Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire One Bear's Reprieve

Read in the paper Saturday. That special precautions have been taken to insure that as hunting season opens. That a very rare "White" black bear in the Juneau area is protected. Don't remember the specifics, but it didn' t sound like the bear was to be taken out of the wild. Rather fish and game making sure that all were inforned that this bear was off limits. Must be one very special bear to make it into the papers of Southern California.
<br>
<br>Phil

He was in the paper here in Salem too. Good lookin' bear. They call him Spirit Bear. If he were not protected, how many of us would shoot him in a heart beat? Just a question. I am not sure I would. I all ready have a black rug. A nice cinnimon would be tempting. These one of a kind individuals are better off left in the wild in my oppinion. What do you think?

Actually, this bear was already discussed down in the Photography section...
<br>
<br>White Black Bear
<br>
<br>Not that many folks check that section out, so I can understand it being mentioned up here.

Rick I agree, personaly I think something so rare should be left alone. But I imagine sooner or later somebody is going to decide no matter what, he just has to have a white bear rug. Hopefully the locals can prevent that from happening.
<br>
<br>Phil

In my opinion, it is just another color phase of a black bear. Nothing more. Just being light colored doesn't make it any easier to hunt. It's not going to be out in the open any more than any other bear. The white ones don't walk up and down the road waiting for someone to shoot them. It is the start of something bad for fish and game to declare a certain wild animal off limits. Whats next? A moose with 80inch antlers because there is no way a hunter would miss something that big? How about goat and sheep because they are white and can be seen for miles? Doesn't sound fair at all. How about caribou out on the tundra? Nowhere to hide, out in the open. Not very fair is it? Maybe we should just stop hunting all together because its just not fair to those poor animals.

Greyghost,
<br>
<br>I have to disagree, and will repeat what I wrote down in the 'Photography' section.
<br>
<br>The bear in the picture doesn't appear to be an albino. It looks to me like a Kermode bear.
<br>
<br>As far as I can tell, there's never been a restriction in Alaska on shooting 'white phase' or Kermode bears in the regs. There are restrictions on just how many Glacier (blueish color) bears may be taken though.
<br>
<br>In Canada the Kermode are protected from hunting. That's fine, as most of these bears live in B.C. anyhow. If they choose to protect them, that's their business.
<br>
<br>According to what I've heard, these bears can have black colored parents, often with the white spot on their chest that you see on lot's of black bears.
<br>
<br>Anyhow, I completely disagree with the Alaska State Hunting Regs being changed by emergency order just to appease a few tourist, photographers, and local non-hunters. When we start putting legal game off limits, "just because they're pretty", where will it stop? Pretty soon you won't be allowed to shoot any 'trophy size' specimen of any game, because it's 'special and pretty.'
<br>
<br>It's easy to see that this could really snowball into a regular practice. Soon 'anti's' all overe the country will be trying to save indivdual animals because they're special in some way.
<br>
<br>No thanks, keep this kind of knee-jerk, emotion driven game management out of my State please.
<br>
<br>As to whether I would shoot this bear? Maybe, but it's small and rubbed. But I wouldn't hesitate because it's white.

I am not really firm on either side of this issue. It should be an individual's decision in any case. Fish and Game has enough trouble with setting seasons and bag limits without getting into the fate of individuals within a species. This is after all an accident of birth, just as the other color phases of black bears. It is not a separate species. No amount of tinkering with the regulations can increase the population of white bears. Scientists may be able to gene splice their way to producing white bears, but that is another thing all together.

Hey, let's don't start that fair bit when talking about big game. They only have what God gave them to protect themselves and provide a living. Teeth, horns, and claws are all an animal has, man has many tools and a mind to think ahead, would you call that fair? They are pushed into small envirements and then persued by thousands each season, fair, I think not. -- no

So lets stop all hunting alltogether, since its not fair?

Just didn't want any hunters thinking they were being cheated.:) -- no

Just checked out the picture, as well as the website on Kermode bears. What an unusual trophy that would be if it were in good fur, and a striking photo as is!

I'd take this bear or an albino bear in a heartbeat. No ethics or morals issues for me. This bear is just an off-colored black. I think Albino's should be culled anyway as an unwanted genetic trait. A hunter who fills his license with an Albino should get another free tag. Regardless of species. Unless, of course, the law says otherwise. I'd abide by the law.

Welcome to the Disney School of Game Management.
<br>
<br>

Like I posted on another forum, this whole thing makes me mad.
<br>When they change regulations you would think they would do it for scientific or some other legit reason. This was done because of pure emotion. fins and feathers didnt want to make the huggers and tourists mad. Personnally I say screw them, it was a legal bear to shoot.
<br>Dont regulate us on emotions, regulate us on scientific and biological facts.

Gents,
<br>After reading all the posts, I can only echo the replies from other Alaskan's here. The Alaskan Board of Game had absolutely NO! reason to issue an emergency order protecting this non-albino glacier bear. One can only hope (now that the damage is done) that this was a quick, knee-jerk reaction voted on without any fore-thought by the men enlisted on the board, and that it won't/can't happen again without the proper outcome based on a sustained yield, biological based decision! This unfortunately sets a precedence that is very dangerous to say the least. IMHO, emotions controlled the issuance of this emergency order. I am offended!
<br>best,
<br>bhtr