Mileage and elevation gain are indicated in the Overview section. I suspect you were enraptured by the glowing beauty of the photos and were distracted from the actual text.
As for the longitudinal information, I would agree that it is confusing since most California peaks are located in the western hemisphere. However, due to an anomolous rift in the San Adreas Fault, this peak and the surrounding area are actually located in the eastern hemisphere, in fact not far from the city of Nanjing on mainland China.
Thanks for your vote! Please reconsider your rating in light of the above information.
After more careful research using Google and my Replogle desktop globe with built-in analog clock, I found that you were correct - Black Mtn is located just east of the Mojave Desert, not in mainland China as I first suspected.
As for wind turbines - there are two primary locations in the state of California where these can be found. The largest concentration is around Altamont Pass just east of Livermore. Altamont Pass, elevation just over 1,000ft (and also higher than much of the Eastern United States) you may recall was the site of the infamous Rolling Stones concert on Dec 6, 1969. A man was stabbed to death, several people were run over in their sleeping bags, another drowned in the California aqueduct. There were two births. The Hells Angels had been hired for security detail. It has generally been considered the end of the 1960's love and peace era, the death of the Summer of Love. But I digress. Yes, there are many turbines there. There are also a lot in the Tehachapi area, though not near Black Mtn. Both of these areas have consistently high winds in addition to easy access and open space. Climbing wind turbines is not recommended or encouraged, unless of course your job is the maintainance and construction of these devices. Do not fool yourself into thinking they are the answer to our energy needs. In fact they are highly subsidized by the federal government. Once the subsidies end, they will be left to rot (as happened back in the 1980's at Altamont when the first round of subsidies were removed) and will stand as rusting monuments to government misdirection of national energy policy. But I'm not a Libertarian or anything. Some national groups including the Audubon society have suggested that death rates among some bird species are unusually high in these areas. Don't listen to these kooks. Death rates are no higher than in the vicinity of major metropolitan airports. Or at least I think so.
I work specifically with the wind power industry. The subsidies will be there. They may be on and off for a little while, but eventually they will become permanent.
Altamont was the worst case of wind power in the world, an accident, and a mistake.
The experience in Altamont has led to much better development. Tehachapi produces more wind power than any other specific region in California.
Quite funny, but also a very thorough page. I should point out that this one is taller than anything I've posted. Not to worry, I've hacked the server so anyone attempting to register a new user named "Nortreb" will have their hard drive erased (just kidding - maybe).
When Dan parodies himself the world better watch out!!!
Note that you don't have to put the "#3" at the end of the page name. I wouldn't personally put it on there but that's me. Do whatever you like, as it is unlikely I'll climb this thing anyway.
The #3 is extremely important. It refers to the assigned HPS number. There are six Black Mountains in total on the HPS list, and without the precise distinctions confusion would be rampant. Sierra Club climbing parties might show up at the wrong trailhead, or even possibly climb the wrong Black Mountain.
A common misconception is that the USGS is correct. As a counterexample, consider this USGS page on Mt. Davis. It lists the summit elevation as 1,231ft above sea level. Someone was smoking something when they surveyed that puppy, because the true elevation is over 10,000ft higher. There are many such examples.
So it comes down to a matter of trust. Are you more willing to trust an organization led by such well-known liars as Clarence King who couldn't find Mt Whitney if it was sitting on his dinner plate, or an organization founded by everyone's favorite outdoorsman, John Muir? You decide...
There are many such errors in elevation on the USGS database. Sometimes the elevation given for a peak is merely some triangulation mark near to the summit, not the true summit. As an example, a peak might have a '4574' mark near to the summit and that's what the database says. Yet, not 100 yards away there is a 4720+ foot contour that marks the true summit. There are also misplaced feature names.
Regarding the Mt. Davis error (Mt. Ritter Quad), I have sent the USGS database manager a note that the page for Davis has slipped a zero on the elevation. 1231 should be 12310 or thereabouts. The Topozone (USGS) map is in meters where 3750m = 12300ft. They can take anywhere from 1 week to 4 months to return the message notifying of the change.
I send them two or three notes a month about elevation errors. I think their database is generated by a computer scan of the maps, so their 'error' is in the lackluster programming and not some cartographer mistake. It appears most of the time the errors are caused by using a triangulated mark nearby to the summit and not the summit contours (USGS convention is to take the halfway point between contours; so for a summit closed contour of 4720+ feet the database will read 4740).
Most of the time the Sierra Club or Mazamas or whoever get their official names from the USGS. After all, the USGS is the governing body on place names. Someone has to be and they are it. Nonetheless, this is a free country. You can name anything you want whatever you want. But you have to admit, in an extreme case, calling Mt. Whitney something like Mt. Fleischman would not only make you look silly but probably cause you to be ignored or disregarded.
Come to think of it, I don't trust that sheepherder much either. I would like to rename it Mt. Larkin. I've always been fond of that name. I've submitted the BGN Form. How long does it typically take the BGN to approve such changes? When I get the official reply, I'll change the name here on SP as well.
Also, was the acclimatization sentence a joke, or were you serious? At first I thought you might be serious, but after reading the entire page and your vote, I wasn't sure. I never thought something is the 5000 foot range would need acclimatization, but since I would have to tavel a few hundred miles to get to somewhere that low, perhaps my perception is skewed.
...I'm wondering if I'm the only one who's actually tried to find this route. I recently moved to Tehachapi and have been looking for a good after work hike not too far from my house. The rugged summit of Black Mountain caught my eye and I've been trying to find a way up it that doesn't require crossing the heavily posted fence line. Are the "no trespassing" signs routinely ignored or is there another route that will "go"?
Nelson - Mar 4, 2005 12:46 am - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentHilarious. What more can I say? (Hopefully it wll be taken in good spirit. Parody is a form of flattery, no?)
nader - Mar 4, 2005 9:17 am - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentComplete with good route info. Nice page.
mtwashingtonmonroe - Mar 4, 2005 9:59 am - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentNice page and have a good one!
-Britt
hgrapid - Mar 4, 2005 11:22 am - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentWow, this mountain really is in Tehachapi!
I have been researching Tehachapi because it is one of the largest concentrations of wind turbines in the entire world!
Good page, funny parody, sorry to bust you on the topo marks.
Thanks for linking to my pages, and I hope to see more from you.
-Dan
hgrapjd - Mar 4, 2005 11:39 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentMileage and elevation gain are indicated in the Overview section. I suspect you were enraptured by the glowing beauty of the photos and were distracted from the actual text.
As for the longitudinal information, I would agree that it is confusing since most California peaks are located in the western hemisphere. However, due to an anomolous rift in the San Adreas Fault, this peak and the surrounding area are actually located in the eastern hemisphere, in fact not far from the city of Nanjing on mainland China.
Thanks for your vote! Please reconsider your rating in light of the above information.
hgrapjd - Mar 4, 2005 3:12 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentAfter more careful research using Google and my Replogle desktop globe with built-in analog clock, I found that you were correct - Black Mtn is located just east of the Mojave Desert, not in mainland China as I first suspected.
As for wind turbines - there are two primary locations in the state of California where these can be found. The largest concentration is around Altamont Pass just east of Livermore. Altamont Pass, elevation just over 1,000ft (and also higher than much of the Eastern United States) you may recall was the site of the infamous Rolling Stones concert on Dec 6, 1969. A man was stabbed to death, several people were run over in their sleeping bags, another drowned in the California aqueduct. There were two births. The Hells Angels had been hired for security detail. It has generally been considered the end of the 1960's love and peace era, the death of the Summer of Love. But I digress. Yes, there are many turbines there. There are also a lot in the Tehachapi area, though not near Black Mtn. Both of these areas have consistently high winds in addition to easy access and open space. Climbing wind turbines is not recommended or encouraged, unless of course your job is the maintainance and construction of these devices. Do not fool yourself into thinking they are the answer to our energy needs. In fact they are highly subsidized by the federal government. Once the subsidies end, they will be left to rot (as happened back in the 1980's at Altamont when the first round of subsidies were removed) and will stand as rusting monuments to government misdirection of national energy policy. But I'm not a Libertarian or anything. Some national groups including the Audubon society have suggested that death rates among some bird species are unusually high in these areas. Don't listen to these kooks. Death rates are no higher than in the vicinity of major metropolitan airports. Or at least I think so.
hgrapid - Mar 4, 2005 3:30 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentI work specifically with the wind power industry. The subsidies will be there. They may be on and off for a little while, but eventually they will become permanent.
Altamont was the worst case of wind power in the world, an accident, and a mistake.
The experience in Altamont has led to much better development. Tehachapi produces more wind power than any other specific region in California.
Andy - Mar 4, 2005 12:25 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentLaugh! Still a quality page though.
I think it needs a trip report in the spirit of Diggler's Pothole Dome TR.
nartreb - Mar 4, 2005 2:03 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentQuite funny, but also a very thorough page. I should point out that this one is taller than anything I've posted. Not to worry, I've hacked the server so anyone attempting to register a new user named "Nortreb" will have their hard drive erased (just kidding - maybe).
Klenke - Mar 4, 2005 2:23 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentWhen Dan parodies himself the world better watch out!!!
Note that you don't have to put the "#3" at the end of the page name. I wouldn't personally put it on there but that's me. Do whatever you like, as it is unlikely I'll climb this thing anyway.
hgrapjd - Mar 4, 2005 2:48 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentThe #3 is extremely important. It refers to the assigned HPS number. There are six Black Mountains in total on the HPS list, and without the precise distinctions confusion would be rampant. Sierra Club climbing parties might show up at the wrong trailhead, or even possibly climb the wrong Black Mountain.
Klenke - Mar 4, 2005 3:01 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentYou're probably right about the Sierra Club making errors.
Moreover, I give more import to the USGS than the Sierra Club (after all, that HPS page says "Use at your own risk" right at the top).
USGS (map) doesn't list Black Mountain #3, only Black Mountain. That's its "official" name.
Either way, I don't care.
hgrapjd - Mar 4, 2005 3:27 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentA common misconception is that the USGS is correct. As a counterexample, consider this USGS page on Mt. Davis. It lists the summit elevation as 1,231ft above sea level. Someone was smoking something when they surveyed that puppy, because the true elevation is over 10,000ft higher. There are many such examples.
So it comes down to a matter of trust. Are you more willing to trust an organization led by such well-known liars as Clarence King who couldn't find Mt Whitney if it was sitting on his dinner plate, or an organization founded by everyone's favorite outdoorsman, John Muir? You decide...
Klenke - Mar 4, 2005 4:40 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentThere are many such errors in elevation on the USGS database. Sometimes the elevation given for a peak is merely some triangulation mark near to the summit, not the true summit. As an example, a peak might have a '4574' mark near to the summit and that's what the database says. Yet, not 100 yards away there is a 4720+ foot contour that marks the true summit. There are also misplaced feature names.
Regarding the Mt. Davis error (Mt. Ritter Quad), I have sent the USGS database manager a note that the page for Davis has slipped a zero on the elevation. 1231 should be 12310 or thereabouts. The Topozone (USGS) map is in meters where 3750m = 12300ft. They can take anywhere from 1 week to 4 months to return the message notifying of the change.
I send them two or three notes a month about elevation errors. I think their database is generated by a computer scan of the maps, so their 'error' is in the lackluster programming and not some cartographer mistake. It appears most of the time the errors are caused by using a triangulated mark nearby to the summit and not the summit contours (USGS convention is to take the halfway point between contours; so for a summit closed contour of 4720+ feet the database will read 4740).
Most of the time the Sierra Club or Mazamas or whoever get their official names from the USGS. After all, the USGS is the governing body on place names. Someone has to be and they are it. Nonetheless, this is a free country. You can name anything you want whatever you want. But you have to admit, in an extreme case, calling Mt. Whitney something like Mt. Fleischman would not only make you look silly but probably cause you to be ignored or disregarded.
hgrapjd - Mar 4, 2005 9:19 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentCome to think of it, I don't trust that sheepherder much either. I would like to rename it Mt. Larkin. I've always been fond of that name. I've submitted the BGN Form. How long does it typically take the BGN to approve such changes? When I get the official reply, I'll change the name here on SP as well.
Scott - Mar 4, 2005 2:41 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentWell written page.
Anyway, how did you vote on your own page? Weird.
Also, was the acclimatization sentence a joke, or were you serious? At first I thought you might be serious, but after reading the entire page and your vote, I wasn't sure. I never thought something is the 5000 foot range would need acclimatization, but since I would have to tavel a few hundred miles to get to somewhere that low, perhaps my perception is skewed.
cp0915 - Mar 4, 2005 3:53 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentI'm guessin' Bob.
Rob - Mar 5, 2005 2:11 am - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentClassic!
hgrapjd - Mar 5, 2005 2:49 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentIt is a classic peak indeed.
yahugh - May 6, 2015 10:14 pm - Hasn't voted
funny but......I'm wondering if I'm the only one who's actually tried to find this route. I recently moved to Tehachapi and have been looking for a good after work hike not too far from my house. The rugged summit of Black Mountain caught my eye and I've been trying to find a way up it that doesn't require crossing the heavily posted fence line. Are the "no trespassing" signs routinely ignored or is there another route that will "go"?