The SRTM data is interesting. My understanding is that SRTM samples a random point every 100 feet or 100 meters or so and then records that data for that area, sort of like a pixel. It may or may not be anywhere near the highest local point. My recollection is also that some of the SRTM figures that came out did not match certain summits very well so I question its overall accuracy. Dunno.
Having said that, I suspect there is a lot more gray than our black/white lists allow for. I would not be at all surprised if this point were higher or some other HP is not properly identified. I guess my thought is that if you do this hobby then you accept that you may have to go back sometimes to clean things up as has happened with the COGPP list.
At some point, I think you just have to accept that you are dependent on the USGS for determining the HP. At least until you have some other evidence. For myself, I guess I would view something that is not in the same contour interval is fairly unlikely, even with the SRTM evidence. But the relatively small contour interval makes it questionable. I might tag it sometime.
I'm quite anal about visiting all possibilities myself but I know that other folks aren't. I do think that a person should be consistent. If something with a different contour interval is going to be a contender, it seems to me that other peaks where there is a similar contour interval make for even stronger contenders. Some examples:
Peak 3700+(50) which could be higher than Muller (P2K/COGPP)
Peak 5822 could maybe be higher than Indian Rock
Point 6360+ on Mount Misery could in theory be a COHP/COGPP/P2K
Does one consider Monument Hill a contender in Grant County?
Do you have to do both summits on Glacier Peak? Most folks don't
Do both summits of Fury for P2000 status? Could be higher than Luna.
Big Foot rather than just Whacme.
Both of the 7467 summits on Cradle (P2K, Backcourt). This one to me seems like a clear case where you to do both if they are within a foot. Etc.
Good points.
As PK said, you cannot trust everything you read.
As you eluded to, these peakbagging lists each have gray areas for some peaks and contenders.
USGS has certainly made errors, as has SRTM and some other methods. I am certainly in no position of flat-out telling a person he/she is wrong about a list contender such as this TR refers to, especially after doing such research as PK has here, because the reality is we truly do not know the correct answers in such cases... yet. Until undeniable, undebatable, widely accepted evidence is conjured up, there will also be gray areas from time to time.
ericnoel - Nov 9, 2011 2:04 pm - Voted 10/10
Washtucna BMThe SRTM data is interesting. My understanding is that SRTM samples a random point every 100 feet or 100 meters or so and then records that data for that area, sort of like a pixel. It may or may not be anywhere near the highest local point. My recollection is also that some of the SRTM figures that came out did not match certain summits very well so I question its overall accuracy. Dunno.
Having said that, I suspect there is a lot more gray than our black/white lists allow for. I would not be at all surprised if this point were higher or some other HP is not properly identified. I guess my thought is that if you do this hobby then you accept that you may have to go back sometimes to clean things up as has happened with the COGPP list.
At some point, I think you just have to accept that you are dependent on the USGS for determining the HP. At least until you have some other evidence. For myself, I guess I would view something that is not in the same contour interval is fairly unlikely, even with the SRTM evidence. But the relatively small contour interval makes it questionable. I might tag it sometime.
I'm quite anal about visiting all possibilities myself but I know that other folks aren't. I do think that a person should be consistent. If something with a different contour interval is going to be a contender, it seems to me that other peaks where there is a similar contour interval make for even stronger contenders. Some examples:
Peak 3700+(50) which could be higher than Muller (P2K/COGPP)
Peak 5822 could maybe be higher than Indian Rock
Point 6360+ on Mount Misery could in theory be a COHP/COGPP/P2K
Does one consider Monument Hill a contender in Grant County?
Do you have to do both summits on Glacier Peak? Most folks don't
Do both summits of Fury for P2000 status? Could be higher than Luna.
Big Foot rather than just Whacme.
Both of the 7467 summits on Cradle (P2K, Backcourt). This one to me seems like a clear case where you to do both if they are within a foot. Etc.
Redwic - Nov 10, 2011 1:56 am - Voted 9/10
Re: Washtucna BMGood points.
As PK said, you cannot trust everything you read.
As you eluded to, these peakbagging lists each have gray areas for some peaks and contenders.
USGS has certainly made errors, as has SRTM and some other methods. I am certainly in no position of flat-out telling a person he/she is wrong about a list contender such as this TR refers to, especially after doing such research as PK has here, because the reality is we truly do not know the correct answers in such cases... yet. Until undeniable, undebatable, widely accepted evidence is conjured up, there will also be gray areas from time to time.