Averill and South Lyon 10/14/06

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Seve

New member
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
11
Reaction score
4
My first VFTT trip report! At 9 PM Friday night I got the word from an unnamed but highly placed official in our household that I was child and obligation-free for Saturday. I quickly decided to take the Plattsburg ferry over from Vermont and check out some previously unexplored terrain on the Lyon Mountain massif west of Plattsburgh, NY. I had just read Spence’s recent VFTT trip report for Averill and Lyon, and for a while have been intrigued about reports of old forests - “lightly cut” in the conservation vernacular – that were included in the State of New York and TNC purchases and easements on the Domtar Industries lands around Lyon Mountain. So I had a general destination. I didn’t know exactly where the lightly cut woods were, but I reckoned five or so miles of bushwhacking should turn up a candidate site or two.

My previous hiking experience in this area was limited to a quick stroll years ago up the standard Lyon Mountain trail from the east. On that hike I gazed upon the antenna crowned shoulder of Averill, and coveted its hundred highest summit, tower blight and all. But after poking around and searching fruitlessly for a “reasonable opening” through the spruce-fir thickets that ringed the open summit of Lyon, I reckoned that “there’s gotta be an easier way” to reach a mountaintop with a huge communication tower. So I put the project off for a decade. Middle age and a young child will do that. In the interim, occasionally hiking northeastern 3,000 footers unfortunately crept back onto my list of “things to do”. By the time I headed back to Averill by the easy route I was forced to acknowledge the existence of South Lyon and Northwest Lyon, solely due to their arbitrary inclusion on some silly list, and to at least entertain the idea of bagging them (as Pigpen recently said so eloquently to the eminent Dennis Crispo “thanks a lot” ;) ).

Perhaps it would have been helpful to inquire on this illustrious forum about directions to the trailhead and such. But, hey, there were some tiny red road lines in my ancient Delorme that lead from the hamlet of Lyon Mountain to the summit of Averill. Plus, as a guy of the north country, I instinctively knew that I could find the trailhead without asking directions. Ended up parking at the end of a dead end dirt road that was clearly not the trailhead, directly north of a small on-stream reservoir and a little past the gated entrance to the old iron mine. Crossed the dam outlet to a dirt road and reached what looked like the official end of traveled road trailhead just past a large municipal water supply tank.

I cruised up to the big antenna and assorted communications detritus in about an hour or so. I could see higher terrain off to the northeast, so I started off through the woods and quickly came across a flagged path to the summit of Averill. The view of northern Vermont was outstanding from the big east-facing summit ledges, as was the view of the ridgeline and col route over to Lyon. From the southern ledge atop Averill I could also see what appeared to be the summit ridge of South Lyon, so I took a compass bearing and used that plus a topo map to bushwhack over to the peak.

The bushwhack from Averill to South Lyon was actually “rather pleasant”, speaking in the understated upmanship code that characterizes certain bushwhacking discussions. In any event, there was little sensation of any previous human activity once I left behind the surreal tangles of old tower cables and huge abandoned electrical transformer canisters with official stickers that claimed that PCB levels were too low for anyone to worry their pretty little heads about (or take responsibility for). It took me a little less than two hours to leisurely ‘thwack south to the summit of South Lyon. Spotted one old yellow double blazed hardwood along a possible ancient trail or route in the col between Averill and South Lyon, and also crossed a northwesterly (I think) line of extremely recent blazes and pink flagging that I suspect was related to recent boundary marking work I came across shortly after.

As I crested the summit ridge of South Lyon, tired and proud, the first thing I saw was a backpack on the ground and a line of east-west trending orange blazes with extremely fresh paint (I could smell it). Dude probably traipses up there every day to hang out and dab a little orange on the trees. The whooooosh of my rapidly deflating ego was audible upon reaching this "rarely visited peak". I headed east for a short distance and came upon two more backpacks, a hand paint sprayer, and a chainsaw hanging on a tree, all within about 25 feet or so of what I though was the actual summit highpoint. I hooted a few times to locate the blazing crew but got no response. I wonder if the recent blazing activity is related to the recent New York or TNC land purchase or conservation easement on 120,000 acres of Domtar land?

I suspected that a pink-flagged rocky knoll near the blaze line was the true summit, so I headed there to look around for a summit register. I didn’t find one but spotted an old pint sized or so plastic peanut butter container on the ground a few feet away, partially chewed and mangled, with moss growing inside, and wondered if it might have housed a register once upon a time. A blazed and cut line trends westerly (and also southerly I vaguely recollect), so I wonder if there is a new relatively easy access to South Lyon via the blazed line from the west, where the topo map shows a 4WD road in the valley to the west of Averill and South Lyon. Sad to think of missing out on such a sweet bushwhack though.

My return plan was to descent the shoulder of South Lyon and bushwhack north for a few miles along the western flank of Averill to eventually intersect the powerline and ATV trail to Averill. I descended to the South Lyon - Averill col, then headed north, passing through two sections of forest that distinctly felt like old growth around the 2,400 feet elevation. Very cool. Big gnarly old hardwoods, principally yellow birch. Huge old rotting snags and stumps. Lots of dead wood in varying states of decay. Lots of forest regeneration, mostly softwoods. No evidence of historical logging. Possible Old Growth? It stirs the soul to hike for a while in a northeastern U.S. forest and not feel the weight of human land use history beneath ones feet.

In the late afternoon clear conditions changed rather rapidly, and it started snowing heavily on the bushwhack slog north. After a couple hours and several miles I finally popped out of the woods on the powerline trail to Averill at around the 2400 foot elevation, cold, wet, and a little spent. I headed uphill as shadows fell and poked around in a quick search for the illusive 3,010+ foot summit of NW Lyon, and ultimately decided that it would have to wait for another day. I was tired and chilled. Darkness, quite frankly, had officially fallen. It looks like easy access to the summit of NW Lyon off the trail to Averill, and I’ll be back to hit it sometime soon, perhaps on the way over to Lyon through the highly touted Lyon-Averill col.
 
Seve, nice tr I looked at the topo maps to follow your route out of curiosity. Perhaps you can save yourself the effort on NW Lyon. According to Topozone there are two in there one northwest of Lyon marked 3013 feet and another west slightly to the north with a top contour line of 3000 feet. The problem is as I see it in the Adrondacks the standard to be counted as a separate peak is the existence of a 300 foot col. Check here, I put the red x between the peaks in question. Lyon

The col between Avery/Lyon and the peak with the 3000 top contour line is above 2700 feet appx 2760 you can see the 2780 line above the col. Even if you add a half contour line to the peak calling it 3010 you are not close to a 300 foot rise. Therefore it cannot be considered a separate peak.

The summit marked 3013 has a col between it and Lyon that is somewhere below 2860 but above 2840. Clearly this cannot be considered a separate peak. I suspect the other summit is the one on the 770 list. However I strongly believe to create a list of peaks one must use the local standard. In the Adirondacks that standard is 300 feet. Of course the falls squarely into the realm of opinion But the Adirondack 46 and the Hundred Highest are based on the 300 foot col rule. But again anyone can make a list using their own criteria.

Anyway one very good TR and enjoyable to read, didn't mean to nit pic your list just pointing out different areas have different criteria. I saw a 100 highest list recently for the Washington Cascades and they are using a 800 foot col rule, ouch!
 
NW Lyon and prominence standards

Antlerpeak,

I appreciate your interest in hiking on the Lyon Mountain massif, and your efforts to save me future effort on the NW peak of Lyon Mountain with the topo map and helpful prominence calculations. I’m all about “saving the effort”, although a good walk in the woods before big game season really ramps up is always welcome even if one doesn’t end up atop a peak on someone’s peak list. Your prominence calculations for potential NW Lyon candidates concur with mine. Clean prominence of 240+/- feet for the southern of the two peaks. Clean prominence well under 200 feet for the northern candidate. Its always helpful to get someone else to confirm one's map-reading skills, as one can stare at topos a bit too long into the evening and easily miss something obvious.

I noted your interest in the Northeast 770 list in past threads, and was a little surprised that you chose my humble TR to critique the use of the standard 200-foot col rule by Dennis Crispo and John Swanson to qualify the 770 peaks, and their inclusion of the NW Peak of Lyon Mtn. But, please Mister Antler, please, I swear I didn’t put the NW Lyon on the Northeast 770 list! I swear, on Verplank Colvin’s Rite-in-the-Rain surveyor’s field book, that it was Crispo and Swanson! I jest, as I sense in your post just a hint of wanting to school a new face on VFTT regarding local standards in all things prominent and peak worthy. Worthy goal, indeed. Hey, given a choice between attempting to school 770 completers Crispo and Swanson about local standards and their use of a 200-foot rise, and schooling Seve the forum newbie, I’d choose Seve as well, and I AM Seve ;)

As you know, there are some great threads on minimum rises used for various peak lists in the VFTT archives. You make an excellent case for respecting local standards, and note that in the Adirondacks that standard is a 300-foot rise. And far be it for me to suggest that the grand hiking traditions associated with the 46er list be altered or discarded simply to achieve consistency with modern maps. As a 46er you are well aware of the either 300-feet rise or ¾ mile separation qualifier, and, no doubt, can rattle off the names of the slew of ADK “4,000” – footers that don’t even meet a 200-foot prominence standard, let alone 300 feet. I also have never been one to let a few “standards” get in the way of a proud tradition like the ADK 46. Why mess with a good thing that thousands of happy campers strive for. The majority of these peaks actually meet the universal 300 foot rise standard you mention, and if someone wants to redefine the 3,000 footer list they are, as you point out, welcome to make a list using their own criteria.

Me - I’m way too lazy to make up my own lists. I reckon I’ll choose to slowly, almost imperceptibly slowly, continue picking away at the Adirondack hundred highest list, with their arbitrary 300-foot rises and ¾ mile separations, in the back of my ancient Guide to Adirondack Trails. And I’ll continue exploring and shuffling up some of the 770+/- Northeast 3,000 footers with arbitrary 200-foot rises, like NW Lyon. I mean, on just a day trip to Averill and the S Peak of Lyon Mt. I scored an easy ADK HH peak, two 3,000 footers, amazing panoramic views of Lyon, the Green Mountains from Canada almost to Killington and south through the Daks, a long interesting bushwhack, and a stroll through potential old growth. That’s pretty sweet.

Jeff
 
Seve said:
Antlerpeak,

I appreciate your interest in hiking on the Lyon Mountain massif, and your efforts to save me future effort on the NW peak of Lyon Mountain with the topo map and helpful prominence calculations. I’m all about “saving the effort”, although a good walk in the woods before big game season really ramps up is always welcome even if one doesn’t end up atop a peak on someone’s peak list.

Actually your post provided the opportunity for my rant about a pet peeve. Consider it a public service in the interest of saving a fellow hiker needless steps to a peak that should not be on a 3K list.

Seve said:
Your prominence calculations for potential NW Lyon candidates concur with mine. Clean prominence of 240+/- feet for the southern of the two peaks. Clean prominence well under 200 feet for the northern candidate. Its always helpful to get someone else to confirm one's map-reading skills, as one can stare at topos a bit too long into the evening and easily miss something obvious.

Here too your effort in reviewing the topo reference I offered verifies that I did not read the terrain in error. We are in agreement that neither of these minor bumps would count under local rules.

Seve said:
I noted your interest in the Northeast 770 list in past threads, and was a little surprised that you chose my humble TR to critique the use of the standard 200-foot col rule by Dennis Crispo and John Swanson to qualify the 770 peaks, and their inclusion of the NW Peak of Lyon Mtn. But, please Mister Antler, please, I swear I didn’t put the NW Lyon on the Northeast 770 list! I swear, on Verplank Colvin’s Rite-in-the-Rain surveyor’s field book, that it was Crispo and Swanson!

I certainly did not wish to suggest it was you who made up that list. Your invoking the sacred name of Verplank Colvin attest to a firm knowledge of Adirondack lore. Your trip report indicated you were in fact following that particular collection of 3k mountains. It was merely my attempt to alert an Adirondack hiker to a questionable list in case you were unaware of its not following the dictates of the brothers Marshall. In fairness though my critique of your trip report said it was "a very good TR and enjoyable to read."

Seve said:
I jest, as I sense in your post just a hint of wanting to school a new face on VFTT regarding local standards in all things prominent and peak worthy. Worthy goal, indeed. Hey, given a choice between attempting to school 770 completers Crispo and Swanson about local standards and their use of a 200-foot rise, and schooling Seve the forum newbie, I’d choose Seve as well, and I AM Seve ;)

I believe this is where the misunderstanding lies. There was no intent to "school a newbie". It was merely an opportunity to point out a disagreement with a popular list. Had someone written about completing the 770 I certainly would have mentioned the 100 or so errant entries. It is clear from the trip report that you are no newbie when it comes to back country travel. Your excursion deserves a tip of the cap as it certainly reflected an advanced level of ability. If you took this to be a slight I humbly express regret for what is a misunderstanding as that certainly was not my intent. You did say you jest and I get the sense that Jeff does not take a back seat to anyone who may have climbed the 770. Most certainly "Seve" is not an easy target as implied above.

Seve said:
As you know, there are some great threads on minimum rises used for various peak lists in the VFTT archives. You make an excellent case for respecting local standards, and note that in the Adirondacks that standard is a 300-foot rise. And far be it for me to suggest that the grand hiking traditions associated with the 46er list be altered or discarded simply to achieve consistency with modern maps. As a 46er you are well aware of the either 300-feet rise or ¾ mile separation qualifier, and, no doubt, can rattle off the names of the slew of ADK “4,000” – footers that don’t even meet a 200-foot prominence standard, let alone 300 feet. I also have never been one to let a few “standards” get in the way of a proud tradition like the ADK 46. Why mess with a good thing that thousands of happy campers strive for.


No one is suggesting that we mess with a good thing that thousands of happy campers strive for. I doubt that anyone can consider the 770 list a standard or one that thousands strive for. I submit that the term "slew" in reference to ADK peaks that don’t even meet a 200-foot prominence standard, let alone 300 feet, is rather misleading. Just which ones don't have a 200 foot prominence?

There are two schools of thought here the 46R's choose to stay with tradition by keeping with the original list. They did have errors, but it was their choice to retain those few specific mountains for the continuity of the prime list. The A.M.C., keepers of the New England 4K lists chose to "update" their roster as map changes occurred. There is no wrong answer here both groups are well within their right and I respect their decisions. These organization did not attempt to impress their criteria on the other. Simply because the maps are modern does not make them correct. Many "experts" contend the conversion to metric contained numerous errors. Some newer maps are less accurate than the older 15 minute series.

Seve said:
Me - I’m way too lazy to make up my own lists. I reckon I’ll choose to slowly, almost imperceptibly slowly, continue picking away at the Adirondack hundred highest list, with their arbitrary 300-foot rises and ¾ mile separations, in the back of my ancient Guide to Adirondack Trails. And I’ll continue exploring and shuffling up some of the 770+/- Northeast 3,000 footers with arbitrary 200-foot rises, like NW Lyon. I mean, on just a day trip to Averill and the S Peak of Lyon Mt. I scored an easy ADK HH peak, two 3,000 footers, amazing panoramic views of Lyon, the Green Mountains from Canada almost to Killington and south through the Daks, a long interesting bushwhack, and a stroll through potential old growth. That’s pretty sweet.

I can't argue with your summation, your description of that hike makes it sound like a worthy destination. In that regard it seems we agree after all. It seems we also agree that the ADK and New England hiking organizations were within their rights to establish the criteria to determine what constitutes a separate summit. Therefore I submit that C&S violated the "local standard" when they made their list and I voiced my objection to that.
 
Seve, welcome aboard. Bring 'em on anytime - very enjoyable read about a generally bleak kind of hike to a communication tower. Having been there, your description of the debris evoked personal memories of contempt.
 
Seve said:
The bushwhack from Averill to South Lyon was actually “rather pleasant”, speaking in the understated upmanship code that characterizes certain bushwhacking discussions. In any event, there was little sensation of any previous human activity once I left behind the surreal tangles of old tower cables and huge abandoned electrical transformer canisters with official stickers that claimed that PCB levels were too low for anyone to worry their pretty little heads about (or take responsibility for). It took me a little less than two hours to leisurely ‘thwack south to the summit of South Lyon. Spotted one old yellow double blazed hardwood along a possible ancient trail or route in the col between Averill and South Lyon, and also crossed a northwesterly (I think) line of extremely recent blazes and pink flagging that I suspect was related to recent boundary marking work I came across shortly after.
So the trail to S Lyon on the USGS map is gone?
AntlerPeak said:
However I strongly believe to create a list of peaks one must use the local standard. In the Adirondacks that standard is 300 feet.
The problem comes with composite lists such as the 770 or NE111. The NE111 was fudged by just combining 2 disparate lists and hence has no consistent basis. The 770 uses a consistent 200' rule and hence disagrees with local lists that do not. I personally favor consistency within a list.
 
Just a few comments, then I will shut up and go hiking.

Thank you all for welcoming me to the VFTT forum.

So the trail to S Lyon on the USGS map is gone?

If there’s a trail there I couldn’t find it. I suspect that it may have been a logging road that showed up on the quad long ago. I was hoping to run into the trail on South Lyon and cruise back to the car, but that never happened.

I submit that the term "slew" in reference to ADK peaks that don’t even meet a 200-foot prominence standard, let alone 300 feet, is rather misleading. Just which ones don't have a 200 foot prominence?

Donaldson, Emmons, Gray, Iroquois, Armstrong, Nye for starters, I’ve heard tell. Still others if one goes metric on us, but I won’t go there. Perhaps not a “slew” sensu stricta, but that lengthy a list of sub-200 ft. risers inevitably starts to develop a distinctively slewish taste and odor. And if it smells like a slew, and tastes like a slew …

It was merely my attempt to alert an Adirondack hiker to a questionable list in case you were unaware of its not following the dictates of the brothers Marshall.

Even if you add a half contour line to the peak calling it 3010 you are not close to a 300 foot rise. Therefore it cannot be considered a separate peak.

I’ll step gingerly out onto the dance floor of debate for one final twirl to politely note that what you refer to as a “local standard” – the Marshall’s peak defining criteria, has evolved into what is perhaps better described as a “local tradition” that embraces two distinct ways to qualify as a peak and numerous exceptions to the original criteria. IMHO, there is a distinct difference between consistent standards and traditions, and one needn’t mesh precisely with the other. Both are fine systems for generating lists of places to go hiking. In any case, I certainly can’t fault the preparers of the so-called “questionable list” for consistently applying the minimum rise qualifying criteria used for their amazing quest, or for not adhering to a “local standard” which allows one to count a peak based on separation distance alone.

But back to the heart of the matter: NW Peak of Lyon Mt. vs. unqualified peakless ridge bump? Deal or No Deal? Local standard or local tradition aside, had the Marshalls headed down from the lofty world of supposed 4,000+ foot summits into the pimpled morass of wannabee 3,000 footers, they would have unquestionably tacked NW Lyon onto their bona fide peak “To Do” list. The 3000+ foot summit of NW Lyon to the northwest of Averill meets the original criteria set for qualifying an Adirondack peak – a 0.75 mile separation from the nearest higher summit OR a 300-foot rise. Get out a ruler - not one of those silly Euro metersticks but a proper ruler with inches and feet and rods and furlongs and such - and see for yourself how far it is from NW Lyon to Averill or Lyon or any other “qualified summit”. At an inch to 2000 feet on the 7.5 minute Lyon Mountain quad it appears to be easily over a mile from NW Lyon to the summit of nearest higher neighbor Averill, wouldn’t you agree? The Brothers Marshall would no doubt be pleased that the local standard will still be upheld when I finally bag NW Lyon : )

“If you set your goals low enough, anything is possible”

- Seve, whilst contemplating certain 3000 footers
 
South Lyon .... and the Northeast 3000 Footer list (770)

Seve quote: "I didn’t find one but spotted an old pint sized or so plastic peanut butter container on the ground a few feet away, partially chewed and mangled, with moss growing inside, and wondered if it might have housed a register once upon a time."

Seve, South Lyon is indeed one of the few non-ADK 100 highest peaks that I had left a register jar. The one you described above sounds like it. I hope you removed it seeing that it was in such bad shape after 12+ years.

As stated, the Northeast 3000 Footer list (770) does use the New England 200 ft. col standard to qualify all peaks listed. If someone wants to climb only mountains in NY that use the ADK standard of 300 feet, then that's their choice. No one is forcing them to consider otherwise. But the Northeast 770 is a regional list that stands on its own merits ... "for better or worse".
 
I have been following this thread since its inception and would like to thank Seve for such a great TR. It serves as a reminder that getting off trail and just going somewhere, anywhere, is one of my life's greatest pleasures. The 770 list, using a 200 foot col rule, definitely raises the bar to a dizzying height. I think it's a totally cool list and I have 2 versions of it. It (they) was (were) sent to me in whispered, reverential tones and I was sworn to secrecy even though all of my bushwhacking friends have it.

I'm sure I'll never do the list but I will complete most definitely the Sawtooth Range portion of it (6/11 now) and probably most of the other peaks in the ADK's. The list serves as a sort of glue that binds together like-minded bushwhackers. Thanks for taking the trouble of creating it.
 
Neil quote: "I'm sure I'll never do the list (770) but I will complete most definitely the Sawtooth Range portion of it (6/11 now) and probably most of the other peaks in the ADK's."

With your attempting all of the approximate 220 ADK 3000 footers, you will be completing some of the toughest to access, scrappiest terrain in the Northeast (!) .... with massive private property issues .... and that's not to say that New England is a cake walk either. Good luck!
 
Dennis C. said:
with massive private property issues ....
There's the rub, those pesky PP issues.

I would be interested in putting together an ADK 3000er list that was free of trailed peaks as well as those that had PP issues. There would be way less than 220, perhaps only 150, I don't know. It would require considerable effort just to elucidate the list.

As for that scrappy terrain, bring it on, I'm getting used to it. :)
 
Top