mattp

The roadbed damage one mile up that 49 road is relatively minor and I suspect they will fix it soon. When I called the rangers they said they were waiting for it to stabilize a bit because they didn't want to fix it while it was still slumping. My guess is that with a couple of relatively dry weeks it is probably stabilizing.

Good stuff, Mr. Simpkins, but you have a system that may not suit everybody. For example, few of us want to carry a frameless pack as we find the extra weight of two small wands in the back of the pack is worth it. And in my book, tents do not suck. A light tent weighs little more than two bivvy bags, and is far preferable. Your leave it all home and carry the tiniest pack approach is not bad, but not necessarily the model that I think inexperienced climbers should shoot for. The key is to figure out what gear you really want as opposed to stuff that you only think you want because it was sold to you or appears on some "newbie alpine climber checklist" and thinking about where you may want heavy duty as opposed to light weight. If you are going to be doing sitting glissades, for example, the light and fast wonderpants are probably a bad idea. If you are going to be bushwacking in the dark, those super small led headlamps are not adequate. If you are going to hike a trail to a basecamp, there is nothing wrong with a bulky pack or having extra items like maybe a beach chair strapped on the outside. Etc. As for a "tip" rather than a reaction to someone else's advice, I'd say that new climbers should not overlook some of the non-technical skills and consider off trail backpacking and scrambling objectives worthwhile along with the tick list peaks in Jim Nelson's guidebook. Set a top rope on a steep snow bank, and learn to climb up and down without using an ice axe and crampons. Practice plunge step on steep slopes with a good runout at the bottom. Climb a messy gully somewhere and spend time talking with your partners about how to manage it so that you are not exposing your buddies to rockfall - looking to traverse back and forth so nobody is below anybody else, bunching up where this can't be done, and taking advantage of sheltered places to stop and wait.

The Clear Creek road is more or less open now. This is the logging road that serves the Darrington climbing area (Road 2060). At about two miles from the Mountain Loop Highway there is some roadbed damage and some snow remains on what is left of the road itself but a Ford Focus made it over that rough spot today and we got stuck coming out but it is doable with 4x4 for sure. Higher clearance than a station wagon would be recommended. Today our hero sawed his way in there, removing probably 100 trees blocking the road, so it is passable at least to the fork about a half mile before the Eightmile Creek trailhead. I stood by and watched (clipboard in hand), while our friend Mr. Builder helped clear the debris. There were an amazing number of blowdowns and some avalanche paths where we have not seen them for at least 20 years. One, on the road below Exfoliation Dome, had a tree at least 3 feet in diameter broken off amid the wreckage. The road needs more saw work and some roadbed work as well but the Darrington rangers tell me they are busy with other higher priority roads for now. Don't head up there in your brand new sports car or you'll regret it.

I HAVE encountered rangers asking those sorts of questions as "trick questions." Most of my dealings with rangers have been pretty good, and it seems that in general I have fewer and fewer complaints as the years go by but as recently as four or five years ago there was a particularly obnoxious ranger in the Leavenworth District who would play 20 question, looking for a ticket angle. I don't know an easy answer to the original question. If you start saying "I don't want to answer that" or "I want to discontinue this conversation," it is probably not going to go well if you happen to have run into a ranger who may be a little too into law enforcement. You probably have some fundamental Constitutional rights, but that is not really what dictates how you want to respond to a ranger who is making you uncomfortable.

Is is going to be an interesting election if the Republican fanatics are going to claim that McCain is more likely to support alternative energy development than Obama, Obama tries to promote himself as the candidate of faith and family values, and folks suggest that conservatives who have voted against every possible welfare or headstart or blah blah blah program and promote notions of social Darwinism actually care more about poor people than liberals.

I bet Jacob's Ladder is dry right now. There may still be some seepage on the last pitch of Dark Rhythm and Rainman. See you up there.

I referred to that "ilk" because that is Fairweather and KK's favaorite word to bandy about when they are accusing liberals of being divisive. As far as donating goes, I have seen it argued that conservatives donate more to charity or some such thing - or at least they report more on their tax returns - but I'm not so sure that such claims have been made when it comes to working in relief organizations. As to politics (and we are talking about presidential candidates here, you are a whack job if you think the republicans stand for "compassionate conservatism." Is that like the Klu Klux Klan approach to racial harmony? We've already had that discussion. OH: and as far as government action vs inaction? Doing something in Iraq was clearly worse than doing nothing would have been. In the case of our oil economy even your buddy KK seems to support some form of "government action" and not just a free market solution. I heartily disapprove of many actions our government has taken over the last 7 1/2 years as well you may also. Its a matter of perspective, no?

'Hope to see you up there this weekend. Bring a chainsaw and some knowledge of how not to get hurt with it and lets see what we can do.

The pumpkins were OK, I thought, though their lead singer was certainly psycho!

Just curious: do you guys really have a problem with substantive discussion? KK was going to explain to me how McCain is so much more about alternative energy development than Obama and now you've scared him off. I really wanna know because maybe I shouldn't overlook the guy.

I'm not sure I follow all that, Fairweather, but I agree that the point is not that republicans vs democrats is good vs bad. Lets actually look at the candidates, for once, and talk about what we do or don't like about their policy proposals or how we think they might run the country. If I have mistakenly said McCain favors drilling ANWAR when he wants to drill our coasts, my point remains the same: a gas tax holiday and "let's tap our domestic supply" are both poor solutions to anything for the reasons I already described. Oh: and if it is not useful to talk about democrats good and republicans bad, or vice versa, why do you keep talking about "the left supports this..." and "lefties' quash dissent." Not only do you continue to do what you condemn, but you are wrong. It is not "the left" who supports a big industry of corn-based ethanol production. Yes, some greenies have urged more ethanol and the cappacinno crowd you oh so abhor seem to like to run biodiesel in their Volvo's, but the greens care about the price of food on the world market and impacts on the poor WAY more than those of "your ilk" and more than anything else the whole thing is benefiting business interests and is pushed by farm lobbies. Second of all, the Republican party in particular and the right in general has been a lot more effective at quashing dissent over the years. To the extent that "political correctness" has become a joke, it should be. But dissent? It is those on the right who said that we couldn't afford to have treasonous Americans undermining our President's march toward war when he was obviously lying about it. And even now, it is the right who lines up behind an obvious failure of a president, lashing out at those who would dare to criticize him even while admitting in private that he is indeed a failure. Looking at our situation in the Middle East and saying that whatever we do we can't talk about leaving Iraq or even moving in that direction because this would dishonor those who we sent to die is just plain stupid. Arguing that there is no clear agreement on global warming when it is clear to all but an ostrich with their head in the sand is well, I don't want to be offensive but it's just dumb. Just who is "hell-bent on preserving their orthodoxy?"

I agree that Obama is not going to be able to magically get us out of Iraq right away. I agree that we should be looking at nuclear power.

NO, Bush is not running. But McCain has certainly indicated that he plans on continuing a foreign policy and energy policy MUCH more like Bush than our good friend Obama is promising. And what of Armitage? Clearly it is too early to say how cabinet appointments may come out, but doesn't it concern you AT ALL that one of the guys behind the Iraq war debacle is one of McCain's close advisors on these matters?

I'm not changing the subject, KK. I agree with you that we should be seeking a switch toward an energy economy not so dependent on oil and coal (maybe you don't agree about the coal). I believe that the government can and should use our tax dollars to help fund it as well I think we should hope for regulations and both foreign and domestic policy initiatives that will encourage this as well. For a minute there I thought you were saying that government could help with this, and it might not just be left up to the free market.

And talk about waste: our entire economy and morale has suffered the results of Bush's wasting our human resources and treasury on unproductive (to say the least) enterprises. If Armitage is to be the next Secretary of the Defense, wouldn't we be likely to see MORE OF THE SAME?

OK so what you are saying is that it is not socialism if we are not talking about social policies?

I'm with you as far as encouraging research and development, KK, but I'd venture a guess that Obama is much more likely to do this than McCain. And don't forget: if the government funds it or adopts regulations promoting it we're talking about tax and spend socialism. As to the gimmick? Clearly your contest is an easy proposal to make and sounds good, but it is not in any way indicative of a commitment to actually pursuing any significant changes in our energy consumption. I call that a gimmick. To suggest that this is going to help us "turn the corner" may not be quite a misleading as suggesting that the gas tax holiday is going to help Americans suffering from high gas prices, but it is not far behind.

You have to admit, a car battery contest IS a gimmick, right KK? Or are you for real, suggesting that such a bright idea is the basis for proclaiming that McCain has a better handle on energy issues?

If that is how you see it, ak, I suppose you may as well just give up. It seems to me, however, that times DO change and it actually matters who sits in the Oval Office. For example, do you honestly think that had 911 happened on Gore's watch he would have bungled the response as badly as the Bushies? Seriously? Do you think he would have deliberately let Bin Laden go and spent all his energy invading Iraq while ignoring his military commander's advice as to how to go about it? I agree to the extent you may be saying that they are both politicians and much of what goes on now is going to continue, though.

It is funny to see die hard Republican's complain that Obama has no plan for energy when McCain's big announcements thus far have been the gas tax holiday and his support for drilling in ANWAR. The first was clearly a stupid gimmick that has absolutely no substance to it and the second is by all accounts not going to do much at all to help increase supply (even if you think it is a good idea) and even the little bit of help it might offer would be ten years away or more. Yesterday, NPR had a story suggesting that Cheney-I-mean-McCain might appoint Dick Armitage as Secretary of Defense. If there is any truth to this, our "rogue" who is going to change everything doesn't look like he's going to change anything and Tvash' summary of McCain's policy proposals sounds just about right. I promise I won't call you names if you respond, KK. Just stick to the issues and not the size of someone's pee pee.

For what its worth, I've skied the White Salmon Glacier on Memorial Day weekend in a more normal snow year and found it quite pleasant. They didn't help get in or out of there, though. By the way: it is no trouble dragging skis through the bushes if you know how to do it. Tie your skis together (bottoms together) and hang them from the side of your pack so you can carry them horizontally, aligned in the direction of travel with tips behind you. They should ride at a comfortable level for an arm rest, and hang so they balance or maybe the tails tend to drop when you take your arm off the armrest. This is the Kodiak method.

Deal we will, KK. And I may even get some new clients out of the deal.

I don't know about you Tvash, but I for one DID find some aspects of "old Ballard" to be charming and part of that had to do with the fact that it was long a semi-forgotten neighborhood and had become a concentrated area of old quirky people and old quirky businesses. I moved here as one of the yuppies who brought about the very changes I am complaining of, but to be sure the wave of development and the turnover in populations is a mixed bag. I realize you commented on the architectural deficits of the Mayor's redevelopment plans, but there are real cultural changes happening as well - and the loss of an affordable neighborhood is something that we may well regret some years down the road after we're all done making money off the boom times and living on fixed incomes and not really interested in moving to wherever it is that we can afford to live at that time. Despite what you or our right wing buddies may think about the landmarks preservation process or whether the City should be regulating development at all, that old Denny's was cool and even though Denny's is trash I'll miss it. The new building going in? There are already at least a dozen just like it that have gone up within six blocks over the last five years. Denny's will be replaced by a Teriyaki joint or maybe World Wraps and there will be an espresso shop, too, along with a real estate broker or tax preparer or whatever. I'll still be able to go out for breakfast but it won't be the same and that corner of Market and 15th is gonnna look a lot like dozens of corners anywhere in Seattle.

True that. First Hattie's Hat was taken over, then we got wine bars on Ballard Avenue. They built a new library and planted grass on the roof. What's next? Mike's Chili gonna start serving sushi?

I use the weather radar loop to see where it has been raining - an area I may wish to avoid when cragging - or snowing - and area I may wish to favor when skiing.