You will note that the author claims that the only bullet in the Bear was the guides and not his.

Subject: The Alaska Rules 6/15/03

Please make your readers, viewers, friends and enemies aware of this unbelievable rule.

I went on an Alaska Brown Bear hunt, guided by Spiridon Bear Camp, Unit (16), Kodiak Island, my guide Mark Enneper, Head Guide Fred Roberts. The hunt took place in the spring of 2003. My shot at a brown bear over 200 yards away cleanly and clearly missed the bear and my guide opened up and killed it. They demanded that I put my tag on the bear. I autopsied the only bullet hole to confirm that the shot was not mine, and it was not. The hunt package cost about $16,000. I did not take possession of the bear since it was not my kill.

Disgusted with the out come of my hunt I contacted the Alaska Department of Fish and Game Commissioners office.

On June 13,2003, I received a fax from the commissioners office and it reads as follows.

�Central to your complaint is the fact that your bullet did not kill the bear, thus you argue you did not �take� it. However, Alaska regulations clearly state that �take� includes �attempting to take, pursue, hunt, fish, trap, or in any manner capture or kill fish or game� (Alaska Hunting Regulations No. 43, page 21). By taking the first shot, you attempted to take the bear. It�s eventual demise, (my guide shooting and killing the bear), was a direct consequence of your decision to shoot. Thus the bear was yours and you had an obligation to tag and seal it�.

That is right from the commissioner�s office.

This is something your guide service will not likely tell you in advance because you would likely not book a hunt. Booking agents will likely not want you to be aware of this.

I as a taxpaying American have an obligation to let �YOU� the unsuspecting hunter know that your silent hunting partner, that being your Alaskan hunting guide can kill your animal, legally and with no recourse for you. You are out your money and this is the price you pay as a non-resident hunter.

Thank You,
Bill Gentner
(734)-462-2357
E-mail: wdgentner@yahoo.com

[ 07-13-2003, 20:04: Message edited by: Mickey1 ]

If I was ever to hunt in alaska I would be sure that I didn't have that idiot for a guide.

What should have been one of the absolutely great experiences of your lifetime ... wrecked forever by a trigger happy (and probably cowardly) guide ...!!! I'm so sorry.

Sorry to hear of your situation,and I am sure that theres two sides to the story, but the guides are largely responseable for the recovery of game shot buy thier clients and most guides will shoot a brown bear as soon as the hunter shoots, that is something to discuss before you book with that guide service. Alot of nonresident hunters come up here fully prepared for the hunt and ALOT come up here that has to be baby sit so alot of guides have hard and fast rules on any given situation. The good guides that I know use discretion and will only shoot when the client fails to put the bear down, situation dictates. Greg

If this sad tale actually unfolded as you have stated I can't imagine the outfitter is not giving you at least another substantially discounted hunt. I have hunted with Leon Francisco who previously was sole owner of the company and I can assure you there would have been no jumping the gun if he had been the guide.
A good agent might have been able to help you negotiate something so you wouldn't feel quite so violated. Sorry!

Thank you for sharing that Bill! What a shame and disgrace. I know for a fact that this activity happens often with other types of hunting. I would have been furious myself. I am in the market for a bear hunt and will remember that outfitter. I seen the same thing happen on a bison hunt. Can you imagine? The shot is half the hunt. There are many hunters out there that have had game shot by the guide for various reasons. And you know they come home taking full claim for the kill. Such is life!

I need to clarify that this wasn't my hunt. I disagree with the assumption that the guide will fire at the same time as the client, if it does happen that is total BS.

If it was me the guide would be putting his tag on the Bear and not mine. That Being said what the hell were they doing shooting at 200 yards? That also is the guides decision. It sounds to me as if the guide had alot Bear fever and too little Bear savvy. Not the kind of guy that I would trust to back me up in a sticky situation.

In a case like this I can't help but think it would be fitting and proper that the guide become familiar with the term "butt-stroke". One well placed to the back of his head would likely do it. Regards, Bill.

I did not realize that Mark Sullivan was guiding Brown Bear hunts

Seriously though, the hunter should have had a conversation about the guide's shooting policy and an understanding from the guide as to when the guide will shoot. I wonder if the guide truly felt that the hunter's shot "cleanly and clearly" missed.

I had the shoot/don't shoot conversation with my PH in Africa before we went out hunting and again when we began our 1st stalk on buffalo. He told me "you are gonna have to kill it yourself". He did not fire his rifle the entire trip. I think he was just cheap and did not want to shoot his ammo

I would like to hear the guide's/outfitter's side of the story before I cast stones at them.

Tim

Prior to hunting, communication needs to take place establishing exactly when a second / follow up shot will happen by the guide, like if the bear is hit and moves away. Also, JMHO, 200 yards is quite a ways off, seems like the guide would want to get his out of state client closer to ensure a hit. One more detail, Kodiak Island is in GMU 8, not 16 (probably just an oversight) - I would like to hear the other side of this tale, from the guides view specifically the discussion prior to the hunt. This incident can be costly to both the hunter and the outfitter / guide(s); it is too easy to slam someone over the internet - sounds like a lack of timely and accurate communication and like the previous post states, if the client was really chapped, possibly the outfitter could compensate the hunter in some fashion - just my .02 - KMule

A guide that worked in the same outfit as I did, would shoot at the same time as his hunter. I did not agree with it. I never heard of it causing problems, but I still did not agree with it.
I have had to shoot wounded game for clients and it has never been a problem because it was discussed beforehand. Even then, at times, it was discussed during the situation. It is amazing how things can unexpectantly go for shit in a hurry. That is why it should be discussed before hand. The guide/outfitter should bring the subject up after introductions along with other "rules" like loaded rifles etc.
With only one side of the story to go on.... the guide had no business shooting at the same time if in fact this is what he did.

Daryl

I agree with most of the posters on this one, but what really blows me away is the fact that the Alaska Game and Fish Department appears to encourage such action through the regulation. What I read here is, you go on a hunt of a lifetime, you see a bear, shoot, miss, your guide then shoots and downs the animal, and you have to consider it yours. Bullshit! If that bear was a B&C contender, if B&C officials knew that you did not kill the bear or even hit it, but your guide did, would your name go in the record books? I say make Alaska G&F commission change the damn law first, then you won't have guides such as the ones you got so darn trigger happy. Just a couple of cents worth. Tom Purdom

Guys,

The hunter stated "over two hundred yards". I would agree with Mickey. That's a long shot brown bear hunting. I would like to hear the guides side of the story and see if he advised the hunter to take the shot, or not, at that distance. Spotting a wounded brownie a jump of "over two hundred yards", if, in fact, there had been a shot made, is a substantial amount of ground and time to make up before it makes heavy cover. It would also seem that someone on their trip of a lifetime would be prepared to take the shot offered or tell the guide he wanted to get closer, or wait, .........after all, it's his hunt. I think we'd all be better served if we knew the whole story.

Joe

If I put my self in the guides position. The client fires, the bear or any other animal doesn't go down. I would fire at the animal no question, there is no way that you can be 100% sure it was a miss, so if a shot is fired, I asume the animal as wounded and act acordingly. The humane killing of the animal comes before the clients needs.

If I where the client I would be angry at my self for taking a shot I couldn't do, but blaming the guide for firening if notting else was discused is not the way to do it.

Since I don't know the guide or the client I can't say if the guide did the right thing in this situation, but I guess there s two sides of the case.

Johan

I have no horse in this race, but IMO, central to this question is that the hunter missed a shot at a brown bear.

That doesn't seem something that I would expect to happen very frequently. I mean, a brown bear is not a ground squirrel? FWIW, Dutch.

Guided Hunt-I would probably never have such a trip. Seeing I'm not made of money. Anyway if that's the law up there in the great white they can keep it!! A 200 yd shot on a Brown? I though the whole reason for shooting Brownies was to get close so he'd have an even chance to chew your Ass off!!!

I hate to say this but if this happened to me we would now be at the stage of taking depositions and looking for a court date.

Some things to consider...

(1) unless the event took place at dusk on the last day of the hunt, the hunter was defrauded out of an opportunity to take another bear after missing.

(2) it's been a long time since I hunted in Alaska but more than a few guides I knew basically thought once the "dude" had a shot and missed that was it ... they had preformed their contactual duty.

(3)from the way the State is interpretering the word "taking" it looks as if they agree with the attitude of a lot of guides in (2) ..... if the State only allows me to "take" one bear and I miss then I legally, according to their reading, can't keep hunting.

(4) the distance the shot was taken from has no bearing on the fact Bill Gentner got screwed. Bill....call a lawyer!

[ 07-15-2003, 04:12: Message edited by: DB Bill ]

Personally, I think they both are SOBs! What kind of an asshole takes 200 yards shots at brownies? That stupid shit got what he deserved, and if it had been up to me confiscation of his rifle. The guide, well I think Mr. Leeper's suggestion would have been most appropriate for that prick!

Lucs

I was very sympathic to his delima until the jerk said booking agents would not tell you either...so now everyone in the world is guilty for what happened to him...He can kiss old spot..Besides once again that is but one side of the story...

I did not know that particular regulation and it is a shamefull regulation, and I doubt that a lot of guides know that either...

I will tell you this, had I been his booking agent (if he had one) the damn guide would have paid him a full refund or I would have, and then I would settle with the guide in a court of law and screw the regulation...If that didn't work, but I believe it would, then I would spread the word throughout the hunting world, SCI, the hunt report and anyplace else I could......

He still ticked me off with his off hand remark...and that lends less credibility to his report at least with me...

You folks would not believe how many dead moose we have found with dawgs after CLEARLY MISSED shots.

There is no way to be sure about a clear miss without going to the place where the animal was when fired at,checking the surroundings for traces of a hit. Hair,blood,etc. Preferably with a dawg.

In that light,the guide did his part right. But that regulation... wow.

[ 07-15-2003, 06:56: Message edited by: Petander ]

I think that the Alaska game law is correctly written, but for a different purpose.

Let's say you were out hunting for an animal (bear, moose, deer, etc.) but you did not have a tag. Let's say a game warden is watching you as you are stalking up to an animal to shoot it. Just as you are about to pull the trigger, you realize there is a game warden there and you don't pull the trigger. Under the Alaska law, he could cite you even though you did not kill the animal. Just like if you have a fishing pole in the water, but have not yet caught a fish. You can still be cited. In my opinion, that is why the law is written that way.

Tim

I always address this issue with the outfitter/PH BEFORE the contract. The only time that the guide is to shoot is A) eminent escape of an unquestionably wounded animal, or B) life threatening situation to me or the guide or aids. I then address it again with the guide. Don't agree, we don't hunt together. Period. So far, I've not found it a problem.

Many folks have come into these rooms and asked what to look for when booking a hunt. The one common theme that runs thru the replies is to have a full and mutual understanding of what you can expect from the guide or outfitter and what they can expect from you. I'm sure Ray can tell you a few stories about having told the sport that he must be in good shape only to have them show up looking like El Blimpo with four cigarettes hanging out of their mouth. Then, when they have a bum hunt 'cause they're not up to it, they want to bad-mouth the guide, the outfitter, God, the DNR, etc.
I would like to hear the guides story. Also, I kinda agree with Dutch. Brownies are pretty big animals.

I'd like to hear the other side of the story...

As an aside,in the hunting tape Canadian Wilderness hunting.A sport shoots a huge griz,
only thing it sounds like 2 shots nano seconds
apart.I wonder who killed that bear?Anyone else
see it?

Jeff

I will have to admit I have a problem with a trigger happy guide, A guide should be able to tell 99% of the time if it is a hit, particularly on a bear, a bear react violently to a hit...

I personally see no excuse for his action..I know a guy who all of you condemned for shooting his clients Buffalo in his videos, so why is this any different...

Now granted I hate to take up this guys side on the issue cuz he pi$$ed me off with his booking agent statment...but such a law is unconstitutional in my opinnion, I have never heard of attempted murder of a bear!

If that were the case then evey time we turned down an animal that we aimed at then we are guilty of killing it, everytime I look at a cow through my scope then I broke the law..It is a BS regualtion and needs to be fought in court and this guy should be doing just that instead of whining like a baby to all who will listen, now I feel better after saying that. Please don't compare this to fishing with your hook in the water, that doesn't "fly"

"My shot at a brown bear over 200 yards away cleanly and clearly missed the bear and my guide opened up and killed it."

That's what you saw.....Did the guide have the same view as you?

"However, Alaska regulations clearly state that �take� includes �attempting to take, pursue, hunt, fish, trap, or in any manner capture or kill fish or game� (Alaska Hunting Regulations No. 43, page 21). By taking the first shot, you attempted to take the bear. It�s eventual demise, (my guide shooting and killing the bear), was a direct consequence of your decision to shoot. Thus the bear was yours and you had an obligation to tag and seal it�.

By the hunter pulling the trigger and firing a live round at the brownie was the attempt to take the bear, which in turn gave the green light to the guide that you wanted to take that bear. Yes, over 200 yards is not the way to go......but, who pulled the trigger first, the hunter.....The guide should have prevented the hunter from taking such a shot in the first place, but as stated before, we don't know what the guide's side of the story is, or who was trigger happy in the first place?

The guide works as a liaison for the hunter for a fee. (And, yes ADF&G game board make no sense at times, but the residents of Alaska elect officials who appoint these folks who come up with these laws, which I'm positive this very subject has been hashed out many times before.) Here's one note; Part of licensing requirements as guide in Alaska is to know Alaska Law........So the attempt to "take" the bear by the hunter was done..................Was it the guides fault that the hunter pulled the trigger and missed?

And why for gods sakes didn't the hunter follow up with a second, or third shot? The last brown bear I killed, it's a automatic second shot, whether it dropped dead in it's tracks or not. You don't take one shot at a brownie and throw your hands up and say I'm finished..........You plug that beast full of lead until there is no more life in it. I don't second guess when it comes to bears, or any animal that bites back. IMO

[ 07-16-2003, 06:04: Message edited by: CK ]

Well, that may well be, but my man in Alaska, has never shot a clients bear in all the years he has been in business, perhaps that is why he is in business after all these years..He is Phil Shoemaker, Grizzly Skins Outfitters....He would laugh at such actions..Once the bear is hit and he knows its hit, then he said he would put in a follow up shot, and then only if he felt it absolutly necessary...

What I see here is a pretty good case being made to hunt Russian bear or to clear up that little matter with the Alaskan Guide prior to the hunt and put that Alaskan regulation where the sun don't shine.

They may think they are a seperate inity but they are still ruled by the US court system...and that reg is unconstitutional as many regs are and they get away with it because folks don't challange it, had this man challanged it they would have ruled in his favor as opposed to going to court and losing the regulation, Id bet on that.

So it's OK shoot at a bear, but not with the intent to kill? Just seeing how close you'd get to it?

Your right, Russia just the place for those kind folks.

Guys,

It's really funny how everyone jumps to conclusions, especially when only one side of the story is known. To say Alaskan Fish and Game laws are complicated is an understatement. A registered guide has a law book that is literally as thick as the Anchorage phone book and the majority of it is on the written exam one takes to attain registered guide status. It is increasingly becoming the norm for more hunters to show up to take brown bear that are not prepared for the tasks awaiting them. Some are out of shape, some can't shoot well, and a lot of them can't handle the pressure of being in close proximity with a brownie. Until we hear the other side of the story, we only have a hunter that paid $16,000.00 for a hunt that he is very disappointed with and, under those circumstances described by him, I, too, would be very disappointed. I can't imagine shooting a brownie
at "over two hundred yards". IMHO, that's just shooting, certainly not bear hunting. It would be interesting to get the guide and the shooter in the same room and hear it all. As Old Judge Watts used to say, "the truth in this case resides somewhere in the middle of all these "facts"." Ray, as far as "unconstitutional"
goes, well, how would you feel if a bunch of folks started telling you how you were going to live in Idaho or Texas? Our legislators, like them or not, were legally elected and appoint folks to our fish and game boards who hold open meetings for all citizens to attend, No, they don't always listen but it works for us and that may be why you can make money off booking hunts up here; because we have game left to hunt. Russia? Be my guest................with the largely unregulated hunting there and some of the horror stories coming out of there, I wish you well. I'm the first to agree that there are people in the business up here that shouldn't be. Many outfitters and Reg. Guides are using inexperienced assistants and this may have been the case in this incident. I think there's more to this incident than we've been told by the shooter(non).

Joe

Dont miss, simple as that.

I believe that I could hit a brown bear at 200yds with a pistol and iron sights on my worst day in a pouring rain with a guide yelling in my ear to shoot... shoot... shoot!!!

I can't imagine how the animal was completely missed with what was probably a scoped rifle.

$bob$

Ovis,
You need to realize that Alaska is in the USA and anyone from any state has rights there, I think your law smells to high heaven, I think the hunter should challange it, I think that missing a bear is legal, I dont think a guide should shoot a client bear...and if you don't like any Idaho or Texas laws then your welcome to state just that, and I'd probably agree with you....Right is right and wrong is wrong and if Alaska can't tell the difference in a poacher and a paid hunter, they need to take a look at that legislation...I got a hunch to many guides like to shoot bears, I have seen it before!!

Point is, based on the original post, and I say based on that and that alone, since that is all we have to go by this jerk got ripped...

BTW I do book hunts in Alaska and Russia and I have great luck in both, my guides do not shoot unwounded bear, never have and any guide that does is unfit....

I have no problem with shooting bear at 200 yards if the hunter is capable and is shooting enough gun to get the job done...I know of a lot of bears shot at that range, by good hunters and good guides that know their capabilities...

Here is my 2 cents...

This spring I 'guided' a couple of guys on a black bear hunt.

I am not an outfitter, I just had some spare time. The hunters where from Vancouver, about 3 hours south of me. I knew one guy, but not the other.

The one I didn't know, had been huntign for 4 years without cutting his tag, so we decided that he should have first shot.

I got him on a bear, (about 100 yards) told him to sit down and shoot. He shot, and I (watching through the binos) was sure he missed...but he was sure he hit.

I told him to shoot again...

As it was my first time 'guiding' I wasn't that smart. I had left my rifle about 100 yards away.

He was all messed up, couldn't shoot-and was trying to give me his rifle to take a shot at the retreating bear.

By this time, he had mentally convinced me he had hit it...but...

I wasn't convinced the bear had been hit.

I wasn't confident in his rifle

AND, I sure as hell didn't want his first animal to get dumped by me!!!

But...The point is...

If I had been holding my own rifle, and the 'client' (in this case he didn't even bring me beer ) was sure -and I was sure- that he had made a hit...I would have fired.

If the 'client' was sure he had missed (and I was sure)..Mr. Bear would walk

200 yards is a long shot on a brown bear and imho the hunter should have never taken the shot nor should the guide allow it. A bear can and will react to a miss as well as a hit, most cases the bear will bite at his sides when hit and be very po and sometimes they will turn and run when hit (rare)so there are situation when you really dont know for sure and the law allows the guide to control the situation to insure the bear is down, but like I said earlier there are two sides to the story and I would love to here it. Greg