Dirtbag climber

People tell me that I live in the "bouldering capital of the South." But a fear of heights keeps me from scaling anything vertical. But the sport is interesting. One reason is that climbers have a serious internal tug of war with wanting to climb anything that looks fun/beautiful and wanting to avoid risking damage to it (e.g., anchoring). Here is a recent example (Park Service Bans Climbing of Utah Arches):

Climber Dean Potter scaled Delicate Arch, the soaring desert symbol of southern Utah. Now, the National Park Service wants to make sure he doesn't do it again.

Arches National Park on Tuesday announced a tightening of its rules on climbing after Potter announced with photographs and video that he made an unassisted climb of the arch just after daybreak Sunday.

Arches Park Superintendent Laura Joss said she reported Potter's climb to the Interior Department's chief lawyers, and park rangers were investigating whether Potter did any damage to the arch.

The issue is "user conflicts." The use of the environment by some threatens the use by others (e.g., snowmobiling in National Parks). Land managers get yelled at by both sides in a user conflict situation. Here is the reaction from a honest-to-goodness environmental economist/rock climber (Delicate Arch Stunt Will Limit Access for All Climbers):

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.

Comments

[Mr. Nobody]

The Access Fund, the advocacy organization with the goals to conserve the climbing access,condemns the Delicate Arch climb. See http://www.accessfund.org/pubs/en/e-news67.htm#_Access_Fund_Condemns

Or see below:

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 in 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

See the Access Fund's website at http://accessfund.org/resources/index.php and http://www.accessfund.org/adopt to reference our conservation and stewardship efforts.
For a list of climbing closures and restrictions nationwide see http://www.accessfund.org/access/index.php.
For more information on the Access Fund?s advocacy work see http://www.accessfund.org/advo/index.php.

Policy Questions: contact Jason Keith, jason@accessfund.org
Media inquiries: contact Robb Shurr, robb@accessfund.org

[Mr. Nobody]

Anchors, Raptors & Rock Quality

Nesting raptors, perceived and actual overuse of permanent anchors (http://www.safeclimbing.org/conservation_bolthist.htm,) cultural heritage are factors which limit access.

In the Delicate Arch climb, fragile rock is the main concern. It is probably Entrada Sandstone which climber/guidebook author, Fred Knapp, describes as a step down from moist brown sugar. It ain't the bullet hard standstone of the New River Gorge & Seneca (Mr. Nobody's home state crags).

P.S. There is an academic body of work involving economics and climbing by various economists including Paul Jakus, author of the above SLT op-ed piece, Therese Grijalva, Douglass Shaw and others.

[Douglass Shaw]

Access to outdoor recreation areas is an interesting property rights issue. A totally free market type might wish to see private land owners take over all recreation lands, but I would hate to see that happen because, among other things, private land owners may well deny all climbers entry, for fear of lawsuits over injury or death. So, for many good reasons, rock climbers need to try to minimize their impact, and resist temptation to pull stunts like the one Potter pulled. Hopefully then, conflicts with federal and other government lands managers, as well as with other types of recreational users, can be avoided, and access will continue.

[Mr. Nobody]

There are a couple "pay to play" private climbing areas that I have visited. Both places are located near more traditional areas (place gear, few or no fixed anchors). In Arkee-saw, Horseshoe Canyon (http://www.climbhcr.com/) is located near Sam's Throne (trad area on public land). As Shaw noted, "private land owners may well deny all climbers entry, for fear of lawsuits over injury or death." This happened at Nelson Rocks after a lead climber took a major whipper. Yep, Nelson is privately owned & is close to Seneca (a major trad mecca located on Monongahela NF land). See
http://www.nelsonrocks.org/climbing.html.

Also, the private ownership changes certain aspects of the recreational activity. For example, Horseshoe Caynon and Nelson have many more sport routes (bolted climbs, generally lower risk and a lower pucker factor ;--0 ).

-Mr. Nobody, Env-Econ's West Virginia correspondent

P.S. When in doubt, run it out. (Jakus will understand.)

P.P.S. Don't wear Chacos to the Tucker County Landfill. http://www.env-econ.net/2005/08/wind_farms_and_.html

[joshua corning]

so i guess global waming will increse if the arch falls in? or some species will go extinct?

NO?

you mean it is simply a pile of rocks that through some fluke of physics formed an arch?

and through fluke of evolution our minds are predisposed to find such formations valuable?

A totally free market type might wish to see private land owners take over all recreation lands, but I would hate to see that happen because, among other things, private land owners may well deny all climbers entry, for fear of lawsuits over injury or death.

this is a funny rational...I am against property rights becouse the State eliminates an individuals responsibility to protect ones own person from harm.

weird.

[Pierce Adams]

didn't he solo that climb? don't we have more pressing issues then hating on Dean Potter? At least the man is spiritual about it. I think if he drilled a bolt ladder to get to the top, yeah hate on the man, but he soloed it. In a day and age when we are fighting wars to secure oil interests and talking about drilling the arctic for petroleum I think it is wonderful to see a human being doing something so awe inspiring as soloing a "delicate" arch or walking across a one inch wide strand of webbing between two spires.