# State Highpoints



## Mike P. (Jun 29, 2006)

I have not checked this out lately     BUT

www.americasroof.com was/is the gathering spot on the www for state highpoint information.   You can find info on all 50.

To promote a friends page & some what relavant to recent threads, Rob O'Keefe, AKA machimoodus & aka, the backcountry explorer has done over 1/2 of peaks (I believe) most of the ones on the east coast, Whitney, Humphreys, Boundary & Kings Peak.

I've stopped doing them although if I get near enough to one I try.  So far I've got, ME, NH, VT, NY, MA, RI (the end of the driveway under prior ownership), CT, PA, NC, TN & NJ.  NJ (besides RI) is the only drive by so far.  Likely the next one is DE, another drive by.


----------



## Greg (Jun 29, 2006)

NY, CT, MA, NH here.


----------



## pizza (Jun 29, 2006)

I beleive americasroof.com is the personal blog of the president of the highpointers club (Roger Rowlett). You want highpointers.org.. and their message board is network54.com/Forum/3897/

I write a column in the quarterly highpointers club newsletter. It's called milestones, and it's maybe the most difficult thing I've ever done - trying to come up with creative ways every three months to express the fact that joe schmoe from the poconos now has 30-something highpoints. (actually, it's not that bad, but sometimes it seems that way.)

I have 22: (in order of completion) NJ, DE, RI, MI, AR, LA, FL, TN, NC, MA, PA, MD, WV, CT, KY, SC, GA, OH, IN, IL, WI, and MI. You can view writeups and photos of all of them on my web site: http://turzman.com/projects/highpoints.

-steve


----------



## Greg (Jun 30, 2006)

Greg said:
			
		

> NY, CT, MA, NH here.


I should mention I drove up Greylock. Washington I've driven up once and hiked 3 or 4 times. I can't remember.


----------



## YardSaleDad (Jul 4, 2006)

pizza said:
			
		

> I write a column in the quarterly highpointers club newsletter. It's called milestones, and it's maybe the most difficult thing I've ever done - trying to come up with creative ways every three months to express the fact that joe schmoe from the poconos now has 30-something highpoints.



I wonder how many I could Hang Glide to?  Would that count?


----------



## pizza (Jul 4, 2006)

YardSaleDad said:
			
		

> I wonder how many I could Hang Glide to?  Would that count?



It has never come up in real life, but there was a hypothetical debate about whether a helicopter ascent of a state highpoint would count. According to official state highpointer club rules, the means of ascent doesn't matter, as long as you come in physical contact with the actual highpoint. The county highpointers club has a different official position - helicopters would NOT count. (which to me seemed hypocritical - if you allowed people to drive up, then how is that different than flying up?)

My personal opinion, and I've made this known on the highpointer message boards,  is that highpointing is an individual effort and that individual takes it any way that satisfies him/her. Hiking, driving, helicopters, and yes- hanggliding to all 50 state highpoints is a logistical nightmare any way you look at it - so if that's how you want to do it, then who the hell am I to say that your effort doesn't count?.


----------



## Mark S (Jul 6, 2006)

Another outstanding source of information on State Highpoints can be found here:

http://www.summitpost.org/list/171191/u-s-state-highpoints.html

36 and counting ...


----------



## skibum1321 (Jul 6, 2006)

pizza said:
			
		

> It has never come up in real life, but there was a hypothetical debate about whether a helicopter ascent of a state highpoint would count. According to official state highpointer club rules, the means of ascent doesn't matter, as long as you come in physical contact with the actual highpoint. The county highpointers club has a different official position - helicopters would NOT count. (which to me seemed hypocritical - if you allowed people to drive up, then how is that different than flying up?)
> 
> My personal opinion, and I've made this known on the highpointer message boards,  is that highpointing is an individual effort and that individual takes it any way that satisfies him/her. Hiking, driving, helicopters, and yes- hanggliding to all 50 state highpoints is a logistical nightmare any way you look at it - so if that's how you want to do it, then who the hell am I to say that your effort doesn't count?.


I don't think they should be allowed to drive or take a helicopter.  It should be under your own power.


----------



## pizza (Jul 6, 2006)

skibum1321 said:
			
		

> I don't think they should be allowed to drive or take a helicopter.  It should be under your own power.



What about Britton Hill, FL?
Elbright Azimuth, DE?
Hoosier Hill, IN?
Mt. Sunflower, KS?

To be fair, a very small minority of highpointers give themselves requirements to hike at least 10 miles (or some other arbitrary number) to these relatively flat spots.

That said, most of these people don't presume to say what other highpointers should be "allowed" to do. In fact, most won't even put on an heir of superiority when meeting others. I have yet to hear some asshole say, "I'm better than you because I hiked up Manfield and you drove the Toll Road." 

Maybe it's just the culture of the club.


----------



## Greg (Jul 6, 2006)

Different strokes for different folks. I've never been a big follower of lists (4K'ers included), but I suppose I understand the appeal. It seems like a great motivating factor, especially for hiking 4K's, etc. With that said, if someone finds satisfaction and a sense of accomplishment in simply visiting a state highpoint, whether they hike or drive, that's their prerogative and it seems silly to suggest that's not the "right" way.


----------



## skibum1321 (Jul 6, 2006)

It just seems that the whole point of highpointing is to get some sort of satisfaction. Is there really any satisfaction in driving your car up a mountain? 
For example, whenever I see a bumper sticker claiming that a car climbed Mt. Washington, I can't help but think who cares? There is absolutely no sense of accomplishment in that.
This is all coming from someone who hates roads up mountains and thinks they ruin the mountain. Take it for what you want.


----------



## Greg (Jul 6, 2006)

skibum1321 said:
			
		

> It just seems that the whole point of highpointing is to get some sort of satisfaction. Is there really any satisfaction in driving your car up a mountain?
> For example, whenever I see a bumper sticker claiming that a car climbed Mt. Washington, I can't help but think who cares? There is absolutely no sense of accomplishment in that.
> This is all coming from someone who hates roads up mountains and thinks they ruin the mountain. Take it for what you want.


No sense of accomplishment for *you*. But for somebody else simply saying that they have been to every state, not to mention to the highest point, may be an accomplishment to them. Remember, not all state highpoints are mountains, and not all are remote enough to need to hike to. Therefore, I don't think that state highpointing is inherently a hiker's endeavor, necessarily.


----------



## pizza (Jul 6, 2006)

skibum1321 said:
			
		

> It just seems that the whole point of highpointing is to get some sort of satisfaction. Is there really any satisfaction in driving your car up a mountain?



Sure..

Look, after climbing Gannet Peak, Granite Peak, Borah Peak, Mt. Rainier, Mt. Hood, and Denali, is it really going to bother you that you drove up Mt. Magazine in Arkansas? Not me. If I need to prove something to myself, Gannet Peak will prove it better than any mountain in the east. 

Now if I have time to plan something, I'll go ahead and hike a state highpoint. I intend to hike Mt. Washington in August, for example - not because I'm opposed to driving, but because I just want to hike Washington. But I am planning a weekend just for that.. If I were to plan a weekend for every highpoint, it would take decades to complete the 50. So I drive up a bunch. And I have no problem with that.


----------



## skibum1321 (Jul 6, 2006)

I just don't like the idea of toll roads in general. I think mountains should be remote places and there is no need to develop them like we do everything else. We are taught about Leave No Trace ethics and yet, we build roads and railways up mountains and build summit lodges. That is making a bigger impact on the environment than pretty much anything an individual hiker could do. 

Back to the original topic, I have no desire to highpoint so I guess I'm just or a different mindset. If I did highpoint, I think that I would want to reach it by foot, even if it was a puny hill. As Greg has reiterated though - different strokes for different folks.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 6, 2006)

pizza said:
			
		

> Sure..
> 
> Look, after climbing Gannet Peak, Granite Peak, Borah Peak, Mt. Rainier, Mt. Hood, and Denali, is it really going to bother you that you drove up Mt. Magazine in Arkansas? Not me. If I need to prove something to myself, Gannet Peak will prove it better than any mountain in the east.



So you have climbed up Rainier and some of these mountains?  Or *you will be* doing so at one point?  I just was on your site and didn't see any pics or reports.  :blink:


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 6, 2006)

skibum1321 said:
			
		

> I just don't like the idea of toll roads in general. I think mountains should be remote places and there is no need to develop them like we do everything else. We are taught about Leave No Trace ethics and yet, we build roads and railways up mountains and build summit lodges. That is making a bigger impact on the environment than pretty much anything an individual hiker could do.



Most of the roads and buildings are actually quite old and *were* things that were built in the 1920's, 1930's, and 1940's.


----------



## Greg (Jul 6, 2006)

Interesting. I always thought Pike's Peak was Colorado's high point...


----------



## Mark S (Jul 6, 2006)

I would expect that folks on a hiking website would tend to snub mechanical/motorized means of attaining highpoints and that appears to be the case here.  I was a peakbagger long before I got into highpointing so I've always leaned in the that direction but have tried to be creative with highpointing.  I've hiked most of my HPs, but have biked several summit roads as well (TN, NC, SC, WV, MA).  On the real easy ones (NB, KS, OH, IN etc.), I'll usually just park a few miles away and walk or park a little further away and bike.  Driving up holds no appeal for me.

But that's only one aspect of highpointing.  A lot of folks get into it to see the country and that's also a large part of it for me.  I couldn't much care how others choose to attain HPs as it has absolutely no effect on me.  The guy that founded the Club (Jack Longacre) didn't place restrictions on how to do it, so that's the way it is.  Cheers.


----------



## pizza (Jul 6, 2006)

thetrailboss said:
			
		

> So you have climbed up Rainier and some of these mountains?  Or *you will be* doing so at one point?  I just was on your site and didn't see any pics or reports.  :blink:



I *will* be doing all that stuff.
I might dayhike Elbert in September.. depends on what kind of shape I can get myself into by then. I have a marathon in December, so the training for that will help.


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 17, 2006)

When I was thinking of highpointing it was more of a hobby to pursue that would get me to travel more, not hike.  The hiking part was a form of exercise.  Along the way life changed & the thought of being away from family to see Arkansas & Mt. Sunflower in KS (or IL, OH, IN, MI & IA which would be worse IMO) became unpleasant.

I'd probably call Highpointing & travel goal for people who like being fit (As Pizza mentioned no easy way up ID, AK, WA, CA, NV, AZ, WY & CO high points) & who think traveling to each MLB or NFL park is a fat man's travel goal.  (or a real fan of the games goal)


----------



## pizza (Jul 17, 2006)

Mike P. said:
			
		

> I'd probably call Highpointing & travel goal for people who like being fit (As Pizza mentioned no easy way up ID, AK, WA, CA, NV, AZ, WY & CO high points) & who think traveling to each MLB or NFL park is a fat man's travel goal.  (or a real fan of the games goal)



heh.. define "easy".. 

there is no road to take you to those highpoints.. and by those standards you can add (this is off the top of my head): Maine, New York, Maryland, Virginia, Connecticut, Louisiana, Illinois (1-mile road is private, you have to walk), Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Montana, and Oregon.

Many of these are easy hikes, but you've gotta hike 'em.. 

A road will take you about a half-mile from Arkansas & Michigan, too..


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 18, 2006)

On a hiking bulletin board a road walk has to be considered easy.

I don't know if I'd call CT hard, it's a decent hike from NY trailhead & over Brace + log book is at Frissell summit (or it used to be) while coming from other side you can use the Mt. Washington Road which is much higher up although you then have to hike up the steep side of Round Mt. (a couple of hundred feet or so) & then up the steep side of Frissell (in MA) & then down to the marker.

Hard time thinking LA would be hard, it's only a few hundred feet. (off the top of my head I'm thinking 545 or just over 600) - (I looked 535 per Rand McNally)

Hood you could take a chair (tram?) up the Mountain.  It does not go to the top.  What I don't know is how much you would have left or if the chair would put you on even the right side of the pountain for hiking.


----------



## pizza (Jul 18, 2006)

Mike P. said:
			
		

> On a hiking bulletin board a road walk has to be considered easy.
> 
> I don't know if I'd call CT hard, it's a decent hike from NY trailhead & over Brace + log book is at Frissell summit (or it used to be) while coming from other side you can use the Mt. Washington Road which is much higher up although you then have to hike up the steep side of Round Mt. (a couple of hundred feet or so) & then up the steep side of Frissell (in MA) & then down to the marker.
> 
> ...



I'm thinking more along the lines of the distance, not elevation.. CT was 3-4 miles RT by the route I took.. Louisiana was about two miles RT. Hood has a chairlift at TimberLine, but it opens too late and doesn't take you very far up. Climbers normally arrive at the summit a couple of hours after dawn at the latest.. The snow softens up later in the morning, causing dangerous conditions. 

Even if the chair opened up early enough, you'd still be dealing with technical glacier travel, at least a couple thousand feet of gain and exposure..


----------



## freeheelwilly (Jul 18, 2006)

Greg said:
			
		

> Remember, not all state highpoints are mountains, and not all are remote enough to need to hike to. Therefore, I don't think that state highpointing is inherently a hiker's endeavor, necessarily.


 
If you want to do all of 'em it sure is - in fact it's a bit more than just a "hikers' endevour", no?  This points up what nobody here has discussed yet:  What about Alaska?  To complete the 50 you'd have to bag Denali.  Not an any task, logistically, physically or financially.


----------



## Greg (Jul 18, 2006)

freeheelwilly said:
			
		

> If you want to do all of 'em it sure is - in fact it's a bit more than just a "hikers' endevour", no?  This points up what nobody here has discussed yet:  What about Alaska?  To complete the 50 you'd have to bag Denali.  Not an any task, logistically, physically or financially.


Touché :beer:


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 19, 2006)

Pizza,

Good points on Hood, although I'd have to say 3-4 miles RT in CT is easy when compared to the Western Peaks or Katahdin, 4miles in CT shouldn't take anyone more than two or three hours & that's generous, IMO.

If one had a bunch of money you could (some of these probably would) hire guides for Rainier & Denali (I suspect Hood also)

What would be the higher peaks out west most people do not (or can not) hire guides for?  I've read my share of TR's from Whitney so I know that many do that on their own (with permit of course) & I don't recall reading any AZ or NV high point reports mentioning guides but what about WY, MT, CO & others.  I've only read one or two UT & NM trips, what about those?


----------



## Mark S (Jul 19, 2006)

Granite Peak, Montana; Gannett Peak, Wyoming; Mount Rainier, Washington;  Mount Hood, Oregon and Denali are the five highpoints that are considered to be on a different level from all the rest.  Everything else is hikable although you can take more difficult routes if you choose on some.  NM (via Bull-of-the-Woods) and CO are long hikes (I have them planned for September) but no more "difficult" than Katahdin or Marcy.  Borah, Idaho and King's Peak, Utah are usually done as overnight backpacks but nothing technical. AZ is also a long hike and NV is a scree scramble (probably Class 2).

Back to the tough five ... Granite has a brief section of vertical rock while the other four mentioned involve glacier travel.  I'm just finally getting into the western HPs with my next trip in a couple of months ... got the rest of the country licked.  Cheers.


----------



## pizza (Jul 19, 2006)

Mike P. said:
			
		

> Pizza,
> 
> Good points on Hood, although I'd have to say 3-4 miles RT in CT is easy when compared to the Western Peaks or Katahdin, 4miles in CT shouldn't take anyone more than two or three hours & that's generous, IMO.
> 
> ...



Sure CT is easy.. my point was that you couldn't drive your car within a mile of it. 

Anyway, guides.

You could hire a guide for any and all of the western peaks. You can hire a guide for the eastern anthills, too. If you want to pay someone to show you how to get to highpoint, nj, I'm sure someone would be willing to take your money.

The better question is which peaks are typically climed with guides?

Generally speaking, people don't hire guides for peaks that are non-technical. Whitney (CA), Boundary (NV), Humphreys (AZ), Wheeler (NM), Kings (UT), Borah (ID), and Elbert (CO). They're all hikes or backpacks, the most difficult aspect being scree (especially NV,UT) and exposure (ID).

People commonly hire guides for Denali (AK), Ranier (WA), Hood (OR) - and less commonly for Gannet (WY) and Granite (MT). AK, WA, and OR are glacial peaks where climbing teams rope themselves to each other for crevasse rescue. WY has some glacial features and frozen couliers that must be climbed. MT has some "easy" 5th class rock climbing, but at 12000 feet with exposure that I understand to be unreal.

Guides to not make a climb physically easier.. you still have to go up under your own strength. What they do is help make sure you don't get lost, hurt, or killed. Many will hold a 1-2 day "clinic" on glacier travel and crevasse rescue, as well as self-arrest, crampon use, etc., before the climb. For Denali, most guides require at least moderate experience with glacier travel..


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 19, 2006)

I think the one big advantage a guide provides is decision making based on years (usually) of experience.

There was a resuce conducted on Mt. Washington (NH) several years ago in October where a hiker went up solo on a cold rainy October day.  His partner canceled which should have signaled something, he had knee surgery earlier that year & while ascending the Trail, either TRT or Lion's Head his knee was troublesome so he opted to descend a different route which meant significantly more above treeline exposure.  As often is the case on a 40 degree rainy day at PNVC, once he got up higher the weather got worse & it was snow & ice he was fighting not rain.  He used his "Easy Button" to call for a rescue which almost did not go because the conditions were dangerous to the team & once up there they were getting ready to leave due to conditions when one of the group found the man.

He said he was experienced due to completing 2 of the 7 summits (Kili & Aconagua I believe) & completing a couple of hikes in CO.  He said all major CO peaks but I never could get out of him if that meant he did the 54 14k's or just Elbert & Longs.  The two Highpoints & Longs could have been done with guides, Elbert too I guess.  My point is his decision making on Washington was really bad.

* rainy 40 degree days in October at 2,000 feet are not good days to travel up Washington
* Partner canceling due to conditions, (I susepct it was windy up top all day)
* not turning back when the knee first became an issue
* picking an escape route in bad weather that involved well over a mile of above treeline travel 
* not having enough gear to withstand bad conditions when planning an October hike in the rain on a cold day & one of the worst weather places is your destination.  (On a summer day without rain & having enough to weather a 30 degree night would be okay - that does not happen in Mid-October)

Glacier travel is a different animal for sure, having knowledge or knowledgable partners (or guides) is a smart way to go.


----------



## Mark S (Jul 19, 2006)

So what's your point?  That highpointers have bad judgement?  Seems like a huge jump of faith to make based on the experience of one person on one highpoint.


----------



## pizza (Jul 19, 2006)

It sounds like the guy just underestimated Mt. Washington.
After climbing a couple of 20,000 ft peaks, it's easy to think 6000 is nothing.


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 20, 2006)

Pizza, I agree he underestimated his hike on that day, Why is the opinion I'm trying to state.  (Opinion, my thoughts based on the facts as I understand them being 200 miles away when it too place7 or 8 years ago! - A co-worker also had a saying for Opinions, they are like _____ everyone has one & they all stink) 

I think he underestimated his trip that day because on big trips he never made the decisions, the guides did.  While In the scope of mountaineering, Washington is not a big trip but when you factor in the time of year & weather he encountered at the start & the well earned reputation of the mountain in that weather, it was(& is) a much different trip than doing it in Mid-July with 0% of rain 

Mark, I'm not saying that at all, the people I know & have met that do highpoints usually do fine.  If I'm picking on anyone, it would be people who don't plan or take part in the planning of there own hikes.   (Whether that is always using a guide or letting your friends/spouse plan the trip & you just follow along)

The person I described was not a State Highpointer & to the best of my knowledge he had no ambition to finish the 7 Summits.  IMO the two he did (if you count Indonesia not Austrailia) are the two easiest  when you factor in elevation, overall cost, climbing, temperture, political climate of the country where the peak is located & all the other logistics. (The two peaks + Oriziba & another Europe trip are the fantasy peaks/trips on my own wish list outside of the US)


----------



## Mark S (Jul 20, 2006)

Okay, so I see you're saying and it is a good point.  But it gets back to what I said earlier in the thread ... how other people choose to attain highpoints has no effect on me so who am I to slam others for using guides if they feel they need them.  Part of my goal is to do all 50 without guides, but we'll just have to see how that goes.  I'm just plugging along one trip at a time and thoroughly enjoying every aspect of it, including planning (which is one of the most enjoyable parts of it).  Ironically, I kind of feel like a bit of a guide for my father who has joined me on my last 16 HPs.  He's not an experienced outdoorsman at all but is having a blast.  He's 67 and my mother keeps making me promise not to kill him!  It will be interesting to see how it goes on Texas, Colorado and New Mexico on our next trip.


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 20, 2006)

It's okay if they use guides, I would recommend people still pay attention to the decison making though.  A friend of my brother was on a Denali trip a few years ago & the group decided to retreat even though the guide wanted to go up the mountain.


----------



## pizza (Jul 20, 2006)

Mike P. said:
			
		

> IMO the two he did (if you count Indonesia not Austrailia) are the two easiest  when you factor in elevation, overall cost, climbing, temperture, political climate of the country where the peak is located & all the other logistics.



I thought you said he did Aconcagua and Kili?
Don't be mistaken - aconcagua is not one of the two easiest.. which wouldn't be saying much, because kili isn't exactly a walk in the park either.


A good guide would teach you to be self-sufficient.. sounds like this guy had either bad guides, or underestimated the mountain by not bringing the gear he needed to survive a storm (or both.)

I would prefer not to pay a guide on some of the technical western peaks, but I wouldn't hesitate to do so if I wasn't with a sufficiently experienced friend(s) that I could learn from.


----------



## Mark S (Jul 20, 2006)

Gotta agree with Mike there, pizza.  Everest, Denali, Elbrus, Carstenz and Vinson are probably all more difficult than Aconcogua and Kili.  Not that any are easy by any stretch ... guides or not.  Interesting that we should be talking about guides and the 7 summits though.  Dick Bass was the first to complete them and he was guided every step of the way ... although he did the Kosciusko version.


----------



## pizza (Jul 20, 2006)

Mark S said:
			
		

> Gotta agree with Mike there, pizza.  Everest, Denali, Elbrus, Carstenz and Vinson are probably all more difficult than Aconcogua and Kili.  Not that any are easy by any stretch ... guides or not.  Interesting that we should be talking about guides and the 7 summits though.  Dick Bass was the first to complete them and he was guided every step of the way ... although he did the Kosciusko version.



elbrus (which can be driven up in a land rover) is harder than aconcagua?
carstenz involves some technical rock-climbing and logistical problems, but harder than aconcagua?


the climb up the north face is non-technical, but at 22,800 feet, it takes a while to properly acclimate - normally there's three camps.


----------



## Mark S (Jul 20, 2006)

48 people died in the Mount Elbrus area in 2004 alone.  The weather is ferocious and like Washington, many go expecting a walk in the park only to be rudely awakened.  Your Land Rover link is a little silly, don't you think?  Of course, having done none of them and only aspiring to Denali at this point, this is a debate that I don't really want to get into.

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock/150255/mount-elbrus.html

Cheers.


----------



## Mike P. (Jul 20, 2006)

A non-technical trip, even at 22,800 which is high but outside of the death zone would be easier, IMO.  I'd pick a local guide or a group from US that does Himalaya so they would know area & high altitude techniques

(I also listed other factors besides elevation, getting to Cartenz & the polictical/religious climate are worse although there is some crime in SA, Cost is also reasonable for SA)

I wouldn't climb anything I was unfamilar with that is any harder than Humphrey's with Dick Bass, I'd prefer doing it solo than with him too.   Now if he was going to give me some tips for getting rich, that I'd listen too or recommendations for a guide.


----------

