Mtguide

It's not too much of a stretch from requiring MLU's or PLB's, to take the next step and mandate that all climbers be implanted with a tracking system chip, then of course all rescue personnel, in case any of them get lost. Since family members might have questions or objections, they'd have to be implanted also; if somehow family members tried to speak to the media, all media personnel need chips, and all of THEIR family members, and anyone else they might talk to... etc.,etc.,etc. Your next question is exactly the right question.... :: " Holt shtill, now, ziss von't hurt a bitt..." :[]

A further distinction that can be drawn is simply the difference between rock climbing and alpine mountaineering.(With the understanding that big peaks requiring alpine snow and ice climbing can also involve plenty of rock climbing, too.) I've lost a dozen friends who died mountaineering on large peaks. Big mountains are dangerous, lots of potential for rock and icefall, altitude, avalanche, glacier travel and extreme weather hazards, greater overall logistical difficulties. Very complex, a lot more to go wrong, far less forgiving. Pure rock climbing much less so. High angle rock climbing areas tend to be more structurally sound and stable, pro is comparatively more frequent and dependable, and notwithstanding the advances in clothing,training, technique, technical gear and skills to progress into a longer or even year-round season, the vast majority of climbs are done during good weather months. Also, most of the well-known areas are relatively accessible, not as remote. By comparison, I've only lost two friends who died rock climbing. Epics in my personal experience, and those of my climbing friends, have also been more frequent on big mountains than on rock. Never take anything for granted on any climb, but mountaineering, even on supposedly easy or simple routes, requires a much higher level of everything you have to bring to it.

Hilarious; but where are their protest signs and banners,etc.?

Ah, verra kewl, laddy. Way to go, Scott.

"Manzanita" is Spanish for "little apples". Arctostaphylos manzanita. Although related, it's not a bearberry (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi), and it's definitely not a Salvia divinorum. Just a humble little workaday scrub shrub. Manzanita berries are edible, usually kind of dry with a mealy, grainy texture, though not very palatable, and they do indeed taste a little like apples. But the berries are a good source of vitamin C, and can be made into a bracing tea with that apple-like taste, slightly tart, acidic, or tannic. Best with a spoon of honey. Good for colds, according to the Native American tribes of the NW and California. Early white settlers managed to make jam or jelly out of them. Many of the tribes of N. Calif. ground the berries up to mix in with their acorn mush. MMM,yummy.

Another problem with the effectiveness of any kind of beacon is that it has to be activated by the climber carrying it. In the event of a climber, or even a whole party, being struck by avalanche or icefall, they might never have a chance to turn on their PLB's or MLU's. Current limitations on battery life and the lack of a remote- or searcher/base-activated system need to be overcome before you have anything approaching a truly useful system. Also, the Mt.Hood MLU's, given the current level of technology, are are about 30 years behind the times in size and weight, and in the method of deployment. I know any number of people who have taken one look at those things, myself included, and said "No way am I packing that damn thing up there." They're like the early cordless phones and walkie-talkies compared to a current state-of-the-art cellphone or Bluetooth. The SPOT locator beacon is about 8 oz. I think, about the size of an avy beacon or GPS unit. And c'mon, mounted on a SASH? Like that won't just get ripped right off during an avalanche or tumbling fall. Ridiculous. Lots of room for improvement there.

Weather was perfect that day - but the forecast on the backend succinctly forecast conditions that would create bad avalanche conditions and minimize options for any self or SAR rescue in the event things went bad. As far as I'm concerned if you do a winter ascent of a significant mountain with less than a 72-hour weather window you are gambling. How well you gamble is dependent on your level of skill and experience. Go with less than a 36-hour window you better be damn good and prepared to deal with all eventualities. But then this is the same mountain with a level of accessibility where thousands of the people summit and make it up and down - so long as nothing goes wrong. If it does go wrong then probably 90% or more of them don't really have the skills or experience to deal. So true. The team that perished on Hood in 2006 also pushed too close to the closing of the weather window. Fred Beckey has often said that you need to actually get into position for your climb while the weather is still active, if you can do so without undue risk, then begin your summit attempt just as conditions begin to improve,(with prudent regard for avalanche threat in winter) to give yourself the greatest possible opening. Early winter in the Cascades is well known for unpredictability. A longtime practice of experienced NW climbers focused on winter ascent of significant routes on the major peaks is to wait until the long mid-winter weather break which almost always occurs sometime between mid-January and end of February. The exact time and length of this pause varies from year to year, but even with climate change has remained fairly consistent and dependable. It usually lasts from 10 days to two weeks or more, with clear, calm, and very cold conditions at the higher elevations. By the time it arrives, snowpack has become much more consolidated, crevasses are completely filled or solidly bridged over, windloaded slopes and cornices are more stable (NOT foolproof,ever) and buildup of rime and heavy crust over areas of exposed rock, powder or sugar snow offer good cramponing and speed. As always, patience, careful attention to forecasting (and we have SO much more detailed and real time information to work from now than we did when I started climbing in 1965-- the advent of Doppler radar, online weathercams, hourly updates, snow profiles, etc. There's pretty much no excuse for being ignorant of the current and upcoming weather.) and timing are climbing skills of equal importance to technical ability and conditioning.

Yes, sorry, it's km.

Re approach notes: From where you turn off the main highway, it's approx. 10 miles to the end just before the basin of the cirque.

You bet,the classic climb of Crown Point has one of the longer chimneys around. The second pitch begins as a deep chimney and actually becomes a tunnel that goes right through the main right hand column. Easy 5th class becoming 4th class, and a complete hoot/kick in the ass.

Looking over the finished product, I am awed, Mike. Absolutely smashing. Thanks so much for inviting me to contribute to it, I'm honored to have had a small part in it.

Spending the night in the Hidden lakes Lookout is one of the greatest such experiences you can have. It's clean, downright homey for a lookout, spectacularly situated at the very edge of the east face of lower Hidden Lakes Peak, and easy to get to. The first time I stayed there, we woke up in the middle of the night to witness the passing of an awesome lightning storm, after which it cleared off to a full moon, with the top of the clouds sitting right at the base of the building, the summits of the North Cascades jutting up through the cloud layer like sharks fins, incredibly beautiful. Highly recommended.

Actually a Hilary Chia or Henry Kissinger Chia wouldn't be too far from the real thing; and I really can't understand why they haven't picked up yet on Al Sharpton, Don King, Weird Al Yankovich, Carrot Top, Conan O'Brien, or Jay Leno (the face alone would sell that one). And a George Bush Chia with an Alfred E. Neumann look, ears and all--priceless. There could also be a line called Hippie Goddess Chias, natural nudes with the "hair" in the strategic places. Missin' some big opportunities, there, really.

First order of business is to STAY THE HELL OFF IT!!! You may very well have aggravated and further injured it by continuing to climb on it after you first clipped it. As billcoe said, that's where you should have stopped, not finishing the route, absolutely not taping it and climbing on it for the rest of the day. Any time there's an impact injury from a fall, (and 10 feet is plenty far enough to fracture even young, strong, large bones--hell, for that matter, 10 feet can kill you if you hit right, I don't care how tough and strong you are) you need to get it looked at. Especially when it's loud enough to hear it snap, crack or pop. Not good, not good at all. If there's swelling,obviously there's damage. Learn to listen to your body. The only excuse for continuing to climb with something like this would have been if you were on a remote face or back country alpine climb with no other way off but to continue on. When you're just cragging,for Xcrist sake, use some common sense and take care of things before you make them worse. Other wise you could have a rather short climbing career, and could wind up with arthritic effects that will show up in later years. The body is tough, but you do have to take care of it properly. Depending on your age,and the nature and extent of injury, it could take anywhere from 2 to 4 weeks, perhaps longer, before it's well healed and stable enough to return to full use. There's not a lot of blood flow to ligaments and tendons, so it takes time. Just because there's not a lot of pain doesn't necessarily mean there's no problem, or that the damage is minimal; some white tissue injuries don't involve much in the way of nerve endings. And after the initial recovery, you should train it to strengthen it, using high reps(to maximize blood flow) and light weight or resistance (to avoid overstraining it AGAIN) and gradually increasing resistance as it gets better. A good physical therapist can give you the correct exercises for your specific injury. In Portland, the Adventist Hospital near Mall 205 has an excellent Sports Medicine free clinic (at least it used to be) one or two nights a week where you can get it evaluated and treated, as well as consulting with a physical therapist and/or physiatrist. Just call for the days and times.

A great place for young climbers is the Round River route on Koala Rock in the Marsupial Crags at Smith Rock. Three pitches of 5.4, good protection, though, as Alan watts' guide says, a bit runout for a first time leader, fine otherwise. Also, if he's only been to a small crag a couple of times, more cragging on 1 or 2 pitch routes to develop more confidence,balance, strength, and some real technique, etc., wouldn't hurt a thing before jumping right into big exposure. Remember that even for fairly experienced climbers, exposure can greatly increase the psychological rating even for low 5th class. Broughton's Bluff, Carver, French's Dome, Bulo Point,and Horse Thief Butte offer plenty of variety and challenge at low el, to keep kids from being bored, and have lots to teach. Then on to Round River, Mt. Erie, (I know, it's a ways away, but a great practice area), Mt. Si, Tumwater Canyon and Castle Rock, Kloochman Rock, etc. Adventure climbing in the Columbia Gorge, such as Rooster Rock, Crown Point, or a trip down to The Menagerie are another good option. Yvon Chouinard says that all climbers are the product of their first two or three climbs; if those are good experiences, a positive pattern is set. If not, the young climber can have difficulties. T.M. Herbert, one of the great Yosemite climbers of the late 60's and on through the 70's, spent several years putting in dozens, perhaps hundreds, of low to mid- 5th class routes all over the West, developing a finely honed sense of routefinding and solid, versatile technique that later stood him in good stead on demanding first ascents on the big stuff later. Nothing like building a good foundation, and by the way, a lot safer for you, too, to have a little more experienced partner once you're four-five hundred feet off the deck.

When in doubt, throw it out. Always consider slings expendable, your life and health not so. And yes, for cragging, where weight isn't so much of a factor, beef it up, go old school both on slings and rope, especially when working a project where you expect to be taking falls, use a rope protector and pulley-type locking biner for toproping, especially over any edges, heavy-duty redundant anchors. Save the skinny slings for backcountry/wilderness alpinism. In his great book "On Snow and Rock", Gaston Rebuffat emphasizes repeatedly the vital importance of gear being of the finest quality, and in perfect condition before you climb, and of constantly checking it, especially remembering to pay attention to it during the climb, not just before and after. Have a long and happy climbing career.

You've discovered French's Dome. There's an actual guidebook, pub. a few years back, and a thorough rundown on routes in the last edition of Tim Olson's Guide to Portland Rock climbs. A very well-known and developed crag.

--"Play for more than you can afford to lose, and you will learn to play the game..." --Winston Churchill "The only true sports are bullfighting and mountain climbing; all others are games." -Ernest Hemingway

It all depends on how serious a climber you are,and just how your time off is arranged,as to whether Berkeley,(or as we used to call it, Berserkley) will be a good choice for you. Even Yosemite and the Sierras, although much closer than where you are now, are still a long drive, most of a day. If you will indeed have long stretches of days off, then that might work well for you. But if all you have is a weekend at a time, you'll soon find that it really limits your actual climbing time. I lived in SF for a year back in 1969. Remember that the traffic and population now are far greater than they were then; we went to Yosemite for a weekend. We left SF at 2:30 PM on a Friday afternoon, and with all the traffic, got to Camp 4 at 9:00 PM, driving like hell (when we could). Got up early the next morning to climb, had a great time,climbed all day, got back to camp about 9:PM. While sitting around the campfire (yep, you could still have a real campfire back then) eating supper, we were talking about what we were going to climb the next day (a Sunday), and my girlfriend said "But you can't climb tomorrow; we have to drive back because I have to teach and you have to work, and I don't want to be getting home late and be all tired out from driving." Bummer. We left Yosemite at about 10:00 AM thinking that would be plenty of time; but we hadn't really counted on the masses of traffic, with weekenders of all kinds,coming not just from Yosemite but from all along the Sierra front. Endless lines of Winnebagos, fishermen, skiers, hikers, dirt bikers, you name it. It was just amazing. Long story short, we didn't get home until almost 10:00 PM due to various traffic tie-ups. The actual driving distance isn't that far,(about 300 miles) it's just that you can't drive fast enough to make any decent time because of the dozens of cities and towns you have to go through, all with their speed limits, and the absolutely unbelievable traffic, especially on the weekends. When all you can average is 30 or 35 mph, the 300 mi. will take you 10 hours. Even back in 1969, I can remember spending almost three hours just trying to get to the little Redwood grove in Santa Cruz, because of traffic, and that's only about 75 miles or so from SF. We tried it again a few more times, but soon realized you really need a week or more off at a time to get the full benefit of any trip to Yosemite or the Sierras, with a full day of travel time for both going and returning home. The next closest decent climbing, but still far short of Yosemite or Sierra quality, is Pinnacles National Monument, down near San Jose. And even it is a couple of hours or more depending on traffic. Another great place to go is Castle Crags, near Yreka, about 3 or so hours north. Back in 69, it was little known and very uncrowded. It's still not as jammed up as Yosemite, but the days of spending a whole week there without seeing another soul are long gone. As far as going to Red Rocks in 4 hours is concerned, think again. That's a very long, full day's drive in the best of conditions. You'd have to average 146.5 mph to make it in 4 Hrs, and believe me, that ain't gonna happen. (Well, it might be a little more possible now that the state has had to start laying off State troopers because of budget cuts. Of course they're having to let the roads go to hell, too, so there's another slowdown.) A few months later, we moved back to Seattle. I love San Francisco and the Bay area (I was born there)and have been back many times to visit; but I'll never live there again. It's just too far from the mountains, too damn crowded, and yes, it is outrageously expensive. Just mho. Now, having said all that, I have to agree with one of the other posts above, that it is a great place, and an experience well worth having. San Francisco is truly a great, great city, and Berkeley and UC are a great center of intellectual,scientific,literary, artistic, and political ferment and creativity. There is nothing anywhere else quite like it, and it's an education in itself. San Francisco comes as close to anything we have in the US besides New York, to having a truly mature urban, and urbane, worldly culture, truly a great international city. Just to go to North Beach, to browse through City Lights Books and see Ferlenghetti himself back there pricing books, to walk up to Coit Tower and watch the fog roll in over Twin Peaks and Russian Hill, or go catch a Giants game at Candlestick Park, head out for great food in the Castro or Mission District, hang out on Divisadero, Chinatown, or at the Art Institute or the Palace of the Legion of Honor up above the Golden Gate Bridge, well, you'll see what I mean after you've been there a while. Even Oakland, gritty and grim as it is, has a great story to tell. Best of luck there,and it really is true what the song says, "I left my heart in San Francisco..."

For Carver, yes, that is true. Makes sense if you're a private owner. Not too far fetched that someone might sue you if their kid, spouse, etc., died climbing on your property. Hell, you could be sued for anything that happens to someone while on your property. If someone tripped over a root or a pebble hiking up to the crag and broke a tooth or sprained their ankle, you can get sued. Being a lawyer, I'm sure that guy has seen it all. People will sue for anything, no matter how ridiculous. A bad hair cut, the hot coffee at MacDonald's, etc. So, waivers are the answer. This is why I'm thinking that waivers are a possibility whenever Madrone opens. Municipalities get sued all the time, at the drop of a hat; people will try to get money from where ever they think there's some to be found. My guess is, they (Clackamas county)will want to protect themselves.

Sorry, I admit I don't really know if that's going to happen. I think I meant to say "probably" or "likely", and for two reasons. One, because it will be a Clackamas County Park; and two,because one of their main arguments in the past against allowing climbing there at all, was liability. Granted, that may have been just an excuse at the time, because powerful interests behind the scenes were pulling every string they could to log and quarry it, which didn't become public until later. But as I recall, the initial excuse offered for closing it was liability. The real reason for closing it was that someone, just exactly who, I'm not sure, was seeing giant dollar signs, during the early runup in the housing bubble several years ago. And it's been my experience that anytime things happen as they have regarding the closure of Madrone Wall, you can almost be certain that someone stands to make a hell of a lot of money somewhere, or at least they THINK they do. It may be that the recession will be what really saves Madrone Wall in the end. And this is by no means to downplay or minimize the Herculean, heroic efforts of all those who have labored so long and hard to save it as a climbing area. One of the early small victories was the geological survey which determined that the rock, and the area, was utterly unsuitable for a quarry. But developers and land exploiters give up their ideas and desires very, very grudgingly. There is still going to be some logging on the property up above. Greed, like gravity, never sleeps. At any rate, with all the foot-dragging on the part of Clackamas county commissioners over this whole episode (almost TEN years now!) waivers is an item which may be either dead, or just playing possum, and I do think it warrants watching. The whole process has been absolutely maddening, two steps forward, one or more steps back. Just when it would seem everything was a go, something else would be trotted out to gum up the works. And thanks for asking, I should have been clearer.

You're probably right, although I guess one alternative might be to have people sign waivers such as we already do to climb at Carver Bridge Cliff, and as will be required at Madrone if they EVER, in our lifetimes, get over noodling around in red tape and actually get the place opened up again. Perhaps they do this at some climbing gyms also? Shows you how much time I've spent on plastic, which is to say, not much. I'd have to disagree, though, with any suggestion that clipping bolts or pre-hung draws in any way approximates the experience of placing and climbing on pro on lead. Sport and gym climbing require some forethought and sequencing, but the holds are the holds, the bolts are the bolts, there's little creativity demanded. Totally different animal. Just the physical difference in trying to stay on your stance while selecting and placing the right size cam, nut,etc. is far more sustained in trad than sport climbing, until you get to the very upper ratings of difficulty. Let alone the fact that you can protect a trad climb in so many different combinations. Plus, the second then has to clean the pitch, re-rack the gear, and leapfrog the next lead. During my learning years it was still pretty much all pitons, a lot of work for both leader and second, beside the sheer weight of all that iron. Compared to that, my first sport climbing experience (outdoors) was really laughable, I was just giggling like a schoolgirl at how much easier and simpler it was, and how much higher of a rating you could climb to. But it wasn't by any means the same. To me there is still nothing like trad that gives you the feeling of having really accomplished something pretty hard to do, of having done "the real thing". Just mho.

I think it's very important to include a wide variety of "natural" crack features, with two purposes in mind. First, crack climbing tends to be pretty neglected at most gyms, but it is an essential skill for serious outdoor/trad climbers. Few peaks, if any, consist of face climbing exclusively. Bouldering, sport climbing and gym climbing seem to have produced a generation of superb face/hueco/smear/crimp/balance climbers who nonetheless whine about "offwidth cracks" in the pages of Rock and Ice. People, there ARE no offwidth cracks; there are simply cracks, of all sizes and shapes and textures, and if you're going to be a complete and versatile climber/alpinist, you have to be able to climb them all if that's what the climb presents you with. Everything from thin, bottoming finger cracks to big chimneys. Yes, I'm Old School on this--Yosemite-style was the standard when I was learning to climb, and we relished the chance to challenge all manner and sizes of cracks. Stemming, arm and leg bars, squirming and "thrutching" in barndoor dihedrals and outward leaning cracks that want to spit you out, it's all part of climbing on real features. Anyway, it'd be nice to see more attention paid to this aspect of rock climbing skills. And it would greatly benefit learning climbers who are interested in trad. The second reason for including a wide variety of crack features would be to provide an indoor/wintertime area where climbers could learn and practice placing and climbing on protection, instead of just clipping bolts all the time. I'm not familiar with the technical and legal/liability problems that might be presented here, but I can guess that there might be issues regarding the durability of the artificial cracks under the repeated pressure of cams, stoppers and wires of all sizes, especially in holding falls, and just where the lines would be concerning the responsibility of the gym, or the climber/customer. But with the amazing variety of materials for creating lifelike and durable rock faces and textures, I think it would be worth a try. Various concrete/polymer/epoxy mixes can actually be as good as, and tougher, than actual rock. And, of course, there's always the option of using actual rock and mortar, like Schurman Rock in West Seattle, just taking it indoors. I think the gym that had these features would tend to attract a wider range of climbers, in particular a little older and more financially able customer who would love to have a place to come when it's pouring outside, to train and practice trad skills, to stay in shape and tune up over the winter for big mountain summer adventures. I also heartily second the suggestions of those above for drytooling features. In short, it just seems to me that the more you can offer, the broader your client base will be, the more of a service your gym would be to the climbing community, and the better it will be for your bottom line over the long haul.

I've lost three long-time friends to lung cancer, none of whom ever smoked anything but weed. Two other friends, also non-tobacco users but dope smokers, have both survived lung cancer, one with surgery to remove a small portion of lung, the other by a bone-marrow transplant. And two others in the same non-tobacco stoner category are currently undergoing treatment for lung cancer. Praying they'll make it. I don't know what the specific carcinogenic elements are in marijuana, but 7 out of 7 coming down with lung cancer is a pretty clear sign to me that smoking anything is not good for you. I used weed for a short time (about 6 months) in the late 60's, noticed that it seemed to be affecting my wind, and quit so that it wouldn't compromise climbing and other athletic activities. Quit using tobacco (I smoked a pipe) at the same time, have never smoked anything since. So far so good.

Chuck Norris has also recently advocated that Texas once again secede from the union, and that he plans to run for President of Texas. ________________________________________________________ Outer space exists because it is afraid to be on the same planet with Chuck Norris. If you have five dollars in your wallet, and Chuck Norris has five dollars in his wallet, Chuck Norris has more money than you do.