That was quite the sweeping generality, amarone. I don’t know about the folks in Atlanta, but out here in Montana (most) hunters don’t “go out and kill wildlife for fun.” The economy hasn’t been very good. Miners, farmers and ranchers have been especially hard hit. These folks go hunting to fill their freezers with meet for the winter. The economics of hunting have been discussed in other threads, but suffice it to say it’s a lot cheaper than trying to buy meat.
Saying that these folks hunt for the thrill of killing Bambi is unfair, unjust, and pretty ignorant to boot.
Actually, I said it was sick to kill for fun. I didn’t comment at all about people who need to hunt to eat. I enjoy meat immensely and if it were a choice of being a vegetarian or killing something for food, I’d kill it. I’d be pretty disgusted with myself if I enjoyed it, though.
There’s just a few hunters around down here in Georgia and Alabama. In the prosperous suburbs where I live, I know many hunters. I’d be amazed if any of them went hungry if they didn’t hunt. They hunt because they enjoy it. And that is what I find sick.
Wow, less than a week after forking over my first $15 to join this board and I’m in the pit! Thanks guys, this makes me feel special .
But seriously, I would like to make clear that I have no desire to to kill a bear, I don’t even own a gun of my own. If I had a gun and knew a bit more, I wouldn’t have had to ask about the subject now would I? My main incentives for my trip up to main is to hike and fish, that’s all. I’m not a fan of hunting any animal for sport or without need. The only exception I have to my envirmentalist dogma is whitetail deer. However, this is a different problem. The deer population is out of control in NJ and is endangering its own survival; thanks in large part to the absence of the once native wolves. In years past, the government has even brought in military sharpshooters to kill as many deer as possible (the meat went to soup kitchens). Coyotes are spreading through NJ, and there is a big conspiracy theory that the government introduced them to help take care of the deer. It almost makes sense, because coyotes don’t create the kind of panic that “wolf” would.
I definately do not approve of killing merely for trophies. However, I might consider having a trophy made on an especially large fish (it would have to be “very” large) with that process that doesn’t actually use or require the death of the fish. I believe they just make a copy out of plastic or something, they can even use just a photo if there is something in the picture to give the fish some scale.
I didn’t even specifically target bears in my post. I have never been to Canada and I was unfamiliar with the wildlife there.
The only time I would even consider shooting a bear would be if it meant saving the life of myself or another person. Although, I’d have to think about it if a bear ever broke into the beehives I keep on my property, but I’d much rather call the authorities and have them relocate it. Though I understand that this often fails and shooting the bear might become neccessary if that happens.
In conclusion, I have no desire to hunt anything with a gun. Though in the past I have used a bow.
PS: Compensating with a gun is far more economical than a Porsche.
I’ve had several bear behavior courses for work in Alaska’s Yukon Charley Wilderness and the North Slope. Not to go into all the details, let me just reaffirm what’s said above - that making your presence known is a good course. Make lots of noise so they’ll know you’re there and a surprise encounter won’t trigger an attack.
Seeing as how our posture would be purely defensive, each instructor without fail recommended the Winchester 870 12 ga pump with slugs. A bullet won’t have the same knock down force and you want the ability to break a lot of bone, the intent being to put him on the ground and to disable his weapons, namely speed, teeth and claws. Flesh wounds, unless they include going through the heart, aren’t going to do you any immediate good because the bear’s heartrate actually slows way down when it’s in a conflict so as to not bleed to death, we were told to as little as several beats a minute.
Their recommendation was to go for high value shots in the front like for the nose or mouth and the foreleg/chest area. Shots between the eyes very well may just ricochet off the skull. Once the bear’s down, walk around behind him, approach slowly and pump several shots into his spine at the base of the skull.
Some good points were made earlier about the wrecklesness of the pitted poster’s intent. I hope he gains some sense of respect before he begins any trek into the wild.
Scarface Z, I am glad to read your post. And welcome to the Pit, as I am the one who dragged you in here.
You needn’t explain about the deer, my SO has done a lot of work with the Pine Bush Preserve & the Karner Blue Butterfly - whose main food source the deers are eating up.
I have nothing but the greatest respect for nature. But to be honest, before posting, I hadn’t even looked up what type of animals are in Northeastern Saskatchewan.:o
But on a side note, several people mentioned protection from hillbillies. But do you remember that guy who went up in someone else’s deer stand and just start shooting people? And I think that guy was from NYC. Or was it NY state? I can’t remember, but the point is, self protection.
The title of your thread was "Fighting a bear… " so you can see why the thread oriented toward bears.
Although there are regional variations, in general the USA has a gun culture whereas Canada does not, so what might be perfectly normal in much of the USA might be unacceptable in much of Canada.
No one up here in Shield country will blink if you carry a gun because you are hunting (and I say this as a non-hunter), but you can expect to raise a few eyebrows (to say the least) if you start wandering about with a gun for protection against black bears, moose, etc., and you will raise concern if you carry a gun for protection against other people.
As far as northern Sask goes, the only bears there are black bears, so there is no need for a gun for protection.
Elsewhere in Canada there are regions where a big shotgun with slugs is a good idea, for griz will attack defensively, and polar bears will hunt you.
I would like the ones here who state that no gun in needed in black bear country to accept my insurance policy for 1 million dollars so if I am ever hurt by a bear, they will pay the money and accept responsibility for all deaths and damages to me and my family from black bear attack.
I just love folks who state that everyone should do as they say because they have the correct and absolute answer. *
Don’t carry a weapon if you don’t want to but to encourage everyone else to do so is a major taking of responsibility and I don’t think you all have the wherewithall to do so. … So put up, you will cover the insurance policy with all that you own because you are right…, correct? ::: sheesh ::: Telling a stranger to the woods that a defensive weapon is not needed is one of the most irresponsible things I have ever heard of. It sure is great that you can’t be held responsible for the advice you are giving so freely.
There is this little thing, ( IMO ) that should be added to all this advice. But is not being done.
The idea that 100% of the time that a gun will never be needed is just incrediable… YMMV
I don’t believe anyone has stated that wildlife (including bears) is never a threat. But the perception that attacks by bears, especially black bears, are some kind or regular occurance is the result of misrepresentation and ignorance. Black bears almost never attack except in an extreme defensive position, and grizzlies are only slightly more aggressive. The idea that one need carry a weapon for defense is silly, any more than one should carry insurance against a lightning strike. Plus, one of the stated reasons in the OP of the original thread was not only defense against bears but also as a signaling device, hunting for food if lost, et cetera; the reality is that the 8+ pounds required for an effective weapon plus ammo is better spent on extra food, fishing gear, field guide, map, and so forth.
There are no guarantees, but frankly one is more likely to be struck down by a falling tree or boulder than attacked by a bear. To worry about it obsessively, to weight one’s self down with eight pounds of steel, to plan and prepare for a bear attack instead of the multitude of more likely threats is grossly out of proportion with the probability of the actual threat, and probably counterproductive in any case. If a gun makes you feel invincible you’re better off leaving it behind.
Again, I’m not against owning, carrying, or when appropriate, using, a gun. But the OP of the original thread asked about carrying a firearms for defense against threats (specifically bears). The answer is that the threat from wildlife attack is minimal, especially given the size of the party. The threat from lack of preparation, inclement weather, or natural disasters is much greater. The notion that animals, and specifically bears are a major threat to hikers and outdoorsmen (or -women) is just not justified by the data.
But if one spends a lot of time in thunderstorms, shouldn’t one carry lightning insurance? Wouldn’t campers or hunters be the equivalent of storm trackers?
Does no one ever remember that I have been struck by lightning twice?
Once in 1959 and again in 1978… I’ve posted about this several times…
Okay, who want to step up and be my insurance carrier? Bawahahaha
Also, I have been so luck to run across a small black bear near Sallisaw Oklahoma in the summer of 1960 that had apparently wounded by some fool that did not make sure of his kill. I was real glad I usually carried a gun when I went walking in the woods near Sallisaw where according to all the folks around swore up and down that there were no black bears with 200 miles. This included the game rangers…
My point being, just cause it is rare, then one should not be prepared? ::: sheesh :::
You want the pilots of your aircraft to think along the same lines?
Yepper, long odds, but then … if you are the lucky one… And I keep reading about different folks who swore they knew about bears and big cats and stuff and such and they keep getting dead.
At risk of being drawn into some tangential discussion (please, Og, no off-the-wall arguments):
Yes, if you are hiking in the wilderness, you are infinitely more likely encounter a bear than if you spend your entire life on Manhattan Island (as long as you don’t go to the zoo), just as if you are a diver or surfer you will be infinitely more likely to be the victim of a shark attack as compared to someone who never swims.
That being said, here are some statistics on bear encounters/attacks in Alaska, which is the place in the US you are most likely to encounter grizzlies and polar bears. To wit:
Look, if you are going to be concerned about bears, then you should be terrified about domestic dogs, paralyzed about traffic accidents, and incapacitated by the notion of viral and bacterial infections. You might as well be equally concerned about micrometeors, sinkholes, or earthquakes, and yet the OP expresses no interest in preparing for those.
It’s a matter of proportion; and in proportion to the potential threat from bears, one should spend the effort being prepared against being lost, breaking a leg, or any number other natural calamities before worrying about the unlikely even of being attacked by a bear. On a multi-day trip, where every ounce is going to make itself felt, I couldn’t conceive of carrying eight or more pounds of material that is grossly unlikely to be put to use. Better, if you really consider bears to be a threat, to spend a half-pound of weight on pepper spray, or better yet, an “ounce” of precaution on not attracting creatures in the first place.
Some people worry about the flying monkeys in The Wizard of Oz. I know I did. But I was three years old at the time. These days, I worry more about the IRS and drunken drivers…and I spend a lot of time in “bear country”.
Wow. I don’t know how much more red that herring could be. I’m not worried about either bears or flying monkeys. I’m just worried about reasonableness. It seems to me that if a person spends a lot of time in “bear country”, he would be prudent to carry an effective weapon just in case. Maybe he’ll never use it. But maybe if he did, there would be six in the last hundred years, rather than seven. One in seven is a small statistic, but it is a large life.
Gus and Liberal, what you both fail to note is the risk to yourselves and others should you enter Canada and carry guns. 40 black bear attacks in all of North America in the last 100 years – that is insignificant. The number of gun deaths are not insignificant.
The difference between having a gun culture and not having a gun culture has resulted in a tremendous difference in the gun death rates between Canada and the USA. That in turn has led to a general position in Canada that unless you have a reasonable need for a gun (e.g. hunting, protection against wildlife, target shooting, etc.), then you should keep your gun locked up. We simply prefer not to have people wandering about with loaded guns without a good reason.
So Gus, the solution for your insurance challenge is that if you are so worried about an infinitesimal risk of a black bear attack, then don’t come to Canada. Stay where you are and carry a gun to your heart’s content. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.
Liberal, you say that you are “just worried about reasonableness,” but you have a track record for being an ass who likes to stir the pot just for the hell of it. Your ignoring the black bear attack rate and ignoring what is reasonable relative to other risks that will be increased by carrying a gun show that once again you are up to your old tricks. In short, hie thee back to the seven page pit thread from which you came: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=300811&highlight=Liberal
I don’t advocate shooting bears in any way. I doubt that while camping in Canada, you’re going to find bears not afraid of humans. I sure as shit wouldn’t trade extra food, cloths, for a pistol.
At home, we do get black bears poking around. These guys seem to be used to humans. I’ll go outside and yell at ‘em and all they do is walk off 50-100 feet and watch me. The only true successes I’ve had scaring those guys off is to shoot in their direction. That much noise sends them on their way.
Stay home. Lock your doors.
No, cancel that. You will be much safer in the wildernest than at home. Really, there aren’t packs of maurading bears and hillbillys out there. The biggest danger to yourself, is yourself.
.