Colorado LiDAR Findings

[bdloftin77]

The highest 200 CO peaks are now analyzed as well.

For those of us that are LoJ illiterate is there a link that provides CO’s Bi-Cents, all 200, ranked in order?

https://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/selec ... n=200&s=CO

Clark also ties with Rosalie
https://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/selec ... n=210&s=CO

[Scott P]

Fantastic work!

[laacjones]

I have an account on ListsofJohn, but I can't for the life of me figure out how to create a custom list of the top n peaks in Colorado like you did (s=CO, n=210). When I try to create a custom list, I don't see the option to specify a peak count. Your advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

[ekalina]

I have an account on ListsofJohn, but I can't for the life of me figure out how to create a custom list of the top n peaks in Colorado like you did (s=CO, n=210). When I try to create a custom list, I don't see the option to specify a peak count. Your advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Although it isn't technically a custom (i.e., user created) list, you can do that here:
https://www.listsofjohn.com/highest?n=1000&s=CO

Change the "n=" in the URL to specify the top n peaks, and then use the buttons on the page to view your (or someone else's) progress.

[CheapCigarMan]

The highest 200 CO peaks are now analyzed as well.

For those of us that are LoJ illiterate is there a link that provides CO’s Bi-Cents, all 200, ranked in order?

https://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/selec ... n=200&s=CO

As I'm going through the list and comparing the changes, I noticed 13656 link https://listsofjohn.com/peak/218246 shows the old map elevation as 13,620'. As I've noticed that the old map elevation is what the 14'ers list currently shows. Example, your new, PT 13820 is the old PT 13811 (which this site is still showing).
But I'm not seeing an old 13620. I believe it used to be what is currently listed as PT 13,660 A. Could 13620 be a typo in your list and should be 13660 instead?

[CheapCigarMan]

Was Clark the only bicent to be knocked off?

Here's what's changed for bicentennial chasers. Feel free to correct me if necessary.

No longer ranked:
Challenger Point (14,086'; was 14,081')
Lightning Pyramid (13,729'; was 13,722')
Wood Mountain (13,682'; was 13,660')

No longer unranked:
North Maroon Peak (14,022'; was 14,014')

Summit moved:
Unnamed 13,660's summit is now 13,656' and has moved down the ridge toward Ellingwood Point

Promoted to bicentennials:
Mt. Parnassus (13,580'; was 13,574')
Rosalie Peak (13,579'; was 13,575'); tied with Clark Peak (13,579'; was 13,580'), which remains a bicentennial
Mt. Evans B (13,591'; was 13,577')
West Apostle (13,597'; was 13,568')

Demoted to tricentennials:
Unnamed 13,573' (was 13,580'); near Pole Creek Mtn.
Unnamed 13,543' (was 13,580'); near Mt. Adams
Mt. Powell (13,556'; was 13,580')

Thunder remains, Lightning falls off, but what about PT 13631? Am I missing it? I don't see it on the LoJ's new 200 list.

[bdloftin77]

Was Clark the only bicent to be knocked off?

Here's what's changed for bicentennial chasers. Feel free to correct me if necessary.

No longer ranked:
Challenger Point (14,086'; was 14,081')
Lightning Pyramid (13,729'; was 13,722')
Wood Mountain (13,682'; was 13,660')

No longer unranked:
North Maroon Peak (14,022'; was 14,014')

Summit moved:
Unnamed 13,660's summit is now 13,656' and has moved down the ridge toward Ellingwood Point

Promoted to bicentennials:
Mt. Parnassus (13,580'; was 13,574')
Rosalie Peak (13,579'; was 13,575'); tied with Clark Peak (13,579'; was 13,580'), which remains a bicentennial
Mt. Evans B (13,591'; was 13,577')
West Apostle (13,597'; was 13,568')

Demoted to tricentennials:
Unnamed 13,573' (was 13,580'); near Pole Creek Mtn.
Unnamed 13,543' (was 13,580'); near Mt. Adams
Mt. Powell (13,556'; was 13,580')

Thunder remains, Lightning falls off, but what about PT 13631? Am I missing it? I don't see it on the LoJ's new 200 list.

I looked through the lists really quick. Is this the mystery peak?
https://listsofjohn.com/peak/218

[bdloftin77]

For those of us that are LoJ illiterate is there a link that provides CO’s Bi-Cents, all 200, ranked in order?

https://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/selec ... n=200&s=CO

As I'm going through the list and comparing the changes, I noticed 13656 link https://listsofjohn.com/peak/218246 shows the old map elevation as 13,620'. As I've noticed that the old map elevation is what the 14'ers list currently shows. Example, your new, PT 13820 is the old PT 13811 (which this site is still showing).
But I'm not seeing an old 13620. I believe it used to be what is currently listed as PT 13,660 A. Could 13620 be a typo in your list and should be 13660 instead?

Yeah, I think 13660A on 14ers.com is the old location. 13656 is higher and in a slightly different location, making old 13660A now unranked. Because it’s in a new location, 13656’s interpolated map elevation of 13620 wouldn’t show up in any old lists.

[Chicago Transplant]

Ben's posts are correct:

13656 is the new high point and is down the ridge from the old 13660. The old 13660 was an interpolation, so the true high point down the ridge was likely missing a contour on the old maps. The old 13660 point is 13654 now and .38 miles down the ridge from the new 13656 high point.

"Len Shoemaker Peak" and "PT 13631" are the same peak.

Edit because I thought my post was confusing

[bdloftin77]

Lidar update: As some of you know, Edward Earl and Andrew Kirmse put together a program that calculated prominences for peaks around the entire world using SRTM data (which google earth uses) and digitally derived data from USGS maps for the US. See here for more info. It's pretty cool.

Joe Grim has worked with Andrew to learn the ins and outs of the program, and to make it compatible with lidar-derived DEMs. Over the past several weeks, Joe's downloaded, renamed, and tweaked countless DEM tiles from The National Map. He did an initial run-through a few days ago of the available coverage for Colorado (UTM zone 13), southern Wyoming, and northern New Mexico. See analysis coverage maps from Joe below.

Coverage.jpg

Coverage2.png

The results he's come up with are very helpful! It'll help us find more demoted peaks, QC already analyzed peaks, and continue the search for more ranked peaks.

From these results, John and I found two newly ranked peaks in the Black Canyon of the Gunnison! He believes Island Peaks is incorrectly labeled on the map, and they are actually SE of the former location.

The map saddles are extremely erroneous - the first one thought to have 171' of interpolated prominence (actually 322'), and the second thought to have 160' (actually 398').

https://listsofjohn.com/peak/218499
https://listsofjohn.com/peak/218500

Tom Pierce, these might possibly be new class 5 peaks to add to your list!

Joe's planning on finishing up Colorado and probably doing Wyoming. So far he's used 2TB of data, filling up a lot of space on his computer. If anyone wanted other states done and sent a gift for some large external hard drives, he might find that tempting. Right now we aren't putting these results directly into LoJ as they aren't quite as accurate as manual analysis and there are incorrect results here and there due to sharp saddles, artificial saddles, sharp summit features being excluded from the DEMs, and lower summit values due to averaged 1 meter DEM tiles vs single point cloud returns. They are good for guidance and QC though and will aid our manual analysis.

Thanks for all your work, Joe!

Unrelated side note - Scott, unfortunately Joe and I found Turkey Monster to be unranked. Still a cool looking pinnacle though.

[TomPierce]

Tom Pierce, these might possibly be new class 5 peaks to add to your list!

Ha, ha, too funny, Ben! I was already thinking the same and salivating before I even came to your shout out! I'll dig into those peaks and report back.

-Tom

[Scott P]

Unrelated side note - Scott, unfortunately Joe and I found Turkey Monster to be unranked. Still a cool looking pinnacle though.

For sure it a cool pinnacle. Of note, the LoJ link says it has 280' rise on the map, but it really doesn't show up on the map at all (it should probably read "map: 0' ".