Connecticut Couple Demands Clarity After Town Threatens to Ban Them From Allowing Hikers on Their Property

ROXBURY, Conn.—Today, a Roxbury family demanded that the town stop using its zoning code to prevent them from opening their sprawling, rural property to hikers and dogwalkers. If the town continues threatening to prevent Charles and Eli Copley from allowing people to use their hiking trails, they and their attorneys from the Institute for Justice (IJ) will appeal to the Roxbury Zoning Board of Appeals, and then to court, if necessary. 

“People have a right to use their property as they see fit, as long as their use does not harm anyone else,” said IJ Attorney John Korevec. “What the Copleys are seeking to do with their property not only doesn’t harm anyone else, it actively helps with forest management and provides people with access to peaceful, private hiking trails.” 

The Copleys are a married couple with three young children who moved to Connecticut from Charles’ native South Africa in 2018. The family bought their 50-acre property in 2022, with the goals of maintaining the forest and having a place for peace and quiet. In order to maintain the forest, the Copleys worked with the Natural Resources Conservation Service to create a forest management plan, which was approved by the town. Part of that plan relies on routine foot traffic from hikers to keep low-growth vegetation at bay, something the Copleys could not achieve without allowing others to use the land. So, they began offering their trails to hikers and dogwalkers. They advertised this on a site called “SniffSpot” and began welcoming people to use their trails for a small fee to help with maintenance. It was a win-win situation: The Copleys received help maintaining the hiking trails and the hikers found a private place with less busy trails.   

Then, in April 2025, town zoning officials sent the Copleys a “Possible Notice of Violation.” The notice suggested that the Copleys were running a “dog park” and provided a copy of the town’s home-based business regulations, but it made no mention of how or why the use might be prohibited. Since that time, Charles and Eli have spoken with state regulators, the Roxbury Inland Wetlands Commission, the Roxbury Zoning Board and Roxbury’s new land use administrator, all to no avail.  

“This process has been incredibly frustrating. All we want to do is invite people onto our own private land, and the town government can’t give us a clear answer as to why we shouldn’t be allowed to do so,” said Charles. “When I moved to the U.S. from South Africa, I assumed this type of property rights abuse could not happen here.”  

In today’s letter to the town, the Copleys asked to either be allowed to have hikers on their land again or to be given clarity as to why that use is not allowed, so they can litigate it in the courts. 

“Connecticut law prohibits localities from stretching codes to ban uses they don’t like,” said IJ Senior Attorney Ari Bargil. “Roxbury must identify an ordinance that clearly prohibits what the Copleys are trying to do, and if it can’t identify one, it must allow them to resume their use immediately.” 

Through its Zoning Justice Project, IJ fights for the right of people to use their property in harmless ways, free from unreasonable zoning restrictions. Last year, IJ won a case on behalf of a Montana shelter after local zoning officials sought to shut it down. IJ is also currently representing a Pennsylvania man whose decades-old home mechanic shop is being threatened because of a personal vendetta from a town official and a South Carolina woman whose business offering backyard swim lessons is being threatened by local zoning officials.