East Crestone Second dGPS Survey

[Veory]

The criterion used was if the boulder is too big for one (normal) person to move under their own power, it's probably natural. It seems quite feasable that there are some medium sized boulders naturally on the summit, as there are plenty of similar sized boulders strewn everywhere else on the mountain.

An entire gym of bored crossfitters could do the funniest thing to the 14ers list.

The funniest thing they could actually do to the 14ers list would be leveling sunshine so most folks don't have to do the out and back.


On second thought, for a similar amount of effort we could just add a couple feet to Grizzly and get a new 14er proper!

[Veory]

Maybe, what all this discussion really leads to is a need for a community decision on what counts as a summit elevation, just like how we've all come to agree on the 300 foot prominence rule. It never mattered to the 14ers list until this survey, but now it's the primary point of contention that determines what the 14er community thinks the high point of one of the most important peaks in the state is.

Whatever the rule, I don't think it should be made to explicitly include or exclude E Crestone, but stand on its own. I'm not quite sure how we would go about making a consensus though.

[Bale]

This is a shot of E Crestone summit I took last weekend. There is a pile of rocks on top for sure, and the measurement was from the tip-top of that pile. The pile looks natural to me but what do I know.

Time to retrieve the crowbar off Gladstone and put it to use...j/k!

Or move a large, nearby rock onto the highpoint of the named (Western) summit. Big enough to make the Peak 14,301' and heavy enough so the average hiker can't move it.

Exactly. While I appreciate the scientific approach and hard work here, if you can move one moderately sized (5”) rock, and make one summit higher than the other, the two summits are effectively the same. My advice is: if you care, tag both, but don’t pin your self-worth on an arbitrary, ever-changing list. But what do I know?

[skyrme17]

These results have to independently confirmed.

By who?

I don't know by who, but I'm sure this discussion will lead others to climb both peaks, and a few will carry an antenna. And irrespective of the outcome, one thing we can be sure of is that the result will agree with a previously reported one. That in turn will make it less headline worthy, and perhaps more credible. Knowledge in general has advanced through the concurrence of independent and dispassionate studies.

[Veory]

These results have to independently confirmed.

By who?

I don't know by who, but I'm sure this discussion will lead others to climb both peaks, and a few will carry an antenna. And irrespective of the outcome, one thing we can be sure of is that the result will agree with a previously reported one. That in turn will make it less headline worthy, and perhaps more credible. Knowledge in general has advanced through the concurrence of independent and dispassionate studies.

The problem is nobody else in this community has the gear right now. You're as good a candidate as any, go get at it!

[astranko]

I love the idea that after 5 million years of growth and erosion, both of the high points are basically within the margin of error of a fist-sized rock. For all the variance that nature has to offer, sometimes there are wonderful symmetries.

[blazintoes]

I love the idea that after 5 million years of growth and erosion, both of the high points are basically within the margin of error of a fist-sized rock. For all the variance that nature has to offer, sometimes there are wonderful symmetries.

[MountainHiker]

This reminds me of a story in the Borneman and Lampert Climbing Guide to Colorado’s Fourteeners of some Harvard alumni, back in the 60s, carrying a long metal pole to the summit of Harvard so it would be higher than Elbert. Since I’m still climbing, I’ll go back and get East Crestone. For anyone who doesn’t want to, you can rest assured Carl Blaurock, William Ervin, Albert Ellingwood & Mary Cronin are still considered finishers since they climbed the list as it was known during their time.

[gb]

This reminds me of a story in the Borneman and Lampert Climbing Guide to Colorado’s Fourteeners of some Harvard alumni, back in the 60s, carrying a long metal pole to the summit of Harvard so it would be higher than Elbert. Since I’m still climbing, I’ll go back and get East Crestone. For anyone who doesn’t want to, you can rest assured Carl Blaurock, William Ervin, Albert Ellingwood & Mary Cronin are still considered finishers since they climbed the list as it was known during their time.

There are quite a few stories there and in Roof of the Rockies. I seem to recall supporters of Blanca trying to make it the highest, and some other collegiate shenanigans. And stacks of rocks on peaks that were right at 14k.

Personally, I think that no one should get credit for OG Crestone this summer unless they place a rock on the summit. And no one should get credit for E Crestone unless they remove a rock.

[HikesInGeologicTime]

My favorite story of the attempts to artificially inflate/deflate mountain rankings is the Elbert-Massive Wars. You can probably guess which peaks were at the center of that controversy. Really, though, Massive is a more epic-looking mountain, so it is kinda unfair that its less-assuming neighbor should take the gold and leave it with the silver of Colorado elevation rankings, and I seem to recall there being plenty of loose rocks to go around near Massive's summit, so let's not leave that one out of any, shall I say, summit enhancements!