Association Updates 1st April 2021

Associations
1

Hello everyone.

This month we have a new association in Brazil, one in Russia and a W update…

PP1 - Brazil - Espírito Santo

Thanks to Douglas, PY1II, for taking on another association.

R3 - Russia (European)

Welcome to Matts, RM2D. R3 comprises 7 summits in the Central Federal District and another 2 summits in Volga Federal District. It’s a P100 association.

[Sorry it hasn’t appeared on the system yet - my fault - it will be there later]

W3 Update

We have a substantial set of updates in place for W3, taking it to metric P150 with the current data from Lists of John. A large number of summit names were corrected. We’re also creating region CT, Central Ranges, as the correct home for one summit (the high point of Carroll County). Thanks to Richard, N2GBR, for working through that long list of names.

Miscellaneous

We have the small tweaks to G in place. G/SE-015 will retire at the end of August. G/SP-014,is now “Longridge Fell - Spire Hill”.

DM has a couple of tweaks.

Welcome to new regional managers in TI, Costa Rica.

7 Likes
3

Amongst the small tweaks there were also a couple of changes in F/CR which I’ll detail later and there is an outstanding association start date to fix for Brazil.

4

Thanks Andy. I was meaning to mention those but got distracted by the realization of having forgotten to ask you to launch R3! :flushed:

5

Congratulations to MT, Matts and all of us on the new association in Russia!

1 Like
6

R3 is now in place.

F/CR-273 is deleted after 3rd May 2021

EDIT:

And PY1 start date fixed.

2 Likes
8

Here’s a list of some of the changes to W3/PO region

W3/PO-001, position change (33 m, 48°), elem changed (819 to 821), elef changed (2688 to 2693)
W3/PO-002, position change (66 m, 48°), elem changed (807 to 810), elef changed (2648 to 2656)
W3/PO-003, name changed ("Roundtop Mtn West" to "North Mtn"), elem changed (790 to 788), elef changed (2593 to 2585)
W3/PO-004, position change (50 m, 150°), elem changed (723 to 721), elef changed (2371 to 2366)
W3/PO-005, elem changed (718 to 716), elef changed (2355 to 2350)
W3/PO-006, position change (58 m, 163°), elem changed (715 to 717), elef changed (2346 to 2354)
W3/PO-007, position change (22 m, 0°), name changed ("Pinnacle Rock North" to "Bald Mtn"), elem changed (696 to 698), elef changed (2283 to 2290)
W3/PO-009, position change (51 m, 330°), elem changed (691 to 692), elef changed (2267 to 2270)
W3/PO-010, position change (13 m, 36°), elem changed (672 to 675), elef changed (2205 to 2216)
W3/PO-011, position change (155 m, 183°), name changed ("Mud Lake Mtn" to "2190"), elem changed (666 to 668), elef changed (2186 to 2190)
W3/PO-012, position change (13 m, 216°), name changed ("Round Top Mtn" to "Round Top"), elem changed (662 to 661), elef changed (2171 to 2170)
W3/PO-013, name changed ("Griffin Reservoir Mtn" to "2069"), elem changed (628 to 631), elef changed (2062 to 2069)
W3/PO-015, position change (19 m, 56°), name changed ("Big Hickory Mtn" to "Big Hickory"), elem changed (612 to 613), elef changed (2009 to 2010)
W3/PO-016, position change (69 m, 216°), elem changed (611 to 613), elef changed (2006 to 2010)
W3/PO-017, valto changed (31/12/2099 to 31/3/2021)
W3/PO-018, position change (47 m, 298°), name changed ("Douglass Hill" to "Douglas Hill"), elem changed (596 to 600), elef changed (1956 to 1970)
W3/PO-019, position change (56 m, 8°), elem changed (589 to 582), elef changed (1932 to 1910)
W3/PO-020, elef changed (1929 to 1930)
W3/PO-021, position change (19 m, 56°), name changed ("Cork Hill West" to "1890"), elem changed (575 to 576), elef changed (1888 to 1890)
W3/PO-022, position change (27 m, 323°), elem changed (553 to 552), elef changed (1814 to 1810)
W3/PO-023, position change (53 m, 51°), elem changed (549 to 550), elef changed (1801 to 1804)
W3/PO-024, position change (96 m, 323°), elef changed (1784 to 1785), valto changed (31/12/2099 to 31/3/2021)
W3/PO-025, position change (155 m, 183°), name changed ("Nazareth Reservoir Mtn" to "Blue Mtn 1690"), elem changed (515 to 517), elef changed (1690 to 1695)
W3/PO-026, name changed ("Orange Hill North" to "1690"), elem changed (514 to 515), elef changed (1686 to 1690)
W3/PO-027, name changed ("Jayne Pond Mtn" to "1670"), elem changed (506 to 509), elef changed (1660 to 1670)
W3/PO-028, position change (152 m, 248°), name changed ("Moon Lake Mtn" to "1610"), elem changed (497 to 491), elef changed (1632 to 1610)
W3/PO-029, position change (2087 m, 78°), name changed ("Smiths Gap Mtn" to "Smiths Gap Benchmark"), elem changed (489 to 491), elef changed (1604 to 1610)
W3/PO-030, valto changed (31/12/2099 to 31/3/2021)
W3/PO-031, position change (87 m, 239°), name changed ("Chicola Lake Hill" to "Chestnut Ridge 1250"), elem changed (381 to 386), elef changed (1250 to 1265)
W3/PO-032, position change (20 m, 123°), name changed ("Shanwnee Mtn" to "Shawnee Mtn"), elem changed (349 to 351), elef changed (1145 to 1150)
W3/PO-033, Sugarloaf Mountain is new
W3/PO-034, Lackawanna County HP is new
W3/PO-035, Hatch Mountain is new
W3/PO-036, Scrub Oak Benchmark is new
W3/PO-037, Hubbard Mountain is new
W3/PO-038, 1970 is new
W3/PO-039, Yeager, Mount is new
W3/PO-040, Cork Hill is new
W3/PO-041, Thompson Hill is new
W3/PO-042, 1710 is new
W3/PO-043, 1649 is new
W3/PO-044, Larksville Mountain is new
W3/PO-045, Shickshinny Mountain is new
W3/PO-046, Florey Knob is new

You can see that the change in location is normally just a few m.

Looking through all the changes only 15% have moved more than a 100m and there are a handful that have moved more than a km.

The are 83 new summits and 29 deletions.

9

Hi Jill.

AMs are always free to request a delay to the updates. If I forgot to suggest this to Richard I apologise. But it does significantly increase the workload if I have to single out the retired-and-not-replaced summits for special treatment. Otherwise it means delaying the whole lot.

As you see we have a net increase by 54 summits. As Andy says the moves are mostly rather small. Any time the new position means old and new AZs don’t overlap we have to replace the reference, so even this can be a fairly small move in effect. There were I think 11 summits which didn’t have a nearby replacement.

The were a lot of names that didn’t make any sense. They are now better aligned with Lists of John. We do now have links in to SOTA from peakbagger.com and folk on there have complained about oddball naming. I think especially when there is a real name rather than just an elevation we need to have a very good reason to invent our own names. Otherwise it’s confusing for people looking at the maps, not to mention me when trying to work out what’s what on LoJ.

12

I don’t see how that can possibly be true. The extent of the activation zone is determined by the physical reality of the topography of the actual ground surface, and that has not changed in any way.

It has always been understood that the coordinates in the database are primarily for identification purposes and are not necessarily the precise location of the true summit. For various reasons, many of them have historically been “a bit off”. Adjustment of the database to provide a more accurate summit location does not change the actual summit position, and hence does not change the activation zone.

Martyn M1MAJ

2 Likes
13

Hi Martyn.

I mostly agree with you but advise caution.

These are possible causes for us to move a summit:

  • The original position was inaccurate (e.g. simply poor precision of placement or failure to notice a higher spot height)
  • The maps / other data sources or interpretation thereof changed
  • The topography itself changed

So, note that sometimes (all be it rarely) the real summit does actually move. We had a case of this recently in a W association. The summit was bulldozed and the op took the decision not to proceed with the activation.

In most cases though it is a change in our imperfect representation of the true topography that is at issue. When I receive John Kirk’s updated listings, kindly supplied by Elliott, I don’t know exactly why they changed. I just have the summit data and the USGS mapping to go by, so I can’t speak to whether folk just missed stuff or if the data changed.

For sure if you have found a higher position than the active listing and can be confident that you are still in the AZ of the summit as listed then of course you can activate there. Indeed, give yourself a pat on the back. But then please bring your evidence (proper national mapping sources please) to the RM / AM / MT teams to get the listing updated.

The note of caution comes in respect of just how confident you can be that your “higher” position really is higher and that the fall between the summits isn’t so big that the “correct” position would actually need re-listing with a new reference, as when the hills are distinct enough that AZs do not merge this is what we do. You might be using a different data source (hopefully we have the best available data - if you think not, please engage with us). You might be interpreting your maps differently. For example, a casual examination of official EA mapping might suggest we sometimes don’t list the “right” position where there is an obviously higher trig point; but we may have found that the trig point was actually on a church roof or some such and not really the highest ground point.

So yes, the W3 summits that simply moved are indeed still valid at their original positions. Otherwise those positions would have been retired. In detail the AZ limit might have been revealed to be slightly different. But if anything I’d suggest that for the majority of summits the access situation is more likely to have been shown to be easier than harder, as we get a fuller understanding of the true extent of the AZ.

In respect of summits where it seems the listing is “wrong” please keep in mind the points made above and note that we do not retrospectively penalize people for activating summits that are later found not to satisfy the conditions for listing, leading to retirement.

If an activator arrives at a summit position that turns out to be just silly, e.g. on the side of the hill, then try to apply some common sense (e.g. listed summit name corresponds to the correct position) and only proceed if you can confidently identify the correct position. This is most likely to be the case (as hopefully we eliminated the worst of these a few years ago, e.g. in the old Italy listing) in associations with poor mapping availability. Either way, please collect the best evidence you can and engage with RM / AM / MT teams to get the listing corrected, which may or may not require a new reference.

We welcome suggestions for listing improvement. Please present quality evidence (national mapping data) first to your RM or AM. Summits Team receives a stream of minor corrections from AMs, for which we are very glad. Nearly all of the “new summit” suggestions we receive directly from participants do not meet prominence criteria, so please do filter these through RM / AM and spare me having to write the grumpy replies.

As for @N3ICE Jill’s summits, I do hope that hasn’t thrown too big a spanner (sorry - “wrench”) into the works but I wish you a good time either way. If the water colouring wins out do feel free to share - we love a good mountain picture. :smiley: