AMC 4000-Footer Club Welcomes 10,000th Member

[MichaelJ]

The number of hikers who have climbed to and from the summits of the Granite State’s 48 recognized 4000-foot peaks and are members of the Appalachian Mountain Club’s (AMC’s) White Mountain Four Thousand Footer Club recently surpassed 10,000, according to Four Thousand Footer Committee Chair Eric Savage.

Full Article

NE67 finishers have hit 2,500. I assume we'll hear a lot more statistics at the ceremony tomorrow night.

 

[Irishskier]

Any thoughts on the FTFC's plan to issue numbers from 10,000+ as mentioned by Eric? I believe the ADK folks do it. Congrats to all that finished and attended the dinner. It was a nice evening.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Any thoughts on the FTFC's plan to issue numbers from 10,000+ as mentioned by Eric? I believe the ADK folks do it. Congrats to all that finished and attended the dinner. It was a nice evening.

I don't see the need to use a numbering system. That type of thing can lead to elitism in some, and I don't think that's what hiking mountains is about.

 

[MichaelJ]

I don't think numbers over 10,000 would lead to any elitism. There are no major steps going forward. It's not like "I was in the first 100" or "I was in the first 1,000" at this point (and with some lists with smaller membership people know that anyway, even not having a number). I think that possibility would exist only if they went back and numbered the previous 9,999 people.

 

[Tom Rankin]

I don't see the need to use a numbering system. That type of thing can lead to elitism in some, and I don't think that's what hiking mountains is about.

I don't think just because I am 5444 that anyone after that is somehow a lesser hiker. It just helps start conversations. "Ok, you're 5999, so you finished a few years after me", or whatever. The only thing a low number tells me is that they started a long time ago, and that impresses me some because completing the lists were generally harder back in the day.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I was not there so I did not hear Eric speak myself. Did he give any rationale for starting to number now? And presumably it is on order-of-application so your number doesn't change based on earlier-finishers-later-applicants.

Tim

 

[MichaelJ]

I was not there so I did not hear Eric speak myself. Did he give any rationale for starting to number now? And presumably it is on order-of-application so your number doesn't change based on earlier-finishers-later-applicants.

I don't know, but at the time I believed it was chronological order of completion. He did mention two people: the person who was the 10,000th applicant, and the person who was the 10,000th finisher.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

I don't think the 4K committee has thought this through. While there's an undeniable euphoria to see that the 10,000 number has been surpassed ... what do they do when then they hit 20,000? 25,000? 50,000? And wouldn't the 127,457 individual feel "extra special" to see that number on his/her certificate? Certainly there's a need to keep track of applicants from an internal record-keeping point of view, but as is obvious from the ADK experience, some people can really get caught up in their number, almost like it's a badge.

Is that what we want for New England? I know I don't. So, if anyone out there on the 4K committee is reading this thread - please leave well-enough alone.

 

[skiguy]

I don't think the 4K committee has thought this through. While there's an undeniable euphoria to see that the 10,000 number has been surpassed ... what do they do when then they hit 20,000? 25,000? 50,000? And wouldn't the 127,457 individual feel "extra special" to see that number on his/her certificate? Certainly there's a need to keep track of applicants from an internal record-keeping point of view, but as is obvious from the ADK experience, some people can really get caught up in their number, almost like it's a badge.

Is that what we want for New England? I know I don't. So, if anyone out there on the 4K committee is reading this thread - please leave well-enough alone.

I'm with Kevin on this one. This will just lead to more Ebay Auctions.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

If it is order of completion, and if I now submit "my application" (which I can't since I am already a member, but let's pretend) so that the application comes after finisher/applicant 10000 but my last peak predates their finish by some small amount, what happens? Do the numbers shift? They can, to a point, order by completions if the certificates are printed once per year...

I would be happy to see an update to the finishers-by-year. This, I know, will come as no surprise to many of you

Tim

 

[MichaelJ]

Personally, I don't think there's any significant difference between "Hey, have you done your White Mountain Fours?" "Yes, I was number 4352" and "Yes, I finished them back in 2004." It makes no difference to me if they number or not, though I'd still like to know when lists hit major milestones (the 100th canine NH48 [past], the 100th winter NE111 [future], etc…)

 

[Raymond]

The 123,456th would feel even more special.

I want to see a list of first and last peaks for AMC list finishers.

Washington/West Bond
Washington/Camels Hump
Washington/Camels Hump
Washington/Stratton

 

[dug]

Sure it's a status symbol. The lower the number, the earlier you were listed, the more prestige that comes with it...

"I did my 4Ks before it was cool to do it".

 

[David Metsky]

None of this is motivating me to send in my application from 21 years ago when I finished the list.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

None of this is motivating me to send in my application from 21 years ago when I finished the list.

Maybe someone will dream up a category (and patch, of course) for "Longest Interval Between Completion and Application". You might be a contender...

 

[Irishskier]

As I recall Eric identified the 10,000th person whose name I did not catch and that he finished in the fall on Mt. Moriah. He then mentioned that the FTFC committee had discussed numbering in the past and with the 10K milestone they'd begin to number going forward. There was far more crowd reaction as he discussed the peaks people commonly finish on (Isolation, Owl's Head, etc).

In my humble opinion the number matters little, nor does sending in the application (which I did), unless it means something to you. I think (and hope) most of us hike for personal reasons such as the experience, fitness, spirituality, etc. Sorry for getting deep.

 

[Hammerdee]

Finished, but not submitted

Then there are those of us who did the 4Ks (and the NE67), but never applied for a patch. I know a few people who fall into that category. That kinda makes a numbering system pointless, no?

 

[Tom Rankin]

Then there are those of us who did the 4Ks (and the NE67), but never applied for a patch. I know a few people who fall into that category. That kinda makes a numbering system pointless, no?

No.

I disagree with you that it's pointless. As long as you realize there are unregistered completers of a list, you can still get a sense of how many people have done it. It's just what you make of it. If you want it to have a point, great. If you don't, that's fine too.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Then there are those of us who did the 4Ks (and the NE67), but never applied for a patch. I know a few people who fall into that category. That kinda makes a numbering system pointless, no?

Pointless? No. Arbitrary? Yes. All it means it that "you" are club member #1234. The same is true for very many things. If for no other reason, should one put the finishers in a database, they probably have a unique primary key, which is likely a sequential number (or it might be a GUID).

(ETA - Tom beat me to the point And I'll add, to his point, that you can get a sense for the number of finishers without assigning finishing numbers. Data on the www.amc4000footer.org site is from early 2008.)

(ETA2 - I know finishers who intentionally, rather from laziness or indifference, chose not to apply, kind of like they are on their own "list of people who don't believe in credit for the list").

Tim

 

[peakbagger]

I finished the list a couple years before applying as my "rule" was it didnt count until I had a reasonable view from the summit. This was somewhat arbitrary on the viewless summits but I still got views along the way. It goes along with my "fair weather hiking decision" Sure I miss an occasional good day but living up in the whites there are usually better ones failry quickly. On the other hand finishing the AT was about a 38 year effort.