Blue, I really don't understand you. If all you want is a giant party, who cares if any of it is built by students. Let's just spend god knows how much money and build a giant ATM out of wood and get everyone tanked on campus. Why even bother sending people out in the woods and cut down trees with axes? Take a few guys with chainsaws out and do it. Get a few forklifts and send Walton home while we are at it.

You say that Bonfire is bigger than the folks that build it? You do realize how it came to be in the first place, a fire built by students without university approval? If the university had started the bonfire tradition instead of renegade students, do you think it would have survived for 100 years?

I would love to see Bonfire back on campus and I understand that it would have to change for that to happen but if the students are not responsible for building bonfire, start to end, then why have them involved at all and if they are not involved, what is the purpose of Bonfire other than a replacement for t.u. yell practice or a giant expenditure of money?

it is called compromise. Those who have been involved in building Bonfire in the past, and those currently involved with Bonfire feel that student involvement is extremely important.

In an effort to find middle ground with that group I suggested that students remain involved or lead in every aspect other than the actual stacking of the logs.

Just as when I was a student, I still would like to attend an event with 100,000 other Aggies expressing a burning desire to beat t.u. But now, just like back then, I don't care how the Bonfire gets there, I just want it there (and as large of a fire, and event as possible).

You still aren't grasping the fact that Stack is no more "dangerous" than any other part of building Bonfire. Quite frankly, students with only rudimentary knowledge of logging cutting down trees that have no guarantee of falling where you want them to is in many ways far more unpredictable and dangerous than Stack. Consider Load; a bunch of students throwing a log that weighs who-knows how much at a handful of other students on a truck full of non-necessarily stable logs is supposed to be safe? Sure you can argue that the magnitude of Stack is greater, but under the current system you know exactly where you're putting every log, exactly how secured it is, how much lean inward it has, how sound the greater structure is, and how restrained the swing-man is.

My point is not to point out all the dangers of Bonfire. The staunchest supporters of a student-built, student-whatever Bonfire will never try to say that Bonfire is an inherently risk-free endeavor. You control the things you can, put as many regulations on the riskier things as possible, and ensure that those guidelines are followed. Where your "compromise" fails is that it doesn't compromise anything. Your reason for taking students off Stack is that that would remove danger. Well, you're blatantly leaving the other dangers involved with the other aspects of the endeavor, so nothing is really accomplished in terms of making it safer.

This is a simple issue of can this thing be done safely. The answer yes to being done safely; the answer is no to being done risk-free. Student Bonfire and its supporters believe that the worth of the experience of building Bonfire out-weighs the inherent risk involved. All you want is a party, and an expensive party at that. You can get that elsewhere without taking away from a tradition that actually has meaning.

12 kids died on stack. The tradition died that horrible night.

Lots and lots of minor injuries happen at cut, every year - the Tradition remained strong.

Saying that stack isn't by far the most dangerous part of the process is pretty ignorant of the historical facts.

Saying that stack is still the most dangerous part of the process shows ignorance of how it is conducted now on Student Bonfire. you really should take some time to see how we keep it safe. you are certainly entitled to you opinion now, but i encourage you to come out some night next fall and see for yourself how it has changed.

+1

I'm sorry, but you are very ignorant of the process of logging. I'm a former Bonfire leader, and I'm also a trained Forest Service faller (tree cutter). Faller is about the most dangerous job a wildland firefighter can have. Cut is by FAR the most dangerous aspect of Bonfire. You have thousands of pounds of wood falling to the ground. Logging is one of the most dangerous jobs in the world. Construction is a very controlled process compared to bringing down trees. There's a reason that in 2001 when Bowen revealed the University's plans for any return to campus, cut was completely eliminated from any student involvement and stack was still going to have limited student involvement. Your heart may be in the right place, but you're ignorant on the realities.

Tom

In my statement I was not referring to Student Bonfire. I don't know enough about that to say one way or the other. I will grant you that the one layer with every log touching the ground may be safer, but my statement was a reflection of on campus Bonfire, 99 and before.

quote:

---

That particular stack design died that horrible night.

---

fify