Can you beat a bear?
BY Herschel Smith
1 month, 2 weeks ago
While carrying a firearm is one option, bear spray is widely considered the most effective and humane way to deter an aggressive bear. But using bear spray incorrectly – or failing to carry it at all – can put you in a life-threatening situation
[ … ]
Bear spray is essentially a highly concentrated pepper spray designed to stop a bear in its tracks by overwhelming its senses. When deployed, it creates a cloud of intense capsaicinoids (the chemical in chili peppers that causes burning), which temporarily incapacitates the bear’s eyes, nose, and throat.
Unlike firearms, which require a direct and accurate shot to stop a bear, bear spray creates a barrier between you and the animal—which is why it’s recommended by wildlife experts and national park rangers as the first line of defense against bear attacks.
Okay. Whatever. Now watch this.
Which is why a 10mm is far superior than a can of seasoning. pic.twitter.com/GS9rGBsFoF
— Steve 🇺🇸 (@SteveLovesAmmo) February 8, 2026
Eh, 10mm Whatever. I shoot Double Tap 450 SMC 230-gr fat boys at 1320 FPS.
— CaptainsJournal (@BrutusMaximus50) February 9, 2026
It may very well be that if you can’t deploy OC spray quickly enough, you can’t do it with a gun either. But carrying the gun at the ready it seems to me that a large bore firearm is still the best solution to predator animals.
On February 19, 2026 at 12:08 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
Bear spray doesn’t create a “barrier” between the bear and the defender; that is the most-ridiculous claim I have seen in quite some time. Try “imaginary barrier” instead!
Pepper spray isn’t disabling to humans and it isn’t disabling to wildlife, bears included. It is an irritant, yes, but spraying a potent irritant at an animal which may already be enraged isn’t what some folks would call a good bet.
If the bear’s biochemical threat response has kicked in, he is already circulating dramatic spikes of cortisol, adrenaline, and other chemicals which enhance his senses, strength, speed, and endurance while deadening pain. Pepper spray is as likely to enrage him further as to repel an attack.
The other problem with a chemical agent which is sprayed is that the spray may not hit the bear’s face, and will thereby missing his most-vulnerable areas, i.e., eyes, nose, and mouth.
Or, the spray may be accurate but blown off-target by the wind.
What about its effectiveness in a torrential rainstorm or a snowstorm?
Finally, even if a given bear spray “works” 95% of the time, that is little consolation to you if you happen to be one of the unlucky five percent for whom it does not work.
Bear spray offers enough in its favor that it deserves a place in one’s repertoire of bear defenses, but it is not even close to being effective-enough or reliable-enough to be considered the primary means or only means used.
In some jurisdictions, Fish & Wildlife and Animal Control authorities are permitted to use stronger, more-effective chemical agents in handling encounters with wildlife, including tranquilizer darts, cholinergic and other neuro-chemicals, and so on. Until ordinary folks are allowed to possess these tools, the pharmacologic tool-chest is rather bare.
It would be interesting to know if there has been any R&D on the use of intensely loud noises as bear repellents, or for that matter, intensely unpleasant smells/odors. And it is already well-known that bears have a primordial, instinctive fear of fire.
When a bear stands on its hind legs, it is accomplishing a number of things. It is getting higher up to enable it to see better and also to enhance its senses of smell and hearing. It is also displaying its dominance to any would-be competitor or opponent. An intensely loud roar or report of some sort – even painfully loud, might cause the animal to flee.
There are chemicals known which are so foul, i.e., putriscene and cadaverine, that they can cause spontaneous nausea and vomiting in those humans affected. Off hand, I do not know if such unpleasant smells would deter a bear, but the subject might be worth investigating. Botanists know that many plants produce repentant and/or toxic chemicals as defenses.
Fire is one of the best defenses against predatory animals, if it is available to you. Would a lit flare deter a bear?
One final thought on wildlife authorities and others who “suggest” bear spray: Most of them, when they step off into bear or mountain lion country, are not just packing a can of spray repellent and crossed-fingers for good luck; they are also carry handguns and high-powered rifles, perhaps a shotgun as well.
If the officials – park rangers and fish & wildlife officers – don’t fully trust sprays, then why should we?
On February 19, 2026 at 11:00 am, george 1 said:
After watching testing by Ron Spomer and a few others it looks like standard old plus P .45 with hard cast bullets can get the job done pretty well. This was a surprise for me. Of course 450 SCM is better.
Tim Sundles addressed the question of 10mm hardcast or plus P .45 hard cast for bears. He said something along the lines of if you want maximum penetration the 10mm is fine. If you want to stop a bear the .45 plus P hard cast will work just fine as well and in a much more reliable platform. That is the short fat .45 is known to feed better that the 10mm.
Some time ago I listened to a video in which a man who was an Alaskan fishing guide talked about this subject. He said he had been a fishing guide for almost 40 years and in that time he had to shoot two bears. One bear he shot in the skull and that bear dropped immediately. He said that one was about 500lbs. He said the other bear was bigger and he shot that one twice in the body. That one went down fairly quickly as well. When they dug the bullet out it had penetrated well over two feet of bear. His weapon was a full size Colt .45 ACP and he used hard cast plus P ammo.
So heck, I guess you don’t need a 44 magnum after all. In my mind though I say if your weapon is reliable with 450 SCM I would use that if you are in a place where large bears roam.
On February 19, 2026 at 11:23 am, Rick said:
Bullets Vs spray misses the point. You could carry bear kyrptonite bit if not on target in 2.0 seconds, you are on the menu.
This is absolutely obvious. Stupid obvious. Yet so often is the argument about caliber, bullet weight, and a hundred other things. None of it matters if you aren’t aware, perceive the threat, decide, respond to the threat, on target. You have two seconds. How many steps, how many decisions is a function of how well practiced and how recent is that practice.
To go from say, gold panning in a creek to shooting a big threat involves a lot of mental decisions and physical body movements all the while trying to temper your rising emotional state. You have two seconds.
Very few people gonna have their wits when facing a charging big animal no matter how much you’ve practiced simulation.
At least you’ll see the bear or moose or elk. Likely you will not have seen the big cat.
On February 20, 2026 at 12:31 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ Rick
Re: “At least you’ll see the bear or moose or elk. Likely you will not have seen the big cat.”
Attacks by mountain lions are not unheard of in the mountains of S. Arizona surrounding Tucson. I’ve done quite a bit of hiking there, and so have friends and family.
Some big cat encounters the mountain lion is seen beforehand, but others – as you point out – the object of the attack doesn’t see or hear anything until the cat is upon him. They’re ambush hunters. That’s part of the ecology of those creatures. And they can leap astonishing distances.
One of the best predictors of survival of a mountain lion attack, is whether the victim is wearing a backpack or not. Instinctively, big cats want to seize would-be prey by the neck. They often mistake a large backpack as part of the prey, at least momentarily, which is long-enough for some people to take effective defensive action, or for others nearby to do so.
Re: “Bullets Vs spray misses the point. You could carry bear kyrptonite bit if not on target in 2.0 seconds, you are on the menu.”
I disagree, respectfully. What choices you make beforehand vis-a-vis your defensive tools and tactics matters a great deal in your relative chances of surviving an encounter with a large and lethal predator. What matters is that whatever method(s) you have chosen, you’d better train with them, hard and often and with the intent of mastering them before going afield.
With the caveat that the “best bear fight” is one you never get into, it is the height of irresponsibility to suggest that training and preparing for the worst-case scenario is somehow pointless. Which is what you seem to be stating in your post. Yeah, it is true that a large bear can cover ground at a rate which is shocking for something that large and heavy. Does that mean we all ought to lie down and make ourselves easier meals for them?
Our ancestors fought large predators with tools far more crude than our own, and managed to prevail most of the time. Mindset is the foremost predictor of survival in any emergency, including those which happen in the wilderness.
On February 20, 2026 at 10:05 am, xtphreak said:
The video seemed to me to be showing the very real drawback to bear spray.
By the time he sprayed the target, it was on top of him.
Bear spray wouldn’t have time to work before he was bitten.
At least a couple bullets in its head would maybe kill it.
Personally if I’m in a threat zone, I’ve got my firearm in my hands.
If you’re hunting, do you carry your rifle on a sling if you think game is close?
Have a Good Day
On February 20, 2026 at 9:07 pm, Paul B said:
Which is why I carry a 5 shot revolver in 357. I can get it from concealment and trigger the gag reflex with it. No time to actually aim so the plan could work.