Has BW made a trip to the lawyers office with all paperwork in hand. Seems Bill G. might have gone to far. imho

Pete,

Thanks, but it's not needed. Appreciate the offer though!

Once again, he proves that he is a small man, with a big mouth.

So did you're fellow coasties get a good laugh out of it?

BW - Thought you could use some humor

Paul,

At my level, I was simply informed that the e-mail had been received from Bill, and that perhaps I should refrain from further debate. But, no official orders were given.

I don't know how the CG repsonded, but I'm sure it was professional. Still, he went ahead and updated his website associating my personal, at home statements, with my employer. And at the same time, attacking me personally. It seems he failed to honor his word, as we had no further discussion of the matter here at AR.

Bills rude and childish actions, along with his failure to keep his word, only serve to strengthen my beliefs that he was to blame for much of what happened on Kodiak Island.

BW - Try this link for extra protection http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html

I remember reading that he pulled his second shot into the air, basically firing out of frustration as the bear disappeared.

Obviously a great hunter.

You can ask any guide up here, and those famous older guides (roughly from 1900-1960, as written in books), that once a bear is shot it should be shot again, especially when it heads towards the thickets, ie getting away. This is for safety reasons, as well as ethical reasons. This point can't be denied. Its the correct thing to do.
bill g says his guide believed the bear was shot, and it was indeed getting away. The guide felt he had no choice but to shoot. Its the guides responsibility to keep his client out of trouble, and bear in the thickets is trouble. By law the guide is there for certain reasons, and this situation fits within these reasons. bill g can't accept it. He figues he ought to be given special allowances.
I really wonder this... Did bill g know for certain he missed this first shot at the time he pulled the trigger? Or did he just get mad because it wasn't his bullet that did the honors?
BTW... what seems to be forgotten here is bill g says this is his cross to bear, didn't he? He accepts the problem. Why he went all this way to create problems for BW, and the Alaskan guides, is beyound me, except that he's a person with an agenda, simply because his ego got bruised.
Another note... How much money he paid is a non-issue. Money don't buy shot placement. ~~~Suluuq

I must be missing something here. If I was hunting with someone who took it upon myself to shoot my animal for me, I would be furious. If I had payed someone several thousand dollars, and they did that, I would be livid.
So he is a lousy shot. That still shouldn't give his guide the right to shoot the bear for him. If the guide made the mistake of assuming the bear was hit, then its the guides mistake, not his. Why should he be responsible for his guides mistake?
If the objections here are because of personal attacks on BW, then that I could understand, and I can join the lynch mob in good faith. But from what I read, he has a right to be pissed, regardless of what is "legal".
Like I say, what am I missing?