100% accurate Gene. The final straw was when the kids started lighting fires up there (yes, some of them were/are that stupid). The Rose Canyon residents understandably complained and the owner agreed to fill in the pool to remove the "attractive nuisance" and help manage his liability. Too bad, as Hal's was a cool feature and many of us enjoyed the novelty of visiting there during a ride. The Rose Canyon horse riders enjoyed it too and got along with the MTB crowd just fine, it was the young party types that were posting FB and Youtube vids that blew it up. Just another example of pushing things too far and ruining it for everyone.
I thought OCTA bought up that property for "mitigation?" They are the folks who put up all the signs and gate across from the fire station.
I have always thought the road "Trabuco Ridge" was a legal road to ride on. This is the fire road that runs from Live Oak and then drops down to Trabuco Oaks. The private property is all of the areas by the pool and fire road that dumps out by the fire station.
We rode it today. The private section coming up from Trabuco Canyon is gated and posted "Permission to pass revocable at any time" and "Ride at your own risk." Up at Hal's there is no signage whatsoever. What I didn't expect was the very fun decent down Trabuco Ridge back to Live Oak Rd. Reminded me of Lower Joplin or upper STT. BTW the pool is filled in, but still a cool place. http://www.strava.com/activities/139255126
I was asking a friend in law enforcement about some backcountry dirt roads and people putting signs up and he mentioned the trespassing laws aren't as clear cut and usually involve intent to commit some type of malice and having to prove intent of such for many of the provisions. His take was that if the "road" is marked on the Thomas Guide there really isn't much they'll do, even if the property owner asks someone to stay off. *Not a lawyer; my take:* Technically I could see it coming down to county parcel records and if there is an approved easement to pass through the property such as to gain access to an adjacent or subsequent property or road. If there is, a property owner may want to put up signs or gates on their side(s) but they probably aren't enforceable if all you're doing is passing through. http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/14/s602 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=552-555.5
You are thinking of O'Neill Oaks. It's a separate parcel from the land that Hal's sits on. And that "mitigation" designation means that it won't be developed.
