[loofus]

[Dayhike Mike]

[Quark]

You know, last time I was at Wallace, I saw the place from where the woman fell. I had always wondered how it was scientifically possible that anyone could jump the fence, as the press said (if we're talking about the same incident), and fill her water bottle up at the Falls and have an intact body to find later on. The fences are on the cliff. Jumping the fence to get to the falls would entail rapelling down, approaching a thundering cascade of water with the force of Niagara, and holding her water bottle out to fill it. If the force of the water didn't suck her in first, the force of the water would rip her arm off. Now, I'm all for cartoon physics, but in the end, reality truly rules. Turns out, she didn't fill her bottle up at the Falls as the news said. She was above the Falls where there is no fence to hop over, and there's a slick tippy rock that acts as a dam, and a nice pool of calm water surrounds it. But you have to step onto the rock to dip the drink. If she intended to dip her bottle there, she would have slipped off the rock and into the drink, not far from the head of the falls. So it turns out she wasn't the victim of herself afterall. Poor memory perhaps (forgot there's a huge waterfall a few hundred feet downstream), but not stupidity.

[kleet]

[Quark]

Sigh..... All right, I admit it, Kleet-o. I don't get it. I'm not into whatever that picture is of.* I assume it's some sort of idiot-box thing. I recognize whosis in the back. But can't you think of sumpin' else that's funny? Something I get? *I'm so distracted I ended a sentence with a prepositional preposition.

[jenjen]

You don't watch CSI?!!!! Your boyfriend always has the tube on, and it's never tuned to CSI on Thursday nights? You are missing (IMO) the only show worth watching on network television.

[Allison]

You, little goat lady, have obviously not watched The Apprentice, because if you had, you would see the error of your ways. [/thread drift]

[Mount Logan]

Don't forget about "Lost" and "Alias" on Wednesday nights!

[MCaver]

CSI is a pale shadow of Law & Order. RIP Detective Briscoe.

[Slugman]

Why do the "negatives" keep talking about rules, when there was no rule that you had to use the cable? And why do they keep implying that doing anything at all means everything must be done, when that is not the case. Some things can be done, and others not done. And why do they insist that the cable was there for protection puposes? Maybe it was there just to facilitate access, making it exactly like a bridge, an example used by a "negative". I don't believe cables should be everywhere, but why does that mean they have to be nowhere? Why can't there be a cable in a few places, and that's all? Why fight human nature? If people are going up those rocks, and some are falling, or some are refusing to go because they don't think it's safe without a cable, and a cable would help, then why not have a cable there, in that one spot? It's not the same as taking something normally safe like a boardwalk and making it idiot proof, like in the Yellowstone example. It is simply allowing safe access to someplace that is accessible but not safely. Making access safer and easier is why trails are built in the first place. Now personally I don't care if there is a cable or not, but I'm still waiting to read a single argument against a cable that holds any water at all. The bridge is still the best analogy. Some rivers have bridges, some don't. There is no general principle that tells us "bridge every river or none at all". And you could be killed crossing without a bridge, at some rivers anyway.

[Quark]

[Jamin Smitchger]

I have been up above Wallace Falls and that is some of the slickest rock anywhere.

[loofus]

[Quark]

Sheesh, loof, you did a better job summing up my summation. I just re-read my glob of stuff, and realize how bad it is written. It's a wonder you could glean anything from it.I was in a big hurry. Working and being a know-it-all at the same time take too much concentration, more than I have.

[loofus]

On the contrary. I think you made some very clear points. I just felt like ranting. I got myself worked up thinking about how I pay fees for a NW Forest Pass, yet I don't see any benefit from it. I felt like venting, but I tried to keep it within the bounds of the thread. You made a good point by saying that the FS is really at a loss trying to keep everyone happy. For the most part, I think they do a fair enough job. We only seem to notice the glaring negatives that don't exactly characterize the FS as a whole. Any public agency is faced with the struggle of keeping the majority of people happy while realizing that they will never please everybody. People who gripe about safety concerns in the backcountry really have no sound argument. I'll quit here before I become anymore pedantic...again.