Is Bear Spray Better than a Gun? Here's What 352 Aggressive Bear Encounters Taught Us...
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 พ.ค. 2024
- Adventurer and biologist Stephan Kesting looks at four studies and 352 aggressive bear encounters in Alaska to see whether bear spray or firearms was more effective at deterring aggressive black, grizzly and polar bear behaviour. The results may surprise you, but data doesn't care about your feelings!
TIMESTAMPS
0:00 - Introduction to bears spray vs guns
02:56 - Analysis of the first report, Bear Spray vs Bullets, Which Offers Better Protection, by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
05:43 - Analysis of second report, Bear Spray or Bullets, by Lynn Dickerson
07:29 - Analysis of third report, Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska, by Smith et al.
15:19 Analysis of fourth report, Efficacy of Firearms for Bear Deterrence
in Alaska, by Smith et al.
21:59 Summary and personal opinions
SOURCES
First study: Bear Spray vs Bullets, Which Offers Better Protection, by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, above.nasa.gov/safety/documen...
Second study: Bear Spray or Bullets, by Lynn Dickerson, www.centerforwildlifeinformati...
Third study: Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska, by Smith et al, bearwise.org/wp-content/uploa...
Fourth study: Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska, by Smith et al,
westernwildlife.org/wp-conten...
MORE OUTDOOR STUFF BY STEPHAN KESTING
Please like this video and subscribe to my Essential Wilderness TH-cam channel here: / @essentialwilderness
Check out my Essential Wilderness site at www.essentialwilderness.com
Follow my outdoors Instagram account at / essentialwilderness
Sign up to get notified about my upcoming book, Perseverance, Life and Death in the Subarctic at www.essentialwilderness.com/book - กีฬา
![ใจเสาะบนเกาะนาคี - อ๊ะอาย สกุณาพร เสียงวิหค [Official MV] | ค่ายเพลงเป็นหนึ่ง](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jbcmGQkfyOg/mqdefault.jpg)
Compelling conclusion. Thanks!
I lived on Kodiak for most of my life, with one bear per square mile. I was an avid deer hunter, hiker, fisherman and photographer and encountered bears on almost a daily basis, sometimes multiple bears on a single day. What all such studies miss (whether pepper spray and bears, handguns and bears, any encounter with brown/grizzly bears) is that defining an "aggressive" bear is entirely subjective and that subjectivity is almost always based on the opinion of somebody that has very little experience with brown/grizzly bears. I won't speak of black bears because in that case, my own experience is limited. How does a relatively inexperienced person define an "aggressive" brown/grizzly? Most commonly, that is based on a threat display which will include loud vocalizations, pounding the ground with their paws and sometimes short bluff charges. It's terrifying, but the problem is that threat displays are the polar opposite of aggression. That bear has already decided he doesn't want to fight and he's simply telling you to go away, so heed his warning and go away. Threat displays are *never* a prelude to an attack unless you do something stupid like shooting or spraying him. Inflicting pain may change the bear's mindset from "go away" to "I'm going to kill you" or it may indeed drive him away, but doing that was entirely unnecessary. Understand the behavior. Bears that give you a threat display are good bears with no intention of attacking. I went through many, many such encounters and simply backed off without any further problems from that bear. I did eventually endure a mauling and barely survived, and it did *not* begin with a threat display. Actual attacks from brown and grizzly bears are all eerily similar. After the mauling I researched in detail hundreds of attacks and reached out to as many survivors and witnesses as I could contact. I wrote a book on the subject (A Kodiak Bear Mauling - Amazon). Brown/grizzly bears are ambush predators. You'll get no friendly warming like a threat display if he's decided to attack. Bears of this species commonly lie up in thick spots during the day and most often an attack is simply because you walked up on him. Bears have a scent pool around them that all wildlife can smell and avoid. Humans can't smell that so when you enter his scent pool (which may extend fifty or one hundred yards), the bear, not knowing we have weak olfactory senses, takes that as a challenge. He is the apex predator and you are challenging his dominance by entering his space. Period. 90%+ of the time he'll simply glide silently away and you'll never know how close you were. Less commonly, he'll exhibit that threat display which is also a benign response. "This is my space, go away!" And in a tiny minority of cases they'll rise, make a half circle downwind (they don't know we can't smell them) creep silently in as close as the cover allows and charge you from the rear or side from close range at 35-30 mph. Depending on how thick the cover is (and these tend to happen in very thick cover) you will have one to two seconds from the time you hear branches breaking before he runs you down. They tend to run you over like a Volkswagen hitting a pedestrian, then turn and comeback to finish you off. That's how actual attacks happen, and this is why I doubt 99% of the cases where some nimrod claims he "stopped" an attack with pepper spray or firearms. You simply don't have the time to deploy a defense. Your real defense is having a partner that you trust. Let him interrupt that attack, or you interrupt the attack on him. Pepper spray is very useful for bears that nose around your camp out of curiosity. That's a bear that needs a blast of pepper spray, though a shot in the ground is just as useful. If you're hunting have an LPVO optic in 1X6 or 1X8 and keep it at 1X until you need to dial up for a shot. The typical 3X9 scope leaves you blind at close range, even if you have time to get a shot off before he's on you. Have a solid partner in bear country. Have a scope that dials down to 1X and keep it there. Hunt from the relatively open ridges, not down in the thick stuff. Bears are not slow lumbering creatures that vocalize and give you warnings. They attack like big cats, from cover, at close range and with blurring speed. Understand the behavior. And please, don't shoot or pepper spray the "good bears" that give you the fair warning of a threat display.
Exactly!!!
Excellent comment. Thanks.
The best comment. Simple, real
Absolutely LEGIT. This is supported by accounts of "Dinner Bell" bears who are attracted to an armed hunters kill site from the gutted animal scent cone or the sound of the initial shots, who then stalk in close from downwind and then charge violently without any warning at armed hunters who often anticipate a bear encounter, ending up in the obituaries.
@@jt3200 I gave up a number of deer to bears. On one late season hunt I dropped a buck across a steep gully and he slid right to the bottom. It was very steep and covered in snow so we walked along the lip for half a mile or so to find a place to climb down. My partner waited there and I climbed down. Most of the bears were already hibernating and we hadn't even seen a track in several days of hunting. I walked along the bottom back to the deer and just as I made the first cut I looked up and a big male bear was standing there about ten yards away, having come from the opposite direction. He was just frozen, staring at me. I dropped my knife back in the pack and picked it up in the crook of my arm, slowly side-stepped to grab my rifle leaned against a tree and began backing up the gully. He just watched until I had opened some distance and then stepped forward and put a big paw on the deer like "This is mine." I just kept backing away. I would call that a benign encounter. We understood each other perfectly.
The person using the gun makes a huge difference.
And the caliber & choice of ammo.
You need to practice to be quick and efficient. I talked to a fishing guide in Alaska and he said a .45 won’t penetrate the body cavity. Too slow. 10mm works well
But like you say you better practice and be quick
now there's a news flash
Same could be said about spray, it's a good idea to practice with inert spray cans, or a bit with real ones if you have to as long as you're careful about wind and whatnot. Wind is also an enormous disadvantage for sprays, if you're downwind you might be screwed or get yourself. Overall if you pick the right gun and train it's probably the best bet, but spray is a lot less spendy and more accessible to most people, so for people with no gun or training at all it might be a better option than buying a S&W 500 or maybe an under-powered but affordable handgun and hardly practicing if at all. It really depends on a lot of confounding factors.
Some sprays though make a fairly big cloud so accuracy isn't a huge issue, but at least what I remember Cold Steel offering years ago is more of a jet stream like wasp sprays, so in that case it's important to know how the arc of the spray acts to hit a target at a certain distance, but it's super effective if you can get the eyes with it and far less susceptible to wind like fogging sprays. It's also orange for high visibility, they sell inert cans for practice.
They'd like to think so, anyhow.
Been a Alaska multiple times. Saw plenty of grizzlies. No bad encounters. I had both spray and 44mag. But if I could only choose one it's the firearm hands down. Not even a question in my mind.
I strongly agree. 🙂
@@chriskitchen4772 A 44 Mag? Not a suitable gun!
@@AndyYoung789 Thanks for that insightful dissertation of why . Guess I'll go unarmed now cause of your post
@@factsnotfeelingssendit5961Well they're right. Unless you get a head shot on a charging bear, a 44 Magnum likely isn't powerful enough to stop a bear.
You are smoking fetty son. You have no idea what you are talking about. @@dextermorgan1
Carry both. I live in prime Canadian Grizzly country with a dense population of Grizz, Black Bear and Cougar. Up here it is big trouble if you shoot a Grizz, even in defence. I carry bear bangers, air horn and spray. At times I also have a 45-70 guide gun. Bear spray is the most effective most of the time but there are instances where they are sick, old or just an exception that they become predatory and a firearm might be required. I hunt in the bush by myself and I have never had to use spray or bullets. All of my encounters resulted in the Bear running away or myself backing away. I've probably been lucky, I also try to be highly aware of sign and the vegetation that I'm in. Sight lines, wind and noise are your friend when you aren't hunting...
The studies rely on completely different criteria. In the bear spray study, the authors only counted times when bear spray was sprayed. In the firearms study, they included all the times the firearm was not fired. Those were 15% of the firearm incidents. Apply the bear spray selection criteria to the firearms incidents, and firearms are at least as effective as bear spray. Access problems for bear spray and firearms (especially handguns) are essentially the same. The studies suffer from strong selection bias. 21 of 71 incidents in the bear spray study were of bear management people harassing bears, not the most dangerous encounter. The 71 incidents only involved 46 bears. In the firearms study, the authors made sure they included every incident they could find where people were injured. It is how they obtained the 56% injury rate. They state they deliberately did not include more firearm incidents.
In the polar bear example, the two sub-adult polar bears curiously approach two researchers who are in a truck. Not a very dangerous situation. The two sub-adult bears are sprayed, and move off. The two papers should never be compared.
@@deanweingarten8700 Somebody with a brain... this video is almost pointless.
45-70? Better get your life insurance updated. Either that or get a "real" gun.
I wonder how many bear defense situations with a gun in Canada are not reported due to your “Government” with you getting in big trouble for protecting yourself? Those 2 hikers and their dog that lost their lives while deploying 2 cans of bear spray that didn’t work last year, probably wish they had a gun when that bear came after them. Is it illegal to carry firearms in your national parks in Canada? I’d take both spray and a firearm.
Logic prevails! I'm in grizz country and it's often too windy for spray but I generally carry both. Why not? I'm almost as interested in the bear's safety as mine. Spray is to there train them if possible so both creatures can survive the encounter.
Oh yes the Smith Herrero study AGAIN ! The Smith Herrero study has a few flaws and , as you stated , their conclusion should be taken with a grain of salt ! Firstly they should have limited the scope of their data to only include the incidents of bear defense using MODRERN firearms . Unfortunately they compiled data on over 400 cases of firearms use, some from over a century ago when antique black powder firearms were in use. Accorrding to their study the most common cause for failure of a firearm to defend a bear attack was " inabillity to reload " Well, that is no surprise when they included data , even news paper articles , from the black powder days of yesteryear . The second GLARING error that I noticed was they studied cases where pepper spray was used on non aggressive bears and compared that to the use of firearms to defend a bear attack . In most of the cases of pepper spray use in the Smith Herrero study , the bears were only displaying curious or otherwise non aggressive behaviour. There is a BIG differnce between scaring off a nuisance bear with pepper spray and having to shoot at a charing bear that is about to kill you or rip your guts open . The Smith Herrero study would have much more credibility if they had limited the scope of their data to only compare similar aggresive encounters using both pepper spray and only modern firearms normal used in the last 30 years or so . I went through the entire paper a few times and my conclusion , based on their study was that pepper spray can often be successfully deployed to scare off or change the behaviour of curious non aggressive bears. In the case of an aggressive or charging bears I believe that pepper spray may help to reduce the duration of a bear attack but not always . Just a few years ago a lady from our area lost her life in a bear attack . They sprayed the bear with pepper spray but according to a family member that only seemd to make the bear more aggrivated. The attack was stopped when the ladys husband retrieved his rifle from the cabin and shot the bear. I have seen with my own eyes how inaffective pepper spray can be on wildlife and there is no way I would trust my life to it if I had a better option . A 45-70 or a 12 Gauge shotgun dosen't care which way the wind is blowing .
These studies are just not equivalent. It is sad they are so often compared. Firearms used on aggressive bears, vs spray used on all sorts of bear behaviors.
Interesting BillyHill4937: You mentioned precisely the same firearms as I did in my comment. Some of the experts on youtube also mention a number of handguns that can be effective. When I see a message like this from Stefan Kesting, I am grateful that there are other viewpoints on the subject. Of course, each person is responsible for their own life and safety. It all depends I suppose, upon who it is that we trust as a reliable source of information. Part of the deceptive reasoning that I see introduced here, is what are called "statistics". People can think of themselves as a "statistic". People can also think of themselves as "possible victim". There is an enormous difference is there not? The same distinctions appear in the arguments of "gun control" advocates. Thus, should we consider ourselves as "statistically unlikely" to be a victim, or should we think of ourselves a "statistically" a possible "victim". Should we consider what the bears think of us? For example, in what way did TIMOTHY TREADWELL think of himself. He was, according to some reasonable estimates, somewhat of an expert. I will grant that. He had a great deal of experience with bears.
By that account, he even ordered a bear to "Go away!" or something to that effect.
----So should we think that our expertise regarding bears and their behavior be reliable?
--- Do we as wilderness travellers actually "know" what the behavior of an encountered bear will be? The majority of us respect wildlife. But my "respect" and my knowledge of statstics do not, in my opinion, justify choosing a MINIMAL DETERRENT. I want a MAXIMUM deterrent, as the outcome may be life or death.
I wonder how many professional guides, or people who go to rescue the mauled individuals, choose to only carry the "more effective" spray?
All you need is your cell phone.
"Dinner bell" bears. They might be attracted to the smell of bear spray because they expect a camp with food for example.
But to that regard, a gunshot can signal that another animal is dead or dying and they can maybe steal it.
Pretty silly if they did I'd say as animals already attacked I'd shoot first spray later lol as animals already known to injure others in close proximity I'd be extra wary just saying but no bear experience no bears in Tasmania Australia but I'm learning as about to move to usa maybe Alaska to marry within a few months
@@LEGOTROLL1 Good humor there! Heh heh!
Professional guides carry large bore hard hitting lever action rifles and know well how to use them, the average hiker outdoor people do not. Unless you hit the aggressive attacking bear in a vital spot the gun won't stop it.
I appreciated your attempt to be data driven and objective. You presented some good data. I think you did a really good job. I have hunted and backpacked in wilderness country for almost 41 years. I have carried both bear spray and a side arm and over the years have had two “bad” bear encounters and one mountain lion that seemed crazy. I have also studied into this debate quite heavily. Here is a couple of points that I don't feel get addressed. Point #1: Most people carrying a sidearm in the woods are not as proficient with the firearm as they think they are. I have found that MANY of the people carry a sidearm they have not even shot in the last 2-3 years. I am no expert at shooting, but I do go to the outdoor gun range 2-3 times per month. In a given year, I will normally send 1800-2200 shots downrange. That is not as much as I would like, but it makes me more prepared than the majority that do not practice at all. I also try to practice shooting in different body positions to simulate not having the perfect shooting scenario. Also, many people that carry firearms are largely ignorant of what type of projectile to use in bear country. If you are using ammo that was designed for self defense it will likely not have the penetration that is needed for predators. Because of my preparation I feel better about carrying a firearm than bear spray. On the other hand, if a person seldom if ever practices with a firearm they would be MUCH better served carrying bear spray. Also, regarding the effectiveness of firearms many studies cite old outdated data. I read one “study” that cited a Grizzly shot by the Lewis and Clark expedition in the early 1800s with blackpowder rifles as proof that a firearm was NOT powerful enough to stop a Grizzly! When I read this “data” I just shook my head in disbelief. Bullet projectiles have gone thru a technology revolution in the last 20-25 years. This is a total game changer. For example: A Glock 20 (10mm) shooting a 200g hard caste projectile has proven to be VERY effective. It has a 15 round magazine capacity and can be comfortably carried all day. It is VERY reliable and shootable and can be extremely accurate in the hands of a practiced shooter. That kind of protection was not available back in the 1940s and 1950s or earlier and so many of the studies still cite data from old low technology projectiles. BUT I repeat that a firearm is ONLY going to be effective if someone is REGULARLY practicing and has developed the necessary muscle memory to perform in an emergency. Many people would be better served with bear spray than their pistol that has sat in the gun safe all year long without being shot. Sorry for the long rant, but I feel your video was good enough that it merited a full response.
CC permit holder here.What you say is so very true. I Regularly train with what ever firearm i carry. It is important. Otherwise it is just a false security. Also your point with ammo improvements is very true. Eg. 9mm loads are much more "hot" than compared eg. to WW2 ammo. etc. I am not a hunter, nor i live in a bear country so i am not well versed with a bullets type, loads, calibers etc. that can be used for hunting or self-defense against bears.
But if i ever was visiting, hiking, etc i would definitely have both. Spray and firearm and i would train with both before going.
Also, there are reports of people which under huge stress could not use even the bear spray. So yes, the training is paramount.
Food or garbage ? ....ok so we are counting bear spray driving away garbage bears .......who the hell gets to shoot at garbage bears ?
This demonstrates the fundamental differences in the studies.
The minute you said "piss everyone off" your cat took it personally.
The BIG question is what people would call an aggressive bear encounter.
Most people, including many used to seeing and encountering bears, are not able to see the difference between a mock attack and a real attack.
People also very often think that a curious bear coming close is an aggressive bear.
If it is a mock attack or the bear being curious only, a bear spray, a shot in the air and you even doing nothing will most of the time make the bear walk away.
But a bear spray can also make the mock attacking bear change it to a real attack.
And someone claiming that is not the case talks pure nonsense.
I have a very good friend that has done research on bears for 30+ years and one of his colleague that was rather inexperienced with bears mistook a mock attack from a brown bear for a real attack and used his bear spray against it, but his first attempt missed the bear, but since he was stressed and rattled by the "attack" he really didn't pay notice to what the bear did as he changed his aim and sprayed again, but at that time the bear had already stopped the charge and was already turning away.
The moment that second spray hit the head of the bear, there was no turning away and just a mock attack anymore.
The bear clearly felt attacked and attacked him in defense and started to bite him and hit him with his paws.
My friend was not able to shoot the bear with his 44 magnum soon enough to stop the attack and he had to move close enough to be totally sure he could shoot the bear in the head and not hit his colleague.
If his colleague had been alone in that situation with his bear spray, he would most likely have been killed by a bear that in reality only did a mock attack.
My friend is never working without a proper firearm to protect himself from bears as he very well know that a bear spray is totally useless against a bear that really wants to harm him.
Yes, he has a bear spray with him as well, but he mainly uses that against young bears that are curious and to stupid to walk away from a shot or two in the air.
I am no scientist as my friend is, but I have been around a lot of bears of all kinds for about 40 years and have had many bears close to very close to me.
I have experienced rather many mock attacks during those years but I have only experienced four real attacks.
Two of them the same year.
All of them brown bears.
None of these four bears would have stopped because of some bear spray as their intent was VERY obvious.
Another friend I have once stopped an attacking polar bear with his 44 magnum and that bear dropped less than 6 feet from his toes and he would for sure be dead today if he had a bear spray in his hands instead of his gun.
If a polar bear is aggressive against you, it will not care at all about your silly bear spray.
Wounding a bear with a firearm can also turn a mock attack into a real attack and some people bring something like a 9mm for self defense against brown bars or polar bears, it is not strange that things are going badly....
Reports and studies like this should be taken with at least some grains of salt and maybe even with a shovel of salt at times.
Most of the times are "aggressive" bears not aggressive at all.
And I totally understand why it is claimed that a bear spray is better than a firearm, since wounding a mock attacking or curious bear with a bad shot or inferior cartridge/ammo will result in a real attack much more often than the use of a pepper spray will.
But the reality is that the bear spray is utterly useless if you encounter a bear that really wants to harm you or even eat you.
But having firearm is not enough.
It needs to be powerful enough and you need to practice enough with it to be both quick and accurate with it incase you need to use it.
A 9mm handgun can in most cases be enough against a black bear if you are a good enough shot with it, but it is close to useless against brown bears or polar bears.
A 10mm handgun is minimum against brown bears and polar bears in my opinion and you need to use proper loads with proper bullets that can penetrate the skull well and deep into the body.
This is what I use when bowhunting in bear country and as backup when fishing or hunting with a rifle in bear country.
My main gun when fishing, is a shotgun with slugs.
And when I hunt with a rifle in brown bear country, I hunt with my 375 Ruger.
All these are very capable to stop an attacking bear if you hit where you need to hit, but the 10mm takes the most practice to be skilled enough with.
A high quality pump action or a high quality semi auto 12 gauge with slugs is by far the best choice for most people in my opinion.
It takes the least practice and is VERY effective against an attacking bear.
The type of bear also matters a lot.
If a polar bear really is aggressive, there is NO pepper spraying in the world that will stop it.
The story about stopping aggressive polar bears wanting to hurt them with a pepper spray is utter nonsense.
If a polar bear wants to hurt you, it will not stop unless it is dead.
When it comes to brown bears, few of them are really aggressive and want to hurt you.
They say that about only 1 in 100 brown bears will attack you and that fits rather well with my own experience.
In most situations by far are they only curious or at worst making a mock attack.
Since most people don't encounter many brown bears when visiting their backyard, would they be rather unlucky to encounter a brown bear that really wants to hurt them.
In most of those cases it is a sow with cub/s, a bear guarding his/her food or you suddenly come very close to it without it noticing you and it attacks you in defense instead of running off.
When it comes to black bears, you need to be very unlucky to encounter an aggressive bear.
I have encountered MANY black bears and have yet not encountered one that was aggressive.
But the most dangerous black bears by far are the dumpster bears and the bears roaming around to gorge in people's garbage.
These black bears tend to have no fear of humans at all and are in general much more dangerous than the black bears in the wilderness that I am used to.
That said, can black bears in the wilderness still be dangerous, but they are extremely few compared with the black bear population.
But you still need to be prepared in case you encounter one of them.
Black bears are also by far the bears where bear sprays are the most effective against.
Both bear sprays and guns can give a false sense of security when it comes to bears and no matter what you choose to bring, do you need to practice enough with it to be able to use it well if you need it.
Personally I would NEVER be in brown bear or polar bear areas without a firearm.
And I highly recommend people to not rely on bear sprays only in those areas.
I VERY much doubt that a bear that really wants to hurt you, will stop because of a bear spray.
Nicely stated...!
Foaming Bear Spray by Cold Steel comes out liquid expanding and sticking to everything...!
One factor that I wonder about in the difference between the rates of success is the type of encounter. I would think that there would be more of a tendency to use bear spray in minor encounters where the bear would have gone away without any type of deterrence being deployed. That would inflate the apparent efficacy of the spray.
That could certainly affect the numbers. That being said, I think it’s relatively rare for people to carry both bear spray and a gun for most activities. I carry both sometimes but only when I’m in really deep bush and most bear encounters in the North are relatively close to towns.
Excellent point! I would even say: the depth of incident investigation varies. They'll do a lot more if a human is injured or if shots are fired, certainly if human or bear are killed. If the bear just left after spray was used, there's not much to investigate, it's just hearsay at that point.
I've quite a few people who have had an encounter with a bear interviewed . What I have taken away from them is if it's a more curious encounter the bear spray works very well but when it's truly an aggressive encounter it's effective and a firearm is more effective. But that's just my take away. I've watched interviews with hunting and fishing guides and have a cousin who is a fishing guide in Alaska. He agrees with the opinion.
Also there is a lot of variation in skill of user, type of firearm, distance etc.
@@essentialwilderness, Alaska bushman for 32 years. Worked for AK F&G for 25 years. Been attacked 5 times. Bluff charged twice. Ran a bait station for 25 years & had multiple generations of bears return every year. Had 1000s of sightings, 100s of up close ( 10-20 feet) encounters. Here's my opinions & i'll tell you why. Throw the useless spray into a dumpster where it belongs. Back in early 2000s we had a California transplant demonazi become our governor. He fired ALL the F&G top officials & replaced em with untrained, fully agenda driven, gun/ hunting hating Sierra Club members. California transplants who wouldn't know reality if it were biting their ass. They phucked up our F&G dept so bad with their bunnyhugger mentality it almost destroyed all of Alaskas wildlife & is doing damage even to today. They purposely censored many fatal bear attacks to not scare tourists away because tourism & oil are Alaskas lifeblood. An Alaskan senator gave up his seat to beat Tony Knowles, the California transplant demonazi idiot & beat him hands down. He immediately fired all the Sierra Club members & reinstated the original F&G experts who desperately tried to UNDO the damage the demonazies did. The demonazies, being the crybabys they are started screaming " Fair & balanced" & through the politics got half the experts refired & replaced them back with the Sierra Club fools & our F&G dept has been at war with itself since & the demonazies don't give a rats ass about FACTS or how many people get killed & use the liberal courts to get their way. Truth & FACTS be damned. That being said heres my own personal experiences. 1st summer attacked by a moose wounded grizzly w a kicked in face who was starving & desperate. He covered 150 yards so fast i barely had time to shoulder, find & fire at 10 feet killing it w a 375 H&H mag. THAT bear was only flipped over & ran 150 yards & into a lake with its spinal cord shot cleanly in half. Running on pure rage adrenaline & muscle memory. Entire gutpack blown to smitherines. Sold that useless rifle & got my 1st 45/70 a loaded my own PROVEN hot bear loads. 2nd summer a 10 ft blackie (7-800 lbs) stood up 200 yards away, saw me across an open swamp, let out the death roar & charged. I hit him @ 100 yards square in the sternum & dropped him like hed been thunderstruck. No more attacks for 13 years & then THREE in one summer. 2 black bear attacks & 1 young grizzly. Killed 1 with the 375, 2 with my 44 point blank w the muzzle shoved tight into their chest & the young griz ( last attack) w my wifes 243 w the muzzle shoved into its chest hard while firing. In NON of thoes cases would spray have helped at all. Its FAILURE rate is WAY higher than reported. All the F&G depts nationwide have been staffed w Sierra Club liberals similiarly & their " Fact sheets are highly skewed LIES. MY GUN stopped every one of thoes attacks & experienced bushmen wouldnt even consider carrying/ using that trash because WE know better. In a REAL attack youll never have time to use both & during a real attack its useless & only pisses the bears off worse. ESPECIALLY a sow w cubs who once stung sees you as an even bigger threat to her cubs & reacts accordingly. A bluff charge usually stops at 10 feet & no spray is needed. However if the death roar is issued that bear fully intends to kill you. Head shots are useless unless you hit the magic triangle. Across the eyes down to the nose & bear skulls are NOT bulletproof. No thicker than ours & easily shot through IF you hit the tiny skull relative to the size of the bears head. The BRAIN is in the magic triangle & any gun can punch into that. Eskimos regularly use 22s to drop polar bears no problem. In the eye, up the nose or sideways right at the base of the ear are solid brain, instant off, brain shots. We had a F&G officer who did his entire career w only a 40 S&W w regular FMJ bullets & didnt shoot them until they were too close to miss. He retired unscathed & laughed at the big bore guys. ( Including me, a 44/454 guy) He did get knocked off his feet a couple times by the bears momentum but never mauled. Bears were instantly dead from the brain shot. I could go on but the bottom line is spray has gottin more people killed & vanished than it ever saved. And theres no escaping the POLITICS & the scums who use it to achieve their agendas.
So I had just seen a TH-cam video about a couple who were on their way to a camp, had reported there location to an uncle, and were subsequently killed that evening by a grizzly bear. There were two cans of bear spray completely empty having been deployed. The rescuers found their camp and then were attacked and killed the bear.
Nothing is 100%, not bear spray, not guns, not seatbelts, not airbags. But if you actually look at the studies, I’m citing you’ll see that hairspray worked about 90% of the time and firearms worked about 80% of the time. Both are better than nothing, but neither are perfect. Guns two can jam, can miss, can run out of ammunition, or can shoot your fellow hiker
@@essentialwildernessNo damn way I'm going to use hairspray on a mean bear. 😊
@@JDsModernMartialArts
I’d pay 50 bucks to see you do that!
I believe I know that story. It was an old malnurished and sick female bear. Most Bears don't have behaviours like that. The problem with playing the odds is that there is always an outlier. Unfortunately media and social media only exaggerate and share the abnormal incidents. I was out his weekend and found three different sets out G-Bear tracks within 500meters of the hamlet I live near and a Mom and 2 cubs walked through Town this morning. No attacks. We see them or their sign regularly they are not inherently predatory. They are wild animals and like humans also have bad apples that don't follow reason. Be careful, smart and have a backup plan or just stay out of their home.
@@essentialwilderness Yes, and why even take the chance? Carry a firearm as well.
As an exploration professional, I have lived and worked in the Canadian wilderness for most of my life. Dealt with a number of close calls with black, grizzly and polar bears. In those 48 years, in the early days, there was no option for bear spray and after seeing the results of bear spray use I am not a big believer in it as the only thing to carry. I carry both spray and a 12 gauge or a 45/70. The spray works well on a bear that must be deterred, a gun is for when a bear must be stopped. You don't always get the choice on which you can deploy and bring to bear in a given situation and you can't always know for sure if deterrence vs stopped is needed but many face-offs can go either way based on your confidence and the vibe you put out. Many encounters backed with gun or spray end with all parties concerned going their own way without either option having to be used. A good part of that being, the human had something they felt would protect them and projected confidence. One thing I have noticed is that in curious bear situations when the bear is still at distance but moving closer to check things out, bear spray sucks at firing a warning shot lol. Still if one of the crew is on the ground wrestling a bear I don't want to have to shoot into that. Hose them both down and hope the bear takes off or at least moves off so you can safely take a shot - your crew member will hate you but at least they aren't bear fodder. That said, one of your best protections is another person or two with you who are similarly ready to deal with the situation. Again, its the vibe projected that suggests don't mess with the noisy two legged things. That can go a long way toward everybody just avoiding each other and going about their day.
Intelligent analysis. The problem with the data that I see is the possibility that bear spray is used on a not too serious charge whereas a firearm is used when the bear is seriously trying to kill you. 10 mm handgun seems to be a smart thing to carry as well as bear spray. Backup companion with a 45-70 wouldn’t hurt.
Accuracy and being able to shoot accurately multiple times seems to be most important.
12 gauge slugs #1 rated bear stopper. Also as a backpacker you want to carry multi-useful items not single use items.
A 12 guage slug IS a single use item
✌😉
@@stripedassape8148 Yep and they don't take much space and I carry extra. :)
As a hunter we try to stay downwind of animals we are stalking such as deer that may result in an encounter with a bear. Startling the bear usually results in an attack. Since this encounter is at close range deploying the bear spray isn’t likely to help not only because being down wind as a factor but reaching in time for the spray usually attached to your belt or pack and then pulling the clip. Hence the hunter holding his or her rifle opts shoots the raging bear in hopes of fending off the attack. This may not prevent the bear from inflicting some wound to the hunter with the bear running with adrenaline at you and coupled with perhaps a deer caliber and not a bear caliber. So the number in the test results then become screwed noting this wasnt efective but others hiking along trails making noise and perhaps not downwind have bears at further distances from them have time to deploy an effective tactic to thwart off the aggressive bear. Note in this situation I would rather have my rifle to get off a good shot or several shots being effective than wait for this charging bear to get into effective range with the spray! Most bear spraying persons armed with spray are likely to have yelled at the bear or walking/hiking in pairs or in a group or that obviously would intimidate the bear than a lone hunter stalking stealthily through the woods.
Thank you for this very honest and meticulous analysis, and for pointing out superficial vs. detailed reports. I work in data analytics, so I'll add my 2 cents. Relying on data can play its own tricks on the analyzer, even if we completely exclude dishonesty and political views. When people consider "data", there is this illusion of data points being fungible, in other words assuming that every bear attack is the same, interchangeable, that every human in a bear encounter is also the same. I've seen professionals at work look at data and draw false or meaningless conclusions and "trends", where there were none. A couple of examples of variability: the data with spray use might have more "hippies hiking in bear country" represented, whereas the data with guns might have more hunters, where the bear behavior and motivation are different. So we are already comparing different situations. People react differently - some are decisive, others might panic or freeze. Every bear is obviously different - different demeanor, different time of year, weather, mood, how hungry, how angry, etc. Another: level of training with a firearm. I read recently about a man who survived, although still injured, but he practiced with his 10mm Glock all year long, and that saved him. Other people don't practice, thinking that the gun is a magic power. There's a guy on TH-cam who relates how his brother took an unvetted pistol with him elk hunting, which he's never once fired. Or how about the elk hunt guide who was killed because the pistol was out of reach and didn't have a round chambered, so his client couldn't get it to work. Even cases of defense against humans, like police shootings or citizen defenders, are considered to be incomplete to judge "stopping power" of some calibers vs. others, although there's far more such incidents vs. bear attacks. Spray doesn't even stop every human attacker.
I dream of visiting bear country some day, maybe years in the future, and I would never want to have to shoot a bear, but I won't go if I'm limited to spray only. So I am studying and training now, learning and figuring out what do bring.
We don't see studies analyzing whether smoke detectors are better than fire extinguishers. We have both. Likewise with bear defense. Spray is a given, a must. A firearm should be up to the person. And that person better put in the time to figure out the caliber, action, ammo selection and lots of training and practice.
P.S. cool looking pump action there, is it chrome plated or stainless steel? What kind is it? I'm not sure I've ever seen one with that finish and type of stock.
Bear spray should include a flame thrower ability together with wood smoke.
Bullet placement is important.
As they are charging aim for the nose or just ahead because they are lower than you ad they are coming ,other wise you will shoot high .
I dont carry a shot gun for bear because there is no way enough penetration after a lot of testing .
A handgun in a chest rei is good ,its faster than a hip holster and with hard cast bullets
Is very effective.
Rifles are also effective but you might have set it down ,with not time to retrieve.
An Alaskan guild recently used a S&W
9 mm auto with buffalo bore hard cast
And it worked.
Its not a one off.
Bullet placment and hard cast bullets are the key.
A 10 mm ,.357 will work to.
When you get to 44 ,454, and larger handgun calibers you run into recoil that hinders your follow up rounds .
Do not rely ever on
Soft lead or or jacketed bullets.
I always travel in twos.
I carry a hand gun in a chest rig and the other person bear spray.
They shoot first ,im the back up.
Oh and besides hanging your food far away from your tent .
Dont go in the tent with the cloths you had on when cooking and eating .
Yup no food in the tent tent ,Or drink unless its water.
I always travel in twos thats the best advise i have seen i would never hunt on my own in USA i am from Australia even here its advisable just in case of a medical episode of a fall getting injured i always carry a personel beacon if on your own to call for help
Okay, my first comment was before watching the video. This is trash studies. Okay, in most cases the bear will stop on its own when charging so if you just happen to set off the spray and the bear would have stopped anyway you get credit for the spray, you see what I'm saying. like I said below in my other comment, if a bear switch flips it will not stop, I'm telling you, it is rare for that switch to flip but when it does. I don't think you can count charges, like I said, I have been charged at least 10 times in my life, they stopped on their own every time, so if I happened to spray would all 10 charges count for spray stopping the bear without a full-on attack.
"Bear Spray does NOT work like bug spray ,,, we wish we didn't have to say that ."
Oh man! 😂 I had one go off in my Xtra Tufs one time... man that burned!
We lived right on the edge of the wilderness in Washington State. Every now and again a Bear would come into the neighborhood. Just about everyone has a Bear Slap. It's two bords hinged together with straps for your hands or hand holds(drawer knobs). When you slap it together, it sounds like a double barrel shotgun cracking off. There were 30 of us kids in the neighborhood running wild all over the place. 10-12 of us would take off in the summer time for 2-3 weeks at a time miles up in the mountains. We would use the Bear Slap every hour or so. But Bears wouldn't ever bother us because there were so many of us stomping around out there.
But I do remember my Dad a few times grabbing the Bear Slap and running out the back door.
I've defended against a brown bear once in Alaska. It was while fishing in Alaska on the Newhalen River by Iliamna. It was harassing me over my string of sockeye, I postured the first time around and it backed away, then it got progressively more brave while I was trying to leave and I had the misopportunity to shoot it in the face with bear spray and didn't have a problem again. Unfortunately the very next day the same bear harassed a local native and their net on the other side of the river to the point where they had to shoot it. The native was cornered and used what appeared to be a .44 mag wheel gun. It was sad to see, but the native was cornered and had already used up his bear spray. I will always wear a bell to let them hear me, and will always have a can of spray in my off hand and tied to my body when in bear country. I carry a glock 20 10mm on a chest harness too, but fortunately I wasn't on the other side of the river that day.
My guess as to why the Mineral Management group was part of it is that miners have a big portion of the interactions.
An angry charging commited bear...vs a bear just mulling around.
I want 3 capable people in big bear country.
Actual Alaskan here, most that live / work in bush carry a bear gun of some sort. they may also carry spray, but when your life is at stake, a gun is always best.
ive found those from los anchorage, tourists, or those that are casual bush goers, tend to favor spray. the types of encounters betwixt the two populations, while overlapping, are different in nature, and local.
lastly, i knew Smith when he was doing Bear research for US fish and wildlife in anchorage, 1011 e tudor rd. if you want to do a deep dive, i dont know if its in the report, or just in research paper, he told me of a story, part of the 'spray misuse'. they used to have FWL volunteers do a test spray after leaving the float plane, at drop off site. everyone carried spray, and there was always one bear gun (shotgun) among the group. during one trip, they tested the spray, getting it on the planes floats. when they came back, they discovered that a gear had gnawed the floats where the spray was, causing enough damage to ruin a float, this sinking partially the plane, and necessitating a rescue. it was a long time ago, and if i remember correctly, that is what smith told me gave (in part) idea for research into bear spray.
*The most nimble rifle design, usually the shortest, the most instinctive to point, and the fastest to get a second shot on target is a double rifle.*
*If I was a lot younger, and I was going to live, work, or play for extended periods of time, or permanently, in black bear country, or the lower 48 states grizzly bear country, then I would drive a piece of junk car/truck, save my money, and commission/purchase a modern double rifle chambered for the .35 Whelen cartridge. Far less average recoil than the .375 Holland and Holland cartridge, or any of its magnum bigger brothers.*
*Unless the .35 Whelen is handloaded to maximize muzzle energy levels, then it will not approximate the recoil levels of the .375 H&H. The .35 Whelen has available a far greater and heavier selection of bullets than those available for the .30-06 Government cartridge, which has killed tens of thousands of black, grizzly, and brown bears since it was intoduced to the civilian market in 1908.*
*I'd attempt to adopt a pioneer frontiersman's or frontline combat soldier's attitude and carry that lightweight slung double rifle EVERYWHERE that I ventured outdoors in bear country. Because, most of the bear attack stories can trace their origin to adult men and women who had little to no situational awareness in bear country. Or else, they trusted to God and the Angels to protect themselves instead of accepting responsibility for their own lives and protection. A handgun is better than nothing, but a rifle or 12 gauge pump-action shotgun is exponentially better than a handgun.*
*I spent thousands of hours in my teens, 20's and 30's shooting handguns, rifles, shotguns, and flintlock longrifle muzzleloaders. I know that I am an above average shot. That being said, I would still elect to arm myself with the following deterrents if in bear country.*
*#1* Bear spray
*#2* Compact .357 Magnum revolver loaded with ammunition containing hard cast lead bullets with wide meplats.
*#3* Stainless steel, 12 gauge x 3" chamber, pump-action shotgun equipped with an extended magazine tube that is loaded with Brenekke Black Magic rifled slugs.
*I haven't shot any firearms for many years. I would committ myself financially and time wise to a MINIMUM of 6 months of steady practice with both firearms as well as the bear spray, under the most adverse weather conditions that Mother Nature could provide me, as well as the most demanding psychological scenarios that I could invent. I would NEED to be sure of my capabilities under the worst circumstances that I could invent BEFORE I would trust my life, or anyone else's life to my ability to defend myself against an angry bear.*
That's really interesting. Valuable analysis. Thanks Stephen.
How do you know bear spray doesn't work? When you find an empty can in a pile of bear poop, along with some poor guy's shoes!
I appreciate your analysis of this issue. You obviously did considerable research. I’ll give this very careful thought. Thank you.
Some great answers here from viewers. Generally, it's difficult to get unbiased statistics as not everyone reports incidents and some groups have certain agendas. If its not possible to carry a rifle or self defense shotgun, carry both bear spray and a handgun like a 10mm with a great penetration round from buffalo bore or underwood. If no guns are allowed or the person is not skilled with a firearm, pepper spray is the only proven option. Sometimes a problem bear needs to be educated but is not predatory and pepper spray will prevent an unwanted investigation. A true predatory bear is better dead, as it can eventually injure or kill a person. Many people are not skilled with a handgun and will not shoot effectively. In summary, carry two types of protection when possible. Be prepared, practice with the spray or firearm so in the heat of the moment, a person can use their tool of choice. Thanks for sharing the studies as they provide interesting info and details.
Thank you, I've never heard this specific point articulated, even though it's almost obvious. A true predatory bear is a danger to humans.
*The specific topic aside, thank you for the masterclass on maintaining healthy skepticism of unsubstantiated claims and rigorous analysis of data / studies. We could use more of that in our day-to-day discourse.*
Thank you very much
Always enjoy your content Stephan, so thank you! But I have a few comments and/or questions.
The caliber of the bullet should be a key component of this analysis. I know many avid hunters who have had several encounters with bears who swear by a .45 ACP pistol. It’s a small and nimble firearm easy to maneuver but yet with huge stopping power. These real world outdoorsman have told me that with that particular firearm they’re pretty at ease and it’s never failed them whereas they’ve had failures with the bear spray (a) outdoor conditions b) the bear charged right through the spray). This caliber of the bullet as parallel to the content of the spray. You wouldn’t want to spray a bear with a dog spray, for instance.
I appreciate your reliance on scientific analysis. I’m a scientist myself but I can tell you that as of the last decade or so, I have increasingly lost confidence in these journals who are easily swayed by those who fund them. I know that’s very much against the scientific method but sometimes there are political motives behind these papers as data can be easily manipulated.
The best source of info are villagers and populations who live in the wilderness full time and deal with bear matters on a frequent basis. I would take their word over any publication. That’s just the world we live in. Ow unfortunately.
Two things...
First, the fourth study (Analysis of fourth report, Efficacy of Firearms for Bear Deterrence
in Alaska, by Smith et al.) did look at long guns vs handguns and found no difference in efficacy between the two. In general bullets spat out of long guns are travelling much faster than those coming out of handgun, and due to kinetic energy being 1/2m*v*v they'll have more stopping power in general.
Second, it's true that any one study or report can be biased, but if you've got four different reports published in three different places then that's beginning to form a pretty indicative pattern. As always, I am open to having my mind changed by more data, but I have not found any reliable data to the contrary.
And I respectfully disagree with you about the power of anecdote. Especially in the modern era people are so religiously wedded to their guns that if you asked a sample of 100 people whether gunsmoke cured cancer that five of them would probably say yes.
@@essentialwildernessHow does that prove the power of the anecdote ? Sorry for my English , English isn’t my first language and I think I am confused. Thank you🙏 ❤
The Smith Herrero report was a study with many flaws and was hardly a fair comparrison. They used at least some data from the days of antique black powder firearms in their study on firearms use . According to their statistics the most common cause of firearms failure to defend against a bear attack was the inability to reload. That is no surprise when they used stats from the old days of black powder firearms. The other GLARING error was they compiled data on pepper spray use where, in most of the cases the bears were displaying curious or non aggressive behaviour and comparred those stats to the use of firearms to defend actual bear attacks . Big difference between a curious bear and one that is trying to kill you. After going through the entire Smith Herrero paper I concluded that pepper spray was often successful at scaring away curious non aggressive bears and black powder muzzle loaders were often not the best choice for bear defense. It's too bad they didn't do a more fair comparison , compiling and limiting the data to only include cases of aggressive bear attacks and also stick with only data from the days of more modern firearms.
Yes, a shotgun is hard to use in close quarters, like you said, but a nice hi-power revolver, like a 44 magnum or 454 casull is WAY different as you can pull that over your head and/or shoot at close quarters much easier than that unwieldly shotgun (if you are in the brush and hit a branch while turning around....). The study discarded the type of gun, well, you know, bear can sprays come in mostly one size and is rather manageable, guns come in different sizes and grabbing and swinging around a long gun, having to use both arms is way different than having to use one arm to unholster a handheld revolver and use the same arm to point at your target. The handgun is not much more different in size than the can and the time to unholster both is very similar.
My questions are"
What are the chances that you shoot yourself with the gun while pointing at the bear?
What are the chances that you will inhale bear spray and now disable yourself, even if you hit the bear with it at close quarters? What then?
The way to look at this issue would be best served by examining only imminent OFFENSIVE bear attacks, not the annoying type-of-bear kind. And yes, it would be wise to have both gun and bear can, because shooting a bear is the last thing you want to do.
In general, peer reviewed journals USED to be more reliable, however interesting studies have shown recent cases wherre totaly made up farcical studies ahave been " peer reviewed" and quoted around and used as evidence other studies.
A very valid analysis. Thanks for the discussion.
Laughed at your John wick joke!
Cracked me up!
This is the most reasoned and plain discussion of the efficacy of bear deterrents I’ve seen. Thanks.
The second study introduced the presence of game meat and fish. That seems like a pretty important detail.
look I was born and raised in grizzly and brown bear country, yes I know they are the same the difference in coastal and inland raised in both. 1. every encounter is different no two bears are the same. Now with that said!! If the bear is not aggressive, just pushy or not paying attention, bear spray is your go-to. However, if the switch has flipped and is set on hurting or killing you a firearm is going to be your go-to. I have seen bears that are switched on keep killing or attacking with a leg ripped off the only thing that will stop a bear dead set on battle is death. I would carry both, most people that live in bear country don't go very far outside without a firearm on them, I would carry both, and what I used would depend on the encounter. I would make my choice. What would make that switch flip, well too many reasons to list, but here are a few common reasons why a bear would go into full-on kill mode. 1. Cubs, especially first-year cubs, 2. breeding season, males get moody and aggressive when females go into season. 3. food cash close by, 4. dumb bad luck, just startling the bear can flip the switch. In most encounters, you need nothing. In some encounters, a little spray will bush them off. but if that switch is flipped you could put that entire can up the nose of that bear and he or she would keep coming like nothing ever happened. I promise you this. if the switch is flipped you have to kill or be killed. It truly is that simple. One time when I was about 13 I was running the rabbit snare trail collecting rabbits, and all of a sudden about 15 feet from be a good 10' bear stood up and screamed at me, I was young and did the wrong thing, in about 0.5sec I took off, never looked back, ran so fast that when I got home my mom said my lips were blue. I have no idea what it did but my guess is not a damn thing. Oh watch out for blueberry patches that is where I have had the most bears sneak up on me, one sec you're alone picking berries the next a bear is eating berries about 10 feet from you. this has happened a few times in my life. I was older by then and just backed up a little and picked berries on the other side of the patch. But I had a bear pistol in my chest or stomach holster. In every case, I could read the body of the bear and they did not give a sh*t about me.
You failed to mention on your list when the bear is actually hunting your for food. Bear encounters at night are far more dangerous because if they are out and about its usually because they are in hunting mode.
The most important consideration of using a firearm for bear defence is practice. If you are not shooting often in stressful situations a firearm is almost useless as a form of self defence during a real bear charge. The reason I believe bear spray has been so effective is 1. Anyone can be proficient in its use and 2. You don’t have to be accurate when you squeeze the trigger.
Well said, thanks for sharing a non biased report, just the facts. I agree, let the evidence dictate what's best to use in a given circumstance.
Great video, very well spoken!!
You’re correct about source biases. My 2¢: Flat Nosed Hard Cast.
Excellent review and summary of available data.
Thank you very much for being a dated driven person
THANK YOU, I LEARNED A LOT.
Great video. I love the format.
Agree totally, I also want original data before accepting any reports. If the original data is not presented no check can be conducted. Even when the data is presented, far too often the conclusion listed cannot be supported by analysis of the data presented. From my experience the data must analysed first to draw accurate information if informative at all.
Yes this is anecdotal. But I heard that a lot of bear spray success stories were on bears that were not extremely aggressive. They then went on to say a lot of bear spray interactions were with bears at garbage dumps
Great video! I really appreciate the data driven approach and the fact that you came into the analysis with an open mind. Frankly, I was really worried about the wind issue with bear spray and I carry both bear spray and a 10 mm with me in the wilderness. I will be less fearful of grabbing for the bear spray if I ever encounter a charging bear in somewhat windy conditions. In very windy conditions, I will deploy my 10 mm if bear is charging from an upwind or side wind position and will deploy bear spray if it is charging from a downwind position.
Thank you, you presented a thoughtful and reasonable argument. I will continue to carry both
Also depends in two camps;
1) experienced w/guns hunters & outdoorsmen
2) non gun campers/hikers & city-ot neo-phytes
Super-interesting. Thanks Stephan.
That was a great vid, thanks.
You forgot to circle back around to the misuse examples in the bear spray study. It’s important to note that in 4 cases, residue of bear spray actually seemed to attract bears. Having been hit by an accidental discharge of bear spray due to the safety clip being dislodged in brush, my biggest concern with bear spray is that in the wind you get one shot. It took me a substantial amount of extra time to hike out while covered in residue, and I was out of commission for minutes. It seems likely, atlthough not proven in this data, that the most likely aggressive bear encounters involve hiking with the wind in your face and surprising a bear, which is the worst case scenario for spray. I actually find most bears avoid human interaction normally. With the wind in my face, I prefer a firearm.
Maybe if we read the directions on the can of bear spray, it will tell the purchaser that it will always deploy downwind. If the wind is blowing toward the user, the aerosol can will not discharge, thus saving the purchaser from any discomfort.
The manufacturer guarantees this. Or, maybe the research and development department understands that bears always, by statistical studies, approach Into--The--Wind, thus assuring that bear spray is effective as a deterrent. If the wind is blowing into your face, the bear spray is designed to pierce through the plasma field of electromagnetic subatomic particles such as Muons and Quarks
and deter the bear from approaching further. When you have returned to camp, and removed your Aluminum Foil Hiking Cap and opened a cold beer to relax around the fire, the slow realization that your left arm is missing will pale in the light of the fact that you have saved the life of a gentle woodland creature. You are one of the "brights" of the world because your thinking is Politically Correct.
Good video, earned another sub
On May 18, 2018 a US Wildlife worker (Amber Kornak) while out in the woods checking bear hair sample traps, was attacked by a grizzly less than 2 air miles from our home at the base of the Cabinet Mountains near Libby, MT....Per various news reports: “As the bear attacked her from behind she was able to reach her bear spray and spray the deterrent to ward off the bear,” Hemer’s fundraising post continues. “Amber’s wildlife training skills kicked in, and she somehow managed to stay calm and hike two miles from the site of the attack to her work vehicle where she then drove to find help.”
I spend a lot of time in the woods hunting and fishing as well as fishing trips to Alaska. When in the woods or at camp I carry two cans of bear spray in a holster for fast access. During archery season I add a revolver. During rifle hunting season, I still carry the two cans of bear spray. Also carry a Garmin Messenger in case I get into a bad situation.
Good information. I carry a handgun and bear spray. Hand gun is in a chest rig for fast deployment. Bear spray is on a waist belt along with first aid kit. I can't get to that bear spray as fast, no doubt about that. Do all of my hiking in the mountains with 2 dogs that are good for situational awareness of potential threats. Those extra eyes and ears plus scenting capabilities alert me to things I rarely know about before those dogs.
I know cases of bears attacks on hunters who had rifles but were in no position to use their gun to protect themselves. I bet these cases were included in the 50% failure rate despite not truly meeting criteria of protective use of firearm. Also, that Missoula, Montana group reporting on bear spray is probably very connected to forest service and anti-gun lefties. FYI. I also think including bears that are not being aggressive is diluting the true protective effectiveness measure because these are bears that could be left unharassed by the humans and didnt have intent to harm which is a very different scenario.
Keep your bear spray ill keep my 12 guage
The Bible shows that bears like bald dudes by the prophet Elisha's example. So just be bald guys 👍🏼
... that's how this dude survived so long!
Wow, great video. Rational discussion. Thanks! :)
Thank you very much
Outstanding thanks
Thanks! Really good information. When I lived in Alaska, before bear spray, always carried either a shotgun or .44 magnum. It is much easier to carry bear spray and dispense with all the firearm safety rules as a bonus.
Excellent video.
This analysis is well made and very true. I used to teach bear education classes for The Kenai Wildlife Refuge to elementary schools throughout the peninsula. I completely advocate carrying bear spray for the reasons you mentioned. Sadly, it's difficult to convince Testosterone Ted that he should do the same and use a firearm as a backup.
PS- the kids at Cooper Landing taught me strategies, not in my curriculum that made so much sense.
LOl that's what that couple that were eaten by a big brown bear in Banff Alberta last fall said befoer they went hiking! Parks Canada said it looked like the bear attacked the wife and started eating her and when her husband came to her aid the bear turned on him and ended up eating both of them. The 911 call he made must have been horrific by the sounds of it. It took parks Canada 18 hrs to get to them but it was much too late. when they got there the bear was still feeding on the couple so parks staff shot it with a real weapon. two full sized empty pepper spray cans were found at the sight. I guess when the pepper spray ran out all he could do was throw rocks at it and watch helplessly as his wife was being eaten untill the bear got tired of his dinner getting interrupted and ate him. I heard that Testosterone Ted offered to lend a gun to them but they said they have "no need for a gun" Sadly, it,s difficult to convince "old hippies" about the dangers of traviling in the remote wilderness in the fall without a firearm but a lot of them learn the hard way. Oh forgot to mention the couple were apparently "Expert hikers and bear experts"
Nice report…. Thanks
7:49 “… I don’t know why the MMS got involved ..”. Well, it’s because the study is about Alaska, which has oilfields, which are Regulated by the MMS (in some cases - although it’s not called MMS anymore), and Grizzlies and Polar Bears can be a problem in the oilfields. That’s why the MMS got involved.
Yep I thought that too . Kinda like they do it for a living as well.
I enjoyed your attempt to be objective about this subject. I watched Ron Sooner’s episode 354 interview with Alaska bear guide Phil Shoemaker- perhaps the man with more than 40 years experience of hunting and living with brown bears. I realized that often times a guide or hunter may aim the firearm at the bear and shout at the bear. The bear will do a bluff charge and depart with no shot being fired. Shoemaker stated that is the most common response. I doubt that data is reported. If spray is deployed, the bear may have bluffed and departed without any response to the spray and was counted as a successful spray incident. So perhaps we need all the data from people who had neither spray nor a firearm ( a control group). I lived in Colorado for years and it is a common saying with people who live in more remote areas with a lot of bears. S. O. S. If you have a bad bear encounter. Shoot, Shovel and Shut up. So without a doubt most successful firearms defense incidents go unreported. The people do not trust the authorities to deal objectively and fairly with them if they have to shoot a bear.
Wow! Thank you.
3:30 Both of these government reports appear to suffer from “survivor bias”. These encounters could be equally explained by concluding that less aggressive bears can be driven away with bear spray and more aggressive bears are often not discouraged by poorly placed gunshots, resulting in the deaths of the shooters. If you survive a bear encounter where the bear also survives, maybe the bear didn’t want to kill you in the first place.
Does most of the time mean they are uninjured 90% of the time or 49.99999% of the time.
I immediately question why they gave a percentage for guns and a "most of the time" for bear spray. That indicated they didn't want to reference the actual numbers. Which instantly disqualifies their opinion in my eyes.
Because the first two are 100% opinion and not studies.
I’ve been studying this for sometime. I have considered 5 handguns for last resort type firearms. So my wife is training w bear spray and Im carrying a firearm. I wish you the best but I think in a legit attack chances of surviving is
50-50.
Most bears that complete attacks are mothers or old bears who are really starving.
But I believe you need to pick one ahead of time if you are by yourself because you won’t have enough time to do both.
I see one problem here. The bear spray research was conducted from some like 1990 to a 2006?? While the firearms use was researched form 1900 to 2006???
It is inconclusive.
The firearms and ammunition evolved greatly since 1900.
Also, it would be very very interesting to know how regularly people trained with firearms they defended themselves with.
Ppl in 1900 did not train much if at all, the price of ammo was so great. And some ppl dont train today because .... they are just lazy and do not make it their priority.
I wonder if another factor which skews the data is the legal/social implications of using a firearm. I imagine if you killed a bear you might not go through the trouble of reporting vs spraying a bear and leaving it out there to harass or injure the next person.
So the firearm categories and time range is interesting. Being that the timeframe begins prior to 1900, one question related to categories is, how many long guns or handguns were smokeless vs. black powder. Also, how many were autoloader, single shot, or manual repeaters, or shotguns? Also, what calibers?
These are considerations of consequence, especially today, as firearm technology indeed advanced materially within that time period.
It would be misleading to lean on data related to single shot muzzle loaders or sub 40 cal handguns.
Such antiquated arms are anemic next to modern firearms. There is a massive difference to a 7.62 Mosin, or a 45/70 guide gun, for instance.
If that study doesn't make these distinctions, then I can't really regard it as credible.
Here’s something missing, it’s about the people that go into bear country with nothing but bear spray and are never seen or heard from again!
And it depends on what bear you run into! If he’s hungry and hunting for something to eat he’ll probably that you for the extra spicy lunch! A sow with young cubs will not notice bear spray and if the cubs are close to being wined she will set you up for her cubs to make the kill!
40 years experience living hunting and fishing Alaska! Personally I wouldn’t carry it just standing your ground and using a loud voice will accomplish the same as bear spray! There’s no substitute for experience and understanding the situation you’ve put that bear in!
First, thanks for sharing your data; I haven't seen a couple if those yet. Down here in the desert our black bears are rarely seen much less a problem. Javelina and Puddy Tats are a bigger concern. Anyone know if catnip spray exists? Thanks a gain and have a great day!
I like your thoughts on this subject. My only difference is I would carry a 10mm with high capacity mags Smith more than one mag as opposed to a shotgun for just the reason you said. Getting a face shot while she's chewing on your skull in the back is hard with a shotgun. With a 10mm you have very close to the power of a 44mag, but you have up to twenty shots as opposed to five or six with a revolver.
But in my case, I would carry both and have many times. I don't want to kill a bear with cubs for nothing if I don't have to. I use the spray first and the pistol only if it's chewing on my skull. Besides, I can guess what a bears gonna do and act accordingly. I don't go into thick brush unless I have to and if I have to then I watch as closely as I can and I scout around and look for tracks going in or out.
So bears don't scare me, I'm just cautious in bear country. Its Skukum that scares me! If the hairy man don't want you in his house he's gonna let you know in the scariest way.
One thing I didn't hear you mention, was that most people will shoot off the bear spray with less hesitation. Which I believe gives it an advantage. Easier to justify that 'warning shot ' when it's non lethal to the bear. Great video!
Best info yet! BUT there's always the outliers that make you pause. I think often of the guy a few years back in Hope Alaska that was found at the back of his property with an empty can of bear spray at the scene. And this is why My wife and I both carry pepper spray and handguns with hard cast.
If it’s tough to get off a shot, then it’s also tough to get off a spray, though spray probably provides a wider pattern under most cases, depending, of course, on what projectiles one is firing and from what distance.
I have seen videos of bears IGNORING bear spray. I know humans who can ignore bear spray in the face, bears are stronger than humans. Perhaps even more important, the odds of bear spray failing to fire is much higher than the odds of a gun failing to fire. You also do not train with bear spray, anyone with a gun should have fired it at least 100 times.
When hiking, I carry a sidearm & bear spray. I live in Northern NJ and we have a ton of black bears. In the last decade I've see or run into close to 3 dozen if them. I've never had an issue with them, and have been going to the same area (Stokes State Forrest) for 4 decades. 3 years ago I literally just started on a train, was about 100 yards off the road heading up a mountain, I look to my left and at the exactly same time, there was a about a 400lb black bear sleeping behind a big tree. He looked up, seen me, got up on all fours, and I yelled at him and he ran away about 30 yards, go ip on his rear legs, head up smelling and then just walked over the ridge.
I carry _both_ bear spray and a firearm when in bear (and cougar) country. As a hunter, I am at higher risk of bear encounters because I'm in the same areas hunting the same prey species as bears. Does bear spray work to deter curious bears? Of course. After all, bears have eyes and lungs sensitive to chemical irritants. Would I choose bear spray over a firearm against an aggressive bear? Absolutely not.
Fair point, however, a firearm is only as effective as the person wielding it. Bear Sprays, having a more dispersed locus of effect than a firearm, may be easier to deploy for average people under stress. The deployment time issue would be similar for both technologies, but the warning distance might very well be shorter for a hunter in bear country versus a hiker on a common trail.
However, I have some issues with the two studies cited. First and foremost, the bear spray encounters sample size was too small to be relevant. The data collection and sources included in either study were not detailed and the quality of those sources is unknown (but likely less reliable the farther back the data was collected). The spray study appeared to primarily be self-reported encounters with curious bears, as opposed to aggressive bears with the firearms encounters. The study's authors may have been biased towards non-lethal methods for dealing with bears.
Also time of season is important when information was collected.
I live in Missoula Montana and was fly fishing with my best weapons ever that ran off a bear that was 20 feet behind me. Bear had zero good intentions. He comes up behind you with no fear of humans,you're in trouble. He knew exactly what he's doing. I had no idea he was there. My 2 German Shepherds ran him off immediately. They were in the water and smelled him . They came running back up the small cliff i was standing on. I had spray and a weapon. But neither would have helped me because i didn't know he was there,but they did.
Ladies and gentlemen...the most reasonable full moustache in America
Why thank you, thank you very much
Good data! 17 years in Alaska, no horrible encounters, but I always carried bear spray, even in the parks around Anchorage. It's just lighter, smaller, quicker to deploy than most firearms. Plus, if you've practiced with an out-of-date can or two, you'll know it's super easy to hit with at close range.
You would rather not be "close range" with a grizzly.🙃
I've read that expended spray attracts bears, so they sell inert practice canisters. Or at least don't practice with expired spray in bear country :)
The age old college English 101 "Cite your source" phrase always helps the defense of a statement. Yeah both papers could have links to the original material.
Guns generally provide more confidence even though the data says pepper spray provides slightly better odds. I think it's the 'confidence factor' that attracts many people to guns in the first place, and that group rarely makes decisions based on data or facts. As a non-firearm person, I have carried pepper spray and see no need to change, especially after watching your video. Thanks.
Bear kind of angry? Spray will probably work -- the hissing and the cloud of gas will likely turn it. Bear REALLY angry and committed to attack? Has to be a gun to stop it.
I carry both simply because a hungry bear will take a hit but an empty stomach often wins over pain. I would be interested in a report of how often firearms and bear spray we present in incidents of human bear predation.
Just like with anything where different outcomes with somewhat similar circumstances are present there are variables that influence outcomes. I believe that if you knowing enter an area where you might encounter a bear, it is best to be prepared for the possible encounter. Having worked as a Deputy Sheriff in Black bear territory having a gun and ammunition powerful enough to dispatch an aggressive bear, or being able to discourage a bear with bear spray, best course of action is to be prepared and just deal with the inconvenience of added weight, and practice stress training with the tools you carry and be prepared to render aid to someone else or your self.
I carry both, and if it aint windy will choose bear spray first. When going through thick timber or areas where i could surprise a grizz i have spray in my hand and ready. If its very windy, which it often is in wyoming i don't even consider using spray. Most bears ive ever seen in one day over 15 grizzly rolling boulders on a 13,000 foot mtn with winds over 60 mph i made the summit with and met a big grizzly over the top we seen each other at the same time about 15 yards away. I knew bear spray wouldn't work with wind in my face also knew there would likely be one up there as i was going into the wind which means they dont know your coming and in 60 mph wind can't here you either. Being alert is the best deterent guns and spray are just tools to use when everything has went wrong which most times can be avoided.
I always carry bear spray, an air horn, a stun gun and a firearm. I think it depends on the situation as to which one is most effective.
Good analysis. One question I have is about how to compare the two studies. It seems to me that there is likely a difference between the types of incidents where bear spray is used compared to the types of incidents where firearms are used. This could have an effect increasing the apparent effectiveness of bear spray relative to firearms. I would be likely to use bear spray even in situations where I would not consider the threat great enough to justify shooting the bear. I would be likely to wait to pull a trigger on a firearm until I was certain that the danger of attack was clear and immanent. This would leave some percentage of successful bear spray events that would also have been successful with a firearm, but would not be included in the firearm study as the firearm would not have been discharged.
My takeaway is similar to yours. My few encounters with bears in the wild have all been with black bears and have all been resolved by either making noise or getting into a vehicle until the bear went away. After viewing you video I am more likely to have bear spray with me when venturing into bear country and about as likely to have a firearm as I would have been before seeing the video. In other words, If I am in dangerous bear country I am likely to have both, but I am also likely to have bear spray with me even if I consider the bear danger to be too low to justify carrying a firearm.
One thing that is going to heavily skew data is the rounds that were used. Did they lump in 9mm, 22 lr, 357, 454 together for handguns? What about rifles? Were they 223, 12ga hard cast slugs, 30 carbine, 300 wm? I don't think that study takes this into account even though its one of the most important factors in success. What would you be more confident in against a big bear 223 or 12ga with hard slugs? Id be curious to see some studies that broke down successful stops by caliber/cartrigde. I think it would be much more valuable than guns as a generic category. Maybe 12ga and 500 sw have a 90% success rate. Maybe they don't, i don't know. But i don't need a study to tell me a 9mm is just going to piss off a polar bear.
I clicked on this video on habit thinking I was going to learn about armbars or leglocks. Was surprised to say the least but a fun video none the less!
Well, thank you for following me to my second TH-cam channel. I’m trying to have my Martial Arts and my outdoor stuff separate, but I’m glad you appreciate both.
Great video. I would premise that a Wildlife Management publication might be skewed against firearms. Having said that, the second 2 you mentioned appeared to have attempted a real study. I would agree with most of the conclusions, however I noticed there was no attempt to record incidents that did not include aggressive bear action, no attempt to address the fact that the bear spray is a deterrent only vs firearms have the potential to physically disable the animal. Anyone who has used pepper spray on humans will report that there are a plethora of variables that determine whether pepper spray works, where as taking out the pump or the control board will absolutely shut things down. I did enjoy the video tho