“Freedom of the Woods”: Why Armed Humans Keep Predators—and People—Safe

AmmoLand ^ | August 6, 2025 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

The late, great wildlife biologist and expert on animal behavior, Valerius Geist, noted the tremendous benefit that hunters create for other people who use wild country. He calls it “freedom of the woods”.  A short version is included in this Wolf Essay.

There is a great Public Good that hunters give to society at large, which I may call here the “freedom of the woods.” It is based on the fact that an armed person acts quite differently from an unarmed one when meeting predators, and we have reason to believe that the predators notice the difference via sight, sound and smell. A confident person is quite intimidating to carnivores, while a fearful one merely encourages predators to confront people. Therefore, unarmed people in the backcountry encourage misbehaviour in predators to the detriment of predators.

Secondly, and of great importance, is that inefficient hunting of predators conditions the animals negatively so that they avoid humans. Subsequently, hikers, campers, and picnickers can go into the woods in safety as carnivores stay away from humans. The Achilles heel of carnivores is being stalked systematically, just as they prey on smaller or weaker members of their own species. Carnivores are cannibalistic; and grizzly bears and wolves are no exception. Consequently, being stalked is very likely a terrifying experience to bears or wolves. Hunted carnivores negatively conditioned will coexist splendidly with humans. That’s the big lesson from our history where we lived together with carnivores in North America (or in Siberia). Where large carnivores are de facto protected, where they may multiply unimpeded, livestock, pets and eventually humans become their victims—let alone game animals.

---

TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: banglist; freedom; hunters; wild; wildlife

[marktwain]

In most of North America, by 1900 large predators had learned to avoid humans, because armed humans in the woods were so dangerous. Now, in 2025, many large predators, particularly bears, wolves and mountain lions, have had a few generations of strong legal protection. Many have learned that humans are no threat.

[ansel12]

I’m a strong believer in this.

[lowbridge]

Who ever thought it was a good idea to have a right to arm bears enshrined in the constitution?

[Carry_Okie]

Therefore, unarmed people in the backcountry encourage misbehaviour in predators to the detriment of predators.

Val Geist used to talk about this frequently, that in the 1950s in Western Canada wildlife was "absolutely well-behaved" until the invasion of "hikers."

[rktman]

Not with some hot sauce and ‘Tony’s’.

[riverrunner]

Having hiked thousands of miles in bear wolf and cougar county.

Being armed has kept me safe.

Animals that are hunted fear humans and tend to avoid them

[Lowell1775]

Pick up a concealed rifle and watch what a taunting crow does........VAMOOSE!

Or old Rabid Rover when a club is presented.....

In Mowgli’s Brother/Jungle Book.....the Daddy tiger teaches his son you can take a few of the little brown ones, but make it a habit and tall pale ones come with their deadly thunder sticks to hunt you down.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Hunted carnivores negatively conditioned will coexist splendidly with humans. That’s the big lesson from our history where we lived together with carnivores in North America (or in Siberia). Where large carnivores are de facto protected, where they may multiply unimpeded, livestock, pets and eventually humans become their victims—let alone game animals.

I think the average Leftist would be struck dumb by such an argument. After all, they saw all of these carnivores in Disney productions and know that they are harmless - white men with guns just insist on displaying toxic masculinity toward them.

[Uncle Miltie]

Thoughts on 9mm with 16+1 in semi-auto versus .357 with 6 in a revolver against black bear in the high Cascades of WA?

Either with Buffalo Bore hardcast…

[marktwain]

Either will work just fine. Black bears tend to break off attacks when they are hurt. Some can be very large, so deep penetrating bullets are called for.

My personal choice would be the semi-auto, but I have often carried a .357 magnum.

[logi_cal869]

Ironically, the same logic applies in the concrete jungle with the most dangerous species.

[metmom]

To our detriment.

Good article.

[eastexsteve]

Thoughts on 9mm with 16+1 in semi-auto versus .357 with 6 in a revolver against black bear in the high Cascades of WA? Either with Buffalo Bore hardcast…

.357 hands down.

[cpdiii]

“357 verses 9mm for black bear”

Get a bigger gun!

[Openurmind]

I think this is true in human societies also. Predators are wary of those who might be armed and can defend themselves.

[Natty Bumppo@frontier.net]

Few people truly appreciate how superior the sense of smell of most large predators is to ours.

If you are carrying a firearm, they can smell the powder, primer, and lubricants from great distances. Those that have been exposed to firearms being used will go to great lengths to avoid individuals carrying them.

For those who carry and spend time in the wilderness, hike the same path with and without a firearm (can’t use Hoppes 9 as your aftershave, either), and note the differences in the amounts and types of wildlife you see.