Bear spray / Handgun

[AK Troutbum]

Firearm all the way. I carry a stainless/synthetic riot 12 ga. on all my rafting trips and while I'm fishing, and a S&W .500 on all my hunts. I've been involved in one DLP killing of two brown bears on Kodiak about 10 years ago and had we only had bear spray, I'm sure things would not have turned out very well for us.

 

[Mike21]

I'll take bear spray over a gun any day, even in grizzly country. In the extremely unlikely event of attack, you would have very little time to fire off an accurate round. Bear spray can be used from the hip and has such a wider area of coverage. I think carrying a sidearm is more comforting mentally but not the best choice. Not to mention bear spray is much lighter. Here is a link discussing this very topic:

http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/HTML/articles/2014/bearspray.htm#.VQ28xTXRfBA

I hope the wind is not blowing..... Also I can think of a few tv episodes where firearms were used to deter bears from a distance. An episode of meateater, and a couple Alaska shows. Seems like firing off a bullet next to a bear is just as much a deterent as spraying it. Plus you have the added option of physically stopping a bear. I also dont think bear spray has a wider area of coverage if you consider a 12 gauge or sidearm has way more range than a can of spray.

Maybe some Alaska guys can speak to this but alot of hunting in Grizzly country is fairly open, where you would have time to prepare for an attack (two of the shows attest to this) Also when I was in Alaska the bush pilot made sure that no bear spray was loaded inside the cab of the plane becasue it can burst inside. He was fine with unloaded guns. So I dont know if it was just him or if that is a standard bush plane practice.

 

[1hoda]

Counterassault has a $14 practice can of spray

 

[dotman]

I do think there is something to a warning shoot with the noise and shockwave from the blast that can be effective at running a bear off but that situation isn't the same as a split second charge. Fred Eichler has a you tube somewhere were a sow came charging in from 20 yards or so and one shoot out of the 44 turned her, who knows if it was a bluff or not. They didn't shoot the bear but they didn't get mauled either.

I'll carry both just because the weight penalty isn't that bad for either, my 44 loaded weighs 33oz, my Glock 10mm weighs 33oz and I'm assuming the bear spray is under 16oz. So combined weight for one of the pistols and spray is still less then most 44 mags.

So even if you miss maybe the sound and blast from the pistol can be effective, never seen a study on anything in this regard.

http://youtu.be/PuYs8Dnef3s

Meat eater
http://youtu.be/4fbQgjlpjgo

In the above video from Fred, I just highly doubt bear spray would of been effective. If they hadn't seen the cubs and the guide hadn't had his pistol already pulled I bet it would of been a different out come, even if they had spray, as no way either would of been pulled quick enough.

 

[jmez]

Fred and company would have gotten bit if not for that guide. I think that would be a pretty typical reaction from most anyone other than those making their living around them.

Pretty good thread on here about a year ago discussing hand guns for bear protection. Search and see if you can find it. Worth the read.

 

[hodgeman]

I've carried all of them for a variety of reasons.

Bear spray works for deterring curious or nuisance bears. Not such bad a deal considering the relative lack of hassle if you use it. Most bear encounters are not attacks occurring out of the bushes at close range. A bluff charge or a bear messing around camp is better sent packing with a snoot full of pepper than letting the shooting start.

If it comes back, shooting one is not such a bad idea.

Being bear aware and keeping your wits about you is probably the best idea no matter what you decide to pack along.

 

[Kevin Dill]

Next September I will be doing a solo hunt in eastern AK for 10 days. I'm getting dropped in by my pilot-friend and I don't plan to see another human until he comes in to get me or something I kill. I will likely be bringing both my S&W 329PD and a can of Counter Assault. I definitely don't ever want to shoot a bear in self-defense, but will if necessary. The spray is probably great for a nuisance bear or one that just persists in hanging around. Don't discount that kind of danger. I recall reading about a guide who got badly ass-kicked by a grizzly they had seen many times in the area of camp. They even had that bear nicknamed and considered him just a potential nuisance. He nailed the guide and it ended badly as I recall.

One personal thing for me: My handgun and bear spray both have tethers attached. In the heat of an encounter it's very easy to trip, fall or get knocked around and subsequently lose your grip on what might save your life. A piece of neon orange 540 paracord between the gun/spray and holster works well. Call me an over-thinker, but I plan to survive with as few scars as possible.

Finally...when I know I'm going into dangerous country I go with a partner, and he looks like this:

 

[airlocksniffer]

That is a beautiful gun if I do say so myself.

 

[Tony Trietch]

Next September I will be doing a solo hunt in eastern AK for 10 days. I'm getting dropped in by my pilot-friend and I don't plan to see another human until he comes in to get me or something I kill. I will likely be bringing both my S&W 329PD and a can of Counter Assault. I definitely don't ever want to shoot a bear in self-defense, but will if necessary. The spray is probably great for a nuisance bear or one that just persists in hanging around. Don't discount that kind of danger. I recall reading about a guide who got badly ass-kicked by a grizzly they had seen many times in the area of camp. They even had that bear nicknamed and considered him just a potential nuisance. He nailed the guide and it ended badly as I recall.

One personal thing for me: My handgun and bear spray both have tethers attached. In the heat of an encounter it's very easy to trip, fall or get knocked around and subsequently lose your grip on what might save your life. A piece of neon orange 540 paracord between the gun/spray and holster works well. Call me an over-thinker, but I plan to survive with as few scars as possible.

Finally...when I know I'm going into dangerous country I go with a partner, and he looks like this:

Great looking firearm! I love the idea of a short length of 550 cord between holster and gun/spray.

 

[Finch]

All you need is a pocket knife!
http://badassoftheweek.com/genemoe.html

 

[JJHACK]

Unless the breeze is In your favour the gun is the better option. It's not bad enough to have a stressful bear encounter but to blind yourself in the process is a nightmare.

Pepper spray will incapacitate you almost instantly when I'm your eyes. Even a light breeze will blow it right back at you. I know this first hand from personal experience.

It's one of those ideas that's flawless on paper but a failure in practice.

 

[lazyKMCranch]

first, I'm no expert, but I work in a prison and use pepper spray, a lot. Pepper spray does have it's place but weather DOES have a large impact on its effectiveness. As for the study, they sight numbers for firearms use and percent effective. OK, but my question is which cal. were used? They never mention that. As we all know there is a huge difference in stopping power between a 9mm and 44mag, and there are plenty of stats to support this (ballistics study on effects of cal. on people). If a 9mm does not stop a determined person it sure as heck will not slow down a bear. So until a study points out the cal. of weapons used I find it flawed. Just my 2 cents

 

[Mad Mountain Mike]

Unless the breeze is In your favour the gun is the better option. It's not bad enough to have a stressful bear encounter but to blind yourself in the process is a nightmare.

Pepper spray will incapacitate you almost instantly when I'm your eyes. Even a light breeze will blow it right back at you. I know this first hand from personal experience.

It's one of those ideas that's flawless on paper but a failure in practice.

JJ I don't doubt your experiences but the other side of that coin is this. If you shoot and wound a grizzly bear in a close in very stressful situation you have just changed what might have been a bluff charge into a full on attack. That same bear that might have just knocked you over and kept on going is now going to rip you apart to the point that it'll take DNA to identify the remains.
In a perfect senerio a person would draw their weapon, aim and fire and the beast would drop dead in its tracks, but in reality a lot of times bears don't die that fast and under duress of a charge a mans aim might not be that true.
IMHO being very aware of your surroundings and avoiding a close encounter is the best option and if the shit does hit the fan then I guess a person is going to use what they are most comfortable with.

 

[BOW1144]

I personally HATE bear spray, I've used it once and seen another guy use it. Unfortunately the guy didn't check the wind and it all blew basically right back in his face. The 4 miles back to the truck was probably the shittiest ( funniest for me) time of his life.

For me I carry a sidearm ( when legal) for 2 legged critters much more so then the 4 legged kind. I live in a state with a lot of weird people in it.

Amen brother you never know when you are going to walk into a garden

 

[Ray]

Comment on the published study data. In 2004, I was in a bear safety class taught by one of the people asked to peer review the study published out of UT grad student work. He told them that their gun data was incomplete. A firearm was present, but they did not determine if it was used. The details were not always available so the grad student assumed in each case that the gun was used. The instructor had been on scene for after action reporting for some of the attacks in the data set.
In one case the group shotgun was unloaded (no shell in chamber) and in an unoccupied tent when the bear hit the camp. The study classified this as a gun in use event but reality was the gun was never deployed during the attack.
When Smith was questioned on this data he said that we don't have time to fix data like that before we have to publish, but we will revise it later. That has never been done, and the study still shows that guns are guns are less effective than spray based on faulty assumptions.
It also doesn't help that AK changed the law on DLP data and they are no longer public data to protect the shooter from animal rights nut jobs.

 

[hodgeman]

There's a lot of issues with the Smith study IMHO.

One thing I never saw wickered out is that a lot of DLP shootings are simply tagged as a hunting harvest. I've know two folks who did just that... bear started nosing around a kill site while they were working on a downed animal...so they just shot and tagged it. Little drama in the paper work ...but lots of drama in real life.

 

[Ray]

That was the other issue the instructor relayed to Smith, but it fell on deaf ears. Some DLP are tagged with harvest tickets and never go into the data set. The cops in Whittier DLP several bears a year and never file forms with the troopers. Bad data is bad data.

 

[Matt Cashell]

There's a lot of issues with the Smith study IMHO.

One thing I never saw wickered out is that a lot of DLP shootings are simply tagged as a hunting harvest. I've know two folks who did just that... bear started nosing around a kill site while they were working on a downed animal...so they just shot and tagged it. Little drama in the paper work ...but lots of drama in real life.

Do these circumstances qualify as a DLP shooting?

Ray and Hodgeman,

The concern of underrreported success of firearms in encounters is interesting. Definitely something to think about.

Do you take issue with the data in the 2006 study on the effectiveness of spray?

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/bear_cougar/bear/files/JWM_BearSprayAlaska.pdf

Are your recommendations then that visitors to your area bring firearms for bear defense only, and not spray?

 

[colonel00]

Isn't it a whole lot easier to tag a bear as a harvest than a DLP anyway? Correct me if I'm wrong but this is how I understand it. For a DLP you still have to skin the bear and hike the hide and skull out. Then you forfeit it to a trooper and have to fill out a report and justify that it was a justified DLP. Or, you could just slap a harvest ticket on it (which are free or very cheap, correct?) and just claim your prize.

I haven't studied that whole report but I don't see where it mentions a distinction between residents and non-residents in the reported data.

 

[hodgeman]

Do these circumstances qualify as a DLP shooting?

Ray and Hodgeman,

The concern of underrreported success of firearms in encounters is interesting. Definitely something to think about.

Do you take issue with the data in the 2006 study on the effectiveness of spray?

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/bear_cougar/bear/files/JWM_BearSprayAlaska.pdf

Are your recommendations then that visitors to your area bring firearms for bear defense only, and not spray?

Bitteroot- A bear with a harvest tag is not counted as a DLP shooting. There's nothing to differentiate it from a normal hunting harvest statistically. In a lot of areas resident bear season never closes...and a lot are incidental take whether they come to camp or a kill site. A DLP bear has to be surrendered to the state and there is generally an investigation. I've also talked to a couple folks who did that, neither want to go through that again. Most folks who can legally tag and keep a bear, do just that.

As far as visitors go... that depends. A guy coming up to fish the Kenai or vacation around the road system is much better off with spray. Chances are they'll never even see a bear and the spray is purchased and disposed of locally with zero of the hassles that firearms can entail.

A guy heading out in the backcountry is better off with both a firearm and some spray IMHO- provided they're comfortable with it.

Not to downplay it- but bears are way down the list of things most folks should worry about. Thousands of folks conduct themselves through the backcountry safely with no sign of a bear at all. Camp clean and keep your wits about you and folks are fine. Gotta remember that Treadwell encountered hundreds of bears over years before one finally ate him and he basically did everything you're NOT supposed to do.