275 miles of the PCT in Washington impacted by new bear-resistant food storage regulations from Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.

You're right, thanks for pointing that out. The Major and the AllMitey are both on the IGBC list. I'll edit that into the post.

I feel like this just makes “don’t do stupid shit with your food” a punishable offense. They don’t want to tighten them so badly that it requires too much preparation or cash, but want a straightforward way to punish people that leave candy all over their campsite and endanger the wildlife

Yeah, I have mixed feelings about bear hangs. A good bear hang is effective, but tbh most people don't do good bear hangs, especially in Washington where it's often challenging to find a good branch to hang from.

Context, for those unfamiliar with the arguments against bear hangs:

• https://andrewskurka.com/argument-against-hanging-bear-bag/

Say what?

I believe the order is related to approved bear sack to be hung 10 ft above ground. You still are required to have an approved bear canister or sack

Bearikade is not on the list, sadly - unless I'm failing at reading comprehension. Different organizational approval from the Sierra, where Bearikade is approved.

For reference: https://wild-ideas.net/shop/

I use the Blazer, which fits in quite a few packs (unlike the Expedition, which is HUGE). Makes a great seat, and it easily holds 7-9 days worth of food depending on what I bring. Wild Ideas stated weight is accurate too. Blazer is quoted at 33 ounces, and mine is 32.9.

Me too. This is my stomping grounds. I have a bear can but I'm still going to instead rely on stringing my food up as I have in the past.

You're welcome. Thanks for speaking up and sharing the news.

If hanging is permitted, what's the big news?

Thanks, just fixed that.

Re the can vs hang issue, that's at the discretion of each individual Forest. They can decide to revise the requirements in the future, but it's not a given that they will.

I don't recall the trees along the PCT in most of Washington as being very bear-hang friendly, and the definition of '10 feet up and 4 feet out' in the Order sounds like it could be very hard to achieve every night for 280 miles in that area. I'd just take my BV.

It's rare that an area will switch from "Use an IGBC approved container" to a subset of that list, but it DOES happen. When it happens (if it does) is anyones guess. They'll change it based on evaluation of yearly data, including human/bear encounters, reports of damaged/destroyed containers, etc.

Some wilderness areas have banned Ursacks because they haven't held up well, but I think it depends on the bear population. Grizzlies are far stronger and far more aggressive, so Ursacks don't do well with them. Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie is black bears, so I think it's safe to assume it'll remain as "all IGBC approved containers" for quite a while.

How long it takes? What do you mean?

Each forest area has its own management staff, who make the rules. When the rules change, they are now changed.

There's no predictable timeline anywhere in this process.

It will probably depend on the bears. Bear in desolation knew how to defeat the ursacks. Washington bear likely do not. If people follow good storage, they probably won’t. Washington bear have never been as problematic as California bear. It’s learned behavior.

When people keep a clean camp and the bears have no interest, there’s no reason for these rules. (And, it isn’t part of LNT. LNT is leave no trace.)

I’m all for protecting the bears and I’m assuming the land managers have a good enough reason for their decision. They don’t do stuff like this lightly.

As a thru hiker, this doesn’t make me mad, it makes me sad. It’s an indication that problem bears must be on the rise. The only reason for that, is letting bears get human food. Wild bears don’t check out human tents unless they’ve learned they can get food from humans. Usually in car/camp situations where people leave food out and often straight up feed bears because they think it’s entertaining. Those bears become emboldened. Next time maybe they grab food without it offered. Those bears teach their cubs and so on.

It isn’t thru hikers sleeping with their food that causes any part of this problem. They are just the last on a long line of dominoes that get impacted.

forest Nazis

That's some pretty strong language. I hope you wouldn't say that to a ranger if s/he was sitting next to you at the bar.

Granted, some of them may be power tripping jerks who misuse their authority (I've met a few). But every line of work has those people.

Perhaps I'm naive, but I like to think that many, if not most rangers go into their careers motivated primarily by a love of nature and a desire to protect our remaining natural places. They're certainly not doing it for the money.