Guns/Bears/Conspiricy theories


PDA






PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 03:37 AM
This is not intended to be another "I am afraid a bear will eat me if I do not carry my .50mag" thread. I just wanted to share a story I heard today. I was talking to a guy in Alaska that I know about setting up a hiking/camping/gold panning trip for later this summer. I mentioned to him I ordered an Alaskan .454 casull to carry. I told him I knew that noone had ever really saved themselves with a handgun in the rare case of bear attack but it was a cool gun so I got it. He immediately said "bullshootties". He said that he had been a tour guide and wilderness guide for 25 yrs now and said bear attacks are super rare but sometimes they happen and he can name at least a half dozen men that have saved themselves with their handguns. I asked why the wildlife commission says different and he replied "because bear are more valuable then men here and they would prefer people not shoot them". He said bears bring in tons of tourism money each year and are more valuable to the state than it's citizens. Therefore they would rather people have the impression that it is not a good idea to even bother trying to use a handgun on a bear. he said he was stalked for over a mile by a brown one time before finally killing it with a .44mag rifle and he made the mistake of reporting it and was treated like a criminal for 3 days. He was not allowed to leave his camp site or talk to anyone. At the end he was told he should keep this information to himself if he did not want to get into trouble with the govt. This all sounded a little conspiracy minded to me but also makes a little bit of sense in a weird way. I am not saying he is not full of bologna but I just thought it was interesting.

If you enjoyed reading about "Guns/Bears/Conspiricy theories" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
U.S.SFC_RET
March 9, 2006, 06:15 AM
Sounds like that they got PC people up there too.

gunsmith
March 9, 2006, 06:22 AM
Sounds like he's honest, even here in Reno they're tons of rad/libs,
and we all know how gov't work attracts rad/libs

mbs357
March 9, 2006, 06:27 AM
I don't doubt it.
Those crazy animal lovers/money lovers are scary.

stevelyn
March 9, 2006, 09:19 AM
That sounds about right. ABWE troopers try to generate as many cases as they can. If you're having to deal with feds you're screwed even more. In the end it's all about the Almighty Greenback Dollar both from an agency and economic standpoint.

If you do a Defense of Life and Property (DLP) kill up here ya better start sharpening your knife after you call the troopers as you're required to recover the hide, skull, and all toe nails.
The skull is sent to ADF&G for measurements and tooth extraction and both are sealed (metal tag).
The state then auctions them off during the Anchorage Fur Rondevous (sp?) and the proceeds go to Alaska Fish and Wildlife Safeguard which is the anonymous tips and rewards program for reporting poaching activity.

Even as LE we're not exempt from the DLP reporting/skinning requirement. We try to avoid DLPs like the plague. Other than the rare exception steel shot to the arse sends the bears elsewhere.

loadedround
March 9, 2006, 09:38 AM
I have never had an encounter with a Grizzley here in Valley Forge but have listened to many so called experts regarding bear defense. My question is this, will the pepper sprays/foggers(not the tiny purse size) work on a bear? All the "experts" at my club claim it will.

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 11:23 AM
Don't get me wrong...I am not advocating killing bears. In fact, in most cases I would probably root for the bear over most people. Kind of a "the more people I meet the more I like my dog" kind of thing. I have had dozens of bear (or "bar" as we call them in WV) encounters (including one brown) and never really had them pay me much attention. I have even been within arms reach of them before realizing it before and they usually just go around you or outright run away. I just thought this was intersting considering the number of times we hear bear/gun questions on here.

tellner
March 9, 2006, 12:15 PM
Sounds like he's honest, even here in Reno they're tons of rad/libs,
and we all know how gov't work attracts rad/libs

As opposed to government handouts which attracts righties like a pig with both trotters in the trough after a new batch of swill.

Cosmoline
March 9, 2006, 12:20 PM
I asked why the wildlife commission says different and he replied "because bear are more valuable then men here and they would prefer people not shoot them".

The Alaska Wildlife Commission doesn't say anything on the issue. There is no such thing as the Alaska Wildlife Commission. Who are you talking about? F&G recommends at least a heavy loaded .30'06, but I've never seen them claim that nobody has ever used a handgun to stop a bear attack. I know of several examples over the past few years in the Anchorage area alone.

DLP shootings do give rise to annoyances. The very best way of avoiding them is to have your brown bear tag and claim the kill as your own, at least when you're in a GMU where this is possible.

Therefore they would rather people have the impression that it is not a good idea to even bother trying to use a handgun on a bear. he said he was stalked for over a mile by a brown one time before finally killing it with a .44mag rifle and he made the mistake of reporting it and was treated like a criminal for 3 days. He was not allowed to leave his camp site or talk to anyone. At the end he was told he should keep this information to himself if he did not want to get into trouble with the govt. This all sounded a little conspiracy minded to me but also makes a little bit of sense in a weird way. I am not saying he is not full of bologna but I just thought it was interesting.

Who's the "they"? What authority did they have to keep him at his camp or keep him from talking to anyone? The whole story sounds like a tall tale. Esp. the business about keeping quiet if he didn't want to get in trouble. He's full of a lot more than bologna!

Zundfolge
March 9, 2006, 12:26 PM
I seem to recall a story within the last year or so of a hiker killing a bear with a 9mm.

I'm sure the wildlife commission has more than its share of antis among their ranks (both anti gun and anti hunting) so they would never do anything to encourage the ownership or carrying of handguns for any reason.

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 12:29 PM
I believe they call themselves the Alaskan Wildlife Alliance but there are also several Alaskan Wildlife Commisions. It dependson what lands you are on. They are usually native run. I have encountered a couple different ones on my trips to Alaska. They usually add the words "Fish &" to the title. I am suprised you did not know what I am talking about. Or are you just splitting hairs? As for who "they" are, I guess you never run into game commissioners, wildlife officers, tourism officials, etc. because they all give the same speal before you go off on any expeditions. Also there was a little touristy (because that is what I am in Alaska) trading post it Skagway I go into that has the actual wildlife report posted outside the door where it states "even though there has never been a documented case of a person successfully defending themselves with a handgun against a brown" (paraphrasing) then when you go inside there where tons of pics of people that supposedly did just that.

ALASKACAJUN
March 9, 2006, 12:42 PM
The only thing I can add to this is if you are going to carry something in the woods to thwart a would be bear attack. You should take a weapon that YOU are comfortable with. For me that happens to be my .300 Wthby. Most people are not proficient enough with a handgun to be effective in a bear attack anyway. I think this is the logic behind most people's attitude's in Alaska toward the carry of a handgun for bear protection. I have heard of a guy who shot a charging bear with a 9MM and killed it on the Russian River. So can a handgun work, most definatly, should it be relied on whole heartedly? Probably not.......:uhoh:

Even the biggest rifle you own will feel like a .22LR when you have a full grown male Griz bluff charging you... Believe me I know! :eek:

- Clint

Cosmoline
March 9, 2006, 12:42 PM
http://www.akwildlife.org/

??

The Alaska Wildlife Alliance is a NGO with absolutely no authority to do diddly. I'm asking because I'm trying to ID the "they" in your post. Are they troopers, feds, or what? Are you talking about the people who supposedly confined your friend to camp, or what? I'm confused.

I have encountered a couple different ones on my trips to Alaska. I am suprised you did not know what I am talking about. Or are you just splitting hairs? As for who "they" are, I guess you never run into game commissioners, wildlife officers, tourism officials, etc. because they all give the same speal before you go off on any expeditions.

A couple different WHAT? Encountered how, and where? F&G enforcement in this state is ADF&G for all state lands and most federal lands other than those controlled by the NPS. The F&G officers are a branch of the state troopers. The only exception to this involves enforcement of certain native subsistence issues where aren't relevant here unless you were trying to claim subsistence rights.

Who's giving you a "speal" before what expeditions?

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 12:50 PM
Read the whole post Cosmoline. I clearly state what I am talking about in the sentence right before the one you chose to quote. Do not expect another reply. I never can understand why some people who think they have a "know-it-all" understanding of something have to try and tear apart people that do not claim to be experts but just post a personal story they heard or experiece they had themselves. I live in oregon, that does not mean I know everything about salmon fishing or the timber industry and would never tear into someone else's story. It is just a way to juvenile tactic to me. Then agian maybe you are 12 years old for all I know. I can tell you that on both expeditions I have been on someone from the state gave us a safety lecture before we left camp. I never stated these people where arresting us or anything. I just said they gave a "speal". What his middle name was, his official title is, or what type of authority he has (one was a local native official) I am not sure. If you want that kind of depth of informtion I suggest you go experience it for yourself. Then again you probably already know him, how many kids he has, his favorite color, boxers or briefs, etc. :)

Cosmoline
March 9, 2006, 12:56 PM
I'm not trying to give you a hard time, I'm trying to figure out who's on first. You throw out a number of organization names, but none of them make any sense to me. Who is the "they" who told you handguns are ineffective? If it's a conspiracy, the first step is to figure out who this "they" is. Can you be more specific?

. I can tell you that on both expeditions I have been on someone from the state gave us a safety lecture before we left camp. I never stated these people where arresting us or anything. I just said they gave a "speal". What his middle name was, his official title is, or what type of authority he has (one was a local native official) I am not sure. If you want that kind of depth of informtion I suggest you go experience it for yourself. Then again you probably already know him, how many kids he has, his favorite color, boxers or briefs, etc.

Where were you? Where were these camps? What local native tribe? Surely you can tell us where you were and what guide service you were using. Experience what for myself? I've hunted here many times, and I have yet to be given a lecture by anyone. I suspect what you went through was orchestrated by your guides, but before I can determine what weight to give it it's necessary to know who was talking to you. There are no reservations here, but there are ANC owned lands. Maybe your guides were taking you on a hunt on those lands and this fellow was from the corp. Or maybe he was just some guy. Without more specifics it's impossible to draw any conclusions.

PlayboyPenguin
March 10, 2006, 04:44 PM
Cosmoline...I am sure it was orchestrated by our guides. They often bring in troopers or other officials to give safety lessons to reduce liability. As to which guide service I used I am afraid I will decline to answer that since it would be like giving the name of the person that told me this story.

Cosmoline
March 10, 2006, 06:04 PM
Why not tell us the name of the guide? It's good to know what the guides are telling people, since in this case it sounds like a lot of BS. It would really disturb me if a guide were bringing people in from the Wildlife Alliance, which sounds like it might be the case. It's not quite like bringing in PETA, but it's still pretty outrageous. Folks spend thousands and thousands to come up here, and I don't want them coming away with a lot of erroneous information or suspicions of a conspiracy.

'Card
March 10, 2006, 06:13 PM
Cosmo, did you read stevelyn's post? Post #5 that begins with the words "That sounds about right..."

So we've got one Alaskan saying "That sounds about right..." and another saying "HOLY COW THIS IS SUCH NONSENSE WHERE DO YOU PEOPLE COME UP WITH THIS CRAP??!!"

Not saying anyone is right or wrong, and personally I couldn't care less, but I do enjoy pointing out the occasional absurdity. :)

Cosmoline
March 10, 2006, 06:50 PM
I'm not taking issue with stevelyn's post. He accurately summarizes the law about DLP shootings. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of what guide service is bringing in Wildlife Alliance "experts" or local "Indian authorities" to spout off and exactly what they're saying. I'm not sure why that's causing so many problems here.

PlayboyPenguin
March 10, 2006, 09:58 PM
Maybe Cosmoline works for the Alaskan Dark Ops Govt....dum, dum, duummmm.

Cosmoline
March 10, 2006, 11:05 PM
So you're not going to tell us what guide service you used?

PlayboyPenguin
March 10, 2006, 11:07 PM
Why are you so eager to know? You wanting to bust the guy or something for telling a story? You some sort of bear narc or are you just a jerk that has to feel like he knows everything? Just curious. :)

Cosmoline
March 10, 2006, 11:50 PM
Narc? What are you even talking about?

Creeping Incrementalism
March 11, 2006, 02:00 AM
This thread is seriously too funny.

Nematocyst
March 11, 2006, 04:12 AM
I'm reading with interest.

Nem

snowtigger
March 11, 2006, 05:12 AM
Let another Alaskan weigh in on Cosmoline's side.
I carry a .44 mag for bear defense, and would never feel undergunned. The local newspaper , The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, runs at least one story each year about stopping a bear with a handgun. I'm sure a search of their archives will disclose at least a hundred such cases.
Fish and game here is policed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. as Cosmo describes. with the exception of the NPS lands (as he also noted) . Anyone else giving you advice should be judged by their own personal agenda.
As far as DLP shootings go, each case is judged on it's own merit. If you shoot, it had better be fairly evident that the bear was inside the "comfort zone" of the average rational person. You are required to attempt to recover the head and hide just like you would for the taxidermist. Exceptions are made for the person who has actually been attacked. I, personally know two men who have survived such attacks. I assure you neither was in any condition to take care of themselves, much less worry about preservation of the hides.
One of these fellows actually shot the bear in the mouth with his .357 mag as it was chewing on him. He was attacked from behind. The only defense he had was his handgun( he carries a .44Mag now).
The other was attacked in his sleeping bag. He had no gun. The bear was running with him in her mouth, when she dropped him and kept running.
The only thing you can say for sure about bears is, you can never say anything for sure about what they are going to do next.
I've never had a close encounter, but rest assured I will take my chances with the law, if he time ever comes. I would rather be judged by twelve, than be carried by six, although after an attack by a Grizz, one might be enough.

stevelyn
March 11, 2006, 09:06 AM
Fish and game here is policed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

Well sort of, but not directly.

The ADF&G more accurately gathers field data, manages and sets management/regulatory policy. Some of their employees do have enforcement powers, but they don't have an enforcement section like a lot of state F&G agencies.

Fish and wildlife enforcement is actually done by the Alaska State Troopers (AST)....more specifically the Alaska Bureau of Wildlife Enforcement (ABWE) in it's present incarnation which is part of DPS.

Until a couple of years ago, it was called the AST Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection (FWP). We commonly referred to them as brown shirts because of the brown uniforms they used to wear. They underwent a reorganization and now everybody is a blue shirt with certain troopers being assigned to ABWE duties.

The DLP report can be obtained from either AST or ADF&G. It can be turned into either agency. However, if the form is incomplete or doesn't clearly state the circumstances of a DLP shoot, ADF&G will forward it to AST for further investigation. If the DLP is reported directly to AST they'll likely send one of the troops out to do an on-scene investigation if practical.

M.E.Eldridge
March 11, 2006, 12:41 PM
I heard once that it was illegal to kill a sow with cubs no matter what the circumstances. Seems like BS to me, but who knows.

Kind of off topic, but is it actually illegal to hunt(for a non-resident) in Alaska without a guide. Or is it just frowned upon?

Cosmoline
March 11, 2006, 04:18 PM
It's not illegal to kill a sow and/or cubs in a DLP shooting. Indeed about the worst case scenario bear attack is a sow backed by a brace of huge two-year-olds. Obviously you're not justified shooting very young cubs, but you shouldn't try to catch them either. The current CW seems to be to leave them alone. They can do surprisingly well without their mother. The only real threat to them once they're past the first few months out of the den is large boars.

Non-resident hunters must use a guide if hunting brown bear and IIRC a few other species. Maybe mountain goat? I don't remember. But in general they don't have to have a guide.

Thanks for the clarification regarding ADF&G. I thought they were simply folded into DPS as a semi-autonomous agency with enforcement officers becoming troopers. I'm still not sure why the changes were made to begin with. I've never had problems with them but I've heard of them hovering near hunting parties watching for violations. I also know a fellow who owns a local gunstore who just got through an extended fight over a fine one of the trooper/F&G officers gave him for a pop can at a campsite. The word I'm getting is the change of authority has not led to any improvements. Just like their brothers on the highways, they're on the prowl for pointless pretense violations to justify their existence.

But in any event the Wildlife Alliance has no place in any enforcement activity. I'm still trying to figure out what this fellow is talking about, but he's apparently run off now.

stevelyn
March 12, 2006, 09:25 AM
Cos,

The reorganization was a lame management decision to give the illusion of more blue shirt troopers on the road than what there actually were.......goes back to my Almighty Greenback Dollar theory.

I've never heard of the Wildlife Alliance, but with a name like that they can't be anything but trouble.:scrutiny:

If you enjoyed reading about "Guns/Bears/Conspiricy theories" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!