Wyoming: Bear Attack on Elk Hunters September, 2021

ammoland.com ^

[marktwain]

Tyler Barnard defensive shooting positions during a bear attack. The far person is where the bear was at during the first shot, the middle person is where Tyler ended up at the last shot. The person taking the picture is where the son was during the attack.

On September 27, 2021, Tyler Barnard was guiding a father-son pair of elk hunters in Wyoming, near Cody, near the Two Oceans pass in the Teton Wilderness. It is part of the Bridger-Teton National Forest, a few miles from the southern border of Yellowstone Park.  Rifle season started on September 20th. The temperature in Cody was near 85 degrees, well above average. They had shot a bull elk and had followed the blood trail for a mile before it dwindled and was lost as the sun dropped below the horizon. They looked again on the 28th. On the morning of the 29th, they had given up. It was a very nice bull.

A little before 8 a.m., they were on a game trail in the area. Then they smelled it.  A hint of dead elk.

They could not see the animal, but it was likely the bull they had shot. By law, they were required to take possession. They left their rifles on the horses and decided to look over the curve of the ridge. The direction indicated was over a slope with plenty of blowdowns and young pines.

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

I use to carry bear spray but it was ineffective. I switched over to a recording of Hillary speeches which immediately makes the bear run away once I hit play. Of course before I do, I wear extremely effective ear protection.

[mn-bush-man]

Am I just missing it or Is there no link for the rest of the story?

[riverrunner]

Here you go.

https://www.ammoland.com/2022/01/wyoming-bear-attack-on-elk-hunters-september-2021/

[riverrunner]

There has been a huge effort by the Anti-hunting anti-firearm’s anti-freedom crowd.

To push bear spray to save bears not humans.

People in the know that have used firearms on bears and other game animals know how effective they are.

VERY.

People who have trained and used spray if they have no agenda.

Know that is is a poor substitute for firearms in a deadly force Situation.

I have shot bears with rifles, shotguns, and handguns.

I have been trained and used spray.

When confronted by a critter that is faster, stronger, most of the time bigger and is always armed.

Yes, bears are always armed with cutting, slashing, puncturing, and impact weapons.

A good firearm is the best protection to have in hand.

[HighSierra5]

Too bad Lizard Cheney wasn’t hiking wearing a bear skin coat there in Wyoming.

[HighSierra5]

We only have black bears around here. They usually come around in late summer and fall. Most of the time they turn over the trash can and break branches on my fruit trees. Sometimes they are a light brown or auburn color but can get pretty big. If I see them close by I’ll fire a few rounds in the air and they take off. It’s the cougars that I’m more concerned with. I saw one last year that truly looks almost as big as an African lion. They’ll get you when you least expect it.

[Dusty Road]

Never understood why one would carry a pistol when they could carry a rifle. The 10 mm struggles to reach 750 ft/lbs while the lowly 30-06 makes 2800 to 2900 ft/lbs easy. The 300 magnums pulls 4000 ft/lbs and the larger 338 Winchester which I feel is about perfect for elk does about the same with a heavier bullet. If you’re in bear country carry something that can take on a bear. If your in big bear country where we’re talking Grizz and Browns carry far more than you need. If the law allows and I don’t see why it wouldn’t if you’re recovery a wounded animal, I’m carrying a rifle.

[Rebelbase]

” People tend to shoot high on charging bears.”

The guy on the Youtube channel, How to Hunt, says the same thing and to drop to a knee to make the shot have a better chance of hitting the bear.

[HighSierra5]

Why not carry both? Plus a Buck knife.

[stockpirate]

WOW brought tears to my eyes, what an event.

[Colorado Doug]

Never understood why one would carry a pistol when they could carry a rifle.

My Smith and Wesson .460 does just fine thank you very much. It can deliver 4000 ft pound delivery of a slug too. And all in a handy dandy pistol that can be brought to bare much faster than a rifle.

[Dusty Road]

Weight. The less I have to carry the better. Most of my elk hunting has been done on horseback but I have hoofed it a few times and you learn to keep the weight down. The best elk hunters I know carried a rifle, extra ammo, a 3 bladed pocket knife and a small hand axe. In an old GI fanny pack he carried a pen light flashlight, extra batteries, small survival tent, Para cord and fire starting gear. He never carried water since finding water wasn’t a problem, he’s drink a bunch before heading out and get what he could along the way. That man was my Pop and he kept the locker full of fresh meat, beef was a rarity for us.

[Dusty Road]

“”My Smith and Wesson .460 does just fine thank you very much. It can deliver 4000 ft pound delivery of a slug too.””

2800 maybe and that’s pushing it. Choice between carrying a 4 lb pistol or a 7 1/2 lb rifle, I’ll take the rifle and the accuracy that goes with it.

[Dusty Road]

“”And all in a handy dandy pistol that can be brought to bare much faster than a rifle.””

That’s debatable especially considering first shot accuracy. My father in law was an outfitter in Wyoming for over 25 years guiding for deer, elk, moose and sheep. While the clients carried their hunting rifles he carried an old Win 70 in 338 topped with a Lyman peep sight set up. He only had to shoot 3 bears over those years but they all went down hard. A Black bear tried to get in the tent with him one night, the other two were similar to this situation, they were trying to recover a wound elk.

[marktwain]

Because for defense, a pistol works better than a rifle.

It turns out, you don't need thousands of ft/lbs of energy to be effective.

Pistols are simply handier, and on you when they are needed, instead of leaning against a tree, or slung over the shoulder.

Over a hundred cases of pistol defenses against bears - they are 97% effective. Caliber is simply not that important, for a number of reasons.

Here is a recent case: Bear shot three times from 460 yards, with a .338 magnum. One shot to neck, hit nothing vital. One shot to chest, only holed one lung. One shot to shoulder, did not break shoulder.

Rifle then jammed in such a way the shooter could not clear it quickly. Large Grizzly boar charged the hunter and his sister (from 460 yds!). They retreated, got out of the way. The bear followed them until the hunter shot it and stopped it with his revolver, a Taurus 5 shot in .454 Casull, as I recall.

[Philsworld]

I also have a S/W .460 Should be no problem taking out a bear with it. I have a red dot and bipod on it. It’s a tack driver at the rifle range. I’d have to look but I think it’s a 13 inch barrel and it has a compensator. (ammo is a little pricey, if you can get it). 5 shot single or double action and you don’t have to mess with a bolt action of a rifle.

[Dusty Road]

I understand but look at the way this story starts. Shooting at a bear at 460 yards is stretching any rifle let alone a 338 and it seems the results were rather predictable, wounded bear. Now given a choice between shooting an aggressive bear at let’s say 25 yards with a 454 Casull or a 300 Win mag which would you choose? We’re talking rock chunking distance not 460 yards where the round has already lost close to a third of it’s energy and starting to drop fast. Hey if a person wants to carry a pistol that’s fine but like I said in my first post carry enough and in my opinion the 10mm isn’t enough even for black bear, I’d start with a 44 mag or 45 LC and go from there.

[marktwain]

Now given a choice between shooting an aggressive bear at let’s say 25 yards with a 454 Casull or a 300 Win mag which would you choose?

The point is, in many cases, they do not have a choice. Rifles work well if they are carried ready to use, and people are diligent in always having them with them.

But rifles are simply much more difficult to carry ready to use and always available. They are more difficult to use in very close quarters, and as happened in the example, rifles can fail and run out of ammunition, where pistols are usually reserved for emergencies.

So... Rifles are fine, and work very well against bears... if you keep them ready to use and ready for use.

I recall another case, where a person just crossed a stream. He had a rifle. He heard the bear charging him. But, he carried the rifle without a round in the chamber, and by the time he had chambered a round, the bear was so close it batted the rifle aside and severely mauled him. He never got a shot off.

As I recall, he ended up killing that grizzly bear with a sheath knife. He survived... just. Terribly mauled, but able to walk half a mile or more before he found help.

I am not advocating for pistols exclusively. It is just the fact that pistols, by any objective measure, work well to defend against bears.

Rifles can work well to defend against bears, but the record is they are not quite as effective, primarily because people do not keep them ready to use and always at hand.

[Lurker]

“Never understood why one would carry a pistol when they could carry a rifle.”

They’re easier to bring to bear, no pun intended, quickly in a situation like this. Increased ammunition supply could also be a factor. Most bolt rifles hold 3 or 4 rounds and are much more difficult to center on target quickly. Follow up shots are also much, much slower.

There’s more to the question than just muzzle energy here. If that were the sole factor a lever gun in 45-70 would be an obvious choice. But when 600 pounds of angry bear is closing in on you at 30 MPH an auto loading pistol in 10 mm with hard cast bullets designed for deep penetration is not a bad option at all.

L