SoCalHiker wrote:

gwave47 wrote:Bears come out of the woods, just like we go in the woods.

I think that qualifies for the most ridiculous (or even delusional) statement I have heard in a very long time.

KristoriaBlack wrote:

Day Hiker wrote: For me it's not about the relative likelihood of injury or death from bear versus injury or death from car. I am just A LOT more fearful of dying by being MAULED and EATEN than I am by simply being slammed really hard into the dashboard of my car.

I wouldn't be too worried about that. It sounds horrible to be eaten alive, but a car can mangle your flesh up pretty badly as well. If its not teeth and bear claws its crumpled metal and shards of glass that tears through your flesh. When I rolled my car I had a branch protrude through the windshield missing my head, car kept rolling, and I kept bracing myself for the hood to collapse, to crunch down and break my neck, or for the metal parts of the car to pierce through my body, to feel that debiltating pain one feels before death. Luckily the car got hung on tree at the bottom of the ravine and I walked away with only a scratch.

Point is: irrespective of weather the precipitating agent is a bear or a car one's flesh would still get mangled up by a foreign entity.

Though I partially agree with you. I think that in a bear attack the screaming would be the worse part. I think the screaming would highten the fear and build up the anticipation of pain. And the screaming during a bear attack would be prolonged---for the duration of the attack. I don't think I would be able to cope with the screaming.

Apart from the screaming, I don't think a bear attack is any worse than any other traumatic injury.

. . .

I urge you to reconsider your stance. The unknown often plays a big role in fear. Though if you sit and think it through, a bear attack is not that much worse than a really bad car accident. Remove the screaming, the terror and the emotions from the equation and think about it level headedly: what can happen? How would you cope? What sort of first aid can you give? Once the horror and the unknown component are removed from the equation a bear attack is only just another traumatic incident. Not worse than a car accident. Everyday Joes, survive being mauled by animals all the time. We're just unaccustomed to knowing what to expect or how to cope. But there are ways to cope. ITs been done before.

MoapaPk wrote:As long as the bear isn't radioactive, I'm not concerned. Radiation-induced death is far worse than any other kind. Not that it is more painful, it's just terribly un-PC.

JasonH wrote:

gwave47 wrote:Bob you're so tough,

You talking to Bob, Punk.

gwave47 wrote:No, you really can't completely avoid bears. We've had two black bears in the past year in the middle of downtown Greenville (a city of 60K people). So if I was going to Dick's Sporting Goods at the intersections of two interstates in a good size city and a black bear attacks me in the parking lot, am I at fault for going outside and being in their territory? Bears come out of the woods, just like we go in the woods.

Next time any of you get robbed, or worse, I'll be the one to say "that's what you get for leaving your house and going into the criminals territory, if you don't want to be the prey of criminals don't ever leave your house ever."

Tree huggers.

redneck wrote:This is why I will never hike or camp in grizzly country. They are simply too unpredictable.

And at 400lbs or so, this was a small bear.

The last California grizzly was killed almost 100 years ago. I confess it's hard to feel really sorry about that.

knoback wrote:Wha? Dude you are mental! These things aren't the bear's fault or the person's, just bad luck when you get right down to it. It isn't morally wrong to carry a pistol so you can defend yourself against bear attack, it's just quite likely to be ineffective or worse. Now if you decide to be proactive and shoot on sight or when you hear something in the bushes or something outside your tent, then it is your fault. Just cowboy up, leave the gun at home and enjoy your climb. You may get hit by lightning or a falling snag. A bear may bite you. If you can't put those things aside after you've taken reasonable steps to avoid them, then maybe you shouldn't go out.

b. wrote:The idea that killing these bears is somehow cleansing the backcountry is ridiculous. This didn't happen in the backcountry. If she had stayed in the backcountry there would be no problem. I don't like it, it really sucks, but these bears will be killed, and should be killed to preserve the rest of them. If bears like this were allowed to keep disrupting the peace, they would all be eradicated as a matter of general peacekeeping.

MoapaPk wrote:

SoCalHiker wrote:

gwave47 wrote:Bears come out of the woods, just like we go in the woods.

I think that qualifies for the most ridiculous (or even delusional) statement I have heard in a very long time.

Hmmm. In Albuquerque, most bear-human interactions occurred when bears came down from the Sandia Mountains into town, perhaps lured by the fruit trees or the poultry and small livestock kept in Tijeras canyon. Several times during my 16 years there, bears wandered way down into the suburbs.

Bob Sihler wrote:

redneck wrote:This is why I will never hike or camp in grizzly country. They are simply too unpredictable.

And at 400lbs or so, this was a small bear.

The last California grizzly was killed almost 100 years ago. I confess it's hard to feel really sorry about that.

Although I totally disagree with the views you've expressed here about grizzlies, I do commend you for this: you don't like them and therefore choose not to go where they are. Would that others were as honest and did the same instead of going and expecting to impose their rules.