Ultralight Tip of the Week

[James Marco]

Mike, these tips really require a book, ya'know…as in another one???
Well Done!!!

[Mary D]

A lot of wilderness areas (such as Wyoming's Wind Rivers) require you to camp 200 feet from established trails and 200 feet from water. This is fine, but there are some places where there is no way to do this if you want to avoid being too close to bark-beetle killed trees which are liable to fall in the next gust of wind. When I've been in such places I feel it is far more important to keep the required distance from water than from the trail, if I can't do both. If I have to be too close to the trail, I at least try to put my shelter where it's inconspicuous.

[James Marco]

Mike,
Many years ago I figured out the pulley system as you describe, cept I also used a small 1/4" pully that weighed about an ounce, each. For full food bags, it sure helps. Especially with two or three people. The small Ti D-links were a BIG boon. Note that the dual links, Nitize #1, tend to avoid tangles a bit better making clipping/unclipping food bags easy on day hikes out of a base camp.

Also, a larger stick, around the size of a broom handle, makes a good haul stick without pinching off the blood supply to your hands.

[Joe Kuster]

Maybe this is that silly climber perspective, but in your diagram you have two individual ropes – one to serve as an achor w/ carabiner at the top of the limb and another to serve as a makeshift pulley that is joined at the carabiner.

An Alpine Butterfly to hold the carabiner would make a bi-directionally suitable knot that would allow a single length of rope to be utilized while not changing any other part of the system. While not common, I mostly associate the alpine butterfly when climbing with groups of three, it's plenty of strong for the job.

[Michael Matiasek]

I like this idea, the use of pullys or even just a simple carabiner or ring sounds like a great way to prevent the string from sawing into the limb. On several occassions this added enough friction to my system that i had a heck of a time getting the bags down. While I really like the elegance of this system isn't the major drawback that there is still a line on the ground that a bear could cut? It would seem that the PCT method would be more full proof. Anyone who has used both care to comment? thanks!

[Mike Clelland]

Here is an image of the PULLEY system for lager loads that might cut into a branch.

[Bob Gross]

Mike's method shows two hanging ropes near the ground. The bears would get those in an instant.

The correct two-rope method leaves no hanging ropes near the ground.

–B.G.–

[James Marco]

"Mike's method shows two hanging ropes near the ground. The bears would get those in an instant.

The correct two-rope method leaves no hanging ropes near the ground."

Bob, I don't believe a straight bear hang will be as effective in well used camping areas. I have used them a lot in the ADK's, but I have seen bear hangs that are simply a matter throw it in a tree and pray. A head height hang is worse than useless. The PCT methode is a waste of time and complicates things in the ADK's. But, my question is how do you retrieve the line if there is nothing near the ground?
Anyway, not to argue this point, but, it *seems* like two lines is two lines, however you do it…even the PCT methode leaves two lines down.

Well trained bears, of course, know to look for a line. I often avoid this by wrapping the line as high as possible, around a tree 3 or four times. Anyway, In more than 30 year of camping, I have never lost my food. Basically, it depends on where you hike. So, as Mike says, YMMV depending on where you go.

[Mike Clelland]

I've camped a lot of places.

In the tundra of Alaska there are NO trees and REALLY BIG Grizzly Bears – and I've never carried a bear canister.

You just pile the stuff someplace near camp and hope for the best. No trees, no cords and I've never had a problem.

In Yellowstone NP they provide bear hang poles in each campsite and the rope is ALWAYS within reach of the bears, and I know of no problems there.

There are habituated bears in "some" places, but not everywhere.

The comment: "Mike's method shows two hanging ropes near the ground. The bears would get those in an instant." might be true in some high use sites, but certainly not everywhere.

[Ken Larson]

ONE or TWO 50 foot ropes?
OR
TWO 25 foot rope pieces?
OR
????

[David Thomas]

> "One of my ultralight friends suggested getting a haircut and trimming my nails before a backpack."

By cutting her hair before the round-the-world flight of Voyager in 1986, Jeana Yeager added 11 miles of range. A few ounces carried 24,986 miles adds up.

But seriously: Cut your toenails several days BEFORE a hike so the tender exposed skin underneath toughens before the hike. GCNP Hiking 101 stuff.

[Mike Clelland]

I only advocate the TWO cord system for teams with REALLY BIG LOADS of food.

Like a team of 3 for a 10 day trip.

All other hanging can be done with ONE cord and NO carabiners.

THe BIG LOAD system:

---

A) 2x cords at 45 feet each
B) 2x tiny steel 'biners

–

The LIGHT LOAD (or standard) system

---

a 45 foot cord!

[Bob Gross]

I hope that this diagram is large enough to understand. Two ropes. Two bags. No rope is tied off to a tree or hanging down within reach.

This is the system that we used in Yosemite from 1978 until about 1999, when bear canister rules starting to come around. Based on the size of the trees, the size of the branches, the size of the bears, etc., I found the best length of rope to use for the A rope was about 60 feet. The B rope could be shorter, like 40 feet.

The extra length is what keeps you from having to pull the weight _down_. By getting out at an angle, you pull the weight out. That takes slightly less effort which is important with heavy loads.

I can still remember watching three guys trying to hoist-away on an army duffle bag that was filled with over 70 pounds of group food. First of all, a duffle bag hangs down so far that you have to have a very high branch. It takes a tremendous amount of effort.

–B.G.–

[James Marco]

Thanks, Bob! I was thinking of a cable system of some sort. I would still have trouble with a stick that reached 10' into the air, though.

Most of my bear bagging for the last couple years has been easy, 12-20 pounds for up to a couple weeks out. With the kids it was more like 7-9 pounds a day, though. My two and a friend or two. Teenagers can EAT! So a 40 or 45pound load for 4-5 days was not all that uncommon. 70 pounds!!!!! Why didn't they split it? I have had branches come down, broken off, with less load than that….

45-50' feet is enough. I cannot really throw a rock with any accuracy much higher than that anyway. I *try* to make tis one of my first camp chores, find a tree and set a bear line…I really HATE doing this after dark.

[Bob Gross]

In California, the only grizzly bear is the one on the state flag. Therefore, all we have to worry about are black bears. Worst case, a huge black bear can stand up and reach about as high as a man can, so if you can get the whole works up to eight or ten feet off the ground, you are good. Part of the problem is that some food bags hang down to far below the main rope.

If I have a small loop of rope hanging down from a food bag (the pull-down loop), then I generally need a stick of three or four feet long to reach it from where I stand on the ground. Bears obviously can't manipulate a stick or a rope, except for biting a rope.

Assign the teenagers to throw the first line up over the tree limb. That's what they ought to be good for.

–B.G.–

[jscott]

Don't underestimate the bears in the Sierra. Yosemite and environs is MIT for bears. They WILL leap through space, break off branches, stand their cubs on their shoulders and do a variety of other things to snatch your hung food. I'm just sayin'.

[Bob Gross]

Jeffrey, the best example of smart black bears was something that I watched in Little Yosemite Valley one time many years ago. A buddy and I had our sleeping bags stretched out on the ground as it was getting dark, and there was a tent not too far away with three people in it. They chose not to hang their food and they were not using a bear canister.

The bear came by and was sniffing around the outside of the tent, and my buddy and I watched this unfold. The three people sensed that there was a bear, so they suddenly emerged from the tent to scare the bear off. As they chased the bear away, suddenly bear number two shows up out of nowhere. It ducks into the tent, grabs up the food bag, and runs off in the opposite direction.

My buddy and I were laughing pretty hard when the three people returned to the tent.

Hey, that's what you get!

Now you know why the park service advocates bear canisters.

I still say that we need to ship some of them down to Roger Caffin so that they can have a fight with the wombats.

–B.G.–

[David Olsen]

I have used this system Bob, and it rocks. Successfully dozens of times with large groups of people's food including with Bub's creek bears in Kings Canyon. I leave the doubled retrieval cord in, since I put hangs even higher, out of stick range. Just separate the two cord ends so worst case the bear grabs one end and just pulls the retrieval cord out of the system. Cord can be re-tossed over the bags to pull them down if this happens.

The second part of this system is defending the territory, big pile of rocks to throw, no cooking nearby etc.

Wouldn't use this system now with habituated bears when the canisters are less prone to
user error and they save a lot of time.

Still use this system with wild bears when doing my own trips. Keep em wild.

We had students wear climbing helmets when doing bear hangs, as both the limbs and
throw bag can become unpredictable projectiles.

[James Marco]

"Assign the teenagers to throw the first line up over the tree limb. That's what they ought to be good for"

Ha ha, that was 15+ years ago…my kids are in their mid 30's.

[Bob Gross]

Yes, David. The first time or two that somebody uses this method, it seems complex and problematic. Once you learn the subtle tricks, it goes pretty good. If you have a small weight of food, then you can do it solo with just your two hands. If you have a large weight of food, then it helps to have more hands.

I was a bear-bagger up until around 1999. One trip I went on had a requirement for a personal bear canister for each participant, so I had to go out and buy a Garcia (which was the only game in town for a while). After a while, I got used to it. Now I own about five different models.

The only extra part is the decoy system. I string up some empty paper bags with bright white cord, and it gives the bears something to go after until I get up to start throwing rocks at them.

–B.G.–

[Anonymous]

"even the PCT methode leaves two lines down."

Not the way I learned it. Could you explain how it leaves 2 lines down? I'm confused.

"The PCT methode is a waste of time and complicates things in the ADK's."

How?

[Mike Clelland]

The PCT method is (very) clearly drawn in the book.

–

[James Marco]

Sorry, it was NOT the PCT system, some sort of hanging system I did not consider because of the wrong leverages. It just didn't make much sense to my mind. Hmmm….I don't seem to find the video offhand, but, I did find an approximate diagram at http://www.backcountryattitude.com/bearbagging.html
(removed the period…damd punctuation…)

Been a long time since I looked at that stuff. The pulley system Mike described is actually a Marrison system and documented at Princton.

[Anonymous]

"The PCT method is (very) clearly drawn in the book."

Precisely my point. Thanks for the visuals, Mike.

[John Donewar]

James' link will work if you delete the .html. at the end.

Try…

http://www.backcountryattitude.com/bearbagging

…instead and you'll see the info that James was referring to.

Party On,

Newton

BTW the PCT method rocks! ;-)

[Author]

Posts