gschryer2

PS... I don't feel too put out by paying the full fine for my second Vantage ticket. That day I scored a nice camalot for booty and climbed with a hottie all day. G

I have received 2 tickets from Vantage F&W (Actually from the district court). Like a traffic ticket you can accept the ticket but contest it. Its even nicer that you can use a written "contestment" rather than having to drive over the pass to George. The written dispute allows you to write all those fine words of non-compliance and protest... thus registering your non-fee-demo vote. The result: The first ticket was reduced significantly. The second ticket was not reduced... they seemed to have noticed my previous disobedience. I paid of course. In the end, you pay much more than the initial parking permit would have cost and unfortunately the proceeds probably don't support the advertised intentions of the original permit fee. This is potentially even more frustrating. As for the forest service pay-to-play... I like the WTA trail work credit method of obtaining your annual pass.

The Mountaineers: First off, Kudos to Steve for kicking off a most interesting 6 page thread! I am sorry for the length I am about to contribute. Who am I? I am a mountaineer for the past 5 years and came to the Mountaineers with about 5 previous years of backcountry skiing and climbing experience. -I too found my early days putting up with the Moutie dogma difficult, though in the end rewarding for my own reasons- My skills are very modest and my accomplishments, I am sure, pale in the shining light of most of your climbing trophy cabinets. I like the idea of stating some basic issues and dealing with them. The Mountie Herds and environmental impact: ------------------------------------------- I agree, the size of the Basic Course enrollment seems outrageous. While the Mounties do things to limit field trip size, it is probably not enough. Interestingly though, many of the places named in earlier claims of Mountaineering hoardes are not even places that the Mounties hold there Basic course field trips. I.E. I don't think they (the Seattle branch) have ever been to Vantage, nor Peshastin in the recent 4-5 years. Yes there are other seminar courses and the crag climbing course that may venture to such places, including Royal Columns, but the group sizes of these courses are far less significant than the Basic or Intermediate course sizes - <20 people. You have to acknowledge that the pass-time of climbing is growing in popularity and will continue in the future. Hopefully we will remember that we all have a common bond and should support all climber's interests in preserving and protecting the environments and facilities we use to our recreational benefit. To second Steve's respnse, the mounties require that all basic students complete a conservation duty. In the past, I believe, a great majorty of these requirements have been accomplished through joining WTA work parties. How many of you have EVER done trail maintenance? How many do it on an annual, or more regular basis? - I am sure there are some of you... so I don't intend to generalize I think the Mountaineers are being scape-goated a la big generalization to represent all organized group learning activities. The Mountaineer's instruction and Leadership: --------------------------------------------- I think we are hearing a confusion between "instructing basic course material" versus "Climb Leadership". On Instructing - I agree that there is some degree of inadequacy in having intermediate course students instruct the basic course field trips. In particular, I agree that certain Intermediate students may NEVER be comfortable with their abilities to instruct REGARDLESS of their skill , know-how or competency. Instructing is not for everyone. And poor instruction, or instruction with the wrong attitude is not beneficial. The mountaineers may need to rethink ways around this issue. A couple things to clear up: There is no requirement to instruct immediately upon entering the Intermediate course, the course participants are given 5 years to complete the course requirements and there is nothing forcing them to do anything they are uncomfortable with before they are ready. As far as the purpose for having intermediate students instruct basic students goes... there are a couple worthwhile points to consider. 1. we have already acknowledged that the skills being taught in the basic course are not rocket science. Complexity is limited by focusing on singular, simple and safe methods to accomplish safe mountain oriented travel. This can be criticized as regimental, but it serves the purpose. 2. If any of you have taken a moment to instruct, tutor or mentor anyone else on any subject matter, you will have discovered that in the interest of doing a good job, you are required to brush up on the concepts and skills yourself. This, in effect, is using the act of instructing to re-train the "instructor" on the skills they should already have. On Leadership - There seems to be an impression that leadership is quickly and easily accomplished within the Mountaineers. Not necessarily so. There is a leadership committee that screens leadershi p applications, checks climbing resumes, follows up with in depth personal climbing references and surely applies a standard of acceptance that goes much beyond passing the Basic climbing course. Beyond the leadership committee's investigation and recommendation for leadership status, the entire climbing committee -proportionally as huge and unruly as the entire program itself- has an opportunity to review, approve or reject, the leadership committee's recommendation. I am sure the club house would be happy to share its policies on this matter to any who care to ask. I am a leader myself, and I dare suggest that it has little to do with my all-star, world-class climbing skills. I think it has more to do with an assessment of judgement. Like you yourself must judge - to climb withing your own abilities, as the conditions of the climb permit, A leader will also judge which climbs to lead with a Mountaineer's party of varying -often unknown- degree of skill and competence. So rarely will you hard-core climbers find a Mountaineers party leading a group of any size up Willis wall, tying up Outer Space or free soloing the nose. Yes, climbing outer space is on an occassional agenda, but no doubt requires leader's permission - which means the leader has probably climbed with you before and knows your competence level. Speaking of the Mountaineer's leadership climbing skills, I have heard and read a lot of criticism on this as well. I came to thinking about it a couple weeks ago. Yes, the skill level varies widely. The physical conditioning level does as well. Many climbers involved with the mountaineers are not considered gifted climbers like yourselves reading this -though some are-. But who cares? These people are more likely driven by, and have a greater sense of personal fulfillment teaching the course, sharing their FUNDAMENTAL skills and knowledge, and teaching safety by leading by example. Yes, they are more driven by their contribution to the growing climbing community than by achieving climbing trophys. Its NOT for everybody! Some of us climbing demi-gods even need climbing gods to look up to for inspiration. Sincere thanks! As for leadership attitude, cockey-ness, rudeness, etc. I guess I have to submit that A-holes roam the planet wherever you go... lurking on this board, and some of them even slip through the Mounties leadership screen. Humans! Enough said, GS

I went to look at the North Face last year in Late July. AT the time, neither the North nor the Kain had been climbed. We bailed on the North and decided to do the Kain instead. The route to the Kain went fairly well. Ascending the Robson Glacier was straight forward to extinguisher rock and beyond. We made our way up to the Robson Resplendant col and camped there. [Aside: We were then hammered by the most amazing thunderstorm I've ever witnessed. Huddled in my bivy bag expecting to die any moment, but slept easily realizing that I would either make it or would not.] The route to the Kain face would have required a traverse of the ridge between the RR col and the dome. Pretty straight forward. My understanding is that a common error is to not do this traverse and attempt to ascend or descend the Robson Glacier from the dome... bad idea. significant objective hazard - ice fall etc.. Looking forward to going back soon, now that I have nearly circum-navigated the mountain and know what mistakes to avoid. PS: as Dru states, there is a GOOD on-line conditions report for the Canadian Rockies, Robson Specific... I used it a lot last year, just don't recall what it is just now. GS.

I was in the party of three heading to Kautz on that weekend. We were wearing snowshoes and still punching in a bit in places. The other reason we were slow was that the two guys I was with were training for Denali (they left last Wed.) They were carrying heavier packs to play with all their Denali gear. There was another party of two much slower than us from Russia. At our alpine start time, we decided against getting out of bed as the wind folded my VE25 in half all night long. When we started heading down the next morning, the two Russians, again moving increadibly slowly, were just heading up the chute at around 10AM... I doubt they made it at that pace in those conditions. GOing to look at Lib Ridge this weekend... quote: Originally posted by To The Top: I was at Muir saturday with a friend, and we saw a party of 3 going to Kautz across the way, and they were going really slow, I bet they were sinking like we were once off the boot track, and there probably was no track there. The conditions aren't firm at all, and with this recent storm, and more snow means more of the same.