Ed_Seedhouse

Well, don't forget Dale Earnhardt Dome on northern Vancouver Island. Like Static it gets steeper as you go higher, but it's a lot bigger - Wapiti mainline is 14 pitches. Take a look here: http://orca.phys.uvic.ca/~jwillis/photos/Nomash_Slabs/nomash.html for some recent adventures there.

Hmmm... wouldn't count on the two years. It has been more than 30 since I worked in the paying out end of a Life Insurance Company, and it was a Canadian company, but back then if we found a material ommission we'd void the policy long past the two year date. Point being that if you lied about something material the contract never existed, and we refunded your premiums plus interest. Of course if your beneficiary sued we'd usually pay out a few thousand more just to shut them up. Things may have changed a lot in 30 years, though.

So let me get this straight - if it's a 5.7 crack but narrows to be 5.9 somewhere in the middle for a few moves, it gets a 5.9 rating. If you take the same narrow section and move it to the top it's still 5.9. But if you then take that very same narrow bit and move it to the bottom suddenly it's 5.7? I thought the idea was to rate the hardest move on the climb.

It may or may not be. Sea level is different in different parts of the world. The Panama Canal must adjust for the difference in sea level on each cost, for instance which, if I recall correctly, is around 5 feet. All your gps can really measure directly is the distance between the gps and the sattlites, and by extension the distance between the gps and the center of the Earth. Your height above the geoid at your location may be quite a different thing, and any gps can only carry a more or less innacturate representation of the geoid. Ed

Not really. For base GPS, without differential corrections, altitude measurements are much less accurate than horizonal locaions. Horizontally you can get down to around 10 meters or less with 3 or more satellites, depending on the current sky geometry. Vertically the usual attainable accuracy is around +/- 100 meters. With differnetial corrections from the WAAS satellites, horizontal can get down to around 3 meters and altitude is supposed to be similar, but then WAAS birds are often not visible, especially when the horizon is not clear as, for instance, in the mountains. It's understandible since there are a number of other variables involved in altitude measurements, and thus more sources of error. For one thing, determining just where "sea level" is at any given point is no trivial matter. On the scale of a few hundred meters, which is what we need, the Earth is not even close to being spherical. Your GPS stores information about this, known as the "geoid", but it doesn't have nearly enough memory to store a complete model. "Sea level" is no trivial matter. How far from the center of the earth is "sea level" at the particular location you are standing at? Not easy to figure out. Just that you are standing right on the seashore doesn't mean you are standing at "sea level" for that location. Ed

Yes, and they gotta swing leads too, according to the rule, which I just made up.

So apparently the Nose still awaits an all male free ascent. When are you guys gonna get on the ball here, eh?

It's easy to prove there is life after death. In 1943 I was dead, in 1944 I was alive. q.e.d.

If I knew I was going to die climbing, I'd stop climbing so as to never die. Of course, avoiding stairs might be difficult. Is getting into bed climbing?

Google is your friend - a google search on "Nootka Trail" brings up bunches of hits.

Just a warm up for the Nootka trail.

'The obligatory corallary to your point is that since no one is obligated to rescue you no-one has the right to dictate your conduct on the oft tossed out grounds that "they are the ones that have to go out and pick up the pieces".' On that ground alone I'll agree - no they don't. But there are plenty of other grounds on which you may be legitimately criticised for your behaviour in the wilderness. If for example you act in such a way as to degrade the experience for others who follow you roundly deserve all the criticism you might get, in my opinion.

My take is that no one has a "right" to be rescued. The people who do the rescuing are voluntarily risking their own lives and deserve only gratitude. To "expect" them to rescue *you*, let alone your dog, is the height of arrogance. You have no business in the wilderness if you are not prepared to rescue yourself. Taking an animal to the wilderness means that *you* are responsible for the animal. People have died rescuing pets. Gratitude is an appropriate response to those who nevertheless undertake such risks voluntarily. To get upset because they choose to value their safety over your pet's safety is, in my opinion, idiocy. "I demand you risk your life saving my pet" is not merely stupid, it is immoral.

>Bring lots of pins as cracks are few and far between. Er, and here I thought you used pins *in* cracks.

> we should all note that Tenzing made it to the top first! > The two stood together on the summit on this day in 1953 > and that is all that matters. Well, truth matters too. The fact is that Tenzing himself, in his autobiography, said directly that Hillary was first on top.

No, after you traverse left around 25 feet on the fourth pitch and belay again. Then you climb impossible looking slab straight up to a bolt and begin to traverse w-a-y right for about 80 feet on way steep manky slab with no pro. That's where "Dream On" goes - I think you are talking about "Dream Symphony". As I said, thank God I never had to follow that pitch. Ed

I finally got to second that pitch (I was never stupid enough to want to lead it) a few years after the Foweraker episode. Dave Lepard lead and I thought the 10d move was casual in Fire's. Never got to try it with E.B.'s. Dave and Carla Bortoletto did Dream on last summer with a tiny bit of aid on the 5.12 section apparantly. But be mentally prepared for an 80 foot unprotected traverse on 5.10/11 slab. On my climb with Dave he fell off on this part (thank God so I didn't have to follow it) and we rapped off.

I haven't taken any really long slab falls, but up to 10 or 15 feet I found it worked best to actually use my hands to attempt to push myself faster downwards. This has the effect of keeping me on my boot soles. Rather lose rubber than skin. The worst thing you can do is try to hold on - I learned that the hard way. I held Greg Foweraker one day as he fell seven or eight times trying to get up to the first bolt on the third pitch of Dream On. As I recall he did use the running technique, but I didn't get a great view as I was concentrating on pulling rope in to shorten the fall. That bolt is twenty feet up past a 10d move so the falls were fairly lengthy. On one fall I pulled in enough rope to be able to touch his extended hand when he stopped. This was all a long time ago. We were climbing in E.B.'s and the techniques that worked with those might not be as good with modern rubber. These days I use the technique of finding some other sucker to lead. Fifteen years ago I lead my teenage nephews up "Bannana Peel" and it felt casual to all of us. Last year my twenty-something niece lead me up it and I was terrified for most of the climb, and mighty impressed with the runouts. I guess being 60 will do that to you, unless you're Fred Becky of course.

Snoboy had to do it this way cause you need XP to run WorldWind Nonsense. I run it on Windows 2000 with no trouble. Wish they'd make version for Linux or BSD though.

> Canada is a sovereign nation with no ties to the British > Government since the Canada Act was passed in 1982. > How is it then that the Government of the time went to the > Queen to get permission to install an extra senator or two in > order to insure that the GST was passed??? But they didn't go to the Queen of Great Brittain, or the Queen of England, they went to the Queen of Canada. They happen to be the same person, but that's beside the point. She moonlights.

Canada is not ruled by the Queen of England. The Head of State in Canada is the Queen of Canada. True, they happen to be the same person, but that's only a coincidence.

I don't know how far you can or want to travel, but compared to, say Victoria or even Nanimo you are a lot closer to Zeballos and the Nomash Valley. The Nomash valley provides access to the Haihte range with lots of alpine rock routes, particularly on the SW face of mount Rugged. The Nomash also give access to the Wapiti valley and 2000 foot granite slab climbs on Dale Earnhardt Dome. I have a mediocre online guide to this area at http://members.shaw.ca/eseedhouse/wapiti/ However given the season and proximity to the West Coast there will be lots of rain for the next few months at least. Still if you get a prolonged dry period you might give it a try.

In part but it is really a wormhole diagram with the matter being spit out at the bottom Yeah I realized that as soon as I logged off but didn't think it was important enough to log back on for.

Too easy. Explanitory illustration of a black hole with matter being sucked in.

No explanation necessary. There must be at least half a dozen ways to make a picture like that, none of them involving actuality.