July 4, 2005, Mt Maude, North Face
7/4/05
WA Cascades West Slopes Central
13364
19
Six of us skied the North Face of Mt Maude yesterday.
In the Bonanza thread, Jeff noted that even very good skiers can fall. He cited the example of Hans Saari, who hit some ice while skiing the Gervasutti Couloir near Chamonix. Now if I remember correctly, Saari was skiing the couloir sight-unseen. I believe he used the excellent tram access available in the French Alps and just dropped it from the top. The fact is that Saari is not the only one to perish that way on the Gervasutti Couloir; the first descensionist's son fell victim to the same plight.
There are more examples of this phenomenon. Other good skiers have fallen victim to unknown hazards by skiing blind. It's the reason I vastly prefer to ski what I climb. Phil, Kam and I significantly extended our day by both climbing and skiing the Crusoe Couloir on Mt Robinson a few weeks ago, at my behest.
This is not to say that I've never skied blind. Ben Manfredi and the Hummels practically made skiing blind de rigueur in several years' exploits on the north side of Mt Adams. I've followed their convention there, but not without a few precautions: make sure you can climb what you've skied in case it's necessary to bail, and have a rope and be ready to use it.
I was vastly outnumbered in opinion and we skied the North Face of Maude without climbing it. There were a few consolatory safety margins, however. We'd read several recent reports from climbers, all reporting and depicting the face in excellent conditions. The weather was great, rather hot, and we were sure the snow was soft. We heard as much from climbers who had just ascended the route as we climbed the south face.
Someone in the group said they felt better about dropping the face blind because of our numbers. They could let a guinea pig make the first turns. I don't know if this is a good safety principle in general. It sounds more like an heuristic trap. Upon seeing both the face and the traverse tracks to the Maude-Seven Fingered Jack Col from above, I was happy to ski first.
Anyway, it was a great descent. The North Face of Maude is truly a classic steep descent on another Washington niner. We skied almost 3,000 vertical feet total, out of 6,000 feet gross ascent for the day. Thanks for a great day, everyone.
In the Bonanza thread, Jeff noted that even very good skiers can fall. He cited the example of Hans Saari, who hit some ice while skiing the Gervasutti Couloir near Chamonix. Now if I remember correctly, Saari was skiing the couloir sight-unseen. I believe he used the excellent tram access available in the French Alps and just dropped it from the top. The fact is that Saari is not the only one to perish that way on the Gervasutti Couloir; the first descensionist's son fell victim to the same plight.
There are more examples of this phenomenon. Other good skiers have fallen victim to unknown hazards by skiing blind. It's the reason I vastly prefer to ski what I climb. Phil, Kam and I significantly extended our day by both climbing and skiing the Crusoe Couloir on Mt Robinson a few weeks ago, at my behest.
This is not to say that I've never skied blind. Ben Manfredi and the Hummels practically made skiing blind de rigueur in several years' exploits on the north side of Mt Adams. I've followed their convention there, but not without a few precautions: make sure you can climb what you've skied in case it's necessary to bail, and have a rope and be ready to use it.
I was vastly outnumbered in opinion and we skied the North Face of Maude without climbing it. There were a few consolatory safety margins, however. We'd read several recent reports from climbers, all reporting and depicting the face in excellent conditions. The weather was great, rather hot, and we were sure the snow was soft. We heard as much from climbers who had just ascended the route as we climbed the south face.
Someone in the group said they felt better about dropping the face blind because of our numbers. They could let a guinea pig make the first turns. I don't know if this is a good safety principle in general. It sounds more like an heuristic trap. Upon seeing both the face and the traverse tracks to the Maude-Seven Fingered Jack Col from above, I was happy to ski first.
Anyway, it was a great descent. The North Face of Maude is truly a classic steep descent on another Washington niner. We skied almost 3,000 vertical feet total, out of 6,000 feet gross ascent for the day. Thanks for a great day, everyone.
Nice job guys... wish I could have been there.
To continue ski-mountaineering discussion... what's your opinion on "climb-what-you-ski", pertaining to very objectively hazardous routes?
I guess there aren't too many examples of this, but suppose you were insane, and decided to ski Thermogenesis ;). Knowing that it would take you 6 hours to climb, and only 1 hour to descend, and that you were going to be "under the gun", subject to random ice avalanches all that time, would you still climb it first?
Or maybe just not ski it at all?
How about when avy danger might be a risk? Generally worse danger exists near the top of the slope where it may be loaded by wind. Having a whole party climbing up on gradually less stable snow seems like a bad idea, as opposed to having one person cut the slope on skis from the top.
How far do you take "climb-what-you-ski"? 8)
To continue ski-mountaineering discussion... what's your opinion on "climb-what-you-ski", pertaining to very objectively hazardous routes?
I guess there aren't too many examples of this, but suppose you were insane, and decided to ski Thermogenesis ;). Knowing that it would take you 6 hours to climb, and only 1 hour to descend, and that you were going to be "under the gun", subject to random ice avalanches all that time, would you still climb it first?
Or maybe just not ski it at all?
How about when avy danger might be a risk? Generally worse danger exists near the top of the slope where it may be loaded by wind. Having a whole party climbing up on gradually less stable snow seems like a bad idea, as opposed to having one person cut the slope on skis from the top.
How far do you take "climb-what-you-ski"? 8)
Skiing something generally covers a lot more area than climbing it does. You could climb the runnel and find icy nastiness, then ski it and find good corn everwhere else. Or vice versa, climb good snow, then traverse out while skiing, and find miserable snow, fall off, and die.
While it's probably a good idea to climb what you ski, it's certainly no panacea.
Rocks can always be an issue, too, I found a few yesterday.
While it's probably a good idea to climb what you ski, it's certainly no panacea.
Rocks can always be an issue, too, I found a few yesterday.
Sky ponders the foolishness on Mt. Maude's North Face (video frame capture)
Further details of the trip:
Who: Sky, Jason, Josh, Paul, Bill and Sam
6:30am - leave the trailhead for Leroy basin.
Climb the south route via endless scree to the summit of Maude, arriving at 12:30. Discover millions (seriously, I'm talking millions) of Ladybugs on the summit. The Ladybugs, forced our retreat and we had no choice but to ski the North Face because they haddn't colonized that slope yet. We all took turns skiing for the camera and headed for the exit gully from the face which is where the scramble back to Maude - 7FJ col begins.
Shortly after the start of the scramble, the cornice hanging above the face collapsed and sent huge chunks of debris all the way to the valley floor. I think the Ladybugs may have moved off the summit and over to the top of the face, perhaps setting up a colony on the cornice! The weight of all those Ladybugs must certainly have been too much for the cornice. This fact, coupled with the hot day and I am glad we didn't climb the face first!
Back at the col, we found there to be enough snow to link up another 1000 vf. of skiing back into Leroy basin. As with any trip up the Chiwawa Road, the day ended with Gluttony at the 59'er Diner.
Phil-
You raise a good point. Avalanche danger changes everything. So do objective hazards like seracs. A hanging serac is the top reason I have read for all the blind drops into Gervasutti. But people still climb the thing too, I think.
There are other alternatives. Particularly for Thermo, I would just climb Liberty Ridge and give it a look. Like Paul said climbing something is no panacea, but you see and observe a lot.
I don't put a lot of stock into one small rock ruining my descent and (gasp) career. I try to ski in such a fashion that I could recover from the small type of catch that little rock or a tiny hidden patch of ice would present. The implications of skiing in such a fashion will certainly differ from skier to skier. I generally want to avoid descending a route if I think one small unknown obstacle would send me head-over-heels. This is a margin of safety I try to maintain. This may mean not linking turns for me. It may mean linking turns at a slower pace for someone else. It may still mean not skiing the route at all for another.
Climbing an icy runnel would do the job fine. It's pretty easy to see what the snow on either side of the runnel is like. And there are many different degrees of iciness and general difficulty runnels can provide; climbing them will tell a lot.
So climbing something does give a general knowledge of the route, along with close visual inspection of surface conditions throughout. It makes a big difference to know the conditions at a particular elevation and aspect right next to the route in question. Even then judgement is key. I've made attempts at descents after a climb, then climbed and descended elsewhere after a couple very discouraging turns. I could have skied a section on belay, but like I've said elsewhere that just doesn't appeal to me. But if you're playing a game with such serious consequences, why not maximize the amount of information with which you have to work?
As far as avalanches go, I still think it's a good idea to climb the route. If you can't climb it, you probably shouldn't be skiing it. If you're going to ski the route based on the results of a cut at the top, I hope you have a very intimate knowledge of the rest of the route and the nature of snow deposition on it too. By cutting the top and beginning a descent, you could put yourself into a very difficult situation mid-route.
Just some considerations. I couldn't give a prescription to fit every situation. I don't think anyone could in a reasonable fashion. A couple things are certain. To make big, steep descents it is necessary to accept some obligatory margin of risk. The next questions are where to draw the line, and how to draw it. I prefer to draw my lines using exquisite route photos scanned from Fuji Velvia 50, preferably using GIMP to edit the digital photo and draw the line. (Sorry Phil ;) ) I'm not suggesting I always have drawn or will draw the line in the correct place, either.
Edit: Nice photo Sam, thanks! In retrospect, I definitely agree with everyone that climbing the south and skiing 'blind' was a good idea on this one. I just didn't want anyone to get the wrong idea... :0
You raise a good point. Avalanche danger changes everything. So do objective hazards like seracs. A hanging serac is the top reason I have read for all the blind drops into Gervasutti. But people still climb the thing too, I think.
There are other alternatives. Particularly for Thermo, I would just climb Liberty Ridge and give it a look. Like Paul said climbing something is no panacea, but you see and observe a lot.
I don't put a lot of stock into one small rock ruining my descent and (gasp) career. I try to ski in such a fashion that I could recover from the small type of catch that little rock or a tiny hidden patch of ice would present. The implications of skiing in such a fashion will certainly differ from skier to skier. I generally want to avoid descending a route if I think one small unknown obstacle would send me head-over-heels. This is a margin of safety I try to maintain. This may mean not linking turns for me. It may mean linking turns at a slower pace for someone else. It may still mean not skiing the route at all for another.
Climbing an icy runnel would do the job fine. It's pretty easy to see what the snow on either side of the runnel is like. And there are many different degrees of iciness and general difficulty runnels can provide; climbing them will tell a lot.
So climbing something does give a general knowledge of the route, along with close visual inspection of surface conditions throughout. It makes a big difference to know the conditions at a particular elevation and aspect right next to the route in question. Even then judgement is key. I've made attempts at descents after a climb, then climbed and descended elsewhere after a couple very discouraging turns. I could have skied a section on belay, but like I've said elsewhere that just doesn't appeal to me. But if you're playing a game with such serious consequences, why not maximize the amount of information with which you have to work?
As far as avalanches go, I still think it's a good idea to climb the route. If you can't climb it, you probably shouldn't be skiing it. If you're going to ski the route based on the results of a cut at the top, I hope you have a very intimate knowledge of the rest of the route and the nature of snow deposition on it too. By cutting the top and beginning a descent, you could put yourself into a very difficult situation mid-route.
Just some considerations. I couldn't give a prescription to fit every situation. I don't think anyone could in a reasonable fashion. A couple things are certain. To make big, steep descents it is necessary to accept some obligatory margin of risk. The next questions are where to draw the line, and how to draw it. I prefer to draw my lines using exquisite route photos scanned from Fuji Velvia 50, preferably using GIMP to edit the digital photo and draw the line. (Sorry Phil ;) ) I'm not suggesting I always have drawn or will draw the line in the correct place, either.
Edit: Nice photo Sam, thanks! In retrospect, I definitely agree with everyone that climbing the south and skiing 'blind' was a good idea on this one. I just didn't want anyone to get the wrong idea... :0
In spring and summer, the north face of Maude catches sun very early and is subject to rockfall after things warm up. I climbed it many years ago from a camp at Ice Lakes and remember being nervous about rockfall on the climb. For this reason, if you're going to ski it, you should either get a very early start, or climb up a different route and ski down it quickly. The north face is not all that steep, except right near the top, so it seems like one of those descents where blind skiing can be a reasonable thing to do. If the snow conditions are good at the top, they're likely to be good lower, as long as you stay out of runnels. The face of Maude melts out almost completely in late summer, so it tends to be snow covered, without a lot of ice lurking underneath.
I second Sky's comment about linking turns. If the consequences of falling are serious, I don't link turns. I see other skiers doing it and it scares me. I've seen people muff turns and momentarily lose control on several occasions.
In an article about Hans Saari's death, Andrew McLean described a fall that he (Andrew) took early in his steep skiing career. He continued: "From that moment on, I've skied like a hack with a blocky, conservative style that keeps plenty in reserve in case I fall. Each turn has to come completely under control before I start the next one." To me that means not linking turns, at least not in the sense I think of it when lift skiing.
I second Sky's comment about linking turns. If the consequences of falling are serious, I don't link turns. I see other skiers doing it and it scares me. I've seen people muff turns and momentarily lose control on several occasions.
In an article about Hans Saari's death, Andrew McLean described a fall that he (Andrew) took early in his steep skiing career. He continued: "From that moment on, I've skied like a hack with a blocky, conservative style that keeps plenty in reserve in case I fall. Each turn has to come completely under control before I start the next one." To me that means not linking turns, at least not in the sense I think of it when lift skiing.
Sorry all, I posted some inaccurate information earlier. The Gervasutti Couloir in question on Mt-Blanc du Tacul was first skied by, who else, Sylvain Saudan. Edouard Baud was the son of a friend of Saudan's, a Chamonix guide named Anselm Baud. Somehow these details were confused in my memory. For more information see here.
Now there is something I did not know. The topo maps show a finger of permanent snow extending up the North Face, but I only looked at a map for a few moments in passing. Maybe I looked carelessly and that's really the Entiat Icefall? Anyway, Lowell's post demonstrates an intimate knowledge of Maude that would provide plenty justification for dropping it 'blind' in my opinion.
In general I will continue to hold climbing what I ski as a cardinal rule.
I gotta be honest here, I still hold linking turns in the highest regard even when the consequences of a fall are serious. I try to link them in a more conservative fashion than I would if a fall didn't matter, but I still feel the need to dance if I can. It could be that I'm fooling myself into thinking I could recover if something happened.
Lastly, here is a rather entertaining account from Ben Manfredi of what was probably the first descent of the North Face of Maude.
The face of Maude melts out almost completely in late summer, so it tends to be snow covered, without a lot of ice lurking underneath.
Now there is something I did not know. The topo maps show a finger of permanent snow extending up the North Face, but I only looked at a map for a few moments in passing. Maybe I looked carelessly and that's really the Entiat Icefall? Anyway, Lowell's post demonstrates an intimate knowledge of Maude that would provide plenty justification for dropping it 'blind' in my opinion.
In general I will continue to hold climbing what I ski as a cardinal rule.
I second Sky's comment about linking turns. If the consequences of falling are serious, I don't link turns.
I gotta be honest here, I still hold linking turns in the highest regard even when the consequences of a fall are serious. I try to link them in a more conservative fashion than I would if a fall didn't matter, but I still feel the need to dance if I can. It could be that I'm fooling myself into thinking I could recover if something happened.
Lastly, here is a rather entertaining account from Ben Manfredi of what was probably the first descent of the North Face of Maude.
Ok, enough of this boring analysis. Time for some STOKE.
Sam, I rotated your pic.
Fun approach scrumbling.
Pretty lakes. There were some campers there, must be nice.
Glacier Peak! Gotta go ski that...
Sky off the top. Short warmup.
Josh off the top. Butterflies in my stomach.
Sky drops in. Whoa. That's steep. Why am I here?
He cranks it. I'm gonna die.
MOMMY! I'm going to walk down the south side.
OH MY GOD I DID IT. Sky watches on, amused at my theatrics. "Dude, it's a joke".
Whoa, I skied that.
Sam. Note the slushy runnels.
Bill.
Sam, and Sky, with a Hummel in the big ol' runnel. Look carefully, you'll see him. Our exit traverse is right behind Sky. Almost there....
Ok, I'm alive. Time to be happy.
Ahh, rock, mud, and snow. On foot. I can handle this. Hey Sam, how about some of those Juju Fish?
Sam, I rotated your pic.
Fun approach scrumbling.
Pretty lakes. There were some campers there, must be nice.
Glacier Peak! Gotta go ski that...
Sky off the top. Short warmup.
Josh off the top. Butterflies in my stomach.
Sky drops in. Whoa. That's steep. Why am I here?
He cranks it. I'm gonna die.
MOMMY! I'm going to walk down the south side.
OH MY GOD I DID IT. Sky watches on, amused at my theatrics. "Dude, it's a joke".
Whoa, I skied that.
Sam. Note the slushy runnels.
Bill.
Sam, and Sky, with a Hummel in the big ol' runnel. Look carefully, you'll see him. Our exit traverse is right behind Sky. Almost there....
Ok, I'm alive. Time to be happy.
Ahh, rock, mud, and snow. On foot. I can handle this. Hey Sam, how about some of those Juju Fish?
:)
Another interesting ski-mountaineering dicussion to have is: when taking ski pictures, is there a natural tendency to tilt the camera such that the slope looks less steep? I find there is. I see it in other folks' photos too. I find I need to concentrate and work against this tendency in order to keep the horizon flat. Sometimes I over-compensate. Is that bad? Are we trying to convey a literal interpretation of the events, or an "impressionistic" one ("it *felt* steep, so I should convey that in the photos"). And who's to say a flat horizon is the correct one anyway? Flat horizons become a moot point anyway, when the camera starts pointing slightly up or down the slope. 8)
Another interesting ski-mountaineering dicussion to have is: when taking ski pictures, is there a natural tendency to tilt the camera such that the slope looks less steep? I find there is. I see it in other folks' photos too. I find I need to concentrate and work against this tendency in order to keep the horizon flat. Sometimes I over-compensate. Is that bad? Are we trying to convey a literal interpretation of the events, or an "impressionistic" one ("it *felt* steep, so I should convey that in the photos"). And who's to say a flat horizon is the correct one anyway? Flat horizons become a moot point anyway, when the camera starts pointing slightly up or down the slope. 8)
Bump since I added pics. :D
I gotta be honest here, I still hold linking turns in the highest regard even when the consequences of a fall are serious. I try to link them in a more conservative fashion than I would if a fall didn't matter, but I still feel the need to dance if I can. It could be that I'm fooling myself into thinking I could recover if something happened.
That's your choice. I think it's a bad idea. To me, good style on a steep descent means making no bobbles. No hooked or washed-out edges, no railed turns, no mini-recoveries. To me, that indicates an adequate safety margin. That's my ideal.
Interestingly, that does not seem to be a widely held standard. I've seen skiers make lots of little (and not so little) bobbles on steep terrain, usually when they were linking turns. Sometimes it seems that people are trying to look good for their friends, rather than focusing on total control. I'm with Andrew McLean on this one. I love dancing on skis, but not when my dance partner is serious injury or death.
Edited to add: In late summer, only the broad, upper snowfield on Maude's north face remains. The lower, narrow section typically melts out. If you were going to do a blind ski of Maude, the top would be a good place to employ a bit of roped skiing, so you can check out conditions with a belay.
Sam. Note the slushy runnels.
Looks like I may be guilty of dancing. Oh well...Runnels or not, that snow was as perfect as it gets for linking turns on steeps in July.
If Josh would hurry up and get me his video footage, we could put all this to rest with a little MPEG entertainment! ;D
:)
Another interesting ski-mountaineering dicussion to have is: when taking ski pictures, is there a natural tendency to tilt the camera such that the slope looks less steep? I find there is.
I do that all the time too!
It's completely unintentionally, though I'm sure our mothers like the photos better that way. ;-)
If Josh would hurry up and get me his video footage, we could put all this to rest with a little MPEG entertainment! ;D
What's in store this time? I want to see some Sjue Caption Technology...
Looks like I may be guilty of dancing. Oh well...Runnels or not, that snow was as perfect as it gets for linking turns on steeps in July.
If Josh would hurry up and get me his video footage, we could put all this to rest with a little MPEG entertainment! ;D
Yeah, c'mon, Hummel! Jason, tell Josh to hurry up if he doesn't see this. ;)
An act of Sky 8):
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skyoverthehill.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skywhy.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skygoodbye.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skydive.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skyoverthehill.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skywhy.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skygoodbye.JPG
http://cascadecrusades.org/SkiMountaineering/maude/routes/northface/northfacejuly2005/skydive.JPG
In the Bonanza thread, Jeff noted that even very good skiers can fall. He cited the example of Hans Saari, who hit some ice while skiing the Gervasutti Couloir near Chamonix. Now if I remember correctly, Saari was skiing the couloir sight-unseen. I believe he used the excellent tram access available in the French Alps and just dropped it from the top. The fact is that Saari is not the only one to perish that way on the Gervasutti Couloir; the first descensionist's son fell victim to the same plight.My recollection (which could very well be incorrect) was that the accounts at the time (which also could very well be incorrect) were that he did climb up, yet then for some reason (either not explained at the time, or forgotten by me now) skied a different couloir than he had climbed. (Although still of course the same potential lesson to be learned re climbing what you ski, or at least being familiar of its conditions.)
You're essentially correct, Jonathan. It's all in the link I posted. Saari climbed the mountain, but not by the somewhat easier couloir he was going to ski, which was reported to be in good condition. On top he decided to ski a more difficult line. Sorry for the confusion, I was originally trusting my (undependable) memory.
Wrong yet again! It wasn't all in the link I previously posted, that was about Baud. It only mentions Saari in passing. Here is more about Saari.
Wrong yet again! It wasn't all in the link I previously posted, that was about Baud. It only mentions Saari in passing. Here is more about Saari.
Great Viddy, Sam, a classic in itself.
Reply to this TR
Please login first: