Washington State Rangers Confirm That Hunter Killed Beloved “Cinder” Bear

We have another story this week of a beloved animal who was killed by a hunter.  Cinder was a young black bear that was nursed back to health after she was severely burned in a 2014 Washington wildfire. She became a moving story for many as she fought her way back to health and was eventually returned to the wild.  The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has now confirmed that she was killed. She was the subject of the book “Cinder the Bear: A True Story of Rescue, Recovery, Rehabilitation and Return.”

The rangers found her skeletal remains and assumed that the hunter cut off the tracking collar on Cinder.  The department’s bear specialist, Rich Beausoleil, said Cinder’s radio collar stopped transmitting in October 2017, but he hoped it was because she was holed up in a den somewhere within the Cascades for the winter. This September, a team set out to find Cinder’s den and instead found her skeletal remains not far from where she was set free after her recovery.

After she was rescued,  Cinder was flown first to Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care in California, which specializes in treating burns, and then to a rehab center in Idaho, She went from 34 pounds to 124 pounds before being released back into the wild.  

17 thoughts on “Washington State Rangers Confirm That Hunter Killed Beloved “Cinder” Bear”

  1. Who gave you the right to be” judge, jury and demand others be executioners?”

  2. Secondly Ninth Amendment. “Rights not granted are retained by the citizens.”

  3. Is bear hunting legal in Washington State and at the time ‘in season?
    Was the bear within limits as defined by Washington State?
    Did the hunter hold a valid hunting license and tags?
    Were proscribed weapons or techniques employed?

    Was any valid effort made to pre identify said game?

    If any of the first four above are NO hang the sumbeach
    Same if the last point was yes.

    Returning to the ‘wild’ is another way of saying ‘fair game.’

  4. Maybe Il Douche who killed Cinder will proudly display her tracking on his “trophy” wall!

    1. City folks should stay in the cities where they have chosen to be hunted and stay out of the USA.

  5. At 124 pounds Cinder would be too small to hunt for sport. There is nothing in this report that proves she did not die of natural causes.

    1. However, believe there are bubbas out there who’ll shoot at anything that moves. Never understood why there are people who enjoy killing anything for sport. If their egos makes them to kill something or somebody, draft them, send them to the front lines and make it a fair fight..

      1. Savage:
        Most hunters are responsible citizens and perform a valuable service in managing game populations. My guess is your dismissive attitude comes from knowing nothing about hunters or hunting. And I’ll bet your epithet “bubbas” comes from your ingrained belief that you are somehow a better person than the caricature you present of a dull-witted, working class, Southern male. Most of the hunters I know are professional people or business owners with the means to engage in the costly endeavor.

        Arrogance and ignorance are never in short supply and usually mutually dependent.

      2. However, believe there are bubbas out there who’ll shoot at anything that moves.

        Avocational hunters in my neck of the woods are meticulous about mastering method and current technology. And, of course, they obtain a permit each year, and those permits are rationed.

      3. Savage, because you don’t understand the attraction of the sport, it’s automatically a bad thing? “I never understood why there are people who enjoy [noisy cars that run around an oval for hours]. Since they enjoy pointless noise, let’s send those people out to the front lines…”

    2. Ḯ đѳ ﬡѳţ ҟﬡѳѡ ḯƒ ţħḯƨ ḯƨ ţħϵ ḉäƨϵ ѳᴦ ﬡѳţ Ƀǔţ Ḯ ƨħäᴦϵ ţħϵ ƨäӎϵ ḉѳﬡḉϵᴦﬡ. Ħѳѡ ḯƨ ḯţ ţħäţ ä ѡḯłđłḯƒϵ Ƀḯѳłѳǥḯƨţ ḉäﬡ đϵţϵᴦӎḯﬡϵ ѡḯţħ ḉϵᴦţäḯﬡţƴ ţħäţ äﬡ äﬡḯӎäł đḯϵđ ƒᴦѳӎ ä ǥǔﬡƨħѳţ ѡħϵﬡ ѡħäţ ᴦϵӎäḯﬡƨ ѳƒ ţħϵ äﬡḯӎäł ḯƨ ƨҟϵłϵţäł ᴦϵӎäḯﬡƨ? Äᴦϵ ţħϵƴ ϵжᴘϵᴦţƨ ḯﬡ ţħḯƨ ţƴᴘϵ ѳƒ äᴦϵä? Ḯ đѳ ﬡѳţ ḯҟﬡѳѡ ḯƒ ţħϵƴ äᴦϵ ѳᴦ ţħϵƴ äᴦϵ ﬡѳţ.

      Ḯţ ḉѳǔłđ ⱴϵᴦƴ ѡϵłł Ƀϵ ţħϵ ḉäƨϵ ţħϵ äﬡḯӎäł đḯϵđ ƒᴦѳӎ ä ǥǔﬡƨħѳţ Ƀǔţ ѳƒ ţħϵ ḯﬡƒѳᴦӎäţḯѳﬡ ţħäţ ѡäƨ äⱴäḯłäɃłϵ ḯﬡ ţħϵ ﬡϵѡƨ ḯţ łϵäⱴϵƨ ӎϵ ѡḯţħ ƨѳӎϵ đѳǔɃţ äƨ ţѳ ḯţƨ ḉѳﬡḉłǔƨḯѳﬡƨ.

  6. I’m “pro-choice” regarding hunting and while I may not engage in this activity, I support the rights of other law abiding people to do so. Let’s keep hunting safe, legal and on demand, hunting rights across this land.


    1. I agree with Antonio and my basis for pro choice is based on the Second Amendment.
      The Framers were dyslectic and meant to say: ..”The Right To Arm Bears..”
      In this situation if the dead bear had been armed with a rifle he could have defended himself. He could have shot the lame brain who shot at him and then put the head of lame brain on a hook on the wall of his cave to show off to others.

      But the notion that “hunting:is and should be held “safe, legal and on demand, hunding rights across this land” is off base. There is “no right to hunt”.

      If there is then someone should go out and find the shooter and kill him/her. That is “hunt”. Someone who shoots a todler, be it a human or a bear, needs to be shot and killed.

      1. “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Of course that does not apply to those who don’t support Constitutional law.

Comments are closed.