Forum
Buying gear? Please use these links to help 14ers.com:

More info...

Other ways to help...

Boulder

Information on peaks other than the CO 14ers and 13ers.
User avatar
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:58 am
Location: Boulder, CO

Re: Boulder

Postby AndyJB444 » Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:29 pm

PS. Just saw that Flagstaff Rd. is opening tomorrow evening, with Walker Ranch to open on Saturday at sunrise...

User avatar
Posts: 525
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:59 pm
Location: Boulder, CO

Re: Boulder

Postby justiner » Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:43 pm

http://www.bouldercounty.org/apps/newsroom/templates/bc12.aspx?articleid=3852&zoneid=1 -
Great news! We have been keeping in close contact with transportation officials on the flood-damaged roads and we're happy to share that Sunshine Canyon and Flagstaff Road in Boulder will be re-opening to recreational cyclists on Saturday.
Last edited by justiner on Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Long Ranger | STRAVA

"Any effort that has self-glorification as its final endpoint is bound to end in disaster" - Pirsig

User avatar
Posts: 525
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:59 pm
Location: Boulder, CO

Re: Boulder

Postby justiner » Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:02 pm

pbakwin wrote:"1000 year flood" (which was actually a 100 year flood in Boulder, or maybe less), is no reason for anything. Significant, stated hazards could be a reason.


I'm not sure it'd be too hard to find those out - ranger station, perhaps? Did you check out all the photos they were posting? They seem pretty transparent on what they're doing - why would they keep a trail closed, if it could be open?

pbakwin wrote:If the city is going to close public land to the public for reasons of safety they should have standards for what is and isn't safe. They don't.


Do we know that? Someone's job is to make that (TOUGH) call though - regardless if it fits yours or my own opinion on all this. If I was that person, would I be cautious, or optimistic with my judgement?

pbakwin wrote:What's safe for one person (let's say, free soloing the First Flatiron) is certain death for another.


As someone who does freesolo the First, I'll point out the obvious: it's pretty hard to to mistakenly free solo the First. Do people get on the Flatirons and realize that it's a dumb place for them to be? OH YEAH.

It's also easy to mistakenly be on a trail that's dangerous. So, I'm guessing the thought was, "Hmm! Well," (points to a trail) "THAT trail is really dangerous, and in need of repair - to be safe, let's shut 'er down and do a once-over and be sure everything else is OK, and fix what's not." That's clearly my own idea, but it seems reasonable. Get it done, do it right.

So why is the First open at all, and a trail that's washed out not open now?

One idea is that to rescue someone injured from a fall on the First, you need to evacuate them, which means - unless you wanna take days and put more risk on the rescuers, you need a trail for RMR to get the injured person down. Thus, the trails are actually really damn important to have. The First is open because the access trail to the First is open. Royal Arch is not open, because the Royal Arch Trail is also, not open. (There's an interesting book called, Playing For Real, that talks about how the RMR does their thing - lots of stories involve the RMR - lots of rescue by carrying people out, straight up helicopter evac is very rare).

pbakwin wrote:OK, it's clear that I don't think that the City should have kept most of Open Space closed for more that the couple weeks it took to assess the damage.


There's people still out of their homes in the area, yeah? Maybe the needed resources were/are being given to them, and us users of the completely awesome and basically free Boulder Mountain Park can just be patient for a little while longer.

I'll stop with all this, as I get the feeling you're borderline trolling. My opinion is that there's not much to criticize the people who run the B.M.P. - I think they're doing a great job. Things take time, people want the park open for a ton of reasons, most very good ones! Still, it takes time.
The Long Ranger | STRAVA

"Any effort that has self-glorification as its final endpoint is bound to end in disaster" - Pirsig

Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:14 pm

Re: Boulder

Postby jpenny » Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:38 pm

I believe they were closed entirely to long and opened in a nonsensical order. Most of the closures were for fallen trees and/or ditches from what I was able to ascertain. The amphitheater trail was closed longer than the majority of the trails in OSMP yet my biggest issue with it was the ditch that ran along less than half the width of the trail. If you are worried about that ditch, than you have no business being on that trail at all. Yet the main trail heading up from Chat had an even bigger ditch on it yet that was open to the public very early. The amphitheater ditch is 10-15 minutes from Chat so you can't tell me it has been closed for rescue purposes. I could hop that far on one leg.

https://bouldercolorado.gov/photo-gallery/photoshow/?photo_id=9846855465&set_id=72157635708218296

It's a tree. Go over it. It's what makes a trail a trail. What I think they should have done is make most sections of the OSMP an enter at your own risk. Make it very clear at signposts and trailheads that rescue is more than likely not their priority and may or may not be extremely difficult to attempt. Most of us I would hope are big boys and girls and would make a conscious decision on whether or not we possess the skills to enter such terrain. I would also hope that most of us don't expect to be rescued every time we go out but that is a different story... I feel like I'm actually talking about something truly dangerous and not just the backyard.

Regardless of what happens, I don't plan on being around for the next flood. I just think a few tweaks to way things went about would have been nice. I personally didn't see much of a threat on many of the closed trails. And what I gathered was the reason for a trail closure, I would happen to find on an open trail.

I guess I was upset because my favorite trail has been closed and I am risking a fine and imprisonment every time I run it even though I am fully capable of doing it, and I see open trails in much worse shape than it. Let us travel where we would like as long as we abide by the standard Park rules and won't take up any extra resources in the event we injure ourselves.

User avatar
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:05 pm
Location: Boulder, CO

Re: Boulder

Postby Ed Matthews » Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:55 am

Hmmm....interesting topic here. I was born and raised in Boulder and we have never seen a disaster like this flooding, this is completely new for us. I understand much of the frustration around the trails being closed but I also believe that living in this area there are many, many other options, your daily hike up Royal Arch may have to wait....pick something new. I also think that the closures are made in part due to safety and in part due to the need to maintain a "sustainablish" trail. During my summers growing up in Boulder I worked as a trail crew member as well as a trail crew leader and I have found that most hikers are not the type who walk through the mud, or step over trees, they simply go around these obstacles. Someone made the comment that the ditch only took out half of the trail, or the tree was easy to step over or around, both of these items cause the trail to widen to an alarming degree and damage much of the surrounding ecosystem that we love. I believe it is much more than safety that went into the decisions made to close many trails.

Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:14 pm

Re: Boulder

Postby jpenny » Mon Nov 18, 2013 11:13 pm

Indeed I did pick something new, hence my former topic that I started on trails around Boulder that gives plenty of information on the surrounding areas including Morrison and Golden. I ran many of those trails right after the flood, however that is a 30-45 minute drive from Boulder. It is nice to be able to get off work, run for a couple of hours and go home before it gets dark.

I understand how many areas could be affected by people creating their own shortcuts around obstacles, however on Green Mountain, more specifically the Amphitheater and Greenman trails, I just can't see that happening. As it was, plenty of people were going up and down those particular trails without incident or erosion.

So being a full time employee that runs 100+ miles a week, there really aren't that many other options with the kind of elevation gain that Green and Bear have to offer, especially with Canyon Blvd closed.

If the trails were in bad enough condition that erosion became a serious problem I would understand. The stretch of trail on the Mesa Trail right out of Chat for example definitely needed work. It's just that in my opinion, some trails were closed when they shouldn't have been. Look at the picture of the tree in my earlier post. That was the crux of the trail. It's at most a foot tall... Who is going to walk around that and cause erosion? Bear Peak West Ridge just wasn't that bad either to be closed for as long as it was. I just think the enter at your own risk philosophy would have been the way to go. Granted, as Ed said, there are not any erosion problems.

Anyway, the trails are open, and these are simply luxury problems. Hopefully the next time something like this happens we will all be more prepared to deal with it

Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Boulder

Postby PaliKona » Wed Nov 20, 2013 8:46 pm

Had some fun today hiking along the Sacred Cliffs south of Green Mtn's Peak. Had never been over there on the ridge..really cool

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cruiser and 3 guests