"One thing that made me laugh so much, it was either in this discussion or in the other one about Ursacks, but someone said something to the effect of "Its not just the weight of the can, it means I have to buy a whole new pack to fit it in." Who told you to buy a pack so small that it leaves no room for any unforseeable items such as a bear can? Thats your fault for being a UL crackhead."
It was in the prior thread, and I laughed, too. Particularly since it's been obvious for a while now that regulations requiring the use of bear canisters are going to become more prevalent. To me, it only makes sense to take that into account when purchasing a pack. If you can afford only one pack, make sure it's one that can hold a bear can as well as all your regular gear, or you may well be sorry.
The same person also complained that bear cans have worn holes in his pack. You mean gear wears out when you use it?! How shocking! I guess patching the holes or buying a new pack made out of slightly tougher fabric's not an option.
Folks, it's Not About Us. Really. The regulatory authorities aren't going to care that protecting bears is going to make life tougher for UL backpackers. Their focus is on what's best for the bears. We're the ones who are going to have to adapt. We might as well get used to it.