7 Mistakes Made by People who are called Defendant

1.  Hire and retain Uncaring Employees: Hire Well, Train Well, and Treat Well

2.  Failing Know Your Customers and why they are buying from you.

3.  Failing to Treat Your Customers the Way They Want to Be Treated:

4.  Examining the problem from Your Perspective: Your customer sees the problem differently than you. The customer may not even understand the problem.

5.  Placing a ridiculous value on principles and pride. Principles & Pride Goeth Before a Lawsuit

6.  Never know Why you are being sued: Sticking your head in the sand, or passing the problem to a lawyer does not resolve the problem.

7.  Forgetting What Your Mother Taught You: If you act like your mother taught you, you won’t be sued.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Copyright 2011 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreation.Law@Gmail.com

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

#RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law #Fitness.Law, #Ski.Law, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law, #Recreation-Law.com, #Outdoor Law, #Recreation Law, #Outdoor Recreation Law, #Adventure Travel Law, #law, #Travel Law, #Jim Moss, #James H. Moss, #Attorney at Law, #Tourism, #Adventure Tourism, #Rec-Law, #Rec-Law Blog, #Recreation Law, #Recreation Law Blog, #Risk Management, #Human Powered, #Human Powered Recreation,# Cycling Law, #Bicycling Law, #Fitness Law, #Recreation-Law.com, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #Ice Climbing, #Rock Climbing, #Ropes Course, #Challenge Course, #Summer Camp, #Camps, #Youth Camps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, #RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law #Fitness.Law, #SkiLaw, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law, #RecreationLaw.com, #OutdoorLaw, #RecreationLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #Law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #AttorneyatLaw, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #RecLaw, #RecLawBlog, #RecreationLawBlog, #RiskManagement, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation,# CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #RecreationLaw.com, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding,

WordPress Tags: Mistakes,Made,People,Defendant,Hire,Employees,Train,Treat,Customers,Want,Perspective,customer,pride,Principles,Goeth,Lawsuit,lawyer,Mother,Taught,Leave,Recreation,Edit,Gmail,Twitter,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Outdoor,Adventure,Travel,Blog,Mobile,Site,Outside,Moss,James,Attorney,Tourism,Risk,Management,Human,Rock,Ropes,Course,Challenge,Summer,Camp,Camps,Youth,Areas,Negligence,SkiLaw,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,AdventureTravelLaw,TravelLaw,JimMoss,JamesHMoss,AttorneyatLaw,AdventureTourism,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,RecreationLawBlog,RiskManagement,HumanPoweredRecreation,CyclingLaw,BicyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,RopesCourse,ChallengeCourse,SummerCamp,YouthCamps

Schoeps v. Whitewater Adventures LLC 136 Fed.Appx. 966, 2005 WL 1523438 (C.A.9 (Cal.))

Schoeps v. Whitewater Adventures LLC 136 Fed.Appx. 966, 2005 WL 1523438 (C.A.9)

This case was not selected for publication in the Federal Reporter. This case was not selected for publication in the Federal Reporter. Please use FIND to look at the applicable circuit court rule before citing this opinion. (FIND CTA9 Rule 36-3.)

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.
Hubert; Christiane Schoeps, as heirs and beneficiaries of Sandra Schoeps, deceased, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.; Mark Gholson, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-17071.
Submitted June 15, 2005.^FN*
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. SeeFed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
Decided June 29, 2005.
*966 Gerald C. Sterns, Esq., Susie Injijian, Esq., Brenda Posada, Esq., Sterns & Walker, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Dena M. Roche, Esq., Jeremy Sugarman, Gordon-Creed Kelley Holl & Sugerman, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
*967 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-02-04784-JSW.
Before: TALLMAN, BYBEE, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^FN**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Hubert and Christiane Schoeps brought a diversity jurisdiction wrongful death action against Whitewater Adventures and its managing owner, Mark Gholson, alleging negligence, breach of contract, and intentional misrepresentation arising from the death of their daughter, Sandra Schoeps, during a whitewater rafting trip organized by the defendants. The district court granted the defendants summary judgment on all claims. The Schoeps appeal only the dismissal of their negligence claim against Whitewater Adventures. We review de novo the grant of summary judgment. Buono v. Norton, 371 F.3d 543, 545 (9^th Cir.2004).

[1] We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. The district court correctly concluded that California law precludes recovery for Sandra’s personal injuries because she expressly assumed the risk of harm when she signed Whitewater Adventures’ liability release form before participating in the whitewater rafting activity. See Sweat v. Big Time Auto Racing, Inc., 117 Cal.App.4^th 1301, 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 678, 681 (2004) (citation omitted). On the whole, the release is in plain language, contains a clear and comprehensive outline of the kinds of harm that may occur, and has the clear import of relieving Whitewater Adventures of liability for negligence or other harms. See Saenz v. Whitewater Voyages, Inc., 226 Cal.App.3d 758, 276 Cal.Rptr. 672, 676-77 (1990).

[2] Moreover, we conclude that the liability release was not unconscionable. See Ilkhchooyi v. Best, 37 Cal.App.4^th 395, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 766, 774-75 (1995) (noting that unconscionability has “procedural and substantive elements, both of which must be present to invalidate a clause”). Substantively, it is not unreasonable or unexpected for an organizer of adventure sports to reallocate risk to the participants through a liability waiver. See, e.g., Ford v. Gouin, 3 Cal.4^th 339, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724, 728 (1992). Procedurally, there were no hidden terms in the liability release, and the most oppressive aspect of the situation was that if Sandra refused to sign it she could not go with the group on the river and might be stuck without transportation in an isolated area. But this was not caused by any action or inaction on Whitewater Adventures’ part; nor is there any evidence in the record that Denyse Caven, who had driven Sandra to the meeting point, would have been unwilling to leave with Sandra or to let Sandra drive herself, nor that no other transportation was available. The district court recognized that Sandra had only a few minutes to decide whether to sign the release and would have lost her pre-paid ticket price had she refused to sign. However, this is not sufficient to constitute oppression or lack of meaningful choice, particularly insofar as Sandra had been given a brochure before the rafting trip in which Whitewater Adventures stated: “[w]e require all trip participants to sign a liability release*968 waiver before embarking on your trip.” See Ilkhchooyi, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d at 775.

We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, San Jose Christian Coll. v. City of Morgan Hill, 360 F.3d 1024, 1030 (9^th Cir.2004), and therefore do not reach the issue of whether recovery is also barred under the primary assumption of risk doctrine. See Ferrari v. Grand Canyon Dories, 32 Cal.App.4^th 248, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 65, 67-68 (1995).

The Schoeps’ maritime jurisdiction claim was not presented to the district court and so we do not consider it here. See United States v. Flores-Payon, 942 F.2d 556, 558 (9^th Cir.1991).

AFFIRMED.

High Country News is looking for bloggers

High Country News seeks a few more bloggers who will write on environmental justice in the West — spread the word and have interested writers e-mail stephanieo @ hcn . org.

This came from High Country News Facebook Page

the Leisure Trends Group “Most Active Americans Panel is Looking for more participants

Hey Friends – Click here to Join the Most Active Americans Panel 

Whether you love the ability to provide leading manufacturers, retailers and resorts your opinions on the leisure products and services you use, or are in it for the chance at great prizes such as outdoor gear, gift cards and even Hawaiian vacations, the Most Active Americans Panel is a great way to stay involved in the activities you love.


URL address link:
http://survey.leisuretrends.com/default.asp?study=5friend

Tell them Recreation Law Sent you.

Technorati Tags: Leisure,Trends,Group,Most,Active,Americans,Panel,participants,Friends,Click,Join,Whether,manufacturers,retailers,resorts,opinions,products,gear,gift,cards,Hawaiian,vacations,Tell,Recreation,Sent
Windows Live Tags: Leisure,Trends,Group,Most,Active,Americans,Panel,participants,Friends,Click,Join,Whether,manufacturers,retailers,resorts,opinions,products,gear,gift,cards,Hawaiian,vacations,Tell,Recreation,Sent
WordPress Tags: Leisure,Trends,Group,Most,Active,Americans,Panel,participants,Friends,Click,Join,Whether,manufacturers,retailers,resorts,opinions,products,gear,gift,cards,Hawaiian,vacations,Tell,Recreation,Sent
Blogger Labels: Leisure,Trends,Group,Most,Active,Americans,Panel,participants,Friends,Click,Join,Whether,manufacturers,retailers,resorts,opinions,products,gear,gift,cards,Hawaiian,vacations,Tell,Recreation,Sent

Volume 2(3): Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership is now available

Bowling Green, Ky. The Western Kentucky University Research Foundation, the Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education; and the Wilderness Education Association are pleased to announce publication of Volume 2(3) of the Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership.

The Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership publishes quality manuscripts to disseminate the latest knowledge related to outdoor recreation, education, and leadership to help develop theory and practice. The journal seeks quantitative and/or qualitative research findings; conceptual or theoretical discussions; or program practices. Relevant topic areas (centered on outdoor recreation, outdoor education, or outdoor leadership) for the journal include, but are not limited to: outdoor recreation, adventure recreation, outdoor education, outdoor leadership, pedagogy, administration, programming, risk management, wilderness medicine, certification, participant behavior, trends, diversity, training, and outcomes.

Abstracts (free) and full articles (available by subscription) are available at www.ejorel.com. Volume 2(3) includes the following:

1. Editors’ Notes – (Aram Attarian and Raymond Poff)

2. Residential Outdoor Education and Environmental Attitudes: An Examination in a Malaysian University (Md Amin Md Taff, Azlizam Aziz, Raja Nor Safinas Raja Haron, Nelfianty Mohd Rasyid, & Mazuki Mohd Yasim)

3. Can Family Outdoor and Countryside Recreation Help Reconnect Children with the Outdoors? Affluent Middle Childhood Perspectives of Countryside Recreation in the United Kingdom (Debbie Pearlman Hougie)

4. The Validity of Petzoldt’s Energy Mile Theory (Maridy McNeff Troy & Maurice Phipps)

5. Appalachian Trail Hiking Motivations and Means-end Theory: Theory, Management, and Practice (Edwin Gómez, Barbara Freidt, Eddie Hill, Marni Goldenberg, & Laura Hill)

6. An Exploratory Investigation of the Roles Friends Groups Play in National Park Management (Melissa L. Baker, Shashi Dhungel, Mae A. Davenport, Jessica E. Leahy, & Christopher A. Bridges)

7. Developing Trends and Issues in U.S. Outdoor and Adventure-Based Programming (Andrew J. Bobilya, Tom Holman, Betsy Lindley, & Leo H. McAvoy)

The journal advisory group (representing AORE, WEA, and WKURF) includes: Tom Stuessy, Ph.D., Green Mountain College; Raymond Poff, Ph.D., Western Kentucky University; Eric Frauman, Ph.D., Appalachian State University; Connie Foster, MLS, Western Kentucky University; Mary Williams, B.S., Wilderness Education Association; Rachel Collins, M.S., University of Utah.

Support for The Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership

The journal, hosted at WKU, uses resources available through TopSCHOLAR™ http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ a University-wide, centralized digital repository dedicated to scholarly research, creative activity and other full-text learning resources that merit enduring and archival value and permanent access. TopSCHOLAR™ uses the Digital Commons platform from Berkeley Electronic Press http://www.bepress.com

The Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education (AORE) http://www.aore.org/ provides opportunities for professionals and students in the field of outdoor recreation and education to exchange information, promote the preservation and conservation of the natural environment, and address issues common to college, university, community, military, and other not-for-profit outdoor recreation and education programs.

The Wilderness Education Association (WEA) http://www.weainfo.org/ promotes the professionalism of outdoor leadership through establishment of national standards, curriculum design, implementation, advocacy, and research driven initiatives.

The Western Kentucky University Research Foundation (WKURF) is organized to support Western Kentucky University efforts to promote the development, implementation, and coordination of extramurally sponsored programs involving research, instruction, public service, and to legally protect, manage and commercialize intellectual property resulting from research, scholarship and creative activities on behalf of Western Kentucky University.

Contact:
Dr. Aram Attarian, Editor-in-Chief
(919) 515-3709, aram_attarian@ncsu.edu
www.ejorel.com

Raymond Poff, Ph.D.
WKU Dept. of Kinesiology, Recreation and Sport
E.A. Diddle Arena 2042    Phone: (270) 745-2498
Associate Professor, Recreation Administration
Executive Director, Nonprofit Administration (American Humanics)

Please consider subscribing and submitting manuscripts to these two great resources for practitioners and academicians:

Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership
Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership

Technorati Tags: Volume,Journal,Outdoor,Recreation,Education,Leadership,Western,Kentucky,Research,Foundation,Association,publication,manuscripts,knowledge,theory,findings,discussions,Relevant,topic,areas,adventure,pedagogy,administration,management,medicine,certification,participant,behavior,trends,outcomes,Abstracts,subscription,Editors,Notes,Aram,Attarian,Raymond,Poff,Residential,Environmental,Attitudes,Examination,Malaysian,Amin,Taff,Azlizam,Aziz,Raja,Safinas,Haron,Mohd,Rasyid,Mazuki,Yasim,Countryside,Help,Reconnect,Children,Outdoors,Affluent,Middle,Kingdom,Debbie,Pearlman,Hougie,Petzoldt,Energy,Mile,Maridy,McNeff,Troy,Maurice,Phipps,Appalachian,Trail,Motivations,Means,Practice,Edwin,Gómez,Barbara,Freidt,Eddie,Hill,Marni,Goldenberg,Laura,Exploratory,Investigation,Roles,Friends,Groups,Play,National,Park,Melissa,Baker,Shashi,Dhungel,Davenport,Jessica,Leahy,Christopher,Bridges,Issues,Andrew,Bobilya,Holman,Betsy,Lindley,McAvoy,WKURF,Stuessy,Mountain,College,Eric,Frauman,State,Connie,Foster,Mary,Williams,Rachel,Collins,Utah,Support,resources,TopSCHOLAR,repository,text,Digital,Commons,platform,Berkeley,Electronic,opportunities,professionals,students,information,preservation,conservation,environment,professionalism,establishment,curriculum,implementation,advocacy,efforts,development,coordination,instruction,scholarship,Contact,Editor,Chief,Dept,Kinesiology,Sport,Diddle,Arena,Associate,Professor,Executive,Director,Nonprofit,American,Humanics,ejorel

Have we grown soft or stupid?

Article theorizes that we do not have the ability to determine when we are at risk anymore. 

An article Listen to your inner voice that warns of perilous activity brings to the forefront the issue that evolution might have dulled our senses to the risks of life.

The theory postulated in the article says we do not know the risk of what we do anymore. “We can’t tell the difference between being brave and being stupid.” Any sixth sense has devolved or has is just ignored.
Richard Culver, the senior director of security services for the American division of International SOS was quoted stating “More people die white-water rafting than white-water kayaking,” he says. “But people feel safer in a raft because they are with others and it is a large flotation device. Therefore, they tend to take on bigger risks, whereas in a kayak you’re more exposed and don’t feel as safe.“”

There are more reasons for this theory, if the argument is valid. Novices go rafting, rarely do novices go kayaking in whitewater where they can drown.

Another theory put forth in the article was a group mentality idea. As humans we feel safe in a group. However we don’t have the skills to use the group to protect ourselves. Musk ox in the arctic when threatened group together with the young and vulnerable in the center of the group. Predators must face the bulls to attack an individual. Predators are able to pick off humans in the group no matter how safe they may feel because we are not thinking like a group. (And this is without the rules changing or the group changing like those groups on TV.) It is just a mass of individuals, consequently there is no protection in a group, even though we think, feel like there is.

I have several personal theories about this. In the US we have become accustomed to the governments keeping us safe or if we do get injured we get rich. On top of that our medical care has been able to bring back hundreds of people from death, most to the same life they had before their injuries. The idea that we need to protect ourselves is just gone, the government does that why should we protect ourselves.

That theory of government protection vaporizes once we leave the US. However that feeling does not. US travelers are always shocked when they are injured and instead of flight for life, a donkey shows up to transport injured travelers to the hospital. I’ve heard stories of US citizens refusing to be transported by donkey or litter believing that flight for life is on its way. There is no flight for life when there are no helicopters.

Another idea I keep bouncing around is the “I saw it on TV/magazine/online and I know I can do that too!” Every little kid who is signed up for a ski lesson first asks, “When are we going to the terrain park?” They may not be able to stand up on their skis or board, but they are ready for the X Games in their mind. That I’m ready I can do it mentality does not fade when we get older and in a few cases seems to intensify.

Whether it is keeping up with Bob next door, reliving old glories or creating new ones, we just don’t understand getting old or we fear getting old and not having accomplished anything. (Thank heavens I’ve not gotten old!)

What does this mean? If you are someone in this group, buy more health and disability insurance. Buy travel insurance and rescue insurance and be prepared….to die. If you lead trips like this you need to do a better job of informing your guests of the risks of what you are doing. We are so driven to get that dollar that we forget that we are taking neophytes (my term for idiots in some cases) into places they cannot survive on their own and may not survive with you.

See Listen to your inner voice that warns of perilous activity
 

 
Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreation.Law@Gmail.com
 

If a tree falls in the woods, is there someone around to start a lawsuit?

It’s the woods, where do you think you are?

Another person has filed a lawsuit claiming injuries from a tree that fell on them. In this case, the person was driving through the Rogue River National Forest when a tree fell and hit his truck.

He is suing the US Forest Service and a lumber company that was supposed to cut the tree down. By failing to cut the tree down, the USFS and lumber company are allegedly liable.

Trees fall over. If you don’t want to get hit by a tree, stay out of the woods. 

Jack London wrote about trees falling in the woods, and I suspect that trees have been falling a lot longer than that and they will continue to fall in the future. When a tall thing no longer has support it falls over. If you don’t believe this, go to any bar where tall people drink excessively.

Please fight this one and do not settle. Unless the US Forest service and the lumber company fight this lawsuit, eventually the woods will be closed or woods will be a field. The government does not like paying out money, and it will be easy to close anyplace that has any commercial activity in it rather than deal with idiots who claim the government should have made the place safe.

See Oregon man sues over tree that fell and hurt him.

Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreation.Law@Gmail.com

CALL FOR PAPERS: ILLUMINARE

ILLUMINARE: A STUDENT JOURNAL IN RECREATION, PARKS, AND LEISURE STUDIES

DEADLINE: DECEMBER 6^th, 2010
 
The Illuminare Student Journal is requesting submissions for the 2010-11 publication. The Illuminare is an online, open access, peer-reviewed journal that aims to publish original student work in the field of leisure studies.  Originally established in 1992 by students in the Indiana University Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Studies, the journal has been emblematic as the premier student-generated leisure journal. The Illuminare seeks to include manuscripts and dissertation abstracts from the five core specializations within the field:

      ·   Recreational Sport Administration
      ·   Park and Recreation Management
      ·   Outdoor Recreation
      ·   Therapeutic Recreation
      ·   Tourism Management

The deadline for submissions is Monday, December 6^th, 2010.  All manuscripts should be submitted electronically to the Illuminare at illumin@indiana.edu with the subject title reading “Illuminare Manuscript: (insert topic area).”  Additionally, see the attached document for guidelines for contributors.
Please let us know if you have any questions!
Illuminare Editorial Board

Austin Anderson (auanders@indiana.edu)
Rachel Smith (smitrach@indiana.edu)
Lauren Duffy (lnduffy@indiana.edu)

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreation.Law@Gmail.com

2010 Polartec Mad Possible Contest

Go vote!

Polartec has a contest that provides grants to College outdoor programs. The winner will receive $10,000. If you are on Facebook go vote for your favorite program.

For information about the contest go to Made Possible College Challenge. 

To vote on Facebook go here: 2010 Polartec Mad Possible Contest
 

 
Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreation.Law@Gmail.com
 

Temporary Outfitter Client Days Available on Beaverhead and Big Hole Rivers

See this announcement from the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department: Temporary Outfitter Client Days Available on Beaverhead and Big Hole Rivers

Application packets are available from the FWP regional office in Bozeman Applications must be postmarked by Dec. 31, 2010, and submitted to:

Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks
Beaverhead and Big Hole Rivers
1400 S. 19 th Avenue
Bozeman, MT 59718

For more information, contact FWP River Recreation Manager Chris McGrath at 406-994-6359 or cmcgrath@mt.gov or Regional Parks Manager Jerry Walker at 406-994-3552 or gwalker@mt.gov.

Winners of the 2010 National Outdoor Book Awards (NOBA) Announced

• Nature and the Environment.  Winner.  Adventures Among Ants.  By Mark W. Moffett.

• Natural History Literature.  Winner.  An Entirely Synthetic Fish.  By Anders Halverson.

• Natural History Literature.  Winner.  The Sound of a Wild Snail Eating.  By Elisabeth Tova Bailey. 

• Outdoor Literature.  Winner.  Kook.  By Peter Heller.  

• Outdoor Literature.  Honorable Mention.  Just Passin’ Thru.  By Winton Porter.  

• History/Biography.  Winner.  Pilgrims of the Vertical.  By Joseph E. Taylor III. 

• History/Biography.  Honorable Mention.  The Last Man on the Mountain.  By Jennifer Jordan.

• History Biography.  Honorable Mention.  Arctic Labyrinth.  By Glyn Williams

• Classic.  Winner.  Annapurna.  By Maurice Herzog. 

• Children Books.  Winner.  Camping With the President.  By Ginger Wadsworth. 

• Children Books.  Winner.  Captain Mac:  The Life of Donald Baxter MacMillan. By Mary Morton

• Children Books.  Honorable Mention.  An Egret’s Day.  Poems by Jane Yolen. 

• Design and Artistic Merit.  Winner.  Freshwater Fish of the Northeast.  Illustrated by Matt Patterson. 

• Nature Guidebooks.  Winner.  Tracks and Sign of Insects.  By Charley Eiseman and Noah Charney. 

• Nature Guidebooks.  Honorable Mention.  Night Sky.  By Jonathan Poppele. 

• Nature Guidebooks.  Honorable Mention.  Molt in North American Birds.  By Steven N. G. Howell.

• Outdoor Adventure Guidebooks.  Winner.  Exploring Havasupai. By Greg Witt.

• Instructional Category.  Winner.  Sport Climbing.  By Andrew Bisharat. 

2010 NATIONAL OUTDOOR BOOK AWARD WINNERS ANNOUNCED

POCATELLO, ID – Indiana Jones figures prominently among the winners of the 2010 National Outdoor Book Awards. It’s not, however, the Indian Jones of movies.  It’s the Indiana Jones of the bug world!
Mark Moffett, also known as Doctor Bug, won the Nature and Environment category with his book “Adventures Among Ants.”

“Moffett is no ordinary scientist,” said Ron Watters, chairman of the award program.  “His research on ants required days spent in steamy jungles, hanging from ropes, sleeping in huts, tents or in no shelter at all.”
“This is a guy who is totally committed to his science,” Watters continued. “He has had swarms of ants attack him, streaming onto his bare skin through any opening in his clothing–through his pants legs and through his sleeves and through the neck of his shirt.  He has been bitten and stung countless times.”
In one instance described in his book, Moffett was painfully bitten on the fingertip by an aggressive African driver ant.  He tried gripping the insect between two fingers to pull it off.  But the harder he gripped, the more than ant clamped down.

Finally in desperation, Moffett stuck his finger into his mouth and crushed the ant’s head between his teeth. That worked. The ant released its grip.

Moffett then proceeded to munch on the ant, casually noting the flavor as he might if tasting the hors d’oeuvres in an expensive restaurant.  The flavor?  It had a hint of nuttiness.

“In addition to ants,” Watters commented, “we had fish and snails as winning topics.”

“An Entirely Synthetic Fish” by Anders Halverson won the Natural History Literature category.  Halverson’s book is about rainbow trout, which is the most widely stocked fish in the world.  But recently biologists have realized that it competes with native fish, and, in a complete about-face in attitude, it is now being eradicated in some locations.

The Nature History Literature category had two winners.  The other winner, which Watters called “a memorizing work” is about a woman struggling to recover from a severe illness.

It is titled “The Sound of a Wild Snail Eating” and is written by Elisabeth Tova Bailey.  While confined to bed and barely able to lift her head, Bailey begins take interest in a common woodland snail residing in a flower pot that a friend has given her.  In time, the small creature gives her solace and hope in her battle against the disease.

A total of 18 books were honored this year’s National Outdoor Book Awards.  Winners of this annual award program represent some of the finest outdoor writing and artwork being published today.  The awards program is sponsored by the National Outdoor Book Awards Foundation, Idaho State University and the Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education.

In addition to works about nature, Watters highlighted two winners in the children’s category.  Both are historically accurate books for youngsters in the 8-12 age range.

“Camping With the President” by Ginger Wadsworth is about a camping trip taken by two icons of the outdoor world:  Theodore Roosevelt, our most outdoorsy president, and John Muir, the world famous naturalist.

The other book is “Captain Mac” by Mary Morton Cowan.  The book is a good choice for budding explorers and is about Donald MacMillan, a geologist, who explored the Arctic for nearly 50 years.
One highly creative work among this year’s winners, according to Watters is a book on surfing.

The book is by Peter Heller and is titled “Kook: What Surfing Taught Me About Love, Life and Catching the Perfect Wave.”

“This is no ordinary book on surfing, ” Watters said,  “It tells a good story, but it’s very much an introspective book.”

Complete reviews of these and the other 2010 winners may be found at the National Outdoor Book Award Web site at: www.noba-web.org.

Here is a list of winners. 

Nature and the Environment.  Winner. Adventures Among Ants: A Global Safari With a Cast of Trillions.  By Mark W. Moffett.  University of California Press, Berkeley.
Natural History Literature.  Winner. An Entirely Synthetic Fish: How Rainbow Trout Beguiled America and Overran the World.  By Anders Halverson.  Yale University Press, New Haven.
Natural History Literature.  Winner. The Sound of a Wild Snail Eating.  By Elisabeth Tova Bailey.  Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Outdoor Literature.  Winner. Kook: What Surfing Taught Me About Love, Life and Catching the Perfect Wave.  By Peter Heller.  Free Press, New York.
Outdoor Literature.  Honorable Mention. Just Passin’ Thru.  By Winton Porter.  Menasha Ridge Press, Birmingham, AL.
History/Biography.  Winner. Pilgrims of the Vertical: Yosemite Rock Climbers & Nature at Risk.  By Joseph E. Taylor III.  Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 
History/Biography.  Honorable Mention. The Last Man on the Mountain: The Death of an American Adventurer on K2.  By Jennifer Jordan.  W. W. Norton & Company, New York.
History Biography.  Honorable Mention. Arctic Labyrinth:  The Quest for the Northwest Passage.  By Glyn Williams.  Viking Canada, Toronto.
Classic.  Winner. Annapurna: First Conquest of an 8,000-meter Peak.  By Maurice Herzog.  Lyon Press, Guilford, CT.
Children Books.  Winner. Camping With the President.  By Ginger Wadsworth.  Illustrated by Karen Dugan.  Calkins Creek, Honesdale, PA.
Children Books.  Winner. Captain Mac:  The Life of Donald Baxter MacMillan, Arctic Explorer.  By Mary Morton Cowan. Calkins Creek, Honesdale, PA.
Children Books.  Honorable Mention. An Egret’s Day.  Poems by Jane Yolen.  Photographs by Jason Stemple.  Wordsong, Honesdale, PA
Design and Artistic Merit. Winner. Freshwater Fish of the Northeast.  Illustrated by Matt Patterson.  Text by David A. Patterson.  University Press of New England, Hanover, NH.
Nature Guidebooks. Winner. Tracks and Sign of Insects and Other Invertebrates: A Guide to North American Species.  By Charley Eiseman and Noah Charney.  Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, PA.
Nature Guidebooks. Honorable Mention. Night Sky: A Field Guide to the Constellations.  By Jonathan Poppele.  Adventure Publications, Cambridge, MN.
Nature Guidebooks. Honorable Mention. Molt in North American Birds.  By Steven N. G. Howell.  Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston.
Outdoor Adventure Guidebooks. Winner. Exploring Havasupai: A Guide to the Heart of the Grand Canyon.  By Greg Witt.  Menasha Ridge Press, Birmingham, AL.
Instructional Category.  Winner. Sport Climbing: From Top Rope to Redpoint, Techniques for Climbing Success.  By Andrew Bisharat.  The Mountaineers Books, Seattle.

Quick Links:  NOBA Website | Scans of Winning Book Covers  |  Full Reviews  |  Winner’s Webpage

Words: You cannot change a legal definition

No matter what the inside cover says.

Definitions of the words used by an industry cannot be defined by the defendant in a lawsuit. There is an assumption, a wrong one, that if we define words the courts will accept that definition. That works for a word that was created and defined by an industry, but not for a word, that has an already established legal or common usage definition. The word Standard is defined by the Supreme Courts in all fifty states. A slightly different definition may apply for some states however the definitions are quite similar. Colorado defined “standard” in Bayer, v. Crested Butte Mountain Resort, Inc., 960 P.2d 70; 1998 Colo. LEXIS 391; 1998 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2416, as:

“In the comment to this section, the Restatement explains that, “. . . the standard defined is normally a minimum standard, applicable to the ordinary situations contemplated by the legislation. This legislative or administrative minimum does not prevent a finding that a reasonable man would have taken additional precautions where the situation is such as to call for them.” Quoting the Restatement (Second) of Torts 288C (1965)….”

California defined standard as:

“The Restatement Second of Torts summarizes the prevailing view in these terms: ‘Where a statute, ordinance or regulation is found to define a standard of conduct for purposes of negligence actions, . . . the standard defined is normally a minimum standard, applicable to the ordinary situations contemplated by the legislation. Lugtu et al., v. California Highway Patrol et al., 26 Cal. 4th 703; 28 P.3d 249; 110 Cal. Rptr. 2d 528; 2001 Cal. LEXIS 5258; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 7124; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 8763”

Ohio defined standard as:

The Act directed the Secretary of Transportation to “establish * * * appropriate Federal motor vehicle safety standards.” Former Section 1392(a), Title 15. n5 “Motor vehicle safety standards” is defined as “minimum standards for motor vehicle performance, or motor vehicle equipment performance, which [*67] [are] practicable, which [meet] the need for motor vehicle safety and which [provide] objective criteria.” Former Section 1391(2). Minton, Exr., v. Honda of America Manufacturing, Inc. et al., 80 Ohio St. 3d 62; 1997 Ohio 356; 684 N.E.2d 648; 1997 Ohio LEXIS 2460; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P15, 083

You may argue the above quotes reference statutes, but there is no difference from a legal standpoint and other words for this discussion. If the term is legal, the courts are going to define the term no matter what you may want or believe. A definition found in a statute supersedes the definition found in the common law or common usage.

Standards exist whether or not any organization believes it. Standards exist in your organization; your standard is what you believe you should be doing. Whether your definition is the definition the jury will accept is a different story.

Standards are changed every day and are different from state to state, community to community, no matter what an organization does. The problem is the organization that is creating standards is putting those standards in place, whether you want them or not. We want to believe that a checklist is an easy way to run a business and avoid litigation. Checklists do not work. The checklist changes to fast and never fits every situation.
There is also a fallacy that standards can be defined to only apply to the situation the standards are meant to apply too. That is absolute fantasyland. To a jury of non-climbers, how do you show in a courtroom the difference between belaying at a climbing wall, a ropes course and on rock. Juries do not understand those differences and therefore the defense has to spend thousands of dollars hiring experts to show that difference between the two standards.

Climbing is not climbing. If you do not believe that, spend a day at any local rock where climbing gym attendees gather. The last two times I was at Eldorado State Park south of Boulder I assisted in rescues. In both cases, the people had come from a climbing gym climbing 5.xx and thought they could climb that level on real rock. Climbing route difficulty is subjective, climbing course setters for competitions go through classes.

How many of you in a college setting rate all of your routes versus commercial gyms that rate every route. Are you trying to entertain and provide recreation or are you educating. Educational groups do not worry about how many of their customers are climbing at 5.13 and how many are climbing at 5.4. They want people climbing. At commercial gyms, there is a desire to move people up the ladder. As such, there is a tendency to lower the rating make believe they are doing a great job.

Standards change and you must run your business your way. Go look at written standards and see which standards do not work or apply to you. Each of those standards is a possible lawsuit against you. Have the standards moved beyond your operation. If there are no written standards, you can operate at the standard of the time of your operation, unless it is deemed dangerous, or unless the written standard says you cannot.

As an example if the climbing wall industry standards had been discovered by the plaintiff in Lemoine v. Cornell University, 2 A.D.3d 1017; 769 N.Y.S.2d 313; 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13209, Cornell would be writing checks. At the time of the lawsuit the written standards of the industry where violated by Cornell. See NY State Law Does Not Prohibit Releases in All Cases.

More importantly, you need to look at two additional issues. 99% of the trade associations in the world do not create standards. Trade associations are created to promote their member’s interests or businesses.
Doctors do not create standards and they are sued every day. Ski areas, do not create standards. In fact, the attorney for the National Ski Area Association stated in a speech that the NSAA would never create standards because of the legal problems involved. Ski areas have more attorneys working for them, then most colleges. Industries that work with “things” that do not change or only change in within specific parameters create standards for those things.

Trade associations promote their members activities. Trade associations in our industry who do not promote their members go out of business. History is definite about this. This occurs even when they are being funded by larger organizations.

The worst part of this, in order to protect your business or university program, you have to fight any organization that promotes standards that will harm you. You have to put them on record that their standards are wrong. This sucks, but if you do not, you will be held in a court of law to the standards someone else created and applied to your program.

Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreation.Law@Gmail.com

Campbell v. Schwartz, 47 Mass.App.Ct. 360, 712 N.E.2d 1196

To Read an Analysis of this decision see

Maine Supreme court applies a broad definition to a well worded Good Samaritan Statute.

Appeals Court of Massachusetts,
Suffolk.
Nancy J. Campbell, administratrix, [FN1] FN1. Of the estate of John Campbell. v. Robert Schwartz & another. [FN2] FN2. Robert Gemler.
No. 97-P-2105.
Argued April 15, 1999.
Decided July 21, 1999.
Affirmed.
**1197 *360 Daniel C. Crane, Cambridge, for the plaintiff.
Peter A. Palmer, Worcester, for Robert Schwartz.
Edward L. Kirby, Jr., Boston, for Robert Gemler.
Present: PORADA, LAURENCE, & SPINA, JJ.
PORADA, J.

The principal issue in this case is whether the Maine “Good Samaritan” statute [FN3] bars the plaintiff’s claims for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering against the defendants. A Superior Court judge allowed the defendants’ motions for summary judgment on the ground that it did. The plaintiff appeals, contending that disputed issues of fact precluded the allowance of summary judgment and that the judge erred in concluding as matter of law that the defendants were engaged in rescue assistance at the time of the accident which resulted in the death of the plaintiff’s husband. We affirm.

FN3. Maine Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 14, § 164 (West 1980), provides in pertinent part as follows: “Notwithstanding any inconsistent provisions of any public or private and special law, any person who voluntarily, without the expectation of monetary or other compensation from the person aided or treated, renders first aid, emergency treatment or rescue assistance to a person who is unconscious, ill, injured or in need of rescue assistance, shall not be liable for damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by such person nor for damages for the death of such person alleged to have occurred by reason of an act or omission in the rendering of such first aid, emergency treatment or rescue assistance, unless it is established that such injuries or such death were caused willfully, wantonly or recklessly or by gross negligence on the part of such person.” (Emphasis supplied.)

The parties do not dispute that the substantive law of the State of Maine is determinative of the defendants’ liability to the plaintiff.

We summarize the pertinent facts, which do not appear to be in dispute. While in northern Maine, on the evening of January 16, 1994, at about 10:00 P.M., the plaintiff’s husband, John Campbell, the defendant Robert Schwartz, and Pat Haddigan decided to return on their individually-driven snowmobiles from the Medawisla camp, where they had been visiting friends, to the Kokadjo camp, where they were staying. The distance between the two camps was at least eight miles.

[FN4] Before leaving, Schwartz called the owners of the Kokadjo camp, Fred and Marie Candeloro, to let them know they were on their way back. Haddigan drove the lead **1198 snowmobile, Schwartz followed him, and Campbell brought up the rear. Although it was their practice to stop several times to make sure that each of them was all right, they decided not to do so that night because the temperature was around twenty degrees below zero. The first one to arrive back at the Kokadjo camp was Haddigan; Schwartz followed some five minutes later. Schwartz told Fred Candeloro that Campbell was right behind him. However, when Campbell didn’t arrive some twenty minutes later, Schwartz said he was going out to look for him. The defendant Gemler, who had been doing some work for the Candeloros at the camp, volunteered to accompany him because he thought it was too cold for Schwartz to go out alone. Both Gemler and Schwartz were aware that Campbell had been drinking during the day. Candeloro said that they could use his snowmobile, but he did not want Gemler to drive it. As a result, Gemler, who had no experience *362 driving a snowmobile, drove Schwartz’s snowmobile and Schwartz drove Candeloro’s snowmobile. After traveling some four to six miles in Schwartz’s opinion (but he also guessed it could have been more like two or three miles), they found Campbell approximately one-quarter of a mile from the trading post store. [FN5] When they arrived, he was trying to start his snowmobile, which had broken down. Schwartz attempted to start Campbell’s snowmobile and did manage to do so, but it stalled after being driven about one hundred feet. Because it was so cold and Campbell had been out in the cold for some time before Schwartz and Gemler reached him, Schwartz apparently made the decision to leave Campbell’s snowmobile behind and return to the Kokadjo camp. Instead of driving Candeloro’s snowmobile, Schwartz got on his own snowmobile. Campbell already had seated himself on the back of Schwartz’s snowmobile, even though that snowmobile was not designed to carry a passenger. Gemler was left to drive Candeloro’s snowmobile. Schwartz instructed Gemler to drive straight down the road behind him. Gemler did so but had trouble seeing to the other side of the road because of blowing snow. After traveling at least 600 feet, Schwartz realized that Campbell was no longer on the back of his snowmobile, and he stopped. [FN6] When Gemler saw Schwartz standing beside his snowmobile, he also brought his snowmobile to a halt. Schwartz told him that Campbell had fallen off. At that time, Gemler said he had struck something in the road which he thought was a log. Upon checking, they found Campbell unconscious on the road. Gemler checked Campbell for a pulse but could find none.

Campbell never regained consciousness and was pronounced dead at the hospital. When Campbell’s blood alcohol level was tested, it registered .34, four times the legal limit in Maine. The police report prepared by the investigating officer attributed Campbell’s death to Gemler’s inexperience with a snowmobile; Schwartz’s decisions to let Campbell ride on the back of his snowmobile rather than on the Candeloro snowmobile, which was designed to carry a passenger, and to return by the plowed road instead of the snowmobile trail to the Kokadjo camp, allowing *363 for greater speed; and Campbell’s inability, because of his intoxication, to have the necessary motor function to stay on Schwartz’s snowmobile.

FN4. By Schwartz’s estimate, the distance between the two camps was fifteen to twenty miles, and by Fred Candeloro’s estimate, the distance was eight miles.
FN5. From the record, it is unclear where the trading post store was in relation to the Kokadjo camp.

FN6. Schwartz recollected that he had traveled one-half mile before realizing Campbell had fallen off the snowmobile. The police report indicated that the distance was approximately 600 feet.

In depositions presented to the motion judge, Candeloro expressed the opinion that he did not consider Schwartz’s and Gemler’s original decision to search for Campbell a rescue mission but a “cautious mission.” He saw no need, when Schwartz and Gemler departed, to mount a search party or call for emergency aid, because from what Schwartz had told him, Campbell was not that far out from the camp, and Schwartz was capable of finding Campbell because of his familiarity with the trails. However, Candeloro further testified that knowing now that Campbell’s snowmobile was inoperative when he was found changed his opinion about the nature of the mission. He also testified that he would not, in twenty degrees below zero weather, send just one snowmobile out to look for someone but would send two out in case one broke down. Warden Roger Guay, **1199 who investigated the accident for the local police, testified in his deposition that when Schwartz and Gemler set out to look for Campbell, he did not consider that Campbell’s absence at that time presented a life-threatening situation. It was not uncommon for a snowmobile operator to get lost for an hour or so, and the seriousness of the situation depended on the preparedness of the operator for this eventuality. In Warden Guay’s opinion, when one is stranded alone in cold weather, with an inoperable snowmobile, and is legally intoxicated, those circumstances would create a potentially life-threatening situation. Guay also was of the opinion that for purposes of safety, a search party should consist of two separate snowmobiles and operators.

The plaintiff does not controvert these facts but argues instead that the determination of the legal significance of these facts was a question of fact and not of law. She further argues that the deposition testimony of Candeloro opining that Schwartz’s and Gemler’s decision to look for Campbell was simply investigatory, and Guay’s testimony that he did not consider a life- threatening situation to exist when a snowmobile operator is missing for an hour in very cold weather, would support a finding that Schwartz and Gemler were not engaged in a rescue mission. The plaintiff’s argument overlooks two material points. First, summary judgment is appropriate when the material facts are not in dispute and as matter of law their legal significance *364 warrants a decision for one party or the other. McHerron v. Jiminy Peak, Inc., 422 Mass. 678, 679, 665 N.E.2d 26 (1996). Allstate Ins. Co. v. Reynolds, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 927, 928, 685 N.E.2d 1210 (1997).

Second, the argument overlooks other testimony of Candeloro and Guay. Candeloro testified that his opinion about the nature of Schwartz’s and Gemler’s mission changed once they found Campbell and discovered that his snowmobile was inoperable. Guay testified that if the operator was intoxicated, his snowmobile inoperable, and the temperature twenty below, a life-threatening situation existed. This is, therefore, not a case where the fact finder could draw opposite inferences from the evidence presented. Cf. Flesner v. Technical Communications Corp., 410 Mass. 805, 811-812, 575 N.E.2d 1107 (1991). While we agree with the plaintiff that the judge’s reliance on “substantial evidence” in ruling that the defendants were engaged in a rescue mission is not the proper standard to apply, see Riley v. Presnell, 409 Mass. 239, 244, 565 N.E.2d 780 (1991), we nevertheless conclude that the on the record presented there were no material facts in dispute.
We now address whether those facts demonstrated that the defendants were engaged in rescue assistance at the time of the accident. The plaintiff argues that in order for the defendants to have engaged in rescue assistance, Campbell had to be in imminent peril or danger, and such was not the case when Schwartz and Gemler found him. The word “rescue” is not defined in the statute. Nor has the statute been subject to interpretation by the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Nevertheless, applying the usual maxims of statutory construction, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine has held that in the absence of a legislative definition, “the plain meaning of the term controls.” State v. York, 704 A.2d 324, 326 (Me.1997). Also, the meaning ascribed to the term must be “consistent with the overall statutory context and must be construed in light of the subject matter, the purpose of the statute and the consequences of a particular interpretation.” Reagan v. Racal Mort. Inc., 715 A.2d 925, 927-928 (Me.1998), quoting from Madison v. Norridgewock, 544 A.2d 317, 319 (Me.1988).

“Rescue” as used in ordinary parlance means “to free from … danger.” Webster’s Third New Intl. Dictionary 1930 (1993). Danger is defined as “the state of being exposed to harm.” Id. at 573. Applying these definitions, the judge properly held that where one’s whereabouts is unknown in rural Maine, late at night, in temperatures registering twenty degrees below *365 zero, a search for that individual constitutes a rescue. His conclusion is bolstered by the subject matter of the Good Samaritan statute. The immunity bestowed by its terms is conferred on persons rendering “first aid, emergency treatment or rescue assistance” to persons who are “unconscious, ill, injured or in need of rescue assistance.” There is, thus, nothing in its subject matter which limits **1200 rescue assistance to situations of imminent peril or harm. Rendering aid to someone who is ill does not necessarily imply imminent peril or harm. Nor is there anything in the statute’s limited legislative history which suggests that it was so intended. Its express purpose was “to provide immunity from civil liability to all persons who voluntarily render first aid, emergency treatment or rescue assistance to persons in need of it and to repeal the present provisions of the statutes which provide such immunity to the more limited groups of ski patrols, licensed ambulance personnel, physicians and nurses.” Legislative Document No. 1910 & H-604. Enacted Laws of Maine 1975, c. 452. Finally, while most Good Samaritan statutes limit the immunity from ordinary negligence to individuals voluntarily providing emergency care, see Annot., Construction and Application of “Good Samaritan” Statutes, 68 A.L.R.4^th 294, 299-300 (1989), the Maine Legislature’s use of the term “rescue” in place of “emergency care” suggests that the Legislature intended that the statute have a broader reach, thus fostering and encouraging aid among the populace not only to persons in imminent peril or harm but also to persons exposed or vulnerable to harm or injury. Contrast Me.Rev.Stat. tit. 30-A, § 456 (West 1987): “Each county may provide rescue services [defined in § 451 as “those services required to free or save persons from imminent injury or death due to accidents or other emergencies”] through the sheriff’s department and deputies.”

In sum, we conclude that the motion judge properly determined that Gemler and Schwartz, as matter of law, were engaged in rescue assistance when they went looking for Campbell. A search for an intoxicated person who is missing in rural Maine, late at night, with temperatures registering twenty degrees below zero certainly constitutes a rescue mission. See Barnes v. Geiger, 15 Mass.App.Ct. 365, 371, 446 N.E.2d 78 (1983). Although the judge did not specifically address the duration of the rescue mission, we conclude that the rescue did not end when Schwartz and Gemler found Campbell on the trail with an inoperable *366 snowmobile. Given his state of intoxication, the temperature, the hour, the inoperative condition of his snowmobile, and the apparent necessity for two operable snowmobiles, they were likewise engaged in rescue assistance when they sought to return him to the Kokadjo camp.

Judgments affirmed.
Mass.App.Ct.,1999.
Campbell v. Schwartz, 47 Mass.App.Ct. 360, 712 N.E.2d 1196

Upcoming Speaking Engagements at AORE.

I’ll be speaking at the Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education at the Keystone Conference Center November 12, 2010.

The first presentation is First Aid: Myths, Magic and Misconception from a Legal Standpoint which will be at 8:30 AM to 9:30 AM in the Crestone Peak II room. 

The second presentation will be Major Legal Issues in Outdoor Recreation and Adventure Travel Law at 1:15 PM to 2:15 PM in the Crestone Peak Room. 

For more information about Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education (AORE) go here. 

For more information about the AORE conference you can go here. 

Polartec contest for College/University Outdoor Programs

Your Program could win $10,000.

Polartec’s Made Possible Challenge gives any College or University program the chance to win $10,000 for the program.
This is from the website:

At Polartec, we understand that experiences in the backcountry, on the trail, atop a summit or on a river have the power to transform. The Made Possible Challenge is an exciting opportunity for us to support college outdoor programs and in turn, encourage students to get outside, gain valuable leadership skills and pass along the ethics of environmental stewardship. The winning outdoor program will receive $10,000 and be fully outfitted with Polartec garments.

To Enter, complete the form below and then submit either a short video or a document. In your submission, tell us what your club would do with the $10,000. We will accept entries until November 1 at midnight. At that point, we will choose finalists and the winner will be chosen in a public vote on our Facebook page. If you are chosen as a finalist, it will be up to you to win the votes of your friends, classmates and the public. For questions, please email MadePossible@Polartec.com. Good luck!

Go to the contest site to enter. 

There is going to be a hole in the industry Monday morning.

Tom Doyle is retiring from NSGA and NSSRA after 40 years.

Tom Doyle has spent almost 40 years with the National Sporting Goods Association providing its members with the most understandable and solid research and analysis of what is happening in the sporting goods world. On top of that for 20 years he headed up the National Ski and Snowboard Retail Association. Research was not Tom’s only job, but it was the one I think that the most people would see his work.
Tom not only knew what was happening, he knew why. I never had a conversation with Tom, when I did not come away with new insight and understanding of the industry. Sometimes my head might be spinning, but Tom’s information always made sense and was based on solid analysis.

Tom is retiring and his last day is today, Friday October 29, 2010. Things are going to be different for all of us who looked forward to his emails giving us a run down on where things were going and why.

Rep Gear Sale in Boulder

Rep Samples on Sale for 50% or more off. 

Several reps have decided to put on a rather impromptu sample sale this Saturday October 30, 2010 at 4299 Sumac Ct, Boulder, Colorado.  They will be selling product at 50% (or more) off of retail on great stuff.  If you’re looking for new gear and apparel it is not to be missed.  Product from the following lines will be available:

Time: Sale will be from 10 AM-4 PM.

No credit cards bring cash. 

Location: 4299 Sumac Ct, Boulder, CO 80301 

Please tell your friends and join us for great deals.
 

 
© 2010 James H. Moss

Want to be part of the Outdoor Recreation Industry?

Sign up to take polls about your outdoor industry experience and possibly win money. 

Leisure Trends Group is a polling and survey company that tracks everything in the outdoor recreation industry. Leisure Trends sends out a survey to members of its Most Active Americans Panel (MAAP) to take the pulse or gain insight about an issue in the outdoor industry.

If you complete the survey you are also in line to win prizes.

The information collected by Leisure Trends is then used for hundreds of different projects, groups and businesses.

Here is Leisure Trends call for more people to join MAAP.

Do You Know Other Active Americans?
 
We know that you probably hang out with other people just like yourself — ACTIVE. Do you think any of those people would be interested in becoming a MAAP member? If so, just click on the “forward to a friend” button below and let them know about the cool things we do at Leisure Trends. And to join the panel all they need to do is click on the link below to sign-up. Thanks for your continued readership, participation and support.

To become a MAAP member please click on the following link to complete a profile survey.
http://survey.leisuretrends.com/default.asp?study=panelfriend
 

 
Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreaton.Law@Gmail.com

My post Association Inbreeding is taking off on it’s own.

My post Association Inbreeding was picked up by Velvet Chainsaws Midlife Corrections (You got to love that title.) in an article Is Your Conference Guilty Of Incestuous Inbreeding Or Speaker Vanity Publishing?

There have been several comments and posts about his take on the idea. There are promises of future posts about finding money to hire speakers.

At the same time, there was a great comment to my post by Dan McCoy from the perspective a conference host.

Association Inbreeding

You listen to the same old people every year, because you need $299.00?

Many times I am asked to give presentations when an organization has a meeting in Colorado. As I work through the presentation process eventually someone tells me that I have to register and pay to attend the conference.

I don’t. I also don’t present if they think their money is more important than my time.

First, you have nothing and are doing nothing that I want to hear or see. I’m not sticking around. No rubber chicken, no boring speakers telling me the history of an organization I already know or don’t care about.

Second, I charge for my time and my knowledge and I was offering to give you a speech or presentation for free. I expect a letter in return thanking me and providing me with a tax write off. (If you figure one hour for the presentation, three hours to prepare, five hours round trip and presentation, that is nine hours or more than $3000 of my time.)

Third, all you are doing is inbreeding: dragging the intelligence of the attendees downhill.

If the only people who want to talk at your conference are those who attend the conference, you are simply reinforcing possibly wrong information. You start to believe what you are saying because you have no dissenting voice. You have no choice but to believe, because it is the only thing you hear.

Your conference becomes a computer, what comes out of the conference is only as good as what goes into the conference. If what is going into your conference is the same every year, then you are simply filling time and space rather than computing.

If the only people who communicate at the conference are the same ones, I hear all yearlong, why should anyone attend?

Signs of Association Inbreeding:

· Attendance varies based the location not the speakers, fun place more attendees.

· A lot of people plan on attending every other year or every three years.

· The people who are regular attendees are also the speakers.

· No one walks out of a presentation mad, upset, concerned or thinking they might be doing something wrong the entire conference.

From a legal perspective and from about every other perspective I can think of, you need new ideas. Your attendees need to find out what you are doing right and equally if not important find out what you are doing wrong.

You need new voices, new ideas, and new people making your attendees think.

I understand the finances of non-profits and trade associations. (I serve on four boards right now.) You need money. However, if you ask for money at the expense of the value of what you provide, you will go away no matter how much you charge. You may have a couple of thousand dollars in your account from desperate people who believe they have something to say and are willing to pay for it, but your association will eventually go away.

If you were a publishing company you would be called a “vanity press.” Before print on demand, there were a few publishing companies that if you paid, they would print your crap. You can see the results at yard sales when the heirs of the deceased give away a book with every sale: “Grandpa’s book on the trains of Calvarias County free with every purchase.” Other than a copy at the historical society, friends at the model train club and the nieces and nephews for Christmas, every single copy is still in the boxes in the basement. Bad grammar, bad theories and something 17 people really don’t care about.

Book awards automatically rejected submissions from vanity presses. They were bad.

Don’t become a vanity press. Don’t believe that because someone was willing to pony up your conference fee what they have something of value to present. If Vanity presses are any indication, the worst publishing in the world was paid for. The same can be said about your conference. Who wants to hear what someone paid to say because someone would not pay them to hear it?

Don’t believe that what you hear at a conference where everyone in front of you paid the same amount of money as you has any value. If I have to pay to say something, it is because I can’t find an audience that is willing to listen to me for free or pay me to talk.

If I pay you to talk, then what I have to say has no value.

Reach out and find new people who disagree with you, who do not just take what is handed to them at face value. Provide quality speakers to answers the questions your members have. Find someone who may never become a member but who has a value to your members.

Even better, you might provide such a valuable conference that the speaker’s becomes a member.

Besides, don’t you get tired of listening to the same old people year after year after year………

What do you think? Leave a comment.

© 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreaton.Law@Gmail.com

#recreation-law.com, #outdoor law, #recreation law, #outdoor recreation law, #adventure travel law, #law, #travel law, #Jim Moss, #James H. Moss, #attorney at law, #tourism, #adventure tourism, #rec-law, #rec-law blog, #recreation law, #recreation law blog, #risk management, #Human Powered, #human powered recreation,# cycling law, #bicycling law, #fitness law, #recreation-law.com, #backpacking, #hiking, #Mountaineering, #ice climbing, #rock climbing, #ropes course, #challenge course, #summer camp, #camps, #youth camps, #skiing, #ski areas, #negligence, #trade association, #conference, #conference fee, #anity press,

WrdPress Tags: Association,presentations,Colorado,presentation,conference,money,speakers,history,Second,knowledge,speech,intelligence,information,computer,Attendance,location,perspective,expense,dollars,account,theories,Book,submissions,pony,indication,audience,Reach,Provide,member,speaker,Recreation,Recreaton,Gmail,adventure,Moss,James,attorney,tourism,management,Human,youth,areas,negligence,attendees,blog
g

Explorers Club Seeks Executive Director

Work for a 100 Year Old Outdoor Institution in New York City. 

Explorers Club Seeks Executive Director – The New York-based Explorers Club is seeking applicants for the position of Executive Director to be responsible for the day-to-day management of the organization. Founded in 1906, the Explorers Club has 3,100 members in 19 domestic and nine overseas chapters. An e-mail copy of the position description and application form can be obtained from Matt Williams, Operations Director, at mwilliams@explorers.org. Experience in management of non-profit organizations is highly desired. Application deadline is November 15, 2010.

For more information about the Explorer’s Club go here.

 
Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreaton.Law@Gmail.com

Big Swap at Wilderness Exchange Tomorrow

Wilderness Exchange is having their annual gear swap Saturday October 9, 2010.

The Swap starts at 10:00 AM and ends at 4:00 PM.

For information about the Gear Swap go here! Wilderness Exchange is located at 15th and Platt. The Gear Swap will be in the parking lot in the back facing I-25.

I know that the following gear will be available:

Mammut Fall 10 products
Salomon footwear
Salomon apparel
Salomon nordic
Mammut packs
Mammut gear

Lots of sales Reps are known to sell their gear at this swap.

ILLUMINARE: A STUDENT JOURNAL IN RECREATION, PARKS, AND LEISURE STUDIES

DEADLINE: DECEMBER 6^th, 2010

The Illuminare Student Journal is requesting submissions for the 2010-11 publication. The Illuminare is an online, open access, peer-reviewed journal that aims to publish original student work in the field of leisure studies. Originally established in 1992 by students in the Indiana University Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Studies, the journal has been emblematic as the premier student-generated leisure journal. The Illuminare seeks to include manuscripts and dissertation abstracts from the five core specializations within our field:

• Recreational Sport Administration
• Park and Recreation Management
• Outdoor Recreation
• Therapeutic Recreation
• Tourism Management

The deadline for submission is Monday, December 6^th, 2010. All manuscripts should be submitted electronically to the Illuminare at illumin@indiana.edu with the subject title reading “Illuminare Manuscript: (insert topic area).” Additionally, see the attached documents for further information and guidelines for contributors.

Please pass this information along to anyone interested and if you have any questions, feel free to contact us.

Thanks!

Rachel Smith (smitrach@umail.iu.edu )
Austin Anderson (auanders@indiana.edu )
Lauren Duffy (lnduffy@indiana.edu )

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Copyright 2010 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law, Recreaton.Law@Gmail.com