[pct-l] Ursack S29 a step closer...
John Poppe
jbpoppe at gmail.com
Mon Apr 21 09:36:47 CDT 2014
Class of 2014, I completed my thru in 2012. I started with a Ursack thinking I am safe from everything. I found the sack to be troublesome, compared to Ultra Sil it is heavy, stiffer and more awkward in my pack when retrieving food. But something we never think about when considering the Ursack is that it can easily be penetrated by mice and chipmunks ruining your sack and food. After Tahoe, I switched out my Ursack for a regular Ultra Sil sack which I hung or slept with. I experienced no trouble with bears, even when I saw them in bear central by Shasta. In 2012 I hiked through Sequoia and Yosemite without seeing a bear just some scat. I carried a bearvault on that trip in the required sections. I firmly believe that the bears realize the vaults are not accessible, thus they know food is not available for them. This is why we can travel thru the parks with little adverse contact with bears, because they have learned we have nothing to offer them. I suspect the Ursack will be investigated by bears, and while they my not penetrate it they will quite likely reduce your food to powder, slime the outside of the sack and possibly carry it off. I also suspect the draw of the Ursack will create more bear/hiker contacts. I'm hiking from Whitney to Tahoe this year doing the JMT and a different route thru Yosemite, I am hiking with a Bearikade thru the regulated parks. I gotta side with Yogi and recommend a solid container like the Bearikade or Bearvault while in the regulated sections, then mail your container home and use a sack of your choosing. I suggest you sleep with your food or hang it properly in a counterbalance method if you feel u need to.
Hike strong, have fun, respect each other and the environment.
John (Grey Wolf)
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:49 PM, walt Durling <durlfam4 at icloud.com> wrote:
>
> I've been following the various posts and threads on this issue since January. Seems like with the advent of each new hiking season this topic flares up, back and forth, pro and con. But what is heartening is that the overwhelming consensus is the recognition that protecting the bears is paramount, no matter which way one comes down on the ursack issue.
>
> I've hiked in the sierras but once, and that many years ago, so I'm no expert. I rented a canister to do it. I recall, though, that I came across many hikers who were sans canisters, taking the chance of not getting caught. Obviously a lousy attitude. I think that is the rare exception nowadays, and that is a good thing, even if someone carries a canister only to avoid a stiff fine.
>
> If the interagency approves the ursack it will be because they deem it sufficient to meet their goal of protecting the bears and the other creatures of lesser stature. I'm sure that hiker comfort will factor a big fat zero in their decision. At that point, as Luce says, it'll be up to the individual hiker to decide which food container to pack.
>
> I'm 62 and I'll be hiking the sierras this summer, and perhaps because I tend to hear things that go bump in the night, real or imagined, I'll be buying a canister and using OP sacks inside it :)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Apr 20, 2014, at 19:46, kevin at kegphoto.com wrote:
>>
>> A link to the bear on the wire video for those interested (I have no
>> connection to Garrett Bros):
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UucHtYr29cE
>>
>> Remarkable climbers.
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014, at 04:26 PM, walt Durling wrote:
>>> If the ursack is approved, I suspect a great many hikers will flock to
>>> it. At that point the discussion will necessarily shift to one of
>>> convenience to the hiker rather than danger to our ursine friends.
>>> Those who choose to go the ursack route will be acting just as
>>> responsibly as those who elect to go the hard container route. No
>>> container is 100% bear proof. Every container has its pros and cons. If
>>> a hiker acts irresponsibly, it matters not which type container is
>>> utilized.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Apr 20, 2014, at 18:42, Mike Cunningham <hikermiker at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The real problem is that a bear that gets your food is inevitably a dead bear. If you will not do what is right stay out of bear country & it really is their country. They live there, not us.
>>>>
>>>> hm
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>> On Sun, 4/20/14, Jackie McDonnell <yogihikes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Ursack S29 a step closer...
>>>> To: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
>>>> Date: Sunday, April 20, 2014, 12:00 AM
>>>>
>>>> The bears are EXACTLY that
>>>> smart. Smarter, actually.
>>>>
>>>> Save your food. Save the bears. Use a bear
>>>> canister.
>>>>
>>>> Yogi
>>>> www.yogisbooks.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Gail Van Velzer <vanvelzer at charter.net>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It is true that everything in the Ursak can be
>>>> crushed. It's also true
>>>>> that
>>>>> the bear canister can be used as a seat or table.
>>>> But, the Ursak still
>>>>> packs easier and is lighter. There's got to be a
>>>> way to hang it and
>>>>> confound the bears! They can't be that smart, can
>>>> they?
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Bob Bankhead" <wandering_bob at comcast.net>
>>>>> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 7:05 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Ursack S29 a step closer...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Try placing your sleeping pad between your bear
>>>> can and your back. Works
>>>>>> wonders for carrying comfort, and I use a
>>>> Bearikade Expedition. I gave
>>>>>> away
>>>>>> my Ursack years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ursacks are more comfortable and are easier to
>>>> position within your pack
>>>>>> because they are soft-sided and flexible and can
>>>> be mostly re-shaped as
>>>>>> needed. Bear cans are rigid and close more easily
>>>> and securely; what you
>>>>>> have is what you get.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hard-sided bear cans make great camp seats and/or
>>>> tables and provide far
>>>>>> better physical protection to their contents.
>>>> Ursacks' flexibility means
>>>>>> their contents can be more easily crushed by
>>>> bears, or by your own weight
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> used for pillows or sit-upons.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the end, you pay your money and take your
>>>> choice (and your chances).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And then there's the issue of what's deemed
>>>> acceptable by the powers that
>>>>>> be..............
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Matthew Edwards
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Ursack S29 a step closer...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Might not be for everyone.
>>>>>> I have a BV 500 and an Ursack S29.
>>>>>> The advantage for comfort in the pack goes to the
>>>> Ursack by far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Might be handy for hikers that find carrying
>>>> barrel between the shoulder
>>>>>> blades painful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pct-L mailing list
>>>>>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
>>>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>> List Archives:
>>>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>>>>>> All content is copyrighted by the respective
>>>> authors.
>>>>>> Reproduction is prohibited without express
>>>> permission.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pct-L mailing list
>>>>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>>>>> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
>>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>>>>
>>>>> List Archives:
>>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>>>>> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>>>>> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pct-L mailing list
>>>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>>>> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>>>
>>>> List Archives:
>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>>>> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>>>> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pct-L mailing list
>>>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>>>> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>>>
>>>> List Archives:
>>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>>>> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>>>> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pct-L mailing list
>>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>>> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>>
>>> List Archives:
>>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>>> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>>> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pct-L mailing list
>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>
>> List Archives:
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubscribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
More information about the Pct-L
mailing list