*Update Below*
It may just be that a man who claimed he was ATVing, stopped for a cigarette and was attacked by a black bear, wasn’t telling the truth…..or something. Alberta, Canada Fish and Wildlife authorities are now saying after further investigation the man’s claims are “unfounded.”
*Update* – Seems that there are some questions being raised about the validity of the supposed bear attack victim and claims made against the victim that a bear didn’t do it. This article states that medical personnel say Gambler’s injuries were consistent with a bear attack and yet Fish and Wildlife personnel say otherwise.
One commenter to the above linked-to article has a theory to consider:
Seriously… using Occam’s Razor, what’s the most likely possibility? The guy is picked up by hikers, with serious injuries, and claims a bear attack, which the people who treated him confirm is a consistent explanation. On the other hand, Fish and Wildlife, who would be charged with the rather difficult task of tracking and capturing an animal in the middle of a rural and fairly forested area of Alberta, made even more difficult by positively identifying a specific bear in an environment where there are several around, decides they would rather not investigate if they claim the injuries to be unfounded. Seems to me that they would have something of an ulterior motive to find a reason not to investigate. Only Mr. Gambler would know for sure, but people should ask the simple question – why would he lie about a bear attack. Clearly he was injured somehow, and in the region he was in, a bear attack is as likely as any other explanation.
