dhrmabum

Like JBo6 says, it's totally condition dependant. Did it last year right around the same time, maybe one week after July fourth, and, while the upper section, maybe upper third was decent(according to my partners; I bailed about halfway up), the middle and lower sections were survival skiing, at best, due to the deep suncups and runnels. . Gnarly, and very challenging. . . to say the least. . The year before, however, skied S.S. on the fourth, and it was fantastic! Great corn, no suncups, etc, and just very fun skiing. Kind of depends on how the spring weather treats the mountain, ie, lots of rain followed by sun, can make for very shitty conditions. Best to keep an eye on it, look for any trip reports as the time nears, etc, etc. Good luck, and maybe see ya there!

Into the whiteout. . .

I wanna be there. . . I love that place, and I've only just tasted it. . Thanks for the photo!

Ivan's ready!

Gnarly!

I was at the lake on the 17th, as well as this past weekend, on July 1. On the 17th, I talked with a few who said they didn't even use their crampons, as the snow was soft. . .

Yowza! Beautiful and amazing! Good work on you guys for putting that one together!

Nice info and good advice in there. Thanks!

Excellent work!

Good job on getting out there and doing a little skiing!

Very good, Billcoe. Before long, it will become the "rich man's forest," . . . Wasn't it George W's intention to privatize forest recreation??

This Washingtonian thinks our state will survive just fine without your "tourist dollars", your "facilities inspections", and, your incessant complaining. I propose a "whiney baby" forum be added to cc.com. It would be a catch all for this type of "discussion". It shouldn't be in a climbing forum IMO... I'll nominate KirkW to be the moderator of this new forum. Mods? Please? d I don't think, in this case, that there was much,if any, whining coming from KirkW. Nor do find the TR he linked whiny at all; rather, I thought it showed with ridiculous irony how f-ed up this whole fee situation is. . ie, a new shitter, closed, w/glorious signage all over, along w/ piles of shit some dog owner didn't feel like carting back in their car. Surprised someone didn't take a shit at the foot of the closed restroom door. . And, he brought up some good points: if people stop going to such and such a trailhead(s), due to shelling out the monies, the immediate area can suffer a decrease in $$. My cousin still goes to Hamilton, and he says he's noticed a visible difference in the number of cars now parked in the lot. This may or may not make a too much of a difference on the local economy, but I can't help think that the little stores, gas stations, etc, in any given area, now would lose a few $ w/ the loss of people going to any given trailhead. .

Now there's a mighty fine question. . I don't know the answer. . Prolly lumped into the General Fund? Fine is $99.00, kindly reduced to $59, if one buys a pass within 15 days of ticket and provides proof of purchase to the court. . . Sounds like the purchase price has gone up a little, now that everyone is getting a slice: Q. How much does the Discover Pass cost? A. An annual Discover Pass purchased from a recreational license dealer, by phone or online costs $35, which includes the $30 base fee, a 10 percent transaction fee and a $2 dealer fee. A one-day Discover Pass costs $11.50, which includes the $10 base fee, a 10 percent transaction fee and a 50-cent dealer fee. The annual pass is good for one year. Who knows? Next year price might be $40 per yr, and $15 for the day. . .

So, despite the hassle of fighting it, and despite Ranger Vicky's protestations about "all the good the money goes toward," And by that, you mean the states general fund. None of that money goes back into the parks. The only thing that has changed from before the passes to now is the parking tickets. Hey, none of it goes to the WA General Fund. 84% of the Discover Pass receipts goes directly to the WSP and is the only funding WSP now gets - they receive no general funds. Every one of you who are so miserably cheap you have to try and scam around it instead of dropping the staggering sum of $30 a year for WA parks should just stay out of them. Ouch!

So, despite the hassle of fighting it, and despite Ranger Vicky's protestations about "all the good the money goes toward," And by that, you mean the states general fund. None of that money goes back into the parks. The only thing that has changed from before the passes to now is the parking tickets. I think that's about right, though I certainly don't profess to know for sure. What Ms. Ranger asserted was that the monies went for trail maintenance, bathroom maintenance, etc, ie, back into the parks. . Funny how, at the time, I saw that the bathroom at Hamilton was locked shut, and the gate to the Hamilton parking area was also locked, meaning one had to park at Beacon and walk up the road to the empty parking area of Hamilton. .

Ah, so this thread has been revived. . I've been meaning to write the followup, so here goes. . I did attend my court date in Stevenson, awhile back, and Ranger. . Vicky?, wasn't in attendance, though she'd sent along her affadavit. I presume she'd sent them for my fellow ticketees as well. Anyway, presented my case to the judge, complete with my photos of the signage, where my car was parked, etc. He commented, contemplated, and. . . rather than a quick dismissal such as all the other offenders received, I was told he'd need a little more time to check it out, look into the statutes, etc, etc. . I left feeling pretty good, though not quite as good as the others-about 3-4-who'd had their Discovery offenses dismissed. Still, the judge did seem understanding of my defense, and said I would receive an answer, after he looked into it a bit further, in about a week. Sure enough, about a week or so later, I received a very brief letter from the good judge, proclaiming "ticket dismissed!" Certainly was a bit of a hassle to fight, miss a day of work to drive to Stevenson at the appointed time, etc, but, very glad my defense prevailed. For anyone who doesn't want to pay $10 for a day's pass, or buy an annual(I wouldn't mind, really, but I couldn't fork over $10 nor $30 on that particular day, which was why I parked down the highway, and, I really only park in the area to hike up Hamilton; just about the only place I go requiring said pass), I suggest parking west of Beacon, and even pulling off the highway(I didn't, though I was in a pullout), and park on Little Road, where, like my pullout, there is no signage. This is certainly not legal advice; the judge offered no explanation as to why the ticket was dismissed, but I think that area is outside of the park. A piece of my defense was that signs essentially were written stating that one must have a pass to park in the recreation area; I stated that I walked into the recreation area, and there was nothing on any of the signs stating that my actions were illegal. So, despite the hassle of fighting it, and despite Ranger Vicky's protestations about "all the good the money goes toward," I feel good that, seemingly, at least, on principle, I won.

Yes. We abandoned our primary plan and did a carryover with full packs over Colchuck. I think you were the smarter man this w/e. Yeah, cool, I remember talking with you. . Me, I just went with the flow; if I hadn't have met up with them, I surely would've went through my own sufferfest(given the night before and the resulting low energy), on Colchuck. Hiking and staying with them at the lake was the easy choice.

Hmmm, I think we may have run into you three on the way out. Unless there were more than 2 cute ladies with foreign accents lounging at the lake (why do I climb and not backpack???) Ha! Maybe so, were you two guys carrying pretty good-sized packs? I've got a couple similar pics of the peak, btw. And, far as I know, I think they were the only women around with foreign accents. . Yeah, though I was tempted to carry on with my original climbing plan, staring up at the route and the enticing peak, I was pretty happy with the choice to lounge on that sun-warmed granite and be dazzled by the beauty around me. .

I have an Osprey Aether 70, and I really like it. Great comfort, holds a lot, etc. I haven't used it on any climbs though, and I'm sure many here would consider it way overkill, but. . . I have seen/and heard of some using it on Rainier, etc.

Jeez, I was there on Sun. as well. Spectacular. My first time there, but not my last. I had intended to climb it, but. . partied a little late the night before, so slept in a bit late, etc. Ended up being satisfied with hanging out at the lake, eating and lounging with two french beauties. . . Heavenly indeed.

Very sad, and scary. . .

Raoul, I have a couple of bags, both a 15deg. and a 30 deg. Both happen to be Marmot. The 30 is called a Marmot Arroyo. I haven't really pushed it too far down, maybe into the mid 30's, and its been fine. The way I use it, it is pretty much my summer, warm weather bag when I'm not expecting to sleep in temps too much lower than what its rated, and think of it as the lightweight bag for warmer nights. If it's going to be much colder, than I'll take the 15 deg. bag, and just not worry about the extra lb. http://marmot.com/products/arroyo?p=117,140,126&ft=140-126 To be a bit more concise, with the "right" 30deg. bag, I would think one could push it beyond a "razor thin" margin, esp. if one wears a jacket, extra clothes, etc. I personally just wouldn't go too much lower than what its designed for. Best o' luck.

If he's in Portland, tell him to check out this place: http://www.daveskillerbread.com/ Dave has known some jail time himself, and has a few people who've known hard times working for him. A good man. Best of luck to your son.

YesSir!

I'm certainly a lover and proponent of wilderness and the keeping of it, but, seems to me ol' Wilderness Watch has their priorities a bit skewed on this one