Seriously? lawsuits gone crazy. Does the public really expect the rangers to protect them from the wild animals. You enter a wildlife area at your own risk.
The ESA protections on grizzly bears as “ endangered “ should be removed.
Then allow grizzly bear hunting
If those same officials make it impossible for the individual to protect themselves from bears then, yes, they should get sued if they fail to protect the public. Either authorize the carrying of large bore handguns and rifles or shoot every Grizzly in the parks, or just shut the parks down altogether. People expect to be safe in the parks, unreasonable as that sounds, because they have been led to believe they will be safe.
There is no waiver that a person signs when they go into Yellowstone that absolves the Park Service if the tourist happens to get killed by a Grizzly or other animal. At the very least the dangers of being in the park or, as in the most recent case, near the park should be made very clear to the public.
We expect government to NOT reintroduce or increase populations of dangerous animals that were either previously hunted out for good reason, or were never present in the lower 48.
These grizzly and wolf "reintroductions" are deliberate attempts to wipe out humans and/or keep us out of rural areas. It's a communist thing.
But to disarm people, it means that humans are an easy snack for a bear, no long teeth or claws to defend with....arming is the only protection a human has.
If all the bears in the area are eliminated, no more problem and people will be safe....
There were reasons our ancestors killed top of the line predators...then some idiot reintroduces them to human habitats....
Exactly.
Humans invading their habitat.
Same problem in expanding suburban areas, i.e., the Seattle area where developement is slowly encroaching wildlife habitat in the foothills of the Cascade mountain range then bitch about the cougars!!
Same logic of those buying in an developement with a cutesy man-made lake/pond and then bitch when the geese and ducks show up!!
Same logic of those moving near an airport and then bitch about the noise!!
I hear you, but isn't different if you have a known man-eater? Catch and release of a man-eating bear is like letting a child-rapist or a multiple murderer back into society without any monitoring.
In the instant case, the issue is whether the “save the bear” mentality which is deeply ingrained in the Predator Panderer Programs (PPP) led to the state creating a clear and present danger to public health and safety.
They did. The jury correctly awarded damages.
IMHO, the jury failed to require the entirety of assets of the bureaucrats involved to be seized before any taxpayer money was used. The salaries, other assets, and pension/retirement assets might have lightened the burden on the taxpayer AND started a salutary change in bureaucratic mentality.
“You enter a wildlife area at your own risk.”
Yes but that means a person has common sense and most people nowadays don’t have any.
I was thinking that the families were going to sue the bears?