Correction #1: There is no apostrophe. It should be "Sauer Mountain". I am actually going to notify the PB website about that, as well. If you read the page closely, it was a member-submitted "peak" (much like SP is), not originated by the PB administrators. Sometimes errors like this happen, even on SP.
Correction #2: Point 3116 on Peakbagger is correct. "Sauer Mountain" is Point 3116. Read basically any TR and it confirms this. Not all named summits have the most prominence on a ridge; in this case, the named summit is just the best viewpoint. Point 3172, the highpoint of the ridge, is unnamed. However, some people might consider them the same mountain; the two points are certainly close enough. I will leave that for other people to decide.
Corrections have been made. While writing this page I was wondering what your opinion was about this specific peak. Most people call the peak Sauer Mountain yet the trailhead has a sign saying Sauer's Mountain Trail. Also if you look at the picture on the second link below there is a picture of a sign saying Sauer's Mountain. Rather confusing.
Just because there is a number of technical issues that don't sit well with me about the two points in question, I decided to combine these two points into one page. I could easily see a name change here in the future and since both really are essentially the same mountain with Point 3172 being the highpoint. Leavenworth seems to have a lot of misnamed or poorly named summits. I can think of at least two other cases.
That's weird about the sign. I will try to do a little more research, on my end...
I like what you did with the name of the Mountain Page. Although the lower point is the named summit, the unnamed point is higher and only a short distance away. To claim a successful summit of the mountain I would say to do the higher point, but to each his/her own. These two points really do not need to be separate SP pages.
I did some more research... and now I feel foolish. The peak has no official name.
The landowner (Mr. Sauer) created a trail that crosses his private land and then onto National Forest land to Point 3116. He put a Guestbook in a jar at Point 3116 for those who use the trail, and as of last year the Guestbook was still there.
So although Point 3116 has no official name, it is nicknamed "Sauer's Mountain" (or "Sauer Mountain") because of his selfless act of allowing a trail to be created for it through his private land.
There is a paragraph in the middle of the following trip report that gives a decent explanation:
http://www.wta.org/go-hiking/trip-reports/trip_report.2009-04-04.5791131275
I recommend leaving the page name as "Sauer Mountain and Point 3172"... but also include "Sauer's" in the Query Name. Then people can find the peak on SP regardless if they type "Sauer" or "Sauer's". Just a suggestion.
Redwic - May 7, 2012 11:26 pm - Hasn't voted
CorrectionsCorrection #1: There is no apostrophe. It should be "Sauer Mountain". I am actually going to notify the PB website about that, as well. If you read the page closely, it was a member-submitted "peak" (much like SP is), not originated by the PB administrators. Sometimes errors like this happen, even on SP.
Correction #2: Point 3116 on Peakbagger is correct. "Sauer Mountain" is Point 3116. Read basically any TR and it confirms this. Not all named summits have the most prominence on a ridge; in this case, the named summit is just the best viewpoint. Point 3172, the highpoint of the ridge, is unnamed. However, some people might consider them the same mountain; the two points are certainly close enough. I will leave that for other people to decide.
EastKing - May 8, 2012 4:02 am - Hasn't voted
Re: CorrectionsCorrections have been made. While writing this page I was wondering what your opinion was about this specific peak. Most people call the peak Sauer Mountain yet the trailhead has a sign saying Sauer's Mountain Trail. Also if you look at the picture on the second link below there is a picture of a sign saying Sauer's Mountain. Rather confusing.
Just because there is a number of technical issues that don't sit well with me about the two points in question, I decided to combine these two points into one page. I could easily see a name change here in the future and since both really are essentially the same mountain with Point 3172 being the highpoint. Leavenworth seems to have a lot of misnamed or poorly named summits. I can think of at least two other cases.
Redwic - May 8, 2012 7:23 am - Hasn't voted
Re: CorrectionsThat's weird about the sign. I will try to do a little more research, on my end...
I like what you did with the name of the Mountain Page. Although the lower point is the named summit, the unnamed point is higher and only a short distance away. To claim a successful summit of the mountain I would say to do the higher point, but to each his/her own. These two points really do not need to be separate SP pages.
Redwic - May 8, 2012 9:27 am - Hasn't voted
Re: CorrectionsI did some more research... and now I feel foolish. The peak has no official name.
The landowner (Mr. Sauer) created a trail that crosses his private land and then onto National Forest land to Point 3116. He put a Guestbook in a jar at Point 3116 for those who use the trail, and as of last year the Guestbook was still there.
So although Point 3116 has no official name, it is nicknamed "Sauer's Mountain" (or "Sauer Mountain") because of his selfless act of allowing a trail to be created for it through his private land.
There is a paragraph in the middle of the following trip report that gives a decent explanation:
http://www.wta.org/go-hiking/trip-reports/trip_report.2009-04-04.5791131275
I recommend leaving the page name as "Sauer Mountain and Point 3172"... but also include "Sauer's" in the Query Name. Then people can find the peak on SP regardless if they type "Sauer" or "Sauer's". Just a suggestion.
EastKing - May 8, 2012 2:25 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: CorrectionsThanks for doing the additional research. I will probably put the Sauer's in the query as you have suggested.