Mt Adams really isn't that far east

General discussions on hiking in Oregon and the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
drm
Posts: 5602
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: The Dalles, OR
Contact:

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by drm » June 19th, 2021, 6:11 am

I think another factor is that there is almost no access to the east side of Adams and no Cascades hiking east of it. It is the eastern edge for hikers. All the other peaks have hikes on their east side. So whatever the meaningless trend lines show, it is the farthest east in relation to it's position in the Cascade Range.

User avatar
adamschneider
Posts: 3367
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
Location: SE Portland
Contact:

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by adamschneider » June 19th, 2021, 8:58 am

You can't measure the Cascades in relation to a perfectly straight north-south line anyway. What really matters is their distance from the plate boundary. And that's kind of interesting because the boundary gets further offshore as it goes north, so the Washington volcanoes are further away from it than the ones further south.

2-Cascadia_tectonic_setting-713x1024.jpg

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1554
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Southeast Portland

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by Charley » June 19th, 2021, 10:54 am

adamschneider wrote:
June 19th, 2021, 8:58 am
You can't measure the Cascades in relation to a perfectly straight north-south line anyway.
Well, you can. But I think you have a good point. "North-south" is, relative to the earth's topography and its tectonic origins, pretty artificial, isn't it?
adamschneider wrote:
June 19th, 2021, 8:58 am
What really matters is their distance from the plate boundary. And that's kind of interesting because the boundary gets further offshore as it goes north, so the Washington volcanoes are further away from it than the ones further south.


2-Cascadia_tectonic_setting-713x1024.jpg

User avatar
BigBear
Posts: 1690
Joined: October 1st, 2009, 11:54 am

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by BigBear » June 20th, 2021, 5:44 pm

I never thought of Mt. Adams as being east of the crest line. St. Helens is the one that is in line with the original Cascades These are the ones where the volcanoes of long ago were destroyed by the glaciation from the volcanos of today like Indian Heaven and Rock Lake (Serene Lake area).

I've always thought of Mt. Adams as being "that far north" more than "that far east." It just takes an extra hour to get there and you better be talking tent and not day hike to get my interest. I've done a trio of backpacks to the Killian Creek area and loved it.

User avatar
Waffle Stomper
Posts: 3620
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by Waffle Stomper » June 20th, 2021, 5:54 pm

Hmmm, it does seem if your line is a trend line Adams along with Glacier and Newberry is a bit of an outlier.
"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." - John Muir

User avatar
Chip Down
Posts: 2622
Joined: November 8th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by Chip Down » June 20th, 2021, 8:54 pm

BigBear:
The impediment to Killen Creek isn't distance, it's that horrible road!

Post Reply