CascadeClimber

Easy: Don't. Erosion is a natural process. Let it proceed naturally. If it causes issues with buildings, remove them. If the tent platforms erode, people can camp on snow. There is no real necessity for any permanent structures at Muir. I am against adding more structure (gravel, rock, buildings, antenna, etc) in the name of preserving what's already there (see above post about more leading to more leading to more). I do respect and appreciate and understand your positions. I just don't agree. It's nice to be able to disagree respectfully.

I'm pretty certain that crowds on the Muir Snowfield during three summer months are not sufficient reason to deem it a non-Wilderness area contrary to a Congressional declaration. I have mixed feelings about efforts to reduce use of the Muir Snowfield (the easiest way to minimize impact), though it's worth noting that park management has chosen to effectively concentrate use there by abandoning the West Side and Carbon River roads. Camping on snow in tents that stay in place for only a day or two seems much less impactful that permanent structures that require maintenance and whose foundations are being used as a reason to fly loads of non-native crushed rock to the site. The problem with infrastructure is that it's almost always used to justify more. Which attracts more people, who are used to justify more infrastructure. Ad nauseum. The guide services operate everywhere else on the mountain without a building or semi-permanent tents, so I'm pretty sure it can be done at Muir, too. Bonus points for using the word 'specious' on a climbing board. I agree with concentrating use. I don't believe that concentrated use calls for more staff and buildings and other stuff that is contrary to Wilderness. Good conversation.

Cogent analysis, and I agree with your suggestions. The saddles on which the Muir and Schurman structures exist are inside small slivers excluded from the Wilderness designation, but that does not mean it shouldn't be managed to wilderness guidelines as much as possible. The large semi-permanent tents the guide services have been allowed to erect each summer are IN the wilderness area and are, I believe, illegal. My fear is that this, like most of what is done at MORA, is just checking a box (public comment period) before they proceed to do whatever they want (again). There is now talk of cell phone boosters and Internet access for park staff at Schurman. It seems that current management is all about more staff, more structure, more fees. Despite my cynicism, I did submit feedback and urge others to do the same, regardless of your position. The direct link to the online comment form is: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?documentID=48847

Cogent analysis, and I agree with your suggestions. The saddle on which the Muir (and Schurman) structures exist is technically outside the wilderness, but that does not mean it shouldn't be managed to wilderness guidelines as much as possible. The large semi-permanent tents the guide services have been allowed to erect each summer are IN the wilderness area and are illegal. My fear is that this, like most of what is done at MORA, is just checking a box (public comment period) before they proceed to do whatever they want (again). There is now talk of cell phone boosters and Internet access for park staff at Schurman. It seems that current management is all about more staff, more structure, more fees.

Hey Clive- thanks for the correction- I've fixed the TR. Amazing that he remembered me from that climb in 2006. Nice to see you both up there. Sorry the weather went south.

Trip: Rainier - Winthrop (Emmons) Date: 8/18/2012 Trip Report: Short version: Red Bull. Up, up, up. Red Bull. WTF? Up, up, up. Yahoo! Down, down, down. Tracks! Down, coffee, down, glissade, down. Beer. Long version: http://www.cascadeclimber.com/blog/?p=96 Gear Notes: The route is spicy. Take more gear than you typically would for the Emmons. Approach Notes: Inter is still in good shape. Glissaded the whole thing in two shots.

The route, as posted on the blog, goes right from Schurman and ascends the Winthrop entirely. The section from about 9700 (it descends some from Schurman) to 11,000 has some challenging crevasse crossings, exposed traverses, exposed blue ice, and is changing rapidly. Yesterday's (Aug 17) post on the blog about the crevasse 'plug' being passable is inaccurate. A walkable reroute is in place as of late yesterday morning. In short, this route is more serious than usual, at least though that section. Expect to do some routefinding and more exposure than when it goes up the Corridor.

It fails the 'short approach' metric, but the West Ridge of Stuart offers a lot of Class 3 and 4 scrambling, leading to the West Ridge Notch, after which you get about 4 pitches of easy 5th to the summit. It's a long climb, especially if you start pitching it out before the notch. The North Face of Vesper is fun. West Ridge of Thompson. The Improbable Traverse on Guye (not sure of the rating). The scramble route up Cathedral Rock is fun. Probably not 5th though. Ingalls is a long walk in for only two pitches. Pretty area, though.

That's not an accurate statement, actually. For the record (all my opinion only): - I prefer option 2. I think the "You have to cook in a different building" point in it is there to discourage people from it. Lame. - The weather telemetry is okay by me. I think the webcam is a wasteful boondoggle and distraction from the mission of the climbing rangers. - The semi-permanent and, I think, illegal giant guide service tents should not be allowed, as they appear to be erected in the wilderness zone. - The eyesore guide hut should be removed. Clients can camp in tents, like the vast majority of non-guided climbers. - I have no issue with the Butler Shelter remaining. The NPS says it's not architecturally aligned with other buildings there, but I don't agree. - I strongly disagree with introducing foreign materials to the Camp Muir site, particularly crushed rock. Erosion is a natural process and trying to stop it creates an unnatural situation in several ways. In general, the document introduces quite a few issues, then seems to pick and choose from those issues in a way that leads to preferring Option 3. Bottom line though, *please participate*, regardless of your position.

I've been wondering how difficult it would be to traverse into the route from the main Guye Peak trail, just after where it splits off from the Snoqualmie Mt. trail. That would make the deproach easier as well, in terms of returning to the vehicle.

Now is your opportunity to participate in the Camp Muir redevelopment plan. Three meetings are scheduled: Aug 1, Seattle REI Aug 8, Tacoma Mountaineers Program Center Aug 9, MORA/Rainier NPS HQ in Tahoma Woods All three are 6-8PM. Project home page: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=25222 Project details (a lot of details): http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=323&projectID=25222&documentID=48847 This is our opportunity to participate in the direction of our resource, and I believe that public participation is far more important than the actual option (there are four) chosen. (cross-posting to Climber's Board as well) Thanks- L

Now is your opportunity to participate in the Camp Muir redevelopment plan. Three meetings are scheduled: Aug 1, Seattle REI Aug 8, Tacoma Mountaineers Program Center Aug 9, MORA/Rainier NPS HQ in Tahoma Woods All three are 6-8PM. Project home page: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=25222 Project details (a lot of details): http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=323&projectID=25222&documentID=48847 This is our opportunity to participate in the direction of our resource, and I believe that public participation is far more important than the actual option (there are four) chosen. (cross-posting to Rainier route reports as well) Thanks- L

This is the first full TR I've written in about seven years. Man, time can really fly. We believe this is the first recorded ascent of any route on the south face of Little Tahoma. http://www.cascadeclimber.com/blog/2012/06/25/little-tahoma-south-face-may-13-14-2012/

I bought a $500k 20 year term policy a few years back from New York Life. They asked a lot of questions about climbing, which I answered truthfully. They said the only way I'd ever get a non-climber rate from them is if I signed that I'd gotten rid of all my gear. The policy is expensive (about $90/month) compared to the non-climber version. I've been considering adding another policy that doesn't cover climbing-related incidents. Reading through this thread though, it's probably wiser to put the money into long term disability.

I went up the Nisqually Icefall to 13,100 on a day trip two weekends ago. I skied from 13,100 down the Ingraham Direct and back to Muir via Cath Gap. The area immediately above the top of Gib Rock is as broken as I've ever seen it this time of year. It's passable, but not a gimme like it usually is. The Ledges appeared to be in decent shape and the big boulder that was sitting at the top of Gib Chute has either fallen or is buried in snow. The Ingraham appears to be more broken up than usual as well, particularly the area just above Ingraham Flats and just below the top of Gib Rock. I couldn't ski through Cadavar Gap as it's melted out to rock and Cath Gap isn't far behind. The upper mountain, above 12,800 looked to be in fine shape.

They might not be classic, but they are heavily used because they are moderate with a short, easy approach. Agree, respecting the closure is important, and let's not disregard the popularity of this area.

The image I saw seemed to show the nest more directly above Write Off. Is it just D Wall that's closed, or does the closure affect that entire area (Nevermind to Hull)?

Dean's letting his adrenaline addiction get the better of him. Same thing happened to Dan Osman.

With the exception of some moderate wind, the weather was great last weekend. I left the parking lot at 8:15 AM on Saturday and turned around at 13,100 (for a variety of little reasons). I went up the Nisqually Icefall and skied down the Ingraham Direct. There is unconsolidated snow on the upper mountain and I didn't see any tracks anywhere above Cathedral Gap. Route finding above the top of Gib Rock is more challenging that usual for this time of year.

All the folks who fawn over the webcam and other structure and planned structure at Camp Muir, and are against this sort of thing should, I think, take a careful look at the slippery slope you're on. You might think you can get just more of the sort of structure that appeals to you, but it doesn't usually work that way. More leads to more leads to more.

The Jefferson Park Glacier route is stellar: Standard glacier approach, one steep pitch to the ridge, a rock or mixed traverse (multiple pitches) to the col, then a scramble to the top. Great route that requires all-around moderate mountaineering skills.

Looking for a solid, experienced partner for Rainier Fri-Sat. Gibraltar Ledges. Need to be comfortable simul-soloing up to and across the ledges. I ski and would be amenable to a summit ski, probably down the Ingraham Direct and through Cadavar Gap. I've been across the ledges 10+ times and have 25 Rainier summits.

Looks like just a little puff of winter breeze to keep the bugs down, John Not five minutes after I commented about the low odds for the missing snowshoer, the news hit that he'd been found unscathed. So I've been holding my tongue (or fingers) this time. And yes, the odds are extremely slim at this point. It's been a shitty month for Rainier staff and visitors; it would behoove us all to appreciate the staff for their work this month as possible.

Email me, Iron. No way I can keep up on the approaches (but I'll hold my own), but I really enjoy alpine moderates.

I'd climb this route. Can't do this Friday, but can sneak out for a mid-week day here and there. In Seattle.