mattp

Mitch - tell us more. Here's another story about having fun: When I first began to go out with my wife, she expressed some willingness to go winter camping and I figured I'd take her out for the dee-lux winter camping experience: a snowcave. We drove up to Pemberton one weekend, and it was colder than hell outside so I figured I'd forego my usual routine of sleeping in the back of the truck in an old log dump near town. We checked in to the Hitching Post, and went straight to bed without watching the mandatory hockey. This was a good call because although she had been a little nervous about this whole thing, the bed was warm and in the morning we walked over to the nearby native place for a health-food breakfast and rainforest friendly coffee, and admired pictures of wolves and totem poles on the wall. Diana could see that winter camping trips don't have to be all that bad. Round about the crack of noon, we started up the Joffre Creek drainage. I figured it couldn't be all that difficult to ski up to the upper lake, because it was only a little over a mile and about 1200 feet elevation gain. I was right, but never-the-less it took us all afternoon. By 4:00 or 5:00 we were up at the lake, and I started digging. Not wanting her to get all wet, I did all the inside work and this meant that she stood around a lot. It was cold (below zero Fahrenheit even before darkness set in) and she got a little chilled but soon enough I had a snowcave with plenty of room to sit around inside and a floor level above the top of the doorway to hold the heat; we crawled in and unpacked. I had brought lots of candles and we cooked a dinner of salmon and potatoes and started sipping our red wine. Despite the cold outside, it was warm enough in the cave to sit around with just a light sweater on. As we enjoyed our romantic getaway, the neighbors came calling. A party of three had snowshoed up behind us, and they were tent-camping nearby (those poor bastards, I thought – the one guy knew what he was doing but the couple was obviously new to winter camping and they didn't seem all that comfortable with the situation and it was well below zero outside by this time. Anyway, they invited us over for some hot buttered rum so we clambored outside and sat around in front of their tent for about ten minutes freezing our butts off. "Would you guys like to come inside?", we asked. "No thanks. We're going to bed" was the reply. No shit, I thought; if they aren't going to hang out in a snow cave, what the hell else are they gonna do – I sure hope they brought warm sleeping bags. So we returned to our cave, drank some more wine, and enjoyed a game of honeymoon bridge. In the morning, we had a leisurly breakfast, and waited for the thermometer to rise above zero before we went out for a ski run in brilliant sunshine. The glacier above, with it's icefall sparkling in the morning sun, was dramatic. The snow was perfect. We toured around a bit, took a couple of runs, and then loaded up and skied back to the car. This had been, she said, the best backcountry ski trip she'd ever taken. It took a few years, but I eventually married her.

I don't think the lack of sensitivity is much of an issue and your ability to hold onto even a moderate fall is increased. As noted by Klenke, you can just wear a glove on the breaking hand and you'll still have the same "sensitivity" anyway.

"specialed, I'd pay to see you try to downclimb 5.6 with skiis on unroped" Are you talking sport or trad?

Shultzy's is at 4114 University Way. I phoned them and they said they's save a table for ten.

I had a pretty fun time climbing the East Ridge of Edith Cavelle in the Rockies two years ago. We went up there to climb Mount Robson, and despite the fact that it looked like there might be a reasonably good weather window for the next five days or so, my buddy was put off by the fact that there had not been a single successful party yet that season. So we headed over to Jasper and he talked me into going for Cavelle. The night before, we cooked our noodle extravaganza in the parking lot and the Japanese tourists kept taking pictures of us. As we poured some whiskey to aid in contemplating the sunset behind our peak, a pickup truck with three guys in front and two guys and a dog in the back roared up, blasting some kind of heavy metal. Climbers! They were all jazzed at having climbed the East Ridge that day, and two of them got out, piled into another car, and they all sped off down the road to go drinking in town. The next morning, we woke up early and headed up in the darkness, thinking an early start would assure we'd be in front of the lineup. But we delayed just long enough at the col that a party of four young climbers caught up and we started up the ridge together. Everytime we pulled up on some little rockface to find another one behind it, somebody would say "dude....that's rad!" We climbed up, around, on and over the ridge crest in a mass party of six, all the way from bottom to top. The rock was great, and although it was incredibly scenic and high up enough to know that you really were on something, nobody ever called for the rope. The last few hundred feet were snow-covered, so it really felt kind of alpine as we topped out onto a corniced ridge, with the famed North Face below, leading to the true summit. The whole thing had been "rad" except a couple of times when it was "sketch." From the top, we could see through broken cloud to the Clemenceau Group and the Ramparts stood off to the West. The lake below was a perfect emerald green. That, too, was "rad." On the descent, there was a traverse on a rotten scree-covered terrace that was dusted with snow. It was "sketch." Then there was a moose at the bottom of the mountain. That was "rad." Back at the trailhead, we piled into their truck and they gave us a ride back to the parking lot where we got out and climbed into our vehicle and headed to town for a drink. But my buddy wasn't into heavy metal. Being old guys, we played some cool jazz.

What is this Sorry Charlies place? Character and coolness? Does that mean it is small, smokey, the drinks are cheap and the place is full of hardcore drunks? If that is what you're looking for, try the bar behind the Golden City in Ballard. There is no sign out front and no window, only a red neon sign that says "open" and a door. You go inside, walk around a darkened wall, and the place is decorated CA 1970, with cork and lots of mirrors and a unicorn. You can't get fat tire and they barely even have call-name liquor. But nobody is turned away and you can pick up a date any time you want. "Open" would never work for pubclub, but it is a fun place to go sometimes.

Right on, Tim. And by the way: nice job on the front page reformat this morning

It is kind of odd, isn't it. As far as I know, there is nobody in the world who we think has missiles that can hit us and is threatening to or even remotely likely to use them.

These folks must not be into sausage. I too thought Schultzy's was popular last time -- that's why I suggested it. But Targees, is OK, downtown (somewhere) might be OK, the Zoo has been fairly well liked (though parking there is difficult), and yes, the Alki has been fairly popular too. What is this Sorry Charlies?

Get real, Greg. Do you argue there should be no police forces because the cops are always trying to get more cruisers and every day they give out more speeding tickets? Of course not. And, for an example of an agency where law enforcement and environmental regulation have been reduced, look at the EPA under the Bush administration. Yes, government agencies tend to develop a life of their own and there are plenty of turf wars, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have government agencies. If you want a country where the government doesn't do much, move to Russia.

"Do we follow Al Gore and eliminate the internal combustion engine, force high energy-use industries to change (example: aluminum & steel)? Who decides what is enough? Who tells me what I can and cannot do, buy, use, et cetera?" Moving away from complete dependence on internal-combustion engines is clearly a good idea if not for a reduction in greenhouse gasses, for a reduction in smog (the primary source of smog in American cities is undeniably the internal combustion engine and the financial and health costs are both measurable and proven). Also reduced dependence on fossil fuels would give us more foreign policy options, something nobody could really argue against – could they? Doesn't everybody who has even casually commented on the state of our industrial infrastructure agree that high energy-use industries like aluminum and steel are in drastic need up updating in the United States? Who cares who decides what is enough? Shouldn't we start moving in that direction anyway and then we can argue about when to stop trying? The government tells you what you can and cannot do, by, use, et cetera, Greg. That has been a fact since the beginning of civilization. Get over it.

I climbed the Tooth with the aid of the chairlift because my buddies thought it would be cool to go Euro-style, but on balance I don't think it was worth it. We had to wait for the lifts to start running and they didn't have a one-way ticket, so the fare was a half-day lift pass (not cheap on a weekend). It is not a long ski up to the Tooth -- had we simply put on our skins and started hiking rather than waiting for the lift, we would have been up there just as fast.

While you guys are going to argue whether or not scientists agree about global warming (and once again I will say that I believe your assertions that the point is one for open debate are, at best, several months out of date), will any of you naysayers answer my point about how if we clean up our act and are wrong about whether it was necessary we will only have spent lots of money (a renewable resource, for sure) to update our infrastructure? I mean, what do we have to lose by cleaning up our act?

Yeah, Freeclimb, he's tripping. But, you see, it was the Liberal press that reported that even Bush's guys recognize the general agreemen about the contribution of greenhouse gasses to global warming. The whole thing must be a left-wing environmentalist ploy.

As in so many other areas taste or manners, it is a matter of balance. While I didn't find deadguy nearly as insulting or inane or rude as many regular posters, I certainly agreed with those who felt that his basic premise and the first couple of posts made it appear that, on balance, he would add little. Maybe it is odd, but people tend to be sensitive to jokes about dying and dead people. I would say much the same thing about the SAR discussion: it is a matter of balance and perspective. Sure, I have often met SAR people who seem to be unqualified (at least for technical rescues and maybe even for a simple lost-hiker search), and I am among those who sometimes like to laugh at the incompetent. Further, I believe that people in those organizations are doing so in part to contribute toward public safety but it is also a hobby for many of them who really enjoy the whole thing, are proud to be rescuers instead of mere wilderness users, and who derive a lot of their social life from the SAR activity (really, they do it for many of the same reasons that a lot us climb). But they DO save lives and they DO sometimes risk their own in an effort to do so. So go ahead and make jokes and criticize, but don't lose track of what they contribute and don't forget that one day they may be coming to get you out of a jam or to retrieve your body.

Calm down, Greg. You deliberately post things that are meant to be provocative, and you certainly don't mince words, so why shouldn't DFA be able to be rhetorical just as you are?

"I dont buy harnesses without gear loops. Seems pretty retarded ass from my point of view. " I'm not really picking an argument with Cavey, but I thought I'd note that this whole discussion seems premised on the assumption that you absolutely have to have gear loops on your harness--no matter what--and I dissagree with that premise. I have a harness like an alpine bod, but it is made with seatbelt webbing and a little thinner. I like it quite a lot for winter climbs or general mountain climbs that are moderately technical and I don't use gear loops on these climbs because my pack belt or coat tails frequently cover the harness and it is inconvenient to rack gear there. Also, I find that ice screws, if hung on gear loops, seriously damage to my Scholler fabric pants -- on the top of the thighs, where they hit the ends of the screws with every step I take. To make matters worse, I have found that if I use black diamond or similar wiregate biners to rack the ice screws, and rack them on my harness, they sometimes unclip themselves at belays if I sit down and I inadvertently leave them behind. On lots of climbs, I find a shoulder sling works just fine for the gear and the hammer holster goes on my pack's waistbelt.

WAC 352-32-085 Technical rock climbing. (1) Whenever used in this section, technical rock climbing shall mean climbing while using such aids as pitons, carabiners or snap links, chalk, ropes, fixed or removable anchors, or other similar equipment. Technical rock climbing includes bouldering and free soloing (respectively low and high elevation climbing without ropes). (2) Technical rock climbing will be allowed in state parks except it is: (a) Not permitted in natural area preserves; (b) Conditioned in heritage areas, natural areas and natural forest areas; © Not permitted where the director or designee has closed the area pursuant to subsection (3) of this section; (d) Limited in state park areas without climbing management plans pursuant to subsection (6) of this section to the use of routes with established fixed protection, new routes that do not use fixed protection, nor require gardening/cleaning with any type of cleaning tool; (e) Not permitted in state park areas closed to public use. (3) The director or designee may, permanently or for a specified period or periods of time, close any state park area to technical rock climbing if the director or designee concludes that a technical rock climbing closure is necessary for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public, park visitors or staff, or park resources. Prior to closing any park or park area to technical rock climbing, the director or the designee shall hold a public meeting in the general area of the park or park area to be closed to technical rock climbing. Prior notice of the meeting shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the area and at the park at least thirty days prior to the meeting. In the event that the director or designee determines that it is necessary to close a rock climbing area immediately to protect against an imminent and substantial threat to the health, safety and welfare of the public, park visitors or staff, or park resource, the director or designee may take emergency action to close a park area to rock climbing without first complying with the publication and hearing requirements of this subsection. Such emergency closure may be effective for only so long as is necessary for the director or designee to comply with the publication and hearing requirements of this subsection. (4) The director or designee shall ensure that any park area closed to technical rock climbing pursuant to subsection (3) of this section is conspicuously posted as such at the entrance of said park area. Additionally, the director shall maintain a list of all parks and park areas closed to technical rock climbing pursuant to subsection (3) of this section. (5) The director or designee shall establish a committee of technical rock climbers, to advise park staff on park management issues related to technical rock climbing for each state park area where deemed necessary by the agency. (6) Each state park area with an established advisory committee of technical rock climbers will have a climbing management plan which will specify technical rock climbing rules concerning overnight stays on climbing routes, bolting, power drills, stabilization of holds, group size and activities, gardening/cleaning of routes pursuant to chapter 352-28 WAC and RCW 79A.05.165, chalk, special use designations for climbing areas, protection of sensitive park resources, and other such issues required by the director or designee. Climbing management plans that relate to natural forest areas or heritage areas must be approved by the commission. The director or designee shall ensure that any technical rock climbing rules contained in a climbing management plan are conspicuously posted at the entrance of the affected park area. (7) Bolting will be allowed as specified in climbing management plans. (8) The use of power drills will be allowed only if the park climbing management plans specifically permit under specified conditions for bolt replacement and bolt installation on new routes. They are otherwise prohibited. (9) The addition of holds onto the rock face by any means, including gluing, chipping, or bolting is prohibited. (10) Except as provided in WAC 352-32-310, any violation of this section and rules contained in the park management plan and posted at the park is an infraction under chapter 7.84 RCW. [statutory Authority: Chapter 79A.05 RCW, including RCW 79A.05.030, 79A.05.035, 79A.05.055, and 79A.05.070. 00-13-070, § 352-32-085, filed 6/16/00, effective 7/17/00. Statutory Authority: RCW 43.51.040. 98-04-065, § 352-32-085, filed 2/2/98, effective 3/5/98. Statutory Authority: RCW 43.51.180. 96-02-015, § 352-32-085, filed 12/21/95, effective 1/21/96.]

"Is Kit the man so many years ago that would use his 357 Python to shoot slings off of the Lower Town Wall?" Sounds like him.

Toast- If you go, be ready for the interagency SWAT team to show up. PullinFool is right, the Wedgewood Boulder is slippery and not all that impressive, really, but it is pretty cool that there is this law in the Seattle City Code.

Greg- Are you for real or are you trolling? Check out the definition of "arrogant" in the dictionary: "full of or characterized by excessive pride or self-esteem; overbearing." If we cleaned up our act, at what would indisputably be great financial cost, we could move to more efficient and sustainable methods of energy production and the like and whether we are right or wrong about the greenhouse gasses contribution to global warming there would be no permanent harm done, but lots of old equipment would have been updated. If we don't clean up our act, we are gambling that modern science is wrong and even Bush's guys are now admitting that humans probably do contribute to global warning so I don't think that is a good bet. Isn't the truly arrogant position the one taken by those who say we don't really know if we are harming the environment and let's not change anything about our practices until we do know it?

"I can't do what ten poeple tell me to do -- so I guess I'll remain the same.... Otis Redding

SMC 12A.54.010 Climbing prohibited. It is unlawful for anyone to climb or be upon that certain rock or boulder known as the "Wedgewood Rock" located within the public street area at the intersection of Northeast 72nd Street and 28th Avenue Northeast. (Ord. 99363 Section 1(a), 1970.)

"Springtime multi-pitches at Castle Rock" Good call. In the Spring, the swallows soar about and the river roars below Castle Rock; snow covers the high country and the high peaks are not really open yet for alpine rock climbing - the crag is at its best. I've had some good times at Castle Rock this time of year.

"At the north pole, there is no sunlight at all from the winter solstice all the way to the vernal equinox (roughly 91 days)." And I don't like it when it gets dark at 4:30 p.m. Those poor bastard seals must really be depressed.