• Happy Incorporation of Hudson's Bay Co. (1670) 🍁🦫🪓

Sleeping On Ground In Grizzly Country Safer Than A Campground

Glenn MacGrady

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
5,087
Reaction score
3,069
Location
Connecticut
“Potentially, being in a campground is more dangerous than camping alone out in the backcountry," Neal said. "Campgrounds are centers of human activity, and humans by nature can be careless."

 
I was just in Yellowstone and environs last week
Two weeks before, a very experienced local hunter, with a rifle, side arm and bear spray had his face removed (lost lower mandible) and generally mauled by a grizzly. He startled the grizzly that was guarding its prey. No time for spray, or to shoulder his rifle or even draw his side arm…
While I have camped and paddled and hiked all my life in the ADK’s with blacks bears around, I don’t think I would ever spend any time in grizzly back country. They’re too big too fast and to unpredictable for my comfort level
 
Most of the backpacking that Kathleen and I have done was in the mountains of British Columbia, where Grizzlies are common. Most of the canoe tripping we have done was in the Northwest Territories, where Grizzlies are common. In our lifetime we have seen, on the ground, approximately 200 Black Bears, five Polar Bears, and 40 Grizzly Bears. We have never been threatened, although two of the Black Bears came into camp, and left only after I fired off a bear banger. We saw the Polar Bears on Hudson Bay north of Churchill. They weren’t aggressive, but neither were they deterred by our prescence.

The Grizzly Bears usually ran as soon as they were aware of us; but not always. On our 1995 Coppermine River Trip with Carey and Janice we were stormbound for 2 days at Big Lake, about halfway on our 11-day overland trip to reach the Coppermine River from Winter Lake. Carey, Janice and I were huddled beneath the tarp, preparing breakfast.

Coppermine035.jpeg

For some reason I decided to get up, just to look around, and saw a sow Grizzly and her cub approaching directly toward us, about 100 yards away. Wanting to remain calm, I stooped back under the tarp, and said, “You know, Carey and Janice, there’s a grizzly bear coming.”

”No there’s not,” Carey replied. I was obviously too calm. With more urgency I said, “Actually there’s two Grizzly Bears comlng.”

They believed me this time. All three of us stood outside the tarp, and stood tall but quietly. The sow saw us, and changed her path to amble to one side of the tarp, still about 100 yards away. She never got any closer, but she showed no real concern.

The other time was in 1993 when Kathleen and I were paddling the Thelon River. It was late afternoon, and we were tired and hungry. We pulled to shore where Kathleen jumped out, and with her back to the beach she held the bow steady for me to get out. I then saw a Grizzly coming toward us, and again, trying to remain calm, I said, “Get back in the boat Kathleen.”

She said, “What?” With measured deliberation I said, “Get. Back. In. The. Boat.” At that point she knew it was a bear. As we backed away from the beach I got the best photo I am ever likely to get of a Grizzly Bear. The bear came toward us, but stopped after only a few feet into the water. It wasn’t aggressive. Just curious. I speculate that it had been napping on the beach when we arrived.

Thelon073.jpeg

I know things can go very wrong, but we have always felt safe when travelling in Grizzly country. We try our best to be cautious and aware. That’s all one can do, other than not go at all.
 
Last edited:
I know things can go very wrong, but we have always felt safe when travelling in Grizzly country. We try our best to be cautious and aware. That’s all one can do, other than not go at all.
Yep, that's pretty much what you have to do, whether it's camping in grizzly country or climbing/mountaineering (see my treatise on "objective" and "subjective" hazards in Glenn's climbing thread). Of course nothing is guaranteed (except eventually expiring), which the Banff incident shows clearly.
 
Most of the canoe tripping we have done was in the Northwest Territories, where Grizzlies are common.

I wonder if it makes a difference if the bear has a long distance line of sight view to the persons, as they would on the barren grounds and as they wouldn't in the dense forests, thick brush or dense vegetation mentioned in some of Mason's articles. In other words, less chance of a surprise/defensive encounter when the bear has a long distance and long temporal view.

That wouldn't explain the incidents of breaking into tents or homes or attacking fishermen, but going after food might in those cases.

I suspect a group of four or more people would deter an attack more than a single person or couple.
 
I wonder if it makes a difference if the bear has a long distance line of sight view to the persons, as they would on the barren grounds and as they wouldn't in the dense forests, thick brush or dense vegetation mentioned in some of Mason's articles. In other words, less chance of a surprise/defensive encounter when the bear has a long distance and long temporal view.
Visibility is key in human/bear conflicts (as is smell). It's pretty nice hiking in the Barrens when you can see several miles with no vegetation over 6". Hiking willow thickets in Alaska is a bit different when you can see only 5-10 feet--making lots of noise is your friend.
I suspect a group of four or more people would deter an attack more than a single person or couple.
Precisely--I don't think (based on reading Herrero's book over 20 years ago) there have been any recorded injuries associated with groups of 4 or above. There have been numerous attacks of groups of two, both from grizzlies and black bears, with fatalities.
 
Where is Glenn’s climbing thread?

 
A couple of changes my dear friend Helmuth Port made after he was attacked in his tent at night were; using a bigger tent (like a six man family type) and playing a radio at night on low volume.
 
Here’s a link to a CBC story regarding grizzlies in southeastern British Columbia that refuse to stay out of town. I wouldn’t camp in my backyard!

I was just in Nelson for a couple of weeks. Hiked an urban trail that had scat and area closures. This was before they trapped them the first time. In Anchorage, grizzlies are just a way of life, with bears using the streams for fishing (usually) when people aren't using the trails along those same streams. And it's getting common that people are getting whacked adjacent to town. It still beats polar bears roaming the streets in Arviat, Nunavut, where they have bear patrols during the winter! When we were there a few years ago we were told to take a rifle when we went to see the graveyard at the edge of town (that had the grave of a recent polar bear fatality). Wild places abound!
 
"Noorlander was attacked by a grizzly bear on Sept. 8 after joining two people to look for a deer they had shot and wounded. The bear came upon him so quickly, he did not have time to deploy bear spray and his gun misfired, according to reports at the time.

"The attack happened south of Big Sky, a popular resort area about 55 miles (90 kilometers) north of Yellowstone National Park . . . ."

 
The attack was an answer to his prayers? OK. And we don't get any more information until we read about it in his book and watch the feature movie? I can already guess what it's about. No thanks. I really feel bad that this happened to him, but from what I read in this story it sounds frighteningly similar to a fellow I knew who thought he could communicate with and tame wild Coyotes. He was ultimately attacked and had his hands shredded by one, and with that the end of his career in Yellowstone Park. If my story doesn't move the needle, then watch the Werner Herzog film "Grizzly Man". By the way, he was south of Big Sky which is directly west and within a dozen miles of Yellowstone Park, not 55 miles north. This is an easy thing for a journalist to check, so perhaps some of the other "facts" in the story may be similarly erroneous.

Mark
 
Here are two earlier AP stories about the attack:



Quoted are the second article's details about the attack:

Noorlander was helping two hunters who rented ATVs from his business as they tried to find a deer they had shot in southwestern Montana, according to Davis.

They tracked a deer that wasn’t the one the hunters shot, and Noorlander spotted a smaller grizzly. He was pulling out his gun to try to scare it away when a larger bear attacked him, Davis wrote.

Noorlander’s gun misfired and he didn’t have time to grab his bear spray from his backpack, so he tried to punch the animal “in hopes of slowing it down,” according to Davis.

“Unfortunately it did not, and after the first punch the grizzly was on top of Rudy,” Davis wrote on a GoFundMe page. “The grizzly left a large scratch down his right chest, bit his arms, legs, and to top it all off, gave him as what Rudy describes as the most disgusting French kiss of his life before biting down and tearing off his lower jaw.”

One of the two hunters shot at the bear and it left the area, said Morgan Jacobsen, a spokesperson for Montana’s wildlife department.
 
A few guidelines to consider: a) be exceptionally careful when coming across a carcass in grizzly country. I believe they were tracking a deer from the day before, and came across the smaller bear on the carcass. The general goal is to try to see the carcass from a distance before approaching. Whether that was possible or not I don't know. But I'd be spooked as heck looking for a carcass after a night out, and not having good visibility. , b) scaring away a grizzly on a carcass can get exciting, and is not recommended--give it up, c) don't keep your bear spray in your pack. He should have had it in his hand at the first hint of conflict, e.g. getting close to carcass even if you don't see a bear, and certainly if you see a bear on it (and you are hopefully backing off), d) fighting the bear when he was on the ground just increases the severity of the attack.

Even if he did things right, he was in a bad predicament--surprising a bear on a carcass, and with Mom nearby. All bets are off regardless. But mitigation always helps.
 
". . . the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must comply with a court order to reevaluate the grizzly bear situation in the Bitterroot. Two decades ago, the agency decided to transplant 25 bears into the Bitterroot recovery area as an experimental population, but then reversed the decision and never followed up."

 
Back
Top