From the Access Fund:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 10, 2006

Contact:
Robb Shurr, Access Fund
robb@accessfund.org
303.545.6772 x100
Access Fund Condemns Delicate Arch, UT Climb

A recent ascent of Delicate Arch in Utah’s Arches National Park has fueled a firestorm of media coverage and interest from federal land managers, politicians and the climbing community. See Park tweaks rules after Delicate Arch climb in the May 10 edition of the SALT LAKE TRIBUNE (http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3804296). Many individuals—both climbers and non-climbers—have expressed outrage at this event, and the climb has received both statewide and national media attention.

The Access Fund does not condone the climb of Delicate Arch and the actions of this individual are not representative of the climbing community.

The Access Fund supports justifiable climbing restrictions which protect natural and cultural resources and works towards effective and reasonable climbing management policies is cooperation with land managers and the greater climbing community. This process of discussion limits unnecessary restrictions, results in climbing management policies based on mutual agreement, and helps to ensure cooperation and effective enforcement of climbing policies.

We trust the public will understand that the actions of one person should not condemn the larger community of climbers who are equally appalled by this event. The Access Fund urges all climbers to recognize and limit the impacts of their climbing practices on the environment and other users of the land and to respect existing closures. If questionable restrictions arise, climbing advocacy efforts opposing such unreasonable restrictions should follow proper administrative procedures.

Climbers pride ourselves on respect for the environment and the Access Fund’s stewardship efforts around the country speak directly to the greater climbing public taking responsibility for climbing resources.

On May 10, Access Fund policy director Jason Keith met with Arches National Park Supervisor Laura Joss to address these incidents as they relate to future climbing access in Arches National Park. At this meeting the Access Fund was told that while no immediate additional restrictions are planned, future climbing access in Arches and other national parks may be restricted as a result of the Delicate Arch incident. Utah’s US Congressional delegation has also weighed in but the possibility of additional restrictions is not known at this time.

"Plenty of negative press outside the climbing community."

I'll take your word for it, but, I just read through this list (posted above the above quote) and there is really nothing as critical as what is written on this thread; only one blanket condemnation.

Hasn't it been fifteen minutes already?

I guess he thinks it supports the patagonia 'dirtbag' badboy image .

My question is this: what makes a rock more beautiful than the next? Why should someone not be allowed to FREE SOLO - the purest form of climbing that is widely considered by the climbing community as a clean, responsible way of climbing - one rock formation that is in a national park, but be allowed to bolt the hell out of another rock formation that happens to be a little “off the map”? Why is delicate arch any more off limits than any other rock? Just because it’s more cool looking than the other rocks in the park?

You guys really need to get a life.

Fuk the police.

Thanks so much for showing us how well public education is preparing the leaders of tomorrow..

Adam

Thanks so much for showing us how well public education is preparing the leaders of tomorrow..

Adam

I agree with Dingus in this: I'm psyched that there are people like Potter out there pushing the limits. Pushing limits is what we all do as climbers, so I think he's a fair ambassador in that way.

I agree with others in this: I think the way he went about it was wrong. I don't know if he deserves to lose his job or not. I have no desire to influence that decision one way or another.

Here's my take on the whole situation: As climbers we need to balance our desire to "go for it" with our self-regulating instinct, or we'll take a bad fall. I think Dean Potter has taken a bad fall - he just may not know it.

GO

Honestly, idiots doing things like this are the reason that we have access problems.

Next time you see him tell him it was f'ed up. He knows it already...Trying to get him fired or his spnsorship canceled is F'ed up... Fine him $2000.00 or whatever figure would be appropraite. ( I have no idea how much those guys make??)
...something like that would be pretty normal I would say.

OK, I can't take it any more. The reason it is called "Delicate Arch":

The arch in question was originally called "Landscape Arch" becuase of it's dramatic position in front of an expansive desert. Another arch in the park was named "Delicate Arch" because it is very narrow (perhaps 3-4 feet), while covering a large (120ft?) span. This arch would never purposely be called "Landscape Arch" because the scenery is actually quite dull. Behind the arch is just a wall of red entrada sandstone...no landscape whatsoever. Sometime in the "olden days" a mapmaker screwed up a map, and switched the names of Landscape and Delicate Arch, so now we call Landscape Arch "Delicate Arch" and Delicate Arch "Landscape Arch".

Because of its distinctive shape, the arch was known as "the Chaps" and "the Schoolmarm's Bloomers" by local cowboys. It was given its current name by Frank Beckwith, leader of the Arches National Monument Scientific Expedition, who explored the area in the winter of 1933-1934. (The story that the names of Delicate Arch and Landscape Arch were inadvertently exchanged due to a signage mixup by the National Park Service is false.)

This is where I'm coming from too. The off with his head crowd, quien sabe, perhaps one day they'll be drinking their own koolaide for some stupid thing they did too. Not that I wish it on them either.

Sponsored athletes are on annual contracts. There is no guarantee it will be renewed automatically. That decision comes down to many factors including performance, behavior, exposure, etc. A company has to evaluate how and where it's limited advertising dollars are best spent.

In this case, a paid spokesperson has single-handedly managed to get an entire activity (dumb as it is) banned from a national park and focused negative attention on the brand. Perhaps when dangling from a string, you should think twice about cutting it.

Sponsored athletes are on annual contracts. There is no guarantee it will be renewed automatically. That decision comes down to many factors including performance, behavior, exposure, etc. A company has to evaluate how and where it's limited advertising dollars are best spent. In this case, a paid spokesperson has single-handedly managed to get an entire activity (dumb as it is) banned from a national park and focused negative attention on the brand. Perhaps when dangling from a string, you should think twice about cutting it.