Well, I suppose it had to be done someday! Here's an article from the Salt Lake Tribune telling of a guy who free climbed Delicate Arch this past Sunday. Needless to say, park officials aren't too amused.
I'm not trying to start anything heated here! Just thought that this might be of interest to the dozens of us who have shot this icon location. Thoughts?
Rules are rules, as far as I'm concerned. I'm all for rock climbing, and there's plenty of it in Arches. If he feels that he should be allowed to climb Delicate Arch, then he should try to get the rules changed, rather than fragrantly break them.
Thank God they don't allow climbing on this arch. It's hard enough to get a shot off as it is, without including fellow tourists. Not much more to say really, other than he's obviously following a different set of rules. Too bad. Stupid publicity stunt, obviously. If he really wanted to "join nature" and simply climb a beatiful feature, he could have just done it and not said a word.
I can't believe he slacklined the Three Gossips. Now that's insane. He's quite a character, from what I've read. Next, he'll try walking across Landscape Arch.
The park considers this clearly against their regulations, but apparently there are no penalties for violating the rules? I'm amazed that Patagonia would even consider associating their name with this!
Bill, I was surprised they didn't mention any penalty either. Maybe something will be forthcoming. It also wouldn't surprise me if it hadn't already been stealth free climbed in the past, this is just the first publicized one. Who knows!
Rene - I'm in, that would be quite a view down from the underside wouldn't it! Actually, I am totally against this. As much as I am disappointed sometimes because of restrictions on where and when I can go places when pursuing my outdoor endeavors, I realize the National Park Service and other agencies that establish these rules have to find a balance between public use and preservation. If they have determined that climbing shouldn't be allowed on the named Arches they likely have done so for good reason. I do my best to respect these types of rules because I understand that the Park Service, as well as us, are the stewards of these wonderful places so many of us enjoy.
I suppose I understand his motivation from the rock climber's perspective (I myself climb occassionally), but rules are rules. There are plenty (an understatement) of other places to climb both in Arches and the Moab area. Some areas are, and should be, off limits.
Who are we to gloat. We are next. We have those dangerous tripods and cameras.
Did you notice in the 2nd article in the Salt Lake Tribune, that it evidently wasn't against
the law at the time he did it? The 2nd article says that they made it illegal on May 9, 2006.
It sounds like the Park service could have done a better job of making the rules better known. I'll give Mr. Potter the benefit of the doubt in this case, and in reality the publicity should be enough to make sure that everyone is now aware of the rules. As far as we know he may not have even been the 1st person to climb the arch anyway, Moab was far less visited in the 60's and 70's and someone may have tried without the park service being the wiser -- I have a hard time believing he was the 1ST to try it. Climbers do a lot to protect wild areas, case in point Castle Valley. Some climbers are real putzes, but I think as a whole they are just as interested in protecting the evironments they enjoy as photogrpahers. Beside, I couldn't imagine a place like Yosemite without climbers
Don't know who or why, but last month I photographed five guys on top of the gossips. They rigged tight lines between them and looked as though they were about to string a banner. One was packing a pretty substantial video camera and documenting it all from on top and Earth Day was close at hand, so I smelled a stunt.
Lotsa red flashing lights, so the party seemed to be getting what they wanted.
I'm on the road, but can post photos when I get home in a couple of weeks.
I imagine its called "Delicate" Arch for a reason. I'd be pissed if some knucklehead damaged it by climbing on it.
This clown is just as bad as the photographer (I forget his name) who set a fire under an arch...
"It sounds like the Park service could have done a better job of making the rules better known. I'll give Mr. Potter the benefit of the doubt in this case,"
I don't know, I've only been there once (three weeks ago) but the rules against climbing named features on USGS maps (which Delicate is) are stated on numerous signs throughout the park, in the park map/brochure, in the climbing regulations, anywhere climbing is mentioned in park literature, in the local guides, and I heard three different rangers in two different places state such (and I wasn't even asking or trying to get information on it). And this guy is supposed to be semi-local. I'd give him the benefit if I thought there was any doubt.
Plus, his little commentary there at the end of the article gives me no sympathy for him at all. He did more than blow dust off, and even if he didn't, the rules are there because those features couldn't stand up to everybody doing it (the trails across slickrock are quite apparent even without cairns). Why should he get to when nobody else can?
Discussion
15 repliesI'm not trying to start anything heated here! Just thought that this might be of interest to the dozens of us who have shot this icon location. Thoughts?
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3800468
I can't believe he slacklined the Three Gossips. Now that's insane. He's quite a character, from what I've read. Next, he'll try walking across Landscape Arch.
Ken
BTW - Planning to put up a new route up the underside of Landscape Arch. Looking for a climbing partner – who wants it??
Did you notice in the 2nd article in the Salt Lake Tribune, that it evidently wasn't against
the law at the time he did it? The 2nd article says that they made it illegal on May 9, 2006.
Art Lund
Don't know who or why, but last month I photographed five guys on top of the gossips. They rigged tight lines between them and looked as though they were about to string a banner. One was packing a pretty substantial video camera and documenting it all from on top and Earth Day was close at hand, so I smelled a stunt.
Lotsa red flashing lights, so the party seemed to be getting what they wanted.
I'm on the road, but can post photos when I get home in a couple of weeks.
This clown is just as bad as the photographer (I forget his name) who set a fire under an arch...
I don't know, I've only been there once (three weeks ago) but the rules against climbing named features on USGS maps (which Delicate is) are stated on numerous signs throughout the park, in the park map/brochure, in the climbing regulations, anywhere climbing is mentioned in park literature, in the local guides, and I heard three different rangers in two different places state such (and I wasn't even asking or trying to get information on it). And this guy is supposed to be semi-local. I'd give him the benefit if I thought there was any doubt.
Plus, his little commentary there at the end of the article gives me no sympathy for him at all. He did more than blow dust off, and even if he didn't, the rules are there because those features couldn't stand up to everybody doing it (the trails across slickrock are quite apparent even without cairns). Why should he get to when nobody else can?