July 16, 2000


What do you think of the new bear-proof food sack?

I came across an ad for a new "bullet proof" bear bag for food storage. The product is called the Ursack and after checking out the test video on their website (http://www.ursack.com/), I think it might show some promise. It's half the price of a bear canister, and at four ounces, only a fraction of the weight. Apparently the Yosemite Park Rangers have approved it for use in the Park (according to the website). Is this product too good to be true? Oh please, your Gear Guruness, shed some light on the matter before I shell out my hard earned cash (or more importantly trust the sack with my backcountry breakfast).

— Tony Castellano, San Francisco, California

No, I don't think the Ursack is too good to be true. It's simply a matter of good technology being put to good use. As most readers are aware, bears are a big problem in the woods. Not so much due to the threat of attack, but because they have come to associate people with food. So each year scores or campers awaken to the sound of a bear trashing their packs, or come back from a day hike to find that camp looks like a very large animal has chewed on everything in sight. Which is exactly what has happened.

In the past, campers have had two choices. One is to try to tie their food up in a tree. But that can be a nuisance -- good trees may not be handy, and many bears have figured out how to reach even the most seemingly inaccessible food bags. The other option has been to pack a bear canister, which is a sort of a miniature garbage can with a lid that fastens very securely. They're effective, but heavy and bulky.

Enter the Ursack folks (the name is a conflation of "Ursus" -- Latin for bear -- and, well, "sack"). They have developed a bag made of super-tough aramid fibers -- the same stuff used in military body armor -- that you fill with food, then tie to a tree or other object with an included Kevlar cord. Like a bear canister, the Ursack is meant to be impenetrable, and indeed it seems to be. The cord is pretty much bite-proof and could in fact support the full weight of an average bear, so it keeps the sack from being stolen by the marauding creature. But the best part of the Ursack is that it's much lighter than canisters -- as Tony notes, only four ounces for the standard Ursack, six ounces for the larger Ursack Major. And, unlike canisters, the Ursack gets smaller as you eat your food. Cost is reasonable, too -- $43.95 for the standard, $59.95 for the Major. The standard back can hold enough food for five or six days, depending on how you pack.

It's not a perfect solution, however. I'd still suggest trying to tie the Ursack where a bear will have a difficult time reaching it, because while most bears probably can't get into an Ursack, they can sure work it -- and its contents -- over pretty thoroughly. So your eggs are going to be scrambled and your graham crackers pulverized into a fine dust. Ursack suggests using tough plastic bags inside its bag for storing soft or liquid items.

In short, they look like a good solution. I intend to get one in to use this summer.