Bear Proof

[Gurn]

Just wondering.
I was thinking about doing a little hiking with my son this fall around Lake Placid. Can we still use Stuff Sacks, or is there a law that says we have to have Bear proof containers.

[Dick]

After July 5, bear proof canisters will be required in the Eastern High Peaks region, which is south of Lake Placid (and I assume therefore exempt). See the map on p. 8 of the High Peaks Region trail guide, or the accompanying topo map for the boundary location.

Dick

[Gurn]

We would be staying at the avalanche lean to. A few miles above Marcy Dam.

[Dick]

We would be staying at the avalanche lean to. A few miles above Marcy Dam.

No question, that area is prime bear problem country. Bear problems throughout that entire corridor are the main reason for the new rule. You'll need to rent, borrow, or purchase a canister.

Dick

[adkdremn]

Gurn-
If you will be leaving from the Adirondak Loj, you can rent a bear canister for only $5 a weekend. They take reservations for them also. I just used one for the first time last weekend and it wasn't bad at all. There were also no bear encounters using it.

[Gurn]

Thanks, I'll keep all that in mind.

[Dick]

Here is a site that lists numerous locations and whether they rent or sell:

http://www.wcs.org/international/northamerica/Adirondacks/adirondackbbear/181285

Dick

[Boreal Chickadee]

I just got the bearvault and I must say it was much easier to just close up the top and not worry about critters large or small. It also allowed me to take a few things that I would have otherwise worried about crushing. So as much as I don't like the extra weight it does have some positives other than resisting bears.

Just remember to put your container in a depression in the ground or an area that our furry friends won't be able to bat it so far that you won't find it in the morning or end up in a lake.

[copper]

Well, if they're batting at it, it isn't really addressing the issue of bears marauding campsites, is it?

[redhawk]

Well, if they're batting at it, it isn't really addressing the issue of bears marauding campsites, is it?

It will when they figure out that they can't get into it. Bears are a lot smarter then humans that way, in facxt most animals are smarter then humans that way.

Fact is, the Bear Canisters do solve the problem, every place they have been implemented. So well that the Anti-bear canister people can't use that as an argument.

Main thing now is time. The bears are so used to being able to forage the food of sloppy, lazy, stupid people that they have to "unlearn".

Enforcement is important to, the Rangers need to really be on top of this and I would like to see fines of $1000 for failure to comply.

[Mavs00]

Well, if they're batting at it, it isn't really addressing the issue of bears marauding campsites, is it?

I'm with Redhawk on this one. Fact is, if they're batting at it (and not getting at the food), It is directly addressing the issue of bears marauding campsites.

I read a couple decent books on the subject (one was Bear Attacks, Causes and Avoidance by Herrero), and from my understanding of the subject and bear behavior;

Bears have an innate fear of MAN that is imparted at birth and it's in their nature to avoid man IF POSSIBLE. I don't know if I'd say bears are smarter than man, but countless generations have taught them that man is "bad" and generally bad things happen to them when man is around. We scare them. On occasion, the smell of food, hunger or some other factor, will temporarily override this fear and they will chance an intrudance into man's domain (campsite) in order get at food. (i.e. it hopes RISK<REWARD). If successful and nothing bad happens, the next time its more likely to risk again, and the fear it feels is more easily overcome. If it does it enough and it's successful often enough, you have a potential problem. A large predator that has deprogramed its natural fear of man and will not hesitate to confront man in it's quest for food.

Most bears have not totally lost that fear of man and it's still pretty stressful for most of them to enter "the ugly man smell" to search for food. They will if they think food is available and RISK is still < REWARD (as it now). Deny them that food for extended periods of time and hopefully the equation will begin to change(RISK>REWARD).

The theory being that most bears, once reprogramed, will not risk "the ugly man smell" just to play soccer with an oversize plastic jug . It's just not worth it to them.

And, as Hawk has said, its worked in many other areas that it's been implemented.

[copper]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's a totally useless idea. And I do defer to most of you guys who "live" there. I'm not going to tell you about your own backyard. But I have to vent. It pains me whenever they have to create an absolute, no exceptions law because everyone else created a problem. I mean, this whole aspect of bear/human contact could have been avoided if the humans did their part earlier, right? I know, I'm upset that the world isn't perfect

For myself, I've been responsible, careful and respectful of the land I've walked-never had or forced a problem with a bear. And I've spent considerable time and money with the specific goal of reducing weight. This just "feels" like a mandatory 3# penalty to a lot of hard work on my part. I suppose that's the part that really hits me.

Redhawk is spot on: they should fine the heck out of any violators. Because I WILL obey this law, whether I object to it or not. I attempt to obey every law that I am aware of. But there is another concern I have: they won't fine anyone. Yeah, someone will have an "encounter" and a $50 fine may result when all the dust settles from their ranger-saved trip; but other than that there will likely be very little preemptive enforcement. Then they will go back to their conference table, with their skewed statistics about how the "canister program" isn't working, and come up with a more aggressive means of containing the problem that REALLY affects people.

Maybe I sound paranoid or overconcerned, but I just think that this problem is going to get worse before better. And truth be told, that canister presents a real challenge in my loadout. Then again, I can just effort to avoid that region.

[redhawk]

The canisters can be a pain, but oddly enough hikers are "adapting" to them, some (like Peanut Butter) actually finding advantages to them.

I'm also sure that as we speak, companies are trying to find a lightweight material that can't be bent or crushed by the bears and we will soon see the "ultra lightweight Titanium" (or new wonder material) bear canister with velcro straps to "easily attach to your pack" for a mere $350.00 with a Tommy Hillfinger or Patagonia Logo!!

The shameful part of this story is that it will be easier to unteach the "dumb" bears "unacceptable" behavior, then it is to teach "smart" humans proper behavior!

When you think about the "bear problem", you realize they are a lot like humans. Most humans will use a prepared food or get fast food from a restaurant (easy) as opposed to cooking a meal from scratch (harder) although the food is not really as nutritious!!

[copper]

I agree, it will be easier to teach the "dumb" bears. The thing is, if "smart" human trapses around with his canister and uses poor cooking/disposal discipline, that human is still going to make contact with a bear "trespassing" on that humans "property".

I guess I'll just throw in my show of support. I acknowledge there is a problem and hope it gets resolved before more serious reprocussions occur to the bear; not the people. Maybe all will end well and my negative apprehension will all be for nothing.

[redhawk]

I guess I'll just throw in my show of support. I acknowledge there is a problem and hope it gets resolved before more serious reprocussions occur to the bear; not the people. Maybe all will end well and my negative apprehension will all be for nothing.

Look at the bright side.

It makes a nice seat at camp and a nice doorstop at home (fill it with pretty little Adirondack rocks!)