Jump to content

Mike_Gauthier

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    420

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Mike_Gauthier

    Glaciers

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    The article is a bit misleading. As I have understood the study being discussed in the story (regarding the Rainier employees) the stakes are used to measure the annual snowfall and its rate of melt, not the thickness or size of the glacier. The story doesn’t really make that connection. The 41 foot drop in one year means that 41 feet of winter snowfall melted in that area.

     

    Having helped w/ the study, I recall placing stakes in the spring (when the snow depth is highest) and then monitoring the rate at which the snow melts throughout the spring/summer/fall. They use a steam drill to create a hole in the snow where they can then place the plastic PVC pole. They drill until they hit the ice or rock on top of the dry glacier below. They don’t really drill into the permanent ice (or they to avoid doing this if possible.) After the PVC pole is measured every few weeks, and thus you know how much and how fast the snowpack is melting (and how much was deposited). The stakes are placed at various locations and altitudes around the mountain (some climbers have seen them on the Emmons) to get varying rates of accumulation and melt. 41 feet was probably one of the higher accumulation and melting areas.

     

    That said; I still believe that the snowpack and snowfields at various locations around the peak are retreating. But my info is less scientific, and more anecdotal. The News Tribune recently did a similar story, so this is hardly the first to explore the topic.

     

    As an aside, I also noticed a crevasse forming on the summit this summer, Columbia Crest that is. Hey FW, have you seen that before? Anyone else notice the summit crevasse this year, or in years passed?

    Rainier concessions

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    A point of clarification on the CUA applications...

     

    The CUA process I referred to above is actually STILL open. The "initial round" closed on Sept 30th, but some types of permits remain available. B/c of this, the application process is extended. It's my understanding that those who did apply (correctly) before Sept 30 will get priority, as long as they meet the standards, etc.

     

    As a reminder, the application is "rigorous" by some people's standards. Make sure you fill out everything completely.

    Rainier concessions

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    Mister Gator, when can we expect a detailed report from the NPS regarding next year's situation at Muir? I realize there must be lots of stuff to iron out, but should we be expecting some word sooner rather than later?

     

    Yes, details to be worked out, most likely, later...

    Rainier concessions

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    Skisports, you're referring to the CUA process. The applications for that program closed on Sept 30th, so it's a done deal for 2007. BTW, there was no prefrence for AMGA, but AMGA guides could have applied.

     

    Scaredsilly and mtnfreak, the Camp Muir Plan is still in progress. There are a number of options, but most of them take quite a bit of $$$. Therefore, nothing is really happening fast when it comes to tearing down buildings or creating new ones. And as for those proposed weatherports, we've tried them before, they really don't work well up there.

     

    Seems like Mr. Tennessee has done is homework. wink.gif Nice work.

     

    Here is something from the News Tribune

     

    Changing of the guides should be good thing for Rainier

     

    I was talking last week about climbing on Mount Rainier with the park’s lead climbing ranger, Mike Gauthier.

    We were discussing the astounding fact that there was no major rescue on the mountain throughout the peak season.

     

    But that was not the only big news related to climbing the mountain to come down last week.

     

    “The news of no rescues is remarkable, and the news of the guide shake-up is equally remarkable,” Gauthier said.

     

    The man better known as “Gator” on the slopes of the 14,410-foot icon of the Northwest certainly has a unique perspective. He has been climbing the mountain since 1990 and has been part of the climbing ranger detachment the last 17 seasons. He has been the supervisory climbing ranger since 2003.

     

    “History is going to look back at the breakup of the guide service into three as a big step in the park’s history and climbing history,” Gauthier said.

     

    Eric Simonson agreed with the historical aspect. He is co-owner of International Mountain Guides, one of three companies that will guide climbs on the mountain beginning next year.

     

    Rainier Mountaineering Inc. retains the largest contract, being able to lead 24 climbers per day up the popular Camp Muir route. IMG and Seattle-based Alpine Ascents will be able to lead 12 climbers a day up that route.

     

    But the three contracts will end a 37-year-old monopoly once enjoyed by RMI. The people I’ve talked to say everyone involved in climbing Mount Rainier will benefit from the change.

     

    Guides will benefit because they will be able to shop their skills to different companies, Simonson said. That will likely mean higher pay for experienced guides.

     

    The park will benefit from higher environmental standards dictated by the new contracts.

     

    Gauthier and Simonson feel the three companies will benefit from the competition. The bidding process has already led the three companies to look for creative alternatives to attract customers.

     

    “Instead of being one company, it’s now a bunch of bright companies that have been doing this a long time,” Gauthier said.

     

    People who take a guided climb will benefit as companies offer different types of trips. Simonson said IMG is considering longer summit trips, maybe four days. Gauthier said lower client-to-guide ratios, as low as 2-to-1, should improve summit success rates. More importantly, it will improve safety.

     

    “The guide doesn’t have a whole bunch of people to look after,” he said.

     

    Whether the competition means lower prices remains to be seen. RMI is still advertising its two-day climb at $795 per person.

     

    “The price might not go up or down, but if that’s the bar we have, everyone can offer more or less. It could be $795 for a four-day trip versus a two-day trip,” said park superintendent David Uberuaga. “I think overall the public will get a better value because of the competition.”

     

    Gauthier pointed out that nonguided climbers also will benefit.

     

    “They also created commercial-free times and zones. The popular routes, like Kautz, won’t have guided climbs on the weekends,” he said. The routes from Liberty Ridge west to the Tahoma Glacier will be commercial-free as well, Uberuaga said.

     

    It will certainly be an interesting year on the mountain when the 2007 climbing season begins.

     

    Hopefully the companies will quickly develop a rapport so we don’t have a local repeat of the controversy that shrouded the 2006 season on Mount Everest. Teams there were so intent on reaching the summit that they climbed right past climbers in distress, leading to at least one death.

     

    Gauthier is confident the new set-up will be a positive one, just as interest in climbing Mount Rainier is showing renewed growth.

     

    “When you raise the bar, you raise the bar for everyone, and that’s usually a good thing,” he said.

    Potter Climbs Delicate Arch

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    All Things Considered , June 2, 2006 ·

     

    They have a picture of damage rock, here's the story. Outside did a more extensive write up, I'll post that next.

     

     

    The Delicate Arch, a fixture of Utah's Arches National Park, may have suffered irreparable damage in a recent climb, park officials say. Climber Dean Potter, who admits to climbing the arch, says he is not the first to do so. But park officials -- and Potter's sponsor -- are concerned.

     

    Karen McKinlay-Jones, the Arches park's acting chief ranger, told Outside magazine that they are monitoring Delicate Arch for any harm done to it, with "a priority over everything except life and limb." The park's superintendent, Joss, added, "If there is damage to Delicate Arch, that is of grave concern to us."

     

    Although there were no explicit regulations banning climbers from taking on the arch when Potter made his attempt, officials say it was an unwritten rule. Visitor guidebooks often suggest that climbers should avoid unique structures that have been named.

     

    The issue is complicated by other concerns, as well. The first is "clean climbing," an ethic that has grown along with the sport. Its adherents do their best not to damage the rocks they climb, by hammering in pitons or other tools. But on eroded sandstone, even ropes can leave gouges if they're tight enough.

     

    After Potter's climb, Outside sent a photographer and reporter to the scene in an attempt to get to the bottom of the story. And the Patagonia outdoor-wear company, one of Potter's main sponsors, has added its voice to the discussion, urging Potter to apologize.

     

    A company spokesman told Outside magazine it opposes acts that damage any natural setting, and it will likely reevaluate its relationship with Potter if it turns out his climb damaged the formation.

     

    Potter says he took all precautions to ensure no damage was done. Melissa Block talks with Potter.

    mountrainierclimbing.blogspot.com?

    in Mount Rainier NP

    Posted

    I've put a new link onto the blog ... It leads to images, etc.

     

    I'd love to do more w/ the site, but will concede that I'm limited w/ web publishing experience, and can't seem to keep up w/ EVERYTHING that is going on. As stated, I'm getting a lot of GREAT reports from climbers. If anyone is interested in contributing (a little, or a lot) I welcome your email and thoughts.

     

    Thanks for checking in,

     

    Mike

    Potter Climbs Delicate Arch

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    I'm not condoning the publicity stunt, but I dislike the idea of trying to get a guy "sacked" over this (or in trouble w/ his employer).

     

    Normally I would agree with you, Mike. But in this case, Potter's job is "climbing ambassador" and he made the climb as part of his job. (Note the initial Patagonia press release.) I don't see anything wrong with arguing that an ambassador who has screwed up this badly should be sacked.

     

    If a park ranger punched out a visiting Mexican climber to make a statement about illegal immigration, I also wouldn't have any problem calling for him to be fired.

     

    Come on Lowell, the park ranger comparison is a bit absurb. As stated, Dean's stunt was poorly planned, but do we need to ruin his life and financial situation over this? I just can not get behind that sort of vindictive spirit. I believe that firing Dean will not lead to any sustainable solution or understanding of the real issue, which should be protecting our natural landscapes for generations to come. All I'm hearing about are newly revised regulations and some negative spray about someone we have in the past celebrated.

     

    The climbing community and the NPS might make some headway in better understanding each other here. The dialogue on this board is healthy, and it's good for our community and in the long term, the NPS too. It certinaly seems that we've all learned a great deal about protecting natural resources and access.

     

    I also believe that before you go complaining about someone behind their back, they at least deserve to hear it direclty from you.

     

    As for the immediate clarification on the closure (which I agree with), I can't help but wonder what the negative fallout of that will be? Might any iconoclast climber now aim for... Humm... lets see, an illegal ascent of the Arch?

     

    I didn't read Patagonia's press release, but if they did indeed flaunt the breaking of regulations, the fastest way to make your point is to shop ELSEWHERE. In America, your best vote is your dollar.

     

    A number of valid points have been made (and some not so valid points I might add.) What about writing Dean Potter directly to tell him what you think?

     

    The offense was public and has caused public damage. The only way to repair the damage is either a public apology or a public censure.

     

    Which supports my point. Until someone that Dean trusts and respects tells him honestly what they think, and how this stunt went terribly, this isn't going to help him, us, or the NPS.

     

    When he realizes that this wasn't such a good idea, DESPITE HIS BEST INTENTIONS, it will be easier to extract that acknowledgement/apology. Which would be best thing to happen!

     

    And if Dean were really savvy about this, he could possibly be the worlds best advocate for protecting natural arches and making sure that you're aware of access regs when climbing (no matter where you climb).

     

    And "There is no such thing as bad publicity".

     

    Yup! But the caveat is that you need to spell my name correctly.

     

    Now I need to get back to the national security issues of Canada ... grin.gif

    Potter Climbs Delicate Arch

    in Climber's Board

    Posted

    I'm not condoning the publicity stunt, but I dislike the idea of trying to get a guy "sacked" over this (or in trouble w/ his employer).

     

    A number of valid points have been made (and some not so valid points I might add.) What about writing Dean Potter directly to tell him what you think?

    I've got a new job?

    in Spray

    Posted

    It may sound like science fiction, but the prospect that suicide bombers and hijackers could be made redundant by flying robots is a real one, according to experts.

     

    The technology for remote-controlled light aircraft is now highly advanced, widely available -- and, experts say, virtually unstoppable.

     

    Models with a wingspan of five metres (16 feet), capable of carrying up to 50 kilograms (110 pounds), remain undetectable by radar.

     

    And thanks to satellite positioning systems, they can now be programmed to hit targets some distance away with just a few metres (yards) short of pinpoint accuracy.

     

    Security services the world over have been considering the problem for several years, but no one has yet come up with a solution.

     

    "We are observing an increasing threat from such things as remote-controlled aircraft used as small flying bombs against soft targets," the head of the Canadian secret services, Michael Gauthier , said at a conference in Calgary recently.

     

    According to Gauthier, "ultra-light aircraft, powered hang gliders or powered paragliders have also been purchased by terrorist groups to circumvent ground-based countermeasures."

     

    On May 1 the US website Defensetech published an article by military technology specialist David Hambling, entitled "Terrorists' unmanned air force".

     

    "While billions have been spent on ballistic missile defense, little attention has been given to the more imminent threat posed by unmanned air vehicles in the hands of terrorists or rogue states," writes Hambling.

     

    Armed militant groups have already tried to use unmanned aircraft, according to a number of studies by institutions including the Center for Nonproliferation studies in Monterey, California, and the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies in Moscow.

     

    In August 2002, for example, the Colombian military reported finding nine small remote-controlled planes at a base it had taken from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

     

    On April 11, 2005 the Lebanese Shiite militia group, Hezbollah, flew a pilotless drone over Israeli territory, on what it called a "surveillance" mission. The Israeli military confirmed this and responded by flying warplanes over southern Lebanon.

     

    Remote-control planes are not hard to get hold of, according to Jean-Christian Delessert, who runs a specialist model airplane shop near Geneva.

     

    "Putting together a large-scale model is not difficult -- all you need is a few materials and a decent electronics technician," says Delessert.

     

    In his view, "if terrorists get hold of that, it will be impossible to do anything about it. We did some tests with a friend who works at a military radar base: they never detected us... if the radar picks anything up, it thinks it is a flock of birds and automatically wipes it."

     

    Japanese company Yamaha, meanwhile, has produced 95-kilogram (209-pound) robot helicopter that is 3.6 metres (11.8 feet) long and has a 256 cc engine.

     

    It flies close to the ground at about 20 kilometres per hour (12 miles per hour), nothing but an incredible stroke of luck could stop it if it suddenly appeared in the sky above the White House -- and it is already on the market.

     

    Bruce Simpson, an engineer from New Zealand, managed to produce an even more dangerous contraption in his own garage: a mini-cruise missile. He made it out of readily available materials at a cost of less than 5,000 dollars (4,000 euros).

     

    According to Simpson's website (www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile), the New Zealand authorities forced him to shut down the project -- though only once he had already finished making the missile -- under pressure from the United States.

     

    Eugene Miasnikov of the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies in Moscow said these kinds of threats must be taken more seriously.

     

    "To many people UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) may seem too exotic, demanding substantial efforts and cost compared with the methods terrorists frequently use," he said. "But science and technology is developing so fast that we often fail to recognise how much the world has changed."

×
×
  • Create New...