Jason_Martin

Books are always a good way to learn. I have a couple of suggestions that I believe are significantly better than the two previously mentioned. Check out "Alpine Climbing: Techniques to Take You Higher" and "Rock Climbing: Mastering the Basic Skills." Both books were compiled by AMGA Certified Climbing guides who teach climbing for a living as opposed to the people who put together "Freedom of the Hills." Speaking of the AMGA...if you want to learn safe and effective methods of climbing in a short period of time, the best thing to do is to take an intensive class from a reputable guide service. Most of the three to six day courses offered by different services throughout the northwest are very introductory in nature. You would do better to go with one of the companies that offers intensive twelve or thirteen day courses. Following one of these you should have a very good understanding of what you need to practice and learn in order to climb safely and effectively. If you don't have the money for a guided course, club classes are cheap and good way to get some basic skills, but be wary. Club instructors are not professional guides and seldom have a similar skill set. Many club instructors lack appropriate experience in teaching and climbing to move club climbers up the skills ladder quickly. On the other hand, there are a few skilled club instructors in each of the clubs. Unfortunately due to your beginner status, it's hard to tell who these people are. This is part of the reason why taking a course from a guide service is probably the best way to start out. Jason

This winter Chimbo was not in very good condition. There is a lot of rockfall potential on the lower mountain and serious melting. The upper mountain is still in good condition and makes for a good climb. If you don't mind the objective dangers and difficult unaesthic climbing low on the mountain, then you will be rewarded on the upper slopes. I found Cayambe and Cotopaxoi to be beautiful mountains with genuinely fun climbs on them. I would suggest these over Chimbo any day... Jason

I generally teach crevasse rescue under three seperate headings. By breaking the systems into three parts I find that people tend to remember the different components more effectively. My subject headings are as follows: 1) Anchor 2) Z-Pulley 3) C-Z Pulley The reality of this system of teaching -- or of any system of teaching for that matter -- is that without practice a student will have a hard time remembering all of the potential steps. As such I emphasize the first skill as being the most important. If a student comes out of one of my lessons with one part of crevasse rescue dialed I want that part to be "Anchor." Once the anchor is complete and the rescuer is out of the system, then he or she can focus on the other elements of the rescue. I believe that if a student understood the basic elements of the rescue, once out of the system he or she may be able to put together a hauling system based on their recollections of their lessons. The system may not be "right" but it will probably do the job and ultimately get the victim out of the crevasse. If the student doesn't remember how to build an anchor and escape the system, then all is lost... Jason

All the new alpine bods DO have a belay loop because of tri-directional loading on the biner. My recommendation is to do exactly what the manufacturer recommends. Do what the instructions that come with the harness tell you to do. If you have an old school bod harness and you are doing a lot of technical climbing, you should consider buying a new one with a belay loop. Jason

The issue is design. We all make assumptions about gravity when we pull on the harness with our fingers. We assume that a fall will load the harness the same way...and it might. But then again it might not. Generally speaking, it is safest and best to use your equipment the way that it was designed to be used. In other words it is safest to belay off the belay loop. This is tested in a variety of ways with a variety of loads. When you don't use your harness the way it was designed to be used, all bets are off. It's going to work for the vast majority of the falls you have to deal with. But you're not going to be very psyched when a weird load hits your harness and damages the biner... Jason

After seeing this repeated thoughout and due to the fact that I teach this on a regular basis, I decided to do a little research. I emailed Craig Luebben, who does gear and rope strength tests on a regular basis then writes about them. I addressed this particular issue with him and this and this was his response: "The "yosemite finish" only weakens the knot if you use the knot as a belay loop, and even then I am not sure how much of a problem it is. The deal is, if you load the loop of the knot really high it will invert, and then you only have part of the figure eight remaining. Some people cure this problem by passing the rope around itself before going through the hole, but that makes the knot a little bigger. I use that finish almost all of the time, and I rarely use that rope loop for anything because I use my belay loop. I hope this answers your question. Have a great summer! Craig"

Speaking of journalism. Have you guys seen this article: Article

Don't feel bad about it. You guys did fine. And you're right. Walking out or doing a descent in the dark is all part of the game. Jason

The Coleman-Deming goes up the Roman Wall above the Pumice Ridge, whereas the Easton goes up the Roman Wall above the crater. The entire upper slope of both routes is known collectively as the Roman Wall. Jason

Generally speaking, if it is clear that the gear has been abandoned and it's not completely jammed, then it's yours. However, there are definately some situations where you should leave the gear. 1) Fixed Ropes -- Often ropes are left to rot, but there are cases, particularly on aid routes, where a party will put up a rope and then return the next day. Usually they will be around somewhere, so you should be able to figure it out. 2) Project Draws -- This is a little less clear. A party or an individual may have left draws on a difficult sport route because they have been returning a lot to work on it. Unfortunately they are not necessarily returning every day so it's not so easy to find out what's going on. You should use your judgement here. Don't just strip a route the first time you see this. If the draws are on the route for months and nobody appears to be using them...then maybe. No matter what, ask around first in this situation. 3) Food or Gear Cache -- This obviously depends on where you are. Use your judgement. Don't take anything that could belong to an expedition on the mountain with you. Jason

This means you should have a 60 meter rope to get up and if you are rappelling the route, two 60 meter ropes to get down. Jason

There are a lot of routes that you can rappel with a 70 meter rope because the pitches are 35 meters. This is where a 70 becomes a luxuary. Though I don't see evidence of route developers putting anchors 70 meters apart, there is ample evidence of 35 meter pitches. Jason

There's definately been a movement toward 70 meter ropes among certain climbers. The reason? There are definately climbs out there that you can get up and down by using a 70 meter rope. In other words, you don't have to carry two ropes up the route to get back down. This makes sense and can be an advantage to owning a 70 meter rope. There will be a contingent of people who argue that a 70 meter rope is better for alpine rock climbing. I'm not one of those. Especially in the Cascades. Many of our classic routes are blocky and require short pitches so that corners may be negotiated. As a result, a 70 meter rope is not very effective. For some alpine ice routes a long rope might be nice. If you are planning on doing a lot of routes where you might be climbing a number of 60-70 degree alpine ice pitches where you want to have a belay but don't want to belay all over the place and you want to eliminate as many pitches as possible, a 70 meter rope might be nice. Due to the weight of a 70 meter rope, it cannot be recommended as a second rope for rappelling. If this is your first rope, I would recommend buying a 60 meter rope. If you have two 60s already and are simply looking for something to fill out your arsenal, then maybe a 70 might be something to look into. This will be a rope that you will keep for a long time because you will only use it once in awhile. Jason

Red Rock Canyon -- My favorite place in the world, but as much of the rock is weak the place definately has an alpine flavor. Jason

Agreed. It is totally inappropriate for government to intervene. And it is stupid for people to call their representatives about this instead of school principals and superintendents. Principals hate complaint calls from parents more than anything else and they will make up whatever rule they can think of to avoid this... As a result it's a total waste of time for government to get involved. Jason

Take Cipro to kill intestinal bugs that you get down there. A course of cipro will usually kill a problem in a few days. The key to success in South America is health. Don't eat anywhere you find suspect...and if you start to get sick, start a course of cipro right away. Technical routes at altitude are no joke. A single pitch of seventy degree ice can take an hour or more depending on your level of acclimatization. It is not uncommon to swing a tool, literally breath for a minute to two, then swing your other tool. These minutes add up and suddenly a route with four technical pitches at an average angle of sixty-five degrees becomes a four to six hour endeavor. Add the time it took to get to the technical portion and suddenly your day is a great deal longer. The moral of this annecdote is that you should not apply Cascade standards to high altitude routes. Plan a great deal more time on the route than you would elsewhere. In additon to this, climb a few things that are not very technical and get used to the lack of air before committing to something more dangerous. There is little that you can do in the PNW to prepare your body for such high altitudes. You're probably already working on your cardio for your trip. Push your cardio training to the limit so that you become used to breathing hard while working hard. Spend at least a week after you get there acclimatizing. Hike, do some non-technical peaks, and hydrate. After five days or so, you should be ready to go up high. Lots of people believe that the air is thicker in South America at altitude than in the northern hemisphere...and maybe there's some truth to that. But I've been above twenty thousand feet in Alaska, Bolivia and Ecuador, and no matter where you are you're worked at those altitudes. Prepare yourself mentally for this ahead of time and you'll be fine. Jason

Though this piece of advice won't hurt anybody, it is incorrect. Tests have indicated that a figure 8 follow-though that is not completely tied will only fail about five percent of the time. There have been no tests that I'm aware of which indicate that a figure 8 will invert or untie itself after adding a Yosemite finish to the knot. Most certified climbing guides do not tie a "safety knot" into their rope after tying in. Many of them do use the yosemite finish. The only thing the extra "safety knot" does is to back up your system if you already tied your knot wrong. At this point the "safety knot" will probably fail as well. Instead of focusing on this extra knot it would be better for climbers to practice dressing their figure 8s. Though an undressed figure 8 is no less likely to fail, an unfinished or incorrectly tied knot is more likely to be missed if you are used to looking at sloppy knots. Clean and dressed knots are easy to recogize as correct and thus inherently safer. Jason

Almost all harnesses on the market now come with belay loops. Even the black diamond bod harness now comes with one. Why? Because belaying off of the waist and crotch loop weakens the biner. A biner is designed to have a load placed directly on its spine. A belay loop allows all potential force to be put directly on the biner's spine. When you place a biner through the waist and crotch loops you triaxally load the carabiner when there is a fall. In other words your biner is automatically crossloaded. In a mountaineering situation where the worst fall you might take is in a crevasse this type of crossloading is not that big a deal. However, in rock and ice climbing where 8 and 10 KN falls are possible, placing your carabiner through the waist and crotch loop is a dangerous proposition. Teaching somebody to do this is even worse. As for your problem, if you can't keep the biner oriented right, use a different biner. Jason

I think there are valid points to almost everyones ideas. In the end it comes down to a personal choice which will be dictated by a question: What is more dangerous, falling upside down in a crevasse or having a problem due to a chest harness? For me the fear of falling upside down in a crevasse does not warrent the use of a chest harness...anywhere. There are so many potential problems with them that I choose to climb without. Most people here are climbing in the Cascades where both the crevasses and the packs are small. The combination of these two things makes it less likely that someone will fall into a crevasse and then be flipped upside down. Indeed, most climbers are climbing with twenty pound packs by the time they get on the glacier and are in the process of making a summit attempt in the Pacific Northwest. A twenty pound pack simply will not flip a climber over...as a result it becomes very difficult to defend the use of a chest harness when it results in so many potential problems. Jason

First, you would have to put your prusiks on the opposite side of the chest biner as it would be impossible to open that biner if you were in a crevasse. Having the prusiks in such a position would suck. Second, the same issue would apply as stated earlier. You could very easily get pulled head first toward the crevasse after your partner falls in. Third, if you're in the middle of the rope and you choose to clove hitch one direction into the biner, the whole purpose of the system is null and void if the person partner on the opposite end of the rope arrests your fall. As a result of these three things, it's probably not a great idea. Jason

there is a difference between censoring and countering an argument (even if it means cutting someone off), no? Point taken. There is a difference. Jason

Nope, just the arguements made against war in general in some of his plays. Maybe Euripides would have been a better playwright to have put into that particular spot...but Lysistrata is so pointed and funny in its attacks on war and war-mongoring, that I couldn't help myself. Jason

I'm not saying that everyone can think outside the box, just that academics strive too. Once again it doesn't mean that they do...or that you or I do for that matter. Yes, when someone has abusive beliefs toward one's own beliefs we try to censor them. You point out that a liberal feminist might try to censor a conservative and anti-feminist idea, of course they will. As will a conservative who is being forced to listen to a liberal idea. Lets not forget about the bans on protests around Bush during his run for re-election. It's human nature to want to cut a person off with a different viewpoint and to stop them from getting to their point. Conservatives and Liberals alike will say that they are for free speech as long as the free speech is agreeable. This is the real reason that free speech is so important. We have to be free to present ideas that are unpopular. And ultimately history and cultural movement will decide what is "right" and what is "wrong." This attack on free speech which is a bilateral attack from both liberals and conservatives is part of the reason that college professors are given tenure. It's so that they are able to say things that are unpopular, but that will also -- hopefully -- give people the opportunity to critically think about a given issue. Jason

I think it does work. Most people agree that history repeats itself with minor riffs. As such, the lessons that have been taught throughout history are still apt today. You argue against the value of the great thinkers if you cannot apply their thinking to modern issues. Academics, politicians, and artists apply ancient philosophy to modern problems all the time. And the radical right can't help but apply their interpretations of the Bible to everything they see... It is arrogant to do this...but that fact doesn't make it any less true that people do this. Culture is all about arrogance. Modern Americans are as arrogant as ancient Greeks, the Roman Empire or Nazi Germans. We live in a culture where we have been told that we are better than other people. The problem is not that we're told that, but that we believe it. Sure there is arrogance on the part of an academic because he or she believes that a given artist would have similar feelings as he or she does were the artist alive today. But there's also arrogance in the belief that Jesus Christ would support a war in Iraq. Education is about learning how to think outside the box. And as you've pointed out, there is even arrogance to the belief that we can do that. People who have spent their lives studying art, philosophy and history tend to be on the liberal side. My point is still apt. The people who have changed the world for the better throughout history have been liberals in their given societies. Academics who see this trend try very hard to think progressivly and to see outside the box. I'll state it again, I believe that academics want to be the kinds of liberals that they see as heros. Like it or not, this is likely why there is a liberal bent to the humanities in higher education. Jason

I can't speak for the sciences...but there is definately a liberal bias in the arts... I think that this is primarily due to the fact that the people who those in the arts study were liberals in their day. And I think it is because the people they study who are alive today tend to have a liberal bent to their work as well. Aristophanes was arguing against wars like the one we're waging now 2,500 years ago. Nearly four hundred years ago, Shakespeare forced people to think differently about power and corruption in dozens of plays. Ibsen took on environmental issues and women's rights in the late eighteen hundreds. And in the 20th century luminaries like Samuel Beckett, Bertold Brecht, and Fredrico Garcia Lorca fought war mongers, dictators, and anyone else who was opposed to human rights... Those in the arts look up to the people whom they study. They like the idea that artists stood up for what they thought was right even when they had to put their lives on the line. In addition to this, I believe that many academics wonder what their heros would think about current world situations. The artists and thinkers I've just listed would most likely fall into the liberal world view were they alive today. This definately has an influence on those who study them. Jason