're facing. On several occasions over the last two years the tombstone on the left is no idle threat. We won our planning commission victory by ONE VOTE. We are facing a small but bitterly entrenched neighborhood committee that claims to care about nothing but shooting, but--in reality--object to overnight programs for kids, banquets, and even u-pick apples. (Yes! Some people in Oak Glen can't even agree that a farmer should be able to build a fruit stand without a full scale land use review.) If our application moves to the courts, we will need to have a big legal war chest to fight them off. No, your contributions here won't be tax-deductible, but neither is your gift to your favorite candidate. The fact is we're better than just a candidate. We're teaching kids--an entire generation of voters--every day to value things like the jury system, the right to worship as you choose, the right to speak your mind, the right to be free in your homes. We're teaching them that Americans were willing to fight and die for those rights--and that most of the world, sadly, doesn't enjoy them. The fact is simple: we're making Americans here, every day. In a world divided by ethnic and political squabbling, we're teaching kids from all cultural backgrounds what we have in common, and what we should fight to maintain--as Americans. Is that worth $10 to you? A hundred? In our first appeal, we raised over $4,000 in two days. Will you join that happy band? If we win, you'll be able to say to your kids, "see those orchards? See those "Lexington Farmers?" See that weaver in his shop? I helped save them." Join the happy band today! ..In closing, a word from the pear orchard and this year's debutante blossoms:
|
|||||||||||||
| April 24, 2006 2:32 PM | |||||||||||||
I hear it almost once a day, at least once a week. "Does the farm get any grants from the government to put on all these educational programs?" The answer is no. We don't receive any subsidies from the federal, state, or local government, not even on our agricultural production, much less our education programs. We actually figured out a way to do what some non-profits, with huge endowments, haven't been able to do--make American living history available to the public nearly every day. Consider the challenges for a moment: A single 18th century regimental uniform can cost as much as $2500. We routinely field not just one living historian, but a staff as large as forty. A single pair of 18th century shoes, with buckles, can cost as much as $125. A good three cornered hat will be at least $35. Colonial spectacles? $200. Multiply those numbers by five or six dozen. Creating buildings in the style of Early America is also expensive. The temptation is to cut corners here and there, to fake beams and floors, but our 18th century farm house was actually built in the post and beam style and milled in New Hampshire . Some of our smaller buildings have even been saved from demolition by transporting them here for reconstruction. Employees are expensive too! Imagine even a small staff of four or five living historians--dipping candles, weaving clothe, demonstrating musket fire. Imagine a day shift and an evening shift, and just do the math across a season, let alone a year. Don't forget: sometimes you have to pay them even when no one shows up to experience a little living history. The cost of living history isn't just expensive for us. In California, we have a marvelous inventory of 18th century missions, but you are not likely to see them staffed by living historians on a regular basis. (Yes, there may be a weekend program here and there, but odds are, at most California missions, you will find a bookstore and a self-guided tour--not much more.) In contrast, at Riley's Farm, you can join a Revolutionary War Adventure, a California History tour, or a 19th Century Homestead tour almost any day of the week. How do we do it? Well, for one thing, we make our living at it. This is not a volunteer hobby for us. We either conduct living history or we can't pay our bills. Incentive is a powerful thing--and we certainly have it. Moreover, good history may benefit by a multitude of counselors but it is rarely produced very well by committees and non-profit bureaucracies. If we think something will work, we try it, and the market itself tests the proposition. If no one pays for the program, we go on to something else. (Don't let anyone fool you, either, that the market doesn't "weigh in" on non-profit historical sites. Most of their revenues are earned by admission programs, not by institutional donors. Even Williamsburg recently had to bow to the public's need to see drama.) As a result of our present crisis, we have explored non-profit status, and we may make use of non-profit status for a few of farm programs, (The New England church, for example, and the school house administration), but turning over a family farm to a non-family committee of experts could land us squarely in the mire of institutional inertia. We care too much about this program, and we have too much invested in it, to endure that risk We don't think Riley's Farm would be the place it is now, if it were run by a panel of consultants, and not a family. Our problem now is that while we can offer living history and make a small profit under normal circumstances, in the present situation--faced with massive regulatory fees and potential legal costs--it will be impossible to continue. We need your help. When our application goes to the board of supervisors, we will, of course, need your help in telling the political leadership of San Bernardino County that our business should be supported. When, and if, the board of supervisors uphold our application, our opponents have pooled their resources to take our business to court. If they do that, we will need to raise a substantial sum of money to fight off that threat. If everyone who visits our farm pitched in $10, we could dwarf the opposition's legal fund, but, when it comes to giving, hopes and realities are two different things. If even a few hundred of you could give $25, $50 or $100, we believe we can achieve the same objective. During the normal course of operation, we are capable of standing on our own, and making a reasonable living on agriculture and living history, but when we are the subject of such selective and expensive persecution, we need your help. Can we count on it? Our opponents have indulged, frankly, in the most irresponsible representation of our record possible. As our video and our independent studies prove, our day time activities do not represent a noise hazard. We are not a "shooting gallery," nor do our neighbors have to endure a major re-enactment every day. Our opponents claim they support living history, but they were willing to complain about "An Evening with Patrick Henry" staged for senior citizens last summer. They are also on record as opposing an overnight camp for groups. They asked the county to conduct a massive review of our land use, fire safety, and food facilities. The nearest complaining neighbors, moreover, are engaged in the same business, and--demonstrating hypocrisy almost beyond belief--they don't have any land use permits themselves. Make no mistake about the nature
of the crisis. If we don't win at the board of supervisors, and if we
don't raise a substantial legal war chest, we will not be able to stay in
business. |
|||||||||||||
| April 23, 2006 8:01 AM | |||||||||||||
|
I had hoped to compose a nice,
leisurely farm journal entry this morning, when we discovered the cows
broke out, and so I have spent the better part of the last half hour
coaxing them back into, and through, a broken pen and then securing them
in the cow milking yard, (still intact.) Nice way
to start the morning. Eighteen years ago, today, Mary and I took our vows here in the farm packing shed. A month or two before, we had planted wild flower seed on the upper farm green, thinking there would be a bed of color up behind a wedding gazebo, but as it got closer and closer to the date, we knew the whole thing would have to take place under the barn roof, or not at all. The clouds were hammering in and the snow began to fall in April. The people who came to our wedding dressed for mud and blizzard faired the best, and Mary had to be carried, veil and all, into the packing shed by her older brother, Pete. One of my parents' friends drove up in a maroon Cadillac and literally threw a present out the passenger window and then sped off in the other direction. A college friend of Mary's, one of the bridesmaids, had a dad in the earth moving business and he spent the whole wedding reception on a farm tractor, pulling people in and out of the snow. (He later told us it was one of the best weddings he ever attended.) My nephew, Danny, the one who has the super-secret job in Washington, must have been seven or eight at the time and he had a habit, then, of losing his "Rs" when he spoke. We had portable heaters set up everywhere, and one of my Dad's salesmen stood too close to one of them. (He wore a toupee.) Danny walked up to him and said, "heah, Mis-toe, yo hair is bun-ing." ("Heah, Mister, your hair is burning.") In the wedding videos, you can see all the guests' breath steaming out as they shivered in line, waiting for the massive spread of chicken and potatoes my Greek mother in law had made by herself. The entire production was being powered by a Honda generator with carburetor problems and every time it shut off, it took ten minutes to get the lights all back on. The poor photographer would take a picture and the flash of his camera would dim the whole barn. Putting it as charitably as possible: It was a country wedding, but it certainly wasn't a country-club wedding. Here's the strange, joyful thing about it though: It really was a wedding. When Mary walked up the packing shed aisle, and then faced me, I was a hit with a bolt of emotion that nearly knocked me down. I kept thinking, "the woman cries at the wedding--usually the bride's mom--and here I am about to break down." Most of my life I was cynical about weddings. There seemed to be something so forced and "on display" about a couple's affections at a wedding, that--even as a child--it seemed to be a contrived occasion to me. Before Mary and I met, she had lived in Paris, traveled through Africa, paid her way through college, and was working for a Fortune 100 company as a staff accountant. She was not only a bit of a feminist; she was down on men--and marriage. Against that backdrop, a mutual friend introduced us. "You are going to love, Mary," she told me, "and Mary is going to love you." Sure, I thought, whatever. Well, when we met, I knew that I liked her right away. She was without pretense, but there was a twinkle in her eye too. She spoke her mind, but whatever cynicism she had about life, was checked by a greater sort of optimism that I don't think she even recognizes in herself now. We had the same take on things; we laughed at that same joke that was parading around underneath the surface, before the joke ever made it into words. One morning we went to breakfast at a sidewalk cafe in Venice Beach, right next to Small World Books. We took in the whole carnival of the place--the roller-skated musician with the turban and the tip-cup, the strange, colored-glass-and-incense retail, the coffee-house buzz of strange young people pretending to think deep, all of that, and I had the sense that the place seemed lonely for all its flash. It was a temple to the self. The whole single, disconnected world--which our age sells us as the "higher life"--seemed so hollow that it was downright frightening. When Mary and I walked out to the parking lot--she to drive off to Riverside, me to Long Beach--I had this sensation that whatever peace I felt at the moment was coming from her direction. That's what love felt like for me--like peace. I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, but I believe God was speaking to me at the moment, and He was telling me, in so many words, "this is the one." Happy Anniversary, Mary! I love you. |
|||||||||||||
| April 20, 2006 5:58 PM | |||||||||||||
 That's
Samuel out there playing trap-ball with Lizzie (our daughter, left) and
Vanessa (one of our staff, right),
out on the parade ground. This is a minor victory for me, whenever I see the kids and the staff out there playing--all in period clothing, with a game that has been all but forgotten by time. If we were better marketers, we would have a few of these game sets out for sale, as we would have sold five or six hundred sets by now. That's Mallory, below right, getting ready for tonight's guests, and back from the trap-ball field, where she complains that Nicholas knocked her down. (We haven't quite inculcated 18th century chivalry yet, but we're working on it.) I've been ruminating all day about 18th century corporate team building--how to keep the guests challenged and the game worth playing, and worth remembering. More later.  |
|||||||||||||
| April 19, 2006 8:24 AM | |||||||||||||
|
There is one thing I know Dennis
Riley and I actually agree on: neither of us has any
credibility with each other. One of the problems
with having an exchange, under those conditions, is that it soon becomes
the sort of shouting match you have been witness to. I
don't think our Op-Ed pieces made the printed version of the
Press-Enterprise, but you can read the last rounds of our public exchange
in their online edition. The Dennis Riley take is
here and the Jim Riley take is
here.
|
|||||||||||||
| April 17, 2006 10:51 AM | |||||||||||||
| Round three (four?) of the Cyber-Duel. | |||||||||||||
| April 16, 2006 9:29 AM | |||||||||||||
|
No Easter Peace in the Cyber-Duel.
More shots were fired. Dennis, an Easter proposal: I'm quite willing to turn this from a duel to an exchange of ideas, but if you fail to acknowledge the progress we have made in meeting both the county's requirements and your requests, I will begin to conclude that the dialogue is pointless, since, no matter what we do, you refuse to be pleased. Some facts for you to acknowledge: You don't live next to a shooting gallery. You don't live next door to a major reenactment every day. You and your son, Devon, entertain hundreds of students per day, right next to us, on smaller parcels. You were wrong when you called our project "identical" to the Royal Rangers project. You were wrong when you claimed I was not willing to compromise on the shooting issue. (I've compromised so far that some guests ask us at the end of the day, "are you going to fire a shot?") If you don't acknowledge both our progress and your willingness to distort that progress, how can we ever arrive at the truth? |
|||||||||||||
| April 15, 2006 7:34 AM | |||||||||||||
You can catch the next, and apparently last, round of the Cyber Duel between the feuding Riley brothers here. |
|||||||||||||
| April 13, 2006 7:32 PM | |||||||||||||
|
Beware: Readers of the Riley's
Farm Journal. What
follows is an actual cyber-space duel (called in other quarters a flame
war), between my brother Dennis Riley and myself.
I hesitated at first, but I thought--what the heck--why not show the world
what I've been dealing with for the last eight years.
|
|||||||||||||
| April 13, 2006 6:07 PM | |||||||||||||
|
A post-script! Dennis: Blue Jim: Black Dear Jim, I forgot one item you have consistently featured on your web: My support for year round business Thanks for reminding folks. Oak Glen survives on tourism. It needs more lodging, food and entertainment. I had hoped that you or I could build a country inn on Dad's property that would offer, say, 40 rooms for guests that come up for special events, dances, or biannual reenactments. I still support that idea. We agree--essentially. I only proposed 8 rooms for country inn style accomodation and144 overnight bunk house (camp) guests. The Press Enterprise, then, must not have done you justice then because they claimed you were only arguing for roadside, seasonal, mom & pop operations. A forty-room inn is not a mom & pop, nor could it ever be only "seasonal." It sure would be a lot less noisy than the 1200 plus camper kids you plan to host. You really need to read our application. We are proposing a maximum of 1200 daytime guests and a maximum of 144 overnight guests, with 8 inn style rooms in addition--not "1200 plus campers." You are getting yourself worked up over a proposal that is not being made. I also supported the Apple Blossom festival in the spring. It's a beautiful time of year for visitors. But it lasts for about a month and then hot summer days are upon us. See, the problem is scale. We have learned over the years that there are limits. The residents of Oak Glen have wisely excercised (sic) caution when those limits are challenged. Businesses that have gone to year round retail have had to undergo close scrutiny by the county when large numbers of tourists are contemplated. The Royal Rangers project was turned down because of numbers of guests that are half what you are contemplating. Dennis, you have your facts all wrong. As I wrote before, we are asking for 144 overnight campers. Compare that to the Royal Rangers--600 overnight guests. As I understand that project, they also had capacity for far more than the 600 overnight guests. Their physical build-out consumed a much higher percentage of the site as well. Our application was approved by the planning commission because our overnight capacity was, in fact, small and the scale of our project's build-out is miniscule in comparison to the Royal Rangers. Ask the county planners if you don't believe me. Even so, you might have pulled it off except for your fixation on shooting. You have certainly caused me to rethink my support for year 'round business. When I see your kids marching in the snow, rain or sleet I just cozy up to the fire and don't miss the income. Some of those kids never get to see the snow. They thank us--over and over--for opening our farm up on those days. You may like the fireplace. Great. Some of us have babies to feed--and property taxes to pay. You should learn that there is a time and season for everything under heaven. Ferrying your customers up from your snow covered parking lot to your barn is not Shelli's idea of fun. Good thing Shelli wasn't on that tour then, isn't it? Our customers enjoyed it. (They re-booked for next year, by the way; I suppose they must have been REALLY miserable.) Make hay while the sun shines! Take it easy when it snows.. We open from Labor Day to Thanksgiving and have come to find that is just about enough. For some people, though, the party never ends. The genie is out of the bottle, now, and can't be put back in. At least it may now be quieter, with a six shot limit. Maybe so. If you allow us to do a little shooting--or shooting that doesn't violate the noise ordinance--that's all we're asking for. |
|||||||||||||
| April 13, 2006 5:41 PM | |||||||||||||
|
Whoa, Nelli! Denny
fired back a broadside. Dennis: Blue Jim: Black Dear Jim, Thank you for responding. Here is my reply. I'm sure your readers would be well served to hear my responses. So I expect that you need to retract the "cowardice" accusation, then, Dennis? I have printed your far-ranging (and utterly ridiculous) comments in full. Isn't it time for an apology? The 1000 rounds - a lie? My remarks were noted in a meeting where Crestline residents were reviewing the proposed Royal Rangers camp. I warned them about allowing a shooting range in the guise of a youth camp. In the "guise" of a youth camp? Are you saying, Dennis, that the Royal Rangers aren't really interested in starting a youth camp or that we aren't interested in starting a youth camp? Look at your words the way you wrote them--"a shooting range in the guise of a youth camp." If we were to employ the same logic on your own farm, we would say "beware of a another commercial retail outlet (your general store) in the guise of an apple farm." I don't question your devotion to apple farming, and you shouldn't question our commitment to serving children and families. This dismissive, corrosive assessment of your neighbor's intentions makes it nearly impossible to have a civil discussion, because you accuse your opponents of deceit before the conversation ever begins. I stated that gun ranges were not permitted under county ordinance no 22.011 but that stealth ranges could come in the back door via adventure camps like Rileys and Royal Rangers. There is nothing "stealth" about us. We have told the County of San Bernardino in writing what we want to do with our land--and it does not include a live gun range. There may be more appropriate places for a gun range on our property, someday, but that would be an issue we would have to take up with the State of California. You have operated, on the contrary, as a stealth public barbecue for years--without a health permit. Have you started a CUP application to approve your amphitheatre, your general store, your blacksmith shed, your school tours? I wouldn't use the word "stealth" if I were you. I warned them of the noise generated by Scott Riley's live shooting events in which "up to a thousand rounds a day are fired". I referred specifically to the New Year's eve day event of 2004 which lasted from 8 a.m. 'til after dark. I also mentioned that such events were in addition to daily mock battles where as many as 80 rounds a day were fired. So you would admit then, that either the Alpenhorn News reported your words incorrectly ("Riley said he hears more than 1,000 rounds fired every day") or you were not telling the truth? It can't be both. Which is it? Tim, of the Royal Rangers, assured me that they were not going to have mock battles, but that they were going to insist on their gun range. I note with interest that they are now offering to fully enclose their range indoors. Did the reporter conflate the two remarks? Perhaps. You knew the context was in reference to live shooting events, Jim, as we had discussed Scott's shoots many times. But I guess it made better propaganda to spin it as a lie. 1000 rounds? Absolutely! I'm glad I spoke up. I hope they, and we, don't ever have to hear that again. "Perhaps" or not? "Conflate" or not? A thousand rounds or not? "Absolutely" or not? Why don't you just admit what anyone who visits here will readily acknowledge: you don't hear "thousands" of rounds a day. Borrowing your musket? I don't remember Tim doing that. You're right. He rented a $700 musket for $20, so that he could use it to portray a Revolutionary War soldier for your school tour guests. I thought that was a generous deal. I don't know why because we have both a Brown Bess and an Enfield musket. But, as to your point, Tim used to fire a single blank round during his Civil War interpretive unit. You're leaving something out--this was a weekday program for you. You appear to have reserved the privilege of shooting for your own school tour programs but would deny that blank shooting privilege to us. In fact we used to all participate in the reenactments that were held two or three times a year. They were great fun. The family all used to fire a few live rounds up in the "gap". Do you remember when I made you targets for Christmas, Jim. I think guns are valuable tools. But they are not toys! Are you claiming that I think guns are toys? If not, stop arguing against a straw man. Remember the .22 revolver you gave your son, Tim, and the advice you gave him to keep an empty brass round in the gun to protect the firing pin? My wife and baby daughter were in the room when he was clicking it for fun. Tim found, to his horror, he had a live round in that gun. I asked you to give him a lecture about guns not being toys. Did you? The fun ended when you and Scott made a business out of it. Scott even allowed an entire western shooting town to be built in the gap. Too bad he didn't bother to keep the shooting up there instead of down by the barn where it was more convenient for his overweight buckskinners. In the end, it got to be too much. Remember Lytle Creek, anyone? We stopped all our shooting though long ago. You had shot up all the credit in the shooting bank. You are arguing--as seems to be your pattern--with old data. You forget to mention that I was the one that argued for ending live shooting on the farm, and that position nearly cost me my relationship with my brother, Scott. (We have since patched it up and work together very well.) If you see any part of our C.U.P. application that argues for live shooting, kindly produce it. Otherwise, stop wasting your breath on something that is not even being proposed. Jealous of you? I think it's just the opposite. You didn't start this gig, Jim, and you know it We had great fun and still do. At heart, we are musicians and farmers. You are neither. As you said, "It is easier to stick a musket in someone's hands". We still at it (sic) both at Los Rios and our own farms. You still need to work on your fifing technique. We do a lot more than "stick" muskets (sticks actually) in the hands of guests. We teach them to dance, to act, to milk cows, dip candles, plant potatoes, and experience the entire spectrum of life in the past. We also teach them about the sacrifices of a generation who fought for liberty. You should be proud of the work we do, as we are proud of the work you do, Dennis. As to not being a farmer, I sure spend a lot of money on farm labor, tractors, seedlings, tree collars, gopher baskets, and irrigation for someone who isn't farming. Thanks for the fifing remark, though, Dennis. It makes my jealousy claim better than I could have in a thousand pages. We want to put you out of business? Well no. We just want you to shut up. We hoped the more money you made, the less noisy you would be. So get at the real living history stuff, make a lot of money and keep quiet about it. We get at the "real living history" stuff every day--unless you are saying that literally thousands of educators don't know living history when they see it. As to putting us out of business, I merely point to your circulation of a petition asking code enforcement to take action against us in a way that, apparently, you aren't willing to endure yourself. I also refer to your formal response to our CUP application, where you asked the county to deny our request. What is that, if not advocating "putting us out of business?" You can't ask that you be seen as both magnanimous and dismissive at the same time. The independent noise studies, which I note you make no reference to, concluded that school busses are far more impacting than musket fire or the sounds of children. Why are you not on a campaign against school and tour busses? Who are the original Rileys? We are, and don't forget it. I was bucking hay on Dad's Yucaipa farm when you were still in short pants. I bought my own farm here in 1978 without Dad's urging or money when you were all still in Arcadia. I arranged Dad's purchase of his Arcadia property which he subsequently sold to Focus on the Family. It was that profit that funded the purchase of his Oak Glen property - which I also arranged. That's a bit like saying, "I'm Donald Trump's apprentice and I arranged for his purchase of those apartment towers." You aren't seriously claiming ownership, and profit, on the basis of your acting, essentially, as dad's clerk, are you? It was our father, Ray Riley, who first brought you to both Oak Glen and Yucaipa, and neither Ray or Bea Riley would have purchased the farm if they didn't think it would benefit their entire family. Has this bothered you and does it still bother you? If so, ask yourself why? Extension of our farm? Did we treat that purchase as an extension of our farm? You bet! We gave it our name. I approached the seller, arranged the escrow, negotiated the price, surveyed the land, dug the wells, brought in the power and water, installed the septic tank and restroom, and transferred our book of tours and square dance contacts to the farm. My son, Devon, who had worked with Blackie since he was 14 to learn irrigation and cultivation of apple trees, replanted the dead or dying orchards, improved the roads, restored the old packing shed (which was scheduled for demolition), conducted the tours and hosted the dances for 10 years before you arrived. A thousand times yes! And your tenure as manager of that "extension" lasted how long, Dennis? Was it one year, or eighteen months? You only had to work with your son and your brother and your dad. Please elaborate. I wasn't involved in day to day operations then, so you can't blame me. What went wrong? You also forget to mention something that our readers may be curious about as well. Our parents wanted the farm to benefit all of their children equally. You couldn't balance your "first here" claims with Mom and Dad's intentions for the entire family. What bothered you then, and bothers you now, is that you have brothers and sisters. You made all of your siblings lives so miserable that Mom and Dad decided to disinherit you. Why do you think that happened? Scott and living history? That was always Scott's dream. We just wish he had spent more time doing it and less time dreaming. Funny, Dennis, but I just read that paragraph to him--he's leading a pioneer hand trek this weekend. Is that dreamin' or doin'? Nonetheless, he and Devon formed a workable partnership which you succeeded in destroying. Or perhaps you just gave it some powerful nudges over the cliff. At any rate, I dare say that Dad got a lot more money back in his pocket from Devon's lease payment than he has received from you. Well, I happen to know both sets of numbers and your wrong by tens of thousands of dollars. I pay more in one fiscal quarter to Dad than Devon paid in an entire year. (I realize you have to speculate about those things, but that doesn't stop you from making the charge, does it?) Your comments about Devon and Scott's partnership--and my role in it--should be taken with the same reduced credibility you would expect from someone who lashes out from ignorance. Trailer Fire/illegal burn? If so, Devon learned that trick from Scott who burned his (Devon's) trailer along with all of Devon and Shelli's scrapbooks and wedding pictures inside. Except that it wasn't Devon who burned the trailer you pictured. I just talked to Scott about
this. He has no idea what you're talking about. Do you deny that the
trailer fire pictured below is being conducted on Devon's property? Some questions for you: You accused Thad of saying John Davis' house was hideous. Why did you say that when Thad had never even seen John's house? And why did you giggle about your U.F.O. siting bit? You asked Thad, "Didn't you think it was funny? " Is this your version of "How to win friends and influence people"?. Whatever I may think about John Davis's house remains just an opinion (however widely it is shared). John Davis, however, put his signature to an appeal of our CUP application. It's always sad that the people who have been granted vast tolerance are precisely the ones who refuse to show it for anyone else. I feed my children by conducting living history. If I have a laugh at the expense of what clearly looks like a Star Trek back lot, so be it. Call it therapy. Is Riley's Farm a commune? Do you have a deed to your home or title to your land? Or is it all held in common? Dad certainly has the money by now to do a split. Why hasn't he? At the very least , he should have honored the business contracts held within the compound. Why hasn't he? My sons all have deeds and separate titles. Is this the difference in business ideas you referred to in the Press Enterprise - all for one, and one for all? Or is it like George Orwell's Animal Farm, where some animals are more equal than others? This is really reaching, Dennis. By this logic, General Motors would be a "commune" since no one individual has title to the factory. As I've said before, we hold our land in a family LLC, far from a commune. If we don't have separate title, however, you had a great deal to do with it. When I wanted the family to subdivide you nearly went apoplectic, yelling at me that the farm would not be a "grub stake" for Jim Riley. Remember? If it is a commune, you are the grand guru, Dennis. (You actually lived through the Sixties, so perhaps you understand the commune thing better than I.) Thanks for this round of cyber dueling, Jim. Please post it where it can be appreciated by your readers. They may be more interested in my answers to your questions than your answers to your questions. Dennis So be it.
|
|||||||||||||
| April 13, 2006 11:37 AM | |||||||||||||
| This duel sure is taking a long time. One shot from Dennis at 2:30 AM. Two shots from me this morning. Now, four hours of silence. These things take a heck of a long time to load. | |||||||||||||
| April 13, 2006 7:05 AM | |||||||||||||
|
Nearly dawn. Dennis, if
you're listening, I'm actually glad that you've started what you call a
cyber-space duel--because at least we're yelling at each other now.
When things calm down, we might even be like the Union and Confederate
soldiers who--50 years after the battle--threw their arms around each
other as brothers on the grounds of Pickett's charge at Gettysburg.
When I first moved up here and you were running school tours every day, I thought it was neat to be able to walk around your grounds, hear the activity, stop at your general store, order a barbecue sandwich from your grill, let Tim borrow my musket to play the part of a Revolutionary War soldier. And I have always accepted your contention that we need to be very careful about noise. That's why we've modified our programs--several times--to reduce noise, but you need to be, honest, Dennis, and you need to admit that for several years at the packing shed, while your son was leasing that facility, you held banquets almost every night from October to December with hayrides running well into the dark hours and amplified music. I can remember stumbling out into the dark and pointing customers to your events and thinking to myself "I love living up here! The Rileys--my family!--have created a village! We've created a retreat that thousands of people enjoy." It never once crossed my mind to call code enforcement on you, or circulate a petition against your business. You, however, did that to me and my children and your own parents. I can forgive that, and move on, but you will need to accept the consequences of your actions. You will need to endure the same expenses we have endured. I think we can work together, though? Are you willing to try? |
|||||||||||||
| April 13, 2006 5:31 AM | |||||||||||||
|
Consternation! Dennis Riley
has challenged me to a cyber-duel. Here' his first
shot, in it's entirety, which I am told to print completely, or accept the
fact of my own cowardice. Never was bravery so cheaply earned: From: Sharon Riley 2:32 AM Dear Jim, You don't know when
to quit. You don't believe in settling things by the code of honor of the
period you portray. So let's do it your way. I challenge you to a modern
duel: cyber style. You have been running your mouth on your website. It's
easy to be brave when no one is shooting back. Let's see how you do when
someone returns the fire. For example, you accuse me of lying about the "
thousand shots". Why don't you call me on that one and print my answer?
You have raised a lot of questions on a public medium, Jim. Have you got
the guts to stick around for the answers? I think your readers would be
interested in hearing from the other side, for a change. There's a few
questions I would like to ask you as well. A couple of rules would be
appropriate: Don't get cute. Stick to the issues or we can fight things
out in a libel suit. And let's keep the questions to two or three at a
time. I don't have the time you do to sit at this machine. Well, Jim, you
can print this on your website and prove that you are interested in the
truth. Or not - and prove that you are the coward I think you are. Your big brother
Dennis P.S. Print the whole e-mail I know it will be hard, but try. Now you see what we've been dealing with as family--and I suspect you're going to get to see a lot more. I am still waiting about the 1000 shots per day answer. Just to let you know where this came from, Dennis was quoted by the Alpenhorn News as follows: Dennis Riley told of a military encampment on a farm adjacent to his Oak Glen property. Complaining about daily military re-enactments, Riley said he hears more than 1,000 rounds fired every day, in spite of a county ordinance prohibiting gunfire. Catch that?
"every day" From day one,
we have taken his noise
complaints seriously (watch the video) and I invite you drop by and see if there is anything
even remotely resembling 1000 rounds "every day."
We offered Dennis 20 rounds per day and he wouldn't take it, and now we're
down--against our attorney's advice--to six rounds per day.
The thousand shots per day accusation would have been true (for two
weekends a year, not "every day") when Devon Riley, Dennis's son, was
running major Civil War reenactments on the farm, but that hasn't happened
here for close to two years. |
|||||||||||||
| April 12, 2006 3:34 PM | |||||||||||||
|
A day beautiful beyond belief up
here--dry, clear, even a little summer-like, which reminds me, we are
going to have a monumental corn and raspberry
crop this July & August, so do the proper thing, the therapeutic
thing, plan to pick raspberries this summer--preferably on a weekday.
Anyone can pick raspberries with the kids on a Saturday, but it takes a
special kind of person to take a day off work and go raspberry picking.
I am relatively confident that Sheriff Taylor would take Opie raspberry
picking along with Ellie, on a weekday, so you should too.
(Andy Griffith did a lot of courting on that show; have you noticed?
I still think Thelma Lou was the pretty one.
When you don't get television reception, you tend to make the best of
Barnes & Noble "complete 4th season" editions.)
Anyway, just like you have to
plant a seed in the field, you have to plant a seed with your customers,
and fair warning, I am planting a seed. You will
go raspberry picking this summer on a weekday. You will
go raspberry picking this summer on a weekday. You will,
you will, you will... |
|||||||||||||
| April 11, 2006 7:15 AM | |||||||||||||
|
A few very loud opponents have been spreading so many falsehoods about us that the task of responding will be tedious, to say the least, but I suppose we need to begin.
Clyde Chittenden, the enforcing fire safety officer in this area, went over our black powder rules very thoroughly and he concluded that when there is no paper loaded in the barrel and when the firing occurs on a designated closely cropped green crop surface or a non-combustible surface, black powder is not a fire hazard. Alison Law claims our stream has never run dry and therefore our biological studies should include amphibious animals. False. The stream next to us is regularly bone dry for months at a time during drought conditions, as was the case not less than 2 years ago. Alison Law claims she approached me to get our food services "legal." False. I approached her, paid her to design a catering kitchen, and when I failed to use her services for our CUP application, she began complaining about us. Alison Law invokes the pointing finger of Walter Knott, founder of Knott's Berry Farm, with respect to our application and Oak Glen. According to Law, Knott said, "don't you ever let happen to Oak Glen what happened to my farm." This is ironic on a number of fronts. Alison Law calls our place a theme park when we are one of the biggest growers in Oak Glen, actually planting new orchards every year. She ridicules our staff wearing historic clothing, when she forgets that Independence Hall was Walter Knott's crowning achievement--by his own admission: "Independence Hall is a beautiful and stately building, and one all of us at the farm will be proud of. I think, like starting Ghost Town twenty-five years ago, that building Independence Hall will be a milestone in the history of the Farm. It will be our reminder of some of the most crucial events in all history." I doubt, very seriously Walter Knott would approve of Alison Law borrowing his memory to ridicule the commemoration of American History. Maybe he was just asking for more sugar for his coffee? One of our opponents has claimed that whatever the county approves here, they will have to approve elsewhere. Patently false. The county has looked at our site plan and has concluded whatever impacts we may present can be contained. If that is not the case elsewhere, it won't be approved. Some of our opponents have claimed we aren't really 55 acres. We're 5 acres and the project will be entirely commercial. False. Ridiculously, preposterously, OUTRAGEOUSLY false. The project is 55 acres, with 705 acres of surrounding vacant rural property on the east side. We are proposing a build-out of less than 2% of the entire 55 acres, and what we are building are historic craft structures, rustic bunk houses, and a small country inn of 8 rooms. Most of the land will remain dedicated to growing apples and row crops. One old fellow claimed we were roundly condemned for lacking fire safety. As Pete Brierty, the San Bernardino County Fire Marshall, testified at the planning commission meeting, we have agreed to meet and exceeed fire safety standards. We have endured fire safety inspections, and yes, we have modified our standards where the need was necessary, but we have never been fined or cited for any fire safety violation--unlike one of our primary detractors, who was recently fined for burning without a permit. |
|||||||||||||
| April 8, 2006 9:28 PM | |||||||||||||
|
It's beyond belief; Oak
Glen has become the stomping grounds of Rod Serling and the Twilight Zone
crew! Some people in Oak Glen must think this mild-mannered Stanford geek is really Indiana Jones. Cindy Swanson, long time friend of Benita's, was getting her hair cut down in town (Yucaipa), and the shampoo-and-nail-polish girls said to her, "so which side of the Riley feud do you hang with?"
"You know," she said, "the big
side--Grandma, Grandpa, Scott, Jim, Benita, Mary, the kids." |
|||||||||||||
| April 7, 2006 11:57 AM | |||||||||||||
| The movie you have been waiting for is now out. Turn up the speakers and watch it: The Quest for Oak Glen standards. | |||||||||||||
| April 5, 2006 6:17 AM | |||||||||||||
I have received so many emails over
the last three days that
I beg all of your
patience in responding to them. I especially want to
thank those of you who wrote the Press Enterprise on our behalf.
A friend of mine
read the article the other day, and he said, "you know it doesn't make
you look that bad. It makes the other side look like they're
whiners." Maybe.
I was really surprised to see that Dennis Riley, my older brother, wanted
absolutely nothing to do with a compromise or seeking peace between the
two sides. (David Myers of the Wildlands Conservancy
told me he thought Dennis was happy with the deal.) Ah,
well. The editors have allowed me to write an op-ed
piece in response, which should be in tomorrow's paper.
 Our opponents are intent on making us appear as nothing more than a noise hazard. Watch the video on the right. We took our camera around to different places along our rural route and started taking footage during the "battle" portion of the Revolutionary War adventure. Even on our side of Oak Glen, you can barely hear our guests, and what you do hear is something like a school playground in the distance. This is NOT a major battle reenactment with hundreds of re-enactors firing thousands of rounds a day. It's a bunch of kids having fun, learning history. The contiguous neighbors--those complaining--also bring school busses full of children onto their properties, and they don't have permits for those businesses. One of the difficult  realities,
in fact, about making our case to the public has been the blatant
inconsistency of our opponents. (Most people just can't
believe that un-permitted neighboring businesses would complain, but that
is, in fact, what we're up against.)
If you can believe it, the person who conducted the un-permitted trailer
burn on the left--get this--actually circulated a fire safety petition
against us. If we were not here--in business--the
updated fire safety system we're building (see the picture on the right,
below) would not be here either. Some of the
residential neighbors, with total justification, are concerned about the
fire hazard associated with any project. We're
concerned too, but if
we weren't here, if this land were not cultivated, irrigated, and tended,
the citizens of Oak Glen would have nothing between their homes and the
wilds of east Oak Glen but dry brush. As it
stands, if this project is approved, we will have the means to
oversee roads and water infrastructure that will help protect the entire
community---and new, watered orchards to serve as a fire barrier.
If this project is not approved, we will have no economic means to create
that barrier.
|
|||||||||||||
| April 3, 2006 7:49 PM | |||||||||||||
|
Wow. We've received so
many letters of support today that I don't know if I'll be able to respond
to them all. Here's just a few:
My daughter visited Riley's Farm on a
school visit. She was so excited about it that we decided to take the
whole family there. We had a great time at Riley's, but we didn't only
visit the farm. We shopped and had snacks in the down town and had dinner
at one of the restaurants....Oak Glen is not exactly the travel
destination of choice without Riley's Farm. It's along way away from where
we live. There would be no reason for our family, or anyone else for that
matter, to travel several hours to Oak Glen without something unique
there. -- Linda, Monrovia
Really! It as not as if you have
Disneyland or Sea World as a neighbor! You have a fruit farm, a historical
reenactment site, a credit to all things America stands for... freedom and
preservation of the history of this country for the tens of thousands of
families like mine and school children that visit each year. The
established business which is Riley's Farm needs to have the right to
continue to operate in the fashion that it does. I suggest these neighbors
who have a problem with Riley's Farm just pick up and move. This is
America, they have the freedom to do so. --Nikki, Burbank |
|||||||||||||
| April 3, 2006 6:01 AM | |||||||||||||
|
Just
in case anyone thinks this issue is really about noise, watch the video on
the left. We have pulled our activity away from the
borders of our property, we have reduced our shots from 80 now to 6;
we have paid for expensive noise studies, which conclude that the
complaining neighbor's busses are more noisy than our musket fire.
Don't let the opposition fool you.
"[Alison
Law] said ...residents come to Oak Glen for its rural atmosphere and don't
want year-round businesses, she contends."
Riverside Press Enterprise 4/3/2006. The graphic below,
however is from the Oak Glen Apple Growers Web site, which Alison claims
to be the president of. The words read clearly "Oak Glen
is open year-round." Which is it, Alison?
More bait and switch? |
|||||||||||||
|
Riverside Press Enterprise: Close but not quite.
The Press Enterprise article took a turn in the more objective
direction this morning, actually including a quote from one of our
supporters, but basically telling the story from the perspective of our
detractors, assuming that we are a nuisance and then lamely trying to get
at the family feud origins of that alleged nuisance.
These two reporters, Imran Ghori and Darrel Santschi were here on two
different days.
I could go on. I think they must have heard me brow-beating them this weekend, or it would have been worse. Compliments, however, to Patrick Berkert for a video well done. |
|||||||||||||
| April 2, 2006 1:30 PM | |||||||||||||
|
There's so much news these days,
that I have to write two or three entries a day to keep up with it.
This is good news. We received a nice letter from a very
close neighbor who complimented us on keeping our early morning youth
walks quiet. She said she very much appreciated our
efforts to keep the "kid noise" down. We got
to talking about being a resident up here in Oak Glen, in the middle of
all this tourist activity, and she said at first they opened up their
orchard almost by way of protest, thinking "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
Then she found out what we found out--that the guests love you for opening
up your home to them. If we didn't have such loyal
guests, I would have lobbied to shut the farm down years ago.
Some of our best friends over the years, have been people we've met here
at a Revolutionary War Tour or during the apple season.
If some of the residents of Oak Glen would consider that the businesses
here are far more than just roadside shops; they are family
traditions for people all over Southern California. Press Enterprise, are you listening? |
|||||||||||||
| April 2, 2006 8:05 AM | |||||||||||||
 We're
working on a combined tour with the Broaders family, who are great
grandchildren of Joe Wilshire, the farm's founder, and who own a beautiful
patch of lilacs just above the farm. The idea is to meet
at the old Packing Shed and take a walk up the old flume road, guided by
one of the Broaders family, pick a bouquet of lilacs and return to the
packing shed for apple pie. Keep watching the farm home
page for more details. Got to thinking about the Press Enterprise reporters. One of them confessed, rudely, to having no interest, whatsoever, in period foods and actually asked the question, "why teach the American Revolution to school children?" The videographer spoke with a thick German accent, and appeared confused by the prospect of American living history, even though he claimed our pretzels tasted just like something out of a European bakery. Imran Ghori got a personal tour of the whole farm, saw the new apple tree plantings, the new raspberry plantings, the 1880s packing shed, the acres of open space, and failed to report that if our detractors have their way, it will ALL be shut down, not just the living history tours he claims we only "bill" as an educational resource. (He's a Berkeley graduate, by the way.) The Inland Empire is not New York and the Press Enterprise is not the New York Times, but some of these guys share the same sort of anemic, "citizen of the world" perspective on local news. The Associated Press saw the value in what we do, when they did a national story on heritage tourism, but the Press Enterprise, lately, can't even seem to balance their story with quotes from our supporters. Unless there are two "Imran Ghoris," this guy also reviews the pop music scene. The linked article contains the curious observation, "Muse singer and guitarist Matt Bellamy laughs when asked if he’s sick of touring America yet." Who asked that question, Imran? What kind of idiot would ask it? (Note to Press Enterprise: get Imran Ghori off our story, please.)
|
|||||||||||||
| April 1, 2006 7:05 PM | |||||||||||||
|
Even
stranger than the UFO appearance Scott Riley and I were witness to
yesterday, is the behavior of one Jon Davis, a very new Oak Glen resident,
who appears to have taken upon himself the mantle of community protector.
Alison Law first told me about Jon's house plans and she couldn't hide her
amusement at the design. I have a guarded respect
for someone who builds a house out of recycled material, but aesthetics
have at least some place in a community like Oak Glen. It is, however, in
the nature of our community, (or it was in the nature of our community),
to live and let live. I studiously avoided
any discussion of architectural standards--even though Thad Riley wanted
to discuss them--in the community plan meetings,
because I knew it made Jon uncomfortable, but to see the owner of
this monstrosity take the lead in the movement
against us is particularly absurd. His son, who
also lives in the glen, has been a constant and cheerful supporter of our
farm. Would it be possible, Davis
family, to expect the same tolerance from you that our community has shown
towards your experiment? So far, this Imran Ghori (ighori@PE.com) of the Press Enterprise has proved to be a real snake in the grass, the sort of reporter who shakes your hand and gives you an oily smile and pretends to be interested in the truth, and then promptly ignores it. He told me personally that he had positive quotes from Oak Tree Village about our project, but he refused to print them. I offered to give him names of other Oak Glen residents who supported our project, but he seemed bent on telling the story according to the template of our detractors, which number, even by Imran's reporting, to be 24 people--in a community of more than 300. I told Imran we had 4800 letters of support from educators, but that too didn't make it into the report. (Note to anyone victimized by the press: some ideologue reporters define the story and justify their lack of objectivity by submitting all new data to their own narrow definition of the story's focus. "Imran," I ask, "would you call David Myers of the Wildlands Conservancy. He supports our farm." "No, Mr. Riley, we're not focusing on your supporters.") In this case, Imran has refused to include the details of our noise study which proves we do not break the noise ordinance. He refuses to acknowledge the support we have in the community and the support we have from educators, claiming we only "bill" ourselves as "as a living-history exhibit that educates schoolchildren." What do you "bill" yourself as, Imran Ghori? A reporter? Note to all of our supporters: Clearly, the Press Enterprise has chosen to mock thousands of Southern California educators, Oak Glen business people, and farm guests by depicting our farm as nothing but a nuisance to our neighbors. They sent out here two of the most hostile reporters I have ever met in my life, (and I've talked to a few reporters in my time), and from the stories they have printed in the last two weeks, it is clear the fix is in. Darrel Santschi, the reporter who came in tow with Imran, spoke with my wife about the period foods we serve our guests. "So you do period food here, heah?" he asked my wife, who told him, proudly, "yes, we do." He responded by saying, "I'm not interested in period food. Just serve me real food." My wife, who is a great judge of character, asked me, afterwards, "who was that jerk?" Consider canceling your Press Enterprise subscription. (951-684-1200) We are. |
|||||||||||||
| March 30, 2006 7:27 PM | |||||||||||||
|
I'm not expecting much from the
Press Enterprise article tomorrow. I've had several
conversations with
Imran Ghori over the last few days and he consistently refuses to
print any of the positive comments that have been made about us in Oak
Glen, including comments made by both the Wildlands Conservancy and Oak
Tree Village. The online version of the Press Enterprise
didn't include today's article, so I can't link it, but he tells the story
as though the complaining minority actually represents the community.
Back when
Karin Marriott was covering the farm controversy, she at least quoted
both sides of the struggle. Imran Ghori and his editors seem
to have been given some sort of marching orders against us.
One of Imran Ghori's colleagues asked me what value there was in teaching
the story of the American Revolution to children. Say
again, Imran? What value is there in teaching American
history, Imran? The story of our country, Imran?
Imran Ghori, what planet do you live on? Like I say, I'm not expecting much. |
|||||||||||||
|
More Farm Journal Entries
|
|||||||||||||
Tales
from the Obvious Department. My employees and
family tell me it's time to move to happier news, so here it is.
There's a weekend picture of the
