Sept 4, 2006, Flett foolishness, Mt. Rainier
9/4/06
WA Cascades West Slopes South (Mt Rainier)
5227
9
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-
Joyometer=17% (700 vf skiing divided by 4000' elevation gain)
I wonder if somehow a long flat trail approach should somehow be put into the joyometer calculation. However the small snow patch found was relatively suncup free and enjoyable skiing...perhaps snow quality should be added to the calculation as well.
Luckily we avoided the long flat approach to spray park on the way in and instead enjoyed the scenic approach over knapsack pass. Wolf enjoyed chowing on the ubiquitous and luscious blueberries. Upon reaching the pass, there was some consternation, gnashing of teeth, and discussion of alternative plans as we could see that the ice of the flett was glistening brilliantly except for few small snow patches.
We decided to continue on. After enjoying a relatively bug free sojourn through spray park, we arrived at the foot of the flett and to the disappointment that the snow patch that we saw earlier did not connect to the foot, ended in ice, and was only 50 some vertical feet. However, there was a nice 200 foot patch on lookers right and then another one higher up of some 100 vf. Still we were discouraged, and chose to checkout the russell.
I was somewhat worried that I would need my crampons to negotiate the flett, but the appearance of hiker in tennis shoes returning from echo rock over the ice encouraged me. Arriving at the russell had the opposite effect as it was mainly ice. It had a few discontinuous patches that probably would have been worth skiing. Discouragement led to a return to yoyo the flett patches.
The yoyoing turned out to be excellent and for that momemt joy was 100%. Then the long slog back to the mowich lake. We avoided knapsack pass on the return, in favor of the nice flat trail since we were tuckered.
I wonder if 700 vf count as a legitimate ski trip and actual September turns. Hmmm....
Here are a few photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/76533141@N00/sets/72157594271419544/
Joyometer=17% (700 vf skiing divided by 4000' elevation gain)
I wonder if somehow a long flat trail approach should somehow be put into the joyometer calculation. However the small snow patch found was relatively suncup free and enjoyable skiing...perhaps snow quality should be added to the calculation as well.
Luckily we avoided the long flat approach to spray park on the way in and instead enjoyed the scenic approach over knapsack pass. Wolf enjoyed chowing on the ubiquitous and luscious blueberries. Upon reaching the pass, there was some consternation, gnashing of teeth, and discussion of alternative plans as we could see that the ice of the flett was glistening brilliantly except for few small snow patches.
We decided to continue on. After enjoying a relatively bug free sojourn through spray park, we arrived at the foot of the flett and to the disappointment that the snow patch that we saw earlier did not connect to the foot, ended in ice, and was only 50 some vertical feet. However, there was a nice 200 foot patch on lookers right and then another one higher up of some 100 vf. Still we were discouraged, and chose to checkout the russell.
I was somewhat worried that I would need my crampons to negotiate the flett, but the appearance of hiker in tennis shoes returning from echo rock over the ice encouraged me. Arriving at the russell had the opposite effect as it was mainly ice. It had a few discontinuous patches that probably would have been worth skiing. Discouragement led to a return to yoyo the flett patches.
The yoyoing turned out to be excellent and for that momemt joy was 100%. Then the long slog back to the mowich lake. We avoided knapsack pass on the return, in favor of the nice flat trail since we were tuckered.
I wonder if 700 vf count as a legitimate ski trip and actual September turns. Hmmm....
Here are a few photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/76533141@N00/sets/72157594271419544/
Did you happen to see the Flett headwall? Is it all ice?
We could see from a distance that a party was climbing it as if it were ice (climbing belay to belay, but could not see from afar what technique they were using to climb or place pro.) Overall it did not have the immediate surface appearance of hard gray/white/blue ice like the flat parts, and no runnels. Much of the center looked like it was still snow, perhaps because didn't get into the sun until about 1:30 in the afternoon and is actually retaining older snow and or the few inches of Thursday's fresh. For the truly daring, it perhaps could have been a good run. But the bottom ~25 feet and the top ~25 feet of the headwall was definitely exposed ice, and reaching either top or bottom of headwall involves much talus grovel (disconnected from any other snow by hundreds of yards).
Are you asking from the perspective of ice climbing it, skiing it, or both?
Are you asking from the perspective of ice climbing it, skiing it, or both?
I need to find a certain Whippet which has been lying there for 2 years (if someone hasn't already taken it). More melted out = more chance of finding it, hopefully.
Phil, I added a few more pictures to my flickr set including these.
Thanks... looks like it still has its annual snowcover.
But the bottom part of the Flett is pretty much gone... each year since I've been there, it gets dramatically smaller :( I remember just a few years ago it gave 800 feet of skiing below the headwall, even when the headwall had melted off all its seasonal snow.
But the bottom part of the Flett is pretty much gone... each year since I've been there, it gets dramatically smaller :( I remember just a few years ago it gave 800 feet of skiing below the headwall, even when the headwall had melted off all its seasonal snow.
A wee bit of thread drift- I was in the N Cascades a few weekends ago, climbing Black Peak. The topos showed a huge glacier on the slopes (the Lewis)- when we got to the cirque, it was bare. The toe of the moraine was masssive- probably 60 feet tall, and then there was just this enormous empty glacial valley, with a few tiny snow patches WAY at the far end. :(
Really don't want to turn this into a GW diatribe. Just amazing to see that first hand; there quite a bit on the web about this glacier, as it's demise has been well studied.
Really don't want to turn this into a GW diatribe. Just amazing to see that first hand; there quite a bit on the web about this glacier, as it's demise has been well studied.
Couldn't get a link to work -sorry- check out the University of Washington Digital Collection, go to advanced search, select all fields and type in Spray Park. There are 3 pages with several photos looking at the Flett and the headwall from across the park - one taken on August 7, 1912 and another circa 1896. It's a little depressing but fascinating nonetheless - it appears the Flett had a substantial snout well below Cat Eye Lake. Let it snow....a lot....
It had a "snout" below cat-eye lake up until a few years ago - although that may just have been from a few seasons of above average snowfall around 1999. I'd be curious to see pics from the 1990's.
author=philfort link=topic=5282.msg22307#msg22307 date=1157578521]
I need to find a certain Whippet which has been lying there for 2 years (if someone hasn't already taken it). More melted out = more chance of finding it, hopefully.
I can't imagine it still being there, Phil...it's a pretty popular place.
Reply to this TR
Please login first: