Rad

More story tellers needed. Come on out and share one!!

Good questions. Here are the facts: The rock fall was August, 2016. The route that got hit the hardest was Elation at the End of Eternity, the 2 pitch 5.9. Leland went back soon thereafter and replaced hardware on that route. Lines to the left may have been damaged or changed, but I don't know details. To the right, GS-7 and Endless Bliss seem to be intact. Everything right of Endless Bliss was unaffected. If you look up at the scar where the debris originated, you can see layers of rock, dirt, roots, and moss that are often wet. And now into the realm of speculation and personal opinion: The area immediately left of the scar above Gun Show looks like it has all of the same features as the section that fell, so I wouldn't be surprised if it fell off too, killing anyone in its path. I'm not a geologist, but I imagine it could come off this week, next year, or 50 years from now. I initially thought there was imminent danger from it and posted the signs you may have seen out there. But as far as we can tell nothing has fallen off there since 2016. Personally, I sometimes climb at the Gun Show but I stick to the right side of the wall and don't linger in the debris area as this is likely to be ground zero if there is another rockfall event. Part of this is because I feel the right side routes are better than the left side ones anyway. As I climbed Elation years ago, I may never go back to climb it again. I'm sure people have climbed it. I just feel that there are other things I'd rather climb and I don't see any reason to accept the unknown risks of that spot. If I were climbing Endless, I'd have my belayer alert to sounds of rock fall and ready to run for cover. There are plenty of other areas with active rockfall that could kill you. Index comes to mind. Several spots in Yosemite. Erosion happens. Climb on! Oh, and the new guide book is coming out very soon.

Love it @Alisse! Make em jealous so they'll take you up on your offer next time.

@dpasquinelli Thanks for sharing. Hopefully some of those who climbed with him can join you. In any case, climbers will be passing over him every time they are out there. RIP Ken.

Spicy snice. Nice!

A group campsite on Icicle Creek in Leavenworth is probably your best option.

Trout are voracious predators that disrupted the ecosystem of mountain lakes. It'd be like adding polar bears to pre-schools, but more gory. Hey, do you suppose we could arm those polar bears with AR-15s? Seriously, though, here's an article on trout in mountain lakes. NYTimes on trout in lakes

I've learned from experience that if it's green when you find it it'll go back to green if it doesn't get traffic. People will be re-discovering Index routes to the end of time for this reason.

The data probably exist, but it might take some work to get them. For example, in MRNP and NCNP backcountry climbers are required to register, so this provides data on the number of outings. This can be compared with accident data. In avalanche papers I seem to recall data about accidents per user-day. There will be cases where the user-days are not available or harder to get, but that doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and say there's no data.

There are numbers, there are statistics, and there are articles on climbing accidents. You can read ANAM and put together your own chart if you wish. Claiming there are no data or that risk can't be quantified is lazy at best and inviting trouble at worst. To Bob's comment, my kids and I talk about how much luck and skill are involved in the games we play. Chess is all skill. Chutes and Ladders is all luck. For the ones in between, we try to assign a percentage. Settlers of Catan, for example, might be 70% skill and 30% luck. Cribbage might be 70% luck and 30% skill. Climbing accidents can be viewed this way as well.. Some are 100% human error (rapped off end of the rope), all luck (a stone falls down Everest and beans poor Ueli Steck), and many are something in between (getting struck by lightning in an alpine thunderstorm). I advise, support, and invest in biotech and medtech companies. There are at least as many types of risk in these ventures as there are in alpine climbing. People's careers, reputations, and money are on the line, so we can't just throw up our hands and say, "I don't know" when it comes to evaluating risk. We try to break down the different types of risk, work to see what can be avoided or mitigated, and determine when there are unacceptable risks. It's never easy, and we still get it wrong, but we analyze as much as we can in hopes of making the most informed decision we can. In climbing, we don't get to learn from our mistakes very often as a single error can kill us, so it's important to learn what we can from the mistakes of others. Adding statistics and probability into these analyses allows us to learn from a larger data set than just a few examples.

It should be noted that most or all of these routes involve mountain navigation and route-finding skills. If the route is 5.4 but you start up the wrong crack or don't cross the crest at the right point you can quickly find yourself in terrain that is 5.9 or harder.

I agree with everything said above. In my experience, carrying a rope, rack, harness, helmets, and related climbing gear adds a lot of weight. You could do trad multi-pitch lines in Icicle Creek canyon before or after your trip and be lighter and happier without lugging that into the back country. Note that the tiny lakes above Stuart Lake are surrounded by incredible boulders and there are plenty of peaks nearby to scramble/climb. There is an unofficial trail that leads up there. Might be helpful to have a topo to guide you. Enjoy!

And the entry right after Ryan's is from....Marc-Andre Leclerc.

I do think attempts to quantify risk are valuable, even if they are flawed, because a better understanding of the risk/reward ratio might change a few people's minds, change their behavior, and perhaps spare them from a life-changing/ending accident. Or it could help them enjoy hundreds of days of climbing, skiing, or other reportedly risky activity without a serious incident. Unfortunately, many of us don't do a good job of evaluating statistics because we draw conclusions based on stories from people we know or read about and ignore or misrepresent statistical data on the subject in question. If someone says they have same risk of dying in a rappelling accident as being hit by a bus in a crosswalk should you believe them? What if your wife asks you to quit alpine climbing because it is too dangerous and take up paragliding instead? How do the dangers of these compare with texting and driving? What if someone could show you data that the chances of a rappelling accident go up 10x if you don't tie knots in the ends of your ropes? There will always be unknowns in climbing, but attempts to quantify risk can make us both wiser and safer. Here are two illustrations from other parts of life: If your doctor tells you that you late stage Pancreatic cancer, have a 98% chance of being killed by it within 2 years, and have a 10% chance of responding to a new drug that could allow you to live 10 years but will definitely make your next year miserable and drain your savings, would you get the therapy? Do you think you will "beat the odds'"? Will you go for the experimental drug? Do homeopathy instead and focus on getting the best out of the time you have? Understanding the statistics can lead to better decisions and better quality of life. The act of building a mathematical model for your personal finances, even if it is too simple and even if it is wrong, is valuable because it forces you to write down and quantify the assumptions that go into the model. Then once you understand the model you can change the assumptions, variables, and inputs and see what happens in different scenarios. Should you retire at 60 or 65? Get disability insurance? Can you afford to take a year to travel? Should you pay down loans, take that expensive vacation, max out retirement investment, or fix that plumbing leak? Everything has costs and near-term and long-term consequences. Quantifying these can be informative and lead to more informed decisions and a better life. Building a simple model of risk in climbing, even if it is imperfect and incomplete, could lead to better climbing decisions, better conversations between climbing partners about risk, and perhaps fewer injuries and deaths for climbers. That said, if you read ANAM and can learn to avoid making the top three types of human errors you will be much safer for it. Bring on the math!