mattp

Yes, but what if you wear rock shoes, but carry ice axe, crampons, etc. in your pack as you might for some of the Bugaboos routes that are better done as a carry-over instead of an up and down? A buddy of mine, a proficient rock climber and experienced big wall climber, called this "mountaineering." So "what kind of shoes are you wearing" is modified by "who is wearing them?"

There may not be another American contender, but Italy has Silvio Berlusconi.

I'm not sure which route is "route 2," but the standard Southeast Face ramp route, from the snow basin directly below the summit, is good all year. I've climbed it in nearly every month on the calendar. I seem to remember the guidebooks were not always clear about the route, but I have not seen the most recent edition. Here's an old discussion: cc.com 2001

I'd be pushing things to climb Great Northern Slab right now, but given the right amount of peer pressure I might be tricked into it. Just don't tell my wife.

If you're going maybe I can go too, Oly. Gimps unite. Die blackberries die. Here's a picture from last year's cleanup:

I’d second the recommendation of Castle Rock “moderates.” They are just about all good, but Midway and Canary are my favorites. (Midway was the first “modern” crag climb in Washington and in my opinion a Leavenworth “MUST DO” even more than the renowned Outer Space. However, with the exception of David Whitelaw’s “Weekend Rock,” the guidebooks do not show it right. Check out my topo at my recommended climbs. If you add the challenges of the South Face of Jello Tower for the first pitch, and “Midway Direct” for the finish, expect to find it pretty stout AND exciting for a 5.8 climb – this definitely aint Kansas-I-mean-Exit-38- both in terms of rating and ambiance.) Be careful if some old guy with grey hair tells you that Damnation is only 5.8. For Icicle Creek, I like the “Regular Route” at Careno too, and there are a cluster of climbs in the 5.10 range nearby that are pretty good. However, I’d also look at the Pearly Gates, Peekaboo Tower (nearby "straight street" is good), and I’d have to say that Condomorpamine Addiction, along with some of the climbs on the way up there is not altogether a bad choice (some on this site will cry foul here, because CA is very heavily bolted but I think it is still a good climb). I have not climbed all the routes there, but I would favor these over the more traditional crags, Icicle Buttress and Givler's Dome (Givler's Crack is a fantastic easy crack climb, though). If you head up to Snow Creek Wall, I’d seriously consider Orbit instead of Outer Space. It is at least as good (many think better) and slightly less crowded.

I'm afraid I won't be riding anywhere this year. I'm still nursing a messed up back. I'll be glad to throw in some comments from the peanut gallery, though.

It will be riding over that pass with the bicycle trailer of yours that slows everybody down.

If using any kind of simple loop for a stirrup - like maybe a prussik or a couple of shoulder length runners or something - you can make it stay on your foot by girth-hitching it to your foot and slipping one loop of the hitch behind your heel and keeping the other under your instep. It will not fall off your foot.

I'm with Hicks. For day trips in dry weather, it generally doesn't matter much what you wear and the cheapo pants from Goodwill are going to perform just about as well as the $200.00 soft shells. For crawling through the bushes you want something fairly tough, for snow climbing you want some synthetic that dries fast, and in general you should probably tend toward the stretchy or baggy. I generally prefer jeans for bushes and some cragging and for skiing or snow climbing I'll wear synthetics. Goodwill old man's dress slacks are about as comfortable and cheap as it gets, but you don't win style points. Same with shorts over long underwear - a very practical combination for general hiking and moderate mountaineering that has become cc.com's biggest fashion faux pas. In the end, style and color are probably about as important as function for most of us.

True, you can do the climb in poor visibility and drip, but it is an even better climb on a stellar sunshine day. The West Ridge is one of my favorite climbs ever. Seriously. There are lots more challenging or "interesting" climbs out there, and really it is perhaps but a side trip on a Bugaboo outing but the West Ridge of Pidgeon Spire is just plain fantastic. Bring a camera.

I disagree with what I think you are suggesting for two reasons. (1) those gun people are full of dookie and they have blood on their hands, a lack of self-esteem, and I hate them - those little complainers (waah waah waah, the liberals want to take away our rights...) and (2) this an important issue that bears discussion even if it becomes a circular one.

Ah, Chuck, I think he was talking about Clinton. And there I agree with DeChristo: by all accounts one of Bill Clinton's downfalls was that he thought he was so smart he could pull it off (lying about Lewinski). The suggestion that he led a "lifetime of deceit" is a little out there, though, and downright ignorant if by that he is implying that Clinton was a worse liar than Bush and the neocons. As to Gonzalez: his testimony leaves two possible conclusions (well three): (1) he is incompetent, (2) he is a liar, or (3) both.

Both were obstructing the truth, for sure, but isn't lying about a blow job in a different category than is lying about using the Justice Department to influence elections or punishing those who declined to do so? And then there is the question of magnitude: the Bush administration officials lie on a daily basis at every level and on every topic from internal politics to global warming and global warfare. Clinton was Honest Abe by comparison.

DO you have any idea what you are talking about or are you simply repeating what you heard from Rush Limbaugh? The point was whether "is" means "exists," or whether it means "exists or ever did." While I don't suggest he wasn't manipulative when he said this or said "I didn't have sexual relations," at least he didn't say "I don't remember" all day long. Personally, I'll take nuanced intellect over bald faced lies.

I gotta say, I always thought the climb was overrated at ***** but Tradclimbguy is the first guy I've ever heard say that the headwall pitches are not great. Those are what you go there for. The rest of the route is mediocre, in my opinion (the crux traverse is fun), but I can't really think of two pitches in a row of moderate climbing like that that are in a better setting on a crag climb in Washington.

My wife has been doing the lymph drianage work for years and it really does work. She could also show you how to do some self treatment, or you can learn this at the Northwest Lymphedema Center in Kent (I serve on their board). My understanding is the pumps are less desireable, but there are compressive garments that can control the swelling. From the perspective of the people I know, chronic lymphedema is distressingly under-understood among the medical community and it may be difficult to get insurance coverage for the response that would be most beneficial.

I have always been in favor of preservation and I think it is extremely cool that we have such an extensive corridor of Wilderness and surrounding public lands that are managed in a fashion similar to designated Wilderness stretching from I-90 to the Canadian border and beyond. With regard this region - what we know as the North Cascades and the North Central Cascades - I don't know what kind of overall recreation planning or wildlife management survey or habitat inventory efforts may have taken place and my impression is that any planning, survey and discussion of the preservation of this region as a whole has been on a limited and often ad hoc basis. And I don't really know how this particular piece fits into the whole. This new Wilderness will help broaden the protected area adjacent to the Henry M. Jackson Wilderness. To the extent that this protects the area from logging or other threat, or if it makes the region a more viable habitat for our animal friends or whatever, I'm totally psyched (unless it becomes a breeding ground for those creatures that like to chew climbing ropes and stuff and they fan out to take over Darrington). However, as a formally designated Wilderness the area will be forever barred to any trail development unless current policies change. The area has almost no trail access at present so as a direct result of this designation activities that I see as appropriate for this area such as hiking, fishing, climbing, or even mountain biking will be severely limited. In the case of mountain biking, it will be barred outright. I really don't know what the potential for these activities in this particular area really was, but like Mo I wonder if those who will be most directly affected by this designation really understand what it means.

When you guys get tired of slagging on each other, I'm curious what everybody thinks about the Wild Sky. Like Mr. Mo, perhaps, I have mixed feelings about it myself.

I'm with Mr. Layback. This discussion reminds me of a quip from a friend of mine, about another friend: "that _____, he has Jesus issues." I tend toward the secular humanism side of things myself, but I sure don't hold it against someone that they believe in Christ and, even if I did, I don't think that would be a reason to boycott their guidebook just because they put their testimonial on the back cover. How many guidebooks have some statement about climbing ethics or environmental politics similarly displayed? Sure, these are more closely related to most climbers' interest and the manner in which most of us view the topic of the guidebook but plenty of authors take advantage of an opportunity to make some kind of statement. I actually think it is kind of cool that he could do that, and I see it as one of the virtues of self publication that one has the freedom to do something other than the salutory praises from a half dozen famous climbers or the gratuitous girly shot or whatever else that the marketers at Falcon or Mountaineers Press think will sell copy.

That's one of the good things about the telemark turn: you don't have to have much speed at all to make a smooth and easy turn. In crappy snow or maybe deep muck, it is sometimes the only thing short of a gorilla turn that will work. And even in great conditions, I can enjoy a nice smooth run down a beautiful mountainside at half the speed of my AT or snowboard buddies. To each his own, but all but maybe a couple of boarder knuckle-heads would recognize that finesse winds points over brutnesse and speednesse and while good skiing is good skiing, the telemark turn does have a certain elegance to it.

My experience with a wide variety of medical and "alernative medicine" treatments, physical therapy, etc. has rarely ever yielded the impression that one single treatment or therapy was "the cure" of whatever ailed me. I've never been hurt like you have, but I've had a whole slew of back problems and I've been in a couple of car accidents and even got whiplash skiing once (on a cc.com spring ski-in; this shoulod be a warning to all cc.com readers that cc.com events are dangerous). There have been some significant moments where a particular treatment really helped. Twenty years ago I had a chiropractor who could fix my back with a single crack, I once had a beginning acupuncture student relieve the pain from a torn elbow tendon with a single session, and a seemingly insignificant bit of advice from a doctor like "take a break and lie down once a day" has made a huge impact. Far more frequent, though, have been the times when I healed over time while employing a variety of treatments that I hoped were complimentary but may hot have been. I tried a few cranio sacral sessions once, and discontinued because it wasn't covered by my health insurance and it was such a light touch I just couldn't believe it was going to do much for me.

True, but I have always been surprised by this. Set up a test anchor biner that is somehow fixed in place such as maybe loaded with something else hanging from it. Then tie a clove hitch to it and wiggle and whip the ends around. It is distressingly easy to deform the "knot" and open it up so that it looks not at all like any kind of knot but merely some loose loopes around a carabiner. I have actually had this happen spontaneously while I was messing around with haul bags and stuff at a belay. I haven't tested it, but I bet the "knot" will slip a ways before it catches again (I hope testing would reveal that it will always catch again, but I have seen this result in loops running through the "top" of the carabiner in such a fashion that I could imagine it might be possible for a pull from the wrong direction to cause one to spontanesouly unclip). Anyway, it is distressing. I'm guessing this is why it is called a "hitch" and not a "knot." I never rely on a single clove hitch for an anchor even if it may be AMGA approved. I have discussed this with several guides and they have uniformly rejected my concern.

I don't think "history will show" there has ever been an administration which has so damaged our ... You're not seeing "gray," you're just plain blind. I don't like Hilary but, in all seriousness, what could she possibly do that would be WORSE? Get a life. Dredging up weeks-old threads and making ad hominem attacks puts you in the same class as Kevboner and Seahawks. Get a dictionary. You wrote that one who disliked Bush was only seeing black and white while you, in your wisdom, could see the gray and concluded that he was merely mediocre, but not a bad president. I responded directly to this point to say that he has been in many different ways the worst president we’ve seen for a long time, and if you can’t see that I don’t think you are really looking. That is not ad hominem. Have a nice day, blind man.