How dangerous is it to be BiGFooting alone?

[Catmandoo]

11 hours ago, wiiawiwb said:

If you are having a violent encounter with a bear you did something wrong. Food storage, territory, etc.Any experienced hiker and avid outdoorsman knows that you don't require a gun to travel through the wilderness unless you plan on hunting or there is a specific problem animal in the area. Any encounters you do have should be dealt with by bear spray just fine.

 

The carrier for the irritant in bear spray is vegetable oil. Yum.   Cold temperatures reduce the effectiveness of aerosol sprays. Cold winds put you in peril.

I believe that the biggest black bear in Washington State was over 600 lbs. I am in Grizzly bear territory. Biggest black bear in the area is about 400 lbs.  In Alaska, I have been around Katmai gene pool Brown Bears. They are very intelligent. All of these animals are 'wild animals' and are unpredictable.  There are posts about bear charges ---  singular.  If there is more than one bear, all of them will be coming for you.  Foo-Foo spray has limitations.

[wiiawiwb]

Catmandoo....for the record, the above quote in your post above was not made by me.  It was made by HikingCoyote and I quoted him in my post.

 

I'm not quite sure why there is an issue of firearm vs bear spray. Why wouldn't someone carry both? Each has it's merits.

[Huntster]

4 hours ago, wiiawiwb said:

..........I'm not quite sure why there is an issue of firearm vs bear spray. Why wouldn't someone carry both? Each has it's merits.

 

Bingo. The skunk approach can work great on curious bears. I would consider carrying spray, but since a hunting license and harvest tag are lighter and easier to carry, that's what I do.

 

Like everything else under the sun today, ideology shapes beliefs on firearms and spray. There is very clearly a segment of society who dislike firearms. That is fine........for them, if that's what they want. I prefer the firearms.

 

From the article I linked above:

 

.........Bear spray is useful for dealing with curious bears. It is a valid option for people who are not comfortable with firearms or who do not want to carry a firearm.

 

Unfortunately, it may also be the remaining option due to radical and unconstitutional government regulation imposed on firearms possession on public lands users by radicalized land use managers in some areas of the county. Not so here in the Last Frontier and remaining Home of the Free. Too many bears, and too many cultural refugees tired of ideological people manipulators.

[SWWASAS]

On 7/24/2019 at 7:01 PM, Hikingcoyote said:

You will not find Grizzly bears in Colorado. There are only sightings, not reported very often. No established population. Only Black bears and they are harmless. Easy to avoid contact. 

Random sightings in Western Washington were the precursor to an established wolf population rebound.  I myself had an encounter before the DNR officially admitted they were present.     I saw that there was a unconfirmed, grizzly sighting in Colorado in 2008.  Since the black bear population is reported to be exploding it is likely that the grizzly will also rebound.    But given that they are likely few, one could probably assume that they should not be a problem.      The parallel with the cougar and wolf indicates to me that eventually dangerous species rebound in numbers  becomes a problem      Humans killed by cougars used to be extremely rare.   Lately the encounters are increasing and humans are getting killed at a rate unseen in decades.   I suspect the wolf will become problematic as their numbers increase in states that are having a rebound.   I guess it boils down to nothing is sure and it is best to be ready for the worst case.  

[Huntster]

On 7/24/2019 at 6:01 PM, Hikingcoyote said:

You will not find Grizzly bears in Colorado. There are only sightings, not reported very often.........

 

Sorta' like sasquatches. Yeah, you may not be able to find them, but that certainly doesn't mean they aren't there. Ed Wiseman found that out the hard way. Had to stab the one that attacked him to death with an arrow in southern Colorado. 

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

Random sightings in Western Washington were the precursor to an established wolf population rebound.  I myself had an encounter before the DNR officially admitted they were present.     I saw that there was a unconfirmed, grizzly sighting in Colorado in 2008.  Since the black bear population is reported to be exploding it is likely that the grizzly will also rebound.    But given that they are likely few, one could probably assume that they should not be a problem.      The parallel with the cougar and wolf indicates to me that eventually dangerous species rebound in numbers  becomes a problem      Humans killed by cougars used to be extremely rare.   Lately the encounters are increasing and humans are getting killed at a rate unseen in decades........

 

I wonder if that is an indication that sasquatch densities might increase? Many believe that, habitat-wise, what's good for black bears is good for sasquatches. There seemed to be high sasquatch densities from 1920-1970 in the PNW. Maybe there will be more of them soon?

[SWWASAS]

You have a good point.    Prior to the last two decades there was a lot of logging in National Forests.     Now it is a fraction of that.   I think logging is perhaps the most disruptive thing we do to BF habitat.    If could be that the tree huggers are inadvertently improving habitat for BF.   Certainly deer and elk populations are a factor.   If bear numbers are increasing it is a good indicator than another omnivore might be benefiting also.     Wolf increases may be a problem factor for that.    Deer populations plummet when wolves increase.  

[SWWASAS]

Something just hit me like a brick.    Lets say that BF is a humanoid species but not human.    We wring our hands wondering why the government would cover up its existence.    Our laws may not apply to BF.    It is not an animal that can be managed by law and not human, governable by laws meant for humans.   .   Should it have been in NA before we were,   that complicates things even more.    Perhaps the whole habitat,  legal standing issue, is so complicated likely to go against us in court,  the government has decided to ignore it as long as it can.   If it ends up on court,  humans may loose cases to the extent that we could loose access to huge portions of the country, especially if they are forested.    Like tribal lands BF could establish BF law in lands that it claims.   If you think about the consequences it is really complicated.       

Edited July 26, 2019 by SWWASAS

[Hikingcoyote]

21 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

 

 

What happens to the first person that discovers a problem animal?

 

Black bears harmless?

I beg to differ 

The person that discovers a problem animal? Created a problem. Ask aky USFS personnel and research LNT principles. It's extremely easy to avoid confrontation. Sadly people watch more tv and read more bear attack articles than measure their time in the wilderness. 

[Hikingcoyote]

6 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

Sorta' like sasquatches. Yeah, you may not be able to find them, but that certainly doesn't mean they aren't there. Ed Wiseman found that out the hard way. Had to stab the one that attacked him to death with an arrow in southern Colorado. 

Yes there have been sightings and once was a population. But bears are easier to track and research than bigfoot. Obviously. The media is great. Tons of reference points, but extremely small and unreliable compared to real time spent in the wilderness. 

[Huntster]

3 hours ago, Hikingcoyote said:

.........bears are easier to track and research than bigfoot........

 

Maybe........maybe not. As a bear hunter, I can assure you that bears are not stupid. If bears were as rare as sasquatches, they would likely be considered extinct........like some folks think that grizzlies are extinct in Colorado.

 

There are currently less than 50,000 grizzlies estimated to be in North America. How many have you seem in your lifetime in the wild?

[Catmandoo]

They know how to not leave tracks. There is a coyote in this area that walks on that log also. This is a track less area. Track less for all animals  Forest floor is a giant carpet with debris everywhere.  I can hear ground snaps very easily. 

[bipedalist]

On 7/25/2019 at 8:23 AM, Kiwakwe said:

Every time I've encountered black bear in the wild they've bolted away. And I've stupidly followed a large sow and cubs raiding feeders in my front yard out into the woods on 2 occasions, because I'm a slow learner. They are not harmless by any means, be careful out there. 

https://www.outsideonline.com/2399171/alex-woods-black-bear-attack

 

 

Updated with youtube video of thievery in Colorado

<<<<>>>>

 

 

 

Intelligent yes, harmless no.   Their memory is such that an incident occurred 11 years after the same young bear learned from it's mother I had a large store triple tube feeder of blackoil sunflower seeds on an elevated backporch with stairs.   Eleven years after that feeder was ravaged and  removed permanently there was a visit up that flight of stairs resulting in the loss of my back porch door.  Humans do condition them for problem encounters for sure.  The bear aware program nationally is very insightful and helpful in this respect .    Here is an interesting Colorado lesson:  https://gazette.com/ap/state/bears-euthanized-after-camper-attacked-in-colorado-increased-bear-activity/article_7cab7328-5338-5c9d-9887-dab27b899628.html

 

This is a little lighter Colorado story that is smokin' hot:   https://gazette.com/ap/state/video-bear-attempts-theft-of-pot-dispensary-dumpster-in-colorado/article_592b84fd-f3da-5b85-8b12-c1fa252314d1.html

Edited August 3, 2019 by bipedalist
twitter link didn't work, so youtube did the trick

[SWWASAS]

15 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

They know how to not leave tracks. There is a coyote in this area that walks on that log also. This is a track less area. Track less for all animals  Forest floor is a giant carpet with debris everywhere.  I can hear ground snaps very easily. 

In an area with significant blow down it is easier and faster to walk on trees than be on the ground and have to climb over and under them and all the down branches.     I would attribute that to the reason this bear is walking on the tree rather than trying to avoid leaving tracks.   I do the tree thing too when traversing blow down areas.   It can increase your speed of travel several times over,   as long as you don't fall off.  

[Catmandoo]

4 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

It can increase your speed of travel several times over,   as long as you don't fall off.  

 

That little bear was all over this terrain. 

I have fallen off of a log that is higher off of the ground than the one pictured. Couldn't do the Iron Man thing so I did the face plant thing. I believe that I was watched. They know that I am not a threat ( face plant secured that classification ). This brings up self extraction. I was scouting a location for trail cams when I fell off of the log. Camp was downhill of scouted area.  In case of injury, crawling downhill back to camp is a lot easier than uphill. I still research alone since that means that I am almost always outnumbered.