June 23, 1998 Ravalli Republic Any sense? by Jim Freeman
As this is being written, there is a hunt on in Glacier Park looking for a grizzly bear, one of three that killed and ate a hiker recently. Two have already been killed by authorities. The third one will be killed when found. At the same time there is a costly program being implemented to introduce grizzlies to the Selway Bitterroot Wilderness area.
I have to wonder if any of this makes any sense. Why put the bears into an area and then kill them if they prey on humans? It has been a long time that grizzlies and humans don't get along very well. Lewis and Clark found that out almost 200 years ago.
It seems to me that if people want to invade grizzly habitat (as that hiker did), they should do so at their own risk. There are many people who know how to handle themselves in grizzly areas, but there is a tremendous number who don't have a clue. I understand that bears could, and probably would, become dangerous once they have killed a human, but does it make sense to allow people to hike in their area and then kill them because they acted like a bear'?
I'm not sure what the answer is, but current policy just doesn't make sense to me. The walk that the hiker took in Glacier was a costly one. It cost him his life, the bears their lives, and the taxpayers a lot of money.
Go figure.