Who is causing this awful weather?

Israel Rwrote:

Ticks and Lyme are scary but not too bad tbh, just wear long pants and shirts while moving through brush and thoroughly check yourself at the end of the day.

Do you actually wear long pants and shirts in the summer, when it's 85 degrees and humid?

JCMwrote:

Do you actually wear long pants and shirts in the summer, when it's 85 degrees and humid?

Yeah, I wear a breathable sun shirt then roll up the pants, sleeves, and unbutton a couple buttons when I get to the wall and there's no real risk of ticks getting on me. Sure it'd be more comfortable in short, sandels, and a tank but it's a minor inconvenience compared to most other climate related discussions in this thread.

Israel Rwrote:

Yeah, I wear a breathable sun shirt then roll up the pants, sleeves, and unbutton a couple buttons when I get to the wall and there's no real risk of ticks getting on me. Sure it'd be more comfortable in short, sandels, and a tank but it's a minor inconvenience compared to most other climate related discussions in this thread.

Idk about that. Having to armor yourself against disease-bearing insects to go outside sounds dreadful, especially in the heat.

By contrast, the drought in CA has had basically no impact on my day to day life, aside from about a week of smokey air from the fires. In no way do I mean to trivialize the impacts of climate change and related disasters, but providing some pushback on this idea that the west has become unlivable.

Ironically, and counter to the current drought situation, the biggest disaster threat where I live is still actually flooding. 

...I thought the weather has been pretty nice lately

For a typical climber taking precautions (long sleeves/pants, daily checks and showers) I think the tickborne disease risk is pretty low. A dirty AT thru hiker is a different story. 

JCMwrote:

Do you actually wear long pants and shirts in the summer, when it's 85 degrees and humid?

I do. 

jdejacewrote:

I do. 

Me too.

Kevin Heckelerwrote:

There's a lot to unpack here but most of it was addressed by other replies.

"Local" as in 5 state widespread flooding?  You again seem to mitigate the issues back East.  They're different, but they're pretty... serious(?).  Just ask anyone who's been flooded in the past 15 years (there's been many events that have affected Upstate as well as the metro areas).  It's getting so bad New Orleans is becoming a ghost town, how long until it starts happening in Philadelphia, Manhattan, Boston?  Who's going to be able to afford the insurance?

Climbers choose to live here because they can get out to climb almost all year round, and if they want winter sports they can find that too.  And mountain biking, some paddling, endless hiking.  It's very different from northeast outdoors life, in all positive ways.  The amount of climbing here is astounding, in three years we're still working on our tick list with no end in sight.  That's just from our front door.  The "scene" is the scene because that's how good things are here.  It's not hype.  You don't have to like it, or accept it.  That why words like denial exist.

Housing in the West tends to be concentrated mostly where there's a city, with municipal water and electric, as well as jobs.  This affects pricing since your options are more limited.  Suburbs are still small cities with only a couple tall buildings (sprawl).  The few who live off the grid have to dig new wells fairly often and those houses al tend to cost a lot.  Wildfires may be driving some of those people out, same way people are leaving New Orleans.  Climate refugees.  Northeast already has refugees, we would consider ourselves that.  We left mostly because of the crappy weather.  And it's only getting crappier.  The long term question for the West will be how long droughts last and if there will be sustainable sources of water.   There's promising advances in desalinization, so hopefully that eases Los Angeles's draw/needs.

Fwiw, the cost of living in Vegas is nearly identical to the Albany NY area, which has a low cost of living.  LA, San Fran, Seattle, Boulder, even SLC now not so much.  Picking where to live, going back to my prior post(s), requires weighing the various factors relating to the social and economic opportunities.  Duh.  Pick wisely, like you should also back East.

Flooding in Manhattan and NOLA won’t spread to other areas above a certain elevation to mass areas. Fires/air quality/Drought don’t stop at a relative elevation.

If you want to live in a Metro city and be an active outdoor climber, i would say New England is not the spot for you.

Albany is a dump. That’s like saying you move to Fresno for the outdoor scene. Poverty, crime, high tax and all the negatives without a reason to attract young people.

I def dont wear a lot of clothes in the summer, unless I'm 'swaking through an overgrown field. Fuck ticks. Just catch them before they bite. Selective deet spraying.  And don't climb in Bolton in spring. 

.. but do ticks out west not carry lyme? Is this something only new englanders have to worry about? 

... and yeah, up here we get about 5 weeks of good climbing weather per year. This is it, make the most of it! 

Gumby Kingwrote:

Okay you can stop bragging or send some of this rain to the south west.

FTFY

Isreal. stupid advice. ticks attach much better to clothing and then they are sneaky bastards that somehow find  a way in. best practice is tall rubber boots over bare legs.. 

Insert namewrote:

Flooding in Manhattan and NOLA won’t spread to other areas above a certain elevation to mass areas. Fires/air quality/Drought don’t stop at a relative elevation.

If you want to live in a Metro city and be an active outdoor climber, i would say New England is not the spot for you.

That bolded quote, yeah that's been the point of my posts all along.  Welcome to the thread.

The fires and drought are at record levels right now.  The water planning/projections, as insufficient as they were, are still keeping the faucets running in all the major cities.  Considering the knowledge being gained and tech advancements that will be viable in the coming decade+, I'm not as worried as you apparently are for the future out here.  Noteworthy?   Yes.  Cause to packup and move back East?  Hell.  No.  

The fact they can half-ass it and still have water is a promising sign of resilience.  Management of the water out West is an ongoing, real-time experiment.  Few places on the planet have tried what is being done to provide water to a hundred million people where water is generally not abundant.

The bigger issue is what happens when the underground aquafers all run dry.  The West is major source of agriculture for the entire country, and without wells a large chunk of that dries up.  And with that vast space underground there's concerns to how that will translate over time to the surface (ie - bad consequences/settling/collapsing in areas).

But let's talk more about climate impacts back East.... tell me again how a sudden movement of the coastline isn't going to impact anything when much of that property is the most (over)valued on that side of the country?  If you look at coastal flood maps for all the cities on the East coast you might realize the folly in your conclusions.  And news flash, there's parts of many Western and gulf coast cities facing the same threat.  Humans are not good at that long term planning stuff, we see 70 years out (span of our lifetime) and past that we might as well be speaking in measures of an eternity.  We see what's in front of us as the only source of permanence necessary. Been getting into geology lately, and what I've learned is that on a long enough timeline none of our cities exist.  The one constant about Earth's geology is that it's constantly changing.  It's ALL temporary.  Global warming is just exponentially speeding up and focusing some of the changes.

sara mcfaddenwrote:

You sure you want to use the word refugee to describe a voluntary move to a place with more sunny days so you can recreate more? You may be misunderstanding the word, or unaware of how your usage may be insensitive to actual climate refugees. The northeast has been pretty lucky so far in terms of climate change driven disasters. A little hotter, a bit more intense and variable rain, and some more large storms. The climate is not forcing anyone anywhere. Yet.

I understand and agree with the spirit of what you're saying.  Climate refugee is just a generalized phrase used to explain movement of people for climate related reasons.  I suppose we fit even the strictest application of that term, seeing that our NY house ended up being so badly impacted this year (even though we were not living in it).  Does having some luck/foresight count against us because we were able to get out/ahead of the problem?  Like, someone moving from New Orleans before the next big hurricane hit?  Even if where they moved to also had the benefit of being drier and sunnier?  Or was it because I posted the phrase it doesn't apply?    

JCMwrote:

If we're talking climate impacts, what about the tick population and Lyme disease risk? See here:

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-lyme-disease

Upward trend in Lyme disease most notable in VT, NH, ME, where winters aren't getting cold enough to control tick population like in the past.

This is a real factor that would give me pause in considering moving back to northern New England. Ticks and Lyme Disease are nasty stuff, and climbers trashing around the woods are especially at risk. Thoughts from New England climbers?

Ticks are here out West, I've had one on me from hiking through brush outside of Red Rock the first year we moved.  Lyme isn't as common, but there's other nasties you can catch form them.

I contracted Lyme from a bite back East, no symptoms for a couple weeks then a faint bullseye appeared away from the bite area (the symptom onset delay and bullseye appearing at a random place on the body are both known to science).  Thankful for antibiotics.

Getting bit back East was fairly common, even with precautions taken.  Now that I know they're here, I've not had any more bites/ticks on me since they're easily avoided.

sara mcfaddenwrote:

Sure, they're bad. And Lyme sucks. I do make some choices over others because of ticks (and mosquitoes, etc.). But it's pretty easy at the end of the day to do a quick check for them. And hopefully if you do get bit, you notice and go on antibiotics right away. Compared to other disasters, ticks are something that individuals can mostly manage on their own.

Just had an embedded deer tick in me yesterday (again).  I take one dose of doxycycline immediately  and another 12 hours later, it happens once or twice a year.  

Not medical advice, but I've worked in the woods for 30+ years and have never had lyme. 

Kevin Heckelerwrote:

That bolded quote, yeah that's been the point of my posts all along.  Welcome to the thread.

The fires and drought are at record levels right now.  The water planning/projections, as insufficient as they were, are still keeping the faucets running in all the major cities.  Considering the knowledge being gained and tech advancements that will be viable in the coming decade+, I'm not as worried as you apparently are for the future out here.  Noteworthy?   Yes.  Cause to packup and move back East?  Hell.  No.  

The fact they can half-ass it and still have water is a promising sign of resilience.  Management of the water out West is an ongoing, real-time experiment.  Few places on the planet have tried what is being done to provide water to a hundred million people where water is generally not abundant.

The bigger issue is what happens when the underground aquafers all run dry.  The West is major source of agriculture for the entire country, and without wells a large chunk of that dries up.  And with that vast space underground there's concerns to how that will translate over time to the surface (ie - bad consequences/settling/collapsing in areas).

But let's talk more about climate impacts back East.... tell me again how a sudden movement of the coastline isn't going to impact anything when much of that property is the most (over)valued on that side of the country?  If you look at coastal flood maps for all the cities on the East coast you might realize the folly in your conclusions.  And news flash, there's parts of many Western and gulf coast cities facing the same threat.  Humans are not good at that long term planning stuff, we see 70 years out (span of our lifetime) and past that we might as well be speaking in measures of an eternity.  We see what's in front of us as the only source of permanence necessary. Been getting into geology lately, and what I've learned is that on a long enough timeline none of our cities exist.  The one constant about Earth's geology is that it's constantly changing.  It's ALL temporary.  Global warming is just exponentially speeding up and focusing some of the changes.

No, you said the “east” as a whole. When in reality you are referring to metro areas and poor cities in one of the highest taxed states in the country.

1. Yes, Flooding and sea level effects all parts of the country. That being said, most of the cities and area effected by sea level change are in FL, TX, LA other than the NYC metro.

2. Mass migration from coasts will effect everyone. But, most people running from FL, NY and LA won’t move to New England, they will move to the Rocky Mountain and SE like the current population pattern suggests.

3. Long enough timeline is irrelevant to the conversation. When you build a house or a road no one is saying “I sure hope it is around in 60,000 years”.

Here is a ranking for best and worst states to handle climate change. 

https://www.safehome.org/climate-change-statistics/

If NYC Metro is forced to relocate, I highly doubt they will move to the Green mountains, Fayetteville, New Paltz or Chattanooga.

Insert namewrote:

...

Here is a ranking for best and worst states to handle climate change. 

https://www.safehome.org/climate-change-statistics/

...

Aside from the top 10 mostly being south eastern states, what I find affirming is the wide diversity of states/locations scattered placement through the remaining 40 entries.  It's consistent with what I was trying to convey earlier -- no one is entirely immune, and there's a range of factors in whether one spot will be impacted more than another.  Note how high New York ranks (20th) versus, say, Nevada (35th).  It seems counterintuitive.  I mean desert = f&@^ed, right?  But there's fewer people here, so the demands on infrastructure and ability to adapt reasonably quickly and cheaply go a long ways to make up for hot temps during the summer.  Did you know Vegas has a second straw at the bottom of Lake Mead?  Hopefully someone at the water authority gets a raise for that foresight.

I hear they drink toilet water in Vegas, cool huh?

https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/aug/24/how-our-water-goes-toilet-tap/

M Mwrote:

I hear they drink toilet water in Vegas, cool huh?

https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/aug/24/how-our-water-goes-toilet-tap/

There's a few cities in the West that recycle water.  LA is next.

My dog really likes the tap water.

What they pipe back into Lake Mead is a bit cleaner than, say, Newton Creek.

Kevin Heckelerwrote:

There's a few cities in the West that recycle water.  LA is next.

My dog really likes the tap water.

What they pipe back into Lake Mead is a bit cleaner than, say, Newton Creek.

So much rain this summer in the NE even my picky ass dog has been drinking out of ponds she wouldn't touch the last few summers, they can be good canaries in a coal mine, then again many good dogs eat roadkill and human feces.

I still believe if the trend continues there is gonna be some major ghost towns in my lifetime.