tigerlilly wrote:I read this too quickly and thought it said "Beer Canister"

I was picturing a 6 pack hangin in a tree........

If you put your beer in the bear canister, it is also a beer canister.

It's also a good idea, because who wants a drunk bear around camp?

I don't know, if it's a "happy drunk" bear, that could be kind of cool. Plus, if it drinks enough and passes out, you could draw stuff on his face or put his paw in warm water.

Don't overcomplicate this.

Just get one of the coin-opening canisters like the Garcia. Or if this is your first time, rent it from a store or a ranger station. Bring some coins, and a pocket knife / swiss army knife with a screwdriver blade; either will open the canister. You were going to bring a knife anyway, right?

If you can't get the can 200 feet away from your tent, leave it 100 feet away, whatever. It's not like the bear is pacing off the distance. Do leave it far enough away that the bear doesn't trip over your tent guy lines. You don't want to be woken up by bears cursing you for not using that reflective guyline string.

If this is your first time dealing with food storage in a well-traveled bear area, trying to master counterbalancing and so on is maybe not such a great idea. The canisters really aren't that hard to deal with. The basic idea is that at most the bear will whack it around a few times and then go away. If they have already figured out that the canisters are too hard to get into, they may not bother.

rhyang wrote:If you're like me, you have lots of random stickers lying around (what online retailer doesn't send stickers in the box anymore ?) I just put a couple of those on my canisters.

And if you don't have any stickers, I will mail some to anyone who sends me an address.


stickers by simonov, on Flickr


stickers@badharvest.net

tigerlilly wrote:I read this too quickly and thought it said "Beer Canister"

I was picturing a 6 pack hangin in a tree........

I've been waiting patiently for Bob Sihler to share a quick "six-pack" with me.

Perhaps next summer, Bob ...? ??

mrchad9 wrote:http://www.ursack.com/

I have an ursack, and quite frankly, would not use it in any well-traveled part of the Adirondacks. I use it only where I think the bears are a bit naive.

MoapaPk wrote:

mrchad9 wrote:http://www.ursack.com/

I have an ursack, and quite frankly, would not use it in any well-traveled part of the Adirondacks. I use it only where I think the bears are a bit naive.

What is that decision based on?

I do not know anything about the Adirondacks, but I do know it works in areas where bears are not naive (and I am not sure how you are determining a bear's cognitive ability).

mrchad9 wrote:

MoapaPk wrote:

mrchad9 wrote:http://www.ursack.com/

I have an ursack, and quite frankly, would not use it in any well-traveled part of the Adirondacks. I use it only where I think the bears are a bit naive.

What is that decision based on?

I do not know anything about the Adirondacks, but I do know it works in areas where bears are not naive (and I am not sure how you are determining a bear's cognitive ability).

I typically depend on indirect methods to determine if the bears are naive. For example, in Bryce, the rangers have found that it is generally sufficient to put your food in your car for the night, to prevent bear interest. I take this to mean that the bears are naive about methods of food protection; the Bryce advice doesn't fly in Yosemite. In the Rubies, one finds bear tracks; but there are lots of hunters, and bears are very rarely seen near the campsites; therefore they have little experience defeating canisters and ursacks. In the Uintas -- well, I simply asked people about their experiences, and they told me they had never used canisters -- so I brought the ursack, more for a protection against rodents.

By the the mid 70s, folks reported how bears would go straight for hanging stuffascks in the Adirondacks, and immediately attacked the suspension points, rather than trying to jump futilely at the bags. That is, they already had learned the weak points of the system.

In 1980 in the Adirondacks, I listened as a bear desperately tried to get my hanging food; then s/he went down to the next campsite and tore apart their measly defenses. In New Mexico in 1969, bears wandered through our camp and went right for the hanging food, but failed to get it as it was suspended 15' above the ground between two trees. I determined that those bears were used to thinking of hanging stuffsacks as food, but were not so smart as to chew the suspension points.

In addition to bears, the Adirondacks have lots of fishers and pine martens, which are capable of shredding an ursack (very sharp teeth -- the ursack site even mentions this problem). Unless you put in the Al liner, and ursack is pretty much useless at preserving your food from a determined bear; s/he might not get the food, but will crush it to a saliva-soaked mess. And if you bother with the Al liner, then you might as well have a canister.

I think that canisters are REQUIRED in some areas of the Adirondacks.

MoapaPk wrote: I typically depend on indirect methods to determine if the bears are naive. For example, in Bryce, the rangers have found that it is generally sufficient to put your food in your car for the night, to prevent bear interest. I take this to mean that the bears are naive about methods of food protection; the Bryce advice doesn't fly in Yosemite. In the Rubies, one finds bear tracks; but there are lots of hunters, and bears are very rarely seen near the campsites; therefore they have little experience defeating canisters and ursacks. In the Uintas -- well, I simply asked people about their experiences, and they told me they had never used canisters -- so I brought the ursack, more for a protection against rodents.

I wouldn't call it being naive then. I have always wonder about the impact of hunting, and the proximity of it, and the positive influence it has on ease of food storage. In Yosemite I think much of the issue is related to their reluctance to put down problem bears.

Yes- could get a crushed mess, but all my food is in bags internally as well. And even with the liner (which I have but no longer use), it is reasonably lighter.

mrchad9 wrote:I wouldn't call it being naive then.

Avoidance of hunters is not naive. But if one thinks of naivete as just being a lack of knowledge, then I think it is safe to say that the bears in the Ruby Mts of NV (e.g) are much more naive than the bears in the High Peaks of the Adirondacks, at least as far as human food is concerned. The more easily-procured human food that a bear encounters, the more s/he will likely learn the tricks needed for harvesting that food. As noted earlier in this thread, the Adirondacks are home to the only bears that have (yet) figured out how to defeat a bear vault.

There is also the issue of numbers. I see few bear tracks in NV; I saw lots and lots in the Adirondacks, particularly on the trails from John's Brook up to Marcy. I think this is partly because of other factors; lots of mud (conducive to tracks) in the Adks, and much of the human habitation is confined to narrow strips along trails, so the bears have to range over smaller regions for fat pickin'.

If a bear really decides to chew on an ursack, no internal liners (assuming plastic bags) are going to make a lot of difference.

Instead of "naive" I might say "less habituated to humans" (and their food). I'm basically agreeing, though.

For someone who has not used a bear can before, I think it's reasonable to start with a Garcia (or Bearikade, etc) that adds security at the cost of a little extra weight. They're also usually available to rent for pretty low fees, so if you don't like it you're not stuck with it.