http://www.bakersfield.com/local/story/4988074p-5051647c.html

Trail users balk at recent push by property owners to keep public from crossing land

By MATT WEISER, Californian staff writer
e-mail: mweiser@bakersfield.com

Posted: Saturday October 9th, 2004, 9:40 PM
Last Updated: Saturday October 9th, 2004, 10:16 PM

KERNVILLE -- One of the most popular hiking trails in the Sequoia National Forest is being squeezed by private property owners, who are fighting the public access rights that have existed across their land for years.

The historic Whiskey Flat Trail begins at the end of Burlando Road in Kernville. It meanders 17 miles north along the Kern River, offering local residents and visitors easy access to nature for fishing, hiking, swimming and mountain biking.
But a conflict over road easements threatens to sever a route that carries the trail across private land from Burlando Road to Forest Service land just 200 feet apart.

"They don't want traffic on what they consider their private road," said Bill Jenkins, a member of the Kern River Valley Hiking Club who uses the Whiskey Flat Trail regularly. "My main concern is that we're losing some historic hiking trails, and trails through some very pretty country, and it's unfortunate."

On one side is John Doersam, whose road easement is an abandoned extension of Burlando Road that crosses his property and leads into the mountains. It hasn't been used in years, and the trail doesn't follow it.

On the other side are property owners along Rio Del Loma Road, whose easement does currently carry the trail, but they insist the easement is private.

The conflict came to a head recently when Doersam asked the county to eliminate the easement on his land. After all, he figured, county building officials recently gave him permission to excavate a pond across the easement, so why would they want to keep it?

Every day, his view fills up with cars when people park at the end of Burlando Road to use the trail -- as many as 30 cars a day on weekends, he says. The crowding also makes it difficult for school buses and fire trucks to turn around.

"The use has really gone up, but they've done nothing to improve the trailhead," he said. "I shouldn't have the whole burden on me. My intent was never to close the trail. I was painted as the bad guy."

The Board of Supervisors recently rejected his request to eliminate the easement. Supervisors sided with the Forest Service, which said the trail may need to go on Doersam's easement someday -- despite the pond.

But the board rejected the alternative Doersam suggested -- another option supported by the Forest Service -- which called for building a new trailhead parking area on Forest Service land and using Rio Del Loma to access it.

"I don't believe you're solving anything by taking all of the issues that Mr. Doersam raised and simply saying we'll push it off those folks down there," said Supervisor Jon McQuiston, who represents the area. "That's not a solution, it's just transferring the problem."

County Planning Director Ted James confirmed that Rio Del Loma is a public road. He also confirmed that a concrete-block wall, a log gate and "No Trespassing" signs installed at the entrance to Rio Del Loma were built without county approval.

Phyllis Hix, secretary of the Rio Del Loma Homeowners Association, said these structures were installed by the subdivision's developer, and they effectively make the road private because they were never challenged.

Hix also said Doersam's proposal would create new problems by hiding the trailhead from view.

"We have had pot growers up that canyon. We've had people who build sex shrines up there. We have all sorts of things happen," said Hix, who purchased the first lot in the subdivision in 1985. "The more you hide it, the more likely it is that somebody's going to get hurt."

Others say those fears are wildly exaggerated. Most trail users are families and nature lovers -- from locals who use the trail daily to visitors from around the world.

A century of access on the trail, they say, establishes a separate public right of access across private land.

"It's a beautiful trail. It has water, it has pools, it has everything," said Kernville resident Robert Linden, who walks his dogs on the trail several days a week. "It's just a great trail. We'd hate to lose it, I'll tell you that."

Dave Freeland, Forest Service district ranger, said these challenges to public access are one of the biggest problems facing the Forest Service today as development occurs on the edge of public lands.

"Land owners moving in are causing a situation where the public can't get up to their public lands," said Freeland. "Trying to secure an easement is really important to us."

_____________________________________
Postings are made for informational and/or educational purposes only. They are not always issues Rockcrawler.Com and I support nor do they necessarily reflect our beliefs. They are distributed in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

and the hikers have always thought themselves exempt. id like to keep up on this and see how in the world they can even make a case since we know that a private citizen can no longer assert their rights to row like this!!!
eh?

Another typical scenario when you have people encroach on public land. ESPECIALLY developers that don't bother to tell buyers the land butt's up to public trail systems or parks. Then the home owner associations step in with their almighty attitudes thinking they have more rights than the people who use the trails. Often times, the trails have existed for more years than the person complaining has been alive! You also have the NIMBY mentality, or those who don't bother to look into the land adjacent to the property they buy. Only one day to hear motor vehicles or other public activity happening over their back fence. Then they go whine about it and try to get the land closed to public access.

Sure, everybody likes to have their piece of paradise. But they also need to understand AND accept the fact that when they purchase land adjacent to a public use area, that they are the ones who have to make changes to allow for public access and useage. Sort of like moving across the street from a major airport, and then complain about the noise. Or the knot-heads that move into the country only to complain that a coyote ate their dog, or that deer ate up their garden. HELLO MORON...the wildlife was there first! YOU moved into their back yard, NOT the other way around. Deal with it, or pack your happy behind up and move back to the city!

>rant off<