What constitutes "Alpine" climbing?

Once again I perpetrated thread drift. With some help. My apologies to Fiona.

I'll start by saying there are climbs in the MP database noted as "alpine" that summit below the "sub alpine" climate zone. And there are plenty of longer trad climbs throughout the US that are not so notated that have, from my perspective, definite mountaineering qualities to them. And there are climbs in the "alpine" zone that are pretty much just back country multi pitch rock climbs.

I have long had personal classifications: alpine light, and rockineering.

What makes a route alpine?

Above the snowline, above the tree line, above the line where common sense screams GTFO! Usually a small self-contained team and ideally a mix of terrain (snow, rock, ice), but not always.

I think this is a good question, Eric, because the answer to Fiona’s question surely depends on her definition.
I’d say more but as I’m on the road with only a phone to type on, and I am about to go climbing in the decidedly non-alpine gym environment. It would be too tedious. But I think my definition is closer to yours. 

The most basic, easy definition in the rockies at least is over 10K feet

Mark Vigilwrote:

The most basic, easy definition in the rockies at least is over 10K feet

This is a reasonable definition,  pretty closely aligned with the definition of the alpine zone, which is the zone above all trees. To me, if you don't travel on or closely pass by a glacier, then it is "alpine light". My reasoning is the the changes in character of the terrain and the types of decisions required for traveling. "Alpine light" absolutely can be very serious. There is just an element missing. 

There also are places where glaciers extend below treeline. Plenty of gray area for sure.

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

Above the snowline, above the tree line, above the line where common sense screams GTFO! Usually a small self-contained team and ideally a mix of terrain (snow, rock, ice), but not always.

I’d throw a glacier approach in the mix, but otherwise second this.

Then again, there are always exceptions. I’d definitely classify a winter tick of the Cuillin Ridge as alpine climbing, but no glacier present. 

If I am wearing my Black Diamond Alpine Pants and Alpine Start Hoody and you tell me the climbing I'm doing isn't alpine enough for ya, we're gonna have a problem 

I am not dissing the Sierra, the Colorado Rockies, or the Tetons. In particular I think the Tetons and RMNP are awesome, which I stated in the other thread.

Managing the various challenges presented by active glaciers and the climates associated with them is fundamental to being an alpinist. The opportunity to fully experience that is just about non existent in the lower 48 outside of the PNW. All the areas mentioned above, plus winter climbing across the western mountain states and in New England provides a lot of opportunity for alpine experience. It all "counts". Just my opinion. 

Why the urge to gatekeep "alpine climbing"?

Why the hypersensitivity to gatekeeping? What's it to you?

I am a big supporter of Washington as a climbing location and have remained here in spite of relentless attempts by friends and partners to convince me to move to sunnier pastures. That said the alpineness of Washington is vastly overblown. If the cascades are alpine climbing then the sierras and rockies certainly are as well.  There really aren’t that many serious glaciers here anymore. The ones that exist are on the big peaks (rainier, baker, shuksan, olympus, etc) that really don’t have any technical climbing routes. I have done a decent amount here and can think of very few outings that combine technical pitched climbing with glacier travel that requires any thought or effort. In the summer there are lots of shriveled husks of glaciers guarding the base of rock climbs, these are generally trivial to navigate and often you can see the rock slab at the bottom of the crevasses ~20m down. In the winter there’s enough snow coverage that it’s not a big deal. The weather here is also very chill compared to the more interior ranges (or anything outside the con48). Great forecasting and very predictable. Violent storms don’t surprise you without warning. Snowpack/avalanche assessment is easy mode compared to the rockies. Outside of rainier there’s no altitude to contend with. As far as training goes; Wyoming and Montana seem like better places to prep for alpinism in the bigger venues. 

Alpine is a mindset, defined as wherever cragging mindset ends. It means different things for different people. You can get alpine anywhere west of the Mississippi. 

The Wikipedia definition is pretty much how I’ve always thought about it:

“Alpine climbing (German: Alpinklettern) is a type of mountaineering that uses any of a broad range of advanced climbing techniques, including rock climbing, ice climbing, and/or mixed climbing, to summit typically large rock, ice, or snow covered climbing routes (e.g. multi-pitch or big wall climbs) in mountainous environments.”

A thing that pops into my head was years ago I read the Half Dome NWF was the most alpine like big wall in the Valley. It’s high elevation, often windy, and north facing Not an alpine climb but Alpine like, and obviously a big wall more than anything else. So many climbs can have more or less of the aspects of how you typically define different styles of climbing and it’s not black or white but what is predominant. If you climbed RNWF in Winter it would be done Alpine climb style but in opinion it’s still a big wall climb. Or you could do North Palisade in late summer and walk across the glacier and it’s pretty much a rock climb to 14,000+ feet but I’d still define it as an Alpine climb. 

My reply to Eric helped contribute to the off topic in the other thread so I'll own the thread drift too    Here's a thought and question I have:

• The thought: using much of Red Rock as an example, someone who climbs multi-pitch trad in Red Rock does not automatically strike me as someone who is well versed enough to safely climb deep in the backcountry on a big alpine multi-pitch route. For example, maybe someone can lead Ginger Cracks (5.9) at Red Rock but that same person may not be experienced enough to safely climb Fishhook Arete (5.9) on Mount Russell. 
• The question for those saying "alpine climbing" involves snow/ice/mixed/etc.: would you use different terms for these two climbs? To me, there is a clear delineation between the two. Would Ginger Cracks be considered a "multi-pitch trad route" while Fishhook Arete would get the same term in your view? Or would you delineate by calling the latter something like a "backcountry multi-pitch trad route"? I've never heard anybody use "backcountry multi-pitch" before and based on my understanding, that falls under alpine climbing which admittedly can encompass more than just strictly rock climbing, though once you involve snow/ice I would start leaning more towards, "technical mountaineering". 

Would Charlotte Dome (~13 miles deep into the backcountry, 12 pitches) fall under the same terminology as Ginger Cracks (~1.5 hour approach, 7 pitches, majority bolted belays) in that view? Just curious, genuinely wondering what the view is on this.

The Alpine Club at CU was just drinking and sport climbing, so I think that counts

For example, maybe someone can lead Ginger Cracks (5.9) at Red Rock but that same person may not be experienced enough to safely climb Fishhook Arete (5.9) on Mount Russell. 

The question for those saying "alpine climbing" involves snow/ice/mixed/etc.: would you use different terms for these two climbs?

No, not really. Both are currently rated 5.9 grade III. I would add something about the altitude of the Fishook, though. The grade rating is what designates the multi-pitch, so no need to type that out or say it. 

Would Charlotte Dome (~13 miles deep into the backcountry, 12 pitches) fall under the same terminology as Ginger Cracks (~1.5 hour approach, 7 pitches, majority bolted belays) in that view? Just curious, genuinely wondering what the view is on this.

Charlotte Dome is also a grade III. Yes its in the back country and I'd say so. 

So, all three of them are grade III multi-pitch rock climbs with 5.8ish climbing, only the setting and elevation is a bit different. Back country is worth a mention too I think, when comparing. To me, user competence does not factor in to route ratings nor grades. 

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

No, not really. Both are currently rated 5.9 grade III. I would add something about the altitude of the Fishook, though. The grade rating is what designates the multi-pitch, so no need to type that out or say it. 

Charlotte Dome is also a grade III. Yes its in the back country and I'd say so. 

So, all three of them are grade III multi-pitch rock climbs with 5.8ish climbing, only the setting and elevation is a bit different. Back country is worth a mention too I think, when comparing. To me, user competence does not factor in to route ratings nor grades. 

I see where you're coming from. Your last sentence made me pause because I agree that user competence doesn't factor into ratings or grades, but I realize I'm looking at it from a perspective of, "someone who can handle climbing Mt. Russell and Charlotte Dome is likely better versed than someone who can climb Ginger Cracks, but couldn't do the former two".

Two different things I'm bringing up, I know. I get your view of mentioning back country, that makes sense. The sense I get of someone's skill level based on how "off grid" the multi pitch they can successfully handle is different than the sense I get if a bolted multi pitch is their max comfort level.

Interesting discussion, thanks 

Alpine climbing is like pornography, hard to define but when you see it you know what it is. Rock climbing is just rock climbing, no matter the altitude or how long you walked to get to the climb. 

Is this alpine climbing or rock climbing with snowy sections or mountaineering or just two guys getting high on a cool mountain?

Honestly I would call that mountaineering without any internal debate. I would put it under the umbrella of "alpinism" that includes mountaineering and alpine rock climbing.

But hey what do I know, that's just my own internal bucketing

====================================================

I hit my post limit so this is going in here:

Apparently this has been debated before...

• https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/118075353/what-the-hell-is-alpine-climbing 
• https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/113496422/define-alpine-climbing 
• https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/109120193/difference-between-alpine-climbing-and-mountaineering 

The best answer I've seen came from Kris Holub and it reads: 

"Alpine climbing is climbing in an alpine environment. Take your particular brand of climbing: ice, mixed, rock, aid, etc and execute in the mountains. In addition to the technical skills of each discipline, you also add in factors unique to an alpine environment: weather, ice/snow, remoteness, long/strenuous approaches, altitude.

Mountaineering primarily focuses on the latter challenges with climbing itself as [usually] a smaller obstacle and more of a means to an end of finishing a route. The line between the two can be blurred at times, but it's reasonably accurate to say that mountaineering becomes alpine climbing when the technical difficulty of ascent becomes the crux of the route, as opposed to negotiating alpine elements."

Alpine climbing: if I get a wittle bit cold while I'm belaying

Cosmic Hotdogwrote:

Honestly I would call that mountaineering without any internal debate. I would put it under the umbrella of "alpinism" that includes mountaineering and alpine rock climbing.

But hey what do I know, that's just my own internal bucketing

Yeah, it was an interesting day. We climbed some sections of snowy rock with crampons on boots, and some sections of snowy rock with rock climbing shoes on. We were above 13,500’ and walked 8 miles to start climbing. I honestly prefer the two guys getting high on a mountain label.

Is this alpine climbing? On this day we hiked for less than a mile, climbed 600’ of sunny rock in rock shoes, booted and ponned up for the ice, and climbed neve to the top at around 11,000’. I think that two guys getting high on a mountain works for this one too. 

Ps. This is definitely Calibrah climbing too if it matters for the definition.

Jabroni McChufferson wrote:

The only time the sierra gets close to “ alpine” is in winter, which is pretty chilly in the shade and if breezy actually 

Disagree. Don't confuse discipline with location. Alpine climbing denotes location/elevation and certainly the Sierra offers the alpine. Alpine rock routes in summer may not strictly be considered alpinism, but that is just a matter of the disciplines required. 

     ^  this  ^