Bear Spray or Bullets in Grizzly Country

Facts be damned, environmental groups insist that hunters can and should use bear spray, not a firearm. According to Man Is Prey (2007), “Several conservation groups, concerned about the needless killing of grizzly bears by hunters who are defending themselves, have petitioned those states surrounding Yellowstone National Park to require hunters to carry bear spray.”

Needless killing? Evidently, the IGBC agrees with environmentalists because the IGBC’s grizzly bear mortality reduction plan includes serious discussions about mandatory bear spray for hunters on federal lands in grizzly country. The IGBC and bear spray advocates are sure to put even more heat on hunters when Tom Smith and Stephen Herrero release a long anticipated study on the use of firearms for protection from bears Alaska.

Preliminary data indicates guns are successful for self-defense about 70% of the time. When the results are published, bear spray advocates will undoubtedly compare the success rate for firearms to the 90% + success rate for bear spray and proclaim, “See, this proves hunters should use bear spray.”

Actually, comparing statistics on bear spray to statistics on firearms merely proves the adage that statistics are meaningless. Even if bear spray outperforms firearms on paper, it’s readily apparent bear spray is not an option for a hunter in the field who’s holding a rifle when a grizzly charges him.

It seems unlikely the IGBC’s 2009 bear spray blitz will significantly reduce grizzly bear mortality. Even if hunters are required to carry bear spray, using it is another matter. What about hunter safety? The IGBC’s failure to provide hunters with the same information on firearms handling that state and federal employees get during bear safety courses guarantees that bears will continue to injure hunters.

Contributed by
Dave Smith

Pages: 1 2