Wounded Bear near West Yellowstone

Forest Service warns public of injured bear By ARCHERY HUNTER near West Yellowstone 

In Hunters are not Conservationists, Yellowstone National Park by Twowolves4 Comments

Wounded Bear near West Yellowstone


The U.S. Forest Service is warning visitors of an injured bear near the Johnson Lake trailhead and is urging people heading to the area to take precautions.

 A Forest Service news release said the bear was injured in an encounter with an archery hunter on Tuesday. The agency is unsure whether it is a grizzly or a black bear.

Officials have posted warning signs at several sites in the area. No trails or areas have been closed.

Visitors are being asked to avoid hiking or hunting alone, to make noise, be aware of their surroundings and carry bear spray.

Source: Forest Service warns public of injured bear near West Yellowstone | Wildlife | bozemandailychronicle.com


  1. I disagree with the first statement to this and another related article I have read. I am in partial agreement with the other, but am of the personal opinion that misinformation on either side only hurts the actual reality of the situation.
    I am very much into archery, am trying to learn tracking and hunting techniques, and fully believe that one is better off knowing survival techniques. That being said, I do not hunt, I haven’t hunted since I was about 17 and shot a raccoon, which was skinned and eaten.
    First off, there is a huge difference between bow hunting and shooting a gun. The amount of skill, practice and outdoor factors come in play, well, even a well seasoned bow hunter will miss from time to time, it is quite an easy feat to accomplish. Just a little bit easier than missing with a tuned/scoped rifle. \
    If it was an unseasoned hunter that should have not been hunting a target is one thing, but a well seasoned bow hunter going after any bear, well, that in itself is quite amazing, I would not consider it lest I be starving and half stark raving mad.
    The other article I read was on hunters being the opposite of conversationalists. Another seemingly one-sided and untrue statement. It all depends on what they are hunting and more importantly: where. Humans have decimated many of the natural predators in the U.S., so much so that some species of wolves have been reintroduced to areas. I’m not saying all, half or even most, but there are plenty of places and examples. It is always important to be responsible with ones opinion, I do not hunt because there is no “need”, and the area I live in, definitely a need not to. But that does not hold true for everywhere, like many parts of Illinois I have lived, where wolves are still hunted as predators of farm animals and the deer need hunters to keep them in check.
    Just saying, the extremes damage both sides, how about some realistic view points?

    1. Author

      All of our Viewpoints are very Realistic 😉 This article was from an outside source for 1. We did not write it, we posted it to warn the Public.
      Being Native American, I Archery Hunted for many years… I would suggest before making such a one sided comment that you first know whom your speaking with. Might perhaps lend your comment a bit of Credibility, yet your lack of experience obviously took that away, both as someone that is Judgmental, as well as no real experience in the woods.

      1. Plenty of experience in the woods, mountains, deserts, rural farmlands, cities and even metropolitan areas :). If the article was from an outside source, then that is who it is aimed at. The lack of credibility is solely in the above comment: “Some People have no need to try to hunt… They wound a Bear… and thats ok??”. A little more information instead of just an emotional opinion with no facts, no information and no real insight to back it up. They started an article with that out of place sentence, it is quite bad. I was expecting something else but was instead left wanting.

        About the other article, if you have lived in the Midwest for a considerable amount of time, you should also know what I am talking about. Another article that makes a bold and strong claim, yet nothing to back it up. In both, I am left feeling like I only read a few paragraphs of articles that should have been a few pages with something, anything else in them to back them up.

        As the reader, it is my job to be critical of the information that I read, and in this case, I am left just having to be critical of a few statements and no real information. I do not have to be a “credible” reader, that is just ludicrous. My unfavorable response to these articles is in the complete lack of information that leads me to believe they are just unfounded opinions. Furthermore, as someone who loves nature, I believe in trying to live a sustainable existence and acting responsible to my surroundings and our planet. We only have one and we are destroying it. I would love to see more people notice, however, I don’t think articles like these help at all.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.