Bear Protection Shotgun

[pathfinder76]

Yes, the Lon Paul custom and yes on the bear being wounded by a client. I'd say ol' Phil had a charmed day that day. Sorry to be dense, i'm not sure what you mean by posting the link. If you mean online, i have the magazine hard-copy. Dunno if the article exists online or not.

What magazine and edition was it? I’m trying to find it in my stash. lol.

 

[thewoodsrunner]

What magazine and edition was it? I’m trying to find it in my stash. lol.

It's the March/April 2014 issue. One of the shorter articles towards the front of the issue.

 

[mark2015]

Jeepers, fellas. Such hostility...

The problem is that a number of things are all true at the same time, and some of those truths work against each other at the extremes:

Slower bullets out-penetrate faster bullets, sturdier bullets out-penetrate softer bullets, bullets with more energy out-penetrate bullets with less energy, softer bullets create better wound profiles, harder bullets create deeper wound profiles, etc, etc.

You can play the same game with external ballistics as well.

A rifle bullet that penetrates 30 or 40 inches but creates a calibre-sized wound channel is a terrible bear defense round (for obvious reasons); likewise a bullet that creates a 12 inch wide wound channel 3 inches deep (again, for obvious reasons).

Research from Fackler suggests that 12ga slugs penetrate reasonably well, although (interestingly) not with nearly as much penetration as that from a 170gr .30-30 Win (Fackler, again). Furthermore, rifled slugs do not expand well, if at all, and as they're moving at not much more than pistol-bullet speeds, they produce very narrow wound channels (~.70 Cal), albeit very deep ones.

But put all the terminal ballistics nerdery aside for a moment to examine the platform itself: you would be hard pressed to find a more appropriate short-range defensive weapon than a pump action 12ga (or a good semi). Cheap, reliable, easy to maintain, easy to procure ammo for, easy to operate, easy to train with, easy to find safe venues to train at, light, compact, reasonably high capacity ... The list goes on.

At the end of the day, a defensive weapon, from the perspective of the user, needs to be accessible, reliable, capable of being used confidently and competently, and reasonably adequate for it's purposes in a terminal-ballistics sense. Like any other firearm, if you choose a projectile that creates a broad and deep enough wound channel, and superimpose that wound channel over a part of the target's anatomy that is essential to the target's health and wellbeing, then you will have succeeded.

The 12ga shotgun is more than adequate for bear defense. There are many other weapons that are also adequate.

And now no one needs to be touchy about the subject.

Seeking to understand here. My current understanding is that a 400 grain bullet travelling at 2700fps will out penetrate a 400 grain bullet travelling at 2200fpm. I think this because the faster bullet has more energy than the slower bullet. All other things being equal.

 

[Suther]

Seeking to understand here. My current understanding is that a 400 grain bullet travelling at 2700fps will out penetrate a 400 grain bullet travelling at 2200fpm. I think this because the faster bullet has more energy than the slower bullet. All other things being equal.

Depends on the construction of the bullet. An expanding bullet increases in diameter when it hits something. Higher velocity typically means a larger increase in diameter, which reduces penetration.

Expanding bullets also loose weight upon impact which reduces penetration. Some bullets don't lose much weight - monometals in particular tend to have very high weight retention, as do some designs like Swift A-frames - but a lot of premium bullets still shed like 25-40% of their weight even if they're bonded.

 

[DogTazmania]

Here’s how the conversation started for me. I hunt the mid-Ontario to lower north big woods for whitetails. I’m also scouting whitetails in Muskoka. The terrain we hunt in either WMU ranges from open shooting lanes of about 100 yards, in some places up to 200 yards and dense cover with shots about 50 yards or under.

My buddy suggested bringing two guns along on the ATV to the stands and picking the flat trajectory shooter in open areas or bush-smashing rounds in denser areas. He has a .243 and 30-06 for open woods and a 30-30 for the dense bush. I agreed. I like 30-06 and have mine set up with a 2.5-10X quick acquisition reticle scope.

My outfitter and his right-hand man like bear meat. We get happen-upon bears in November, and I don’t mind sharing game meat. I also meet happen-upon grumpy boars and sows with cubs in Muskoka in spring while scouting whitetails as it’s heavily populated. I take appropriate precautions, including bear spray because nobody wants to shoot a sow with cubs.

A shotgun is excellent for close range, quick, handy and packs a lot of power, if needed to defend or take a good eater in fall in the dense growth. A Winchester Defender SXP 18.5” 12 gauge with Federal Deep Penetrators should do me fine. The 30-06 is good for open spots and will do the job. Dual purpose for whitetails and bears. The 30-06 is filled with bonded bullets or monoliths to cover both jobs.

My chances of being attacked by a black bear compared to a grizzly in Ontario are 100% greater. Go figure. So, here’s the thread I opened on the hunting forum. Please help me understand this.

I'd like the MNRF and COs to answer this question, considering this revealing statistic and problem:

"Rate of fire is another criterion that isn’t on most hunters’ radar. Statistics vary, but most police officers don’t exceed a 50% hit rate. Even if you train regularly, you might not hit a bear on your first, second, or third shots, especially if the bear is charging. “If you think you’re gonna go out and shoot a moving target with 100% accuracy, you’re one brick short of a full wheelbarrow,” said MeatEater’s Clay Newcomb."

Reference the article "The Best Bear-Defense Guns and Cartridges"


https://www.themeateater.com/gear/g...tridges?rbid=da06c7bdabd14ad86998d4c0cdb3ac0d

Thanks for all the input on this. I didn't expect that volume of response so quickly. Its truly appreciated. Ontario is terrible. Or maybe Ontario is weird. It is three rounds for a shotgun regardless of game in Ontario. Why I asked is I'm scouting an area for whitetail in the spring heavily occupied by black bear. I've had encounters. Most of them escape if you keep an eye but encounters with ornery boars who are hungry and sows with cubs are common. If they're startled, they can be dangerous. Nobody wants to kill a sow with cubs. I'll be in an open season WMU and I carry bear spray plus other precautions. If it's a last resort, I'll justify it to the CO after. The usual glib answer is "carry a rifle." Well the shotty is quicker, lighter, I'm better with it and the slugs at close range are a stopper. I wrote the MNRF. I'll let you know what the answer is.

I'm adding thoughts that come up. Here's another good reason I like a shotgun for the area I'll be hunting bears. Increased danger from range of the projectile from a rifle compared to a shotgun. I'm acutely aware of "know your target and your backstop." I pay attention to my shooting lane, direction and anticipate what lies beyond. When hunting areas with wilderness homes/cottages or party hunting in dense cover, ricochets are a possibility to consider, and I believe a heavy slug is less likely to bounce off a branch and generally not carry as far as a high velocity rifle round.

That's why we have some controlled hunts limited to shotguns, muzzle loaders and bows, only, right? In the USA there are several "straight wall projectile states" for the same reasons. Please correct me if I'm wrong. So, in an aggressive bear encounter, like hunting down a wounded animal in dense cover that I have an obligation to retrieve, why is my government limiting me to a potential to miss or only hit with one round, increasing risk? How many rounds do rural police and COs shuck into the tube of their 12 Ga to euthanize bears hit by cars?

 

[ThatGuy]

Seeking to understand here. My current understanding is that a 400 grain bullet travelling at 2700fps will out penetrate a 400 grain bullet travelling at 2200fpm. I think this because the faster bullet has more energy than the slower bullet. All other things being equal.

If those bullets are both designed to fragment (or not) at equal rates for their respective impact velocities, then yes. More energy will produce more penetration than less energy will produce. The physics behind bullet terminal performance dictate that if/as a bullet sheds mass through fragmentation, it's remaining energy will decline at a disproportionate rate as it's mass is reduced.

So the general tendency is for slower bullets to retain their mass more readily, and this penetrate more deeply. A couple examples of what might generally happen terminally with a couple different bullets (keep in mind that individual bullet designs are "rated" to perform a certain way at a certain impact velocities). Assuming the same diameter bullet throughout the examples:

1: 150gr Hornady SST impacting at 2700fps vs 150gr Hornady Interlock RN impacting at 2200fps. You will almost certainly get more penetration from the Interlock, although the SST will produce a FAR more dramatic wound channel.

2. If the same Interlock RN we're driven to an impact velocity of 2700fps, it may well fragment shortly after impact and produce very poor wounding. Why? Namely because that particular bullet (common in the .30-30, and designed for those velocities) is not designed to impact above ~2400fps.

3. Two homogeneous copper bullets, which fragment poorly or not at all, when driven at different velocities, could be expected to penetrate to a depth determined by their respective energy levels, i.e the faster bullet will go further, because everything else is equal, and neither bullet will shed mass after impact.

That's why I say that this is all a bit more complicated than most people truly understand (myself included); it can get a bit contradictory, as in "how come my 300RUM bullet with more energy only penetrated 3 inches into my elk, but Grandpa knocks 'em dead every year with his .30-30?!?" Ballistics is a science, and terminal ballistics is absolutely the most poorly understood and difficult to study branch of ballistic science.

And we ALL have limited understanding, limited experiences, and are victims of small sample sizes.

 

[Gunnutz]

Defensive situation is when a bear is interested or acts aggressively towards you.

Distance largely depends on the bears behaviour. I've been within a few yards of a bear that was not acting aggressively and didn't feel it was a danger (other than the fact it was a bear)

If a bear is coming at you aggressively and less than 50 yards away it's sure as hell a danger. It may break off the charge but once it gets past 50 you better be ready to shoot. Hopefully you won't have to but you better be ready.

I had a grizzly that kept coming towards me, not fast, not super aggressive but wouldn't stop advancing despite warnings (he was trying to decide what I was) and I picked a spot about 20 yards out that if he went past there I was going to shoot. Luckily the wind changed and he didn't like my scent so turned around and ran off.

Very good point about picking a spot that the bear would be shot at. My reflexes don’t operate as quickly as many of my hunting buddies. SO I pick a spot which is point of no return for the bear. Done this a number of times ( not hundreds like the obvious experts here) with both black and grizzly in the Yukon.

Fortunately didn’t have to act on it, but I had it worked out in my mind so I only had to act if it became necessary.

Firearms in my hands at the time included a 30/06 with premium 180 grain bullets. A gun that I am very confident and comfortable with. On one occasion a short barreled Mossberg pump 12 with lead slugs. Also a combination I have practiced with enough to be comfortable.

Also subscribe to the theory that the only warning shot will be into the bear’s vitals.

Worth what you paid for it.