AT Hikers...welcome to Western style regs! :D

[Mags]

http://www.accessnorthga.com/detail.php?n=245591

Only effects a small portion of the AT, but something to keep in mind!&nbsp; Not sure how the logistics work. But there you have it...<br><br>Having carry&nbsp; a bear canister is very common out West I'm afraid (more so in National Parks than USFS land).&nbsp; I believe they are required in the Daks, but I'll let someone else more knowledgeable about those mountains chime in.<br><br>Wonder if such places at The Whites will have these types of regs in the future?

[TOMP]

Well I guess I will be the first to break that rule. But seriously since its only for a 5 mile section I will just make sure not to camp there. Good to know thanks for the info, I will mark it on my guide.

[TOMP]

Well I guess I will be the first to break that rule. But seriously since its only for a 5 mile section I will just make sure not to camp there. Good to know thanks for the info, I will mark it on my guide.

[TOMP]

Also in New Jersey campsites in bearcountry they supply big metal bear containers for public use that stay at the camp site, seems like this would be a better option than requiring each individual to carry a heavy container.

Considering the time frame of this regulation it seems to be aimed at the thru-hiking crowd, I just dont see anyone actually buying this container.

[TOMP]

Also in New Jersey campsites in bearcountry they supply big metal bear containers for public use that stay at the camp site, seems like this would be a better option than requiring each individual to carry a heavy container.

Considering the time frame of this regulation it seems to be aimed at the thru-hiking crowd, I just dont see anyone actually buying this container.

[MuddyWaters]

If it protects Yogi, I suppose its OK. Although I think many would work around it before carried a 3 lb bear can. Eat last of food for big dinner before entering area, then continue to Woods Hole w/no food. Get up next morn and go to Neels without eating, eat there. etc

[MuddyWaters]

If it protects Yogi, I suppose its OK. Although I think many would work around it before carried a 3 lb bear can. Eat last of food for big dinner before entering area, then continue to Woods Hole w/no food. Get up next morn and go to Neels without eating, eat there. etc

[dink]

I worked as a river raft runner in DWG one summer and all the campground had big bearproof lock boxes for the campers...if georgia wants us to use bearproof food boxes they should do like new jersey and provide them at all campsites...just my 2 cents!

[dink]

I worked as a river raft runner in DWG one summer and all the campground had big bearproof lock boxes for the campers...if georgia wants us to use bearproof food boxes they should do like new jersey and provide them at all campsites...just my 2 cents!

[HT1]

can anyone find the actual "regulation" rather then just the article

[HT1]

can anyone find the actual "regulation" rather then just the article

[Nooga]

Another reason for the Forest Service in GA to hassle hikers. Just string up cable like in the Smokies

[Nooga]

Another reason for the Forest Service in GA to hassle hikers. Just string up cable like in the Smokies

[RichardD]

It does not suprise me. There were many many stories during my thru last year of people losing food to bears in Georgia, even off Bear cables at shelters. My observation, at the shelters where people lost food bags off bear cables the food bag attachments were simply hooks. if they were replaced with carabiners the food bags would not fall off when the bear shook the cable. A simple inexpensive fix that might have made this rule unneccesary.
At shelters where there were no cables the quality of the food hangs that I observed were, for the most part, laughable.
It seems rather silly to have this rule for only a 5 mile section, who is going to buy or rent a bear proof container for 5 miles. Install a proper bear cable or metal box at the shelter and be done with it.

[RichardD]

It does not suprise me. There were many many stories during my thru last year of people losing food to bears in Georgia, even off Bear cables at shelters. My observation, at the shelters where people lost food bags off bear cables the food bag attachments were simply hooks. if they were replaced with carabiners the food bags would not fall off when the bear shook the cable. A simple inexpensive fix that might have made this rule unneccesary.
At shelters where there were no cables the quality of the food hangs that I observed were, for the most part, laughable.
It seems rather silly to have this rule for only a 5 mile section, who is going to buy or rent a bear proof container for 5 miles. Install a proper bear cable or metal box at the shelter and be done with it.

[RetroGear]

It seems rather silly to have this rule for only a 5 mile section, who is going to buy or rent a bear proof container for 5 miles. Install a proper bear cable or metal box at the shelter and be done with it.

RichardD is correct. Although I'm 100% in favor of doing whatever is necessary to prevent bears from becoming problem bears, I don't think the Forest Service has thought this through. Is the USFS going to loan/rent anti-bear cans like the NPS does out west? I doubt it. Are they going to install proper bear cables or boxes? I doubt that too. How many hikers are going to purchase a heavy, expensive BearVault (or similar) for a 5-mile section of trail? Very few. Of the relatively small number of eastern-US hikers who have BearVaults, how many will bring them for such a short section of trail? Very few. So the alternatives for the vast majority of hikers are (a) don't RON in the prohibited area or (b) ignore the reg. My personal guess is that many (most?) people will choose option (b), which will do nothing for the bears and will only further hassle hikers.

If you are going to legislate a solution to a problem (yeah, I know, it's a reg, not legislation ... machts nicht), you should try to tailor the legislation to solve the problem. The only thing the USFS's "solution" will do is create a bunch of scofflaws ... it isn't going to do squat to solve the problem.

(Maybe what really happened is, some supergrade USFS supervisor realized that the only real solution to the problem bear problem is to install bear boxes or proper cables, but couldn't find any money in the budget ... so, being the bright star that he is [he's supergrade, remember?], he decided that what we'll do is, we'll create an unworkable reg that most of those dumbass hikers will violate. Then we'll increase ranger patrols in that area, so they'll catch the violators and cite them. We'll use all the money we get from the fines to have bear boxes built.)

[RetroGear]

It seems rather silly to have this rule for only a 5 mile section, who is going to buy or rent a bear proof container for 5 miles. Install a proper bear cable or metal box at the shelter and be done with it.

RichardD is correct. Although I'm 100% in favor of doing whatever is necessary to prevent bears from becoming problem bears, I don't think the Forest Service has thought this through. Is the USFS going to loan/rent anti-bear cans like the NPS does out west? I doubt it. Are they going to install proper bear cables or boxes? I doubt that too. How many hikers are going to purchase a heavy, expensive BearVault (or similar) for a 5-mile section of trail? Very few. Of the relatively small number of eastern-US hikers who have BearVaults, how many will bring them for such a short section of trail? Very few. So the alternatives for the vast majority of hikers are (a) don't RON in the prohibited area or (b) ignore the reg. My personal guess is that many (most?) people will choose option (b), which will do nothing for the bears and will only further hassle hikers.

If you are going to legislate a solution to a problem (yeah, I know, it's a reg, not legislation ... machts nicht), you should try to tailor the legislation to solve the problem. The only thing the USFS's "solution" will do is create a bunch of scofflaws ... it isn't going to do squat to solve the problem.

(Maybe what really happened is, some supergrade USFS supervisor realized that the only real solution to the problem bear problem is to install bear boxes or proper cables, but couldn't find any money in the budget ... so, being the bright star that he is [he's supergrade, remember?], he decided that what we'll do is, we'll create an unworkable reg that most of those dumbass hikers will violate. Then we'll increase ranger patrols in that area, so they'll catch the violators and cite them. We'll use all the money we get from the fines to have bear boxes built.)

[burger]

I'm 100% in favor of this. I've hiked 2/3 of the AT, and the Georgia section had more food-related trash (wrappers, leftover food, etc.) left at firepits and shelters than any other part of the trail (with the possible exception of Harriman SP in NY). I'm not surprised that they have problem bears down there. And if requiring canisters prevents bears from getting in trouble and killed, I'm all for it.

The big picture is that it's 5 miles. Neel's Gap has a hostel. Beyond that, if you don't want to carry a canister, just hike past the 5-mile section. If you can't make it the 5 miles, you probably shouldn't be hiking.

[burger]

I'm 100% in favor of this. I've hiked 2/3 of the AT, and the Georgia section had more food-related trash (wrappers, leftover food, etc.) left at firepits and shelters than any other part of the trail (with the possible exception of Harriman SP in NY). I'm not surprised that they have problem bears down there. And if requiring canisters prevents bears from getting in trouble and killed, I'm all for it.

The big picture is that it's 5 miles. Neel's Gap has a hostel. Beyond that, if you don't want to carry a canister, just hike past the 5-mile section. If you can't make it the 5 miles, you probably shouldn't be hiking.

[Yahula]

can anyone find the actual "regulation" rather then just the article

Here's the actual reg on the USFS site: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/conf/n...TELPRDB5351877