Hey, I am not an attorney but a forester, and I am posting based on
NMSbowhunter's post Friday about wanting some protection for landowners that allow folks to hunt on their property. (I sent this to him, and he suggested that I post it for everyone.) Most states have what is known as a recreational use statute (RUS) that provides protection to private property owners that allow others to use their land for recreational purposes but charge no fees for the privilege. Google it with your state referenced, and you can find far more info on line than I can share. On my first try, I even found a post by a Massachusetts attorney describing a real case. The landowner's duty of care is much higher if they charge for the opportunity, like a lease. But, the gist is that landowners are obligated to do very little to keep a user/hunter safe, unless the user pays. Unfortunately, these statutes do not prevent a lawsuit and the cost of defending a lawsuit, but they do edge the balance in favor of the landowner.
So, say a hunter gets hurt while saddle hunting on a landowner's property in a partially dead tree and sues that landowner for not removing the partially dead tree, he will probably lose. However, the landowner will probably have to retain legal counsel and suffer lost time tied up in the case. In other words, the RUS does not protect users from normal things that could happen, and it generally does not protect landowners from the cost of defending even frivolous suits.
In TN, our RUS actually references 18 types of outdoor activities, even stuff with obvious risks, like climbing, firearm shooting, hunting, even riding off-highway vehicles. My guess is that all 50 states have similar laws on the books, though their may be differences from state to state . . .
Hugh