Man kills bear with log

I think 1) bear was young 2) guy got lucky.

But he got a ticket for being stupid. He should have left right away.

Killing animals is not PC in some circles. NOT mine. PETA people eating tasty animals. Cheers..Rob

The ticket was for "not securing his campsite" Apparently according to the DNR expert, if there is no food or garbage around, you want have any problems with bears. Too bad no one told the bear in Utah that. Or too bad the parents of the kid in Utah didn't have a "hand cannon"

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!

"Mr. Everhart was given a ticket for failing to secure his campsite, according to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources."

I can hear it now, “Well the law says he is required to secure his campsite, he failed to do so, and a citation was issued.”

Being a law enforcement officer, this is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. Who ever the officer was who gave the ticket should not be a law enforcement officer, whether it be federal or what ever he is. It is so hard to explain how irritated this makes me. And people wonder why some law enforcement officers are not liked. Not because we have a job and some people will never like it, but because some officers loose all their common sense, if they ever had any, when they put the badge on.

Ok I will get off my soap box.

Now the second part. He should have had a gun. But let’s think about that, he probably would have been arrested for carrying a concealed weapon in his tent. Or maybe taking a game animal out of season without a valid tag, or maybe wasting a game animal. OMG!!!!!!

This is my opinion of the officer who gave the ticket. If he had one less brain cell, he would be a plant!!! LET’S HAVE SOME COMMON SENSE!!!!

I am sure there is more to the story but OMG!!!!

Heck I figured he would get a tickit for outa season kill.....

At first, I thought it was ridiculous that he was ticketed too. But after some consideration of the story, I think he deserved it, as he demonstrated a lot of bad decision making, and put his kids in danger, and that's all the cop could cite him for was "failure to secure the campsite."

He was in bear country, maybe he did or did not know that. I consider "securing your campsite" from bears to be separating your food from your sleeping area. If a bear is coming into your camp after food, he's going to get it whether it's in your sleeping bag or hanging from a tree 100 ft away. If it's in a bear canister, let him play with that while you figure out what to do regarding the safety of your kids.

This guy was a retard. He let his kid throw a shovel at the bear while it was running *away* with the cooler. "Go little Johnny, be the hero and bring dad back the cooler. Oh the bear didn't like that? Let me throw this log at him! If that doesn't work, we'll spray him with these shook-up beers." Granted, a 300 lb bear is not a big bear. That's about like being attacked by Dom DeLuise.

So, in order of appearance, the infractions:
1) Left unsecured food out in middle of camp
2) Didn't leave well enough alone when the bear tried to haul the food away.
3) Let his kid pursue and attack bear
4) Used a really lame method to subdue the now-pissed-off bear because he didn't have proper personal protection in bear country.

Yeah, I'd have chewed his ass out and given him whatever ticket I could drum up. I think a real hero is a reluctant one, not the guy who commits multiple acts of stupidity and manages to come out okay.

Last summer I was in Yosemite NP. They were as rabid as
Rosie O Donnell at a NRA convention, when it came to how bears and people interact.

If a bear gets into your food, perfume, deodorant, toothpaste, or any other human item you WILL be cited! Something like $225.00 Even if said items are in your car. Everything goes in the steel bear box.

The reason is a fed bear is a dead bear. Once a bear learns it can break into a car for food that’s the end for the bear. The NP was very professional in letting me know there is zero tolerance on this. With groups like PETA, ALF and the government it is a sad fact we will see more of this.

Lets not forget the cougars either. The big cats like to eat people too. You had better be prepared or you might be lunch for some big carnivore.

In Oregon you use to be able to hunt cougars with dogs. No more. You could use bait to attract bears. No more. Now only deputized state hunters can use these methods. WTF Why not let regular hunters use these methods? Don’t get me started….

Ok here we go. The role of a law enforcement officer is not to punish, it is to uphold the law and attempt to keep the infraction or crime from happening again. If the cop only gave the ticket because the guy was stupid, I would not have enough tickets to last a full shift. Sure the guy might need a good ass chewing. And like I said I do not know the entire story, maybe the guy has already received a warning and it is time to get a ticket.

I have a rule I abide by while on duty, this goes for most infractions/violations and a few small crimes: You get an ass chewing or a citation, not both. Sometimes a good ass chewing is the best thing. For example: if a guy has a lot of money, what good does a citation do, NONE!!! Let’s be realistic, a citation like that guy received, what will it really accomplish, NOTHING!!! If you chew him out you may get a better result next time. There are times you gain respect and a learning experience by not issuing a citation.

If we were all arrested or cited for every violation and crime we committed over the years, none of us would have a driver’s license, a pilot’s license, and we would all have a criminal history. (CCH) All I am saying is there should be some common sense involved and the officer is not the punisher EVER.

Good points, Wayne. I never thought about it like that. A good law enforcement officer would have made this guy feel like a dunce, but lesson learned. I like that you(and hopefully other officers) have the same attitude of trying to prevent by ass-chewing. Obviously the officer is not the punisher, but by writing a citation he can drag out the guy's proverbial "ass chewing." A lecture or humiliation in front of their friends just doesn't work on some people.

The problem here is that the awareness just isn't there for the general public. The knowledge that stupidity will result in a fine often increases awareness (hopefully.) It could be part of a revenue generation program for Georgia too...who knows what their motivations for writing citations are.

I agree with you, John. People choose to ignore what they don't want to hear, or what would force them to act in a responsible manner vs a compulsive manner. Places like Yosemite NP have very aggressive awareness programs, but other areas of the country it might not be the same way.

My dad lives out in the sticks on 40 acres. He recently had some former-city-living neighbors move in on the adjacent property, and they started to feed the wild turkeys, squirrels, coyotes, or whatever comes to the back yard. It can only end badly, as we do have bears in southern Oregon. He's warned them but they can't fathom the dangers and won't listen until their home is disrupted somehow.

Maybe they should feed a Couger.

Wayne, you must be a old cop.

The reason for tickets is revenue enhancement for the government. At least that’s true here in the liberal strong hold of the people’s republic of potland. R omitted on purpose.

Sorry Zane. Not all libs are bad. I don’t know if you are a real police officer. I think you make to much since. I’m just kidden Wayne. I have 27 years in the Fire Dept. Real hard to have a airplane on gov wages too. Opps…thread jacking ticket. Regards…Rob

Ok here we go. The role of a law enforcement officer is not to punish, it is to uphold the law and attempt to keep the infraction or crime from happening again.

Well I am not an “Old” cop, depends on your definition of old, but I believe the role of law enforcement is dramatically different than it was a few years ago. I have been in law enforcement for only 12 years. I had the fortunate opportunity to ride with a great officer when I was a reserve. Luckily I had common sense also but his guidance really helped in my career.

But I have to agree with Rob, the role and attitude of most law enforcement administrations, is revenue generation. Let me give you an example.

ODOT Seat Belt Grant

Now on the surface this is a great program. It saves lives and educates those who choose not to wear their seat belt. But from my perspective, it is only a revenue generator. The state gives the money to law enforcement agencies. They in turn are requested to write so many tickets an hour. ODOT now has to comply with the Federal requirements of the Seat Belt Grant so they (The State) will receive their money. Not only for the grant but for road improvements, new bridges, and anything else the State can think of. Talk about a lot of wasted money.

I only write a ticket when I can justify it in my mind. (Is this the only way this ‘person’ will learn from his/hear actions?) So, I sign up for a four hour overtime shift on the seatbelt grant. I was told by the officer who was in charge of the grant, “We need to see at least four citations per hour.” I ask, “Can we write warnings if it fits?” He told me, “Well that is not the intent of the program.” Can you guess what my response was????



I wrote 26 warnings and 2 citations, the two that received a citation really deserved it!! I bet you can imagine how that went over.

Treat people like people until they decide they do not want to be a person any longer. You would be amazed how you can calm a situation down by just being a person yourself.

An Old Cop. That’s funny!!!

The reason I have the plane is I got it at a good price and I only have a few hobbies. So my hobbies are my daughter, my wife, my plane and my guns.

Pif, I like your line of thinking. I have sat in on a few interviews for deputies in our small county (small county=low pay=fresh out of school canidates). We have an experienced deputy who kind of leads the interviews. You should see the new guys squirm for an answer when he asks them "will you enforce by the letter of the law, or the spirit of the law?" It kind of puts things in perspective.

As for the campers, I guess as the old saying goes, "i'd rather be lucky than good any day"

A bear is really a ravenous stomach attached to a nose, propelled by four paws. Their existence is dominated by the desire to gain weight before the next hybernation...people don't interest them, food does. The considerable intelligence bears have is focused almost entirely on procuring more food.

With monotonous regularity, a bear who is exposed to human food, usually in the form of garbage, will begin a downhill slide which ends with the bear becoming enough of a problem that it is dangerous to people.

Humans are not a natural food source for bears. Almost without exception (though there are a very few), bears that attack people have been conditioned to associate people with food.

People food has more calories than grasses and berries, so it is more attractive. Bears which are naturally shy of people begin to associate people with food in the form of garbage. They overcome their fear to satisfy their hunger. By frequent assosciation with people, they loose some of their fear and become more bold.

Since most people are too lazy or stupid to protect their food supply, a slightly bold bear can reap incredible caloric rewards. It's a self perpetuating cycle that all starts with some lazy slob leaving a messy camp or cabin.

Of course, that lazy slob rarely reaps the rewards he so justly deserves...it's the people who come later and have to deal with the food-conditioned bear that reap the rewards.

The unfortunate child who died in Utah may have been in a clean camp, but I guarantee that people before him were not, and the result is a bear which has learned to directly associate people with food...an association which never needed to happen.

I personally find a world with bears and cougars and rattlesnakes and wolves in it infinitely more interesting than a world without them. I know that some feal differently, and to them I would kindly suggest they move to one of the many metropolitan areas where such things are not found, rather than stay in the small fraction of the world that still has them and complain about it. (That's nothing personal against anyone here!)

I'm glad the Georgan prevailed over the bear, and I'm glad he got a ticket for being an idiot with his food. Some may say an ass chewing was more appropriated, but I'd say $300 out of the kitty and a afternoon in court is a very good ass chewing, and a whole lot more likely to change his habits. It's too bad the people who came before him and created the problem didn't all get tickets too. Being stupid should hurt.

On a less opinionated note, anyone who is actually interested in learning more about how bears and humans interact should read 'Bear Attacks Their Causes and Avoidance' by Stephen Herrero. The author is a professor of environmental science and biology who has spent well over twenty years studying bear behavior and bear attacks. It's a very complete book (though a bit old, being published in 1985). In addition to a lot of solid information on both black and grizzly bears, there are fascinating accounts of bear attacks, including the rare predacious killings. There's a good chapter on which weapons have proven to be most effective against bears, as well some of the more proven techniques for stopping a charging bear. It's an excellent book for anyone interested in bears.

$300 out of the kitty…. You are assuming he will be found guilty and he will be ordered to pay the full fine. And will the $300 make a difference in his financial situation.

An afternoon in court…. You are assuming he is required to appear. I am not sure how Georgia law is written but in Oregon you are not required to appear on a violation you can handle it all by mail.

Like I said in my other posts, I do not know the entire story, maybe he deserved a citation. But I do believe, and this is with my little LE experience, for most people you need to look at the ‘spirit’ of the law, not the black and white ‘letter’ of the law. (Thanks lancef53 for that) For some officers they only look at the outcome or the result of a situation, not the intent. I will give you one more example.

A guy is elk hunting. He has a cow tag. He sees a nice cow, shoots the cow and beyond where he could see there stood a 5 point rag horn bull elk. Well the bull elk was also killed. Now, did he intend to kill the bull, No. Did he make a mistake, Yes. Was he unsafe in his gun handling, Yes. Did he commit a violation, Yes.

The guy dresses out the cow, he then dresses out the bull, he places his tag on the cow, loads both elk into his pickup and drives to the nearest ODFW location and explains to them what happened. Can you guess what happened? THEY ISSUED HIM A CITATION for taking game out of season without a valid tag. Did he commit the violation by the ‘letter’ of the law, yes. Did he commit the violation by the ‘spirit’ of the law, no.

Now I have a few thoughts on this type of situation. The next guy who makes a valid mistake, and we all make mistakes, will not dress out the elk, he will not tell anybody because he knows he will be issued a citation for sure. Now we, as LE officers have forced a good person to break the law or make a bad decision. Because making the right decision only resulted in a citation anyways. All I am saying is common sense needs to be used. Not always is a citation necessary.

Sorry Zane for hijacking this thread.