W

This seems like an unrelated issue and supported entirely on conjecture. I have not so far seen or heard any evidence that these two deaths were in any way a direct product of the victims being guided clients and therefore inexperienced. Until I hear something contrary, I'm guessing based on what's been reported thusfar that both were victims of pre-existing congenital medical conditions of which they likely were not aware, particularly a 20 year old. This has happened before, not only on Denali but in other arenas. A very experienced Swiss guide died in his tent of a coronary in 1992 at 14K. Jim Fixx is another example. It might, except that it appears that the dangers of Denali had, at most, peripheral involvement in causing these deaths. You probably should wait until the bodies have actually been removed from the mountain and a COD established before jumping to conclusions, not to mention choosing a different venue in which to address your grievances.

A great example related to your question above was, again, in Chile. Allende was democratically elected (barely), but his policies of redistribution were an abject failure economically and socially. He angered the elite class and the military wing. The damage his policies were doing to the country might very well make the 1973 coup, on some levels, a defensible action. But getting back to the original point, there was nothing that Allende's regime did prior to his overthrow that could remotely justify the 17 year reign of terror that followed. Marxists were far from the only ones targeted, the net was cast wide to anyone with leftist views, to anyone who spoke against this extremist government's policies. I might add that elections were also cancelled in this case. The widespread hatred and paranoia of Marxism or anything remotely related to "leftist" ideology helped to fuel another coup and the even more horrifyingly genocidal regime of Jorge Videla in Argentina a few years later. The class gap in most Latin American countries is and has been so profoundly more vast and pronounced than that which we have here in the United States. Much of this I think is rooted in wealth that has been passed down through generations of Spanish rule and then consolidated by the rule of military governments, or governments that were otherwise hopelessly corrupt. Additionally, given that, I think much of the wealth that has been generated independently over the years has come about through various forms of corruption and abuse of power, which seems historically to be the way things get done in those countries, unfortunately. Hence there is a tremendous amount of resentment in the lower classes, as well as the only recently booming middle classes. So I'm not sure that it is entirely accurate to compare many (not all, certainly) of the wealthy elite of Latin America to the average Joe who achieved the American dream by simply working hard. Having said all that, it doesn't make redistribution of wealth a viable solution, economically or ethically. Take away a man's money and it will provoke the same reaction in him whether he got it through inheritance, graft, corruption, or hard work. Conversely, institutions designed solely to not only consolidate wealth but which actively interfere with and prevent others from access to opportunities are no better, and no less prone to invoking a violent insurrection. Until recently, in those two extremes you have much of Latin America's governing history. There is no easy answer to your question. Every culture, our own included, has it's contradictory and simultaneous forms of submission to, and rebellion against, authority. Until humans resolve this issue on both individual and collective levels, conflicts will be inevitable. In the meantime, we're truly fortunate here that our particular mix of this has not resulted in a society where the free exchange of ideas is not possible without an attendant exchange of violence. Happy 4th...

Having traveled extensively in Central and South America, it is not hard to notice in speaking to people and simply observing daily life that the majority of the populations are, in one form or another, what you would call 'leftist', although a distinctly Latin American version of social conservatism runs deep throughout. The odd paradigm then is the extent to which many of these countries have been dominated by violently oppressive military regimes over the past 5 decades. One can't help but notice that the return to stable democracies in countries like Chile, Argentina and Nicaragua has nonetheless brought leftists back to power. In some cases, such as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, the rise to power of leftism was indeed corrupt and has not been positive for the region or the world, but countries like Chile have been a positive example. While you may not agree with leftist politics, from an objective standpoint it seems to be a fact of life that fits with and appeals to the cultures of certain regions and countries. Unfortunately, cultures with such an extreme gap between haves and have-nots results predictably in a rise of extremism on both sides. My point is that simply taking sides in the issue from afar, based on your personal biases and aesthetics as related to politics and social issues, ignores the reality on the ground for the everyday Latin American. If- through democracy and non violent means- the will of the people wants to create a political and social landscape that is "leftist", then that is, in my opinion, their business and their right, not to mention the very foundation of what democracy is supposed to represent. I don't have to agree with leftist politics to make this observation. Violent insurgencies such as FARC and Shining Path are another matter and I don't excuse them or their methods in the slightest. A violent response to them by those in power is also not unexpected, but I don't excuse them either. Excusing state-sponsored massacre of entire villages and rounding up civilians for torture and interrogation, as a 'proportional response' to anything, reduces the issue to a very base level. At that point, one could very easily reverse your above question: given a largely leftist population being ruled by a corrupt, oppressive military junta, -Do you expect the people to just roll over?

As a government employee, you're both a steward of the land and a public servant. Your attitude portrays neither, rather, it portrays that of an arrogant, insecure, high handed authoritarian who took the job in a quest for an illusory personal power over others. Is this a veiled threat of some kind? Will there be an investigation? You and your supervisor sound quite dangerous, actually. I'd like to know what the USFS budget is for "surfing internet climbing and outdoor recreation sites in the search for dangerous individuals". I'm sure my congressman would be interested to know also.

Sounds like we're definitely talking about the same ledge. We also wanted to climb the face in the middle of the corner but as you said, neither the rock nor the pro was very good- the corner has better pro and the climbing is secure. As I recall, until you actually reach the ledge you can't really see the crack system you end up climbing, which begins with the black, lichened 5"-6" off width off the right side of the ledge, you can't miss it, it's only about a 40' pitch or so and ends on a narrow ledge in the corner. The 10c pitch is almost a full rope, and the anchor at the top takes some work (loose rock). The 11a breaks out right from here (every other way looks grim), but even this way is quite intimidating. Off the left side of the big ledge is another crack system, which looks far more difficult, and takes on all the roofs and overhanging rock you were seeing- I want to say that Wayne Wallace and someone (McGown?) did a route over there way back in the 80's but I'm not sure? Wayne, you out there? Joe P. and Stoney climbed Dragonfly a week prior to our ascent, which helped inspire us to try it. It certainly doesn't see much traffic but I'm sure it had been climbed many times prior to our ascents.

AlpineMonkey, Forrest and I climbed this route two summers ago; it's hard to tell exact details from your picture, but your dotted line looks pretty close to where we went. We soloed up to about where your dotted line ends, but we might have been just a bit further left. Up to that point it was about 5.5 or easier. There was a definitive corner system we were angling into. We roped up for the final 60 meters of it, it was about 5.8 or so and a little sketchy (rubbly rock), but it ended on a large, comfortable ledge off to the left. I actually think the FA party was on the steeper ground to the left of us, which obviously would make for a much longer and more serious route. Indeed, the upper wall is very steep and intimidating. Off the ledge, there is a 5.9 OW- it's not too hard but it's quite lichen-y, and the #5 camalot doesn't fit so good in the upper section of it, so you have to run it a bit at the end. The 2nd pitch is the best one, it's a very steep and sustained 10c crack, pumpy jamming and lb'ing. The final pitch is the crux and it is full value 11a: awkward, balancy laybacks and jamming up steep hollow flakes protected by questionable tiny cams and RP's. Then a scary mantle above pro leads to an overhanging, grainy thin hand/ringlock crack. This takes you to the ridge crest. From here, you need to routefind carefully, staying on the crest resulted in several dead ends and having to downclimb. Generally stay left of the crest to pass obstacles for the first several ropelengths (but you can simul all of this). Eventually it becomes obvious and you stay off the right (north) side and climb miles of 4th and low 5th terrain, ending with a grovel up some really chossy gravel into the summit ridge notch, at which point you can downclimb all the way to the glacier below on the south side- also very chossy. If the rock was cleaner I might rate it higher, but at it stands, aside from the 10c pitch I thought it a mediocre route especially compared to nearby classics such as CBR, Boving, and Backbone, and it has a rather undignified finish. Nonetheless, it's worth doing to round out your Dragontail collection.

As I suspected. Instruction based not on training and first hand experience, but on armchair analysis and opinions deduced from reading about other peoples adventures. Sketchy. I would think that professional guide services would find this appalling, not to mention an affront to the amount of time, effort, and money that it takes to reach the level of professional certification.

The problem is, I can tell right away from your attitude and tone, not to mention the content of your website, that your "seminars" and such are teaching rigid, unbending principles and formulas designed by and for neurotic control freaks who can't handle adversity and the unknown, as a means for dealing with dynamic, ever changing, and unpredictable situations in the mountains; a reliance on technology, and an assumption that rescue is just a phone call away. You are using a fear-based approach that seeks to control the uncontrollable and predict the unpredictable, and it discourages any inclination towards developing the most essential aspects of a safe mountaineering career: Resourcefulness, intuition, and flexibility for dealing with any situation. You fail to explain how your philosophy bridges the gap for a person starting out climbing, who is totally out of their element and has no concept of how to survive in the outdoors, to get them to a point where they could, for example, climb in Alaska with "basics" they learned "long ago", but without the psychological safety net of phones and PLB's you harnessed them with from the outset. How do you propose that one reach that point of perspective as pertains to the prospect of rescue, or lack thereof, when your primary tenet of education involves being prepared to summon help? Your methods more or less ensure a student will either never venture beyond their backyard to truly remote areas, or will otherwise foster a lifelong dependency on guides and authority figures to show them the way. Who is your target audience, then? Weekend warriors with their families, who pile out of their Astro Van at Paradise and look at Rainier, think it's closer than it is, and decide to "hike up it"? Or someone who is earnest about learning about mountaineering and developing skills they can effectively use? No one in the latter group with an ounce of sense is ever going to consult the Sheriff, or listen to sound bites on news reports from rangers and reporters for gathering information about mountaineering. I've read your mission. That combined with your above promotion of your site and your free seminars and such leads me to ask a question that I would think would be on the mind of any Certified Mountain Guide who has put in countless hours and dollars towards training in their profession: Who are you and what are your qualifications for teaching wilderness survival and mountaineering skills? Your boasting of "free ADVANCED mountaineering seminars" to me kind of reeks of "why bother paying a guide service when you can get free instruction from me?". Over the years I've encountered a number of what purport to pass as "Climbing Clubs" that are in reality a bunch of totally clueless neophytes being led around by a single, demagogue-like leader with no bonafide training to his credit, who claims to know everything about everything, and whose teachings are not open to question or discussion, and is almost cult like in organization. I've already said it- analysis of accidents is carefully and tactfully done in the AAJ reports, not for reporters in the parking lot right after the accident. It's called sensitivity and diplomacy. Further, you clearly do not know anything about David or the workings of his job. Alerting climbers to potential risks defines 80% of the climbing ranger's daily routine, and out of a crew of gregarious and talented rangers, David has always been one of the best at communicating with the climbing public. So if you are going to point the finger at someone publicly, you damn well better do your homework first. You are treading on thin ice with such ill-informed public accusations. Hindsight observation is not even 20/20 in this situation. Among other things, navigating down terrain like that in a whiteout, even with a GPS, is not without risks (cornices, crevasses, avalanche slopes, etc.), and at night might have been impossible. Your speculation and agenda-based criticism, especially in such an unsolicited forum, is highly disrespectful and in extremely poor taste. There is a big difference between attitudes like yours, and those of what I consider sensible climbers; both might carry a cell phone and/or GPS, but the former considers them a tool of last resort, while you consider them a primary essential of first resort. It all goes downhill from there. Have a nice day.

Trad Guy: You wouldn't know it from reading your website, but "traditional mountaineering" possibilities exist beyond volcanoes in Oregon and Washington. Many of these places have a) no cell phone coverage whatsoever b)no Sheriffs, search and rescue teams, or helicopters whatsoever and, believe it or not, c) poorly accurate or even non-existent maps. In such places, your Responsibilities #1, #3, and #4 have absolutely no value. #2 is just common sense. I am curious what your advice for mountaineering in these areas would be- stay home? If your format is meant to be a rigid template to be followed for all wilderness travelers, then the future of the exploratory spirit of human adventure is bleak indeed.

I agree 100% with this post. In addition, as a close personal friend, climbing partner, and former coworker of David Gottlieb, I take vigorous exception to the criticism and implied share of blame placed upon him and/or the NPS in general for this incident. David has always been a straight talker with visitors, especially up on the mountain in informal settings, and certainly doesn't pull any punches when it comes to advice. What also has to be understood is that when speaking with the press, especially as a representative of the Park Service, it is not the forum to be launching accusatory criticism of the victims. David has, on numerous occasions, literally put his life in jeopardy saving, or trying to save, many people over the years. Compassion for fellow climbers aside, it is also in the interest of every potential rescuer to issue preventative advice to other climbers, as it also affects their own safety when an incident occurs and the call goes out. So any implication or speculation that David was negligent in his duties as a ranger or as a fellow climber in this instance are indeed outrageous and far off base. While the modern technology of GPS and cell phones are certainly tools that climbers can, perhaps should, choose to include in their strategy and safety plans, the tone of that website is representative of what is clearly an increasing trend in 'mainstream' mountaineering- fostering and encouraging a unhealthy dependence on electronic gadgets and a plan for outside rescue- a mindset which time and again has demonstrated itself to carry over into actual decision making in the midst of critical alpine situations. At the same time, this distraction leads to a neglect or outright ignoring of the imperatives of self-reliance, personal responsibility, good judgment, good partnerships, and a deep respect for the mountains. It amazes me that the media continues to feed to the equally uninformed public the erroneous impression that PLB's, MLU's, and/or some sort of more punctual response by SAR teams would have somehow changed the outcome of most of these high profile (or low profile) mountain incidents. Climbers survived whiteouts on Rainier and elsewhere for decades before cell phones and MLU's and GPS. I'd argue that such devices would make some more likely to venture out into horrific weather conditions with the false confidence they inspire, an especially dangerous possibility when combined with a commensurate lack of real-time outdoor survival skills, knowledge and understanding of mountain weather, and a developed mountain sense. More than once, armed only with a compass and map, or even less, I've simply decided to stay put and wait for an improvement in the conditions; or if we ventured forth, it was with a sense that we were totally on our own, and never with a plan that involved reliance upon others should things not go as planned. It's quite obvious to anyone with any experience and common sense that there were mistakes made in this incident- in fact, I think there are very rarely any true "accidents". But the self-righteous tone of that website seems more bent on promoting some sort of private agenda, at the expense of others, than providing any sort of meaningful insight by which the less experienced can learn something important about outdoor survival.

Sounds about right. In the 2003 winter, I broke 5 BD picks that I had bought all at the same time the previous year. Most of them broke in relatively soft ice, after no more than 3 days of use, and I think 2 of them broke on the first day of use. Every single one broke about 1 inch from the point. Thankfully, none broke while I was in a strenuous or committing position on the climbs; although one broke while I was soloing the easy lower section of Cascade Falls, I was able to continue climbing with the short pick until reaching the ledge below the steeper step. That same winter I talked with a guy who worked in Valhalla in Canmore who said he had a whole pile of broken BD picks, and eventually I started meeting others with similar tales during this period. I think there was a manufacturing glitch in a batch made during 2002. This concern caused me to want to take at least one spare with me everywhere I went for another year or so. It was the "Stinger" picks with the old point on top which BD has since modified to be flush with the tool (and it's now called the Titan pick). I haven't broken one since that year.

JK- In truth I have not done much detailed indepth research on southeast, mainly because I have enough on my plate already and the additional psyche would be too overwhelming; that said, I do know there are still some really good, big, unclimbed lines on Logan, Alverstone, Augusta, and a number of others in the St. Elias region. Given the vastness of the mountains in southeast, the paucity of visitors, and the typically bad weather- my intuition tells me a little exploration would reveal a goldmine of untouched alpine faces just waiting to be discovered. Western AK Range: I'm pretty sure Mt. Dall has just one ascent, and not by the 5000-6000 foot face it sports. Probably has shitty rock (black shale)...but then John, being a Chugach mix-ter you ought not be too concerned. The Kichatnas of course remain far from climbed out, and the Revelations remain nearly unexplored. The "Hearts" near the Chedolothna glacier have good granite supposedly- how long do you want to walk for it? Last year Wilkinson/Gilmore et.al. attempted the huge route on The Fin near Foraker, seems likely there are some big faces in that neck of the woods up the Yentna Glacier. The southwest face of Foraker (left of the Talkeetna ridge) is an enormous face- close to 3000 meters; I suspect it is largely threatened by seracs, but without having a direct look, I won't discount the possibility of a line existing in there somewhere. Not likely an easy approach. Beyond that- a whole lot of big stuff (I'm talking Andi Orgler routes in particular) in the Gorge has yet to even see a repeat attempt- Wine Bottle, the Pearl, West face of London Tower, etc. Time to get busy!

NF of Huntington was climbed by Roberts and McCartney in 1978. Dangerous is an understatement. Anyone who attempts it better have some motivation beyond 'making the papers', and even then, a lot of luck to go with it. East Buttress of Johnson was nearly finished by Doug Chabot and Renny Jackson in '99- Doug told me once, "someone's going to finish that thing someday, but it sure as hell won't be me!". I tried it in '01 with three friends; weather didn't allow us to get past pitch 10, but the climbing above that likely would've stopped us- gets very runout at that point and not obvious where to go. Great looking line, but, very chossy. East Face of Denali: With all due respect to Washburn, I really have to disagree with his enthusiasm for this face. It is huge, it is beautiful...but unless you like climbing through and under VERY active seracs for 2500 meters, I think there are much better objectives awaiting. There really isn't even a great line through this wall, it looks like it would involve a ton of traversing and playing hide and seek from the seracs. Joe P. and I skied past this face in 1997 enroute to Mt. Silverthrone, and, despite being in our mid 20's and super psyched on just about anything, we both immediately laughed it off for it's exceedingly obvious objective hazards. Don't get me wrong: it's doable, and someone will eventually do it, mostly I think because Washburn put it out there. I do, however, believe it is no place for people with children or, for that matter, anyone who has anything meaningful to come home to. IMHO. Infinite/Moonflower/Cassin: Oh, this has been "attempted" numerous times. My observations over the years suggest that the main criteria for an attempt of this one-season trifecta is that you have no prior experience climbing in the Alaska Range, and even better, none outside of the lower 48. Ambiguously: I think Alaska's best remaining big rigs are in southeast. All over the place.

It must have been The Creek, eh Mike? Or is this just the first step on the road to Boulder?

Hey Dale Last I heard the Akai was supposed to close down this fall, not sure if that happened yet. I once spent a whole winter in the Akai, but that was 5 years ago. Back then it was good- small kitchenettes, clean, daily maid service. Went back last winter to find it had changed hands- and it was a filthy pit- hair in the beds, in the shower, in the reefer; unvacuumed floors, smell of cigarettes permeating everything, piles of garbage stacked up in the hallways. Weird crackhead looking folks seeming to be semi-permanent residents. A friend wrote an online review stating "After staying in this hotel I felt like I'd slept with a dirty hooker!" And no he wasn't talking about me. The Bow Valley and the Drake are almost the same price as the Akai and as you know, much nicer than that. I've also heard the Banff Boundary Lodge is a great deal- if you can get a room, it's often filled up. Cheers Mark

My wife and I returned to our campsite on Kane Creek Road (Kings Bottom) in Moab last night, to discover thieves had rifled our campsite. We don't expect to ever see the stolen items again, but in case anyone happens to see something for sale, on a bulletin board or whatever, fitting the descriptions below, we lost: Feathered Friends Tern sleeping bag, short length, cobalt blue. Petzl Tikka headlamp BD Vectra Headlamp Lounge Lizard Chair Sog Utility Knife Thankfully most of our stuff was in the car with us. If nothing else, if you're camping in this area, beware.

The "wide flare" is an awkward pod up high where you can get a decent rest- then you exit that on splitter hands/thin hands (#1 and #2 BD). It's different than Crime of the Century and Clean Crack, it's steeper, but with more secure jams.

I've not done the route, but I have to admit I've always laughed when reading the guidebook: "III, 5.7. Expect to bivi."

Porter, A long time ago I broke the medial malleolus of my tibia (i.e.=ankle). It doesn't sound nearly as serious as what you have (I didn't do the fibula). But I did have 2 screws surgically placed, which sped up the healing and ensured a proper set. Spent about 5 weeks on crutches, the latter part of it in a walking boot with some light weight bearing. I was back rock climbing almost exactly 2 months later- although sticking my foot in cracks was not so successful at first. I went ice climbing 10 weeks after the surgery, but the bigger boots gave good stability. I also had the screws removed about a year later, because in addition to some skin irritation, I feared that a repeat of this injury (a common one at that...) with these screws in there would likely pulverize my bones. So if you have the option to remove your hardware down the road, it might be worth considering. In a separate incident, I also broke my heel with 3 fractures, luckily all of them shallow and not displaced. I was back climbing 5 weeks later; climbing was easy, but walking/hiking was not for a month longer, and the prospect of falling and landing hard on any ledges also was a bit dodgy until some time had passed. In retrospect, I probably pushed my return a bit too fast on this one- I started walking 2 weeks after the break (against doctors orders) and a week later went back on crutches because of the pain. Best advice I can think of is to work on flexibility while you're unable to bear weight, and get some massage/lymphatic tissue work done, which will keep moving the edema out of your foot where it likes to collect. Although I'm not sure how extensive your fractures are (shattered? or clean?) I'm sure you're aware that the broken bones you have are probably the least of your concerns with recovery- it's the soft tissue and tendon/ligament damage with lower leg injuries that will require ongoing attention. Good luck! You'll be back before you know it.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'backpacking' around the Gorge area- are you going mountaineering, or hiking/bushwhacking in the lower realms? Travel in the Gorge even well into summer will be most effective with skis, even off the main glaciers. If you're talking about just hiking around the foothills or smaller peaks below or to the east of the Ruth, there likely will still be snow down to about 1000'; that's about the time also that the snowpack starts to come down and there is a lot of avalanching especially on south faces.

You won't likely need down pants during that time in the Ruth, day or night. A 10F bag at basecamp would be plenty warm enough. In June, when the sun is out during the day, you're likely to be climbing in a t-shirt.

What's most unfortunate is how this issue has become hopelessly politicized by both sides. There was a time when someone's credentials meant something and experts were taken seriously. Now thanks to meddling by politicians, pundits, activists, and special interests, no one is respected or taken seriously regardless of their expertise. We're just left with a bunch of blowhards with political agendas pointing to isolated weather events as "proof" that global warming is/is not real. We've reduced this to a high school level debate over pollution limits versus the rights of industry to maintain profits. Are these mutually exclusive? BTW, the Emmons, and I believe, the Carbon, are both advancing last I heard. It's believed that the cause is indeed the rock debris insulating the glacier.

It seems to me that on-site leading at this level of climbing has been made possible precisely because of rehearsing and practicing at even higher levels. You may be correct in stating that the above climber is not really a 5.13 climber if it takes them weeks or months to redpoint a .13; however, I would suspect that their efforts at this level is exactly why such a climber will walk up to almost any 5.12 and flash it onsight, exactly in the pure style you advocate. Which is to say, rehearsing and soforth has helped bring onsight grades way up from what they once were, or at least, brought them up much faster than they would have otherwise risen. And with these rising onsight standards, it's no accident that alpine style, and speed, in the mountains has evolved accordingly. Traditions are great, until stubborn adherence to them causes them to stifle progress. Roll with it.

OTH, What camera are you shooting with on all these trips? The sharpness and color of your images is outstanding. Excellent effort on your climb as well.

Hey John, When Joe and I did it in 1998, the rockfall had already happened, probably within a few months prior to our ascent. The approach ramps were covered in tons of loose, shattered debris. Lunger's description sounds a lot like what we did: I recall the opening corner with a rightward undercling flake leading to an endless, splitter hand crack. Near the top, this crack continued above and appeared to get wider and became a flake/pillar as it topped out. We weren't sure that finishing on this was the right way so we did a short traverse out left, which led around a corner into the massive rock scar, which had much lighter colored, pinkish rock. We belayed on an small, leaning, exposed, debris covered ledge. The final pitch was a 10 foot traverse left into a very steep crack which appears to be the same one which bobbyperu is climbing. That crack was about 40 feet and led to the pillar's top and easier ground, and was definitely the crux of the route. So I'm confused, is this the original way or a variation to it? We sort of were under the impression the original last pitch had fallen off and the steep crack we climbed was something revealed by the rockfall. It does also sound like continuing up the main crack system offers another way out.