The Mountains and Hills of Hong Kong

Hi There,

I wonder if you have tried the phrase 'Hills and peaks in Hong Kong' using Google Search.  That should give you quite a load of it.

T

Hi There,

I believe Wiki has such a list of over 200 peaks, with altitudes as I have seen it before.  Suggest to have another go.  Some of the lesser hills had been levelled decades ago for various reclaimation  or redevelopment, say, the Sacred Hill in To Kwa Man, or Morrision Hill in Wanchai.

T

Hi There,

If you already have the lsit provided by Government Department, you may assume the list is official.  The next best thing to do is to look up each of the names for more geological information.  Or, you might like to invest on some maps, also published by the Government.  The peaks should hae been marked with their respective altitude one way or the other.  Generally speaking, the 1:20,000 set suffice for such purpose.  (https://www.landsd.gov.hk/mapping/en/paper_map/tp.htm)

T

Greetings!   For general interest, I consult the 1952.1 map which shows the contours and mountain peaks.  I assume  the same survey techniques and within the same time period were used.  But they are old numbers - "--- Air survey and ground control 1924-25 ---field revision 1935-37 --- revised and reproduced 1952".

There are newer and more current maps, but we will still run into the question of consistency - how and when the new numbers were arrived at, and is it valid to compare them with old numbers?

Some of the 1952.1 map-peaks have been revised, for example Lion Rock 497 m to 495 m as shown in the current Wikipedia list. The Wikipedia page does not tell when and how the revised numbers were determined, though it makes reference to the Map of Hong Kong provided by HKSARG --- retrieved 22 May 2020".   A year ago, a quick look shows that some 1952.1 peak elevations also appear in the current Wikipedia list. 

If precision and consistency are essential, then all the peaks need to be surveyed using the same method and within the same period of time, and referenced to the vertical datum used. I wonder how much does it cost to fly a surveyor to land on every peak to take satellite measurements. Regards, Peter

http://www.hk-place.com/view.php?id=127

https://peakery.com/region/hong-kong-mountains/peaks/#order=elevation&pa...

Not a lot of use I know, but nevertheless here's a couple of links I found in my list of HK hiking bookmarks.  Good luck with your endeavour! 
 

Also many HK peaks sport many triangulation pillars, documentation on which is here

https://www.geodetic.gov.hk/en/gi/keymaps.htm

e.g. Here's the survey report for Kowloon Peak 

https://www.geodetic.gov.hk/summarysheet/98.pdf

I tried a similar exercise in making a list of peaks for hiking purposes. 

This is my working list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1imHNb7tmOLiW9dD5nnXY-7701WSZMh0M_jOh4t_6GX8/edit#gid=1004847886

I'm not suggesting this is 100% accurate, but it may help you as a checklist if you are working down a list - I am almost certain this includes every point above 300m, although I am less confident about the names and the exact coordinates - some hills, Lin Fa Shan for example, are marked in slightly different places on different maps.

I climbed all of these over the course of about 4.5 years, taking my time. I love hiking in Hong Kong, so if you'd like me to spend a month or two going round them again with GPS equipment getting accurate coordinates and heights for you, I would be happy to discuss fees :-) 

Greetings jj_hk!  I like your list, and am impressed by your interest and ability to climb so many of them.  Your list no doubt will bring improvements.

I did a quick comparison of the first 40 hills with those in the Wikipedia list, and found that both contain, with very few exceptions, similar elevation figures.  There are a few ones in your list but not in the Wikipedia, and vice versa.  This leads to difference in ranking which I don't think is important.  Some of the missing ones could be due to the different names used in the two lists.

I like the coordinates column.  May I suggest that a new column be added to your spreadsheet named "Wikipedia", with note for example 1-957m for the row "Tai Mo Shan".  This says your elevation is the same as in the Wikipedia's, and the difference in ranking, again, is not important except that it is a part of the Wikipedia ranking.

For those that are in the Wikipedia list but not in yours, you may wish to add a new row for them.

On elevation differences, Shun Yeung Fung is 590 m  in your list and 591 m in Wikipedia's.  Kwun Yam Shan is 546 m in your list and 552 m in Wikipedia's.  These could be due to a mistype somewhere, or physical changes to the peak(s).  I think it is worth showing both so future work would focus on the cause, and the update can be traced back to your work.    Regards, and keep up the good work!  Peter

Thanks for the kind words! 

Somewhere on my PC I have my original working I used to combine the wikipedia list with others, when I have a spare moment I will dig it out and try to add the columns you suggest.

Where there is a difference, this is mostly down to the height being shown on a map differently, I believe - I took two sources as more authoritative than wikipedia, the HK govt. hiking maps, and/or OpenStreetMap. This was only for my own use, so I didn't worry too much about tracing sources, but if others are interested I will try and do it properly!

In case of any interest you have

http://peakmaster.top/

Trail runners have been "competing" for a while to do all the peaks there. I always guessed that those were the highest peaks. But not sure.