Another Lawsuit

[eldorado]

The victim apparently knew of the bear study and was even warned days before the mauling to stay away from the area.
Mr. Evert unfortunately failed to exercise proper caution and judgment on that fateful day when he decided to take his walk.

http://news.yahoo.com/widow-sues-over-grizzly-mauling-killed-her-husband-233047201.html

 

[mightyhunter]

I hate commenting on grizzly bears and wolves because of all the misinformation floating around.Chris Servheen and the USFWS put out a lot of misinformation about this case to the public. The Park County Sheriff's Department cleared most of that up but no one was listening. I am familiar with the Libby Creek Trail where this happened. I have actually hiked it. The timber is pretty dense down low and the trail system involves two trails that merge into one that heads south and eventually cuts over to Eagle Creek. This area is within a few minutes of a large Boy Scout Camp known as Camp Buffalo Bill. The deceased fellow had a USFS leasehold cabin at the trailhead. The idiots who performed this study(in close proximity to much human activity) drugged the grizzly bear next to the trail. After doing their "tests" they left a drugged grizzly bear next to a trail in an area that is inhabited by both homeowners and boy scouts in the summer. Yes, the bear was under the influence when they took off. They pulled their warning signs off the trail on the way out in an apparent hurry to get home. You might read the archives of the Cody Enterprise newspaper if you want to know what actually happened.

What Mr. Evert knew, and whatever fault he has in this matter, will be up to a jury to decide. The federal government has tort immunity and the Plaintiff will have a high burden of proof. The idiots who did the trapping should have been fired and perhaps prosecuted. More stringent guidelines should be followed. I once walked into a grizzly bear trapping area that was not signed. The people involved had only posted warning signs on one of the two trails leading into that area. I smelled the bait and saw the trap only after I was within a 100 ft. of it.

You should read the misinformation that was put out by the USFWS on the grizzly bear that killed the man out of Cooke City in 2010 at a campground. The USFWS, and its spokespeople, are masters at deflecting criticism and trying to blame the public for every bear attack.

My personal favorite piece of misinformation involves the use of bear pepper spray or a firearm. Chances are you won't have time to deploy either should you be the victim of a grizzly bear attack. I doubt it would have made any difference if Mr. Evert had the spray or a firearm. I have nothing but sympathy for him and his family.

 

[UGAhunter]

Sad the man got attacked.

The last two paragraphs are quite important, if I was on the Jury.

"Chuck Neal, a retired biologist in Cody who had frequently hiked with Evert, told Reuters last year that he had warned the botanist of research activities in the area, and urged him to stay out of the forest just days before the attack.

Neal said in June 2010 that Evert had called him one week before the mauling to ask about a sign posted in the area warning about bear-trapping activities, and that Evert was "absolutely aware" of the risks of hiking in the area."

 

[mightyhunter]

There is risk in hiking anywhere on the North Fork of the Shoshone River drainage. Any person familiar with the area knows that. Everyone seems content to blame Mr. Everts and ignore the culpability of the idiots who did the trapping.

1) Would a reasonable person assume, that if signs were removed from the trail system indicating bear trapping was in progress, that the danger had passed?

2) Would a reasonable person assume that a drugged grizzly bear would be left next to a trail that no longer had any signs warning of the potential danger?

3) Should Mr. Everts have waited 7,14,30, 60 or 90 days after the bear trapping signs were removed to venture out on the trail system from his home?

Read the Cody Enterprise archives if you want some factual reporting on how this incident went down. A jury will have to make a decision in this case and the burden for the Plaintiff is great. I think the federal government will settle because they did screw up.

 

[nfh]

there is such a huge problem with grizzlys up there. there to the point where its out of control. over 700 encounters were reported last year. on the radio a few people have been chaarged at, a couple got a few good bites out of them.

when the game and fish did there bear count they got 30 some bears in one drainage, now thats crazy

 

[slamdunk]

I knew this would happen.....one bear lawsuit that brings 2.2 million only opened the flood gates to several others.
I wonder if i can sue for a rattlesnake bite??

 

[mightyhunter]

The Spence Law Firm, LLC out of Jackson, Wyoming is the Plaintiff's attorney. That is the big boys in the big leagues. The government(being the taxpayer)is going to take a real hit on this one.

This isn't a floodgate lawsuit brought about by a jury verdict in Utah. This was a real screw up by some federal government employees who ignored protocals for bear trapping. I sincerely hope that this lawsuit delves into all the deflection that USFWS and the federal bear people have engaged in over the years. This will be interesting but ugly. I would be willing to bet that Chris Servheen and USFWS will be squirming. I can see some heads rolling (including Servheens). That would be a good thing.

 

[D13er]

heads roll???...not a chance. A peon got ate by a bear...the USFWS couldn't care less.





JB

 

[RELH]

D13er pretty well sumed that one correctly.

RELH

 

[grizzmoose]

I think a reasonable person would consider the fact that anytime a hiker, hunter, or fisherman enters bear country, they enter at their own risk.

I think a reasonable person would also want to question the cause and effect relationship between the drugging and the attack. If I was a juror, could I be convinced with "clear and convincing evidence" that A caused B?

Did the drugging cause the attack?
Did the removal of signs increase the risk, when the hiker was already aware that bears live in the area?
Would the hiker not have hiked that day if told otherwise?

Lots of questions to be answered. From the little Ive read, I'd find it hard to side with the plaintiff.

 

[bowhunt]

I have read a little about this.
I am telling you that if someone in my family got killed by this "drugged, tested, and pestered Bear" I would be PISSED.

Why in the world would you be doing this so close to human activity.
I always take the side of: Your in the woods, you take a risk...but in this case.

They stuck a stick in a hornet next, next to much human activity, and they want no responsibilty. I am not so sure this is clear cut.

 

[eelgrass]

Not sure which is worse, trusting a grizzly bear to do the right thing, or trusting the government to do the right thing. The poor guy never had a chance.

Eel