Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

bear canisters on the NPT

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bear canisters on the NPT

    Hey Folks - I'm not always the brightest bulb on the porch but I do try to pay attention to changes in rules and regulations as they pertain to NYS lands. In a recent YouTube video the person making it said that as of 2020 bear canisters would be required over the entire length of the NPT. My first reaction was when did this happen? My next question was is this correct? So if anyone out there has the answer, I'd appreciate hearing about it. No sense in not playing by the rules on future trips if a canister is going to be required.

    And hey, if nothing else, I can actually put something down on my Christmas list when my kids ask me what I want this year

    That's all for now. Take care and until next time...be well.

    snapper

  • #2
    No, not the entire length, but in the Western High Peaks (the Cold River section.)

    Comment


    • #3
      Dundee - Thanks for that. I knew about the change coming to the High Peaks and forgot that stretch along Long Lake up to the northern terminus was in that range so it looks like it's time to retire the Ursack and get a canister.

      As for the YouTube "personality," this is why I always take the information gained from those videos with a bit of suspicion. Hey, just because some person says it, doesn't make it true.

      That's all for now. Take care and until next time...be well.

      snapper

      Comment


      • #4
        personally, I don't like the can law for the WHP. It's not necessary and I've written a letter. I invite you to do the same , if you're interested.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by dundee View Post
          personally, I don't like the can law for the WHP. It's not necessary and I've written a letter. I invite you to do the same , if you're interested.
          I agree, I think I’ll do the same, not sure what good it will do it can’t hurt.

          Comment


          • #6
            Maybe if enough people write....

            There are places that see very little traffic and will never have a bear problem, Number Four LTs, the Cold River horse trail and most if not all of the NP.

            Comment


            • #7
              I could be wrong but I’m thinking it’ll probably be one of those new DEC regulations that exist on paper but is not necessarily strictly enforced, and is mostly on the discretion of the Ranger in charge. In other words, if you’re careful & responsible with your food & keep a clean camp along the NPT portion of the WHP region then you’ll probably be ok. If you’re not & give DEC a hard time about it when confronted then...when it becomes a problem it will be a problem that needs to be enforced more.

              Comment


              • #8
                haven't seen such reg for 2020, not even in public comment stage
                will only go by current regs
                NYSDEC requires the use of Bear Resistant Canisters, as defined in regulation, by overnight users in the Eastern High Peaks Wilderness between April 1 And November 30.
                NYSDEC encourages campers to use bear resistant canisters throughout the Adirondack and Catskill backcountry.
                http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7225.html

                Comment


                • #9
                  https://www.adk.org/changes-to-high-...oming-in-2020/



                  UMP Amendment pdf to download:
                  https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...AO3wqVMbeFGs7j
                  "There's a whisper on the night-wind, there's a star agleam to guide us, And the Wild is calling, calling . . . let us go." -from "The Call of the Wild" by Robert Service

                  My trail journal: DuctTape's Journal

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    see change they are implementing is as follows

                     Bear canister regulation o Adjust dates of requiring a bear canister to the beginning of May till the end of October
                    o Add that bear canisters used by the public must be from a Department- approved list, which will be updated annually on our website.
                    o Change bear canisters required in Central High Peaks Zone and Outer High Peaks Zone

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yeah, the planned changes are due out sometime next year. The public comment period for the changes was the same as the public comment period (last year) for the High Peaks UMP Amendment- the regulatory changes were proposed as part of that amendment.

                      As pointed out the changes are two fold:
                      • Instead of going with a general definition of what constitutes a "bear canister," the new regs will refer to a list promulgated by the department of approved brands and models. I.e., the BearVault brand canisters will no longer be legal to use.
                      • The bear canister requirement will be expanded to the Outer High Peaks- which comprises the former Dix Mountain Wilderness as well as the former Western High Peaks.

                      Of note is that (under the proposed regulation) the bear canister requirement will not be expanded to cover the Adirondack Canoe Route- which includes the NPT lean-tos and tent sites on the shore of Long Lake. In other words, NPT thru-hikers (at least northbound ones) won't legally need to fit everything into their bear canisters until they leave Plumleys and arrive at the Cold River at Shattuck Clearing. This does give some "wiggle room" in regards to canister usage as for most thru-hikers, only 2-3 nights worth of food (at most) will need to fit in the canister.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DSettahr View Post

                        Of note is that (under the proposed regulation) the bear canister requirement will not be expanded to cover the Adirondack Canoe Route- which includes the NPT lean-tos and tent sites on the shore of Long Lake. In other words, NPT thru-hikers (at least northbound ones) won't legally need to fit everything into their bear canisters until they leave Plumleys and arrive at the Cold River at Shattuck
                        This is incredibly stupid! If there is going to be a bear problem in the WHP it will be at one of the Long Lake lean-to, not at Ouluska Pass or Cold River 1&2. And virtually no one goes to the LTs on the horse trail. Is anyone at DEC thinking?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by dundee View Post
                          This is incredibly stupid! If there is going to be a bear problem in the WHP it will be at one of the Long Lake lean-to, not at Ouluska Pass or Cold River 1&2. And virtually no one goes to the LTs on the horse trail. Is anyone at DEC thinking?
                          Yeah. Especially considering their stated rationale for expansion is to eliminate exclusions and complexities so that user groups know where they are required, as in "the entire zone". Yet the canoe route exclusion still exists and is more difficult for the average user to determine. And if not, then an NPT corridor of 500' from the trail is also easily understood.
                          "There's a whisper on the night-wind, there's a star agleam to guide us, And the Wild is calling, calling . . . let us go." -from "The Call of the Wild" by Robert Service

                          My trail journal: DuctTape's Journal

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dundee View Post
                            This is incredibly stupid! If there is going to be a bear problem in the WHP it will be at one of the Long Lake lean-to, not at Ouluska Pass or Cold River 1&2. And virtually no one goes to the LTs on the horse trail. Is anyone at DEC thinking?
                            "Is anyone at DEC thinking?" Simple answer: No.

                            They are scrambling with inadequate resources to follow orders from above. I know from conversations that these orders are not allowed to be questioned. So wherever in the higher bureaucracy that these orders are coming from, you've got people that don't know sh** and never set foot in the woods passing dictates that the poor bastards at the work level have to try to follow and promulgate.

                            I took my dog up Dix mountain the other day. Nice hike. Took an hour to find the "dog rules" for Dix on the messed up DEC site. all sorts of obsolete pages that contradicted each other. No time to fix it - busy spraying out new rules.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Funny sidebar, I purchased the smaller BC450 canister because of this thread mainly for weekend overnight hikes with my wife I think my wife thinks using a canister will absolutely keep bears away! Let's keep that going.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X