I guess they feel if they release the info Lois, the bear may hear about it and leave the area....IDK!!

Is it possible the bear was a minor?  It wouldn't be right to release the bear's name if he or she was underage.

Maybe it wasn't a bear at all...

An ongoing investigation? What were they going to do, arrest the bear? "All right, Bosco, up against the wall! Feet back and spread 'em!" Were they afraid he might get some vital info from the evening news?

Friends lived up in that neck of the woods~ I bet by the time the woman made it to the fire station or very soon after, most folks knew what had happened.  I understand protecting the family,and lord knows the bear has made good it's escape,identity intact...I imagine folks were on their guard. I would want to know for my family,my pets and my own safety.

It is my understanding that an animal such as a bear, attacks only in desperation,or in sickness. I know hikers that have chased down bears for that backpack that was poached,and won. In the Grand Canyon,the year I went ,times were desperate~ one sleeper awoke to a wolf eating their down bag. We do have to realize we are inching ever closer in to "their" land,water and hence food are hard to find.

But after an attack, I am with you Lois~ that bear is a danger to all.

I don't see why it's such a big deal.  We're the ones invading his habitat.  There's a girl I knew from Florida who was surfing back in 2001 and was attacked by a shark.  The animal took a huge chunk out of her leg, and she had to have skin grafts. News of the attack went nationwide, and I remember one of the news anchors asking her if the attack changed her opinion of surfing.. she said casually, "Nope.. as soon as I'm healed, I'll be back in the water."  She wasn't enraged that the Shark attacked her, and she definitely didn't demand it's death.  She realized the actual dangers of the sport and accepted it. I believe that we all should have that same kind of mentality when we knowingly are in the habitat of a dangerous animal.

That being said, I can't even begin to imagine the trauma that this woman went through, and I think she has a lot of courage.

I guess I just don't get it. What does it matter if fish and game is mum? A bear is a bear. He's injured or sick, or whatever. Let's not start open season to all hunters. Too many possible injuries, etc. Lois, why do you care? Do you think Fish & Game have somehow tagged him in a secret laboratory and they "know" who he is???? 

What if she was trying to take photos of this bear or some other actions that may justify the bear?  Perhaps Fish and Game has found some evidence that leads them to believe the bear truly acted in self-defense or that the victim made fatal mistakes?  You can't hardly blame a bear for attacking if you wander into an area that's close to their food and cubs without proper protection.  If you don't know the details of what happened, then isn't it a bit premature to assume that there's no fault on her part?  You never know...maybe she was completely innocent (very probable), but her dogs spooked the bear or got to close to the bear's food or cubs? 

I'm also a bit unsure about what details you want on the bear?   DNA confirms that it's a Black Bear.  But, beyond that, the woman may not have got a good look at the bear (based on where her injury is).  You can't really expect fish and game to approach every bear and dart it for a DNA sample.  You know she was attacked walking her dogs.  You know she had her scalp torn off and then drove herself to a fire station.  Interesting that the bear let her go or walked away from the kill.  I assume that's the bit about the dogs helping.  They may have spooked him enough to leave his kill and believe he could come back later to consume it.  Bears don't recognize fence lines and care very little about whether they're on private property, being that they can't read very well and all.  If you want to live in nature, then you don't get to choose which "nature" comes on your property.  You should be aware at all times and carry protection.

I spent years in the wild Sequoia National Forest as a boy but was properly trained to do so. If you have a dog and want to wander in critter country it had better be the right kind of dog and you had better know what action to take when coming across a bear or lion. I agree DFG has enormous power and abuses this power at times, but that "cloak of confidentiality" is abused throughout the whole spectrum of government including the schools too often to cover their own ineptitude and evade responsibility.

What is wrong with you people?  You are paranoid and intrusive.  Maybe the victim doesn't want her ordeal to be publicized in detail, understandably.   They've already released adequate information for us to get a plain idea of what had happened:  the woman was walking with her two dogs on her private property and she happened on a brown bear.  It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happened next.  They told us her injuries and that of her dogs and that they had attempted to track the animal down.   What other information are you looking for?   Do you want a full narration of the encounter? Then wait for the lady’s blog, if and when she decides to write one. Otherwise, hold your morbid curiosities and give the authorities a break, holy cow!

The bear's already back in Mexico.   Do we have extradition policies in place here.

If I'm understanding the article correctly  the issues are, 1 no description of the bear, and 2 no description of the victim's injuries.

1.  Google a picture of a brown bear and you pretty much got it.

2.  What does it matter other than to the victim, her family and her doctor?

Maybe it was a serial rapist/murderer in a bear suit.

I really do not understand why any more information needs to be published about this incident.  It seems very cut & dry to me.  What more details are you hoping to get?  Are you going to ask the bear why he did it?  I truly doubt the specific bear will be identified in a bear line-up.  I really do not understand the need to know everything!  Why does entitlement know NO boundaries?  Would Ms. Henry like her daily act ivies to be scrutinized under a microscope?  Would she like her picture posted in newspapers and the internet after being mauled by anything, not just a bear? 

Did you stop to consider the last thing the F&G department needs is a group of armed vigilantes who are going to take matters into their own hands.  Maybe keeping some of the detail under wraps is necessary for the safety of humans and wildlife.  Do you really think the state government needs to spend more money on the search for this bear?  Do you have any idea how far a bear can travel in one day?  The budget is already strapped,  maybe they are cutting their losses before too many resource are wasted.  I don't intend to sound unsympathetic to the victim here, this is a terrible incident. I wish things like this would never happen, but when humans encroach on the habitat of wild animals situations like these can and will occur. 

RESPONSE FROM BEAR ATTACK LADY

Dear Ms. Henry,

As a journalist, I fully sympathize with the public's need to know details of relevant public safety issues, and as a citizen I understand my both duties and my responsibilities to my community and the greater society.

To this end, I have cooperated fully with public safety agencies since the very beginning of this incident, and have made certain those in my community directly affected by this attack were contacted and briefed.  I have worked closely with State and local CAFG personnel to ensure all that could be done, would be done-- including providing photographs, measurements, DNA samples and detailed descriptions of the bear, the attack, the site, and relevant environmental anomalies.

However, before the Air Evac even hit the tarmac at UCLA I was photographed FROM ANOTHER HELICOPTER by someone with a telephoto lens.  I am told that nearly TWO HUNDRED "news" personnel were waiting for me to arrive...and all this a little more than an hour after the attack!

First the hospital staff, and now my home have been barraged nonstop by media networks and people I've never heard of wanting intimate details of my experience.  My son has had to field the rudest and most smarmy questions imaginable from these "professionals," and even had his motives impugned by one network for using (horrors!) HUMOR to thank the people who saved my life.

My parents are 85 years old.  They have had a terrible terrible year.  I would have done ANYTHING to spare them this nonsense.  What I had desperately hoped to avoid has now taken on a life of its own, thanks in large part to the efforts of enquiring folks like yourself.

When I am feeling a little bit better and can sit up and see (for example,) I will be glad to answer any and all questions you people like.  I will release grizzly (sorry,) photographs that will make your toes curl in delicious horror.  I will describe in intimate detail what it feels like to have your eyeball popped by a bear tooth, or watch it spitting your own teeth out onto the ground into a pool of your blood.

But until then, PLEASE!  At least give me some time to heal, okay?  It's been a rough week.

I sincerely, doubt, Ms. Howard, that you are in any imminent danger from bear attack there at your computer.  And all the people who belong up here already know what to do and are on the lookout for any untoward activity.  We have BEARS up here, you see....

Please let the Fish and Game do their job.

And you, as you have obviously done, do yours?

Thank you,

Sincerely,

ahansen

Most of the people clamoring for information on how to protect oneself from a bear attack probably never get clost to a trail where a bear might be.  We don't see many here in town.

Further, if you need this lady's account of the attack to protect you from being attacked by a bear yourself,  you really need to limit your outdoor experience to Hart Park and CALM.

Bear Attack Lady~ All I want to know is ,where is the dang bear~ and that info should come from F&G.You should be left alone to heal and,when that is over speak or not as you like. I can not imagine your pain,please take care.Having a bunch of intrusive media folks in your face must be terrible. *They* might try getting some real news,there must be some someplace!

The reason for a public alert,for the Piute area, would because of animals,children etc. Bears are scared of me and never come into Bakersfield because of it ;-) Best wishes and good healing.

As my column stated, my issue is with a government agency withholding public information without legal authority.

Yes, we do need to know how this attack occurred. Bears are not predatory animals. They are scavengers and typically avoid humans. So how the attack happened is important information. It also allows people to understand how and why Fish and Game has concluded the bear must be killed.

My issue was not about being denied gory photos or details of injuries.

Lois, maybe the Fish and Game people just don't want to bother with the pesky media asking all the stupid questions they typically do.

What would you have asked that wasn't already known? Maybe, "Sir, is it true that bears [edit.] in the woods"?

Lois, I am sure you occationally practice journalistic discretion regarding publicizing details in your stories, why shouldn't the F&G be able use theirs to protect a victim from unnecessary publicity and potential embarrassment?  Yes, you have the legal right to ALL that information but in this case, the F&G has already provided the public with enough information for us to understand how and why this bear attack happened, your legal right is insignificant to the principle of protecting the innocent.    This is an example of how a law can sometimes be vehicle of abuse rather than protection.  The bottom line is we must use common sense.

 Despite our own desires to feel that our government is keeping us safe and taking care of everything for us, our own government fails us when it does not keep us informed about many of the secret functions that take place behind closed doors. In fact, I would argue that Democratic ideals tend to be discarded when our government is not informing us about what they are doing. How can any people feel any measure of trust for a government that they know has deliberately kept things from them, things that they should have known about?

I see my last comment here has been edited. I guess I should have used the word POOP instead of the other "S" word, even though I didn't completely spell it out.

But I guess POOP happens.

Ahansen, I hope you and your dogs are okay and are recovering from your injuries. I hope the bear gets moved to a wildlife refuge, so it won't attack any more people but will still be able to keep its life.

And to add insult, I understand the bear bared its bare bear bottom.

Umm, respectfully, Lois, wasn't there just a huge FIRE in that area?

Your response to the victim: "Yes, we do need to know how this attack occurred. Bears are not predatory animals. They are scavengers and typically avoid humans. So how the attack happened is important information. It also allows people to understand how and why Fish and Game has concluded the bear must be killed."

Why is the fire not acknowledged in your editorial? Isn't it obvious that displaced wildlife will seek any and all means to survive, even attacking humans and dogs? 

If you are so concerned about a transparent government, I suggest you focus on real issues, like the Department of Health and Human Services.

Mrs. Hansen, I wish you and your family a peaceful recovery.

The nature of the circumstances leading up to the bear attack could have some relevance for those trying to understand why the attack happened. Researchers for example might want to know how the bear was behaving before it attacked and what the victim and her dogs were doing. I could see people getting frustrated if those basic details are held back. It's not as if they want to see grizzly pictures of the damage done to the victim. They just want to figure out why the attack happened or if there was something to be learned from the attack that could prevent future attacks.

Fish and Game Wardens are not "like cops." They ARE cops. They're sworn peace officers just like the CHP and every city and county law enforcement agency. They are conducting a law enforcement investigation and right now they say they're not ready to release the details. Cops frequently exercise that discretion and they have the authority to do so because we "mere citizens" have entrusted them with that responsibility. Let's allow them to do the jobs they are trained to do.

Both bears killed were done by people with valid bear kill licenses. They don't issue those licenses just because someone was attacked. Those bears were likely deemed nuisance bears, hence the licenses. You may disagree with the term "nuisance bear", but that's an issue to take up with Fish and Game.

Edit: Well, from watching 17 News, the second bear kill may not have had a valid license and was not in immediate danger. If that is the case, I would hope Fish and Game goes after the woman for not getting a proper permit.

Wow I feel for the bear attack lady. Honestly last year my sister and I were false charged by a bear in a national park. Scariest thing we ever encountered in our lives.(And I do speak for both of us.) But we never wished that the bear would be killed even though the ranger told us that he was a brazen bear, and had problems with campers in the past. I was in fact in his home. I love to  camp, and do live in the mountains too, and know that this is always  a very real danger. I wish nothing but the best for the victim., but hope that the bear is spared.

Ms. Henry -

Good Piece!

Respectfully, "Bear Attack Lady",  and  sympathies to you, the column's point was to call to question the inappropriate claim by a Fish and Game employee to secrecy of an ongoing investigation into a bear attack. The information related to the ongoing investigation is public  - nothing to do with "gory" details and a media frenzy.  

"Lady", you are the center of attention, unfortunately for you. But it is what it is - Fish and Game does not work for you solamente.  As a member of the media yourself, you should know and appreciate that.

--virgil

Two bears are now dead while the bear that mauled the poor woman is still on the loose.  What's going on?

The first bear was supposedly killed on a valid bear kill permit because it was bothering livestock. Now, you can make arguments that ranchers in bear country should just accept that as part of doing business in the area, but that is the published reason that bear was killed.

The second bear kill was IMO (from viewing the report on 17 News last night) unjustified. TBC's article said the lady that shot the bear had a permit, but 17 News didn't mention anything of the sort. The circumstances however were totally the lady's fault. She left dog food on her front porch and the bear came up to eat it. Nothing in the report indicated it was doing anything other than eating food that was left out. The lady seemed downright gleeful that she shot it. Really, if you live in bear country, you should not be leaving food of any sort outside where the bear could get it. Dogs should be fed inside or in an enclosed (with a top) pen. Garbage cans should be secured. 17 New's story: www.kget.com/news/local/story.aspx

Shwaine, you would be surprised by the advice I once got from a federal biologist (I know I sure was!)

I spent all of last summer at Bass Lake and had major issues with a mother bear and her two cubs. She managed to pry open our (supposed) "bear-proof" Dumpster one night and went at it! Garbage scattered one hundred yards in every direction ... that was fun to clean up lol. Of course, since she hit the jackpot with all the leftovers she found, she began coming around all the time, even in broad daylight. After the first incident, I began driving my garbage down the hill to Oakhurst every night, dumping it like a criminal in the alley behind Me-n-Ed's. Four big dumpsters, lots of room.

I talked with the biologist at length over the course of several days as I had small children and was terrified to let them outside. I was worried that my youngest would try to approach the cubs and of course, that would be a problem. The biologist told me that because of the drought he was seeing more and more wildlife seeking sustenance at lower elevations. He gave me some tips to deter the bear and basically said it's the humans that teach the bears "bad" behavior. I followed his advice and she eventually went away after about ten days.

What surprised me, though, was he said if at any time my family was in imminent danger, I could take matters into my own hands and would be issued a permit retroactively. Fortunately it never came to that. So maybe that's what happened in the case with the dog food lady. I'm with you ... leaving the food out was not wise.

I have a picture of the bear sitting on top of my dumpster in broad daylight on a disposable camera somewhere. I'll post it if I find it.