Grizzly ate the guy's head.....
https://www.fieldandstream.com/outdoors/hiker-killed-grizzly-bear-attack-yellowstone-park/
https://www.fieldandstream.com/outdoors/hiker-killed-grizzly-bear-attack-yellowstone-park/
Another DUPe report: Man eaten by bear
- Thread starter Jack 99
- Start date
Double Naught Spy
New member
The head was not consumed. If the head would have been consumed, the guy would have been dead, but he lived long enough to have two surgeries.
Yes, the bear took a chunk out of his skull, according to the article you cited, and damaged one side of his face. The bear did not eat the guy's head as you stated.
Someone once said "There are lies,damned lies,and statistics"
An eastern Colorado Coroner not long ago investigated a gun murder/suicide.
Then he noticed someone recorded official cause of death as COVID19.
I have often heard "There are no known cases of (bear,mtn lion,etc) killing anyone.".
You go ahead and believe what you want.
A few years back there was a National Geographic (I believe) documentary on predatory black bears. It seems to have been scrubbed from the internet.
It showed several cases where people in the USA had been killed and eaten by black bears.The typical bear was an older male.There was a style of the persistant stalking bear was there to eat you.
One of the victims video'd the bear.I can tell you I have seen that look on a bear that was in my camp coming for me.
There was a case of an older couple that camped on an sland,and there was a boardwalk in Yosemite where multiple people were attacked.
Human remains of the Woman killed near Durango were found inside a female bear and two cubs.
I know,there will be the Disney story,the woman "must have been trying to kidnap a cub"
The Parks and Wildlife news release suggested momma bear may have been teaching cubs humans make a tasty dinner.
From where (besides TV) did the idea come that bears,lions,wolves,etc,have some noble,spiritual connection that makes human meat not Hallal,or Not kosher,or taboo?(for a bear)
Predators adapt.Where humans and predators overlap,humans are slow,relatively weak,and if they are stupid enough to be unarmed,they put up a puny fight.
As a bonus,they won't give the predator hairballs.
There is no rational reason why humans would not be the preferred prey for large predators.
What may hold the answer is the number of people who have "disappeared"
For some nice bedtime stories read Kannut's "Bear Tales of Alaska"
Last edited:
I disagree. History has proven that when those "large predators" learn humans are dangerous, they tend to avoid humans as their preferred prey.
However, the conditions have to exist for the predators to learn this, and they have to continuously exist so each new generation of predators learns the lesson. And while those conditions once existed in most of our country, it is much less so today, and we are seeing the results of that.
Somewhere around 20 years ago, my state banned trapping of or hunting cougars with doge. Its very tough to hunt cats without dogs and few people do it. Result down the road is that rather than making some money from hunting licenses, and the cats (mostly) being afraid of people, and dogs, today the state has to spend a couple million annually to hire people to hunt and destroy "nuisance" cougars threatening children at rural bus stops, and actually killing livestock and dogs. Young cougars mostly no longer learn dogs=man=dangerous...
bears? same principles, where bears are unthreatened they fear nothing. "Park" bears are especially dangerous, because of being protected and the number of people they are likely to come in contact with. Mr Bear (any species) doesn't care how you feel about him, if you smell like food, and act like food, you are potential food. And that leaves out all the cases where the bear isn't actually interested in eating you for dinner, but will happily dine on your carcass anyway. waste not, want not you know...
You CAN (nowadays) if you CONCEAL. No open carry allowed, though.
But I don't know if that was the case 21 years ago.
But yeah, watching the tourists in Jellystone is more entertaining than watching the wildlife.
Last edited:
Someeeewhat related anecdote I heard about a long distance cyclist in I believe Southern CO:
He was setting up camp alongside a road in the dark and had the raised hackles feeling, he scanned around with his flashlight and 2 eyes lit up. He grabbed his bear spray and investigated to find a mountain lion watching him pretty fearlessly. So he sprayed it. The cat jumped a fence and turned around to watch him again. 2nd spray had it take off.
Needless to say, he decided not to camp there!
He was setting up camp alongside a road in the dark and had the raised hackles feeling, he scanned around with his flashlight and 2 eyes lit up. He grabbed his bear spray and investigated to find a mountain lion watching him pretty fearlessly. So he sprayed it. The cat jumped a fence and turned around to watch him again. 2nd spray had it take off.
Needless to say, he decided not to camp there!
Desmosedici
New member
Referring to Double Naught's post, the article referenced the man being killed by a polar bear. Can you imagine? Just seeing one of those beasts, even if far away, would strike significant fear in me. They are enormously intimidating creatures.
I suppose a .375 H & H would be your only hope in terms of a rifle against a polar bear?
I suppose a .375 H & H would be your only hope in terms of a rifle against a polar bear?
Geezerbiker
New member
I suppose a .375 H%H would do the job but I'd want a rifle that I'd almost fear the recoil as much as the bear. Maybe a .416 Hoffman or .448 Lott...
Fortunately I live far from grizzly habitat and I've only seen a black bear in the wild a couple times. Around here bating bears is a no-no and they say you may never see one otherwise.
Tony
drive_sideways
New member
You won’t want hollow points, instead swap those out for some gas checked +p hardcasts. Those might punch through the dense bone and flesh and hit a necessary vital organ. Really a 10mm would be minimum. Glock model 40 with some hardcasts would be the minimum IMO. The long slide really tames the muzzle flip, and longer distance between sights equates to easier target acquisition.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Double Naught Spy
New member
I know this sounds like it makes logical sense, but I really have to question the basis for justifying such a claim. To my knowledge, there are no public medical records on the failures of handguns in defense against bears where it was noted that a failure to reach vital organs after hitting dense bone was a salient issue. I strongly doubt most folks actually understand the osteology well enough to know what bones are in contention for this issue and what bones are not.
The reason I mention this is not to pick on d_s, as the claim is not original to him. It is oft repeated, much like that of folklore. Does anyone even know if hardcast gas check 10mm or .40 cal bullets fired from a pistol even have the ability to the flesh and grizzly dense bone with enough energy to continue on to hit the necessary vital organs? Again, the body of literature on this topic, like the medical records of failures, appears to not exist.