Ultralight Rifle

If REI carried the rifle I might consider purchasing one. I would like to be able to try one out for a few years before I committed.

"I've walked and camped all over the place in Canada too. Ths situation isn't the same in the USA where I don't think trespass is considered a minor issue. "

I'm afraid we're a long way off of the original topic, perhaps someone wants to start a different thread on camping situations worldwide?

Trespass is considered a major issue here in the states, but you are most likely to be assulted or threatened by landowners who are currently using their lands for illegal means (most often growing or making illicit drugs). To date I've been threatened with guns three times because I was following what I thought was a permitable land boundry (they are not always well marked in national forests) and a schoolmate of mine was shot in the face with a shotgun for attempting to retrieve his dog that had treed a racoon near some old lady's meth shack. He survived but was blinded in one eye and only significant surgery saved the other.

While many lawabiding land owners will allow permission if you ask (something I've had to do when a deer jumps a fence after being shot), trespass is not a wise idea.

Even our waterway rights are being limited by law. Previously any fully navigable stream was permitted by watercraft to cross private property, however some states are tightening the waterflow requirements to exclude smaller creeks and rivers. Something I'm sure will concern packrafters.

"If REI carried the rifle I might consider purchasing one. I would like to be able to try one out for a few years before I committed."

Rifles are typically non-returnable. However, they hold value exceptionally well. If you tried it and didn't like it you can often sell it over retail on the used market since the buyer can avoid Federal Firearm License transfer fees (usually $25-$75) and avoid shipping (which must be done as overnight express on a trackable private carrier as per firearm laws). This of course only applies to the US – here the used gun market is a much larger enterprise than one imagines.

I find the comments here informative and interesting; I am not attempting to slag the Brits here as I am VERY pro-Brit and I do not see them doing so to me or to the Yanks. A good open discussion of various aspects of outdoor lifestyles is really worthwhile, IMHO, and nobody seems angry to me, so, I hope the gentleman reconsiders his decision to leave.

Joe, things are sure getting ugly with the "grow-op" situation, the R.C.M.P. here working with D.E.A. people from the US, stationed here by treaty, have been doing great things cleaning this up…and I applaud this.

BTW, if any of you Brits plan to make it over here to B.C.. let me know and I will gladly help you with planning and advice on the best parts of B.C. to explore. I can also legally take you shooting at my gun club and you can hunt Grouse here with me as an accompanier….free. So, you can get to merrily blast away with my handguns, among others and enjoy what is a very relaxing pastime.

That's all for me, I have said my piece and now have wood to cut and split for the fast-approaching winter.

This has been a rather interesting topic to follow, I had no idea some of the trespass laws in other parts of the world.
In the interest of keeping things in perspective you're unlikely to have a gun pointed at you in the US. Its really a steriotype that we're a bunch of gunslingers ready to drop someone who puts a toe across our property line. The problem is drugs/crime moving out into the country.
Overall the problem is blown out of proportion just like bear attacks, mountain lion attacks, snakes etc. I bummed all over other people's property in rural Arkansas without being shot.

I've enjoyed a lot of the info on this thread. You can learn a lot about things on this forum that you never would if they were all moderated out, as I never have enough interest to wander onto the massive number of hunting or gun forums.

Joe, I was j/k about the REI return policy and rifles. Everyone, including grandmas and little girls, seems to have a few guns in my neck of the woods, it's just part of the culture.

I guess we all react differently. I hadn't noticed lots of angry folks, just a few people who express their views forcefully, which is fine with me. I agree with last two posters.

Dewey, thanks for the offer. I didn't think you were slagging off the Brits. I wouldn't say our government was above criticism anyway! & it has restricted some freedoms. However in the outdoor area it has increased freedoms. I like knowing I have a right of access to land and a right to wild camp. I'd be more concerned if I lived in a city, where the "surveillance society" has got completely out of hand.

And back on topic the rifle I carried in Spitsbergen was very heavy. I'd have loved a lighter weight one. But I doubt a 22 would be much use against a polar bear.

Dewey, I was referring to a gentleman from the states not a Canuck, in response to your statement about the states as opposed to Canada.

In retrospect, the guy I spoke to was probably exaggerating to cover his embarassment at getting his map reading mixed up, and I apologise if anything I said inflamed the debate here. This has been IMO one of the better gun threads on BPL.

I have hunted with small bore rifles and shotguns, legally, as well as with an air rifle, semi legally, OK, at times, illegally.

Britain is *very* uptight about guns and their ownership, overly so IMO, but then, I was properly trained to be careful and responsible around firearms like you were.

As for lightweight methods to get protein supplements on the trail, I have snared rabbit and hooded pheasant (illegally). It's my fight for a little more freedom than the bureaucrats and gamekeepers understand my need for.

It's an overcrowded island, and everyone thinks they have more rights than everyone else. That's probably why we don't carry guns here. ;-)

I was visiting my Mother and Brother in Colorado's most southwesterly town, and was having lunch with them and my brother's friend. She (the friend) turned to me and said "So I hear you backpack a lot, what do you carry?"

Me: "I carry a LuxuryLight Pack."

Friend: "No, I mean what kind of gun."

Me: "I don't carry a gun."

Friend: "You're crazy not to go armed."

Me: "I guess I'm just not a victim."

That was the end of our conversation for the rest of the meal. (A delicious Elk Burger)

"But I doubt a 22 would be much use against a polar bear."

Sure it would!

As soon as the bear noticed that you've got a single shot .22 calibre rifle, in bear country, the utter shock and disbelief would cause it would fall to the ground, harmlessly incapacitated by the bear equivalent of hysterical laughter, during which the people can make their escape! (o:

This has been a fun thread, I hope you international posters don't go away your perspectives are most interesting. I wouldn't worry about stumbling on some pot growing, gun toting locals except in a few specific areas. If you're doing the normal camping thing in National Forests etc. you should be fine (I believe some areas in southern California are a problem).

Joe just to clarify, I wouldn't want to trivialize your friends aweful experience or you getting threatened. I just meant to add the perspective for or non-US friends that that sort of thing is not really the norm.

Chirs, I had no idea you were required to carry a gun for polar bears. If you do again, there are (relatively) light rifles that can drop a large bear. I don't know what your selection is like over there but I found a .375 magnum that only weighed 7 1/2 pounds (nine or so is more common).

Luke, thanks for the info. I rented the rifle in Longyearbyen on arrival. At the time it was a requirement for ski touring groups to carry one – this was in 1996, I don't know the current regulations. If I ever go again I will certainly want a lighter weight gun.

Chris, are polar bears really that bad up there? I'm surprised they actually required you to bring a gun.
A popular thing in Alaska is a short barreled 12 gauge shotgun firing slugs. That would proably be your lightest option. Another trick if you did go again would be go to a hunting supply website and order a nice thick should strap so you can carry the thing more comfortably.
Good hiking.

Please move this to Chaff… Please

"Chris, are polar bears really that bad up there? I'm surprised they actually required you to bring a gun. "

I cannot say for 100%, but I believe that this is an outfitters requirement for safety rather than a law of any sort.

For grizzly bear or polar bear encounters, I'd suggest something along the lines of a 300 Winchester Super Magnum. There are lots of guns to choose from, personally the lightest in that caliber I've handled was a titanium version of a Model 700 Remington. Never shot it, just handled it in the store while window shopping for a new Elk rifle. Granted, that's overkill for all other species of animal, baring some african wild game.

With a 220 grain or larger 300WSM bullet it should be a quite capable weapon. That said, guns like that bite on both ends and if necessary to ever be used, the additional weight of standard models reduces recoil significantly. An exceptionally light gun of that caliber would produce in excess of 80 ft pounds of recoil or potentially much more – I'd have to fire up my ballistics program to know the specifics. The same gun in standard weight would essentially half the recoil to a still shoulder bruising level.

For someone new to shooting, a lightweight model in a large magnum could easily dislocate a shoulder or break a collar bone making you much less able to take a second shot if necessary. As such, I don't think that an untrained hiker has any buisiness learning to shoot with such a weapon until they have worked their way up with more moderate calibers. It's easy to develop a massive flinch while shooting punishing recoiling firearms, which could easily cause a miss.

For lightweight backpacking, sometimes it's just worthwhile to ensure that the rest of your gear is as light as possible to ensure that you can carry what you need to do the job. This compromise is very common when lightweight backpackers do photography work. The best photo gear is quite heavy (much heavier than a rifle), so you've gotta figure out what you can safely leave behind without sacrificing quality.

So, this thread has seen a lot of posts asking it to be moved. We currently have Fishing and Photography BPL forums. Would there actually be interest in a Hunting BPL forum?

No need to move this to chaff IMHO, as this is about a potentially very cool piece of GEAR. I don't have bears, mountain lions, coyotes, snakes, alligators, or any other non-human critter to protect myself from. Here, hunting is simply a sport, as well as an important means of pest population control. Having access to such a light gun would allow more of us around here to control the pests at the smaller end of the scale (rabbits, possums, stoats etc…) while making the prospects of catching some fresh meat along the way a bonus. I don't really remember how topics such as shooting polar bears came into it, as this little rifle is clearly not intended for that kind of prey! A trigger safety should be added though.

I don't think a hunting forum would be a bad idea here; just another subdivision of UL backpacking with it's own unique gear/issues.

I'm also pretty curious about bowhunting and backpacking (thinking about shifting into archery and putting the rifle away). A hunting section could possibly provide help there too.

I'm sure someone will argue this is a BACKPACKING site- but, as Joe says, there's plenty of fishing and photography talk here, stuff that would probably be more at home on devoted fishing/photo sites.

HOWEVER
Since the mere mention of firearms seams to immediately draw out extreme opinions, bigotry, nationalistic rants, and general ignorance from ALL SIDES, I fear the forum would degenerate pretty quickly…
Do we really want to take the chance?

I wouldn't mind a bit, provided a small change is made to the 'Recent Threads' function.

Make it selective or de-selective. That way I can de-select Hunting and be rid of a whole lot of 'Stuff'.

The comments about rifle recoil are not quite realistic and I was just finishing one of my custom-built light Grizzly defence rifles today. I have two .375s, one a light packing rifle, a .458WM being built and many .338WM. and similar rifles, which I shoot and use year-round. I have NEVER seen an orthopaedic injury due to rifle recoil in over 50 years of shooting.

I have friends in the "Eastern Arctic" of Canada that conduct Polar Bear research and guide tourists to see and photgraph these great carnivores. Their working rifles are identical to mine used in Grizzly country here in B.C., although the Polar Bears are primarily carnivores while our Grizzlies are opportunistic omnivores and most of us consider them LESS dangerous due to that difference.

During this time of year, the bears here are in their "hyperphagic" phase of their annual cycle and thus much more aggressive and prone to attack without warning than during most of the year. Consequently, we usually carry now when hiking in much of the BC wilderness and doing so is wise, IF, you have the skill to use your rifle well.

I think that a gun-hunting thread here is every bit as legitimate as those concerned with photography, for example, and see no reason why this cannot be discussed here as it seems a number of posters are interested.

"No need to move this to chaff IMHO, as this is about a potentially very cool piece of GEAR."

Just what I was thinking. I am really tired of people coming into the forums and not really adding anything to the discussion but calling for Mod's to basically censor the forum because they don't like what they are reading. If you are so offended by what you are reading why are you reading six pages of it? You are in control of what you left click on. You can always click the back button. I see this forum as passionate people agreeing, disagreeing and rethinking their positions. Sure some come on stronger than others but at least they really believe in what they are expressing but can entertain other ideas and respond accordingly. The focus has drifted a little but it seems that someone has always stepped up to redirect.

"The comments about rifle recoil are not quite realistic and I was just finishing one of my custom-built light Grizzly defence rifles today. I have two .375s, one a light packing rifle, a .458WM being built and many .338WM. and similar rifles, which I shoot and use year-round. I have NEVER seen an orthopaedic injury due to rifle recoil in over 50 years of shooting."

Of course not, your and educated shooter and you probably learned the basics with something more managable at a much younger age. I was refering to people whom an outfitter gears up and says "Hey, here's your gun." and hands a new shooter a heavy recoiling gun. The situation does happen and if they don't know how to shoulder or grip it correctly things can go wrong.

By the way, I did pull up my ballistics application and here's the following:
Remginton 300 Ultra Mag (sorry, I believe I misquoted it above as a super mag)
100 grains of AA8700 powder
200 grain barnes TSX bullet
5 pound rifle (such as the lightweight titanium jobs)
Velocity of 3000 fps

Yeilds 80 ft/lbs of recoil – enough to break a collar bone if shouldered incorrectly.

All data was pulled from my Barnes reloading manual, Volume 4 and ran through the Barnes Ballistics 2.0 application.

Out of curiosity I ran the numbers for a .460 Weatherby Mag – with a high grain load and a 6 lb rifle (probably not even possible in that caliber) it produces an astonishing 170 ft/lbs – of course it's rated for hunting elephants. However in an 18 lb rifle (probably more realistic – totally a guess) it's down to a managble 56 ft/lbs.

I guess the point was directed at backpackers who go through expedition outfitters and whatnot. The gist is that a heavy rifle is a bummer to carry, but if you want to shoot it in anything other than an emergency, sometimes that weight makes a big caliber gun a bit more forgiving.

I take your point concerning rifle weight and recoil, although your examples are extreme and not really within the parameters of "doable" custom pieces. We had .338RUM and .338Win. rifles on our trip last month and these are light, but, easy to shoot for us and they are effective in bear situations.

I just want to address the situation concerning backpackers, outfitters and bear safety as that is more relevant to this forum and thread, IMO.

Here in Canada, where you have a large number of Grizzly, Black and Polar Bears, it is highly illegal for an outfitter of a backpacking tour company to allow a backpacker from another country to possess a firearm. NO outfitter here will hand a backpacker a gun, not under any circumstances normally found anywhere in Canada, as this would eventually result in some rather unpleasant encounters with the R.C.M.P.

I have, on numerous occasions, installed and supervised camps of 75 silvicultural workers and fire fighters in remote Canadian bush and NEVER allowed firearms possession by anyone. I always confiscated and locked up any guns that were brought into camp surreptitiously and it was clearly understood that doing so could result in termination for cause. This was/is standard practice in remote camps since long before I started wilderness work in 1965.

Very simply, I am a serious gun user of many years experience and I am afraid of guns, as is any other wise person I know. I see NO reason for non-resident backpackers in Canada to carry guns, and all Canadians who do so should have appropriate training and certification; guns are not toys.

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf

For those curious about large bear protection in a
firearm here is an 1983 report. It appears to me
from the report, that the bullet's construction, size
and velocity have more to do with the suitability
than the specific caliber of weapon. Some of those
listed as doing poorly were just a function of the
bullet coming apart too easily.

"Chris, are polar bears really that bad up there? I'm surprised they actually required you to bring a gun. "

Kuje, not where we were going, which was inland. We only needed one rifle for 11 people. And we didn't see a bear or any sign of a bear. A mountaineering expedition we met, who were doing day ascents from a base camp on the coast had one rifle per two people, flares and electric tripwires. And we met a group attempting a traverse of Svalbard who abandoned because of polar bears.

I was leading a commercial trip so counted as an outfitter.

Dewey-

Why should non-resident folks not be allowed when you
feel the need to carry weapons yourself?