Wilson "true summit" ?

[mhrsebago]

Although the northern-most peak on the Mt Wilson ridge is "official", my altimeter consistently read the "middle" peak as higher this weekend. And the "middle" sure "looked" higher (we all know how accurate that is!). I don't want to stir up an Owl's Head-like controversy, but does anyone else have any firm data regarding these bumps' elevations?

 

[NH_Mtn_Hiker]

For VT. Mt. Wilson

The northern peak is labeled 3745'. However, the middle peak is clearly 3780'-3800'. Just because a peak has a benchmark, it isn't necessarily the summit. Take West Bond for example. The north-eastern peak is the summit, though there is a benchmark on the peak just south-west of there.

 

[NH_Mtn_Hiker]

Here we go.
Looks like Topozone has an extra 20' contour line in there.

 

[Pig Pen]

I watched my altimeter as I did this in late December. The North Peak (the one with the nice outlook) was 10 feet shorter than the bump just south of there. The northern most bump was way shorter. So I think it is the middle peak. But you might as well go all the way to the north peak because that's where the nice view is.

Another thing to think about on this is that in the end we are all food for maggots, in the meantime we should concentrate on things that are important. (Not that finding the true summit is not important).

 

[mhrsebago]

Thanks for confirming my suspicions, everyone.
Pig Pen, I certainly agree with you - the "true" summit is of minor significance in the larger scheme of hiking trip rewards.
The "Long Trail Guide" and one of my very knowlegable Vermont hiking buddies both declare the northern peak to be THE summit, however.

 

[bill bowden]

True summit of Wilson?

According to the map there are two knobs which are circled by 3780 foot contour lines. One appears quite tiny, the other slightly larger, both significantly higher than the North peak with the outlook.

By my hazy recolection, there used to be a register in a bottle on what I recall as the more northerly of the 3780 foot knobs; it was only a short ditance off the trail in a very large (for the altitude) blasam fir.

In terms of Pigpen's more important things, the LT slightly more northerly over Cleveland and Grant(?) Rooselvelt(?) passes through a section of forest with some very large red spruce trees and uneven aged firs and balsams. Can a knowledgeable person tell me whether this is old-growth forest?

 

[dms]

By my hazy recolection, there used to be a register in a bottle on what I recall as the more northerly of the 3780 foot knobs; it was only a short ditance off the trail in a very large (for the altitude) blasam fir.

Bill, it was there when I first did the peak in the 80's, but on a return trip in the mid 90's it was no longer to be found.

 

[RoySwkr]

The "Long Trail Guide" and one of my very knowlegable Vermont hiking buddies both declare the northern peak to be THE summit, however.

The AMC decrees the higher contour to be the summit
http://www.amc4000footer.org/ne100.htm

The GNIS is not particularly accurate with respect to elevations, look up Bartlett Haystack sometime

And the Long Trail Guide is not that accurate with respect to summits, what they call Baker Peak is neither the highest point nor where the USGS says it is

 

[Papa Bear]

I remember when Onestep and I did this last September, we had the same feelings. To quote from my trip report:

We continued up to Breadloaf, which is a wooded summit a short distance off the trail, had a bite to eat and then turned north to climb Mount Wilson which was about an equal distance in the opposite direction from the shelter. Wilson has a broad ridge and when going over it, it was not clear where the high point was. Someone had told us the summit is obvious, but it was not. We reached the end of the ridge which has a pointy peak with a nice viewpoint nearby about 4:30. I decided to check my altimeter carefully on the way back. Although this northernmost peak was more "peak-like", if you will, I wasn't convinced it was the highest. Sure enough, my altimeter showed two bumps along the ridge to the south of this point between 10 and 20 feet higher. Obsessives that we are, we even bushwhacked a short distance to a fourth bump, but that was indeed lacking. So we decided that one of the two middle bumps was the true summit, but we didn't know which one. When I got back I checked Topozone, and sure enough the north peak is clearly lower than the other two bumps. So whichever one is the true peak, we got it - twice - both coming and going.

So if you hiked from the south to the outloook and returned, you got it (twice). If you hiked from the north to the outlook and returned, you ain't got it!