Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

Grizzly attack just outside Yellowstone

Mountaineering, rock climbing, and hiking news.
 

Postby simonov » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:58 am

mrchad9 wrote:Would have to agree with Dow the handle is probably not an asset to your POV.


It's certainly doesn't help dealing with people like Dow, since he can't seem to get past that.

Because of my moniker, and nothing else, he seems to have ascribed properties to me he has no business assuming.

Not that I mind. We are surrounded by people who are are most comfortable with labels, boxes, a black and white world.


mrchad9 wrote:And I was also wondering, if guns were so effective why still a reluctance to enter grizzly territory? Or perhaps your position is not the same as gwave47 and Bomchaser, and there is some acknowledgement that they are not the solution to everything nor creators of invincibility.


Start with reading comprehension and the rest takes care of itself. I never said anything like that. A pity if you of all people head down the same path Dow has chosen, based on a moniker.
Last edited by simonov on Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User Avatar
simonov

 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Location: Costa Mesa, California, United States
Thanked: 466 times in 269 posts

Postby simonov » Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:19 am

Tanngrisnir3 wrote:
redneck wrote: there is no repeating handgun on earth that can be used reliably against a bear weighing between 500 and 1,000 lbs. You will simply not get the penetration required to damage vital organs.


No, I'm sorry, they exist, but they're a relative pain in the ass and unwieldy. Revolvers spec'd for .450 Marlin, .454 Casull, .460 S&W, etc....


Yes, those are powerful handguns, but I'm not convinced. A .454 Casull has a two thirds or a half (or less) the energy of a .308 or a .30-'06. There can be 12 inches or more of bearflesh between the surface of a grizzly's skin and his vital organs. That's a LOT of penetration.

Again, I am talking about being able to reliably bring down an animal. I suppose a big-ass handgun is better than nothing, but they are damned heavy.


Tanngrisnir3 wrote:
redneck wrote: So the idea of carrying a handgun to defend against grizzlies is rather a quaint one. And terribly naive. And perhaps dangerous.


Tell that to the hundreds, if not thousands of fisherman, hikers and guides who do so w/regularity up in AK.


I am.

How often do they bring down grizzlies with their sidearms? I have no doubt plenty of people carry handguns in grizzly country. Plenty of people right here in Summitpost have been defending the practice. For those who don't mind the weight, I'm sure it makes them feel much more comfortable. But how many of them have actually managed to bring down a bear with a handgun?

Among gun nuts, there is a widespread belief that a gun will solve most of the problems in the world. I've never bough into that.

I am especially leery of handguns, due to their relative lack of power and the difficulty of actually hitting anything in the heat of the moment, without a heck of a lot of practice.
User Avatar
simonov

 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Location: Costa Mesa, California, United States
Thanked: 466 times in 269 posts

Postby Tanngrisnir3 » Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:37 am

redneck wrote:
Tanngrisnir3 wrote:
redneck wrote: there is no repeating handgun on earth that can be used reliably against a bear weighing between 500 and 1,000 lbs. You will simply not get the penetration required to damage vital organs.


No, I'm sorry, they exist, but they're a relative pain in the ass and unwieldy. Revolvers spec'd for .450 Marlin, .454 Casull, .460 S&W, etc....


Yes, those are powerful handguns, but I'm not convinced. A .454 Casull has a two thirds or a half (or less) the energy of a .308 or a .30-'06. There can be 12 inches or more of bearflesh between the surface of a grizzly's skin and his vital organs. That's a LOT of penetration.

Again, I am talking about being able to reliably bring down an animal. I suppose a big-ass handgun is better than nothing, but they are damned heavy.


Again, there are some, and they're exotic, but they were created specifically for that purpose. 500 Wyoming Express, Beowulf, etc...

There's a certain type who prefer to hunt w/handguns. Would I? Never. Do they? Yup, and they make their gear accordingly.

Tanngrisnir3 wrote:
redneck wrote: So the idea of carrying a handgun to defend against grizzlies is rather a quaint one. And terribly naive. And perhaps dangerous.


Tell that to the hundreds, if not thousands of fisherman, hikers and guides who do so w/regularity up in AK.


I am.

How often do they bring down grizzlies with their sidearms?


I have no idea. I think rather than completely 'bringing them down', it's to stop the attack. The two times I've been fishing up north in grizzly country, the guides both carried revolvers of this nature and both (for hands free purposes) carried them in specially made 'chest holsters'.

I have no doubt plenty of people carry handguns in grizzly country. Plenty of people right here in Summitpost have been defending the practice. For those who don't mind the weight, I'm sure it makes them feel much more comfortable. But how many of them have actually managed to bring down a bear with a handgun?


No idea.

Among gun nuts, there is a widespread belief that a gun will solve most of the problems in the world. I've never bough into that.


Well, that's getting beyond the scope of what I was addressing. I prefer not to address the politics of guns and those who either hate or love them. Nothing ever gets solved.

I am especially leery of handguns, due to their relative lack of power and the difficulty of actually hitting anything in the heat of the moment, without a heck of a lot of practice.


I agree. I carry one at work, and w/out constant training (and even then) one can never be sure that something/one won't get the drop on you.
Tanngrisnir3

 
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:51 pm
Thanked: 59 times in 35 posts

Postby Arthur Digbee » Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:28 am

MikeTX wrote:i think if a grizzly charged me in the wild, i would probably just shit myself. maybe he would be turned off by the odor and leave me alone.


A friend of a friend successfully scared a black bear away by vomiting on it. So your plan would probably work too.
User Avatar
Arthur Digbee

 
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:03 pm
Location: Indianapolisish, United States
Thanked: 255 times in 173 posts

Postby Bob Sihler » Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:00 am

Arthur Digbee wrote:
MikeTX wrote:i think if a grizzly charged me in the wild, i would probably just shit myself. maybe he would be turned off by the odor and leave me alone.


A friend of a friend successfully scared a black bear away by vomiting on it. So your plan would probably work too.


Or always hike in a group of three, with you in the middle. Hey, forget that talk about getting together to do something...
User Avatar
Bob Sihler
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7496
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:20 pm
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Thanked: 1974 times in 1111 posts

Postby gwave47 » Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:04 am

Bob Sihler wrote:
Pepper spray issued to police officers is not the same stuff as canisters
of bear spray. I'm guessing if the PD used bear spray on people it would
be a lot more reliable.
[/quote]


Yeah, I assumed it would have some differences. I don't know enough about what they use in bear spray but would assume that it is stronger. Before when I referenced spraying myself with pepper spray and learning my lesson about the effects of a blowing wind, I failed to mention that I still chased the guy on foot for 1.25 miles before he stopped and went willingly. Yes it had monumental effects on my eyesight (one eye completely closed due to burning sensation and the other slightly squinted due to burning sensation and tears filling up the eye) but it didn't at all effect my ability to breathe or physically exert myself.

I just always assumed that stronger product + stronger more dominant intended target = same effect as pd spray on a weaker smaller target. But again I know nothing about the science of the stuff, just my assumption.
Bob's anonymous PMer seemed to have some fairly solid references in support of his statement. Therefore, barring being informed of more sufficient evidence that contradicts his claims, I would be inclined to believe our anonymous PMer.


The debate about whether there is a handgun strong enough to bring down a grizzly could go on forever. There's not enough reliable accounts. It depends so much on the gun, size of the bear, caliber bullet, type of bullet, placement of the shot, number of shots fired, shooters accuracy. We could argue both ways all day and I could give you this accurate answer. In some cases a handgun will kill a Grizzly, in some cases it won't, in some cases of the bear living it will retreat, in some cases it will get pissed off and attack more aggressively. I would always argue that a handgun can easily take down a black bear as I know numerous people who hunt black bear in NC/SC/TN with handguns and are pretty successful. Lastly, I have never witnessed it first hand and I know we all hate to refer to TV (I myself can't believe I'm about to make a tv show reference) but I have seen episodes on Nat Geo and Discovery where Rangers in AK experience bears near their cabins and their response was to always pull a handgun and fire a warning shot, the bears would always scatter, I'm sure they also had bear spray and a shotgun or rifle handy, but this seemed to always be the first response.

Maybe in the future I'll let my hiking partner carry a can of bear spray and I'll carry my sidearm. In event that the bear spray fails, we'll have a second option.
User Avatar
gwave47

 
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
Thanked: 16 times in 9 posts

Postby lcarreau » Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:04 am

For crying out loud, you guys are taking this topic way too seriously!

"Where the hell is my beer !!!??"

Image
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4056
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 921 times in 693 posts

Postby desainme » Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:14 am

Daa yum that looks like the bear that stove in our car door back in 1991 or so on Route 11 just west of Millinocket, Maine.

My neighbor who has spent a good deal of his life in MT and who has the pleasure of leaving Butler Co. to return to MT says he has camped several times at Soda Butte and will reconsider as to whether he will frequent this area again.

Here is a pretty secure method of protection but it weighs 150 lb
the Ursus Mark VI-kind of a cult film I understand

Hurtubise's http://www.nfb.ca/film/project_grizzly
User Avatar
desainme

 
Posts: 6241
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 6:02 pm
Location: Oxford Cornland, Ohio, United States
Thanked: 68 times in 54 posts

Postby gwave47 » Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:28 am

Hillarious Desainme!

Would I get the electric cart to carry me up the mountain as well?

Well that ends the argument of which is more dangerous? Car Crash vs. Bear

I think you could survive both in this suit, but you'd have one hell of a time trying to get out of that car.
User Avatar
gwave47

 
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
Thanked: 16 times in 9 posts

Postby chugach mtn boy » Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:44 am

Well, odd that it would happen while involved in this thread, but I managed to get myself into a 20-yard bear encounter in the brush this evening. I was doing a time trial on the hill climb course I will (pathetically) "race" in 2 weeks. The bear turned out to be a blackie, so no worries, but I really thought I was making enough noise that I wouldn't be surprising any bears at all. So I guess you never know. Maybe a hearing impaired bear. The dude was huffing at me and would not give trail.
User Avatar
chugach mtn boy

 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:54 pm
Location: Anchorage, Alaska, United States
Thanked: 181 times in 109 posts

Postby Bob Sihler » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:23 pm

MikeTX wrote:
Bob Sihler wrote:
Arthur Digbee wrote:
MikeTX wrote:i think if a grizzly charged me in the wild, i would probably just shit myself. maybe he would be turned off by the odor and leave me alone.


A friend of a friend successfully scared a black bear away by vomiting on it. So your plan would probably work too.


Or always hike in a group of three, with you in the middle. Hey, forget that talk about getting together to do something...


really? okay, whatever. sorry you feel that way.


I guess if we're not in bear or cougar country I'd still be okay with it. I just don't want to be the guy who loses because you followed my advice. :wink:

Seriously, though, any interest still in Utah this fall (October 9-15)? I have my itinerary all planned out now. Worth a PM?
User Avatar
Bob Sihler
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7496
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:20 pm
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Thanked: 1974 times in 1111 posts

PreviousNext

Return to News

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2006-2013 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.