Update from the GoFundMe page:
On Monday, May 25th Peter Sherfig, a 40 year resident of Big Sky, was tragically injured when he ran into a grizzly bear. He was mountain biking on a very popular trail in the Spanish Peaks development area. He sustained serious injuries to his face and neck and will have to travel and undergo extensive cranial and facial reconstruction. His insurance is $12000 deductible and will not cover the airlift to Billings or wherever he needs to go for further care. His personal and health care expenses will be exorbitant
Peter and his family have been a vital part of our community. His two children grew up here In Big Sky and in Bozeman. He taught for years at Ophir school and went on to open a learning academy in Bozeman.
As first reported by the Billings Gazette
, a grizzly bear attacked and critically injured a man mountain biking near Big Sky on Monday afternoon.
According to Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Park's spokesperson Morgan Jacobsen, a man in his 60s was riding alone on a trail on private property in the Spanish Peaks Community just above the Ousel Falls Park Trail near Big Sky when the attack happened. Initial investigations from the FWP show that it's likely that the rider surprised the bear after rounding a sharp corner on the trail and it does not look like a predatory attack.
The rider was able to escape the bear and walked to the South Fork Road where he was aided by a passing motorist. The man was then airlifted to a Billings, Montana hospital and is in critical but stable condition, sustaining injuries to his face and back according to Jacobsen.
The trail has been closed while the investigation continues and game wardens are not actively searching for the bear.
Jacobsen encourages people recreating in bear territory to carry bear spray, recreate in groups, avoid areas with animal carcasses, and look for signs of bear activity.
We have reached out for more information and will update this story as it comes available.
To be fair he probably paid a lot of money for nobody else to ride that trail.
"To be fair, he probably paid a lot of money for nobody else to ride that trail."
A comma is the difference between helping your uncle, Jack off a horse OR
helping tour uncle jack off a horse.
If your going to be a spelling/grammar pedantic, do it rite!!!
Also, the comma after "to be fair" is optional as it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. The ones in uncle Jack (and the panda eats shoots and leaves) are not, because they *do* change the meaning. Oh well...
Well, I was referring to the fact I wanted to change how I word my shitty joke at the most critical part. What do you expect from a product of the 27th best education system in the world?
Rite is a ceremonious or religious act.
Like a rite of passage....
Practice using those things guys...seriously. They kick more than you think, and fiddling with the cap is something you dont want to be doing for the first time with a Sow 10 feet away
They are one time use only...you test it by just using an expired one, or just doing it cause you go in bear country a lot and want to be prepared. 20 bucks or death...lol. simple answer for me.
Deploy in 2 to 3 second bursts when the bear is within 30 feet.
This is what the article stated. If a bear charges waiting till 10ft is suicide IMO.
I think that's the more accurate point between bear spray and firearms. Obviously people kill bears every year with firearms, even handguns. So pretty sure they are also effective! But even a Glock 29 etc. Is still a lot of weight to ride with in a place you can get to it reasonably fast. (that chest holster above is perfect for hiking, but to be 100% for mountain biking it would need additional retention IMO)
@MikeyMT: No doubt we'd all be shitting bricks during a bear attack and have a much greater chance with a dispersing cloud of spray VS hitting a head shot, etc. AND hopefully the intent is just to get the bear to go away.
BUT if I lived in Alaska, or I guess Montana, then I think I'd consider carrying BOTH!
But then again, I'm confident that to many gun people, a gun is always the answer, despite what the science says. Telling firearm proponents when not to need a gun is like telling religious people when their religion is wrong; Save your breath.
or don't and go out in bear country with your feelings and personal opinions, I don't really care
Now let's consider statistics: factually, we only know the man in the article has been on one MTB ride (could very well be more, but I don't want to speculate). We also know he was attacked on this ride. That's a 100% rate of getting attacked by bears. I personally have MTB'd in Montana 4 times with the equipment described above, and have been attacked 0 times. Random chance? Maybe. But again, better to have than want, I know I personally will go with my proven numbers vs. riding in Montana essentially naked as recommended by Pinkbike downvoters.
I feel that way about SO SOOOOO many things....I mean, even with recent events, Ding Dong! Darwin wins!!!! So, stay home, wear a mask...much like the Holiday Inn's lights, death will be waiting for us, all of us. Pesky thing about life, fatal, every time :-)
My point was that many do not do all the research. Feel free to label me as you wish. I won't take the effort to respond to the "city dwelling pinko" label since you already know so much about me and everyone else who might dare disagree.
(Of which I am neither, well not sure what you would define "gun person" but certainly not religous)
I know the journal, because that was the one that the author of the article you wanted to post compared to another journal of his. This is all wonderfully explained in the article I posted where some thought is given to actually interpreting the data instead of compiling it in a way that reaffirms a bias like the one you and the other guy did. The fact is there are too many variables to say which is more effective. Like I said I usually go out with my gf, I carry a firearm, her bear spray. Using data improperly like that to support a conclusion that isn't entirely true can be dangerous to those that want to actually know the best way to protect themselves in the back country, let alone having you act superior because of your choices. Why all the insults? Honestly some people just need to be insulted and based on your dumb comment with all the obvious arrogance you come across like one of them.
But, yes, we have the god given right to arm ourselves.
Given the heated response to my "poking the bear" in referencing the dedication of gun people and religious people (not sure those labels are pejorative) , I think at least half that argument is proven.
So long as you know your best way to protect "you," just as I have my best way to protect "me," we'll be alright.
Did you ever consider that the research you are relying on is flawed? Let me explain:
I used to live "down a sunny dirt road deep in Bear Country". I often rode a bike carrying a Weatherby carbine. Nice light accurate hunting rifle, Mine could punch 25 mm groups all day long.
Our bears were American Black Bears. Little guys, maybe no bigger than 300 kg. Most a lot smaller, maybe 200 kg. We also had coyotes, cougars and bobcats. The Weatherby would have dispatched any of the above with ease, and maybe even a big bear like a Kodiak or Grizzly. Would need a good heart/lung shot to drop a big animal with that rifle.
Most of the time these animals try to avoid a large adult, and at 120 kg I fit that description pretty well. But I did once come home to find a cougar on the porch. Yes, I tried to track it and if I had found it I would have killed it. And this leads me to the reason that the data set is flawed.
There is a saying in rural America, "If you have to shoot an attacking animal you shoot, shovel, and shut up!" If I had found that cougar that was on my porch that is what I would have done. It was not hunting season, so rather than deal with a very hostile bureaucrat, follow the rule of "3S".
I am going to claim that what the study found was that some people are injured when they are attacked by bears. No shit! What they did not take into account, and I don't know any way to get an accurate count, was how many people dropped the bear and walked away happy to be alive and never reported it to anyone. That is what I would do.
@martinKS: yes.. exactly
Claymores point one way and are labeled “front toward enemy”. Not saying you would not be injured standing close behind one, as I wasn’t brave enough to try it. Those things are no joke
Edit: my reading comprehension is not so good today. I read @Ironmonsoon602’s comment totally wrong and basically said the same thing he did. In the words of Homer Simpson, “I am so smart, S-M-R-T!”
"Is that something more a firearm? “If you’re competent, then a firearm is a valuable, time-tested deterrent,” says Tom Smith. He goes on to reference the case of Todd Orr, who was famously mauled twice by the same bear here back in 2016. Despite employing the spray, the bear still managed to attack Orr, then later stalked and attacked him again. “Bears accurately shot don’t have that option,” says Smith. “Game over.”
"So what’s the conclusion here? To me, this isn’t an argument for or against guns or for or against bear spray. It’s an argument that, despite the presence of deterrents, dealing with an aggressive bear encounter does not involve any sure outcomes. Rather than beginning and ending the conversation with a false statement about bear spray’s efficacy, we should instead acknowledge that recreating safely in bear country requires training and knowledge—not dogma."
I've seen that shit fail to stop (or even seriously wound) a pit bull. Does any country have gun nuts as superior and silly as the US?
very cute. First of all, kg are a measure of mass, not weight. It would be 2950 Newtons. Or maybe just a touch under 50 stone.
Also, US customary units predate the Imperial units, since Imperial Units were established in 1824 and by then we had already told the crown to Sod Off! Not to mention that a US surveyor's foot is different from a US standard foot...
I am well aware that most of the time bears and wild cats will run away from humans, but once in a while they don't. If I was traveling in Grizzly or Kodiak or Polar Bear country I would have a larger caliber rifle if possible. Maybe a .300 Wby Mag. Yes, you can carry a rifle on a bike. I have done it many times, mostly hunting deer.
I'd rather spray and pray +p+ 9mm out of a longer barrel or go for a few shots on a big ass 44 mag/.454. I'm larping either way, still don't know I could stop a charging Grizzly with either of those.
But found another study too, 3 Grizzlies and 9's. "We have found four cases where 9 mm pistols were used to defend against bears. All were successful."
Does that mean they cherry picked the 3-4 times it worked to fend off a bear? IDK? But they weren't pretending...
Obviously smaller caliber handguns are a compromise to what your willing to carry compared to the where, when and why your carrying it. (personally, an outfitter without a long gun near by would not get my business) What most people would be willing to mountain bike or run with is not what most people would hike with. (same goes for Bear Spray, some of those cans are HUGE)
Life is about compromise, some people might not venture outdoors without a bear proof suit and a flame thrower. Some just pack a multi tool that doesn't even have a blade on it. Pick your poison...
Then if you go look at the other Outside article it's very obvious the data they used to form their opinions are not apples to apples at all. The firearms were all aggressive bear encounters VS the bear spray was a hodgepodge including when Wildlife/Fish and Game? actively went out and sprayed bears over and over as a way to train the bears to stay away from certain area's. Obviously a bear who's attacking you and getting sprayed is not the same as you getting up close enough to a bear and spraying it.
I'm not saying bear spray doesn't work, etc. Just saying I don't see any "slam dunk" evidence one way or the other in those two links?
The links you've posted don't always say the model of hand gun, but the ones that do (AFAIK) were all full sized. Additionally, every article about the guide who killed a bear with 9mm has a number of people saying how professionally irresponsible that dude was for carrying an inappropriate gun. Dude killed a Grizzly in his backyard with a pocket knife years ago, doesn't mean it's an intelligent decision. Not any harder to carry an appropriate full-sized gun then to play bear commando with a 10mm carry piece on your chest.
And why the hell are we still having to address the 9mm angle. If your saying +p+ jhp yadda yadda all I'm hearing is you need to reconsider your caliber choice.
Anyway as previously stated, keep up the good work.
Maybe you don't remember when you said, "...bunch of outdoor experts are riding with 9 and 10 mm, pretending it's going to stop a Grizzly?...". I merely linked to evidence that shows in fact 9mm handguns have stopped and killed Grizzlies. I'm not arguing that larger calibers are more effective. Duh...
Now your saying they had to be a full sized 9mm handguns. But... even if you didn't READ the article there was a nice big picture showing the guide used a SHORT-BARRELED, CCW oriented SW 9mm. It wasn't the extra 8-12% FPS from the barrel length. It was using the right load and hitting his shots.
We agree a guide protecting others was irresponsible to rely on it nomatter how experianced he was. But you are wrong to say it's "pretend".
If your riding in/around Jct. your not in Grizzly country either. NM or CO if you show up on your bike at a trail head with a 20" shotgun with slugs VS me showing up not visibly armed nor in any way encumbured by a long gun I can guarantee which one of us people will think are LARPing and playing commando...
In my late teens and 20's I hiked and biked a fair bit through Wyoming and the only firearm I had was a 22lr in my car. (I did have a wistle ) Currently I don't have a Grizzly problem where I ride, the one time I saw a Black Bear in NM he took off just as I realized what that furry "brown thing" was cause I mostly saw his "butt" and he must have been rolling in mud or been a blonde. I froze for a few seconds, but then got off my bike and walked quietly to see if I'd get a chance to see him again. Stupid, I know. But it was pretty cool.
If I was headed back to Wyoming I could see the logic of looking into a larger caliber. But I'd rather not increase frame size too much for on bike use personally. What I use now, I feel is great for what I'm using it for!
I'm not saying not to use bear spray. Just seems to be a common theme of people trying to prove guns don't work VS lots of data showing they do work. Again, I'd rather have both and never have to use either...
As to all this weird stuff with bringing long rifles to Colorado trails (no Grizzlies in CO, so never said there was a need), or Youtube personalities putting up edited videos of how good they are, they don't really relate. Not even someone getting lucky and killing a relatively stationary Grizzly at close range with a 9. f*ck, Timothy Treadwell used to back them off with his voice. Doesn't make it a good plan. Go find me someone reputable who recommends a subcompact gun in Grizzly country. Would love to see the reasons.
I'm aware of the trade-offs, (compromises, we already went over this) People don't even want to wear camelbaks these days, how many do you think want to carry large caliber full size handgun on their chest while mountain biking? ( 3 of you in this thread I guess? Do you even Chestcannon Bra? Or just pretend to do it on the interwebs?)
Hickock45 is a pretty trusted low BS individual who clearly demonstrates the gun can be shot accurately without any cut scenes by a 70 year old.
Funny though, G29 is SO "subcompact" they had to make a new version so the average person could even get their hand around the grip... With a +1 it's the same size as a 19/23 but still wider and heavier. Yeah, total purse gun. Is it harder to shoot more accurately compared to a G20? Yes, no argument.
I'm not riding in Grizzly country, I'm not trying to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't carry if they are.
I was riding in soft dirt almost silently . Suddenly a huge Mountain lion jumped out of the brush with his back to me . At first he didn’t notice i was there but then got a whiff of my scent , turned around and hissed and growled .
I nearly passed out , I remembered to make my self as tall as possible and continue riding toward the lion . He jumped back
in the bushes and ran up the slope .
An encounter like that makes you realize just who is the boss in the wild .
These animals are incredibly beautiful up close and terrifying all at the same time .
-Your health care system is beyond FU.
Comparing an american friend with the same profession’s total spending on health insurance, pension fund, university loan, university fund for the kids++ my 49% income tax actually came out favourably by 10%. That’s 10% of your income spent on white collar workers doing unnecessary administering and beriching themselves doing unnecessary unfruitful work. If you vote with your wallet, you should vote for a fair and efficient free public health care system
A lot of people seem to think we get taxed to hell up here in Canada, when in reality, people earning between approximately 40-50K get taxed 7% LESS.
Sure, we get taxed a bit more on goods and services, (depending on the province of course) but that's discretionary spending that citizens have freedom over.
"U.S. federal income tax brackets range from 10% to 37% for individuals. In Canada, the range is 15% to 33%. In the U.S., the lowest tax bracket for the tax year ending 2019 is 10% for an individual earning $9,700 and jumps to 22% for those earning $39,476. The corresponding bottom Canadian bracket stays at 15% until $47,630. This is the bulk of the reason that lower-income Canadians are often better off than their American counterparts."
Article sources: IRS and CRA websites
Unfortunately, America can't seem to realize it saves money, plus they have a both rational and irrational fear of government, the irony, is they've let their whole system fall apart and our practically run by corporations and the wealthy. I say that having been raised in a state where a certain member of the gov is trying to cease stocking of a native fish species because of a multi million dollar "donation" and in a state where ski resorts are shuttered almost every year because injury lawyers can and will sue any private residence or business if someone is injured on the premises, regardless of waivers and such. Why? because the government makes its decisions based after the highest bidder and our ma and pop ski resorts can't compete with lawyers. If America tried to get a healthcare system, or if a state did, (as they are the ones who are supposed to be in charge of such), they would find heaps of money convincing them otherwise, while the public condemned the healthcare as too expensive and to controlling.
Montana Grizzly Bear Notice:
In light of the rising frequency of human/grizzly bear
conflicts, the Montana Department of Fish and Game
is advising hikers, hunters, and fishermen to take extra
precautions and keep alert for bears while in the field.
We advise that outdoorsmen wear noisy little bells on
their clothing so as not to startle the bears that aren't
expecting them. We also advise outdoorsmen to carry
pepper spray with them in case of an encounter with a
It is also a good idea to watch out for fresh signs of bear
activity. Outdoorsmen should recognize the difference
between black bear and grizzly bear poop. Black bear poop
is smaller and contains a lot of berry seeds and squirrel fur.
Grizzly bear poop has little bells in it and smells like pepper
For years, conventional wisdom has advised people to make noise to avoid dangerous surprises while traveling in Alaska bear country. For those who choose not to talk, sing, clap or bang on a cook pot, that usually means wearing bear bells, a tried-and-true hiker's accessory. But do the bells really work, or work the way we think they do, a federal bear researcher asks. Though he emphasizes that it's too soon to draw any broad or definitive conclusions, Tom Smith of the U.S. Geological Survey's Alaska Science Center has tested a group of brown bears that seemed to pay bells no mind at all.
Over several days last fall, while doing other research about bear behavior along the coast of Katmai National Park, Smith hid in a blind near a well-traveled bear path and pulled on fishing line attached to a string of bells tied to an alder bush. Not one bear looked in the direction of the noise or even perked up its ears, Smith said.
TX: ''This doesn't mean bear bells don't work, '' he said. ''It just means the bears didn't respond the way we thought they would. Not one of them reacted to the bells at all. It's fascinating stuff.''
Smith said he first tinkled the bells lightly. The bears didn't respond. Then he yanked on the line, making a jangling noise ''almost as loud a fire alarm.'' Fifteen groups of one or more bears walked past. Not one flinched.
He didn't think the bears were deaf, but he wondered. So he snapped a pencil to mimic the sound of a twig breaking. The bears immediately turned and looked at the biologist's blind, about 150 feet away. A loud huff, mimicking the noise of another bear, elicited a similar response.
Americans - "hey it might hurt us - let's shoot it with the biggest guns we can!"
Surprised they haven't tried shooting the corona virus yet.
Once the dodgy bars reopen downtown I’m guessing they’ll all be back on the prowl there.
Come up on wildlife (bobcats, bear, snakes,etc).
Curious, What are you riders taking with you just in case you run into wildlife on the trail?
Hope all is well with him
Mind you, I see plenty of dangerous 'wildlife' in some of our urban areas!
Actually, i gotta admit that with all the stories, articles, etc. I thought there was a lot more instances of murder/violence on the AP trail. I saw only 11 murders since they started tracking it in the 70's. (course 11 is kinda scary, but I guess the trail goes through 14 states so that's a lotta trail...)
Seriously, yes, I have run into strange ones, but normally not threatening. Of course, I’ve spent a lot of time in backwoods all over the south, so not much really surprises me anymore here.
Fk him. He was disturbing your ride .
I piss off hunters where i live by making a ton of noise to scare off the animals . Arrogant hunters believe they have more rights than you to be there . They DONT.
That is interesting, and good!
Honestly not sure how so many American cyclists stomach the risk? How do you choose between a large monthly health insurance payment, or a hefty deductible? I'm honestly curious and not trying to start a flame war. My basic understanding is that work-provided group medical plans are the key? Must be challenging for contractors and retirees.
With middle income people in the US and Canada paying very similar tax rates, it's a shame the US government can't roll such a vital service into that.
Ah right. I suppose responses like this put things into perspective.
Just to play along- the last time the US attacked Canada, they lost.
But real talk, we don’t need protecting. If the USA can’t be bothered to invade, why would any other country?
Uh.. You talk like that in front of your wife and children?
I was looking for insight, not insults.
Honestly these things are rare but they happen and it's just what it is. I always carry bear spray (there's more than bears, too) for peace of mind
I'm sorry but I just could not ride somewhere like that unless I WAS bearing arms.
Heal up quick, Mtb Cowboy.
How can you identify grizzly shit? Full of bear bells and smells spicy.
Just interested as will be riding in areas with bears, etc in the Balkans next year.
Here, let me help.
And you’re British too...
verb (used with object), rec·re·at·ed, rec·re·at·ing.
1. to refresh by means of relaxation and enjoyment, as restore physically or mentally.
verb (used without object), rec·re·at·ed, rec·re·at·ing.
2. to take recreation.
Basically everyone in this thread is both right and wrong - and they're all ignorant of the differences between language.
The Merriam Webster dictionary is in American English.
The Oxford English dictionary doesn't list it that way: www.lexico.com/definition/recreate
The Cambridge dictionary doesn't either: dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/recreate