Topic

Ursack Update


Forum Posting

A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!

Home Forums Gear Forums Gear (General) Ursack Update

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 87 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1564352
    Bob Gross
    BPL Member

    @b-g-2-2

    Locale: Silicon Valley

    I believe that the only problem with bear boxes (steel footlockers that were anchored) was that it concentrated a lot of camping to the immediate 100 yards around the bear box. With a bear can, people will camp nearer to the view or somewhat closer to the water source.
    –B.G.–

    #1564369
    James Naphas
    BPL Member

    @naphas13

    Locale: SoCal

    >I have to wonder if I'd get fined for using a bear canister AND an Ursack. Both would probably be hung using the PCT method. <

    Hanging a bear canister is the one surefire user error mode associated with them that I can attest to. Several years ago some former eagle scouts from a troop I was associated with had a garcia canister breached after being hung. The addition of the cloth bag used in hanging gave the bear enough purchase to hold the canister while it broke in the lid, in this case by caving in the plastic tab and then prying the lid open. They reported that the bear worked on getting the canister open for a couple of hours before succeeding.

    Since I was the ASM in charge of backpacking and stored most of the troop's gear in my garage I got to see the canister after they returned it. I was nearly able to pry the lid that was missing that little tab off myself with my fingers, so I can see how a bear could do it pretty easily.

    #1564384
    Raymond Estrella
    Member

    @rayestrella

    Locale: Northern Minnesota

    This is good stuff. I have always been interested in the Ursack but as most of my hiking is in the "bad" areas never have tried them.

    The BV 500 is the latest can from Bear Vault and is allowed in Raes Lakes last time I was there. The 300 and 400 series are not. (I have them all…)

    Don't hang your Ursack at Whitney. They have tree diving bears there and you may have it drug away. From what I understand is they should be tied to something.

    #1564388
    Robert Blean
    BPL Member

    @blean

    Locale: San Jose -- too far from Sierras

    > And of course there have been documented failures of canisters, in particular the Bear Vault, which had to go through two re-designs to thwart some particularly intelligent, or persistent, bears in, I think, the Rae Lakes area. Interestingly, their approval was never pulled, as far as I know, though someone may correct me here.

    I thought the original failures were in the Adirondacks.

    The approval for the early models was, in fact, pulled — at least in Yosemite (I do not know about elsewhere).

    — Bob

    #1564389
    Bob Bankhead
    BPL Member

    @wandering_bob

    Locale: Oregon, USA

    I suspect you'll have trouble getting your permit because:

    1 – Except for the backpackers' campgrounds in Little Yosemite Valley and Tuolumne Meadows, there are no bear boxes in either direction on either the JMT or PCT.

    2 – You'll never convince a ranger that you can hike the 56 miles from TM to the northern border of Yosemite in a single day. No way.

    3 – It is only 12 miles from TM to the southern border of Yosemite at the top of Donohue Pass. While doable in a single day, it is a tough FIRST day as the final 4 miles is all uphill. I believe the canister requirement continues well beyond there as well, so you would still be in violation.

    4 – Starting from Yosemite Valley, and even assuming you used the bear boxes at Little Yosemite Valley on your first night, it is still a long 32 miles to the top of Donohue Pass on day two, and you still have a lot of elevation gain to overcome. Good luck convincing a ranger you can make it all the way in a single day.

    Incidentally, there is usually a ranger stationed on the trail in Lyell Canyon during the day. They aren't complete fools; just look at the clueless day hikers and campers they deal with every day.

    #1564391
    Robert Blean
    BPL Member

    @blean

    Locale: San Jose -- too far from Sierras

    > I agree that all the canisters are just bear resistant, and user error can provide easy access.

    Has there been a documented failure of a Bearikade?

    — Bob

    #1564394
    Ian White
    Member

    @deuceregular

    Locale: Southern Jefferson

    I am pretty sure canisters are required at Thousand Island lake. I think the problem bear there was removed, but not the canister requirement.

    When I was there in 04 the bear visited twice during the night, but was easily chased out.

    #1564403
    Mark Verber
    BPL Member

    @verber

    Locale: San Francisco Bay Area

    > Has there been a documented failure of a Bearikade?

    I think there have been a few failures which is why there is a requirement for canisters to be above a certain serial number. Some changes were made in response to the failures though I don't know what those failures were.

    There was at least one failure caused by someone trying to cook? in the canister. So the carbon fiber / metal interface was weakened and the broke.

    –mark

    #1564407
    Robert Blean
    BPL Member

    @blean

    Locale: San Jose -- too far from Sierras

    >> Has there been a documented failure of a Bearikade?

    > I think there have been a few failures which is why there
    > is a requirement for canisters to be above a certain
    > serial number. Some changes were made in response to the
    > failures though I don't know what those failures were.

    AFAIK that is quite ancient history. I am not sure how ancient, but my Bearikade is well above the serial number you reference, and I have had it for some years. I have not heard of any failures of any made in the last several years.

    >There was at least one failure caused by someone trying to >cook? in the canister. So the carbon fiber / metal >interface >was weakened and the broke.

    I guess … I expect that cooking in an ursack or any of the plastic bear boxes would not be a good idea either :)

    — Bob

    #1564414
    drowning in spam
    Member

    @leaftye

    Locale: SoCal

    > Hanging a bear canister is the one surefire user error mode associated with them that I can attest
    > to. Several years ago some former eagle scouts from a troop I was associated with had a garcia
    > canister breached after being hung. The addition of the cloth bag used in hanging gave the bear
    > enough purchase to hold the canister while it broke in the lid, in this case by caving in the plastic
    > tab and then prying the lid open. They reported that the bear worked on getting the canister open
    > for a couple of hours before succeeding.

    Just the fact that the bear got to the canister is bad news. If a proper bear hang can delay a bear for a few hours, and then the canister can stall it for a couple more hours, then that's about as much as I can expect. I certainly don't expect to stop a bear that's willing to take however long it takes to get into my food.

    Anyway, the Ursack would definitely be hung. If a ranger walks into my camp, I'll show the approved bear canister that's filled to the brim, along with an Ursack that's filled with overflow and toiletries. And that's if I even have to use the Ursack at all. Obviously only the canister would be used if it fit everything…which will be the case a few days after my last resupply.

    #1564422
    Bob Bankhead
    BPL Member

    @wandering_bob

    Locale: Oregon, USA

    Yes, canisters are required at Thousand Island Lake and all the way to Tulley Hole. South of there, they are only recommended until shortly before you reach the Rae Lakes area.

    #1564431
    Ted E
    BPL Member

    @mtn_nut

    Locale: Morrison, CO

    Rocky mountain national park started also requiring bear canisters too, even though they have a very scarce bear population. They aren't specifying any specific qualifications, so I'm just going to use my ursack and hopefully they won't give me any grief. I've never had any bear troubles anywhere in or around rocky mountain np…

    #1564439
    Lori P
    BPL Member

    @lori999

    Locale: Central Valley

    "I wonder how much grief you'll get at the permit counter if you say you are using an ursack, either utilizing the bear boxes or camping beyond Yosemite the first night."

    If you're getting a permit in Yosemite, and tell them you don't intend to use a canister, you get no permit at all.

    I listened to a couple argue round in circles with a ranger – "we're going to eat all our food, sleep, and hike out in the morning without eating." Nope. They had to rent a canister then and there, before the ranger would give them a permit. Put your trash and toiletries in, they were instructed.

    And if they catch you using an Ursack (and rangers do hit the backcountry, with tents, for quite a ways out) you can potentially be fined up to $5,000. The fine/penalty for no permit: $75, and an armed escort out of the wilderness. (Yep, they do escort you out.) Yosemite is pretty strict.

    #1564445
    Bob Gross
    BPL Member

    @b-g-2-2

    Locale: Silicon Valley

    Hanging a bear can is probably one of the stupidest things that I've heard of. Bear cans, especially a Garcia or BearVault, are designed so that the bear can't find any part to grip with claws or teeth. When you put a nice nylon bag around it, you have given the bear something to bite on and carry it off. Then it can work on the can in its leisure.
    Seriously, I keep nearly all of my food in the bear can all of the time, and when I am finished with it in the evening, I simply lay it on the ground about 25 feet from my tent or sleeping bag. Why 25 feet? Because that is the maximum distance that my camera's flash will illuminate the scene fully.
    The most bear can contact that I have ever seen from the bears is when they hit it with one paw, and then they walk away looking for easier pickings.
    –B.G.–

    #1564577
    Josh Leavitt
    BPL Member

    @joshleavitt

    Locale: Ruta Locura

    Gary

    "Thom, I think maybe titanium would be fairly equal to aluminum here, except more expensive. Titanium is twice as strong as aluminum, so you could use a thinner gauge to get the same strength. However, Ti is 60% heavier than Al. It seems like a rather expensive way to save 2.16 oz., but it could be done.

    Josh, please correct me here if I'm missing something…"

    Your not missing anything, your right, but only technically ;-) The aluminum liner is only ~.020"-.030" thick(At least that is my recolection, and sounds right for the weight.). So a Ti liner of the the same or less weight, might be so thin that it would not be of much prctical use.

    Two ways to find out :-)

    #1565097
    Barbara Karagosian
    Spectator

    @barbara

    Locale: So Cal

    Re where the boxes are in Yosemite – they have a couple at the Sunrise tent campsite, as well as LYV, Cathedral Lake TH, Glen Aulin TH and TM.

    #1565322
    Matthew Bishop
    BPL Member

    @mattsbishop

    Locale: Iowa

    Last time I was in the East side backcountry office, they had a collection of approved bear canisters hiding behind the counter–All hard sided. It would be great to hear if you get them to approve of an ursack. I've been eyeing them, if only for the times I find myself above tree line and won't be able to hang my food.

    #1565353
    dan mchale
    BPL Member

    @wildlife

    Locale: Cascadia

    I have always thought that nesting 2 Ursacks could make it pretty tough for a bear to get at food. Ursacks are light enough and inexpensive enough to do that, and then when people are not in bear country they can be used as singles for little rodents. I'm not sure why Ursac could not market a double system.

    #1565566
    First Last
    BPL Member

    @snusmumriken

    Locale: SF Bay Area

    When the Ursacks have failed it has generally been through the opening. For whatever reason the sack isn't closed up completely, the bear gets a claw in and gets it open. Doubling up might not help that.

    #1565594
    Greg Mihalik
    Spectator

    @greg23

    Locale: Colorado

    Kristin,
    Tell me more, please.

    The top can never be completely closed to a bears claw. But when properly knotted, was the bear still able to expand the opening, effective pushing to knot 'up' closure cord and opening the bag?

    Or is 'properly knotted' the crux question?

    What was the scenario?

    When I tie off to a tree, there is a double overhand securing the opening, then the ends go around the tree and get knotted again, leaving as little slack as possible. Pulling on the sack opening will probably get a little yield, but hardly enough to get something out.

    Any additional information that you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks.

    #1565605
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    "When I tie off to a tree, there is a double overhand securing the opening, then the ends go around the tree and get knotted again, leaving as little slack as possible. Pulling on the sack opening will probably get a little yield, but hardly enough to get something out."

    +1

    The key is to get the Ursack snugged up to a tree, or log. I do a preliminary tie-off and then pretend I'm a bear and haul back on the bag as hard as I can, until the aperture is tightly closed. Then I adjust the double overhand knot and re-tie the Ursack for real, well snugged up to the tree. Get it tight enough and a bear won't be able to get a claw near the opening, let alone get any purchase.

    #1565631
    First Last
    BPL Member

    @snusmumriken

    Locale: SF Bay Area

    I had read on the Ursack website that the failures were related to the opening rather than a tear through the fabric.

    http://www.ursack.com/ursack-update.htm

    Ursack argued that the decision was unfair because it was based on six alleged failures and such failure standard is not applied to other canisters. Only one of these alleged failures involved torn fabric, and that was in a ranger-baited bag in Yosemite Valley where no canisters of any kind are allowed. Yosemite refused to provide that evidence or even send a picture. All the other "failures" involved user's failure to cinch and knot the opening completely tight.

    #1565645
    dan mchale
    BPL Member

    @wildlife

    Locale: Cascadia

    The Ursacs I have are older and have only 2 rows of stitching that hold the drawstring in. If a persistant bear simply cut and abraided those two exposed rows of stitches, the game is over. If I was making the things, there would be no failures. It would be easy to hide that row of stitches for one thing. Sure, it may be Spectra thread, but maybe it isn't. Being exposed to bear claws like that is a poor design.

    #1565661
    Robert Blean
    BPL Member

    @blean

    Locale: San Jose -- too far from Sierras

    I just went to the ursack web site and looked at the pictures of how to hang the ursack.

    I was amused at their picture of how to secure it above treeline — to a pretty good-sized log (several inches in diameter).

    — Bob

    #1565822
    David Carbiener
    BPL Member

    @hikingdave

    Locale: Northern California

    I saw that too and laughed. Where did the log come from when it was above tree line? Didn't make sense to me.

Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 87 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Forum Posting

A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!

Get the Newsletter

Get our free Handbook and Receive our weekly newsletter to see what's new at Backpacking Light!

Gear Research & Discovery Tools


Loading...