Do you keep your gun loaded when you hike?

If you don't you might want to check this out.

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/backpacker-shoots-kills-grizzly-538666.html?imw=Y

So, the guy had it holstered and just whipped it out and blazed away? Doubt it.

HAMTERO said:

So, the guy had it holstered and just whipped it out and blazed away? Doubt it.

Click to expand...

That's the idea of carrying a piece in grizzly country. Needs to be a pretty good caliber AND a good aim to bring down a grizzly, though ... a .22 handgun will only insult the critter ...

Begs the question of gun or bear spray. I've carried neither in my times in grizzly country but had the odds in my favor based upon the best available information. Lot's of time in more probable grizzly locations and I'd likely wish to carry both despite the weight and bulk.

Might have been a bluff charge

...or not. I have had it happen to me (not a grizzly). My reaction was to grab a large club-like branch/log and brandish it caveman-style as it approached at a good running clip, and then it quickly did a 180 and ran off ( probably chuckling to itself over my antics).

I wouldn't assume yet that this particular instance was simply a bluff charge, but guns in the parks are certainly going to lead to lots of incidents of this nature, where it's really hard to determine exactly what the threat level was when the trigger was pulled.

???????

Trying to figure out this statement from the story:


"It's legal to carry firearms in that area of the park but illegal to discharge them."

If you can not discharge the weapon, what good is it? Are you supposed to wave it at the bear and tell him I have gun?

bandana4me said:

Trying to figure out this statement from the story:


"It's legal to carry firearms in that area of the park but illegal to discharge them."

If you can not discharge the weapon, what good is it? Are you supposed to wave it at the bear and tell him I have gun?

Click to expand...

A friend did graduate work there, said it was required to carry (and, as the New Yorkers would say, be ready to use) sufficient firepower. He also said that his advisor needed his .45 handgun to fend off an attack in a tent. He brought back a (then-legal) AK-47, which he said would probably not have been sufficient. His permitted weapon was a deer rifle (Winchester .30-06 kind of thing); said it would have been too clumsy in the tent; traded it for the .45. Such interactions were not common, but not too rare either, he said.

If you carry a firearm for self defense, common sense dictates that it must be loaded. If the moment comes when you actually need to shoot, you must be ready to do so without any fumbling around.

G.

Gee...you can carry but not discharge.
They have no problem discharging them from planes to kill the "wildlife" but you can't kill a griz who is charging your hiking companion?
It seems that any gun in that situation would be better than none at all.
Strange...very strange.

I think perhaps Alaska should revisit it's laws.

bandana4me said:

Trying to figure out this statement from the story:


"It's legal to carry firearms in that area of the park but illegal to discharge them."

If you can not discharge the weapon, what good is it? Are you supposed to wave it at the bear and tell him I have gun?

Click to expand...

the linked article said:

Park officials are determining the justification for the shooting.

Click to expand...

"Illegal to discharge" means you can't walk around shooting at things for no reason, there needs to be a "determined justification". I know in CT it's illegal to discharge a firearm on less than 10 acres. So if I'm on 2 acres and I shoot something the police have the right to determine if I was justified. Also in CT, if you carry a handgun, it's illegal to NOT have it loaded. I imagine this is so police can assume it IS loaded if it's brandished.

Regarding guns or pepper spray, (I've said this before here) I have a friend who has hunted and hiked actively in grizzly habitat in Montana and Wyoming for years who only carries spray. I'd bet most grizzlies could kill you before they died of your gun shot wounds, even if you had good aim with large caliber.

This is similar to shooting a criminal. If the girl was killed everyone would say "too bad nobody had a gun". Now that the bear's dead and the hikers are safe everyone wonders if he was justified. This is a problem.

Tim Seaver said:

...or not. I have had it happen to me (not a grizzly). My reaction was to grab a large club-like branch/log and brandish it caveman-style as it approached at a good running clip, and then it quickly did a 180 and ran off ( probably chuckling to itself over my antics).

I wouldn't assume yet that this particular instance was simply a bluff charge, but guns in the parks are certainly going to lead to lots of incidents of this nature, where it's really hard to determine exactly what the threat level was when the trigger was pulled.

Click to expand...

A black bear is not in the same league as a grizzly. They are more like big raccoons. Saying this was a bluff charge (or not) is lame-o.

Maddy said:

Gee...you can carry but not discharge.
They have no problem discharging them from planes to kill the "wildlife" but you can't kill a griz who is charging your hiking companion?
It seems that any gun in that situation would be better than none at all.
Strange...very strange.

I think perhaps Alaska should revisit it's laws.

Click to expand...

Maddy - I think the issue of carrying a firearm has less to do with Alaska and mostly to do with being in a National Park.

A federal law was also changed recently in an attempt to provide consistency between state and federal jurisdictions, which created a flurry of intense "debates" on virtually every hiking BB I frequent.

Mostly I don't think we have enough information about this Alaskan incident.

To all - keep it civil or don't post.

What would be the point of carrying the gun if it wasn't loaded?

The man fired nine rounds from his .45 caliber, semiautomatic pistol at the animal, which then stopped and walked into the br

Click to expand...

How many hit? Tough bear!

Luck is the residue of design

He had little notice, a surprise attack. The gun he used isn't recommended for killing anything larger than a human.

The shooter fired nine times but they haven't yet said how many times the grizzly was hit.

This is the handgun recommended for killing grizzlies and some government officials in Alaska are required to carry one, according to what an LEO posted on another board, $770, 2 1/2 lbs.:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SRHAlaskan454.htm

That's Ruger's website, go to it to see the recoil photos. A big, strong guy who is an expert and the revolver is pointing straight up after the shot.

A lot of us would be on our butt. That's exactly what happened to a fisherman who was surprised last summer up there. No warning, the grizzly was on the dead run toward him, spotted only 20 yards away. Two shots from the Ruger .454 Super Redhawk Casull and he was on his butt, but the grizzly died at his feet.

A post on another board also said those were the gun rules for the third of Denali NP that the shooter was in. Two-thirds of the park has a different status (??) and the gun rules are different there. Not sure if more or less restrictive.

A couple more comments -

- The behavior of black bears in the East can be quite different than in the West. If you're in the West's backcountry, it's a good idea to do some reading on bear behavior. If there are mountain lions/cougars in the area, do some reading about them to.

- Here's an excellent page in bear behavior, particularly if that may include grizzlies. It's from Parks Canada, and they have lots of experience with bear encounters. If you think your chances of encountering a bear in BC are minimal, click on the link "Bear Updates".

It's our responsibility to keep ourselves safe, and to not endanger a bear in the process. They have a right to exist also.

jjmcgo said:

He had little notice, a surprise attack. The gun he used isn't recommended for killing anything larger than a human.

The shooter fired nine times but they haven't yet said how many times the grizzly was hit.

This is the handgun recommended for killing grizzlies and some government officials in Alaska are required to carry one, according to what an LEO posted on another board, $770, 2 1/2 lbs.:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SRHAlaskan454.htm

That's Ruger's website, go to it to see the recoil photos. A big, strong guy who is an expert and the revolver is pointing straight up after the shot.

A lot of us would be on our butt. That's exactly what happened to a fisherman who was surprised last summer up there. No warning, the grizzly was on the dead run toward him, spotted only 20 yards away. Two shots from the Ruger .454 Super Redhawk Casull and he was on his butt, but the grizzly died at his feet.

A post on another board also said those were the gun rules for the third of Denali NP that the shooter was in. Two-thirds of the park has a different status (??) and the gun rules are different there. Not sure if more or less restrictive.

Click to expand...

There are several calibers that could be considered adequate for Grizzly. What isn't stated is what .45 it was. A .45 long colt is a potent cartridge. Since he fired nine times I suspect it was a .45 ACP. At close range that is a very potent weapon against humans, what it was designed for, but doesn't have the penetration I would want for a Griz.

Several things come into play. As with man or beast the purpose (except when hunting) is to make the offender (the threat) stop what he is doing as quick as possible. It the threat dies in that pursuit it is assumed that it is justified or you wouldn't be shooting. No one should ever shoot to hurt and no self respecting school teaches that.

That being said, realize the Bear still traveled 100 feet. If the bear still had a mind of destruction and kept heading towards the shooter, it would likely have also been game over for the shooter as well. This has happened, more than once.

Also be aware that caliber doesn't make up for incompetence with the gun. A true marksmen, who won't get rattled under the pressure of a charging grizzly and can hit a quarter at 25 yards could kill it by hitting it in the eye. We call those people trick shooters. 95% of "trick" shooters think they are that guy, but only less than 1% are in fact that guy or are just that lucky. So we are stuck mostly with proper caliber guns. .44 mag, .45 long colt with heavy loads, 454 Casull and larger. These are not guns one picks up and starts shooting with competence in an hour. It takes a fair amount of training. Using one of these guns to start blowing chunks off of a grizzly is not going to make him happier. Proper placement of the bullet is crucial or they will just have you and maybe the bear to bury or you to bury and a really pissed off Griz to find. This takes significant amount of practice and even with that there are a significant number of people that just will not be able to shoot these guns at all. They are large, heavy and the recoil and blast is significant.

I have fired and owned a .44 mag for 30 something years and still enjoy firing it and taught many other how to shoot big bore handguns. I have fired cartridges out of handguns that are considered elephant cartridges i.e .458 Win Mag. I have also fired and loaded wildcat cartridges that you need to make yourself such as the .30 Herret that has as much Kinetic energy at 100 yards as the .44 mag does at the barrel. Like I have mentioned, I worked in a gun store for more than 10 years and fired a lot of guns and talked to a lot of big game people. Bullet placement with the right gun and gunner is the only attitude to have with dangerous animals.

If it was me I would be armed and prepared, two different things. My greatest wish is that I would not feel threatened enough to even need to draw the gun, just my camera.

Keith

My personal opinion is that one knows when there is a risk if one knows wildlife and is educated on thier behavior. I have seen lions up close, one was very passive and one approached me with ill intent for sure. I carry when Im out west for this fact, wildlife seems to find me. In the instance of the lion that approached me, I fired 2 shots in the air, this was sufficient to let him know I was not easy food for the taking, if he did not disperse, I would have taken him down right there. Frankly I love wildlife and lions rank high on my list, BUT if its me or him, goodnight lion. AS far as the reprecussions of shooting an animal with the law, Ill take my chances and be honest, report the incident and deal with it. Whats the old saying " I'd rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6 "

jjmcgo said:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SRHAlaskan454.htm

That's Ruger's website, go to it to see the recoil photos. A big, strong guy who is an expert and the revolver is pointing straight up after the shot.

Click to expand...

Hmmmmm. Just looked at that url. Not trying to cast aspersions but I just looked at the guy firing the redhawk. In all three photos he has his eyes closed. Now, I might not be an expert but I have always had trouble hitting anything when I fired and I had my eyes closed. But, again, I'm no expert.

Regards,
Keith

When I paddled the Yukon 1000 last July, we were told to be very aware of bear activity where we camped each night. There was some debate on the Y1K forum about bringing firearms along with us. Shooting an animal in self defense is allowed both in the Yukon Territory and in Alaska - the 1000 mile race goes approximately 500 miles in each. However, the catch is that if you kill an animal, you must take the carcass out to the nearest law enforcement authority for the region - imagine especially the kayakers doing that with an 800 pound griz. The distance could be as much as several hundred miles on the river. The worst case would be if you shot just before entering Alaska, you would have to paddle upstream 80 miles against a 6mph current to return to Dawson, YT. We elected to keep several canisters of bear spray handy instead. We did see bears while paddling, but not during our short nights on shore. We tried to camp on gravel shoal islands rather than the mainland.

The potential of bear attack was not the only warning. Actually we were told that we were more likely to be killed by a charging moose than by a bear. I've seen accounts where that is very real. We did see several more moose than bear.

Here's a photo of a local guy who lives near the 1000 mile finish line at the Dalton Highway bridge. He calls himself a bushman and he always carries the sidearm with him. He was a real nice guy, super to talk to about his life, and was fascinated with the race and our canoe. He's shown in the photo helping us load it for transport.

Alaskan

Nessmuk said:

He calls himself a bushman and he always carries the sidearm with him. He was a real nice guy, super to talk to about his life, and was fascinated with the race and our canoe. He's shown in the photo helping us load it for transport.

Click to expand...

Never leave home without a fully loaded bandolier!