Smokin Joe NOT GUILTY!!!

[TreeGuy]

Originally Posted by duffy4

I thought permoting breaking the law was against board rules here.

"well said" and "X10" would be accessories to the offence.

Not PROMOTING anything.

I'm simply speculating as to what my actions would be as a result of this case if I were unfortunate enough to be in Mr. Lucas' position.

Who could have figured that the biggest danger from a grizz attack would be people like yourself and not the animal. Pathetic. Fellow outdoorsman indeed.

Tree

[Rocks]

Originally Posted by duffy4

I thought permoting breaking the law was against board rules here.

"well said" and "X10" would be accessories to the offence.

There is no rule on this board against "permoting" anything!

Well said Tree... X12, WELL SAID!

[Grizzly Adams]

It's funny how the 'Monday Morning Quarterbacks' always have the right answers...........

I think it's more than Monday Morning Quarterbacking, because we very well may find ourselves in a similar predicament and any discussion could be very relevant, how we react. Might even save some bear's life. I had a chat with a well known guide and outfitter yesterday and he related some interesting stories. He' s been bluff charged by Grizzlies a number of times of times and according to him, there is nothing more frightening and you never know absolutely, it's not for real.
Electric fences? A good ides but not always practical. or guaranteed to work. I guess we could have chain link enclosures, like they have at Lake Louise and everyone has to camp within them, but I don't think any of us would be willing to accept that.
Grizz

[duffy4]

Perhaps "permoting" was the wrong word to use (or promoting if you will)

"If I have to take a 'friggin bears' life, I will without batting an eye. Then I will bury the ******** and keep my mouth shut!"

I aint taking no alternate measures when it comes to dealing with a problem bear, you can have your pepper spray,bells, tree climbing and electric fence, I'll take my gun,and you will never hear a word of it.


Both of these statements seem to me to be suggesting "taking the law into ones own hands" or said another way breaking the law.

MESSAGE BOARD RULES

Do not place any material on the message board that could be considered offensive to other users, or unlawful.

On a board where most of the time posters are quick to jump all over "poachers" or anyone suspected of breaking a game law, I am surprised at the reactions of posters on this thread.


Who could have figured that the biggest danger from a grizz attack would be people like yourself and not the animal. Pathetic. Fellow outdoorsman indeed.

Treeguy, not sure what you mean by this??? Are you directing that comment at me???

[huntin]

Originally Posted by Young Eldon

Sounds like we all lost on this incident:
Grizzly died.
Joe and family lost time, peace of mind, joy of trip, cash, etc.
COs and others lost public support, confidence, etc.
Judge thinks most of it was a waste.
Several members here on this board seem to have decided that SSS is the sensible solution.
Perhaps we need to take home some other lessons from this experience as well. Joe and party members may have been able to do more to avoid this confrontation since I was told the bear had been seen in the area well ahead (hours and several minutes immediately prior)of the shooting. Some possible actions that may have saved the day include:
Carry and use Bear Spray not just rifles.
Fire warning air horn and/or shots.
Climb trees.
Leave the site when it was first learned that the bear was in the area.
Set up electric fence around the camp.
Some of these options may have been tried (there seems to be a dearth of information in this regard) and none of them may have worked in this case but they have all worked for many people in similar situations. My guess is that Joe and company may give them higher priority on their future trips. As we all should! Use of lethal force is sometimes warranted but due diligence to avoid these kinds of confrontations demands more preparation and trying of other options first if at all possible.
Those of us that think aversive conditioning of bears causes more problems than it solves need to realise that it does not claim to solve all future problems with a given bear. Everyone realizes that some bears are likely incorrigible and need removal. That does not mean we can quit being responsible for our own actions and welfare in bear habitat. Spending our time trying to blame others for these wrecks would likely be better spent trying to figure out ways we can personally reduce the risks of them happening again.

so now when you go on a pac trip you need to take an electric fence. might as well take a generator and some gas you car and a fricken tv for that mater. i happen to have head the story from a person who was on the trip and the bear was chasing their horses about 20min befor they had tried to chase him off and he returned to camp they had only one thing to do shoot him in the day light befor he comes back in the dark where he had the advantage

[duffy4]

You can run a fairly good electric fence on a pretty small battery. With a solar charger.
It is a changing world. There are not few back country campers and lots of grizzly bears anymore. There are lots of campers and fewer grizzlies now. If you look at the "BEAR SMART" programs you will see that there are a number of things we can do to cut down on human/bear situations. No one thing will solve all problems but together they will do a lot.

The ultimate and final solution will always be to kill a bear. But if there are some things we can do to prevent that I think we should be aware and doing them.

[TreeGuy]

Originally Posted by duffy4

The ultimate and final solution will always be to kill a bear. But if there are some things we can do to prevent that I think we should be aware and doing them.

AGREED 100%!

This is where I personally have a problem......

There are lots of campers and fewer grizzlies now.

May I ask how you have come to the conclusion that there are fewer bears?

Tree

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by duffy4

You can run a fairly good electric fence on a pretty small battery. With a solar charger.
It is a changing world. There are not few back country campers and lots of grizzly bears anymore. There are lots of campers and fewer grizzlies now. If you look at the "BEAR SMART" programs you will see that there are a number of things we can do to cut down on human/bear situations. No one thing will solve all problems but together they will do a lot.

The ultimate and final solution will always be to kill a bear. But if there are some things we can do to prevent that I think we should be aware and doing them.

I guess the time has come to ask if you've got a horse, running in this race? Do you put an electric fence around your camp every night?
I think the majority of us here feel we should have Grizzly bears, in our Wilderness areas, we just don't want to be human sacrifices, on that altar.
I got the County paper today and it has an extensive article, on the case. The incident actually started, on the meadow, where the hunters had their horses hobbled. They heard bells and one of them rushed out, to find the bear, chasing their horses. He came back and got the other two, concerned the bear was hunting the horses. All were armed. The bear made another attempt at chasing the horses, but then noticed the men, who were yelling, at him and started moving closer. One of the men, Nutting, was going to shoot the bear, but Lucas told him not to. At that point, the bear proceeded to the south side of the camp site and they lost sight of him. They heard a shot and returned to the camp site, where Lucas showed them where the bear was shot and THE BROKEN FENCELINE..
At the trial, testimony was given that the collared[one year previously, and ear tagged bear was undergoing aversion therapy, a programn designed to teach bears to avoid humans. Lucas stated he only fired on the bear when it approached the FENCELINE OF THE CAMPSITE.
The Crowns final witness [talk about Monday morning quarterbacking], stated he wouldn't consider this an agressive bear, at times testy, indifferent and at times cocky, but still yielding to humans. Gibeau said the bear wasn't hunting the horses, but was chasing them out of curiosity. He went on to say that the bear likely wasn't coming for Mr. Nutting, but was trying to get around him and Mr. Lucas.


" I find, not withstanding, that in my experience of living in the mountains that bears are dangerous and unpredictable animals. In my view, Mr. Lucas properly came to view that bear, as a danger."
Justice John Reilly

Grizz

[ABDUKNUT]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

May I ask how you have come to the conclusion that there are fewer bears?

Tree

Cmon guy, your first comments are fully understandable, but do you really think there's 'MORE' bears now? How could this be possible, considering the rate at which their habitat is being encroached upon?

[TreeGuy]

Originally Posted by ABDUKNUT

Cmon guy, your first comments are fully understandable, but do you really think there's 'MORE' bears now? How could this be possible, considering the rate at which their habitat is being encroached upon?

AB, at NO point in time on this thread did I state that there were 'MORE' bears. I am merely asking why Duffman feels that there are, "LESS", bears.

Tree

[huntinstuff]

I killed a bear in the NWT. It broke a window in a cabin and the lady inside was screaming. Bit of a tricky shot too as only the bears arse was available for a shot. And that 303 I used had seen better days......but at 10ft I didnt think I could miss, even with the worst rifle.

We called the CO and they flew in, took some pictures then we took a knife and punctured the lungs and sank the bear in the lake.

Why did we sink the bear in the lake? Have you ever tried to dig a hole in the Canadian Shield? I'd still be there.

To the CO's it was perfectly acceptable. I just followed their direction.

Not much different from this fellas predicament. I hope he gets some sort of compensation, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it.

[uglyelk]

okay sss... shoot sink shut up

[hal53]

Lot of people talking....as usual, not much experience with the actual situation....easy to sit by the computer and impart your wisdom...... "aversino behavior???"""....that's like saying young offenders can't be named because our system will "rehabiltate" them...right before they break into your house while they're on parole in our pathetic system....

[pdfish]

Originally Posted by duffy4

.

MESSAGE BOARD RULES

Do not place any material on the message board that could be considered offensive to other users, or unlawful.

On a board where most of the time posters are quick to jump all over "poachers" or anyone suspected of breaking a game law, I am surprised at the reactions of posters on this thread.

For crying out loud, where does "poaching" enter into this equation? The majority of the people commenting on this thread are in agreement that Mr. Lucas did what he felt was right given the situation he was in. I guess it's a good thing that it wasn't trial by jury, especially if you were a juror.

[brianscott]

Is Smoking Joe a welder by chance???
I was in a camp in Slave Lake, there was a rig with SMOKING JOE'S WELDING
on the side.
A coincedence maybe?

[duffy4]

Originally Posted by pdfish

For crying out loud, where does "poaching" enter into this equation? The majority of the people commenting on this thread are in agreement that Mr. Lucas did what he felt was right given the situation he was in. I guess it's a good thing that it wasn't trial by jury, especially if you were a juror.

If you had read and understood my whole post you would see that I was not refering to Mr. Lucas as a poacher. I was commenting on the posters above who seem to be openly suggesting they would break the law.

But thats ok. Normally there are always a number of posters who misunderstand a post and go off in another direction.

[pdfish]

Originally Posted by duffy4

If you had read and understood my whole post you would see that I was not refering to Mr. Lucas as a poacher. I was commenting on the posters above who seem to be openly suggesting they would break the law.

But thats ok. Normally there are always a number of posters who misunderstand a post and go off in another direction.

I did, in fact, read your whole post and yes, you didn't go as far as outright call Mr. Lucas a poacher. However, you did indeed elude to that regarding posts from other members who said they would do the same thing (as I will be fully prepared to do when fishing/camping in coastal BC this summer should worse come to worse), going as far as stating:

"well said" and "X10" would be accessories to the offence.

I, for one, fail to see the difference.

[duffy4]

"I, for one, fail to see the difference."

Yes I think that is the problem. You fail to see the difference between what I said and what you think I am "eluding to".


"If I have to take a 'friggin bears' life, I will without batting an eye. Then I will bury the ******** and keep my mouth shut!"

"I aint taking no alternate measures when it comes to dealing with a problem bear, you can have your pepper spray,bells, tree climbing and electric fence, I'll take my gun,and you will never hear a word of it."

Here are two quotes from posters above.

Mr. Lucas did not do that sort of thing. These fellows are talking about breaking a law and keeping it quiet. My post that you feel aludes to Mr. Lucas, "eludes to them.

We are both off topic now from the original topic, so long.

[TreeGuy]

Originally Posted by duffy4

Mr. Lucas did not do that sort of thing. These fellows are talking about breaking a law and keeping it quiet. My post that you feel aludes to Mr. Lucas, "eludes to them.

You're missing the point Duffman! After the blow to Mr. Lucas' reputation, the stress and 10's of thousands of dollars in legal bills, due to arse covering CO's and a crown prosecutor looking to set a prescendent, do you think he'd EVER report a good shoot again?

How in the HELL is it worth it to the average guy to be honest in such a situation?

Are you willing to risk everything in the hands of folks who are more interested in advancing their careers and their agendas than they are using common sense?

I'm not. IMHO, you would have to be a damned FOOL to be honest about a self defense kill in Alberta right now based on this case.

Do you know what this has done? Probably not, but I'll explain it to you and be sure to type slowly.......

If it is not worth it to be honest about a good shoot within 14m with witnesses, what is going to happen is the SSS principal will take over with lots of BAD shoots at 100m+ going unreported.

This STUPID case has accomplished NOTHING in terms of helping the grizzlys, and like the gun registry will force good, decent and honest folks into being criminals. It's not right and you damn well know it.

Tree

[carpediem4570]

I have seen first hand what happens when the legal system,(there is no justice), gets ahold of someone. In Canada the Crown can continue to come after you even though you have been found not guilty. The Crown can keep charging you if they so desire. To prevent this, the crown should be forced to pay for expenses incured by the accused if he/she/they are found not guilty.

The old rule was innocent until proven guilty, the new rule is innocent until proven broke.

Comments, criticisms, suggestions always welcome.

Kindest regards,

Carpediem

[Keeleclimber]

I agree Carp,
This trial was two years in the making. Thats alot of Lawyer fee's not to mention sleepless nights and misinformed negetive media coverage.

If the CO's were held accountable for their decisions, this probably could have been avoided and the right call would have been made two years ago.

The result is major lack of confidence in our CO's. I believe in the regulations, might not a gree with some, but I still believe and follow the rules and ethics.
But this whole situation has really gave the CO's a black eye and it will be hard to ever take them serious again.
Whats a guy going to do next time a problem bear has to be shot? Its going to happen, bet he doesn't turn to the CO's for nothing.

[Matt L.]

I agree with ya Tree. I'm thinking that those CO's are goin' to be wishing the had just shut up cause nobody's goin' to be reporting much of anything to 'em for fear of bein' charged. That trial's opened one helluva pandora's box.

[Cowtown guy]

Keel,

Did the charges come from the the initial investigation? Or was this a push by the Crown to try and set a precedent? If this was solely on the Crown's shoulders then I don't think we should be bashing the CO's.

If charges were pressed as a direct result of the investigation then bash away.

I mention this because I think it is only fair to say that if the Crown is pushing the CO's in the investigation, then they are only doing their jobs. Although they are being seen as the badguys here maybe that isn't fair. Should we be directing more blame at the Crown? I know that I have to do some things every once in a while that people get upset about at work, even though I have told management it isn't the best idea. I don't want to do this stuff but I still HAVE to.

What are the odds that you could convince Joe to come around and give an accurate account of how the proceedings went?

[Bogman10]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

You're missing the point Duffman! After the blow to Mr. Lucas' reputation, the stress and 10's of thousands of dollars in legal bills, due to arse covering CO's and a crown prosecutor looking to set a prescendent, do you think he'd EVER report a good shoot again?

How in the HELL is it worth it to the average guy to be honest in such a situation?

Are you willing to risk everything in the hands of folks who are more interested in advancing their careers and their agendas than they are using common sense?

I'm not. IMHO, you would have to be a damned FOOL to be honest about a self defense kill in Alberta right now based on this case.

Do you know what this has done? Probably not, but I'll explain it to you and be sure to type slowly.......

If it is not worth it to be honest about a good shoot within 14m with witnesses, what is going to happen is the SSS principal will take over with lots of BAD shoots at 100m+ going unreported.

This STUPID case has accomplished NOTHING in terms of helping the grizzlys, and like the gun registry will force good, decent and honest folks into being criminals. It's not right and you damn well know it.

Tree

Just tossing in my 2 cents here. That is very well put!!! It will do way more harm then good. The only people who will profit by this are the LAWYERS.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

Keel,

Did the charges come from the the initial investigation? Or was this a push by the Crown to try and set a precedent? If this was solely on the Crown's shoulders then I don't think we should be bashing the CO's.

How would a crown prosecutor have even known about the incident if the CO's didn't bring it to him/her? I have to believe they thought it was warranted. If they didn't they would have just said "fine, you did the right thing, see you later" and that would be the end of it.

The guy was found not guilty. That doesn't mean the CO's were negligent. Happens all the time in lots of criminal cases. The judge just saw it a different way. It's just that when it's a non-hunting case we usually criticize the judge for letting the "criminal" off, and don't berate the police.

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by Young Eldon

Climb trees.

Bear is in camp 14 metres away, you have a rifle, and you are with your son...and you climb up a tree?
Maybe you deserve to get eaten

[whitetailhntr]

Originally Posted by brianscott

Is Smoking Joe a welder by chance???
I was in a camp in Slave Lake, there was a rig with SMOKING JOE'S WELDING
on the side.
A coincedence maybe?

Smokin Joe Lucas is a canadian champion calf roper,NFR qualifier and Calgary stampede calf roping champion as well.He is a well respected and honoured member of the cpra. He and his wife operate a western store in Carstairs and Joe spends a bunch of time teaching kids to rope.He's a heck of guy.

[Keeleclimber]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

Keel,

Did the charges come from the the initial investigation? Or was this a push by the Crown to try and set a precedent? If this was solely on the Crown's shoulders then I don't think we should be bashing the CO's.

If charges were pressed as a direct result of the investigation then bash away.

I mention this because I think it is only fair to say that if the Crown is pushing the CO's in the investigation, then they are only doing their jobs. Although they are being seen as the badguys here maybe that isn't fair. Should we be directing more blame at the Crown? I know that I have to do some things every once in a while that people get upset about at work, even though I have told management it isn't the best idea. I don't want to do this stuff but I still HAVE to.

What are the odds that you could convince Joe to come around and give an accurate account of how the proceedings went?

I agree with everything you said, but the charges were from the investigation by the CO that happens to be the director of the Bear conditioning. He was pi***d cause one of his "lab rats" got killed.

In court, the Crown prosecutors evidence used against Joe, was all the events from our statements. Both sides agreed to what happened as far as were the bear went and were the shot took place...
Its like they were hoping one of us would slip up, and change the story so they would have somthing to work with. All we had to do was tell the truth,the way things happened, it was easy. The prosecutors made themselves look so bad with their "experts" stating that Grizzly bears are predictable and a stalking bear will not be aggressive.

Defence Lawyer: " Sir,the bones and tendins found in the bears intestine would indicate it had previously ate meat of some sort?"
CP "expert"witness:" NOoo, that indicates the bear had eaten bones and tendins"


There was to many ridiculos statements from the CO's and their experts to remember. The judge was getting so fed up he wasn't going to let the CP have anymore witnesses on stand.
They had video of the same bear that was killed, that they thought was going to help them prove the bear wasn't aggressive. Holy did that backfire in their face.
Anyways, its to bad the whole thing couldn't have been filmed, potential FHV material.

[ovis40]

Originally Posted by huntinstuff

I killed a bear in the NWT. It broke a window in a cabin and the lady inside was screaming. Bit of a tricky shot too as only the bears arse was available for a shot. And that 303 I used had seen better days......but at 10ft I didnt think I could miss, even with the worst rifle.

We called the CO and they flew in, took some pictures then we took a knife and punctured the lungs and sank the bear in the lake.

Why did we sink the bear in the lake? Have you ever tried to dig a hole in the Canadian Shield? I'd still be there.

To the CO's it was perfectly acceptable. I just followed their direction.

Not much different from this fellas predicament. I hope he gets some sort of compensation, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it.

What kind of bear was it that you shot? I also had to kill a bear (grizzly) in the NWT after 8 hours of trying to get it to leave camp alone. Back then I was required to skin the bear, write a full report as to what happened and turn it over to the CO's. They would then give it to the Hunter and Trapper association (First Nations I believe) who would ship it to auction in Vancouver.

Originally Posted by Keeleclimber

I agree with everything you said, but the charges were from the investigation by the CO that happens to be the director of the Bear conditioning. He was pi***d cause one of his "lab rats" got killed.

In court, the Crown prosecutors evidence used against Joe, was all the events from our statements. Both sides agreed to what happened as far as were the bear went and were the shot took place...
Its like they were hoping one of us would slip up, and change the story so they would have somthing to work with. All we had to do was tell the truth,the way things happened, it was easy. The prosecutors made themselves look so bad with their "experts" stating that Grizzly bears are predictable and a stalking bear will not be aggressive.

Defence Lawyer: " Sir,the bones and tendins found in the bears intestine would indicate it had previously ate meat of some sort?"
CP "expert"witness:" NOoo, that indicates the bear had eaten bones and tendins"


There was to many ridiculos statements from the CO's and their experts to remember. The judge was getting so fed up he wasn't going to let the CP have anymore witnesses on stand.
They had video of the same bear that was killed, that they thought was going to help them prove the bear wasn't aggressive. Holy did that backfire in their face.
Anyways, its to bad the whole thing couldn't have been filmed, potential FHV material.

All of the Court proceedings and judgement are Public Knowledge. Let's all keep track of when it will appear on the Government website and post it here. I am sure it will be quite enlightening!!!