Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Bear Cannisters

Expand Messages
  • pctpacker
    Some of these methods work in some areas but the new regulations in the Bubbs Creek/Rae Lakes areas make many impossible. If you haven t already seen these you
    Message 1 of 473 , Apr 23, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Some of these methods work in some areas but the
      new regulations in the Bubbs Creek/Rae Lakes areas
      make many impossible. If you haven't already seen
      these you can find them
      at:<br><a href=http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/sequoiakingscanyonhikers target=new>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/sequoiakingscanyonhikers</a><br><br>I believe these regulations will soon be used in
      many more areas along the JMT/PCT. To really solve the
      problem, the NP and NF will have to provide alternate
      means of food storage far beyond those presently
      available (more boxes, new storage
      innovations).<br><br>Unfortunately, it comes down to making a choice: save the bears
      or save some weight....I have to go with the bears.
      Most of your arguments are true: most of us here know
      how to properly protect our food, but MANY hikers do
      not, and some just don't care. Due to this, the regs
      are needed.<br><br>If properly packed, a canister can
      actually SAVE space in your pack without adding much
      weight. You can get a lot more food compressed into a
      canister than you can toss loosely into a stuff sack or
      backpack and save some packaging weight at the same time.
      Check this out
      at:<br><a href=http://www.sierrawilderness.com/article.html target=new>http://www.sierrawilderness.com/article.html</a><br><br>To make up for any weight added I am trying to cut
      pounds elsewhere by using some of the newer lightweight
      innovations and leaving non-essentials behind. Just be
      careful not to sacrifice safety to save weight!
    • tiocampo
      Here is my opinion on the snowpack: At this time, it is pretty much normal or slightly below. The snowpack will dwindle pretty much as usual, unless
      Message 473 of 473 , Feb 24 8:48 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Here is my opinion on the snowpack: <br><br>At
        this time, it is pretty much normal or slightly below.
        The snowpack will dwindle pretty much as usual,
        unless there are some new major storms. <br><br>Whatever
        the JMT veterans would say about "normal year
        conditions" should apply this year. Last year was
        exceptionally dry in the high country. This year will certainly
        have more snowpack, but nothing like 1983 or 1997.
        <br><br>But hey, it might snow some more! Winter ain't over
        yet, but the probabilities are dwindling.<br><br>Here
        is my tip on interpreting the snow water equivalents
        shown for individual sensor sites: <br><br>loose, new
        fallen snow is deeper, say up to 12 inches of snow to 1
        inch of precip<br><br>dense, old snow is less deep,
        say from 3 to 6 inches of snow to 1 inch of precip.
        This is applicable when daytime air temps have been
        above freezing for a while<br><br>Have a great time,
        whatever you decide to do!<br><br>Best Regards,<br><br>FRF
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.