Contributors to this thread:
Tired of seeing this crap!
This is from my personal Facebook page, reading the paper (online version) I was appalled by what I read! The reporter used the term Hunter to whomever perpetratored this horrific act and will never be called out, unless we do! I’ll make time today contact him and attempt a correction, I’ll post his contact later if anyone else wants to join in!
I just saw that, so lame...
So ... was it a legally killed bear? Animals with collars are shot (legally) pretty often. In fact, it is sometimes how Fish & Game Departments gets the collar back to download the info from it.
Tim I’m with you there. Where is the evidence it was “a hunter” who killed the bear. Just an easy way for a liberal, tree-hugging reporter to spew his/her anti-hunter opinion that most people will believe as factual reporting.
Make’em squirm !!
I'm not as bothered by the terminology, even though it's damning, as I am the lack of details. The collar being gone makes me think it was poached, but who knows?
Yeah, need more details... But any humanized bear released outside a national park or any secured area is a dead bear... As they say, "A fed bear is a dead bear"...
Well, I guess if the Bears name was Cinder when it was alive maybe a new name could be added with its passing? Maybe, "Ashes" or "Bones" or maybe ? Gets alittle absurd that because some animal gets a name then it is held up as some sort of idol by the public. People need to stop adding human emotions to animals, they don't feel emotions like humans and when one ends up dead and legally taken like Cecil the lion and human gets death threats.
The article is ridicules, just more anti-hunting propaganda ! There is no valid information other than the bear is dead and the collar was cut. Was it a hunter or poacher? How do they know how the bear died? There may be evidence, but the article has no substance. I call BS!
It looks to me like a cub
Well I'm just happy that Cinder was able to make a friend and be rehabilitated together.
The pictures were from 2 years ago. The bear was young when saved from the fire, but released. Now he would have been at least 3-5 years old etc.
I am still waiting to hear for certain it was a poacher. Just because the collar was not turned in, does not mean it was an illegal kill. Also article says nothing about what was actually found of the bear, was it the bones, hide, meat maybe all they found was the collar and the back bone ribs etc.
This is just horrible writing by a person with a clear bias.
"Cinder was flown first to Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care in California, which specializes in treating burns, and then to a rehab center in Idaho, where she became friends with another cub –– an important step of her recovery. She was later driven back to to Washington state with her new friend."
What did this cost? Would it not been better to euthanize her and use the money spent on the rehab for something more constructive than saving one bear? This "burns" me up (pun intended). Liberals would spend a million dollars to save a beached whale; only for the whale to turn around and beach himself again!
You can't understand these people, just like you can't out think an idiot. Common sense is so uncommon these days, and it's getting worse.
The collar had a note on it that said “Return To Cinder”.
Sorry, carry on.........
TXHunter, you win the internet today. Well done!
"The department's bear specialist, Rich Beausoleil, said Cinder's radio collar stopped transmitting in October 2017, but he hoped it was because she was holed up in a den somewhere within the Cascades for the winter. This September, a team set out to find Cinder's den and instead found her skeletal remains not far from where she was set free after her recovery.
Beausoleil said it appears the collar stopped working because a hunter shot her and cut the collar, rendering it inoperable."
So 11 months later they found the skeletal remains and can tell it was shot by a hunter? Perhaps it was shot legally and de-boned onsite before being packed out? Of course they have to use the pictures of when it, yes I said it and not calling it by name, was a cub just to play on the emotions of those reading the story.
That is some horrible writing for sure. Writers used to have integrity. They used to ask the important questions and report from multiple sides of a controversial issue. Writers no longer report, but instead editorialize an opinion.
That is the true tragedy here. The writer, Christopher Brito, and the reporting agency, CBS, both did a horrible job.
The last time our local paper called a poacher a hunter, I walked into the editor's office and gave him a brief, polite tutorial on semantics. He took it to heart--probably unusual for most journalists.
Just wondering if anyone broke the news to Cinder's companion from the wildlife center??? How about a gofundme to pay for the counseling???
They need to fly these “Biologists”( writers welcome too) to St Jude for a week visit for proper centricity for empathy and compassion.Craziness.
Tim thanks for sharing. That's pretty lame and sheds a poor light on a hunter. I hope you do call him out. Keep us posted.
what about these idiots .....
I know what you mean. The constant bombardment of anti hunting propaganda never stops and has gotten worse with social media.
If you’ve ever seen burn treatment, I’m sure you’ll agree: the people who treated that bear instead of putting it down should be jailed for cruelty.
Probably we ll intentioned, but Sick And Wrong.