It's anonymous, so what do you really think?
It's anonymous, so what do you really think?
I honestly don't see a big issue with this memorial. It's smaller than 3' by 3', it's at ground level and not a towering eyesore, you have to walk a bit through talus from the parking lot to find it plus, it's facing south. Not easily stumbled upon or seen. It's just another tribute; can we have too many?
i think it is nice to have a memorial to honor the people in a tragedy like 911 and all that or an attack on the USA . but like spyboy saidQuote:
Originally Posted by Rich
" I don't think I can go onto park property and plant a tree without permission, and that's just adding to the number of trees."
so im with him on this one until the park or others who's land it is on said it is ok
I am not opposed to it either for the purpose it serves, to remember the lives of those lost in such a tragic attack on the US. If it were any other less significant purpose I would object. I don't think that memorials of any lesser magnitude should start popping up in the Whites or ever become commonplace.
So if 9/11 is the baseline many other events would fall within that magnitude. The attack on Pearl Harbor, WWII as a whole, pretty much every other war the US has been involved in. What about Katrina? A natural disaster, but still a disaster.
What about a heart disease memorial? It would certainly touch a lot of people since that's how most people die.
The National Park Service really nailed this dilemma. They simply don't allow memorials of any kind, no matter how poignant, tragic or devastating the cause.
I've had to really think about my response to this one.
On one hand, I very much try to follow the Leave No Trace principles any time I'm out. Also, as others have pointed out, why not memorials to other causes that are just as close to a persons heart? Personally I think there should be time limits on roadside memorials at places like crash sites. They end up littering the area as people leave pictures, teddy bears, etc.
As far as LNT, is a rock litter? I wouldn't think so, but maybe once its all painted up it is. Perhaps the argument is made that the materials in the paint disturb the environment. If someone, not as sensitive to mother nature, painted a rock using paint the will easily wash away in the rain, it could leave a mess.
If I was hiking up the mountain and stumbled upon this site (NOT knowing about geocaching) I'm not so sure I'd like it, and would wonder if it was sanctioned or not.
On the other hand, as a geocacher its a very creative cache that I'd like to find. It just might bring people to MWO that might not otherwise have gone there and end up bringing more awareness of it to more people. Since it was started, 248 people have visited the site. As I've geocached myself, its brought me to places right in my home county that I never knew existed.
The cache description says its a few steps from the parking lot at the end of Tuck's Trail. This is the trail I took last year and never saw it, so maybe its not as big and an eyesore as we may think?
The cache description does also clearly state "PLEASE, DO NOT BRING AMERICAN FLAGS AND OTHER STUFF. BRING A ROCK. BE IT PAINTED" and they also say to "TAKE NOTHING."
I'm curious to know if willy, the original creator of the site, is the cache owner listed on the geocaching site, or did that person find the location and decide to list it as a cache? ALL caches are reviewed by local admins onthe site to make sure they follow the rules laid out. There are some reviewers that may seem more relaxed than others, and also (as I've only been doing this a year) the rules may not have been in place, or as strictly enforced back when this cache was started.
I can understand this and respect their decision not to allow memorials because it could get out of hand and taint the pristein nature of the Whites.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill O
I also feel that if memorials had been placed on the mountain for the attack on pearl harbor or WWII shortly after their occurance they would have been far more widely accepted then than they are now and even though Katrina and heart disease are unfortunate disasters in peoples lives I don't think they can be given the same significance.
If we are going to look at eyesores on the moutain, wouldn't you agree that the mess left over scattered around the summit from all the construction projects is greater than the small pile of rocks left by those who built the memorial?
and so why not stop all the people driving up because they dont the Leave No Trace principlesQuote:
Originally Posted by WSR88D
just a thought every one has an opinion so who is right
You can't, the Auto Road and Cog are on private property. In order to stop their use the government would have to seize their land.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie