Mob tourism: If you tell them, they will come

Re: “Alternatives to Colorado’s high country leaves will spare your sanity,” Oct. 6 commentary and “Herman Gulch, alpine glory at the Continental Divide,” Sept. 29 feature story

I am writing regarding Krista Kafer’s commentary on “Autumn Tourists” last Sunday and on periodic Denver Post articles on places to go outdoors. I think The Post should start a series entitled “Now that we’ve screwed up these places by publicizing them, here are new places to trash in the coming years.”

For example, a recent article on Herman Gulch is going to exacerbate a growing problem there. My sister, who lives in Denver, now tells me that trailhead, which is one we used to use before it got so jammed, now on weekends has cars flooding the parking lot and lining up along the on and off ramps back almost to the interstate. Imagine the quality of the hiking experience.

Kafer’s article encapsulates the problem – after advertising all the cool places to go look at leaves, the complaint now is that all the “tourons” are taking up the suggestion. And now she is suggesting that new places to screw up, such as those in southeast Wyoming. Thanks. May all your trips outdoors be as terrible as the ones you are creating for others.

Reg. Rothwell, Cheyenne, Wyo.

Re: “Mountain drivers frustrated with traffic because of leaf-peeping ‘ding dongs,” Oct. 3 news story

We were one of the hundreds that got caught in the massive traffic jam on Guenella Pass last weekend. I read the article about Clear Creek County only having a small force and that they can not tow away illegally parked cars.

Now that everyone is aware of the county’s problem, do you think that is going to prevent this from happening again next year?

It’s time for the county to begin planning what they will do to keep the inconsiderate ding-dongs, as you have stated, from parking where they shouldn’t when the leaves turn golden next year. Oh, and by the way, let’s not forget the mountain of doggy (poop) bags that the ding-dongs left behind.

Chris Jimroglou, Centennial

Relationship ban should extend beyond tenured professors

Re: “CU should prohibit sexual relationships between students and professors,” Oct. 6 editorial

After this lengthy and worthy piece on the possibilities of sexual pressure by those in positions of influence at CU’s campus and an across-the-board need for change, the editorial ends with this, a very specific, “policy on amorous relationships must prohibit tenured faculty from pursuing and having sex with anyone enrolled as a student at the university.” Just “tenured faculty?” It seems like a very specific identification for what is described as a much broader issue than that!



Source link

By admin

Malcare WordPress Security