Living amongst Grizzly's

[mpotzold]

Hmmm rule of thumb..take the width of front print...in this case 6 1/2 inches ? Add 1....equals 7 1/2 inches now change that to feet.

So that 6 1/2 inch wide front track is a 7 1/2 foot bear.

Formula is add one..change to feet.and after a whole lots of years is pretty darn accurate .

Still a pretty big bear, nice photos.
Cheers
Steven

OUTDOOR LIFE ARTICLE-same answer

"There’s no substitute for experience when it comes to judging by sight, and I have a lot to learn, but there is one surprisingly accurate way to size a bear if you can find a good track. If you measure the distance across the width of the front pad in the track in inches, then simply add 1, you will have a pretty good idea of what the bear will square in feet (the average of width & length of the hide). This seems far fetched, but it’s surprisingly accurate and virtually right-on with every bear I have measured. We measured my bear’s tracks at 8 ½ inches across, and he was right at 9 feet 6 inches. So the next time you find some bear tracks, measure the width of the front pad. And if you’re fortunate enough to take that bear, I guarantee it will be right on."

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/liv...and-size-bears

[J_T]

Hmmm rule of thumb..take the width of front print...in this case 6 1/2 inches ? Add 1....equals 7 1/2 inches now change that to feet.

So that 6 1/2 inch wide front track is a 7 1/2 foot bear.

Formula is add one..change to feet.and after a whole lots of years is pretty darn accurate .

Still a pretty big bear, nice photos.
Cheers
Steven

Yup. That's always the rule we've used. Forever. Agree, it's accurate.

[mpotzold]

Welcome to my ignore list SS Steve. If you think derailing the thread with that comment is your best work, then I won't miss ya.
Derailed in 3 posts that must be a new record. I am going to set a new record for not posting anything.

Temper,temper! SENSETIVUS problem!

A buddy just said that you multiply the width of the front paw times 100 lbs and that is it's weight. 650 + lbs

Nonsensical! WHY?
Grizzly bear weight can vary by 400 lbs plus throughout the year. The paw size is a constant unless a growing cub so Steve's formula makes sense.
Will I also be on your list? SO BE IT!

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Yup. That's always the rule we've used. Forever. Agree, it's accurate.

Here too.....

[ACE]

Rule of thumb ..... take the width of front print ..... in this case 6 1/2 inches? Add 1 ..... equals 7 1/2 inches. Now change that to feet.
So that 6 1/2 inch wide front track is a 7 1/2 foot bear.
Formula is add one ..... change to feet, and after a whole lot of years is pretty darn accurate.

Steven's formula is a good field estimate of nose to tail measurement ..... 'in the round'
Black or G-bear .....
Good post srupp!

[srupp]

OUTDOOR LIFE ARTICLE-same answer

"There’s no substitute for experience when it comes to judging by sight, and I have a lot to learn, but there is one surprisingly accurate way to size a bear if you can find a good track. If you measure the distance across the width of the front pad in the track in inches, then simply add 1, you will have a pretty good idea of what the bear will square in feet (the average of width & length of the hide). This seems far fetched, but it’s surprisingly accurate and virtually right-on with every bear I have measured. We measured my bear’s tracks at 8 ½ inches across, and he was right at 9 feet 6 inches. So the next time you find some bear tracks, measure the width of the front pad. And if you’re fortunate enough to take that bear, I guarantee it will be right on."

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/liv...and-size-bears

hmm good to see Outdoor Life taking my advice..lol

hmmmm had to have learned sumpthin over the past 30 years amongst grizzlies..

and size was of paramount importance..so by sight and tracks..

cheers
Steven

[Fred1]

Steven's formula is a good field estimate of nose to tail measurement ..... 'in the round'
Black or G-bear .....
Good post srupp!

Agreed! I have a Gbear Ive been watching since March and his track is exactly like that one in the pic - and yes hes a 7 footer. Great stuff! Weight is a real tough one to judge...

[srupp]

Hmmm lots of times the bear shows on a slide..the grass does not allow for accurate track measurement..snow melts out and is usually highly unreliable..river banks with semi solid foundation..or the same on wet rds works well over the years this measurement has been highly reliable..2 different sized tracks often indicates a sow with young..
The sow with 2 juvenile delinquents that charged Rob Marsh..David Marsh..and myself in Kwatna. .I judged her to be 8 footer..and d her track was 7"..Tims black grizzly was taped at 9 foot 6 inches..his track in the mud was 8 1/2 "

When Chilcotin Hillbilly went to bring his truck after shooting a wonderful Chocolat colored black bear the track on the road followed the formula laid out...
Often on rds with rain or moisture the pressure alone will make the tracks show up plainly even if not indented..especially if viewed from a relatively low angle from the side..
I can not think of one example where this has not proven true.
My Mother's day brown black bear was an awesome bear..spotted from over 1 km from above..once down to the main rd I found fresh tracks..they showed the enormous size of this brown black bear..and soon after harvesting the bear it's size compared to the tracks was confirmed.
Does it not work sometimes..I have no experience to the contrary..
Cheers
Steven

[One Shot]

tigrr?....Dang he hasn't come back. Mmmm..wonder if the griz got him while he was out trying to check the paw to weight formula?

[RiverOtter]

Hmmm rule of thumb..take the width of front print...in this case 6 1/2 inches ? Add 1....equals 7 1/2 inches now change that to feet.

So that 6 1/2 inch wide front track is a 7 1/2 foot bear.

Formula is add one..change to feet.and after a whole lots of years is pretty darn accurate .

Still a pretty big bear, nice photos.
Cheers
Steven

Steven's formula is a good field estimate of nose to tail measurement ..... 'in the round'
Black or G-bear .....
Good post srupp!

While I agree that the formula works for both black and grizz when the hide is squared, I've yet to see it correspond to a "round" measurement. In fact, IME, a round nose to tail measurement would be closer to actual front pad width, converted to feet.

I've also found that a skinned bear hide laid out flat and measured in both directions, without altering in between, will be a bit wider than it is long.

And at the risk of making an ignore list, a track is about as accurate at determining weight as it is at dictating skull dimensions. LOL.