[Philmont]: Bear Bags vs. Bear Cannisters

While I agree with the basic sentiments of Dave's post, let's beware of
a "holier than thou" attitude. While I have seen some appalling
behavior from non-Scout campers, I have also seen plenty of Scout Units
whose backwoods behavior was equally abysmal, both at KOA-style
Winnebago ghettos and in remote wilderness environments. I am sure I am
not alone on this List in this regard. There is a ceaseless need for
education.

It is probably worth recalling the bad old days of the 60's and 70's on
the Ranch vis-a-vis bears - pre-cable days. I saw 18 bears in '72 and
23 in '73, and heard (and smelled) plenty more at night. Certainly
there is some redundancy in those "sightings", "hearings", and
"smellings", but you get the basic idea - there were a heck of a lot of
bears wandering around the campsites. Before cables, we used the old
tree-to-tree method for hanging bear-bags, and the bears came through in
herds, *knowing* that they would find improperly or carelessly hung
bags. And they did. And they did. And they did. Although my Crews
never lost anything, we had to share our remaining food with other Crews
who were less meticulous in their bear safety, multiple times both
years. In those days, Staff camps maintained a goodly supply of excess
food to restock Crews who had lost some or everything - one of my
enduring memories of steaming teenage anger was being aggressively
quizzed (as the Crew Chief) by a Camp Director as to how we had allowed
a bear to get our food, when in fact we had given half our stuff to
another Crew who supplies had been completely wiped out. It didn't help
that I was more than half-starved by the time we got to this jerk's
camp. My Advisor stepped in before I committed a felony assault and
battery. [Hell, it's been nearly 32 years and I'm STILL pissed off
about it. What an idiot!]

Anyway, the situation was tough on the bears too. There is a standing
story that many a bear would eat all the various dehydrated food (along
with everything else) in a set of bear-bags, and then go get a big drink
of water - resulting in a fatal expansion as everything rehydrated.
Many other bears were shot for repeated or overly aggressive raiding.

As you can imagine, this didn't change overnight. It took the Ranch 20
years to both recognize the problem and more importantly do something
about it. The "something" was installation of bear-bag cables at
virtually all campsites, an aggressive approach to harassing inquisitive
bears, trapping and moving raiding bears to remote locales, and
increased camper training and education. And doubtless more that I have
forgotten. For the most part, this multi-faceted attack has been quite
effective.

But not perfectly. If you chat with any of the bear experts on the
Ranch, they will tell you that a large percentage of bear scat contains
camper trash. Many of you have seen my previous posts bemoaning the all
too common practice of stashing trash under rocks (probably to prevent
the wind from blowing it away) and then forgetting it. I have
personally seen sets of food packages (entire meals in many cases)
thrown into latrines or off to the side of campsites - in my guess, this
from immature or T.P. campers who were forced to carry it against their
will and decided to just dump it instead (who checks that everyone who
was given food at the beginning of a hike turns it in at the next
campsite???) I have seen spigots at staff camps where dirty dishes were
quite obviously washed out. We have had a number of intentional
"bear-baiting" incidents on the Ranch, and also a number of camper
temper-tantrums that were essentially food-fights. A post several years
ago indicated that according to Philmont investigations, the majority of
all camper-bear incidents were due to human carelessness - or actual malice.

In short, we don't have a pristine record, or anything close to one. As
y'all have heard me say on several past occasions, all things considered
the bears really are amazingly well-behaved. However, while I hope it
doesn't happen - and despite the Ranch's overall success - it wouldn't
surprise me if Philmont eventually has to institute the use of
cannisters. Either because the state of New Mexico insists, or due to
liability concerns over lawsuits if/when someone gets injured and a
dorsal-finned ambulance-chaser makes hay on the fact that the BSA is
using an "archaic", "discredited", and/or "ineffective" system. We will
see.... In the meantime, keep educating!

- Dr. Bob

Dave Parmly wrote:
> Maybe it's me, but it seems the debate over bear canisters as opposed to
> bear bags is comparing two very different issues. The idea of bear
> canisters is very helpful in an environment where the animals have
> already learned, through the unsupervised habits of thousands of sloppy
> American campers, that people + tents = food. The canister is designed
> by a pessimist/realist who has already decided that the bear is
> purposefully coming into camp looking for food. No matter how neat and
> Leave-No-Trace camper "Z" might be, Campers "A" through "Y" have, over
> time, conditioned the bear who has taught her cubs, who taught their
> cubs, to associate the round blue thing with something that at least
> smells like it has potential to be food, whether they get into it or
> not. Scouts coming to Philmont should be more disciplined than the
> average camper at Yosemite or on the AT, plus there are rangers and
> staffers to keep them honest. Based upon the evidence I've seen on the
> trail, from the detritus left behind by Inca-hat wearing, Greens-loving
> campers with packs and poles festooned with Earth-First and Sierra Club
> patches and stickers, in spite of all their talk about "loving the
> environment", I maintain far too many backcountry hikers are
> fundamentally selfish, lazy, undisciplined slobs on the trail who'd like
> little more than to look down on we, "BSA brown-shirt Nazis", who
> actually try to live the Outdoor Code. Bear canisters are excellent for
> anyone who is going where these people go and who wants their food
> protected.
>
> The way I perceived the anti-bear philosophy at Philmont is, through
> their highly supervised environment, to keep the vast majority of bears
> from even making the association that people + tents = food. It seems
> to me that the canister does PROTECT your food from bears, but leaving
> it on the ground with food aroma on the outside of the canister still
> draws animals to the conclusion that tents + people = food. The
> principles of the Bear-muda triangle are not just to keep the animal
> from eating your food. Considering the numbers of Scouts who pass
> through Philmont every year and the statistically low number of genuine
> bear encounters that the animal was deliberately coming after people it
> associated with food, I'd say let Philmont keep doing what they are
> doing.
>
> IMHAWIO, the bear canister is conceding defeat to the animals and indeed
> inviting them in to camp, creates a greater potential danger to people
> and ultimately, changes the behavior of the animals.
>
> Dave Parmly
> Knoxville TN
>

-------------------------------------------------------
Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/
Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp
-------------------------------------------------------
Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com
Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com
List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp
List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com
-------------------------------------------------------
As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
-------------------------------------------------------

 
Received on Sat Jan 1 00:11:30 2005