Colorado LiDAR Findings

Colorado peak questions, condition requests and other info.
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.
Post Reply
User avatar
bdloftin77
Posts: 1090
Joined: 9/23/2013
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 58
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by bdloftin77 »

Tornadoman wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:41 pm A random 'bump' that might be worth checking just in case is the 13,299 Point near 13,317 in the Sawatch (St. Elmo/Mt. Princeton area roughly). It shows a saddle of 13,000 to 13,040 (average 13,020), thus an estimated prominence of 279'. Probably won't make the cut, but it would seem there is at least a chance.
I got 13315' for the summit and 13019' for the saddle, so it's safe. But barely! I'm guessing there's some 240'-279' ones that are actually ranked, but that aren't even on the radar.

Nearby 13,317' is actually 13,332'.
User avatar
Tornadoman
Posts: 1438
Joined: 7/30/2007
14ers: 58  8 
13ers: 266 35
Trip Reports (12)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by Tornadoman »

bdloftin77 wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 8:10 am
Tornadoman wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:41 pm A random 'bump' that might be worth checking just in case is the 13,299 Point near 13,317 in the Sawatch (St. Elmo/Mt. Princeton area roughly). It shows a saddle of 13,000 to 13,040 (average 13,020), thus an estimated prominence of 279'. Probably won't make the cut, but it would seem there is at least a chance.
I got 13315' for the summit and 13019' for the saddle, so it's safe. But barely! I'm guessing there's some 240'-279' ones that are actually ranked, but that aren't even on the radar.

Nearby 13,317' is actually 13,332'.
Wow, that one IS close.

I have one more that interests me that I don't think is on anyone's radar. There is a random, steep little peak near Pierre Lakes. I don't remember noticing it while climbing Capitol or Snowmass, but it really stood out from a few miles away. It has a 13,080 contour (so an assumed elevation of between 13,080 and 13,120), and a saddle contour between 12,800 and 12,840. Attached is a picture... wonder if anyone has climbed it (Boggy??)
13er Tower.jpg
13er Tower.jpg (151.31 KiB) Viewed 1847 times
Climb the mountain so you can see the world, not so the world can see you.
User avatar
Boggy B
Posts: 781
Joined: 10/14/2009
14ers: 58  7 
13ers: 777 76
Trip Reports (40)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by Boggy B »

Tornadoman wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 8:36 am I have one more that interests me that I don't think is on anyone's radar. There is a random, steep little peak near Pierre Lakes. I don't remember noticing it while climbing Capitol or Snowmass, but it really stood out from a few miles away. It has a 13,080 contour (so an assumed elevation of between 13,080 and 13,120), and a saddle contour between 12,800 and 12,840. Attached is a picture... wonder if anyone has climbed it (Boggy??)
I haven't climbed the nunatak, but Kiefer says it goes at 4th class, so probably he has?
Would be a good excuse to check out the Pierre Lakes basin.
User avatar
TakeMeToYourSummit
Posts: 355
Joined: 9/9/2012
14ers: 58  2 
13ers: 287 25 2
Trip Reports (8)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by TakeMeToYourSummit »

Boggy beat me to it! Here is the TR link: https://www.summitpost.org/climbing-the-unknown/801901
I'm horrible with names...
But will never forget a mountain's face!
User avatar
bdloftin77
Posts: 1090
Joined: 9/23/2013
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 58
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by bdloftin77 »

Tornadoman wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 8:36 am I have one more that interests me that I don't think is on anyone's radar. There is a random, steep little peak near Pierre Lakes. I don't remember noticing it while climbing Capitol or Snowmass, but it really stood out from a few miles away. It has a 13,080 contour (so an assumed elevation of between 13,080 and 13,120), and a saddle contour between 12,800 and 12,840. Attached is a picture... wonder if anyone has climbed it (Boggy??)

13er Tower.jpg
I got the summit at 13,072' and the saddle at 12,839' for this one.
13080
13080
13080.jpg (207.75 KiB) Viewed 1734 times
User avatar
Tufftommy-BV
Posts: 66
Joined: 4/22/2017
14ers: 57  4 
13ers: 509
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by Tufftommy-BV »

Another fatality. 13010 across from Chief A is under 13k. Now Chief is a mega-orphan!

Looks like the adds and subtracts are back to even.
Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted....
User avatar
bdloftin77
Posts: 1090
Joined: 9/23/2013
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 58
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by bdloftin77 »

There’s some fairly big Centennial changes! For an easy comparison with the old list, start with Jagged and continue in descending elevation.
d_baker
Posts: 3100
Joined: 11/18/2007
14ers: 58  15 
13ers: 348 11
Trip Reports (59)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by d_baker »

bdloftin77 wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:17 am There’s some fairly big Centennial changes! For an easy comparison with the old list, start with Jagged and continue in descending elevation.
Where is the list for comparison?
User avatar
Jon Frohlich
Posts: 2609
Joined: 10/14/2005
14ers: 58 
13ers: 162 3
Trip Reports (29)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by Jon Frohlich »

d_baker wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:18 am
bdloftin77 wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:17 am There’s some fairly big Centennial changes! For an easy comparison with the old list, start with Jagged and continue in descending elevation.
Where is the list for comparison?
I don't suppose it's high on any priority list but can we get this Lidar results page sortable by elevation instead of date? It's hard to find anything or make any sense of it when it's sorted this way. A CSV download option would work too.
User avatar
supranihilest
Posts: 720
Joined: 6/29/2015
14ers: 58  42 
13ers: 709 1 8
Trip Reports (112)
 
Contact:

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by supranihilest »

d_baker wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:18 am
bdloftin77 wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:17 am There’s some fairly big Centennial changes! For an easy comparison with the old list, start with Jagged and continue in descending elevation.
Where is the list for comparison?
Here - https://listsofjohn.com/lidar/lidar.php
Jon Frohlich wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:25 am
d_baker wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:18 am
bdloftin77 wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:17 am There’s some fairly big Centennial changes! For an easy comparison with the old list, start with Jagged and continue in descending elevation.
Where is the list for comparison?
I don't suppose it's high on any priority list but can we get this Lidar results page sortable by elevation instead of date? It's hard to find anything or make any sense of it when it's sorted this way. A CSV download option would work too.
Coincidental timing - I sent an email to John Kirk this morning asking if he can make the columns sortable on the LoJ LiDAR page. We'll see what he comes back with.

Ben - perhaps adding a link to that page in large text at the top of the very first post would be useful. It's where all the results are aggregated, it's been hard keeping track of individual changes throughout the lifetime of this thread since they're scattered throughout many separate posts.
Last edited by supranihilest on Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
bdloftin77
Posts: 1090
Joined: 9/23/2013
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 58
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by bdloftin77 »

I’m out on a hike for the next several hours. Kicking myself for not taking a screenshot of the short Excel spreadsheet I made with the updated elevations for the border range Centennial peaks. I believe the new centennial list would end with a tie between Niagara and Trinity at 13,816 feet. Trinity, Arrow, and Niagara are higher than Expected. I believe Dallas and Teakettle might no longer be high enough.
User avatar
bdloftin77
Posts: 1090
Joined: 9/23/2013
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 58
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: Colorado LiDAR Findings

Post by bdloftin77 »

Adam Klopp (who also discovered that North Maroon is ranked) and I looked at borderline peaks all the way from Potosi through higher than Jagged.

If someone hadn’t when I get back, I’ll post the new lowest Centennials in order.
Post Reply