Here's what we know about the Mama Grizzly attack

[joeybee12]

Three people were attacked and one killed, PROBABLY by her but they won't know until DNA tests are done.

The people stored their food properly.

We have NO PHUCKING idea what might HAVE or might HAVE NOT provoked or happened to the bear prior, so we cannot say the people didn't do anything, or someone else in the area did. Could be a lot, could be nothing.

In other words, we know basically very little, but the usual suspects are gleeful and insistent another animal die.

God forbid they ever serve on a jury.

[geek tragedy]

1. One was in her sleeping bag.

Sorry, no one is 'gleeful' that a magnificent animal has to lose its life. But, you can't have bears hunting people in a national park that draws that many visitors.

[joeybee12]

4. Again, you are wrong...it wasn't a National park, they say it was "near" and having

lived in Yellowstone, the area they talk about might not be all that close. Try again.

[Gormy Cuss]

44. Gallatin National Forest land, to be precise, close to the Yellowstone boundary.

It was a very weird bear attack. The three people who were attacked weren't camping in close proximity.

[kestrel91316]

8. FAIL. Improper storage of food is guaranteed to get a bear rummaging around

and making trouble. The bear is guilty of nothing. The humans are guilty of provoking it.

[joeybee12]

11. I will say that the food (according to sources) was stored properly...

...but what else was in the area, who else was...was some asshole hunting, where he/she should not have been...which DOES happen...

[geek tragedy]

17. Three attacks in one short period of time indicates

that the bear is the issue, not the people.

[joeybee12]

18. Another assumption...

amazing, you're still not willing to try and figure out what happened...maybe the bear is the issue, maybe not...there were more than those 3 people in the area. You're jumping to conclusions.

[proteus_lives]

2. Trying to start your own thread where your point isn't getting pummeled?

:rofl:

[joeybee12]

5. Try to not make sense again?

You've made it an art form! Start a bsuiness!

[proteus_lives]

10. Sense?

Why are you talking about things you're totally unfamiliar with?

:rofl:

[joeybee12]

13. Good thing you laugh at your "jokes"

No one else does...we have common sense.

[proteus_lives]

14. Not laughing at my joke.

I'm laughing at something else.

[REP]

3. Crap, I thought it was a Palin thread.

[joeybee12]

7. When i saw the original thread, that was my first thought, too.

[Arkana]

43. You know, this was my first thought too.

[hamsterjill]

6. I wouldn't want any like that on my jury!

n/t

[Hassin Bin Sober]

9. I thought only one was killed?

[joeybee12]

12. Edited...thanks.

[proteus_lives]

15. Here's what he's ignoring here and on other threads.

MULTIPLE UNPROVOKED ATTACKS ON HUMANS.

I thought I'd use ALL CAPS because the OP is fond of them. ;-)

[joeybee12]

16. Again, you are wrong, they ARE ASSUMMING unprovoked...

What happened prior to the attacks by others? Anything? Nothing? AGAIN YOU ARE ASSUMING and assumptions are not facts.

[proteus_lives]

19. Ok, sports-fan. I'll play.

Why are you "assuming" on behalf of the animal?

If we are wrong, what makes your "assumption" right?

[joeybee12]

21. Did you read my OP? I said there could have been nothing provioking her...

...we don't know is my whole point.

Also, you're getting all your "information" from the media...do they always get it right?

[proteus_lives]

24. Where are you getting yours?

Are you a bear-whisperer?

What reason do the media or rangers have to be dishonest about this case? Aren't the people running the investigation and park area reasonable experts on the subject?

[joeybee12]

27. Again, this didn't happen in Yellowstone...

so there's your first mistake.

And yeah, the media always gets everything right because they are always competent? If you don't have a healthy mistrust of what is reported about ANYTHING, then I feel sorry for you.

How can a thorough investigation be done in less than a day? And see my post to Vinny, these unprovoked attacks are so arre you need to be thorough to prevent a possible attack in the future...if you just ASSUME it was unprovoked and it wasn't, what happens the next time it happens, and the time after that?


And yes, having lived and worked in Yelllowstone for three years most "rangers" are not experts in wildlife at all...they are mainly police....who are told to catch kids smoking and tourists speeding.

[madinmaryland]

37. DUDE! You ALL are arguing about ASSUMPTIONS!

Get real!!

[Vinnie From Indy]

20. WTF?

I will assume that the people on the ground are competent to determine what the fuck happened. I have faith that the authorities in the area are not going to wantonly kill a mother grizzly based on nothing at all. I have no idea what the OP is talking about in regard to the "usual suspects". This is a bizarre OP.

[joeybee12]

22. In less than a day they will have determined EVERYTHING about the incident...

..nice to know you have such blind faith in what people can accomplish so quickly.

[Vinnie From Indy]

23. Well golly!

I guess my default position is that the people in charge in the area where the event took place are competent and not eager to kill a mama grizzly based on nothing. I guess I would ask you why you think your opinion has any validity at all. You are not there on the ground, you have not inspected the site and, I would suspect, you are probably not an expert in bear behavior or genetics. In short, what the fuck do you know about anything beyond posting bizarre shit on DU?

Also, who is the "they" you refer to when you offer that "they have determined EVERYTHING in a day"?

[joeybee12]

26. Golly back!

1) you are getting all your "information:" from the media...which, of course, is reporting everything, right?

2) Yes, I have worked in yellowstone for three years so I know a shit little more than someone like you who apparently knows nothing and thinks all "experts" are doing a bang-up job. Besides, this wasn't in Yellowstone, so we're not dealing with an area where the grizzlies are even protected...they have been de-listed, so they're fair game. These are not federal authorities cheking this out, but state authorities.

3) Grizzly bear attacks UNPROVOKED are SO FUCKING AMAZINGLY RARE...that to assume it was unprovoked after essentially NOTHING of an investigation is a travesty not only because the bear dies, but because they could possibly miss something that MIGHT prevent what appears to be another UNPROVOKED attack when something was done to set the bear off...yeah, let's not keep people safe, let's just brush this under the rug.

Suck on that golly, sweetheart.

[Vinnie From Indy]

29. You seem to believe that the people tasked with responding to this

incident are incompetent or simply hate bears and want to kill this one to get their jollies. I will admit that I know nothing about the attacks beyond what the dishonest media is delivering. Who knew that the corruption in the media extended all the way down to reporting on bear attacks?

[joeybee12]

30. Do you know any park rangers? under Bush, the vast majority of them

were hired essentially as police...to catch kids smoking, tourists speeding...only a small number actually deal with wildlife or are conversant on the topic...so yeah, having dealt with them I do think they probably are not well-equipped to handle an investigation.

[petronius]

25. Discussing things based on assumptions and limited information is par for the course

on internet discussion boards - it's what we always do. Why object to that so vehemently on this particular topic? :shrug:

[joeybee12]

28. I think bears are great...and if a bear dies needlessly, because rangers

don't do their job, then that sucks for the bear and for anyone else who gets attacked in the future because the rangers screwed up.

[petronius]

31. I think bears are great ,too, and I love seeing them in the wild

I'm sure we all want the rangers and wildlife officials to do their jobs in a careful, respectful, and thorough way...

[joeybee12]

34. Agreed...but as I wrote elsewhere, the vast majority of rangers are essentially

police officers ...this was done under Bush...they are not trained in wildlife...people think all rangers are the same, do the same thing, ahve the same training. Not by a long shot. The number of those specifically trained about wildlife and are knowledgeable fell drastically under Bush...it is probably not not wanting to do a good job...it's about not being trained to know what to do.

[yawnmaster]

32. At least one camper is reported to have been sighted the day before hiking and

wearing a t-shirt that said "Eat Me".

[madinmaryland]

33. You got a linkie to support your assertions?? Thanks, joey.

[joeybee12]

36. Read it all, mad, read it all...n/t

[madinmaryland]

39. Read all of what joey. There is no text in the body of your last post??

:wtf:

Link, please!

[joeybee12]

40. The whole thread ..all my posts...n/t

[madinmaryland]

41. Huh? I was just looking for a link to your assertions? Or are you just making assumptions?

I realize that a lot of people believe that if they read it on the internets, then it must be true!

Or are you just trying to stir up some shit in GD?? :evilgrin:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. Wow.

:crazy:

[joeybee12]

38. That's high praise from you! Thanks!

[bemildred]

42. Hmmm. This isn't about Sarah Palin, is it? nt

[ejbrush]

45. Here's what I know about Soda Butte campground.

Soda Butte Campground? I know the place well. My old man, a schoolteacher hear in Wisconsin, had this thing about cool mountain air. Every summer, 'cept 1979, he'd load all of us up in whatever vehicle/camper combination we had at the time and head out to Cooke City for as long as possible. So, if I tally it up, I spent the summers of 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 (interesting times, what with the world burning up around us), 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, and 96 camping out near there. 88 and 90 were spent at Coulter Campground, two miles further east of Soda Butte. 90, 91 and 92 the old man wrangled a Campground Host postition at Soda Butte Campground, and my brother and I had a lucrative campfire wood concession from the Forest Service. I can say honestly I'm familiar with the area.
Saw one black bear once up there, during 88 when the fires were moving a lot of critters around. Honestly, I've seen more bears in my brother's driveway in Wisconsin than I ever saw up in Montana. Never saw one grizzly, though I did stumble across a fairly fresh set of tracks on a hike once. I decided to go back where I came from at that point.
Thing about Cooke City is that it is really not terribly wildernessy. The place was settled in the 1880s, and was a pretty bustling mining and logging area right though the 1960's. High traffic recreation area, lots of jeep trails, hiking, excellent fishing. Still some logging going on, mostly for local consumption. Couple of nice bars in town, some decent eating, a really cool general store. Soda Butte campground is about a mile east of town, adjacent to a massive tailings impoundment from the huge copper and gold mines that were in operation there. Soda Butte creek, which flows through the tailings, was basically sterile the entire time I remember it, though there were rumors of fish returning in the early 2000s. The campground itself is immediately below USH 212, which is a fairly busy road, and during the summer regularily fills to capacity most nights. Used to have 21 sites, but they expanded it to have a few more around 2004 I think.
It's a busy place during the summer. Not very bear friendly.
Illegitimis nil carborundum