|
climbersam
Jun 12, 2003, 4:17 PM
Post #1 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 73
|
I may be moving to California soon, but I'm not sure where to live.
My criteria in order of importance are;
1. Inexpensive to live
2. Small town
3. Available work
4. Scenery - beautiful location
5. Close proximity to climbing
I visited a place called Ukiah, seemed nice, but looking for other places.
Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
unirock
Jun 12, 2003, 4:31 PM
Post #2 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2002
Posts: 26
|
Small town, but available work and inexpensive living? In general, Cali is expensive. Here's an indicator: the average house in California cost 325K? I live in the Sacramento area and like it here. It's close to Tahoe and fairly close to Yosemite. You might look into Vacaville as a possibility.
|
|
|
|
|
kevlar
Jun 12, 2003, 4:36 PM
Post #3 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 5, 2002
Posts: 272
|
consider CLOVIS...
2 hours south of Yosemite...
1 hour east of numerous large granite areas...
downfall...can get hot an smoggy
PM. if you are serious...I have climb books on the area
cheers
john
EDITED FOR SUCKASSES ... YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 12, 2003, 4:42 PM
Post #4 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I may be moving to California soon, but I'm not sure where to live. My criteria in order of importance are; 1. Inexpensive to live 2. Small town 3. Available work 4. Scenery - beautiful location 5. Close proximity to climbing I visited a place called Ukiah, seemed nice, but looking for other places. Any ideas?
This place you describe, Paradise I think? Doesn't exist in California and hasn't for decades. The combination of 3 and 4 will price you well out of #1. Numbers 2 and 3 don't seem to be able to conexist in this state unless you have very specific skill sets, such as a teacher or someone in the medical profession.
Ukiah is a nice place yup. It is so far from decent climbing it isn't even funny though. Like 5-6 hours from Yosemite for example, one way. Decent climbing, I said!
I can't speak to SoCal at all. In Norcal, if cheap is your most important priority, you can forget about #4. All the beautiful scenery has been taken.
The Central Valley offers the best combination of cheap/work/proximity to climbing in NorCal. The downsides are: it is a furnace in the summer and a foggy bog in the winter. The economy is perpetually depressed when compared to the rest of the state and wages are significantly lower here. And the smog is second only to LA in terms of density, and will surpass LA within 10 years. The upsides are, depending upon city and preferences, you are closer to great climbing and world class skiing than virtually anywhere else in the state, with the cheap living and potential work caveats thrown in.
Depending upon your work, you might want to consider a Nevada town such as Reno, or Carson City/Gardnerville.
Bishop is the classic small town/beautiful scenary/proximity to climbing locale. But there isn't much work there at all. Mammoth is a cool little tourist ski town, if you have skills in that arena. But it ain't cheap! Forget about the Tahoe/Truckee area. The average house there is in excess of 500k. Seriously.
Cheers,
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dsafanda
Jun 12, 2003, 4:46 PM
Post #5 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2002
Posts: 1025
|
You want to live in California in a beautiful town that is close to climbing, affordable and has lots of jobs?
Ha! Don't we all.
Your list of wants is the exact same wish list that millions of other people in this state have. You're going to find out that you'll probably have to make some compromises. The most beautiful town might not be the most affordable. The town closest to climbing might not have as many jobs as a town closer to San Francisco or Sacramento.
If proximity to climbing is indeed last on your list...Ukiah is a pretty good idea. I'd look in to the Lake Tahoe area but that's going to be more expensive.
Ah! Dingus beat me to it and as usual his response is much more comprehensive.
|
|
|
|
|
apolobamba
Jun 12, 2003, 4:59 PM
Post #6 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2003
Posts: 337
|
Dsafanda has said it all.
Ridgecrest, Visalia, and Tehachapi might be options, but none that I would take. Idyllwild might work if you like driving.
Your California dream has left this state.
|
|
|
|
|
caveman
Jun 12, 2003, 5:13 PM
Post #7 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2002
Posts: 127
|
my parents used to live in ukiah, they hated it
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Jun 12, 2003, 5:16 PM
Post #8 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
I can't believe someone would RECOMMEND living in Fresno. If Bakersfield is the armpit of the state, Fresno is just HELL. I wouldn't wish that on anyone who knew any better.
>1. Inexpensive to live
>2. Small town
>3. Available work
>4. Scenery - beautiful location
>5. Close proximity to climbing
This IS pretty funny. I've been on a search for that myself. I tried Mammoth and Bishop, but that knocks 1 & 3 out. Unless you're looking to drive everywhere, you can't have it all.
|
|
|
|
|
drkayak
Jun 12, 2003, 5:29 PM
Post #9 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 22, 2002
Posts: 136
|
In reply to: I can't believe someone would RECOMMEND living in Fresno. If Bakersfield is the armpit of the state, Fresno is just HELL. I wouldn't wish that on anyone who knew any better.
I agree!
I think the Sierra foothills east of Sacramento is a reasonable compromise. Placerville or Auburn areas.
|
|
|
|
|
apolobamba
Jun 12, 2003, 5:32 PM
Post #10 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2003
Posts: 337
|
I thought the term "armpit of the state" was reserved for Oildale or for downtown LA.
|
|
|
|
|
badphish
Jun 12, 2003, 5:42 PM
Post #11 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 2, 2003
Posts: 207
|
try some towns in Nor.cal closer to oregon, or
ones closer to nevade, what about quincy? truckee?
|
|
|
|
|
alvchen
Jun 12, 2003, 5:50 PM
Post #12 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2002
Posts: 616
|
Fresno isn't that bad, but damn it's hot. You could live in the foothills and commute to Fresno. There is only one climbing gym in Fresno, and it's ridiculously small, you're better off driving to Yosemite.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 12, 2003, 6:03 PM
Post #13 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Tollhouse. You could get a job bussing tables at the Tollhouse Cafe! You'll only have to clean about 10 tables a day and there's a cliff just outside of town.
I don't know how someone living in Bakersfield or Sacramento could dog Fresno! Clovis isn't that bad, but keep in mind Fresno is no small town. It's bigger than Oakland or San Jose proper.
Foothill towns to consider:
Oakhurst
Mariposa (not much there at all)
Sonora
Angels Camp
Jackson
Placerville
Auburn
These are in order of cost of living, lowest to highest. Auburn is above the 300k mark in housing costs now. But commute work is most realistic for Oakhurst, Placerville and Auburn (Fresno and Sacramento).
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Jun 12, 2003, 6:04 PM
Post #14 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Other thought in your housing search:
Try the the grocery store litmus test. If you are in a tourist town, this only works on weekdays of non=holidays. Walk into the grocery store. Look around. These are your locals. Would you want to meet these people?
That's how I decided I wouldn't want to move to Moab. Those folks were old and busted. I know. I went twice just to be sure.
Now, in Mammoth, you walk in, and it is a feast for the eyes. All guys, all in their 20s, all strapping. :)
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
Jun 12, 2003, 6:07 PM
Post #15 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
In reply to: Fresno isn't that bad, but damn it's hot. You could live in the foothills and commute to Fresno. There is only one climbing gym in Fresno, and it's ridiculously small, you're better off driving to Yosemite.
Joshua Tree,just go away for the summer to climb. Work from home, or in a restaurant in 29palms.
I think a whole house is about 250dollars a month,for rent.
Bishop, South Lake Tahoe,Arcata,Idywillid,and Yosemite, (but it's well not exactly a small town)--but you already know that. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
climbersam
Jun 12, 2003, 6:35 PM
Post #16 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 73
|
Thanks for the advice all, I'll get this noted for my roadtrip.
|
|
|
|
|
desertgranite
Jun 12, 2003, 7:28 PM
Post #17 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 2, 2003
Posts: 52
|
In reply to: I may be moving to California soon, but I'm not sure where to live. My criteria in order of importance are; 1. Inexpensive to live 2. Small town 3. Available work 4. Scenery - beautiful location 5. Close proximity to climbing I visited a place called Ukiah, seemed nice, but looking for other places. Any ideas?
Forgetabout Ukiah, checkout CLEAR LAKE, you'll love it! This destination should satisfy ALL your criterea:
1. Trailers are cheap dude!
2. Only you and yur cousins
3. Start up your very own meth lab!
4. Lakeside & Mountains
5. Climb at the Bear every day!
Welcome to paridise!
|
|
|
|
|
nabisco
Jun 12, 2003, 7:37 PM
Post #18 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2001
Posts: 38
|
I am moving to Cali , I'll be there by the end of June, and I have found nearly all the criteria you have mentioned. exept for the inexpensive part. I going to live in Auburn and work in Sacramento. Auburn is about 1-2 hours from Tahoe area, about 5 from yosemite, 5 hours to Bishop ect. in other words its great location. Auburn is a Beautiful laid back town in the foothills of the Sierra. I will eventually be looking for roomate here in a few months. So check it out. If your in the area pm me and we'll go climbing. I like trad and sport up to 11. I used to live in placerville so I know the area pretty well from a climbers perspective. :twisted:
I would stay the hell away from fresno.. dirty, nasty expensive.. The ONLY thing that town has going for it is its proximity to THe Valley IMHO
|
|
|
|
|
climber1
Jun 12, 2003, 10:12 PM
Post #19 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2000
Posts: 484
|
Fresno? anyone that suggest Fresno has got to be kidding. with out a doubt Fresno is the worst place to live in cali.
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jun 12, 2003, 10:19 PM
Post #20 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
move to Weed.
|
|
|
|
|
crazyfingers
Jun 13, 2003, 12:18 AM
Post #21 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 512
|
Try Grass Valley, right outside of the Tahoe/truckee area
|
|
|
|
|
dsafanda
Jun 13, 2003, 1:11 AM
Post #22 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2002
Posts: 1025
|
Hey, that's a pretty good suggestion
|
|
|
|
|
watersprite
Jul 24, 2003, 11:45 PM
Post #23 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 1601
|
In reply to: move to Weed.
I second this! or Redding. close to OR, Shasta, Lassen, Trinity- there is so much up there. Pick up one of Tom Stienstra's books on camping in Cal. - he knows every nook and cranny in the state.
|
|
|
|
|
watersprite
Jul 24, 2003, 11:46 PM
Post #24 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 1601
|
In reply to: Try Grass Valley, right outside of the Tahoe/truckee area
also close to Nevada City, CA - mentioned above... climb at Tahoe or Donner.
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Jul 25, 2003, 12:36 AM
Post #25 of 42
(11278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
From my perspective, I wouldn't call Grass Valley cheap.
Clear Lake, now there ya go. In SoCal we have our own version of Clear Lake, with more climbing, Apple Valley. My friend Josh and his wife moved from a thousand clam per month closet in Santa Barbara into a sprawling desert palace for about 70 grand. Paid off the rest of their debt from the SB years in about a year and a half. Of course, now they're about to commit suicide and are planning to move back to the central coast even if they have to live in a tent but, well, you said you wanted cheap...
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jul 25, 2003, 12:50 AM
Post #26 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: From my perspective, I wouldn't call Grass Valley cheap. Clear Lake, now there ya go. In SoCal we have our own version of Clear Lake, with more climbing, Apple Valley. My friend Josh and his wife moved from a thousand clam per month closet in Santa Barbara into a sprawling desert palace for about 70 grand. Paid off the rest of their debt from the SB years in about a year and a half. Of course, now they're about to commit suicide and are planning to move back to the central coast even if they have to live in a tent but, well, you said you wanted cheap...
Why stop at Apple Valley? Move to Barstow. You'll be a stone's throw from New Jack City and an hour from J Tree. It can't be any more expensive than Apple Valley, and the risk of suicide is probably only...double.
Actually, if you're willing to forego culture and breathable air (and to some extent your willingness to move anywhere in California suggests you are), consider the Inland Empire, especially San Bernardino, Riverside, Yucaipa, and Colton. They're about an hour from Williamson and Suicide/Tahquitz, 1.5 hours from J Tree, and minutes from Mt. Rubidoux. Cheap and plentiful housing and Mexican food dives.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
moabbeth
Jul 25, 2003, 1:03 AM
Post #27 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 1786
|
You're never gonna have it all here unfortunately, everything in California is a trade off. Cheaper places to live are usually cause no one else wants to live there.
But back to the original question - what kind of work are you looking to do? Is it something you could do anywhere (computers, construction). Some places that are close to climbing yet still not too expensive are Joshua Tree/Morongo Basin/29 Palms area (they're building a giant new casino down along the 10 fwy in Cabazon, there will be jobs opening up in that area from it). Sure JT is hot in the summer but you're still only an hour/90 minutes from Tahquitz/Suicide where it's cooler. Then from Oct-March you have JT RIGHT THERE!! There's also the Running Springs/Big Bear area, there's climbing up there and it's lovely up in the forest...and you'll be above the smog encased Inland Empire so the air is better. And with both places you're within a couple hours of a major city should you need anything major.
Oakhurst is a pretty cool little town. Less than an hour outside of Yos Valley, it doesn't get any better than that for climbing location. I'd imagine it's affordable. And it sure is gorgeous up there.
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Jul 25, 2003, 1:26 AM
Post #28 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
In reply to: Actually, if you're willing to forego culture and breathable air (and to some extent your willingness to move anywhere in California suggests you are), consider the Inland Empire, especially San Bernardino, Riverside, Yucaipa, and Colton. They're about an hour from Williamson and Suicide/Tahquitz, 1.5 hours from J Tree, and minutes from Mt. Rubidoux. Cheap and plentiful housing and Mexican food dives. -Jay
Come on now Jay. Don't tell me theres no culture in lovely San Berdo. Have you ever drove down Highland Ave or Mill St west of Waterman on a Fri or Sat night? Thats some serious in your face culture right there :lol:
But seriously, now that I have escaped the IE for almost 4 years now, I have begun to realize something. While it isn't heaven for "high life" (unless of course your refering to Miller High Life), for climbing it IS pretty amazing. With 2 hours you can be climbing on granite, quartz, sandstone, limestone, Volcanic, or conglomerate. You can do long routes (Tahquitz/Suicide), untold amount of trad routes (JT), amazing sport routes (Frustration, NJC, Williamson, Echo, Malibu, DP, Holcolmb, etc..) and yet there is still more rock to be developed in SoCal than most people will ever have a clue.
You can be at the beach and surf in the morning, and then hit Big Bear and snowboard in the afternoon, drop down the backside and sport climb at NJC in the evening (I've done it and it makes a pretty damn sweet day!).
In addition, while some "poo poo" it, the immediate to local climbing at Boxsprings, Rubidoux, Big Rock, and other spots (Gasp, yes believe it or not there are other areas with developed routes around) is far better than most realize. Since it is so local and easy to get to, it makes for great early morning, late afternoon-evening climbing. I know, I used to do it every week.
Top that all off with the fact that you can be in Vegas within 4 hours, and actually I personally don't think the IE is that bad. The smogs a killer, the gangs *may* get you, but if you know your way around, there are still some nice communities to live in. I personally think East Highlands (while getting very expensive) is a great place to live and worth every penny. I always seem to enjoy myself when I visit family down there. Lots of Mtn Bike riding, hiking, Road Biking, and other activites beyond just climbing. And being central to the 10 and 15 freeways, make it a pretty good home base to head out on road trips from.
If you ever move (provided you don't end up somewhere really sweat like Vegas/Flag/Salt Lake) to somewhere else, you may just realize that what you have in SoCal. While nothing is world class, the diversity of the SoCal Climbing experience is hard to beat.
|
|
|
|
|
onedancer
Jul 25, 2003, 8:50 PM
Post #29 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 5
|
Matt,
saw you photo, is that tower in MA?
just wandering
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jul 25, 2003, 9:08 PM
Post #30 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: You're never gonna have it all here unfortunately, everything in California is a trade off. Cheaper places to live are usually cause no one else wants to live there. Some places that are close to climbing yet still not too expensive are Joshua Tree/Morongo Basin/29 Palms area (they're building a giant new casino down along the 10 fwy in Cabazon, there will be jobs opening up in that area from it).
I would second this. Particularly if you work part time jobs and can travel (read: get the hell out of there) in summer.
It also depends on your favorite type of climbing and whether you do winter activities. If you are into winter sports, something in the Reno/Carson scene wouldn't be bad.
If you only rock climb and you are going to work year around, then I would recommend something in the Fresno area. On a clear day, you can climb in Yosemite in winter (might get a couple of sunny days a week in winter--it helps to have a flexible schedule). The Socal climbing isn't too far away and you can climb at higher elevations in the summer.
There are some less expensive places around Sacramento. Smaller towns such as Winters and Woodland have cheaper (this is relative) housing, but are a close commute to Sacramento, Yosemite (3.5 hours), and Tahoe (2 hours).
Good luck and come join the hoards (everybody else, including me, has).
|
|
|
|
|
phyre
Jul 25, 2003, 9:25 PM
Post #31 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 120
|
If being close to epic climbing is the most important thing to you than count this suggestion out. however if you really want to live in a great small town that is in some beutiful contry move to Arcata CA. It is in Humboldt CO. which, while best known for it's ability to supply so cal and oregon with all their pot, is also a great place to live. For California it is less expensive than most places because it isn't really growing. In fact it hasn't changed at all for at least 12 years. It is in the heart of the Redwood forest. It is about 5 miles inland, and has some great public, non-crowded beaches. There is some climbing. check out Patricks Point, or do some beach climbing at Moon Stone beach. It is also not a bad drive to Smith Rock in Oregon. I lived there for 11 years and loved every minute. It also made the top 5 best places to live list in Outside magazine so you can check out other info there. Also for pictures just look at any yakama catalog that is where they're headquartered.
hope you enjoy it.
phyre
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Jul 25, 2003, 9:34 PM
Post #32 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
How 'bout this...Vegas? It's not California, but it's the cheaper, has more jobs, is closer to climbing, and can even be pretty if you live out in the desert. Of course there's the blazing summer to think about, but you won't be that far away from higher ground there either.
As someone who makes a decent living doing the kind of work that towns with a population of 150 don't normally require, yet still can't afford to move out of the Oakland ghetto war zone without taking on extra roommates, I've considered heading to Vegas.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jul 25, 2003, 10:33 PM
Post #33 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: If being close to epic climbing is the most important thing to you than count this suggestion out. however if you really want to live in a great small town that is in some beutiful contry move to Arcata CA.
Yea, but the job outlook is pretty bleak, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
bandycoot
Jul 26, 2003, 12:21 AM
Post #34 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
Redding CA. Try to get a job with Yates :) It is where I'm from, and it is surrounded by absolutely beautiful country. I'm sure there is hidden climbing in the area that could be found and developed if you have the time/inclination, and there are good climbing areas in the mountains 1-2 hours away.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jul 26, 2003, 1:59 AM
Post #35 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
I think you may want to look at Palm Springs and the other Coachella Valley towns. They seem to meet all the stated criteria.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Aug 11, 2003, 5:53 PM
Post #36 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Hey, what are the down sides to Placerville?
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
tempestwind
Dec 20, 2004, 3:25 AM
Post #37 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 23, 2004
Posts: 133
|
In reply to: I can't believe someone would RECOMMEND living in Fresno. If Bakersfield is the armpit of the state, Fresno is just HELL. I wouldn't wish that on anyone who knew any better. >1. Inexpensive to live >2. Small town >3. Available work >4. Scenery - beautiful location >5. Close proximity to climbing This IS pretty funny. I've been on a search for that myself. I tried Mammoth and Bishop, but that knocks 1 & 3 out. Unless you're looking to drive everywhere, you can't have it all.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
gamehendge
Dec 20, 2004, 4:17 AM
Post #38 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 398
|
In reply to: In reply to: I may be moving to California soon, but I'm not sure where to live. My criteria in order of importance are; 1. Inexpensive to live 2. Small town 3. Available work 4. Scenery - beautiful location 5. Close proximity to climbing I visited a place called Ukiah, seemed nice, but looking for other places. Any ideas? Forgetabout Ukiah, checkout CLEAR LAKE, you'll love it! This destination should satisfy ALL your criterea: 1. Trailers are cheap dude! 2. Only you and yur cousins 3. Start up your very own meth lab! 4. Lakeside & Mountains 5. Climb at the Bear every day! Welcome to paridise!
I've been to Clear Lake once. Scaaaaarrrryyyy. It's where all the meth dealers and truckers own lakeside vacation homes. Plus there's a Adi Da cult headquarters located conveniently in the nearby mountain. :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
thomaskeefer
Dec 20, 2004, 6:03 AM
Post #40 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2002
Posts: 186
|
There is actually a really good place to live that meets all your criteria... It has some trade offs but not many and it is about 2hrs from Yosemite. Has cragging in town (diablo), plenty of culture (San Fran) and plenty of Work. It also has tract housing and the typical cali suburban feel that people for some reason dig.. It is called Antioch.
Look it up.. Not paradise by any stretch but you have what you need.
|
|
|
|
|
pk
Dec 20, 2004, 6:13 AM
Post #41 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 459
|
In reply to: How 'bout this...Vegas? It's not California, but it's the cheaper, has more jobs, is closer to climbing, and can even be pretty if you live out in the desert. Of course there's the blazing summer to think about, but you won't be that far away from higher ground there either. As someone who makes a decent living doing the kind of work that towns with a population of 150 don't normally require, yet still can't afford to move out of the Oakland ghetto war zone without taking on extra roommates, I've considered heading to Vegas.
I've been debating places to move for quite some time and decided on vegas!
I climb multi pitch trad and aid for the most part, sport when I want a pump. Vegas for me seems like the most resonable place to move for climbing, Red Rocks, Zion, VRG etc etc etc. for aid it's a bit far to yos but zion is only 2 hours away and the multi pitch trad in red rocks, well rocks.
P.K.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Dec 20, 2004, 4:20 PM
Post #42 of 42
(5967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Gamehendge gets the second place award for digging up an old, died-long-ago-and-has-been-discussed-to-death thread this week.
:wtf:
Ah, the nostalgia...I remember the good ol days when Enigma used to post. God I miss her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
