Brown Bear attacks group of teens in Alaska

[una_dogger]

Sounds like a great job, Dirtpig67!

I will echo Bob's words, thanks for stopping by and sharing your perspective.

 

[Craig]

Nols Risk Management Statement dated March 2011

The National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS) was founded in 1965 by Paul Petzoldt. From its start
as a summer outdoor program located in Lander, Wyoming, NOLS is now a year-round internationally
recognized outdoor school with locations in Wyoming, Alaska, Arizona, Washington, Idaho, Mexico,
Chile, Brazil, Yukon Territory Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, We also conduct courses in India,
Tanzania, British Columbia Canada, and Norway. Approximately 3000 students enroll each year in
NOLS field courses participating in more than 160,000 field program days in multi-week wilderness
expeditions.

We average about 170 injuries and 160 illnesses per year. The majority of injuries are minor and include
sprained ankles, minor wounds and sore muscles. The majority of illnesses are gastrointestinal illnesses.
It is rare for an injury or illness to be serious enough to require a night in the hospital. Occasionally,
approximately three or four times a year, we will have a more serious injury such as a leg or arm
fracture.

There is a risk management consciousness that pervades the school and indeed, guides every step of the
school's development. Risk management has always been and will continue to be a priority at the
National Outdoor Leadership School. Nevertheless, no matter how many systems an organization
employs, and no matter how stringently those systems are enforced, incidents will happen. We cannot -
nor can anyone- reduce that possibility to zero. We do not seek risk for the sake of risk, but the
wilderness areas, which are the classrooms for our educational expeditions, have no handrails, and no
simple solutions for complex emergency situations. Participants on our courses must accept the fact that
risk of injury or death may be unavoidable during travel and recreation in remote areas.

Impressive - IMO

 

[TrishandAlex]

nice to hear from someone with actual experience

Yes, thanks for your post, it was very informative.

 

[DougPaul]

nice to hear from someone with actual experience, not paraphrasing a book...

Timothy Treadwell had actual experience too...

I prefer to get my info from the experts. Herrero (a professor of biology and environmental science at the University of Calgary and leading authority on bear behavior and attacks) has over 5000 hours of field experience and has analyzed records of over 400 hundred encounters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Herrero http://www.ucalgary.ca/evds/people/faculty/herrero http://www.canadianrockies.net/grizzly

Anecdotal info is notoriously unreliable.


A book is the predecessor to the computer, Kindle, Ipad, etc. It has the advantages that its memory is non-volatile, it has no batteries, it works well in bright light, and it will not go obsolete in 10 minutes. This particular book has been described as the standard reference in the field. http://www.canadianrockies.net/grizzly/gbsafety.html#books

Doug

 

[una_dogger]

iirc one ofTreadwell's fatal mistakes was his unwillingness to collaborate with both sides of community, both the wildlife biologists and the locals-- an thereby conducted his research in a vacuum.

 

[TrishandAlex]

Timothy Treadwell had actual experience too...

I prefer to get my info from the experts.

I prefer to get my data from hard sources too -- scientific, peer-reviewed academic journals and publications, if possible. Books are great if they are loaded with references to peer-reviewed, scientific papers or are written by bona fide experts who have published academically (for example, Herrero).

That being said, there is something valuable in having information from someone who's lived in the area and has a perspective we have not yet heard. [I don't count Treadwell as such a person...he visited grizzly country each year with the purpose of getting close to the bears, he didn't live there fulltime as an average citizen...and, of course, he had an agenda that seemed to be out of touch with the reality of grizzly bear behavioral biology].

 

[dirtpig67]

I prefer to get my data from hard sources too -- scientific, peer-reviewed academic journals and publications, if possible. Books are great if they are loaded with references to peer-reviewed, scientific papers or are written by bona fide experts who have published academically (for example, Herrero).

That being said, there is something valuable in having information from someone who's lived in the area and has a perspective we have not yet heard. [I don't count Treadwell as such a person...he visited grizzly country each year with the purpose of getting close to the bears, he didn't live there fulltime as an average citizen...and, of course, he had an agenda that seemed to be out of touch with the reality of grizzly bear behavioral biology].

There is a lot of info out there that academics and other "experts" can never learn or know about by simply studying a topic. Sometimes it just takes living the life to know. The real experts are not always the PhD's who wrote the book on the subject. We lived in a very rural area with a lot of Alaskan Natives (ie Native Americans for lower 48'ers). I lived and worked with these people and learned volumes from the experience, but am no where near the experts that they are on the Alaskan bush. The academic knowledge that many people are now researching and writing books about is more of an instinct to these people that has developed over thousands of years in that environment. If you want to know how to operate and live in the Alaskan bush, listen, learn, and live with the Alaskan Natives for several years and you will gain more knowledge than can be obtained from any book on the subject.

A lot can be learned from academic research and books and most visitors can learn many things from them that will keep them relatively safe - entirely safe is not achievable. But this is often the attitude that visitors have when up there. Many think if they read and apply the bear books and carry a can of bear spray, they are just as safe as any typical lower 48 backcountry experience. This is not the case.

There are still wild places on the earth in which some bits of knowledge and wisdom can only be gained by experiencing the land for your self and learning first hand from those that have lived in that place longer than recorded history. Many the things that I learned from the native people, I cannot quantify, define, or describe. Many things I picked up are subconsciense things that I learned by simply being there around them in the woods which slowly changed the way I did things and operated in that wilderness. There are still things in which experience and first hand knowledge trumps "hard-sources" and academic learning . I have a scientific academic background and if you told me something like that before I lived in Alaska I would have dismissed it. Living and learning there has taught me that there are some things that can never be learned completely from books and that what defines someone as an expert is very dependent on the subject at hand.

 

[TrishandAlex]

Dirtpig67,

As a former anthropologist who used data obtained through the method of participant observation as part of her research, I completely agree with everything you wrote. Some of my academic knowledge on a certain subject (not bears) came from spending time with a group of people in a very remote part of South America. Had I not a degree, an academic insitution behind me, or the means to academically publish/give talks on the subject, the knowledge I gleaned still would have been the same. Of course, publishing a paper on a topic makes the knowledge official in the eyes of the scientific community and keeps everything in check, since papers are put through a rigorous peer-review process before they are or are not accepted for academic publication.

In my opinion, the ideal way to learn about something is a combination of the above. Look to the PhDs and the folks who've spent years studying and publishing...AND speak/live with the people who reside in the particular area of interest, if possible. Combine the two, but put more more weight on the academic research (IMO) because, if the research is solid and the data's been put through peer-review, the information should be without bias. Can't always say the same for information you've received from someone living in the area, since you might not know if you're talking to someone who's reliable and realistic (like you) or someone who has an agenda (like Treadwell). In your kind of situation, where you have the chance to live in an area for an extended amount of time and can become part of the culture for months/years, it makes complete sense to do what the residents do, since they are, as you say, living the life. However, perhaps the knowledge they have is limited to the particular population of grizzlies that surround that particular area? Or perhaps not, I don't know anything about grizzlies other than what I've read; I'm just wondering out loud.

 

[Jay H]

Posted by BanjoLady on FB:

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/artic...henomenal-job?page=full#.Ti_GUXa8P6M.facebook


[edit] ha, guess I didn't scroll up enough... sorry, just saw the post by "B"..

Jay

 

[StaceyM]

The real experts are not always the PhD's who wrote the book on the subject.

If I've learned anything in grad school, it's not to trust someone solely for their degree title. That's not to say all Ph.Ds are unreliable, but academics are people too and can make mistakes or miss important points. And some unfortunately do try to prove their theory correct (whether it is or not) rather than test a hypothesis.

In my opinion, the ideal way to learn about something is a combination of the above. Look to the PhDs and the folks who've spent years studying and publishing...AND speak/live with the people who reside in the particular area of interest, if possible. Combine the two, but put more more weight on the academic research (IMO) because, if the research is solid and the data's been put through peer-review, the information should be without bias.

I completely agree on your point of diversifying sources because both have strengths and weaknesses. Academic data is often based on averages of large populations (disclaimer: I'm not a population biologist or anthropologist) so you miss out on info to be learned from outliers, but you get a good idea of general trends. Anecdotal can cover both general trends, but also can pick up on unusual cases which could be important in a situation like this one where there were a lot of small things (large group spread out while crossing a loud river, etc.) that contributed to an attack.

Sorry for the ramble, in any case the boys did a great job in a tough situation.

 

[Craig]

There are still wild places on the earth in which some bits of knowledge and wisdom can only be gained by experiencing the land for your self and learning first hand from those that have lived in that place longer than recorded history. Many the things that I learned from the native people, I cannot quantify, define, or describe. Many things I picked up are subconsciense things that I learned by simply being there around them in the woods which slowly changed the way I did things and operated in that wilderness. There are still things in which experience and first hand knowledge trumps "hard-sources" and academic learning . I have a scientific academic background and if you told me something like that before I lived in Alaska I would have dismissed it. Living and learning there has taught me that there are some things that can never be learned completely from books and that what defines someone as an expert is very dependent on the subject at hand.

Dirtpig67-

It sounds as those your time in Alaska could add valuable specific information to this discussion.

As you probably know the teens in this situation were, (suppose to be) following excepted protocol for traveling in bear habitat.

Would you please explain what specific additional or different things, you believe, should have been done to minimize the risk they faced?

 

[dirtpig67]

Dirtpig67-

It sounds as those your time in Alaska could add valuable specific information to this discussion.

As you probably know the teens in this situation were, (suppose to be) following excepted protocol for traveling in bear habitat.

Would you please explain what specific additional or different things, you believe, should have been done to minimize the risk they faced?

I guess one of my points was that the protocol they followed was probably about as good as it gets for someone who is just visiting and cannot live in a place and learn all the best practices and skills over years of time.

They probably had minimized the risk as low as they could given their experience and amount of time spent in the Alaskan wilderness.

The one thing that I have never read in a bear book or seen in a bear safety protocol, was that you can follow every rule and every suggestion in the book and you can still get attacked and killed by a bear. That is the part that is usually left out of the book.

 

[Craig]

They probably had minimized the risk as low as they could given their experience and amount of time spent in the Alaskan wilderness.

Would you please explain what specific additional or different things, you believe, should have been done to minimize the risk they faced?

Perhaps I should have asked -

Would you please explain what specific additional or different things, you believe, could have been done to minimize the risk they faced?

Afterall these threads are all about learning.

 

[Neil]

what specific additional or different things, could have been done to minimize the risk they faced?

Air horns. I have one that can be re-charged with a bicycle pump. I use it in grizzly country when whacking through the forest en route to treeline or back down through forest from summit. Along streams I blast more often. It is very, very loud.

Not a nice thing to use in crowded areas but I've only used it well away from any trails or any other people. Herrero gives it a page in his bookand gives good evidence that is very effective. I never have owned pepper spray but I hear bear bangers work. The horn prevents an encounter while spray, banger, waving arms overhead, playing dead etc. are all after-the-fact measures.

 

[Chugach001]

That so many "ran", leads me to believe, that yes "human" nature took over, but, their level of education is questionable. (not there/MO).

.

So I was "pushed" out of my camp once alone in the Brooks Range by a Griz. My mind was screaming DON'T MOVE but my feet would take off in a 10' panicked sprint. Then I would stop and hear the voice screaming in my head. Then I would be launched again in a running spasm for another 10 feet - totally rejecting my better sense and years of wisdom. I spazzed/stopped my way 100 yards across the creek bottom and up a hill. Totally out of control and at the whim of my visitor. Every time I stopped he was tensed and looked ready to pounce. Then I would settle and he would settle. Then I would spaz again and he would get ready to pounce. There is absolutely that run/attack stimulus/response mechanism with bears. Holy Sh*t, just typing this reminds me with a shiver.

And I knew 100% better from years of living in Alaska and countless bear encounters. Fortunately, he was a friendly bear.

The running part of the story struck a cord with my because I can totally empathize.

 

[una_dogger]

Narrow winding path, sound of the river, taking eachother by surprise.... I think these guys did quite well -- all lived, excellent teamwork while waiting for rescue, some defensive swipes by the bear and then retreat...I think they were lucky. A serious test of the skills they were out there to acquire!

Disclaimer: never lived in Alaska, never encountered a grizzly or brown bear, never read Herrera. < tongue in cheek>

 

[dirtpig67]

Perhaps I should have asked -

Would you please explain what specific additional or different things, you believe, could have been done to minimize the risk they faced?

Afterall these threads are all about learning.

I think the individuals could do little else to improve their situation if they were following their protocols and precautions correctly. Like I said before, attacks will happen even with those precautions in place. There is only so much the risk can be reduced for people just up there on a visit. That is just the reality of the Alaskan wilderness.

I think the biggest improvement is on NOLS shoulders. I know that their focus is on outdoor leadership, but they need to admit that they cannot teach students everything they truly need to know to be safe in the Alaskan bush in a NOLS course. Along with that admissions is taking steps such as not letting student groups go into the wilderness without a safety person who is trained, experienced, properly equiped, and who's sole purpose is to protect that group from the wildlife.

The problem with this is that it is somewhat of an indirect admission by NOLS that they cannot teach you all of the skills to operate safely in the Alaska bush. This is probably not something that is good with the image that NOLS tries to present as one of the premier outdoor leadership schools in the world.

 

[Dave Bear]

I can not even imagine how much it took the ones that fought back to do that! So impressive that Victor was able to kick it in the face, perhaps one of the best deterents that happened. I would presume it would take years of chance minor encounters with bears that size to even begin to feel you would not run.

The very closest I ever came to a bear in the wild was a black bear on the same rasberry briar. At first I thought it was kinda cool (I was 14) and kept picking. Then I thought about the possibility of me being between it and cubs and I slowly backed down the trail not daring to take my eyes off where it was. The year before a large male had demolished a bee hive and sat on the other side of a fence in a pasture. He could not have cared less about the noise we made or the bees around him. Even an old Winchester over his brow barely got his attention. When he chose to leave it was his choice and he covered a 20 acre pasture faster than most horses.

They are a beautiful creature from a distance and not to be confused with the trained pets you see in a cage. Even our blacks deserve more respect than they get as a truly wild animal that should not be fed by accident or purpose. Eventually stastics will change because their habitat and manners are influenced by us and none of that will follow the book!

 

[DougPaul]

I can not even imagine how much it took the ones that fought back to do that! So impressive that Victor was able to kick it in the face, perhaps one of the best deterents that happened. I would presume it would take years of chance minor encounters with bears that size to even begin to feel you would not run.

In general, kicking a grizzly in the face is considered to be the wrong thing to do--it will generally cause the bear to keep attacking. Most grizzly attacks are defensive and playing dead tells it that you are not a threat.

Black bear attacks are more likely to be predatory so fighting back is generally advised. However there have been exceptions (eg a mother black protecting cubs by attacking rather than the more usual fleeing and climbing a tree). Black bears from the NW have been reported to be more aggressive than blacks from the East.

Doug

 

[Dave Bear]

Not disagreeing with the narrated and discussed "best practice" in the event of a grizzly attack. Just saying even standing next to one stuffed in a museum case tonight made my hair stand up on the back of my neck to look at his jaws, paws, and claws! It would be tough to do an adequate job of playing dead and not running. You can read it as many times as you like but the book is a far cry from hearing, smelling and feeling one close to you in the circumstance these guys were in.

Doug, my post regarding black bears around here was not relative to the NW bears and perhaps not relative to the thread except to say our stats can and likely will change due to more run ins and food storage issues. If I ever have the good fortune to be in the NW I would also want to be in the company of someone familiar with that habitat, not hiking solo with a lot of book sense about what to do. My encounters on NH trails have been next to nil, two cubs from a distance treed on Blueberry Ledge trail late one day. No sign of the mother. And the odor and noise of a big fellow one day on Rattle River, and yes I ran like hell in the direction opposite the noise!