Ursack failure

[Karl Keating]

I was at the ranger station at Devil’s Postpile National Monument on August 10. A ranger said that a pair of hikers reported that a bear had gotten into their Ursack the day before. The Ursack had the mandatory aluminum liner.

According to the ranger, the bear used its claws to tear at the Ursack’s opening until it had worn away the fabric.

[jonathan hauptman]

is it possible that the hikers where using something claimed to be an ursack, but they were lied to(thick stuff sack or something)/I think we would need more info. before we take this failure seriously. do you know if your ranger freind actually saw said ursack or did the hikers just tell him about it(did bear carry of the sack)/more info and/or witness reports would help. I do not mean to nitpick, but an ursack failure is a serious matter when it comes to ursack getting/staying approved. A failure could be the end of the ursack in bear territory. This would be bad for ultralighters everywhere(extra 2 pounds). I hope that this so called failure is a false alarm. If not…it sucks!!!

[jonathan hauptman]

P.s., is it possible that the ranger(possibly a disbeleiver in ursacks) just assumed that it was an ursack. Perhaps the idea of an ursack in his woods put a stick up his ****. maybe just a biast ranger.

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

While failures have happened, they are rare (yes, I am a huge fan of Ursack bags)…and almost always are due to the human not closing the bag properly. If the failure did actually happen, I’d wonder – considering that a bear shouldn’t be able to get to the opening if tied off to a tree!! The bear would be able to pull at the bag from the rear – with it’s teeth.

I am always suspicous when a ranger is the one selling the tales. Why? Here in Wa, at the ONP, there is a ranger that tells tales to force bear canisters on hikers. His freaking tales change constantly! They are always about how Ursacks are not good enough. We blatantly lie to him at this point. Ursacks are allowed everywhere in that park except for the coastal strip, so they go with us. We obey the coastal rule. But when a story ranges from insane mt goats to drooling bears, and it changes on every visit, you have to roll your eyes.
Yet the park service there actually has Ursacks that they use themselves!! Some of us ran into him in the backcountry-and did he have a canister? Nope.
Though I can understand the point of canisters. If everyone used one, they’d have almost no incidents. It is easier to just require them, than to rely on humans to use a tool properly, which is what an Ursack is.

[Ken Helwig]

all great responses. I too wondered out loud when I read this yesterday. I almost responded with the same questions, but thought ahh not again. There are some folks out there that would love to see Ursack fail. For me, above tree line I think Ursacacks are on of the most fail safe containers out there. I fehave owned different Ursacks over the past 5 years and not ONCE have I had a problem. As for the aluminum instert. I happily accept it into my Ursack when nescessary.

[Karl Keating]

1. It wasn’t clear to me whether the ranger had seen the Ursack.

2. The present NPS policy is that Ursacks should NOT to be tied to trees but are to be left lying on the ground: “The Ursack must be used with the aluminum insert and we are asking users to leave them on the ground (100 ft from camp) and not tied to an object in order to prevent resource damage.”

3. The ranger said the hikers found their Ursack about 50 feet away from where they had left it, implying that they had not tied it to a tree.

4. I tied my own Ursack to downwood, but in retrospect I see that that would not have prevented a bear from clawing at the opening. I should have tied it to a branch a few feet off the ground.

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

The whole “resource damage” line is a bunch of hooey in most situations. At least IMO. I tie my Ursack off, as does everyone I know with one. We tie ours off around tree bases or branches, so that the bag is hitting the ground.
A hammock can do more damage than the Kevlar threads would….sigh!

The NP Rangers just need to admit that they don’t like Ursacks, and call it a day.

[Al Shaver]

Sarah, The tree damage is not from the sack, but rather from the bear clawing at the fragile and essential bark as well as disturbing the ground at the base of the tree. Ursack.com has a link to this SIBBG (Sierra Interagency Black Bear Group) commissioned report.

I’m curious why the NPS doesn’t allow Ursacks in the coastal strip of Olympic National Park.

I agree that this fine and critical tool for lightweight backpackers requires more skill to use effectively than cannisters. I always suspect poor technique in a case of failure. A few careless people could get these outlawed for us all.

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

Al, they made canisters (or use of hard sided plastic buckets hung on bear wires) mandatory a number of years ago…due to lazy humans and the racoons. The coons were so bad they would rip into tents, sleeping bags, etc. Coons are adapt at sending the young up bear wires, and opening pinatas ;-) The rule has worked well, and racoons are pretty rare these days.
The tree damage makes me wonder though…bears rip into trees all the time up here! It is a food source for them. You can see where bears are active by looking for missing bark :-)

[Alice Hengst]

Perhaps the hikers weren’t careful about using the Odor-proof bag in the proper manner. I have always made sure to keep the top of the OP bag as far away from the opening as I can, so that a bear couldn’t possibly rip it open without first breaking into the sack. I also find it takes a little work to get the opening of the Ursack closed as far as it will go, and then to tie the overhand knot so it won’t open any farther. A bag that was closed sloppily could have made it easier for the bear to rip it.

I too have questioned the resource damage reason for not tying the bag to a tree. Bears rip up trees in SEKI all the time! Even if a bear carried my sack 20 feet, there’s a good chance I could not find it. (Heck, I can’t even find stuff that’s right in my pack.)

[Mike Storesund]

It seems there are a lot of ‘unknowns’ and hearsay with this thread.

1. Did the users close the Ursack properly?
2. Was part of the inner bag protruding out of the opening?
3. Was the bag overloaded making it impossible to completely close the sack?
4. Was it really an Ursack?
5. A ranger said it was reported…
6. Is the ranger biased against the Ursack?
7. Were Odor Proof bags used?
8. Were the OP bags handled by cooking hands after being closed (leaving scent on the outside)?

Numbers 2 and 3 further imply improper closure / usage of the sack. Numbers 5 and 6 questions the source of information (second, third, forth-hand?) and the integrity of the ranger, which I try not to do, but still needs to be considered. Numbers 7 and 8 question the materials used and their handling procedure.

I have had my Ursack almost 2 years now and added the liner to make it a Hybrid last spring and have not had a failure. I have not had any encounters with bears either, so my experiences are limited. I do take caution when handling the OP bag to ensure as best as possible that I do not contaminate the outside of the bag with odiferous substances. That could also be the reason I have not had any bear encounters ;O) I really like the product and will continue to use it, regardless of the outcome of this isolated, unsubstantiated ‘report’.

[Dan Schmidt]

My ursack failed. Mice started a little hole and a bear finished it. This was an older yellow kevlar one.

[Ryan Jordan]

I’m wondering how a policy like this might affect the habituation of bears…

“Hikers are expected to remain with their food at all times. Although specific brands and models of storage containers are not required, the hiker is responsible for making sure that a bear does not come into contact with their food, by using bear spray as a deterrent. Hikers should carry all of their food with them while day hiking away from camp. Hikers should sleep with their food. If a curious bear should show an interest in their food, the hiker should allow the bear to approach close enough to spray the bear directly in the face.”

[Preston Patton]

I was in Yosemite earlier this week and had an Ursack failure. The bear dragged it off (I didn’t have it tied to a tree, per NP regulations) and tore a hole in the bottom of the bag. It looks like the threads were torn. The aluminum insert also tore a hole in the fabric and is protruding about 0.25 inch. It was one of the new hybrid models. I followed all instructions and recommendations. I would like to say that I’m VERY impressed with Tom Cohen at Ursack. I sent him an email with pictures and he refunded my money the same day and is very interested in improving the design. (I’m sending the failed bag to him so they can take a look at it.)

[David Bonn]

One of the problems with bear spray is that it doesn’t really hurt the bears. Heck, humans can get tolerant to pepper spray. Spraying bears a lot would probably produce bears that were at best slightly annoyed by pepper spray.

So rather than having a hungry bear come after you and your food, you’d have a hungry, slightly annoyed bear coming after you and your food. Probably not an improvement.

[Ryan Jordan]

>> One of the problems with bear spray is that it doesn’t really hurt the bears. Heck, humans can get tolerant to pepper spray.

I’ve heard this, too, but haven’t been able to dig up any hard evidence or proof substantiating this claim. In all of the case studies I’ve read from YNP about bear spray “failing”, in every case, there was evidence the spray never made it to the eyes because of wind or bad aim.

[Ryan Faulkner]

Just wondering if you were using an OP liner, I did when I was in yosemite last week and had no problems of any kind with my ursack, I thik it may help just to keep the odor down then the bear wont be as interested with your campsite, I dident even see one bear while I was out

[Preston Patton]

Yep, I used an OP liner and was careful about closing both the liner and the Ursack. I was just north of the Cloud’s Rest/JMT trail junction. According to the ranger I talked to, there’s a bear there that is pretty agressive about getting backpacker’s food. I guess I found him!

[Aaron Wallace]

>>I’m wondering how a policy like this might affect the habituation of bears…

And thus, we may have the answer: a certain percentage of hikers will use marginal storage techniques and not correctly/optimally use their bear spray, and the bears will become habituated to getting food successfully from people sleeping at night. (An evolutionary biologist might take this further: bears could eventually gain an adaptation that makes them tolerant of the spray. They’re probably already developing enzymes that let them digest Clif bar wrappers and even freeze-dried food…)

One problem is it takes a disproportinate amount of negative conditioning to override occasional positive reinforcement. Any “keep the food from the bears” technique has to work pretty much all the time, especially since the reward for stealing food is so good, and the negative consequences of failure are comparatively slight.

[d k]

Coincidentally enough, I just talked with a friend this evening whose trip in Sequoia last week was aborted on the 3rd night after a bear made off with their Ursack (secured between 2 rocks with a steel cable, since they were above treeline). The bear bit through the cable and the sack was never seen again. Granted, it was an old-style (no aluminum liner). They hiked back out in 1 day what they’d taken 3 days to do…bummer.

[Alice Hengst]

Sounds like SIBBG needs to find the same bear for testing the next new model!!

When your Ursack was found by the bear, was it near your camp or was it hidden at a distance? Maybe we can throw our Ursacks into the brush so there is no human trail leading to it, and then the bears wouldn’t find it.

[Preston Patton]

I put the Ursack about 40 yards from where I was camped. In that area, the bears pretty much patrol from one camp site to the next.

[Thomas Cohen]

I am the inventor of Ursack (and president of the company). It pains me to have to write this, because we thought we had come up with a nearly perfect bear proof product. Although the Ursack Hybrid has done extremely well, we have learned from this incident that the bottom of the bag may be vulnerable. We think it may be because the Vectran fabric has fewer filaments per inch than the Spectra we previously used (and is not currently available because of military demand). Coincidentally, the new Ursacks just now coming from our sewing facility are made with a beefier Vectran that was not available before. We hope that solves the problem. Unfortunately, there is no really scientific way to test it. The Vectran we have been using was successfully tested by us at the zoo and by the SEKI rangers in the wild. Only real world camper experience tells the tale.

We are always searching for ways to make Ursack better, and are working on new ideas now to address the possible vulnerability of the Vectran bag. Until we get to the end of this summer season, there is no accurate way to determine if this vulnerability is a serious problem or not. Lots of our previous customers have bought the aluminum liner to add to their Spectra bags, and there have been no reports of any problems with that version of the hybrid.

What is really critical is the willingness of the Sierra rangers (and SIBBG in particular) to keep working with us. We all know that no bear canister is perfect. Just this week, I got an email from a park service employee in Tuolomne Meadows who reported the failure of a well known hard sided canister (NOT a Bear Vault) being used by a back country wilderness crew. I won’t give the brand name because I don’t have first hand knowledge, and would ask that all of you use the same restraint in reporting failures of any product. If SIBBG revokes the use of any product without the possibility of approving improved versions, it is the kiss of death because the Sierra is such a huge part of the market. We want to be sure that any decisions are made on verifiable facts, not rumors.

I welcome your input on ways to improve Ursack. You can email me directly at [email protected].

tom

[Colleen Clemens]

as for sleeping with food, i was told by a backcountry ranger in Sequoia NP that any instance of nighttime bear/human contact she had heard of in SEKI was due to hikers sleeping with their food.

i’ve personally encountered human food-conditioned bears in both Yosemite and SEKI. the Yosemite bears were downright frightening in their aggression. in those areas i would never use anything but a canister. using an Ursack would leave me sleepless, just waiting for the bear to come.

however, in the San Gabriel and San Bernardino ranges (southern Cali), i use an Ursack and sleep soundly, because teh bears there are just completely different. i’ve actually never even seen a bear in these ranges, although i know they are there.

i think it’s a question of understanding the bear situation where you are planning to go. Ursacks work well in many areas, but the unique situation in the Sierra Nevada calls for something a little less breachable.

[Ken Helwig]

Well only half true. I am on my 6th year using Ursacks and I have used them in areas that allow Ursacks, and this year with the insert in Yosemite and Seki….No problems. Most likely their conditional approval will be revoked once again. So back to the drawing boards I guess. But all of the other areas of the Sierra’s I WILL be using an Ursack without the aluminum insert.

[Author]

Posts