Auf Forststaßen kann der Waldbesitzer das Befahren mit Kraftfahrzeugen und/oder auch Fahrrädern und Mountainbikes untersagen.
Zu Fuss den Wald betreten ist jedoch erlaubt.
kryzjulie on
It’s an old conflict between forest owners (forests are, unfortunately, majorily privately owned in Austria), who are also technically liable for any damages ensuing from at least grossly negligent lack of maintenance on the roads, and… pretty much everyone else. There have been initiatives to extend the existing legal right to use forests for recreation (no matter if publicly or privately owned) to cycling, rather than it being limited to walking, hiking, … only. These initatives haven’t been successful yet, though.
Particular-Bat-5904 on
Its an insurance thing. In case you get hurt, the owner may be responsible for it, getting a punishment.
When id*ots walk their dogs through cow herds, its also the farmer facing court if something goes wrong.
Well, i call it stupid. You should be allowed to ride on your own responsibillity.
gixanthrax on
Your Woods, your Rules.
wodaknosp on
because rich fucks own everything
WomBat1140 on
This is and will be always a problem with …. i understand both sides, but as already said – it´s all about money / insurance and so on. Stupid law …
myusernamerulez on
and to be honest, it’s hard to ensure the safety of both the hikers and of the riders.
just as in the city there are (ideally) separate cycling and walking roads, the separation should be given in the forests as well.
8 Comments
Auf Forststaßen kann der Waldbesitzer das Befahren mit Kraftfahrzeugen und/oder auch Fahrrädern und Mountainbikes untersagen.
Zu Fuss den Wald betreten ist jedoch erlaubt.
It’s an old conflict between forest owners (forests are, unfortunately, majorily privately owned in Austria), who are also technically liable for any damages ensuing from at least grossly negligent lack of maintenance on the roads, and… pretty much everyone else. There have been initiatives to extend the existing legal right to use forests for recreation (no matter if publicly or privately owned) to cycling, rather than it being limited to walking, hiking, … only. These initatives haven’t been successful yet, though.
Its an insurance thing. In case you get hurt, the owner may be responsible for it, getting a punishment.
When id*ots walk their dogs through cow herds, its also the farmer facing court if something goes wrong.
Well, i call it stupid. You should be allowed to ride on your own responsibillity.
Your Woods, your Rules.
because rich fucks own everything
This is and will be always a problem with …. i understand both sides, but as already said – it´s all about money / insurance and so on. Stupid law …
and to be honest, it’s hard to ensure the safety of both the hikers and of the riders.
just as in the city there are (ideally) separate cycling and walking roads, the separation should be given in the forests as well.
It’s just that the plebs still isn’t allowed to do some things, because somebody owns the forests (and most of the accesses to lakes (beaches) aren’t open for the public as well). For a small history lesson: [https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000134804355/als-oesterreich-den-menschen-erlaubt-hat-den-wald-zu-betreten](https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000134804355/als-oesterreich-den-menschen-erlaubt-hat-den-wald-zu-betreten)