Man Charged For Protecting His Family

[Paulie]

I don't know, I have mixed feeling about this. I have a feeling he didn't really have to shoot that bear. I have a feeling he could have made his kids go in the house, and then hazed the bears, scaring them off.

Because if the bears had actually tried to hurt his kids, they would have hurt his kids. They weren't trying to hurt anyone. They were just being curious, sound like.

I'm really thinking he could've just scared the bears off. The other two ran away when he fired his gun. He could have just fired his gun and all three would have run.

He's living in a bad spot if he has issues with grizzly bears! I got this from another article:

Hill and his wife have six children, and their home is between two federal grizzly bear recovery zones - the Selkirk zone to the west and Cabinet-Yaak zone to the east.

Biologists estimate that 100 grizzlies inhabit the zones that include parts of Idaho, British Columbia and Montana.

Read more: Outrage as man is charged with shooting endangered grizzly bear after it threatened his children | Mail Online

Yeah, because simply shooing 3 bears away would make me feel totally secure that said bears would never again try to enter my property and endanger my family.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

I am the first one to defend a person's right to protect themselves and their family against marauding wildlife. But I don't think these bears were aggressive, and could easily have been scared off.

Reminds me of a guy in my neighborhood who shot a neighbor's dog who came into his yard. Used the excuse that a two-year old was present and the dog was menacing. He's full of bull. He just wanted to shoot that dog and he knew because it was a pitbull everyone would be on his side. He was a weenie. I could have taken care of that dog without shooting it. He just wanted to do it.

3 brown bears..................pit bull LOL sorry but that kinda funny.Brown bears are big strong cantankerous BEASTS you or anyone else would have NO idea what they may or my not do. you make the wrong ill advised ,like thinking they are friendly, choice your lunch.

My younger brother makes money by taking people out to hunt brown bears. I grew up in big brown bear country...Southeast Alaska. I probably know a lot more about brown bears than you do. I didn't say they are friendly, it just doesn't seem like they were being aggressive in this particular instance.

Do you think people should shoot bears every time they come ambling along and set foot on their property? Do you think bears know what property lines are?

If you can't take it, you probably shouldn't live in bear country. You can't just shoot every damn bear that comes around.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

I don't know, I have mixed feeling about this. I have a feeling he didn't really have to shoot that bear. I have a feeling he could have made his kids go in the house, and then hazed the bears, scaring them off.

Because if the bears had actually tried to hurt his kids, they would have hurt his kids. They weren't trying to hurt anyone. They were just being curious, sound like.

I'm really thinking he could've just scared the bears off. The other two ran away when he fired his gun. He could have just fired his gun and all three would have run.

He's living in a bad spot if he has issues with grizzly bears! I got this from another article:

Hill and his wife have six children, and their home is between two federal grizzly bear recovery zones - the Selkirk zone to the west and Cabinet-Yaak zone to the east.

Biologists estimate that 100 grizzlies inhabit the zones that include parts of Idaho, British Columbia and Montana.

Read more: Outrage as man is charged with shooting endangered grizzly bear after it threatened his children | Mail Online

Yeah, because simply shooing 3 bears away would make me feel totally secure that said bears would never again try to enter my property and endanger my family.

Yeah, well he only shot one out of three. Maybe the other two will come back looking for revenge. And they'll be a little sneakier this time.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

By the way, Grizzly and Brown bear are the same species. Grizzly stay inland and don't go to salmon spawning streams, mainly eating berrires and such. So Grizzlies are smaller than Browns which hang out in more coastal areas and eat salmon.

I wouldn't want to eat either one, but then, I don't even like moose meat.

 

[Againsheila]

or he could just be a poacher covering his tracks

Yeah, poaching, IN HIS OWN YARD!!! That makes sense.

 

[yidnar]

i'll bet the feds are not going find him guilty....they are just letting everybody know that justified or not you can't kill an endangered without scrutiny....

 

[Harry Dresden]

we had a similar case here in California.....a guy killed a grasshopper that flew in his face.....it turned out it was a Zayante Band-winged Grasshopper.....on the endangered list.....poor basterd will get 25 to life down here .......what?.....its a true story.....this is California.....

 

[The Gadfly]

I imagine the feds understand it, too. In every national park I've been in they warn you to not feed the bears/alligators.

The guy should make an effort to not make his home attractive to bears. Or move. Or kill all the bears.

Most of the time bears stay away from where people reside....every once in awhile they stray on to the property....that is when they become desensitized to humans and become a problem.
I have a lot of friends up here that live in the bush....50-100 acres that they live on. They deal with the wildlife all the time....just not a grizzly.

I understand that. Obviously, this guy is doing something wrong that they are foraging on his property looking for food.

Ravi,
Is there ANY federal action you WON'T defend (especially when your party of choice is in power)? I didn't think so. Several points come to mind. First, bears are unpredictable; even an expert will admit that even they cannot always tell if a bear is about to charge, or whether the charge is a bluff or not. Second, ANY adult grizzly is potentially a very dangerous animal. It's also NOT slow; it can easily outrun you, and can cover 50 to a hundred feet between you (or your kids) and it before you have any appreciable time to react. Third, have you ever faced a grizzly at close range? I have, with a can of "bear gas", and while it worked (that time) it was NOT a confidence inspiring experience, and every bit as scary as anything I ever faced in combat. I'd have preferred a 44 magnum or a rifle, and I will never again go hiking in bear country where I cannot carry one or the other. Fourth, yes, a "warning shot" MIGHT have worked, IF there was enough time for a follow-up shot if that failed; we do not know if this man had that time, or not-WE WERE NOT THERE, and NEITHER WAS ANY FEDERAL GAME WARDEN. The fact that local authorities had no problem with his actions speaks volumes! Fifth, I regret this bear had to be killed, but as any wildlife biologist will tell you, having ANY bear around your home is extremely dangerous (and that includes the relatively harmless black bear). For what it's worth, I don't even kill poisonous snakes on my property-I catch and relocate them; I am entirely in favor of protecting non-game wildlife-as long as it is not unreasonably unsafe to do so. In this case, the feds are being unreasonable and overzealous. The very fact that this man reported the incident to authorities shows beyond any rational doubt what his intent was.

The almighty federal bureaucracy is NOT always right; in this case, it's blatantly and obviously dead wrong! We all damn well ought to be outraged, when our government acts this way! Now, go hug a tree, know-it all, or better yet, take that "save-them-all" mentality and go hike in bear or cougar country, or walk one of those canal banks in the Florida burbs, which have become prime gator habitat. You'll soon learn the error of your ways...if you don't wind up as something's lunch.