Bob Loomis

Hi Mark, I was intrigued by your reference to the Elkhorn range in Oregon having technical ice as early as November (sorry if I am reading wrong and you are referring to alpine ice). I searched online for some further references and found nothing concrete. By freeway I am about 6-7 hours from Baker City on a good day, so in the winter, I might have to add an hour. I am in Spokane, so the same driving time investment gets me to some super good venues in Canada. None-the-less your reference is potentially interesting. I wonder if you might share for all our benefits some more specifics about the ice climbing in the Elkhorns. Perhaps it is all well knowm and I am the last to know, but perhaps others might be interested as well. I can see the folks in Portland, or even up around Seattle being interested. Things like approaches, technical grades, multi-pitch or single pitch, etc., would all be good information. I will understand if you prefer to keep all this a local secret, but would be very appreciative as to any specifics you might want to share. Cheers and Safe Climbing, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Hi SummitChaser, Thanks for correcting my English. My general impression is the ROS already have plenty of trails, including accessing the base of all the major outcrops, so creating new trails is likely not necessary. Again the general tenor of my comments was to make suggestions and trust in people's good judgment about how they might reduce the magnitude of their impact. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Dear Fellow Climbers, Last weekend I was up at the Rocks of Sharron/Tower Mountain/Big Rock/Krell Hill (ROS), south of Spokane. It was my first time up there since last fall. The grass was green and full. All the wild flowers were in full bloom--the shooting stars, the buttercups, etc. But I noticed some climber impact. This August will be the one year anniversary of the area coming into public hands and I anticipate there will be more climbers up there as well as other users. My hope is we can avoid having the ROS end up looking like Minnehaha. Minnihaha has many issues, most of which are not created by climbers. Examples include the graffiti. But climbers have over the decades contributed to the hard pack beneath many outcrops and the general denuding of the ground. So I wrtite to encourage you, my fellow climbers, to try to think about how to tread lightly. This could mean not creating new trails if avoidable, picking up trash if you see it, minimizing the use of a crash pad, etc. I trust in your good judgment to see what needs to be done or to be avoided, and to act accordingly for those to come. We have a great little gem in the ROS and I hope we can keep it that way for generations to come. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Dear Fellow Climbers, Today, Friday, 23 April, I found a small bit of gear at Minnihaha in Spokane. Tell me what I found and if accurate, we can work out the details to get it back to you. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington >loomis@rescue.com<

Hi Dane & Fellow Climbers, I would likely be a buyer (depending on the final look of the product, how it attaches to the harness, price, etc.). I have only had one instance where my BD plastic racking "biner" broke, and fortuately it was close to the ground so it was easy to pick up the spilled screws. But I was surprise at how easily the BD racking "biner" broke--not as robust a product as I had assumed. So the idea of something made of alumimum is an improvement. I support some of the comments made by others regarding method of harness attachment, etc. But here is something not commented on by others--I like the fact you used anodized alumimum (red in the picture). In one or two very limited low light situations (end of day, blizzard, etc.) I have reached down for a screw and had to focus and blink twice to see what I was reaching for. That is partly because my soft-shell pants are also black--so it is black on black. I admit this is a very minor and limited detail. But having a red (or other color) anodized racking biner might be a very slight advantage in low light situations, so I see that as a positive feature of what you are working on. That is my "two cents." Cheers and Safe Climbing, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA

Dear Fellow Climbers, I thought more about Jake's earlier post on this thread regarding leader falls. First, he was polite and kind in the phrasing of his invitation to share ideas about falls, and second, there might emerge from a discussion of leader falls some valuable information. So I thought I would give it a try. Here goes. 1. I exclude from this any short falls (ex., bouldering near the ground, sport lead falls--clipping when the last bolt below you is at your ankles, etc.). It is not that they are irrelevant falls, it is just that I think Jake is more interested in longer ones ("screamers). 2. I have taken over the years "screamers" on traditional rock leads, aid pitches, waterfall ice, and long friction bolt leads (old Toulumne Meadows, old Squamish Apron, etc.). About two dozen real ones on rock, a few on ice, a few on aid, and a few on run-out friction. The scariest were the aid and friction pitches. On aid there is so much flying around I always got a bit banged up (and scared thinking the "zippering" of gear would never stop), and on the run-out friction there was too much time to think about it and get burned on the slide down. The longest I have sustained was about 30 meters, down to say 4-5 meters. Aside from bruises and contusions, only two broken bones (simple, not compund factures), and some bad ankle sprains. Some were with helmets, most were not. No head injuries--thankfully. 3. The easiest falls (mentally) were the ones I did not see coming just because I was caught by surpise. The worst were the ones I anticipated by a few seconds. The anticipation meant that I tensed up and rather than falling like a "rag doll" I fell scared and tense meaning I banged up more. 4. The biggest safety innovation for me with respect to falling was the advent of the sit harness. The first to show up, at least in Spokane, was summer 1975--the Whillans sit harness designed by Don Whillans for Everest (crude by today's standards--heavy, no gear loops, no padding, etc). Prior to that my few leader falls were onto a bowline on a coil or swami belt which really hurt and if you hung a long time you could sufficate from a collapsed diaphram. So I was super grateful to get a sit harness to climb in. 5. My leader falls on waterfall ice, thankfully, were ones I did not see coming. I am enough of a coward that if I thought I was going to take a for-real leader fall on ice, I would likely really tense up (thinking of all the sharp stuff, broken ankles, etc.) and likely get hurt more. My for-real leader falls on ice all came when my tools ripped through rotten ice, not due to losing balance, etc. Thankfully other than cuts and bruises, I came out of those okay. 6. There is a school of thought which says to acclimate to real leader falls one should go out and intentionally take some. I am reluctant to tell others what to do, but personally I am not a big fan of that school of thought--at least when it comes to "screamers" (might be okay for little baby falls onto a bolt that is right close and you are in an overhang--but then why bother--not much acclimating to fear going on is such a limited situation). For sure, I would not advise this for technical ice, it is just too serious a situation. So in sum I think leading is not to be trivialized, and should be undertaked with an informed, clear mind. Each person has to decide for him/herself what is worth doing and what is not worth doing. Hope that helps. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

Dear Fellow Climbers, I am (I think) happy that my original posting engendered some conversation. Here are some observations: 1. The last item on my list in my original posting urged a flexible, adaptable mind-set, rather than an inflexible (rule-based) mind-set. So several responses describe my posting as a set of rules. Maybe I should have used a better word than "maxims" in my introduction, but my idea was to list things that seem to help, but for you to adapt to your situation as you deemed fit, rather than force something down someone's throat. 2. Jake invites me to describe some of my falls. But that is hard to do in any kind of concise way. I have taken leader falls on rock and ice, and survived them. Why did I fall on those occasions? Sometimes inattention, sometimes in over my head and not knowing it, once or twice a hold broke off, etc. There is no common denominator to my leader falls. Sorry to be so vague but that is the truth. 3. I agree with all of Dane's post (above)--leader falls on ice are serious matters and the ideas he offers are worth reading. 4. Over the years I have been critized by climbing partners for placing too much gear. One person, last winter said he would not climb with me because I put in too many ice screws, thus lessening his "fun" by having to stop and remove them (in fairness I do not think he was serious, just spewing words at the time). But it is true, when leading ice I tend to place a fair number of screws. So what is my point? I am trying to support Dane's point (Gadd's point, etc.) that a long leader fall on ice is likely to be a serious, bloody affair. My leader falls on ice have been at most a couple of body lengths and that was fine with me. 5. My comments about keeping your microlight on your person if possible were motivated by several rationale, only one of which was keeping the battery warm. So I concur, new battery technology has lessened if not eliminated the need to consider battery warmth, but quick access to the light in dim conditions, etc., are other reasons why a person might want his/her microlight on their person rather than in their pack. 6. One nice thing (among others) about this site, and climbing discussion forums in general is for people to share their wisdom. When I was a new climber (I am 55 now) Robbins' Basic Rockcraft had just come out but was not on the storeshelf--it was all (for me anyway) trial and error, rumor, informal mentoring, etc. So what is my point? All of you are fortunate to have Dane and others (not me--I never was and am not now on Dane's level) contributing their decades of experience to the discussion. The same is true on sites like SuperTopo, etc. My hope is discussions like this are rewarding and helpful--Lord knows I sure could have used something like this when getting into this wonderful thing we call "climbing." Cheers and safe climbing to all, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

Hi Psychobikere, I have used BD carbon fiber tools for some years (the original Cobras, and the new Cobras) and like anyone, have various scratches, etc., to my tools. I am no expert (no engineer or materials professional), but from what I have been able to learn, if the scratches are cosmetic, then the tool's shaft is fine. But if the scratches run deep (ex., when you run your fingers over the scratches are you detecting scratches that are more like deep gouges), then unless repaired, the tool may be structurally suspect. I say "may be" because it would depend on the nature and extent of the gouges. Fortunately there are fiberglass repair kits (any marina or marine supply place will do) if you want to hold onto the tools and not retire them. If the scratches are cosmetic then perhaps wrap them in tape to prevent further scratching. I defer to others with more knowledge. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Congratulations Beau, I am proud of you. You have come a long way in a short amount of time as an ice climber. You are like a good wine--only going to get better with age (and experience). Keep it up, for sure, and get some better tools while you are at it :-) ! Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Dear Fellow Climbers, A week or so ago Alpine Monkey started a thread in this forum under the heading “is it worth dying for.” It has generated a lot of good discussion about perceptions of risk and managing that risk. It seemed logical to go the next step and share strategies, so the following is a list of things I do—a set of maxims I employ. Some are generic to all areas of climbing; some are specific to ice climbing; some apply only to long routes—pick and choose as you wish. I hope you find them helpful. Here goes: 1. Do not go climbing with a divided mind and half-hearted. Get in the car and go because you really want to go. Going climbing with less than a full commitment is a disservice to you and your partners. Many accidents in the mountains are tracable to the climber never wanting to be there in the first place. 2. Climb with an aware and focused mind. There will be time after the climb to think about why your girlfriend is leaving you, why your co-worker got a raise and you did not, etc. Many accidents in the mountains are tracable to the climber’s mind being elsewhere rather than the task—which is to climb the route as competently, safely, and effectively as possible. 3. When I go ice climbing I do not go climbing for the fun of it in the classic sense of the word “fun.” Of course it is fun, but ice climbing is dangerous. I adopt a professional’s mindset, like a neurosurgon might prior to doing a complicated brain surgery—there is nothing casual about it. If I am bouldering with some friends or top roping at a crag, that might be the time to be a bit more relaxed, but not ice climbing. So once I get to the route the horseplay and joking is gone. I focus on the task at hand. In preparation (getting on my harness, etc.) I do not do things that would distract my partner and I expect him/her to do the same with me—no idle chatter, etc. On the drive home is when it is time to joke, etc. 4. Prepare assidiously. Do not go into the field with dull tools, crampon bails that do not fit your boot, etc. You do not have to have the most expensive gear, but what you do have should be in good working order and you should know how to use it in the dark if need be. 5. Use simple systems. It might be great to be able to tie the latest triple overhand with a half twist backflip bowline knot you learned from some instructional DVD. But in the field there are only a few knots you need for 98% of all climbing—clove hitch, figure eight, prussik, and bowline. Extend that idea of simple systems to everything else you do. 6. Use the thinnest glove system you can safely get away with when climbing—it reduces hand fatigue associated with gripping your tool and reduces the fumble factor associated with handling carabiners, screws, tying knots, etc. Experiment with what will work that is thin. If it is that cold, carry something thicker on your harness and put those on over your climbing gloves at the belay. 7. Effective team and individual speed matters. Stand in the middle of the freeway long enough and you will get hit. Dart across the freeway and you might just live. Fast effective teams are safer simply because they spend less time exposing themselves to objective hazards, are less fatigued, etc. So how to gain speed. Here are some ideas. Anchors: this is not sport climbing where one is usually clipping off on pre-set bolts. Assuming decent ice the leader should be able to fire in two screws, pull a shoulder-length sling off his/her shoulder—clip, clip—half twist to one side of the sling, clip and tie in with a clove hitch in under two minutes flat. I have seen parties where the leader takes five minutes or longer to set up some elaborate set of anchors with everything nicely equalized. If the leader takes five minutes, it takes the second three minutes to break it down (eight minutes total). On a ten pitch day that is 80 minutes—that is huge!! That is the difference between descending in the dark, etc., and not. Worse I have seen people ice climb and take 15-20 minutes for the same task. They might get an “A” from their mountain school instructor in anchor building, but that kind of approach is dangerous in the mountains. If the leader gets set up in two minutes, the second can break in down in under one. Add it up. Of course there are exceptions, if the ice is really bad, etc. But if the ice is that bad an anchor with 10 screws might just be the climbing equivalent of “whistling in the dark.” If it is that bad then live with a less than bomber anchor and whoever leads the next pitch get in a screw right off the belay to reduce the forces. Also less time building and breaking down anchors means less time cooling off at the belay and getting cold. Keep moving means staying warm. 8. How to gain time. Leading ice is dangerous—the leader will want to take his/her time and get good sticks every time if possible, and move with patient care. But the team can gain time with the second. Unless the second is trying to get on the cover of Rock & Ice with some graceful shot—the motto of the second should be “go, Cat, go.” The second can get away with less than ideal sticks, longer reaches, some awkward stances, etc. If it is reasonably safe to do and will save time the second should do it—a fall for the second does not mean the same thing as it does for the leader. Practice speed on a TR so when you need to, you can turn on the afterburners. 9. The leader should get comfortable leading with a little play in the rope. It is frustrating, enervating, and potentially dangerous to always be bumping into the rope every time the leader makes a move up or has to fight the rope to get a clip. If the belay is too tight and the leader moves up, it can pull the leader off. I would much rather run the risk of falling a little bit further (and yes, I have taken several for-real leader falls on technical ice), than arriving at the belay fatigued and frustrated because I fought the rope the whole way up. Tight belays have their place sometimes, but usually not. Get mentally comfortable leading with a little play in the rope. 10. So long as you are moving and generating heat and it is not brutally cold, it is okay to eat snow periodically and take a little less water in polybottle form. I leaned this from something Messner wrote years ago. One of the 8,000 meter peaks he did in alpine style he and his partner carried no stove and only one water bottle, because they were continually moving, and they supplemented by sucking on ice bits and snow. I tried this one winter in the Waterton. I carried one water bottle and supplemented with snow all day long—worked fine—but I was moving so I was cranking the heat. 11. Carry your microlight (couple of ounces) in that little pouch on the inside of your softshell. You will be grateful later that you kept the battery warm rather than cold in that pack you wore all day. Also try hard not to carry a pack on the route. Squirrel things onto your person and harness, and ditch the pack. Just like in bike racing there are products (Patagonia pile vest, ex.) which feature a low back zip pouch—stick your bars, and other small items in there—easy to reach, kept warm, and might mean no pack, or maybe one pack for the team instead of two. A few years ago I climbed Polar Circus, and got by with the smallest Camelbak for my pack (sans bladder of course). I was fine and had margin. By the way, climb long enough and you will drop your pack at least once. If that happens on a long route it might mean having to bail. But if your essentials are on your person that is one less contingency to worry about. Forget about what you learned in Mountain School, you can safely climb with much less in the way of essentials than your instructors (who are usually not top-tier climbers) would have you believe. For sure there are times when you need to take everything and the kitchen sink, but take a cue from the greats—they pack and travel light—so can you. 12. Use a long rope—70 meters should be the norm for ice climbing, or longer. You can link pitches, might not need a second rappel rope, etc. It gets hard to hear each other that far apart, and all that snow tends to muffle sound, so agree on rope pull signals (two pulls means off belay, etc.) or use small two way radios—that is what my partners and I use. Cheap, light, batteries last several days—eliminates yelling and all the time spent repeating yourself, confused signals, etc. 13. It is hard to make accurate route and risk assessments at a distance. Unless it is perilous to do so, once there, get out of the car and really look around. If not sure bring some small field glasses or hike up to the route’s base. I find that I can only get a real picture of what I am getting into when I get close to the actual objective. 14. Practice being objective—really objective, not pseudo-objective so you look macho to yourself and your friends. When making assessments, start with the facts, then backfill with gut feel, intuition, guess-work, etc. Feelings should be part of the mental equation, but feeling come and go depending on how you slept last night, what you ate for breakfast, etc. So start with a clear-headed, unbiased assessment of the facts at or near the route for accuracy (temperatures on prior days, temperature right now, quality and condition of the ice, and a hundred other factors that have to be realistically evaluated to get a picture of what is really going on). 15. Be a principle-based (flexible) climber rather than a rule-based (inflexible) climber. If you see a faster, safe, and effective way to do something in the field, and it looks right, it probably is, so do it, even if it violates some “rule” you learned from some DVD or clinic. Great performers are highly imaginative, creative, flexible, and adaptable people. Standing around debating whether some rule applies to your situation and what to do about it, is a great way to get hit. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA. >loomis@rescue.com<

Dear Fellow Climbers, Great discussion! Here is what I am working on--was I the one to make an unkind, ungracious, and disrespectful (macho sounding) comment to someone I do not even know (AM)? If I did, then like I said above, I owe AM an apology, and I want to make it--because it is not my style to publically shame someone, much less a stranger (might joke with a friend but that is way different). So AM here is what I look like. White male about 5' 10", about 170 lbs, give or take. That day (Saturday) my partner and I got to DP about 2:30 to 3:00 pm, give or take (I did not have my watch on). I was wearing all black--black softshell jacket with a red hood, black softshell Marmot pants, and my composite boots kind of have an ugly yellow look. Blue pack. My helmet is a blue BD Half Dome. My partner is several inches shorter and wears glasses. I do not wear glasses and am middle aged (55). If the man who spoke to you in the way you said fits that description, then it is likely me, and under my ethic, I made a big mistake. If it was me the above apology stands as well as the offer of a beer, and until that time, this is my electronic handshake. When we are talking about individual risk assessment, I think we can all agree, that goading or trying to shame another climber into putting his/her life on the line, should have no place among our ranks. Each climbs for his/her own reasons, and we respect another's right to decline to climb. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA. >loomis@rescue.com<

Dear Fellow Climbers, I am genuinely glad for the mature and thoughtful tone of the discussion. Just a couple of things. Last night for the first time since last Saturday, I had a chance to talk to my partner (and had him read my post) to see if I had been accurate (there is always a bit of subjective interpretation person-by-person to the same event). He said I got the narrative right. It may not matter, but when discussing decision-making relative to risk, it helps if readers get the sense that something is largely accurate. When I started out my post by observing about the nature of the Internet, I most definitely did not mean to identify any person, I was just making a broad sociological observation. So I hope no offense was taken. I do not know who Craig is, but it would be out of character for me to atack someone in such a backhanded way. So to Craig I was simply making a broad observation about human behaviour as opposed to making a comment about a person and/or you. Since I focused on the topic of risk in my original post I, in the interest of brevity (I know my first post was detailed), did not discuss one item. In AM's original post he references some climbers making a comment about why was AM and his partner watching instead of climbing, and doing so in a macho tone of voice (taking at face value the accuracy of AM's recollection of events). When my partner and I arrived at DP there were two climbers watching, and it might be that one was AM, but I do not know. My recollection of my actions (my partner can speak for himself) was getting out of the truck, going over, shaking hands, having a brief pleasant chat and then I going back to our truck to get my gear. It would be very much out of character (for anyone who really knows me) for me to make such a backhanded swipe at another person, much less in a macho tone of voice (not sure I could do it if I tried). But as I sit here typing these words I cannot recall what I specifically said. So if pressed could I categorically deny making such a statement to the climbers my partner and I encountered at the parking area for DP (possibly AM)? No, my memory of what was said is not that good, but I sure as heck hope that no such words came out of my mouth. So to AM, if it was me and I said anything close to what you reported in the tone of voice you reported, you have my unreserved and abject apology. I will do better next time. And like I say if it was me and we ever meet again, allow me to buy you a beer and restate my apology to you face-to-face like any person of integrity would/should do. Cheers to all, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA. >loomis@rescue.com<

Hi Paul, Thanks for the update. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA. >loomis@rescue.com<

Dear Fellow Climbers, The topic of risk in climbing raised by AlpineMonkey (“AM”—no insult intended, just a keystroke saving abbreviation) is an important one, and since I was one of the people at the Devil’s Punchbowl (“DP”) last weekend, I thought it useful if I made a contribution to this forum. Part of me is reluctant to do so, but the risk seems worth it. The Internet is a great innovation, but sometimes the anonymity afforded a person (Usernames, etc.), emboldens a person to say things they would otherwise be reluctant to say in face-to-face conversation. So in contributing to this important topic I run the risk of being the target for fellow climbers who are not interested in thoughtful discussion. But on the other hand most climbers are interested in thoughtful discussion, especially about a topic which is at the core of what we love to do, so proceeding with a contribution seems worth it. I have and will continue to raise the level of my postings by signing off with my real name so I take ownership for my words. What AM brings up has been with us climbers since inception. It comes under different names—the physchology of risk, risk-management, risk perception, etc. Risk is at the core of climbing, especially at the higher levels. Whole books, biographies, autobiographies, CDs, lectures, journal articles, seminars, etc., all related to climbing have been generated about this topic. So far be it for me to make a contribution of that caliber. But what I can do is tell you what was going through my head on the day in question, and how I evaluated the risk, which might be informative to others. First, I am by nature a somewhat conservative climber. In fact most of my partners over the decades have told me in one way or another that I could be a substantially more accomplished climber if I were willing to take more risks. I think they are right. Putting aside issues like time commitment, level of athleticism, a big reason why I am not a more accomplished climber is I am not willing to expose myself to the objective hazards, long leader falls, etc., which are part of climbing at a higher level—I back off things frequently, I put in too many screws, etc. So an irony for me is that on one of the days mentioned by AM, I thought and believed that I was acting responsibly, and only undertaking a modest amount of risk. So what was my decision-making? AM mentions both Saturday and Sunday. I was at DP on Saturday (2 January) later in the afternoon. The two days were quite different. Sunday (in Spokane) was warm, somewhere in the range of 10 or more degrees warmer (Celcius) than Saturday. Due to that factor alone I would have judged DP too objectively dangerous a place to be. But on Saturday the daytime temperature reached around +2 C (I did not have a thermometer in the field, but that is about right). My partner and I spent most of the day a couple of kilometers to the south of DP, at Pee Wee’s Playground. The ice was stellar—steep, and most of it was blue. The entire time we were there it was quiet—no ice fell, no rockfall, etc. So after we finished at the playground, we were heading home to Spokane. On the spur of the moment we decided to get in one more pitch at DP. Earlier in the day we had dropped off two friends at DP. They wanted to climb there as they did not feel ready for the steeper stuff. Both of they seemed comfortable. One has climbed Denali and taken technical water ice classes, etc. The other one, in addition to be a climber for some years, teaches classes in risk management, rope management, building anchors, avalanche rescue, etc., and is a professional engineer. They elected not to join us at the playground, so we were picking them up at DP, but as I said we decided to get in one more pitch to close out the day. My comments do not include what they thought, evaluated, etc. I write only for myself. Evaluations and perceptions of risk involve the question of generalization versus particularization. Consider by analogy the risky task of driving a car. We all know that scores of people die daily from auto fatalities, and a host more a seriously injured. Daily the number is high for near misses (people not signalling when changing lanes on the freeway, etc.). No question, driving a car entails risk. If one generalizes the risk (every stretch of road is at all times in a dangerous condition) too much, one would never drive. So most people, consciously or unconsciously, particularize the risk (what is the risk at this moment for this stretch of road under these conditions—daylight, icy, etc.), and make driving decisions accordingly—and most live to talk about it later. I submit that we as climbers do the same thing, again, consciously or unconsciously—that is we particularize the risk (what is the risk today, on this route, under these conditions, with the equipment I have, the partner I have, the time I have, the route information I have, my conditioning, etc.) and try to use our best judgment, and again most of us live to talk about it later. So here is how I particularized the risk. I started with our experience at the playground—no issues, so extraploting just a couple of kilometers, it seemed likely there would be few issues. The preceding days seemed cold enough at night to keep the ice in good condition (incidentally the ice on route I led at DP that day was in excellent condition). Also I had climbed at DP before, including with some world class climbers (no hyperbole—I really mean world class), under much worse conditions with no issues. Like any location, climbing venue, mountain, etc., DP is not one entity. It is at least three separate venues, and the risk changes substantially depending on which of the three you happen to be at. There is the lower area where Trotsky’s Folly (TF) is located. There is the upper left side where Trotsky’s Revenge (TR) is located. Then there is the right side main amphitheater (MA). So by breaking DP down (particularizing it) I was able to get a closer approximation of the actual risk. TF looked loose and wet—detached from the rock—not a great choice. The MA also looked unattractive. I had climbed TR before—several times and knew that there were several ways up. The left side of TR puts one right underneath a large icecicle, but by hewing to the right side there are either no icecicles or small ones (that day while I was on it nothing fell from above on the right side of TR). TR and MA are divided by a rock escarpment which shields climbers from almost anything that might come from above, no matter how large. My partner and I hiked up to meet our friends and proceeded over to and under the rock escarpment. I led the right side of TR and set up a belay at the slings and descent rings at the large bush that sits atop the right side of TR. The large icecicle above the left side of TR then broke loose. Yes, it was big, but it fell where I anticipated, harmless off to the left side of TR. I did not get hit, other than a bit of a dusting from ice fragments in the air. My rope did not get hit. No person in our group got hit since the others were well off on the right side and sheltered by the rock escarpment. Evidence of the relative safety of the route choice and location of my belay is found in the good size growth and existence of the big bush which is used as the rappel point. If ice fell there on an annual basis I suspect that area would be scoured clean, much like an annual avalanche path is kept clean. But other than evidence of plenty of climbers standing around the large bush, it is very much alive, well, and large. Is this route choice, and belay and rappel location completely free of objective danger? No. But was this route choice for TR fairly free of objective danger at the time? In my estimation the answer is “yes.” Can I empirically back up that statement? No. In fact a critic of my choice would be free to point out what did fall off to the left, and what might have fallen during the time I was not there. My reply is that based on prior experience, on the spot field assessment based on breaking the risk down, rather than generalizing it to all of DP, etc., I, or any other observant and reasonably objective climber, could acertain a reasonably safe way to climb the route. I would offer as support the fact that no one in our group at the time received anything more than a dusting from ice crystals in the air (the two others earlier in the day had been in the MA and did report bits of ice falling). Would such an assessment of risk always work all the time? No. It was, and always is an informed judgment call. But AM does raise legitimate points. Change our location, route selection, level of experience, etc., and the risk could have risen dramatically. Others may have done exactly that at other times on the days in question. Also AM is right to observe how much experience and judgment (or lack thereof) was involved in the decisions of others. I cannot speak for others. All I can do is to try to give you a window into my thinking at the time. Knowing what I know now (that a large piece of ice was close to falling and did fall nearby—20/20 hindsight), would I have still done what I did? Well, honestly I do not know, but probably yes—I and my partner were climbing well, the route ice was good, it was a pretty day, and we were having fun on a reasonably safe route choice. What I and my partner did was safe given that we were untouched. But could the result have been different? Yes, it could have been. But to live in a world of what could happen to you, versus what is likely to happen to you, is for competent climbers two very different worlds. I try to live in the latter and not the former. Helen Keller is reported to have said something to the effect that life is either lived as a daring adventure or it is not lived at all. Her comments are not license to live stupidly, but they have value for climbers who seek adventure, challenge, and to raise their standards. There has been, is, and is likely to be continued debate in climbing about this topic. Seekers of safety tend to focus on sport climbing, bouldering, gym climbing, etc. Seekers of adventure are drawn to other aspects of climbing. Fortunately we have some freedom about this choice. There is another risk not raised by AM—the risk of living a banal life. If one drifts too much in the direction of risk avoidance, declining challenging situations, I submit that one runs the risk of living a less vibrant, less fulfilling, less rewarding life. Risk and reward are commensurate—the lives of all the greats that have gone before us, and not just in climbing—stand for this proposition. Many climbers today have not an inkling of what the likes of Walter Bonatti, Jeff Lowe, Barry Blanchard, Lionel Terray, Peter Croft, Bill Tilman, Eric Shipton, etc., did with integrity in climbing and the risks they took. But in my estimation they and others were and are the pathfinders who lit the way with their example. They have a torch to pass to our generation. I am not fit to walk in their shoes, but I can try to be their student and learn. Fortunately there are climbers of the current generation who have picked up the torch and are carrying it forward—Colin Haley, Sonnie Trotter, Steve House, Leo Houlding, Vince Anderson, etc. So in sum, was I on the day in question a wild reckless fool with his life? That is for you to judge. With as much objectivity as I can bring to the task of self-assessment, and with the wisdom of a middle-aged, seasoned climber, I am inclined to say “no.” I made a field assessment, added in my experience and judgement, and safely climbed a nice piece of ice unaffected by nearby risks, and in the process added to an already good day. Cheers and safe climbing to all, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA. >loomis@rescue.com<

Hi AlpineDave, Dane, and Others, Now it all comes back to me. Yes, I cannot remember the year, but around 2002, I was climbing Hyperspace with another guy. We got pretty high on the route and he took a fall and fairly badly sprained his ankle and bruised his heel bone. He had trouble putting weight on it, so we elected to bail (kind of a challenge due to the overhanging nature of the route near the top). So we rapped down to out packs. I offered to run out and get a rescue, and to his credit, he said no (the traditional climbing ethic is self rescue if possible). So I gave him a pain killer tablet, we tape up his ankle, got a stick for him to use as a crutch, and I double packed out. He was doing fine within a month of so of the fall. Yes, Dane is correct, in a situation like that I would and did care about my partner. Probably the relief of getting back to the parking lot with no further incidents led me to celebrate in the way I did, which can look like (to someone who does not know me) that I was just being a showoff and a jackass (which I try never to be). But I guess I was just happy my buddy and I were back down, and it seemed like a celebratory thing to do in the moment (that is accept the push up challenge)--oh well, alls well that ends well. To the technical issues posed by Doug Sheperd. I have had a chance to get in more swings with the 2010 Fusions. Some cold and brittle ice, and some soft and warm ice. My technical comments do not change or are otherwise dependent on ice temperature. But my earlier comments regarding steepness continue to be reaffirmed. This tool is really at its best on near vertical, vertical, or overhainging terrain. It could be good on alpine ice (but I have not used it in this way), but other tool choices would be better if one is planning to mostly climb moderate ice (say WI 3 and below). I did add BD Android Leashes to the tools, and really like the feel. They are great leashless or leashed, so I am glad I gave myself the choice. The thing to point out is that with a leash I did not notice a decrease or alteration in performance. Cheers and safe climbing to all, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Hi Chirp, Thanks, I think you are right. I look several times at the road in the background and it looks right for it to be the Snow Lakes Parking Lot. I still cannot place the time and people, but that is okay. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Hi AlpineDave, Wow, that is me alright, but for the life of me I cannot recall the time or location. The car in the background is my old Honda, but I have not had that for awhile, so just a guess, the photo is maybe 10+ years ago. My back sure felt better then. I have no idea about the location or who is taking the picture, maybe you can fill me in. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA.

Hi Dane, Thanks for your kind comments. One thing you are most definitely doing for the ice climbing community is advancing the technical discussion and encouraging people not to be afraid about modifiying the tools they get from manufacturers--which is often needed in order to overcome the design compromises made by the manufacturer. You have a technical background and shop, along with decades of experience on hard routes which gives you a lot of credibility--I applaud the discussions you are initiating and maintaining. Ever since I have known you, you have been a real student of climbing--which is admirable. Well, I guess I got shorted a bit with respect to grip handle inserts/shims, because truly all I got was one extra insert/shim per tool at time of purchase. I think you are right, go with the smallest grip within reason. I think you are right, the user will use less energy holding onto the tool and gain a little more control when swinging. I kind of thought about what you stated--how many grip inserts/shims can a climber safely add and still have enough thread to shaft to make using umbilicals with the tool a safe proposition (imagine someone's surprise at field testing that issue and coming out on the wrong end of the test!). I like your idea of using the upper grip on low angle ice. Intuitively it sounds correct, I will have to try it the next time I am out. But old age is creeping up on me as are the years of climbing--my upper back on the left side hurts almost daily--the result of a hard smack in a leader fall years ago, and some fingers in my left hand are a little weak due to tendon stains from decades ago. But I still do what I can with the body I am given. Also, you are right on in the pick comparison--I did notice a change--not with the same precision to be sure--but it is noticeable. Perhaps BD took years of criticsm about breakage, etc., and made some improvements this year. It would be interesting to run a survey this spring after the technical ice season comes to a close, concerning BD pick breakage. My guess is fewer climbers will report breakage this season if they are running the new (2009-2010 vintage) BD picks--but that is an unscientific guess on my part. I hope your comments and my reply help the greater climbing community, I always benefitted from those who went before me as well as my peers. Cheers and Merry Christmas to you and your family, Bob Loomis, Spokane, WA

Dear Fellow Climbers, After another day of climbing with the 2010 Fusion I have a few more comments. 1. Clearance--very good, if not excellent. For instance there were a few times when I reached around behind a pillar to get a good stick, and the tool's clearance made that maneuver so much easier. Reaching over bulges was likewise much easier as compared to the Cobra (my other tool). 2. Angle of Ice--this tool is not optimal if one is climbing lower angle (say 70 degrees or less) ice--it tends to bounce out of the ice unless the swing is finessed). On the other hand with a bit of practice (perfecting the swing) this tool comes into its own in vertical terrain--very solid stable sticks that come out easy. Thought I have not used the tool in this way I would imagine that the tool would be even better in overhanging mixed terrain. Versatility--with the hole in the head BD gives the user options, such as clipping or leashing to the head in a traditional mountaineering way (very unlikely use, but none-the-less an option)for traditional mountaineering uses. Also one could (for example) put BD Android leashes on this tool and thus adopt the tool for leashed or leashless technical use, something I am likely to do just to give myself the choice if I want it. I continue to find little in the way of criticism about this tool. A very good performer. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

Dear Fellow Climbers, On Saturday 12 December my partner and I climbed some around Banks Lake. In general the dry conditions and cold temperatures mean that many things have a good beginning but not enough moisture to fully form. But the Devil's Punchbowl was well formed, as were some things in PeeWee's Playground. This week snow is in the forecast, but rising temperatures as well. By next weekend some other things might come in. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

Dear Fellow Climbers, I recently had the chance to purchase and field test the new 2010 BD Fusions. The field testing included my partner trying the tools. We had between us four other pairs of tools. In some instances it was side by side testing (Fusion in one hand, brand X in the other hand), in other instances it was climbing a pitch with Fusions and then re-climbing the pitch with brand X tools. Here are my preliminary impressions: 1. Aesthetics—BD has produces a clean elegant tool, no useless “bells and whistles,” just a nice clean look to the tool. 2. Balance—the tool is very well balances—one its strong points for sure. 3. Swing—not the smooth swing of say a carpenter’s hammer, but more of a chopping motion—a bit of a change—more like dropping the tool with wrist action than swinging it. 4. Stability of Placement—very stable and secure placements—another strong point for the tool—no wobble--once placed in the ice the tool really conveys a sense of stability and security—not the sense that as one pulls up on the tool it is going to come out in your face. 5. Ease of Removal—possibly the best feature of the tool—my other tool is the BD Cobra—which can be a challenge to remove from a placement. The Fusion lifts out of its placement like a charm—virtually not effort. After a day of climbing with the tool it got stuck perhaps twice, whereas with the Cobra under same conditions the stuck tool phenomena would have been say 20-30 times—which means much less pumping out to deal with when using the Fusions. 6. Rust—since the head and bolt are made of stainless steel the rust progression will be slower, which should mean that swapping out broken, bent picks in the future should be slightly easier (less chance of a frozen rusted bolt to deal with). But stainless steel with rust, it just takes more time. 7. Value Proposition—with BD Cobras now some $50.00 per tool more expensive, the price for performance proposition for the consumer is very good—one gets a lot of tool for the money. 8. Pick--“T” Pick is standard, thus less chance of breakage. But this “T” pick is not the old BD “T” pick—it is cut smoother—not quite ready to climb on out of the box, but much less filing needed prior to first use. A nice improvement by BD. I do not necessarily think this tool is a “game changer” but it is a very good tool, and does legitimately advance the “state of the art.” Others have already commented on how BD took the criticisms leveled at the Petzel Nomic, and made improvements, so no need to restate those. I view this tool as a real challenge to the other manufacturers, and it will likely be a few years before they respond (field testing prototypes takes time, then the whole tool and dye process). My criticisms are few: 1. Top Stein Pull Teeth—I do virtually no mixed climbing, so these teeth mean almost nothing for me. If one is planning to only ice climb with these tools, the stein pull teeth did hold up removing the tool from its placement once or twice (tight pockets, between tight ice drips, etc). I plan to file these teeth down a bit—not remove them entirely, just make them a little less aggressive, especially up the pick’s length where they would be less useful in any case. 2. Grip inserts—the tool comes with one set of grip extension inserts, so for a pair of tools one gets two sets. The cost of these inserts is pennies, and so BD is being a little cheap by not including one more set for each tool. For climbers with big hands, or who climb in very cold conditions and will be wearing several glove layers, the grips will be too small even with all the inserts provided by BD. Other than these two criticisms I could not find anything else to comment on. I am sure that after a full season with the tools other points may come out. But in the meantime I hope these early observations help. Cheers and safe climbing to all, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

Dear Fellow Climbers, The other day while working out at the gym I chanced into a conversation with a guy. It turned out he was a Navy diver a decade or two ago, and stationed such that many of his dives were in the north Atlantic--a cold body of water. We got to talking about how he and his colleagues stayed warm in such a cold environment for extended periods of time. He shared with me an idea which I had not heard of before, but he said really worked. This is for the legs. It is: before putting on the neoprene suit the divers would put on a pair of women's pantyhose. He said the pantyhose did several things. One is it helps to hold a thin layer of air next to the skin, thus increasing warmth. Second it helped offset the clammy feeling associated with neoprene. A nice feature is the low cost, so that if the pantyhose become torn, one is only out a few dollars. Also very little weight and bulk, and of course, flexible. Also this material would tend to breath well, thus not trapping sweat. I have not tried the idea myself. But my initial reaction is this might be a good way to increase the temperature range of a pair of Scholler pants. He said they did not cut the feet out of the panytyhose as this helped again to keep feet warm with little increase in bulk or weight, thus not having to go up a boot size. The obvious downside is putting up with all the ribbing and joking from your climbing buddies if you wear these in the field. But sometimes you want a little more warmth but not the bulk and weight of a much heavier pant or pant layers. So just passing on the idea. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

SRCFC (Solid Rock Climbers for Christ) is sponsoring a waterfall ice climbers rendezvous on 27 February 2010 in Field, B.C., Canada. All are welcome—one need not be a member of SRCFC to participate. No guiding, clinics, or formal instruction is planned. For those coming from the west, participants will be having breakfast that morning in Golden at the Saw Mill restaurant (at the bottom of the hill heading to Field on the TransCanada Highway) at 6:00 am. Regardless of direction of travel the plan is to meet in Field around 9:00 am outside the Parks Canada warden/visitors center (immediate off the highway as one turns into Field), exchange greetings and friendship, and then head off to climb and have fun. An encouraging Word and friendship will be extended to all who attend, including at breakfast. Each participant is responsible for his/her costs of attending, transportation, clothing, gear, and climbing safety. Participants are encouraged to make a positive contribution to ice climbing and to Canada’s park system by such things as bringing a litter bag to gather up trash and tat, donating steel rings and fresh webbing for some of the older rappel stations, giving a Cliff Bar to a new climber you happen to meet, etc., each doing what best fits for him or her. For more information you can email Calvin at >info@srcfc.org< or Bob at >loomis@rescue.com<.

Dear All, Allow me to add a few comments based on first hand knowledge. A couple of things can be said about the contributions made by Dane Burns to this really interesting thread. One is he really does have an authentic perspective to offer. I can attest from first hand interactions and some climbing with him, that Dane Burns has been an active climber since the early 1970s and has remained so since then. Frequently during this decades long interval he was climbing stout and committing routes. Also, he has since that time been a person who does a fair amount of "homework" to back up his statements. One small case in point. There was a time in the 1970s when Dane had an apartment in Coeur d' Alene, Idaho. One routine day after some local cragging one or two of us were over at his apartment. I was a poor college student at the time and thought I was doing good to buy the monthly issue of Mountain Magazine (now defunct), and occasionally Off Belay Magazine, etc., in order to keep up. That evening at Dane's apartment, while sitting around "shooting the breeze," my jaw dropped at the "mountains" of climbing related magazines, journal articles, books, etc., which Dane had already amasssed--and intelligently read. He was and remains a real "student" of climbing. I raise these two points (long term involvement with climbing, and perchance for in-depth reading and research) with respect to Dane, not to force others to agree with him, but to offer to others, that he does bring a measure of sincerity, documentation, and authenticity to his comments. Cheers and safe climbing to all, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington

Hi Waterboy, I do not have an email address for the fellow. Two postings after my initial post to start this thread, Paul Detrick proved Jim's contact information and that is what I used. My guess is he may not be using the Internet to conduct his business. He is 82 and runs a small, solo operation. He may not see the need to have a webpage for his business, etc. But he answers his phone and is a good man all around. I think you will find him a good person to deal with and get your sharpening needs taken care of. Cheers, Bob Loomis, Spokane, Washington