Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development - Senate

46 is, you know, tourism is the 2nd largest. Industry in the state and we have many state parks and land, but we encourage people to use, let their public property be used for recreational purposes. There's a law that was put in years ago and there was lots of things put in it, but this is just an update. We're adding a few things. This is gonna add horseback riding, cycling, mountain biking, rock and climbing, skateboarding, hover boarding, and paddle boarding just to, uh, limit liability of private landowners. So it's a pretty simple, straightforward bill. Questions from the uh committee. I, I OK. We'll give everybody a few minutes. So Senator Hickey, you recognize? Thank you, Mr. Chair state your name for the record? Me? No, go ahead. I'm sorry, you don't do that. Thank you. I want everybody to know who you are idiot. just, just a question. So, so does the, does the property owner that, is there some type of disclosure that they have to have or something of that nature, or does the, If somebody just comes onto their property, and they say their horseback riding, but they haven't really given them their permission. Is that going to also exclude them from any liability or let me let legal counsel answer that. Play. I you lay stone, general counsel at Parks Heritage and Tourism. You recognize So the existing bill is for private landowners, primarily private landowners that wish to open their property up for fishing. Uh Other activities for the community or people to be involved in, they invite the person in. It's not where somebody just goes on somebody's private property without their knowledge. And, um, You know, it doesn't give the public a right to enter onto private property and My, my question, I don't, I don't disagree with your bill. So let me say that on the front end. But what I've, what I've also been told in the past, and maybe this is a little outside the scope of this, but I think it's all inclusive. So if somebody comes onto your property and, and gets hurt, and you haven't invited them, then you as the property owner could possibly assume some type of liability or some, or some charge could be made about against your insurance policy. So here's my thing, if we're going to exempt it, You know, if somebody allows it to happen, Then should we also not exempt it if, uh, you know, Although they haven't allowed it to happen, you know, they shouldn't be liable either. That's a totally different legal issue in terms of invitees and non-invitees and open and dangerous. I understand, but by the same token, So that's my next deal. So if Somebody trespasses on, I'll use my property, just as as subject matter. So if somebody trespasses on me, and I haven't given them permission, I'm still liable. But if I have given them permission. I'm not liable. So do I always, not that I'd want to lie, but do I always say, yup, they had permission. Well, it's, it's a little bit different in terms of the, the common law, if somebody goes on your property and, you know, They're riding a horse and the horse. slips on something and they fall off. If they were trespassing. You wouldn't have liability in that instance. OK. If there, if there's money involved, does that change this in any way? pull, pull your mic a little closer this existing question. I'm only applies when the landowners not charging a fee, OK? And does that say that in here? Is that, or is that just a definition of recreational or where is that? In 1811, 3010 of the definitions. There's a definition for charge, OK. And then later on, uh, maybe the earlier statute that may not be before you. Um, uh, discusses, uh, making land and water. Areas available for public for recreational use, um, limiting their liability, but if they do not charge, That's what gives them the that's that's in that in that Arkansas code that you, that starts off, OK. Senator Hickey, if I may, Katherine Andrews, director of the Office of Outdoor Recreation. Um, there are really 3 types of ways that people can come onto your property. One is trespassing, and that to Clay's point is a totally separate legal issue. 2 is if you invite them to come onto your property for free. 3 is if they are paying to come onto your property. So this middle one, the one where you're inviting them to come onto your property for free is where this statute comes into play. OK. According to what you said on the trespass, according to what you said with the trespass. So you don't think the property owner would be liable in that case either under our current statute. If you're opening it, if you're opening your property up. For recreational purposes without a charge. The statute gives you a release of liability. If you're just a private landowner, I mean, there, there's a wide variety of situations like there's open and notorious conditions, you know, if you have a swimming pool and you don't have a fence on it, but you know kids are coming in and getting in your pool. Without your permission and you allow that to go on. I mean, there, in, in terms of the trespass, the common law tort area is Way beyond this bill. OK. So that leads me to another one. We can do swimming pools or I was gonna ask about lakes. So if you do have a pond or something and you'll allow kids to go on there and swim for recreational purposes. You're not going to assume any liability within that pond or lake. You're not this statute now there is a case and And I'm not prepared to answer that much detail, but there was a case in federal court about whether or not there was um There are exemptions for like malicious. Actions may be gross negligence. I'd have to go back and look, but certain situations. You could be if, if, if you knew and, and allowed a dangerous condition and people to still go on, even after we passed this law, so swimming's already in there. OK. Fair enough. And that you're referring to is the trespassing piece of it, not this. So if somebody comes onto your property and they go swimming and they get hurt and you didn't know about it, then that's one thing, but if you lured them in or if you knew about a very dangerous condition and didn't do anything about it and they were trespassing. That's a totally different issue. Yeah Mine was, is, you know, if you're just allowing them to swim there for recreational purposes, you know what's happening or you know it's not safe. I just, I just hope we're not opening up of some unintended consequences here. So again, You know, from a macro level, I'm I'm for what you're trying to do. I just hope we thought this all the way through. So I'll point out the original, the original act was passed in 1965, so we've had it for 60 years and, and this amendment. Simply adds a few additional categories. They were mentioned earlier. 59 years I was born in '66. Right Sure Gilmore. Hey, thank you. So just, just following up on those. I know later in the, in the statute, 1811304, it's specifically talks about the landowner owes no duty of care and goes through all those things. So I think there's a lot of coverage there, but I guess my question is, why do we enumerate any, any of these things. Why don't we just say for recreation purpose, can be done. So, We've talked about that as well, um, because you do have kind of a catch all at the end. But because there are some that are enumerated, and I believe some, some Catherine can speak to this, uh, there were some people that are involved in, um, cycling or mountain biking that asked, you know, can we have this, can we also be enumerated in here, because if you, if you just have this catch-all. Uh, now, my mountain biking, we might all agree is, but you Is, is hoverboarding is, is that a recreational, uh, purpose, and so, and we're only adding a few here. And those are ones that are actually. The public has has asked. And they're up and coming um activities like rock climbing, cycling, things are that are priorities within Department of Parks, Heritage and tourism, things that were building within our state parks and other recreational areas. And so, specifically lining those out helps a private landowner to say, OK, if people are coming onto my property specifically to do this, then things are good. Sometimes when it's in that catch-all, it's kind of a gray area and private landowners say, well, I don't know if that, you know, spelunking is in there, if that's counted, so I'm not going to let anybody do that. So by lining out specifically what those are, it helps clear up that gray area. Well, I'm a big fan of Spaany myself, but, um, but Right But no, I think, I think that's helpful. I just, look, I think I'm good with the bill. I just didn't know why we list without, you know, we basically say recreational purpose without limitation, then we list the following, so I just wanted to add one thing Marty Ryle, director of Li Fa Sports tourism is a little closer to the mic. We're having trouble on that. Sorry, Marty Ryle, director of legislative Affairs, Parks Harage tourism. Also, as we encourage these activities, there are situations where, you know, you have, you have public trails on one end and public trail here and there's private land in between that we want to encourage those landowners to have access for the cycling to go through that private land. And so that's another situation that, that, uh, this would, this would help with. Sheriff Scott Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the only question I had was about swimming for like property owners. Um OK. So, If you had kids in your neighborhood who jumped your fence to swim and they couldn't swim, that could be. So how is that, how was trespassing. OK, so that would all be covered under trespassing. And there wouldn't be liability on the owner or that's a, I mean. I do know, I, I can't give you a specific case, but I do know there have been cases where if you have something like a pool, and you know that neighborhood kids are using it. And there may be some condition that, or you know, that a kid that can't swim is using it or has been over there. There may, the common law may impose some liability in that instance. I can't give you a definitive yes or no. But swimming again was already included in this. Um, So I, I grew up and my parents, my grandparents had a pool and kids from the neighborhood always jumped our brick fist, fist to like swim, and so some of them, a lot of minorities can't swim, so my grandparents were never giving them the OK to come swim in our private pool, but I'm just wondering the liability for landowners who have a pool, but you, you are saying that that's probably covered under trespassing. OK. Even if they're not telling the kids, hey, you can come swim in my pool. Well, that's, that would be the, the trespassing part of that. If somebody goes on your In your backyard and jumps in your pool uninvited. They're not in NYT. OK. OK. They let him Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had some of the same concerns that Senator Hickey did, but I think I feel better now. But since we are enumerating these and since it was mentioned, I'm familiar with all of these activities except the very last one, and maybe because it comes after skateboarding, I can't help but picture Michael J. Fox. Can you explain to us whatever boarding is and have you ever been? I have not. I'm not quite as adventurous as those that hoverboard. Um, but it's, there's a few different types that are coming out, like a, a one wheel where if you've ever seen like a skateboard, but it's got one wheel and you put both your legs on it, or your feet on it, rides down, um, there's those and then there are some that that are are able to hover above trails. Um, they're very uncommon, but they are coming. So they're out there. So they're, they're levitating. In, in some form or fashion, some of them are. OK, thank you. Don't feel intimidated by his questions because last session he had to explain artificial insemination, and he's never participated in that either, so. You'll never live that one down. Any other questions, committee, uh, Senator Hickey, go ahead. So just, uh, again, I understand that we've already got this in place other than the ones you're adding, but this is just kind of brought up some things in Senator Gilmore, like under the current statute, it literally says an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others, of course, you know, I think if you own, and we'll use the pool. I mean, so insurance companies though, I guess, They can still require that. As a condition to insure the property? Is that the reason that's happening and it's It, it just, it just seems odd to me because I've always heard that, you know, if you have a pool that you're required to fence it or whatever, and again, we have a statute on the books, maybe it is since 1965, which I guess it would be 60 years if it was January, February, but So, but according to this statute, I don't even know how they're doing that. The owner of the land owns no duty or care to keep the premises safe for entry or use. I mean, so. If it's trespassing, then, and you knowingly know that you have a really dangerous. Something on your property, then there is some liability in that. She Scott. So, to me, because I can swim and I was a lifeguard. The 9 ft pool was not deep to me, but if there's kids in the neighborhood who are jumping the fence, that might be knowingly dangerous to them, so. That's kind of confusing to me. In that instance, the landowner would need to do something like put up a fence around their pool. So the fence would just clear them and the trespassing instance, yes, in the private. Inviting, um. I don't think so. No, I think you're covered under the statute as it stands. But do you understand my concern, what I'm saying? I do, yeah. Sergeant Gilmore So, I guess just to sort of recap and get, get it straight in my mind. You have coverage as landowner to provide for recreational activities. This just gives landowners a level of More comfort or whatever it is, knowing that these things are specifically enumerated, correct? Great. Motion at the proper time, Mr. Chair. You know, questions. Crow, do you like to close rebuild? Oh, excuse me, we have everybody signed it. OK, no one signed up. Is there anyone in the audience like to speak for against Bill? Yeah. Oh, you, you, you have to come to the table. If you would state your name for the record and then you're recognized to ask your question. Hi, I'm Marty Ollison. I was listening and I was just wondering, does this mean that a landowner There's a bike trail here and it picks up here and you're here, and it would cross your land. Do you have to have it posted that this is open to the public, but you're not liable. I mean, is there any requirement for having it posted or is that a given? Uh I'll have to look at that, to be honest with you. I just happen to be in that position yeah I was just wondering. Get, get with him after the meeting, to do that. Anyone else say no one Senator Crow, would you like to close for your bill? Yes, I'd asked for a good vote. Uh, I make a motion to pass. Motion to Gilmore 2. All in favor say aye, all opposed. Congratulations, your bill passes. We'll try to get passed on the floor for you this go round, so, uh, for those that's a private joke and, and Senator Crow tried to get a bill passed one time and it, he got such a negative vote on the floor that he was going to vote against his own bill. Uh, I've been told that Senator Johnson is making a an amendment on his bill, so that bill will not be heard. today, uh, I'm sorry, Senator Leyden, you have a question? Does that mean we can maybe expect him to run it on Thursday or can he set a special order of business? because I imagine most everybody here in the room with all respect to Senator Kroll was probably here for that piece of legislation with Senator Johnstone. I can't answer that question right now because I haven't seen the amendment. Now we don't have it and I don't want to speak for something I don't have in hand. That's that's fair enough. OK, we're adjourned. All right