Peter Bills: Exercise in arrogance ends predictably

Rescuers carry one of the four youths injured in a polar bear attack on a remote Arctic glacier. Photo / AP

Blurring the lines between a sense of adventure and rank foolhardiness has often seemed a problematic exercise.

The news that a 17-year-old British schoolboy was mauled to death by a polar bear on Svalbard island in the Norwegian Arctic evokes instant feelings of sympathy for the family of the young man.

But closer examination of the facts suggests that perhaps we ought to pass on our sympathies too, to the family of the subsequently shot male bear now left behind to forage for themselves.

The heavy hand of mankind hangs uneasily over this sad incident. We have to state some basic facts here - this adventure group was invading the animals' natural habitat.

Secondly, mankind's activities in other fields that have led to global warming have already threatened the future of polar bears. It is thought this particular bear may have been attracted to the British campers by the smell of food.

As one Norwegian expert said: "Attacks appear to be frequent because more bears are getting stranded on the ice due to melting conditions and also more tourists are coming to camp so there is more likelihood the bears will come across people."

Given that view from an expert at the Norwegian Polar Institute, it is surely relevant to ask what on earth a group of British school kids were doing camping in the heart of a region known for polar bear activity?

Just a few weeks ago, there was a case in America's Yellowstone National Park of a black bear going into three tents and mauling to death a male camper.

The corollary would be whether it was considered wise to go and set up a camp for the night in the middle of an African game reserve, outside the fenced-off tourist areas, for an "adventure".

Would you go and camp in the midst of an elephant reserve?

It seems to me that mankind wants it both ways. He wants to see wild animals in their natural habitat and thinks that invading their territory to camp is perfectly acceptable. But when a hungry animal attacks, as is its nature, human beings cry foul.

Shooting any bear because it is hungry and searching for food seems at variance with the whole ethos of animal conservation. Mankind can have it one way or the other. He can claim every wild territory on the planet for his own use and wipe out every animal in a collective massacre. Or he can respect the rights of animals to retain their (albeit greatly diminished) habitats and stay out of their way.

The fact is man has been pushing the boundaries of what he sees as his own domain for centuries. It is time this stopped and the protection of animals was given some real meaning, such as fines for intrusion into certain areas.

The folly of this particular school trip leaves the onlooker bemused. Locals say that a trip-wire set up around the camp with an alarm should have worked. It didn't. They also say one or two members of the party should have stayed awake all night, with an armed rifle, ready to scare off any inquisitive bears. They didn't.

The first these schoolboys knew what was happening, a 250kg bear was rampaging through their tent, tearing wildly at their bodies and mauling them. It is a wonder only one member of the party died.

Those who cheerfully led young people into such obvious danger without proper security or awareness ought to hang their heads in shame, never mind face legal consequences.

But the basic fact is, these people simply should not have been there. Remote areas such as this are remote for a reason - they are the habitat of wild animals. The notion of campers marching in and staying overnight is a revealing insight into mankind's total disregard for the animals' habitat and his arrogance in believing it right and proper for him to be there.

I have enormous sympathy for the grieving family of this particular young man. But in no way do I defend his right to have been where he or his chums were.

The sooner mankind, in the form of nosy tourists, stops invading the few remaining areas in the world left to wild animals, the better. In the meantime, those who led this thoroughly unwise, dangerous exercise ought to find themselves arraigned for the disaster.