Did a Hunter Purposely Kill Hope the Black Bear?

Let's set this straight right now. I never said that the hunter who killed Hope broke the law, what he did was legal, but, unles there are some mitigating factors in killing her, he did do somehting wrong. And the way I feel about him, does not express my feelings about hunting or all of the other hunters out there. I am pro hunting all of the way, and I'd like to think that most hunters woudl not have killed a yearling bear in this situation. they woud have made sure of what they were shooting at - before they shot.

I've been accused of condemning this hunter, without getting the facts. Much of what I laid out in my post about the killing of Hope, is in fact - fact. I have talked to someone who knows the facts, as much as I have divulged. The rest of what I have laid out, comes from deductive reasoning.

Lets look at how I laid out my argument;

I think there are way too many indicators that show this to be a purposeful killing. I just do not see how - with all the publicity this has received, in hunting publications, including magazines and newspapers, in this blog, on 3-4 pages on Facebook, including the Lily the Black Bear page, Lily; Bear with a Bounty page, and my own Protect Minnesota's Research Bears page, and on several TV stations in Minnesota – that this hunter either did not know he was setting up within Lily and Hope's home range, where the bears most likely to come in to a bait station would be Lily with her cub, and Hope, a one-year-old bear; or that this hunter could not tell that Lily was a female.

1. Arguably conjecture. One could argue that he knew nothing about any publicity, although it is extremely likely. I am told that he did in fact talk to Dr. Lynn Rogers, he did know where Hopes home range was.

So – taking all that information into account we can conclude:

that - any hunter (not necessarily a black bear hunter) would know that the units around Ely contained bears that were being researched, and that those bears were accustomed to humans and food scraps more than most bears, and that the bears most likely to come into a new food source were juveniles (1-3 year olds), because juveniles are not generally with their mothers (who might warn them away from a new food source, or they might have trouble finding food because they are not with their mother), and that the probability of a one-year-old bear coming in to a bait station in that area would be Hope, was high, and that the probability that any female yearling to come to a bait station in that are was extremely high.

and - this hunter purposefully moved from another area to the area that contained the home ranges of at least three radio collared females, including Lily and Hope's home range, and - that hunting ethics hold that shooting a cub (under one year) or a sow with cubs - is taboo

3. Fact

then - the only conclusion we can come up with is that - this hunter moved to the Ely area in order to be within a famous research bear's home range, where he expected to see a one-years-old famous black bear, that was accustomed to seeing, hearing and smelling humans, an accustomed to being fed by them (making it easy to bait and to kill)

4. in all probability Fact.

and - that he intended to kill that black bear named Hope.- for some yet unknown reason (I'm not buying the "they taste better" explanation, because I do not know a bear hunter, who is not looking for a large bear with a great pelt, or a record book bear). Besides, I do not think they taste all that good. And I know other hunters who feel the same way.

If this hunter sincerely did not want to shoot Hope, all he had to do was not shoot any yearling bear that came to his bait station. It was that simple.

6. Fact. We have been told that this hunter e-mailed the NABC and wrote that he did not want to shot Hope.

I've been told that this hunter is a seasoned hunter, who should know how to sex a bear,

7. Fact

and that he saw Hope at approximately 7:05 PM, which would leave him with enough light to shoot the bear, or he would not have shot it in the first place. So, he should have known it was a female yearling black bear that he was looking at,

and he went ahead and shot it. If he is a seasoned hunter, who knew there were yearling males in the area and 2-3 adult boars, then why didn't he wait to see if he could get one of them to come to his bait?

9. Fact

If this hunter says he did not want to shoot Hope

10.Fact

all he had to do to avoid killing her was to not shoot any yearling that came to his bait.

I cannot believe that he did not know which bear he was shooting, or who it was.

I may be wrong about this hunter, if so I apologize, but I do not think I am. The scenario I have laid out, makes it doubtful that the killing of Hope was not a purposeful act. If he did not want to shoot Hope, a bear that he know was a yearling female bear, and knew (from all the publicity about it) that she had slipped her collar - all he had to do to avoid even the slimmest chance of killing Hope, was pass up on every yearling bear that came to his bait (Dr. Rogers tells me there were only two other yearlings in that area, both were males). And if he knew there were two to three large males in that area (I've been told that he did know that), why would he not wait for one of them. I'm not sure about believing the "young ones taste better". Even if that is the case --- he says he did not want to shoot Hope, then why did he not wait until one of the yearling males came in?

If I was in his place, and did move my hunting are because I was not seeing any bears, I would not move to an area within the home range of Hope, because I would not want to shoot her, especially if I was signed up for the $5000 Jackpot. I would not set up there, because I would think that most of the bears I saw there were either sows with cubs (which hunter ethics say you should not shoot) or they were research bears. Why would I want to hunt there, if there were so many bears that I should not be shoot?

I would want to hunt in an area where there were bears I could shoot in good conscience.

If I did (for some unknown reason) set up in an area known to contain research bears, including the yearling named Hope (who I claim I did not want to shoot) why would I shoot any yearling bear, just on the off chance that the bear was Hope?

If this person did not know how mad and sad, people around the world would be, if she was killed by him - I am sure he knows know.

All this person had to do, to avoid killing Hope, was pass up all yearling bears, and there would be no chance that he would shoot Hope. If it was an accident, either this person has very little skill determining the age and sex of bears, or they had very little self control.

When people defend this person, they often say that he did nothing wrong, due to the fact that this bear did not have a collar on, and what he did was legal, which it was. However, when they use that as a defense, they invariably forget the fact that this hunter says he did not want to shoot Hope, and yet he did shoot Hope.

This person saying that he did not want to shoot Hope, after he did shoot her, and after he saw the public feelings about it after she had already been killed, sounds more than anything else, like an excuse for actually killing her. Is it a way of trying to minimize what happened, or a way of getting out of it? I'll let you decide.

Unfortunately, this incident does a lot of harm to hunting and hunters, who are some of the most ethical conservation minded people I know. My feelings about this hunter do not, and should not, refect on the way I feel about my fellow hunters, or hunting in general. I enjoy hunting as much as the next hunter, and probably more than many hunters.

Hunters in many cases, do humanity a great service by helping to keep many game species within the carrying capacity of the habitat, and provide much of the funding needed for wildlife management and conservation. I shudder to think where conservation would be if it were not for the hunters. We need hunters and hunting. so - thank you to all of my fellow hunters - keep up the good work.

I'd also like to thank all of the conservation officers and employees out ther, wihout them wildlfe management and conservation would not be waht it is in Minnesota. I've met many CO's over the yeas, and aswith all people, most of them are nice people, who care about the enviromnent of Minnesota. Thank you for all your hard work.

God bless, and hunt safe