Death Valley Rangers Seek Help Identifying Vandal
- Thread starter ski3pin
- Start date
Uttering bad words at the moment.
craig333
Riley's Human
Probably the same words I'm thinking of ;(
Mighty Dodge Ram
Senior Member
If the Feds can confirm their suspect he should be flagged. When he tries to cross the border in the future...and he will...they can nab him. I cannot fathom what goes through someone’s mind...if anything...when they do something like this.
The biggest problem with terrible human beings is that they very seldom realize that they are terrible human beings. Thank goodness they are very much in the minority. When I was young I thought they were stupid people, but have since learned that even well educated and 'sophisticated' people may be terrible humans. I hope they catch this terrible person soon, and if he is from our friendly neighbor to the north, I would be o.k. with him being permanently banned from visiting the U.S.
Smokecreek1
Smokecreek1
Unfortunately, there are allot more of those "types" out and about, especially now that most of those who try to protect those same resources except for LE and some resource protection specialists have been furloughed! While some of them are just plain vandals, or do it without thinking, allot more especially poachers and pot hunters do it because they want too, for either profit or they think it is their right to do it! For to many years I had to deal with these people and many are repeat offenders and no amount of education will stop them.
Smoke
Smoke
Wango
Contributors
Maybe if these idiots ever saw real consequences, the "artist" that painted faces in National Parks a few years back got off way too easy. the morons that walked across grand prismatic in Yellowstone, not much either.
I see stupid tourist crap every time i'm in a Nat. Park. Nothing happens to them, so nothing stops them.
I see stupid tourist crap every time i'm in a Nat. Park. Nothing happens to them, so nothing stops them.
A few years back we were at the Columbia Icefields in Jasper NP. A BIG sign at the toe of the glacier in many languages informing the tourists that walking onto the glacier was dangerous, even fatal because someone had died just the week before by doing so.Wango said:
Wait for it...
Did that stop them from walking on in droves?
Wango
Contributors
Vic,
Selfish, arrogant and dumb.
Great combination.
Selfish, arrogant and dumb.
Great combination.
ntsqd
Custom User Title
We have more people, we aren't in danger of running out any time soon. Now if they'd just not leave a mess behind them when they go.....
i dislike graffitti as much and maybe more than anyone, but is what this guy did really all that much different than Black Cyn. or the Bishop/Benton petrogylphs when judged 10,000 years from now?
i dislike graffitti as much and maybe more than anyone, but is what this guy did really all that much different than Black Cyn. or the Bishop/Benton petrogylphs when judged 10,000 years from now?
I sure think it will be. In my mind, there’s a difference between a jerk’s vandalism in a national Park, and an early culture’s technology for documenting its experience in the wilderness.ntsqd said:
ntsqd
Custom User Title
There's a couple places that I know of along the Mojave Road where someone from it's early days basically did the same thing. Name and date marked into a rock. In my mind the only difference is that those marks are historically significant because they place a specific person at a specific location and that allows us to 'anchor' events in history. What this guy did will have no historical significance 100 or more years from now.
OP
OP
In this incident, I can only hope that Lacy is deeply ashamed of the company she keeps.
craig333
Riley's Human
I'm not sure we should hold the dog responsible.
BillTheHiker
Senior Member
What? Don't you recognize dog writing?craig333 said:
If I have the story correct, 2 of 4 foreigners banned for bad behaviour in Yellowstone and other places in 2016 (?) died going over a waterfall up here in 2018 (plus a 3rd vlogger). Misadventure caught up with them.Wango said:
Yes, or carved in trees or on buildings. I've seen some old ones too. Maybe this guy looks into the future fancying himself a famous explorer or person of worth and note ... hey, maybe he's plans to start being that exceptional guy soon, I mean not now but, real soon !ntsqd said:
ntsqd
Custom User Title
I think he's just an A-H that doesn't know better or doesn't care, but even though the old ones are of historical value I tend to classify them the same way. I can't stand the hypocrisy of treating them differently.
I too, deeply hope that Lacy really objects to her name being included.
I too, deeply hope that Lacy really objects to her name being included.
Smokecreek1
Smokecreek1
One man's etching is another man's worthless graffiti ! One of the major problems we always had as practicing field archaeologists was defining just what is/was an "prehistoric or historic " resource (Ant. Act of 1906) and "if" something is, "is it protected by law (National Historic Act of 1964, Arch. Preservation Act of 1979.etc.,) Without getting to deep into the law(s), an object, place or thing needs to be determined to be "significant" for any host of reasons (age, condition, association with historic events,etc.,) before it is protected by any relevant fed, state or other law. Since these objects were evaluated and met one or more of those criteria-they were covered by the law.
All that said, i remember in the early 70's when that under the law, things at least 50 years old could be classified as historic, so that rusty old can dump from the '30's could overnight become and important historic resource that might need to be studied and protected! I remember my exasperated boss asking me , " can't you just find one nice example and we'll protect that one??" Several of us field arks also noted that maybe, that we and our site reports, could be now be defined as historic resources
! While most of us would agree that a axle grease signature from the 1840's and any associated wagon ruts down High Rock Canyon in Nevada, or a prehistoric mammoth kill site, or some prehistoric rock art anywhere, is protected by law---nothing will 100% protect it from someone who is determined to destroy, deface or steal it ( believe or not, someone up on the Modoc NF years ago were cutting rock art panels from the rock faces so they could sell them). No self respecting dog would take part in such activities!
Smoke
All that said, i remember in the early 70's when that under the law, things at least 50 years old could be classified as historic, so that rusty old can dump from the '30's could overnight become and important historic resource that might need to be studied and protected! I remember my exasperated boss asking me , " can't you just find one nice example and we'll protect that one??" Several of us field arks also noted that maybe, that we and our site reports, could be now be defined as historic resources
! While most of us would agree that a axle grease signature from the 1840's and any associated wagon ruts down High Rock Canyon in Nevada, or a prehistoric mammoth kill site, or some prehistoric rock art anywhere, is protected by law---nothing will 100% protect it from someone who is determined to destroy, deface or steal it ( believe or not, someone up on the Modoc NF years ago were cutting rock art panels from the rock faces so they could sell them). No self respecting dog would take part in such activities!Smoke
TomTraveler
New Member
Here’s the Death Valley National Park ranger post on Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B_OM2yYnVyc/?igshid=k2xsqgrbfezg
https://www.instagram.com/p/B_OM2yYnVyc/?igshid=k2xsqgrbfezg
