Mt Adams really isn't that far east

General discussions on hiking in Oregon and the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
drm
Posts: 6133
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: 3711
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: 1834
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Milwaukie

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
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

User avatar
BigBear
Posts: 1836
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: 3707
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: 3037
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!

querulous
Posts: 39
Joined: October 7th, 2020, 3:11 pm

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by querulous » October 4th, 2021, 10:28 am

In every way that counts, Adams is by far the most easterly of Washington's big volcanoes. Its east side drains east (to the Klickitat). Every other Washington volcano drains exclusively west. And biogeographically, the tree line is just super-dry. There's very little silver fir even on the west side. The east side is exclusive whitebark pine territory. That is one of the things that makes Adams interesting, for sure. It's different.

So enough of the casual line-drawing.

User avatar
Chip Down
Posts: 3037
Joined: November 8th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by Chip Down » October 4th, 2021, 4:28 pm

querulous wrote:
October 4th, 2021, 10:28 am
So enough of the casual line-drawing.
I'll dress up next time. :geek:
Attachments
tux.jpeg

User avatar
drm
Posts: 6133
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: The Dalles, OR
Contact:

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by drm » October 5th, 2021, 6:46 am

The Cascades are not a plate boundary uplift range like the Sierra Nevada, they have their own hotspots, so I don't think the offshore plate boundary is really relevant. My attitude follows from quereuous' comments. Mt Adams is by far the driest of the major volcanoes, and dry usually means east. But it's not really east of Hood and only slightly east of Rainier, so I think the MSH rain shadow is what creates the impression that it is east.

User avatar
adamschneider
Posts: 3711
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
Location: SE Portland
Contact:

Re: Mt Adams really isn't that far east

Post by adamschneider » October 5th, 2021, 7:42 am

drm wrote:
October 5th, 2021, 6:46 am
The Cascades are not a plate boundary uplift range like the Sierra Nevada, they have their own hotspots, so I don't think the offshore plate boundary is really relevant.
The Cascades are a volcanic arc associated with a subduction zone, so the offshore plate boundary is EXTREMELY relevant!

Image

Post Reply