Interesting article on bear spray vs. bear handgun defense

[hpmag308]

The articles were an interesting read. Since you cannot carry a side arm in National Parks, bear spray probably is your best option when there. Surprising a grizzly sow with cubs on a hike in a NP is a recipe for disaster. Also, encountering an aggressive bear looking for a meal is probably not going to end well. Such is the risk of hiking in bear country. There would be no question in my mind on what I would be carrying if hunting where firearms are allowed. It would not be a can of bear spray.

So, you can carry your firearm in the actual park itself, as long as the state laws allow it, but you cannot bring the gun into the ranger station, visitor center, or any other federal building — even with a recognized CCW permit.

 

[Mark37082]

Very interesting to learn you can carry a side arm in NP. I talked with a person at GNP prior to visiting. They told me firearms are prohibited. It was probably just a park service office worker that answered the phone. I sure would have felt better on some of those remote hikes with a side arm.

 

[WYO300RUM]

I always carried a Ruger Super Blackhawk while hiking the sub-alpine country in Mt Rainier park, keeping it accessible but discreetly hidden. Sorry.

A grizzly sow and cubs can go 3 ways: 1) the cubs run far away in the opposite direction - the sow will likely follow them, or might stay to maul you 2) the cubs tree nearby - the sow will maul you 3) the cubs are yearlings and approach you out of curiosity - the sow will use you to teach predation to her cubs - this will be fatal encounter. The third instance and the instance in which you violate a grizzly's food cache will be fatal encounters - the bear will try to kill you. Many other grizzly encounters may be of the educational mauling kind - the grizzly hurts you but leaves you alive to communicate your fearsome experience to your species-mates.

Grizzlies grow increasingly aggressive toward people if they aren't hunted. Think of the grizzly's educational mauling - it is analogous to a human hurting the grizzly in a human-bear encounter - the grizzly learns that humans can hurt him and may somehow communicate that to his species-mates. Using a handgun will hurt the bear if you hit him, maybe that will contribute to bears avoiding humans in that area. I can't guess at the effect of bear spray in this context.

The USFW approved putting grizzlies in the north Cascades. Rumors they're getting some from Wyoming. Wyoming, Montana and Idaho wouldn't give Colorado wolves so the got 10 livestock killers from Oregon. They've already started killing cattle and some have moved close to Wyoming border , where it's a predator zone. No tags needed, no season . Come on over.

 

[WYO300RUM]

I loved my solitary wilderness experiences. Unfortunately, being alone in grizzly country is not a good idea - most grizzly attacks occur on solitary humans. There is a smaller likelihood of being attacked if there are two of you. But 3 or more is best. Avoid brushy areas, keep to high visibility environments.

I don't say don't go solo, I say be aware that most grizzly attacks happen to people by themselves, and try to be triply alert. I remember the feeling of being alone in the wilderness, nothing matches it. But it does come with its dangers.

It's no fun hunting in griz country by yourself when you have an animal down either. Ive told the story on these bears before. The first two photos he was 24 yds. from me. I watched him cover up my deer carcass from week before at 243 yds. The 4th photo he was on my elk carcass from week before. 3rd photo was with my digital camera at about 175 yds. No, not Yellowstone. I can't post videos here for some reason.

 

[Rick79]

Far as I know one can still carry in YNP, it's just down the road from me. No discharging is another thing. It'll be interesting to watch what happens when someone protects themselves in the park with a sidearm and takes out the bruin and lives to tell about it. How will the Park proceed from there. I'm for betting it'll be a slap on the wrist kind of thing.

Would you rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6? I'll take being judged if it comes to that. The one time I was in a DLP situation the federal DA that reviewed the case dismissed it, it wasn't in a national park though.

I think you can still carry in national parks too if the state allows concealed carry. The left coast parks might not allow it but that's just a guess since I've never been to any there.

 

[Taj]

My bear spray has lead in it. When I worked for S&W I used to call on the Alaska State Troopers. They did a lot of studies/research on bear spray. That's why they carries a 12 bore loaded with Brennekes.

 

[WYO300RUM]

I loved my solitary wilderness experiences. Unfortunately, being alone in grizzly country is not a good idea - most grizzly attacks occur on solitary humans. There is a smaller likelihood of being attacked if there are two of you. But 3 or more is best. Avoid brushy areas, keep to high visibility environments.

I don't say don't go solo, I say be aware that most grizzly attacks happen to people by themselves, and try to be triply alert. I remember the feeling of being alone in the wilderness, nothing matches it. But it does come with its dangers.

I couldn't copy link so copied and pasted.

Feds Approve Grizzlies Back In Washington State, Wyoming Bears Likely To Be Used

Some of Wyoming's grizzly bears will likely end up going to Washington state's North Cascades after the federal government this week approved a reintroduction program there. Washington locals already hate the idea.

Mark Heinz
April 26, 20243 min read

A pair of Wyoming grizzlies in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. (Getty Images)

It's official, grizzlies will be reintroduced to the Cascades ecosystem in Washington state. But whether Wyoming bears will be sent that way remains uncertain.

And many Washington locals don't want them there anyway.

After years of considering the possibility, the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this week announced plans to start transplanting grizzlies to the Cascades region in northwest and northcentral Washington.

Washington Locals Not Happy

Regardless of whether any of those grizzlies come from Wyoming, it's not likely they'll get a warm welcome from locals in Washington, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of the Interior Rob Wallace told Cowboy State Daily.


Wallace is a Wyoming resident who oversaw the USFWS and NPS during his tenure. He recalled going to testify on behalf of the Interior Department during a 2019 public hearing on grizzly reintroduction in Omak, Washington.

"I could tell it was a going to be a controversial hearing when I pulled into the parking lot and saw law enforcement officers on the roof with sniper rifles," he said.

Many locals in Omak and other small communities in the North Cascades region were strongly opposed to grizzlies being transplanted there, he said. They expressed worry over grizzlies attacking cattle, and possibly disrupting other existing land uses.

Will Wyoming Grizzlies Go?

No exact dates have been set for the reintroductions to begin, but the federal agencies say they plan to use grizzlies from existing "healthy populations," possibly including Wyoming.

The plan is to release three to seven bears each year for five to 10 years until an initial population of 25 grizzlies is established in the North Cascades.

An inquiry from Cowboy State Daily to the Wyoming Game and Fish Department regarding whether the agency had been approached about providing bears hadn't been answered by publication time.

There's a chance that Game and Fish might be involved in the Washington reintroduction program, large carnivore specialist Dan Thompson previously told Cowboy State Daily.

"I don't want to speculate as to where bears would come from this early on, but we — agencies involved with Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem grizzly bears — will hopefully be part of future discussions as to how these things would occur," Thompson said at the time.

'Disconnect In Logic'

Wallace thinks there's a "disconnect in the logic" of transplanting grizzlies from Wyoming or other states where the bears remain under federal endangered species protection.

"It's very hard for me to see them (grizzlies) coming from Wyoming," he said. "To take an endangered species, that they say there aren't enough of, and send them off to the Cascades" seems to contradict the federal agencies' own thinking.

A push to get grizzlies de-listed from Endangered Species Act protection in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho gained momentum last year, but seems to have fizzled out this year.

Reintroducing grizzlies to the North Cascades was also criticized by retired federal ecologist and grizzly conservation advocate Chuck Neal of Cody.

He previously told Cowboy State Daily that reintroduced grizzlies in the North Cascades could become an "island population" with no chance of intermingling with other populations of bears.

Mark Heinz can be reached at [email protected].

 

[Taj]

Washington state "approved" putting grizzlies in the east Cascades. Rumors they're getting some from Wyoming. Wyoming, Montana and Idaho wouldn't give Colorado wolves so the got 10 livestock killers from Oregon. They've already started killing cattle and some have moved close to Wyoming border , where it's a predator zone. No tags needed, no season . Come on over.

Those bears will probably get fat eating those Birkenstock wearing, Subaru driving folks in Washington.

 

[Jasbo]

The articles were an interesting read. Since you cannot carry a side arm in National Parks, bear spray probably is your best option when there. Surprising a grizzly sow with cubs on a hike in a NP is a recipe for disaster. Also, encountering an aggressive bear looking for a meal is probably not going to end well. Such is the risk of hiking in bear country. There would be no question in my mind on what I would be carrying if hunting where firearms are allowed. It would not be a can of bear spray.

You can Carry Concealed in US National Parks! Of course your permit(s) must be valid for the State the NP is located. Example; as IL resident I have a Non-Resident Utah CC permit which I use when fishing in Yellowstone NP (Wyoming & Montana). California is anther matter…I don't enter that unfriendly territory.

 

[fta0303]

The USFW approved putting grizzlies in the north Cascades. Rumors they're getting some from Wyoming. Wyoming, Montana and Idaho wouldn't give Colorado wolves so the got 10 livestock killers from Oregon. They've already started killing cattle and some have moved close to Wyoming border , where it's a predator zone. No tags needed, no season . Come on over.I

 

[dfanonymous]

 

[fta0303]

I spent many years hiking in the Wa and Or Cascades. I'm glad that I was able to do that in my life. I'd never have gone unarmed. And I stopped it when my Dad saw a grizzly smack dab in the middle of my favorite hiking area, about 1995. I'm pretty sure I came close to him twice before that without being able to see him. My hiking was always solo. I wouldn't do it today knowing of the grizzly. Low likelihood of encountering a bear, so they say. But if you do,he controls the issue, not you, unless you shoot him on sight. I'd not venture into grizzly country without a very compelling reason, especially not alone.

Once again the feds override everyone. Only fools and people who don't go there want grizzlies planted in the North Cascades. The North Cascades connect to the rest of the Cascades and the Yakima Indian Reservation. I don't know why, in this country where bureaucrats are supposed to work for us, the people, we have to put up with this idiotic decision. At some point, someone will die because of it.

 

[WYO300RUM]

I spent many years hiking in the Wa and Or Cascades. I'm glad that I was able to do that in my life. I'd never have gone unarmed. And I stopped it when my Dad saw a grizzly smack dab in the middle of my favorite hiking area, about 1995. I'm pretty sure I came close to him twice before that without being able to see him. My hiking was always solo. I wouldn't do it today knowing of the grizzly. Low likelihood of encountering a bear, so they say. But if you do,he controls the issue, not you, unless you shoot him on sight. I'd not venture into grizzly country without a very compelling reason, especially not alone.

Once again the feds override everyone. Only fools and people who don't go there want grizzlies planted in the North Cascades. The North Cascades connect to the rest of the Cascades and the Yakima Indian Reservation. I don't know why, in this country where bureaucrats are supposed to work for us, the people, we have to put up with this idiotic decision. At some point, someone will die because of it.

I hunted Yakima area in 1980. My buddy moved there. His dad bought apple orchards. It was after Mt. Saint Helen blew in May. I was there in Oct. There was the volcanic sand all over ground, fallen trees, etc.. Ash was gone. It was weird to look at. Rained and it was quiet walking though. I could see Mt. Rainier and I think other was Mt.Adams ? From where we were. It was a beautiful place. I'm sure some grizzlies could come into Washington from Canada.

 

[HARPERC]

Grizzlies wandering into new parts of Washington, Idaho - East Idaho News

As Montana grizzly bears have pushed beyond their usual mountain strongholds into the Bitterroot and Judith Basin areas, Washington state residents got a surprise visit this fall from a 476-pound grizzly west of the Pend Oreille River. “That was an eye-opener for the state of Washington,” said...

www.eastidahonews.com

This made me laugh, that bear was likely born and raised in that area, they've been there for 30+ years I know of first hand. USFWS, USFS, Game department all know this, years ago even had one in a backyard filmed and on news.

Same scam going on in Cascades, reliable photos have been taken of them there for many years.

Easier to convince most in the state Bigfoot resides here than grizzlies.