Meaden/Sand?

Discuss geopolitical area highpoints, prominence, and similar lists.

Meaden/Sand?

Postby RyanSchilling » Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:21 pm

Does anyone know whether the prominent point at 10,897' in the central Elkheads should be referred to as Meaden Peak or Sand Mountain? By all accounts, the quad is in error where it labels this peak as Meaden Peak, because Meaden is actually the 10,561' peak to the west (something that you can confirm at the USGS's GNIS site). Scott Patterson on SummitPost calls 10,897' "East Meaden". If you look at the 100K series, it looks like the name Sand Mountain might have been intended to encompass three summits: 10,879', 10,714' & 10,847' (and on the 250K series, the name Meaden Peak is nowhere to be found). Any opinions?
User avatar
RyanSchilling
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:29 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Postby Mike Garratt » Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:08 am

This reply is from memory not from looking at the map.
As I recall the placement of the name Meaden Peak on the 7.5 minute map is incorrect.
Mike Garratt
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 3:15 pm

Re: Meaden/Sand?

Postby John Kirk » Fri Jun 12, 2015 1:00 pm

Looking at the decision card from 1932, the quad section is '5', which means the 7.5 minute quad is correct showing it as the 10,879' location, and the 10,561' location is not Meaden.

DecisionCard_06555.pdf
(30.38 KiB) Downloaded 91 times
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Re: Meaden/Sand?

Postby Scott Patterson » Sat Jun 13, 2015 9:09 am

This is from Joseph D. Kramarsic's book on the Elkhead Mountains:

meaden 001.JPG


meaden 003.JPG


Locals who make the distinction between the two usually call them West Meaden and East Meaden, though locally 10,879 is also sometimes known as McFaddin Peak. Sand Mountain is definitely the one to the south and is named for the sandy escarpment on the east side. 10,879 is not Sand Mountain.

Personally, I don't like the name "North Sand Mountain" on LOJ for 10,879. It just introduces a fourth name (the other three being Meaden Peak, East Meaden, and McFaddin Peak) to what the peak is already known and the name is never used locally. If a mountain already has three established and used names, even if non-official, I see little reason to create yet a forth one (more confusion!).

I used the name East Meaden on Summitpost and explained that the peak is sometimes named McFaddin Peak. Here is what I wrote on summitpost concerning the name of the peak:
http://www.summitpost.org/meaden-peak-e ... #chapter_2
Scott Patterson
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:58 pm

Re: Meaden/Sand?

Postby John Kirk » Mon Jun 15, 2015 10:08 am

Thanks Scott.

Since the 1932 and 1975 dates Joe K mentions line up with GNIS official dates, and the lat/lon is updated, it seems reasonable to assume Joe is correct. I've adopted the "McFaddin" unofficial name since that name is in print in his book.
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO


Return to Highpoints, Prominence & Etc.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest