Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Great Basin Peaks Section list

Expand Messages
  • Andy Martin
    (Bob Sumner) Just found out - we have a brand new peak section. They ve been working on it for a year, and are ready to go. Read about it here:
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 15, 2010
      (Bob Sumner)
      Just found out - we have a brand new peak section.
      They've been working on
      it for a year, and are ready to go. Read about it here:
      http://toiyabe.sierraclub.org/GreatBasinPeaks.html


      List is at
      http://toiyabe.sierraclub.org/GBPeaksList_04_01_10_DLG.html

      It is infested with big prominence peaks !
    • Bob Bolton
      Does anyone know how the Sierra Club goes about including or excluding peaks from their lists? I ve long wanted to know if they have objective criteria they
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 15, 2010
        Does anyone know how the Sierra Club goes about including or excluding peaks
        from their lists? I've long wanted to know if they have objective criteria
        they apply when selecting peaks; if so, what those criteria are, and if not,
        why not.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Adam Helman
        Hello Bob, I am unversed in the exact methods employed by the Sierra Club. However I did emplace the following text in The Finest Peaks , Chapter II, page 13 -
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 15, 2010
          Hello Bob,

          I am unversed in the exact methods employed by the Sierra Club.
          However I did emplace the following text in The Finest Peaks , Chapter II, page 13 -

          In California the HPS (Hundred Peaks Section), DPS (Desert Peaks Section) and SPS (Sierra Peaks Section) of the Sierra Club sponsor and encourage hikers to climb the summits on their respective peak lists.2

          A committee sits down and decides which mountains are to be incorporated based upon numerous considerations that are not entirely quantifiable.

          This decision by committee has numerous consequences, all of which are distasteful to any person interested in complete objectivity. When a property owner restricts access, that peak is bumped off the list, and may be replaced by another peak to maintain the total number.

          Mountains are timeless entities, at least on a human time scale. Thereby time invariant peak lists are preferable to those which may change at the whim of some individual or group decree. The mountain exists regardless of access issues.

          Sincerely,

          Adam H.


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: Bob Bolton
          To: prominence@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 10:22 PM
          Subject: Re: [prominence] Great Basin Peaks Section list



          Does anyone know how the Sierra Club goes about including or excluding peaks
          from their lists? I've long wanted to know if they have objective criteria
          they apply when selecting peaks; if so, what those criteria are, and if not,
          why not.





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Edward "7.389056099" Earl
          (Bob Bolton) ... (Adam H) ... The DPS list is determined by a vote of the members, with a majority vote being necessary and sufficient to modify the list. I m
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 15, 2010
            (Bob Bolton)
            > Does anyone know how the Sierra Club goes about including or excluding peaks
            > from their lists? I've long wanted to know if they have objective criteria
            > they apply when selecting peaks; if so, what those criteria are, and if not,
            > why not.

            (Adam H)
            > I am unversed in the exact methods employed by the Sierra Club.
            > However I did emplace the following text in The Finest Peaks , Chapter II,
            > page 13 -
            >
            > In California the HPS (Hundred Peaks Section), DPS (Desert Peaks Section) and
            > SPS (Sierra Peaks Section) of the Sierra Club sponsor and encourage hikers to
            > climb the summits on their respective peak lists.2
            >
            > A committee sits down and decides which mountains are to be incorporated based
            > upon numerous considerations that are not entirely quantifiable.
            >
            > This decision by committee has numerous consequences, all of which are
            > distasteful to any person interested in complete objectivity. When a property
            > owner restricts access, that peak is bumped off the list, and may be replaced
            > by another peak to maintain the total number.
            >
            The DPS list is determined by a vote of the members, with a majority vote being
            necessary and sufficient to modify the list. I'm not sure what it takes to get a
            proposed change on the ballot. In 2004 Gerry Roach tried to get Elephant Tusk
            (in TX) added to the DPS list. He didn't succeed. The HPS list is similar:
            http://angeles.sierraclub.org/hps/bylaws07.htm
            I don't know about the SPS, but I suspect it too is similar.

            Note that the HPS peaks must meet several other requirements in the section
            by-laws: They must be at least 5000' above sea level, no two may be less than a
            mile away from each other, and they must be within a certain region of the coast
            and transverse ranges of southern CA, bounded by a specific pattern of lines of
            latitude and longitude. In 1946, Guatay Mtn (originally thought to be over
            5000') was ejected from the list when it was later found to be 4885'.

            > Mountains are timeless entities, at least on a human time scale. Thereby time
            > invariant peak lists are preferable to those which may change at the whim of
            > some
            > individual or group decree. The mountain exists regardless of access issues.
            >
            Well, not quite. The USA lost an ultra about 30 years ago.


            Edward "7.389056099" Earl
            esquared@...
            http://home.earthlink.net/~esquared
          • Adam Helman
            ... Well, not quite. The USA lost an ultra about 30 years ago. I suspect that the demotion of Mount Saint Helens from ultra status is an event which occurs
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 16, 2010
              > Mountains are timeless entities, at least on a human time scale. Thereby time
              > invariant peak lists are preferable to those which may change at the whim of some
              > individual or group decree. The mountain exists regardless of access issues.
              >
              Well, not quite. The USA lost an ultra about 30 years ago.

              I suspect that the demotion of Mount Saint Helens from ultra status is an event
              which occurs rarely over a single human lifespan when considering a 58 peak list.

              It takes millions of years to grow and then erode a mountain past a certain
              cutoff value (in theory this occurs twice during it's existence).
              Dividing "millions" by 2 x 58, one obtains a duration FAR greater than,
              say, 70 years.

              However volcanoes are a different breed - and it might just be that they
              "appear" and "disappear" from peak lists on a much more frequent basis.

              The destruction of Mount Mazama must have been FAR MORE spectacular -
              not to mention Krakatoa's more recent eruption in 1883.

              Perhaps I should have made a footnote wherein volcanoes are
              singled-out as more ephemeral peak list members than "normal" mountains?

              Adam H.



              .



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • gjmacleodca@cs.com
              In a message dated 4/15/2010 9:43:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ... ********** Hello Andy and Bob, Thank you, Bob, for notifying the peakbagging community of
              Message 6 of 6 , Apr 19, 2010
                In a message dated 4/15/2010 9:43:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
                oldadit@... writes:
                > oldadit@...
                >
                **********

                Hello Andy and Bob,

                Thank you, Bob, for notifying the peakbagging community of the existance of
                the new Toiyable Chapter Great Basin Peaks Section, and their excellent
                Great Basin Peaks List ... And Andy, for calling my attention to that list.

                The first thing I did with the list was to convert it from the Adobe Reader
                *.pdf file into a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet file .-xlc file, so as to
                have a "workable" file, where useful data could be appended, such as to whether
                a given summit was climbed and when.

                It turned out that Barbara Lilley and I have climbed 90 of those listed
                summits, which is about 78% of the total or about 83% -- if Idaho and Oregon
                are excluded, where we have done little climbing.

                I have attached that Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet file .-xlc file:

                Toiyabe Chapter Great Basin Peaks Section-Peaks by State.xlc

                Gordon


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.