Sleeping Wth Your Food in Black Bear Country

[Anonymous]

"Not so much in the Sierra."

+1

[Bob Gross]

"Not so much in the Sierra."

Agreed.

As it was explained to me once by one NPS bear wrangler (bear technician), the more that bears are allowed to get to human food, the more driven they are to go aggressively after human food. The more aggressively they do that, the more likely that humans are going to get in the way and they may get hurt.

Back in the old days before we had bear canisters, I had led group backpacking trips in Yosemite, so we had to hang our food. In twenty years of that, I never once had any group food taken by the bears, although once the bear stuck its nose into a sleeping face and scared the crap out of the sleeper.

In some parts of our national parks, if the ranger doesn't like the way you have your food stored, he will write you a citation, and that gets expensive. If he really doesn't like the way you have your food stored, he will escort you out to your trailhead, thus terminating your trip.

–B.G.–

[Art …]

Mike W. – I would very much like to Not be the cause of a bear being put down.

I'm simply trying to separate fact from myth when it comes to Sierra Black Bears.
I've been in the Sierra many times and not once have I been aware of a bear in my camps vicinity.
Have I been smart or lucky ? I'm trying to find that out.

Tom – thanks for the input. Upper Funston Meadow is probably the earliest we would consider stopping. if there is a permanent bear box there we would consider using it for sure. but our hope is to get further than that.
So my concern for bears would be between Upper Funston Meadow, past Kawaeah Gap to Bearpaw Meadow.

[Bob Gross]

I think there is a bear box next to Moraine Lake.

–B.G.–

[d k]

"Have I been smart or lucky ?"

or maybe you were asleep, or maybe it's the bear that was smart… It took me years of trips in the Sierra before I saw a bear; even though others in my party saw them somehow I was always someplace else when the bear came by.

[Bob Gross]

Some people seek out bear country. Bears can be quite photogenic, so that's where the photographers go.

Others avoid bear country. Bears can be quite troublesome, pesky, and downright awful if they damage your gear.

Some backpackers can pick campsites carefully so as to minimize the chances of an ursine encounter. Others maximize chances. It has been about thirty years since I slept with my food, so I will leave that for others.

How can you maximize your chances of seeing a bear, but minimize your chances of having the bear steal your food? First of all, pack all of your food in a bear canister or else do a perfect hang from a tree, assuming that there are trees. Then put up decoys. Duck hunters set their duck decoys out, don't they? You can set out your decoy food bags and still stay legal. Use empty brown paper grocery bags tied up with bright white parachute cord, and hang them just barely out of the reach of the average black bear. Do all of that at a distance from your sleeping spot equal to a good shooting range for your camera or your camera with flash. The ranger can't give you a citation since there isn't any food in the bag.

–B.G.–

[Mike W]

>> Have I been smart or lucky ? I'm trying to find that out. <<

That is a really good question and one that I can completely identify with. I hike and fish in an area that is known as the "Cougar Capital of North America". I have spent 40+ years fishing and hiking here and I have never seen a cougar. All of the people I hike and fish with have seen cougars (… I've even been with them when they have seen cougars), yet I have never spotted one. Both my sons have seen cougars while out with me, but not me! I can be pretty certain that a few cougars have seen me though.

Since I don't hike in the Sierra's, I would listen to those that frequent that area. I might have a different opinion if I hiked somewhere where there were fewer bears.

I agree with those that have said it is part of the risk assessment process that we do on every trip we take into the back-country. As I mentioned, I sleep in the clothes that I cook in (I think the risk is worth it to save the weight)… in my area, where there are lots of bears, sleeping in the clothes I cook in might be more dangerous than sleeping with your food in the Sierras. I do think that if you have to ask the question, then maybe you need to store your food elsewhere because your not fully comfortable with the idea.

[Hiking Malto]

Art,
I know exactly why you are asking this. On long days, hiking into the night, you may or not not have that ideal tree to hang the food. You through down right next to the trail for a few hours sleep. Here's where I came out on this. First, if possible I will hang. Not because I fear for my safety but because I get a better night sleep. But, there have been times like the Bob Marshall Open in Montana last year that I slept in a tree well using my food bag to level out my feet. There was little choice. I was high in the snow with no trees to hang. It was getting dark and I was heading off trail straight down the mountain. Sleeping with my food seemed the least worst option.

As far as food smells etc. I think people talk out both sides of their moth on this. I know my pack smells like food. I keep food in it constantly and have crumbs in the food pouches. often my pack is stuffed in my clothing sack as a pillow. Is there really much difference between that and a food bag? I suspect that those that think sleeping with your food is crazy probably have food smells all over themselves especially if they cook. But they feel better with the food safely tucked away. But are they really any safer?

[d k]

"I suspect that those that think sleeping with your food is crazy probably have food smells all over themselves especially if they cook. But they feel better with the food safely tucked away. But are they really any safer?"

In the Sierra, yes. Sierra black bears are smart creatures; they want to eat our food, not us, and they can tell the difference between a person with food smells on them and a bag of food. They may sniff at a sleeping person who smells like food, presumably because it smells good to them, but if they couldn't tell the difference there would be chewed up backpackers too numerous to count by now. And I'd be one of them.

In grizzly country, you may have a very good point, since (I would suspect) people are more likely to be viewed as a primary food object by those bears, rather than just something that brings the food in on their backs.

[M B]

" The ranger can't give you a citation since there isn't any food in the bag."

I believe a ranger can issue tickets for "harassing wildlife" or "baiting" that would cover a pretty broad spectrum of things.

Ipso de facto…If you pretend that something is what it is not while committing a crime, you are guilty of breaking the law. ie, you sell parsely pretending its marijuana, you are guilty of selling marijuana, not parsely.

Who knows if this can be extended to hanging foodbags?

I wouldnt want to find out btw.

I think a bear would go by his nose anyway, not sight of a foodbag, so probably moot.

[Anonymous]

"Tom – thanks for the input. Upper Funston Meadow is probably the earliest we would consider stopping. if there is a permanent bear box there we would consider using it for sure. but our hope is to get further than that.
So my concern for bears would be between Upper Funston Meadow, past Kawaeah Gap to Bearpaw Meadow."

Art – One last thing I forgot to mention: If you end up in the vicinity of 9 Lakes Basin, a good option would be to hike up to the smaller lakes above the largest lake in the basin at ~10,500'. I don't have a map at hand, so I can't give you its exact elevation, but it should be pretty clear what I'm talking about. There are some grassy benches up there, below the long, skinny highest lake in the basin just below Pyra-Queen col, that would be ideal. They are far enough off and above the trail to not attract any bear attention, especially if you are not cooking and have low odor food. I bivvied on a bench just above the main lake a few years back coming down from Lion Rock Pass and was just fine. No bears or any sign of same. I was also going cold, low odor food.

[J Mag]

So let me get this straight. Art is more than happy to enter a hunting thread and harshly insult people who choose to kill animals. But he is willing to engage in a practice that contributes to bears being killed?

In this same thread he insults people who break the law by not paying their taxes but once again is willing to… wait for it… break the law?

Art if you bring that pedestal you're on with you I'm sure it is more than high enough to keep you and your food away from any bears :)

FYI I don't hunt and I pay my taxes but love some irony when I see it.

[Justin Baker]

I sleep with my food regularly in places with black bear populations that aren't considered "black bear country". It's a do at your risk sort of thing.

I wouldn't do it in the sierras which are known for active and human familiar bears unless it was a more remote lake above the treeline.

By sleeping with your food I hope you mean having your food right next to you, leaving your food a distance away form you is very irresponsible.

[Jerry Adams]

What about rodents?

I've had food next to me and rodents got in.

[Billy Ray]

Dumb

[Justin Baker]

Food bags make good pillows :)

[Hiking Malto]

Wow, in your haste to show hypocrisy. You jump to many conclusions. What he is asking about, sleeping with food, is not illegal in many if not most of the Sierra. (Edit: he even spelled out a location where canisters aren't required.) So this wasn't even a legal question at all.

Second, it is debatable, given five pages of debate, that sleeping with food vs a good hang vs. a typical bear piñata hang vs. canisters has an impact on the bears safety. I will concede that canisters vs piñata and sleeping could be a valid debate but nowhere did Art mention canisters. So again, you twisted his thread to suit your needs.

Bottom line, put down the pitchfork.

[Art …]

J Mag – I am flattered to be such an important part of your life that you monitor my every word on the internet. My only request of you is that you get my words and my subtle meanings straight when you try to quote me.
I will definitely try to live up to your expectations as I move forward.

[Anonymous]

"Bottom line, put down the pitchfork."

+1 to your entire post. This one sure flushed out a lot of ideologues on what is, as you say, a very legitimate topic for discussion. There are so many variables involved in making a decision on whether to hang, carry a canister, or sleep with your food that it is basically impossible to make a one size fits all rule. It is one of SEKI's dirty little secrets that most backcountry rangers sleep with their food. 'Nuf said.

[Anonymous]

"I will definitely try to live up to your expectations as I move forward."

Hey Art. If you are really serious about living up to his expectations, REI has Exped Synmat 99 UL pedestals on sale for $2000. I know, that sounds like a lot of money, but when your reputation is at stake….. ;0)

[Greg Mihalik]

I did hear of a UL 12' multi-section collapsible Bear Pole with three guylines attached to the top. The guylines are Spectra and chew-proof, and the pole is to skinny and smooth to climb.

You hook your food bag to the top, raise it to vertical, and then hammer in three gonzo stakes.

Art might not be able to stand on top, but his food would be safe.

[J Mag]

Art, I do not read your every word, I just thought it was a bit unfair of you to attack people over and over who practice responsible hunting (of course you know the thread I am referring to) but then engage in a practice that has been known to contribute to bears being put down. I just like bears a lot.

And I was under the impression that hanging your food was required throughout the Sierra? That is what I referring to. I guess I may be mistaken.

I wasn't at all upset at the time but I see now that people took my post to be a lot more harsh than I intended and indeed I worded it very poorly/aggressively at the time. For that I apologize.

The point I was trying to convey is that we all sacrifice a LOT in the name of going ultralight. But I don't think anyone (however innocently) should sacrifice the safety of the environment, its inhabitants, or other hikers. And I'm not even a hippie.

I understand life is all about risk vs. reward. But the "reward" of not carrying 1-2 oz of bear bagging cord or avoiding 1-2 minutes of effort is not (to me) worth the "risk" (however small) of a bear hurting you or having to be hurt because of this. Now if you come prepared to hang and become forced to camp above the treeline or similar (e.g. injury) that is a unique situation.

Essentially there are well known and highly respected hikers who have already said what I was intending much better than I have. Be a part of the solution, not the problem.

[Larry De La Briandais]

Considering what I have read here (no personal experiences with the areas you mentioned) I would probably use a bear canister, based on my personal risk assessment. If you are certain that you will not sleep in an area that requires canisters, then I would use a ursack. I would not sleep with it.

BTW, I have left food out in the open for 30 years in an area of the sierras that does have an occasional bear (I have seen one and heard another one in those 30 years) and never had a bear eat any. Had a couple of ring tailed cats get it one time, but never a bear. I still wouldn't sleep with it, even there.

[Craig Burton]

No posts yet on the different risks involved here:

1) Hanging your food (presumably away from camp) – lowest risk of bear encounter, low risk of food compromise.
-A good scenario to have, but hanging your food is not always practical and sometimes a major burden – I get that.

That leads us to scenario…

2) Stowing your food (again, presumably away from camp) – lowest risk of bear encounter, medium risk of food compromise.
-Good to avoid any potential bear encounter, but opens your food to compromise from many different land creatures incapable of climbing rope.

3) sleeping with your food – low risk of bear encounter, low risk of food compromise.
-Not an option I would ever choose, but if food is the most critical part of your travels (unlikely in the lower 48), you have some means to protect yourself, and option 1 is not available one may consider this risk.

Now… let's put all of this into a risk priority matrix with an equal severity for bear encounter and food compromise:

H-Axis = Food compromise / V-Axis = Bear Encounter
1 = lowest, 3 = low, 5 = medium, 7 = high, 9 = highest

–| 01|03|05|07|09
__________________

01| 01|03|05|07|09
03| 03|09|15|21|27
05| 05|15|25|35|45
07| 07|21|35|49|63
09| 09|27|45|63|81

Scenario 1 = 03
Scenario 2 = 05
Scenario 3 = 09

If you get realistic and assign a higher risk severity of bear encounter over food compromise (most scenarios in the lower 48), then the results become even more clear:

H-axis = Food compromise with risk severity of 3 (low) / V-Axis = Bear Encounter with risk severity of 5 (medium)

—| 003|006|009|012|015
_________________________

005| 015|030|045|060|075
015| 045|090|135|180|225
025| 075|150|225|300|375
035| 105|210|315|420|525
045| 135|270|405|540|675

Scenario 1 = 30
Scenario 2 = 45
Scenario 3 = 90

The diabetes argument brought up is an interesting case, which adds a 3rd variable for food accessibility, and should be considered in one's risk assessment – but I'll leave it out of this example.

Consider the medium risk of food compromise in scenario 2 and your survival plan. You will likely last longer (better chance of rescue / self-rescue) without food when compared to the low risk of bear encounter in scenario 3 where you may have injuries and possibly have food compromised as well.

I often choose scenario 2 for shorter hikes; but I have even had food compromised in scenario 1 – which I will choose for minimizing the risk of having to cut short a longer hike. The particular case was a bag of mashed potato mix left in an open/exterior mesh pocket of a hanging pack – a mouse bit through the ziploc and compromised some mashed potato mix.

I have never had an issue with scenario 2 – food in a drybag tightly stowed under a rock, tightly wedged between tree branches, etc.

Scenario 3 is not an option I would ever choose in my adventures, but I am surprised by the number of experienced backpackers here willing to take that risk – especially if food rationing is not an absolute necessity to survival. I'll take a shortened trip with food compromise over a bear encounter (even if I'm on the winning end of it) any day. But HYOH, enjoy, and as one said – "Be part of the solution, not the problem" – choose wisely when considering food placement given the location.

[Anonymous]

Interesting, actual statistics and some clever answers to Dumb questions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PExlT-5VU-Y

Who can't carry an extra 2 pounds and doesn't have 5 extra minutes. 44 feet per second and 600+ pounds means even just getting body blocked could break a neck.

[Author]

Posts