[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [pct-l] bear manners

On Wed, 2 Sep 1998, Tom Reynolds wrote:

> Karl,
> You are accusing me of what is not true. I am not advocating that anyone be
> forced into anything. I am advocating DO NOT BELIEVE THAT COUNTERBALANCING
> WORKS because, it usually doesn't.

If what I said came across as an accusation, I'm sorry about that. It
wasn't meant as such. 

advocating, then great! I'll agree with you there. Counterbalancing
seems like a good idea in theory but in practice it doesn't work all
that well. 

The reason I chose to respond was that your tone have been so full of
absolutes. I'll say it again. Make some room for alternative opinions
and folks will be more willing to agree with your own. Softening your
tone and accepting that Brick and other folks aren't going to agree
will make for some much better discussion.

> Assuming double the food weight after the fat leaves you can still get 6-7
> days of food in a canister. The first day's food need not be in the
> canister. That gives you 7-8 nights [8-9 hiking days] between resupply. At
> 18 miles a day that is 162 miles between resupply {Kennedy Meadows [south]
> to Mammoth}

Doing 18 miles/day in there would help immensely but that's asking a
lot for the average thru-hiker. Most of us slowed down to 14-16 miles/day
in there. Going through there in June made for some tough going. I was
overall quicker than the average thru-hiker at 132 days total but
personally, I couldn't have done 18 miles/day in the high Sierras.

That's a good point that the first day's food doesn't need to be in   
the canister. If I understand you're scenario, you're assuming no food
is eaten on the last hiking day. Most people wouldn't go for that.
Still, I'll revise my estimate up to 7-9 hiking days on a bear
canister. For a typical thru-hiker in June that give a range of 120
miles (8 days * 15 miles/day) which is still workable. Some
thru-hikers will feel differently. For them, I'd hope they do a good
job of counterbalancing, using bear boxes, or stealth camping. 

> Actually I prefer bear boxs to canisters for the average joe. Most people
> will not take the time to properly pack a canister and won't make the hard
> decision to leave the Pringles home. I ran across a group doing the JMT.
> They had canisters but lost food anyway because all the food wouldn't fit

Hey now, Pringles have a pretty good calorie to weight ratio. :) Of
course you're right. They have a volume problem that makes them not
work well in a canister. It's too bad. I really like Pringles while

But anyway, I do hope that the various regulatory agencies continue
and even expand the placement of bear boxes.

Just a point of discussion. It would help us if you'd quote the
material that you're responding to. Sometimes it sounds like you're
responding to things out of context. I'm pretty sure you're not but
without the previous post at hand it's difficult to tell.


* From the Pacific Crest Trail Email List |  http://www.backcountry.net   *