770 Northeast US 3000 footers

[Jean]

Anybody know where this list can be found?
I had no luck searching with Google.

 

[Dennis C.]

Jean, send me your e-mail address through VFTT and I will send you the 770 list. It is still a "work in progress" as there was another peak recently discovered in the Adirondacks. There are also "marginal" peaks "subject to interpretation", as you'll soon discover. Thanks for your inquiry.

 

[vegematic]

me too!

I'd like the list too. Tried to PM you but your box is full. My email is [email protected]
Thanks!
vegematic

 

[funkyfreddy]

Hi Dennis, I understand you've completed this list. Wow, that's a lot of mountains! I'm going to E-mail you as well. Since I love to hike and climb peaks this will give me something to contemplate.

 

[Raymond]

Who was Number One and who was Number Two? Or did you finish together (in which case Dennis gets No. 1 alphabetically)?

Does your patch have "770" on it? I sure hope not, if the count has risen to 771.

What did you use for a "rise" to determine what's a mountain and what isn't? What about mountains that are just under 3000 feet? Did you climb them, "just in case," or are you currently climbing them anyway because you're working your way down to sea level?

What's the most common name on the list? "Bald"? "Black"?

 

[Dennis C.]

John Swanson and I finished this list together in August, 1997, followed by Sue Eilers in 2000. As with most lists, there are still mountains being discovered through continuous poring over topo maps. We used the New England standard 200 foot col rule to qualify the peaks. The colorful 4 inch patch shows all the outlines of Northeast states that have 3000 footers and has the marking "NORTHEAST 770 3000 FOOTERS". Two thirds of the peaks are trailless. It's an incredible adventure that is best shared with others, especially the bushwhacks. I believe there are now over 30 climbers who have completed the New England list of approximate [451] 3000 footers. We try to encourage as many climbers as possible, but be prepared with lots of time and effort. It took me 16 years, but it's been done in as little as 10. I am available for consultation anytime.

 

[Puma concolor]

As I remember, you guys even got a small write-up in Outside Magazine after finishing this list. Just curious as to what your geographic cut-off was ... I'm guessing you included Maine, VT, NH, NY, MA and PA. Obviously not WV, but was Maryland in the mix?

 

[Papa Bear]

I'm guessing you included Maine, VT, NH, NY, MA and PA. Obviously not WV, but was Maryland in the mix?

Perhaps This will answer that question.

Pb

 

[Puma concolor]

Too funny, Papa Bear.


But, did you know the Highpointers consider MD and WV to be part of the Northeast -- kind of odd if you ask me. Also, Backbone Mtn, Maryland and Davis Mountain, PA (both State HPs above 3K) are both essentially rises on the Alleghany Plateau and are barely 60 miles apart - same geology if not geography. I did 'em both in one long day from Albany and back.

 

[Dennis C.]

We used the Mason-Dixon line and included the (4) southwest PA peaks on the Northeast list. And for the record, John and I chose Mt. Davis (PA high point) as our Northeast finish peak. Gene Daniell (for one) expressed that he didn't recognize PA as part of the Northeast (as far as peaks are concerned), since there is quite a gap between the 3000 footers in the Catskills and those in southwest PA. Technically, that is sound reasoning. Mt. Davis should be grouped with the others in Maryland and WV.

 

[funkyfreddy]

Hi Dennis, By using Gene Daniels criteria that means there are ONLY 766 peaks on this list OK, let's get on with it...........?%#*?!

Right! I think I'll start with the Catskill 100 highest and see how it goes first, maybe see how many pieces of torn clothing I'll have to replace before moving up to the ADK's...........

Any one up for some Catskill bushwacking? How about Van Wyck for starters? It's supposed to have some nice views. I've recently been looking at my maps while pondering the Catskill 100. Looks like some real interesting routes getting to and from some of these mountains...........

Another question...... how many people have done the Catskill 100?

 

[Raymond]

Dennis—or John—here's another question: If you used a 200-foot rise on all sides, does that mean you did that other summit of Table Top (that Bruce Schofield, in his "High Peaks of the Northeast," said would qualify under AMC rules)? There must be lots of Adirondack summits that qualify with a 200-foot rise, rather than 300.

How did you determine what was the high point of the trailless ones? What percentage of them had canister registers in place? Did you place canisters yourselves?

What percentage of the peaks are on private land, and how did you learn who the owners were?

Sorry about all the questions. When I first read of your feat in "Outside," I hoped you'd write a book detailing your exploits, but that doesn't seem likely, so I'll have to keep bugging you this way.

 

[Nadine]

Hi Dennis!

After completing the 100 and craving a good bushwack, I'm looKing for a new list. If you could send me a copy of the 770 I'd really appreciate it

Thanks,
Nadine

ps, I tried to pm you but your mailbox is full.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

Raymond has an Interesting point on that second peak of Tabletop. On the 1953 map it has a 300' rise from its col with the main peak. With the current metric maps the rise is 92m (301.837'). You have to laugh at all the time that people spent arguing about MacNaughton, and they missed a real high peak at 4300'.

The other 200' qualifier (among the 4K) that I am aware of is Yard. The third 4220' peak of Tabletop had a 200' rise on the 1953 map, but on the current metric topo only the rise is only 55m (180.446').

The other side of the coin are the 46er peaks that fail the 200' criteria: Gray, Iroquois, Armstrong, Donaldson, Emmons, and Nye. All of these fail on the 1950s maps and the current metric maps. Dial and Carson (S. Dix) only have a 60m (196.85') rise on the current maps, but perhaps 60 meters should be the accepted equivalent of 200'. All of these mountains (and several others failing the 300' criteria) were included on the 46er list because they had a 0.75 mile distance from the adjacent higher summit. That 0.75 mile criteria is problematic in that there are many other >4000', and > 0.75 mile peaks (and ridge bumps) that could have been included, e.g. Little Marcy. The 46er list is a historic list, without a consistently applied criteria.

I have never examined the Adirondack list down to 3K, but there are probably a significant number that Dennis and John added based on the elimination of the distance criteria, and with a 200' rather than a 300' rise criteria. I am also looking forward to receiving the 3K list (and have emailed Dennis).

 

[Jean]

Post'r boy you are starting to sound like Mr. X .....

 

[funkyfreddy]

there really IS only one list!!! and this is it! i'm all over it!
anybody wanna go whackin'?

Let me know when you're heading down to the Catskills. I'd be glad to bushwack some of these mountains with you! I believe there are 98 of them in the Catskills and a lot of them are very nice hikes and climbs.

Thanks, Dennis, for sending me the list! It looks like Jay and I will be going to Van Wyck, Table, and Peekamoose this weekend, may also explore the Ashokan High Point area a bit as well. From looking at maps of the area I think an interesting hike might be to walk the Catskill divide, starting at Woodhull mountain and then going across it to Van Wyck, Table, Lone, Rocky, etc.

 

[Jay H]

For those interested, I have taken the lists from Fred that he send me and converted them to PDF format, although I'd like to add those gridlines back, so bare with me while I play with them. But, if anybody wants the files in PDF format, just PM or email me and I'll forward you them. Fred didn't have Excel so I converted them for him.

Thanks Dennis and Audrey for the lists!

Jay

P.S. Nice horns Fred! Another convert in the VFTT evil minions... [insert evil smiley here]

 

[Grumpy]

. . . The 46er list is a historic list, without a consistently applied criteria.
. . .

I enjoyed your discussion about the criteria used to decide which peak makes a particular list, but take small issue with you on the comment quoted here.

The Adirondack 46er list is a "historic" list, as you note. But I think it is based on consistently applied criteria -- those used by the Marshalls and Clark as they pored over the maps of their era to plan their adventure. Maps of the region have undergone several revisions since then.

One thing discussions like this point out is how evolving technology and standards for the construction of maps changes our view of the world. That's pretty interesting, if you think about it.

G.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

To address Grumpy's point , it is not merely that maps have undergone revision. That is true. The Marshall brothers missed some mountains like Little Marcy that fully qualified per their original criteria on the topo maps that existed in the 1920s. Probably I should have just said that they had some oversights. Perhaps the larger problem is that any list criteria that includes a distance criteria with an "or" conjunction will allow numerous ridge bumps to qualify. Nobody wants that kind of list. That is why most lists only use a rise (a.k.a. prominence) criteria.

The 46ers have chosen to maintain a static or historic list so that all members have climbed the same 46. In essence the 46er criteria is not based on height, prominence, or distance. The list of 46 has become the criteria. That is no less valid than a club that dynamically updates their list per map revisions or to correct earlier oversights/errors.

It appears that the 770 Northeast US 3000 footers list will use a consistent prominence criteria for the entire northeast and make updates as needed. Some 46er peaks should not be on the list, and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Dennis C.]

Better late than never, Raymond! To answer your latest questions: Yes, we did that other summit of Table Top, and later went again for an official winter completion as well. Using the 200 foot col rule certainly added a fair number of peaks to the overall Northeast list.

Typically what we did was try to touch all the nearby summit bumps which appear to similar in height. We didn't have or use a GPS (then in its infancy) to test slight elevation changes. We put up a lot of the popular canister registers on secondary 3000 footers in New England to the point that almost every qualified peak had one. We put up a bunch on the ADK 100 highest bushwhacks, but most have been removed (by now). We then discontinued that practice on the other NY 3000 footer peaks.

Getting permission to climb peaks on private land was easier in the Catskills; more property owners live nearby. Some larger tracts of ADK land are owned by more distant owners (not easily located). The actual percentage of private owners is tough to guess.