While what he did was gutless and illegal, in my eyes it's ultimately no different than factory farming (which most Americans don't seem to take issue with). He shot ONE bear "in a bucket", and U.S. consumers essentially do the same to more than eight billion captive animals annually. I guess it's merely a matter of perspective.
I heard about this the other day. While I'm not anti hunting, what this clown did is despicable. Gutless slob is right.
Posted by Bill Chambers on August 17, 2006 at 1:28 PM
I'm a life-long hunter (not for trophies, for food), and what this moron did (whether legal or not)has no real connection with hunting at all. I love the manager's statement - those guys can justify any and all behavior. If he's found guilty I hope he gets some serious jail time.
Also note that the other character in the story is the owner of a game farm often used for photography workshops. If you're scheduled to attend such a workshop, you may want to reconsider.
Another fine black eye for nature photographers in general. Specifically "wildlife" photographers. It is bad enough that people think all wildlife is photographed in places where there are bleachers, viewing platforms or feeders. Now they will think we tame them, then sell them to those who don't even hunt for their kill.
Another fine black eye for nature photographers in general. Specifically "wildlife" photographers. It is bad enough that people think all wildlife is photographed in places where there are bleachers, viewing platforms or feeders. Now they will think we tame them, then sell them to those who don't even hunt for their kill.
Another fine black eye for nature photographers in general. Specifically "wildlife" photographers. It is bad enough that people think all wildlife is photographed in places where there are bleachers, viewing platforms or feeders. Now they will think we tame them, then sell them to those who don't even hunt for their kill.
"Now they will think we tame them, then sell them to those who don't even hunt for their kill."
And they'd be right in this case, no?
Pete D.
Posted by Kent Staubus on August 25, 2006 at 8:39 PM
I didn't see the point in killing the bear. It's not like he went out in the woods and "earned" it or has any skill. This is a sign that competitive pressure to come home with the biggest critter has gotten to the absurd level. It all turned out as a big emBEARassment for the guy in the eyes of those he wanted to impress. Indian reservations where I live offer buffalo "hunts" on their herds. While the animals aren't exactly tame and far more wiley than the bear, it's still pretty much like going out into a pasture and shooting a cow. I don't see the point.
Some of you are missing what I think is the REAL villian here. The guy that runs the wildlife park in MN. I can see that if you can't afford to feed the bear any more you might want to sell it, but how could a guy sell what had to pretty much be a "pet" bear to simply get arrowed by a phoney? But even that's a side point. Note that the story also talked about how the preserve owner was apparently leading poaching hunts either out of season or on park land? I mean come on, that's far worse than the joker that shot a pet bear.
Kent in SD
Posted by Don Bartram on August 27, 2006 at 2:03 PM
I have a bunch of really good photos of that particular bear that I took on a trip several years ago. It was really very tame and easy to work with. At the time I was very impressed with the owner and the way he "seemed" to handle his animals. I sure have been proven wrong. I also feel that the enphasis should be on the owner not just the "hunter". Just think if the guy hadn't been famous we probably wouldn't have heard about and he might have been able to continue in business.
Discussion
14 repliesGuy
Also note that the other character in the story is the owner of a game farm often used for photography workshops. If you're scheduled to attend such a workshop, you may want to reconsider.
Guy
And they'd be right in this case, no?
Pete D.
Some of you are missing what I think is the REAL villian here. The guy that runs the wildlife park in MN. I can see that if you can't afford to feed the bear any more you might want to sell it, but how could a guy sell what had to pretty much be a "pet" bear to simply get arrowed by a phoney? But even that's a side point. Note that the story also talked about how the preserve owner was apparently leading poaching hunts either out of season or on park land? I mean come on, that's far worse than the joker that shot a pet bear.
Kent in SD