Graffiti vandals creep into National Parks

[Ray Eklund]

I have seen no post on this Thread that is not TRUE and HONEST feelings. It is the "degree" of the offense that is being discussed. Humans have a natural need to make their mark. Before spray paint, before steel tools, before cities, towns, villages, before agriculture... Graffiti was Important.

The cave art of prehistoric France would be today's graffiti.

The pecking upon the iron rind of red sandstones in the Southwest have graffiti for special places and to mark ownership of an area.

Spanish exploring the Southwest went through some great effort when finding an appropriate flat protected surface to make their mark of the occasion for all to see.

When the human population was small, graffiti was a part of leaving their dreams, someone's thoughts or just idle time for idle hands of someone with an artistic talent. Who knows. I do not. Much of this graffiti's meaning has been lost over the thousands of years that these marks intent were made upon surfaces that still exist today. Anthropologists and archaeologists still try to find meaning of the prolific handiwork of humans, like us, leaving their mark. As their mark became centuries old, whatever remains of this graffiti is protected, socially, everywhere in our arid Southwest, as a good example.

Much of modern graffiti today has no significance, other than an individual wanting recognition. Among the group of the few, their graffiti has meaning. Being among millions of individuals and not 25 individuals of a nomadic family group, modern graffiti has no meaning... to you or myself, but I want to give an example of some graffiti that became important and positive.

- The Berlin Wall. Any surviving fragments of the wall with graffiti is now in museums. Protected. There is very little left of the Berlin Wall as it was removed and lost within a decade. This modern graffiti BECAME historically important. Who are you or myself to make that judgement of good or bad?

- A local artist in Castle Rock, Colorado did a remarkable thing worth mentioning. She is a neighbor of mine. Many concrete surfaces were being tagged by graffiti having no meaning to the majority, but to a small minority it meant something. She received donated paint and supplies and painted over the graffiti HUGE patriotic art representing the US Military and the Police. She did large scale wonderful art on bridge pillars and bare concrete surfaces of things that really meant something. I am sure the Castle Rock Police Department has photographs of this wonderful work.

This art has not been tagged. This art with symbolism has not been tagged. The City of Castle Rock has not had to remove graffiti since. Hopefully this will remain the case. For one person to come forward and TAG with GRAFFITI of her own, with meaning to everyone, even taggers... you must be careful to criticize before you understand. Not all graffiti is the same.

- Mount Rushmore and the Crazy Horse Memorial are massive forms of graffiti. Just because YOU think it art or has meaning, does not change the fact that the granite of the Black Hills has been defaced.

All I ask is that you open your mind, a little please, and consider WHY can one's graffiti be welcomed and HOW can chronic taggers find respect for a professional artist/sculpture's graffiti at the same time?

- Pueblo, Colorado built massive concrete retaining walls intended to prevent erosion caused by the Arkansas River. These walls had chronic graffiti. The City of Pueblo invited artists of all kinds and ages in the city, assigned large sections of concrete surfaces to be desecrated "by invitation". Today when you drive through Pueblo, Colorado and cross the Arkansas River... look. Although after a decade the invited graffiti art is weathered some, but... I never have seen any malicious tagging at this extensive site.

Music to one's ears is Noise to another's ear. Keep that in mind. Sometimes we speak and think with emotions and not consider that sometimes there is a purpose in what we call graffiti. You might have to think. That could be dangerous.

I have a tendency to prolong the agony of the average reader, who finds anything longer than an short obituary is hard to grasp. Sorry for that. So be it. If all messengers expected criticism from others by saying something, I would also keep my posts to under ten words or ... less. I will take the criticism, but at least do it in a sentence long enough to get your point across. An empty mind has short sentences and fewer nouns.

[dayner]

Ray, well said

[xrvr]

There's a wall here in Gainesville on one of the main streets that is set aside just for taggers. The only part not tagged is the memorial to the students killed by Danny Rollings a long time ago. This wall is probably half a mile long and is monitored for obscentities, basically anything else is okay. Jim

[boondockdad]

Originally Posted by Ray Eklund

I have seen no post on this Thread that is not TRUE and HONEST feelings. It is the "degree" of the offense that is being discussed. Humans have a natural need to make their mark. Before spray paint, before steel tools, before cities, towns, villages, before agriculture... Graffiti was Important.

The cave art of prehistoric France would be today's graffiti.

The pecking upon the iron rind of red sandstones in the Southwest have graffiti for special places and to mark ownership of an area.

Spanish exploring the Southwest went through some great effort when finding an appropriate flat protected surface to make their mark of the occasion for all to see.

When the human population was small, graffiti was a part of leaving their dreams, someone's thoughts or just idle time for idle hands of someone with an artistic talent. Who knows. I do not. Much of this graffiti's meaning has been lost over the thousands of years that these marks intent were made upon surfaces that still exist today. Anthropologists and archaeologists still try to find meaning of the prolific handiwork of humans, like us, leaving their mark. As their mark became centuries old, whatever remains of this graffiti is protected, socially, everywhere in our arid Southwest, as a good example.

Much of modern graffiti today has no significance, other than an individual wanting recognition. Among the group of the few, their graffiti has meaning. Being among millions of individuals and not 25 individuals of a nomadic family group, modern graffiti has no meaning... to you or myself, but I want to give an example of some graffiti that became important and positive.

- The Berlin Wall. Any surviving fragments of the wall with graffiti is now in museums. Protected. There is very little left of the Berlin Wall as it was removed and lost within a decade. This modern graffiti BECAME historically important. Who are you or myself to make that judgement of good or bad?

- A local artist in Castle Rock, Colorado did a remarkable thing worth mentioning. She is a neighbor of mine. Many concrete surfaces were being tagged by graffiti having no meaning to the majority, but to a small minority it meant something. She received donated paint and supplies and painted over the graffiti HUGE patriotic art representing the US Military and the Police. She did large scale wonderful art on bridge pillars and bare concrete surfaces of things that really meant something. I am sure the Castle Rock Police Department has photographs of this wonderful work.

This art has not been tagged. This art with symbolism has not been tagged. The City of Castle Rock has not had to remove graffiti since. Hopefully this will remain the case. For one person to come forward and TAG with GRAFFITI of her own, with meaning to everyone, even taggers... you must be careful to criticize before you understand. Not all graffiti is the same.

- Mount Rushmore and the Crazy Horse Memorial are massive forms of graffiti. Just because YOU think it art or has meaning, does not change the fact that the granite of the Black Hills has been defaced.

All I ask is that you open your mind, a little please, and consider WHY can one's graffiti be welcomed and HOW can chronic taggers find respect for a professional artist/sculpture's graffiti at the same time?

- Pueblo, Colorado built massive concrete retaining walls intended to prevent erosion caused by the Arkansas River. These walls had chronic graffiti. The City of Pueblo invited artists of all kinds and ages in the city, assigned large sections of concrete surfaces to be desecrated "by invitation". Today when you drive through Pueblo, Colorado and cross the Arkansas River... look. Although after a decade the invited graffiti art is weathered some, but... I never have seen any malicious tagging at this extensive site.

Music to one's ears is Noise to another's ear. Keep that in mind. Sometimes we speak and think with emotions and not consider that sometimes there is a purpose in what we call graffiti. You might have to think. That could be dangerous.

I have a tendency to prolong the agony of the average reader, who finds anything longer than an short obituary is hard to grasp. Sorry for that. So be it. If all messengers expected criticism from others by saying something, I would also keep my posts to under ten words or ... less. I will take the criticism, but at least do it in a sentence long enough to get your point across. An empty mind has short sentences and fewer nouns.

Let's be clear, the importance of the Berlin Wall is the wall itself, and the fragments themselves as remains of what it represented- that's why they're protected in a museum; not because of the graffiti on the wall.

Prehistoric art and ancient cave paintings were specifically ART and not graffiti because the surface belonged to the artist.

Mount Rushmore? Really? Massive forms of graffiti?

Something you conspicuously neglected to mention in your critique is this: art is commissioned. Graffiti is done specifically without consent or ownership; no permission or request. It's illegal on it's face, and in my humble opinion, the overwhelming majority of it is a reflection of the rancid evil in the offenders soul who impotently attempts to spread evil.

PS. Don't poo-poo 'short sentences and fewer nouns', it's been said: 'brevity is the soul of wit'.

[IanPoulin]

Originally Posted by eubank

It has been noted by some that the mission of the NPS has a fundamental contradiction, and I think that was essentially what we're seeing in this thread.

Begin with a fundamentally true fact about humans: Most are great, but some are troublemakers. The mission statement, unfortunately, does not recognize this fact: "...to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such
means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." The result is that damage will happen, and it will continue to happen. Short of changing the mission by either giving up on protection or limiting access, there is little that can be done besides trying to educate
.


Lynn

Lynn --

I think you have it correct; with exception of which ought be a -- the thread cites the small allocation of enforcement for which additional laws or government oversight are likely to have little effect. It comes back to education - how do we take what are currently the greatest detractors and instill into them the wisdom, or future view, that they may become the greatest defenders?

[Ray Eklund]

Eubank, thank you for the National Park sizes! Never seen that before.

First just a few of the US national parks by square miles:

Death Valley: 5,269 square miles
Yellowstone: 3,468 square miles
Grand canyon: 1,902 square miles
Big Bend: 1,252 square miles
Yosemite: 1,189 square miles
Great Smokey Mountains: 814 square miles

*********
Although citing the number of "Park Rangers" it does not include the more numerous volunteers. If you consider the square miles of each National Park, you must also realize than only a very small percentage is open to the public. Much is inaccessible... thus a perfect reason to make it a National Park or even a Wilderness Area. Restricting access is part of the process for protection. Not the Park Ranger force.

Park Rangers are there to enforce civility among the tourists. Not to protect anything, which is near impossible. Park visitors are expected to be the eyes and ears of any protected "from people" lands.

Boondockdad believes that anything "approved by the establishment" judges what is appropriate. That is why some tear down historic ruins because they no longer represent the current approval of the establishment. Just because the majority accept what is appropriate today, does not mean it is correct now or a hundred years later.

"Art is commissioned". If I were to pay/commission someone to spray paint the front of the local Police Station, does that make it appropriate and legal? Only an artist could come up with that idea. The vast majority of "tagging and graffiti" is found in urban areas and who is to say it is not... commissioned art?

I conspicuously neglected to mention many critiques. I left some points out of my "critique" for those who have some ideas of their own to discuss, rather than being politically correct and deride valid points as a matter of personal opinion or choice.

If brevity is the soul of wit... it would put all comedians immediately among the unemployed. I have yet to find any humor among those short posts on this thread concerning graffiti. If the intent of your posts on any Airforum Thread is to be humorous, you might find a better website to spread your graffiti humor as it is not commissioned nor witty. Our perceptions must be written on a wall to make any sense.

[boondockdad]

Originally Posted by Ray Eklund

Although citing the number of "Park Rangers" it does not include the more numerous volunteers. If you consider the square miles of each National Park, you must also realize than only a very small percentage is open to the public. Much is inaccessible... thus a perfect reason to make it a National Park or even a Wilderness Area. Restricting access is part of the process for protection. Not the Park Ranger force.

Park Rangers are there to enforce civility among the tourists. Not to protect anything, which is near impossible. Park visitors are expected to be the eyes and ears of any protected "from people" lands.

Boondockdad believes that anything "approved by the establishment" judges what is appropriate. That is why some tear down historic ruins because they no longer represent the current approval of the establishment. Just because the majority accept what is appropriate today, does not mean it is correct now or a hundred years later.

"Art is commissioned". If I were to pay/commission someone to spray paint the front of the local Police Station, does that make it appropriate and legal? Only an artist could come up with that idea. The vast majority of "tagging and graffiti" is found in urban areas and who is to say it is not... commissioned art?

I conspicuously neglected to mention many critiques. I left some points out of my "critique" for those who have some ideas of their own to discuss, rather than being politically correct and deride valid points as a matter of personal opinion or choice.

Not sure how you arrived at my endorsing only 'approved by the establishment'.
As a long time member of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, I take the protection of architecturally significant landmarks very seriously. That's probably also why I find graffiti particularly egregious.

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning on commissioned work...
WRT your example; if you (somehow) owned the police station, paid someone to paint it in accordance with the municipalities ordinances- then it would be legal.. it wouldn't be graffiti.
Graffiti is by definition, writings or drawings done illicitly.

Originally Posted by Ray Eklund

If brevity is the soul of wit... it would put all comedians immediately among the unemployed. I have yet to find any humor among those short posts on this thread concerning graffiti. If the intent of your posts on any Airforum Thread is to be humorous, you might find a better website to spread your graffiti humor as it is not commissioned nor witty. Our perceptions must be written on a wall to make any sense.

Wow. That's kinda harsh, isn't it?

Might behoove you to check what a 'public forum' is, and also the definition of 'wit' (hint: it doesn't have to mean humor).

[mayco]

As Superintendent of Parks for our city I really didnt struggle with the philosophy behind graffiti, it was destruction of public property. We can go on for years discussing what is "art" and what is "graffiti" and many have tried to define both. In fact, I have seen many street paintings that I thought were absolutely beautiful. However there is a time and place for everything. Choosing to use public space without permission as your canvas for self expression is defacing public property. My salary was paid by the tax payers and I was charged with the duty of being a good steward of parks owned by every tax payer in our district. Dealing with vandals was an every day part of that stewardship. Not to analyze whether graffiti was worthy or not. In twelve years in that position i never received a complaint about the removal of someones "tag". Complaints of areas that had been hit were common. Multiply that by thousands and that is what our National Park staff are up against. Its vandalism, just as if they chose to tag your Airstream. Once again self respect and respect of public property starts and ends at home with good parenting. A child probably learns how they will respect or disrespect public spaces before they reach 1st grade by watching their parents. I do believe that those in the profession would agree that the best way to combat ANY type of vandalism is to remove it or repair it as fast as possible. For many reasons.
Having said that, I also think its wonderful that agencies are getting creative in providing space for those who want paint street art. Some private businesses are also encouraging it on their buildings, I think thats great. A time and space for everything.

[boondockdad]

Well put, Mayco.

I believe it is definitely a symptom of the culture war.

You can't expect a youth to respect anything if they don't respect themselves.

The solution goes way beyond funding. Throwing more money at the problem won't touch it. Take the 'war on poverty'. 22 TRILLION spend since the start of LBJ's great project, and does anyone seriously think we're better off now?

With God's help, we're doing our part- raising our children to know right from wrong.
Because as a parent, everything else amounts to a hill of beans, if you didn't raise your children properly.

[McDave]

"I do believe that those in the profession would agree that the best way to combat ANY type of vandalism is to remove it or repair it as fast as possible."

There is one better way, in my opinion, which would be to prevent it from happening in the first place.

Vandalism is an interesting crime, in that nobody really benefits from it, other than the momentary rush the perpetrator might get from doing it. People rob to get money; people take drugs because they want to get high; people murder other people because they either hate them or the other people get in the way of their committing some other crime. You're not generally going to be able to talk people out of robbing or doing drugs or murder, since there are actual reasons for doing those things, whereas there really aren't any important reasons for making graffiti other than the lack of anything more interesting to do, so I would think that prevention of graffiti might be a possibility.

Prevention of vandalism involves discovering the motivation for doing it and redirecting it in a more positive direction. I'm sure there are many different motivations for many different people. I mentioned despair and anger in my last post. Someone mentioned a desire for fame. The list probably goes on and on.

I certainly have no problem arresting people who have committed crimes and punishing them appropriately. I have no problem with "good parenting," although that reminds me of the old joke about how to live a long and healthy life: pick healthy grandparents. By the time people are out making graffiti, their parenting has pretty much ended, and they are stuck with the results.

Everyone who has posted pretty much agrees that the resources of the national parks are woefully inadequate to arrest and punish a meaningful number of people who make graffiti, and I suppose city policy departments have more important crimes to worry about, therefore the threat of arrest and punishment is not a meaningful deterrent, so maybe we should look at ways of prevention, as deterrent doesn't seem to be working very well.

[mayco]

I agree, prevention is the key. I firmly belive that prevention starts at home, with the parents. You just cant legislate or program good parenting. If it worked then the problem would have been solved years ago, with the multitude of social programs already in place. Two parents who are involved in the childs life. But thats getting off topic. (Not necessarily two parents in the same home now, two INVOLVED parents)

[Ray Eklund]

Boondockdad:
As a long time member of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, I take the protection of architecturally significant landmarks very seriously. That's probably also why I find graffiti particularly egregious.

*******

Although this may have little to do directly with National Parks, the points are similar as it is not the Park to blame, but the people from environments I describe in the following:

I am sure you are busy in nearby Detroit saving architecturally significant landmarks. Detroit's founding fathers established their community in 1701. Obviously what later generations considered architecturally significant since then, were torn down, replaced and today being torn down again. Progress need not preserve the past, nor prevented to evolve on its own life of community. We in Castle Rock do not need you to "advise" our local issues, considering what monumental problems you have to... preserve.

Dearborn, Michigan probably has nothing left of its founding in 1786, as well. What there is today to "preserve" would be unsafe and lacking in modern engineered construction improvement, even if fifty years old.

If we were to "save" everything that some group found as architecturally significant, I would be living in a shack with a dirt floor owned previously by a 1859 gold prospector along Clear Creek in Denver. Tossing out your membership in a group does not make your opinion no better or valid, than someone else's opinion.

Dearborn, Michigan is another great example of a city falling apart. Save your own city. The nation and world have their own unique priorities and needs.

Citizens in MY TOWN are doing something. One step at a time. It is not the physical buildings in a town or city that are the problem you seemed to be concerned. Graffiti will weather off a surface or be removed by those who object to the message, real or imaginary. It is the people and the culture of YOUR immediate view that are the problem. Fix that and you fix graffiti.

You missed the point about tearing down historic buildings. The Middle East is doing this at the present. Save some of those.

Nepal will rebuild their buildings to meet better standards to resist earthquakes.

Even the Cliff Dwellers of the Southwest remodeled and updated over centuries of living in them. What humans do not tear down, geologic time will.

We in Castle Rock, Colorado HAVE done something to improve the quality of life and is also now, for such a small town/city, the third best place to live in the United States. Work with an organization for Dearborn... and avoid the National. Dearborn Trust of Historic Preservation as long as YOUR group is paying for the preservation with sweat and your equity.

I am for improving the living standards where I live. Taggers have been around since permanent communities were first built. You nor I will prevent graffiti. A hundred years from now, there will be taggers.

I do not speak in philosophical terms, membership in group therapy and mumbo jumbo. That is for the politicians who have let their communities fall into ruin from avoiding the real problem, those who are living in those communities. Anyone posting on this thread are not the ones you need to be "converting". Direct yourself to those areas in Dearborn, which you no doubt would avoid even contemplating the thought of patrolling the evening hours to convince one or more taggers... how you feel.

[jbroedlow]

We just hiked Tent Rocks near Santa Fe, NM and met up with some park rangers that were looking for people climbing where they shouldn't be. We then talked about people defacing some of the rocks and the rangers said it happened all the time but they were lucky the rocks could be easily cleaned because they were so soft. I asked what the penalty was and I think they said $250 or so. Now there's the problem. How about $1,000-$5,000 fine to make people stop and think? What happened to the two idiots that carved their name into the coliseum in Rome?

[boondockdad]

Originally Posted by Ray Eklund

Although this may have little to do directly with National Parks, the points are similar as it is not the Park to blame, but the people from environments I describe in the following:

I am sure you are busy in nearby Detroit saving architecturally significant landmarks. Detroit's founding fathers established their community in 1701. Obviously what later generations considered architecturally significant since then, were torn down, replaced and today being torn down again. Progress need not preserve the past, nor prevented to evolve on its own life of community. We in Castle Rock do not need you to "advise" our local issues, considering what monumental problems you have to... preserve.

Dearborn, Michigan probably has nothing left of its founding in 1786, as well. What there is today to "preserve" would be unsafe and lacking in modern engineered construction improvement, even if fifty years old.

If we were to "save" everything that some group found as architecturally significant, I would be living in a shack with a dirt floor owned previously by a 1859 gold prospector along Clear Creek in Denver. Tossing out your membership in a group does not make your opinion no better or valid, than someone else's opinion.

Dearborn, Michigan is another great example of a city falling apart. Save your own city. The nation and world have their own unique priorities and needs.

Citizens in MY TOWN are doing something. One step at a time. It is not the physical buildings in a town or city that are the problem you seemed to be concerned. Graffiti will weather off a surface or be removed by those who object to the message, real or imaginary. It is the people and the culture of YOUR immediate view that are the problem. Fix that and you fix graffiti.

You missed the point about tearing down historic buildings. The Middle East is doing this at the present. Save some of those.

Nepal will rebuild their buildings to meet better standards to resist earthquakes.

Even the Cliff Dwellers of the Southwest remodeled and updated over centuries of living in them. What humans do not tear down, geologic time will.

We in Castle Rock, Colorado HAVE done something to improve the quality of life and is also now, for such a small town/city, the third best place to live in the United States. Work with an organization for Dearborn... and avoid the National. Dearborn Trust of Historic Preservation as long as YOUR group is paying for the preservation with sweat and your equity.

I am for improving the living standards where I live. Taggers have been around since permanent communities were first built. You nor I will prevent graffiti. A hundred years from now, there will be taggers.

I do not speak in philosophical terms, membership in group therapy and mumbo jumbo. That is for the politicians who have let their communities fall into ruin from avoiding the real problem, those who are living in those communities. Anyone posting on this thread are not the ones you need to be "converting". Direct yourself to those areas in Dearborn, which you no doubt would avoid even contemplating the thought of patrolling the evening hours to convince one or more taggers... how you feel.

I see.
We've gone from "who am I to judge art?"
to
"there's always going to be vandals, so whatevs"

I guess property rights and ownership really threw a monkey wrench in your pro-vandalism diatribe, eh?

- - -

Actually, we've several excellent historic preservation structures that are quite a bit older than 50 years here in Dearborn; that are still functional and occupied daily. Despite your fears of living on (what we'd call a "Michigan basement") a dirt floor, appreciation for historic architecture doesn't automatically mean a rigid dogmatic stance of conservation. Actually, the point I made in another thread about natures constant state of change, and we humans relatively negligible impact on her; speaks to this ongoing continuum.
A constant cycle of building up, then breaking down.
Some specimens should be protected and preserved- but, not at the expense of walling them off behind glass and barricades. Which ones are preserved are occasionally providential, but most always self-evident to an educated mind and lover of what is noble, just, pure, lovely, virtuous and praiseworthy.

The pro-graffiti argument makes me think of the disparity in required reading from 100 years ago vs. today. Back then, an elementary school students list had: "Treasure Island", "Captain Courageous", "Evangeline", and of course The Bible. Titles, that not coincidentally, introduced children to an array of themes crucial to understanding the foundations upon which America and western civilization were built. Now, it's "The House of the Scorpion", "The Last Book in the Universe", or "Hunger Games".
Written within the last 20 years, books based on nothing more than a passing fad.

- - -

Perhaps it's the more nuanced mind that can appreciate the value of illicit graffiti. Obviously there are folks who think there is something beautiful and uplifting in this. I will give you this: it is emotive.

I guess I've seen builders do worse to a historic Sears & Roebuck Foursquare, all in the name of adding a few square feet... am I right?? But, I digress.

I like your NIMBY position. Particularly taking a local interest, and rebuking any national oversight or meddling. That's a very noble position to take. But, like all organizations, there needs to be organizational hierarchy to insure all our ships are sailing in the same direction.
By all means, pursue what you think is best, out there in Colorado. Lord knows, the dopers have.

- - -

Nope. Graffiti is vandalism. It has no value. It is not part of the human condition. It is de-evolution... and like the etymology of 'vandalism', this current plague of 'taggers' and their sickening doodles will forever go down in history as nothing more than a plague of miscreants spreading their dreck.

Of that, I am sure.

[xrvr]

I equate graffiti with littering. I think you'll find it's the same people who would do both. Lack of respect for others, for property either privat or public, and for authority. We've had to go to parking permits in our neighborhood because high school kids park here. They block driveways, mailboxes, and walk through backyards sometimes climbing over fences and damaging them. This is an affluent community, these kids are of different races, they all have enough money to buy cars, and yet they show no respect. Example. Neighbor stopped two girls from walking past his house into his backyard to climb over a fence to get to school. He politely told them that he preferred they didn't do that. One of them then said that its okay then to walk through. He said no, why would you think that. Her reply was you said thst you preferred we didn't walk through but you didn't say not to. He clarified his meaning. Sorry for another rant. Jim

[Ray Eklund]

I have been to the majority of National Parks in the western USA. I have never found blatant graffiti. Yes, names scratched on wooden bench seats and of course, the family scratching their names onto handrails.

Is there an affordable and reasonable way to prevent these acts of vandalism?

No.

This is a "tar baby" that has no solution. You can expand this onto City Parks and National Forest campgrounds and there still is no possible way to prevent those with intent, from doing.

The original post is an example of a family who had no regard as to what they were doing. They and others with the same mindset will continue to do this. If there were a way to prevent such activity, it would have been discovered and in practice.

The best any of us can do is to point these individuals out and react. Most of the true damage is done at night. The graffiti vandals know it is wrong. They do not care and the punishment, if any, is of no consequence.

Repeat DUI drivers can be prevented. Speeding. Bank Robberies. Larceny. Residential breaking. None can be prevented with or without laws. We do the best we can to mitigate these situations, but have absolutely NO control over these individuals.

The family that was defacing the handrails in the National Park. Had you grabbed one of the family members... it would be YOU that would be charged with assault. A judge would eventually toss the case, but we understand that it is we, the responsible individual, who have everything working against us.

Be the responsible citizens that most of are and be very careful when encountering these individuals that care little about themselves or your family.

[boondockdad]

Originally Posted by jbroedlow

We just hiked Tent Rocks near Santa Fe, NM and met up with some park rangers that were looking for people climbing where they shouldn't be. We then talked about people defacing some of the rocks and the rangers said it happened all the time but they were lucky the rocks could be easily cleaned because they were so soft. I asked what the penalty was and I think they said $250 or so. Now there's the problem. How about $1,000-$5,000 fine to make people stop and think? What happened to the two idiots that carved their name into the coliseum in Rome?

This.
Make the fines hurt.

Or how about like they do in Finland, and base the fine on the persons net worth... some millionaire got a speeding ticket for what amounted to 18mph over the limit, and based on his worth the fine was $130,000!
If he was median income, it would have been something like $600.

If they're a minor, hit their parents with the fine... and give the delinquent huge community service.

[IanPoulin]

Originally Posted by boondockdad

This.

Make the fines hurt.



Or how about like they do in Finland, and base the fine on the persons net worth... some millionaire got a speeding ticket for what amounted to 18mph over the limit, and based on his worth the fine was $130,000!

If he was median income, it would have been something like $600.



If they're a minor, hit their parents with the fine... and give the delinquent huge community service.

This is good! If there are fines available, allow them to scale up/down to the individual and their capabilities. I still think education needs to be in there somewhere, but this is a fantastic idea...

On a tangental note, and not intending to "support" graffiti, but if you ever travel to Pompeii, find time to visit the so-called "secret museum" in Naples at the National Archaeological Museum. When Pompeii was excavated, they uncovered an amazing amount of Roman era graffiti in the city, nearly all of insanely obscene by today's standards as well as some fairly lewd household artworks, statuary, etc.. The graffiti which was not obscene was usually political in nature, with follow on graffiti in the obscene category. The museum also includes numerous (in-)famous household art pieces (the one most likely known is the statue of the god Pan copulating with a goat.

Lewd or not, graffiti or not, the works in the walls of Pompeii and its museums are a fascinating look into the cultures of Rome not available anywhere else.


2011 Airstream International Serenity 28' - 30a/taupe
2013 Ford F150 v6-ecoboost with max tow and HD payload packages

[mayco]

I would guess that about one in 1000 (or less) vandals/taggers are ever caught. So increased fines really wont do much. Im all for it but really, not much impact on the problem.

[Ray Eklund]

It will be interesting to see these vandals caught, where they are from and what punishment, if any, will be dispensed.

"Police ask for help catch graffiti vandals (Denver Post, June 7, 2015)

Graffiti vandals are tagging various spots in Castle Rock, including public art pieces along town trails.

Castle Rock, Colorado Police are looking for at least three suspects, based on video surveillance. One is a male in his late teens or early 20's wearing shoes with different color laces. The other two suspects are males about the same age.

The vandals are also tagging construction equipment, sidewalks, walls and other spots around town."