mattp

Actually, Catbird, there is a "relevant" point in Joseph's statement and my reply: one who contemplates establishing a new route should think about the context -- that is, how it will fit into the area and whether it may cause access problems or stimulate bolting conflicts or cause other problems. (Granted, this is only tangentially relevant to the initial question "how is is it done".)

That has sometimes been the case, but it has also happened that the climbers who react against sport climbing to wage the bolt wars and draw land owners or land managers into those conflicts actually cause the access problem, and trad climbing itself has also caused access problems.

For smaller diameter ropes, I prefer a slightly stiffer hand because i think it means they tend to whip around things a little less when you pull a rappel - so they get stuck a little less. I had no complaints about the stratos failing any "smoothness" test, and in fact I have owned several pairs over the years and the old ones are only slightly stiffer than the new. Stratos ropes are tough.

For now this has been canned, and the property is going to be turned over to the city as an extension of the park. however, as we all know this could change. How'd that come about? That's good news! Too bad they already built the sewage treatment plant there, though.

I really don’t think we know what drives Seattle area public policy and planning decisions, but I sure as hell don’t think it is any overriding sense of what is a good idea. I’ve lived here for over twenty years (does that make me a native?) and it sure seems to me that the overriding principal here is that THE DEVELOPER ALWAYS WINS. Could it be that the Monorail is failing because it won’t generate the government-sponsored largess that other large-scale developments have? I’ve seen the big building boom in the 80’s, when Martin Selig seemed to pretty much have his way with the City and, for example, he was allowed 20 extra floors on the Columbia Tower (what do they call it now?) because he gave “concessions” like all that “public space” on the lower 5 floors so he was allowed to build above the existing cap on building heights to 40 stories or something like that. Then there was the Norsdtrom parking garage – who benefited from that? And then the Microsoft campus had a highway built just for it alone (sort of), and the Westlake Mall was built as a “city park” when in reality it was a private development. Who is paying for that wonderful highway exit and access road for the Issaquah Highlands? Paul Allen offered to build a “commons” but we the voters turned it down (maybe that was a good decision and maybe not) but isn’t the City going to let him do whatever he wants? And we’re going to have “exclusive” housing development in the middle of Discovery Park, last I heard. Is it perhaps the case that the Monorail is being shot down because it is good for “the people” but not good for Mr. Big? I don’t know if the City/County/State officials are getting rich off of any of this, but I bet the developers are! I also bet that we, the taxpayers, are contributing mightily to every one of these projects. I really don’t know the truth of any of this, but I wonder.

The real question I have is this: why are the powers that be so set against the monorail? From day one most powerful people around town have been shooting it down and thats why we've had four votes to build it and it h hasn't gotten anywhere while, by contrast, we've voted no on two stadiums that have gotten built. Why are we moving forward on light rail, but not the monorail - is it really an inherently bad idea? Yes, some say that an elevated line is ugly and they note that Fifth Avenue has suffered from the impact, but hey: a monoral line doesn't block traffic and isn't it much cheaper per mile than light rail? Yes, Ballard to West Seattle may not be the most heavily travelled route in the city, but won't the light rail serve or potentially serve SE and NE Seattle so a line serving NW and SW portionsof the City would seem to compliment that, right? It seems to me there are plusses and minuses here, but we're not talking about them. It's not about whether the little guy gets screwed when land is condemned -- as we have been discussing here, and I don't think it is about whether the financing package is no good -- as we've been discussing in the media. What are the real issues? Do we really think the monorail board has been incompetent while Sound Transit has been well run?

Plexus- I've heard of several people trying to get to Bacon Peak from Mount Watson and proclaiming it "impossible." Based on their reports, I'm guessing you have to drop down into Noisy Creek somwewhere, rather than follow the ridge crest. Have you done this trip?

You seem at least equal to me, at least as far as arguing for entertainment. Don't give up! Really, though, I think this whole question is an interesting one. I don't know what to make of all the morass of politics we face over public transit. Is the monorail a bad idea? I don't know. To borrow from your "clarification," all I'm saying is that I really don't know if the monorail is a bad idea or not.

That's why I asked for clarification of your viewpoint, Archy. When you wrote stuff like how no one's property was comandeered or stolen to make biketrails and said you didn't understand why the little guy had to get screwed for public transit and held out busses as an example of how the little guy doesn't get screwed, it looked to me like you were arguing a rather strong line against public condemnation for transit. Where you express sympathy for the victim of urban growth -- at least in the form of transit expansion -- I'm with you. I'm not sure the situation is as you suggest, however, if you are suggesting that the property owner is always or even usually forced to sell their property for some under-valued amount or that roads and street-cars do not require takings of private property. (I'm not putting words in your mouth here, am I?) Also, I am sure the "little guy" who lost his or her house is unhappy about the situation even if they got 110% of "actual market value" unless they were planning to sell anyway -- and when they look back after the transit is completed and (maybe) values in the area have gone up, they are probably even less happy about it. It'd be interesting to lear what payments were made to those who are losing their property for stations along the new light rail line and what accomodations/support/etc. is going into Rainier Valley or the U. District and what this is going to do for the "little guy." I don't know -- do you? Where you read in the newspaper that the local chamber of commerce says area businesses are going to be severly impacted, or when Mr. Citizen Activist comes out with some alarming cry and it is published in the newsapaper alongside predictions of ecomonmic growth and talk of an improved quality of life in the area I don't really know what to make of it all. By the way, you ignored my last red herring. If it penciled out to be a good idea in terms of practical transporation coirridors and cost, What would you say to a proposal to convert some of the bike paths that have been built through "rails to trails" programs back to rails again?

Ahh, but roadway construction constantly requires condemnation of private property. How much land was taken by the government when they built I-5 through Seattle -- even though they already had a perfectly good highway 99? Sure, along I-5 much of the dedicated bus lane construction is taking place in what was previously the median so the current construction certainly has not required as much condemnation as the creation of a whole new right-of-way but, at the root of it, are you saying that we should consider no new rights of way? Or that they should be a last resort? Or we should compensate the property owner above market rate? Or what? (As a distraction, let me mention something that a friend pointed out to me recently regarding the bike paths we all think are so great: nobody is talking about this, but might the Burke Gilman trail and similar old rail lines actually better serve the general population if they were replaced with light rail? )

Mr. Pi, What led you to this choice? I'm wondering about cameras myself, and the small pocket-size and (maybe) a good lens sound good. How about Low light?

Right on, Doxey! That's called "stepping up to the plate."

As far as I have understood, every real effort at "public transportation" everywhere has invoved some "taking" of private property and this has included, often, "fucking over the little guy." Yes, our Constitution provides that we give "fair" compensation, but that is not always what the little guy thinks if fair – particularly in retrospect. And this question is the same for the light rail project that IS under way. Private property has been condemned for the light rail, too, and it will not be accomplished without heavy impact on many many property owners along the route. I bet some "little guy" was screwed when they built the London tube, the Paris metro, the New York subway, or any other large scale public transportation project ever built. The Monorail, I think, has been subject to some weird politics. Is it inherently a worse concept than surface-level light rail? I don’t really think so but there are arguments either way. However, there have been strong interests who have been against the monorail from the beginning. And I wonder why. Have they screwed up the project? It seems so. But the voters have THREE TIMES voted yes. And now the Mayor says he is going to weigh in against it, but he doesn’t want to make the call without a FOURTH vote. And then, they tell us, the City Council and perhaps the Mayor will likely kill the project anyway. Why would we vote a FOURTH time?

If you DO bring your dog, please clean up after the little darling. Last time there were quite a few dog logs left around the campsite, and I don't know if anybody found them in the dark but I'd be quite surprised if they didn't.

Isn't that a song by Rage Against the Machine?

Real ice climbs are in short supply in the Cascades, until winter arrives anyway (which may happen as early as another month or so up high), but the North Ridge of Baker offers a good and relatively easy ice climb. At this time of the year, the busted up glacier approach will be quite challenging and may involve some technical climbing in and out of crevasses but I bet never a Fall passes without somebody doing it even though others have declared it "impassable."

You may have a point, robo, but only to a point. It is the rangers' JOB to take care of the park. They can't have everyone who wants to play Lewis and Clark head out and hack at the bush with a machete. Similarly, they should not let reports like this one - even if partly made in jest - appear in a widely read public forum without comment.

Yup, I miss that place too. Not the scree fields you have to descend to get from the standard route to a vantage point below the west ridge, though - that is some of the worst garbage I have ever seen. In places, talus and dirt overlie eroded soft-rock "slabs" of crap ... I once took a ride on a twelve foot lava sled of death there. There is a really beautiful basin below the NE side of the peak. Belnap Crater is cool and has some neat lava tubes very near the top. The lava fields nearby are a great place to torture yourself with a cross country excursion...

Time for another recap: We've got the group campsite at Leavenworth's Eightmile Campground reserved Friday September 30th and Saturday October 1. Friday night, trickle in and hang around the campfire. Climb on Saturday, expect something resembling a party Saturday night, climb on Sunday, go home. In the past, folks have set up and supervised some top-ropes for novice climbers while others have paired up at the campsite to go climbing; still others have spent the weekend just hanging out in the canyon. Thus far, I have not heard of any specific plans along these lines for this year. Oly has talked about putting on some kind of a slideshow on Sat. and requested pictures of foreign climbing trips. He and Minx are going to sing Karaoke and dance for us. Bring something to share and make it fun for all. A monster cook stove and super duper coffee setup would be popular. Maybe a grill? Firewood? Canopy tents can be a plus if it rains. Camp lanterns are nice at night. Folding chairs are a plus. Somebody needs to get 100 sausages and stuff them in a pinata so we can whack it with a big stick. There has been some talk of a tee shirt design contest. Where's your entry? [edit: sorry to repeat some of what Oly just said. I don't think I contradicted him but simply added in the bits he forgot like about the karaoke and dancing show.]

What's wrong with that, Choada? Are you jealous maybe? Sure, Erik went out and got himself some attention but I think it is pretty cool for there to be a big newspaper article portraying mountain climbing as an exciting and worthy endeavor rather than an irresponsible drain upon society and theirs was a worthy climb. Way to go, guys.

For the first time, I noticed that if I hold my mouse over the "go to cc.com NOW" button permanently installed in my browser, it says "F*&k you wanker."

We almost decided to crowd you, Mr. Cash, because we saw some drippage on the wall when we looked up before starting the hike up to Jacobs Ladder. However, I figured it would turn out OK and it did. Pope, I think that pitch is some kind of .11. Your mileage may vary.

The seven day forecast calls for a drier trend over the next week. Lets hope it continues. Here's a shot from two or three years ago at ropeup:

My brother from the flatlands picked a rather rainy weekend to visit Seattle for some climbing. However, we managed to climb most of Jacobs Ladder today before we had to rap off and head for SeaTac. You might be surprised what you can do in Darrington on a marginal forecast. Pitch 4 of Jacobs Ladder:

Or up. My only experience with this was, many years ago when I helped guide several groups of climbers up Rainier one summmer, and some of them who we left behind this way felt better after they sat still for an hour and started crawling up the mountain on their own.