Your recent article on the “trails conflict” between private property owners and horse people brought to mind several points. Before proceeding, I will mention that I am a horse owner, and I do keep some of my horses at my home in the Santa Monica Mountains. The area where I live is one of those where the motorways (fire roads) go through private property, and where equestrians, mountain bikers and hikers have, for recreational purposes, used these roads, as well as having created “off-road” trails. As pointed out in your article, property owners are starting to crack down on this use, although the reason stated is that people who are doing this are “not horse people.”
I think one of the reasons is that the inconsiderate minority of these recreational users, have, in large part, ruined it for everyone. I have been at the receiving end of this sort of behavior. People have felt it is okay to ride into my gated and fenced riding arena, which I now keep padlocked. I have had mountain bikers fly by and scare my horse — on my own property. Unleashed dogs accompanying hikers have chased my cats. A number of hikers and equestrians seem to think that they can just go anywhere on one’s property “to look at the view.” Likewise, I am aware of people who are busily creating trails across private property, regardless of the damage caused by the erosion of these trails, since, unlike the trails built by the conservancy, they are just hacked into the slopes. Unfortunately, the considerate users suffer as a consequence.
But a far more important reason, I believe, lying behind the blocking of private land, is the liability issue. Many states have statutes limiting liability for horse related injuries occuring on ones property. California is not one of them. It would not be an unknown phenomenon for someone to fall off their horse while trespassing on your land, and then sue you. Unfortunately, the risk of litigation outweighs the benefits of being nice.
Annette Peterfy