[CitizenKane]

I'm going to disagree here. He started a signal fire which he left unattended in the desert which ignited a 230-acre blaze. Hiking in the desert is quite dangerous and his actions could have easily endangered others. He's lucky that no one else died as a result of his actions and I can easily see why this kind of penalty would be made in this case.

[gizmo]

It was "100°F and bone-dry", according to the article. He had no chance of putting the fire out. And he would have died if he hadn't started the fire.

We don't typically punish people so harshly when they damage property out of carelessness. This punishment also doesn't work as deterrence. This guy thought he was prepared, after all. He packed an axe and other junk, but that won't do you any good if you lack basic navigation skills. This guy didn't intend to do something immensely stupid. He was just so out of his depth that he didn't even realize he started on the wrong trail.

[CitizenKane]

I don't think ignorance is that excusable in this case. I grew up in the desert and in cases where it's "100°F and bone-dry" it's extremely dangerous to undertake a long hike without proper preparation, especially if you don't even know where you are.

If someone accidentally kills someone there's a punishment involved, even if they didn't intend to do something immensely stupid. It's one thing to be ignorant, but it's another thing entirely to be ignorant to the point of endangering others.