Pete_H

Just say no to slowshoeing.

Actually, yes it is. As your compatriot in this argument, Mr. Fairweather, has pointed out elsewhere, "Unless a crag is on private property, it doesn't belong exclusively to you." Our new mountain bike trail is not on private property, its on FS / public land. It was built through cooperation between the City, private MTB advocacy groups, and the Forest Service. For further improvements and benefits to the outdoor community to progress it will be achieved by working with land management agencies. Here is a perfect opportunity. Do you really think the threat of a permit system to crag in the Icicle is real? I can mine / log / cut trees down for firewood / hold a dirtbike rally / etc. all on Forest Service land legally, but the FS is going to close the Icicle to climbing? Really? One single example has been brought up, throughout the whole country, of a crag in California closed to climbing because of environmental concerns regarding preservation of a green toothed frog and now all of a sudden a couple seasonal employees who want to help clean up and build a couple trails are going to lead to a permit system? You are seriously delusional. Your argument is the logical equivalent of the far right-wingers ridiculous assertion Obamacare will lead to "Death Squads."

It actually used to be more of a timber community. But you would have known that if you'd taken the time to support our community by wandering downtown Leavenworth and eating some stuesel, visiting the non-profit Nutcracker Museum, or purchasing some headwear at the Hat Shoppe!

That's funny and all but no one here is complaining about the faux Bavarianism and tourism. Sure, its part of the deal and many local climbers derive their income from the tourism industry. It is what it is. However, of all people here its pretty ironic Tvash is advocating complacency when it comes to getting civicly involved or to making positive changes in our community.

Funny thing is, of the group that chopped DDD, I don't think any of them even climb anymore. I would not be surprised if the route was re-bolted again.

I agree. I don't support localism or think locals have any special authority over the crag. However, these are anchors that will be used and appreciated by all visitors to Castle, and as far as I'm concerned, has nothing to do with locals vs. non-locals.

I would think south faces are probably ok but north faces are probably holding a bit of snow. The popular routes on D-tail and Stuart are probably not snow free.

Spin it anyway you like, but I'd rather see Leavenworth be more similar to Canmore, Whistler, Durango, Withrop, etc. than Disneyland. That said, you guys make extremely valid points but I think a balance can be achieved between adding amenities, like expanded bike, hike/run, ski trails or a local climbing gym(for example), and protecting the local wilderness "resource."

Those are good points. For me personally, I see increased cooperation between the climbing / outdoor community in the Leavenworth area as a positive step towards further development of the area as a recreational destination. As great as the Leavenworth kitsch Bavarian attraction is, I think it could be a better place if the economic base diversified into sustainable and natural attractions and sports like mountain biking, climbing, skiing, trail running, kayaking / SUP'ing, etc. This would make 11worth a better place to live and visit and would be more enjoyable for us all. In order to move in this direction, obviously more cooperation with land management agencies is important. A climbing ranger program would be one way to start down this path.

OMG! Fixed anchors at a crag. The horror!

Holy shitballs, you really are a closet Teabagger. Advocating smaller government, questioning federal involvement and everything. On a side note, no one is arguing for more heavily managed Icicle, just maybe for a few more services and trails and such.

Epic. Well, thanks for not spray painting all the key holds on the Gendarme. sickie

Let us know how you like them. Drift looks like a pretty good touring ski for the Cascades.

Good anchors make good sense. Thanks to whomever put them in.

Anyone have any beta on whether FS roads on east side of Mt. Baker would be gated?

While these things happen on a super small scale, they just don't really happen in wilderness areas. There're still laws, and you can still have Forest Service patrols... they're enough to keep our wilderness areas wild, I'm sure they'd be plenty enough to keep Rainier wild too. Obviously a bit of a hyperbole, but that is actually the sort of thing that goes on on Forest Service land. My point was leaving the Park open without any form of regulation probably isn't a good idea. I think we can agree that while dealing with the bureaucracy and permit process on Mt. Rainier is annoying at best, National Parks provide areas that climbers can take full advantage of while remaining free from concerns over resource extraction and small-scale environmental degradation. For example, I'm sure you seen the vast clear cut tracks just outside Rainier National Parks. On the way up to Forest Service trailheads I'm sure you've seen places where people have dumped garbage; and how about all the blue tarp trailers and abandoned cars, etc. up the Middle Fork Snoqualmie. You don't really see that stuff in National Parks.

But then what's to stop someone from dirtbike raging through spray park alpine meadows or toothless Joe and his tweaker crack buddies from bringing their caravan of double wide meth labs and set up shop and maybe fell an old growth Hemlock or two to sell for some extra cash.

Good question. The gates will most surely be closed but are the rangers and park staff going to round up everyone already in the valley and tell them they have to leave? I'm sure the park will be closed to climbing but are the rangers still getting paid and if not who is going to enforce a closure?

Sucks. My buddy is headed down to Yos arriving today. Had been planning the trip for a while. Guess its plan B for him.

I would suggest you consult a topo map or Google Earth to get an idea of the terrain.

Keep in mind, you may want to size up if you go with a ski with a lot of tip / tail rocker, like a Hi-5 or a DPS. The ski will be shaped more like a C and therefore will have shorter actual distance from tip to tail.

Hey Kevin, one thing I noticed is that the survey doesn't take into account those survey takers who have non-wilderness medical education. Not sure if that would result in some skewed survey results or not. Best of luck with your Masters.

Lots of good deals to be had now as retailers are getting rid of last years inventory.

I just don't see a real reason to get a ski in the mid 80mm's underfoot for year-round skiing in the Cascades. Many of the fatter skis these days perform so well in a wide variety of conditions with a minimal weight penalty, that its worth the compromise. I don't think its a safety issue skiing a narrower ski in Cascade powder but I think you'll have more fun in a wider variety of conditions with a fatter ski. The powder here is often very deep and / or heavy which obviously favors a fatter, rockered ski. In spring, before the snowpack consolidates, the snow is often sun-effected slush, which favor a fatter ski. Furthermore, in the Cascades it is common to ski mountain lines in which you'll encounter everything from ice / hardpack to powder to slush at different elevations and aspects. Again, nice to have a fatter ski that can handle a wide variety of conditions. A couple more skis I'd check out, which I haven't skied but look good on paper, are the Black Diamond Drift and the Scott Rock'Air.

True, but skis like the G3 you have, Volkl Nunataq (107mm underfoot), La Sportiva Hi-5, DPS pure 99 or 105, are as close to a 1 ski quiver for Cascades touring as you can get.