mattp

Our cat is a little angel. Just ask Ray.

For "steeper rock/ice" you may be right. But rather than taking one tool that is not useful for glacier travel and, if it has a bent shaft, is clumsy when placing pitons (it sounds as if you are thinking about a single tool), don't completely discount the possibility of going "old school" and taking an alpine hammer and ice axe. With such a combination, you are all set to clean grass-choked cracks, hammer away at whatever you want, climb at least small amounts of vertical ice, and probe the edges of suspect snowbridges.

If you are doing more general mountaineering than technical ice climbing, a general mountaineering axe is what you want. The straight shaft without any pinky-thing is designed to be inserted into the snow for use as a tent stake or used the same way as a hand-hold on a snow climb. It slots downard between your shoulder straps more easily when you have to make a quick downclimb or rappel, and the curve on the pick is designed for general alpine use rather than more specific to water ice. Length is also an issue: if I was going to climb the Emmons Glacier route on Mount Rainier, I'd much rather have a 70 cm ice axe than an ice tool. It is unusual for someone to blow out of their steps or topple over on a snow climb, but it does happen so I wouldn't discount the self arrest use of an axe either for yourself, or for arresting a slide after your partner falls into a crevasse on a glacier. I often use an alpine axe for water ice climbing and, believe it or not, it works fairly well. I have also used the ice-tool on alpine snow climbs, and it also works fairly well. The right tool for you depends on what you think you are going to do more of, or what you want to do more of.

Cascade Climber: Without more information, I question your attitude here. I HAVE dug a snow cave with an ice axe before. I often DO NOT carry beacons and shovels for a winter climb. I NEVER carry a bivvy bag (though I usually have a large pack and raincoat, and maybe a garbage bag if the weather is poor). My stove HAS failed before. Did they lack sufficient skill to take care of themselves? Apparently not. Did they tell their family that they should start worrying on Sunday? Probably not. There are lots of idiots who trod upon Mount Rainier ill-prepared and these guys may be among them. I have no problem with trying to draw lessons from their experience, but I don't think a public rant based on little information other than how you think you would have packed is very much of a help. IAIN: There have periodically been some interesting articles in the Seattle papers that dealt directly with climbing, and included big pictures and stuff, that did not sensationalize as you fear. In the last two years, there have been a couple of stories about the bolting controversies, portraits of big-name and not-so-big-name climbers, and etc. I'm not saying they lack for sensationalism or that they do not serve their corporate masters, but once in a while we DO see some good reporting. Honest.

Mr K- I'm with you on the ski-party thing: a drive-up location with dry ground and a bonfire will allow many more people able to meet each other than will a winter-camping experience that requires skiing or snowshoeing with camping equipment. I don't think, however, that agenda would be threatened if a few hard-cores make an overnight trip this month or next. Some guys just happen to like to sit around in the snow, freezing their butts off while they wait for the stove to melt drinking water.

Settle down there, WatchDog. You suggest utter disdain for "so called" experience climbers who would be so bold as to head up Mount Rainier with only one bivvy sack and no shovel and no beacon, "barely any food and no water." While I have a hard time imagining not taking ANY water (do you know for a fact that this is true??), I can tell you that plenty of folks who post on this board would not think it irresponsible to set out from Paradise without the shovel, beacon, or more than a moderate amount of food, and no bivvy bag. Lots of us have arrived at an alpine campsite to find that our stove doesn't work. Setting out to climb Mount Rainer last weekend doesn't really sound like a good time to me, but I don't know what they actually thought they were doing. Were they hell-bent-for-glory, and planning to march uphill until they reached the summit or soccomed to exposure? Apparently not. Should they have wandered down off the mountain in something near their original sign-out time? Perhaps (I think I could find my way down from Muir Snowfield in a whiteout, but there are plenty of people who have failed to do so and staying put may not have been a bad call). I don't know what they actually told their family members about what to do if they were overdue, do you? Maybe they were irresponsible, and deserving of your scorn, but perhaps their thinking was: let's see what we can do with relatively little gear, in a real mountain environment (not a winter camping workshop on Heather Ridge). It sounds to me as if they may have done fairly well by themselves (I don't know what "mild frostbite" means – could it be what I call frost nip when my fingertips tingle for a few days after a cold-weather climb?) . To feel some compassion for their worried family members is one thing, but to slam them as you have seems a little overboard -- unless you know more about them and the situation than your post reveals. After slamming the climbers, you dismiss the media as vultures. They may be tools of the <pick one> [liberal left] [corporate conspiracy][government][Rupert Murdock's evil empire], but in reporting this story I believe they presented more or less accurate information and that their readers generally wanted that information. Did they really go all that far out of their way to distort anything -- any more than a story about the basement of the Bank of California building filling up with 3 feet of water? Not only do you slam the media, you then go out of your way to personally attack Newstips and King5News. What exactly is it that you find so despicable about them?

Don't sweat the wand pocket if you find a pack that otherwise suits your needs. A Picket can easily be inserted beneath compression straps and locked on with a carabiner (better 2 of them) and for the relatively few times you will be carring wands, you can fashion a wand pocket by tieing a stuff sack on the side of your pack.

For a group overnight, Smith Brook is good because it has easy flat road skiing into an area where there are in fact a few big trees left standing. There is good yoyo skiing up there, and a couple scenic lakes. It is not the best for classic big ski runs or ski mountaineering, however. With the roads so much more open than usual, we might consider other destinations. If folks want to climb a real mountain on skis or carry snowboards up on snowshoes, Hidden Lakes Peak might make a good group destination. With snowmobile support, the north side of Mount Cashmere might be good.... For great views if the weather is good, you don't have to go more than thirty minutes in just about any direction from Paradise to find a good place for digging snowcaves. If you can't wait for the highway to open up so we can go visit Mr. Parker, there are lots of good places to go. If there is to be a Spring trip to Mazama and an earlier trip is to be a smaller group, planning the whole thing becomes more flexible...

Dustin- I have liked the microfiber wind pants that they have at MEC. They are pretty tough and fairly light. When the ass gets wet, it dries quickly. Personally, I would not want a waterproof patch on the ass because then I'd just sweat more and the main benefit I derive from the windpants over something like goretex is the greater breathability. The schoeller fabric works pretty well, too, and lately that has been more often what I wear. I usually don't find that it needs anything over it except when climbing a dripping waterfall or when, on a technical winter route, I will be sitting in the snow for long periods of time and then am not active for long enough to dry the seat. When hiking through wet woods, I usually take the pants off because my bare legs don't soak up much water. Gaitors keep the water from filling up my boots.

About a mile or so below Crag Camp, on the north side of Mount Adams in the White Mountains of New Hampshire there used to be a trail intersection marked with a sign in what I believe was Greek text. It was the junction of 5 trails, and the spot was called "Pentateuch." Did you put up the sign, Dr. Dwayner?

I'm with you, Cracked. Unless you are ice climbing, windpants will get you through just about every day of climbing any reasonably sane person wants to undertake in a given year.

Thanks, Greg. I had feared it might be even worse than that. "Plenty" at treeline must mean twice that or better ??? It sounds like maybe I should head up there soon.

How much snow would you estimate there was at the parking lot, and in the woods nearby?

Dale- I admit that I have never seen this recommended by anyone, and there may be some drawbacks. But I would think "force placed on the picket" would not be among them if you are meaning a compressive foce along the axis of the picket. Perhaps you are thinking the angle of the pull will be altered by the fact that the cable from the attachment point and the carabiner form a triangle and thus, perhaps, a slight outward pull (perpendicular to the snow surface) may be imparted? Is there also introduced some downward pull (parallel with the snow surface) on lower portions of the picket? If so, might this lessen overall tendency for the picket to pull out ? I speculated about using the cable in a vertical placement, but in fact I do generally clip a carabiner to the appropriate hole and ignore the cable unless placing the picket like a deadman. But the question was, I believe, "is there some way to use the cable." Vector analysis and speculation, please.

People are saying that he has shown he cannot be trusted now because he has a history of playing games with the inspection process and hiding weapons. I believe they are correct. They also say that he skims off the top, and rewards his own people, and is not all that interested in helping the plight of his poorer citizens or tribes not alligned with him. This is probably more true than false. But if past behavior is a measure, he has also shown that he will rebuild infrastructure if he has the opportunity. I would be willing to venture a guess that if the sanctions were lifted or altered to provide more cash flow, he would in fact rebuild power plants, water systems, treatment plants and other infrastructure that was destroyed in the '91 war.

C'mon, Klenke - picture Jim Forman, standing in the Paradise parking lot with his hair blowing about his face, holding a flashlight. Unless, maybe, the rangers ask them to do so, they don't withold information so much as they don't have much information to present; to make the story more exciting they have him stand out in the storm. That's all. It's classic TV news and it can be kind of amusing.

I'd say the Klipchuck Campground on Highway 20, the second weekend after they open Washington Pass, would be a good choice. There are tours of all ability levels off Highway 20.

Fairweather, I'd have to go back through the threads to see if you stated this or not but it has been stated here that the comparison of Saddam to Hitler is accurate and that appeasement now is like appeasement in 1938. Obviously, for the reasons that pointed out, that is not the case. Most notably, there is nobody advocating or even practicing appeasement. Had a coalition of European powers kicked Germany out of Poland after they invaded, destroyed Germany's infrastructure, and maintained a presence there for most of the next eleven years in order to prevent Germany's rebuilding their infrastructure, would you or anybody else here argue that Germany could still have perpetrated WWII? Any effort to compare this situation with history should look at our efforts to accomplish regime change. Clearly, in its weakend state Iraq poses little immediate threat to us or our allies and we are going there to replace the government. This is much more like Afghanistan, Kosovo, Vietnam, or Chile than it is like WWII.

I once saw Shasta and Rainier at the same time, from the top of S. Sister.

Is that Doctor Don on Canary???

Dwayner - You indicate dismay that I would suggest that you said we have no right to comment on the Bible. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I sincerely asked what it was that you had intended in your prior post. In that post, you had offered your usual proffessorial remarks and the message seemed to be that nobody could validly comment on the meaning or relevancy of the good book unless they were willing to complete a scholarly study of theology. I enjoy reading your remarks, Dwayner, but if you are going to be pedantic and put down others' comments as uninformed and random, while exhorting your own as studied and balanced, you really have no right to complain when someone takes offense.

Death triangle or not - what does it matter? I understand the vector analysis, and I agree that we should where possible avoid the American death triangle but the danger imparted by the additional forces placed on two anchor bolts incorrectly slung is completely exaggerated. If there are two bolts, or two trees or whatever, back it up as you see fit and then put a locking carabiner on it. You're good to go for a toprope.

So Dwayner - What are you saying? That cc.com sprayer's have no right to comment on the bible? I am not a biblical scholar, and I wouldn't profess to be able to argue with you, but what are you saying here? Eating shellfish may have been a bad idea in biblical times, and pigs may have been difficult to herd. But what about homosexuals? Is someone who scoffs at the biblical prohibition on homosexualty or someone who deems it a historical oddity incorrect? Or is it simply your position that none of us have a right to comment on the Bible? Please tell us, Your pal, -Matt

The current forecast is for snow above 3,000 or 4,000 feet, and it may be enough to make nice skiing. Winds are predicted to be moderate, and from the South. Look for some kind of avalance hazard on open north-facing slopes, but the skiing may be good on a variety of aspects at the higher elevations. If it is not too windy and if the snow falls with steadily falling freezing levels, it might be a good weekend for backcountry skiing.