SB 1545
Establishes immunity from action for trespass for persons that corner cross on public land.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
67%
Oppose
33%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill establishes a legal immunity for individuals who ‘corner cross’ – meaning they walk across the property line where public and private land meet – on state-owned land. It protects landowners from trespass lawsuits against those who do so responsibly, provided they are authorized to be on the public land, don’t cause damage, and don’t disrupt the landowner’s use of their property. The bill also clarifies that corner crossing does not constitute ‘unlawful entry’ for criminal trespass laws and takes effect immediately upon passage.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Testifiers generally support Senate Bill 1545, citing its need to clarify civil liability and criminal enforcement for individuals accessing public land through corner crossing. They argue that the bill provides necessary guidance to reduce conflict and uncertainty, while respecting private property rights. Many emphasize the importance of accessible public land use, particularly for recreational activities such as hunting, recreation, and conservation. Testifiers also highlight the potential benefits of clarifying access rights at public land corners, protecting both private landowners' and public users' interests. Some note that the current law on public land access is unfair and propose a solution to allow the general public to access public land by 'corner crossing' without trespassing on adjacent private lands. Overall, proponents of SB 1545 aim to strike a balance between public land use and private property rights, promoting freedom and reducing conflict in Oregon's checkerboard public lands.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of Senate Bill 1545 express concerns about the legislation's potential impact on private property rights, liability, access rights, and sensitive agricultural areas. They argue that the bill does not adequately address concerns regarding trespassing, liability protection, and grievance redress, particularly for rural landowners and public lands in Oregon. Many the bill would create unintended consequences, such as increased costs for landowners, potential loss of grazing privileges, and conflicts over access to private property. Some also express concerns that the legislation's vagueness regarding trespassing on private property could lead to harm to property owners and compromise fundamental rights.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.