Expect more access battles

As an attorney who specializes in public access law, I read with great interest “Happy Trails for All?” [by Darrell Satzman, Nov. 7] regarding the successful integration of recreational use and development at the Oaks in Calabasas. Unfortunately, in the public access matters in which I have been involved, litigation has ensued more often than negotiation.

As population density in the region increases and development pushes against open space, the battles of access versus exclusion will increase in both number and bitterness.

Because prevention is cheaper and less painful than cure, one way to avoid such an end is to determine ahead of time where the access battles will occur. Most access disputes arise where the public has been using a trail and one day a new owner arrives and blocks the trail. That is often the end of the story, as few recreational users have the funds or determination to fight the owner. If, however, recreational users would, before the gates go up, determine the public’s right to use the trail, they could start working through negotiation to preserve public access before it is too late.

In addition, governmental bodies in the region should perform a trail census so that recreational users can refer to such a list to determine if their favorite path is safe.

The success of both of these suggestions rests on the increasing organization of recreational users into constituency organizations with other groups dedicated to the preservation of what is left of the wild in Southern California.

It is only by becoming so powerful that government, the mediator in most access battles, cannot ignore the recreational user that access and preservation in the region stand a chance.

Paul Ayers

Glendale