Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

14ers in California and Washington state or any other peak in the USA
Forum rules
  • This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
  • Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
  • Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
  • Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
User avatar
JaredJohnson
Posts: 419
Joined: 8/27/2014
14ers: 28  5 
13ers: 13
Trip Reports (3)
 
Contact:

Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by JaredJohnson »

Hi there, in April 2021 we had a baby that had a heart problem. It was a crazy journey, not exactly easy but much easier than one might imagine, living in a different city to be close to specialists, living in the NICU for a month, managing expected symptoms of heart failure, traveling back and forth after moving back home, worrying about what happens if she gets COVID etc etc. In November 2021 she had open heart surgery and it went incredibly well, she is as good as new in just about every way and we get to have a pretty normal life again, albeit learning to raise a baby with Downs but that's all good (:

One thing that remains abnormal for the moment is that her cardiologist recommends against taking her on our typical Colorado vacations this summer. He says there's a small chance that the elevations we encounter in the mountains of Colorado could trigger medical problems due to some temporary adaptations that her cardiovascular system made while she was previously in heart failure. He indicates that by next summer this should not be a concern, and even now it's more of an "abundance of caution" thing but we're totally on board with the abundant caution route.

I've still managed to get away and do plenty of fun mountaineering for myself. However, my wife also enjoys class 3 and 4 scrambling with me as well as solo, but she normally can't participate above 10-12k ft until she has acclimatized for about a week; otherwise she gets serious altitude headaches and persistent nausea. So we normally plan a vacation with the kids in CO and after a week or two of that we do something together and/or she does something on her own. That's not an option this year.

Also some of my kids are interested in trying some peak bagging with me; last summer I took my 11 year old backpacking to SCL and then we summited Humboldt together. He's very interested in doing something like that again; he's also spent some time at the climbing gym and is interested in exploring more exposed class 2 and/or less exposed easy class 3 in order to get an idea of whether he has an interest in progressing to the most difficult CO peaks someday. Although my wife and I find the experience of technical climbing rewarding in itself, my kids are excited about the idea of climbing a mountain with me and not that interested in just doing some climbing. Normally we're able to carve out times during our vacation to go off and do things like this together without having to split up parts of our family for a long road trip of our own.

Aaaaanyway I've been trying to brainstorm areas where we could plan a vacation and get to do mountaineering objectives but without any concerns about taking baby to any significant elevations. I haven't yet asked for clarification on what counts as "significant", I kinda want to have some locations/elevations in mind before asking. We live at 1,300' so obviously that is fine, and "in the Colorado mountains" surely includes 10k ft and above. He also is quite comfortable with us traveling to random other places so he's clearly not worried about what happens when we take the interstate toward Florida and accidentally climb to from 1,300ft to 2,000ft along the way. but I would have to delve further to vett a location that was at 3,000' or 6,000' or whatever.

Ideally we would find a lower elevation area where there are still actual mountains with significant prominence which take a legit effort over 0.5-2 days to complete and include some real significant pitches of class 3 and/or 4 scrambling. If that doesn't exist, we might get creative and do like some long distance but non technical stuff on the AT or in death valley this winter or something. But I'm hoping the geniuses on here will see our sob story and come up with the perfect place to go pretend we're in Colorado bagging 14ers and doing real mountaineering (:
User avatar
summitrunner
Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/19/2006
14ers: 18 
13ers: 2
Trip Reports (1)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by summitrunner »

Great job, dad!

How about California? Low altitude, big vert.
"To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift." PRE
Matthew Holliman
Posts: 2
Joined: 8/21/2013
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by Matthew Holliman »

CA isn't particularly low altitude -- the best scrambling is all in the Sierra IMO, so generally around 12k and higher. There's some stuff in Northern CA (Trinity Alps area), but the best scrambles there are still up at 8-9k.

You might consider Washington -- you can find plenty of objectives in the 4-6k elevation range (e.g. around Snoqualmie Pass area), if that isn't too high. B.C. or Alaska, too -- lots around Anchorage in the 4-5k range. Not great scrambling in general (pretty chossy), but very scenic. (BTW, I very much enjoy my visits out to CO, but both WA and AK blow it out of the water for scenery IMHO. Maybe that's heresy on this board).
User avatar
ncxhjhgvbi
Posts: 88
Joined: 6/16/2017
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 58 2
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by ncxhjhgvbi »

Its been awhile but I remember that the adirondacks have some slabby stuff - I think Algonquin Peak had some cool slabs (easy class 3/difficult 2). Mt Monadnock as well close to Boston. There’s probably some good stuff in the NH Whites and I’ve had a few friends who really loved the Katahdin knife edge. The granite out there is super cool.
User avatar
Monster5
Posts: 1760
Joined: 8/7/2009
14ers: 58  31 
13ers: 290 37
Trip Reports (27)
 
Contact:

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by Monster5 »

Totally agree with Holliman above but I'd take my blasphemy a step further:
  • Colorado is not the place to be for serious mountaineering. It's great for low-grade all-season peak bagging and rock climbing overcrowded routes
  • Washington definitely fits the bill.
  • Surprisingly, Idaho fits the bill. I spent a couple weeks there and had the impression of Gore Range meets Washington Pass.
"The road to alpine climbing is pocked and poorly marked, ending at an unexpectedly closed gate 5 miles from the trailhead." - MP user Beckerich
User avatar
Monte Meals
Posts: 408
Joined: 5/16/2011
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by Monte Meals »

If you don't mind traveling to Canada, the Ice Fields Parkway
is spectacular with tons of great hikes and scramblers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_H ... ds_Parkway

Good camping and most of the peaks top out below 10,000 ft.
User avatar
Scott P
Posts: 9447
Joined: 5/4/2005
14ers: 58  16 
13ers: 50 13
Trip Reports (16)
 
Contact:

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by Scott P »

There are lots of possibilities. Even in Colorado, a lot of the hardest peaks are in the 5000-7000 feet range (climbing the 5ers or 6ers in Colorado is a lot harder than doing the 14ers).

Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona have a lot of gnarly peaks 3000-9000 feet as well.

The caveat to the above is that all of those aren't good summer places. The above is desert mountaineering rather than alpine mountaineering.

If you want somewhere for summer try Washington, Canada, or Alaska.
Last edited by Scott P on Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I'm old, slow and fat. Unfortunately, those are my good qualities.
User avatar
Jon Frohlich
Posts: 2610
Joined: 10/14/2005
14ers: 58 
13ers: 162 3
Trip Reports (29)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by Jon Frohlich »

I'd vote for checking out Washington. Check out the Thornton Lakes area in the North Cascades. We climbed Trappers Peak (approx 5900) a few years ago and there's also X Mountain, Thornton Peak, and Mount Triumph in there. The trailhead for Trappers and Thornton Lakes was something like 1200 feet.

Trappers was an easy Class 3 scramble with a stunning view. I believe Thornton was Class 3 or 4 but you'll have to do some research. There's other peaks out there too.
User avatar
jrbren_vt
Posts: 673
Joined: 2/18/2006
14ers: 14 
13ers: 29
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by jrbren_vt »

Another thumbs up for Washington's North Cascades.

Also Canada, I recall turning back from Mt Wilcox (https://www.summitpost.org/wilcox-peak- ... cox/153841) many years ago because it was too scrambly for my taste.

For scrambly climbs to summits in the northeast, checkout Adirondack Slides.
https://www.amazon.com/Adirondack-Slide ... 0978655400,
https://www.summitpost.org/eagle-slide- ... ain/346654,
https://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2011 ... slide.html,
https://www.mountainproject.com/route/1 ... east-slide .

In New Hampshire checkout Huntington Ravine (To Mt Washington) or King Ravine Trails (to Mt Adams).

None of these is "serious mountaineering", but I suspect the definition of that term depends on who you are asking.
I am a hiker, not a mountaineer, so my definition is pretty forgiving.
There is tons of scrambling around Colorado Springs to summits under 10K, but COS itself is 6000+' so that may not work.

There is a ton of wonderful low elevation peaks in Scotland, ranging from walk ups to technical climbs, if you want to go abroad.
*****************
Best Regards
*****************
User avatar
ejhaley23
Posts: 6
Joined: 6/9/2022
14ers: 26 
13ers: 4
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by ejhaley23 »

ncxhjhgvbi wrote: Thu Jul 21, 2022 1:49 pm Its been awhile but I remember that the adirondacks have some slabby stuff - I think Algonquin Peak had some cool slabs (easy class 3/difficult 2). Mt Monadnock as well close to Boston. There’s probably some good stuff in the NH Whites and I’ve had a few friends who really loved the Katahdin knife edge. The granite out there is super cool.
+1 to Katahdin in Maine. Beautiful ridge hike with some sub peaks you can loop to make it a longer day with decent elevation gain. You top out just over 5000' so could work for you.
User avatar
glenmiz
Posts: 1142
Joined: 8/30/2013
14ers: 58 
13ers: 121 1 3
Trip Reports (4)
 

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by glenmiz »

Lots of options significantly below 10k in the Cascades of Washington State.
Aim high to end high
User avatar
Scott P
Posts: 9447
Joined: 5/4/2005
14ers: 58  16 
13ers: 50 13
Trip Reports (16)
 
Contact:

Re: Lowest elevation areas with serious mountaineering

Post by Scott P »

If you ever do get the chance, Norway is wonderful. The mountain in the photo (Stetind) is less than 5000' high.
High-peak-Stetind-rises-from-fjord-in-northern-Norway.jpg
High-peak-Stetind-rises-from-fjord-in-northern-Norway.jpg (128.38 KiB) Viewed 1619 times
Romdalshorn was one of the best climbs I have done.
I'm old, slow and fat. Unfortunately, those are my good qualities.
Post Reply