Exception that Proves the Rule

The case is here:

www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/california-governor-signs-law-force-billionaire-restore-beach-access-n216181

See how hard it is for the state to reopen the access road? They had to CHANGE THE LAW!

Even with the well-known much-gossiped sqatter's right, it is very rare and difficult to impose public easement on private property by adverse possession. LZ's biggest worry is not the loss of property right but tort liability of someone (trespasser) hurt on his property.

My point is:  "DANGER" sign is more important than "NO TRESPASS" sign.