chris

I think these accidents bring home the point that if we chose to tolerate fixed draws they should be steel and cable, not aluminium and quickdraws. And if you're going for the hard onsite on a popular route, pay more attention to those fixed draws and consider carrying one back QD or taking the fall rather than clipping.

Two questions, that I'm trying to answer for two separate clients, sharing Portland in common: 1. Where is the best ski bench for mounting and tuning? Not necessarily backcountry-focused, either. I'm looking for the best shop, period, to get a pair of boards worked on, within Portland. 2. I'm also looking for recommended independent down-hill ski shops that also sell side-country gear (Marker Dukes, etc). Thanks for your recommendations!

Matt- Talk to the outfit. Keep in mind that since most of the cool alpine lakes are buried under a thick blanket of snow and ice, not having ski-plane capabilities can be a show stopper. And in my experience, float-plane pilots are loath to attempt landing amongst floating ice.

In fact, you can add a whole bunch to the entire route and really dumb-it down! This is an adventure route. Please don't bolt it and make it open to the masses. Wetslide, I don't mean to suggest that we retro bolt the entire route in order to, as Raindawg and yourself suggests, "really rumb it down" and "make it open to the masses." I do believe that if fixed hardware is necessary, that it be such that requires the least amount of maintenance for the longest possible use before replacing. Using that criteria, bolts are the best option. Pins get used more often by FA teams, in my opinion, because they are quick and easy to place, and on that day - and for many days after - they are solid and adequate for lead protection. But give them a few seasons and they become untrustworthy, as the pins on this route certainly have been. No one deserves to climb on untrustworthy protection that may have been bomber when first placed but are suspect now. The FA team - or whomever placed those pins - had more security and safety on that traverse than anyone who did it this year. To repeat: I'm not suggesting that we add bolted anchors, or install bolts elsewhere to protect run-outs. I'm simply suggesting that bolts are equally secure to a well-placed pin, and last far longer with greater reliability. Therefore, I believe that bolts should be placed to replace the pin (now only a singular PIN), that once adequately protected that pitch.

Ahhh. Makes sense now.

I've looked on KOMO without any luck. Anyone have a link? This may be related: http://www.king5.com/news/local/Search-for-overdue-hiker-on-Mt-Garfield-169161306.html

The CAG and the Select call it 5.8 (I think). If you don't think its 5.8, that's cool with me - call it what you want.

My Jetboil has a fill line at about 1/3 of the pot - if you fill it up above this line, it will boil over. And it has two speeds - on and off. I don't cook in it except for pasta noodles, and when I have filled above that 1/3 mark, I watch it carefully to turn it off as soon as it boils. With pasta, you don't have to keep it simmering - you can bring to a boil, turn it off and give it a few minutes, fire it back up and repeat until the noodles are cooked. The MSR Reactor operates much the same way. Both are meant to boil water and melt snow - not really anything more. They're awesome alpine stoves. If you want it to be a backcountry gourmet cook switch back to a Whisperlite.

Hey, on a different note, I just read Klenke's description of the route over on Summit Post. I tried to log-in there but I'm having some difficulties resetting my password. I followed Nelson's description of the route from the Select Guides, which differs a little bit from Klenke's at the traverse. In my opinion, Nelson's is a better description. There's a great crack in the alcove (top of p5) that took two #1 and a #2 cam. When nearing the end of the traverse on p6, if you climb up and over on very solid, incut edges (instead of down 6-10' as Klenke proposes), you'll reach a vertical running crack on the high angle ramp. It's perfectly located for a three-piece anchor and will provide a great belay for the follower. Klenke description: Climb the whole traverse in one 150' pitch, down-climb the finish. Nelson description: Break the traverse into two pitches (50' and 100'), and climb up at the finish.

Ed, that's not an exact analogy. A well placed piton, on the day its hammered in, can be treated like any other piece of fixed gear, including a bolt. It just loosens and weakens much faster than any other piece of fixed gear. If we're going to leave fixed hardware in the mountains, I'm in favor of using fixed hardware with the longest lifespan, so the it lasts longer in the same condition as the FA team that got to use it. At least that's my opinion.

In fact, you can add a whole bunch to the entire route and really dumb-it down! That's a bit of hyperbole, but: When those pitons were placed, I'm confident they were bomber - the leader and the follower were confident that they had adequate pro. But now, after all these years? After all the freeze and thaws - and now that the second piton is unreliable (and likely unremovable)? So we can do one of two things - we can head up with a hammer and a few pitons, do our best to reset the bottomed out, metal-fatigued old one; and try to replace the broken new one. And in another five years another generation will be worried like the first team never was. Or we can replace the two pitons with bolts that would last 20 years, and still provide the same experience as the FA team (or the team that placed those pitons, since we don't know who did that). Obviously, I think the bolts are a better idea. I know that you disagree. But I don't think there's a difference between pitons, rivets, or bolts - at least not for the first ascent team.

Trip: Guye Peak, West Face - Improbable Traverse Date: 9/1/2012 Trip Report: I'll add some photos as soon as I'm able, but yesterday I climbed the Improbable Traverse with Dave. The route is surprisingly good, and it can be easily climbed with a 40m rope. The topo/photo description in the Select is pretty much spot on, and the photos of Kittleson and Nelson help identify exactly where the traverse is. Because of the plethora of loose rock sitting on random ledges, I don't recommend linking pitches (its possible to link 1-2, 2-3, and 6-7 with a 60m). Of the two pitons protecting the 5.8 crux, the first is a bottomed-out short KB hanging out enough to slip-hitch, not clip, and ignore the flexing. The second piton - a lost arrow copy - has visible stress-failed at the end of the blade and shouldn't be trusted. The third "off route" piton described by Nelson is 6 feet above it, so I used it for protection with a long sling and there was also a good spot for a 0.75 cam soon afterwards. At the end of the pitch, someone before us using a lot of chalk downclimbed a corner to access the ramp, but I found a good spot for a #3 stopper and followed Nelson's direction to climb up on good edges and incuts. These piton placements would be ideal bolt candidates. Topping out on the ramp is a great place to put away the shoes and the helmet, but I'd keep the harness, rope, and a slim rack out. There are a couple of 4th class steps where we were happy to have a quick belay and even a few pieces of pro near the top. We used the rope one last time to get over the north summit - you can go down and around, but up and over is more fun. Then followed the scrambler's trail back down to Alpental. Gear Notes: Cams to #4, consider bringing doubles .5-3. 1 set of stoppers 40m rope is adequate - keeping pitches to 30m minimizes incidental rockfall Approach Notes: There are two pullouts on Alpental Road, either side of the Ober Strasse intersection. Hike up the road to the obvious switchback nearest the talus, and head up.

What I'm curious about is how many trailheads, since this ruling, have been "improved" to include those six amenities, like the sign board and a picnic bench, even if its not necessary. I can think of a few. But the NW Forest Pass has persisted, even after the Fee Demo program supposedly expired. As for me, I spend enough time in North Cascades to justify getting the Inter-Agency Pass. It still annoys me, though, and I thought y'all may be interested.

http://www.adventure-journal.com/2012/08/court-strikes-down-fees-but-forest-service-still-collects And discuss (or rant, as the case may be).

Nice work Ian! This is one of those destinations that I think we've all wished there was a great guidebook for, but no one was willing to put in the work to make it happen. Thanks for putting this up! I'm getting my copy.

On my first Denali trip, the sewn-on gear loop tabs of my BD Alpine Bod dug into my bony hips. To the point I developed sores/wear points. At 11,000' I finally took a knife and cut the tabs off. The BD Couloir is a better harness because it packs smaller and the fabric gear loops are mounted to the bottom of the waist belt, not the top like the Alpine Bod. Its become my harness of choice for ski mountaineering, mountaineering, solos and 3rd class scrambles. Blue Ice makes something similar that I'd like to check out.

Forgot to mention - take the heather-filled couloir immediately behind the beehive tower in Chair Basin (is that the thumbtack?), and you have an awesome ridge traverse to the base of the buttress. No ropes required. This is my now my preferred finish to the approach.

Trip: Chair Peak - NE Buttress Date: 8/25/2012 Trip Report: Photos on Monday. Since I've never been up to Chair Peak in the summer, I decided to make a trail run/solo climb out of Saturday afternoon. The climb was uneventful. For the beginning third, I opted to climb the more solid green lichen rib on the left instead of the dark chimney that headed right. It was more difficult climbing, but good moves on really solid rock. For the second third, I stayed right and on the rib/ridge/arete/whatever about 2/3 of the way, then traversed left (starting just below a horizontal red band), to an easier corner on the far left side of the buttress that lead to a big gnarled krumholz tree. Continuing up the right side looked viable, but exceeded the 4th class rating I was looking for. The final third can either be straight up through the heather, or up solid rock on the left side. I chose the rock. I downclimbed to descend, choosing the heather for the top third, following my line pretty precisely for the middle third, and opting for the deep, dark chimney on the bottom third. I would agree with Beckey's 4th class rating if using the chimney, my route description for the middle third, and the heather at the top. Variations like the green arete on the bottom third or staying on the buttress right through the headwall on the middle third bumps it up to low 5th. Gear Notes: I did take climbing shoes to move faster and with more security. Approach Notes: Because the old trail has fallen into disrepair above Source Lake, I think it's a toss-up if you take the Source Lake turn-off or continue up to Snow Lake Divide and then follow the old trail down. I followed the Beckey description up into the bowl, and the current popular avalanche path route down. They both took about the same amount of time, though the Beckey line was more pleasant. I started from a talus field adjacent tot the trail at about 4300-4400 elevation. A few cairns in the talus field told me that someone had been here before too.

I think it comes partly from tradition - the figure eight was introduced after the bowline, and since everyone tied back-ups on the bowline, they continued to do so with the fig 8. But there's never been a report of a correctly tied, finished fig 8 spontaneously coming undone. There's several cases of unfinished fig 8's failing - Lynn Hill's 80-footer in France is possibly the most famous. I think the gyms continue to teach it because it gives them a visible redundancy, allowing a lone employee manning the desk to take a look across the space and see - that even if someone completely fouled up their fig 8, they have some sort of backup knot that may work. Its not a guarantee, but it does add a level of reassurance. I teach my guests this distinction, teach them yosemite finishes when they do have longer tail then needed, and explain that backup knots may get in the way at anchors on multi-pitch climbs, so we try to do without them.

Anyone been around the Tooth, Bryant, or Chair Peak recently? Looking for an estimate in snow coverage.

I agree with your observation about how the Park Service has concentrated use on the Muir and Emmons routes - but I think the climbing season is from May through October, not three months. The problem I have is that tent platforms on snow or rock aren't typically tucked up against each other, but spread out to accomodate foot traffic privacy. And the slate isn't wiped clean each day - those plat forms degrade after a few days and require new plat forms to be built. In the end, its all sprawl. And in September, I think we'd be hard pressed fitting 50 tents on Camp Muir dirt and the surround snowfields, especially since the crevasses on the Cowlitz are typically open enough to make that area an unadvisable camp. So I'm really against the sprawl, and I think huts help mitigate that. And I'd be all in favor of a similar arrangement at Camp Schurman. I know it would be a cold day in hell before that realistically would happen, but that's my opinion when you want to concentrate the use of 100+ climbers at one spot on the side of a mountain. I may have missed it being mentioned in the EA, but I thought the primary reason for introducing new material to Camp Muir was to cover foot-paths and platform surfaces, covering the volcanic fines and minimizing off-site transport by wind (or keeping the loose, sandy dirt from getting blown away by the wind). You're right, this is a good conversation.

Denali no longer has pit toilets at either the SE Fork of the Kahiltna or 14K. All climbers must use the clean mountain cans at all locations. With the exception of 17K, the CMC bags get tossed in designated crevasses near the camp. For 17K, they're supposed to be carried down and disposed at 14K. Given the volume of waste involved in the length of time required to do Denali, asking groups to carry out their waste would likely not be very well-received. Doh! Show's you where I haven't been lately. That sounds like a good compromise. Still, because of the day use I think toilets are a better mitigation at Muir.

Scared, I knew we would be at odds and I'm disagreeing with you. When Denali National Park considered requiring climbers remove all their waste (via blue bag or can) and decided that they'd get a higher level of cooperation and better overall sanitation by continuing to use the pit toilets at the Kahiltna and 14. NOTE: Since I last climbed Denali (which has been awhile), the pit toilets have been removed and bagged waist is deposited at marked crevasse sites. I stand corrected. I don't remember the citation anymore. I believe that 17-25 tents and two structures take up less space than 35-50 tents and the existing historic structures. I think that by encouraging 1/2 the users to stay in the shelter, the footprint of the total area impacted would be the most minimal of the Alternatives. I can support this opinion having witnessed at least 12 huts in Canada and New Zealand that succeeded in doing just that. I'm not trying to be superficially plausible, yet wrong; nor am I trying to mislead. You do get extra points for using specious in a sentence. I forgot to mention that I think that anyone using the shelters - guided or non-guided - should pay a slightly higher user fee than someone choosing to carry a tent. This would require the Park to make reservations and issue receipts for the hut, but I agree in paying for what you use and it seems reasonable to expect someone who won't use the shelter to pay less. I agree with Cascade that trucking in gravel sucks, but I don't know an alternative. I don't see this requiring more staffing than currently. I'm just trying to state my opinion as clearly as I can. I did use your statement to help focus my thoughts, and I did read the EA completely. I think its fair to disagree about this - it reflects a fundamental difference in opinion about what climbers' impact in the environment should be.