Hunting in Grizzly Country
02-13-2012, 12:30 PM
#21
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
KB.........getting back to the handgun for a minute. Of course I agree to keep using the rifle, but what if the bear knocks you down, and you lose the rifle. Wouldn't having a handgun be a good backup?
02-13-2012, 01:38 PM
#22
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 18
You have to appreciate how violent such an attack is. Imagine a dog shaking a rat...
You'd be far better off (in my experience) using your hands to protect your neck and trying to stay face down than in trying to get turned around and shoot the critter. Most of the time (most of the time...) they are going to back off after enough punishment has been administered. "Most" of these attacks are territorial or threat-driven, so if you can keep your torso and neck protected, you'll likely survive even if it ain't pretty.
Read the book - it's only $4.99. There's some graphic pix there and it isn't pretty, but I'm alive. My mauling was pretty typical. I had a steel framed Alice pack which protected my torso. I did take some kicks and punches at the face of the bear when I was face up and had my leg and hand destroyed for doing so. If the animal had swiped or bit at my face or chest while I was in the vulnerable position of facing the bear, I'd be dead. In any case, there's no way I could have drawn a gun in that scenario since I was being shaken and swung around the entire time. I just kept turning turtle every time I broke loose and then hiding under my pack until a companion shot the bear off me.
If you feel safer carrying a big bore revolver, then do so. But honestly, you won't get a chance to use it unless the bear backs off for some reason.
You'd be far better off (in my experience) using your hands to protect your neck and trying to stay face down than in trying to get turned around and shoot the critter. Most of the time (most of the time...) they are going to back off after enough punishment has been administered. "Most" of these attacks are territorial or threat-driven, so if you can keep your torso and neck protected, you'll likely survive even if it ain't pretty.
Read the book - it's only $4.99. There's some graphic pix there and it isn't pretty, but I'm alive. My mauling was pretty typical. I had a steel framed Alice pack which protected my torso. I did take some kicks and punches at the face of the bear when I was face up and had my leg and hand destroyed for doing so. If the animal had swiped or bit at my face or chest while I was in the vulnerable position of facing the bear, I'd be dead. In any case, there's no way I could have drawn a gun in that scenario since I was being shaken and swung around the entire time. I just kept turning turtle every time I broke loose and then hiding under my pack until a companion shot the bear off me.
If you feel safer carrying a big bore revolver, then do so. But honestly, you won't get a chance to use it unless the bear backs off for some reason.
02-13-2012, 01:52 PM
#23
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
Sounds like you got lucky. I only have to deal with black bears now. They just run away most of the time.
I did go to Alaska once when I was younger. I worked a gold claim with a buddy north of Fairbanks. I brought a .458 mag to stop an attack, and carried a .44 mag all the time. Luckily, I never had to use either one.
I did go to Alaska once when I was younger. I worked a gold claim with a buddy north of Fairbanks. I brought a .458 mag to stop an attack, and carried a .44 mag all the time. Luckily, I never had to use either one.
02-16-2012, 03:48 PM
#26
Spike
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: IDAHO
Posts: 15
I just did an interview with a guy who guides in the Teton Wilderness on the subject of grizzlies. A couple of highlights - he recommends no less than a .44 as a sidearm. And that might not be enough for a charging grizzly (and he has a story to back it up). He also says they set up an electric fence around camp each night, and it's pretty eerie when they hear the bears bump the fence, bark, and then try again further down the line.
You can read the rest here, if you're interested:
http://idahoman.com/interview-with-g...izzly-country/
You can read the rest here, if you're interested:
http://idahoman.com/interview-with-g...izzly-country/
02-17-2012, 10:06 AM
#29
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 18
It's hard to get the point across...
Consider this. If you talk to bear guides (and I know a number of them), they all have stories about how hard it is to kill a grizzly once it's adrenalized (is that a word?). Basically, if you sneak up on a bear, even a big 1000 pound brown bear, and whack him good with an appropriate caliber he'll go down right there. It's just like shooting a cow - BANG - he falls over.
HOWEVER, if the client blows that shot and gut-shoots the bear. Wow! The animal is instantly enraged and full of adrenaline and it's going to take a lot of body shots (or one lucky CNS shot) to take him down. Every Alaska bear guide has stories about that adrenalized bear that took a dozen .338 and .375 shots to finally bring him down. It happens. Frequently. The first couple of shots are going to kill the bear, but they aren't going to kill him RIGHT NOW. Most of the time that bear is running away from the hunter and so they wait an hour or so, then go look for him.
When a bear decides to attack, he's already starting out full of adrenaline! And he's not running away, he's coming right at you. So, unless that body hit spines him or breaks some major bones and slows him down enough for additional kill shots, you're pretty much screwed.
So, a rifle, even something like a 30.06 with a good 180 grain slug, has enough penetration to go end to end through that bear. Even a poor shot might go through and take out a hind leg and tip the bear over long enough to get a second shot in.
A .44 mag? Not likely. I have a nice Ruger in .45 Colt that can be loaded up with more impressive ballistics than a .44, but I wouldn't want to rely on it against a bear. I'm good with a handgun (really!), but in the time frame that these events occur, I don't think it would do much good.
The analogy I like to use is to picture somebody skipping at softball a you from 20 yards away at 35 miles per hour. I mean "skipping" as in bouncing along the ground... A softball is about the size of a bears brain from the front. When a bear is running at you (which is how bear maulings start) his head is also rising and falling and he's coming at 35 to 40 mph. So, what do you want in your hands to hit that softball?
If you're Jerry Miculek, then a big bore handgun will probably do it for you. If you're not Jerry Miculek, then you probably want a rifle with iron sights (or a low powered variable set at 1x) or a shotgun loaded with slugs.
Consider this. If you talk to bear guides (and I know a number of them), they all have stories about how hard it is to kill a grizzly once it's adrenalized (is that a word?). Basically, if you sneak up on a bear, even a big 1000 pound brown bear, and whack him good with an appropriate caliber he'll go down right there. It's just like shooting a cow - BANG - he falls over.
HOWEVER, if the client blows that shot and gut-shoots the bear. Wow! The animal is instantly enraged and full of adrenaline and it's going to take a lot of body shots (or one lucky CNS shot) to take him down. Every Alaska bear guide has stories about that adrenalized bear that took a dozen .338 and .375 shots to finally bring him down. It happens. Frequently. The first couple of shots are going to kill the bear, but they aren't going to kill him RIGHT NOW. Most of the time that bear is running away from the hunter and so they wait an hour or so, then go look for him.
When a bear decides to attack, he's already starting out full of adrenaline! And he's not running away, he's coming right at you. So, unless that body hit spines him or breaks some major bones and slows him down enough for additional kill shots, you're pretty much screwed.
So, a rifle, even something like a 30.06 with a good 180 grain slug, has enough penetration to go end to end through that bear. Even a poor shot might go through and take out a hind leg and tip the bear over long enough to get a second shot in.
A .44 mag? Not likely. I have a nice Ruger in .45 Colt that can be loaded up with more impressive ballistics than a .44, but I wouldn't want to rely on it against a bear. I'm good with a handgun (really!), but in the time frame that these events occur, I don't think it would do much good.
The analogy I like to use is to picture somebody skipping at softball a you from 20 yards away at 35 miles per hour. I mean "skipping" as in bouncing along the ground... A softball is about the size of a bears brain from the front. When a bear is running at you (which is how bear maulings start) his head is also rising and falling and he's coming at 35 to 40 mph. So, what do you want in your hands to hit that softball?
If you're Jerry Miculek, then a big bore handgun will probably do it for you. If you're not Jerry Miculek, then you probably want a rifle with iron sights (or a low powered variable set at 1x) or a shotgun loaded with slugs.
02-17-2012, 11:47 AM
#30
Spike
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: IDAHO
Posts: 15
Note that in the story told in the interview, the guide tried spray first. I hunt in grizzly country, and in the past I've always just taken spray, as that is what most experts recommend, and I didn't want the extra weight of a sidearm.
But it is apparent that sometimes spray is not efficient enough. You can hope so, if that is all you got. But I think I'll end the debate in my own mind, and carry both. Spray first, shoot second.
But it is apparent that sometimes spray is not efficient enough. You can hope so, if that is all you got. But I think I'll end the debate in my own mind, and carry both. Spray first, shoot second.