Bogley

[rock_ski_cowboy]

moabfool wrote: I know it's been said, but there's no way he didn't leave a groove when he pulled his rope.

Unless he didn't pull his rope. Don't know what he did, but its possible that he set his rope such that after rappelling off carefully (tied off on the other side to someone), with a few huge shakes/waves up the rope, he coule flip it off one end of the arch or the other. Thus not having to pull or leave any sort of groove/rope mark.

Another feasible set up for not leaving any mark would be to anchor with the pull cord (the article mentions him taking one up with him) doubled through a ring or rapide that the rope (going over the other side of arch) is either tied to or doubled through, just off the pullcord side edge. Have the anchor person tie into both ends of the pull cord. He raps off the rope side. Once the rappel is completed, the pull cord is pulled. Since the ring is over the edge, no groovies. Once the pull cord is out, the weight of the rope would inevitably cause it to fall off the other side of the arch. Although there would be a little contact/friction across the top of the arch, it wouldn't be along any single line and no grooves would occur. If the rope didn't fall initially, a shake or tug would surely do the trick.

A little elaborate, hope that made sense.

Food for thought if you're ever rappelling an arch or fin and don't want to leave a groove.


Not that I approve of his actions or anything...

[Iceaxe]

Delicate Arch stunt will limit access for all climbers
Paul M. Jakus

A couple of years back the Outdoor Retailers Show threatened to leave Utah due to the state's perceived lack of support for the non-motorized recreation community. The retailers argued the state gave too much "weight" to motorized recreation in public lands management, an argument partially rooted in the belief that the motorized folks flouted regulations designed to limit user conflicts and damage to public lands.

Now we have Dean Potter, a non-motorized user of public lands, who decided to climb Delicate Arch in clear violation of the climbing regulations of Arches National Park. Yes, one of their own decided to violate the rules.

Or, should I say, "one of our own," for I am a climber of more than 30 years, and I am outraged by the indefensible actions of Mr. Potter.

Potter's statement that climbing Delicate Arch was not illegal is self-serving and disingenuous at best, and an outright lie at worst. Every climber understands that access to climbing resources on public land is governed by a climbing management plan. Prior to his climb the Arches National Park Web site specifically stated that all named arches on 7.5 minute USGS maps were off-limits to climbing.

In fact, all the climbing management plans in areas with such features have a similar statement.

Mr. Potter's actions demonstrate a blatant disregard for our sport's history. I remember the days when the number of climbers and the damage we caused was small. But the rapid growth of our community over the past three or four decades meant that we could no longer ignore the damage we caused ourselves and others.

In the 1970s climbers engaged in self-regulation as we moved from exclusive use of rock-scarring pitons to so-called "clean-climbing" techniques. With the advent of climbing management plans in the late 1980s and early 1990s, climbers banded together in regional and national organizations to negotiate with land managers about access issues. Such plans always designate the formations on which climbing is prohibited.

Over the past two decades we climbers have become acutely aware that the actions of one person could affect access for the community as a whole.

But along with the growth our sport came the opportunity to move up the social ladder from "dirtbag climber" to "professional climber." Mr. Potter is a professional climber paid in cash and kind by numerous outdoor equipment companies to have his exploits and photographs - sponsor's logo prominently displayed - published in outdoor magazines. Indeed, the announcement of Mr. Potter's ascent of Delicate Arch came from his sponsor, Patagonia. To maintain sponsorship, a professional climber must stay in the public eye, something for which Mr. Potter is apparently richly gifted.

About a month ago Mr. Potter's "slackline" stunt on The Three Gossips (similar to a tight-rope walk between rock spires) caught the eye of climbers and the National Park Service. Less than a week later, all slacklining in Arches was banned. And now Mr. Potter has climbed Delicate Arch, apparently hoping to profit from an action that puts climbing access to Arches at risk to all climbers.

Let's face it: The easiest management policy is an absolute ban on all climbing. Such a policy would be so simple that even Dean Potter could understand it, yet would punish the rest of us.

All of which brings us back to the Outdoor Retailers Show. The companies that participate in this trade show must band together on behalf of all climbers and condemn the actions of Mr. Potter and the complicity of Patagonia. His actions are clearly motivated by sponsorship, and his sponsors should show respect for other climbers by immediately terminating their relationship with Potter.

Only if we, as a community of climbers and equipment manufacturers, assure land managers that we can engage in self-regulation and self-censure will these same managers allow us access for enjoyment by all.
---
Paul M. Jakus is a professor in the Department of Economics at Utah State University.

.

[mra243]

An email I received from Patagonia in response to an email I sent them:

Hello,

Thank you for writing us with your concerns. Patagonia ambassador Dean
Potter's May 7 free solo of Delicate Arch has generated significant
controversy about the legality and appropriateness of the climb of what has
been described as a national icon. We'll be interested to follow the
controversy and to listen to views of those on both sides.

A few facts are in order. First, no crime has been committed. The National
Park Service has conceded that its regulations were ambiguous and that they
will not cite Dean for the ascent. They have said they will seek to clarify
their regulations to prevent a second try. The Park and a number of opinion
leaders have argued that Delicate Arch is an icon that should not be
climbed.

It is important to note that Dean did no harm to the route or to the rock.
He free-soloed the arch, placing no anchors and creating no impact beyond
blowing dust off the holds. As he says, "No one reveres rocks more than me.
I consider all rocks sacred, as do most climbers."

Dean, like all Patagonia ambassadors, undertakes his own climbs on his own
terms. He told us about the climb afterward.

We have taken positions in the past on a number of issues of climbing
ethics, including bolting. We take no position on this one. As Casey
Sheahan, our CEO, notes, "From the early days in the Tetons to the
rebelliousness of Yosemite's Camp 4, every generation of climbers has had
its run-ins with government regulations that attempt to restrict climber's
freedom of expression. At Patagonia we don't control the ways our sponsored
athletes conduct themselves except to encourage respect for the environment
and uncommon approaches to every challenge. Dean is at the pinnacle of free
solo climbing, makes decisions for himself, and has our complete support."

Again, we thank you for your time and your opinion.

Patagonia

[moabfool]

mra243 wrote: An email I received from Patagonia in response to an email I sent them:

(Body of letter removed. See above.)

That has got to be some of the finest corporate double speak I've ever heard. One of the greatest non-appologies of all time. They might as well have said "We seriously doubt this will effect our bottom line, and Dean Potter has made us a truck load of money in the past, so he can do whatever he wants with our blessing."

I'd say that I plan to boycott Patigonia, but I've never bought any of their products, so the point is moot. I certainly will think of other manufacturers first when making equipment decisions.

[Iceaxe]

mra243 wrote: An email I received from Patagonia in response to an email I sent them:

Hey, that is the exact same letter I received. And here I thought I was special :lol8:

Guess I won't be buying anymore of Patagonia's over-priced clothing :2thumbs:

.

[FlyfishermanMike]

The man is a weasel. Free soloists that gather a group and have a film crew are doing it for the wrong reasons. I couldn't think of anything more satisfying than free soloing something and then never telling anyone. Even if the law was poorly written it was still written with the intent that no one climbs of named arches. The fact that he would disrespect the people in charge of taking card of the land just shows how much he doesn't care about anything other than himself. That letter from Patagonia was a laugh.

^^ike

[RedMan]

Frankly I am not the least bit amazed.

For years I have enjoyed both motorized and non-motorized use of the outdoors, catching flack about my motorized uses all along the way.

I have always argued that the "Idiot factor" knows no boundry while everyone regularly pretends that as long as no motor is involved then no harm is being done to the environment.

This proves my point. Simply because you don't own a motor does not keep you from being an idiot. And owning a motor does not make you an idiot. And being an idiot does not keep you from going outdoors and creating problems for the rest of us.

Thanks to this jackass we now have new and more rigid regulations. Why do people insist on forcing the governments hand? He knew it was wrong and did it simply because he knew he could get away with it legally. He probably also knew he would be the last because the regs would be tightened aftewards.

What an SOB, he should be banned from leaving his house.

[PunchKing]

Here is an article from Outside magazine. This article points out that it did in fact damage the arch. If it makes it any better it does say that no damage can be seen with the naked eye but there are photographs showing the damage.

http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200606/dean-potter-delicate-arch-climb-1.html

I hope this produces one heck of a video.

[Iceaxe]

"I just blew the dust off"..... my ass....

I believe several members of this forum predicted the arch would suffer rope grooves. Potters a dumbass.......

[PunchKing]

Yo here is a "wicked" video showing the parts of the ascent.

Fox News Story

[moabfool]

Stolen from Outside Mag:

At first, Potter refused to talk about the Delicate Arch incident when Outside contacted him in Yosemite over Memorial Day weekend. The next day he called back, saying he had not been pressured to speak on the record by Patagonia. He apologized—sort of—saying that he was "sorry that all this negativity has arisen from such a beautiful communion with nature," that he should be allowed to take pictures of his exploits just like everybody else, and that, at the time, he saw "no reason legally or morally" that he shouldn't have climbed the arch.

"The voice of the community is important to me," he said. "My views are not concrete. I'm open to change." In a private e-mail exchange among colleagues, Potter also said climbing the arch represented his "freedom of expression."

I think I'll use my "freedom of expression" this weekend and go dynamite Lost Arrow Spire. I guarantee that ol' Dean-o Pot(head) would be pissed if somebody did that. Of course I'm kidding. Seriously, everybody at the ATF, FBI, CIA, NSA, NPS, Dept. of Homeland Security, and the ASPCA can go back to DEFCON 2 (or wherever it was before they read this message). I'm just making a point that the whole "freedom of expression" thing is not an excuse for all behavior. "Beautiful communion with nature?" Bull! It's nothing but arrogance to think that he's the only person in the world who gets to "commune" that way. "...No reason legally or morally..." to not climb the arch? Clearly Mr. Potter has a very myopic view of legality and morality in this situation. Who does he think he is, the King of Town?

http://www.homestarrunner.com/vcr_kot.html

[Sombeech]

It must have been his freedom of expression to have a cameraman climb it also, so he could be filmed coming up.

What would happen if people expressed their feelings by punching him? Is that a freedom of expression?

[Iceaxe]

Foolish young man...... Potter should just own up to the fact that he pulled a dumbass stunt and then all would probably be forgotten...... instead he continues to dig himself a deeper grave.......

First he claims he didn't know, yeah right, every noob in the state knew Delicate Arch was off limits. Next he claims a free solo, and then admits a rope was used to practice the moves. Next he claims a first ascent, when every arch bagger in the state knew it had been done. Now he is trying to blame the NPS for its regulations..... This fool is causing nothing but headaches for future climbers in the NPS.

Hey Potter..... it's time to "man up", come clean and say your sorry's......


Controversy surrounds possible damage in rock climber's arch ascent
Climber might have damaged arch
By Christopher Smart
The Salt Lake Tribune

Grooves near the top of Delicate Arch appear to be caused by climbing ropes. A story on Outside magazine's Web site speculates that Dean Potter may have caused the damage during his controversial May 7 ascent of the sandstone icon.

Dean Potter may be done climbing Delicate Arch, but he hasn't finished wading through the criticism unleashed by the much ballyhooed "free solo" ascent.

The man who claimed to be the first to climb the southeast Utah sandstone arch without ropes came under increased scrutiny again this week after Outside magazine alleged in an online feature story that Potter did, in fact, employ ropes. And the magazine hinted that he might have damaged the Utah icon.

In an interview with The Salt Lake Tribune on Friday, Potter conceded that photographers accompanying him used ropes - but he denied allegations that rope scars on the sandstone formation were left by his party.

"I have climbed for 18 years and know how to climb rock in the most environmentally sensitive way," he said when confronted with the magazine's allegations. "We did have a rope up there, but we positioned it in a crack, and the rope was padded with my jacket."

In the Outside story titled "How Delicate Was Dean?" - it appears only on its Web site, http://outside.away.com - writer Tim Neville explains that before Potter attempted the free ascent, he practiced the climb using ropes.

"He rehearsed the moves first with protection from a top rope draped over the formation," the story said, relating eyewitness accounts. "[T]here's even a chance Potter did permanent damage to Delicate Arch's famously soft sandstone."

Magazine Editorial Director Alex Heard said in an interview that his magazine launched its investigation after letters came pouring in, even though Outside had yet to write about it. Those responses were running nine to one against Potter's climb.

"There were a couple of things that I wasn't seeing answered," he said Friday. "The main one was: Was there any damage up there?"

The magazine hired a photographer with powerful telephoto lenses to take a visual inventory of the sandstone surfaces. Those images "identified three distinct grooves worn by rope into the sandstone," the article said.

Despite earlier statements, Potter now says at least two other men ascended Delicate Arch before he did.

On May 7 after his climb, the climber had told The Tribune he was the first to make the ascent without ropes.

"I'm definitely the first person who's ever free-climbed it," he said at the time. "When I got up there, there was really no sign of anything, and I've found no record [of anyone else climbing it]."

But on Friday, Potter said he has subsequently learned that two other men had said they climbed Delicate Arch. Any damage to the sandstone could have come from them, he said.

A National Park Service investigation is ongoing, according to Arches Superintendent Laura Joss.

"We are taking this very seriously and are investigating all aspects of it," she said. "Delicate Arch is a Utah icon but is also revered by the whole country."

Investigators are aware that photographers were on the arch with Potter, Joss said.

"Because of the angle of the video, we could tell at least one person was above him."

Shortly after Potter's ascent, Park Service officials strengthened regulations aimed at keeping climbers off all named arches in the park. The new rules have angered many in the climbing community, according to Outside.

Potter said that should be the real issue.

"The National Park Service continues to limit environmentally minded user groups without talking to the public."

"I do regret the negativity that surrounds this climb," Potter said.

"But if it opens people's eyes to the diminishing use of the parks, then the negativity will be worth it."

[Richard Barron]

When Abby and I got married at Delicate Arch ( http://richardbarron.net/wedding/ ), we followed both the letter and the spirit of the law. We tried to keep our ceremony brief and simple, with respect to whomever might there, and to the place itself. The Park Service required us to have a Special Use Permit, which we did, and that permit spells out how we should conduct ourselves.

When I showed Abby the article about Dean Potter's stunt, she was appalled. There are so many cool places to climb in Utah. The only reason to climb Delicate Arch is to be the absolute center of attention. Potter is a four-year-old. And don't even get me started about the Michael Fatali Delicate Arch incident.

I'd also like to add that the bickering that goes on at the arch at sunset is inexcusable. If you've come to take pictures as the sun goes down, realize that the park belongs to all of us, including anyone who might want to pose in front of it. Just be quiet and enjoy the moment.

-Richard

[Sombeech]

Richard Barron wrote: I'd also like to add that the bickering that goes on at the arch at sunset is inexcusable. If you've come to take pictures as the sun goes down, realize that the park belongs to all of us, including anyone who might want to pose in front of it. Just be quiet and enjoy the moment.

-Richard

Interesting. Is this quite the gathering place at sunset for pictures? If it is, I could imagine everybody trying to "get their shot" before the sun goes down.

Is there conflict that arises here?