The reality of wilderness animal attack and carrying firearms

Status
Not open for further replies.
michaelmcgo said:
... shooting another person is something that requires lots of though before you pull the trigger so that if you ever have to, you can react with the speed needed. A dangerous person will demonstrate that they are dangerous and practice allows you react quickly.
Click to expand...

I've run over all the situations I was involved in mentally many times. A gun was involved in at least one of the incidents, and probably a couple of the others, as well. In the last incident (crazy/angry man with a shotgun) there was no warning. He just walked in off the street with his weapon, herded us all into one office, and robbed us after threatening each of us with his weapon.

In one of the other situations (a mugging), I could see that developing but I was too young (early teens) to be able to carry a weapon. That incident did teach me a lot about situational awareness. I consider that to be my first line of defense.

As far as firearms, though, we all have current CCWs and abide by Georgia's concealed carry laws and we train with a friend who is one of the shooting instructors for a local law enforcement agency. He's an LEO himself and works with a district attorney's office, so he helps us with advice about when to pull and shoot as well as how to do it.
 
Depends on location and your mental ability to deal with the situation at hand...does it require deadly force to be dealt with ?
nothing wrong with packing both (Pistol & Spray) IMO
just b/c a large Cat or Bear comes along looking for food does not mean to shoot it dead... just spray and she feed herself/young another day...
Pistol more for people trouble more so than animals & yes I pack as well
 
I carry neither a gun nor bear spray.

But I have thought about it, and am still thinking about it.


Like you, I also realize the statistics are in my favor, and that I am incredibly unlikely to be in a situation in the woods where the presence of something that goes boom is going to determine my chances for survival, but I also grew up around guns and they provide a certain sense of comfort when it's dark and you hear something snapping twigs near your camp.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to managing risk, and I feel it's an incredibly personal decision based on one's comfort level. I consider myself a lightweight hiker, but not an ultralight one - I carry more gear for redundancy, comfort, and safety than I will likely ever need, because I've made the evaluation that I'm not willing to accept the risk of going without, despite the fact that said risk is incredibly small. Ultralight guys, on the other hand, make the much tougher decision of paring down to the absolute bare minimums, and the statistics of survival rates of UL hikers seem to validate their decisions. In one sense, I admire them for their willingness to leave behind things that I consider essentials - both for their ability to tolerate sometimes less comfortable situations, but also their willingness to put in the work and tough thought it takes to push themselves out of their comfort zone. In a way, I'm taking the easy way out by carrying a big knife, bear canister, large first aid kit, and the kitchen sink - by being prepared for most situations that face me, I get to avoid the tough decisions and analysis that come with weighing risk.


That might all seem very off topic, but I think it ties in nicely to the reality of animal attacks, balanced against the weight and bulk of a firearm. At the end of the day it's a risk vs reward equation - is it worth the risk to leave the gun at home and have a lighter load, or is it worth the weight to carry that insurance for a situation that is very unlikely to happen.



I will tell you that I've been far more freaked out about lightning, when out in an open meadow at 11,000 feet with a storm blowing in, than I have EVER been about bears or mountains lions. Yet I don't carry a lightning rod into the woods with me. :D
 
I most always pack my Ruger SP101,loaded with Rem.125gr hollowpoints+a speedloader full when in the woods.It's not the animals I'm worried about.
 
Carrying a gun in the wilderness doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. There are a lot of dangerous critters in the woods (2 and 4 legged) so having a gun with you for protection just makes sense.

Being "one with nature" is great and all but naturally (no guns) if you go up against a bear, the bear is going to eat you, unless you somehow manage to kill it with your knife which would be kinda hard to do... Animals have their teeth and claws and we have our guns and knives, without them we're a lot lower on the food chain than we'd like to be. Criminals will definately be armed as well so by leaving your gun at home you're at a disadvantage.

The chances of being attacked by people or animals in the wilderness are low but it does happen so if you can carry a gun then I don't see a reason not to.

Oh and no I don't carry a gun in the woods but I'm trying to change that.
 
dan-g
HERES THE QUESTION TO OTHER FORUMITES. Am I a weine for clinging illogicaly to my firearm. Before anwsering please state if you own guns or not,
since this will heavly influnce your replie.
Reply With Quote
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have guns :thumbup:

But why would you feel that having a firearm is illogical? Why would you think having a firearm makes you a 'weine'?
Lastly, why would you care what others think, since it is YOUR butt you are contemplating protecting?

oh, and spell check is your friend. :D
 
I carry in town and in the bush when I'm back in PA. If I'm going to be in an area with lots of day hikers I carry concealed. If I'm going to be out there away from people I carry openly. I have had an "incident" in the bush that was revolved with a handgun, fortunately no shots fired. I could care less what anyone thinks about me being armed. It's boxers or briefs, in other words, what's in my pants ain't none of anyone's business. Mac
 
Carrying a handgun or long gun is really dependent on the situation, and the person. Thankfully, in the US, you can still decide for yourself whether you should or should not carry - as there are definitely situations and places, where not carrying would be similar to attempting to cross a desert with no water. There are also times when carrying would be considered just as ludicrous. Each person has to decide for themselves. Just as lighters can start forest fires and endanger wildlife and people, guns can be dangerous, as well - AND, just like lighters, a gun can keep you alive and save the lives of others, too. There is nothing magical or mystical that makes a gun or the person carrying it any more dangerous than someone carrying a lighter.
 
texastonydobbs said:
just b/c a large Cat or Bear comes along looking for food does not mean to shoot it dead...
Click to expand...

+1 :thumbup::thumbup:

I carry my pistol with me most times when I go out hiking. I realize that statistically speaking, even were I to be involved in a confrontation with a bear or cat, I would not need to use lethal force. I have come face to face with a mountain lion on a couple of occasions when I was miles from the nearest trail. We checked each other out and went on about our business. No big deal. But I still slept a lot better that night knowing that I had my pistol.

The only bear I've ever come across that wasn't hightailing for the hills was in a public campground. No need to shoot him. He just wanted some dumpster leavings. Still feel better knowing that I have my pistol every time I come across some scat, though.

Logical? Not really. But it makes me feel better. Kind of like the redundant firesteels and knives.
 
Last edited:
MustardMan said:
Yep, much better to use your firewood :D :thumbup: :eek:
Click to expand...

If I had a 6-year-old who threw a shovel at the bear, I would've been very, very angry with him. But then, it's impossible to control kids all the time. Glad the dad was able to resolve the situation and keep his family safe.

As far as carrying firearms in the woods, I don't see a problem with it.

I don't currently own any guns b/c I live in NYC, but I plan to eventually own a gun or two once I move. Not sure I would pack it on the trail, though.

Based on my research, bear spray seems like a good deterrent for all kinds of potential problems, including people.

Now here's a related question with a preface:

I read a ton of posts about people being more concerned about "the 2 legged predators" than those with four legs, often in conjunction with reasons for carrying firearms in the wilderness.

My question is -- Have many forum members run across "2 legged predators" carrying guns in the woods?

That prospect scares me -- lowlifes with guns in the remote wilderness -- because my bear spray wouldn't be much use on them.

But if consensus is that wood-bumming hooligans tend NOT to be armed, then I'd feel quite comfortable unholstering my bear spray at the slightest sign of something fishy and spraying away if things went south.
 
Yes I carry a handgun and a long gun when I travel through the woods. BUT, I adhere to the premise that if "the only tool you have is a hammer then all problems start to look like a nail!"
A lot of folks arm themselves with a firearm and/or Oleoresin Capsicum (the hammer) and then every problem they encounter starts to look like a nail and they use the only hammer they have to solve the problem.

So with that being said, the firearm is always a last resort - always. Make sure you have other tools in your tool kit including avoidance, pre-planning, mitigating your exposure to potential threats by not camping near water were both two and four legged threats like to frequent, keep your camp area clean, have a back up plan or two plus an escape route, minimize socializing with people you do not know or trust, travel in groups with equally minded folks, and other tactics to numerous to list here and besides no one would care anyway.

The firearm is not my first option but very last. I try to exercise other tools first and save the firearm as a last resort.
 
I don't carry a firearm, but I also realize that I put myself in a semi vulnerable position if I meet pot growers or tweakers.

I carry a big knife, in a flapped black nylon sheath that blends against my pack. I keep it on the right side, where most people won't see it (assuming we pass left sides).

Carry it if you want, and conceal it if you want (but have a CC license). It's your business, and if your group got threatened by druggers, suddenly that gun might seem not such a bad idea.

As was stated above, it's a last resort, but not having it makes it an un-resort.
 
You are not a weird. You have common sense to carry in the wild.
I own guns.
 
i own a gun but have yet to carry it as i don't feel i have enough skill yet to use it effectively:rolleyes:. I practice with it given the time.

I don't live where there are bears or cats but there is a problem with meth heads so i carry tools that are effective weapons. A good hawk and bowie make me feel safe plus they do pretty good for this whole "bushcraft" thing as well.
 
PorcupineMtns66 said:
You are not a weird. You have common sense to carry in the wild.
I own guns.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call it "common sense" to carry in the woods. That is a pretty broad assertion.


It is a descision based on perceived threats. I don't carry a firearm because I don't feel the need. For the problems I may encounter, bear spray is the logical choice. It has proven to be more effective against predators than a gun. If I was a hunter in big game territory, I would want a side arm... that would make sense for that situation. The threat of 2-legged predators is slim to none, where I roam. If I was in prime meth lab territory, you're darn tootin' I would want something that could "reach out and touch somebody". :thumbup:


Rick
 
There are three questions no one can ever answer for oneself:

1. Who the threat might be (two or four legged)
2. When or where the threat might take place (can't say with 100% certainity it will or it will not take place, here, there or anywhere)
3. What it is going to take to stop the threat(s)

If I could answer all three with 100% certain I would just not show up to that place at that given time, on that given day and avoid all together. There is NO place on this planet that is 100% safe. The reason many of us practice for wilderness survivial is that one in a million chance we "may" need to overcome a threat of hypothermia, starvation, injury, or whatever. So, it only seems logical to take wilderness surivival to the next level and be prepare to include threats coming from two or four legged critters - when we least expect it.
 
Quirt said:
There are three questions no one can ever answer for oneself:

1. Who the threat might be (two or four legged)
2. When or where the threat might take place (can't say with 100% certainity it will or it will not take place, here, there or anywhere)
3. What it is going to take to stop the threat(s)

If I could answer all three with 100% certain I would just not show up to that place at that given time, on that given day and avoid all together. There is NO place on this planet that is 100% safe. The reason many of us practice for wilderness survivial is that one in a million chance we "may" need to overcome a threat of hypothermia, starvation, injury, or whatever. So, it only seems logical to take wilderness surivival to the next level and be prepare to include threats coming from two or four legged critters - when we least expect it.
Click to expand...

¡Exactly! As somebody said before: it's an insurance policy. You don't know for sure if or when, something bad is going to happen. Where I live, we don't have bears (brown or grizzlys or any other kind), we have jaguars, tapirs, wild pigs (pecaris), snakes and in Darién province, FARC's and drug traffickers.
Not sure that any spray is going to be of any use, so here, I would carry a gun (also, NRA member, have guns) -and wouldn`t visit the Darien province-.
 
Wow, didnt expect two pages before I got to my computer at the end of the day.

Great replies I apreciate the aplication of logic. magnussen, these are the statistics im talking about. It has been proven bear spay and a bear bell is far more effective in a bear conflict. This statistic basicaly removes bears from the things I should be carrying for. Also mustardman, you seem to have a similar logic process to me. I know the primitive camping method and have seen how seemlesly these people can truilly disapear into the woods. Needless to say nature savy peole can really ovoid conflict before it even happens.

I did really discover the heart of my worries, the two leg threat. The more people talked about it the more I realized what actualy worries me.PEOPLE. It may also be a illogical fear. The actual number of peole violently assalted in the woods is quite low. But the massive quantity of movies where some backwoods, hick, jackass is rapping some woman while her boyfreind slowly bleeds out, is huge. The worst part is how my logic center works. Rather than thinking this is just some dumb movie, made by someone from hollywood, whose longest experiance in the woods is a dayhike. I imidiatly think that, I have eight shots and would pick off the shotgun wielding bumpkin at 25yrds from behind that tree first.

What im trying to say is my logic doesnt go full circle. I just feel like im bieng had by fear and im annoyed as shit that hollwood might have exaserbated my emotions.

After reading all these post and pinpointing my worrie, im probably going to pick up a 340pd. Five shots of 357 is fine and in all honest i really enjoy my snubie's and adding a 130z micro sounds fun. When its all said and done I cant really differentiate between logical concern and illogical fear.There is a massive element of white trash tweekers in the backwoods of Humboldt and the meer though of one of them touching any of the buitiful women I know makes my blood boil. Even if thats a remote posibility as long as its a posibility I cant let it happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top