[pct-l] It is not a simple problem

[goforth@cio.net (Joanne Lennox)]

It appears that most problem bears are educated in Campgrounds, and around
high use areas.  They attain food in one way or another.  Their behavior
becomes more aggressive and destructive (tear apart cars, retrieve foodbags
from between persons seated at picnic tables or actually in the process of 
preparing food - usually in the dark, start false charging persons to get
them to run and drop food). These are things that are happening in areas
where it is fairly easy to store and protect food and  is possible to
escape injury in a car or restroom,etc.  This is what I saw happening at
the hikers Camp in Toulome in 99. Every hiker there was conscienious and
knowledeable about bear problems and food storage(they were all using food
storage boxes): the bear was just way ahead of them and used surprise and
darkness to his advantage.  If  Knowledgeable people can not protect food
with bear boxes, how can they do it with canisters? The bear that was
causing the trouble was simply relocated.

Now instead of the campground, we have a very agressive, knowledgeable,
fearless bear in the backcountry.  The translocated bear has not been
reeducated, the problem has simply been transplanted into an area where
hikers do not have cars, and rangers, bearboxes, and restrooms and cars,
and the hiway( lets leave!) to help them deal with the problem.  In fact
the bear has less victims to choose from and probably is more hunger, and
it is not unreasonable to believe that the same bear will be even more
aggressive in the backcountry.

I do not believe that the bear associates relocation and his own aggressive
behavior.  In other words, relocation is not a negative reinforcement.  He
is still getting the reward every time he tears apart a car or backpack,
and gets toothpaste, or the cherry scented chapstick left in the car.( And
for those of us who travel 1500 miles to get to a Sierra trailhead, it is
almost impossible to not leave SOMETHING in the car with a scent on it ; so
there has been no incidents of a bear breaking into a car that did not have
food inside?).  If I am away for 3 months Hiking or riding in the Sierras,
I should not have a cooler in my car without food in it?  I guess I should
throw out the Cooler and all my stuff (Including precription drugs and
clothes which are scented), every lime I go to a Sierra trailhead and than
drive the 100 odd miles and spend a week or so acquiring another cooler and
getting the prescription, and the clothes and the food and laudery
detergent, chapstick, boot grease, etc.  If I have my horse trailer, I
should not have saddles, ropes, or horse tack(all the leather is oiled), or
blankets, or vitamins, electrolytes, or supplements,. hay or any of about
20 scented products that are usually carried for horses treatment and
emergencies(liniment, electrolytes, hoof dressing, fly repellants, scarlet
oil, etc).  I should not have a first aid kit in my car - mine has a lot of
scented products in it.  Bears have torn apart campers;If I want to live
out of my car or truck, why should I not be allowed to do so?  With a horse
and trailer, I frequently have almost no other options.   What is the
limit? 

This is like the recommendation and policy that says the hiker should wear
clean clothes, not spill any food on himself, not carry ( or use )any
scented product or food in the pockets, not sleep in the same clothes that
he eats in, cook and sleep in two different areas.  This mystifies me.  How
many changes of clothes do most hikers carry?  How many people camp and
cook in two different places? Often times it is difficult enough to find
one small campsite - I slept on the trail 3 times in 99.  I think there has
to be some rationality in the policies and awareness of about what people
will and will not do, about what bears are capable of.  

I think that the policies of the Inyo and Park service has reinforced
problem bear behavior.

Recently, It appears theat they are starting to rethink some of these
policies - and have began  to institute some negative reinforcement
measures.  - Rubber bullets, slingshots.  They have also encouraged the use
of slingshots in some of their circulars, they have consistently asked the
public to drive off problem bears and to protect their food.  The first
time (5 years ago) that I met a backcountry ranger who told me to
aggressively defend my food, I was dumbfounded.  Why should I be forced to
defend my food against a problem bear in the wilderness? It is dandergous!!
 I felt that this was not my problem, but one for the Park Service.  I have
walked in the Mountains for 40 years, climbed over 600 mountains, thruhiked
the PCT, and NO BEAR HAS EVER COME CLOSE TO GETTING ANY FOOD OF MINE.(never
carried a bear cannister)   Neverthless, I feel more vulnerable than ever,
mostly because I feel that the policies of the Forest Service and Park
Service are not helping really deal with the problem, and the measures are
getting more and more onerous for the hiker and there seems to be no limit
to the bears willeyness or the burocrats resistence to broader measures. 
And like Dave, I feel that it is just a matter of time before the bear
canisters get carried off and dropped down cliffs or whatever it takes for
the bears to foil this particular measure.

Mostly, I feel that the problem is not so simple.  To me, "just carry a
canister" is like saying"can't we all just get along?".

This is not simply a people problem, other wise we would not be talking
about problem bears.

Never could figure out why those bears did not eat my socks.  come to think
of it, I thought I lost one at a campsite one night, but maybe.....



Joanne, theuncleanwhocarriesfoodinherpocketsandevencooksinhersleepingbag