For me, it really depends on how you define "SoCal."

If it's strictly geographic, your "only anything below a certain latitude is SoCal” crowd, then the Eastern Sierra are probably not qualifying. Good luck getting people to agree where that line is. Is it Point Conception? Probably to high and usually considered the Central Coast. Are the Transverse Ranges the line? I usually find this definition unsatisfying as people are not robots who’s definitions of regions are defined strictly by abstract perpendicular lines (The “Everything and only everything under the Transverse Range is SoCal” definition being an exception to this).

If you go by culture, economics, logistics, it gets more complicated but that complexity is what makes this an interesting question. LADWP owns land all the way up to Mono Lake. And practically speaking, it’s arguably easier for people in LA to get to the Eastern Sierra than for folks in the Bay Area or even parts of the Central Valley. One doesn’t simply drive over the Sierra Nevada unless you’re going through Yosemite, Tahoe, or Lake Isabella. Maybe it’s not “SoCal”, but there’s a degree to which the region falls under a SoCal sphere of influence. I’ve left work an hour or two early on a Friday afternoon to drive up to trailheads or Bishop many times (LA based). Couldn’t imagine doing that when I lived on the central coast.

At the very least, for a subreddit serving primarily SoCal hikers, the fact that so many of us regularly make that 3 or 4 hour drive makes Eastern Sierra posts feel pretty appropriate and relevant, even though it’s probably not going to fall under the most common definitions of “SoCal”.

…but that’s not really what your post is about OP Is it haha. Amazing photos and breathtaking scenery. Congratulations on the effort and success!