Yellowstone Grizzly Bear

Recently a man was found dead in Yellowstone. It was determined that he was killed by a grizzly bear. They found the bear, which turned out to be a female with two cubs. She had apparently killed the man, ate some of him and cached the rest. 

While a mamma bear protecting her young can become violent and kill humans she feels are a threat, it is apparently unusual for her to stick around and feed on the body. 

Because of this unusual behaviour, park authorities decided they had to kill the bear for fear it would attack other humans. They also captured the two cubs and are sending them to a zoo. 

The Yellowstone NP Facebook page has been very open and transparent about the whole situation and has been accepting of the negative feedback from folks who don't agree with their actions. 

I think, from a public relations perspective, they've handled the situation rather well. They've been good about not glossing over any of the facts and have outlined the facts that allowed them to make their decision. 

Obviously not everyone has agreed with their decision. Some folks have commented that the man who died made the decision to hike in off trail areas, alone and without bear spray or other protection. And that because of these decisions he made he put himself at risk and therefore the bear shouldn't be killed because of his actions. 

Other folks are upset that so many people are on the side of the bear and not the man. And that people should feel sorry for the man and not the bear. 

Some people are on the side that the bear means nothing compared to humans and shouldn't be given a second thought. Others feel that the bear meant something but should still have been put down. 

My personal opinion is that I don't like the killing of wild animals in wild places that were just being wild animals. And even though she did more than a defensive mamma normally would, she didn't do more than a bear would. She might have started by defending her cubs but when the threat was gone she may have realized she had sustenance for her cubs. 

Regardless, I don't think the man should be blamed for what happened. He paid for what happened with his life and that is extremely sad. We have no idea what he did or didn't do while he was out hiking, or how exactly the situation unfolded. Whatever it was he did or didn't do, I'm pretty sure he didn't purposely go after the bear or cubs. He was technically no threat to them, even if mamma thought he was. As such he certainly didn't deserve to die. 

But I also don't think the bear deserved to die. She deserved a second chance. Ironically humans get more forgiveness for more vile acts than wild animals do. I think, at the very least, they could track her and watch her behaviour. If she proved to be dangerous they could have reevaluated. But if she went on being a non-rogue bear then they could have just left her alone and the park would have three majestic bears instead of none of them. 

I've said before, and I'll say it again, that if I'm ever killed or mauled by a bear that I wouldn't want the bear killed if it wasn't doing anything unbearlike. As a human I understand the risks I take being in a bear's very limited territory. I have a lot more safe space than it does, if I didn't want to take the risk, I'd stay home. 

I'm sad that there are people who feel the bear is better off dead because it means nothing and wild animals aren't important. Those folks, unfortunately, don't understand the concepts of conservation and preservation. 

I can respect both sides of the argument as far as the two sides who believe the bear had worth. I can't respect those who feel the bear was expendable and that nature is useless.