Worcester Mt (North Pk)

[Peakbagr]

I've been using the fullsized USGS topos and Nat'l Geo maps and haven't yet been able to locate Worcester Mt (North Pk). Might one of the NE 'whackers be able to lend me a hand locating? The Worcester Range is pretty large and its been a fun but confusing search. Its elevation is 3,490'.

Any tips would be gratefully accepted.

Thanks,

PB

 

[audrey]

I'm pretty sure I've climbed that one, if the 2003 Vt Day Hikers Guide is accurate:

Going north on the Skyline Trail, about 3/4 of a mile after you pass the Hogback Trail,

"The trail continues atop the ridge, with modest changes in elevation, before finally starting a steady climb, leading first to a false summit (3,278 ft) (5.4 mi.) and then the true summit (3,477 ft.) (6.0 mi.) of a nameless peak (USGS Mt. Worcester)."

The trail then descends into a saddle and begins to climb Mt. Worcester before descending to the road via the Worcester Mountain Trail.

The Skyline Trail is a real beauty.

 

[Peakbagr]

Audrey,

Thanks very much.

Alan

 

[Amicus]

. . . Worcester Mt (North Pk). . .

Coordinates (unverified, but from a list thought to be reliable):

44 deg. 25' 50" x 72 deg. 36' 46" (Mt. Worcester Quad)

 

[Peakbagr]

Thanks, guys.

Alan

 

[jniehof]

That's odd...so the N. Peak of Worcester Mtn. is SSW of the main peak? (i.e. the one labelled as Mt. Worcester in the Day Hiker's Guide)

Incidentally, the Map Adventures Northern Vermont map (3rd ed) labels the unnamed 3477' as Hogback, not the 3462 further south which is so labelled. (It also calls the Hogback Trail the "Ridge Trail"...I was very confused reading this thread until I pulled out the Day Hiker's Guide! Caveat hiker! Now I'm only partially confused.)

 

[audrey]

I'm sorry to say that I went back to read the rest of the trail descriptions in that book and it appears we haven't taken Mt. Putnam and Hogback into account. I'm confused too, so I'll have to sort it out another day.

 

[Jazzbo]

Mount Worcester

I located Mt Worcester on Historic topo map in northeast corner of Montpelier Quadrangle. See this link:

http://docs.unh.edu/VT/montgc21ne.jpg

It is shown as 3286' elevation. it is north of Stowe Pinnacle and Hogback Mt. I have Stowe USGS map and Worcester Range runs off map to neihboring Quad. It appears to be on the neihgboring USGS Quad called Mt Worcester Quad.

Jazzbo

 

[audrey]

Jazzbo, your historic map is quite different from what I've got.

My old 3K list (Gene Daniell's, about 1990) names (going north from Mt. Hunger):
N Hunger 3586
Worcester Mts South 3642
Worcester Mts North 3490
Mt. Worcester 3293

This is what I see on your map:
N Hunger c. 3620
? Worcester Mts South c. 3740
Hogback (?not listed on my 3K list but meets 200 ft criterion) c. 3440
Worcester Mts North c. 3580
Mt. Worcester 3286

My 1968 Stowe and Mt. Worcester quads show the same as my 3K list, obviously the list was taken from these quads, and Hogback has only a 40 foot rise from the col and therefore is not listed as a 3K.

 

[Spruce Grouch]

The Green Mountain Club has a map: Mt. Mansfield and the Worcester Range. It would be very helpful for someone planning to climb any of the four peaks on or close to the Skyline Trail. Also it has directions to the four trailheads that lead to the Skyline.

 

[RoySwkr]

My old 3K list (Gene Daniell's, about 1990) names (going north from Mt. Hunger):
N Hunger 3586
Worcester Mts South 3642
Worcester Mts North 3490
Mt. Worcester 3293

It's IMHO poor nomenclature but yes what he calls the N Pk is S of the main peak

Where Hogback is also varies by source

Just do the 4 peaks with 200' cols and don't worry about names, or add Hunger and White Rocks for Peaks of the Universe

 

[Peakbagr]

Looking at the map right now, I'm seeing Worcester Mt North Peak as SW of Mt Worcester, but its elevation is showing on the map as 3,477' unless the elevation has been revised on a later edition of the map.

 

[RoySwkr]

Looking at the map right now, I'm seeing Worcester Mt North Peak as SW of Mt Worcester, but its elevation is showing on the map as 3,477' unless the elevation has been revised on a later edition of the map.

You're getting old like me, and need a magnifying glass. Note 3480 contour to E.

 

[Peakbagr]

Roy,

Thanks, and my eyes are aching.

I've been staring at the map on the computer and using the magnifying tool.
On the pixilated computer map, is it the other bump? Its hidden under the second '7' of 3,477 on my map. Yes, I hope.

 

[albee]

It's IMHO poor nomenclature but yes what he calls the N Pk is S of the main peak

Heaven forbid someone calls into question Gene Daniell's nomenclature!

The confusing point about this naming convention is that you left out a letter in transcribing the name. The peak in question is "Worcester MtS North Peak". You see, White Rock Mtn, Mount Hunger, "North Hunger", Mount Putnam, the Hogback, and "North Worcester Mts" make up the "Worcester Range" or "Worcester Mountains". Mount Worcester proper is also part of this range and it is well-known to lie at the northeast end of the ridge.

The name on the 3K list means that it is an unofficially named bump at the north end of the group of mountains collectively called the Worcester Mtns on the topo quad. (This can be deceiving as the Worcester Mountains continue on, far north of Worcester Mountain as well - all the way to Elmore Mountain - but there are no peaks above 3,000' after you get past Worcester Mtn.)

While peakbagger.com isn't terribly all-inclusive and it doesn't always share the same naming conventions that Mssrs Daniell and Swanson came up with, it does show this peak in their list: http://www.peakbagger.com/peak.aspx?pid=12444

This link shows a list of nearby peaks, as well: http://www.peakbagger.com/search.aspx?tid=R&pid=12444

The 3K list has 4 summits on that ridge that count. 2 of the true summits are off-trail, but as I recall there are no jars to speak of up there due to the proximity of a trail. The views are spectacular if you get good weather, though: http://good-times.webshots.com/album/561467890YwLwgM

 

[mookie]

whatever the names of the peaks are, it is a fantastic range to hike.

 

[Peakbagr]

Good information and summary, Albee.