|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 236
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 236 |
Seems to me you would save total hiking distance if you just hid it somewhere near the Onion Valley trailhead. It wouldn't be difficult to hike over the pass while you were out, and it would only be one trip instead of two. Actually this would add more distance and probably another day on my main hike as I would have to detour 7.1 miles to the Onion Valley Trail head. It's true that it would save hiking it into the wild and then picking it up again but to me that is not really a problem because it makes for a nice weekend trip into the mountains for the task. If I hike the Bear Vault in I will end up leaving it some where near the JMT so I can just make a pit stop to grab the rest of my food before moving over Glen Pass to camp at the Rae Lakes. It's not just the added weight of the can on my pack but it's attaching it, as it is putting all this stuff on my pack is going to be interesting. The only way I would not go back for it is if I was injured or something but in that case I would probably send someone after it...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 236
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 236 |
The great thing when they tear into the car, these days, is the ticket and fine you will get for improper storage of food It wouldn't always be fair though, last weekend when I was in Yosemite we had a truck load of stuff including an ice chest with food and a resupply package I had brought for drop off some where else, so we arrive at the Mariposa Grove being forced to park in the lower lot because of capacity and I look around to find no bear boxes at all! I mean what were we supposed to do? luckily the only problem was that by mistake I had left packages of hot dog buns in the back of the truck which got completely ate by some critter. Then the next day we pull up to the Four Mile Trail head yet again with a truck load of stuff since we had no camp ground to find no bear boxes once again, well all of it went into the front of the truck and we hoped... How can you really help it with car camping foods if they don't offer proper storage?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 961
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 961 |
Though sympathetic to your plight, Yosemite would not seem to be an ideal place to car camp, given the bear/food situation. If you have a place (other than your car) to sleep at night, then leave all your food, etc. there during the day (except for what you're going to use during each dayhike or multi-day trek -- take that much with you in your daypack/backpack/canister), thus leaving your car "clean".
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 380
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 380 |
Move faster? Maybe.
But a week is a week. There are basic metabolic daily needs that are somewhat independent of activity. Plus hiking faster and covering more distance means more food not less. hiking faster at lower weight means about equal use than hiking slower carrying spare food aorund your waist - I am essentially getting around the second bear canister by "bulking up" - I've literally been eating things I would usually avoid knowing I'll be up there for a month eating below my calorie needs for at least 2/3 of the days. true about the week being a week - my food planning is driven by distance, not the wish to be out there for a week. If I was hiking without the kids, I'd only need food for 5 days in that section.
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Can we give the cars/bears part of this topic a rest?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 159
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 159 |
RogueP:
Although Steve C. is right and maybe this needs a rest, I can't pass this one up since you're proposing to leave junk in the area where I'm the ranger. Bad idea and, as noted, illegal. The main problem is, however pure your intentions, the odds of you getting back to pick it up are low. That means I eventually find it and have to pack it out -- along with all the other junk people leave "intending to come back." That ends up being hundreds of pounds of abandoned stuff -- canisters, food caches, fishing rods (really) & etc. per year. To say nothing of it being an intrusion on wilderness character.
And, if I do find it before you, it's gone. Guaranteed.
So, I'd really encourage you to find a Plan II (I only skimmed this thread, but assume someone mentioned the Onion Valley boxes or even the Independence PO where you can mail it).
Don't want to sound overly harsh, but I really get tired of picking up after people, especially the sometimes tortured rationalizations that some junk is better than, say, foil left in a fire pit.
Have a great trip though.
Thanks,
George
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 380
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 380 |
some interesting news: http://www.ursack.com/ursack-update.htm What's going on with Ursack?
January 13, 2010
It appears that Ursack will be allowed almost everywhere in the Sierra this year except Yosemite National Park and three areas (Rae Lakes, Dusy Basin, Rock Creek) of SEKI. We calculate that Ursack may be used on more than 98% of the Pacific Crest Trail. SIBBG, the Sierra Agency Black Bear Group, no longer exists. There are no standardized bear canister tests--each Superintendent of Forest Service Manager makes the decision for his or her own area. While Ursack will likely submit the S29 AllWhite Hybrid for consideration by Yosemite and SEKI, there can be no assurance of approval given those parks lack of testing criteria and/or their historical antipathy toward Ursack.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 159
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 159 |
there can be no assurance of approval given those parks lack of testing criteria and/or their historical antipathy toward Ursack. Oh MEOW! Could have been phrased better, I think. It's not like NPS just took a random dislike to the Ursack, it's that historically, they haven't prevented bears from getting a "food reward" -- bears either tear into it (fabric failure) or get into it because users don't close it correctly (user error). When the latter happens too often, it's a problem in design and needs to be made dumb proof. So what it comes down to is bears keep trying to get into the sack under most all conditions. With the hard sided canisters, they leave them alone 'cause they've learned they can't get in. Until Ursack makes a bomb-proof one that bears won't get the more-than-occasional food reward, I have to agree with NPS. George
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 224
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 224 |
Recalling my college experimental psych. classes == random reinforcement creats the strongest learning bonds, never saw a bear in class though!!!
When I get a little money, I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes. Erasmus
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 119
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 119 |
Seems like a big hassle over nothing. If you are going to do a resupply stop, just use the canisters. I own 2 Bear Vaults and a Garcia. They can be a pain, but I would rather carry them than worry about where we are stopping for the night. My daughter (11) and I tend to stay on the trail sunrise to sunset, with a few stops throughout the day. At the end of the day the last thing we want to do is worry about food. We eat, make camp, and go to sleep. We put the canisters where we can see them for photo ops if a bear comes by.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3 |
Dad and I usually use about 2/3 of a Bear Vault for seven or so days of backpacking, including sunscreen, chapstick, toothpaste, and all of the other toiletries. We usually have plenty of room, if we really pack everything down tight, but then, we don't eat breakfast, or a real lunch. We just snack on trail mix (nuts, dried fruit, and m&ms) as we go, although we recently discovered the benefits of italian dry salami. Dinners are our big meal...Rice and Chicken, basically every night. Well, and mashed potatoes. No desserts, or anything fancy like that. The potatoes and rice and chicken fill us up for the day. I'm eleven; we just did Mt. Whitney via Kearsarge Pass this summer on this exact diet.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 159
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 159 |
It appears that Ursack will be allowed almost everywhere in the Sierra this year except Yosemite National Park and three areas (Rae Lakes, Dusy Basin, Rock Creek) of SEKI. Just to clarify. Everywhere in Sequoia Kings that canisters are required (www.nps.gov/seki/planyourvisit/upload/food_storage_restrictions_SEKI_20070410.pdf]) you'll have to use a canister or a food storage box. You can use the ursack where you can also hang food -- but you can only use it as a food-hanging bag, like a regular (but kinda heavy) nylon bag. In Sequoia Kings, you cannot use it as Ursack advertises -- just leaving it on the ground or whatever. Proper food storage continues to mean hanging it correctly (which doesn't really work if there's bears around); using a food storage locker; or using a canister. Having an Ursack changes none of that in Sequoia Kings or, I suspect, other areas where canisters are required. George
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 32
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 32 |
"SIBBG, the Sierra Agency Black Bear Group, no longer exists. There are no standardized bear canister tests--each Superintendent of Forest Service Manager makes the decision for his or her own area."
This is a kinda disturbing part for me. Standardization is nice; knowing your equipment would be good to use anywhere, not having to check with too many jurisdictions.
Though, the website still seems to be working. Does the group exist?
|
|
|
|
|