WhiteBlaze Pages
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
$10 for printed copy(paperback). $6 for interactive PDF. $2 for printable PDF.
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41
  1. #1

    Default Another wrongful killing in GSMNP

    Once again the biologists in GSMNP killed a bear they wrongly thought bit a sleeping hiker. See the news section at nationalparkstraveler.com if you want the story.

  2. #2
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    7,115
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    Given the circumstances, the Ranger's decision seem to have been entirely appropriate. I wish them the best of luck finding the one that bit the thru-hiker at Spence Field, and putting it down.

  3. #3
    Registered User kolokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-11-2008
    Location
    Beachwood, Ohio
    Age
    61
    Posts
    475
    Images
    52

    Default

    If you read the entire article, you know that it was not a simple decision, nor was killing the bear their first choice.

    They tried to fit the bear with a radio collar so that they could release it until DNA tests were in, but this particular bear had a neck that was bigger than his head. He would have easily removed the collar once awake. In the interest of human safety, they decided to euthanize the bear. I think they acted appropriately.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Formerly uhfox

    Springer to Bear Mountain Inn, NY
    N Adams, MA to Clarendon VT
    Franconia Notch to Crawford Notch

  4. #4

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,869
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    It was to cover their ar$e.

    If they did nothing and someone was injured again there would be lawsuit and people would be fired.

    By killing a bear, one they can claim was the most likely one, they prevent that.

  5. #5
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    7,115
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    It was to cover their ar$e.

    If they did nothing and someone was injured again there would be lawsuit and people would be fired.
    If you were charged with making a decision, which would be your greater concern -- that someone was injured because of your failure to perform your duties, or that the National Park Service would be sued because of your failure to perform your duties?

    The Rangers made the right decision, and one that will allow them to sleep soundly. Had they gone another route, my guess is that it would not have been fear of a lawsuit that would haunt thier mind at 3 o'clock in the morning.

    Of course, everyone is different.

  6. #6
    Registered User kolokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-11-2008
    Location
    Beachwood, Ohio
    Age
    61
    Posts
    475
    Images
    52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    It was to cover their ar$e.

    If they did nothing and someone was injured again there would be lawsuit and people would be fired.

    By killing a bear, one they can claim was the most likely one, they prevent that.
    Did you read the article? The plan was to put a tracking collar on the bear, but that was not possible due to the size of the bear's neck. If they just wanted to kill any bear they could have done it without all that time and effort.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Formerly uhfox

    Springer to Bear Mountain Inn, NY
    N Adams, MA to Clarendon VT
    Franconia Notch to Crawford Notch

  7. #7

    Default

    I got a free download link on this site for "Bear in the Back Seat". It was written by the Chief Wildlife ranger at GSMNP about his career managing the wildlife in the park. Most of the book is about bears and it was clear the rangers really care for all of those animals, but they have to protect the human visitors. Most of the time, unacceptable animal behavior is a direct result of humans breaking rules, but the animals have to pay. Don't blame the rangers. Really interesting book and makes you think differently when you read stories like this one.

  8. #8
    Registered User canoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-29-2012
    Location
    Tyner, NC
    Age
    64
    Posts
    954

    Default

    Nothing wrongful about it. TOOOO many bear in the area. They need to be thinned out. Over population means disease and hunger. Which means more unwanted encounters,injury and left unchecked possible....well. There is also over population is the shennies. Just a matter of time.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by canoe View Post
    Nothing wrongful about it. TOOOO many bear in the area. They need to be thinned out. Over population means disease and hunger. Which means more unwanted encounters,injury and left unchecked possible....well. There is also over population is the shennies. Just a matter of time.
    TOOOO many humans in the area. Smokies has 11 million humans thru the year, bears have around 1,500. Do the math. In the very least close automobile access in the park. Tourists need to be thinned out.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,869
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UHFox View Post
    Did you read the article? The plan was to put a tracking collar on the bear, but that was not possible due to the size of the bear's neck. If they just wanted to kill any bear they could have done it without all that time and effort.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    How was the plan to put a tracking collar on a bear, any old bear they found, not a bear shown to be linked to the incident, a "reasonable" plan in any way?


    The bear was a scapegoat.

    The incidents are exactly the same wherever they happen. Bear, cougar, shark, alligator, doesnt matter. Always exactly the same response.
    Last edited by MuddyWaters; 05-25-2016 at 22:19.

  11. #11
    Registered User kolokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-11-2008
    Location
    Beachwood, Ohio
    Age
    61
    Posts
    475
    Images
    52

    Default

    The tracking collar was so that they could find the bear once the DNA results were in. You should read the article.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Formerly uhfox

    Springer to Bear Mountain Inn, NY
    N Adams, MA to Clarendon VT
    Franconia Notch to Crawford Notch

  12. #12

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,869
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UHFox View Post
    The tracking collar was so that they could find the bear once the DNA results were in. You should read the article.

    I
    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    And what good exactly does finding the wrong bear again do?
    Please explain.

  13. #13
    Registered User canoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-29-2012
    Location
    Tyner, NC
    Age
    64
    Posts
    954

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post
    TOOOO many humans in the area. Smokies has 11 million humans thru the year, bears have around 1,500. Do the math. In the very least close automobile access in the park. Tourists need to be thinned out.
    Yes there are tooo many people in the park, but you might want to go back and do the math. Bear numbers have never been so high than they are now. Nothing even close. It is an un-natural concentration of bear... and humans. I am surprised there are not more attacks.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post
    TOOOO many humans in the area. Smokies has 11 million humans thru the year, bears have around 1,500. Do the math. In the very least close automobile access in the park. Tourists need to be thinned out.
    Well said Tipi. That is if closing the park to vehicles means those people go back home and don't come stampeding over to my favorite areas.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    12-19-2005
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    3,716
    Images
    3

    Default

    And what good exactly does finding the wrong bear again do?
    Please explain.



    it appeases the people who get mad that the wrong bear was put down........

  16. #16

    Default

    Too bad we can't put gps collars on odors that can be perceived as food-like by bears. For then we could track, relocate, and attempt to educate the humans that are attracting bears to shelters, campsites, etc.. It seems to have been proven that black bears are not attracted to the smell of cotton, nylon, cuben fiber, or hiker stench.

  17. #17
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    7,115
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by August W. View Post
    Too bad we can't put gps collars on odors that can be perceived as food-like by bears. For then we could track, relocate, and attempt to educate the humans that are attracting bears to shelters, campsites, etc.. It seems to have been proven that black bears are not attracted to the smell of cotton, nylon, cuben fiber, or hiker stench.
    August,

    If you have not done so already, you might want to read the post of the thru hiker who was bitten. It is #114 in this thread (you may need to scroll back to post 114):

    http://whiteblaze.net/forum/showthre...ighlight=Rickb

    That thread also provides a link to the thru hikers blog that provides much more detail.
    Last edited by rickb; 05-26-2016 at 07:05.

  18. #18
    Registered User vamelungeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-24-2009
    Location
    Wise, Va
    Age
    60
    Posts
    968
    Images
    24

    Default

    I'm not a park ranger, but I've been a public servant for 30 years, and this thread highlights why I can't wait for retirement and would never advise any young person to go into public service. You can't win, no matter what you do.
    "You're a nearsighted, bitter old fool."

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb View Post
    August,

    If you have not done so already, you might want to read the post of the thru hiker who was bitten. It is #114 in this thread (you may need to scroll back to post 114):

    http://whiteblaze.net/forum/showthre...ighlight=Rickb

    That thread also provides a link to the thru hikers blog that provides much more detail.
    Thanks for sharing that rickb. I look forward to reading the hiker's story.

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-17-2015
    Location
    Canton, Georgia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    683
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    The hiker's story seems to me to indicate the bear was just on a serious hunt. He went to the opposite end from where the hiker's pack was. One would think the pack would have been the attractant.
    " Of all the paths you take in life, make sure a few of them are dirt. "

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •