TR: Squamish Buttress (long)
Matthew Buckle
was about time I posted one of my own:
Squamish Buttress III, 5.10c (via Rock On)
I'd been meaning to have a go at the Squamish Buttress all summer, but
somehow a combination of lousy weather and a lack of reliable partners had
conspired to keep me off the route. I expected this weekend would just be
another of the same, despite the perfect weather, until Dave, who I was
climbing with on Saturday managed to partially tear a tricep chicken winging
up Split Beaver in the Smoke Bluffs. A shitty deal for Dave to say the
least, but now Kevin, who was interested in trying one of the longer routes
on the Chief, was in need of a partner for Sunday.
Sunday Morning we left Vancouver just before 8 to arrive at the Apron
parking lot just after 9. Already 11 cars in the parking lot, and 4 parties
on Diedre. I've never understood why everyone seems to migrate to Diedre
when there are so many other great routes in the area, but if it keeps the
crowds off whatever route I want to do, I guess that's ok. We had decided
to approach the Buttress via Rock On, as both of us had been wanting to do
this route as well for some time.
Leaving the van, it was pretty nippy, so we brought jackets, and we figured
the top half of the route would be baking in the sun, so we brought lots of
water. As soon as we finished the 15 minute approach up the South Gully, we
realized our mistake, the jackets immediately came of and got stuffed into
the pack, while the route looked like it wouldn't be in the sun until the
very top. The pack now weighed in at about 20 pounds, which neither of us
could understand as it only contained 2 light jackets, 2 bagels, tevas, and
some water.
there was 1 party ahead of us, so we took our time racking up and I started
the first pitch. The climbing was uncharacteristically steep for it's grade
in Squamish, up blocky corners with fun moves and good rests, ending at a
good sized belay stance. The lead of the party ahead of us had just
finished the second pitch, so I waited a few minutes before belaying Kevin
up. Kevin led the second pitch, which again went smoothly up more of the
same steep blocky corners, this time ending at a belay ledge big enough to
park a car. This was just as well, though, as we would end up stuck on this
ledge for the next 45 minutes.
As I got up the ledge atop the second pitch, the second of the party ahead
of us had just started trying to free their rope which had become quite
seriously stuck behind a flake. Kevin and I toke advantage of this
opportunity to re-organize our gear, and drink as much water as we could to
reduce the weight of the pack. After 15 minutes, the party ahead was
getting a bit worried about their prospects with the rope, having made
little progress in freeing it. We started to get a bit worried when 15
minutes later they called down and asked if we had a knife on us. By this
time, a couple other parties had gotten started on the route below us, and
it turned out one of them had a knife. After about another 15 minutes, the
party ahead offered to let us climb through while they waited for the party
below to arrive with the knife to cut their rope out of the flake. I
started up the pitch, a somewhat awkward tight corner with some good jams
way in the back, very glad I didn't have to grovel up it with the pack, and
making sure to keep the rope from going anywhere near the flake the other
party was having trouble with. In order to avoid the climber above, I had
to make the traverse at the end of the pitch across a balancy mossy slab
instead of the good crack and edges below, but arrived at the 3rd belay
without much trouble. This one was a bit crowded, a triangular sloping
ledge, but we made due. As soon I started belaying Kevin up, the second of
the party now on the same pitch as us called that he had managed to free
their rope, and the knife wouldn't be needed after all. Now we had a scene
right out of Chamonix, with two parties climbing the same pitch, ropes
intertwined, to reach the same little stance, which was definitely cozy with
4 people. The other party offered to let us go ahead, as they had already
held us up enough, an offer which we were very thankful for. We now had the
rest of the route with no one above us.
Kevin got started up the next pitch, a long (45m) sustained 10a corner,
which was thankfully dry for the most part. He made short work of it, and
soon called out that he was secure at the belay above. I started up, happy
to be off the crowded ledge. The pitch has some great climbing, a
combination of handjamming and laybacking, with an interesting mantel and
some stemming thrown in for good measure. The crack was damp at mid height,
and the pack didn't help as I tried a foot-back stem for a rest while
working out a set nut, but soon enough I was back at it and up to the huge
ledge atop the pitch. One more quick pitch with only a few hard moves and
we were at the big forested ledge above the Apron and below the Buttress.
We ate some lunch, re-racked the gear and coiled the rope, donned our tevas
and set off through the forest for 5 minutes to find the base of the
Buttress. After a bit of searching, we found something that matched the
guidebook description, but didn't look much like the topo, and there was no
sign of the promised bolt to protect the 5.9 face moves. As we couldn't
find anything else that looked promising, and there was another party
heading up the trail behind us, we decided this was most likely the start.
A easy moves through the roof, and there was the bolt a few metres above. A
couple tricky moves and up to an easy corner, up a crack and across a ledge
to the belay. Certainly none of the 5.8 crack the topo described. We
simul-climbed the next 3 pitches, listed in the guide as mostly easy with
moves to 5.8. I'm not sure who's definition of 5.8 this was, but it didn't
seem deserving of much more than 'easy 5th'. One more pitch of fun but
short cracks with bug ledges in between (again, a few tricky moves, but much
easier than the 5.9 listed in the guide) and we were at the ledge below the
crux pitch.
The fine crux pitch makes up for the debatable quality and difficulty of the
lower pitches on the route, a fantastic small corner and finger crack
rising 25m up the vertical headwall, 1500 feet above the valley floor. As a
party ahead of us was just finishing the pitch, we took our time looking at
the brilliant thin cracks to the right on the headwall, and trying to get a
look at the new route which had been put up just south of the lower pitches
of the Buttress. 15 minutes later the pitch was free, and Kevin started up.
Fantastic finger jamming and stemming up the steep, sustained crack, in a
fantastic position, this pitch is one of the best I have climbed at
Squamish. Instead of trying to follow it with the pack, I tied in half way,
and hauled the pack up after I had reached the top. One more pitch up
zig-zagging ramps and we were at the top of the climb.
We decided to finish off with one last pitch up Raven's Castle to reach the
south summit of the Chief, and opted for Welfare Daze, a direct line up the
slab with a couple tricky moves near the top. We nearly got taken out by a
half full water bottle careening down the slabs from a careless hiker above
who then had the audacity to ask if we could retrieve his water bottle for
him, but other wise the pitch went without incident, placing us atop the
south summit.
The weather was perfect, 25 degrees, not a cloud in the sky, perfect view
down Howe Sounds and up the Squamish Valley, so we sat back and relaxed for
half an hour on the summit slabs before making the descent. A quick stop to
gas up, and we were headed back to Vancouver, with a week of work ahead of
us to rest up our battered hands and fingers for next weekend.
All in all, it was a fantastic route, despite the marginal quality of the
lower pitches of the Buttress. Rock On was great, even with the hold up,
but I guess that's the price you pay for doing a classic route at a popular
area with a short approach. For anyone heading up the Buttress who is
comfortable in the 5.10 range, I'd suggest trying Lower Pan Tease to reach
the crux pitch of the Buttress instead of the lower Buttress pitches, as it
looks to offer much more sustained climbing, in a fine exposed position.
Matt
--
Matthew Buckle
www.interchange.ubc.ca/mbuckle/matt_climb.html
Steven Cherry
> understand as it only contained 2 light jackets, 2 bagels, tevas, and
> some water.
ObBaba: Water sox!!!!
Great trip report, thanks!
-steven-
--
<ste...@panix.com>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It's hard to successfully maintain a bad mood for an entire
three hour approach. -- Tom Dunwiddie, rec.climbing
Rich Pawlowicz
> on Diedre. I've never understood why everyone seems to migrate to Diedre
> when there are so many other great routes in the area,
Now there's a tough question. Why Diedre when there are other multi-pitch
5.7s around like...um....like...what? Besides Banana Peel (also crowded)?
RP.
--
Remove XYZ from email address.
Matthew Buckle
Steven Cherry <ste...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:7rjvcb$s5g$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> > The pack now weighed in at about 20 pounds, which neither of us could
> > understand as it only contained 2 light jackets, 2 bagels, tevas, and
> > some water.
>
water sox: is this some wonderful item which would allow us to combine our
footwear and beverages to reduce weight on a climb? sounds interesting!
seriously though, I have vaguely heard of them. Are they any good for long
approaches/descents, or on rough ground?
Steven Cherry
>> ObBaba: Water sox!!!!
>seriously though, I have vaguely heard of them. Are they any good for long
>approaches/descents, or on rough ground?
I should let Karl B respond, since that's whom I learned their virtues
from, but he would say that they're very light (fabric only on top, no
rigid sole) with grippy rubbery bottom. They're quite cheap ($10-20), take
very little room in the pack, and are good enough for most descents. For
example, I have softbody feet (can't do *anything* barefoot) and yet they
were good enough for me to walk down from Middle Cathedral.
Adrian Wilson-Guimond
Have you done Angel's Crest? Sweet!
Matthew Buckle <matthew...@seagatesoftware.com> wrote in message
news:7rjfil$edm$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
> I've been enjoying enough of other peoples trip reports lately I thought
it
> was about time I posted one of my own:
>
> Squamish Buttress III, 5.10c (via Rock On)
>
<snip>
David Woodsworth
<ric...@XYZ.ocgy.ubc.ca> wrote:
>Now there's a tough question. Why Diedre when there are other multi-pitch
>5.7s around like...um....like...what? Besides Banana Peel (also crowded)?
How about Slab Alley (my favourite, an under-rated highly-enjoyable
outing). 8 pitches of mid-5th class slabs, with a few 5.8 sections,
and one 5.9 move (which can be aided past if needed)..
Or Pineapple Peel (5.8). Bypasses the crowded crux of Banana Peel.
Or Sickle. Only one 5.9 move, otherwise 5.7 or lower. (Granted,
you've got to line up for the first two pitches of Diedre).
David Woodsworth
email dwo...@direct.ca
Rich Pawlowicz
>
> On Mon, 13 Sep 1999 16:21:19 -0700, Rich Pawlowicz
> <ric...@XYZ.ocgy.ubc.ca> wrote:
>
> >Now there's a tough question. Why Diedre when there are other multi-pitch
> >5.7s around like...um....like...what? Besides Banana Peel (also crowded)?
>
> Or Pineapple Peel (5.8).
Weeellll...you can't class these as 5.7's because...they aren't. Even
if it's just one move, if you can't do it, you can't do it.
(it isn't clear you can aid past the crux of Slab Alley until you
are looking up at those bolts; and there is no easy way to get past the
crux of Sickle - short of a shoulderstand. I wish there was, more traffic
would clean it up)
David Harris
>David Woodsworth wrote:
>> How about Slab Alley [..] one 5.9 move
>> Or Pineapple Peel (5.8).
>> Or Sickle. Only one 5.9 move
>
>Weeellll...you can't class these as 5.7's because...they aren't. Even
>if it's just one move, if you can't do it, you can't do it.
Yeah, but sickle isn't exactly 5.9 either.
>...there is no easy way to get past the
>crux of Sickle - short of a shoulderstand. I wish there was, more traffic
>would clean it up)
I climbed Sickle a couple of hours ago, and I think calling the
crux 5.9 is a more than a bit of a stretch. _Maybe_ 5.8. Even calling
it "a crux" is stretching the term.
A friend and I took a relative beginner up to the apron today.
There were the usual four hundred climbers on Diedre, half a dozen or
so on Banana Peel, and the slowest 3-person party in the world on
Sparrow. So we opted for Sickle and had a great time. Good climbing,
no people...
And for those who don't mind a bit of runout 5.8, doing the
Stirling Moss variation and finishing on Sparrow is probably the
nicest way to do it. Actually, now that I think about it, the 5.8 on
the Stirling Moss section is harder than the so-called 5.9 on the
so-called crux.
------------------------------------
David Harris
dha...@netcom.ca
-------------------------------------
Matthew Buckle
they are quite often one more experienced climber taking a newbie out for
their first multipitch. If this is the case it should be no problem for the
more experienced climber to lead the crux.
Matt
Rich Pawlowicz <ric...@XYZ.ocgy.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:37E3C888...@XYZ.ocgy.ubc.ca...
> David Woodsworth wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 13 Sep 1999 16:21:19 -0700, Rich Pawlowicz
> > <ric...@XYZ.ocgy.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >
> > >Now there's a tough question. Why Diedre when there are other
multi-pitch
> > >5.7s around like...um....like...what? Besides Banana Peel (also
crowded)?
> >
Richard Abbott
rap off. Or perhaps Jungle Warfare. The only 5.10 move is the first, and can be
easily aided with a large friend. The rest of the pitches are simple 5.8s with
great belay stances.
-Richard
Tom Rogers
>
> Rich Pawlowicz <ric...@XYZ.ocgy.ubc.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Yeah, but sickle isn't exactly 5.9 either.
>
Oh, yes it is. It would be a 5.9 move in Yosemite too.
> I climbed Sickle a couple of hours ago, and I think calling the
> crux 5.9 is a more than a bit of a stretch. _Maybe_ 5.8. Even calling
> it "a crux" is stretching the term.
It would be the crux too because it is the worst spot to fall and
results in someone seriously injured. The rest of the route is not that
bad.
You must be some lame ol' sandbagger or something.
I think the ratings for many of Sqaumish's routes are high as compared
to other regions, but they are consistent with the region.
Tom
>
>
David Harris
>David Harris wrote:
>> I climbed Sickle a couple of hours ago, and I think calling the
>> crux 5.9 is a more than a bit of a stretch. _Maybe_ 5.8. Even calling
>> it "a crux" is stretching the term.
>
>It would be the crux too because it is the worst spot to fall and
>results in someone seriously injured. The rest of the route is not that
>bad.
>
>You must be some lame ol' sandbagger or something.
I guess I have to cop to the "lame" and "old" parts. I was
certainly lame (two days post surgery) when I climbed Sickle the other
day. And I can't deny being older than most of the people on r.c, but
I don't think I'm a sandbagger.
As to whether the move under discussion is 5.9 or not, well,
that's a question without a provable answer. In the end, there are
only two grades: either you can climb it, or you can't; and whether
you call it 5.9, or 5.8 or whatever, it's not what I'd call serious. I
took one of my sons up it when he was seven -- how hard can it be? And
the day I led it in my lame condition, we had a beginner with us --
she didn't have any trouble either.
>I think the ratings for many of Sqaumish's routes are high as compared
>to other regions, but they are consistent with the region.
I think Squamish ratings are like ratings in most of the other
major areas I've climbed in -- i.e. best taken as a rough guide only.
(Except maybe Index, where _everything_ is harder than you'd expect.)
Tom Rogers
> I
> took one of my sons up it when he was seven -- how hard can it be?
My son climbed 5.5/6 at the age of 3.5 years.
>
> I think Squamish ratings are like ratings in most of the other
> major areas I've climbed in -- i.e. best taken as a rough guide only.
> (Except maybe Index, where _everything_ is harder than you'd expect.)
Oh here we go again.... Index is a cake walk.
tom "index sandbagger" rogers