dberdinka

Size large, worn for a single day of ski touring. Great pant/layer. I just decided since I don't actually do any winter/alpine climbing anymore I'd be better off with a more ski specific pair of pants. I'm 5' 11" and 170-175lbs and they fit fine. $180 + shipping. ($300 retail) PM or email dberdinka AT gmail DOT com. NWAlpinist Salophette

For climbers of modest abilities and limited risk threshhold the Twin Sisters Range is great. Solid, grippy rock with big exposure on easy terrain. The linkup described below was the most enjoyable day of traveling alone that I've ever had. Green Creek Glacier Area

I think the Adjama is the best do everything harness I've had. Of course it seemed to fit ME much better than the other brands I tried on. I say try on 4-6 different brands and go with whatever fits best. Same thing with helmets.

Single mini-traxion. Though I think about getting a second one.... What the other guy calls a catastrophe knot is always a good idea.

Jeff Jackson at Rock & Ice wrote up an article that seems fairly balanced and relies heavily on this thread. Article Who would have thought CC.com would be a bastion of "restrained rhetoric"?

Howling Wolf Ridge has a great name. On the drive in, shortly before the parking lot, there is a great vantage point of the valley including Howling Wolf. In the middle of the ridge there is a rock formation on the skyline that looks exactly like a howling wolf. As a climb it looked a bit dirty but who knows.

Nice collection of gear but it seems like you would have way better luck hocking it on Supertopo or possibly Ebay.

"The fastest I've done Backbone Ridge was 54 minutes base to summit." It's all impressive but that strikes me as really freaking fast for 2000+' of mildly-chossy 5th class rock. Dang.

The wherewithal he had to sit there and make a little movie is pretty fucking crazy. Thats one tough dude.

Why so much butt hurt? His last TR appears fairly tame intially? Catched Version

Beautiful images. I'm guessing your buddy is hooked now.

Anyone up at the pass over the weekend? Curious if the snow has melted off, particularly on east faces. Thanks.

Just realized I left a substantial TR anchor at the top of the small beginners crag a few minutes above the main Fun Rocks crag two weeks ago. Would love to get it back. $40 plus shipping? PM or email at dberdinka AT gmail DOT com. Thanks!

On second thought maybe the FS should shut down access and make rock climbing illegal.

On Tuesday afternoon there was 5"-6" at the pass. About the same at Harts Pass on Monday. My impression was that on the spires themselves the snow would not have been significantly deeper. However on TAY there is a report of 4' of pow on the Lewis Glacier at 6800' just south of Rainy Pass. Telemetry shows 50+ degree temps over the last several days at Pass level with warming now occuring at 6800'. Shutdown signs exist but nothing saying you can't use the trail only the unlocked and recently cleaned pit toilet.

I've been real happy with Gaia as a GPS, tracking, route creation app. It's expensive (relatively speaking) but you get what you pay for. You can download for free multiple layer of maps for all of North America and a bunch of other places. Then use these in the backcountry where you have no cellular service.

Sure everyone in Leavenworth wants more regulation and restricted access to the local mountains. That makes a lot of sense! Your ability to find a conspiracy in every event combined with your inflamed sense of victimization by the "Other" is just so darn....Conservative!

Hi Max. I believe Paul Preuss was the most famous and effective communicator of a strict "Leave No Trace" ethic for climbers. But that idea effectively died with him in 1913. Climbers are going to very reasonably leave rappel anchors. In the mid-1990's the Forest Service very nearly banned ALL fixed anchors in wilderness areas they managed. That included bolts, pins and webbing on natural features. As I recall with the help of big industrial players (REI etc.) that was rescinded. The issue of fixed anchors has now been clarified within wilderness areas of National Parks. My issue with North Cascades National Park is that they are clearly not following the spirit or word of the order. You can and should read Order #41 here. Directors Order #41 "If significant climbing activities occur in wilderness, a climbing management plan must be prepared or be included as part of the park's wilderness stewardship plan or another activity level plan. Plans will be developed with the aid of public involvement and collaboration and will include public review and comment. The occasional placement of a fixed anchor for belay, rappel or protection purposes does not necessarily impair the future enjoyment of wilderness or violate the Wilderness Act." A complete moratorium on bolting with no scheduled development of a climbing management plan does not follow that order in the least. Having not been on Forbidden in many years I am not convinced that the West Ridge gullies needed bolted rappel stations anymore than North Early needed a second rappel route. That said I'm not concerned about overbolting in NCNP either. The geography and geology simply prevent that from being a possibility. What bothers me is that those bolts were placed lawfully within the regulations established by the NCNP at the time and they were removed haphazardly by the park to enforce some sort of perceived historical climbing style. While other national parks have active climbing management plans and rangers, I personally cannot think of any other examples where the park service engaged in the active placement or removal of anchors on established and frequently climbed routes. As pointed out above there could very likely be liability issues in doing so. Clearly it's a long stretch to claim that the recent fatality would not have happened if the bolted anchors were still there. Yet based on the amount of loose rock, tat and bad anchors on that face combined with a history of gruesome rappelling accidents in Boston Basin there placement certainly seems to be prescient in retrospect. I know the climbing rangers for NCNP both read and have posted on CC.com in the past. Maybe they would like to provide their perspective on Order #41, their moratorium and the removal of anchors on Forbidden Peak.

My position is inconsistent . Or maybe more accurately my position is not expressedly for or against which in this polarized era of debate will obviously confuse people. So my position is "Used judiciously when clean gear is generally not available they can be an asset." Though I've placed quite a few up there myself WA Pass has seen in my mind the excessive use of unnecessary bolts in recent years. To whit adding another rappel route to a peak that already has a retro-bolted rappel route strikes me as excessive. On Vesper we established the route ground up hand drilling 2 bolts and using generally mediocre pins for protection and anchors. Considering that pins are a complete relic I felt justified in replacing beak placements and tied off pin belays with bolts (SS power bolts at that). There are more great lines to do on Vesper. Considering the heavy levels of munge on that wall if I head back it will be top down. At that point feel free to call me a hypocrite.

Really I just wanted to complain about it on the internet this morning. No constructive action taken.....

It's the sort of intransigence that doesn't recognize or acknowledge that the West Ridge of Forbidden is unique in that it gets an enormous % of the total technical climbing usage in the range by climbers of all levels of ability. That this is one place where good fixed anchors might really be appropriate.

So I missed this development over the summer. "On May 13, 2013 the National Park Service released a policy directive entitled Director's Orders #41 (Wilderness). The policy allows parks to authorize fixed anchors through development of a Climbing Management or similar Plan only if the activity is deemed appropriate in that park." This was generally considered to be good news for climbers as it was not a blanket ban that many expected. However North Cascades National Park has apparently had a two-fold response. 1) NCNP has established a mandatory moratorium on installing new fixed anchors. "However, the NPS intends to engage the public in a planning process to address climbing related issues as time and resources allow." 2) More controversially the park service has been chopping existing anchors as well. They've been accused of chopping relatively new bolted rap anchors on the heavily used gully descent off the west ridge of Forbidden Peak. It's been suggested that the recent fatality on Forbidden may have been avoided had these anchors been in place. I'm personally bothered by their rather draconian approach for a number of reasons. In large part it amounts to mentality that a certain perceived stasis must be enforced with no regards to actual historical, cultural or environmental merit. For example NCNP claims the moratorium exists "In order to preserve a wilderness experience that reflects a raw style of mountaineering in a range that has changed little since Fred Beckey made first ascents of now-popular peaks." Yet Fred Beckey was willing to drill MANY bolts on numerous first ascents in the North Cascades and elsewhere if they proved necessary. Witness the East Buttress of South Early, Flagpole Needle in the Enchantments, Baron Spire in the Sawtooths or Zeus and Moses in Canyonlands. Nothing jumps out at me in NCNP proper but thats a rock quality issue more than some self-enforced raw style of climbing. Of course the number of bolts that have proliferated within NCNP over the last 50 years is ridiculously low. Yet if climbers are to have the ability to explore new lines inevitably they will be pushed out on to more imposing and blanker faces that could potentially require the judicious use of bolts. So the question remains Is removal of existing anchors part of their official policy? When and will they actually develop a climbing management plan that involves the input of the community? (Of course I should probably call them up and ask!) Any thoughts?

Not only will you be carrying blue bags Pat you'll soon be carrying a urine container in the high country as well. Nothing causes more damage in the alpine than the frantic consumption of your urine by mountain goats. A bear container will be mandatory as well lest we see more of these "climbers methods for hanging food". Or maybe just a well sealed ziplock in your urine container will suffice. I'm honestly alarmed by the facebook photos that contain pics of the staging zone at the foot of Snow Creek Wall, or a slightly rearranged bivi ledge on Serpentine Arete. No reason the FS couldn't decide that due to impacts SCW now requires a permit much like the Enchantments.

Interesting that it's a state agency providing the funding for a ranger position on federal land. Goes to show how broken the FS is. Cost 56k. "The primary recreation opportunity provided by this project is responsible use and continued access to hundreds of climbing areas and thousands of climbing routes in the popular Leavenworth area." Of course that is the intent of the Recreation & Conservation Office. Not sure how much control they have over it's actual implementation.

I think Pete has hit the nail on the head as far as to where significant NEW impacts are occuring, further aggrevated by the popularity and lack of dispersion of bouldering. Trad climbers poop too it's just scattered all over the hillside and the access trails are possibly more established. Certainly the rangers could make a positive impact on the area if they organized or invested their energy in coming up with solutions for waste disposal or formalizing trail networks. Which would require acknowledgement that climbing in all it's forms and locations is an acceptable use of national forest land. Knocking over cairns on a (relatively) lightly used access route to a remote backcountry wall then spraying about it on facebook does absolutely nothing to protect the resource or improve the relationship between climbers and the forest service. I also find their mission statement on the facebook to be essentially anti-climbing. It certainly makes no effort to acknowledge climbing as an acceptable recreational use of national forest. Furthermore photos on their facebook page imply an inordinate concern over erosion at what they term the base/staging areas of popular climbs such as Outer Space. Would be curious to know what their intentions are other than monitoring. Ultimately based on their behavior so far as expressed through their social media I think everyone here has very good cause to be wary of their intentions.