High Sierra Topix

Are you sure you were not sneaking some of Rogue's food?

That metabolism may be great for backpacking, but watch out when you get old! You may pack on the pounds then when you exercise less.

I have been known to scavenge off of Rogue's food quite a bit but all in all it isn't very much in terms of calories.

I am definitely aware of gaining weight.. I hope to be able to keep exercising through my old age in the best possible form I know how... backpacking!

And to answer the question of an alpine belly... not quite sure what that means but I'm fairly skinny with a small belly.

Alpine belly is an old term. It just means carrying a reserve of fat that can be utilized like a camel's hump. It doesn't mean someone is obese, just that they have some extra, and on men that often presents itself in the belly region. On women I suppose it would "alpine hips" or "alpine ass".

It's not always obvious though. Many skinny people carry a kind of invisible fat in their abdomens, "visceral" fat. It's been in the news recently because of the risks associated with it (cardiovascular, metabolic, cancer).

Without actually measuring your body fat it would be hard to know. But either way it sounds like you have a lower than average base metabolism. That's a big advantage on long mountain trips, but potentially an issue in city life where food is overly abundant and tends to be highly caloric.

I've always had the opposite problem. I'm adapted to a world where there's a food source every 50 feet.

I started using the old Garcia canister back around 1999, and I was packing for a trip that was to be nine days. Getting nine days worth of food into it was quite a trick. Of course, I didn't have to squeeze the first day's food inside the canister since I would be eating it during that first day before nightfall. Then for the last day, I would be out before sundown, so I really only had to squeeze about 7-8 days worth of food into it. I moved on to other brands of canister. One helpful planning tool is to build a cardboard box. Let's say that your canister holds 500 cubic inches, and you need to get five days worth of food into it. That is 100 cubic inches per day. So, build a cardboard box that holds 100 cubic inches, and experiment with food and food packing until you can cram one day's worth into that box. Last summer I was heading out on a trip that might take me as long as nine days, and that was going into a Bearikade Scout. By laying the food out on a table, I could get a good eyeball estimate of where the bulky food was so that I could minimize it in favor of the dense food. OBTW, I have not carried Mountain House meals in about 25 years now. It is way too bulky, mostly because of the empty packaging that has to be carried out. I've gotten to the point now where my breakfast is mostly powdered. My mid-day beverage powders are plentiful. My evening meal is at least half powdered.

It appears that I need around 90 cubic inches per day capacity. If I pack it hard, I can get around 7 days into a Weekender and 10 into an Expedition. Yes, I do all the same tricks, eating the first days food, pulverizing most anything into a powder. My only food space luxury is a 1/2 pita pocket per day, but if I have to I smash those too. The last two years I have taken around 1.75 lbs a day, so that Expedition pill weighs almost 17-19 lbs at the start of an 11 day trip. I try to keep a pack base weight below 10 1/2 lbs, but that goes up with some snow or shoulder-season adjustments. On an 11 day trip I will depart with one liter of water and clock in around 32 lbs.

bobby49 wrote:... One helpful planning tool is to build a cardboard box ...
...mostly because of the empty packaging ...

An alternative to the box is to use a conversion chart and common kitchen measuring cups. For example, 100 cu in is just under 1.75 quarts.

On the MH packaging, one-zip loc bag per meal doesn't bother me.

Byonorom wrote: ↑Thu Nov 22, 2018 1:05 am
The few negative reviews the pack seems to get has to do with fit (after all, this is a one-size-fits-most). I found it to be comfortable, and had it loaded with as much as 55lbs during my JMT hike.

A pack has to fit - It has to fit you, and not cause you problems loaded with your gear. Your idea of pack selection based on whether it holds a bear canister only takes you so far - when part of your gear is a bear canister that's taken care of under the general recommendation to select a pack that fits and holds all your gear.

I cannot wear Osprey packs not because they don't fit, but because the pack regardless of size causes me back pain. So no, negative reviews don't always have to do with fit. Sometimes it's just the wrong backpack, period.

"It will hold more than you want to carry."

Exactly, which is why the Catalyst is an odd choice for regular backing when food volume is limited by a bear canister.

Is the Catalyst approved for use in the Sierra? Each jurisdiction has different criteria and each bear can brand has to be tested in specific test sites. For example, my Bearikade is approved in the Sierra but NOT approved for the Rocky Mountains where there are grizzlies. Solar charged electric fencing/bags are very weight-effective for larger groups on long trips and used in the Rockies. Unfortunately the powers that be will not likely approve these for the Sierra.

I cannot afford to have several sizes of bear cans, so I have the same issue with the bear can being more than I need on shorter trips. But I find that by the time I put my stove, fuel, cup, pots, cozies, fishing gear, and smellys inside, it is pretty full anyway. As long as the bear can fits well inside my backpack, whether it is totally full or not is not a big concern, except for the weight. But then, on shorter trips the food weight is less anyway so the extra pound of the bigger bear can does not bother me as much.

The Catalyst is a backpack, not a bear canister.