Daily Interlake Bear Article

Above is a link to the local daily newspaper’s online article noting the results and findings pertinent to the death of a cyclist originally called “Grizzly Bear Attack” in news stories. At the time of the incident, law enforcement noted that they were unsure if it was a Grizzly or a Black Bear. Additionally, there was a short article that noted that the cyclist was travelling at a high rate of speed on a path with limited visibility and collided with the bear.

The article in last week’s paper reports that DNA results confirm the bear was a male Grizzly and that that particular bear had been trapped, DNA taken, and the bear released in 2006 in a routine study and collecting of information. The bear has not been involved in any human encounters nor property damage, i.e. livestock.

The articles on the incident are pretty basic and conclude a “wrong place/wrong time” horrific accident. I wish there was a bit more information. The cyclist who died was a well liked Forest Service person, native to this area and by all reports an all around good person to fellow humans, animals and environment. Still, travelling at a high rate of speed on a path with limited visibility has its risks. Mr. Grizzly Bear was on the path and “oof” – probably 185-200 pounds of bike and man slammed into him. I find it a bit hard to fault the bear for responding. The report now calls this a “mauling” and that means that the bear did not devour, but subdued and then left.

Some missing information, which is possibly due to respect for the cyclist’s family is: what about injuries from the collision? Newton’s first law of physics says something along the line of “an object in motion tends to stay in motion”. When the cyclist collided with the bear, the bike probably sort of stopped against the bear, but I’m thinking the rider did not and depending on if the bear was “standing”, the cyclist likely flew in the direction of travel and my point is … the cyclist was possibly injured badly, but that has not been disclosed. I think it is important information partly because the plethora of original articles were fear-mongering bear attack articles. And now we have what to me, is a lukewarm dissemination of the bare minimum of information, still with the headline: “Bear Mauling”.

The bear might have mauled, but even the article notes:

State wildlife officials removed traps and cameras from the area after failing to capture any bears and determined the grizzly had simply responded to being struck by a mountain biker traveling at a high rate of speed.

“Sight visibility at the location of the collision is very limited and the collision was unavoidable,” a July 2 press release from the agency stated. “The bear reacted, which led to the attack.”

I have no wish to blame the cyclist. But it does appear that he took a risk and paid a horrific price. I am terribly sorry for the wife, family and friends of the cyclist. I am relieved that the bear left the area and has not done anything which would lead to being euthanized.