Jason_Martin

Bush's so called "healthy forest act" is anything but. This bill goes way beyond thinning. Take a close look at it...a look beyond the propaganda. It is not a call to environmental logging practices, but an all out assault on forests that are healthy. Though I consider myself an environmentalist, I'm also a realist. Logging is important. However it can be done more effectively without attacks on former environmental legislation. Jason

Well said Mtnfreak! Jason

There's still a little time to write to the Park Super Intendant! This is the email I sent. Feel free to use anything you might want to from this in your own email to the Super Intendant. __________________________________________________ Dear Park Super Intendant, As a professional climbing guide and a guidebook author, I have a tremendous amount of interest in the future of guiding on Mt. Rainier. The reason I am writing this email is because I would like to voice my support for Alternative #3. Certainly this email may seem slanted because of my profession and it could be read that way. However I would like to state that I am personally NOT interested in working on Mt. Rainier. Though my company does have interest in these proceedings, I enjoy a diverse range of work in other locations. I am not a pawn of my company and am writing this email of my own free will. I would like you to read my comments as if you are reading the comments of a professional observer, someone who has insight into the guiding industry and what this particular alternative is likely to do. First and foremost I believe that competition is good. Everybody can agree that competition in a field such as computer technology creates better computers and more diverse programing. The same is true with guides. If there were more guide services working on the mountain, competition would cause guides and guide services to work hard in order to be the best. Quality guide services already spend money on guide education. It is likely that the spirit of competition would cause this to become even more common amongst the most professional services. I have worked alongside other guides from other guide services in places such as Squamish, Red Rock Canyon, Lee Vining, and Mt. Baker. The reality is that in these venues guides are very pleasant to one another. They often share ideas on ways to do things, guiding styles, and route conditions. The result is that all guides in a particular area reap some benefit from being around other professionals. The unfortunate reality is that some guides are not very professional. They don't treat their clients well or they don't understand modern guiding techniques or they are simply just arrogant. When these guides are around guides from other guide services that are striving for excellence they learn. They see how professionals treat their clients and employ proper techniques on the mountain, as a result they too strive to be better. The public currently doesn't have much of a choice as to who to go with on Mt. Rainier. They are simply stuck with RMI. As the public enjoys having a choice between Starbucks and Seattle's Best Coffee or between McDonald's and Burger King, I believe that the public would enjoy a choice on Mt. Rainier. Some have stated that more guide services would decrease the jobs available in Ashford. This particular point is ludicrous. If a guide loses his or her job, there are more guide services available in that location to potentially work for. More guide services would also mean more "home bases" for clients to get equipped. These "home bases" would employ MORE people than are currently employed in Ashford. Some have stated that multiple guide services would create competition to reach the summit. They believe that if one guide decides to go in marginal weather then another guide from another service will be forced to go as well. This too is ludicrous. Professional guides are professional, they are capable of making up their own minds about what weather is appropriate and what weather is inappropriate. Once again, I have personally been in the preceding situation on Mt. Baker. I have seen inclement weather where one guide decides to go and another guide decides to stay many times. There is no pressure. Professional guides can think for themselves and make a decision based on their clients and their own comfort level as to whether they will go or not. Ego to get to the top is not and should not be a part of a true professionals persona. And lastly I would like to oppose one element of the Alternative #3. I understand that some areas will be closed to guiding, a commercial free zone if you will. There are a couple of problems I see with this: 1) The more area open to guiding, the less concentrated guides and clients will be in a given area. 2) Guides are a positive presence when something goes wrong in an unguided party. Guides are responsible for getting people out of jams throughout North America. 3) Guides are very good when it comes to the Leave No Trace ethic. They tend to provide good examples for non-guided groups and excellent examples for their own clients. This type of presence is important on all aspects of the mountain. 4) Routes such as Liberty Ridge and Ptarmigan Ridge are difficult routes and there have been some tragedies on these routes in the past. Many climbers wish to move forward with their skills and these routes provide a place to do that. Perhaps with a guided presence on routes such as these there would be a few less dangerous situations. I understand the need to keep commercialization to a minimum. Perhaps the best idea would be to limit guiding on this side of the mountain. However, to completely close it to guides would be unfortunate. As shown above, guides can have a very positive influence in a number of ways. I appreciate your time and I appreciate the fact that this is open to discussion. By opening this issue to the community you have created a very positive environment for discussion. Thank-you for your time. Sincerely, Jason D. Martin

This is within reason in my opinion, Jason. If someone is putting up a project and does not complete it within one season's time (there are exceptions of course) then I say it is free game, especially if all the gear is in and all that is left is a redpoint, which the setter has left to do in the "next couple of seasons" for example. They may have put money into the hardware and so deserve a crack at the rout first off, but if I see red tape on a finished route for more than one season, it becomes fair game. I do have to say that this is an exception rather than the norm as most people who put up routes can do them and are psyched to do them, hence why they put them up in the first place. These routes are brand spanking new and the guy who put them up deserves a couple of weeks to get up them. He's doing a great service by putting in these routes and I think we should at least give him to the end of this season. If it helps, some of these new climbs may be the hardest in the state. The guy working on them says they're probably hard M10. Jason

Scrambler has a point about the mounties. There are always good people around and there are always bad. Certainly some instructors are going to be great and some are not. Jason

Just to play devils advocate... There are a lot of people out there who have learned how to climb from mentors outside the mounties circle who only have a couple years of experience and purport to be experts. There are a lot of people out there who have many years of climbing experience who really don't know what they're doing either. And learning from a book alone is simply not enough for most people. How many can say that as a whole, when they were in school they learned more from their books than from their teachers? There are many proficient climbers out there who never took a class from anybody. But I believe that those who are truly proficient that learned this way are the minority, not the majority of those who climb. So it seems that both avenues present a bit of a dilemma. One could take a mounties class and learn from someone with only a year or two of experience or one could learn from someone outside the circle whose skills may be just as suspect. The only way to be truly sure that you are getting professional instruction is to take a class from a reputable guide service. Unfortunately this is expensive, but at least you'll learn how to do things the right way the first time around. Jason

There are still routes being developed on this wall and fixed lines have been left in some locations to impliment the continued work on this and other walls in the area. If you see a climb with tape on the bolts DO NOT climb the route. The people who have put in the bolts get first dibs on these routes. It means that they have not yet been climbed by the people who put in the bolts and should not be climbed until the red flagging on the bolts is removed. Jason

Comment Period on Plan

Though Alternative Three is clearly the best I agree with j_b. Limited guiding on technical routes should be considered, even if it's only a half dozen permits. Nothing has been decided yet. The best thing we can do to change the current situation is to write to the park service in support of Alternative 3. Talking about how we're for or against it on this website doesn't do anything. Writing an email to them has a far greater impact. Jason

There have been a few citations written and some threats of jail time... Certainly cars on the road create a larger issue than the actual climbing. Jason

She said it on "Real Time with Bill Mhare(sp?)". Of course he and the other liberal guest ripped her apart on that one while a conservative senator just sat there with a little child molestor smile on his face and watched it happen. Jason

What do you think would happen if Fox New reviewed Al Franken or Michael Moore's books? Do you think they would be fair and balanced reviews? If so you haven't been paying attention to Fox News. The liberal bias thing is a myth. The New York Times is a mainstream newspaper. And to attack the newspaper because of who their book reviewer chooses to review is just plain stupid. It is not evidence of a political slant, but evidence of the fact that there are thousands upon thousands upon thousands of books published each year. And there is ample evidence that Bill O'Reily and Ann Coulter are idiots... Why review them? On the other hand, I wonder if they have reviewed the Colin Powell book, "My American Journey." I wonder if they have reviewed any one of a number of books on the Regan years. Conservatives (in particular those like Coulter and O'Reilly) who cry unfair because the newspaper didn't review their books are the same ones who blame liberals if anything goes wrong. "Oh my toilets clogged, blame the liberals." "Oh the economy's falling apart and we're in a terrible debt, it was clearly Clinton's fault even though he had a surplus." My favorite Coulter line of all time was when she said that "liberals can't have good sex." Clearly something that has nothing to do with politics whatsoever, but the type of thing that makes a person look stupid for saying. O'Reilly contradicts himself and puts people down on a regular basis for confronting him on his views, something that makes him look stupid. There is clearly a right wing media machine with Fox news and talk radio. These media outlets verbally attack the left on a regular basis. If the New York Times is a liberal wing of the media and the best that they can do to show how left wing they are is to not review some books, they aren't doing a very good job at being a liberal media outlet. Jason

Dru, Those things are almost as dorky as hand jammies. Scott, An adjustable daisy is a step up. But you still can't adjust yourself out very far. Sometimes I set myself up ten or fifteen feet down from the actual belay on a clove hitch so that I can look down over a lip to see and hear my second. It's partially a matter of preferance and partially a matter of who your climbing with. If you're climbing with beginners a lot or you have a potential situation where you're going to have to move away from the belay some distance, then tying directly in with the rope is better. If you're climbing with the same guys all the time and you don't feel a need to put in this additional means of manuevering there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Jason

MisterE, Read the John Long book. Or even better, the "Technical Handbook for Professional Mountain Guides." The Magic X doesn't follow all the tenants for a SRENE anchor, which is arguably the best anchor. (Solid gear, Redundant throughout the system, Equalized, with No Extension) The Magic X is usually not redundant and has extension. Sideloading on an anchor already loaded with bodyweight which has been led up to with the rope running through the pieces below is somewhat unlikely. All that said, people do things different ways and though I'm a bit down on the system you describe it's unlikely to fail unless one of your pieces blows, then the extension in the system is going to screw you. But in a multi-pitch sport climbing scenario this isn't going to happen. Thus I don't like your system, but it's not wrong. Your reasoning for using your system however is a little off in most scenarios. Jason

There's no valid reason that I can think of off the top of my head for switching ends of the rope. Perhaps with a weird rock rescue scenario... But even then...? Following is a quick breakdown of what I do on a multi-pitch climb. A multi-pitch sport climb is no different than a multi-pitch trad climb and there are many right ways to do this. 1) Climb to your belay station and buid an anchor using a cordellette or a double-length shoulder sling. Ideally this should be built with an overhand eight knot as the powerpoint. I don't do a magic x at belay stations as there is no advantage. (See John Long's Climbing Anchors book for more info on the standard overhand eight SRENE belay station.) The reason I do this instead of clipping into anchor bolts with double runners coming off my harness or a daisy chain into one and the rope into the other has to do with rock rescue. If you want to easily escape your belay, haul your second or any one of a number of other things, having a cordellete or a double length sling anchor is more effective. 2) Once the belay is built, I generally tie into the power point with my rope using a clove hitch. I do not use a daisy chain here, in fact I don't use a daisy chain for anything but aid climbing. The reason I tie in with a clove hitch instead of some kind of sling type approach is because I want to be able to adjust my position. With a clove hitch instead of a daisy I can make myself closer or further from the anchor at any point without untying from the anchor. This may be important if you need to adjust yourself to see your second if he is a newbie or something. It simply gives you more flexibility. 3) There are two effective ways to belay a second from this type of station. First you may belay directly off the anchor using a reverso, a gigi, a grigri, or a munter hitch. Second, you may redirect the rope from your harness through a caribiner in the shelf and back down to your partner. The nice thing about belaying off the anchor is that once again rock rescue is simple from here. You do not have to escape the belay to do anything. You were never in it to begin with. For those of you not framiliar, the shelf is the spot above the figure eight in your anchor system. You may clip a carabiner between each of the strands here and have a second powerpoint which is completely equalized. When you redirect, using the shelf is an important consideration. If the climber below falls, both your weight and his weight are on all points of the anchor in this system. If you have only clipped one point of the anchor and are redirecting through that, then when the climber below falls, both your weight and his are on that one point as well. Having both your weights on all points of the anchor is clearly better. But periodically for whatever reason, you have to redirect through one point of the anchor... There are very few reasons to belay directly off your harness to the climber. Clearly if you are at an excellent hanging belay and you are belaying directly off your harness to the climber below and that climber falls, you are getting pulled down and it's quite uncomfortable. The only reason I might belay off my body is if I'm on a trad climb in weird ground at a poor belay station. If I don't trust all the gear in my belay or there is little gear to trust, I might belay off my body because I might be able to position my body in such a way that it becomes part of the system and backs things up to some extent... Clearly this is used only in exteme situations once in a blue moon. 4) As you belay your partner up, you may butterfly stack the rope over the line which you are tied in on. This keeps the rope from hanging all over the wall and getting caught on things. It also sets up the rope nicely for the next person to lead out. If you are doing all the leading you may either pancake the rope onto your partners tie in line or restack it over his line so that your end is on top. This is far safer than doing some kind of untying and retying craziness. Hope all this helps! Jason

Options one and two essentially keep RMI as the sole concessionaire. Jason

The gigi works extremely well with thin lines. Jason

Reverso's are awesome devices, but they wear out. I think they are the best device for bringing a second up and it seems stupid to just use it in one venue. And technique has little to do with it. The best thing to do is to treat the Reverso like a rope. When it gets old, retire it. I did the atc and gigi thing for a long time and I agree that if you're really worried about it, this is the way to go. Jason

Once again, if you look closely we have included this info for some routes but no where near all. You have to read the route descriptions to find it. The direction the route faces is really only important if it's south. This is the biggest factor in climbs not forming. Within the book, you will find that many areas are listed to be south facing. Don't go there unless it's been cold for awhile. Jason

November 7, 2003 CLIMBER COMMENTS NEEDED BY DECEMBER 5 TO NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CLIMBING MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ROSS LAKE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA IN WASHINGTON STATE’S NORTH CASCADES On October 28 the National Park Service (NPS) announced that it will begin the scoping process for a Frontcountry Climbing Environmental Assessment and Management Plan (CMP) for the Ross Lake National Recreation Area (Ross Lake NRA). Over the past few years, rock climbers and boulderers have been developing new routes and bouldering areas in the Skagit River Gorge between Newhalem and Diablo along the North Cascades Highway. Potential controversial issues in the CMP may include bolting, cleaning of moss and vegetation away from rocks, and clearing rock and debris to create trails and improve bouldering landing zones. An extensive website has been developed for one of the crags (www.misha.org/Climbing/Newhalem/Map1.html) and word has spread quickly among the climbing community. There are many opportunities for additional climbing routes and bouldering in the Frontcountry (i.e. non-wilderness) of Ross Lake National Recreation Area (NRA), given the ease of access and abundance of rock. Your comments are needed no later than December 5th to provide input regarding the scope of the CMP. The Scoping Process The NPS seeks public input to help them identify issues and concerns concerning recreational climbing in the Ross Lake NRA. Climbers should take this opportunity to tell the NPS what they think are important issues that the CMP should cover – that is, the “scope” of the CMP. Once the NPS receives all the public input during this scoping phase, it will then produce a “draft CMP” with range of alternatives that progress from “no action” to increasingly higher levels of regulation and/or management. Once the NPS releases this “draft CMP” – later this winter -- the public will again have the opportunity to comment, both in written form and public meetings. Hopefully a final CMP will be in place by next spring. See the Access Fund’s scoping comments to the Indian Creek Corridor Plan (http://accessfund.org/whoweare/COMMENTS/IndianCreekEA.htm) for an example of how to write scoping comments. The NPS has identified the following preliminary issues that will be addressed in the Ross Lake NRA CMP: Fixed anchors Climber paths Route "cleaning" Human waste Cultural resources Safety New Climbing Routes See http://accessfund.org/programs/RossLake-scoping-PR.htm for the NPS press release announcing the scoping process. In addition to the issues specified by the NPS noted above, the Access Fund also suggests addressing some of these issues with more specificity: -What level of fixed anchor use is appropriate, and what process, if any, should be used to authorize new fixed anchor placements. -Should bouldering have its own set of management actions? The physical extent of the CMP. -What level of cleaning, if any, should be allowed for the development of climbing routes and bouldering? -Where and how should access trails be built, and by whom. Washington Department of Transportation (WDOT) will need to be a partner on this aspect of the plan. -How and when should human waste management issues be addressed. -Where parking should be provided. Both Seattle City Light and WDOT will need to partner on many of these parking issues. -Safety issues pertaining to auto traffic, hiking access and parking. -Natural resource management actions. Your scoping comments should also indicate your name, where you live, why climbing is so important to you, and why the climbing and bouldering at Newhalem is so special. Make sure to comment during both the scoping phase as well as during the draft CMP public comment period. The more letters the NPS receives from reasonable sounding climbers offering practical solutions to current or potential impact issues the better. Send you comments by December 5, 2003 to: Superintendent North Cascades National Park Service Complex 810 State Route 20 Sedro-Woolley, WA 98284 Comments may also be sent via e-mail to: NOCA_Superintendent@nps.gov Or by fax: 360-856-1934 If you have questions, please contact Roy Mason Zipp, Natural Resources Specialist at (360) 873-7490 extension 31 or e-mail roy_zipp@nps.gov.

It was in excess of four years of work to get what's there. Clearly with all the "Rumors of Ice" there is TONS more research to do. We could have kept researching and trying to get all this information, but then you wouldn't have seen the book for three or four more years. As Alex stated sometimes the information just wasn't available. This is why we have a website up for you guys to help us make the second edition better. Also, if you look inside many of the route descriptions you will find the lengths of pitches. Clearly there are a number without feet or meters, but that's part of the game too. If a sixty meter rope is required we have indicated it. Jason

I do think the pack is really heavy and I do think it does have way too many bells and whistles on it. However, that said, if you need that kind of space it's a decent pack. They don't seem to make many large capacity packs without a bunch of extra crap on them which make them heavy. Jason

Don't rent it. Ignore it. Pretend like it doesn't exist. And while your at it pretend like the second movie doesn't exist either. It's really hard for me to understand how anyone could like the third movie. There were a few interesting things in the second, but really almost nothing in the third. I guess if you really like people whispering to each other, underdeveloped characters, an extremely drawn out and boring death scene for one of the characters, lots of people who are going to be killed by machines in "just a few hours" but don't really seem to do anything about it, and an extremely sappy and sentimental ending... Maybe you might like it. The movie is not just bad, it's BORING and bad. When Neo disappears for about a half hour of the film, I don't care, because by that time I could care less about him anymore. The movie just plain sucks. Jason

I just saw the new Matrix piece of trash. It is utterly horrible. I would urge everyone to avoid it. The movie is not only boring, but just plain stupid. Jason

Sean Issac mentioned that he was going there at the Indoor Ice Comp in Everett. He said he went there before with no problems. He told me that he was going back to the same place he went last time this year to climb some more crazy routes. I'd check in AAJ's for recent activity there. And there were two books written about the kidnapping. One of them was by Greg Child and the other was by someone else I can't remember. Check Climbing Magazine#199 and #206 for more beta on the kidnappings. Jason