The case of an injured moose has sparked debate on where human intervention with nature starts and ends.

Minnesota residents recently spotted a pregnant moose on Gunflint Trail, located in the state's northeastern region. The animal had an open wound on its tail side. Experienced woodsman Mark Ceminsky and DNR conservation officer Darin Fagerman believed that a wolf attacked the moose; luckily, the moose survived and was strong enough to heal on its own.

Officials made the opposite decision in the case of a baby eagle with a broken wing, whose nest was watched by thousands of people around the world through a video feed called the EagleCam. When the bird showed signs of struggling, viewers posted on the Nongame Wildlife Program's Facebook page and even called the governor to ask for help for the eagle.

The public demanded that officials act, and the eagle was brought to The Raptor Center at the University of Minnesota. Veterinarians treated it for a broken wing and systemic infection, but in the end, the eagle had to be euthanized because of its low chance of survival in the wild.

Officials with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources previously established a hands-off policy when it launched the EagleCam from a nest in the Twin Cities. The wildlife managers changed the policy when the public reacted.

Lori Naumann, the program's spokeswoman told Chron, "Social media had a big impact on our decision-making process. My phone blew up. My email blew up."

A senior scientist with the National Wildlife Foundation, Doug Inkley, along with his colleagues, was more in favor of letting nature decide when it comes to wildlife.

"It depends on the circumstances in each case, and often it depends on how man has affected the situation," he stated.