New Hampshire 200 Highest and New Hampshire 300 Highest Lists

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Tom Rankin said:
Many hikers seem averse to bushwhacking. Witness the endless discussions about Owl's Head.

But once people learn that a herd path has developed on Mt. What-cha-ma-call-it, off they go! :eek:

Maybe that is where some of the reticence to share lists comes from.
Click to expand...

It seems these canisters are a pretty good motivator for some people. I'm curious how those mesh with LNT - who oversees those on state/federal land?
 
rocket21 said:
I took a photo of it as well and that's not quite what it says. Those who have had folks Down's Syndrome in their lives would not have appreciated the variation of the F word used. Unfortunately it's just a sample of the canister filth and backchannel communication (unfortunately, just like high school, it gets around) that has given some of the bushwhacking community a bad name in recent years. Fortunately there are quite a few people out there who are removing the bathroom note entries. Interestingly, others have taken to removing entire canisters because they weren't placed by their clique.

Back to the discussion of exclusivity of lists and fear of overuse of the peaks...considering most of these peaks are on public land, I don't understand why some who have already hiked the peaks think their footsteps (for sake of discussion, we'll say they were the 24th person to go there) were somehow kosher and of no impact, yet if more people come in the future, person 124's footsteps are somehow bad.
Click to expand...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MwHWbsvgQUE
 
rocket21 said:
Interestingly, others have taken to removing entire canisters because they weren't placed by their clique.
Click to expand...

The reference to the canister placement/un-placement clique prompts a quick digression from the thread topic just in case anyone therein sees this: Those PVC canisters are getting really good! My compliments to whoever's been assembling them and steadily improving the design to be both rain tight, durable, and at the same time easy to operate in winter. I'll be visiting a sizable number of NE/NH100 peaks (and a few 3K's) over the next couple of winters, and would be happy to assist with placement/re-placement where needed, if an additional set of engineering-adept 'snowshoes on the ground' would ever be at all helpful. Just let me know. [end of digression]
 
alexmtn said:
The reference to the canister placement/un-placement clique prompts a quick digression from the thread topic just in case anyone therein sees this: Those PVC canisters are getting really good! My compliments to whoever's been assembling them and steadily improving the design to be both rain tight, durable, and at the same time easy to operate in winter.
Click to expand...

I agree the design has advanced. The ones being removed by a certain clique are on some of the lower peaks in the list linked in this thread...those canisters were placed in recent years and are of a smaller, yet otherwise quite similar design to the 'AMC' canisters. It's been unfortunate to visit scenes of these removals in recent hikes, seeing off color remarks written about the individual building these canisters, as well as the debris left behind by those in the clique deciding to take them down.
 
TJsName said:
It seems these canisters are a pretty good motivator for some people. I'm curious how those mesh with LNT - who oversees those on state/federal land?
Click to expand...
I don't know about anything but NY, but here they are illegal. We have very few canisters, aside from the canisters permitted by agreement with the 3500 Club and the DEC. A few peaks have illegal signs. Apparently they are tolerated. But there is the same 'take it down/leave it up' battle going on here (maybe the same people, I have no idea).
 
alexmtn said:
Hmmm. I think we'd all agree that with thousands of NH48-seekers tramping through, the above certainly applies to Owls Head, though I remain amazed by how the Black Pond bushwhack still to this day is not a rutted-in cakewalk. But, really -- when we get to '200, '300, '1000 lists, just exactly how many hikers are we worried there's ever going to be? Enough to create a herd path?? Seriously???

Sadly, as much as we might wish to think/hope that it's something more noble, my experiences tell me that a major driver of the reticence really is a strong feeling of privileged exclusivity. ... Beyond the political benefits, new, like-minded friendships are a wonderful thing.

Alex
Click to expand...
Alex, you are correct, some people are this way. But there are others who are selective in what they say because they don't want to see overuse of fragile areas.

Regarding politics, even though I am the President of the 3500 Club, I'm not a really politician. Not every one who hikes a lot has to be an activist. There are other ways to give back.
 
TJsName said:
It seems these canisters are a pretty good motivator for some people. I'm curious how those mesh with LNT - who oversees those on state/federal land?
Click to expand...
To use an analogy, geocaching is legal anywhere in the GMNF and anywhere but Wilderness and above-treeline in the WMNF. The state of NH has proposed geocache regulations but not implemented them. There are certainly some near summits in NY and a well-known former Ranger is an active geocacher - what's the story, TR?
 
rocket21 said:
Back to the discussion of exclusivity of lists and fear of overuse of the peaks...considering most of these peaks are on public land, I don't understand why some who have already hiked the peaks think their footsteps (for sake of discussion, we'll say they were the 24th person to go there) were somehow kosher and of no impact, yet if more people come in the future, person 124's footsteps are somehow bad.
Click to expand...
Back to the more original discussion of publishing obviously incorrect lists instead of correct ones - what do you see as the benefit of giving wrong elevations that make it harder to locate peaks on a map?
 
RoySwkr said:
To use an analogy, geocaching is legal anywhere in the GMNF and anywhere but Wilderness and above-treeline in the WMNF. The state of NH has proposed geocache regulations but not implemented them. There are certainly some near summits in NY and a well-known former Ranger is an active geocacher - what's the story, TR?
Click to expand...
I believe Caches are forbidden in Wilderness, and require permission in Wild Forests. The cache on the BLM summit is approved. Geocache.com claims they investigate rogue caches and take them off the web if inappropriate.
 
Tom Rankin said:
Alex, you are correct, some people are this way. But there are others who are selective in what they say because they don't want to see overuse of fragile areas.
Click to expand...

Remember, the context for this conversation is '200/'300/'1000 list bushwhacks. It's in that context that I'm hard pressed to envision a scenario wherein one of these peaks would be at any risk at all of being trampled and herd-pathed.

Tom Rankin said:
Regarding politics, even though I am the President of the 3500 Club, I'm not a really politician. Not every one who hikes a lot has to be an activist. There are other ways to give back.
Click to expand...

Tom, I'm certainly not a political activist either -- like you, I've accepted various leadership responsibilities as part of what I do to give back. I don't think of it as activism simply to be positive and welcoming to a person who's interested in furthering his/her relationship with the mountains. First off, it's a straightforward application of the Golden Rule -- and beyond that, it's simply part of sharing my enthusiasm for what I love. And happily, it also happens to be a great way to help strengthen and renew the world's wilderness constituency.
 
alexmtn said:
Remember, the context for this conversation is '200/'300/'1000 list bushwhacks. It's in that context that I'm hard pressed to envision a scenario wherein one of these peaks would be at any risk at all of being trampled and herd-pathed.
Click to expand...
You might be surprised how many people will hike a peak it if has a decent herd path, vs no path at all. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a conversation like:

Person: Is Mt. XYZZY a nice peak?

Me: Yes.

Person: Where is the trail head?

Me: There is no trail.

Person: Ooooohhhh.........
 
In a previous discussion, I defended the use of cairns on unofficial Wilderness paths. I believe Tim said that some view them as offensive and anathema to the Wilderness experience. I really don't see the point of these canisters. If you hiked that peak, YOU know you hiked it. A geocache is just more trash. How can their use square with LNT?
 
Grey J said:
In a previous discussion, I defended the use of cairns on unofficial Wilderness paths. I believe Tim said that some view them as offensive and anathema to the Wilderness experience. I really don't see the point of these canisters. If you hiked that peak, YOU know you hiked it. A geocache is just more trash. How can their use square with LNT?
Click to expand...
Especially considering the profane trash being written in some of the canisters, there is something that could be said about that. I don't think it's unreasonable to have something to signify the highpoint of a peak, though.

RoySwkr said:
Back to the more original discussion of publishing obviously incorrect lists instead of correct ones - what do you see as the benefit of giving wrong elevations that make it harder to locate peaks on a map?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure you've hiked more peaks in New Hampshire than anyone else who's posted in this thread, so I suspect you have firsthand information on pretty much any of the peaks you think are listed or omitted in error. Maybe you could just post them here, so that either the list maintainers can make changes, or so that those considering working on the lists can ensure they've hiked all of the possible peaks?
 
I, for one, think it's nice when I get to a summit and find an actual sign (many of which are/were historic if they haven't been "stolen") or a label on a canister (if there is one, or a pillbox, or whatever) so I know I found the correct summit. I don't copy tracks on a GPS so I do use old topos (usually on my phone) to find the summit and sometimes I get to the wrong one. Other times, I think a sub-peak is the summit but I don't find anything so I keep hunting.
 
Tom Rankin said:
You might be surprised how many people will hike a peak it if has a decent herd path, vs no path at all. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a conversation like:

Person: Is that peak next to Mt. Plugh over there a nice peak?

Me: Yes.

Person: Where is the trail head?

Me: There is no trail.

Person: Ooooohhhh.........
Click to expand...

Admittedly tough to follow all the themes in this multithreaded thread -- but if you remember the this sub-discussion...

Yes, I've had/heard that conversation many times as well. It supports my point. Absent some other motivation [I contend that being on a '200/'300/'1000 list is sufficient motivation for only a really small number of people], the "Ooooohhhh" crowd will indeed steer clear of such a peak, the peak won't get rutted, and hence they'll continue to steer clear. So no herd path harm done by being supportive/encouraging to the new person.

NE100 in the 3 seasons: I agree with the concern.
 
rocket21 said:
I'm pretty sure you've hiked more peaks in New Hampshire than anyone else who's posted in this thread, so I suspect you have firsthand information on pretty much any of the peaks you think are listed or omitted in error. Maybe you could just post them here, so that either the list maintainers can make changes, or so that those considering working on the lists can ensure they've hiked all of the possible peaks?
Click to expand...
Back in reply #11 I offered to create a correct list if they specified what criteria to use, I never got an answer from Ed or Bryan and suspect I never will because the present list is such a hodgepodge that numerous
peaks would need to change if it was standardized.

No hiking experience is needed to verify an existing list, in fact you don't even need to know how to read a map for 80% of the peaks. Just go to listsofjohn.com and compare elevations and verify col depths. LoJ
unfortunately uses a 300' col depth for unnamed peaks so some peaks can't be verified there including those that also lack 200' cols.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B the Hiker
2023 other Grid lists
Replies
2
Views
540
hikeritz
hikeritz
B the Hiker
Grid Finishers 2022
Replies
7
Views
1K
VinnieG
VinnieG
Ed'n Lauky
Pepper--One of the greatest New England hiking dogs
Replies
11
Views
2K
sierra
sierra
SpencerVT
Finished the Vermont 500 Highest List
Replies
5
Views
1K
TEO
TEO
Salty
Time to get rid of the NEHH
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
John H Swanson
J

Latest posts

Top