Editor's note: This updates with the size and estimated age of the sow, park still awaiting results from scat sample, mention of public outrage over the decision.
A grizzly sow tied to the death and partial consumption of a Yellowstone National Park hiker by DNA evidence and teeth marks was killed Thursday, while her two cubs were to be transferred to a zoo.
Lance Crosby, 63, of Billings, Montana, had gone on a pre-work hike last Friday along the Elepant Back Loop Trail near Lake Village. When he failed to show up for work, he was reported missing. Around noon that day rangers found his body near the trail, and also saw the sow and her cubs near the body, park officials said.
An autopsy conducted Monday on his body concluded that Mr. Crosby died as a result of traumatic injuries sustained from a bear attack.
The sow had been captured Friday night, while her cubs were captured on Monday. DNA testing of bear hair found next to Mr. Crosby's body linked it to the sow, as did canine puncture wounds on the hiker, and bear tracks at the scene, Yellowstone officials said. Testing on a scat sample for evidence that she had fed on the hiker's body was under way.
"Based on the totality of the evidence, this adult female grizzly was the bear involved in the fatality and was euthanized today," park officials said in a release. "An important fact in the decision to euthanize the bear was that a significant portion of the body was consumed and cached with the intent to return for further feeding. Normal defensive attacks by female bears defending their young do not involve consumption of the victim’s body."
Details of which zoo the cubs would be sent to were being finalized Thursday. An announcement on which zoo was expected Friday.
The female grizzly weighed 259 pounds, which falls in the range of 200-450 pounds. She also was estimated to be 15 years old; a final age will be tied to analysis of a tooth.
"She was a healthy old bear," said Yellowstone spokeswoman Amy Bartlett.
The bear had not previously been tagged or fitted with a radio collar, so park biologists had no background on her life.
The fate of the grizzly had drawn sharp public criticism from many circles, with both the Yellowstone headquarters as well as the National Park Service's Intermountain Region office in Denver receiving countless phone calls this week from people upset that the bear was facing a death sentence.
"Very sad! I was going to visit Yellowstone in September. Because of the killing of a grizzly sow and putting her cubs in a zoo, makes me angry! Idiot hiker! I will never go there again!" Christina Intemann wrote on Traveler's Facebook page.
"I was going to go to Yellowstone for vacation, not any more. I will not support parks that do this," wrote Melinda Grieco. "How awful and this bear has cubs. Nice work Yellowstone! Yeah, transfer the cubs to a zoo an animal prison when they could have just been left to be free in their environment."
Other readers, while saddened by the outcome, understood the decision.
"A very sad ending to all involved here. My sympathy goes out to the family of the hiker killed in this incident," wrote Sue Davidson. "Also to those that were responsible in making the decision to end the life of this bear and to send her cubs to live out the rest of their lives in a zoo. The whole story is tragic. When hiking in wilderness, where wild animals make their homes, we all take risks. Big ones."
"Please understand - once a bear sees a human as a food source in the park, it is a huge problem. Yellowstone loves their bears and does what they can to prevent this," Jen Dial Santoro wrote. "However, this bear cached the human for later, much like they do with their food kills. That behavior is not something they can risk for the visitors. Certainly in the past they have been successful placing the cubs in a safe humane environment like the enclosure in West Yellowstone.
"Understand too, that the outpouring of love for these animals is why the parks exist. Our national parks are important to bring the citizens of our country to see the plants and animals. The benefit is obvious in the outpouring of sympathy for these bears; without the parks, people probably wouldn't care as much," she added.
Yellowstone Superintendent Dan Wenk said in a release that the decision to put down the bear was not easily made.
“As managers of Yellowstone National Park, we balance the preservation of park resources with public safety,” he said. “Our decision takes into account the facts of the case, the goals of the bear management program, and the long-term viability of the grizzly bear population as a whole, rather than an individual bear.”
Mr. Crosby had spent five seasons living and working in the park for Medcor, the company that operates three urgent care clinics in Yellowstone. He was not carrying bear spray, according to park officials.
Area closures put in place after his attack, including the Elephant Back Loop Trail and Natural Bridge Trail, were to be lifted on Friday.
The last mauling in Yellowstone was four years ago, when a Michigan man was killed and partially consumed in August 2011 while hiking on the Mary Mountain Trail. Nearly two months earlier, another visitor was out for an early morning hike with his wife on the Wapita Lake Trail near Canyon Village when he was run down and killed by a sow grizzly that investigators determined was exhibiting normal defensive behavior.
In the end, investigators determined the sow was involved in both incidents and put her down.
All of Yellowstone is bear country. Hikers are encouraged to travel in groups of three or more, always carry bear spray that is readily accessible, make noise on the trail, and be alert for bears. Per park regulations, people are required to maintain a minimum distance of at least 100 yards from bears and wolves and at least 25 yards from all other large animals. For more information on hiking in bear country and how to minimize the dangers associated with a bear encounter, visit: http://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/bearsafety.htm
Comments
I completely agree with the parks officials. This was a matter of protecting both sides of the fence. In nature a food source is found and taught to the young. The bear needing to feed its young came upon someone who was not prepared to show the bear why you should not attack or view them as they're next meal. That could have been the first time that bear came upon a human. Do the right thing and carry bear mace it doesn't just save your life it saves the integrity of the wild we all hold dear.
I do not agree with what has happened. ..if the bear went into a town or city, that would be different, but she was in her home ....,im sad about the hiker, but Yellowstone is bear country. ..it is a chance hikers take....sad and i am disappointed in the decision that was made.....shame on the superintendent who made this decision. ....when does human life become more important than animals.....shut down all hiking trails, or hire more rangers to take people on hikes....how about protecting the animals that call Yellowstone home...forget the tourist who want to hike.....sad sad
Please understand the bear did not do anything "wrong" as far as a bear goes and she was not killed out of vengeance of to "teach hoed bears a listen." You now have a best that has learned people are a good source, to be killed and catches for later consumption. She must be eliminated to prevent a future tragedy. Sad, but the right thing to do.
This hiker wasn't killed way out in the back country of the park. He was killed within a short distance of a very popular marina and a very popular highway-accessible trail system. Those bears would have encountered many other humans, and once they learn that humans are easy prey, more visitors would have been attacked and possibly killed. So i believe the park made the best decision, given the circumstances.
That being said, Yellowstone is bear country. Always carry bear spray when hiking anywhere in the park!
First I would like to express my condolences to the family of Mr. Lance Crosby. I think the difficult decision of park officials to suppress the bear and capture her puppies unfortunately was the right choice.
The bears did not just kill the hiker (an employee of yellowstone) that intruded on the their territory. They "consumed" him. Once a bear or any animal becomes a man-eater, chances are they always will view humans as a food source. Man is an easy target. We are slower than most mammals and have no natural defenses to protect ourselves. Would you prefer preserving the life of a man-eater over protecting future lives of vistors and employees to yellowstone??
I didn't read anything that said the hiker did anything wrong. This was a tragic and unfortunate incident for both the hiker and the bear but the park service did the right thing. I also have trouble understanding those who place higher value on animals than humans. Also, for those critical of the parks decision, what would you say if this bear killed someone else, and what would the parks liability be if they didn't take this action? That said, I am curious as to how we arrived at the hypothesis that once bears feed on humans they will always see them as a food source. It makes perfect sense but is there a study to support this?
Well after its founding a century ago, the National Park Service waged war against any predators in the parks--even those that did not consume human flesh. Now that the wolves are back in Yellowstone (1995), many had hoped the prejudice would change. Obviously, it has only given the managers another excuse to "manage" everything, without ever honestly managing the visitors. There is how you begin protecting the wildlife, again, assuming you really want to protect it. You remove everything from the park--and visitor behavior--that is in conflict with the wildlife.
Since the Park Service has no intention of doing that--a visitor is a taxpayer, after all--expect these tragedies to continue. But don't kid yourselves that this is management, any more than the FAA is managing drones around our airports. First and foremost our government is managing its bureaucracy to ensure that everyone's proverbial you-know-what is covered.
If you want to protect grizzly bears in our national parks--and air traffic around our airports--you make the penalty commensurate with the infraction. That is the only thing human animals understand.
So, how will our government react if a drone clips the wing of a 747? Certainly, not how government just reacted over the mauling in Yellowstone. And you wonder why the human animal has a long way to evolve.