Prescribed Burn Arrest

[rogerthat]

I agree, that's why I said unfortunately for Snodgrass. He's just the fattest chicken in the hen house. As for the 20 (potentially 40) acres, it seems like it's just the most recent in a line of grievances against the state. It could have been planted in improved grazing that he has the cost of seed and all time high priced fertilizer invested in, it could open up the land to erosion, the fire could have nearly made it to his house or barn or something, he could have been the using the field for horses, anything. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of people making assumptions based off of a story that doesn't provide a lot of detail, and as per usual the assumption goes straight to "landowner man bad" when the title of the article should be "government agency responsible for damages to private property, again".

Huh? They arrested a federal employee while he was doing his job. That’s the headline

 

[sapperJ24]

I agree, that's why I said unfortunately for Snodgrass. He's just the fattest chicken in the hen house. As for the 20 (potentially 40) acres, it seems like it's just the most recent in a line of grievances against the state. It could have been planted in improved grazing that he has the cost of seed and all time high priced fertilizer invested in, it could open up the land to erosion, the fire could have nearly made it to his house or barn or something, he could have been the using the field for horses, anything. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of people making assumptions based off of a story that doesn't provide a lot of detail, and as per usual the assumption goes straight to "landowner man bad" when the title of the article should be "government agency responsible for damages to private property, again".

I was trying to get at the potential value of forage lost to determine the severity of the potential crime. The Forest Service pays out all the time for damages to private property. I'm not suggesting the landowner is bad, he has a right to be upset, I don't see how arresting someone solves that.

To determine the losses, until other numbers provided, I'm using the $1.35 AUM figure. So yeah, it seems like not that much, even at 40 acres.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

20

and as per usual the assumption goes straight to "landowner man bad" when the title of the article should be "government agency responsible for damages to private property, again".

What in the world are you talking about? Who said anything about the landowner? The article is about the sheriff arresting a USFS employee.

Ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas. I don’t care how much the landowner has invested into the 20 acres (maybe the equivalent of one AUM). File a tort claim with fair market value and real time expenses and go from there.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Out of curiosity, anyone know if the ranchers have a USFS lease?

 

[CowboyLeroy]

Why demand a burn boss be arrested? Why not sit down like an adult and talk about seeding, fertilizer, fencing, weed mitigation and a truckload of hay for his stock (if he has any).

Naaa, let's just start arresting people and being an asshat.

I just re-read the part of the article that starts "somebody's got to be held accountable"

The sherif initiated conversation and asked if the rancher would like to press charges

"Absolutely, somebody's got to be held accountable"
unfortunately for Snodgrass he was the burn boss on a fire that escaped the designated area in multiple places, burned part of the ranchers fence the week prior (a week after he'd removed cattle from national forest land allowing them to go back on to national forest land) and now burning 20 to 40 acres of another pasture where's probably having to double stock cows due to having compromised fences elsewhere

Holiday and McKinley then went and arrested snodgrass.

If you look at my first post you'll see that I said I don't think taking working hands off a jobsite is a good idea when in an emergency situation but he was far from being a ass hat. He may have been an angry hat, but I don't think he was being an ass hat. I think he's a landowner that's experienced destruction of private property at the hands of a seemingly incompetent burn boss. I say incompetent because his fire was out of control on multiple fronts and I say seemingly because it probably seemed like it at the time.

 

[Irrelevant]

I am but that didn't address my question. Unfortunately for Snodgrass somebody has to take responsibility when accidents happen. He's the big man on the job and thus is his responsibility. Looking at it from the ranchers perspective he's seen gates left open, fences burned up, and now a pasture burned up. He's got a right to be mad. I'd be irate if I were in his shoes.

Again, I think you miss the point.

If we as a public, as a neighbor, and a shared interest, want to FS to manage forests to prevent catastrophic wildfires, then we needs to recognize that that "want" requires action, on a large scale, involving mechanisms that aren't fail safe and completely controllable. This is a prime example of allowing perfection to be enemy of the good.

Personally, if the Private landowner is going to demand the FS be held accountable then I would like to see the rancher be arrested, fined, and lose his grazing rights for the "stragglers" referenced in the article. He's clearly violating his grazing permit. "Someone has to be held accountable."

 

[BuzzH]

I just re-read the part of the article that starts "somebody's got to be held accountable"

The sherif initiated conversation and asked if the rancher would like to press charges

"Absolutely, somebody's got to be held accountable"
unfortunately for Snodgrass he was the burn boss on a fire that escaped the designated area in multiple places, burned part of the ranchers fence the week prior (a week after he'd removed cattle from national forest land allowing them to go back on to national forest land) and now burning 20 to 40 acres of another pasture where's probably having to double stock cows due to having compromised fences elsewhere

Holiday and McKinley then went and arrested snodgrass.

If you look at my first post you'll see that I said I don't think taking working hands off a jobsite is a good idea when in an emergency situation but he was far from being a ass hat. He may have been an angry hat, but I don't think he was being an ass hat. I think he's a landowner that's experienced destruction of private property at the hands of a seemingly incompetent burn boss. I say incompetent because his fire was out of control on multiple fronts and I say seemingly because it probably seemed like it at the time.

To condense your post, you don't have a clue about prescribed fire and are fine with asshattery.

About right?

 

[sapperJ24]

I say incompetent because his fire was out of control on multiple fronts and I say seemingly because it probably seemed like it at the time.

Where'd you hear it was out of control on multiple fronts? First I've heard of that. I'm interested in your source.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

20

What in the world are you talking about? Who said anything about the landowner? The article is about the sheriff arresting a USFS employee.

Ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas. I don’t care how much the landowner has invested into the 20 acres (maybe the equivalent of one AUM). File a tort claim with fair market value and real time expenses and go from there.

One party says 20 the other says 40. I deal with NRCS every year over how many acres here and there so I know there can be confusion. As for the landowner thing it just seems to be a trend on Hunttalk. It bugs me.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

To condense your post, you don't have a clue about prescribed fire and are fine with asshattery.

About right?

I burn my woods every year. And I know that govt insurance programs usually don't pay out until the following year.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

Where'd you hear it was out of control on multiple fronts? First I've heard of that. I'm interested in your source.

 

[sapperJ24]

View attachment 246903

Ah, okay. Thanks for the response.

My interpretation of that was there was active fire to the north, as intended as part of the prescribed fire, and while active, not necessarily out of control. And then yes the uncontrolled slop on private, which I believe I read was pinned on an internal flare up.

To me, I read one uncontrolled front, although it was corralled within an hour.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

Again, I think you miss the point.

If we as a public, as a neighbor, and a shared interest, want to FS to manage forests to prevent catastrophic wildfires, then we needs to recognize that that "want" requires action, on a large scale, involving mechanisms that aren't fail safe and completely controllable. This is a prime example of allowing perfection to be enemy of the good.

Personally, if the Private landowner is going to demand the FS be held accountable then I would like to see the rancher be arrested, fined, and lose his grazing rights for the "stragglers" referenced in the article. He's clearly violating his grazing permit. "Someone has to be held accountable."

 

[MTGomer]

If there is a situation where someone should be held accountable, it is rare that the boots on the ground guy is who it should be.

Was there any consequences for anybody for what happened in NM this year?

 

[Deleted member 20812]

One party says 20 the other says 40. I deal with NRCS every year over how many acres here and there so I know there can be confusion. As for the landowner thing it just seems to be a trend on Hunttalk. It bugs me.

20, 40. Big deal. At the end of the day, it’s a civil tort. If he needs supplemental hay to offset the loss of 1-2 AUM, he’ll get some. It won’t matter what it costs per ton. Uncle Sam has the bill.

I guess I’m missing where anyone was bashing in this landowner?

 

[CowboyLeroy]

Ah, okay. Thanks for the response.

My interpretation of that was there was active fire to the north, as intended as part of the prescribed fire, and while active, not necessarily out of control. And then yes the uncontrolled slop on private, which I believe I read was pinned on an internal flare up.

To me, I read one uncontrolled front, although it was corralled within an hour.

See thas what I'm saying, neither of us REALLY know the details. We just know that a fire got loose and destroyed some private property. Looking at the article it appears that the state of Oregon is extremely thorough when it comes to issuing burn permits and I doubt any of the necktie crowd is going to take the blame for this.

 

[Irrelevant]

I guess I’m missing where anyone was bashing in this landowner?

I was/am. Anyone who complains this hard, is this big of an asshat, and demands "someone is held accountable" ie. arrested, should be bashed.

View attachment 246905

I'm calling BS on the POS landowner

 

[CowboyLeroy]

20, 40. Big deal. At the end of the day, it’s a civil tort. If he needs supplemental hay to offset the loss of 1-2 AUM, he’ll get some. It won’t matter what it costs per ton. Uncle Sam has the bill.

I guess I’m missing where anyone was bashing in this landowner?

Damn dude I can't keep screenshotting and highlighting. But ass hat and a cal for him to be arrested are the first that come to mind.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

I was/am. Anyone who complains this hard, is this big of an asshat, and demands "someone is held accountable" ie. arrested, should be bashed.

I'm calling BS on the POS landowner
View attachment 246906

How? Have you ever tried to run cows out of the woods? It's awful I promise.

 

[sapperJ24]

See thas what I'm saying, neither of us REALLY know the details. We just know that a fire got loose and destroyed some private property. Looking at the article it appears that the state of Oregon is extremely thorough when it comes to issuing burn permits and I doubt any of the necktie crowd is going to take the blame for this.

True, we don't know exactly how it happened. But we do know someone was arrested. And again, not to diminish private property rights, as things currently stand, I do not see the level of damage warranting an arrest. The actual monetary value of damages seems to be at most 40 acres of grass, fence posts, and time to repair, so maybe $500? In general people don't get arrested for a couple hundred in damages. I see the arrest as sending a message.