national

Bear shot dead after rampaging through Sapporo

89 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


89 Comments
Login to comment

I do not understand this killing of bears. Humans are the invaders, because of lass of habitat, bears have to come to towns looking for food.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Checking the literature I find references to descriptions of lone male bears which can indeed develop a taste for salty human blood.

Not at all common, but whenever it does happen, anywhere in the world, such a bear presents the authorities with a difficult choice.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The bears in hokkaido are a menace for years and the numbers of hunters had been dwindling and can't keep up it with increase numbers of bears.

Humans are a cancer on this planet. Where is the bear supposed to go after humans steal and destroy their habitat. Maybe the noble people of Hokkaido should scuttle down to the safety of Tokyo.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

But developing a taste for humans, or anything, requires a learning process based on past experience.

We're probably not that appealing as dinner, over packaged, over processed and too much fat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Back in April @DesertTortoise 9:45am, someone was reasonably advocating ‘a shotgun blast’ to the bear’s face was enough deterrent to give a surprised hunter enough time to put some distance between theirselves and the attacking bear.

A bear, especially a brown bear, can easily outrun any human. It is not even close. They can swim fast too. Look how easily that bear climbed a barbed wire topped fence. A human doesn't often survive running from a bear. Their idea is a good way to get themselves killed like those two hapless sailors at NAS Kodiak.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Some years back a lion escaped from a Russian circus in Japan. It was an elderly beast, completely docile, and was sunning itself on a high spot not far from its cage where local hunters, recruited by local officials, blasted the animal out of existence. It made no sense to me at all.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This is so unbearable to watch.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Poor bear.

Mistaken to believe human beings are more important to this earth than other living things. Humans are ruining the earth, not the bears. Rabid bear? OK, so confirm it to be by tranquilizing and euthanize if necessary, but don't just shoot the bear and kill it. Damn, that just sucks.

Bothersome because the Japanese find reasons of following misguided rules and poor human qualities that allow them to shoot the bear and look the other way. It's a cultural problem that rules rule and sensibility does not.

Particularly the politics and every day salaried corporate worker, don't have enough empathy toward humanity much less to care about wildlife...bears, dolphins, whales, whatever...it's all about the yen, or some messed up tradition that needs to be modified or quit...rarely if ever about the earth, nor the heart. They're like a bunch of Trump's in this regard. Global warming? Nah, shoot the bear, tho', it'll kill ya.

People who love their guns want to kill.

That's a simple view, but why else does anyone want to own a killing machine? Gun protection is bs, one doesn't kill or be killed in this world, as many idiots believe. A need for guns exists for survival and safety: the ultimate ridiculous irony of gun lovers.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Make a lovely rug in someone's home.

I'm glad they shot that anamal before it killed any little children

The life of one child is worth more than the life of all the bears in the world !

I know it sound heartless.....but there's

Plenty more where they come form !

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

But developing a taste for humans, or anything, requires a learning process based on past experience. That isn't possible unless the predator can frequently encounter the "food source."

Some animal experts say that others don't, I tend to think they do as shown to be the case by other carnivore and omnivores but is it definitive, that would depend on which study you want to believe

Bear only preferences when it come to feeding is available, least effort, best quality with the least injuries. Humans have all four qualities. Bears don't go shopping and select human because they are more tasty.

Spot on.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Bear only preferences when it come to feeding is available, least effort, best quality with the least injuries. Humans have all four qualities. Bears don't go shopping and select human because they are more tasty.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Anyway, usually, they don't, but they have happened quite a few times and when a bear bites you, of course, it tastes you and that is the danger, once it has tasted human flesh any carnivore or omnivore will do it again if given the chance.

Maheshwor Dhakal of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation in Kathmandu believes that as soon as leopards and other big cats start to prey upon humans, it is difficult to get them to stop. 

"Since human blood has more salt than animal blood, once wild animals get the taste of salty blood, they do not like other animals like deer," Dhakal told CNN.

But developing a taste for humans, or anything, requires a learning process based on past experience. That isn't possible unless the predator can frequently encounter the "food source."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna49734403

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A gun owner must own a shotgun for 10 years before applying for a licence for a rifle. The amounts of ammo are very restricted.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Back in April @DesertTortoise 9:45am, someone was reasonably advocating ‘a shotgun blast’ to the bear’s face was enough deterrent to give a surprised hunter enough time to put some distance between theirselves and the attacking bear.

*- “*Death of man attacked by bear sparks conversation about what to do when facing one” - Apr. 16.” -

Seems more rural Japanese people would have shotguns as opposed to rifles. In that scenario, it seems reasonable, and more practical, than a rifle, yes?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert TortoiseToday 09:54 am JST

The bear was doing normal bear things. This particular one looked like a juvenile. No reason to kill it.

This bear was not doing normal bear things. It was attacking four people - one of them suffered serious injuries - in four different places within Sapporo City without being deliberately provoked.

There are plenty of brown and black bears living in the forests of Northern Japan and usually they avoid humans. If a brown bear comes down from the forests to a large city and suddenly attacks humans - in this case even from behind by surprise - causing serious injuries it shows it has no fear of humans and is clearly a dangerous wild animal - imagine what might happen if it is attacks a group of children going to school...

There was clearly a good reason to kill this particular bear.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

And for the people saying the SDF gate guards should have shot it, a NATO 5.56mm rifle would probably have taken about 10 shots to kill a bear, and even more with a 9mm pistol.

Like I said earlier .45 ACP did nothing but make that brown bear at NAS Kodiak angry and get two sailors killed for no reason. 30-30 might be enough for a black bear but brown bears are harder to take down. .375, .40 or .458 are necessary for a brown bear. Military organizations do not typically use rifles of those calibers.

Having said that rangers in the US routinely dart bears with tranquilizers and take them away from populated areas to be released. The bear was doing normal bear things. This particular one looked like a juvenile. No reason to kill it.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

There is a high likelihood this black bear had rabies and there was no chance of treating or sedating a rabid bear

Not very likely, since there are virtually no rabies in Japan. It is essentially rabies-free.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Poor thing was shot at least three times by the 'sharp shooter'.

Well all his shots did hit the intended target. It more often than not takes more than one shot to take down a bear, even with a high powered rifle.

And for the people saying the SDF gate guards should have shot it, a NATO 5.56mm rifle would probably have taken about 10 shots to kill a bear, and even more with a 9mm pistol.

Camp Okadama is in an urban area, with the main gate facing a busy national route. Do you really want soldiers opening fire with “assault weapons” in that environment? The hunter that killed the bear was using was appears to be 30-06 or larger caliber rifle. Such a caliber has about 3 times more stopping power than 5.56mm “assault weapons” and even then it took three clean hits to take it down.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

”But it’s ILLEGAL to own guns in Japan” …obviously you don’t know much about J-Pan.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Are there no tranquiliser darts in Hokkaido for these eventualities?

Sure there are. They're called bullets, and they tranquilize permanently.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I'd actually like to know for a fact whether bears who've had this sort of contact with people do in fact become a menace or whether this is just a pretext for an expedient solution.

Experience in the western US, especially the northern suburbs of Los Angeles suggest this is in fact the case. Bears get accustomed to people making it easy to get food out of trash cans, swim in backyard pools, take fruit from backyard fruit trees and it is just easier than trying to grub food in the forest. It is common enough around LA that the local rangers are equipped to dart them with tranquilizer darts, immobilize them and take them back up into the mountains. But keep in mind in LA all they have are black bears which are much smaller and more interested in fruit and berries than eating meat. They are also a bit more timid. Big brown bears are aggressive apex predators who are not intimidated by anything.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

who keeps asking "why why why" or "poor bear" probably never had a chance to face a bear in real life

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Extremely scary news. I am shocked the SDF soldiers did not turn their service weapons on the beast as it rampaged through the base and Sapporo City, potentially killing many.

Lol. True story from the late 1980s. The US Navy had a major air station on Kodiak Alaska. P-3Cs were stationed there to track Soviet subs in the Bering Sea and North Pacific. A big brown bear, also known as a grizzly bear, wandered onto the runway. Base Ops dispatched two sailors in a Jeep each armed with Model 1911 .45 ACP handgun. Those normally make very big holes in people and one round to the center of mass is usually enough to drop someone. Not a bear however. The two sailors confronted the bear and emptied both handguns into it. The Bear subsequently killed both sailors. It took a hunter who knew where to shoot the bear (shoulder shot works best supposedly) with a powerful enough hunting round that is not something one finds in any military to drop the bear. During the necropsy something like 12 .45 caliber rounds were found mushroomed out against the bears skull. Not one bullet penetrated the bears skull. About all they did was make it angry.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I'd actually like to know for a fact whether bears who've had this sort of contact with people do in fact become a menace or whether this is just a pretext for an expedient solution.

Besides, it didn't eat anyone, it just flayed at them as it was totally stressed out. So I'm not too convinced by all the self appointed bear experts on this panel.

If Hokkaido had an actual protocol instituted by bear experts on how to deal with this shirt of situation, perhaps this could've been drawn to a better end for all, much earlier. It was first spotted in the middle of the night, so they certainly had enough time to get some kind of plan into action.

Instead the cops and some local yahoos and their rifles were running around like headless chickens.

This disorder and inability to make good decisions under pressure reminds me of something...

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Rampaged is a stupid word to use i this headline. Poor bear.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

That's all true, but it depends on the situation. Tranquilising requires monitoring and tracking after an initial dose as it's not immediately effective. This is fine if the animal isn't near people. A zoo animal or an animal in the woods or on the savannah, for example. Also if the animal isn't particularly dangerous, like a deer, or has been otherwise captured or contained. In this case, the bear was in a built up area and had already injured four people. 

Yes, that is correct and based on that what you just mentioned, the decision was made to put the animal down

I think the 'hollywood' comments are against people assuming a decision was made to immediately exterminate the animal. On the contrary, it seems they'd considered other options before settling on extermination.

I think so as well, I heard quite a few interviews from people that were saddened by all of this, but they knew the seriousness of it and took immediate action.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

garypen,

That's all true, but it depends on the situation. Tranquilising requires monitoring and tracking after an initial dose as it's not immediately effective. This is fine if the animal isn't near people. A zoo animal or an animal in the woods or on the savannah, for example. Also if the animal isn't particularly dangerous, like a deer, or has been otherwise captured or contained. In this case, the bear was in a built up area and had already injured four people.

I think the 'hollywood' comments are against people assuming a decision was made to immediately exterminate the animal. On the contrary, it seems they'd considered other options before settling on extermination.

coordinating efforts to capture the brown bear, or if deemed necessary, exterminate it."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Why are people mentioning Hollywood when erroneously putting down others' comments about tranquilizer darts?

In the US there are government agencies specifically created to deal with wildlife. They routinely tranquilize such animals.

Yes. there are also times when wild animals are killed, like with this unfortunate creature. But, tranquilizing is a common occurrence. It's not some Hollywood fantasy.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Jeans and T-shirt, yes best comment, dry but real.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@WilliB **What happened to tranquilizer guns? Does Sapporo not have a zoo that carries these things? **When you have a wild animal just roaming the streets you have no choice but to put it down. Once it injures a person they will continue to cause mayhem as this bear did. Why use a tranquilizer? Putting the bear to sleep and taking the bear back to the woods only allow him to come back and cause mayhem again!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I wager though the authorities dropped the ball, complacently.

I guess they might bear some responsibility.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Well, Jeans and T-shirt, agreed the bear in question didn't break out into song and dance, so couldn't be mistaken for Baloo.

I can't speak for Sapporo, Hokkaido.

I wager though the authorities dropped the ball, complacently.

A economic saving, until a hungry bear lets loose on the community.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Poor bear…. I wish they would of shot it with a tranquilizer instead. And put him in a zoo. Man and beast cannot coexist in this era??? I hope they distribute the bear s meat instead of going to waisteland

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

There are many bears in Japan, especially Hokkaido and Akita and the vast majority of them do not harm humans at all.

However every year some Japanese, but also Russians, Canadians etc. are attacked by a few bears. Some people suffered serious injuries, a few even died.

If a bear, like this one, is attacking humans - in this case 4 people - it has already no fear of humans and understood that human flesh can be eaten - and the only way to go is to put it down.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It's a bear, traumatized in a city.

Just shoot it.

It doesn't want to be your friend.

Sometimes life is tough.

Bluntly and sadly put, but you're right, especially in this case.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Jeans and T-shirt I'm not right, it is a comment and opinion, no more, no less.

And you're entitled to that. Don't mistake me, I'd rather they darted it. Or, even better, caught it by mechanical means. But again, this isn't some cartoon where Yogi Bear takes a tranq in the butt, looks to camera, and then collapses immediately into peaceful repose. This was a dangerous, wild animal on the loose in a built up area.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Tell “this” @Ulysses 8:23pm, to the deceased:

“Bears don’t eat humans.“ - [in response to: “when they taste human flesh, you need to put down a bear, … about 20 yrs ago near my parents farm, in that incident it also attacked a few people.]

“Grizzly Man” and his girlfriend.

“In 2003, Timothy Treadwell was camping with his girlfriend, Amie Huguenard in Katmai National Park when and where bears were aggressive about searching for food. One park ranger suggested that the bears were so confused by Treadwell's direct, casual contact. Other park rangers point out that Treadwell's actions put them at real risk of harm. By familiarizing them with human contact, he increased the likelihood that they would approach human habitation seeking food, and cause a confrontation.” -

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's a bear, traumatized in a city.

Just shoot it.

It doesn't want to be your friend.

Sometimes life is tough.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

KansaiTen,

Good comment, although this was a brown bear. As stated in the caption and the article itself. Japanese black bears aren't found on Hokkaido.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I lived in Alaska for years, where we encountered bears on a regular basis. If you encountered a grizzly or large brown bear angered by your trespassing in their territory, that could be the end of you even if you shot at it point blank. But black bears will share a territory with humans, and run away when given the opportunity.

I now live in a National Forest here in California that is overrun with black bears. Black bears will poke around the periphery of communities looking for trash. Only mother bears get upset—when cubs are with them. We simply coexist, and I have never seen a “rampaging” black bear in over 20 years of living in a mountain community.

All bears are carrion eaters and will not hesitate to eat a diseased animal. Squirrels, foxes, and wild dogs commonly contract and die of rabies in the wilds. There is a high likelihood this black bear had rabies and there was no chance of treating or sedating a rabid bear. Once they are rabid, they become irrational and attack anything that moves. Black bears do not normally engage humans in this way. There was something wrong with this bear, and it is fortunate no child was harmed.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

ROFL, you are mixing your bear with tigers and lions.

I wish.

Bears don’t eat humans.

https://nypost.com/2020/09/14/hikers-discover-bear-eating-man-at-smoky-mountains-campsite/

Anyway, usually, they don't, but they have happened quite a few times and when a bear bites you, of course, it tastes you and that is the danger, once it has tasted human flesh any carnivore or omnivore will do it again if given the chance.

Rather it has to do with the bear attacking humans, there is a good likelihood they will do it again.

That as well, but the person was bitten, so they did the right thing.

Poor thing was shot at least three times by the 'sharp shooter'.

That can happen with big animals, try shooting a male moose, if you can kill it with one shoot, that is an impressive feat. But I think at this point, I worry more about the human than the animal in this situation.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I think its sensible that the schools took measures about the kids walking home. However, the news that several flights were cancelled for one bear reminded me of British Rail in the UK cancelling trains because there were leaves on the line.

Before anyone says bears are venturing into inhabited areas because of "a lack of acorns", was it an emaciated bear? It looks plenty strong in the photos. Is anyone out there actually counting bear numbers? The deer population and wild boar population in Japan are currently very high. They are certainly not suffering from a lack of food.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

What possible need could there be to kill a squirrel?

They're like rats, especially when they multiple and start eating crop

Tasted human flesh, had it?

What?

The bear was not euthanised (put to death humanely). It was shot in cold blood by a hunter with a gun. Nothing humane about it.

You can use whatever euphemism you like, doesn't matter, the most important thing was, it was put down and had to be done for everyone's sake.

No doubt a necropsy will reveal that it was suffering from some sort of brain illness.

There will be no necropsy, at least not a proper one in a lab.

You know the real reason they couldn't use a tranquilliser dart?

It spoils the meat.

All the hunters would fall asleep after finishing their kuma nabe.

Again, once a bear bites a human, you need to put it down, tranquilizing it and sending it back at that point won't help, you need to euthanize the bear, that's pretty much it. As for Kuma nabe, it's pretty good, had it in Kumamoto, surprisingly good actually, they're omnivores so why not?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Humans move out of bear territory and give them back some of their land

So, are you suggesting that the Japanese and Ainu decolonize Hokkaido? Interesting suggestion. “Bear Lives Matter!”

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Jeans and T-shirt I'm not right, it is a comment and opinion, no more, no less.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Seen any “Ezo Okami” lately @Hiro 7:47pm:

“Government should have tackle these increase numbers long ago. Just cull the numbers already.” -

Too much “culling” of the Hokkaido wolf went on in the Meiji era. And then, the Honshu “Japanese wolf” hasn’t been seen in 100 years.

“The forest can't sustain the overpopulation [bears(?)] anymore.” -

Perhaps ‘nature can't sustain the overpopulation of Humans’ anymore, encroaching into the forest and other wilderness areas?

“The bears in Hokkaido are a menace for years and the numbers of hunters had been dwindling and can't keep up it with increase numbers of bears.

Good for the animals. Good for the environment. (The Japanese tyrants stole Hokkaido from its indigenous “First People”.) Another series of events from Japan’s ‘shameful past’, on par with America’s “Trail of Tears”.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Why KILL?? he is just doing what any of us will do when hungry, searching for food, and if some people were in his way and panic he would panic too.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Kochi mountains have a issue with hogs, they have to be hunted and numbers culled.

They can terrorize very living thing.

Every prefecture are fully aware of the risks.

Bears or Hogs.

They left it until after the attacks', reactive instead of proactive.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Let's just be honest, the bear was probably scared and trying to get away.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

when they taste human flesh, you need to put the animal down, we had to put down a bear about 20 years ago near my parents farm, in that incident it also attacked a few people, sad, but it’s sometimes necessary.

ROFL, you are mixing your bear with tigers and lions. Bears don’t eat humans.

Rather it has to do with the bear attacking humans, there is a good likelihood they will do it again.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Just cull the numbers already. The forest can't sustain the overpopulation anymore.

Typical. Destroy their habitat then kill them because they have no habitat. Stop cutting down the forests for a start. You're blaming bears for a human problem.

They've been here longer than you, maybe you should leave the country if you don't like them.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Well no, Jeans and T-shirt, I wouldn't, however I would like to have tad more confidence in the locals that should.

That's assuming they got it wrong, and you're right in saying that sedation was the better option. We've already established that you have no idea, so why not trust that those actually on the scene (one in which four people had already been injured) took the appropriate actions.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Well no, Jeans and T-shirt, I wouldn't, however I would like to have tad more confidence in the locals that should.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No, incompetence allowed this bear to run amok, and cause injury.

Well hopefully they call you next time. I'm sure you'll be able to handle it, considering you don't even know what kind of bear it is.

* Japanese black bear (Ursus thibetanus japonicus), *

> A total of four people, including one Self-Defense Forces member, have been attacked and injured by the brown bear. We express our sincere sympathy to them," he said.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Japanese black bear (Ursus thibetanus japonicus), is well known in Japan, the hunters could have tranquilized this bear if all had the will to do so.

No, incompetence allowed this bear to run amok, and cause injury.

One excuse after another won't get Davy Crockett off the hook.

Yes, Crockett was a bear hunter, of course, Crockett never came up against a bear that had the temerity to shoot back.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

The sdf should have killed it. I don't care what animal it is. The moment it pose a threat to human lives, it should have been shot. Humans lives comes before anything. This makes the sdf appear weak to the public if they don't even dare to shoot a animal and instead have to wait for hunters to come solve it. Why the hell am i paying tax money for if they can't even protect the peace from a damn animal. The bears in hokkaido are a menace for years and the numbers of hunters had been dwindling and can't keep up it with increase numbers of bears. Government should have tackle these increase numbers long ago. Just cull the numbers already. The forest can't sustain the overpopulation anymore. Any person who said to release it back to the forest clearly has no idea how bad it is to do that or just not living in japan.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoSoowBSnzs

Poor thing was shot at least three times by the 'sharp shooter'.

Humane. huh.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

This was considerably more than a ”*fracas” @Mr.Ling 5:54pm: *As stated earlier, have you considered the practical experiences of the more learned & experienced “experts” on such bear attacks

- “Prof. K. Rudyard, noted hiking enthusiast from Hokkaido, and others offered interesting recommendations & ‘tactics‘ when encountering a rampaging bear… :

*- “*Death of man attacked by bear sparks conversation about what to do when facing one” - Apr. 16.

… most of which would really not have been effective, in this case.

… particularly, both 9:04am and 10:48am? - “Best wishes to you”, sir.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I had to put down a lot of animals from coyotes, bobcats, wolves, feral pigs, squirrels, rodents, it's good 

What possible need could there be to kill a squirrel? Tasted human flesh, had it?

The bear was not euthanised (put to death humanely). It was shot in cold blood by a hunter with a gun. Nothing humane about it.

No doubt a necropsy will reveal that it was suffering from some sort of brain illness.

There will be no necropsy, at least not a proper one in a lab.

You know the real reason they couldn't use a tranquilliser dart?

It spoils the meat.

All the hunters would fall asleep after finishing their kuma nabe.

3 ( +10 / -7 )

The rampage prompted local school closures and the cancellation of several flights at a small regional airport, NHK reported.

had to laugh. surprised the JR trains weren't halted too.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Yes, it is sad, but there is not a whole lot you can do in this situation and the big problem is what a lot of people don't realize once a carnivore gets a taste of human flesh, you can tranquilize it as many times as you want and relocate it, the bear will most likely come back, its natural fears of humans has been diminished and that is very bad and very dangerous, imagine if the attack would have been on a child? Do you still want to relocate the bear? Sorry, the best thing for this situation is exactly what the men and animal control did, you need to euthanize the bear. I had to put down a lot of animals from coyotes, bobcats, wolves, feral pigs, squirrels, rodents, it's good and it helps to conserve and keep the population in control.

This is not Hollywood, unfortunately. There was a need to bring this beast down within minutes, before people were slaughtered, and not wait around for tranquilizer guns.

That is absolutely correct. It's not the bear's fault, the bear just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Please, people. If you think tranquilizing a rampaging bear is easy, go watch another movie. Because that's obviously where you got the idea from.

Good point. You don't just fire a dart at a wild animal and it drifts off peacefully to sleep. Firstly, it isn't immediate, and there were people's safety involved here. Second, getting the dose right is quite an exact science. Too little can be ineffective, and too much can be deadly for the animal. There's a reason why in surgery, one member of the surgical team is responsible solely for maintaining the patient's condition and sedation levels.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

What happened to tranquilizer guns? Does Sapporo not have a zoo that carries these things?

This is not Hollywood, unfortunately. There was a need to bring this beast down within minutes, before people were slaughtered, and not wait around for tranquilizer guns.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

You’ve outlined @Hakman 5:37pm, ‘some Covid measures’ being ‘claimed’ by Olympic promoters, but what additional protections will be avail for the now, potential threat by these bears?

- “Sapporo will host marathon and race-walking events in Aug.” - “attacks have been happening more often in URBAN areas, including Sapporo….it's not unreasonable to consider at least the possibility that might turn up somewhere along the route during one of these races. I'm sure the organizers are taking notice, so it's not unreasonable to bring it up in a news report.” -

If the current IOCJOC ‘playbook, (Version Three, Jun 16) , outlines rules for sporting participation, ‘after-hours’, restrictions, recommendations & protocols for condom ‘souvenirs’ and other proposed ‘rules of engagement’, then what exact measures will the IOCJOC be taking to protect an overall, endangered populace from these new, most-likely unanticipated, additional threats to public safety? Will there simply be ‘cautions’ in Version Four or ‘specific guidelines and protocols to follow?

Perhaps this was a random event and ‘not really’ an extraneous danger, just more of the IOCJOC continuing to use the media to Promote Their Olympics “At Any Opportunity”?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Nobody likes animals more than I do, so I don't like it when one needs to be put down. But sometimes it's necessary -- because people come first.

I was with you until the last four words.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Murderers!

put it to sleep and take ito the mountains.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Wasn't it not possible to tranquilize the bear before mauled four residents?

Hakman, with forethought to the risk, number of watchers are the best opinion.

I used to attend the family fox shoot in UK , I never shot anything with a pulse. A fox is fast quick and clever.

A bear can be tranquilized, however careful prep, numbers are needed, and a team that is not going to get phased by a hangry bear.

I understand it take patience, and planning....

Simpler, I guess to just load and shoot.

It is not as if the animal is important. yes ?

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

If its the bear in the photo its a relative baby, maybe three years old. Rampage is too strong. In bear terms this was merely a fracas.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

@Laguna 5:29pm: Rabies, perhaps?

- “a necropsy will reveal that it was suffering from some sort of brain illness. Bears avoid humans and don't attack unless startled - unless they're sick.’ -

Prof. K. Rudyard, noted hiking enthusiast from Hokkaido, and others have some interesting recommendations & ‘tactics‘ when encountering a rampaging bear… :

- “Death of man attacked by bear sparks conversation about what to do when facing one” - Apr. 16.

most of which would really not have been effective, in this case.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

snowymountainhellToday  05:31 pm JST

Promoting the Olympics “At Any Opportunity”?

- “Sapporo will host the Olympic marathon and race-walking events in August.” -

Is this really necessary to mention the big O in relation a bear attack? Seems somewhat “off-topic” but it was included by the editors/writers. (“Any news is goods news”?)

As the article says, such bear intrusions and attacks have been happening more often in URBAN areas, including Sapporo. And it's not unreasonable to consider at least the possibility that a bear might turn up somewhere along the route during one of these races.

I'm sure the organizers are taking notice, so it's not unreasonable to bring it up in a news report.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Poor bear.

4 ( +14 / -10 )

"Why didn't they use tranquilizers? Why didn't they do this and that and blah blah blah blah ... "

I just 'love' how stories like this bring out everyone's Inner Animal Control Expert.

Please, people. If you think tranquilizing a rampaging bear is easy, go watch another movie. Because that's obviously where you got the idea from.

Movies are not real life. Movies are not real life. Movies are not real life. This cannot be repeated often enough. But apparently it needs to be.

Nobody likes animals more than I do, so I don't like it when one needs to be put down. But sometimes it's necessary -- because people come first.

1 ( +14 / -13 )

Promoting the Olympics “At Any Opportunity”?

- “Sapporo will host the Olympic marathon and race-walking events in August.” -

Is this really necessary to mention the big O in relation a bear attack? Seems somewhat “off-topic” but it was included by the editors/writers. (“Any news is goods news”?)

10 ( +10 / -0 )

No doubt a necropsy will reveal that it was suffering from some sort of brain illness. Bears avoid humans and don't attack unless startled - unless they're sick.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

I'm sure it could've been tranquilized and released it far enough for it not to be a nuisance. But I think it wouldn't be wrong to say that Japanese people show little empathy towards animals, and that could be why they need to humanize their poodles with little coats and hats.

I really don't see much respect for animals in Japan, so I'm not surprised.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

If only they played RDR2, they would would have known to stand still to avoid getting mauled by bears.

Apply with some sarcasm.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

The dramatization in this article…

- “it rampaged through the city, injuring four people including an SDF member and lumbering across busy roads.…dramatic news footage showed the bear bounding along a residential st, crossing a busy rd and clawing at the gates of a military barracks, causing alarmed troops to scatter.” -

…reads ‘like a Kaiju movie’. The news services abroad will have a field day, especially when the see this AFP story of a Monster originates from “Tokyo”.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Terrible for the victims. Tragic for the bear.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

I'm sure it could've been tranquilized and released it far enough for it not to be a nuisance. But I think it wouldn't be wrong to say that Japanese people show little empathy towards animals, and that could be why they need to humanize their poodles with little coats and hats.

12 ( +20 / -8 )

I had a friend who was once attacked from behind by a bear - but that was when he was still in the club.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Humans move out of bear territory and give them back some of their land

5 ( +15 / -10 )

What happened to tranquilizer guns? Does Sapporo not have a zoo that carries these things?

10 ( +20 / -10 )

clawing at the gates of a military barracks, causing alarmed troops to scatter.

The PLA will enjoy this.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Why?????

They really had no choice. The bear had already viciously attacked a pedestrian from behind while he was walking and when that happens, when they taste human flesh, you need to put the animal down, we had to put down a bear about 20 years ago near my parents farm, in that incident it also attacked a few people, sad, but it’s sometimes necessary.

-1 ( +17 / -18 )

Are there no tranquiliser darts in Hokkaido for these eventualities?

21 ( +30 / -9 )

“Sapporo will host the Olympic marathon and race-walking events in August.”

Crikey, having bears on the loose might be a handicap for some then!

@Fighto, doubt the local troops would be already bombed up in these circumstances..

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Extremely scary news. I am shocked the SDF soldiers did not turn their service weapons on the beast as it rampaged through the base and Sapporo City, potentially killing many.

Regrettable the bear is deceased, but it could have been so much more tragic.

Why?????

The Japan Bear and Forest Society has warned that forest-dwelling bears are being spotted in greater numbers in areas inhabited by humans as they search for food.

-8 ( +9 / -17 )

Why?????

8 ( +18 / -10 )

Couldn't they have just dropped some picnic baskets or honey to mollify it? I'm sure if a bunch of Hokkaidian yahoos started taking pot shots at me, I might not be so peceful, either.

9 ( +25 / -16 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites