Mt. Evans

Mt. Evans

Posted on 30. May, 2009 by in News

Friday I made my first foray back to the mountains. The weather was nice and I was mostly interested in checking out conditions and perhaps giving a few goes on Seurat, which is a classic problem that I hadn’t done at Area A. Surprisingly, almost everything was dry. The hike to A was easy and it seems like the alpine season at Evans has begun. I gave a few burns on Mental Pollution Low and then went down to Seurat. Ben Scott made the first ascent of this beautiful line. It took me a few burns to figure out the beta, shuffling my feet up and down the crack but the sequence finally came together and I topped out as thunder rumbled down the valley.

img_5439Seurat V7

img_5432 Pinto is back in the game.

I was also interested in checking out Area B, although the report from the girls was that it was inaccessible. We dropped our pads and made our way up the now well worn path and scoped out the boulders. Classics like Gorillas in the Mist V10, City Walls of Dying Dreams V10 and The Hume Problem V9/10 were dry and totally climbable. There was a minimal amount of snow and I found it to be nothing that would stop a dedicated climber. The mountains are always a dangerous place, with harsh weather and deep snow drifts this time of year and climbers from out of town or those with inexperience should perhaps wait until things clear up. For the rest of us, it’s go time!

img_5473 “Area B is totally unclimbable”

One final note, just a friendly reminder that as the alpine areas come into season we need to be careful. Please, out of concern for the access of the area, do the hike every time.

29 Responses to “Mt. Evans”

  1. peter b

    31. May, 2009

    I thought Seurat was V5 by now. Nice photo of the contraband van!

  2. seth

    31. May, 2009

    actually, v3+ now Peter. just when i thought you were in the ‘know.’

  3. chris schulte

    31. May, 2009

    Actually though, access to the Idaho Springs City Reservoir can be granted to a citizen of Idaho Springs who puts up a $100 deposit to “check out” a key, for one day or over the weekend; or by granted permission of one of the landowners whose land the “road/easement” passes through (1984). A permit is required that is issued by the city, and meant to be displayed in the vehicle, but on person is fine, as long as you are okay with digging it out or your gear for a landowner or occasionally, ranger. Or maybe even a sheriff.

  4. B3

    01. Jun, 2009

    While this is true, Chris, the rangers have expressed that climbers refrain from using the road. As a user group it is imperative that we do everything we can to appeal to them, instead of trying to find loop holes around them. I actually found the road, but after doing some research I haven’t driven down it in five years. The Denver Climbers Coalition and the NCC have done alot of tireless work to insure that Mt. Evans is open for everyone. It would unfortunate if there were individuals trying to undermine that. The hike is easy, and I strongly urge everyone to do it everytime!

  5. wade david

    01. Jun, 2009

    Huh? I’m going to have to call you out on “Seurat V7”, I believe that this problem is no easier than V8, sorry JE….. most climbers I have talked to believe it is standard V8, Let’s say 15 out of 20.

  6. chris schulte

    01. Jun, 2009

    Indeed it would be unfortunate, ridiculous, if any individuals were trying to undermine that access. I’ve spoken with several rangers, city hall, and even a couple of different area landowners, both private and professional; rangers are concerned with legal access, user impact and stash pads, all things everyone should do their best to preserve in balance. They have to answer to the landowners. Most landowners are worried about hunters, dirt bikes tearing through, and kids breaking glass or vandalizing structures. Fire is also a huge concern, as all can see on the walk in to area A; lightning, 1974… Anyhow, back to the point. Locals, renters, picnickers, water dept. employees, and lotsa fishermen use the road, all the time. It’s not a loop hole for anyone with paper or permission, but it wouldn’t be hard to create a problem out of a non-issue. Use of an easement by permission of the possessor explains the history of the gate (and defines the nature of an easement); it (the actual gate) is the private property of the “neighborhood”, to which access is granted to the City Reservoir. And the road has been there since before 1942.

  7. B3

    01. Jun, 2009

    Lynn Hill said 5.12c, others say V8, so I’ll split the difference.

  8. chris schulte

    01. Jun, 2009

    Didn’t Lynn say 13c for the Nose, too?

  9. anson

    01. Jun, 2009

    I have to agree with Schulte. If you are legally allowed to drive up the road, then that is all that matters. Your purpose up there (whether fishing or climbing) has no bearing on anything.
    and V7? seemed like an 8/9 to me.

  10. anson

    01. Jun, 2009

    but as always, I enjoy reading your blog! keep up the good work

  11. peter b

    01. Jun, 2009

    I am way out of the know re: Mount Evans but I want to get up there soon if for no other reason than to experience the “easy” hike, which I rate between 5.11b and V6, so splitting the difference makes it about E3

  12. justin roth

    01. Jun, 2009

    nice pics and nice post.

  13. B3

    01. Jun, 2009

    Anson, I am not trying to stop some one that has a right to be there, nor do I disagree with all of the legalities that Chris brings up. For an extremely small group (of total potential users), there is a way to legally access the road. This is not applicable for roadtripping climbers, or those climbers from Denver or Boulder.
    On the other side, rangers have expressed anger towards climbers who have illegally (either through copied keys or driving through the gate) used the road and that behavior clearly threatens access. My intention of this post, more than anything, is that If you do not have a key legally, and you drive up the road, you are threatening access. Simply do the hike.
    Chris, you are well known climber and if you did get a key legally, be prepared to tell people what you wrote here. It wouldn’t hurt to do the hike, as it is easy, but I can’t deny anyone who has legal precedent.
    Finally, we should be listening to what Ms. Hill has to say about grades, she has more experience than almost anyone. Apparently what was .13c for her was 14a for Tommy Caldwell. I agree with Lynn’s conservative approach.

  14. Bennett

    01. Jun, 2009

    If you are strong enough to climb Seurat,
    then a little hike should not be a problem.

    Anyone who needs to drive in to send there proj,
    IS A BIG PANSY!

  15. chris schulte

    01. Jun, 2009

    I agree completely. The road is, by written agreement, not for use by anyone except those who have LEGAL ACCESS. The use of the road has several check-valves, like for instance a limited number of keys that can be checked out, even by Idaho Springs City residents.
    All of this is law, and again, a non issue.
    If your intention of this post was to communicate the importance of legality when using private access to public land, it seems crucial to have all the facts before you publish photos on the internet attached to a diatribe.
    On paper, what you did was post a photo of a private vehicle and say (without actual knowledge or authority), THIS is wrong and illegal. If there had been a sticker of a largemouth bass on the vehicle rather than a pair of 5.10s, would you have looked twice?
    It seems rather impetuous to take uninformed action in a situation like this, in the way that you have. If some fisherman’s (or local climber’s) car ends up being vandalized by some confused “vigilante” after arriving at their own conclusions, bereft of fact or authority, a very serious situation will have been created out of nothing.
    It’s pretty irresponsible to make an assumption and present it as set facts in a public forum, hey? Your site gets a number of hits, I’m sure, and it’s in everyone’s best interest to make sure that no incomplete, untrue, or slanderous information is disseminated.
    As far as what I wrote here, all I’ve done is share how legal access can be acquired. Of course I’m prepared to reiterate this information to anyone who wants to know, though anyone who cares to do the research can find out for themselves.
    The law is written to apply to everyone, even climbers or hikers from Denver, Boulder, or wherever.

    I will say that it’s easier to do the hike.

    Other than that, Lynn is just one person, like each of us.

    And a conservative approach is a very sliding scale, isn’t it?

  16. anson

    01. Jun, 2009

    yep, so few climbers will have legal access (copied keys not being legal access) that it is probably a nonissue and otherwise, I unfortunately agree that the hike is the only way for all others. But fortunately, I think the back is way more like a 5.8 with a V2 slab at the end. 😉 but then again, maybe i’m more like lynn with my hikes and tommy with my boulder problems?

  17. sock hands

    01. Jun, 2009

    clear creek county resident friends are a hot commodity!

    i think jamie’s point is a good one.

    chris has gone through the proper channels to gain access, but other climbers may not understand this. they see the van and assume that there is a new way to sneak in, as was done in the past.

    when the gate is open for camp deliveries, parents’ events, etc, climbers have driven on up without the proper permit. when the camp reported the dramatically increased use, sheriffs were dispatched… news of which was conveyed to the rangers, who were very displeased and believed it showed that climbers have no respect for the rules and regulations of the area… a preconception that would have cut against climbers with respect to management decisions if it wasn’t for the efforts of the NCC. this is why it is such a sore issue.

    clearly chris has done his homework, which he had explained to me in intricate detail last season. however, if you have not gone through these proper channels, do not be a dumbshit and roll up the road without a permit. you will threaten the relations that have been forged with the forest service for the sake of saving a little juice for a send that is not rad and that one cares about anyway.

  18. sock hands

    01. Jun, 2009

    ps: a few years ago didn’t you say it was v5, wade?

  19. sock hands

    01. Jun, 2009

    wader
    7a:
    06/06/11 Sarat 7A,7C Mt. Evans

  20. peter b

    02. Jun, 2009

    Not that Tommy is a conservative grader or anything…

  21. B3

    02. Jun, 2009

    Chris, of course I wouldn’t have posted a picture of a fisherman’s van, because fisherman haven’t jeopordized the bouldering at Mt. Evans. It was a fair assumption that as a resident of Boulder you were there illegally, as I know you have been in past, as have I.
    As a sponsored climber, it is irresponsible not to take every precaution possible and to not use my website as a forum for discussion of important issues like these. My methods are debatable.
    I am sorry you got singled out, but of course I let you speak your mind. I am psyched about this open dialouge and I am sure alot of people have learned more about this issue, both from your posts and mine. Hopefully that is something positive.we can both take from this.
    Jaeger thanks for posting, you are always thoughtful and intelligent.

  22. wade david

    02. Jun, 2009

    Yeah JJ I did! Because I hate 8A.NU (mainly because there are a lot of cry babies trying to take the hardest grade on that site, everyone else is cool ) and I said that to get under some skin, but I truly beileve it is no harder or easyer than V8. What do you think about that ? Huh?

  23. Bennett

    02. Jun, 2009

    Classic. I wondered why Mr Schulte was getting so bent on this one.
    So you got called out for being a lazy-ass,
    and you can’t even admit a little bit of fault?

    wow. Hope you send your proj Chris!
    cause thats all that really matters anyways.

    I mean for real, lets get all this passive-aggressive stuff out of the way.
    You wanted to haul pads, save energy, whatever for your climbing day/sending your proj.
    So you found a semi-legal way to drive up the private road.
    JE called you out, and now you don’t like it.
    Tough! this is the beauty of the internet.
    You got busted, plain and simple.

    Lets all learn from this by realizing one truth,
    People who drive up the road are all lazy!

  24. sock hands

    02. Jun, 2009

    word. just to clarify: my point was not to say that chris should have to hike, since he’s done the legal leg-work, but that everyone needs to realize how his van came to be parked where it was…. navigating administration… not gate crashing.

    though at the cost of more internet drama, i think the ‘debate’ has made the situation very very clear with respect to the road.

    wader: yes: v8 all day long…. especially for those with bigger feet than i…who cannot get them to dig into the deeper, more positive spots of the crack.

  25. chris schulte

    02. Jun, 2009

    Well sir,
    I appreciate your candor in the matter to some degree. I’m not sure that it’s a fair assumption to think I was breaking the law. Anyone COULD have the right to be parked up there, no-one deserves to be singled out in such a manner, and only The Authorities have the prerogative to question anyone. It is easy to act passionately when it concerns something we all feel strongly about, and I admire your ethical stances in several departments, but there is a time, place and method for discussions like these, and other topics of contention. Face to face, maybe a small group, maybe over beers, or maybe something more solid. Facts are, there is still a photo of personal property on your site as an example of something that is illegal. It seems prudent to take the obvious course of action, edit your content, and next time consider a few deep breaths before pulling out the soapbox. I didn’t GET singled out, this is your website, and you are responsible for it’s content. On a related note, I appreciate being allowed to speak my mind.
    Thanks.

  26. B3

    03. Jun, 2009

    Chris, of course my method could be questioned, and that’s exactly what you did, which I encouraged. Maybe I am right, or maybe not. I took the picture off out of respect.

  27. cbd

    03. Jun, 2009

    almost as good as the maury povich show. does everyone know who their baby daddy is?

    small point .. Although it is always in the best interests of any user group to show the best face possible, to be conscientious and show respect .. appeasement has never proven to be in anyones best interest in the long run. Being singled out as a less favorable user group than say .. fishermen? is almost as retarded as saying “thousands of people can walk up and down these stairs every day but skateboarding on them is OUT of the question.”

  28. peter b

    03. Jun, 2009

    Jamie, that’s a good way (and time )to wrap up this controversy. Good work everyone!

  29. chris schulte

    03. Jun, 2009

    Jamie, I appreciate that, I suppose. Again, one-on-one is nice and usually civil. Seems like SOME goals were accomplished, and no-one is the better for it.
    Bennett, I don’t know you, and I can’t go any further in painting a clearer picture as to why I was upset concerning this issue. I didn’t find a semi-legal way to go up the road, I found a legal one; I didn’t have to look hard, folks have known about it for a long time. Being friendly goes a long way in the world. Can’t say I see any fault to admit to there.
    Pleased to meet you. Now, years from now, when we’re having pina coladas and getting caught in the rain, we can say we met over the internet.
    Jamie, thanks again for the opportunity to do whatever it is we’ve done here. I can’t help but wish we had covered similar ground in the past, and now, I am somewhat ashamed. I feel like I got pushed into a fight, and again, this “community” is a little worse for wear, rather than moving onwards and upwards, and always twirling! twirling! towards the center.
    Thanks for watching. Go climbing instead.

Leave a Reply