metric list?

[arghman]

vague curiosity compels me to ask if anyone's made a "metric" list for the northeastern US, e.g. all peaks 1000m+ that have 100m+ cols. (>= 3281ft, 328ft col)

I seem to remember one of our Canadian posters talking about a similar list for Quebec.

(not that I have any intention of doing it, just curious)

 

[Mr. X]

This question has made me wonder why/ how anyone came up with the 48 4000 footer guideline.

 

[Waumbek]

This question has made me wonder why/ how anyone came up with the 48 4000 footer guideline.

Good question. I've also wondered why 4000', not 3500', not 4500', etc. I suspect that 4000' was selected by analogy to European/alpine 4000 meter clubs. Early AMC'ers were highly conscious of European trends and patterns.
The "Alpina" section of the AMC magazine is a case in point. Actually, it was ADK'ers who started 4000' lists first, I believe, but the same awareness of European climbing customs and practices pertained to them.

 

[cbcbd]

Is there a 2K list? How about a 1K?

 

[Papa Bear]

I seem to remember one of our Canadian posters talking about a similar list for Quebec.

(not that I have any intention of doing it, just curious)

The Canadian list comes from Greg Sleyden's excellent site Peakbagger.com

The list is Quebec 1000-meter Peaks

Note that he uses 100M clean prominence as a metric, however he does list a few peaks with smaller prominence values, but for those he doesn't rank them, i.e. he doesn't list an ordinal number for the peak. For example, notice between #39 and #40 there is the unnumbered Monument 450 Peak, a peak that several folks here have climbed. With a listed clean prominence of 249 feet, it makes the NE 3000 footer list (minimum 200 feet of interpolated prominence) but dooesn't make the 100M prominence cutoff.

Where did he get 1000m and 100m? Easy, he made them up - since they are nice numbers (100m is a popular prominence cutoff worldwide. I think such peaks are called "Munros"), and they produce a nice sized list.

 

[imarchant]

vague curiosity compels me to ask if anyone's made a "metric" list for the northeastern US, e.g. all peaks 1000m+ that have 100m+ cols. (>= 3281ft, 328ft col)

I seem to remember one of our Canadian posters talking about a similar list for Quebec.

(not that I have any intention of doing it, just curious)

I compiled a list for the NY peaks. There are 135 peaks 1km high with >100m prominance.

I have the prominance calculated for 204 of the 1,000m peaks down to 20ft (6m) of prominance.

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

Good question. I've also wondered why 4000', not 3500', not 4500', etc. I suspect that 4000' was selected by analogy to European/alpine 4000 meter clubs.

The first 4,000 footer list was compiled by the Marshall brothers and their guide, Herbert Clark. I strongly suspect that they chose 4,000 on the "Goldilocks principle"; 4,500 would have meant too few peaks, 3,500 too many.

On the other hand, around 1900 Karl Blodig was the first to have climbed all Alpine peaks over 4000 metres. He reported on these climbs in his book "Die Viertausender der Alpen (the 4000 metre Alpine peaks)", first published in 1923, which ranked among the alpine classics. The book was published after the Marshall brothers had started their quest (1916), but it is possible that his achievement was already known. One version of his list is available on the ViaAlpine web site. The official UIAA list based on a complex set of criteria (topographic, morphological and mountaineering), has 82 peaks.

I believe that the first list of peaks with a given elevation was that published in 1891 by Sir Hugh Munroe.

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

vague curiosity compels me to ask if anyone's made a "metric" list for the northeastern US ...

For one man's defense of feet, see Gerry Roach's In Defense of Feet. I initially wondered whether it was a tongue in cheek piece or the work of a genuinely passionate "metric hater" ; a recent (2005) addendum to that piece tells us it was the former. An excellent fun read for those who have not yet come across it.

 

[jn316]

5000?

I like the idea of a 5K list, not only because it's more manageable, but because of the mountains themselves. The Northeast 5K summits are all more like each other and distinct from lower summits than are all the 4K peaks. And the 5K peaks may be more lovable as a group. Many hikers have a couple 4K's they aren't happy to repeat, while each of the 5K's seems to invite return trips. And it's a list you can do year after year, a goal i set for myself each year, (but one i rarely achieve, because of work, weather, gas prices, life stuff.) ...still have the 3 most distant to do this year.

 

[RoySwkr]

vague curiosity compels me to ask if anyone's made a "metric" list for the northeastern US, e.g. all peaks 1000m+ that have 100m+ cols. (>= 3281ft, 328ft col)

This was done for New England by Paul Lindsey around 1980

I don't have a copy and the original list if located would be obsolete due to quad revisions

There was a NH 6K club which climbed various knobs on Mt Washington that ME might turn up in an old Appalachia

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

There was a NH 6K club which climbed various knobs on Mt Washington that ME might turn up in an old Appalachia.

A couple of years ago (give or take a couple of years!!) there was a posting somewhere (???) about a 6,000 footer club, with no details. Looking at the Washburn map I saw only one other peak inside the 6,000 foot contour, Ball Crag. There are also two other benchmarks inside that contour; a 6,247' one about 300' SW of the summit, and a 6,066' one about about 400' NE of Ball Crag.

Without Google, how do you search 70 years worth of Appalachia for something like that

 

[RoySwkr]

Somebody made an index for the first 100 years or so which was published by the AMC, never saw it and don't know how detailed it was

I think the 6k club used 10' prominence or somesuch and had at least half a dozen peaks

 

[David Metsky]

I remember reading about the 6000'ers, dressing up in formal wear and drinking copious quantities of champagne on each little knob and outcropping on Washington. By the time they returned to Lakes of the Clouds they were completely sloshed and quite loud. Sounds like a fun group.

I think I read this in an Appalachia or an Outdoors in the past 10 years.

-dave-

 

[Paradox]

... drinking copious quantities of champagne on each little knob and outcropping on Washington. By the time they returned to Lakes of the Clouds they were completely sloshed and quite loud. Sounds like a fun group.
-dave-

Now this is a group I can relate to.

.

 

[jn316]

I remember reading about the 6000'ers, dressing up in formal wear and drinking copious quantities of champagne on each little knob and outcropping on Washington. ....... Sounds like a fun group.

I think I read this in an Appalachia or an Outdoors in the past 10 years.

-dave-

Mt Madison Volunteer Ski Patrol
est. 1962 (?)
fun group

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

Mt Madison Volunteer Ski Patrol
est. 1962 (?)
fun group

One of the members of our Wednesday Hiking Group is a member of the MMVSP (Mount Madison Volunteer Ski Patrol) and yesterday I asked her about the group. She was kind enough to give me a history of the group, and after the hike I asked my good friend Google more about the group. Not much came up, but one item was an article by Guy Gosslein entitled MMVSP on the Old Hutsmen Association site.

There is a description of the 6000 Footer Club:

The traverse was grand from the outset. It was an elegant tour of all the 6,000 footers in New England, wherein champagne-sipping lady and gentlemen members who had motored up the Auto Road in vintage cars and fine (or over-fine) attire, strolled around the summit of Mount Washington and up over Ball Crag and Air Force Peak before settling down to a gourmet picnic among the rocks. The tour was typically a leisurely one, and by the time the lady and gentlemen members got to the appointed picnic site, balance had become a problem for some. Not content to limit the insult of the Grande Traverse and Alpine Picnic to Swampy, Macmillan twitted the AMC’s 4,000 Footer Club by issuing shoulder patches for the 6,000 Footer Club of New England.

Of the three summits the summit of Mt. Washington and Ball Crag are well defined on maps. Does anyone have any idea what "Air Force Peak" is? The Washburn map, best I can tell, shows only the summit and Ball Crag as peaks.

 

[MichaelJ]

Does anyone have any idea what "Air Force Peak" is?

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a euphemism for the weather obs. Like "Air Force" = "Wind pushing you" ...

 

[--M.]

I remember reading about the 6000'ers, dressing up in formal wear and drinking copious quantities of champagne on each little knob and outcropping on Washington. By the time they returned to Lakes of the Clouds they were completely sloshed and quite loud. Sounds like a fun group.

...

-dave-

Indeed, although I would be surprised if there weren't comment at some point about the risks of inebriation combined with the ever-famously-dangerous Presidentials. I know if I were associated with such a group (at least during my twenties), there'd probably be a call to SAR by the Lakes staff and a lot of Monday-Morning-Quarterbacking by boards such as these. Being trashed on the high peaks can only be described as quaint if it happened a long time ago and without incident.

[What a buzz-kill this guy is!]

Also, what's with patches being earned with the aid of automobiles?

--Scrooge

 

[Grayjay]

air force peak

Air Force peak is probably just the old parking lot for the Air Force jet engine research building that once stood across the auto road from Ball Crag.
In their state, the parking lot with a banking, was probably good enough to be designated as a peak. Those involved in this venture had vast experience in the mountains, and a little fun and ceremony was good, and not frowned on back then.