snowtigger
Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 91
Let another Alaskan weigh in on Cosmoline's side.
I carry a .44 mag for bear defense, and would never feel undergunned. The local newspaper , The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, runs at least one story each year about stopping a bear with a handgun. I'm sure a search of their archives will disclose at least a hundred such cases.
Fish and game here is policed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. as Cosmo describes. with the exception of the NPS lands (as he also noted) . Anyone else giving you advice should be judged by their own personal agenda.
As far as DLP shootings go, each case is judged on it's own merit. If you shoot, it had better be fairly evident that the bear was inside the "comfort zone" of the average rational person. You are required to attempt to recover the head and hide just like you would for the taxidermist. Exceptions are made for the person who has actually been attacked. I, personally know two men who have survived such attacks. I assure you neither was in any condition to take care of themselves, much less worry about preservation of the hides.
One of these fellows actually shot the bear in the mouth with his .357 mag as it was chewing on him. He was attacked from behind. The only defense he had was his handgun( he carries a .44Mag now).
The other was attacked in his sleeping bag. He had no gun. The bear was running with him in her mouth, when she dropped him and kept running.
The only thing you can say for sure about bears is, you can never say anything for sure about what they are going to do next.
I've never had a close encounter, but rest assured I will take my chances with the law, if he time ever comes. I would rather be judged by twelve, than be carried by six, although after an attack by a Grizz, one might be enough.
I carry a .44 mag for bear defense, and would never feel undergunned. The local newspaper , The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, runs at least one story each year about stopping a bear with a handgun. I'm sure a search of their archives will disclose at least a hundred such cases.
Fish and game here is policed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. as Cosmo describes. with the exception of the NPS lands (as he also noted) . Anyone else giving you advice should be judged by their own personal agenda.
As far as DLP shootings go, each case is judged on it's own merit. If you shoot, it had better be fairly evident that the bear was inside the "comfort zone" of the average rational person. You are required to attempt to recover the head and hide just like you would for the taxidermist. Exceptions are made for the person who has actually been attacked. I, personally know two men who have survived such attacks. I assure you neither was in any condition to take care of themselves, much less worry about preservation of the hides.
One of these fellows actually shot the bear in the mouth with his .357 mag as it was chewing on him. He was attacked from behind. The only defense he had was his handgun( he carries a .44Mag now).
The other was attacked in his sleeping bag. He had no gun. The bear was running with him in her mouth, when she dropped him and kept running.
The only thing you can say for sure about bears is, you can never say anything for sure about what they are going to do next.
I've never had a close encounter, but rest assured I will take my chances with the law, if he time ever comes. I would rather be judged by twelve, than be carried by six, although after an attack by a Grizz, one might be enough.