Trying to decide between moving to SLC, Rapid City, Grand Junction, Vegas or Tucson. Any advice?

Move to Bishop

Charlie Swrote:

Just pass over Nevada and Utah and end up in Colorado.

If that's a possible plan, I highly recommend to try it out during a climbing trip for a couple of weeks. Colorado climbing is an "acquired taste" as not everyone is into cruxes that are created by not touching lose blocks or squeeky flakes. It is a great place to practice the dark arts of proper anchor building though. With all the questionable gear placements, it is often suitable/recommended to build four or five piece anchors. It is a well-known fact that more than half of all licence plates in many popular climbing areas in UT, WY, SD are from Colorado.

Patrikwrote:

If that's a possible plan, I highly recommend to try it out during a climbing trip for a couple of weeks. Colorado climbing is an "acquired taste" as not everyone is into cruxes that are created by not touching lose blocks or squeeky flakes. It is a great place to practice the dark arts of proper anchor building though. With all the questionable gear placements, it is often suitable/recommended to build four or five piece anchors. It is a well-known fact that more than half of all licence plates in many popular climbing areas in UT, WY, SD are from Colorado.

Shh. Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming are full. Go away.

SLC sucks

GJ seems pretty cool but the climbing is *not* actually that close, as someone pointed out, and it’s all really sunny

Vegas isn’t all that bad IMO when it comes to the strip. I forgot it was even there when I was in the area. I think it would be hard to be a 9-5er and climb there though and it seems like the limestone isn’t that great unless you’re climbing real hard (my problem, not anyone else’s)

Tucson seems cool and there is housing unlike the other mentioned areas like flagstaff and lander.

I went to RC this summer with high hopes and was beyond disappointed

Lander & Flagg & bishop - you might have luck and actually find an affordable place if you ask around. Also check furnished finder (they’re not always furnished)

Jackie Swrote:

SLC sucks

GJ seems pretty cool but the climbing is at actually that close, as someone pointed out, and it’s all really sunny

Vegas isn’t all that bad IMO when it comes to the strip. I forgot it was even there when I was in the area. I think it would be hard to be a 9-5er and climb there though and it seems like the limestone isn’t that great unless you’re climbing real hard (my problem, not anyone else’s)

Tucson seems cool and there is housing unlike the other mentioned areas like flagstaff and lander.

I went to RC this summer with high hopes and was beyond disappointed

Lander & Flagg & bishop - you might have luck and actually find an affordable place if you ask around. Also check furnished finder (they’re not always furnished)

Why did RC disappoint? Just curious

Charlie Swrote:

Shh. Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming are full. Go away.

Full?? That's odd ... 

population density (people/square miles):

WY  6

NV  29

UT  40

CO  57

No wonder you have to patiently wait in line when climbing in CO (unless you're lucky to get a reservation entry permit to RMNP, Lumpy, or Eldo by booking a month in advance).

Steve Williamswrote:

Move to Bishop

Rents are sky high -- IF you can even find a place.  Renting here is a blood sport.

BAdwrote:

Rents are sky high -- IF you can even find a place.  Renting here is a blood sport.

No joke. LA and Bay area folk during the 'demic sure brought their rent prices with them didnt they. It's wildly out of whack.

Patrikwrote:

Full?? That's odd ... 

population density (people/square miles):

WY  6

NV  29

UT  40

CO  57

No wonder you have to patiently wait in line when climbing in CO (unless you're lucky to get a reservation entry permit to RMNP, Lumpy, or Eldo by booking a month in advance).

There are a lot of better and uncrowded  places to climb in CO than RMNP, Lumpy, and Eldo.  Maybe try leaving the front range?

Patrikwrote:

Full?? That's odd ... 

population density (people/square miles):

Maybe look up hyperbole? Or tongue in cheek? Or realize that those here don't really want more?

James Weisswrote:

It's not too late to get a roommate. 

It's not just a roommate anymore for bend, it's roommates. Pretty much any housing I can find around $1000 is a shared house with 3-4 other people. There's not nearly enough non-family housing in Bend to keep up with demand sadly. Redmond has good options , but I don't want to live that far out.

Devin Scheidwrote:

Redmond has good options , but I don't want to live that far out.

That far out? Redmond puts you closer to the best central OR climbing than Bend. Tbh I would live in Redmond sooner than any other place on your list.

Tim McCabewrote:

Landed in Tucson in 93 been here pretty much ever since, laid back, not too big, not too small it's the Goldielocks of cities to me. People bitch about the traffic, but you can easily get around town on a bicycle if your fit. Rents are going up but I should think cheaper then LV. 

The Hill's are great, never considered RC lived in Custer, Hill City, and didn't care for the everybody knows everybody small towns. I am sure the climbing community is great still, I see they still have their annual TR fest at Rushmore. Southern AZ also has a climber fest at Cochise every year, there's a huge variety of climbing, Tucson is big enough to have most everything you might want in a city without being obnoxious like Phx. 

Best of luck wherever you end up. 

Yeah I lived in Tucson for a year and loved it. The climbing community is great. Went to Beanfest 2018 and had a fun time. Only problem I had with it was the bouldering around Tucson isn't that great. There's good stuff out there it just involves really long approaches. I've been sport climbing so much these past 5 years I really wanna get near some good bouldering. I might just end up going with Tucson though since I already know a bunch of people there.

Matthew Tangemanwrote:

That far out? Redmond puts you closer to the best central OR climbing than Bend. Tbh I would live in Redmond sooner than any other place on your list.

Yeah that's true it puts you way closer to Smith. The housing market is still super tight and expensive in Redmond, but there is stuff occasionally. I should take another look at Redmond too.

By far out I was referring to Bend being the nexus for the climbing community, even though it's farther away from Smith. But Redmond's still a good choice.

Chad Millerwrote:

For the GJ list I’d say you’re rather spot on except for #1 and  #3. Housing in GJ is one of if not the lowest in the state. As for crime, drugs, and homelessness- It’s not that bad. In fact the occurrences of those things are below the national average.

Also I wouldn’t say the climbing in town is good. Unaweep is 45-60 minutes away and that has really good climbing The mountain biking in town is world class though. 

Correct. Junktown has the monument which is in season 7 months a year and has more scary trad on sketchy rock than you can FA in a lifetime. but if you have a normal amount of fear and enjoy climbing established routes you will be driving a ton. Unaweep is great but for bread and butter sport climbs it’s rifle summer and main elk winter, 3 hours round trip. Be a mountain biking boulderer and/or drive a fast, fuel efficient car if you move there, is my advice.  

Marc801 Cwrote:

American Fork and Maple Canyon are an hour and 90-ish minutes, respectively, from SLC. Logan canyon is 100 minutes north. Some would argue that the climbing in LCC is indeed world class.

Including areas requiring 3hrs+ of round trip driving is a bit of stretch for considering an area part of a city's easily-accessible/local climbing. 

(Would anyone move to NYC or Albany solely to access the Gunks?)

In LCC's case, how often are people solely traveling to SLC for a destination trip to LCC (vs just the convenience of it or adding it along to a road trip)? 

Besides any social, economic, or environmental concerns, I do not think SLC, in isolation, is a mecca for outdoor climbing for the Average Joe. If you want to regularly make long drives to explore a wide variety of world class areas, have access to the snowsports, city amenities/gyms, and pursue other outdoor rec. - then yeah it might make sense.

I just think there's a bit of unjustified navel gazing in some areas like SLC that misrepresents its value as a rock climbing center.

Nate Grygowrote:

In LCC's case, how often are people solely traveling to SLC for a destination trip to LCC (vs just the convenience of it or adding it along to a road trip)? 

Almost never. At least I never see traveling climbers there. I see some at AF, but usually they didn't come to UT just to climb there. Some people love LCC but they have drunk the kool aid. If you like wandering/diagonal routes on slabby, rounded, flaring cracks and sparsely bolted slabs with some occasional kitty litter choss and loose flakes...then sure, it's amazing. 

Besides any social, economic, or environmental concerns, I do not think SLC, in isolation, is a mecca for outdoor climbing for the Average Joe. If you want to regularly make long drives to explore a wide variety of world class areas, have access to the snowsports, city amenities/gyms, and pursue other outdoor rec. - then yeah it might make sense.

This is right on. The local stuff here is cool, and there's a ton of it, but the cooler stuff is all a bit of a drive.

That being said, there is a LOT of climbing within a 3 hour driving radius. A little different than your comparison of NYC to the Gunks, within 3 hours we have: City of Rocks, Joe's Valley, Uintas, Maple Canyon, American Fork, Logan area, Ogden Area, BCC, LCC, assorted small wasatch crags, Ibex (a little more than 3). Increase that to 5 hours and you have Lander, Jackson/Tetons, Moab / Indian Creek, VRG, St George, Mesquite, Rifle, the Fins...and more. 

I just think there's a bit of unjustified navel gazing in some areas like SLC that misrepresents its value as a rock climbing center.

The amount and variety of climbing within a weekend or long weekend driving distance means you can climb effectively year round in good or decent conditions, in most any style -- if you are willing to drive. The local crags adjacent to Salt Lake are good, but they are just good local crags. With a few exceptions they are pretty mediocre, and what makes them cool is their accessibility from a major city. None of them are destinations in their own right. 

Nate Grygowrote:

Including areas requiring 3hrs+ of round trip driving is a bit of stretch for considering an area part of a city's easily-accessible/local climbing.

I was specifically referring to what many generally consider world class.

 (Would anyone move to NYC or Albany solely to access the Gunks?)

Yes. I've known Gunks regulars who have done just that. Consider that at his height of climbing, John Stannard was a Gunks regular. He lived in Silver Springs, MD - a solid 10+ hours round trip.

In LCC's case, how often are people solely traveling to SLC for a destination trip to LCC (vs just the convenience of it or adding it along to a road trip)? 

Sure, not many, but they do exist.

Besides any social, economic, or environmental concerns, I do not think SLC, in isolation, is a mecca for outdoor climbing for the Average Joe. If you want to regularly make long drives to explore a wide variety of world class areas, have access to the snowsports, city amenities/gyms, and pursue other outdoor rec. - then yeah it might make sense.

I just think there's a bit of unjustified navel gazing in some areas like SLC that misrepresents its value as a rock climbing center.

Actually, I agree with you on that.

Eric Chabotwrote:

Almost never. At least I never see traveling climbers there. I see some at AF, but usually they didn't come to UT just to climb there. Some people love LCC but they have drunk the kool aid. If you like wandering/diagonal routes on slabby, rounded, flaring cracks and sparsely bolted slabs with some occasional kitty litter choss and loose flakes...then sure, it's amazing. 

This is right on. The local stuff here is cool, and there's a ton of it, but the cooler stuff is all a bit of a drive.

That being said, there is a LOT of climbing within a 3 hour driving radius. A little different than your comparison of NYC to the Gunks, within 3 hours we have: City of Rocks, Joe's Valley, Uintas, Maple Canyon, American Fork, Logan area, Ogden Area, BCC, LCC, assorted small wasatch crags, Ibex (a little more than 3). Increase that to 5 hours and you have Lander, Jackson/Tetons, Moab / Indian Creek, VRG, St George, Mesquite, Rifle, the Fins...and more. 

The amount and variety of climbing within a weekend or long weekend driving distance means you can climb effectively year round in good or decent conditions, in most any style -- if you are willing to drive. The local crags adjacent to Salt Lake are good, but they are just good local crags. With a few exceptions they are pretty mediocre, and what makes them cool is their accessibility from a major city. None of them are destinations in their own right. 

Agree. Personally I'm not a big fan of the climbing in LCC.