First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Items that do not fit the categories above.
Forum rules
This forum is for general, mountaineering-related topics. For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
User avatar
djkest
Posts: 1588
Joined: 9/7/2009
14er Checklist (58)
13er Checklist (16)
Contact:

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby djkest » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:06 am

MrFrumpylane wrote:G&T would be my bet. While nature is known to shape the earth over time, humans do it faster!! Considering the cluster**** traffic that flows through Stevens Gulch and those silly (but kewl) 14er summit dance offs, those two summits will surely be whittled down by countless foot traffic ranging from vibrams to birkenstocks.


It takes an aweful lot of foot traffic to wear down a rock even 1/2"! I'm not so sure I support this theory- they are also some of the "higher" 14ers as well. But yeah, lots of traffic.

Sidebar- which 14ers recieve the most summit attempts every year? How about "just hikers" (non-summit attempts)

1) Longs Peak
2) Pikes Peak
3) Grays Peak (Torreys is less)
4) Bierstadt

Am I right?
Life is a mountain, not a beach.
Exploring and Wine, my personal blog
User avatar
MrFrumpylane
Posts: 112
Joined: 5/29/2007
14er Checklist (33)
13er Checklist (8)
Contact:

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby MrFrumpylane » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:10 am

djkest wrote:
MrFrumpylane wrote:G&T would be my bet. While nature is known to shape the earth over time, humans do it faster!! Considering the cluster**** traffic that flows through Stevens Gulch and those silly (but kewl) 14er summit dance offs, those two summits will surely be whittled down by countless foot traffic ranging from vibrams to birkenstocks.


It takes an aweful lot of foot traffic to wear down a rock even 1/2"! I'm not so sure I support this theory- they are also some of the "higher" 14ers as well. But yeah, lots of traffic.

Sidebar- which 14ers recieve the most summit attempts every year? How about "just hikers" (non-summit attempts)

1) Longs Peak
2) Pikes Peak
3) Grays Peak (Torreys is less)
4) Bierstadt

Am I right?


I was more or less kidding about my post and just taking a slam at those two peak's popularity. Afterall, I should know that is improbable because I studied geology in college. :)

As for your sidebar list- if you're def just talking about the amount of foot traffic irregardless of summit attempts, I'd say you're spot on.
User avatar
Rcizzle
Posts: 141
Joined: 6/10/2010
14er Checklist (58)
14ers in Winter (6)
13er Checklist (4)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby Rcizzle » Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:37 am

I was told by some geologist I met on Little Bear that the Colorado Rockies were still growing. Who knows I guess.
Bad decisions make good stories.
User avatar
Mark A Steiner
Posts: 1230
Joined: 4/14/2008
14er Checklist (3)
13er Checklist (11)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby Mark A Steiner » Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:08 am

Rcizzle wrote:I was told by some geologist I met on Little Bear that the Colorado Rockies were still growing. Who knows I guess.

Uplift aside (my opinion it is still occurring everywhere in the Rockies to some degree) the University of Utah Research Institute (UURI), responsible for monitoring the Yellowstone Caldera, has pointed out that the mantle plume under Yellowstone, presently feeding the caldera magma chamber, is responsible for ongoing deformation across most of the western United States. Does this include measurable uplift? Probably so in some areas. One area of major concern presently is a high level of built-up stress along the Teton Fault south of Yellowstone.
Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatever state I am, therewith to be content - Paul the Apostle.
Like it or not, I am a slow driver. Putt ... putt ... putt ...
Good day.
User avatar
barnoff
Posts: 6
Joined: 8/29/2011
14er Checklist (14)
14ers in Winter (1)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby barnoff » Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:24 am

Jim Davies wrote:The real question is, will the metric system completely take over first?


LOL!
User avatar
Mark A Steiner
Posts: 1230
Joined: 4/14/2008
14er Checklist (3)
13er Checklist (11)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby Mark A Steiner » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:29 am

[quote="Matt Lemke"]The Colorado Rockies are actually very stagnant as far as growing or shrinking is concerned (at least the Sawatch, Park and Front Range uplifts) These 3 uplifts contain such a dense and hard rock base that they are eroding very slowly...much slower than they should be for gneissic and granitic mountains. As for the San Juans and Elks...that's another story. They are eroding much quicker and are actively shrinking and erosion will certainly do a number on these peaks well before anything in the Sawatch, Park or Front Ranges.]

Quite true. The volcanic San Juan peaks present greater slope instability (see San Juan Ron's comment - this thread). Another case in point: the Slumgullion Slide. You can see expressions of soil or mud movement in many places although not necessarily measurable from year to year. A water-saturated mudflow happens quickly. Steep, factured lava flow outcrops such as on Wetterhorn break off easily due to frost action. Only the Needles and Grenadiers offer serious resistance to erosion in the San Juans (granite).

The Elks are largely sedimentary. The siltstones and mudstones on the Bells, Castle and Pyramid saturate with water in persistent heavy rains. These properties can be extended to the Mosquito Range as sediment lithologies are similar to those of the Elks (reddish silt/mudstones and gray silty dolomite), although weathering profiles are less dramatic.
Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatever state I am, therewith to be content - Paul the Apostle.
Like it or not, I am a slow driver. Putt ... putt ... putt ...
Good day.
User avatar
denvermikey
Posts: 437
Joined: 8/9/2007
14er Checklist (49)
13er Checklist (50)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby denvermikey » Thu Sep 27, 2012 7:38 pm

North Eolus is gonna lose some off the top if this keeps happening:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwMUmsIU7Uw
"Every man dies, not every man really lives" - William Wallace
"Because it's there" - George Mallory
"In the end it's not the years in your life that count, it's the life in your years" - Abraham Lincoln
"You only live once but if you do it right, once is enough" - Mae West
"Climb mountains not so the world can see you, but so you can see the world." - Unknown
User avatar
somethingrandom
Posts: 517
Joined: 8/15/2010
14er Checklist (16)
13er Checklist (3)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby somethingrandom » Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:35 pm

djkest wrote:It takes an aweful lot of foot traffic to wear down a rock even 1/2"! I'm not so sure I support this theory- they are also some of the "higher" 14ers as well. But yeah, lots of traffic.

Sidebar- which 14ers recieve the most summit attempts every year? How about "just hikers" (non-summit attempts)

1) Longs Peak
2) Pikes Peak
3) Grays Peak (Torreys is less)
4) Bierstadt

Am I right?


While off-note, I would put the list with Evans taking Grays spot. Surely more people 'hike' Evans than Grays given the road to the top. Otherwise I like the list.

As for which would 'lose' 14er status, I am with SJR in it being Sunshine. Be it 1 foot or 6 (though I will go with 1), the slides between Sunshine and Sundog will no doubt cause more than a foot of damage in the next 5-10 years.

My $.03
-Just as soon as you idiot proof something, some a**hole is just going to come along and make a better idiot.

-To Cessna: "November one, zero, four Lima Papa, wind 080 at 90 peak gusts 120, runway 35 cleared for takeoff"

To fellow controller: "Watch this sh!t"

-Whether climbing or flying, the single greatest thing to remember is that every ascent is optional, and if you feel like making another, your subsequent descent is mandatory.
User avatar
Above+Beyond
Posts: 13
Joined: 9/17/2012
14er Checklist (30)
13er Checklist (70)

Re: First 14er to succumb to the elements?

Postby Above+Beyond » Thu Sep 27, 2012 10:34 pm

Rcizzle wrote:I was told by some geologist I met on Little Bear that the Colorado Rockies were still growing. Who knows I guess.


I was under the impression the Rockies were still rebounding from the removal of the weight of all the ice which covered them during the (last) Ice Age, and that this growth process was faster than the erosional rate taking them down.

I'm not sure where I ran across that idea, or whether it's still thought to be true.
And beauty will go savage in the secret mountains. - Robinson Jeffers

Return to “General Mountaineering Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests