There isnt really any official way to label a mountain. Ive been on "mountains" ranging from like 900 feet to 18,500 feet. In some places the altitude of the low lying areas may be well over 10,000 feet high, so then would a hill 10,250 feet high be considered a mountain or hill? It all depends on where you are, but if at sea level I would say it has to be in that range to seem mountain like. But really to have an impressive mountain id say it has to be a lot more (like 5,000 if at sea level and higher if not).
2007-02-02 07:35:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by billybob 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no hard and fast rule.
The foothills of the Himalaya exceed 10,000 feet but because they're so small compared to the neighbouring summits they'd barely qualify for the distinction of 'hill' let alone 'mountain'.
A lot depends on the nature of the surrounding terrain. In some parts of the US 2000 feet would be considered a mountain whereas in others it would be 3000 feet. In other places it would be a different figure.
2007-02-07 07:46:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Trevor 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no official height that turns a mountain into a hill.
Different organizations use different measurements to fit their own goals.
"The British Ordnance Survey once defined a mountain as having 1,000 feet of elevation and less was a hill, but the distinction was abandoned sometime in the 1920's."
"Britannica Student Encyclopedia, the term 'generally refers to rises over 2,000 feet (610 metres)'."
"Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 does not appear to draw this distinction, and in Scotland the term 'mountain' is more subjective, often being used for hills exceeding 3,000 feet (914.4 m)"
2007-02-02 15:35:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by wdmc 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say 2000 ft and over can be considered a mountain.
2007-02-02 15:30:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
there is no official height defined for a mountain,although u can say any mountain beyond the height of 2000 ft can be considered as mountain
2007-02-08 02:36:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by monalisa three 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
3000 ft
2007-02-06 23:07:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by lewis a 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
In Afghanistan and Irac only the military summit is designated for operational purposes. To appreciate why see USA recruiter.
2007-02-06 21:44:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The smallest in the world is the Sutter Buttes in CA. They are around 2000ft above sea level.
So my guess for the minimum heighth would be 2000ft.
They can go as hight as 24000ft.(maybe taller)
2007-02-02 17:09:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sparky 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Make you wonder if there is a dwarf mountain in our future.
2007-02-07 19:05:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by Lew 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
actually its 1000ft so ur both wrong.
2007-02-04 02:19:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Ross 3
·
0⤊
0⤋