Owl's Head: True summit

[BillyRay]

I’m planning a hike up owl’s head, and was wondering if anyone has any info or advice on whether to shoot for the long accepted summit or the true summit. Is the true summit a tough bushwhack? Is there a better route than the slide? Is there a reason to bother?

If there is already a discussion on the topic that someone can point me to, that will be great.

I guess I’m mostly interested in the latest condition of the “trail”… Is it becoming a herd path, or still a total bushwhack.

 

[David Metsky]

The normal approach is to go to the "old" summit, then continue along the ridge until you hit the "new" summit. So it's really a superset of the previous hike. I haven't been to the new summit, but reports are that a herd path is forming but not yet up to the same rigid specifications of the path to the old summit.

So a search on Owlshead and you'll find several threads with photos.

-dave-

 

[albee]

It is a well travelled herd path to the newer "true" summit, except for one 10' thick section that you would just have to push through. There is a sign and a cairn at the proper summit now. Not a bushwhack at all, although it is a good 0.4 to 0.5 miles north along the ridge.

It is surprising how many people I saw turn back at the one little section where the herd path wasn't obvious. Someone has piled up about 4 rocks at a viewpoint on the way. I passed 6 people partying it up thinking that that "cairn" was the summit, and 3 other people on the way out that thought that cairn was the summit as well. Visual reference will tell you where the highest point is... and you don't need to be a bushwhacker to find your way there.

If you go up there, do mother nature a favor and remove a couple of the rocks from the cairn at the old summit... some idiot had gone and dug up a bunch of rocks from the surrounding area and built a cairn on top of and surrounding a young 2' tall balsam tree. It is sad to see the tree trying to sprout through the rocks. I took about 5 or 6 rocks off, but unless they are disposed of properly somebody else will rebuild the cairn-tree.

 

[peakbagger]

I was up at the "new summit" a few weeks ago and I found the herd path a bit more obscure that previously described. Due to a few patches of blowdowns, the path disappears in spots and new paths sprout off of it. They eventually come back together as long as you stick to the high spots of the ridge but for someone new at the game, they may stop at the very obvious cairn.

 

[NewHampshire]

Is there a reason to bother?

That is a personal decision. Both summits are acceptable for the 48 list. So, since the "old" summit is still considered good for the FTFC, don't feel you HAVE to go to the "new" summit. But if you want to go to the "new" summit then thats absolutely fine too!

Brian

 

[DougPaul]

Is there a reason to bother?

Obviously a personal decision. My approach would be "best practices" in the context of the time of ascent, so I would now go to the true summit, but would not repeat the climb if I had previously climbed to the "old" summit.

In fact, I did it in winter, skiing up the north ridge. Any ground markings were covered by the snow, we were in heavy spruce, and I used a compass bearing to a nearby summit to find our location. The compass said we were on the summit so we declared "success" and headed down. So we might have actually reached the true summit back when people were just hiking to the lower point...

Doug

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

The distance between the two summits is only about 0.2 mile, and takes about 8 to 15 minutes one way, time depending upon whether you can stay on the herd path all the way or rather need to do a little back and forth action when losing and re-locating the herd path. The discrete sign on the "new" summit makes the extra effort well worth the distance.