Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

Day hike, Osseo Trail, Mt. Flume

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Day hike, Osseo Trail, Mt. Flume

      Gorgeous day in the Whites today. Somehow I walked 11 miles and did 3300 feet vertical in less than 6 hours. I'm used to walking at half that speed. You may need to scroll the image. It's a pano from the summit of Mt. Flume. Mt. Liberty and the start of Franconia ridge off to the right. Rte. 93 in the valley below, Kinsman and Moosilauke on the other side of 93. You can see a couple of slopes of Loon Mountain near the left edge of the photo. Osseo Trail goes up Mt. Flume from the southwest. Very nice trail!


      [IMG:http://terrapinphoto.com/misc/flume_pano_web.jpg]

    • Astro wrote:

      Rafe, that is impressive. I believe you were not too far from where BB has been hanging out lately.


      You are correct. I was there last weekend and followed the same route. It starts at Lincoln Woods Visitor Center. The climb is steady with a steep section of stairs near the end. I ended up doing 14.6 miles that day to Garfield Ridge Campsite. I don't recall my pace, but might have been a bit slower. I went over Flume, Liberty, Lincoln, Lafayette, and Garfield that day. The walk to Lafayette was nice. I thought the down off Lafayette and the climb over Garfield was going to kill me. The Osseo Trail as a route over Franconia Ridge is nice in that you do the steep stuff early. I am good for a steep climb early. Steep stuff late demolishes me.
      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

    • hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      Did you tell him next time you would prefer more water and less altitude readings?
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • Astro wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      Did you tell him next time you would prefer more water and less altitude readings?



      kept my mouth shut. if it werent for him, i would have been trying to stealth near garfield pond.
      its all good

    • hikerboy wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      Did you tell him next time you would prefer more water and less altitude readings?



      kept my mouth shut. if it werent for him, i would have been trying to stealth near garfield pond.


      You would probably still be looking for a flat spot for your tent.
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123

    • Rasty wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      Did you tell him next time you would prefer more water and less altitude readings?



      kept my mouth shut. if it werent for him, i would have been trying to stealth near garfield pond.


      You would probably still be looking for a flat spot for your tent.


      i was seriously looking for a place to tent coming down lafayette into the col before the climb up garfield but i couldnt find one. i was spent.the trail down is one of those stone ruts surrounded by dense fir and spruce.
      its all good

    • A few years back Kathy and I went up Garfield , NOBO,in the middle of the night as part of a night hike. When we got to the top we couldn't find the trail, even though we were looking right at it. We pulled out our sleeping bags and lay down and went to sleep between a couple of trees. Woke up in the morning to the sight and sound of a pair of feet, and lower legs, walking past my head.

    • hikerboy wrote:

      Rasty wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      Did you tell him next time you would prefer more water and less altitude readings?



      kept my mouth shut. if it werent for him, i would have been trying to stealth near garfield pond.


      You would probably still be looking for a flat spot for your tent.


      i was seriously looking for a place to tent coming down lafayette into the col before the climb up garfield but i couldnt find one. i was spent.the trail down is one of those stone ruts surrounded by dense fir and spruce.


      The old camp site is near that pond. In this case, you did do it wrong. There is plenty of room for stealth camping on both sides of the trail in that area. You must have really been spent. There is also great stealth camping spots after the new campsite in the next col. But I am no one to talk. I slept at the new campsite.
      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by BirdBrain ().

    • BirdBrain wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      Rasty wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      Did you tell him next time you would prefer more water and less altitude readings?



      kept my mouth shut. if it werent for him, i would have been trying to stealth near garfield pond.


      You would probably still be looking for a flat spot for your tent.


      i was seriously looking for a place to tent coming down lafayette into the col before the climb up garfield but i couldnt find one. i was spent.the trail down is one of those stone ruts surrounded by dense fir and spruce.


      The old camp site is near that pond. In this case, you did do it wrong. There is plenty of room for stealth camping on both sides of the trail in that area. You must have really been spent. There is also great stealth camping spots after the new campsite in the next col. But I am no one to talk. I slept at the new campsite. I practically begged the guy to let me set up in an overflow spot (not on a platform). He would not let me. Another reason I dislike the AMC.

      yes i could have stealthed near the pond, but thats when the guy with the gallon jugs of poland spring showed up.
      its all good

    • hikerboy wrote:

      between lafayette and garfield was where i got heat exhaustion a few years back.that climb up garfield was interminable since the guy who gave me water gave me altitude readings every 50 feet.


      If you catch me doing that, please tell me to STFU! My altimeter is on my wristwatch. I can look at my watch without turning into a cuckoo clock.
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.

    • BirdBrain wrote:


      The old camp site is near that pond. In this case, you did do it wrong. There is plenty of room for stealth camping on both sides of the trail in that area. You must have really been spent. There is also great stealth camping spots after the new campsite in the next col. But I am no one to talk. I slept at the new campsite. I practically begged the guy to let me set up in an overflow spot (not on a platform). He would not let me. Another reason I dislike the AMC.


      AMC is really between a rock and a hard place. They don't make the rules, the USFS does. And if AMC doesn't enforce them to the letter, even when it makes no sense, USFS will throw them out and bring in someone who will. I bet there is no shortage of rent-a-cops who'd take the job for an extra 50 cents an hour. If AMC ever goes away, mark my words, you'll start seeing a rigidly-scheduled permit-only system, with tickets issued for not adhering to your schedule. "That's the problem with you hikers. You just can't PLAN!"
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.

    • BirdBrain wrote:


      I understand your points (I think). However, isn't the MATC and the DOC bound by the same rules? They are not the pain in the Democrat that the AMC is. I understand that the MATC and the DOC don't have the mobs that the Whites generate. I just see the surrounding clubs doing a better job with far less funds. I honestly don't see myself ever hiking the Whites again other than to get the other 4000'ers in the area. I am staying away because of that club. In my final week to Vermont I hit my planned schedule perfectly. The AMC would not allow me to adhere to my schedule. I almost kissed the first DOC sign I came to. Their trails were better than the AMC's. There camps were better. And they actual marked their peaks. I honestly think the AMC sucks at what they do and I think it has something to do with the money. I think the MATC and DOC are humble and the AMC is holier than thou.

      It is not an issue for me anymore though. I don't plan to visit their precious peaks again. I don't like to hike amongst snobs. I find it went well beyond the rules. These people were actually rude and put out at the idea that they should even talk to me. In the AMC area I found myself longing for the smiling rangers of Baxter. Now there is an area that regulates, but they also smile and are happy to answer any question you ask like you are an equal.


      As a former DOC volunteer and a Dartmouth alumnus, I thank you! I still find it amazing that a little college (maybe 4000 students?) can marshal a club to maintain such an amount of trail. Not just the A-T, but a good many miles of other trails. But I know that the DOC has an easier time of it. The only "sensitive and protected alpine environment" that they have to deal with is Moosilauke, plus a few patches in the Second College Grant - and neither place is Forest Service land. The college owns it outright. So no, DOC doesn't quite face the same situation that AMC does. (By the way, my dealings with AMC in MA and CT have been great.) Also, you will get stepped on by DOC if for some reason you come into a resource conflict with Dartmouth students. (And once again, it's not the club, it's the college!) Let's be grateful that the College has granted easements-in-perpetuity to the trail users.

      I know that Warren Doyle has a very different assessment from yours of the Baxter rangers. But given the way he behaves, I'm not surprised he gets treated that way. Still, I'm not as sure they'd be as nice even with me as they are with you. I'm from away. In any case, they're real rangers, and that makes a difference. They're not just charged with enforcing the rules; they have enough autonomy that they can work with you on finding a way to do something close to what you want while staying on the right side of the rules.

      If you start working on the Northeast 111, remember me when you start crossing over into my home turf! I'd love to meet up with you in the Cats or Daks and maybe bag a peak or six. Assuming you can tolerate a slowpoke.
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.

    • My continued public flogging of the AMC serves no constructive purpose. It will not change the minds of the AMC or those that have had good experiences. Furthermore, it will not comfort those that have had bad experiences. Worst of all, in this instance it detracts from a great day hike by rafe. Therefore, I am going back and editing my ignorance and will try to refrain in the future.
      Non hikers are about a psi shy of a legal ball.

    • BirdBrain wrote:

      My continued public flogging of the AMC serves no constructive purpose. It will not change the minds of the AMC or those that have had good experiences. Furthermore, it will not comfort those that have had bad experiences. Worst of all, in this instance it detracts from a great day hike by rafe. Therefore, I am going back and editing my ignorance and will try to refrain in the future.


      Go ahead and flog all you like. IMO, AMC is a necessary evil. I have never thru-hiked the Whites, and I can see how it could be a logistical nightmare. I mean, there is really no way to do it without begging for accommodation from the hut-masters.

      Being mostly local (well, 2-3 hours away) my treks through the Whites are often only incidental to the AT. I may find myself on the AT at some point during the hike, but the hike itself is focused on a particular ridge or summit, and the approach is quite likely to be a blue-blaze, eg. Bridle Path, Tuckermans, Nineteen Mile Brook (etc.)

      There are hundreds, if not thousands of miles of trails in the Whites that are not the AT. The AT just happens to claim many of the highest (and most scenic) ridges and summits. Once you're off the AT, camping is much easier, and the AMC's presence is hardly felt. For example, in the Pemi wilderness area, or any of the mountains south of the Kancamagus highway, or in the Evans Notch area (off of Rte. 113.)

      Another way to avoid the AMC is to hike in winter -- but again (for me, anyway) that limits you to day hikes. If you're up to it, most camping restrictions are lifted in winter. As I understand it, Carter hut is left open and unattended in winter.

    • BirdBrain wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      Rafe, that is impressive. I believe you were not too far from where BB has been hanging out lately.


      You are correct. I was there last weekend and followed the same route. It starts at Lincoln Woods Visitor Center. The climb is steady with a steep section of stairs near the end. I ended up doing 14.6 miles that day to Garfield Ridge Campsite. I don't recall my pace, but might have been a bit slower. I went over Flume, Liberty, Lincoln, Lafayette, and Garfield that day. The walk to Lafayette was nice. I thought the down off Lafayette and the climb over Garfield was going to kill me. The Osseo Trail as a route over Franconia Ridge is nice in that you do the steep stuff early. I am good for a steep climb early. Steep stuff late demolishes me.


      By the way, that is a very impressive day's hiking, in my opinion. It's quite possible I've never done the stretch of AT between Lafayette and Garfield summit. Though I have traversed the Franconia ridge many times, probably a couple dozen times or more. Usually it's a loop, up Falling Waters and down Bridle Path, or the other way around. I've done it in winter as well.

      14.6 miles in the Whites with a full pack is a good day's hiking. I'm impressed -- and not at all surprised at your reaction to that last climb up Garfield.