Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite?

Not sure it really did pass the test — the grizzlies were rewarded for their efforts; they didn't manage to tear the Ursack apart, but they did get food flavors by biting it, and so kept at it. Living in a zoo, they may not have really been hungry, and enjoyed treating the Ursack as a flavored toy. But Jeremy's experience suggests that a motivated definitely bear can definitely get into an Ursack, so I suspect that if the Grizzlies were really hungry, they could have penetrated it.

It actually looks as if, from the video, they could have, had they wanted, pulled the pole over.

Well ursack made it sound as if the test was passed. I guess we'll find out soon enough, but I get what you're saying. Jeremy's experience shows that you will definitely want to use a liner with it to protect your food. A bear did get in his friend's ursack. If I remember he couldn't say if the knot was tied properly by his friend. It's possible it was used properly and breached. Really hard to say it is definitely possible for a bear to get in it when its used properly based on that one experience though. I think an hour of active work on it in the test without a breach is a good sign. I think when used with a liner it could be a good option. I'd be comfortable using it. No arguing that a bear can is more idiot proof though. I hope we continue to see innovation in this area.

How are they going to get around resource damage? Seems that was an issue with jurisdictions, tying a Ursack to a tree/shrub and a bear working it, causing damage to the anchor. Hmmm? I had a Mammoth, CA area bc Ranger question why I had left my upgraded Ursack laying on the ground one day. I had to tell them that was how it had to be or required by them.
Duane

>> The photos are from the Grizzly Discover Center, Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee Canister Testing, about 2009 (memory fading….).

Hi Greg:

Do you remember who you talked to at the IGBC? I've contacted the IGBC myself to get more information about Bearikade testing and the IGBC says that they have no record of any testing performed on a Bearikade or a Bearikade prototype.

If you prefer not to discuss this in public, please send me a PM.

David,
As I recall, IGBC Testing gave me the run around. I talked to someone at the Grizzly Center. I do not recall who it was, other than it was a male. We talked for maybe 15 minutes. There was nothing confidential about our conversation. His position was "… this is how it failed, we need good solutions, I'm sorry this failed, I hope it gets improved and tested again". He then emailed the photo. That was the end of it.

I contacted Wild Ideas and asked about the testing and anticipated follow-up. The response I got was "Well, it was a prototype. Besides, most of our business is in the Sierras, so it's not a high priority".

Hi Greg:

I just got off the phone with Randy from the Grizzly and Wolf Discovery Center. He's currently in charge of bear resistant testing. He's double-checked all their records and cannot find any testing paperwork for Bearikade or indeed for any product produced by Wild Ideas.

Do you recall if the product and or company name was different at the time of testing?

It was the same then as now.

Edit: Call Wild Ideas. They will know when and where it was tested.

There is more movement at the IGBC to retest the Ursack due to the "ambiguous" results last year. http://www.ursack.com/ursack-update.htm

Also here is a blog post that surfaced last summer which has an account of a failing ursack. I wonder if younger bears will be included in the test protocols: http://giantdumpster.wordpress.com/tag/ursack-failure/

I was really rooting for the ursack for obvious reasons… but the more I see the more I think it is just not worth the risk for me or the bears. At least not in certain wilderness areas like yosemite.

That was an interesting story about so many bears in camp. Personally, I have never had more than three bears, and they were very fiesty. Rangers often tell you to store your food a certain distance away from your camp, but I don't believe in that. I generally put my bear canister at a distance from my sleeping bag that is equal to the maximum flash range on my camera.

–B.G.–

"I generally put my bear canister at a distance from my sleeping bag that is equal to the maximum flash range on my camera."

Bob, that's a good tip!

I'm curious, Bob–does the flash tend to scare them off, or do you have to add some loud noise (banging pots, yell at them, firecrackers, etc.)? My air horn does a good job on them in Glacier/Yellowstone, but it would be cool to chase them off and get a photo from my tent at the same time.

As I have stated previously, the fur of a typical black bear will soak up just about every photon of light that you throw at it, and it is almost impossible to overexpose the dark fur. So, setting the flash compensation at +1 or +2 is not stupid.

I always have to think carefully about which camera rig I am carrying and the maximum flash range of it. One only does about 12-15 feet, and the other one does around 100 feet. I generally step off the distance so that I can pre-adjust my camera before sunset. At night, it is extremely difficult to get an autofocus lock of the black bear fur. So, it is not stupid to use a bright continuous light in order to help the camera along. Bears hate that.

–B.G.–

Gary, first you have to get your priorities straight. This will vary between a grizzly bear and a black bear. Also, it matters if the bear is a mother with cubs.

Sometimes I have had black bears see the camera flash and then immediately depart. More typically, they seem not to understand what the flash is, so they just continue their work. They seem to understand a bright flashlight better. I would think that a bright strobe mode on a light would scare them.

Banging pots and pans will get their attention, but it works best if you run toward them while banging. Shouting "Bear!" when you charge them seems to get their attention.

I think firecrackers would work good, except in most places like Yosemite they are prohibited from use in the backcountry. They are used in the front country campgrounds by bear technicians only. I have a very loud electronic horn in my intrusion alarm system, but I don't carry it so often.

I generally try to concentrate on getting the photo first, and then I scare off the black bear. For grizzlies, it is hard to keep that priority.

–B.G.–

"Also here is a blog post that surfaced last summer which has an account of a failing ursack. I wonder if younger bears will be included in the test protocols: http://giantdumpster.wordpress.com/tag/ursack-failure/"

2things stood out in her blogpost, at least for me: 1) She wasn't using the latest Ursack; 2) She didn't have the aluminum insert, which allowed the bear to sink its teeth into the bag from both sides. This allowed it to exert much greater force on the fabric and, even if it didn't get the food, render it unfit for human consumption. The whole idea of the insert is to mimic the hard sided canisters by presenting the bear with a cylinder that it can't get its jaws around. She screwed up, IMO, and paid the price. This incident was not the fault of the Ursack, again, IMO.

That insert makes a fantastic windscreen for your canister stove too. Does not blow around like foil.

I've considered a bear canister for camping above treeline in Grizzly country (where there are no trees for bear bagging). Any thoughts on whether an Ursack with an insert would work on a Grizzly bear? Tying it off to a small tree at timberline would be a lot simpler then finding a tree big enough for a griz proof bear bag.

Edit – I know grizzlys probably won't stred it. I am more concerned they'd get a taste through the bag if they crush it enough. In the Sierra's you can chase the bear off. In Grizzly country I'm less incline to run out in the dark to meet a bear. All that means if a grizzly did find the food he'd have time to work on it uninterrupted.

Bob, I definitely understand the difference between a black and a griz; I've been around both, plenty. Blacks are spooky, griz aren't. I'm thinking that the flashing strobe on my Fenix might just work OK on a black bear, along with a couple of loud "Hey dude, get the hell outa here, boogie, boogie, boogie!" type of comments. I won't really know until the next incident comes along. If I live, I'll post my story for your amusement. I just hope I never see another griz at close range. Blacks, OK, but not another griz.

"That insert makes a fantastic windscreen for your canister stove too. Does not blow around like foil."

Great idea. Textbook example of multiple use gear.

"I just hope I never see another griz at close range."

Gary, you know that you have a long enough focal length on your camera lens when you look through it at the grizzly and all you see is fur.

–B.G.–

"April 11, 2014

IGBC test today. PASSED. Details to follow."

Being able to use for the PCT this year would be amazing!

" Any thoughts on whether an Ursack with an insert would work on a Grizzly bear? Tying it off to a small tree at timberline would be a lot simpler then finding a tree big enough for a griz proof bear bag."

No sure answer to this one, Luke. I face the same problem with black bears all the time, and am similarly uneasy about confronting them once they are in control of the bag. Even a blackie can ruin your day in that kind of situation. What I have concluded is that avoiding attracting them in the first place is the best strategy. So, I go stoveless in bear territory, eat away from camp, and double bag my food with Nylo Barrier odor proof bags. I wash my hands before putting the second bag over the first one to avoid leaving any odor on the outside of the final bag. So far, so good, but there are no guarantees.

'

"you know that you have a long enough focal length on your camera lens when you look through it at the grizzly and all you see is fur."

Or teeth. ;0)

Good points on oder Tom. I went stoveless last time but had a lot of greasy trailmix type food. On one hike I used a trash bag and ziplocks for my food. I could smell it in my pack which meant the bears definitely could. I then got an Opsack and couldn't smell it. Opsacks may not be perfect but my own "smell test" would indicate that less smell is getting out. So maybe now the bear can only smell my food at 100 yards rather then 500 yards, I'll take whatever improvement I can get.

I'll probably eat a combination of bars, nuts, fruit, and cheap jerky. The advantage of prepacked food is there is another layer of plastic between the food and the bear's nose. Also these are foods with minimal grease and they won't shower me with crumbles like say, crushed pringles. I'll probably throw in a couple small opacks to seal up the garbage in.

"Opsacks may not be perfect but my own "smell test" would indicate that less smell is getting out. So maybe now the bear can only smell my food at 100 yards rather then 500 yards, I'll take whatever improvement I can get."

For me that's the name of the game, and I spend far more time working to improve that than worrying about new gear. The reasons I went to Nylo Barrier bags over Opsacks are that they allow a much better seal, are lighter, larger, and, being a floppy bag that doesn't use a zip lock, conform to just about any space. They are also cheaper.

"I'll probably eat a combination of bars, nuts, fruit, and cheap jerky. The advantage of prepacked food is there is another layer of plastic between the food and the bear's nose. Also these are foods with minimal grease and they won't shower me with crumbles like say, crushed pringles. I'll probably throw in a couple small opacks to seal up the garbage in."

I think you're spot on the mark here. Minimizing the odor of the foods you bring is huge, IMO. I do the same.

I also use a small Opsack for my food and garbage during the day, and transfer the garbage to the main sack at night. Keeping the odor off your pack, clothes, etc is super important, because no matter what the odor is on, the bear will smell it and come to investigate. At that point, it's just a matter of time until he discovers the food bag, odor or no, and then you've got a problem.