Hunting Grizzly Bear with a Spear

[Double Naught Spy]

I think they hunted the cave bear, which was bigger than a grizzly?

There is a tremendous amount of overlap in their sizes.

The average estimated weight for cavebear males was 400–500 kilograms (880–1102 pounds), while females weighed 225–250 kg (496–551 lbs). For grizzlies, adult males weigh on average 180–360 kg (400–790 lb) and adult female grizzlies weigh 130–200 kg (290–440 lb).

Note however, that grizzlies have reached 1600 lbs in size. We don't have a record weight on cavebears and what weights we do have are really based on estimations from various measurements compared with today's species of bears.

 

[Flintknapper]

DNS wrote:

He's goin' to lose a finger...

True, but it’s a small price to pay…for the lesson learned.

Lesson: Trying to kill a badger with a knitting needle is a patently bad idea.

Lesson Extrapolated: Attempting to kill a Grizzly Bear with a spear…. takes “bad idea” to a whole new level. Logarithmic….I would wager.

 

[fastest45ever]

Bears don't bother you. If you are mad at Great Whites because they are at the top of the food chain in the ocean, which they really aren't, go pick a fight with one of them.

I'm sorry but this is way too Captain Nemo for me. Bears hardly ever attack.
Great white sharks are about 150 times less likely to kill you then God and His thunderbolts.

If you want the thrill of exposing yourself to death, why not take up surfing in the Farrallons? Great waves and huge. You'll get a full adrenal rush from the waves which will kill you, maybe a curious white shark, and the real king of the food chain, killer whales. Oh, killer whales hardly ever attack people either, unless provoked.

By the way, White Sharks are relatively rare, and they travel over great distances to feed and breed. Film "The Great White Shark highway"
goes into great depth on how these are social, relatively smart, incredible animals. We are REALLY lucky that they don't view humans the way you view them. They are well equipped to bite you in half with one bite for fun.
As you have pointed out, the combination of a huge, giant animal(s)
with razor sharp teeth, that ambushes it's prey by accelerating to 25-35 miles an hour, and hitting it from below, pretty much the equal of getting hit by a Mazda Miata with teeth, well, as I said, thank God they don't view you as the challenge you view them.

The good news is they don't like the way we taste, and only bit by accident, and rarely at that, usually caused by us being stupid enough to look like the prey they are hunting, in the area the prey usually is.

Sometimes I can't help but think that humans are going to be the death of the planet, and all that is beautiful on it.

Don't get me started on Shark Fin soup.:banghead:

OK: Now that I'm done with my rant: If you are considering this contact Phil S.

http://www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com/

He's on the famous side for booking hunts for bears in Alaska.

 

[Cosmoline]

Actually if shark fining was restricted to fishermen who fought the animals with a spear in the water, there wouldn't be overfishing.

 

[Rembrandt]

Anthony Hopkins speared a Grizzly and saved Alex Baldwin in the 1997 movie "The Edge". The bear lunged at him and impaled itself on the home made spear.....great Hollywood tale that doesn't work well in the real world.

A bears heart rate is about 25 beats per minute, it takes too long for the bear to loose enough blood and go into shock, why many hunters have been killed by the bear they killed.

 

[Zoogster]

fastest45ever White sharks are neither the vicious JAWS of the movies nor the only by accident seal mistaking friendly animals the experts who wish to paint them as nicely as possible to preserve them make them out to be.


They bite boats on occassiona and you can find multiple instances of them biting the propeller on small boats, the only part of the boat with small enough dimensions to bite.
They didn't mistake the prop for a seal either.
So the seal accident theory won't hold up for that, no problem, the experts can figure out some new innocent theory, lets say the electrical impulses put out by the motor. Yeah they only bite the only part of the boat they can get their mouth around because of electrical impulses, otherwise they are nice.
Do you really think something willing to bite a boat on occassion wouldn't take a bite out of what they clearly knew was a person out at sea if they were hungry or curious?


Reality is they are a big fish, that is relatively intelligent. It will opportunistically eat what it believes that it can and that meets its needs.
It will sample things it is unsure of, to see if it can make a habit of eating them in the future. The real reason few people have problems is because they generally cruise in water that is deeper than the millions of people that visit the beaches wade in, or even surfers are surfing in. The ones that occassionally go in shallow enough to encounter surfers are the exception, and so the potential for problems is low.
Statistics on danger posed is based on the percentage of people that visit the beaches, nevermind that most never go more than waist deep in the ocean. Flat sandy beaches.
Well certainly a predator that predominantly inhabits deep water, and is more common near rocky deep areas (no sandy touristy beaches) is not going to pose much risk to the average person that spends the majority of their time at the exact opposite when they go to the water, shallow sandy beaches.
It is not because they coexist well with people, but rather because they are rarely around people. They also transition to eating mammals at over 10-12 feet to 14+ feet and so the smaller ones people encounter are less likely to view people as a potential food source.
Humans in the water look big compared to marine life, hundreds of pounds larger than they are, especially if wearing and carrying gear or on a board. This means things are generally larger than they need to be before they feel confident taking on a human.


They also hunt large animals that can pose a risk to them by delivering a devastating single bite, swimming off and letting it bleed out or weaken, and then coming back.
This is standard strategy for elephant seals, and even some sea lions and other things that could inflict injury.
Well when they do attack people they seem to feel it is wise to use the same strategy most of the time, a massive devastating bite, swim off...
Except most people are with other people, and are removed from the water before it goes further.
This lets the experts that want to give them the best image possible once again say..oh it was an accident, if it had known it was a person...It only took one bite and when it realized it was not what it wanted stopped...
Conveniently ignoring that is exactly how they hunt things they feel might be dangerous to them.
They intentionally craft an image to preserve them, even if it requires a little fibbing.

As for killer whales, they are rare, and we have seen them to. I am not concerned with them at all. Although to keep proper perspective the ones most people interact with are social fish eating pods. These are different from the mammal eating nomadic ones.
I have seen videos of them toying with pinnipeds, tossing them around like rag dolls while alive, for fun. Playing with them like a beach ball. I still don't think they are of much concern but wouldn't jump into the water to swim with them either because they could certainly decide to have some fun with you too. It is a large intelligent predator, that most likely won't choose to bother you.
They also rarely encounter humans in the water, and tend to be more common in places too cold for your average casual swimmer. As I said those primarily studied are the fish only eating relatively stationary pods.

Personally I like large predators and think it is healthy for people to have them around.
I can tell you that California wouldn't be as anti-gun as it is if people were more regularly confronted with animal predators. Which in reality wouldn't pose that much increased risk compared to the already present much more common human predators. Just being indoors or in a car almost eliminates risk, and people might be more inclined to support firearm possession for the remaining times.
I would support grizzly and wolf reintroduction into California. From what I understand ranchers and farmers are making it as difficult as possible to reintroduce wolves to their previous range, because they don't want the hassle of losing livestock.
I have not heard of any brown bear reintroduction programs to reestablish their former range. Though I don't know why not.
I think the environmentalists should put their money where their mouth is and support such a thing too.
Most are hypocrites. The same kind that will tell you that you that by going in the ocean you are entering the sharks territory where it is just being natural even if it bothers you, but would demand the slaughter or relocation of anything like a grizzly near their home or daily lives.

In fact I am not even interested in shooting brown bears, which number less in North America than the amount of people in a small city.

However I was curious on the legality of spear hunting the largest predator on the continent. Something I am sure would be so unpopular with your average hunter that it is never going to pose any risk to their population.





I don't seek a thrill exposing myself to death. I do plenty of that in traffic with idiot people.
Exotic challenges can be interesting though.
However the opposite is equally bad, people that try to preserve themselves to the extent of reducing the quality of their life.
I have worked with elderly patients in nursing homes, and living a long time is not all it is cracked up to be for a large percentage of those who do.
Sitting in a lonely place, with family that rarely wants to waste their time off work visiting some elderly person. Unable to do basic things like control their bodily functions or even walk unassisted most places.
Treated like children by half who work with them.
If you lived a mundane safe life where you did almost the same thing at work most of your life, accumulated few quality experiences, only to make it to that state through your longevity, I would not exactly call that a success.
There is plenty of people that died much younger that had a better life overall.
No matter what you do, you still die, you can't cheat death, it is coming for you anyways.
Quantity does not make up for quality. So there is a balance.

 

[ErieLurker]

This is truly hardcore retro hunting, all the way back to at least Cro-Magnon times. And them Cave Bears back then were vegetarians.

Ole Grizz enjoys his meat, and will readily settle for The Other White Meat if it decides to poke him in the eye with a sharp stick, or toothpick. Either one, it's all the same to him.

Just to be on the safe side, advancing to c.500 B.C., and bringing an entire Greek phalanx along would be a rather safer bet.

If this (spear-hunting Brown Bear) turns out to be legal anywhere in NA (other than for an aboriginal hunter, and even then...), then I'm just going to face-palm so hard every one on this board will be able to hear it.

 

[Certaindeaf]

If it were legal and someone weren't retarded, I'd say go for it. Someone that is not mentally deficient pretty much knows the risks involved in most any given thing.. we see daredeviltry every day. That's their choice.
What I find kinda odd and interesting is the Kravitz Crabtreeism/busybodyness of saviors of "proper think".

 

[JohnM]

astest45ever White sharks are neither the vicious JAWS of the movies nor the only by accident seal mistaking friendly animals the experts who wish to paint them as nicely as possible -------yada yada--------
and yadayadayada-----
it is coming for you anyways.
Quantity does not make up for quality. So there is a balance.

If you say so.

 

[Alaska444]

I don't seek a thrill exposing myself to death. I do plenty of that in traffic with idiot people.
Exotic challenges can be interesting though.
However the opposite is equally bad, people that try to preserve themselves to the extent of reducing the quality of their life.
I have worked with elderly patients in nursing homes, and living a long time is not all it is cracked up to be for a large percentage of those who do.
Sitting in a lonely place, with family that rarely wants to waste their time off work visiting some elderly person. Unable to do basic things like control their bodily functions or even walk unassisted most places.
Treated like children by half who work with them.
If you lived a mundane safe life where you did almost the same thing at work most of your life, accumulated few quality experiences, only to make it to that state through your longevity, I would not exactly call that a success.
There is plenty of people that died much younger that had a better life overall.
No matter what you do, you still die, you can't cheat death, it is coming for you anyways.
Quantity does not make up for quality. So there is a balance.

Hmmm, I guess you are now the judge of quality of life experiences as well. Hunting a grizzly bear with a spear ain't exactly the smartest chore a person could do. What part of smart does quality of life entail? If that is what you want to do, just take someone to videotape your last day on earth so we can enjoy that experience as well.

Looks like this thread is on its last legs and soon to go bye bye from the moderators.

All I can say is "good luck."

 

[fastest45ever]

Have you contacted Phil Shoemaker?
http://grizzlyskinsofalaska.com/

 

[dprice3844444]

remember,if your going to do something dumb like that,always take 2 extra people who run slower than you.

 

[fastest45ever]

You really want to take something with paws like this on?
http://grizzlyskinsofalaska.com/images/PICT0193a.jpg
Thats from Shoemaker's website. An excellent site of bears.

 

[Art Eatman]

Pretty much done, looks like.













Or maybe half-baked.