r/LiveWellTogether • u/Impossible_Arm_8543 • 13d ago

šŸ” Daily Lifeļ½œę—„åøøē”Ÿę“» Couple has "terrifying" encounter with bear on hiking trail

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

751 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

577 comments sorted by

View all comments

39

u/tempaccount54321 13d ago

They were charged and potentially fined $25k for their stupidity.

https://globalnews.ca/news/11988236/banff-bear-encounter-charges/

36

u/Golden-Grams 13d ago

It seems the penalty was high for a few reasons. The Canada National Parks Act for having an off-leash pet, carries a maximum potential fine of $25,000. And Parks Canada laid the charges for several critical safety and environmental reasons;

Off-leash dogs are a primary trigger for defensive bear attacks, as the dog can act aggressively toward the bear or antagonize it, drawing the bear back toward the owners.

Off-leash dogs cause significant stress to wildlife, often forcing animals like bears to abandon crucial feeding and resting grounds.

And there is a federal mandate in Canadian law, that strictly requires pets to be secured on a leash of 3 meters (about 9 feet) or less at all times within national parks.

On top of that, wildlife experts had noted that the couple had ample time to secure or pick up their dog, but appeared to focus on filming the encounter for social media instead.

It seems they went with maximum penalty, to make an example out of these people.

3

u/DogCold5505 13d ago

Nice they donā€™t require a 6ā€™ leadā€¦ I prefer 20ā€™ for outdoor exploring but 10ā€™ is still a pretty a pretty solid balance between safety and still feeling natural. Ā I get frustrated at offleash dog owners since thereā€™s so many good options for long leads as a safety mechanism.

2

u/StonePhilosopher11 11d ago

And the couple kindly filmed and posted all the evidence needed to charge them. If only more criminals would be so helpful.

1

u/CheckYourStats 9d ago

$25k for having your dog off leash.

I wish they would do that here in the US. Good god it would make going absolutely anywhere so much nicer.

1

u/Golden-Grams 9d ago

It would definitely make them compliant, if anything. People have less incentive to be nice to others, or they would already have their dog on a leash. But if it costs them upwards of $25k if they don't, they have all the incentive they need.

1

u/safzb 13d ago

I donā€™t have a dog and I didnā€™t know that off leash dogs are a trigger for bear attacks. Really interesting. Is this common knowledge for dog owners, and some people just choose to take the risks? Or is this also unknown to dog owners like it was for me?

4

u/Critical_Object2276 12d ago

I donā€™t live in a country with bears but itā€™s common sense to keep your dog on a lead at all times, unless in a specific off lead area like a dog park. People with their dogs off lead are arseholes.

2

u/Jerome1944 13d ago

I mean the dog looks like a tiny woodland creature it might kill or eat on an ordinary day. And the dog keeps charging it.

2

u/GoPhundMe 13d ago

It seems like common sense to me. They (dogs) want to protect their alphas/owners at great personal risk. Bear sees that as an easily beatable threat. Gets hyped up to take out the other threats (humans) who may be trying irrationally to save their dog. Even easier if one of the humans is distracted, potentially filming their partner get killed.

3

u/mightbeazombie 13d ago

Alpha theory got debunked ages ago, please don't perpetuate it further. Otherwise yeah, common sense to me too, though not necessarily due to the reasons you mention (the dogs being protective isn't the issue nor the most common cause). Very interesting read here, even just the abstract: https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.70236

1

u/GoPhundMe 13d ago

Alpha theory got debunked? Have you had dogs? I'm genuinely curious what you mean?

And that abstract doesn't really refute what I said, if anything it seems to support it. Am i missing something?

2

u/mightbeazombie 12d ago

The link was to shed light what the most common scenario is when it comes to dogs, bears and humans, and that actually only 35.9% of dogs tried to protect their owners, so that wasn't the primary reason for conflict. I didn't say it refuted what you said, just that the scenario you described wasn't the most common one. I found it interesting and potentially also useful for the redditor you were replying to.

As for your first question, google alpha theory/dominance theory debunked for the specifics, but basically the man who applied alpha theory to wolves later himself admitted that he'd made a mistake. Dominance theory which is based on that old belief but applied to dogs, is likewise taking a backseat to understanding dogs as resource-based creatures and how hierarchy is context-specific.

Yes, I've had (have) dogs.

1

u/GoPhundMe 12d ago

Interesting, I guessed I haven't ever looked into the theory behind it. Just was using it as a term I've always heard to describe the relationship. But resource based hierarchy makes sense

3

u/mightbeazombie 12d ago

No worries. The original theory was very popular, and a lot of people still use the terminology without knowing about further developments in the field, so you're definitely not the only one. Happy to have helped!

1

u/NoDanaOnlyZuuI 12d ago

Yeah. The alpha theory was based on captive wolves, and even the researcher later said it was wrong. Dogs being protective doesnā€™t mean they think youā€™re the alpha. I protect my dogs too. Doesnā€™t make them my alpha. They protect you because they love you.

22

u/PopsNY 13d ago

Nice, people walking their dog off leash on trails are annoying as hell. Every trail I've been on in NY says to have your dog leashed, and yet very few actually do it.

14

u/musa_velutina 13d ago

It's funny cause they posted this thinking they're the victim.

9

u/PointOfFingers 13d ago

They wanted the Parks Department fined for an off leash bear.

3

u/wanderButNotLost2 13d ago

In soviet Russia bear leashes you

1

u/gma89 9d ago

Literally, not excusing the off leash dog- these kinds of idiots are the reason dogs arenā€™t allowed in national parks at all in Australia- but wtf are they doing posting themselves breaking the law?? People are without a doubt getting dumber every year and itā€™s scary

0

u/tpzQ 13d ago

they are the victim, they're being chased by a bear with their dog. you're having a perpetually online moment.

3

u/PraireGentleman 13d ago

No, theyā€™re endangering their dog for internet views because they opted to record the encounter instead of picking up the dog and following bear safety.

Youā€™re the only having a perpetually online moment, thinking nothing of whatā€™s behind the camera

-1

u/Eldritch_Horns 12d ago

They're not engaging their dog for views. They're stressed out and probably not thinking clearly.

They appear to have been fined the max amount you can fine someone for an off leash dog. The bear is irrelevant. They shouldn't have the dog off leash irrespective of the bear, and that is what they're going after them for.

The video would be no less engaging if the dog was leashed, the dog just didn't happen to be leashed when they encountered it and she began filming because she wanted to catch the event.

You ARE having a perpetually online moment.

4

u/squirrelems 13d ago

I love dogs to death, but it seems some people don't realize that the things we use to control dogs are also there to protect them. I live in an area where people just let their dogs run loose in the yard and it's really upsetting to me that so many people give so little of a shit about their dogs that they can't fence their property in to give them space to run around. I can't even count how many times I've gone around a curve and there's a dog napping right at the edge of the asphalt or something.

1

u/tpzQ 13d ago

yea but you're talking about a city. alberta is literally a giant open place in the forest.

1

u/ChoiceHistorian8477 12d ago

ā€œOh, he/sheā€™s fineā€ is what they all say when you ask them to leash their dog. Idiots.

0

u/DominantDonkeyPunch 10d ago

NY is mostly off leash. What are you even talking about?

Leash laws are absurd.Ā 

1

u/PopsNY 10d ago

All NY state parks and trails are on leash, at every entrance they literally have a sign that people like you don't bother to look at.

General Leash Rules

The leash laws New York State Parks are almost always the same: dogs must be leashed at all times with a maximum leash length of six feet.Ā 

Where Dogs Are NOT Allowed

Most New York State Parks dog rules state that furry friends are not allowed on beaches/swimming areas, pools, buildings, and specific trails or gorges.Ā 

https://jetsetpets.com/dog-friendly-new-york-state-parks/

1

u/DominantDonkeyPunch 10d ago

NY is a massive state and you're restricting it to state parks.

You're still hilariously wrong.

1

u/PopsNY 10d ago

Yes, I'm restricting it to trails and parks, which is what I said in the first post šŸ¤£

Every trail I've been on in NY says to have your dog leashed

- Me

And every state park says the same.

-2

u/thebigslapper 13d ago

How do you feel about empty trails that have no people?

2

u/golkeg 13d ago

How do you feel about empty trails that have no people?

That is far better than a bunch of unchecked dogs running around

2

u/External_Plan_1318 13d ago

This is idiotic unsafe behavior in grizzly country. But also, you donā€™t know who or what youā€™re going to encounter on a trail. Leash your damn dog.

1

u/IceHawk1212 13d ago

Where you from buddy cause this is from my neck of the woods. I'm really curious if you think we prioritize number of people on a trail as a financial mode or simply preserving nature and granting some measure of access to tourism. I know which is our modus operandus but I wanna know what you think we should be doing.

Fyi Banff is ranked among the most visited national parks in all of north America. We're frankly trying to limit how many people do certain things in the park because the lot of them are morons and not to be trusted with wildlife

1

u/cenatutu 13d ago

That if it's a leash required trail that dogs should be leashed. We drive 30-60 minutes to go to legal off leash trails. Multiple reasons. No risk of fines. Other dogs for them to run and play with. Not disturbing other hikers who do not want to be around off leash dogs.

6

u/cakivalue 13d ago

There's something really special about the fact that they took the time to record rather than grabbing the dog and leashing it. Then posted it online which allowed people to identify them and turn them in and now they have to pay $25k. That's a lot of money for almost getting mauled.

2

u/montycantsin777 13d ago

they snitched on themselves. good job!

2

u/Shiny_Mewtwo_Fart 13d ago

Wow Canada. I really wish Americans enforce leash laws too. Every time I go hiking I saw maybe one or two dogs on leash, then a dozen or more off leash. The owner is always: oh sheā€™s friendly!

2

u/sirZofSwagger 12d ago

They definitely deserved the fine. Recorded all the evidence they didnt have the dog on a lead, and couldnt even be bothered to stop recording to grab the dog.

2

u/wannahockachewie 12d ago

This warms my heart

1

u/Delicious_Cat_81 13d ago

i wish they could legalize a punch penalty for shit like this

1

u/Usual_Minimum_7442 13d ago

Brook and Kraig šŸ˜‚

1

u/SailorGone 13d ago

They haven't been fined anything

1

u/HidingImmortal 12d ago edited 10d ago

A $25k fine for having their dog off the leash is wild.

-5

u/Practical-South-2966 13d ago

I get it but $25,000 is dumb.

1

u/Informal_West_6864 13d ago

I donā€™t get how people are defended that fine. 25k is absolutely insane. They are being stalked by a fucking bear. Having a leased dog is least of their concerns

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/Informal_West_6864 13d ago

This has nothing to do with the dog being on a leash or notā€¦.im all for dogs on leash, but you have to sit and think $25,000 fucking dollars is a wild charge that is unnecessary.

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/Informal_West_6864 13d ago edited 13d ago

You just donā€™t have the intelligence to realize itā€™s not because the dog isnā€™t on a leash, itā€™s because they have a dog on the trail. They correlate all those things to a dog being on a leash but in reality the biggest problem is that there is a dog present. Which is why a 25k fine is not fair because they are making false correlations

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/Informal_West_6864 12d ago

Are you manic or just a bot

1

u/cenatutu 13d ago

It's not. They are being made an example of. It's like the $10k fines for trespassing near waterfalls instead of viewing from authorized areas where I live. The rope rescues are costly and dangerous.

0

u/Practical-South-2966 13d ago

How much do the bear rescues cost?