Jump to content

jordop

Members
  • Posts

    2677
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jordop

  1. Yeah and if you watch CNN right now they've got a wicked pundit explaining how the public can see past these silly trivial matters, that we're all only human! Riiiggghhhtt. I seem to remember them taking a slightly different stance during Clinton's fiasco.

  2. Lucky that the skis didn't fly into someone else's car. Then there would be a whole new can of worms. BTW, what would your responsibility be had that been the case? Might be a good precedent for applying to sorting out the ski losses.

     

    Exactly. In this case it would be hard to link my lack of inspection of the rack to a third party injury in which my skis impaled someone else. Every professional I talk to about this says no way no how, it's HIS deal.

  3. Sorry dude, but it's not his fault. Yours.

    While the law in the US may suggest that the onus is upon me to make sure his car is sound, all the insurance folk I have talked to here say that it is his responsibility to ensure proper maintenance on the car and its accessories.

     

    He is unwilling to make an insurance claim. May be a large deductible and/or increased premiums

  4. Go skiing with dude in dude's car. Give skis to dude, he puts em on his car rack. 30 mins later skis fly off roof and bounce down the hwy doing 70mph. Skis are essentially brand new. Ski techie says don't bother repairing them: they are f8ked.

     

    Should:

    Dude pay replacement cost?

    Dude pay me for what I paid for them?

    Dude give me what I would have got if I had sold them with 6 days's use on em?

    Dude offer repair bills and nothing else?

    Dude offer nothing?

     

  5. Umm, this is about HELI-SKIING AND COMMERCIAL TENURE, not guides being able to access public lands. Guides have always been able to guide, land a helicopter, etc in the Wadd area.

     

    We are talking about a HELI-SKIIING TENURE whereby there will be repeated and frequent mechanized use of a formerly wilderness area.

     

  6. Wow, thanks for telling us all about it, that's very cool of you. I especially like the way you have no idea what you are talking about:

     

    I'm all in favor of increased guiding access to public lands

     

    since this is not the issue here, nor ever has been. Apparently no one has been allowed to guide on Waddington until now?

  7. Is this proposal any different that the gazillions of folks who fly into Denali each year or those who access the Mt. Robson by helicopter because they're too lazy to haul their gear in for 25 + kilometers?

     

    Yes, incredibly. Please RE-read Don's previous posts.

     

    I enjoy the peace and solitude of the backcountry like most of you folks, but I'm finding it harder and harder these days to justify why my views/desires should trump others; particularly commercial interests or those who lack the skills/willingness to expereience this spectacular area a little bit differently. Surely the solution is to compromise by allowing some sort of limited/licenced commercial access.

     

    K so I went to Patagonia on vacation tryin to do a new route on Cerro Torre and there was the continual whine of snowmobiles out on the icecap throughout the climb. Would that change things for me and my experience? Oooo, I'd say so.

     

    You can heli ski and snowmobile in lots of pretty amazing areas in BC. But south of Logan, there is only ONE area where you can climb new routes on savage 14'000 foot peaks.

  8. You're never going to convince the Campbell government of anything by shaming them into thinking about the long-term social benefit of something like the preservation of wilderness.

     

    I'm too old to succumb to such a pessimistic attitude - or is it perhaps that I'm just naive enough to remain optomistic. I do know one thing - unless you speak up about your interests, whatever 'the other guy' says carries the day. and while I'm no friend of the current government, even they have some degree of social sensitivity - behind each of those voices is a vote!

     

    so don't waste your time here; sit down and tap out an e-mail to Mrs. Tetarenko.

     

    cheers, don

     

    Okay, yes, we all represent votes, but let's avoid the "save the environment" type of nostalgic wailing that gets dismissed instantly by the more profit-minded folks running the show. I'm writing a missive today and I'm thinking about the kinds of concrete concerns that might have more influence than a easily dismissed lament about the wilderness shortsightedness of government: The fact that the tenure is way too big, the fact that as you say there is a near century of culture that has developed here, the fact that there is existing revenue being generated here that may be affected, the fact that the license is so open ended that it will be easily abused . . .

  9. I wanna do a route around here that tops out in a godammned hay field like they got in Scotland.

     

    That Kirkpatrick movie at the the VIMFF was so British it was hilarious, what with the 500 sq ft flat in Sheffield, the late night spice shop dinner, swinging tools at powder . . .

  10. wfinley said:
    Explain to me why Inuits in Baffin should be held to the same laws as Vancouverites when it comes to subsistence?

     

×
×
  • Create New...