Bob Martin does the Idaho county highpoints too? I didn't know that.
Anyway, I'm not really in to highpointing, but any thoughts of doing the highpoints in the National Parks?
I'm doing Arches over Christmas, and Glacier and Yellowstone have highpoints that I would like to climb.
Thanks Scott. Bob Martin has picked off a few of the Idaho county highpoints as well as a couple in Washington. Check out Bob's map, it is pretty neat. Also, be sure to check out his partners map, Bob Packard, it is mind boggling.
Have fun on your upcoming trip. You always find great things to do and it always fun to read about your travels and the peaks you've visited.
The list. Get crackin'.
Usual high quality job Dean!
Thank you Radek, I appreciate the nice comment and vote. Let me wish you and Shirley a Merry Christmas and may Santa stuff your stocking with lots of gas money for your upcoming adventures that 2006 will bring.
Very nice Dean.
Thank you Dave. I especially appreciate a vote from someone who lives in Idaho. So many great mountain areas in your state. My dad was from Arco so I feel like I have some Idaho roots always tugging at me.
There’s a lifetime worth of great Idaho peaks to choose from (just half a lifetime for Dan or Sean). Which order to do them is the problem. I’ve already got way too many on my wish list for next year. One of them is Diamond in the Lemhi’s which I know you have your eye on as well. I’m hoping for early July depending snow levels. Dave
Great page Dean
Thank you Dennis. Maybe I can accompany you when you get around to doing this one. I'd like to pick up Saviers and Bromaghin next time I'm in that area.
So silly that it is a county highpoint, even though it is so close to higher mountains. Nice work on the page!
Thanks Dan. Yes, if the county line had been drawn a bit differently, this would have been just another bump on a ridge and Norton Peak would have been the county highpoint. Norton is only one foot lower and is really a nice looking mountain.
My two cents:
You should name this page "Camas Cohp" and use it to cover the whole massif there on the county line. Your current name is a bit vague.
I don't think it proper to call this Peak 10337 since it [the massif] has only about 220 feet of prominence from nearby Pk 10441 [South Summit of Bromaghin Peak].
Point 10337 may be higher than Pt. 10360+ nearby (another excellent example of USGS maps being wrong) but the whole massif deserves consideration.
Your points are well taken. It is a shame that Norton Peak wasn't two feet higher as it would make a fine and worthy county highpoint. However, that is not the way that it works. Tis true that Pt. 10360 doesn't exist and is a failing of the USGS map.
This picture shows the area that would be pt 10360 but it is obviously lower, in fact this pic was taken about twenty feet down from the summit.
I did change the name a bit, incorporating both the Peak number and the cohp aspect. I've also asked Sean, who lives in Ketchum to shed any light on the possible name of the peak. Sean is the one who has put up the lion share of the local peaks on SP. He may not know but is capable of finding out.
Thank you for your vote and comments, and let me wish you also a Merry Christmas.
I like the Smoky Mountains, it's never very crowded there.
Thank you Melinda. I think the name "Smoky" is appropriate as there seems to be a haze in the area, most likely due to the trees. Kind of like the Great Smoky mountains of the east coast. Have a great Christmas.
Nice page Dean! Just wondering if you knew why so few people have done all the Idaho county highpoints?
While Idaho has many easy county highpoints, it also has some real challenges that keeps many from attempting the state. It is one of my goals to get all of Idaho's cohp's but it'll take me a couple more years as many require a lot of time and effort. Thank you for your vote and the question. The best guy to ask would be Dan Robbins, he knows how tough some of those relatively unknown cohp's are.
Good page Dean. This would be a good winter ascent...I think you've given me an idea hehehe.
Although the Smokys are probably the least excitable range in the area they are still beautiful and there's no reason this shouldn't be considered its own mountain, (check your e-mail for my proposed naming solution.)