|4,831 page views|
Photo by Chris Fox.
I never have figured out quite how to pronounce the name of this climb. I also have no idea what the hell a buissonier is. A buisson is a bush. The nearest I can figure is buissonniere, French for "to play truant or skip school". In any case, a pretty good climb.
Begin behind campsite (#21). First moves off the deck are awkward - protect with small nut or TCU to avoid castration from sharp fin of rock below in the event of a fall. Either jam or lieback the left-angling crack. Gear belay.
Descent: scramble down chimney to the southwest (a little tricky).
Standard rack. A small nut or TCU will help protect initial moves off the deck.
Just at the crux on this unusual climb.
BETA PHOTO: The Blob - Southeast Face
At the rest in the chimney.
BETA PHOTO: Doing the lay back
Top of Buissonier during the snow.
|By C Miller|
Jul 16, 2002
The name means "living in the bush", at least that's what the old Wolfe guide said about it.
|By Infernal Doom Fanatic|
Oct 1, 2004
Don't let the 5.7 fool you, this is very strenuous. I followed this classic and it's a typical old school Robbins sandbag.I was pretty gassed when it was over.Not for fledgling 5.7 leaders.
|By Richard Beller|
Dec 30, 2004
This is a JTree sandbag at 5.7. When this climb was put up, 5.7 meant a moderately hard climb, roughly equivalent to 5.9 at modern sport climbing areas. Many beginners would find Papa or Mama Woolsey easier to follow than Buissonier.
|By Kevin Currigan|
Feb 26, 2005
It was definately a burly warm-up on a cold morning. If you are not comfortable with 4th class downclimbing consider the rap. I found the downclimb fairly exposed. However, the rap looked like it might eat our rope about half-way down.
|By Woody Stark|
Nov 23, 2005
Sandbagged, wretched, lousy, stinking, crummy, foul, nasty and perverse. Only people who enjoy surgery would like this thing. I ignored it for years. I wish I'd continued so. On the other hand, you might as well climb it so you can check it off.
From: Westminster, CO
Nov 24, 2005
the word "Sandbagged" is used very often when concerning climbs that some feel are over rated... My question is, if it is just one rating over, should it be considerer a true "Sandbag" or just a bad day for someone, or maybe a techniques they are not great at, or AGE or the many other factors involved???... A route rated 5.7 that is in fact 5.10a is what I would call a true "Sandbag"... Or a 5.3 offwidth that feels more like 5.9 (I soloed one and was quickly humbled)... is it me or am I on to something here??? Ratings are somewhat relative to the FA... beyond that it is a sort of starting point for the rest of us to get some idea of what it goes at. And ratings have changed through the years. Is it a "Sandbag" if it was put up "way back when" or just the "rating of the day"???... Sometimes it seems that many people want to change "ALL" of the ratings on a climb to climb basis... I have done the route here in question and agree that it felt a little harder than what is now considered 5.7. But I also took a good look at it and could figure that out before stepping onto it. Then agin, I did it back when I climbed much better... So how should it be rated???.... I stick with 5.7 for now...
|By tony grice|
Feb 13, 2006
the start is 5.8 no pro. spicy. A must do for everyone
|By Adam Stackhouse|
Mar 20, 2006
5.7 or 5.8, doesn't make that much of difference. Fun, clean climb. Sandbag is defined in the dictionary as Captain Kronos
Sep 23, 2006
It was dirty, crumbly and had a nasty bush in it when I did it. Never did it again. I see the bush is gone.
From: Mesa AZ
Dec 13, 2006
Start up high on the fin to gain hand crack and trust your feet. Getting into the chimney helped alleviate the horrible crux jam at the top...The descent was a horrible spine-cracking experience just waiting to happen... Be careful!
|By big lebowski|
Feb 23, 2007
Nice climb with a frustratingly awkward start and an increasingly strenuous crack, finishing with a short sharp layback - good value 5.8! We did the rap descent which features a scary start involving either a vertical plummet for 10 feet (not recommended ;-) or a bit of heel-hooking to get down below the anchors
|By Bill Olszewski|
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Mar 10, 2007
Maybe I've just climbed too much in Josh over the past few years but I think this is an excellent climb for the rating and no big deal with the walk-off. It does look intimidating (and feels that way the first time) but goes down no issue. Eats gear rather well, just make sure you place that first piece to protect you from the "fin" and don't do the lieback - walk the arch instead. Yes, a little awkward, but it saves your arms. And take that rest at the start of the vertical section.
|By Darren D.|
Apr 12, 2007
This was a lot easier the second time. This route seems to be on quite a few soloists' circuit. Being camped at the site right by it, we saw soloists run up the thing quite frequently. The slab downclimb past the chimney seems to be easier than the chimney itself.
|By Brandt Allen|
From: Joshua Tree, Cal
May 29, 2007
This is a wonderful, aesthetic, sustained route for anyone with some basic jamming technique. Perhaps a bit strenuous for 5.7 but the pro is good. The descent chimney is scary looking but very secure and no big deal.
From: las vegas, nv
Oct 30, 2007
Thought this was a really fun route. I did not find it stiff for the 5.7 rating, just that it has a sustained section to work through. Very good pro and if you just move through the crux section you get a nice rest in the chimney.
|By Charles I.|
From: Boulder, CO
Nov 5, 2007
I have done this route twice now and always get forced into the layback at the top. Makes it harder than it should be. Anyone know anything about the offwidth to the left? I heard it's last ascent was in the 80's. Yikes!
Nov 15, 2007
This route is definitely not sandbagged.
BETA ALERT: You do not have to lieback anywhere on this route. If you lieback it then it will of course seem more strenuous. Just rack all your gear on the left side and walk up the crack, jamming more for balance & security than for upward movement.
Jan 1, 2008
Awkward off the deck? I'll say! Very sketchy.
Jam the crack and walk up it? I whipped 3 feet below where the crack / flake goes vertical about halfway up. Left some finger DNA for my follower on the slick as snot lip. Finally moved past the section by liebacking on smeary face edges.
Strenuous? You betcha!
5.7? Not in my opinion - but I can see how the Stone Masters would think so.
Classic? I won't go back for a second helping.
The rap route can be tricky at the top - you need to have secure footing to avoid swinging out into the air below the chock stone where the slings are fixed. Awkward diaganol movement the the whole way down.
Maybe it was just a bad day for me, it's happened before.
|By Pete Hickman|
From: Tacoma, WA
Feb 22, 2008
It is an awesome climb, beginning would be sketchy if you don't protect it with a nut, no lie backing necessary, I think 5.7 is fair, easy to protect, and the descent looks much scarier than it is.
|By Sascha von Meier|
May 5, 2008
I didn't think it was that hard for the grade. The start is definitely thought-provoking, but it does protect with a small cam and/or nut -- this, of course, takes up the space where your fingers would have gone, so after some grumbling it finally occurred to me that using the wall to the right for a chimney-move start might not be inappropriate. (Hey, didn't Royal love to chimney?) There's no need for strenuous liebacking; this climb is all about relaxing into a good body position. Lots of fun!
And the chimney on the descent only looks like it will spit you out (terrified me); but once you get down into it, it's really not that bad.
|By Royce Robertson|
From: Joshua Tree, California
Sep 25, 2008
A Royal Robbins 5.7, so do the math. Not an easy 5.7 unless you have the upper body strength to pound through the laybacking. Challenging climb. Definitely recommended but closer to 5.8 or 9 for newb leaders
|By Nathan Stokes|
Dec 7, 2008
The beta about walking and jamming up the crack didn't make this route seem bad at all. I neglected to rack everything to the left and it made right foot moves awkward, but a good climb still. I also used the large offwidth at the top to chimney up the final vertical which may have made it easier also.
|By Joe M|
From: Rapid City, SD
Jan 11, 2009
rating: 5.8+ PG13
Although the pro on this is really good and you can really sew it up (I did), the 5.7 rating is definitely old-school. The start is definitely protectable, but still a little spicey! Fun route though, will definitely do it again!
|By Russ Walling|
Jan 17, 2009
Rated F6, or 5.6 in the old guide. Seemed accurate at the time.
Nov 17, 2009
rating: 5.10 PG13
Super tight hands. You will have to layback if you have large hands, which will make the climb uber-strenuous.
|By The Gray Tradster|
Nov 17, 2009
5.6 or 7 if you do it correctly.
No liebacking required.
From: Boise, ID
Dec 3, 2009
The walkoff can be made easy. If the chimney intimidates you, traverse across the top of it on good holds past a small boulder. On the other side of the small boulder is a wormhole that you can squeeze down through with no exposure whatsoever. At first it seems like you won't fit, but just keep wiggling and you'll make it through.
|By Josh Smethers|
From: Malvern, pa
Mar 19, 2010
Onsight. Purple C3 to protect the start. Balancy. Great right hand two finger lock to pull up and over the vertical section. Tough climb for 5.7. Sweet climb!
From: Laguna Beach, CA
Nov 8, 2010
Just did this climb over the weekend. The move right out of the gates was the crux for me. I found if you rack to the left and smear with your left and toe in the crack for your right, this never got more difficult than the 7 that it is rated. I absolutely love this one and can't understand why so many people have cried over it. I may have liebacked once briefly where it goes most vertical, but I can understand why screws are coming off if people try to lieback the whole thing. If you wanted to give it a higher rating, maybe for the start.....for anything else, check your style and try it again.
|By Johnny Ice|
From: Tucson, AZ
Mar 30, 2011
Fun climb. The decent was weird. Everyone I talked to wasn't really sure how to get off. We walked east and scrambled down a chimney which was scarier than the climb. I'd say the climb was 5.7, the decent was 5.8+.haha
May 18, 2011
To protect the start, a #3 Camalot can be placed up and behind the climber's right in the large pocket
|By Brian Chastain|
Feb 20, 2012
Holy cow. When I first went to J-Tree after only climbing a month or two in winter 2009, this and Hands Off were the first lines I set my eyes on. Since then, I have done a bunch of other routes and kind of forgot about these.
Feb 19, 2012, I returned to finally lead these. What many of you people have written here is down right blaspheme to the climb. I warn everyone who reads these posts to take them with a grain of salt, a microscopic one.
The only thing I have to say is that when standing on the rail, like walking up a hand rail to a stair case, it is a little slick, either from the heavy traffic it gets or the fact that all the snow in the corridor there made it a bit moist (and/or both). Keep the right foot wedged in the crack well and you'll be fine.
As for the down climb, I also think what many people wrote is crazy. The chimney is only like ten feet and there is three ways to do it. The way I did was wedge down the off-width part right when you walk up to it. The rock is very smooth and polished right there making it very easy to squirm down. You can go down the center of it, definitely harder, or you can go to the far end in chimney fashion while using off-width techniques on the section where it pinches off.
I know guideline #1 is to not be a jerk, but I think that is what many people here have acted like. If you see a line you want to do, do not read what people "KEYBOARD WHIP" the ratings up to and other things associated with the climb. I almost got psyched out of climbing this thing from all the garbage written here and was ticked off after doing it of how wrong many people were. I hope I don't get in any trouble here with anyone, but if they can express their opinions here about the climb in the way they have, I should be able to also.
Sorry for the tutorial............This thing is 5.7, no harder, no easier.
From: Atascadero, CA
Feb 20, 2012
The rap off this climb isn't bad. Down and to the climber's right from the belay ledge. Try to stay on the slab at the start of the rap and not fall into the abyss/chasm directly below the rap slings.
|By Amanda Archer|
From: Pasadena, CA
Mar 9, 2012
Love this route, but not the decent. There used to be a rappel off the east(?) face, but someone cut the slings. Had to find our way down a 5th class water chute and my husband short-roped me.
|By Bernard Van De Walle|
Feb 20, 2013
First move as well as 3 meters of layback are difficult...
Some people seem to say you can do it without layback... Honestly it just seem way easier with laybacking ;-)
In My opinion a good 5.8 if you are not used to that style