I’m sure by now you have all heard of the Instagram user Creepytings. Its owner, a woman by the name of Casey Nocket, apparently went on a road trip through Western National Parks and – unfortunately – appears to have left a long trail of graffiti in her wake. We here at Modern Hiker broke the story first and we’ve since become ground zero for a lot of the discussion around this issue (the traffic slammed our otherwise excellent servers twice and will probably end up costing me some overage fees, but whatever).

Early on, this was a rare example of the Collective Power of the Internet being used for Good. Both in our comments and on Reddit, users scanned the Instagram images we saved and were able to determine – in some cases down to the exact spots on the trail – the locations of most of the graffiti images. And based on the rich social media history, we were able to determine a long list of other National Parks that might also be affected by graffiti even though no images were posted (hence the National Park Service naming ten Parks in their press release). Now that the story is starting to reach beyond the outdoor world, I’ve noticed we’re running into some people who just don’t seem to be able to see what the big deal is. I hope this post can answer some of their questions and maybe even wring something positive out of this mess.

What’s the difference between these paintings and cave art?

At first glance, this may seem like a good point. Many of the protected instances of rock art and even graffiti in the parks aren’t necessarily that ancient – at Utah’s Newspaper Rock, some of the protected etchings are only about 60 years old. So who’s to say that Nocket’s work won’t be considered important in another 60 years?


Climbing across pictographs in Joshua Tree

There’s a very simple answer to that question, though: Cave art and earlier graffiti existed before the land was under federal ownership and the protection of the Park Service, which makes it very clear that any sort of vandalism or defacement is a big no-no. Beyond the cut-and-dry legal boundaries, it’s also been noted that in many cases those petroglyphs and pictographs were some of the only sources of artistic expression for that culture – or they denoted sacred or important landmarks or were even just a way to decorate a home. Today, artists not only have an almost limitless number of venues for self -expression, but they also have a wide variety of ways to publish their work. There is no need to deface public property for your art – and there is certainly no need to crawl over pictographs for a “cool” Instagram shot as she apparently did near Barker Dam. Even though most of those pictographs were painted over in the 50s, there are still some originals in that cave – and defacing them can land a person in federal prison.

One person’s graffiti is another person’s street art.

Near the Mist Trail

Near Yosemite’s Mist Trail

This is a matter of subjective taste. I live in Los Angeles, which is not exactly known for being one of the world’s most photogenic cities. However, we have a wonderful culture of murals and street art and I actually find many examples to be vast improvements over our otherwise drab building exteriors. Again, the difference here is that most (but admittedly not all) buildings with murals and extensive street art give permission to artists to create their work on privately held property. Regardless of whether or not you consider the Creepytings paintings to be art, they were most definitely not done with permission and done on land that literally belongs to every American.

Well this is what happens when you get city people coming to the National Parks.

To be honest, this response bothers me a lot. Whether you live in a town right outside a National Park, a sleepy surburb, an overpriced skyscraper condo, or a neglected inner-city borough, these National Parks are yours and you deserve the right to visit them. This issue has nothing to do with city-types in the backcountry (it seems like Nocket lives somewhere in upstate New York, and not New York City anyway) or East Coasters trashing our West Coast parks, or about the gender of the person responsible – it’s about graffiti in National Parks and that’s it.

It’s just one person leaving a few paintings around outside. Aren’t there more important things to worry about? People seem like they’re out for blood!

Yes, they do. This is difficult to explain to people who don’t enjoy the being outside like we do, but I’ll try.

When you experience the great outdoors you are surrounded by an incredible sense of awe and wonder. Unlike most activities and products today that put ME ME ME at the center of the universe, gazing upon Yosemite Valley for the first time or looking out at the vast expanse of the Grand Canyon is a way of letting the Universe put you in your place. You are instantly humbled and you will remember the experience forever. It’s been years, but I still get goosebumps thinking about the first time I saw the waters of Crater Lake or the first time I got out of my car and was floored by Death Valley’s unbelievable silence. These are experiences that remove us from our push notification addled, social media soaked modern life and remind us that we are but one tiny, temporary sliver of the world. That is the true work of art here – so when that work is marred, those of us who’ve had that experience outdoors feel like we’ve been punched in the gut. You wouldn’t add a doodle to the Mona Lisa, would you? (Puckish French artists excluded).

We also know what our rangers and park staff are up against. Parks are just not on the priority list for any government, be it state, local, or federal. National Parks and Forests suffer from perennial under-funding and most of the money they do receive goes to things like fire suppression and not trail maintenance or patrolling rangers. Here in Los Angeles, our Angeles National Forest receives almost as many visitors a year as Yosemite but gets only a sliver of the budget, and as a result trails are falling apart, visitor centers are unmaintained, and on some of the more popular trails, graffiti and pollution are rampant (although we’re hoping its new designation as a National Monument will help with that). Yes, Ms. Nocket is one person – but what happens when dozens more like her follow and there’s no money in the budget to clean up after them? Saguaro National Park has had to deal with a rash of social media-inspired graffiti on its namesake cacti and Joshua Tree’s historic Barker Dam is currently undergoing renovation after dozens of people scratched their names into its historic surface.

Bridge To Nowhere Hike (July 2009) 040

Graffiti on the East Fork Trail. Photo by Colleen Greene.

From the photos on Instagram, it seemed like most – if not all – of the paintings were in highly visible areas not too far on the trail. The Kayenta Trail to Emerald Pools is one of the most popular in all of Zion National Park. There are almost always crowds at the Barker Dam site in Joshua Tree. The Mist Trail is only a few minutes away from the throngs in Yosemite Valley. Canyonlands’ Roadside Ruin is literally in view of the only paved road in the Needles Section of the Park. Not only was this graffiti left right where a majority of park visitors would have to see it – but they were also left on routes that – if budgets allowed – would probably have patrolling rangers. This combination of a love of the outdoors and a frustration with the severe contrast of care our public funds provide is, I think, at the core of a lot of the rage that’s been vented in comment forms all over the Internet. But the reason people are pushing for maximum punishment here comes both out of the sheer scope of her crime (again, perhaps ten or more National Parks may have been defaced by her) but also from recent history. Last year, two Boy Scout leaders toppled some 170 million year old hoodoos in Utah’s Goblin Valley State Park (and like Ms. Nocket, they also put their crime on social media). They faced five years in prison but instead were each fined less than $2000 and stripped of their Boy Scout titles. We don’t want to see that happen again.

So what, do you want to ruin this girl’s life?

No, we don’t. We just want her to be held accountable. I’ll speak for myself here: if she’s found guilty, I would like her to be punished to a reasonable extent of the law – and potentially banned from National Parks for a time. She needs to be fined and do some community service in parks and she definitely needs to realize the consequences of her actions. But more importantly, I hope that everyone who’s as outraged about this as I am can take that rage and turn it into something positive. Instead of fuming in comment threads and signing petitions, find a local park you care about and volunteer some time to help clean up or maintain trails. Donate to a conservancy. Write to your Congressperson and ask them why our parks don’t get the money they need. Or better yet, find someone who doesn’t understand what the big deal is about this and take them outside, show them what a little time in the wilderness can do, and let them find out for themselves. delicate arch panorama

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+67Pin on Pinterest10Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someonePrint this page

Casey Schreiner

Founder and Editor-in-Chief at Modern Hiker
Since founding Modern Hiker in 2006, Casey's work on the site has appeared in regional and national publications, including the Los Angeles Times, National Public Radio, the Associated Press, CNN, New York Magazine, High Country News, and others. He has broken several national news stories about outdoor vandalism and policies and his first book "Day Hiking Los Angeles" is available for pre-order.
Tags: , , , ,

Categorised in: , , ,

This post was written by Casey Schreiner on October 23, 2014


  • “……find someone who doesn’t understand what the big deal is about this and take them outside, show them what a little time in the wilderness can do, and let them find out for themselves.”…Casey Schreiner.


  • rustic says:

    This issue become more about the threatened violence really intended or not.
    Also ridiculousness of profanity spewed in absolutely the most childish way possible.

    And jail time on the taxpayers dime —- that being a total waste of money in every conceivable way.

    It has turned into a witch hunt far overshadowing the so called and uncalled for “artwork” if you want to call it that.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    Casey, you did a great service by exposing Creeptings to the internet. You seem like a nice guy. Maybe too nice. Instead of taking a firm stand again what she did, you now endorse a simple change from paint to chalk. I thought you were an unwitting accomplice, but I’m not so sure after failing to get you realize.

    You wrote, “Excellent comment. Thank you for adding your voice here.”

    In reply to “Mr. Deadhead” writing,

    “if you absolutely must do something there [our National Parks] just use chalk, or some other non-toxic water-based medium designed to be temporary, that’ll wash off in the rain. you’ll probably never be back there to look at it again.”

    Subsequent posts by Mr. Deadhead revealed that he thinks the world is asking for his unsolicited vandalism and that “we damn well better appreciated it.”

    Endorsing this sociopath is like telling a rapist its OK, as long as you use a condom.

    You will probably delete this post, but I hope the message sinks in some day.

    • Mark, your ability to jump to incorrect conclusions seems to far outdistance your reading comprehension.

      • Mark Schultz says:

        I hope my conclusion is incorrect. You seem like a really nice guy, but those are exact quotes and the rest of the context is below. People will find several comments about the use of acrylic paint instead of another medium with little or no pushback. And the art has to better, let’s not forget that popular discussion here. Lose the snake people, how about unicorns and rainbows on the face of Half Dome in water-based paint with chalk borders. Should be just fine, no argument here.

        You have yet another chance to straighten this out. if you can’t say no to them, then you’re just providing these people a platform to convince themselves its okay. Sorry, but you can’t claim to be “unwitting” about it. Step up, please.

        • You took a 1200 word comment detailing personal confessions, ambiguities in presentation, and condemnation of the Creepytings vandal and reduced it to a single sentence that fit your preconceived outrage. “Excellent comment” could have been in reference to this person’s admissions, or their experience, or even their ability to participate in an online discussion without completely flying off the handle. It is incredibly facetious of you to imply that by saying something is well done that I agree with every single one of the points made by that piece, in the same way I can say that I like “The Silence of the Lambs” but not be pro-cannibal-serial-killer. This is bumper sticker political discussion at its worst and I absolutely will not have it here.

          I am under no obligation to you to police every single comment on this site. I wrote my peace in the original post and – if you pay attention to it – you’ll find it to be a very clear condemnation of Creepytings’ actions. In every single interview and statement I have given, I have addressed the chalk comments and specified that if she did use chalk it would still be vandalism and illegal. I do not have the time nor the desire to respond to people who don’t read what came before their comment – and at this point, honestly, I regret even trying to clear up some of the gross misconceptions here.

          If you want to express your distaste for others’ comments and positions then you are welcome to do so in a polite manner. If you continue to use faulty logic and incendiary language, don’t be surprised when people react to you in a negative way and don’t be surprised if you find your comments deleted.

          • Mark Schultz says:

            One last comment (I hope) for all hikers who are concerned about this issue. It will come back into the news once the courts are done with her. No telling what the outcome will be, but the graffiti “artists” might also troll back here trying sneak their philosophy back into the discussion. This is not something to ignore. Don’t be afraid to stand up and challenge them. Some of them sound intelligent, but they’re basically cowards with no respect for others. When they make these statements that are simply intolerable, challenge them head on. Never mind the rest of their con, don’t fall for it. There is no grey area about how to paint our National Parks in an environmentally friendly way. Its crazy talk and stand up to it. Don’t be a silent lamb, its deafening to those of us who see what they’re really up to.

      • Jeff H. says:

        Hi Casey, I’m wondering what ever happened with the “other Casey (Nocket)”? After scouring the net looking for updates, it appears the whole issue has just been swept under the rug and forgotten. I’m sure I’m not the only one hoping this idiot is prosecuted to the fullest. Do you know what’s happened?

        • You are not the only one who’s wondering what’s taking so long. This morning I sent an email inquiry to the Chief Public Affairs Officer of the Park Service. I’ll update information as soon as I get it.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    In scrolling through the comments, it looks like you did a good job removing violent threats and profanity. Now can we make it perfectly clear what she did is not acceptable whatsoever, not even in chalk? People have used your forum to promote the idea that this is somehow OK as long as the art is “good” and its done in chalk. These misguided people just aren’t getting it. Please stop coddling them with discussions about art. This has nothing to do with the quality. Its about the crime, people. They have plenty of legitimate public art opportunities and their urban jungles to vandalize where its hopeless to reverse. Do not allow these people to think for one second that this is OK anywhere else in this world, and especially not in nature. Anything short of standing up to this is a big mistake. People who vandalize the world around them are disturbed, so realize who you’re dealing with. There are comments stating the world is “asking for it” and “we damn well better appreciate it.” Unless you want to see more and more Creeptings on your hikes, stand up and tell them this is NOT OK.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    Casey, you tried to reason with 2 yrs olds keying “art” into a Mercedes. Nice of you, but these people do not comprehend basic hikers ethics like leave no trace. It sure appears as if several of them are not even hikers, just common graffiti taggers.

  • rustic says:

    Casey, nice of you to moderate me when a very large number posts here are —- kill her, maim her, arrest her on the tax payers dime or just childish profane name calling.

    It seems its just mob rule type of mentality over an issue to be frank, kinda meaningless. No matter how good or bad the so called art is.

    So be it I guess, that most posts on here and the other thread are nothing more than you would see in a high school click.

    • As much as I would love spending my weekend moderating comments by hand, I’ve found an automatic moderation looking for specific keywords to be easier on my sanity. If your comments were moderated it’s because they used one of them – but as the comments on this article in particular have gone completely off-topic, I’m just about ready to shut them down.

  • Erik says:

    Balanced article. Comments, though? Jeez. If most of this vitriol doesn’t come out of the same egotistical entitlement that in other circumstances might motivate climbing around on petroglyphs or painting faces on rocks where it’s obviously inappropriate, then I’m a green flamingo sharing a bowl with Kim Jong Un. Comment-expert diagnoses notwithstanding, you don’t have to be a sociopath to be socially empowered to act like an idiot. Give a human a chance to learn, and work to heal the culture that provides that wrongheaded empowerment. I’d go with the last sentences in the article for suggestions, but maybe add- take one of those friends who don’t get it with you on the same outing that you’re volunteering to help clean up or maintain our natural spaces.

  • This blog has the very best of intentions. Usually perpetrators of graffiti in remote areas are not caught, but the “creepytings” vandal obliged us by posting her crime on social media. Three points: (1) Public agencies have a procedure to combat graffiti. It is removed as soon as possible so as to discourage proliferation of more of the same at the site. The wilderness ethic of “leave no trace” is actively promoted and mostly embraced by the public. It is a quiet, effective way of dealing with this problem. (2) A formal criminal investigation of these crimes is taking place. The best thing to do now is to allow this investigation to follow its course. (3) Let the responsible agencies (Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service) know of your personal concerns, it will reinforce, strengthen the “leave no trace ethic.”. What you really want is for there to be less graffiti in the future. Also send your petition to those agencies, you don’t even have to reach a minimum number, do it today.

    The 20th century psychiatrist, Carl Jung wrote “There must be some people who behave in the wrong way; they act as scapegoats and objects of interest for the normal ones”. The most vitriolic commentary here has been deleted from this blog, but even some of the tamer expressions are a little disconcerting, with a lynch mob mentality, out of proportion to the crime committed. Does this really have the effect of discouraging wilderness graffiti? Yes, I agree with another poster that language can be used to express strong feelings and not meant always, or even usually, to be taken strictly literally. I’m also sure every real lynching started out with this kind of “symbolic” language. So, I guess I’m suggesting lighten up a little for the time being, and maybe contemplate where the threat of graffiti fits in with other far, far more destructive intrusions into areas “untrammeled by man”.

    Each of us, every day, is doing more harm to the earth than creepytings did during her entire summer of vandalism. Industrial scale emissions of heat trapping gases are increasing the temperature of the oceans and atmosphere, changing climate patterns, lengthening fire seasons, degrading habitat, melting ice and causing oceans to rise throughout the world. ( see http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/27/ipcc-climate-report-un-secretary-general from this mornings Guardian). It is the responsibility of people with the ability to be deeply moved by the beauty of the natural world to become involved in the growing movement to combat this silent and invisible threat. Your passion, energy and activism are needed. Global climate change threatens every revered place you hike through, but you will see no warning in the form garish acrylic coated offenses to the eye and spirit.

    • Mark Schultz says:

      You’re accusing each of us on this forum of being worse than Creepytings in one day than what she did in an entire summer. Sorry, I don’t buy it, and I don’t appreciate the accusation. Back up your accusation with calculations of her carbon footprint for her summer of vandalism. Be sure to include flying and driving from New York around to 10 National Parks throughout the western US. The carbon footprint from manufacturing the paint, the chemicals and disposal costs of cleanup, etc. Then calculate an average daily carbon footprint for the readers on this board you are accusing. Back up your claims.

      • Mark Schultz says:

        Oh, and one more thing, unless you’re using a solar powered kiln, your carbon footprint might be way about the average person on this board if you’re doing a lot of pottery. Some of us bike to work and drive hybrid cars and have solar panels.

        As an engineer, I look forward to seeing your calculations of Creepytings carbon footprint for the summer. Its going to be pretty high with those thousands of miles of travel – a lot more than an average person’s daily. As a hiker, I’m insulted by linking these issues and accusing everybody in the process. I’ve tried to explain below that you’re doing a disservice to the cause of global warming by making such obviously ridiculous claims and by linking the issue to a crime like this. It just ends up trivializing things.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    Here’s another genius posting prolifically below that needs to be called out. According to “Mr Deadhead” it’s just fine to go vandalize our National Parks, as long as the art quality meets his standards. Being a ghetto tagger, he’s an expert, so maybe the Park Service can hire him to decide for us which ones we need to like and which ones we need to clean up. This is an exact quote, believe it or not:

    “If creepytings had genuinely made something remarkable, I’d tell everyone here to shut the hell up and appreciate it. don’t you even doubt me on that. but she didn’t, and there are plenty others who might also not (another argument towards chalk, if it’s terrible, it goes away).”

    What arrogance. It’s unbelievable. He’s under the delusion that people actually want this unsolicited crap, like it needs to be done to improve the world. I hope I’m done pointing this out and standing up to these people, but I’ll keep going if they keep going.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    This issue boils down to 2 things, really. 1. A legitimate debate about her punishment. I’m for direct restitution, manual labor cleaning up the mess she made, and a fine to cover all costs. She should be requesting this as a way to get back into society.

    Item #2 is for the hiking community (because this is a hiking forum) to close ranks and make it perfectly clear this is not acceptable. Not with chalk, nothing, period, nada. Failure to stand up to these misguided hostile people in an unambiguous way is giving these idiots a yellow light. They don’t even understand what a red light means. At this point, its an isolated cancer. If its not isolated and removed, it will spread. That is why I’ve gone after so many of these comments. There is no gray area about whether this is acceptable or not. It’s not acceptable. Period. No excuses. Debate something else.

  • Nikki Kim says:

    Simple solution. Whenever you see someone doing this, beat the livin’ sh** out of them. Then explain to them that they can call the cops if they want and they can face a federal charge for their actions while you’ll face a state charge for assault.

  • caljam71 says:

    What this NYC woman did is no different than dumping out a garbage truck in the middle of 8 national parks. She HAD to put HER “art” work all over these parks so we would see HER nasty stuff. I say prosecute and give her 25 years. She can do herself in a cell. Whenever I go into the wilderness, I go by the credo: leave nothing behind.

  • Elle says:

    I haven’t read through the comments, but found this only because of the White House petition set up to hold this person responsible to the full extent of the law. If anyone has ever visited a national park (any park for that matter, paid the visitor fees or walked through a visitor center, you can’t escape the reason why it’s a local, state, or federally protected land. Whether it’s historical or environmental value to protect it, you do just that, protect it. Countless children go through the Jr. Park Ranger programs at Nat’l parks and take their oath to protect and educate others about PRESERVING for future generations to come, and an adult doesn’t have that same reasoning? Tagging isn’t the only problem, It really is sad when you know going for a nice hike involves having to carry trash back to keep the areas clear not for others, but for the wildlife. She’s sorry only because she was caught, but had no conscience about it when she thought it wouldn’t carry the backlash that it did. Definitely needs to be punished for each count of vandalism she caused and definitely not a slap on the wrist either.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    Only 2 people stood up to this comment posted far below, and they weren’t very strong replies. This is what I’m talking about, people….

    “i am all for graffiti in grungey industrial settings as I think it brings a lot of beauty and a human feel to areas that are in their own right a vandilism of the earth itself. I don’t think there is really a problem with writting on a rock .. I mean, we appreciate to look at things people made that are “old” (hieroglyphs). and in reality, sharpie will not stand up to the test of time . Taking a picture of yourself breaking the law in a national park is pretty dumb though!!!”

    • I wondered how long before a hang ’em/flog ’em Broken Windows type would turn up and start trolling, Tea Party style.

      Shame it was quite a good conversation here til then…now it’s become the Mark Schultz Troll show.

      *Unsubscribe from comments*/

      • Mark Schultz says:

        Nice try. Not even a Republican, certainly not a tea bagger.

        Sorry I’m late to the conversation, just standing up for what I think is right. Trying to do so in a thoughtful manner.

      • Mark Schultz says:

        Tim, you picked a good alias. You’re walking the wrong way alright. Turn around and go back to your gang infested ghetto and enjoy your graffiti. If someone likes it, they can take a tour through your neighborhood. Don’t even think about spreading it.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    Like a few others trying to have it both ways in these comments, your looooong post below has a token of condemnation of her, followed by relativism and justification. The pattern goes like this…”what she did was wrong, BUT, it’s nothing compared to ……” (fill in the blank of you favorite cause).

    Your particular cause is global warming, as if it has anything to do with vandalizing our national parks.

    Here’s the full context of your statement about “prophesy” from your letter to the Editor of the Fresno Bee.

    “Whatever the motivation was for this wilderness graffiti, I take it as a prophecy, a reminder that all is not well with our world.”

    • Mark Schultz says:

      Casey, this post is in the wrong spot. I reposted it below as a reply to Sequioa Pottery. Please clean up my mistake. Thanks.

      Good job dealing with extremes on both sides of the spectrum on this hot topic.

  • Mark Schultz says:

    Reading these comments, you’ll be amazed to see people try to link some unrelated cause to this criminal act. As if this has anything to do with Global Warming or Wind Turbines. One person called it “prophesy.”

    Mr Deadhead even wrote that it would’ve been OK if only she had used chalk or some kind of temporary paint. What an insult to true Deadheads out there.

    This craziness is an insult to hikers everywhere. Stand up to it, people.

    • Mark Schultz, you are a true master at taking other peoples thoughts out of context. What exactly are we supposed to stand up against, thoughtful expression from many points of view?

      • Mark Schultz says:

        Like a few others trying to have it both ways in these comments, your looooong post below has a token of condemnation of her, followed by relativism and justification. The pattern goes like this…”what she did was wrong, BUT, it’s nothing compared to ……” (fill in the blank of you favorite cause).

        Your particular cause is global warming, as if it has anything to do with vandalizing our national parks.

        Here’s the full context of your statement about “prophesy” from your letter to the Editor of the Fresno Bee.

        “Whatever the motivation was for this wilderness graffiti, I take it as a prophecy, a reminder that all is not well with our world.”

  • Bill Smells says:

    She apparently has money and subsequently needs to be made an example of. I disagree that she should he held reasonably accountable–she needs to be held thoroughly accountable and punished to the fullest extent of the law. Doing it once is one thing, doing it multiple times and flaunting it is inexcusable.

    Let her punishment serve as a warning to those who think they are above the law. Yes, it is her fault. Yes, she should be charged to the fullest extent of the law.

    It’s all about accountability; something she apparently lacks.

  • jHy says:

    “When you experience the great outdoors you are surrounded by an incredible sense of awe and wonder. Unlike most activities and products today that put ME ME ME at the center of the universe, gazing upon Yosemite Valley for the first time or looking out at the vast expanse of the Grand Canyon is a way of letting the Universe put you in your place. You are instantly humbled and you will remember the experience forever. It’s been years, but I still get goosebumps thinking about the first time I saw the waters of Crater Lake or the first time I got out of my car and was floored by Death Valley’s unbelievable silence. These are experiences that remove us from our push notification addled, social media soaked modern life and remind us that we are but one tiny, temporary sliver of the world. That is the true work of art here – so when that work is marred, those of us who’ve had that experience outdoors feel like we’ve been punched in the gut. You wouldn’t add a doodle to the Mona Lisa, would you?”

    1st: I’m not trying to pick fights, just trying to expand the discourse.

    2nd: I wish people would just take the Mona Lisa off the pedestal already.

    I find this paragraph to be comically representative of many people’s disgust with ‘graffiti’, ‘art’ ,’vandalism’, etcetera that is being discussed here. Taken seriously however, it seems blatantly obvious that this girl likely rationalizes in a way very similar to the author above. When I go out into a National Park, National Forests or any public land in America, the focus tends to shift away from my thoughts, and my experiences into the reality that is only present in certain combinations of time & space–the reality of a centerless existence–a reality very few people experience. Paint in places it ‘shouldn’t be’ is typically described as such by people who think themselves to be fit masters of their universe. perhaps what can be gained through observing this hypocritical debate is a little more respect for the National Parks, the National Forests and all of the remediated lands of America, who have silently borne our & our ancestors savage brutality. trees and rocks wither gently beneath the introspective, ignorant, momentary gaze of the plasticized explorer–just as they did before, just as they will after.

    Dear Author, the way you write about the way the Grand Canyon, Death Valley, Crater Lake and the Universe seems to put “ME ME ME” at the center of your ‘universe’. perceptively, this is antithetical to the presumed condemnation of an average american narcissist (creepytings).

    • You’ve managed to get the exact opposite of the point I was making. When I was recounting my experiences at those National Parks, it was not a thought of “All of this is here for me,” it was “I can’t believe how small and unimportant I am and I’m thankful landscapes like this exist to remind me of that.” The fact that it was my experience does not make it a selfish one, nor does my desire for other people to be able to have that experience without looking at an ugly painting of a white-faced figure with a snake coming out of its mouth.

      There has actually been some very interesting research into the science behind this feeling of awe. People who are awe-struck literally have their perceptions of time altered in that experience – which in turn leads to lower stress and blood pressure, a desire to volunteer, and a push toward putting others’ needs before your own. Awe can come from many things – the natural world, a work of art, a monument or skyscraper … I would argue that it rarely – if ever – comes from graffiti (although if you read the rest of the post you’ll see that graffiti/street art does not objectively bother me).

      You say that people who think paint in places it shouldn’t be typically think of themselves as masters of their universe. I completely disagree and think you have it all backwards – Those people are just fine with the natural world in its natural state, and don’t feel a desire to leave their mark – whether it’s a painting on a rock or a name etched in a tree. It’s the ones that do leave a mark who see themselves masters of their universe. As for me? I’m just passing through.

      • jHy says:

        thanks for the reply! one part of it i find interesting is the idea of ‘awe-struck passer bys of the natural world’. While I don’t disagree with you, I wonder if these ‘passer-bys’ are necessarily ignorant of the truths woven into the past of conservation & recreation in America. Because in my personal experience in our nations parks and forests, I have been occasionally awe struck at the perception of modern conservation & reservation as ‘graffiti’.

        • This is what I said elsewhere as the landscape being a construct, problematic to say ‘this is untouched wilderness’ in the first place. No such thing, and usually in most parks someone either got their land stolen or requisitioned, even whole villages moved so it could be ‘more natural’. As a defence it’s lacking.

          That said what she did was crass and out of place entirely… Even though this not-entirely-natural landscape isn’t 100% her dawdlings would work better in an urban environment.

          But let’s not pretend these parks are natural, all bear scars of man, all have an unnatural walk or boundary, all are a construct coming out of the 18th century for gothic ‘wild’ gardens mixed with urbanites conservation efforts as a reaction to mass urbanisation in the (here anyway) 1930s-1960s. A modern Thoreau fantasy.

    • Mark Schultz says:

      You used “I” or “my” 9 times, just saying.

      • Using the first person in a first person narrative does not say anything about the author or the author’s point other than the author chose to use the first person to convey an experience that was experienced personally.

        This nonstop nitpicking and degenerative argument for argument’s sake is incredibly disheartening. It’s almost like no one even bothered to read anything in the post.

  • The Fresno Bee printed an op-ed about this, http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/10/27/4201615/editorial-throw-the-book-at-yosemites.html?sp=/99/274/1345/ , and I responded with this letter to the editor, http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/10/30/4207252/bigger-threat-than-graffiti.html?sp=/99/274/277/
    I hope Modern Hiker will take a look at these links.

    I know that this is a sort of delayed response in the day of instantaneous social media, but time taken for contemplation is sometimes still of value.

    Ai WeiWei is a Chinese conceptual artist who in 2011 “exhibited” in a New York art gallery. The exhibit was of a large group of ancient Chinese Neolithic pieces of pottery which WeiWei had completely covered in various colors of bright, cheap industrial paints. In a large photograph at the exhibit he is shown dropping one of the “defaced” pots to the ground, breaking it into many pieces. Another part of the exhibit is a cheap Ikea-type glass jar filled with one of the pots that had been ground to a powder, completely “destroyed”. WeiWei has never made any statement about what the exhibit “means”; to the best of my knowledge, he has not uttered a word about it. Some have repeated a variety of a family of explanations; that the exhibit was a statement on the destruction of Chinese culture by commercial interests, the carelessness in destroying value by plowing blindly into the future. Others see simply a purpose of questioning what is valuable and important, to shake our understanding of what is valuable.
    I do not believe the “CreepyTings” vandal intended any such higher meaning in painting on natural treasures, and I completely agree with the Bee’s “throw the book at her” assessment even if there was any “higher” meaning than simple ego-driven vandalism. If this was any kind of ill-advised conceptual art, whatever the law prescribes in the way punishment should be part of the “exhibition”. Keep in mind WeiWei legally owned the pottery he defaced and destroyed. I still can’t figure out what WeiWei was getting at, not in words, but the reality may be slowly dawning on me.

    Regarding the point in my letter to the Bee, that “… every one of us, every day, does more harm to the planet than a platoon of “CreepyTings” vandals”: I was writing of the undeniable reality of global climate change brought on by massive human carbon dioxide emissions. I read some of the expressions other commenters made of their deeply felt experiences of wilderness, and I share them. It is a real possibility the groves of Giant Sequoia near my home in the southern Sierra Nevada may go extinct over the coming centuries due to warming of their habitat, http://www.livescience.com/47524-giant-sequoias-climate-change.html . There is much more, of course, google it: coral reefs, polar bears, marine ecosystems, coastal cities. Go to http://whatweknow.aaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/whatweknow_website.pdf for a warm-up. The American Association for the Advancement of Science is arguably the most respected publisher of scientific journals on earth. So: enjoy your hikes, revel in the inspiration of nature, and revile those who deface it, but please do not forget the destruction you do not see. http://citizensclimatelobby.org/ .

    • Mark Schultz says:

      Sequoia Pottery, tying this crime to other global issues, however important, creates an impression of justification in your letter to the Fresno Bee editor. You’re lowering the discussion about serious issues down the level of a common graffiti tagger. Then to call this vandalism a “prophesy,” as if it has some higher purpose, is not only bizarre thinking, it may encourage more “warning signs” by crazy copycats encouraging them to destroy nature to protect it.

      • Again, every one of us, every day, is causing more damage than “CreepyTings ” entire summer. Global warming has no “tags”, it is silent and invisible. The purpose of my post was to encourage people to think of the bigger picture and put this case of isolated vandalism in perspective.

        • Mark Schultz says:

          So what exactly is the result you expect? People will suddenly wake up and stop burning fossil fuels because some nut drove a car to all these parks and desecrated them with graffiti? Sorry, linking graffiti to global warming has the opposite effect, it’s an insult to anyone serious about global warming and a joke to those looking for another way to mock it. And to call her actions “prophesy” comes across as loony to me, sorry.

          We probably agree on both issues, but linking them just doesn’t work.

          • You are looking at this isolated event of vandalism in a much too parochial, narrow isolated way. The obvious reason for the furor is because the visual manifestations of the desecration focuses rage at the one individual responsible for the graffiti. You seem to believe that discussing the graffiti in a larger context is somehow minimizing the importance of what this string of posts is about. Sorry, but you could not be more wrong. You seem to take great umbrage at the use of the word “prophesy”. This was obviously used as a litrary device and not intended to be taken literally. I agree with the thrust of the thread of these posts, it certainly is a “big deal”, much bigger, I thaink than you can imagine. I suggest you stop with the inane pedantry and start thinking of the big picture.

          • Mark Schultz says:

            Sequoia Pottery, by trying to blur right from wrong on this, and then associating the grey area with your global warming obession, your are doing a disservice to your cause. Some things in life really are black and white and society needs to call it out and close ranks. Period.

            What I see here is you and a few others using this hot topic in a pathetic attempt to promote some other cause. Its like the Beatles trying to use Charles Manson to sell the White album because he thought “Helter Skelter” was prophesy.

  • Carmen Bria says:

    This is a serious infraction and should not be taken lightly. However, there is an ongoing criminal investigation and we should allow that to play out. It is my hope that this woman will be dealt with fairly and will learn some valuable lessons here. It should be noted as well that no one should now go out and attempt to remove this graffiti thinking that they are helping or doing something good. This would be a terrible mistake and done improperly could result in permanent damage. The national parks are working with professional conservators who will attempt this graffiti removal in an appropriate manner at the right time. I agree with Mr, Schreiner that if you want to help, please work directly with a place of your choosing to assist with trail maintenance, clean up, or other appropriate activity that, in fact, will be helpful and much needed.

    • Gordon says:

      “on going criminal investigation” is the oldest dodge in America. It’s time to do the right thing. This doesn’t warrant a whole lot of investigation. And yeah, I’d be quite comfortable ruining this person’s life.

  • Jack C. says:

    To be morally consistent, I hope people feel an even greater sense of disgust when giant wind turbines are planted in or near wilderness areas, as is happening quite often now. It’s vandalism on an industrial scale under a superficial green badge. Landscapes in places like Maine and Vermont are under continual threat from the same lack of aesthetic values that inspired this girl. Her stuff is really quite trivial in comparison, but I’m not condoning it.

    P.S. She’s young and not too shabby (I find myself staring at those shorts) so someone will probably come to her moral rescue.

    • Mark Schultz says:

      Exactly how close must a wind turbine be to a wilderness area so that everyone should feel the same outrage as what she did? Why are you confusing these two issues in the first place? And wind turbines? We’re supposed to be equally outraged about wind turbines as someone painting our national parks? Really?

      Where exactly are these wind turbines WITHIN a designated wilderness area? How did they get that past the Wilderness Act?

  • Alan says:

    Expression anger over this young woman’s behavior is acceptable. I’m grateful for this blog for initiating the investigation and will follow the story as due justice is served through the courts. However, I wish the moderators would use stronger language in decrying the rape/death wishes and threats. Defacing a national park is a serious crime, but anonymous death/rape 1000 times more despicable and inhuman than one girl’s valdalism, serious as it is. It shouldn’t be defended or protected just because it’s “venting”. It’s disgusting and should never, never, never be defended or tolerated.

  • Mitch Walker says:

    Imagine the punishment they’d bring down on her if she were black, and not an entitled white girl. I think this is a vile crime and her punishment should include financial restitution, community service 30 days of jail time, psychological counseling and art lessons. Please God make sure she gets art lessons!

  • mrdeadhead says:

    i do art, i’ve tagged some crap, i’m a long-time fan of graffiti, though I don’t consider myself a graffiti artist (could never climb a fence well enough), and I’ll just say I don’t condone her actions.

    graffiti artists have always had one simple justification for what they were doing: it was their home. if someone was going to run subways, freight cars, put up bland ugly buildings to save a buck, wallpaper their neighborhoods with ads, etc etc. then the artists were damn sure going to take it back. no one was going to tell them what they could or couldn’t look at in their own city, and if someone tried, they had trouble coming because the artists were always smarter than them, organized in communities, and had no good reason to worry about being caught. this is what separated the artists from the vandals, who were very much just doing it to destroy someone else’s stuff. collabs happened, the crews formed, the communities formed, the cops fought back, the pieces got bigger and better, the styles multiplied and grew, it was a good thing.

    with that said, she is not from any of the parks, she is not reclaiming what’s rightfully hers, she is not a graffiti artist. this is the same reason why actual graffiti artists don’t tag parks like this. basically nature’s innocent, they tag manmade things. she’s an offshoot of the more tasteless “street-art” loving world that just loves anything that looks remotely like graffiti, especially in the wake of Banksy and other artists that managed to blow up beyond the limits of graffiti communities into the mainstream (whether they wanted to or not). these people do not appreciate anything about the art, the artists, their motivations, nothing. they think it looks cool, that’s about it. while graffiti artists would assume an alias in order to not get caught while still claiming their work, street artists do the opposite. social media and all that nowadays makes it very easy for an alias to lead back to the person, and many street artists take advantage of this to promote themselves in a highly-stylish but negligibly-tasteful manner.

    so if she’s not a graffiti artist, is she just a regular artist? kind of, not really, it’s totally subjective. she’s chosen to be an artist, but mostly because it’s a great way to get her name out there. she’s looking for attention. it’s childish, and it shows the childlike logic that led her to think this was a good idea, and that’s why she’s not an artist. some artists might have just recognized the natural beauty of the park, and appreciated in a way similar to this hiking community. some artists might have looked at the walls and said “i want to draw all over this” and they would’ve taken a picture and drawn on that. there’s even other artists who might look at the rivers and lakes and said “i want them to be filled with blood and the sky made of fire as giants battle dragons for the fate of the world” and they would’ve gone home and painted it, and it would the most epic thing you’ll ever see. that’s the advantage to being an artist, we can make what we imagine come true. so in the end, the parks did not motivate her, inspire her, or anything other than host her for her stay. she used the parks natural beauty as a backdrop for her work’s lack of skill or beauty (at least in my opinion, if you liked them, then that’s great for you). there are some who think she was hoping for all this press as a way to get famous, but i think that’s honestly not the case. I think she honestly thought her pieces, combined with the landscape, were such a winning combination that the fans would just come flocking, like a child might. without ever really thinking about what she was doing, there wasn’t any disrespect intended or implied, just ignorance.

    With all that said, a few things more. I wouldn’t call her a graffiti artist, call her a vandal. if you love nature in all it’s splendor that’s fine, but don’t rip on graffiti, cities, or the people in them. it’s not a great idea to antagonize graffiti or street art communities, because there is some jerk that considers themselves a part of one or the other (like every community has), who will go tag the hell out of something you like because they imagine a challenge has been issued. Also, even though i think what she did was absolutely wrong, I’m not calling for maximum punishment, because that’s ridiculous, they’re always ridiculous, and it won’t help her understand what she did. also keep in mind the sizes of some of these things, as far as I can see (still not sure why someone hasn’t taken the pics from her social networks) none of them are very big. She’s working with a paint pen in the one pic, which aren’t great quality (especially on rough, unclean surfaces), nor do they cover a lot. despite her choice of acrylic (asshole), the clean-up on those is easier than spray-paint, and assuming she wasn’t smart enough to prepare the surfaces there’s a chance they could be so faded after some natural exposure that eventually you won’t be able to tell where they were without looking. she did not commit all of the vandalism in all the parks, and you can’t treat her (or any american actually) as such. oh also be careful what clean-up initiatives you push for, some of the chemicals that clean up paint will destroy the nature a hundred times worse than a little bit of paint did. though hopefully in the long run, as much as you hate what she did, it’ll be funny if this is the event that got you what you wanted. her vandalism could become the best thing to happen to the parks if it leads to better things for them.

    also to any artists that did see these pictures of hers, and now some stream of ideas involving the parks or any other bit of nature is running through your mind: that’s fine, but be respectful. having a good camera means you can take pictures that you can manipulate, edit, draw on, do any number of things without actually altering the landscape. maybe just sit there and draw it out (hopefully you’ve learned to draw. you need to know how to draw.) in a sketchbook. doing so might even give you a better appreciation of the scene. if you absolutely must do something there just use chalk, or some other non-toxic water-based medium designed to be temporary, that’ll wash off in the rain. you’ll probably never be back there to look at it again. if all you really want is that picture of the work, then it doesn’t need to be permanent. she used acrylic because she’s an asshole. don’t be an asshole. acrylics, enamels, oil-based, solvent-based, none of that stuff is acceptable if you just want to add art to the scene and not destroy it.

    • Excellent comment. Thank you for adding your voice here.

    • scotts says:

      I also appreciate your comments mrdeadhead. Photos, sketchbooks, paintings all good.

      However I think chalk embedded in rough stone will last quite awhile, and will certainly remain to diminish the experience for anyone who comes along in the interval.

      Maybe sand castles or sand paintings? Even then, do the rest of us a favor and wipe them out after you snap the selfie.

    • Mark Schultz says:

      Mr. Deadhead your manifesto is making ridiculous excuses for her behavior and you claim it would’ve been okay if only she used chalk. You actually wrote, “… if you absolutely must do something there just use chalk, or some other non-toxic water-based medium designed to be temporary, that’ll wash off in the rain. you’ll probably never be back there to look at it again.” Never mind the rest of the public who are disgusted by this, if the artist uses water-based paint and doesn’t come back, then its okay.

      NO, that’s not okay. Not even CHALK. If you can’t understand that, then stay out of all of our national parks.

      And no, your comments are not excused because you simultaneously call her names while you blatantly accept and condone her general behavior.

      And no, I’m not afraid some graffiti “artist” will come tag my house for saying this. What, people are supposed to be terrorized by graffiti taggers? What are you, a gang banger too.

      • mrdeadhead says:

        first off, you don’t know what a manifesto is. an open visible message on essentially a message board that would be viewed by both sides? I think it’s nothing more than a statement. a personal one, at that.

        second off, no I don’t care if you want to see it. as an artist, I couldn’t care what you think. to the point where saying this to you equates to a minor annoyance… you’re like a less-substantial gnat.

        if something has to exist, we will make it. if we don’t, we’ll slowly go mad. just because change frightens you, doesn’t mean others are the same. and there are countless individuals willing to drag you kicking, screaming, and fingertips bleeding, into a new state of perception. these people are also just a few of billions of people on this planet that don’t care who you are, care to know you exist, or give two shits about your opinion on public art.

        I argued chalk because it’s a compromise, and it preserves two kinds of beauty, as I and only I see them. it also respects the institution of the national parks, the idea that if a populace wills something special to remain untouched, it’s common courtesy to abide it and go somewhere else.

        if there’s any land that isn’t part of a park, preserve, habitat, or something else, then it is fair game as far as I, and this time, many others, care. and honestly, it’s in your best interest that we get there and do our thing before a development company does.

        artists are the only ones peddling the unique, so you damn well better appreciate it, because someone’s going to do something eventually. we have never had boundaries, our earliest works were on cave walls and landscapes. our rich and beautiful history of not giving a shit has created the world that you live in, and we will most certainly not contain ourselves for the likes of your poor taste.

        If creepytings had genuinely made something remarkable, I’d tell everyone here to shut the hell up and appreciate it. don’t you even doubt me on that. but she didn’t, and there are plenty others who might also not (another argument towards chalk, if it’s terrible, it goes away).

        and no, you’re 100% not important enough to anyone who could tag to bother going to your house, let alone bother tracking it down. get over yourself. I’m sorry, but you deserved to know.

        • Mark Schultz says:

          Thanks for backing off on your threat to tag my house, I’m so relieved I can put my shotgun away.

          Your very long posts are indeed a manifesto proclaiming a philosophy that needs to be called out and stamped out for the good of society. Your arrogance is way over the top, claiming a mantle of superiority because you can’t distinguish property destruction from art. You’re clearly depressed about your world, so painting your surroundings makes you feel empowered.

          Art is in the eye of beholder, as a conscious decision to look at or not. Graffiti is nothing more than a dog peeing on a fire hydrant, marking a dot in the world until the next dog comes along. It stinks, period. Once it gets going, its hard to stop and the stench piles up. That’s your world. My world does not tolerate this.

          Graffiti is an insult to true artists struggling to get their work on display in a competitive world. You simply can’t compete so you take the short cut. Get someone to commission a mural they actually want to see, its not up to you to decide.

          • mrdeadhead says:

            i don’t believe i ever threatened to tag your house… i see, are you grasping at straws? poor form, old bean. and no, my long posts aren’t manifestos, nor are they even artist’s statements, they’re simply long-winded. and yes i do think i’m better than you specifically, but only because i’ve read the words you’ve written. most other people are actually pretty cool in my opinion. in fact, almost all of my friends are other people, and they’re great, love ’em to death. i’m sorry if you think artists know they’re better than you individually (most of them would though, if the knew you existed), but that’s not usually the drive. it’s not a mantle of superiority, it’s one of difference.

            and no, art isn’t in the eye of the beholder (god you can’t even use an extremely common maxim properly), that’s beauty. if art were subject to the wills and opinions of everyone in society, it would all be terrible, static, and pointless. your world might not like this, it might not even tolerate this, but again: no one cares about you or your world. we have our own worlds, and we like ours better. they’re less based in fear, have bright colors, cool patterns, and tits all over the place (tastefully, of course).

            second off, if you actually knew anything about art you’d understand why paragraphs 2 and 4 are clearly you talking out of your ass, so i’m not even gonna bother with those. go home, clean your shotgun, buy something beige, and allow the people of substance to continue talking about this like adults.

          • Mark Schultz says:

            You’re no artist, you’re a vandal with no respect for other people. And you’re an insult to anyone would likes the Grateful Dead and has any respect for nature.

            Your arrogant statements are amazing and obvious to anyone. Your insults are childish and not worth addressing.

            Let me repeat it again until you understand. Or perhaps you need to sit in a jail cell and then go clean up graffiti until it sinks in. It is not acceptable to vandalize other people’s property, public or private. What part of that do you not understand?

          • Mark Schultz says:

            There are many opportunities for public art that are legitimate and solicited. If people like what they see, it will catch on. If you fail there, paint every wall ceiling, floor, and driveway of your own house or your friends house. The point is that it should be requested, not forced. LIke the difference between a date and a rape.

            To slither out into the night and force your “masterpiece” onto the public is arrogant, illegal, and it really pisses people off. To then claim “they damn well better appreciate it” is arrogance beyond the pale.

  • Don says:

    Casey, I appreciate your efforts to moderate the over-the-top comments but am wondering if that does not paint an accurate picture of the outrage many of us feel towards this young woman. I understand and can even empathize for the armed robber who is compelled to commit a crime to feed his/her family, but I feel there is a special place in hell for those who cause pain or destruction for no reason other than to cause grief towards others. This was not the act of a child but an adult who obviously understands the quality of her actions and still operated with the mens rea (an evil or guilty mind.) to perform her vandalism.

    I apologize for sounding like a barbarian but to me after a financial penalty and a short jail stint I would compel a tattoo artist to recreate one of her objets d’art on her forehead. Unfortunately the king of the world position is already taken.

  • Brad says:

    No amount of esoteric babble, regardless of how artfully articulated, changes the fact that it is a violation of countless state and federal laws to deface public property, particularly when it is located in national parks, wilderness areas and the like. In fact, many of the countless parks and wilderness areas I’ve visited have signs specifically prohibiting doing anything to deface the landscape. Even if pretty girl cannot read, ignorance of the law has never been a defense to criminal charges. She should do some hard time and repay what I can only assume are many hundreds of thousands of dollars in actual damages.

  • Anna says:

    I’m sure someone has already said this, but I’d like to see her have to put in all the hard work to remove her “art” with a law enforcement officer watching her do it.

    • scotts says:

      I think this is a great idea for justice. It’s always much easier to make a stink than to clean it up. Maybe by the 8th or 9th park or so the vandal might begin to appreciate what she marred so thoughtlessly. All it would take is looking around.

      In the overall scheme, I hope all the law-and-order, punishment-freak types posting here will show the same focus and drive in future when public spaces are put on the auction block by the greedhead privatizers in government, for immediate liquidation for the benefit of the greedheads in the private sector.

      The wilderness, its continuing quality and viability as such, along with our access to it, is under grave and constant threat. Creepytings(tm) isn’t even a drop in the bucket.

      • scotts says:

        If anyone thinks I’m hawking psuedo intellectual psychobabble here, consider that Gov. Schwarzenegger was raring to liquidate California’s state park system, to the tune of 220 parks. These days, Gov. Moonbean, the great librul hope, only wanted to hoc off 70.

        Raging Fanboys probably won’t find this too immediate, or too compelling though — too busy nestling their little wet noses into Schwarzenneger’s manly cleavage — that is, when there aren’t any little girls to kick around.

    • Carrie says:

      Anna, I agree with you and it should be at her expense, not the taxpayers. This woman should absolutely have to clean every area she defaced and then some. You can’t teach a lesson, if you don’t teach the lesson.

    • Aimee says:

      I agree, with a toothbrush and some water… in the hottest part of the summer

    • Mark Schultz says:

      Yes! And she should be volunteering to do that. What better way to put this behind her and take responsibility for her mistake. This is a perfect case for direct restitution – go clean up your mess and we’ll move on.

  • Couldn’t believe that Cosmopolitan Magazine writer wrote that more young girls should break the rules and that Casey is a hero. DISGUSTING message. PS I don’t buy Cosmo and won’t in the future either.

  • Donna says:

    I work in the prison system, from my experience I find it very unlikely that she would end up in an institution where she would be “beaten and raped” as some are hoping for, which is totally ignorant. However, I think the cost of housing her for 12-18 months is an expense that is well worth dipping into the tax payers pockets. It will send a message that this sort of thing is NOT taken lightly. Also, little miss “I’m entitled to do whatever I want” will get a reality check. In prison no one is special. You all dress the same and follow the same rules. Yes, rich inmates have access to goodies poor inmates don’t. But having more can cause you even more grief. And…LOL…please please feel the need to leave your artistic mark on the prison and get your whole dorm’s visitation or privileges taken away. That’s a real quick way to see how appreciated your individuality is. Yes I believe a year to a year and a half with no facebook, twitter, instagram or selfies will give miss priss some time for reflection. She needes to also pay the max fine…but shame on those of you that think this crime warrants brutal physical and sexual assault…maybe those carless words were just an expression of your outrage, but just like this chick you need to find an appropriate way to express yourself.

  • ActualArtist says:

    Should she be killed or abused for this admittedly terrible crime? Of course not, that’s absurd.

    Years in prison? Possibly, but why do we want to spend *more* money to house her after spending tens of thousands (or possibly more) cleaning up after her?

    Any punishment or fine resulting from her criminal actions is not “ruining her life” — she did that herself, by herself, and was quite determined to do so.

    Just make her work and remove every single one she did, and apologize for her actions. Of course, she’d have to work under direction of a specialist, both to assure that the removal of her destructive works did not further damage these sites, and that they were in fact removed. And she should pay for that cost — all of it. She should pay for the enforcement costs, too, all of them.

    It’s really the best way to deal with vandalism of this sort — compel the criminal to restore the site to the original condition. Everybody wins, and those who should “lose” don’t “lose it all”.

  • As someone who photographs and likes graffiti & street art when it’s done well or commenting on the environment it’s in (quite often on my walks I’m as much taking pictures of that as nature) and as an arts grad I really hate what she’s done. That is NOT the place, not the format for hard to remove acrylic scribblings, which if it was her making sarky comments about Banksy she’s not even in the same universe, these are terrible, not even good paintings of faces, or cartoons or whatever.

    But aside from the stuff which can be a matter of taste, as a ‘supposed’ artists she’d know that place is everything, that these don’t seem to comment on the environment around them at all, they could be in chalk or something less destructive and few would make a fuss unless she was scrawling over an ancient site or pictograms…Artists DO work outdoors, as do street artists and graffiti artists, but they tend to try and either make the artwork from local materials (Andy Goldsworthy, Richard Long) or something that looks like it should be there, a part of the place. These Creepytings faces just don’t work from an artistic level either, but also jump out, they’re intrusive. And that’s beside the idea that the parks are owned by everyone, so she is destroying her own heritage. I’d have some sympathy if she was making a political point, or a point that the landscape is as invented as anything in a lot of places (it’s a construct, especially here in the UK) – but I don’t see anything like those ideas in her ‘paintings’. If it made you think about a place, or laugh, then there would be some point, but these faces seem just vain.

    We have a problem here with people scratching or painting on rocks, which kills the lichen which has been growing for a very long time. That similarly, like tagging of trees and cacti (WHY? Go find a ruined wall or house if you must…) makes no sense to me. It does go into the wanton vandalism which I’m loathe to go down since I don’t agree with the Broken Windows ethos – graffiti can be beautiful, funny, and remind you of those who have gone before. But it can be crass, arrogant and abusive, like this woman’s work.

    • scotts says:

      I’d say the difference is not so much that we ‘own’ the parks, but that the aspects we value are not human constructs. The vandal in this case insults and degrades the profound, the sublime and the transcendent. No quality of art would be an improvement on any of this scenery.

      The graffiti artist, in some cases and in certain settings, elevates surroundings which can certainly use it: industrial settings, blighted areas, utilitarians spaces. This can also be a real, political act, in that it is human comment upon the human.

  • Paul says:

    As an avid and responsible outdoorsman, sometimes I find myself annoyed with some of the rules at National Parks and other public lands. “You can’t hike there” or “you can’t camp here” come to mind.

    This current situation reminds me of why those rules exist. I’m not going to ruin those places by hiking or camping there, but it isn’t only about me. If everyone was a responsible and respectful outdoorsman, we wouldn’t need such rules. The rules exist because of people like Casey Nockett – the ones who are not respectful of others and the land, and who actively desecrate it. I hope that she receives due process and that justice is served.

    It’s sad to see that some people don’t find this a big deal – and are outspoken in their remarks about how there is something wrong with those of us who do think it is a big deal. I hope someday they can be more understanding, even if they are not as passionate about the outdoors.

  • Tara Townsend says:

    Stupid ignorant creature. She probably believes she is something special which gives her the right to deface landscape which has existed for ages. She is not special, she is just a speck of dust in the universe as we all are, nothing better nothing worse, just a transitory bit in eternal space.

  • Gene says:

    Ditto, about how well you articulated this issue. I will now write my Senators and Representatives in the House.

  • Another Bitter Cynic says:

    Don’t like it? Angry and enraged?
    Then spend a weekend at any of the thousands of parks across America that are in desperate need of clean up.
    There will *always* be people interested in “leaving their mark” on the world. So, if you don’t like it, you should roll up your sleeves *this weekend* and get to work.

    • Rose says:

      True and thank you for the reminder. But people like Ms. Nocket who think they have the right to deface national park land with their “art” need to know there will be serious consequences for their actions, e.g. a steep fine, many hours of community service, being forced to help clean up their mess, public humiliation/shaming and perhaps even some jail time.

    • Mark Schultz says:

      Sounds like a perfect punishment for her and anyone else caught doing this. Which park are you going to clean up this weekend, or are you not angry about this?

  • Rustic says:

    October 25, 2014 at 12:47 am
    “We can only hope and pray that Casey Nockett will serve prison time, where she is brutally beaten and raped.”

    There are many people posting similar to this. Yes, I would say there absolutely no call for the violence(the anonymously of the Internet or not).
    The fact is if a person is commenting this violence. EVERTHING they have to say means nothing—- implied violence internet or not discredits their opinion.

    The crime if you want to call it that or wrong doing. Deserves clean up at owners expense that is plenty—- my bet she would not repeat.

    Big difference between vengeance and punishment. Many here should look up the difference—- that would be in Websters fun.

    • Good grief, I had no idea that some people were making such remarks, yeah, that’s totally uncalled for. There is massive outrage across the country about this, emotions are high, fortunately 99% of us are calling for justice, it looks like, not calling for vengeance.

      I like seeing Modern Hiker’s professional acumen and covering all the salient facts, Casey truly does a stellar journalistic job on these issues.

    • scotts says:

      Misfocused rage is the mode, and kneejerk hyperbole the tool, of the apathetic in day-to-day life.

      • Towel says:

        Stop with the pseudo-intellectual psychobabble Scotty. We get it…

        • scotts says:

          Thanks towel. Glad you do.

          What I don’t get is that many posting here seem to think that their opinions somehow carry more weight if they are claimed to be based in rage. I’d think the opposite to be true.

          Thoreau, Muir, Leopold, Stegner… not many ragers among them. Or fanboys.

          I think the sweet spot must be somewhere between apathy and rage, don’t you towel?

    • Everett says:

      This is a crime, don’t try and sugar coat it and call it “wrong doing”. A 21 year old should know right from wrong unless she can plead ignorance because she is a iPhone addicted Millennial. Vandalism in a National Park is a Federal Crime punishable by up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine. Far too lenient if you ask me. If all goes well that could mean 10 years in prison and a $50,000 fine.

      • cjlaw2000 says:

        Everett: 10 years in prison? the same prison time as a manslaughter conviction?. I say $50,000 fine pay for all the restroration and one year working for the national park sevice on a clean up crew in Yosemite where the public restrooms get lots of use ie: really dirty

  • It’s interesting to note how many of these hardcore nature lovers want this girl to “fry,” or rot in prison, or have her face used to clean up her graffiti. Seems a lot you are borderline headcases who don’t see much distinction between this girl and violent criminals. I’m not saying it’s right that she’s doing this, but the penalties people want to invoke far outweigh her crimes. Some of her drawings look like they were done with chalk, anyway. All this “rage” and “contempt” is what lynch mobs are made from. Doesn’t speak well for the nature crowd.

    • M.R. says:

      She admits to using acrylics, difficult and damaging to remove…

    • That desire for violence is merely rhetoric, people are outraged, they don’t actually mean it. Like the Whitehouse Petition to have her charged with serious indictments rather than a wrist-slap like the two Mormon Scout Leaders were wrist-slapped when they destroyed the hoodoo, people want Federal agencies to DO SOMETHING SERIOUS with this woman, set the tone for others, and their frustration comes out in rhetoric they don’t mean.

      Also America still could benefit from the occasional lynch mob, justice rarely gets served in this country when the criminals have money.

      • scotts says:

        Lynch mobs typically target the weak and the peripheral and are usually organized by and for those doing the most damage in reality.

        That anyones ‘rage’ would be activated by this event/person, of all things, speaks to very sheltered, apathetic day-to-day existence.

    • scotts says:

      Please don’t mistake venting internet fanboys with “the nature crowd”.

      These forum discussions are their canvas, just as the national parks were the vandals.

      Narcissistic defacement isn’t only about painting on rocks.

    • Footprint says:

      Frankly, I think this is on par with a violent crime. Violent crimes hurt the victims, the criminals, and their families. That rarely includes more than a dozen people. In explaining how it is worse to harm a national park, it is relevant to outline why national parks exist. National Parks are all about observation and preservation, or in other words, keeping the landscape and environment unchanged from how it was when the park was founded and making that unchanging view available to the public to see, smell, feel, and hear. That is distinct from conservation, which aims to maintain a sustainable plan of use. The result of preservation and observation is a refuge for many species that might otherwise go extinct and a pleasant public space that is open for respectful use. Ideally, National Parks will preserve a piece of our culture as a country and as a planet for future generations to experience and observe. If Nocket had used chalk, watercolors, or other non-permanent media, then perhaps the crime would be minor. Only a few people’s experience of the park would be marred by her vandalism before it was cleaned. Likewise, if she had vandalized a national forest or other conservation-oriented park, then it would be less severe. The problem is that she used acrylics in a National Park. Those paints probably killed the lichen and other flora in the area where she used them and will be difficult to remove without causing erosion and damage to the rock. In other words, she has permanently damaged a piece of our heritage and it cannot be undone. These sorts of crimes are forgivable for the ignorant such as children, but Casey really has no excuse. She may be a childish and self-centered adult, but she is an adult all the same and we should treat her like an adult, holding her responsible for having damaged the property of all Americans, infringed on our rights, and disrespected all generations of people to come.
      Yes, violence is bad and it can have long-lasting repercussions. Her vandalism, on the other hand, is guaranteed to have an impact on billions of people’s experience of the outdoors. Yosemite alone gets 4 million visitors every year and will probably have over a billion visitors between now and 2200. If you ask me, a minor offense to billions of people is just as bad as a large offense to one person. I think she should serve time in prison, or at least get sent to the same ring of Hell that Gifford Pinchot went to after building the Hetch Hetchy Dam (which is probably not even such a bad place when you consider how many wonderful things Pinchot did aside from destroying Hetch Hetchy).

  • Tom S says:

    I’ve been following this story for a bit now and can’t decide what’s worse; the people who don’t see what she did as wrong, the people who want to string her up by her thumbs, or the arrogance of this narcissistic little twerp. She deserves to be held accountable for her actions, but lets all take a collective breath and try not to make her a symbol for all that is wrong with our social media obsessed me-me-me world. Make her clean it up and then maybe those of us who’ve been brought to rage by this should channel some of that energy into something productive that feeds the soul rather than fans the flames.

  • Rustic says:

    There is no doubt she should clean up her “artistic” license.
    But, fining her will do not a bit good because of the monumental waste of perfectly good money that being, going to any sort of government agency.
    And, jail is also would be travesty of common sense—- another waste of tax payer money.

    She should be made to read all of the violence directed toward on this and the numerous other blogs/forums out there.
    Or, sent to live in a Muslim country as free spirited women that being, knowing how women are treated under sharia law. Just kidding I would never wish that on any women—- I got caught up in all the stated internet “violence” that makes up the majority of posts here.

    Anyway, whatever happens in this case to I am sure it’s importance will be remembered of great importance—- NOT!!!

    • She certainly should be billed for the phenomenal cost of cleaning up her messes. Her Daddy will simply pay it, I expect, just like he’s written checks to bail her out of her brat behavior since she was 7 (her ego and “I did nothing wrong” attitude makes me think that maybe she’s a rich entitled brat whose Daddy has money. Guess we’ll find out at the trial.) :)

  • If the work was beautiful and something unique and went with the landscape, aided it not made it a ugly blemish on natural beauty and the natural art natutre has, I would be more sympathetic but her art is Graffetti like you see on the side of trains and bridges and there for I deem it Ugly. I saw this kinda stuff all over London rail ways and its not unique ,not interesting – lets have everyone smoking shall we- like thats a good habit to promote. Sorry this is no better than scrawls on a bathroom door. Plus disrespecting the parks is not cool.

    • Footprint says:

      Carly Everett Phillips, I understand why you dislike her art, but I think the problem is much bigger than that. It would be disrespectful to all Americans to vandalize the National Parks regardless of what sort of imagery was spread all over the rocks. If Klimt painted The Kiss on your forehead while you slept, it might be an amazing painting, but you’d still be upset about the invasiveness. Without your permission, your face is not Klimt’s canvas and without my permission and the permission of all Americans, the National Parks are not Nocket’s canvas. It really doesn’t matter who did the painting or what she painted. What matters is how and where she painted.

    • SWestberg says:

      I wouldn’t be more sympathetic if it “looked better”.

      Ugly or amazing, who is she to decide what should permanently be added to a place that has been set aside to be as minimally developed as possible?

      By making it subjective, you make it okay in certain situations. And you can’t do that, or we might as well toss the NP system out entirely.

  • Sage says:

    I hope the full extent of state and federal law puts her away for a few years for destroying these areas. She should be held accountable & used as a public example of how not to behave. she is a conceited, ignorant human who thinks her ‘artwork’ & selfies are something important that everybody should she. She is wrong on all accounts. ThAt she lacks the spirituality & common sense to understand how to treat the Earth in the most beautiful places is a loss her soul will never understand. I feel no pity for her, I hate her, and I would spit on her if I ever had the chance. She is a disgusting piece of a human. Her attitude & actions reflect how much of a true artist she is NOT. — she needs to pay in time, action & $$. I’m sick of these idiots always assuming they are so important & must share their ignorance with those that respect the sacredness of the Earth. In another time, I’d be happy to see her hands cut off…… At least ten parks defaced. What a losey, soulless human. She should also get NO glory for righting her wrongs. I’m also sick of the people that totally screw up & then are heros for fixing their screw ups. We need public stockpiles to throw rotten fruit at people. I bet she has no shame. She’s an idiot.

    • Everett says:

      Absolutely right. There is a entire industry built around people who’ve done wrong trying to “rehabilitate” themselves into respectability. There is no such thing as shame anymore.

    • Footprint says:

      I couldn’t agree more. The strangest thing is how society is promoting that mindset. Movies and books like 127 Hours, Into the Wild, and even children’s movies like Brave glorify people’s mistakes and blunders. Who turned that little Scottish princess’s family into bears? The princess, that’s who. Who turned them back? Ok, she did, but that doesn’t mean she should be praised. She should feel bad about ever having changed her family into bears. Likewise, it’s impressive to survive cutting one’s own arm off, but it doesn’t change the fact that he put himself in that situation.
      As for Casey Nocket, I don’t really think it would be a good idea for us to have her fix her mistake. I really can’t imagine her putting the proper effort into cleaning it. It’d be so easy to cause more damage while cleaning that I’d much rather have her pay the parks to clean up her mess, because the employees of then NPS have shown that they care about the parks and they’d surely do a better job.
      I don’t know what sort of punishment she should get, but I’m positive that we should at least boycott her and not promote any of her endeavors (artistic or otherwise) until she has shown that she has grown up a little bit.

  • Mike Francis says:

    Pardon me for saying so, but this is a perfect expression of today’s libertarian spirit. Me. Social responsibility? Ha! Duty/obligation? Antiquated social construct. Public parkland? Statist socialism. I can do anything I want, wherever I want, whenever I want. You can’t tell me what to do, I am a sovereign citizen. Every whim of mine is a right. National parks are unconstitutional Big Government exploitation. It’s my land, and I can do what the (bleep) I want to do with it. Case closed. Go away, commies! Creepytings is an American Hero!

    • Jerk Finder says:

      Wow. You certainly have it all figured out, haven’t you Francis? “Case closed”, even. Well there, righteous one, why don’t you reward your “American Hero” with forced facial tattoos of all the National Parks she has vandalized?… An ironic “artistically expressive” twist for all those around her to appreciate.

    • She does seem to exhibit the Libertarian attitude, yes, right down to boasting that she’ll keep doing it, but from the little bit of evidence she has allowed to slip on to her various social media pages, my first take on her is that her parents are rich entitled parasites which have always written checks to bail her out of the consequences of her actions and now they’ll have to write another check so it’s no big deal for her, just Daddy’s money of which there is more.

      During the trial I hope to see whether I’m right or whether I’m wrong. I want to see if the trial (assuming there is one; her lawyers may advise her to plead no contest) yields details of her mindset. The human behavioral aspects of such activities is something I have always been interested in, and a trial would help to detail what enabled such filthy behavior.

  • Mama says:


    Just wow…

    This is so wrong for so many reasons. Thanks for bringing this issue to light and updating this forum about it. I’m going to add my own rant.

    This girl is obviously very ignorant, and yet she obviously thinks that she is right considering her comments, and still doesn’t get it. Art is about creating something of beauty that has emotional power. Art usually stands for something. This girl just selfishly stands for her own self. She is the epitome of the selfie trapped inside the selfie. She can’t get out and someone needs to throw her a line.

    It makes my blood boil when I see graffiti on trails too, which I’ve noted has been on the rise. This is likely to be even more of a growing issue as today’s youth are raised in urban settings and are culturally disenfranchised and disconnected from nature. It’s a real problem. My observation of more marks like this on trails is an indication that there is a subset of the population who really does not GET it. They see the kind of thing she did as an extension of their artistic and individual freedom of expression. But they are wrong and this is a CRIME.

    Let me explain this the way that girl’s mother should have.

    Dear Casey Nocket,

    Why is this 100% a crime and NOT at all (i.e. 0%) art.

    –> National Parks are a public space for the people to enjoy, a public good

    The big fat rule about national parks is when you go there to try to leave as little of a trace as you can. You act in such a way as to maintain and preserve this public good. Low impact. Don’t litter. Leave no trace. Leave only footprints. Take only pictures. There is a very good reason for this.


    Because people who go to National Parks want to see nature. To remember nature. To FEEL what it is like to be wild and free again in nature. To commune with nature. Urban humans (like you) are forgetting what nature is. It is not your personal canvas honey. These parks serve as an important reminder of so many things that in the common good. We, originally, come from nature. It was here first. It is whole. It is big. It doesn’t need us. But we certainly need it. (i.e. no nature, no food, no oxygen, no clean water=dead…need I go on?)

    To be able to walk a trail in a natural park surrounded by a vista and environment that has no marks of cultural urban life is like visiting a numinous other planet for many of us. It’s one of the things that gives life meaning. That makes life worthwhile. It’s like replugging back into actually real reality. It is an experience of transcendence to leave the urban setting and just be able to tune back into nature away from the human, constructed, urban, urbane world. For some, it’s that it is beautiful and perfect just the way it is. For some others (probably more than would publicly admit) it is as close to a spiritual or sacred experience as they will ever have. Not in the religious sense, but in the sense of touching something that is numinous, wholly other, bigger than you, whole and self-willed and wild. It’s the sanctuary before religion came along and usurped the term. This kind of experience, is, for those who know what I’m talking about, absolutely precious and priceless.

    And so, National Parks are not a place for one person to make their selfish mark for their personal enjoyment and glory at the expense of everyone else that goes there. We do NOT go to natural parks to see cultural art exhibitions (well I guess we could if they were organized by the park in collaboration with artists setting up temporary, removable installations – but I digress). We go to the parks to get AWAY from the cultural/urban context. To be as fee as we can from cultural urban artifact and immersed in as much nature as we can.

    Sure, you have your right to the freedom of artistic self self expression. BUT the rest of us also have OUR right to be free from other people doing things (like creating ugly art of women with buns smoking in the middle of a park – like seriously wtf?) that impinges on our equally legitimate rights to be free from harm to our rights and our well-being. That’s the essence of liberty honey. It’s NOT just about YOUR freedom TO do X. It’s about MY freedom FROM you doing X if I experience a form of harm from it.

    So, sure, go do your art, but not where it will cause harm to humanity, the public good and the environment. That’s not called art. Art on a canvas = art. Art in urban cultural setting = art. Art on a wall to make a statement against capitalist ursupation and oppression of the people = art. Art in a National Park = waste = garbage = crime = harm to those people who go there to use the parks as they were intended. And, as such, we have the right to freedom from the likes of you messing up the public good and natural environment — ecologically and aesthetically — of our national parks.

    So. Let me repeat. In this context you are not creating art. You are destroying a natural park, diminishing a public good, and desecrating nature.

    Yes, I said it.

    Desecrating. Which is pretty much the opposite of art which is a creative act which serves humanity. Your act of putting an unwanted, unsanctioned, illegal, callous, selfish, ugly painting in the National Park is an affront to what is good and right in humanity.

    –> It is a public space of cultural heritage

    As I mentioned, for many people, going to national parks to hike and get away is the closest thing to a sacred experience they will experience. Sacred. Not as in any organized religion sense. But in the original sense of being whole. As being nature that is outside of human influence. Self willed. Whole. On its own terms. Without humans — like you — f’cking around with it for a change.

    It is a wonder, pleasure and privilege to be able to walk through such as setting, and be reminded of the numinous wonder of the Earth. But the more people there are like you who walk through and basically poop all over the place, the worse it is for everyone else.

    About the petroglyphs. And the difference. Between theirs. And your version.

    Yes, there are petroglyphs in these places. Made by humans.

    I get the impulse when one sees a petroglyph to want to add a print of your hand, leave your mark. Feel like you are part of the chain of people who have been to this place. I get that. BUT it’s not ok for you to do that for the above reasons and the ones below:

    The context of indigenous people leaving THEIR paintings on rocks was different than the context of YOU painting on the rocks. Their painting there = culturally appropriate to do so on their sovereign land for their legitimate social and spiritual reasons. You painting there = defacing and destroying the public park environment and sticking a big middle finger up to the heritage of these already disenfranchised peoples. You should have painted a penis and a big dollar sign. Because you aren’t acting like a feminist, who acts to preserve and defend the feminine and the disenfranchised and nature (which is typically seen as feminine). You’re acting more like a selfish d-ck. Like a rapist who feels you can just take what you want when it is not your right, not on any grounds. We, the public, we just say “NO”.

    Got it yet?

    No means no.

    All of N America was originally the lands of First Peoples before colonialists came and invaded and usurped those lands. The creation of those petroglyphs are just one way that they interfaced with the land that they did in culturally significant, respectful and relevant ways that held deep meaning for them and honoured the spirit of the land, the Earth and their place on it. We’ve since taken the land from these First Peoples (in a colonial act that was accompanied by a solid case for genocide, but that is another matter), but at least these National Parks also stand, not only as places to preserve the natural legacy of the Earth, wild, for all people to freely enjoy – but these parks also preserve the cultural heritage of First Peoples. (That being said, if the original tribes that had claim to that land wanted to use them again, they are the only ones who would have a leg to stand on in a court of law for leaving more rock art.)

    To think that you can go and leave your mark on top of theirs is NOT some sort of form of enlightened artistic expression, or communion with the cultural fabric of being through time or revolutionary art, or ironic placement of modernity or whatever else you think it is — but the opposite in fact. It is a form of self-centered and terribly inconsiderate CULTURAL APPROPRIATION.

    Your selfish painting in the public park without permission and with harm to the rest of us who that park is intended for (who share a social contract to use the park but leave no trace) is — in artistic form — the continuation of colonial disrespect and basic stealing the use of the public land that is there for ‘the people’ for your own private gain and it is a violation to indigenous tribes and their way of life. You are extending the behaviour of an arrogant and entitled colonialist, masculine, dominant, selfish culture that takes the goods of the land for oneself to the detriment of others, particularly Native Americans. (Which also probably makes it a form of racism, denigration and cultural harassment.)

    The First Peoples have had enough of colonialists coming and pissing all over their land and taking from it and profiting from it at their expense, without ignorant self-professed artists coming along and essentially denigrating, defacing and appropriating their cultural traditions and artifacts. How cocky, arrogant and ignorant can you get. And you call that art? And you think other people are dumb to not get it. You obviously have no idea what real art it. What you are doing is essentially another form of racist usurping of land and culture for your own gain, and oh, by the way, let me repeat, a crime.

    –> It is generally culturally, socially and *artistically* ignorant and selfish

    Who the hell are you? Who gave you the right to deface the cultural heritage of First Peoples and ruin the natural setting and experience of public parks for what they were intended to be for the rest of us? You think you are Banksky who spoke for the disenfranchised? I have news for you. You are trodding on the disenfranchised, NOT the other way around. You’re not making art “for the people”. You’re acting like a narcissist who only cares about your own advancement. Is that what you really want? You appear like you don’t get the soul of art. That’s the worst crime here, because art is a thing of beauty and joy forever. Not a cultural abomination to the common good of the little person. And I wouldn’t be so hard and pissy in this comment if it wasn’t for the fact that on top of what you did you posted comments indicating that other people who criticize you are idiots and don’t get your art.

    No. YOU are the one who doesn’t get it.

    These are PUBLIC parks that are there for the COMMON GOOD of ALL people, including the poor common person. You can enter, a lot of the time, for free, or a very low cost. This is not THE MAN who is there as the virtual face of the 1% who is appropriating the resources of the earth that you are making a statement against, like Banksky. Public parks are the opposite of the man. They are there for everyone. i.e. Not elitist capitalist settings that would be the kind of cultural context that would make the subversive art of graffiti stand as art that has meaning both aesthetically and culturally.

    (In fact it is the capitalist, military industrial complex which is largely responsible for destroying much of nature, which makes these parks all the more valuable as places of no-take, no-mark, as more and more government land gets appropriated for the benefit of private industrial benefit, and industry even pushes for things like exploratory or other kinds of rights in parks, further degrading the protection of these systems (at least here in Canada).)

    You think you are some sort of revolutionary artist like Banksky, but this just indicates that she does not even get the soul behind graffiti art. I know enough about Banksky and that art movement to know that they are about sticking it to “the man”, for the rights of the common person, to take power away from the elitists, to speak for the people, to essentially improve and beautify or make a statement on what is usually otherwise butt ugly interfaces of the urban environment created by capitalist powers that don’t really care for the little guy.

    Banksky’s art, from many perspectives actually improves what is an otherwise depleted urban interface. It is beautiful as transformative act on an urban surface of modernity erected by a capitalistic system. It therefore has an *asethetic* that is usually better than the original space. It increases net beauty in the world. And it has a *message* that says that the people matter, that we deserve a better life, that the systems of government control are not fair and that the people deserve more. More equity. More beauty. Art is about an expression of humanity and beauty in the end.

    In other words, yes this (http://banksystreetart.tumblr.com/image/100509940790) = art. It provides a reprieve of beauty and humanity in an otherwise utilitarian corporate urban environment. It is a breath of fresh air amidst the grime.

    Instead, you are more like the heartless industrial capitalist thug. You waltz in, cavalier, and takes away from the people an essential piece of beauty that is there for the public good and instead usurp it for your private, selfish, elitist benefit. You are more like the self-centered 1% club CEO who wants to hoard the public good for your gain while others lose. This is a far cry from the bohemian artist who rebels because they are trying to set the people fee and add more beauty to the world, or the graffiti artist who rebels by making a statement against the forms of oppression and hegemony in society. Your art is instead, as it plays out in reality, an expression of hegemonic will on the public good of the common man that serves your elitist intent, and a shame to the essential cause of graffiti art which is to stick it to the MAN, not to stick it to the underdog. Art is about service to humanity, not taking from it.

    Yes, so as an artist, is that your message? That you don’t give a sh-t about anyone else or anything else except your own ascent to power? A statement about the artist as capitalistic, industrialist, selfish usurper of land that is not privately hers for her own private gain? Because that is the message I got out of it.

    Maybe hunker down and site in a basement somewhere and scribble on the floor and think really hard about boundaries, between your rights and the rights of other people and what the hell you thinks you actually stand for other than oppression or confusion. Because, as it is, you are communicating to the world that you value being a senseless thug who doesn’t stand for anything of authentic benefit to nature or to other people who have to share this planet with you.

    I wonder what would help you get it. How about if someone wants to make some permanent art on your body while you’re sleeping at night, without your permission, because it is THEIR form of self expression? How about if someone took your sketchbooks and decided to draw a big dick on every page? For many of us who value nature and National Parks, we see these parks as connected to our bodies, our souls, and as such they should be free of your form of vandalism. Yes, vandalism. Not graffiti. Not art. You needs to step out from admiring your face in the mirror and your selfie on facebook and your followers on instagram and step out into the world beyond this narcissistic frame of reference where other people have rights TOO.

    What she did in the parks is not a visual expression that carries the message of beauty and freedom for the common man or woman. It’s not feminist. Here. Learn something about feminism and modes of exerting power over others to dominate them to have to experience or do something they don’t want to.


    Here is the essence of it: “Notice that there are two salient features of this definition of power: power is understood in terms of *power-over* relations, and it is defined in terms of its actual exercise.” And domination?…”the common thread in these analyses is an understanding of power not only as power-over, but as a specific kind of power-over relation, namely, one that is unjust or illegitimate.”

    Unjust. Illegitimate.

    Think about those things. What makes what you did unjust or illegitimate to others as a mode of “power-over” the rest of us using the parks, that is not only illegal in the legal sense, but in the ethical and moral sense? No one else wants your art there. WE DO NOT WANT IT BUT YOU FORCE IT ON US.

    And that is exactly what the mode of art that Banksky does in the city is justified for as a form of civil disobedience through art. It is a statement against the oppressive dominating forms of society (the 1% for example). Except in this case, you are not Robin Hood. You are not taking power from the oppressors through your act. You are making life even worse for the common man, the oppressed man. You are adding to the injustice. Not making it better. In actual exercise.

    There is a whole range of argument about how what you did is more on the side of the misogynistic rape and pillaging of nature, which the colonialists also did as they saw themselves as ascendant and entitled to do so. Her work, being in line with the type of masculine will that feels that it can penetrate the will of someone else when they don’t want it, and it is against common law rights, actually speaks in opposition to oppression of the feminine principle, of the indigenous, of nature, of the poor. It’s the desecration of all that. Instead, your act stands to serve only your personal freedom to the detriment of others, to the detriment of the public good and freedom of the people. You’re being the elitist that is arrogant in your sense of entitlement compared to the rest of us. This attitude is tantamount to megalomania, especially considering that you repeated it over and over again and given the self-congratulatory and defensive nature of your responses on social media outlets, it’s not coming across as defensive against a large reaction, but as self-righteous.

    Look I’m not saying that you are a bad person, but you are behaving like a bad person. BAD = causing harm. Get it?

    Maybe it’s time you stopped and stepped up to the plate and took responsibility and said “sorry”. That’s all we really want. Stop strutting around like an arrogant pr-ck who feels self-justified even after you’ve insulted and hurt many other people. YOU’RE ACTING LIKE A BULLY. I’m sure it sucks to have media filled with a bunch of people like me berating you, but we are not doing it to bully you for nothing. We are doing it because YOU ARE NOT OWNING UP that you did a sh-tty thing there, to the park, to the other people who want to use that park, and to indigenous and human culture. When I go in a park and I see stuff like what you did, it HURTS me. It pains my heart. If feels awful. That someone could be so callous. That someone could deface the natural setting like that with no regard for the experience of other people. It sucks. So, just own up already and we’ll get off your back. Everyone makes mistakes. I’ve made some huge doozies. It’s not the end of the world. None of us are perfect either, but stop acting like you did nothing wrong and we’re the idiots and take responsibility for what you did.

    If you want to do a noble thing to make up for what you did, you should also apologize to the Indigenous tribes on whose original land you felt you had the special elitist right (that was more important than the collective rights of the rest of us as well as indigenous peoples) to go and culturally appropriate and deface their form of art and heritage. Or maybe you should try to write them and the rest of us a public letter defending why — on ethical, legal and artistic conceptual grounds — your form of private artistic expression has more value than the value of wild and beautiful nature, the value of cultural ecosystem services that bring benefits to the public in terms of health, recreational, aesthetic and spiritual values and experiences that comes from national parks, and the distinct value of Indigenous, sacred cultural heritage.

    If you do not apologize and at least realize that what you did was an act of oppression for other people that sucked for the rest of us, you should be probably also be banned permanently from National Parks until you do. It’s obvious you don’t want to play nicely in that shared sandbox.

    That being said, if you want to go into nature and go and leave your own form of artistic petroglyphs in the real backcountry on crown land (NOT national parks) as part of your own feeling of a cultural tradition that is of value to you, as a means of communing and interfacing with and giving to nature one’s artistic expression in a personal and respectful way, go right ahead. But do it out of the public parks, thank-you very much, and do so in a way that is considerate and compassionate to life (not toxic), respectful to the common good, and at a scale & in a manner that isn’t going to ruin nature for someone or something else. And, maybe btw, how about this time, you check if it is a crime first too.

    Finally, if you’re going to engage in some form of civil disobedience and rebellion, get your facts straight love, and make sure you are rebelling AGAINST the forces of oppression in society, NOT, in essence, becoming them.

    So, yes, to the rest of people (if you have bothered following my diatribe this far) I think that there should be VERY strict penalties for this kind of thing. Like the penalties for littering on the highway. In the thousands. And she should have to probably also pay for the cleanup and do community service to help clean up garbage in the city so she can get a sense of what it is like to have to clean up the messes that other people like her go around making in public space.

    Maybe as a preventative measure, parks can put up signs too, to let people know the rules of order if this kind of thing is on the rise. Put up registration systems and/or cameras. (Which also has some safety benefits.) Just having people know that they have been tracked will often serve as prevention. At the trail head, or on the same sign, let other people know the number they can call if they observe people doing this, along with the usuals, like what to do about bear sightings.

    • Amen and >9000 likes for everything you say here. It *is* desecration, and I hope that first off she has stopped, secondly I hope that she realizes what she’s doing is wrong.

    • mrdeadhead says:

      uhhh sorry i glossed over that until the end, but rule 1 of fighting vandalism: don’t put up signs saying “don’t vandalize anything”. that’s called “asking for it”

      also, there has to be a line at some point. if you want to argue the merits of natural beauty, the way to preserve that is not to litter the area with man-made signs. sure they have more merit, or purpose, than graffiti, but they’re essentially the same thing.

  • Andrew Ralowicz says:

    We can only hope and pray that Casey Nockett will serve prison time, where she is brutally beaten and raped.

    • Rustic says:

      Seems to be like the majority of “positive” dialogue here on this issue.

      I guess this group of masterminds is ready to tackle the worlds problems—- lord help us.

    • Jerk Finder says:

      Interesting, yet potentially excessive option for park users restitution… But I admire your passion.

    • Fortunately you and your sentiment is in the minute percentage of opinion. Everyone but you hopes for justice. Your rhetoric is filthy.

    • scotts says:

      Interesting that this post is not censored, but mine that called this sort of misguided, authoritarian agression into question were swiftly removed.

      Moderater, can you explain this double standard?

  • Brett Robles says:

    I’m of the opinion that this current situation is exactly what she was trying to create. She knew the world would go bat s**t crazy if she did this and posted it to social media. Right now she’s getting exactly what she wants – her 15 minutes. It’s a shame that we live in society so full of people that would destroy a one of a kind natural wonder in the hope of garnering some celebrity status. That being said, I am also of the opinion that an army of tattoo artists need to hunt her down, tie her up, get ridiculously drunk and unsteady, then tattoo random stupid and hideously ugly s**t on her from head to toe.

  • Deb says:

    Excellent commentary. Your post and subsequent news escalation happened while I was at Yosemite. Just catching up on the story while still filled with the wonder of the park. Can’t wait to hear you on the news this week.

  • Artoo45 says:

    This woman is officially my poster child for The Millennials.

  • On a related note. I live near a lovely little hill here in suburban Boston. At the top there is a lovely little rocky top, from which you can see the city skyline. It’s a sweet little climb up there and very secluded. A couple of years ago I climbed up there and someone had painted a 20 foot mural with his name in 6 foot letters all over the rock face to commemorate the death of some unfortunate teenager who apparently loved the place.

    Am I evil for thinking that this was really, really wrong? I’m sorry the kid died, and I understand that the pain of that loss can give you blinders. But does that give you the right to essentially steal that place from all of the rest of us and name it HIS place forever and ever?

    • Mama says:

      No. It doesn’t.

    • :( A small brass plate cemented discretely to a corner of the rock would have been less obtrusive and maybe people could understand it and accept it. Outlandish spray paint in huge letters as some kind of monument is totally out of line. :( What a mess!

      • Daniel Richner says:

        I live in the Skylands region of New Jersey, 5 minutes from the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, unfortunately a similar thing happened a few years ago when a young man in high school “fell” into a waterfall after a tropical storm, that was known for people jumping off into a a deep hole at the bottom. After the kids body was found, Graffiti showed up all around the waterfall area “commemorating this young man.” I was filled with hatred for a few months. This spot I had journeyed to for years for its beauty and serenity looked completely destroyed. You do not destroy natures beauty in any aspect. It is completely disrespectful and I urge anyone that sees this type of activity to report it to the police immediately. As other people have said, you do not paint over someone else’s art. What you go to these national parks for is to see natural art and it should not be ruined in such a way!

  • Charlene says:

    As a recent retiree of the National Park Service and of one of the Parks affected I am not only saddened but outraged. There are wonderful artists in this world but thankfully none that are so Narcissistic about their own talent they would do this. The modern Hiker should post the collective cost to the American taxpayer for this defacement. I can tell you we are not talking about a maintenance worker with brush and a bucket of water to clean it up. This thoughtless display is going to cost many thousands of dollars to repair and extra work added to an already short staffed group of people to fix. Please Modern Hiker report in the future the total cost to us the American taxpayer what this self absorbed thoughtless act just cost us.

  • Charlene says:

    as a recently retired employee of the National Park Service specifically Crater Lake National Park, it makes me so sad to see someone deface such a beautiful place. I know what my over worked and under staffed coworkers and friends are going to have to do to repair this. I also know how much this is going to cost us the American tax payers to fix this. If you think this is going to be a quick wash it of the rock, you are sadly going to be shocked at the thousands of our tax dollars this is going to cost just to repair one park. I think when all these precious places are finally repaired The Modern Hiker should post the collective cost to us, the American tax payer, and some of you I’m sure will have a far different view of what kind of person she is. There are wonderful artistic people in this world but thankfully not all are as narcissistic about their talent as her.

    • Something over a dozen vandalisms, the cost of cleaning this is going to be phenomenal, yeah. It takes just minutes to shit-up a rock, it takes from hours to days to clean it up and restore the rock (if possible) back to what it was.

      Solvents can’t be used in most places, it has to be painstakingly chipped off, burned off, vacuumed up, or scraped with wire brush, it’s HOURS of work and for the large vandalisms it is days of hard, hot, sweaty work.

      I hope her Daddy is given the bill.

  • Robert says:

    “Do you want to ruin her life?” Yes, I do. I’m tired of this narcissistic crap and I want to see her rot in jail for many years. I want to see her used as an example, so that maybe other people will think twice before doing this. I’m tired of seeing graffiti, both in the natural environment and in our cities. These people must be stopped, in any way possible.

  • Mindy Snyder says:

    It’s unfortunate that some people want her to die a slow death. She is a human being. She is ignorant as we all have been in our lives. She needs to clean it up and, well, punished. And for those who minimize what she has done…if everyone were allowed to paint, litter, deface, etc. our protected natural environments, we would have nothing left. We need to protect the sacred lands for they are healing in so many ways. What she did should not be tolerated, but neither should she be treated as trash because of her ignorance.

    • Mike Francis says:

      She’s not a little kid “misbehaving.” She’s a grown woman with a narcissistic personality. Maybe she has emotional problems. Whatever. She defaced public property and beautiful scenery in a peaceful place with self-absorbed schlocky nonsense pictures. I have no sympathy for her. She should be publicly humiliated, because she sought public attention for this so-called artwork. People need to grow up. Shame is not a bad thing. She needs to be ashamed for this vandalism.

    • SEO says:

      She needs to be executed by poison. Plain and simple. We need to cleanse the earth of fungus like her.

    • :) I agree, my initial reaction was anger and outrage, but the courts will give her fair justice, I think, because the incident has achieved national coverage, the courts will be sure to avoid a wrist-slap like the two Mormon Scout Leaders got when they destroyed the hoodoo, that also lead to outrage.

  • Michele R. says:

    I am angry, disgusted and generally tee-d off about what this ignorant woman did, but the word that REALLY comes to mind is “CONCEITED”!!!! Why does she think that the rest of the world should be forced to look at her “works of art”, would “enjoy” looking at her “works of art”???? I am confounded by people like her……..

    • NoNameMcGee says:

      What the hell are you talking about? First off, there is a ton of “art” that is forced on people around the globe in public places, put there by decision makers for the good of the public that mostly doesn’t want to see it. Secondly, it’s a tiny splash of paint/marker that’s on an otherwise giant planet Earth. If you really think that bit of insignificant splatter matters, then you are most likely the vein and conceited one who thinks you matter on a cosmic scale.

      • Aracely says:

        If you feel like it’s just a tiny splash of paint/marker on this giant planet Earth, why don’t you donate your car/house/valuables for this idiot to use as a canvas. National parks are a common space and you treat them with the respect for the sake of the parks themselves and everyone who uses them.

      • mherduwynn says:

        Exactly! This person is so right! Nothing matters at all, like learning to spell ‘vain’, for example… idiot.

      • Michele R. says:

        You are absolutely correct in two points! There is art forced upon us in “public” places, but not in the middle of the wilderness, a place that should have as little modern human impact as possible. People seek out and hike through these wondrous places to GET AWAY from the deluge of people and their creations. Everything possible is done to keep these wild places wild, that is why there are LAWS against the kind of thing that she did so brazenly.
        Secondly, as you mentioned, these “public” works of art are put there by decision makers, groups of people who weigh the cost, appropriateness, beauty (whether we agree or not) and suitability of these placements of art. And they are usually done by recognized artists, who at least have somewhat of a following who think they are credible. These “public works of art” are not just placed nilly willy by a single conceited, arrogant person who intentionally breaks the law because she thinks that “nature” would be better off with her paint splattered on it!!

      • J.O. says:

        Wow, that’s some tortured logic there McGee. So people should be allowed to do whatever they wish on our shared lands and monuments, because we’re all just insignificant specs of dust in the vast cosmos?

        There is nothing conceited about wanted to maintain the natural beauty of our national parks. Are you familiar with Broken Window Syndrome? If this goes unpunished expect a lot more than just a few “tiny splashes of paint”

        And your public art argument doesn’t hold water either. As addressed in the article, legitimate public art was vetted and approved. Whether you like it or not is immaterial. It went through the proper process and serves some perceived need. They only thing this girl’s (not woman’s) simplistic non-art serves is her own ego.

      • Jerk Finder says:

        Ridiculous argument you dense, closed-minded, and self-absorbed buffoon. I’ll come over and paint your house purple – just a small splash of color in this big world of ours… You poor thing, born without a brain.

      • violethart says:

        it’s vandalism. Pure and simple. As the article states, it’s illegal. The idea of someone using marker to doodle all over ancient rocks is just disgusting. I would throw the book at her.

      • “… there is a ton of “art” that is forced on people around the globe in public places, put there by decision makers for the good of the public that mostly doesn’t want to see it…”

        Not on public lands, there’s not. You *do* understand the difference between public lands and private property, right?

  • Diane, Former Child Vandal says:

    When I was a kid, a little over 50 years ago, I graffittied a women’s restroom in a state park. When my Mom found out, she marched me to the restroom with a bucket, cleanser, and rags and made me clean it all up. And she didn’t stop with my mess. I had to clean ALL of it up. Mom ignored my howls of protest that ” It’s not fair! I didn’t do those other ones!” It was hard work and I had to listen to the comments of all the women who came in to use the toilets – to the effect of how disgusting the graffitti was, etc. I vividly remember my shame to this day. Eventually, as an adult, I came to realize the value of the lesson my Mom taught me. And it cured me of any desire to vandalize anything, ever again.

    The scale of the vandalism in this case leads me to think that Casey Nocket has done quite a bit of this, probably for years, Like me, she probably started out with “small” stuff. But unlike me, she didn’t get punished for the small stuff and learn a hard lesson. And that is the real shame – it never should have been allowed to get to this.

    • Wombat says:

      Too bad Casey didn’t have a mother like yours.

    • Jerk Finder says:

      Good Lord. Dumb is dumb. Don’t try to justify this with “Woh is me” psycho babble. She evidently has the time and financial resources to travel great distances just to deface Mother Nature – in her coordinating LuLu outfit. She’s just another selfish, entitled, lazy, social media poisoned, attention whore – or so it appears.

  • John Weald says:

    Once she is tried and found guilty, they need to use her face to clean the paint off the rocks. This might prevent another moron from coming along doing the same idiotic thing!

  • di says:

    i am all for graffiti in grungey industrial settings as I think it brings a lot of beauty and a human feel to areas that are in their own right a vandilism of the earth itself. I don’t think there is really a problem with writting on a rock .. I mean, we appreciate to look at things people made that are “old” (hieroglyphs). and in reality, sharpie will not stand up to the test of time . Taking a picture of yourself breaking the law in a national park is pretty dumb though!!!

    • Her “work” just betrays a complete lack of respect for our national parks/monuments, and the natural landscape. There are many places such crap can be scribbled, and she made the wrong move. Also, it seems to be much more relate to ego that art.

    • Greg says:

      How could you be for graffiti in an urban setting? People own those buildings. The only type of graffiti that is acceptable is graffiti commissioned by the owner of a property. It is a very base argument to say that human construction on earth is a form of vandalism itself do therefore it’s okay to write on other peoples property. As for your argument that it is similar to hieroglyphics, well the two are nothing alike. we appreciate things like hieroglyphics because they give us perspective on the past, not for their artistic beauty. This woman is not even trying to produce anything of beauty… Just to leave her own selfish mark on something that is much bigger than her. I say that it won’t stand the test of time is not the point. The point is she should know better in the first place.

  • Elizabeth says:

    Wonderful follow up to the original article (and all of it’s updates). I was absolutely flabbergasted when I first read about her vandalism. I do hope she is arrested and receives the stiffest fines possible. Not only as a deterrent for her, but for others as well. I was appalled at some of the places she did this – the Mist Trail for example is heavily traveled I’m sad no one saw or stopped her.

    Thanks for turning this into a teaching moment and not simply a witch hunt.

    • Hopefully a teaching moment for *every* vandal who walks in to the outdoors carrying paint. If they stake her to the ground and throw the book at her, that’s a lesson learned for herself but also for others who think there’s nothing wrong with what she did. :)

  • scotts says:

    I think it’s possible to condemn this vandalism and seek restitution, including appropriate punishment, without having to inhabit some emotional state of ‘rage’. In fact, I’d say this expression relates to justice about as closely as the vandals expression relates to ‘art’. Both are self-absorbed, more suitable to group therapy context than public deliberation of appropriate behavior and how things ought to be.

    The same expansive impulse behind my wilderness ethos tells me there is ample space to call for justice well short of “rage”. In fact, I think it’s probably a requirement.

  • Buddy says:

    I cannot believe we’re even having this discussion! Federal Offense. Destruction of MY property which I love and have paid dearly for. Stiff penalty.

  • Melissa says:

    This woman needs to be punished vandalism is not acceptable. Tagging is tagging and in her case she’s destroying nature. If they allow her to continue doing this everyone will think it’s ok and they’ll start doing the same. She needs so be punished, fined and then sent back to clean everything up.
    One thing that can ruin a hike for me is seeing how other people don’t appreciate nature and destroy it.

  • John from Tampa says:

    As a Boy Scout leader I was disgusted by the Utah idiots and our LNT scout instructor did a whole session on that to the boys. This is even more discouraging in that she cannot plead ignorance; she keeps doing it. She should get charged with a felony. As a former Art Major her stuff is just BAD as well, This is just sad on all counts, I see another scout meeting topic coming on…

  • Joey M says:

    here’s a list of senators on the national parks subcommitte, let them know with phone calls and emails that vandalism charges need to upgraded to a felony. Right now, they are only misdemeanors


  • Jim says:

    Will this graffiti be easy to clean up or not?

    • Renna Shesso says:

      If this is indeed acrylic paint: No. Whether painting your kitchen or creating fine art, splashing your clothes (or anything else) with acrylic painting and *letting it dry* before trying to clean it up means that it’s there for keeps. What would work, in these settings? I don’t know. Sandblasting or such might be the only answer.

      If it’s crayon, oil pastels or chalk, there are other methods, maybe, but the pigments (and wax or oil binders) still leave a residue. Art materials are DESIGNED to be impervious: that’s part of what makes this so massively screwed up.

    • No. There is a patina on the rock. If you scrap it off, you get newly exposed rock. So while gone, you can see it was there.

  • 100peaks says:

    And bravo, Casey, for the context and turning the frown upside-down. :)

  • 100peaks says:

    What most of you said.

    As someone who comes back from the trail regularly with found beer bottles and cans, and mylar balloons stowed in my pack, I felt the rage rising.

    But it seems like this all stems from bad parenting, where her mother responded to a post, with something like “I almost cried, I am so proud of you.” It obvious her mother thinks she’s a gifted artist taking risks, so this girl believes this, as well.

    My daughter often asks, “Why did someone do that?” when we see news of something bad happening. My answer is almost always the same.

    “It just a case of people making bad decisions.”

    I don’t think this girl is evil. I think she just made some very bad decisions, and the outdoor community doesn’t respond well to these sorts of decisions, as we encounter similar signs of this behavior on a regular basis.

    I think she should publicly apologize, and have tons of community service, which should include, and not be limited to, cleaning up her own mess, on her own dime.

    • She needs to realize shes not everybodys special little snowflake, and some of us dont want the rainbows that shine out of her crack left on the trails we hike

    • linda earnhart says:

      I completely agree. As a friend of mine said, she is not the center of the universe.

    • Joe Commentor says:

      ‘bad decisions’? what a crock! It’s called ‘WRONG’, it’s called ‘immoral’. How about shooting someone? well, I guess that was a ‘bad decison’. How about being an adulterer? Honey, I realize now it was a ‘bad decision’. How about robbing a bank? At the time I had no money it didn’t seem like a ‘bad decison’. Are you one of those ‘don’t judge me/others’ types?

    • Her parents are rich entitled little brats, Daddy always wrote a check for this daughter’s consequences so the daughter never learned that she’s doing anything wrong, it looks like. It looks like Daddy’s money has kept her free and clean yet now with the national outrage maybe Daddy’s money isn’t going to fix this for her.

  • steveaustin says:

    Indeed, well put. Mad props for the nod to Duchamp’s ‘L.H.O.O.Q.’–the obvious difference being
    that Duchamp didn’t deface the ACTUAL Mona Lisa. While C. Nocket did–deface the original.

  • Scott Turner says:

    “if banksy did it u’d have a hardon” – Casey Nockett, taken from her Tumblr. http://creepytings.tumblr.com/post/100729128141/i-dun-fucked-uuuuuuup

    From now on, instead of being angry at people like this, I am going to devote my energy doing the exact opposite of what they do. I am going to volunteer, improve, snag every piece of trash I find on a trail, and do whatever I can to help the environment. It felt good to express righteous anger, but it will feel even better to counteract this kind of nonsense.

  • Randy says:

    I would like to thank you Casey, (and callipider), for spearheading this issue. That said, I don’t think it’s a matter of taste at all. Nor do I care about where she is from, or about so-called “street art” vs graffiti, or any other excuse. That ‘s all nonsense! This person is obviously a self-absorbed twit who places a higher value on her own infantile sense of expression than on the natural heritage of this nation, or of the concept of public property. I think she really needs a timeout to re-evaluate her true place in the universe, and to serve as an example to others like her, because it seems to be a growing problem. Disconnected youth with mixed-up priorities spending too much time in cyberland and not enough time interacting in real life.

  • Scott Turner says:

    I may be adding fuel to the fire here, but it appears that her Tumblr is still going strong and that she has very little remorse:

    “if banksy did it u’d have a hardon”



    *off to do some art*”

    For all of the anger and rage vented in her direction, it appears to have had little to no effect. She may change her tune after she is apprehended, tried, and sentenced, but for now it seems as if she does not care.

    Therefore, I concur with Casey that our energy would be better spent in action rather than in words. For every one person like this, I am sure there are 20 who care. If 20 people who care got up and did something to improve or protect the wilderness, it would vastly outweigh the effects of one person.

  • LYNX says:

    Come on and, where does freedom come in all this?… I mean I think you are judging somebody you don´t know, we can´t know the motives behind her actions… and who is to judge, if what this lady does, is art or not? and how can we know why the cave men painted the caves, were you there? did you speak to them? I do agree with the fact that poor girl is not very talented and well if I saw her I would recommend that she practiced a bit more on paper before going out and painting on the rocks… and if it makes you so so angry to see those pictures you are free to go and remove them, there are many techniques, it´s far more productive than commenting in a blog…. I stone carve, I love stones and I will go into the forest choose a giant rock and spend hours carving it and I do it in public land and who is to say I can´t do it, who is to say I can´t do something my ancestors did almost since the beginning of humanity.

    • Randy Guthrie says:

      Friends, have you ever wondered what a “douchebag” is, exactly? It’s Lynx. A smug, self-satisfied, myopic asshole who thinks his lame-ass stone carving is superior to nature’s.

      I doubt Lynx’s “ancestors” carved stone with a latte and a gluten-free scone.


  • KLA says:

    I agree with Casey completely. Let’s channel our disgust into something positive. I always carry trash bags with me on hikes, and almost always end up collecting trash that irresponsible people leave behind. Most of that I see at State Parks and recreation areas, but I have seen much trash in Utah near Capitol Reef and Escalante. Just take a few minutes and pick up some trash. The little things can make a difference.

    The fact she is a city dweller has no relation to what she did, in my opinion. I live in Chicago and I would never dream of doing anything like this, and that includes my hiker friends in the city. I usually see this stuff in more rural areas, such as Southern Illinois….Cave-in-Rock State Park, Garden of the Gods, etc. But the last couple of years I have witnessed graffiti in Utah and California National Parks and it just blows my mind.

    Like I suggested yesterday, I believe she should spend the next few months scrubbing her graffiti off of the rocks she destroyed. I also suggest a hefty fine, and some sort of public humiliation–perhaps have her wear a shirt proclaiming she vandalized National Parks while she cleans the rocks

    Actually, I feel sorry for her.

  • tim says:

    and huge fine of course.

    • Glamor Camper says:

      Right on Tim. Felony conviction, fines and has to clean up her digusting defacing of the national parks. “The Woman” as she is being referred to on NBC is a selfish, distructive, moronic a-hole who deserves to pay for ruining parts of OUR national parks.

  • tim says:

    felony and jail time. period.

  • Mike Smelser says:

    Well said Casey. I especially appreciate:

    ” I hope that everyone who’s as outraged about this as I am can take that rage and turn it into something positive. Instead of fuming in comment threads and signing petitions, find a local park you care about and volunteer some time to help clean up or maintain trails. ”

    Get off the friggin computers and do something positive! I know that Yosemite has countless volunteer opportunities through their well managed Volunteer In the Park program (aka VIP). There are opportunities for individual and group work trips available year round. Well worth the time and effort and a free campsite and entry pass to the Park for your trouble. Best deal in town.

  • osprey says:

    All I am saying is this is a small non issue. And I am moderated where as people are on here wanting to kill and maim her are not moderated???
    I am neither for or against her actions. Just rather for ignoring them.

    Just goes to show where peoples morales show up on their priorities…

  • Tim says:

    Actually, Casey, yes, I want her life ruined; and, I want her to live a very long and suffering life. My dad was a nature freak. He loved all things grand and small and, in particular, he adored national parks, monuments, etc., and instilled the same love in all his kids. He passed away in 2011, but would have had something to say about this. When he saw vandalism like this, it would break his heart. I wonder how many, even in these comments, are expressing the anger of their broken hearts. Our character is not the result of breeding, but of the memories of the things we do, see, hear, smell, touch, and taste. Everyone who encounters this vandalism is now permanently tainted by it. What the Scouts did in Utah is one thing, but this is on a much higher and wider plain. I would probably never have seen the rock formations they destroyed. Nobody who did not know they were there, walking by today, would never consider the damage was man-made (and they may actually wonder what incredibly tiny act of nature toppled it, causing them a lifetime of research and wonder). It does not minimize the gravity of the act, but it does minimize the extent of the impact.

    So yes, since her actions have caused such wide-ranging ripples, she needs to be given an equally harsh penalty.

  • Kai says:

    Frankly, I don’t think a suspended sentence would be appropriate, she really needs to be locked up for a while to understand the seriousness of her crimes.
    Something that no one has brought up is the fact that it appears someone else was taking the photos. This person, too, should be held criminally liable, too.

  • Neil says:

    I think what raises this above an ordinary case of vandalism, bad as that would be, is that Nockett is flaunting her crime on social media. We would be annoyed to come across the defacement out hiking; seeing it in our homes, and seeing the alleged perp bragging about it, is what creates the rage.

  • Nick says:

    I am from the UK and have enjoyed some memorable trips to the beautiful unspoilt National parks of the American west. As H. M. Wormington said “…once infected (by the desert) there is nothing one can do, but strive to return again and again…”
    I am so angry that the publicity this idiot is receiving will “inspire” other morons to copy her. I hope the authorities act quickly to locate her and make an example of her. Make her clean it up! Fine her and jail her! It is bad enough seeing our city public places covered in gang art.

    • Heather says:

      I don’t think the press she is getting is going to inspire others to copy her. The only press I’ve seen is about how awful and stupid her actions were. It’s not like she is,or will ever be, getting featured in Juxtapoz.

  • Cynthia O'Keeffe says:

    It makes me really really sad to read about the incredible selfishness and thoughtlessness of Casey Nocket. It’s not just because she vandalized National Park property. For me, it’s seeing places I camped, hiked, and enjoyed with my children when they were babies…and when I was younger, too. I think our collective anger is evoked because we all have very personal memories of these places, the people we shared them with, and the era those visits represented in our very brief lives. It’s not easy to quantify. The lack of respect and thoughtless ego evidenced by copping an attitude when confronted with the facts is literally nauseating. Casey Nocket, wherever you are, turn yourself in and be prepared to take responsibility for the vomit you painted on OUR property. Apologize publicly and MEAN IT. Go to jail and serve your time like an adult. Pay for the removal of the damage you did. Never, EVER should you be allowed into our National Parks again.

  • Brad says:

    She should be held accountable. I thought it was already against the law to deface, or destroy part of a national park, if so then she should face the repercussions. For people who don’t understand the outrage many see at this vandalism, imagine that this person was instead going around Washington D.C and leaving her graffiti on Lincoln’s memorial or the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the national outrage that followed would be the same outrage that some of us see here. These are god given gifts to mankind to be enjoyed be all, and if you can’t really appreciate that and feel the need to deface it, don’t bother coming to the park at all, your just pissing all over everyone else’s enjoyment of the natural splendor.

  • It has nothing to do with city people; go buy your own land to deface says:

    1. Sounds like she’s just begging for attention.
    2. I don’t think this has anything to do with city-people. City people are awesome park visitors — and non-city people can be awesome or destructive too.
    3. I have my own answer for why this is bad and the historic drawings/art/glyphs are not — public land. Back in the day, this land was not owned by the federal government for all. There may have been communal use of the land, but it was different (and frankly I am not of that culture so I don’t want to speak to it). Now, the land and clean up is paid for by tax dollars. If you want to draw on rocks, missy, go buy some private land of your own and draw on those rocks.

  • Ken Hatch says:

    There is more difference between prehistoric art that should be explained. As well as some issues with modern marketing that make this really disgusting.

    Prehistoric art is the beginnings of history, rock art is a message from people long passed that is on the only material they had. It is an exploration of the foundations of communication. Native rock art is the end of prehistory and the beginning of history, that makes it very special and something that modern societies have decided is owned by humanity due to its place in the foundations of our history.

    her markings on rocks are not comparable in any way except the are ‘marks’ on a rock.

    A modern person creating art on natural materials that are in place in nature is in no way experimenting with a new form of communication and expression, they are being selfish and trying to create permanent mark of their passing that place to clam it from the rest of humanity.

    In this case by including an online brand of there own (the instagram nickname) they are advertising their “artistic” brand. This person could arguably have been trying to gain financially from defacing these sites.

    The motivations of a modern person are not and cannot be the same as the native artist of the past. To entertain anything other then this is a selfish claim to a small bit of the earth is to honor every spoiled child that made a ridiculous comparison to justify their actions. Their is zero artistic intent is this selfish act no matter how the individual may protest or cite any other humans past actions.

    • Good deeper info on that distinction, thank you.

    • Kyra says:

      This is the most compelling argument I’ve heard thus far. I think her intentions weren’t to be creative as much as they were to gain a following on Instagram. I’ve lived in Colorado Utah and California, and I’ve been fortunate enough to experience a lot of these parks. They are beautiful places that’s are irreplaceable and took thousand of years to create. It’s unfortunate that someone would ignorantly deface these monuments so she could have internet attention. I know what I’m about to say next is mean but I have to say it. She’s not even a good artist which I know is subjective but that’s my opinion.

      I do think people should stop being so harsh. She made a mistake because she didn’t know any better, I’m sure she knows better now and will get the appropriate punishment.

    • Amen to everything you note here, Ken — including the poor spelling. :) She strikes me as the daughter of a rich entitled brat who never taught the daughter any of life’s better lessons.

  • I agree that channeling rage into something positive is always a great thing to do…moving from armchair activist to working activist….but, like with most issues in this world, you have to work through the rage first (in a non violent way)….I like that this has got the hairs standing up on the back of people’s necks. I have a home in Joshua Tree and just got back form a trip in the Southwest to many of the places she chose to leave her arrogant marks, and I often find myself in a state of anger when I see trash or trees carved up or even some rock climbers/hikers/tourists who don’t care for he thing they love….this is an extreme example of disrespect of areas that deserve respect with no trace left behind. Very extreme. So, yes, shake the tree and do something. But being angry about it for a day or two until it is made sure her punishment fits what she now knows is a crime, I think is totally cathartic and maybe even educational. At the very least, she might learn, too that whomever had told her she was a great artist was perhaps just trying to sweet talk her and sadly, she really isn’t. And for anyone who thinks this is something having to do with treating a woman in any special kind of angry way, I know I’d be just as incensed if a man had done this.;)

  • kevpod says:

    Very well handled, Casey.
    And, your wayward namesake could play a very useful role by owning up and helping out in a constructive way with anti-vandalism education.

  • Jay says:

    So, I think I want to go and visits someplace nice in the Eastern United States, I don’t know, say, New York state, and maybe paint some crappy “art” on Nocket’s house or maybe her car and express my importance in this world! I’m sure she’ll be okay with that.

    • Tim says:

      Beautiful. Jay, that is probably one of the most appropriate suggestion of something good coming from this. I think a lot of other crimes should be punished in the same way: eye for an eye.

  • jezzerat says:

    “…who’s to say that Nocket’s work won’t be considered important in another 60 years?”

    Me. I’ll say it: “Her work won’t be considered important in another 60 years. Unless you count her enablers on Instagram.”

  • jr says:

    I think you might want to tell people not to harrass her online or in person, to avoid accidentally encouraging the types of awful things internet mob justice sometimes does to people, especially women.

  • I wasn't here says:

    For myself…. I think a proper punishment would be one year in a Federal Pen – suspended – 5 years probation, restitution to the NPS for cleaning up her vandalism, and I’d probably throw in a psych evaluation as well. Clearly she’s not a murderer, though she could very well be a borderline psychopath. She could just also be a very dumb, very immature person with a twisted view of the world.

    • defenseman13 says:

      Agreed. Skip the psych eval though. Take that time and effort and put it into Community service, a few hundred hours or so, which of course will be park cleanup. And a ban from going to National Parks for that 5 year probationary term.

  • Scott Turner says:

    I wonder how much of the rage stems from two separate facets: one, many people know how often vandals get away with what vandalism and that pent up frustration has been unleashed on somebody who violated Leave No Trace principles so blatantly; and two, many people who love the outdoors are keenly aware of the far more destructive man-made threats to the parks and then see somebody callously and, seemingly, arrogantly leaving unwanted marks. This is something like “the straw that broke the camels back,” and thus people seem to really want her to pay for it – not just literally but as a symbolic revenge for all of the other blows the environment suffers.

    That may be a stretch, but I as I sit here and worry about the worst drought in recorded history and the IPCC changing its language from that of prevention to that of adaptation, all it takes is one thoughtless individual defacing a rock, and my blood is instantly boiling.

  • Stravan says:

    50 years ago I recall a parent telling his daughter that “fools’ names and fools’ faces appear in public places” to explain why it was bad and shameful to carve ones name into a tree in a public park. This was an act of a self-centered, narcissistic individual. The lesson of 50 years ago is as relevant now as then.

  • Tera Adams says:

    In the words of Edward Abby “What meaning has freedom without wilderness?” Its a good question, and one that she fails to answer with her desire to express feminism and freedom within our wilderness boarders. Totally makes me very sad, and I hope she is stopped and prosecuted. I hope other don’t try a repeat act, wrecking even more of our wilderness. Natures art doesn’t need any help from humans. http://vimeo.com/10584287

  • Rose says:

    Um, no…as others said I don’t want to “ruin” this woman’s life but she displays a shocking sense of entitlement and ignorance. She seems to be a sociopath. This type of personality may not be “cured” by jail time or public shaming but it may help. I don’t think “all is forgiven” if she simply cleans it up. She (and others with similar tendencies) need to learn there will be swift punishment for blithely defacing our beautiful public natural resources with no regard for others. I think public shaming and jail time would go a long way in this case.

  • Tonya says:

    THE NERVE OF THIS WOMAN. As someone who has never visited a national park but would love to, I think this is abhorrent and she should be punished. People are truly disgusting. There are few enough places to get some air, think without noise, pollution and away from a cell tower and she’s out there defacing OUR property like she owns it. She should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law as should anyone who does the same.

  • Linna says:

    If we cut off her hands she can’t be expected to clean up her mess, and it is a mess and not art. Self-entitled immature juvenile needs to grow up and develop a social conscience! To avoid prison, she should clean up all her crap at her own expense!!!
    As for constructive purposes, my husband and I make it a practice to do a ‘trash’ hike wherever we go. Take a bag along, or pick up a plastic bag along the way, and pick up trash as you walk.
    I have been to many of the places she defaced and she did not add anything, she only defaced history and beauty.

  • Katie says:

    Yosemite National Park is my home and I have spent time in many of the parks that she has defaced. It is heartbreaking, gut wrenching, and just completely despicable that someone would do something like this. I have seen many other acts of vandalism while living in Yosemite but nothing to this extreme. By the way she handled the situation, it seems to many that she just wanted to get “famous”. Well, she got what she wanted. Now let’s hope she get’s what she deserves!

  • Anne Dirkse says:

    Thanks for bringing this woman’s horrible vandalism to light, and getting the NPS involved. I agree with your thoughts entirely – the whole point of protecting Federal and State lands is to leave some spaces relatively untouched – sure we can drive through them, but there are so many opportunities for getting away from the connected world and enjoying wilderness. I love these places dearly, like you. It’s really a shame that people feel the need to do these kinds of things, and while like many I don’t feel hatred for her, or want to see her life ruined, I feel also that she chose to publicize her actions and open them up for public comment – I hope she understands the value of these lands and what her selfish vanity has brought about some day, or at least that her example will teach others why it’s not okay. Thank you.

  • Paul says:

    One thing I’m surprised by is that nobody stepped in and reported or stopped her. I’d make a citizens arrest if I saw someone vandalizing our parks or other natural beauty and I’d encourage everyone to defend our public spaces from idiots like this woman. We can’t always rely on cops to protect our treasures, sometimes us citizens have to step in to protect our environment from people who just don’t care.

    • I’m a little shocked by that, too. These were very popular trails she was on – and it seemed like she was visiting in summer: peak tourist season for most of those parks.

      • Neil says:

        Could be dumb luck she wasn’t seen, could she was seen but people didn’t want to get into a confrontation with a person who could destroy public property, But my guess is that she hung out at these locations and completed her vandalism piecemeal, during any time she was alone. And do these defacements look like they took a lot of time? I don’t think they do. She’s probably experienced and fast at spraypainting her scribbles.

  • Pat says:

    SO infuriating! One very selfish person trying to immortalize herself for her virtual fans. It’s probably the first time she’s ever even visited a national park. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

  • The narcissist should fry. Her art sucks and so does she. Give her the attention she deserves and put her away unless they close these locations to those of us who appreciate them. I have ben to them and her actions f it up for all of us. Ruin her life? she has ruined some awesome locations for all of us. Scrub your shitty art from these locations…pay…and also serve time. Serve notice to the selfie generation that this is not acceptable.

    • Rose says:

      Yup. Well said! ;-)

      • Rose says:

        Oh dear. Just to clarify, in re-reading this post this morning, I was not agreeing that she should “fry” per se, but was tapping into the passionate sentiment expressed here. Last night I also felt pretty angry but certainly I do not condone violence. I do think she should have to pay her debt to society, via a steep fine, community service (e.g. personally cleaning up the mess she made), being banned from the parks for life, and/or some jail time. This will hopefully send a message to others that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated and will be punished.

        The notion of a “selfie generation” also struck home with me. I was born in the 1960’s and I fear that Facebook and it’s ilk do promote a type of narcissism in the current generation…everyone looking for their “15 minutes of fame.”

    • KWadsworth says:

      ….Sorry, she should “fry”? Don’t think so – violence is kind of an overreaction.

      Although, I saw someone make a very good suggestion on another forum I frequent, when it comes to what an apt punishment SHOULD be –

      1. She should be fined for cleanup for each case, with the fines charged SEPARATELY. (Meaning – she can’t just get one fine to cover all her actions, but rather each park charges her SEPARATELY, so the fine is even bigger.)

      2. She should be part of the cleanup team for each and every one of the sites, and she must pay for the transport to and from those sites out of her own pocket.

      3. She should turn her Instagram and Tumblr and all other social media she has back on, and post pictures of her cleaning up – and how dirty and sweaty and grimy the cleanup effort is making her, and how damaged the sites are as a result, and the dirty looks the rangers are giving her the whole time.

    • Renna Shesso says:

      Agreed absolutely, I’m no fan of her art. But in the few comments I found, Nocket seemed to be deflecting criticism of her actions by confusing it with critiques of her handiwork, coming either from idiots who don’t understand art, or from people who are just too devoted to well-known graffiti painters like Banksy to acknowledge her as a promising newcomer.
      If the issue becomes the quality of the work, it opens a trapdoor for equally egotistical morons who may be better artists to think that it should be OK if THEY do it.
      Whatever the quality of the artwork, it’s the LOCATION that’s the problem – this would be less ugly but just as wrong if it was done by Michelangelo.

  • Roman says:

    she should pay restitution and more….f her and her supposed art. I have been to many of the places she has defaced and photographed. I think her hack art is just a bad wannabe….never mind a narcissistic selfie. If they don’t throw the book at her….all the other narcissist will follow. Your art sucks…and so do you.

  • Chip says:

    Leave only footprints is a catchphrase for a much deeper philosophy. If you want to leave a legacy don’t impose it in others…go earn it.Creepytings needs to be accountable just as Michael Fatali was when he burned a dura flame log at delicate arch some dozen years ago.IMO.

  • There is a natural urge to want her to feel the pain she has caused thousands of people with her behavior. I don’t know how far retribution goes, but I definitely want other, similar individuals who think defacing our National Parks is a cool idea to look at what happened to Casey Nocket, the months she spent in jail and the thousands of dollars of restitution she had to pay, and ask themselves if vandalism is worth it.

    • Definitely. I agree that she should be punished and that it should be more than a slap on the wrist – but I also hope that everyone who cares enough to sign petitions and rage in comment forms also cares enough to go out and help one of their local parks directly.

      • Susan says:

        Casey, I spend hundreds of volunteer hours cleaning and repairing places in and around Moab. It takes s long hours to remove the stains of graffiti left by someone that believes they are more important than anyone else. I would not want to visit a museum and see paint smeared across the Mona Lisa.

      • It’s great that you’re striving to make this a teachable moment and I hope you’re wildly successful. I’m probably just too cynical these days. I have given a great deal of volunteer time to public lands and this episode has inspired me to continue, so maybe it’s working.

  • Joe says:

    You have some really elitist and patronizing responses here that don’t help portray your stance of “We are all one and one with nature.”

  • Cole Darby says:

    Great Article, Thanks Casey!

  • louisablog says:

    Thanks for your insights. I don’t want to ruin this woman’s life, but if she were to fuel a trend, it could ruin the beauty of many precious places. I hike to get AWAY from human culture and the mindset that goes with it, of dominating the landscape via human constructions – whether physical or ideological. If I wanted to see “art” like Creepytings’, I’d visit train yards.

  • oldtimer says:

    I appreciate your trying to turn something positive out of this. however make no mistake, this vandal must be punished the fullest extent of the law and made an example of for those similarly inclined.

    • Lex says:

      Wholeheartedly agree! These are despicable acts of vandalism of some of our most treasured, beautiful places. The perpetrator would appear to be sociopathic and I cannot fathom any of this sentiment about “not ruining her life”. Actions have consequences!

  • Brendan Hermes says:

    Well said, Casey. I go to parks to escape man-made art and revel in that created by a less aggressive environment. It seems unfair that a human can take a few minutes to destroy something our environment has sculpted across the entirety of time.

    She needs to clean it up and apologize and, in my eyes, all is forgiven. Let’s hope her narcissism dies down enough to realize she’s in the wrong, and if not, then she should be properly punished.

    I will make a small donation to one of the parks she defaced, though. I believe your idea of spin is a good one.

  • David says:

    Beautifully put, Casey. I have nothing but contempt for people who deface public property and reading about this supposed art made me very angry. Your suggestion to channel our energies into constructive purposes is excellent.

    • Marta Reiner says:

      While traveling in Turkey I discovered the beauty of the ancient city of Ephesus. I saw a warning sign that stated, ” Don’t even think of picking up one tiny rock or vandalizing this site!”. Armed guards stood by. The citizens protected their antiquities. America wake up and educate others-It’s Not OK To Deface Property. She deserves punishment for the crime.

Join the Discussion