Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board Bear Cannisters

After last summmer's 7 day backpacking trip to Rae Lakes, my wife and I decided to go lightweight. We both carried a large BearVault (BV-400) which broke our backs. Now they are sitting in our back room and we don't know what to do with them as we don't have a lot of room. Next summer we plan to use either the Ursack (provided it's still allowed) or a small BearVault. What have other people done when they no longer had use for their bear cannisters and didn't have extra room to keep them?

sell on e-bay

I'll second the Ebay idea. But you may want to hang on to your BV400's a little bit longer, at least one of them.

I would not be surprised if Ursack loses its conditional approval. There were some documented failures last summer of bags used in the recommended manner. Yet the latest from their website sounds encouraging:

"September 21, 2006
Apparently my previous post has caused some confusion. The Ursack Hybrid is still conditionally approved for use in Yosemite and all other SIBBG areas. There has been no change in approval status--although there have been lots of false rumors. The percentage of torn Ursacks, as compared to the number sold, is miniscule--less than 1/4 of 1%. The only fabric damage that I am aware of occured in approximately the same area of Yosemite during the approximately the same time period. It could have been a single bear. There has been no reported damage to either the retrofitted Ursacks (i.e. the green Spectra bags retrofitted with aluminum) or the newer Vectran bags sold since around August 18, 2006 (beginning with about order #9193)."

I'm going to wait and see before I buy one. I'm not sure if a failure rate of even .25% is acceptable to the SIBBG. And that number is based on units SOLD, not on units actually USED in bear country. Perhaps we'll see another summer of conditional approval to validate the new design.

You may want to check out the Bearikade canister. It's pricey but it only weighs as much as the BV350 while its volume is nearly that of the BV400. I was very happy with mine on the JMT last summer. The BV350 may be a bit small for two of you for any length of time.

And consider this if you're counting ounces: Your BV400's can hold 17 cubic inches of food for every ounce they weigh. For BV 350's that ratio goes down 13.3 cubic inches. You could go with the Bearikade at 18.5 cubic inches/oz. but if two of you are out for a week you'll need two of them and that's going to be expensive. There are lots of cheaper ways to save weight in your pack.

The Ursack is your lightest, cheapest alternative. But the future of the Ursack TKO 2.0 Hybrid is up in the air. The BV350 is smaller but actually heavier than what you already have if you look at volume/weight ratios. On a very short trip you could carry one BV350 for both of you. But on anything longer it's lighter to have one BV400 than two BV350's.

Just checked the SIBBG website. As of today Ursack and both BV models are still conditionally approved.

I just wanted to thank Ken and Mtntrailrunner for responding to my post. Mtntrailrunner, I never realized that the BearVault 400 gives you more carrying space per ounce than the BearVault 350. Thank you again.