chris

In my house, we have a "panic rule" that could be applied to this example. If I'm out on a cragging or a "short-day" alpine climb, like Snoqualmie Pass, than I have until midnight to call home. On an all-day climb (i.e., Dragontail), I have until noon the next day to call home before SAR is called. If its a bigger, overnight trip I have until dark the day after I'm supposed to be exiting. We have a dry erase board in the gear room that I list the route I'm climbing. I write the "panic time" at the bottom. Lately I've taken to adding the park/forest/wilderness area and county the climb is located in - since SAR ops outside of National Parks are managed by the Sheriff, its useful to be able to tell 911 which county SAR lieutenant you need to speak to. I've lost count of how many times I've finished climbs in the dark, and hiked out much, much later than we ever planned for. Twice in 15 years I've had an unplanned bivy. And I'd rather get home, late, tired, and with a great story about why I'm late than to have a helicopter flying around my head prematurely. Yes, this could delay life-saving assistance. But I value being self-reliant, enough that I'll accept that small increased risk to climb in the mountains on my own terms. If I want an increased margin of safety I carry some means of electronics (SPOT, radio, sat-phone, etc) to call for help for myself. I agree with Coldfinger - the lesson here seems to be "have a plan." If you're climbing as two rope teams, talk about what the plan is if someone get's hurt, or if a team doesn't make it back to camp. If you've told someone back home that you're going to be out be 6pm or else - let your partners know! This is an easy conversation to have in the car on the drive up, or in camp the night before.

Curious why you need different bindings for those three? Inserts would still be advantageous if your bindings all have the same mounting pattern, then you can still swap the bindings between skis. My ski-mo boards are mounted with Speed's, and I wouldn't want a plate because it adds weight. I am a big fan of brakes, though, so my go-to boards have Vertical FT's. My new powder boards (coming soon!!) will be mounted with Vertical FT's too. If I still skied side country as much as I did in Jackson and Tahoe, I would have them mounted with a pair of Marker Duke's for the step in/out convenience, and I'd also be using a beefier pair of boots to drive them. I agree that plate can save $$, but only if you have plates on all your skis. And having plates on only two pairs isn't enough in my thinking - I think you'd need three pairs or more all sharing the same binding to make this truly cost effective. In my experience, most people have only one pair of skis, some have two pairs, and few have three or more pairs.

I'm unconvinced, since i prefer a different binding for my lightweight ski mountaineering, go-to BC boards, fat BC boards, and resort/side country skis.

And that was exactly the case for us! It was certainly good climbing - we continued another two pitches, then rapped down the left side of the headwall (Gastro? I forget the name) with a single 70m.

Why not just use the skinniest single you can find? There are singles on the market now that are <9mm. Or take a twin (in the 7mm) range and double that - You can get the full advantage of a 60m rope for rappels and have the edge protection you want. Personally, I decided after climbing a 4th class route earlier this summer with a double that I wasn't ok doing so again. There were just two many opportunities for edge abrasions, even with me carefully managing the rope. And we didn't identify that hazard until we were on top of it, and rationalized it away so that we didn't have to stop and reorganize the rope. Not the best management practice, so I don't think I'll be doing that again.

If you were visiting me in Seattle I'd probably take you to do the East Ridge of Forbidden. Long, alpine, and a reasonable two day trip. Down in Portland, I think it would be Mt Jefferson - don't know much about the route, just that its alpine and involves some rock climbing.

FWIW, I've had no problems using 5mm cord and dyneema slings as autoblocks and kleimheists on 7.8mm ropes.

Thanks everyone - we did Matt's suggested mash-up of Till Broad Daylight and the Kone. Very worthwhile, except I'd say to do the first two pitches of TBD and then switch right over to the Kone. Equally run out, but better bolts.

The same year tibloc came out, I heard of a guiding fatality in the alps attempting exactly what you describe here, and remember a notice coming out from Petzl to specifically NOT use a tibloc in this manner. Like it's been mentioned before, no ascender is intended to catch dynamic loads of any sort, and toothed ascenders will threaten to tear the sheath and possibly cause the rope to fail.

Anyone we know up on Mt Stuart this weekend? Because it looks like someone needs a rescue today: http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today/2013/07/climber-seriously-injured-on-mount-stuart/

Is there a possible rap descent from the West Ridge notch, allowing for a faster access than traversing across the Boston Glacier?

I'm looking to get in touch with Darryl Cramer, preferably by phone. If anyone has his email/phone number, could you please PM me? Thanks.

I worked with Marty for three seasons in Antarctica. Wayne, Marty was American, but had settled down in Christchurch, New Zealand, and guided on the South Island when he wasn't traveling. I'm still holding out hope that they'll be found, but I find myself tearing up even as I write this. Light candles, folks - two good climbers are missing. EDIT: Ah f#ck. Just read this - crushed. http://www.explorersweb.com/everest_k2/news.php?url=marty-and-denali-schmidt-reported-missin_137506126

I've also experienced jerk doctors, jerk lawyers, jerk bartenders, jerk baristas (especially snobby jerk baristas), jerk wait staff, and jerk flight attendants. And a jerk taxi that cut me off on I-405 as I was driving home from Index yesterday - why do they act like they own the road? There can be huge difference between a guide in their 20's who's only a year or two into the profession - and may be out in another year or two - and another guide in their 30's or 40's that has been at it for 10+ years. One has been around and has seen a lot - the other may think they've been around and seen a lot. To provide a bit of balance, I've also experienced jerk independent/non-guided climbers and climbing teams who thought they were more skilled, experienced, or entitled to be there than me and my guests. And for every story I've read here about jerk or unsafe guides, I have three for the weird, foolish, or unsafe practices I've seen of unguided climbers - likely because I spend +150 days/year in the field, not because unguided climbers are more likely to be weird, foolish, or unsafe. Folks, there's more than enough room for everyone to be be out here in the mountains. Sometimes I think that the land management practice of separately managing and permitting guided teams from non-guided teams only contributes to this "us versus them" attitude I've seen on countless occasions from both sides. But the guided public is equally valuable as the unguided - the more people who experience how fantastic this environment truly is, the more it will be valued for its intrinsic worth and not simply for its resource extraction opportunities. But of course that means sharing space with other folks - and some of those folks will be jerks. So I try - really hard. I make a point to say hi to my neighbors in camp, and let them know what our plans are - I've found that if I start by admitting what we're up to, you're more open about what you're up to. If we figure out that we may meet on the mountain/route, this makes it much easier to work together. It may take a bit of time and shenanigans - have you ever seen 5 people on one multi-pitch bolted anchor? - but it's always easier to deal with someone you know with a grin than a stranger with a curse. And all of you are more than welcome to PM or email me any sort of question, including the "WTF did they do that?" questions. I'm proud of my profession, its history, and of our shared mountain culture. This was my fourth draft of a response, and I hope it reads as thoughtful as I tried to be. Off the soapbox now. Your turn.

Matt, I'm interested in exploring - and I have week days off. Let me know!

So my first - and only - route to date in Darrington has been Dreamer on the Green Giant (which I'm embarrassed to admit I've done three times). I'm going to correct this gross oversight tomorrow, but everything looks SO GOOD. So I'm asking you - what's your favorite Darrington route? If you're favorite is something on the Giant, please tell me your second favorite. I'm trying to go somewhere new!

I'm not really surprised or alarmed. The implications (to me) is that helicopter rescues will be reserved for "life-or-limb" injuries more, and that non-life-threatening rescues will take more time to descend by litter or on foot.

I heard the same thing as Quarry - The only roads that could be financially justified to demolish/eradicate/eliminate are ones that could jeopardize water quality (and/or possible fish habitat) if allowed to erode into non-use. Otherwise, I think under current management practices the plan would be to gate and close. Several people advocated for the more Canadian approach to "close" but leave ungated, allowing 4WD and bikes to use the roads as much as they dared. I actually like this idea, even though I don't own either of those. Presumably, if a user breaks down / rolls over / get stuck, they're responsible to remove their vehicle, or the USFS will and will charge them for it - that's how its already managed through much of the Southwest without any fuss. Fairweather, I just finished looking at all the road maps and there doesn't seem to be any roads within the wilderness areas - there are roads that are carved out of wilderness areas, but its actual wilderness boundary, not a "buffer". Perhaps the Upper Stehekin example that you cited was a one-off? Presumably it would take an act of congress to get these roads (if closed), added to the wilderness areas surrounding them.

I sort-of agree with Coldfinger, minus the hyperbole. I just think the weight difference between the smaller diameter cords is so negligible that its dismissable, and I find twin lines to be more useful in more applications, but at 8mm or less (a new one just came out that's <7mm), they pack smaller, weigh less than my single ropes, and allow me to travel more freely. I mean, I know in theory I can rappel on 5mm cord, but in practice its a snarly pain in the ass, and I would be nervous about rappelling on 5mm over sharp edges though. I have a quiver of ski-mountaineering / glacier travel ropes (all twin certified), in 30, 40, and 60m lengths, which I think addresses almost any combination of team size and rappel length. The 30m Beal Rando (8mm) weighs in just under 2.5 lbs (1110 gm). My 40 and 60m lengths are Beal Ice Twins (7.7mm, one of my 60's had to get the chop). The weight difference to go any smaller is so negligible - and a smaller belay device like a Reversino almost mandatory, so I'm satisfied with that. EDIT: So you inspired me to go nosing around Sterling Ropes website, which has a full range of cords that might address your question. In theory, it looks like you could rappel on something as small as 4mm, which has a failure strength of +1,000 lbs (4.7kN). At 3mm, the cord strength sharply drops off to less than 472 lbs, or 2.1kNs. Sterling does make a pretty nice 6mm cord intended for rappelling, rated to 14kN, but cautions that you need special training for rappelling on such a thin line. I think this answers your direct question - but I certainly don't recommend it!

There are five more meetings: 6 August, 11am-1:30pm Enumclaw Public Library 21 August, 4:30-7pm Darrington Community Center 10 September, 5:30-8pm Bellingham Public Library 24 September, 1-3:30pm Monroe Public Library 9 October, 5:30-8pm Everett Public Library You can RSVP and reserve a seat by emailing sustainableroads@gmail.com Another option is to go online to make comments and tell them specifically which roads you value (a la Fairweather): http://www.mbssustainableroads.com

Its also a good reminder that you probably shouldn't be climbing below another team on routes that are known to have loose rock. One of the reasons The Tooth gets multiple parties is its slanted nature deflects rock fall to the side. That's not the case on the West or East Faces. I think the NE Buttress on Chair and the Improbable Traverse on Guye have this propensity as well.

One way you can get away with a smaller rack is by not climbing it in 2 pitches. Break it up into 4 pitches (just like you will on the rappels), and you need less gear, be less concerned with rope drag, have less miss-communication, and a lot more fun. Most of the problems I see on the Tooth are from leaders insisting on linking pitches.

Super basic, but clean and close to town center. At winter rates, it was 1/2 the cost of the Vagabond, which is much more hip but costs it.

Relax, Christoph - they're just taking the piss out of ya'. Seriously, proper footwear hasn't been the single leading cause of accidents/incidences in the Cascades, in my experience. It has been a contributing cause, but usually improper footwear is indicative of poor judgement in other facets as well (i.e., full-length-glacial-travel-technique-while-climbing-the-Pearly-Gates). The guide services tend to go with plastic boots because they have a longer use-life, and are appropriate in wider range of conditions. Especially stormier ones, where local climbers may choose to turn around and wait for a nicer summit day. That said, the only plastic boots I own today are my ski boots.

If you're looking for a single-quiver ski that can handle a mid-winter dump at Baker and a summer ski down the Muir snowfield, something 100mm underfoot is the best compromise. It has enough float for the deep, but is still relatively light enough for spring and summer missions, without being so wide that you have to work to put it on edge in hard conditions. If you are going to build a quiver, I'd recommend a different ski. I'm not a huge fan of the lightest skis on the market right now - they all seem to sacrifice performance for weight savings. And I'm insistent that the ski has to have a flat tail for anchor building, so that eliminates a lot of the market right now too. I like K2 because they perform consistently with a small weight penalty that I can tolerate. I'd rather have a heavier ski the performs well than a lighter ski that doesn't.