3000' rule - yay or nay?

Trailhead condition requests, questions, alerts, etc.
User avatar
BillMiddlebrook
Site Administrator
Posts: 7525
Joined: 7/25/2004
14er Checklist (58)
14ers Skied (46)
14ers in Winter (21)
13er Checklist (161)
Contact:

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby BillMiddlebrook » Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:56 pm

you'll find plenty of previous discussion on this topic if your search for "3000 foot rule" in the forum.
"I have made it through the things others would surely die just watching"
- Megadeth
CR0SS
Posts: 107
Joined: 5/17/2010
14er Checklist (1)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby CR0SS » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:09 pm

tommyboy360 wrote:
KevinK wrote:Is it really worth walking miles of boring road just to add a little vertical gain? Why not add in Dyer, Gemini and maybe Sheridan instead? That way you would get a nice loop hike, less road walking, plenty of vertical, and a couple extra ranked peaks.


+1 More Mountain and less road. This is a great alternative than to parking far down a MINING ROAD and walking up it just to comply with someone eles's rules. Hike the surrounding peaks/variations and truly discover all sides of the Sherm. The road was built by a mining company -- I don't see how hiking it gives you a deeper mountain experience then parking at the start of the Iowa gulch trail. I'm happy to experience the road with just the windows down and the camera held outside of the car. KEEP OFF THE ROAD for the full 3000 if you're hiking it --that would be the ideal rule interpretation for me. There are a lot of ways to increase the challenge/fun factor on Sherman... but adding more time on a mining road doesn't do it for me. I'd rather keep a short day and head for happy hour or go hit an afternoon sesh @woodward and hike their ramps.


I agree walking a mining road does not make your climb to the summit better than someone else. I am not going to pat you on the back because you mastered a skill that 1 and 2 year olds struggle with. Get out an enjoy more of the mountains around you instead of just one peak and a road. So many people climb all these 14ers but all they really experience are the road then the trail and the summit. What about the ridges and other cool features of these mountains? Driving up a road vs walking it also can save you from the early morning starts and can give you more time up high. Above treeline is a great place to be. Give yourself time to enjoy it. Why rush through it to avoid weather so once again you can walk down a road.
Sierra Club, helping to confine humans within city limits one acre at a time.
User avatar
SpringsJeff
Posts: 33
Joined: 7/16/2009
14er Checklist (37)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby SpringsJeff » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:24 pm

My wife and I adhere to the 3000' rule but that's a personal choice. I would never dis anyone who chose otherwise.

If you add in Gemini you get 3000' at Sherman, and it's a pleasant little side trip.
User avatar
gdthomas
Posts: 2046
Joined: 6/15/2005
14er Checklist (58)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby gdthomas » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:30 pm

Not everyone has to adhere to the 3,000' rule but everyone should have a rule. The rule should consider personal goals and as well as self esteem.
User avatar
wildlobo71
Posts: 2173
Joined: 4/1/2008
14er Checklist (58)
14ers in Winter (6)
13er Checklist (40)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby wildlobo71 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:36 pm

jaymz wrote: Therefore, I'm not going to hike up a damn road just so a few sticklers will respect me more...


Agreed. We aren't out getting trophies or sponsorships here, this is for personal enjoyment; health, recreation, etc... I've yet to find the Professional High-Altitude Hiking and Climbing League of North America on ESPN2, ESPNNews, or Altitude. In fact, as it was pointed out to me by one of my co-workers today, "99.5% of the whole world wouldn't even know what you're talking about if you told them you've climbed all of the Colorado 14ers."

Do it because you love it and how it makes you feel; be it 500' or 6000'. I summited Mount Cameron as a 250-pound guy, and I was a hurtin' unit the whole way up from Democrat - therefore I earned the right to say I hiked it.

tmatthews wrote:
I used to not care; in fact, I chose my first 14ers based on how far I could drive before hiking (Antero, Sneffels, Princeton). Now that I'm in better shape, though, if I don't gain 3,000 feet or more, it doesn't seem like a hike or much of a workout for me. It's weird how my views on that has changed over the years.


Terry, you and I are now in similar situations, and the more gain there is - the better it feels. I never thought I'd be saying that, even from last year. Kudos man! I still don't care about the 3K rule, but now I look forward to it a lot more.
You've never really stopped even if you feel like you have.
User avatar
Greenhouseguy
Posts: 1008
Joined: 9/20/2006
14er Checklist (40)
14ers in Winter (7)
13er Checklist (113)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby Greenhouseguy » Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:06 pm

Our 14,000-foot threshold and 3000-foot rule seem kind of silly and arbitrary when you consider that most of the world is on the metric system. The last mountain that I hiked was French Mountain. It is "only" 13,940 feet, so it doesn't get the respect or attention that a 14er would get. To the rest of the world, French Mountain is 4,249 meters. Huron Peak is 14,003 feet, or 4,268 meters. What would a European think about the difference between 4,249 meters and 4,268 meters? They might puzzle at why we would flock to one peak and virtually ignore the other.

The same goes for the 3,000-foot rule. If you hike Mt. Sherman from the Leavick site, you get your 3,000 feet. But that's only 914 meters. Shouldn't you go for 1,000 meters? It's absurd when you think about it. People should just choose routes that are well-matched to their abilities and have a little fun while they're doing it.
"May your boulder be your blessing." - Aron Ralston
User avatar
crossfitter
Posts: 893
Joined: 7/7/2009
14er Checklist Not Entered

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby crossfitter » Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:55 pm

I don't adhere to the 3000' rule because there is no mountaineering to be found in walking up a road. I find it amusing that many defenders of the 3000' rule have no problem taking the cake-walk class 1 and 2 routes up when a far more interesting and challenging class 3 or 4 route is available. I feel that I more than make up for foregoing that silly metric by doing lots of challenging non-standard routes. I'll take the far more impressive feat of climbing 2000' of class 4 over 3000' of class 2 any day. The 3000' rule pretty much only makes sense if you are trying to establish a standard for speed-records IMO.
- A mountain is not a checkbox to be ticked
- Alpinism and mountaineering are not restricted to 14,000 foot mountains
- Judgment and experience are the two most important pieces of gear you own
- Being honest to yourself and others about your abilities is a characteristic of experienced climbers
- Courage cannot be bought at REI or carried with you in your rucksack

mr3mtnlabbie
Posts: 6
Joined: 7/16/2009
14er Checklist (16)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby mr3mtnlabbie » Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:08 pm

yay for me & 3mtnlabbie, unless it might be a double, but we are still hittin 3k++, and the hikes are always long,,14ers are the best, shame on those that don't put the work into it & respect what they are & how difficult they can be!..IMHO:)
User avatar
Sugar Madison
Posts: 657
Joined: 5/25/2010
14er Checklist (30)
13er Checklist (26)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby Sugar Madison » Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:16 pm

It's your party... do whatever tickles your fancy.
User avatar
coloradokevin
Posts: 1554
Joined: 6/13/2007
14er Checklist (15)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby coloradokevin » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:17 am

BillMiddlebrook wrote:you'll find plenty of previous discussion on this topic if your search for "3000 foot rule" in the forum.


I was actually starting to believe that people had grown tired of this debate, as I don't recall a 3,000 ft thread in the past few months!

Personal opinion:

1) I only care if I feel like I climbed a mountain, and I don't care if I meet another person's arbitrary definition of success.

2) My definition of a successful climb means climbing from any number of normal practical routes up a peak. I'm not planning to back-track down a road to gain an additional few hundred feet, but I also understand that driving to the top of a mountain isn't the same as climbing a mountain.

3) The 3,000 ft rule isn't. It is a guideline, and one that wouldn't even work in some areas of the country... You'd be hard pressed to find many peaks back east where you could gain 3,000 ft.
User avatar
Mountainspirit
Posts: 377
Joined: 9/9/2009
14er Checklist (20)
13er Checklist (6)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby Mountainspirit » Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:16 am

ColoradoKevin wrote:1) I only care if I feel like I climbed a mountain, and I don't care if I meet another person's arbitrary definition of success.

2) My definition of a successful climb means climbing from any number of normal practical routes up a peak. I'm not planning to back-track down a road to gain an additional few hundred feet, but I also understand that driving to the top of a mountain isn't the same as climbing a mountain.

3) The 3,000 ft rule isn't. It is a guideline, and one that wouldn't even work in some areas of the country... You'd be hard pressed to find many peaks back east where you could gain 3,000 ft.



Well said. =D>

I think, like everything else, it's all just a matter of perspective. I have a friend with MS. He can barely walk. If I drove him to the top of Evans, had him walk that final 1/4 mile to her summit, it would be equivalent to any of us "well bodied folks" climbing the Keyhole route on Longs.

Yet there are many who no longer have function in their legs, and still they climb with devices powered by their arms.

Different perspectives, that's all.

For whatever it's worth, my only RULE when climbing is to return home safely.
"I sang out from a mountain top, out to the valley down below
Because my cup doth overflow
With the beauty of the days gone by." - Van Morrison
sdizzle
Posts: 40
Joined: 6/26/2007
14er Checklist (57)

Re: 3000' rule - yay or nay?

Postby sdizzle » Wed Jul 28, 2010 5:35 am

"Do you use the 3000' rule?" That would be a good survey question if it hasn't already been done. I do not use 3000' rule. Having said that, my 2WD car has required to hike up many, many additional feet on 4WD roads.

Return to “Trailheads, Roads, and Camping”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: lkk8815 and 4 guests