Length of Firewarden's Trail on Mt Hale??

Does anyone know the length of the Firewarden's Trail up Mt. Hale? It almost certainly is given in older WMGs, and someone may have measured it with a GPSr.

I am asking because I am attempting to calculate the length of the Twins, Guyot, Zealand, Hale and back loop. The new lost trails site seems less informative than the old one; I cannot find the trail descriptions that used to be there.

I assume you've already tried eyeballing it on the 1941 map

The problem with "eyeballing" is that I have no idea how accurately (or otherwise) the map depicts the switchbacks. That is why I would prefer a field measurement (old WMG) or at least a GPSr estimate (less accurate than a measuring wheel, more accurate than eyeballing).

Mohamed, if you care about accuracy, this might not help, but I consider it 5 miles long.

[edit to add: But then again I'd be wrong, perhaps. I have only taken this route in winter. Is there a road segment that is gated in winter that I would have to ski up?]

I've done separate hikes up the Fire Warden's trail to the summit of Hale and back to the road in 2:30 and 2:45. It is certainly not 5 miles. We have estimated the trail length, including the section of the North Twin Trail, to be 3.5 miles in length.

JohnL

nhmtnhiker is the king of the fire wardens trail. are you asking for distance including the walk in on the north twin trail? pm him or maybe he will chime in here. I seem to remember that loop being 18 miles. I would love to do that loop soon

hikerfast said:

nhmtnhiker is the king of the fire wardens trail...

Click to expand...

You're so funny.

As close as I can calculate, (using the 14th and 27th editions of the AMC WMG), it's 1.0 mile from the North Twin Trailhead to the Mt. Hale Trail (commonly referred to as the Hale Fire Warden's Trail) which puts it between the first two river crossings. Then it's 2.5 miles up the trail to the summit. So John L was correct...3.5 miles from trail head to summit.

Thanks, NH_Mtn_Hiker!! I was pretty sure that someone here had an old WMG.

hikerfast said:

I seem to remember that loop being 18 miles. I would love to do that loop soon.

Click to expand...

Pretty close, I get 17.9 miles and 5,300 feet.

Mohamed Ellozy said:

Thanks, NH_Mtn_Hiker!! I was pretty sure that someone here had an old WMG.Pretty close, I get 17.9 miles and 5,300 feet.

Click to expand...

Add 2 miles and 200' for the round trip in Winter from the parking area at the end of Little River Road. (due to Haystack Road being closed)

NH_Mtn_Hiker said:

Add 2 miles and 200' for the round trip in Winter from the parking area at the end of Little River Road. (due to Haystack Road being closed)

Click to expand...

Also add 2 miles for going back and forth along the N Twin Tr looking for the the start of the Firewarden's Trail


A couple of weeks back I decided to try the Firewarden's Trail for the first time (along with the complete loop described above). I was solo and my finding the start relied solely on what I had pieced together from various web references. After almost three passes between the two river crossings and one wrong start I was about to give up and go to N. Twin directly. Then, like in one of those video games where the hidden door opens up, there was the fairly obvious start of the trail.

chipc said:

Also add 2 miles for going back and forth along the N Twin Tr looking for the the start of the Firewarden's Trail


A couple of weeks back I decided to try the Firewarden's Trail for the first time (along with the complete loop described above). I was solo and my finding the start relied solely on what I had pieced together from various web references. After almost three passes between the two river crossings and one wrong start I was about to give up and go to N. Twin directly. Then, like in one of those video games where the hidden door opens up, there was the fairly obvious start of the trail.

Click to expand...

The Fire Warden Trail can be difficult to locate from the bottom...but it's easy to find from the top.

It can also be difficult to follow going up it for the first time due to old roads and herdpaths branching off to the sides forming "Y" intersections. Following the trail down is pretty easy though. Should you lose the trail while descending, just keep going down hill and make a right turn when you get to the river.

What's this ME, your guidebook collection doesn't go back to 1948?

Note that the original Mt Hale Trail started by immediately crossing the Little River while the customary route today is to stay on the E bank until you pick it up. I agree with the 3.5 mile estimate either way.

hikerfast said:

I seem to remember that loop being 18 miles. I would love to do that loop soon

Click to expand...

Me too, but if I was that close to the Bonds then I'd want to pop over...

NH_Mtn_Hiker said:

The Fire Warden Trail can be difficult to locate from the bottom...but it's easy to find from the top.

It can also be difficult to follow going up it for the first time due to old roads and herdpaths branching off to the sides forming "Y" intersections. Following the trail down is pretty easy though. Should you lose the trail while descending, just keep going down hill and make a right turn when you get to the river.

Click to expand...

Now that I have done it I agree that it is very easy to find from the summit of Hale. I just didn't want to get into the situation of having hiked 14 miles, not find it, and have to backtrack or really bushwack.

RoySwkr said:

What's this ME, your guidebook collection doesn't go back to 1948?

Me too, but if I was that close to the Bonds then I'd want to pop over...

Click to expand...

1948 and older WMGs are very expensive, I do not feel that I am willing to pay the price.

This is a tough loop, adding the Bonds seems to me to transform it into a killer loop

1955 WMG says .....

NH MT Hkr is right again! He wins the rubber tip that fell off my trekking pole on Franconia Brk Trail just above the beaver ponds if he can find it. My 1955 WMG gives distance from Little River Trail to top of Mt Hale as 2.5 miles.

Another lost trail is the Tuttle Brook Trail. This trail started near where Tuttle Brook empties into the AMMO River close by junction of Rt 3 and Rt 302. Might this be in area of the Living Water Camp Ground? The Tuttle Brook Trail went along Tuttle Brook for a ways and made a junction with Mt Hale Trail (aka Fire Warden Trail) 1/2 mile from Summit of Mt Hale.

Dr Wu posted TR for just the loop you're thinking about. It sounded interesting but not for the fainthearted. Do a search of Trip Reports with key words and you'll find it. I tried to paste a link but couldn't figure how.

Just checked a GPSr track from last October ... N. Twin to Firewarden 1.0 miles, Firewarden's 2.3. Not too far off from the WMG numbers, which I trust more.

Hope to do it on Sunday, I heard that the foliage is quite good along the trail. (Where did I hear that? Silly question, at The Mountain Wanderer, aka White Mountain Gossip Central.)

Jazzbo said:

NH MT Hkr is right again! He wins the rubber tip that fell off my trekking pole on Franconia Brk Trail just above the beaver ponds if he can find it. My 1955 WMG gives distance from Little River Trail to top of Mt Hale as 2.5 miles...

Click to expand...

I'm glad your '55 guide and my '55 guide agree.

Mohamed,
Does the GPS track account for the angle up the mountain or does it just measure the horizontal distance. I never paid any attention to mine.

NH_Mtn_Hiker said:

Does the GPS track account for the angle up the mountain or does it just measure the horizontal distance.

Click to expand...

The GPS (and your map) gives horizontal distance--the difference between horizontal and 3-D distance is often very small.

However, a distance measured by a GPS track is often not very accurate.

Doug

NH_Mtn_Hiker said:

Does the GPS track account for the angle up the mountain or does it just measure the horizontal distance. I never paid any attention to mine.

Click to expand...

Interesting question, must admit that I never thought about it. But I do notice that most of my GPSr tracks give a shorter length than the guidebook, so that suggests that the track length does not take elevation gain into account. In other words:

d = sqrt((x2 -x1)^2 + (y2 - y1)^2)

rather than

d = sqrt((x2 -x1)^2 + (y2 - y1)^2 + (z2-z1)^2)

I am assuming that over these short distances they use plane rather than spherical trigonometry

Not too hard to test, but I must admit that I am too lazy to do so (at least right now).

In any case, the distance between two track points is often of the order of magnitude of the error in each point, so I trust wheel-based distances much more.

I've checked mine occasionally on hikes when I've had it along, and it seems to be horizontal distance. Ergo don't bother checking your GPS to see how far you've come on e.g. the North Tripyramid slide.