Talk:Toozaza Peak

Wrong Lat/Log

Well, as you may see in several map-services, this volcano isn´t at +59° 28' 60.00", -13° 9' 0.00" as mentioned, which would be in the middle of the atlantic between UK and greenland. Any one knows the correct location? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.189.184 (talk) 12:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the coordinates. It should now be located at Toozaza Peak. Black Tusk (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Unofficial?

Is the name for this mountain 100% unofficial? The term is used by the Geological Survey of Canada which is part of the Canadian government and the GSC has officially named mountains in the past e.g. Pillow Ridge for its pillow lavas, Eve Cone after a Tahltan woman named Eve Edzerza, Wetalth Ridge was named to recall a small group of wandering and exploited outcasts from the Tahltans called "Wetalth" people. I'm sure Toozaza Peak is named after Toozaza Creek. Black Tusk (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

See my reply about this on your talkpage.Skookum1 (talk) 15:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

A GSC citation would make it official, even if it's not in BCGNIS; BCGNIS has priority IMO (constitutional technicality) but if it's in CGNDB, GSC or Atlas of Canada that qualifies it as official.Skookum1 (talk) 15:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

If that's true then there's likely to be more officially named geological formations not found on BCGNIS; Bowie must be official because it is found on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada site but there's no marine features found on BCGNIS as far as I know, not even the Explorer Ridge or Juan de Fuca Ridge. I wonder what else is official not listed on BCGNIS..... Black Tusk (talk) 18:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I do not see this name as unofficial. As stated above, the Geological Survey of Canada uses it in literature and the GSC has named other volcanic features that appear in BCGNIS (e.g. Pillow Ridge, Eve Cone, Williams Cone or Kana Cone). Black Tusk (talk) 21:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

As in my edit comment right now, if the GSC is using the name that's close enough to official, as this will likely become the gazetted name; the Jennings Peak nomination was an alt-name coined during bivouac.com "survey" work and would maybe be more suitable, anyway, for a peak on the north side of the Jennings. This one's name makes sense not just because it's at the head of Toozaza Creek but also anyone coming up that valley - if there's even a trail! - would have a view of this ridge throughout the trip. As for offshore placenames, that's not in BCGNIS' purview, as offshore waters, particularly outside the 200mi limit, are under federal jurisdiction (and the BC govt doesn't have a department, or a budget, for ocenaography....).Skookum1 (talk) 21:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Alright, that is all what I wanted to know. You said several times you did not trust bivouac except for coordinates, prominence and elevation, but you seem to keep searching other information on that website that is likely not even used or reported in proper papers or maps e.g. you just said "Jennings Peak" was an alt-name coined during bivouac.com "survey" work. Bivouac is not even a proper website for what it is supposed to be and it is operated by someone that does not care what he is doing, including naming mountains/peaks in his own right. I can find out if Toozaza Peak will become the gazetted name for this mountain very easily by asking a volcanologist associated with the GSC. Anything that is not a suitable name on the GSC website will obviously not become an official name, but Toozaza Peak seems appropiate for this mountain as stated. Another mountain not in BCGNIS is Little Bear Mountain on the northern flank of Hoodoo Mountain. Black Tusk (talk) 23:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The "survey" work was my own, exploring Basemap and plotting coordinates into bivouac's database, and was part of exhaustive work to chart prominence relationships across the province; the original name I used for it would have been "Peak 29-36 Toozaza Creek" with "Peak 29-36 Jennings Creek" as an optional/alternate name; I had no knowledge of the GSC's designation (if they didn't, in fact, borrow it from bivouac) at the time; the bivouac renaming was typical of RT's less controversial namings, and he would have also adjusted the alt name to Jennings Peak. As noted above, if it's good enough for the GSC that's close enough for me, and their "clout" will likely carry the name into BCGNIS/CGNDB on the next round of namings. Similarly "Buckwell Peak" over west of the Chilkoot Pass which Robin renamed, I suppose because these are the core of prominence zones, i.e. the highest of their groups; it was Peak xx-xx Buckwell Glacier when I "made" it....what I don't like especially in Bivouac is that Robin has been trying to substitute the range system with the prominence-region system as if the latter were moer meaningful/important; more logical to him (he's a programmer, not a historian), so often I find peak entries which do not give their range location, only their prominence "regions" - which really mean nothing except to prominence groupies; they're meaningless to the general public and without historical context but bivouac.com is targeted at climbers and "prominence enthsusiasts" and "peakbaggers". Some peaks still have ranges designated, I guess he just hasn't gotten to all of them yet (there are, after all, thousands of entries) but it's really quite aggravating to see my work go "poof" because somebody figures his judgement on geography is more important than anyone else's, including government databases and official toponymy. I know that when each page opens, there's some calculations involved between the range/region boundaries and the page latlongs, and his rationale is to cut back on server processing power; rather than buy more CPUs, he ditches data....all this is among the many reasons I left; but the elevations, latlongs and prominence relationships were all based on Basemap's STRM/TRIM entries, at least for those within BC, and I trust them because I charted the vast majority of them....Skookum1 (talk) 13:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

That is good to know. BTW I am almost done creating a template for the Pacific Ranges and I am not sure how the Kitimat Ranges template will turn out. Still have to work on the Boundary Ranges template. Black Tusk (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Continental Divide?

I think Toozaza is on the Continental Divide, which passes through this area for sure, coming towards Toozaza from the west along the south side of the basins of the Rancheria & Little Rancheria Rivers and the north side of the Swift and Jennings basins. I'll try and work it out from the topos, the divide may actually bypass the area's high-point....I cant' remember if the Cottonwood River, just south of here, is a Dease tributary of a secondary Stikine one...probably Dease, so it may be that the continental divide routes via the divide between Tuya Lake and the Cottonwood, then runs south parallel, more or less, along the west side of the Dease basin to Dease Lake, which is definitely on the divide; if Toozaza or antyhing else in this area turns out to be a high-point on the divide, it should have Category:Great Divide of North America added to it.Skookum1 (talk) 01:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I had a good long look at AcmeMapper's satellite view and some of Basemap in that area, and I'm pretty sure that Toozaza itself is not on the Continental Divide, although the southern subpeak on the same mini-range definitely is; it appears by its colour to be made of the same material as Toozaza so maybe is aide-crater/peak/vent that vulcanologists haven't identified and it doesn't have an official name anyway. But I'm reasonably certain that Ash Mountain is on the Continental Divide, as would be other summits in the Tuya Range. Southeast of Dease Lake, the divide definitely passes through the Three Sisters Range and likely Glacial Mountain, which is in that group, is on the divide. I'll be making Frog Lakes, which is the location of a pass between the Pitman, part of the Stikine basin, and the Obo River, part of the Finlay basin, which is on the divide.....and I know that some of the summits in Tatlatui Provincial Park are on the divide for sure (Skeena basin to the west, Finlay to the east). There's various named passes in this area, I'll figure out which of them might be on the divide....the reason I got interested in this is that the Continental Divide of the Americas article glossed over the transit through northern British Columbia; I added some bits such as Summit Lake, British Columbia (the divide passes through the town itself, whereas the lake article which I didn't put the divide category on is within the Peace drainage)...I suppose Giscome Portage also is, but the latlong for that location is I think the outlet of the portage on the Fraser.....I may add the divide category to Ash Mountain later, once I can confirm this through other topo maps.....Skookum1 (talk) 01:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmmmm....no, not Ash Mountain, though Ash's southeast subpeak, yes....but back to Toozaza I misread the stream patterns, which on closer examination are one of those areas that flow in both directions, as it were, with many interlaced channels and ponds; the ponds immediately east of Toozaza are the headwaters of Toozaza Creek, and a ways to the north of Toozaza Peak and the ponds on its north side are the Jennings Lakes, which are the head of the Jennings River....so the "col" transits the marsh/ponds immediately north of Toozaza Peak which does make Toozaza on the path of the Continental Divide...I'll consult Bivouac for where the key col is in question, to make sure (as I know the Basemap display back then was much more detailed and I worked over this area with a finetooth comb....trick is now that the Toozaza Creek summits which have Toozaza as their parent have stupid names like Zus NW142 or whatever, and will be hard to search. this is dangerously close to original research, but since when is reading a topo original research?Skookum1 (talk) 01:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I just looked at Atlas of Canadas maps, including the hydrography and elevation image, which is sort of a hill shade, and I was wrong about the ponds to the north; they're part of teh Little Rancheria basin, but a creek just to their west is part of the Jennings drainage....and the ridgeline between the two leads straight up and over Toozaza Peak (which of course isn't named on the map, and Bivouac also gives Jennings Peak as an alternate name). I'm gonna stick my neck out and place the Great Divide category and a line about this in the article; citations if anyone asks are Basemap, Atlas of Canada, and Acme Mapper....Skookum1 (talk) 02:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to note that it's surrounded on its east and west by eskers, another subglacial feature, so I'm betting that they're volcanic ash/lahar material....Skookum1 (talk) 02:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Toozaza Peak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101211081948/http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/volcanoes/cat/volcano_e.php?id=svb_tpk_052 to http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/volcanoes/cat/volcano_e.php?id=svb_tpk_052

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:57, 17 May 2017 (UTC)