EISPIRATEN

I am planning a very early morning hike this Sunday, I need to be back home before noon. I am thinking about hiking Mount Pacifico via a route from Alder Saddle or Pinyon Flats (PCT) on the West/Southwest side. If time permits I might climb Mount Sally and/or Mount Mooney.

Anyone interested in joining me? I plan to start hiking no later than 6 am.

If you go up to Mt. Mooney, check out the Stony Ridge Observatory and/or Devil's Peak (not sure if this is its official name). They are both south of Mt. Mooney. At 5870' I'm not quite sure why Devil's Peak isn't on the HPS list - anyone know why? Perhaps because the view is even more non-existent than the one from the top of Mooney .

From Alder Saddle you can make an interesting loop.

Head west the dirt road from Alder Saddle as shown by the blue line on your topo, but where the blue line and the pink line (from Pinyon Flats) start to converge, you can shoot up a fairly steep gully about 0.3 mi to meet the PCT. There is an obvious use trail to the right of the gully. Take the PCT to the major ridge going almost due north from the summit of Pacifico, turn left off the PCT and follow the ridge to the summit. For your return leg, follow the main dirt road down but when the dirt road takes the first major switch back to the west, follow the remains of an old road almost due east over some flat terrain on top of a major east trending ridge. The flat terrain drops off, but you keep following the remains of the road as it follows the east trending ridge. You'll want to stay on the North side of the east trending ridge. You re-join the PCT west of the point where you went up the gully from the dirt road from Alder Saddle. After rejoining the PCT, follow the PCT east to the point where the gully drops back down to the dirt road, and follow the road back to your car at Alder Saddle.

This route has the advantage of being shorter and more direct than the route from Pinyon Flats and of being a heck of a lot more interesting than following the road all the way from Alder Saddle.

Be aware of a major wash out on the dirt road just west of Alder Saddle. It's no problem for an experienced hiker, but just be aware that it's there.

I did this route a few months ago, and it was nice because it left me with quite a bit of my day left for other things.

The views from Pacifico out over the desert are worthwhile.

Hikin_Jim wrote:From Alder Saddle you can make an interesting loop.

Head west the dirt road from Alder Saddle as shown by the blue line on your topo, but where the blue line and the pink line (from Pinyon Flats) start to converge, you can shoot up a fairly steep gully about 0.3 mi to meet the PCT. There is an obvious use trail to the right of the gully. Take the PCT to the major ridge going almost due north from the summit of Pacifico, turn left off the PCT and follow the ridge to the summit. For your return leg, follow the main dirt road down but when the dirt road takes the first major switch back to the west, follow the remains of an old road almost due east over some flat terrain on top of a major east trending ridge. The flat terrain drops off, but you keep following the remains of the road as it follows the east trending ridge. You'll want to stay on the North side of the east trending ridge. You re-join the PCT west of the point where you went up the gully from the dirt road from Alder Saddle. After rejoining the PCT, follow the PCT east to the point where the gully drops back down to the dirt road, and follow the road back to your car at Alder Saddle.

This route has the advantage of being shorter and more direct than the route from Pinyon Flats and of being a heck of a lot more interesting than following the road all the way from Alder Saddle.

Be aware of a major wash out on the dirt road just west of Alder Saddle. It's no problem for an experienced hiker, but just be aware that it's there.

I did this route a few months ago, and it was nice because it left me with quite a bit of my day left for other things.

The views from Pacifico out over the desert are worthwhile.

thanks, that sounds like a fine plan, that is what I think I will do.

HikeUp wrote:If you go up to Mt. Mooney, check out the Stony Ridge Observatory and/or Devil's Peak (not sure if this is its official name). They are both south of Mt. Mooney. At 5870' I'm not quite sure why Devil's Peak isn't on the HPS list - anyone know why? Perhaps because the view is even more non-existent than the one from the top of Mooney .

thanks, I will make sure to check those out when I get to Mooney, I wouldn't have known otherwise. At times it seems like the peaks on the HPS list are arbritrary, some peaks really are not peaks. Here is some info. I found online about what qualifies a mountain, and many of the HPS peaks do not qualify!

Prominence turns out to be a convenient way to compare summits. Mountain climbers can use prominence to rank the importance of mountains. Prominence is also useful as a qualifying rule to determine inclusion of mountains on lists of summits.

Lists of the highest mountains have been around for at least 100 years. However, such lists have a classic shortcoming; how does a mountain qualify for inclusion on the list? In the absence of a qualifying rule, one might say that the earth's ten highest mountains are ten rocky outcrops on the Mt. Everest summit block. A list of high mountains must either employ a minimum prominence as a criterion or be based on a subjective sensibility as to what constitutes a separate peak (such as limiting entries to named peaks only).

This question of what constitutes a separate peak is a recurring one amongst mountain climbers. In Colorado, the generally accepted criterion for inclusion on lists is 300' of prominence. The 300' rule (sometimes referred to as the Colorado rule) is based on a 1950s survey of 14,000' mountains in Colorado published by the U.S.G.S.

I find it particularly odd that Devil's Peak is not included on the list being as it is higher than Mooney.

Devil's Peak's prominence is about 5870'-5630'=240'

Mooney's prominence is about 5840'-5605'=235'

I'm baffled.

The ANF website describes these 2 peaks perfectly, except for the apparent error of stating that Devil's is on the HPS. The views of Twin Peaks, Waterman and Devil's Canyon can be spectacular - especially from the roadway just east of the observatory.

Ah, prominence, that most beloved of subjects to the peakbagger.

Prominence is somewhat arbitrary. While 300' is widely used in Colorado, 500' is generally the Alaskan standard. In the British Isles, sometimes 15m (~50') is used. Why? Simply because where there are more peaks, something is needed to truly distinguish one from another but where there are fewer it's actually helpful in terms of navigation to identify them as peaks.

Regarding 300' as the standard for S. Calif: Consider the popular "Nine Peaks Challenge" in the San Gorgonio Area. Choosing 300' as our prominence standard reduces all peaks west of Dollar Lake Saddle to just one peak (Anderson) and all peaks east of the saddle to just two, Charlton and San Gorgonio. Somehow the "Three Peaks Challenge" doesn't quite have the same ring to it. One also loses interesting peaks like The Dragon's Head (although Bighorn does just make it). Note that I'm doing my math quickly here, so correct me if I'm off.

Perhaps, in keeping with the custom outlined in my first paragraph (more peaks, more prominence; fewer peaks, less prominence), 150' would be a reasonable standard for S. Calif? With 150', we lose things like Little Charlton and Alto Diablo which should never have been called peaks in the first place but retain things like Jepson, The Dragon's Head, S. Bernardino, E. S. Bernardino, etc.

Just something to think about.

Be careful in those Santa Ana Winds during your trip.