Boston's Promised Land - An Access Rant

Matt, Whom did you speak to in the WMCC--was it someone who was a board member? While obviously our primary focus is in the western half of the state we have been and continue to be willing to provide advice and support to folks further east (and elsewhere). Unfortunately we just had our spring/summer board meeting last night, and don't expect to have another until fall.

Alan Rubin wrote:Matt, Whom did you speak to in the WMCC--was it someone who was a board member? While obviously our primary focus is in the western half of the state we have been and continue to be willing to provide advice and support to folks further east (and elsewhere). Unfortunately we just had our spring/summer board meeting last night, and don't expect to have another until fall.

PM'ing now.
Edit: Now that this seems to be settling down somewhat, it's worth mentioning that there are several other access-troubled areas in Eastern Mass that could use a climbing advocacy group, a couple of which could become legitimate hubs for local climbers even if they're not the next Rumney/Cathedral. While letting the WMCC help in this instance is one way of resolving it, these areas are going to flounder (and potentially get destroyed) until a group organizes to tackle access. An EMCC would also be able to form a coherent policy on best practice in dealing with rogue bolters/bolt-choppers, anchor renewal, and so on. The Crow Hill saga should be evidence enough of the need for that. I don't want every crag to become an overbolted, overdeveloped outdoor gym. However, these secret crags on private property are destined for eventual destruction. Once it's demolished, it's gone for good. Private development is typically a one way street.

Michael Schneider wrote:Yes I did read and understand that today's climbers want it all laid out for them in advance. The need for as much "pre beta" or - Correct easy to follow - how to . . . .X X X,

It's literally not even about that, it's that Lynn Woods and the Promised Land were posted on mountainproject....for what purpose? Why would you post names and grades of (in the case of the promised land) 200+ boulder problems with relative directions between boulders, no map, no topo, so you can't find anything, descriptions so vague they're more than useless. I'm still in complete awe and confusion about that page, it makes no sense. If you're trying to preserve access...maybe don't post it on mountainproject? Keep it word of mouth like other (better) areas in New England. But you want the "FA credit" so you post it all up as vague as possible, and say to PM for a tour, which you then refuse to give? Either add actual information on the page or delete it.

It just ruins the area. I saw some great lines at the Promised Land and surrounding area, even did one or two, and I'd love to repeat things others have put up, but it's impossible to do so.

As somebody who lives in Eastern MA, but not real near these boulders - I have to say, the "keep it quiet or access will be closed" sounds like a horrible head-in-the-sand attitude. If people work to get land preserved as a park, then it might last. Otherwise, it's just a matter of time before the suburban subdivision or the strip mall gets dropped on top. Maybe it'll be decades before that happens, but it'll come eventually. If there are boulders worth saving then people should work to do so, even if it risks irritating the landowners in the short term.

Bill Shubert wrote:it's just a matter of time before the suburban subdivision or the strip mall gets dropped on top. Maybe it'll be decades before that happens, but it'll come eventually.

Agreed. And from the looks of it, 'decades' is unrealistically optimistic.

 Tylerpratt  said 

"Hey there CT climber here. Be careful with sharing info on boulder locations in New England. I know from first hand experience amazing locations that have been closed because of too many people finding out about it. It has happened to us via private landowners and companies land. There's a reason why these locations are not shared with the public. Because THEY GET SHUT DOWN. Welcome to New England."

http://www.mountainproject.com/v/orenaug-park/107320708

 http://www.mountainproject.com/v/thomaston-ice-climbing-closed/106393216 

Not to mention a dozen others that have amazing quality rock that now has no climbing no trespassing signs.

 Both of these examples are from private residences buying property and closing access. There are more  .  .  .

Ian McAfee wrote: It's literally not even about that, it's that Lynn Woods and the Promised Land were posted on mountainproject....for what purpose? Why would you post names and grades of (in the case of the promised land) 200+ boulder problems with relative directions between boulders, no map, no topo, so you can't find anything, descriptions so vague they're more than useless. I'm still in complete awe and confusion about that page, it makes no sense. If you're trying to preserve access...maybe don't post it on mountainproject? Keep it word of mouth like other (better) areas in New England. But you want the "FA credit" so you post it all up as vague as possible, and say to PM for a tour, which you then refuse to give? Either add actual information on the page or delete it. It just ruins the area. I saw some great lines at the Promised Land and surrounding area, even did one or two, and I'd love to repeat things others have put up, but it's impossible to do so.

This perspective seems a bit narrow and is not one I share. I for one am thankful Old Timer posted these problems and boulders. I'm not sure why folks are getting shut down when asking for a tour. He is very likely busy putting problems up elsewhere. Go out there with a sense of adventure, climb, and if the MP posts bother you, ignore them. If you go with someone who knows some of the boulders by name (me+ a handful of others I know) it is not that hard to figure out the next one. It's fun actually.

This is a very healthy conversation otherwise. I think there are lots of good points here. Please don't forget that approaching a large land owner with a request to do what they may consider high risk may cause them to unload the land before the City has a chance to organize a buy. Go ahead and discuss with the city and see where they stand. This seems like a logical first step.

Hi All,

I wanted to dig this thread back up. Since the "rant" much work has been done on the MP listings, directions, names, etc. for all of Lynn Woods. Many more boulders have been logged and problems added. 98% of the boulders in the public park have been mapped and referenced with MP names and ID tags. The formal Lynn Woods public area map will be released this week and posted on MP. This map will be an update to the first published map by Jon at LynnWoodsBoulderin.com. The new map runs on .gpx files to make using a GPS app on your phone a breeze. Combined with the MP app, you have all the info you need to find and send. Stay on the trails please.

Regarding the Promised Land (and other access troubled land), about 95% is mapped but will not be released until access issues have been resolved. Lynn Woods has over half a dozen areas (including the Promised Land) that have access issues with varying magnitude. There is a kick-off meeting tonight for the formation of a eastern MA/RI Local Climbing Coalition (LCO) to work with the Access Fund. I'll be proposing the Promised Land Protection Project as worthy of significant effort. There are smaller projects within the parger PLPP that will be easier than others. We'll start with an easy one. Please let me know if you're interested in being involved. The meeting tonight is at Central Rock Gym in Watertown MA starting at 8pm.

Tim

Thanks Tim, can't wait to revisit the areas, appreciate all of the hard work!

That's really great to hear the map and info from that site being integrated to MP. Lynn Woods is such a huge climbing resource and a special place.

Morgan Patterson wrote: Heard about that story... a rather unfortunate outcome. I was told the town even discussed taking the land at the base through eminent domain. Wasnt the issue not the popularity of the crag but litterally that they didnt want to see climbers at all on the cliff behind their pond? Ruined their 'view'? That was my understanding... not a quantity of climbers problem. 

That's sort of what I remember. Climbing there was fine before the original landowner by the pond sold and the property was subdivided. When the second house was built, the access problems began:  There was an incident involving the new owner's dog and some climber's dogs. Climbers screaming obscenities when they fell off routes while the new owners sat in their backyard did not help.

Too bad, because the nicest section of cliff (Viewing Wall) is now off limits.

From the description page:  "It's probably best to think of this as a place to get quality bouldering in an idyllic setting in the Boston area" and " the best bouldering within an hour of Boston."

That's not really a rousing endorsement of the area. Look at the description pages for Farley, Pway and Lincoln Woods - lot's of description of the quality of the rock, challenging problems, style etc. Those descriptions make me want to go check them out. The Lynn Woods first paragraph by comparison made me lose interest by the second sentence.

zswan wrote:

From the description page:  "It's probably best to think of this as a place to get quality bouldering in an idyllic setting in the Boston area" and " the best bouldering within an hour of Boston."

That's not really a rousing endorsement of the area. Look at the description pages for Farley, Pway and Lincoln Woods - lot's of description of the quality of the rock, challenging problems, style etc. Those descriptions make me want to go check them out. The Lynn Woods first paragraph by comparison made me lose interest by the second sentence.

We're just helping each other find the goods and have fun. I mean, do you really base where you climb on the description? And by the way, it's true. LW is indeed the best bouldering near Boston. There was a time before MP and bouldering guides where you just went out and climbed the boulders. Do you want to learn somw LW climbing history?

Tim McGivern wrote:

I mean, do you really base where you climb on the description?

Considering that I have limited time to climb and that this is the only info that might be available on an area? Yah absolutely I would. 

I mean look, people in this thread were complaining that "kids" don't want to climb at the local areas and I'm pointing out that the MP page isn't exactly 'selling' it. It's criticism, take it as you will. I have zero skin in it so I don't really care.

zswan wrote:

Considering that I have limited time to climb and that this is the only info that might be available on an area? Yah absolutely I would. 

I mean look, people in this thread were complaining that "kids" don't want to climb at the local areas and I'm pointing out that the MP page isn't exactly 'selling' it. It's criticism, take it as you will. I have zero skin in it so I don't really care.

Interesting. I see your point. I've found MP in general to be mediocre at best when it comes to describing areas. Probably because most of the pages are user generated. I think a really good source of how good an area is the locals who climb there. The person who wrote it for Lynn Woods based it off of the common knowledge at the time. The recent "work" done on the page recently focused on the actual climbing data. The overall description is hence a bit outdated. I guess I'm surprised folks would put so much on the overall description is all. This is the first time LW has had good data, so the reaction I usually hear is excitement. I would imagine updates will continue. 

There is a new Lynn Woods Climbing Map that builds off the map from lynnwoodsbouldering.com. Dave Twardowski, Luis Gaviria and I have located and updated close to 98% of the climbing locations in the the municipal park and beyond. This was a huge effort and Dave T deserves serious props. Boulders or cliffs with known access issues are not on this map. 

The new map is on the Caltopo platform, so the data can be downloaded to a GPS app such as GAIA, or used to create custom maps. Combined with the MP app, you end up having a virtual guide on your phone. 

Another important update is that the names of boulders and problems has been coordinated with the Mountain Project page. This was done carefully with consideration of the original developers. The map is not perfect, but it is by far the best resource available for climbing at Lynn Woods at this time. It will also improve with time. If there are folks who are interested in improving the map, please let either me or Dave know.

caltopo.com/m/sh27