Mountain Biking - Legally ride on private property.

Yes, it's true. You can legally ride on private property. It's your right to travel on trails on someone else's property. Like this:

http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/norge06/geir_meadow.jpg

Or, how about legally riding in a National Park, on any trail? Like this:

http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/norge06/rondane2.jpg (the rider is the orange speck, middle left)

Some countries give their citizens rights that are unimaginable to most folks living in North America.

(DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME)

p.s. Yes, I can be spelling "legally" but I cannot be editing da subjective line

An old man in my area owned a lot of acreage here. I mean hills and hills. Over time, they built a commuter route through it and many many cars use it to cut through to get to the other side. He owned the land on both sides of that road, but do you think he still owned the property the actual road is ON? He has since passed on and his daughter sold it off to development - but I have always wondered about that.

As always great pics.

An old man in my area owned a lot of acreage here. I mean hills and hills. Over time, they built a commuter route through it and many many cars use it to cut through to get to the other side. He owned the land on both sides of that road, but do you think he still owned the property the actual road is ON? He has since passed on and his daughter sold it off to development - but I have always wondered about that.

In the US, if someone else uses it for seven years (I think) and he does nothing to enforce his ownership or be productive with it, that other person may be able to claim the land through adverse posession.


Some countries give their citizens rights that are unimaginable to most folks living in North America.

...but at the cost of the property rights of the owners. If I had a piece of property like that, I'd be glad to carve some trails across it, but it should be the property owner's perogative, and guests should ask permission. Noting your username, I'd think Ayn Rand would tend to agree.

Awesome pics though. Pete Fagerlin has an awesome collection of ride videos and pictures. I'm more than a little bit jealous of the places he's been.

thats cool to know, awesome pics hank

In the US, if someone else uses it for seven years (I think) and he does nothing to enforce his ownership or be productive with it, that other person may be able to claim the land through adverse posession.

The statutory time period varies from state to state, and is but one of many requirements for a claim of adverse possesion to ripen into fee title.

Happens very rarely these days.

Awsome pictures. We kina have the same thing here too. The mountain that we ride on is private property, but he lets us use the land.

An old man in my area owned a lot of acreage here. I mean hills and hills. Over time, they built a commuter route through it and many many cars use it to cut through to get to the other side. He owned the land on both sides of that road, but do you think he still owned the property the actual road is ON? He has since passed on and his daughter sold it off to development - but I have always wondered about that.

If the people used it for long enough, there may have been enough evidence to grant an easement through prescriptive use.

He still owned the property, regardless.

hmmm. Okay. Thanks guys.

He was a stubborn old coot and didn't like authority. That's why I was surprised he didn't fuss as much as he did over little things. A lot of people didn't like him and he was in the news alot for being a pain. He was so crotchety that he would make me laugh. He was cool though. I liked Mr. Smith.

If the people used it for long enough, there may have been enough evidence to grant an easement through prescriptive use.

He still owned the property, regardless.

I've had to deal with this same situation on my daily commute. Just up the street is a "private road" that stretches about 100 yards. There is one caustic soccer mommy who has told me that I can't walk my dog (access to loacl trail) or ride my bike there since it is "private" (despite lack of signage and continuous use by the public for eight plus years).

Trying to explain a "prescriptive easement" to her was like trying to explain the theory of evolution to a rabid Bible thumper.

So if there is an easement on the property, who is responsible for the cleanliness of the area that butts up to the edge of the road? Mr. Smith would have old metal barrels and some junk along the edge but refused to move it because it was "my property and I do damn well what I want with it". Although it may have been a safety concern, there was still enough room for a stalled car to pull over. The county and Mr. Smith went back and forth about this for years, at least 12 if I remember well. It was never resolved until after his death when his daughter just had it cleaned up.

It is NOT your right to travel on POSTED private property. The definition of "posted", of course, will vary from state to state. In WV, "posted" can be actual "no trespassing" signs, or merely 1 strand of fence. Also, in WV, one might be arrested by a Conservation Officer (game warden) for being on private land unless one has written permission from the landowner on thier person. The courtesy issue aside, I would suggest checking the laws and regulation for your state, and speaking to the landowner before you traipse across someone elses land.... it's a major liability issue for the lamdowner if you get hurt!

Virginia is the same os WVA as listed above. Im not all that well traveled, but PA. sure has a nice system of open hunting, biking, hiking, or whatever access. Unless it's posted, it's open.

So if there is an easement on the property, who is responsible for the cleanliness of the area that butts up to the edge of the road?

The property owner would be responsible for complying with any "cleanliness" ordinances that may exist on the local level.



Mr. Smith would have old metal barrels and some junk along the edge but refused to move it because it was "my property and I do damn well what I want with it".

And he was well within his rights to say that. "Mr. Smith" may have been smarter than you thought - by tacitly granting permission to the parties crossing his property, he ensured there could not be an easement created by prescription, insofar as "hostile use" is a requisite for an adverse possesion claim.


Oh, and Hank Rearden, thanks for the primer on Scandanavian real property law. Great shots as usual.

Yes, it's true. You can legally ride on private property. It's your right to travel on trails on someone else's property. Like this:

Or, how about legally riding in a National Park, on any trail? Like this:

Some countries give their citizens rights that are unimaginable to most folks living in North America.

(DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME)

p.s. Yes, I can be spelling "legally" but I cannot be editing da subjective line
What exactly is subjective and what line are you speaking about?

And BTW- the state is usually in control of these right, not federal, obviously unless it's federal property, which I shouldn't have to comment on. I would've thought you knew that. If you come to Michigan, you can go where ever you'd like unless it's clearly marked for no trespassers/fenced off. We're an out doors state though. Talk to your local legislature.

It is NOT your right to travel on POSTED private property.

It WAS my right to travel on POSTED private property in the first picture.

Of course, YMMV.

The property owner would be responsible for complying with any "cleanliness" ordinances that may exist on the local level.




And he was well within his rights to say that. "Mr. Smith" may have been smarter than you thought - by tacitly granting permission to the parties crossing his property, he ensured there could not be an easement created by prescription, insofar as "hostile use" is a requisite for an adverse possesion claim.


Ahhhhhhh.........Okay I get it! ;) Hey Gastro thanks for teaching me this! :)

What exactly is subjective and what line are you speaking about?

I have a typo in the subject line. Get it?


And BTW- the state is usually in control of these right, not federal, obviously unless it's federal property, which I shouldn't have to comment on.

The national government dictates the property rights in my pictures.


I would've thought you knew that.

That's funny.

Maybe I should have put the following bits in a larger font, different color, and in bold? Heck, I'll do that now.


Some countries give their citizens rights that are unimaginable to most folks living in North America.

(DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME)

Unimaginable? Glad to live in the US where, yeah, landowners still have some rights! I pay the property taxes on my property, yet I can be sued when some a**hole decides to trespass on said property & injures him or herself.... In WV, the legislature has made it harder for people to sue when they do not have permission to be on private land, but it still happens.

My kids bike, and they have 135 acres to roam about, plus the neighbor's 103 acres. but they know to ask permission to go on other people's private property. If I don't know you (and even if I do), you are best advised to stop at the house & ask if you can use my land.

Unimaginable?

Your strident response proves my point.

And BTW- the state is usually in control of these right, not federal, obviously unless it's federal property, which I shouldn't have to comment on. I would've thought you knew that. If you come to Michigan, you can go where ever you'd like unless it's clearly marked for no trespassers/fenced off. We're an out doors state though. Talk to your local legislature.


Out west there is a lot more federal land, for instance, Oregon is about 50% federal land, and a lot of it is off limits to mountain bikes.

trespass on my land and I will use my Virginia right to shoot you in the ass for attempted criminal intent of my property. you see in the commonwealth of Va. once you step more than 1 foot onto a posted area you are considered to have criminal intent and the owner has the right to protect his property from criminal intent. you may sue me for the said damage to your ass but you will lose.
I am also a "Bible thumper" and though I understand your "theory" of evolution I disagree with it and will , just like you trespassing, allow you to find out the truth on your own. I have no need or desire to argue with you over facts. I will let consequences deal with themselves.

trespass on my land and I will use my Virginia right to shoot you in the ass for attempted criminal intent of my property. you see in the commonwealth of Va. once you step more than 1 foot onto a posted area you are considered to have criminal intent and the owner has the right to protect his property from criminal intent. you may sue me for the said damage to your ass but you will lose.
I am also a "Bible thumper" and though I understand your "theory" of evolution I disagree with it and will , just like you trespassing, allow you to find out the truth on your own. I have no need or desire to argue with you over facts. I will let consequences deal with themselves.

You'd shoot another human being because they made the most grievous mistake of stepping onto a piece of ground that some papers say are yours? I didn't know Jesus was cool with that kind of thing; learn something new all the time.

Here we go...................

Unimaginable? Glad to live in the US where, yeah, landowners still have some rights! I pay the property taxes on my property, yet I can be sued when some a**hole decides to trespass on said property & injures him or herself.... In WV, the legislature has made it harder for people to sue when they do not have permission to be on private land, but it still happens.

My kids bike, and they have 135 acres to roam about, plus the neighbor's 103 acres. but they know to ask permission to go on other people's private property. If I don't know you (and even if I do), you are best advised to stop at the house & ask if you can use my land.

Just the fact that people are willing to sue somebody when they injure themselves on someone's land says a great deal about society in general, why must we always be out to get someone and to make a scam, quite pathetic.

Just the fact that people are willing to sue somebody when they injure themselves on someone's land says a great deal about society in general, why must we always be out to get someone and to make a scam, quite pathetic.

Well, I whole-heartly agree with you & wish it weren't so, but meanwhile, back on the farm here, it's just one of those facts of life.

I totally fail to see what's wrong with the concept of private property, though. Perhaps a socialist state upbringing will do that to you...

So Hank - IS there private property where you live? If so, what's the point if anyone can do whatever they want on it, when they want, without so much as a "by your leave"?

Don't be confusing scientific theory with scientific hypothesis iamthetas. It makes you look stupid.

trespass on my land and I will use my Virginia right to shoot you in the ass for attempted criminal intent of my property. you see in the commonwealth of Va. once you step more than 1 foot onto a posted area you are considered to have criminal intent and the owner has the right to protect his property from criminal intent. you may sue me for the said damage to your ass but you will lose.
I am also a "Bible thumper" and though I understand your "theory" of evolution I disagree with it and will , just like you trespassing, allow you to find out the truth on your own. I have no need or desire to argue with you over facts. I will let consequences deal with themselves.

Did you puff up your chest as you typed that?

God (!) damn you just did a fantastic job of illustrating the fact that you're a complete tool.

Thank God (!) I don't live anywhere near the ass end of the country where you supposedly own property.

So Hank - IS there private property where you live?

Yes there is. I fact I own property. There is also private property where those pictures were taken. The point that you and some of your fellow neanderthals are missing is that different areas have different laws pertaining to private property.


If so, what's the point if anyone can do whatever they want on it, when they want, without so much as a "by your leave"?

You are a lying sack of sh|t. Sorry.

Where did I ever write that anyone can do whatever they want, when they want, on the private property in the picture that I posted?

You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills, find an adult to translate my posts for you, or both.

Good luck.

This is the best thread ever, for reasons most will never fully appreciate, I fear. Sweet blessed irony...

Oh, and people...Roark was the hero, not Rearden! lol

I don't even necessarily disagree with "Hank Rearden," but he's a seriously huge troll, for those with eyes that see. Anyway, anyone who reads Ayn Rand and is over 20 is the real idiot.

I don't even necessarily disagree with "Hank Rearden," but he's a seriously huge troll, for those with eyes that see.

Yeah, heaven (!) forbid that someone posts something that is related to mountain biking on a number of levels that actually forces people to question their pre-conceived notions about trail access, etc.

In the strange world that you live in is someone an idiot if they just listen to the Atlas Shrugged book on tape? That might be an option for people over twenty who are fearful of being labeled an idiot by an idiot posting on an obscure internet forum.

Yeah, heaven (!) forbid that someone posts something that is related to mountain biking on a number of levels that actually forces people to question their pre-conceived notions about trail access, etc.Nah,the OP was good, but since then you're just insulting people to egg them on, and you know it.


In the strange world that you live in is someone an idiot if they just listen to the Atlas Shrugged book on tape? Oh, I guess you're still a genius if you do that. ;)

Nah,the OP was good, but since then you're just insulting people to egg them on, and you know it.

Nope. I'm only insulting the dimwits who cannot read and/or have shown themselves to be stereotypical rednecks.

That's done on principle, not to egg them on. Egging them on is no challenge whatsoever.

Chill it guys.

There's the topic of when it's fitting to ride on private property, which seems to me to be well within the scope of this forum. If you want to share you opinions on what current property laws, do it nicely. If you want to get into a serious debate about it, take it to P&R. If you want to talk about evolution versus creation, take it to P&R. If you want to see who can come up with the most subtly clever insults, take it to a local bmx park.

For what it's worth, I think Ayn Rand had a lot of good points, more than Karl Marx ever did, but as a whole in the real world, her philosophy is only slightly more practical than socialism. Atlas Shrugged is well worth a read. I got way more out of it than my college philosophy classes.

Anyhow, now I think I sort of get the point Hank was trying to make. I'd be interested to know a little bit about what makes the distinction between types of private property. Is there a registration process? Does it affect tax status in any way?

There's the topic of when it's fitting to ride on private property, which seems to me to be well within the scope of this forum. If you want to share you opinions on what current property laws, do it nicely. If you want to get into a serious debate about it, take it to P&R. If you want to talk about evolution versus creation, take it to P&R. If you want to see who can come up with the most subtly clever insults, take it to a local bmx park.

How's this for "chill"...

Why don't you consider taking your wannabe moderator act to "P&R"?

I'll discuss the replies to my post(s) in this forum, despite your unsolicited, and silly, "advice."

Cheers.

(ouch)

Call me a wuss. But I wouldn't even begin to even try to argue with Hank. Somehow he always wins.

But I wouldn't even begin to even try to argue with Hank. Somehow he always wins.

Because Hank knows how to present a logical argument, unlike the self proclaimed bible thumper who offered his opinions as "fact" and then says "I have no need or desire to argue with you over facts". His attempted argument is bunk, because he has no logical reasoning to back up his "facts".

Because Hank knows how to present a logical argument, unlike the self proclaimed bible thumper who offered his opinions as "fact" and then says "I have no need or desire to argue with you over facts". His attempted argument is bunk, because he has no logical reasoning to back up his "facts".

This is true. Any argument, whether right or wrong, can be won by how the argument is presented.

This is why Americas justice system has anal intercourse with itself everyday, and lawyers take benefit of that.

Ive made two posts and deleted both of them because they came across just to threatening. I just think its a shame to think your winning anything by insulting a "caustic soccer mom" and apclassic, a mountain biking mother and race promoter, by calling her a lying sack of ....

It's says alot for some of you in this forum that think this is "winning an argument" and it says alot about Hank whatever. Too darn bad, this for the most part is a really nice bunch of people.

How's this for "chill"...

Why don't you consider taking your wannabe moderator act to "P&R"?

I'll discuss the replies to my post(s) in this forum, despite your unsolicited, and silly, "advice."

Cheers.

No wannabe moderator act here Hank. Chill it.

While you OP was excelent... your inflamitory, agressive and hostile remarks have reduced this thread to a steaming pile of horse dung.

Stacey
Forum Moderator

What a great thread. Even got the attention of the cops. Cool.

This thread is based on legalities that fluctuate state to state, when the topic should really be about consideration and common courtesy. Trails are not a right. They are a privilege. If we all took the time to consider this fact before we get up on our high horse about usage, maybe everyone would be more likely to see eye to eye and more trails would open for all to use.

If I find a new trail not marked with No Trespassing signs, I use it. If I see the owner, I still ask permission. If I want to use a trail that appears closed off, I find the owner and secure their permission. If I know for a fact the abutter to the trail has no right to post it, I ignore the signs, but will still attempt to secure their good will. It is that simple. Why does it have to be more difficult than that?

it's this sense of entitlement that many mountain bikers have about riding on private property that really irritates those people we need the most - private property owners. the attitude displayed by some is really hurting our scene rather than helping it

the thread was just fine until people began assuming that hank was talking about having the right to ride on private property in the states without fully reading his post. then out came the classic "Glad to live in the US where, yeah, landowners still have some rights!" and "trespass on my land and I will use my Virginia right to shoot you in the a** for attempted criminal intent of my property" attitudes so many of us non-americans hate. the implied sentiments behind such comments are pretty ********, if you ask me. who says land owners don't have any rights in other countries? who says someone who's trespassing--either knowingly or unknowingly--is intending to make you the victim of some sort of heinous crime?

thank God most other countries don't have the same "i broke myself on your property, so i'm going to sue you" litigation problems so rampant in the good ol' (:rolleyes:) u.s. of a.

I just think its a shame to think your(sic) winning anything by insulting a "caustic soccer mom"

Here's another example of people being unable to read. Where did I insult a caustic soccer Mom?



and apclassic, a mountain biking mother and race promoter, by calling her a lying sack of ....

So I'm supposed to be psychic and somehow divine that apclassic is a mountain biking mother and race promoter? If that is true, that somehow gives her a "free pass" to make idiotic posts and remain unchallenged? That gives her the right to make claims that are completely at odds with what I've posted?

Please...


It's says alot for some of you in this forum that think this is "winning an argument" and it says alot about Hank whatever. Too darn bad, this for the most part is a really nice bunch of people.

Read more carefully lest you make yourself look less than bright once again.

This thread is based on legalities that fluctuate state to state, when the topic should really be about consideration and common courtesy. Trails are not a right. They are a privilege.

Riding the trail in the first picture is not a privilege, it is a right.

Additionally, the thread is NOT based upon legalities that fluctuate state to state.

Sorry.

it's this sense of entitlement that many mountain bikers have about riding on private property

If it's perfectly legal, in fact a legislated right, how does that equal a "sense of entitlement"?

Riding the trail in the first picture is not a privilege, it is a right.

Additionally, the thread is NOT based upon legalities that fluctuate state to state.

Sorry.Please tell me why it is a right. Please make note of where it says you have that right.

While you as OP may not consider this thread about legalities that fluctuate from state to state, the fact that they do will color the responses of all based on their local knowledge or lack therof.

BTW- no need to apologize. Unless of course that was just a reflection of your attitude.

Please tell me why it is a right.

Because the law says so.


Please make note of where it says you have that right.

The Outdoor Recreation Act of 1957.


While you as OP may not consider this thread about legalities that fluctuate from state to state, the fact that they do will color the responses of all based on their local knowledge or lack therof.

At this point (actually for quite a while) the responses are being colored by reading comprehension issues.