Mountain Buzz banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
2,506 Posts
Cases like this challenge my values and ideas. The classic choice is incarceration and that would definitely be cathartic. That said, it ends up costing us the taxpayers and ultimately doesn't offset the damage down to Ruby Horsethief. More and more I think the agencies should collaborate to have multi-year bans for individuals like this. He showed a flagrant disregard for law and the environment. He damaged a resource that won't heal in our lifetimes and I do not believe he should have the privilege of using it again. Sadly, there is no way to enforce that concept without requiring groups to name everyone on their roster and increase general oversight which is also unappealing. Like I said before, gear confiscation does seem in order.

I hope they require him to pay off the large cost of suppression and rehabilitation from the fire. That to me would be justice. Even if it over decades I think it would be a proper consequence for his actions as well a deterrent for others.

It would be immensely disappointing and a failure of justice if his connection to a company that has been philanthropic to the region affects the legal outcome. Fingers crossed that does not happen.

Such a bummer to see another fire in such a beloved river corridor. We just don't have many cottonwood galleries left in these places and it will decade many decades for them to provide the shade and ecological benefit again.

Phillip
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,506 Posts
this is starting to feel like a mob fueled witch hunt. beware.

I too was pissed when I heard about the fire, then I floated it last weekend. Not saying fireworks during a fireban or being from Breck are okay, but...Its not that bad. It aint miles of scorched earth in the canyon, you'll be wondering where the fire was when you float RH next summer. Also, fires happen in nature, but natural causes help us feel better about them.

I'm sure (I hope) the perp feels like a tool. After he changes his name, and we meet him on the river, we'll prob think hes not that bad...
I don't support the witch hunt mentality but I cannot write off his actions as "not that bad". He willingly and knowingly took illegal items into a area with a fire ban and destroyed one of the limited resources there for boaters. On the big scale of the environment does one island on the Colorado River matter? Maybe not. But in the scheme of the region we are already losing cottonwoods because of dams (juvenile recruitment is down with the lack of flooding) and healthy riparian areas are severely limited and damaged through the river system.

It matters ecological and recreationally. His unethical and illegal actions should bear the weight of the actual costs. I believe that should happen in a just way in a court of law that recognizes the footprint he has as well as the statement it makes to other land abusers.

Phillip
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,506 Posts
There is a fundamental difference between sponsoring an event and coworkers going on a trip together. If/when it becomes part of the public record that this was a sponsored trip by the company than I think the implication, moral and legal, will be settled. The speculation and simple connection to the company at this point doesn't seem to be much to stand on.

For example, my wife and her female coworkers go out to dinner every month? Say one person gets drunk and causes a ruckus? Is the company ethically obligated to cover for any issue that may arise in that situation? I have talked about getting some of the veteran skiers from my program together for the summer to maintain contact but it would be all out of pocket and unpaid? Is the resort liable ethically for our actions? Answering yes to those is an expansion well outside of what I understand to be accurate.

I often argue that people should consider the implications of their actions on their off-time but that is different than spreading defuse responsibility to the company. Personal accountability is paramount in this case, until (if/when) details confirm it was a company trip.

Phillip
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,506 Posts
Jumping to Conclusions interesting choice of words considering the initial Law Enforcement Report issued One person 2 tickets. No mention of Biz Trip or anything like that. Jumping to Conclusions that was my whole point. I can say everyone that disagrees with me is a Anti Business Socialist that spent time under the Gov's desk in Arkansas and have just as much factual evidence as those that say this was a sponsored trip.

I will throw in a tree the planting and the watering apparatus. And would be interested in starting another thread about how the heck do you all put river trips together and fill permits other than ask your Family then all the hot people you know then the ones with money that can help you that way And then the people you work with. sj
WTF? This requires an entire gallery of side eye gifs:









 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top