Grizzley shot (1 Viewer)

[Andy Adcock]

After dragging a woman from her tent and killing her.

Grizzly bear shot dead after killing woman in Montana

Leah Davis Lokan, 65, was on a mountain biking trip when she was attacked by the bear.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Ratal]

Everyone in Montana knows Ovando mountain and Park are jammed filled with bears - and that bears demand extra precautions being taken.

So sad to see her meet her death this way, utterly tragic - but the number one lesson she forgot was to respect the dangers that the wildlife pose. Those mountains are dangerous places and you should move through them with that in mind at all times

 

[YuShan]

"Ms Lokan and her two companions, who were staying in a separate tent, then removed food from their tents and secured them before going back to sleep. But the bear returned shortly afterwards, leading to the fatal attack."

Keeping food in your tent in grizzly country is a definite no-no.
R.I.P. both this lady and the bear.

 

[rpg51]

When traveling in grizzly country my companions and I use tents that have never seen food, not even tooth paste. We stop to cook and eat, and then we move down stream to a different area to camp. But, I have to say, it is also true that every now and then an experienced group taking all the right precautions gets attacked. It is a very real, albeit small, risk. When we drive from one city to another we take similar risks. A life without risk is not a life that I aspire to. The question is the extent of the risk. Grizzly bears are a fairly high risk endeavor. The thing is that many people do not realize just how real the risk is. It is very sad to hear that people have been hurt when traveling in the wilderness. To some extent when you are in an area where there are habituated bears, just being in a tent may be risky. Bears start to associate tents with food.

 

[MikeInPA]

Another fine example of an animal dying because of stupid people.

 

[Farnboro John]

I dunno about this one. I'm not sure the authorities aren't right in this case.

If you do everything right - or even if you make a mistake and correct it - and then a bear gets you, the bigger risk is that the bear then decides humans are a prey item and seeks them out habitually because they are easy prey.... and people who do everything right habitually, start getting killed. Then you will see calls for reduction or elimination of bear populations - not great.

Maybe killing one Grizzly in these circumstances is the only realistic answer for the authorities: especially if they can do it quickly and ensure they get the right bear. Then everyone continues to enjoy that bit of wilderness - including all the other bears.

I'm not the biggest fan of humans in general and I think anyone walking to the North Pole shouldn't be armed, if a bear gets them tough cheese. But places people habitually go, and value partly because of the wildlife in them, require a balanced approach and I think this may be the best that can be done for both bears and people.

John

 

[YuShan]

I dunno about this one. I'm not sure the authorities aren't right in this case.

If you do everything right - or even if you make a mistake and correct it - and then a bear gets you, the bigger risk is that the bear then decides humans are a prey item and seeks them out habitually because they are easy prey.... and people who do everything right habitually, start getting killed. Then you will see calls for reduction or elimination of bear populations - not great.

Maybe killing one Grizzly in these circumstances is the only realistic answer for the authorities: especially if they can do it quickly and ensure they get the right bear. Then everyone continues to enjoy that bit of wilderness - including all the other bears.

I'm not the biggest fan of humans in general and I think anyone walking to the North Pole shouldn't be armed, if a bear gets them tough cheese. But places people habitually go, and value partly because of the wildlife in them, require a balanced approach and I think this may be the best that can be done for both bears and people.

John

A Grizzly bear doesn't see humans as a prey item. But they will go after your food once they associate humans with food, and may then defend what they see as THEIR food source. At that point the bear can become a threat to humans. And then it may be necessary to shoot the bear.

But this is totally avoidable as long as people make sure they store their food safely (preferably in a bear canister that the bear cannot open), so the bear doesn't get conditioned. As we hikers/campers (and rangers) say: "a fed bear is a dead bear". So storing your food sensibly is not only to protect your food, it is to protect the bear.

I think the only animal species that nominally sees humans as prey is the Polar bear.

 

[Jos Stratford]

I think the only animal species that nominally sees humans as prey is the Polar bear.

And Tigers on occasion

 

[YuShan]

And Tigers on occasion

I know. That's why I wrote "nominally". From what I heard, kills by tigers are usually old/weak/sick individuals that have become incapable of catching their usual prey (deer) and out of desperation then go for the easier to catch inferior food.

 

[Jos Stratford]

I know. That's why I wrote "nominally". From what I heard, kills by tigers are usually old/weak/sick individuals that have become incapable of catching their usual prey (deer) and out of desperation then go for the easier to catch inferior food.

In the Sundarbans, I believe no link with poor health or age, but fairly routine to prey on people entering the swamps. Used to be an average of about 20 or so kills a year, maybe still the same.

 

[Jos Stratford]

I think the only animal species that nominally sees humans as prey is the Polar bear.

And mosquitoes and other little biting things 😅

 

[YuShan]

In the Sundarbans, I believe no link with poor health or age, but fairly routine to prey on people entering the swamps. Used to be an average of about 20 or so kills a year, maybe still the same.

I think that is still true. But my understanding is that the Sundarbans are the exception to the rule. The humans who get killed there are usually honey collectors, fishermen, folk like that who get ambushed. It is easy there because it is a dense mangrove (I've actually visited the Sundarbans in Bangladesh. It is quite wonderful. Unfortunately I didn't see a tiger there.)

The tigers there are actually a quite small race, so it is interesting that they are the ones that kill. There is a theory that they got a taste for human flesh from the bodies of dead people the get routinely thrown into the Ganges and end up in the Sundarbans.


Sundarbans in Bangladesh


Our guards


Early Morning in the Sundarbans

 

[YuShan]

Looking for tigers and rhinos in Chitwan NP, Nepal. I asked the guide if he was scared of tigers. To my surprise, it was only his #3 fear. His #1 fear was the Sloth Bear, because they are unpredictable and can do quite some damage. #2 was the rhino. They are OK as long as you keep your distance. #3 was the tiger, but he said they will avoid you, so not much of a danger. Though they could be very close, they will just lay flat.


This was actually quite scary.


My foot next to a fresh tiger footprint


No tiger found, but a rhino is cool too

 

[Andy Lakin]

A tricky one but people need to remember that many bears in America are shot every year legally. Look at the number of people getting their jollies bow hunting large prey such as this.

On the survival shows you often see them saying "hey bear" or similar so as not to startle the bears if they unexpectedly come across one when walking trails etc. I've often wondered how effective this is!

 

[Loud Green Man]

Another fine example of an animal dying because of stupid people.

Sadly it clearly didn’t die soon enough and primerilly because the now dead and allegedly “stupid” lady failed to deploy a firearm.

Ironic given the Country in question where packing a handgun along with the energy bars would hardly be considered cutting edge stuff.

LGM

 

[Farnboro John]

Sadly it clearly didn’t die soon enough and primerilly because the now dead and allegedly “stupid” lady failed to deploy a firearm.

Ironic given the Country in question where packing a handgun along with the energy bars would hardly be considered cutting edge stuff.

LGM

I don't know how much pistol shooting you've done but most people couldn't hit a barn from inside it. Without constant relentless practice a handgun will be more dangerous to the user than the target, and that includes the possibility of angering a bear by non-fatally injuring it - by far the most likely outcome in the dark in a tent while being attacked. Its not as easy as it looks in the movies.

John

 

[Loud Green Man]

I don't know how much pistol shooting you've done but most people couldn't hit a barn from inside it. Without constant relentless practice a handgun will be more dangerous to the user than the target, and that includes the possibility of angering a bear by non-fatally injuring it - by far the most likely outcome in the dark in a tent while being attacked. Its not as easy as it looks in the movies.

John

I guess this will take some believing but prior to the UK handgun ban I owned and regularly shot one of these, albeit I concede a situation never arose whereby I had need to deploy within a 🏕 or indeed anywhere in Tunbridge Wells other than the Speldhurst range:

LGM

 

[Farnboro John]

I guess this will take some believing but prior to the UK handgun ban I owned and regularly shot one of these, albeit I concede a situation never arose whereby I had need to deploy within a 🏕 or indeed anywhere in Tunbridge Wells other than the Speldhurst range:
View attachment 1463661
LGM

Yes, well I preferred a 9mm Cz75 and a Desert Eagle in 44 Magnum myself, but the point stands.

John