[pct-l] Ursack(s) for Oregon

[hikeon]

The same thing happened to us on the JMT.   It is not a fun experience when you don't have much food to eat and you are hiking over 12,000 ft passes!  I would think twice before choosing the right bear protection to store your food if you are like us and get hungry when you hike!  Plus I felt bad knowing that once the bear had the food he definitely would be able to get into the sack sooner or later which would cause him or her to come back to steal more food from the next hiker.  This of course is sad because then the bear becomes a "problem bear" and all because the food was not stored properly.  In the end nobody wins.
Cindy
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Donna "L-Rod" Saufley 
  To: Daniel Bailey ; omullis at aircanopy.net 
  Cc: Pct-l at backcountry.net 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 5:22 PM
  Subject: Re: [pct-l] Ursack(s) for Oregon


  One of the biggest problems with the Ursack (I own one and used it for my Sierra trek last year when it had condiional approval)  is that the bears can carry the bag away.  Unlike the hard shell type cannisters, the bear CAN get the Ursack in its mouth and take off with the whole thing.  Another concern is that while bear's teeth and claws can't penetrate the fabric, small rodents can nibble though them and make holes.  So, if a bear gets your Ursack and takes off with it (which happened to two thru-hikers just out of KM last year), eventually they will be able to get at the contents -- therefore it is not an effective deterrent.  

  L-Rod


    -----Original Message----- 
    From: Daniel Bailey 
    Sent: Dec 5, 2007 9:13 AM 
    To: omullis at aircanopy.net 
    Cc: Pct-l at backcountry.net 
    Subject: Re: [pct-l] Ursack(s) for Oregon 

    If you double-bag your ursack, you're going to limit how much food you can store in the inner sack.

    An ursack within an ursack may act as a deterrent, but if a bear can get through the first sack, they'll eventually get through the second. 

    IMHO, bears in Oregon are much more timid than those in the High Sierra.  Follow the basic usage guidelines for the ursack (don't sleep with it, tie it to a tree, etc...) and you should be fine.

    As an Oregon native, I've had no problems with using my *single layer* ursack left alone for extended periods while out peakbagging. 

    Be well,

    Senator

    ---

    Ollen wrote:

    Reading all the traffic regarding Ursacks and Garcias and BearVaults and Bearikades, primarily if not exclusively in the context of California PCT sections and, being the owner of a never-yet-used Ursack V27, intended for use in Oregon only Sept 2008... 

    I am wondering about the effectiveness and/or (f)utility of perhaps 'double-bagging'... that is, an Ursack within an Ursack...

    Rather than eating the cost of my V27 to replace it with a (perhaps unneeded for Oregon and certainly heavier) BV / Garcia /Bearikade, might it not be sufficient and overall less costly for me to buy another V27 and double-bag?  I'd be out only $50 more, the twin V27s weigh in at 16 ounces combined, and, when used in conjunction with odor-proofing liners might just be a workable and sufficient food protection strategy for Oregon... 

    Your opinions will be appreciated and considered.

    Thanks,
    Ollen
    Venus, TX



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Pct-l mailing list
  Pct-l at backcountry.net
  To unsubscribe or change list options (digest, etc):
  http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/attachments/20071205/9666ac7c/attachment.html