MOAB area closed to non-residents, even camping

WoW mtn proj is bringing all the narcissistic kooks out of the woodwork.

Thoughts and prayers yall!

Richard Gilbert wrote:

I can’t climb hard. I was injured in Iraq and spent two years in a hospital with a broken back, busted abdominal wall, dislocated shoulder, and blown knee...  

I don’t make YOUR community look like anything! As a matter of fact I support YOUR community a lot... and, again, I was hardly around another human being (which is the point) so STFU.... please and thank you. 

Traveling from CO to UT for climbing and then bragging about supporting the community! 

We have now entered the twilight zone!

Richard Gilbert wrote:

I can’t climb hard. I was injured in Iraq and spent two years in a hospital with a broken back, busted abdominal wall, dislocated shoulder, and blown knee...  

I don’t make YOUR community look like anything! As a matter of fact I support YOUR community a lot... and, again, I was hardly around another human being (which is the point) so STFU.... please and thank you. 

Thank you for your service. I couldn't imagine that happening.

Understand that why you were "hardly around another human being" was because those people were respecting the requests of locals, health officials, healthcare providers who have politely asked you to stop thinking about yourself and stay home.

TL;DR: Indian Creek camping closed to non-residents and all non-essential leisurely travel within San Juan County restricted.

***FYI** San Juan County, UT restricts non-resident camping.

San Juan County Sheriffs Office1 hr · PUBLIC HEALTH NOTICE/RESTRICTIONS
 We want to inform all public that there are current restrictions on all camping and on all non-essential leisurely travel within San Juan County, per the San Juan Public Health Department orders that were signed  on March 27, 2020.
 San Juan County residents are to follow the same social restrictions  while camping as have previously been ordered. Gatherings of more than 10 individuals are prohibited. While camping, maintain a minimum distance of 100 feet between family groups. Maintain one camp per designated space. We are not trying to discourage outdoor activities and we also believe there are benefits to outdoor exercise and activities as long as they are done responsibly and in accordance with current  social distancing recommendations. We  ask San Juan County residents to avoid leisurely travel to other areas  and also limit non-essential travel.
 Leisurely travel is defined as travel into San Juan County for the purpose of vacationing or self-quarantining outside of your home county or state. Just as many other counties do not want San Juan County residents burdening their resources at this time, San Juan County does not have enough resources to welcome leisure visitors to our county at this time.
 Leisure visitors to San Juan County are not allowed to camp, including developed and primitive sites. Although we understand the great outdoors may be a good way to self-quarantine, visitors can place heavy burdens upon our resources. The rural nature of our healthcare facilities presents us with limited services that are already taxed by a potential COVID-19 incident in our area. One injured visitor who needs overnight medical care means one less hospital bed for all of those who live in the county. Additionally, one visitor case of COVID-19 in our area would take away essential resources from those who live in the county. Leisurely travel in and through San Juan County is prohibited.
 Additionally, our San Juan County Search and Rescue Division is busy and has already received numerous calls of visitors stuck in compromising situations in our back country. When visitors are lost or injured, our team is called out for rescue, along with San Juan County EMS. Oftentimes, we assist along with our fellow law enforcement agencies. Even if a visitor is not exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19, they may still be contagious and increase the risk of infection to our essential first responders, who would then need to be quarantined for 14 days.
 It should be noted that all campers are currently being contacted by law enforcement officers to ensure compliance with the San Juan Public Health Order and closure signage is being established at popular camping locations. Citations can and will be issued, especially in instances of repeat offenders. As the San Juan County Sheriff, I have reached out and asked our local law enforcement partners to assist in enforcing this order and educating the public. This includes Blanding City and Monticello City Police Departments, the Utah Highway Patrol, BLM, and National Park Service.
 PLEASE, if you are not a San Juan County resident, postpone any plans for an overnight stay in San Juan County Utah, whether that be in a lodging facility or camping, and help us protect our small community. All of us in San Juan County thank you for your support and we will welcome you back when this ordeal passes.
 Jason Torgerson - San Juan County Sheriff
 Kendall Laws - San Juan County Attorney
 Kirk Benge - San Juan Public Health

That is an illegal order.   The county and state does not get to make rules on who can disbursed camp on FEDERAL land!

tom donnelly wrote: That is an illegal order.   The county and state does not get to make rules on who can disbursed camp on FEDERAL land!

But the health department can. 

Canyonlands and Arches are also in the process of shutting down.

Meanwhile, Staying at Home per the latest edict but ventured to the store for the once a week recommended trip and parked 3' on either side of another person's car, lot fairly full. I did not use a cart that hundreds of hands have touched. There are no disinfectant wipes left in the dispenser near the entrance. Dozens and dozens of people in close proximity in the store, we pass each other closely in the aisles. I look before choosing an item (no doubt touched by many others) I pace far behind another but try not to walk in their wake. At the checkout I swipe the screen that many have touched.

And the Forest Service wants to close down the nearby trail heads?

Makes perfect sense . . .

Red John wrote: Meanwhile, Staying at Home per the latest edict but ventured to the store for the once a week recommended trip and parked 3' on either side of another person's car, lot fairly full. I did not use a cart that hundreds of hands have touched. There are no disinfectant wipes left in the dispenser near the entrance. Dozens and dozens of people in close proximity in the store, we pass each other closely in the aisles. I look before choosing an item (no doubt touched by many others) I pace far behind another but try not to walk in their wake. At the checkout I swipe the screen that many have touched.

And the Forest Service wants to close down the nearby trail heads?

Makes perfect sense . . .

My argument to a T

tom donnelly wrote: That is an illegal order.   The county and state does not get to make rules on who can disbursed camp on FEDERAL land!

Actually local authorities can close access to public lands in an emergency. The difficulty in this case is that they're trying to close access for non-residents but keep it open for residents. It would be a lot less problematic if they just closed access for everyone. There's a similar issue in San Juan County, Colorado (Silverton). See https://coloradosun.com/2020/03/26/coronavirus-uphill-skiing-closures-silverton-colorado/.

That is just what I am saying.  The locals do not get to decide they can use Federal land and close it to everyone else.

Red John wrote: Meanwhile, Staying at Home per the latest edict but ventured to the store for the once a week recommended trip and parked 3' on either side of another person's car, lot fairly full. I did not use a cart that hundreds of hands have touched. There are no disinfectant wipes left in the dispenser near the entrance. Dozens and dozens of people in close proximity in the store, we pass each other closely in the aisles. I look before choosing an item (no doubt touched by many others) I pace far behind another but try not to walk in their wake. At the checkout I swipe the screen that many have touched.

And the Forest Service wants to close down the nearby trail heads?

Makes perfect sense . . .

Well groceries are a little more important than trailheads. 

But hey, if you want the feds to control when you can go to the grocery store a la 1970s oil crisis, stay tuned.

tom donnelly wrote: That is just what I am saying.  The locals do not get to decide they can use Federal land and close it to everyone else.

If you can get in without using their roads and facilities its open, dont be a whiner.

B P wrote:

Well groceries are a little more important than trailheads. 

But hey, if you want the feds to control when you can go to the grocery store a la 1970s oil crisis, stay tuned.

Umm...I think that was a swing and a miss . . .

How about them Saudis, still manipulating aren't they?

Red John wrote:

Umm...I think that was a swing and a miss . . .

How about them Saudis, still manipulating aren't they?

Explain “swing and a miss”

tom donnelly wrote: That is just what I am saying.  The locals do not get to decide they can use Federal land and close it to everyone else.

Martin le Roux wrote: Actually local authorities can close access to public lands in an emergency. The difficulty in this case is that they're trying to close access for non-residents but keep it open for residents. It would be a lot less problematic if they just closed access for everyone. There's a similar issue in San Juan County, Colorado (Silverton). See https://coloradosun.com/2020/03/26/coronavirus-uphill-skiing-closures-silverton-colorado/.

Thank you. I made this point, intentionally inelegantly, in another thread today.

I am doing social distancing. I am not using my unexpected paid time off to make a climbing road trip across the country.

But increasingly, the message I'm getting is not "Stay away so you don't overwhelm our resources" but "Stay away while we continue to climb/hike/etc. on public lands we all own." The OP of the Unaweep thread raised it to a new level of audacity, but the sentiment is coming out loud and clear on other threads here and in many FB groups as well.

Quite frankly, it tempts me to go to these places, but I know the bigger picture and I won't. However, I will remember this, and in future trips to these areas, I will do all I can to minimize my patronage of the local businesses.

What changes that is either the locals stop the sanctimony and/or they hold themselves to the same standards they want everyone else to follow.

Robert S wrote: Thank you. I made this point, intentionally inelegantly, in another thread today.

I am doing social distancing. I am not using my unexpected paid time off to make a climbing road trip across the country.

But increasingly, the message I'm getting is not "Stay away so you don't overwhelm our resources" but "Stay away while we continue to climb/hike/etc. on public lands we all own." The OP of the Unaweep thread raised it to a new level of audacity, but the sentiment is coming out loud and clear on other threads here and in many FB groups as well.

Quite frankly, it tempts me to go to these places, but I know the bigger picture and I won't. However, I will remember this, and in future trips to these areas, I will do all I can to minimize my patronage of the local businesses.

What changes that is either the locals stop the sanctimony and/or they hold themselves to the same standards they want everyone else to follow.

Enjoy where you have decided to live, is that hard to understand? Ownership is not in question that I can see, selfish narcissistic behavior is being questioned.

B P wrote:

Explain “swing and a miss”

K. Didn't mean to be mean; just figured the story told the tale.

 
Groceries are important and necessary. (sustenance, well being, etc.)
Outdoor exercise is important and necessary for many. (stress relief, well being, etc.)
People will travel to either no matter what (sorry, I see a lot of cars parking along streets near parks, open space, etc., and people out hanging around to just be outside)

Grocery Store: 
-Many, many cars in close proximity (usually less than or slightly more than car door swing away), can be overflowing onto adjacent streets, etc.
-Often lines of people in close proximity at checkouts and at opening (even with tape on the ground for distancing) (transmission probability is higher)
-Many surfaces to be touched by many non-household individuals, doors, carts, shelf items, screens. (transmission probability is higher)
-Products handled by many non-household individuals. (Transmission probability is higher)
-Many non-household individuals in less than 2 meter (6.5') proximity. (transmission probability is higher)
-Restroom is usually supplied. (Not all customers use the restroom for short duration trips, some do of course)
-Temperature controlled environment with a certain % of recirculated air.

Trailheads:
-In non-Covid times, (and now) often loaded with close proximity cars such that supplied parking is full and cars flow down adjacent roads.
-Fewer of the same surfaces are touched by many non-household individuals.
-Typically groups of non-household individuals are spaced in excess of 2 meters (I know of few people who like to hike right on somebody's ass or have footsteps right behind them)
-People step aside to allow others by (not usually closer than would occur in a store)
-Restrooms may or may not be open. (Not all hikers use the restroom, some do, others will disperse waste among open space as is typical)
-Air is not recirculated or controlled.

My guess is that management of most trail heads will result in a better result than simple closure. (Enforcement and management may increase; it always does in busy times)

And, wear gloves in the store . . . 

Red John wrote:

K. Didn't mean to be mean; just figured the story told the tale.

Its ok, I can handle it. 

I get what you're saying, but Im trying to articulate that just because we are exposed in some essential areas doesn't mean that we should just throw caution to the wind everywhere.

I don't know, maybe this is just one of those conversations you need to have in person?

Quite frankly, it tempts me to go to these places, but I know the bigger picture and I won't. However, I will remember this, and in future trips to these areas, I will do all I can to minimize my patronage of the local businesses.

What changes that is either the locals stop the sanctimony and/or they hold themselves to the same standards they want everyone else to follow.

The local business, perhaps Alice's Restaurant, or Johnny's Autoshop, or Technu's Skin Care Salon, are hardly responsible for Bulbous Polyp claiming to some climbing forum that he's climbing every day. Please consider: in times of crisis and ambiguity, people react differently. And when fear takes deep root in the human psyche, the temptation to bar the gates to the town and shun all visitors is hardly a new phenomena. These behaviors we see, in others, in the mirror, on the telly; my sense is they are ancient and woven into what it is to be human in the first place.

Rather than personalize it, I think its best when I take a deep breath and realize, people are gonna be people. We are not in lock step, and thank goodness for that. Sure, strangers going to those little mountain towns increase the chances of those townspeople catching the virus. That's undeniable. Its just as undeniable that some climber can go up an empty canyon and boulder away, alone, all day long and then go home and no one will be the wiser. No one was at risk save the person who took the risk. Perhaps if Bulbous Polyp falls and twists his ankle, Bulbous will crawl back to his car like a man instead of speed dialing 911 for a quick fix to his predicament. That would be the fully independent thing to do, self-rescue, and don't ask for help at all. I can respect that ethic and have lived it more than once myself.

Its ok for some community minded folks to post signs and messages saying don't come round here no more. Its OK. Don't take it so personally. If you must go anyway, please just go and keep quiet about it. If you get rousted by the sheriff, or angry locals, well that's too bad for you. Please don't come crying about it here. Just take your lumps. If you're going to truly isolated areas no one is ever going to know and your personal freedom to do whatever you wish remains intact.

Its when rugged individualists feel compelled to rub everyone else's nose in their noncompliance that upsets the gate closers. A lot of folks starting personalizing it and well, that's human nature too I suppose.

A climber who wants to come round here to climb is not my enemy. The townfolk who want to shun strangers are not my enemy either. They're just people being people. I see Americans doing amazing things right now, unprecedented since WWII so far as i can tell. These are moments of pride, not criticism.

Sorry I was gone climbing... what did I miss??