Guys, a week or so ago I posted that a buddy of mine asked me to try and locate him a .375H&H. Come to find out, he's wanting the rifle for an upcoming black bear hunt in Idaho. Apparently the guide suggested he bring a rifle of at least .30 caliber, which he interpreted to mean the bigger the better.
Now I've never hunted black bears, and I suppose it's none of my business if he wants to buy a .375H&H; afterall, who needs a valid reason for a new rifle purchase, but it sure seems unecessary for black bear, especially over bait. I can't imagine them being anything that a standard issue "deer rifle" wouldn't handle. My buddy shoots a 7mm Remington Magnum with 160gr bullets for deer and elk, but for some reason he doesn't think it has enough "poop" for this application.
What do you guys think?
Idaho has some big black bears, but the 7RM is more than adequate for the biggest of them without concession of any kind. I would hope he would do better than a box of factory soft-points, though...
I agree with Sitka, the 7 is more than enough jam..............just use heavy for calibre bullets.
The 7mmremmag is more than enough for any black bear.My hunting partners and I have used the 140gr partition with great success.
Better than heavy, go X............
Having guided in Idaho for a while I would agree with the guide that suggested 30 caliber or bigger. It's been my long standing opinion that guns under 30 caliber do not leave a functional blood trail. That goes double for bears! that hair and fat will seal a hole Pretty darn quick. Bears don't leave much in the way of foot prints to follow either. If he is hunting with hounds or bait then things could be a bit less of an issue. However for spot and stalk on spring green hill sides where a bear the runs 100 yards will be very difficult to find I have to agree with the guides professional opinion here as it mirrors mine.
Under .308 leave little to no functional blood trail, if they do it's not for very long
Under .338 to .308 leave a decent blood trail most of the time but not always very long. you're lucky to still see anything beyond 75-100 yards.
375 to .338 are where dependable blood trails start. These calibers will nearly always lead you right to the game with little difficulty if they are hit well.
Over .375 will in most cases leave a trail that can be followed at a walk leaving copious amounts of blood which can also contain chunks of fat meat organs and hair.
G.W.- If your friend wants a bigger stick, then have him look at the ballistic charts and have him compare the 375 H&H and 300 RUM. The 300RUM carries more wallup faster and further in every catagory except right at the muzzle. This was my choice after sitting down with my partner and him explaining all the scientifics and what not. I believe he would be more than satisfied with this choice. Good luck!
Have to say I'd go with what JJ has to say on this one - he's probably been in on more bear and big critter kills than most of us could dream of...
I'll through in what I've heard and read from other guys like JJ, and finally admitted to myself through personal experience - it's better to hunt with a rifle that you can handle and shoot well - and then be selective about your shots, than to go with a rifle that has more power than you can handle and screw up the shots because of it.
Since you're buddy has the 7 RM, he's used to '06 level, or slightly above, recoil. The .375 H&H is another step up, though a bit different (more, but more of a push or a shove than a whack). That might be a consideration for him.
Also, what type of rifle(s) is he used to? I'm going to assume, though please correct if I'm wrong, that the 7 is a bolt-action. If so, and he is used to and wants to stay with the bolt, then that's fine - the sky is the limit as far as calibers. The .350 RM might be more in line with what he's used to, and still have plenty to get the job done. Same thing for any bolt gun in .358 Winchester or 35 Whelen, if he can find one. The new Remington CDL is chambered in .35 Whelen, and it's a fine looking, fine handling rig - even for a Sucks. If short mags are his thing, then the .325 WSM is a very definite bruin-getter. None of these would hit as hard as the .375 H&H, on either end, which might be a good thing on the "sending" end.
But, if he's used to and comfortable with other actions, or might just want one, then there might be other caliber options out there that might suit better than the 7 or the .375.
I know that Remington used to make the 7600 pumps in .35 Whelen. That's a pretty good sized hole, and plenty of power, without being overly nasty on the recoil end. Quick follow-ups possible, and acceptable accuracy for woods (bait) ranges and could even stretch it if a bruin was sighted out to a couple of hundred yards.
For close-work only, and with quick follow-ups and decent accuracy again available, the Browning BLR in .358 Winchester, the Winchester 94 Big-Bores in .356, .375, .444, and the new one in .450 Marlin, as well as the Marlin 336s/1895s in .356, .375, .444, .450, and .45-70 can certainly handle any bear out there. The bigger bores (thinking specifically about the .444 and .45-70) can be had with rather impressive HPs, and all of them can be loaded with deep penetrating and excellent expansion bullets. All of these leverguns will hit with about the same recoil (both energy and velocity) as a hot/heavy 7mmRM; with the ability to go way, way up in the case of the .450 and .45-70.
If a single-shot is more his style, then personally, I'd go with the Ruger #1 or T/C Encore in something like a .45-70 (in either), a .405 Winchester (Ruger) or .375 JDJ (T/C). Also, the JDJ ought to get near H&H performance with noticably less punishment.
All of that said, the .375 H&H can certainly take care of any black bear that has ever knocked over a bait barrel.
Let us know how he comes out and how the hunt goes.
Raghorny, your hunting partner needs to recheck his ballistics. The 300 RUM is not what he claims. Here is the data right from the Hornady Manual:
300 mag 180 grain bullet muzzle 3200fps 4092fpe
At 100 yards 2967fps and 3517fpe with a 200 yard zero it's +1.2" high (maybe it could be loaded hotter or use a longer barrel. The same can be said for the 375HH so I am using typical load data rather then some home made special "hot" ammo)
At 200 yards it's at 2745fps and 3012fpe
at 300 yards it's at 2534fps and 2567fps with a -5.8" drop
The 375HH at the muzzle with a 270 grain bullet is 4700fpe
at 100 yards 2563fps and 3935fpe (Nearly the same FPE as the RUM at the muzzle!) the trajectory with a 200 yard zero is +2.1"( 9/10's of an inch difference) for practical purposes on the game intended it's no difference. The Velocity at 200 yards is 2336 and the FPE is 3272
At 300 yards the Velocity is 2122 and 2699fpe with a -8.3" drop. 2" more drop at 300 yards,for practical purposes on the game intended it's not enough difference to worry about, we are talking "big game"
It still carrys more energy with a far bigger bullet, that bullet weight and diameter cannot be stressed enough. That alone makes more difference then any scientific FPE calculation!
At 400 yards the trajectoy of the RUM begins to pull away with only -17" compared to -24" with the 375HH however the 375HH still exceeds the the FPE 2167 for the RUM VS 2208 for the 375HH. This is all the way to about a 1/4 mile, not just at the muzzle!
The reality is that the 300RUM is a flatter shooting gun giving it an edge at hitting the target more consistantly beyond 350 yards for big game. However do not confuse the power difference between the two. There is simply no comparison in over all knock down killing power at any practical hunting range.
Although the FPE is not my determining factor for a firearm with more power, it happens to be the "industry" standard. As far as I am personally concerned the bullets diameter and weight far outweigh the FPE value. To that end the .375 diameter bullet is so far superior to a .308 diameter bullet the two cannot be compared for shooting the bigger game of the world which could include black bears.
The 375HH would not be my first choice for a spot and stalk black bear hunt during spring in Idaho. Might not make the top ten if I were shopping to get a gun for that hunt. I only post this to clear up the major misconception that you commented on regarding the 300RUM being more powerful at all distances beyond the Muzzle.
JJ. I think you said what I was trying to say: ( The reality is that the 300RUM is a flatter shooting gun giving it an edge at hitting the target more consistantly beyond 350 yards for big game) I was just putting another option on the table , because it sounds like the guys friend wants a big shooter and the 300 RUM is just another option and a better one IMHO!
I wish you well with this long range effort. I have never met a single experienced hunter in my life and my whole career hunting bears that could judge a bear with any degree of accuracy for sex, size, or hide quality over 300 yards. Shooting one at that distance that runs off with little or no blood is going to change the way you view recreational bear hunting when you have to go searching for a wounded animal that can and will hurt you given the chance.
raghorny,
I read both your first post on this topic, and JJHacks reply. They don't say the same thing, not even close.
It's great you like your 300RUM, but few bear hunters are going to agree with your opinion as it applies to this case.
Getting back to Great Wapiti's original inquiry, if I'm reading his post right this will be a black bear hunt over bait. In that case, a 7RM will do fine when stoked with the right bullets such as the NP or X bullet on the largest black bears over bait. I've killed several big black bears with various 7mms and I've only felt undergunned one time and that had more to do with playing backup for a friend. But if the hunter wants to shoot a black bear with a 375 over bait then there's nothing wrong with that. I say more power to him, bigger is always better if the hunter is up to it.
Not sure if I understood JJ's comment correctly on judging bears over 300 yards, but with good optics an experienced bear hunter can surely distinguish between a dink and a mature bear out past 300yds if its not too dark. One knows a big bear when a big bear presents itself if the spotter knows his bears, I'm sure JJ will agree.
MtnHtr
Should be going bear hunting in Colorado this fall - I have 3 preference points and put in for an area where 1 was a guaranteed tag last year.
My Marlin .45-70 will probably be the rifle I select, with a 350g bonded bullet at a shade under 2200fps.
GreatWaputi,
Do you have any more information on the hunt. Where in Idaho? What time of season? What distance will he likely be shooting?
If he is shooting a baited bear(close range), my choice would be a bow/arrow or handgun. If he is within 250 yards of a bait, my choice would be anything from 308/30-06/300 wm with 180's or 358/35 whelen with 225/250's.
His 7 mag will do fine. Nothing more is needed. Most bears are 200-250 lbs., 300+ is very large for Idaho.
I agree with JJACK, judging size and condition of a bear at long range is difficult. Bears are constantly on the move and make for a difficult target at long range.
You mean to say you cannot judge a bear feeding on acorns under a canopy of oaks between 300 and 500 yds using a decent pair of 10x40s and a 20X+ spotter during a mid-day siesta off a good vantage point?
MtnHtr
The hunt is over Father's Day weekend in June. Apparently the bears come in early and late because the guide suggested he bring a rifle equipped with a scope becaue open sights would be hard to see. His dad has a Winchester lever action .375 Big Bore that he thought about using, but decided against it after talking to the guide.
You guys have a ton more experience than either him or I when it comes to bears, but I find it interesting that some guys advocate using the largest caliber possible, while someone else says a bow or pistol is adequate over bait. I think he'll probably stick with the 7mm Mag after pricing .375H&H rounds today...$45.00 to $60.00 per 20 round box makes for some expensive shooting!
To be quite honest, I think the .375H&H is beyond his recoil threshhold anyway....he tends to flinch and pull shots every-now-and-again with even the 7mm Mag. Now it's just a matter of convincing him without hurting his ego...
I think we could be headed into a real abys of misunderstanding here. Some habitats are going to provide better situations then others where long range bear hunting is concerned. In all the areas I have familiarity with in the PNW the bush in spring will be between ankle high and waist high. The thickness varies by elevation. Most Idaho Spot and stalk hunts will be at an elevation where it is very steep and brushy. I find no problem with judging a bear in the open at 300 yards that is somewhat still. Sexing a bear at that distance is near imposssible. the great majority of hunters cannot sex a bear period so adding 300 yards is not a benifit. If you cannot sex the bear then many times you cannot see the cubs which are too small to be seen in the knee deep bush or grass, very often hidden in the rocks of a rock slide or under a stump or fallen tree while mom is out grazing.
As I have written many times before there are about 1000 things that can happen when shooting beyond 300 yards and only one is good. Feel lucky?
It is going to be very difficult to have all the answers needed to shoot a bear at that distance in the PNW habitats the way the are constantly moving. Judging hide quality even with 10X40's is at the very best a con toss. I have frequently used a 40X spotting scope to see hide quality on bears in SE Alaska that were only 100 yards away. Even then some had thin hair or rubbed sections I could not see trhough the scope.
As this is an out of state guided hunt I must assume(maybe I'm mistaken here?) that the hunter is out for a trophy quality animal and will desire to have a quality hide for the rug or mount. In that case shooting a spring bear over three hundred yards will be a real gamble as to the quality, size and sex of your bear.
Maybe in areas with more open habitat or bears that have a large volume of food without the typical roaming habits the distance might not be as much an issue. It's still very difficult to determine the sex and if there are cubs involved. It is absolutely possible to determine a giant of a bear. However it's becomes a much more difficult task for the guide or any hunter to decide if the bear is a 250 pound male or a 165 pound female at 300 plus yards. I have done this far too long and with some of the best guides in the business. The further you get the higher the risk. Bears don't come with antlers or horns. The judging of a bear is not very easy beyond 150 to 200 yards and even that can fool you frequently!
JJ,
No misunderstanding here since you've clarifed your stance. I've glassed for bears hours on end here in the Sierras and the terrain is very similiar to N.Idaho (I've hunted over that way too). One can glass off a high vantage point looking down or across canyons. You can watch a bear over 300yds away for a long time and determine if cubs are present and for trophy quality.
A pard and I glassed a nice boar over a thousand yds away sunning himself on a hillside below the snowline in the Cabinet Mtns of MT not too far from the ID panhandle in early May one year. The bear was fresh out of hibernation and snoozing and napping just below a rocky outcropping. Later, that week my pard killed that bear and he was every bit as big as we thought (close to 300 and 6ft). At least we think he was the same bear since he killed him about a hundred yards from where we saw him earlier that week. Alot of the spring bears in the Idaho's panhandle region and N.Montana are killed on closed logging roads where they come to feed on fresh grasses. The forestry dept usually seeds these areas with grass seed after logging is done and they become havens for spring bears. Alot of these roads and clearcuts can be glassed easily from over 300yds away.
I can't speak for PWS but I do know plenty of hunters who hunt up that way who glass the beaches while on foot and do really well. I watched a woman on a hunting show kill a nice black bear at over 300yds across a small bay. The guide ranged the bear, had the woman client take a rest over a rock and it was bang/flop, lights out. She had a clear shot over the water and the range was a bit over 300yds.
One can glass and judge black bears at well over 300yards in mtn country if they have good optics and lighting, and a good vantage point. I've done it, my pards have done it and I'm not buying your stance one bit.
Great Wapti,
I don't know who your friend's guide is but if he is advocating that a 375H&H is needed for spring black black bears over bait and a 7RM is not enough then I would take him with a grain of salt. Its amazing how many so called locals obtain a guide's license and all of a sudden they are experts. Not saying this is the case here but it could very well be.
Sermon over!
MtnHtr
mtn hunter
You won't find too many bears feeding on acorns under oaks in Idaho. No oaks or acorns to speak of either. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />
In Idaho, you can not shoot a sow with cubs. In a spot and stalk situation, the bear is usually moving along feeding on grass etc.. in and out of brush during the last couple hours of light.
Judging its size, condition, sex... is difficult.....not impossible. Good quality optics sure help.
I used to bait for bears. My stand was never more than 20 yards from the bait. Ideal for the bow or handgun. Overkill with a rifle IMO.
Coyote- you and I be thinkin' alike. Except my load is Re7 and 400 gr Speers at 1875 ft/sec. I know of a couple of bears that were really, really, impressed with that load.
I hate to say it but I built a 35 whelen for just such a purpose in case I get the 200 yard shot while on my way into or out of the bait.
JJ is absolutely right about the blood trails from black bears - they don't leave much, especially fat fall bears. The second bear I shot was with the 45-70; the bear was quartering me slightly (thought it was dead broadside). Put a 350 grain Hornady right behind the near-side front leg but only caught 1 lung and liver. The bear only went ~ 100 yards but the blood trail was relatively good. Even then it took 45 minutes to find it in the Canadian bush (Quebec).
To the orignal post, I'm not against your buddy buying the 375 for bear hunting but he also doesn't need to load it full tilt either. A 375 bullet traveling 24-2500 ft/sec is still overkill, shoots plenty flat enough and allows a larger exit. A 270 gr 375 cal bullet traveling 2500 ft/sec drops ~1, 3, 14 at 100, 200, 300 yards if sighted in at 150 yards. It recoils ~ 33 ft/lbs in a 9 lb rifle as well. His 7 mag is likely in the 27 ft/lbs category with max 175 gr loads so the 375 shouldn't be a huge step up. Plus we all need another rifle.
When I hunted Montana near Libby, we glassed bears from over a half a mile away. Most were grazing on grass near clear cuts. We had no problems identifying cubs w/sows or the dinks (and most were dinks compared to what I'm used to) using binos or the 20X spotter. Yes, there were brushy areas but that is not where we found the bears, they were where sunlight could shine on closed forestry roads and the edges of clearcuts, the sunlit areas germinated grass seeds hence bear food.
I've always believed its better to cover more ground with your eyes and optics rather than your feet. If you can't judge a bear in good light with good optics under a thousand yards then you don't know what a good bear looks like to begin with. I'm fortunate enough to live near big black bear country and I've glassed, killed and helped kill my share of big bears. And I don't mean a 300lb dink with mickey mouse ears either. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />
There are bear hunters and then there are big bear hunters, the latter knows that a big boar has certain features that will set him apart fom the dinks and that includes big bear sign when scouting. This judgement comes with experience from spending time in big bear country and paying attention to big bears, both dead ones and live ones.
The way I see it, if you cannot ID a good mature bear using good optics in good light under a thousand yards, then you are setting yourself up to shoot a dink or worse, a sow with cubs.
MtnHtr
I agree with JJHack,
I don't think black bears are hard to kill, but so many run off into thick stuff when shot. Unless you've shot quite a few, you might not have had one you had to trail in really thick stuff. Until that happens you might disagree with JJ's post. After it happens to you - you'll know what he's talking about.
Their lack of hooves makes them harder to track, the thick crap they like to live in can be thicker than what other animals would be hanging around in - and as was mentioned earlier, their thick pelt, coupled with what can be bodies covered in deep layers of fat - can all add up to the hardest animal to track that I know of.
Couple that with the remote chance they might want to hurt you back if you do end up finding them where the distance is measured in feet - not yards - and you have the reason I prefer Nosler 220's and Barnes X's 200's fired out of a 30-06 Remington Pump as my "go-to" bear combo.
I always try for a double shoulder shot - myself. Breaking 'em down seems to work better than waiting for them to die from lung or heart shots in my experience.
A few years back I was in the Taylor Mountains in Alaska with my wife and a guide with two hunters who were on a mixed hunt for black bear and caribou. The guide who was supposed to hunt with my wife and I was not there due to weather. In the meantime we were hanging out with the other guide and his hunters. One of these men had wounded a bear by trying a neck shot at about 200 yards, I thought that was a stupid shot and told him so. I noticed a bear limping and told the guide we should go after it because it was more than likely the bear from the day before. We then had quite an adventure tracking this wounded bear. My wife sat on a hilltop with binoculars and could see the bear when we could not due to brush and terrain. She gave us hand signals to help us find it. It finally stopped in some berries and the guide got uphill from the bear with his hunter. He was ready to back up the hunter and the hunter changed his mind about shooting because of the thick brush and being excited about being so close to the bear. I was watching from the side and slightly downhill. When the guide relaxed and put his rifle down the hunter mounted his rifle and fired without warning. He was using a 7 Mag and shooting at very close range in heavy brush (alders?) I have never seen anything move so fast in my life. The bear ran downhill and all I could see were branches moving. I watched as it came to a small stream but never saw the bear, only moving branches.
The guide then walked downhill to the stream and started looking for blood. We never found the bear! The bear hunter told me he had tried another neck shot! I asked him why and he said he always used a neck shot. Duh! After that conversation I decided I didn't like neck shots or 7 Mags for black bear. I think you can take what JJ Hack says as the GOSPEL!
Great White North
Never had to track a bear shot with a .358 win. ,.35 whelen or .350 rem mag. a .375 is way too much for black bear over bait. and it's harder to shoot well.
GreatWhiteNorth, sounds like the problem was with the shooter, rather than a poor caliber choice...
This has been an interesting thread. As an update, my buddy has given up the idea, at least for the time being, of getting a .375H&H. He doesn't handload and factory ammo costs more than he is willing to spend. I'll suggest he use a premium bullet in the 7mm Mag.
I don't hunt black bear but my buddy has whacked a zillion of 'em with a 30-06. I think he is shooting 180s.
I'm with JJ on his observations. I hunt black bear in the Maine woods where a 60 yard shot is arguably on the longish side. Also black bears are relatively soft targets--if hit properly of course. At our place in Maine, the 06 is the #1 caliber for bears, but I've seen the gambit and they do leave a lousy blood trail for the most part. Accordingly, I shoot for the shoulder with what I think is a good bear caliber, the 35 Wheelen. In Maine most bears are shot right at dark, so even if they go a short distance, tracking them raises the pucker factor, hence another pitch for a big hole right on the shoulder. I was fortunate in shooting a nice bruin two Septembers ago right at dusk and that 225gr Swift whacked him hard, he never took another step and that should be your goal. jorge
FWIW - I have only hunted bears 2x. In Onterio in a small bear area (average size 125lbs) And I shot a sow at 90 yards with a 30-06 180rg Partitions IIRC and she died within 10 yards - heard the death moan and everything (that'll freak you out at dusk) - my uncle shot a 200 lb boar with a 270 from a range of 40 yards - we tracked it almost 1/2 mile - needless to say it ended up with 2 more 30-06 rounds in it from my rifle before he died - tough old bastid - skinned him out and found an old broadhead burried in his back.
Based on our expirences -- I wouldn't go less than 30 cal and would prob go with the largest caliber I can shoot comfortably.
Mtn Hunter; I agree that given the time and right conditions you can identify a good bear at longer range. However I'm not viewing this as a local hunter with a lot of time or a guy that can hunt prime habitat for the whole season. I have to view this as a guide, or out of state hunter with a narrow window of opportunity to shoot a bear.
Let me put this into that perspective. When a guide that has a business reputation to maintain takes a hunter who has a 6-7 day hunt for black bears they are not typically searching for a particular animal or the extreme trophy. If that bear shows up then great everyone will be happy. But the reality of this hunting as done in the spring between guide and client is much different.
with the possible weather conditions in the higher country with clouds and fog, rain etc. The guide may only be able to show a hunter a bear a day on average, probably less but it's a practical number. If the bear is to far, too small, the stalk is buggered, or the bear just wanders off out of site. There are coutless ways to fail even when seeing a bear.
When that one bear comes into view in and out of the bush on day 4 or 5 within a practical range the job to judge the size, sex, hide, must be done in a hurry and the shot taken. A paying client has come a long way and the weather and lost opportunities are forcing the need to have success. It might be the last chance to shoot before the hunt is over, or weather changes end the hunt. The pressure builds. The bear is in and out of the bush somtimes only seeing part of the body as he climbs over stumps or logs. Maybe for a few seconds he walks across a clearing but again back into the bush. You watch the bushes shaking and moving for 20 minutes at a time before he emerges again with a slight view. The luxury of watching bears for long periods does not exist in this situation. The guide must make the call with very little visual info to go on. The hunter must make the shot with brief moments of exposure in the bush.
This is very typical of a guided bear hunt in the PNW. It can be more open or more bush, each bear picks the spot not us. For this reason I stand by my comment that judging bears beyond 300 yards is not at all consistant or practical. Under good conditions it will work. It would work for a local with lots of time to pass and or try a few days later. Those options unfortunately do not exist for a hunter using a guide with a narrow window for success on a guided hunt. Each time you decide to pass a bear it could be the last chance you have on a very short hunt. As the clock ticks down the pressure builds and judging gets sloppy. It's just Human nature.
JJ,
Your post is well taken and thank you for the clarification. You posted the following line to raghorny and that is where I disagreed with you based on that statement, you wrote:
Quote:
"I have never met a single experienced hunter in my life and my whole career hunting bears that could judge a bear with any degree of accuracy for sex, size, or hide quality over 300 yards."
JJ
End of quote
Later you did post under certain situations that it is entirely possible to accurately judge bears over 300yds but I take it you have not hunted under those situations except in the PNW?
Certainly if you factor in bad weather or fog one could not accurately judge a bear over 300yds away. Poor light would also hamper bear judging over 300yds. But you did not post that in your original post and those factors (weather, fog, rain etc) would apply to most big game hunting where judging for trophy quality is of importance.
As for pressure on a guide to produce a bear for a client, I think thats a whole different subject and ball game. Alot of clients get ripped off every year by bear guides, shooting dink bears is anti-climatic IMHO and experience.
MtnHtr
A 270/7mm whatever/30-06-300 Mag will be fine.
Because of our mild winter the bears have been out of their dens for a long time now though our season doesn't open til Sunday. I'd suspect Idaho is in the same condition.
I guess it's moot now since the source of the question has made up his mind. I'm not an experienced bear killer, but I'm a pretty experienced .375 shooter. For a baited hunt, not in the rain forest, I would think the hunter would do better with the 7 mag he knows (and still flinches on sometimes) than trying to learn to shoot the H&H before he goes bear hunting. I've let a lot of guys who shoot "deer rifles" shoot my .375s, and there is a pretty big difference. Easy to forget if you shoot them for a long time, but it's a pretty significant jump, and not conducive to precise shooting over bait---which should eliminate any long trailing jobs if done well. JMHO
You make good points, Steve_NO. The real question now is which bullets are most suitable for the 7mm RM on his hunt.
I guess if I were bearhunting with a 7 mag, I'd probably go with a bonded Swift to hold the mushroom on and leave as good a blood trail as possible. The 175 Nosler partition is a fine bullet and would give you an exit, but it would probably just be the shank of the bullet left, and a.284 hole in a fat bear ain't going to let a lot of blood out.
Black bear have always just been an extra tag carried on an elk hunt for me, so I've never tried to figure out a specific black bear gun. I'm either carrying an '06 or a .338 for elk, and I'm satisfied that either one will do if I'm lucky enough to see a grown up bruin. The only ones I ever had shot opportunities on were dinks, even to my unskilled eye. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
Brad is completely right. 270, 280, 7mag., or 06 is plently. Most all spring bears in Idaho will weight less then 200lbs. In the fall you can add about a 1/3 to that. Heck, I've kill sring blacks with 1 shot from a 6mm Rem. and a 257 Rob. They must not be wearing their kevral vests in the spring. Pedro
In Minnesota you will more often than not see your bear right at dusk or first thing in the morning in heavy cover which doesn't let much light through even when there is some.
We hunt over bait so shots are close. There are always branches that jump between you and the bear when you shoot. With good bullet placement a 30-06 with 180 gr bullets equals success. The problem is bullet placement is not always good. Bears move around and branches get in the way.
From talking to many other bear hunters over the years in the gun shop I can tell you that most experienced hunters like a bigger bullet than 6mm. I knew one gunsmith who bragged about his 6mm and said it was plenty of gun who the next year showed up at bear camp with a Siamese Mauser in 45-70.
Something must have changed his mind. Another one used a Blr in 308 with 150 gr and said it was plenty, he bought a 375 H&H Magnum Model 70 the folllowing year. I will use a 35 Whelen with 250 gr bullets this year if I draw a tag. You can use whatever you want! Is this a great country or what? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
GWN
Mtn Hunter,
It's obvious that you know what you know and won't hear of anything else. You had three if's in your post: if good optics, if good light, if good vantage point. Another assumption you don't seem to realize is relatively open vegetation. Some parts of Idaho, Washington, B.C., Alaska and even western Montana have really thick vegetation and brush below timberline. Make that thick wet brush, grown up clearcuts (the best ones are not fresh cut lawns), thick brush one step off of the grassy switchbacks on roads, rain, fog, closed or washed out roads forcing long climbs/hikes to see some of the best areas... This discussion is sort of like a decaf nonfat latte with no whipped cream: why bother. But it is interesting. One of the better guides I know has a personal limit of 100 yards on everything he shoots: sheep, moose, bears, even a high ranking goat that he passed at about 200 yards till he could stalk within 100. He doesn't so limit his clients, especially those who are sure they know better. It's just his personal decision about how to make his own shots (and follow up) sure.
Confession time: I killed a two year old cub once that I'd judged to be a whopper bear. Driving up to fish in fog and rain one spring I came around a corner and rolled up right beside a huge black bear feeding on the road edge. We looked at each other from about six feet apart before he stepped over the edge of the drop. I jumped out with my rifle and couldn't see anything in the thick brush except what looked like a road below me that I could see down a slot through the brush and trees. 75 yards ahead of me a side road forked in the bear's direction so I drove up there and down the side road. It didn't double back to the bear at all. After 1/4 mile I turned around and roared back to see a bear ahead of me in the fog, in the road in a low place with a solid bank behind it, about 100 yards on my side of the junction. I bailed out and took a rest, but the bear didn't look right so I hesitated. Range was about 100 yards, probably less. In the fog and wide road I had nothing to compare it with, so shot it. Legal, but an embarrassing oops. Different bear. Lest you think that is too unusual, I shot the wrong bear another time when I thought I was finishing one about 100 yards from where my partner had shot it. I dashed up a side skid road to circle ahead of the wounded bear while my partner followed it. In the next clearcut above I saw a same size & chocolate colour bear with its rump to me, weaving on its feet. Shot it before it could get out of sight in brush. Nice bear but wrong bear. It was feeding away from me, hence the weaving. Lots of bears in that country and lots of cascading streams to mask noise. Golly it must be nice to hunt in sunlight and good weather, with open vegetation country to see and walk through. Once in awhile I hunt east just to enjoy that.
And I have trailed wounded bears in brush so thick we had to part it each step and squeeze through. Dead bear each time, but not fun. One bear shot in a grassy skid road had only made it about 15 feet but 14 of it was hedge thick. Another gorgeous cinnamon one was in a tiny hole not quite as large as the whole bear, in acres of thick slide alder, huckleberry and mountain mahogany, about 150 yards. At the shot it disappeared.... It must be nice to find shootable bears only in the middle of open clearings.
As to cartridge: I've killed or seen black bears killed with tools ranging from a tire iron to a recurve bow to .22 long rifle to .375 H & H. While I have used a 6mm and a 6.5 when it was the tool in hand when living in bear country, I never took less than a .30 if I was intending to shoot a black bear. Will a 6mm or even a .22 rimfire kill a big black bear? You bet. I'll stay here and give you hand signals while you trail it.
Okanagan,
Its time to put this thread to rest. My opinion and experience are just that and since most here don't feel they are not of the "gospel" lets just leave em be. JJ has clarified his statements and I have attempted to clarify mine. His nor my opinion are wrong, just different experiences.
I do feel along with others here that some put waaay too much faith in one person's opinions or advice and then term it as the "gospel". LOLs! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
I've posted a few links here on spot n stalk bear hunting for other's opinions/experiences on the subject since mine don't hold much water here on the campfire. Take em or reject em fwiw.
There are plenty of guides/hunters out there that can judge bears accurately in the PNW. The way I look at it, if conditions are such that one cannot accurately judge a black bear beyond 300yds, they should be using a different tactic under those conditions(for example - bait, calling). Pay close attention to the spot n stalk subtitles or paragraphs in these articles:
Black Bear Bonanza Stalking Black Bears Bear Bagging Tips Proven Methods I'm pretty much done on posting my opinions/advice on this thread. I can take comfort in that my experiences and advice have served myself and others well when it comes to harvesting a mature black bear instead of just filling a client's tag on an immature bear.
MtnHtr
I have shot 15 black bear, with the following rifles:
.243
7x57
.308
.300 WM
No problem, all one shot kills. Not that tough of a critter to put down.
JJ, the HUGE difference here is, you are guiding a lot of city slickers for the most part, or guys on a timeline. Few know how to shoot, or what they are shooting, let alone be able to judge a bear 5 feet in front of them. Serious bear hunters aren't going to hire a guide, unless they have to in provinces where required by law. Even then, they are not going to lean on a guide to make the call, IF they are serious bear hunters. You see the WORST of the lot of "hunters". Most have money and want to brag about their kill. They care about little else....especially getting familiar with their fire arm. They don't shoot well and generally don't shoot magnums (when they do, they are scared to death of them). The next problem is, they buy the cheapest ammo at walmart they can. I don't know how many times I have seen rich hunters roll into camp with all the latest and greatest gadgets, but buy [bleep] for ammo, "because it is too expensive." That boggles my mind.
I think this is why your "sub .30" opinion is so strong. The guys you are hunting with and guiding shoot [bleep] bear bullets and hit the fringes more often than not. You need a good blood trail when [bleep] shooting takes place. An experienced shooter/hunter is rarely going to botch a shot that needs a tracking job, regardless of caliber. Bears are NOT difficult to anchor. Bust the shoulders and it is over. Shoot the lungs, or anywhere else and you have a tracking job. I absolutely despise hunters that insist on lung shots on all big game, especially bears, unless they are bow hunting. Yes, they kill nicely, but RARELY does the animal die within a hundred yards. On bears, 100 yards can seem like miles in willows. Anchor the suckers and break bone, puting them down in sight. Same goes with elk, deer or anything else.
A .35+ caliber rifle will leave a slightly bigger hole, and does allow for more of a "fringe" shot, vs. a .270 or something similar....especially when shots are angling and bone is encountered.
You simply cannot compare the people you are hunting with, to real bear hunters....or trophy bear hunters. They are a breed apart, know how to shoot and how to anchor bears. They know what works ALL the time and how to use it correctly. Big Stick and his pards come to mind. They hunt HUGE bears and often at long range. They seldom get the luxury of getting within 300 yards to "juge" size, yet they always kill trophies and lots of them. They aren't using .375's either <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> They are serious bear hunters, not city slickers with a big huge wizzum magnum and Eddie Bauer duds. Just making a comparison. No flames. Heck, the only bear I have killed has been with bow and arrow <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Flinch
We make a lot of assumptions about each other. Most of my bears have been spot and stalk, my favorite way to hunt them. All we have is our own experiences and we arrive at different judgements sometimes even based on very similar events, and that's appropriate. In my experience black bears are surprisingly easy to kill. I killed my best one with an old recurve and an old style Bear razorhead. Even the one killed with a tire iron was an accident. My pard didn't mean to kill it, just pacify it when it got rambunctious (after being roped and tied by some cowhands who were loading it in a a pick-up, trying to decide just what to do with what they'ed caught). As to tidy broadside shots, I shot a beauty at about 40 feet one time through a three inch hole in brush, when all I could see was two ears and a little patch of hair that I deduced must be the bear's shoulder based on position of the ears. After a 1000 yard spot and stalk, my nephew shot a whopper at 40 feet in thick brush. I followed a wounded bear hit with a 7 magnum and fail safe bullet, by traces of scuff marks, bent twigs/grass and urine squirts, no blood trail at all. Have shot or been in on some 22-250, 6mm and .243 and .270 bears as well as larger calibers. No argument from here that any of those calibers will kill bears with one shot.
The only bear I was in on losing after a solid hit was shot with a 6mm and 95 grain Nosler partition bullet. Hit in the shoulder, though maybe a little on the back edge of the shoulder at about 90 yards, broadside. Blood and bone fragments where the bear bit at the wound when hit, otherwise no blood trail. Rain in near rain forest, springy moss left no tracks... Would I hunt bear with a .243? Yes, if that's what I had available, and wouldn't feel too handicapped. Would I advise others to do so? No. I do less than optimum or smart things for myself sometimes that I don't particularly recommend, plus I know what shots I will take and which I will pass. It's one thing to hunt when you live in bear country and are familiar with rifle and the game. It's a whole nother situation to take a once a year or maybe even once in a lifetime hunt when the only bear you see may not give you the optimum broadside shot on a sunny day in the middle of a lawn grass meadow, after posing beside a height and length measure. If you are going on the second kind of bear hunt, if getting a bear is the priority, take the larger of your rifles that you can shoot well, and try to get close enough for careful shot placement if you can. If getting a bear with a particualr weapon or light cartridge is the priority, go with a bow or a 22-250, but factor in more limited shot options, and just maybe admit that less than optimum weapons are slightly more limited.
Flinch Agreed 100%
That means that about 95% or more of the people I have ever met fall into the not serious bear hunter catagory. Which leaves about 5% with the serious skills to handle any eventuality in judging a bear. I simply do not know that many people who live breath and exist for bear hunting alone. Most are bear hunters of opportunity, not deliberately persuing them. Most might spend a weekend or two hunting bears specificly. To meet the requirements you have about "expert hunters" it takes a hella lot more investment in time.
Regardless of the guided or not guided theory. I have been hunting with countless people over the years who I did not guide but simply hunted with. I cannot even begin to recall all the guys that thought the bear we saw at 250 yards was a shooter, when in fact it was about a 5' 180 pound bear. Nor can I recall the exact numbers of minimal to non-existant blood trails when bears were shot over bait at under 30 yards with all kinds of guns from .243's to 458's and muzzleloaders and handguns. The Blood trail thoery is not a wild guess but rather based on a massive resolution of actual bear kills and long tracking jobs.
It's difficult to measure the SE Alaska habitat against other places. Realize that the folks living there and hunting there have also got a huge resolution of bears to look over. When you live in a place where you can see bears while driving to town every day it's a hella lot different then the fella who sees a bear once a year and must decide with nothing else to go on if it is a big trophy bear or a small young female.
Let me put this another way. A couple years ago a bear was spotted in Tacoma Washington. The police on the tele said that the bear was very large and potentially very dangerous. His words were that "the bear was well in excess of 300 pounds". He stated he had lived in the state his whole life and had been around bears and hunted bears and he had never seen a bear this big. The news showed Police cruisers driving slow down the city streets with PA system on full volume saying "please stay in your homes a bear has been seen in this neighborhood."
About 2 hours go by the the bear is fianally run up a tree in a back yard. The F&G vet shows up and darts the bear. When it falls from the tree into the net they placed for him to fall into it is carried and put into a traillered culvert trap. The bear was 140 pound male according to the vet who had to match the weight of the bear to the dose in the tranqualizer dart.
Now somebody tell me how this trained observer a Professional Law enforcement officer could have been off by that much? At very close range! This bear was about 2 years old or younger. The point is that a bear regardless of what has been said here is a very complex animal to judge in the field unless you have been living in good bear habitat much of your life and are able to see them frequently.
I'll go so far as to say they are the most difficult of all normally harvested big game to judge for both size, sex, and hide quality. But please do not compare what the folks in SE Alaska are capabale of compared to a guy in a much less game (bear) rich habitat. No more then they would judge Pronghorns in the central rockies easily and accurately.
Finally,.... this thread is not involving expert hunters, or long time residents of Craig Alaska. It's involving a fella going on a short term guided bear hunt.
I'm in JJ's camp:
What some seem to be missing is that holes tend to plug in bears, regardless of size. Once you get to the .30 cal range, you start getting blood trails reliably. Go slightly larger and you will be all but guaranteed of a blood trail. I'm sure I'm repeating others, so please excuse.
Two solutions. Always be sure of your shots and break shoulders and use a bullet that can make it through both shoulders of a big bear and it's a mute point.
If you're a heart/lung shooter, the bear is likely to run. We all know a lung shot critter can go some substantial distances -- others drop at the shot. Wouldn't YOU rather have a blood trail to utilize to find your trophy 200 yards away?
Honestly, I'm a fan of breaking shoulders, but I'm also a fan of 30 cal and larger for bears.
Sounds to me like a great excuse for a new rifle this guy is passing on!!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
AMEN! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />