Owl's Head cairns and signs removed

[askus3]

David: I agree the USPS (United States Postal Service) is not involved in any way!!!

 

[albee]

Yes, the USFS definitely does have better things to do than constantly cleaning up after a group who should be more respectful.

Have you ever been to the summit of The Fool Killer? Because I could have sworn the register there says it was left by someone named ForestGnome... Based on this statement I'm assuming it was a different person that frequents the Sabbaday Brook trail area and calls themself by the same name.

The only differences between the two examples is that it ISN'T okay to leave a cairn or sign at the end of a well-traveled herd path (meaning people will create more herd paths in looking for the summit cairn/sign) in a Wilderness area but it IS okay to leave an empty peanutbutter jar tied to a tree on a trail-less peak in a non-Wilderness area. Either way would be leaving something un-natural in an area that should be beautiful and natural - Wilderness designation or not.

On a different note, isn't there a cairn at the summit of Galehead? Is that okay because the Frost trail is an official trail? Otherwise the two summits are very similar, both in Wilderness areas and both with trails that dead-end at non-descript viewless summits.

Why do the stewards of the "Forever Wild" Adirondacks allow cairns (and signs if they are one of the 46) at their "trail-less" summits? Not even allowing a summit cairn on Owl's Head is a bit much.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

On a different note, isn't there a cairn at the summit of Galehead?

I've never seen one, unless it's very recent.

As the ADK's - as I recall, they're mostly managed by the NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation. There is a large area owned/managed by the Ausable Club known as the AMR - Adirondack Mountain Reserve - and if you've hiked over there they have their own trail signs, methods of blazing, etc. And some areas are privately owned, like areas near Allen which is owned by the logging company Fitch Pruin.

So, I don't there are any Federal agencies involved in most of the ADK's. People like Peakbagger and Pete Hickey can jump in here if I've made mis-statements or been incomplete.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

As the ADK's - as I recall, they're mostly managed by the NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation.

Kevin is correct. The wilderness in the Adirondacks and the Catskills is managed by the NYS DEC. In the Adirondacks there is also an Adirondack Park Agency, APA (also a state agency). The DEC and APA both play roles in the wilderness management of the Adirondack Park. Federal government agencies are not involved. The 46 Adirondack summits and 33 of 35 Catskill summits are now state owned. Some access trails and designated paths are still privately owned.

In both areas many wilderness advocates, DEC and APA officials wanted the canisters removed as they were considered nonconforming. However, to their credit the DEC and APA do reasonable jobs listening to the public and advocacy groups while formulating land management policies. The regulations and rules may not be to everyone's liking, but everyone has the opportunity to provide input.

The 46er Club canisters was a battle that many felt the 46ers did not fight hard enough to retain. The summit signs were part of the compromise in the decision to remove the canisters. I believe the summit sign permission is written into the Adirondack Park master plan or the individual unit plans.

By contrast the Catskill 3500 Club fought hard to keep their canisters. The canister provisions are written into the Catskill master plan. The only compromise was that they are now painted gray in wilderness areas, while in wild forests they are still allowed to be bright orange.

 

[forestgnome]

Have you ever been to the summit of The Fool Killer? Because I could have sworn the register there says it was left by someone named ForestGnome... Based on this statement I'm assuming it was a different person that frequents the Sabbaday Brook trail area and calls themself by the same name.

'Twas the forestgnome. Was the moose antler that I left at the base of the tree still there? I was exploring the mountain and happened upon the register. I generally stick to slopes and saddles and drainages and bogs, so I don't generally have a problem with the summit signs, and the Fool Killer is not in wilderness.

I should've been more clear. The reasons for playing this game with USFS are weak. The wilderness laws are being broken by those I would least expect to do so, by those who had ought to most appreciate the wilderness and the folks who enforce the wilderness laws. To paraphrase Metsky, we should be their freinds, not foes. The reasons I read for repeatedly and illegally putting up signs and markers and defying the wilderness laws are weak.

Gotta go, it's a gorgeous morning!!!

Happy Trails

 

[David Metsky]

On a different note, isn't there a cairn at the summit of Galehead? Is that okay because the Frost trail is an official trail?

There's a small one, just visible in this photo.

 

[skiguy]

Graduation Time

First of all I will totally admit to not having read this whole thread. But it seems that the topic at hand has been discussed before in many shapes and/or forms. I am particularly surprised ALBEE that you iniated this thread to begin with because I have the utmost respect for your recent accomplishments and the billboarding thence; therefore why take notice? Wilderness is certainly a relative term in the NE and especially here on this board...but why beat the Drum for the rest to hear?
I can also admit to being party to previous trips that have missed the entry to the slide on which this peak is in discussion let alone finding the Summit; but in this lies the mystery. The New Hampshire 48 have been seeked by many and Owl's Head is part of that mystery.
More so I think Owl's Head has been a sort of "Rights of Passage " for many.
I will not argue with technology and advancement as I work in the field and live it....but why post about it when some adventure is left for the little bit of Wilderness that is left for the NH48?
Personally I feel that discussion much like you had with the Ranger about pulling down cairns is part of the process in finding a place like Owl's Head. Why not let some of that adventure be found for the seeker and not pave the way. Certainly one can agree that this Peak is a sort of Bridge or Graduation to other lists which demand skill that needs to be learned and understood much as you have done and why not let some of that Adventure and Mystery be left to the Seeker?

 

[albee]

Skiguy.... I think the purpose of this thread was just to spread the information that there is no longer any cairns or summit signs to look for if one were to attempt to bag this peak. If this information had not been announced by me, it would have been announced by someone else in a matter of time. Maybe it will help someone from missing the trail and going all the way to the height of land on the Lincoln Brook trail and having a disappointing hike. OH is certainly a rite of passage, but announcing that the cairns are gone can only make people safer and more prepared in my eyes.

I hope my posts haven't sounded like I am encouraging anyone to resurrect the summit cairns or illegally replace the summit sign.

In the process of debating this, we have had some interesting discussion on the root of the problem between the FS and the deviants that continue to install non-conforming items on the summit and at the base. I cannot take responsibility for what others have said in this thread, but as I stated in my OP - I have no problem with the ranger's actions, and I've always supported compliance with FS regulations. Feel free to PM me if I'm missing your point or if you'd like to discuss it further - I'd be happy to hear your opinions.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

There's a small one, just visible in this photo.

Thanks for posting that, Dave - I had a brain cramp. When I read the question about whether there was a cairn on Galehead, I was thinking sign - not cairn - and posted accordingly.

Sorry for the confusion - I've never seen a SIGN on Galehead in the past 10 years or so. As for cairns - I have several pics myself of friends, including Brutus, with that little pile of rocks in the background.

 

[skiguy]

Skiguy.... I think the purpose of this thread was just to spread the information that there is no longer any cairns or summit signs to look for if one were to attempt to bag this peak. If this information had not been announced by me, it would have been announced by someone else in a matter of time. Maybe it will help someone from missing the trail and going all the way to the height of land on the Lincoln Brook trail and having a disappointing hike. OH is certainly a rite of passage, but announcing that the cairns are gone can only make people safer and more prepared in my eyes.

I hope my posts haven't sounded like I am encouraging anyone to resurrect the summit cairns or illegally replace the summit sign.

In the process of debating this, we have had some interesting discussion on the root of the problem between the FS and the deviants that continue to install non-conforming items on the summit and at the base. I cannot take responsibility for what others have said in this thread, but as I stated in my OP - I have no problem with the ranger's actions, and I've always supported compliance with FS regulations. Feel free to PM me if I'm missing your point or if you'd like to discuss it further - I'd be happy to hear your opinions.

Thankyou for discussing this in a civil manner. By no means did I infer to contend that you disagree with Forest Service Policy. I think what I am trying to point out which has been common topic here is what should be a part and what should not be a part of "Wilderness" and more specifically "Owl's Head". Do we really need Blazes or a Sign or any other information on where Owl's Head is other than a breif discussion in the guide and a mark on the map?
Again to reiterate some I feel that "Owl's Head" is and should be kept as a sort of Rites of Passage. It is something that for many is a place to work up to on the NH48 List. A place to test and hone one's skills for peaks of the Bushwack nature that are truly Bushwacks and more obscure. Again a sort of Bridge between marked trails,unmarked trails, and true orienteering.
In other words Owl's Head is unique and IMO it should be kept that way.
I do realize that technology has greatly changed things from the first time I tried to hike Owl's Head and missed the entry to the slide; but I still had a great and safe experience none the less. Hiking and climbing with time becomes a sort of personal style. Everyone is entitled to have there own opinion especially when it comes to the use of our National Forests and especially in the ridgid everyday life that most of us have to lead.
Again I respect your input. I guess I'm just an old fart sometimes that wants some things in this world to stay the same.

 

[drewski]

the sign returns???

rumor has it a new sign has appeared on owls-head??a muchroom sign??

 

[albee]

I feel that "Owl's Head" is and should be kept as a sort of Rites of Passage.

I understand, and I agree. Ideally, one would have to "learn the hard way" if they wanted to bag OH for their NH48.

One of the benefits of this message board is the ease of exchange of information. If you wanted to rely on your instincts, challenge yourself, and find the summit on your own - you could. If you wanted to do some research here and ask questions of those more experienced - you could. One of the primary reasons for VFTT is sharing our knowledge and experiences. I'm sorry if I "pulled aside the curtain" a bit on this mountain, but nobody is forcing anyone to look. Even though I like to bushwhack and explore off-trail, that doesn't mean that other people will want to or enjoy it in order to bag this peak. If peakbaggers are going to go out there eventually, I'm sure the FS wants them to be mentally and physically prepared - and having this knowledge in hand will make for a safer trip.

Actually, now that I think about it, reporting that there are NO cairns or signs can only serve to make this mountain more of a rite of passage for hikers. The information gleaned from this thread is exactly the situation you had hoped for - that people will now have to figure it out for themselves. Happy trails!

 

[skiguy]

I understand, and I agree. Ideally, one would have to "learn the hard way" if they wanted to bag OH for their NH48.

One of the benefits of this message board is the ease of exchange of information. If you wanted to rely on your instincts, challenge yourself, and find the summit on your own - you could. If you wanted to do some research here and ask questions of those more experienced - you could. One of the primary reasons for VFTT is sharing our knowledge and experiences. I'm sorry if I "pulled aside the curtain" a bit on this mountain, but nobody is forcing anyone to look. Even though I like to bushwhack and explore off-trail, that doesn't mean that other people will want to or enjoy it in order to bag this peak. If peakbaggers are going to go out there eventually, I'm sure the FS wants them to be mentally and physically prepared - and having this knowledge in hand will make for a safer trip.

Actually, now that I think about it, reporting that there are NO cairns or signs can only serve to make this mountain more of a rite of passage for hikers. The information gleaned from this thread is exactly the situation you had hoped for - that people will now have to figure it out for themselves. Happy trails!

Well put and agreed! And now if people would take a look at this thread it would as you have mentioned might help to facilate some understanding between the Forest Service and the people that are not playing by the Rules.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

rumor has it a new sign has appeared on owls-head??a muchroom sign??

I usually try not to give advice on NH mountains as I am primarily a NY hiker. ... But here goes.

If there are people who really want summit signs or canisters, then they need to get the USFS (or the appropriate organization) sanction. And it would be beneficial to get it written into the land management plans. Like them or not we all need to play by the rules and regulations. Otherwise you are just debarking up the wronged trees.

 

[Willoughby]

rumor has it a new sign has appeared on owls-head??a muchroom sign??

I was on Owl's Head Saturday (along with several dozen other people, it was a popular destination). There were no signs or arrows at any of the important waypoints - there were markings at the beginning of the path, I thought they were pretty easy to spot but one group of well-equipped hikers went right by, then came back a few minutes later with their GPS out. A few micro-cairns on the slide, I can't imagine them surviving long given the traffic (or even a stiff breeze). Nothing higher-up on the slide (where I got off line ). Markings that again, I thought were sufficient, at the "Underhill summit" and the "interim summit", but there were groups on the mountain that didn't find either.

I'm no bushwhacker, and the path between the two summits was the hardest-to-follow hiking I've done in the Whites. Surprisingly (to me) it was harder to follow on the return, I got off-line a couple times, and once I floundered my way back to try again. It was easy to tell when I was falling off the ridgeline, but tricky to follow the zigs & zags of the path...

 

[Eric Savage]

The Underhill Summit

My latest compromise idea - no cairns on slide (who needs them?) and no trail signs but 2 signs to mark this over-50-year-old historic path. One would be at the bottom to mark the start of the historic path and one at the Underhill summit recognized for over 40 years.

Actually it's not clear that the 'old' summit is the Underhill summit. Miriam made the discovery on a winter ascent and my suspicion is that her discovery never caught on or that when spring arrived, it was no longer recognizable and people went back to the 'first' summit. If the 'old' summit is the Underhill summit, where were the first parties stopping? - there don't appear to be any candidates for a summit to the south of the 'old' one.
If anyone can provide evidence to the contrary, I'd be very interested but until then, I'm thinking that the Underhill summit is the one that was recently rediscovered.

 

[Eric Savage]

Talking with the Forest Service

The Four Thousand Footer Committee (FTFC) did have a conversation with representatives from the Forest Service last year (thanks to RoySwkr for instigating it).
My impression is that the last few years of fuss over Owl's Head was started by the misguided soul who painted the blue blazes all the way up the herd path back in the early part of this decade. (Until then, there seems to have been a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" approach to what little maintenance was or was not going on up there.) The FS is willing to abide a small cairn marking the start of the herd path - but every time someone, even innocently, adds a stone to it, it gets a step closer to no longer being "small." We also discussed the possibility of some kind of marking at the summit but have not reached any agreement yet. (BTW even FS personnel have a range of opinions on these topics.)
An important thing to keep in mind is that the FS is not responsible for the disappearance of all of the missing signs/cannisters/blazes. They stated clearly that such things are not allowed in designated Wilderness but also said that they aren't responsible for all (or even most) of the disappearances, which are not confined to designated Wilderness. There appears to be someone or someones out there who are even more zealous about removing all traces of human impact than the FS is reputed to be.
The FS did confirm what others have stated here: that there is essentially no chance of making the herd path official or creating an alternative one (and the FTFC has decided not to pursue this option).
We are keeping in touch with the FS on this and other issues of interest to peakbaggers so if you have any questions or concerns to report, we are one possible avenue.

 

[Mike P.]

I'll find out first hand what things look like a little over a week but here is another suggestion.

If marking the herdpath is considered poor form, (thinking above the slide, assuming a 5-8 samll stone cairn is okay on the bottom & I always thought the slide was pretty evident), in areas where it may appear that two choices of herdpath exist; throw/place a few down branches/trees over the false paths. By blocking the wrong paths, you've shown people the coorect path/trail, no paint, no signs. With all the people doing the 48, concentrating use on a single path will quickly make the path evident

It's similar to something I do in on the ADK herpdaths. In areas where I question which way to go, I look for a place where someone has cut a downed tree or other sign that people have been there. (No one goes 3/4 of the way up Redfield or Allen - off trail - with a saw just to cut a few down trees for no reason) If people block a path, there should be a reason, I doubt someone would walk 18 miles round trip just to play a prank on the rest of the hiking community, even 20 days before halloween

 

[RoySwkr]

If the 'old' summit is the Underhill summit, where were the first parties stopping? - there don't appear to be any candidates for a summit to the south of the 'old' one.

There is a bump S of the old summit and somebody said they found the old marked tree there but I couldn't

Actually it's not clear that the 'old' summit is the Underhill summit. Miriam made the discovery on a winter ascent and my suspicion is that her discovery never caught on or that when spring arrived, it was no longer recognizable and people went back to the 'first' summit.

Have you read her book? The summits were visually different in that the one she found had a view and the original one didn't, and she mentions a group going back the next winter to the one she found. At that time the Four Thousand Footer Committee was heavily involved in building trails and marking summits
<FLAME>unlike the existing committee whose sole mission seems to be selling patches</FLAME>
and I'm sure the embarassed committee went back the next summer and marked the place she found if only to see the view.

If anyone can provide evidence to the contrary, I'd be very interested but until then, I'm thinking that the Underhill summit is the one that was recently rediscovered.

I'll ask you what evidence you have for your belief. The best evidence that the Underhill summit was the former summit not the recently-discovered one is a picture in her book showing a view to the E which seems to correspond with that from the former summit, presumably peakbaggers of the era knew of this view and would have continued until they found it.

The FS did confirm what others have stated here: that there is essentially no chance of making the herd path official or creating an alternative one

That may be true for the present officials, but they will move on and that may change

 

[mtnpa]

Actually it's not clear that the 'old' summit is the Underhill summit...If anyone can provide evidence to the contrary, I'd be very interested but until then, I'm thinking that the Underhill summit is the one that was recently rediscovered.

Evidence to the contrary: