Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Alaska Minimum 'caliber' for Kodiak Brown Bear?

Question for those who spend lots of time in bear country-
If someone deems a pump action Remington dependable enough to carry in bear country, why would they carry it in 12 gauge instead of carrying it in 30/06, fed with 200 grajn Nosler Partitions, which I think would give much more dependable penetration?

A sledgehammer, typically weighs about 10 pounds, which is, ironically 10 times as heavy as a 16 ounce framing hammer, and can be swung about as fast as the framing hammer.
The most powerful shoulder fired sporting rifle is not ten times more powerful than a standard, non magnum. That's one place your anaogy falls apart.
The second place your analogy falls apart is that in the field, under observation covering 30 years of experience, the lighter calibers ( the claw hammer in your analogy) has proven MORE SUCCESSFUL in doing the intended job than the heavy magnums, in the hands of guided hunters.
So, using the hammer analogy of yours, the correct question would be "If, over 30 years of performing rtasks where a claw hammer was more successful than a sledge hammer was in performing the same task, why would someone insist that it was better to use the sledge hammer."

Now that is funny!!!

Royce already did a fine job debunking your analogy but he left out the very real part where "energy" would have to mean something in killing potential and it does not... It is strictly about breaking organs and making them bleed.

Among other things, I have .308s, a .300 Win Mag, a 7mm Wby, a .340 Wby, and a .375 Wby. I shoot my 340 better than any of them.

I went to the range last Sunday, and I shot mostly 1-1/4"-1-3/4" groups at 200yds with my .340 Wby--about the same, but slightly better than I do with my 7mm and .300. I'm taking my .340 back to Unit 17B this Sept. A .50 BMG does more damage than a .22 LR. While the differences are smaller, the .338-.375 calibers do more damage than a 7mm. Just is what it is. Physics. Common sense. I love my 7mm, but it's just reality. I'd love to bring a .243 to go brown bear hunting so I wouldn't have to feel a heavier push on my shoulder (which I didn't notice in the least last time with my .375 when squeezing the trigger on a chance of a lifetime target). I would be all for it if I thought it was a good idea when I might not get to do it again for a long time or forever--who knows. The only reason that I can shoot my .375 and .340 well is that I worked hard at it and mitigated recoil at the range (padding, etc ...). Hard, but not that hard. It's not that hard. I'm not taking my 7mm. I shoot it well. I shoot my .340 better.

Where did I mention "energy"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man (�A straw man, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument.�).

You did not mention it by name just by every possible inference and nuance of your argument. If you fail to grasp the point I suggest counting to ten by potatoes.

Because tolerances in shotguns are far more forgiving than metallic cartridge guns... Shooting anything like high pressure loads in a 760/7600 shows pretty quickly the difference in extraction forces between bolt actions and pump guns.

I have a 7600 in 35WhelenAI with a bit of excess headspace. If I shoot it with neck-sized reloads only it is significantly harder to work than SB sized loads. Enough so it has been just hanging in the safe for a very long time... It has been used on a number of bears, deer, moose, and caribou... but the bolts go hunting these days.

Oh, I see, you're using the term "energy" in quotes in misquoting me, and then claiming that it's among the "inferences and nuances." Do you know what quotation marks mean?

Heavier and fatter bullets of the same construction do more damage than slimmer and lighter ones going the same speed on either flesh or bone on a really large animal. You can call it �energy� if you want�I didn�t. But no one with a brain thinks otherwise. Does a 62gr .223 Rem. bullet moving at 3,000 fps do as much damage on a brown bear as a 270gr .375 bullet moving at the same speed? No. No. And no. That's why Phil calls himself "458," not "223." The differences between a 160gr 7mm bullet moving at 3,000 fps and a 270gr .375 bullet of the same type moving at the same speed are closer, but still pretty far apart. And we�re talking about a tough aggressive carnivore that can weigh over a thousand pounds that, more often than not, is not felled by the first shot.

Thanks for sharing the details based on your single brown bear. I hung on every word, really...

one potato
two potato
...

You're welcome. I assume that, if I hunt a million brown bears, smaller thinner bullets will someday become better than bigger fatter ones of the same type on large game, and guides who have spent decades hunting brown bear will then disagree with that. My guide has hunted and guided with a .338 for decades. I'm sure that, when I kill a few more myself, he will start hunting with a .177.

three potato
four...

That's about as intelligent as your other 25,000 posts. Several thousand hours wasted acting like a child on the internet. I wonder what you might have accomplished if you had all of thousands of hours back.

MH,

You keep bringing up this point about since residents can hunt brown bear every year as an OTC tag and only have to spend $2500 on a remote fly out hunt to 17B then sense we spent less money somehow that makes us feel better using a smaller round.

Furthermore you'd be inclined to do the same from what I gather in these posts I quoted from you. Care to explain what you mean, cause you make it sound as though since we are residents we are willing to use these "marginal" caliber rifles because were aren't as invested monetarily as a non-resident and some how more willing to risk wounding a animal? When in the reality we aren't the ones hunting with a guide and has a clean up crew right there with you anyways if you do muff it up. But you are saying above if the guide wasn't there to help take the animal down from a bad shot you'd you more apt to use a smaller rifle? I would think as residents without a guide we'd be more inclined to ensure the bear is hit well than one that has a guide behind them to back them up.

I fail to see this point you are trying to make by you repeating to voice this stance, so if you get time and care to explain that would be great.

Personally, I could care less what one choose to hunt brown bear with so long as they are comfortable with it and shoot it well. But you feel this need for you defend your choice of a 340 wby and no one is saying you shouldn't. If you like it and shoot it well use it again it obviously works as will many other options. Best of luck to you this fall sir.

Royce I like the Rem 760 & 7600 have a 06 in 760 and a 35 Whelen in 7600. I like them both and reload for them if I keep the loads under max no extraction issues. Had a rechambered 35 Rem to 35 Whelen, in a Rem 760 headspace issues and hard extraction with most loads. Which Art (Sitka Deer) said also about his 760 in 35 Whelen IMP. With good ammo in both my 760
and 35 Whelen I have no concerns with either in bear country.

Also we tried one of Arts 35 Whelen IMP rounds in my 35 Whelen Improved and it had a much larger chamber than my rifle.

Bear taken by Larry Kelly

Alaska lanche,

I've heard the same argument about resident elk hunters here in Montana for decades: We can get by with smaller cartridges than non-residents because we have all season to hunt, so can "pick our shots."

This is mostly BS. While a few Montana residents hunt the entire season, most have jobs, so end up hunting weekends, when most other hunters are out. Unless they're lucky enough to own some elk-suitable land, or know somebody who does, they hunt public land like everybody else.

We have a 5-week rifle season, except in certain back-country areas that pretty much require horses to access. As a result, most residents can hunt five weekends, which means 10 days--IF they don't have something else they must do for part of the weekends. Some take a few days off from work to hunt, but the majority just make do with whatever Saturdays and Sundays they can.

Since they have limited time, and usually end up hunting where most other people do, their chances at elk are often fleeting, or take place in timber where the angle isn't ideal. As a result, few resident hunters pass up half-decent shots at a legal elk.

Non-residents usually hunt for at least a week, and often for 10 days. They often hire an outfitter, who has horses for taking them deeper into public land, or leases private ranches where pickups are often used. Hunting pressure is much lighter, especially on private land, where a lot of elk move after the first few days of hunting season, due to pressure on public land.

I have hunted elk in all those ways, though most has been foot-hunting on public land. In general, the easiest shots come on private land, though the early back-country public-land hunts can also be easier, because they start during the rut.

Twice when hunting private land I've seen 30-some branch-antlered bulls on one mountainside, a week or two after the season opened, and they lingered at least an hour after legal light. You NEVER see such large numbers out in daylight on public land.

In other words, non-resident elk hunting is often far easier than resident elk hunting, with far more options for "picking shots." Yet many non-residents firmly believe they simply must bring a .300 or .338 magnum, rather than the .270's, 7mm magnums and .30-06's used by many if not most residents.

The two bulls I've killed when I've been lucky enough to hunt private land during rifle season, by the way, were standing close to broadside, in the open, at 250 and 150 yards. Both were 6x6's, taken with a .30-06 and a 7mm magnum.

For some reason I understood you to be in the legal field??? If that is the case you certainly have trouble following a simple argument. You do stay on one side firmly, but understanding any aspect of the other side is well beyond you.

And as an example it is comical to attempt to mock someone for doing EXACTLY the same thing you do.

Marinehawk,



Nice choice on the .340 Weatherby cartridge. I have a couple friends who swear by the .300 Weatherby but I feel the .340 is the most versatile Weatherby round.