I am not an animal activist. I eat meat and own a fur coat (although I didn’t ask for one–it was given to me by my husband as a Christmas present).
I wonder, however, why the Tribune thought the article about a 9-year-old girl shooting a bear that her hunting dog had treed was something that should be published as an accomplishment (Main news, Dec. 5). Was the bear threatening her life or that of her father or dog? Were they hungry, and did they use the bear for food and/or clothing that they needed to stay alive themselves?
Even under those circumstances, the event could only have been considered incredibly sad. The Tribune seems to have considered it cute that a 9-year-old child could be trained to point a gun at an animal and kill it for sport, but I believe there are many people who would think differently.
