Quandary Peak Upper East Bowl

[timf]

No offense, but not many will likely answer this question. Although not likely to slide, it HAS happened on occasion. To predict avy conditions in December or any other time is almost impossible to answer. We have no idea what the temperature, wind, and precipitation will do. Best to evaluate the conditions from a safe vantage point that day.

[taylorzs]

Variable, I have ridden that line several times in January, I dont think I've been on it in December. Sometimes in the winter it is fairly safe as the wind scours it creating hard convoluted snow. The convoluted snow can keep new snow from having a smooth surface to slide on as well. This descent can be a relatively safe winter descent, SOMETIMES. It is plenty steep to avalanche. It is east facing so it still recieves heavy windloading at times. If you don't know how to evaluate snow conditions just don't go there. If you are comfortable, skin up the ridge one day this winter and poke around. See what you think. If the bowl is sketchy that day you can always ski down the ridge. As long as you stay on the east ridge you cross no avalanche terrain. Keep in mind though that people have walked off the ridge in white outs and triggered avalanches that kill them on the couloirs and steep snow sections on either side of the east ridge. Also the lower east bowl often sees alot of slab build up. There are some tricky sections to navigate and I have regularly seen sketchy snow conditions there during the winter. Often times I have ridden the upper east bowl down, hiked back up to the east ridge at 12,000' (about) and dropped off the southside of the ridge a bit above treeline. If you do this just make sure you slowly traverse east on the descent. You can get cliffed out or end up in serious avalanche terrain on the south face if you drop any more straight down fall line or to the west on the south face of this mountain.

[Fiemus]

This old (and popular) TGR avi story on Quandary wasn't the upper bowl, but was a similar aspect and makes interesting reading:

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/show ... hp?t=20772

[taylorzs]

FYI That is the lower east bowl I spoke of in his accident report. The standard east ridge route ascends to lookers left of the bowl. And theupper east bowl ascends above thepicture in this accident report. You can look at both bowls when you climb up the ridge. Id never seen a slide there or that accidnet report. THanks! That gives good example to what I was talking about.

[TomPierce]

Yeah, that lower east bowl is well known (at least to me...I've seen it slide) as a slide area in prime (or bad?) conditions. It's actually near where the old Quandary summer trail used to switchback up years ago and is right at treeline. I agree with the TGR report, in the summer it's just a grassy slope with no anchors. The current summer (and for the most part, winter) route, as stated above, breaks left a bit over the ridgeline and goes up. This bowl is the sort of area not to drift into in limited visibility.
-Tom

[coloradokevin]

I'm glad to see this thread, and the discussion about this route. I have often heard that the bowls on Quandary Peak are not steep enough to slide, and even viewing a topographic map of the area doesn't get one thinking that this area screams of avalanche danger (to be fair, I hadn't actually measured the slope myself, as I haven't actually skied that route myself). Clearly this bowl is open, and has an aspect that would likely wind-load during our winters, but the overall angle just doensn't LOOK real bad (Yet again we prove how useful an inclinometer is, eh?)

But, in taking a closer look at the topo map, one can see an area in the lower east bowl where some of the contour lines start to hug each other a bit more closely. In viewing this map, I suspect that the primary start zone for this avalanche area is fairly short, but clearly it is long enough to cause a slide (per the trip report on TGR). The hazard is subtle on this map, and doesn't grab one's attention like viewing the Stanley Slide Path on Berthoud Pass would. Based on what I read in the TGR trip report (where the guy and his dog were slid), I'm going to guess that the very brief steep area (said to be approx 34 degrees) that this guy spoke of is located between 12,240' and 12,280' in part of the area that I circled on this map. Another spot appears viable as one descends heading NE into the bowl from the marked point at 12,100 ft on the lower east ridge.

But, I'm not an avalanche forecaster, and this is just my guess based on prior backcountry experience, and the avalanche class that I've taken in the past. Maybe there is someone on this forum from the CAIC who can comment more on historical hazards in these bowls?

Nevertheless, looking at the topography on this climb, and remembering what it was like from my last climb, I believe that it wouldn't be very hard for an unsuspecting climber to wander into the bowl while descending in bad weather! Definitely something to watch for on this mountian, considering how often this peak is climbed during times of elevated avy danger.

[ajkagy]

it's very rare to have the upper east bowl slide on quandary. Usually most of the snow is stripped clean and the snow that does stay turns into nasty sastrugi. In my opinion the skiing is rather poor mid season on the east bowl unless you have fresh snow with no wind which is rare as well. Although given a surface to slide on, enough snow and a slope angle in the 30s+ and you can see slides...no brainer there.

[coloradokevin]

Although given a surface to slide on, enough snow and a slope angle in the 30s+ and you can see slides...no brainer there.

True enough, and I'd agree that anyone with even a cursory knowledge of avalanche behavior ought to be able to understand that simple equation. However, I think problems often occur when folks fail to correctly estimate a slope angle. I personally always carry an inclinometer with me when I'm traveling in the winter backcountry, as I don't like to rely on my inherent ability (or inability) to guess which slopes are truly in the 30+ degree range.

Even with an inclinometer, it is easy to make errors if one isn't thinking clearly... Just by way of one simple example, if you sight a slope from below, without actually being at the base of the incline, the angle of the slope will appear to be lower (I've seen this error happen from folks who were approaching a slope, and wanted to determine the angle from a distance -- clearly this is simple geometry here, and that angle wouldn't be the angle of the slope, but rather the angle from the top of the slope to the point where the measurement was taken). Mind you, such a distant angle measurement can be useful to determine whether or not a slide might be able to reach you, but it isn't going to tell you the angle of the slope itself (and, alpha angles are probably of limited value to most of us in the backcountry anyway)! Similarly, a slope may average a certain angle, but still have an area that is steep enough to birth a slab somewhere in the middle.

In re-reading my post, I guess I'm just feeling a bit too nerdy tonight, because I'm spending the weekend typing about gemoetry on a climbing forum!

I'm certainly no expert here myself, but I always try to remain well aware of the fact that the seemingly miniscule mistakes can often be the same mistakes that kill you in the wild!