High Sierra Topix

Been lurking behind this hot button thread watching how it would develop. Rather predictably has run its usual course including minor misinformation and a few anectdotal accounts I view with a considerable grain of salt. I tend to agree with much of what DoyleWDonehoo related and like him am an old backpacker that has a long history back before the days of canisters of not losing food. I am not at all a fan of the ban on Ursacks nor of the need to instead carry canisters without considerations of where one is camping at. If one is merely passing through a known bear area with an intent to camp where a cannister is not required, I don't see the need to carry a canister as that is rather inconsiderately inflexible. Fortunately Inyo National Forest that has considerable bear issues in many areas has done an excellent job in being considerate in many of their policies. Policies in some of the national parks have on the other hand been rather inflexible.

The requirements for bear canisters have done much good for the sake of black bears in the Sierra. The reality has been that there were always a considerable number of ignorant, lazy, and or unskilled, backcountry visitors that did a poor job of protecting their food from bears. The end result not surprisingly is policies have evolved to consider the lowest common denominator of users as to where they draw the line. And that tends to grate against some of us that would otherwise not have significant issues. Accordingly I would prefer policies that offer more flexibility instead of black and white, one size fits all approaches.

Thus as a more extreme example if say I'm a peak bagger hiking from a mid elevation forest trailhead first ontrail then later up in timberline offtrail onto a crest ridgeline staging camp location over tedious fields of talus, I would hope such would not require lugging up a canister just like Ralph and Norbert down on a trail a mile below with their bacon breakfast and smoking fire beside Pipsqueek Lake. Yes an Ursack in such a situation but not a Garcia.

By far most backcountry visitors camp within earshot of trails, popular lake edges, or large streams. The most important strategy for not having to deal with bears is to NOT CAMP in those places or obvious use routes to such places, not make fires, and not make a lot of noise long into evenings. Instead we have a love for dawn and early mornings thus usually hit the sleeping bags soon as dusk darkens the sky.

There are some short trips where I bring my Garcia especially if our destination is to a known heavy bear zones. Like my trip last year to Kibbie Lake. Simply makes camp life simple and pleasant. But the canister requirements in national parks have essentially eliminated my ability to take trips longer than 6 days because the kind of food I prefer to bring won't fit. That is where an option for two Ursacks works while carrying two of the bulky cans simply won't fit in a pack besides being heavy.

I agree with everything SSSdave said. I am of the same mindset where I hit the sack when it gets dark so I can be up in the morning, packed and leaving camp as sunlight hits so I can hike in the very best time of day when the world is new. I hate one size fits all rules. Lite-packers who count ever ounce hate rigid cans, and mountaineers (with bulky heavy gear-loads) who spend most of their time above treeline/bear-habitat hate the heavy cans, as do the more experienced backpackers. Ursacks are as good of cans (as has been proven), especially for those of us like the ones above. Only thing to do I guess is to keep complaining until those making rules decide there is more than one way to do things.

It's funny how anecdotal stuff is great if you agree with it. I've seen pics and heard firsthand accounts of a number of Ursaks torn up by persistent black bears in the Sierra. Some of those are posted here on this forum. Lady at a backpacking store wouldn't sell me one because she found out I backpack in the Sierra - she didn't want to get another one returned torn up.

Yet it works fine?? as good as a canister? Yeah. I'll stick with the canister.

AlmostThere wrote:I've seen pics and heard firsthand accounts of a number of Ursaks torn up by persistent black bears in the Sierra. Some of those are posted here on this forum.

I actually have never read anything on this forum about a firsthand Ursack failure, nor have I seen any pictures (does not mean there are none). But there ARE these accounts:
http://www.ursack.com/ursack-fieldtests.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I have seen firsthand accounts and talked to people who have had bears work on their Ursacks, and no failures. There HAS been failures in the past with the older bags, then again there has been can failures too. So what. A few failures here and there will not add up to wholesale bear habituation.
Then again, many Ursack "failures" in the past were never documented very well nor stories checked out, and there are people out there with a vested interest in the Ursack failing.
All in all, modern Ursacks are as good as cans, tested and proven, and the failure rate of cans and Ursacks are low enough to not constitute a threat to habituating bears. YMMV.

Wow!! I've kinda sat back and watch this thread morph ugly like so many others of recent, but wanted to chime in based on a few recent comments. First off, I use a bear cannister because it has helped reduce the numbers of habituated bears. I dont really like it either due to the weight, but if it will help keep bears out of our food and looking for natural food sources, then I'm for it.

That said, I didnt use one for years and actaully just got my own. Dont get all worked up, I used one over the last 10 years, but either a loner from my bro or I rented one. I also did several trips without them (West Side TH's) and never had a problem. You might have already guessed I fall into Mr. Donehoo's line of thought. I carry one, but never had a bear get my food and have been backpacking since the mid 70'S. Ive had em in camp, but only ever had one get anything (our trash bag) and that was 100% my fault. I forgot it by the cooking area. Funny thing was, it left my counter balanced food bags alone. I will admit to avoiding spots folks told me there were alot of bears (1000 Island Lake, Little Yosemite (Yosemite at all for that matter), Buubs Creek, etc), and I dont think that we often hiked with our dogs hurt much either, but there were bears out there.

But Fish, your comment was the one that caught my eye and made me reply.

fishmonger wrote:

frediver wrote:

Not sure if you have been in the Sierras in the 80s, but I can tell you that every night at ANY campsite between Whitney and Yosemite was a bear party. Sleep was a rare event, as you spent half the night chasing bears off your poorly hung food. All they did back then was patrol camp sites, smell for humans, because in more cases than not, it was a guaranteed easy meal.

Really man???? That statement is just not true as I backpacked often between Whitney and Yosemite in the 80's and 90's and I never expeienced that (Bear Creek Draniage, Mono Creek drainage and the northern KCNP, McGee Creek, Hilton Lakes, etc). Using a bear container is the right thing to do, but stop with the "back when I was a kid, the bears were thick as the mosquitoes" tales.

What SSSDave said.

Troutdog 59 wrote:
Really man???? That statement is just not true as I backpacked often between Whitney and Yosemite in the 80's and 90's and I never expeienced that (Bear Creek Draniage, Mono Creek drainage and the northern KCNP, McGee Creek, Hilton Lakes, etc). Using a bear container is the right thing to do, but stop with the "back when I was a kid, the bears were thick as the mosquitoes" tales.

I must have been halucinating then. Look for the claw marks in the bark of trees along all the nicer camp sites along the JMT - they are still there today, and there are no bee hives for Pooh to take down.

Didn't say they were thick - they just knew where to find white man with beef jerky dangling from trees, and it was usually where there was smoke and where more than one tent was found every night. Back then there were also about twice as many people on the JMT than you find today, so plenty of poorly hung food, night after night, in the same places. Finding a decent tree to hang food was job #1 for the last 2 hours of your hike and you usually found them in the same places, where everyone else was camping.

In my first 3 JMTs ('88, '89 and '90) I must have had about 20 bear encounters (well, we heard them, or heard others throw rocks and make noise near us, it was part of the experience). I could look out our notes from those hikes and start listing the sites with details.

After 1990, we started to hike well off trail and raraely saw a bear. Now, seeing a bear on the JMT is a rare event, and a bear looking for your food at night I've only seen in campgrounds like Tuolumne Meadows where their chance to find stuff left in the open is higher than in the backcountry, and apart from canister use, I can't think of much else having changed.

I have had many bear encounters. A bear ran off with my pack in Pate Valley, but that was my fault, I left some toothpaste in a side pocket. I found the pack(Kelty) the next morning covered with slobber, and except for a chewed pocket it was fine. I have never had a bear steal my food (hanging technique), but have had many close calls, and they were always due to my own mistakes. I carry an Ursack. I love it and if properly utilized it is a secure way to protect your food. It would be great if they made one the size of a duffel bag that you could clip to a frame or a belt/strap system and carry away.

I carry a bear can, always will. I do think an Ursack is more than enough for most high country, but I play ball for the sake of the bears.

Having lived in Colorado for a while, I often read on the 14ers.com board. Recently, there has been a rash of bear issues in certain backcountry camp spots that serve some of the big 14k peaks. These bears are tearing into tents, and luckily with nobody in them, but it's just a matter of time. basically, they have no rules there on bear cans and most folks don't know how to properly hang food. These bears found food in a tent and now that's what they do, break into tents. Someone will get bit sooner rather than later. One person talked to a Ranger and the ranger mentioned that he might "point" some bear hunters up that way this fall. Stupid people = dead bears.

At least here in California, people are well aware in the backcountry and the mandate is a good one. It may not be necessary for experienced backpackers up high, but you can't start making everything subjective in this manner or the rule breaks down and guess what, bears will be killed and our backcountry will turn back into a festival of bears busting into camps. I have met zero bears in the backcountry and I would not mind keeping it that way. Sure, i would love to ditch two pounds out of my pack, but what would I sit on?? And seriously, a couple pounds isn't going to ruin my good time.

But the cans aren't necessarily for you, they are for the amateur so as to minimize their mistakes.

While I think most people on this forum are experienced and knowledgeable backpackers, I find it shortsighted to the scapegoating, if you will, of beginner backpackers. It reeks of 'Do as I say not as I do". Who is to say who is an experienced and who isn't? Do you want the NPS or USFS dictating that? If a bear did come to where you were camping, even if it was way off the beaten path, your experience wouldn't really prevent the bear from getting your food. Also there is a tendency for people to think of themselves as more experienced than they really are, and goes for practically everything. I sure wouldn't want people deciding on their own what to do with food storage based on their perception of themselves.

Also, if you have more flexibility in the rules, they become more complicated. Canisters at this lake, but not at that one, but later required at that pass, etc. Yosemite had a somewhat complicated rule a few years ago with canister use required 7 air miles from a road, below 9,600 and at Benson Lake. I remember it because I was doing a Tuolumne - Sonora Pass trip on the PCT where it was a bit confusing where I had to have a can in relation to where I planned/hoped to camp. It was just easier and less stressful knowing that I could use a can and be ok the whole trip. Sure it wasn't needed all the time, but it gave me a peace of mind while trip planning and camping. Also, given an option to get out of a canister area, I think a lot of visitors would say or think they could hike to that area and not actually do it. While a little troublesome for a select group of hikers at certain times, the broad canister requirement is simple and promotes compliance for the vast majority of hikers.

As for the ursack, if you aren't willing to use it in an area with traditional high bear activity, I don't think you can say it is reliable. I have seen torn up ursacks, they don't work. It may work in some areas or with some bears, but It doesn't work sierra wide. The forum must have covered it, though can't seem to find it now, but the whole ursack issue went to court, was scrutinized and the ban was upheld. Not sure what the NPS/USFS agenda would be against the ursack as they don't gain anything by it being banned, nor would they if it was allowed. I would think they would gladly allow something that was effective against bears and that hikers liked.