Talk:Howe Sound Group

This needs a citation

I've never seen this name anywhere before. If it's a bivouac.com grouping, and doesn't exist anwhere else, that doesn't make it notable enough. The name North Shore Mountains is much more well-established; even the flank along Howe Sound, from Brunswick to about Deeks Lake anyway, is the Brittannia Range; for "groups" there's the Sky Pilot Group near Squamish, but I've never heard of a Howe Sound Group.Skookum1 18:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked a variety of maps, (old and new) and local literary resources (including books specific to mountaineering) an couldn't find reference to Howe Sound Group. Googled, and basically bivouac is all that comes up, and even then they put (North Shore group) after the heading. Fannin Range, Britannia Range all good, but this?--Keefer4 01:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Tsylos Skookum1 21:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge So to summarize, a merge makes sense to me, being in line with the principle that any actual encyclopedia should not create names and labels for geography but rather document sources for them. Still enjoy perusing bivouac though ;) --Keefer4 23:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you all, there is no Howe Sound Group, and merging with North Shore Mountains should be considered. However, if you ask any vancouverite what the North Shore Mountains are, most will answer "Those ones" and point to the north shore. The point here is that they are referring to the ones they can see, which in fact are in different ranges. This Howe Sound Group article was a bad and incorrect attempt to define a larger range that contains these mountains, but I think a merge into the north shore mountains article is not entirely correct for geographic purposes.

The North Shore Mountains article has to be revised to just include those visible from Vancouver, and here is why:

John Baldwin refers to Howe Sound for this area.
Fairley refers to the region as Howe Sound/North Shore, and furthermore on p 15 writes "The North Shore Mountains can be reached from roads in North and West Vancouver".
Matt Gunn refers to the north shore mountains as "the mountains above North Vancouver and West Vancouver".
In 103 Hikes, the guidebooks of record since 1973, the chapter titles "North Shore" contains these hikes:
- Black Mountain
- Howe Sound Crest Trail(south)
- Historic Hollyburn
- Mount Strachan
- Lower Grouse Mountain
- Goat Mountain
- Mount Fromme
- Lynn Headwaters
- Coliseum Mountain
- Lynn Peak
- Mount Seymour
- Elsay Lake
- Mount Elsay
- Three Chop Trail

All of these with the exception of Elsay are visible from most of the lower mainland, and Elsay is included because you get to it from Seymour.

Basically, The North Shore Mountains is a colloquial term in common usage to refer to a group of mountains that excludes most of the howe sound, mountains like Bishop and north along Indian Arm, and those behind Lynn Valley like Capilano, Sky Pilot etc, which are in geographical ranges already.

Baldwin, John (1995). Exploring the Coast Mountains on Skis. John Baldwin. pp. p. 45. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
Fairley, Bruce (1986). "Chapter 3: Garibaldi Park". A Guide to Climbing and Hiking in Southwestern British Columbia. Gordon Soules Book Publishers Ltd. pp. p. 15. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
Gunn, Matt (2005). Scrambles in Southwest British Columbia. Cairn Publishing. pp. p 28. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
Macaree, David (1994). 103 Hikes in Southwestern British Columbia. The Mountaineers.

Is there any way we can redefine the north shore mountains to mean the common term that vancouverites use to refer to the group of 7-8 peaks they can see from their windows, but which in fact are comprised of three different ridge line:

- Howe Sound Crest (Brittannia Range) - Grouse/Lynn Peak - Seymour (Fannin range)

In any case I concur, this article should be deleted. How does that happen? Tsylos 07:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We'll probably give it a few days and if there aren't any flood of objections, then it would be deleted. Now another point I have to include is, what one can see of the North Shore Mountains, changes depending on where one is looking at them within Vancouver/Burnaby or indeed south of there. From parts of central Burnaby (specifically nr Patterson Station if I recall), for example, Sky Pilot Mtn is visible, Brunswick and some others from other spots. And I do remember reading in one of those excellent literary citations Tsylos mentioned (possibly Fairly or Gunn, but I'm not at home right now, so can't look it up), that Brunswick was specifically included and noted as being the highest of the North Shore Mountains, which is why I added it to the list a few months back. Main point is: what a person would point to and consider the 'North Shore Mtns' varies from Point Grey or Little Mountain, Downtown, Burrardview or somewhere in Burnaby, depending on where their window is. Therefore I think some latitude should be given. I'm in favour of articles on the individual ranges as well as a more colloquial 'North Shore Mtns', article including all mountains visible from any part of Vancouver that are situated on or beyond the North Shore of Burrard Inlet.--Keefer4 09:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And just to note, as redlinked somewhere, North Shore (Vancouver) or North Shore (Burrard Inlet) should be created (North Shore currently goes, I believe, to Oahu). But really also to pose the question - if you're in Surrey or Mary Hill, what are the mountains to the north of you? I'm not sure, exactly, what someone there would say, except for maybe knowing which one is Burke and which one is Coquitlam Mtn; "Coquitlam Range" as mentioned rings a bell, perhaps in journalistic or historical writing somewhere. Meslilloet is of course highly visible from SFU and Centennial Park, although to me it always seemed to be "deeper mountains" than the North Shore Mountains, in and behind as it were, although not yet part of the Garibaldi Ranges. It's "my bad" that the area east of Indian Arm is included; and my further bad that that may be a hangover from the organizational system within Bivouac, as remembered/inherited without thinking to. Is that Sky Pilot, huh? I wondered; there's another couple of things you can glimpse in the upper Lynn/Seymour from various points...and of course, though most people don't realize what it is, Elphinstone - on the other side of Howe Sound - is clearly visible through the "cut" of the Capilano valley from much of Vancouver proper. Anyway, I'll re-hash the map and make it North Shore specific, with the Indian River as the cut-off point....er, but what to do about Mesilloet? Even if there's a Coquitlam Range, it's not part of it either.Skookum1 09:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't want to stick to the literal, "those mountains that you can see from Vancouver", perhaps more appropriately "Those mountains that border on the District of North Vancouver and the City of West Vancouver"? Tsylos 01:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge has been done. If, but only if, we can find some other sources besides bivouac.com for Howe Sound Group, a sentence mentioning it would be a worthwhile in the North Shore Mountains article.--Keefer4 23:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]