Feds to hold Scouts Accountable

[Pacific Tortuga]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/...p/ap_small.gif
Government: Boy Scouts set Utah wildfire

14,200 acres burned in Utah in 2002 costing than 12 million to control. I'm sure the kids and parents can not pay that check, so will they sue the BSofA ? Looks like they have a good case .......... The Weasel ?

[Jim Adams]

I was in Algonquin Prov. Park this past fall canoeing and the park officials were attempting to contact U.S. officials about a group of scouts on a canoe trip that cut down 2 live birch trees about a foot and a half in diameter to make benches around a fire ring in the parks interior and then they painted the rocks at the ring blue. They also pulled live branches from cedar trees to place under their tents for padding and insulation in the same campsite. There were also multiple trees with hatchet or axe marks on them at the same site. This WAS an incredible campsite and the most beautiful place that I had ever seen as a campsite, having visited the site many times in the past. When I completed my trip and reported the damage to the Ranger, I was then informed that it had happened approximately 2 weeks earlier by a group of U.S. boyscouts.
geek

[Topcat]

I hate stories like that. I have 2 sons in the Scouts and i work with the troop a lot. We spend time on every trip discussing LNT and dont think any kids from my troop would do something like that and know that none of the Dads would dream of allowing it. The problem with groups like the one Jim is describing is the parents. They would be doing it with scouts or not. They should be made to do reclaimation on that site.

[iamscottym]

It don't think it's fair to fault the BSA. I do think it's fair to prosecute the boy scouts though. By entering a park, it's your job to know the applicable rules and regulations. Even in the absence of a fire ban, good judgement should have told the teens (yes, I'm aware teens aren't known for their judgement) not to have a fire. I think community service in the form of trail maintenance would be an apporpriate punishment.

[Jim Adams]

Don't get me wrong, I think scouting is great. Although I never went further than cub scouts ( not a strong troop in my area) I think that it is a great organization to teach young people about the wilderness. I have also had a few bad experiences over the years with "leaders" that don't know s**t.
It is a shame that these few are the ones hurting the reputation and get all of the print!
geek

[RAT]

I have also had a few bad experiences over the years with "leaders" that don't know s**t.

Exactly. I have been to many shelters before and witness much destruction by the kids (both boy scouts and church youth groups) while the leaders do nothing. I remember once with Sam Waddle at Jerry Cabin they were on top of the roof throwing the chimney rocks off into the yard. Makes ya wonder how these "leaders" got to be leaders ?? I think they should all be held accountable.


RAT (was a Webelos scout once )

[skyhiker2]

I'am all for accountablity, but in this case I don't have a clue as to what should happen to them...???

[RAT]

I agree with those that think they should be made rehab all the damage they have caused. Would be fitting punishment, good learning exp. and save alot of money for taxpayers

RAT

[4eyedbuzzard]

Not for nothin' all, but the court hasn't found them [the scouts] responsible yet. The judge did not rule on the government's request for a summary judgment, and the scouts want a full trial. There is that pesky presumption of innocence concept to deal with here.

[white rabbit]

The leaders are responsible, not the BSA and not the boys themselves, but not to the extent of 12 million dollars! Ouch! The best way to deal with it would be to allow the guilty scout troop, and any other troops in that area that are willing, to help clean up the mess; Community Service. Let the government pick up the tab for 12 million. That's just pocket change to them.

[4eyedbuzzard]

The leaders are responsible, not the BSA and not the boys themselves, but not to the extent of 12 million dollars! Ouch! The best way to deal with it would be to allow the guilty scout troop, and any other troops in that area that are willing, to help clean up the mess; Community Service. Let the government pick up the tab for 12 million. That's just pocket change to them.

One, responsibility for the fire hasn't been established yet.
Two, that's MY and every other taxpayer's $12 million in pocket change.

[white rabbit]

One, responsibility for the fire hasn't been established yet.
Two, that's MY and every other taxpayer's $12 million in pocket change.

I was in the scouts for many years and am a Eagle. If my leaders had thought there was ANY possiblity that we had started a fire we would have been involved in cleaning up the mess. If it is proven that the scout troop was at fault, the 12 mil cost of fighting the fire would be a great amount to the BSA, but we have all seen our government wastefully spend far more than that at the drop of a hat.
Just the opinion of a humble hiker.
I'm a taxpayer, too.

[Monkeyboy]

Bad link to the news article.....I'd like to read it.

And was it 12 million for control costs, or was it a loss of 12 million dollars worth of trees.....big difference, if they were counting the cost of lost lumber.

As far as holding the BSA accountable....it wasn't their fault.
As far as holding the boys accountable.....their too young.
As far as holding the leaders accountable....yeah, right, like they have 12 mil just laying around.....if they did, they wouldn't be scout leaders.

Simple question....if it was just Mom and Pop Jones with their ruffian boys out on a family camping trip, would you still want them to pay 12 million for damages? Probably not....the US Gov't has accounts already set up for just such damages. Like Iamscottym said, make them do ALOT of community service.

As far as cutting down trees, limbs, painting rocks, etc.......you'd have hell to pay in our council.....we are BIG on leave no trace.

[The Weasel]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/...p/ap_small.gif
Government: Boy Scouts set Utah wildfire

14,200 acres burned in Utah in 2002 costing than 12 million to control. I'm sure the kids and parents can not pay that check, so will they sue the BSofA ? Looks like they have a good case .......... The Weasel ?

I've served on risk management committees of local Scout councils (the county/regional body for Scouts, over Troops and Packs), and some troops, all councils, and the National Council have abundant insurance for such things. Leaders sometimes have to use homeowners' insurance, as well.

As for liability, it's very possible under a 'failure to supervise' approach, much like one is responsible for one's own children.

The Weasel

[4eyedbuzzard]

Bad link to the news article.....I'd like to read it.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/n...boyscouts.html

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=798281

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_4998512

[white rabbit]

Thanks for the link 4eyed. If the claims below are true it changes my perspective of this issue. A quote from it is below,

"The government claims the Great Salt Lake Council was negligent in allowing the Scouts to camp without adult supervision. There were 17 Scouts, ages 12 to 14, being supervised by two 15-year-olds, Overby said."

You have to have competent adult leaders in Scouting for it to work. I would not consider most 15 year olds to be competent leaders.

[rickb]

I can understand a private citizen going after whoever has the deepest pockets (its always about the money, even when it isn't), but to my way of thinking, the government should first go after those who were most directly responsible.

Even if bankrupting hourly workers trying to feed their families isn't as wise a political move as going after a Scout Council. And if it is decided that approach wouldn't be just (my way of thinking barring any special circumstances), best to leave it there.

There have to be many adult individuals who bare a far greater deal of cuplpability than the local Council.

Anyone think the council packed the kids lunches and drove them to the trailhead?

Why not sue society as a whole?

[Jack Tarlin]

Because society as a whole didn't cause the fire.

Individuals did.

The BSA should pay for this, and being heavily insured, they're certainly capable of doing so.

[weary]

....Why not sue society as a whole?

You mean like us taxpayers? We're a pretty good approximation of society. I suspect we don't have to sue, however. Just do nothing and we'll just pay automatically.

[rickb]

Jack is correct: Individuals started the fire.

Given that he understands that, I can't fathom why Jack wants to extend responsibility to the BSA.

Other than they have insurance. Is that a good reason?

What do people think the BSA did, exactly?

At worse, my guess is they had a lax policy with regard to how they managed trip reoprts filed by individual troops.

BFD.

The BSA didn't start this fire.

Some kids did.