Page 8 of 8

Re: Them damCan Regs.

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:29 pm
by sparky
frediver wrote:I'm trying to fit everything in my Garcia now, I look to be about a day short, 7 in need 8.
A Garcia can just almost maybe works in my G-4 pack, It sure would be nice to have an extra .5-1in in the pack body width.
I just about added an inch of girth to mine, but devised a way to get it secured horizontal...mostly in the pack.....really hard to describe. My sit pad insulates what's exposed. In reality its diagnal, but when secured, the side that's higher simply lays flat as it collapses the nothingness below it. Has to be just right but carries well.

I could care less what you decide to do, but I think a can is the only way to go. Yes the rule is thete because of careless individuals, much like drug laws ect....some say we have a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws.

Just don't lose your damn food.....hanging can be a pain.....

Re: Them damCan Regs.

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:43 pm
by tightline
Back in the day I did A LOT of backpacking without the cans--didn't even know about them really. I had a couple of occasions where I chucked rocks at bears. On one of these occasions (NW Yosemite)these teenage kids came running into our camp, filthy, and screaming that a bears had just torn into their tent, as the kids were cooking in their tent. They were ALL shook up. Right then two bears came trotting up, the kids were screaming-- and my buddy and I stood up and just nailed them with rocks. The bears sprinted off. The kids thought I was Jeremiah Johnson--we thought we were heros. We didn't care about nuthin'---we were in our early 20's, when you think you're invincible. I never gave a second thought to throwing those rocks. We were cooking pancakes at the time too--so what if the bears kept coming on? Then what? Looking back on that situation..well today I would rather have just had the can. Now I would be more scared--although I'd still throw rocks if the situation called for it. I was senseless then but when I think back on it how many senseless people might be sleeping with their food (not knowing any better)when that bear comes investigating--or whatever, instead of just putting stuff in a can and setting it away off. When I first started using the cans (per regulation) I thought it was a joke..but then I realized how handy and convenient they were. No more hanging. No more worrying about whatever sounds outside wondering if they were into your food. They make a good seat....On extended trips-if you are by chance is a position where you have too much food for the can(s), well at least you have a guaranteed whatever days amount of food if you are raided. Personally, just my opinion but I think the extra weight is worth it. And it's a reasonable enough law because of what I related above, as well as other reasons stated.

Re: Them damCan Regs.

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:05 am
by frediver
As you have stated there are lots of good reasons for having a can.
And as you have also described, your food is not always in the can.
Rocks, Harsh Language, or Pepper are the only deterrent when Yogi
decides to sample your fresh cooked meal. It is only a matter of time
until fresh beats canned.

Re: Them damCan Regs.

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:41 pm
by hikin_jim
I ***hate*** bear cans. Heavy, bulky, awkward, yuck. But I don't want bears to get into my food either.

I've got an UrSack which I use in less bear prone areas (Southern California), but from what I hear (admittedly imperfect information), given enough time a bear can get into an UrSack. I guess with an UrSack you have to figure out a way to drive off the bear fairly quickly.

So, I carry the frickin' stupid can in high risk areas (SEKI, Mammoth, etc.) and the UrSack elsewhere -- until something else better comes along.

HJ