A decade or so ago, there was an outbreak of rabies in wild animals and some domestic critters- I helped take care of a kid savaged by an allegedly rabid beaver (those bucky-beaver teeth are even more effective on flesh than on trees) and a farmer exposed to a proven-rabid cow (not a cow-bite victim-something bit the cow, and the cow slobbered virus-laden saliva on the farmer, who had some broken skin on this beslobbered hands). That got me thinking about the possibility of rabid bears. The weapons that provide reliable one-shot kills on charging bears tend to have wheels attached, amking them poor choices for carry weapons. A wise old woodsman told me not to worry: rabies is generally transmitted by bites, and not many things get to bite a bear.

Guess we're not gonna find out anytime soon...

Actually, I was thinking about having some Howitzer support on standby- Not a problem! :-D

Sir, are you referring to my packing list/pictures? I'm still gathering everything, but I'll post it when it's finished- will most definitely get some critique on my final pack-list---

So, what gives with the "do your potty business well away from camp?" I've never heard of that before.

I've heard of the "triangle" method where you camp in one place, store your food in another, and cook in a third spot, all about 100 yards apart, but I've never heard that bears are attracted to human waste.

And what about pepper spray for black bears. If one did catch a bear going after one's food, would pepper spray be a good idea or are you "asking for it" (risking that the bear would turn on you)?

I don't know if this has been stated already, but even if so, it is important enough to remember that I will state it anyways:
Bears can climb trees, and they have learned how to deal with ropes. Believe it. They are very smart and just as agile. The only sure way is with a canister, and keep it a safe distance from where you sleep, outside of your pack. Don't hang anything, as bears can get it and at the same time damage the tree. They might even go the route of severing the rope by chewing. Again, bears are smart.
Don't use canisters inside bags, as they can be carried away, and even though the food inside is not gotten, you may find it difficult to track your food to its new, bear-chosen location. Even the smartest bear will feel less than motivated to roll a canister to any considerable distance. If you think canisters are too heavy, then reorganize your pack list by eliminating something(s) of equal weight, so that you do include one. Besides, at a couple of pounds, they are not too heavy. Toughen up, ultralighter.
Ultimately, we are all responsible for maintaining that our wild friends remain wild. Canisters do not reward hungry bears in any way, and that's how they learn to avoid human camps as food sources. Non-food items that they smell might still attract them, so you might want to canister those things too, but bears are ultimately only there for calories. If their hunger is rewarded by raiding a camp, they will do it again. A bold bear is a dead bear. Let them remain wild, free, and alive.
Your food source should be thought of as secondary to the health of a wild ecosystem. We are all guests of the wild, while in the wild. Please keep it, and rememeber that.

I have to disagree with you there. Humans are just as naturally occuring as anything else. We need to be responsibile for our actions, we need to do a good job of stewarding the wild, but we aren't some invader species that has somehow "infected" the earth. If we were an infection, the the cure would be of course to eliminate the infection. I trust you'll be the first to volunteer?

Responsibility and diligence in the wild? Yes. A guest? Certainly not. John Muir said it well, "people are beginning to find out that going to the mountains is going home; that wildness is a necessity; and that mountain parks and reservations are useful not only as fountains of timber and irrigating rivers, but as fountains of life."

Nicely said Jim.

Humans might be as naturally occuring as anything else, but they are no longer wild, which I believe is a shame. As far as eliminating myself for the sake of the wild, I have in fact sacrificed my old and wrongful attitudes and beliefs for more appropriate and respectful attitudes and ways, so that I am more in harmony with the wild, more at home there. But I must also admit, that I think most humans have probably not done any such self-sacrificing. If people continually go to the wild in the modern and disrespectful ways that they seem so proud of these days, it will not be long until there are no more wilds. All the bears will be raiding camps, and the racoons will be eating from our hands. Campers will continue thinking that biodegradable means they can wash their hair in the streams, and the wilds will become a campground, not wild anymore. Natural perhaps, but not wild. I have no ultimate need of nature, per se, I desire wilderness. Further, if I truly felt from your hastily thought-out and presumptuous response, that you honestly sought a truly philosophical discussion with me, I would be happy to correspond with you further on some deeper level, but as it seems, you do not, and so I do not. Thus I have no choice but to ignore you or argue semantics.
The only point I was making is that we as modern humans must change our attitudes and thus our ways concerning wilderness. It is a mistake to think you can be a part of wilderness if you seek to tame it.
Unlike the cancer that humans seem to be, humans have the ability to change their ways. They don't need to be eliminated by way of a false logic. They only need to be motivated to change for the betterment of the whole. Don't defend our ugliness and weakness. As a rural-suburban man who genuinely feels a love for wilderness, I believe I have enough sense that I can honestly say that when in the wild, I am a guest and that's all there is to it. I live at the edge of town, right next to the wilderness, but in town nonetheless, not in the wild forest as the animals do. Until such time as I live exclusively in the wilderness like the animals do, I will continue to be a guest when I am there. John Muir was very poetic and his words are a great catalyst for change. He and others like him seek that humans understand their great potential. We very easily deceive ourselves, and to think you are at home in the wilderness when you know that you are not, is folly, and is how people find out that they are in fact in a survival situation, and not at all at home.
If you really believe that you can subsist permanently in the wilderness, and that you require nothing that wilderness does not provide, that you truly are at home there, that its terms are your terms, that you are simply another animal in the ecosystem, then why don't you live there permanently? Why don't you raise your children there, and teach them the ways of the wildeness, instead of the ways of urbanization and globalization? The answer is probably because you long for HOME, or the weather turns, you HAVE to go back to work, etc. Unfortunately, as natural as it might or might not be for us humans to be as far removed from wilderness as we are; and this is debated by philosophers everyday; we humans are destructive, eliminative, and intrusive to wilderness. To say that wilderness is our home and yet that it is natural for us to, for lack of a better word, destroy, wilderness, is in the very least, a contradiction. There should be no doubt in your mind that this is true.
I don't want to argue semantics anymore.

I'm sure Jim meant very well, but he was obviously just not understanding well enough the philosophy that compelled me to say exactly what I had said. Language can be a tricky thing, and "a wily mistress." Like I said,...semantics.