Truth Coming to Light Re Grizzly Bear Fatal Attack
The facts are coming to light regarding the June 17 fatal attack by a grizzly bear on Erwin Evert, noted botanist.
For background see [here, here].
On July 16 the US Fish and Wildlife Service released the Investigation Team Report — Fatality of Erwin Evert from a bear attack in Kitty Creek on the Shoshone National Forests on June 17, 2010. [11.5 MB here].
Dave Smith, Bear Attack Examiner of Examiner.com, analyzed the Report:
Report incriminates feds in fatal bear mauling
by Dave Smith, Examiner.com, July 20, 2010 [here]
Ever since a grizzly bear near Yellowstone Park that had just been trapped, tranquilized and released by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team killed Erwin Evert on June 17, agency representatives have told the media Evert had no one to blame but himself. They claimed the trap site was closed and posted with warnings.
On June 19, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service grizzly bear recovery coordinator Chris Servheen told the Billings Gazette, “We try to do everything we can to minimize the risks. But we can’t protect ourselves against people that ignore every warning we give, and we can’t protect people against themselves.”
On July 16, the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service issued a 105-page report about Evert’s death that said, “There were no warning or closure signs at the incident location where Mr. Evert approached this site when he was killed.”
The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) had been trapping near Evert’s cabin on Kitty Creek in the Shoshone National Forest for about three weeks before his death. The IGBST failed to notify Evert, or 13 other cabin owners in the area, of it’s activities.
The IGBST did not do a news release so the local media could warn people about bear trapping at Kitty Creek.
The cabins along Kitty Creek are located on Forest Road #448. The road ends just beyond the cabins, where Kitty Creek Trail #756 begins. There were no warning signs at the trailhead.
Evert was killed about two miles up the trail. It was perfectly legal for Evert or anyone else to head up the trail.
The IGBST set bear traps at numerous sites in the Kitty Creek drainage over the course of three weeks. The trap sites were posted with signs that said, “closed.” Evert was well aware of bear trapping in the area, but never went beyond the closed signs.
The 430# male grizzly bear that killed Evert was released at trap site #3 at 12:30 p.m. “With the bear showing signs of recovering, the crew removed the snare equipment and closure signs in the area and left.”
It was noted that “the bear had a large open wound behind its left shoulder and numerous scars and fight wounds on its head and neck.” … [more]
The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) abandoned a wounded, drugged, male grizzly a mile from the Kitty Creek cabins and a Boy Scout camp, took all their signs down, and departed.
The only sign of a “dangerous bear” that Erwin Evert had seen was at a different site a week earlier. That sign did not mention trapping and drugging, nor did it mention the site where he was killed.
Following the fatal attack, the IGBST deliberately spread misinformation to discredit and disparage the victim, although IGBST employees were well aware that they had taken down all the warning signs before Erwin Evert had even left for his hike. IGBST knowingly lied to the media and falsely claimed that Evert ignored the removed signs. IGBST also told the media they has closed the trail (false), that Evert’s wife was their employee (false), that Evert had knowledge of bear trapping and sites (false), and other lies as part of a clear campaign to blame the victim.
The IGBST is administered by the USGS Biological Research Division. They are died-in-the-wool global warming alarmists [here]. They claim global warming is killing off grizzly bears, when in fact grizzly bear populations are expanding. They are allied with radical environmental groups who are suing the government to drive human beings off the land [here].
The IGBST operates in the shadows, with an extreme political agenda that taints any “science” they do. Hiding their shadowy existence is why they took the signs down. The IGBST had never informed the media that they were trapping grizzly bears in the area. They think they are the CIA of bears, and that the public should be kept in the dark as to their machinations. They also seek to hide their research data.
As a consequence of the IGBST’s clandestine operations, an innocent citizen and taxpayer has been cruelly killed.
It is imperative that the US Attorney investigate, indict, and prosecute IGBST officials for negligent homicide and for the attempted cover-up of their crimes.
See also: Bear researchers gamble with lives of citizens by Dave Smith [here]
Court suits involving bear researchers are inevitable by Dave Smith [here]
Attention All States: Prepare to be Sued Over Wolves
“If we don’t get some reform in federal laws very soon, we’re all going to be living in Jurassic Park.”
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation News Release, July 21, 2010 [here]
MISSOULA, Mont.—With their latest petition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, animal rights activists are preparing to sue for federally mandated release of wolves in every state, warn officials with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.
David Allen, RMEF president and CEO, says animal rights groups have learned that introducing wolves translates to major fundraising, and activists have found a way to exploit the Endangered Species Act—as well as taxpayer-funded programs that cover lawyer fees—to push their agenda and build revenue through the courts.
“There are now about 100,000 gray wolves in the U.S. and Canada, and over the past few years in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, activists discovered that every wolf is also a cash cow,” said Allen. “If we don’t get some reform in federal laws very soon, we’re all going to be living in Jurassic Park. This is not about saving a lost species. It’s about money and special interest agendas.”
“Americans need to wake up,” he added, “because when you respond to those fundraising letters with photos of cute little wolf pups, you’re writing a check that our country’s rural and traditional lifestyles can’t cash. You’re eroding the fundamentals of America’s model for wildlife conservation.”
Allen said undermanaged wolf populations in the northern Rockies are compromising the health of other wildlife species—especially elk and other prey. In areas of Montana and Idaho where wolves share habitat with elk, calf survival rates now are too low to sustain herds for the future.
“How do animal rights groups who claim to defend wildlife justify elk calf survival rates below 10 percent? Clearly they have another agenda,” said Allen.
Participation in hunting and the funding it generates for conservation also are being negatively affected, as are local economies, livestock production and potentially even human safety.
Continuous lawsuits by activists have setback wolf control and management efforts, compounding problems and costs for states.
“Now imagine bringing these kinds of impacts to more populated states elsewhere in the U.S., and I think we’re looking at an unprecedented wildlife management disaster,” said Allen.
RMEF has helped to successfully restore elk populations in Kentucky, Tennessee, Wisconsin and other states where habitat is suitable and citizens support the effort. Elk restoration is being considered currently in Virginia and Missouri using these same criteria.
“There are two proven ways to restore a species,” said Allen. “Our way is offering to help with funding and expertise so long as the local public wants the species and the state can manage them. The other way is using lawsuits and loopholes to shove a project down people’s throats.”
Animal rights groups filed a petition July 20 complaining that wolves now inhabit just 5 percent of their former range in the U.S., and that wolf populations should be recovered in all significant portions of that range. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) responded by saying that it is reviewing “what is realistic and where the suitable habitat would be.” The agency’s review could be complete by late 2010 or early 2011.
“We urge USFWS to be very cautious in this evaluation and reject the rhetoric of the Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Earth Justice, Humane Society of the U.S. and other animal rights groups. Wolf re-introduction in the greater Yellowstone region was a classic example of ‘let’s get our foot in the door and then move the goal line,’ and should be warning enough. This is a fundraising strategy with anti-hunting, anti-ranching, anti-gun impacts, and the public needs to understand and see it for it is,” added Allen.
About the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:
Snowy peaks, dark timber basins and grassy meadows. RMEF is leading an elk country initiative that has conserved or enhanced habitat on over 5.8 million acres—a land area equivalent to a swath three miles wide and stretching along the entire Continental Divide from Canada to Mexico. RMEF also works to open, secure and improve public access for hunting, fishing and other recreation. Get involved at www.rmef.org or 800-CALL ELK.
Has The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Become A Rogue Agency?
LOBO WATCH Editorial News/Press, July 20, 2010 [here]
by Toby Bridges
There are now a number of very dark clouds hanging over the fish and wildlife arm of the U.S. Department of the Interior. And the tallest thunder cell has to be the manner in which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has handled the so-called Wolf Recovery Project in the Northern Rocky Mountain states of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana - especially in how the agency resorted to the manipulation of wolf science and wolf facts to expedite restoring wolf populations where they had been missing for most of the past 70 or 80 years. Or, were they?
The Endangered Species Act was established in 1973, to protect and restore endangered or threatened wildlife species. Back when that act became law, there were between 50,000 and 60,000 wolves of varying subspecies roaming freely across Canada (and likely just as many in Alaska). Still, since there were only about 700 to 1,000 wolves known to exist in northern Minnesota and in several small pockets in northwestern Montana, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pushed to get the “gray wolf” added to the ESA list of endangered species in 1974.
One of the tools used by FWS to facilitate their management of a species/subspecies that is endangered or threatened is to establish it as a “Distinct Population Segment”, separating it from the management of that species or subspecies as a whole. And this is likely where the “gray” area lies in the ESA listing and the management of the gray wolf as an “endangered species”.
First of all, the gray wolves of central Canada were never really endangered, or threatened for that matter. Despite ongoing wolf control efforts in Ontario, the wolf population just to the north of the U.S.-Canada border was not endangered back in 1973 when the ESA was established. Neither have wolves been endangered or threatened there since that act was put into place. Likewise, there has not been any efforts to prevent their migration south, into northern Minnesota. Even so, the mad wolf scientists of the FWS felt compelled to write themselves into the annals of wildlife conservation and took it upon themselves to classify the wolves of the upper Midwest as a “Distinct Population Segment” , and endangered - even though absolutely nothing separated them from the tens of thousands of wolves north of the Canadian border.
And their muddling with such wolf facts came back to nip them hard on their backside.
Deadly Bear Journalism
Dave Smith of Examiner.com is doing an excellent job reporting about the fatal grizzly bear mauling of Erwin Evert near Yellowstone Park on June 17 [here].
Dave Smith is the author of Don’t Get Eaten, and Backcountry Bear Basics: The Definitive Guide to Avoiding Unpleasant Encounters. In past lives he spent more than a decade in Alaska, and another six years working as a winterkeeper in the snowbound heart of Yellowstone Park. He’s an avid outdoorsman and traveler, and the “bear examiner” at Examiner.com.
Smith’s reports to date on the June 17 fatal mauling include:
Investigation of fatal bear mauling could take months
by Dave Smith, Examiner.com, July 1, 2010 [here]
If history is any guide, it could be months before wildlife officials finish their investigation into the June 17 death of a man near Yellowstone Park killed by a grizzly that had just been trapped, tranquilized and released.
Seventy year-old botanist Ewrin Evert of Park Ridge, IL was killed near his cabin on Kitty Creek, about seven miles from the East Entrance of Yellowstone National Park. There were no witnesses. On June 29, Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team leader Chuck Schwartz told the Associated Press, “federal wildlife authorities outside the team will conduct the investigation.”
How long can Evert’s widow, daughter, and friends expect to wait before the investigation is completed? …
Will fatal bear mauling be investigated?
by Dave Smith, Examiner.com, June 28, 2010 [here]
Will there be an independent, objective investigation by law enforcement officials into the suspicious death of a man near Yellowstone Park who was killed by a grizzly bear that had just been trapped, tranquilized, and released? …
Seventy year-old botanist Erwin Evert of Park Ridge, IL was killed on June 17 just two miles from his summer cabin on Kitty Creek, near the East Entrance to Yellowstone National Park.
Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team leader Chuck Schwartz says a 50-to-100 square yard area around the bear trapping site was closed. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service grizzly bear recovery coordinator Chris Servheen claims a trail that began near Evert’s cabin and lead to the trap site was closed. Evert’s wife and cabin owners in the area dispute these claims. …
Servheen told the Chicago Tribune that on June 17, the bear trappers caught a 430-pound male grizzly in a foot snare. “They tranquilized it, collected blood and hair samples and fitted it with a [radio] collar. They waited for it to stir, then beat a quick retreat.”
Did they watch the bear to make sure it recovered from being tranquilized? “Standard Operating Procedure” for the “Capture, Handling & Release of Grizzly Bears” in Canada’s Northwest Territories is that “bears captured by snare should be observed from a safe distance until they recover and move away from the site.” (p.20)
A Park County, WY sheriff’s department press release said that after tranquilizing and radio-collaring the bear that later killed Evert, trappers “packed up their equipment and left the area.”
If their job was done, why would the trap site still be closed? Wouldn’t the trappers take down the “closed” signs and pack them out with the rest of their equipment?
Erwin Evert left his cabin for a daily hike at 1:15 p.m. He could easily have covered the two miles to the bear trapping site in an hour. That puts him at the trap site at 2:15 p.m.
According to the Chicago Tribune, authorities said trappers left the area where the bear was released “around 1 p.m.” Oddly, the bear trappers did not cross paths with Evert. Stranger yet, there’s no indication law enforcement officials have tried to determine exactly when Evert died.
The bear trappers were on horseback. It was only two miles to Evert’s cabin, but they didn’t arrive until at least 4 p.m. Why would it take three hours to cover two miles on horseback?
Near the cabin, the bear trappers were met by Erwin Evert’s wife Yolanda, who told them her husband was late returning from his walk. One of the bear trappers claims he went back up the trap site and found Evert’s body. Did he notify a supervisor via cell phone or 2-way radio? “Hey boss, I thought thought you might want to know there’s a dead body where we just tranquilized and released a grizzly bear.”
All that’s known is that the bear trapper went back down the trail to the cabins to deliver horrifying news to Yolanda Evert. It took 15 minutes, round trip.
The Park County Sheriff’s Department wasn’t notified “that a subject had possibly been mauled and killed by a grizzly bear until 6:48 p.m.”
What took so long? The bear trappers met Yolanda Evert sometime between 4 p.m and 5 p.m. If there was no cell phone service or 2-way radio service at the cabins on Kitty Creek, it was 15 minutes max to the East Entrance of Yellowstone Park. Why did it take almost 2 hours to call the Sherrif’s department?
Nothing about this story adds up. Everything points to a cover-up.
Yesterday, the Casper-Star Tribune’s editorial board said a “formal review” of closures during bear trapping operations by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team “might reveal some ways to improve the process.”
Not doubt it will. But an in-house review of bear trapping procedures by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team is one issue, and a law enforcement investigation into the death of Erwin Evert is another matter entirely.
Is a law enforcement agency going to investigate the mysterious circumstances surrounding Erwin Evert’s death?
