Home / AMERICAN NEWS / Rescue of Injured Eagle Sparks Nationwide Debate Over Wildlife Intervention

Rescue of Injured Eagle Sparks Nationwide Debate Over Wildlife Intervention

A nationwide debate began over U.S. wildlife intervention when officials rescued an injured eagle that was suffering from a broken wing. The injured eagle was part of a nest of eaglets that were being broadcasted to thousands of people all over the world.

On the other hand, a moose was found in pain from an open wound where its tail should have been in Minnesota. Wildlife experts agreed that it was a result of a wolf attack and chose to leave it alone.

injured eagle

Minnesota Nongame Wildlife Program’s EagleCam.
(Facebook)

These types of natural events in the wild highlight a nationwide issue that’s common all throughout the country: when should we let nature take its course and when is it appropriate to intervene?

“It depends on the circumstances in each case, and often it depends on how man has affected the situation,” Dough Inkley, a senior scientist with the National Wildlife Federation said, according to The Associated Press.

Though every animal is needed to maintain genetic diversity, Inkley and other biologists prefer leaving it up to nature’s wisdom, though intervention can occur with endangered species or when humans caused the problem, says AP.

Yellowstone National Park spokesperson Amy Bartlett says that officials hardly intervene with nature. The only case she could remember was when a grizzly bear was hit by a car several years ago.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources announced a “hands-off” approach when they went live with an EagleCam this spring. The EagleCam had a large following when three baby eagles hatches, though soon after one of the chicks began experiencing issues.

Eagle-viewers demanded that action take place, posting a slew of complaints on the Nongame Wildlife Program’s Facebook page along with calls to the governor’s office. Officials then decided to take the injured eagle from its nest, according to AP.

The eaglet was taken to The Raptor Center at the University of Minnesota, where vets found it had a systemic infection and a broken wing. They were forced to euthanize the eaglet after determining it had no chance of surviving in the wild or living a pain-free life in captivity.

About Chelsea Alves

  • johnhay

    “one of the chicks began experiencing issues…”

    Can intelligent, professional writers please stop substituting “issues” for the word “problems” — or better yet, actually describe the problem at hand? That reads ridiculously and it’s terrible reporting.

    • michael

      Most of the time, those “intelligent professional writers” you refer to are just kids who will say things like “gone missing” and “has issues” and the other meaningless, lingo-laden tripe that you find in high school and college newspapers unless wiser editors step in. Even in the big city newspaper where I work, much of the staff fits this description (especially in the summer when cheap interns are everywhere), and senior editors have, uhm, “issues” when it comes to making them respect the language and their readers.

    • http://www.kacweb.com/writing.html Kenny Chaffin

      Yes the standards have plummeted. We need serious journalism, not web-posts. It’s actually quite frightening and one more piece that is a part of the War on Science.

  • Devildoc68

    This type of thing has been going on for years… why is this news? Slow day at the media I guess.

  • Cheeky Bum

    We are not living in a Third World Country! If there is an injured animal take it to the Vet! What is the debate?! This writer is clearly an idiot. Fresh off the boat. Why give him a voice in our country’s practices?

    • jean_luc_turbo

      HE’s “fresh off the boat”?!! Your comment shows how your racism and inability to read “his” name go hand in hand.

    • lpaulbak

      The writer seems pretty open to both sides of the argument to me. She presents both sides of the argument from what I can see. What I get a kick out of is the fact that our country has the nerve to debate how to handle nature in a way that respects natural selection and eugenics while practicing the most harmful form of dysgenics within our own species. What gives us the right?

  • Chris Meyering

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with helping any living being in need if one has the means and resources. Were all part of the same planet. Although I do understand the non intervention argument, and I understand why you shouldn’t feed them. But I believe its our duty as human beings to help a wounded animal for we are the only animals with the ability to ad so. Not to mention that we are resp0onsible for most of the worlds suffering of wildlife….

    • jamdev12

      Chris, I wonder if you are a vegan. Are you? I would say that your are probably not. So with that I would have to say that taking a stand for one type of animal because you like it more than another doesn’t jive well when many more get slaughtered on a daily basis for your consumption.

  • JerryBallew

    Nothing wrong with helping endangered species live. Better than those testosterone little stub hunters making like “real” men hunting down wildlife with their firepower in place or real manhood.

  • proudrat

    “nature’s wisdom” Nature has no wisdom. It’s just ongoing random events playing out in a system designed to be self-perpetuating. Survival of the fittest and eat or be eaten is the name of the game.

  • effingreat

    We have no problems slaughtering cows and pigs and other animals… so why not save some too?