Mt Evans Bouldering Guidebook--Request for Public Opinion

While climbing last weekend at Mount Evans, I ran into Bob Horan. After briefly discussing his upcoming book, "Bouldering Colorado," I found out that he is planning to include the bouldering at Area A. This would be the first published guide for the area and it has encountered significant public dissent in addition to having serious potential to affect future access to the area.

Specifically regarding the book:

According to Bob, the book would contain info on about 6 boulders at Area A, although he wouldn't elaborate on which ones, specific problems or any access or ethics info. He supposedly submitted info about the guide to someone at Evans to be reviewed, but none of the people I am in contact with knew anything about it and very little information is available elsewhere.

I have listed a bit of background and my personal opinion below, but would like to hear what the community has to say about the issue. As a representational group for climbers, the Northern Colorado Climbers Coalition would like to hear what you have to say in order to determine how we will address the issue. You may reply here, or send me an e-mail at

horsetoothhang@yahoo.com.

We welcome your comments, whether they are in agreement with my personal opinions or not.

A Brief Overview of Mount Evans

Bouldering at Mount Evans is very different from many other Front Range crags. Although it is an alpine area like Rocky Mountain National Park, Mount Evans is a US Forest Service Wilderness Area. Designated according to the Wilderness Preservation act of 1964, Wilderness areas such as Evans are designed to "secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness". As a result, very different rules and regulations apply to the area, often focusing less on providing recreational opportunities (i.e., climbing, hiking, camping, etc) and more on preserving natural resources.

Home to a large number of rare natural resources such a Artic Tundra, 2,000 year old bristlecone pines, and significant populations of bighorn sheep and mountain goats, Mount Evans is a fragile and pristine environment. Despite having a road that leads to the top of the mountain, the majority of Evans wilderness has been relatively untouched and is very well preserved.

The bouldering area that Horan plans to include in his upcoming book is set in a fragile forest environment. The main access trail is an unmaintained social trail that wanders through the forest, patches of willows and across a number of areas that can be marshy at times. Already, despite a lack of public access information or guidebook, very notable effects from climber use may be seen. We have been monitoring the area over the last few years and can see a visible change in the proliferation of social trails, expansion of landing zones, and a variety of other bouldering related issues.

My opinion on a Guidebook

To my knowledge, no one at Evans has ever condoned or approved of a bouldering guidebook and many people, especially a large number of local climbers are opposed to the idea at this time. If Horan is printing this without coordinating with the land management agencies and with significant dissent among the climbing community, there could be serious complications.

In my personal opinion, the infrastructure at Evans is too underdeveloped to support the massive influx of people that a guidebook will likely bring. In the last few years, we have seen a drastic increase in user days and impacts related to climbing. At the moment, various climbing organizations are working hard to help mitigate impacts and ensure that the climbing community has access for the future.

Several other publishers have considered adding Evans to upcoming guides, but have refrained due to the current situation. I have a great deal of respect for them because they can see beyond the immediate dollar values of a few guidebooks to the implications associated with bringing an unsustainable number of climbers into a seriously sensitive area without appropriate infrastructure.

Indubitably, having access restricted or losing access altogether to any part of Evans would be the biggest tragedy in Colorado bouldering history. Without the help of any guidebook, the Dali boulder has already gained notoriety around the world and it is common to see large crowds lining up to try problems on it on any given weekend. Many other problems (i.e., the ladder, Bierstadt, Pink Fink, Seurat) often see large groups as well, with noticeable impacts despite not being world renown.

Many of the existing rules and regulations at Evans are designed to disperse people in order to reduce impacts. Although it hasn't been strictly enforced, Evans has a policy that states that no more than 15 people can congregate in one area. It is clearly written on the back of the Wilderness Use permit that all visitors need to fill out.

Greater numbers of climbers at Evans are inevitable. Like the Park, it is a summer destination for climbers across Colorado, the nation, and increasingly the world. My greatest fear is that a dramatic increase in use will exceed sustainable capacity to the point that it creates serious access issues. As in the case of the maximum group size, policies are already in place that can alter how bouldering is regulated without a significant legislative process or public input.

Generally, guidebooks are not abhorrent things. They often provide climbers with opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable. However, in this case, Horan's guide has serious potential to restrict or eliminate opportunities for climbers in the future.

I was recently discussing the issue of guidebooks with a local Fort Collins land management agency. Ironically, they expressed irritation because the "Colorado Front Range Bouldering: Fort Collins" book by Bob Horan provided incorrect access information. They were not included in the writing process and as a result, climbers often approach the Quarry bouldering area incorrectly and without paying a mandatory entrance fee. Despite being printed 13 years ago (and the guidebook being outdated), a number of climbers still approach via Horan's suggested method, thus violating park policy and creating tension between the two groups.

Having a guidebook to Evans in the future may be inevitable. However, now is not the time in my opinion. As in the case of Horan's "Colorado Front Range Bouldering: Fort Collins", the upcoming "Bouldering Colorado" guide that includes Evans is likely to create lasting problems. A large number of things, including trails, access points, local ethics, and research on sustainable use numbers need to be further developed prior to publishing any sort of guidebook.

I don't know Horan personally beyond our interaction on Saturday. I know he has been around for a long time and has contributed significantly to the Colorado climbing scene. However, I am greatly disappointed that a book like this could be released so casually. The implications of this are massive, and I would hope that he is truly dedicated to the well being of the greater climbing community above his own personal motives. Access to such a pristine and amazing climbing area is truly a privilege and not an issue to be taken lightly or for personal gain.

~Cameron Cross
President
Northern Colorado Climbers Coalition

Cameron,

This reminds me of a recent trip I made to climb an alpine rock route on the East flank of Pikes Peak. The locals we encountered on the way in that day were kind and forth coming with robust beta. We would have gotten along without them just fine, but their knowledge cut at least a few hours out of our trip. However, it was made plainly known to us by more then a few locals on more then a few occasions that we were never to share any knowledge about the area with anyone else ever. I was told point blank "whatever you do just don't ever publish it on the internet".

I read your full post and understand your concerns and have carefully noted your logic. It is sound. But, in today's 24/7 instant communications world you can't keep the genie in the bottle forever.

I think the concern that a horde of boulders are going to descend onto Mt. Evans due to inclusion in said publication is over blown. The logistics of a Mt. Evans bouldering trip are a good bit more involved then going to Rotary at Horsetooth.

They should take the park service at Hueco and deposit it somewhere it's needed, like Mt. Evans. A mandatory class on preservation of prestine environments, a higher entrance fee, and punishment to the fullest extent of the law for those who break the rules could be the only way to preserve the area.

Dont do it.

Cameron Cross wrote:However, I am greatly disappointed that a book like this could be released so casually. The implications of this are massive, ... Access to such a pristine and amazing climbing area is truly a privilege and not an issue to be taken lightly or for personal gain. ~Cameron Cross President Northern Colorado Climbers Coalition

If the concern is over a matter of a book being published, then you really don't have access. All you are saying is to keep an area under the radar.

What would be better is to discuss the area & manage it better. We're not talking about promoting motorized use. It's a matter of letting people get out into their wilderness and enjoy it; maybe just some better trail & sanitation guideline effort from both sides of the argument.

Hell, I could just Google-Earth and point out the lot of the area. Does that make me the destroyer of the wilderness??

Keep in mind this area sees far greater use in frequency from all kinds of activities; it's really not an unknown area nor a remote area for that matter.

So when you tack the word 'social' to the word 'trail,' it's bad. Got it. It's like a new language.

SAL wrote:Dont do it.

Wise up to these truths. I'm pulling for you Cam, and already sent my email to Falcon. The address, and Peter's feelings on the issue can be found on Peter's website.

Go and read it for yo'self.

mountainsandwater.blogspot.…

Seth Murphy wrote: Wise up to these truths. I'm pulling for you Cam, and already sent my email to Falcon. The address, and Peter's feelings on the issue can be found on Peter's website. Go and read it for yo'self. mountainsandwater.blogspot.…

Seth and I agree on somthing.
The world is gonna end.
Maybe i should re-vote..

I would like to thank everyone for their opinions today. A number of people had excellent points regarding the issue and I would like to take a few minutes to discuss the most pertinent ones.

Several people have expressed that merely refraining from printing a guidebook is not a solution to securing access to the bouldering at Mt Evans.

I certainly agree. Continued access to Evans will be secured through a variety of means. First, the infrastructure must be established to accommodate increased use (I know I keep repeating this, but it is important). Second, the climbing community needs to become actively involved in the stewardship of the area. This goes beyond hosting a clean-up per year—climbers need to be both aware and active in maintaining the resource they use on a daily basis. Third, users of the Mt. Evans area need to be educated about the area. And lastly, access will be secured by collaboration between climbing organizations such as the Access Fund, Northern Colorado Climbers Coalition, Denver Climbers Coalition and the various land management agencies involved.

People are often confused about what sets Evans apart from other areas in terms of management, climbing and ethics issues, and environmental resources. Contrary to the bouldering in the Park, the Evans area is managed through the collaboration of 4 different agencies, all with different policies towards climbing. They are the US Forest Service, the City of Idaho Springs, Denver Mountain Parks and the Colorado Department of Transportation. While at first glance, climbing seemed to be a relatively simple topic, the involvement of multiple agencies complicates matters exponentially. The majority of bouldering also falls within the Wilderness Area boundary that has unique and important implications to the future of climbing in the area.

Local ethics are still being established and environmental resources have yet to be fully (or formally) documented. The point of postponing a guidebook is to help reduce exponential and potentially uncontrollable impacts associated with immediate overuse while we are working to establish a number of important building blocks for the future.

Intrinsically, guidebooks have the power to both positively and negatively affect an area. In the case of Evans, a guide is certain to bring greater numbers of people. However, it also has potential to be used as a powerful educational tool that could ultimately help mitigate the effects of the increased use. Perhaps the most important element in writing a guidebook that benefits the climbing community and land management agencies involved is collaboration. By working with land management groups, guidebook authors demonstrate dedication to both the climbing community (by providing valuable and accurate information that helps ensure access) and managers (by helping educate user groups and fostering respect for the resource).

The time will come when a guidebook is appropriate and beneficial. However, at that time, it should be a joint effort between a well-informed author and the various management agencies involved. Horan’s inclusion of Evans in his upcoming book was done without any collaboration with management groups. Without any involvement, the various land management agencies have no way to voice their concerns and are forced to become reactionary to whatever comes out of the situation. By allowing them to be a part of the writing process, authors help ensure that the climbing community has it’s greatest chance of securing long-term access to any crag.

Thus, postponing a guide at this time serves a dual purpose to help ensure long-term access: It provides the climbing community and land management agencies with more time in order to better establish bouldering as a sustainable form of recreation and it gives the author time to collaborate with the various agencies in order to publish a guide with greater accuracy and potential to positively influence the situation.

Another issue that came up today was the fact that I sought public opinion on the subject rather than the author.

As the director of a local climbing organization, I feel it is my obligation to listen to what the community has to say on any issue that may affect us. I certainly have my opinions on the subject, and framed them as such. The point of requesting public opinion is to assess where the community stands on the issue in order to decide how we should proceed as an organization.

Given that there was no discussion put forth by the author (or collaboration with the management agencies involved) and the book is less than two weeks away from being printed, I would say that the inclusion of Evans in the upcoming guide would be a surprise to the vast majority of the climbing community. Furthermore, I have been in close contact with the USFS for the last several years and know where they stand on the issue at the moment. Given that their perspective is somewhat privileged information, I felt that the greater climbing community should have a greater understanding of the factors influencing the debate prior to making a decision on whether or not a guidebook would be an appropriate choice at this time.

Over the last year, several publishers have contacted various people within the climbing community to receive input regarding the potential of an Evans guidebook. Due to nearly overwhelming response advising against it, they have refrained, realizing that community support of the project is still weak at best and that the potential for damage is strong. There was no need for them to do a community survey because they recognized that waiting is more appropriate at this time.

In reality, a public survey should have been done by Horan months or years ago, before he significantly invested time and energy in the project. I would have been happy to explain the access situation based on my experiences and put him in touch with the right people at the Forest Service so he could talk directly with them regarding the project. However, as it stands, the climbing community and land management agencies have been kept completely in the dark and we have nearly been robbed of our ability as a group to dictate the future of our own crags.

At the moment, the Forest Service is composing a formal letter to request that Mt. Evans be excluded from Horan’s upcoming guidebook. They intend to send it to him and the publisher, Falcon Books. A number of people have already submitted letters to the publisher requesting the same. I have sent Horan two e-mails thus far, one formally requesting that he refrain from including Evans in the guide and a second to ask what his plans were. As of tonight, I have received no response from either e-mail.

If you would like to submit a comment to Falcon, you may do so at the following address:

guides@falcon.com
Subject: Falcon Reader Response

I’m not sure if the e-mail listed above is the most effective, so I will call tomorrow to see if there is a more appropriate address.

Also, Bob, if you are following any of these threads and for some reason haven’t received my e-mails, please contact me at horsetoothhang@yahoo.com so I can resend the messages.

Cameron Cross

Thanks Cam for all of your hard work and insight into this issue.

There has been a lot of problems with bouldering at Evans, including impact from social trails, stashed pads, the dirt road access, etc. and after speaking with the park service personally about this issue in the past (especially after that Urban Climber article), they have expressed very valid concerns about impact. While they say people cannot publish a guide to the area, they can. Freedom of Press. However, the park service can absolutely close down the bouldering. That is very real and a guidebook would only help this. As Cameron pointed out, the park's goal is not about recreational activities but preservation and the bouldering up thre has had a lot of negative impact. There have been some great bouldering stewards but a guidebook will bring in the masses to an alpine area that can't recover. I'm all for sharing information and don't like "secret" areas where you have to be in with the right crews, but in this instance, perhaps it is best. The bouldering is phenomenal up there and it would be a terrible loss for colorado bouldering. People mentioning that access is not secured if there can't be a guide - well you're right, it's not secured. The park is considering closing bouldering, but the issue right now isn't about secured access per say, only endangering the chance of secured access with a guidebook. If people want to climb there bad enough, it's easy enough to find that information or people to go with. Tough issue indeed.

Cam, if you need Bob's contact info, please email me and I'll give it to you. I need to get in touch with him anyway and return some slides to him.

I think a guide book is ok. More people will be up there which means more crash pads stashed and more people around to give you a spot. As long as he doesn't tell everyone where the key to the gate is hidden we should all be ok.

Gary Burghoff wrote:I think a guide book is ok. More people will be up there which means more crash pads stashed and more people around to give you a spot. As long as he doesn't tell everyone where the key to the gate is hidden we should all be ok.

hahahahhahaaa

This guy...

Nice Post Cam. I'll send an e-mail to the publisher stating my objections.

I think everyone needs to understand that when you visit an area for the first time, there is a big difference between being shown around by someone who knows the place and trying to find boulders out of a guide book. If you’re trying to find it out of a book, it leads to bush whacking and wandering around off trail. That causes unnecessary impact. Plus you don’t learn the current access situation and history of an area. Normally, if you get a shown an area you learn a lot more about how to climb there observing certain ethics.

This really isn’t about keeping the Bouldering from anyone. I would have no problem giving anyone a tour of Mt. Evans, and I’m sure Cam wouldn’t either. But having climbers wondering around off trail reading from a guidebook and breaking rules they didn’t know existed will only cause more problems for an already troubled area.

I love mt evans. It's beautiful climbing, scenery, etc. I don't think this area will ever be a huge destination as long as the access is kept to a 45' hike. Keep that secret key locked up and there won't be an issue. The genie's already out and I think a responsible guide and some work on the approach trails and cairns would reduce impact. Stop putting your camels out at the base of routes and we'll be set. Devil's head has some great stuff. No one climbs back there. great guide book. 45' approach.
That said I don't know crap about the issues with land management.

Sometimes I feel like the greatest colorado adventures are the ones where you really have to seek out the rock, and find beta from locals before you find the best problems.

I definitely love meeting other climbers, but I would rather not completely establish the "fast-food" style of climbing access. Especially since I've seen many climbers from across the nation that travel to colorado to climb - and witnessed them trash the front range areas. So I don't mind keeping them on the front range. i expect to pick up cigarette butts around rotary, but not at evans or emerald lake for example.

I guess what I'm saying is that I would rather reduce impact by reducing access to non-locals. Theres several other areas to climb, and I'm sure they can still get beta from locals if they're good people.

Wellll... if what you're really concerned about is preserving the wilderness, stop going there to boulder and encourage everyone you know to go somewhere else too. Otherwise, you're argument comes down to preserving access for you and your friends and whomever else is deemed "good enough" to be let in on the "secret." Elitism and hypocrisy of the worst sort.

Just my $0.02.

But I guess that if these boulders are worth keeping secret then I'd better not tell anyone about the amazing 7-8 pitch water ice climbs I've found in Colorado. It'd just make it too crowded and endanger access for me and my buds. See, how's it feel?

Patrick,

Thanks for your opinion. A few clarifications:

My reference to the opinions of the management agency at Evans regarding a guidebook as 'privileged information' was referring to the fact that there wasn't public discussion regarding a guide prior to the news that Horan's guide would be published. I have discussed the issue at length with the Forest Service, but had no need to draw attention to it since the other two publishing companies refrained from printing an Evans section earlier this year.

It wasn't until I learned Horan would be publishing a guide that I felt the community should know the Forest Service position since it is an important aspect of making a decision on a book's merits or drawbacks. Had we learned of the situation earlier, I would have been able to approach Bob on an individual basis to express their concerns.

I have, in no way been censored by the USFS.

Also, I would just like to mention that everyone I have worked with throughout the years has been awesome. They are committed to working with the climbing community to resolve issues and address concerns.

Despite formal requests to refrain from printing the info, Bob confirmed that he will keep the Evans section in his upcoming guide...

ok, so now what?

The areas are probably going to get printed sooner or later anyway; The Black Wall & Aprons were published decades ago.
Most boulderers already know where to go.

By far, more has been done to damage the upper Bierstadt area than anything the technical climbing community has done. Was it really such a good idea after all to install the boardwalks allowing access through the wetlands & willows from Guanellas?? This action certainly precipitated an explosion of hikers for an easy peak-bag impacting the summit areas. (not that I haven't also been one to benefit)

Certainly, leaving the pads has done its share to affect access; I am grateful everyone cleaned up. And, I understand there are other policy issues going on here; but the real concern is how are all of us: climbers, hikers, USFS, and other agencies, going to conserve the area?

Continuing to rant about who is saying what or writing about an area isn't accomplishing anything.

All I can offer is that management by closure isn't going to help conservation either; though better trailing, parking, & sanitation will.

This sounds like a last-ditch effort by locals to keep this area for themselves. Your argument for the preservation of the area's delicate vegetation sounds noble on the surface, although the tacit message sounds more like you enjoy the privacy and don't want to share.

The bouldering up there is no secret, nor is the new route development. If anything, Bob's new book might help to preserve the environment by guiding climbers directly to specific locations, as opposed to their wandering through delicate vegetation, trying to find these areas on their own.

Ken Cangi wrote:This sounds like a last-ditch effort by locals to keep this area for themselves. Your argument for the preservation of the area's delicate vegetation sounds noble on the surface, although the tacit message sounds more like you enjoy the privacy and don't want to share.

Ken, in fairness to Cameron & the rest of the boulderers, there is another problem with multiple inter-agency relations and ineffectiveness of everyone to address conservation properly. It isn't just a matter of a locals-only thing; none will be more local than me anyway, or rather just as local.