have it mounted?
 

this is pretty dam shameful. dude is going to mount his kill. an 84 lbs 1 year old (female) bear. my dog weighs more than that.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=519&e=2&u=/ap/20041026/ap_on_re_us/bear_hunt

I suppose that in this age of tolerance, we should not judge someone who wants to mount a dead bear . . .

...not that there's anything wrong with that....

Wow, just a babe....

Yeah, sure....the next thing you know, those bears will be wanting a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing their rights to be mounted! :rolleyes:

Sheesh!

Randy

I believe the only one who should be mounted is the idiot Edited -Z who killed the bear!

The kill was part of a state-sponsered cull. The season was limited to Western MD and was originally going to take 1 week, although once 20 bears were tagged the first day, the hunt was ended since their total cull goal was 30 animals.

Hunters were encouraged to shoot any bear--not just the trophy animals.

There is nothing wrong with hunting.

no hunting is not the problem, the ability to see that this bear was a boo boo and no yogi is where the outrage lies. pull back on the shot for god's sake, and look for a bigger one.

size/age/gender should have matter in these cases.

i'm with eric. it is too damn bad that man and beast like the same land to live in. so in order for the animals to have a healtier life, the numbers need to be limited. i have participated in state culling programs, as labor for a friend, not to hunt. and they assigned a game biologist to hang with us. he designated the particular animal to shoot. he picked the oldest of the bunch. in this case, it was for a oryx herd that was introduced in new mexico, and due to the lack of predators like LIONS, they are living a nice country club life. hunting isnt for anyone.

I agree with you on that, as I personally would not have taken the shot on this bear--but the wildlife honchos were actually encouraging the hunters to take ANY bear--the reason was 2-fold
First--they truly wanted to cull the population which translates into taking any animal--young, old, male, female, cub, etc.
Secondly--they were intially criticized by the tree-huggers when the announcement for the bear hunt(first one in MD in 50? years) was made--the critique was that it was not being done to control the population, but was being done as a "trophy hunt" just so hunters could bag the largest bears--taking one this size clearly shows that was not the case.

If this were my bear, I would have passed on the shot, but if I did take it, I would NOT mount it--would probably just keep the skin.

vash,

A good buddy of mine is a wildlife biologist. He was working on a deer cull project in Chicago about 3 years ago for the state--his job was basically to drive around at night with 2 warden sharpshooters and spot deer for the wardens to shoot., he would then help them ID the deer, gut them and take them to the processor to be donated to the local food bank. Obviously this was on the outskirts of the city, but that is all they would do each night for the 2 months the project was active. Culling is a fact of life.

Have him come out this way, we have a rediculous amount of deer... I worry every night that I'm going to hit one.

Best Job Ever!
 

Getting paid to hunt! That reminds me of the time I lived in American Samoa. There were these two marine biologists there who got a government grant to "explore the sport fishing possibilities in American Samoa." They basically were given a boat and fishing gear and they went out fishing every day - weather permitting. They would log their catches and were eventually supposed to file a report which would be used to promote tourism in America Samoa.

I got to go out with them one day and will never forget it. Cobalt blue water, tropical sun and plenty of fish. I caught a 45 lb. yellowfin tuna and several dolphins (the Mahi-Mahi, not Flipper).

It's good work if you can get it.

cliff, i recognize the intent of the effort, and i forget you are from texas every now and then. being a california liberal panty waste as i am, i dont see the logic in "kulling" by taking such a young immature animal.

find its mother, and shoot her. see then there is not two additional cubs that need to be "kulled" in the next couple years. that 84 pound one year old (the estimate in the article) will not be breeding for a few years, thus helping keep populations down. its mother (or another mature female) may give birth to 3 or 4 cubs by the time she becomes ripe.

and yes the "kulling" was mis-spelled by design,,, this time.

Nothing wrong with hunting . . . man and beast have to share the same land. . .

How about "culling" the numer of humans. That I could agree with.

Yet, some would judge...

Again, we shouldn't judge. If you prefer to mount the hunter, that is your choice and although I may disagree, I will defend to the death your right to choose whom or what to mount . . .

MHO -- the state should've provided rules for killing larger, mature animals, and f*ck the whiners who said the cull was "only" for trophy. If it's that kind of upside-down "logic" that persuaded state officials to allow killing of young bear, they need new state officials.

JP

That bear in particular is the first one hunted in 51 years, so it's signifigant enough to mount. A normal hunter, like my family in Minnesota, is going to kill an adult bear. This guy was just excited to go kill something and to be part of the historicalness...

mount no. rug yes.