mattp

Would any of you George Bush fans or promoters of the war against Iraq care to answer my questions about what has been and what should be our role with respect to arms proliferation? I know you probably think it was cool to seize the scuds headed for Yemen, but I'm curious what you think about these matters in a broader context.

Question: do you guys think the U.S. sells weapons to countries with possible ties to organizations involved in terrorism? Second question: if we are contemplating a war in some part of the world, do we have a right to intercept weapons shipments in the region? Perhaps Yemen agreed not to purchase weapons from N. Korea, but what if they hadn't made any such agreement? Are we expecting to be at war with every nation in the area? I'm not against seizing weapons that are being shipped illegally (if they were), but what are we actually doing about weapons proliferation if you look beyond this incident and review our history and our foreign policy?

If I am not confusing it with another place in the area, I was recently talking about this with someone who has put up some climbs there and he expressed some concern about the private property issue. I don't know whether he has had some contact with an unfriendly land owner, but in any event caution is in order. I'd be hesitant to promote the place, or even to visit, until someone attempts to resolve the issue (not out-and-out against it, but hesitant). My thinking is that there are plenty of places to climb and if this one is a good addition to the mix, someone should see if they can arrange access; if not, I don't need to go there. If you do go to check it out, don't park in the way of, say, some apparently unused side road, keep a low profile, and respond respectfully if you meet the land owner. If you actually have to walk along someone's driveway or pass through their yard or on their nature trail or something, you oviously should ask permission.

I don't know what the "G3 or BD/Skye Tip-tail kits" look like, but in my opinion the ONLY way to go is the "Canadian" system where the front of the skin has a wire loop over the tip of the ski, and the tail has a strap sewn on it, which wraps around the tail of the ski (small groove needed here) and then has a loop of elastic which leads to strap and a "D" ring that slips over a screw. If your glue is working well, it doesn't matter what strap or clip system you have but the tension from the rear of the ski is crucial if not. Any system that has the elastic pulling on the front of the skin rather than the rear will allow the tail clip to slip off if your glue is starting to fail and you change angles or slip around much.

Skiing downhill with skins on really DOES suck and, unless you are on some kind of tight trail with a deep track where you can't get out of the rut to slow down, I don't know why so many people think it is easier than simply traversing and crashing once in a while. I almost never have to resort to skinning downhill, the lowest form of cowardry in the entire backcountry universe, but I once used the skins turned around backward so we could simply walk down hill on an extremely broken up glacier in zero visibility. With a little help from some duct tape, it worked like a charm! And nearly full coverage was helpful on the few wind-blown bare sections. For ski mountaineering, I would recommend shaped skins cut to leave just a tiny bit of the edge exposed – just enough so the edges can bite. One downside of shaped skins is that when you fold them over on theirself to put them away, it is a little more difficult to get all the glue surface covered up.

Looks like we're about to take a direct hit. radar loop

Clean taps?????? Is that an issue???? Too small??? Nobody's ever gotten sick there and Hatties has not yet been too small for us -- not even close I don't think -- but we keep hearing about how small it is. What is this anti-Hattie's Hat strong-arm conspiracy?

It seems to me inarguable that just about every weekend there is a group or maybe a couple of groups of cc.com climbers who seem to converge on some climb that was discussed during the week on cc.com. Big Four ice caves, Observation Rock, Coleman Glacier, Eldorado ... whatever. But just as with the climbs featured in Jim Nelson's books or in Fifty Crowded climbs, anybody who doesn't want to visit with the masses can simply climb elsewhere. There was probably nobody on Pyramid Peak or Spider Mountain (two relatively approachable peaks with excellent ice climbs that were probably in good shape last weekend). One could lament the crowds caused by cc.com or they could simply go elsewhere, but there is nothing wrong with somebody wanting to go where other climbers are suggesting they may find a fun route in good shape.

Thanks for the link, Jim. After briefly scanning that report, I am inclined to agree with you that the tribe's history and practices seem well documented and I am prepared to accept the idea that climbing is more intrusive (to them) than a highway tunnel. But I'm not so sure the Access Fund shouldn't request that the rights/desires of climbers be taken into consideration in any U.S. government agency (Forest Service) management plan. After all, the Access Fund is a climber's advocacy organization and their job is to promote access -- not necessarily with a blinder to other groups needs -- but at least to ask that access be discussed. This may not be a situation where there is any workable compromise and it may have to be that climbing will either be allowed or it won't. I didn't notice anything about the spiritual use of the area being seasonal, for example, and there is no way the modern American climbing community would agree, for another example, that only males should climb there. But the Access Fund, in promoting a certain alternative that favors climbing access, is following their mission. Perhaps they should should have given at least some acknowledgment of the history of tribal usage at Cave Rock, but the balancing of priorities and claims and rights and such is to be undertaken by the Forest Service, not the Access Fund.

If you do not line up something in advance, you may do OK to just show up and see who's there. When I was there fifteen years ago, I first climbed the regular route with a parter I had lined up in advance and we had a good climb but I wanted more. So I picked up a partner for one of the south face routes, an Aussie named Malcom, and he turned out to be a much better partner than my first one. I've picked up partners this way when travelling quite a few times, and so far I have never regretted it.

I don't have any information for you, but my guess is the road is fine. There has thus far been very little snow down to the trailhead elevation -- what is it - 3000 feet? -- and very little rain for a long time. Even if by some freak of nature you have to park well down the road, it would be an easy walk to the trailhead.

Nice one, Mr. T.

Tex is right when he says "some of you are just posting like the hardest crack you have climbed and stuff". In my case, Slow Children IS one of the harder cracks I've climbed, but I think it is also a great pitch so I seconded the nomination. However, the title of this thread was "best moderate crack pitch." Ropegun says a "moderate" crack pitch is one that is 5.11a and under, but I think Fred is more on the money when he nominated the Great Northern Slab -- although short, it is a very clean and classic crack and it is moderate by any pride-inflated standard. Surprisingly, at 5.6 it is one that almost demands crack technique. Yes, a sportie could lieback and edge climb it to avoid using a jam, but that would probably make it at least 5.9. I notice nobody nominated Damnation.

Not to be snide, Lawgoddess, but Josh is right -- the approach is not that bad. In fact, it is not bad at all. You will find few North Cascade mountain climbing approaches that are easier. Go for it!

I suppose I would have to agree with you, PP, that some of those listed may be less than one of "the best." Toxic Shock, for example, is good enough, but the only reason it is popular is that it is one of few truly "moderate" climbs at Index. If it were 5.11a, for example, I doubt anybody would walk all the way up there for a climb that is frequently wet at the start, is discontinuous, has that usually slimy step-accross, and really only has two fifteen foot sections of the "crack" climbing that the climb is known for.

Of the pitches listed here that I have done, I agree that all of them are excellent. I think Sloe Children is particularly so because it is continuously steep and challenging but there are plenty of stances where one can shake out and place pro, and it finishes with that wild lunge for a rounded knob. But moderate? You may be a good climber, Ropegun, but I don't think 5.11a crack climbing can properly be called "moderate."

I heard the same story as Mike. Hey Mike: why don't you go out there and climb it and come back with the TR?

quote: Originally posted by gapertimmy: I'm locking the board tonight at 7PM for the remainder of the holiday weekend to fix all of this shit. You can't do that. It is our god-given right to ignore our in-laws while we spray on the internet. You owe us. We'll have to send Caveman and a dozen other thugs down there to make you start it up again if you shut the board down.

That is the Bruce I'm talking about. In the 1970's, he was the most consistently active climber at Grand Ledge, wrote the "guidebook" and more or less the president of what was called the Michigan Alpine Club. He moved west for many years, but I think he eventually moved back to Michigan, maybe in 1990 or so. Bruce was/probably still is a good man.

Yes, it was Owl and Thistle that I was thinking of. Kells is that Irish fern bar near the market, isn't it? It looks as if Dante's would be a popular choice for tonight, and we can pick a downtown location for some time soon. Maybe by next week the Bon Marche will light their Christmas display and we can go caroling.

Is the picture posted above the "high strength tie-of?" If so, it looks like a good way to anchor a rope to a tree to me. The multiple wraps, if snug, will probably eliminate any spinning of the rope around the tree and minimize damage to the tree and to the rope. If you are using a rope as a long runner so you can set a top rope using a tree that is far back from the edge, be aware of the possibility that the rope can swing back and forth (and sweep rocks from the cliff-top or suffer some abrasion) if your climb is not directly below the tree. Also, consider the possibility that a climbing rope may stretch when loaded, even with a relatively small load from a top-rope fall.

Sorry. My compouter or the CC.Com server is slow and I thought my post was lost. [ 11-25-2002, 04:45 PM: Message edited by: mattp ]

Dante's is at 5300 Roosevelt Way NE, in the U-District. See you in hell or maybe you could beg for special consideration and we could go back to - what was that place on Post right by the ferry dock that we've been to three times - was that Kells?

Like you said, Scotch: not to put words in his mouth. But I bet when David gets back from his weekend he'd offer to set you up with some and if for some reason he's not -- I will.

Yes, I think it IS fair to say that he has sought to keep it quiet about Squire Creek Wall. I'm not entirely sure I can blame him, though, and he is not the only one in on this conspiracy.