Kill 'em first, then sort it out

Tennessee authorities have captured a bear suspected in a fatal attack on a child in a national forest.

It’s been killed and sent off to a lab to see if it’s the right bear. Apparently it was waaay too much trouble to sedate it and look for gunshot wounds before killing it.

And this way, any growing panic about the idea that there are potentially dangerous wild animals in remote forest areas will have been assuaged, plus we’ve evened the score - Clueless Humans* 1, Bears 1. Although long-term stats favor Humans by a wide margin (there’ve supposedly been something like 56 fatal bear attacks on humans over many years in the U.S., and many thousands of bears are killed annually by hunters).

We can all rest easy now.
*refers to authorities.

Did they arrest anyone for being an accessory to being a bear?

It’s very important that the attacking bear be caught. Black bears fear humans, and generally stay clear, that’s why there are so few attacks. Once a bear knows it can take out humans without problems, it will get more bold and attack again. It’s not about evening the score, so much as preventing future attacks.

Of course, even though it’s very important to get the bear, that does not mean you should just euthanize every bear you catch until you get the right one. You would think there’s a way to do it without having to kill them all.

How long does it take for a bear to digest it’s food? I thought the reason they shot this bear was to get it to the lab to inspect the contents of it’s stomach to see if this was the bear responsible for the attack on the child.

I don’t know about you lot, but if I came across a bear whilst out in the forest and I had a firearm with me, I’d be emptying the entire magazine into it and then doing my Roadrunner impression… :eek:

Didn’t Bill Bryson’s book A Walk In The Woods devote an entire chapter to the ways in which bears have killed, maimed, and generally terrified hikers on the Appalachian Trail?

Sedating a big animal is very difficult; it’s not like in the movies where you shoot it and it drops a second later. The trap used may have permanently maimed it. Plus, I’m not sure we know that the bear was really shot. The guy claims he shot the bear, but I don’t know for certain that he actually hit it, or where, or whether it was a nick which could easily have healed.

All in all, they probably felt they had to send the bear to the lab.

I read in an early article and then heard later on the Six O’Clock News that “The bear has been euthanized until it can be determined if it is the same bear”.
Whaa? Euthanized is not an “until” kinda thing. Once you is, you is.
Also, they needed the bear captured because of looking for a possible wound, and compairing hair and saliva samples. I too was surprised to learn that it had indeed been killed pending a review of the investigation. A shame in either case.

My heart goes out to the family that lost a child at such a young age and and hope the mother makes a full recovery. Physically at least.

I have come across black bears many times in the Shenandoah on the AT and they have never been a problem. They are very shy and take off running.

The bear left hair behind at the scene and they are going to test to see if there is a match.

Emptying a clip in a bear just because you run into him in the woods is a pretty stupid idea and also illegal. I’ve run into a dozen or so bears, and I’m quite alive.

There may be something to this. Idiots everywhere think it’s fun to feed bears, bait bears, leave food behind at campsites, and they become acclimated to humans, then become a threat. That certainly is a possibility here. Allthough, the bear could have been just out of hibernation and hunting, they are pretty dangerous when hungry.

Boo fucking hoo. They killed a non-endangered animal that more than likely was responsible for the death and severe injuries of human beings, and as such, exhibited extremely abnormal behaviour (rabies?). :rolleyes:

Bill Bryson’s book is a fanciful account of playing on the AT. There has been one attack on AT hikers in all the years people have been hiking the trail, and only a small handful of attacks otherwise. Bears are shy creatures for the most part, you usually only see them as they run away from you. Opening up on a bear you meet in the woods would be unnecessary and possibly criminal if you had no reason to fear.

Bears are not completely harmless. They can attack, but it’s very rare. They also do something called bluff charging, as a way of scaring off humans when they feel threatened. If you are going into the woods (especially armed to protect yourself) you need to learn these things. It won’t matter, since you’ll never get a shot off at the bear as it’s running away.

Bears have a very large home territory. The one they caught and killed is most likely the bear that attacked that familiy.

What did those koalas do to you?

A bit over the top and unnecessary in the vast majority of cases. A well placed .303 soft point from a single shot Martini Enfield ought to work fine on a black bear any way. No need for a whole magazine.

Call me a bleeding heart, but I’m always sad when animals have to be killed because of contact with people.

I didn’t see any indication that the bear was acting abnormally. Yes, bears usually run away from people, but perhaps this bear had cubs in the area, or something the people did made the bear feel threatened. It was just acting like a bear. We can’t expect wild animals to be tame.

Contact = Death and severe injury. Black bears don’t normally do this = abnormal. Do you feel sad for the 6 year old killed by the bear? More sad about it than the bear?

Pre-emptive killing is unnecessary and wrong, even in these post 9/11 days.

If we’re talking about humans, plants and animals are a tad different. Pre-emptive killing is necessary for these things for a myriad of reasons. Rogue behaviour leading to the death and severe injury of human beings is one of those reasons.

After reading smiling bandit’s post, I’m leaning towards the idea that euthanization was probably the only viable option. You can’t radio collar the bear and trust that it won’t hurt anyone while the tests are done. You probably can’t just imprison the bear and let it back out unscathed if it’s the wrong one. You can’t even be sure that looking for a bullet wound would work. Bears are big, have tough hides, and thick fur, no guarantee you can find a bullet hole, no guarantee the bear was hit in the first place.

I’d prefer the live and let live approach with this bear, if it were possible to do and still ensure the attacking bear got caught and killed.

The bear was clearly acting abnormally. Violent encounters with black bears are rare enough to be big news even though they enjoy a large population and frequent encounters with people.

If a bear is hunting you, you’ll never know it until it’s too late.

If you see it first, then it probably doesn’t care a thing about you.

When I said “contact” I was referring not only to the bear in the OP but all of the bears which have to be euthanized because they begin feeding on garbage and coming into pouplated areas, making them a danger. It’s more frequent that a bear is killed for that reason than for hurting a person.

Of course I’m sad about the poor little girl, and I also feel terrible for her family. It’s an all-around tragic, horrible situation. I can imagine the agony of her parents. And, yes, I certainly feel worse about the child dying than I do about the death of the bear.

That said, I don’t see where it’s wrong to feel sad about the bear, too. The bear was not “evil.” It was just a wild animal which reacted agressively when humans entered its territory. We don’t know why the bear acted as it did, but it was a wild animal in a wild area. You can’t expect the forest to be as safe as a petting zoo.