Home | USA | World | 3D Images | Cities |  Books | Panoramas |  Webrings |  River Headwaters | Tri-State Markers | Access Issues |Forum
Search | Club | Dogs | VRML | Highest in Each State | Counties | Calculations| Topo Maps | Lowest | 14'ers |  Contact

americasroof.com

News about highpoints and people who climb them

Not Found

Apologies, but the page you requested could not be found. Perhaps searching will help.

Search for:

Tennessee Summits Above 4,000 Feet
Compiled by Ivan Ash

GENERAL NOTES:
The 200 Foot Col Rule: This is a means, admittedly somewhat arbitrary, but with several precedents, of distinguishing "true" summits from spurs or "minor" peaks. This "rule" states that for two adjacent peaks, the lower of the two must be separated from the higher by a col (saddle) that is at least 200 feet below the lower summit to be considered a separate, qualified peak. In other words, a summit must have a minimum 200 foot prominence in order to qualify. This rule is widely accepted in the mountains of New York and New England. A similar criteria, but using 300 feet, is used in the western United States, Colorado, for instance. In Washington, both 400 ft and 800 ft have been used, as well. Obviously anyone who wishes could apply their own criteria.

Possible Qualifiers: Summits that are starred (*) are possible qualifiers. For these, the data from the topographic maps do not give the exact elevation of the summit or of the col, or both. Instead, the elevation can be ascertained to be between the elevations as indicated by the enclosing (cols) or above the highest shown (summits) contour lines as discussed in Summit Elevation Data, below. This leaves a range such that some values of the possible combinations of col and summit elevations would qualify and some would not. More exact knowledge of col and summit elevations would resolve this issue. See, also, the discussion of summit elevation data below.

Naming Convention for Unnamed Summits: I have designated unnamed summits in the form "Z0xxxTN", where "xxx", is a number beginning with 001 and ascending in order as needed. I know that a common convention is to use the elevation in combination with the location to designate such summits, but, in working with the large number of summits in this state, I found too many summits with the same elevation and deemed using the elevation plus the location in latitude and longitude as too unwieldy. The letter "Z" was chosen so all these unnamed peaks would fall at the end of an alphabetic list, again in the interest of manageability. The "TN" is used to differentiate lists for different states; the state postal abbreviation is added to the end of each unnamed summit. For instance, the posted West Virginia list uses the suffix "WV" for each unnamed summit and the posted Virginia list uses "VA"..

Named vs. Unnamed Summits: There are several peaks for which elevations are given in the databases, but under the name using the word "mountain". Yet the typeface used is that for ridges or ranges that have several peaks, though, in some cases there is only one peak. I have stuck with my convention considering peaks to be called knobs, etc., and any name using "mountain" not to indicate the summit, but the whole mountain (range) unless the "correct" typeface is used. I have used the form Z0xxxTN for summits where there is no clear use of the typeface that seems to be identified with summit names, even though the USGS data lists the summit elevation with the name of the mountain. There are instances where the USGS data lists a summit in a range under the name of the range, even though there are higher summits in the range that are not listed. On occasion the listed location is not even a qualifying summit at all. The USGS maps and data base are not at all consistent. There are cases where the word "mountain" is used for a summit with the explicit use of the typeface that seems to be specifically associated with summits When the "summit" typeface is used, I have listed that name to be the name of the summit, regardless of the terminology. It is recognized that local custom and elsewhere the name of the mountain may be used for the summit. Nevertheless, I have chosen to be as consistent as possible, relying on the typeface used as the primary arbiter. However, for each summit I have listed the mountain as well, so those persons who wish to use the name of the mountain can do so with the information in the table.

Shared Summits: Note that there are several summits that are exactly on the state line between Tennessee and North Carolina. These should count for either state. Also, in some cases counties, or, at least in one case, four quads, share a summit.

Ridges and Summits: In the USGS database, and elsewhere, a summit is sometimes listed with two or more names. If you examine the USGS data, you will find that they both have the same coordinates.

Latitude and Longitude: Remember that west longitudes are to be entered with a minus sign.

Summit Elevation Data: The elevation for some of the named peaks as given in the USGS data base may be suspect in that some of the summits may be listed at an elevation which is too low. Several have contour lines enclosing the summit which encompass a "large" area, yet the summit elevation is given as equal to the highest contour line shown. This would imply that the summit is very flat. I find this difficult to credit. Therefore, I have followed the precedent used by the "White Mountain Guide", edited by Gene Daniel and published by the Appalachian Mountain Club, which is to extrapolate the summit elevation by half a contour interval when the highest contour is used in the USGS data. A dagger (†) indicates summits, named or unnamed, that are extrapolated. In some cases the enclosed area seems so small that the extrapolation is not justified. Peaks in this category are marked with a double dagger (‡).

Caution About Benchmarks: In addition, it may be noted that some of the elevations for peaks that are taken from the data on the topos, may be slightly low. This is surmised from the example of Spruce Knob in West Virginia, which is 4863 feet, but some mistake it for 4861 feet because a nearby benchmark is at 4861, two feet short of the actual summit. The benchmark appears on the topographic map, but the actual summit elevation does not. This, possibly, could be true for other given elevations near summits in Tennessee. Unnamed peaks with elevations given "at" or near the summit may also have elevations for benchmarks or other references that are not actually at the very highest point. Nevertheless, until better data is available, I, in some cases, have used these elevations as if they were the actual summit elevation.

Cautionary Note on Legal Access: Some of these summits may be on private property. I have made no attempt to determine which, if any, may be in this category. Each individual who wishes to visit a peak should be responsible for determining the accessibility of the summit. Even those summits which are in public areas - National Forests, State Parks or others - may have some access limitations.

MARKING CONVENTIONS SUMMARY:
* The asterisk signifies a "likely" qualifier. This means that there are possible combinations of col depth and summit elevation for which the summit will meet the 200 foot col depth requirement and some which will not. This indeterminacy results from the topographic maps and the related database not giving exact summit and col elevations.  For instance, if the summit is defined only by the highest contour, the actual elevation could be the contour elevation up to an additional contour interval, less one foot. EXAMPLES: For a summit that shows only the 4080 contour with no other summit elevation information, the summit could be 4080 to 4119 feet. If the col elevation associated with this summit is defined by two contours, one at 3880 and the other at 3920, the col depth could be from 160 to 239 ft, some of which would meet the criteria and some not. For a summit that has an exact elevation, such as 5893 ft., and a col elevation defined by the contours at 5680 to 5720, the range of possible col depths would be 153 to 213 ft, again, some qualifying and some not.

§ Sometimes there are two adjacent summits where one, but not both definitely qualifies. The col between the two summits is not sufficiently deep for both to qualify. However, there is not sufficient data to tell which is the actual qualifying summit  so both are listed and given the same ranking. Such summits are marked with a §. See expanded discussion below.

† A dagger by the summit name indicates that I have added half the contour interval to the highest shown contour interval that defines the summit, i.e., I have extrapolated the summit elevation by half a contour interval. These are inexact data and I would appreciate it if anyone having better information would send it to me with any notes on how it was acquired.

‡ A double dagger by the summit name indicates that the highest contour interval for the summit encloses such a small area that I did not extrapolate the summit elevation as for those summits marked with a single dagger (†). These are inexact data and I would appreciate it if anyone having better information would send it to me with any notes on how it was acquired.

.
SUMMIT PAIRS (§) WHERE ONLY ONE SUMMIT QUALIFIES, BUT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE WHICH ONE:

These are numbered to correspond to superscript references in the table.
1. Mount Yonagusta, NC (not in this list), is listed at 6135 ft. Tricorner Knob, TN/NC, is listed at 6180 ft. However, the topo map shows only a contour at 6120 for Tricorner Knob, as well as for Mount Yonagusta. In addition, the area enclosed by both 6120 contours is very similar. Thus the 6180 and 6135 elevations are suspect and Mount Yonagusta may be the qualifying peak.
2. The col between Doe Knob and Brier Lick Knob is 4400 - 4440. The col depth is, therefore 80 -160, depending on the actual elevations. Therefore, both cannot qualify. Listed in TZ database at 4520 for TN, but at 4200 for NC, which is obviously wrong. Although the listing for Brier Lick Knob is 5 feet higher than for Doe Knob, for TN, I am reluctant to accept this as I look at the topo map. I will still list them as alternatives, rather than eliminate Doe Knob.
3. The col between Z0071TN (4240 - 4280) and Rye Patch Knob (4240 - 4280) is 4080 - 4100 ft (20), giving a col depth of 140 - 180 ft. Thus, both cannot qualify. Which one is qualified depends on data not presently available.
4. The col between Little Bald (5220) and Z0048NC (not in this list) is only 80 - 120 ft. Thus, one, but not both, can qualify.
5. The col between Lick Rock and Z0019TN is 4440 - 4480. Col depth for Lick Rock is 179 ft max and for Z0019TN is 160 - 200 ft. Thus, one, but not both, can qualify.

OTHER NOTES:

6. There are two possible summits, one of which has a noted elevation on the topographic map (4175 ft) and one of which is defined by the 4060 contour which would allow a summit as high as 4179 ft.
7. Database says 4560, but topo map shows highest contour as 4360 at the location of this summit.
8. There are two possible locations for this summit One is marked at 4726 ft, which is noted in the list. However, there is an adjacent summit, having the second set of coordinates, with a highest contour at 4720 ft, allowing for a summit as high as 4739 ft. Better data is needed to resolve the qualifying location.
9. Although The Bald is listed at 4657, there is a contour at 4660. The 4657 must actually be a benchmark at the stated elevation, not the summit.
10. There clearly is a contour for 4400 enclosing a very small area. However, the 4360 contour is not easily visible. Thus there is some uncertainty.
11. For Z0060TN the elevation may be higher than 4340 ft as the elevation on the topo may not be at the actual summit. The map is difficult to read and the contours are not clear.

Comments and corrections are solicited. Please send them to Ivan Ash at jivan@ieee.org.