Posted on 03/11/2012 11:06:28 AM PDT by Askwhy5times
An article in the Daily Mail, and other places, cites a study by BYU biologist and bear expert Tom S. Smith that claims carrying a gun in bear country does not make you safer.
Many people have wandered into bear country reassured that their trusted gun would keep them safe if they ever come face-to-face with an aggressive grizzly.The study is published in the Journal of Wildlife Management. The full study is hidden behind a membership wall. I can only comment on the details provided in a lengthy press release posted on BYU's website. Most of the articles add this spin line which is directly from the BYU press release.But experts have shattered that myth after carrying out a study of hundreds of animal attacks.
A Brigham Young University study found using a gun is no more effective at keeping people safe than not using a firearm.
This finding is especially relevant given the 2010 law allowing guns in national parks.Here are some other relevant excerpts from the press release.
Smith and his colleagues analyzed 269 incidents of bear-human conflicts in Alaska for the study, appearing in the forthcoming issue of the Journal of Wildlife Management. Those incidents involved 444 people and 357 bears, 300 of which were brown bears.There is a serious problem with this comparison. The people involved in these encounters are not bear hunting. It seems reasonable to believe they only used a gun if they felt severely threatened. It is apples and oranges to compare 229 encounters where people felt threatened enough to use a gun on a bear to 40 instances where people had guns, but the threat level never rose that high. The bears in the second group were likely less aggressive. The press release then makes the claim non-lethal deterrent such as bear spray is actually more effective against aggressive bears than a gun.The researchers found no statistical difference in the outcome (no injury, injury or fatality) when they compared those who used their gun in an aggressive encounter (229 instances) to those who had firearms but did not use them (40 instances).
“People should consider carrying a non-lethal deterrent such as bear spray,” said Smith, a gun owner himself. “It’s much easier to deploy, it’s less cumbersome and its success rate in these situations is higher than guns.”
In a 2008 study, Smith found that bear spray effectively halted aggressive bear encounters in 92 percent of the cases.Is this claim valid? Here are some excerpts from the BYU 2008 press release for this study which is also by Mr. Smith.
Hikers and campers venturing into bear country this spring may be safer armed with 8-ounce cans of bear pepper spray than with guns, according to a new study led by a Brigham Young University bear biologist.[...]
Concerned about hikers' and campers' persistent doubts that a small can of liquid pepper spray could stop half a ton of claws, muscle and teeth, Smith and colleagues analyzed 20 years of bear spray incidents in Alaska, home to 150,000 bears. He found that the spray effectively halted aggressive bear behavior in 92 percent of the cases, whether that behavior was an attack or merely rummaging for food. Of all 175 people involved in the incidents studied, only three were injured by bears, and none required hospitalization. Smith and his research team report their findings in the April issue of the Journal of Wildlife Management.Again, there seems to be an apple and oranges situation. The 2008 study includes bears that were merely rummaging for food. It is reasonable to believe the most people wouldn't use a gun because a bear was rummaging for food. Gun use would be reserved for the most aggressive encounters. Additionally, this was a fairly small sample of only 71 incidents where bear spray was used. BYU biologist and bear expert Tom S. Smith claims to not be anti-gun. That may be true. However, he is very pro bear. In this audio recording of an interview, Mr. Smith concedes there are some bears pepper spray will not stop. In those cases, only a gun can settle the issue.
How do you tell if you’re in black bear country? The bear scat will have berries in it.
How do you tell if you’re in grizzly country? The bear scat will have little bells in it and smell like pepper spray.
By the way, the report (bang) of any loud firearm will very likely scare a bear away, even if a bear is wounded (most cases). The information in my last comment was more for the purpose of humane defense (avoiding leaving bears wounded and suffering).
In my case...? There’s a bear that regularly walks by near me to get a drink from a creek. No problems from that bear at all (all black, smaller bear). He’s just another neighbor. It helps that the area is not treed.
There were problems at another location, far from here and several years ago, where neighbors left food in their trash. ...a couple of large males (both unusually large, brown and long-haired) that became too familiar with people there. That area was also heavily treed.
One last thing. In at least some states, local wildlife employees will lean toward prosecuting you for shooting a bear except in cases of local livestock owners doing so because of predation. So they lean way against new residential arrivals, and especially, tourists.
How do they define a bear attack? If I shoot the bear before it actually injures anyone, how is that categorized? Is it thrown out because no one was killed or injured? If the bear doesn’t press the attack and turns tail, how is that categorized? This is a study where you can completely bias the outcome simply by how you define a bear attack.
That is the real world!
Tell you what, let’s take these “scientists”, force them into a bear pit, and give them the option to either take a gun with them, or not.....let’s see how many of them take the gun.
“Very few people carry firearms that will put down a bear or develop the skills and anatomy study needed”
____________________________________________________________
This is the entire point of the study.
He drew a Ruger .454 Casull revolver. There was no time to aim, barely time to squeeze the trigger. He’s not sure whether he got off two shots or three, but one proved fatal.
“Total luck shot,” he said.
“It doesn’t get any closer. He slid by me on his chin when I shot him,” Brush said. “I was backpedaling as fast as I could. I wasn’t even aiming. I tripped over my own feet as I pulled the trigger.”
He estimated that the animal weighed 900-plus pounds, and was 15 to 20 years old. It had grass packed in its molars and little fat on its bones.
“It was starving to death and saw an opportunity,” Brush said.
I also read this article about two unarmed people killed in yellowstone by different bears within a month or so of each other.
In Alaska, people expect problems from bears and are normally armed. In Yellowstone, people are not allowed to be armed. In National Parks, you can be eaten alive for the crime of Political correctness. In Alaska, you eat bear. That is my study on the issue.
Guess which one I chose?
That's just silly. A bear wouldn't carry a 38!
Research is not generally performed for knowledge anymore. Research is done to satisfy grant funding. As such, a researcher who wants to continue to get funding will report what will result in further funding down the road.
The big exception is research which is done to find information that will result in a profitable product.
“I dispute that Smith is a bear expert. Timothy Treadwell was a bear expert. He lived with bears. They ate him.”
Treadwell was a bear expert. He has studied them from inside and out.
Carrying a firearm may not make me safer, but it also doesn’t make the bear safer, either.
The 44 would be fine if there were no bear but if a bear is going to do the dirty work, slow is fine.
Hmmm, you make a good point!
Um, Grizzly Bear, Polar Bear, Brown Bear, Black Bear meets .50 cal. .458, 30.06, .45ACP., bear loses, human remains alive. What am I missing?
Thanks Askwhy5times. Partisan Media Shills ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.