RMNP unranked pks from Lisa Foster's Hiking Guide

[jmbrooks8]

I sifted through Lisa's book to see what was different relative to info here and on maps. The following 9 unranked peaks within RMNP boundary stood out:

Peak Name Elev Prom Quad County Coordinates
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gibraltar Mtn 13300 120 Trail Ridge Larimer 40 29.581'N 105 38.180'W
Middle No Name 12780 0 Trail Ridge Larimer 40 29.980'N 105 37.854'W
Jagor Pt 12632 132 Fall River Pass Larimer 40 22.825'N 105 46.209'W
Little No Name 12530 70 Comanche Pk Larimer 40 30.276'N 105 37.735'W
Mt Eleanor 12380 200 Grand Lake Larimer,Grand 40 21.100'N 105 45.205'W
S Specimen 12269 89 Fall River Pass Larimer,Grand 40 26.351'N 105 48.783'W
Mt Ikoko 12232 132 Comanche Pk Larimer 40 32.537'N 105 42.259'W
Castle Rock 8669 129 Estes Park Larimer 40 23.380'N 105 32.525'W
Window Rock 8530 30 Estes Park Larimer 40 23.403'N 105 32.442'W

And "Never Summer Pk" seemed to have the name "Jiffy Pop Pk".

Has anyone noticed this info in any other source?

[John Kirk]

Added. It will save me a couple steps next time if you can format coordinates as decimal degrees instead of degrees and decimal minutes. Also "Window Rock" was put in at 8540 since there is no spot elevation on the map.

[jmbrooks8]

Ok - will do. Thanks John for adding them. I see them in the elev lists but not RMNP yet...

[Steve Knapp]

Cool! Nice to have a few more points in the Park to check out, though unranked peaks don't usually make it too high on my list.

By the way, that book is awesome! Great reading for anyone working on the RMNP peaks. I checked it out of the library last summer and renewed it at least four times. Need to pick up a copy one of these days.

[lukePlumley]

I believe that Lisa is still waitressing at the Dunraven Inn in Estes Park. Stop by and get the book there, and she will happily sign it for you!

[Mike Garratt]

Sure is strange how guide book authors are compelled to make up these names.
The origin of most names appears incomprehenisble unless it is something about the rock, the view or N or S XXX.
It is easier to remember the elevation of most.
At least rock route names are humorous rather than sounding like the name of someone's pet.

The obsession has spead outside Colorado.

When I was hiking in the Uinta's 13er last summer, I met a couple of climbers.
They tried to describe where they had come from based on a Uinta guidebook.
They were stumbling trying to describe where they had been.
I said you mean came over 13xxx and 13yyy and they said yes.
Then they said, where do those names in the book come from anyhow?!

[John Kirk]

My feeling is if people want to waste their time on insignificant bumps that would go unnoticed without the false names, let them. There is an award for this (although maybe I should design one specifically for peaks that are both < p300 and unofficially named). Aside from 5th class climbs or some type of geological phenomena, unofficially named, unranked summits not going to capture my interest. On the aspect of unofficial names for peaks that do have adequate prominence, I'm ambivalent about. On one hand, it helps to identify what peak you are talking about, especially when there are multiple peaks in an area with the same elevation (interpolated or clean). On the other, there is no control as to what names are authoritative and multiple names will float around; these come and go with the passage of time. Washington state seems to possess a phobia about unnamed peaks, almost as though a lack of name translates to insignificance or concern that a peak cannot exist on its own merits without a name. Up to four unofficial names per peak is not uncommon, and agreement on which is the most logical/widely accepted is not easy to come by. I guess it is human nature to want to assign names to things. What can be brought into question is the relevance of the thing assigned a name. Back to CO, "South Specimen" is a good example, where there are thousands of other 12k+ "summits" with at least as many closed contours that will go unnoticed. Why is "South Specimen" any different? Certainly not because the summit is actually "important", but comes into play with bias of the author.

[TWorth]

"Little No Name" is the other amusing one in the Foster list. If it's so little, and also has no name, why bother naming it? Its almost like a satire of the whole naming thing, giving the "peak" a label like that, kind of funny I think.

Maybe with these guidebooks, some authors feel the need to mention and name every little feature is order to appear "authoritative" and "comprehensive", but it ends up creating confusion. I like how the Garratt/Martin 13er guide refers to unnamed peaks as elevations - easy to locate when using the USGS quads/printouts in the field or at home planning, no matter what the campground host down the road calls it.

I understand there is demand to see these names on this site, but its seems like an awful lot of extra work.

[Steve Knapp]

Does this mean that those who have climbed every named peak in the Park now have nine more peaks to do?

[John Kirk]

Does this mean that those who have climbed every named peak in the Park now have nine more peaks to do?

How about we make up some more of our own names so no one can finish the list (adding a new one every time someone catches up).


Seriously though, even if someone is pursuing an official names list, they should be aware that there will likely be a lot of peaks they won't do that will inevitably become officially named. The beauty of a prominence threshold (when compiled error-free) is the lists aren't subject to addition within human time except for rare event of rapid orogenesis (mountain formation). The rise of a new ranked peak... Lava Dome of Mount Saint Helens:
http://geology.rockbandit.net/2008/05/23/mount-st-helens-lava-dome-growth/