No Agua Peak North, Taos County, NM

[drdickie]

I climbed No Agua Peak North in Taos County today. The topo map shows a small high spot at roughly the LOJ coordinates and a listed elevation of 8989. However, this mountain (and the neighboring other two No Agua peaks) are on a mine company property. No Agua East and West appear to be undisturbed at the top by the mining activity, but the top of No Agua North appears to be strip mined away. The highest spot I found is about 400 feet sw of the high spot on the topo map and the LOJ cooridantes, and my highest GPS elevation reading was 8951--38 feet less than the official elevation. I frequently find GPS elevation readings can be way off, but my highest reading on No Agua West (that I climbed just before this one) was 9137 compared with the 9140 contour line shown on the map, not a very big discrepancy. The combination of the visual evidence and the GPS reading leads me to suspect that the elevation of the remaining peak is between 8950 and 8960 and located slightly sw of the listed coordinates. Are these changes significant enough to merit changes in the entry for this peak?

Dick Oestreicher "drdickie"

[John Kirk]

Yes, and satellite imagery confirms what you've stated - updated the listing. Did you happen to speak anyone at the mine?

[Jeremy Hakes]

I climbed No Agua Peak North in Taos County today. The topo map shows a small high spot at roughly the LOJ coordinates and a listed elevation of 8989. However, this mountain (and the neighboring other two No Agua peaks) are on a mine company property. No Agua East and West appear to be undisturbed at the top by the mining activity, but the top of No Agua North appears to be strip mined away. The highest spot I found is about 400 feet sw of the high spot on the topo map and the LOJ cooridantes, and my highest GPS elevation reading was 8951--38 feet less than the official elevation. I frequently find GPS elevation readings can be way off, but my highest reading on No Agua West (that I climbed just before this one) was 9137 compared with the 9140 contour line shown on the map, not a very big discrepancy. The combination of the visual evidence and the GPS reading leads me to suspect that the elevation of the remaining peak is between 8950 and 8960 and located slightly sw of the listed coordinates. Are these changes significant enough to merit changes in the entry for this peak?

Dick Oestreicher "drdickie"

More importantly, any chance of someone else getting up there? I'd like to stand on those summits!