A Bear Lost Its Life In Amherst.

[Member 2358]

So, what were the choices...

Euthanize the bear
Tranquilize the bear for transport out of the area
Tranquilize the bear for medical attention, then transport out of the area
Let the bear do its own thing (i.e. hands off; do nothing)
Attach a GPS to the bear and publicly report its whereabouts so the public knows
Officials stay with the bear 24/7 to ensure that it does no harm

Any other options?

[WNYresident]

You left out euthanize the bear and bring carcass to meat processing butcher.

That's a tough one seeing you are spending other people's money. You'll have those that want it saved no matter what the cost is and others who are fine shooting it.

I know if it was on our property and the choice was shoot it or tranq it would be tranq'd. My better half would have it no other way. But, if it went after our dogs she would probably beat it to death with a shovel.

There's a question.

Let's say it did attack your pets. Even though you are within town limits would you get in trouble if you pulled out a rifle and shot it before pets or family were injured?

[Member 2358]

...

There's a question.

Let's say it did attack your pets. Even though you are within town limits would you get in trouble if you pulled out a rifle and shot it before pets or family were injured?

Amherst, NY says ->

"§ 198-4
Discharge of firearms restricted.
Except as hereinafter permitted, no person, firm, association or corporation shall discharge any firearm or permit any firearm to be discharged within the Town of Amherst outside the Village of Williamsville. The foregoing prohibition shall not apply to duly constituted law enforcement officers engaged in the lawful performance of their duties or to persons acting in defense of persons or property or to the discharge of any firearm as part of target practice or trap shooting under proper supervision in an area or building occupied and maintained for that purpose."

"...acting in defense of persons or property..." <- guessing this would make it OK(?).

[WNYresident]

I guess you could say your pets are your property. Just wondered. I'm not planning to go deer hunting or bear hunting in my yard.

[gorja]

When I lived in Clarence, a dopey raccoon was in the yard. The sheriff had me grab one of my son's shotguns and he shot it with that. Apparently, if he used his own, there would have been paper work.

[grump]

When I lived in Clarence, a dopey raccoon was in the yard. The sheriff had me grab one of my son's shotguns and he shot it with that. Apparently, if he used his own, there would have been paper work.

Why wasn’t that raccoon simply tranquillized and relocated to a different location? Why wasn’t DEC contacted and an elaborate plan developed? And isn’t it pretty insulting and show species bias to refer to a raccoon as “dopey”? And the poor thing was shot in what amounts to a clandestine operation, using weapons that couldn’t be traced and leave an official record. Sounds like a raccoon death squad!

[gorja]

Why wasn’t that raccoon simply tranquillized and relocated to a different location? Why wasn’t DEC contacted and an elaborate plan developed? And isn’t it pretty insulting and show species bias to refer to a raccoon as “dopey”? And the poor thing was shot in what amounts to a clandestine operation, using weapons that couldn’t be traced and leave an official record. Sounds like a raccoon death squad!

It was more likely rabid. Why spread it?

[Member 2358]

It was more likely rabid. Why spread it?

That's an interesting statement.

Rabid = potential danger, right? So, here the response is end the animals life. Better safe than sorry, I suppose(?).

Is not an injured bear roaming a populated/developed residential area(s) and many times 'location unknown' an equivalent potential danger?

[grump]

It was more likely rabid. Why spread it?

Most likely rabid? How do you know? What tests were performed to determine its condition prior to its execution? None, right? Why not tranquilize it and test it to see if it was ill. Maybe it was just dopey as you said. If it had been tranquillized, taken away and tested, were it found to be rabid it could’ve been humanely euthanized without danger of spreading the disease, instead of being shot gunned in your yard in an unofficial and most likely unauthorized action.

[grump]

That's an interesting statement.

Rabid = potential danger, right? So, here the response is end the animals life. Better safe than sorry, I suppose(?).

Is not an injured bear roaming a populated/developed residential area(s) and many times 'location unknown' an equivalent potential danger?

But you see, people are conditioned to view a bear as the cuddly little thing they tuck in with little Timmy or Susie at night. He’s the cute little character with his nose stuck in the honey jar. He’s not a predator who will kill prey in order to eat and wild animal who poses an especial danger when approached if injured. Don’t you watch the Disney Channel for pity’s sake?

[gorja]

Most likely rabid? How do you know? What tests were performed to determine its condition prior to its execution? None, right? Why not tranquilize it and test it to see if it was ill. Maybe it was just dopey as you said. If it had been tranquillized, taken away and tested, were it found to be rabid it could’ve been humanely euthanized without danger of spreading the disease, instead of being shot gunned in your yard in an unofficial and most likely unauthorized action.

You can't test for rabies on a live animal

[grump]

You can't test for rabies on a live animal

Hell of a thing, then, to make the test and find out you’re wrong. Why shoot an animal you don’t even know is sick or injured?! At least with the bear the police knew it was injured and saw it hobbling around as a result. Why not just relocate the raccoon? It was dopey? Hell, so are loads of politicians. You want the sheriff to take your son’s shotgun to them, too?

[Member 2358]

It was more likely rabid. Why spread it?

Exactly why do you say that it was "more likely rabid"? Upon what well constructed, evidenced based, accurate, valid, and reliable information is that statement based?

I think it is just an easy off-hand justification for taking the life of an animal that is intruding on personal property. i.e. - I don't want it on my property, so I'll claim this condition to facilitate/justify what I want.

I smell a double standard.