Suing the Forest Service for Damages

[makattak]

from a falling tree:

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2013/apr/10/idaho-family-sues-usfs-1m-after-tree-hit-son/

The family's 6 year old son was hit by a dead tree when it fell on their campsite.

Normally, I'd be outraged at blaming the government for something like this.

However, I'm fairly certain the government has prevented anyone else from removing said dangers. As a result, I think the lawsuit is appropriate (although likely for too much.)

Anyone know the restrictions on cutting trees (even dead ones) in a National Forest?

[Tallpine]

Normally, you would need a firewood permit, and certain areas are off limits.

There is an exception for gathering wood for campfires.

[MillCreek]

We have had similar cases in Washington state and they seem to be consistently dismissed by a Federal judge.  We have another case going on right now against the State for a tree that fell and crushed an SUV while it was traveling over Stevens Pass in a snowstorm.  The argument is that the State was either negligent in doing avalanche control and/or should have closed the highway due to dangerous conditions.

[MechAg94]

Dumb question, but if you were camping on private land and a tree fell over causing injury or damage, would you want to sue the homeowner for failing to control the tree or take the blame your self for camping next to a dead tree?  What is the tree was not dead and it just rained a lot?

Do we really need to sue for everything these days?

[makattak]

Dumb question, but if you were camping on private land and a tree fell over causing injury or damage, would you want to sue the homeowner for failing to control the tree or take the blame your self for camping next to a dead tree?  What is the tree was not dead and it just rained a lot?

Do we really need to sue for everything these days?

On private land: was I invited? Was the area one designated for a campsite? Am I prohibited from removing trees that appear hazardous to me?

I am generally opposed to the massive number of lawsuits brought in this country, but my impression is that the forest service has had a policy to prevent any cleaning up of the forests in deference to the environmentalists.

When someone is harmed by that policy, I think there should be consequences. 

[drewtam]

When someone is harmed by that policy, I think there should be consequences. 

Kinda like those who ban CC on private property should be held liable for the consequences?

[dm1333]

Normally, I'd be outraged at blaming the government for something like this.

However, I'm fairly certain the government has prevented anyone else from removing said dangers. As a result, I think the lawsuit is appropriate (although likely for too much.)

Is the logical outcome of this that the Forest Service has to remove every single dead tree that might possibly fall onto a campsite?  What about large dead limbs on a live tree?  I don't know what that campsite looked like or how "established" it was, but I have passed on plenty of sites while backpacking because I didn't want a tree or limb falling on me in the middle of the night.  Why didn't this family do the same if that dead tree was so obvious?  

[makattak]

Is the logical outcome of this that the Forest Service has to remove every single dead tree that might possibly fall onto a campsite?  What about large dead limbs on a live tree?  I don't know what that campsite looked like or how "established" it was, but I have passed on plenty of sites while backpacking because I didn't want a tree or limb falling on me in the middle of the night.  Why didn't this family do the same if that dead tree was so obvious? 

Yes, actually. IF the government is tasked with providing an area for use (in this case, the campsite) AND has prevented anyone else from making improvements to that area (removing dead trees, in this case), it is, as a result of these, responsible for providing a SAFE area since it has prevented anyone else from doing so.

[Tallpine]

Often, the FS does remove dead and green trees from campgrounds and surrounding areas for fire reduction purposes, and/or to make the area more visually attractive and easier to maintain.

However, these projects cost money and require an environmental analysis, and then some damn enviro-nazi is likely to sue to stall or kill the project 

I don't agree with a lot of things the FS does, and in some cases they are idiotic and corrupt, but they really are caught in the middle of various factions when trying to actually maintain and improve the forests.

A suit like this is likely to just result in the FS closing almost all campgrounds. 

[charby]

A suit like this is likely to just result in the FS closing almost all campgrounds. 

Probably very true if the suit wins.

[Tallpine]

Probably very true if the suit wins.

Even if it doesn't win, if it proceeds to trial. 

[Boomhauer]

We had to cut 300-600 trees per year at my old park to keep up with the death rate. We cant possibly cut every dead tree or tree that dies. Pine beetles go through pines like *expletive deleted*ing chainsaws through saplings.