Down the lane, beyond the stand of giant rhubarb where Thumbelina lives, the public path breaks left into a pasture. There’s a tiny sign and a stile made of hewn stone steps that keep the sheep contained in the field beyond. On the far end of the field the path connects with trails in Kennall Vale Woods, a public park that shelters the ruins of an ancient quarry. From Kennall Vale the trail leads into Ponsanooth, where you can pick up other paths that lead, by field or by lane, to other places.
Public paths like these, linking the village to the woods, are not unusual in Great Britain. They have been part of the community commons for decades, centuries, perhaps millennia. They are a national treasure.
Here in the United States, we have public paths as well. I’m sure you’re thinking right now of your favorite trailway on Sonoma Mountain — maybe it’s the trail to the Wolf House in Jack London State Historic Park, or the Umbrella Tree Trail in North Sonoma Mountain Regional Park, or one of the trails you’ve enjoyed on an SMP-sponsored hike to Fairfield Osborn Preserve or the Sonoma Land Trust’s Baylands. From the rail trail running alongside the SMART tracks to Pole Mountain on the coast, Sonoma’s public backyard is laced with public treasures.
But there’s a difference. In Britain, the public path is both history and expectation; they simply exist, and the concept of private property doesn’t come into play. In the United States, and on Sonoma Mountain, public paths are rare and exceptional, and they end where private property begins. There’s a fence, often outfitted with a no trespassing sign. The way beyond is closed.
It’s obvious to anyone who looks at Sonoma Mountain, whether from the west side or the east, that it harbors an abundance of open space. But there’s no way to link those open spaces.. Aside from a singular trail that links Jack London State Historic Park to North Sonoma Mountain Regional Park, private property and fencing seclude protected lands on the mountain. Crane Creek Regional Park in Rohnert Park is buffered by private property. Lafferty Ranch, the lovely, lonely pocket of open space overlooking Petaluma, is blockaded. The Sonoma Land Trust’s vernal pools are an island.
But Sonoma Mountain has the potential to host a pair of fabulous public paths, one from east to west, and one from north to south, as segments of the Bay Area Ridge Trail.
It won’t be easy. Pushback against the public path is entrenched. Raise the subject, even among SMP’s board of directors, and you’ll hear a reflexive no. It can’t be done. Private landowners will never let it happen.
The reasons are many: Fear of increased liability; fear of property value loss; fear of crime; fear of the wildfire; fear of someone else having a say over land they own; fear of things I haven’t imagined because I’ve not been asked to dedicate any of my property to a public path.
But what if I was? 
What if, as part of a plan to build a connector to the Bay Area Ridge Trail, I was asked to give up an easement across my property? What would I need to push past the pushback?
Would I want to be compensated? You betcha. Not made of money here.
Would I want a fence to keep people from wandering elsewhere on my land, potentially committing crimes? Not likely. I’m not a fan of fences because they inhibit wildlife. And in my experience as a guidebook writer, once in the wild, people seldom wander from the routes they’ve chosen to follow. My home is not their destination.
Would I be afraid of someone falling down and suing me? That’s a good question, because whether I’m liable or not, getting sued would be a pain. But provided the thruway is maintained by an experienced entity and protected by the government immunity that generally applies to all parkland, my concerns could be addressed. It’d need to be a conversation.
Plus, see above. Blood from a turnip …
Would I be concerned about my property value going down? Nope. Even if it takes a hit, it’d be for a good cause.
Would I be worried someone might start a wildfire? Yep. But while my lizard brain screams “No deal!”, the rest of my brain knows that, even though most wildfires are caused by humans, humans walking on trails are generally not the ones starting them. That said, would protections need to be in place? That would have to be part of the conversation.
Would I have a problem with someone else having a say over what I do on my land? Probably not, so long as it’s a conversation. And for most trail easements, it is.
Would I be willing to have that conversation? Absolutely. For all these issues — and the ones I haven’t thought of —conversation is key to finding the way forward. The issues may be as sticky as wet adobe, but unless we work through them, we won’t get anywhere.
Consider this essay a conversation starter. We love to hear from our supporters and their neighbors about what we need to talk about, what we need to consider, to start tearing down fences and making the public path — the way to connection with the land and with each other — the expectation rather than the exception.
Tracy Salcedo is an award-winning guidebook author and chair of Sonoma Mountain Preservation. This essay is derived from a column she wrote for the March 15, 2026, edition of the Kenwood Press.
