private orv park

[trxguy]

everyone keeps saying it......need a private park but i am wondering

dnr fs and everyone else gets a budget, grant or whatever you want to call it..... (money) from the state for upkeep or whatever

private orv parks...seeing it is a for the public so to speak does anyone know if washington offers grants or charity money to someone trying to do that type of thing

i am from the east coast and when i read about parks over there i hear that they get grants and such to help be build, seeing that it is going to be used for public not personal recreation...

i wish i could word this better, the thoughts are there in my head i just can't seem to type them....i hope what i did type makes sense

 

[NotSoPC]

A large part of the issue is getting the ok to use your land for it. Also the insurance side of things. The hoops they want jumped through are crazy. Had a buddy looking into it that had the money but decided it was not worth the time and effort to have his neck on the line the whole time. Would be nice if a deal could be worked out with the state or county city to help keep people from just blazing a trail anyplace they want.

 

[pokey]

They (grants) would have to come from private sources. Grants like NOVA cannot even be applied for by non govt entities. Also to be considered is that you cant profit from a NOVA grant as a private landowner would.

 

[Sandtrap1986]

Man I have thinking the same way ....I have 40 acres in the toutle river area that I had put serious thought into using for a park of some sort ...:corn:

 

[Ty.]

Man I have thinking the same way ....I have 40 acres in the toutle river area that I had put serious thought into using for a park of some sort ...:corn:

I'd wheel it.

 

[crapyota]

there is a chance of a private motocross park going in this summer on mtn. loop highway!! been trying to comunicate the need to expand it with some 4x4 trails!! we will see how it turns out!!

 

[Tod]

Liability exposure is what makes insurance so unaffordable.

Last legislative session I wrote a bill that would have improved the liability situation alot.

see link

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2011-12/Pdf/Bills/Senate Bills/6080.pdf

It had strong Senate support, but once the trial lawyer's lobbyist came out against it, it was game over.

I will try to fine tune it for 2013, but the lawyers don't like anything that reduces lawsuits.

 

[WA-Wheeler]

What about a nfp organization and waivers...........not charging but run by donations. I don't know nothing about not for profit stuff though. Guess I could do some googling.

 

[Tod]

What about a nfp organization and waivers...........not charging but run by donations. I don't know nothing about not for profit stuff though. Guess I could do some googling.

You would likely want to be a nonprofit 501c3 or 501c4 corp, but the liability exposure is still there even with waivers.

Remember that even when you sign a waiver, if you have health insurance, the fine print usually precludes you from signing away their right to try to collect to recover the cost of any medical bills that they pay out on.

 

[WA-Wheeler]

You would likely want to be a nonprofit 501c3 or 501c4 corp, but the liability exposure is still there even with waivers.

Remember that even when you sign a waiver, if you have health insurance, the fine print usually precludes you from signing away their right to try to collect to recover the cost of any medical bills that they pay out on.

Ah.... Shows how much I know

 

[japerry]

You would likely want to be a nonprofit 501c3 or 501c4 corp, but the liability exposure is still there even with waivers.

Remember that even when you sign a waiver, if you have health insurance, the fine print usually precludes you from signing away their right to try to collect to recover the cost of any medical bills that they pay out on.

This is one of the crux of the problems. Luckily there are some ways around it. A much more dangerous sport (DH Mtn Biking) has an insurance policy with the WHIMPS bicycle club, which with a lease & stewardship contract (at $0), basically keeps the private land owner of Galbriath Mtn out of any liability.

Judging by how they say the DH mtn bike community is a boon for bellingham hospitals (seriously, they said this in a community meeting), I'm going to guess the insurance is somehow working out for them.. or no one is suing.

The real issue here is signage. If you can show that there are signs for 'known latent conditions' on your property, have insurance, and establish a 3rd party non-profit that is NOT the land owner, you might have a fighting chance.

I'd like to see DNR open up contract negotiations similar to what Trillium did. But being public land, its a bit harder to lease one block of land to a particular user group.

 

[nowires]

If I remember right. In the D pass there is a clause for immunity of private property owners as long as they charged less than $20. I might be wrong but there was something in there like that at one time

 

[japerry]

If I remember right. In the D pass there is a clause for immunity of private property owners as long as they charged less than $20. I might be wrong but there was something in there like that at one time

Sorta correct -- you can charge upto $25 and fall under the immunity clause. However, it still means you must not have any 'known latent conditions' ... judging by the trial lawyer who doesn't understand that signs can be removed, I don't have much hope for this changing.

 

[Binder]

If I remember right. In the D pass there is a clause for immunity of private property owners as long as they charged less than $20. I might be wrong but there was something in there like that at one time

It's an immunity for all property owners who charge less than $25 just like it's always been.

 

[nowires]

Sorta correct -- you can charge upto $25 and fall under the immunity clause. However, it still means you must not have any 'known latent conditions' ... judging by the trial lawyer who doesn't understand that signs can be removed, I don't have much hope for this changing.

It's an immunity for all property owners who charge less than $25 just like it's always been.

I knew it was something like that an I was tired and figured some one would correct me.

 

[Tod]

It's an immunity for all property owners who charge less than $25 just like it's always been.

Problem is that even staying under $25 does not exempt you from the "known dangerous artificial latent condition" standard.

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