chucK

Don't know what happened with the six-year old, but if the dog was leashed (which I doubt, but it was leashed after the incident), it was leashed right in a trail intersection. As for the other dog that came after me, it and the others were off their leash, on the trail, no way to avoid them. I guess according to JJD I should have beat up the women who were with the dogs.

Makes no sense at all. Either it's a completely made-up newsstory, or the story the man told is bogus, covering something up. Gives new meaning to that age-old excuse, "the dog ate it".

The dog that bit the child yesterday did not look the dangerous type. And no dogs seem dangerous to their owners. They'll tell you with a straight face that their dog is very friendly and never bites even when it's got a piece of your arm in its mouth. For the record, one party I passed on Saturday had a dog off the leash and the minute they saw me ran up and held their dog. I guess that's good, but it makes you wonder why exactly they felt compelled to do that?

Since the exciting threads today are about whiners at Smith, I thought I'd do a little whining of a well-known vintage. Saturday, I'm walking down the trail, this medium dog comes around the corner. I stop, try to be friendly, and it starts barking and dashes back around the corner. Then comes this more scary-looking pit-bullish type of dog and it's looking pretty growly. Owner rushes up and works at getting first growly dog, and of course says about the pit-bully type dog that, "He's very friendly. He never bites". This dog is snarling at me, and I put the back of the hand out to it to let it get a sniff and it tries to take a chunk from me. Dog is corralled and leashed and I move way out into the bush to get by as the mutt snaps at me. Then yesterday, we were up at Three O'Clock Rock with a couple of families, and some dog bit one of the six-year olds in the face! The party with the dog were hanging out right at a trail intersection. PoS dogs! Sorry to say it, but the only solution is the final solution.

But how do you feel about people talking on cell phones up on Mt. Hood? Sometimes you just can't have your rules whereever you are. It's tough cohabitating with other humans. Nice poll by the way, in terms of the way you made three fairly reasonable options.

As a general rule, I think, if you are going to bolt to make the climb safe, the defintion of "safety" ought to be for someone climbing at their limit on the crux of your route. Thus, a 5.4 route (if you really needed to bolt it) should probably protect a 5.4 leader. Conversely, a 5.10 route shouldn't need bolts right next to every 5.7 move. Oh...and I'll go way out on a limb here and agree with Bug saying no bolts right next to protectable cracks. Uhh...um...except to rapell from like on top of Prusik Peak. I think that's OK if those bolts are next to cracks.

Are you saying we should encourage (or at least not discourage) death threats? What about mere threats of vandalism of a project that one has put a lot of work into? Remember that we are communicating in a virtual world, a discussion board. Threats and intimidation sadly may get things done in the real world, but on a discussion board they tend to limit the only use of a discussion, the exhange of ideas. I understand that some may enjoy watching the spectacle of death threats and the like, and discouraging that will certainly step on some toes. But, whatever I'm puzzled by this digression into whining about board policies. It seemed like your discussion about bolting was going pretty well.

They had all the passions and feelings of a lynching party. Captivating perhaps, but encouraging discussion? You say you want a discussion, but all you're really doing with this post is voting, by standing up on a big soapbox and flashing your ass. "YOU SUCK" "NO, YOU SUCK" "I"M CHOPPING YOUR FUCKING ROUTE" .....silence...

To answer a question (?) with a question. Why does the choice of tool affect your decision? I totally agree with the "carefully placed" part, but don't quite get why power drill makes it evil. Often the ease of the power drill can remove "carefully placed" from the equation, and I can totally understand that reasoning. There's also the fact that power drilling is illegal someplaces, and GOD KNOWS I would not condone anything against the law! But suppose we're talking about carefully placed bolts only? Are they bad or good depending upon the tool used? In the eyes of the law, the answer is often yes! We could leave it at that I guess. But debating the ethical goodness beyond what our statutes tell us is often an interesting diversion.

I hope it's fake!

Image -> adjust -> color balance ? something like that. give it a try

Remember that one the next time you call for banning of handguns or snowmobiles.

It will obviate carrying an extra rope for descent!

You really should check out Shock Treatment or Fuddhat/Kill Da Wabbit if you like 5.10 slab. Both excellent routes, easily superior to Online in all aspects except ease of access.

Here's a link to something a little less biased than Scott Silver. Sounds like a small victory. They'll still be able to ticket you for anyplace they got bathrooms though. "H.R. 3283, The Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, creates a two-tier system for recreation fees on sites with amenities, but establishes that no fees are to be charged for basic use (including, but not limited to, parking, picnicking, general access, camping, hunting or fishing) on undeveloped areas that have little or no investment in amenities and maintenance." [...] According to the legislation, a “standard amenity recreation fee” may be charged on sites only if an area is managed, has substantial federal investments and includes all of the following: a permanent trash receptacle; designated developed parking; a permanent toilet facility; an interpretive sign, kiosk or exhibit; a designated eating area; and security services. An “expanded amenity recreation fee” may be charged if the user is taking advantage of specialty facilities or equipment such as boat launches; electricity; developed campgrounds; or the rental of cabins, boats, day-use or overnight structures, or historical buildings.

As I remember he didn't just convert. He also used his fame to publicly call for the death of Salman Rushdie.

Hear hear!!! This thread is about how many times you've climbed the Tooth this year, and associated stories. Let's keep this discussion on track.

Here's an interesting angle: The story on Bush's Nat Guard non-service bumped another much more well investigated story about the Niger yellow-cake uranium documents! Crazy. That Rove is good. Real good.

Four (4) Notes: After some searching, spied that route with the fixed draws that Dr. Merv was bitching about. That route looks pretty impressive! Has it ever been climbed? What about free climbed? Afternoon was recurrently punctuated by the thunder of dynamite being used to smooth out the Snow Lakes trail. Reminded me of the Winter up there. Pleasantly uncrowded, bluebird day, blah blah blah. You shoulda been there

Could be immobilized (dead or dying) rather than lost.

Perhaps related to this ?

And to talk about really convoluted... what if you just make a ring with your fingers and loop them around the draw, without weighting (or touching?!) them, while you clip with the other hand? Here, you're safeguarding yourself should you slip, but you are not using the draw as a hold for aid in physical upward progress? How about that question, oh ethics masters?

What about the chains on top of the Sword pitch? I ask for two reasons. 1) It seems like it would be very hard to clip without using them!! 2) The next "pitch" is a bolt ladder anyway, so you could just say you're starting the next pitch, not finishing the sword

I haven't been as active as I should be in WCC, so I could be wrong here, but maybe the reason WCC hasn't taken an official position on some of these issues on their website and elsewhere is because they've only had one (1) meeting so far. Perhaps the founders of this group like Mattp don't want to presume what the rest of the people getting involved wish to support, so they are waiting to get a consensus before forming an official position? Maybe if you got involved they might even want to listen what you have to say?

But Ryland, have you not considered that your act of ratting out the lawbreaker could itself detrimentally affect your access? The Feds might not have a quick clean way that will stop the bolting without inhibiting your access. You may lose your access due to collateral damage. You could say, "it was that lawbreakers fault", and ultimately, down the chain of culpability, I would agree with you, but the net result would still be the same.