Sunday, April 15, 2007

Blatent Disregard for Life

The Idaho Fish and Game once again demonstrated their blatent disregard for life, by unjustifiably killing an endangered Grizzly Bear. Last week a man in Eastern Idaho was mauled by a Grizzly Bear. The mauling occurred on his property and was likely the result of the bear trying to defend a moose carcass which was left over from the winter. Because of the mauling, the Idaho Fish and Game trapped and killed the bear.
The argument for killing the bear appears to be that the bear might do it again? One Fish and Game officer also said that the bear could have rabies! An apparent way for the officer to justify what he was doing.
Anyone with wildlife experience should know that most animals, especially carnivours, will fight to protect their food. If this bear was really out to eat people, I guarrantee that it would have been successful in doing so! It most likely just wanted to keep the man away from the area.
To put this in perspective, the bear was guilty of our law of battery. For that, we have given the bear an immediate death sentance. It isn't like this bear was a repeat offender, breaking into houses, chasing or hunting people in the streets. No, it was in its element, far from population centers, in its surroundings, doing what bears do - just trying to survive.
We could have relocated the bear, we could have hazed the bear from the area, we could have let it be!
When will our society learn to live with nature? When will we learn that we are dependent upon nature for our own survival? When will we look at the bear and realize that it also has a right to the land? When will we stop killing things just because they "could" be a threat?

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Rob, even worse, watch this unfold. Be patient, it's worth it.

So, first I get this info:
So yesterday I sent out that email about how they had decided the best action to take was to kill the bear in Idaho that mauled Timothy.

So, tonight we have a few commentators who would like to speak on behalf of F&W.

Gentlemen...proceed.

I am going to start with the first one and repost it. Please be patient. Just stay with me here...

Update: The grizzly bear has been killed. Scott MacButch tells the story. He was there. He also clears up a lot of other information about the area where this happened which has not been made clear by the media. Scott sent this as a comment. I moved it to part of the post. It follows:

This morning around 07:30 am the Grizzly that was involved in the recent
mauling was killed by Idaho Fish & Game. It had been caught in a leg snare
during the night and was bellowing most of the night, as my cabin is right next to where it was caught. When the Id Fish & Game arrived (along with the Sheriff & deputy) I expressed my hope that it could live and wished that it would have left. Do note that even Tim, the guy that got mauled wished it no harm, but they told me the decision had been made, that there was a remote chance that it might have rabies and that tests would be performed on the tissue. The bear was 350-400 lbs and it took 5 of us using all our strength using a sled to haul it up the wooded hill on the back of my property.

They will perform a necropsy today in ID Falls. There is no evidence that any cubs were around. There were no other tracks that I have been able to see, and they are pretty clear in the snow. I felt especially bad that it was a female. It had one broken canine and the other teeth, especially the incisors were very old, really ground down leading us to believe that it was a relatively old female, though I wonder if some of this wear was from it
chewing on the steel cable during the night. Other than the teeth, the bear
looked in good shape from coming out of hibernation.

Just to set a few facts straight, this is not a development or subdivision,
I own 32 acres and have since the 1980’s. Yes, the Teton Valley is experiencing rapid growth, but the Targhee Forest is only 1/4 mile from my
land, so this is not the case where some bear walked into a new subdivision.

The other notion that seems to be vented in these blogs, is that people that build up here don’t want to assume any risk. I know I may not representative of all my neighbors, but many of us are keen observers of wildlife, and care deeply about them. There are also several guides and backcountry skiers that
live up Rammell Mtn road, and believe me, we know a few things about risks.

I guess one observation I could pass on concerning the mauling, would be
that it occurred at around 08:30 pm. This and early morning are a time when
bears become quite active, and a time that we should avoid walking in dense
timber, though if my dog Pup was barking, I probably would have done the exact same thing, but I won’t any more. Tim had walked about 75 yards from
his house when he was attacked, as I found blood there and down feathers.

I feel real bad for Tim, and it says something about his compassion and
spirit about having no ill feelings toward the bear, but the fate of the bear was out of our hands.
-------------------------
then we get this:
Officials kill grizzly bear that attacked E. Idaho man...
Apr 15 2007 4:15PM
Associated Press
Officials kill grizzly bear that attacked E. Idaho man

BOISE, Idaho (AP) A grizzly bear that mauled an eastern Idaho man last week has been killed.
Officials say the 15-year-old male grizzly that weighed 350 to 400 pounds was caught in a snare and then shot yesterday.
Game wardens and Teton County sheriff's deputies had been trying to capture the bear since the Tuesday attack on 33-year-old Timothy Henderson.

Henderson spent three days in a hospital before being released Friday with multiple claw and bite wounds.

Officials say the bear was likely guarding a winter-killed Moose carcass it had found that was about 50 yards from Henderson's cabin. The cabin is located in grizzly bear habitat near the Wyoming state line.
-------------------------
Then this:

Wildlife officials kill problem grizzly near West Yellowstone...
Aug 14 2006 9:50PM
Associated Press
Wildlife officials kill problem grizzly near West Yellowstone

BOZEMAN (AP) State wildlife officials kill a 20-year-old grizzly bear captured over the weekend in the West Yellowstone
area.Officials say the male bear routinely looked for food in residential areas. They say it was habituated to people, and it caused property damage by breaking into numerous garages and a shed.

Kevin Frey is grizzly bear management specialist with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. He says the decision to euthanize the bear was based on its behavior, age,
declining health, and worn teeth.

The agency says bears that associate food with people and homes usually are trapped and relocated. Those that return repeatedly after being relocated are considered a threat to public safety, and usually have to be killed.
--------------------------
Okay, did you get all that...?

First we hear it's a female (that's bad)
Then it's 15 years old
Then it might have rabies (that's bad)and BS by the way
Then it was a bear that had never had problems in the area before
Now it's a male
Now it's a problem male
No, it's 20
Habituated to people
Are you guys following me here?
A thief
A vandal
BUT...none of that matters above.
They killed the bear because it was old. Oh and that little tiny
blurb about it's "suddenly violent" behavior.
So, I guess in order for us to swallow all of this information and to
justify killing the bear, you know...they had to tweak a few of the
conditions.
Went from a sweet, older female with no convictions to a...snapping,
snarling, white hot ball of canine terrrrrrrrorrrrr.

"er...we can kill it now."

Anything remotely suspicious about this.?!
Man am I boilin'!

Anonymous said...

I meant Ursine not Canine....sigh

wolf21m said...

I also noticed the inconsistencies in the stories, but did not follow it detailed enough to realize the increase in years. I did notice, the female to male, and wondered if this was also a ploy to justify it.
I also noticed that the Statesman article said that the bear had been captured before. They were careful not to say it was in trouble before, but I am sure that most people read that into the statement. I felt it was irresponsible journalism to include that statement without substaniation as to why it had been tagged. I am sure that if it were tagged for being in trouble, we would know all of the details.

Alan said...

Nice tracking of the reporting of the kill, but I prefer to look at that the underlying premise. "Bear hurts man, man takes revenge, bear must die."

Obviously the homeowner didn't do anything wrong, he was just checking on his dog. He, living in grizzly bear country, encountered a grizzly and came out the worse for wear. Rogue bears should be eliminated, but a bear dong what bears do ... defending its meal ... I don't see why it had to be killed. Other than the F&G had to look like they're taking "decisive action to protect the public." Jeezus.

Anonymous said...

I heard Tim interviewed on the radio on the way into work this morning, and he was stating that the reason he wasn't more severely mauled or killed was because the bear was 15 years old and had old teeth (or his head would have been crushed)...I could tell by his comments that he seemed compassionate toward the bear and as you have all stated bore no ill will towards it. It really sickens me that the media will take a story like this and only publish the pieces that make their story sensational - even worse than that they are willing to twist it to justify the actions taken. In my humble opinion killing the bear was an unfair response to this so called attack and probably done just to quiet the demands from people who don't have the full story..

Anonymous said...

Rumor has it that they did not have access from private roads to public to release the bear. Copters weren't running until June. Apparently Idaho's funding, among the other bear states, are having problems with funding. Typical excuses.
I wonder if they were so panicked about rabies if they even gave the guy a shot for it. All bears who defend their carion have rabies. LOL.

Anonymous said...

Ok, first of all, mosto f the time, Bears will not fight to defend unless engaged themselves. They will normally scream it out like they do with other bears. Seriously, they jsut yell and try to scare the other into backing down. That bear (If it was of sound mind) would have yelled and screamed at the guy isntead of charging him like that. Second of all, why can't we trust the game department? I can believe thier decisions were justified. They are experienced with dealing with wildlife, and have respect for it. They would not needlessly kill this bear. HAve some faith in the system people.

Anonymous said...

Ok, first of all, mosto f the time, Bears will not fight to defend unless engaged themselves. They will normally scream it out like they do with other bears. Seriously, they jsut yell and try to scare the other into backing down. That bear (If it was of sound mind) would have yelled and screamed at the guy isntead of charging him like that. Second of all, why can't we trust the game department? I can believe thier decisions were justified. They are experienced with dealing with wildlife, and have respect for it. They would not needlessly kill this bear. HAve some faith in the system people.