crazyjizzy

Hiking out to the mountains and setting up a tent is also a selfish goal. Climbing a mountain is just about the most selfish thing that you could do. Only if you affect others to their, or the environments detriment So what are you arguing for here, huts or no huts? Some would argue that since the population density is higher, a few well placed huts would mitigate impact. But you would just whine that these people are stupid I am making the arguement that new huts are not appropriate in the central and northern Cascades You're just so right on today, Jizz! I totally think that we should pave all trails and build hotels, motels, and a Hooters high up in the alpine! While we're at it, could you be my bitch and carry up my stuff for me? I don't want to throw out my back carrying that heavy pack. Oh, fuck yourself. You were the one who effusively wrote about how huts in Europe serve food Far less money? I imagine definetely not. But it sounds like there are some areas that would benefit from concentrating use (campspots). I don't think the huts in the Coast Range (the ones that got me thinking about this whole bit anyway) were built to concentrate use anyway. I am sure that several hardened campsites are much cheaper than the EIS for a hut, much less than the hut itself. There is no comparison to the Canadain Huts. Those in the Bugs etc, are more akin to the high use areas of Camp Four and Snells Field. These are in places that a person could go to for several weeks. Other huts are of historical age. Other huts are in very desolate areas, as a bit of help to access via air. I never advocated for building in a wilderness area. Correct, Matt Perkins did. I was responding to several posts, by several posters Wow- You've got me pegged again, Jizz! I totally want to build a Hooters at Cascade Pass, and one on the Ptarmigan Traverse as well! Right along side those monster Hotels I want to build. How did you guess that? There's a huge difference between building a simple hut with wood bunks/cookstove near a wilderness area and building some of thesyour hotels and Hooters in a wilderness area like you metioned. I don't see it as a slippery slope as you do. Where would your hypothetical hut be? Could people approach it with helicopters? Why not? Again, I never advocated for building in a wilderness area. See my earlier response Which you did. You originally contributed nothing to this thread except getting your panties all stuck up your ass and jumping up and down and ranting and raving. Instead of having a discussion, you had nothing better to contribute than calling people idiots. I thought people stopped doing that in highschool (or are you still in highschool?). Matt Perkins is a disingenous person. He is stretching the truth to say I am anonymous. How did he call me at my house if he didn't know who I am. Who are you? Are you really who you say? This whole "anonymous" thing is really a specious arguement when used against most long time posters. Your logic amazes me. Obviously somebody was just pointing out that you've stayed at many huts elsewhere in the mountains and enjoyed them, so why not in your own beloved cascades? Sounds like hypocricy to me. People are all about hypocracy, and what is appropriate Fair enough. That's about the most constructive thing you stated this whole thread. So why are the lowlands acceptable to you and not the alpine? Is it personal (i.e. maybe you only go to the alpine and don't care about the lowlands anyway, so go ahead and build huts there) or due to some environmental reasons?

Dalius said So lets discuss this shit, and make matt pee happy. I believe most arguments for huts in Washington are based on lazy and selfish goals. What is appropriate one place is not always appropriate someplace else. The population density of the US is much higher than in NZ or Canada. So, are you advocating hotels in the wilderness (or Wilderness)? Too lazy to carry your shit to Boston Basin? That is correct. But would more effort into more hardened campsites result in more landscape protection for far less money? And without the hypocrisy of a hut? Who would want to bunk in a hut at Boston Basin, with people arriving late at night, and leaving at all hours? How does putting a building up allow for more people to bond with nature. If “Helihiking” was allowed to occur in NCNP more people could “bond”. How about if the 4 x 4’ers were allowed to bond by driving over Cascade Pass? This is a specious, selfish, and hypocritical statement. It implies that a building inside a designated wilderness is OK because it is for “us”. Continuing this hypocritical shit, dalius wants to get all cutsie cutsie with the rules: So, he is saying (again) that playing fast and loose with the spirit of the law is OK, because it is us. Climbers were the ones who saved NCNP. There is patented land in the Cascade Pass, Thunder Creek, and Ptarmigan Traverse areas. In the past, tourist helicopters have landed here, causing much hue and cry. I could buy a piece of patented land, follow land use rules, pass the UBC and IBC, and build a Hooters. Trask and his pals could fly in on helicopters, bringing in lots of fuel for all of my generators. People miles away would love my sound system. It’s all legal. My point here, is that those who would support a hut squeezed onto the edge of a Wilderness, would have no moral standing to oppose the JoBerg Hooters that give me and Trask so much joy. These statements are I believe fine examples why huts a not needed in the Cascades Only a half-day hike from the car? Not a real climber? Where is the need? Can’t real climbers carry a tent? Can’t hikers go to Boston Basin? It seems as though a hut would be hypocritical, as well as an assault on the Wilderness act, or in the very least an assault on it spirit. How about this logic: Re: Colchuck Lake I’m not a laywer, but isn’t that the wish of the Wilderness Act, and by extension, the people of the USA? Or this example of lack of brains: The fact is, there isn’t a whole lot of wilderness out there in Washington, much less enough for a wilderness user group to be destroying it. Then Matt Perkins accuses me of anonymously calling him a dumbshit. This is a disingenuous accusation. It is based on the premise that Matt Perkins is not a dumbshit, and does not know who “Crazyjizzy” is. In fact, he has called me at my house several times regarding my posts about Infinite Bliss. He is attempting to show he is a victim of anonymous name-calling. This is not true. Matt Perkins is a lawyer, and highly trained at disingenuously altering facts. I did call him a dumbshit, but to solicit sympathy in this fashion is playing fast and loose with the truth. AlpineK accuses me of hypocrisy, and being a motherfucker. I have also been to Hooters, I read the paper, and I use coins. That does not mean I want a Hooters franchise in Matt Perkins Boston Basin hotel, that I want a huge copper mine at Image Lake, or I want to clear-cut Mount Rainier National Park. I submit that AlpineK is one dumb cock-sucker. I stated earlier that I do think that there are spots in the cascades where a hut would be OK. But not in the high alpine. But I do respect AlpineK’s ability to fight, and to name call without getting his panties in a bunch

I have also been to Hooters, I read the paper, and I use coins. That does not mean I want a Hooters franchise in Matt Perkins Boston Basin hotel, that I want a huge copper mine at Image Lake, or I want to clear-cut Mount Rainier National Park. I submit that AlpineK is one dumb cock-sucker.

It ain't "powder coat", it paint. I've built more steel buildings than you have.

This is spray, in the climbers forum! STFU. How do you like your own medicine? Hypocrit.

The impact of a hut in a heavily forested valley is less than a building at Boston Basin. Duh. You could see the building and it's shiny metal roof from the road. People who camp at Colchuck Lake do not want to bunk in a building with fifty other people. Is that clear enough. The comments about "soft" came from others, from ascensionist, which I clearly stated. There is no analogy between the Bugaboos and any spot in the Cascades.

The environment in the following places would beneift greatly with huts: Baker(Coleman/Deming) A fine and historical hut site. CJZ would firmly support it. Sahale Hanaggen Pass (that campground is tramped to hell) Snow Lake No Various spots on Ross Lake every 10-15 miles Sure Glacier Peak again, historical sites Wonderland Trail every 10-15 miles ditto Mt. Olympus

He said so right here How's your reading comprehension?

I don't have to, I'm the Uberator

If it was a UH 1, then it was probably Army Reserve. I participated in a rescue at Vantage in 1998, where a UH 60 did a litter pick-up. I think Navy is MAST, I do not believe that CG is MAST.

Yes, in 1986 That is incredible. You really have a friend?

My buddies on ASC agree with me, so go fuck off. ------------------------------------------------------------ I couldn't agree more, Mark. Some good arguments. Huts a half-day ski from the car??? Perkins must be getting soft in his old age. My experience with structures is in teh Adirondacks of New York. They have extensive trail systems and a great system of lean-tos; however, they, and many of the trails were maintained by the Adirondack Club (ADK) or whatever they are called. There is also John's Brook Lodge out from Keene Valley and I think that was privately run. In a population dense area like the Cascades, making people work for their wilderness experience keeps the numbers in check. From things I've read, easy access to the Dolomites, the hut systems, and via ferrata, really make it crowded up there. I definitely think that you can't compare the Cascades to the Alps/Dolomites of Europe. Besides, how do they plan to pay for it? --------------------------------------------------------- Hell no, I think the Cascades need huts, mountain top pubs, trams to remote peaks so more first assents can be put in Euro-style & a light rail system that would allow the masses to get some alpine time the easy way, PLUS we should think of privatizing the public lands so more recreational development can take place (ATV trails, Mt. Bike trails, XC systems with lodges offering massage, wine, cheese, caviar, champagne, Nordic resorts in North Cascades National Park so more extreme skiing can take place with little effort of approach). Man Old Perkins is on top of things, lets run him for “pubic” office. Just to add a side note to this: I attended a American Alpine Club meeting on Capital Hill a few years back with some of the "blue noses" of CC.com. They were mostly Brits that work for the Evil Empire. Their main concern was how to change AAC attitude more toward "THE" Alpine Club. WTF this is United States of America, last I remember we kicked their asses out of the Colonies to do it OUR way. Fuck the hut system because 1. we won't hire a hut guardian to keep it ship shape 2. to guard against vandalism 3. to keep users that don't pay for the hut from using it 4. keep the hutn in repairs. Just look at the NPS and the NFS so see how well of a job our taxes keep things in repair. Nope keep it like it is... ---------------------------------------------------------- The more complicated the Starbucks order, the bigger the asshole. -------------------------------------------------------- I think huts are a great idea. It's a great place to go pee-pee so no one can see your pathetic excuse for a wang. It makes a good place to poop when it's raining. You can use it for target practice, or a place to park your 4 wheeler in the wilderness. Also, AlpineKunt can smoke his dope in there and piss off Scottery'x. ------------------------------------------------------------ At Smith Rock, we do not have, nor do we need, any huts. We hang out in our puffies until it's time to send, then we step up and fire that rig. Then we head to the fucking pub like men; none of this lurking in a hut drinking Nutella tea and eating dry pancake mix because the jerky got eaten by a polar bear. Fuck yeah!

Maybe I don't want any "mountain" huts. Like the Cascades need a bunch of huts, you can walk across the range in a day. How is Boston Basin not accessible now? Colchuck Lake is enough of a zoo, without a dirty fucking lowland hut. It is a dumb idea, and you're a dumb ass.

When there are riots in the street, and the pundits are predicting that civil war is near, is that a real reason for tourists to stay away? I was here first. Actually, you probably were not. I started posting here as anonymous in real early, November(?) 2000. I registered a couple of weeks later. I also started climbing in 1975. So there.

Even if it was Bhag, the stunning pillar isn't the Scottish Pillar. The stunning pillar is the one Flavelle and Lane did the second ascent of.