mattp

specialed - your girlfriend would give you shit about partying with people you met on the net but not about climbing with them? -mattp

I don't disagree with WillStricland's recommendations for routes, but they are the routes in Fifty Crowded Climbs and you will find them busy with parties who are probably not quite ready for them. There is a reason they are famous (they are great routes), but my advice would be to consider some of the less popular climbs unless you are out to tick the 50 Classics. In many cases, these other routes are JUST AS GOOD. Petzolt Ridge, for example, is similar in character to the complete Exum, though easier, and where it joint the Exum you will be on generally third and fourth class terrain where it is easy to pass a slow party.

Mr. Ed - It's definitely SUB alpine, but I'd like to head for Squire Creek wall with somebody who is up for some adventure climbing. - Matt

Many Cascade "ice" climbs don't really become ice until late season. I don't have first hand knowledge of this one, but I would guess that it might not really become icey until September or so, and from what I've heard about the Boston Glacier, I believe the approach will be reasonable although you might have to cross a 'schrund.

Saturday and Sunday, July 7 and 8, there will be a trail project on the trail to Three O'Clock Rock at Darrington. Last year, the work party was able to greatly improve the trail to the crag, and this year we hope to work on the next segment of the trail, which passes Four O'Clock Rock and heads up to Squire Creek Pass. This portion of the Squire Creek Pass trail, in the Eightmile Creek drainage, has been all but abandoned and is in such poor shape that the Forest Service has even taken down the sign at the trailhead. Note: this project is sponsored by the Access Fund, the Washington Trails Association, and The North Face, and has been planned in cooperation with the Darrington ranger station, Mount Baker Snoqualmie National Forest. Note also: volunteers are asked to sign up at the web site for the Washington Trails Association, www.wta.org . The registration form can be activated by selecting trail teams, then schedule, and scrolling down to July 7 and 8. Come out and show your support!

Trevor - The NE Buttress route is long, but technically very easy, and I know several parties, including myself, who have descended the same way to avoid having to carry over the top of the mountain. It makes a reasonable three day outing, and is doable in two. The campsite on the alp slope below the glacier is *****. - mattp

Klipchuck Campground, about ten miles down the highway to the east, is very pleasant and much sunnier than the one right next to road which is the closest to the pass. It can be full on a nice weekend, though.

If the old bolts are 1/4", you can probably remove them by pounding a knifeblade piton under the hanger, doing the same with a lost arrow, and then prying them out with a crowbar. Once you get them out, inspect the bolts to be sure you didn't break one off and leave some metal in the hole (if so, you won't be able to drill in that hole any further)and you can then drill the holes out with a 3/8" or 1/2" bit, and install the appropriate new hardware. As to what is appropriate, 3/8" has become standard but Darryl Cramer has suggested that if you are replacing a belay station it is not overkill to use 1/2" bolts. I don't know how easy it is to get hangers that are already drilled for a bolt of that size, however. One consideration would be what you then plan to use for the actual rappel/belay station, and I believe that you should install chains (or hangers with rappel rings attached directly to them) if you are going to the trouble to set a new belay station. Wads of slings are ugly and can be seen from quite a distance away, and even if they aren't chewed on by rodents the sun will immediately begin its attack and eventually they become unsafe. If installing chains, I prefer the Fixe belay chains or similar set up that is powder coated to minimize visual impact and which is convenient for as many as three climbers as well as being immediately recognizable as something that can be trusted. I know of no way to remove 3/8" bolts. They can often be chopped and tapped back into the hole so that the stud doesn't stick out and you might then tap a pebble into the hole or use caulk or epoxy and rock dust or sand from some crumbly rock nearby, as noted already in this thread. If anybody knows how to remove a 3/8" bolt, I'd like to learn about it. One web page has speculated that an acetylene torch might burn them out, but wouldn't this make a mess?

If I thought it would really work, I'd be for further discussion on this bulletin board and in some kind of in-person town meeting type forum, with the goal to be the airing of opinions and formulation of some common ground rules for developing and maintaining climbs. We'd really have to have some expert moderator, however, or this would only degenerate into a mudfest. Also, we'd have to have some kind of policing to enforce any ground rules or there would continue to be some people who would ignore "public" opinion and do what the hell they want. So for now, I'll just try to voice my opinions when given the opportunity, listen to others when confronted with a different idea, and urge everyone to take responsibility for their actions and try to behave in such a way that reflects well upon the sport. This is vague, bland, insubstantial and romantic drivel, I know, but what can a guy do?

I've been driving a 4x4 Toyota for several years and, while it has been a very reliable vehicle, it has the following downsides: it only carries two people comfortably, it gets poor gas mileage; it handles poorly at high speeds; and it offers poor visibility. Further, I drive on logging roads at all times of the year and I find that I use the 4 wheel drive only a few times a year. If you are going to use the vehicle primarily for commuting and you are a weekend climber, I would look for clearance, yes, but unless you are using the truck bed for hauling cargo on a regular basis I don't see the advantage of the pickup. Minivans and station wagons will allow you to sleep in your vehicle.

Mr. Puget - You suggest that I have elevated Brian Burdo is some kind of Saintly status, but I have clearly indicated in my prior posts that I do in fact share some of the critical views of what has taken place at and with respect to Exit 38 and Little Si. My point is that there were some things that were done well, and I think that Brian put more effort than you recognize into planning for minimum impact and trying to promote a good public image for climbers but, even if all he did was to "obey their commands" with respect to certain issues, he did that. There have been recent situations in Leavenworth and at Vantage, I believe, where this did not happen. No, Mr. Burdo is not a saint. I already said I think Exit 38 is an eyesore. And yes, he is a self-promoter. But his efforts to make something that would reflect well upon the climbing community have, in my view, been under-recognized. And it IS personal: real people take real actions with real consequences and we cannot talk about what was done without at least implicitly talking about the individuals who did it. I cannot directly comment on the impact of events at Exit 38 or Vantage on a decision by the Banks Lake manager because I don't know much about what has happened at Banks Lake. I will say, however, that my guess is that the "Banks Lake manager" is responding out of genuine concern. While Exit 38 may have been cited as an example in some discussion one day (or even several times, for that matter), I bet the root issue is that where there is a sport climbing area there will be climbers, cars and dogs, and they will want to stay overnight in the area. Mr. Manager would not be doing his job if he didn't worry about the impact of a new sport climbing destination in his (or her) area, and even if Vantage and Exit 38 had never been developed he should have been able to look as far as Smith Rocks to identify the concerns. As to future discussions at Banks Lake or elsewhere, I believe climbers will want to be able to demonstrate that they are willing to work with land managers and neighboring property owners, and I would hope that we can point out the positive as well as the negative aspects of what has taken place in other areas. Perhaps Joshua Tree is the poster child for responsible climbing area development, I don't know. I agree that sport bolting and the "public" acceptance of it are negative trends in our sport. Yes, the irreversible nature of installing a bolt, and the unsightliness of grid bolting give those opposed to climbing a strong argument to use against us, whether the bolts are the real issue or not. And the hot debates among the climbing community over the retrobolting of a route like DDD at Castle Rock certainly add fuel to some of these fires. But the tide is against those of us who simply want the issue to go away. I support anybody's campaign to promote traditional climbing values over sport climbing methods. But let's try to be realistic and let's not go on a tirade against sport climbing areas but instead let's focus on how those might be developed and maintained in a manner that will allow all of us to keep on climbing. - Matt

Peter and Pope - I agree, Exit 38 is an eyesore. I view it as an outdoor gym, and I go there for a workout sometimes, but it is my least favorite among all Washington climbing areas. I agree, too, that I wouldn't want to see that style of climbing "invade" traditional rock climbing areas and I think it unfortunate that there are a lot of climbers who think that an outdoor gym is what climbing is all about. Agreed, thirdly, that the guidebook is a glossy overproduction that contains little more information than the prior six or ten page article published in Rock and Ice. But my point was that I believe the area and the book serve a large group of climbers and that there are a lot of positive things that could be said about them beyond just that they keep the riff-raff away from Index. Chipping and gluing aside, few people putting up climbs and promoting an area have ever worked as hard as Brian did to assure that their efforts would not cause access problems or other bad PR for climbers. And the place is wildly successful if you measure it by how many people are out there having a good time. I agree with Mr. Blakely that there is room for a variety of approaches to the sport and I don't see Exit 38, in and of itself, as a threat to Index or Washington Pass. - Matt

Have you ever been lied to or discouraged by "the man" offering bogus information? What can one do, besides never trusting anything a ranger says? I once called the ranger station in Sedro Wooley to ask about ski conditions at Washington Pass. The ranger said that the skiing was poor, avalanche conditions were highly dangerous, there was no place to park, and the campgrounds were all closed. Three days later, I called the ranger back and told him that the skiing was great, the snowpack stable, the DOT had plowed plenty of parking, and two of the campgrounds were open. He asked: why are you telling me this? He made it clear that it was not his job, as the person answering the backcountry recreation line, to provide information helpful for climbers and skiers. Many times, I have been misinformed by these folks. But even worse, they lie! Once, in Icicle Creek, a ranger lady standing in front of a gate told me the road was closed and we might as well head somewhere else. When I replied that I had been told by another ranger that the road was to open that day, she told me that it was going to open in 20 minutes! I've had these experiences in National Parks, National Forests, and at State Parks. But not so much in Canada, Europe, or Asia.

Mr. Puget: I'm not saying everything about Exit 38 is positive for the sport, and I'm not suggesting that events at North Bend climbing areas don't impact land management policies elsewhere, but I do believe that the North Bend development effort can be cited as an example of how climbers and the Access Fund can work with land managers to solve or prevent problems. For example: (1) none (or few) of the routes on World Wall I top out because of the manager's concern for rare plants growing on top of the crag; (2) at the request of the same land manager, Brian chose not to publish his climb or climbs on the main cliffs of Mt. Si; (3) the location of Exit 38 was selected in large part because it could accommodate crowds without causing traffic and parking problems; and (4) there are numerous other issues on which efforts were made to address concerns raised by the land managers and the neighboring property owners. In this respect, my guess is that the State Parks are more alarmed about what has taken place at Vantage than they are about what they've seen at North Bend, but in both cases they have certainly seen that where there is a sport climbing area, there will be lots of climbers, cars and dogs. They also know that some of those climbers and their dogs and may be their cars as well will be inconsiderate and perhaps even offensive, whether trad or sport climbers. I am unclear about your last comment/question: "if you as a climber consider 38 an eyesore, then can you imagine how others might view it? And isn't their viewpoint worthy of consideration when defining what is acceptable behavior?" My last post concluded that I believe there is room for many different approaches - and that Index, Washington Pass, and Exit 38 can co-exist. To those who think Exit 38 is an abomination, I say: don't go there and thank god that most of the people who climb there will never expend the energy to hike even as far as Snow Creek Wall, let alone Prussik Peak, so there is at least some inherent limit to the tendency for such climbing styles to take hold everywhere. To those who think it represents divine perfection, I say: get a grip. To those non-climbers who think bolts are an abomination, I say: lets look at what the impacts truly are - I'm open to discussion and I hope you are. All of us will probably agree that we are experiencing a boom in the sport and there are access and environmental issues that must be addressed. The question is one of balance. To me, "acceptable behavior" means (1) respecting other's, (2)minimizing damage to the climbing environment, (3) minimizing impact upon neighbors or other area users (see #1), and (4) climbing safely. [This message has been edited by mattp (edited 06-20-2001).] [This message has been edited by mattp (edited 06-20-2001).]

Pope - Your mocking of Brian's effort is certainly in some measure justified. However, I hope you and everyone else who climbs around Western Washington recognize that even though the motivation behind his publication may have been commercial, and the climbs he set up may in some measure lack style and aesthetics, Brian is the single person most responsible for creating a very successful climbing area safely enjoyed by thousands of people. Not only were the crags set up to be user friendly in the new sport tradition, but consideration was given to how to reduce impact on the neighbors and other recreational users and Brian was particularly active in gaining the involvement of other groups, including boy scout troops and the access fund, and in working with the land managers. In addition, I find it admirable that a guy who climbs 5.hard spent so much effort to develop 5.easy routes that can be enjoyed by climbers who aren't as good as he is. While he is not the only one who set routes, built trails or worked with the North Bend area bureaucrats, Mr. Burdo deserves a great deal of credit and if anybody deserves to "cash in" on the place, it is him. There are other guidebook authors, just as commercially motivated (or more so), who have not given nearly so much of themselves. -Matt Perkins

What do you guys use those knives for? I've been climbing trad routs, big walls, sport, alpine and ice for over 30 years and I have almost never used a knife except for preparing snacks. Maybe 6 or 8 times I have wanted to cut some slings to clear a wad of sunbleached slings from some overstuffed bolt hangers and I didn't have a hammer to simply pulverize the offending slings.

It snowed lower than 5,000 feet in the last two weeks, so you may find new snow lower than that. It has been very wet lately, so you will almost certainly encounter a lot of deep snow and trailbreaking may be a bit of work! Watch out if the sun comes out, because this stuff will turn to glop at best, and might be dangerous. I haven't seen any current information about crevasses, but I can tell you that the Sulfide is usually not terribly crevassed after the initial 800 feet or so leading to the shoulder sw of the Summit tower (out of desperation, I've even skiied it in September). On the summit rocks, be especially careful because they tend to shed their dressing with even a hint of warming or sunshine. A good source of information would be the ranger named Kevin, who usually works out of the Mt. Baker ranger station in Glacier (telephone listing is under Maple Falls, Wa.). The Sulfide is not in his "area" but he is more helpful about paying attention to recent climbers' reports and relaying that information than anybody else I've ever dealt with at Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie NF. The staff at Sedro Wooley have, in my experience, usually offered nothing but discouraging and inaccurate information.

I've climbed with pick-up partners in a variety of situations, including Index cragging, Yosemite big walls, and a technical route on the South side of Mount Cook, in New Zealand. I have yet to regret it.

I am one of what I believe were several differnt climbers guys who suggested the approach over the col when Jim and Peter were preparing the book and, while the book might have pointed out that this approach is nowhere near as friendly as the ice lakes approach, I believe it remains a valid alternative because it is so much shorter than climbing nearly to the summit before doing the climb, and hiking almost all the way around the thing. I don't know about the direct descent from the col, but the traverse did indeed involve travelling accros ledges and slabs littered with loose rock and there was a short bit of down-climbing on garbage, but I would go that way again if I ever went back to repeat the climb. Maybe I have a higher tolerance for junk than some. Jim, I think you were too hard on yourself.

Peter - You didn't ask for a reply, either, but I don't understand your aversion to three-person parties. For alpine climbs or long trad climbs, three is (or can be) slow. For walls, I have found it to allow a good division of the work and in no way to slow things down. Perhaps you didn't have the right team of three. -MattP [This message has been edited by mattp (edited 06-08-2001).]

I don't know what Twight might mean, but I would go with ScottP - a white gas stove is probably not a good choice for conversion to a hanging stove, because the risk of a flare up is so great.

Charlie - Assuming you are comfortable scrambling in exposed terrain, I believe you would easily be able to make the rappels up on the ridge with one rope (many parties make just one or two short rappels there). In the couloir, there are rappel stations along the sides allowing rappels over the step section, which is probably less than half a rope, and the schrund, if there is one. Again, assuming you are comfortable with the terrain, you should be able to get down with one rope.

Several people commented on the salacious nature of the recent Rock and Ice magazine. Being the lecher that I am, and being intellectually interested in the issue, I had to go out and buy one. But the women pictured there are all fully clothed and nowhere do I see anything misogynous or even what I would think is mildly inappropriate. Sure there are women climbing, and one is pictured with lipstick on her face. But few of the pictures show body shape or skin, and I don't see what the big deal is. Is it just the fact that there are posed pictures where it might seem the object was simply to portray a female climber? How is that different from a pumped up sport climber dude with rippling flesh, cool sunglasses and a doo? I share a disappointment that the magazines have turned to hype and gloss, but its not a matter of sexism, is it? I find all the fascination with corporate sponsored "extreme" alpine climbing just as bad. And by the way, I showed "Rock and Porn" to my politically correct fiancee and she agrees.

My understanding is that you can transport empty fuel bottles, as long as they do not smell of gas. In preparation for flying to Alaska, I've emptied bottles, washed them with dish soap, and let them air out. Voilla - smells like new. You can pump air through your MSR or similar stove, and then leave the fuel cap off one that has a built in tank, and you will probably pass an inspection. Or you might bring a brand new stove, still in its package. The problem is, however, that if you are going somewhere weird, you may have trouble getting good quality fuel to refill them when you get there (the kerosene available in Nepal, for example, makes a quick mess out of a multifuel stove). Some destinations (I've heard about this when planning travel to coastal Alaska) have ground shipping services, or boat shipping, but this is slow. Also, you have to have an 800 number for the shipper to call if there is a spill or damage to your shipment. Another possibility I've heard of is to order fuel cartridges for a propane stove and have the delivery address be your destination - this way the vendor has to make the arrangements. [This message has been edited by mattp (edited 05-31-2001).] [This message has been edited by mattp (edited 05-31-2001).]

The newspaper article this morning addressed this topic and it was interesting to see that, even though they highlighted the expense and stated that public payment for mountain rescues is controversial, they also quoted the park superintendent as saying that climbing rescues are in fact less expensive than all the searches for kids who wander out of campgrounds and they quoted the Sheriff as saying that the public pays to rescue people who do stupid things in other activities so it may only be appropriate for the public pay to rescue climbers (he didn't suggest that climbing was stupid, though, but only that even if you view it as stupid you should still support paying for the rescues). Though the article was written as if it were against publicly funded rescues, any careful reader would have definitely gotten the idea that there are two sides to the question and many, I would guess, might even be persuaded to see our side of the issue. I say, thanks to the Park Superintendent for trying to provide some balance to the public perception of rescue costs, and thanks to the PI for trying to provide real information about the issue!