Bear spray vs Bullets
- Thread starter Wyodog
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
jmden
Well-Known Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Rick Sinnott former Alaska DF&G wildlife biologist
LINK- Are guns more effective than pepper spray in an Alaska bear attack? | Alaska Dispatch News
Some highlights from the article
Of the handguns tested, only the .44 magnum was powerful enough to be considered minimally effective, and it ranked well below most of the rifles and the shotgun with slugs. The authors deemed the .44 magnum a backup weapon, useful primarily in that it can be strapped to your body whereas a rifle or shotgun may be out of reach when the attack occurs. The .357 magnum and .45 were not adequate. The authors did not test the .454 Casull or any .50 caliber handguns, recommended by some advocates....
Does carrying a gun prevent serious or fatal injuries by bears? Not according to Kaniut's list. In 86 (70 percent) of the 122 maulings where enough information is provided, either the victim or someone else in the party had a firearm. Of course, some bears are shot before they can do any damage. These encounters aren't included in Kaniut's list and aren't necessarily reported. A firearm can be useful, as Herrero attests, but obviously firearms don't prevent maulings. Many of the victims in Kaniut's list were injured before a firearm could be discharged, or the shots missed the bear. In 40 (36 percent) of 110 maulings someone in the party had wounded the bear before or during the attack.
How about Herrero's contention that a firearm may increase the likelihood or severity of a bear attack? Based on Kaniut's list, in 30 percent of the 40 attacks where the bear was wounded before or during the attack, the bear killed at least one person. In 24 percent of the 86 attacks where someone in the party had a firearm, a person died. That seems like a high fatality rate to me.
Is a firearm better protection than bear spray? Bear spray -- a concoction of propellants and capsaicin (from red pepper) that burns the eyes and mucous membranes -- is effective up to about 30-35 feet. Dr. Tom Smith, Herrero and others assessed the effectiveness of bear spray in 72 incidents in Alaska where someone used it in defense. Bear spray was effective in 92 percent of the 50 cases involving grizzlies and 90 percent of the 20 cases involving black bears. No one who used bear spray was killed. In the nine instances where a grizzly charged a person, the bear broke off the encounter after it was sprayed, and only one person was injured. The injury was relatively minor, deep scratches requiring stitches. Eventually, someone who uses bear spray will be severely injured or killed by the bear. But it seems clear that bear spray promises to be at least as effective at preventing maulings as a firearm.
LINK- Are guns more effective than pepper spray in an Alaska bear attack? | Alaska Dispatch News
Some highlights from the article
Of the handguns tested, only the .44 magnum was powerful enough to be considered minimally effective, and it ranked well below most of the rifles and the shotgun with slugs. The authors deemed the .44 magnum a backup weapon, useful primarily in that it can be strapped to your body whereas a rifle or shotgun may be out of reach when the attack occurs. The .357 magnum and .45 were not adequate. The authors did not test the .454 Casull or any .50 caliber handguns, recommended by some advocates....
Does carrying a gun prevent serious or fatal injuries by bears? Not according to Kaniut's list. In 86 (70 percent) of the 122 maulings where enough information is provided, either the victim or someone else in the party had a firearm. Of course, some bears are shot before they can do any damage. These encounters aren't included in Kaniut's list and aren't necessarily reported. A firearm can be useful, as Herrero attests, but obviously firearms don't prevent maulings. Many of the victims in Kaniut's list were injured before a firearm could be discharged, or the shots missed the bear. In 40 (36 percent) of 110 maulings someone in the party had wounded the bear before or during the attack.
How about Herrero's contention that a firearm may increase the likelihood or severity of a bear attack? Based on Kaniut's list, in 30 percent of the 40 attacks where the bear was wounded before or during the attack, the bear killed at least one person. In 24 percent of the 86 attacks where someone in the party had a firearm, a person died. That seems like a high fatality rate to me.
Is a firearm better protection than bear spray? Bear spray -- a concoction of propellants and capsaicin (from red pepper) that burns the eyes and mucous membranes -- is effective up to about 30-35 feet. Dr. Tom Smith, Herrero and others assessed the effectiveness of bear spray in 72 incidents in Alaska where someone used it in defense. Bear spray was effective in 92 percent of the 50 cases involving grizzlies and 90 percent of the 20 cases involving black bears. No one who used bear spray was killed. In the nine instances where a grizzly charged a person, the bear broke off the encounter after it was sprayed, and only one person was injured. The injury was relatively minor, deep scratches requiring stitches. Eventually, someone who uses bear spray will be severely injured or killed by the bear. But it seems clear that bear spray promises to be at least as effective at preventing maulings as a firearm.
Rick Sinnott was quite protective of bears during his employment with F&G. He was removed from his duties at one time late in his career, because of his derogatory comments toward residents, along the lines that they weren't doing enough to prevent bear/human problems in residential areas. His supervisors removed him from responding to problem bear complaints. In simplest terms, he was more protective of the bears than he was the people, in that instance.
A lot of the information in his article is good information. But I read it with some understanding that when there were bear/human incidents, the bears were always less at fault than the people were. His article invests a lot of time telling us that firearms can kill people, rather than sticking with their value as a bear defense tool. Don't we already know that firearms are designed to kill?
As I mentioned earlier, the current ADF&G employee in my area of the State responsible for responding to bear complaints has no use for bear spray. His preference is the Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun with Brenneke slugs.
A lot of the information in his article is good information. But I read it with some understanding that when there were bear/human incidents, the bears were always less at fault than the people were. His article invests a lot of time telling us that firearms can kill people, rather than sticking with their value as a bear defense tool. Don't we already know that firearms are designed to kill?
As I mentioned earlier, the current ADF&G employee in my area of the State responsible for responding to bear complaints has no use for bear spray. His preference is the Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun with Brenneke slugs.
Last edited:
jmden
Well-Known Member
Would someone enlighten me as to what, if anything is special about Brenneke slugs? Also, which slug of theirs are the best for bear defense?
I've got a few of these as they seemed to be about the most potent I could put my hands on. This is a 3" shell with an 1 1/4 oz. slug traveling at 1600 fps:
Federal Premium Ammunition - Shotshell
In fact, the only thing I could find more powerful was one Brenneke item. USA Special Forces Maximum Barrier Penetration Magnum 2-3/4" 1-3/8 Oz Alloy Slug 1650 fps 5 Rounds SL122MBPM. Very potent, especially for the smaller 2 3/4" shell:
Ballistic Data
Not sure the linked Brenneke slug is meant for dealing with dangerous game or not, although I would think it would do the job with authority.
Throw those Federals away. Well, they'd be good enough for black bear...
The "special" features of the Brennekes are the wad cutter frontal face and hard cast, non-expanding slugs. They aren't designed to mushroom or deform when they hit a game animal. They're shaped like wad cutter pistol bullets, and the flat frontal face means lots of tissue damage compared to the round nose slugs of the same diameter. They provide deep penetration (no expansion compared to that soft lead, splattering Federal slug), and a good amount of trauma to the animal (wad cutter). A 12 gauge slug is already greater than 0.7" in diameter. You don't want further diameter (expansion) at the cost of reduced penetration.
The Brenneke USA Special Forces Maximum Barrier Penetration Magnum 2 3/4" shell has only been on the market for less than one year. My brother carries them in his gun shop, and he's sold some for bear protection. They're a bit more expensive than the standard line of Brenneke slugs, but 10 will last you a long, long time - even after you fire several through your weapon to ensure POI and function. They would be great slugs to stop the largest of bear at close range. If they'll penetrate an engine block, they'll plow deep into the biggest bears with ease also.
Brenneke sells a 2 3/4" 1 1/4 oz 12 gauge slug, which the local ADF&G prefers. He provides bear protection training for Alaska employees. He's had attendees short stroke their 3" pumps more commonly than those shooting 2 3/4" pump actions. However if you're experienced with a 3" pump action shot gun, I say it's a non issue. Brenneke also sells a 3" 1 3/8 oz Black Magic 12 gauge slug. I killed a bull moose with one of these at a distance of ~125 yards around 12 years ago while I was out Sandhill Crane hunting.
I just visited the Brenneke web site. Products
I see they now sell a new 3" 1 1/2oz 12 gauge slug, called their Magnum Crush. That would be a bear stopper for sure.
So in addition to their Special Forces Maximum Barrier slug, any of these 3 additional Brenneke slugs / products would be good bear protection slugs for smooth bore barrels.
12 gauge 2 3/4" 1 1/4oz Heavy Field Short Magnum Green Lightning
Ballistic Data 12 / 2¾"
12 gauge 3" 1 3/8oz Black Magic
12 GA 3'' Black Magic
12 gauge 3" 1 1/2oz Magnum Crush
12 GA 3'' Magnum Crush
jmden
Well-Known Member
I figured it must be that they are hard cast, but even with a (quick) look at their website, that's not too evident. Was wondering about that Fed slug...
HARPERC
Well-Known Member
J E Custom
Well-Known Member
jmden
Well-Known Member
Several years ago my family camped at one of the popular campgrounds in Yosemite National Park, where bears seem to be valued more than humans, BTW.
One night a black bear walk right next to the tent my wife and I were in, heading right to the tent my kids were in. Well, I shot out of that tent with bear spray and a knife and a primal roar, which freaked out my wife
, but by the time I was out of the tent the bear was gone. When I saw the shadow of that bear outlined on the side of my tent, heading towards my kids tent at night, instinct kicked in. I'll tell you...it was gonna be mano e bear. The kids slept through it all and were basically dragged/carried into our tent after the initial excitement. Anyway, on to the point...the next morning while talking to the neighbors a couple of doors down, they reported that they watched what I'm pretty sure was the same quite large bear manipulate the the 'bear proof' steel container latch mechanism and open up the 'bear proof' container. So, much for 'bear proof'... They do seem to learn...
T3-OleMan
Well-Known Member
Been thinking about it as I read all the new post on this every day and need help in defining my CO BLACK BEAR threat circle. You know like in the "LEO 21' threat circle". Bring your threat inside that 21' and you will die because you were stipid! Google it if you don't know about this.
I think you have to decide what that range is NOW so when it happens you just react and dont have to stop and think. I know CP&W will do an autopsy of the shooting seen and the looser. In case I'm the winner just don't want to put up with alot of long winded crap from people that were not there. Just want to go on with my ELK hunt and come back home. How many yards would you want in your CO BLACK BEAR threat circle. I have 2 black rugs and a full mount and don't need any more Bears.
Don't mind firing a warning shot outside the circle, but not inside it. That would be dump as many 40 S&W / Win. Black Talons in it as possible till threat no longer is there. I'm thinking to protect me I better start rapid fire at 25 to 30 YDS just to get off 3 and hope to empty but that won't happen in real life. What would be your circle on CO BLACK BEAR threat CHARGING straight at you!
I'm 73 hurry up - All of you?
WildRose
Well-Known Member
All else aside including all incidents where someone had a firearm as being relevant is completely disingenuous.
A firearm that is not discharged is simply a club. A firearm in the hands of someone who cannot competently handle it may be more harmful than helpful in a high stress situation such as a bear attack.
If you aren't comparing apples to apples you aren't having a conversation that's worth having.
I do however appreciate the effort to find the quotes.
WildRose
Well-Known Member
Sounds like a very smart guy to me!
