Ursacking the JMT

The JMT outside the parks is just as problematic with the habituated bears as the area inside – if you have any intent of camping away from the lockers anywhere, BAD IDEA. Regardless of how much we'd like the Ursack to work there – there are reasons they are not allowed in bear canister mandatory regions. The bears get the taste of food and persist until the tree is damaged and/or the bag is opened. Having talked to rangers who have had to deal with the end result – a torn bag that required bolt cutters to get the rope off the tree, since the bear yanked the knot too tight to be undone – and seen the pictures – the very last thing I would do is expect an Ursack to survive anywhere on the JMT. Cue the cult of Ursack out of the woodwork… I've been demeaned plenty of times for refusing to base my opinions in this matter on conspiracy, misunderstandings, improperly tied knots, etc. If a thoroughly habituated bear gets a taste through the fabric, it's not worth it. You lose, the bear loses again, and the problem of food rewards for bears continues.

Don't feed the troll…..

Montana or Alaska are still canister free if you are physically unable to haul the extra two pounds of weight, but somehow able to take mountain backpacking trips. or if you wait a few months the canister rules are relaxed after october 31 in SEKI.

Thanks for the opinion, lori. As for me, anywhere I can legally use an ursack, I'm going to. If there was a grand concensus that the ursack is bad, then I word give it up, but there isn't. There are other sides of the story. The PCT is mostly Ursack approved. It is only Yosemite and SEKI that have held out, and from what I've been reading, that is mostly politics.

October 31st? Is SEKI finallyi coming around??

That sounds ominous, but I don't understand it. what does "don't feed the troll" mean?

I assume the "October 31st" limit assumes that bears will be in hibernation by then (I don't think it's a 666/Halloween reference, LOL)…

Do not feed.

I've been reading the SEKI rules closely recently on this matter. Three things I've learned: 1) In Dusy Basin, Rae Lakes Loop, and Rock Creek, you must carry a bear canister. No exceptions. It doesn't matter if you're planning to camp in areas with bear lockers available, you need to have an approved canister on your person. 2) In all other areas: 2a) it is permitted to forego the canister if you plan to camp only in locations with lockers (provided you actually use the lockers). 2b) If you do not store your food in a bear locker, you must counterbalance it on a branch 10 feet from the trunk and 20 feet from the ground. The PCT method, despite being equal or superior to counterbalancing in all ways, is not approved, and I've heard of people getting fined for using it. The Ursack is not approved. All that to say, if you're going to be in SEKI there's no point carrying an Ursack. Even in situations where you don't need a canister, the only legal alternatives are lockers and counter-balancing. If you're doing one of those anyways, the Ursack offers no advantages over a nylon bag. Hopefully this changes soon, but for now, those are the rules.

The PCT hang is for wild bears only. In SEKI they grab the cord hanging down and pull down the whole branch.

"I've been reading the SEKI rules closely recently on this matter." Mitchell, where did you source these rules? Can you give a link to where you think the definitive SEKI rules are recorded? thanks Ralph

http://www.nps.gov/seki/planyourvisit/bear_bc.htm

"Do not feed." OK, I give. Who are we not supposed to feed?

"The PCT hang is for wild bears only. In SEKI they grab the cord hanging down and pull down the whole branch." Uh….can you provide any documented instances of this happening? This sounds pretty far fetched to me.

I would guess it happens like this Bear walks out onto the limb and it breaks. Camper sees bear and branch on ground, declares bear must have pulled it down.

Pretend it's politics – that's fine. I won't be losing any food, myself. I am an evidence-based entity, as are the rangers who deal with this stuff in person. Bears in the Sierra don't really hibernate, and Yosemite does not lift the requirement for a can in winter. Plenty of bear tracks have been found in the snow. Bears do wake up and move around once in a while. Marmots, on the other hand, are true hibernators, and can be dug out and put back without waking. The counterbalance method is what is required in any jurisdiction – no one mentions alternates. It's sort of like the debate with the alcohol stove – in a fire ban, it's banned in Sierra National Forest, but in the parks it's evidently not considered "open fire" and SEKI now has specific language on their website reflecting this. In the national forests I visit the rangers now really urge bear canisters – the more popular wilderness areas are having more bear issues, these days. The websites are ridiculously vague in places and people who answer phones are often clueless, so I usually ask when I get a permit about the various issues currently in the places I will pass through. Like the instruction I got at Roads End to put the Bear Vault in the lockers in Paradise – a bear learned to get the lid off. That instruction was absolutely nowhere online that I could find, but the ranger was quite adamant that no one could leave it out and expect to have food. A friend tried to do the JMT without resupply in the 90s, before canisters were a requirement. He was camped near Tuolumne Meadows and had gone above and beyond with an epic counterbalance hang. Just fifteen minutes later, along came a mama bear and cub – the cub was up the tree, out the branch, gnawed through the rope, mama grabbed it as the cub came down, and off went 2 weeks of food. It does not pay to underestimate habituated bears.

""Do not feed." OK, I give. Who are we not supposed to feed.?" To me everything about OP says this is someone looking to stir up crap. First post ….on something that has caused many unpleasant exchanges on BPL. Second post mentioning something about " living in a free world". I may well be wrong and if so my apologies, but for now I read this as someone's second account, probably someone bored. That is why I agreed with PedEstrian, not to feed it. We'll see where it goes.

NPS website says plain as day what is allowed.

OK. Well, it looks like it's just too risky to go with an Ursack, and there is no way I'm fooling around with counterbalancing food. I've had cubs grab food that way too. I went with one guy enroute to climbing Charlett dome once who thought that if he kept his food in his pack and used the pack as a pillow, the bears wouldn't dare take it. What a putz this guy was. The bear snatached it right out from under his head as soon as he fell asleep, of course, and killed out climb. Anyway, it would be great not to have to lug that stupid cannister around through all the places that don't require it, but if the rule is that you can't even set foot on SEKI land without a cannister…regardless of where you plan to store it at night, then that's that. And that's what I really wanted to know. I didn't really want to spark up a dispute between the bear cannister evanelists and the ursackers.

Pony up for a Berikade; you'll never look back or regret it. Wicked pricey, yes, but they last forever. I have a scout and a weekender; the scout is practically a pleasure to carry. I counterbalanced for many, many years; lightweight canisters are far simpler. Also, much easier when you suddenly realize that there's something you need or want in your food cache just before getting into your tent at night.

"if you are physically unable to haul the extra two pounds of weight, but somehow able to take mountain backpacking trips" I think this is a condescending comment on a website with the name "Backpacking LIGHT." Something like, "Real Backpackers don't worry about weight." But in fact a large part of my backpacking life is very much concerned with weight. For years I lugged around a 60lb+ pack, wore huge leather hiking boots, and carried all manner of unnecessary weight. I don't anymore…not because I am "Physically unable to haul the extra two pounds of weight," but because in light of available technology it doesn't make much sense. I'll admit that I get obcessive about the weight thing, but on the other hand, my last six-day trek was with a 18lb pack, including food and water, and I could have shaved more off with my GG backpack. I am always looking for ways to shave off ounces (including my own body fat). And then along comes this huge-ass canister that is not only heavy but awkward. I can find a way to get rid of it, I will, though it doesn't look I'm going to be able to avoid it in SEKI.

Hey Jeffery, I agree with the Berikade. I actually have one too. and I know what you mean about forgetting something just before you turn in.

The Bearikade Scout isn't nearly as awkward as the larger sizes; still, I can carry 5 days worth of food with this (carrying the first days' lunch and dinner in my pack and having only breakfast on the fifth day). If you're out longer in Seki and can manage to camp the first night at a site with a bearbox, you could extend the range even further.

That sounds like a good plan. I usually don't eat much of a breakfast…half a bar of something and some coffee. Mostly I eat on the trail. At night, I don't do a whole lot of food either. I've been mixing a serving of potato soup or corn chowder (freeze dried) with a small amount of some other freeze dried meal, like Kathmadu Curry, or something similar. So five or six days of food doesn't amount to all that much. The trail snacks probably weigh more.