Hacker News Reader

Comment by justinator | Hacker News Reader

Wait, what? I live in Colorado, and a third of the state is public land. There's two long distance trails (The CT and the CDT) that go over much of the state, or completely through. I've lived for months on a bike, and never camped in the same spot twice - and never once had to pay for it.

I think there's more public lands in the county I live in currently (Boulder, CO) than there is in all of the State I grew up in (CT). I know many places in this state that I could walk 100 miles through, without hitting a paved road. I live 30 miles from a National Park, and 18 miles from the nearest Wilderness Area.

A, "right to roam" law would certainly be nice to have, but we're not being suffocated by private land ownership. Things are just different here, than in Scotland. Less people per area of land.

View on HN

In CA when you go out to the desert areas you often hit fenced in areas you can't/shouldn't cross. This makes it very difficult to approach interesting areas. Sure there plenty of trails but I only realized how confined you are in CA when I got to Scotland where it's so much easier to roam around.

A lot of desert ecosystems are incredibly fragile, and if just one asshole with an offroad vehicle starts doing donuts for fun on the weekend will get damaged in ways that can take decades to recover.

There are plenty of public lands in CA where you can walk around off trail.

>https://www.nps.gov/articles/seug-soil-crust.htm

Living soil which can be destroyed by footsteps. Cyanobacteria and lichens and algae. One of the oldest organisms on Earth.

Right to roam laws clearly don’t include the right to do damage by driving an offroad vehicle anywhere you like.

Yes, but the existence of jerks with offroad vehicles explains some of the fences.

There are plenty of places where just having visitors regularly hike across the ground off-trail does significant damage to the ecosystem, which is why fragile or popular parks restrict public access to marked trails and designated campsites.

I've stood on mountaintops in California where I couldn't see the end of the National Park I was in, past the horizon. Sequoia-Kings Canyon NP itself is half the size of Scotland.

California has 199,490 km2 of protected public lands, more area than 2.5 Scotlands.

unfortunately there are still many "land locked" public lands among those protected lands in california: public lands which are encircled by private lands, with no easement. in the sierra the access situation is generally very good, however there are definitely examples elsewhere which beg the question of what it means to be "public" when it can't be accessed.

for example, although the summit of berryessa peak is on BLM land, the only access is through private land. fortunately one land owner was convinced to allow an easement on a short section of trail to allow the opening of the berryessa peak trail, and access to this peak, but for years it was public and yet off-limits.[1]

on the west side of lake berryessa, cedar roughs wilderness, currently has no access. there are old roads/trails in there which are accessible from private land, but no public easement.

there was an article posted here last year about similar issues surrounding the crazy mountains in montana[2].

[1] https://www.summitpost.org/berryessa-peak/766290 [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-10-25/this-land...

Yes, there are national parks but if you are not close to one you are out of luck. Go out to the Mojave for example. There are huge areas that are fenced off.

Not the case here in Texas. Nearly everything is private land, roaming around here is a sure way to get shot at.

Texas gives the message of, "stay out". I say, "OK: No problem".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com