>>1299097>statistics show 90% it's a bluff charge.Literally where, and how do they know its a bluff charge?
> bear spray actually improves your odds by about 8%The only source on this admits to using anecdotes and clearly says his data is weak, and it would probably be different with better data
>it's not temporarily maiming the bear in case it was a bluff charge after all.Literally who cares about maiming a bear that (bluff) charged you. For the entirety that Europeans have been in north america and in many NA tribes bears were killed on sight and were seen as an ultra predator that was a deadly threat to the community, because of this bears were driven close to extinction in many areas. Because of this the only bears that lived and are around feared humans and either ran on sight of them or died, as it should be.
However, in the last 50 years psuedoenvirmentalists and leftists have lead the charge against any violence against bears at all, leading to increasing aggressiveness and restoration of populations to historical levels, to a point where in some states bears populations are at their highest point in 100 years, while their territory is restricted to a fraction of what its once was, and human populations increased 20 fold.
This is obviously a recipe for disaster, once bears stop fearing humans, and learn that there is no downside to attacking us other than 5 minutes of irritant.
The fact that a bluff charge is even an option for a bear is evidence of this.
They SHOULD be shot on sight, and driven away from people at every oppurtunity, to make them fear people so we DONT have to drive them to near extinction AGAIN.
