added). In Hayko, the injured child and his playmate were attracted onto the land by a mining shack, which we concluded, as a matter of law, was not an "unusual attraction." Id. at 146, 235 P. at 374. The child plaintiff "could not see the box of caps till he had trespassed." Id. at 145, 235 P. at 374. Thus, because the alleged attractive agency, a box of dynamite caps, did not invite the trespass, the doctrine did not apply to the injured child. 137 Moreover, contrary to the majority's assertion, we acknowledged in Hayko that the attractive nuisance doctrine applies only to trespassers: "The plaintiff was a trespasser to whom there was owing no duty, unless under the attractive nuisance doctrine...." Id. at 145, 235 P. at 374; see also Esquibel, 112 Colo. at 549-50, 151 P.2d at 759 (<HOLDING>). 138 As the court of appeals correctly
holding that the defendant was not liable for the child plaintiffs injuries resulting from climb ing on old automobiles on the defendants land because the child trespassed on the land due to its availability and proximity to her home and not because of the attraction of the automobiles holding that a cause of action for damages to property resulting from a permanent nuisance accrues to the owner of the land at the time the injury begins to affect the land and mere transfer of the land by deed does not transfer the claim for damages holding that animal husbandry operations were included in the definition of farm even if the animals do not touch the ground graze on the land or feed from crops grown on the land and holding that land used to support buildings used in the production of agricultural products is a productive use of the land holding that limitations began to run when the defendant began wrongfully discharging water containing harmful chemicals on the plaintiffs land and not on the date when the extent of the damages to the land were fully ascertainable holding that land sales contracts were not securities because they involved no investment in an enterprise even if land was bought on expectation that development of the area would increase the value of the land