HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dmanke@sanjuan (Dennis Manke)
Subject: Re: Yahoo - Ottawa's MEC is open
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria B.C. CANADA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 23:31:45 GMT

In article <Bx7GED.2n1@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> molnar@Bisco.CAnet.CA (Tom Molnar) writes:
>
>Uhh, definitly not the lowest possible price.  They maintain healthy margins
>on most of the gear they sell.  They use the "profits" to open new
>stores, like the one in Ottawa or to renovate stores like the one in BC
>or Ontario.
> ...

and access more customers - sell more gear - and ultimately lower prices
for us all. There is a phenomenon called beat the co-op's price
wherever you see MEC. Yes, in Vancouver all of MEC's competition
sells same items at a slightly lower price - typiclly 1% less than MEC.
For years the private sector has been crying foul and claiming that in a
couple of years there will be no competition. From what I can see, it has
only helped since the competition now has to sell something different and
as good or better than what MEC sells to make a good profit. It doesn't
appear to be too hard since MEC is big and like government, things move
slowly. I will note that before MEC there was nothing - at that time
the private sector sold whatever made the most profit, which usually
didn't imply the best quality or selection. In the end everyone benefits.
You only need look at places where there is no MEC - prices are typically
20%-50% higher or more.


Dennis
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: todd@chester.cms.udel.edu (Todd Sanders)
Subject: Re: GoreTex and bears
Reply-To: todd@chester.cms.udel.edu
Organization: Marine Studies, University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:47:23 GMT

In article 1@qis.dofasco.ca, moynes_r@qis.dofasco.ca (Richard Moynes) writes:
>Let me see if I've got this right now. 
>
>- GoreTex is waterproof (won't let water pass through).
>
>- Over 70% of a bear's mass is water.
>

I've got it,  lets take all the Gore-tex jackets and pants no one  likes and put them on
the bears.  Then only 30% of the bear will be able to attack, if that's what you are worried about.

Even I can outrun 30% of a bear. :-)  :-)
From: sommer@scd.hp.com (Jeremy Sommer)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
Subject: Best Sierra Skiing (was Re: Sierra Nevada in May)
Date: 7 Nov 1992 01:56:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Santa Clara Division
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscau.scd.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

Green, Peter G. (pggreen@juliet.caltech.edu) wrote:
: In article <1992Nov6.012214.4834@nas.nasa.gov>, eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya) writes...
: >Best skiing?  In May?  Huh?  Try March.  May is for climbing.

: May is a nice time to climb, but Nancy had it right, late spring
: offers great backcountry skiing if you are willing to make the
: approach.  Finest run I've ever had was in a dry year on June 1.

May does provide great ski conditions in the Sierra - when there's enough snow
to ski on.  It depends on what type of trip you are planning.  If your route
stays high, or you're just heading to a single high area, you may avoid walking
entirely.  Otherwise it's often better to go in March or April to have a better
chance for coverage, even though the quality (separate from quantity) isn't
quite as good on average.  (An average of many disparate circumstances.)

Some of the best skiing I've experienced was on a skiing/climbing trip to Bear
Creek Spire over Memorial Day three years back.  Snowline was maybe 10,800' -
on the north-facing slopes.  There was some crappy snow in one area, but that
was because it was adulterated with ice-chunks from some earlier slide.  In
general, the skiing was excellent (it would have been better if I had been in
shape).  Had there been just a bit more snow, I could have skied along the
crest for miles, in to-die-for conditions.  I'm hoping to do that in May some
year when there is a real snowpack.

-Jeremy Sommer
From: rseymour@reed.edu (Robert Seymour)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
Subject: Re: Light & Warm Synthetic Bag: PARADOX?
Date: 10 Nov 92 02:01:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov10.020118.1527
Reply-To: rseymour@reed.edu
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <1992Nov9.211958.4905@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
Gen.M.Kanai@dartmouth.edu (Gen M. Kanai) writes:
> I figure this newsgroup is the best place to start.
> 
> I am looking for a light and warm synthetic sleeping bag, and I think
> that this might be a paradox.  Everyone knows that down is light,
> compactable and warm, but sucks when wet.  
> 
> I am considering the "Gold-Eck" bags sold by Mountain Tools, but I have
> no idea how good they are.  Does anyone on the net have any experience
> or heard second or even third hand info on these bags?
> 
> My requirements are -20 degrees, long, not necessarily Gore-Tex, but
> synthetic and lightweight!  For instance, the North Face Tangerine
> Dream is a nice bag, but it weighs 8-9 lbs!  I dont want anything that
> heavy or extreme. 
> 
> Can anyone tell me what fill they like and why?  Does anyone have a
> good idea for me?  How about bivy bags?
> 
> thanks in advance, 
> Gen.Kanai@Dartmouth.EDU

	If you have the money and will use it, there is no substitute for a  
Gore-Tex Down sleeping bag. A down bag and bivy can be good, but I find that  
they almost always get wet. I'd suggest looking at Marmot Gore-Tex bags. North  
Face also makes very nice ones (though I find that the Marmots are more  
durable). However, you stated that you wanted a synthetic fill. If its enclosed  
in Gore-Tex, I don't think you need a synthetic fill (down in Gore-Tex can  
still get wet, but if your careful, it shouldn't), but that being the case,  
look for a Marmot bag. There not the lightest, but the durability is worth it.  
Bivy bags are good for extra warmth and protection from wetness occasionally,  
but I wouldn't suggest it as an alternative to a Gore-Tex bag, or for cases of  
regular moisture exposure.

--
Robert Seymour				rseymour@reed.edu
Departments of Physics and Philosophy
Artificial Life Project			Reed College
Reed Solar Energy Project (SolTrain)	Portland, OR
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: sheehan@pagosa.scd.ucar.edu (Tim Sheehan)
Subject: Re: Lunches and Snacks: what do you bring?
Organization: NCAR/UCAR
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:59:34 GMT

Amongst many of the people I pack with, bringing the best food is
a matter of good natured one-upsmanship. My friend Raimund and I
decided that we would bring ice cream for the whole group on the 
last trip of the summer.

After some experimentation at home, I decided our best bet would be
to make a quick stop at the grocery store on the way to the trail
head, buy some Rondos (these are small cylindrical chocolate
covered ice cream treats made by Dove), and put them in a vacuum
bottle.

We spent the night before the trip in Leadville, Colorado. On the way
out of town, we stopped at the grocery and made the others wait away
from the car. Much to our surprise, they don't sell Rondos at the 
Safeway store in Leadville. So we bought some full size Hagan Daas(sp)
bars and had to slice them up and put them in the vacuum bottle.

The ice cream was still good 10 hours later, but the cold weather
made eating it a little anti-climactic. The vacuum bottle did come in
handy, though, as it kept water hot enough for tea over night. I was
able to warm up a little while the first water of the morning was 
boiling.
-- 
-Tim-

sheehan@ncar.ucar.edu

Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: tamada@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael K. Tamada)
Subject: Re: Lunches and Snacks: what do you bring?
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 03:14:39 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.190702.2804@spectrum.xerox.com> damouth@wrc.xerox.com writes:

>And speaking of smoked oysters:
>Those small but highly flavored "extras" can have a big effect on my
>enjoyment of generally bland trail food.  I usually have a couple of
>lunches of bagels and cream cheese.  Bagels are one form of bread that
>you can sit on without harming it much.  And to add a little zip, I
>toss in a tiny jar of cheap caviar.  A little bit goes a long way.

     Hmmm, I've always had trouble with bagels.  Sure, they're
indestructible, and they've got decent shelf life.  But slicing
them in half so I can put stuff on them is a pain.
     I usually take hard rolls instead.  Not as indestructible, but
easier to slice open.  
     Several people have mentioned tortillas, which I've never tried
on the trail, but it sounds like a good idea.

--Mike Tamada
  tamada@oxy.edu


Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: jsp+@cs.cmu.edu (John Pieper)
Subject: re: fleece jackets
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:08:14 GMT




Fleece jackets are the greatest thing since pre-sliced bread, but they do
have one significant fault: don't let them get near heat.

I once was winter camping, wearing fleece pants. We were making water (that
means boiling it, stupid), and after I poured a potful into the water
bottles, I noticed the pan had a leaf stuck to it. So I wiped it off on my
thigh. Had I been wearing cotton or wool this would not have been a problem.
As it was, I now have a nice flat spot where there used to be fleece.

Aside from that, fleece jackets are great. When they get wet, you can just
wring them out, and your body heat is sufficient to dry out what little
water is left. Note, however, that if your coat has a thick bottom seam like
mine does, it's pretty hard to wring out thoroughly.

Oh, there is one other really bad point to poly-fleece: it's a magnet for
cigarrette smoke. Never wear a fleece coat to a bar or restaurant where
people are smoking unless you want to stink, or unless you are planning to
wash the coat when you get back anyway.
----------------
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry,alt.gathering.rainbow
From: dencisco@eos.arc.nasa.gov (David Paul Encisco)
Subject: Re: Rainbow Gathering
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:07:52 GMT

rob@cygnus.com (Rob Savoye) writes:

>In article <1992Nov12.131000.22689@brtph560.bnr.ca> JB <jbl@mesaadm.cre.nt.com> writes:

>>  You can always tell where the Rainbow groups have been in the Southern
>>  App's; the debris is incredible, the trenches from cooking and common
>>  latrine are left open, and the nearest water supply is slimed.   I
>>  respect their views as their own, as I do their lifestyle, but from
>>  personal experience I can't respect their use of the land.

>  I find this strange. Not that I want to push the blame away from the
>Rainbow Folks, but I find this hard to believe. The only time I can
>remember that the cleanup has't been as good as usual is cause of the
>Forest Service. 

Unlike JB's complaints, my beef is: you herd a group of Rainbow
folks to a pristine spot (and in our case, one with hot springs) and
you let them graze for what I thought was a weekend (14 days?), what
do you think their consequence will be to the land that they dance
and frolic on? Trashed? We ain't talking litter, we're talking flora.

> Most Rainbows are 
>*much* more land concious than the average backpacker. I find most of
>the shelters/camping on the AT a flithy mess. based on this I could
>conlude that all backpackers have no sense of sanitation.

You mean they're not backpackers? They have to hike in 13 miles to get
the hot spring at Big Sur. Nice fallacious conclusion Rob; you might
want to think about your use of the words "most" and "all".

Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: todd@chester.cms.udel.edu (Todd Sanders)
Subject: Re;Gore-Tex
Reply-To: todd@chester.cms.udel.edu
Organization: Marine Studies, University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:33:18 GMT


>Gore-Tex is expensive because all manufactures who want to use
>Gore-Tex mambrane have to ship their product to Gore-Tex factory in
>Maryland and then get it back.  With this monopoly and transportation
>cost no wonder those things are so expensive.

>Does anybody care to comment ?


W.L. Gore Industries, (which includes Teflon,BTW,) will not sell a product that does not produce a 
20% profit ratio.  Sound hard to believe, or at least it does to me, but it comes from some one who does know, since he is an exec for them.  

Blaming the high price  on transportation  is bunk.  Their "Maryland plant is on the Delaware , Maryland boarder.  You can enter from De as a matter of fact, and is only 2 miles from the dreadful I-95.  

They have a so-called outlet shop here in Newark, De, but it is unimpressive.
From: johns@trident.datasys.swri.edu (Stephen Johns)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
Subject: Re: Backcountry in the Movies
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:08:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: io.188
Organization: Southwest Research Institute

Death Hunt, with Lee Marvin, Charles Bronson and the guy that played Apollo in
Rocky, has some really good backcountry stuff.  It has a considerable amount
of violence too, which I consider a plus.  Good story/plot.
-- 
Stephen Johns, Research Analyst
Southwest Research Institute, SA, TX 78228 (512) 522-5751
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson - FSC)
Subject: Re: Abbey bashing.
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:42:34 GMT

If you don't like the writings of St. Eddie, 
which backcountry authors do you [the Abbey Bashers especially] 
think is better (or prefer)?

Don't worry, I'm not going to bash any of your choices ...
I'm really just kind of poking you to give me some suggestions
for reading, now that winter has closed most of my backcountry haunts.

thanks,
John
John S. Watson, Civil Servent from Hell          ARPA: watson@ames.arc.nasa.gov
HOMEBREW NAKED! --- Ursus cerevisiae nudium  (The Bare Beer Bear)

#include <stddsclm.h> 
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: trzyna@CS.ColoState.EDU (wayne trzyna)
Subject: Re: Abbey bashing.  Was: Trip rpt: SE Utah 4wd vacation, part 3/4
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:01:56 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

In article <141296@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> dovey@renoir.llnl.gov (Donald Dovey) writes:
>This
>story allegorically raises an essential dilemma of the modern wilderness
>lover:  How do I help protect a wilderness without simultaneously
>reducing my access to it?

Easy:  have fewer children.

-- 

-Wayne Trzyna
 trzyna@CS.ColoState.EDU
Xref: sparky rec.backcountry:8656 rec.climbing:4212 rec.skiing:7195
From: azw@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Michael Woodward)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry,rec.climbing,rec.skiing
Subject: Re: Direct Euro-belays
Summary: Gratuitous ulcer aggravation
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:26:18 GMT
Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth


Time to rattle a few cages......

I've just found an old thread I was going to respond to, but the machine died,
so....

There is much hot air talked about the relative merits of directly belaying
to the gear, and via a body. 

A belay via a body clipped to the anchors only helps the safety of both in 
the situation where the impact force on the belay/belayer is small. When it 
is big, the proportion of the force (which can be up to a couple of tons) 
taken by the body is negigible compared to that taken by the belay. There is a
school of thought which suggests the only point in NOT attaching the active
climber directly to the anchors is to satisfy the basic human social urge
to die in company. Having climbed a lot of my hardest routes in the company
of a tiny woman weighing less than 7 stones, I preferred her to attach 
me to the gear.

 Having said this, when the situation was reversed, I always had an
irrational beleif that I could somehow protect her better by attaching her
to me and me to the belay. (Actually, for most routes with small fall 
factors, this was true due to our difference in weight).

On all but the shortest falls, she'd be wrenched against the gear anyway.
Conversely, due to her lesser weight, she could take correspondingly
longer falls without strain coming onto the belay.


When deciding which way to go, the forces on the belay should be considered,
and if large, then a direct belay at least allows the survivor a chance of
soloing off

If the fall factor is small and the belay is crap, then the strain on it
can be reduced significantly by fastening yourself to the belay and 
the active climber to you. Otherwise, direct to the belay is the trick.
If the belay is good, there's no problem. If it is bad, the survivor has a 
chance of soloing off. It also concentrates the mind, since there is always the 
irrational belief that your second's presence in the belay chain is somehow 
going to save the day, so you use lethal belays in blissful ignorance. Going 
direct makes you pay much more attention to the belay due to a (ficitious)
perceived risk.

Dont send me any Email, I couldnt give a toss about your opinions

Have a nice day (I think I'm going sick)

Andy Woodward
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: graham@cs.montana.edu (Jonathan Graham)
Subject: Re: A Seat with a View (Re: Snowy Sierra Nevada)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, MSU, Bozeman Mt 59717
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:07:45 GMT

In article <01010064.hrsosw@titipu.resun.com> ed@titipu.resun.com (Edward Reid) writes:
>
>> And don't you wish you could get the airlines to keep the windows 
>> cleaned better?
>
>Actually, I wish they would clean them less.  Or at least learn how to clean
>them without scratching them.  The scratches are worse than the dirt.  I've
>sat by windows so pitted that I basically couldn't see the gorgeous views
>I knew were outside.  So that's another tip: fly 767s instead of DC9s.
>
	I'm not to sure on the details of this but a friend of mine was attempting
to explain those annoying scratches to me the other day.  They have something to
do with the way the plexi-glass is produced.  Something about the layers being 
perpendicular to each for more strength, but at the same time creating those scratches.
This is a really rough translation of what he said... bit off the alt.backpacking 
topic, probably could get more info from some rec/alt.aviation.* group.

					-Jon

Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
Subject: Re: Is Gore-Tex overrated ?
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:32:50 GMT
Reply-To: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems

In article 92Nov4170646@newt.newt.cuc.ab.ca, deraadt@newt.cuc.ab.ca (Theo de Raadt) writes:
>In article <13773@texsun.Central.Sun.COM> dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard) writes:
>   I think lots of people survived the ice age on mile-high glaciers without the
>   stuff.  On the other hand, many people love it.  You really want an argument,
>
>They were smart -- they stayed sheltered as much as they could, rather than
>venture to the tops of mountains. To sweat is to die. "For me" gortex makes
>this a bit less of a worry.
> <tdr.
>--
>
>This space not left unintentionally unblank.		deraadt@newt.cuc.ab.ca

But they had to spend the daylit hours hunting.  Temps were constantly cold, year
round.  Exposure is as serious on top of a glacier as on top of a mountain glacier.
Remember, these were arctic conditions- just as are found on top of the rockies.
And they didn't get to look forward to central heating and hot toddy once the climb
was done.  These folks were professional survivors.

Hmm- what a concept for a business- a mail order shop for ice-age gear, just like
the real guys used to wear!
B


Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: viviana@igor.tamri.com (Vivian Aldridge)
Subject: Rustic cabins in the Sierra?
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:57:00 GMT

Greetings,
Does anyone know of any rustic cabins which exist in the Sierra?
Now when I say rustic I mean the cabins that have no running water
or electricity.  However, a pot belly stove would be nice for some
heat, but not essential.  I once stayed at a cabin like this at
sequoia for ten dollars a night.  Actually, I'm used to snow
camping, so staying at a rustic cabin wouold be a step "up".

If I get any responses I'll post a summary.

Thanks!
Vivian

viviana@tamri.com
From: hall@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Hal F Lillywhite)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
Subject: Re: Lunches and Snacks: what do you bring?
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:51:30 GMT
Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or.

In article <1992Nov11.050420.29732@netcom.com> micki@netcom.com (Michelle Stone) writes:

>When I am on a short trip (3 to 4 days) I like to sit down in my 
>sling lite chair on the top of a peak and pull out a Diet Coke.  It
>never ceases to amaze my hiking companions!

The second time I climbed Mt. Hood (graduation climb for basic
climbing school) we were on the summit enjoying the view and weather
(it was amazingly nice that day).  One of my fellow climbers reached
into his pack and pulled out 2 or 3 liters of sparkling cider which 
he proceeded to share with all members of the group.  Need I tell 
you who was the most popular member of the party that day?

Similarly, a friend was on a climb where on the summit the leader
produced a watermelon for the enjoyment of the group.
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
From: chris@metter.fmpmis.metter.com (Chris Mathes)
Subject: Re: Is Gore-Tex overrated ?
Organization: Metters Industries, Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:42:37 GMT

william@castle.ed.ac.uk (William Warburton) writes:

> IMHO This sums up the arguments for Goretex perfectly- if you want to
>be comfortable & can afford it then don't hesitate.

> If the cost matters & you are looking for perfection to justify the
>expense then don't bother.

If cost is a problem, then check out catalogs that cater to hunters,
specifically Cabella's.  The Goretex raingear I saw in there was
_much_ cheaper than what I have seen on _sale_ at outdoor outfitters (less
than half the price in many cases).  The only disadvantage I can think
of is that this stuff probably doesn't have all the bells and whistles
that the higher priced garments have, e.g. lots of big pockets, and huge
underarm zippers.  FWIW though, they still have to meet certain standards
set by the Gore company in order to carry the Gore label.  One plus (at
least to me) is that the colors were very subdued compared to what is
marketed to yuppie outdoor types.  I get tired of trying to find the least
obnoxious combination of day-glo colors when shopping for hiking clothes.

Hunting catalogs are also good sources for less expensive long underwear
(in all of the latest, new-and-improved fabrics, of course), socks,
wool garments, etc.

-Chris
-- 
Chris Mathes, Metters Industries, Inc.      UUCP: {..!}uunet!metter!chris
Tel:(703)418-0323                           INET: chris@metter.fmpmis.metter.com
"The Tao of Programming flows far away and returns on the wind of morning."-TToP
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry,rec.climbing
From: morrison@cup.hp.com (Bobbie_Morrison)
Subject: Re: GoreTex bags (was Re: Light & Warm Synthetic Bag: PARADOX?)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 16:18:16 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]

Hugh Grierson (hugh@nezsdc.icl.co.nz) wrote:
: 
: desperate emergency ones) in GoreTex bags with/without a bivvy bag.  What I am
: led to believe is that the goretex bag will still leak through the seams
: (it isn't seam sealed), but using it with a goretex bivvy bag will result in a
: loss of breathability (compared to a non-goretex bag + bivvy bag).  Are either
: of these situations actually a problem in practice?

I think it was the Mountain Tools catalog that recommended NOT using a
goretex bag in a bivy sack.  (Mountain Tools is a gear catalog here in
the US, but also provides "tips" on how to use the gear.)  

I'm guessing that it creates too much moisture pressure on the outside of
the sleeping bag and therefore doesn't let it breath so much.

--Bobbie Morrison
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry