Nevada listed!!

[Layne Bracy]

Looks like John has completed the Nevada P300 listing, singlehandedly!

I know there's probably still more work to do in putting it all together, but well done!

So, what remains in the west?

AK <10K
AZ
CA <12K
HI
OR
WA

[John Kirk]

I should have stuff put together in the coming two weeks. NV holds the title for most P300s, surpassing MT. CA clearly will be the contiguous U.S. leader, probably followed by WA, but I still found NV's count interesting.

WA is next. I had planned on some side projects like TX and SD but ended up just wanting to get NV overwith as quickly as possible.

[Al Sandorff]

I'm not sure if it is already the plan or not, but I had a thought. By doing the counties for a state in order of descending high point, each 1K level could slowly be reached in descending order as well. For example in Califronia since it's already listed down to 12K+, then the next counties worked on could be the ones that have a COHP in the 11K range. That way when those counties are wrapped up, then the 11K level would be available and so on. I'll need the 10K's before I'm able to add any that I've climbed that aren't listed yet, but anyhow just my 2 cents. I could work on my home county of El Dorado if you're looking for volunteers, or Siskiyou, San Bernadino, or Alpine if you think my idea is good and want me to instead work on a county that has points at 11K+

Al

[John Kirk]

Hey Al,

Any help you're willing to offer would be much appreciated. I'm more than halfway done with Washington, after which I can dedicate more time to California and finish it up. Feel free to ask any questions you may have. Here are some links you may have already seen:

This goes over most of the methodologies:
http://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/glossary.html

TOPO! methods are a little less documented, but examination of the files shows the structure used (also what counties are done/mostly done):
http://listsofjohn.com/Quads/California/CA.html

[Al Sandorff]

I'm in the dark regarding UTM coordinates. Regarding line parent, I understand the concept of following the highest connecting ridge away from the saddle, but when a ridge later forks in two or more directions, then is it the higher low point or higher high point that is used to determine which ridge is highest? For example from Freel Peak what I would call the dominant ridge avoids the Proximate Parent of Highland Peak before connecting with Stanislaus Peak. It seems a bit arbitrary though.

Al

[John Kirk]

I'm in the dark regarding UTM coordinates. Regarding line parent, I understand the concept of following the highest connecting ridge away from the saddle, but when a ridge later forks in two or more directions, then is it the higher low point or higher high point that is used to determine which ridge is highest? For example from Freel Peak what I would call the dominant ridge avoids the Proximate Parent of Highland Peak before connecting with Stanislaus Peak. It seems a bit arbitrary though.

Al

The files for CA are a bit dated - don't worry about UTM, I'm not using it anymore. The Washington files use the most current method:
http://listsofjohn.com/Quads/Washington/Washington.html

TOPO! files are really all I need -the rest is exported from those into excel. If you don't have TOPO!, then an excel file with name, elevation, coordinates (decimal degrees), saddle evelation and coords is sufficient.

Line parents should always follow the least drop to a higher peak (one that exceeds or meets 300' interpolated prominence). Think of it in terms of raising the water level on earth to just below the saddle. Then the next closest higher peak following dry land is the line parent. I there are two equal saddles, pick the one between the closer higher peak.

[Al Sandorff]

I included a small sample file. I didn't want to do too much in case I had to look them all up again to get more info. The Acme method I'm using is not showing me a quadrangle name. I figured out UTM, but if you don't need them that will save me a few steps for each peak. Let me know if I'm on the right track and then I'll keep going with El Dorado County.

Al

[John Kirk]

Looks good Al - All I need is columns B,C,D,F,H,I,M, and N. I have a lookup file that automates quadrangle names based on the coords.

[Al Sandorff]

John,

Please list El Dorado County as being worked on to avoid anyone else from duplicating the work. I have a few more questions. At 38.88672 120.08245 there is a "Cathedral Peak" with no obvious measured center point in the middle of the SSE slope between Fallen Leaf Lake and Mount Tallac. I'm not sure whether to list it or how to list it if so. At 38.79932 120.08529 there's a point "7377" with no closed contour line. Do I list it and if so is the saddle interpolated to 7368 or 7369, or just 7377 with no rise? I just wanted to further understand the rules used before I got too far along to avoid causing more work later.

Thanks, Al

[John Kirk]

John,

Please list El Dorado County as being worked on to avoid anyone else from duplicating the work.
Thanks, Al

Got it.

John,

At 38.88672 120.08245 there is a "Cathedral Peak" with no obvious measured center point in the middle of the SSE slope between Fallen Leaf Lake and Mount Tallac. I'm not sure whether to list it or how to list it if so.
Thanks, Al

Since there is no closed contour or spot elevation that would exceed an interpolation, I wouldn't list it at all.

At 38.79932 120.08529 there's a point "7377" with no closed contour line. Do I list it and if so is the saddle interpolated to 7368 or 7369, or just 7377 with no rise? I just wanted to further understand the rules used before I got too far along to avoid causing more work later.

Unless a point has enough rise to be a soft-rank (possibility of having 300' rise) or an official USGS name with more than zero rise, we don't list as a peak.