Torts; abrogating liability for owners of private property for dirtbike use on private property. Effective date.
SB1605 creates a new section of Oklahoma law governing dirtbike use on private property. It defines key terms such as “dirtbike,” “participant,” “motorcycle,” “owner of private property,” and “inherent risk of dirtbike use,” and then provides that a participant assumes those inherent risks by choosing to ride on private property. As a result, a participant or the participant’s representative may not bring a claim against, or recover from, a private property owner for loss, damage, injury, or death that results from those inherent risks.
The bill also sets out exceptions to that liability protection. It does not apply to employer-employee relationships covered by the Administrative Workers’ Compensation Act, and it does not shield a property owner from liability for intentional injury, gross negligence, unsafe equipment that the owner knew or should have known was unsafe, failure to use reasonable care, or other willful, wanton, grossly negligent, or criminal conduct that proximately causes harm. The measure is scheduled to take effect November 1, 2026.
If enacted, SB1605 would add a new liability-limiting provision to Title 76 of the Oklahoma Statutes, effectively codifying an assumption-of-risk rule for dirtbike recreation on private property. It would narrow the circumstances under which injured riders or their representatives can sue property owners, while preserving claims for intentional misconduct, gross negligence, unsafe equipment, and similar serious wrongdoing. The bill would primarily affect private landowners, clubs, businesses, and other entities that sponsor or provide private property for dirtbike use, as well as riders and their families.
No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no documented debate or recorded floor sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a liability protection for property owners rather than a broad restriction on rider rights, with explicit exceptions intended to address safety and misconduct concerns.
The likely point of contention is the balance between protecting private property owners from lawsuits and preserving remedies for injured riders. Supporters would likely favor the bill as a way to encourage recreational dirtbike access and reduce exposure to ordinary accident claims, while opponents could argue that it limits accountability and may make it harder for injured participants to recover damages. The exceptions for gross negligence, unsafe equipment, and willful misconduct appear designed to address those concerns, but the scope of what counts as an “inherent risk” versus negligent conduct could still be disputed.