I'm no authority on bear defense or packing handguns on mountain hunts, but a few years back, I met an Alaskan named Steve Nelson at Gunsite. It was a fascinating conversation that changed my mind about bear defense. I was so impressed that I had him write an article for Guns & Ammo PISTOL magazine.
Steve spent a career in mineral exploration in the wilds of Alaska. From 1965 to 2008, he killed 4 bears that charged him, two black bears and two grizzlies. On these bears, he used a .375 H&H, .30-06, .44 Mag, and .454 Casual. (If you like data, during that same time, he had 220 nonaggressive bear encounters as well.)
For stopping a charging bear, he said a rifle is the best choice. No surprise there. Next up was a shotgun with slugs. After that, I asked about handguns: 10mm vs. big-bore revolver. He said revolvers were superior due to energy and reliability.
That made sense. A 10mm is sightly behind a .357 Mag. in terms of energy, and well, there's less to go wrong with a revolver. However, I countered by noting the 10mm's big advantage over a revolver: ammo capacity. After all, isn't 15 rounds better than 6? He agreed that more firepower is a good thing, but he had data to back up why that didn't matter on bear charges.
Steve had (or maybe has) a firearm training company that specialized in bear defense. They ran simulations, one of which was a charging bear. From the holster, semiauto shooters were faster and had a slightly higher hit ratio. Makes sense.
However, regardless of handgun type, he said the best shooters only got off 4 rounds during the simulated charge. Yikes. Even more concerning to Steve was the number of pistol shooters who panicked, limp-wristed their 10mm, and induced malfunctions. I guess it was common.
Bear attacks are rare, but they do happen, so I don't judge anyone based on what they do or don't pack. Regardless of firearm selection, a bear charge sounds like the most terrifying wilderness experience possible.
View attachment 565112