Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?
Mischa
Thanks for your answers.
Michael
. . . . . . . . . .
Info on moderated group rec.guns is at http://doubletap.cs.umd.edu/rec.guns
JLG
the minimum to have one gun do all 3. You could get by with a 7mm mag on a
moose or even a 30.06. Going after an Alaskan grizzly would be foolhardy
with anything less than the 300. That's my opinion, I know there will be
others that disagree, so no flames please. JLG
Mischa wrote in message <6pnhpm$3...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
> ...
Bill Kapaun
#
# Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
#
It would be considered underpowered for moose and bear (other than black
ones).
Bamby66464
#Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
#
#Thanks for your answers.
#
#Michael
#
#
I never hunted Alaska but I would only shoot a Grizz with a 308 if I
had to. Ive heard writer's say the 30/06 is the sensible minimun for interior
grizz but they were speaking about 180grn and 200grn bullets.
Up to 165 grn's the 308 is ballistacly the same as the 06, but after
that the bigger case capacity of the 06 wins out.
If I ever spend the $10,000 to kill a Grizz
I'll spend the xtra $ for a 338 winnie or 375 H&H.
If your speaking about Black Bears the 308 should do fine.
Either way have a great hunt.
Ricky
MarkypieP
#
#
Grizzly-iffy
Black-Yes
Moose-doubtful
caribou-don't know
T. Scheeler
#Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
#
#
caribou. I assume you're an average marksman. As for bear, I hope your life
insurance is paid up. Again, I assume average skills (objectively evaluated).
If a .308 is sufficient, it is BARELY sufficient. Naturally, shot placement is
critical. On the otherhand, many overgun to make up for poor skills and even
poorer judgement.
My minimum would be .30-06 with 220gr bullets.
Tom Scheeler
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from
oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that
will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine
Bterr
Ammo with Trophy Bonded bullets is about
the minimum anyone would want.
It's okay for everything in Alsaka
but Grizzly and Brown
bears. You'll need to keep the
range under about 150 yards
to ensure a good level of energy.
If I had my druthers, I think
a .35 Whelen with a 225gr.
Barnes X bullet would be
a better overall choice for
short to medium range. My cousins
who hunt in AK use a .338 mag with
the Trophy Bonded Federal Premium
loads and report good results. So the
answer is yes, if you keep the range
fairly short and place your shots well.
However, you'd be better off with
something bigger.
David A. Holly
You can certainly kill those animals with a .308 provided your placement is
very good. However, everything I've ever read about hunting such animals
recommends something more appropriate. In other words, match the cartridge
to the game. For bear, moose, and caribou you should be using at least a
30-06, or better. No matter how close some people think the .308 is to the
30-06, the 30-06 holds more powder and can handle heavier bullets much
better.
The 35 Wheelan would also be very appropriate for those 3 animals. Many
choose a magnum like the .300 Win, .300 Weatherby, .338 Win mag, 7 MM Mag,
or the newer 7MM STW (Shooting Times Westerner). These rounds will do the
job, no doubt about it. Especially on moose. Moose have been known to
absorb bullets and keep on going. For critters of this size, you need
stopping power. Sure, a .308 can kill a moose, but how long will it take
the poor animal to die? A more appropriate cartridge, like the .338 Win
mag., will slam into the moose and give it more hydrostatic shock. This is
when blood and other fluids rush away from the bullet's path through the
animal like a shock wave. This shock wave helps to "stop" the animal in
it's tracks and kill it quickly.
A great place to learn about cartridges and how appropriate they are for
certain game animals is the book, Cartridges of the World (now in it's 8th
edition). It has sections on current, obsolete, wildcat, proprietary,
military, handgun, British, European, shotshells, and rimfire cartridges.
They give the historical background on each cartridge and comment on how
good it is. It's fascinating reading. You quickly learn that the
cartridge, not just the gun, is the what shooting is all about.
Hope this helps,
=David=
Mischa wrote in message <6pnhpm$3...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
> ...
. . . . . . . . . .
Eric B. Vogel
make it work. That doesn't necessarily make it the best choice though.
Large and dangerous game calls for a large and dangerous bullet, and
since we're talking about the last frontier state, you might consider a
frontier cartridge like the .45-70.
E-Man
Denes S. Varady, N3NV
Try to use a 10" twist barrel.... [MOST 308's are 12"]...
Eskimos [oh my God, innuits] often use the .22 Hornet, [Full jacketed, of
course], to hunt POLAR BEARS.
In article <6pnhpm$3...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, spy...@ix.netcom.com says...
#
#Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
Michael Little
#
# Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
#
# Thanks for your answers.
#
# Michael
I would say yes to moose, caribou, and black bears. I wouldn't want to
hunt a big salmon-fed brown bear with a .308, although it will certainly
kill one.
Fluid
#
# Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
#
Sufficient for all three, a qualified yes. A wise choice for an
out-of-state hunter, probably not. Several friends use, or have used
..308s for the game mentioned ( not grizzly ), and it worked for them,
but being locals they can afford to wait for a good shot, and don't have
to take any shot offered. Non-resident hunters are under time
constraints, and may have to take 'challenging' shots. Under these
conditions, the .308 may be marginal. A better choice would be at least
a .30-06 and 200-grain premium bullets. If brown bear or grizzly are on
the ticket, best try a .35 Whelen, or a .300 or .338 mag.
Caribou and black bear can be taken with the .308 pretty well, but I
would use premium bullets, either Nosler Partition or Barnes X bullets,
180-grain weight. You may not need this much weight, but it won't be a
disadvantage and may save you an animal by providing extra penetration.
Alaskan animals aren't bulletproof, but some are large and tenacious,
not to mention dangerous. More Alaskans were killed by moose than by
grizzlys a few years ago.
Jay T
BUD CHAPMAN
OR LARGER WOULD BE BEST. I USE 375 H&H....
AND IT HAS A TRAJECTORY AT 30/06 LEVELS.....P.S. IT WAS A WONDERFUL ARM IN
AFRICA........
Mischa wrote:
> ...
HerrGlock
.454 Casull for back up too.
:)
HerrGlock
Gene Rohling
#
# I LIVE IN ALASKA AND I WOULD SUGGEST 300 WIN. MAG AS MIN. BUT SOMETHING OF 338
# OR LARGER WOULD BE BEST. I USE 375 H&H....
# AND IT HAS A TRAJECTORY AT 30/06 LEVELS.....P.S. IT WAS A WONDERFUL ARM IN
# AFRICA........
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree with you, Bud ... but, for a Kodiak Brown I sorta lean towards a
.50 cal MG ... on single-shot, of course!!! :+0
Gene
Gene Rohling
#
# I feel that .308 is sufficient to do the job if you have the skill to
# make it work. That doesn't necessarily make it the best choice though.
# Large and dangerous game calls for a large and dangerous bullet, and
# since we're talking about the last frontier state, you might consider a
# frontier cartridge like the .45-70.
#
# E-Man
#
I dunno, E-Man .... you would almost have to hot-load a .45-70 to get
the ballistics you need ... and I'm not sure that too many actions could
take *that* ...
Bamby66464
#Eskimos [oh my God, innuits] often use the .22 Hornet, [Full jacketed, of
#course], to hunt POLAR BEARS.
#
#
1st time I heard that. I wonder who ends up doing the hunting. I bet
eskimo taste's good to a bear tired of seal blubber.
Ricky
lund...@ccinet.ab.ca
##course], to hunt POLAR BEARS.
bamby...@aol.com (Bamby66464) wrote:
# 1st time I heard that. I wonder who ends up doing the hunting. I bet
#eskimo taste's good to a bear tired of seal blubber.
One of the largest grizzly bears ever killed in Alberta was
done in with a .22 rimfire by a woman. The beast (the bear,
not the woman) is mounted and on display in Kinuso,
Alberta.
The .22 Hornet and the .222 Remington were very popular
among the Inuit of the Canadian arctic. Mostly because the
bullet would make a very small entry hole in a pelt and
wouldn't exit. Also ranges these firearms were used at were
probably less than 50-75 yards.
rde...@flash.net
> ...
For what it's worth, and please, I don't mean to be a smartaxx, if you
are asking, there may be a dangerous situation ahead. I would say the
same to those who ask about Africa - that these types of hunts are not
for unguided, inexperienced hunters. If you are involved in the
planning of such a hunt, and your guide/PH hasn't gone over your
experience, equipment, etc., this is a warning sign - BIG TIME. If
you are merely doing some armchair planning for the future, a .308 is
not a good choice (and not even a choice for griz). If you are
thinking about a particular gun with a thought to its eventual use
solely as a gun for Alaska, you might consider something else. A .308
is a good choice for most lower 48 sized/type game, but in Alaska, an
first-time "fly-in" hunter really needs more gun. The other responses
have given excellent advice on choices, so I feel no need to comment
on that.
Hope this helps?
Denes S. Varady, N3NV
They [the Innui's] used to go out and LAY down as a BAIT... [Eff. radius = 1mile].
If he's fallen asleep - the bear had a dinner.
If he did not - the family did.
It was a tough life...
The polar bear is the ONLY animal which will actively hunt a human.
Denes
In article <6presr$g...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, bamby...@aol.com says...
> ...
Fluid
#
# #Eskimos [oh my God, innuits] often use the .22 Hornet, [Full jacketed, of
# #course], to hunt POLAR BEARS.>
#
Light calibers were and are popular with many Northern eskimos and
indians. Several reasons, none having to do with killing power. The
..223 is still popular due to low recoil, light rifles, inexpensive ammo
and the ability to drop an animal up to moose with one shot. Most
indians I know who use the light calibers shoot for the ear. Most are
excellent hunters who can get up close. Ditto for eskimos with polar
bear....head shots up close, plenty of skill, patience and courage.
Note that while the light calibers are used, many Native hunters do
prefer something with a bit more upmh.
# I dunno, E-Man .... you would almost have to hot-load a .45-70 to get
# the ballistics you need ... and I'm not sure that too many actions could
# take *that* ...
Factory 300 HP ammo is plenty for most Alaskan caribou and black
bear....I used 300 Hornady handloads to factory velocity for years with
excellent success on local Alaskan game smaller than moose/big bears.
For those, a good 350-400 grain bullet at 1800+ fps works very well -
this is far more potent that the rounds the old buffalo hunters used on
FAR larger animals. Most current .45-70s can take loads like this in
stride: Win M1886, Ruger No. 1, Sharps 1974s, Marlin M1895, T/C
Contender and TCR rifles. In fact, the .45-70 is used today on Alaskan
bison, but due to state game laws the loads must be pretty stout, and
suitable for only the Ruger, TCR and some rolling block and bolt
actions.
In 1978 I shot a 9.5' brown bear once with a Hornady 350 RN loaded to
1950 fps in an M98 .45-70...worked just fine. Bear fell down, got up,
fell down for good. Complete penetration from 70 yards.
Jay T
docfa...@my-dejanews.com
spy...@ix.netcom.com (Mischa) wrote:
# Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
#
#
# Michael
Absolutely! Even a .22 CB will do it. Keep in mind that before the advent of
firearms, these animals were being harvested by spears, arrows, knives, rocks,
etc. It's not the tool, but the mind behind the tool that matters.
docfarquar
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Jeffrey A. Del Col
I wouldn't go hunting in Alaska with anything less than a .35 Whelen
with 225 grain bullets at a minimum of 2600fps.
A .308 is way too light for Alaskan bears. You want to anchor the brutes,
not anger them. Bears are often taken at fairly close range, and you want
to have enough power to break down their shoulder bones with one shot.
Otherwise you might get to be brother bruin's lunch.
Other good choices might be a 7mm Magnum--either Rem. or Weatherby. or,
better yet, a .338 Win. magnum.
Learn to shoot the rifle well --before-- you go and check the zero --after--
you get there.
J. Del Col
--
Hornet's glazed fast in a plum's juice,
Gold and ebony in amber funeral beads.
Dauven
#
# In article <6pnhpm$3...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
# spy...@ix.netcom.com (Mischa) wrote:
# # Will a .308 be sufficient to hunt bear, moose and caribou in Alaska?'
# #
# # Thanks for your answers.
# #
# #
#
# etc. It's not the tool, but the mind behind the tool that matters.
#
# docfarquar
You forgot to add that many of the Alaskan natives that hunted bear with
the above mentioned tools became the bears dinner. Yea you can hunt
brown bear with a .22 but if you do you are a dammed fool. I killed a
700 lb brown bear with a 30/06 firing 220 grain projectiles. Befor I
could stop the bear he covered 85 yds around 5 seconds. Did I mention
that I finally stopped him about 15 yds from were I was standing. First
shot broke right sholder, (to slow him down). Second shot broke the
left sholder to stop him. Third shot to kill him. I don't want to do
that again that's why I use a .375 H&H mag. If you aren't pushing 250
grain projectiles at 2700 fps you are chancing to become bear snacks.
PS Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds. Guess
what the bullet just glanced off that thick head. When a bear is
standing on all fours and looking at you his skull is about 30 degrees
from horiziontal.
Jim in Ore.
Gpery
Don't think so..........
Fluid
#
# # Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds. Guess
# #what the bullet just glanced off that thick head.
#
# Don't think so..........
Better think again. Bullets glance off human skulls too, and they are
neither as thick nor as angled as that of a big bear. While a very
large grizzly may have a 'head' 12-inches wide, the actual brain cavity
is usually less than 5" across. Hitting anything else in the head is
just going to piss him/her off.
The bones in the skull are severely angled, and the brain case looks
much like a football - oval with a "pointed" end facing forward. Like
tank armor, the angled bone easily deflects all but near-perfect frontal
shots ( the bear would likely have a heck of a headache though! ).
Shots from the sides are much more likely to penetrate the bone, in fact
it would be rare for them not to.
Next time you get a chance, look carefully at the skull of a large
brownie. You may be surprised at the natural armor that you see.
Jay T
Scott Machan
you imagine with all that fur and skin.
Gpery wrote:
> ...
Christopher Lym
: # Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds. Guess
: #what the bullet just glanced off that thick head.
:
: Don't think so..........
Why not? Do you know otherwise?
Chris
Ken Pisichko
# Gpery (gp...@aol.com) wrote:
# : # Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds. Guess
# : #what the bullet just glanced off that thick head.
# :
# : Don't think so..........
#
# Why not? Do you know otherwise?
#
# Chris
OK guys I'll jump in...
What is a skinned skunk? What did you shoot it with ? Boy, Oh Boy - you
say the bullet glanced off? Glanced off? Really now? You say that skunk
was a living real NA skunk. Hummmmm.......
I thought US shooters were smarter than to read this kind of stuff. Every
skunk that I've shot and saw shot was killed easily. Shotgun, .303 British
and even .22 LR all killed them dead. Body shot or head shot all work
fast. The head shot (ie brain not anatomical head as in nose/jaw) works
best with the .22LR - but you need to be close as in 100 ft or so. But
watch for the "P" ;-)
Ken
Dauven
#
# #what the bullet just glanced off that thick head.
#
# Don't think so..........
#
walk/running on all fours the skull surface is at a 20 to 30 degree
angle from the horizional then let people make up thier own minds. Now
if I had a 90 degree purpendicular shot then yea it will penetrate but
running bears are not 90 degree impacts. Been there, done that, got the
shit scared out of me
Jim in Ore.
Halfton
## Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds. Guess
##what the bullet just glanced off that thick head.
#
#Don't think so..........
#
Yea well BB guns have been known to do that, And since watching this
thread I have taken my 308 win. that I have killed 9 elk (8 bulls, 1
cow) with and over a half dozen mule deer and thrown it in the
garbage. My next gun will be something so big as to need wheels and a
quad to get it into position for shooting. Maybe if i save up I can
even get armor plating you know, just in case!!!
Jim Kirkham
jtk...@lis.ab.ca
Member: The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (9yrs.)
Member: The Alberta Fish And Game Association.
I am the midnight watchman down at Miller's Tool and Die.
And I watch the metal rusting, and I watch the time go by..
(Harry Chapin)
Steve Leoce
with decent bullets (jacketed, 150grs or more) is going to bounce off ...
certainly not without substantial damage to the structure or the contents ...
and certainly not at 50 yards...
Who's willing to put their head inside that skull and give it another shot??
Halfton wrote:
> ...
cou...@javanet.com
## Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds. Guess
##what the bullet just glanced off that thick head.
#Don't think so..........
The original post hasn't showed up on my newsfeed, but I assume he was
talking about a bear skull. It's far from unlikely -- a bear's skull
is shaped to deflect bullets, much like the frontal aspect of a modern
tank. It's also much thicker than a human skull.
One school of thought holds that you should aim at the downhill
shoulder of a charging bear. Break that shoulder and he'll probably
fall down, then break the other shoulder quick before he can get up
again, then you can finish him off. The other school of thought
advocates aiming for the head (center of mass of a charging bear)
figuring the bullet will probably glance off his skull but it'll
penetrate his body with any luck, and likely under pressure you'll
miss the head and hit him somewhere else anyway....
Cougar Allen :{)
First they came for the machine guns and the sawed-off shotguns, and I said nothing because I didn't own a machine gun or a sawed-off shotgun....
Tom Albano
and 30-06 ammo comes packed in. Please let me know if you can help out.
Tnx,
Tom
Fluid
#
# # : # Just for kicks I took a shot at the skinned skull at 50 yds.
#
# What is a skinned skunk? What did you shoot it with ? Boy, Oh Boy - you
# say the bullet glanced off? Glanced off? Really now? You say that skunk
# was a living real NA skunk. Hummmmm.......
I have to assume that the second poster above is either a troll, or
someone who doesn't read very carefully...:^)
Jay T
Steven Speer
shoot at from a low angle of attack and see what happens. If it'll bounce
off water, it'll bounce off bone, rock, wood or anything else hit at such
a shallow angle at such high speed. Maybe you haven't ever actually looked
closely at a grizzly bear head, but the web is full of straight on photos.
The brain is behind a VERY low sloped brow behind a sloped snout.
It isn't just a .308 that would skip, I use a .375 H&H for my annual Alaska
treks and I wouldn't try to shoot a bear straight on in the head with it.
-Steve
Fluid
#
# There's no way that a solid shot on any kind of bone tissue from a .308 Win
# with decent bullets (jacketed, 150grs or more) is going to bounce off ...
# certainly not without substantial damage to the structure or the contents ...
# and certainly not at 50 yards...
Yet another post from someone who has probably never even seen a brownie
in the bush, let alone shot at one. The topic is well covered in other
recent posts to the thread.
The suggestion to stick one's own head in a 'skull' to test his theory
clearly shows that the poster doesn't intend to try to prove his claim
himself ( which he could try to do ), instead relying on his own best
'guess' at what might happen. Ask an Alaskan or northern Canadian who
has shot a big bear what will happen. But wait, maybe this .308 is like
that famous .30-06 from another thread which would penetrate 12 feet of
concrete AND a steel helmet..... :^)
Jay T
Chris A. Goodey
a good shot with a .308 is probably better than a bad shot with a
bigger gun.
A .300 magnum is a little better.
I understand guides that back-up the hunter often use .458s. Of
course, the average shooter will not master a .458 Winchester magnum,
My favorite African Big Game hunter author Peter Capstick sure likes
the .375 H&H Magnum. It doesn't shoot real fast bullets, so may not be
good for 400 yard shots, but stuff stays hit. A good compromise might
be a .338 magnum. It helps to pick the right bullets. For many, a hunt
for bear, moose and caribou might be a once in a life time hunt. Why
ruin it with too small a gun?
Jeffrey A. Del Col
In a previous article, fl...@alaska.net (Fluid) says:
#Spomeone wrote:
##
## There's no way that a solid shot on any kind of bone tissue from a .308 Win
## with decent bullets (jacketed, 150grs or more) is going to bounce off ...
## certainly not without substantial damage to the structure or the contents ...
## and certainly not at 50 yards...
#
#Yet another post from someone who has probably never even seen a brownie
#in the bush, let alone shot at one. The topic is well covered in other
#recent posts to the thread.
#The suggestion to stick one's own head in a 'skull' to test his theory
#clearly shows that the poster doesn't intend to try to prove his claim
#himself ( which he could try to do ), instead relying on his own best
#'guess' at what might happen. Ask an Alaskan or northern Canadian who
#has shot a big bear what will happen. But wait, maybe this .308 is like
#that famous .30-06 from another thread which would penetrate 12 feet of
#concrete AND a steel helmet..... :^)
#
I agree with Fluid.
A prominent English gun maker who served in WWI was struck in the
head at close range by a German 8mm Mauser round.
The FMJ spitzer bullet glanced off his skull, giving him a tremendous
headache and a mild concussion but doing little else.
From this freak experience the gun maker concluded that spitzer bullets
were worthless for hunting!!
Bullets will indeed bounce off head bones if the angle is right. The
skull doesn't even have to belong to a Kodiak or polar bear.
J. Del Col
--
Hornets glazed fast in a plum's juice,
Gold and ebony in amber funeral beads.
Halfton
#Spomeone wrote:
##
## There's no way that a solid shot on any kind of bone tissue from a .308 Win
## with decent bullets (jacketed, 150grs or more) is going to bounce off ...
## certainly not without substantial damage to the structure or the contents ...
## and certainly not at 50 yards...
#
#Yet another post from someone who has probably never even seen a brownie
#in the bush, let alone shot at one. The topic is well covered in other
#recent posts to the thread.
#The suggestion to stick one's own head in a 'skull' to test his theory
#clearly shows that the poster doesn't intend to try to prove his claim
#himself ( which he could try to do ), instead relying on his own best
#'guess' at what might happen. Ask an Alaskan or northern Canadian who
#has shot a big bear what will happen. But wait, maybe this .308 is like
#that famous .30-06 from another thread which would penetrate 12 feet of
#concrete AND a steel helmet..... :^)
Well it may be true that our Griz's here in Alberta arn't as big as
yours in Alaska we don't make claims that they are armour plated
either, and well a 308 may be marginal on the light side I think I
would rather use that then have to roll a 105 howitzer along behind
me. Assumming of course that that would be enough gun for those bullet
defecting monsters.
Jim Kirkham
jtk...@lis.ab.ca
Member: The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (9yrs.)
Member: The Alberta Fish And Game Association.
I am the midnight watchman down at Miller's Tool and Die.
And I watch the metal rusting, and I watch the time go by..
(Harry Chapin)
. . . . . . . . . .
PlumbrKng
...same for moose and 7mm Rem mag for the Caribou ......
Fluid
#
# Well it may be true that our Griz's here in Alberta arn't as big as
# yours in Alaska we don't make claims that they are armour plated
# either, and well a 308 may be marginal on the light side I think I
# would rather use that then have to roll a 105 howitzer along behind
# me. Assumming of course that that would be enough gun for those bullet
# defecting monsters.
Cute response, but hardly helpful to the original poster. What YOU
"would rather use" is irrelevant. Had you read the entire thread, you'd
be aware that most who have ACTUALLY HUNTED the bears feel better with a
rifle having a bit more punch than a .308.
No one has claimed that you need a howitzer - the .338 Magnum is one of
the most popular cartridges up here, and there is a reason for that. If
one is to come to the Last Frontier to kill a bear, he should plan to do
it with a non-marginal cartridge, unless he isn't "man enough" to make
the effort. The bush is full of hunters dead from bear attacks - to
tell a chechako that a .308 is plenty for a big bear might be to place
him at unnecessary risk. My conscience won't allow me to do that; would
yours?
Jay T
Superposed
What about short range? Will the bear be on me before I have time to plot the
trajectory or should I just call in the Hueys if he gets inside a 1000 yards?
Laser ranging?
Please help, my hypothetical hunting trip in the bear infested wilds of the
East Slope of the Blue Ridge begins in about a month.
Joan McInerney/Craig Helmuth
As long as you don't shoot 'em in the butt and expect them to be
dead in two seconds a 308 should be fine. I've taken three bears
and a moose in the past three seasons with a 30-06 and it works
well. No shots were over 125 yards and I was using Barnes 180 gr
X bullets for the most part. All except the moose were one shot
kills (moose took two add'l to anchor him).
The cartridge used is almost not relevant - pick the terminal
performance you want, select a bullet that is known to deliver
that performance, then pick a cartridge that will launch that
bullet at the needed speed. And practice!
Caribou are pretty easy to kill, nothing fancy needed from a
bullet.
Moose are about the same, but even broadside thats a whole lot
of animal to shoot thru, so I'd pick something that retains
weight and doesn't fragment so it will penetrate completely.
Bear - well there is a difference of opinion on that. Some of
the guides teaching a state sponsored bear hunting clinic don't
like bullets such as the Nosler Partition because they tend
to exit the animal. These guides feel all the bullet's energy
should stay in the animal. The contrary view is that just
dumping bullet energy into soft tissue is not a sure stopper,
that bullets have to penetrate and break bones to rapidly disable
a game animal, hence the use of premium bullets. Take your pick!
-craig Happiness is Fifty below zero!
Joan McInerney/Craig Helmuth
# If
# one is to come to the Last Frontier to kill a bear, he should plan to do
# it with a non-marginal cartridge, unless he isn't "man enough" to make
# the effort. The bush is full of hunters dead from bear attacks - to
# tell a chechako that a .308 is plenty for a big bear might be to place
# him at unnecessary risk. My conscience won't allow me to do that; would
# yours?
#
# Jay T
Pay no attention to this "man enough" baloney...this guy has had
too much coffee or testoterone or some other arm-chair expert vices.
Many of the great Alaskan bear guides of this century have used a
30-06 with 220 grain slugs for big bears. Try the Barnes 200 grain
X bullet if you handload or just about any of the premium factory
loaded ammo.
Take along a 12 guage pump with slugs & #4 buckshot if you are
unluck or unwise enough to have to dig a wounded bear out of thick
brush. Note that non-residents of Alaska must be guided on bear
hunts (close relatives hunting with non-residents excepted) and
a guide will generally loan you his gun to shoot with if they are
worried that you are using too small a gun.
I can't remember the last bear attach on a bear hunter - most people
hurt by bears up here are doing something else and not focusing on
potential bear sign. An alert hunter is more important than nit
picking about the caliber of the gun...
And yes I have killed three Alaskan bears in the last four years.
Happy hunting!
-craig
Fluid
#
# Pay no attention to this "man enough" baloney...this guy has had
# too much coffee or testoterone or some other arm-chair expert vices.
Sticks and stones....and 25 years of hunting in the Great Land.
# Many of the great Alaskan bear guides of this century have used a
# 30-06 with 220 grain slugs for big bears.
Name a 'current' Alaskan guide who uses a .30-06 to back up his clients
on a brown bear/grizzley hunt. You won't find many if you find one.
Then again, Dan'l Boone was a great hunter, and HE used a knife to kill
a grizzly....by your logic then, a knife would be great to use on big
bear. Okay, not a knife, a flintlock maybe....
# I can't remember the last bear attach on a bear hunter -
Maybe you haven't lived here very long. Two dead in SE Alaska in
1992/3, both hunters out hunting. They were in all the local papers.
One was on a stand, apparently attacked from behind - a .458 Mag may not
have helped him. BTW, there was no time frame to 'the bush is full of
dead hunters'...and isn't one dead hunter enough?
The point of my post was to give good advice to someone who seemed to
know little about the subject. Check out the local sporting goods
stores soon when hunting season gets into full swing in SC Alaska.
Check it out in the Spring too. Most Alaskans will be using a belted
mag on big bear. No, it isn't necessary, and a .35 Whelen or similar
cartridge will work fine. And a .308 will certainly kill a bear, but it
is not the best choice by any means.
The great bears are a diminishing breed, and they deserve our
respect...if you've hunted them as you claim, then you know what I'm
talking about. We owe it to the game to dispatch it cleanly, and to use
the best, adequate weapon for the job. I claim that the .308 is not the
best weapon, and thousands of other Alaskans agree with me. You and I
can agree to disagree here.
# And yes I have killed three Alaskan bears in the last four years.
There aren't many places in this state where you can legally kill three
brown/grizzly bears in four years - the limit is usually one every four
years for residents in 93% of the state's regulated game units. Little
black bears are another matter. :^)
I've hunted Kodiak Island almost yearly since 1974, and I see plenty of
brownies, sometimes up close and personal. I would not feel as
comfortable in these situations with a .308 as I would with a .338. Why
would I say less than this to a man who needs advice on the subject?
Why would you?
Jay T
Steven Speer
: Pay no attention to this "man enough" baloney...this guy has had
: too much coffee or testoterone or some other arm-chair expert vices.
And later...
: Take along a 12 guage pump with slugs & #4 buckshot if you are
: unluck or unwise enough to have to dig a wounded bear out of thick
: brush. Note that non-residents of Alaska must be guided on bear
: hunts (close relatives hunting with non-residents excepted) and
: a guide will generally loan you his gun to shoot with if they are
: worried that you are using too small a gun.
The great shotgun reference, once again raises it's ugly head. You'd be
better off with a .50 caliber black powder rifle. Why on earth would you
carry a shotgun instead of a more capable rifle? It isn't any quicker and
easier to throw a slow projectile out than a fast one. My advice is to
ignore the advice of anyone who suggests shotguns are good big bear defense.
In roughly 12 years on the net, we've yet to hear from one of these "experts"
who have actually used one in such a capacity. On the other hand, the USFS
issued a report that showed the 12 guage with slugs to be equal in defensive
function to a .44 mag, while virtually any rifle, even a .30-30, scored
multiple times higher in effectiveness. I don't have it handy, but I've
posted the whole report annually when this thread comes up (always in the
Fall you know) every year for the last 6 or so - check Deja News if you
want to read it.
Now for the obligatory retort of the "I talked to an Alaskan guide who said"
variety. I've talked to plenty too - I tend not to make life based decisions
on the advice of seasonal workers who don't need high school diploma's. Not
a slam on all guides, just an observation that you can get anyone to say
anything in this day and age.
-Steve
Joan McInerney/Craig Helmuth
crowd, for they like talking more than doing.
The 308 will more than adequately do the job when applied
correctly. Be sure to put in your practice time at the
rifle range and be ready to climb some hills (we have some
up here!).
I would also make sure your scope is up to the task: the
weather can go from very mild (winter 76-77 the ice was
off the beaches in February enough to go clam digging!) to
not so mild (In Sept 92 the remainder of hurricane Inki
[sp?] that tore up Hawaii so bad nailed Alaska with lots
of very early snow. I know of many of hunters that were
stranded out in the field by that storm for a week or
more.). I seem to remember an article in "Handloader"
or "Rifle" about testing scopes for fogging - if you have
any doubts about your scope, test it.
Any if someone starts giving you a hard time about the 308
ask 'em if you can trade them your 45-70 derringer for one
in 50 BMG cause the 45-70 is a too small... :-)
-craig
Fluid
> ...
Yep, pay attention instead to someone who reads about doing it, or who
has done it once or twice. Ignore the advice of thousands of hunters
who do it every year. Listen to cute references to long-dead hunters
from fifty years ago, who didn't have today's technology, or the money
to by it. Ignore structured studies of firearms use on big bear.
Listen to recommendations to use a shotgun against large dangerous
animals instead of proven powerful rifles. Ignore the experience of
shooters who have repeatedly faced charging brownies, ignore their
descriptions of their experiences, ignore their recommendations. Listen
instead to the cheechako who has shot a couple of black bears off his
ATV....
In spite of all the clever hyperbole, no one in the thread has suggested
that a .308 won't kill a big bear. Of course it will, and cute
references to the use of .50 BMG are just that - cute dissembling off
the real topic: Is the .308 really sufficient to hunt big bear. If you
can be certain to place your shot perfectly, if you use the correct
bullet, if the animal isn't too worked up, then it will work. If the
shot isn't perfect - and who can guarantee it always will be - or if the
animal is worked up to begin with - it will NOT be enough. I've watched
numerous brownies take multiple hits from large, powerful rifles and not
only keep on their feet, but keep coming. One 9-footer on Admiralty
Island comes to mind - she took four good hits from a .340 Weatherby,
and five less-than-great hits from a .30-06/220RN, before she laid down
for keeps. Another had both shoulders broken by a .375 H&H, but he kept
crawling toward the hunter until stopped by another in the neck.
The above examples are not meant to scare or to impress the readers, but
they are a couple of real-life examples of what CAN happen when hunting
the big bears; they are experiences that are shared by those of us who
HAVE spent lots of time in the bush amongst these wonderful animals.
Bears are not bullet proof, and most will succum to good hits in a
normal manner. But some will not, and if you wish to stake your life,
or the life of another unsuspecting hunter who may later come into
contact with the wounded bear ( pity that poor bastard! ), then by all
means use a .308 or .30-06. It will kill a bear. Many of us Alaskans (
thousands of us in fact ) prefer the extra insurance of a larger, more
prudent cartridge. We think our own lives, and the lives of the bears,
deserve it.
Jay T
> ...
Steven Speer
: crowd, for they like talking more than doing.
:
: The 308 will more than adequately do the job when applied
: correctly.
On the off chance that the original author is still following this and trying
to figure it all out I'd like to suggest that posts such as this that
make blanket statements that reject the well articulated arguments of others
without actually addressing any of those arguments should be the ones that
are ignored. The technique employed here is called "proof by assertion".
It sounds good in a bar, at a gun show, or on usenet - but if you're fool
enough to actually act on this kind of advice, I suppose it all works out in
the end anyway.
You've been given some solid suggestions for places to ask follow-up questions
where they can be answered with some degree of authority that lies outside of
vague claims and handwaving boastful speeches - do yourself a favor and follow
a few of those leads. A $20 book could be a great investment - try "Hunting
in Alaska" for starters.
-Steve
rde...@flash.net
#On the off chance that the original author is still following this and trying
#to figure it all out I'd like to suggest that posts such as this that
#make blanket statements that reject the well articulated arguments of others
#without actually addressing any of those arguments should be the ones that
#are ignored. The technique employed here is called "proof by assertion".
#It sounds good in a bar, at a gun show, or on usenet - but if you're fool
#enough to actually act on this kind of advice, I suppose it all works out in
#the end anyway.
#
#You've been given some solid suggestions for places to ask follow-up questions
#where they can be answered with some degree of authority that lies outside of
#vague claims and handwaving boastful speeches - do yourself a favor and follow
#a few of those leads. A $20 book could be a great investment - try "Hunting
#in Alaska" for starters.
#
# -Steve
#
On that off chance he is still following and the even "offer" chance
anybody cares, I 100% agree, so that's all I'll say.
Take care,
Safe Shooting (and hunting)
piper...@gmail.com
this great state. With proper shot placement I have cleanly harvested moose
brown bear and caribou with a 243. Much more important than cartridge size
is marksmanship abilities. A bullet behind the ear is lethal instantly period
regardless if it's a 50 bmg or a 243. When I was working as a bear hunting
guide out of the Dillingham area I carried a 375 h&h as my guide rifle.
While hunting for my personal pleasure I usually use a 45-70 in a Ruger no1.
I have used the 308 on moose but nothing else and my last moose with the 308
I put into his heart from about 80 yards. Moose went less than 10 feet.
If you can put a bullet behind the ear into the brain then you can use a 22 lr.
Just a matter of how good of a marksman are you. I used to trap with an
old native man that used a Winchester 94 in 30-30 for everything. And was
humane about it.
If you can shoot accurately and don't insist on long shots through the lungs
and are willing to put a bullet in the brain then this whole discussion is
pointless.
Gunner Asch
#and are willing to put a bullet in the brain then this whole discussion is
#pointless.
Well stated! Bravo!!
Gunner
TimR
# #If you can shoot accurately and don't insist on long shots through the lungs
# #and are willing to put a bullet in the brain then this whole discussion is
# #pointless.
#
#
# Well stated! Bravo!!
#
# Gunner
A 17 year old thread.
But if anybody is interested, I found the original Forest Service report from 1983:
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf
Gunner Asch
#But if anybody is interested, I found the original Forest Service report from 1983:
#http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf
#
#
I just read this article again, and its very much worth reading
several times, if anyone lives in bear country
Gunner
Martin Eastburn
camping. Long term was a cabin which never happened - we moved overseas.
While I was on site clearing brush and finding cannon balls and doing
what is fun, a Ranger came up the road and parked across the river from
us. I walked over the bridge where he just went to see what was up.
Normally they didn't bother us stake holders. He wasn't.
He said a rogue Grizzly had attacked a camp and killed a dog and did a
number on one of the men. It was just coming down the mountain and
smelled or ran into them. The issue was this bear had been taken way
back in the woods by helicopter drop net - no roads and mountains
between. It kept coming back to this small area were people were.
The ranger said it was time to take him down for the last time. He had
a pistol on his hip, a large knife on the other and a smaller one in his
back. He had a quiver of arrows and a really nice looking bow.
He said he would never hunt a bear with a rifle or a pistol if at close
range, the bear has nerve centers - micro brains - about it's body.
Mindless he could attack and swipe. He claimed a brain shot was so-so.
A heart shot was so-so. Don't be close or he might run you over
mechanically.
The bow and arrows (bleeders) were intended to be a long term bleed down
if that what it took. The Gun was to complete the downed bear and
Knives to complete what the gun didn't. They were also his last defense
if the bear turned on him and tried to kill him.
He was an Indian or part Indian ranger and a serious man.
I never saw him again, nor did I see the bear. I only hope he got the
bear and not the reverse. His truck was gone the next Summer. I had
two weeks on the camp so he was out on foot for a couple of weeks when
I left.
Martin - site near Angus N.M. Near the deep mountain lake - beyond it
some miles.
The PDF contains some interesting test data and setup data.
newyoup...@gmail.com
# #
# #
# It would be considered underpowered for moose and bear (other than black
# ones).
Never have I seen such a ridiculous thread. A .308 partition or trophy bonded tip in
the 165-180 range of premium bullets is very sufficient for black bear, moose, and caribou.
So uninformed.