johndavidjr

My 4-yr-old Makalus have disappeared (!) following my trip to Mt Stone area. I'd like suggestions for replacements. Meantime it looks like I'm stuck going to BC later this week with some crusty, 20-yr-old, resoled Asolo Yukons, & hoping like hell to avoid blisters & sole delamination. I need boots for garden-variety mountain climbs in summer NW etc....I'm sort-of interested in Garmont's high-toppped "approach" shoes, but they look a little light for glacier slogs and step-kicking. Trango S might be overkill (???) for my purposes. I'd appreciate any general or specific thoughts on boots.

For those seriously interested in film and a highly informed, somewhat lengthly review of f9/11, here's link to as good a piece as you'll find. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17315

This certainly isn't advise, as I've only gone seriously fishing a dozen times in my life. But the best fishing I ever did was with a short stick and maybe six feet of line. I started out with a dry fly, but quickly switched to fish guts, and caught a half-dozen small trout, maybe, in about half an hour. This isn't anything special, but my best catch, & quite good when tossed almost directly on a fire as supplement to whatever crap I was trying to eat at the time. This by the way, was at small lake just off Rainy Pass in 1975. A pretty lonely place at the time, but now has handicapped access via paved walkway from parking lot.

Here is the point Simon tries to make; The review entirely misses the point of the film. Simon is smart enough to know this, but nenetheless writes: "The main premise of Mr. Moore's recent work is that both Presidents Bush have been what amounts to Manchurian Candidates of the Saudi royal family. Mr. Moore suggests ... the Saudi government, having soured on their pawns for unstated reasons, launched the attacks of Sept. 11."

Simon is holding Moore to the standards of journalism, about which Simon is terminally sanctimonious, to the point that he's always made me want to retch. Moore, however, isn't a journalist & doesn't suggest otherwise. He is, however, careful with the precise facts used in film & does use them to make questionable inferences, in a few instances, which as an informed person, I find merely a tad humorous, yet this I suppose is Simon's indignant point. Moore's inferences would be a problem, perhaps, if the aim is to present something other than opinion. This isn't Moore's aim. Nor is it the aim of Rush Limbaugh, who uses "facts" in a similar manner. Why doesn't the Wall Street Journal publish a critique of Mr. Limbaugh (instead of occassionally publishing his essays?). Clearly Limbaugh has had far greater influence than Moore & seems to get far less scruitiny. As for the Malcom quote, my thoughts aren't easy to express, but unfair manipulation of "sources" in journalism is the coin of the realm & Simon, with his sappy reporting, is a master at doing so. Facts are a different question, but not entirely unrelated. ___________

Hmm-- yes it the act does indeed apply to NP as well as NF lands. Guess I'm "stumped by the stars" again, though there appear to be significant differences in how the two agencies apply the designation, & you won't find a "wilderness area" in a national park, though I had been aware there are NP areas designated as wilderness-- a fine and meaningless distinction. Regarding actual applications, I again mention the place in NH where the major feature, as far as hikers are concerned, is a 15-mile trail that is a former logging railroad bed. A NF "wilderness area" very popular with Boston hikers.

Forgive me for not reading the debate over the accuracy of Moore's inuendo. I'm a liberal journalist, and have long found Scott Simon insufferable for his sanctimony. Here, if anybody cares, is what Janet Malcom, among the very the best journalists, says about her profession in a famous quote. "Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible." Moore isn't a journalist. Simon is full of himself. ____________________

Fairweather: Clearly there are no "federal Wilderness" areas outside of national forests. I assume the act to which you refer covers only national forest lands. The park service, presumably has a different set of designations with regard to wilderness preservation.

You like hiking? So walk the extra four miles. Realize that they want to relocate much of this road on to more stable ground, & not merely rebuild. This isn't a big deal in itself, since it's a short road. But it will cost some millions of dollars in federal subsidies to highway contractors. These funds could be better spent elsewhere on bridge repairs or other projects, that would offer a bigger pay-off to hikers and climbers. This is not, repeat not, an "access issue" in any real sense. Nor is nearby thread on proposed wilderness designation. _____

Thanks for link CJ. Quite informative & I stand partly corrected, Brian. But I'm still unclear how entire WA delegation voted. After all, even Gov. Evans, of a long-gone breed of moderate Republicans, essentially opposed the thing until he got adequate cover. I guess he knew on which side his bread was buttered. Also, though it's surprising to see such a pro-environmentalist history published by the Feds, I think it's slightly bias in favor of the victors (ultimately the park bureauacracy) & doesn't adequately discuss the extent of opposition. The impetus for the park, it would seem, was mostly out-of-state. _____

Brian: One must realize (& perhaps you do) how vastly different Washington was in the mid-1960s, in terms of economics, politics and demographics. As one small example, environmentalists, as the term is currently understood, hardly existed. My assertion shouldn't be that hard to swallow. But I'm sorry I can't recite chapter and verse, and thus can't effectively refute your assertion. But I believe (and I could be wrong) most of the Washington Congressional delegation was opposed to the park at the time. This shouldn't be a surprise, as business interests were uniformly opposed. There may have been an exception in Henry Jackson, but I'm actually not sure if he was a member of the delegation at the time. If you have any more solid information on this history, then do tell, as obviously I'm interested. _______________ ___

My pal at the 'murican Literature Association (ALA) says that two years ago, ALA certified that Saddam has written at least one novel. Don't know what their criteria was/were. I assume he's in essence phony baloney, but on the other hand, those Iraqis do have have an relationship to language that is known to be very different, relative to us 'mricans. _____

Here's a good discussion, mostly already touched on in this thread. http://www.promountainsports.com/ice-axes.shtml Chouinard's book on ice & snow written in 1970s said a 70 cm axe was/is nearly always the preferred length for mountaineering, without regard for user's height. I don't remember exactly why, but do remember that it made a good deal of sense. That book, BTW, was the first to systematically emphasize self-belay & related grasp for routine use, also, I think. It remains slightly controversial. Also, it seems to me using axe as cain on steep slope puts one very much at risk of going out of balance & though I'm not much of a snow climber, I do try desperately to plant self belay without ever leaning on ax. Tell me if I'm wrong... ____

I dursn't mention the publisher, but the 6th ed of "Freedom of the Hills" (1997) says that insect repellents with ethyl-hexanediol and dimethyl phthalate are much more effective against flies than DEET but that these ingredients don't deter mosquitos. Also says DEET is not very effective against flies, which seems correct. What (if any) bug dope has this fly stuff? _________________

It must depend... on what I don't know. Was there first week of this month & found mosquitos fairly minimal in one forest camp and another camp on tarn at treeline beyond Upper Lena Lake. A swamp below Lake of Angels near Mt. Stone was thick with them, but they took a snooze at sundown. Saw zero deer flies.

I especially enjoy Jerry Falwell's columns on that site. I'm going to be sending them to all my scientist friends. Thanks for the link, Sail Boy!

A NH fed wilderness area has bridges & at one time, a logging railroad. Place famous as virtual logging desert at turn of Century. Now non-controversial as "wilderness" & mobbed with hikers. Wash locals' opposition in early 1960s, to establishment of North Cascades National Park was nearly total. Similar opposition to ONP. Similarities to this discussion? ______

Kudos to JoshK's point Since my previous point was deleted, then maybe I can put it this way: perhaps actual climbers are better able to understand the value of wilderness mountaineering than so-called property rights advocates. Speaking of deletions, I don't understand relevance to this particular forum of addressing objections to federally designated wilderness. ___________

Post deleted by mattp

The real "access" issues in climbing forums would typically arise from the assertion of so-called property rights. Wilderness mountaineering is a legitimate climbing value, & that means approaching alpine areas with lots of sweat and trouble. I don't think Sailboy is a climber. He seems to be interested more in politics of the RV crowd. Further, I doubt he'd approve of the alternative, European climbers' model, which includes government subsidies for cable cars & huts,& a relatively progressive and restrictive view of property rights. _______

Brian (Fairweather) -- if you support zoning then I must assume you support the idea that everyone has a right to have their interests represented in land use. Why don't you agree that land values are supported soley by the economy? What other basis could there be? "The economy" merely defines the outcome of various competing interests. If there weren't these various interests, which actually includes both yours and mine, as well as those of the extremely wealthy and even those of people in prison and on welfare, there would be no economy and land would have no value. If you insist on arguing against these points, maybe you should consider Margaret Thatcher's famous quote against Democratic Socialism (stuff like Social Security): "There is no such thing as 'society.' " _____________

Unless you're talking about acreage on Mars, land value is supported soley by the economy, in which everyone participates; by extension everyone has the right for their interests to be represented in all land use. -----------

My first night in Boston Basin (a couple of trips) I almost threw up dinner looking at N Face of Jberg considering lines in Beckyg guidebook. Am respectful. Did a direct line in 1994??? via gully on face of Mix-Up to second-highest summit on ridge, from snow near, or part of, Cache Glacier. Found very old bolt on pseudo summit. Not bad a route; nor good. Class 4.

Brits have been the best at war at least as far back at 13th Century, when they repeatedly beat the crap out of the French. U.S. & "special relationship" is heir to this tradition. Look at Brit climbers-- They're frek'n nuts.

Good link to TNR story. I must start looking at BBC site more regularly. They have good coverage on Pakistan military ops. The Paks are remarkably incompetent though.