View Full Version : Testing bear proof
Watching the Science channel "Outrageous Acts of Science" (lets not get into the lack of any real science) where they showed video of an Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee ( http://igbconline.org/ ) facility which uses rescued live grizzly bears to test how well things like coolers, trash cans and bear canisters resist bears attempts to open them.
I had no idea there was such a thing and apparently there are actually two organization who do this, both of which maintain lists of what they've test and rated.
Yep.
The Grizzly folks are in the Rockies. Montana I think.
The Black Bear folks are on the west coast.
The two lists are not recognized by the other group.
Wayne
MuddyWaters
11-08-2018, 07:26
Its limited bear play
And indicates some level of resistance
In no way...bear proof
Items passing.....do fail.
HooKooDooKu
11-08-2018, 10:16
Does the Black Bear group still exist? For some reason I thought IGBC was the only game in town now.
I couldnt find any direct evidence but SIBBG is(still) referenced by the NPS and most descriptions of it say its an informal group. Likely it only exists when there is a need for its services.
Does the Black Bear group still exist? For some reason I thought IGBC was the only game in town now.
Or maybe it’s the Yosemite-California Group Think?
Interesting government thinking:
When Big Bend NP decided to implement bear resistant food containers in the Backcountry, they accepted containers from either organization. The rest of the National Park System should take note.
I’m not holding my breath.
Wayne
HooKooDooKu
11-08-2018, 12:43
I couldnt find any direct evidence but SIBBG is(still) referenced by the NPS and most descriptions of it say its an informal group. Likely it only exists when there is a need for its services.
I couldn't recall the name SIBBG (Sierra Interagency Black Bear Group), but it is listed in the wikipedia article on Bear Resistant Food Storage Container (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear-resistant_food_storage_container).
It would seem that IGBC is an official organization (with a .org website), related to the USDA Forest Service. They maintain an official list of certified products that have passed their testing requirements for resistance to grizzly bears.
Based on Ursack's lawsuit from 2011 (http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/05/09/09-17152.pdf), SIBBG is "an informal body", and based on comments at b (https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/bearikade-in-denali/)ackpackinglight (https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/43284/), that group was disbanded as a result of the lawsuit.
I have to agree with your info and wonder why with NPS having updated their website food storage page only 6 months ago choose to keep the reference to SIBBG. I think while reading what I could find, only one area was mentioned as accepting SIBBG approved devices, all the rest ONLY accepted IGBC certification, I do not know if that info was current.
MuddyWaters
11-08-2018, 14:48
I have to agree with your info and wonder why with NPS having updated their website food storage page only 6 months ago choose to keep the reference to SIBBG. I think while reading what I could find, only one area was mentioned as accepting SIBBG approved devices, all the rest ONLY accepted IGBC certification, I do not know if that info was current.
Places which accepted sibbg testing grandfathered those test. This is.....the sierra...duh.
The test was 100 lb dropped on cannister from ht of one ft i think.
No test is perfect. Cannister pasding igbc has been eaten open by black bear. No test takes cumulative damaged into account either.
In sierra interagencies own acknowledgement......a cannister people will use, that fails occassionally, is better than a heavier one they will not. This was recognized. It is possible to build secure heavy cannisters, no one would use them.
HooKooDooKu
11-08-2018, 15:26
...The test was 100 lb dropped on cannister from ht of one ft i think....
Much more to the testing that SIBBG did than that. Read thru the opinion rendered in the Ursack Lawsuit (http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/05/09/09-17152.pdf) and you'll see the testing started with a visual inspection and testing in a zoo. If they were satisfied with the testing done by the zoo bears, they allowed one year of field trials and would then reevaluate.
MuddyWaters
11-08-2018, 15:39
Much more to the testing that SIBBG did than that. Read thru the opinion rendered in the Ursack Lawsuit (http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/05/09/09-17152.pdf) and you'll see the testing started with a visual inspection and testing in a zoo. If they were satisfied with the testing done by the zoo bears, they allowed one year of field trials and would then reevaluate.
Probably pre-dated that even.