Roger, let me preface this with a couple of items: 1) I'm not trying to ignite an acrimonious battle here and 2) if I end up with 1/10 your climbing resume I'll be happy.
I am interested in what you think the benefits are of land ownership. It seems from your comments that you believe denying access to a hiker/climber is not, or at least should not be, among these. If I haven't misunderstood your position, the logical next question is what conduct rises to the level that it can be controlled by the landowner, and who gets to decide that a given action has crossed that line?
RSS Feed For This Forum