Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Grizz are Once Again Denning on the Plains

I wish those bastards would stay in the hills. I don't like having to worry about them while I walk creek bottoms for pheasants.

So how did all the plains grizzlys ever survive without whitebark pines?

I was born and raised in grizzly country here in Montana. Have spent plenty of time hunting among them, along with hiking in Glacier National Park. Have been within 50 feet of grizzlies a couple of times in Glacier and the Bob Marshall Wilderness and both left. Have also packed fresh game meat out on my back in areas with plenty of grizzly sign. Have been doing stuff like that for almost 50 years, and the biggest problem so far was when a bear tore up part of a tent camp, looking for food, after an outfitter friend and I left the camp for a couple of days.

Have also hunted considerably in grizzly country in Alaska, Alberta, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories. Have been bluff-charged twice, both times by mama bears with cubs. That was on Kodiak Island, and both charges happened in the same morning. In my six other trips to Alaska have seen plenty of other grizzlies and browns, sometimes within 20-30 feet, and none of those have threatened me in the slightest.

Have also taken one grizzly in Alaska, in two hunts. That seems to be about the normal success rate for inland bears, and believe me, it generally takes considerable looking to find one, even when you're tent-camped not far from a well-beaten bear trail.

That doesn't mean people haven't been killed by grizzlies in Montana. Obviously that's happened, but the chance of being injured or dying while traveling to and from Montana is probably a million times greater than being attacked by a bear while hunting.

Statistically, the most dangerous large animal in Montana isn't the grizzly bear, but the saddle horse. Now, obviously there are a lot more horses than grizzlies in the state, but if you book a horseback hunt in the Montana wilderness, the odds are still considerably greater of being hurt or even killed by your horse than just seeing a grizzly bear.

I realize all that doesn't provide any comfort, since apparently one of the most horrible things many people can imagine is being attacked by a wild animal with large teeth and claws. But it's reality.

There were plenty of food sources on the plains for the bears when Lewis & Clark first saw them. As the bears were killed off, and pushed back into undesirable habitat (by white settler standards), they adapted to different food sources.

I was being just a bit sarcastic. The whitebark pine deal is blown way out of proportion for the mtn bears. For political reasons. There are no (or very very few) whitebark pines in many of the mtn areas right now. Right above my house is a perfect example, lots of bears and no whitebark pines. Yet the greenies would have us believe that the bear's existence depends on them.

It is important to know the changing dynamics related to the white pine bark though. Grizz are very adaptive, and as a result of the WPB and the lack of cutthroat they've turned to elk and other sources of food.

Surely they can adapt anywhere which speaks volumes in terms of their adaptability to changing habitats, unfortunately too many want to cherry pick issues when it comes to grizz and wolves.

My guiding buddy up in Alaska has said he always feared a cow moose with calf than a sow and cub. Not by much, but the cow will not back down as readily as a sow. However his last encounter was with a sow who bailed off the narrow river bank and attacked the river boat. She had twins on the bank playing. It was caught on film by an archery hunt crew. A S&W 500 bullet was sent in her direction to scare her back onshore. He didn't want any DLP paperwork to fill out.