Print

Print


>crucial point. How do you not spend $400 when it will drastically minimize
>the risk to your life?
>

Easy. When spending that $400 means not eating for the next week. Starving
to death is no different from dying in an avalache. Actually, I'd probably
choose the latter if pressed. But I got the impression that price was per-
person. I suppose that a group of 5 would make it more justifiable. I also
have plenty of local connections in in Jackson, so spending money on a
guide wasn't even on the radar.

Still, if I was gonna spend that kind of dough, I'd be in a heli or save
$300 and go to Silverton. Speaking of which, Matt and I are trying to
amass a group of solid skiers for when we go. You get the best bang for
your buck (or in my case, my brother's buck) when you can get a group
together that skis more or less at the same level. We haven't picked a
date yet, but if anyone's interested, let me know. And not to sound like a
jackass, but I mean it when I say "solid". If you never were able to keep
up with the usual "sick pup crew" at skivt-l partees then that probably
means you won't want to ski with us. The most important part is that you
can hike fast, since the best terrain there requires traversing and
hiking. Also, for the same reason, no snowboarders. Again, nothing against
boarders ... we just want to get the most skiing in as we can.

Jerm

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html