No new details in Denali bear shooting(AK)

FAIRBANKS — Officials at Denali National Park and Preserve have released no new details or information regarding the fatal shooting of a grizzly bear by a hiker on Friday in the 6-million-acre park south of Fairbanks.

Park officials on Tuesday still had not released the name of the hiker who shot the bear, and rangers are investigating the shooting to determine if it was justified, according to park spokeswoman Kris Fister. She did not say if the park service was contemplating criminal charges against the shooter.

A new law passed by Congress in February made it legal to carry firearms in the area of the park where the bear was shot but illegal to discharge them. Rangers said it was the first known instance of a grizzly bear being shot by a visitor in the wilderness portion of Denali, formerly called Mount McKinley National Park.

The man who shot the bear was hiking with a woman Friday evening in the Igloo Canyon area when the bear emerged from trailside brush and charged the woman, according to accounts from the hikers to park officials.

The man fired nine rounds from a .45-caliber, semiautomatic pistol at the bear, which then stopped and walked into the brush.

The two hiked about 1 1/2 miles out to Denali Park Road to report the shooting to rangers, who restricted access to backcountry units in the area for fear that the bear was wounded and dangerous.

On Saturday, rangers returned and found the dead bear about 100 feet from the shooting site.

All of these Bear murder threads have done nothing but run on about what weapon was used, what cartridge, what load. But, what about the poor bear? When will we see justice? How long will our society tolerate these cretins who wander through the pristine wilderness slaughtering the wildlife? And for what reason, just because the bear was trying to make lunch of these interlopers? My heart cries for the soul of this poor bear. How will the struggle against Global Warming be possible if all of our furry friends are summarily executed at the whim of a pistol packing lunatic.

All of us down here at Ghetto Lofts voluntarily surrender all of our firearms when we put down our $150,000 deposit for the glorious opportunity to live here in downtown Detroit, where the oppression of a Capitalist society is on view everyday. We hold weekly candlelight vigils for those loft owners cut down by yet another display of our racist society.

I hope these people get the punishment that they deserve for hastening the extinction of our beloved Polar Bears.

"Does the description of the killing of the bear sound plausable? Is it be possible to shoot a grizzly bear nine times, having it then stop charging, walk off into the bush and die? The article does not say where and how many bullets actually struck the bear, but is it possible?"

Absolutely. I think one thing to keep in mind is that the story doesn't sepcify the size of the bear. When we hear the words "Grizzly Bear" our mind automatically leaps to the huge specimens we might see in the zoo, in a movie or on the pages of hunting magazines. The fact is that in the wild, there will be some bigger bears, and some smaller ones, so there's a chance this was a (relatively) small grizzly of say 3-400 lbs or so.

Any firearm is capable of fatally wounding virtually any creature....even a lucky shot with a .22LR that enters an eye socket and tunnels into the brain pan will kill a large creature...of course, the reliance on luck in such situations is far more likely going to result in a mauled hiker than a dead bear.

Bears are in a sense, "heavily armored" given their heavy bone structure, thick hide, and layers of subcutaneous fat. There are a number of considerations behind bullet selection. First, you want the projectile to stop in the target. A bullet that blows right through an animal transfers the bulk of its kinetic energy into the backstop and not the target. In light skinned game, this is accomplished by using rapidly expanding bullets, typically with a hollow point and a thin copper jacket. This allows the bullet to expand, and ideally expend the entirety of its energy in the target. It also has the secondary effect of creating a larger wound channel as the diameter of the bullet increases...doing additional damage to blood vessels and contributing to a quicker "bleed out." In heavy game, expansion is generally not an issue, because the density of muscle, bone and sinew is going to stop the bullet anyways, and in such cases, penetration is the desired result. A lot of big African game and large American bears have been hunted with either FMJ bullets or soft points, that deform far less than a hollow point, but stand a much greater chance of retaining their integrity and momentum as they smash through muscle, bone and sinew and hopefully do some damage to internal organs.

How does this translate to a .45 (presumably an ACP)? Well, you already have a comparatively large wound channel based strictly on the diameter of the projectile. What you lack are some of the secondary effects you'd obtain with the velocity of a rifle or even a magnum chambering in a revolver. The account to me seems more than possible, but also quite likely. I doubt any reasonably intelligent person would deliberately go bear hunting (poaching) with just a .45 ACP...so I'm guessing it was a defensive scenario. If they hit the bear with it, the bear was probably close enough to be a credible threat. And yes, I think a bear that sustained a few hits would have enough left in it (especially considering the adrenaline) to saunter off a good distance to die.

An off-the-shelf Chip McCormick magazine (for a full sized Govt model M1911) holds 8 rounds. FIne and well made magazine - I see them in the store all the time and they seem to sell well.

SO if the hiker was nutz enuf to carry in Condition One.... 9 rounds sounds about right.

Or the hiker could have been carrying a Tarus 24/7 Pro with a 14 rd magazine

Or a XD, or a Glock, or whatever-. THe news stories have never been specific, and the folks seem to be from Outside, as none of the local ‘news’ sources have tried for an interview.

But ya, I suppose if you carried a M1911 or knockoff 45, you would have the magazine in the weapon and two additional magazines for 24 rounds....

After a few conversations with my guide, I see why he carries a 375.

Ain't no way I'd feel good about a shotgun against a wonded brownie.

Many guides discourage use of 300 Mags, prefer hunters carry 338 or bigger.

I've had my 300 Wby Colt Sauer for 35 years, killed over 200 deer with it, so guide is comfortable with it.

After listening to a few of his stories, I'm far less comfy with it than before hearing them. But I'll use it, while NOT letting the guide with the BIG gun outta my sight.

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.