ashw_justin

Wow, I guess this is what swinging is like for uberdorks. At least they haven't discovered how to replicate at these conventions yet. Now when will we break ranks with the severely oppressive nations, that force women to wear burkas and/or cover their breasts in public?

Good info. I expect they would want to include the Grouse Creek area in their search as skiers often use this as an approach to the upper mountain.

Clearly there is some really classic sea kayaking around here! I recommend taking a(some) self-rescue and navigation class(es), and maybe even some whitewater cross-training if you're going to frequent open coastlines, enter/cross major channels, or go on long trips. The extra skills and confidence are nice even if nothing ever goes wrong. kayaking pr0n!

Oh, that is okay, cause it is executive privilege to lie in order to make a funny about dead people. (Comedic license is essential for supervillains.)

How generous! yay! permits for everyone! Maybe for a couple more dollars we can support a nonprofit editor

What about stuff in the Sierras and such? Teleross and lunger made Postive Vibrations look and sound pretty cool. Is that neomoderate?

I agree that the main effect that this kind of journalism can have is to raise awareness that there are people in need, so that those with more than enough for themselves may realize that they can/should help. Seems like adding an icing of blame to that (often unfairly) can only hurt, as this replaces what would be a feeling of charity with a feeling of defensiveness. Clearly there are explicit injustices, and sometimes these are even perpetrated consciously. These are the axe-worty. But then they only account for a smaller part of what is referred to by inequality. What I was saying is that there is a certain inevitable amount of inequality in any society. This may be perceived as a source of injustice even though it is 'natural.' But whatever this form of inequality is called, I think it is better to recognize it as more of a collective societal condition than to blame it on the privileged class. Once battle lines are drawn, the 'sides' will just become more polarized and myopic (and the widespread distrust and disunity makes it easier for the minority of true bad guys to hide). I'm also worried about the negative effects of popularizing the idea of the oppressed, victimized, and hopeless lower class of America. Doesn't this notion of defeat and helplessness seem a little self-reinforcing? Now there are some true victims, we can be sure.* But it's sort of a tragic idea that someone who is already starting from a relative disadvantage has to deal with a continual message from the rest of society that they don't stand a chance, while on the other end, the same message reinforces the idea within the privileged class that the lower class can not change, even if assisted. Here is the problem I see with thinking in terms of equality in the sense that seems to be proposed by the series: should all but a single person in the country feel like shit, and should we all think that we live a shitty life, just because we are not the single richest person in the country? No, we decide what the lowest acceptable living standard is, and we try to bring everyone up to it who is under it. That seems like a much more realistic goal than trying to make everyone live perfectly equally. Certainly a good place to start would be to start bringing what we consider to be an acceptable standard of living up to at least that which is now found in other countries. (*This series seems to be doing it's best to point them out, but one should be careful about forming generalizations from case studies.)

You could always do the South Route on Mt. Adams as a 'warmup.' The route is 'non-technical' and crevasse-free. Recommend skis/snowboard for extra training weight and improved descent on summit day, if you are a competent skier/boarder.

Everything is relative--in any society, there will never be absolute equality. It is not even theoretically possible. Therefore, no matter how advanced society becomes, and no matter much time and money we spend trying to institute equality, there will always be differences in living standards, among many other things. Irreducible distributions are an inescapable property of the physical world. The best we can do is to make sure that the tails don't get too ugly. Take for example, the idea of a 'poverty line,' and trying to aid those below it. Also take for example the progressive tax. These are things that we should be proud of not only because they exist, but because (at least in principle) the citizens support these kinds of remedies, not because they are forced to, but because they believe it is best for their society. So really instead of accusatorily and illogically waving the flag of 'equality is an easily-attained reality that is simply denied to the poor by the rich,' it seems that the advocates of equalization (which is at least asymptotically possible) should be more carefully appealing to the idealogical/voluntary interest of the privileged in supporting the underprivileged. Alienating the very people who can help (or not help) the most is a stupid and spiteful idea.* But perhaps the barely-concealed hostility in your post is absent from the series (which I haven't watched). I'm sure at least part of it must positively promote more of the same kinds of humanitarian things that we engage in in order to call ours a civil society? (*Chopping their heads off and trying to take over their fortunes would be more effective--but it would be broadly unjust to try that if you didn't have the support of nearly the entire country.)

I bet he couldn't even campus the problem with the blue tape in the cave either. Can't believe these alpine 'climbers.'

Waterproof. Lightweight. Breathable. Patagonadia.

Once I had a spontaneous crash without much warning upon reaching the car after a long winter tour, and immediately threw up my precious recovery granola bar and water. This should bump me up a letter grade or two right?

My interest in the accounting arose due to the nearly 50% increase in the fee, without a clear understanding (explanation) of how the extra funds were distributed. I'm not arguing whether or not the absolute value of the permit cost is 'cheap' or not. But in terms of percentages, a 47% increase is not what I would describe as 'cheap,' so I am/was just curious how the extra revenue is distributed. That is simply information that we have a right to (thanks btw), and how we react that information is another matter. Personally I don't know enough about the MSHI to pass judgment on their cut. I'll leave that to someone else because I am usually sympathetic to honest-seeming stewardship efforts. I am wary however of the contract for permit sales with a single private vendor. I don't know what the details of the contract are, but non-competitive private contracting creates a for-profit monopoly ripe with scalping opportunities. Anyway call it paranoid, but supporting a fee system without understanding it is essentially asking the administrator to protect the sheeple from their own ignorance. It is the clichéd blank check. Now maybe you could call the I.R.S. for me...?

Yes but please note that my post posed questions not assumptions, and that $15 * 1.1 != $22. So my question stands: where does the each part of the extra $7 fee actually go, specifically? It seems like this kind of information should be readily available on the website(s) selling the permits. (but maybe I am blind, or things have changed since I last looked?)

Haven't there been at least two high-profile accidents in the Pearly Gates vicinity in the recent past where inadequately protected ropes seriously aggravated the situation? Rope on steep terrain is nearly pointless in terms of physical safety without at least one bomber piece of pro. Rope as I see it typically employed is more of a danger to team members and anyone else in the fall line, than any kind of reasonable protection (which would consist of a well-trained team carrying and using multiple pieces of protection appropriately--which most people who climb Hood will probably not take the time to do, even if they are capable).

Speaking of that, when they started selling permits online only, I tried to ask them how much of the $22 permit cost (old $15 permit fee + new $7 'service charge') goes to active.com (the private, exclusive permit vendor) and how much to the Mt. St. Helens Institute (a private nonprofit, administering the permit sales?). They didn't want to give me an answer by e-mail. Does anyone know specifically how the permit revenue is distributed now?

I don't think we disagree--I'm not that worried about the occasional annoyance. So maybe it's a non-issue. Time will tell. I wouldn't have any problem with motorbikes and snowmobiles on approach roads if they were all properly-muffled, had clean-burning engines, and didn't cause any off-road damage.

What, are we playing mind games now? Would you motorbike to the top of Sahale Peak (or whatever your NCNP destination) if you knew it were possible and that you could get away with it?

The first ~4-5 miles up Goodell Creek on the way to the Pickets is/was a 'road.' So is the first ~2-3 miles of the way up to Thornton Lakes and Mt. Triumph. I know that your first reaction was probably 'how do I get the trailhead as quickly as possible now.' This is a narrow view that doesn't account for how this might affect others in the park. I am simply suggesting that while they figure out what to do about repairs, you could at least consider non-motorized travel beyond the bridge. Like I said, having to deal with lots of noisy, noxious-gas-spewing motorbikes would significantly increase the suck value of the extended trip for anyone using non-motorized travel. (And I hope that is not seen as a bonus. )

An easy and pleasant nature walk, 2-3 hrs to the Eldo trail or 3-4 hrs to the CP trail. Could even be less than an hour by bicycle. Just about the only thing that could make that actually suck (aside from bad weather or a flat tire) would be frequent motorbike traffic. I mean I could probably deal with one or two huffs of petrol along the way, but that's a very popular destination.

I think there's relatively little flak here because most people already consider snowmobilers to be reckless. Furthermore, since he was not a climber, other climbers do not feel the need to vilify him out of fear of being associated with his shame.

Here is a better view. There are definitely two reasonable-looking lines there that I'm guessing have been skied more than once. I'm not sure the g-men would really care if people skied into the crater if MSH weren't such a popular destination.

Take it easy, he's just a snowmobiler

Is that right? On the maps I have seen that show the wilderness boundaries, true summit is not actually in the rec. area.

I don't know why you guys are having a hard time with this. This is the stuff of legend. "He reportedly fell 100 to 200 feet before landing on the inside slope of the crater. He then slid on his hands and knees to the bottom of the crater. He was wearing his snowmobile helmet, and Cox said there is a heavy snowpack in the area, so snow may have broken his fall." It's like Ed Maginn falling 2600 feet down Orient Express and walking away from it. It's not something you want to happen, but it could end up being one of the best days of your life, depending on how you see things. His breakfast will taste better than any meal you and I have ever tasted.