Whether or not you like it, the law is the law, and it MAY (note I said "may") impose liability on the property owner under this scenario.
It certainly is foreseeable that a snowmobiler during a snow squall on a lake covered with high drifts might not recognize, due to the high snow, that the high spot he's traversing is in fact a jetty / extension.
Given the above, IF there was not a clear warning that the bubbler was in use, liability COULD adhere.
The statute is interesting, as it would seem to prohibit bubblers (" Heating, Agitating or Other Devices in Public Waters, Safety Hazard. – No person shall put, place, operate or cause to be put, placed or operated in the waters of this state any so-called heating, agitating or other device which inhibits or prevents the natural freezing of water, or forming of ice, and impedes either the ingress or egress to or from ice by means of any public access thereto.")
But then it says: "If the heating, agitating or other device is placed anywhere else, nearby signs shall likewise be placed to warn of possible danger. Said signs shall read DANGER, THIN ICE and shall be of sufficient size to be readable at a distance of not less than 150 feet, and shall be visible from all directions and shall be equipped with reflectors and color-coded in a pattern unique for this purpose only."
Was the required warning in place, visible form all directions, festooned with reflectors etc.?
If not: hello, litigation.
Look, this is America: people sue.
Get used to it.
|