mattp

Nope.

Chuck, there are lots of things that might be considered "normal precautions." For example, you might want to stay away from a gully below a cornice - particularly in warming weather, and when we get a sunny day like today you are going to see rock heat up and trigger slides, mostly "point release" rather than the more deadly "slab" avalanches but still something to worry about -- especially if you are somewhere above a cliff or stream where getting caught up in even a relatively shallow surface slide could be deadly. But Harry and Mr. Fake know all - just stay home and for the love of god don't ask for advice on this bulletin board.

Al Gore climbed Mount Rainier during a stormy period when most of us would have stayed home.

Yes, skis have been known to help but they won't necessarily make it effortless and, moreover, they keep the road gated well after it starts to melt out so we 206'ers from cc.com don't go up there and get our SUV's stuck and tear up the roadbed and stuff.

That'd be nice, but it really isn't a bad walk up the road if that plan fails. Walking back down the road, when you are tired out after some monster snow slog, however, can be painful. You emerge from the woods without breaking your neck and the trip is over yet sadly not quite over yet...

I think the physiologists are united in saying that a single day's excursion to altitude, even just two weeks before your intended climb, will not add to your acclimitization in terms of the body's response to altitude. However, a prior visit will definitely help you get a feel for the mountain and training of any kind will help.

How about a helmet cam!

I think you are right, cc.com is not really the place for that sort of thing to be a regular institution but there is nothing preventing Mr. Natural from sending a PM to his buddy Olyclimber and saying "Hey: here's my plan. Watch for my triumphant return post, OK?" It will work better if it is a one-on-one sort of arrangement and somebody is clearly responsible to follow through. I think we all should follow the SAME standards - those outlined in the descriptions of the forums.

Do you guys have some fear of letting Timy or me say that this site could be friendlier to “dumb questions?” Just a question. Carry on with the spray.

Actually, I would agree with you that it rarely happens. It happens regularly, however, and even though you'll get ten or even fifty helpful answers for one flame toss or whatever, it happens enough to discourage broader participation. About a month ago, I looked through a week's worth of posts and found really only four or five threads out of two hundred active threads where I thought something was out of line. One could say "not bad, eh?" And they'd be right. However, I constantly run into people who are hesitant to ask questions or post trip reports because of that stuff. I know that many people here are not interested in broader participation - they are content to play with their on-line friends every day when they should be working and perhaps they don't really want much more. I believe that with a little tighter adherance to the "spray here; not there" distinctions between one forum and the next, we could have a little more chance to discuss climbing without losing the fun.

I wouldn't go that far (and in fact I'm not sure Timy really would, either, if push came to shove) but this place could be more supportive or encouraging of climbers who may not meet your high performance standards without greatly impeding your ability to amuse yourself.

I agree with you, Timy, that it is sad to see folk’s so often flame somebody for asking what they feel are dumb questions – especially in the “newbies” forum where there is not supposed to be such nonsense. However, I’m glad to see you’ve come back for more and I hope somebody's on-line quip isn't going to stop you from climbing what you want to climb. See you on the trail.

For car camping (helicopter or fixed wing approach) on a glacier, I'd think that would be just the thing. It is not all that bulky and those little extras make life in camp more fun when you are sitting there reading books and waiting for weather. Cooling it down will be no problem.

Climb Ca may have a valid point, in part. I do think that we are much more focused on performance and ticking off recognized “must do” objectives than we used to be, and this may in part be feeding a trend toward fewer climbers pursuing a wider range of mountaineering destinations that used to be more popular. I’m not sure I blame that on some evil corporate marketing strategy, however – it just seems to reflect evolving attitudes and interests. While it appears there are as many climbers as ever who venture into the Pickets, it is a lot easier than it used to be because there are now established routes, and even trails, that take one there. Meanwhile, the North Cascades rangers do report falling numbers applying for camping permits at popular destinations like Boston Basin. Some of this may be due to an increased interest in car-to-car one-day ascents, but I don’t think all of it does. Fundamentally, I think, we are less interested as a user group in the bonding with nature thing that was such a big part of the sport when I started climbing. But maybe that was an unrealistic fantasy in the first place: did I come away from my botched venture into the Pickets by a stupid brush crash approach thinking I wanted more of the same? No. Do I cherish my wilderness camping trips over some awesome climbing trip where we climbed some cool big lines? Not really. Still, however, when was the last time we saw someone write on THIS website about how they enjoyed a fantastic sunset and the wildflowers were awesome and all the birds were singing up at what-the-heck meadow? They’d get laughed out of town if they celebrated that aspect of their latest climbing adventure! As Climb Ca says in his “rant,” it is still mountaineering if you climb some class three scramble route, and I think a “backpack” to Dome Peak is every bit as respectable as a speed-climb of Liberty Crack, but we don’t seem to celebrate it as such.

How is Spetch for access? There was a logging road pretty high up the creek some years back but I've never actually been up there to ski...though I've been in the area. That north side run off Oleg is fantastic!

I would not recommend soloing the NE Buttress of Johannesburg. I have soloed it and found it to be quite scary. In fact, I found Liberty Ridge more comfortable as a solo climb and I have a friend who has soloed both of them who felt the same way. By the way, I take back my Triumph recommendation. I recieved a private message stating that I was nuts to recommend a route I've never even climbed. That could be.

The N. Face route on Maude is a good one, technically casual for the soloist with the skills described but also a remote and beautiful climb with enough adventure component to feel like the real thing. I have not done it, but I bet Triumph by the standard NE Ridge route would be a fair choice. The West Ridge of Prussik would be good, too, though you might want to bring a short rope and some gear for the "friction pitch." These are both rock routes, though; you'll have a difficult time finding an ice climb in the middle of the Summer in the Cascades - with or without a partner. The NE Ridge on Kyes Peak might offer a "sort of" alpine climb, without real glacier travel. The NW Ridge on Adams is a good non-technical summit route with a little steep snow climbing up high, as long as you have no objection to talus. The Lava Cleaver has a little less talus and more "ice" -- in fact, for 400 or 500 feet it might even feel like a moderate ice climb if the temperatures are cold. The N. Face of Spider, too, is a snow/ice climb with only a little bit of glacier travel and might be OK. The S. side descent sucks, though, and the "first pitch" may be gnarly. It is in the heart of the North Cascades, and you'll feel like you are really out there.

That belay seat is awesome! Are those available as a kit?

The ridge is a rather appealing feature when you view it from the hut. I've been half way up it to drop onto the Anniversary Glacier and the lower half is quite unremarkable when you actually go up there. I think an equally appealing route would be to climb up the Twin One Glacier and summit from the SE.

THere is also the WAC 352-32-270 Sno-park permit. Fees for the winter recreational area parking permits will be established by the commission and shall be published by state parks. These permits include: (1) Seasonal permit - commences October 1 and expires May 1 of the winter season for which it is issued. ...

That is likely true, Harry. However, I once drove all the way to Monroe to contest a speeding ticket in StartUp to have the generous judge mark a $116.00 ticket down to $108.00! On the bigger argument, I just don't think you're likely to find a District Court judge who wants to strike the Snow Park law as Unconstitutional and what I've heard in a few inquiries with lawyers who do traffic tickets is that the semantic arbuments and I didn't know kind of excuses are getting less and less successful -- as a rule. Last time I went to court and watched a few of these, everybody who tried some argument like yours or who said the officer was mistaken did not have any success.

Good luck with that argument, counsel.

Aha. I wonder if the small print on the "Winter Recreation Site" sign might give similar dates?

Your argument just buttresses my reasoning. It is simpy untenable to argue that one couldn't have the common sense to observe the 6 foot snow bank as well as the ongoing snow showers and fail to realize it was still winter. You might have a point if we were talking about a summer squall with flowers in bloom along side of the road but, during a snowstorm on March 24 with the snowpack probably at about its height for the season, it is clearly winter. There is no basis in Washington law for stating that "winter" only runs from December 21 to March 20 -- in fact the legal period for studded tires probably comes as close as any such standard and that period runs from November 1st to April 1st. Clearly, this ticket was written in the Winter and a legalistic argument about the spring equinox just cannot fly.

Depending on the conditions, I'd say you might, Ivan, unless you are measuring your climb against somebody else's standard and they adhere to the December 21-March 20 regime. If the trail is dry, the snopack firmed up, sun shining, and rock dry you are probably not making what any body would call a winter climb -- even if the calendar says January. On the other hand, if you go up to Mt. Stuart this week and climb the thing in a cold weather blizzard, most of us would think we'd had a "winter" experience even though the calendar might say April 2. You'd get corrected, however, and told that it was not winter but "winter conditions" or something like that.