Fairweather

I'm pretty familiar with Mount Hood having climbed it a bunch over the last 35 years, but I'm not familiar with "Snow Dragon and Pure Imagination." Are these new climbing routes? or ski descents?

I've never thought of Ivan as an industrial-strength abrasive. More like Soft Scrub.

You didn't say how far you are willing to hike, but I agree with the above--Mount Rainier has probably the closest/easiest access glaciers with the shortest drive&hike combo time from Spokane. Mount Adams might be in the running as well if you're holding off until next summer--Mazama Glacier or the lower portion of Adams Glacier. Eliot Glacier on Mount Hood might even be an option. North Cascades Glaciers will probably require some solid hiking time in addition to the long drive.

A mutual acquaintance told me that you are a mechanical genius--but I didn't know you build cool houses too. Very nice work.

Another nice retirement cabin. Not sure about energy inputs related to the use of concrete vs wood, steel, natural stone.

Details. You gotta risk it to get the biscuit.

Knock out the deck railing and it would be a great little shack for an aspiring paraglider.

I appreciate the small house movement as well--just not that particular unit. And there is something kind of "Linden Hills" about its location that wreaks of social hierarchy. Inadvertent, I'm sure. Or maybe subconscious. Either way, the locals are feeling the love, no? Any idea who did this one? or where it is? I like it.

Yeah too bad they couldn't stay as backwater former logging towns with an out of control meth problem. But if that's what you prefer, at least you've still got Aberdeen and Darrington, among others. Well, thank God those backwater hicks now have you & your fellow interlopers there to save them! How soon until LMA finishes work on that new meth clinic?

As a life, liberty, and property kind of guy I don't really have a problem with the guy's right to put up the shack on his own little slice of New Seattle. And it sounds like this so-called artist followed the letter of the law. Still, it is an ugly shit hole, IMO. Sounds like the locals think so too. Entertainment value is off the charts.

Ok, that is one ugly f-ing hut. Even without the cement legos laying about. And that smarmy young fembot deciple lecturing the locals about accepting change leads me to believe that wire-guided shoulder fired anti-hut weapons should be issued to all of the poor locals who reside on the valley floor. ...or a rusty old GMC Jimmy pointed downhill with a strong cable attached would probably do the trick too.

Cle Elum. Leavenworth. Mazama. Seattle's newest burbs. Guess the locals gotta expect a few squabbles with the locals who aren't really locals. Still, as long as the locals aren't allowed anywhere near the amenities at the new owner's lodge I suspect this will all work itself out.

Up until 1973 the east side of Adams was administered by the USFS. But after the Yakama Tribe successfully litigated their right to Mount Adams' east side--based on the unambiguous language of the 1854 Medicine Creek Treaty--there was quite a bit of bitterness among the wilderness/hiking community who were not immune to the deep, local anti-Indian sentiments of the day. What's more, a lot of misconceptions about permits persist because of Harvey Manning's rant in his 101 Hikes about the supposed complicated nature of obtaining a permit. I think this rant has since been edited out, but a lot of old copies remain in glove boxes. It is also possible that ole Harvey wrote this bogus warning to discourage travel into Avalanche Valley--a place he clearly loved and described as being "where good little hikers go when they finally hang up their boots for the last time"--or something close to this. In any event, the Yakama Nation has done a very good job of managing their side of the mountain and allowing access that is, in my opinion, no more restrictive than the USFS--and certainly less restrictive than the NPS. Kudos to them.

If I knew with 100% certainty that one million Iraqi children were going to be taken from their opiate-addicted fathers by their meth-addicted mothers--despite the ruling of a local sharia judge--I would immediately submerge my Nokia 925 in a five-gallon bucket of water--and mix in some copper-filings just to make sure.

Huh?

Except that is not the permit fee - we do not know except that is maximum amount proposed. It could be $15 … The money is not the issue.

No issues. A five-dollar permit (per person, per day) can be purchased from the Yakama Nation ranger/attendant on patrol in the Bird Creek area during the summer. Bring cash. You can also call the Tribal Center in Toppenish and get one that way. I don't think non-members are allowed on tribal land during fall, winter, or spring.

I am aware of resistance to additional federal wilderness designations--and given the litigious nature of many green orgs, I agree with the resistance. I'm not up to speed on the "return to the states" movements you cite--but if the courts have consistently sided with the federal position, what are you worried about? And won't idiotic proposals like this one by the USFS only lead to additional erosion of support for wilderness? Sounds like a dumb idea on so many levels.

It's a slippery slope; today censorship and a $1500 permit, tomorrow the guillotine. Oops, wrong thread.

Good points, Ivan. Radio, TV, and those freeway digi-signs are all good methods of getting the word out. Getting into my personal cell phone and telling me YOU WILL PAY ATTENTION is just annoying. MHO.

Are you saying the "constitution angle" is not a legitimate concern? More and more, the pro-government left seems to see it as an obstacle, so I'm wondering if this is where you are coming from. As for permits, I think you are (deliberately?) conflating extractive uses with benign. Woodcutting should require a permit. Taking your Cub Scouts out for a hike should not. Nor should taking pictures for any purpose. You wouldn't tolerate being asked by a government employee to produce papers while walking down a city sidewalk; why should we tolerate it while walking along a trial?

Hmm, you might want to start working for the timber, mining, grazing, and other extractive industries. Because their view point is very similar. While they do get a permit and do have impact they also pay far less than what they would pay if on state or private land. Now lets take your argument one step further. A climbing guide takes clients into the wilderness, their activities have no impact, if they earn enough income they pay an income tax. Yet they pay for a permit. So why should not a commercial photographer? Your point about guide services is good, and I too have some issues with this arrangement. But comparisons to extractive uses are absolutely ridiculous. And to try to pigeonhole pcg is this way is very poor form.

Anti-bolt ranting? Gene, I think you have me confused with someone else. As for the Amber Alerts, I guess I wouldn't mind them if they were being used for their original purpose--which, I believe, was to notify the public to be on the lookout for a stranger-abducted child. I have yet to receive an alert based on this type of urgency. They have been, without exception, sent out based on parental custody. It's becoming like a car alarm in a parking lot--nobody pays attention any more.

Same same?

Remember, Ansel would be required to pay for his permit only after a government censor approved his images and captions. So there's that...