Bear Protection for Backpacking Suggestions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Alaska 444 and Skidder are right. Anyone planning on carrying spray needs to buy a second canister or use an older one about to expire for testing. While it may be sensed by someone 70-100 feet away, it won't have a serious effect on a bear.

I don't know why you'd want to use the spray on a bear that far away anyways. Usually when i see a bear, We don't notice each other until we're about that range apart and neither want to get closer. Panicly shooting the spray (or firearm) at that range is irresponsible and stupid as you'd end up with an empty canister and likely as much pepper in your eyes and respiratory system as the bear. The bear is probably just going about their day. Or if it is aggressive, wait till it's 10 meters so it can get a real strong dose. Of course there are exceptions like if a bruin is repeatedly harassing a camp, then that long gun may be in order.

Still, when I read the Buffalo Bore owners's comments, I got the sense that he's a little out of touch with the wild. Maybe the only times he gets out are to hunt so his impression of bear encounters are a bit skewed towards the "life or death" frame of mind. If we all behaved as the ammo company owner suggests, that of dispatching any bear that doesn't immediately run away, our wilderness will lose a great deal. That's another reason to prefer using spray; which will also deter aggressive bear behavior. Wonderful if momma bear has a spicy experience with humans and then teaches her cubs to not charge other humans.

Having an itchy trigger finger just isn't necessary with the right bear sense.
Actually, the reason I put the quote by Tim Sundles, i.e. the "Buffalo Bore guy," is to show a deep contrast to the absurd bear management philosophies of the last few decades. In Anchorage, Rick Sinnott is punishing PEOPLE for bear encounters by issuing garbage fines instead of doing something about the out of control bear population in and around the Anchorage area.

If you look at a map of Anchorage, it is surrounded by Chugach state park where hunting bears was denied for 30 years. Now there is a token 10 permits given out with the hope that only 3 will be harvested every year. The people of Anchorage are outraged by this approach.

Outrage builds in Anchorage after bear attacks

Thomas Wood, a longtime Eagle River resident, said Anchorage's approach to bear management is "nonsense."

"They should shoot all the bears in town," he said. "Now they are coddling the bears so people are getting hurt. It is so stupid. The inmates are running the asylum."

Sinnott is not going to abandon old themes.

"I am still going to hammer on people about garbage this year," he said.

Last year, the city replaced more than 20 municipal trash containers in municipal parks with bear-resistant cans. This summer, the city plans to replace industrial trash bins with bear-resistant cans in areas where there are restaurants and apartment complexes.

For the first time, people who improperly dispose of their trash will be fined instead of being issued warnings. Fines for a first offense range from $50 to $300, up to $600 for a second offense.

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2009205337_apusanchoragebears.html

In a previous interview, Rich Sinnott noted that Chugach is a bear factory that pumps bears into the system. Surrounded by three sides, Anchorage is the recipient of all of those bears. When I lived in Anchorage in the 1960's, a brown bear in the middle of the city would have been big news.

Today, the F&G of Anchorage and surrounding areas is treating the city limits as if it was an outdoor zoo where the residents WANT to see bears and moose and other wildlife inside the city limits. That is complete lunacy.

In light of that urban "zoo" mentality, TIm Sundles, the "Buffalo Bore guy," sounds much more sound than those yahoos do. In effect, we are now selecting for aggressive bears that will teach their cubs to be aggressive against people. Tim Sundles is stating we need to eliminate the aggressive bears so that the other bears remain afraid of man. If you think that is nuts, so be it, but I believe Tim Sundles has a lot more sense than Rick Sinnott and his minions.

BTW, a quick Google of Tim Sundles will give quite a few examples of his hunting trips. He is a very experienced outdoorsman and hunter. Lets stick to the facts even if you disagree with his statements especially since he is not here to refute false statements against him.

Lastly, Tim Sundles is a bit of local hero in the war against the Feds mismanagement of wolves. He has already tangled with the Feds which makes his statements even more remarkable.

http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/one-spicy-meatball/Content?oid=932577
 
Last edited:
I agree on the .44 magnum, but this is the lady I want backing me up!!

Bear attacks man and dog; wife attacks bear; all survive

According to WHTM and other media reports, the brawl began at about 3 a.m. Monday as Richard Moyer heard the pet dog, a pit bull/husky mix, barking outside. He opened the door to let the dog inside, and the bear followed. Thus began a battle that brought Angela Moyer rushing into the living room to find out what was happening.

She found her 6-foot-6, 300-pound husband on the floor, being attacked by the animal. "The bear was on him. Our dog was in the mix with them. I was like, 'This is crazy.' I just reacted," she said. "There was nothing really going through my mind other than 'Oh, my God, we got to get this bear out of here.'"

Whatever Angela Moyer did, it worked, because the bear swung around and headed for the door. But it knocked her over on the way. She ended up on the outdoor patio. Richard Moyer, despite cuts to his head, face and arms, staggered outside to find the animal attacking his wife, and he threw himself back into the fray. At that point the bear began tearing into his head.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nat...e-attacks-bear-all-live-to-tell-the-tale.html
 
Today, the F&G of Anchorage and surrounding areas is treating the city limits as if it was an outdoor zoo where the residents WANT to see bears and moose and other wildlife inside the city limits. That is complete lunacy.

Oh it's not that crazy. I rather like the wildlife right here. It makes life more interesting. There needs to be a balance, as in all things. So long as the brownies are minding their own business they do well enough. It's their territory too. And mostly they're peaceable. And the moose pose no serious threat to anyone. It's best to keep things in perspective. Even in bad years Anchorage DRIVERS are exponentially more lethal than our wildlife! They're terrifyingly bad.
 
Oh it's not that crazy. I rather like the wildlife right here. It makes life more interesting. There needs to be a balance, as in all things. So long as the brownies are minding their own business they do well enough. It's their territory too. And mostly they're peaceable. And the moose pose no serious threat to anyone. It's best to keep things in perspective. Even in bad years Anchorage DRIVERS are exponentially more lethal than our wildlife! They're terrifyingly bad.
The two legged critters are almost always more dangerous, but not living in Anchorage any longer, all I have to go by is what is reported. Sorry, it sounds crazy to me to have grizzly bear inside the city limits and yes, there have been quite a few attacks the last decade.

When I lived at the top of O'Malley road in the 1960's, we NEVER saw bear inside the city or ever worried about them outside playing. In those days, the top of O'Malley road was out in the boonies. We had about 5 or six house in a mile or so of road.

What explains the lack of conflict in the 1960's and the increasing conflict with moose, bear and other critters today? We had plenty of moose but never any bear issues. We took no special precautions with garbage or even considered them at all. Is it that we are now in their home? Funny, they left the city to us in the old days. Sounds like they are invading us today in Anchorage because of an overpopulation spilling over from the Chugach state park due to a truly misguided F&G philosophy of game management.

Just saying, it sound crazy to not only allow, but promote that kind of potentially dangerous wildlife within the city limits. I believe it is just asking for trouble allowing them to become tolerant of man and habituated.

Sadly, Anchorage is not the only city that is being invaded by bears and other wildlife. Some places in New Jersey now have a bigger black bear problem than folks in Anchorage. Sorry, it just doesn't make any sense to me. We have bear all over the place here in northern Idaho, but for the most part, they stay away from the suburbs. Folks that live on the edge of the forests, well, that is what they choose. I am glad we don't have folks advocating to let the critters run around with us here in town the way they do in Anchorage. We get deer but the mountain lions and bear stay away. I am thankful for that since we have young grand children.

I respect your opinion, but shucks, I just don't agree.
 
Packing both a 44 (or larger) and pepper spray is not a bad idea. For years I packed both, but whenever a tussle in the brush would peak my interest...it wasn't the spray I reached for. My first reflex is to go for my Redhawk. For me to go for the spray first, would require hours of additional training.

Make sure its "magnum" spray and not the "derringer" kind you keep in a purse, or European man bag.
 
Last edited:
Now, I don't live in an area with a lot of bear attacks, but have looked into the firearms for areas I hoping to work (was a geologist in gold/silver exploration). I actually found that my choice ended up being a 454 puma in a scabbard on my back or backpack. I load 405 WQ WW at about 1400 out of it, and have clocked the 320? grain Buffalo bore at 2300 fps out of the rifle. Funny thing is you get 11 shots out of a rifle that is actually lighter than a hand cannon, and I can get 4+ shots off in under 1.5 sec. with draw. Accurate at 12" target at 20 yds, and just as fast to draw as a pistol with practice.
 
Just saying, it sound crazy to not only allow, but promote that kind of potentially dangerous wildlife within the city limits. I believe it is just asking for trouble allowing them to become tolerant of man and habituated.

But they give us an excuse to carry around large rifles and handguns!
 
But they give us an excuse to carry around large rifles and handguns!
Fair enough, can't argue with that.:D

My dad carried a 30-06 in his truck just about all the time when we were up in your part of the country. At least they still allow big guns like you say.

Take care.
 
epiphany!!!:D

I need to put gun rails on a DA or SA heavy caliber handgun. .475 Linebaugh, .500JRH, .500 Linebaugh Max/or mini.;)

Mount to the gun rail a cannister of high velocity bear spray. It needs to be a narrow cone, or better like that gel stuff they use for shooting BG's in the face.

You pull the gun, aim, fire the bear spray. If that doesn't do the job, the gun is already in firing position. It would work even better with a rifle, or shotgun.

I should have applied for a patent first.:banghead::D
 
In response to Alaska444's comments on the Rick Sinnott and the bear's getting into trash, it comes squarely down to responsible behavior if you live on the edge of town. Sinnott was issuing citations for people putting their overflowing trash cans out on the road a day or more before it was scheduled to be picked up. Of course that is going to attract bear activity. What bear is not going to check out the smell of yesterday's grilled salmon? That's sort of a survival skill of bears that can not be naturally selected out. Is it too much to expect the most affluent demographic part of the city, who can afford to live anywhere but choose to live on the border with the State Park, to put their trash out on the right day?

I'm not a F&G scientist, nor one that is heavily involved with wildlife management enough to have a strong opinion on the matter, but I can say this: there is no substitute for good bear sense nor responsible behavior. I prefer to expect these two qualities of humans before endorsing eliminating bears. Perhaps one day we will move to authorize open hunting on bears (and the crazy moose population across ALL of Anchorage) and maybe that is the solution. I don't know. All I do know is that we can go a long ways to prevent ill encounters before making a decision like that.
 
In response to Alaska444's comments on the Rick Sinnott and the bear's getting into trash, it comes squarely down to responsible behavior if you live on the edge of town. Sinnott was issuing citations for people putting their overflowing trash cans out on the road a day or more before it was scheduled to be picked up. Of course that is going to attract bear activity. What bear is not going to check out the smell of yesterday's grilled salmon? That's sort of a survival skill of bears that can not be naturally selected out. Is it too much to expect the most affluent demographic part of the city, who can afford to live anywhere but choose to live on the border with the State Park, to put their trash out on the right day?

I'm not a F&G scientist, nor one that is heavily involved with wildlife management enough to have a strong opinion on the matter, but I can say this: there is no substitute for good bear sense nor responsible behavior. I prefer to expect these two qualities of humans before endorsing eliminating bears. Perhaps one day we will move to authorize open hunting on bears (and the crazy moose population across ALL of Anchorage) and maybe that is the solution. I don't know. All I do know is that we can go a long ways to prevent ill encounters before making a decision like that.
Dear AKMtnRunner,

It has been a long time since I lived in Anchorage, but I will tell you that I don't worry a bit about putting my trash out the day before they pick it up. We have a huge bear population and the woods are about 1 mile from our house. The deep woods that is on the edge of miles and miles and miles of northern wilderness. Yet, we have no bear problems at all in this area.

When we lived at the top of O'Malley road in the 1960's right in the middle of the boonies, no bear problems at all as well. Failing to understand the relationship between a hunted bear population and one that is not I believe is at the heart of the Anchorage bear problems. Just my opinion, but even Rick Sinnott is now talking about token hunting pressure on bears in Chugach. My goodness, 10 permits!! Yeah, that will really bring a solution.

So, once again, they are indeed punishing people with garbage citations for out of control bear behavior that they have created by failing to teach them the fear of man which is not hard to do. That is not wiping them out my friend, putting them in their place, absolutely. Until that happens, big brother in Anchorage will hand out citations to the people and do nothing about the real problem, over population of bears within the city limits. Sorry, just makes no sense to me at all and I pray to God that that mentality does not migrate down stream to us any time soon. I enjoy that bears are actively hunted in Idaho, at least the black bears anyway. At some point, they will need to start hunting the recovered grizzly population here as well, obviously in a controlled fashion. Just the way it is.

Let them have the woods, the cities and towns belong to us, pure and simple.
 
I have to agree with most of the people who recommend revolvers, and bear spray. There are numerous youtube videos showing how well bear-deterrent works, simply because it is designed to, and to do it well. A revolver's reliability is beyond question (if a major brand). If that's how you want to go, learn how to be accurate against a moving (small - the head) target.

HOWEVER,
If you can find it in your library, read the compilation of the Lewis & Clark's Expedition authored by Stephen Ambrose something like 20 years ago. He makes a point of illustrating how the members of the party were COMPLETELY surprised (and almost destroyed) by how resilient and unstoppable the grizzly bears were. And they weren't city guys; most of the group had been soldiers in the Revolutionary War, and quite accustomed to shooting and killing.
If you go up against a brown bear you might stand a chance with most of today's available center-fire large caliber handguns. But grizzlies are something much harder to deal with. The recommendations for bear spray are quite valid.
 
you claim that you can grab a rifle out of a scabbard, lever out 4 hits at 20 yds in 1.5 seconds? I say that your watch stopped, bud, to be nice about it. :)
Some folks practice and prefer rifle to bear spray. Actually, DLP studies may support this approach just as much as the pepper spray studies support that approach.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-AVr7gNmrU&feature=relmfu

Maybe not 1.5 seconds, but not bad at all. He did get the first shot off in that time frame. With proper loads, you may only need one good hit to stop the critter.
 
Rick has been retired for a few years, you know. And the people of Anchorage decide how to address wildlife here. So I'm not really seeing why this is such a big deal. It's just another way of approaching the matter, and it actually works pretty well. I'm also not sure where you got the idea there were only 10 bear hunts allowed in the Chugach. Hunting is more restricted in the GMU subparts near Anchorage's built-up area in the main part of the state park, but that's not really viable hunting area anyway. Far too many people are running around in there for safety. If you want Chugach bears in GMU 14 you just go a little bit further out and you're free to harvest one brown every few years and one black every year with no closed season in some cases:

http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=huntingmaps.bygmu&gmu=14

And go further out into the mountains into neighboring GMU's and they get more generous. To say the bear in the area aren't hunted is simply incorrect. The reason they keep coming is because the wilderness is a bear factory and their food sources--salmon and moose--are in the city. As long as garbage bears and their enablers are dealt with and the people use common sense, there's not much of an issue.
 
Last edited:
Rick has been retired for a few years, you know. And the people of Anchorage decide how to address wildlife here. So I'm not really seeing why this is such a big deal. It's just another way of approaching the matter, and it actually works pretty well. I'm also not sure where you got the idea there were only 10 bear hunts allowed in the Chugach. Hunting is more restricted in the GMU subparts near Anchorage's built-up area in the main part of the state park, but that's not really viable hunting area anyway. Far too many people are running around in there for safety. If you want Chugach bears in GMU 14 you just go a little bit further out and you're free to harvest one brown every few years and one black every year with no closed season in some cases:

http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=huntingmaps.bygmu&gmu=14

And go further out into the mountains into neighboring GMU's and they get more generous. To say the bear in the area aren't hunted is simply incorrect. The reason they keep coming is because the wilderness is a bear factory and their food sources--salmon and moose--are in the city. As long as garbage bears and their enablers are dealt with and the people use common sense, there's not much of an issue.
Dear Cosmoline,

As I have noted in a couple of prior posts, I don't live in Anchorage any longer so I can only glean what the situation is from what is in the news and print on the internet. Rick Sinnott may have retired after 28 years, but he is still very active in the bear debate in Anchorage and he is very active in writing about the situation. An interesting article he wrote a couple of months ago I believe belies his approach. It seems he is MORE concerned about keeping a thriving bear population with the Anchorage city limits than he is about the consequences of that many bears in an urban setting and the difficulties of habituated bears.

Is bear population growing in Anchorage, Alaska?
Rick Sinnott | Aug 22, 2012

The number of bears killed in recent years is too high to sustain, based on existing population estimates. Shooting more bears than the number that can be replaced by reproduction or immigration means that local bear populations could be decreasing instead of increasing. Yet some people are adamant that the Anchorage bear population is increasing every year. Just like the mosquitoes.

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/bear-population-growing-anchorage-alaska?page=0,0

The most interesting aspect of this article is the comments at the bottom which included the involvement of Rick Sinnott as well. I don't live there, nor vote there so my opinion is only my own, but shucks, like I said earlier, glad folks don't want to see bear running around town here in Northern Idaho. In the woods, yes, best running away from us, but in town, doesn't seem we have much tolerance for that. If that is the way you folks wish to live, so be it but it sounds nuts to me to protect a large bear population within an urban setting.:what:

Once again, just my own opinion, but I am glad we had no bear problem at all when I was a kid in Alaska. Not sure what has changed since then, but we never considered them as kids running around in the woods behind our house at the top of O'Malley road. Sadly, that may not be very safe today, but it was nearly 50 years ago. Why??
 
Here is another article the next day by Rick Sinnott. The comments at the bottom of the page underscore a lack of consensus on bears in the city limits. I like the following comment:

by AKgasman | August 22, 2012 - 12:23pm
Agressive bears should hunted down and shot!

by AKgasman | August 22, 2012 - 12:21pm

Read Sinntt's claftrap before did not need to read it again. Any Time they close a trail because of bears we have too many bears. just Old timer who can remember back when Anchorage did not not have any bears.or moose.We ate them all. A child could wander any where in the Anchorage bowel with out a problem.

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/artic...r-infested-some-residents-seem-think?page=0,3

I agree, aggressive bears should be shot.
 
I agree, aggressive bears should be shot.

I agree.... and believe they should all be hunted, even if its with a limited amount of tags. The reason they are aggressive is because they are not hunted.
I grew up in the NW corner of Montana. A place where a back road bike ride and playing in the woods was never a danger. This is not the case anymore. Between the cougars, bears, and wolves, one dares not lose sight of their little one. It's like a big game preserve, and it has cost Montanans hundreds of jobs. This corner of Montana has the highest in unemployment, but yet it's one of the richest in natural resources? The animals have more rights than the humans. If you have to defend yourself in the woods, around here, the motto is: Shoot, Shovel, and Shut-up... the three S's. If you don't you better have a body part in a bag on your court date.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top