What is appropriate to share on the internet?

[Iceaxe]

The BLM is whining because the location of all the hidden Anasazi ruins in Cedar Mesa are being shared on the internet. What do you guys think about this?

What is appropriate to share on the internet and what is not?

Favorite fishing hole?
Favorite mountain bike trail?
Favorie Hike?
Favorite Canyon?

I'm guilty of doing just what the article is taking about with the recent Cedar Mesa pictures and location I posted in the hiking section of the forum. Should the thread be removed?


BLM plans activities as Antiquities Act turns 100
By Joe Baird
The Salt Lake Tribune

The Antiquities Act, created to protect the nation's ancient ruins, artifacts and other cultural and paleoecological resources, turns 100 this year. And the Utah office of the Bureau of Land Management is celebrating the centennial.

State BLM officials plan to commemorate the 1906 act with a daylong series of events at the Edge of the Cedars Museum in Blanding.

"The Antiquities Act is really the foundation we have for cultural resources management," BLM spokeswoman Adrienne Babbitt said Tuesday. "Many think it is simply the mechanism that gives the president the authority to create new national monuments. But what it really does is protect the past on Utah's public lands."

The Antiquities Act was created by Congress following a rash of looting of prehistoric fossils and Native American artifacts from federally owned land. The legislation required permits for archeological and cultural exploration, and imposed penalties on violators.

BLM officials want to drive that point home again during the centennial celebration. The agency has become increasingly concerned, Babbitt says, over the rise of what she calls "accidental vandalism" brought about by increased visitation on BLM lands.

The Internet, where information on archeological sites can be found, also has played a role.

"In the past, BLM was able to manage the problem more easily by simply not disclosing where sensitive sites are located, which we still do," she said. "With the Internet, that is not as effective as it once was. That's why our focus for this has been working with the public to tell them how to visit these sites correctly."

Theodore Roosevelt was the first president to use the Antiquities Act, proclaiming Devils Tower in Wyoming the nation's first national monument in 1906. Roosevelt gave the Grand Canyon monument status in 1908.

The area later became a national park.

The Antiquities Act has at times been controversial. Some southern Utah residents and state and county leaders are still smarting over President Clinton's creation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in 1996. The state has argued in past court filings that Clinton exceeded the scope of his presidential powers in creating the monument.


Monumental additions

The following national monuments in Utah came into being via the Antiquities Act, which is now 100 years old. Several of the monuments went on to become national parks.*

Grand Staircase-Escalante
Cedar Breaks
Dinosaur
Hovenweep
Natural Bridges
Rainbow Bridge
Timpanogos Cave
Bryce Canyon*
Arches*
Capitol Reef*
Zion (portions)*

* Saturday's activities in Blanding to mark the 100th anniversary begin at 7:30 a.m. with a pancake breakfast, and continue throughout the day with displays of Native American artistry, interpretive walks to several ancestral Puebloan sites and an educational symposium from 1 to 5 p.m. at the College of Eastern Utah's San Juan Campus.

.

[DickHead]

Anything and everything. If I have a spot that is so secret and so good and nobody knows about it (yeah, right), then I *might* sit on that knowledge.

[rockgremlin]

Tough call. Probably all of the people who subscribe to your site aren't the types that will roll up on ruins with the intent to vandalize or rob. I would say that most types that get out of doors often, and appreciate the outdoors also have the decency to respect these sites, and leave them untouched. I say keep on posting them - since I live so close to them, I plan to visit them all.

[stefan]

shane

I think the more these ruins are published the bigger a problem there could be. while it's good that more folks will become excited to check out the stuff, there will clearly be more impact on the sites that are visited. i do believe that photographs showing people standing within, touching, or leaning on ruins may be setting a bad example for others, as they may take it a step further.

i think the problem with publishing ruins is that it is harder to teach people how to act around them appropriately, say than canyoneering. i think the fear is that these places will be exposed to more people who are going to negatively impact the sites. in some ways, by publishing the information, you should assume some responsibility for this if it occurs, directly or indirectly from your information.

you're not the only one out there who is doing it. MK has done it for years, though in a somewhat different manner. Tassoni purposely avoids it almost completely in his book on cedar mesa. And with the internet GPS coordinates of ruins are becoming more and more available.

I believe though that with your site you CAN have a decent impact on many people by showing them what's appropriate to do at these sites. This should be in accordance with the current conventions.

as far as other canyons, hiking/canyoneering, go i think everything is fair game. Though clearly, impact will result.

[Udink]

This is always a tough issue, no matter what the subject matter. What good are these ruins and artifacts if nobody sees them? On the other hand, what good are they if everybody visits them and they are subsequently lost for future generations?

The way I see it, if these really are national "treasures" (which I believe they are), then the BLM, NPS, or other managing agency should do more to protect them. Give out whatever information you want, but let the managing agencies enforce the rules. Obviously, this isn't really happening right now.

[Sombeech]

I've got a hard time sharing my fishing hole in the Wind Rivers, just because I like the solitude up there. But then I feel like I need to share the knowledge that has been given me. This may be my last year up there, so you fellas can have at it!

But on the other hand, it's VERY difficult to navigate to, so it's even hard to share the info.

For vandalism issues, it's understandable. But most of the time, it's just people like me enjoying the "exclusive" spot, and when we're done with it, we'll tell where it is.

[DirkHammergate]

Ask RockGremlin, he likes to share semi nudes. Perfectly acceptable.

[Iceaxe]

FWIW: the Cedar Mesa stuff I posted was already in Tassoni's book. So I felt as it was fair game. In other words, I was not the guy who spilled the beans. Not sure if its right or wrong, but my feeling has always been once the horse is out of the barn there is no sense in shutting the door.

I also spent some time talking with Kelsey yesterday and I know some more Cedar Mesa stuff will be in his new book which I believe comes out today (MK mentioned some place on North Temple already has it on the self).

Placing it inside the CoF does limit access to a relatively small group while providing the info to anyone who really wants it.

Anyhoo..... I'm interested in hearing what others think about this. Its a tough call, I have a hard drive filled with beta on ruins and rock art.... I enjoy sharing with those who respect the site but understand it comes at a price.

More thoughts, advice, recommendations?

[James_B_Wads2000]

you're not the only one out there who is doing it. MK has done it for years, though in a somewhat different manner.

What do you mean differently?

[stefan]

you're not the only one out there who is doing it. MK has done it for years, though in a somewhat different manner.

What do you mean differently?

well shane focuses on ruins themselves in all respects even the titles. MK *tends* to talk about the canyon and includes the photos of ruins, ruin descriptions and their rough locations on a map. I would say there is a slight difference in the focus. But one could easily see very little difference. there really isn't any point i am trying to make, just a comment.

[icthys]

I've always teetered back and forth on a issue like this.

I've got my fishing spots that I will never mention on the internet even if they aren't secret. Once I get around to posting some FT's (fishing trips) you won't find me mentioning where it was I went unless it's very well known like Strawberry, Provo River, Weber River, Lake Powell, etc. On the other hand if someone asks me through email or a private message I'm willing to give up the goods, I don't have a problem taking people there either.

Then there is the selfishness in me. I love the information you and others post. If you didn't I wouldn't have the time to find them myself and enjoy them. If you weren't openly posting I wouldn't have a problem shooting a email to ask for information either. The way you post with most in your CofF is a great way to put the info out but still keep it on the down low. I can see the difference in posting an arch location versus a ruin site. Looting and vandalism is a big concern for ruin sites and openly posting information begins to invite problems.

I for one would hate to see you stop posting info

[Iceaxe]

There is anther school of though on this and that is..... the more folks who know about something cool the more folks you have protecting it. Its pretty hard for a pot hunter to raid a site when a visitor with a cell phone can pop over the ridge at any time.

In the end it is going to have to be education that wins this battle..... educating the public is a much bigger chore and is a lot more difficult then the old keep it quite approach, but with the proliferation of information I see no other reasonable course for the future.

Just a little more food for thought....

[shagster]

I love the information you and others post. If you didn't I wouldn't have the time to find them myself and enjoy them.
I for one would hate to see you stop posting info

I have to agree. I am not that familiar with many places, but I love learning of new places to visit. Like others have said it is also important to preserve these great places. Like Iceaxe said it is going to be education that wins the battle.

[Scott P]

FWIW: the Cedar Mesa stuff I posted was already in Tassoni's book.

If it's already in a book, it's no secret. Plus, so far the places you have added so far (but I'm sure more may be coming, such as the one you mentioned you know where) were on the old maps decades ago.

I also spent some time talking with Kelsey yesterday and I know some more Cedar Mesa stuff will be in his new book which I believe comes out today (MK mentioned some place on North Temple already has it on the self).

I gave him some stuff, but it was already on the old maps. Back when Highway 95 went between the Bears Ears (1930's).

If it were in a technical canyon or something like that, I would use more caution. I worried some of the hidden ones in Hideout Canyon being published.

The concern is valid, but it is just a few spoiling it for the rest of us. People like Calvin Black were reckless idiots whom stole from the ruins. And he was a county commisioner (luckily he's now dead). A few years ago, I remember reading in the paper that some school teacher took here class out to Grand Gulch to dig through the ruins (!). I've seen foreign tourist steal from ruins. There is always bad apples in the bunch. It is only a few. Most are respectful. A few are not.

[Iceaxe]

If it's already in a book, it's no secret. Plus, so far the places you have added so far (but I'm sure more may be coming, such as the one you mentioned you know where) were on the old maps decades ago.

I have a copy of the old USGS maps which are very useful in locating ruins. But really only a small percentage of ruins are noted on the old maps. To the best of my knowledge the fortress ruin I mentioned to you when we met at the museum is a pretty recent discovery and its not the ruin itself that is so impressive but anther aspect unique to the particular ruin.

One other point about all this ruin stuff that really bugs the shit out of me...... it has to do with the recently disclosed Rock Creek area. And the part that bugs me is the Universities are already planning big digs in the area. To me that just smells of looting under the disguise of academics. Anyone else feel this way or care to try and change my opinion?

[James_B_Wads2000]

it has to do with the recently disclosed Rock Creek area.

Do you mean Range Creek? I have never heard of Rock Creek.

James

[Scott P]

I have a copy of the old USGS maps which are very useful in locating ruins. But really only a small percentage of ruins are noted on the old maps.

Yes, I didn't mean most of them were on the map, just the ones you recently added, ie Fish Mouth Cave ruin. Where did you stumble on the 1930 maps, by chance?

To the best of my knowledge the fortress ruin I mentioned to you when we met at the museum is a pretty recent discovery and its not the ruin itself that is so impressive but anther aspect unique to the particular ruin.

Yep, I don't know where that one is.

it has to do with the recently disclosed Rock Creek area. And the part that bugs me is the Universities are already planning big digs in the area. To me that just smells of looting under the disguise of academics. Anyone else feel this way or care to try and change my opinion?

Which Rock Creek are we speaking of? I know of two rock creeks on the CP that have lots of archeological sites (one is a side canyon of McElmo, the other Desolation), but don't know if you are refering to a different one.

[stefan]

And the part that bugs me is the Universities are already planning big digs in the area. To me that just smells of looting under the disguise of academics. Anyone else feel this way or care to try and change my opinion?

DO explain your point here. Looting, hmm, maybe i see what your trying to say is that they will remove anything for their own personal (academic) use. it's not as if they are going to take it home with them and keep it indefinitely or sell it to the highest bidder.

my guess is that the problem you have is that in general unversities tend to store most of this stuff away in back rooms, for example, the majority of the extensive glen canyon "loot," rather than place them in museums for all to see.

this last point i agree with, but i *hope* they'll eventually make a great large museum, preferably in the CP itself somewhere, for all to see. or possibly a couple of museums. i think museums are good things....don't you?

but i am wondering if you are questioning the "dig" at all. do you think it's perhaps better left in the ground? they are MOSTLY protected but this way no one gets to see them.

[Iceaxe]

Do you mean Range Creek? I have never heard of Rock Creek.

Yup.... meant Range Creek.

Rock Creek is next/near Range Creek when you access from the Green River as we once did.

Back in the late 60's my father bought a complete set of 7.5 quads for Utah. I have most the maps, but some were lost or destroyed.

"loot" was a strong word..... but yes, I have a problem with the digs. First it destroys the area for everyone else to visit, at least in a natural state. And yes I like museums, and if they are going to dig it up and remove items it should be placed where everyone can visit. I would like to see Range Creek left untouched for anther 100 years, except for hiking through. Perhaps just place the stuff that can be picked up from the surface in a museum.

[stefan]

I would like to see Range Creek left untouched for anther 100 years, except for hiking through. Perhaps just place the stuff that can be picked up from the surface in a museum.

yes, while this is a VERY attractive idea, i am torn.

if i remember correctly the family which owned the land gave it to the university(s) to do with as they saw fit. is this the case? i hope when they are finished with their likely extensive and long-term digs, that they return the place to a modified semblance of how they found it.