Bear spray crusader Chuck Bartlebaugh putting on a demonstration to show approximate distances for when to start pulling on the trigger of a can.

As the oldest major bear spray brand (it has been the brand of choice for many bear researchers) and considering Jonkel’s long-standing role in advancing bear conservation, Counter Assault set, in a de-facto way, the high bar for what other bear sprays ought to do.



Before Counter Assault could go to market, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency performed testing on the ingredients to insure they did not permanently harm people and bruins. The agency handed down requirements that all cans hold at least 7.9 ounces of chemicals. A few years after Counter Assault was developed, Matheny got mauled. (He was not carrying the big can of Counter Assault). The product he subsequently developed, UDAP, emerged and it was forced to meet the same standards established by EPA.



A can of Counter Assault casts a spray that lasts between 7.2 and 9.2 seconds. UDAP offers three different sizes of bear spray. Two of those UDAP products, comparable in size to Counter Assault, emit a spray with a duration of around four seconds for one and 5.4 seconds for the other.



While such data might seem wonky and inconsequential, those involved with bear spray say otherwise. They claim that every second matters and so does the intensity of the disorienting agents coming out of a can.



, in layperson’s terms, is that no longer do they suggest cans of spray hold enough repellent that, when the trigger is squeezed, guarantees a continuous blast of ingredients lasting at least six seconds.



The two different can sizes of Counter Assault:; 8.1 fluid ounces with a spray that last seven seconds, and 10.2 ounces with a spray that lasts 9.2 seconds. The spray has a range of between 12 and 30 feet.



Bartlebaugh points in particular to the investigations of Smith, Herrero and colleagues. In one paper,



“Most of the public out there, especially people travelling from urban areas to Yellowstone or Glacier, aren’t that familiar with bear spray and how it works,” Bartlebaugh, who started the non-profit



Bartlebaugh added: “Being well armed with knowledge is the greatest asset for safe travel in grizzly country. Being ignorant is dangerous.”



In general, bear spray has been spectacularly effective and while he stops short of suggesting Counter Assault is superior to UDAP, Bartlebaugh says this: “Every split second you can buy yourself when faced with a charging grizzly matters. You can cram 7.9 ounces of chemical ingredients into a can and meet EPA requirements but what makes the difference is how it is dispensed.”



Bartlebaugh said that decades ago when Bill Pounds went before the bear committee, he asked how many seconds a can of bear spray should last. The reply that came from Chris Servheen [the now retired national grizzly bear recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service] and others was “at least seven seconds” and “the longer the better.”



Here's the link to the



Read the comments to a discussion by retired Idaho State University professor and conservationist Dr. Ralph Maughan at The Wildlife News a decade ago under the heading "



Matheny, whom I've known for decades and interviewed him when UDAP first came on the market, comes across as a sincere man. He and UDAP have been involved in a fierce competition for market share with Counter Assault, with some outdoor gear retailers only carrying one brand or the other. The photo of Matheny’s bloody face, snapped after his fateful encounter with a grizzly down Montana’s Gallatin Canyon, became his attention-grabbing calling card in stores. As the oldest major bear spray brand (it has been the brand of choice for many bear researchers) and considering Jonkel’s long-standing role in advancing bear conservation, Counter Assault set, in a de-facto way, the high bar for what other bear sprays ought to do.Before Counter Assault could go to market, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency performed testing on the ingredients to insure they did not permanently harm people and bruins. The agency handed down requirements that all cans hold at least 7.9 ounces of chemicals. A few years after Counter Assault was developed, Matheny got mauled. (He was not carrying the big can of Counter Assault). The product he subsequently developed, UDAP, emerged and it was forced to meet the same standards established by EPA.A can of Counter Assault casts a spray that lasts between 7.2 and 9.2 seconds. UDAP offers three different sizes of bear spray. Two of those UDAP products, comparable in size to Counter Assault, emit a spray with a duration of around four seconds for one and 5.4 seconds for the other.While such data might seem wonky and inconsequential, those involved with bear spray say otherwise. They claim that every second matters and so does the intensity of the disorienting agents coming out of a can. What the bear committee change means , in layperson’s terms, is that no longer do they suggest cans of spray hold enough repellent that, when the trigger is squeezed, guarantees a continuous blast of ingredients lasting at least six seconds.This unexpected move was shocking to Chuck Bartlebaugh, who, more than any other person in the U.S., has been a bear spray evangelist, a tenacious crusader trying to educate the masses about why bear spray has worked in reducing the number of maulings.Bartlebaugh points in particular to the investigations of Smith, Herrero and colleagues. In one paper, Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska published in The Journal of Wildlife Management, they wrote: "Some people have been reluctant to rely on bear spray for protection. We believe several reasons contribute to their reluctance. Chief among these is the notion that bear sprays are too weak to dissuade curious or aggressive bears from approaching people. Additionally, some people believe that wind can easily render sprays ineffective and that wind-driven spray may incapacitate the user."“Most of the public out there, especially people travelling from urban areas to Yellowstone or Glacier, aren’t that familiar with bear spray and how it works,” Bartlebaugh, who started the non-profit Be Bear Aware , told me. “They don’t know there are different brands and they certainly don’t know there is a big difference between Mace, pepper spray, and bear spray. And they don’t know that even if you have bear spray, unless you’re able to extract it in seconds, it’s of little use.”Bartlebaugh added: “Being well armed with knowledge is the greatest asset for safe travel in grizzly country. Being ignorant is dangerous.”In general, bear spray has been spectacularly effective and while he stops short of suggesting Counter Assault is superior to UDAP, Bartlebaugh says this: “Every split second you can buy yourself when faced with a charging grizzly matters. You can cram 7.9 ounces of chemical ingredients into a can and meet EPA requirements but what makes the difference is how it is dispensed.”Bartlebaugh said that decades ago when Bill Pounds went before the bear committee, he asked how many seconds a can of bear spray should last. The reply that came from Chris Servheen [the now retired national grizzly bear recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service] and others was “at least seven seconds” and “the longer the better.”Here's the link to the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee Guidelines for bear sprays back in 1999. The controversy has actually been raging for years, involving a number of arguments, including one that EPA should mandate requirements for the distance bear spray can fire. Some sympathize with Matheny.Read the comments to a discussion by retired Idaho State University professor and conservationist Dr. Ralph Maughan at The Wildlife News a decade ago under the heading " Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee to look at claim it unintentionally endorses Counter Assault. Matheny, whom I've known for decades and interviewed him when UDAP first came on the market, comes across as a sincere man. He and UDAP have been involved in a fierce competition for market share with Counter Assault, with some outdoor gear retailers only carrying one brand or the other. The photo of Matheny’s bloody face, snapped after his fateful encounter with a grizzly down Montana’s Gallatin Canyon, became his attention-grabbing calling card in stores.





When Bartlebaugh—whom I’ve also known for 20 years—called me in the wake of the bear committee decision in late 2016, he was incredulous mostly because he believes the move sends a confusing message to a mostly uninformed public. That message is that people, when navigating bear country, can now let down their guard a bit.



The EPA’s permit approval process for bear spray addresses toxicity of ingredients and amount of ingredients in a can; it does not deal with the intricacies of how it is deployed, for example, in proscribing how far the fog of spray is projected. Nor have EPA regulators dispatched personnel into the field to stand in the face of charging bears and assess which product works best.



UDAP offers its own version of "magnum-strength" bear spray. One has 7.9 ounces and another 13.4 ounces.



The EPA’s permit approval process for bear spray addresses toxicity of ingredients and amount of ingredients in a can; it does not deal with the intricacies of how it is deployed, for example, in proscribing how far the fog of spray is projected. Nor have EPA regulators dispatched personnel into the field to stand in the face of charging bears and assess which product works best.Frank van Manen, who oversees the Yellowstone Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team today, a research unit with the U.S. Geological Survey based in Bozeman and whose staff has had thousands upon thousands of contact hours with wild grizzlies, told me the bear committee did not want to be in a position where it was perceived to be endorsing one bear spray brand over another. “There’s something to be said for manufacturers themselves specifying best use of their own product rather than an organization like the IGBC being overly prescriptive on what the criteria should be,” Van Manen said, noting that the IGBC doesn’t have the resources to function in a regulatory capacity like EPA.

Bartlebaugh says federal and state agencies and hunting and conservation groups have done a poor job of educating the public about bear spray, particularly how to deploy it. He cites a number of recent incidents in which bear attacks occurred and human victims couldn't get cans out of their holsters or backpacks or didn't have time to flick off the plastic safety. If he had his druthers, effective use of bear spray would be a mandatory part of hunters' safety courses that kids must complete before being allowed to go afield in griz country with guns. And he would require all hikers to carry it. BYU's Smith says that if not a legal requirement then it ought to be considered an ethical one.



Bartlebaugh cites a number of recent incidents in which bear attacks occurred and human victims couldn't get cans out of their holsters or backpacks or didn't have time to flick off the plastic safety. If he had his druthers, effective use of bear spray would be a mandatory part of hunters' safety courses in states that kids must complete before being allowed to go afield in griz country with guns. And he would require all hikers to carry it.



Matheny believed the IGBC’s six-second rule gave Counter Assault an unfair advantage. Bartlebaugh, however, says the suggested IGBC recommendation was based on observed bear behavior, not as a marketing ploy to benefit Counter Assault. "I've interviewed many hunters and it's amazing they don't even know the brand they are carrying," Bartlebaugh said in an earlier Mountain Journal story on the findings of a mauling involving hunter Todd Orr. "And some think the spray in their cans lasts for 60 seconds or 30 seconds. Some don't realize that given the size of the can it will only actually spray for four seconds."Matheny believed the IGBC’s six-second rule gave Counter Assault an unfair advantage. Bartlebaugh, however, says the suggested IGBC recommendation was based on observed bear behavior, not as a marketing ploy to benefit Counter Assault.

In an interview after the bear committee rescinded the 6-second rule, Matheny told me, "As a grizzly bear attack survivor, I believe that in a bear attack you want to have a high-volume spray. Studies show that in most cases you have less than 2 seconds to react before the bear reaches you. It’s not a matter of how long the can sprays in a constant duration. Bear spray is designed to be deployed in repeated bursts of spray. It’s more about being prepared and knowing how to operate your spray and following the manufacturer’s instructions on the label. To get more spray in seconds does not make a can have more spray. High volume bear spray works."



UDAP offers three sizes of bear spray: a can with 7.9 ounces of repellent that sprays for approximately 4 seconds; a 9.2-ounce can that lasts for 5.4 seconds; and a hefty 13.4-ounce can with a continuous spray of 7 seconds. Based upon his research of bear attacks, Bartlebaugh says four seconds is way too short. He asserts that bigger cans, which can forcefully project a spray with greater carry, provide a better cushion.



“My recommendation is that when a charging bear gets within 60 feet, the user should start spraying for 2 to 3 seconds so a cloud is 30 feet out when the bear gets there and enters the cloud. You don’t worry about aiming at the face, the eyes or nose. You just get that cloud out there. In many incidents previously reported in newspapers, bears that encountered the fog would break off their charge," Bartlebaugh says.



He is an absolute stickler on this point: "People going into the backcountry or any area where grizzlies live need to be taught to use bear spray faster when it approaches and not wait for the bear to get close. I'm not talking about spraying when it's 200 yards away. We also have instructors telling people to wait until the bear is 10 feet way, 20 feet away and 30 feet away before spraying. But with the speed of a charging grizzly that's too close. If you can begin spraying when the bear is within 60 feet and coming toward you, do it. Just spray downward and get the cloud of spray between you and the bear. Don't wait to spray the bear in the eyes and nose like you would when using pepper spray on a parking lot mugger."

When deploying bear spray in the direction of a charging grizzly, aim lower rather than higher, experts like Chuck Bartlebaugh say. Tilt the can downward in the direction of the bear so that the ingredients atomize in the air and rise, creating a wall (rather than spraying over the top of the bear). Do it sooner rather than wait until a bear is mere feet away. And make sure you have a good grip on the can. Hold with two hands if necessary.



Sometimes, there can be more than one bear in an area as in the case of hikers moving through berry patches and stumbling upon a carcass where multiple bears are feeding. “Other variables are that if you have rain or a headwind or side-wind, the spray can get blown out of the bear’s path, so you better have enough reserve,” Bartlebaugh says. “And, if you’re only carrying one can, you should have a little left for the hike out should the bear happen to return as it did with the 2016 attack on Todd Orr in the Madison Mountains.”



It's also important that everyone hiking into bear country have a can of spray. There have been instances in which a bear attacked two people and one of the hikers, who was carrying a can, couldn't remove the safety before the bear was on them.



I spoke with Gary Moses, who spent nearly 30 years as a ranger in both Yellowstone and Glacier national parks, each known for their grizzly populations. He was involved with teams that reviewed the causes of several bear attacks.



for Counter Assault to help with its public education initiatives. He notes that the duration of bear spray is important because people, when forced to take quick action when confronted by a grizzly, will sometimes deploy bear spray too soon and press down on the trigger until the can is empty.



But he worries that people might empty the can too soon if a bear is at a distance. “Their initial deployment is for a lot longer than they think and they spray the entire contents is one burst,” he says. “It is really important that, for bear spray to be most effective, you get a concentrated dose into the space of the animal. If you use up your can at 25 to 30 feet and have nothing left, that’s when there can be problems. Bear spray works when properly deployed. But ask anyone who’s been attacked by a bear and they’ll invariably say, ‘They wish their can of product had been able to spray longer.”



In 2016, one of Moses' close friends, a mountain biker, was killed when peddling at high speed down a trail, ran into a grizzly.



Moses notes there’s a question he receives more than any other. “It might be a trail runner, jogger, mountain biker, or walker who lives near bear habitat. They want to know what I suggest for carrying the smallest and least-expensive can of bear spray possible and, as a result, they confuse personal defense pepper spray, which comes in small cans, with bear spray.”



His reply: bigger cans filled with more content that spray for longer, are always better. UDAP offers three sizes of bear spray: a can with 7.9 ounces of repellent that sprays for approximately 4 seconds; a 9.2-ounce can that lasts for 5.4 seconds; and a hefty 13.4-ounce can with a continuous spray of 7 seconds. Based upon his research of bear attacks, Bartlebaugh says four seconds is way too short. He asserts that bigger cans, which can forcefully project a spray with greater carry, provide a better cushion.“My recommendation is that when a charging bear gets within 60 feet, the user should start spraying for 2 to 3 seconds so a cloud is 30 feet out when the bear gets there and enters the cloud. You don’t worry about aiming at the face, the eyes or nose. You just get that cloud out there. In many incidents previously reported in newspapers, bears that encountered the fog would break off their charge," Bartlebaugh says.He is an absolute stickler on this point: "People going into the backcountry or any area where grizzlies live need to be taught to use bear spray faster when it approaches and not wait for the bear to get close. I'm not talking about spraying when it's 200 yards away.Just spray downward and get the cloud of spray between you and the bear. Don't wait to spray the bear in the eyes and nose like you would when using pepper spray on a parking lot mugger."He also harps on this point: Don't carry bear spray in a backpack; keep it at a place where it is at the ready and easily accessible; make sure you can dislodge the safety and in some settings have it in your hands. Know that bears in bear country can be anywhere. "It's not uncommon for bears to not be seen because they’re in thick brush or laying in day beds or suddenly appear from closer distances," he says. "In those cases you spontaneously spray toward the bear, the stream of the spray tilted slightly downward, and keep spraying until it breaks off its charge or you decide to go to the ground and lay flat.”Sometimes, there can be more than one bear in an area as in the case of hikers moving through berry patches and stumbling upon a carcass where multiple bears are feeding. “Other variables are that if you have rain or a headwind or side-wind, the spray can get blown out of the bear’s path, so you better have enough reserve,” Bartlebaugh says. “And, if you’re only carrying one can, you should have a little left for the hike out should the bear happen to return as it did with the 2016 attack on Todd Orr in the Madison Mountains.”It's also important that everyone hiking into bear country have a can of spray. There have been instances in which a bear attacked two people and one of the hikers, who was carrying a can, couldn't remove the safety before the bear was on them.I spoke with Gary Moses, who spent nearly 30 years as a ranger in both Yellowstone and Glacier national parks, each known for their grizzly populations. He was involved with teams that reviewed the causes of several bear attacks. Moses has served as product ambassador for Counter Assault to help with its public education initiatives. He notes that the duration of bear spray is important because people, when forced to take quick action when confronted by a grizzly, will sometimes deploy bear spray too soon and press down on the trigger until the can is empty.But he worries that people might empty the can too soon if a bear is at a distance. “Their initial deployment is for a lot longer than they think and they spray the entire contents is one burst,” he says. “It is really important that, for bear spray to be most effective, you get a concentrated dose into the space of the animal. If you use up your can at 25 to 30 feet and have nothing left, that’s when there can be problems. Bear spray works when properly deployed. But ask anyone who’s been attacked by a bear and they’ll invariably say, ‘They wish their can of product had been able to spray longer.”In 2016, one of Moses' close friends, a mountain biker, was killed when peddling at high speed down a trail, ran into a grizzly.Moses notes there’s a question he receives more than any other. “It might be a trail runner, jogger, mountain biker, or walker who lives near bear habitat. They want to know what I suggest for carrying the smallest and least-expensive can of bear spray possible and, as a result, they confuse personal defense pepper spray, which comes in small cans, with bear spray.”His reply: bigger cans filled with more content that spray for longer, are always better.





Van Manen says the advantages of bear spray, as a class of non-lethal weapon, are clear and unequivocal.



“There are reasons why bear spray should be the first choice for anybody recreating in bear country,” he says, pointing to Smith’s research in Alaska that showed bear spray to be 92 percent effective in deterring attacks by grizzly, black and polar bears.



In contrast, there was 84 percent success with people who used handguns and a 76 percent success rate with long-guns. Firearms also had a high risk of injury in dealing with a wounded bear. An analysis by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service titled "

Horse people drag a dead grizzly that was killed by elk hunters claiming self defense inside Grand Teton National Park. It's annual "elk reduction program" is the only big game hunt that occurs inside a national park and is very controversial. That grizzlies might be shot and killed by elk hunters inside Grand Teton at all has prompted some conservationists to sue to stop the hunt. Grand Teton officials today require all hunters to carry bear spray. Photo by Thomas D. Mangelsen (mangelsen.com)

"When it comes to self defense against grizzly bears, the answer is not as obvious as it may seem. In fact, experienced hunters are surprised to find that despite the use of firearms against a charging bear, they were attacked and badly hurt. Evidence of human-bear encounters even suggests that shooting a bear can escalate the seriousness of an attack, while encounters where firearms are not used are less likely to result in injury or death of the human or the bear," the overview noted. "The question is not one of marksmanship or clear thinking in the face of a growling bear, for even a skilled marksman with steady nerves may have a slim chance of deterring a bear attack with a gun.



Another danger with choosing firearms, van Manen notes, is that shooters have sometimes inadvertently



For Bartlebaugh, bear spray has yet to achieve its full promise which is keeping more people and grizzlies alive on the landscape. “The first major victory in reducing bear mortality was the advent of bear spray, which was huge,” he says. “But the real triumph will be when a much higher percentage of people, especially hunters, actually carry it and know how to use it effectively.”



Now with grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem removed from federal protection, he is concerned that gains which have been made in keeping bears, especially females of reproducing age alive, could reverse course if non-lethal conflict resolution does not continue to be emphasized and taught to the masses entering the woods. Moses and Bartlebaugh worry that recreationists in grizzly country might interpret the abandonment of the six-second rule as a reason to be less vigilant. Counter Assault has really tried to reach hunters, as demonstrated by this video collaboration with the well-known sportsman Craig Boddington Van Manen says the advantages of bear spray, as a class of non-lethal weapon, are clear and unequivocal.“There are reasons why bear spray should be the first choice for anybody recreating in bear country,” he says, pointing to Smith’s research in Alaska that showed bear spray to be 92 percent effective in deterring attacks by grizzly, black and polar bears.In contrast, there was 84 percent success with people who used handguns and a 76 percent success rate with long-guns. Firearms also had a high risk of injury in dealing with a wounded bear. An analysis by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service titled " Bear Spray vs. Bullets: Which Offers Better Protection " noted that based on investigations of bear attacks going back to 1992, persons confronting bears and defending themselves with firearms got injured 50 percent of the time. "During the same period, persons defending themselves with pepper spray escaped injury most of the time, and those that were injured experienced shorter duration attacks and less severe injuries," the review stated."When it comes to self defense against grizzly bears, the answer is not as obvious as it may seem. In fact, experienced hunters are surprised to find that despite the use of firearms against a charging bear, they were attacked and badly hurt. Evidence of human-bear encounters even suggests that shooting a bear can escalate the seriousness of an attack, while encounters where firearms are not used are less likely to result in injury or death of the human or the bear," the overview noted. "The question is not one of marksmanship or clear thinking in the face of a growling bear, for even a skilled marksman with steady nerves may have a slim chance of deterring a bear attack with a gun.Another danger with choosing firearms, van Manen notes, is that shooters have sometimes inadvertently shot themselves or their backcountry companions . “Nobody gets seriously injured or hurt when they misfire using bear spray,” he said.For Bartlebaugh, bear spray has yet to achieve its full promise which is keeping more people and grizzlies alive on the landscape. “The first major victory in reducing bear mortality was the advent of bear spray, which was huge,” he says. “But the real triumph will be when a much higher percentage of people, especially hunters, actually carry it and know how to use it effectively.”Now with grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem removed from federal protection, he is concerned that gains which have been made in keeping bears, especially females of reproducing age alive, could reverse course if non-lethal conflict resolution does not continue to be emphasized and taught to the masses entering the woods.

: Mountain Journal is committed to giving you free reads you won't get anywhere else, stories that take time to produce. In turn, we rely on your generosity and can't survive without you!



EDITOR'S NOTE: No bears or people were injured in the making of our lead image. Photo at top is a composite featuring a screen shot photograph of a video featuring renowned sportsman Craig Boddington enlisted to create an educational video on bear spray for the public Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee. The grizzly head was added. Graphic by MoJo Associate Editor of Content Angus O'Keefe.



Two videos below: The first is produced by National Geographic and features an interview with bear attack survivor Nic Patrick who runs a ranch along the South Fork of the Shoshone River near Cody, Wyoming. Patrick imparts sage wisdom about living in grizzly country.

: Mountain Journal is committed to giving you free reads you won't get anywhere else, stories that take time to produce. In turn, we rely on your generosity and can't survive without you! Please click here to support a publication devoted to protecting the wild country and the wildlife you love.No bears or people were injured in the making of our lead image. Photo at top is a composite featuring a screen shot photograph of a video featuring renowned sportsman Craig Boddington enlisted to create an educational video on bear spray for the public Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee. The grizzly head was added. Graphic by MoJo Associate Editor of Content Angus O'Keefe.Two videos below: The first is produced by National Geographic and features an interview with bear attack survivor Nic Patrick who runs a ranch along the South Fork of the Shoshone River near Cody, Wyoming. Patrick imparts sage wisdom about living in grizzly country.

The second is one produced by UDAP that features conversations with bear attack victims Todd Orr and Mark Matheny and features a demonstration on bear spray use.

It must be noted that the advent of specially-trained dogs used to protect people and livestock from grizzlies—and combined with more responsible management protocols adopted by livestock producers—have been game changing in reducing conflicts. Hunt and her contemporaries have been part of a two-front revolution in promoting co-existence between people and wildlife predators that, in a less-informed age, used to simply be targeted for eradication or treated with nothing but intolerance.° ° °Counter Assault emerged from tests done on captive bears at Fort Missoula in Montana. Years later, in 2008, the then-head of the Yellowstone Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team Charles Schwartz, led an investigation into bear spray's efficacy. Let’s make it clear here for those urban New Yorkers and Los Angeleans who might be reading this and making naive assumptions: bear spray as a repellent is not applied like mosquito repellent or sun tan lotion to your own skin.Think of it as a giant can of hair spray but filled with stuff that can knock out a bear’s ability to use its olfactory (smelling) system, which is vital to its confidence in confronting a perceived threat. And if you make the mistake of dousing yourself, it makes your eyes burn and water, causing you to wheeze and gasp for breath. It makes you focus on thinking of nothing else except making the extreme discomfort go away. When it has the same effect on a grizzly, which it does, that means that a charging bear forgets about making you a focal point.