Route Guide    Partners    Forum    Photos    What's New    Journal        
Sign Up  |   Log In:Login with Facebook
REI Community
Rock Climbing Photo: Perhaps Cleo's 1st Ascent?  This was "borrowe...
Id# 106835296, 374 x 600px View full size
Comments on Photo Add Comment
By Burt Lindquist
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
Jul 22, 2010
Wow! There appears to be very little tree growth around the base of Cleo's Needle way back then..... I am betting the place had a much more alpine feel then..... Were they doing roped ascents back then?
I don't see gear anywhere or a rope.... solo onsight FA?
By Peter Arndt
Jul 22, 2010
You know Burt, It just might be. Go to the forum page and view the pics of "Cleft Rock". Unless I have completely overlooked it I don't think this formation stands today.
By Remo
From: Madison, WI
Jul 23, 2010
Nice find Peter.
By Chris treggE
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
Oct 16, 2016
This is definitely still Cleo's needle. What doesn't make sense is the lack of tree coverage. If the last glaciers came 12,000 years ago and this valley was actually spared from glaciation, why were there no trees? Take a look at any present day photo of Cleos and the trees are almost up to the summit block. Even 10-15 years ago they were a lot shorter. Look at 2012 versus 2004.

Rock Climbing Photo: 1910 postcard of Cleos needle
1910 postcard of Cleos needle


Rock Climbing Photo: Aaron and Rebekah enjoying the view from Cleo's ne...
Aaron and Rebekah enjoying the view from Cleo's needle, August 2012.


Rock Climbing Photo: Photo by Mike Pyle of Amos Patrick climbing up to ...
Photo by Mike Pyle of Amos Patrick climbing up to Molly Patrick on Cleo's Needle
By Doug Hemken
Administrator
Oct 17, 2016
Fire(s)? I can't imagine that would have been a good place for logging.

Chris - aren't those modern photos from different angles? Which exaggerates the difference?
By Chris treggE
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
Oct 18, 2016
Yeah Doug I think the 2004 photo was from further out, like on Turk's Head, and I took the 2012 one and it was from the top of Queen's or thereabouts. So yes, different angle. But still some difference in tree height, which to me still seems kinda odd.
By Michael Behrend
From: East Lansing, MI
Oct 23, 2016
Hey Chris,

"This is definitely still Cleo's needle. What doesn't make sense is the lack of tree coverage. If the last glaciers came 12,000 years ago and this valley was actually spared from glaciation, why were there no trees? Take a look at any present day photo of Cleos and the trees are almost up to the summit block. Even 10-15 years ago they were a lot shorter. Look at 2012 versus 2004. "
Not to beat a dead horse, but I think the angle of the picture is sufficiently different between those two and the perspective and time of year the old original picture was taken made a big difference.

The valley was partially glaciated, here are some good descriptions; pages.uwc.edu/keith.montgomery...
pages.uwc.edu/keith.montgomery...

I'm learning a lot about it's geology!
By jon jugenheimer
Administrator
From: Madison
Oct 28, 2016
Even if the glaciers were not in that valley but all around it, it would be extremely hard for trees to be growing in that environment, and thus a complete lack of trees in the DL valley (which was a river valley before the end moraines plugged it up and diverted the WI river into its general present course). The glaciers covering WI in the last ice age were 100s of meters thick to a Km or two thick in some places. I would imagine that snow was covering the land 6-7-8 months out of the year in the glacier fringes, and at this altitude, ill bet the environment would be like present day Montana at 12K feet...maybe a few shrubs, some grasses, but no trees per say.
Photo 2 of 54
Avg Score   5.0 from 9 votes
Your Score   

Perhaps Cleo's 1st Ascent? This was "borrowed" from the Wisconsin State Historical society site. Taken by H.H. Bennett perhaps around the turn of the century?

Submitted By: Peter Arndt on Jul 22, 2010
 Printer View