Las Vegas Excursion

A little over a week ago, I got up before dawn, ate a quick breakfast, packed up and left the keys to my hotel room and hit the road, heading northeast back to Colorado from Las Vegas Nevada. Watching the first rays of the morning sun hit the dry peaks west of the highway near Mesquite, I knew I had a long way yet to go and plenty of time to think about the past week's adventures.

It was decided that I should head somewhere out of town solo the week before Christmas, an opportunity that I was eager to take, having not gone on a dedicated climbing trip in several years. And even if it would be only a few days, the chance to see some new boulders, meet some people, and maybe get some projects for a future visit was irresistible.

I piled a bunch of pads in my car and headed over the mountains in perfect weather. The sun was beginning to lower by the time I went through the San Rafael Swell where you really see the Utah desert landscape along I-70 and as had been the case since I passed Idaho Springs, snow was everywhere. I had had warnings that this might affect the climbing in Saint George but it was surprising to see so much snow that far south.

A quiet night in a budget motel in Saint George was a nice surprise and I took my time getting started as daylight revealed the city was surrounded by snow anywhere there was shade. I wanted to check out Moe's Valley but realized that my car would not handle the ice, snow and mud on the drive in. I realized though that it was just a mile or so, hardly a bad walk in so I hiked in on the road. This was the view from the Sentinel Boulder.

Snowy conditions in Moe's Valley

Undaunted, I started on the easier warmups in the vicinity, getting used to the soft and somewhat sandy rock. Though the landings were for the most part flat, some of the boulders were tall enough to merit care, especially on the topouts. After doing the Sentinel V2 (the groove on the left in the photo above) I did the classic Huntsman Graffiti V5, a series of long moves on small crimps on a leaning wall. This is a problem as good as any I have done in the grade and well worth the effort to visit if you are passing through.

Huntsman Graffiti V5

After chatting with a couple that showed up shortly after (the only people I saw that day) I headed deeper into the valley proper. Again, plenty of snow covered the tops of virtually all the boulders, including most of the classics such as Gription V9 and a problem I really wanted to do, Dead Rabbit, a crimpy V10. Dead Rabbit had 4 inches of snow at the top but the actual problem was dry. The hard climbing ends at a huge jug below the lip so I figured I would call it good if I got there. A big if as it turned out. While I got all the moves quickly, one in particularly proved desperate on the go and after a number of attempts, I was forced to move on. This problem has some of the best rock in the area, more like Joe's than the typical Moe's quality.

The crux on Dead Rabbit V10

Moe's Valley has a lot of boulders!

After this I went over to look for the Lindner Roof V9 which as it turned out was running with water and broken, which should up the grade a bit. In the vicinity, I did a problem called Shoulder Popper V8 which was clearly easier and a very classic crimpy arete named Hermione, a stout V3 or 4. I needed to leave to get to Vegas so I walked back out towards town feeling pretty tired. Moe's is definitely worth a stop though I wouldn't recommend it when covered with snow!

During a slow crawl through the VRG due to a truck accident, I recalled days spent working routes here such as the bouldery Hell Comes to Frogtown and the Route of All Evil. The VRG is blessed with amazing rock yet cursed with a grim location right off I-15. However there is probably no better place in North America for hard sport climbing in the cold seasons of fall and winter than Saint George and environs with numerous 5.13 and 5.14 routes, most of which are not too hard to access.

Two hours later I was in Las Vegas and checking in at the Suncoast Hotel Casino. Well removed from the Strip and 15 minutes from the Kraft Boulders trailhead, this casino is perfectly located for climbers. Throw in the fact that the climbing gym and Whole Foods are five minutes drive away, along with REI and the local climbing store and it's almost like you never left Boulder. The Suncoast is not crazy cheap (Hooters was on Expedia at 14 dollars a night) but I had a big but comfortable quiet room with a short hassle-free drive, perfect for mid-winter long nights.

Suncoast Casino

Wednesday I was still incredibly tired from Tuesday's explorations but I went out to check out the Kraft Boulders, one of the most well known and historically important bouldering areas near Las Vegas. A few tries on Slice'n'Dice V9 went nowhere and I eventually wandered over towards The Pearl, the celebrated classic from decades ago. Facing due south and polished by thousands of ascent, this problem is not a give-away. It certainly looks much better than it climbs with a tweaky shallow pocket and greasy feet.

The Pearl V4/5 Two moves of actual climbing but hard

I ran into Seth Robinson, Vegas local and guidebook author, who gave me a tour of Gateway Canyon, the area just northeast of the Kraft Boulders. This is one of a number of places where the latest development has taken place. In fact while I was there, a crew including Jimmy Webb, Nalle Hukketaival and Daniel Woods was taking down new problems left and right. I think it's safe to say that the guidebooks will need new editions soon.

Speaking of guidebooks, there are two available: one from Wolverine that is a select guide and the Tom Moulin "bible" which is a massive compendium of all the bouldering in the entire region. I bought the latter but found that the binding fell apart very quickly (while reading it in the hotel!) and returned it. I will be waiting for the next edition on that one. For a quick visit, the Wolverine one will work but is also very much out of date out at this point on the newer problems.

One of the best parts of the hike was seeing the remarkable and unique shapes and designs on the walls of the canyon

Erosion on the Keystone Boulder

Powerslave V12, a problem to come back for

At the end of the day we ran into Courtney Woods who wanted to try Lethal Design, a power-endurance V12 near the mouth of the canyon. I was able to take some good photos and also some notes for a possible session the next day.

Courtney Woods working on Lethal Design

This problem is more like a short route and comes complete with a somewhat sketchy topout over large, wobbly, jagged boulders. This landing could use some constructive reworking, no doubt, as it is unnecessarily unsafe.The climbing is intensely crimpy with lots of options for fingers and feet but no real respite until the last good edge before the slab. Armed with ideas and beta, I planned on coming back the next afternoon.

I felt better the next day and warmed up on the Potato Chip boulder which was much more fun than The Pearl and comes highly recommended.

After this, I met up with Courtney and Daniel Woods to head over to Gateway. Daniel wanted to do a problem called Burnt, a low V12 start to a V7 in the Kraft boulders. Unfortunately he had forgotten one of his climbing shoes somewhere and was forced to try it with a Sanuk on his right foot. Fortunately the problem is left-foot intensive. However building sun made it imperative to move on.

We headed over to Gateway and set up the pads for Lethal Design. The first third is sustained to several cruxy moves along a diagonal seam. Then a good hold allows a long reach to a spiky undercling, another good sidepull for the left hand and a final couple of hard moves to a good edge as the angle kicks back.

Working this problem means being careful about skin as too many tries on the same spiky crimp can puncture your fingers quickly. Fortunately the moves are not super hard. The problem's difficulty lies primarily in its continuity and complexity. Satisfied I had worked everything as well as I was going to that day, I headed out with Courtney and Daniel back to the Kraft Boulders hoping to get a good try or two on the Monkey Bar Direct, a steep and reachy V8 right on the trail.

Sadly drained of skin and power, I had to put this problem on the return list. Walking out under spitting rain, I ran into Daniel and Courtney again. Not surprisingly Daniel sent Burnt in one shoe!

Is Vegas worth the trip? Absolutely. It is definitely not the caliber of Hueco Tanks but there are many very worthy problems of all grades and this combined with a wide array of other climbing options and most importantly minimal bureaucratic hassles, make Vegas a prime winter destination regardless of your climbing style or preferred terrain. I only know that I left wishing I had three weeks instead of three days.

Bouldering Book Review of Gimme Kraft

Head on over to my blog on bouldering for a review of the excellent book called Gimme Kraft, a new German/English text on climbing training.

http://www.theboulderingbook.com/2013/12/gimme-kraft-review-and-interview-with.html

Can Climbers Think More Clearly About Ethics?

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.

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.

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? 

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?

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.

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.

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.