Coast Starlight Hits Herd of Expensive Cattle

[George Harris]

Looking at the map in the news article adn comparing it with the features in Google maps, this location appears to be near Modoc Point, OR (I stand corrected on saying California. Sorry about my geographic error.) In this area the railroad is fairly straight for a long distance and paralleled by US 97 on the east side, close but not imediately adjacent.

I am well aware of the usual cow thinking, "The grass is greener on the other side of the fence." The area adjacent to the fence and as far through it as the cow can reach seems to always be the most closely grazed part of any field. Also, any trees tend to be leafless to a point as high as a cow can reach. It is an easy way to tell whether a field is used for grazing land or has been in recent years. All the tress and brush along the fences or elsewhere look like they have been trimmed to a precise distance above the ground.

However, as said before, if these critters were so valuable, the guy should have done his best to be sure that they were fenced in fenced out or whatever you want to call it to prevent just what happened, regardless of the provisions of law.

If one or more had gotten on the adjacent highway and been hit, then who would be at fault? Hitting or having an accident while trying to miss a cow can be have serious consequences. Who would you think would be considered to be at fault if a cow suddenly appears in your headlights and you end up with serious injuries from the collision?

 

[TN Tin Man]

However, as said before, if these critters were so valuable, the guy should have done his best to be sure that they were fenced in fenced out or whatever you want to call it to prevent just what happened, regardless of the provisions of law.

If one or more had gotten on the adjacent highway and been hit, then who would be at fault? Hitting or having an accident while trying to miss a cow can be have serious consequences. Who would you think would be considered to be at fault if a cow suddenly appears in your headlights and you end up with serious injuries from the collision?

If you're asking me directly. Here's my answer.

Those provisions of law lay the framework for liability in the circumstances you outline.

As to the highway, ODOT has responsibility to fence out cattle or provide signage if there is no fencing. Similiar to wildlife crossing signs. In these cases liability lies with the State and the cattle owner.

Don't take my previous post as a defense for the Rancher. Just the opposite, I think he is 100% responsible for his herd. The railroad had fenced thier right of way and should not be held accountable for this guys lack of herd supervision.

 

[MrFSS]

However, as said before, if these critters were so valuable, the guy should have done his best to be sure that they were fenced in fenced out or whatever you want to call it to prevent just what happened, regardless of the provisions of law.

If one or more had gotten on the adjacent highway and been hit, then who would be at fault? Hitting or having an accident while trying to miss a cow can be have serious consequences. Who would you think would be considered to be at fault if a cow suddenly appears in your headlights and you end up with serious injuries from the collision?

If you're asking me directly. Here's my answer.

Those provisions of law lay the framework for liability in the circumstances you outline.

As to the highway, ODOT has responsibility to fence out cattle or provide signage if there is no fencing. Similar to wildlife crossing signs. In these cases liability lies with the State and the cattle owner.

Don't take my previous post as a defense for the Rancher. Just the opposite, I think he is 100% responsible for his herd. The railroad had fenced their right of way and should not be held accountable for this guys lack of herd supervision.

From the civil liability side, being a retired insurance adjuster, I can say we would see cattle in the road accidents with our insureds vehicles from time to time. First thing we did after taking care of the car damages was look to the owner of the cattle to get our money back (subrogation). Unless the cattle owner could prove that he wasn't responsible for the cattle getting loose, we usually were able to collect. So, Amtrak should be looking to this cattle owner for any damages they sustained. Injured people on the train, could, too.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

From the civil liability side, being a retired insurance adjuster, I can say we would see cattle in the road accidents with our insureds vehicles from time to time. First thing we did after taking care of the car damages was look to the owner of the cattle to get our money back (subrogation). Unless the cattle owner could prove that he wasn't responsible for the cattle getting loose, we usually were able to collect. So, Amtrak should be looking to this cattle owner for any damages they sustained. Injured people on the train, could, too.

Did these incidents occur in states with "open range" laws? Apparently that's a pretty big legal distinction in some states. Some folks in the comments section seemed pretty darn sure the host railroad would settle in order to avoid a lengthy uphill legal battle. Then again I've seen Union Pacific sue the Federal Government to recover fines assessed for drug smuggling, so it's not like UP typically shies away from a legal battle. Should be interesting, assuming it makes it to trial and verdict.

 

[George Harris]

However, as said before, if these critters were so valuable, the guy should have done his best to be sure that they were fenced in fenced out or whatever you want to call it to prevent just what happened, regardless of the provisions of law.

If one or more had gotten on the adjacent highway and been hit, then who would be at fault? Hitting or having an accident while trying to miss a cow can be have serious consequences. Who would you think would be considered to be at fault if a cow suddenly appears in your headlights and you end up with serious injuries from the collision?

If you're asking me directly. Here's my answer.

Those provisions of law lay the framework for liability in the circumstances you outline.

As to the highway, ODOT has responsibility to fence out cattle or provide signage if there is no fencing. Similiar to wildlife crossing signs. In these cases liability lies with the State and the cattle owner.

Don't take my previous post as a defense for the Rancher. Just the opposite, I think he is 100% responsible for his herd. The railroad had fenced thier right of way and should not be held accountable for this guys lack of herd supervision.

Wan't meant to be personal. No offence intended.

Probably bringing a little of my grandfather's attitude into this. He alwasy felt that the open range and public land grazing in the west gave those guys an unfair advantage over the farmers that had to buy and pay taxes on the land they used for their cattle, and that advantage was in part taken from taxes he and everybody else was paying.

 

[TN Tin Man]

No offense taken.

Ranchers do have to pay for thier grazing leases on public land (BLM, BOR, or Forest). But IMHO it does not come close to the property taxes imposed on private land owners.