The ones that don’t count

[Kevin]

An interesting side topic came up in the Colvin & Blake Trip Report thread about the mountains that count and don’t count on the 46 list.

http://www.adkforum.com/showthread.php?t=4496

I think that topic deserves it’s own thread, so the original one stays on topic.
lumberzac

Blake (aka "Bleak Peak") is tradition, like Couchsachraga. And like most traditions it makes very little sense to have to climb either of them since neither qualify for 4,000 feet. Yard and MacNaughton could easily replace them, right?

[lumberzac]

Yard and MacNaughton could easily replace them, right?

Actually the latest surveys show MacNaughton at 3983', so it still wouldn't count. Yard on the other hand would still count, as well at one of Tabletop's sub-peaks.

From what I’ve heard, one of the best ways to climb Blake it to start at Elk Lake and go up the Pinnacle.

[Judgeh]

Blake (aka "Bleak Peak") is tradition, like Couchsachraga. And like most traditions it makes very little sense to have to climb either of them since neither qualify for 4,000 feet. Yard and MacNaughton could easily replace them, right?

No argument for Yard.

[Dick]

Though Yard is over 4000 ft., The ADK High Peaks Guidebook states that it is too close to Big Slide to "count" as one of the required peaks for 46er status. To qualify, a mountain has to be 3/4 mi. or less from other mountains, or rise 300 vertical ft. or more on all sides.

Dick

[lumberzac]

I just measured the distance between Yard and Big Slide and it came up as .88 miles.

In my earlier post I mentioned that one of the Tabletop sub-peaks should count as well. Looking at it some more using the Marshall Brothers rules of 300’ col or ¾ mile apart, both of the sub-peaks would qualify. The higher of the two sub-peaks has a 300’ col with Tabletop. The second sub-peak is more than ¾ mile from both Tabletop and Phelps.
Only one could be used because the two sub-peaks are only .4 miles apart and the col is only about 160’ between the two.
Now isn’t this fun?

[SLJames]

I liked Couchsachraga alot
I have always wondered about Yard, though.

A joke I have in my head sometimes is that the Marshall brothers got tired of keeping really close track towards the end, stuck out a finger and said, "Ok lets just finish this...(pointing) 44, and over there is 45 and let's see... 46, I need a drink!"

I'm shooting for the top 60, and then start working on 60-70 etc on up.

[Dick]

Certainly some mountains that don't "count" probably should be on the list, and others that do "count" shouldn't be there. But tradition reigns supreme, and I can't see the 46ers changing the list. But what do I know?

Maybe Tony Goodwin will jump in on this discussion?

[lumberzac]

But tradition reigns supreme, and I can't see the 46ers changing the list.

I agree, and would like to see the list remain unchanged, but it is also fun to explore the “what ifs.”

[Pete_Hickey]

Actually the latest surveys show MacNaughton at 3983', so it still wouldn't count. Yard on the other hand would still count, as well at one of Tabletop's sub-peaks.

With all of the mistakes on those metric maps, I'm not sure how much weight I give to this.

[Kevin]

But tradition reigns supreme, and I can't see the 46ers changing the list.

Let's think, for a moment, about all the traditions that have come and gone in mankind's history and how few remain. The reason? Many of them made sense at the time, but upon further review were found to be grossly incorrect. It takes time, as I've said.

Then again I don't believe in the tooth fairy and don't hesitate to walk under ladders.

Broken mirror? Get a broom.

Black cat? Pet the damn thing, it's lonely.

The world's still flat, right?

It takes a few generations for change to occur (waiting for those holding onto the traditions to die). Change doesn't happen overnight partly out of respect, partly out of frustration trying to move the old grumpy elephant from the middle of the room. Better to just lay in wait for the consensus to change.

This is actually an old topic, but I can't remember if it was one I had in private messages.

[lumberzac]

With all of the mistakes on those metric maps, I'm not sure how much weight I give to this.

That is a good point to bring up. For example I know there is a discrepancy between the 1973(?) map and the current map as to the location of the summit of Nye.

[Rik]

They all count. Hike em all.
The tradition is to climb the same peaks. The club is not called the "NY4ks". Instead of changing an already existing club one could always choose to form their own. Or one could just hike em all.

[percious]

I am surprised no one mentioned Little Marcy yet.

I'm all for adding Yard. Somewhat dubious about the others.

-percious

[lumberzac]

This is what I’ve come up with if the 46 list was to be edited. Please note that I’m not suggesting that it should be done.

To be dropped:
Couchie (under 4000’)
Nye (under 4000’)
Blake (under 4000’)
Cliff (under 4000’)
Gray (less than ¾ mile from Marcy and col under 300’)

To be added:
Yard (more than ¾ mile from Big Slide)
Little Marcy (more than ¾ mile from Marcy)
NE Tabletop (300’ col between it and Tabletop)

To be added, maybe:
MacNaughton

[Skyclimber]

A tradition is a tradition and should not be broken! The list of the 46 will never change, as I see it. There is no reason to and I hope it never does.

Everyone has climbed peaks, less than 4,000' feet, so why should these peaks be any different?

Why does everyone always have to knock these four Mountains down? Can't anyone enjoy the trails, the herdpaths, the beauty along the way and forget about the view, that is "suppose to be at the top?" The view, is only a bonus, as there is so many, other rewards along the way, that should be enjoyed and considered as well. Being within nature, appreciating being in the woods, is what really should count here.