Does hanging food really stop bears?

Chris Servheen (bear researcher) is a member here, he may be able to provide some insight, but I’m not sure how much he monitors the forums.

Is the reason bears don’t get more of our tree-hung food really due to them not happening to be in the area that night?

Statistics (probability) would offer up a resounding “yes” answer to this question.

However, consider a Yosemite bear and compare it to, say, a less-habituated bear in someplace where fewer people go, like SW Montana.

“Habituation” is the process by which a bear “practices” and “learns” how to do stuff, like steal a bear bag in a tree. Habituation happens when it has lots of opportunities to do so, and occurs more in areas where there are more human-bear interactions. Or, in other words, where human density is high.

I’ve seen “wild bears” in Montana and Alaska look at a canister or bear bag in a tree, and move on. In Yose, no!

So habituation is one thing.

Then you have the nature of the bear itself.

Just a few miles from a campground near Cooke City, I woke up one morning and found lots of fresh (grizzly) bear tracks outside my shelter (a tent). Curious bear, roaming around camp. My food was hung in a tree, tracks below the bag, no weird signs indicating that the bear was trying to get the food.

A few nights later, a (grizzly) bear in the campground tore into a tent and killed a camper and ate part of the body.

Two different bears (most likely). Two different behavior tendencies, histories, or whatever other events led up to one bear leaving my camp alone and the other bear going nuts.

So the explanation that suggests probability (of bear proximity) alone is probably pretty good, but perhaps insufficient.

Do not forget that the general category of “bears” includes black bears and grizzly bears. Black bears are omnivores with few predatory inclinations. Grizzly bears are generally much more predatory. (Indeed there was a study about grizzly’s predating on blacks in Yellowstone.)

These are two different animals with two different behaviors. Size plays into it. A Grizzly bear is generally much larger at around 450lb for an average male. The average for a black is around 240.

Here in the NE corner of the US, all we have is black bears. Except when habituated to people, black bears will move away from an average sized adult. Of course, this does not include mothers with cubs. In most cases, you simply want to look big. That is as big as the bear and he will recognize the potential for his own damage if he attacks. A Grizzly bear will simply not care about a 200pound human and can attack him easily.

Both are opportunists. If they find food, they will eat it. A black usually grubs, and eats things like berries. If he finds a dead or injured animal, he will eat it. A grizzly will attack and probably eat anything that comes within his reach.

While I cannot say for sure, I believe that bears can smell food when hauled up a tree. They know what it is, where it is, the various types of food in the bag and how much is in it, by smell. Some foodstuffs they recognize. A black bear will generally not bother with well hung food. Too much effort. But pictures of bears crossing lines, hand over hand like a human, to get at bird feeders are common. A bear, like most other predators, will usually ignore things he cannot catch, but, he is NOT above grabbing it if he can. Of course, there is the “trained” bears of Yosemite that subsist on people food and work to improve their knowledge of getting it. (Not quite true, but not really a joke…)

A lot will depend on how the bear is doing at foraging. If he finds something to eat every time he looks (it is just a matter turning over a log to get worms, grubs, and salimanders, etc) he won’t bother to exert himself. You food will be safe. If he is hungry, he will be much more aggressive and spend time and effort trying to get a hung bag. If he smells food in a tent because he is hungry and opens it up, and finds a person in it, he could well attack that person. (People are only another animal in the woods.) A grizzly is especially prone to this. Most blacks would simply run off.

So, in lean years, bears are much more aggressive. But, I have always hung my bag on a limb the bear cannot climb and is not strong enough to support a bear and they cannot reach. They certainly do not want to fall and injure themselves. This is simply self preservation. It helps to move the line to another tree, also.

So, getting back to your basic question, bears are generally not nocturnal. They are not all that active at night except during a good bright moon. Generally, there are simply no bears around. In the case a bear does come by, it is too much effort to figure out or climb the tree or find the line & chew it if he is not all that hungry. But, if he wants it, he certainly can get it. Even bear canisters are not 100%. And ursacks and the like can easily become a masticated mess since some liquids can leak out. Sleeping with your food is not recommended, but people did that for many years. Hanging or canisters or ursacks are only a deterrent. They never stop a bear. All you can say is they will slow him down to the point of frustration…he moves on to easier pickings.

Just make it difficult enough for the bear, and he won’t bother your food bag. But, once he has gotten one, he WILL come back for more. Do not ever be sloppy, because the next camper may pay the price. Besides saving the bear, since nuisance bears are often killed. You save both your food, yourself and the bear with a good hang or by using a canister.

I thought the idea with hanging , or canisters or ursacks was to slow them down.  Campers can then make a ruckus to scare or at least perturb the bear into giving up.

That’s the theory as I understood it; I don’t speak from actual experience.  I do hang my food as best I can, but may not confront a bear trying to get it.  That’s another thread I just subscribed.to.

You’ll notice that canisters and the Ursack are labeled as bear resistant, not proof.

I think of an Ursack as defendable and a canister as a bit more defensive. I don’t hang anymore, ever. PITA.

“I did a little online searching and am getting the impression hanging food in a tree (even properly) won’t really stop a determined bear.”

Perhaps, but properly hanging all smellables can stop many of the other four legged furry animals which are just as determined to get a meal as any bear in the woods. Even though we call them bear bags, they do a great job of keeping raccoons, opossums, mice, mini-bears, and all the other fuzzies/fluffys out of one’s food.

Just a couple weeks ago, a co-worker was on a trip with a friend, and they didn’t take any precautions, other than to hang their packs 6 feet up in a tree. They had food in their tent as well. They woke up and “something” had completely chewed apart one of the packs, and the foam tips of a pair of their hiking poles. I’m pretty sure if they had hung a bear bag, their gear would have not become “collateral damage”.

I did a little online searching and am getting the impression hanging food in a tree (even properly) won’t really stop a determined bear.

Kinda like people and cars. Locking the car and hiding valuables in the trunk will keep most “inclined” people out of your car. It won’t stop a determined and “skilled” car thief.

Two random thoughts about this thread

First, the bear research I have read differentiates between defensive behavior (a female defending her cubs) from offensive behavior (the bear thinking you are prey). Herraro, Bear Attacks (2002).  Herraro has a whole chapter on the dangers of garbage and habituation. There is probably more recent research.

Second, by all accounts, Philmont Scout Ranch has 1000s of people pass through the backcountry successfully hanging their food and avoiding bear encounters. I have not seen any statistics, but anecdotally the bear-human encounters at Philmont result from youth and adults not hanging their food or worse actually leaving food out in plain sight.

Black bears are omnivores with few predatory inclinations. Grizzly bears are generally much more predatory. (Indeed there was a study about grizzly’s predating on blacks in Yellowstone.)

First, I’m not sure what predatory instincts have to do with hanging food. Both blackies and grizz are omnivores, and our food bags need to be protected from both. That said, grizzlies’ longer claws make them poor climbers, so it’s probably more important to do a good hang around black bears than grizz.

Second, I think predatory characterizations are important when it comes to human-bear interactions (which is kind of off-topic for this thread), but in that context I think your characterizations (as a casual reader might take them) are reversed. A large majority of black bear attacks are predatory attacks by lone males, while grizzly attacks are more likely to be protective attacks, often by mamas with kids in tow.  (Again, this doesn’t really affect food-hanging choices.)

Hanging food works as long as it’s done well and done consistently by all. Our food doesn’t even smell like food to bears that have never encountered it up close, so it’s the knuckleheads who don’t bother with hanging–and give bears their first taste–who do the first bit of bear habituation. Then the next knucklehead that just dangles his food over a limb 5 feet off the ground takes the bear(s) the next step. Then the ones who try but do poor high hangs take them one step further. Eventually, you get California bears.

If we all do a good hang (or a canister) every time, we can spare each other and the bears a lot of long-term heartache.

While James is right that “Indeed there was a study about grizzly’s predating on blacks in Yellowstone.”, I’d stress that fact a bit more.

Brown bears kill and eat black bears!

That fact (and whether hunting bears is allowed) are fundamental to black bear behavior in an area.  On the Central Kenai Peninsula, where I live and do most of my hiking, humans and grizzlies both kill and eat black bears.  I see black bears much less often (and then only fleeting glimpses) than brown bears even through there are 10x more black bears.  Just 100 miles away in an area with no grizzlies (perhaps because there are no salmon streams), black bears behave very differently and are frequently seen in the open or walking down the middle of the road.

So while black bears in the Sierra had evolved for thousands of years being killed by grizzlies and native peoples, they haven’t been for many decades.  The successful behavior they learn from Mama Bear isn’t laying low to avoid people and grizzlies, it’s how to score human food.  All carrot and no stick (except for me).

The perfect hang-bag tree – one with a long horizontal limb 20 feet off the ground – exists only the pamphlet the ranger gave you.

And even with a good tree, it’s your first use of that particular tree to hang food.  It is the 400th attempt by that bear to get food out of that tree.

Always go with the PCT hanging method and place your bag far away from the trunk of the tree. I even hear stories about Adirondack bears sending their cubs out on a limb to get your food.

Odor management and campsite selection are paramount, IME, to which I would add the areas you choose to hike in.  If they don’t smell it, they will have little reason to come and investigate.  If you don’t camp in popular areas there will likely be fewer bears, and even fewer habituated bears, although that depends on the seasonal availability of natural food sources to some degree.  Unhabituated bears are also far less likely to be aggressive.  In general, remote, higher altitude locations are by far the best bet for a bear free trip, IME, at least in the Sierra and the Cascades.  Natural food sources are scarce, and there are far fewer humans with portable dumpsters for the bears to dive in.  It is also worth noting that in areas where bear hunting is permitted, bears generally steer clear of humans.  As for hanging food, it is at best a temporary solution to buy time for the hiker to confront the bear, IMO/IME.

Thanks for all the great comments!

When a bear can isn’t required, I’ll occasionally take one anyway. Other times I take my Ursack. Hanging is a pain—often there isn’t a decent tree/branch nearby or I’m above treeline.

If I ever have my Ursack get chewed by a bear, I’m sure I’ll be motivated to switch tactics.

I don’t care for ursacks for the same reason I don’t care for canisters. They simply weigh too much. I have seen people in the ADK’s give up on tying them, they just hang the bag like a normal bear hang. What a waste of weight.

Cubs have a little more agility in trees. But, even they weigh a lot more than a branch will support. And if you drop the bag about 3-4′ from the branch, it more’r’less insures critters won’t get it. The big weakness is the cord. There is some military spectra line about 2mm that is fairly stiff. It will take a LOT of chewing, hopefully, enough to frustrate the bear.

“The big weakness is the cord. There is some military spectra line about 2mm that is fairly stiff. It will take a LOT of chewing, hopefully, enough to frustrate the bear.”

Another point of failure is the branch itself.  Bears in the Sierra have been known to chew through branches.  It happened to a friend of mine up at Sphinx Lakes in KCNP some years ago, and I suspect the tactic has spread by now.  Of course, there has to be a limit to the diameter of the branch that a bear can chew through, but I have no idea what that might be.  Never underestimate a determined bear.

Tom, yes, this is one of the trade-offs. A thick branch can be climbed by a bear but not easily chewn. A thin branch is not able to be traversed by a bear, but can be chewn through. Anyway, this usually assumes an intelligence in bears that is almost scary. They have to understand that chewing through a branch will cause it to drop, that the bag is part of the branch and will come down, too. Once they figure out indirect cause and effect, all sorts of bear deterrents fail.

Anyway, this usually assumes an intelligence in bears that is almost scary.”

While creative problems-solving intelligence on the level of crows or octopus haven’t been documented in bears, they definitely can learn from mama bear.  If a bear, through luck or trail&error, learns a new trick to defeat a hang bag, then she’ll teach each set of her cubs, who teach their cubs, and so on.

Not a truly skilled and determined bear. I have had my food taken out of a tree when hung with t a textbook tree hang. Long branch, 30 feet off the ground, 10 feet plus from the trunk, counterbalanced, etc. This was in Yosemite in the waning days of legal tree hangs there. Those bears had learned how to do it. Cubs would climb the tree, shinny out the branch – a branch not strong enough to hold mama – and dive down onto the bag, taking it down to the ground. One of our bags was down near ground level, destroyed. The other was up at the branch, jammed up there so tight that it took three guys pulling on the rope wrapped around a stout stick to get it unstuck.

So hanging food only works with bears who have not learned the tricks. Personally I got so sick of the whole hanging routine that I’d rather carry the canister any day. But if you are outside the national parks, in most wilderness areas and national forest there are hunters in the appropriate season, and that makes a big difference in all wildlife behavior. I always know when I have entered a national park not by the signs but because suddenly I see deer hanging around. In The Emigrant wilderness in California I nearly always see fresh bear tracks on the trail as I walk along, but I have never seen bear there, and canisters are not required. Hunters are in there every fall ,and horse packers frequent the area. Bears don’t care for either group.

Of course, there has to be a limit to the diameter of the branch that a bear can chew through, but I have no idea what that might be.

Don’t know if it is true, but I remember reading somewhere that bears are known to have chewed through 5” branches to get food.

“Don’t know if it is true, but I remember reading somewhere that bears are known to have chewed through 5” branches to get food.”

Sounds reasonable, especially given the bear doesn’t have to chew all the way through.  Just enough to be able to pull the branch down or collapse it by putting weight on it.

From what I’ve seen in Algonquin Park many hikers are terrible at hanging food. They leave backpacks at head height and think that’s fine, and no they are not hanging from 20 foot high branches to be raised later but from maybe a 12 foot branch.

I’ve found that hanging properly in a forest with a crowded canopy is more frustrating than bringing a BV450 or 500. I’ve used an Ursack but not sure I trust it so much for a longer trip. I worry that the food would be destroyed and it would be a long hike out eating bashed up food.

“I’ve used an Ursack but not sure I trust it so much for a longer trip. I worry that the food would be destroyed and it would be a long hike out eating bashed up food.”

Use the aluminum insert that Ursack offers.  It will keep your food from getting crushed and mashed together.  The combo is still something like 12 oz or so lighter than a trad canister.

IMO there is far too much emphasis on hanging and less on odor management.  Put your food and trash in re-sealable mylar bags.  Put the mylar bags inside a container (either Ursack or hardsided).  However, the odor management piece is the #1 priority of the two.

Unfortunately If you camp in areas frequented by others then even if you do everything right you may very well run into a Bear habituated to humans with food who have not previously managed their odor well and now everyone else will pay the price.

Although if other people are camped nearby, I wonder if it’s like, “you don’t need to run faster than the bear, only faster than your buddy” – if your food smells less than other people’s, might you get less attention?

Argument in favor: my experience that they go for the pack with the salami in it.

Against: They do bite things (packs, ziplock, etc) just to test it and if it contains food, they proceed to tear into it.