Jackson Hole news | Jackson Hole feature | Jackson Hole environmental | Jackson Hole sports | Today's News

Biker fought bear with questionable spray
Experts say old, unapproved spray might be reason grizzly kept advancing.

By Angus M. Thuermer Jr.

The pepper spray a mountain biker used in August when he tried to repel an attacking grizzly bear was not approved for use against bears, a wildlife group has said.

A bear biologist also said the age of the spray ­ at least several and likely more than five years old ­ may well have contributed to the spray's ineffectiveness. The comments underscore the need for backcountry users to know more about their bear pepper spray, its contents and quantity, experts said.

The experts commented on an incident in which Tom Foley rushed to the aid of companion Kirk Speckhals in a grizzly bear encounter on Togwotee Pass on Aug. 29. Speckhals, who was not carrying spray, fended off repeated charges by the grizzly with his bike before the bear pinned him. Foley arrived on the scene and said he sprayed the bear in the face with Bear Pause.

The bear did not seem deterred, Foley reported, and left only after loud shouts and when there was only about a second's worth of spray left in Foley's can.

Bear Pause is no longer on the market because it does not meet EPA specifications, said Chuck Bartlebaugh with the Center for Wildlife Information in Missoula, Mont. The group informs backcountry users about effective bear deterrents.

A grizzly expert also said that the age of the deterrent ­ Foley's can was several years old ­ likely compounded its ineffectiveness. Chris Servheen, Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Montana, recommended backcountry travelers buy a fresh can of EPA-approved bear pepper spray annually.

Even following all those recommendations, hikers may want more than a single 8-ounce can of bear pepper spray, the experts say. Foley said he agreed.

"After what happened, I would want a back-up can," the mountain biker said.

The EPA began getting involved with bear spray in about 1994, according to information provided by Bartlebaugh, when it issued a stop-sale order on pepper spray products advertised as bear deterrents. Under pressure from Congressional delegations, among others, the federal agency rescinded that order but only on the condition that manufactures begin to register their products with the agency.

At issue was the proliferation of products in different sizes with varying strengths and effectiveness. The EPA, operating under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, determined that it would approve only sprays that met the parameters drawn from successful tests by Dr. Charles Jonkel. Jonkel, grizzly researcher, tested a wide variety of products, from bull horns to umbrellas to pepper spray, on bears, including six grizzlies. The bear pepper spray that proved successful worked in 500 tests.

Through its registration process, the EPA required products marketed as bear deterrent to be derived from capsaicin and related capsaicinoids, the active ingredient in hot peppers. Approved deterrent must contain a certain percentage of hot peppers, hold enough of the active ingredients, and meet labeling requirements, among other things. Experts say approved products should be called bear pepper spray, not just pepper spray.

In 1998 and 1999 after a number of bear encounters in which hikers and hunters were mauled after trying to defend themselves with pepper spray not approved by the EPA, the agency cracked down.

One company the EPA went after was Chemarmor, manufacturer of Bear Pause. Bear Pause was made from synthetic capsaicin, not natural capsaicin, and the agency claimed the company violated various elements of the EPA's registration and marketing rules.

A debate ensued on the front pages of Montana newspapers. While Chemarmor claimed its product was effective, the EPA responded that Jonkel's studies set the standard since synthetic capsaicin had not been as rigorously tested. Chemarmor was fined $4,500. It no longer is in the bear pepper spray business.

As a result of its vigorous enforcement, the number of bear pepper spray companies has declined. But consumers still need to be aware that pepper spray not approved for use against bears is being sold in outdoor stores.

Servheen said people who use fresh, approved spray should not have a problem fending off a bear as Foley did. It is "really doubtful," that a bear would persist in advancing against a proper pepper deterrent, Servheen said.

Old bear spray tends to separate from its propellent and is not expelled properly, he said.

"Old bear spray is not something that should be used," he said. "People should buy a new can every year."

Servheen also said that the bear that attacked Speckhals was probably just curious in the first instance.

"I've heard cases before where bears have chased bikes on roads in Glacier" he said referring to the national park. "It's something unusual and attractive because it's a different kind of motion.

"It might have been more of investigation," he said of the bear's first charge. "When [the bear] got close he was probably shocked," Servheen said, cautioning that his assessment was speculation.

The bear advanced within a "critical distance" of Speckhals, then turned to a different behavior. "He was trying to neutralize this guy," Servheen said.

Respond to this article by e-mailing publisher@jhnewsandguide.com