Should You Report a Grizzly Bear Self-Defense Shooting?

AmmoLand ^ | November 13, 2025 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Decades ago, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service established a regulatory requirement to report the taking of grizzly bears in self-defense in the lower 48 states.

From 50 C.F.R. 17.40(b)(1)(i)(B):

Grizzly bears may be taken in self-defense or in defense of others, but such taking shall be reported by the individual who has taken the bear or his designee within 5 days of occurrence… 

The penalties for failing to report to the authorities within 5 days are up to six months in prison and a $25,000 fine.

Tim Sundles of Buffalo Bore Ammunition recently created a video about handguns for defense against wild animals. He has interesting experiences and views. At about 33:00 minutes, he puts forward his opinion about the requirement to report grizzly bear self-defense shootings. He talks about the Fifth Amendment. From the transcript:

“And another thing about these protected grizzlies, you know, if you shoot one in self-defense, okay, now you’ve got a certain number of I think it’s 2 days, 3 days to get somewhere to a fishing game department and and notify them.”

“Incriminate yourself.”

“Yeah. And that goes completely against the Fifth Amendment. There is no law that is legal that says you have to go self-incriminate. That’s what the Fifth Amendment is all about.” 

As Sundles mentions, reporting a self-defense shooting has risks. If the government decides to prosecute, it could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in defense costs and take up months or years of time. The risks have little to do with the penalties for not reporting. The risks are primarily from being charged with killing a grizzly without justification. The legal standard for justified shooting of a grizzly, even in the lower 48 states, is not high.

Sundles does not mention the risks of not reporting such incidents.

---

TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: banglist; bear; bearrepublic; bearsrepeating; fifth; report; righttoarmbears; thingsiworryabout; unbearable

[riverrunner]

The ability of the government to track ones whereabouts increases all the time.

[Jonty30]

Im more scared of a sasquatch than grizzly. The occasional grizzly carcass is found, but we’ve never seen the sasquatch that killed him.

[marktwain]

People are seldom charged with non-reporting unless it is part of a plea deal, after they have been charged with the illegal taking of a grizzly bear.

Not reporting is taken as implying guilt. The investigative tools of cell phone tracking, DNA analysis, and the resources the Fish & Wildlife services are willing to expend to find people who have killed grizzly bears in the lower 48 states, are extensive. They are more than are often expended in homicide cases.

Examples of cases are included in the article.

[redfreedom]

I agree fully, they are definitely real and something to be afraid of. I knew a guy that gave a first hand account. He was abducted by aliens, then the space craft flew directly over the Bermuda Triangle where he was repeatedly raped by a herd of big feet.

Compared to that, grizzlies are your friend.

[kiryandil]

and the resources the Fish & Wildlife services are willing to expend to find people who have killed grizzly bears

Hey, it's only YOUR money that they're blowing to track you.

Oh, and their toys are high-dollar, too!! 😉😂😂

[KingLudd]

Can’t you just say that you were scared for your life and that you’re having chest pains? /s

[Omnivore-Dan]

Too much government control over our freedoms. Ok, so you shoot a bear in self defense and you dutifully go to a game warden and report it. Now you will have to prove it was in self defense to some nitwit who wants to fine you up the wazoo. How do you do that? Especially if there were no witnesses to defend you?

[Chickensoup]

There are so many fish and game and wardens there needs to be made up cri.es to give them something to do.

If you want to read something pathetic go to the fish and game licensing and hunting rules for the state of Maine.

Complicated as the state is run by non hunters. The annual rules need a lawyer to untangle.

[marktwain]

Now you will have to prove it was in self defense to some nitwit who wants to fine you up the wazoo. How do you do that? Especially if there were no witnesses to defend you?

---

Others have already fought those battles. The standard for defense against bears is now precedent in the Ninth Circuit, where almost all the lower 48 Grizzly bears are.

It is not a difficult standard to meet. The prosecutors have to show you did not believe you or others were in danger from the bear. The prosecutors *bear* the burden of proof.

https://www.ammoland.com/2025/09/legal-standard-for-self-defense-against-grizzly-bear-attacks/

[GreenHornet]

Should You Report a Grizzly Bear Self-Defense Shooting?

Yes. If a grizzly bear shoots someone in self defense, it should be reported. However, I don't think the bear should be charged.

[marktwain]

Can’t you just say that you were scared for your life and that you’re having chest pains? /s

---

The actual, legal standard is pretty close to your comment.

From the article on the legal standard:

“The precedent is now well established in the Ninth Circuit. To convict a person who claims they killed a grizzly bear in defense of self and/or others, the government must prove the defender did not believe they were threatened or that others were in imminent danger by the bear.

The subjective belief on the part of the person making the defense of self and others claim is the key criteria. The person making the claim does not have to show they were objectively threatened. They need to show they believed they and/or others were in imminent danger.”

[BobL]

“The ability of the government to track ones whereabouts increases all the time.”

With Flock Cameras just about everywhere now, they’ll have your plate, for sure, so 99% of the hard work in finding you is already done. From there it’s just going down the list of people who were in the area and eliminating the ones with strong aliabs.

[Omnivore-Dan]

Seems these days prosecutors don’t need any proof, or they fabricate it. Foe ex. Pres. Trump has been persecuted by prosecutors for many years now with nothing but lies. You say others have fought those battles. No offense, but I don’t think there should be a battle.

[yukong]

Some of the tools the government used to track non-reporters is effectively no longer available to them. Cell phone geofencing is all but gone. Many courts have declared the practice unconstitutional, and further, Google, the one time biggest harvester of such data, as well as most others, have stopped responding to law enforcement warrants, and they are no longer keeping the data long term. So the government will no longer be able to use geofencing unless you turn over your phone. So, if you get involved in such, destroy the phone you had in your possession when you committed the crime, and get a new one.

[Omnivore-Dan]

Then it seems to me that if it is so easy to beat the rap, the whole thing is pretty much moot.

[DFG]

[kiryandil]

Good to know. 🙂

[marktwain]

Then it seems to me that if it is so easy to beat the rap, the whole thing is pretty much moot.

---

If you are informed and aware, and acted with genuine fear, you are correct. The legal standard derives from the Wallen case, where the accused shot three yearling grizzly bears. He repeatedly told the responding local game warden he feared for the safety of his wife and children, and he was only trying to scare the bears off with his beat-up .22 rifle.

But a .22 is much more deadly than many understand, and all three bears died not long after being shot, after running away. The bears were found by neighbors and the investigation started.

The case was appealed to the Ninth Circuit twice, and was sent back to the District court twice. The Second time, the Ninth Circuit instructions basically said:

The prosecutors lied in this case to convict this man, so be very careful you perform the third trial in accordance with our guidance.

The prosecution dropped the case and refunded the fine to Wallen, but it took several years to get to that point.

Now the precedent is set. Details are included in the linked article about the legal standard.

[Track9]

Maybe to the department of underwear.