mattp

High, I think dberdinka's basic premise is fairly sound though I would note that it is a whole different ballgame on those big peaks and our normal sense of "what is right" doesn't quite apply. "Up there," people routinely climb well outside any "safe" zone in terms of preparedness and teamwork doesn't work the same either. I suspect that most of us, if faced with a fixed rope high on K2 and the energy to climb it, would ascend that rope regardless of whether we had adequate skills or reserve to get back down in the event that it was not there for the descent. And once things are going wrong it all too often becomes every man for themself.

Bolted belays may offer a sense of security, but most of the time I'd say that it is actually the protection pieces that safeguard moves where you might actually fall that are the most important -- and far more important than, say, one of three pieces you probably installed at a belay. I have not paid careful attention to Accidents in North American Mountaineering for several years, but my bet is the number of belay station failures is pretty small compared to the number of accidents due to failing protection. A trad climb with bolted belays does offer some confidence and a cheaper and easier prospect of a retreat, though.

I didn't mean to sound as if I'm down on structured learning, but I just seem to hear a lot of folks suggest it is irresponsible to go out climbing without more formal instruction, and once a week we read about how it is absolutely essential that every rock climber practices how to escape the belay or whatever before they ever consider leaving the ground. We also see folks complaining that this or that curriculum was inadequate or so and so was an irresponsible party leader because "what if something had gone wrong." In my own case, I'm pretty sure some folks around here would say I was irresponsible to take an inexperienced climber on a multipitch climb, and to lead technical rock, without a qualified belayer.

It is common for people to overestimate the steepness of snow and ice. Standing on an actual 45 degree slope feels damn steep and unless you've done a lot of high angle ice climbing it is difficult to tell yourself it isn't much steeper than that. An old standard formula is to take the angle that you think it is, cut it in half, and add ten degrees.

Yesterday, I took a cc.com poster to Index for his first rock climbing outing and after we were through I told him: a day or two of further instruction and some time spent fooling with the gear and I’d say you could take on moderate rock climbs with a reasonable margin of safety. Nuts or not? Some folks like to practice and study to death these days and others prefer to just do it. My new friend has been heading into the mountains on his own, with companions that have little experience, and he’s been able to do some pretty good climbs including Sahale Peak. He and his pal read Freedom of the Hills and then taught themselves how to do self arrest, practicing it forwards and backward, and they’ve been doing some moderate snow climbs but have avoided glacier travel because they recognize their lack of experience. This guy’s read Freedom of the Hills and John Long about rock climbing and without any instruction from me he knew how to jam and what was needed for a good belay anchor. He nearly got one of my cams stuck but was it his fault or mine - placing an expensive gizmo in a location where it could get over-cammed if not taken out just right? He’s been practicing his knots and knew the figure eight, double fisherman, how to properly coil a rope. He’s been bouldering at UW rock a fair bit. Yesterday, we climbed two routes in the Great Northern Slab area, and I opted for routes that I could have solo’d because my partner had never belayed before and I didn’t want to take the time to practice belaying sufficiently that I’d have real confidence in his belay – and just how much confidence should I have in a first-time belayer anyway? But he handled the rope just fine as far as I could tell, and he completed two rappels without any problem (I belayed him as he rapped on a single line and then I tied the two ropes together to rappel as I normally would). He’s going to take a rock climbing seminar at the end of the month, and I don't know the curriculum but I bet they'll teach him how to escape the belay and practice "building an anchor" and I hope they'll spend some time on gear placement. I told him that after that he’ll probably be fairly well-prepared to take on some easy climbs. I warned that learning what constituted a solid placement of gear, how to deal with loose rock, and routefinding are more advanced skills that one only learns with experience and he should seek opportunities to climb with more experienced climbers rather than team up with his inexperienced friends at first, but can’t somebody with basic common sense and a minimal foundation go out and enjoy the hills? In my years of climbing I have not observed that those who slowly progress through a structured climbing curriculum come out of it showing any clearly greater margin of safety or good judgment than those who are motivated to seek out opportunities to climb with more experienced climbers and study up and practice on their own.

Nice post, Bill. Most of the time, those who proclaim "all politicians suck" or "government is not the answer" or "corporations are evil," are tossing about slogans that largely amount to an excuse not to actually think about something. I think you are right about how politicians often start out with some integrity and laudable goals that can get hijacked as their political career unfolds. Certainly, those attracted to and who do well in politics may have certain traits such as an ability to speak out of both sides of their mouth at the same time and an inclination to seek power or attention, but I'm betting both Obama and McCain at least started out thinking they were trying to do something positive. Having said that, I share some of your cynicism at this point - certainly Obama has proven himself willing to pander to the masses just as McCain has. Take this oil reserves idea for example: why the hell would we tap into what are held for a serious national emergency just for a short term bump in oil prices? But McCain? The gas tax holiday was completely nutty and the suggestion that normal Americans other than stock holders will benefit from granting more opportunities to American oil companies is just plain stupid.

Good quote. This pretty much describes just about any big climb, whether it be a wall, a big high altitude mountain, or a big alpine route. Yes, I've had actual fun on more than one outing, but the actual "fun" days are usually found on smaller endeavors where dehydration, exhaustion, and overall fear are less. Going out with a bunch of friends to yuk it up on a familiar climb = fun. Stretching my limits and struggling for 22 hours without a break = fun in retrospect more than the actual moment. For me, there have been some shining moments on big climbs where I felt it all came together in some way, but the "fun" part has more often come while sitting in camp or celebrating after the climb was completed.

I admit: I've carried them "purse" style too. It is not manly, but it does offer easy deployment and they don't droop down to trip you up as much as they do hanging vertically. They do, however, get in the way of other racked items if you have pins and qizmo's and ice screws on a normal shoulder sling.

I don't mean to sound snide, but I question where you would want to rack 4 or 5 pickets. I have never ever carried 4 or 5 pickets on a climb anywhere -- and I've climbed "alpine" routes in North America, Asia, Europe, and New Zealand (Europe not really). I have actually brought that many pickets on one or two trips where I planned to use them as tent stakes, but I have never "racked" that many. For the most part, I consider them to be marginal as anchors, although I have (rarely) encountered snow conditions where I trusted them. I've seen insanely steep snow in Alaska, but any terrain where I've actually used pickets was mostly semi-technical where I used them at a belay or carried one or two for a possible crevasse rescue. I don't think I have ever placed one as "protection" in the middle of a pitch. Seriously: I have never carried more than two unless I was planning to use them as tent stakes. In answer to your question: If I want to keep one accessible I usually carry it clipped to a pack strap, with a 'biner clipped to it above mid-point so it hangs vertically but dangles the least possible amount and stays as much as possible out of the way.

There's plenty of tradition behind things like this. Exum Ridge on the Grand is the closest analogy I can think of, but think too of the North Face of Mt. Shuksan (it is not north of the summit, ends at an outlying shoulder, and faces NNE) or for another example of how history and tradition affects things like this consider that the fat that published rating reflected the crux of the original way Lovin' Arms at Index was done even though there was a distinctly easier variation nearby. The "upper" N. Ridge of Stuart was climbed in 1957. The "lower" half later. I don't disagree with the telemarker -- there is some good climbing on the lower portion and in particular at the start -- but if I did the route again I might well do only the upper half.

Damn, Will. You're stooping to Mountie bashing?

The down booties can be slippery and downright dangerous if your camp is in a location where there is potential to slide over the edge of something. I used to know someone who would glue running shoe soles on his booties for this reason.

Right, but Obama was the one who said he was going to be "post-racial" (whatever the fuck that is) and NOT bring race into the race. Yet, he has repeatedly over recent days. Yes, the idea that he could be "post racial" is rather hard to define but McCain's "common sense conservatism" is no better, and we actually DO know what they mean by these phrases - in a general if not specific way. Prole and KK have it right about how complaining that he is "pulling the race card" is mostly just a code phrase that means: "lets not have whatever discussion is timely." This week, McCain's whining about how Obama's playing the race card was really nothing but a dodge with a bit of negative attack add mixed in: he could easily have addressed the question of whether or not he or his supporters have in fact tried to portray Obama as a muslim or as "different" from mainstream America. That, of course, would not have been to McCain's advantage so he chose to play the "anti race card" instead. Obama's proclamation that he is "post racial" may or may not not stem from any great idealism but wouldn't you admit that his campaign has stayed well away from any Jesse Jackson type rhetoric and he's done a remarkable job of minimizing the extent to which he becomes the "black candidate?" This is certainly a lot more meaningful than Bush's "compassionate conservatism" ever was and in my mind a more compelling stance than McCain's complaints that "we've tried racial quotas and preferential treatment is bad for all Americans." Obama's position (or at least his posture) with respect to racial politics in America is refreshing. McCain's? He's simply recycling campaign slogans that have been used since the Reagan years.

I think you'd be doing pretty well to climb anything else in combination with the NE Ridge of Bugaboo in a single day. The route is not huge, but it is long and the descent complex enough that most parties find it a full outing. The standard route on Snowpatch is an excellent climb. Most people will not like the McCarthy route because of the squeeze chimney. Surf's UP is a more popular route these days.

Are you ignoring the obvious again, Fairweather? We've seen a lot more about how Obama is muslim and swore in on the Koran and his wife is not proud of white America than we have about how he's being mistreated on account of his skin color. Clearly, it is those who favor McCain who have been playing the race card the most aggressively.

This post generated two pages of discussion, at least half of which was jokes, deliberate misinformation, and name-calling that added nothing to any real discussion. The ever brilliant Mark McJizzy observed that “there is a lot of supposition going on here.” He said it is more likely that this is preparation for a mapping effort that may or may not have anything to do with any major management or development proposal. Further, he pointed out, the housing economy and history of nearby Crescent Bar suggests that a major development in this area is unlikely. Somebody said climbers should get involved, and Peter Puget agreed: he offered the following: Here is a link the WDF site: http://wdfw.wa.gov/ Here is a link the WCC info page for Vantage: http://www.washingtonclimbers.org/Climbing/vantage.htm Puget wrote that the Frenchman Coulee Climbers' Coalition was a group active a few years ago. They have (had?) a Yahoo Group set-up. He wasn't sure if they are still alive or not. Builder206 provided a link for the Yahoo group. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FrenchmanCouleeClimbers/ Sobo offered some history and noted that the FCC arranged and paid for the porta-lets to be brought upon the property and were (for a while, at least) maintained by them.. He suggested the group may now be defunct, or at least not very well funded, which might explain why "the shitters are in such disrepair. Mebbe they just got tired of replacing them after the Gorge Bois fucked them up and/or threw them over the cliff across the road after every concert." Lucky entered the discussion to say that the cc.com joke squad was not serving climbers well by taking a topic that is of interest to many and insulting the guy who brought information to cc.com while turning the whole thing into a circus sideshow. I agreed. I received helpful reminders in the form of personal messages complaining that I was too critical of the brilliant contributions of cc.com’s finest jokesters who would never ever consider being insulting in any fashion, and I was told I took all of this too seriously. Carry on. Discussion and information might be helpful.

Try to follow along here, Scott. We're talking about a new bridge here - and how to pay for it. Remember? The question that those complaining about the toll seem unwilling to address?

Umm, Scott: we're talking about a toll. Yes, there has been some talk of imposing tolls on existing roads, and they could impose a toll on 520 before beginning construction, but that is not the basis of KK's original objection. Pretty much everybody agrees that we DO have to build a new 520 bridge and the major questions are how much capacity and whether to build the new interchange on top of the Arboretum or the climbing rock and how to pay for it all.

But Bill: these folks want * no urban planning because that is "inefficient government intervention that kills the economy" and * no traffic jams because "that sucks" and * the State to pay for a new bridge on five miles of roadway that will take 5% of a year's annual operating budget of the entire State because they think they are so overtaxed already and why the hell should they pay any toll? and * the free market (that is, everybody else) to absorb the cost of any externalities such as increased automobile traffic, pollution, greenhouse gas If faced with the obvious suggestion that the numbers don't add up: the State which they argue is irresponsible can't afford to spend that much on such a tiny bit of roadway, KK says he would accept a toll set at a rate that was based on a different project that was completed in a different economic and environmental climate when - 40 years ago? What are you smoking, Bill? DO you actually WANT those evil government bastards telling you how to make your community a better place to live?

Any different ideas on this topic?

You seem to have time to discuss things here on cc.com. Think how much better this world would be if you'd go out and tree sit some time. You cold bring your deer rifle and a flask and make a point about how "the man" can't tell a "real man" how to hunt.

Hey Panos: While you are there, ask Jim about the rescue operation alluded to briefly in the first post. The quote I remember is: "Don't worry, Mr. Nelson, we have the mountain surrounded."

waxing prophetic? Ha ha. You got me there Dechristo. Perhaps that was a Freudian slip reflecting a substantial cynicism on my part. I'd still like to see broader participation in our democracy and I think we'd benefit if more people actually paid attention to politics, though.

I have quite a few Heliums on my rack and I like them a lot. They are light, easy to handle, and the lack of a sharp hook where the gate closes is a real plus in getting them on and off the rack or using them to rack wired stoppers. I don't do much aid climbing and I don't remember struggling with them when hanging on gear mid pitch or at a belay. The biggest draw back with the Heliums I have found is that, as with all wiregates and bent gate 'biners I have used, they unclip themselves more readily than a traditional carabiner. They do so less than some other wiregates I have used, though. They also do not work well for a carabiner break (for rapelling) and the belayer cannot hear a "click" when the leader clips the gear they've just placed.

Wow, Clavote. I'm sure you are right about most of this or all of it, but missing is a little perspective me thinks. Young people might actually smoke weed and socialize while they are protesting? Certainly not unique to "hippies." Self centered and self righteous? Not very special either. Unclean? This probably is more on the mark as a byproduct of some hippy ideals but when flung about as an insult it IS just an insult - used to dismiss or disgrace the accused. I agree that there are more important things to protest over than a grove of oak trees and youthful idealism may be misguided or self important. I realize, too, that Berkeley is known for some pretty stupid stuff in the name of political correctness. But I don't see any big harm in this and the disdain that you express would be better reserved for those blind sheep who see the powers to be screwing us every day and selling our future to the Chinese without saying anything about it because they are too busy worrying about their stock portfolio or whether there is a new scratch on their beamer. We need MORE people who care about trees or turtles or war. I think our nation would be better off if it were not just "dirty hippies" who were willing to take to the streets, and if more would take to the airwaves or organize for the ballot box... or actually get involved at ANY level in our national political narrative.