A grizzly bear that emerged from a thicket and charged two backpackers in the backcountry of Denali National Park and Preserve was shot and killed by one of the two who was carrying a .45-caliber semi-automatic pistol, according to park officials.
The killing Friday is believed to be the first instance of a hiker killing a grizzly in the park's wilderness. The killing occurred in the original Mount McKinley National Park portion of the Denali, which was expanded by two-thirds in 1980.
Until February, when Congress changed the rules, it was illegal to carry a loaded firearm in that portion of Denali. While the rule change now allows hikers to carry firearms in all areas of Denali, it still is illegal to discharge them, park officials said.
Park officials did not speculate whether the killing was justified. This is believed to be the first instance of a visitor to a national park killing an animal with a firearm since the gun regulations were changed.
According to a release from the park, the two backpackers, a man and woman, were hiking in dense brush along the edge of Tattler Creek, which is at the west end of Igloo Canyon roughly 35 miles from the park headquarters.
"The man, who was in the lead, drew a .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol when they heard a noise coming from the brush. When the bear emerged from the thicket and ran toward the other hiker, he fired approximately nine rounds in its general direction. The bear stopped, turned, and walked back into the brush, where it quickly disappeared from view," said the release.
The two then headed roughly 1.5 miles back to a road, where they encountered a park employee, who called in the incident and took the two backpackers to the Toklat Road Camp. A ranger there did a short preliminary interview with them at approximately 10:00 p.m. Because of the concern that a wounded bear was in the area, four backcountry units were immediately closed, and bus drivers were instructed to not drop off day hikers in the Igloo Canyon on Saturday.
"Early Saturday morning rangers and wildlife technicians flew to Toklat via helicopter to conduct a secondary interview with the two backpackers. Afterwards they flew over Tattler Creek and all of side tributaries, very low at times, to determine if there was an active, wounded bear," the park release said. "No bears were seen during the overflight, and late in the afternoon three rangers hiked into the site. The bear was found dead in a willow thicket approximately 100 feet from the pistol casings at approximately 6:00 p.m.
"The bear’s body was transported via helicopter to a landing site on the park road and brought back to headquarters on Sunday, where park wildlife biologists are assisting with the investigation of the bear carcass. The backcountry units have been reopened."
The case is still under investigation, and the names of the backpackers are not being released at this time. Park wildlife biologists and rangers are trying to determine if there was a justification for shooting the animal.
The estimated grizzly bear population in the park north of the Alaska Range north is 300-350 animals.
Comments
If the hikers were being charged and eared for their lives that is enough just cause to shoot...or should we wait for the bear to rip off one's head?
Absolutely, I would always pick a dead bear over a dead human. Just think how horrible it would have been for one of them to watch there friend being mauled and eaten, torn to shreds right before their eyes. Definitley, kill the damn bear.
Well, I'm back and thought I'd reply on my trip to Alaska. Yes, I am alive and didn't need the knive or bear spray. My wife and I spent 2 weeks in Alaska, which brought us from Denali National Park to the Kenai Pennensula. We hiked on many trails, took bus tours into Denali NP, two seperate cruises one from Seward and one from Wittier, and took close to a thousand pictures and videos. We saw black and brown bear, moose, caribou, mt. goat, dall sheep, artic fox, humpback whales and orcas, mountains and glaciers. It was great! We hiked in prime moose calving areas which are also prime bear feeding grounds. We saw fresh moose kills, and fresh bear scat, but we had to look very heard to even see a bear. All of which were very far off. I have asked many local people and all have said the same thing. They don't want to be around humans. They even said to be scared of the moose as they are less predictable and just as deadly. They kick in all directions. I guess what I am trying to say is, if you want to see some extremely wild and beautiful country, spend some time in Alaska. Do be scared of it. But do be cautious and well informed. Stay out of areas that are suspicious of bear activity and if you see a caution sign, don't look for trouble. Hike in groups of three or more and have fun! You don't need a gun to spend time there. Bear will tell you when you are in their space just as you let them know when they are in your space. Learn the signs, learn how to handle it. I went to Alaska paranoid of bear and the horror stories you hear of. But I left Alaska with the understanding of co-existance and the mutual respect of the animals that live there. I came home, only wanting to return. Keep the forum going, again, this is all great info.
Just another thought... any and every animal will defend itself when attacked. It doesn't matter if it is a bear or a deer or a bird or a butterfly. Why should we not expect a human to defend themselves?
These animals all have natural abilities that allow a reasonable defense ie. strength/size, speed/antlers, beaks, or poison. Humans have only our minds, we don't have strength, speed, claws, or teeth suited to physical combat. We have to use our minds ie. inventions such as spears, bows and guns to survive the wilderness.
Before you say we can use our minds to exercise proper precaution to avoid problems remember this. Animals are way better at it than us. They can hear, see, and smell better than humans. The only way they survive is by being better than the other animals around them, and yet so many are still eaten by predators.
My conclusion? We should avoid conflict whenever possible, just like the rest of nature, but when in inexcapable danger we can and will use whatever means possible to live. It is not murder, it is nature.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43877193/ns/us_news-life/
Seems to me, rights of humans must always outweigh that of
wild animals or dangerous game as defined by law (as well as similarly
dangerous humans). Bears are considered potentially dangerous, and like humans
who present imminent threat of great personal injury (pretty given), you
are justified from what I can tell. For example, the physical act of charging
is justified under law and if you add to that, you perceive it as attacking you
and you had no intent to kill first (i.e. not hunting, you tried, were not in a
protection zone) then that should be that. You should always try to do your
part, such as attempt other things first (if you have time!). It is our
Constitutional right which preserves our lives, but our responsibility for our
choices will always be challenged in court. Avoid the situation if you
can, but if the bear ignores your hiking bell, invades your camp site/trail,
acts aggressively, won't be scared off, and charges you or your group, how many
feet do you wait as they charge you or your child? If the bear is scared
away fine, but if they see you as food or are angered then you are dead. They are
stronger, faster, and you have no true defense. There has been many stories
lately of people seriously hurt from bear attacks on the news (e.g. Wa guy mauled
head, kids mauled by bear, and that bear friendly guy and girlfriend eaten
while in their tent, and plenty of wild cat mauling and killings as
well). I would be curious what the bear experts say to how close a
black bear vs. a grizzly gets to you before it isn't a bluff? I really
don't feel like having my family's head crushed in, and hope they live.
If you carry, you carry a tremendous responsibility to prove your case as you
will be accused of wrong doing. If they want to protect an area that is
up to the government which is fine; that is their responsibility. Just my
views, I'm not a lawyer.
Just thought I'd post the results of the investigation
/2010/07/no-charges-forthcoming-shooting-grizzly-denali-national-park-and-preserve6320
The poor grizzly bear.. wrong. Human beings are people and the bear is an animal. If a witness says the man shot the bear needlessly, then fine, bust his butt for it. Otherwise, if he's not a known criminal, I would take his (and the lady's) word for it. It's smart to go armed into the wilderness.
Bears charging people get shot, there is one less dangerous bear and the rest re-learn their fear of man, a healthy respect. Other would-be hikers have learned that this park is full of bears and won't be as likely to hike there. Sorry the park lost a bear, they are among the higher animals.