| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
..
9 |
J.P.
Super Nomad
Posts: 1673
Registered: 7-8-2010
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
Mood: Easy Does It
|
|
Punish Many For the Actions Of A Few
Isn't that the American Way " Home Land Security"
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by mtgoat666
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
It has been my experience with 30 years with the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management that the type of security that SkipJack talks
about is generally impossible to accomplish, and even then only happens at a tiny fraction of the "sites", and renders those sites in some cases as
zoo-like, and the wonder is lost. Still, the protection-zealots sometimes prevail, the result being that 1000's of sites are almost NEVER seen by the
public. Personally I think this is a shame, and a travesty.
The same type thinking in the western Public Lands has resulted in hundreds, if not thousands, of once open and free public roads being closed to all
but the "elite"--------all because of a few knotheads that misbehaved somewhere sometime. "Punish the many for the actions of a few"-----.
THAT is "irresponsible", in my view.
Barry |
no one is being "punished." natural and cultural resources are simply being protected.
what is this BS about only the elite being able to access roadless areas? there are plenty of areas accessible by road. it would be silly to say
that ALL public lands should be accessible by road. there are already sufficient areas accessible by road. being fit enough to hike beyond the road
end is not an elite status, it is a normal human status. |
Goat----------"BS" ??????? Thousands are being "punished" as they no longer can visit places that they have been going to for ages with their
families and friends, my family included. The result being that part of our tradition is lost forever--------for WHAT??? The few vandals still find
ways to get around the "protection" devices, believe me!!! It is a challenge to them to find ways around the "protection devices"!!! Only the
law-abiding are punished since they mostly obey the closures.
The "elite" I am referring to are the Bureau folks and the "scientists" that still use these "closed" roads to access areas that THEY want to see,
and/or explore, and "study". It happens, believe me, all the time--------I was THERE. They DO NOT hike in, except in very rare occasions!!
I agree that some areas should be set aside as "roadless", but the Feds have gone wayyyyyyyy to far due to the pressure of a few. Who decides what
are "sufficient" areas still open to existing roads travel------that is a VERY subjective topic, and the zealots with obvious intentions have gone
wayyyyyyy to far, IMO, and I was right in the middle of these decisions, tho often in the minority. Many, most of which never even visit these areas,
want it ALL closed off to vehicles, horses, etc.------crazy, and incredibly selfish!!! Many of us, including me, because of age or other
disabilities, cannot hike miles to see something. When there is an existing road to these areas, and it is closed off, it is especially frustrating
and maddening to many--------and for WHAT??? I know of no areas that were closed off on the Public Lands of SoCal and elsewhere that were not
violated by some of the "vandals"-------NONE!!! Again, it mostly keeps out the law abiding, but the vandals get in anyway because they are VANDALS,
and that is what VANDALS do!!!
Often what these closures do is infuriate folks that would otherwise obey laws, causing them to retaliate and destroy things that they would otherwise
not do. Again, many of these closures are CRAZY!!!! and counter-productive!!
I have been there, and saw it, and been involved in these decisions!!! and have seen the results. It drives me and my Family nuts!!!!
Barry
|
|
|
Skipjack Joe
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8084
Registered: 7-12-2004
Location: Bahia Asuncion
Member Is Offline
|
|
As i said before, Barry, it's a wonder you ever worked for the Park Service. A ranger who is an anti conservationist. Frankly I don't know how you got
along with the other Park Service employees. I have never met one with your mindset and I've been to most parks in the western US. Perhaps the law
enforcement wing of the Service walks to a different beat than the rest.
Anyway you haven't provided any argument as to where my statements are wrong. All you've said is that they don't work. Please provide actual
information. Please stay on the subject.
The highway is littered with graffiti for anyone to see. These have been so-called idiots but we're to assume that the people who read DK's directions
are not. Why?
There is a road leading to the paintings. What guarantee can you provide that the walls won't be trashed? Can you please answer that? It's a simple
enough question. Are you saying that the price to pay for a defamed wall art is worth the price of having visitors see it until it happens? Is that
your position? Are you even knowledgable enough to understand the value of these paintings to make such a decision?
I have already made plain to you that this is not an elitist issue. Read above. Why do you persist in repeating it?
|
|
|
Skipjack Joe
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8084
Registered: 7-12-2004
Location: Bahia Asuncion
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Again, it mostly keeps out the law abiding, but the vandals get in anyway because they are VANDALS, and that is what VANDALS do!!!
Barry |
Do you realize what you wrote? Because we can't eradicate vandalism we should give them free reign. Let's get rid of our police force. Let's open our
jails. We're not getting all the criminals, let's let them have at it.
|
|
|
Natalie Ann
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 2819
Registered: 8-22-2003
Location: Berkeley
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by David K
[Igor], I was offering some comfort to you for you, after you posted the "kick me" comment, so you would not feel this guilt you put on yourself. You
did not disclose the location, others did....
|
 
nena
[Edited on 1-6-2013 by Natalie Ann]
Be yourself, everyone else is already taken.
.....Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Again, it mostly keeps out the law abiding, but the vandals get in anyway because they are VANDALS, and that is what VANDALS do!!!
Barry |
Do you realize what you wrote? Because we can't eradicate vandalism we should give them free reign. Let's get rid of our police force. Let's open our
jails. We're not getting all the criminals, let's let them have at it. |
You are making your own interpretations of what you THINK I meant, not what I said.
To me, Law Enforcement should of course try and prevent criminal acts, and catch criminals (a given), but in this case (remote site vandalism) it is
realistically a mostly impossible task, and the barriers that we put up ostensibly to prevent it are mostly symbolism-only in reality----------i.e.
they don't really work, and they certainly desecrate the pristine quality of these sites, just like the vandals grafitti does-----so what is the
point? I encourage small and descrete "interpretation" signs at often-visited "sites", but that's it. (and even these signs eventually are ALWAYS
vandalized). In other words, don't punish the many for the bad destructive actions of the few-----don't visually ruin or hide a site just because
there are crazy's out there that will desecrate the site-----keep the big picture in mind--------answer the question of what you are trying to
accomplish, and is it worth it to limit the publics enjoyment of same. It's subjective, of course, and the crucial question is what are your
objectives? Mine is to provide for the enjoyment and education of the public in most cases, not to hide something---lock it up---- that is declared
by those in the know of limited or obscure scientific value, usually because "the value" is duplicated a 1000 times over already.
That is simply selfish & myoptic, in my opinion.
Barry
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
As i said before, Barry, it's a wonder you ever worked for the Park Service. A ranger who is an anti conservationist. Frankly I don't know how you got
along with the other Park Service employees. I have never met one with your mindset and I've been to most parks in the western US. Perhaps the law
enforcement wing of the Service walks to a different beat than the rest.
Anyway you haven't provided any argument as to where my statements are wrong. All you've said is that they don't work. Please provide actual
information. Please stay on the subject.
The highway is littered with graffiti for anyone to see. These have been so-called idiots but we're to assume that the people who read DK's directions
are not. Why?
There is a road leading to the paintings. What guarantee can you provide that the walls won't be trashed? Can you please answer that? It's a simple
enough question. Are you saying that the price to pay for a defamed wall art is worth the price of having visitors see it until it happens? Is that
your position? Are you even knowledgable enough to understand the value of these paintings to make such a decision?
I have already made plain to you that this is not an elitist issue. Read above. Why do you persist in repeating it? |
Much of what you write here I don't believe I understand, just as you mis-interpret what I am saying.
I not only was a "Park Ranger", I was a Supervisor of Park Ranger's who was assigned to Grand Canyon, Glacier Natl. Park, Dinosaur Natl. Mon, Cape
Hatteras and Wright Brothers, etc.---some of the cream of the Park Service sites, and I got along well with my fellow NPS and BLM cohorts, thankyou.
You appear to not really understand what LE is all about, and / or your expectations are quite unrealistic-------many are guilty of this.
I am NOT a "anti-conservationist". In fact I was a member of the Sierra Club for years until they took a lot of bad turns in their policies, mostly
under Dave Brower's leadership, and acted without knowledge of, and education about, their stands on many environmental issues. I, and my Family,
quit the Club over these issues. The Club has gotten only worse since, IMO, decreasing their effectiveness and credibility-----and that's a shame.
Law Enforcement often does take a different stand on issues since we are the one's that are trusted and expected to enforce the regs, and understand
mostly what works, and what doesn't. Unfortunately, there are many different opinions within the Law Enforcement community, not to mention with the
Interpretive Branch, which has led to a sad schism within the Service between LE and Interpretation, and within LE itself. Silly, but true.
I never said you statements were wrong---------I just don't believe they work, are practical, and most important, are in the best interests of the
majority.
Most vandals are not researching places to vandalize--------in fact I would submit that it almost never happens (if ever)---------so I am not worried
that some crazy is going to read David's posts and say, "Ah Ha, some place to vandalize". (Even tho I admit that some NOMAD'S do sometimes appear
crazy-----not you, of course)
I cannot in any way "guarantee" that any sites will not be vandalized-------we live in a world with a few crazies, and NOTHING that we do will change
that. Yes, I AM saying that the priority of the Public seeing these sites far outweighs the priority of trying to protect them from the inevitable
and occasional vandal in these circumstances. And no, I am not qualified to "say that" even tho I have a minor in Anthropoligy and Archeology, but I
have talked to many who are qualified, and some agree with me (many selfish Archy folks do not), especially on the sites with very limited scientific
value--------and that have been professionally photographed and documented, if possible, or practical, or realistic.
I explained in another post to "the Goat" my meaning in saying "elitists", but to summarize----scientific types within and outside the Bureau,
in-house Govt. Manager's including Congressional tours, Bureau LE types in declared hot-pursuit, and Interpretive and Maint. folks doing their work,
tours by special purpose groups like the Sierra Club, etc.------all of which are sometimes allowed to violate restrictions and closures in the name of
"need to know and see and do", or to "evaluate" despite the illegality of many of these "exceptions". I participated in many of them over my 30 year
career. Many of these "closures" are NOT respected by the very people that the environmental community FORCES to establish them thru their lobbying
of Congress and Fed. Manager's. Bureaucrats do as they are told, but they don't necessarily agree with it all, and that disagreement sometimes
manifests itself. (I never did this, of course)
Barry
|
|
|
micah202
Super Nomad
Posts: 1615
Registered: 1-19-2011
Location: vancouver,BC
Member Is Offline
|
|
...my gawsh,,,yer all sat on the same cactus patch or what?????
...or is it just a bad batch of coffee on the peninsula.??
...how does that saying go?.....''is a pictograph precious if nobody sees it''???
...there's just sooo few people who don't at least feel 'SPOOKED'or'HEXXED' if they were to damage something like those artifacts----that's why
they're STILL IN GOOD CONDITION
...if these sites were chained off like others have been,,,that's when devious minds start to (tr)oll
[Edited on 1-6-2013 by micah202]
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by micah202
..''is a pictograph precious if nobody sees it''??? |
Not to me it isn't---------
Either is a Van Gogh
Barry
|
|
|
Skipjack Joe
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8084
Registered: 7-12-2004
Location: Bahia Asuncion
Member Is Offline
|
|
Looks like we've come to a standstill:
You say that it's selfish to protect these paintings at the cost of people seeing them.
I say it's selfish to let the general public view them until they are properly protected.
Notice that nobody is suggesting that this art be not seen by anyone. Yet you keep insisting that.
You say that these sites should have minimal protection because it can't be done. I see that as being beside the point. How it's done is a different
matter. Do you mean that if it could be protected you would support it? That then we wouldn't be labeled as "selfish".
I think part of the problem is what value we place on these paintings. From my perspective you don't value them enough. On the other hand, a museum
curator may feel that I don't value them enough. In fact, this entire thread may be defined as those who care more than others. I, for one, don't see
much beauty in the geometric petroglyphs that abound everywhere and wouldn't mind having those less protected. An archeologist may feel otherwise. But
I'm ready to consider the opinion of an expert and give it more weight than my own. I mean, that's what they're there for.
Regarding Vandalism. I'm begining to think that these places wouldn't be vandalized. They would simply be trashed by those who have no understanding
of it's value. I'm assuming that vandalism denotes an evil intent. It's interesting that large segments of the highway are trashed because they don't
see any value in a rock. However, you'll notice that the virgins of guadalupe along the road are never desecrated. But a rock is just a rock. A
convenient substance upon which to write on. This is due to ignorance. It is that same ignorance that will likely cause some traveler to write "Bobby
+ Betty" over a cave painting.
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64852
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
One more time, just so we don't get too much over done with our thoughts on letting people know about these treasures...
NONE have been defaced/ ruined (and I have been posting about Baja on the Internet since 1998, if you think what I do here is wrong).
The more people know about them, the better chance they have of being valued, respected, etc. I only wish the missions were better photographed and
respected, perhaps we would see more of them today if some value was placed on them. They had no value to be saved, so people (and Nature) destroyed
much of them.
These sites are already found in books and magazine articles for a hundred or more years, do you complain to those authors? The Internet is just
another form of communication. Again, none of the sites have been ruined that I shared in this thread.
|
|
|
rts551
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6699
Registered: 9-5-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
I wonder how many artifacts may have been destroyed by people walking and posing below these paintings? Just another take on what may be protected
|
|
|
MMc
Super Nomad
Posts: 1679
Registered: 6-29-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: Current
|
|
If you were to replace cave painting with Baja You all would sound like me b-tching about DK other postings
This is a "kick me post".
"Never teach a pig to sing it frustrates you and annoys the pig" - W.C.Fields
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by rts551
I wonder how many artifacts may have been destroyed by people walking and posing below these paintings? Just another take on what may be protected
|
It depends. If there are pottery scatters below the paintings, then yes, many are destroyed simply by walking on them. I doubt that this is usually
the case at "rock art" sites as pottery scatters are normally associated with cooking areas, not "art sites". If there is cryptobiotic soil crusts in
the area (common in Utah), any trampling of the area even once leads to erosion and destruction of the soil crust, thus allowing artifacts to be
washed away. In reality, all kinds of damage can be happen when excess traffic passes thru, so everything is a trade-off.
Most artifact destruction is caused by people just picking them up and walking away with them. It is human-nature to do this, even by so-called
educated people. This always destroys the integrity of the site, but there is very little that can be done about that. This is why it is so important
for Archy-folks to inventory, photograph, and collect the site ASAP. But there are so many sites that it happens only at the very special sites.
Most sites do not yield much "new" information, if any----it is mostly all duplicated already at other sites, but it is still fascinating to see and
find by the layman, as is the rock-art itself.
I have spent hours and days locating "sites" of all kinds left by the Native People's, and historical rock-art left by the early pioneers and
explorers in Utah and Idaho and Wyoming-------just to see and visit them, and speculate. I love that.
Barry
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64852
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by rts551
I wonder how many artifacts may have been destroyed by people walking and posing below these paintings? Just another take on what may be protected
|
Since the sites are not secret, the archaeologists had plenty of years to study them. I suggest you read the papers by William Massey and Eric Ritter
to verify... The building of the Transpeninsular Highway is the first place you should throw blame at... because if it is people seeing these place
you hate so much, that is what has brought the most people to Baja... I like people and think people are the most important living things on the
planet. It is people who made the rock art sites and it is for people to enjoy them.
Coyote and other critters do plenty of disturbing. As passionate as I am about historic sites, being careless and destructive isn't part of my goal.
Preserving and giving importance and recognition to them is.
|
|
|
DianaT
Select Nomad
Posts: 10020
Registered: 12-17-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Natalie Ann
| Quote: | Originally posted by David K
[Igor], I was offering some comfort to you for you, after you posted the "kick me" comment, so you would not feel this guilt you put on yourself. You
did not disclose the location, others did....
|
nena
[Edited on 1-6-2013 by Natalie Ann] |
|
|
|
rts551
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6699
Registered: 9-5-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Geeze. What a jerk. I asked a question. Didn't say anything about hate or who is destroying the site. Although I thing Barry made some good points
about preserving an area.
| Quote: | Originally posted by David K
| Quote: | Originally posted by rts551
I wonder how many artifacts may have been destroyed by people walking and posing below these paintings? Just another take on what may be protected
|
Since the sites are not secret, the archaeologists had plenty of years to study them. I suggest you read the papers by William Massey and Eric Ritter
to verify... The building of the Transpeninsular Highway is the first place you should throw blame at... because if it is people seeing these place
you hate so much, that is what has brought the most people to Baja... I like people and think people are the most important living things on the
planet. It is people who made the rock art sites and it is for people to enjoy them.
Coyote and other critters do plenty of disturbing. As passionate as I am about historic sites, being careless and destructive isn't part of my goal.
Preserving and giving importance and recognition to them is. |
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
Looks like we've come to a standstill:
Notice that nobody is suggesting that this art be not seen by anyone. Yet you keep insisting that.
You say that these sites should have minimal protection because it can't be done. I see that as being beside the point. How it's done is a different
matter. Do you mean that if it could be protected you would support it? That then we wouldn't be labeled as "selfish".
I think part of the problem is what value we place on these paintings. From my perspective you don't value them enough. On the other hand, a museum
curator may feel that I don't value them enough. In fact, this entire thread may be defined as those who care more than others. I, for one, don't see
much beauty in the geometric petroglyphs that abound everywhere and wouldn't mind having those less protected. An archeologist may feel otherwise. But
I'm ready to consider the opinion of an expert and give it more weight than my own. I mean, that's what they're there for.
|
I must not be writing clearly, SkipJack. I do not "insist" that you pro-protection and secrecy folks are saying that "nobody" can see the
sites----you're not-------but you surely are saying that it should be limited to the experts only, and people that experts can trust. (By the way, I
understand this belief, but I just think it is wrong in many cases)
I say that these sites have none or "only minimal protection" not because it can't be done (tho it can't) but because I believe it does more harm than
good to restrict visitation and clutter up the site with baracades. What "good" are these sites if people can't see and hopefully appreciate them in
their pristine existence? If they could be protected with some kind of a death-ray (kidding), then yes, I approve of that as it is not visually
intrusive (until the ray hits you). So yes, you would not be "selfish" then. I interpret the "selfish" part as the insistance that the locations of
these many sites remain secret to most people----that, to me, is selfish, and totally unnessary.
The "geometric petroglyphs" (otherwise known as "geo-glyphs") are NOT common, and in fact are very rare relatively speaking. And I think they are
incredible, and extremely fragile. All the one's that were in my area of responsibility (Imperial Valley) were fenced and patrolled (but vandals
still got in and damaged them). It is interesting to note that several of the Geo-Glyphs had mostly survived for years totally unprotected, but
shortly after we fenced them vandals tore down a section of the steel pole fence and spun divots upon the Glyphs with their motorcycles and dune
buggies.
The "experts" are all over the place on protection including the Archaeologists. The more reasonable and flexible one's realize that many sites are
NOT that valuable to Science, but are of tremendous value for the people to see and appreciate, and people should be encouraged to go and see them.
Those big-picture decisions are made by Manager's and Supervisor's, not the individual Archeologists, in many cases anyway, as they should be.
Barry
|
|
|
Skipjack Joe
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8084
Registered: 7-12-2004
Location: Bahia Asuncion
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
I say that these sites have none or "only minimal protection" not because it can't be done (tho it can't) but because I believe it does more harm than
good to restrict visitation and clutter up the site with baracades. What "good" are these sites if people can't see and hopefully appreciate them in
their pristine existence?
|
Barry,
I have spent about 5 posts saying the same thing now and yet you still don't get it.
NOBODY IS TRYING TO KEEP THESE SITES FROM BEING SEEN.
DO YOU READ ME?
The difference is that one side wants them to be protected before exposure and the other does not.
Now I understand that it is very convenient to paint one side as being selfish to gain support but there is truth to that. It's just propaganda.
There are plenty of great rock paintings in baja that are now protected (a waste of time by your standards). Why don't you guys concentrate your
efforts on telling the public about them until baja gets its act together on the remainder.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
I say that these sites have none or "only minimal protection" not because it can't be done (tho it can't) but because I believe it does more harm than
good to restrict visitation and clutter up the site with baracades. What "good" are these sites if people can't see and hopefully appreciate them in
their pristine existence?
|
Barry,
I have spent about 5 posts saying the same thing now and yet you still don't get it.
NOBODY IS TRYING TO KEEP THESE SITES FROM BEING SEEN.
DO YOU READ ME?
The difference is that one side wants them to be protected before exposure and the other does not.
Now I understand that it is very convenient to paint one side as being selfish to gain support but there is truth to that. It's just propaganda.
There are plenty of great rock paintings in baja that are now protected (a waste of time by your standards). Why don't you guys concentrate your
efforts on telling the public about them until baja gets its act together on the remainder. |
Like two ship passing in the fog before radar---------I think I "get it", yet you can't see it. We are just like Congress.
Zeus help us!!!!
Barry
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
..
9 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
