Misleading article on injured bear hunter

Yogithebear

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2017
Messages
54
Location
San Diego
https://fox5sandiego.com/2018/10/01...r-bear-he-shot-rolls-on-top-of-him-in-alaska/

Not a bear hunter, but I found the first line of this article bizarre and misleading. “Bear meat is no delicacy and hunters almost never eat it.” Bizarre because the article is about a severely injured hunter, so I’m not sure what such a provacative statement brings to the story. Misleading because while brown bear meat is not required to be salvaged in Alaska, black bear meat is (the article hyperlinks to an ADFG site that notes many consider brown bear mean unpalitable, but that link also includes the above mentioned regs on salvaging of brown and black bears).

As I said, I’m not a bear hunter and I’ve never tried bear meat. Curious if anyone can chime in, particularly on brown bear meat. Does anyone eat it, is it common, is it used for dog food, anything? Or is it hunted more as a furbearer? Nothing wrong with that IMO, like other furbearers hunted or trapped.

Back to the article though, the first line smacks of the anonymous author(s) from Tribune News kind of gleeful over the hunter’s (a service member) injury.
 
That opening line looks like MSN. I hate the quotes of Trump did this and accused this without evidence. Accuse and you are right; also with evidence!

Sorry for being off track, but one of my main peeves!
 
Stupid article, horrible accident. While I have not shot a brown, I have gotten a couple black, and ate them both. Both were good table fare. You can read right through the article, its more about the poor bear than the hunters.
 
Eaten 3 black bears... all were delicious, in many ways I actually prefer bear to ungulate meat. I would imagine an interior bear (grizzly) would be good table-fair and a costal (brown bear) would be hit or miss, if I had the 15k+ to hunt one I would most certainly eat it.
 
Bear meat is no delicacy and hunters almost never eat it. But that did not stop two Alaska men from going after some big game over the weekend. It didn’t go well.
Have Gerald Martin fix a roast and the writer would recant every word... Flat out fantastic!
 
Just finished up a bear hunt in Nevada, where meat is not required to be salvaged. NDOW does keep track of what hunters do salvage, just to have the stats on hand for folks who are opposed to the hunt. The stat they gave was that 95% of hunters who are successful salvage the entire bear.
 
"Mature male brown bears can weigh up to 900 lbs., while grizzlies can reach up to 1,400 lbs."

Aren't they the same thing?
 
Yogi Idiot ,crawl backin your Dummmasss Den!!!.Find Another forum to pollute.:cool::cool:
 
Last edited:
Yogi Idiot ,crawl backin your Dummmasss Den!!!.Find Another forum to pollute.:cool::cool:

I have no idea why you would say this. Seems like a legit post and gripe he had about a hunting article on a hunting forum. Seems the only pollution is your choice of words and grammar.
 
"Mature male brown bears can weigh up to 900 lbs., while grizzlies can reach up to 1,400 lbs."

Aren't they the same thing?



Some would argue they are the same. But in the popular context the statement is backwards. Brown bears live in the coastal regions and feed on salmon among other things. They grow much larger than interior grizzlies who don’t have the rich salmon in thier diet.
 
When I lived in Alaska we weren’t required to retain fall black bear meat. I think we might have been required to keep spring bear meat, but that may be me confusing what we did with what the law required.

At any rate, a fall bear that had been feeding on salmon and probably skunk cabbage was not eatable. They were sometimes hard to even skin out.
Grass fed spring bears were decent and the meat was retained.
Where I live now in Washington the bears eat decent all year.

Of all the dogs I’ve had in my life I’ve not had one that would eat bear meat. I don’t know why.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
110,816
Messages
1,935,414
Members
34,888
Latest member
Jack the bear
Back
Top