Grizzly Attack, Montana

[sask boy]

I know that the three S system is used by many here in Saskatchewan.
While I was hunting with DrMike we stopped in at a friend of his and he told a grizzle story that happened to him where he had to put down a grizzle that was in his yard going after his cattle.
Unfortunately a photo circulated of the animal and the CO came to visit him he was not charged for shooting the animal as there was little doubt he had to but he was charged for not reporting it to the authorities .
I believe that is how the story went .

Blessings,
Dan

 

[DrMike]

That is correct, Dan. It was neighbor children who bruited about their school that divulged the shooting of the bear. The bear was threatening both school children and calves in his rather sizeable herd.

 

[Thankful Otter]

Do folks actually think they would need to consulate an attorney or the
Local law book to protect themselves or their property from anything? Including a bear? OMG

The simple answer is, "Yes." Remember, E, over seventy percent of our population live in two major centres here in BC. Guess who carries all the weight. The tragedy of this is that it generates the SSS concept whenever there is a conflict (SSS=shoot, shovel and shut-up). We are fortunate where I live to have COs who are quite a bit more sensible. If there is a possibility that the shooter was threatened, they will cut a break. Otherwise, it is much as it is for any citizen living in NJ or NYC who dares defend himself/herself--plan on explaining yourself before a judge. Lawyers can dissect a two-second event so that it requires seven days to fully explain what took place.

Dr Mike is spot on here Earle and makes several excellent points.

There is already some concern about what we call "the creep effect". They got the grizzly ban in B.C., now lets start working on "-----" ( insert the Territory )

Dr Mike, I also believe it is a tragedy that citizens feel that it is necessary to use the SSS concept.

Dr Mike has made an excellent post above touching on a variety of "truths". Working with ( and i use the word "working with " loosely ) it is amazing what a lawyer from Quebec can and will argue on behalf of an animal rights group. Dr Mike's statement that "a two second event can be dissected and discussed for seven days, is spot on.

I sometimes would love to have the lawyer arguing on behalf of the group, living the two second event ( a polar bear deciding he is dinner and his reaction to that, in real time) before he is allowed to argue, what should have been done or could have been done differently.

I apologize to the forum for the "tone" of this post, but this is a real sore spot with me.

and Earle, just so there is no misunderstanding, I understand ( and I believe that Dr Mike understands ) your point, and we all three wish we lived in simpler times, when common sense was the order of the day. Lucky for you two, both of you did have the opportunity to have enjoyed those times in the past, I envy you both.

 

[35 Whelen]

Point taken Cheyenne! But are you implying the good Dr and myself are
From a my gone era!!!! Lol.

 

[Europe]

Point taken Cheyenne! But are you implying the good Dr and myself are
From a my gone era!!!! Lol.

YES! And I miss it

 

[c. schutte]

Point taken Cheyenne! But are you implying the good Dr and myself are
From a my gone era!!!! Lol.

YES! And I miss it

There are a few of us simi-younger folk who were raised by those same by-gone era.

 

[HAWKEYESATX]

What they should have done is let the Griz alone. You won't win a fight against one, unless you're carrying big artillery, period. I understand their frustration about that they shot the elk. But these are the kind of people that are like road rage idiots you hear about on the news. If cooler heads were to prevail, they should've walked away, and considered themselves lucky and DON'T go messing with a Griz while he's eating, even if you're the one who shot the elk, and the Griz claimed it as its own. You're asking for trouble when you do, and they got the trouble head on by barging in. IMHO, that's 2 hunters we don't need out there anyway.

Sent from my LG-TP450 using Tapatalk

 

[Rol_P]

No where has it been said how the elk died. Suppposition is the hunters shot it. Unverified as far as I can see.
In my humble opinion they should have quietly backed away from the situation rather than holler at the bear.
Second mistake was having the safety on bear spray while in Bear country. In 2013 Yellowstone Park Rangers suggested the safety be removed from the spray when you exit your vehicle. It was also suggested that it be readily accessible, not in the bottom of a pocket or pack.
Lastly, why let the bear get close enough to swat your arm down before you can fire a warning shot, or one in the neck?
Be bear aware and safe folks. Happy Hunting, Rol