ursack vs bear canister

Next time i use the ursack i will counter balance the log with another on a thick branch with the 10/10 method.

May I add that I have always used the Ursack as instructed per instructions. There are plenty of places in the Sierras that allow counter balance, and I couple this with the Ursack for added safety for the bear. I also check in at the ranger station and follow regulations 100% prior to every adventure.

"I wonder how many Coors Lights I can fit in my Ursack?"

Depends on whether they're empty or full. One thing about bringing Coors Light: You won't have to worry about the bears getting into your Ursack. ;=)

"There are plenty of places in the Sierras that allow counter balance, and I couple this with the Ursack for added safety for the bear."

sigh…

"May I add that I have always used the Ursack as instructed per instructions."

Could you perhaps provide us with a link to the instructions that tell you to do a counter balance hang with an Ursack?

http://www.ursack.com/ursack-use-and-care-instruction.htm

http://www.ursack.com/propper-hang.htm

I just want people to use it properly and not ruin it for the rest of us. None of this my way is better krap, follow instructions.

"Fergawdsake! WTF is to be learned? Cinch aperture tight; overhand knot to secure aperture; wrap rope around tree; tie rewoven figure 8; secure with overhand knots or half fishermans knots."

What's to be learned? Three different knots. And a certain percentage of backpackers are unfortunately going to find that too complicated. They WILL mis-tie the Ursack, and consequently some bears ARE going to get food rewards.

Contrast that with the Garcia can. It's virtually impossible to fail to fit the lid on properly. About the only way a person can fail with a bear can is if he/she also hangs it inside a stuff sack in the mistaken belief that that will add additional security, as a fall from a height might split the can open. The can's not completely idiot-proof, but it comes a lot closer to being so than the UrSack.

Can I get a t-shirt that says "Ultralight Crackhead" on it?

"One thing that made me laugh so much, it was either in this discussion or in the other one about Ursacks, but someone said something to the effect of "Its not just the weight of the can, it means I have to buy a whole new pack to fit it in." Who told you to buy a pack so small that it leaves no room for any unforseeable items such as a bear can? Thats your fault for being a UL crackhead."

It was in the prior thread, and I laughed, too. Particularly since it's been obvious for a while now that regulations requiring the use of bear canisters are going to become more prevalent. To me, it only makes sense to take that into account when purchasing a pack. If you can afford only one pack, make sure it's one that can hold a bear can as well as all your regular gear, or you may well be sorry.

The same person also complained that bear cans have worn holes in his pack. You mean gear wears out when you use it?! How shocking! I guess patching the holes or buying a new pack made out of slightly tougher fabric's not an option.

Folks, it's Not About Us. Really. The regulatory authorities aren't going to care that protecting bears is going to make life tougher for UL backpackers. Their focus is on what's best for the bears. We're the ones who are going to have to adapt. We might as well get used to it.

This whole debate is stupid.

If the Ursack is approved use it as per the directions if you want to.

If not use a canister if required.

The which is better arguement is stupid as we do not have sufficient information to make that judgement. So those tbat are in charge of protecting bears should develop a standard set of testing and monitor use in the field and base their decisions on that. Beyond that we just follow regulations.

"What's to be learned? Three different knots. And a certain percentage of backpackers are unfortunately going to find that too complicated. They WILL mis-tie the Ursack, and consequently some bears ARE going to get food rewards."

Those who find 3 simple knots to be an insurmountable challenge should definitely use the Garcia and pay the 1.5 pound plus weight penalty.

"About the only way a person can fail with a bear can is if he/she also hangs it inside a stuff sack in the mistaken belief that that will add additional security, as a fall from a height might split the can open."

By no means unlikely given some of the posts on this thread.

"The can's not completely idiot-proof, but it comes a lot closer to being so than the UrSack."

I'm at a loss for words. :=(

Can I get a t-shirt that says “Ultralight Crackhead” on it?

Is it made from Cuben fiber?

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

"Can I get a t-shirt that says "Ultralight Crackhead" on it?"

@Ben F: I already trademarked it.. shirts on sale for $125,000 and are just .4 nano ounces for a pack of three.

Hikin Jim you are funny, that's why I enjoy BPL. This thread was meant for opinion/hypothetical purposes and got too personal; and the different camps out there showed their opinions and I respect that. After all, there will always be persons that use no bear food protection at all so let's just respect each other that we're looking out for the bears. I use a bear can in Denali every time, there is no alternative period. I have had 25+ close bear encounters with no bears ever touching my food and I will keep it that way.

Who does not use bear protection?? I will bring you their heads!!!!

The Ursack is neither intended to be hung or to be bear-proof (it is not).

IMO, these two factors combine to create its main failing.

You have to actively defend the Ursack. Expect interrupted sleeps if you're using it as described. It will hold off the bear for a while, but sustain some damage (which future bears will use to their advantage). If the bear is desperate, it may decide to defend its "find" from you, getting you into more trouble than you started with.

If you ignore it, the bear will either smash your food to bits, or possibly get a small reward through a bit/torn hole.

I've abandoned the whole bear-proof concept. I'm now PCT-hanging an Ursack Minor. Bears in my area (BC) are plentiful but not habituated enough to defeat a hang, but critters are everywhere and will get at a normal hang. The Minor helps with that.

Bear cans are a no-effort solution to both, seemingly win-win. But just too heavy and bulky to consider unless required, IMHO.

Bradley, i agree with you, thanks for chiming in. Gregory…. I don't see a bear can on Many famous thru-hikers gear lists…..

An interesting thought came to mind.. I have long wondered why bears, with their immense weight and strength, don't literally punch a hole in the lid of bear cans like they sometimes do to car windows. Perhaps they dont bother because they know there is way easier food to be found with people who dont use cans, improperly hang, leave a dirty camp, etc? I know bears dont like to put a lot of effort into getting food if they can help it (see Yellowstone dumps). So yes, while the garcia and other hard sided cans are not 100% bear proof, they appear to be bear proof in that bears dont seem to put the effort into trying to break them when theres easier food to be found, and its my experience that there always is and always will be, considering how many dirty camps and fire rings I've seen over the years!

ps. I always clean any camp I stay at, as well as pick up schtuff along the trail as much as I can. I don't smoke, but I've never come out of the woods with less than a pack of butts in my pocket :(

"Gregory…. I don't see a bear can on Joe V's PCT gear list. Easy buddy…."

@Kaleb Joking man! I thought the excessive amount of exclamation points and the notion that I would behead someone for not using a bear can would give that away, sorry if it didnt. But for real, if you dont use a bear can I will find you and stick a machete where the sun may or may not shine depending on if its cloudy or not.

Anyone have any pictures of the Ursack wedged in a crack in a rock high enough where a bear can't reach it. I would like to try that and use a cam.

re read first post.

@Kaleb: The purpose of a Ursack is NOT to prevent bears from reaching your food. The purpose of a Ursack is to provide a means of preventing your food from being carried off. It will not protect your food from getting crushed and your food will have smelly bear saliva on it if / when they reach it as it is tied to an object that the bear cannot cart the Ursack away from.

If you hang your Ursack, you've bypassed it's primary purpose because if a bear reaches your food, it will go with them as they skip out of camp. In problem areas, bear hanging may not work because as others have mentioned, if it always worked, we wouldn't need bear cans, but we do.

Bear cans cannot be carried off, so just like a Ursack, we don't hang them, but because their size prevents a bear mouth from carrying them away, we don't have to tie them down. A Ursack does fit into a bear's mouth and can be carried away, so securing the ursack to a tree or simlar prevents a Ursack from being carried away, some will disagree with even this though.

Hanging Ursack = potential for food being carried away
Wedging Ursack in high rock = potential for food being carried away (if you can reach it, a bear likely can and high rocks aren't easy to find, probably not as easy as finding a tree and following ursack instructions and using it correctly)
hiding Ursack = potential for carrying away

Tieing Ursack to tree or other object per Ursack instructions = most likely way to prevent food from being carried away.

Trace, I already knew everything you said

@Kaleb: Your previous posts suggest otherwise, hence my and others' attempts to help out. :)

My parents have a place in the far northern Sierra Nevada foothills. Bears go through on occasion and get into trash cans. The accepted local practice is to bungee the lid on. Apparently if the bear knocks a can over and it doesn't spill the contents they move on.

I would certainly use my Ursack with confidence in areas where the bears are so easily foiled. Or where the problem is raccoons or other critters. (Though raccoons might just untie the knot).

I don't like using the Ursack with the aluminum liner. It doesn't shrink as it empties, can't be used as a chair, and doesn't save enough weight over a can to be worth the bother and reduced protection.

In Yosemite, King's Canyon, etc. I sleep best with the food in a box or can.

I do think this is a good discussion. And I have hung an Ursack with counter balance- ONLY when the ranger instructed me to either use counterbalance OR a can. I think my point is that it is better to use an Ursack with counter balance rather than a nylon bag with counter balance, in case the bag falls somehow.

An Ursack will work properly even if not suspended from a tree.

The reason you might want to hang an Ursack (in the Sierra National Parks/Forrests hanging is not recommended – park rangers do not want bears damaging trees while attempting to get at food) is that the Ursack is soft sided (unless of course you get the aluminum inner liner – but at that point you’d be better off with a hard-sided container). Bears are likely to crush food contained in an Ursack.

Another reason to suspend an Ursack (or tie it to a tree or other heavy object) is that bears may carry an Ursack away some distance even if they cannot get the food.

These points are addressed on the Ursack website: Ursack FAQ

Proper function of the Ursack depends on proper knotting. If the draw cord is not correctly knotted, bears can gain access to food.

I like my Ursack and use it when bear resistant containers are required and Ursacks are allowed. It’s lighter than hard sided containers (7.6 oz for Ursack versus 36.7 oz for Bearikade Expedition) and is much easier to pack. In places where Ursacks are not allowed, I use a Bearikade.