the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
02-13-2009 | 05:09 AM
#11
Fork Horn
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
From: SE Wisconsin
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
ORIGINAL: mr.mc54 The land owner is fighting the DNR over the Large Black Bear that was hit by the combine in Dunn county WI. Their reason is they say the Bear was still alive when hit by the combine. When the bear was dressed out it was still steaming some four hours after it was hit. The bear was shot a day and a half earlier according to the ND hunter who shot it. The land owner who bought the bear from a warden says that they had a contract with the DNR when they bought the bear for $75.00 and they didn't know the bear was shot at that time. The land owner says that the reason the DNR wants the bear is because of it's huge size. This one will go to court!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The DNR allowed the farmer to have the bear because at the time there was no evidence of any wrong doing.
Later, it was learned the SD hunter had attempted to purchase a bear tag during the gun deer season. Flags went up, pieces were put together. The bullet holes were discovered. The DNR then needed the bear carcass for evidence and the investigation.NO different than any police investigation, evidence is gathered, perserved, and secured.
The whole thing is kinda boring standard stuff. This rumor spreading with wild a$$ speculation is for the tabloids. JMHO.
02-13-2009 | 06:29 AM
#12
Typical Buck
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
From: Blue Ridge Mountains of VA
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
Well, call it as you see it, I'm interested to see how it turns out. In my opinion, If the farmer had not found the bear, dead or alive. It would have probably been lost all together..[:@] That fact alone should make it the farmers bear..I'm curious? How far did the bear travel?...What size is this bear?
02-13-2009 | 07:18 AM
#13
Fork Horn
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
From: Barron county Wi
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
ORIGINAL: 1sagittarius
Wow, you guys are pathetic.
The DNR allowed the farmer to have the bear because at the time there was no evidence of any wrong doing.
Later, it was learned the SD hunter had attempted to purchase a bear tag during the gun deer season. Flags went up, pieces were put together. The bullet holes were discovered. The DNR then needed the bear carcass for evidence and the investigation.NO different than any police investigation, evidence is gathered, perserved, and secured.
The whole thing is kinda boring standard stuff. This rumor spreading with wild a$$ speculation is for the tabloids. JMHO.
Wow, you guys are pathetic.
The DNR allowed the farmer to have the bear because at the time there was no evidence of any wrong doing.
Later, it was learned the SD hunter had attempted to purchase a bear tag during the gun deer season. Flags went up, pieces were put together. The bullet holes were discovered. The DNR then needed the bear carcass for evidence and the investigation.NO different than any police investigation, evidence is gathered, perserved, and secured.
The whole thing is kinda boring standard stuff. This rumor spreading with wild a$$ speculation is for the tabloids. JMHO.
Oh and thoughts and prayers with you mrmc54 with your surgery today I hope everything goes well and you have a speedy revovery!!!
02-13-2009 | 10:47 AM
#14
Fork Horn
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
From: SE Wisconsin
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
ORIGINAL: jessejmc1979 What would the dnr say if the farmer decided that he didn't want the bear anymore?
ORIGINAL: jessejmc1979 Would he get his money back?
ORIGINAL: jessejmc1979 Knowing our dnr I probably would have to lean towards no!!
ORIGINAL: jessejmc1979 Exactly what kind of investigation do the geniuses have to do when they have a confession?
ORIGINAL: jessejmc1979 That seems pretty cut and dried to me, but the idiots in Madison probably would be able to screw that up too.
02-13-2009 | 11:14 AM
#15
Fork Horn
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
From: Barron county Wi
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
So if the hunter admits guilt why don't you explain to me what evidence is needed? An admission means guilty. The dnr thinks that they can do whatever they want and ignorant "followers" like you make this possible. You are in the vast minority in your unconditional support of the dnr, and I have to ask do you work for the dnr or just trying to get in.
02-13-2009 | 05:08 PM
#16
Typical Buck
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 675
Likes: 0
From:
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
So sags. if the DNR only needs the carcass for evidence, shouldn't the farmer get it back when the trial is over?
If you really want to start a heated debate, ask sags his stand on the DNR's policy for CWD
If you really want to start a heated debate, ask sags his stand on the DNR's policy for CWD
02-13-2009 | 06:25 PM
#18
Fork Horn
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
From: Barron county Wi
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
They didn't give the bear away.....They sold it!!! Very big difference there. The farmer paid for the animal, and if they weren't smart enough to look for bullet holes before they sold it then tough sh**!!
02-13-2009 | 06:47 PM
#19
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,679
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin/Michigan
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
ORIGINAL: jessejmc1979
They didn't give the bear away.....They sold it!!! Very big difference there. The farmer paid for the animal, and if they weren't smart enough to look for bullet holes before they sold it then tough sh**!!
They didn't give the bear away.....They sold it!!! Very big difference there. The farmer paid for the animal, and if they weren't smart enough to look for bullet holes before they sold it then tough sh**!!
02-14-2009 | 04:28 AM
#20
Thread Starter
Typical Buck
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 814
Likes: 0
From: N/W WI.
RE: the landowner fights the DNR for the large black bear
ORIGINAL: 1sagittarius
Wow, you guys are pathetic.
The DNR allowed the farmer to have the bear because at the time there was no evidence of any wrong doing.
Later, it was learned the SD hunter had attempted to purchase a bear tag during the gun deer season. Flags went up, pieces were put together. The bullet holes were discovered. The DNR then needed the bear carcass for evidence and the investigation.NO different than any police investigation, evidence is gathered, perserved, and secured.
The whole thing is kinda boring standard stuff. This rumor spreading with wild a$$ speculation is for the tabloids. JMHO.
Wow, you guys are pathetic.
The DNR allowed the farmer to have the bear because at the time there was no evidence of any wrong doing.
Later, it was learned the SD hunter had attempted to purchase a bear tag during the gun deer season. Flags went up, pieces were put together. The bullet holes were discovered. The DNR then needed the bear carcass for evidence and the investigation.NO different than any police investigation, evidence is gathered, perserved, and secured.
The whole thing is kinda boring standard stuff. This rumor spreading with wild a$$ speculation is for the tabloids. JMHO.
#1 The hunter was from North Dakota
#2If the hunter all ready confessed no carcass is needed![:'(][:'(][:'(]