.500 Linebaugh by Hamilton Bowen...

'Cause I like big guns? That would be my answer .

You actually don't need any kind of gun at all to survive a grizzly attack. I worked for a lady who, on duty in a park in Alaska, played possum with an attacking griz and emerged unscathed. Her partner suffered significant wounds and they aborted their mission.

I could have suggested that she was simply too tough and ornery for the grizzly to stomach, but, since she was my boss at the time, I held my tongue. Just for the record, she was one of the better supervisors I have experienced. Grizzlies just have no taste whatever....

Liegh

What Chaos said, Cause I like big guns. The little woman is into .45's, including old and exotic makes. I'm a large, extremely muscular guy so I can soak up a lot of recoil and carry a lot of weight. And it's going to be mounted on a survival vest for a trip to Alaska. I'll have a pair of rifles of course, but if they can't be retrieved then I want to have something on me capable of handling the situation. And I promised my .454 Casull to someone in the event of my death, so if I don't make it out for some reason the it might not be recovered or returned either.

Les

I've heard of that once or twice, will check it out.

Chaos

You sound like a man after my own heart.

Hiker

I've heard of that several times, but wouldn't want to test the theory personally. There are cases where playing dead did not help. Bears are carrion eaters, so just curling into a ball doesn't seem that good of an idea to me, JMHO. If I can find room on my vest I'd like to add bear spray, but to be honest, in a survival situation an attacking bear, it would supply a lot of meat, a warm fur to wrap up in (far more durable and warmer than a heat sheet), tools and some claws for jewelry and to remember the bruin by in my aging years.

Thanks to all of you for responding.

I'm hardly a bear expert. This guide looks pretty good to my untrained eyes: http://www.wikihow.com/Survive-a-Bear-Attack.

What I've read is that a bear feeling defensive for some reason is more likely to leave you alone if you don't act like a threat. A predatory bear needs to be convinced that you are not food; playing dead or running away will just cause you to become bear scat.

Playing dead is indeed a pretty dicey procedure,I'll admit. I would prefer to carry a shotgun with slugs. I understand that bear spray is statistically more effective than firearms at halting attacks.

I would check out a biologist named Stephen Herrero and his latest information. He is no theoretical biologist; he has field time and face time with both griz and black bears. I believe he is a proponent of bear spray - and a very clean camp.

Ah yes, the eternal and very contentious debate about guns vs bear spray. These arguments always become very heated, with lots of strong opinions, often by people who have never actually shot a bear. In my opinion, a good sources is Rick Sinnott's article Are guns more effective than pepper spray in an Alaska bear attack? Sinnott recently retired as an Alaska Dept of Fish and Game wildlife biologist. For many years he was the biologist for the Anchorage area, and investigated numerous human/bear encounters, and disposed of many problem bears. He knows what he is talking about.

For a scientific article on the effectiveness of spray, see Smith et al: Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska

See Herrero's book Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance. Herrero is a Canadian wildlife biologist, and one of the worlds experts on bears. His book is well worth a read. However the "revised edition" doesn't have a lot of new material, so it is well worth buying a used copy of the first addition, if you find one.

For the record, I own both long guns and handguns, and am profficient with them. I have killed two bears (one black & one brown) on hunting trips. However my own personal choice for most of my frequent activities in bear country is to carry bear spray rather than a gun. Your choices may differ.

Personally, I wouldn't want a charging bear to get close enough to me to where bear spray might be effective.

I would prefer, in this order, a powerful rifle, a powerful handgun, and a can of bear spray. My choice is dictated by how close the bear has to be to you for your chosen protection method to have half a chance of being effective. At ten feet, bear spray might well be as effective as a handgun. But I don't want a charging bear to be ten feet away from me to find out!

A rifle could take out a bear (assuming appropriate caliber choice and marksmanship skills) from 100 or 200 hundred yards away. A handgun would probably be limited to 25 yards (assuming you choose an insane caliber). A can of bear spray would be limited to only a few feet or yards. Now, how close do you want that charging bear to get to you? Personally, I'd want all three options. And if possible, I'd throw a hand grenade into the mix as well, as an additional choice.

Better yet, try to keep yourself out of "charging bear" situations in the first place. None of your options are really that great once the brute is coming at you.

First, let me say this: I can understand how this discussion of guns vs pepper spray can get heated and out of hand. That is not my intention and if it starts to lean in that direction I'll ask one of the mods to lock or delete this thread, whichever is done on this site. That said, I appreciate all information, tips, advice and links from everyone. You've all been very informative and helpful. I thank you for that.

Chaos
Hence the big gun and possibly spray. If I can leave the animal alive and a bit leery of humans, that's a win win. But when the chips are down, if I can only have one, I'll take the gun, far more multi purpose and in my opinion, more sure of stopping the bruin. A dead bear is a better option than a dead me, JMHO.

Hiker

I read an article by a guy who either lived or just spent a lot of time on Kodiak Island. He carried a .44 mag and I believe a .460 Weatherby mag and had some good advice. He was the one who said the.44 isn't effective and the recoil of the Weatherby had become too much so he switched over to a shotgun with slugs. All well and good, IF I can retrieve my gear and guns and bow. But I'm looking at the worst case scenario, where I get out with only my vest and what's in my pockets. So a handgun is the choice of the day. I even considered two handguns. The big one for dangerous game, and a .357 with assorted .38/.357 loads as a hunting tool for smaller game. Thanks for the link.

AKSAR

I'm willing to go the non lethal route, it's a wild animal, it doesn't know any better. He see's a lot of easy meat for the taking, in HIS territory. It's no more personal than a hunter shooting a deer for the freezer. But looking at my vest design the bear spray would be with my grab n go bag, so it might come down to pistol and a well placed shot. Or three. I would rather err on the side of caution. Thanks for the links.

Haertig

Very well said. I agree whole heartedly. Except about the handgun range. With an "insane" caliber I'd feel comfortable out to fifty yards. But at that range I'd fade away, or just try to discourage him. He's not an immediate threat at fifty. At twenty five it's time to take action.


All that said; The chances of going down and being in a survival situation are very small. And having to face a bear in a life or death confrontation in a survival situation is even smaller. But I'd be a fool not to consider the possibility of it happening, and not preparing for it would make me an even bigger fool. Besides, There's a lot of mental comfort in being armed and equipped in the back country. JMHO.

Just a note to clarify, so people don't inadvertently get into trouble. Alaska law allows killing game for food in a survival situation, and also allows killing a bear in self defense.

However, state law is also quite explicit that if you do shoot a bear in defense, you must report it as soon as possible, skin out the bear, and surrender the hide with claws attached to the state. The Wildlife Troopers and/or Fish and Game will investigate all of these shootings, but in practice, they virtually always give you the benefit of the doubt. The hides taken in "Defense of Life and Property" are then sold at auction. If you don't report the shooting and/or keep any part of the animal, it would be considered poaching.

The reason for that requirement should be fairly obvious. If one could keep the animal after a DLP shooting, then anyone who wanted a bear rug would go just go out and shoot the first bear they see, irrespective of whether or not they were in danger. Nobody would bother with such things as season, hunting licences, tags, etc. If you want a bear trophy, you need to do it on a legal hunt.

I know you wouldn't intentionally break the law, but I just want to make sure everyone understands what the Alaska DLP laws mean. Below is a quote of the actual statute, with a few key points emphasized: