https://www.theonefeather.com/2021/0...reek-fatality/
likely due to trauma caused by bear. Second time in park history.
https://www.theonefeather.com/2021/0...reek-fatality/
likely due to trauma caused by bear. Second time in park history.
NoDoz
nobo 2018 March 10th - October 19th
-
I'm just one too many mornings and 1,000 miles behind
a) OP's post looks like a failed attempt to insert an image
b) I thought this might be a first (for death, not attacks) ... but LazyLightniing's link indicates there was one before.
Here's the link to the official announcement, same info: https://www.nps.gov/grsm/learn/news/...ality-2020.htm
Sad to finally hear that the bear killed this gentleman. I thought they would find that he died from other causes and then was scavenged by the bear.
We hiked right past that campsite last october. They still had it closed at the time. When I was getting reservations for this trip, I initially was planning on staying at that campsite, but found it was closed when I went to make reservations.
I had to just delete the original post due to the corrupt image. It kept crashing my browser attempting to edit. Deleting the first post deletes the whole thread, thus take 2 here.
"Sleepy alligator in the noonday sun
Sleepin by the river just like he usually done
Call for his whisky
He can call for his tea
Call all he wanta but he can't call me..."
Robert Hunter & Ron McKernan
Whiteblaze.net User Agreement.
That you. I was attempting to copy the image from the Park's Web page. Obviously it didn't work and I could not delete it.
I actually stayed at that campsite (82) over the July 4th weekend. My source incorrectly told me that the bear had been scavenging a dead body. The coroner report says otherwise.
Even though I knew the bear had been taken down and it was almost a year ago I was still creeped out staying there.
Yes to number two for the GSMNP, but a gentle reminder that he was #69 killed by 'black' bears in the US. I have read every available report gathered. The Smoky's is not special, as there are 2 bears per square mile. Most of those fatalities were 'not' in a National Park. Black bears are an integral fabric of wilderness and wildlands and have the history to prove it. If you bore while reading the reports, try the grizzly bear reports and gawk at the heavily armed men, mostly guides/hunters/contractors who perished by claw and teeth. If you get bored on those, try Canada's reports for Black bears alone-it will take a while.
The body was originally discovered with the bear scavenging the body. Since no one witnessed the attack, the only thing we knew, until the report came out, was the bear was found scavenging the body. Last time this occured a few years ago, the coroner's report was the person does of a drug overdose and the bear most likely found the body post mordom rather than beimf the likely cause of death.
"trauma caused by a bear". Euphemism of the month.
And here it is again. This NPS unit is now recommending bear spray for black bear areas.
Hikers are reminded to take necessary precautions while in bear country, including hiking in groups of three or more, carrying bear spray, complying with all backcountry closures, properly following food storage regulations, and remaining at a safe viewing distance from bears at all times.
Be Prepared
Found this study of black bear attacks over a 109 year period in N. America. Some findings:
91% of fatal attacks were upon parties of 1 or 2 people
92% of fatal attacks were conducted by a MALE bear
food or garbage "probably influenced" the bear to be in the attack location in only 38% of fatal attacks
https://www.nationalparkstraveler.or...011_-_copy.pdf
I was confused by the finding that the "most fatal" bear attacks were conducted by lone male bears. If you're dead you're dead.
Be Prepared
I guess it also means that the "least fatal" bear attacks were conducted by female bears and/or male bears who were not lonely.
More seriously, I suspect most people know to be wary of cubs so females might be avoided or taken more seriously than lone bears. Still, considering all we hear about females with cubs, this is surprising.
This may also suggest that even if being attacked by a female with cubs is the most likely scenario (I'm curious if it is), they are not interested in killing as much as eliminating a threat. Whereas male black bear attacks, if more rare, may be more frequently fatal because they are only attacking to prepare a meal.
I'm not lost. I'm exploring.
The issue with "mama bear" is for grizzly's, not black bears.
I have yet to specifically hear about someone being attacked in GSMNP by a mama bear that was defending her cubs.
Not saying it's never happened, but in my 20+ years of going to GSMNP or spending time in various online forums such as this, I've never hear a story about someone being attacked by a black mama bear that was trying to defend her cubs. Even the woman who was killed by a mama bear in 2000... I've heard more evidence that she might have been approaching the bears to get a picture more than I've heard any evidence that she likely came between the two bears.
The warming about "mama bears" come from grizzlies because a male grizzly bear will actively attempt to chase and kill cubs. As such, a mama grizzly has to protect her cubs from anything she even MIGHT perceive as a male grizzly.
But male black bears don't tend to chase or otherwise try to kill cubs. As such, black bear cubs (in GSMNP) have no other predator that can get to them if they can get to the safety of a tree. So if you surprise a black mama bear with cubs, and for some reason the cubs can't instantly run to mama to get away from you, they instinctively climb a tree and mama knows this (and is as likely to climb a tree to stay near the cubs and get away from you as she is to run into the woods).
So as long at you're not trying to approach a mama bear with cubs, you don't have much to worry about simply because you encounter a mama black bear.
I agree with you about black bear mothers. I looked at the SNP, GSMNP and WMNF sites which say nothing about a mom and her cubs. Over the years, I guess I have merged the bears in this respect. However, I have found multiple general bear articles that don't differentiate between bear types and warn against surprising a mother and her cubs. The two times I've seen cubs up close, I was not able to see mom. (Maine and Montana)I doubt it accounts for the 92% number but I still suspect the general public, myself included, is more wary of a mom and her cubs than a lone bear and hence are less likely to approach one.
You shouldn't be approaching bears regardless of type (male, mama, cubs, black, grizzly). So the phrase "less likely" shouldn't apply.
Example of a "bear encounter" I had in GSMNP:
Was hiking a trail when we approached a spot where we had seen a mama with a cub the day before. Stopped to look around to see if the bear might still be in the area. Down the side of the hill, perhaps 50+' away we could see the dark outline of mama bear. What we failed to notice was the tree about 10'-20' to our side with a cub in it. But mama never made a noise, didn't try to approach us, because she knew her cub was safely up a tree out of our reach.
But we were suddenly startled when we hear this gosh-awful noise. The lone cub had apparently lost his nerve with us around and him being separated from mama. He was scampering down the tree (basically a controlled fall) and then darted into the woods to catch up with mama.
People do approach bears so the phrase applies. Approach = move closer. Many sources indicate you may approach as close as 50 yds as long as you don't disturb the bear. I am comparing the behavior of people in the presence of lone bears or mother bears with cubs and this is my impression of people's behaviors. and will rephrase:
I still suspect the general public, myself included but not everyone, is more wary of a mom and her cubs than a lone bear and hence "is more likely to retreat from the former even if they are at a "safe" distance.
You revisited a spot that you had seen a bear with cubs the day before. You ended up seeing a bear with cubs but now you were perhaps 50+' away from moma and 10'-20' from the cub. I call that approaching. Just saying.