Washington Has anyone ever approached the timber companies?

[Slackkinhard]

This is the key.

 

Risk versus reward.

 

What positive would they gain by allowing access versus what risks are the exposing themselves to?

 

In the olden days, local ownership of timber companies saw some value in good community relations and allowing access was an important component in those relationships.

 

Modern out of state / out of country ownership rarely embraces that concept so the scale is strongly tipped toward the negative when considering access.

 

The equation is cold hearted, but understandable when viewed from their perspective.

 

The burden is on us to propose scenarios that they might accept as more positive than negative for them.

 

OR, it is to impose penalties on those owners for not being good neighbors.  If ya don't fight back, they continue to take until you do

[motovita]

 In WA a landowners liability goes down when there land is open for public use. There are other considerations though.

 

RCW 4.24.210
Liability of owners or others in possession of land and water areas for injuries to recreation users -- Limitation.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) or (4) of this section, any public or private landowners or others in lawful possession and control of any lands whether designated resource, rural, or urban, or water areas or channels and lands adjacent to such areas or channels, who allow members of the public to use them for the purposes of outdoor recreation, which term includes, but is not limited to, the cutting, gathering, and removing of firewood by private persons for their personal use without purchasing the firewood from the landowner, hunting, fishing, camping, picnicking, swimming, hiking, bicycling, skateboarding or other non motorized wheel-based activities, hang gliding, paragliding, rock climbing, the riding of horses or other animals, clam digging, pleasure driving of off-road vehicles, snowmobiles, and other vehicles, boating, nature study, winter or water sports, viewing or enjoying historical, archaeological, scenic, or scientific sites, without charging a fee of any kind therefor, shall not be liable for unintentional injuries to such users.

[tod701]

 In WA a landowners liability goes down when there land is open for public use. There are other considerations though.

 

RCW 4.24.210

Liability of owners or others in possession of land and water areas for injuries to recreation users -- Limitation.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) or (4) of this section, any public or private landowners or others in lawful possession and control of any lands whether designated resource, rural, or urban, or water areas or channels and lands adjacent to such areas or channels, who allow members of the public to use them for the purposes of outdoor recreation, which term includes, but is not limited to, the cutting, gathering, and removing of firewood by private persons for their personal use without purchasing the firewood from the landowner, hunting, fishing, camping, picnicking, swimming, hiking, bicycling, skateboarding or other non motorized wheel-based activities, hang gliding, paragliding, rock climbing, the riding of horses or other animals, clam digging, pleasure driving of off-road vehicles, snowmobiles, and other vehicles, boating, nature study, winter or water sports, viewing or enjoying historical, archaeological, scenic, or scientific sites, without charging a fee of any kind therefor, shall not be liable for unintentional injuries to such users.

 

The key to achieving any useful level of liability immunity is to create an exemption to RCW4.24.210(4)

 

http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.210

 

(4)(a) Nothing in this section shall prevent the liability of a landowner or others in lawful possession and control for injuries sustained to users by reason of a known dangerous artificial latent condition for which warning signs have not been conspicuously posted.

 

I have proposed adding the following language:

 

Conditions naturally or normally arising from road maintenance and timber harvesting do not constitute a known dangerous artificial latent condition and a landowner shall not be liable under subsection (1) of this section for unintentional injuries resulting from such conditions.

[Woods_Rider]

I don't think the equestrian have any different immunity protection than we do. 

 

My understanding is that they do, but perhaps I am not understanding correctly as I am not a lawyer. 

 

RCW 4.24.530 Limitations on liability for equine activities — Definitions. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.530

 

RCW 4.24.540 Limitations on liability for equine activities — Exceptions:  http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.540

 

This Back Country Horsemen of Washington website has an interesting explanation of the regs: http://www.bchw.org/lnt/main/equine_liability_laws.htm

 

EQUINE LIABILITY LAWS

 

There are two categories of laws that affect liability for injuries or damage incurred by equestrians.  They are written specifically to address liability concerns around horses, and to insure that equestrians and other recreational users continue to have access to open space.  Washington State has enacted both categories of these laws.

 

 

I also see signs like these everywhere we go in WA with our horses and we always have to sign waivers. 

 

 

I'm not sure if this is any different from any other activity that occurs on private land but it sure seems to be designed to limit liability and that is how it is being interpreted by the equestrian community in WA State (or at least the crowd we run with which is quite diverse and knowledgeable).  -Ed

[tod701]

This only covers event promoters, trainers, guides and such, not land owners or managers.

RCW4.24.540(2)( B )(ii) still applies the known dangerous latent condition standard for liability to the land owner or manager.

Edited June 4, 2015 by tod701

[Woods_Rider]

I see. Thanks for the clarification Tod.  -Ed

[ACree]

I find it amazing too, in fact even as a mountain biker, I think they get away with murder compared to other groups.  No other group hauls lumber into the woods to build the equivalent of a downhill supercross track, and IMO that's no more appropriate for forest land than an actual supercross track would be.  I do think there will be some serious injuries sooner or later and things will change for mountain biking as well.

 

Check out exits 27 and 38 for an amazing display of 'user built' trails, or the trail propagation at the Tokuls.

 

I've been AMAZED at what the mountain bike crowd gets to do in the woods. Building all kinds of wood features left and right. I don't get it. 

 

If we tried that we would be crucified. 

 

I've kept my mouth shut on that one since I don't feel the need to take anything away from them, but seriously, how does that happen? 

 

I've also heard they are having a hard time keeping some of their trails (which probably used to be our trails) and are facing some of the obstacles we are, but from the outside looking in, they seem to be doing way better then us. 

 

I guess its due to the lack of a noisy polluting engine in the end. I can understand why the general public would see and treat them differently. 

[waycrazy1]

Some of the MTB guys feel it's easier to ask for forgiveness then permission. Disclaimer ( this is a small percentage not all MTB peeps are outlaws)

[tod701]

No other group hauls lumber into the woods to build the equivalent of a downhill supercross track, and IMO that's no more appropriate for forest land than an actual supercross track would be.  I do think there will be some serious injuries sooner or later and things will change for mountain biking as well.

A ticking time bomb for the land owner.

If they know about the structures and don't do anything it will next to impossible to avoid liability.

[Slackkinhard]

gotta blame someone.....Freedom is on life support

Edited June 5, 2015 by Slackkinhard

[baconispower]

I've been AMAZED at what the mountain bike crowd gets to do in the woods. Building all kinds of wood features left and right. I don't get it. 

 

If we tried that we would be crucified. 

 

I've kept my mouth shut on that one since I don't feel the need to take anything away from them, but seriously, how does that happen? 

 

I've also heard they are having a hard time keeping some of their trails (which probably used to be our trails) and are facing some of the obstacles we are, but from the outside looking in, they seem to be doing way better then us. 

 

I guess its due to the lack of a noisy polluting engine in the end. I can understand why the general public would see and treat them differently. 

 

they do it but not without consequences.    this is a good documentary about what is going on over near leavenworth.

 

[mattwave]

Reviews?

 

https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-mx/2013/specs.php

[baconispower]

does anyone really think electric dirtbikes will change any of this?  i certainly don't.  they hate dirtbikes just as much as they hate mtn bikes, the greenies/enviros don't want to see anything in the woods that is assisted drive machinery. 

 

our club leases land from a timber company to build trails, ride, and hold events.  they do make us jump through a lot of hoops, insurance for guests, max capacity, gps approval of proposed trails, etc...   and anyone that rides on the property has to sign a release. i wish that when you register a dirtbike you could sign a release of sorts to release the anyone and everyone from any liability if you crash and wad yourself up.

Edited June 5, 2015 by DRS

[ThunderChicken]

I find it amazing too, in fact even as a mountain biker, I think they get away with murder compared to other groups.  No other group hauls lumber into the woods to build the equivalent of a downhill supercross track, and IMO that's no more appropriate for forest land than an actual supercross track would be.  I do think there will be some serious injuries sooner or later and things will change for mountain biking as well.

 

Check out exits 27 and 38 for an amazing display of 'user built' trails, or the trail propagation at the Tokuls.

 

Hey ACree,

I think I've seen your posts over on MTBR. I'm "KellyC" over there.

I live in North Bend. We should ride sometime. I've got lots of good stuff around Rattlesnake lake.

Good to see another "cycling" motorcyclist. Or visa versa. : )

[ThunderChicken]

Also, the Dirt Fish people who have their rally school up in Snoqualmie have been kicking ass with the locals. Their business is up and thriving. Its basically an ORV park for rally cars. Sure its a relatively small area, but they faced similar concerns from the community when they tried to first locate up there. Noise, dust, environmental issues, traffic, etc, etc, etc. 

 

I quizzed them at length at the Dez 100 and I came away impressed. They have apparently won over most of their neighbors by working very hard at being pro-active good neighbors. 

 

Nice to hear about a success for a woods based motorsports organization even if its not dirt bikes. 

 

I asked them when they were going to open up some dirt bike trails and put in a motocross track, they immediately shot down that idea. 

 

They may be nice but they are apparently not stupid.  

 

After moving to the area less than a year ago and seeing how "anti" everything people are here, I am amazed that Dirt Fish is able to operate.

[ACree]

I think it will make a difference, but will not magically cause access issues to go away.  Noise and fuel use are two of the complaints.  Take those away, and they'll be left with 'we don't like them'.  What electric won't do is change the motorized/nonmotorized distinction.  Other than trails, mx tracks seem to fight noise issues more than anything.  Electric should fix that problem.  Again look at Duthie, and watch some videos of what's going on there on youtube.  There's virtually no difference in risk between what bikes are doing there and what electric motorcycles would do in a similar facility.  Duthie was an almost 10 year process.  Moto groups need to start now to have something like that in 10 years.

 

 

does anyone really think electric dirtbikes will change any of this?  i certainly don't.  they hate dirtbikes just as much as they hate mtn bikes, the greenies/enviros don't want to see anything in the woods that is assisted drive machinery. 

 

our club leases land from a timber company to build trails, ride, and hold events.  they do make us jump through a lot of hoops, insurance for guests, max capacity, gps approval of proposed trails, etc...   and anyone that rides on the property has to sign a release. i wish that when you register a dirtbike you could sign a release of sorts to release the anyone and everyone from any liability if you crash and wad yourself up.

[highmarker]

Our bike actually have engines, electric bikes have motors. So if the sign says no motorized vehicles......?

[Old_Man_Time]

You guys are kind of indirectly hitting the nail on the head with dirt bikes IMO. Whenever I meet some anti-orv type (seems to be pretty much everyone that does not ride) that do not seem to too obnoxious and we can have a friendly discussion, I try to find out the specific things about ORV activity that they don't like. Its the usual things. 

 

• Noise. (I can certainly understand that although I don't think its as bad as its made out to be).
• Enviro damage (erosion, run-off, sedimentation of streams, disturbing sensitive fish reproductive habitat, etc.).  I think this issue is massively overstated, but it is real, and in some places it has been bad in my admittedly unprofessional opinion. And hikers do the same thing but seem to get a pass on that (think thousands more people across thousands more miles of trails). 
• Garbage and litter (don't know why we always get tagged with that one).
• Rude behavior on the trails. 
• Dirt bikes are dangerous. 

 

I think that about covers the main complaints. 

 

Then I try to talk them off the cliff by asking, well, how about if we mitigated those issues?

 

What if we had quiet dirt bikes that were easy on the trails? For garbage, rude riders, I tell them I don't think we have the exclusive rights to that, but that we could do better and in fact riders are working very hard on those very issues all the time. 

 

This discussion usually blows their minds and like a little child confronted with some reality that they don't like, they usually start grasping for straws for some other reasons why we shouldn't be out there. 

 

Well, you're using all that gasoline, we should be saving that gas. You don't NEED to be out there burning up all that gas. 

 

What?! 

 

It's as if they just don't want anyone else to have fun out there. So strange. 

 

Anyway, I think the only way we'll ever be able to keep, much less gain more access, is to mitigate the impact we have, whether its real or imagined. 

 

If we take away their ammo, what are they going to use against us? 

 

If one considers all their reasons, many of which are not peculiar to dirt bikes, it becomes apparent that what we are really seeing is a generation that has been brain washed by a Public School System that pushed the lefts agenda into the minds of generations of voters. The bias is there and quite often has no true facts behind it. Simply politically motivated so called science. We do ourselves a great harm every time we give in to this garbage as if it is fact. The folks that I have ridden with for years religiously follow the pack it in pack it out rule. I have some friends who actually pick up garbage others have left behind, really quite impressive if you ask me. Countless times I have seen rude behavior by hikers when the dirt bikers extend a hand of friendship. Rudeness is not exclusive to those who enjoy the internal combustion engine. Loudness of our bikes can be improved and has been by many. I still have several bikes that are semi loud but in time they will be replaced with new quieter machines. There are riders who get a kick out of riding trails as if they were motocross tracks by breaking their tires loose when ever they get an opportunity. But as we have become more aware of how this negatively effects our sport it becomes less and less an issue. Dirt bikes are dangerous and so is the family automobile. The facts clearly show drinking and driving on our public road ways causes more deaths than riding dirt bikes or quads. What it comes down to is the lefts and often rights political agenda is that government knows best and we need their guidance in all that we do from the cradle to the grave. We are told we need more government and ours has become huge. Not exactly what our forefathers envisioned. I realize that with freedom comes responsibility but that does not necessitate bigger government with more laws than any one man can be aware.

 

We need to keep on being polite and doing our best to keep our sport alive. In my opinion the America of my childhood is disappearing and "freedom" is an old word which once had a different meaning than it does today.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Old_Man_Time

[chezdude]

I honestly wouldn't mind seeing enforcement taking the time to ticket riders, and especially quad riders (as they are ofter the biggest offenders) for machines that are over the sound limit.  There are too many decent silencers and products out there to justify running an exhaust that you can hear two ridgelines away.  Sound is something we can't eliminate but can mitigate to some degree.  

[tod701]

I honestly wouldn't mind seeing enforcement taking the time to ticket riders, and especially quad riders (as they are ofter the biggest offenders) for machines that are over the sound limit.  There are too many decent silencers and products out there to justify running an exhaust that you can hear two ridgelines away.  Sound is something we can't eliminate but can mitigate to some degree.  

 

I agree, but there are two problems.

 

The max ORV sound level in Washington State is so high that a lot of really loud crap is legal.

105db at 20 inches is loud.

 

The other problem is training / equipment.

If the LEO is not formally trained or the test equipment does not have current calibration documentation then the ticket is easy to beat.