Alan Wechsler: Comparing Colorado to the Adirondacks
by Alan Wechsler
I recently spent a few days touring around Colorado by bicycle. It was my seventh trip to the state, in both summer and winter.
The trip took me on a few parts of the Colorado Trail, a 450-mile hiking route that follows the spine of the Continental Divide from Denver to Durango. It also took me to some of Colorado's old mining towns, most of which have been recast as a combination tourist attraction and burgeoning home to the young, artsy and outdoorsy.
The trip got me thinking about the differences between the Rocky Mountains and the Adirondacks, where I first learned to climb mountains and have spent the last 25 years exploring.
The first thing I noticed was how Colorado's small towns are thriving. Salida, Durango, Leadville, Buena Vista, Silverton, Fair Play, Gunnison, Crested Butte -- all former mining or farm towns, now big with tourists, outdoor shops, art galleries and the like. In fact, I didn't see a single town that wasn't overflowing with tourists, although I'm sure some of the off-the-beaten-track communities may still be a bit threadbare.
According to some of the locals I talked to -- the new locals, the young folks, not the fourth-generation mining families still hanging on -- making a living in these towns can be tough. But they're willing to put up with the relatively low cash from, say, driving a bus in Summit County or running an outdoor store in Leadville in order to win the outdoor and small-town lifestyle that comes with it.
The Adirondacks have some successful towns, of course, but I don't see the artists and outdoor enthusiasts flocking to live in the North Country the way they are out west. Perhaps it's because Colorado has a mystique (along with better snow, no black flies and more predictable summer weather) that the Adirondacks can't compete with. Or perhaps Colorado has marketed itself better. Or maybe it's because Colorado's libertarian values make it a lot easier for regions to change direction than under the Adirondack's heavy regulations (although my understanding is that villages are fairly immune to the APA rules that tie up land in the forest preserve). Thoughts, readers?
Colorado also has a functioning Legislature, and much lower property taxes. On the other hand, the Adirondacks has hundreds of beautiful lakes. Try waterskiing on a seasonal river out west, and you'll wind up with a face full of sand.
Both places have world-class hiking opportunities. The Adirondacks has the 46 peaks more than 4,000 feet high. Colorado has 54 peaks more than 14,000 feet high.
Colorado trails have switchbacks and are mostly smooth. Adirondack trails go straight up and are rocky as hell.
Colorado residents will warn you about the mosquitoes. But anybody who's been to the Adirondacks in June will laugh at what Rocky Mountain residents call a bug problem.
Colorado has two major national parks (Rocky Mountain and Mesa Verde) and a variety of lesser parks and monuments. It's got more world-class ski resorts than I can count on two hands and some of the best powder in the world. The Adirondack Mountains, as great as they are, don't really have the national fame that Colorado natural areas command. There's some pretty good skiing here, but c'mon -- Iceface versus Champagne Powder? No contest, sorry.
Colorado has hail. I got hailed on five times, with pellets as big as marbles, sometimes for as long as 45 minutes. I had to take shelter under trees or rocks. They say Colorado gets monsoon rains in July and August -- afternoon thunder showers that allegedly last for an hour or so. But on my trip the rains came as early as noon and sometimes lasted all day.
The Rockies have world-class mountain biking. The Adirondacks has very little mountain biking to speak of -- some nice trails near Wilmington, Old Forge, Shelving Rock, to name a few. What there is tends to be wet, rocky or rooty.
For rock climbing, Colorado's Lumpy Ridge, Garden of the Gods and Eldorado Canyon are a little more user-friendly than Poke-O-Moonshine and Wallface. But I'd put some of the Adirondack climbing classics -- Hesitation, Partition, Hard Times, Pete's Farewell, Roger's Rock, Gothic's Finger Slide -- against anything the Rockies have to offer.
The Rockies have a desert climate, and pine forests that disappear around 11,000 to 12,000 feet. The Adirondacks have lush vegetation that provides refreshing shade all the way up.
The Adirondacks also have something else the Rockies don't have -- plenty of water. Although there are some lakes out west, such as those pictured here, there's also places in the Rockies where you can hike for 20 miles or more without seeing a drop. And out there the sun beats down on you like a whip -- you've got to slap on sunblock every hour if you don't want to feel like a french fry at the end of the day.
There is something else the Rockies have that the Adirondacks don't -- a massive ATV and four-wheel jeep network. There's a hundred miles of these rugged roads that connect Silverton, Ouray, Lake City and other mountain communities -- vestiges of the old mining history. The towns nearby are chockablock with Jeep tours and ATV rental shops.
Of course, what they don't have out there is mud, which is something that would make a similar trail network in this area hard to sustain (or even advocate for). They also have a hell of a lot more open space to accommodate all user groups. Our six million acres are puny compared to it all.
Spending time in the Rockies was eye-opening. But I'm glad to live in New York. I like the change of seasons, the history, and our concern for protecting what limited natural resources we have. We're not the Empire State for nothing.
But I wonder if there's a way to bring some more of Colorado's successes to upstate New York?
16 Comments:
Alan, This is a good post. I was raised in the Adirondacks and a job took me to Colorado for 8 years. Now I am back here in NYS. One comparison you did not make was about the people. I felt that people in Colorado are much more open to change (and dare I say more friendly) that some are here in the Adirondacks. (just look at some of the comments here at the Almanack - "go home trouble makers"!) In my opinion Colorado is doing well because they are able to better evolve with the changes around them, and adapt to the tourist opportunities their surroundings afford. Heck here is the Adirondacks we bicker and fight for years over a few rusty old fire towers! Once we get through with this one try and see if you can get then OK to develop some higher elevations towns in the Adirondacks into the kind of resort towns they have in the mountains of Colorado. Good luck!
Yes, I completely agree with everything Alan said and agree with Paul about the people. I lived in the Adirondacks all my life and recently moved to Colorado. Colorado is a state of transplants, people who came for the outdoors lifestyle, sunshine and powder. And the "locals" (if you can call them that) are VERY friendly and welcoming. There is no "us vs. them" mentality like you find in the Adirondacks. Colorado is one big melting pot filled with people from all over the country.
In the Adirondacks, there is culture war of haves vs. have-nots, tourists vs. locals, second-home owners vs. old-timers. If your family has not lived in the Adirondacks for generations, you are looked down upon as an outsider. It's a shame because it shouldn't matter what brings people to the Adirondacks as long as they come.
And yes, people in Colorado are much more friendly and open to change as Paul pointed out. People here would laugh at the ridiculous circus surrounding a new project, like what happened with the Adirondack Museum branch on Main St. Lake Placid. New projects are built all the time and the small towns are better because of them.
"Or perhaps Colorado has marketed itself better."
I do believe the Adirondacks have a PR/marketing issue. As amazing and unique as this place is, a lot of people just don't know about it or understand it. For example, I grew up just 2 hours south of the High Peaks - a little outside the park - and I can probably count on one hand the amount of people who I grew up with that can describe to you in detail what the park is. Things like "forever wild", the "great experiment in conservation", the "forest preserve"... you would be lucky if half of them had even heard these terms. Most of them might have camped here when they were young, been to Lake Placid or Lake George, but that's about it.
Likewise, now that I live here, I am consistently stunned by the destinations and activities that we simply stumble upon. Places we had never heard of, or things we had no idea were going on. We live here now, are actively seeking this stuff out, and STILL find it hard to get information about all that is awesome about this place.
There are a lot of people who would kill to live in a place like this if they were more aware of it... not just in spite of development restriction, but in some cases BECAUSE of it. I know, because I was one of them. These are people who would come here and gladly apply all of their creativity to do what it takes to make a living. Be that telecommuting, starting a small business, stringing together part time jobs, you name it.
It seems to me that attracting people like this, and making sure they know about the area and what it has to offer, should be an Adirondack priority.
Great article! I lived in Durango for a while, loved it but left to come back to the Adks. The lack of water, and greenery, was a major factor.
One thing you didn't mention about these small mountain towns in 'Rado - many have colleges and/or major ski resorts. Having either means a yearly influx of young people from around the country, and though their stay if often seasonal, many stay and make a life there.
Something else worth noting - places like Durango and Crested Butte have been overrun by speculative second home development in the last decade, on a scale that Adk developers residents couldn't imagine, and the result has been that the "locals" - young folks, families, working class people - have been pushed out of town by exorbitant rent and home prices. Four of us moved to Durango in 2001 - only one remains, and he was recently forced to move 10 miles out of town to find affordable housing.
Another difference - Colorado has huge amounts of federal land under the management of 3 different agencies with 3 very different agendas - Park Service, Forest Service, and BLM. Although many of the land use debates are similar.
Thanks for the post!
Dave, I agree with you on PR at some level. But some of that again is based on people in the area. I lived in the Adirondacks for about 25 years and am now one of these dreaded second home owners. We rent our place out in the summer when we are not using it. Before we bought it it just sat vacant almost all summer (it is only seasonal). In some cases these second "homes" can actually help the economy. I know that our renters spend quite a lot of money when they are in the area. When I lived in Denver I (as a front range local) rented places in the mountains when I was skiing at times. Local or not money is still green!
But going back to the PR. Many of the folks that I know (including family) in the Adirondacks do not want people to visit. They are like the anti-PR machine. Also, many other locals do not want the crowds and development that naturally come with growing into a larger tourist driven economy. I think that folks in Colorado have accepted that model for the their mountain towns. I know a guy who was working as a ski bum in Steam Boat Springs. One day he was working at a grocery store and some customer was being a pain and he was not terribly polite with the lady. Who is next in line but Billy the Kid, the unofficial spokesperson and advocate for Steamboat. He berates my friend for not properly sucking up to this tourist that has come to spend their money in town. Can you imagine that happening in an Adirondack town? Not the one I grew up in!
You know they've been trying to that in Tupper Lake, build a western style resort, and the enviromental lobbiests and agencies have been all over them trying to stop it. In CO it would have been embraced! Main difference is CO embraces development and tourism which by the way go hand in hand.
Very interesting post. My wife and I had this same conversation a couple months ago while driving through Lake Placid.
We have been in NYC since 1994, and only "discovered" the Adirondacks in 2008. We've done 2+ day trips to the Adirondacks maybe 10-12 times. We've been to CO about an equal amount since 1994.
For us, it came down to a few key things:
Airports - not 1 commercial within hours of the Adirondacks. CO has plenty.
Regional - because there are no airports, visitors have to drive in. This means the Adirondacks only serves a regional crowd, within 300 miles or so, max.
Competition - If people are driving from NYC or Boston or Montreal, it is just as easy to go to Vermont or NH.
Skiing - no comparison. The variety, terrain and support facilities in CO wins. Admittedly, we are not huge skiers, but the activity drives a lot of other development.
BRBR,
FYI - It's true that we have few airports, and visitors have to drive in and so the Adirondacks serves a regional crowd, however, within 350 miles (a days drive, 7 hours at 50 mph) there are (according to the APA) "around 84 Million people including about 18,000,000 Canadians and 66,000,000 Americans."
Anonymous 1:01 got it right. The Adirondacks' biggest problem is the attitude of the people who live there. Constant bickering, negativity, us vs. them, "we live here, you don't". And a certain amount of snobbery in places like Lake Placid and Old Forge. They resent the very tourists they depend on, resent any attempts to build tourism (which is the logical source of income for any scenic region) and then b*tch and moan incessantly about how terrible the north country economy is. Gets tiresome. Adk residents are, in many cases, their own worst enemy.
I live here. Have for over 30 years or so. I have family who live outside the park. They come once every 3-4 years to visit because it is a 6-7 hour drive for most of them. They would come up at least 2 times a year if it were only a 3 hour drive. They love the area and can stay with us for free when they come. A 7 hour drive for a weekend stay is too far and too long for most people. That is why the holidays (xmas,Presidents, 4th of July, etc.) are the busy time here. People have more time to get here. Vacation areas that are within a 2-3 hour drive do a better weekend trade so I think PR needs to be spent in the communities that are closer.
I completely agree that PR should focus on bolstering the number of visitors from the inside of that 350-mile radius.
A large number of readers of Adirondack Almanack come from that inner periphery, notably the Capital District (Albany, Schenectady, Troy), Syracuse, Plattsburgh, and Saratoga. However, a large portion also come from the lower Hudson Valley / NYC / NJ, Mass, and PA.
I would call those folks the "loyal Adirondackers" - they don't live here, but they probably wish they did, they might own a camp or a second home, but whether they do or not, they come often as they can, and they introduce others to the area. They are the basis of our tourism economy - and they're already sold on the region. Most probably drive three to five hours I would guess.
I agree though, we need to focus on increasing the inner ring, the larger New York cities just an hour to two away, the day trippers, the overnighters.
I would note that many of the mountain towns that Alan writes about in the blog are a pretty long drive from metro Denver. It depends what is at the and of the drive. If you have what people want they will drive awhile to get there. Even if that means driving across the continental divide and through Rabbit Ear's pass in a snowstorm! The Wolf Creek Ski area in SW Colorado is full of cars from Texas on a busy winter weekend. It can be a 3 hour drive in traffic to get the 50 miles from Summit County (and it's ski areas) to Denver. Once the Northway is jammed with non-stop cars heading north on Friday or south on Sunday let's see how the folks handle it? It means turning other parts of the Adirondacks into places like the condos they have on Lake Placid. For Colorado it is the skiing for the Adirondacks it is the lakes. The question I have is do folks have the stomach for the changes? I have seen lots of posts here that seem pretty negative towards development.
Negative towards development is an understatement in the ADK's. And, it's not the locals who are against it. It's the out of towners who don't want to share the park. There are alot of out of work carpenters right now who have made a good living over the past 10 years building second homes and condos. Ask them what they think about development in the park. It used to be that you could work for the State and make a decent living up here. No more as the State is winding down it's prisons and other institutional jobs. If you want tourism then you need to embrace some development. People want to come to thriving towns and villages not empty ones. When they see construction happening they conclude that there are might be a happening place and make their own investment. I wish that people would stop blaming the local people for all the issues in the park.
Anon 2:44, yes you are right. But there is also support for development from those of us that own second homes in the park. I would love it if my property remained as remote as it is now but that is just not practical, if we want the area to improve economically. If I don't want a new neighbor on the vacant lot next to me I better buy it myself. Can't afford it though. Someone was looking at it this past weekend, may have a new neighbor next summer. I'll just suck it up and try and get along, maybe my kids will have some new friends, gotta look at the bright side. Like you say the carpenters can sure use the job building the new place.
Another point that occurred to me after reading the readers' comments is that Colorado markets itself as a single entity: Colorado. Yet the Adirondacks are one of more than a half dozen very different and self-standing regions of New York: The Thousand Islands, Niagara Falls, Leatherstocking, the Finger Lakes, the Hudson Valley, New York City, Long Island's East End. Of course you've got the "I Love New York" thing to try to unify it all, but it's tough.
I think people consider Colorado to be a single large entity of mountain scenery, wide open spaces and Western independence. New York's identity as a whole is a lot harder to pin down, and that means the Adirondacks may always be in competition with other areas of NY (and the mountains of New England) for attention.
As a native upstate New Yorker living in my wife's native Montana, I can say that if the Adirondacks and eastern Appalachia weren't special I wouldn't have stumbled upon this page in a bout of homesick-tinged nostalgia. I think about these comparisons a lot since I really miss those mountains often. As a person married to a native Montanan, I can assure you that the natives are NOT always open and friendly to outsiders here. I think the idea that mountain westerners are so much more open and friendly than easterners is a product of marketing and PR, and is simply perpetuated amongst transplant groups. Having numerous transplant friends and acquaintances, I hear a lot of comments about Montana and Montanans that sound like they wearing rose colored glasses on the issue, and appear to live in a state of ignorant (though innocent) bliss. They've never met, or at least spent much quality time with locals/old timers, and just tend to associate by default with other transplants with the same self-facilitated culture and perspective on thier adopted home. The friendliest natives I have actually encountered are in the regions of Montana that get few tourists, second home owners (the worst), and transplants. They have yet to become embittered by the fear of cultural change and real estate that is so grossly inflated that no native could ever think of buying a home. I for one hope that the Adirondack region can learn to adapt to a changing economy in a relatively sustainable manner (such as you see in say, some parts of Vermont where locals and transplants alike embrace the traditional culture of the place), but certainly hope it NEVER becomes a an Aspen, a Boulder, a Bozeman, or a Jackson Hole. While the Adirondacks may not be a progressive economic powerhouse, I know for a fact that I could afford a home there in a stunningly beautiful location, whereas I could never do that here in Bozeman or many parts of MT and would be self-conciously aware that I am really not wanted here. And HAVE NO DOUBT that native/old-timer mountain westerners are EVERY BIT as resistant to outsider influences and change as native Adirondack-ers may be. I hope the eastern mountains stay special, get more sustainable, stay affordable, and keep it real.
Post a Comment