Skip to comments.Bill would clarify grizzly self-defense rights
Posted on 09/14/2011 11:43:31 AM PDT by jazusamo
BOISE --Idaho's congressional delegation introduced legislation today that would amend the Endangered Species Act to clarify that people have the right to defend themselves and their families from grizzly bear attacks.
The legislation is in response to the well-publicized case of Jeremy Hill, a north Idaho man who was charged last month with violating the ESA for killing a grizzly bear on his property in May. Hill said he believed he was defending himself and his family.
While the U.S. attorney later dropped all federal criminal charges, Hill agreed to pay a $1,000 fine. Grizzly bears are listed as threatened under the ESA.
Lindsay Nothern, communications director for Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said Idaho elected officials heard from a lot of people who were very upset that Hill was charged in the first place.
"They felt it was crystal clear that Mr. Hill was defending his family and his property and that his family and property were in immediate danger," Nothern said.
Current provisions in the ESA about the taking of grizzly bears are vague and make it possible but very difficult to shoot a grizzly bear legally in self-defense or the defense of others, Nothern said.
"We need further clarification that people are allowed to defend themselves," he said.
In a joint statement, Crapo, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, and Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, said the changes proposed by their bill would be a drastic improvement over current ESA provisions protecting grizzly bears.
They said the ESA rightly protects threatened and endangered species but Congress never intended to deny people the right to protect themselves or others.
The new legislation states that the provisions of the act regarding the taking of a grizzly bear will not apply to anyone who was acting in self defense, the defense of another person or who had a reasonable belief of imminent danger.
Risch stated that everyone who has followed Hill's case understands he was not hunting a grizzly bear, but protecting his family, "which he truly believed was in harm's way."
"This legislation will allow an individual to act in self-defense without having to mount a costly defense of their actions, if done appropriately," Risch stated. "This is a common-sense change that needs to be passed."
Nothern said the legislation is not a broad attempt to redefine the ESA, but "is confined to grizzly bears because of the significant harm they can cause."
The legislation will be referred to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which includes Crapo as a member, and the House Natural Resources Committee, which includes Labrador.
They should be introducing a bill to get rid of this abomination entirely, the Federal Government has no Constitutional authority to pass such laws to begin with, except on federal land.
Better to be judged by twelve than digested by one...
I agree completely. The ESA has been terribly abused by the enviro-nazis in their demented cause of stopping use of lands in our country whether it be public or private lands.
Seems it would be ok to add Wolves to that just in case clause.
I thought the same thing. Of course they’re not so difficult to bury. :-)
the Endangered Species Act should be repealed completely and everywhere.
people have the right to defend themselves and their families from any two or four legged predator attacks....anywhere and anytime
Grizz is a tough critter to kill. What caliber and how many shots through what gun?
Sub linked article says “rifle” and at least two shots; one to injure, one to kill.
No caliber mentioned.
I’ll guess 30-06 until someone comes up with a fact. Even with a 30-06, I’d sure want that second shot to go through the bear’s cranium. Anything else would just make a doubly wounded and P.O.d grizzly, I would think.
He had just gotten out of the shower when he heard the scream of his wife. He picked up a 270 that belonged to his oldest daughter and shot the 2 year old Grizzly. It went down but got up and headed for the brush and he shot it again. It stayed down but was not dead and he approached it and finished it with a third shot.
Funny how the ESA has put the brakes on that big PV solar power generation boondoggle over a few dozen tortoises. Or is it tortii? Freudenshade, baby!
Is it just me, or does the title conjure up an image different from the article? Knowing the liberal/environmental wackos in today’s world, I could just image a bill that was written to grant grizzly bears the right to self-defense.