On Sunday morning Dean Potter made what is most likely the first modern ascent of Utah's Delicate Arch. He free soloed the arch a number of times in the early hours of the day. He did use white chalk.


What is your opinion of this?

rape the land--under any guise. Obscene.

Is the issue that he climbed it or that he discolored it with chalk when he climbed it?

Can't imagine that the NPS wouls be too thrilled about that stunt, especially breaking the only rule for climbing that they have in arches. Oh well. Any pictures? Surely it was a photographed stunt...guess we'll be seeing that in an upcoming Patagucci catalog....it should help me decide to buy some more overpriced undies.

I hate the use of chalk, come on Dean, this is Utah not Chalkorado.

The Access Fund probably won't dig riling up the Park Service.

A Patagonia picture probably won't help anything... If he wanted to climb it, no problem. Leave no trace and then no harm no foul. The chalk and possibly publicizing the act probably won't help anyone.

Other than those two issues, I have no problem with it. He should head to Mt. Rushmore next and climb some presidents!

Uh oh. One of my 12 year old students just randomly asked me if I saw the guy that climbed Delicate Arch without any ropes or gear. He said he saw it on Fox News and that they interviewed him.

Not good.

So I take it the issue is that he climbed it.

I don't have a problem that he climbed it, but I have an issue with the publicizing. If you are climbing for the publicity, you have some issues, and if you climb a state symbol for the publicity, you have some real issues. However, from what I know of Dean, this doesn't sound like him.

Sounds fair enough to me, John. I don't think we are talking about "the rape of the land" though. It's not as if he is trying to dynamite the feature to see how the arch blows apart, or strip mine the area, or dump the missing plutonium from Rocky Flats (way off topic now). Utah & chalkless - I don't know about that, maybe hammerless, he could have used colored chalk, otherwise I don't see a problem with his climbing as long as a wildlife agency hadn't considered the area a concern.

Some years ago, a photographer named Michael Fatali decided to capture the sunset-washed glow of Delicate Arch by lighting a fire underneath the feature, ostensibly to demonstrate lighting techniques to his students. This was STUPID. Not only did his stunt not even approach the glow from the setting sun, but it also resulted in oily char-marks that were partially removed by hand using dental picks. He'd already pulled this stunt at Canyonlands National Park.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001oMT&>>>>>

Fatali was fined, banned from both parks for two years, and had the privilege of paying for the man-hours required to restore this landform. Perhaps Mr. Potter will share this fate for his arrogant little maneuver, assuming of course that he did use white chalk.

I was curious to see if anyone had issues, and if so, what those may be. I myself am not sure what to think about it.

Just stoking the fire for some good debate.

I think ultimately, the issue is that public reaction to Potter repeatedly violating NPS rules for the sake of publicity is reflecting poorly on the climbing community. Not a big deal? Here is an article out of the Salt Lake Tribune.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3800468

It would be a drag to have Arches closed to all climbing. The irritated superintendant has authority to do that.

You and my bro - birds of the same feather. I hate you both, I need chalk for the finger stuff.

Potter said he took great care to leave Delicate Arch undisturbed, and he is unapologetic about undertaking the challenge.
"I am very conscientious about following nature's rules. I respected the arch to the fullest. I did no more than blow a little dust off a few handholds," Potter said. "What has our world come to if we cannot join nature by climbing one of nature's most beautiful features?"

Okay, bullsh!t Dean. I agree with the above, it sounds good. But then what's with all of the cameras, publicity, and Patagonia??? That doesn't sound like being one with the environment to me.

I'd say bring on that superintendent. Let's have him discuss the mgt policy directly attacking clean climbing.

Delicate Arch should never have been climbed! Potter did not think of what his stunt could begin. For now every climber in the world is thinking of climbing Delicate Arch. One ascent likely had near zero impact on the arch, but what about 1000? Pulling a rope down from the top 1000 times might cut it in half!

It is not easy to prevent people from climbing Delicate Arch, I would not be surprised if the NPS has to close the entire area near the arch to all people!

What a disaster! I respect Potter for his climbing ability, but he really should have thought before pulling off this stunt, and publicizing it.

Over the course of the last 30 years or so I have made countless pilgrimages to Delicate Arch in all kinds of weather in all seasons. In December my daughter and I visited Delicate Arch after an early morning snowfall had melted away. We were the only people in the park that day. We didn't see other cars and we didn't encounter another soul on our hike up to Delicate Arch. What a special day Tori and I shared! Climbing Delicate Arch and publicizing it, in my opinion, IS raping a sacred structure. Is this a trick only tackled by a testosterone laden lad? I'm not surprised.

I guess I don't see how a climber destroys a piece of sandstone by doing what Dean accomplished (except, I think we are all agreeing as to the use of white chalk on this rock). I don't see the Arch as being sacred, it's just a formation of sandstone. The environment is going to take that arch out, then what are the complaints going to be about? The wind & rain "raped" the Arch?

I'd agree, he's directly addressing the park in a public manner; let's do it. I feel this goes to the same issue as Cave Rock & it's the same issue the City of Denver uses: attacking climbers for climbing on rock because other people see them climbing, and doing so without any justification for encroaching on a wildlife habitat of concern. Where's my portaledge? Maybe it's time for a sit in.

OK lets all jump on Delicate Arch and see how longs it takes to crumble.

I don't think he has destroyed anything...except maybe the fragile balance between land managers (nps) and climbers right to "use" their public lands. Only time will tell what impact his ascent has made.

What if the NPS outlawed climbing in the Tetons & Glenn Exum solo'd his namesake ridge today on the Grand?

Where would you put yourself as being a climber?

Actually, Delicate Arch was "raped" long ago. Anyone who has been to the base knows the columns are already covered with graffiti. This really annoys me as a photographer because any close shot of the arch will show these scars.

Dean's actions did little or no immediate damage, but the point is he publicized his stunt which has set a precedent that it is open to clandestine climbing. Does anyone seriously think that his will be the only ascent? Delicate Arch is special because it is one rock feature that actually could be destroyed by climbing (in my opinion anyway). Sure it will fall down due to wind and rain in a few hundred or thousand years, but does that mean it's OK to deface it with graffiti, chalk, and rope trenches?

Potter's prance up Delicate Arch pisses me off EXTREMELY. Just talked to my husband and he thinks it's "bad" but not "so bad". That pisses me off. I should go to the Catholic Church's most sacred crucifix and climb it. Wouldn't that make a great photo op! Think I'd piss anyone off? Oh, heck, chalk marks on sandstone ain't so bad--look at the water marks on Lake Fowell. Must go sit in meetings all afternoon. Will give me time to think about this.

George, I don't think I'm talking about defacing the rock. Sure, he made a mistake in using white chalk. Had he used similar product as with the Garden (of the Gods - Col Springs, CO), we would only be addressing climbing in and of itself. Climbing is a part of our heritage as Americans, and I say we hold to that given a National Park setting.

If descents are going to mar the rock, then fixed protection is going to become necessary, it can certainly be camo'd to match the rock. We can certainly do our part to be conservational about the use of that formation. If our passage is intrusive to others, then have designated times to allow for climbing & viewing (whether it be times of the year or time of day, I guess it would depend on what is feasible for conservational mgt).

Gouges in sandstone due to ropes being pulled are a real problem, just check out this photo on the Lightning Bolt Cracks:

http://www.mountainproject.com/v/utah/moab_area/indian_creek>>>>>

The Salt Lake Tribune article says that Dean lowered a string and pulled up a rope for his descent. Presumably somebody clipped into one end on the ground while he rappelled down the other end (or maybe he even downclimbed?). To retrieve the rope, rather than pull the rope, a careful climber could simply flip the rope off, thus preventing any rock damage, and I imagine this is what Dean did. I just fear that subsequent climbers may not be so careful.