Dumb Aussies sue Federal Government for Bear attack

[burn_this_city]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/....html#comments

Pretty ridiculous, I hope they lose badly. Who would have thought there would be wild animals in the wilderness?

[blankall]

I would feel bad enough about this:

"Brodie told court wardens later shot the bear that attacked them, as well as a cub."

Not sure how they think they can get away with suing anyone.

[troutman]

If they had any vegemite in the tent, they will be out of luck.

Bear warnings are everywhere in Banff NP.

[troutman]

They allege the government, which administers the park, failed to design the campground and use protective devises such as fencing, alarms, barriers and guards or supervisors in such a way to prevent entry and attacks by bears.

It's called a Hotel mate.

[GoinAllTheWay]

It's beyond stupid but unfortunately I think they will get some money. I was reading the an article in the Herald about it yesterday and apparently a couple of Americans (think it was Americans) did the same thing but settled out of court.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by troutman

They allege the government, which administers the park, failed to design the campground and use protective devises such as fencing, alarms, barriers and guards or supervisors in such a way to prevent entry and attacks by bears.

It's called a Hotel mate.

Or a prison.

[troutman]

Would the Park have insurance for this?

[habernac]

Respect the wilderness or pay the price.

You'd think people who live in Australia, which has more than a few things that are lethal in the wild, would have a much better clue about this sort of thing.

[troutman]

Bear Management in the Park:

http://www.pc.gc.ca/docs/v-g/oursges...c7/index_e.asp

You are camping in a very special place, a national park. We share this landscape with wild animals that depend on it for their survival. These include black and grizzly bears, cougars, wolves, coyotes, and others.

This campground has a "Bare" Campsite program in place. A special effort is being made by park staff and campers to ensure that no wildlife attractants are ever left unattended at any sites in these campgrounds. The "Bare" Campsite program is in place for your safety, and to help keep the wildlife in our National Parks alive and wild.

I wonder if there is any fine print on the camping permits about risk.

[valo403]

I'm not really sure what's ridiculous about this, it's the same as any negligence action. If they can prove that the government agency should have instituted additional safety measures and didn't they have a legitimate claim. The fact that things have progressed to this stage, and that they have an expert testifying on their behalf, seems to indicate that there is at least an argument to be made that reasonable measures were not taken to prevent an attack like this.

[cKy]

How has this taken 16 years to go to court? And why is this even in court? What a waste of taxpayers money. Someone send Bart Simpson to Australia to unleash the frogs.

[Phanuthier]

Morons

Side self story, had a bear go into my campsite and even my tent 2 weeks ago in Yosemite NP, California. Scared it off banging a log, but ended up stealing my friends granola bars. It was mostly because we were reckless with our food lying around though.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm not really sure what's ridiculous about this, it's the same as any negligence action. If they can prove that the government agency should have instituted additional safety measures and didn't they have a legitimate claim. The fact that things have progressed to this stage, and that they have an expert testifying on their behalf, seems to indicate that there is at least an argument to be made that reasonable measures were not taken to prevent an attack like this.

Are you kidding me??? You sound like a lawyer.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm not really sure what's ridiculous about this, it's the same as any negligence action. If they can prove that the government agency should have instituted additional safety measures and didn't they have a legitimate claim. The fact that things have progressed to this stage, and that they have an expert testifying on their behalf, seems to indicate that there is at least an argument to be made that reasonable measures were not taken to prevent an attack like this.

Using that logic couldnt you sue any land owner for any kind of animal attack?

[troutman]

http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/docs/pc/guid...ecurite04.aspx

Parks Canada also recognizes that park visitors have a certain responsibility for their own safety, and that risk management must become an integral part of their experience.

Responsibilities Of Parks Canada:

Parks Canada's public safety program involves the following:

• identification and remediation of hazards related to infrastructure
• visitor risk management and public safety planning
• appropriate levels of search and rescue services
• targeted prevention, education and information programs that encourage self-reliance
• communication of site-specific hazards to visitors
• cooperation with other departments, non-governmental organizations, tourism operators, concessionaires, and service providers

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm not really sure what's ridiculous about this, it's the same as any negligence action. If they can prove that the government agency should have instituted additional safety measures and didn't they have a legitimate claim. The fact that things have progressed to this stage, and that they have an expert testifying on their behalf, seems to indicate that there is at least an argument to be made that reasonable measures were not taken to prevent an attack like this.

If you are that much of a , stay inside and watch TV.

[mac_82]

Does the Australian government protect people against sharks, snakes, spiders, jellyfish, crocodiles and dingos?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Are you kidding me??? You sound like a lawyer.

He is right. This case is about whether the Park's safety plan for bears was reasonable, and to what extent the plaintiffs assumed risk or are contributorily negligent.

[mykalberta]

Theres no signs in Sydney that says beware of disease ridden skanks, but I still always wear a raincout. Its called common sense. I guess you cant expect much from a prison continent gene pool, they were doomed from the beginning.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Theres no signs in Sydney that says beware of disease ridden skanks, but I still always wear a raincout. Its called common sense. I guess you cant expect much from a prison continent gene pool, they were doomed from the beginning.

As long as there are lawyers in this world, people will cash in off of bs cases like this.