Page 168 of 170 FirstFirst ... 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 LastLast
Results 4,176 to 4,200 of 4250
  1. #4176
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Behind the Zion Curtain
    Posts
    4,875
    Solitude will be missing an icon this upcoming season. Crazy George’s ma has been ill so he has to take over running the restaurant. I don’t make it over there near enough lately, but I always enjoy seeing his smiling face when I do.

  2. #4177
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Fresh Lake City
    Posts
    4,573
    Quote Originally Posted by CirqueScaler View Post
    I have been having this conversation w/ some of my running and hiking friends. Many of them want to go up the S Ridge weekly, or more frequently. I don't see the point. I find it pretty secure if you have the focus and care, but it is fatal exposure, and I try to avoid superfluous flirtation with death. If it's part of a line or a mission or something else, it can definitely add to the experience. But to do it recreationally, or casually, doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
    A lot of fun things in life are inherently dangerous. Backcountry skiing is high on the list, just above rock climbing I'd imagine.....
    Last edited by brutah; 10-08-2021 at 05:17 AM.

  3. #4178
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    616
    Quote Originally Posted by brutah View Post
    A lot of fun things in life are inherently dangerous. Backcountry skiing is high on the list, just above rock climbing I'd imagine.....
    No doubt, but that's not a proper comparison. I'm encouraging my friends to be safer.

    If you rock climbed on a rope, that is fun and very safe. If you rock climbed without a rope, that can also be fun but it's less safe.
    If you backcountry skied on a high danger day on a low angle slope, that is fun and very safe. If you backcountry skied on a high danger day on a steep slope, that can also be fun but it's less safe.

  4. #4179
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A LSD Steakhouse somewhere in the Wasatch
    Posts
    13,234
    i watched a troller go for a nasty ride on box elder on a low danger day in the midst of a low danger week
    so in my experience
    the dangers always there and using someone elses 1 word adjective to determine safety is kinda foolish
    "When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
    "I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
    "THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
    "I have posted in here but haven't read it carefully with my trusty PoliAsshat antenna on."-DipshitDanno

  5. #4180
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by brutah View Post
    A lot of fun things in life are inherently dangerous. Backcountry skiing is high on the list, just above rock climbing I'd imagine.....
    Huh, the south ridge of superior is equivalent to skiing where you fall, you die IMO. Equivalent to a slope that's easy to ski, but there is no room for error for a good part of the run. You put yourself on that slope weekly - your chance of falling on that easy slope goes up and up and up. I think 'average joe' people comparing these unroped easy-but-deadly climbs to something broad like backcountry skiing is what SAR is busy.

  6. #4181
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Alta
    Posts
    2,931
    ^^^
    People talk about that scramble like it’s a walk in the park. While not technical, consequences are huge. People racing the whurl on Strava seems absurd.

  7. #4182
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    5,846

    WASATCH STOKE, CONDITIONS, OBSERVATIONS and ASSORTED DRIVAL 20-21

    for some counterpoint, consequences are huge when you drive your car too. and you have a lot less control over whether you incur those consequences. and let’s not be TOO melodramatic, while the exposure is surely fatal at times, the south ridge is not nearly yfyd the whole way. not to be taken lightly for sure, but it’s not like free soloing sendero luminoso or whatever. also not like skiing yfyd where a very minor misjudgment in conditions can kill you.

    if you’re really saying that repeated exposure to dangerous ski slopes is dangerous mainly because you continually risk falling, and thus the south ridge is the same, you are being willfully naive. there is some element of dice-rolling in avalanche terrain, in addition to your own control of your physical movements, which is simply not present on that scramble. and there’s something of the speed at which you move, by necessity, when steep skiing that is not by necessity present in a scramble. and your equipment has more modes of failure, and so on.

    this is no defense of the WMW bro culture or talking about “trail running” the south ridge or west slabs or whatever; those people are indefensible. and I have very little sympathy for people who willfully get in over their heads, or who lack the respect and humility you need to survive in the mountains. but let’s not be melodramatic just because we’re too old to make bad decisions for a reasonably sane and responsible person, going up the south ridge once a week probably averages out to a much longer and less paralyzed old age than skiing a viv bruchez line once a fiscal quarter.

  8. #4183
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sandy
    Posts
    5,151
    Quote Originally Posted by mall walker View Post
    this is no defense of the WMW bro culture or talking about “trail running” the south ridge or west slabs or whatever; those people are indefensible. and I have very little sympathy for people who willfully get in over their heads, or who lack the respect and humility you need to survive in the mountains. but let’s not be melodramatic just because we’re too old to make bad decisions for a reasonably sane and responsible person, going up the south ridge once a week probably averages out to a much longer and less paralyzed old age than skiing a viv bruchez line once a fiscal quarter.
    I guess I always see the problem area lies where people don't/can't estimate the risk they're taking. I would never knock the Dorais brothers for what they do because I think they have stayed alive by making good risk/reward decisions. And I would have to believe they fully understand the risk they take one -- it keeps you focused and on point.
    It's the people that go the mountains without a clue of the situation they are in that seems to cause the problems, And this can range from the person that just move here from whatever place we want to make fun of to the really strong runner/gym climber that decided to do something exciting.

    I think the other problem that happens to humans when we do something repeatedly is we get complacent with it, and start to let out guard down. and then an accident happens. And that was my point with the south ridge, etc. is you still need to pay attention to it and respect it, it's like the Grizzly Man thing, it's still mother nature, always be sort of on point with things that can kill you.
    When life gives you haters, make haterade.

  9. #4184
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    5,846

    WASATCH STOKE, CONDITIONS, OBSERVATIONS and ASSORTED DRIVAL 20-21

    Quote Originally Posted by sfotex View Post
    I guess I always see the problem area lies where people don't/can't estimate the risk they're taking. I would never knock the Dorais brothers for what they do because I think they have stayed alive by making good risk/reward decisions. And I would have to believe they fully understand the risk they take one -- it keeps you focused and on point.
    It's the people that go the mountains without a clue of the situation they are in that seems to cause the problems, And this can range from the person that just move here from whatever place we want to make fun of to the really strong runner/gym climber that decided to do something exciting.

    I think the other problem that happens to humans when we do something repeatedly is we get complacent with it, and start to let out guard down. and then an accident happens. And that was my point with the south ridge, etc. is you still need to pay attention to it and respect it, it's like the Grizzly Man thing, it's still mother nature, always be sort of on point with things that can kill you.
    For sure. And I guess there’s an element of “who is reading this stuff (on TGR) that isn’t a regular in the thread and getting cavalier about this stuff” that I don’t often consider; I usually think of this thread as the 10-15 mostly old grouchy people who always post here, and occasionally some stray couch surfing mag, and I’m sure there are impressionable youths reading too much into everything said here, not understanding the context, never having met any of us, and so forth.

    It’s also hard here where you have just so many people for whom the mountains are just an extension of the city; they never learned growing up how to be in the wilderness, how to travel within your abilities, how to only ever rely on self-rescue, and so on; for whatever reason (moved here from brooklyn, parents never taught them, whatever) all the mountain/nature/whatever ethics that some of us (or at least I) take for granted and sometimes assume that any serious mountain traveler has, they don’t have. They have that national park mentality: “this is here for my entertainment and if its dangerous that is the fault of some authority or other”. And it makes your job much shittier for sure. And if you DID learn those things, the wilderness ethos, but you don’t get the butterflies in your stomach and that tingling feeling that “hey this is dangerous, so be careful” when you’re going up the south ridge, or down the south face, or whatever - complacency may get you. And I’m certainly no exception.

    I do object to giving the impression that, if you’re taking south-ridge-level risks, you’re already taking the same risks as if you’re skiing the NE couloir on Lone Peak or something. Because people will make the assumption that way too: “well steep skiing is like a dangerous scramble; as long as you move carefully and keep your head, you will be safe” which (everyone here knows) is dangerously untrue for steep skiing.

  10. #4185
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Montrose, CO
    Posts
    4,618
    Quote Originally Posted by mall walker View Post

    It’s also hard here where you have just so many people for whom the mountains are just an extension of the city; they never learned growing up how to be in the wilderness, how to travel within your abilities, how to only ever rely on self-rescue, and so on; for whatever reason (moved here from brooklyn, parents never taught them, whatever) all the mountain/nature/whatever ethics that some of us (or at least I) take for granted and sometimes assume that any serious mountain traveler has, they don’t have. They have that national park mentality: “this is here for my entertainment and if its dangerous that is the fault of some authority or other”. And it makes your job much shittier for sure. And if you DID learn those things, the wilderness ethos, but you don’t get the butterflies in your stomach and that tingling feeling that “hey this is dangerous, so be careful” when you’re going up the south ridge, or down the south face, or whatever - complacency may get you. And I’m certainly no exception.
    This is definitely a factor in the Wasatch, but man, it is happening everywhere, even super remote places. Many factors are to blame, technology, guidebooks, the gram, better gear, blah blah blah; but the reality is there are a different breed of people in the mountains than there used to be. Access is easier, and there are more people. I have told people before "this ain't Disneyland." I really think a lot of backcountry users (both new and old) don't fully understand some of the risks they are taking, be it complacency, ignorance, or a combination of the two.

  11. #4186
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dreamland
    Posts
    1,103
    Hey, I've got my smartphone with GPS so I can never get lost and I can call rescuers at anytime and they'll know exactly where I am is a completely different mindset than growing up without cell phones when the constant thought in the backcountry was "if I get lost or hurt here I'm probably fucked." For most people today danger has been significantly removed from the backcountry experience, which IMO completely dulls the experience.

  12. #4187
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    2,839
    "consequences are huge when you drive your car too" This counterpoint has never ever made any sense to me in any shape or form when comparing to risks outdoors. Maybe I'll start saying exactly that when dropping into sketch terrain to see the WTF faces of my partners this season.

    I like the cellphone comment/thought, it's a fair point for some people.

  13. #4188
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SLC, Utah
    Posts
    4,281
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudfoot View Post
    Hey, I've got my smartphone with GPS so I can never get lost and I can call rescuers at anytime and they'll know exactly where I am is a completely different mindset than growing up without cell phones when the constant thought in the backcountry was "if I get lost or hurt here I'm probably fucked." For most people today danger has been significantly removed from the backcountry experience, which IMO completely dulls the experience.
    I think this is largely true. Before I had my first (and only) backcountry accident, I thought that being safe in the backcountry was like a checklist. I had my Avy1, my WFR, a great first aid kid, plenty of opiates, an InReach, etc. Before shit went sideways I was absolutely aware of the consequences, and I thought I had made adequate plans for dealing with a serious backcountry emergency.

    In hindsight, we were extremely well prepared, but nothing could have possibly prepared us for how shitty of an experience that was. We used everything we brought and still came up short - and even in a "best-case worst-case scenario" (after things went wrong pretty much everything else went right).

    It's hard for me to understand the gram counting mentality that I see among a lot of backcountry skiers these days - a mentality that leads to compromised safety. Yep, my crisis puffy is fairly heavy, and my first aid kit is super comprehensive. I carry more water than I'll ever drink, and I don't need 5 pairs of hand warmers, but I sure as shit bring them. On very long tours I even bring a bothy bag or a tarp. Sure, the weight sucks, but gear keeps getting lighter, and I keep getting stronger.

    Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

  14. #4189
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    5,846

    WASATCH STOKE, CONDITIONS, OBSERVATIONS and ASSORTED DRIVAL 20-21

    Quote Originally Posted by muted reborn View Post
    "consequences are huge when you drive your car too" This counterpoint has never ever made any sense to me in any shape or form when comparing to risks outdoors.
    The point is that the consequence is not automatically correlated to the chances of incurring it. And doing something high-consequence doesn’t automatically make it “risky”. But it’s an easy / cheap / lazy argument to point at a high consequence to criticize the decision making of someone who makes different choices than you.

    Lots of things, including things we all do every day, are high consequence. On its own that is meaningless.

  15. #4190
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    616
    if you’re really saying that repeated exposure to dangerous ski slopes is dangerous mainly because you continually risk falling, and thus the south ridge is the same, you are being willfully naive...


    Is this directed at me? My post about rock climbing/bc skiing was saying that you can adjust the risk profiles within two sports (rock climbing and backcountry skiing) to reduce or increase the safety of the activity. I wasn't saying that soloing the S Ridge is comparable to steep skiing. That doesn't seem very comparable without a lot more detail.

    Quote Originally Posted by tgapp View Post
    Yep, my crisis puffy is fairly heavy...
    I was just discussing the weight of a crisis puffy a few hours ago

  16. #4191
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    In Your Wife
    Posts
    8,291
    Quote Originally Posted by skifishbum View Post
    i watched a troller go for a nasty ride on box elder on a low danger day in the midst of a low danger week
    so in my experience
    the dangers always there and using someone elses 1 word adjective to determine safety is kinda foolish
    I don't always agree with SFB, but while the rest of you are contorting yourselves into positions that would allow you all give yourselves a hearty rimjob to justify your piss-poor, cavalier decision making, he hits the nail square on the fucking head. Bravo, Dibs.

  17. #4192
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    12

    Daily Fast Tracks @ Snowbird ($49)

    Was this known? I had not heard about and really bummed Snowbird is going full Disney.

    I can't insert link to source but excerpt from WSJ article posted on twitter. Copper, Batchelor and Killington too.

  18. #4193
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Montrose, CO
    Posts
    4,618
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...es-11633705877

    First I've heard of it. But if it's true, that is some B fucking S. RIP resort skiing. Ironic that I just said this morning "this ain't Disneyland" in this very thread?

  19. #4194
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    6,643
    Quote Originally Posted by mall walker View Post
    For sure. And I guess there’s an element of “who is reading this stuff (on TGR) that isn’t a regular in the thread and getting cavalier about this stuff” that I don’t often consider; I usually think of this thread as the 10-15 mostly old grouchy people who always post here, and occasionally some stray couch surfing mag, and I’m sure there are impressionable youths reading too much into everything said here, not understanding the context, never having met any of us, and so forth.

    It’s also hard here where you have just so many people for whom the mountains are just an extension of the city; they never learned growing up how to be in the wilderness, how to travel within your abilities, how to only ever rely on self-rescue, and so on; for whatever reason (moved here from brooklyn, parents never taught them, whatever) all the mountain/nature/whatever ethics that some of us (or at least I) take for granted and sometimes assume that any serious mountain traveler has, they don’t have. They have that national park mentality: “this is here for my entertainment and if its dangerous that is the fault of some authority or other”. And it makes your job much shittier for sure. And if you DID learn those things, the wilderness ethos, but you don’t get the butterflies in your stomach and that tingling feeling that “hey this is dangerous, so be careful” when you’re going up the south ridge, or down the south face, or whatever - complacency may get you. And I’m certainly no exception.

    I do object to giving the impression that, if you’re taking south-ridge-level risks, you’re already taking the same risks as if you’re skiing the NE couloir on Lone Peak or something. Because people will make the assumption that way too: “well steep skiing is like a dangerous scramble; as long as you move carefully and keep your head, you will be safe” which (everyone here knows) is dangerously untrue for steep skiing.
    This resonates with me, especially as my 20 year old kid is playing in these canyons and peaks. Certainly our attitudes here are different since we aren't in our 20s anymore. And I can fool myself by saying that I'm stronger now, but I am definitely not stronger now. When I was in my 20s I remember being baffled by people who got stuck backcountry. Why wouldn't you just keep walking till you were out? 72 hours? No problem. And it's true - I could keep moving - jogging even - for literally days without stopping. My kid is now in that place. You feel invincible because in many ways you are. Until something really consequential happens - slide, bad crash really far out on a bike, hypothermia - and it's real, real fast. And most people, as Mall Walker says, are not that strong. They just think they are. And so that perception of invincibility fades away pretty quick.

    The other element is the total lack of understanding of the risks when things do go bad, and what can cause them. My mentors preached to me the importance of taking care of your gear. My mom, of all people, taught my how to be prepared for the unexpected outside (as did my dad, but from my mom it made a big impression.) I've passed that on to my kids incessantly. Most people don't have that luxury. The 'gram makes it look like fun and games, and that's what they expect cause i's all they know. And it's awesome. Until it's not.

    Lastly, I do think there is a greater level of expectation now - expectation that someone will bail you out, rescue you, warn you if something is dangerous. That was not how I got indoctrinated into this. There was danger, worry, and self rescue around every corner as far as we were concerned. We didn't have cell coverage or the money for sat phones. We had what we knew and what we brought. Paper maps even. On the surface it seems more dangerous, but I wonder if it really is, because those people were prepared and now folks are often not.

    One more thought on risk: of course there is risk in what we do. Of course it's added beyond what is normal in life. That's why we are out there. If it wasn't for that seeking of risk we'd be day hiking. We've all had accidents in our groups, close calls, moments of terror. The game is not to remove them. The game is to reduce the highest level of risk to something less than death or life altering injury, and then go for it. But think of your highest rock climbs - they felt better than bouldering. Your fastest mtn bike downhills - felt better than the slower ones. Largest hucks on snow - felt better than the shorter ones. Huge multiday hikes in the high country with the weather blowing up into a shitshow around you - felt better than day hikes.

    The risk is why we are here - we just want to get rid of the chance of giving up life or livelihood.

    And finding that balance point is the entire game sometimes.

  20. #4195
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    5,846
    Quote Originally Posted by snowaddict91 View Post
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...es-11633705877

    First I've heard of it. But if it's true, that is some B fucking S. RIP resort skiing. Ironic that I just said this morning "this ain't Disneyland" in this very thread?
    oof... that is fucking laaaaaaaaame

  21. #4196
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by mall walker View Post
    The point is that the consequence is not automatically correlated to the chances of incurring it. And doing something high-consequence doesn’t automatically make it “risky”. But it’s an easy / cheap / lazy argument to point at a high consequence to criticize the decision making of someone who makes different choices than you.

    Lots of things, including things we all do every day, are high consequence. On its own that is meaningless.
    im getting pretty lost my n the context here but all I’ll say is I drive to work because I have to earn a living and support my family. The risk of dying driving to work is not something I can avoid.

    when I climbed the south ridge of Superior I did it for fun. My workplace unfortunately isn’t the top of Superior. (Since I’m a shitty climber, I don’t do the South Ridge weekly)

    we could get into ‘but you drove to Superior’ but I would hope my point is coming across - driving is more of a necessity to live in my world.

    saying that something high consequence is not necessarily risky goes without saying and the car analogy doesn’t work for me to show this, just my opinion.

  22. #4197
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    7,239
    Not a bad day of first snow at Alta. Snowshoe but maybe next storm will cover stuff to tour.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1633819317.219628.jpg 
Views:	87 
Size:	190.7 KB 
ID:	388406

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1633819330.594327.jpg 
Views:	93 
Size:	192.3 KB 
ID:	388407

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1633819343.476006.jpg 
Views:	91 
Size:	233.4 KB 
ID:	388408

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1633819381.688936.jpg 
Views:	85 
Size:	225.3 KB 
ID:	388409


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32, 35

    2021/2022 (13/15)

  23. #4198
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Montrose, CO
    Posts
    4,618
    Quote Originally Posted by snowaddict91 View Post
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...es-11633705877

    First I've heard of it. But if it's true, that is some B fucking S. RIP resort skiing. Ironic that I just said this morning "this ain't Disneyland" in this very thread?
    Confirmed via their IG that it's happening. They said more details coming October 12th.

  24. #4199
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    5,846
    unbelievable lol

  25. #4200
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    13,653
    Quote Originally Posted by snowaddict91 View Post
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...es-11633705877

    First I've heard of it. But if it's true, that is some B fucking S. RIP resort skiing. Ironic that I just said this morning "this ain't Disneyland" in this very thread?
    Copper has been doing that shit for years now...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •