CAMP USA Recalls Tour Nanotech Crampons Due to Fall Hazard

Name of Product: Tour Nanotech Automatic and Semi-Automatic Crampons

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2015/CAMP-USA-Recalls-Tour-Nanotech-Crampons/

Hazard: The heel bail which connects the ankle strap to the crampon can detach from the crampon, posing a fall hazard.

Remedy: Replace

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled product and contact the firm for a free pair of replacement crampons.

Consumer Contact: CAMP USA toll-free at 877-421-2267 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. MT Monday through Friday or online at http://www.camp-usa.com  and click on the Safety Notices link at the bottom of the page then click on Camp Tour Nanotech Crampons for more information.

Photos available at http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2015/CAMP-USA-Recalls-Tour-Nanotech-Crampons/

Recall Details

Units: About 500 (in addition, 19 units sold in Canada)

Description: This recall affects all Tour Nanotech Automatic and Semi-Automatic crampons. Both crampons are made of steel plates that attach to boots for ice climbing. The Tour Nanotech Automatic has a red heel bail with a gray strap that fastens around the ankle. The Tour Nanotech Semi-Automatic has a red toe strap at the front of the crampon and a red heel bail at the back. A gray strap is connected to both heel bails and fastens around the boot.

Incidents/Injuries: CAMP USA has received one report of the heel bail detaching during use. No injuries have been reported.

Sold at: Specialty outdoor retailers and online at backcountry.com, camp-usa.com and mountaingear.com from June 2013 to June 2015 for about $220.

Importer/Distributor: CAMP USA Inc., of Broomfield, Colo.

Manufactured in: Italy

Note: Health Canada’s press release is available at http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/recall-alert-rappel-avis/hc-sc/2015/54800r-eng.php

 

Retailers: If you are a retailer of a recalled product you have a duty to notify your customers of a recall. If you can, email your clients or include the recall information in your next marketing communication to your clients. Post any Recall Poster at your stores and contact the manufacturer to determine how you will handle any recalls.

For more information on this see:

For Retailers

Recalls Call for Retailer Action

A recall leads to lawsuits because injuries are connected to the product being recalled thus a lawsuit. Plaintiff’s hope the three can be connected

Combination of a Products Liability statute, an Expert Witness Report that was just not direct enough and odd facts holds a retailer liable as manufacture for product defect.

Product Liability takes a different turn. You must pay attention, just not rely on the CPSC.

Retailer has no duty to fit or instruct on fitting bicycle helmet

Summary Judgment granted for bicycle manufacturer and retailer on a breach of warranty and product liability claim.

For Manufacturers

The legal relationship created between manufactures and US consumers

A recall leads to lawsuits because injuries are connected to the product being recalled thus a lawsuit. Plaintiff’s hope the three can be connected

Combination of a Products Liability statute, an Expert Witness Report that was just not direct enough and odd facts holds a retailer liable as manufacture for product defect.

 

 

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Copyright 2015 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law

Email: Rec-law@recreation-law.com

Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog: www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, Recall, Recall, CPSC, Consumer Product Safety Council, CAMP USA, CAMP, Tour Nanotech, Tour Nanotech Crampon, Crampon,

 


Ecuador Ministry of Tourism now has Newletter and Information alerts about Climbing & Mountaineering in Ecuador

On behalf of the Ministry of Tourism of Ecuador, we wanted to share updates about the Cotopaxi Volcano Situation.

The Ministry of Tourism calls tourists and tour operators to remain alert to guidelines and recommendations provided by the Ministry of Security Coordination.

Below I’ve shared full press release. Please let me know if you have additional questions.

Best,

Jose Gonzalez


200 Hudson Street 7th Floor
New York, NY 10013

Office 212-219-0321 | Direct 646-762-8737
jgonzalez

Newsletter: Cotopaxi Volcano Situation

Quito, (28-08-2015) Last Friday, August 14, a yellow alert was declared in the provinces of Cotopaxi, Tungurahua and Pichincha as a result of emissions of ash from the Cotopaxi volcano which occurred in the course of the last few hours prior this announcement. In this regard, President Rafael Correa, advised the public to remain calm and to keep themselves informed using the only official channel, which in this case is the Ministry of Security Coordination with its spokesperson, Minister Cesar Navas.

Similarly, President Correa declared a state of exception throughout the country due to the Cotopaxi volcano eruption process, in order allocate all necessary resources to assist immediately and efficiently to the community in case of an emergency.

According to the latest newsletter issued by the Ministry of Security Coordination, the Geophysical Institute reported that the afternoon and evening on Wednesday, August 26, through satellite photographs, gas and ash emissions were detected. The Institute also reported that so far, the atmosphere near the volcano remains clear, with the presence of light gas emissions in the vicinity of the crater. The Ministry of Security Coordination announced that the volcano is being monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with the goal of having permanent information on its activity.

In earlier days, as a preventive measure, the entrance to Cotopaxi National Park and El Boliche National Recreation Area was suspended due to the ash fall. Given this alert, the Ministry of Tourism calls tourists and tour operators to remain alert to guidelines and recommendations provided by the Ministry of Security Coordination. We will continue to inform through this channel.

The local airports are open and operating normally, including the airport in Latacunga. Also, tourism activities are normal in the rest of the country as well as National Parks, such as: Cayambe Coca, Galapagos, Llanganates, Machalilla, Podocarpus, Sangay, Sumaco, Yasuni, Yacuri and Cajas. Remember also that Ecuador offers numerous options to visit and enjoy a unique journey in the Andes, the Coastal region, the Amazon and the Galapagos Islands; four worlds, each with spectacular destinations to discover.

For adventure lovers, here are some excellent options: Ilinizas Ecological Reserves, El Angel, Antisana, Cotacachi Cayapas; Pasochoa Wildlife Refuge, Pululahua Geobotany Reserve; Puyango Petrified Forest; Cuyabeno Wildlife Reserve; Limoncocha Biological Reserve; among others.

In case to visit Quito or areas near the volcano, where ash fall is recorded, it is advisable to consider the following recommendations:

• Protect your eyes with goggles, nose and mouth with a damp cloth and mask.

• Wear clothes that cover most of your body, to prevent skin damage.

• Cover food and drinking water, to avoid contamination with ash.

• If you have animals, you should also pay attention to these recommendations.

• Insulate gaps in doors and windows, to prevent the ash from coming in.

Useful information:

Alerts warn us from danger. In a volcanic emergency, the authorities, with technical advice, declare alerts so people and entities responsible take security measures.

The yellow alert is a significant activation announcement of the threat.

After the announcement of this alert, President Rafael Correa declared a state of exception throughout the country to be alert for a possible eruption of the volcano. The measure allows allocate resources and means in order to safeguard the integrity of the people.

Due to the activation of a yellow alert, the Ministry of Security Coordination recommends:

– Review a family emergency plan, find out about evacuation routes and safe places.

– Take the basic personal and family safety measures, have your emergency kit.

– Be informed by official sources (Ministry of Security Coordination).

Do not forget that an orange alert is a warning to prepare for an impending adverse event; and a red alert refers to the attention of an emergency or disaster.

For more information visit:

http://www.seguridad.gob.ec/

#VolcánCotopaxi


No written signature on the release so there is no release, even though the plaintiff acknowledged she would have signed one.

A contract requires a meeting of the minds and the agreement to contract. Even though the defendant proved the plaintiff had the intent, the defendant could not prove their own intent.

Soucy, v. Nova Guides, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95438

State: Colorado

Plaintiff: Megan Soucy

Defendant: Nova Guides, Inc.

Plaintiff Claims: Negligence

Defendant Defenses: Release

Holding: for the Plaintiff

Year: 2015

Warning, this case is probably not over so any decision, here can be altered, changed or appealed. However, the decision is so interesting it was worth the review.

The case involves an All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) accident. Normally, engines are outside the scope of these articles. However, the facts surrounding the incident are not at issue or even discussed. The main issue is the defense of release raised by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff, her mother and sister were visiting Colorado. While there the party contracted with the defendant for a jeep tour. During that tour, all three signed a release. Two days later, the parties came back and contracted for an ATV tour. The mother and sister signed the release, but the plaintiff did not.

The release for both activities was identical, in fact, it covered, Jeep Tours, ATV, Mtn. Bike, and Hiking in one document. Dependent upon what activity the person signed up for the appropriate box was checked. For the first tour, the box Jeep Tour was checked. The mother and sisters ATV box was checked for the second tour.

The release in the language even spoke the risks of ATV tours but all in the same sentence as the other tours.

I/We have asked to participate in the sports of mountain biking, all terrain vehicle riding, hiking, and jeep touring and related activities with Nova Guides, Inc. I understand mountain biking, all terrain vehicle use, hiking and jeep touring also include the risk of falling from said vehicles.

However, because the box for the only release the plaintiff signed was for a jeep tour, the court did not by the argument it also applied to the ATV tour.

The interrogatory answers of the plaintiff and her testimony in deposition indicated she knew releases were required, understood them, had signed them in the past and would have signed one if asked for the ATV tour.

Moreover, with respect to the tours with Nova in July 2012, Soucy testified that, had a waiver of liability been presented to her on July 11, 2012, she would have signed it. In fact, Soucy attested that she believed the waiver of liability she executed on July 9, 2012 for the Jeep tour carried over for her participation in the July 11, 2012 ATV tour.

This decision is based on a Motion for Summary judgment filed by the defendant based on “release” which was denied by the court.

Analysis: making sense of the law based on these facts.

Under Colorado law contracts can be formed orally and based on the party’s intent.

Under Colorado law, contractual conditions may be express or implied. When interpreting a contract, courts consider “the facts and circumstances attending its execution, so as to learn the intentions of the parties.

A release is an agreement that follows the rules of interpretation and construction of contracts.

By her acts of paying for and taking the ATV tour after admitting she would have signed a release the court found the necessary intent on the part of the plaintiff.

Accordingly, the Court concludes it is not disputed that Soucy paid for a commercial service, willingly received that service, and believed the waiver she signed on July 9, 2012 — in which she “assume[d] the risk of personal injury, death, and property damage … which may result from [her] participation … in … all terrain vehicle riding” and waived “any claims based on negligence or breach of warranty [she] might assert on [her] own behalf … against Nova Guides, Inc.” — was valid and necessary for her participation in the ATV tour on July 11, 2012.

However, the reason why the court dismissed the defendant’s motion for summary judgment was the court could not find the same intent on the part of the defendant.

A contract implied in fact arises from the parties’ conduct that evidences a mutual intention to enter into a contract, and such a contract has the same legal effect as an express contract. … [thus, t]o be enforceable, a contract requires mutual assent to an exchange for legal consideration.” (emphasis added). Nova has proffered no evidence of its intention that Soucy be bound by an agreement to waive liability for the ATV tour on July 11, 2012; that is, nothing in the record demonstrates that either Hilley or any Nova personnel asked Soucy to execute or otherwise agree to a waiver for that tour, either by verbally asking her or by presenting her with a written agreement. Nor has Nova provided any affidavit evidencing, or even an argument by Nova concerning, its intent for this verbal agreement.

Because the defendant could not and did not offer any evidence that it had the same intent as the plaintiff, there was no proof of the intent to contract by the defendant, and the motion was denied.

However, for an oral agreement to be enforceable, there must be mutual assent from both parties. The evidence proffered by the parties does not show that Nova intended to be bound by an agreement with Soucy to waive liability for the ATV tour on July 11, 2012. Because an issue as to this material fact exists, the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is denied.

Again, this is not a final decision. The issue can be reargued before or at trial with the defendant showing the intent to contract.

So Now What?

There are several major flaws in this case by the defendant besides not being able to prove the intent to contract. This is a classic case of making your release complicated thinking it will save your butt, and the complications created a nightmare.

The first is the defendant is using a release with check boxes. If the wrong box is checked or not checked, then the release has no value. The same thing could have been accomplished, and the case ended if the boxes were eliminated.

The second is no system to make sure the release is signed by all adults and by adults for all children before the trip starts. The classic example was a rafting company that required participants to hand in their release to receive their PFD. No release, no PFD. No PFD you could not board the bus to go to the put in.

While working for one whitewater rafting company the shop manager realized one person had not signed a release. She ran and caught the bus before it pulled out and asked who had not signed the release. No one said anything. She said OK, everyone off the bus; you can get back on when I call your name. She had every release with her, and the bus was not leaving until everyone had signed.

The non-signer, not pretty sheepish, raised his hand and was handed a release to sign.

Normally, I write releases around activities. You can cover the risks of most paddlesports in one release for kayaking, rafting, stand up paddleboards, etc. Oceans pose different threats than lakes and streams so ocean activities are on a different release.

Here, however, the release combined the risks of human powered and motorized activities. Jeep tours and ATV tours probably run similar risks. However, they also have different state laws applicable to them. Mountain biking has different risks than hiking. Dependent upon the area where the mountain biking occurs and the hiking you might be able to cover the risks in one document.

However, to be on the safe side, I think three different releases should be used. Jeep and ATV tours on one, mountain biking on the second and hiking on the third. It would be easy to track them, having each one printed on a separate color of paper. You know based upon the color of the paper on the release what the customers are expecting and where they should be going.

Don’t make your release complicated in an attempt to make it work, or make it cover too much. This is one instance where killing a few more trees to write the release may save a hundred trees in defending a lawsuit.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FaceBook, Twitter or LinkedIn

Copyright 2015 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law

Email: Rec-law@recreation-law.com

Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog: www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

By Recreation Law       Rec-law@recreation-law.com              James H. Moss

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, Jeep Tours, ATV, Mtn. Bike, Hiking, All Terrain Vehicle, All-Terrain Vehicle, Nova Guides, Release, Meeting of the Minds,

 


Soucy, v. Nova Guides, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95438

Soucy, v. Nova Guides, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95438

Megan Soucy, Plaintiff, v. Nova Guides, Inc., Defendant.

Civil Action No. 14-cv-01766-MEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95438

July 20, 2015, Decided

July 20, 2015, Filed

COUNSEL: [*1] For Megan Soucy, Plaintiff: Gregory A. Gold, Sommer D. Luther, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Gold Law Firm, L.L.C, The, Greenwood Village, CO; Joel Stuart Rosen, Cohen Placitella & Roth, Philadelphia, PA.

For Nova Guides, Inc., Defendant: David James Nowak, Tracy Lynn Zuckett , White & Steele, P.C., Denver, CO.

JUDGES: Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge.

OPINION BY: Michael E. Hegarty

OPINION

ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge.

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [filed May 28, 2015; docket #18]. The motion is fully briefed, and the Court finds that oral argument will not assist in its adjudication of the motion. Based on the record herein and for the reasons that follow, the Court denies the Defendant’s motion.1

1 On September 8, 2014, the parties consented to this Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

BACKGROUND

I. Procedural History

Plaintiff Megan Soucy (“Soucy”) initiated this action on June 24, 2014, alleging essentially that Defendant Nova Guides, Inc. (“Nova”) was negligent in causing her injuries when the all-terrain vehicle (“ATV”) she was driving overturned during a trail ride. Complaint, docket #1. In response to the Complaint, Nova filed [*2] an Answer asserting 13 affirmative defenses, including “Plaintiff’s claims may be barred or limited by contracts entered into by the parties.” Answer, docket #7.

Thereafter, the Court held a Scheduling Conference on September 22, 2014 at which the Court set deadlines for discovery and the filing of dispositive motions. Dockets ## 12, 13. Discovery progressed and, well before the deadline, Nova filed the present motion for summary judgment arguing no triable issues exist as to whether Soucy contractually waived her claims in this action. See docket #18. Specifically, Nova contends that its Waiver of Liability is valid pursuant to Colorado law and the waiver is enforceable despite lacking Plaintiff’s signature. Id.

Soucy counters that she was never presented with nor signed a Waiver of Liability before the July 11, 2012 tour during which she was injured. She argues that the July 9, 2012 waiver she signed before a Jeep tour did not apply to the July 11 ATV tour, since only the Jeep tour was referenced in the July 9 waiver. She further asserts that any release that may be construed as signed on her behalf by her mother is unenforceable. Finally, Soucy contends that any evidence of her intent [*3] is factually and legally irrelevant.

Nova replies arguing that Soucy’s own testimony demonstrates she intended to be bound by the Waiver of Liability, despite its lack of her signature.

II. Findings of Fact

The Court makes the following findings of fact viewed in the light most favorable to Soucy, who is the non-moving party in this matter.

1. While vacationing in Vail, Colorado in July 2012, Soucy, her mother, and her sisters participated in a jeep tour on July 9, 2012 and an ATV tour on July 11, 2012, both guided by Ben Hilley of Nova Guides, Inc. Deposition of Megan Soucy, April 6, 2015 (“Soucy Depo”), 97: 20-25; 129: 12 – 130: 16, docket #19-1.

2. Soucy was 20 years old in July 2012. Id., 136: 23 – 137: 4.

3. Based on her past experience, Soucy understood she must typically execute a waiver of liability before engaging in activities such as “ATVing” and the “safari trip” (also referred to as the “Jeep tour”). Id., 143: 13-20; 145: 16-20.

4. Prior to participating in the Jeep tour on July 9, 2012, Soucy signed a Lease Agreement and Waiver of Liability, on which a handwritten check mark appears next to “Jeep tour” as the type of tour selected (the other options are “ATV,” “Mtn. Bike,” and “Hiking”). Id., 144: [*4] 4-145: 7; see also Nova Guides Lease Agreement and Waiver of Liability, July 9, 2012, docket #19-2.

5. Nova’s Waiver of Liability includes the following language:

PARTICIPANT’S AGREEMENT TO ASSUME THE RISKS OF PERSONAL INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH MOUNTAIN BIKING, ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE RIDING, HIKING, AND JEEP TOURS AND TO RELEASE NOVA GUIDES, INC., ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS, THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE, AND THE U.S. GOVERNMENT FROM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY IN CONNECTION WITH MOUNTAIN BIKING, ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE RIDING, HUMMER AND JEEP TOURING ACTIVITIES.

*THIS IS A RELEASE OF LIABILITY. PLEASE READ BEFORE SIGNING. DO NOT SIGN OR INITIAL THE RELEASE IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND OR DO NOT AGREE WITH ITS TERMS.

1. I/We have asked to participate in the sports of mountain biking, all terrain vehicle riding, hiking, and jeep touring and related activities with Nova Guides, Inc. … I understand mountain biking, all terrain vehicle use, hiking and jeep touring also include the risk of falling from said vehicles. I understand that accidents or illness can occur in remote places without medical facilities. … I understand that route or activity, chosen as a part of our outdoor [*5] adventure may not be the safest, but has been chosen for its interest. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF MOUNTAIN BIKING, ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE RIDING, HIKING, JEEP TOURING, like all outdoor activities involve the risk of contact with wild animals, falls, equipment failure, collisions and/or contact with manmade or natural objects and other riders and drivers which can result in personal injury, property damage and death.

2. I expressly assume all risk of personal injury, death, and property damage set forth in paragraph 1 above which may result from my participation and my minor children’s participation in mountain biking, all terrain vehicle riding, hiking, and jeep touring and waive any claims based on negligence or breach of warranty I might assert on my own behalf or on behalf of my minor children against Nova Guides, Inc., its officers, directors, agents and employees, the U.S. Forest Service, and the U.S. Government for personal injuries, death, and/or property damage sustained while participating in mountain biking activities, all terrain vehicle riding, hummer and jeep touring with Nova Guides, Inc.

Nova Guides Lease Agreement and Waiver of Liability, docket #19-2.

6. Soucy recognized [*6] that operating an ATV involves a risk of injury. Id.; see also Soucy Depo, 154: 8-13.

7. Prior to Soucy’s and her family’s participation in the ATV tour on July 11, 2012, Soucy’s mother, Susan Pesot, completed and signed a Lease Agreement and Waiver of Liability, on which a handwritten check mark appears next to “ATV” as the type of tour selected. Deposition of Susan Pesot, April 7, 2015 (“Pesot Depo”), 92: 2 – 93: 7; see also Nova Guides Lease Agreement and Waiver of Liability, July 11, 2012, docket #19-3.

8. Soucy did not sign the July 11, 2012 Waiver of Liability. Id.

9. Pesot signed the waiver only on behalf of herself and her two minor children (Soucy’s sisters). Pesot Depo, 92: 12-17. She listed Soucy and Soucy’s other sister as participants on the ATV tour “because Ben told [her] to write down all the people who will be driving the vehicles.” Id., 93: 2-13.

10. Pesot did not sign the waiver on behalf of Soucy, who was not a minor, nor asked Soucy to sign the waiver because “that was not [her] responsibility to have [Soucy] sign it.” Id., 92: 12-25, 93: 1.

11. Also, Hilley did not ask Soucy to sign the waiver; however, Soucy would have signed the Waiver of Liability completed by Pesot on July 11, [*7] 2012, had it been presented to her by Hilley or Pesot and she were asked specifically to sign it. Soucy Depo, 215: 4-8 and 217: 7-15.

12. Soucy thought the Waiver of Liability she signed on July 9, 2012 “carried over” for the ATV tour in which she participated on July 11, 2012. Id., 144: 4 – 145:14.

13. Soucy participated in the ATV tour on July 11, 2012. Id., 171: 17-21.

LEGAL STANDARDS

A motion for summary judgment serves the purpose of testing whether a trial is required. Heideman v. S. Salt Lake City, 348 F.3d 1182, 1185 (10th Cir. 2003). The Court shall grant summary judgment if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions, or affidavits show there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). A fact is material if it might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing substantive law. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202 (1986).

The moving party bears the initial responsibility of providing to the Court the factual basis for its motion. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986). “The moving party may carry its initial burden either by producing affirmative evidence negating an essential element of the nonmoving party’s claim, or by showing that the nonmoving party does not have enough evidence to carry its burden of persuasion at trial.” Trainor v. Apollo Metal Specialties, Inc., 318 F.3d 976, 979 (10th Cir. 2002). Only admissible evidence [*8] may be considered when ruling on a motion for summary judgment. World of Sleep, Inc. v. La-Z-Boy Chair Co., 756 F.2d 1467, 1474 (10th Cir. 1985).

The non-moving party has the burden of showing there are issues of material fact to be determined. Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322. That is, if the movant properly supports a motion for summary judgment, the opposing party may not rest on the allegations contained in his complaint, but must respond with specific facts showing a genuine factual issue for trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e); Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380, 127 S. Ct. 1769, 167 L. Ed. 2d 686 (2007) (“[t]he mere existence of some alleged factual dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly supported motion for summary judgment; the requirement is that there be no genuine issue of material fact.”) (emphasis in original) (citation omitted); see also Hysten v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry., 296 F.3d 1177, 1180 (10th Cir. 2002). These specific facts may be shown “‘by any of the kinds of evidentiary materials listed in Rule 56(c), except the mere pleadings themselves.'” Pietrowski v. Town of Dibble, 134 F.3d 1006, 1008 (10th Cir. 1998) (quoting Celotex, 477 U.S. at 324). “[T]he content of summary judgment evidence must be generally admissible and . . . if that evidence is presented in the form of an affidavit, the Rules of Civil Procedure specifically require a certain type of admissibility, i.e., the evidence must be based on personal knowledge.” Bryant v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 432 F.3d 1114, 1122 (10th Cir. 2005). “The court views the record and draws all inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.” [*9] Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Pittsburg, Inc. v. Pepsico, Inc., 431 F.3d 1241, 1255 (10th Cir. 2005).

ANALYSIS

Here, it is undisputed that Soucy did not sign a form waiver of liability for the ATV tour guided by Nova on July 11, 2012. According to Soucy, that is the end of the story. However, Nova argues the lack of a signature on a written agreement “is not always necessary to create a binding agreement.” Motion, docket #18 at 10. Nova contends that Colorado law allows consideration of the parties’ intent in the formation of a contract. Id. Soucy counters that extrinsic evidence, such as the parties’ intent, “is not admissible in a case where the court properly determines as a matter of law that an agreement is unambiguous.” Response, docket #19 at 17. Soucy argues alternatively that, “whether the parties have entered a contract is a question of fact.” Id. at 18.

The Court finds that, because Soucy does not challenge the validity and enforceability of Nova’s waiver of liability, the question is not whether terms of a formal contract are ambiguous (since no formal contract exists between Soucy and Nova from July 11, 2012), but whether an agreement between Soucy and Nova was formed on July 11, 2012 before Soucy was injured on the tour.

Under Colorado law, contractual conditions may be express [*10] or implied. Lane v. Urgitus, 145 P.3d 672, 679 (Colo. 2006) (determining whether an agreement to arbitrate existed between the parties) (citing Goodson v. Am. Standard Ins. Co., 89 P.3d 409, 414 (Colo. 2004)). When interpreting a contract, courts consider “the facts and circumstances attending its execution, so as to learn the intentions of the parties.” Id. (quoting Eisenhart v. Denver, 27 Colo. App. 470, 478, 150 P. 729, (1915), aff’d, 64 Colo. 141, 170 P. 1179 (1918)). “In contractual settings, [courts] can look to the circumstances surrounding the contract’s formation in construing the contract, in order to carry out the intent of the contracting parties.” Id. (citing Lazy Dog Ranch v. Telluray Ranch Corp., 965 P.2d 1229, 1235 (Colo. 1998)); see also James H. Moore & Assocs. Realty, Inc. v. Arrowhead at Vail, 892 P.2d 367, 372 (Colo. App. 1994) (“Generally, whether a contract exists is a question of fact to be determined by all of the surrounding circumstances.”).

Whether the parties to an oral agreement become bound prior to the drafting and execution of a contemplated formal writing is a question largely of intent on their part. Mohler v. Park Cnty. Sch. Dist. RE-2, 32 Colo. App. 388, 515 P.2d 112, 114 (Colo. App. 1973). “That intent can be inferred from their actions and may be determined by their conduct prior to the time the controversy arose.” Id. (citing Coulter v. Anderson, 144 Colo. 402, 357 P.2d 76 (Colo. 1960)); see also Moore, 892 P.2d at 372.

“A release [of liability] is an agreement to which the general rules of interpretation and construction apply.” Squires v. Breckenridge Outdoor Educ. Ctr., 715 F.3d 867, 878 (10th Cir. 2013). In Squires, the court analyzed extrinsic evidence including a letter and the plaintiff’s statements of belief to determine whether a waiver of liability was [*11] procured through fraudulent inducement. Id. at 878-79.

Here, in response to questions by Nova’s counsel, Soucy testified during her deposition that:

o Based on her past experience, she understood she must typically execute a waiver of liability before engaging in activities such as “ATVing” and the “Jeep tour”;

o Prior to participating in the Jeep tour on July 9, 2012, she signed a Nova Guides Lease Agreement and Waiver of Liability;

o She recognized that operating an ATV involves a risk of injury;

o She did not sign an identical form Waiver of Liability prior to participating in the ATV tour on July 11, 2012;

o She would have signed the Waiver of Liability completed by her mother on July 11, 2012, had it been presented to her by Hilley or her mother and she were asked specifically to sign it; and

o She thought the Waiver of Liability she signed on July 9, 2012 “carried over” for the ATV tour in which she participated on July 11, 2012.

While Soucy’s counsel asked her questions during the deposition, his questions did not concern any waiver of liability. Soucy Depo, 254: 9 – 255: 17. In addition, Soucy did not provide an affidavit or other testimony in response to the present motion. Nova argues that [*12] “the clear, undisputed evidence from plaintiff’s own testimony is that she intended to assent and be bound by Nova Guide’s Waiver of Liability when she participated in the July 11, 2012 ATV tour.” Reply, docket #22 at 5. The Court must agree.

At her deposition, Soucy confirmed not only that she understood the concept of a waiver of liability, but also that she was familiar with such a document, as she had executed waivers in the past.

Q. Are you familiar with the concept of a waiver of liability?

A. Yes.

Q. Have you executed those type of documents in certain situations where you wanted to do an activity and it required a waiver?

A. Yes, yes.

Soucy Depo, 125: 1-7. Moreover, with respect to the tours with Nova in July 2012, Soucy testified that, had a waiver of liability been presented to her on July 11, 2012, she would have signed it. Id., 215: 4-8 and 217: 7-15. In fact, Soucy attested that she believed the waiver of liability she executed on July 9, 2012 for the Jeep tour carried over for her participation in the July 11, 2012 ATV tour.

Q. — did you understand before engaging in an activity such as ATV’ing, that you would typically execute a waiver of liability?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

Q. So that’s [*13] something you were familiar with. Did you at the time think that that was the document that he gave your mother?

A. I think, actually, the day before, when we got on that thing, Melissa and I filled something out.

Q. So you think that when you kind of took the safari trip —

A. Right.

Q. — where you were in a vehicle, that you actually filled something out?

A. We may have, yeah.

Q. You, yourself, as opposed to your mother?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you read it?

A. I don’t remember.

Q. Do you remember what it was or what it said?

A. No.

Q. And when you say “we,” do you mean you and all your sisters?

A. Melissa and I, separate from my mom.

Q. Did your mother also execute a document on the safari trip?

A. I believe so.

Q. And did Mr. Hilley, on the safari trip, explain what you were executing?

A. I don’t remember.

Q. Did you at the time think it was a waiver of liability?

A. Yeah. I think– and that’s why when we were in the car the next day, I just thought that kind of carried over or something.

Q. So when you were in the bus, going to do the ATV tour, you thought that what you had signed the day before carried over?

THE WITNESS: Right.

Q. But you generally understood that with respect to these type of activities, [*14] you did need to execute a waiver of liability?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

Soucy Depo, 143: 16 – 145: 20. Importantly, Soucy then participated in the ATV tour on July 11, 2012, which presumes that Soucy paid the required fee and Nova performed the requested service of guiding the tour. Soucy’s testimony does not appear to be vague. She assents to the proposition that she believed a waiver of liability she actually signed relating to one activity applied to another activity as well. She does not attempt to contradict that sworn testimony, so it was uncontroverted.

Accordingly, the Court concludes it is not disputed that Soucy paid for a commercial service, willingly received that service, and believed the waiver she signed on July 9, 2012 — in which she “assume[d] the risk of personal injury, death, and property damage … which may result from [her] participation … in … all terrain vehicle riding” and waived “any claims based on negligence or breach of warranty [she] might assert on [her] own behalf … against Nova Guides, Inc.” — was valid and necessary for her participation in the ATV tour on July 11, 2012.

However, an agreement requires intent to be bound by all parties. “A contract implied in [*15] fact arises from the parties’ conduct that evidences a mutual intention to enter into a contract, and such a contract has the same legal effect as an express contract. … [thus, t]o be enforceable, a contract requires mutual assent to an exchange for legal consideration.” Winter v. Indus. Claim Appeals Office, 321 P.3d 609, 614, 2013 COA 126 (Colo. App. 2013) (citations omitted) (emphasis added). Nova has proffered no evidence of its intention that Soucy be bound by an agreement to waive liability for the ATV tour on July 11, 2012; that is, nothing in the record demonstrates that either Hilley or any Nova personnel asked Soucy to execute or otherwise agree to a waiver for that tour, either by verbally asking her or by presenting her with a written agreement. Nor has Nova provided any affidavit evidencing, or even an argument by Nova concerning, its intent for this verbal agreement. Under the circumstances presented here, the Court will not infer such intention. See Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 323 (the moving party bears the initial responsibility of providing to the court the factual basis for its motion).

Accordingly, a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether an agreement was formed by both parties on July 11, 2012 before Soucy participated in the ATV tour and, thus, summary judgment is [*16] improper.

CONCLUSION

Soucy’s deposition testimony reflects her conduct, beliefs and intent regarding whether she agreed to waive Nova’s liability for any negligence claims resulting from the ATV tour on July 11, 2012. No genuine issues of material fact arise from this testimony or any other evidence provided by Soucy as to whether her assent to such agreement existed. The Court must conclude, then, that the evidence demonstrates Soucy’s agreement to waive Nova’s liability for the injuries she suffered on July 11, 2012.

However, for an oral agreement to be enforceable, there must be mutual assent from both parties. The evidence proffered by the parties does not show that Nova intended to be bound by an agreement with Soucy to waive liability for the ATV tour on July 11, 2012. Because an issue as to this material fact exists, the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [filed May 28, 2015; docket #18] is denied.

Entered and dated at Denver, Colorado, this 20th day of July, 2015.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Michael E. Hegarty

Michael E. Hegarty

United States Magistrate Judge


The Access Fund is starting an Anchor Replacement Program and Fund to “fund” it.

af-newsletter-header2
August 2015
Join-Give.png
facebook.png twitter.png instagram.png vimeo.png boxed.png
Introducing New Anchor Replacement Fund
anchor replacement fund_enewsThe Access Fund and the American Alpine Club are proud to announce a new joint grant program available to local climbing organizations and anchor replacement groups seeking funding for fixed anchor replacement at climbing areas across the United States. By partnering on this program, the nation’s two national non-profit climbing organizations are filling a need unmet by their existing climbing conservation grants–replacing fixed anchors at local crags. This grant program is made possible by corporate support from ClimbTech, Petzl, and Trango. “Across the United States, bolts installed in the 80’s and 90’s are aging, and there are growing concerns of anchor failure, incidents, and access issues,” says Access Fund Executive Director Brady Robinson. “While bolting standards continue to evolve, there is an immediate need to address aging and inadequate fixed anchors and increase support for local and national partners leading these efforts.” The inaugural Anchor Replacement Fund application round is now open, and applications are due by September 15. A joint committee made up of experts from both organizations and the anchor replacement community will manage the review process. Grant guidelines and forms can be found on our website.
Learn More
Save The Homestead!
Save+The+Homestead_enews.jpeg

With over 250 sport climbs on 12 limestone walls, The Homestead in central Arizona is one of the best winter limestone climbing areas in the country. The climbing at The Homestead, as well as the access point, is on a complex matrix of private, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and state trust land. In 2014, the bank foreclosed on the 1,687-acre Dripping Springs Ranch, which overlapped key portions of the access road, trailhead, and first few dozen routes of The Homestead. If sold to a non-climber-friendly buyer, access to the entire Homestead area, including the coveted walls on BLM land, could have been lost. Now we need your help! Using funds from the Climbing Conservation Loan Program, Access Fund temporarily acquired the 360-acre northern block of Dripping Springs Ranch as an access point to The Homestead. But we need your help to raise $235,000 to secure permanent access and cover critical costs for the acquisition, public right of ways, and long-term stewardship. Access Fund is proud to announce a broad coalition of partners for this project, including the Arizona Mountaineering Club, Climbing Association of Southern Arizona, Concerned Climbers of Arizona, Queen Creek Coalition, and Southern Arizona Climbers Coalition. We are also working with the BLM and State of Arizona to record a public right of way across state trust land and repair the most eroded portion of the road.

Learn More
It’s Time to Rate Grants
Grant_Sign.jpg

Each year, the Access Fund awards grants to local climbing communities with worthy projects that preserve or enhance climbing access. The Access Fund Climbing Preservation Grants Program is an example of membership dollars at work in local climbing communities across the country, and you have the opportunity to review qualified grant projects and rate them, providing valuable input to our grant selection committee as to which projects you want your dollars to support. There are 8 worthy projects up for funding consideration during this round, including a climbing area acquisition, education and signage, two stewardship projects, a rescue team, two recreational agreements, and local climbing organization start-up. Please take a moment to rate these important projects.

Rate Grants
Action Alert: Tell Congress to Reauthorize LWCF
LWCF+climber-4_enews.png

We need your help to protect a critical land conservation tool. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is one of the most effective tools we have to conserve land and improve outdoor recreation opportunities–and it’s going to expire forever this September unless Congress reauthorizes it. The LWCF has helped Access Fund and its partners permanently protect multiple climbing areas, including Palisades Park in Alabama and Bozeman Pass in Montana. We are currently working on an acquisition at Castle Crags in California, which could be in jeopardy if Congress doesn’t act today. LWCF is funded by a percentage of the more than $6.7 billion in annual offshore oil and gas lease revenue, not taxpayer dollars. Every year, LWCF can receive up to $900 million of offshore gas and drilling revenue to spend on conservation efforts, though Congress often appropriates it at a lower amount. If you haven’t already done so, please take 5 minutes to help us protect this critical conservation tool. Use our easy-to-use letter writing tool to contact your Congressional representatives and encourage them to reauthorize the LWCF!

Take Action!
Access Fund Awarded Elite Land Trust Accreditation
ltac_seal_green_crop.png

We are proud to announce that Access Fund has been awarded land trust accreditation from the Land Trust Accreditation Commission, an independent program of the Land Trust Alliance. The Access Fund is one of 317 land trusts from across the country that has been awarded accreditation since the program’s inception in 2008. Accredited land trusts are authorized to display a seal indicating to the public that they meet national standards for excellence, uphold the public trust and ensure that conservation efforts are permanent. The seal is a mark of distinction in land conservation. “Land Trust accreditation is an important milestone for the Access Fund,” says Access Fund Executive Director Brady Robinson. “It helps strengthen our land acquisition and protection program and it illustrates to local climbing organizations, landowners, and partners that Access Fund is the leading organization in land conservation standards, tools, and resources when it comes to protecting and stewarding America’s climbing areas.” Since inception in 1991, the Access Fund has supported 55 land acquisitions in partnership with land trusts, public entities, and local climbing organizations, totaling 15,943 acres across 27 states.

Learn More
Inside Scoop: The Gunks
Gunks+Enews.jpg

Dreaming about a trip to the Gunks this fall? If you’re like most climbers, you pore over guidebooks for weeks or even months when planning a climbing trip, educating yourself on routes, descents, gear, and camping. But what about the local ethics, issues, and challenges at your destination crag? Part of being a responsible climber is knowing how to tread lightly–both socially and environmentally. In this Inside Scoop series, we connect you with local climbing access expert Pete Cody, Chair of the Gunks Climbers Coalition, to give you valuable insight into local ethics and issues at the Gunks.

Get the Scoop
Industry Buzz
  • Outdoor Industries Women’s Coalition seeks 50 CEO pledges to accelerate women’s leadership in the outdoor industry. Learn more.
  • Meru opens in select theaters across the US. Find a screening near you.
  • The Outsiders Ball raises $265,000 to get more youth outdoors. Learn more.
Upcoming Events
  • Second Annual Boulder Bash || Lake Tahoe, CA || August 21-22
    Get details.
  • Craggin Classic || Salt Lake City, UT || August 28-30
    Register today.
  • Red River Gorge Stewardship Training || Beattyville, KY || September 10-12
    Register today.
  • ROCK Project || Seattle, WA || September 19-20
    Register today.
Access Fund
P.O. Box 17010
Boulder, Colorado 80308
303.545.6772
info
Access Fund Website
Join
Renew
Donate
Shop
Banner photo generously donated by:
Merrick Ales

open.aspx?ffcb10-ff021171716605-fe5015767c670d7e7c13-fe9813727467077877-ff6b167275-fe7e1c797d62037f7c-ff971371


Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory needs a Community Education Coordinator

POSITION TITLE: Community Education Coordinator

Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory is looking for a motivated, dynamic educator and camping industry professional who will bring bird conservation topics to a variety of audiences, specifically through interpretive programs and summer camps.

POSITION DETAILS:

Organization: Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory (RMBO)

Location: Brighton, CO; The position is based out of RMBO’s Headquarters and Environmental Learning Center, with some travel to partner organizations around the Denver metro area and Front Range required.

Reports to: Education Director

Supervises: Seasonal Staff, Interns, and Volunteer Naturalists

Salary: Commensurate with qualifications: $29,000 – $33,000/year, plus benefits; this is a salaried, full-time, exempt position.

Schedule: The position will be required to work several weekend days a month, plus extended program weeks and hours during overnight camps and some day camps. Thus, applicants will need to be flexible and accommodate a variable weekly schedule.

Expected Start Date: As soon as possible

OVERVIEW OF ORGANIZATION, PROGRAMS, AND PHILOSOPHY:

Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory (RMBO) conserves birds and their habitats through an integrated approach of science, education and stewardship (www.rmbo.org). Our work radiates from the Rockies to the Great Plains, Mexico and beyond. Our mission is advanced through sound science, achieved through empowering people, realized through stewardship and sustained through cross-border collaborations. Together, we are improving native bird populations, the land, and the lives of people. We monitor and identify population trends, research habitat needs, engage landowners and managers in wildlife and habitat stewardship, and educate diverse audiences.

The organization was founded in 1988, and educational programs built around its banding stations and Bald Eagle Watch were part of operations from the start. Since then, RMBO’s educational agenda has grown to also include K-12 School Field Trips and In-Class Programs, Home School Programs, Adult Education Programs, Family and Community Programs, a Volunteer Naturalist Program, a variety of Citizen Science projects, and Day and Overnight Summer Camps. RMBO engages approximately 25,000 people each year across a broad geographic spectrum, with around 200 of these individuals participating in our Summer Nature Camps, which are based out of the organization’s headquarters and Environmental Learning Center at the north end of Barr Lake State Park in Brighton, CO.

Using birds as the hook, RMBO Summer Nature Camps offer day and overnight camp sessions for youth between the ages of 2 and 17, with an emphasis on providing opportunities to safely explore and learn about the natural world and conservation. Camp sessions are designed as part of a progression to introduce children to the outdoors at a young age and build their skills over time, taking our youngest participants from basic, sensorial interactions with nature to a more sophisticated appreciation and understanding of their place in the natural world. Camps range from two-hour experiences with 2 to 5 year-olds and their parents to ten-day overnight camps for 15 to 17 year-olds, the latter of which has participants learning about, conducting, and presenting scientific research projects and exploring careers in natural resources. Ultimately, the desired outcome for all of our programs is for participants to become more interested in the world around them and, subsequently, better informed and engaged citizens.

QUALIFICATIONS/REQUIREMENTS:

· Bachelor’s degree in natural resources area or environmental education/interpretation, with two years of working experience in a related field required; Master’s degree preferred. A combination of degrees or experience in the areas of wildlife biology, environmental science, or education is a plus.

· Experience developing, marketing, administering, leading, and evaluating environmental education/interpretation programs, especially day and overnight summer camps.

· Solid understanding of camping industry standards and risk management.

· Experience teaching environmental education school programs in formal and non-formal outdoor and classroom settings.

· Experience and confidence delivering scientific messages to diverse audiences.

· Strong communication with adults and children, and proven ability to cultivate relationships with families.

· Strong organizational, logistical, grant writing, and networking skills, with proven ability to handle multiple tasks and roles, prioritize, and meet deadlines.

· Experience in budget management.

· Strength in building and maintaining partnerships with diverse organizations.

· Proficient with Microsoft Office suite (Word, Excel, and Publisher).

· Responsible, creative, relational, enthusiastic, flexible, and resourceful team player; self-motivated, results-oriented, and dedicated to providing clients with quality and enriching experiences.

· Must be in good physical condition, able to lift/carry 40 pounds, and able to hike long distances at altitude.

· Specific knowledge and experience regarding bird identification, bird banding, ornithology, and natural history of the Front Range desired.

· Must possess a valid Driver’s License and have a clean driving record.

· Must pass Federal and State background checks.

· Current CPR and First Aid Certifications (WFR Preferred).

· Ability to speak Spanish a plus.

DUTIES/DESCRIPTION:

This position will be responsible for fostering the growth RMBO’s Summer Nature Camps, Family, and Community Programs by:

· Planning, marketing, administering, leading, and evaluating day and overnight camps for 2-17 year olds and parents during the summer.

· Assisting with the development and implementation of the Leaders-in-Training program, a summer camp volunteer/leadership program for 12-17 year-olds.

· Maintaining relationships with local and remote summer camp families/clients through regular communication, events, and programs throughout the year (reunions, family programs, etc).

· Planning, advertising, leading, and evaluating monthly family programs, partnership events with Barr Lake State Park, and pre-school programs.

· Leading RMBO’s annual Christmas Bird Count for Kids and coordinating with local organizations to promote other events around the metro area/state.

· Leading, coordinating, and implementing Bird Tales, a therapeutic environmental education program for individuals experiencing dementia, and other off/on-site interpretive programs for adults (at libraries, senior centers, rec centers, etc).

· Assisting with training, scheduling, and supervising of volunteer naturalists.

· Supervising education assistants, interns, and other staff as needed.

· Assisting with school programs as-needed (several days per week in April/May and September/October).

· Building partnerships and work with local communities and organizations to increase awareness of RMBO and our programs by representing RMBO at community events and meetings.

· Tracking all participant numbers, scholarships, and budget information and providing required information to School Programs Coordinator, Education Director, CFO, etc.

· Seeking out and applying for additional funding for this position, the education team, and scholarships for programs.

· Performing other duties as assigned, including facility, grounds, and site-based projects around the Environmental Learning Center.

To apply: Please email a cover letter, detailing your summer camp and environmental education knowledge/experience and your philosophy as to the development of children in the context of the camping experience, as well as a resume with at least three references (names, phone numbers, and email addresses) in a single document to: Tyler Edmondson at tyler.edmondson.

CLOSING DATE: September 1, 2015

RMBO Community Education Coordinator Job Posting.docx


Cal-Wood Education Center looking for a Full Time Environmental Education Program Director

CAL-WOOD EDUCATION CENTER

JOB OPENING – Full-time Environmental Education PROGRAM DIRECTOR

Cal-Wood is a non-profit organization located 15 miles northwest of Boulder Colorado in the beautiful Colorado Rockies. Our private 1,200 acre classroom has provided schools with award-winning residential/science-based education programs for the past 33 years. Students along Colorado’s Front Range, and beyond, spend three-days/two-nights at Cal-Wood studying local plants, animals, weather patterns, forestry, pioneer life, geology, pond ecology, and more. Instruction is tailored to each school’s academic needs. Students learn about Cal-Wood’s forest management, including fire mitigation, water conservation, and alternative energy. Our professional instructors also make a point of introducing students to the possibility of pursuing careers in science and natural resources management. In addition, Cal-Wood is a pioneer in customizing environmental education programs for linguistically diverse students. We are now looking to expand our facilities and be able to serve more school groups to keep up with our demand. We are seeking for a professional Program Director to help us achieve our goals.

Description of Position:

  • Develops a plan to increase school programs and summer camps.
  • Develops, coordinates, implements and evaluates all aspects of Cal-Wood’s science based school programs.
  • Develops, coordinates, implements, and evaluates all aspects of our summer camps.
  • Meets with classroom teachers to develop customized programs to meet the schools’ academic needs.
  • Responsible for all aspects of our environmental education curriculum.
  • Is responsible for all school programs scheduling and logistics.
  • Develops and implements marketing strategies for our EE school programs and summer camps.
  • Provides training, supervision, and leadership to our five instructors and two interns.
  • Builds partnerships with other youth organizations.
  • Provides professional communication with the rest of Cal-Wood managers.
  • Works with our land stewardship manager to incorporate aspects of our land management into the curriculum.

Qualifications:

  • Bachelor’s degree in Environmental Education, Natural Resources, Natural Sciences, Education, or a related field.
  • At least 5 years experience teaching environmental/conservation education and curriculum development.
  • At least 4 years experience coordinating residential EE programs with supervisory responsibilities.
  • Strong organizational and time management skills.
  • Strong communication skills with adults and children.
  • Ability to handle multiple tasks and roles, patiently and professionally.
  • Understanding of the Academic Standards.
  • A good understanding of the natural resources management.
  • Experience in working with diverse audiences.
  • Experience marketing environmental education programs and summer camps.
  • People skills, team player, outgoing, creative, resourceful, critical thinker, results-oriented, and self motivated.
  • Have strong written and oral skills.
  • Experience in budget management.
  • Spanish speaker is a plus.
  • Proficient with MS Office suite (Word, Excel, and Outlook)

Salary: Very competitive. Benefits: ½ of health insurance paid, dental discount program, vacation, sick leave, and some meals on site.

Starting Date: Fall 2015. Applications accepted until the position is filled

Application Process:

To apply please e-mail cover letter and resume to infoatcalwood.org. Any questions concerning the position may be e-mailed to infoatcalwood.org. Please check our website for more information about Cal-Wood: www.calwood.org

Program Director ad.doc


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,541 other followers

%d bloggers like this: