Forum of Lists

The 'Big' Peaks of the lower 48:

http://listsofjohn.com/USPro/USProIndex.php

Enjoy!

I wonder why this term came about? Perhaps in that brief interval when there were 49 states: Alaska(upper/most northern) and the other 48(all lower/southern to Alaska).

With the addition of Hawaii, there are now 50 states: Alaska(upper/most northern), Hawaii(lowest/most southern), and 48 in the middle. Yet we continue to call them the "lower" 48.

"Contiguous" is more accurate than lower, although there are plenty of non-contiguous land portions. I don't like "continental" either, since Alaska is part of the continent, too.

I guess "middle 48" just doesn't sound catchy enough! Maybe "eastern" 48 works, aside from the portions of Alaska in the eastern hemisphere.

I agree that lower 48 is problematic - I don't use the phrase anywhere in the member areas, and use the more representative 'contiguous' for my own sanity .

Consider this area now the 2,000' Prominence Area:

US 2K Prominence Peaks!

Excellent work, John, and very sleek how you imported our information from the other lists, like the county HPs.

I never knew that Nevada had the most 2K' peaks! My guess was California.

Aaron M's map demonstrates well how crammed with peaks the whole state is
http://peaklist.org/USmaps/nevadasummits.gif

Ranges, ranges, and more ranges. I don't think there's a shortage of peaks to bag climb there.