mattp

Of course, before we plan a pubclub around them we better see if they are interested. I posted an inquiry on Colin's thread but perhaps I'll delete it and send him a p.m.

Nice one! Tell us more!

Way to go guys! That route is one of select few routes that may be significantly underrated in terms of overall difficulty in Jim's select books. I wonder how often that route comes into what might truly be called "good" condition?

I thought CJZ had a good idea in suggesting we try a dining establishment some time. Northlake Pizza isn't too far from Fremont or Ballard, and its right next to the Burke Gillman. How late is it open? Might Colin or any other sub-twentyoner's make an appearance if we did that?

Sloan Peak, February 7-8, 2003 Which Cascade climber hasn't stood on top of a summit, from Mount Stuart to Mount Shuksan, and noticed the striking profile of Sloan Peak, dominating the skyline west of Glacier Peak? Fred Beckey calls it "the Matterhorn of the Cascades" and while this accolade may be a bit much, I agree that Sloan Peak is outstanding and, besides, it stands near the Mountain Highway. I had been wanting to climb it for years. Earlier in the week, I had discussed a weekend ski trip to Canada but family obligations were to require my presence in Seattle on Saturday night. With the high pressure building and the weather predicted to remain stable through the weekend, however, I HAD to do something. When Wotan of Ballard e-mailed to ask if I could climb on Friday or Saturday, I replied: "what about Sloan?" His reply was: "that's what I was thinking." You see, two great minds do think alike: here was a peak that stands close to a road that normally isn't drive-able in the middle of winter so we'd be able to drive at least five miles closer than in a normal year. With recent rainfall up to high elevations, followed by only moderate amounts of well-bonded new snow -- and that having mostly fallen above 4,000 feet -- the approach would be relatively easy walking and the climb should not be avalanche prone. Lastly, with only minimal technical difficulties and those all coming above 6,500 feet, everything that mattered should be frozen (the freezing level had been at 4,000-5,000 feet for several days); we could pretty much count on being able to get up and down in a day or day-and-a-half in fairly casual style even though it was a significant Cascades summit and this was February. I could work 'till noon on Friday and we could still squeeze in a good climb (I worked 'till 10:00, and we split town). The hike up Bedal Creek was the standard Mountain Loop Highway stuff. Gooseberry, Slide Maple, and Devil's Club completely obscured the trail for 100 yards at a time, and numerous windfalls and icy creek crossings made for interesting travel. We walked, crawled and jumped to the end of the trail, followed flagging up a wooded spur, and crossed the high basin below the west face of Sloan. As the sun set slowly in the west, we gained sweeping views of the surrounding mountains as we gazed upwards at the great granite cliffs above; once again, we agreed, we were blessed to be shined upon by the mountain gods. Above 4,000 feet, there was enough soft snow atop an icy crust to impede progress but we made it to camp at the high col SW of the peak just after (rather than the planned-upon just-before) sunset. We set the tent and sat by the stove in fading light and, aided by the light of a half moon, enjoyed a windless and relatively warm evening. Dawn comes late at this time of year, so we enjoyed a full night's slumber. Well rested, we set out again as it started to get light and headed over to the base of the "lower shelf" on the south face. The knee deep snow proved hard work, and it took a full hour and a half to wallow over to the shelf, and swim upward to the connection point that had appeared tricky from camp but turned out to be relatively easy. Wotan took the lead, and this picture shows him just about to start on fifty feet of thunk-hard neve, about 45 degrees or so to reach the "upper shelf." Very nice. Above this, there was a gully pitch blocked by an ice-clad chockstone, and then we were on the upper west face, where goat trails wander to the summit during the summer. At this time of the year, however, it was real climbing. Not terribly technical, and any self-respecting hot-shot would turn his or her nose up at it, but the sun was out and this was quite enjoyable for a couple of old guys like us. Soon enough, we reached the summit. Ever mindful of my family obligation, we didn't linger for long but there was time for a quick victory smoke and then we down-climbed the route (leaving a couple of pitons in situ for a gear grabbers or clean climbing police of this world) and ski-daddled back to camp to pack up and run back to the car. I made it to dinner on time and I'm sure Wotan made points at home for returning at a respectable hour.

Fleb- After the first Leavenworth fires, I called the Leavenworth Ranger Station to ask if I could get a permit for an enchantment trip. This was at least one, and probably more like two months after the fires were out. They said the entire area remained closed because of the danger that half-charred but still standing trees might fall on a hiker (the access trails passed through a mile or two of burned timber but the Enchantment Basin, of course, had not burned). I insisted that I had hiked through burned areas before, and I'd be willing to take my chances. They said "no dice." So then I asked if I could approach the area from Ingalls Creek so that I would not travel through any area affected by the fires. They said no. Why? They said that if they caught me up there - even if I had a hiking permit and my car was parked at an Ingalls Creek trailhead - they wouldn't know for sure that I hadn't actually hiked up Snow Creek!!! If they close the Mountaineer Creek trail this year, look forward to more of that kind of law enforcement.

I don't really understand the qualitative difference here. Having read Don's description of the AG system, it sounds to me as if it is simply another variation of the NCCS attempt to grade routes according to "length of route, time required, average and maximum difficulty, ease of escape or retreat, effects/hazards from weather, objective dangers, and "challenge or degree of commitment". I have never been overly confused by the application of the NCCS grades to pure rock climbs, because it has always been obvious to me that a climb of Liberty Ridge is a much more serious (read dangerous and committing) endeavor than a climb of the Grand Wall despite what their relative NCCS grades or technical difficulty ratings might indicate. When I evaluate a climb, I look at the given ratings but also at the verbal description, the range or formation where it is found, and a topo map. I also usually make it a habit of trying a fairly moderate route for my first climb in a new area, and thus I am unlikely to equate the overall difficulty of a grade VI 5.10 rock climb in the Bugaboos with a route rated the same on North Twin. To me, the potential indication of 17 different levels of difficulty seems likely to be just as much a source of debate and confusion as increased information. I appreciate that Don may be clarifying things by falling back upon a more "pure" grading system that hasn't been "polluted" by being applied to pure rock climbs, but I don't see AG ratings as inherently better than the NCCS and YDS combination that I already understand.

Ade- I emailed Jim Ruch and he replied that (regarding winter climbs at Snoqualmie Pass) "I've done all the regular stuff and a few first ascents. The NY Gully and the Washington Dihedral are the firsts. The NY Gully is well documented but the Washington Dihedral has never been documented to the best of my knowledge. It's really only a practice area to the left of the NW face of Mt. Snoqualmie I did with Bill Lidell years ago. A couple of good pitches of mixed climbing in a dihedral. I have some pictures I can dig out if you want them. "

But Veggie- What are the prospects for a favorable outcome vs an unfavorable one if we invade? And how would the situation get worse if we waited for another several months or even a year? Do you think Norman Schwarzkopf has a point or not?

To you guys who are all hot to invade Iraq, I ask: What do you think about what Stormin' Norman said last week? "The general who commanded U.S. forces in the 1991 Gulf War says he hasn't seen enough evidence to convince him that his old comrades Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and Paul Wolfowitz are correct in moving toward a new war now. He thinks U.N. inspections are still the proper course to follow. He's worried about the cockiness of the U.S. war plan, and even more by the potential human and financial costs of occupying Iraq. " Quoted from the Washington Post.

Cheese! Are they still making CHEESE???? Isn't that contrary to international agreement? Obviously, this can not and will not be tolerated in a post 7-11 world!!!!

Erik - Don't you think a policy of containment might work? Give peace a chance!!!

But what are we going to do about North Dakota?

Maybe we should send the fighters to North Dakota? After all, we need no more proof of the fact that they are harboring nuclear weapons!!!

NbyNW- I agree that the primary reason all of us are griping about the fees (both parking fees and wilderness fees) is that it is inconvenient and annoying. I also agree that we climbers often expect special privileges in our use of public lands. But you and Rat suggest that we should appreciate the fact that forest practices have improved in recent years, and that there are hard working and underpaid wilderness rangers who truly care about the mountain environment, and somehow you both imply that this should affect our overall confidence in the United States Forest Service. Again, I will repeat myself to say that the USFS has presided over the full-scale rape of our national forest land, and I will note that even Rat, in his well-written defense of modern forest practices alluded to the fact that changes in the institutional program have primarily come about not through the efforts of the "good guys" within the agency, but through the effects of lawsuits and other political pressure from outside the organization. The vibrant mountain forests have almost entirely been removed and replaced with tree farms, and this had been overseen and facilitated by the USFS. It is not inaccurate to call it deforestation, and while it may not be nice, I believe the moniker "deforest service" may well be more accurate than "forest service." I am glad there are some good people there and I am sure there always have been. I attended a thoughtful presentation on the use of funds generated by the Fee Demo program in Mount Baker Snoqualmie National Forest and I believe that this program probably is, as you say, an important source of funding for trail maintenance and wilderness management programs. But as you know, the law enforcement officer who enforces that program in the Leavenworth Ranger District is a complete jerk and every encounter with him only further's our anger over the fees and our mistrust of the District management. You are right, that change will not come from playing games with Larry the Tool, but can you blame anybody who feels that this is an appropriate response to being harassed by him? I acknowledged in my first post that the permit system has led to some meadow recovery in the Enchantment basin. But I have already stated how I think it is not the right tool for the job, and I think there is some validity to the idea that the system places a particular burden on climbers who may require flexibility so they can go when snow or weather conditions will be favorable and may require a permit that will allow them to camp near their objective. Most climbers that I know are simply NOT able to hike in and climb, say, the South Face of Prussik Peak or Backbone Ridge on Dragontail and then hike out in a single day. And I bet that, on average, climbing teams in the wilderness are probably smaller in number and less likely to want to have a campfire or to dig trenches around their tent or to leave trash behind than are those who go there to hike and hunt and fish. In wilderness areas around Leavenworth, climbers almost certainly do have less overall impact than hikers, hunters, fishermen, and horse packers. For thirty years, I have found the Leavenworth rangers to be hostile to my climbing objectives while the forests around there have just about all been carted off to the mill. A weekend backpacking trip costs $70.00 and I am liable to get a ticket for even an inadvertent violation of some rule because the employees think they have heard it all and therefore cannot cut anybody any slack. I'm sorry, but I cannot really find much to appreciate about the fees or the way in which they are administered in the Leavenworth area.

Dru - Are you sure that the North Cascades are not part of the Canadian Rockies???? Damn.

fhf- Rat has said, twice, that he is also against the fee demo program. (Edited to note he said he was against the permits as well.)

I believe that when I climbed the route I did in fact drop something like fifty feet to pass around some rocks, but as everyone has stated -- it was obvious where to go. I'm guessing that Mike's "warning" is based on some confusion that actually happened more than once, but maybe at another time of the year or something.

On a Northwest Airlines flight, the pilot once announced that we were over the Canadian Rockies while we were still over the North Cascades, though we may have been on the Canadian side of the border at that point. Twenty minutes or a half hour later, we passed over the Bugaboos... That "loser" from Utah is right. It is ALL the rockies.

Rat- You are right that we have to pay to maintain our public lands. That's why I pay taxes. I don't think that enjoying these lands should become a privilege for those who can afford it. -Diana

Rat- You offer some good information to this discussion and I can't say that I disagree with the idea that forest management practices have improved in recent years. And not only do you offer good information, but I find much of what you state to be appealing. However, I would still argue that well over 90% of our old growth forest is gone -- and will never be replaced by any tree farm. I don't know the numbers, but I bet it is the case that over 75% of the public lands in the state of Washington are cris-crossed by roads built with public dollars (almost ALL of the private-owned land is completely lost). I bet it is also accurate that well over 90% of the original salmon spawning habitat has been irretrievably lost and the native productivity is not expected to recover any time in the foreseeable future. I could be wrong as to any of these statistics, but you get the idea. I am glad they are finally improving land management practices but, as you note, there is real reason to worry that the forest management practices will only get worse with George Bush as president. Aside from resource management issues, this is a discussion of the practice of requiring fees for the public use of public lands. As my wife stated, I believe that there is something fundamentally wrong when we have, as a nation, subsidized private industry in the resource extraction business for a hundred years and now we, as individuals, must pay to simply walk and camp on the same lands. -Matt

I agree, Ed. One of the articles I read quoted an avalanche tech as saying there was a funky layer left over from a warm spell in November, and it sounds as if that layer may be bad news!! Clearly, there is an unusual potential for large and dangerous avalanches this season and Klenke is right in the respect that, after two serious accidents, a cautious person might want to stay away from the Selkirks right now. I would not, however, second guess the judgment of either the Canadian Avalanche Association or the leaders of this high school group in connection with this tragedy. Avalanche hazards are difficult if not impossible to predict with certainty.

Don't tell anybody, but yes, I was back. This time with another partner (I won't tell who). Once again, we were turned back by warm conditions - wet rock slabs with slush on them. Who knows: we may yet have winter conditions but even when they forecast a freezing level of 2,000 feet it doesn't seem to be frozen at 4,000 feet this winter!!! By the way, just in case anybody is wondering: N Face of Sperry Peak looks like a mediocre climb and it is protected by a forest of slide maple and devil's club, so there is really no reason to go there unless one is a true afficionado. I enjoyed my brush-beatings, however, and I am anxious to return. I enjoyed both outings and both partners expressed interest in going back -- would anybody like to join us? Call me at 1-800-devil's-club.

This is not really Mattp--we share a computer . It is Diana instead and I haven't registered to post on this site. First of all, we subsidized the logging industry for decades. That industry was one of the most heavily subsidized in history. Now we have to pay to enjoy the outdoors. It was $70 for camping and parking permits for four adults and two kids!! We camped at Eight Mile Lake for two nights. I kept wondering how many families could afford these expenses and teach the next generation to appreciate the mountains. Why should we have to pay Disneyland prices for this?

Rat- Thread creap is a serious issue on this board and I should be ashamed of myself for persuing an off-topic debate (I might even have to move this thread to "SPRAY"), but what are you trying to say here? Do you think the Forest Service has in fact systematically protected the mountain forest environment in their management of logging practices on Nationaal Forest lands around Leavenworth? Yes, I sloppily painted with a broad brush--not only on this issue but on the law enforcement and public relations topics as well, but how is it that you disagree? -Matt