mattp

Once I came around a corner on the Snow Creek trail to notice that all the bushes and trees in one small area were literally dripping with them. I've always thought they hang ouit primarily in the bushes, ready to pounce. However, on Saturday I was over at Tieton and after getting fried in the sun, I went and lay down in the shade for a few minutes. Not five minutes passed before I felt one crawling on me and it turned out I had picked up 15 of the little bastards!

We may want to try to head to North Bend on a slightly more optimistic forecast:

Have fun!

Pete and Bryan did report a climb there a few years back, and somebody from the Department of Wildlife or maybe Fish and Wildlife or whatever asked them not to promote the climb because there were birds nesting on it. They have respected that request. Given everything else in the area, you can imagine what the rock is like. We are probably not missing out Washington's answer to the Squamish Chief.

CP is right that the ridge between Ellinor and Washington is sharp in "some places." Especially with cornices and such, it would be a pretty good feat to stay on the actual crest the whole way. If you simply want to connect the two peaks, I think it is preferable to drop into Jefferson Creek than to traverse the "front" side. You won't get your couple of pitches of class 4 that way, though, except the summit block itself on Washington may resemble class 4 for a very short bit at this time of year. Here's Ellinor as seen from Washington, a little later in the Spring. (from Eric's Basecamp site) And here's looking back the other way: In both pictures, you can see the open snow slopes in Jefferson Creek that connect the two peaks via short gullies at either end.

I spoke to the biologist about this annual closure when she was at last Fall's cc.com ropeup. She explained to me that this pair is one of two pairs of Pergrine Falcon's that nest in the entire Leavenworth Disrict. It that is so, I think we ought to be willing to cooperate with this annual closure even though it comes in the part of the year where we're all itching to get out on the crags. It's not like there is no place else to climb around Leavenworth.

Right on "main street" (I'm not sure the actual name, but its the old Snoqualmie highway), there is a grill -- maybe it's the North Bend Grill or something like that. We've gone there in the past and they treated us just fine.

An important consderation is ease of preparation and clean up. Most of the proposals here invlove little or no cooking. Good idea. Ramen-type things are easy to choke down when you're not feeling 100%, but they don't mave a lot of calories. You can add stuff like cheese and sausage for calories, but fatty stuff like that can be hard to digest when you're not doing well. Nuts and dried fruit and stuff that is munchables straight from a plastic bag and you don't have to make any decision about how much to prepare are popular. I've seen lots of people use mre's or similar foods, but these are heavy. They ARE real easy to deal with, though.

If you don't understand the difference between capital improvement projects and educational programs, and how they are subject to different criteria and their funding comes from different sources, you must not understand much about large educational institutions and must also not care to. It'd be hard to argue with your premise that there are lots of wasteful construction or expansion projects underway at pretty much every college campus you can think of, and even at lots of grade-school and high school campuses as well. But "education?" There is certainly waste here, too. You can quote Rush Limbaugh about the latest degree program in something ridiculous, I'm sure. But folks who argue that cutting off the funds is going to improve the situation are really just promoting further reductions in funding, and nothing more. The schools that you think suck so bad are only going to get worse if you "hit 'em where it counts."

March 20, Icicle Buttress:

It can take an amazing amount of work to pry off what seems to be a very loose flake sometimes. An extra long snow picket can be a useful tool here.

The reason you'd pay to camp in the Icicle is that the campgrounds are pretty nice. And the fee? You believe in user fees when it comes to just about everything else, don't you Greg? You know, freeloaders are bad and why should I benefit from your labor being userped by the overbearing Federal government? I don't think our campgrounds should be operated by Thousand Trails and I agree with most of the arguments against Fee Demo, but how much is it for a campsite? $8.00? You get a picnic table, potable water, and a clean toilet. You don't have to take a dump in the watershed and they even collect your trash. You may have to listen to the kids in the next campsite who get up at 6:00 am, but you don't have to screw around with Officer Larry. As far as I'm concerned, its fine to dirtbag it if you want to. You can find a more secluded spot for sure and you can spend your $8.00 on a couple of latte's instead. Whatever you do, don't argue with Officer Larry, don't make a mess, and do respect private property rights in the Canyon. We already have a fairly serious relations problem with the Leavenworth District and it won't serve us well to cause problems by being either selfish or righteous.

The Chutes are a summer trip. Here is a july 4 photo:

Isn't Cinnamon Slab another easy one?

Like I said: to each his own. The most fun I've had on the mountain were two four-day climbs. You don't have to do it that way, but your suggestion that anybody who "needs" that much time ought to go back to Kansas is a bit much. I don't know the physiology, but I know that I enjoy making an intermediate level camp at, say, 8,000 feet. While 11,000 feet may be a little high on most routes for good camping, I don't think it is nuts, irresponsible, stupid, or otherwise a bad idea to consider camping at Ingraham Flats or at the flats at a similar elevation on the Emmons. For most parties on Mount Rainier, altitude in itsself is not the biggest problem. Dehydration and exhaustion may be reduced if one doesn't climb 5,000 to 6,000 feet in the hot sun within several hours' prior to their starting on their summit climb. In addition, while you are more likely to experience high winds or wake up in a cloud cap if you camp higher on the mountain, you are also closer to your tent during your summit climb if you camp higher on the mountain. Yes, people HAVE died from altitude illness on Mount Rainier and I'm aware that soem advocate a speed ascent where the idea is to get up and down before you have a chance to get sick.

Fenderfour, Nobody is saying that you or anybody else "can't" make it in two days or even one. There can be advantages to doing it on a longer itinerary, though, and I bet there is a higher rate of success for parties who allow extra time. To each his own.

We need a NEW MOVIES FORUM!

When I climbed Yokum Ridge, we belayed something like 17 pitches. The only "solid" anchors we got were when we kicked/chopped holes in the snow and rime and sat down to belay. Or at least we told ourselves that these platforms were solid....(we KNEW that the screws and pickets in between were garbage). dmuja makes a good point about the mutual suicide pact and how it may be better to unrope if you don't have anchors, but so to does iain: the reality is that most of us spend a great deal of time roped to a partner with little or nothing in the way of secure belays on a general mountaineering outing.

I'm with Cascadeclimber on this one. I should say I've never made the climb as a day trip, but I've made the climb on two, three, and even four-day itineraries. By far the most enjoyable trips I've had on the mountain were on the three and four-day plan. Mount Rainier is cool. It's worth spending the time to get to know it a little bit, and it makes summitting LOTS more fun if you aren't so tired you have to crawl to the top. I can understand the draw of doing it as a day trip, and I have been told that it might even be a good way to avoid alititude illness because you aren't going to be at high elevation long enough to get sick. However, I enjoy camping, watching the sunset, and taking pictures. If you have the time and the weather is good, I think it's worth while to carry food and equipment sufficient to stay a day or two. I'd actually like to haul camping gear to the summit some time and spend an entire day up there.

The last pitch of "Local Boys Do Good" will pique your interest.

I've been in there at this time of year before, but I don't think this will be the year. Mt. Baker/Snoqualmie NF, November 14, 2003

Do not shorten them unless you really have to. Instead, do as Sobo suggested, and run them around your ankle once. This will probably do it, and it will mean that you won't lose the crampon if you are wearing them with flexible boots and the crampon somehow becomes unclamped from your boot because you flex too far, or if you kick it off while descending, or whatever. If the straps are not long enough to make a complete pass around your ankle, they are too short and you may one day want to wear them with a bulkier boot so if you shorten them so they are just long enough for your current boots, they will then be too short. If, after wrapping them around your ankles, you have short ends left over -- tie them around your boot laces or something.

Just for reference, here is a shot of a late June or early July ski down toward the hairpin from the col below S. Early Winter Spire (David Whitelaw on skis): For those so inclined, there will be plenty of snow.

OK, I was just checking. Yeah, he's being selfish. They ought to nail him with a big fine. But that's what we have traffic cops for. Don't let him ruin your day.