ATV liability concern raised

LOWVILLE — A former Lewis County manager and legislative candidate in the Tug Hill District is raising concerns that the county's decision to charge for use of its all-terrain-vehicle system may have increased the county's potential liability for accidents.

However, county officials — including his opponent, Legislator Richard C. Lucas, R-Barnes Corners — don't share those fears.

"My concern is strictly liability," said Joseph L. Baruth Sr., who is challenging Mr. Lucas for the seat in District 8, which encompasses the towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, Montague, West Turin and Osceola.

According to state General Obligation Law, a landowner must have shown "willful or malicious conduct" — not just negligence — to be held liable for injuries suffered on the property stemming from a number of activities, including "motorized vehicle operation for recreational purposes."

However, the law doesn't provide that layer of liability protection for injuries suffered when permission to use the property is "granted for a consideration other than the consideration, if any, paid to said landowner by the state or federal government."

The county in May opened a permit-based ATV trail system. Permits — which cost $40 for members of area ATV clubs and $80 for non-members — are required to ride on private and county land, but not public roads.

The former county manager said both the county and individual landowners are more at risk under the permit system.

"I think I would be more concerned," Mr. Baruth said. "I'm conservative. I want to be protected."

One problem the county and individual landowners face is that repercussions of an accident wouldn't be certain until an incident and ensuing lawsuit occur, he said.

Mr. Baruth — who was county manager when the county began its ATV system environmental review in late 2007 — said he supports an ATV trail system, as long as it is legal, well thought out and not rushed.

"My wife and I own an ATV, and we enjoy it. My neighbors are avid ATVers, and they enjoy it," he said.

County Attorney Richard J. Graham said he mentioned the General Obligation Law issue to legislators when they were discussing a permit system and was comfortable with them moving forward, particularly after taking nearly two years to develop an ATV trail plan.

"The question was one of responsibility," Mr. Graham said. "We have a duty to live up to the standards of the trail management plan. This places a duty on the county to make reasonable efforts to keep the trails safe."

Trails on county and private land are reviewed on a regular basis and insured through policies held by the county and the Tug Hill Adirondack ATV Association, he said.

"We've done what we felt was prudent," said Mr. Lucas, Legislature vice chairman and chairman of the Economic Development and Insurance Committee.

The move to a permitted system was done only after consulting with the county attorney, other environmental attorneys and the county's liability insurance carrier, he said. Insurance premiums are based on "experience" and shouldn't be affected by the trail system unless there are future claims.

"If you go through life always worrying about being sued, you wouldn't accomplish very much," Mr. Lucas said.

The intent of the permit-based system was to establish and maintain trails without further tapping directly into the pockets of local taxpayers, he said.

"Let the people who use it in the end pay for it," Mr. Lucas said. "I believe overwhelmingly the majority of people in the county are in favor."