William Stinson posted this on Facebook today.

Now that the lakes are melting and the temps have warmed up - the bears are coming out of their holes.

So, it is the time to think about sidearm/firearm selection for carrying while flying. The caliber debate is probably as old and handguns themselves. Opinions abound with regards to caliber/cartridge selection and revolver versus semi-automatics.

Most opinions are based upon folklore rather than definitive real-life data from self-defense shootings of bears in the field. From my time working a side gig at the Cabela's Gun Library here in Anchorage for a few years - the majority opinion among self-appointed "experts" appeared to be that a wheel gun in .44 Magnum was the minimum - and even the preferred sidearm of choice.

I can't say that I agree with that opinion. My preference would be a 12 ga. shotgun with a Brenneke Classic Magnum slug. But, since this discussion is limited to handguns/sidearms - I decided to dig around the internet for data collected from real-life bear encounters where handguns were used for self defense.

What appeared in the searches is the following article that was written in 2018. The determination and definitive fact is not based upon caliber or design of the handgun, but was to - in fact - HAVE a sidearm/handun and know how to use it. (Ammunition and projectile selection is crucial - and what I think we should discuss amongst the group) The use of handguns as a bear defense tool was 97% effective - any handgun - in the data for the article.

You can read the entire article here:

https://www.ammoland.com/…/def...st-bears-with-pis…/…

But, I have reproduced the data and conclusions below.

"To summarize, we have found 37 verified cases where pistols were used to defend against bear attacks. Included, for complete data reporting, are two cases where bears were shot at with both rifles and pistols, making it difficult to determine the efficacy of pistols alone.

Of the 35 strictly pistol defense cases, one was a clear failure. That is the use of the .357 against an Alaskan grizzly by a geologist on 20 June, 2010. It is likely the bear was not hit in that incident.

There are four successful defenses with 9 mm pistols. The three grizzly bears were killed, the black bear was wounded and ran off.

Two of the three uses of the .357 were successful. One was against a grizzly that was stopped with one shot, but then escaped. The other grizzly was killed with six shots fired.

There were three uses of .40 caliber pistols, all against black bears, all successful, all of the bears were killed.

There was one use of a 10 mm pistol against a grizzly. 4 or 5 shots were fired. It was successful and the bear was killed.

There were two uses of .41 magnum revolvers. Both were against grizzly bears, both were successful and the bears were killed.

There were twelve uses of .44 magnum revolvers. All were successful. One was against a black bear, it was mortally wounded but finished off with shotgun slugs. Eleven were against grizzly bears. Two were driven of with “warning shots”. One was driven off, without evidence of being wounded. One was wounded and not recovered. One was wounded and finished off at the scene with a shotgun slug. Six were killed without further assistance.

There were four uses of .45 caliber pistols against bears. All were successful. One was against a black bear, which was killed with additional shots, probably from another handgun. The other three were grizzly bears killed with multiple hits from the .45 caliber pistols.

There was one use of a .45 Super pistol. It was successful. The grizzly bear was killed with one shot.

There was one use of a .454 Casull revolver. 4 or 5 shots were fired and the grizzly bear was finished off at the scene with a rifle brought by the defender's wife.

There were three cases of pistol defenses against bears where the pistol caliber was not identified. One was a grizzly, which ran off. It was not determined if the bear was wounded or not. The other two were black bears that were killed with the pistol fire.

There was one case where both .357 magnum and .44 magnum revolvers were used. The grizzly bear was killed.

In total, there were 8 defenses against black bears and 27 defenses against grizzly bears.

One pistol failure out of 35 cases translates to a 97% success rate for the use of handguns against bears.

Successful bear defenses with a pistol are probably under-reported, much like successful firearm defenses against criminals. If a predatory black bear is shot and runs off, there are strong incentives for the shooter not to report the incident. Incidents, where no human is injured, are seldom considered news. This creates a strong selection bias against successful pistol defenses against bears.

Predatory black bear attacks are the most common fatal black bear attacks in North America. Only 8 of the pistol defenses listed above are defenses against black bears or 23%. It is reasonable to believe there should be about twice that number. Black bear predatory attacks often give potential victims good opportunities to use a pistol effectively.

I have two reported instances of successful bear defenses with a .38 special revolver. One against a black bear, and one against a grizzly. I have not been able to verify either. I have found two more reported cases of the successful use of the 10 mm pistol, and one more for the .357 magnum, but have not been able to verify them.

Even in the age of the Internet, reports can become difficult to find after a few years. I recall an incident where an Alaskan State Trooper killed a grizzly bear with his duty pistol, while an associate with a 12 gauge shotgun did not fire. I have not been able to find that report. It may have been the 2013 incident where unarmed Thomas Puerta was killed and eaten. I am not certain.

If anyone has sources for that incident, or of others not recorded here, either successes or failures, please let us know.

Pistol defense failures against bears should be widely reported. When humans are injured by bears, it is news.

In this compilation of incidents, one was a failure. The .357 magnum was fired three times. The shooter was mauled after the first shot and after the second and third shots. It seems likely the shooter missed all three shots. It is the only bear defense with a pistol, that failed, that we have found.

One failure out of 35 incidents is better than a 97% success rate for pistol defenses against bears. Using a pistol to defend against bear attacks seems to be a viable option.

The often cited Efficacy of firearms for bear deterrence in Alaska by Tom S. Smith, Stephen Herrero, and others, included 37 instances of a handgun being present when a bear attacked a human. The instances collected were from 1883 to 2009. They recorded 6 failures to stop the attack out of the 37 instances. That is an 84% success rate. Pistol and ammunition technology have greatly improved since 1883.

The authors of the Efficacy of firearms have not released their data. There could be as many as six instances of overlap between the Efficacy of firearms data set and our collection, so a combination of the data is not useful unless the Effficacy of firearms data set is released. We cannot know how many of the six “failures” of the efficacy study might be because the handgun was never attempted to be used, was unable to be accessed because it was buried in a pack, or for other reasons.

All of the instances cited in this article can be verified independently.

©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included."

This article brings up some questions and points in my mind.

First - making good hits is THE most important thing when using a handgun for self defense. Therefore, select a sidearm that you can control and shoot well. Good hits - with any caliber - is always better than a near miss with the biggest baddest super magnum flame throwing beast of a handgun.

Second - bear attacks happen FAST. If the sidearm is big, heavy, and bulky - can you draw, aim, and get good hits quickly? Can you control the handgun to stay on target and successfully make follow up hits?

Third - expect that more than one hit will be needed to end the threat. More bullets is better than fewer when it comes to capacity of the chosen firearm. Is a 5-shot revolver enough? Doubtful that you will have time needed for a reload - of any handgun - in a bear defense encounter.

Fourth - ammunition/projectile selection is crucial. When dealing with bears and other dangerous animals - PENETRATION is as important as getting good hits on the target. Bullet selection should be solid, non-expanding projectiles. Hardcast lead or solid copper bullets are the best, followed by full metal jacketed lead bullets. Most commercial main-stream ammunition manufacturers do not load cartridges with defense against dangerous animals in mind. Specialty or boutique manufacturers do make such ammunition specific for bear defense.

My personal favorite manufacturers are Underwood Ammunition, Buffalo Bore, and Grizzly Cartirdges. Double Tap, HSM, and others exist that can be obtained here in Alaska as well.

I am curious to hear other member's thoughts - and what your chosen platform, caliber, and cartridge selection has been. I have a few platforms that I may use - but my usual choice is an HK USP Tactical 45 that has been converted to fire .460 Rowland cartridges with a 13-rd capacity, using Underwood Ammo 255gr Hardcast lead bullets chronographed at 1400 fps. It is a compromise with a big heavy bullet traveling fast from a controllable and reliable pistol with a decent magazine capacity that can be comfortably carried in a chest rig.

Thanks for reading through this long-winded post. But I think it is an important topic for back-woods aviators to consider and discuss.

The latest up date.

63 cases.

https://gunwatch.blogspot.com/...-effective-when.html

If any body has any more verifiable accounts let me know I well make sure the author gets them.

Head shots? the 357 with a Keith simi wadcuter hardened should work just fine as will some others for head shots and that's about it IMO..Should a bear get hold of me I want to empty the pistol as fast as possible..I prefer a S&W 41 magnum myself, six in the bears chest if he has me down under him, and then the fettlel position I suppose..

Never shot a bear with a pistol and won't be in a position to do so anytime soon..I just like the 41 magnum, its lighter recoil and the ability to control it in fast double action shooting..Shot a couple of deer with it and a black bear and several treed Mt. Lions..I never have been fond of the 357 on deer with shoulder shots, they tend to run quit a ways in my experience, as a combat pistol its about as good as it gets with proper bullets..

Short shotguns or massive handguns may seem attractive and you can Use whatever you want, it's your life, but unless you are comfortable and competent with your choice, and have it on you at all times, you are unlikely to be successful.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Short shotguns or massive handguns may seem attractive and you can Use whatever you want, it's your life, but unless you are comfortable and competent with your choice, and have it on you at all times, you are unlikely to be successful.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
+1

+1 & +1 more

I agree,you must be comfortable with your piece.Several years ago at the SHOT show I was talking to the S+W rep. about their new titanium 44 mag.He looked me straight in the eye + said,"I work for S+W but this lightweight hurts. It was all I could do to finish a cylinder."Carry what you're comfortable with.

quote:

Originally posted by NormanConquest:
I agree,you must be comfortable with your piece.Several years ago at the SHOT show I was talking to the S+W rep. about their new titanium 44 mag.He looked me straight in the eye + said,"I work for S+W but this lightweight hurts. It was all I could do to finish a cylinder."Carry what you're comfortable with.

No need to shoot full power loads in the lite weights if your a hand loader.

It is easy to come up with a very effective load. Yet will not be hard on you.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by NormanConquest:
I agree,you must be comfortable with your piece.Several years ago at the SHOT show I was talking to the S+W rep. about their new titanium 44 mag.He looked me straight in the eye + said,"I work for S+W but this lightweight hurts. It was all I could do to finish a cylinder."Carry what you're comfortable with.

No need to shoot full power loads in the lite weights if your a hand loader.

It is easy to come up with a very effective load. Yet will not be hard on you.

Yeah, right.

The same limp-wristy snowflakes who are 'okay' with shooting a titanium fly-weight .44Mag snubby are somehow not okay with a 15-rd 10mm Glock for bush carry?

Please explain that logic again.

Thanks.

quote:

The same limp-wristy snowflakes who are 'okay' with shooting a titanium fly-weight .44Mag snubby are somehow not okay with a 15-rd 10mm Glock for bush carry?Please explain that logic again.

Please explain what you are talking about.

X2,that kinda went by me as well.

I used to carry a S&W 629 in bear country, but it was too cumbersome.

I now carry a Taurus 44 Tracker. It’s a bitch to shoot but a joy to carry. It’s not a target pistol and its not for plinking, it’s for shooting a big animal at spitting distance.

I spoke with a bear attack victim and he said always keep your pistol firmly attached to your person. A bear comes in so fast you probably won’t get a shot off unless you’re already in a shooting stance.

BH63

quote:

I spoke with a bear attack victim and he said always keep your pistol firmly attached to your person. A bear comes in so fast you probably won’t get a shot off unless you’re already in a shooting stance

Here are 63 cases where handguns were used to defend against bear attacks.

Read them and decide for yourself.

Situational awareness and the willingness to act are very important factors. In the time periods of a bear attack.

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/...-effective-63-cases/

I have about 3 or 4 books on bear attacks. The guy I spoke to rounded a bend in the trail. A black bear was coming down the trail and immediately charged. He had a rifle in his hands but had no time to even raise it. He was an experienced hunter who grew up in bear country.

Occasionally, attack victims spot the bear ahead of time, but other times the bear is either hunting the victims, or they surprise each other at close range.

As for heavy recoil on lightweight pistols, if shooting a bear in self defense, I doubt if you would even notice recoil. I know when shooting an elephant or buff with my .416 Rem Mag, I don’t ever remember noticing recoil, nor does it interfere with shot placement.

BH63

One can search and find a story that backs up or disproves what one wants to know.

Most of the time one has the ability to defend ones self.

Not noticing recoil for a single shot has nothing to do with not being affected by recoil.
Having to recover from recoil during a life threatening situation is very real and an important consideration

Agreed.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Not noticing recoil for a single shot has nothing to do with not being affected by recoil.
Having to recover from recoil during a life threatening situation is very real and an important consideration

The physical ability to bring hard recoiling hand gun back on target is very real.

The reality is less than 1 in 50 million will ever have to use a pistol to kill a bear in self defense.

If a bear clamps down on your shooting arm you might be lucky to get off even one shot, so I want to make it a good one.

But again, whatever gives you peayof mind.

BH63

I would also add that using a gun that allows you to make multiple, rapid hits may give you a better chance than some handcannon that is much slower for repeat shots.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I would also add that using a gun that allows you to make multiple, rapid hits may give you a better chance than some handcannon that is much slower for repeat shots.

My hard cast 315gr WFN 44mag loads at 1275 to 1320 depending on the revolver.

Can really put the smack on critters.

I have seen it penetrate 3 plus feet in a bear.

But follow up shots are sure slower then a 240 at 1100.

I always asked is it better to have more power or faster follow up hits.

The most important is having a firearm when you need it.

having been dealing with big bears since 1980 I can assure you that during a bear charge and a massive adrenaline dump to your system, everybody's fine motor skills go to hell.

You can bet your life on the possibility of a single first round hit from your heavy loaded 44, 475 Linebaugh or .500 whatever to stop the charge. Knowing that even heavy rifle cartridges often can't do it with single hits.
Or use a pistol with lighter recoil, assuming it gives adequate penetration of course, and giving yourself a better chance due to the ability to make multiple hits.

It is your life and your choice

Only time I’ve ever felt terminally at risk from a bear was very recently and wasn’t guiding grizz / brown, it was in the off season job bush piloting and with a black bear of all things, despite nearly all my outfitting bears being coastal Grizz. I had a .224 single shot, and it almost worked well at a dozen paces. The shot entered just below and inward of the eye, you can see the little entrance hole below, but ended up going down and along the palette, into the throat making for an enraged but very distracted bear spinning and gushing blood at a range where droplets got on my boots. One more shot at spit on it range in the heart while it was spinning in front of me and it fell and started moaning. I had no chance of breaking bone with that rifle, a 3 3/4lb modern rook rifle.

I hesitate to tell this story as one bear defence story usually sprouts many, and many of those I struggle with. The lessons I took were to use a gun that penetrates, in a straight line, and when it comes to rifles stay over 2,200fps impacts preferably from previous experience. That and make it light so you’ll actually carry it all the time, that’s why I had my rook rifle. Phil you saw my reaction on the company Instagram I built a .375 wildcat that fits 5 down in a 6 1/2lb Mauser walking rifle. Naming it the .375 Kemano after my best bear river.

quote:

I built a .375 wildcat that fits 5 down in a 6 1/2lb Mauser walking rifle. Naming it the .375 Kemano after my best bear river.

Tell us more about the cartridge.

Thank you.

Angus, your Mauser looks ideal.
And that little rook (bear ?) rifle is exquisite

quote:

Only time I’ve ever felt terminally at risk from a bear was very recently and wasn’t guiding grizz / brown, it was in the off season job bush piloting and with a black bear of all things, despite nearly all my outfitting bears being coastal Grizz.

Interesting I would like to heard the circumstances behind it.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

I built a .375 wildcat that fits 5 down in a 6 1/2lb Mauser walking rifle. Naming it the .375 Kemano after my best bear river.

Tell us more about the cartridge.

Thank you.

The .375 Kemano as I’m calling it is a .375x57mm improved, neck shortened to .250” and shoulder bumped forward to the .30-06 position, and steepened and blown out slightly. It will headspace on the .30-06 / Whelen shoulder with a slight crush fit, to simplify making brass. Just trim the .375 expanded .30-06 or .35 Whelen brass to 57mm and load, after the first firing they take full shape. The pre-firing brass will headspace however and take the powder load I’m using (56.0grs H4895 under a 235gr Speer for 2,650fps), but you gain a couple grains capacity after firing and I’ve been shooting it at 2,715fps at 57.5grs with no pressure yet (case head expansion .0004” or less, primers not flattened yet). I went with the x57 case length after mocking up a Hawk / Scovill and a .375 Whelen and finding it very deep seated with my preferred bullets and pointy monos in particular. By getting rid of some of the .30-06 / Whelen neck but keeping the shoulder position and expanding it slightly was able to edge ahead of .375 Whelen and fit my magazine much better. I don’t think it’s doing anything new or special but it’s fun and fills my niche for a light walking rifle.

The bear is a long story and is a discussion for the campfire.

Thanks for the cartridge info.

Sounds quite a bit like the Mannlicher model 1910 in 9.5x56. I assume your model has a bit more K.O. power.It was an innovation in it's short life until 1911 when H+H came out with their .375 + that was all she wrote.

You’re on point, so much so that I had Stuart build a 9.5x57 MS first on his Satterlee titanium M98, and found myself wanting more speed. I really want to see impacts in the mid 2000s FPS for bears, and the 9.5x57 is not a speedy round. The .375 I built here gains 300fps+ over my 9.5, benefitting from more barrel as well to be fair (24” compared to 19”). I suspect it’s 200fps faster than the 9.5x57 on straight merit. Nothing that’ll change the landscape of handloading; but it’s the same distance ahead of the 9.5x57 that it’s behind .375 Ruger with the same powders (175fps slower than the .375 Ruger, bullet and powder for like). Won’t be something that’ll make a name for itself, but it is close to my ideal bear rifle.

I had to run two reamers to cut the chamber, the first of which was a 9.5x57 reamer. Then a Gibbs reamer with a .375 pilot to cut the shoulder. I’ll probably have a proper .375 Kemano reamer and die set made for the pleasure of seeing them on the shelf.

quote:

Won’t be something that’ll make a name for itself, but it is close to my ideal bear rifle.

Stainless and syt stocked would make it into a better Ideal bear rifle

But that just by opinion.

Already been there, with the Satterlee and my stainless Model 70 .375 H&Hs. I’m fully nitriding this Mauser is the plan and they’re as good as stainless after that, in some ways better as you can run them dry / no oil to catch grit.

Angus, for someone who knows and cares for their rifle coatings can work great but for most folks I have always held the opinion that the outside of the rifle shouldn't be much more rust resistant than the inside.
Sort of like an idiot light.

I know the late Alaskan Master guide Hal Waugh always spoke highly of the 358 Win as a fine round for big bears and one of my most experienced guides (PWS) built a 358 Win and used it a few seasons.

I certainly like my 9.3x62 for all around use and have never noticed any difference between it and the .375 on big bears.

Totally agree Phil, going to nitride the barrel inside and out. Extends the life of them too as I shoot too much not that I’m likely to ever shoot out a .30-06 improved capacity .375’s throat. Should last most of a century.

On the .375 Kemano don’t want to take over the thread so a final update. She’s all done tweaking, shooting 235gr ER Raptors at 2,750fps, more room for another grain or two but that’s plenty for me. Forming brass I just load factory .30-06 and fire, trim the neck, and load. Little ring on the .30-06 shoulder is the crush headspace I set tight to make forming easy. Alternatively the cream of wheat method and a 7x57 case pops out ready to load cases too. For data it’s nearly identical to .375 Whelen Ackley Improved.

quote:

Originally posted by Angus Morrison:
Already been there, with the Satterlee and my stainless Model 70 .375 H&Hs. I’m fully nitriding this Mauser is the plan and they’re as good as stainless after that, in some ways better as you can run them dry / no oil to catch grit.

Sounds like a good plan.

quote:

Originally posted by Angus Morrison:
Totally agree Phil, going to nitride the barrel inside and out. Extends the life of them too as I shoot too much not that I’m likely to ever shoot out a .30-06 improved capacity .375’s throat. Should last most of a century.

On the .375 Kemano don’t want to take over the thread so a final update. She’s all done tweaking, shooting 235gr ER Raptors at 2,750fps, more room for another grain or two but that’s plenty for me. Forming brass I just load factory .30-06 and fire, trim the neck, and load. Little ring on the .30-06 shoulder is the crush headspace I set tight to make forming easy. Alternatively the cream of wheat method and a 7x57 case pops out ready to load cases too. For data it’s nearly identical to .375 Whelen Ackley Improved.

FINALLY! A reason to read this thread. Cool round. If you had a 9.3x62 shooting 235grain bullets, would your cartridge have any velocity gain over it? I like the idea of your cartridge. 9.3x62 is great, but we have better selection of .375 bullets and would afford better flexibility in loading.

Your neck sizing step down is the same way I make my .30 Gibbs cases,then fire form in chamber.

I sure liked my 9.5x62 ( aka 375 Scovill)
But when the 9.3x62 became popular and I picked up a couple and my guides were borrowing them, there was a very big chance that the 9.5x62 ammo would get mixed with the 9.3 ammo

quote:

Originally posted by NormanConquest:
Your neck sizing step down is the same way I make my .30 Gibbs cases,then fire form in chamber.

Done that same expand one size above, then size down to make a shoulder for fire forming process in other wildcats works great. This oddly enough though is a factory .30-06 round fired in the .375 Kemano chamber, it fireforms a case that’s just too long.

Have to trim the neck to that false shoulder, then load and it’s ready to go. By shortening the case to x57 length I’m able to reach the lands with the pointier bullets and make mag length, without losing case capacity as only the neck shrinks.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I sure liked my 9.5x62 ( aka 375 Scovill)
But when the 9.3x62 became popular and I picked up a couple and my guides were borrowing them, there was a very big chance that the 9.5x62 ammo would get mixed with the 9.3 ammo

Good reason to simplify, risky business. You need a .375 Kemano now no risk there of chambering in a 9.3x62, reamer and gauges are free to borrow. 9.3x62 is popular here too in the bush, great round.

A well used case after full pressure firings,

Just great! Now you got the little wheels turning, thinking of another rifle I don't need.