Canister for "West West" Scar Ridge

[bigmoose]

Years ago I climbed Scar Ridge from the Kanc and signed in at the canister, not aware that the "canister peak" wasn't the ridge's true high point.
Since then I've visited the ridge's other bumps and found the other canisters. But it didn't seem right that there was no canister identifying the high point (hardly a "point", though) at the western end of the ridge.
On last Saturday, July 21, I stuck a PVC canister on the flat "West West" Scar at a point that seemed highest...it's located at the convergence of a couple of moose paths in the vicinity of the "x" marking 3774 on the topographic map...on the western end of west west scar.

Given that location, it might make sense to approach from the west.
You can climb the Loon ski slopes (bagging 3065' N. Loon, a fine little rocky pinnacle within sight of the lift tower while you're at it), then heading east along the ridge. There's a faint old trail that goes through pretty woods to the north side of west west scar before it dips down and heads north to Black Mountain. The climb from the old trail to the summit is through mostly open woods... unusual for this nasty ridge!

Maybe there should be a patch for those hitting the five Scar canisters...
(4 pvc and allegedly a Nalgene bottle on the bogus "East East" scar).
A suitable patch might be a Band-Aid....

 

[dms]

There's a faint old bootleg xcountry ski trail that goes through pretty woods to the north side of west west scar before it dips down and heads north to Black Mountain.

This trail is actually an old hiking trail to the summit of Black Mountain. There used to be a register at the summit, and in some places the trail is amazingly obvious. It's mostly open woods to the top of Black.

 

[albee]

I attempted West Scar Ridge from N. Loon Mountain for my second-ever bushwhack just about one year ago. I found the "trail" that heads for Black Mountain, and followed it for a good 1/2 mile thinking it was a herd path to West Scar... There are plenty of small sawed-off tree stumps along the way, and I distinctly remember wanting to come back here to VFTT and report that someone has been maintaining an illegal trail to West Scar Ridge. But then the trail started losing too much elevation to the north and it started to fade out, so I headed into the thick stuff. I remember it was terribly hot, I was sweating my butt off, and being swarmed by bugs... I ended up giving up. But Loon Mountain was fun - I took the rest of the afternoon to explore the trail through their caves and I even found a piece of Loon Gold!

Thanks for placing a register up there, BigMoose - I just might have to drop by and sign in... Too bad the traditional register will now become obsolete.

 

[MichaelJ]

I gotta say that I think the 4000-footer committee ought to chime in because which summit have they traditionally recognized? There's a lot of documentation out there referring to the "true summit" and the "canister summit" and it's going to get confusing for a while.

I did this trip just a few weeks ago, via Loon, and it was a true bushwhack for a good long distance once we left that herd path, but at the same time it was a very good and rewarding hike. I'd hate to see Scar get easier because nobody goes from the east anymore or does the "traditional canister" summit.

 

[Papa Bear]

I gotta say that I think the 4000-footer committee ought to chime in because which summit have they traditionally recognized? There's a lot of documentation out there referring to the "true summit" and the "canister summit" and it's going to get confusing for a while.

I did this trip just a few weeks ago, via Loon, and it was a true bushwhack for a good long distance once we left that herd path, but at the same time it was a very good and rewarding hike. I'd hate to see Scar get easier because nobody goes from the east anymore or does the "traditional canister" summit.

Here's Eric Savage's (head of the FTFC) take on the situation as of 2005:

As for Scar Ridge, the x3774 bump is considered to be the true summit but is so flat that no one spot can be identified as the highest. As long as you make some reasonable effort to wander around over there, you can count it. The cannister was placed on the other peak only to make it easy to find (it would just be cruel, after having done a bushwhack like Scar Ridge, not to make it as easy as possible to find the cannister). I seem to recall a pretty good herd path leading from the cannister to the 3774 peak.

From This VFTT thread

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

The bushwhack up to the canister from the Kanc is not that difficult. I felt that the hardest part of the whole bushwhack was the trip from the canister over to the west peak and back. I had seen Eric’s statement before leaving so I went over there. I was surprised at how clear the woods were on the top of the west (west) peak. I don’t understand Eric’s comment that it would be difficult to find the canister. There are many bushwhacks where finding a canister is (would be) more difficult.

I do believe some official statement should be made by the committee. While Eric said what he said, Gene Daniel in his unpublished document on the bushwhacks simply states that “purists” will probably want to go to the west peak. That really leaves the question open.

I know folks who have simply gone to the canister and back stating that "if that’s where the canister is that’s good enough for me." You can tell by the way the herd trail dies out leaving the canister and heading toward the west (west) peak that many people having reached the canister don’t continue on to the west peak.

I think that if the west (west) peak is the highest that is where the official NE100 canister should be, and from the time of the ‘official proclamation’ the hike should only count for NE100 if you go there.

 

[MichaelJ]

Well, I think the "east west" peak was a lot harder than the "west west" so I'm surprised the canister was placed there to "make it easier".

I'm cool with the idea of making it official on the true summit though fear that it would extend the existing herd path all the way to the summit and eliminate this from being a 'whack. Either way, I just wanted to make sure it's the FTFC's call...

 

[bigmoose]

I didn't run the idea of placing a west-west canister by the committee per se, but talked to Steve Smith about it... he didn't seem to think there'd be a problem. Granted, it's only an "unsanctioned" canister, but feel free to sign in....

 

[albee]

It is my understanding that you don't even have to sign in at the registers at all to get recognized since it is all based on the honor system, so this is all a moot point. Signing in and reading other peoples' entries is just a fun habit we get into... The only real benefit the registers serve is to let Search and Rescue know if you made it to the top before you got lost...

All I know is that it is a good feeling to find a canister and know that you've reached the place that most of our predecessors consider the highest point - it takes most of the wandering around out of it. I agree that the "west west" bump appears to be higher, and it is good that people will now have a more obvious destination to search for now.

In the end, you can be a peakbagger or you can be a canister bagger... or both! And only you will know the difference.

 

[bigmoose]

Albee -
Too bad you missed the Adirondack canisters. You could spend half the day reading the entries in those things.
My only lament is that I missed the Allen can... that was my number 45 and they'd decided to rip down the canisters before I made it up there.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

Everything Albee says is true, but that doesn't answer the question as to which peak you are supposed to bag. I know of no other situation where the FTFC recognizes a peak that they do not consider to be the high point, or do they? The Eric Savage statement has never been published in such a way that it is readily available to all hikers. The way it is given, one could assume that it is the personal opinion of the president and not the official position of the committee. The Gene Daniel statement is perhaps more readily available and certainly carries a lot of weight with some. Certainly the location of the official canister is in itself something of a statement. Perhaps the new canister is good in that it may encourage some sort of an official pronouncement. If it manages to stay there awhile anyway.

 

[RoySwkr]

I know of no other situation where the FTFC recognizes a peak that they do not consider to be the high point, or do they?

Owls Head

The Gene Daniel statement is perhaps more readily available and certainly carries a lot of weight with some.

When that register was originally placed, there was a statement from Gene in the front of the book, presumably that book is no longer there?

Perhaps the new canister is good in that it may encourage some sort of an official pronouncement.

Don't hold your breath. Seems like it was 2-3 years ago we were promised a clarification of the mtn bike policy, and the Owls Head situation is also a couple years old.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

Owl's head has its similarities but if I understand the situation, it actually is somewhat different in that the original canister was placed on Owl's Head at the spot felt to be the highest and when a new high point was determined it was moved. The committee has exercised reasonable flexibility in making the changeover. It will probably not be that long before the original site will no longer be an option. If I understand correctly, the Scar Ridge situation is different in that a canister was placed on one peak even though it was known that the other peak was higher. There is also one important voice saying 'Sign in at one peak then go to the other' and another key voice saying 'Sign in at one peak and go to the other if you feel like it.' That's what I find unique. The reasoning that it would be difficult to find the canister makes no sense to me at all. If you've been over on the West West peak you know how open the woods are there. I think it would be difficult not to find it there.

I never saw the edition of the book you are referring to with the Gene Daniel statement. I found it in the document on the bushwhacking peaks which has been mentioned for some time on the website as 'soon to be published' and yet for some reason hasn't been. So much the better, because I got it from Gene free for the asking by E-mail.

A statement was made at the last awards ceremony about the Owl’s head policy. If the committee doesn’t want to insist that people go to West West peak that’s fine. But they should at least make a statement.

 

[Amicus]

Given that location, it might make sense to approach from the west.

Great minds, similar lines, I guess. In researching the July 7 hike MichaelJ mentions above, I concluded the same thing, and you followed our route. (I posted a TR on RoT, not here, so you probably didn't see it.)

I had seen references in prior reports here and private communications to the herd path that takes you .51 mile east from the top of Loon No., before veering north toward Black, and that was the key to making this fairly easy.

That said, while you and we had good luck finding open woods to the true (west) summit, luck plays a big role, as we had a much tougher time coming down, although our line was very similar. Witness also albee's experience, and just last week, a veteran 'whacking friend of mine, attempting that same route, was turned back in disarray after only a short stretch of the 'whack after the herd path.

As to which counts, unless and until the USGS comes out with a different topo map, many of us will count the west bump only, regardless of canister. (My altimeter, I'll confess, said the east [canister] bump was at least five feet higher, but that's not scientific.)

 

[dms]

Owl's head has its similarities but if I understand the situation, it actually is somewhat different in that the original canister was placed on Owl's Head at the spot felt to be the highest and when a new high point was determined it was moved.

To the best of my knowledge there has never been a register on Owl's Head, a summit sign only.

 

[McRat]

It's the odd nature of bushwhacking.

You make the best effort you can, based on your ability. If you claim the peak in good faith, it's yours. I think the FTFC seems guided by this.

When I go back to Owl's Head next month, I will try to visit the true summit du jour - but in no way do I feel my previous summit less valid.

From time to time the rules seem weird, but they exist to remind us we are playing their game. I hit both summits just to satisfy myself.

Some day, I may get bored enough to create my own list and design a patch - but I can guarantee the rules I apply would make the AMC FTFC seem quite rational.

 

[adamiata]

The Scar Ridge peaks probably started out as mole hills.