Goblin Valley vandals Charged

[Sun Dance]

What did they do here? I guess I'm not seeing it.

[cchoc]

What did they do here? I guess I'm not seeing it.

This is a place called the Racetrack Playa in Death Valley. It's a great place to take pictures of the rocks and their paths across the playa. Right by where the white truck is parked is a sign that says to stay off when muddy, It will probably take years for nature to clean up their footprints. It's basically just having respect for those who come along after you do.

[ratagonia]

It's basically just having respect for those who come along after you do.

Why would anyone ever do that????

[SRG]

Nope. That formation is gone forever, smoking pot is not a valid comparison.

When you find the pot that isn't "gone forever" after you smoke it... please give me some

[Slot Machine]

I don't think Scott Card owes anyone, especially you, an explanation of the philosophy behind his client selection. In thread after thread on here... Edited because there's no reason for me to be a dick

???

Was just saying SC would clear his own name if Taylor wasn't his client. And faster than a fat boy could push over a hoodoo, I might add.

[Sombeech]

Looks like the scouts visited Death Valley too:

Attachment 71773

Too bad they'll never catch these jerks unless someone turns them in.

Sometimes, "damage" means it won't be as cool as a photograph for the next visitor, as in footsteps in the mud. No ecosystem is disrupted by scouts, creatures aren't changing their feeding habits, it just doesn't look as awesome on facebook because your friends will know you're not the first one there.

The footprints in the above picture were left at different times by different people as well. I believe "sharing the environment" means that from time to time, we won't get the photograph that we really wanted. It doesn't necessarily mean a Disturbance in the Force. Time will "heal" these footprints with each rainstorm, and then the photographers can be at peace with the illusion of solitude, just as long as they crop that parking spot out of their photograph so their fans will assume they hiked 3 days in to get the shot.

As for tipping over the goblin, yeah, that is a permanent change to the landscape, although none of us would never ever know where this particular goblin was without trying to research it.

Riding or walking on a trail when it's muddy? That constitutes actual trail damage, because ruts or holes can be left on the trail making the riding / travel difficult and bumpy. Horse riders, hikers and mountain bikers can be ticketed when traveling certain trails in the mud. This has nothing to do with how photogenic it is.

[cchoc]

So ignoring a sign saying to stay off when wet is cool? I know many people don't value being considerate of others, I just don't have much use for them.

And if you have ever been out to the playa you'd realize its a long way to drive just to get your boots muddy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Sombeech]

So ignoring a sign saying to stay off when wet is cool?

Nope, never said anything of the sort.

I'm saying some consider it damage when they don't get the photograph they desired.

[Scott P]

Time will "heal" these footprints with each rainstorm, and then the photographers can be at peace with the illusion of solitude, just as long as they crop that parking spot out of their photograph so their fans will assume they hiked 3 days in to get the shot.

Time will; it just takes a long time to erase the marks in this location. When muddy, footprints there can last several decades or even hundreds of years. It doesn't rain often there, so muddy conditions are rare.

Anyway, the moving rocks are pretty cool:

http://www.nps.gov/deva/planyourvisit/the-racetrack.htm

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...park&FORM=IGRE

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...ry&FORM=RESTAB

There are several theories of why the rocks move, but no one really knows for sure and no one has ever seen one move:

http://geology.com/articles/racetrac...ng-rocks.shtml

Time lapse is hard to catch since they only move an estimated few seconds in a period of three or more years.

[cchoc]

Nope, never said anything of the sort.

I'm saying some consider it damage when they don't get the photograph they desired.

That's not what I said, and I'm not trying to impress you or anyone else with my photos. That said, I still consider the folks who did this inconsiderate jerks. I do try and love my neighbor, but there are some I'd just rather not have as a neighbor.

[Sombeech]

Time will; it just takes a long time to erase the marks in this location. When muddy, footprints there can last several decades or even hundreds of years. It doesn't rain often there, so muddy conditions are rare.

For sure, and although there are only theories to how the rocks move, moisture is most likely involved. So i was going to add that footprints probably won't change the course of the rock, as that same moisture that moves the rock will most likely erase the footprints.

Definitely an intriguing mystery as to how they move.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Scott P]

So i was going to add that footprints probably won't change the course of the rock, as that same moisture that moves the rock will most likely erase the footprints.

Yes, moisture will for sure eventually erase them. But it could take decades or hundreds of years. If moisture erases the footprints, it would also erase the "trail" behind the rock.

As for changing the course of the rock, actually it would. Although no one knows for sure, the ice raft theory is the most plausible and accepted. Unlike a rock, the footprints wouldn't move while skimming across on an ice raft. For the rocks to move, the surface has to be almost completely flat.

You can tell that the rocks moved at different times (notice the different paths) and probably years apart as well:



If the "trails" are still there after several years, footprints will be as well. When dry, the surface is almost rock hard, so footprints aren't much of a problem.

[xxnitsuaxx]

???

Was just saying SC would clear his own name if Taylor wasn't his client. And faster than a fat boy could push over a hoodoo, I might add.

And I'm saying that he shouldn't give a single thought to "clearing his name" in your eyes. Scott Card likely doesn't care what you think, and for good reason. What kind of special breed of arrogance motivates you to expect someone to justify their career choices to you? Why should anyone waste a single minute worrying what you think about their decisions? You've come a long way, Slot Machine. Your bombastic and contemptuous screeds used to be directed at people who disagreed with your canyoneering philosophies; you now expect others to take all of your opinions seriously and justify themselves to you. It's been fun watching your trajectory.

[Slot Machine]

And I'm saying that he shouldn't give a single thought to "clearing his name" in your eyes. Scott Card likely doesn't care what you think, and for good reason. What kind of special breed of arrogance motivates you to expect someone to justify their career choices to you? Why should anyone waste a single minute worrying what you think about their decisions? You've come a long way, Slot Machine. Your bombastic and contemptuous screeds used to be directed at people who disagreed with your canyoneering philosophies; you now expect others to take all of your opinions seriously and justify themselves to you. It's been fun watching your trajectory.

Not arrogance motivates, but endless curiosity about all people that make choices that are opposite of what I would choose. Not saying that so-and-so is wrong, or I am right. I simply like to push people to prove me wrong. (Which on this thread, if SC could have participated, he clearly would have.)

You ask some questions that seem rhetorical, but are not. Nobody has to play on the Bogley playground, including you Austin. You don't have to read OR care about what I write. Neither does SC, which I assume he does not. How much a person cares is entirely up to the individual. I expect nobody to care about anything I write. From experience, Bogley is just not a wise place to invest any emotion.



That being said, I like it when SC plays, as he often has well thought out opinions, not that I agree with any of them.

Back on topic: This thread is about law, a criminal, and his defender, NOT canyoneering. I've stayed on topic, and learned a bit. Do YOU have any content to share Austin? Do YOU have anything to contribute to this thread OTHER than personal attacks?

[Sombeech]

I still consider the folks who did this inconsiderate jerks.

Absolutely! I agree. To ignore the warnings and to walk in the mud is inconsiderate. I just wouldn't call these footprints damage. They have temporarily interrupted the photogenic opportunity of this one particular racetrack.

Graffiti on canyon walls? Yeah, that's damage.
Tipping over goblins? Yeah.
Fire damage outside of a designated campfire spot? Yeah
Muddy ruts on a trail that will harden into a rough road? Yeah

Muddy footprints on the flats that make a photo less appealing, in my opinion, not damage. Ignoring the sign/policy though is still inconsiderate, but whether or not the sign is there, you can draw a distinction if this is damage or not.

[cchoc]

Absolutely! I agree. To ignore the warnings and to walk in the mud is inconsiderate. I just wouldn't call these footprints damage. They have temporarily interrupted the photogenic opportunity of this one particular racetrack.

Graffiti on canyon walls? Yeah, that's damage.
Tipping over goblins? Yeah.
Fire damage outside of a designated campfire spot? Yeah
Muddy ruts on a trail that will harden into a rough road? Yeah

Muddy footprints on the flats that make a photo less appealing, in my opinion, not damage. Ignoring the sign/policy though is still inconsiderate, but whether or not the sign is there, you can draw a distinction if this is damage or not.

Most of the people who come to the playa do so for photography. It will take years for the footprints to go away. If someone took a crap on the playa it wouldn't be damage, leaving muddy footprints is.

I do a *lot* of traveling and try to leave each place I visit as much as it was when I arrived as possible. To me that's just being responsible.

[Sombeech]

If someone took a crap on the playa it wouldn't be damage .

No, it could be indecent exposure, it could be considered littering, it could be considered a lot of things.

Let's not get in a pissing match over it anyways.

[cchoc]

No, it could be indecent exposure, it could be considered littering, it could be considered a lot of things.

Let's not get in a pissing match over it anyways.

Long after the big deuce was gone the footprints would still be there, ruining the view for those that made the drive. You are the one splitting hairs on what defines damage, I'm just trying to help you understand the distinction - and it would take a much more massive pissing match than either of us could complete to clean up the footprints.

As it is, I feel like we have made our opinions clear on the subject.

[accadacca]

I just got back from Death Valley last weekend. I didn't visit this area but did wonder how they kept people from damaging the area. Strange enough, when I got home I heard about this incident.

[canyoncaver]

No, it could be indecent exposure, it could be considered littering, it could be considered a lot of things.

Let's not get in a pissing match over it anyways.

Ummmmm, sorry but you are the one promoting the pissing match. You have had several people state that the racetrack footprints will likely be around for decades, yet you continue to insist that they are ephemeral, and will be erased by the next rain. They will not. As someone else pointed out, the fact that you can see the rocks' trails proves you wrong.

This is most certainly damage, and was perpretrated in clear violation of a sign that not only asks you not to do it, but also explains the very good reasons why they don't want you to do it.

For me, this falls in the same category as Goblin-toppling. It is only a slightly different flavor of ignorance. I would support charges against the people that willingly did it. Maybe not a felony conviction, but felony charges that get plea bargained to misdemeanor fines and community service would suit me just fine.

As for this quote:

Sometimes, "damage" means it won't be as cool as a photograph for the next visitor, as in footsteps in the mud. No ecosystem is disrupted by scouts, creatures aren't changing their feeding habits, it just doesn't look as awesome on facebook because your friends will know you're not the first one there.

This quote describes exactly the reason why society places a high value on conservation. We are really protecting it for ourselves, and for those that will succeed us. There is little doubt that the earth and most of its processes will out-live the human species. The aim of conservation is to preserve the earth for the benefit of humans. We as a society believe that society is better off with un-toppled goblins and racetrack playas that are untracked by humans. National parks exist for the "benefit and enjoyment of the people." For Racetrack visitors, that enjoyment will be diminished for the next few years. Is it really so unfathomable that someone should pay a nominal fine as a token repayment for this loss of enjoyment?