I better chime in to clarify things since I'm good friends with all the peeps that were involved in this and have talked to most of them. Noone were physically restrained and there were no force used in this incident. From what I understand, after the spotlights were out and mass chaos subsided, both sides got to discuss in a civilized manner. The rent-a-cop were very careful in this regard, especially the head person. The hikers were asked for their ID, got photographed and were asked to leave, which they did. End of story. The rent-a-cop didn't have weapons. I believe only one of them did. Most of them were not law enforcement officers.
The water agency might be wrong for posting notice on your car about trespassing if your car is parked on public land. They go about with the assumption since you park there, you must be a hiker and about to trespass into section 33. The actual location where the group from the water agency engaged the hikers might or might not be in section 33.
This issue has been going around for years like mentioned previously. I'm not sure where the confusion is. There is a legal way to do it as has been posted previously.
Please do not make this out to be worst than it is. Please do not paint someone or a group in bad light without first understanding the situation and the history behind it. It is counterproductive.