>>2833189I lived on Svalbard for two years. The requirements for polar bear protection when you were outside of the settlements were very simple, and very effective.
Minimum of .30 calibre rifle, 12 gauge shotgun with slugs, or .44 calibre handgun, in that order of preference. In addition you would have a flare gun or a flare, and if you were staying at a cabin outside the settlements you would bring flares on tripwires.
In practice, this meant everyone had the stainless Ruger 77 in .308, since it's a cheap and easy to maintain gun. If you already had guns on the mainland before you moved you could of course use that, but the Ruger 77 was de rigeur, together with a flare gun.
The escalation of force started with shouting, to shooting flares, to firing warning shots, and hopefully never to lethal shots (only in self/group defense).
You could supposedly get rubber baton rounds for the shotgun, in which case you were supposed to shoot at the rear part of the bear. That sounds like more of a gamble than I would care to make.
Curiously, bear spray was never an option.
In heavily wooded and more temperate bear country, I could probably see the case for big handguns, shotguns and perhaps also for rifles with larger, heavier bullets, perhaps something like a 9,3x62mm, which isn't very hard to shoot with, but still performs well in brush, even out of a shorter barrel. Since shooting flares in a forest probably isn't very smart, I suppose I can see the case for bear spray, but I don't know enough about that to have much of an opinion.
