tvashtarkatena

Trip: Sub Zero Zen in the Land of Furry White Asses - South Fork, Shoshone River - Cody WY Date: 1/28/2014 Trip Report: Main Vein by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr There are three steps to assessing an ice pitch: 1-The Approach: “Oh God, that looks terrifying” 2-The Base: “This doesn’t look so bad” 3-Halfway Up: “Oh God, this is terrifying” But you’ve gotten yourself treed on something that is shattering and fracturing in great, skritchy columns that cock for an inch and come to rest on a thumb sized nubbin of frozen dirt. The ice is blue-brittle, the feet imaginary, the rock you seek refuge on crumbles beneath your front points, and the cruelest irony of all: despite the Enceladusian temperatures, the sun is melting your screws out, one by one. Not that they’d hold, anyway. There’s nowhere to go but up, so up you go, using every trick, every cheat, every breathing technique, every appeal to an indifferent universe you can muster. And suddenly, both crampons are crunching through low angle snice, and your self-inflicted battle with the universe’s most ubiquitous and fickle medium is over as quickly as it began. You exhale. Gravity releases a growing smile. It's your belayer’s turn. The first pitch of Main Vein is seldom in. It’s still hard to say whether it was in or not during our final day of climbing in the South Fork of the Shoshone River. There is a rock bypass, which reputedly offers up its own set of horrors. I suppose a pitch like that does serve a purpose – to let you know that it’s time to go home. Carter Mountain by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Save a brief visit from our host Matt of the Double Diamond X Ranch, we saw no one for our first two days in the South Fork of the Shoshone River. That’s not to say the place is devoid of life. It’s a frozen petting zoo of bighorns, white tail deer, elk, eagles, red tail hawks, ravens, ouzels, magpies, ducks, great horned owls, lynxes, coyotes, foxes, rabbits – I’m just naming what we saw or heard – to that add grizzlies, mountain lions, pronghorns, moose...I’ve never seen wildlife density like it anywhere. The mountains surrounding the valley are stunning – and full of ice. Hey There, Ice Climber by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr On Second Thought, Think of the Children by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Matt and Jeanine own and operate the Double Diamond X Ranch, our home for the week and the clearly superior alternative to staying in some dumpy motel in rotten-egg reeking Cody - an hour commute each way – if the road is clear, that is. Staying in the valley allows one to become immersed in its silence and solitude – even more so if sub zero temperatures and snow conspire the keep other ice pilgrims away. Home at the Double Diamond X Ranch by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr High On Boulder by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr The river crossing to High On Boulder was mostly frozen; only a couple of punch through slushies. The climb itself was in excellent condition save some delicate and brittle crux ice (shown). Cabin Fever by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Cabin Fever, as I discovered on lead, was not quite as solid as our previous objective. I knew something was up when water spurted out of my pick strike like a struck artery – then it snapped into focus – the entire flow save some WI6 icicles to the right was only an inch thick and visibly flowing on its inside surface. It certainly wasn't going to take screws - and probably not me, either. Fortunately, I was only 15 feet up and could easily back off of it and save it for another day. Temperatures were, indeed, low. I led with 4 merino layers, a micropuffy, and a windshirt, and was barely holding my own with that. The amphitheatre, far from protecting from the spindrift laden wind, acted as a wind scoop. Still, it’s a spectacular place and the posthole in and out provided a scenic workout. Postholing back from Cabin Fever by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr After our experience on Cabin Fever, we were ready for a sure bet, and we got one with the wonderful, moderate butter ice on Bozo’s Revenge. It didn’t come hassle-free, however. Snice and sub zero temperatures provided challenges that the climbing itself did not. Snicing up to Bozo's Revenge by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Bozo's Revenge by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Post-Bozo's Revenge Saunter by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Untitled by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr I should mention our vehicle – the Snow Shark, complete with a full set of Craigslist acquired I’Zen Studs and world’s dimmest low beams. That thing really ate up the snowy roads, though, even if it had to burn a bunker’s worth of fuel doing it. Snowshark Sighting by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr The Special Love I Have For You (crux section, Main Vein) by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Sunday Afternoon by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Cold Crescent by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr For me, the South Fork was as much about its beauty and solitude as the climbing. I fell in love with the place. A frightening final climb effectively pushed me out of that nest, but I have a feeling I’ll return - winter and summer, for the rest of my life. After Cody, I’m not sure I’ll ever be able to tolerate the tourististan that is Canmore, but to each his or her own, I reckon. Parting Shot - South Fork of the Shoshone River by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr After a tough drive, DougD and his gracious wife Catherine were kind enough to put us up, feed us a wonderful dinner and breakfast, and provide excellent company and conversation in Spokane – which logged impressive 4 F temperatures the following morning. Thank you both for that. Scenic Montana by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr Gear Notes: Feet: large fitting Scarpa Mont Blancs with two pairs of thick Smartwool socks worked well for me, Scarpa Phantom Guides with 2 pairs of thinner wool socks were a bit too chilly for Nastia. Hands: Seirus neoprene liner gloves inside and XL OR Vert gloves for leading, OR Alti mitts for approaches/belaying. Pants: I used Icebreaker boxers, the thinnest Smartwool long johns, and REI ACME pants. Nastia went with a merino baselayer and primaloft pants. Top: I wore the thinnest Icebreaker short sleeve T, Ibex Indie Hoody, a $10 merino sweater from Goodwill, a Montbell UL hooded down puffy, and a light windshirt. Added an extra merino midlayer for the really cold day at Cabin Fever - plus a big assed puffy for standing around that day. My gear kept me comfy enough. Approach Notes: Snow shoes would have come in handy for the Cabin Fever approach. Not so much for any of the others. Skis not recommended. Not enough coverage, too many rocks.

Repeating the request for a Pan Dome update, if anyone's been up there. Thx

Diluting the hate, one star at a time.

Two words: Hut system. Go Euro or go home.

flat belayer reqd for max R

tree+pig=trebuchet. check my math here.

Full on spring corn and weather up there this weekend. Anybody with spring ski traverse plans should just get on that action right now.

I'm gonna try to verify with some actual route info to see what the longest horiz penjis are out there. Don't know if you can do the 45 deg. thing in practice on too many routes. Can also come up with a generalized equation for that ultra nerd. Hittin the road for a bit, back later. Any steps missing in drawings should be easy to figure out. I just drew the essential states required to royally hose oneself regarding a safe retreat.

Redux, with screaming pendiz. These are the only ways I could think of to do this with one rope. R = max horizontal distance between the pendi fulcrum and the next anchor assuming both are at the same elevation, if only one rope is used. This is a specific case where you're penjiing over to a spot directly horiz to anchor 1 at max angle of 45. Not sure how much you can push that angle practically speaking. Depends I reckon. Also, if anchor 1 is higher, horiz reach is farther. If its lower, less. This is a specific case for horiz reach = vert between anchor 1 and fulcrum Method 1 Pro: Faster, good if EZ down low, horiz reach 17m Con: Dangler cn snag while leader penjiz, 2 fulcrums Method 2 Pro: Good if EZ up high, no dangler snag, 1 fulcrum Con: Slower, horiz reach only 15m PenjiLand2 by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr

Both leader and follower must pendulum in the both methods I've drawn. Nobody gets out alive. I didn't show anybody actually swinging and screaming is all.

Agreed. Volunteer service is just what it sounds like - you're not getting compensated in any way for your service. And that's the basic question here - are donations covering the costs of YOUR activities outside the core mission of the charity, or are you being reimbursed for expenses incurred doing that core mission? If the former, you're just asking for someone to pay for your vacation, plain and simple. In essence, you're unreported overhead for that charity. One could argue that the PR value would collect donations that wouldn't otherwise be made, but I can guarantee you that if this climbing team spent the same amount of time and effort in direct funding raising efforts - phone banking, outreach, key donor relationship building, etc, they'd collect a lot more $$$ for that charities core mission with much lower overhead.

This assume you've got only one rope, per the OP. Method 1 Pro: Faster, good if EZ down low, horiz reach 17m Con: Dangler cn snag while leader penjiz, 2 fulcrums Method 2 Pro: Good if EZ up high, no dangler snag, 1 fulcrum Con: Slower, horiz reach only 15m PenjiLand by PatGallagherArt, on Flickr

The mission statement of CCA is "We Prescribe Joy". Joy is good, but the charity does not fund cancer research nor subsidize treatment. After Live Strong, its hard not to be more skeptical about today's huge field of cancer charities and what they actually do.

Although I gotta say I've witnessed the Big Man do some wild-assed shit that got us through.

I go one better - I have my buddy do that while I finish my fatty. Me when you need something like this Cliff Clavenized, Keenwesh when you want to actually get up the pitch, Ivan when things suck and you need to witness something suffering more than you.

This does leave me wondering why someone wouldn't just donate directly to the charity in question rather than filter it through this or any other 'climb for…' project. I do a fair bit of fundraising for a large non-profit, but I must confess I never really understood the advantage of donating indirectly in this manner. The PR value of climbing peaks that have been well trampled seems minimal. I can see the value of 'fun runs' where donors pay to participate in an event, and some of that goes to charity - those tend to be big celebrations that can make a splash, particularly if they become well-known annual events. Our fund raising model is a bit simpler - we point to our track record and ask for the money. The donor gets nothing other than the knowledge that we'll take that money and efficiently do what we say we're gonna do with it, and they helped make that happen.

I've also assumed the leader doesn't just burn a fatty and float past the pendi on his way to awesome land.

Incorrect. If R is the max horizontal distance from pendi fulcrum to leader/belayer as well as the max pendulum length, assuming the leader/belayer is level with the fulcrum, then the follower when fully lowered out will be at a 45 degree angle from the leader/belayer, therefore Rope Length L = 2R + R*SQRT (2) (draw it to see WTF I'm talkin bout) If L = 60m, then max R = L/(2+SQRT (2)) = 60/(2+1.414) =17m this is the max horizontal distance from leader/belayer to fulcrum, as well as the max pendulum length for leader and follower. This is best case - if the follower has to 'wind up' in the opposite direction to make the pendi happen, max R is even shorter. I've also assumed knot length is accounted for by rope stretch.

There is excellent (and strenuous) road cycling and trail running in the hills to the W and S. It's a huge area with a very low population density. I lived in Saratoga for a summer - loved it.

Cuuzzz its super light? Is this a trick question? One man's ruined is another man's Tenacious Tape job. I get about 4 years out of my Montbell UL down jackets, and I kick the living shit out of them. That UL stuff is SO DAMN COMFY. And its way cheaper than midweight stuff of comparable quality, so there's that. I always carry TT and apply it right away when there's a core breach, however. And I've learned not to wear it around a campfire. FF does last (4 bags in my lifetime quiver) - and its heavier and more expensive than UL gear from WM, Montbell, etc. Having a situation specific quiver of bags, jackets, etc will greatly increase the life of your more delicate items.

I don't think anyone mentioned the river after seeing that photo cuz it spoke for itself, no? Has anyone seen those giant concrete jacks (as in the kind kids play with) that are going to shore up Hwy 20 along the Skagit near the blueberry farm? Google 'Core-loc' images. Weird and cool! Just airlift a few of those into ONP with an as-yet-to-be-invented giant rocket powered helo. Problem solved. If you're gonna get sued anyway, you may as well go HUGE.

I'd say number 1 is better characterized as dealing with competing priorities with limited resources, 2 is definitely accurate, and 3 probably doesn't apply to many, if any, land managers in WA. Washingtonians love our historic structures, and land managers respond in kind - or lead the charge, both individually and in trying to fulfill their stewardship responsibilities. If you want a real (tough) project - take on the High Rock Lookout. Washington's most trashed. Go figure - it's a short, easy walk from a road. Good for restoration work, bad for keeping that work from getting destroyed by the hairless monkey. Sad, because the viewpoint is spectacular.

People may relentlessly refer to me as the town pump, and I'll admit I do like the occasional massage, but I assure you there's plenty Left of the American brain. Pretty much most of the known universe. Yours, Tv

The Act basically says 'don't do it (motorized equipment) unless you really need to meet the minimum requirements for the purpose...ie, less is more. It's not a bad formula for preserving wilderness character as defined - which, after all, is the whole point of the Act. Removing the 'necessary' or 'minimum' wording could produce unintended consequences that could damage that wilderness character - more elaborate structures, higher impact and longer term construction projects, temporary roads, etc. I don't know, the act works pretty damn well the way it is, even if we all don't get exactly what we want every time. The nature of litigation may change, but the number of suits may not. American wilderness management serves as a pretty decent model for the rest of the world, even if there are fewer places to keep out of the rain than, say, Canada or New Zealand.

Under the Wilderness Act, use of motorized equipment is prohibited 'except as necessary to meet the minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act' (including emergencies). The public purpose(s) referred to include recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use. What is 'necessary' and what constitutes meeting 'the minimum requirements' were points of disagreement during both the Green Mountain Lookout and ONP structure lawsuits. Neither suit argued that the structures themselves violated the act - both pre-dated wilderness designation and served historical and recreational purposes, and so were allowed under the Act. Rather, both lawsuits focused on the use of helicopters to perform the restoration/replacement work. Both chainsaws and helicopters are used to maintain wilderness areas. Old growth blow downs and the transport of bridge stringers arguably make them 'necessary' - few would argue that trails are not an important and allowed way to fulfill the 'recreational' purpose of the Act. Structures, and particularly shelters, are more controversial, at least in the litigation sense, in that they have a greater impact on wilderness character and are less necessary for recreation than trails. Shelters also tend to require more motorized equipment use for maintenance and restoration - the Green Mountain project involved 65 chopper flights, for example. More extensive use of larger equipment for structures deemed less necessary attracts more attention from watchdog groups. ONP might arguably have squeeked by had it discreetly used chain saws to replace the two collapsed shelters in question. Plaintiffs would have had a weaker case at least. Choppering in pre-fab structures apparently created a bit too much of a splash for both its critics and the judge, however.