Delicate Arch

Moderator: Shaft

User avatar
jonathan knight
Scotch provider
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 12:04 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Delicate Arch

Postby jonathan knight » Mon May 08, 2006 7:01 pm

Sounds like Dean has soloed it and base-jumped off? With a permit?

Check this out:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/show ... hp?t=53019
It will probably be on Fox news at 9 tonight.

User avatar
jonathan knight
Scotch provider
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 12:04 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Postby jonathan knight » Mon May 08, 2006 10:31 pm

Sounds like he found a loop hole in that it was not actually off limits. It will be soon. The NPS seems choked, and plan on instigating a permanent ban. He up and down climbed it a number of times.

adk
N00b
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 9:18 am
Location: slc

Postby adk » Tue May 09, 2006 8:38 am

What is your opinion on this? I saw it on Fox 13 last night and I had mixed feelings. Why did he do it with the camera crew near by? He said he did it in the "purest form", so why does he feel the need for it to be on video?

How hard is it? I would love to hear anyone's opinion.

User avatar
grayhghost
Super motivated and shit
Posts: 584
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:07 am
Contact:

Postby grayhghost » Tue May 09, 2006 9:22 am

He free-soloed it, then dropped some string down to pull up some rope for a rappel. Read more here.

I know Landscape Arch has an off-limits perimeter because of rockfall but I haven't heard of anything covering all of the arches.

He did carry chalk which could become unsightly if loose-rock free-soloing ever became really popular.

dirt girl
Gaper
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 4:10 pm

Postby dirt girl » Tue May 09, 2006 9:22 am

I think he's an ass! It would be great if he just went and did it, but making a PR stunt over it is LAME! He's trying to get a fatter paycheck from Patagonia, while the Park Service gets pissed about climbers. Some climbing 'ambassador' he is!
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3800468

User avatar
jun
S to the P to the R to the A to the Y
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 11:08 am
Location: The Dirty Pond

Postby jun » Tue May 09, 2006 9:22 am

Where's the video?


i say if he found a loop hole and he didn't break any laws or regulations and he wanted to climb it, then good on him.
Up, way up.

User avatar
grayhghost
Super motivated and shit
Posts: 584
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:07 am
Contact:

Postby grayhghost » Tue May 09, 2006 9:42 am

I did a little googlin' and came up with the regulations:

Stay the fuck off

I don't know Dean but unless he holds an advanced degree in philosophy he is going to have a hard time 'splainin' this one to the man.

User avatar
jonathan knight
Scotch provider
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 12:04 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Postby jonathan knight » Tue May 09, 2006 9:42 am

I think he has a bad case of OCD and issues with the Tool from living in the Valley. There are unwritten rules that most climbers abide by. For instance, we don't try to get away with climbing above the vaults on the Church buttress much less try to make some kind of spiritual statement. I can't help but think that this will make some bad impressions amongst land managers making the Access Fund's job more difficult.

adk
N00b
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 9:18 am
Location: slc

Postby adk » Tue May 09, 2006 9:45 am

jun,

To me his reasonings were fine. What an accomplishment! I heard the interview with him on the news and he goes off on his pure style, how he did for the right reasons. OK, fine, but why do you need camera's, film footage, interviews, etc? Do it privately...

It looked alittle like I want to please the sponsors, "look at me" motives going on.

User avatar
Brian in SLC
Gives Directions to the Pile
Posts: 730
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2003 2:02 pm

Postby Brian in SLC » Tue May 09, 2006 10:44 am

adk wrote:To me his reasonings were fine. What an accomplishment!


What a selfish and moronic thing to do. I'll bet, goodbye to sponsership for him. Nothing like having a real job to find some contrition.

Not like arches weren't climbed in Arches....but...they've been very well known (the "named ones") to be off limits to climbing for probably over 20 years. Ugh. See info below...

-Brian in SLC

Why would anyone want to climb an arch? Well, clearly arches have a lot of power and therefore it must be good to walk across them. It must be something about overcoming all that air. Volcanoes have a lot of power too, but arches are more easily done in shorts and tennis shoes and obviously that is a plus. Anyone who prefers wool pants and stiff boots should toss this book and head for Mt. St. Helens.
- Gerry Roach - from Arch Bagger

Arch Bagger
- A Scrambler’s Guide to Arches National Park

Gerry self-published Arch Bagger, his first book, in 1982. The 5.5 x 8.25 inch, soft-cover, 70-page guide describes scrambling routes to the top of 39 named arches plus the standard route to the top of Elephant Butte, the highest point in Arches National Park. The book has 21 black-and-white photographs and 18 illustrations. The guide describes how to get on top of the arches, but not how to find them. Gerry wrote Arch Bagger in a light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek style to make the book more about being free and exploring than about particular deeds.

After Gerry produced Arch Bagger, the National Park Service defined new rules for climbing in Arches National Park. Climbing is prohibited on any arch identified on current USGS 7.5 minute topographical maps but, with a few exceptions, is permitted elsewhere. This rule affects 16 of the 39 arches described in Arch Bagger. Presumably, it is legal to visit the tops of the other 23 arches described in Arch Bagger. Gerry doesn’t know how the park defines “climbing.” In his world, hiking is movement with a difficulty of Class 1 or Class 2, scrambling is movement with a difficulty of Class 3 and climbing is movement with a difficulty of Class 4 or Class 5. Using this definition, 4 of the 16 arches described in Arch Bagger on which climbing is prohibited are still accessible. Gerry has not pursued the matter with the park service, and it is best to err on the side of caution in this environmentally sensitive area.

Gerry printed a mere 300 copies of Arch Bagger, the tiny tome is long out of print, and it is very scarce.
boissal wrote:Somebooody's smart balls need to be kicked all the way up the roof of his not so smart mouth.

User avatar
jun
S to the P to the R to the A to the Y
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 11:08 am
Location: The Dirty Pond

Postby jun » Tue May 09, 2006 10:44 am

after reading the park regulations it's obvious he broke the rules.
i read the article in the trib and its pretty much ghey. i'm sure dean is a good guy and wants solid ascents but he's also very transparent. i'm sure this was solely done for a future video (similar to the Return 2 Sender-probably the same makers) which is why he climbed it several times.

i don't this this was just an ethics issue. he broke rules. i originally said "good for him" since he found a loop-hole. there was no loop-hole. anyone who has climbed in a NP knows that if you are uncertain about the availability of a climb you check with park officials first, which i'm certain he didn't.

so here's my revised version to my earlier post:

"hey, thanks Dean for ruining our future chances with climbing in national parks. i'm sure your antics will only hurt and not help efforts to increase climbing availability in protected areas."
Up, way up.

User avatar
trashman
Tosser
Posts: 916
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:30 am

Postby trashman » Tue May 09, 2006 1:36 pm

i definately think this will make things worse for climbers in the NPS in the near future, but i definately disagree with this statement:

anyone who has climbed in a NP knows that if you are uncertain about the availability of a climb you check with park officials first



officials tend to be a bit reactionary to climbers, especially over on the west side of the state. i know i'm not the only one on this site that assumes a "don't ask" stance when climbing there.

User avatar
jun
S to the P to the R to the A to the Y
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 11:08 am
Location: The Dirty Pond

Postby jun » Tue May 09, 2006 3:22 pm

sounds like Dean took the same stance as you trashman.



i guess its a matter of where to draw the line
Up, way up.

User avatar
trashman
Tosser
Posts: 916
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:30 am

Postby trashman » Tue May 09, 2006 4:02 pm

wow, i opened this up ready for a bunch of venom.

i will say that parts 2 & 3 of my "don't ask" policy are "don't get caught", and "don't tell anyone".

definately don't agree with his actions on those grounds, but he does seem to be deliberately stirring up controversy for some reason.

User avatar
jun
S to the P to the R to the A to the Y
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 11:08 am
Location: The Dirty Pond

Postby jun » Tue May 09, 2006 4:26 pm

well sure. controversy is good for exposure if in a month or two you are promoting a new video.

i periodically think up scandals to circulate about myself in hopes that i can better get my name out there. i just don't actually follow through with it because i know that in reality know one will care.
Up, way up.


Return to “Routes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron