LOL, not much of an excuse, especially when you're filming it. Now you've got a wounded bear on the loose. What could possibly go wrong - especially over time, after you leave and the wound gets infected?
Shoulda tracked it and killed it, Ted. But you know that.
P.S. Look out for any blowback against your gun rights. Federal convictions tend to invoke all sorts of restrictions.
Bears wound each other fighting, and a superficial wound with an arrow would likely heal right up. If the bear was only nicked there wouldn’t be much point in tracking it too far. This just sounds like more overreach and federal BS to me.
“They've got apparently some crazy law in Southeast [Alaska] that says if you even touch an animal with an arrow, it becomes your animal,” Ross told the paper. “He looked to see if he had hit it and didn't believe that he'd hit it fatally.”
Well - hard for me to say, as I wasn't there, nor have I seen any video on this... If he was filming, one would think there would be some good video evidence that the shot was not fatal (or even crippling). But with the Alaskan law being what it apparently is - an arrow (or bullet, I would assume) is well off the mark and you clip hair - you have "filled your tag". Something is a bit strange (or messed up) here.