Bear containers are coming to ADKs

[rhihn]

I think it is very easy for this topic to become political. My question to you guys is: Of those of you who have lost food to the bears, how many of you carry those blasted containers around now?


Good point...reminds me of the old saying that the definition of a conservative is a "liberal who's been mugged." We have only been using a canister for a little over a year now. When we first started using it, we were stashing our food, but still hanging our garbage. I was chastised by a couple of people on this forum (rightly so, I think) for considering garbage "less important" than food when it comes to bears. We now sometimes actually carry TWO canisters and stash all garbage. Admittedly there are two of us. It's forced us to re-think food (and sometimes get a good home-dehydrated meal out of it!), but we still sometimes have difficulty getting the garbage/food ratio right. But finding the right tree and location for a hang, the annoyance of forgetting something and having to retrieve it, etc...for us, nothing beats the convenience and peace of mind of canisters, once we're at camp.

 

[rdl]

After 25 years of hiking/camping in the Adirondacks I have never lost food to bears. I attribute that to the much easier pickings that are out there from badly hung food bags or people just throwing their food bags in the brush. But that didn't stop me from buying a bear canister this spring. The problem that has developed over the years is not going to go away next year once more people start using canisters -- this will be a gradual process and probably will never be eliminated -- look at Yosemite for an example.

I think the time saved by not hanging a food rope anymore will be offset by time spent figuring out the best way to pack food in the canister.

Regarding enforcement at interior sites, simple solution from the rangers perspective: they radio their conterpart at the trailhead who is then waiting for you when you hike out. Witnessed this situation with someone who had started a fire at Marcy Dam this August. I was signing in at the Loj trailhead when a ranger approached two people who were signing out and asked if they were the ones who had a fire at Marcy Dam. I guess they could have lied and said no, but I assume the interior ranger had given a pretty good description of the culprits. So a ticket ensued for these campers. But what's the point of the civil disobediance ? What satisfaction is gained from it ? If it's just ignorance then accept the regulations and move on.

 

[Remix]

What about clean clothes

I know I am drifiting away from the thread topic, but do the people who frequent Marcy and other bear-active sites keep a set of clothes for eating and another set for everything else?

 

[Trail Boss]

After a hiatus of nearly a year, I thought it was time to return to VFTT and see what's new in the ADKs. Same old problems, more new rules.

The situation has degraded since my first hike in 1979 and I place the blame squarely on the shoulders of everyone who visits the ADK park. I include myself even though I've never:

- lost food to bears
- shat in a stream
- camped illegally (except for my very first trip)
- burnt wood that was 'live and up'
- left more than footprints
- etc

I've made an effort to observe every guideline designed to preserve the park for future generations (and myself) to enjoy.

If eveyone had made the same effort, we'd need fewer restrictions on our current activities. But we didn't, and it is unlikely we ever will, so the guidelines proliferate.

Am I happy about having to lug around the deadweight of a canister?
No, especially because I've never lost food to bears.

Will I use a mandated canister?
Yes, because it helps to protect the bears from us (you read that right).

At the very least, we should strive to preserve the current state of the park's character for another 25 years. Any improvements would also be welcome.

 

[spaddock]

AlpineSummit's post was so refreshing, seems everybody else here are perfect little angels.


S.

 

[lumberzac]

I guess the thing that aggravates me the most about this whole issue isn’t the canisters them selves. It’s that fact that things have gotten so bad that they are now required. There real is no sense fighting the issue, canisters will be required next year. Should I decide to camp in the Eastern High Peaks Wilderness (which I’ve only done three times in the 20 years I’ve been backpacking), I’ll be carry a canister. What’s the point of fighting over this with a ranger? They didn’t make the rules; they just have to enforce them. And it isn’t there job to be traffic cop. They are there to protect the park; so let all help make that job easier for them to do.

 

[Grumpy]

What does the proposed reg actually say?

Y'know, in all this wonderfully philosophical discussion about the bear canister business, I haven't yet seen the text of the proposed regulation. I find reference to it through the NY DEC web site, but no specific verbiage. Can anyone post the actual proposed language here, please?

Thanks.

G.

 

[lumberzac]

Grumpy, I don't have a link to the actual document, but after talking to a ranger last weekend, it looks like the regulation will be almost identical to the regulations out west. I do know that the regulation is only for the Eastern High Peaks, the same area that is covered by the no fires regulation.

 

[ALGonquin Bob]

Since the new mandate won't apply until next year, it may not have been officially worded yet. We have all winter to discuss and debate this before it actually applies. It won't affect me at all, since I already carry my food in a canister.

To quote a infamous lawbreaker: "It's a good thing".

 

[percious]

does anyone find it ironic that fires usually keep animals away?

-percious

 

[lumberzac]

does anyone find it ironic that fires usually keep animals away?

-percious

That is rather ironic, but I'm glad the fire ban is there. One look at the trees by Lake Colden and you will notice that most don't have any low limbs, because campers removed them for there fires.

 

[stoopid]

Re: I beg to differ

I work in the Law Enforcement / Medical Examiner field and I can tell you, with certainty, that EXESSIVE SPEED is a significant factor in ALL Motor Vehicle Fatalities NATIONWIDE. And there is significant data to back that up.

Go -HERE- and download "Traffic Safety Facts 2002 - Speeding" (towards the bottom) for more info.

Another thing, the purpose for speed control measures (i.e. tickets) used by Law Enforcement is not REVENUE PADDING, it's an attempt to stem the over $40 BILLION economic cost of speed related accidents each year in the US.

That's not conjecture that's fact..........

I realize those numbers, but I posted a fact about those numbers (in order to trump silverback's analogy, as speeding has nothing directly to do with bearcans):

99% of the time someone speeding harms only the speeder.

It's semantics, but I was specific for a reason -- if my actions likely only affect me, then fine -- it's my choice. Silverback was equating speeding to not bringing a bearcan -- two different issues -- me speeding will likely only impact me, but not following the bearcan regulation increases the odds of my food being eaten (impacting me) AND the bear being 'trained'/rewarded to do it again.

Originally posted by Silverback My ultimate point was, which you conveniently chose to ignore, was this: If all individuals decided to make their own "choices" on the proper application of the laws/rules or whatever, the result will be either destruction of a valuable resource, or a need to "super-regulate" it to protect it.

The very fact that we have this issue with canisters is proof of that. All those "personal choices" have led to habituated bears and another regulation.

Since I'm new to hiking (only about 2 years) it wasn't MY choices that caused this, and it wasn't my parents that had black slaves ... so don't tread on me!

Part of my issue is with HOW it's being enforced. I argue that IF you're going to enforce the rules, then do so with an iron fist. Don't warn me, then when I ignore the warning in defiance not ticket me. It diminishes your credibility and brings to light your true motives for ticketing were out of ego and not your duty. To enforce this it's going to need to be done either at the gate or through a social reform among all hikers. Problem is, we can't all agree to the necessity, and not everyone even cares enough to be bothered.

I like percious's point about those who've had their food stolen and are they carrying a can now... while I voluntarily dished out $80 not everyone will (some won't even be bothered with the $5/weekend rental fee). THESE are the people who need to be targeted, but not at camp later on that day (as it's already too late), but either at the trail head or long before they even think about going camping in these areas through education and awareness.

 

[percious]

Point well taken, but there are efforts underway to trail (educate) the populus. Last time I was down at Heart lake they had a tent on display that was less than adequate in the rain. (bear holes) They also had an olive jar that was no match for a bear.

We were stupid when we hung our bear bag, and did not defend our cache out of fear. We paid for it by hungrily carrying out 5 days of garbage over Algonquin. (Salvaging some part of the trip). So, the DEC is trying to educate people, and if that display at heart lake isn't enough to convince people, then the bears will, when they lose their food.

I imagine that once the reg. goes into effect people will stop talking about it and just follow suite. I just don't see what the whole contraversy is. I mean, do people complain about bear containers in the Sierras?

-percious

 

[rdl]

I mean, do people complain about bear containers in the Sierras?

I think when people in the Sierras see car doors torn off by bears in search of food they realize that bear canisters are a good thing. I have friends who hike in the Sierra's on a regular basis and it's just second nature to take your canister. When the regulations were implemented they viewed it as long overdue.

I find it interesting on the Yosemite website that canisters are required within 7 linear miles of any trailhead. Are any campsites in the High Peaks beyond 7 linear miles of a trailhead ?

 

[WalksWithBlackflies]

Originally posted by Percious

We were stupid when we hung our bear bag

I believe this is exactly what Stoopid is talking about. Isn't there already a reg about properly securing your food, be it by hanging or another means? If a ranger saw your "stupidly" hung bag, he should have enforced the rule then and there... either by making you re-hang your bag or fining you.

Last year, I was at Uphill Lean-To... there were pinatas all along the trail. You could reach up and touch them. A ranger took the time to basically scold me on my late start up Skylight/Gray (which I easily summited and returned to camp by dusk without having to use the headlamp I showed the Ranger), but obviously did nothing to those who improperly hung their bags. The bears got every one of 'em. ENFORCE THE REG AS IT EXISTS. An excellent way to ensure compliance is a bear canister, but if I want to take the time to properly hang a bag, then let me.

 

[percious]

I think when people in the Sierras see car doors torn off by bears in search of food they realize that bear canisters are a good thing.

We should be glad it didnt get to that in the adirondacks.

-percious

 

[stoopid]

We should be glad it didnt get to that in the adirondacks.

-percious

But I'd like to see a black bear ripping into my hyundai with a crowbar

 

[NYBRAD]

Back in the late 70's I remember a pop up aluminum camper being torn open like a tuna can at Lake Eaton State campground.

 

[Grumpy]

. . . I believe this is exactly what Stoopid is talking about. Isn't there already a reg about properly securing your food, be it by hanging or another means? If a ranger saw your "stupidly" hung bag, he should have enforced the rule then and there... either by making you re-hang your bag or fining you.

This is a case in which -- forgive the metaphor -- the proof of the pudding is in the tasting.

What might appear to the gimlet-eyed and highly skilled or knowledgeable among us as an "improperly" hung bear bag that subsequently survives the night, must, by definition actually have been a properly hung bag. After all, it worked, so the owner should be applauded for demonstrating uncanny skill and genius rather than be ticketed for ineptitude.

Conversely, a supposedly expertly hung bag that gets torn up must be, by definition, improperly hung because it failed, and the owner should be ticketed, fined and drummed out of the corps for being a slovenly dunce.

The point is, you never really know for sure if the bag has been properly strung up until it's been put to the overnight test. Simple enough, right?

On the other hand a camp set up in a no camping zone is, by definition, unambiguously not in compliance. Campers who receive only a warning for such an infraction should (a) move their camp to a legal spot, forthwith; (b) assimilate the lesson; and (c) thank their lucky stars they have not been visited by Ranger Grumpy if they fail to do so.

Let's not allow our generally free-spirit inclination to resent authority get in the way of reason here. The bear canister regulation probably is overdue and evidently is coming. It most likely will specify that if you camp you use a can. That's pretty cut and dried. Let's pledge to help make it a success by complying on our own. Character is measured by how we behave when nobody's looking.

G.

 

[WalksWithBlackflies]

Originally posted by Grumpy...a supposedly expertly hung bag that gets torn up must be, by definition, improperly hung...and the owner should be ticketed

If it gets torn up, it wasn't properly hung... thanx for making my point. We should each decide if we want to use a canister, hanging bag, or 30 layers of ziplock bags stashed behind a stump... but we should also be aware of the consequences. If I improperly hang a bag, fine me. If it happens enough (dependent on amount of the fine or my sense of environmental morality), I'll gladly take a canister with me. However, if my bags never get taken, then what's the harm?

All I'm saying is that we already have a reg in place... it just needs enforcement. Couple it with some education and maybe a sign at the trailhead stating the fine with an arrow pointing you to the nearest (optional) canister rental area.