Forest service employee arrested after fire burns private property on two separate occasions
- Thread starter Rmc
- Start date
M.Magis
Well-known member
For all the detail that article went into, it still didn’t really say why he was arrested. There has to be something more to it.
Doesn't make sense. Doubt any thing comes of it.
Sad that the fire caused personal damage, but ---- planned burning is necessary.
Dave
Well-known member
Well you have to know the history in this area. It is not too far from me. The Hammonds had a controlled burn on some of their property. Jumped their line and burnt about 100 acres of sage brush on BLM ground. They got sentenced to 5 years in prison as domestic terrorists. Is what is good for the goose good for the gander? When those guys took over the abandoned building on the wildlife refuge it started as a protest to the Hammonds going to prison. The feds shot and killed Lavoy Finnicum(sp), one of the protesters, a short distance from where this fire was. Harney and Grant counties are huge counties size wise and veery low populated. The feds have been pretty heavy handed and as a result are not real popular.
Even if you disregard politics what doesn’t make since?
Someone starts a fire . It gets away from them and burns private property.
A week latter the same person comes back and lights the fire again and again looses control of the fire and once again looses control and burns adjoining property. Is this not negligence?
In my area you have to have a burn permit to start a fire to reduce fire danger or any type of agriculture burn.
What would happen to me if not once but twice I lost control of a fire and caused damage to others private property?
Once might be able to say I was ingnorant. But if I went back and lite the same fire a week latter under very similar circumstances and the fire once again damaged someone else’s personal property would I not be held responsible?
Rafter S
Well-known member
I won't weigh in on whether or not the arrest was warranted, but I read a separate article that says he was arrested while the burn was still in progress. I do think it might have been better to wait until the fire was out. I don't know much about the mechanics of controlled burns, but removing the boss while it's ongoing doesn't seem like a good idea.
I assure you the forest service had their permits.
If you had the permits and followed the laws you would be held financially responsible which would be covered by your insurance. It's not a criminal act though. That's per the law. Not my opinion.
There are conditions in which it is illegal to burn or light. None of those were mentioned in the article though.
Taking the history out, on the face it appears as a harassment tactic by the sheriff. It's a slippery slope.
Last edited:
So removing a person from a fire that they actually started that caused personal property damage isn’t a good idea. Remember this was the second time this happened in a week.
What where they supposed to do continue to allow someone to continue to light fires that resulted in personal property damage?
You better brush up on your law then.
Search gross criminal negligence.
You statement isn’t supported by laws on the books.
I should clarify and say not in Texas. I'm not sure how the laws vary in other states.
In Texas there are laws specifically outlined to protect burn bosses. They are a licensed person by the state. I was just at a class for CEU credits last month. We all sat through several hours of a legal section.
It may be different there but I stand by what I said. If the forest service did it nothing will come of it. As long as you have you permits, burn plan, adequate personnel, call it in, are with in the burn parameters, and what ever else hoops you have to jump through it will be near impossible to prove criminal negligence.
It's totally different is Billy Bob Rancher or Farmer just goes out and lights a fire.
callmefence
Keyboard cowboy
Local sheriff vs federal agent. As someone who believes in the constitution written by it's founders I have to side with the local county sheriff.
GoWyo
Well-known member
When the federal government has fires get away from them on a prescribed burn, they can be sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Unfortunately, there are all kinds of loopholes such as the "discretionary function exception" that the courts seldom hold the feds responsible. Your own property insurance usually has to cover when the feds burn up your property. This forest service guy seems to be a knucklehead if his burns got away from him twice in the same week. The only realistic recourse was to send a message through the local sheriff.
Prescribed burns always have a burn plan which sets the weather parameters that have to be expected before a fire is lit. If the forest service guy was outside those parameters, there is a problem. If was within the parameters and the weather took an unexpected change then he may have an excuse. Interesting case. Just like all people, federal employees act better when they have to conduct themselves to the same level the rest of us do.
Prescribed burns always have a burn plan which sets the weather parameters that have to be expected before a fire is lit. If the forest service guy was outside those parameters, there is a problem. If was within the parameters and the weather took an unexpected change then he may have an excuse. Interesting case. Just like all people, federal employees act better when they have to conduct themselves to the same level the rest of us do.
callmefence
Keyboard cowboy
A burn boss is in no way protected from gross negligence.
Police officers are given protections but plenty still get arrested and convicted.
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the guys judgement. The article is extremely vague. Based on the info given its not criminal. There should definitely have be some reflection and actions taken after it got out the first time before going at it again. I would be curious to know if they adapted the plan the second go round or just went at it again.
It would be wise to look in to the matter and be sure all possible steps were taken but putting him in handcuffs with an active fire, especially if another boss was not put in place, could be seen as being just as wreckless as the guy the put in cuffs.
It would be wise to look in to the matter and be sure all possible steps were taken but putting him in handcuffs with an active fire, especially if another boss was not put in place, could be seen as being just as wreckless as the guy the put in cuffs.
Last edited:
Can’t have it both ways.which one is it?
First you say that negligence is civil not criminal per the law. Then you say criminal negligence is near impossible to prove.
So what would you do as the local law enforcement agency? Your job is to protect and serve the people in your area correct?
What would you do if you had someone who started two fires within a week that resulted in private property damage. With the potential to do more damage,including loss of life.
This persons employer also has a long history of lighting fires that end up causing property damage and loss of life. What would you do in that situation? Wouldn’t you have not only a legal but moral obligation to try to stop such activities?
No one is protected from gross negligence. The article did not give any examples that would indicate gross negligence.
callmefence
Keyboard cowboy
Seems I read something about dry windy conditions and relighting a fire that had just gotten away from them.... maybe I dreamed it.
