How come the Sierra Club calls this peak 10,549ft? Your figure matches USGS marker I found, but it's 10 feet shorter. Do we have to go back up there again? :-)
I got the elevation from the benchmark. I'd assume the SPS figure is a typo, but I'm curious where you saw that. The list on the SPS pages just shows "10,480+" (I'm guessing the 7.5' is missing a contour line).
Good page! From afar it apears to be a small mountain (speaking of the pictures of course) but then you look at the altitude...
I miss more photos, books and more routes. Delete "Miscellaneous Info" if it's going to be empty, you'll always have the chance of adding sections.
Hi Diego, thanks for the vote. I couldn't add any books because none cover the peak, and I've added all of the photos I have that would be helpful to others for climbing the peak. (There are more photos on Bob's trip report, BTW). I'm not a big fan of all the redundant photos on SP, and try to do my part not to contribute to the problem.
I've only climbed the East Slopes myself, so I could only add that route. Only one other route is mentioned by trip reports on the web, the west side approach, which is described in the overview. As far as I can tell from the summit register, everyone climbing the peak uses one of these two approaches.
I prefer to leave Misc. Info in, so that people adding miscellaneous additions that don't fit elsewhere can put them there until they're integrated... it doesn't hurt to leave the section in.