Earlier this month, a B.C. man in Anmore got in trouble for helping an injured/sick bear. Why? Because by helping the bear he violated the Wildlife Act. So what happened exactly? A nice neighbour, Mike Robson, took an emaciated bear to a local wildlife centre. The bear had been outside on their neighbour’s porch for 16 hours. Frustrated by seeing that this injured bear cub received no care, or that the Mother bear did not come, Mrs. Robson called the BC Conservation Officer Services who refused to help the bear cub. The officer said to call back in another day. Additionally, the cub was the size of a dog who did not have anything to eat and endured -2 conditions. Due to his actions, Robson is now being investigated and may face serious consequences for violating the Wildlife Act.
There are reasons why humans should not interfere with wildlife, which are detrimental to the well-being of animals. Sounds bizarre, but true!
Please read the full article here: https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-man-under-investigation-for-taking-emaciated-bear-cub-to-wildlife-centre-1.4761227
Please read the articles below for some reasons why humans should not intervene with nature.
http://www.wildlifelandtrust.org/wildlife/living-with-wildlife/four-reasons-not-to-feed.html
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2016/05/160523-when-to-rescue-wild-animals/ (grade 6, harder reading)
Now is your turn to weigh in on this. What do you think about this whole ordeal? Would you have done the same thing that Mr. Robson did or would you have gone another route- if you did, what would it be? Knowing that you would be violating the Act, would this stop you from helping the bear cub? What are some reasons why you should not help / feed wildlife? Grade 5’s 20 sentences, Grade 6’s 25 sentences! Do not forget your details!!
I have seen many types of these cases all over the entire internet dating back to a long time all with stories of a very brave people having bears getting into their houses and them ending up calling the police which influences us to think that “oh, those bears are dangerous”. I’m not saying that bears are creatures we shouldn’t care about which brings me to my point that what this man did was brave. This is an act people would praise over and over about because he helped a poor bear who was in the cold and was without his mother bear for huge period of time which would be terrible if you switched places with this bear in its perspective. Along with that a man decided to help the bear out and brought it out to a wildlife center and when the police came to investigate the man was charged just because he saved a bear because it was against a law? This does not make sense because this guy just saved a bear and is punished for it, I know handling a bear could be extreme but the least the government could do is give this case an exception. Also noting that this is happening in Canada is weird because when you think of Canada it is genuinely a fair and developed country now and this sounds like a thing a dictated country would do. If I saw the bear I would have waited like him but maybe have called the emergency services to help instead of myself but again if I didn’t have my phone because I don’t have one I would help it because we should treat animals well because they are important in our life cycle. I also do agree to the government though that it would have been better to wait for people to act and that it is dangerous to try saving a wild baby bear. If he had went and picked the bear and the mom comes, she will take it very differently and that would lead to something terrible. The man also could have possibly mess up its cycle and source of food because if the bear escaped let’s say, then it would depend on humans for food and that would interfere with nature and nature was made a way that shouldn’t be interfered with by humans unless it was made for us to do that. If I knew I was a breaking several laws I would still do it considering it is the right thing to do and if I get harmed, I will get harmed in honor. This just shows how merciful people are towards the animals, this also relates in some ways to Sikhs, no I’m not calling them out because they’re different, they as people are more into saving animals and are vegetarians and have two things that tie in with this.
Sikhs are big on not interfering with nature and would be on the government side on how they shouldn’t have gotten involved with the bear and its life so Sikhs would really be able to think through this and come up with many reasons why interfering with animal wildlife is bad. First, they for a long time knew the problem the world is dealing with would come which is that we already have damaged the renewable resources, the atmosphere, the ocean, and the ecosystems which if left unaddressed will continue to happen due to what us humans have done. So, Sikhs have always been thinking about this and are prepared and they only eat plants so with this aspect they would take the side of The Canadian Government for charges against Mike Robson, another reason they take side with the government is because they really consider god as a green person or idk what to call him but not as literally green I mean by as environmentally friendly and they also consider it from the words of the Guru Granth Sahib that air is our teacher and water is our father and that the Earth is our mother which increases their faith that they shouldn’t hurt their mother which is referring to Earth, Sikhs seem to be very eco-friendly towards the Earth and don’t even decide to kill animals even though some nutrients are only provided by these animals but they also take part with the other side of this case.
Sikhs try to be caring towards animals if they are hurt which is exactly what the man did because what the Sikhs would do if they considered the Earth their mother so they would help “her” out which would lead to the Sikhs supporting this man who cared for the bear because of the followings of the Guru Granth Sahib and their belief towards it. Sikhs would do the thing Robson had done if they followed their belief so it’s kind of in two ways how Sikhs are examples of people who are really into these kinds of stuff.
Another thing is that I wouldn’t even bother the fact that this man did this if I were the government unless something happened after the actions committed. The least I would do is give him a reminder on this law and praise him for what efforts he had done towards the wildlife because you don’t often run across someone who have saved a baby bear from maybe even dying. Some reasons I found about why you shouldn’t interfere with the wildlife because it ends up interfering with our lives by thinking it will always get food from us. This also is terrible for the fact after he called for help, no one ended up coming to help him out for the slightest and I understand that he might have gotten tired of how long and bad the emergency services were taking but taking it into your own hands is just too risky. The police were refusing to act and told them not to do anything or they would get arrested and face legal charges, this is a thing that is showing us that some people don’t do their job and do complete opposite because clearly this is something a normal police officer would do because they are supposed to take action over these cases and solve them and instead of doing that, they decide to not move and tell them to do nothing until the morning. The officer even would just put the bear into the wilderness, and it would be forced to fight predators by itself instead of it getting taken care of and properly given to its mother. What even more increased the fact they wanted to save it was because it was skinny for its size and was only 20 pounds when it should be at 80 pounds at its age.
A similar case happened at the Yellowstone National Park when a man loaded a Bison into his SUV after finding it cold along the roadside and after he gave it to the rangers, they tried reuniting it to its family. The man was charged for breaking park regulations even though he might have just saved an animal’s life. Again, the main reason not to fiddle around with nature was because it messes up their life cycle because if they are introduced to a new food source from humans then it will always depend on humans for food instead of hunting themselves. If the animals are scared and are then interfered with humans, then they will end up having to move which ruins both the sights of humans coming to the park and it ruins the animals because they may have to build their habitat all over again in a completely or somewhat different place. Another thing that I have said constantly and is agreed on the article is that you shouldn’t interfere because nature was made the way it was made and that if you’re a prey you are going to have to die for the cycle to continue on and interfering breaks the rule of that. Usually it is fine if you brought an animal by rescue after it was hurt by human cause because if it was in nature then you shouldn’t interfere because it is just part of the life cycle of animals and if they are primary consumer, secondary consumers or decomposers it just makes it so more life can occur. These conservation officers are doing extremely bad because they have done so much terrible stuff to the bears in the past decade including killing over 4,500 bears in the last 8 years, killing a bear after raiding the Christmas cake poultry and now this case. This is a bad reputation for these officers who are supposed to be protecting and helping the community instead of doing very bad stuff to people in need. Of course, in the end we cannot argue with the laws placed down unless you have something like what happened in Honk Kong happen here but that is very low of a chance. Another thing people get worried over is the fact that they made the mainly because of the risk of poaching or overhunting a certain species which has happened several times in the history of Canada which was devastating especially for the indigenous who are really good at countering these type of situations and try to limit their fishing. In conclusion, this is a case that really does show the truth of what us humans should, if us humans wanted to save an animal it should be the case that if it seems necessary like this case and no one is responding to it than people should be allowed to help but if you look at the other side the people trying to help could easily get hurt and is why the law put in the first place, It also shows us how different religion and beliefs have different look and perspective against this specifically being on the Sikhs and the Indigenous population in Canada, this also shows us how much we need to improve on helping people with these types of problems and how conservation officers should be trained better.
p.s Ms Panesar is using a very similar title to her other blog for the sexism in Soccer.
No I’m not… well maybe… okay, I’m going now!
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooof I HATE THOSE PEOPLE
y opinion I think that what Mr. Robson did was the right thing because if he just ignored the bear, then the bear could’ve died as the bears mother didn’t come and the bear wasn’t cared for. I can’t imagine seeing that injured bear like that and I don’t think that the situation went the right way. I understand what Mr. Robson was trying to do and all he was doing, was helping the bear, not trying to kill it. I think that calling the BC Conservation Officer Service was the right thing to do but when they refused to help, I felt like they should have come, immediately as the bear was in bad condition. If the BC Conservation Officer Service came, then Mr. Robson wouldn’t have been in trouble and the bear would have been cared for. The bear was there for 16 whole hours with nothing to eat and endured. Imagine how you would’ve felt if you were in desperate help like that bear cub! Thanks a lot, to the BC Conservation Officer Service, Mr. Robson is now going through trouble and might face serious consequences for tolerating the Wildlife Act. Instead of Mr. Robson having to go through this, I think the BC Conservation Officer Service should face consequences for not going there to help the bear cub as it wasn’t Mr. Robson’s fault for helping the bear. It was the BC Conservation Officer Service’s job to help people (by helping them with the animal) and animals (by taking them to get them cared for) and by not helping either of them, they were the ones who held them down. If that was me, I would’ve done the same thing as Mr. Robson and Mrs. Robson even though I knew it was violating the rules except, I would have called for another conservation crew because there should be more than 1 in BC. I think the man did a good job of taking care of the cub and taking it to the Critter Care Wildlife Society. No, it wouldn’t stop me from trying to help the bear but what I would’ve done would be to just keep a good eye on the bear, not feed it (as I don’t want to be punished seriously), and keep calling conservation crews until they come. The only thing I think that the Robson’s did wrong was not calling other conservation teams because then, possibly, they wouldn’t have gotten into this trouble and the bear would have quickly gotten cared for. The main reason you shouldn’t feed wildlife is because you don’t know whether the food you feed wildlife is safe for it unless you are an expert of what foods wildlife can eat or what they can’t eat. The animal you feed might get diseases and spread them or can get injuries from the food. Feeding food to animals near a road or near vehicles is dangerous too because the animal might die suddenly, if a vehicle can’t see it and strikes it. Human food is also not good for animals and it can also make wild animals lose their fear of humans, as it is their natural habit. Even though the wildlife you feed is desperate of having food or is in deep hunger, that shouldn’t mean you can just go up to some random creature or whatever and give you part of your lunch or so. According to the Wildlife Act, it is illegal to feed wildlife food. It is risky for the person and the creature (or whatsoever) to feed food to it or take food from the human as the creature can possibly die and the human can get in huge trouble. Feeding a wildlife creature is extremely the wrong thing to do and if you do come across one who is starving to death, then I believe you should call for help for further ado, get them to check the creature in case it has worse conditions than just hunger issues. It is as simple as that and it would benefit you and the creature as you wouldn’t get in trouble and the creature can possibly be treated well and taken care of.
In conclusion, I think that what the Robson’s did was fine but still a bit illogical and that I would’ve done the same but in a logical way which wouldn’t get me in trouble.
Why would it be bad to help a bear that is in pain. Like what, why, and that’s so abusing to stop or accuse a person for helping a bear. So, I think this is what the police or someone was thinking. Bears are dangerous and you should not help it. And if you help the bear you are just helping danger so the danger could attack and possibly eat us. Ummmm no. This is what I’m thinking haven’t you learned anything in school. And for a fact bears don’t attack you unless you frighten them or scare them. But otherwise they are completely harmless. And only very few people got attacked or even killed in a bear attack. And the chances that a bear is attacking you is very low. And let me tell you why. Usually bears just want to play with you. And you know bears, they could be rough but that’s just a bear playing. And when a bear plays with you and starts chasing you. Well you usually freak out. And that’s why you start doing harmful stuff. And that’s when the bear tries to defend itself. DEFEND, not attack. So that’s why people think that bears are bad for the world. And that’s why humans don’t want to help the endangered. But there are a few people in the world that know how others feel. Especially animals. And that’s why you should learn from them. So back to the fact, of the post. I really disagree with the police officer. And I agree with the person who was trying to help the bear. And since that person got a punishment, I’m really rethinking to trust officers. And you know how that person took the bear to the animal care center thing. Well you know how the care center is supposed to take care of it. Well no they told him to just leave him there and wait till his or her mom comes. Well one day passed and nothing happened. Like that’s so bad. Why would the care center tell him to just leave the bear there. Like just imagine if that was you being thrown out like you were nothing. And they get paid for this. This is just crazy what they do here. And I thought they were supposed to CARE about the animals. And bears, bears are just as important as everyone else, and animals. And just saying that is a bad thing to do. And I thought we all learned to treat others the same way you treat yourself. and nope apparently we did not learn that yet. And let me just tell you for a fact that I’m not surprised. And in my opinion I agree with Mike Robson. Thanks for listening. And this got so out of hand that i had to learn it. SHAME ON YOU POLICE. thanks for reading.
To my look of the bear thing, I think Mike did the right thing. He helped wildlife that needed help desperately, well… not desperately. I would not keep him outside but not what u would think. If I had a childy house or doghouse that the bear could stay in. If that’s still violating the wildlife organization, I would be triggered. I would no other ideas to do. I could bring the bear to a different wildlife place. If that also does not work, I WOULD BE STEAMED! Another thing is that this time could still be bears or other animals’ hibernation. Since its hibernation, I would still be sad for the bear. 1st of all, its injured, and 2nd, the bear could possibly be sick. In mike Roberts shoes, I’ll be non-able to think at this point. I could call 911 or sew them if it’s possible. But otherwise, yes again be STEAMED!! In the bears paws, I’d be scared. It would be like I would want to die. I would wish for my mom and dad, (bear mom and dad,). Sitting on the front porch of a man I don’t know, crazy. If I could, I would go UNDER the porch. It’s not violating the wildlife, and it’s a good place to sleep. or hibernate for the rest of the winter. Till next time, HUMAN BEINGS OF THE PLANET! MUH HA HA, I AM AN ALIEN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not. lol
troll face( @_@ )
The Courageous Cub
Mike Robison found a cub outside alone. He was sick and not well nourished. He decided to call A wildlife center. (But jokes on him) they rejected his offer. They told him to wait and see if the mother will come back for cub. He decided to keep the bear on his backyard. A day went by and still, no mother. So, he had the idea to bring the cub in. But now he’s been investigated. He may even earn bad consequences just because he disobeyed the Wildlife Act. As much as I love to learn and care about Wildlife, I guess it was wrong. But if I were to be in Mr. Robison, I would’ve done the same thing! I think it would be right to not just leave him there. My brother would probably do the same thing. It would irritate me if they just said “Oh, sorry you can’t do this even though it was right!” it was their literal job. So why are we doing it? Were helping the wildlife/animals. But were doing their job and they stop us from doing it. And in the end, they won’t deal with it. They probably did but in the way of just ‘letting it be’ so it can be ‘happy’. It’s injured. How did we see this before you did? But aren’t vets almost the same thing as wildlife centers? It makes me feel upset that they just start investigating him and acting like it was a bad and big deal. It’s just a cub! It should still have the right to live. It had was ill and starving and they say to let it be. And it’s not like they could’ve just called Mr. Robison the next day to see if the mother was or wasn’t there. Or maybe just even do their jobs. But no! they thought that they were the ones who were the ones saving it when Mr. Robison was doing the hard work.
By Kadin
I am in both because I think that it’s a fine of 100000. At and at the same time the baby bear is going to die sooner and feeding it is a fine. but (she or he) did a good thing to go to the animal center to take care of it. but the people their said no to the helper and that’s why the (lady or man) should let it go to the forest. or wear it came from because that bear will think you’re the mom of the cub. and I think it is in Victoria because of the island. and I have been there before, and the police will find out. with bad cop and nice cop that’s the only way to do the fine but you can keep it a secret to other people. and don’t tell you family or your best friend and I feel like I would kill the bear. with a knife and stab till I can’t no more, and my parents are probably going to yell at me (Kadin). will my family can’t feed a bear it eats too much and I thought that bears hibernate in the cold weather like in caves and the mother probably died. finding food for the cub bears eat salmon and berries and I think that man should not. Have been hunting for it because people kill animals in the forest the nature and my reason to you(classmates) are to not or help the wild animals and not kill them. And today I learned that you can be nice to nature you can’t change. what you did in the past(someone) and I had to learn it the hard way from my dad ‘mom. and my sister because I play to much video games and when I am (Kadin) at school. then I don’t play games I play basketball and I don’t know why the animal center. did not allow a bear to be in a facility for injured animals it is sad. to know because if you read it police they can arrested the(lady or man) who is taking care of the bear is nice but I think they should throw it back in to the woods.(forest)and I don’t have that much to say it just that female animal. (most but not all) leave their cub or baby animal and hide them from danger.
In my opinion, I don’t think that Mike Robson should be investigated for ‘violating the wildlife act.’ He may have violated this act, but not many people seem to realize that he saved a little bears life as well. I don’t think that the Wildlife Centre should have done this, because nobody knows what would have happened to the bear cub if he left it alone in the forest. The bear would have probably been left there injured and in pain without its mother/family. Since the bear was so young it most likely wouldn’t have been able to hunt for itself or find food. Even though Mike Robson did a good thing for this bear, I probably would have handled the situation a different way. If I came across an injured bear, I probably wouldn’t have come too close until I knew what was wrong with the bear, and if it was still going to attack. Eventually, I would call a nearby veterinarian or wildlife Centre and I would follow their instructions. If I knew that I was violating the Wildlife act, I probably would have just done what the people at the Wildlife Centre told me to do. They know more about animals and wildlife then me. This means that they would probably be telling me what’s best for the animal (or in this case, what’s best for the bear.) A few reasons why you should never bring wild animals to your house, are because this can be dangerous. It can be dangerous for you and your family, because it might always be ready to attack, you just don’t know when. You should never give wild animals food. Normally, if you give a wild animal food, they will know that you have food, which means they will be coming back to you hoping for food. Sometimes, if you don’t give the animal food after when they come back for it, they will try to attack you if you don’t give it any treats/food. It can sometimes happen that if you are feeding a wild animal or getting close to it, diseases can be transmitted, since you never know if you or the animal is sick. A lot of the time, other wild animals can spot you feeding another wild animal. This can cause many crowds of wild animals and can get dangerous if these animals get annoyed. Sometimes, people aren’t aware that human food can be very bad for wild animals, especially if you keep on feeding them. Doing this can cause serious health problems for the animal and can sometimes even put its life at risk. A lot of the time, wild animals become getting a lot more aggressive than they are supposed to be when they don’t get what they want (food). What do you think about this whole situation? Do you think Mike Robson should have left the bear alone in the forest? What would you have done in this situation?
This is from Sally:
In my opinion, if you’re helping an injured bear cub in need, and the BC Conversation Official Services refused to help obviously help it! So, what you’re violating the Wildlife Act YOU’RE HELPING WILDLIFE ANIMAL! I honestly don’t understand why your violating Wildlife Act because they’re the ones not stepping it up and helping. And if they didn’t help, they mentioned that the bear was as skinny as a dog. Who knows what will happen if the cub spends another day waiting there’s a possibility that the bear will die of hunger? The mother bear has probably abandoned the cub knowing that it’s been on the porch for 16 hours she most likely won’t come back. People who wouldn’t help this poor little bear cub I would consider selfish because knowing that they’ll get in trouble they wouldn’t risk it for just a small bear cub.
The reasons to not interfere with wildlife are ridiculous and that coming from a 10-year-old. Of course, you’d help a bear cub especially If its MINUS 2 DIGREES! In the article I read it said that “it wasn’t the right thing to do” I mean please!! There were some rules like don’t feed the wildlife which I would understand but not helping critters in need is ridiculous! Some simple things like feeding a bear cub (WHO IS STARVING) and putting a blanket around it can get you into some “serious” consequences. If anything, I think that the BC Official Services should be the ones getting investigated. The background of the porch was covered with snow and frost it was probably freezing. In the video the man had mentioned how he would go to jail for his actions and that means he’s determinant he did the right thing. He also seems he takes no regret of what he did knowing that there will be consequences. Put it like this there’s a baby about to die would you help it or go to jail? I think that this whole article is ridiculous. Just let the man be. I understand that if you feed wildlife you might hurt them but saving a baby cub is not hurting them it’s helping them! GOSH! Mr. Robson is a kind man who does not deserve to be punished for what he did. Nothing should happen to Mr. Robson and that’s it. If I were in the situation Mr. Robson has been in, I would help the cub because who wouldn’t? Even knowing that I would be in trouble and even might go to jail I wouldn’t sacrifice a bear cub for myself. In conclusion I think that Mr. Robson should not be punished, and they should help the bear.
If I ran into a baby bear that was sick or injured would I help it? If I were in that situation, I would want to help the bear. But there are some things to consider.
First, are there other bears in the area? Especially a mother bear. That would be very dangerous. This is because a mother bear would protect its cub or cubs. If there are no bears around, I would try to get a closer look to see what is going on. If the bear cub looked very injured or sick, I would want to do something to help the bear cub.
Second, I don’t think it would be a very good idea to handle a wild animal without knowing more about it. For example, the bear could be carrying a sickness. It could bite you or attack you in some way. I would call somebody for help. Maybe they could give me information about what to do.
Once I find it’s ok to help the bear, I would take it to an animal care center. They would know what to do.
I guess even though I would get fined, I would help the bear cub. I wouldn’t want anything to suffer and be in lots of pain. I understand that it’s a wild animal and that they would not want anything to do with it. But I feel that they should take care of those kind of animals.
To Help a Bear, or to Not?
I care deeply for nature, for our home, and for animals, especially the ones endangered. I remember when I was even younger, I would beg my mom to let me start fundraising for the children and animals that needed help the most. Sadly, it did not happen. For Christmas, I got Maya this “Help Black Bears!” bookmark (and I hope you (Maya) like it!) which I thought would be appropriate to because I know she cares (like a lot of other people!).
I hate the Wildlife Act. It reminds me of the Indian Act, or the Chinese Immigration Act, because it’s discriminating not the humans, but this time the animals that really need what we all need. I think the man, Mike Robson, was doing what most people would have done. I know how in many parks the signs posted saying not to feed wildlife animals, but some desperate animals really need the food and water.
I think the Wildlife Act should be a bit less strict of feeding wildlife animals because some critters would die without the resources they need. I mean, could you go 16 hours alone without feeling a bit uneasy, lonely, and hungry? The majority would be no, but not everyone can handle that feeling. I would be feeling like no one cares about me.
If the Canadian Government really wants to keep the Wildlife Act, at least put some ‘stations’ in the deeper part of the forest/woods where the bears are in. The cabins would have appropriate food for the wildlife creatures so if they get lost, they can still have food and water (I guess someone refills too?). It can also be a place made so that the mother bear would know where to go if she trained her cub to find the place/hut. The Canadian Government probably doesn’t know that animals are the same rank as human. Probably sarcasm, probably not.
Apparently, from what I found while I was doing research, The Wildlife Act was created to protect the animals and creatures. But how, when some of them are starving and in need? How, when they are about to cross the line of life and death? Aye, the government should really think what they meant, before making that a law. So many people want to help the nature, but yet, the government deny it.
I still think that the government don’t understand the difference between an animal in need and an animal that that survive on its own. The Wildlife Act should be worded differently; animals can survive but sometimes a human can make its life much, much better. Nature should not be overestimated and thought that anything “belonging” to nature can survive on its own. I think Gaea’s going to “overpower those who think more than needed.” (Sorry, Greek ‘n Roman life T~T) Meaning that nature is not always going to protect those who need in, and in this case, the animals. She didn’t send out any animal for the bear to eat so…
Jumpy post, jumpy life…
Also Ms. Panesar, Labib and I noticed we can’t see the other posts… I was going to show Labib his beautifully long post… but I can’t see it, logged in or not.
Oh! And Ms. Panesar, as I went back to class (after rinsing my eye), your former students said to do a blog post about Kobe Bryant…?
Would you guys like to?
Yeah RIP Kobe Bryant
Blog Post
If I were the guy I would save it because if the mom bear didn’t come it would have died. I like wildlife so I would save the baby bear especially because it has a long life to go. Even if I get fined I would not mind because you may be saving a life. I think that the government should help the man since it is like saving a baby from starving. I think that the government did it because they thought that the bear will never hunt. I think that saving an animal is way better than not doing anything. The person who saved it I think is very brave because he knew the consequences but he still did it. I think that people right now should be helping wildlife rather than doing nothing. In my opinion the government should not give him a fine because 1st he is helping wildlife. 2nd because it is really dumb and stupid to fine him. The people should not investigate because he did literally nothing wrong. I think that they should have never done this because again the guy was just trying to help. I think that sometimes people should just think about it. If I were in his situation I would probably complain to the government. I get that you should never feed wildlife but it was very weak and needed help. This person has a very big heart but the government may have but not for this situation. I think that the government and the world should be helping wildlife because the wildfires in Australia is killing a lot of wildlife so we all need to help keep the Earth alive. Because the Earth might actually be like judgement day from Terminator in 2029. In one of the articles they say that he may go to jail but I think that he should not because he was helping the Earth even if it’s a small thing. The government I think should support him but that doesn’t mean to feed wildlife. I think that following laws is important but having a heart is important too. Thank you for reading my Blog Post hope you have a very good day.
P.S. its my birthday on Thursday if you did not know that shame on you!
By Tyson
By Joshua
I think Mike Robson and the Wildlife Act are both right. I will go through the reasons. Starting with saving the bear. What Mike Robson did was correct because saving a living creature’s life is the right thing to do. Also, Mike Robson waited for the bear’s mother to come. And nothing happened. The Bear was injured and tired. It did not have any food to eat. If I see a bear on my porch, and it was injured, I would have taken it to a wildlife center too. A helpless cub left in the wild. Yes, it might affect the ecosystem. But it is such a cruel thing to do to leave it out without any care.
Now let’s talk about the wildlife act. The wildlife act protects the animals, so they know how to hunt and live the way they live. The only reason why this rule was made was because if you treat specific animals like monkeys good or give them food, they will know that you have food and ask for more. The problem here is that their future generations will not know how to hunt for food or get fruits. And when humans no longer feed them food, they will not have much food and starve which causes them to be endangered. What Mike Robson did here was taking the cub to a wildlife center which was against the wildlife act.
The article says that he might face serious consequences. For saving a cub? That might be kind of weird. But if we dig deeper, this might affect the ecosystem. Here’s an example, the bear does not know how to take care of itself which causes a little fewer bears in the future. Next, maybe bears will be endangered in the future. Saving a tiny cub might cause bear distinction. You are probably thinking: Nah saving a cub won’t affect the bear’s future generations. Sure, maybe saving a Cub will not affect it but just in case, the man was warned or fined for breaking the wildlife act.
What I’m saying is that saving a small cub might not hurt but there is a slight chance that it will change the future.
I think that is wrong and people should be allowed to save animals lives because it’s a good deed and all they do is get mad at him and don’t even say thank you. I think that people must help animals and not leave them alone to suffer and have a painful death. What if they were animals and no one was allowed to save you. If you interfere with the wildlife i know it may kill the animal but if you just leave them alone, they will eventually die because no one tried to help the animal. It’s fine if you atleast TRY to help wild animals because inside, they could feel that someone cares for that animal. If you just walk right past the animal, pretending to not notice it, it will feel like its nothing. If someone was lying on the ground about to die, you would probably help them because they are not really a wild creature. Really just a human who needs support. But for animals, since they are not the same species, they won’t help. So thats could be a little racist but at the same time, not racist. And again, offencive and at the same time, not offencive. So I think people must be allowed to help. Not saying you must feed it but atleast help bring it to an animal rescue station or help it how you would help humans. I still don’t get why people are trying to investigate about this guy. He did something good that day. They should reward him and not be like “oh i think it was him who hurt this animal, so he just brought this animal in so it looks like he’s trying to help.” but really, he is helping a lot and at least the animal knows he cares because the wildlife care is also interfering with the wild animals because they are helping the animal just like the guy did. Helped the animal and gets in trouble for it. It’s just like handing in homework worth an A+, and get in lots of trouble for doing what we are supposed to do. But for some reason, that guy was not allowed to do what the animal wildlife care people are doing. It’s not like he must be part of the crew to do this because apparently you need to be part of the wildlife squad. But like if it wasn’t for the guy who saved the bear, the bear would probably be injured or even worse, dead. So for the people in the wildlife crew that do care about their job, should be very thankful for the guy who saved a BABY bear. So maybe since he did help, and that he does care, he should be part of the wildlife team. I think that the people who are kinda mad at Mr. Robson, should be the ones that are in trouble because they got mad at someone who did a good deed for the bear. Also it’s good that he did it because the population of bears would be less and they must be doing SOMETHING good to help the world and help the mountains where they live in too just like some people.
I think the man made a right choice to save the bear, although he was not in the right place to make that decision. There are consequences to human interference with animals, but if mike Robson hadn’t rescued the bear the bear may have been seriously or even worse killed. But also, by saving it he messed up some wildlife regulations put there to protect these animals. I feel like I’m not exactly in the right place to judge this situation since I wasn’t there, but no one really can because no one was there except for mike Robson who did what he thought was best. I support him because he did what he thought was best, he evaluated the situation as best as he could by himself. At first, he followed the rules but when he saw how much that baby bear cub was hurting, he helped it, and that’s why I support him. Sometimes we all must break some rules to do the right thing, and by right thing I mean what feels right to you. It’s easy to follow the rules doing everything just to make sure that it’s not against the law, that’s easy. What’s not easy is that to follow your gut and do the right thing the one that feels good in your heart. It’s true that there could be horrible results, like the mother bear showing up. I believe that if he saw that there was not much of a chance that the bear had a mother, then I believe him. Why would he have to lie about it? I don’t think the rangers are in a place to change the law, they must follow the regulations, or they’ll be fired, I can understand that. We can’t exactly blame the rangers since they are only trying to do their job. Right now, there’s no “bad” guy in this situation, they are all doing what each they think is right. The rangers are doing their job, mike Robson did what he thought was the best decision at the moment. Who can we blame? The officer who refused to help, he could’ve at least looked at the bear. I’m not saying it’s all the officer’s fault, but he could’ve just gone to look at the bear to check on its status, you only understand so much through the phone. Again, this bear was in freezing temperatures! With no food to eat this bear was starving, he was small for a bear as well. I doubt anyone could refuse this poor defenseless bear help. Well, maybe not anyone but most people wouldn’t, although this isn’t a good thing to do because then the bear will become too dependent on humans which is bad because he will no longer know how to hunt. That bear may have died without the help of mike, we can’t always go around excusing people for their wrongs, I think this is a bit of an exception. Over all I believe mike Robson made a right decision in taking the bear, he may have damaged some rues but in general he did the right thing, from what he saw, he made what he believed was a right choice.
sorry for any typos!!!!!
I think that it was right to help the little starving bear. When I notice that it is dangerous to help wildlife, no matter their conditions, maybe perhaps this rule shouldn’t exist to creatures who are in pain and in danger of dying if they can’t be helped. I think his actions were right, however I would recommend consulting the government as soon as possible and tell them how dire the situation was so they might help. If the government does not approve of the idea of helping the animals, I think there should be a law that says that you should be allowed to help the creature and take it to the wildlife center, but then must release it after it has been cured. I think this because then you have two sides; your side, which is helping the creatures in need, and the government’s side which is leaving it alone because you are releasing it to live its own life again.
If I was in Mr. Robson’s shoes, I would be very put down when I had to be investigated after I had done something in my own belief to help this bear. I believe that people should stand up for what is right and do something about the situation and might be a good idea to get the government to support your intentions, then act. Also, perhaps Mr. Robson knew the cost of what he was doing but couldn’t bear to see the bear in pain and wanted to help so badly. (No pun intended.) Although Mr. Robson did something kind, I think it would have been better if he put him inside the plastic box, gave him something small to eat and wait for the people who were going to take care of this issue for him.
Knowing the violations of the of the act, this would not stop me from helping although, I know that it might not be such a good idea to act this way. Maybe I should take the bear back to the forest and help it find a nice stream or shrub with many berries on it. Then I would report to the government or police saying that I had successfully returned the bear to his natural habitat. This would be a better way to help it and make sure that it doesn’t start depending on you for survival.
Some reasons that show that it is a bad idea to feed wildlife is first, the food that we eat is not fit for animals. Second, this makes wildlife forget the fear of humans and start depending on us more and this will prevent them from learning their useful survival skills. Third, if you keep on feeding wildlife, they might come long distances to find you and, on the way, they may encounter many life and death situations like crossing big highways and injuring a certain body part. Some injuries may lead to suffering, and then death. Fourth, if your house is by a somewhat big road, when the animal comes to find something to eat and you feed it near the road, a vehicle might run over it and end its life. Adding on to this, the animals might end up searching the vehicles for food, and it might get trapped inside.
Overall, I think that the action to support wildlife is important, especially if they are in need for help and I think that the government should accept all reasons to help wildlife in their state of need, even if it means to change the law. However, that I understand that the act was very dangerous for the bear and it would end up depending on me to help it through its life. We should be exceptionally careful when trying to help wild creatures because you never know what might become of your help.
I know it is not a good idea to enter with animal affairs ,but the bear was on the verge of dying. You have to help the animal even though you are going to have to bend some certain rules. It is a really bad idea to help an animal because the animal will be dependant on you. Then sooner than you know it, there is a whole infestation of bears relying on us for food and maybe even shelter. Though it is abad idea it is still considerate to help a needy animal every once in a while. Mr. Robson did not have bad intentions, if anything he had great intents. When I think about this situation it is encouraging to let the dying animal die. That is a little harsh. I would have called a wildlife centre. That is what Mr. Robson did but they refused to help. What is the point in a wildlife centre if they are not going to help you. SHAME ON YOU. I wonder what they were thinking when the Conservation officers told them to call the next day. The Robinsons must have been terrified. I mean it’s a lot to take in. There is an almost dead animal nearby and the people that are supposed to help, are refusing. Mr. Robinson took matters into his own hands. He shouldn’t have. Every animal has a time to die. This man should have used his mind little before just going into action. If you are only using your feelings, what does that make you. An animal. If he was thinking he might have realized that he was gambling with nature. This could hit us in the face later on with the infestation of bears I was talking about. And if I know anything about gambling, you should think again before entering your bet. I completely understand why this man might be in trouble. He is complexly worth it. I think the bear might have been fed before and came into human territory for food. The local wild life centre is kinda weird. They refused to help the bear. No-one would be in trouble if the wild life centre was doing their job. My main point is Mr. Robinson is nice but he should have been thinking.
how is it
For starters I wouldn’t let the bear come into my home.
In the article it said that the bear was injured, which is super sad for me and I would love to be able to help the bear.
Maybe I would try to first patch It up wherever it’s injured, provide a couple of blankets so the baby cub can be warm.
If I bring it into my home I would put myself and my whole family in danger.
Some people might disagree on this because it’s a lonely bear that has no food shelter or home.
But what if the mother bear comes to get her cub?
It could destroy your house and everything you own.
I get that the man wanted to help the baby cub, but it was a dangerous thing and I guess I would be tempted to do the same thing.
Baby cubs are super cute and you want to protect them.
I would try my best to shelter the baby cub and provide help, but would not take it into my house.
Wildlife doesn’t live the way people do.
They don’t have TVs, phones, fireplaces, furniture.
All that stuff would scare them and they might think that is harmful for them, and start destroying everything.
You can’t mess with Wildlife.
If you feed a bear it would just keep constantly coming back for food.
After feeding wild animals, they think that is normal and would not know how to hunt and feed themselves or their young ones.
They would eventually die.
When you feed one animal it could attract more and then after that it could start a big competition over who gets the piece of food.
The animal could end up getting injured.
There are diseases that can spread to people or animals.
They could lose their Wildlife Instinct for hunting prey .
We could lose all our wildlife habitats.
This would all happen just from taking a bear into your home and feeding it.
People food is not healthy for animals as its not nutritious enough.
I love animals and it would be so hard to watch them suffer, especially when you can see them in close proximity.
But I would also be scared, what might happen if I do?
What are the consequences for doing so called “helping them”.
When it is probably more harm.
Lately, a bear cub was injured, sick, cold and starving with no mom coming to save him. Then a man named Mike Robson saves the poor, helpless bear. He took the bear to a wildlife center, where the bear could be taken care of. Then Mr. Robson got in trouble for breaking the Wildlife Act. The Wildlife Act is a rule where you can not feed or help wildlife so they do not become reliant on humans.
So, now for my opinion. I think the authorities should be ashamed of themselves. SHAME ON YOU! They literally want to punish a man for saving a poor bear cub that was injured, sick, cold and hungry. I think the authorities are being unreasonable. The bear was on its way to die so it was good that Mr. Robson saved him. I do not think laws should prevent people from doing what’s right. That poor bear was just a baby and it needs to live its life. I know people think it is nature but they should think about how they would feel if they were left somewhere to freeze and starve.
If I was in Mr. Robson’s shoes I would save the bear and bring it to the wildlife center. A bear cub would be near the mother bear and wouldn’t be wandering alone. If I saw a bear cub all alone I would know something is not right. Mr. Robson did the right thing in my opinion. He is very frustrated because he could be fined or put into prison for simply saving a bear cub from a slow and painful death. The bear was about 55 POUNDS UNDERWEIGHT and was clearly starving.
So to sum it up, I think Mr. Robson was right and did a good thing. People like to complain about everything so they are trying to punish Mr. Robson for doing a good deed. Mr. Robson saved the cub’s life and I think he is a good person. The authorities on the other hand are very bad people who would punish a man for saving a bear cub. I love bears and I think we should always help them when they are in need.
Baby bear at my door?!
Oh wow, imagine finding a baby bear at your door! What a surprise! This man found a hungry poor sick scared baby bear with no mother at his door! His first intentions were to leave it, but at that time it was –2 and raining. He went and feed the bear, and drying da bear AwwwwwW uwu. He waited a while, but
the mother bear never came. Soon 16 hours had passed. So, he called BC Conservation Officers, but they refused to help the poor baby bear. They said to call back some other day. The cub was a size of a dog, I think they should have done something about it. Now he is being investigated for breaking the law. I would have done what Mr. Robson had done, I can’t watch a baby animal die of the cold and loss of food! It may be against the law. But animals are dying fast due to what US humans do! Over 4341 black
bears, 162 grizzly bears, and 780 cougars have been killed these past few years. PEOPLE NEED TO TAKE ACTION TO SAVE ANIMALS!! Some reasons that I would NOT help the bear would be, laws. If I helped the bear, then I would have to go to court, which involves a lawyer, if not I could be charged, or worse arrested! The bear may suddenly attack, bears are STILL bears! There dangerous and almost extinct,
because of us crappy (please don’t fine me for dat! 3:) humans. It can disrupt the ecosystem (not like we aren’t doing that more ;-;) causing more and more animals being shot down because they believe there with be food there for them forever. I feel like the Wildlife Act is wrong for trying to charge/arrest this
man, for saving a bear that people are already killing!! They should think about their own actions! So many animals, not just bears are being killed every day by STUPID humans! Its running late and I have school tomorrow DUH. That will conclude this, thank you.
-Noorai~
Hello, today I will explain about my thoughts on: TO HELP A BEAR OR TO NOT. I think that the man did the right thing and it was just what lots of people would do. I also think that the officer wasn’t doing the right thing. The officer should have just accepted the bear cub so the bear cub could have a better life. The officer should have accepted the bear cub. How they rejected the bear cub is like rejecting a child. If I was him, I would definitely follow the route that he did. If I didn’t want to do what he did I would just leave the bear on the porch but give it a bed or something like that. I would still do what Mr.Robson did though. If I knew I was violating the act I would still do what he did. I would still do this because I would not let the bear suffer in –2 degrees temperature, imagine standing in –2 degrees for 16 hours waiting for your mother. I do wish though that the mother bear had come already so the bear wouldn’t have to suffer more. Why I would still do that because then the bear cub would have an easier life. Now for the reasons why people should not feed animals, I have 6 reasons for this. I think people should not feed animals because: 1. Then animals might like people food and then might get aggressive for our food. 2. Also, if they like our food they might go into our garbage cans and make a mess. Also, the garbage that spills could pollute the ecosystem. 3. Human food can kill/poison animals that eat the food, human food is like junk food to animals. 4. You shouldn’t feed animals when you go to GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK because the squirrels there actually BITE! 5. You also shouldn’t feed animals because they might get close to humans and get hit by a car or bus. 6. Too many animals in one area is also bad because with more animals there is a higher chance of humans getting diseases from the animals.
THANKS FOR READING!!!!!!
I think that if I were Mr. Robson, I would’ve taken the bear cub to that Critter Care Wildlife Society (in Langley), or any other place that might be willing to help this bear, that would just like Mr. Robson did. This technically isn’t fair that Mr. Robson might have to go to jail of pay large fines to the police (or government) all because he touched a bear, didn’t harm it, and brought it to a wildlife facility. Sure, you normally wouldn’t want to touch a bear, but a harmless, defenseless, poor, cold bear? You would normally want to help it. Forget you. If I saw that poor bear, I would’ve IMMEDIATELY taken it to somewhere safe and warm. The bear was sick and had to endure NEGATIVE TWO-degree temperatures. The bear had been outside for sixteen hours all by itself, and as Mr. Robson said, “No mother bear would leave a cub by itself.” His wife even called a conservation officer that morning because she was concerned about the bear cub. The article said that they refused to help. The conservation officer, Nicole Caithness, said that the reason they refused to help was because they needed to have the bear under surveillance for twenty-four to forty-eight hours, just in case the bear hadn’t just wander away from the den by accident. If the bear did just wander away by accident, then the officers would just hope that the bear could find its way back. If the bear did get lost and decided to stay here, that’s when the officers come in. The officers guide the bear back to the forest or den that they came from, or they just take them to a wildlife center, just like Mr. Robson did. What I don’t get is that the officers know that the bears weak and injured, and their job is to take the bear to a place that the bear can rest and recover. But if Mr. Robson already did that, he’s basically doing the officers job for them. That’s a good thing. So, if someone does a good thing, should they get fines for it or even go to jail? I don’t think so. I mean, have you ever seen a person in public, do something nice, and then suddenly, the next day the news say that the person that did something nice is getting a large, juicy fine or even face time in jail? Again, I don’t think so. In fact, I think that going to jail or getting a big fine for doing something good is the stupidest thing that I’ve ever heard. Sure, Mr. Robson is violating the wildlife act by touching the bear, and normally if you get close to a bear, they become aggressive towards you, and you wouldn’t want to feed the bear because the bear will just keep coming back, but again, this is a bear cub. Its mother is gone, the cub is sick, injured, and had to endure negative two degrees outside all alone.
One of the wildlife center employees, Senior animal care technician Nathan Wagstaffe said the male bear cub only weighed twenty pounds. The average weight for a bear cub like this one should be about seventy to eighty pounds. “He was probably born in January or February of last year, but bears have this amazing ability that when they don’t have enough food, they stop growing,” he said. “His heart was definitely in the right place but unfortunately his actions were not.” The officials said it was the wrong thing to do, but Mr. Robson said that he was willing to go to jail for it. Pacific wild is an organization that protects wild animals and try to tell other people to stop hunting the wildlife. In the video, it said that this organization has sent a “open letter” to the province, saying that the B.C. conservation officers have killed about 4341 Black Bears, 162 Grizzly Bears, and 780 Cougars in the past eight years, from 2011 to 2019. The video also said that the ministry of environment is now looking at the letter. The Ministry of Environment (and Climate Change Strategy) is responsible for all the effective protection, management and conservation of B.C.’s water, land, air and living resources. The video said that the bear is in good hands in the wildlife center and may stay there for up year. “I think it’s ridiculous,” said Robson. “All I was trying to do was help the bear.” I agree with him. As I said earlier in my blog, I have never seen anybody (other than Mike Robson) get fined all because he did a good thing. Maybe you, the reader might have, but all I know is that I have never seen anyone be treated like this. How would you feel if you were Mr. Robson and you helped a poor, sick bear and now you’re getting fined for it? Would you fight back? Or would you just accept the fact that “yup, I violated the wildlife act and now I’m getting fined”, like Mr. Robson did. I would’ve immediately fought back because it’s just not fair. I’m pretty sure that the video said that Mr. Robson was prepared to hire a lawyer to aid him in this case. So, in conclusion, I think that I would’ve went the same path as Mike. Even if it meant that I was violating the wildlife act, I would still do anything to help the bear.
In my opinion i would have done it worse than Mr.robson. He went straight to rescue the bear cub.What i would have done was do it more afraid than straight in for the rescue but if i did not the bear would have starved to death and maybe worse.But what he did was not a wrong act it was a good act but this might not remain the same cause it has a good reason to not interfere with wildlife but what’s worse it can cause? People teach bear and animals how to hunt all the time so this act was not bad act. Now why would a mother/father bear leave a cub behind? I searched and it said:a mother bears connection with a cub would remain strong till the cub grow big enough to hunt and live by itself. This would mean the bear grew big enough that the mother bear thought it can hunt,live and have a family by itself.Or we have another option that is more sad than the last one the mothers DEAD this could also be another reason why for one day the mother did not return and why the cub was at starving in the winter.now back to mr robson. He didn’t even think that the bear was going to do harm he went swooping down and went to a bc conservation officer to help it but the man was literally man of the law and did not help he was going to have to leave the cub outside till the mother came because interference might cause harm to the wild life. But this is madness! The bears gonna die and you rather refuse to help instead of helping it! But if Mr.robson did not help the bear would die and maybe the mother was alive the mother would not know what happened the the life time journey would happen and the mother would never find or the bear cub would go to a different house and do the same thing but the owner might not do the same as robson did he was someone like a green person save the environment guy this is what i think would have happened.
The reason to not feed wildlife is because the wild life can just get food from you and never learn to hunt the bear would never get a mate and breed more bears. If this is not right then it would also get attached to humans and would live with the humans.This is not the only person who rescued an animal more have done the same and was treated worse for doing something that might not harm like giving it a ride,freeing him, or just handing to someone who can take care of the animal. And to add more of my opinion do i think that this should be allowed? Yes but it shouldn’t say NOT ALLOWED TO TOUCH ANIMALS.this is cruel you look at an animal die.and reasons why we humans kind and harmful should help. Some animals are going instinct like whales and even some bears like pandas etc. So why are the officer not wanting to help? These animals are going extinct and all they do is obey the law.So in my opinion this act was right and i would do the same.Even tho rules are far greater than what we do to help.
pls dont look at mine,mine sucks cause i know and i wrote it.:(
No it doesn’t!!
I would have helped the bear cub because I wouldn’t want the bear to die. Why would anyone want to leave an animal stranded outside hurt, hungry and in -2 degree temperature especially since it is a bear cub. I don’t understand why they would try to get that man in trouble, was just trying to help a animal that was in trouble. The government is trying to get him in trouble because they are saying that he violated some sort of law that says humans can’t interfere with wildlife, but then what are all those wildlife care centres that they advertise on T.V., are those illegal? Why are those people trying to get him in trouble, they should be rewarding him for saving a bear cubs life. I read the article and it seemed like nobody was trying to help the bear not even his neighbors would help the bear and the bear was on their porch. I think that the law about not interfering with the wild life is stupid, what I mean by that is I get why that law is in place, what I don’t get is what if a animal is in danger and is on the verge of dying, you can’t just let it die. It seems like there are always laws or rules that when you look at them from one perspective they seem like they make sense and from another perspective its like it doesn’t make sense at all, just like this one. I get why there is a law about not interfering with wildlife like it can mess up a food cycle or make a animal dependent on humans and not on themselves. Also fining someone or getting someone in trouble for saving an animals life is the opposite thing you should be doing, you should be thanking them for being such nice people because there are so many people who have no manners and are being rude all day and also they saved a animals life. Normally people don’t get to save lives and saving a persons life you are considered a hero and get thanked, but saving an animals life and you get fined, that’s what i don’t think is fair. Where do the people who makes laws thinks food comes from and if you let a animal die you can either make it into food so you are not wasting anything or you can not realize its there until it is too late and it is probably going to be the latter. If you let the animal rot then it is wasted because the person didn’t think enough to save the animal, so just save the animal. That is why I think that the law is stupid because an animal dies because you didn’t think enough to save it and it just doesn’t make sense at all from one perspective. Bear cubs can’t survive on their on without their mothers and the mother of that bear cub was no where to be found. Taking the bear to one of those wildlife care centres or something was the best possible thing to do in that situation otherwise the cub might have died from starvation or hypothermia or even dehydration so that person did the right thing. It’s not like putting the bear in one of those animal care centre places is going to make the bear come back wanting food or something. I’m pretty sure that those care centres train the animals to hunt for food or look for food so the animals don’t become lazy and try to get food from them. I read that normal bear cubs are usually 70-80 pounds and this cub weighed in at 20 pounds, thats how hungry it was it was 50 pounds below average weight. So, as the conclusion to my blog post, I would like to ask you what would you do in that situation, like I said in the beginning I would try to help the cub. That is the end of my blog post, I hope you liked it and goodbye.
I think Mr. Robson did the right thing to help the bear, because if he didn’t, the bear probably would’ve died. It really bothers me that when the wife called BC Conservation Services, they rejected her, even though she was doing the right thing. I think it was wrong of BC Conservation Services to reject Mrs. Robson because she was just trying to help, and she wanted to get the bear cub to safety. The bear cub had to wait more than 16 whole hours, which is a whole lot of time to wait without eating any food or drinking any water. As mentioned on CTV, the bear was already malnourished and in bad shape, and it probably lost its mother a while ago, and somehow wandered into Mr. Robson’s backyard. I understand that BC Conservation Services have to follow the rules and wait for 24 or even 48 hours before picking up a wild animal, but they could have at least sent someone to check if the little bear was injured or starving. Maybe if someone experienced with wild or bigger animals was sent, they would see that something is not right, and they would take the bear cub with them and then Mr. Robson would not be blamed. If you saw a bear cub in your backyard, would you help it? If I saw one, I would, without a doubt, I would want to do something help it. I don’t think the man should be questioned, because it’s not like he fed the bear or tried to harm it, he just helped it by taking it to a local wildlife centre. If I were Mr. Robson, I would have done the same. I would have to be in the position, but since I never was, I think that I would help the bear, even if I knew that I would face consequences. At least I would feel good about trying to do something rather than watching an animal suffer. But even though I think Mr. Robson did the right thing, it would be better if a professionally trained person, who is trained to work with wild animals or bears was involved, because they can be dangerous. Some of the reasons that bears are dangerous is because if you get close to them, they might harm you, or severely injure you. The bear’s mother could have been around and attacked Mr. Robson trying to protect her cub. Nobody should be feeding bears and other wild animals because they might continue to keep coming back because they learn that they don’t have to hunt and all they have to do is wait for you to give them some food. Another reason that you shouldn’t feed bears is because human food isn’t that good for animals. After all, the bear cub is now safe in the wildlife centre, and even if it is never released back into the wild, it is still better than if it died of cold or starvation. I am surprised that even Conservation Services thought that Mr. Robson was wrong. Are they absolutely sure that a bear cub would eventually simply get up and search for food and water? Also, it’s not like Mr. Robson was searching for a bear cub in the forest, it just showed up in his backyard. It would be wrong if he was actually went and grabbed a bear out of the forest and took it away from its mother and family. In conclusion, we all learned from this article – I think I would first call the BC Conservation Services but if I thought they are not responding I would keep on calling until someone came over to check the animal, but I wouldn’t just stand still and not do anything about an animal in distress.
I think that Mike Robson is perfectly in the right, for the reason that he was rescuing a bear cub that was outside in –2 degrees Celsius weather for 16 hours straight. The mother bear has clearly left it or died because no mother bear would leave its child for a day and allow somebody to just kill the defenseless bear. When Mike had enough of the bear cub being left outside, he took it to a wildlife center. Shortly after he returned to his home, where an officer had finally responded to the freezing bear, however he had already sent the bear to the wildlife center. Then he was being investigated just because he sent a bear to a wildlife center so it wouldn’t freeze to death, and because he violated a wildlife act. That is actually really freaking stupid. He sent a bear that was freezing whose mother was clearly not foraging to a wildlife center, just to get investigated and told he had violated The Wildlife Act. The bear was starving, too. It was way lighter than it was supposed to be, 60 pounds lighter than that of how bears usually weigh. He barely interacted with the bear, just wrapping it in a blanket and giving it to a wildlife center, not giving it food or acting friendly to it. After a few seconds the bear couldn’t have seen him with the blanket wrapped around him, so the bear probably wasn’t even affected by the whole thing. He didn’t want the bear to be killed by the conservation officers, so he sent it to a wildlife shelter. The article itself even says “it’s unlikely it had become used to people”. So, in what way is he violating the wildlife act? He barely even did, that’s the problem. The most damaging thing he did was wrapping a bear in a blanket and sending it away. That’s it. Yet he will still get fined and might be even arrested for rescuing a bear, which is actually really stupid and shouldn’t be a thing. This whole ordeal over him “violating” the wildlife act is extremely stupid, and I don’t think he should be fined at all.