Re: Mt Conness

Anyone here hike Mt. Conness? Specifically the east ridge approach? What's the scramble REALLY like above Alpine Lake? Is it very dangerous? How about the White Mtn/Conness saddle approach?

Lastly, how scary is that summit block? From photos online, there are a few super-exposed sections that I may be uncomfortable with, but if there are good holds and footing, I woudn't have a problem. Obviously this is hiked a lot, so it can't be THAT difficult, right???

Even from the elevation of lower Young Lake it looks difficult. Mt. Conness looks mean. But, that's probably just my age. I did Mt. Lyell in my youth and thought it was easy.

We talked to some people as they passed by our Young Lake campsite, who climbed it that day. They said it wasn't all that hard. They were in their twenties.

That's said to be the easiest route. The 2,600 (?) foot elevation climb out of Saddlebag Lake in about 3.5 miles is said to be the harder trail.



Post Edited (09-10-08 19:25)

---

mark2

The East Ridge is class 3 (from same book that said Dana was class 1).
The Other Route from Saddlebag heads for the lowest Saddle North of
White Mountain. This is class 2.
The Route from Youngs is class 2.

I've done the route from Youngs and it wasn't supremely difficult.
I did it with my 65+ young old buddy...

The only part that got me scared was the section before the summit.
I didn't have any troubles with it... only watching Mike do it.
I'm ok with me putting myself in harms way but I cringe at watching
others... that last section may be a little more than you want to deal
with.

Here is sorta what you are dealing with near the summit:


(and, yes, if you are wondering... there aren't many cracks and crevices in Yosemite I haven't seen)

---

Everything I know I learned from

Yeah, it's the summit block that looks to have the most exposure. How are the couple of really exposed sections, in terms of footing and holds? I've pieced together from trip reports and photos that there are 2 really "bad" sections that require some bravery. And your pic looks like one of the sections I've seen described: a 1' walkway about 10' long with an inward sloping wall opposite the chasm. Is that the section you are on in the picture?

Probably the most exposure I've ever had was the section between the false and true summit of Round Top (I know, that's really nothing...). How does this compare, or does it?

The "summit block" is really the only place with any exposure.
IMO it is more intimidating than the Angels Landing hike in Zion.
I have not been to Round Top so I cannot comment on that.
There is a small section where you are exposed on both sides that I recall.
The picture of Mike is coming back down. There is stuff much worse than
what is in the picture. It is just hard to get a picture that shows it well.
This was the best picture that actually showed that he was in "danger".

If you have the time and equipment I would recommend Backpacking to
Young Lakes and then summit from there. That way if you decide you
just don't want to do the last section you still have Young Lakes and
Ragged Peak to enjoy. The lake turning into a marsh between White
and Conness is also very interesting and pretty....
I guess what I'm saying is that just getting to those summit blocks is worth the effort IMO.

Have fun.

Here is the lake turning to marsh:
(This was June 15 '07... so it may look much different...)
('06 was pretty decent snow year... also note people for scale in photo)

Excellent photos, Billl - thanks!

---

Wilderness forever,
Bruce Jensen

I don't think the exposure on the last bit of Conness is as bad as the narrow part of Clouds Rest from the east. The first time I did Clouds Rest I was on my hands and knees for about 30 feet.

---

Old Dude

mrcondron wrote:

> I don't think the exposure on the last bit of Conness is as bad
> as the narrow part of Clouds Rest from the east. The first
> time I did Clouds Rest I was on my hands and knees for about 30
> feet.
>

Isn't it said that Cloud's Rest is one of the most exposed Class 1 hikes a person can do (at the summit, at least)?



Post Edited (09-15-08 08:36)

cthenn wrote:

> mrcondron wrote:
>
> > I don't think the exposure on the last bit of Conness is as
> bad
> > as the narrow part of Clouds Rest from the east. The first
> > time I did Clouds Rest I was on my hands and knees for about
> 30
> > feet.
> >
>
> Isn't it said that Cloud's Rest is one of the most exposed
> Class 1 hikes a person can do (at the summit, at least)?

Not at the summit. It didn't seem all that exposed. It was sort of a bunch of tiered levels up to the summit. Certainly there was some scrambling, but I got the sense that if I fell off anywhere near the top, I would just fall down to the next level a few feet below. Of course going all the way to the edge either west or east would result in a nasty fall, but it wasn't that hard to stay away from those areas.

Well, I just did Castle Peak this weekend, so I figure if I can overcome my fear of heights and do 70' of near-vertical rock climbing, I should be able to handle Mt. Conness...



I think *this* would qualify as Class 3!



Post Edited (09-15-08 08:35)

Um... ya.. that's class 3.

You should not have any trouble with Conness.

Have fun

Here's Mike getting to top of Clouds Rest.
Tenaya Lake in background... and, o wow, you can almost see TM!
(yes, another dig on that "silly" HD article)

Also, on this trip we got snowed on and someone didn't bring a tent.
(hint, he is in the picture)

Looks like you can't see Tuolumne Meadows from Clouds Rest either

"On A Clear Day You Can See Forever"



Post Edited (09-17-08 19:46)

---

THE YOSEMITE POST
Voice of the Rocky Marmot Empire

Quote
bill-e-g
(hint, he is in the picture)

Well, there's a few pixels of him.

here's a good Conness trip report:

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty_pages/romain.wacziarg/climbing/ConnessSept02.html

I'm thinking of having a go at it sometime in the next couple of weeks.

vdrummer wrote:

> here's a good Conness trip report:
>
> http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty_pages/romain.wacziarg/climbing/ConnessSept02.html
>
> I'm thinking of having a go at it sometime in the next couple
> of weeks.

Nice link, thanks. Would anyone know the aprpoximate mileage for the hike by this route? Either walking or boat ride?

Thanks ~

---

Wilderness forever,
Bruce Jensen

It's approx. 3 1/2 miles the way they went. Their route is south of Saddlebag so no boat ride is available.

Ah yes, I read that trip report during my internet-scouring of Mt. Conness info. That's the route I plan to take, or perhaps deviate south to the White/Conness saddle out or back.

Re-reading this, it brings up a point. Why do people drive 4.5 hours, over 200 miles to this part of Yosemite (or beyond) for a dayhike? And it seems like a lot of people do that. Hell, I drive 160 miles almost every weekend to go skiing in winter, but I just can't imagine getting up at like 3AM to drive to Yosemite, do a strenuous 6-8 hour hike, then drive home. All in one day. Does anyone in here do that? Don't get me wrong, I love the wilderness, and I'd love to do as much Yosemite hiking as I could, but it just seems like a huge undertaking to drive 8 hours (cumulatively), and hike 6-8 hours.

I think it's kinda like when you really like a girl you will go to great extremes to see her.

Done it many times. Mt. Dana, Clouds Rest, Wawona Grove/Chilnualna Falls, Valley Hikes/Taft Pt./Sentinal Dome.

Heck, one time last year I had my full pack... hiked 15 miles... still only 3pm... only 5 miles to car... late October... hiked back to car and drove back
home to the wife.. So ended up doing 20 mile "dayhike" with my backpack...

But as with a girl... I much prefer staying overnight.
I guess I should tell the wife Yosemite is my mistress.

bill-e-g wrote:

>
> But as with a girl... I much prefer staying overnight.
> I guess I should tell the wife Yosemite is my mistress.

HAHAHAHA!!!! Good one!

I did Conness from Youngs Lakes more than forty years ago with a group of young-teen boys. As I recall, it never required the us of our hands, although there is a short section below the peak that is quite exposed, walking along a narrow ridge with very steep drops on either side. You could easily see the bergschrund on the north side....

And while you may have had a great adventure on Castle Peak, my wife and I climbed that about ten years ago with a straight class 2 route. No need to clamber up what you were climbing there....

---

Check our our website: http://www.backpackthesierra.com/
Or just read a good mystery novel set in the Sierra; https://www.amazon.com/Danger-Falling-Rocks-Paul-Wagner/dp/0984884963