Re: Federal Government and Liability

[Teddy Lancaster <Teddy@runningbear.com>]

Well said, Linda, and you are right in your quote. I did, however, talk at
length with Denise Ferris privately.  This COULD be an issue and CAN be used
AGAINST current  US Forest Service policy and impending policy.

My point is: MOST  US Forest personnel do not know and do not understand the
ramifications of this.  I, for one, intend to use this argument as a means
of getting them to maintain the trails we use...  Put the fear in their
heads that they MAY be sued and perhaps they will actually do the job they
are supposed to do.

Just another log on the fire.....

Teddy

lbm@ici.net wrote:

> Teddy commented that at the "Horse Trails in Forest Ecosystems"
> conference
> recently held at Clemson University in South Carolina she learned that,
> because many federal parks and national forests are now charging user
> fees for trail use, the feds are now exposed to liability lawsuits.
>
> I don't remember what was said quite that way.  What I remember was that
> the speaker (Denise Farris of the Farris Law from in Kansas City
> Missouri (http://www.farrislawfirm.com), in her talk on "Legal Impact of
> Equine
> Limited Liability Act and Volunteer Protection Act on Landowners and
> Equine Sponsors/Participants") said if a *private* individual or
> organization
> charges for use of their land, then you are definitely upping the ante
> on
> your liability exposure.  She described several different levels of
> liability
> that one could have based on the kind of relationship the landowner had
> to the
> person using the land.  Fee-for-use creates the highest liability.
> (Excepting
> only for fee-for-use with children involved!)
>
> There was question from the audience.  "Does that mean that, since that
> the Feds are charging user fees, they are now subject to liability?"
> The response was that user fees, federal lands, and liability were
> completely unexplored legal territory.  Generally, the feds have *not*
> been subject to the same liability exposure under the same sets of
> circumstances as private individuals have been.  It is likely that
> federal government agencies will continue to maintain that, despite the
> introduction of user fees, they and their employees are not subject to
> the same liability exposure as a private landowner charging for use of
> their land.  Should such a question arise, there may be congressional
> action that would spell out what liability, if any, would exist.
> (Heck, if Congress can pass a law saying you can't sue your HMO if it
> fails to cover you, they can pass a law to protect their own Park and
> Forest services!)
>
> However, we'll all have to sit tight and see what happens when the
> first horseback rider or mountain biker takes a tumble and decides to
> jeopardize the entire national park/forest system by suing over it.
>
> Does anybody else who attended remember more or better what was said on
> this particular point?  I do remember her saying that, according to
> a national insurance rating system, all trail riding is classified as
> a "Rugged Outdoor Adventure."
>
> Linda B. Merims
> lbm@ici.net
> Massachusetts, USA