Alpine_Tom

Okay, I feel a lot better now. Thanks, carletonj

I hate to get off topic and all, but I was under the impression that this "Cascade Climbers" site had something to do with climbing -- beta, trip reports, gear recommendations, etc. I sure don't particularly object to people spraying one another, but is it really necessary to do it here? Particularly a guy who was clever enough to be able to afford to retire at 30 and go climbing, I'd expect to be out... climbing or otherwise enjoying himself, rather than hunched over the keyboard lashing out at people, deserved or not. I hope that's what I'd do. But instead, I'm at work, which is why I'm hanging around here *heh*. FWIW, your alpinelite.com website has been interesting and useful to me, and I appreciate the effort you've put into it.

You could always say "Oh, *that's* what that was! Some guy in the parking garage paid me ten bucks to carry some of his luggage for him. He put it in my suitcase while I was locking my car." That would probably get you off.

If you read those Morning Reports, every couple of days there's a rescue of some kind -- lost hikers, canoers, canyon explorers caught in flash floods... and, of course, the odd climber. Which of these should be required to carry rescue insurance or pay for their rescues? Every time a climber needs a rescue this issue crops up, but when a berry picker gets lost and has half the King County search and rescue out looking for them for days, that's reported as a heartwarming news story about how "there are still heroes."

One of my fantasies for years has been the "five peak week:" climbing the five Washington volcanoes in one week. I don't know if anyone's ever actually done that. The biggest problem would be finding a seven-day period of good weather. And, a partner or two as unbalanced and compulsive as you.

I just looked at http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/ today. They say that FR 2329, the approach road, is open to Keenes Horsecamp, as of 5/22. I don't have a map here at work, so I don't know how far that is. Last time I looked into it, I was told to call the Wind River Ranger Station at 509-427-3200 for more current information. I'm interested in doing that route this spring, so I'm mightily interested in how it goes for you [This message has been edited by Alpine Tom (edited 05-23-2001).]

It's interesting that no one has mentioned the first thing that popped into my head when I read Donna's post -- it's the hordes of climbers that constitute a "market" for cool, high-end gear. If the climbing community was the same size now as it was in the early '60s, there would be no sticky rubber climbing shoes, no grigris, no new-matic crampons, no plastic boots, no six different brands of high-tech ice tools with replaceable blades, no kernmantle ropes, no high-quality route books. Chinnard made his own pitons from Model-T leaf springs; would you be willing (or able) to do that, in exchange for solitude in the hills? And, you know, it has never been hard for me to get away from the crowds, without really trying. I was one of two parties on Glacier Peak when I climbed it four years ago. I have been the only human on Mt. Shuksan, one beautiful afternoon in April a few years back. Two winters ago I solo'd the Wyeast route on Hood, and I saw a total of three people, and only one of them was close enough to talk to. This spring on Leuthold Couloir, we didn't see another person from the time we left Illumination saddle to when we got down to the ski area. And last month on our attempt of Colchuck Peak, we saw some footprints, but not another person the entire way. Not exactly hard-core climbing, but not particularly obscure. I'd edit the quote above to say that 95% of the climbers are using 5% of the land. If you want to hike up to Camp Muir, or the Snow Lake trail, have fun, but don't expect solitude. But in my experience, you don't have to get very far off the trail AT ALL to be about as alone as you could reasonably expect.

Try this: http://www.mountainguides.com/screensaver.shtml

Here’s a question, because I’m bored at work. You’ve climbed Rainier without paying the summit fee, for whatever reason. You’re hanging around the summit, relaxing with your climbing partners, and a climbing ranger comes up to see your fee slip. You say you don’t have one. He pulls out his citation book to write you a ticket, and you say that you don’t have any ID, and the high altitude has caused you to forget your name, address, etc. What happens then? Presumably he’s not going to handcuff you and call for a helicopter to fly you off to jail, if you refuse to cooperate. He could, I suppose, call down Paradise and have a ranger meet you and follow you to your car, and nail you that way. But how would they know whether you were parked at White River or Paradise? One option, I suppose, would be for him to march you down the mountain, and nail you then. You’d complain that your tent and gear is at Camp Hazard or someplace, and he’d say “tough.” That would call for him assuming a tremendous amount of liability, though, in the event of an accident of some sort on the descent, both for you and for your remaining partners, if they’d all paid and were left behind to fend for themselves. I guess this applies to Adams or St. Helens, as well as a lot of other places as well, where overnight camping is restricted (Boston Basin, the Enchantments, etc) I’m not advocating this, by any means, just wondering how they enforce it. Has anyone seen this happen?

A more reasonable alternative: go home and get a good night's sleep Friday evening. Get up Saturday AM and drive down to White River, and do a standard 2-day ascent -- camp at Camp Shurman, get up at midnight and do the summit. With a little luck you can be back to Shurman by 2:00 or so, where you can rest for a couple of hours, then pack out. Bring (and eat) plenty of high-carb food, and drink more water than you want. I've done a one-day ascent of Rainier (Fuhrer Finger) and in some ways I think it's easier than a two-day. Certainly it relies on a smaller window of good weather. But Emmonds is a looong climb, and a long hike in and back out. And, if something goes wrong, being up there with daypacks this time of year seems risky. Maybe I'm just getting old and tired.

This was from http://www.nps.gov/morningreport/ Someone posted a reference to it a few weeks ago here, and it makes for interesting browsing. For instance, there was a discussion from a few days ago about black bears in Yosemite breaking into cars, and ripping out the back seat to get into the trunk area! I'd always assumed that inside a locked car was a perfectly safe place to be.

From today's NPS Morning Report: A total of 1,319 climbers have registered to climb the peak so far this year; 130 climbers checked in last Friday alone. Geez, sounds like a July weekend on Rainier!

quote: Originally posted by OCK: You use a straw and slide it over the tick. Then take some dental floss and make a granny knot. Slide the loop down the straw to the head of the tick. pull the string tight. Pull the straw away. Pull the two ends of the thread easy..., and Bingo! that is absolutely the best way i have ever done it. The critter came out 100% and i did not squeeze any of the critters spooge into my dog. ock That sounds like a lot of work. I can't imagine my dog holding still long enough for that to work. When I was a kid in North Carolina, my mom got ticks off us with nail polish remover. It makes them pull their heads out, as I understand, then you can squish them. The worst part was that you regularly found them in your privates (much easier to see 'em down there at age eight!)

For a long time, my car cd was KSRV, "all Stevie Ray all the time." I've broadened out (in more ways than one) I highly recommend The Boss Joan Jett (I've still got a crush on her!) Sleater Kinney (esp. Dig Me Out) Papa Chubby another vote for Bob Marley, and Ziggy M. Dave Edmunds On the way back from Colchuck, Mr. GT turned me on to Spearhead, and I've got their two best albums now, but I've only got to play them at work so far.

No, way! Lemon juice in a margarita is a heresy practiced by people like the Santa Fe Cafe. It's lime juice, triple sec, and tequila (and salt.) I don't measure, I mix to taste (maybe THAT'S why it ends up tasting so darned good!) but generally, about equal parts tequila and lime juice, and real easy on the triple sec. Salt the rim, dump in the ice and the margarita, and leftovers will never be a problem. You're right about the blender, though, GT. Leave it on the shelf.

My first Rainier attempt was up the Emmonds, and I didn't like it much. It's a REALLY long hike in (and back out!), and the summit day is a long, steady, unrelieved slog up a 30-40 degree slope, with no variety, no change in scenery except to turn around every half hour and measure your progress against Little Tahoma. A far more interesting climb is DC, spending the night on Ingraham flats. It's much more varied than Emmonds, and you're away from Muir, and the summit day is a bit shorter (and you don't have to traverse cathedral rock in the dark!) Or, look at the Kautz Glacier or Fuhrer Finger routes, especially if you want to avoid the crowds. You'll want to do it with someone familiar with the route (which is good advice on ANY Rainier climb, probably) since there isn't a foot-deep trail to follow to the summit. Good luck!

Did you go up Pilchuck? I was suckered in by the blue skies at home Saturday morning, and took the dogs up there. What a blizzard up there on the summit! I was never so glad to see the lookout open. There was a surprising number of people up there, given the forecast and the conditions; I bet I saw three dozen people, including what looked like a Mountaineers group practicing with avalanche beacons.

"...a trail 6 inches deep and 2 years wide" huh? That's pretty wide. If TomRogers is so concerned about the environment, what's he doing photography for? Don't you know that the chemicals involved in film processing are a significant source of water pollution?

Hard at work today, I saw the post on the missing climbers on Mt. Baker, and followed it back to http://www.nps.gov/morningreport. The next one (http://www.nps.gov/morningreport/msg00829.html) includes an account of a rescue of "canyoneers" down in Zion NP. My point (winding circuitously around to it) is: do they charge these canyoneers, to offset the cost of rescues? It seems to me that canyoneering is at least potentially a lot more dangerous than slogging up the Emmonds glacier.

Okay. As I was writing my post, I was thinking that maybe I should post it in the SPRAY forum. I don’t really want anyone, not even snowmobilers or jetskiiers, to die. I do, however, stand by my position that snowmobiles are an abuse of the wilds, and it’s simply not possible to use them without greatly diminishing the wilderness experience of everyone around you. I grew up in eastern Washington, where people actually used to tell stories about chasing elk with snowmobiles. It’s a sport, I guess, or was. I’m sure it’s a small minority that is obnoxious about abusing the machines, maybe the same percentage as is obnoxious about climbing or surfing, but the difference is that even those who make an effort to be courteous are still spewing pollutants into the air that I have to breathe, and their two-stroke motors are echoing for miles in the quiet, ruining the experience for everyone else. To me, much of the greatness of the wilderness experience is the absence of machines, of getting away from an environment designed exclusively for the comfort and convenience of people. To experience the nature that God designed, rather than the one man is busy improving, at the risk of sounding too much like John Muir. There are not that many places in the world that we can go to get away from the noise or machinery, and I really don’t see any possible value to racing around with these machines, except to observe the old California creed that if you’re not burning gas, you’re not having fun. And yes, I own a car, and drive to the places I climb. But I don’t insist on my right to drive it down the Burke-Gilman trail, or down the clam beds at Ocean Shores, or into the Opera House. My apologies for misattributing the theory of natural selection, eric. Like “schizophrenic,” the term “Darwinism” has become an often-misused shorthand. And I’m sorry about the oil technology blunder. It’s remarkable, though, when street motorcycles haven’t been able to have two-stroke motors for decades, that it’s still okay to use loud, polluting technology in the woods, where noise and smell carry so much further than on the streets.

I’d call this Darwin in action. I’d favor snowmobiles at Mt Baker, as long as there’s an open season on them, with a reasonable limit (say, 2 per day per hunter.) They’re loud, obnoxious, destroy the wilderness experience for everyone for miles around them, and are extremely efficient at hauling great quantities of trash into the backcountry, and leaving it behind smoldering in their firepits for others to enjoy. (Or maybe it’s backpackers who are leaving empty cases of Schmidt’s and empty bottles of 10W-40?) Maybe I shouldn't talk like this, this being Good Friday and all, but...

There was an article in the Seattle times about this last year, and one of the bits I remember was a person who refused to pay the fee, on the grounds that since it was a "demonstration project" his refusal to pay was a form of protected speech. The judge bought it, as I recall. Of course, I don't have any of the particulars, but maybe MrGoodTime or some other legal type might have some useful input on this tactic. (My search of the ST web archives failed to find that article.) Another tactic suggested in an October 29, 1998 ST article is to park a quarter-mile from the trailhead because it is legal, although not advertised in the news releases about the fee program.

Not to change the subject... but has there been any further word on those two Baker climbers? It's been a week, and if they were as poorly equipped as the news coverage indicates, it seems like they might be all out of luck.

As far as walking routes, there are plenty of hiking opportunities around here, though it's a bit early in the year. Have a look at http://www.wta.org/wta and http://www.cooltrails.com/ and http://nwog.org/. If you're comfortable with snowshoes, you can rent them at REI or Swallows Nest or other places, and they'll increase your options greatly. Have a great trip!

This topic has been worked over fairly completely, but as the son of a reference librarian, I can't help quoting from an authority -- (it's in print, so it must be true!) This is from Duane Raleigh's "Knot's & Ropes for Climbers" "Single ropes are those designated by the UIAA as safe for single-strand use...Single ropes come in diameters from 9.8 to 11 mm. Sport climbers, to whom every ounce is the enemy, typically use 9.8-10mm ropes... Double Ropes are those that you must use in pairs, although you don't need to clip every rope through every point of protection. Rather you can alternate clipping the ropes, an appreciated feature that reduces rope on winding and traversing routes. You'll find double ropes in the 8 to 9mm range. Double ropes are ideal for ice, alpine, and mountaineering, where you typically need two ropes to rappel the route and carrying two heavy single ropes doesn't make sense... All double ropes have the number 1/2, surrounded by a circle, on the rope's whipped ends. Twin ropes are the most dysfunctional of the lot, and I've never been able to rationalize a place for them. These 7 to 9mm lines are used in pairs like double ropes but differ drastically, as both strands must be clipped to every point of protecion. In my eyes, cliping both ropes robs them of the great advantage of double ropes - that of alternating clips to minimize rope drag. Also these small-diameter ropes are snag and tangle prone, and I can never seem to keep them orderly. Still, twin ropes provide the highest safety margin of all ropes and are the lightest combination possible, making them appealing to a few extreme alpinists... Twin ropes have the number 2 surrounded by a circle, on the rope's whipping. Don't confuse twin ropes with double ropes; they are similar but not interchangeable."