This is confusing. Park regulations, apparently, already prohibit climbing on named Arches. So what would the point be in "working with [their] solicitor" to close the Arches permanently? What the fuck could a lawyer do about it anyway?
On one hand I understand Dean and his hippy ideals of wanting to climb on nature and shit. Its very idealistic and pretty. But unfortunately in the real world, the reason they have those rules is the same reason we keep ORV's off trails in National Parks.
Its that same arrogant attitude that I see from the full-time Yos climbers. They think they're above the rules and that they're actions don't have any impact on the environment. Like Steph Davis's recent article in Alpinist complaining because they kicked Chongo out of the valley - for living there full time for like ten fucking years! He uses the septic system there, drinks water, breathes air, consumes resources in the Valley like anyone else. Why should the rules not apply to him. Like Lowell said, they think the world revolves around them. Fucking grow up.
Thanks also for furthuring the image that rock-climbers don't care about regulations, as represented by our "best".