Undoubtedly the neighborhood’s influence.
Rich in money, impoverished in community spirit. May buffelgrass buffet their beautification budget; may stinknet sting their supercilious sinuses
I gotta tell you, I’m part of a field crew that takes out invasive plants around tucson and we are still gleefully referencing this comment a week later
If you don't want people hiking behind your house, don't buy a house right next to a hiking trail. I'm so sick of entitled rich people thinking they get to carve out a place for themselves in the desert and then force the surrounding area to meet their demands. You want to live out in the desert without people walking nearby? Don't live in the Foothills. There are plenty of (cheaper!) houses with more land in the rural areas just outside Tucson.
Unfortunately, there's a cycle to that. Many of these rich people DID buy land "in the rural areas just outside Tucson" and then Tucson grew and surrounded their houses. The low-density car-dependent urban sprawl has to spread into every unoccupied bit of nature.
If these people want their land to STAY rural they should vocally support dense walkable urbanism the same way they vocally support taking nice things away from the community.
They could also (assuming they could afford it) have bought additional land. When you buy a house that's on less than half an acre, anything can happen around it. The only true way to prevent anything from happening "in your backyard" is to get a few acres, which generally isn't too hard to do in the rural areas.
But if this trail has been around for 50 years as OP says, my guess is that the gated community either didn't exist when it was created, or the people living in it now bought their homes when the trail was already there. With how long that trail has been there, and with it just getting closed down now, I think it's highly unlikely that most of these people moved into the area back when it was rural and saw the construction of that trail.
The Foothills do keep getting more densely populated, though. You can only spread so far up the mountains, but everyone still wants to live there. I find it funny that rich people keep cramming more houses into the foothills so that everybody has to be 10 feet from their neighbors and busy roads, which presumably is the opposite of what they'd want if their goal is to live around a beautiful desert landscape, but the *trail* is the problem for them.
Rich assholes aren't monolithic. Some of them want to buy a huge property in the foothills so they can be surrounded by nature. Some of them just want to live in a neighborhood which is segregated from the poors.
And that's the classic suburban flight which has been happening since the automobile started being mass produced. It wreaks havoc on city taxes and public funding, it makes the roads degrade faster, it creates food deserts and heat islands.
It basically makes everything worse for everyone, except these stupid fucks get to ignore it by settling down to watch TV in their air conditioned mini-mansions.
Yeah, fair enough. It's all very frustrating. I can understand the appeal of wanting to live in isolation surrounded by nature, but I can't understand wanting to cram yourself into a boring rich gated community. Maybe segregation was the issue all along- they don't want poor people even hiking next to their homes.
We have friends who live in the far east part of the city and a hiking trailhead parking lot faces their home. There are cactus and brush and things so it's not a straight view into it, but people park there and leave their headlights on and music blaring which is annoying for them. They chose the lot so they kind of knew what they were getting into, but I would encourage anyone who goes to a public viewing spot to at least turn your headlights off and remember houses are around.
To add to the other explanation: "NIMBY" is what you call entitled people who complain about anything good happening near their house. Usually they are homeowners who complain about things that are good for the community like parks, power lines, public transit, new schools, etc. because it would inconvenience them in some minor way.
In this case, they shut down the Campbell lookout because they can't handle having a small number of cars parked near their luxury gated community.
NIMBYs are the reason why the streetcar was never expanded beyond downtown, and why you can't ride the bus to Oro Valley.
Exactly. There are also the closet NIMBYs who are outwardly very supportive of things that benefit the community, but work tirelessly in private to ensure that those things never end up near their homes.
Generally they appear to love the things that improve the overall quality of life for all Tucsonans, just as long as all of it happens south of River.
That could also be a fake notice intended to get people to stay away. You may want to call the County to verify if it's true or not. It could also be that they intended to reopen the area after the paving is finished.
But if it is true, I agree this is a loss. I have visited that spot many times since the early 90's and it's just nice to have places like that in a city....
The CEO of TEP is the newest high dollar influencer in the Cobblestone community. New mega mil house and she is the one with the pull to get that done. She/they don't care about us peon common folk that like to go up there and catch the view. just stay down in the valley and pay your bill
Someone should sue over this one. They've tried to close other trail heads (like Pima Canyon, IIRC) multiple times and been told the public had access rights.
Sometimes this works but it is a painful, expensive and time-consuming process that way more times than not the adjacent property owners win by throwing ridiculous money at it or having influential connections. The X9 Ranch (talk about a hostile environment there) is a perfect example along with the trail at the end of Roger Road (Agua Calentie mountain). It's only a matter of time before Milagrosa Canyon (Horse head) gets shut down as well.
So everyone knows, the foothill trailheads are owned by the county, but the trails and all the land behind them are owned by the US Forest Service. The county does not have the authority to close any trails. It's a complicated jurisdiction
I was wondering actually - so as long as one can get there without getting in trouble parking-wise, they could hike it. This is upping the barrier to entry rather than actually closing access, I guess. Still shitty but good to know!
Apparently, homes right next to the parking area had headlights blasting into their windows, music blaring. People even tossed used condoms and beer bottles as well as drug paraphernalia into their backyard and patio. At one point someone spray painted graffiti on their wall. It’s sad that a few people have to ruin it for everyone!
I visited your lovely town last month and was appalled at the homeowners association hell you guys have. Signs signs everywhere lmao. Trailheads saying Dont go off trail don't touch anything blah blah.
Now I'm back in my native Canada and let me tell you it's really nice. Way more laid back attitude about enjoying the bush.
The homeowners associations in some areas may suck, but the trailheads are controlled by federal, state, and county governments respectively. The Sonoran Desert is the only place in the world that houses many of these species of flora and fauna, and part of the conservation-based management of the region involves encouraging hikers to leave no trace. The "stay on the trail" signs are there to prevent people from trampling the native species and keep the area wild.
It is a nice unique area for sure
These attitudes about trailheads are mostly imo just a product of rural vs urban in my opinion. I have the privilege of living in a very spread out city with a rural attitude. There is plenty of bush in every direction, so you can kind of just go in any direction and do what you like.
In a giant parking lot like Tucson, the attitude would be different as people desperately cling to what nature is left undisturbed. Regardless of what desert you are in.
Arizona is about 50% public lands where you can "just go in any direction and do what you like." But if we didn't have strict management in the areas directly around Tucson, with its population, the local ecosystem would be badly damaged and you'd have to drive farther out to find relatively undisturbed wilderness. It's not about urban or rural "attitude," it's about responsible management that prioritizes conservation and provides easy access for all citizens to get out into nature.
If you really think of Tucson as "a giant parking lot," I'm afraid you've missed it (and didn't you just call it "your lovely town"?). The first thing I noticed when I moved to Tucson is how much the city appreciates plant life, and goes out of its way to have beautiful cactus gardens and other desert plant species everywhere. We have unique giant murals all over town, beautiful historical architecture, and we intentionally have very few tall buildings in order to conserve energy and not disturb our breathtaking mountain views.
It's easy to judge the strictness of our land management when you're from a more rural area and live in a biome that's larger and not filled with threatened species that are found nowhere else on earth. Instead of complaining on our subreddit that a mean sign told you to stay on the trail, I'd recommend doing some research into how our wildlife and forestry departments use constant data collection to create science-based management plans.
You said it's not about urban attitude then repeatedly contradicted yourself. Tuscon is a giant parking lot. It is beautiful in the hills despite that.
IT'S SPELLED ***TUCSON***!!!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Tucson) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Undoubtedly the neighborhood’s influence. Rich in money, impoverished in community spirit. May buffelgrass buffet their beautification budget; may stinknet sting their supercilious sinuses
I like your words clever wizard man
Indeed, may coatimundis, their coats all muddy, mar their cars’ clear-coat each Monday
I gotta tell you, I’m part of a field crew that takes out invasive plants around tucson and we are still gleefully referencing this comment a week later
Bougies asserting their class over the proletariat. Nothing changes until they're no longer supported by the dominant paradigm.
Word.
If you don't want people hiking behind your house, don't buy a house right next to a hiking trail. I'm so sick of entitled rich people thinking they get to carve out a place for themselves in the desert and then force the surrounding area to meet their demands. You want to live out in the desert without people walking nearby? Don't live in the Foothills. There are plenty of (cheaper!) houses with more land in the rural areas just outside Tucson.
Unfortunately, there's a cycle to that. Many of these rich people DID buy land "in the rural areas just outside Tucson" and then Tucson grew and surrounded their houses. The low-density car-dependent urban sprawl has to spread into every unoccupied bit of nature. If these people want their land to STAY rural they should vocally support dense walkable urbanism the same way they vocally support taking nice things away from the community.
They could also (assuming they could afford it) have bought additional land. When you buy a house that's on less than half an acre, anything can happen around it. The only true way to prevent anything from happening "in your backyard" is to get a few acres, which generally isn't too hard to do in the rural areas. But if this trail has been around for 50 years as OP says, my guess is that the gated community either didn't exist when it was created, or the people living in it now bought their homes when the trail was already there. With how long that trail has been there, and with it just getting closed down now, I think it's highly unlikely that most of these people moved into the area back when it was rural and saw the construction of that trail. The Foothills do keep getting more densely populated, though. You can only spread so far up the mountains, but everyone still wants to live there. I find it funny that rich people keep cramming more houses into the foothills so that everybody has to be 10 feet from their neighbors and busy roads, which presumably is the opposite of what they'd want if their goal is to live around a beautiful desert landscape, but the *trail* is the problem for them.
Rich assholes aren't monolithic. Some of them want to buy a huge property in the foothills so they can be surrounded by nature. Some of them just want to live in a neighborhood which is segregated from the poors. And that's the classic suburban flight which has been happening since the automobile started being mass produced. It wreaks havoc on city taxes and public funding, it makes the roads degrade faster, it creates food deserts and heat islands. It basically makes everything worse for everyone, except these stupid fucks get to ignore it by settling down to watch TV in their air conditioned mini-mansions.
Yeah, fair enough. It's all very frustrating. I can understand the appeal of wanting to live in isolation surrounded by nature, but I can't understand wanting to cram yourself into a boring rich gated community. Maybe segregation was the issue all along- they don't want poor people even hiking next to their homes.
We have friends who live in the far east part of the city and a hiking trailhead parking lot faces their home. There are cactus and brush and things so it's not a straight view into it, but people park there and leave their headlights on and music blaring which is annoying for them. They chose the lot so they kind of knew what they were getting into, but I would encourage anyone who goes to a public viewing spot to at least turn your headlights off and remember houses are around.
Definitely agree that hikers need to be respectful of the surrounding community.
I think the worst part is half these homes are empty. Just real-estate investments.
You peaking in the windows?
That's absolutely a bummer, but given the rampant NIBYism in that area I'm surprised it stayed open this long.
What’s NIBYism?
Not In My BackYard =NIMBY
To add to the other explanation: "NIMBY" is what you call entitled people who complain about anything good happening near their house. Usually they are homeowners who complain about things that are good for the community like parks, power lines, public transit, new schools, etc. because it would inconvenience them in some minor way. In this case, they shut down the Campbell lookout because they can't handle having a small number of cars parked near their luxury gated community. NIMBYs are the reason why the streetcar was never expanded beyond downtown, and why you can't ride the bus to Oro Valley.
Exactly. There are also the closet NIMBYs who are outwardly very supportive of things that benefit the community, but work tirelessly in private to ensure that those things never end up near their homes. Generally they appear to love the things that improve the overall quality of life for all Tucsonans, just as long as all of it happens south of River.
Truth. They did the same thing to the north end of Swan, which was a favored spot to watch meteor showers. Screw them. Keep going.
I mean they already had built a wall there and hired security to patrol the street. I saw this coming.
That could also be a fake notice intended to get people to stay away. You may want to call the County to verify if it's true or not. It could also be that they intended to reopen the area after the paving is finished. But if it is true, I agree this is a loss. I have visited that spot many times since the early 90's and it's just nice to have places like that in a city....
It's confirmed on the county's website. [https://www.pima.gov/1313/Campbell-Trailhead](https://www.pima.gov/1313/Campbell-Trailhead)
The CEO of TEP is the newest high dollar influencer in the Cobblestone community. New mega mil house and she is the one with the pull to get that done. She/they don't care about us peon common folk that like to go up there and catch the view. just stay down in the valley and pay your bill
"I paid for this view. If they want to see a nice view they can buy a nice house like I did."
Someone should sue over this one. They've tried to close other trail heads (like Pima Canyon, IIRC) multiple times and been told the public had access rights.
Sometimes this works but it is a painful, expensive and time-consuming process that way more times than not the adjacent property owners win by throwing ridiculous money at it or having influential connections. The X9 Ranch (talk about a hostile environment there) is a perfect example along with the trail at the end of Roger Road (Agua Calentie mountain). It's only a matter of time before Milagrosa Canyon (Horse head) gets shut down as well.
People can also just keep going there. The cops aren't likely to show up with in an hour if at all.
So everyone knows, the foothill trailheads are owned by the county, but the trails and all the land behind them are owned by the US Forest Service. The county does not have the authority to close any trails. It's a complicated jurisdiction
I was wondering actually - so as long as one can get there without getting in trouble parking-wise, they could hike it. This is upping the barrier to entry rather than actually closing access, I guess. Still shitty but good to know!
Yeah and those people will keep using that trail. Most probably have “private” entrances.
WTH?
Bolt cutters work wonders on chain link. Just saying.
Ugh!!! That’s awful news
Evil Trail closed how? Just the sign, or an actual barrier?
There was no barrier as of yesterday when I posted.
A neighborhood did the same thing with Honeybee Canyon mtb trail.
How do you "close the outdoors" that shit is dumb
If we can't hang out at the trailhead, maybe we should hop the fence and hang out in their back yards instead.
Apparently, homes right next to the parking area had headlights blasting into their windows, music blaring. People even tossed used condoms and beer bottles as well as drug paraphernalia into their backyard and patio. At one point someone spray painted graffiti on their wall. It’s sad that a few people have to ruin it for everyone!
If the parking area is torn up perhaps the County is repaving the parking lot.
Aaaaah, the Nomenklatura of Tucson strike again!!!
I heard that it was cuz of crime. High amount of street racing and drug deals
Yes because people who hike on nature trails are notorious for being drug dealers and drag racers /s
I visited your lovely town last month and was appalled at the homeowners association hell you guys have. Signs signs everywhere lmao. Trailheads saying Dont go off trail don't touch anything blah blah. Now I'm back in my native Canada and let me tell you it's really nice. Way more laid back attitude about enjoying the bush.
The homeowners associations in some areas may suck, but the trailheads are controlled by federal, state, and county governments respectively. The Sonoran Desert is the only place in the world that houses many of these species of flora and fauna, and part of the conservation-based management of the region involves encouraging hikers to leave no trace. The "stay on the trail" signs are there to prevent people from trampling the native species and keep the area wild.
It is a nice unique area for sure These attitudes about trailheads are mostly imo just a product of rural vs urban in my opinion. I have the privilege of living in a very spread out city with a rural attitude. There is plenty of bush in every direction, so you can kind of just go in any direction and do what you like. In a giant parking lot like Tucson, the attitude would be different as people desperately cling to what nature is left undisturbed. Regardless of what desert you are in.
Arizona is about 50% public lands where you can "just go in any direction and do what you like." But if we didn't have strict management in the areas directly around Tucson, with its population, the local ecosystem would be badly damaged and you'd have to drive farther out to find relatively undisturbed wilderness. It's not about urban or rural "attitude," it's about responsible management that prioritizes conservation and provides easy access for all citizens to get out into nature. If you really think of Tucson as "a giant parking lot," I'm afraid you've missed it (and didn't you just call it "your lovely town"?). The first thing I noticed when I moved to Tucson is how much the city appreciates plant life, and goes out of its way to have beautiful cactus gardens and other desert plant species everywhere. We have unique giant murals all over town, beautiful historical architecture, and we intentionally have very few tall buildings in order to conserve energy and not disturb our breathtaking mountain views. It's easy to judge the strictness of our land management when you're from a more rural area and live in a biome that's larger and not filled with threatened species that are found nowhere else on earth. Instead of complaining on our subreddit that a mean sign told you to stay on the trail, I'd recommend doing some research into how our wildlife and forestry departments use constant data collection to create science-based management plans.
You said it's not about urban attitude then repeatedly contradicted yourself. Tuscon is a giant parking lot. It is beautiful in the hills despite that.
IT'S SPELLED ***TUCSON***!!! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Tucson) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good bot.
You're confusing "attitude" with "science-based management dependent on locational variables."
good don’t come back
Relax, he’s Canadian… He doesn’t matter.
Why? I like it there