3,000 foot rule question?

[nunns]

Has anyone ever submitted a 14er starting from the lowest elevation point in Colorado, on foot? This should be the true standard on which a colorado 14er is submitted.

If I start at the lowest point in CO (where is that anyway?) and then climb all of the 14ers from there, on foot, in one single traverse, AND then finally return to the lowest point in CO on foot, am I in compliance? Or do I have to go back to the lowest point in CO after each 14er?

Sean Nunn
Raytown MO

[Flyingfish]

If I start at the lowest point in CO (where is that anyway?)

The lowest point is on the Kansas border in the Republican River Wildlife area.

[mrgooseskin]

If I start at the lowest point in CO (where is that anyway?)

The lowest point is on the Kansas border in the Republican River Wildlife area.

The lowest point in CO is actually about 22 miles north of that, where the Arikaree River flows into Kansas (very close to the KS/NE/CO tri-point, elevation ~3,340 feet.

Where the Republican River flows into Kansas is ~3,510 feet.

Sorry, I'm a true stickler when it comes to pointless geographic facts.

Edit: this is also the highest lowest point of any U.S. state.

[Climber 4037]

Everything counts if you want it to count.

I personally think the "3000 foot rule" is ridiculous.. It's just a number.

I also think what decides if a mountain is a mountain is crazy.. I generally view it as a massif and if high peaks are on the main massif it's just a high(er) point.

Meeker and Longs Peak are a classic example... to me, Meeker is just a high point on the Long's Peak massif. Long's is the mountain, Meeker is just a high point on that mountain..

Same with Mount Massive... it's one huge massif with lots of high points..

So many Colorado and California 14ers would not be 14ers if I was judge and jury

That would make my list a lot shorter

LMAO...

[nunns]

If I start at the lowest point in CO (where is that anyway?)

The lowest point is on the Kansas border in the Republican River Wildlife area.

That makes sense, but it also makes by quest a lot harder. It's a long ways from there to Long's Peak.


Sean Nunn
Raytown MO

[pbakwin]

I thought for a long time it would be great for someone to go for the Colo 14ers speed record using an "anything goes" approach, ignoring the arbitrary, odd 3000 foot rule. (OK, we'll say you have travel on the ground, no helicopters.) Drive to the top of Pikes & Evans - fine. Start from the highest possible TH. Whatever works. Makes a lot more sense to me than the way the records have been pursued. Starting below some of the standard THs, as FKT aspirants have done, is ridiculous. Starting the clock for the whole project at some arbitrary spot up the trail below Chicago Basin, and stopping it along the trail 3000' below Longs Peak, is also ridiculous.

[RichH]

I think this rule makes sense for anyone trying to set a FKT for all 14ers but is completely meaningless for the rest of us who just want to climb the peaks from the standard trailhead.

[Scott P]

The hardest mountain I have climbed was only 2723 feet high. So, did I really climb it?

[illusion7il]

???
Its 3000 feet. And combining it with wetterhorn puts it way over

Actually Nellie Creek TH is at 11,400 (according to this website) and the summit is 14,309. The intermediate undulations add the extra hundred feet. The 3,000' rule definitely applies to the difference between the starting elevation and the summit, not the total gain.

I disagree. Where do you get that from? I think its the total gain. Which is over 3000 feet.

Perhaps some visual aid will help. And just in case you can't figure it out, 14K is the summit. It's very simple, If a peak is 14,001 ft. then you must start or reach a point in your hike that is 11,001 ft. or lower, It doesn't matter how many bumbs you go over. Roach explains this perfectly using San Luis routes comparing how even though the Willow Creek route has more RT elevation gain than the route from Stewart Creek, The willow creek route does not meet the 3000 ft. rule but the Stewart creek route does.

[Trotter]

Actually Nellie Creek TH is at 11,400 (according to this website) and the summit is 14,309. The intermediate undulations add the extra hundred feet. The 3,000' rule definitely applies to the difference between the starting elevation and the summit, not the total gain.

I disagree. Where do you get that from? I think its the total gain. Which is over 3000 feet.

Perhaps some visual aid will help. And just in case you can't figure it out, 14K is the summit. It's very simple, If a peak is 14,001 ft. then you must start or reach a point in your hike that is 11,001 ft. or lower, It doesn't matter how many bumbs you go over. Roach explains this perfectly using San Luis routes comparing how even though the Willow Creek route has more RT elevation gain than the route from Stewart Creek, The willow creek route does not meet the 3000 ft. rule but the Stewart creek route does.

I'd personally count both those summits. Agree to disagree

[Jim Davies]

I bet 90% of the CMC finisher list has "cheated" on this rule, either at Guanella Pass or Kite Lake.

[SchralpTheGnar]

Does the cmc finisher application say “I swear I gained 3000 feet for each of these peaks” or something to that effect. I wouldn’t know because 20 years later I’m still not a finisher, it’s schralps great shame