>>394876To be fair, I can see where he would get that impression if he only looked at the study and didn't consider it in a wider context. Bear spray is effective because it is not only easy for someone untrained to use, but also because those who carry bear spray are likely doing specifically because they fear that they may be attacked by bears and are therefore aware of this issue.
Those who were carrying firearms could have been carrying them for whatever reason, and may not have been aware of the possibility of bear attack. Obviously a .22 isn't going to be very helpful. Notice that handguns are somehow more effective than long guns, likely because their carriers were specifically worried about attack, and increased accessibility over long guns. The lower effectiveness compared to bear spray can be attributed to poor training. Also, the study doesn't state whether the injuries occurred before or after the firearm was used, ie someone could have been attacked by a bear and then grabbed a rifle out of their vehicle.
Anyway, it seems like forest rangers and others who go /out/ professionally tend to carry either both guns and spray or just guns, so the answer is likely train and maintain situational awareness.
