North Kinsman's true summit

When hiking the Kinsmans last Sunday, I was discussing with my companions the question of where the true North summit might be. At the time of the discussion we were on our way back from tagging the cairn on the South summit and had been snacking at the wonderful viewpoints on North. We looked around at the start of the viewpoint spur path and couldn't quite decide if the highpoint was on the trail. Then as we started heading back to the Mt Kinsman Tr I noticed a big pointy boulder with a small cairn of 3 or 4 rocks on it, just to the right of the trail. It looked to me that this was a higher point than anywhere else around, but wasn't sure. After getting home I looked it up in the White Mountain Guide and it looks like that was indeed the true summit. At the time we were there I thought about scrambling up onto it, but it was a little difficult-looking and I was tired and unsure if it was the true summit, so only reached up to tag it with a trekking pole.

So my questions - have any of you purists out there been up on top of this rock? And how were the views up there? And if you haven't physically touched the top of this rock should you claim the peak? And for that matter, if the summit of a mountain has a cairn on it, do purists feel that you need to touch the top rock of the cairn or is touching the cairn, or standing next to it, sufficient?

The peak of N Kinsman is indeed that little highpoint right on the trail just before the view spur trail if you are going south.

-dave-

North Kinsman Summit

I was just up there Monday. Like you, I wasn't 100% sure where the true summit was, and somehow didn't notice the boulder until I was on my way down. Being a bit of a purist, I did scramble to the top of it, nearly losing my balance trying to stand up at the very tippy top. This is definitely the highest point, though not by much.

On a lot of summits it's hard to tell exactly where the highest point is. Heck, if not for the rock pile on South Kinsman, I'm not sure one could discern the true highest point (BTW - I also touched the highest rock on top of the cairn - twice just to be sure!). And sometimes, as is usually the case on Mt. Hood, the absolute highest point is on top of a nasty looking cornice, which I'm not about the go stand on. My usual line of thinking in these instances is as long as I'm certain the top of my head is higher than the highest point - in effect placing "me" higher than the actual summit - I'm satisfied that I've climbed the peak.

- Strider

Claim it. But then again, I'm not a stickler for detail like that.

strider said:

Being a bit of a purist, I did scramble to the top of it, nearly losing my balance trying to stand up at the very tippy top.

Click to expand...

Yikes! That would sure make for a nasty fall into the bush!

strider said:

My usual line of thinking in these instances is as long as I'm certain the top of my head is higher than the highest point - in effect placing "me" higher than the actual summit - I'm satisfied that I've climbed the peak.

Click to expand...

I like that way of looking at it!

I think you should all go back and do a handstand on the true summit or it doesn't count....by the way, I've done the Kinsmans...let me know how it goes...

rocksnrolls said:

And if you haven't physically touched the top of this rock should you claim the peak?

Click to expand...

If you are a purist, you must touch the top of the rock to count it, but for ordinary hikers walking by on the trail counts

And for that matter, if the summit of a mountain has a cairn on it, do purists feel that you need to touch the top rock of the cairn or is touching the cairn, or standing next to it, sufficient?

Click to expand...

Cairns being man-made, there is no need to ascend them, touching the highest ground is adequate

At the time of the discussion we were on our way back from tagging the cairn on the South summit

Click to expand...

But here's where we may have you, there are 2 rock ledges with cairns on them at the S Peak, and the S one is generally considered higher. So if you didn't visit both...

- a self-appointed expert

What follows is my personal opinion, not that of the Four Thousand Footer Committee, aka FTFC (perhaps Eric might want to chime in):

I believe that "peakbaggers" are hikers, who want to get to the "top" of a mountain without too much splitting of hairs. On the other hand county highpointers are definitely hair splitters, the serious ones will walk a grid over the highest contour on the topo if there is no clearly defined highest point.

On a summit like South Twin, with two bumps both of which are easy to climb, I will climb one or the other, both if I feel like it.

On the other hand, the first time I hiked The Horn I was unable to climb the rocky summit cone. It was clear that it was the summit, and that I had failed to climb it, so I did not claim it (one of my companions who also failed claimed it; it is a judgement that each of us must make). I returned a couple of years later, more skilled at scrambling, and climbed it.

In the case of North Kinsman, I always knew that that rock was the true summit, and did not bother trying to scramble up it until I had "bagged the peak" several times. That was a hair that I felt was best left unsplit, though Lord knows I have been guilty of splitting other hairs.

Of course, going up the Blueberry Ledges Trail to the ledgy South Summit and not continuing along the Rollins Trail to the true summit is another matter. Here I believe that there is no ambiguity: you did not go to the summit.

The FTFC operates on the honor principle; if you claim that you have climbed a peak nobody will ask you for the evidence, nor for the exact spot that you reached. To me that means that it is up to you to define, within the limits of common sense, what you mean by "reaching the summit".

RoySwkr said:

If you are a purist, you must touch the top of the rock to count it, but for ordinary hikers walking by on the trail counts

Click to expand...

Darn it, Roy says in one sentence what it took me several paragraphs to say (less clearly)

When I was up there I thought that that rock was the high point, but the way I remember it I just reached up and touched its top with my hand. How could that be considered to be less acceptable than standing on it? I don't take off my boots and socks to get a bare foot on a tippy-top point otherwise.

<soapbox>
Get as close as you can without putting your life in jeopardy. If you feel like you were at the top, then you were at the top. Hike your own hike...don't worry about someone else's rules.
</soapbox>

rocksnrolls said:

...
So my questions - have any of you purists out there been up on top of this rock? And how were the views up there? And if you haven't physically touched the top of this rock should you claim the peak? And for that matter, if the summit of a mountain has a cairn on it, do purists feel that you need to touch the top rock of the cairn or is touching the cairn, or standing next to it, sufficient?

Click to expand...

Now that you've posted this, you are obliged to return and tag the 'true' summit! If only you hadn't mentioned it...

trailbiscuit said:

<soapbox>
Get as close as you can without putting your life in jeopardy. If you feel like you were at the top, then you were at the top. Hike your own hike...don't worry about someone else's rules.
</soapbox>

Click to expand...

Now that's an attitude I can fully agree with!

Thanks for all the input and opinions on the matter. And yes, I think I'll try to get up on top of that boulder the next time I'm up there, just cause I want to not cause I have to. I'm hoping to do a Kinsman Ridge traverse later this year, so maybe then...

I'm glad I read this thread last night as I had planned a visit to both Kinsmans today. I found the summit boulder pretty easy to climb, actually. It was sliding down on my backside that hurt!
-veg

Mohamed Ellozy said:

Of course, going up the Blueberry Ledges Trail to the ledgy South Summit and not continuing along the Rollins Trail to the true summit is another matter. Here I believe that there is no ambiguity: you did not go to the summit.

Click to expand...

Funny you should mention Whiteface. It was the only summit I wasn't sure about. I must have hiked half way across the Rollins Trail before I turned back. As luck would have it, Chicken Boy had a picture taken at the same angle at the summit of Whiteface to confirm that my summit photo is correct.

Yes -- I'm that anal.

And I climbed up the backside of the boulder of N. Kinsman to touch the top. Simply because I needed to fulfill my ritual. Hike, touch the top, photo, etc. It worked for me. If anyone else didn't do it, I don't think that four foot difference matters much in hiking 4000 footers. Close enough. Each to their own.