Save a dying bear cub, go to jail?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hiker-saved-baby-bear-cpr-204600449.html

Comments/thoughts ?

I would absolutely have done the same thing.  How could you not?

Good story. Anyone with a love of nature would have done exactly the same thing. Not even close to the story in Yellowstone. Thanks for sharing this.

Interesting story and topic. I'll present a different view (with a visual aid!). I would have just left it alone and called a wildlife official to report the situation at my first opportunity. While I don't question or criticize the good samaritan's intentions, I don't think we should encourage lay people (i.e., non wildlife experts, including me) to make judgment calls and personally take action like this. While Andrew says "Not even close to the story in Yellowstone" (regarding the bison calf that was "rescued" because it looked cold and then had to be put down) can we trust people to know when they should interfere with nature and how to properly do it? Just as an example, people here locally have been known to try to "rescue" what they mistakenly think is a fawn that has been abandoned. A mother deer will leave her fawn alone for hours. See above photo of one left alone for hours last year in the back of my next door neighbor's yard. It's a slippery slope, and I think a bright line rule of not personally interfering, as required by wildlife laws or regulations, may be best. So, I think the better practice is to not personally interfere but to instead call wildlife officials to report what you found. Not always practical or effective, I know.

<div>FAKE NEWS!  Did that catch your attention?  Well that's was the intent of the headline in this case, because the real bottom line intent of both the tabloid TV news and Yahoo News, is to sell advertising, and that takes sensational headlines.  The basic story here is that a person with good intentions acted responsibly by bringing an apparently abandoned, physically distressed bear cub to a wildlife rehabilitation facility; and then  law enforcement officials decided not to charge the man, even though his action was technically in violation of a law prohibiting removal of animals from "their natural habitat."  That's not very sensational, so the idea that there was a "jail threat" was used.  The result is that people are led to believe that the law prohibiting removal of wildlife from their habitat is outrageously misguided.
 </div> <div>The intent of such laws is obviously to protect wildlife from those who want to use wild animals for their personal enjoyment by making them pets, as well as those who want to do the same thing, but with good intentions of saving them, ignorant of the fact that most young animals taken from nature are in fact not abandoned.  "Adopted" infant animals ("kidnapped" is usually more accurate) often die soon after capture, and even those who survive typically face a life in captivity.  Rather than using this incident to educate the public about that fact,  this story chose to enrage people about a seemingly unfair law.
 </div> <div>The system for enforcing such wildlife protection laws offers officials opportunities to ensure fairness to people as well as protection for wildlife.  Law enforcement officials (as in this case), government prosecutors and the courts typically seek to enforce the spirit of the law.  Legislative intent is made clear by the bills creating such laws, even if it is not clear in the statute.  Used responsibly, such laws protect wildlife without unfairly burdening people.  That's what happened here, but a headline like "Officials Decide Not To Charge Man Who Brought Bear Cub To Wildlife Center" would never make it to the national TV audience or Yahoo's advertizing-laden web pages, would it?</div>

I don't like interfering with nature, and usually don't; however, in a case like that, I feel certain I would, especially if the animal was on the Endangered List.