wfinley

Also note that the XGK works with just about any type of fuel out there -- a plus when all you can find is watered down kerosine. My climbing tends to be of the glacial slog variety thus weight is not that much of an issue; On extended trips where we have 4 people we'll carry two stoves and cook separately; if one stove dies we can always suck it up and share one stove / 4 people. For 2 person trips it depends on the type of trip. Having had numerous stoves break on me in the past I always err on the safe side. Sometimes we'll carry 2 pumps / 1 stove, sometimes 2 stoves and then cache one at the base of the route / basecamp. As for fuel - on winter / spring AK trips I haul 33 oz / 2 people / 5 days for mellow ski or climbing trips (i.e. - hanging out in the lower mountains where it will be around 15-25 degrees). When we're in areas especially prone to storms or if I know it's going to be super cold or high altitude I'll actually double the amount of fuel to 66 oz / 2 people / 5 days. This is a tad on the heavy side but it means I can sit in the tent when the storms role in and not have to fret about running out of fuel.

Summer of '95. We loaded up the Oldsmobile and drove 36 hours straight to the Tetons. We then proceeded to climb the Durrance Route on Symmetry only to summit and discover we were on Storm Point (one peak to the east)! After that we took note of things like route finding and then ticked off classics like Guide's Wall, Irene's Arete, the Durrance Route and the Owen Spalding. On the marathon drive back we bivied at the gates to Devil's Tower and at dawn ran up the Durrance Route and were back on the road by noon for another marathon drive back to the east coast. I was 20 and the mountains blew my mind. After I returned to the east coast I decided it wasn't for me and began planning to move.

Check out neice.com -- these pages in particular: http://neice.com/Articles/MT_Katadin/index.htm http://neice.com/ubbthreads/postlist.php?Cat=1&Board=me

What can I say - I'm an astute movie critic. Ask me about the red car in Ben Hur.

Mine was the east face of Mt. Nestor in the Canadian Rockies. We were young and totally naive regarding snow and ave conditions. Stopped by the Alpine Club and asked about routes and when they told us none of the alpine route were in shape we laughed at them and said "How could they be out of shape? It's sunny." We thumbed through the book and chose a route that Dougherty described as "an enjoyable afternoon climb". We left around 10:30 am and at 2pm were slowly digging our way up a ridge of wet mash potato snow. 36 hours later after enduring many firsts like first bivy, first time intentionally triggering slab aves with big rocks, first time belaying off ice tools that wouldn't hold shit, we stumbled back to the van and got the hell out of Canada.

Where do you find these links?

You ever notice in the desert scene that when the shots are from below (and you can't see the guys face) the climber is actually leading; but when it's a close up of Eastwood he's somehow leading on toprope? That always cracked me up.

Yeah - but only if you haul beer in your backpack.

Do you get the AAC news? In the last issue there was a story about climbing in Pakistan and the AAC's involvement with misc. projects over there. I've tossed mine so I can't recall exactly who to contact. Find an old copy or ask the AAC for contacts.

BTW -- Clint I have rock & ice guidebooks for the NE if you want to borrow them.

You aren't going to be doing any clipping at the Gunks! St. Paddy's Day at New Paltz will be cold as balls. Anything where you'll need fingers will hurt to no end, If you're dead set on Feb. rock routes stick to the easy routes with big holds and big roofs like Shockleys, Horseman and High Exposure. Grab Todd Swain's guidebook and just climb routes with two or more stars. PS - I would suggest skipping the Gunks and driving to North Conway for ice. North Conway is 3 hours away from Boston; New Paltz is about 3 1/2 hrs from Boston.

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to you all. May the powder the deep, the ice fat and the rock warm for all of next years adventures!

Make sure they watch eBay - lots of stolen stuff is sold on there.

And this is the Oregon S&R 2005 Annual Report: http://www.oregon.gov/OOHS/OEM/docs/sar/sar_annual_report_2005.pdf PS - With all the traffic CC is getting I think this should be a sticky.

I doubt that the recent events on Hood will lead to restrictions - however I do think it's possible we will see a fee structure proposed and possibly even put in place. The war in Iraq has stripped publicly funded parks to the point where NPS staff are being forced to find additional ways to charge or figure out who to cut. Rising fees on Denali are a great example -- I wouldn't be surprised to see a registration and fee structure proposed for Rainier, the Grand other prominent mountains (perhaps even El. Cap). (Hood might be a little harder because it lies in a national forest and thus the infrastructure doesn't exist.) It sucks to think about climbing and how it relates to things like the economy and public opinion, but I think that the Iraq war has put us in a really deep hole and in the next few years the state and federal governments are going to do everything they can to increase revenue sources for public ventures. Public opinion regarding climbers and rescue may just be the impetus for legislation that regulates and turns climbing into a commodity. Personally I have mixed opinions on this. I think it's bogus that climbers burden more than their share of the costs - however if climbers, hikers, boaters etc. shouldered more of the costs for our national parks then we would have more a voice when it comes to conservation and issues like rescue and required gear. Think about the voice that hunters and fishermen / women have in the West. This is because hunting and fishing license are huge sources of revenue for states and thus there is a direct correlation between the people, their activities and the land. Climbers / hikers etc. sink money into park passes and campgrounds but there is no additional revenue that is directly related to their activities (hunters and fishermen pay these same fees). Until fat, lazy American sees how we (climbers) contribute to the economy and thus help support our parks, fat lazy American will continually whine about how we're sucking them, as taxpayers, dry. They could care less about the obvious (Iraq, pork projects like Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere") and as long as the media and legislators stands up and makes comment about the burden we put on taxpayers we'll always be fighting against public opinion.

No - only republican climbers leave a W. This doesn't happen very often though because republicans are mostly ignored in the mountains.

Wow! Awesome photo of Snowpatch Spire. Just beautiful! How many goats did you have to sacrifice for such clear weather?

Or $5,000,000,000 / month in Iraq.

Oh come on... you all know as well as I do that every year a number of climbers get killed by avalanches. The table in the back of Accidents in NA Mountaineering shows 278 ave deaths in the US from 1951-04 and another 125 in Canada in that same time. In 2005 there were 8 avalanche deaths. Granted the table does not differentiate between ski mountaineering and say, an ice route - but plenty of climbers out for a day of "real climbing" have been killed by avalanches. I think a better position / explanation is to say that climbers try very hard to avoid avalanche prone areas and because of this they are willing to take the risk of sometimes traveling through avalanche terrain without beacons so as to not have to deal with the added weight and gear. I suppose it's dumb but so is riding your bike to the liquor store without a helmet.

Hey - thank for that link. Gadd's blog linked to this thread which has decent info: http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1394069;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;guest=829849

I have a question about half ropes that vexes me: I always climb on two 8.5 mm half ropes. One meandering routes I will often only clip one rope for say, half the pitch, and on the second half I'll clip the other rope to minimize drag. If I take a fall onto one of the 1/2 ropes but the other rope was last clipped in, say, 40-50' below me, is this considered bad? If you climb on 1/2 ropes do you run it out like this or do you use long slings to minimize drag and alternately clip each rope as you climb. Obviously if the fall potential includes sharp rocks / edges one would alternately clip ropes in case of a core shot - but what about on routes where this isn't an issue? PS - According to Mammut's website: "When used singly, half ropes are tested with 55 kg fall weight and must resist 5 standard falls, with a diameter of 8–9 mm and 42–55 g per metre. Used singly, they are suitable for additional securing, for example if there are two other climbers on the rope." However - Black Diamond's 8.1 Half Rope has "No" marked for "Resistance to a factor 1.77 fall over an edge at radius 0.75mm" whereas their 9 has "Yes" marked.

The deadline to comment on the preferred alternative for the Kenai Winter Access management plan is Monday (12/18)! In collaboration with quiet recreationists and the conservation community, a map that captures a collective vision for the non-motorized community—a Citizen’s Alternative (or “Alternative 1 with improvements”) has been made. A high resolution copy of the map is available at http://akcenter.org/GIS/pickup/KWA/ (the two maps are identical, just the titles are different). Thank you to the passionate and knowledgeable folks who have volunteered considerable time and effort on this issue, especially Tony Doyle, Page Spencer, Mark Luttrell, Rick Smeriglio, Charlie Crangle, and many others! Please urge the Forest Service to adopt this citizen’s alternative for the final plan! Email comments to: comments-alaska-chugach@fs.fed.us What's Happening? The Forest Service is accepting comments on the draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Kenai Winter Access Project until December 18, 2006. This plan will affect recreation opportunities on the Kenai, including Resurrection Pass, Carter-Crescent Lakes, north and south forks of Snow River, Russian River and Summit/Manitoba. If you're in a hurry, you can simply click the email link below and urge the Forest Service to adopt the changes presented in the Citizen’s Alternative map (shown below). Want more info? Keep reading. Email comments to: comments-alaska-chugach@fs.fed.us The Details: We're seeking a balance between areas open to motorized recreation and those set aside for quiet recreation. Unfortunately, the current proposal dedicates over 70% of the planning area is to snowmachine use, and we are working to achieve a balance closer to 50-50. Of all the options proposed by the Forest Service, we had supported Alternative 1 in the last comment round. Now, a hybrid "preferred alternative" has been released, which has a few glaring shortcomings. So we’ve produced a "citizen's alternative" map that makes those key adjustments to the Forest Service map: The Carter-Crescent unit should be on a seasonal schedule to alternate with the Resurrection Pass unit- so that skiers and snowmachiners each have one of these units each year. (The current proposal designates Carter as open to motors all the time, and Resurrection as seasonal- leaving skiers with significantly reduced terrain in the years that Resurrection is motorized.) The Snow River drainage is the most popular ski trail in the Snow River unit- yet that trail is set aside for motorized use, contrary to the rest of the Snow River unit. The Snow River drainage should be for non-motorized recreation. The watershed of the North Fork of the Snow River should be included in the non-motorized zone (in the southern area of the Ptarmigan/Grant unit). North from Summit Lake to the Hope cut-off, slopes and drainages east and west are set aside for non-motorized recreation, except for a motorized corridor on either side of the highway. This corridor of motorized use bisects a popular skiing area, both eliminating the potential for quiet recreation and creating a conflict-prone access zone. All land adjacent to the highway from Summit Lake to Frenchy Creek should be included in the non-motorized zone. Supplemental EIS and Related Documents The purpose of this comment period is to provide an opportunity for public comments on the draft SEIS prior to the completion of the Final EIS and Record of Decision. The Responsible Official for this decision is Joe Meade, Chugach National Forest Supervisor. Comments are due by December 18, 2006 Additional Talking points for your consideration: The Forest Service needs to preserve natural quiet and wilderness quality recreational opportunities, and to protect the extraordinary natural habitats of the Kenai by designating large areas as permanently non-motorized. The Citizen's Alternative proposes the most-balanced management scenario of winter recreation for all users. It offers the best mix of terrain and cabin availability, and ensures that there will always be an opportunity for high-quality quiet recreational experiences. The Forest Service has failed to analyze the cumulative impacts of motorized uses to quiet recreation opportunities, communities, and other social values, as well as wildlife.

My wife just asked the bank about this today... $12 / month in Alaska... but if you climb it jumps to $165 / month.

Seen on a truck somewhere in WA: Hug a Logger You'll Never Go Back to Trees

This has become an international media event with debate over rescue and costs popping up all over the US. Climbers are a small special interest group that can't even agree with each other over tiny details - much less the general public on broader issues. The last thing that the public needs to see on television is a group of climbers headed out combined with a random interview of some SAR official asking climbers to avoid the area. If the public sees a news segment like that they'll go nuts and we'll be one step closer to more government oversight for all climbing areas. Climb elsewhere this weekend.