Two Hikers die on WIlderness Hikes in Utah

[Deborah]

Legislating away the responsibility for yourself is a dangerous course of action. I'm more keen on the power of a free market economy driving this sort of place out of business. Not likely to get to much business if they keep killing their customers.

150+ kids dead. Exactly when might that "free market economy" kick in?
We can't even gather accurate statistics of injuries, assaults, deaths to show the industry is ineffective, because they report to no one. I'm not giddy about the Fed legislation unless this is strongly enforced. The "free market economy" doesn't work if people don't know the reality of what's going on in these programs. How many parents know?

If people want to do stupid shit to prove how big of balls they have its their own business. Don't expect me to weep when they end up dead or to even try to stop them either.

Okay honey, guess that means next time you get snokered and fall off the yacht, I shouldn't throw you a life preserver. That will be really hard for me to do, but if you insist..... I'll honor your wish.

[Oz girl]

I've made up my mind and I'm not likely to change it.

As a diversionary tactic I'll post this link and be gone from the thread.:

http://http://cafety.org/index.php?option=com_joomlaboard&Itemid=26&func=view&catid=5&id=2093#2093

Legislating away the responsibility for yourself is a dangerous course of action. I'm more keen on the power of a free market economy driving this sort of place out of business. Not likely to get to much business if they keep killing their customers.

If people want to do stupid shit to prove how big of balls they have its their own business. Don't expect me to weep when they end up dead or to even try to stop them either.

When has the market left entirely to it's own devices behaved morally? Did enron? Exon Valdez? Arthur Anderson? Dr Phil? WWASP? Just as people are expected to follow laws and and behave with a basic minimum level of decency so should companies. When people behave in a way that is bad enough to harm others the law steps in and holds them accountable. Why should this be any different if you are hiding behind the corporate veil? if anything the need for company regulation is greater because people have a conscience. A company does not. it exists to turn a profit. There needs to be an independent referee to ensure that it is doing so in a way that conforms to a basic ethical standard

Moreover the law to a certain extent reflects what a society values. What does allowing a company to turn a profit from something that endangers lives something like this say about what western society values?

[nimdA]

Enron, Doc Phil, and The tooth fairy don't have anything to this discussion now do they?

Also Deborah you know damn well I was talking about BOSS and the 28 year old, and not the kids. This discussion hasn't been about the kids for me yet. Despite your repeated attempts to link the two.

Which is total bullshit in my opinion.

This man made a choice and he died for it. Its on his head.

[Anonymous]

Why are you not so clearcut with your own choices in the program then? I read your blog and you suggest you as a staff are a victim of the program as well, as an adult, who could of walked out at any time. This does not mesh with your hardened stance on personal responsibility showed here,

[Oz girl]

i will make the link clear. This is a company that knowingly sold a dangerous product or service. This is criminal behaivour

All of these other companies have too made money by fucking eithier their customers or their shareholders or the planet at large over. This is also criminal.

When criminal behavour occurs it needs to be punished. otherwise I could just sell kiddie porn on the net under a company name because there is afterall a market.

profiting something that kills, steals inflicts harm or molests=

Profiting form something that does not=


   

[Anonymous]

Got it. And, I don't care if you're 7 or 70. If someone has what you need to survive and denies you, it's neglectful.
Doesn't matter why he went, how many miles they hiked that day, what releases he signed, what BOSS'S water policy was, or any of the other BS defenses that have been presented as distractions....
The fact remains a man was dying of dehydration and they could've save his life, and chose not to.

You continue to digress.

Of course they would have given water if they thought he was dying of dehydration.

An assessment was made and based on his training and experience, the instructor thought that everything was ok.  The assessment was wrong in this case and an unfortunate death was the result.

It had nothing to do with being macho.  There was no 'choosing' to let him die happening.  This situation is about a mistake that an individual instructor made in his evaluation.  He believed he was correct.

You basically state that the instructor was fully aware that Dave Buschow was dying and let it happen anyway.  

Reports stated that a couple of others in the group had asked for water and received it.  Apparently, I'd guess they were more insistent than Dave Buschow was.  

The option to drop out of the course also exists.

You're not being FORCED to do anything.  You can stop at any time.  Several dropped out when I took the course.

Again:

1.  We don't have all the information so can only speculate on many things.
2.  The 2 local offices that did complete investigations and did have all the information found nothing to indicate negligence.
3.  1 death during a course in the 37 year BOSS history does not indicate an organization that is careless about safety.
4.  This was an unfortunate accident cause by a mis-diagnosis by an individual.
[/b]

[Anonymous]

unfortunate accident

This was not an "accident" it was Negligence!

[Anonymous]

unfortunate accident

This was not an "accident" it was Negligence!

No, it wasn't according the the local authorities that determine that.

[nimdA]

i will make the link clear. This is a company that knowingly sold a dangerous product or service. This is criminal behaivour

All of these other companies have too made money by fucking eithier their customers or their shareholders or the planet at large over. This is also criminal.

When criminal behavour occurs it needs to be punished. otherwise I could just sell kiddie porn on the net under a company name because there is afterall a market.

profiting something that kills, steals inflicts harm or molests=

Profiting form something that does not=


   

So does this mean I need to sell my stock shares in Colt Firearms?

Which I won't. To good of a long term stock for me to sell now.

However, this will be my absolutely last post on this matter. But only after I say this:

The difference between me and the dead guy is I drank two cans beer on a subway last night and reminded myself of how damn lucky I am for being out of the business. Even after I was offered a job in another facility, which I turned down.

Also.. future warning.. I won't discuss the contents of my blog on fornits. The two, for me anyway, will remain seperate.

[Oz girl]

So does this mean I need to sell my stock shares in Colt Firearms?

Well just for you i will pretend i dont have an issue with guns and say no. However if you are a gunshop owner and a crazy guy goes into your shop and says Hi Im dave the nut bar. Voices in my head say i should kill myself and th wife. may I please buy a colt?
if you say sure. thatll be (insert price here) you should be held liable.

Just as if you run a wilderness course in extreme conditions and you dont recognise one of your clients is in serious meidcal trouble you should be liable

[Deborah]

Enron, Doc Phil, and The tooth fairy don't have anything to this discussion now do they?
Also Deborah you know damn well I was talking about BOSS and the 28 year old, and not the kids. This discussion hasn't been about the kids for me yet. Despite your repeated attempts to link the two.
Which is total bullshit in my opinion.
This man made a choice and he died for it. Its on his head.

I have not made repeated attemtps to "link the two". Within the last few pages we have discussed the "similarities" of what happened at BOSS and what happens in youth programs.

Just for clarity, are you suggesting regulation is necessary for youth programs, but not other businesses/industry?

I might see where the guy held responsibility for his death if the staff had been saying, "Look Dave, dude, you're exhibiting classic signs of severe dehydration, you're delusional/hallucinating. We're going to bend the rules. You need to drink some water"... and Dave refused.
That's not what happened. He asked for water and was denied. He attempted to fill his water bottle that morning and was "warned" not to, whatever that means. Matters not what the program policies are/were, to me, they allowed someone to die needlessly.

[Anonymous]

I might see where the guy held responsibility for his death if the staff had been saying, "Look Dave, dude, you're exhibiting classic signs of severe dehydration, you're delusional/hallucinating. We're going to bend the rules. You need to drink some water"... and Dave refused.
That's not what happened. He asked for water and was denied. He attempted to fill his water bottle that morning and was "warned" not to, whatever that means. Matters not what the program policies are/were, to me, they allowed someone to die needlessly.

More speculation.  We don't know that the instructor was aware that he was delusional/hallucinating.  I can speculate too and guess that had they known that if it were the case, they'd have re-acted.  If something like that had come out of the 2 investigations of the incident, I'm sure the finding wouldn't have been what it was.  

Yes, of course he was told that the 32 ounce water bottle he was carrying isn't allowed on the impact phase because they aren't.  He could have filled his 24 ounce cup though and that is allowed.

[Anonymous]

Grown men pay money to be treated like that under the laughable guise of "survival"?

He completely had it coming.

Good luck killing some more 'tards, EmployeeDave. Darwin thanks you.

[Deborah]

BOSS officials refused to answer our questions,  :roll: but because of the incident, the school's permit for using federal land was partially suspended by the U.S. Forest Service. To get it back, the Forest Service said the survival school must change its course policy to include, among others things, that students carry water in a 32 ounce bottle. CNN has learned from Forest Service officials that the school will change its survival course policy.
CNN Video
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/200 ... .death.cnn

The 29-year-old former River Vale resident's death on July 17, 2006, has touched off a wave of criticism and sparked a federal lawsuit against the Boulder Outdoor Survival School (BOSS), which organized the hike and the 28-day course of which it was part.
Dr. Paul Auerbach, founder of the Wilderness Medical Society and a professor of surgery at Stanford University Medical Center in California, also criticized hike leaders' actions.
"There is risk in the wilderness, for sure, but there was no risk whatsoever to this man's companions had they chosen to do the proper thing and try to save his life with cooling, rest and water," Auerbach wrote in a posting on rememberdave.net, a Web site set up in the aftermath of Buschow's death.
BOSS, which charges more than $3,000 for the course, has denied any responsibility, saying that Buschow, an Air Force veteran, did not read its manuals and may not have communicated important medical information before embarking on the strenuous trip. Officials said Buschow had also signed liability waivers.
"Mr. Buschow expressly assumed the risk of serious injury or death prior to participating," BOSS asserts in a lawsuit filed in January that asks a judge to validate Buschow's signed liability waivers.
Brook Millard, the family's attorney in its lawsuit, said it could take 18 months before the case would be ready for trial.
"I believe the actions taken by BOSS and its employees were outlandish and that his death was absolutely caused by their neglect and their intentional withholding of water," Millard said.~~

A lawyer for the school said Friday he had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment.
BOSS filed a lawsuit in the same court in January, asking a judge to uphold liability waivers signed by Buschow when he applied for the course. There has been no progress in that case.
"Mr. Buschow expressly assumed the risk of serious injury or death prior to participating," the school's lawsuit said.
The U.S. Forest Service, citing Buschow's death, partially suspended the school's use of Dixie National Forest until the school got advice on providing food and water.
The agency lifted the suspension May 25 after the school filed a plan that allows the bottle for "obtaining and transporting water" during the early phase of the field course and two bottles during later stages.~~

Correct and more humane steps are being taken.
Based on previous cases, not sure how smart it was to go after BOSS and not the guide. We'll see how it comes down.

[Joyce Harris]

Ed White AP Article Une 5, 2007
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nati ... hirst.html

According to the attorney for BOSS, the survival school now allows carrying a 32 oz bottle of water to "drink as they go."
This change came after Dave Buschow died from dehydration.

The U.S. Forest Service did not lift the suspension on BOSS's use of Dixie National Forest UNTIL BOSS filed a new operating plan allowing for adequated drinking water supply during hikes.

It certainly seems that BOSS has realized the importance of allowing the hikers to have water available to "drink as they go."
And the U.S. Forest Service certainly supports having water available for hikers.

This young man should not have died for the lack of a glass of water; and I extend my condolences to his family, who must still be grieving his senseless death.