Grizzly mauls two kills one

[Candy]

This thread is insane. The animal killed a person and is a danger to other people. I don't care if its a croc, bear, lion, or one eyed one horned flying purple people eater... Attack a human, game over. It is, what it is. Its not about any BS with PETA, or god, or anything other than common sense.

The person was in animal territory thinking that they are safe....that is the insane part.

 

[RichardS]

The person was in animal territory thinking that they are safe....that is the insane part.

What difference does it make if they thought they were safe? And why was in the bears territory? Wasn't it also a squirrels territory? When the people are in the woods at their camp site, isn't it their territory?

 

[Candy]

No way it's the people's territory and I haven't heard of any squirrels who kill people. They are in bear territory and they actually know this when they go in and still choose to spend the night in a tent. Not very smart.

 

[RichardS]

No way it's the people's territory.

Why? Really think about it.

They are in bear territory and they actually know this when they go in and still choose to spend the night in a tent. Not very smart.

Irrelevant.

We get it, you like bears. You think the bear was doing what bears do.

The consensus is that the woods are a safer place without a bear that knows it has the capacity to kill humans.

 

[dmmj]

dob't squirells carry rabies, and fleas which can carry the plague?

 

[Ickisrulz]

And this is what I am talking about. Why do we put ourselves out in there country and then blame them for what comes natural. As for bears not attacking humans I don't believe that either. I dare to say if you stand yourself in front of a bear your not going to have much of a chance. I do understand that if you are in natural that you will do everything in your power to protect yourself against them, but after the fact doesn't make sense to me. We don't even know that it's the right bear and as for the fact that they say they have the right one due to DNA, who are you believing here? How many times have they convicted innocent humans based on having to provide the public with a killer even if it's the wrong person?

---

There is no difference between an animal life and a human life, a life is a life. .

That is perhaps the scariest thing I have ever seen posted here

Maybe you'll understand more if I put it in this way.....Do you think to God that one life is more valuable then another? I'm afraid that's just how you as a human perceives it, that's probably why that post was scary for you. Aren't you the one who tried to get PETA to back you on saving the lives of animals? I'm afraid this outlook doesn't match that, but it might be a clue on why they didn't.

---

If you are talking about the God of the Bible...then yes...although he loves animals...he loves people more as they are created in his image and have a special place in fellowship with him. Jesus said a man was more valuable than an animal very plainly. Read the Bible.

 

[Tom]

Candy, I like you and I share your angst about the death of a majestic, beautiful wild animal. What I'm trying to relate to you is that, unfortunately, in most cases, this is the best and only sensible response for all involved, including the bear. Yes, I said including the bear. Relocation does not work. Other bears already occupy the territory where they would be relocated to. This leads to horrible territorial battles. Both bears are then injured and wasting precious energy fighting instead of foraging for much needed food. The loser, normally the interloper, will usually be driven away from territory after territory and subjected to slow starvation and suffering from repeated injury. Infection is likely, especially in this weakened state and if the bear survives until winter, it won't survive the winter as it didn't build up the necessary fat reserves.

The other problem with relocation is that there is nowhere in the world to relocate them to where humans don't exist. Humans move all over North America and it just isn't right dropping off a killer bear in somebody else's neck of the woods.

 

[Jacqui]

And yes to God there is a difference, humans were made in Gods image not animals.

Hmm did you read that in the bear's version of the bible or the humans? I have always found who tells the story, tends to show only their own version of any story.

I think the real story is missing and believe the human caused harm to the cubs or the perceived threat and the mother did what she needed to do to protect them. Yes I think the human was in the wrong, yes I think the poor mother bear and her cubs got the bad end of the deal, but unfortunately there is no quick or right fix in this case. The people will go on to tell their version of the story and sell it to the papers, mags, or TV. The bear cubs if lucky will have a tolerable life, but not the one of freedom they should have gotten to live. Of course freedom can also mean a very short life itself.

The only good thing so far, is maybe the cubs will get to stay alive.

Candy, I do understand where your coming from and feel a lot of the same anger, but how would you feel if you were the person who said, "Let's relocate this family of bears" and it was done. They went to a remote area. You hear back from the rangers how once located there, the cubs all died in a couple of weeks due to not being able to fit in to that area. Time goes on and as it does, that mother bear roams as bears will do. Unknown to you, she does become on of the rogue type bears (yes not all will, but perhaps this is one of the unlucky ones whom does). Far from where this attack took place and months later, a family stops to photogragh the view. Out of nowhere, without cause or without giving notice, the mother bear attacks the family. The little girl with pigtails and an unending smile (perhaps a child you love dearly), is the first to feel the rath of the bear....

Do you still think it was worth the chance? Did that last family deserve to pay for what the earlier idiot did? The mother bear and family didn't deserve their fate either, but the bears atleast had a factor in what happened, this last family had none.

 

[Neal]

Out of nowhere, without cause or without giving notice, the mother bear attacks the family. The little girl with pigtails and an unending smile (perhaps a child you love dearly), is the first to feel the rath of the bear....

WOW!!!!

 

[Maggie Cummings]

Candy...you need to reread about this bear thing. The bear attacked people in the middle of the night in their tents asleep. She was not defending her cubs, she was eating people sleeping, and easy meal. Just the same as box turtles will die trying to get back to their home territory a relocated bear causes more harm and ends up dying a slow awful death. While there's not one person on this forum who thinks killing the bear is a good thing, we all know it was a necessary thing. The U. S. is not as big as you think and when you are in the wild you see the same wild animals over and over. I can drive from L.A. to New York and I will see the same drivers over and over. I am not explaining myself very well, except to say, the wild is not as big as you think. That bear had to die in order to save humans in the future. Once they see how weak the prey (us) are/is they will continue to prey on people. Why go after anything else once they see how easy we are to eat???

 

[Isa]

Candy, I agree 100% with you. I just saw this thread and after reading the OP and was about to reply I saw that there were 3 pages! I understand what you are saying 150%. We humans, think we own everything!!! That is what I hate about humans!!! It is crazy, we think
we know the best of every animals or reptiles or fishes... on this planet. I am asking myself the same question you are asking yours, why did they not relocate them!!! Why put the cubs in a zoo and why kill the mother! I do not want to go back on the subject but I hate it when people say animals have no rights! First of all, Who are we to decide that!! And second of all, you guys know that a lot of people do not agree with you, why keep saying it, it is ok we know what you think so stop saying it!!! I am really sad for the family, they did not deserve to be killed . Maggie has a point, maybe they had to kill the mother I do not know, but why put the cubs in a zoo??

And yes to God there is a difference, humans were made in Gods image not animals.

Hmm did you read that in the bear's version of the bible or the humans? I have always found who tells the story, tends to show only their own version of any story.

LOL Jacqui you are so funny!! Thanks for the morning laugh

 

[Tom]

Candy, I agree 100% with you. I just saw this thread and after reading the OP and was about to reply I saw that there were 3 pages! I understand what you are saying 150%. We humans, think we own everything!!! That is what I hate about humans!!! It is crazy, we think
we know the best of every animals or reptiles or fishes... on this planet. I am asking myself the same question you are asking yours, why did they not relocate them!!! Why put the cubs in a zoo and why kill the mother! I do not want to go back on the subject but I hate it when people say animals have no rights! First of all, Who are we to decide that!! And second of all, you guys know that a lot of people do not agree with you, why keep saying it, it is ok we know what you think so stop saying it!!! I am really sad for the family, they did not deserve to be killed . Maggie has a point, maybe they had to kill the mother I do not know, but why put the cubs in a zoo??

And yes to God there is a difference, humans were made in Gods image not animals.

Hmm did you read that in the bear's version of the bible or the humans? I have always found who tells the story, tends to show only their own version of any story.

LOL Jacqui you are so funny!! Thanks for the morning laugh

Isa, you would have preferred the cubs be left in the wild to die of slow starvation or be eaten alive by another adult bear?!?

 

[-JM]

Bear cubs are very dependent on their mother. They wouldn't have had a chance left alone in the wild.

Edit: Also, bears in zoos are so spoiled these guys will never know they used to be "wild". Keepers bend over backwards to reproduce a "wild" environment for the animals, and provide enrichment to simulate wild behaviors and situations. The result keeps the bears (or any animal) happy and mentally and physically fit. That does not mean they could ever be released (that's a different sort of program) but it does mean that they aren't left in a pen to rot and be stared at. These cubs, while not where they were perhaps "born" to be, couldn't be in a better position to lead a healthy happy life.

 

[Itort]

Relocating the mother wasn't an option. She had learned how to obtain a very easy form of meat much easier than an elk or even ground squirrels. Now she would teach her cubs to hunt these weak, easy, abundant prey items. All animals, espically intellagent ones which bears are, look get through life with a minimum use energy and least danger of injury. Grizzly bears in the lower 48 few humans as harmless (unlike 100 years ago when that human was armed with a deadly weapon). I lived in Alaska for two years and being an avid fisherman spent considerable time in grizzly country armed with only a camel bell. That bell meant human and human meant danger (they are hunted there). This sense of danger (both to bears and humans) is missing from the lower 48. Another factor not told of this case is was the victum menstrating? One of the cardinal rules of bear country (going back thousands of years) is women on their peroid don't go in bear country. Alot of the feeling expressed in this thread is from people not in touch with the realty of the wilderness.

 

[mctlong]

Wow, what a sad story. I do agree that they had to kill the bear to prevent it from killing anyone else.
The sad part is that its not the bear's fault and this whole situation could have been avoided. Now these poor cubs are stuck in cage for the rest of their lives. Its horrible.

 

[Missy]

I know what you mean Shelly, it is sad that the cubs will not grow up wild but I would hope they went to a fantastic zoo with a great big bear habitat.

 

[DeanS]

OK! I'll say this once! If you want to bring biblical implications into this, then remember this. After the creation of Adam, God gave man dominion over ALL animals. While it would be nice to be the game keeper and ensure harmony, this can NEVER be. As Tom mentioned earlier in the thread, once a predator tastes human blood and realizes how easy were are to take down, it can be pandemic. Grizzlies and lions seem to acquired a taste for human flesh like no other mammals. Sure, a polar bear will resort to the same thing (given the opportunity), but they do not use the element of surprise. They just come at you head on with enough warning for you to retreat. If a grizzly or a lion hit you...you almost NEVER see it coming.

I commented earlier...

GRIZZLY COUNTRY!
NO CAMPING!

Just my way of saying, Think people...and know the risks!

 

[RichardS]

I hate it when people say animals have no rights! First of all, Who are we to decide that!! And second of all, you guys know that a lot of people do not agree with you, why keep saying it, it is ok we know what you think so stop saying it!!! I am really sad for the family, they did not deserve to be killed

Let me appeal to your logic. If animals have rights, then they also have rules. The bear had the right to be there, but the bear did not have the right to kill the people. So, there are consequences to those actions.

Now get back to Narnia, where its obvious you formulated your perspective.

On a serious note, for serious members, I see this with local gators on a weekly basis. Some tourist from (insert northern state) comes down and feeds alligators bread, marsh mellows, road kill, crabs, whatever. After a few days/weeks, the gator associates food with people. As soon as anyone in the know is informed.... that gator is killed. The gator did nothing wrong, heck it didn't even bite or attack anyone. Still had to kill it. Relocation is not an option for similar reasons as we pointed out with the bears.

 

[dmmj]

Animals don't have rights, and they never should. we went over this with our PETA thread, if you want animals to have rights, that means no more pets, no more zoos mo more meat, if animals have rights then tha bar commited murder and deserved the death penalty, using the animal have rights theory, you can't have it both ways with animals, rights = responsibility.

 

[johnnyg50]

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/article_217c700c-9c5e-11df-964e-001cc4c002e0.html
According to this article, there has not been an unproked attack in this area since 1984. The keyword here being UNPROVOKED. I find it interesting that some people in this forum are blaming the victims in this case. The victims were asleep in a CAMPGROUND (not in the back county) at 2am, when the bear attacked them in their tent. Since grizzlies rarely attack people unprovoked, the authorities had NO CHOICE but to put this bear down. Candy, it appears from your postings that you're a mom. How would you feel if this bear was relocated, found it's way into another campground and attacked one of your children? Then you find out the same bear was responsible for an unprovoked human attack. I would hope at this point that you value your children's lives over the life of this bear. I am also an avid animal lover and believe humans should do their part to SHARE our beautiful country responsibly with it's indigenous animals. However, it is absolutely our right to protect ourselves against animal attacks and the authorities have a responsibility to protect the public from what they believe to be a dangerous animal. If I was Ranger Rick and decided to release this bear into a remote area and it attacked another human, I would not only have to live with that guilt for the rest of my life, but I and my agency would be open to a tremendous amount of liability. As far as the authorities lying to make the public feel better is concerned, what research have you done Candy to prove this point. Do you know how many people would have to part of the CONSPIRACY to make that happen? Bottom line is this was a rare event that hasn't happened in the area in 26 years. It's not like the rangers are lining up grizzlies and executing them on a daily basis. Believe me, they don't want to kill this animals unless it's absolutely necessary.