Culture Clash?

[Chesney's Girl]

She screamed at the sight of sheep without having actually seen a dog, because she already KNEW there would likely be guardian dogs--but continued down the hill towards the sheep anyway, having alerted the dogs (by her own scream) that something dangerous was coming. Two nearby campers were able to drive off two large so-called "dangerous" dogs, who rather easily could have also attacked two more puny humans, but apparently they didn't. This wasn't the fault of anyone but Legro and her own stupid actions.

 

My sentiments exactly!

[Bill Fosher]

I don't know about the law in Colorado, but in the two states where I have written about civil litigation -- New Hampshire and Mass. -- in a lawsuit the jury could have been instructed to consider the rider's contribution to her own predicament, and the award would have been adjusted accordingly. For example, if the jury found that her damages were $100,000 and she was 90 percent at fault, she would have been awarded $10,000. I'm pretty sure that this is a common-law principle dating back hundreds of years.

 

In criminal cases, the matter is black and white: did the defendant commit a crime or not. In this case, the jury apparently applied the facts to the law and determined that the rancher had committed the crime of keeping dangerous dogs.

 

In any event, in a civil case, her own behavior would have been at question. In the criminal case, it probably couldn't even have been raised. The questions of fact probably would have been much more clearcut: did the Robinsons own the dogs, and were the dogs dangerous.

[Ooky]

While I can also see both sides of the story, Bill F is right in that grazing lease rights usurp some other public use rights, although sometimes the lease language is a bit TOO friendly to the rancher in question. I don't think lease rights should allow overgrazing or riparian destruction, for example, but that is neither here nor there. This rancher did have a right to have his flock there.

 

I disagree with Melanie's statement that the "backcountry" (which this area is not) should not be grazed. As we have lost many of our historic species and/or numbers of large native grazing animals, we need domestic grazing animals in grasslands across the country to keep them healthy. Now, if you want to debate keeping them out of or drastically reducing the number allowed in sage scrublands in the Great Basin, certain areas in the Mojave, or more arid forests, etc., that I can see real ecological reasoning for. But the absolute fact is that grasslands require large animals herds, and NEED to be grazed.

 

But the saddest thing about this story to me, and some of the comments, is that there is a percieved incompatibility of use. I mean that the rancher is saying, backcountry recreation gives you nothing but grins and giggles, but ranching gives you food. Or people are saying that ranching is going the way of the dinosaur and that recreation is where the use is really best served. But such dichotomies are missing the point. Open space is at a premium and is under assault. BOTH groups actually need each other in today's world to keep these areas open and usable for uses other than building condos, malls, roads, reservoirs, and ski resorts. (In this sense I am talking about recreation such as trail riding, mtn biking, camping, fly fishing, hunting, etc., not skiing or motorboating).

 

I've asked people I know with sheep in CA why they don't have LGDs, especially when their flocks are predated by mtn lions etc. I was told they are not compatible with people nearby and that if you have the possiblility someone could be on your land or near your flock, you can't really keep them. That made me wonder how some of you are able to - I still don't fully understand the issue.

[geonni banner]

I do not own or work livestock, nor do I own or ride a mountain bike. I have heard and or experienced many things, good and bad about people who do both. I can imagine, though, that there are good, bad, stupid, intelligent, careless and careful people who do both.

 

It makes me sad that two dogs mauled a woman. It makes me sad that those two LGDs that were probably carrying out their duties, as they understood them, are now dead. It makes me sad that the flock they once guarded is now without protection from predators.

 

I can see that both parties could have prevented such a thing from happening by thinking through the ramifications of their respective situations.

The rancher might have considered that clueless, “entitled” city types would inevitably be in direct contact with his dogs. He could have set up situations with his dogs and people who had not met them to see how they reacted, and chosen to train them to tolerate strange people or limit their use when there was a likelihood of them being exposed to strangers around “their” sheep.

 

The biker might have considered avoiding a big flock of sheep as a cautionary measure.

If, as someone else pointed out, the sight of a flock of sheep was enough to make her scream, she might well have made a wide detour to avoid them.

 

Certainly both parties should have been informed that there was going to be a likelihood of sheep and bikers encountering each other.

 

I can also see that it would easily be possible for a shepherd to be unaware that the LGDs were attacking someone at a given moment. After all, he/she cannot be everywhere at once. Presumably a shepherd has more to do than anxiously scanning the entire flock at every moment. My understanding was that this was a large flock, grazing a large area.

 

But what makes me saddest is that we live in a society that finds litigation to be the answer to everything. I see this incident as an accident – an “Act of God,” if you will. But it seems that there are no more accidents any more – there must always be someone to blame. We can no longer simply try to help each other through the fallout of an unfortunate accident and learn how to avoid it happening again. We must draw apart, close our ears to dialog, and seek restitution.

 

As yet another person pointed out, common sense is increasingly uncommon. So, it would seem are rational thought and simple consideration. People climb over gates that tell them to keep out – people try to drive at speed in close proximity to livestock and dogs. What a world!

 

Now we have a woman with grievous injury, a rancher without two of his most useful helpers and two dogs who have lost their lives. What can be salvaged from this clusterf**k for the future?

 

Can stockmen get together with the people who are responsible for leasing this land and scheduling public events like bike races to educate/warn those who might find themselves in this situation in future? Certainly there are those who will ignore any sensible precautions that are suggested, but there are also those who will listen – and those who do not will find it less easy to lay blame if they choose to be so foolish as to ignore an “official” warning.

[juliepoudrier]

Can stockmen get together with the people who are responsible for leasing this land and scheduling public events like bike races to educate/warn those who might find themselves in this situation in future? Certainly there are those who will ignore any sensible precautions that are suggested, but there are also those who will listen – and those who do not will find it less easy to lay blame if they choose to be so foolish as to ignore an “official” warning.

According to the article, the sheep owner had been apprised of large events in the area in years past and had kept his sheep and dogs out of the area for those events. In this case, it seems he got no warning from the event organizers and so wasn't aware that he should keep his sheep/dogs away from the area for the race. That's why so many of us have noted that the fault really seems to lie with the event organizers who failed to give the rancher the heads up. Had they done so, then likely this entire incident would have been avoided.

 

J.

[Journey]

I kind of wonder if the fault is with the event organizer? Were they new? Did they know about the flock grazing on the leased land? Why aren't they mentioned in the article? And why didn't the G'ment get involved since this happened on "public land" or at least the State? Oh, wait you can't sue the G'ment can you?? I guess there is a lot not in the news story. I think it's a shame this man has a "criminal record" now and that the prosecutor was bullied into prosecuting by the Legro's. Vindictive is right but but their vindictiveness could possibly ruin this rancher, his livelihood, and his family. Something is wrong here....

[Bill Fosher]

Ooky,

 

My guard dogs interact with members of the public almost every day, and are very keenly aware of whether the person is there to look at the sheep (or feed the dogs a treat) and to steal or harass them and respond accordingly. The three dogs I have now, one would prevent the theft of sheep by leaning on and slobbering all over the culprit, one would jump up on them for attention and try to lick their faces, and the other would bark and bark. All three would physically move their sheep away from the would-be thief.

 

I have no idea how they would respond if someone rode a bike screaming into the flock of sheep, but I can tell you I would pity the fool who did it. At the very least, she would have been knocked off her bike, and even my dogs, great snuggling marshmallows that they are, would have probably bitten her. In order to do that, however she would have had to cross electric fences that would have required her to dismount her bicycle, at which point the guard dogs would have advised her against entering the field.

 

But I even when I am grazing publicly-owned lands, I am allowed to use portable electric fencing, and the vegetation in New England is such that the use of intensive rotational grazing is practical, even for relatively large flocks. I have had a few circumstances where the presence of my sheep has interfered with recreational uses of public lands, but for the most part folks have recognized the role that my sheep play in keeping the land open so that it is available to them in the 11 months out of the year when my sheep aren't there. No conflicts. Mostly fans.

[SoloRiver]

Well I guess I am an idealist, but if areas require large grazing animals it would make more sense to me that they be native species instead of introduced domesticated animals... but whatever.

 

I have no idea what this area is like, whether it is "backcountry" or otherwise, but people should be able to share and I agree, the attitudes on both side pretty much suck. If ranchers want to pit themselves against "grins and giggles" then doG help them, because my guess is that recreational use brings in way more money to local areas and creates more jobs than sheep ranching does. I don't believe that the Legros assholery (which is what it is) has so much to do with the fact that they are "city" folk (never mind that they apparently actually do live there) as the fact that they are apparently assholes. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone who didn't grow up with a stalk of hay between her teeth is an idiot.

[Bill Fosher]

Well I guess I am an idealist, but if areas require large grazing animals it would make more sense to me that they be native species instead of introduced domesticated animals... but whatever.

 

And wouldn't it have been a pretty sight if Legro had ridden her mountain bike into a herd of bison, screaming at the top of her lungs, after sundown. Her encounter with the guard dogs would have seemed like an afternoon at Starbucks.

 

I am not one to think that everyone who didn't grow up around animals is an idiot. I am the child of school teachers, and grew up around nothing more dangerous than a Siamese cat. (Who was, actually, pretty dangerous.) I have had to learn everything I know about safety and common sense around animals, and I learned a lot of it the hard way.

[Debbie Meier]

Well I guess I am an idealist, but if areas require large grazing animals it would make more sense to me that they be native species instead of introduced domesticated animals... but whatever.

 

And wouldn't it have been a pretty sight if Legro had ridden her mountain bike into a herd of bison, screaming at the top of her lungs, after sundown. Her encounter with the guard dogs would have seemed like an afternoon at Starbucks.

 

 

I was thinking more of her being attacked by the pack of wolves that were released on the land to help control the population of the native species...what ever that is...

[SoloRiver]

Well, what I was saying is that I would rather have the bison and wolves than the mountain bikers, but whatever. Have at it, guys.

[Eileen Stein]

I don't know about the law in Colorado, but in the two states where I have written about civil litigation -- New Hampshire and Mass. -- in a lawsuit the jury could have been instructed to consider the rider's contribution to her own predicament, and the award would have been adjusted accordingly. For example, if the jury found that her damages were $100,000 and she was 90 percent at fault, she would have been awarded $10,000. I'm pretty sure that this is a common-law principle dating back hundreds of years.

 

Just in case anyone is interested in this side issue, the common-law principle dating back hundreds of years is that contributory negligence is an absolute bar to recovering damages from someone who has negligently injured you. IOW, if Legro were able to sue Robinson (which she was not, according to the article, because "in Colorado, owners of a dog that protects livestock are exempt from civil liability for bites"), and if the traditional law of contributory negligence applied, she would have no case if her own negligence contributed even in the tiniest degree to her getting injured. However, Colorado, like NH and MA, has adopted a reform called comparative negligence, which tries to apportion damages according to the degree that each person's negligence contributed to the injury. The comparative negligence standard that Colorado uses, however, doesn't apportion damages purely according to percentage of negligence. It will allow you to sue successfully only if your negligence was less than 50% of the combined total negligence. So if she were found to be 51% at fault, her case is thrown out; if she were found to be 49% at fault, she would be awarded 49% of her damages. I'm sure Bill is right that NH and MA use a "pure" comparative negligence standard, where you can recover that proportion of your damages that were caused by the other person's negligence, even if your own negligence was 90% of the cause of the accident.

 

In the criminal case, assuming that the law defines a dangerous dog as one who bites a person, which it apparently does, her negligence/provocation would not be relevant except at the sentencing stage.

 

Since the Colorado legislature had seen fit to exempt LGDs from civil liability, it seems to me there might be a good chance that they would create an exemption for them in the criminal "keeping a dangerous dog" statute as well, and that their failure to do so prior to this incident was merely an oversight. I wonder if anyone is going to push for this legislative change, and I wonder if it could be achieved.

 

My sympathies are with Robinson, who in the past and in this case made all reasonable efforts to accommodate other uses of the land, and who had been given reason to believe he'd be warned when events like this one were planned. I also agree with those who say that Legro and the Vail recreation department share the blame.

[Bill Fosher]

Bison and wolves would get the nod from me over mountain bikers as well. Snowshoers -- that's a different story.

 

Thanks for clearing up my vague understanding of the law, Eileen.

[Mark Billadeau]

I wonder what would have happened if the injuries were due to an accident involving other uses of public lands. Would the lessee be held criminally liable if the mountain biker had gotten injured in the midst of a mining or logging operation; or do these lessees have the right to prohibit public access during their operations?

 

Mark

[greenakeys]

FWIW...

 

I feel for the woman who got attacked. I understand her pain and her need for some sort of justice. I think the dogs were just doing exactly what they were there to do. How can the dogs be liable? Id love to know more about the case. Did they sue the event organizers? If anything, the event organizers or the stewards of the public lands were to blame for not alerting the farmer and giving him enough time to move his sheep and dogs out of the area.

 

She shouldnt have been anywhere near where the dogs were. Unfortunately, the race organizers seem to have not been able to contact the farmer to get him to move his sheep and dogs. She ended up in their path.

 

The good thing is that no one was killed. The dogs could have killed her in an instant if they were vicious dogs.

 

The bad thing is that the farmer looks like a horrible dog owner now that he has lost this lawsuit. The LGDs get a bad name. The guy seems like a responsible farmer. Had he not given the interviews, or taken a worse attitude, it could be easier to see things on her side. But, she seems unwilling to understand why there is a need for the dogs, or why she shouldnt have been in their area. She just wants revenge at this point, not justice.

 

The lawsuit should never have been allowed to go forward. There was no criminal intent. Its just a tragic, almost "perfect storm" of coincidences that brought this woman together with that herd of sheep.

 

She should be counter sued to collect the lost sheep revenue.

[Ooky]

Bill F, thanks so much for the reply - that clears up a lot for me regarding LGDs and what you can expect from them. You are right, riding a bike screaming into a flock is basically the worst thing she could have done. Her injuries aside, the mental picture made me chuckle, though.

 

Melanie, I also used to think like this, especially because I love bison meat - why not just use bison? And they do graze differently, all grazing animals do. But I was warned that bison husbandry is essentially impossible on a large scale. So, we have what we have.

 

Sorry for the late replies - have been in the field doing surveys on a ranch for the past few days!

[wsp]

Another hard hit to the sheep industry .The poor shepherd will probably sell off his flock as he won't be able to make a living with no dogs to protect his flock. I feel sorry for the dogs too. What else are they supposed to do with this crazy screaming thing on two wheels attacking their sheep. She was upsetting the sheep, and the screaming just made things worse. I watch my lgd's reaction to dogs working his flock. He is fine as long as they treat his sheep nice, but when they start chasing and splitting, he gets defensive. Though he never shows any sign of biting. I would think the lgds in colorado would need to be a little more aggressive to take on wolves and cougars.

I think people like her and her husband should be banned from buying any ag products grown in the US.

[Carson Crazies]

Seriously though. Who rides a bike into a flock of sheep screaming or even otherwise? Who does that??? I mean, come on. It was a mountain bike race. Find another way around.

 

I feel bad for her pain. Just because I think she did something incredibly stupid (and this coming from me, the queen of doing stupid things) doesn't mean that I don't believe that her pain and fear are real - I believe they are. But I believe she is at fault here - she and the race organizers.

 

Would she have ridden into a pond if it were in her way? Heck no. She would have gone around it. She should have gone around the sheep. Aren't mountain bike races done on all terrain bicycles? With cool knobby tires? Go around.

 

If I went to my family all mangled up and told them I'd ridden into a flock of sheep and had been attacked by guard dogs their response would have been that not only am I an idiot, but I should be APOLOGIZING to the shepherd. They'd be right. They'd also be laughing at my bad judgment (after having assessed that I would indeed live).

 

PS to DR - I live in the city. I have a lamb and a deer in my freezer. The lamb I helped castrate. I've trimmed his hooves, and I've helped to deworm him. Not everyone who lives in the city thinks their food magically drops from the sky into the plastic wrapped container.

[Gloria Atwater]

Howdy all, new here.

 

I just read this article and its attendant discussion with great interest, and I fear I've little to add except confusion and sadness. We are becoming a country at odds with itself, where consumers and producers are strangers to each other. The article merely illustrates how broad and nearly unbridgeable that gap is.

 

Sadly for me, my greatest empathy goes with the sheep rancher and his dogs, though perhaps the woman's ignorance should be forgivable. In her way, she was an innocent. Still. Where is common sense, that she would SCREAM upon seeing sheep? Has she no inkling whatsoever that to appear out of nowhere, a screaming intruder on wheels, would trigger SOME response from those dogs? If she drove up my driveway amongst my lap-sitting, face-licking, leg-climbing border collies - and screamed to announce her arrival - I dare say someone would get bit.

 

I find of great note the fact there were campers right there to help her, and they'd had no problem with the guardian dogs at all.

 

What I find most tragic, out of all of this, is that human ignorance, innocent or not, is always behind the deepest blows to the ranching and farming industry. That is what grieves me. That is what makes me draw back from complete empathy with the victim: she and her husband defend her ignorance and so will see a man's livelihood lost.

 

Alas.

 

~ Gloria

[Sue R]

Welcome, Gloria, to the USBCC boards! I'm glad to see you here.

[Bill Fosher]

That is what makes me draw back from complete empathy with the victim: she and her husband defend her ignorance and so will see a man's livelihood lost.

 

That, and the fact that they weren't satisfied with his loss of livelihood -- an outcome for which you'd think she, at least, would have empathy if her story about needing to close her speech pathology practice were true. They wanted him to go to jail. So blinded by their own (undeniable) pain were this couple, that they only tools available to them -- or that they chose to use -- were anger and venom. Because they were unable or unwilling to go after those who made all the decisions that put her in the place at the time where she was hurt, they chose to seek vengeance against the only one left -- the rancher -- via the only avenue left -- the criminal courts.

 

It is also worth noting that a criminal conviction on his record will bar him from many forms of employment for the rest of his life. So, in addition to ruining his livelihood, they have also blocked many other avenues that would have been available to him if he decided to give up ranching voluntarily.

[ItsADogsLyfe]

In looking for further info on this I found this article dated July 2008. In this article it states she suffered a broken ankle and had 68 stitches. I would really think two LGDs both attacking her would do far more damage than this if they'd thought she was a threat. Its a sad incident no matter how you look at it, but I really feel for the rancher in this case.

 

http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20080711/...entProfile=1062

[desertranger]

I did make a post earlier, fairly long one. What happened to it?

 

Laura I'm aware that there are people who live in the city who can slaughter a cow or castrate a lamb. But how many are there percentage wise? Additionally not all city-zens live in the city and most people who go on vacation leave their common sense at home including myself. It's part and parcel of going on vacation.

 

Still this lady knowingly rode into a situation where she didn't know squat which is something I see all the time. People hiking without water in the summer (they die because of that, 7 last summer), climbing up a set of rocks and getting stuck needing rescue, touching a dangerous plant then blaming me for your pain as I perform first aid. Who's at fault if a tourist is injured because they are wearing the floo floo shoes and fall. Believe it or not I am. I'm held responsible just like that poor shepherd is. Frankly if you do something stupid like that you deserve whatever happens to you. I've lost track of how many people I've pulled out of the desert because they did something stupid, my blog is filled with their stories. Had she died she would have been the recipient of a Darwin Award.

 

They say every one has a little Elvis in them. Everyone has a little city-zen in them as well.