Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite?
Display Avatars Sort By:
Ben F
(tekhna) - F
Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 16:57:29 MST Print View

Don't know if you guys saw the update last week:

http://www.ursack.com/ursack-update.htm

Is there a comprehensive list of where the Ursack is and isn't allowed? Or is just the King Range etc.. where it's not allowed? Or Yellowstone as well?

Hiking Malto
(gg-man) - F
Good News! on 02/27/2012 17:48:32 MST Print View

Hopefully this tesing will be completed and the Ursack approved by the start of the summer hiking season. This whole affair has been foolish.

Matthew Zion
(mzion) - F

Locale: Boulder, CO
Re: "Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite?" on 02/27/2012 18:08:07 MST Print View

+1 that the testing and approval is quick. I'm glad I haven't bought a canister yet -- I'd much rather carry one of these.

Ben F
(tekhna) - F
Re: Re: "Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite?" on 02/27/2012 18:11:16 MST Print View

I'd really like to buy one as well. This might be the one time I abuse the REI return policy--buy a Bearvault and return it if/when the Ursack is approved again. There's got to be a lot of pent-up demand for these. They're a clearly superior product in terms of weight, and no worse it seems in terms of failing.

Stephan Doyle
(StephanCal)
Re: Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 18:25:58 MST Print View

Wasn't there hope of this last year, too?

I'm cautiously NOT going and selling my BearVault quite yet.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 18:32:34 MST Print View

I own an Ursack. And I would certainly be delighted if the thing gets approved at Yosemite, etc. -- but only if that approval comes without the need for the stupid aluminum liner! While sack + liner together is still lighter than many hard plastic bear vaults, the difference isn't all that much. And it's a nuisance wrestling that liner in (or out) of the ursack.

a b
(Ice-axe)
Ursack S29 on 02/27/2012 18:33:56 MST Print View

Let's see.. should I carry my 3 lb BearVault 500 through the Sierra or my 8 ounce Ursack?
I SO hope they approve the Ursack!
I agree GG Man, the whole thing has been ridiculously mis-handled.
If an Ursack passes the same test as a hard sided container then it should be approved. Pretty simple really.
Now that as of tomorrow morning I am back in the Plumbing/construction trade again I might actually be able to afford an Ursack.
Oh yes.. Yes I did! :)

USA Duane Hall
(hikerduane) - F

Locale: Extreme northern Sierra Nevada
lighter than that on 02/27/2012 18:51:58 MST Print View

Matt, seems my old green, original Ursack weighs 5 oz, the insert is around 11 oz. I'm away from home, so can't check my sheet or reweigh it.
Duane

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 18:59:01 MST Print View

Redwood National Park does not allow them either.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: Re: Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 18:59:38 MST Print View

Duane:

My green ursack plus line is weighs 22oz.

a b
(Ice-axe)
Ursack Specifications from their site on 02/27/2012 19:09:57 MST Print View

Ursack S29 All White 7.3 ounces
Aluminum liner 10.8 ounces
Odor Proof sack 12X20 inches 1 ounce
There is also a .25 ounce tube of seam grip to be applied to the seam of the ursack.
So total weight of 19.35 ounces in the "maximum" protection mode.

James Castleberry
(Winterland76)
Bear Vault 500 Specifications - from their home page on 02/27/2012 19:45:52 MST Print View

2 lbs 9 oz. I have a season pass and hike in Yosemite as often as I can, but the worst part is lugging my BV 500. I've considered bearikade, bareboxer, BV450, etc., but this Ursack would be great.

Jason G
(JasonG) - F

Locale: iceberg lake
+1 on 02/27/2012 20:57:39 MST Print View

+1 on the excited and optimistic this will be approved by summer. It would be a bummer if the liner was required because I hate the bulkyness of bear cans and that would remain with the liner. I wonder if ursack will raise their prices if it gets approved.. they are surly gunna get a flood of orders

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 21:00:00 MST Print View

Need to get me some seamgrip.

Ben F
(tekhna) - F
re on 02/27/2012 21:16:08 MST Print View

Anyone know if the Ursack is approved for the Winds? If it is, I'll just buy one now.

a b
(Ice-axe)
Wind River Range on 02/27/2012 21:36:29 MST Print View

I am not aware of any restrictions on food storage in the Wind River Range. If I recall correctly there was just a wooden post near the southern entrance where i filled out a permit. Personally i just slept on top of my food through there but i do not recommend you do the same.
However here is a trick i did use in the Winds above treeline. I found a pile of boulders and using my trekking pole I stuffed my food sack deep into a crevice between the boulders. An adult bear would not be able to fit inside there or reach the sack with it's paw. Of course a marmot or mouse could still get the food in there.
I did this once in the Winds near Shannon pass.
Everywhere else i just slept right on top of my food sack which was wrapped up in a large garbage compactor bag and covered in my stinky shirt.
You could of course be mauled using this approach to food storage so YMMV.
Here is what the terrain looks like in the Winds:
.I stuffed my food sack deep into those boulders behind my shelter since their were no trees to hang
.
There aren't too many suitable trees to hang from. The Ursack would be better than my silly approach of sleeping on the food. Assuming you can find something to tie the Ursack off to. Otherwise stuff it into a crevice beyond the reach of a bear.

Edited by Ice-axe on 02/27/2012 21:44:03 MST.

USA Duane Hall
(hikerduane) - F

Locale: Extreme northern Sierra Nevada
That's about right for weight on 02/27/2012 22:17:04 MST Print View

Thanks Ben, that's about what I recall for my set, 20-21 oz. Fortunately when I last used my Ursack legally out of Mammoth, the Backcountry Ranger had no ideer how it was to be deployed. I gave her my email addy but never heard from her as I only had my sack tied to a tree and she thought it had to be tied in a tree like a bear hang. She was working with a small crew, redoing fire pits, making the Ranger fire pit, using three rocks, I thought they were neat and would cut back on large campfires.

Matt, I took my Bearicade when I visited the Winds two summers back, gotta go back. Your pic is some of what I saw too. I brought my canister because of ole man grizz.
Duane

Hikin' Jim
(hikin_jim) - MLife

Locale: Orange County, CA, USA
Re: Re: Re: Ursack closer to being allowed in Yosemite? on 02/27/2012 22:54:28 MST Print View

Man! That would be cool if the Ursack were finally approved. I hate bear canisters, particularly the Garcia ones.

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

Bradley Danyluk
(dasbin) - MLife
Ursack on 02/28/2012 00:47:52 MST Print View

Has it really been that mis-handled, though? When you look in detail, there are a pretty incredible number of reports of the Ursack being breached. I own one, but would never tie it at ground-level like they recommend, or bring it into regions that require canisters. At the very least your food is pulverized and inedible after an attack, which ends your trip. At worst it developed a hole (heard a few reports of this) under attack and the bear squeezed and ate out of the hole.

Ben Wortman
(bwortman) - M

Locale: Nebraska
Seam Grip??? on 02/28/2012 07:24:42 MST Print View

What is the deal with seam grip and the Ursack? I bought one 2 years ago (all white one) and have not heard that you need to use seam grip at all.

Can someone explain this to me? Is it recommended or is there a specific reason it is needed?

Thanks

Ben