chris

The White Spider - the very first comparison study of Alpine Fast & Light Tactics on a challenging route. So ahead of its time that Harrer never realized it himself!

Absolutely right. Welcome back, Joseph. How was Beacon?

A special place where I can call idiocy - really?!?!?!?!?!?!? I'm there! Bye for now. Please go away.

That depends on many factors such as how many parties in a team, how skilled and experienced, which mountain, which route, what kind conditions, to name a few. But yes the right keyword is "no guarantee." Please go away.

Please go away.

Please go away.

Matt, Because of the recent press that informed the general public of our existence, cc.com has been invaded by a horde of people who don't climb, or who don't climb in the Cascades. They have perverted our forums to a degree even we ourselves have never reached. Worse yet, they clutter up our threads and waste our time reading though their ignorant and blatantly un-educated posts to learn anything of material value to the subject. In MontanaPup's words, "tell Matt they've hijacked entire website." Layton's analogy of gawkers at an accident may describe it best. Please lock this thread. Force the new arrivals to disperse. Better yet, please PM them and give them some ground rules - like where the bloody hell Newbies and Sprayers should post their thoughts. But lock this thread - its value has been lost in this worthless clutter. To which I'm going to start adding to in volume.

I'm considering a run up Granite Peak - can anyone tell me where the snowline elevation is?

Dude, no one ever plans to use one of these!

Choada- I've rope-soloed in the alpine, with a single strand of a 70m twin system, simply cloved into a locking carabiner at my waist.

Jens- They may be right about the sport climbing potential at Red Rocks, but they're smoking something and not sharing if they argue that the trad sucks. The trad kicks ass - I've spent a total of two months there now, and I've never climbed the same route twice, and nothing smaller than 4 pitches long. I'll keep going back. I'd love to hear about some big limestone walls with Verdon-quality though, so give'em a couple of beers and get them to tell you more.

Sorry Kev - I had to step away from the computer for a few hours. It sounds like your one piece of gear wasn't consistent with the route, and that a bolt was more appropriate. I wouldn't call this bolting a crack. To me, the issue occurs when someone places a bolt at a stance where a natural piece of gear could also be placed. That seems to be the inappropiate use of fixed gear. My question is more akin to my OW examples. When the South Face of Conness was climbed, there was no such thing as big gear, so the FA team placed bolts (the originals are still there, little 1/4"s spinning in the wind). Is it appropriate to replace the bolts of the FA team (all were hardmen, no doubt), or should current ascents carry wide gear, and should someone remove those bolts? Or when a piton finally works loose, should the placement be replaced with another pib, a bolt, or an RP? What happens when a team successfully frees an aid line, and one of the fixed pins used for pro later works loose? Is it appropriate to add bolts on a free version to protect an extended section of hooking?

I'm right with you there, Hawkeye.

You guys tell me. Climbing with clean protection is a recent (relatively) phenomenom. How do we address repeat ascents of routes that were established when pitons were the standard pro? Or of free ascents of aid routes? Once a route has been free'd, how should the fixed gear be addressed?

Yeah, I was feeling pretty clever with that "e-ass" and "bonehead" comment. Sorry for starting the name calling - that was pretty childish of me. E - I can't see enough to tell WTF is going on! Is that lower bolt intended to be part of some anchor? Are there two more bolts to the left with chains, and the bolter intended someone to incorporate the three bolts into an ascent anchor? Are they standing on a 2m wide ledge? Can't tell. Don't know. Never climbed it. I don't know what the history is! Did Kor place three bolts on the FA cause he was worried about piton scarring? Did someone else come along and add a few bolts, and then a few more? Don't know - haven't researched it. If that was the case would I be angry with Kor? But I don't know. I agree with you too, the bolts seems excessive. In fact, I'd like to see most of them go. Maybe. In the end, what I'm arguing, is that "NO BOLTS NEAR NATURAL PROTECTION" is a great guiding principle. But that's all it is. Every decision is not black/white. Every circumstance requires a re-consideration of the guiding principles. And I want to know more.

Kev, you just articulated your ignorance very well. Bolting OW has been happening since the 1960's. These include the not-so-insignificant First Ascents of the East Face of the Keeler Needle and the South Face of Mt. Conness, both of which feature bolt protected off width pitches. Whatever happened with understanding history before taking action in the present? My questions about this pitch are completely valid - Kor may have bolted this pitch to prevent scarring the crack with multiple piton placements. Since he has a reputation for only placing bolts when he felt they were absolutely necessary to prevent death, I do wonder and want to learn why they were placed here. So rather than be the moron you descibed above, I'm asking for more information and withholding my final judgement until I've heard more. Its called research, you should try it sometime. With all that wind-up and mud-slinging done, I do agree that these bolts appear superfluous. I wonder if it was re-bolted to follow Kor's original bolting methodology (which is a lot more run-out than in Frosty's pictures), or if it had been retrobolted. Retrobolting will have me as pissed off as Kevbone seems to be now - and only my respect for what Kor accomplished is moderating my responses.

But why is that? Because the manufatures want them to, to get there curiosity up about "how long it will last, how many falls etc....." Then they get to turn around and sell more ropes. Kevbone, marketing (in most cases) is driven by the advertiser's desire to address a perceived consumer want/need. Manufacturers make lifetime and use recommendation becauses most consumers factor in product lifetime into a purchasing decision. Also, its well known that petroleum products (like artificial fibers in a rope), off-gas, break-down, and susceptible to uv degradation. And I'be been using Beal ropes exclusively for five years - they've been fine, and I really recommend them for alpine and ice!

check out the following technical information at Beal: dynamic test standards: http://www.bealplanet.com/portail-2006/index.php?page=normes_dynamiques&lang=us lifetime dynamic ropes: http://www.bealplanet.com/portail-2006/index.php?page=duree_vie&lang=us I don't think these recommendations are made purly to sell more ropes - I also believe that consumers repeatedly ask this question. Its important to remember that the UIAA/CE tests are to certify a rope to a minimum standard, not state that this is a ropes maximum abilities.

That's a sweet example Frosty, but I have two questions: When did Kor do the FA? Since it may predate the common use of cams. Where are these photos on the route? Enelson is be an e-ass and Kevbone is being a bonehead and they're both assuming (have either of you climbed this route?) that its the first pitch and not some wide ledge off the ground, which could justify the low bolts.

Off White is completely right - how do you train your staff to "have a kind word" for "visiting climbers" who might not be "familiar with the conditions?" Worse yet, how do arrange the meeting? Do you require climbers to arrive at a ranger station to pick up a permit? Who is this conversation going to be with - a desk jockey, or a backocuntry ranger who happens to be in town after a patrol? Will the station remain open later at night and earlier in the morning, especially on the weekends? Requiring any kind of face-to-face meeting assumes 1) that the public land managers have the manpower and the personnel to provide accurate information 2) that public land managers have the budget to pay for this duty.

Mike, In our case we know for certain that montanapup's asthma is exercise-induced, not necessarily allergens. She's been as high as 18000' feet in spring and summer without incidences, and has had incidences trail running this winter at sea level here in Bellingham.

Uhhmmm, well, dual frequency beacons haven't been promoted in quite awhile. Even when they were the norm, they were notorious for having problems with changing frequencies and wire problems for the ear bud. Switching completely to 457mgHz was a relief. I have a dualie too, but I only use it for multiple victim transceiver drills. They've become museum pieces.

I've climbed the Knudtson and Harrington Couloirs in September 2005 and 2006. In dry years the Harrington features 80m of bare, 60-70 degree ice at the finish. Exciting. For future ascents: There is a fixed-anchor rap descent down the climber's left side/skier's right side of the Knudtson couloir. 2 60m ropes needed. Red line - Knudtson Couloir, III AI3 (partially hidden) Yellow line - Smrz Couloir, III AI3 5.6 Green line - Harrington Couloir, III AI2/3 Blue line - Moynier Couloir, III AI3/4 (partially hidden)

Are we talking about the same route? Are we talking about a bolted crack at index, or at smith?

CJ is right - I will never ski with anyone who insists on using a dual freq transceiver.