As others have said, it is human nature to become desensitized to risks as time passes.

You have to force yourself -- or your organization -- to not get complacent. And others will often mock you for your concerns.

And then you have to balance living a full life vs living a life ruled by risk.

oldarmy76 said:

---

txags92 said:

---

sellthefarm said:

---

txags92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

FM 949 said:

---

Didn't we already do this a few pages back? My response then was how far do you take that plan. Is it for a 50 yr flood, a 100 yr flood, a 200 yr flood? A plan goes out the window when it is exceeded by Mother Nature. What happens if some unimaginable event sends water over the hill? What then? Is it still someone's fault then? Or at that point, is it so preposterous that it's an Act of God?

And since you added "And do you think Mystic did all they could to protect their campers?"

I think they did what they felt was reasonable before the event and met the normal standard of care in the industry. We can agree after the fact, that it wasn't enough for this event.

---

I think this is the big sticking point for many in this thread and all over the state. IMO it should be clear that they DIDNT DO WHAT WAS REASONABLE before the event. Being in charge of over 700 girls and housing them next to a river is already a dangerous situation whether the weather is bad, or not. Not having effective communication, counselor training, etc is a recipe for disaster. And I am not just talking about from floods.

---

And they had experienced bad floods before. Granted not this bad. But my goodness, if you are by a river and experienced flooding and know the area is prone to that, how can you be so unprepared? It is mind boggling to me.

---

It is not an excuse, but it is an explanation...too many times, people equate being "above the 100-yr floodplain" as the same thing as "safe from flooding". It is an erroneous assumption that has gotten thousands of people killed over the years all over the country. The fact that we decide the need for and cost of flood insurance based on that arbitrary number gives it a weight in people's personal risk decision-making that is un-deserved IMO. All of the plans and preparations along that stretch of the river should have been based on the 1932 flood elevation, not the 100-yr flood plain elevation. When people erroneously think they are safe, they neglect the things they would otherwise need (like communications) that would be necessary to overcome mistakes they made based on their erroneous assumptions.

---

This is 100% true and it's further complicated by the fact that the maps are just not any good to begin with. If I read your prior post currectly - the current map is using 9.5 inches in 24 hours to determine the 100-year and even the updates you expect to be coming in the next year or two only update that number to, 11 or 12 or whatever you said. It rained that much in a matter of hours that night. Why are we updated flood maps using such poor data? It's a major factor in all this.

---

The prior post in the chain about the updated evaluations was not mine, but I can answer some of the questions. In climatology, typically the last 30 years is used as the period of record and the 1% probability of max rainfall is calculated based off of the rainfall events that occurred during that 30 year period. Periodically, NOAA will update the climatology by dropping the oldest years and adding the newest years to the block of data. When that happens, new maps after that date will incorporate the new data if the modeling has not already been completed.

However, the problem with a lot of the modeling is that it usually is focused on the 24-hour 1% probability storm, when in a lot of cases, a large chunk of the 24-hr rainfall for a given probability will fall within a much shorter timeframe. For instance, at the Hunt gauge nearest to Mystic, the 24 hour 1% probability storm is 11.6 inches in the current NOAA Atlas, but the 6 hour 1% probability storm is 8.31 inches. If you model runoff from 11.6 inches spread over 24 hours (0.483 inches per hour), you are going to get significantly different flood elevations than if you model 8.31 inches over 6 hours (1.385 inches per hour).

I think there is an effort underway (or it may already have occurred) to widen the modeling to look at a wider range of rainfall duration/frequency data on the 1% probability to use the one that creates the highest flood elevation, not just blindly using the 24-hr data. But keep in mind that there are thousands of watersheds to be modeled and a relatively small team of people reviewing the work of the contractors. The process to go from model completion to new map adoption is long, partially because it is government, but also because there is a lot riding on these flood maps, economically and otherwise, so they are often challenged by stakeholders during the review process and can get tied up in courts along the way. And after adoption, there are still revisions ongoing constantly for situations like Mystic had, where areas were shown within a given flood elevation, but on the ground survey info indicated otherwise.

It is a messy and imperfect process, and while it is at least somewhat useful for actuarial use by insurance companies and such, it really is not very useful for assessing true level of risk to prepare for emergency planning, specifically because of events like this flood that far surpassed the 1% probability rainfall amounts.

---

Just fyi, the 24 hour rainfall total is not assumed to fall at an average rate over the 24 hours. In Kerr county, it has a type 2 distribution assumption. Which still has most of the rain falling over a short period of time. Here is a sample of that type of storm.

---

Good to know. I knew there had been some changes to those kinds of assumptions, but wasn't sure how long ago it happened or if it was integrated into the current maps from more than a decade ago.

dermdoc said:

---

Rattler12 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

txags92 said:

---

StringerBell said:

---

https://www.expressnews.com/news/texas/article/kerr-county-camps-legislation-21022307.php

---

Having structures in the floodplain is not the problem; letting kids sleep in them when flooding is likely is the problem.

---

You think? What responsible adults made those decisions?

---

The parents of the children made the first decision.

---

Just curious, what is the purpose of your post? And you got a blue star so congrats I guess.

This thread is very revealing as to how tone deaf people are to stuff like this as to how their posts affect the grieving.

And I get it, some of y'all don't care. Even though you know parents of the girls read this thread. I don't get what you accomplish with posts like this.

---

To bring to light that due diligence needs to be done by parents of the possible outcomes, good or bad, before placing their children in potentially dangerous situations. That using a little foresight can be a positive preventative of disastrous outcomes to the most vulnerable. One poster said that his daughter had the foresight to look at the future forecast for the area and decided not to go based on that. She evidently was aware of the fact that rain and possible flooding could occur. This whole thread has been about hindsight. Had more parents looked at the terrain, the positioning of the camp, the weather forecast and made a different decision based on said factors this whole thing would never have occurred. You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

I would suggest there are more posters/viewers out there that have had similar thoughts but haven't posted anything because of the reaction I got..........sometimes the truth hurts but if it makes more families think about some of the possible dangers to their kids of being put in potentially dangerous situations and under the care people who may or may not be qualified, may or may not have appropriate procedures in place and keeps their child safe then I can take the reproaches and rebukes.

With all due respect, you just don't get it. This is just sick.

Quote:

---

You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

---

Everyone that tragically loses a child or lived one second guesses. That's not the same as you trying to assign blame to parents.

Your posts blaming parents are not only dumb, but show you are generally clueless on how to read a room. There are parents and grandparents posting here that lost children. You should be ashamed of yourself. derm is a better man than I for how he's handling your asinine arguments.

Rattler12 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Rattler12 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

txags92 said:

---

StringerBell said:

---

https://www.expressnews.com/news/texas/article/kerr-county-camps-legislation-21022307.php

---

Having structures in the floodplain is not the problem; letting kids sleep in them when flooding is likely is the problem.

---

You think? What responsible adults made those decisions?

---

The parents of the children made the first decision.

---

Just curious, what is the purpose of your post? And you got a blue star so congrats I guess.

This thread is very revealing as to how tone deaf people are to stuff like this as to how their posts affect the grieving.

And I get it, some of y'all don't care. Even though you know parents of the girls read this thread. I don't get what you accomplish with posts like this.

---

To bring to light that due diligence needs to be done by parents of the possible outcomes, good or bad, before placing their children in potentially dangerous situations. That using a little foresight can be a positive preventative of disastrous outcomes to the most vulnerable. One poster said that his daughter had the foresight to look at the future forecast for the area and decided not to go based on that. She evidently was aware of the fact that rain and possible flooding could occur. This whole thread has been about hindsight. Had more parents looked at the terrain, the positioning of the camp, the weather forecast and made a different decision based on said factors this whole thing would never have occurred. You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

I would suggest there are more posters/viewers out there that have had similar thoughts but haven't posted anything because of the reaction I got..........sometimes the truth hurts but if it makes more families think about some of the possible dangers to their kids of being put in potentially dangerous situations and under the care people who may or may not be qualified, may or may not have appropriate procedures in place and keeps their child safe then I can take the reproaches and rebukes.

---

Fair enough. I just think some posters need to show a little more empathy to the victims families. Feelings are still pretty raw. Maybe bring up this discussion after a little time for healing.

BMX Bandit said:

---

With all due respect, you just don't get it. This is just sick.

Quote:

---

You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

---

Everyone that tragically loses a child or lived one second guesses. That's not the same as you trying to assign blame to parents.

Your posts blaming parents are not only dumb, but show you are generally clueless on how to read a room. There are parents and grandparents posting here that lost children. You should be ashamed of yourself. derm is a better man than I for how he's handling your asinine arguments.

---

I am getting tired of being lectured by posters from the Mystic groupies to the "I am right and I am going to tell you how you are/were wrong".

Folks, people are grieving. Hard. Kids died. Assigning blame at this time or being interested only in Mystic going on just seems to show a complete lack of awareness of the situation.

At least he didn't call me a drunk or tell me to leave.

And of coirse, the ones making these tone deaf posts did not lose a kid. Pretty predictable human behavior.

dermdoc said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

With all due respect, you just don't get it. This is just sick.

Quote:

---

You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

---

Everyone that tragically loses a child or lived one second guesses. That's not the same as you trying to assign blame to parents.

Your posts blaming parents are not only dumb, but show you are generally clueless on how to read a room. There are parents and grandparents posting here that lost children. You should be ashamed of yourself. derm is a better man than I for how he's handling your asinine arguments.

---

I am getting tired of being lectured by posters from the Mystic groupies to the "I am right and I am going to tell you how you are/were wrong".

Folks, people are grieving. Hard. Kids died. Assigning blame at this time or being interested only in Mystic going on just seems to show a complete lack of awareness of the situation.

At least he didn't call me a drunk or tell me to leave.

And of coirse, the ones making these tone deaf posts did not lose a kid. Pretty predictable human behavior.

---

I guess I'm one of the tone deaf. We have 4 grown children and 5 grandchildren. For folks to say I don't care is absurd. My children would never have been put in this situation, three of the grandchildren are young adults and can make their own decisions and I am pretty positive that the father of the 2 young ones feels just the same as I and his mom do and with that I will now bow out of this conversation.

Rattler12 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

With all due respect, you just don't get it. This is just sick.

Quote:

---

You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

---

Everyone that tragically loses a child or lived one second guesses. That's not the same as you trying to assign blame to parents.

Your posts blaming parents are not only dumb, but show you are generally clueless on how to read a room. There are parents and grandparents posting here that lost children. You should be ashamed of yourself. derm is a better man than I for how he's handling your asinine arguments.

---

I am getting tired of being lectured by posters from the Mystic groupies to the "I am right and I am going to tell you how you are/were wrong".

Folks, people are grieving. Hard. Kids died. Assigning blame at this time or being interested only in Mystic going on just seems to show a complete lack of awareness of the situation.

At least he didn't call me a drunk or tell me to leave.

And of coirse, the ones making these tone deaf posts did not lose a kid. Pretty predictable human behavior.

---

I guess I'm one of the tone deaf. We have 4 grown children and 5 grandchildren. For folks to say I don't care is absurd. My children would never have been put in this situation, three of the grandchildren are young adults and can make their own decisions and I am pretty positive that the father of the 2 young ones feels just the same as I and his mom do and with that I will now bow out of this conversation.

---

Nobody said you did not care about your opinion. Or the campers. I question whether you care about the effect of your posts on grieving families. From what I have read, you don't.

But you did get a chance to post your opinion so there is that. In my opinion, not the time or place for that opinion but it is an open forum. You be you.

It's certainly a tricky thread to post in as I think everybody cares about the families who lost children. Personally, no natural disaster has hit closer to home for our family and kids. And at the same time people still want to have an honest conversation about what transpired and how to best prevent it in the future. Reasonable people can disagree there and on a message board some posts will come across as offensive.

I'm probably considered a "Mystic Defender" which I guess isn't completely inaccurate but doesn't capture what I'm defending. I think I'm a defender of trying to figure out how to best prevent these tragedies from occurring although we will never be successful in doing so as nature will always find a way to do something extreme. Because even with the risks involved I want my kids to experience them and experience people like the Eastlands. In my opinion, when it turns to people only wanted revenge against a family then these places/experiences disappear. Because with hindsight nothing is ever good enough and it's easy to pinpoint well if they just did X.

We need really good people to create great places in this world for children to grow and flourish. More now than ever in the society we are living in. And I unfortunately think that is disappearing as I think a lot of really good people know that no matter how hard they try they can't predict/prevent everything and get turned away from trying.

And to the poster who blames parents for sending their camper to Mystic I'm not sure where to start or even respond but I'll say this. I sent my daughter to Mystic and you could say I knew the risks as I talked to them quite a bit about flooding, cabin placement, etc. My focus on their plan was much more on the need not to have to evacuate the cabins (although not only that) as I had a family member once be swept away and drown trying to evacuate a rising river when I was a kid. That said - I was comfortable with where the cabins were located although I knew the risk was not zero. It's never zero. But I still wanted my daughter to have the experience because unfortunately everything worth doing carries more risk than sitting at home. And when you look back on life a lot of the most memorable moments are not going to be risk free.

I think about that as we unfortunately attended the funerals of 5 of the Mystic girls. And one thing that sticks in my head everyday from the eulogies is that these little girls life's were cut far too short but they were lucky enough to have families who provided them incredible love and experiences. And those all carried heightened risk. Tomorrow is not guaranteed even for our youngest kids and I want to give them the most incredible love and experiences that I'm able to do so.

Long post and I'm not trying to offend anybody. We pray for the Mystic girls and their families everyday, we pray for the Eastlands everyday and yes I pray that places for kids to be kids continue to exist as well.

And what that last sentence means can be very different for different people and that should be ok too.

Alta said:

---

It's certainly a tricky thread to post in as I think everybody cares about the families who lost children. Personally, no natural disaster has hit closer to home for our family and kids. And at the same time people still want to have an honest conversation about what transpired and how to best prevent it in the future. Reasonable people can disagree there and on a message board some posts will come across as offensive.

I'm probably considered a "Mystic Defender" which I guess isn't completely inaccurate but doesn't capture what I'm defending. I think I'm a defender of trying to figure out how to best prevent these tragedies from occurring although we will never be successful in doing so as nature will always find a way to do something extreme. Because even with the risks involved I want my kids to experience them and experience people like the Eastlands. In my opinion, when it turns to people only wanted revenge against a family then these places/experiences disappear. Because with hindsight nothing is ever good enough and it's easy to pinpoint well if they just did X.

We need really good people to create great places in this world for children to grow and flourish. More now than ever in the society we are living in. And I unfortunately think that is disappearing as I think a lot of really good people know that no matter how hard they try they can't predict/prevent everything and get turned away from trying.

And to the poster who blames parents for sending their camper to Mystic I'm not sure where to start or even respond but I'll say this. I sent my daughter to Mystic and you could say I knew the risks as I talked to them quite a bit about flooding, cabin placement, etc. My focus on their plan was much more on the need not to have to evacuate the cabins (although not only that) as I had a family member once be swept away and drown trying to evacuate a rising river when I was a kid. That said - I was comfortable with where the cabins were located although I knew the risk was not zero. It's never zero. But I still wanted my daughter to have the experience because unfortunately everything worth doing carries more risk than sitting at home. And when you look back on life a lot of the most memorable moments are not going to be risk free.

I think about that as we unfortunately attended the funerals of 5 of the Mystic girls. And one thing that sticks in my head everyday from the eulogies is that these little girls life's were cut far too short but they were lucky enough to have families who provided them incredible love and experiences. And those all carried heightened risk. Tomorrow is not guaranteed even for our youngest kids and I want to give them the most incredible love and experiences that I'm able to do so.

Long post and I'm not trying to offend anybody. We pray for the Mystic girls and their families everyday, we pray for the Eastlands everyday and yes I pray that places for kids to be kids continue to exist as well.

And what that last sentence means can be very different for different people and that should be ok too.

---

I agree with everything you said. I believe the Eastlands were/are incredible people. I also believe they were complacent and made mistakes that led to needless deaths and threatened Mystic closing down, which as I have posted, I am against.
Justice must take place in my opinion.
Edited to add that I do not want revenge on the Eastlands. I just want the truth. And justice.

And you are of course entitled to that opinion on the Eastlands. And even though I do not share it regarding their actions it does diminish my love/prayers for the families who lost children. I can't speak for everybody who would be considered a "Mystic Defender" but would imagine most feel similarly.

Alta said:

---

And you are of course entitled to that opinion on the Eastlands. And even though I do not share it regarding their actions it does diminish my love/prayers for the families who lost children. I can't speak for everybody who would be considered a "Mystic Defender" but would imagine most feel similarly.

---

Fair enough. From what I am hearing, the plaintiffs do not want to settle because they want the facts to come out. They feel that will help this from happening again. We shall see.

And thank you for not accusing me of being drunk or tell me to leave just because we have different opinions.

Camp Waldemar, Stewart, and Vista group lobbying against the 2 Senate bills. This is about to get real ugly. A ton of old money on the camps side.

Grok Summarized two bills as follows… are these good summaries? Seem pretty reasonable… licensing program a black hole and broad but seems appropriate.

Senate Bill 1 (Natural Disaster Preparation and Recovery):
Requires youth camps located in 100-year floodplains to develop and implement flood evacuation plans when flood warnings are issued.
Mandates the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) to establish a licensing program for emergency managers and require annual training for all emergency coordinators.
Obliges local governments to conduct annual emergency drills supervised by TDEM.
Requires local governments to submit after-action reports within 60 days following a disaster.
Establishes a working group to centralize meteorological data, recommend improvements to statewide weather coverage, and allow higher education institutions to join regional flood planning groups.
Strengthens disaster response by requiring training for local officials and enhancing communication between state and local agencies.


Senate Bill 2 (Flood Emergency Communication and Warning):
Directs the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) to identify high-risk flood areas and require local governments to install outdoor warning sirens in those locations.
Requires TWDB to establish rules for siren operation, standards for installation and maintenance, and requirements for backup power systems.
Creates a grant program to help communities cover the costs of installing, testing, and maintaining the sirens.
Mandates coordination between local governments and emergency management agencies for siren deployment.

Thanks for the summary.

I hope communication devices in all cabins/buildings are included in their emergency plans too.

Asking grok to dig deeper regarding radios it includes the following…


Senate Bill 1 includes specific requirements for youth camps regarding communication and warning systems as part of enhanced safety measures, particularly for disaster preparedness in flood-prone areas. While there is no explicit mention of two-way cabin-to-cabin radios for interpersonal communication, the bill mandates weather alert radios in each cabin and camp-wide emergency warning systems that include public address capabilities for alerting occupants during emergencies. Key provisions from the bill analysis include:
Weather Alert Radios in Cabins: Requires youth camp operators to "maintain operable radios capable of providing real-time weather alerts issued by the National Weather Service or a similar professional weather service in each cabin." These radios are intended for monitoring conditions to support emergency responses, such as floods.
Emergency Warning and Public Address Systems: Mandates the installation and maintenance of "an emergency warning system that is capable of alerting all campers and camp occupants of an emergency and includes a public address system operable without reliance on an Internet connection." This system facilitates camp-wide communication, which could extend to broadcasting messages to multiple cabins simultaneously during evacuations or alerts.
These requirements are tied to broader emergency planning obligations for youth camps, such as developing comprehensive plans for natural disasters (including floods), establishing notification procedures for camp personnel during emergencies, and posting evacuation routes in each cabin. Senate Bill 2 focuses on broader flood warning sirens and grants for communities but does not address camp-specific communications.

BMX Bandit said:

---

With all due respect, you just don't get it. This is just sick.

Quote:

---

You don't think some/most/all of these parents have not already thought "Why did we send her there?"

---

Everyone that tragically loses a child or lived one second guesses. That's not the same as you trying to assign blame to parents.

Your posts blaming parents are not only dumb, but show you are generally clueless on how to read a room. There are parents and grandparents posting here that lost children. You should be ashamed of yourself. derm is a better man than I for how he's handling your asinine arguments.

---

Yep, easily the worst argument I've seen on here in a long time.

Many of the best parts of life involve risk -- summer camps, playing sports, hiking, camping, skiing, trips abroad or road trips across America. Whats the alternative, sitting at home and avoiding the roads unless it is a strict necessity for school or work?

The issue isn't whether there is risk in going to summer camp...that's completely obvious for every parent sending their kid to any camp.

The issue is whether the camp had a sound plan and acted responsibly and efficiently to save the lives of children in their care when the flood unfolded.

Quote:

---

In the highly unlikely event, these cases go to trial, the plaintiff lawyers would love nothing more than for some mystic attorney to make this kind of assertion.

You'd have record setting jury awards

---

Why wouldn't "these cases" go to trial?

Eastlands going to settle or, wrongful death claims never get past a judge?

I think the latter is more likely, but the Eastlands may not have the resources and wouldn't risk a jury trial.

So why would these camps be against safety bills? Makes you think.

BTKAG97 said:

---

Yesterday said:

---

I mean you can literally sue anyone you want for anything these days. That said, if I'm on the jury you're going to have a hell of a time convincing me an RV park is at fault from an act of god.

---

Seconded.

---

Esp when everyone knew they were in a flood plane

Gator92 said:

---

Quote:

---

In the highly unlikely event, these cases go to trial, the plaintiff lawyers would love nothing more than for some mystic attorney to make this kind of assertion.

You'd have record setting jury awards

---

Why wouldn't "these cases" go to trial?

Eastlands going to settle or, wrongful death claims never get past a judge?

I think the latter is more likely, but the Eastlands may not have the resources and wouldn't risk a jury trial.

---

They can't settle unless the plaintiffs agree to it. And from what I heard that is not going to happen. The truth will come out.

dermdoc said:

---

Gator92 said:

---

Quote:

---

In the highly unlikely event, these cases go to trial, the plaintiff lawyers would love nothing more than for some mystic attorney to make this kind of assertion.

You'd have record setting jury awards

---

Why wouldn't "these cases" go to trial?

Eastlands going to settle or, wrongful death claims never get past a judge?

I think the latter is more likely, but the Eastlands may not have the resources and wouldn't risk a jury trial.

---

They can't settle unless the plaintiffs agree to it. And from what I heard that is not going to happen. The truth will come out.

---

If the plaintiffs are wanting the truth more than the money, then more power to them. Most people would just take the money and call it a day.

dermdoc said:

---

So why would these camps be against safety bills? Makes you think.

---

IDK, but they are unnecessary.

The TX DSHS has authority by law to make the changes w/o legislation.

Just political grandstanding to me...

No Spin Ag said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Gator92 said:

---

Quote:

---

In the highly unlikely event, these cases go to trial, the plaintiff lawyers would love nothing more than for some mystic attorney to make this kind of assertion.

You'd have record setting jury awards

---

Why wouldn't "these cases" go to trial?

Eastlands going to settle or, wrongful death claims never get past a judge?

I think the latter is more likely, but the Eastlands may not have the resources and wouldn't risk a jury trial.

---

They can't settle unless the plaintiffs agree to it. And from what I heard that is not going to happen. The truth will come out.

---

If the plaintiffs are wanting the truth more than the money, then more power to them. Most people would just take the money and call it a day.

---

I said I wanted the truth. I am not going to tell people who lost a kid how they should respond. Like posters on here have said.

The complete lack of empathy is incredible.

Oh and I am sober. And am not leaving.

Gator92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So why would these camps be against safety bills? Makes you think.

---

IDK, but they are unnecessary.

The TX DSHS has authority by law to make the changes w/o legislation.

Just political grandstanding to me...

---

So where have the TX DSHS folks been? And if it is political grandstanding and means nothing, why are the camps responding the way they have? The whole thing stinks.

But according to a poster on here that I did not know what I was talking about. And was drunk and needed to go away.
I take no pleasure in any of this but my goodness it is bad.
Why would any camps be against increased safety measures?

Quote:

---

They can't settle unless the plaintiffs agree to it. And from what I heard that is not going to happen. The truth will come out.

---

Think its going to be difficult to get a wrongful death suit v the Eastlands and Mystic in front of a jury.

I say that so we can debate the merits of such a suit. I may be wrong and welcome other more informed opinion.

You of all people need to be prepared for such an outcome. If you want get to a trial, it may not go the way you think.

You have said you want Justice. You have said you do want the camp to survive, but you don't want the Eastlands to profit from it.

What about the Eastland family who had nothing to do w/ running the camp, but have ownership share in the land? Are they liable? Do you want to bankrupt them? I'm guessing the extended family doesn't get much income from the operation and their only wealth is locked up in the value of the land that they were never going to sell.

You want "the truth to come out" that Dick Eastland "screwed up". Maybe he did, but you may never get your day in court to find out.

I am not defending anyone here and I have no connection to the Eastlands or Mystic. I speak from experience. My mother was killed in a car wreck by an unlicensed driver that ran a red light.

The driver was never charged w/ anything including driving w/o a license...

Never said anything about a wrongful death charge. I just read how people respond. The camps are basically circling the wagons. You don't do that unless you are in a bad position. We shall see.

Never let a crisis go to waste. Our legislature is a joke.

Demand change from the agency that oversees youth camps.

TX DSHS Jennifer A Shuford Commissioner

She has the power to make the change you want.

ETA link to DSHS executive team

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/about-dshs/dshs-executive-team

Gator92 said:

---

Never let a crisis go to waste. Our legislature is a joke.

Demand change from the agency that oversees youth camps.

TX DSHS Jennifer A Shuford Commissioner

She has the power to make the change you want.

ETA link to DSHS executive team

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/about-dshs/dshs-executive-team

---

If I remember correctly, the two new Senate bills, that the camps oppose, gives DSHS the authority to do something. Before the bills, they did not have the authority to do much. And the bills give them the power to do something.

See my earlier post

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3552957/replies/70709671

Quote:

---

Sec. 141.009. STANDARDS. The executive commissioner by rule shall establish health and safety standards for youth camps. The standards may relate to:

(1) adequate and proper supervision at all times of camp activities;

(2) qualifications for directors, supervisors, and staff and sufficient numbers of those persons;

(3) proper safeguards for sanitation and public health;

(4) adequate medical services for personal health and first aid;

(5) proper procedures for food preparation, handling, and mass feeding;

(6) healthful and sufficient water supply;

(7) proper waste disposal;

(8) proper water safety procedures for swimming pools, lakes, and waterways;

(9) safe boating equipment;

(10) proper maintenance and safe use of motor vehicles;

(11) safe buildings and physical facilities;

(12) proper fire precautions;

(13) safe and proper recreational and other equipment;

(14) proper regard for density and use of the premises; and

(15) records of criminal convictions of camp personnel.

---

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.141.htm

Quote:

---

Why wouldn't "these cases" go to trial?

---

Because in all likelihood they settle before a trial is needed.

Quote:

---

Think its going to be difficult to get a wrongful death suit v the Eastlands and Mystic in front of a jury.

---

It wouid be very easy because the judge isn't going to throw their case out (against whoever operated the camp)

A wrongful death suit is a civil case that is brought by the heirs of a deceased person. For the children, it's their parents.

Here, it would be very easy to get that case in front of a jury. I don't think it will reach that stage because the case will settle at some point prior.


Very sorry to hear about your mother. That's terrible. But you are confusing a wrongful death civil suit with criminal charges.



Also, you don't "get the truth" at a trial. You get a verdict. The information the parents are seeking will come out in the discovery process.

dermdoc said:

---

Never said anything about a wrongful death charge. I just read how people respond. The camps are basically circling the wagons. You don't do that unless you are in a bad position. We shall see.

---

It might be because more government involvement won't really help things. It rarely ever does.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but emotions are high right now...rightly so.... and what some might normally be against in any other situation, those same emotions might be driving them to ask for things they usually wouldn't in other situations.

This whole thing sounds like a worst-case, act of God, scenario that "more government" absolutely wouldn't have changed.

God bless the families and all involved, though. I can't imagine the absolutely gut-wrenching sadness.

BigRobSA said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Never said anything about a wrongful death charge. I just read how people respond. The camps are basically circling the wagons. You don't do that unless you are in a bad position. We shall see.

---

It might be because more government involvement won't really help things. It rarely ever does.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but emotions are high right now...rightly so.... and what some might normally be against in any other situation, those same emotions might be driving them to ask for things they usually wouldn't in other situations.

This whole thing sounds like a worst-case, act of God, scenario that "more government" absolutely wouldn't have changed.

God bless the families and all involved, though. I can't imagine the absolutely gut-wrenching sadness.

---

I think we all have the same dog in this fight. We all wish this never happened and want it to never happen again. We all know that the Eastlands loved the kids and there was nothing malicious in play. We all know this was a tragic event. Some of us think negligence could have still played a part. I wish the parent blaming would come to a full stop.

BigRobSA said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Never said anything about a wrongful death charge. I just read how people respond. The camps are basically circling the wagons. You don't do that unless you are in a bad position. We shall see.

---

It might be because more government involvement won't really help things. It rarely ever does.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but emotions are high right now...rightly so.... and what some might normally be against in any other situation, those same emotions might be driving them to ask for things they usually wouldn't in other situations.

This whole thing sounds like a worst-case, act of God, scenario that "more government" absolutely wouldn't have changed.

God bless the families and all involved, though. I can't imagine the absolutely gut-wrenching sadness.

---

You know me well enough to know how much I hate government anything except basic enumerated Constitutional powers.

With things like this, I am usually all for calling it an act of God and move on.

But I think discovery is going to show that these deaths could have been prevented fairly easily with just common sense and appropriate preparation. I actually believe that with zero planning there was still time to save everyone with appropriate decision making.

i do not know how you correct bad decision making. Or "punish" it. I know that if I make bad decisions as a doctor,I have liability and can be sued (not so much since tort reform) or even punished by the Texas State Board

So how do you correct bad decision making? I think in this case, especially with kids and young counselors involved, a concrete plan is needed so there are fewer decisions to make when the sheet hits the fan.

It is kind of like sports, medicine, fire fighting, police work, the military, etc. You practice and drill beforehand so that when crap happens you just perform as you have been taught. Minimized critical decision making as you are basically programmed.

If you read Mystic's flood "plans", which basically was shelter in place and let the Eastlands make the decisions, it seems obvious that was not adequate,

The obvious question is that "Would planning and preparation in this event be enough to overcome bad decision making"?

We will never know for sure. But I think it would have helped tremendously.

The other possible solution that could be provided by the bills is to force the camps to build cabins higher. You obviously can't predict how high the water will go a future flood events.

So I think the bills could help by requiring plans and higher cabin builds. Perfect, no. No plans are. But common sense screams that just doing nothing and whistling in the dark is insane. Especially with the lives of kids.