dmuja

If you contact an HMO they will tell you - they have those figured down to the cent. Life is a business, it -like everything else- is a quantifiable commodity, nothing more nothing less. Havent you learned this yet?

Mountain Madness is Great! Great group of people, super guides. I Having taken one of their classes, I HIGHLY recommend them! Who the fug believe s in "jinx's" anyways? Silly..

His family called him Nikko on TV

Hard to explain cuz I think it falls under a "personal preference" category kinda thing. Its not like they don't weigh anything at all and i consider them bullky and sometimes distracting. Unpacking, I just thought, "Im smarter than that and when I climb I want to be smarter" (ie smarter then a mindset of relying on electronics). I like the mental game. For me thats a big part of climbing, its just how I think/feel. I don't like to carry cell phones either, and Im not that fond of bolts. If utter safety was what I was after I would do something else. Your free to carry them if you want but for me its different.

Another thing, if they do restrict or ban certain types/times of climbing on Mt Hood, what an utterly fucked up legacy that is to lay on those 3 climbers. Does anyone think thats what they would have wanted?

Muhamed Ali has variously but mostly been held in esteem by people across the globe as a both "charming underdog" and "true champion". The only place I know of where climbers might have once been held in any esteem is europe. For the most part, especially in America, climbers are at best considered oddities, and more often seen as bothersome dirtbags or spoiled "eleitist" irrisponsible risk takers. The question I have along these lines is - did we become what they called us? Putting it another way, does the "climber-rebel-antisocial- dirtbag" image/complex thing that seems to come across here on CC.com so clearly serve the cause of a sustainable climbing culture? Maybe if we keep thinking "it will all blow over, or "fuck them, they will never understand" etc., only serves to bring closer the day when climbing may indeed become outlawed. You might think Im nuts, but 10-15 years ago, if you would have asked me about cigarette smoking some day becoming as illegal as illicit drugs Id have thought YOU were nutz. Hear were are on that verge though. If you ask me, it looks like society and maybe humanity in general seems headed for totalitarianism and some day climbing may become a very political act of subverting the state. Maybe sooner then we think. Im just wondering if theres a way we could "resist" now or are we doomed to become quaint relics of a bygone time where there actually was somethink akin to a freedom in those hills?

Defcon 5 - attack imminent How should climbers respond? Im betting that legislation will follow shortly. The lawyers and politicians will get involved because thats what they do (no offense intended). There will be again another move to charge rescue fees, pass along rescue costs to rescuees, and this time, restrictions or even an outright ban on certain types of climbing. Its in the wind now after probably one of the most publicized search and rescue attempts in mountaineering history. I hope Im wrong about the wind. My best to the families and climbers involved in this. I have utmost respect for them and they deserve our sympathy, prayers and best wishes. Apparently, this was no ordinary mountain SAR operation however. Whether it was the "James Kim" effect (may he R.I.P), the Internet wagging the media dogs or some other reason, I can't say for sure, but its not every climbing accident that draws in hightech "spy" equipment and communication companies, the FBI as well as multiple branches of the military in addition to the local authorities and volunteer mountain rescue groups. Mostly though it was the medias (national and world wide) hype and obsession that made this one different. Careers could be trashed under the pressure of such bright lights, so was that the reason maybe? NBC news tonight closed their now nightly "Mt. Hood" piece by citing the high costs of the rescue op emphasizing it as "a $100.000 bill that the tax payers will have to cover". As the story has now become stale and almost routine the "cost issue" was clearly made the crux of their report. We can talk about the accuracy of that amount and what made this rescue effort "different" but really the point here is more along the lines of this: How should climbers respond to whats likely to be the after effects of the "Hood Accident"? Or, do you think this will all blow over once the media attention is off? Should we come together on this in some way, or are we blowing it by sticking to some hidden neurotic tendency that we choose to portray as something like "tough individualism"? Also, how did CC.COM do here? Could it (we) have done better? Did or does CC.COM help or hurt climbing in light of this particular "event". Could CC.COM help in some kind of organized response to the issues that are (imho) about to be raised regarding costs and access? Not implying anything here, just seems like some stuff may need to get said. 'Coarse, it may be that Im just paranoid, but I DO live in a state where the Police now use infared scopes at night just to pull you over for not wearing a seatbelt.

1. What is a snafflehound? (a): I prefer a Guinness Stout or Rogue Ale to SH's 2. What are we referring to when we say "The Mountain" (a): A Seattle radio station playing sometimes bad alternative rock music. 3. Who is Fred Beckey? (a): That one guy that stole my girl friend. 4. What is a glacier and why are they dangerous? (a): That one big crack up on Mt Hood thats like, a half mile deep. 5. If your partner says bring the 9 mil, what is he referring to? (a): Something that he/she is going to end up carrying. 6. Which season is longer, ice climbing season or ski season? (a): Global warming will soon make this question irrelevant. 7. What's the difference between climbing in winter and winter conditions? (a): You get credit for one, but not the other. 8. Who holds the speed climbing record on Mt. Hood, Mt Rainier, Mt Adams, and Mt Baker? (a): The is only one d*a*n-da-man! 9. Have you ever bolted a crack? (a): Only after she was tied up. 10. Do you know what horsecock and the Nodder are? (a): Two guys from Enumclaw.

wait a minute, for bein a bunch a anarcho-counter culture rebels theres way too much agreeance goin on in here..

"its people loyk you, which cause unrest"

As to #1... My thinking right now is they tried for Cooper spur on descent. Like others have said, they saw Cooper Spur on the approach (maybe on the climb too?), they didn't see the South route, so familiarity for one reason (I have something in common with these guys in that I have not climbed the North Side of Hood, I would see CSpur as a possible descent/bail-out route if I was unfamiliar with the South and climbing the NF. If the weather was starting to come in it would most likely be coming from the south to west which would make a North side bivy or descent feel like a good choice. Also, one of the notes did mention cooper spur as a bail out route if things went bad so they already were thinking that way. As to #2... Their note made it seem like the main climbing day was Friday which as that video showed earlier was a good weather day but with some high clouds. I think they orig planned to be off the mountain by Friday evening at the latest. Its certainly possible they got slowed and had to bivy Friday night. As to #3... I wouldnt speculate as to if they summited or not - suffice to say, for me it makes sense that they would stick to a Northerly aspect though. obviously speculation on my part

Bet they listen to Korn

I didnt take Jasons post as to be making climbing "more heroic" than other endeavors. But I do think that goal setting-achieving types, athletes etc, independent free-thinking solitude seekers and such have a much better chance of understanding climbers then your average excessive consuming couch potato, which is to say your average American, which is to say your average fatty. Your right about one thing though Matt, we DO have to defend ourselves because the damn sure is A LOT more of them then their is us. And they don't want none of their tax $ going to rescue "those irresponsible types". Just look at what the Hood threads brought forth..

J-man, WORD! Im reminded of something I read many years ago.. This SPEC OPS guy was once interviewed and his comments were something along this line: "..While Im out in some remote place across the world away from anything safe or friendly, sleeping under rocks and eating bugs just trying to survive, someone is in their home and worried about the "waxy yellow build up" on their kitchen floor.." nice contrast I thought

lemme guess, you wear black eye shadow and a black trench coat and listen to Korn?

no Kay, Nikko is Fuggedaboudit not Brian

bears repeating, 1) The NF route that was chosen and climbed is generally considered a technical "winter" route - ie it needs skill, ice and settled snow to be safe to climb. They had all these, Good decision on their part. 2) The climbers gave themselves an adiquit and acceptable weather window in which to complete their climb of this particular route. The weather was very good on Friday - Good decision on their part. 3) Something (a fall perhaps) caused the climb to become a self-rescue situation. "..It" happens to the best of us. 4) The climbers attempted a self-rescue and/or to go for assistance. Good decision on their part. 5) The climbers were unable to self-rescue or get assistance in time before unfavorable weather moved in. This could have been because they were slowed down tremendously due to trying to gain a secure position with an injured party before attempting self-rescue/assistance, OR IMO, it is likely that the two who went for help likely fell somewhere. Given the circumstances, it seems like a "reasonable decision" to attempt to get help for a seriously injured partner. I personally believe that they surely would have been able to self-rescue or get assistance to Kelly had a "second fall" by the Nikko and Brian not occurred. Yes I know thats speculation. I post this because it does bear repeating, even to some of the so called "experts" who have been in the media lately saying things like "I would never climb in December" etc.. (you know who you are, and shame on you for letting the media distort your intent). These guys were climbing a technical route and had technical experience apparently enough to do the route. They were not ignorant of winter climbing technique, winter routes, winter weather etc..They did not go wrong by "deciding to climb in December in the Cascades" Thats just silly and you experts should know better. These guys are/were not "hikers" who underestimated mother nature. They are/were technical climbers on a technical winter route - period. We attempt to distance our selves from tragedy by looking for ways to say "that would have never happened to me because..what ever, if you do this kind of climbing, this could have been you too. D

xsept, like 3-4 people died from trees falling onto their homes when they were "inside"

Ya, but I try to prepare more for the probable cuz often, anythings possible.

Speaking as someone who benefits from a "somewhat" less volatile maritime PNW snowpack (vs much of AK for instance) I think most PNW "alpinists" would not be inclined to carry them because they would not be inclined to be climbing in borderline avy conditions the way say a back country skier would be. Not that they don't climb in those conditions at all (some die every year doing it), its just that they would be more inclined to developing the smarts to avoid avys then to relying on yet another "post incident" recovery gadget. Having said that, last year we took them up Hood in February but later decided (for various reasons) that it would have been better not to bring them. Less gadgetry, more smarts.

For eternity I shall climb In a desperate and futile attempt To escape.. This.. Shee-ott!!!

Ha! we'll be lucky to fend of all the attempts to "ban climbing!" after this is done.

In light of the present atmosphere being hyped by the media pertaining to the "undue risks" taken by climbers in the midst of a society of exceptionally nonactive, super opinionated, anti-critcally thinking lemming like consumer/"individuals", I thought id beat em too the punch and ask a few questions. Lets start the ball rolling shall we? So, why do "we" allow people to "climb" anyway? Lets say that real slow shall we? Why -- do -- "we" -- "allow" -- people -- to -- climb -- anyway? And while we're at it, lets ask a few other questions as well ok.. Why do we allow people to take floaty thingys on water when they often drown? Why do we allow people to bring kids onto giant hollow aluminum tubes that travel at 30,000 ft at 500mph? why do we allow 16 year olds to control 4000 lbs of steel moving at 65mph? Why do we build tall structures that may be prone to coming down in high winds or when the giant alluminium tubes come crashing into them? Why do we allow strangers to interact with our kids supposedly "educating" them? why do we allow people to participate in something called "sports" when so many are injured? Why do we allow total strangers to prepare our food for us? pleez continue...

Thanks guys, Just trying to clear up some of the vagueness. Personally I cant think of anything that these guys did wrong - not that I'd want to discuss that either. Non-climbers wouldn't know either way. And they clearly left themselves a large enough weather window even for the unexpected. My best, and hopes go out to them and their families.

Thanks Fargo, Would Coop spur be an odd choice for a NF bail-out even with good conditions and WX? Im not familiar with the N side of Hood, just the south. D