Fairweather

Retro, "...characters in his book were terrorists (for the environment)"... as if it is ok since it was "for the environment"?... He IS highly acclaimed indeed; by Earth First and ELF/ALF types who like to go aroung burning down ski resorts, rich folks homes, and university laboratories. His books gave them the formula for the loose asociations that they keep as well as the glorification of this type of terrorism. ....Oh yeah, I forgot...if it is "for the environment" then that makes it OK. Is that right? This is the type of mentality that allows people like McVeigh to blow up a building full of innocent people without remorse, or bomb an airliner out of the sky and harden themselves to the "collateral damage", or spike a tree without concern for the logger (father, son of someone) who could get a cutting chain wrapped around their head. No, I stand by my Edward Abbey analysis...he espoused terrorism as a means to further his agenda. He was a terrorist.

Uncle Tricky, "The late great Abbey"?? Surely you jest! Edward Abbey's "Monkey Wrench Gang" book puts him in a class with Timothy McVeigh and Osama Bin Laden. The man was a terrorist and his book is rightly considered a terrorist handbook. You shouldn't evoke the words of a terrorist to decry an over zealous Forest Service/government. Edward Abbey is not quote-worthy.

I am honestly undecided about the fee demo program. Maintaining access roads and trails does take $$$, and I did buy my $30 pass this year. What I DO have a problem with and refuse to pay are CLIMBING fees such as the "volcano pass" that gets you access to Adams, Baker, Shasta, StHelens. And what do these fees support???..."Climbing Programs". Maybe I can see this on Rainier where they use some of the money to haul the shit buckets down from Muir and Shurman, but where do they get off charging a fee for these other mountains? And all of the $$$ goes to pay for a few geeks in uniforms to make sure you...PAID YOUR FEE! Kind of an extortion racket if you ask me. Also; if I pay my USFS demo fee, then where do they get off trying to close the Middle Fork Snoqualmie Road just because a few enviro-geeks like hiking abandoned road bed? I paid my fee to KEEP IT OPEN! Right?

Winter, As a not-so-grouchy 40 year old climber and supporter of REASONABLE environmental law, I can tell you that "the movement" is going too far in twisting The Wilderness Act and The Endangered Species Act. Lawers are the willing tools they use to lock out the public and to put an agenda/ideaology ahead of public safety and human life. I was once proud to call myself an "environmentalist". That changed in the early to mid 1990's when they turned on me and started locking me out of my favorite areas...not because of environmental damage, but because of subjective ideas like "solitude". I stand by my "intolerant/grouchy" label that I used to describe today's environmentalists. Stop locking climbers and hikers out of the mountains they love and care for and I may one day support you again. Your "movement" has been corrupted.

Don, AMEN! I wish more climbers would see as you do that environmentalists are NOT our best friends. They try to limit our access at every turn and now want to ban fixed anchors. It's ashamed "the movement" has been hijacked by a bunch of lawyers and those who see evil in everything human hands touch. They sure have done some good over the years, but why shut out the very people upon whom you've built your support? Mountain Bikes, Hang gliders, snowmobiles, dogs, horses, skiers, lug soled boots, brightly colored fabric, cell phones, motor drives on cameras,people in general....and CLIMBERS....it seems a vocal few of these enviro's hate just about everything. They act like grouchy old men if you ask me.

RStewbone, I believe Mr Larsen honestly believes he is protecting both The Wilderness Act and "his" mountain. Maybe I'm naieve, but I'm not sure "follow the money" is behind this guy's goofy ideas. Who knows...maybe he's trying to put the "solitude" provisions of The Wilderness Act on trial. (I'd be all for that.) Or maybe he's been intimidated/threatened by the lefties/ELF types that you guys down in Oregon seem to have so many of. (no Oregon dis intended) Anyway, he went back on his word and if he has his way we'll all be locked out. Rest assured, I'll be climbing anyway...what will they do when I refuse to identify my unpermitted ass? Lead me down from Crater rock at gunpoint/in handcuffs? Bring it on. Also, I don't believe this is a Republican/Democrat issue...the fee demo, the lockouts, any of it. Republicans have climbers lumped together with "hikers/environmentalist/WTO protester/lab burner-downers". (They don't mind screwing us out of a few bucks just to piss us off.) As we all know nothing could be further from the truth. Climbers are much more social than the aforementioned groups. Democrats would like to see groups like The Sierra Club running the whole show. Then we could all look foreward to being locked out of virtually all wilderness where humans are deemed "intruders". Basically, we're screwed supporting either party. It's not a "party" issue. The user group who screams the loudest (within the confines of the law) will be heard...climbers just have to scream a lot louder because we generally don't have the support of the enviro's or the $$$$ to BUY our way in. I'm convinced it will come down to ignoring registration/permitting. Maybe a fake set of license plates and a pair of bolt cutters (for gates) will be our only means by which to access "our" mountain wilderness areas.

Wow...Stories like this are terrible. Terrible for his family. I've wanted to climb Fairweather (Northwest Basin Route) for a while now and Gulf Air , to my knowledge is/was the only air taxi available. The previous owner, Mike Ivers(?) was killed dropping off some river rafters a few years ago. The flying in this part of AK just seems a bit more "on the edge" than the Denali operations. It's not the climbing that'd scare me...it would be the flying. Maybe I'll start at Alsek Bay...by boat.

I just received a letter today from Gary Larsen, Forest Supervisor of Mount Hood National Forest. In it he gives notice that he is "withdrawing" his earlier decision to allow continued unlimited use of Mount Hood and adjacent wilderness areas and he will "undertake additional deliberations around the issue of solitude and consistency with the Wilderness Act". Understand that this is the guy who wanted to limit Mount Hood South Climb to 25 individuals per day (permits and fees,no doubt) to preserve "solitude". As this climb sees hundreds of climbers per day during peak spring and summer months, this would cause climbers to lose a valuable "trainig" resource and would force a lot of novices onto more difficult and dangerous routes where they may be placing themselves (and potential rescuers) in danger. Whatever your opinion of The Wilderness Act, I doubt few climbers would argue that they go to Mount Hood to find "solitude", or that they would support a use limit to impose solitude. MY GOD; there's a SKI Resort there! (Solitude is the ONLY issue here...no documented environmental damage has been included in the EAS) The Access Fund thought they had won this fight last year when Mr Larsen issued his first ruling. Now it appears that the "final" decisions of a Forest Manager aren't worth a damn. Write or call: Gary Larsen Forest Supervisor 16400 Champion Way Sandy, OR 97055 (503)668-1700

Robertm, Great friction and the rock on the summit pinnacle is 100% solid. It is real crappy below the giant chockstone though. There was no one else on the route and I think that ascending while others were rappeling would have bee a bit hairy. You cant rap directly off the summit...we belayed down to a small ledge with two new-ish looking bolts and rappelled from there straight down to the top of the chockstone. Used two ropes but one 50m might do it. Hope this helps. Brian

Climbed Mt Cruiser in one day from Staircase R.S. yesterday with my brother Steve and Terry Mclain. I'm more of a glacier/alpine climber so the route seemed harder than the 5.0 it is rated...in fact, I'm sure the first few moves on the pitch above The Chockstone are 5.4. A lot of exposure, but there always seemed to be protection (bolts; a couple of small cracks) just when you needed it. Crampons make the climb up to Needle Pass easier, and two ropes make the descent faster. (3-double rope rappels from just below summit to base of the gully beneath the chockstone.) No other parties on the route. This climb may be faster from Mildred Lakes/Hamma Hamma side.

Anyone ever been up K's Spire? (That rock thumb beneath Little T) The books make it sound like low 5th class, but I've never met anyone who's actually climbed it. Is it rated accurately? How is the rappel? Need two ropes? Good anchor? Bolt? Horn? Just curious...thinking about climbing something "unusual" later this summer.

Beck, I'm not sure you read the entire string or you could not have come to the conclusion that I am "pro-logging". Simply because I agree that a judge in Idaho made the right decision about the Roadless proposal (which I feel would limit eventually diminish existing access) does not mean that I am "pro logging". (although I do enjoy reading Mountaineer PAPER back guideooks and wiping my ass with PAPER) I am however tired of hikers (like you?) who seem to feel that they hold the deed to all government owned land and see fit (with bogus science in hand) to petition their government to BAN certain types of recreation such as hunting,snowmobiles,(neither of which I participate in) mountain bikes,Paragliders,etc. I believe that if wilderness access is limited, future generations will become ambivalent about wilderness in general. Then you'll really see some wilderness rape goin'on with an apathetic public not giving a rat's ass! I agree with you 100% about the High Bridge/Dosewallips/Enchanted Valley fiasco. No... the repairs have not been done and won't be until next spring at the earliest. In the meantime I think the Hayden Pass/Sentinel Peak/ Eel Glacier approach and climb is shortest... and probably better anyway.

I last climbed the Adams Glacier in July 1984. I would put it on a par with Emmons Glacier on Mount Rainier, or just slightly more difficult when it isn't broken up...ie: before August. This route doesn't have that "big mountain" feel that Rainier has. Remember also though that you may have this route to yourself unlike Rainier/Emmons Glacier. We took one extra tool between the two of us (didn't use it) and one screw (didn't use it) and one picket (didn't use it) but I wouldn't suggest leaving these items behind. Especially later in the season. We decended the North Ridge.

Mattp, I'll let you have the last word. Thanks for taking an interest in the subject even if we did stray a little. Great debate! (AlpineTom too!) Also a great string started by you under "Rangers Lie". (Alpine Lakes) Check out my post. I think it will make your blood boil. Brian

Last summer my brother and I signed in at White River to climb Little T. I asked the on duty rangers about conditions and they replied that no one had climbed it recently. I checked the sign-out report book at the station and, indeed found no recent reports. It turns out that we had Meany Crest to ourselves that night. When we summitted the next morning I opened the register and read down the list of recent summiteers. I was surprised to see an entry made by a NP Ranger who signed his name and wrote "NPS Patrol". He had summited solo and THREE DAYS EARLIER. Why didn't he bother to pass on the results of his "patrol" to the general-public-joe-climber at White River Ranger Station via the book or other rangers?? Was he really on "patrol", or just out havin'-a-good-ol'-time on our tax $$$?? Later, we were decending Meany Crest when we ran into some ascending climbers. They had decided to climb "unregistered" because they were told that all Little Tahoma Alpine Zone camp allocations were taken. In fact there was NO ONE ELSE ON THE FUCKIN' MOUNTAIN! I have been similarly lied to about the Echo/Observation/Flett Glacier area and been lied to about snow on Mowich Lake Road(which was gated at Paul Peak) when in fact there was none.

Mattp, I respect your viewpoint but would like to point out a couple more cases to make my case: 1.) Mount Hood,1999. Under pressure from environmental groups the manager of the Mount Hood National Forest decides to impose a limit of 25 climbers per day on the south side route of Mount Hood. He uses the "solitude" provisions of The Wilderness Act as justification. He can cite no "physical environmental damage" as this route has seen heavy traffic for over 100 years. Only when fair minded groups such as The Access Fund step in does he put his plans on hold. 2.) Wenatchee National Forest. Thousands of blow downs block hundreds of miles of trails in wilderness areas after the "big winter of 1998." Trees are "piled like jackstraws" over popular trails. When the USFS starts to clear these trails they are stopped by at least 4 environmental groups decrying the use of chainsaws to clear access. (even though this practice is used in National Parks and is the quickest and least overrall impactful way to clear blowdowns.) These groups insisted that handsaws only be used to clear the trails. When it was estimated that this might take 10 or more years, the head of the local "Alpine Lakes Protection Society" stated "If hikers cant overcome these obstacles then they don't belong there." When a fair minded FS Manager threated to uphold the letter of the law by using dynamite instead of chainsaws these groups backed off. 3.) Let's not forget the unresolved "fixed anchor" debate. What's up with that!?!? 4.) Exatctly what is "mechanized"? Certainly mountain bikes...what about rondonee skis? Climbing skins are certainly a "ratcheting" device and a tele-skiier is certainly travelling at an "un-natural speed"(as Harvey Manning likes to justify with)downhill. What about a wheelbarrow used for trail maintainance? Matt, I certainly agree with you that your "follow the money" theory is up to 50% of the cause of lost access. But I think that environmental intolerance (to other user groups) is just as big a part. Additionally, let me clarify my statement about "socialist" environmentalists...I did not intend to apply this tag to all those involved in the logging debacle of the 1980's, however a better front-door approach would have been to push legislation banning raw-log exports. I do believe however that either A) socialists like wearing environmentalist clothing, or B) many environmentalists are in fact Socialists. One need not look farther than the WTO protests, or environmental views re rivate property rights to see this. I love the outdoors and don't want to see wilderness ravaged by greed. We must remember that we are ALL part of "The Corporation". To think otherwise is denial. ......I'm climbing Mt. Cruiser (Olympics) this weekend! I hope I'm allowed in!

mattp, thanks for your thoughtful reply. While I don't have a problem with the Roadless Proposal on the face of it, we must realize that such a policy will inevitably take on a "life of it's own". Two cases in point would be The Wilderness Act of 1964, and The Endangered Species Act. Laws written with a good and fair, basic premise in mind...but then horribly twisted by radical environmentalists and their lawers. (ie: the "solitude" and "motorized"....now "mechanized" provisions of The Wilderness Act and the backdoor use of The Spotted Owl and now the Klamath Sucker Fish to accomplish their socialist agenda rather than having a public debate on the issue at hand, which was logging and now is regulation of farming and hydroelectricity). I certainly DON'T support NEW road construction in National Forests, but environmental interest groups will easily twist the wording/meaning in this proposal and step in to PREVENT the repair and maintainence of EXISTING roads. This means reduced access for hikers and climbers! This "twisting" has been shown time and time again. As for the proposal being given a fair hearing....it was not! When you hold public meetings and notify/invite only those groups who you know in advance will support your proposal, then NO...you haven't held fair and adequate hearings. The judge in Idaho was 100% correct.

Westside Road stands a better chance of being repaired under the current administration than it did under the previous one. They seem to be more interested in spending money to repair exixting National Parks than simply aquiring more lands to strain an already burdened system. Do you remember when Carbon River Road was closed for 4 or 5 years a while back? The repair $$$ were appropriated but went unused for years because the old superintendant ( Bill Briggle) subscribed to the "let nature take over" philosophy that allows access roads to fall into disrepair. This misguided idea espoused by some radical, and sub radical environmentalists is designed to keep people OUT of wilderness areas. The Clinton era "roadless proposal" would extend this access-killing idea to Forest Service land as well.

I understand that the Westside road in Mt Rainier Park has been adequately repaired for quite some time now but that only country club rangers are allowed to use it. Is this so that the NPS can concentrate more hikers/climbers/tourists at Paradise and then point their fingers with their mouths wide open, agast at how we're "loving our mountain to death"? Then they can implement their "shuttle bus/no private vehicles in the park" plan and further limit access to "their" mountain. I thought when Jarvis took over as 'Super things would loosen up a bit and yet as of today even Mowich lake road has yet to open for the summer although the snow has long ago melted off of it. My point is that it would sure be nice to climb west side routes like Tahoma Glacier without having to plan a mini expedition. This would free up some of the supposed "overuse" on other routes as well. I know some of you like the mountain biking opportunities that Westside road provides but some great climbing opportunities as well as dozens of family dayhikes are fading away. The NPS has been promising a shuttle service on Westside Road for years now too but, of course it has yet to materialize. This wouldn't fit their master (whine about Paradise) plan.

Why is it that climbers have MORE freedom in socialist Alpine countries like Italy, France, and Germany that we do here in the USA? We live in a "free" society yet we've recently turned management of our mountain areas over to Sierra Club/Wilderness Society SOCIALIST/COMMIES! Every day we lose access as another road is left to fall into disrepair or another arbitrary "use limit" is imposed. Hopefully "w's" administration will restore some balance to this Forest Madness. You want "SOLITUDE"? Go find it somewhere! Don't try to spoil everyone else's day! Maybe it's time to rewrite The Wilderness Act?

I scoped it out with binoculars from the highway between Elbe and Ashford this past Thursday. It looks solid/smooth. A couple of small crevasses near the top of The Sickle if you're planning to go that way. Of course, the approach is still a bitch! WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO OPEN WEST SIDE ROAD???!!! They say it's safe enough for a shuttle bus ("someday") but not safe enough for personal vehicles. BS! They close roads and then gripe about Paradise being "too crowded" and their favorite cliche: "loved to death". The Tahoma is one route on Rainier where I wouldn't feel the least bit guilty ignoring registration requirements. Flame suit on...

Just curious if anyone has done/ has current info(last 4 years) on climbing "The Castle" on Adams' east side. There was a HUGE rockslide that came off the Klickitat Icefall side of The Castle in 1997. Has this altered the route? Also, has anyone just traversed over to the top of The Castle from the South summit? Are C.E.Rusk's ashes/memorial still in place there? I've done a few routes on this mountain and would like to add The Castle Route to my list. Thanks.

quote: Originally posted by willstrickland: Wow, didn't know the West Side was that popular during that week. I simul-soled the Reid on 5/12 and encountered quite a bit of rock and icefall. Both my partner and I got beaned by baseball and larger sized ice and rock. We managed to on-sight the route with little route-finding difficulties. I wouldn't want to be up there after about 5am, rock/ice fall was insignificant until we were in the upper sections of the headwall (like 6am). At that point it was "keep your head down and climb as fast as you safely can" We summited at 7am after a 7 hour ascent. This was a great route, a blast to climb with only one tool (take two!), and the ice in and above the final narrow chutes was great (in a Cascades kind of way) We decided to solo due to time, and the fact that the rock is little more than frozen kitty litter, the ice sucks, and the snow wouldn't likely hold a fall of any distance. Took a single 8mm line with us, but never used it and didn't even put on the crampons until about 9,700. Highly recommended route, but do it in early season and get an early start. One other note, the traverse after Illumination saddle was thigh-deep postholing on a 30 degree slope...heinous! I still want to do Leutholds, maybe next year or this winter. Will, This route is commonly reffered to as "Castle Crags" but it is, in fact Reid Glacier Headwall. I've done Leuthold in Feb... The route you did is considered much more difficult. Nice job. br

Viking, I attempted Adams 6/13. Stopped by deep snow. Adams Glacier in GOOD shape. About 1 1/2 feet of new snow! Once this consolidates the route should be great!

quote: Originally posted by Dan Harris: How does Adams compare to Mazama? I have gone up Avalanche Gulch on Mount Shasta, Hayden Glacier on Middle Sister, OR and some steep snow fields in the Central Sierras. Nothing very crevassed. Mazama looked like the next step up from these routes. Dan, The Adams Glacier route is significantly more difficult than the Mazama. You can easily access the Mazama route by parking at Cold Springs (South Spur-normal route) hiking up about half mile to the RTM trail, turn right(east) then follow this trail into the reservation for about one mile before you leave the trail and angle up and left toward Mazama Glacier Saddle. About 3 hours total. True, you'll be trespassing, but the Yakimas promised to keep this area open to all rec. activities when Nixon expanded the Reservation boundary here in 1973. They have since gone back on this agreement. They don't patrol the backcountry beyond the roads so you'll have no problems. Also, there is a lot of new snow above 5500' that may be temporarily blocking access to Cold Springs trail head.