At 4 a.m. on Wednesday morning at least one bear ravaged a campsite near Yellowstone National Park, killing one man and leaving two others wounded. The other campers fled the site and hid in their cars to escape being attacked. Authorities have not yet released the names of the victims.
The attacks occurred at the Soda Butte campground in the Gallatin National Forest.The campground has been shutdown and wildlife officials are still scrambling to figure out exactly what happened.
"We don't know if it was one bear, two bears, a black bear or grizzly bear," Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokesman Ron Aasheim told the Associated Press. "Obviously, the bear's gone now. Will it come back tonight? That's the question.”
In 2008 a grizzly bear bit a camper at the same campsite. The camper survived the attack and the bear was eventually trapped and transported to a research station. For the most part, fatal grizzly bear attacks are uncommon in Yellowstone. Only five people have ever been killed by grizzlies in the park, according to wildlife biologist Kerry Gunther.
However, Wednesday’s attack comes just one month after 70-year-old botanist Erwin Evert was killed by a grizzly while hiking in Kitty Creek near Yellowstone. During the time of the attack, researchers were trapping bears in the area, and it was supposed to be closed to hikers, but Evert ignored the warning signs.
There is some speculation that drugging and trapping bears could cause them to be more aggressive to humans, but there is no solid research on the subject. Wildlife officials do not think that the bear attack on Wednesday had anything to do with trapping or drugging bears, and so far, it seems that the attack was totally unprovoked.
Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h-zvKvHc7LVgGFN-WcG2ni...
Comments (19)
http://www.ukuggus.com/
http://www.asics-us.com/
http://www.mbt-usa.com/mbt-chapa-c-4.html
http://www.coachusabags.com/
you have to accept the fact that you might get eaten when your in bear country, The bears that raid human camp sites obviously lost all fear of man & are the most dangerous to mans safety.
I guess they are saying now that it is a Grizzly
Still very sorry for the attack victims and the cubs.
I want to start by saying I am so sorry for the death of the man killed by the Black Bear and the others who were injured, they did nothing to provoke this attack. We seem to be forgetting the point though...WE are in Bear territory....and now that a Mamma Bear acted like the ANIMAL that she is...we are going to kill her and imprison her cubs to a life of HELL in a zoo? Campers and "wildlife lovers" love to be up close and personal with these WILD ANIMALS until they hurt or kill someone....then not so cute anymore...the bear and her cubs should have been captured and released into a remote "non camping area" far far away from people having campfires leaving food around and taking pictures of WILD ANIMALS.
bears will be bears no matter if you really need a sign telling you bears are in the park,any time you go into the wilderness there are risk involved,thats part of the thrill.if you want to be cuddled and molly cocked stay at home.
It is time to establish grizzly bear hunting seasons in all areas where they live. Not to kill all of them just a controlled number in order to maintain the correct order in the food chain. Apex predators must not be allowed to become desensitized to humans whereby thinking of them as acceptable prey.
A bear population that is hunted will not be as likely to attack a man rather they vacate the area upon scenting man.
later,
charlie
I didn't learn much from this article. There is no way that I would go into bear country unarmed -- it doesn't make sense. Many of us have seen the results of bear attacks.
Minou,
You are correct that researchers eventually removed the warning signs, but you are wrong when you say "no trail closures were posted prior to the incident." Also, you implied that Mr. Everet did not know about the bear trappings and the inherent danger of hiking the trail. That is also incorrect.
Here's some information taken from a report following an official investigation of the incident:
"The report relayed accounts suggesting Evert put himself at risk despite being aware of the danger. Evert had seen the warning signs while hiking yet expressed hope in the days before his death that he could 'catch up with' the researchers and talk to them, said the report, drawing from a statement by a forest ranger who'd talked to Evert's wife and daughter."
The research had been going on for awhile, and Evert was well aware of it.
This story is a perfect reason for ANY outdoors person to at least get a CCW permit if for no other reason than to be prepared. If they don't feel that where they live is enough of a jungle, they can be sure that National Parks which are homes to bears, coyotes and mountain lions just might qualify!
In NPs where I'm allowed (and I don't go unless allowed), I carry a 6 1/2" bbl Blackhawk in .357 Mag with hollowpoint hunting rounds and a 2" SP101 for backup - my family is just TOO IMPORTANT to me to do otherwise.
I prefer what Gen Stormin Norman took on his Alaskan jaunt, flash bang grenades with a .45
Minou, It is not semantics. It is legal definition. When one states there is any kind of legal liability, he needs to have his definitions correct, that would be following the legal definition, which is that slander is only oral communication. You said nothing about defamation, only slander. This does not meet the legal defintion of slander.
As an aside, if you get any of your news from the mainstream media, you are being fed half truths and some out right lies. They only report what they want you to hear. They were going to completely ignore the Journolist debacle until the alternatives picked up on it.
Bottom line, the MSM is incapable of giving any kind of unbiased story.
I'm not here to toy with semantics, Bo. The first definition for slander in the dictionary is defamation. The second is malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report. The third is the law which is oral defamation. Regardless, Evert did not disobey any warnings. There were none! Reports like Robinson's make me wonder how much of the news we read or hear is really true!
Minou, I count that -1 as coup on my part. Thank you.
minou, slander is spoken oral communication not written; the burden of proof would be on whether or not actual damage has been done to the parties allegedly slandered. Since this was not spoken oral communication, slander is an inaccurate word. You are one who also needs to get your facts straight.
Alex Robinson,
You are disseminating inaccurate and false information regarding the Kitty Creek incident. No trail closures were posted prior to the incident. Evert did not ignore warnings. The signs were removed! You need to do better research and read the federal investigative report before you print your news articles or you will be liable for slander! FYI.....FWS website at:
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone....
congress recently passed a bill allowing handguns in national parks/ bears live there/ be prepared when you enter THIER HOME,you can't blame the bear for being a bear
When people ignore signs saying an area is closed, such as Erwin Evert did, only bad can become of it.
Campers need to realize that a campsite has to be clean, no food or food scraps laying about. Food left out is a free dinner invitation to a wild animal.
I used to walk the woods as a kid with a knife for protection, but now I carry a pistol and knife. I don't know if I feel safer, but I feel better knowing I have more than just a knife for protection.
I'm thinking the minimum gun that I would want to take into a place like that would be a .44 Magnum. Smith makes their mountain gun just for this kind of situation.
With a heavy load, it would not be a lot of fun to shoot. But still, it would be more enjoyable than getting chomped on by a bear. That rates real high on my list of things I never want to experience, being chomped on, that is.
this is why people should be aloud to carry a gun in parks where the danger is high.especially with bears!
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)
congress recently passed a bill allowing handguns in national parks/ bears live there/ be prepared when you enter THIER HOME,you can't blame the bear for being a bear
I prefer what Gen Stormin Norman took on his Alaskan jaunt, flash bang grenades with a .45
Minou,
You are correct that researchers eventually removed the warning signs, but you are wrong when you say "no trail closures were posted prior to the incident." Also, you implied that Mr. Everet did not know about the bear trappings and the inherent danger of hiking the trail. That is also incorrect.
Here's some information taken from a report following an official investigation of the incident:
"The report relayed accounts suggesting Evert put himself at risk despite being aware of the danger. Evert had seen the warning signs while hiking yet expressed hope in the days before his death that he could 'catch up with' the researchers and talk to them, said the report, drawing from a statement by a forest ranger who'd talked to Evert's wife and daughter."
The research had been going on for awhile, and Evert was well aware of it.
bears will be bears no matter if you really need a sign telling you bears are in the park,any time you go into the wilderness there are risk involved,thats part of the thrill.if you want to be cuddled and molly cocked stay at home.
this is why people should be aloud to carry a gun in parks where the danger is high.especially with bears!
I want to start by saying I am so sorry for the death of the man killed by the Black Bear and the others who were injured, they did nothing to provoke this attack. We seem to be forgetting the point though...WE are in Bear territory....and now that a Mamma Bear acted like the ANIMAL that she is...we are going to kill her and imprison her cubs to a life of HELL in a zoo? Campers and "wildlife lovers" love to be up close and personal with these WILD ANIMALS until they hurt or kill someone....then not so cute anymore...the bear and her cubs should have been captured and released into a remote "non camping area" far far away from people having campfires leaving food around and taking pictures of WILD ANIMALS.
I'm thinking the minimum gun that I would want to take into a place like that would be a .44 Magnum. Smith makes their mountain gun just for this kind of situation.
With a heavy load, it would not be a lot of fun to shoot. But still, it would be more enjoyable than getting chomped on by a bear. That rates real high on my list of things I never want to experience, being chomped on, that is.
When people ignore signs saying an area is closed, such as Erwin Evert did, only bad can become of it.
Campers need to realize that a campsite has to be clean, no food or food scraps laying about. Food left out is a free dinner invitation to a wild animal.
I used to walk the woods as a kid with a knife for protection, but now I carry a pistol and knife. I don't know if I feel safer, but I feel better knowing I have more than just a knife for protection.
It is time to establish grizzly bear hunting seasons in all areas where they live. Not to kill all of them just a controlled number in order to maintain the correct order in the food chain. Apex predators must not be allowed to become desensitized to humans whereby thinking of them as acceptable prey.
A bear population that is hunted will not be as likely to attack a man rather they vacate the area upon scenting man.
later,
charlie
I guess they are saying now that it is a Grizzly
Still very sorry for the attack victims and the cubs.
you have to accept the fact that you might get eaten when your in bear country, The bears that raid human camp sites obviously lost all fear of man & are the most dangerous to mans safety.
Minou, It is not semantics. It is legal definition. When one states there is any kind of legal liability, he needs to have his definitions correct, that would be following the legal definition, which is that slander is only oral communication. You said nothing about defamation, only slander. This does not meet the legal defintion of slander.
As an aside, if you get any of your news from the mainstream media, you are being fed half truths and some out right lies. They only report what they want you to hear. They were going to completely ignore the Journolist debacle until the alternatives picked up on it.
Bottom line, the MSM is incapable of giving any kind of unbiased story.
This story is a perfect reason for ANY outdoors person to at least get a CCW permit if for no other reason than to be prepared. If they don't feel that where they live is enough of a jungle, they can be sure that National Parks which are homes to bears, coyotes and mountain lions just might qualify!
In NPs where I'm allowed (and I don't go unless allowed), I carry a 6 1/2" bbl Blackhawk in .357 Mag with hollowpoint hunting rounds and a 2" SP101 for backup - my family is just TOO IMPORTANT to me to do otherwise.
I didn't learn much from this article. There is no way that I would go into bear country unarmed -- it doesn't make sense. Many of us have seen the results of bear attacks.
http://www.ukuggus.com/
http://www.asics-us.com/
http://www.mbt-usa.com/mbt-chapa-c-4.html
http://www.coachusabags.com/
Alex Robinson,
You are disseminating inaccurate and false information regarding the Kitty Creek incident. No trail closures were posted prior to the incident. Evert did not ignore warnings. The signs were removed! You need to do better research and read the federal investigative report before you print your news articles or you will be liable for slander! FYI.....FWS website at:
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone....
Minou, I count that -1 as coup on my part. Thank you.
minou, slander is spoken oral communication not written; the burden of proof would be on whether or not actual damage has been done to the parties allegedly slandered. Since this was not spoken oral communication, slander is an inaccurate word. You are one who also needs to get your facts straight.
I'm not here to toy with semantics, Bo. The first definition for slander in the dictionary is defamation. The second is malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report. The third is the law which is oral defamation. Regardless, Evert did not disobey any warnings. There were none! Reports like Robinson's make me wonder how much of the news we read or hear is really true!
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)