Dear HCN,
I am the author of the
Sierra magazine article cited as being “guilty” of “misinformation
about wildlife” (HCN, 5/10/99). The story concerned the research
Charlie Russell and Maureen Enns are doing with grizzly bears in
Kamchatka. HCN quotes Chuck Bartlebaugh of the Center for Wildlife
Information as saying that “the story is full of holes.” For
starters, Bartlebaugh says, “The story mistakenly identifies the
bears as grizzlies. Ursus horribilis doesn’t live in Asia.”
If Mr. Bartlebaugh has discovered a new species
of bear, HCN should have given the story more play. If not, I
wonder about the quality of his “wildlife information,” because
every other source will tell you that Kamchatka brown bears are
indeed our friend Ursus arctos horribilis.
I am
also criticized for describing Russell’s and Enns’ approach of
speaking gently to bears “rather than making noise and avoiding
bears as people are instructed to do with grizzlies in Montana.”
Well, yes – my story was about Kamchatka, not Montana. But the main
issue seems to be the photo accompanying the story showing Russell
“napping with the bears, resting his head on one cub’s rump.”
Charles Jonkel (who was also quoted in my story) told HCN that the
photos should not have been published because “People who see the
photos won’t see the text that goes with them saying, “Hey, don’t
ever do this.” “””My text said precisely
that.
Jonkel is, of course, entitled to his
opinion; personally, I find it unlikely that anyone would try to
use a grizzly for a pillow because they saw a picture of it in a
magazine. But what I’m curious about is how HCN got a special
dispensation from Bartlebaugh et al, to illustrate its story with a
photo of a child standing 10 feet in front of a bull elk. Do the
people who just look at the pictures in Sierra read every word of
HCN? Hats off to your readers
then!
Paul
Rauber
San Francisco,
California
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline No holes in the story.

