mattp

The first time I skied the SW Chutes was one of the more memorable ski runs I have ever had. My buddies and I had been going out "partying" and skiing quite a bit, pursuing "turns all year" but also just enjoying the camping and the dirty jokes that boys tell along the way. On this particular occasion, half the guys couldn't go so we all fit into one car, a Cadillac with a trunk so large that the skis fit inside it. We didn't have a map, but Doug said he knew the way. We drove around the long way through Yakima, and then headed up washboarded logging roads that took us into the Indian Reservation. I wondered about this, but Doug said he knew the way. We kept complaining that we were lost, and Doug said "I got it." After what seemed like hours of choking on all the dust (it was July and there hadn't been any rain for weeks) we came around a corner to see the same sign we'd passed before and realized kimosabe had taken us around in a circle. STOP! We insisted it was time to stop driving and go to sleep right there. In the morning, we headed into Trout Lake for breakfast. The waitress was kind of flirty, and we enjoyed a leisurely breakfast before heading up to the trailhead. It was probably nearing ten o'clock before we got there, but we had all day. On up the trail, we stopped to throw rocks at marmots who were raiding somebody's campsite at timberline and then we decided to get even more juvenile so we turned the pack stays around in somebody's pack left there – I bet THAT wasn't a comfortable hike out! On up the mountain, we enjoyed joking with a 75 year old fisherman who was climbing the standard south spur climbing route at our slow pace. There were all kinds of people there: there was a group of girls wearing lipstick, families, and I think Daniel Boone even passed us by. At the summit, we posed for photo's with at least 25 other people, and strapped on the skis. The first part of the descent was all sastrugi, and our friend Phil (who hadn't been on one of these outings before) said "you guys are crazy!" and took his skis off. Down at the false summit we discussed which way to go, and Phil was very concerned about the icy slopes and the fact that you couldn't see over the edge when looking down toward the SW Chutes. It'll be fine, we said, as we started down toward the drop with Phil's eyeballs bugging out. He didn't feel safe going the other way by himself, so he followed cautiously. The top of the ski run has a convex shape to it, so you drop a couple hundred feet as it steepens and you still can't see the bottom. Suddenly, about three hundred feet down, we could see all the way down to a blue lakelet at the bottom and the snow softened so we started to feel that there was at least SOME chance that somebody might be able to arrest a fall by employing the skipole arrest. "You ever done a skipole arrest before, Phil?" "Huh what?" Down at the lakelet, we stopped for a celebration and somebody passed a flask. Looking back up at our tracks, we were all pretty stoked. It had been a fantastic ski run, in great condition, with excellent views; 3500 feet of non-stop turns in one continuous drop. "You guys are NUTS," said Phil. But then it was time to go again, and we found a little finger of snow continuing on down. Our snow finger headed into a pile of rock, but kept going – we were skiing on a six to fifteen foot wide finger of snow obviously overlying a streambed. At one point the snow just about ran out, but at the last minute could hop turn around a boulder and it opened back up again to head rightward onto another short open slope for the last bit of a ski run. Following us down that gully, skiing way to fast and with no concern for the rocks Phil had screemed "YOU GUYS ARE CRAZY!" Taking our skis off at timberline, there was a nice stream there and we sat for a bit in the late afternoon sun. Phil allowed as he'd had a good day. Here's a picture I took on a subsequent trip down the SW Chutes:

No, eric8, look again: I said it wasn't 5.5. However, if backed into a corner I'll say it isn't 5.6 either (that slab where Fred and Helmey gave each other a shoulder stand is 5.7 for one move, I think). Also, most topo's and route descriptions make it sound like three relatively straight-forward pitches - most "newbie" climbers belay about five pitches and find them far from straight-forward. Then there's the issue of getting their rope stuck on the way down, and the deadly bowling alley approach/descent gully is no joke either.... I'm with you in having been stumped by that first move on Zoom, though.

I've always thought Breakfast of Champions was kind of hard for the .10a rating. Also, I think the Beckey Route on Liberty Bell is one of the most underestimated routes around. My N. Cascades Alpine guide says 5.5!

I'm pretty much with Glasgow on the dogs. There have been a couple of times when I've actually enjoyed somebody else's dog being there, and sometimes people are able to bring their dog along without having it beg for food, lie down in the middle of the trail, or shit in the woods. But not very often. And think of the poor dog. Even the Siberian huskies that we had when I was a child wouldn't enjoy being tied to a tree at the base of an ice climb for several hours (set 'em up with a harness and they sure had a good time dragging a sled all over some horzontal ice and snow, though).

I say you have no right to demand somebody get out of your way just because you want to lead the pitch and they are using a toprope. If they are tying up a climb for several hours while a group of eight climbers rehearses the line, you would not be out of line to suggest that you'd like to have a chance to have a go at it -- but you WOULD be out of line, in my view, to think you had an absolute right to insist that they get out of your way. Wuld that diagonal pitch crossing the top-rope lines be the start of Zebra Zion? Whoever put up all those sport lines there created a ready-made conflict that is here to stay. With a little bit of tact and cooperation, one should be able to diagonal on through without ruining everybody else's day -- but I personally would try to get on the route (ZZ) early or late in the day when there are few or no other parties in the way.

IF you follow Dima's link, above, that's what it says.

The Cascade River Road was plowed to the Eldorado Creek trailhead the year before last. You might get lucky and find it plowed to the road closure at mile 18.1 - I believe that is about two miles from Eldorado Creek.

Catbird, you are right that things have gotten better with the route reports. I do still delete what I consider to be obnoxious posts from time to time, though. I do not think it is in any way inaccurate to state that many people who would otherwise post trip reports do not do so because they fear somebody is going to ridicule them for taking 2 ½ days to climb the Serpentine Arete, flame them for mentioning that somebody might want to bring a couple of pins on their rack, or complain about their writing style. You actually seem to like to be flamed, so I'm not surprised to see you argue that it is no big deal, but others do not. Is there a crisis? No. Could things be handled better? Yes.

Once upon a time we believed that education was important and that everybody in our society should have equal opportunities. Now, it seems, we have decided that public education is some kind of cesspool not worthy of our tax money and that there is nothing wrong with a system under which the richer you are, the better schools your kids can attend.

That's it!

I'll agree with you that it is geneally considered bad form to attack a man rather than an argument, PP, but in Rupert Murdock's case I think we can make an exception.

You got that right, Mr. Puget. You won't see anybody if you go here: The only problem is, it isn't in some guidebook to "select" climbs.

Ground-up efforts suffer from more problems than just the lack of cleaning, in my mind. True, I have dug out some cracks on rappel that I would have completely neglected in favor of bolted face climbing had I been leading something and when I've climbed from the ground up a first ascent I have left cracks and faces uncleaned, but one of the big problems with ground-up climbing is that you can't see where all the ledges is. When you look down a route, you can often see a lot more about what is going on. And we have talked in the past about how the leader who may be fearing for their well-being doesn't have the time or inclination to think about things the same way the guy hanging on a top-rope may. My one or possibly two pitch a day limit stems not just from the logistical issue of how many hours there are in a day, though. I think it also has to do with the amount of actual care that should go into placing bolts - and I just don't think most of us are good for more than that before we start doing a poor job of it.

I often use the parallel turn when I'm tired, or when in some kind of deepness, or when I'm just on hardpack and feeling lazy, true. But there are some kinds of breakable crust and other horror show material that I find the telemark is better. And I'm sorry to say it, but although you are much faster than I am, you are no Jean Claude Killy, Mr. K. If you wanna look pretty on your skis, you're going to have to get your head out of the toilet and go back to ski school.

Slappy- Yes, rap bolted sport climbs established with a power drill can be set at an alarming rate, but I don't think GOOD climbs can be set via rappel much faster than one can make a first ascent from the ground up. I don't have any experience with one-pitch crags, but on the bigger climbs, at least, it takes days and days to clean a line, TR and pre-inspect it, and properly equip it with bolts and chains. And assuming unlimited battery power or one of the newer drills that gets a zillion holes to a charge, the ground-up first ascent might well go much faster (though I don't think that the climbs would come out as well). Even on a sport-crag, I would guess that one should not try to do much more than a pitch a day -- maybe two on a good day -- if they are really trying to do a good job of it. And this speedy route development assums one is setting a route comfortably below their limit where working the moves is not an issue. (Tthough not too far below their limit -- I maintain that a 5.12 climber is probably not qualified to put up a 5.6 climb because they may not be able to tell where the real 5.6 challenges and the relevant "natural weaknesses" lie.) What do you think?

Down-boy, Cracked. In this instance he wasn't attacking YOU. Get ahold of yourself.

Yes, bouldering is guilt-free because there are no bolts (though some whoescale slaugher is involved in modifying the landing zones and scrubbing moss from those filthy western Washington boulders, isn't it?). Just out of curiosity, what is the "state of the sport." I keep hearing about the troops of the pad people, but I've never run into them. Are the numbers increasing? Is there a bouldering area near Seattle where there are bunches of climbers like there are at Exit 38?

I don't quite understand all of that postmodernism and need to conquer stuff, Scott, but the fact is that climbing is a pretty worthless activity and it is also dangerous. Yes, we are driven -- and we can be pretty self-absorbed about it -- but "a destructive deeply seated need to conquer anything and everything just because [we] can?" You're suffering some serious angst, my man.

If you really need a spray thread on Molly Ringwald, why don't you start one. It is not as if there isn't room on this board for spray and non-spray threads. Do you spray masters always have to bring your spew to these serious and dignified threads, thereby bringing everyone DOWN TO YOUR LEVEL? Can't we have some adventure here -- take a risk -- state your true position on the subject? Is debating bolt practices a dead art, known only to those great posters of the golden ages of cc.com or can we move the board forward into the NEW GOLDEN AGES? Back in my day, "real" climbers knew how to debate the issues of the day. Good people debate; bad people spray. It takes not talent to spray -- all I gotta do is to jettison all sense of moderation and I could spray with the best of you in no time. If you don't like discussion, don't discuss.

I don't think it is total spray yet, Off, because there is enough inherent interest in the underlying topic that we keep returning to it, but we could probably take it to hyper-spray without too much trouble.

Pope- Your bolt-pulling arguments sound eeriliy similar: "If you don't like it, climb some other place." "Don't impose your beliefs on me." "The damage caused by my actions are miniscule compared to other climbing practices." "Climbing must move forward to something more noble." "Just as you did, I'm entitled to alter the rock as per my vision." But not: "There's room for every style or crag: Sport, trad, alpine, ...it's all good." "The best climbers don't need your stinking bolts." "Climbing without bolts is called adventgure. Ever hear of adventure?" "You should tolerate my pulling these bolts. It's not like there is a group of bolt pullers waiting to erase Smith Rock." "You guys who don't climb without bolts are just weak hearted. You feel threatened by the genuine technical competence." "Sure pulling bolts is altering the climb, but the rock was already already altered when they went in. What's the big deal? I'm just restoring a little more naturalness to the crag." But lastly, you rest it all on this assertion: "I may be out of tune with 90% of today's climbers, but I tell you I'm right and all of you are wrong ." How could you defend your practices with arguments that sound like they could be used to defend such a vile practice as chipping?

Just to clarify, I want to point out that Thinker is full of you-know-what where he implies that you will only make a mess out of your first couple of belays. Maybe I'm an idiot and only climb with idiots, but my partners and I still manage to still screw it up sometimes after over 30 years of practice! You shouldn't have too much problem at a bolted sport-belay, though.

This is cool, Oly. Situation ethics? Integrated ethics? I feel young - just like I'm back in philosophy 101 in college once again. We can debate about the Middle East at pubclub tonight but meanwhile we have these "great issues" to pursue....

Scott- There is nothing "ethical" about trying to impose your ideas of style and aesthetics upon others who are doing nothing to harm you, anybody else, or the environment. You may try to argue that it is harming the environment to put up and utilize that sport crag at exit 38, but nobody else but you and possibly Pope will ever accept that argument. There is nothing about true "situation ethics" that says they only apply when they are not in your way. That is the thing about "ethics" they almost only apply when they ARE in your way --- otherwise we're just talking about rules of convenience. In this sense, I say your blanket "bolted routes are wrong" pseudo-ethic is actually more of a rule of convenience than an ethic - because you have told us you think those bolted routes suck and you don't want to climb them anyway. It is a convenient way for you to put down other climbers, but has nothing to do with ethics.

According to some, it is OK to murder if you are murdering Islamic terrorists before they murder you.