Rocky Mountain National Park now requires bear canisters in order to get a backcountry camping permit.
Denver Post Article

Sadly, I believe that canisters are the future for almost any bear habitat. There was once a day when no one purified water. I think canister use will become a similar paradigm shift in bear country.

Hopefully increasing demand will spur new technology and result in ever lighter and cheaper canisters. I won't say smaller because the current minimal dimension of about 8" is just big enough to keep the whole thing out of a bear's mouth.

Once you get used to them they're really not so bad. And they make a fair camp chair. Not to mention a washing machine.

I believe you are correct about the future of bear canisters, however I wanted to comment on your purifying water reference. It is interesting that the push for water purification and the belief that backwoods water is contaminated came about at similar times to the bottled water frenzy. People have been conditioned to believe that tap water is bad and thus it is easy to convince them the backwoods water is also bad/worse. I have come across little evidence to support either contention. In fact an email sent to water testers at Paul Smiths College in the Adirondacks regarding water being contaminated yielded an interesting response. To their knowlege no one has ever done a study investigating the water for biological contamination, the only testing is for pH levels and other non-biological measures.

edit: they do count fish and loon populations so those two biological measures are done. I was writing about biological pathogens.

I'd have to agree with the water purification. It really kind of just depends on where you are. In places where lot's of people hike and horses and dogs accompany, probably best to purify. But when you get back far enough and closer to the sources, pruification is less necessary. I mean, I drank a whole Nalgene bottle of creek water in the middle of the Sawtooths here before I had my purifier, and I never had any problems because the source wasn't terribly far away and not too much traffic back there at all. It is always a risk of course anywhere.

As for bear canisters, I don't really see it as a bad thing. There aren't enough responsible backpackers who know how to take care of what they do with their food properly when bears are around. It's probably best for both parties at the end of the day.

Not really. The U.S. Forest Service in California began issuing water quality warnings for the backcountry--specific to giardia--in the early '80s, easily a decade or more before the bottled water craze. It took a long time for the concept and the marketplace to gel. Early filters were very clunky and a lot were from the cottage industry, not the big makers we have today. Other than that there were iodine and boiling. Of course since then, effective marketing has really increased the sense of need on the part of the consumer--warranted or not. Two big reasons remote water quality issues got traction were the re-authorization of the Clean Water Act, which added regulation of small and seasonal water systems, and concerns about people with immuno-supression diseases.

I note this a someone who used to hike with a Sierra cup clipped to my pack so I could drink from streams I crossed in the Cascades.

IIRC bottled water craze (beginning of the increase to todays consumption) also began in the late 70's/early 80's. I agree that the different regulations surrounding water quality were the catalyst for both consumer demands. That was my point that the consumer perception began approx the same time even though there was, not one of cause/effect. I apologize if I implied that.

Note: I still have my sierra cups. I do not use them, as I have switched to lighter alternatives. But I do still dip and sip.

Just to be clear, I never meant to imply that all backcountry water needs to be filtered. On the contrary, I did the entire High Sierra Trail last summer without treating a drop.

Filters are usually a precaution, often used when not really needed. The same can be said for bear canisters. Most people who carry them will probably never see a bear.

It's a precaution though, and as far as I'm concerned, if bears live in the area, they're not a bad thing to have despite the room they take up and the added weight. Yeah, you might not see a bear, but bear cans aren't really for if you see a bear on the trail. If you use the thing right, you probably shouldn't ever see it or the bear that might be trying to get in it. But the likelyhood of seeing a bear doesn't make it any less necessary.

I mean, most people aren't going to get into a car accident but we still should wear our seatbelts.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I HATE bear canisters! I'm sick of these ridiculous regulations. It's typical American overreaction and if people are too stupid to know proper food-storage techniques while in the backcountry, they shouldn't be out there. Now, the rest of us have to lug around those F-ing bulky, heavy things because of all the tourons.

Jason:
Next time, please tell us how you really feel. Try not to hold back so much.
Sorry, buddy. Just had to give you a hard time.
Seriously, I hate the idea of carrying a bear canister, just because people have been sloppy in the past as far as taking precautions to protect their food. I'm having to buy a new pack this summer to thru-hike the JMT, just to carry the stupid canister.
Oz

Look at how people hang food where it isn't required. An 90 year old granny could grab the food. I think a big part of the problem is people not knowing what a bear is capable of doing. Like many peoples work, just half ashed.

It's probably cheaper to require canisters than hiring rangers to oversee food hanging tests to verify people aren't tourons.

It wouldn't be so bad if they'd get their heads out of their posteriors and approve ursacks and stuff.. but again, you have the problem of tourons not knowing how to use them.

How many tourons will get a canister? Not many. It might eliminate the high percentage of tourons now. Unless they can rent them...and then use them improperly, so it's all moot anyway.

This really is the standard bureaucratic approach. You ignore the problem or make some sort of token gesture and hope the whole thing goes away. Of course it doesn't so when it gets bad you overreact with some poorly thought out draconian regulation.

Most tourons don't even learn about the regulations of their desired location. They would still go and continue to provide bears with easily accessible food perpetuating the problem while the rest of us either comply with the regulation, or choose alternative locations. While a few tourons might get 'caught" by forest rangers or other enforcement, the majority will likely not.

Interesting that most bear problems are in national parks, not national forests. It's partly more front-country tourons plus the USNPS habit of relocating problem bears to the backcounty to prey on us backpackers, but I suspect the main reason is that bears are definitely more wary of people in locations where they are hunted.

Not that there aren't bear problems in some locations in national forests, but most of the time you'll never see or hear of a bear outside of a national park. If you do see one, it's usually the hind end of a bear that's heading in the opposite direction at full speed.

That being said, proper food storage is essential no matter where you are.

Just did my first trip with a bear canister. My wife and I are from MA but went out to Sequoia NP for a 5 day/4 night trip.

They're required out there, so we bought one canister ahead of time so we could figure out how to get enough food in it, and succeeded in keeping our stuff small enough to fit enough food for both of us for the entire trip, plus our garbage and toiletries. It was a close fit, but it worked.

I have to say, I didn't mind it nearly as much as I thought I would. We got to our first campsite pretty late in the day and it was a luxury to not have to find a suitable place for a bear bag and deal with setting it up. It's also much easier to access the canister if you need to get something out or put something in that you forgot about. Even better, you don't have to worry about rodents either.

The peace of mind and convenience is worth the 3 lbs in my opinion, and I'll be taking the canister with me from now on. It's pretty amazing what you can fit in those things if you put the effort in, and like I said, to me it's worth the weight.

Not true in Yosemite. No canister, no permit, and they do patrol the trails all hours of the day.

A couple was forced to rent a Garcia even tho they swore they would eat all their food the first day and have nothing but trash hiking out the following morning. The ranger said "bears eat trash" and gave them a canister. Very upset tourons, but it was only five dollars to rent it.

I am not familiar with Yosemite, thanks for the info. If they are going to have the regulation it is good they are able to (and will) enforce it.

Or an enormous pile of still steaming poo, complete with berries!

I already knew what it looks like, goofball! Saw enough of it in the Monongahela last fall. Now, why you actually have a pic of it, that's another question. Let me get a glass of wine first . . .

When it says RMNP, this is only referring to the actual park, not some of the wildernesses that are on the CDT, right?

I can count on one hand the times that I did NOT see a bear on a trip. On several trips I saw up to 10 bears in 4 days! I see bears ALL the time! Once you really start looking for wildlife and go solo (quiet) you will see a lot more than you think.