Close Call

[mattjv89]

Well this just surfaced on the Reddit AT page, Rock Gap shelter took quite a pruning last night. Five in the shelter side but no injuries.

33820

[Trance]

Wow.....

Just when you thought you were safer in the shelters than in a tent.

[daddytwosticks]

Wow! Glad nobody was hurt. We've gotten tons of rain around here and lots of wind. Trees will be falling all over. That shelter needed replacement...very old. Let's hope this thread does not turn into a shelter bashing argument. :)

[Tennessee Viking]

I wonder what how the VA shelters faired as there were numerous tornados throughout VA.

[rocketsocks]

Mother Nature has absolutely no regard for man are shelters, hikers or hiking, is 't that kinda one of the things were supposed to learn along our journey...a little humility. Glad no one was hurt.

[Water Rat]

Shout-out to Ron Haven for picking those hikers up during the storm!

[Pedaling Fool]

So if a tree falls on a shelter, it's considered an 'act of God' and there's basically no legal action you can take if you're injured -- I'm assuming. However, if the tree is obviously dead and falls on a shelter is there any legal action for the injured?

I know under Florida law if I have a healthy tree blown over by a storm it's an 'act of God' and I'm on pretty good legal standing; however, if I have a dead tree that falls on a neighbors house, than I have legal issues...

Just curious:)

[canoe]

Several of the hikers bloging on trailjournals where there

[burger]

So if a tree falls on a shelter, it's considered an 'act of God' and there's basically no legal action you can take if you're injured -- I'm assuming. However, if the tree is obviously dead and falls on a shelter is there any legal action for the injured?

I know under Florida law if I have a healthy tree blown over by a storm it's an 'act of God' and I'm on pretty good legal standing; however, if I have a dead tree that falls on a neighbors house, than I have legal issues...

Just curious:)
Seriously? So are you saying that the Forest Service (or whatever other underfunded agency controls the land a shelter is on) has to go out every year and cut all the dead trees around every shelter?

If you camp in the woods, you accept the risk. If you see dead trees around a shelter, camp elsewhere. The last thing our woefully underfunded public lands agencies need is liability for pruning every dead tree and limb.

[Pedaling Fool]

...

Just curious:)


Seriously? So are you saying that the Forest Service (or whatever other underfunded agency controls the land a shelter is on) has to go out every year and cut all the dead trees around every shelter?

If you camp in the woods, you accept the risk. If you see dead trees around a shelter, camp elsewhere. The last thing our woefully underfunded public lands agencies need is liability for pruning every dead tree and limb.See, I use these freakin' smilie things and say I'm just asking out of curiosity, but still I get responses like this.

No, I'm not saying that the Forest Service or any other agency should be on the hook and responsible for cutting down all trees. And I do accept the risks.

I was just hoping to hear from one of our legal people here, out of curiosity... We do have a few lawyers here...

Again, another emotionally-charged post, but I've come to expect them. Maybe you should go for a run or a hike or something:D

[Cfullerton]

So glad everyone is safe! Must have been a bit terrifying!

[nsherry61]

Seriously? So are you saying that the Forest Service (or whatever other underfunded agency controls the land a shelter is on) has to go out every year and cut all the dead trees around every shelter?
And, the next obvious step is the risk of dead trees falling on someone along the trail, like nearly happened to my son (I watched it fall and miss him by about 10 feet as I'm screaming at him to look out). So, we should have all the dead and diseased trees cut down within 100 feet or so of the trail to keep the trail safe too. And what about all those roots and rocks in the trail tread that can cause sprained ankles or more serious injuries from falls? The list goes on. Please, everyone, stay home, stay inside where it is safe. And, please, please, stay out of the woods and away from trails and trail shelters where you could get injured or die.

Back to the OP. Thanks for sharing the image and news. It's always good to see (and vicariously enjoy?) what is going on along our beloved trail corridors.

[Puddlefish]

Seriously? So are you saying that the Forest Service (or whatever other underfunded agency controls the land a shelter is on) has to go out every year and cut all the dead trees around every shelter?

If you camp in the woods, you accept the risk. If you see dead trees around a shelter, camp elsewhere. The last thing our woefully underfunded public lands agencies need is liability for pruning every dead tree and limb.

I just look at it as something that hikers should report to the proper authority. If I see a potentially dangerous tree near a trail, I take a picture of it and send an email to the local trail maintenance group. I don't worry so much about liability as I do responsibility, and that responsibility should be shared.

[gpburdelljr]

It's sad when the thought of legal action for something like this even crosses someone's mind.

[colorado_rob]

C'mon folks, lose the negativity on the legal thing, he was just asking.

[Pedaling Fool]

What if the tree was on one of the private properties that the AT runs thru and if fell on you, can you sue the land owner.


:D

[Puddlefish]

C'mon folks, lose the negativity on the legal thing, he was just asking.

Yeah, liability has such a negative connotation, when it's associated with getting paid. It can also just be equated with responsibility. Nothing wrong with being responsible.

[Water Rat]

Wow! Glad nobody was hurt. We've gotten tons of rain around here and lots of wind. Trees will be falling all over. That shelter needed replacement...very old. Let's hope this thread does not turn into a shelter bashing argument. :)

I think the trees already took care of the "bashing" part. ;)

[Puddlefish]

I think the trees already took care of the "bashing" part. ;)

Water Rat wins this thread. (http://instantrimshot.com/index.php?sound=rimshot&play=true)

[peakbagger]

Its great that no one got hurt. There is an excellent book on accidents on Mt Washington called Not Without Peril. There is chapter about a hiker that died in Tuckermans Ravine. The family sued the forest service for not making the terrain safe, they lost as the forest service established that anyone entering the area took on the risk. They forest service does post warnings and maintains a crew there during ski season to assist those who are injured but they ultimately do not stop people from ignoring their warning. At one point one of the volunteer organizations who assist them reportedly would meet folks entering the ravine in particularly nasty avalanche conditions, advise them of the potential for trouble and then ask them for name and next of kin if they insisted on continuing.

In NH and other states there are recreational liability laws for private land. In order to encourage private land to be open in NH, if the owner doesn't post it they are covered by the law. Unless the landowner can be proven to have established a deliberate cause for an accident the owner is not liable for any injury. Over the years there are always lawyer trying to get around the statute to sue but generally the bar is set quite high. If on the other hand the owner posts the property then the anyone entering the land who gets injured possibly has a case.

[nsherry61]

For what it's worth. Looking at the OP's photo, the tree is actually trees (plural) suggesting that the cause of the blow-down was not likely a dead tree but rather a bunch of trees that were uprooted, not broken off. So, "act of God" . . . unless you're an atheist.

[Violent Green]

So if a tree falls on a shelter, it's considered an 'act of God' and there's basically no legal action you can take if you're injured -- I'm assuming. However, if the tree is obviously dead and falls on a shelter is there any legal action for the injured?

I know under Florida law if I have a healthy tree blown over by a storm it's an 'act of God' and I'm on pretty good legal standing; however, if I have a dead tree that falls on a neighbors house, than I have legal issues...

Just curious:)

There is precedent in situations like this. Courts have found several times that the NPS, USFS, etc are not liable for damages or responsible for visitor safety.

There was a case a few years ago where a young boy was killed in a campground by a falling tree. In this case, the tree was actually dead and fell during a storm. The parents sued claiming the tree was obviously dead and should have been cleared by the USFS. The courts said if the tree was dead and an obvious danger perhaps you should not have camped under it. It's a wild area and you assume the risk. USFS won.

Ryan

[nsherry61]

. . . The courts said if the tree was dead and an obvious danger perhaps you should not have camped under it. It's a wild area and you assume the risk. USFS won.
Sometimes the courts get it right!

[burger]

Pedaling Fool, sorry to misread you (I generally just gloss over emoticons when I'm reading).

Moving away form the AT for a second...on the PCT and CDT there are TONS AND TONS of dead trees. There are stretches of mile after mile in Colorado and Wyoming with nothing but dead trees. We went out of our way to not camp under dead trees, but I have no doubt that eventually someone is going to be hurt by one falling on one of these trails. There are just too many dead trees.

I don't know what the answer is--I think it's too big an area for the FS to cut them all, and a lot are in wilderness or national parks where cutting is verboten. And the problem is only going to get worse with drought and climate change.

Be careful out there people. If you're in the forest, take a look overhead before you start setting up your tent.

[wornoutboots]

Wow!! So glad everyone is okay!!

[WingedMonkey]

What if the tree was on one of the private properties that the AT runs thru and if fell on you, can you sue the land owner.


:D

You would have to sign a waver that says you wouldn't take legal action.

Oh wait that only counts at river crossings.

[SWODaddy]

There is precedent in situations like this. Courts have found several times that the NPS, USFS, etc are not liable for damages or responsible for visitor safety.

There was a case a few years ago where a young boy was killed in a campground by a falling tree. In this case, the tree was actually dead and fell during a storm. The parents sued claiming the tree was obviously dead and should have been cleared by the USFS. The courts said if the tree was dead and an obvious danger perhaps you should not have camped under it. It's a wild area and you assume the risk. USFS won.

Ryan

Good! I can just imagine the lawyers chopping down every tree within 100ft of a shelter or campsite.

[Another Kevin]

In upstate NY where I hike, the trailhead register kiosks often have signs that say something like: "This is a wilderness area. Visitors may encounter natural hazards such as steep dropoffs, unstable slopes, deep or rapidly moving water, quicksand, abandoned mines and other industrial workings, violent weather, and dangerous wildlife. Trails may be poorly marked, obstructed, flooded or otherwise difficult to follow. In a wilderness area, little to no effort is made to mitigate these hazards. In the event of an accident, rescue may be hours or even days in arriving. Cellular telephone coverage may be spotty or nonexistent. Please plan your trip accordingly."

This is on State land rather than Federal, but I don't think that a court would hold that the State has any duty to develop a wilderness area in order to ensure traveler safety. Moreover, the State would enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity in any case - you can't sue a State government unless it consents to be sued. They all have statutes waiving immunity for cases such as traffic accidents where a State employee driving a State vehicle is at fault, but it would be hard to advance a legal theory that would have the effect of eviscerating a 'wilderness' designation by requiring that all the hazards that go along with a wilderness be eliminated. For Federal land, a FTCA lawsuit would be an even rougher road.

[mattjv89]

For what it's worth. Looking at the OP's photo, the tree is actually trees (plural) suggesting that the cause of the blow-down was not likely a dead tree but rather a bunch of trees that were uprooted, not broken off. So, "act of God" . . . unless you're an atheist.

Exactly what I was thinking about how they fell. Except for the large trunk in front which may have been a dead snag those all appear to be healthy trees that would have passed visual inspection as not a hazard, except for the shallow root plate they all shared. As far as any of us can tell from the photo it looks like an incident that would only be prevented by clear cutting the entire shelter radius which is certainly not an attractive solution. I remember going by a shelter in NJ I think where that had been done and man was it ugly.

I certainly agree that nobody should be liable for such events though it's a good preventative measure to clear obvious hazard trees along the trail when practical, and around established campsites. I see this implemented to varying degrees depending on the trail club. I imagine a major obstacle here is finding volunteer help skilled enough to do that safely. It's one thing to handle a chainsaw well enough to clear a blowdown off the trail, another thing entirely to bring down a big dead tree and come home to tell about it. I've been involved in various forms of tree work for most of my working life and nothing puts me on alert like cutting into a big crispy dead one.

[map man]

Well this just surfaced on the Reddit AT page, Rock Gap shelter took quite a pruning last night. Five in the shelter side but no injuries.

33820

I'm not familiar with this shelter. It looks like the shelter, in the right part of the photo, stayed intact. But then along with multiple trees coming in from the left, it looks like those trees took out some kind of man-made structure that was not part of the shelter (some wall or platform appears to be down). Or am I misinterpreting the photo?

For those who really know this shelter do you know what that is?

[JumpMaster Blaster]

Water Rat wins this thread. (http://instantrimshot.com/index.php?sound=rimshot&play=true)

I second that motion!

[mattjv89]

For those who really know this shelter do you know what that is?

It had me confused too since I didn't stay there, I had to look up a picture of the shelter in it's undamaged state. I The crushed area is an attached roof over a picnic table.

[fiddlehead]

What if the tree was on one of the private properties that the AT runs thru and if fell on you, can you sue the land owner.


:D

If you are EVER pedaling (or hiking) up in PA and think about stopping in for a visit to my house, PLEASE STAY AWAY!
You are not welcome.

[johnnybgood]

I wonder what how the VA shelters faired as there were numerous tornados throughout VA.

All of the confirmed Tornadoes, 7 at last count were east of the AT and the Blue Ridge Mountains.

[George]

Good! I can just imagine the lawyers chopping down every tree within 100ft of a shelter or campsite.

that job is usually done pretty well for firewood

[Traveler]

I am not a lawyer, however, I have had some experience with this type of issue on private lands opened to the public and publicly owned land allowing open access. The short answer is suits are typically not successful for several reasons. On the AT, there is an easement or "corridor" the trail runs along through public and private lands that shields the property owner from these kinds of things.

Where the AT may not have an easement and uses separate agreements and other trail systems, many States have enacted statutes that limit the liability of a landowner to those who are using the land, such as hiking, fishing, hunting, etc. These statutes provide a shield of sorts to landowners that help insulate them from injury or damage liability while people are parked or using their land(s) as an encouragement for landowners to open their land for use by the general public. Where there can be a question of responsibility by the landowner or maintenance authority (appointed by or through agreement with the landowner) if there has been notification of a significant hazard by trail users (usually called "active notice") or the maintenance authority has noted a significant hazard (usually called "constructive notice"). However, these suits are usually not successful for a number of reasons stemming from open use statutes that provide some discretionary immunity when hazard mitigation require significant resources that have to be budgeted over a period of time or require participation of other authorities for permits, access, or assistance.

In instances like storms that bring down both healthy and dead trees, the "act of god" standard would apply and all risk is borne by the user. That said, notifying the local maintenance group of a hazard if you see one is part of good trail citizenship and helps that organization with maintenance prioritization with marginal resources these folks usually operate on.

[Pedaling Fool]

So if a tree falls on a shelter, it's considered an 'act of God' and there's basically no legal action you can take if you're injured -- I'm assuming. However, if the tree is obviously dead and falls on a shelter is there any legal action for the injured?

I know under Florida law if I have a healthy tree blown over by a storm it's an 'act of God' and I'm on pretty good legal standing; however, if I have a dead tree that falls on a neighbors house, than I have legal issues...

Just curious:)
Thank you all for your legal advice;)

BTW, my question was specific to shelter areas on the AT, not the entire forest -- that's just too big an area. I was just wondering since it's a developed area if there were some legal recourse, just out of curiosity. I'd be willing to bet that if a family member of a VIP were to be seriously injured in a dead tree fall on a shelter there may be a court case....but for the rest of us regular Joe's, it's camp at your own risk:)

But that's for the lawyers to decide. I suck at law stuff, so don't worry fiddlehead, even though I'd like to sue you, I couldn't :D

[Roamin]

Glad to hear all are safe. Who have us have not had a passing thought of this happening while we slept?

[bstiffler]

So if a tree falls on a shelter, it's considered an 'act of God' and there's basically no legal action you can take if you're injured -- I'm assuming. However, if the tree is obviously dead and falls on a shelter is there any legal action for the injured?

I know under Florida law if I have a healthy tree blown over by a storm it's an 'act of God' and I'm on pretty good legal standing; however, if I have a dead tree that falls on a neighbors house, than I have legal issues...

Just curious:)

Pretty sure if you decided to go hiking days/miles into the wilderness and are injured you do it at your own risk.

[bstiffler]

For what it's worth. Looking at the OP's photo, the tree is actually trees (plural) suggesting that the cause of the blow-down was not likely a dead tree but rather a bunch of trees that were uprooted, not broken off. So, "act of God" . . . unless you're an atheist.

Sonif I declare myself as an atheist do I still get to sue?

[Woodturner]

I'm not familiar with this shelter. It looks like the shelter, in the right part of the photo, stayed intact. But then along with multiple trees coming in from the left, it looks like those trees took out some kind of man-made structure that was not part of the shelter (some wall or platform appears to be down). Or am I misinterpreting the photo?

For those who really know this shelter do you know what that is?

The part that is crushed is/was a kind of lean-to that was added on to the original shelter years after it was built. The shelter sits downhill within sight of the AT on mostly sloping ground that doesn't offer a lot of tenting locations. My guess is that the add-on was an attempt to make the shelter a little bigger as hiker numbers started increasing. The last time I was there the table was in front of the shelter just like most of them. The road to the USFS Standing Indian Campground passes within twenty feet or so of the AT pathway at Rock Gap. The shelter is maybe two hundred yards or less southbound from Rock Gap. It is not visible from Rock Gap, but this time of year with the leaves off, it is visible from the road. Back in the day when Wallace Gap was THE road to Franklin, Rock Gap shelter was a good place to stay if you wanted to head to town because it was close to Wallace Gap and you could get there fast for an early morning hitch.
I hated to see this post because I have some good memories of nights spent at the Rock Gap Lean-to/shelter. Its a little like losing an old friend. True, the last time I stopped by it a few years ago it was well on the way to becoming a dump. But it's still newer than the Cold Springs shelter two shelters northbound.

[daddytwosticks]

The part that is crushed is/was a kind of lean-to that was added on to the original shelter years after it was built. The shelter sits downhill within sight of the AT on mostly sloping ground that doesn't offer a lot of tenting locations. My guess is that the add-on was an attempt to make the shelter a little bigger as hiker numbers started increasing. The last time I was there the table was in front of the shelter just like most of them. The road to the USFS Standing Indian Campground passes within twenty feet or so of the AT pathway at Rock Gap. The shelter is maybe two hundred yards or less southbound from Rock Gap. It is not visible from Rock Gap, but this time of year with the leaves off, it is visible from the road. Back in the day when Wallace Gap was THE road to Franklin, Rock Gap shelter was a good place to stay if you wanted to head to town because it was close to Wallace Gap and you could get there fast for an early morning hitch.
I hated to see this post because I have some good memories of nights spent at the Rock Gap Lean-to/shelter. Its a little like losing an old friend. True, the last time I stopped by it a few years ago it was well on the way to becoming a dump. But it's still newer than the Cold Springs shelter two shelters northbound.

The Cold Springs Shelter was rennovated about 3 years ago. Still small, but I love listening to the small creek right in front of the shelter as you nod off to sleep. :)

[Woodturner]

The Cold Springs Shelter was rennovated about 3 years ago. Still small, but I love listening to the small creek right in front of the shelter as you nod off to sleep. :)
Is it still the same basic CCC log shelter though? I probably haven't been there for five years. I think the only renovation open to the Rock Gap shelter will probably be what was done at Carter Gap. Building a new one.