Faraway Mtn May Be Closer Than You Think

Amicus said:

Which one? Is either of those 2720?

Click to expand...

The E bump on the USGS 15' map, see map links earlier

Amicus said:

News to me - which one?

Click to expand...

See above about AMC being an error

rocket21 said:

I don't have permission to post the 'PT' map at this time.

Click to expand...

That's a good reason not to post it!

I'm a little surprised as he certainly handed out enough paper copies.

Here are the pages from "Mountains of NH" showing the state's official opinion that Faraway is the lower bump on the USGS map
01 = cover
02 = title page
03 = text

Thanks for posting those three pages from that 1949 pamphlet or book prepared by the New Hampshire State Planning and Development Commission. Such objects are inherently interesting to some of us.

I note that the only location it gives for Faraway Mtn. is Moultonborough, a point on which we can all agree. It gives an elevation of 2,720 feet, which might confirm your assumption that they meant the SE of the two bumps that are within the horseshoe bend of the High Ridge Trail, if some topo map of that era marked that bump x2,720. No topo map of any era that I have seen, however, assigns an elevation to either of those bumps.

Still, the contour lines of the 1930 Mt. Chocorua Quad do show approximately that elevation for the SE bump (and maybe also the NW, which is partially obscured by "Ridge," from "Mtn. Ridge Drive," as that quad labels the High Ridge Trail).

In any case, I don't consider a 1949 pamphlet or book prepared by the New Hampshire State Planning and Development Commission to be binding on anyone, even surviving members (if there are any) of that Commission.

Interestingly enough, on the same page of that 1940s document, Foss Mountain appears to be incorrect (they show it as 1,640'...the north peak is 1,647', and the main peak is 1,657').

In regards to the REAL Faraway, those who are interested will note that on the Trail Bandit Ossipee Mountains Map, which has now been printed, I wimped out and placed the name "Faraway Mtn." as close as I could to be an equal distance between the hill 2782 and the two lower hill tops, without covering up the trails. Now everybody can choose for themselves which is the REAL Faraway.

Trail Bandit said:

I wimped out

Click to expand...

THIS guy wimped out?

Stop The Presses! Newly discovered data (see the attached map) shows the confirmed position of the REAL Mt.Faraway. This is from my Delorme NH Atlas, 2002 edition. We know tat Delorme is a respected mapping company and this is the most up to date, unbiased map I have seen. I consider the Faraway issue to be settled once and for all.

Trail Bandit said:

Stop The Presses! Newly discovered data (see the attached map) shows the confirmed position of the REAL Mt.Faraway. This is from my Delorme NH Atlas, 2002 edition. We know tat Delorme is a respected mapping company and this is the most up to date, unbiased map I have seen. I consider the Faraway issue to be settled once and for all.

Click to expand...

Well, I think the only solution at this point is to label all 5 Faraway Mountains - the Delorme location, the current USGS location, each of the two humps, and the Scudder/AMC location.

Amicus said:

It gives an elevation of 2,720 feet, which might confirm your assumption that they meant the SE of the two bumps that are within the horseshoe bend of the High Ridge Trail, if some topo map of that era marked that bump x2,720.

In any case, I don't consider a 1949 pamphlet or book prepared by the New Hampshire State Planning and Development Commission to be binding on anyone, even surviving members (if there are any) of that Commission.

Click to expand...

The book uses the highest contour elevation for summits if no spot elevation is given.

Obviously you aren't a Democrat from NH or you wouldn't question anything by Miss Hancock whom I'm told is still alive if you wish to question her.

rocket21 said:

Interestingly enough, on the same page of that 1940s document, Foss Mountain appears to be incorrect (they show it as 1,640'...the north peak is 1,647', and the main peak is 1,657').

Click to expand...

Take a moment and think!

Obviously the book was not made from todays maps but from those available then or probably the 1930 Ossipee Lake quad where the highest summit contour is 1640'.
http://docs.unh.edu/NH/ossp30se.jpg

In the case of Foss Mtn you can't be sure which of the two bumps she felt was the summit, but Faraway Mtn has only one 2720 bump which most anyone who has read a lot of USGS maps would assume was the summit (such as the PeakMaster, who owns maybe 1000 USGS quads and has looked at a lot more).

Trail Bandit said:

Stop The Presses! Newly discovered data (see the attached map) shows the confirmed position of the REAL Mt.Faraway.

Click to expand...

I believe that has been noticed before. However the original 1st Edition NH DeLorme which is based on the county map series shows it as the 2720 peak. Unfortunately the county map is something like 18x36 and I haven't figured out how to scan it yet.

So when I did Faraway for my winter list a few weeks ago, did I go to the real summit? We went from Roberts and then went off the trail on what looked like a road to a cell tower. Then we went back to the trail where there is a really nice view further down.

Jim lombard said:

So when I did Faraway for my winter list a few weeks ago, did I go to the real summit? We went from Roberts and then went off the trail on what looked like a road to a cell tower. Then we went back to the trail where there is a really nice view further down.

Click to expand...

Absolutely! The bench at that view outlook on the High Ridge Trail is a memorial to someone, but I don't know the details. Those two bumps we talk about were once reached by a carriage road that peals off that road to the cell tower near its beginning, but it has grown in so much that getting to the bumps is really a bushwhack (but neither long nor difficult). If you drop south through open woods from the SE bump, you'll come out on the High Ridge Trail right at that view-bench (or very close).

Thanks Amicus

Jim lombard said:

So when I did Faraway for my winter list a few weeks ago, did I go to the real summit? We went from Roberts and then went off the trail on what looked like a road to a cell tower. Then we went back to the trail where there is a really nice view further down.

Click to expand...

You did not go to the true summit of Faraway Mtn, but you went to the summit that is incorrectly called Faraway Mtn on the Ossipee10 list which is what started this whole discussion

If you look at the ~1920 map you will see that the radio tower summit was then called Mountain View, and nobody has presented any primary evidence that it was changed since.

RoySwkr said:

You did not go to the true summit of Faraway Mtn, but you went to the summit that is incorrectly called Faraway Mtn on the Ossipee10 list which is what started this whole discussion

Click to expand...

That is Roy's opinion, to which he is of course entitled and which is not without some basis. Others, including the AMC (in its latest map that covers Faraway), Scudder's View Guide, and the Lakes Region Conservation Trust (in its only publication I have seen that addresses this), think x2,782 (Jim's cell tower summit) makes more sense as the "true summit," whatever the unknown maker of the c. 1920 golf resort map may have had in mind. If you want to learn more about all that and have nothing better to do for an hour or so, read the voluminous prior posts on this topic, here and elsewhere.

As we left the main trail, we climbed (somewhat) to the cell tower. It seemed like the highpoint to me. I'm counting it! From a distance it looks like the highpoint also.

I've said this before, but I'll say it one more time: the argument is not about which bump is the highest. The question is whether the name "Faraway Mtn" should be applied to that highest point, when most of the evidence (that I've seen, anyway) indicates that it was applied to a lower point, and furthermore, if Roy's sources are to be believed, the highest point had a different name ("Mountain View").

The AMC has a tendency to move names onto higher bumps (see my previous comment in this thread about Owl's Head), but I for one don't accept the AMC as an authority on names (for one thing, they're pretty inconsistent - again see my previous comment in this thread).

I think we should agree, for the future and for those to whom it matters, that the lower summit nearest the outlook is the official one, on no other basis than that the antenna farm on the other summit is ugly and not representative of the beautiful Ossipees.

RickB. said:

I think we should agree, for the future and for those to whom it matters, that the lower summit nearest the outlook is the official one, on no other basis than that the antenna farm on the other summit is ugly and not representative of the beautiful Ossipees.

Click to expand...

Interesting take, but have you been to those bumps (neither of which can fairly be called a "summmit")? They're just undulations in featureless woods, with no views, unlike the antenna peak (if you climb up a little). If aesthetics are to be decisive, I'd go with the "Faraway Outlook" bench on the High Ridge Trail, which is also the popular notion of "Faraway," in my experience.

Amicus said:

Interesting take, but have you been to those bumps (neither of which can fairly be called a "summmit")? They're just undulations in featureless woods, with no views, unlike the antenna peak (if you climb up a little). If aesthetics are to be decisive, I'd go with the "Faraway Outlook" bench on the High Ridge Trail, which is also the popular notion of "Faraway," in my experience.

Click to expand...

That's a fine suggestion, Amicus. I was just trying to accommodate the must-touch-the-highpoint readership.

Others, including the AMC (in its latest map that covers Faraway), Scudder's View Guide, and the Lakes Region Conservation Trust (in its only publication I have seen that addresses this), think x2,782 (Jim's cell tower summit) makes more sense as the "true summit," whatever the unknown maker of the c. 1920 golf resort map may have had in mind. If you want to learn more about all that and have nothing better to do for an hour or so, read the voluminous prior posts on this topic, here and elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Of course if you read the prior posts, you will discover that Gene Daniell thinks that the true Faraway is the lower peak and the next AMC guide will correct the error. If Scudder and the LRCT got their info from the AMC, it sounds like "Others" may be building their castles on clouds not stone.