mattp

Winter: Isn't the Blue Ribbon Coalition an industry group? If so, that would be like having a climber's lobbying group led by REI and The North Face -- I am sure they would end up supporting some policies that you and I might not be completely psyched about and that might include user-fees. Anyway, even in your reference to the BRC I see some things I can agree with: if there are going to be fees, the revenue generated should be spent to actually maintain some kind of facility or trail in the local district and the program should be publicly accountable. I'm not 100% sure anybody has said that climbers are more arrogant than all other user groups, though Fairweather said he was ashamed to admit his affiliation with climbing sometimes, but I sure do know a lot of climbers who think they are real cool but hunters or fisherman are real uncool. And lots of those uncool people don't even use 2 stroke engines. I agree with managing public forest lands (or deserts or rivers) to (1) minimize environmental impacts; and (2) protect the integrity of the experience for all user groups. I wouldn't be surprised if there were lots of hunters and fisherman, and maybe even some ORV users out there who would also agree. Matt

Can anyone identify the route? Extra points for identifying the climbers because I have no idea who they are.

Here I go, agreeing with GregW again today! I have no doubt that Microsoft would want to be able to scan your computer to see if you have any of that nasty java on there, or to make sure you aren't running unlicensed copies of their software, or to see if they can install something that will make their competitors' programs crash. And I bet they have the technology to do so. Further, I don't doubt that the gubmint might be tempted to spy on some miscreant after they fire off one too many angry letters to their senator, demanding immediate resignation because said senator voted for a tax increase or something.

The journals of Lewis and Clark are pretty interesting, too. You might not want to read the whole thing, but the Mandan's were pretty cool, their encounters with grizzly bears were exciting, and it is fun to read about how they spent an entire winter complaining about having to eat salmon.

Call me cynical, but I don't doubt that they would do this, nor that they could.

Sisu- I agree that I don't see it as a matter of compromising our desire to enjoy the mountains or crags in some semblance of quiet and clean air so that they can be taken over by snowmobiles and dirt bikes. That is why I pointed out the Mount Baker and Lake Wenatchee areas as examples of where I don not begrudge motorized users their access. However, Jon and J_B may see it as a "zero sum game" so that if we gain, the motorized users lose (or the other way around). Even if there is some truth to that view, I still think we should recognize that these other groups are not all comprised of ignorant fat destroyers of the earth and I think we should seek common ground where it may exist. We don't want fees and I bet most of the individual snowmobile riders, ORV people, fishermen, and etc. do not either. All of us probably want more funding for long term recreational use of the National Forests and we would probably all benefit from having areas managed such that the snowmobiler doesn't have to worry about coming around a corner to suddenly find a couple of cross country skiers in the middle of the road and the cross country skiers don't have to worry about whether they are going to get run over when one is trying to help another with a binding problem. In suggesting that some climbers like to present themselves as superior, and stating that I hear them describing their exploits as "facing nature on nature's terms," I am trying to make it clear that I do not agree with such a portrayal of our sport vs theirs. Is your point about my use of the phrase "on nature's terms" that we have no right to claim we are doing this when we drill holes in the rock or rip grass out of a crack system? If so, you are right, a debate of the environmental ethics of climbing may be a distraction from the topic at hand but there too I bet we could find plenty of common ground though you and I may well disagree on some fundamental issues. In my view, it is not asking to sleep with the devil to show respect for other user groups and to inquire whether there may be some areas where individual recreational user's needs may not be served by business interests or governmental policies. -Matt

J_B- REI's interest (might just as well be N. Face or Lowe or whatever) is in selling product. If you think they are inherently eco-friendly as a corporation, I believe you would be seriously dissapointed to sit in on one of their board meetings. Don't let the fact that they have defined their market group fool you: for the most part, they are simply pandering to people like you and me who think we are environmental warriors when we drive our SUV's to Smith Rock for the weekend, pick up a couple pieces of trash while we are there, and then take a side trip over to Mt. Bachelor only to complain about the snowmobiliers in the snowpark that is probably paid for by their organized lobby. I think you ought to listen to more Zappa.

J_B- Those that ride ORV's or dirt bikes or whatever are individual users who just want to be able to go out to the woods and enjoy their Saturday -- just like you and me. And they have rights, just like you and me. Further, their interests are probably no more in line with Yahama then are yours with The North Face or REI. If you cannot acknowledge that, you MAY BE narrow minded and you are certainly being dogmatic and providing evidence to support the complaints raised by Sisu and Fairweather. Think about it: we are all pawns on the same chessboard even if some are black and others white. -Matt

J_B- I guess I never thought it was a rock star's duty to further the "youth" movement. Yes, Janice and Jimmi espoused support for the right (leftward) view of the world, but I always liked the "Frankness" of the darker side of things. Maybe I'm just a cynicial bastard.

J_B Zappa was THE MAN.

Caveman is getting ready for the big GROUP HUG at the New Orleans!!!

Fairweather - Indeed, we share a great deal of common ground. That is why we are able to interact here, on this site. But go for the "East Face" and we'll see if you agree. If it doesn't work out, you'll come back cursing my god damned liberal campaign of misinformation, no? (Just kidding.) -Matt

Now Bill is in the act. Time for a GROUP HUG!!!!!

Fairweather: what gives? You and I have been in some measure of agreement (however small) both here and in the "access" thread? Next I'll be expressing approval of your Mount Olympus photo's. Rock on, dude.

Fairweather - You asked Iain. But I will say that I agree: you have a duty as a parent to try to instill proper values. You also have a duty to allow your daughter to grow up. Does she want to go to Evergreen or Berkeley, some other "liberal" institution? I'm sure you realize this, but if you try to prevent her from exploring the world of liberal politics you will only make it that much more attractive to her. I believe that when kids hit age 25 or 30, they generally tend to revert to their parents' world view even if they dallied in some other perspective. I'm not a parent nor am I any kind of expert in parenting, but my guess is that you're better off supporting her at this stage of the game. If you feel that Evergreen (or any other situation she may embrace) is truly dangerous, you have no choice but to intervene in her choices. But if not, let her grow up. -Matt

Iain- I am not all that well-versed in the ARC, though I have read some about them in the anti fee-demo diatribes from Scott Silver and people like him. I bet, however, that the ARC does not speak for all those who enjoy running snowmobiles or dirt bikes. What I am saying is that the people in those other groups are recreational users just like us, and they are dealing with many of the same land-managers. On Mount Baker, for example, the snowmobile lobby was successful in having a pie-shaped slice of the south slope designated as recreation area rather than wilderness, so they are allowed to ride up to the crater rim. As a backcountry skier and a climber, I use the same trailhead and I am willing to share the mountain with them because I know that it is just about the only alpine mountain in the state where they are allowed. I also know that I will not see them if I go on any side of the mountain other than the Easton Glacier (yes, I know that upon occasion they have violated their boundaries and headed over to the Coleman but this is rare). When I periodically read rants in forums like this board, voiced by skiers or climbers who take offense at their being there, that just doesn't match up with my experience: the snowmobilers on Mount Baker who I have met have been knowledgeable and respectful of other users, and I have had no problem with them. More than anything else, I believe that I have a shared desire to see the place kept clean, the parking lot safe, and to see access maintained even if it may prove inconvenient or expensive for the rangers or a problem for their friends, the loggers or miners who seem to have such a huge pull on how the Forests are run. And I am in awe of their organizational abilities for getting that pie-shaped slice of Mount Baker in the first place. How did they do that? Similarly, I know that just about all the roads between Lake Wenatchee and the Entiat River valley have been designated for motorized vehicle recreation. I have no hard feelings about this but, rather, I wonder how it is that they were so successful as to lobby for such wide access to public lands that, for many of us, seem to be reserved for logging company use only. I DO feel that I share a common interest with those folks who drive snowmobiles over there because we all like to get out there in the winter and spend time in the mountains. Again, I hope they maintain the roads, the parking areas, and the policing of the area, and I hope they do not just do what the logging companies or Disney or Coleman or any other commercial lobby wants and leave the area gated to other users who are not specifically funded by Congress or who pay large user fees. I hope the Lake Wenatchee District of the Wenatchee National Forest is able to engage in long-range recreational planning. I believe that Fairweather and Sisu are right, that where we engage in some kind of moralistic rhetoric about these other user groups, we are missing an opportunity. I am afraid that JB, while stating very clearly a fundamental disagreement with motorized users, fails to recognize that there are some issues on which our interests coincide. -Matt

Fairweather: I can understand your "daddy won't pay" policy for Evergreen, because it is clearly a liberal or perhaps radical oriented fantasy land. But I would say that if you have much respect for your daughter, you should have confidence that she would be able to withstand any indoctrination that she might suffer there. I bet that she is already "lost" if she is interested in going to Evergreen, but if she has a proper head on her shoulders she can make up her own mind at age 18 about what she wants to believe in. And I can assure you, Evergreen has consistently been rated very highly over the years, as far as actually getting a good education is concerned. In the interest of fairness, I should disclose that I graduated there in 1981. I and my friends who graduated at the same time are still proud of and excited about what we did as undergraduates. Can many who graduated from the University of Washington in 1981 say the same thing? -Matt

I believe it IS a proven fact that instant oatmeal causes death. See Vol. 29, New England Journal of Medicine, Pp. 543-44 (Gagme and Thenpuke, 1986). But I've been digging the following, lately, and it doesn't have to be heated: powdered milk grapenuts raisins roasted (salted) sunflower seeds Try it -- it is nutty and sweet at the same time, and if you don't wait so long as to let your grape nuts turn to complete slime, it actually almost seems like you are eating something real. The only other alternative that makes any sense is to just stop at a cafe on the way to your climb.

Yeah, but I'll still tell him to sit the hell down! I can imagine that you can "brace yourself" for a pull using your feet -- especially if you are standing on a flat floor where friction is all you have to brace against. That is why they don't fight a tug-of-war sitting down, I suspect. But the realities of belaying your buddy on a mountain climb are not quite the same as a tug-of-war and in the event of a fall you WILL be jerked around, and you will be lucky if you are able to anticipate the fall and the stance you ended up at is such that you can brace yourself in the exact direction of the pull (or perhaps the exact change in directions as your buddy sweeps off the little buttress directly below into some gully off to your side). I could be wrong but I believe it has been, like, 40 or 50 years since the German alpine club recommended a standing hip or shoulder belay.

Perhaps April Fools' day has come a little early.

Might it be for hooking branches? It could be called the Darrington Pick.

Trask- I may agree with you that there are a lot of naive people in this world and you may find your share of them at a peace rally, but the people who most lack critical thought on the war issue these days are those who eat up GW's lies without asking questions and brand anyone who is against the war as a traitor. I don't believe you fall into that category, but way too many people do.

Scott- Call me paranoid, but personally I would consider a back-up that would not depend on the soloist at all -- a truly "redundant" back-up. (Well sort of, because, as we may recall from a prior conversation, ...)

Trask - I'm not suggesting that motorized groups do not care about the environment. I am sure some of their members do and some don't -- kind of like climbers. What I am saying is that I agree with Fairweather to the extent that climbers do sometimes adopt a smug attitude that says we are better than others and prevents us from seeing where our goals may in fact coincide with those of other user groups. Do you disagree with that idea?

Whatever type of ascender or belay device that you use, I would seriously consider using a back-up of some kind. That could either be a second rope that dangles loosely and you tie off to it every twenty feet or something, or you might back yourself up like you do when jugging a line - by tying off to your rope (below the belay device) every once in a while. This will cause the tail end of the self-belay line to be un-weighted, though, which may render your device less self-moving.