Grizzly bear attacks man picking berries in northern B.C.

[Boberama]

This is a pretty interesting discusion. While I agree we should have the rights to many things and hate to be told I cant do something but I have to agree that I have zero desire to see a bunch of hand guns being carried. Even if its the most level headed, experienced guys there are out there. The more honest legal guns wandering the streets the more that can possibly end up in the wrong hands. There is no need to carry a hand gun. There are legal means now that work fine for personl protection from wildlife. The only protection most use a hand gun against is other people.

Ive been around bears since I could walk and my family has been guiding in grizzly country since the early 60's in BC, Alberta, Yukon and the NWT and all they have ever carried or needed was a long gun.
Ive guided with guys in BC that have had permits to carry hand guns and they always argue how much better they are. I dont disagree that they wont work but they are far from better. Ive been full on charged by 3 grizzly bears. Two I shot and killed and one shot and turned but didnt kill. And many many warning shots fired.
The biggest and most aggressive was shot while on a moose kill. It came out of the bush while myself, my hunter and 2 hunters were retreiving meat and horns the morning after the moose was shot. We knew a bear had been on it so we were on full alert. That bear came out of the bush 150 yards away at full run making the most hair raisning grow you could imagine. There was zero doubt on his intentions and I dumped him with one shot head on with a 30-06 at 100 yards. Sure glad I wasnt packing a pistol on that occasion.

Ive been in the discusion with many guys in many hunting camps and its all the same . Each person has his or her personal preference. They all will work. Some like the pistol because it is fast and multiple rounds can be shot rapidly. The down fall is that most are only good close in. A long gun in "my opinion" is best as its good from long range down to a couple feet.
Others have very valid points on shotguns and would be my second choice. They load them in alternation with slugs and buckshot. And this also works.

Big thing is that most people that get mauled have zero chance to use any type of defense. One of my best friends was mauled in the Yukon. He had guided in that area for 15years and new all the bear defense and knew everything about being in bear country. Him and his hunter unknowingly walk between a sow grizz and a cub in bear high alders. He was packing a shot gun and the hunter a .300. When that bear stood up and charged he said everything he ever learned went out the window. He said it wouldnt have mattered if he had a hand gun shotgun, rifle or anything else. The distance was enough to get maybe one shot off but with panic in your brain things dont always function right . The hunter finally shot the bear but the damage was done already.

What im saying is all three will work fine. But I sure wouldnt say one is far supirior to the others. The main thing is if the user can stay calm enough to use them. Guys can talk big but when push comes to shove very very few of us will keep our composer in that situation. In 2007 I had my closest encounter and I shot that bear at full charge in camp at night. The distance was 5 paces from where I shot to where the bear fell. Did I stay calm and react right ? Shit no. I dont even remember the gun going off all I remember is turning to run. Situation wouldnt have been any different if I would have been carrying a pistol, shot gun or something bigger than the 30-30 I had at my hip.

Should handguns be more redily allowed out in the field? I dont beleive so. There are means to protect yourself so use what is there. But again just my opinion.


Oh and as for your ATV comment Dewey, if you think its only lazy guys that ride them you best rethink your statments!!!!!!!!

SG

I'll be honest.

I want the right to carry a handgun for two-legged predators.

And I don't see why I shouldn't be allowed.

I have visited the United States. I've been to Oregon, Seattle, Florida, etc.

And all these states have CCW laws that allow handguns to be carried.


There isn't rampant shooting.
It's normal.

40 US states have SHALL-ISSUE CCW. If you don't have a criminal record you can get a CCW license. Eight more states have MAY-ISSUE, where they try to restrict the issuing. Only two states offer no clear means to carry, and these laws are about to be struck down as unconstitutional.





Frankly, I don't care what happens to the crime rate or shootings etc.

It's a RIGHT, not a privilege in my opinion.






Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Ben Franklin

[Dewey]

My personal bush experience goes back to 1956, that of my family in BC to 1870 and to the 1880s in Alberta, and 1898 in the Yukon and NWT. Most of the oldtimers I learned from started in the Kootenays before WWI, some of them were still hunting when I started working in the bush, alone for three months at a stretch, without a break in 1965, age 18. I have spent enough time in the bush in BC to have some idea of what works best and I would NEVER carry a shotgun with buckshot to use on bears, after skinning a few and trying buckshot out of my Remington 870 slug gun, the first gun I bought specifically for bear defence when I started supervising forestry crews in bear country circa 1969-1970.

The penetration is just not sufficient and that of the common "Foster" style slugs is also not enough to always get into the vitals of a bear; I do have Brenneke slugs for my Benelli Nova and my Merkel drilling in 12-12x9.3x74R and consider these useful for bears, but, as they are very difficult to obtain in Canada, I really hesitate to recommend a shotgun for bears.

I consider a .30-06 with 200 or 220 NPs an excellent tool for the task and there are better ones if one can handle them and has the time and willingness to practice to the extent one needs to be really fast and accurate. I also strongly believe in using ONE type of gun for this work as the "muscle memory" issue is important here. I would never chose a handgun when I can use a rifle and I had a bear type handgun from 1990 to last year, when I sold it to some young fellows, as I had not packed it in years. It was a 5.5" Redhawk and I loaded 300 gr. FN-HC slugs over 21-H-110 and it was easy to shoot fast and accurately.

I liked it for using the outhouse on one of my firetowers in Alberta as there was this old sow I had been warned about and the O/H was a little cramped, not enough room to use my .375 and in the dark, at that range, the revolver bullet would do the job. A hardcast, heavy, flatnose revolver bullet at 1200 fps-mv, will out-penetrate most heavy rifle bullets and only an illegal "solid" will do better. So, my use and ownership of a revolver is for such purposes and I have the self-discipline, pro. training and animal knowledge to use it properly, as I always have and always will.

Just a couple of hours ago, my phone rang and it was a job offer in the Yukon, where an exploration company wants a "bush facilitator" to look after some camps, claims, mines and keep an eye on contractor crews. My wife was an "outpost" RN in the "Territories" in the '70s and loves it there, so, I may accept this job , although I am retired. This, is the kind of situation, where I would carry a revolver every day and the owner of the company does so as well. I would keep my rifle in my vehicle or cabin/tent, but, one wants a gun handy at all times and a revolver works best in this use.

So, some do, some do not and the misuse of any type of firearm is really irrelevant to this issue, IMHO. In Alaska, the guides I met there when I worked out of Stewart in the early '70s, before Highway 37 was built, seemed to all carry heavy revolvers and it just seems right for any Canadian to have this right if prospectors, timber workers and even "guides" an legally do so. Again, no offence to anyone intended, but, if you don't like a handgun, well, just don't buy or carry one and lobby government for tougher treatment of the tiny minority who do misuse guns, not to restrict we responsible Canadians more than we now are.

[Boberama]

My personal bush experience goes back to 1956, that of my family in BC to 1870 and to the 1880s in Alberta, and 1898 in the Yukon and NWT. Most of the oldtimers I learned from started in the Kootenays before WWI, some of them were still hunting when I started working in the bush, alone for three months at a stretch, without a break in 1965, age 18. I have spent enough time in the bush in BC to have some idea of what works best and I would NEVER carry a shotgun with buckshot to use on bears, after skinning a few and trying buckshot out of my Remington 870 slug gun, the first gun I bought specifically for bear defence when I started supervising forestry crews in bear country circa 1969-1970.

The penetration is just not sufficient and that of the common "Foster" style slugs is also not enough to always get into the vitals of a bear; I do have Brenneke slugs for my Benelli Nova and my Merkel drilling in 12-12x9.3x74R and consider these useful for bears, but, as they are very difficult to obtain in Canada, I really hesitate to recommend a shotgun for bears.

I consider a .30-06 with 200 or 220 NPs an excellent tool for the task and there are better ones if one can handle them and has the time and willingness to practice to the extent one needs to be really fast and accurate. I also strongly believe in using ONE type of gun for this work as the "muscle memory" issue is important here. I would never chose a handgun when I can use a rifle and I had a bear type handgun from 1990 to last year, when I sold it to some young fellows, as I had not packed it in years. It was a 5.5" Redhawk and I loaded 300 gr. FN-HC slugs over 21-H-110 and it was easy to shoot fast and accurately.

I liked it for using the outhouse on one of my firetowers in Alberta as there was this old sow I had been warned about and the O/H was a little cramped, not enough room to use my .375 and in the dark, at that range, the revolver bullet would do the job. A hardcast, heavy, flatnose revolver bullet at 1200 fps-mv, will out-penetrate most heavy rifle bullets and only an illegal "solid" will do better. So, my use and ownership of a revolver is for such purposes and I have the self-discipline, pro. training and animal knowledge to use it properly, as I always have and always will.

Just a couple of hours ago, my phone rang and it was a job offer in the Yukon, where an exploration company wants a "bush facilitator" to look after some camps, claims, mines and keep an eye on contractor crews. My wife was an "outpost" RN in the "Territories" in the '70s and loves it there, so, I may accept this job , although I am retired. This, is the kind of situation, where I would carry a revolver every day and the owner of the company does so as well. I would keep my rifle in my vehicle or cabin/tent, but, one wants a gun handy at all times and a revolver works best in this use.

So, some do, some do not and the misuse of any type of firearm is really irrelevant to this issue, IMHO. In Alaska, the guides I met there when I worked out of Stewart in the early '70s, before Highway 37 was built, seemed to all carry heavy revolvers and it just seems right for any Canadian to have this right if prospectors, timber workers and even "guides" an legally do so. Again, no offence to anyone intended, but, if you don't like a handgun, well, just don't buy or carry one and lobby government for tougher treatment of the tiny minority who do misuse guns, not to restrict we responsible Canadians more than we now are.

I agree.

I also believe that if one can have one for wilderness protection one should be able to have one for self-defence too.

Of course that is not a government-valid reason in Canada.

I didn't understand what you meant by illegal solid, though.

[Dewey]

It is a contravention of "The Wildlife Act" in BC, to shoot or even load a "solid" or "full metal case" bullet in a hunting rifle. So, in the strictest interpretation of the law, such a bullet, even if used for bear defence, is "illegal". The MOE comes down REAL hard on residents who make even small mistakes with hunting regs. as they are, just as with the Forest Service, very biased to "Guide-Outfitters" and other commercial exploiters of BC's resources, just as in Alberta and they WILL make life miserable for anyone using a "full patch" bullet.

As it happens, with the handguns I now have, even a "shudder-gasp-eeek" GLOCK, I would very seldom carry concealed, were this legal as I do not want the responsibility of a gun with me when going to the mall for a book or shopping for food, etc. BUT, it IS my RIGHT and I want that respected by all governments in MY Canada, as it should be.

[sheepguide]

So in your vast knowledge Dewey you have never heard of guys carrying buckshot in a shotgun for bears? Funny many many guys do it. Couple slugs followed by 1 buckshot followed by slugs. With your knowledge you should know that if the first two haven't worked its getting serious you may have to start running. Chances are square on buckshot to the face  could take some eyes and other parts with it. Could up your odds on escape if them first shots haven't stopped that adrenaline fed bear. Then more slugs if needed.

[Dewey]

I have never stated that I have ...vast knowledge..., merely what I have done, where and when and as a method of giving a basis for why I have the opinions that I do. I do have considerable bush experience as one might expect of a person of my age, birthplace and upbringing and I try to post what I think is an honest and useful commentary for anyone interested.

I have seen two Black Bears shot with Imperial buckshot from 12 ga. guns and both were wounded and it was necessary to kill one with a .30-06 and the other with a 7mmRM, this was back in the mid-60s, when I started hunting and working in the bush. I decided then that this was a cruel and inefficient method of shooting a bear and I still hold that opinion. I have never seen a Grizzly shot with a slug and hope I never do, but, who knows, perhaps I might some day.

When, working on the BC coast, in forestry, during the '60s, '70s and '80s, I saw quite a number of bears and some Grizzlies were VERY large and I seriously doubt that a soft lead "Foster" slug would penetrate the water-soaked fur in a frontal approach, let alone get through the chest muscles into the lungs and heart and aorta. Maybe I am wrong, but, that is my impression and why I prefer to carry a large rifle when I am working in the habitat of these bears.

We can argue this all day and through the night and make whatever comments we wish to; it is a topic that arouses a lot of animosity in many forums and one that I now usually avoid. So, that is all I have to say on it.

[Boberama]

So in your vast knowledge Dewey you have never heard of guys carrying buckshot in a shotgun for bears? Funny many many guys do it. Couple slugs followed by 1 buckshot followed by slugs. With your knowledge you should know that if the first two haven't worked its getting serious you may have to start running. Chances are square on buckshot to the face  could take some eyes and other parts with it. Could up your odds on escape if them first shots haven't stopped that adrenaline fed bear. Then more slugs if needed.

I think that's silly to say the least.

I'd load all slugs, Brenneke.

Wouldn't matter anyways because you aren't going to be able to get off more than one or two shots if Old Eph charges.

It is a contravention of "The Wildlife Act" in BC, to shoot or even load a "solid" or "full metal case" bullet in a hunting rifle. So, in the strictest interpretation of the law, such a bullet, even if used for bear defence, is "illegal".

Does the bear mtn punch bullet count?

I suppose it would.

[Boberama]

I asked Vanilla Gorilla about it on another forum and this was his response:



He carries an XD 45 and a couple knives every day so he knows better than us.

I don't want to participate in this anymore, this discussion is getting too heated.

I leave you with Gorilla's above response to mull over.

You have to click the zoom in button on the lower right hand corner to read it.

[sheepguide]

Your right Dewey it could be a long discusion! And my opinion like I said is to cary a long rifle over anything else. But I just wanna point out that you are talking using buckshot in a whole different context than I am. Disposing of a bear humanly well thats 100% long rifle territory, not pistols, not shotguns.
But in a shotgun on a charge situation it could help. If them first couple rounds havent done the trick(best chance to down charging dangerous game is shot one everything after that is alot of luck and praying)that bear is dam close and pissed as hell, so adrenelin is pumping and he is 10 times as tough to bring down and then you hit him square in the face with a round of buckshot he is then gunna have a tough time seeing and smelling you. Possible giving you the time needed to get away or get enough distance to get a kill shot in him.

And if im in a defence situation as we are discusing here I real could care less on how humane the bear is dispatched!
 Just wanted to straighten things out and say that I didnt mean that guys use buckshot as a means to kill bears, just as a last chance option if the 2 slugs first in line havent succeeded.
SG

[Boberama]

I'd like to say the conversation is not only about bears.

Humans can be just as dangerous. Why just a couple weeks ago I was approached by three guys who asked me for a lighter.

They had no cigarettes I could see.

If you're a cop you'll know what that means.

[Sonny]

I'd like to say the conversation is not only about bears.

Humans can be just as dangerous. Why just a couple weeks ago I was approached by three guys who asked me for a lighter.

They had no cigarettes I could see.

If you're a cop you'll know what that means.

Are you a cop?

[Boberama]

I'd like to say the conversation is not only about bears.

Humans can be just as dangerous. Why just a couple weeks ago I was approached by three guys who asked me for a lighter.

They had no cigarettes I could see.

If you're a cop you'll know what that means.

Are you a cop?

No a cop told me when I asked him that some people do that, when you reach in your pocket for a light they attack you and steal your money.

And come think of it they did seem aggressive and overly forward, plus it was in an isolated rural/urban area.

[Sonny]

I'd like to say the conversation is not only about bears.

Humans can be just as dangerous. Why just a couple weeks ago I was approached by three guys who asked me for a lighter.

They had no cigarettes I could see.

If you're a cop you'll know what that means.

Are you a cop?

No a cop told me when I asked him that some people do that, when you reach in your pocket for a light they attack you and steal your money.

And come think of it they did seem aggressive and overly forward, plus it was in an isolated rural/urban area.

Low lifes on Franklin scare me...When I'm down there I keep my doors locked..

[Paul]

@Sheepguide and Dewey excellent posts and a great discussion.

Bob, you keep alluding to self defense against people. In my 40 years I have never ever needed a gun to defend myself from anyone in any situation. I have never been robbed, threatened or beat up. Sure I have been in a few pickles but if a guy knows how to talk things are usually easy to diffuse. Obviously you feel a need to have a gun to protect yourself, have you ever been threatened with a firearm? Robbed?

[Tuc]

Dewey, thx for the update. Good to hear the fellow will make it.
I'd stay away from that blurberry patch if I were him and let the bears have it.

[Boberama]

@Sheepguide and Dewey excellent posts and a great discussion.

Bob, you keep alluding to self defense against people. In my 40 years I have never ever needed a gun to defend myself from anyone in any situation. I have never been robbed, threatened or beat up. Sure I have been in a few pickles but if a guy knows how to talk things are usually easy to diffuse. Obviously you feel a need to have a gun to protect yourself, have you ever been threatened with a firearm? Robbed?

Nope, not threatened.

I've heard many cases all over my area where people have been stabbed, shot, beaten to death or otherwise rippled or murdered.

Most aren't reported in the news.

[Rocks]

I spend a quite a bit of time in grizzly country every year. I've run into a few but never had a problem. Most of my time in the bush is on horseback, I've been within 50 yards of a couple while sitting on a horse and both were fairly calm encounters with the bear taking off. I was scared a couple times while on foot, but have been lucky so far and have never been charged. In the summer I usually pack a marlin 45-70, and of course have my hunting rifle with me during hunting season. Like SG said though, sometimes it happens so fast it doesn't matter what you are carrying. A guy I know and his son were mauled by a sow grizz a couple years ago, they were carrying a rifle, and it jammed, they both got mauled and ended up fighting the bear off with a walking stick.

[Tuc]

Like SG said though, sometimes it happens so fast it doesn't matter what you are carrying. A guy I know and his son were mauled by a sow grizz a couple years ago, they were carrying a rifle, and it jammed, they both got mauled and ended up fighting the bear off with a walking stick.

Rocks I think we sometimes become complacent of our surroundings and when bears attack they are already within stricking distance. Then a rifle or bear spray is no guarantee.
I remember quadding in Waiperous 7 or 8 years back on a new lease road. We were taking our time looking for moose tracks in the new dirt and we quadded right past a grizz sow and her two cubs. They were right along side of the road tearing up roots and never noticed them until we were parallel. Had she attacked I'm sure she could of had one of us. Not paying attention to your surroundings in bear country can be a BIG mistake.