"Cheat Sheet" on Native American ancestral claims for Barstow's Mayor

Open letter to Barstow Mayor Lawrence Dale

August 31, 2007

Mayor Lawrence Dale
City of Barstow
Barstow, CA 92311

RE: Your Recent Assault on the Ancestral Heritage of Local Native American Tribes

Dear Lawrence,

California's Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and the U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as well as Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are responsible for determining what Native American tribes have ancestral claims to Barstow.

Not You!

Not your friends at Detroit-based Barwest LLC!

And not their hired "experts" from Missoula, Montana!

It certainly must be embarassing to realize that after seven years as the Mayor of Barstow and now as president of SANBAG you didn't know this.

You really should familiarize yourself with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines available from the the Governor's Office of Research and Planning; and certainly the City of Barstow's General Plan. It might be best to get some counsel on these matters from someone other than Barwest's Michigan lawyers.

Truly,
Your friends at TVT

P.S. Let us know if you find the Big Lagoon Rancheria or the Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians on these lists.

* * *

Here's a little "cheat sheet" paragraph you may want to cut and tape on the inside cover of your day planner.

Barstow General Plan/Technical Report
IV.2 Cultural Resources Management Plan
Preface – Native American Concerns
(pages IV.2.6 – IV.2.7)

"Therefore, any project must involve consultation with and involvement from local and regional Native American cultural entities as listed by the Native American Heritage Commission. The local Barstow office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) maintains a listing of representatives of Native American groups who claim an association with the Barstow area; specifically the Serrano, Kaaiisu, Fort Mojave, and Chemehuevi."

Barstow's Mayor isn't familiar with his City's General Plan; nor is he a scholar of Native American history or culture

Barstow Mayor Lawrence Dale isn't a local historian nor scholar of Native Americans despite recent representations.

And it appears that Mayor Dale has failed to study and familiarize himself with his city's General Plan too.

Recently Barstow Mayor Lawrence Dale, in his official capacity, has mistakenly written,

"To the contrary, the Barstow General Plan lists 15 tribal groups, including the Cahuilla and Cupeno, as having ties to Barstow…"

Mayor Dale misrepresents the truth for the benefit of Detroit casino syndicators.

First, the Barstow General plan does not provide a list of 15 different tribes that have ancestral claims to the modern-day Barstow area as Dale seems to imply. The General Plan mentions various Native American groups throughout its 54-page technical report on cultural resources management, but in no way does that report indicate each of those tribes had ancestral connections to Barstow.

The Barstow General Plan does, however, recognize that the California Native American Heritage Commission maintains a list of those tribes that have ancestral claims in the Barstow area. The General Plan also acknowledges that the Barstow office of the Bureau of Land Management recognizes four tribes specifically as having ancestral claims in Barstow.

Perhaps Lawrence Dale should familiarize himself with those official lists.

Barstow General Plan/Technical Report
IV.2 Cultural Resources Management Plan
Preface – Native American Concerns
(pages IV.2.6 – IV.2.7)

"Therefore, any project must involve consultation with and involvement from local and regional Native American cultural entities as listed by the Native American Heritage Commission. The local Barstow office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) maintains a listing of representatives of Native American groups who claim an association with the Barstow area; specifically the Serrano, Kaaiisu, Fort Mojave, and Chemehuevi."

Contrary to Mayor Dale’s representations, the Barstow General Plan does not represent that the Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians have ancestral claims in the modern-day Barstow area. The General Plan’s Technical Report section provides a discussion that simply mentions the Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians were believed to have had relationships with the Serrano Indians (San Manuel Tribe). The Serrano are referenced for discussion because they are a Native American group most like the less understood Vanyume Indians who had ancestral lands including modern-day Barstow – but there are no representations that the Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians had ancestral lands in Barstow.

Barstow General Plan/Technical Report
IV.2 Cultural Resources Management Plan
Cultural/Historical Overview - Ethnography
(page IV.2.27)

"Since little is known about the Vanyume, and most existing information, though not universally accepted, suggests certain affinities to the Serrano, relevant behavioral information with applicability to the Vanyume was extrapolated from the Serrano..."

"Coalitions with other Serrano clans were based on reciprocal ceremonial, marital and economic relationships. They also established alliances with similarly organized Cahuilla, Chemehuevi, Gabrielino, and Cupeno (Strong, 1929; Bean, 1972)."

Ironically, that very same section of the Barstow General Plan that mentions relationships between the Serrano and various other Indians, includes the following two references that seem to support representations by the Chemehuevi Indian Tribe that its ancestors included modern-day Barstow among their rightful homelands.

Barstow General Plan/Technical Report
IV.2 Cultural Resources Management Plan
Cultural/Historical Overview - Ethnography
(page IV.2.26 & IV.2.28)

"The Vanyume became extinct through missionization in the 1770s, with the Chemehuevi, Mojave, Serrano, and possibly Chumash moving into their area after contact (Greenwood and McIntyre, 1979:28); Forbes, 1963; and, Barker and Schlanger, 1974)." IV.2.26

"It is reported that during the 17th and 18th centuries, the central portion of the Mojave was abandoned by the Mojave Indians and the area was occupied by the Chemehuevi." IV.2.28

It seems that at the suggestion of those behind Detroit-based casino developer Barwest LLC, Mayor Dale disregards any such claims by the Chemehuevi Indian Tribe or any others; even when those claims are supported by language in his city's General Plan.

What or whom would compel Lawrence Dale to use the office bestowed upon him by the people of Barstow to make the false representations he has made about that city's history and its General Plan documents.

Barstow General Plan Documents name tribes with historical ties to the greater Barstow area

From the City of Barstow's General Plan:

IV.2 ARCHAEOLOGIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Technical Report


IV.2.26 - CULTURAL/HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Ethnography
At the time of Spanish contact, the project area was occupied by the Vanyume Native American group. Little is known of the Vanyume other than they appear to be a small population of hunters and gatherers exploiting a large area between the Kitanemuk to the west, the Serrano to the south, the Kawaiisu to the west, and the Chemehuevi to the north and east (Greenwood and Mcintyre, 1979:28). Their territory centered along the Mojave River from the Daggett-Barstow area eastward about one-third of the way from the river to the Providence Mountains, and westward to the Serrano territory...

...The Vanyume became extinct through missionization in the 1770s, with the Chemehuevi, Mojave, Serrano, and possibly Chumash moving into their area...

General Plan states any Barstow project must involve local consultations, names 4 Tribes acknowledged by BLM

From the City of Barstow's General Plan:

IV.2 ARCHAEOLOGIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Technical Report

IV.2.5 - Native American Concerns
Another category of resources which is included under prehistoric resources, includes ethnographic elements pertaining to Native American issues and values. It would be presumptuous for any non-Native American to draw conclusions about the special concerns which the local Native American community may feel towards a specific project. Native Americans recognize all prehistoric sites within their territory as art of their heritage. Potential disturbance and destruction of any resource can adversely affect the values of their culture and their ability to transmit these values to future generations. Therefore, any project must involve consultation with and involvement from local and regional Native American cultural entities as listed by the Native American Heritage Commission. The local Barstow office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) maintains a listing of representatives of Native American groups who claim an association with the Barstow area; specifically the Serrano, Kaaiisu, Fort Mojave, and Chemehuevi.

Here's a tip for Schwarzenegger's legal affairs secretary, you don't have to take the Detroit Developer's word for it

Andrea Hoch, Governor Schwarzenegger’s legal affairs secretary needn’t depend on Detroit-based casino developer Barwest nor what she hears from San Bernardino County tribes to get an understanding of ancestral claims and historical territories related to greater Barstow. Local, state and federal agencies in the Mohave Desert region are frequently involved in CEQA and NEPA activities that include cultural resources elements and consultations with tribes they have acknowledged as having historical ties to the area.

There are volumes and volumes of such documentation readily available in this electronic age. A quick review of the numerous studies and undertakings by such agencies will bring some independent clarity to Ms. Hoch and provide her with a more objective understanding of these matters.

For starters, the Barstow General Plan specifically identifies four Native American groups, recognized by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), with ancestral claims to the Barstow area: Chemehuevi, Fort Mojave, Kawaiisu and Serrano. It was in fact, when the City of Barstow caucused with the Chemehuevi Tribe on such matters in the mid 1990s that the parties began to explore joint opportunities for economic development including a casino in Barstow.

Second, in developing the latest comprehensive land management plans --updates to the California Desert Protection Act -- for both the Western Mohave (WEMO, 2006) and the North & Eastern Mohave Desert Regions (NEMO, 2002) the Department of Interior acknowledged and consulted with the representatives of the following federally recognized Native American Reservations respectively:

NEMO	WEMO
Consulted with leaders of these reservations: Chemehuevi (CA) Colorado River Indian Tribes1(AZ) Ft. Mohave (AZ) Timbisha (CA) Las Vegas Paiutes (NV)	Consulted with leaders of these reservations: 29 Palms Band Chemehuevi Colorado River Indian Tribes Ft. Mojave Lone Pine Paiute Shoshone Morongo Band San Manuel Band Timbisha Shoshone

Those examples are representative of dozens more.

For decades, when agencies based in the greater Mohave Desert (e.g. Fort Irwin, Edwards Air Force Base, the BLM, various offices of the National Park Service and the City of Barstow) were either required to contact, or desired to contact and consult with recognized Native American interests, they did not seek out representatives of the Los Coyotes Band (northeastern San Diego County) nor the Big Lagoon Rancheria (Humboldt County, 50+ miles south of the Oregon border); and conversely no representatives of either of those Reservations have previously asserted their own interests or involvement in such greater Mohave Desert matters.

Sovereign tribes within the Mohave Desert/San Bernardino region must be shown the same deference local and state governments would expect if the tables were turned; and the needs and desires of local tribes should be heard addressed with the same importance, respect and priority that local government leaders have come to expect.

Ignoring the concerns of these sovereign communities or simply “blowing them off” is not the right thing to do. Long after the Detroit developer feeding you one-sided half-true information has gone back to Michigan to count the money, tribes of San Bernardino County will still be here; and local and state governments will need to work together with the tribes for the protection and benefit of all Californians.

 

You may want to review these related posts as well:

• Schwarzenegger aide Andrea Hoch doesn’t have a clue!
• Detroit-based Barwest Gaming taught Schwarzenegger aide Andrea Hoch all she needs to know on Native American history of the Great Mohave Desert

• Casino developer’s representations biased; consultants “specialization” challenged

1 Colorado River Indian Tribes Reservation (CRIT) is a collection of Native American people whose ancestral heritage is tied to the various tribes that made their homes along the Colorado River including Mojave and Chemehuevi people.

Detroit-based Barwest Gaming taught Schwarzenegger aide Andrea Hoch all she needs to know on Native American history of the Great Mohave Desert

Andrea Hoch, Governor Schwarzenegger’s legal affairs secretary was asked by the Chairman of the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee to clarify circumstances and details surrounding gaming compacts for the Big Lagoon Rancheria (Humboldt County) and Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians (San Diego County) prior to a June 28, 2006 hearing on the two agreements.

Among other things Hoch was asked to (1) provide background on any other Northern California sites that were considered for Big Lagoon; and (2) respond to charges that the two tribes in relocating hundreds of miles from opposite corners of the state to Barstow are encroaching on ancestral territories of San Bernardino County based tribes.

It is interesting to note that in a run down of Northern California sites considered, Hoch gives the following as reasons several Northern California sites were abandoned:

• “In addition, another tribe may have had a claim to this site.”
• “and another tribe may have had historical claims to the area on which the site is located”
• “However, another tribe had been talking to Fortuna representatives about a site for a gaming facility in that city”

There is nothing certain or definitive about these possible ancestral claims or apparent historical ties to the land and yet they are given as reason enough for Big Lagoon Rancheria to abandon any further consideration of those particular sites. And in one case, since a tribe was already in talks with a particular City, Big Lagoon [Barwest] dismissed that site apparently not wanting to “butt-in.”

But when it came to butting-in on a Mohave Desert tribe, Barwest and its partners apparently didn’t think twice. And when Hoch was asked to respond to charges of tribal encroachment in the greater Barstow area, she dismisses similar claims by San Bernardino County tribes as unsubstantiated or inconsequential. Apparently Southern California tribes must meet a higher standard than Northern California tribes.

It’s unclear what qualifies Andrea Hoch as an expert on Native America history of the greater Mohave Desert as nothing in her resume would indicate a particular expertise in the field and she makes no references to appropriate state agencies like the Native American Heritage Commission or California’s academic and research institutions.

Instead, her arguments dismissing the ancestral claims of San Bernardino County tribes are a convenient parroting (cut and paste) of arguments used often by attorneys and PR representatives of Barwest LLC, the Detroit casino syndicators bankrolling and directing the Barstow twin casino resort plans for tribes from opposite corners of the state.

Hoch begins her response to then-Chairman Jerome Horton’s questions on encroachment concerns by stating:

“We have given consideration to opponents' claims. Based on our information, no federally recognized tribe has sovereign or cultural interests in Barstow.' Further, though the opponents claim sovereign and cultural rights of the 'Serranos"' to Barstow, it is our understanding that there is no federally recognized Serrano entity.”

What Andrea Hoch selectively leaves out is that by “We” she means the Governor’s staff and Barwest attorneys; and by “our information” she means an elementary study commissioned by Barwest, and conveniently based on findings and understandings as known in the mid-20^th Century, to make the points that Barwest wants to make. Truth be told, this section of Hoch’s letter (heck, maybe even the entire response letter) was originally drafted by Barwest attorneys.

Hoch’s limited knowledge about Native American history in Barstow comes directly from a study by Missoula, Montana based for-profit entity Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA). Barwest commissioned the study after Mohave Desert scholars failed to produce the report Barwest representatives wanted them to draft. HRA provides consulting services to developers and other public and private clients in the areas of cultural resource management, litigation support, and natural resource history. HRA has no record of expertise or experience in the Mohave Desert.

The fact that Andrea Hoch would fail to adequately entertain concerns of California’s regional tribes and yet rely solely and without question on a report by consultants based in Montana, outlined and paid for by the out-of-state proponents and investors in the proposed project, is insensitive to the Southern California Indian people involved and insulting to all Californians. This is not how progressive public policy decisions are made, and not what’s necessarily best for Californians, but rather how public policy benefiting special interests rules the day.

Andrea Hoch fails to solicit, entertain or consider scholarly information that presents a point of view different from the Barwest commissioned study; and failed to seek out any other independent scholarly sources or public agencies (Mohave River Valley Museum, BLM, DOI/National Parks Services in the Mohave Desert, Defense Department, Native American Heritage Commission, etc.) on the matter of greater Barstow area ancestral claims and local history.

Hoch failed to meet with and hear directly the claims of the Southern California Tribes involved.

It is near certain that neither Governor Schwarzenegger, Dan Kolkey, Pete Siggins, Andrea Hoch nor any other team of administration officials took field trips to investigate and verify what’s been represented about all three communities (Barstow, Los Coyotes Reservation/Warner Springs and Big Lagoon Rancheria/Trinidad) involved prior to concluding compact negotiations. It is doubtful Marian Ilitch has completed any similar series of field trips either.

What’s represented by Hoch in her letter is simply a one-sided view provided without question by the project’s advocates.

The picture below is of a monument marking the entrance to the Mohave River Valley Museum; a place one might visit on a field trip to the greater Barstow area organized by parties other than Barwest or Barstow Mayor Lawrence Dale.

You may want to review these related posts as well:

• Schwarzenegger aide Andrea Hoch doesn’t have a clue!
• Here's a tip for Schwarzenegger's legal affairs secretary, you don't have to take the Detroit Developer's word for it

• Casino developer’s representations biased; consultants “specialization” challenged

Casino developer may have mislead Schwarzenegger's negotiator to get approvals for twin casinos

Dan Kolkey may have been duped by Barwest's half-truths and illusions but this should take all that mystery and confusion away

From the very beginning, Barwest LLC demanded secretness and exclusivity. A city employ explained that prior to June 2003, there had been 15 months of top-secret negotiations and that he, a city employee, had signed a confidentiality agreement with the Detroit developer. And when they could no longer moved foward in secret, Barwest demanded and got an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with the City of Barstow (June 2, 2003). There is not one reference in that exclusive agreement to the Los Coyotes Band of Indians nor in the "rationale" provided to the Barstow City Council at the time they were to consider approval of the agreement. That ENA between the Detroit Developer and the City of Barstow was extended in September 2003 and again March 1, 2004 without reference to the Los Coyotes Tribe.

In March 2004, a Desert Dispatch columnist reported that Barwest Principal Michael J. Malik and his attorney Lance Boldrey had threatened to walk away from Barstow if the City engaged in discussions with any other prospective tribes or partners. Overtime you can see a pattern of threats and heavy handed leverage.

By June 2004, pressure was building on the City Council to resist yet a third extension of the Barwest ENA and other sideshows were secretly playing out behind the scenes but wouldn't be disclosed for almost a year:

(1) in March 2004 Governor Schwarzenegger had informed Barwest, Los Coyotes Leaders and Mayor Lawrence Dale that he would not approve a Los Coyotes project;

(2) An original introduction to Big Lagoon Rancheria Chairman Virgil Moorehead in April/May 2004 was not productive;

(3) Los Coyotes leaders were becoming increasingly disenchanted with Barwest; and in fact, would formally split with Barwest a month or two later (August 2004); and

(4) Mayor Dale was facing re-election.

Fearing their original 2-3 year capital "investment" might be flushed away, Barwest conjured up a little scheme that:

(a) guaranteed Barwest exclusive casino development rights to Barstow, regardless of tribe, via a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between Barwest and the City; and

(b) invoked the Governor's name and manufactured a "do or die" sense of urgency in order to convince a majority on the City Council to approve, what amounted to a bogus Municipal Services Agreement (MSA) with the Los Coyotes Tribe for a project Barwest and the Mayor knew was already "Dead on Arrival."

It wasn't a binding contract they sought with the MSA but simply a placeholder for Barwest and a barrier of entry into the Barstow market for anyone else over the following nine months. Barwest and local politicians needed to buy some time: Barwest needed time to regroup after the Governor rejected their plans for Los Coyotes and after Los Coyotes rejected Barwest as its business partner; and local politicians were looking to get through their re-election campaign with little noise and controversy. [Officials seek to dispel rumors; Desert Dispatch 10.02.04]

Understand, Barwest presently controls at least 100 acres in Barstow, maybe more (at one time Barwest's officials indicated hoped to acquire 200+ acres). Barwest has access to thousands of acres of BLM land directly adjacent to its 100+ acres. Neither tribe owns or controls any land in Barstow today (that's the purpose of the federal fee to trust process). The original Los Coyotes casino project approved by the Barstow City Council expressly limited the tribe to a 20 acre development. But now, the project has more than doubled: there are two casinos (twin full-service spa casino resorts) to be developed on almost 50 acres (250% larger); with nearly three times the number of the slot machines and gaming tables originally anticipated in the Los Coyotes proposal. Sound like someone hit a jackpot?

With this in mind, read the following post which substitutes Barwest's name for Los Coyotes name where it would be factually correct to get a true picture of who's pushing things in Barstow.

---

The following dialogue between Senators and Daniel Kolkey, Governor Schwarzenegger's former lead gaming compact negotiator is excerpted from transcripts of a March 28, 2006 Senate Governmental Organization Committee hearing, Sacramento, Calif.

SENATOR FLOREZ: So, Los Coyotes without Big Lagoon wouldn’t be a valid use of State policy then?

MR. KOLKEY: No.

SENATOR FLOREZ: So, there lies one issue. So, you have Big Lagoon that normally wouldn’t be eligible is eligible now—excuse me, Los Coyotes—because of Big Lagoon. Is that correct?

MR. KOLKEY: The project is eligible under the Governor’s policy because it facilitates Big Lagoon’s relocation.

SENATOR FLOREZ: So, in essence, what came first then—Big Lagoon or Los Coyotes? Why would Los Coyotes even be on the topic if the Governor’s policy itself wouldn’t allow for that?

MR. KOLKEY: Well, number one, the only way for us to facilitate the relocation of Big Lagoon was to find a site in Barstow. Barstow & BARWEST had already identified this site near outlet malls as part of its plan for renovation of the city. And they had an exclusive agreement with Los Coyotes BARWEST. So, the only way that we could facilitate the Big Lagoon relocation was through the site identified by the City of Barstow with Los Coyotes BARWEST. And these were the facts that the State was dealing with then. Let me just say that having gotten Los Coyotes’ BARWEST's agreement to do this, we felt it was a matter of, really, honor and fair dealing that we stick with Los Coyotes BARWEST throughout this. In other words, they BARWEST facilitated this relocation. As a matter of honor and fair dealing, we were going to stick with BARWEST, Los Coyotes and Big Lagoon as a unified project and not try and find, if we could, some other site in Barstow. This was the site that Barstow had picked. Los Coyotes BARWEST facilitated it, and this accomplished, through a relocation and consolidation, really, of two casino projects, the Governor’s policy of avoiding the environmental impact on the coast. [BARWEST is rewarded with two casinos for taking the Big Lagoon problem off Kolkey's lap.]

SENATOR FLOREZ: Okay. Senator Battin?

SENATOR JIM BATTIN: Mr. Kolkey, I have a couple of questions I don’t understand. So, the City of Barstow got to decide where California was going to allow a casino project?

MR. KOLKEY: No—I wouldn’t put it that way. What we have here is we wanted to relocate the casino project that Big Lagoon had on the coast.

SENATOR BATTIN: But through Los Coyotes’ BARWEST's agreement with Barstow, that somehow became an exclusive. You could not have put Big Lagoon there without Los Coyotes?

MR. KOLKEY: We would have needed a site, and one of the things that the Governor’s proclamation has made clear is that in relocating any tribal casino under the Section 20 authority, is we want support by the local jurisdiction and the local community. We’re not going to relocate a casino against the wishes of the local jurisdiction or the local community. And so, if the local jurisdiction says, Here’s where we would like to have a casino, then we’re going to accommodate that local jurisdiction. We’re not going to force something on the local jurisdiction, so we were going to do it where Barstow wanted to do it.

SENATOR BATTIN: So, if I understood a recent news article that I just read, is that the City of Barstow has actually not. . . . the city council could not take a position on the referendum that is in front of the city right now; whether or not they support having the casino there.

MR. KOLKEY: Well, that local initiative is actually quite different from support of the Big Lagoon-Los Coyotes unified casino project. That is a local initiative that seeks support of casinos in Barstow but at a different site and not the site at the outlet malls that the City of Barstow had identified.

SENATOR BATTIN: The city council of Barstow, then, has passed and made a deal with Los Coyotes BARWEST?

MR. KOLKEY: The City of Barstow has a . . .

SENATOR BATTIN: Exclusive, you said.

MR. KOLKEY: They had at the time we were negotiating an exclusive agreement [with BARWEST not Los Coyotes as Kolkey suggests over and over]. This was in 2004. They had an exclusive agreement with Los Coyotes BARWEST. They also have an MOU MSA with Los Coyotes ...

[Yes, there had been an MSA for a project that had already been aborted long before the Barstow City Council awarded the agreement - in March 2004 the Governor had rejected that proposal. Barwest and Mayor Dale failed to reveal they were no longer pregnant with the Los Coyotes Casino when they asked the City Council to seal the deal with an MSA they knew would not ever be valid. Then weeks before the November 2004 election it was discovered Mayor Dale had never executed the bogus agreement.

It wasn't until almost a year later when Barwest announced it would give birth to twin Casino resorts that the players confessed what had gone on behind the scenes the year before].

click for: complete transcripts

Ilitch owned casino site

50-acre Barstow site is part of larger several hundred acre commercial mega resort plan Ilitch envisions for the Mohave Desert community. Ilitch controlled Barwest would have the exclusive rights, free of future competition, to develop the only two casinos and all encompassing resorts in California's 'High Desert' area from the Cajon Pass Summit north to the Nevada stateline.

BARWEST-Owned Site

Proposed Dual Indian Casinos and Resorts
Barstow, CA

*Map included in 9/06 EIS/TEIR Scoping Report

Barwest owns multiple parcels totalling 110+ acres; 48-50 acres set aside for dual casino resort developments. The Barwest owned land is adjacent to hundreds of acres managed by the Bureau of Land Managment (BLM). BLM has been approached about land swap acquisition of the adjacent lands; presumably part of the larger master resort development plans by Barwest and other commercial developers. Neither Big Lagoon or Los Coyotes Indian tribes own or control any land in Barstow today.