Codger_64
Moderator
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Messages
- 62,324
As I have mentioned in a few previous posts, I am re-outfitting for backpacking. I have done quite a bit of research into what is available now, since my prior experience with the sport was so long ago (circa early to mid 1970s). Equipment and techniques have evolved dramatically and so have my own needs. One item that didnt exist back then was bear canisters.
Traditionally when in bear habitat, food was placed in bags and suspended from high tree limbs. Most larger wilderness jurisdictions (National Parks) disallow this method of food safety now I am learning. Bears are smart critters and many have learned to retrieve hanging bags.
I understand the authorities insistence on complying with the new regulations and read that backpackers in some places face canister inspection before a backcountry permit is issued. Some backpackers even report rangers checking them for canisters on the trail, fines imposed for those found with inadequate or unapproved containers for their food.
Reasoning behind the bear canister regulations is pretty obvious to me. First and foremost is to protect the bears. Bears habituated to thinking of hikers as a num-num food source become a danger to people and are often destroyed after a confrontation. You just cant un-teach a bear bad habits. Relocation of problem bears has been tried, but failed more often than not.
As for myself, I like the idea of being less prone to having to cancel a planned trip half way though because I lost my food supply. The old way, hanging or bear-bagging, even when it worked for bears, left food at the mercy of other critters like possums, raccoons, squirrels etc., besides being a pain even where appropriate trees could be found (some areas have only young growth trees if any at all). Canisters can be left on the ground (but not close to your tent).
Other than the expense, issues of bulk and of added pack weight, I dont see much of a downside to the requirement, or even voluntary participation outside of regulated areas where bears exist.
Expense? Ive seen prices for approved hard canisters range from $40 up. Many National Parks where they are required rent them (Example Yosimite: $5 for up to two weeks with a $65 deposit) , as do some trailhead outfitters who also sell them. They can also be rented online, though prices are generally higher (Example: http://www.lowergear.com: $25 for two weeks).
There are also some soft containers available, but they are not usually approved and have shown possible failure to do their job. Generally, they are not watertight (many canisters are) and do nothing to inhibit crushing of the contents unless an aluminum stiffener sleeve is inserted into the bag. Ursack is one:
Do the National Park and Forest Services accept URSACK as an alternative to hard-sided, bear-proof containers?
There is no uniform testing or approval mechanism in place the National Park or Forest Services.
Every park has its own standards for acceptable bear and critter resistant containers. For example, Canyonlands N.P. lends Ursacks to campers (with a deposit), while other National Parks restrict or ban the use of Ursacks.
Some parks require bear-resistant containers, but do not specify any particular brands.
Always contact the Park you will be visiting BEFORE you bring URSACK (or any other container).
The advantage of the soft containers is mostly in weight reduction if I understand correctly. But the hard canisters also have the advantage of deterring most rodents, raccoons, dogs etc.
Of those of you who camp, backpack or play in bear habitat, do you own or rent a canister? What brands/models have you tried?
Note: This is not a "bear attack thread, please don't make it one!
Codger
Traditionally when in bear habitat, food was placed in bags and suspended from high tree limbs. Most larger wilderness jurisdictions (National Parks) disallow this method of food safety now I am learning. Bears are smart critters and many have learned to retrieve hanging bags.
I understand the authorities insistence on complying with the new regulations and read that backpackers in some places face canister inspection before a backcountry permit is issued. Some backpackers even report rangers checking them for canisters on the trail, fines imposed for those found with inadequate or unapproved containers for their food.
Reasoning behind the bear canister regulations is pretty obvious to me. First and foremost is to protect the bears. Bears habituated to thinking of hikers as a num-num food source become a danger to people and are often destroyed after a confrontation. You just cant un-teach a bear bad habits. Relocation of problem bears has been tried, but failed more often than not.
As for myself, I like the idea of being less prone to having to cancel a planned trip half way though because I lost my food supply. The old way, hanging or bear-bagging, even when it worked for bears, left food at the mercy of other critters like possums, raccoons, squirrels etc., besides being a pain even where appropriate trees could be found (some areas have only young growth trees if any at all). Canisters can be left on the ground (but not close to your tent).
Other than the expense, issues of bulk and of added pack weight, I dont see much of a downside to the requirement, or even voluntary participation outside of regulated areas where bears exist.
Expense? Ive seen prices for approved hard canisters range from $40 up. Many National Parks where they are required rent them (Example Yosimite: $5 for up to two weeks with a $65 deposit) , as do some trailhead outfitters who also sell them. They can also be rented online, though prices are generally higher (Example: http://www.lowergear.com: $25 for two weeks).
There are also some soft containers available, but they are not usually approved and have shown possible failure to do their job. Generally, they are not watertight (many canisters are) and do nothing to inhibit crushing of the contents unless an aluminum stiffener sleeve is inserted into the bag. Ursack is one:
Do the National Park and Forest Services accept URSACK as an alternative to hard-sided, bear-proof containers?
There is no uniform testing or approval mechanism in place the National Park or Forest Services.
Every park has its own standards for acceptable bear and critter resistant containers. For example, Canyonlands N.P. lends Ursacks to campers (with a deposit), while other National Parks restrict or ban the use of Ursacks.
Some parks require bear-resistant containers, but do not specify any particular brands.
Always contact the Park you will be visiting BEFORE you bring URSACK (or any other container).
The advantage of the soft containers is mostly in weight reduction if I understand correctly. But the hard canisters also have the advantage of deterring most rodents, raccoons, dogs etc.
Of those of you who camp, backpack or play in bear habitat, do you own or rent a canister? What brands/models have you tried?
Note: This is not a "bear attack thread, please don't make it one!
Codger
