Ultimately, the most relevant stat to consider if probably fatal bear attacks within a Canadian National/Provincial Parks (it sounds like guns aren't necessarily prohibited in the US parks), and how many of these might have been mitigated with a firearm? I'll actually put in a bit of work here, but this list may not be comprehensive:
1. Doug Inglis, 62, male
2. Jenny Gusse, 62, Female [15] September 29, 2023 Wild Red Deer River Valley, Banff National Park, Alberta A response team trained in wildlife attacks were mobilized, after receiving an alert from an inReach GPS device at about 8 p.m. on Friday Sept 29, 2023, but weather conditions at the time did not allow for helicopter use, leading the team to travel to the location by ground through the night. The response team arrived at 1 a.m. and found two deceased individuals and their dog (Tress), also killed. A grizzly bear displaying aggressive behavior was encountered and euthanized at the site.[16][17]
Seems unlikely a gun would have helped; perhaps could have saved one of them
3. (Black Bear) Jacqueline Perry, 30, female September 6, 2005 Wild Missinaibi Lake Provincial Park, Ontario Perry was killed in an attack at a remote campsite.[108] Her husband was seriously injured trying to protect her with a Swiss Army knife, and later was given a Star of Courage award from Governor General Michaëlle Jean.[109] Ministry of Natural Resources staff shot and killed the bear near the area where the fatal attack occurred.[110]
Gun may have helped; hard to say if it would have been soon enough to save her life
4. Isabelle Dubé, 35, female June 5, 2005 Wild Canmore, Alberta Dubé was killed while jogging with two friends on the Bench Trail. After an initial attack, Dubé climbed a tree while her friends sought help. The bear brought Dubé down from the tree and mauled her.[133][134] Fish and wildlife officers shot and killed the bear.[134] At the time of the attack, the trail was closed, and the public had been told to avoid it.[135] A few days earlier, the bear had been relocated from Canmore to Banff National Park.[133]
Gun may have helped, though hard to say how likely 3 women would be to carry a gun(s) while jogging.
5. (Black Bear) Raymond Kitchen, 56, male
6. Patti McConnell, 37, female August 14, 1997 Wild Liard River Hot Springs Provincial Park, British Columbia McConnell died from injuries while defending herself and her 13-year-old son Kelly from a black bear attack on a boardwalk to the hot springs. Kitchen heard the attack in progress, and was killed while attempting to rescue. Kelly and a 20-year-old man were also injured. The bear was shot while standing over the victims.[141][142] McConnell's son received a Star of Courage for his attempt to save his mother. Kitchen also received the honor, posthumously.[143]
gun may have helped, but it's worth noting the number of humans that may have been caught in crossfire
7. (Black bear) Raymond Jakubauskas, 32, male
8. Carola Frehe, 48, female October 11, 1991 Wild Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario While they were setting up camp on Bates Island, a black bear broke both of their necks. The bear then dragged their bodies into the woods and consumed the remains. When police arrived five days later, the bear was guarding the bodies. A park naturalist called the attack "right off the scale of normal bear behavior".[149][150]
a gun may have helped; seems more likely to save one of them than both
9. Christine Courtney, 32, female July 5, 1996 Wild Kluane National Park, Yukon Courtney was killed while hiking on the Slim's Valley trail in Kluane National Park. Her husband was also attacked but survived. Park wardens killed the bear.[163]
gun may have helped
10. Trevor Percy-Lancaster, 40, male September 15, 1992 Wild Jasper National Park, Alberta Percy-Lancaster and his wife were setting up camp in an isolated area of the Tonquin Valley. They surprised a bear, and began running away. The bear initially caught Percy-Lancaster's wife, and then he distracted the bear, which turned on him.[168][169]
don't want to victim blame, especially considering it was 31 years ago and I don't know what conventional wisdom was at the time, but I find it hard to imagine proficient deployment of a gun instead of fleeing
11. Ernest Cohoe, 38, male August 24, 1980 Wild near Banff, Alberta While fishing with a friend just north of Banff, Alberta, a bear charged and bit off part of Cohoe's face. He died a week later as a result of the injuries.[193][194]
gun may have helped...though hard to say if it would have precluded the charge
In every case where a gun may have helped, bear spray may also have been just as effective (not listed in these summaries, would have to dive deeper to see if it was deployed). If bear spray was present but not deployed for whatever reason, it seems likely that a firearm would also not have been deployed for those same reasons.
So it's really a question of how many times has bear spray been insufficient, and for what reason? If the reason was inaccuracy, then a firearm is unlikely to have fared better. Properly deployed, you can fire ~4 good bursts from a can. So maybe bullets #5 and beyond would be the difference maker.
Without reading deeply into each of these incidents, we only know of 1 can of emptied bear spray
43 years, 11 fatalities where guns were prohibited as an option. You'd have to dive more deeply to consider relative gun use vs. national park backcountry use (though many of these were not far off the beaten track), but I can't fathom any way to twist the numbers to conclude it is safer to be in the presence of a firearm than it is to be in bear-country without one.
A few incidents where guns were present and failed to save (there are many more, I wasn't really looking for them):
12. Claudia Huber, 42, female October 14, 2014 Wild near Teslin, Yukon A 25-year-old healthy male grizzly bear broke into a home and chased the victim and her husband outside. The bear pursued and fatally attacked Ms. Huber. Her husband, Matthias Liniger, shot at the bear and killed it.[69]
13. Rick Cross, 54, male September 7, 2014 Wild Kananaskis Country, Alberta Cross, a hunter, was killed by a mother bear when he accidentally got between her and her cubs. Park rangers stated that it appeared that Cross managed to fire his rifle before being overwhelmed. RCMP said it appeared he wandered into the area where the mother and cub were feeding on a dead deer.[71]
14. Ken Novotny, 53, male September 17, 2014 Wild near Norman Wells, Northwest Territories While on a hunting trip near Norman Wells, Novotny was charged and struck by a bear. Friends reported Novotny had just killed a moose and was processing the carcass when the bear "came out of nowhere." He died on the scene. Authorities later found and killed the bear responsible for his death.[70]
15. Don Peters, 51, male November 25, 2007 Wild near Sundre, Alberta Peters' body was found 200 metres (660 ft) from his parked truck. He was on a hunting trip. An autopsy confirmed that he died due to a grizzly bear attack. The bear that attacked Peters was captured and killed the following April.[126][127]
One of these fatal attacks is that of a family member.
The Following User Says Thank You to Minnie For This Useful Post:
Conservation officers are trained professionals, and have taken courses and training to know when to reach for the bear spray (which they also carry) or the gun. They are also the ones called in to deal with aggressive/problem animals, and face disproportionate encounters with problem animals compared to those of us out there in our full Patagonia kit. If everyone has to go through the same vetting and training as conservation officers before they can carry a gun, and are subject to the same loss of income for doing it wrong, ok, maybe.
On the topic of conservation officers and as mentioned, the real danger is from people, just like any law enforcement officers. For example in my work, I am technically an officer in BC. Not one that can carry a firearm, but I have powers granted by the province to inspect private properties unannounced to enforce very specific regulations. There are times that I know the people involved are potentially dangerous so they send a CO trained to use a firearm to come with me for extra security. Usually we ask the RCMP first if possible, but it isn't always possible and we share the same office space as the COs.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
I think there are valid arguments against guns in general, guns in the backcountry, etc, but when the question is “Why are they allowed in the backcountry and not in a National Park” almost nobody has come close to addressing that question. “Because guns are bad” might be true, but that is not a valid reason as to why they are allowed in one area and not the other. You know what I mean?
Surprising you need to be told the purpose of a national park is protect the wildlife and environment. The goal is conservation and to preserve the natural environment mostly from crappy humans.
I think I get your point that if the firearm is only being used for protection than why shouldn't it be allowed for protection in national parks since it is elsewhere? Simple answer is since the goal is to not allow hunting/poaching in conservation areas to make it easier to control you can't allow anyone to carry firearms. Poaching or illegal hunting does happen even in places you are already allowed to hunt (ie. hunting out of season or off roads still very prevalent in RR Alberta, ect). Unfortunately even though most hunters/hikers/ect are incredibly responsible and deserve the right to carry for protection there needs to be places to keep the morons out.
Without knowing a whole lot about bear anatomy, I think a grizzly bear charging at you, the only targets you have are the head and it’s shoulders/front legs. It’s not going to come at you walking on two legs like a circus act where you can hit all of its major organs. Again, this is where I think firing off the bear spray needs to be as precise.
Take a look at a picture of a bear. If you for directly at it, the bullets will likely end up in the face or chest cavity. They are quite large targets. The bear may not spend it's whole time charging either. That could give you the opportunity to hit the side of the bear.
The shoulders are quite small from the front of a bear and largely hidden by the huge face. Even then, the sound of the gun may scare the bear.
Another major downside of the guns in parks, is you're going to see way more dead bears. That's probably a lot of instances where a bear acts aggressive or gets closer but doesn't actually attack. With firearms in the mix, there's no benefit of the doubt. The bear is getting shot.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
Take a look at a picture of a bear. If you for directly at it, the bullets will likely end up in the face or chest cavity. They are quite large targets. The bear may not spend it's whole time charging either. That could give you the opportunity to hit the side of the bear.
The shoulders are quite small from the front of a bear and largely hidden by the huge face. Even then, the sound of the gun may scare the bear.
Unfortunately a bear doesn't usually pose for a picture, most of their attacks are stealthy from short distance and they run 3x faster than a human, 99% of people would be so freaked they couldn't hit a barn door let alone multiple shots into a bear coming at you at 30mph.
If a bear is intent on stalking you it most likely will win no matter what you carry, like I said before, either be in a crowd or stay home.
Ultimately, the most relevant stat to consider if probably fatal bear attacks within a Canadian National/Provincial Parks (it sounds like guns aren't necessarily prohibited in the US parks), and how many of these might have been mitigated with a firearm? I'll actually put in a bit of work here, but this list may not be comprehensive:
1. Doug Inglis, 62, male
2. Jenny Gusse, 62, Female [15] September 29, 2023 Wild Red Deer River Valley, Banff National Park, Alberta A response team trained in wildlife attacks were mobilized, after receiving an alert from an inReach GPS device at about 8 p.m. on Friday Sept 29, 2023, but weather conditions at the time did not allow for helicopter use, leading the team to travel to the location by ground through the night. The response team arrived at 1 a.m. and found two deceased individuals and their dog (Tress), also killed. A grizzly bear displaying aggressive behavior was encountered and euthanized at the site.[16][17]
Seems unlikely a gun would have helped; perhaps could have saved one of them
3. (Black Bear) Jacqueline Perry, 30, female September 6, 2005 Wild Missinaibi Lake Provincial Park, Ontario Perry was killed in an attack at a remote campsite.[108] Her husband was seriously injured trying to protect her with a Swiss Army knife, and later was given a Star of Courage award from Governor General Michaëlle Jean.[109] Ministry of Natural Resources staff shot and killed the bear near the area where the fatal attack occurred.[110]
Gun may have helped; hard to say if it would have been soon enough to save her life
4. Isabelle Dubé, 35, female June 5, 2005 Wild Canmore, Alberta Dubé was killed while jogging with two friends on the Bench Trail. After an initial attack, Dubé climbed a tree while her friends sought help. The bear brought Dubé down from the tree and mauled her.[133][134] Fish and wildlife officers shot and killed the bear.[134] At the time of the attack, the trail was closed, and the public had been told to avoid it.[135] A few days earlier, the bear had been relocated from Canmore to Banff National Park.[133]
Gun may have helped, though hard to say how likely 3 women would be to carry a gun(s) while jogging.
5. (Black Bear) Raymond Kitchen, 56, male
6. Patti McConnell, 37, female August 14, 1997 Wild Liard River Hot Springs Provincial Park, British Columbia McConnell died from injuries while defending herself and her 13-year-old son Kelly from a black bear attack on a boardwalk to the hot springs. Kitchen heard the attack in progress, and was killed while attempting to rescue. Kelly and a 20-year-old man were also injured. The bear was shot while standing over the victims.[141][142] McConnell's son received a Star of Courage for his attempt to save his mother. Kitchen also received the honor, posthumously.[143]
gun may have helped, but it's worth noting the number of humans that may have been caught in crossfire
7. (Black bear) Raymond Jakubauskas, 32, male
8. Carola Frehe, 48, female October 11, 1991 Wild Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario While they were setting up camp on Bates Island, a black bear broke both of their necks. The bear then dragged their bodies into the woods and consumed the remains. When police arrived five days later, the bear was guarding the bodies. A park naturalist called the attack "right off the scale of normal bear behavior".[149][150]
a gun may have helped; seems more likely to save one of them than both
9. Christine Courtney, 32, female July 5, 1996 Wild Kluane National Park, Yukon Courtney was killed while hiking on the Slim's Valley trail in Kluane National Park. Her husband was also attacked but survived. Park wardens killed the bear.[163]
gun may have helped
10. Trevor Percy-Lancaster, 40, male September 15, 1992 Wild Jasper National Park, Alberta Percy-Lancaster and his wife were setting up camp in an isolated area of the Tonquin Valley. They surprised a bear, and began running away. The bear initially caught Percy-Lancaster's wife, and then he distracted the bear, which turned on him.[168][169]
don't want to victim blame, especially considering it was 31 years ago and I don't know what conventional wisdom was at the time, but I find it hard to imagine proficient deployment of a gun instead of fleeing
11. Ernest Cohoe, 38, male August 24, 1980 Wild near Banff, Alberta While fishing with a friend just north of Banff, Alberta, a bear charged and bit off part of Cohoe's face. He died a week later as a result of the injuries.[193][194]
gun may have helped...though hard to say if it would have precluded the charge
In every case where a gun may have helped, bear spray may also have been just as effective (not listed in these summaries, would have to dive deeper to see if it was deployed). If bear spray was present but not deployed for whatever reason, it seems likely that a firearm would also not have been deployed for those same reasons.
So it's really a question of how many times has bear spray been insufficient, and for what reason? If the reason was inaccuracy, then a firearm is unlikely to have fared better. Properly deployed, you can fire ~4 good bursts from a can. So maybe bullets #5 and beyond would be the difference maker.
Without reading deeply into each of these incidents, we only know of 1 can of emptied bear spray
43 years, 11 fatalities where guns were prohibited as an option. You'd have to dive more deeply to consider relative gun use vs. national park backcountry use (though many of these were not far off the beaten track), but I can't fathom any way to twist the numbers to conclude it is safer to be in the presence of a firearm than it is to be in bear-country without one.
A few incidents where guns were present and failed to save (there are many more, I wasn't really looking for them):
12. Claudia Huber, 42, female October 14, 2014 Wild near Teslin, Yukon A 25-year-old healthy male grizzly bear broke into a home and chased the victim and her husband outside. The bear pursued and fatally attacked Ms. Huber. Her husband, Matthias Liniger, shot at the bear and killed it.[69]
13. Rick Cross, 54, male September 7, 2014 Wild Kananaskis Country, Alberta Cross, a hunter, was killed by a mother bear when he accidentally got between her and her cubs. Park rangers stated that it appeared that Cross managed to fire his rifle before being overwhelmed. RCMP said it appeared he wandered into the area where the mother and cub were feeding on a dead deer.[71]
14. Ken Novotny, 53, male September 17, 2014 Wild near Norman Wells, Northwest Territories While on a hunting trip near Norman Wells, Novotny was charged and struck by a bear. Friends reported Novotny had just killed a moose and was processing the carcass when the bear "came out of nowhere." He died on the scene. Authorities later found and killed the bear responsible for his death.[70]
15. Don Peters, 51, male November 25, 2007 Wild near Sundre, Alberta Peters' body was found 200 metres (660 ft) from his parked truck. He was on a hunting trip. An autopsy confirmed that he died due to a grizzly bear attack. The bear that attacked Peters was captured and killed the following April.[126][127]
Despite this very small sample of fatal attacks in Parks, there still seem to be a few trends:
5/8 incidents were in fairly deep backcountry, 2 were very near townsites of Banff/Canmore, and then Liard Hot Springs is just south of Yukon, but right off the highway, so you'd maybe call it semi-remote.
Definitely a trend to late summer/fall (including the random firearm incidents at the bottom).
4/5 in the backcountry happened at camp or while setting up camp. From personal experience, I know it's easy to let your guard down once you've reached camp (my closest grizzly was when fetching water after dumping my pack at the site...and of course I did not bring my bear spray!).
The only incident in the course of 'regular hiking' was in the Yukon in 1996. No bear spray noted, juvenile grizzly was only 60kg. It sounds like they tried to sneak past the bear and then dropped their packs and played dead...basically in line with the conventional wisdom at the time (except maybe trying to sneak past), but we know things are a bit more nuanced today
Unfortunately a bear doesn't usually pose for a picture, most of their attacks are stealthy from short distance and they run 3x faster than a human, 99% of people would be so freaked they couldn't hit a barn door let alone multiple shots into a bear coming at you at 30mph.
If a bear is intent on stalking you it most likely will win no matter what you carry, like I said before, either be in a crowd or stay home.
In the heat of the moment, I'd still rather have a gun.
That being said, guns are likely far more dangerous than bears. I'm probably more likely to shoot myself than ever actually need a gun to fend off a grizzly bear.
Well, name calling is always a good way to carry on a discussion, but despite that I would reply by asking why would anyone feel the need to hike with a gun? If your safety is that much at risk, why hike at all?
If you are working in the bush, doing necessary jobs, then having a gun is justified, but the idea that recreational hikers should be allowed to carry guns in national parks is simply absurd.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to blender For This Useful Post:
Has anyone here ever shot a grizzly bear?
Hunting or self-defence?
I'm just curious about feedback from the perspective of someone who has actually done it.
Well, name calling is always a good way to carry on a discussion, but despite that I would reply by asking why would anyone feel the need to hike with a gun? If your safety is that much at risk, why hike at all?
If you are working in the bush, doing necessary jobs, then having a gun is justified, but the idea that recreational hikers should be allowed to carry guns in national parks is simply absurd.
It's not absurd; it's totally reasonable. So if I'm surveying in the rocky mountains my life is of high enough value that you're fine with me being able to defend myself with a weapon, but if I'm just hiking then I should accept that a bear might eat me. That's what you're saying, yet you think people who value both those human lives and their right to defend themselves as being absurd? And to boot, you get offended at being called a Karen?
Lol, wtf dude
Telling me I shouldn't hike and bike in the mountains - literally my main activity in life - because I would like a gun to defend myself should I come across a bear (something I'm allowed to do in almost all of Alberta, mind you, except where some guys a hundred years ago drew imaginary lines on a map) is somehow a reasonable statement to you, but you clutch your pearls and bemoan the lack of conversational integrity when somebody calls you a Karen.
It's not absurd; it's totally reasonable. So if I'm surveying in the rocky mountains my life is of high enough value that you're fine with me being able to defend myself with a weapon, but if I'm just hiking then I should accept that a bear might eat me. That's what you're saying, yet you think people who value both those human lives and their right to defend themselves as being absurd? And to boot, you get offended at being called a Karen?
Lol, wtf dude
Telling me I shouldn't hike and bike in the mountains - literally my main activity in life - because I would like a gun to defend myself should I come across a bear (something I'm allowed to do in almost all of Alberta, mind you, except where some guys a hundred years ago drew imaginary lines on a map) is somehow a reasonable statement to you, but you clutch your pearls and bemoan the lack of conversational integrity when somebody calls you a Karen.
Reading about the formation of national parks north and south of the border was an interesting read to say the least.
I'm glad that some people moved to conserve these swathes of pristine land full of natural beauty from exploitation of their resources with the public ideals of manifest destiny being at the forefront in the 19th and 20th centuries, but I think these parks have evolved slowly into being slightly overbearing with rules and regulations.
The land and the species within their "borders" can be preserved in all their glory to thrive for decades/centuries to come while also keeping visitors physically safe from natural threats as well as able to experience these places without the anxiety of feeling grossly underprepared when wildlife does come into close proximity because the overbearing parks people want to abolish nearly all means of self-defense because the public is viewed as totally inept at outdoorsing responsibly.
And i wouldnt trust most people as far as I could throw them. But the general public tourist types the parks want to herd and restrain aren't the ones you find 40km deep in remote wilderness. I would've trusted Doug and Jenny as two experienced enthusiasts of the outdoors to have those means to use in an emergency such as this.
The backcountry is too vast and remote to be monitored and patrolled effectively by the handful of guys cleared to carry guns. Until they can be more efficient at intervening to protect people out there, maybe exceptions should be made.
Well, name calling is always a good way to carry on a discussion, but despite that I would reply by asking why would anyone feel the need to hike with a gun? If your safety is that much at risk, why hike at all?
If you are working in the bush, doing necessary jobs, then having a gun is justified, but the idea that recreational hikers should be allowed to carry guns in national parks is simply absurd.
So you have a paid gig in the backcountry "contributing" makes you worthy of self protection, but not being a traveler (because, #### those people, including this seasoned, 60 year old, by all accounts responsible couple)
Interesting line to draw.
Yeah, any one trying to "put their foot" down and silence/conclude a debate just because they feel conviction is pretty Karen-like.
Also making statements synonymous with "if you're afraid you don't belong outside in the woods" is pretty arrogant.
Even the most experienced people feel fear. There is always uncertainty and unknown variables when in nature. In fact, experienced people know and recognize this! And no matter how many hikes or camping trips you have under your belt, every one has their moments when rustling in the bush activates that fight or flight response. The sympathetic nervous system is innate to humans because it was necessary for us to exist today.
You yourself have experienced that same fear too, because you're human. So hopefully you're banishing yourself too with that statement. Let's all just stay home because none of us qualify according to you.
