mattp

It is a totally goofy story either way. No matter how you look at it, there seems to be no question that GW DID NOT complete his obligations to his country -- and he's lied about it. We'll all debate whether this shows there is some kind of media bias, or whether CBS is sloppy or whatever, and in the end we'll all forget that in this campaign Kerry did not make a bunch of noise over Bush's failure to serve - he only sought to capitalize off of his own record just as candidates have always done when they had some military medals to show off -- until the Bush camp started flinging the mud.

I think you are mostly right about that, Dru, though I generally think that we should avoid developing climbing areas right next to trails or roadsides or campgrounds -- there is much more potential for user conflicts than there is for any benefit to come from creating situations where we will be interacting with other users such as hikers, bikers or families with small children, or creating hazardous roadside situations by standing around on the shoulder, or creating a "scene" that is observable from a picnic area.

For sipping good scotch, the .6 liter Sigg drink bottle is the way to go. The simple yet elegant mechanics of unscrewing the top aid in the contemplation of a fine sunset, and the pleasantly finished metal body cozies up nicely in your hand. Best of all, it won't ever leak in your pack and it is, as Snoboy noted, coated with an inside finish specifically designed to hold liquor. If you happen to be out with the Mountaineers, it looks like a fuel bottle and they won't take it away from you in the parking lot. For backpacking, the platypus or equivalent seems the best way to go. It weighs very little and flattens to almost nothing once you empty it.

Note: some posts here have appeared to be based on the assumption that the draws in question are hanging right above the trail to Snow Lakes. That is not the case. The climb we are discussing sits above the access route for Das Toof, and would only be seen by people who have left the hiking trail and are following this "way trail" (or some variant of it -- I as up there two months ago and did not see this route even though I was keeping an eye out for it). I agree with those who criticize the practice of leaving draws hanging on a cliff. As I've said: it has become an "accepted" practice by many and I think that is unfortunate. But lets not be confused here: these draws are not hanging above a popular hiking trail crowded with non-climbers. In my mind that doesn't make it "better," but it changes the discussion somewhat: by-and-large it is climbers who will be offended, not families with their kids. The issue in this case is what do WE want to see at the crags and in the mountains, not what are THEY going to see.

Like you say, Merv, I'm simply "calling it like I see it." Tone it down a bit and I think you'd find folks more able to discuss whether climbers should take their draws home with them and we might even see a reasoned discussion of whether permanent alterations in the form of such bolt-intensive mixed climbs are worthy.

[Commentary] Lets see if we can have a real discussion here. Titling a thread "ice sporto litter" and starting out by describing the climb as an "attrocious bolted overhanging "mixed climb" that someone must think is really special," with typical Dwayner-style venom and put-down, reminds me of prior threads based on the premise that sport climbers are cowards who do nothing but deface the rock. Further, the statement that this route was in the wilderness, apart from the "technical" distinction of where the actual legal boundary lies, seemed (to me) a bit exaggerated. In my opinion, the past net effect of threads that started out like this, or headed this direction before they were done, has been to get lots of people mad, drive many users away from the board, and to stifle conversation about important issues. Lets try to keep this discussion more "on track."[/Commentary] I agree with those who feel that leaving the draws in place when you leave the area is poor form. There may be reasons for it in some places, and maybe somebody thought they had a good reason for doing it in this case, but it seems to have become a much more widely accepted practice than I would like to see. Another point that I fear could get lost if we descend to a discussion of whether bolted mixed climbing is OK in the first place is where might such a bolted mixed climb be appropriate? I gotta say, I am not all that psyched about modern "mixed" climbing... but if there was a place anywhere in the State that a climb like this might be appropriate, wouldn't it be at Snoqualmie Pass, just outside the Alpental ski area? As I understand the Ski Area license, this location is indeed probably just a couple hundred yards outside their area.

Good point, Rudy. Instruction and clinics and stuff are now offered in gyms where 25 years ago there was no such offering, or little of it, outside of climbing clubs and guide services. Fleb, I think you oversimplify a bit, but I basically agree that following-to-leading or sport-to-trad are probably larger leaps than simply gym-to-exit-38. However, I think you discount some of the challenges you have learned to face. Even at Exit 38, the holds are not marked with tape (if it hasn't rained, they may however be marked with chalk). You gotta use more judgment to find a route. Even at Exit 38, there remains some danger of stonefall. You gotta use some judgment about where to sit while you belay. Even at Exit 38, there are places where the ground at the bottom of the crag is not flat and it is not covered with pea gravel. You have to be careful not to fall on your way to the first bolt. And, after that, there are places where you could get hurt in a leader fall -- you gotta use some judgment about where to just throw yourself at a move you are unsure of. You also may have to be able to get yourself out of a jam if you drop your rope from the top of a pitch when you are threading the anchors. Now that I think of it, we are some badass mofo's, climbing at such a terrifying place as Exit 38!

That gym-to-crag issue is big, Alex. Not only do we see people on the crags and in the mountains who may lack a background in outdoor survival and safety matters, but the gym-climbing initiation leads newer climbers in particular to sometimes expect or seek a gym-like experience when they head outdoors. I'm not looking to spark a "sport climbers suck" attack thread, but efforts to minimize our visual impact and environmental concerns can be lost in the tunnel-visioned pursuit of performance.

It doesn't take yet a fourth hand to "unlock" the ATC and hang on to your hanging climber while feeding/reeling in the other one, as it does with the Reverso. This is not a distinction specific to climbing with a team of three, but I am sure you are aware that the ATC doesn't lock up the same way that the Reverso does - that is a fundamental premise of this discussion. Like I said, I prefer the Reverso in this situation but (generally on lower angle terrain) I've have used the ATC and I've felt that I was providing a secure belay – though safety police on this site have admonished me that I must have been delusional.

I think the RP's are for that bouldery couple of moves near the end of pitch 3 - didn't you set a couple of small pieces there in a thin-crack in the corner, before making a couple of face moves and then crawling up the corner to the belay? I thought Pitch 5 was probably only 10b if you took the high traverse, perhaps 10 feet above the belay. You step out right on a small slanting flake or ledge and get some kind of undeclingy fingerlock or something and then make one move to reach a vertically oriented crack/corner system with face climbing protected by crack pro. It seemed the sensible way to me, and the difficulty is more in line with the rest of the climb so I never understood why folks would take the low traverse - except it was the "original." Any ideas about this?

As I understand it, you are correct that all of these events has been "somewhat different." I recall that the analysts told Kennedy and Johnson, however, that we were in big trouble in Vietnam long before they acknowledged it, while others were indeed pushing for the use of the atomic bomb and some still maintain that we could have prevailed with the use of overwhelming military power. I belive similar dynamics played out in planning and undertaking subversive interventions in China and Cuba during the '60's -- the (professional) analysts' predictions were better than those of our (elected) governmental leaders. One theme that I believe has been repeated is that our State Deparment analysists and their counterparts in the DOD have been remarkably accurate in predicting the outcome of overt and covert operations, but politics have often dictated that their "warnings" were ignored.

I believe you are correct that this would not be the first time that political considerations have overridden what the analysts, both DOD and State Department, had to say. In fact, didn't they say similar things about Vietnam and perhaps Korea?

I find much of what Zinni has to say convincing. I've been trying every Google search I can think of to try and figure out who it was on the Joint Chief's of Staff, who said essentially the same thing BEFORE the invasion and got sacked for it -- that the war plan did not provide enough troops to secure the area quickly or to secure the aftermath. (Yes, I know this may not be exactly what Zinni has said.) Wasn't there somebody who said this, in the weeks leading up to the war, and who got sacked for saying so?

It looks as if it might have a lot of broken and brushy terrain. Not so?

BD does seem prone to releasing new products before they are fully field-tested, don't they? I bet they will be safe though - and if there's a recall I sure hope you'll be able to trade them in without buying a new one!

How did you like the climb?

There was some celebration of last Fall's washouts in a conservation group newsletter that came out last winter. It specifically mentioned the Mountain Loop Highway, Suiattle River Road, the Whitechuck Road, and Bacon Creek, and the authors wrote that "thanks to the flood, there may now be a transient opportunity to effectively pressure the Forest Service to decommission many of these mostly useless roads." NCCC Newsletter -- see article on Page 6 The motivations here are apparently similar to those for abandoning the road up the Dosewallips River. I understand the conservation objectives related to preserving wilderness areas and reducing impacts on salmon streams, and I understand the police problems associated with a road like the Middle Fork, but I think some of these groups go a little too far. We have vast tracts of wilderness in places like the Olympic National Park and the Glacier Peak region. I believe the public should have access and that there is great value in maintaining major access roads like the Dosewallips, Mountain Loop Highway, Whitechuck, and the Suiattle. So, too, I would hope that they will continue to maintain many of the "smaller" roads to trailheads and popular climbing destinations like the Clear Creek area outside of Darrington.

I'm with you there. The idea of guiding can be appealing but the reality is that it is generally low paying and seasonal work, and it tends to get one used to feeling and acting like a babysitter whenever they go climbing. I suppose people could make similar generalizations about lots of other professions, though.

I saw a guide taking some beginners climbing at Mount Eerie on Saturday. He pissed me off initially because he expressed a slight proprietary attitude and he had his stuff spread out all over the place. He quickly got a clue and consolidated his stuff and, after he saw that I wasn't going to kill my seven-year-old nephew he relaxed and let us climb. The proprietary attitude comes in part from being responsible for other people, I guess. Anyway, I ultimately enjoyed sharing the crag with his group, and not only did he seem to know what he was doing but he seemed to do a fairly good job of encouraging his "clients" to enjoy themselves. I think he worked for Cascade Guides. He was a marked contrast to the loudmouthed jerk I recently saw teaching some kids to climb at Marymoor. Unprofessional, unsafe, and unencouraging. Guides and clubs, even Scott's guides and clubs, can be OK by me.

Don't you guys ever get tired of bashing Scott?

The train trestle at exit 38 is itself a "destination" for small children, and the railroad bed staging area is a good place for them. On any given Saturday morning, there are usually people with their children there; much more rarely at Little Si.

How 'bout today?

Lammy's right, extended stays were prohibited in Camp IV when I first went there in 1979, though enforcement was not all that efficient and I think it may have been a 14-day limit. I think the nub of the issue is largely as Bug stated it: there is increasing recreational pressure being placed on shrinking available lands, both public and private. At the same time, there are shrinking public funds to operate public lands for recreational purposes, and this is part of the reason why I think overall recreation planning is often poorly coordinated with other resource management and preservation priorities.

I too knew Rodchester through his participation on this website and some exchanges of private messages following discussions here. I knew him to be thoughtful, knowledgeable, and a real contributor to our sport. Like everyone else here, I will miss him.

I mostly agree, Fenderfour, but where I have a comfortable ledge, particularly one which may be incut or where there are places to brace my feet or something so I'm pretty sure I won't be pulled off -- I sometimes DO sit on a ledge with my anchor at or below my butt, and belay a follower. When they pass me and lead the next pitch, I'm hoping they get gear in early so that I am then anchored from the expected line of pull in the event of a fall. I do this more in trad climbing and mountainclimbing situations where the anchor is sometimes a crack behind the ledge I am sitting on or some extension of it. It also happens where I am sitting on a bush or something.