Naming 13,838 and13,820?

[gore galore]

It's not that I am against naming these peaks, it is rather the haphazard manner in which the idea was presented and the means to name all of them by just the thirteener finishers which is not realistic. Most thirteener finishers have moved on and is there anyone who is going to track down all 56 finishers? And how do you know that all of them would be interested? SoSo Peak that you mention and another one, Proposal Peak that I hear about is what you get when unofficial names are attached to peaks. Eventually these unnamed thirteeners outside of wilderness areas will probably be named but not all in this generation. They will be named gradually as they have historically been over time with continual use until officially named. Atlantic Peak is a prime example, gradual use of an unofficial name on the Hundred Highest list until formally named.

[supranihilest]

This thread should be taken out back and shot.

azkmbb.jpg

[greenonion]

This thread should be taken out back and shot.
azkmbb.jpg

+1

[HikerGuy]

Unnameds rule! They are the easiest to find in a list sorted by elevation.

[JChitwood]

I’m guessing Cronin is the last unnamed Centennial to be officially named.

[BB_ME]

Suggested name: Thirteen-thousand-eight-hundred-and-thirty-eight-more-or-less.

[Dave B]

I'm OK with naming them if they can be gendered too. Don't necesarily need English gendered names, a simple "el" or "la" in front should suffice. I mean, I don't see why La Plata gets to be the only gender-realized 14er in CO.

El Longs Peak has such a nice ring to it, hopefully it's not mad at me for assuming its gender tho...

[LifeIsGood]

Before this thread dies, I wish to add the brilliant idea that just occurred to me, to honor Bill Middlebrook by naming a peak after him:

Some mountains are not named “Mount” or “Peak,” but rather “Benchmark,” such as “Buckskin BM.”

So one of the 110 unnamed 13’ers could potentially be (unofficially) named “BC Skier BM,” which stands for “BackCountry Skier Bill Middlebrook.” This way, it would appear to be just another Benchmark! Mwahahaha!

This underground project must circumvent rules, regulations, and authority.

That’s all from me, now I’m going to go sit in a free hot spring and smoke a joint with my friends (seriously), which is how life used to be before we all had a smartphone glued to our hand.

[Veory]

Lets throw a real benchmark up there and call it BM BM

[Boggy B]

It's not that I am against naming these peaks, it is rather the haphazard manner in which the idea was presented and the means to name all of them by just the thirteener finishers which is not realistic. Most thirteener finishers have moved on and is there anyone who is going to track down all 56 finishers? And how do you know that all of them would be interested? SoSo Peak that you mention and another one, Proposal Peak that I hear about is what you get when unofficial names are attached to peaks. [...]

We would be remiss not to mention "Yahoo Mountain" (Dziezynski) in this company. It's fine that Roach and others invented pet names for peaks they climbed, or in some cases didn't climb. It's rather presumptuous to publish them as if they were named, though it's our fault we all use the pet names as a matter of convenience.

I think once you exhaust the logical order of precedence for names (convention of local tribes/communities/landowners, then explorers/discoverers/mappers, then first ascensionists.. maybe), there is no compelling authority to assign an official name to a feature. Certainly not Roach nor the many, many people who climbed those peaks before him, nor the 13er finishers at large, what an odd concept.

As in the prior thread on this topic, the only thing I'd support is a classification scheme that generates informal, meaningless but stable names to use in lieu of raw elevations.

[Veory]

I just don't agree with that take. Who better to name it than the people who spend the most time there? That seems like the next logical step down to me. Why do we mandate that only those of past times had the right to arbitrarily pick names? History is now, too.

[Boggy B]

I'd argue "the people who spend the most time there" are the people who've lived in proximity to the mountains, who've depended upon them for survival, who've spent many hours studying their features, exploring their basins, forests, creeks and lakes. Peakbaggers, by definition and by and large, touch a summit once to check a box and move along, largely in service of ego and accolades (myself included). So for starters I'd say the people who have a legitimate relationship with it are better to name it.

With that said, to the extent those groups already named everything they've cared to, and that we already know and use those names (probably not 100%), I don't see a burning need to impose unenduring monikers on the rest.