Black Bear Kills Unarmed Woman In Unprovoked Attack; Bear Spray Fails, Gun Works
BY Herschel Smith
4 years, 3 months ago
Dean Weingarten at Ammoland.
The father said he was talking to her when he heard a gurgling noise, and was no longer able to communicate with her. Nine minutes later, his son-in-law, Stephanie’s husband, Curtis Blais, called him and told him of the attack. Curtis had tried bear spray, but it did not work, so he got a gun and shot and killed the bear. From cbc.ca:
After waiting two minutes, Esquirol disconnected and called back. No one answered. Seven minutes later, he got a call from his daughter’s husband, Curtis Blais, who had been in the cabin’s kitchen about 30 metres away.
“Curtis called advising me that a bear attacked her, that he sprayed the bear with pepper spray, and the bear got more angry.”
Esquirol said his son-in-law told him he got a gun and shot the bear twice before it went down.
“So by that time, Stephanie had no pulse. He gave her mouth to mouth, but she was injured beyond the point of recovery.”
[ … ]
The bear was not starving. Its stomach was full of blueberries. From foxnews.com:
He said a conservation officer told him the bear was unprovoked in the attack and that the bear wasn’t hungry. It had a stomach full of blueberries.
We do not know how much time was consumed by complying with the Canadian government laws on firearms and ammunition storage.
Free men don’t follow unrighteous laws when those laws put themselves or their loved ones at risk.
When in bear country, always have a large bore firearm within reach. Or be at increased and unnecessary risk. The choice is yours.
And no, bear spray isn’t a large bore firearm.
|
|
On August 28, 2020 at 11:49 pm, Quietus said:
Our host says to always have a large-caliber handgun within reach. Keywords are “always” and “within reach.” After ruminating on that: does your 100% 24/7 access to the bear gun, violate those keywords? If so, might want to try harder to have the popgun always within reach.
So … carry in a hiking pack is out. Carry on the waistband of your ruck is out, unless you wear your ruck as you sleep. As is carry on any other sort of belt, unless your wear that belt as you sleep.
Jeff Cooper talked about hauling in on a pistol lanyard while in a sleeping bag, that a M1911 will appear, a person would hope that it would appear in Condition One. I do think, however, that Cooper may not have liked M1911s in Condition One as the preferred sleeping mode. Ready to be corrected on that.
If you consider more modern bear bumpers, Glocks do rule. You can put a lanyard ring on a G20 for sleeping bag use- but then I think a wise person would want to protect the trigger guard with the common kydex guard, now sold by many. Dale Fricke out of Bozeman might have been first maker for a kydex way to protect a Glock trigger. So … OK, now the G20 is gonna be safe, lanyarded and TG protected, inside your bag as you sleep.
Then, happy enough with the gun’s safeness, a person might consider the need for two working hands to strip the kydex off the trigger guard, as he gets awoke by Buddy Bear.
The most sensible way that I’ve found to carry always and nearby, a pistol in the field during 24/7 activities of daily life, is with a center-chest kydex rig. Several vendors make them. That said, I do remember that our host has said that he had weight/strain problems carrying a gun high in a central location with a rig made by a high-quality vendor out of Colorado. My opinion, the vendor is just right but the carry position might have been too high and too relaxed.
There are no happy options available for carrying a pistol in bear country. First rule, is that the pistol carry method cannot be capable of being shucked for the sake of convenience. Used to be, leather USGI M1911 rigs could absorb sleeping bag grease and look salty with use. Not so much anymore, with kydex being the new norm.
On August 28, 2020 at 11:59 pm, Herschel Smith said:
@Quietus,
Within reach certainly does not mean locked away in a chest, safe or otherwise. I have a large bore pistol sitting within 2 ft. of me as I write. Not that I’m at risk of four-legged threats at the moment.
Glocks rule for those who like them, and then there are 1911s for those who like 11 degree grip angles, FNX-45s or Springfield armory for those who like large bore tactical guns with high cap mags with 11 degree grip angles, and so on and on. Then there are the wheel guns, which are both a superb choice and gentlemanly. There are .357 mags, .44 mags, 454 Casull, etc. See the point?
To each his own. We can be the “rainbow coalition” of gun owners, willing to go with the flow of each choice and see the beauty of it all.
I’ve worn a Hill People Chest Rig before, and while it works for a while, I confess it gets heavy over the long haul (days at a time).
On August 29, 2020 at 4:49 am, Lori G said:
Does anyone know if this was a Grizzly or a black bear?
On August 29, 2020 at 8:52 am, Ned2 said:
Bear spray gives unwitting tourists and retards a false sense of security in bear country. The forest service has been pushing it as “protection” for too long. Most of us up here in Grizzly country carry a sidearm.
On August 29, 2020 at 10:23 am, Joe said:
Oddly enough bear spray does not work as well on black bears as it does on grizzly bears. Most everyone gives grizzlies a fair amount of respect but many underestimate black bears, they are certainly capable of ripping you up. They are normally more passive but there are lots of them and it only takes one.
On August 29, 2020 at 11:13 am, Bill Sullivan said:
Lori G- The heading on the article says it was a black bear.
On August 29, 2020 at 11:29 am, Fred said:
@Joe, blacks are more aggressive toward humans than griz. It may not be a function of the spray on blacks but that they much more often a) make contact with humans and b) attack persons. Even when accounting for demographics blacks are more dangerous to humans than griz (this may vary in AK), not that either is cuddly mind you. It might not be the spray but a natural inclination of a black to follow through against humans in claims on territory, food, etc.
I do wonder if blacks, more so than griz see humans as a direct competitor for resources. That might explain the aggression instead of explaining it as species specific behavior.
On August 29, 2020 at 12:26 pm, Lori G said:
Whoops thanks Bill.
We live in black bear country (it is baiting season now) in Northern Maine. Our favorite type of bear spray is lots of .45 bullets from multiple Glocks. The bears up here so far have been very shy around humans, except of course when cubs are involved. I am surprised to read that blacks are more aggressive than grizzlies.
On August 30, 2020 at 1:59 am, Joe said:
Black bears definitely have a different temperament than grizzlies. Grizzlies in some ways are more aggressive than black bears, but I believe they don’t view humans as a food source as often as black bears do. With grizzly bears an attack is often due to a surprise encounter and a fight vs flight reaction from the bear or protecting a cub or food source. A grizzly is more direct and pure aggression when it wants to attack, a predatory black is often kind of sneaky, they don’t always charge like a grizzly would, they may approach kind of slowly gradually testing the waters so their attack may not seem like its going to be an actual attack at first. I believe most black bears are timid and prefer to avoid people but there are so many more of them that just by numbers some are going to be predatory. I’ve been around both a fair amount but certainly no expert.
I came upon a black bear cub that had gone up a tree and then saw mom at the base of the tree. Mom did not attack thankfully but rather ran off a way’s and then took a parallel path to me as I left the area. If those bears had been grizzlies there is a much higher chance the mother would have attacked. But I’ve had grizzlies run away or just observe me so far. Thankfully the ones I’ve gotten close to have not been ill tempered or been with cubs or defending food.