Bear Spray vs. Gun?
Posted on | May 21, 2009 | 1 Comment
With news of the possibility of being allowed to carry a gun in National Park land, the question comes up; which is more effective if you are attacked by a bear: gun or bear spray? Here is what the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services say on the issue.
At first glance, this question may seem like a no-brainer. After all, aren’t guns made to kill, while pepper
spray (so-called “bear spray,” when it comes in big cans) does not? Unlike an attack by a human assailant,
who may be able to use your own weapon against you, that safety/survival argument for using pepper spray doesn’t apply to a human-bear encounter… or does it?When it comes to self defense against grizzly bears, the answer is not as obvious as it may seem. In fact,
experienced hunters are surprised to find that despite the use of firearms against a charging bear, they were attacked and badly hurt. Evidence of human-bear encounters even suggests that shooting a bear can escalate the seriousness of an attack, while encounters where firearms are not used are less likely to result in injury or death of the human or the bear. While firearms can kill a bear, can a bullet kill quickly enough — and can the shooter be accurate enough — to prevent a dangerous, even fatal, attack?The question is not one of marksmanship or clear thinking in the face of a growling bear, for even a skilled
marksman with steady nerves may have a slim chance of deterring a bear attack with a gun. Law
enforcement agents for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have experience that supports this reality –
based on their investigations of human-bear encounters since 1992, persons encountering grizzlies and
defending themselves with firearms suffer injury about 50% of the time. During the same period, persons
defending themselves with pepper spray escaped injury most of the time, and those that were injured
experienced shorter duration attacks and less severe injuries. Canadian bear biologist Dr. Stephen Herrero reached similar conclusions based on his own research — a person’s chance of incurring serious injury from a charging grizzly doubles when bullets are fired versus when bear spray is used.
From FWS
Tags: bear attack > ccw > firearm > gun > handgun > pistol > self defense > wildlife
Comments
One Response to “Bear Spray vs. Gun?”
Leave a Reply
May 22nd, 2009 @ 11:25 am
Neither “Field use of capsicum spray as a bear deterrent” (Herrero, 1998) nor “Efficacy of bear deterrent spray in Alaska” (T. Smith, Herrero, et al., 2008) includes any data on firearms.
The 2008 study showed that the spray stopped bears 92% of the time, and prevented human injuries 98% of the time.
Be aware that your can of bear spray is carried in a hip holster or chest harness. If you’re carrying a concealed weapon, a pistol, and you have a classic surprise encounter with a nearby grizzly, the 1st question to ask is, “what can I get to faster, my bear spray or my pistol?”
Incredibly, the bear spray cult contends that a big game hunter who shoots a charging grizzly in self-defense rather than using bear spray is killing the bear “needlessly.”
Wrong. It’s pretty tough to deploy bear spray carried in a hip holster or chest harness when you’re holding a rifle. The dirty little secret the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the bear spray cult is keeping from big game hunters is that 71 of 72 people who used bear spray in the 2008 study were hikers and non-hunters. Hikers in national parks aren’t holding a .30/06 when they get charged by a grizzly. They have 2 hands free to operate bear spray.