Kimmo

mom and dad are both awesome climbers, and very capable people. it's no surprise their kids are are as successful as they are.

there's nothing "unfortunate" about your kids not being climbing "phenoms", but regarding the considerations: yeah there are. it's something i personally wrestle with, having a little one involved with the game/sport/hobby. it's pretty obvious that we, as humanoids, are descendantly/biologically more evolved to deal with things like branches and other large grabbables, vs the tiny crimps that modern rock climbing is mainly about. as a result, kids do tend to have a few climbing-specific injuries, such as growth plate fractures in fingers.

what is "good"?

Fatso? wtf? really? you haven't seen him lately?

yeah but when puberty hits: boooooom, fatso like his old man.

jesus boadman, he said he wants to learn to NOT be intimidated by cracks, and this is the list you give the poor fellow?!? may I humbly suggest the following: -Ultra Brutal; -Great Northern Slab; -Aries perhaps; -Taurus rings a bell... and yes, -Toxic Shock is a good teacher.

hand ok, you're on my team next bar-room brawl. glad you're better.

i might have the time and inclination to answer your question, but not right now. i said i'm sorry. plus, i think you broke my hand. but seriously, yes i was in favor of removing some bolts at index, on crack climbs, placed in the last 10 to 15 years. i posted both here and rcnw, and really lost my interest in doing so after hearing the divided opinion. yes i actually did take in what people said, and realized it would be a divisive act over a few pounds of metal that really rarely bother me, and only if i get on my high-horse! you ok btw?

man, i just had a really hard time reading that self-justificatory piece of misleading drivel. it further saddens me that those two, with their stated reasons, took it upon themselves to do this deed. i guess it comes down to the fact that really no one would be able to justify such an act in eloquent terms.

Hmmm I wonder what the locals think? You know, the ones who live there, the ones whose country it is? The ones who might actually make a living of some sort catering to the gringo thrill-seekers? I wonder if their opinion on the matter is of any concern to the gringos? Or is gringo only concerned with the effete ethicism inre 50 lbs of metal on some mountain in the middle of nowhere? Pretty funny. But having said that, I have very little knowledge of what role the thrill-seeking gringo plays in the local economy, and how much the removal of said route might affect them. If the locals don't give a damn (you know, localism and all that!), I really don't give a damn.

first thought: never use such a flimsy piece of metal for slack-lining. second thought: the gate opened somehow. if i recall at all correctly, that biner has a gate that seems suspect in its ability to "lock" correctly.

never allow "authority" to be the final arbiter. it is much much better to be left with "not much" than a lie from "authority". (i don't recall the "authorities" opining much about local opinion either.)

sure, why not? whitey goes to another's country and imposes will on populace (again, not entirely sure how locals felt, but i recall them not wanting the thing chopped. i'd guess it has something to do with many earning a livelyhood from the climbing). can't say i can glean from what i've read any "consensus" regarding this issue, but i don't think it matters as much what gringo in europe thinks, versus what local in argentina thinks.

Ego. Both the installation of the bolts, AND the removal. Or so I think. Better style would have been to simply climb the route free, and leave it as it was. Having said that, I would have most favored an approach that was informed entirely by the opninions of the local residents (read: Argentinians); they're the ones with a dog in the fight, way more than the gringos.

“It's supposed to be free of structures, free of motor vehicle use. The (lookout) is either legal or it's not. For people to say it's OK is the same as saying the wilderness should be open to off-road vehicles,” Nickas said. “Everybody wants it their way. The hikers don't want the loggers or the miners or the off-road vehicle folks. You can't expect your pet use to be OK, when the Wilderness Act is designed for us to step back and let it truly be a wild place. Without it, future generations won't know what wilderness is.”

i think working 3 days a week makes any commute less of an issue. coupled with having 3-5 days off. another consideration: what time will you be commuting? coming into the city between 7-9 am or 3:30-6 pm presents a different challenge than any other times. if i were in your shoes, i would consider renting a house on the eastside for 6 months: north bend carnation issaquah territory; and then a house in seattle: capitol hill columbia city green lake territory. and evaluating. very very different vibes between eastside and westside.

it seems she couldn't answer ANY of his questions as to why it was illegal to park there. Did they really say to him he was within State Park land? If they did, I would reconsider my previous advice.

North Bend, on the coast. Not Bend. Don't know of anything over thataway.

They didn't write the rules, but they need to know what the rules are when enforcing them. The ranger in question admitted to not knowing the rules, but in what seems to be an antagonistic power play, chose to issue a citation anyway. This entire issue has nothing to do with "doing what the ranger told you to do", as you seem to indicate baa baa, but with Discovery Pass compliance. It's pretty clear that rangers (now unfairly put in a position of having to issue citations in order to finance a limited budget which ensures their own employment, among other things) will continue to issue these citations based upon their own interpretation of the rules, UNTIL CHALLENGED. That's why it's very important to challenge this citation with a strongly developed argument based on a firm understanding of the written rules of the Discovery Pass, void of emotive hyperbole.

Contest the ticket. And MAKE SURE you subpoena the woman who wrote the ticket. You'll want to question her, thereby letting the court know that she didn't know the answer to your questions at the time of the citation (plus, the state will dismiss if she fails to appear). I have a feeling any judge would be quite sympathetic to your case (as long as your court-room demeanor is good). And, some have said that the parcel maps indicate park ownership of your chosen parking spot: is there a park entrance sign 1/4 mile from your parking area? Any other signs indicating park ownership ANYWHERE else? Again, not sure if the Park Service has legal obligations to show the public exactly where the boundary lines are, but having a park entrance sign seems a pretty strong indication for the public to base its decision on Discovery Pass compliance. I'm sure there's legal language regarding this kind of thing (and probably strong court sympathy). Force the Park Service to defend what i believe to be an entirely unscrupulous double-taxation.

[video:youtube]

what is a "spiritual experience"?

yeah, i think the term "cause" is usually applied to aiding people in distress. I'd recommend sending any extra monies one has floating around to the Seattle Children's Hospital. Or St. Jude Hospital.

What's the "cause", exactly? All I got was that a married couple wanted to climb a bunch of climbs and ran out of money.... Not to be cynical, but back in the days of my road-trips, running out of money meant going back home and working for a bit. Now if there is a "cause" that I'm not aware of, perhaps I'll feel differently!

fun stuff, and a familiar face to boot.