thedylan

I think the pro-reintroduction position is pretty easy to understand: we killed the grizzlies and decimated their habitats and now we want to atone for our sins. I haven't heard a single person on this thread who is actually opposed to eventually restoring a healthy grizzly bear population, they just disagree with the NPS' method and lack of consideration of other competing concerns. The anti-reintroduction position is maybe a little more complex, but I'll take a stab at getting to the core of it. All of us in our society already live under constant threats: debt, layoffs, decreasing spending power, productivity shaming, and wealth moralizing just to name a few. For those of us who are able to go to the mountains, it may be the only place in our lives where we get even a weak approximation of that feeling of freedom that is supposedly our birthright. And now the NPS wants to spend millions of dollars to further reduce our dying access, both by forcibly reintroducing a physically threatening animal, but also by increasing their ability to regulate and punish us out of the land. People opposed to it can't be NIMBYs when they have no say and no power--it's very clearly not *my* backyard. When we talk about restoring ecosytems we need to start from a clear understanding of just how unlivable the human habitat is becoming too. We hate what we've become but we don't really know why. "8 billion people" is an empty scapegoat rooted in the belief that humans are inherently bad, which we only believe when we feel we have to disobey our conscience to survive. This reintroduction scheme is far less about a love of grizzlies and far more about an unconscious hatred of humans. The discussion of Rotenone in alpine lakes reminds me of the ubiquitous use of 1080 I noticed throughout New Zealand (the DOC uses it to kill rodents). Besides putting it in traps everywhere they actually fly over areas and spray 1080 from planes. I mean it's literally chemical warfare. It blows my mind just how similar the liberal attitude towards "invasive" species is to the conservative attitude towards "illegal" immigration.

Absolutely we need a well organized and funded firefighting force and all that. The problem is punitive power and the ability to make the rules without a discussion, or only as much of a discussion as you feel like. We all know the park rangers are great people who we would feel are on our side if there were not this power imbalance. I know most probably won't find my argument convincing and that's ok. I'm a little "out there" because I don't believe we need the threat of punishment to run a productive society. In fact, it is the threat of punishment which inflames people's anger, makes them feel helpless, and leads to the intense power conflicts and struggles we see all around us. For example, the logging, mining, and drilling companies would be completely defanged without the backing of the police and military to sanction their activities. And I believe that Blue Lives Matter, which is why I think fines and jail time should be voluntary. Then people's ability to resist it would only be as strong as their conviction that what they did was right. Public opinion and appeals to conscience are a lot more powerful than we think. But I feel like I've said enough, my goal was just to share what I feel and the conclusions I've come to and I have done that!

National Park Service Bans Food in North Cascades National Park Seattle -- The National Park Service issued Wednesday a unilateral ban on food in North Cascades National Park. The decision began when a park ranger noticed that a climbing guide was lugging large quanitites of food into the backcountry to prevent his clients from bonking and losing their balance on cliffs or steep snow slopes. "I arrived at Boston Basin camp and saw them sitting there eating this huge spread" said the park ranger. "I thought to myself: this is a wilderness area not MacDonald's. If you want to eat go there. Food doesn't belong in nature." In it's public statement announcing the ban, the park service expressed a concern that the practice might spread to other park users, and could lead to a proliferation of buffets, potlucks, or even barbeques in the backcountry. They said they were worried people might even invite local wildlife, such as bears, squirrels, and marmots, to their parties. Unfortunately the ban has already stirred up controversy, and many park users are upset with the decision. In response to this, a North Cascades park ranger and representatives from a number of local climbing organizations climbed Eldorado Peak--one of the most popular peaks in the park--without food, to assess the safety and efficacy of the ban. When asked to address those still upset by the new ban, the park ranger said: "This is how democracy works. If you don't like it, talk to your senator or congressperson. Or better yet, join the National Park Service! After 20 years of promotions, you'll be able to change this decision no problem. Actually, you'll kinda be able to do whatever you want."

I find myself agreeing with @Fairweather even though, yes, his rhetorical style is disrespectful. Here's my take: between the Washington Climbers Coalition, Access Fund, AMGA, American Alpine Club and other guiding companies, Wilderness Society, The Mountaineers, Washington Alpine Club, Skagit Alpine Club, Washington Trails Association, The Nature Conservancy, Conservation Northwest, and on and on, we can manage our lands just fine. In my opinion, the NPS is the only one not participating in democracy. We do not need an institution with punitive authority to realize our values in the management of public lands. Public opinion, advocacy, and volunteering are far more effective. Just my 2 cents.

Haha true the crux is definitely harder climbing moves. Maybe I should have said riskiest--a sea of rubble covered slab with subtle changes in steepness and rock quality that required more sustained concentration than any other section (for me). Jason I have no doubt you would've led the crux just fine if you needed to. You just have less of an ego than Sean and I (aka hard man points).

Sean climbing up to the ridge crest. I thought this was the hardest part, though the exposure on the ridge felt scarier. Sean dispatching the crux!

I finally got back out there and climbed the central arete specifically looking for the bolts I saw 3 years ago. I didn't find them. So either they are very well hidden, someone took them out, or I completely hallucinated the whole thing. In any case the situation is resolved for me. That Green Creek Circuit is one helluva route!

Thanks for the fun trip Sean. Such a beautiful setting, relaxing first day at camp, engaging route, and wild summit. Yeah snow routes in the cascades are sketchy these days. When do you think was the last time that couloir got a good freeze this year? But though the snow was sketchy the rock was better than expected. Definitely some looseness but a lot of compact chunky greenschist reminiscent of the Fisher Chimneys. Fun scrambling. We greatly benefited from all the mistakes and mishaps of others over the years--I fully believe there is some terrible rock on this peak and I'm glad we got to avoid it. Very surprised to be the only names in the register since 2018. Let's see some ascents! The north face/ridge route looks cool too and then you don't have to climb over the bergschrund!

Good idea to post, sounds even scarier than when you told me about it! I didn't realize there was a party below. Glad they and you and Dan are all ok.

Kind of on my own topic here but I just wanted to say: I saw they changed the language of the bear notice on the NOCA website and it is definitely better. Maybe they read this thread! Anyway I'm grateful that someone did that, I think people are more likely to listen and understand.

Honestly it's NIMBYism. I feel for the staff at NOCA because they have a big job and a small budget, but it's so easy to fall into this type of thinking... "we used to have such a nice quiet neighborhood." Take the recent bear issues at Cascade Pass. Here is what NOCA says on their website: Blame, shame, and punishment, without sharing any responsibility. This isn't helpful communication. I didn't learn anything except that I'm probably a bad person who shouldn't visit the park since I'll ruin it for everyone including the bears. The signs they put on Cascade River Road have much the same message. I also don't see how this helps the bear. Maybe some friendly educational signs, plans for food storage lockers, I don't know. I wish I could see that the park service was stepping up, but the message we all hear time and time again is that park visitors are a problem they wish would just go away. What if instead we accepted reality and got to work? I personally care much more about protecting the bears that actually live in the park today than some abstract and problematic idea of "untouched wilderness." I don't think angry signs and punishments are going to do the job.

Nice work!! Looks both scary and fun. Is it just me or does the rock actually look kinda nice? I must have climbed in the cascades for too long. Of course pro is another story, I'm certain there's none of that.

It may have been possible to skin through the step but it didn't look probable. I suspect the step is a victim of glacial recession. Here is May 2011 when Tom was there: And April 2022:

Thanks for the report Darin. For me it feels impractical/inconsiderate to be opposed to piton rappel anchors, those are inevitable if anyone not comfortable soloing wants to climb out there. Drilled bolts and unnecessary anchors on ascent routes like Little Sister is specifically what I am opposed to. Too bad you didn't run into them, I'll have to go back out there and make sure I wasn't hallucinating in the fog :D.

Baker Mountain Guides got back to me and said they are not their bolts and agree the bolts are unnecessary.