SUBSCRIBE | NEWSLETTERS | MAPS | VIDEOS | BLOGS | MARKETPLACE | CONTESTS
TRY BACKPACKER FREE!
SUBSCRIBE NOW and get
2 Free Issues and 3 Free Gifts!
Full Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email: (required)
If I like it and decide to continue, I'll pay just $12.00, and receive a full one-year subscription (9 issues in all), a 73% savings off the newsstand price! If for any reason I decide not to continue, I'll write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing.
Your subscription includes 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Or click here to pay now and get 2 extra issues
Offer valid in US only.


» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Page 1 of 212>>

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Bear spray saves 4 people from Grizzly and cub, in Yellowstone. 2 were injured< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
desert dweller Search for posts by this member.
Greetings
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 9834
Joined: Feb. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 10:42 am  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

2 people were treated for injuries after an encounter with a grizzly bear in Yellowstone

By Associated Press, Updated: Friday, August 16, 7:29 AM


Two of the hikers were able to use their bear spray and the sow and cub left. The encounter lasted about a minute.

Source.


--------------
Seek Higher Ground
Can you feel the silence


Photobucket
Flickr
YouTube
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 2
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 11:22 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Glad they were prepared.

--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 3
red dog Search for posts by this member.
Elev  2,180'
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6986
Joined: Nov. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 11:49 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Another incident in Idaho as well:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs....injured


--------------
Arizona
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 4
nogods Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6339
Joined: Sep. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 12:43 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

is that area near Idaho where they put all the problem grizzlies?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
Loon Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 383
Joined: Sep. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 5:15 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

E gads! I'm headin west for the Tetons in about 2 hours. I've got my spray!
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 6
Bohan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 41
Joined: Aug. 2013
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 5:39 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I want a hiking stick with a heat sensor.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 7
TDale Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 15494
Joined: Jun. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 6:13 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I'd want a Karelian.

--------------
"Sure as I know anything, I know this - they will try again...They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave."
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 8
Montanalonewolf Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 7134
Joined: Mar. 2010
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 7:27 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I'd want someone slower than me... :p

--------------
If you are free to be a Liberal- Thank a person with a gun.

Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
eyebp Search for posts by this member.
Camping is for losers
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 9870
Joined: Dec. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 7:32 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I want my dad back.

--------------
Give me the wine. You keep the bread.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 10
Ecocentric Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5219
Joined: Jun. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 7:38 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Yea though I walk through the valley of bears I will fear no bruin, my bear spray is with me.

--------------
"Travel suggestions from strangers are like dancing lessons from God." -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 11
Ben2World Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 25973
Joined: Jun. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 7:59 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montanalonewolf @ Aug. 16 2013, 4:27 pm)
QUOTE
I'd want someone slower than me... :p

And meatier too.   :;):

--------------
The world is a book and those who do not travel read only a page.  -- St. Augustine
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 12
reubenstump Search for posts by this member.
Lago Grey
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sep. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 16 2013, 10:23 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Ben2World @ Aug. 16 2013, 7:59 pm)
QUOTE

(Montanalonewolf @ Aug. 16 2013, 4:27 pm)
QUOTE
I'd want someone slower than me... :p

And meatier too.   :;):

With huckleberries smeared all over them.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 13
ponderosa Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4330
Joined: Jul. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 17 2013, 12:00 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(nogods @ Aug. 16 2013, 10:43 am)
QUOTE
is that area near Idaho where they put all the problem grizzlies?

There have been rumors of problem bears being relocated to the area around the Idaho Montana border, in the Lake Creek and Lions Head areas.  Yesterday's Idaho incident and another one a few weeks ago were both in the Shotgun Valley area, 30 or 40 miles from those areas.  The Island Park district of the Targhee NF west of Yellowstone has seen the grizzly population naturally growing for a while though.  It's understood that there is a substantial grizzly population in that region at this point.


--------------
The harder the toil, the sweeter the rest.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 14
double cabin Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16651
Joined: Nov. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 12:06 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

*****MAJOR STORY DEVELOPMENT**************

https://www.facebook.com/GreaterYellowstoneBears

I will be tremendously disspointed in and angry with the Park Service if this is ultimately verified. People are scared enough about bears, publishing an enormously false report about it being a party of four as opposed to a party of 2 will compound those fears without correction/retraction IMMEDIATELY.

Not indentifying one of the injured as a Ranger is also IMO quite troubling. Given this I'm wondering if the attacked DID NOT deploy spray and only the other group of two that came to the aid of the ranger and other hiker deployed it after the attack commenced?  I'm also wondering if this Ranger made the "noise" prudent in short sight distance.

Could the press release have been fabricated to save this ranger embarassment?

Almost every encounter between bears and humans is a result of human error, and it sure is starting to sound like that very well might have been the case here with a person that's supposed to know and exercise every prudent protocol.

I solo hike a lot and have had a few tense encounters, and although my choice to solo is admittedly "bad" protocol by otherwise doing what I was supposed to has served me well enough to be here armchair quarterbacking this incident.


--------------
We have nothing to fear but an industry of fear...and man skirts.

http://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=129511480442251
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 15
RebeccaD Search for posts by this member.
Double Arch, Arches N.P.
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 11536
Joined: Jul. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 12:41 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I didn't follow the link earlier,but the story on the OP's link is very clear now that it was two separate attacks on groups of two.

--------------
Writerly thoughts, book reviews, and random short fiction found at
The Ninja Librarian Blog
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 16
double cabin Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16651
Joined: Nov. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 12:53 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I must confess I didn't read DD's link before my response, but given the tiltle of the post I assumed it would corroborate this local article that clearly indicates it being a party of four in the Yellowstone attack.

http://www.jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=10178

I remain quite skeptical of the initial press release's veracity.


--------------
We have nothing to fear but an industry of fear...and man skirts.

http://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=129511480442251
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 17
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 1:24 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(double cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 10:06 am)
QUOTE
*****MAJOR STORY DEVELOPMENT**************

https://www.facebook.com/GreaterYellowstoneBears. . .

I wouldn't call it a "major story development" quite yet — based upon some anonymous Facebook user claiming to have other anonymous sources.

It sounds like several of the "photographers" on the Yellowstone Forum who have major grudges against the Park Service. They feel that way because those "photographers" expect just about anyone (especially locals) with an expensive camera to be above the rules. But the Park Service isn't the only entity capable of misleading the public.

Without revealing his name there, let's just say that Double Cabin has been to Yellowstone Forums, where he found this thread. That is where the claim of a supposed "fabrication" of an NPS New Release is being propagated. Who is making the claim? One poster.

That poster, "ynp4me," the one making the allegations against the Park Service, appears also to be the owner of the Facebook page linked above. And if you read her previous posts going back a couple years, I think you'll also find that she belongs to that group of "photographers" I mention above. They basically think that anyone willing to spend a thousand dollars on a new camera ought to be allowed special privileges in Yellowstone Park regarding the required distance from bears.

She is hardly one to claim a lack of bias regarding interpretive rangers and bears in Yellowstone Park. Besides, what is a group of four as opposed to two groups of two? Many people here claim to hike in groups when in fact they are rarely close together when hiking. Are they all "fabricating" their trip reports? ???

I'm not saying that news officers of the NPS are not biased. But they surely take a more sober view than the biased voices that seek every excuse to blame them — when the real reason may be that a would-be "photographer" with a thousand-dollar camera thinks she has purchased exclusive rights to photograph grizzlies from 10 to 20 feet away.


--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 18
double cabin Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16651
Joined: Nov. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 1:58 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Travis,

In the event anyone else didn't read my posts very well as I said I am "skeptical" of the veracity of the initial report. You don't think the possibility that the group size was grossly misrepresented is a major development? Well given group size is a major component of bear "sense" I'll respectfully and adamantly disagree with you. I also was conditional with "will be..." in my potential consternation for the park service; so beyond your obsession with disputing anything I say with respect to the actual reality of my posts you chose to perhaps misrepresent what was the point of your reply to it? For the record whatever relevance you perceive I post under "JohnnyB" at ynet and have no reason to obscure that.

I forgot about weighing in on the relocation of "problem" bears. I have noted for some time many bears being relocated to the Union Pass area in recent years. This article asserts a disproportinate frequency of "negative" human-bear encounters in that area in respect to the entire ecosystem:

http://jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=10148

From what I've seen and heard bears are "relocated" all over the place within the ecosystem. People in the Dubois area don't like hearing of "problem" bears from the Cody area being relocated to the Upper Wind River Valley and I've read reports of Dubois area "problem" bears being relocated to the Cody area. Many in the upper Wind River Valley beleive bears in the Cody and Dubois areas are quite different when it comes to interaction with humans, with an assumption that "Cody Bears" are more prone to be problematic.  

That said given Grizzlies, whatever their numbers, inhabit far greater ranges than they did not long ago relocation as a management tool will of course have to occur across the ecosystem. To save us all some possible misdirection: Yes, I know the historic range of grizzlies was considerably greater than it is now.


--------------
We have nothing to fear but an industry of fear...and man skirts.

http://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=129511480442251
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 19
red dog Search for posts by this member.
Elev  2,180'
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6986
Joined: Nov. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 2:11 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I'm not going into conspiracy theories or alterior motives, but the story linked in the OP has been significantly altered.

The first version was very specific about 4 hikers in Yellowstone...the "two injured hikers were unable to delpoy their bear spray in time and the bear abandoned the attack only after a 3rd member of the party was able to do so successfully" ... or something to that affect

The first version of the story made no mention of the Idaho incident, which is why I linked to another atricle in post #3.  In fact that article still reads the Yellowstone party was a size of four.


--------------
Arizona
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 20
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 2:30 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Hey, DC, I'll answer that later on this evening. Right now I have other commitments. Stay tuned. :D

--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 21
Bohan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 41
Joined: Aug. 2013
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 18 2013, 2:55 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I guess hip holsters for bear spray that let you shoot from the hip are best. Also, if I saw a cub at any distance, I'd stop and look around as I reach for the spray.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 22
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 2:21 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Let's get to the meat of the issue, and then I'll respond line by line to Double Cabin.

The sole discrepancy claimed to be in the NPS Report is that there were two groups of two hikers instead of one group of four hikers in this incident. Not one bit of evidence that that is true is presented either in that forum or this forum.  The complaint accusing the National Park Service (NPS) of outright fabrication of the news release, is made solely by a California resident, Ynp4me, who claims to have inside sources. She is both the original poster of the Thread at Yellowstone Forums (Ynet) and is the owner of the Facebook Page which Double Cabin linked above, despite the fact that he actually got his information from Ynet Forums.

She, Ynp4me, says the NPS Report is unbelievable, careless, misleading, lies, wrong, unprofessional, garbage, ethically wrong, sloppy, and on and on — all with a hefty dose of HER OWN CAPITAL LETTERS — as if she needs to yell this to the multitudes. And she repeatedly faults the NPS for not verifying the information in its new release.

Yet not one iota of evidence does Ynp4me present to prove that she herself verified her own claims. Someone asks her for documentation on her Facebook page, and she declines to provide it — claiming only that she has inside sources she garnered from her distant home in California.

So the only source for the accusations against the NPS and complaint about group size misrepresentation is from a California resident who refuses — or cannot — name any other source for her claims. Of all the Yellowstone aficionados at Ynet, no one agrees with her except Double Cabin posting at Ynet under the name JohnnyB. He has added virtually nothing in this thread except an echo of Ynp4me in the other forum.

No one at the Ynet forum nor here disputes the News Release in claiming, "the sow and cub left the area after an encounter which lasted about a minute."

Yet in that minute the vociferous critics claim that two groups of two hikers each joined to repel the sow and cubs. Now if the second group of two was down the trail and hiking at a normal pace of 2 mph, it could not have been more than 176 feet from the first group of two. At a regular pace of two miles per hour, a hiker covers 176 feet in one minute. So for this entire incident to be over within one minute, the second pair of hikers would be hiking within 176 feet — or less — of the first pair. But also in that minute, the second pair catches up, decides they need bear spray, and deploys the bear spray, thus repelling the sow and cub.

In other words, I asked this question before and Double Cabin declined to answer: What the heck is the difference? Group hikers commonly hike at much greater separation that a mere 176 feet. (See these two threads in our own forum for examples: Hiking in Groups and Hiking Solo.) Yet the complaint is not that group members were spaced too far apart. The complaint is all based upon an unverified claim of one group of four versus two groups of two. But has the vociferous critic in California ever hiked in a group enough to ask herself: What is the difference?

Like I asked above, and got no answer, "Many people here claim to hike in groups when in fact they are rarely close together when hiking. Are they all "fabricating" their trip reports?" And is the NPS really so guilty and deserving of such dastardly denunciation for speaking to those of us hikers who know by experience how groups commonly hike?


(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 1:58 pm)
QUOTE
You don't think the possibility that the group size was grossly misrepresented is a major development? Well given group size is a major component of bear "sense" I'll respectfully and adamantly disagree with you.
Notice what Double Cabin did here. He first asked me a question. Then he used his own puppet to answer that question for me. And then he argued against his own puppet as if that were me. :D


(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 1:58 pm)
QUOTE
. . . so beyond your obsession with disputing anything I say with respect to the actual reality of my posts you chose to perhaps misrepresent what was the point of your reply to it?

I kind of made my point above, and I'll continue doing so. Whether it is an "obsession" or not, perhaps I find it too entertaining to watch someone stick his foot in his own mouth without me commenting on his lack of taste.  


(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 1:58 pm)
QUOTE
In the event anyone else didn't read my posts very well as I said I am "skeptical" of the veracity of the initial report.

Ah, Double Cabin says that here, but then he goes on to treat the entirely unverified accusations as if they were in fact true. Unfortunately his small skepticism is but a whisper compared to the dastardly reputation he and his vociferous source are so willing to YELL about the NPS. And where does he express the same skepticism toward his source? Not here and not at Ynet.


(Double Cabin at Ynet @ Aug 18, 2013 9:37 am)
QUOTE
. . . it should have been quite easy to determine from the other two hikers that there was no "party of four."

And there Double Cabin is presuming that the mole hill that is treated as a mountain is, in fact, actually a mountain — based solely upon some woman in California throwing a temper tantrum about completely unverified information — her own made-up claim.


(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 1:58 pm)
QUOTE
For the record whatever relevance you perceive I post under "JohnnyB" at ynet and have no reason to obscure that.

Then that is for Double Cabin to reveal and not for me. But the fact is that he chose to link his claims to a woman's anonymous Facebook page  — as if it were a bona fide news outlet —  instead of to Ynet forums, where he actually got the claims in the first place, and where he reinforced Ynp4me's tantrum via the name JohnnyB.


(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 12:53 pm)
QUOTE
I must confess I didn't read DD's link before my response, but given the title of the post I assumed it would corroborate this local article that clearly indicates it being a party of four in the Yellowstone attack. Ά ( Jackson Hole News article )

The real question is, Did Double Cabin read even the Jackson Hole article that he linked? Here is what that article says:
    The area this occurred at is very dense forest that has regrown since 1988. That type of environment would make it difficult for them to see at a very great distance.
Ah, so the vociferous critics act like no self-respecting grizzly sow with cub would dare attack a group of four in dense vegetation, where neither the grizzly nor the hikers could see each other. So, the claim goes, the four must have been split into groups of two (separated at no greater distance than which group members commonly hike at.) Nothing else makes sense, eh? It's all so unheard of, eh?

Yet, two years ago in this very forum we discussed a grizzly attack on a NOLS group, no less, of seven hikers. And the headline read, NOLS kids did a 'phenomenal job'. But the text of the article goes on with a spokesman for NOLS claiming that he was "personally proud of the students," and "They did a really good job." And the claim was "the worst happens, as it sometimes does" and that there wasn't much the NOLS group could have done about the situation. All these proud statements were made despite the fact that it was widely publicized early that the NOLS group panicked and fled at the sight of the grizzly attack.

But Double Cabin didn't insist that NOLS be publicly humiliated like he now thinks the interpretive ranger in Yellowstone may deserve. Not at all. Double Cabin instead noted the importance of NOLS to the local economy, and he is not about to treat that respected school like some mere NPS ranger who may have goofed. But we don't know that, do we?

Now we have the loud repeated insistence made by Ynp4me at Ynet and echoed by Double Cabin here that NPS correct its news release. But did NOLS ever correct its news release? Read the NOLS Press Release. There are several updates, but nowhere there does NOLS retract its earlier claim that the NOLS students did all they could but, you know, "crap happens." Where is the mention that the students panicked and made the situation worse? And as a result they incurred far worse injuries that the four hikers in Yellowstone.

But grizzly sows with cubs in dense underbrush with low visibility don't attack groups, eh? Since when? Did we learn nothing in 2011?

But eventually NOLS provided a report on their incident, as NPS will do on this one. And neither will be posted to the original news release. In the case of the NOLS group, some of us read,
    A newly completed NOLS examination of the attack made available to Alaska Dispatch paints a portrait of a group in panic -- a normal and predictable reaction -- and suggests their behavior might have worsened an inherently dangerous situation.

(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 12:06 pm)
QUOTE
Greater Yellowstone Bears Facebook page, owned by ynp4me Ά I will be tremendously disspointed in and angry with the Park Service if this is ultimately verified. People are scared enough about bears, publishing an enormously false report about it being a party of four as opposed to a party of 2 will compound those fears without correction/retraction IMMEDIATELY.

Well, I bet you are not mad at NOLS. But I take a different view. Perhaps the NPS report erred on the safe side. The message may be, Don't think you're secure in a group of four if you don't stay very close together and practice all other bear avoidance procedures. Group of four or groups of two, it won't make a real difference.


(Double Cabin @ Aug. 18 2013, 12:06 pm)
QUOTE
Not indentifying one of the injured as a Ranger is also IMO quite troubling. Given this I'm wondering if the attacked DID NOT deploy spray and only the other group of two that came to the aid of the ranger and other hiker deployed it after the attack commenced? I'm also wondering if this Ranger made the "noise" prudent in short sight distance. Ά Could the press release have been fabricated to save this ranger embarassment?

You know for someone like Double Cabin who expresses a token skepticism — but not toward his own source in a California gossip maker, well he sure knows the power of suggestion. All he has to do is merely suggest something is true like some dastardly fabrication, and who will ever remember that he never returned to correct himself? All he has to do is suggest something horrible, insist it be corrected, and then just let the rumor ride, all founded on nothing. No verification at all. Just a woman from California putting on a show at Ynet and Facebook.


--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 23
Montanalonewolf Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 7134
Joined: Mar. 2010
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 6:49 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I haven't read all of the above but I saw this this morning.

QUOTE
Four other people - two hikers and two rangers - were attacked in Yellowstone National Park and a nearby forest in Idaho late last week.

The first attack occurred on Thursday when a group of four hikers came face-to-face with a young bear cub on a trail in Yellowstone.
Ad Feedback

The mother of the cub appeared almost immediately and charged the hikers.

"One person was treated at the scene, while the second injured hiker was transported by ambulance to an area hospital with bite and claw wounds," Yellowstone Park authorities said in a statement.

The confrontation lasted about a minute, before the hikers sprayed bear repellent to stop the attack.

In a separate incident, two employees of the Bureau of Land Management in Idaho were attacked while performing a forest health assessment, The Los Angeles Times reported on Friday.

One of the two men needed treatment for bite wounds on his thigh and buttocks while the second man was bitten on the hand as he attempted to use bear spray.

A spokesman for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game said the bear had probably been disturbed by the men while resting.


So one group of 4 with 2 injured and 1 group of 2 with 2 injured.


--------------
If you are free to be a Liberal- Thank a person with a gun.

Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 24
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 7:26 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montanalonewolf @ Aug. 19 2013, 4:49 am)
QUOTE
So one group of 4 with 2 injured and 1 group of 2 with 2 injured.

The thread topic was one group of 4 with 2 injured — in Yellowstone. The other incident took place in Idaho and was added to the thread later by Red Dog.

Double Cabin's objection is to the Yellowstone incident — the topic of the thread —not the Idaho incident.


--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 25
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 7:37 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(red dog @ Aug. 18 2013, 12:11 pm)
QUOTE
. . . but the story linked in the OP has been significantly altered. . . .

No, the story has not been altered. The topic of the thread was about an incident in Yellowstone — in Wyoming. You were the one who added a second incident in Idaho, west of Yellowstone. News articles combined the two incidents, but the topic of the thread was only the incident in Yellowstone — not the incident in Idaho.

Between the two different incidents in two different states, 6 hikers were involved with 4 injuries.


--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 26
reubenstump Search for posts by this member.
Lago Grey
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sep. 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 9:33 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

And there it goes, another thread devolving into sniping, with the original subject relegated to a mere pretense for bickering.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 27
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 9:46 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(reubenstump @ Aug. 19 2013, 7:33 am)
QUOTE
And there it goes, another thread devolving into sniping, with the original subject relegated to a mere pretense for bickering.

No, the thread has not devolved into sniping. My long post above may be beyond some folks' attention span, but it sure is beyond sniping.


--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 28
Colter Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 343
Joined: Dec. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 3:57 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

“This bear by all accounts was acting on instinct, defending its cub. That is natural and normal behavior for a sow grizzly,” Nash said Friday.

Attacking a human nearing a cub is not normal behavior. Normal behavior in bears does not make headlines. If that was normal behavior there would be thousands of maulings a year.

After the first bear fatality in Yellowstone (in 25 years) a couple of years ago the NPS said the sow was exhibiting normal behavior. I argued on this forum that it was highly abnormal behavior and that the bear should be killed. They did kill the bear, but not after it was involved in a second fatality.

It appears all four of the current victims suffered minor injuries. If bears weren't scary, there would be no story. Grizzlies can kill someone easily with one bite or one swat. Fortunately, they are, with very, very few exceptions, highly reluctant to kill someone, bear spray or not.

Despite the stats, I'm sure the encounters were hugely frightening and there is little doubt that spraying an aggressive bear in the face is appropriate.


--------------
Alone Across Alaska: 1000 Miles of Wilderness
Please check out my story and photos!

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 29
TravisNWood Search for posts by this member.
W Y O M I N G
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16605
Joined: Apr. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 5:48 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Excerpts from Stephen Herrero (see footnote*) in the section, "The Evolution of Aggression in Female Bears":
    (199) Andy Russell has described the difference in aggressive behavior between black and grizzly bears: "to compare him (the grizzly) with his lesser cousin, a black bear, is like standing in a case of dynamite beside a sack of goose feathers." (200) I have already stressed how these differences result in more serious human injuries being inflicted by grizzly bear mothers as compared to black bear mothers. Why should the two species, which have so many similarities, be so different behaviorally?

    Ά My field observations of the two species gave me clues and help me formulate a hypothetical explanation for the differences. . . . (204) Ά In this context it is easy to see the importance to black bears of trees and other escape terrain such as dense brush. Trees or dense brush are the core of the mother bears' defense of offspring. . . . Ά The grizzly bear mother typically lives in different environments and shows a more aggressive protection of offspring. . . . Even for grizzly bear females with the young, however, noncontact forms of aggression, such as charges, are far more common name is physical contact. (205) Ά But the documented instances of human injury following sudden confrontation with the grizzly bear female with young substantiates my claim that their behavior is different from that of black bear mothers.

    Ά To understand why requires a journey back in time for several million years, to the age when the grizzly bear line first evolved. . . . Ά I suggest that grizzly bears evolved from forest dwelling ancestors by developing adaptations that allowed them to feed and survive in the open environments created by glacial retreat. Ά (206) I have described how natural selection favored longer claws and greater development of muscles related to digging for food. Natural selection also favored females that could effectively defend their cubs in a treeless environment. . . . Whatever the circumstances were, the grizzly bear mother evolved as a bear more likely than was a black bear mother to physically attack some potential sources of danger. Human beings seem to fit into this category. Thus the grizzly bear adapted structures and behaviors that allowed it to eat the more abundant foods of open environments, and while in the open to defend itself and its cubs.
*Stephen Herrero, Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance (Guilford, Connecticut: The Lyons Press, 2002), 199-206.


--------------
Location — Wyoming
Webpages — Cloud Peak Wilderness Maps — Rocky Mountain Wildlife
Photos — Bighorn Mountains — Wyoming Steppes
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 30
Montanalonewolf Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 7134
Joined: Mar. 2010
PostIcon Posted on: Aug. 19 2013, 10:03 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE

QUOTE
Attacking a human nearing a cub is not normal behavior.


Yes it is. ANY perceived threat to a cub brings on a defensive attack. Just because you're human doesn't make the attack abnormal.

QUOTE
Normal behavior in bears does not make headlines. If that was normal behavior there would be thousands of maulings a year.

There are known to be uncounted, likely into the thousands, encounters where the bear "snuck off" and the human was never aware a bear was anywhere close.

QUOTE
Between the two different incidents in two different states, 6 hikers were involved with 4 injuries.


True as far as it goes*. The confusion was with the news media combining two separate incidents.

*There were actually 7 maulings on the same day in 5 different states. In addition to the one(s) under discussion, there was 1 each in CO and MI (blacks) and another griz in AK.


--------------
If you are free to be a Liberal- Thank a person with a gun.

Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
37 replies since Aug. 16 2013, 10:42 am < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 1 of 212>>
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply Bear spray saves 4 people from Grizzly and cub
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code



Get 2 FREE Trial Issues and 3 FREE GIFTS
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
The Best Trails in America
YES! Please send me my FREE trial issues of Backpacker
and my 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Full Name:
City:
Address 1:
Zip Code:
State:
Address 2:
Email (required):
Free trial offer valid for US subscribers only. Canadian subscriptions | International subscriptions