RIP Largest Grizzly Bear on the Planet

GoldenMotor.com

KCvale

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2010
3,966
57
48
Phoenix,AZ
My sister in-law lives in Alaska and she came down here to Phoenix for a few weeks over the holidays; we talked about going up to visit here next summer to escape the heat and when she got home she sent us this story.

- - - -
This is a picture of a man who works for the US Forest Service in Alaska, and his trophy bear.



He was deer hunting when that large grizzly charged him from about 50 yards away.

The guy emptied his 7mm Magnum semi-automatic rifle into the bear and it dropped a few feet from him.
The big bear was was still alive so the hunter reloaded and shot it several more times in the head.

The bear was just over 1,600 pounds (726 Kg).
It stood 12' 6" (3.8 M) high at the shoulder, 14' (4.26 M) to the top of his head.

It is the largest grizzly bear ever recorded in the world.

The Alaska Fish and Wildlife Commission did not let him keep it as a trophy, of course; but the bear will be stuffed and mounted, and placed on display at the Anchorage airport to remind tourists of the risks involved in the wild.

Analyzing contents of the bears stomach, the Fish and Wildlife Commission established the bear had killed at least two humans in the past 72 hours, including a hiker missing two days prior to the bear's own death.

Backtracking from where the bear had originated, the US Forest Service found the missing hiker's emptied 38-caliber pistol.
Not far from the pistol was the remains of the hiker.
The other body has not been found.

Although the hiker fired six shots and managed to hit the grizzly with four (that the Service ultimately retrieved, along with twelve 7mm slugs, inside the bear's body), the 38's only wounded the bear and probably just really pissed it off.

Think about this:

If you are an average size standing man, you would be level with the bear's navel when he stood upright.
The bear would look you in the eye when it walked on all fours!

To give additional perspective, this bear, standing on its hind legs, could walk up to an average single story house and look over the roof; or stand beside a two story house and look in the upper
bedroom windows.
---

Can you picture that monster going to McDonalds?

He wouldn't do the drive through, he could just walk up, pull the roof over dining area off, and eat all the fat people; heck we are talking about a beast that sits by an Alaskan river during salmon spawn and eats huge fish like we eat potato chips like Lay's because 'nobody can eat just one' hehehe ;-}
 

Ludwig II

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2012
5,071
783
113
UK
Hunting I am ambivalent about, but that sounds like reasonable self defence. Big sod, wasn't it?
 

Ludwig II

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2012
5,071
783
113
UK
A question raises it's head here; if it had eaten two hikers recently, were there any more be accounted for in it's range over the preceding years?
 

KCvale

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2010
3,966
57
48
Phoenix,AZ
Beats me, I am just re-posting the story my sis in-law sent me in e-mail, but ya got to figure a carnivorous animal that large feeds on animals the size of an Elk or a Buffalo (you won't find a buffalo in Alaska, that is just a size comparison) as an entree, things the size of people and deer are just appetizers, and things like pigs or dogs are just toothpicks.
 

paul

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2007
5,547
44
48
66
Kalamazoo, MI
when i went to anchorage airport they have a huge polar bear. really makes you feel small that is for sure, that is one big grizzly
 

racie35

Active Member
Nov 17, 2012
1,702
5
38
usa
Tough situation for sure and probably had to happen...still,its kinda sad the genes are gone now that made him the baddest, biggest yogi ever.
 

2door

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 15, 2008
16,302
175
63
Littleton, Colorado
I have to wonder what the outcome would have been if the bear had a gun too. Then at least the fight would have been fair.

Tom
 

Greg58

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2011
5,353
2,575
113
65
Newnan,Georgia
Tom the way I see it the 7mm in the hunters hand made it a fair fight for him, no matter how we feel about it this bear was dangerous.
 

GearNut

Active Member
Aug 19, 2009
5,104
11
38
San Diego, Kaliforgnia
Holy cow! That bear's nose is bigger than that guy's head!
I have read that hikers/ campers of the Alaskan outback are strongly encouraged to have at minimum a .45 side arm. .44 magnum is better.
Most residents that make their living out in the wild or travel through remote areas frequently carry something similar to a Taurus Judge loaded with .454 Casull.

With all due respect to Tom and all others here who might take offense to the following comment... and I really mean that....

Fair fight? A 1,600 lb bear against a 190lb man.
That's like putting a car up against an motorized bicycle in a fight to death.
Who's going to win? We all here know the answer to that one.

I would rather have something, anything, effective to put an advantage in my favor.
Dying, to me, don't sound like all that much fun...

That USFS Ranger is lucky to be alive.
 

Intrepid Wheelwoman

New Member
Oct 29, 2011
2,830
61
0
Hauraki District, New Zealand
I just had to look up what a Taurus Judge was.

Basically I'm not a gun person or one for using weapons at all these days, but when my children were small and we were dirt poor I would go out hunting most mornings before sunrise and not come back until I had shot enough meat for the day. I used either a really old Remington 22 bolt action rifle I'd purchased for cheap or a Swedish made military Mauser rifle from the early 1900's I'd bought from a surplus military weapons specialist also for a lowish price.
As a spiritual Franciscan I don't think I could shoot at any living thing these days, but back then i was doing it for my kids and I became a very good shot. Personally I think that I'd prefer it if Mr Big Bear was able to roam the forest in peace and not be dead. BUT when he started attacking and eating people things immediately became different.
If he had attacked me and I'd had my old Mauser with me I would have shot him too. I freely admit that the most likely outcome would be that I would have been killed in that scenario, but as long as I would have been able to keep chambering rounds I would have kept shooting. The name of it is wanting to survive.

What surprises me is that the young ranger was able to kill such a huge animal armed with only a 7mm calibre rifle. God grant that none of us ever end up in such a desperate situation.
 

cosmickid

New Member
Sep 11, 2011
98
0
0
planet earth
Having worked up in Alaska over the years, I'm surprised that the hiker with the .38 even thought he could do damage to the Bear. He should have used it on him/her-self. A .44 mag is minimum with a bear. When I was on land, I carried a 12 gauge with an extended tube loaded with slugs. I suspect the missing hikers were probably wearing bells. Bears have come to know that those bells some hikers wear, are just dinner bells.
Standard rule is with bears in Alaska is :
If you can see the bear and he has seen you, it's time to pray for a quick death if you aren't carrying something with enough punch & shock to stop a bear.
 

CTripps

Active Member
Aug 22, 2011
1,310
1
38
Vancouver, B.C.
Apparently this story has been kicking around for quite a while.. the only constant is that every few years when it gets pulled out the bear gets bigger.

Have a read:
Debunking the myth of a '1600-pound man-eating grizzly' from Alaska

Here's another one, from the North American Bear Center. They explain the bear was actually about 10'6" to the top of it's head and was stopped not by a 7mm but rather a .338 Winchester Magnum. It was not charging, it was having a drink at the riverbank..


One of the (many) places responsible for the story is 'Montana Hunting' (.org) (Note, there's a pretty nasty pic in that article)..
 

2door

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 15, 2008
16,302
175
63
Littleton, Colorado
I suppose what I'm saying is that whenever you venture into the bear's domain you'd better be prepared for an encounter. It's their domain. Unless your job depends on it, why go where you might become a potential meal? Ask for trouble and you might find it.

Hiking? Deer hunting? In grizzly bear country? When you know the chances are good that you could be confronted by an animal that considers you not only a trespasser but also something to feed himself or his young. That's just nature. There's no malevolence at play there. The bear wasn't 'out to get anyone' or settle a score.. or obtain a trophy. He was doing what evolution and his programming dictated.

The fact that the shooter was a ranger doesn't play into it. He was where he knew he might come upon such a creature and obviously armed for the potential. The bear wasn't in the wrong place at the wrong time; the man and the "missing hikers" were.

The arrogance of humans sometimes astounds me. No, I'm not a tree hugger nor do I advocate 'protecting' all wildlife. I've taken out my share of squirrels that chew branches off my trees and damage my house. I've shot pigeons that leave their droppings in my yard where it might contain bacteria that could sicken my dogs. I've popped some rabbits that come in my yard and eat the grass down to the roots. I won't even go into how many fish I've caught, killed, and eaten. I've taken a few harmless pellet gun shots at coyotes that pose a threat to me and neighborhood pets. In those cases, except for the fish :) the critters were infringing into my territory. I didn't go looking for them or venture outside of my space to eliminate them.

I was simply saddened by the demise of such a grand creature that actually posed no threat to anyone outside of his dominion. He, in my lowly opinion, didn't deserve his fate.

Tom
 

KCvale

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2010
3,966
57
48
Phoenix,AZ
I suppose one could look up what grizzly bear is stuffed and in the Anchorage airport but I really don't care, this has been fun as my clever title in the Tavern made it fun to read and it still has more fun in it I think.

For example scenario 1.
You are out hunting and trying to take the bears dinner from him?
Walk into a strange house and try to take away the hungry dogs food.

I have others but no time.
You get the idea, like what other animal could go up against are 'biggest grizzly', a Bull Elephant, Rhino?
 

fasteddy

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2009
7,454
4,920
113
British Columbia Canada
There are worse and more frequent attacks than bear attacks and they happen closer to human habitation with a greater chance of death than from bears which can be frightened off with loud noises and bear spray. Bears are much afraid of humans than cougars.

Yep, mountain lions,cougars, pumas, what ever you want to call them. Like all cats they are ambush predictors and they usually attack from behind so you never see them unlike a bear that charges. They tend to grab their prey by the back of their neck thus you never see them as they get ready to attack.

Their favorite prey around humans are live stock, family pets and children. Adults are also attacked with regularity.

Here is an account of an attempted attack a few months ago.

Steve.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j...-YrvaI_MB1h-PKQ&bvm=bv.60157871,d.cGU&cad=rja
 

BigBlue

Member
Nov 29, 2011
781
0
16
California
Sad but true, you are more than likely to be attacked and killed by a human than a mountain lion or a bear.

Only 20 people have been killed by mountain lions since 1890 in North America: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_cougar_attacks_in_North_America
Most were children. More than two-thirds of the Canadian fatalities occurred on Vancouver Island in British Columbia.

Brown bears (Grizzly) have killed more people than mountain lions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America. Most incidents have occured with only 1 or 2 people in the vicinity.

Chris
AKA: BigBlue
 

fasteddy

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2009
7,454
4,920
113
British Columbia Canada
BigBlue,

We're talking about being in the woods not East L.A. and if you noticed I said a greater "chance" of death. You just rarely see them coming. The attacks in Canada from cougars are largely on Vancouver island since it is fairly well populated and the cougars have a smaller area to hunt in than the rest of Canada and they have reduced their food supply so that people and pets are now on the menu.

Here is a list of cougar attacks in North America if anyone is interested. As I said with cougars you are not safe in or near your house.

Steve.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j...NAAOxhRe6Vvb7uw&bvm=bv.60157871,d.cGU&cad=rja