Can climbers think more clearly about ethics? Is there a way to make ethical arguments clearer and more relevant to the sport of climbing? What has sparked this thought is the recent revelation that Joe Kinder, a well-known figure in American sport climbing, decided to cut down a tree that interfered with the first 20 feet or so of a climb he wanted to bolt near Lake Tahoe. For any number of reasons this was the wrong thing to do but remarkably enough a striking number of Joe's defenders commented online that apparently this wasn't such a big deal after all, because after all, hey it's just a tree, and/or don't you live in a house made of wood so you are just as guilty and so and so on.
I think Joe has received enough of a shellacking from everyone else and I consider him a friend so I am not going to deliver a sermon on why cutting the tree down was a bad idea. But I am going to take issue with his defenders who are among other things betraying a fundamental lack of understanding of how the sport of climbing actually works. Fundamental to this is an understanding of the principal issues at stake in making ethical decisions, issues that many, in fact too many, internet commenters seem willfully ignorant of.
Ethics is the study of right and wrong, conditions that humans have been aware of since the dawn of, well, humans. The argument can be made that every action we take involves to some degree a consideration of its ethical dimensions. Games, which climbing is certainly an example of, allow us to play with ethical questions in a relatively low-stakes fashion. That is to say, nothing truly significant is at stake regarding whether we get to the top of a climb. Even if we spend $50,000 climbing Everest, whether we get to the top or not really changes nothing of significance. How we treat people or the environment along the way is much more significant than reaching a summit or clipping chains on the proj.
Climbing is not superficially involved in ethics; I would argue instead that ethics is embedded into the very fabric of the game. This is something that a newer generation seems to have forgotten and is worth reiterating. Maybe a good starting point is this argument: There is no point in climbing something that has been altered to suit your abilities. In climbing there is always an easier alternative, such putting up a ladder, or walking around the back, or grabbing a sling, or just lying about what you have done. To climb something honestly is by definition to forego an easier alternative, a weaker alternative, a "less right" alternative. Therefore there is no logical way to avoid the continual presence of ethics in the sport.
Knowing this is central to thinking clearly about how to judge whether actions relating to a climb are ethical or not. So coming back to the alteration principle. Climbers violate this principle in diverse and incremental ways, the least egregious affecting primarily their own experience, the most egregious affecting the lives of others and the environment which we all share. Using shoes or other gear, applying chalk, top-roping or placing bolts are a few examples. Using shoes doesn't involve much in terms of direct alteration of the rock but purchasing shoes from an unethical manufacturer in order to save money seems to be violating some important principle, perhaps that of the Golden Rule as in would I like to be cheated out of my labor or work under a totalitarian regime? Chalk is innocuous enough unless of course I do not make the minimal effort involved in cleaning up my chalk marks, thereby affecting the experience of others including non-climbers. Top-roping seems to fit primarily under competitive ethics, the least significant in real terms of climbing ethical questions. For example top-roping a scary lead first and then claiming a ground-up ascent doesn't affect anyone else's experience very much in real terms. The rock is the same even if you told a lie. If someone else decides to climb ground-up because of a story, that climber is still responsible for his or her actions. Most of these minor alterations can be described as reversible, restorable, or of minimal external impact.
Placing bolts has long been seen as ethically complicated because of the alteration principle and yet is widely accepted in many areas because of an overpowering imperative of safety for many or even feasibility of climbing a formation at all, as in massively overhung walls that could not be toproped or protected by other means, foreclosing any likely possibility of human ascent. That said, they still violate the alteration to suit one's abilities rule and for that reason are frowned on in many places. But even with these examples, we might ask, does this alteration principle provide a guide to ethical actions?
Philosophers often think of ethics in two basic directions, actions based on possible consequences, such as will this make me or others happier or less unhappy, and those founded in intrinsic moral duty, that is I am doing the right thing regardless of consequences or any benefit or harm that may occur to me or others. I think climbers would do well to consider their actions in both these lights and think both in terms of consequences of their actions and whether there is something intrinsically right towards which we should aim in climbing. I would argue that the alteration principle functions as an absolute one toward which we should aim and that we should acknowledge when we deviate from it. To borrow from Kant's categorical imperative, can we will that all climbers should strive not to alter the rock or the environment?
Looking at various responses to the Kinder incident, I am struck by the degree to which relativism (the notion that there is no absolute standard of right or wrong) and utilitarianism (the position that actions which result in greater human happiness are more ethical) dominate the discussion. I am also struck by the degree to which an abstract human construct, a climbing route, which has minimal utility and a contrived identity at best, becomes something worth sacrificing a living being for. I think we should ask ourselves why it's acceptable to chop down trees and not acceptable to chop holds. Is it coherent to argue that since we all drive cars and kill the environment in myriad other ways, we have no standing in criticizing environmental destruction by climbers? Is there a way to respond to relativism and claims of utility?
The argument is made that numerous routes have required "ethical" infractions including bolts, glue, and modified holds to make them "go." My argument is that rock modification is relevant primarily in the context of competition and utility, that is, a better route is a more natural route since as mentioned above, there are any number of ways to "get around to the top", so to speak. If there is perceived utility in bolting or otherwise modifying a climb, it seems logical that this utility should be discussed among the community it claims to benefit, much like a town would debate an eminent domain action to demolish a building. In other words, at the very least, (and I would not argue that it settles the issue of whether an action is ethical) there should be an informed public discussion on the merits of that action.
If this claim of utility is made in regard to living beings, the need for that discussion seems even more urgent than ever. Here the claims of relativism become even more shaky. Following the alteration principle, ending a life is not reversible and its external impacts are potentially considerable. For example, a number of individuals claimed that in the east of the US, trees are very common so cutting them there is not a big deal. California on the other hand is much more arid so the loss of a single tree at a cliff is more serious. But if we look at this from another perspective, say, that of human life, would we be persuaded by the claim that there are billions of people so what's one or two less? And would our concerns about trees or the environment really be nullified by reading paper books or living in a wooden house?
The latter point has some ardent defenders but upon closer examination grows less coherent. On the one hand, a tree is cut down to make a route go. On the other, well what exactly? Is the house built in an environmentally conscious fashion. Is it even a new house? And so on. On the one hand deliberate destruction to make a climbing route "go," on the other, again it's not so clear. The motives of the first action are clear, but those of the second would need to be examined much more closely.
My larger point is that climbing and environmentalism need to get closer together. The contemporary emphasis on expansion and consumerism ("Never Stop Exploring") in climbing should be at the very least matched with an emphasis on limits and consideration of the needs of the natural communities among which we play. Our game, as noted above, is rooted in an ethical decision not to take the easy way. In my view a better motto might be "Never Stop Thinking" whether it's about ethics or our impacts on the environment.
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Boulder City Council Elections and Climbing Access
The recent flood-induced closures on Boulder OSMP land and in RMNP (not to mention the government shutdown) have made climbers acutely aware of how important unhindered access to public lands is to their lives. Living next to OSMP open space, I can speak to the value it adds to my family's health and that of the surrounding community. I can think of no other community in the country with such diverse and easily accessible publicly-owned open space. It is a unique and irreplaceable treasure for present and future generations.
Boulder has invested heavily in this land in many ways and discussion about the future of its public lands has always figured prominently in local politics, going back over half a century. There is a new sense of urgency in the climbing community in the wake of the flood closures, perhaps building on the West TSA plan and the establishment of HCA zones that require permission to visit or travel off-trail in. A recent proposed (and then cancelled) meeting of climbers with two candidates for Boulder City Council certainly raised the profile of climbers' involvement in Boulder politics even further.
Last week an op-ed piece was published by representatives from the Access Fund and the Flatirons Climbing Council, both of which I have done volunteer work for (as well as for OSMP), that stated that "certain City Council members, unprompted and without a formal vote, identified several 'overarching issues' for further study. The list included the twice-rejected subjects of off-trail restrictions and nighttime curfews. OSMP staff have taken council members' comments as direction to consider implementing these additional restrictions." You can read a study on night access here. Whether climbers' fears of increased restrictions are valid or not, there is a growing consensus that there needs to be more involvement with the process of planning and decision-making at OSMP.
After discussion with various climber access advocates, I decided to ask the two candidates most favored by them, Andrew Shoemaker and Ed Byrne, about their positions regarding climbing access in Boulder OSMP lands so that any climbers reading this blog can have an additional resource for choosing representation in city government. I sent them each identical questions which they promptly responded to, indicating that they take OSMP access seriously. By the way, as a resident of unincorporated Boulder County, I do not vote in the city elections and this post is not a formal endorsement of either candidate.
1. How do you see yourself as an advocate for recreational use of OSMP land?
AS Prior to the flood, I used OSMP every day -- either for cycling, walking my dog, hiking, fly-fishing, climbing, paddling or cross country skiing. Additionally, I organized the Boulder stage of the 2012 USA Pro Challenge bike race ending on Flagstaff Mountain; in part to publicize Boulder and its open space program. Responsible enjoyment of open space encourages the preservation of open space and the formation of an environmental consciousness. Indeed, some of our great environmental activists were climbers, surfers, skiers (among other things) first -- their environmental ethos then arose out of their passion for being in the outdoors.
AS I am opposed.
AS My demographic (mid-40s, family, moved to Boulder to make a living while enjoying outdoor recreation lifestyle activities like climbing, paddling, cycling, skiing, etc.) is unrepresented on Council, even though outdoor recreation enthusiasts, professionals, and businesses make up much of Boulder. As such, I will bring a new perspective for Council to every Council meeting and to the appointment of members of City boards (such as the Open Space Board of Trustees). The City boards are very important, and therefore who is appointed to these boards is critical. For example, the City Council appoints the Open Space Board of Trustees, which makes recommendations and decisions about open space policy. My style of affecting decisions is one that works well in Boulder -- one of collaboration and consensus building rather than telling people what to do. I have good relationships with members of the open space department (from my Pro Challenge work) as well as with the outdoor recreation community. I hope to work together with both to preserve existing access and to facilitate responsible use of open space.
Boulder has invested heavily in this land in many ways and discussion about the future of its public lands has always figured prominently in local politics, going back over half a century. There is a new sense of urgency in the climbing community in the wake of the flood closures, perhaps building on the West TSA plan and the establishment of HCA zones that require permission to visit or travel off-trail in. A recent proposed (and then cancelled) meeting of climbers with two candidates for Boulder City Council certainly raised the profile of climbers' involvement in Boulder politics even further.
Last week an op-ed piece was published by representatives from the Access Fund and the Flatirons Climbing Council, both of which I have done volunteer work for (as well as for OSMP), that stated that "certain City Council members, unprompted and without a formal vote, identified several 'overarching issues' for further study. The list included the twice-rejected subjects of off-trail restrictions and nighttime curfews. OSMP staff have taken council members' comments as direction to consider implementing these additional restrictions." You can read a study on night access here. Whether climbers' fears of increased restrictions are valid or not, there is a growing consensus that there needs to be more involvement with the process of planning and decision-making at OSMP.
After discussion with various climber access advocates, I decided to ask the two candidates most favored by them, Andrew Shoemaker and Ed Byrne, about their positions regarding climbing access in Boulder OSMP lands so that any climbers reading this blog can have an additional resource for choosing representation in city government. I sent them each identical questions which they promptly responded to, indicating that they take OSMP access seriously. By the way, as a resident of unincorporated Boulder County, I do not vote in the city elections and this post is not a formal endorsement of either candidate.
1. How do you see yourself as an advocate for recreational use of OSMP land?
AS Prior to the flood, I used OSMP every day -- either for cycling, walking my dog, hiking, fly-fishing, climbing, paddling or cross country skiing. Additionally, I organized the Boulder stage of the 2012 USA Pro Challenge bike race ending on Flagstaff Mountain; in part to publicize Boulder and its open space program. Responsible enjoyment of open space encourages the preservation of open space and the formation of an environmental consciousness. Indeed, some of our great environmental activists were climbers, surfers, skiers (among other things) first -- their environmental ethos then arose out of their passion for being in the outdoors.
EB We are fortunate to live on the north side of the open space between Broadway and Wonderland Lake in North Boulder. We have had many opportunities to hike, run, bike, and snowshoe here and on many other trails in Boulder's system, averaging about one or two visits per week.
We did not spend our community’s hard-earned tax dollars to create opportunities for citizens to “look” at our open space – passive recreation, including cycling and off-leash dog use in designated areas is permitted by the City’s home rule Charter, and I will advocate for recreational use to continue, and to expand modestly in order to relieve pressure on the system and promote a high quality experience for all users.
When negative impacts arise, we should address them, but we will never have the resources to hire enough rangers to catch every violator – we need buy-in from Boulder’s responsible citizens, who together are our best defense against the 3-4% who don’t treasure our OSMP as much as the vast majority do.
2. What are your views on tightening off-trail/nighttime access in OSMP land?
We did not spend our community’s hard-earned tax dollars to create opportunities for citizens to “look” at our open space – passive recreation, including cycling and off-leash dog use in designated areas is permitted by the City’s home rule Charter, and I will advocate for recreational use to continue, and to expand modestly in order to relieve pressure on the system and promote a high quality experience for all users.
When negative impacts arise, we should address them, but we will never have the resources to hire enough rangers to catch every violator – we need buy-in from Boulder’s responsible citizens, who together are our best defense against the 3-4% who don’t treasure our OSMP as much as the vast majority do.
2. What are your views on tightening off-trail/nighttime access in OSMP land?
AS I am opposed.
EB We have enough OSMP rules and regulations. I have not been persuaded that we have a problem with off-trail or night-time use of open space such that prohibition of access is warranted. We don’t need more reasons for clashes between OSMP rangers and citizens enjoying Boulder’s OSMP. I believe that our rangers have an extremely difficult job, made more difficult by an enforcement focus that tends to alter their perception of OSMP users as potential "violators" instead of "valued customers." Such perceptions tend to fester over time as preconceptions are reinforced by negative encounters, while positive ones are often taken for granted.
In the mid-1980s, when I was the prosecutor, negative encounters between parking control officers (PCOs) and downtown visitors became so prevalent that I called the PCOs in for a customer service training session. While writing 300 tickets per day, the PCOs met about 5 citizens, and every meeting seemed to turn into a shouting match. "Give them warnings," I said. Collections went up. Appeals went down. Skirmishes ended. Rangers should be trained in a similar manner. Catch people doing things right. Praise them. Warn violators. Keep track of the warnings. Punish repeat offenders.
3. If elected to the City Council, how do you see yourself affecting the decisions made about OSMP land use in the future?
In the mid-1980s, when I was the prosecutor, negative encounters between parking control officers (PCOs) and downtown visitors became so prevalent that I called the PCOs in for a customer service training session. While writing 300 tickets per day, the PCOs met about 5 citizens, and every meeting seemed to turn into a shouting match. "Give them warnings," I said. Collections went up. Appeals went down. Skirmishes ended. Rangers should be trained in a similar manner. Catch people doing things right. Praise them. Warn violators. Keep track of the warnings. Punish repeat offenders.
3. If elected to the City Council, how do you see yourself affecting the decisions made about OSMP land use in the future?
AS My demographic (mid-40s, family, moved to Boulder to make a living while enjoying outdoor recreation lifestyle activities like climbing, paddling, cycling, skiing, etc.) is unrepresented on Council, even though outdoor recreation enthusiasts, professionals, and businesses make up much of Boulder. As such, I will bring a new perspective for Council to every Council meeting and to the appointment of members of City boards (such as the Open Space Board of Trustees). The City boards are very important, and therefore who is appointed to these boards is critical. For example, the City Council appoints the Open Space Board of Trustees, which makes recommendations and decisions about open space policy. My style of affecting decisions is one that works well in Boulder -- one of collaboration and consensus building rather than telling people what to do. I have good relationships with members of the open space department (from my Pro Challenge work) as well as with the outdoor recreation community. I hope to work together with both to preserve existing access and to facilitate responsible use of open space.
EB I have known Mike Patton since he was the Human Resources Director for the City in the 1980s and I was an assistant city attorney. His responsibilities have changed, but I know he has a strong grasp of what makes Boulder special, including our community’s love for and stewardship of OSMP lands. I believe Mike will respond effectively to the concerns I have heard from many Boulder citizens concerning a perception that an adversarial relationship is growing between some rangers and certain members of the public who enjoy using OSMP lands. There’s no call for that – it diminishes broad-based support for “crowd-sourcing” protection of our open space.
I would like to thank Ed Byrne and Andrew Shoemaker for their help. For more information on all the candidates' positions on issues of relevance to the election please visit http://www.boulderblueline.org/election-2013/
I invite comments or communication from other candidates or officials as well. Please remember to vote! There are serious issues on the ballot including municipalization of electricity and much more.
I invite comments or communication from other candidates or officials as well. Please remember to vote! There are serious issues on the ballot including municipalization of electricity and much more.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Getting There: Front Range Climbing Access Progress Report
Since my last post, some important progress has been made regarding access to climbing near Boulder. Eldorado Canyon remains closed but I am optimistic this will change very soon. Many more trails are open on OSMP land including Fern Canyon and Shadow Canyon, though climbing is still closed. The lower Satellite Boulders, between the Second and Third Flatiron, are now open which is really the first significant reopening of bouldering in the Flatirons since the flood. The First and Third are open to roped climbing though the south side of the Third (and the Royal Arch area in general) is closed.
OSMP is having volunteer climbing surveyors go out into various sectors to assess damage and safety issues which I think will be very useful in getting many more areas open. I am participating in this process and will report on what I know and have heard. I have visited the Satellite Boulders twice in the past week and am struck by how little damage occurred outside the main gullies and washes below the Flatirons. My belief is this will be the case for most of the popular areas including Fern Canyon and Dinosaur Mountain. That said there is a rumor that Black Ice may be no more...
Really big news was the early reopening of Boulder Canyon. The NFS is maintaining a closure on the north side of the canyon but this leaves quite a lot open on the south, including most of the good bouldering, which is all still intact and accessible. Castle Rock, on Boulder County land, is now open as well. Opening 119 also radically lessens the approach time to Estes Park, allowing much-needed tourist traffic to get to the beleagured town.
That said the antics of the GOP's Tea Party wing are still afflicting the region as the National Park remains closed. Hopefully this will be resolved soon and things can begin to recover, especially once 36 re-opens which I am guessing will be sooner rather than later.
As I said before, areas to the north and further south have been open and attracting more than their usual quota of visitors, owing to the access issues around Boulder and RMNP. And of course area gyms have helped make up for the closures as well. But I think everyone will breathe a sigh of relief once things are a bit more back to normal. And of course for those whose homes have been devasteded by the flood, things may never be back to normal. Check out http://donateboulder.org/
or http://www.unitedwayfoothills.org/ for info on how you can help.
UPDATE: As of today, October 12, Rocky Mountain National Park has been temporarily reopened with state funding
ANOTHER UPDATE: The problem mentioned above, Black Ice, along the Fern CanyonTrail, is no more.
OSMP is having volunteer climbing surveyors go out into various sectors to assess damage and safety issues which I think will be very useful in getting many more areas open. I am participating in this process and will report on what I know and have heard. I have visited the Satellite Boulders twice in the past week and am struck by how little damage occurred outside the main gullies and washes below the Flatirons. My belief is this will be the case for most of the popular areas including Fern Canyon and Dinosaur Mountain. That said there is a rumor that Black Ice may be no more...
Really big news was the early reopening of Boulder Canyon. The NFS is maintaining a closure on the north side of the canyon but this leaves quite a lot open on the south, including most of the good bouldering, which is all still intact and accessible. Castle Rock, on Boulder County land, is now open as well. Opening 119 also radically lessens the approach time to Estes Park, allowing much-needed tourist traffic to get to the beleagured town.
That said the antics of the GOP's Tea Party wing are still afflicting the region as the National Park remains closed. Hopefully this will be resolved soon and things can begin to recover, especially once 36 re-opens which I am guessing will be sooner rather than later.
As I said before, areas to the north and further south have been open and attracting more than their usual quota of visitors, owing to the access issues around Boulder and RMNP. And of course area gyms have helped make up for the closures as well. But I think everyone will breathe a sigh of relief once things are a bit more back to normal. And of course for those whose homes have been devasteded by the flood, things may never be back to normal. Check out http://donateboulder.org/
or http://www.unitedwayfoothills.org/ for info on how you can help.
UPDATE: As of today, October 12, Rocky Mountain National Park has been temporarily reopened with state funding
ANOTHER UPDATE: The problem mentioned above, Black Ice, along the Fern CanyonTrail, is no more.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Update from Boulder: Not Much Better
It's been about three weeks since the last post and I thought I would post an update. It should probably be titled, "Just When You Thought it Couldn't Get Worse" because that is exactly what has happened. Courtesy of Tea Party Republicans in the House of Representatives, a federal government shutdown has eliminated access to Rocky Mountain National Park and possibly hindered reconstruction efforts on Highway 36 from the National Guard. For icing on the cake (literally, well literally ice anyway) snow is forecast for Friday across the Front Range. This will seriously hamper the many efforts being made to clean up and restore the small mountains towns hit so hard by the flood in September.
So what's up climbing-wise? Lincoln Lake is closed now and Evans Area A is going to be getting snowier by the day, along with all other alpine locales such as Guanella Pass. Access to the Estes Park region, seriously affected by both flooding and the NPS closures already, is only by a lengthy and tedious (though scenic) crawl from Central City far to the south. Clear Creek is open, which is why I was trying Echale last Saturday, but more about that another time. Coal Creek Canyon is closed.
Eldorado Canyon is still closed though heavy equipment has been in place trying to repair the road and volunteers have been on the ground working on trails. The real mystery is Boulder's Open Space and Mountain Parks department. After an initial wave of openings, the only "legal" climbing in their jurisdiction at this writing is on the First Flatiron and the mediocre bouldering on Mount Sanitas. While unofficial word is that trails on Bear Peak and Green Mountain and elsewhere have been minimally affected, if at all, there has been complete silence on the condition of or any plans to reopen Flagstaff Mountain, the Mesa Trail or any of the significant trails on Bear or Green. In a peculiar instance of inconsistency, the trail to the Satellites is open but the boulders themselves are closed to climbing. Local dissatisfaction with this situation has been increasing as the time from the flood increases and it becomes increasingly apparent that in many locations trail damage has actually been insignificant. Furthermore despite the availability of literally hundreds of volunteers and OSMP claims of major damage, virtually no opportunities for trail reconstruction or rehabilitation have been posted. You can find out which trails are open at this OSMP page. (UPDATE: there may be plans for OSMP to enlist climbing volunteers to assess climbing areas in the Flatirons. Check the FCC page for more details. Also see this announcement from the BCC.)
Boulder Canyon remains closed as the road (SH119) is undergoing emergency repair to get it passable before winter proper begins. This is expected by mid to late October but whether the NFS will immediately re-open the land bordering the road is another question altogether. As mentioned above Highway 36 between Lyons and Estes is being rebuilt but a full reconstruction of the road will have to wait until next year. Highway 34 between Estes Park and Loveland was hit incredibly hard and will be out indefinitely. Further north things are brighter with Carter Lake, the areas around Fort Collins (Horsetooth, Arthur's) and Poudre Canyon all being open. Areas to the south, especially south of Denver, are generally accessible and open, though how the federal government shutdown may affect certain spots (such as Shelf Road) is not exactly clear.
So in a nutshell, I would not especially recommend coming to Boulder for climbing at this point. Climbing access is basically still on hold and with winter approaching, options are narrowing. This may sound like whining, especially given the catastrophic destruction and losses so many have experienced. However for lots of Front Range residents, the opportunity to run, hike, ride and climb without driving long distances is much needed stress relief in these difficult times. It's bad enough when natural destruction hinders these opportunities but worse when political obstruction extends this peculiar exile from our own backyard.
So what's up climbing-wise? Lincoln Lake is closed now and Evans Area A is going to be getting snowier by the day, along with all other alpine locales such as Guanella Pass. Access to the Estes Park region, seriously affected by both flooding and the NPS closures already, is only by a lengthy and tedious (though scenic) crawl from Central City far to the south. Clear Creek is open, which is why I was trying Echale last Saturday, but more about that another time. Coal Creek Canyon is closed.
Eldorado Canyon is still closed though heavy equipment has been in place trying to repair the road and volunteers have been on the ground working on trails. The real mystery is Boulder's Open Space and Mountain Parks department. After an initial wave of openings, the only "legal" climbing in their jurisdiction at this writing is on the First Flatiron and the mediocre bouldering on Mount Sanitas. While unofficial word is that trails on Bear Peak and Green Mountain and elsewhere have been minimally affected, if at all, there has been complete silence on the condition of or any plans to reopen Flagstaff Mountain, the Mesa Trail or any of the significant trails on Bear or Green. In a peculiar instance of inconsistency, the trail to the Satellites is open but the boulders themselves are closed to climbing. Local dissatisfaction with this situation has been increasing as the time from the flood increases and it becomes increasingly apparent that in many locations trail damage has actually been insignificant. Furthermore despite the availability of literally hundreds of volunteers and OSMP claims of major damage, virtually no opportunities for trail reconstruction or rehabilitation have been posted. You can find out which trails are open at this OSMP page. (UPDATE: there may be plans for OSMP to enlist climbing volunteers to assess climbing areas in the Flatirons. Check the FCC page for more details. Also see this announcement from the BCC.)
Boulder Canyon remains closed as the road (SH119) is undergoing emergency repair to get it passable before winter proper begins. This is expected by mid to late October but whether the NFS will immediately re-open the land bordering the road is another question altogether. As mentioned above Highway 36 between Lyons and Estes is being rebuilt but a full reconstruction of the road will have to wait until next year. Highway 34 between Estes Park and Loveland was hit incredibly hard and will be out indefinitely. Further north things are brighter with Carter Lake, the areas around Fort Collins (Horsetooth, Arthur's) and Poudre Canyon all being open. Areas to the south, especially south of Denver, are generally accessible and open, though how the federal government shutdown may affect certain spots (such as Shelf Road) is not exactly clear.
So in a nutshell, I would not especially recommend coming to Boulder for climbing at this point. Climbing access is basically still on hold and with winter approaching, options are narrowing. This may sound like whining, especially given the catastrophic destruction and losses so many have experienced. However for lots of Front Range residents, the opportunity to run, hike, ride and climb without driving long distances is much needed stress relief in these difficult times. It's bad enough when natural destruction hinders these opportunities but worse when political obstruction extends this peculiar exile from our own backyard.
Friday, September 13, 2013
When the Levee Breaks: #boulderflood
Driving back from work on Wednesday was not a lot of fun after a full day of on and off rain. The intense and sustained nature of it made me wonder if this was not a typical rainfall for the area and the events of Thursday Sept 12 confirmed it. Writing today, I can say that Boulder has undergone a natural disaster unlike any since I have been here (almost 20 years) and probably in several generations.
Summing up what has happened is difficult to say the least but essentially every canyon between north Denver and Fort Collins has either experienced serious flooding or could do so in coming days. The brunt of the water has hit the cities of Longmont and Boulder the hardest but no municipality has been unaffected and Lyons in particular, will never be the same.
What does this mean for climbing in the area? Basically, nobody should plan on coming to Boulder specifically for climbing in the next few days at least. Although road closures will probably be lifted soon as flood waters dissipate, significant issues will remain for weeks and possibly months. Here's a quick rundown of local areas and likely problems
Summing up what has happened is difficult to say the least but essentially every canyon between north Denver and Fort Collins has either experienced serious flooding or could do so in coming days. The brunt of the water has hit the cities of Longmont and Boulder the hardest but no municipality has been unaffected and Lyons in particular, will never be the same.
What does this mean for climbing in the area? Basically, nobody should plan on coming to Boulder specifically for climbing in the next few days at least. Although road closures will probably be lifted soon as flood waters dissipate, significant issues will remain for weeks and possibly months. Here's a quick rundown of local areas and likely problems
Clear Creek Canyon assuming it remains open, will be very unstable on the approaches up its steep slopes for some time. Eldorado Canyon State Park is closed, Eldorado Springs has been evacuated and within the park, the road washed out west of the Bastille. Boulder City and County Open Space are officially closed and many trails have been seriously damaged. Boulder Canyon has had massive rockslides and will be closed to traffic for some time Steep hillsides and loosened boulders will make for hazardous conditions in many locales for weeks, along with destroyed trails.
 |
| Highway 36 just before it washed away completely. Via Twitter |
Access to the high country is seriously compromised with major highway washouts on Route 7 and Route 36, the two primary roads to RMNP from the east. The town of Lyons where 36 comes over from Boulder has seen massive destruction and there is no access west or east through it. It will be some time before Lyons is anywhere back to normal. Estes Park itself has seen major flooding and roads and trails within RMNP may be closed due to damage as yet unknown. Estes Park is currently accessible only from the west via Trail Ridge Road which could close any time due to early season snow.
 |
| Route 7, west of Lyons.Via the Denver Post |
Further north, route 34 along the Big Thompson River is closed due to rockslides and the river itself may well wash out the highway completely. Further east 34 has washed over I-25 and other significant roads making north-south travel in the state very difficult north of Denver for most.
In Fort Collins proper, the Poudre river is at flood stage making access to Poudre Canyon impossible and the possibility of rockslides is high with continued rain. Areas such as Carter Lake and Horsetooth may be affected as well but I have no first hand information.
Before coming to Boulder in the next few days, I would strongly recommend checking in with local news sources and resources such as Colorado Department of Transportation. Links below.
http://www.boulderoem.org/emergency-status
UPDATE: Rocky Mountain National Park is closed to recreational visitors
UPDATE: Rocky Mountain National Park is closed to recreational visitors
Saturday, September 7, 2013
Bouldering with Ashima
I don't know if it's a habit of mine to stop writing for a while in August. It makes sense to me. Between the heat, getting ready for fall and a general sense of lethargy, I am content to drift down the stream of the internet and dip my gnarled toes in whatever comes along and not contribute. And given the rate of return on my investment of time and effort, maybe a long break is only right.
First try in Rocklands from Jimmy Webb on Vimeo.
The diabolically fickle weather has not prevented a number of notable ascents including a series of sends of the new V14 Wheel of Chaos, a lengthy and steep problem in Upper Upper that sent Jimmy Webb to the ER last year after a sharp block came off and sliced his arm open. (I wonder if there is a list of boulderers who have had medical attention thanks to various Park mishaps) And Jimmy's recent ascent of the Wheel of Wolvo, a tough (V14) entry into the Overcling traverse adds yet another V15 to the Front Range. Considering that he has flashed and/or downgraded a number of hard problems here and in South Africa and Switzerland, this is significant. And Hypnotized Minds still awaits a repeat.
But maybe more interesting than that was Ashima Shiraishi's very quick repeat of Automator. It was particularly interesting to me because I had the opportunity of working in with her a few weekends ago on the first afternoon she was trying it. I have a seen many many strong climbers but I freely admit I have not seen a 12-year old girl so thoroughly dominate a difficult boulder before. It was very easy to predict, considering how easy she made the moves look on a very damp and warm afternoon (in fact pouring rain came down shortly after) that she would complete the problem very soon. This she did the very next day, putting in one of the fastest repeats of the problem that I know of.
In reflecting on her ability, one of the more interesting points of comparison I came up with was the 37 years of age difference between the two of us and the similarity in the sense that we are both pretty uncommon sights in the world of climbing, on opposite ends of the spectrum. I am particularly impressed by the degree to which she presses forward in the absence of peer groups that understand her focus and drive. Assuming she decides to continue climbing at a high level, the future looks very bright for her.
For my part, I am equally interested in the fate of those, who having tasted early success, either lose the plot or leave the sport altogether. I think this is something that those who feel the sport needs to get to the next level are leaving out. The careers in climbing that can actually support a reasonable quality of life have little to do with climbing hard and more to do with more mundane skills like marketing, accounting, logistics, manufacturing, design and so forth. I am not worried about Ashima, especially as she is still so young but I do have concerns about the propostion that teen climbers might entertain that they can have a future as fulltime climbers after they age out of the protective cocoon of parental support and a heavily subsidized competition scene. I have seen way too many climbers burn out and/or drop out once this occurs.
From my side of the age spectrum, I remain convinced that the best approach to climbing is to take the longest view possible while maintaining a consistent level of motivation to do one's best. Today's climbing scene is heavily youth-oriented, possibly in part because of a recognition that parents are the most likely consistent source of revenue growth in a sport that is steadily getting older in terms of average age. Indoor climbing is being marketed as the way to reach out to broader populations and appeal to youth in the way that skate parks accelerated the growth of skateboarding. Increasingly sophisticated marketing and promotion can go along way in making the sport appealing to youth outside the normal demographic of middle to upper middle-class white people
However, my belief is (and I spend a lot of time in climbing gyms!) that ultimately the climber who bonds with the natural experience of climbing outdoors is likely to stay in the sport the longest. Here's hoping that Ashima's generation succeeds in doing the same.
First try in Rocklands from Jimmy Webb on Vimeo.
The diabolically fickle weather has not prevented a number of notable ascents including a series of sends of the new V14 Wheel of Chaos, a lengthy and steep problem in Upper Upper that sent Jimmy Webb to the ER last year after a sharp block came off and sliced his arm open. (I wonder if there is a list of boulderers who have had medical attention thanks to various Park mishaps) And Jimmy's recent ascent of the Wheel of Wolvo, a tough (V14) entry into the Overcling traverse adds yet another V15 to the Front Range. Considering that he has flashed and/or downgraded a number of hard problems here and in South Africa and Switzerland, this is significant. And Hypnotized Minds still awaits a repeat.
But maybe more interesting than that was Ashima Shiraishi's very quick repeat of Automator. It was particularly interesting to me because I had the opportunity of working in with her a few weekends ago on the first afternoon she was trying it. I have a seen many many strong climbers but I freely admit I have not seen a 12-year old girl so thoroughly dominate a difficult boulder before. It was very easy to predict, considering how easy she made the moves look on a very damp and warm afternoon (in fact pouring rain came down shortly after) that she would complete the problem very soon. This she did the very next day, putting in one of the fastest repeats of the problem that I know of.
For my part, I am equally interested in the fate of those, who having tasted early success, either lose the plot or leave the sport altogether. I think this is something that those who feel the sport needs to get to the next level are leaving out. The careers in climbing that can actually support a reasonable quality of life have little to do with climbing hard and more to do with more mundane skills like marketing, accounting, logistics, manufacturing, design and so forth. I am not worried about Ashima, especially as she is still so young but I do have concerns about the propostion that teen climbers might entertain that they can have a future as fulltime climbers after they age out of the protective cocoon of parental support and a heavily subsidized competition scene. I have seen way too many climbers burn out and/or drop out once this occurs.
From my side of the age spectrum, I remain convinced that the best approach to climbing is to take the longest view possible while maintaining a consistent level of motivation to do one's best. Today's climbing scene is heavily youth-oriented, possibly in part because of a recognition that parents are the most likely consistent source of revenue growth in a sport that is steadily getting older in terms of average age. Indoor climbing is being marketed as the way to reach out to broader populations and appeal to youth in the way that skate parks accelerated the growth of skateboarding. Increasingly sophisticated marketing and promotion can go along way in making the sport appealing to youth outside the normal demographic of middle to upper middle-class white people
However, my belief is (and I spend a lot of time in climbing gyms!) that ultimately the climber who bonds with the natural experience of climbing outdoors is likely to stay in the sport the longest. Here's hoping that Ashima's generation succeeds in doing the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
