[NoboruWataya]

Curious to know the basis on which they were arrested. I guess it's something in the realm of criminal damage to public property. But that would imply that Maestri's bolts had become part of the public property that is the mountain. I assume Maestri was not arrested for inserting the bolts.

Not being a mountain climber at all I don't really have an opinion on this, but I do naturally sympathise with the anti-bolt guys because I am fond of the idea of leaving no trace.

[cjonas]

They didn't remove the bolts for "leave no trace" reasons. They removed them because the style they were put up was considered "poor climbing ethics". They felt it could go "free" and on gear.

This would have made the summit unobtainable to all but the strongest climbers in the world... Which would have upset many people who had traveled far and spent a lot of money to attempt the summit.

Alex Honnolds "climbing gold" podcast has like a 3 part series on this history if your interested to learn more.

[butlike]

Just goes to show you money can't buy everything. Can't buy you being in good enough shape to climb the mountain at the mountain's level.

[kodt]

I think the question here is: what is the specific criminal charge or law that was broken to be arrested?

[dfxm12]

You don't have to be charged with anything to be arrested. Kennedy's wikipedia page suggests they were released from jail, implying LEO decided they actually committed no crime (and certainly weren't charged). If you're really curious, maybe the jurisdiction has public arrest records, but this assumes that the cops were doing everything by the book, which is not always an apt assumption.

My guess is that towns and leo get, let's say, passionate, when a big tourism draw gets defaced, or when something can get more dangerous, but cooler heads eventually prevailed.