LoJ unranked 13ers not on 14ers.com

[HikerGuy]

Has anyone created a list of unranked 13ers that are listed on LoJ but not listed on 14ers.com?

Here are some examples:

"The Butterknife" 13,479 Tenmile
"North Conejos Peak" 13,048 San Juan
"Little Wasatch Mountain" 13,037 San Juan
"Gibraltar Mountain" 13,293 Front
"Ski Hayden Peak" 13,324 Elk
"Captain Bivwacko Tower" 13,698 Sangre de Cristo

[backcountrybrodes]

Lol, this is the exact reason I'm not going for the unranked 13ers with the ranked 13ers. The unranked list is too convoluted from too many sources. And besides, you could stand on a rock pile with 20ft of prominence attached to something like Pikes Peak at some amount above 13k (13,106ft for example) and call it an unranked 13er and tell everyone they have to climb it.

The ones unranked at ~285ft to ~299ft of prominence are a slightly different story, but I still find the whole thing incredibly trivial to keep track of.

[cougar]

That would need to get a custom list on LoJ.

Also, the Sawtooth is on both sites, but with a different location. LoJ has it as a gendarme mid ridge, .13ers has it as the highpoint above the ridge on Blue sky side.

[Boggy B]

Lol, this is the exact reason I'm not going for the unranked 13ers with the ranked 13ers. The unranked list is too convoluted from too many sources. And besides, you could stand on a rock pile with 20ft of prominence attached to something like Pikes Peak at some amount above 13k (13,106ft for example) and call it an unranked 13er and tell everyone they have to climb it.

The ones unranked at ~285ft to ~299ft of prominence are a slightly different story, but I still find the whole thing incredibly trivial to keep track of.

Yeah, unfortunately "unranked" is not a useful classification, especially post lidar when most of the map soft-ranked peaks became unranked.

In order of normal list precedence (there is overlap between ranked/named statuses)
1 - Ranked (LiDAR P300+) - this is "The 13ers"
2 - Soft-ranked (LiDAR P299.x+) - not commonly done before lidar update, now it's just West Eolus and people are dong it
3 - Named - Officially (by the US gov't) - not commonly done before 2020, now gaining popularity
4 - Historically ranked/soft-ranked demoted by LiDAR (Map P280+) - not commonly done before lidar update, now gaining popularity, ironically
5 - Bonus - Unranked, unofficially named (in any published text or map, as prescribed by LoJ) - not completed by anyone*, the ones listed on 14ers.com are gaining popularity

*14ers.com has never included all the bonus peaks, or even a logical subset of them. Yahoo, Crossfire, Black Mtn are a few that popped up after I did the ones that were listed on 14ers.com. There are many more worthy bonus 13ers on LoJ that haven't been carried over here--Purgatory Point, The Hand, North Summit to name a few. In terms of historical significance, for example, Purgatory Point is on equal footing with the likes of Kismet and Sunlight Spire, whereas Crossfire, Captain Bivwacko, etc. are, as they say, of no consequence whatsoever.

I would guess Alex Henes is the closest to finishing all of the bonus 13ers currently known.

[Garrett]

Hi Troy, I’m not on LoJ but last I checked there are 31 unranked on LoJ that are not on 14ers.com. Of those 26 or so really aren’t peaks. They’re named ridges, towers/climbing objectives, or historic points of interest. 14ers.com includes 10-12 that aren’t peaks either - like Dickers Peck, a short tower in a saddle or “The Prow”. Summits maybe but not peaks.

For LoJ Fort Peabody is an example, historic but not really a peak. Many of the towers around Sneffels are historic and interesting climbs but not really peaks. And there are ones like “Yellow Boy” that who knows why it’s on there. Most unranked that fall below 165’ or so of prominence are well within the normal variation of a colorado ridgeline and very likely not a peak. There are a few low prominence peaks that distinctly are peaks however below that mark are other mtn landforms more so than peaks. Above that 165 it’s a grey zone until you get into the 200 ft prominence range. In my opinion at least.

There’s also several on Peakbagger that are not on either LoJ or 14ers. Maybe 25 that are legitimate peaks. Three that come to mind are “The Billboard” by Silverton with 290ish ft of prominence. Then Vista Point and South Thumb which were removed from 14ers for some reason.

Also many, many others that aren’t on any of those lists. An example here, I recently posted about Lost Needle which is yet to be determined if it’s ranked. Likely with 299’ of prominence and very much a peak. Or ones like peak 13041 - “ Little Goose Mountain” which is separated from South River peak by over a mile with 250’ of prominence. And a last example - Peak Four and One Half as listed on it’s 1988 Bob Rosebrough register, between Peak Four and Peak Five.

I can share some data with you after the weekend if you’re interested. Just shoot me a message.

[BillMiddlebrook]

[alexhenes]

Categorizing an unranked point as a "peak" in its own right is kinda like porn... you'll know it when you see it.

Boggy's categories are spot on. Unfortunately (IMO) LoJ's published text condition is too low of a bar to categorize a point as a peak. "The Butterknife" is just one example. It is mentioned in one of the "Making Turns" ski guide books most likely because it is located at a nice place to transition or a reference point for a ski line. Not something worthy of climbing on it's own.

Authors often need to name features to make their directions clear. I don't believe the intention is always to promote a point to peak in its own right.

However, when a book is published, and a point all of a sudden becomes a "peak" on 14ers, LoJ, Peakbagger etc. it creates interest (and confusion) and people want to go see what all the fuss is about. Guilty... hahaha!

In addition, with guide books being outdated by websites, the text requirement is being blurred.

Many people in this community who don't publish books are just as (if not more) qualified to determine if a point is an actual peak than some of the book authors.

It is relatively easy to publish a book these days. If one of us published a book and referenced 100 new points on ridges across the state would we have 100 new unranked peaks on 14ers, LoJ, Peakbagger?

For me historical significance is one of the more enticing reasons to include a point on the unranked Bonus List. If the OG's climbed it and thought it was cool enough to write about back in the 1930s... I want to go there.

IMO the unranked list needs to be relatively stable. New additions should be added over time with community consensus... not when a single person puts it in physical print.

Oh... LoJ has a 'Source' link for each unranked peak that references why the point has been included. Yellow Boy's source says "Name appears on USFS signage at Ashcroft Townsite."

[Boggy B]

"what is a peak" has been debated ad nauseam, and to wit the original CO peakbaggers did not agree with this take.

Anyway here's a visual I threw together, accuracy not guaranteed:

co13ers.jpg