Rodchester

When do they close the road up to the parking area on Pilchuck? Anybody?

Yeah...don't know much about Gov't contracts uh? The system has a built in preference for those already contracted. There has not been what is refered to as an open bid in many years. So to say there has been an actual competetive bid is bung. In fact even under this new proposed system, Lou's gang gets a prefernce. I have heard some in the park refer to the proposed plan as the "Lou and two plan." RMI is in like Flynn and the two remaining spots are open for competition. I'm not in love with any of the plans, but since these are the choices, I'll take the "Lou and two plan." And why is it soo many people have such ahtred in thier hearts about Bush? I'm certainly no Bush lover, but come on.

I can stand that... you are a [insert insult implying stupid with money]. This is a different Senator offering a different bill that would effectively end the fee system (park pass) as we know it. I think it is a great idea to eliminate it. Lummox...if you want to keep paying the fees to use the National Forest lands, that's your opinion...but I disagree. I want to see the parking and volcano pass end. The National Park's system of fees is different and entrance fees have always existed. Not that I love them, but I'll put up with it. I'll take the non-fee use of the National Forests any day.

I can stand that...

Minx: I too have spent lots of time there and love it. However, I have often wondered if I could adjust to year round living in WY. Jackson can be cool, but sooo touristy and crowded. Other towns like Dubious are really cool, but sooo small. My wife insists that I'd go crazy and that the winters are too cold for her. I had a buddy that lived in the Jackson area for five years when he was in his early to mid 20s and he loved it then and still looks back foldly on his time in the area. Another buddy moved to Bozeman for a year and a half and also loved it, but eventually came back to Seattle. I think a large part of the problem would be making a living. If you can do it, I'd try it for a couple of years. Good luck with your decision.

Agree...not saying it is super hard or anything, but it was harder than 5.4. Cool route though. I'd say 5.6.

The Federal Wilderness Act dates back to the 1960s..I think 1965. It is Federal and controls specifcially designated Wilderness areas in National Forests. That has always been my understanding (I actully did some research on it in law school some years ago). But I can't confirm this 100%. I am curious, because if this is the case then Camp Muir is a violation of the Act. Do you have a cite for the Washington law that you refer to?

I'll second the Lowe packs. I also have an Alpine Attack 50 and really like it...though I'd love it if it had the same tool system as my TNF pack. But be advised it now has a light frame...great for humping moderate alpine loads and occasionally heavier loads. But if you want an old fashioned rucksack, its not your pack. Alpine Attck 50 Also check out the South Peak for a smaller pack.

Some of the TNF packs have a version of "tool tubes" that aren't actually a "tube" of material, but a ring at the top and bottom (with the same quick release. This allows you to slide in any tool, bent, straight, or whatever. I have an older version and love it. I don't know the names of the packs now-a-days. Good luck.

This doesn't sound like a way to recoup costs, but a way to raise cash for other things. That is pure BS. This would in effect make rescues a profit center for the Sheriff's Dept. This could in turn raise other potential liability issues. A very dangerous path for the county. Some lawyer MIGHT get rich on this one. yea...all those guys getting rich at the sheriff's dept! Give me a break. Those helis are expensive. I sure $1000 doesn't even cover their costs for one rescue. I think it encourages a little more responsibility. You missed the point. A governmental entity is USUALLY immune from suit, unless it is conducting a business. If it is disclosed, as they did here, that the intent is to raise cash for other services (not cover costs) then a solid argument could be made that they are in the rescue business...and their immunity could be lost. This could open them up to suits that might otherwise be barred due to their immunity. I did not say anything about cops making money off of it. I said it could be viewed as a profit center. If it generates profits (i.e. funds to be spent on other things) this could create a situation of liability. Sorry if you thought I meant profits as in barney Fife gets to take home money.

This doesn't sound like a way to recoup costs, but a way to raise cash for other things. That is pure BS. This would in effect make rescues a profit center for the Sheriff's Dept. This could in turn raise other potential liability issues. A very dangerous path for the county. Some lawyer MIGHT get rich on this one.

Not climbing, but adventure: Shakelton's Antarctic trip with the crew of the Endurance is in my mind the greatest epic of survival of all time. It even makes Simpson’s story seem almost short and sweet. Well, almost anyway.

The ability to exhaust exiting stock is very common place in these types of purchase and sale agreements. Otherwise the deals wouldn't go through. This is not just the outdoor industry, but most all industries that produce a product. Sorry to hear about Twight getting the raw end of the deal, but its not illegal. While the deal may screw some, it benefits others . . .even some of the small guys. Also, the stock will eventually be liqudated, and Twight, assuming his relationship with Grivel NA continues, will be back in business. It just sucks to hang on in the meantime.

Illegal sale? Check that? My understanding from people in the industry and from people at Mammut-Europe is that Mammut purchased Climb High with the eventual goal of it serving as the North American distributor for all Mammut products. Because Mammut makes and sells its own line of hardware in Europe (actually they have someone else make it and then stamp the Mammut name on it) and because Grivel is a major competitor, they could not continue to carry Grivel. Grivel was also not interested in having their primary competitor distribute their product in the states when Mammut is going to make a push into the North American market. This is simply an evolution of the business and neither Grivel nor Mammut were interested in working with each other. Would you trust your distribution to your competitor? The stock “on hand” was purchased in the sale and a right of exhaustion was likely given. This is typical in the business. Otherwise you’d be buying stock that you can’t sell. That is why Climb High is blowing out the old stock. I am aware of this through some business connections in Europe and some sponsored climbers that I know and work with (on the business side) Grivel now has a new NA distributor and continues to do business. Although I have no idea what that arragment is, or who it is with. It is possible that some athletes and or other sponsored programs were not picked up by the new owners, Mammut, or that the new Grivel distributor was not interested in picking them up. There is however, nothing illegal about it. Illegal sale? If you know something I don't, fill me in.

As long as it doesn't effect the quality, I like it!!!

Looks inetresting...but does the boot take other crampons, or do you have to use the Montrail crampon? It seems like the boot would also take other crampons. But I'm not sure. Anyone actually seen or tried these things?

Mexico and Ecuador....cheap and fun fun fun.

Why aren't the 500s good for what he is doing? They are just fine and easy to use. They also have the advantage of accepting a mountaineering boot better than any other non-silveretta AT binding.

or try www.speedclimbing.org Looks like Dan is not as alone as he seems to think that he is.

The real question is: What the OFFICIAL time? In order to find out, go to www.speedclimbing.com

I have the same set up, but formally had an old pair of 400s on true touring Hagan boards. That said, I ski just fine in them on the blues, greens, and on some blacks. No doubt that at high speeds you can really feel the boards flopping and chattering. The set up is not as good as a good alpine set up. But I still have plenty of fun. You'll be fine.

Best Alpine Biner I am a huge fan of these Trangos lightweight wiregates. They are as light as the BD Neutrino but considerably larger and easier to use. They are also economical. Weight: 35 gm for the WireGate Major Axis: 24 kN Minor Axis: 8 kN Gate Open: 8 kN CE Retail Price: $5.95 I know that mgear.com had some on blowout as a quickdraw and that Second Ascent carries singles. I tried a couple and now have quite a few more. For alpine they rock. Has anyone tried the newest Trango ? It claims to be the lightest full sized biner... Dimensions: 93mm x 57mm Gate Opening: 26mm Rope Bearing Radius: 4.5mm Weight: 30gm (1.09 oz) Major Axis: 24kN Minor Axis: 7kN Gate Open: 9kN Price: $7.50 Available: October 20, 2003

I have an older version of the Lazer called the Tambo and it is a pretty damn good boot, well balanced between performance downhill, performance touring, and weight. I'd say take a scale in with you or ask to use the shop's postal or mail scale. I think the weights on the BD site are all in size 8, kind of small size, but it is clearly listed.

I haven't seen the Garuda tents around in a couple of years. They were good tents. Nothing to write home about, but good tents. The single wall, if I recall correctly, was designed to vent, not breath. A buddy had one and didn't like it compared to his Bibler. He sold it and was happy to have done so. Does Dana Designs still make them?

I agree with the sentiment expressed by many here: Why not go with shell and a separate insulation layer for a more versatile system? I have climbed a lot in other climates, Rockies, South America, New England, etc. In New England it gets considerably colder that here in the PNW. I used the separate shell and insulation setup in New England (–38 degree with 100 mph winds on Mt. Washington ) and I use it here to. This way I can have a shell (hard or soft) with no insulation for wamer but wetter and/or windier days, insulation for colder days with low winds and no or little precip, and both for wehen you really need it. With an all in one coat, you have one choice instead of three. Why would you sacrifice the versatility? What do you get for giving it up? Nothing that I can see. Am I missing something?