Criteria for peaks

Questions about how this site works or problems you are experiencing can be addressed here.

Criteria for peaks

Postby OliverHansen » Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:12 pm

I'm wondering what criteria are used to decide if a peak should be added to the site. More specifically, here is the area near where I live and where I have been slowly working on completing peaks:

http://listsofjohn.com/mapf?lat=40.4460 ... 13&t=u&d=y

Notice that to the north and east of the Stansbury Mountains is a "peak" called Coyote Knolls that has 5' of prominence. There are several other peaks with more prominence that are sub-peaks in the stansbury mountains that are not listed. Do minor sub-peaks only count with a certain amount of contour lines completely surrounding it?

Thanks in advance for any replies. Happy Snowshoeing season everyone >.<
OliverHansen
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 7:51 pm

Re: Criteria for peaks

Postby JoeGrim » Tue Feb 23, 2016 8:28 am

The main rule is that if it is a "named peak", and has at least one closed contour around it, it qualifies to be included on LOJ. The definition for a "named peak" is one that is officially named by the USGS and/or is mentioned in a printed book or map. However, in the recent past, John has allowed peaks to also be added, even if they don't have a closed contour around them, if personal observation indicates that they have at least 20' of prominence.
User avatar
JoeGrim
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: Loveland, CO


Return to Site FAQ's

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest