HikeArizona.COM

When I started hiking I was surprised to find sharing some public locations was frowned upon. That's putting it lightly. Rather a virtual knock on the door by the concerned. More times than not I was told what I was allowed to do on public land.

My thinking was and is that scaring folks away is a stupid angle. It has created one ruins website I've crossed paths with that was specifically created out of hate for the lack of information. Let's just say it was created by Peter. Dare we even go into social media. Seems like proof that method backfired.

I've been near the initial sentence location in my hikes many times. It wasn't planned but I turned away as I approached. I'd rather be able to say with honesty, I've never laid eyes on it. Anyone that knows me, knows I avoid these locations. I just want to hike without controversy. There is plenty to see without ever going to ruins or caves. I created HAZ in hopes of a peaceful resource because someone was rude to me while researching information on a peak. If sharing historic places on public lands offends or is deemed irresponsible by a fair margin then I certainly do not want HAZ to fuel that fire.

When asked to delete geocodes on HAZ photos in sensitive areas I've gracefully complied. Same for aircraft wreckage, springs near private property, etc. There is a fauna label that if applied pops up "Location protected by HAZ Hikebot." I'm open to ideas to apply that tactic or such in other ways.
Since we have a fair sized group of like-welding jokesters it's monitored. Ultimately the moderated status on this topic too. Keep in mind there are other moderators for the forum. I do welcome those interested that show public signs of using that control while being impartial.

Perhaps no routes on ruins or dead-spot locations that allow nothing to be queried for a radius on such items. Perhaps no guides on ruins or caves period. Peter is praying he gets more traffic...

RS in beta has new labels for route finding, technical, no dogs. Point is, HAZ is the accumulation of ideas. It's member driven. If running away, posting garbage, supporting corporated driven instead and turning off HAZ is the answer let's hear it.

In my personal opinion, anything on public land is subject to online identification and publication. That doesn't mean I always think the publicizing of certain places is a good idea, it just simply means that I feel anything on public land is subject to becoming public knowledge. If someone finds an amazing place (ruin, cave, natural feature, etc) on public land and they want to keep it a secret, then that is certainly their right, but then I would expect them to not mention it online at all. On the flip side, if someone else reveals the location of a sensitive site, then it is entirely that other persons right to do so without facing criticism. We can't control how other people choose to share information about public land. No matter how difficult someplace is to find or reach, you are not the first person to have laid eyes on that place, nor will you be the last. That's just reality. Social media, blogs, websites, gps mapping, satellite imagery, drones, etc all contribute to making every last corner of the "wilderness" accessible nowadays, and it will only continue to increase.

Restriction of information is not the answer at this point, we're too far past that point. I think (hope) better education and awareness of the sensitivity and cultural impact of these locations is probably the best bet. Respect. Understanding the history of how these places came to be. The more you can get people to understand the importance of these sites, hopefully the more they will want to respect these locations. And, yes, I know there are plenty of people out there who are jerks and will destroy anything no matter what. Not much can be done about them. But instilling the respect for our public lands in as many people as possible has to be key in saving these lands.

A couple of my thoughts:

Maybe on HAZ, there be more of a focus on educating WHY these sites are so important. A big colored banner at the top of guides containing ruins, caves, etc. Increase the awareness with information about how to respect these sites while they are being explored. Maybe a sentence or two about not geotagging locations or posting photos with identifiable locations in the background. A lot of people honestly do not even think about what potential destruction follows after they post a neat place on social media.

Have a "sensitive site" checkbox at the bottom of a triplog which adds that same banner of information to the triplog. Maybe also have the use of that checkbox strip the route and geotags from public view of that triplog. Possibly even consider having those checked triplogs removed from search results.

There will never be a perfect solution. The best we can each do is enjoy our lands in the ways we each deem appropriate and respectful. Nobody will agree on exactly what those ways are, but education will have to be a big part of it because restricting knowledge will never lead to an improvement in how people treat these lands.

Edit: added a missing word in the first paragraph.

I think the issue of sharing ruins and caves are two totally separate issues and should be treated as such.

Sharing caves is partially about protecting the cave and partially just gatekeeping. Those pretending it's a safety concern are often just hiding their tendencies towards gatekeeping. I don't mean to downplay the importance of protecting caves-- their geology and ecosystems are unique and important.

Ruins, on the other hand, are cultural sites whose descendants (depending on tribe) often consider them to be living spaces whether currently inhabited or not. The Hopi, for example, prefer these places to not be referred to as "ruins". Native Americans have lived under occupation for hundreds of years now and damaging their cultural sites is an especially disgusting level of disrespect. The more people that visit these sites, the more vandals reach them-- it's just the numbers. Some people feel the need to leave a mark for whatever reason. It's not just social media or the internet. Pictures of Roger's Canyon from before and after the publication of Hiking Ruins Seldom Seen proves it. 100 year old inscriptions by homesteaders and cowboys next to more recent names and dates in the glyph wall I visited last weekend proves it. You protect these sites by not sharing them publically.

None of us can prevent others from sharing but we can set an example or at least not be their platform.

I have a very large collection of various maps that depict the location's of features that land managers, private land owners and native Americans request that I do not disclose or share. Some of my archives I will not copy and comply with their request or if they approve provide a different edition that does not depict such features. I highly respect authors, web masters and contributors of their trips for sharing but not disclosing.

It’s a question of impact.

As our population grows and our society becomes more wealthy, more people have more time and more means to venture more places than ever before.

Some of the best preserved cultural sites have been protected with some kind of administrative status. These areas often do not permit visitors to enter, climb on, even touch any part of the site. You can observe it from a distance. Perhaps that’s a model we should consider? There are countless photos on this site and others with people climbing walls, picking up and organizing pottery, eating lunch inside, etc. These behaviors don’t align with what is permitted at sites like Mesa Verde or Tonto Monument. Is it bad to consider why?

As more people have gained easier access to maps and publications, official agencies have removed the markings for ruins, caves, and other sites on updated editions. Wildernesses have “inventories” of special sites that have had their location redacted. One may consider querying the reason for that.

In the absence of the resources to properly manage, patrol, and administer sensitive sites it is inevitable that the impact of visitation will deteriorate and ultimately destroy them. Not every spot can be a national park with carefully managed access and protection.

HAZ is just one of many resources in the information age. Like social media, it is a place where individual users can disseminate their personal knowledge and experiences to a vast number of other people instantaneously, often driven by the desire for attention or accolades of having accomplished something others have not, faster, farther, etc.

We are our own worst enemy. No filter on HAZ is going to fix it. No discussion amongst a handful of hikers will render a solution. And the places we revere will pay the price.

Mixed feelings. I'm kind of under the impression that the people who generally vandalize places aren't going to put a lot of effort into getting there. So I tend to treat places differently based on accessibility. I don't mind sharing a photo of some hard-to-get-to place on the internet because I figure the only people who are going to put the effort into getting there are going to have better wilderness ethics. If it's easy to get to, it's generally already well-known, and either has official protections, or has already been destroyed.

Small story. Cave managed by the BLM. It's off the radar except to some grotto's etc. On one of the initial explores ( entrance by rappel only), one caver having some personal problems and taking a mind altering substance had a meltdown. Damage to cave resulted. I've had one experienced caver tell me it was the most beautiful cave he had seen-- and he's been in Lechuguilla and some other " big league" caves. This caver was then shunned. And the BLM closed the cave to pretty much everyone. You can find pretty much NO images of this cave on the net under it's name. So hard to reach or exclusive or whatever is no protection for some resources. The only way is unfortunately controlling access. That is not what this site is about.

As someone who spends a lot of time looking for "obscure" ruins and petroglyph sites I'm attuned to what google searching can do. If I can find directions to the site or a location with an internet search then it's not really obscure (and probably already "over-exposed" and hence not so interesting to me). And I don't want anyone else's search to bring up information I posted giving the location. It's surprising how quick your HAZ post can jump to the top of a google search.

So I handle the situation this way: if I go to one of these places I'll often post the GPS track. I do this out of respect to fellow HAZ people who may want to know where in the heck that place is. Probably not exactly where it is, just what part of the state. (I get a little bit frustrated when reading nice triplogs and seeing pictures but with no idea where they are.) Anyway, after a couple days I take the GPS route down...Joe has made this easy.

Occasionally a HAZ person will PM me asking for directions. If it's a place I found on my own and they offer to be careful with any subsequent disclosure (they always do in advance) I'm happy to do it. If it's a place someone else told me in confidence I refer them to that source.

Petroglyph people are particularly paranoid. They only disclose to close confidants and they never post GPS locations. They are very careful not to show background features which help others figure out the spot. Fragile ruins also fall into this category, but most AZ ruins are just rockpiles and don't need such care.

I think Joe started this thread to get discussion about Route Scout which, of course, records and uses GPS routes. As a phone troglodyte I'm not a user, but can't the situation be handled by just avoiding long-term public posting of sensitive routes?

I recently posted a comment on a HAZ members triplog that may or may not have been the impetus for the start of this discussion. The poster had attached a GPS route to the location of a lesser known and infrequently visited ruin and petroglyph site onto a uploaded YouTube video of his hike. I did not tell or ask the member to remove the route from his video, but to just give some thought to the matter. I've seen so many videos on the "Tube" of yahoos walking on ruin walls with a selfie stick in one hand and a beer in the other. Some of these people deface or add rock art and remove pottery. I believe some have found these locations due to watching other videos on the web. Many of these were in locations that are very difficult to get to and reached only by a long trek by foot. Caveat...the HAZ member's video was NOT one of these!

The question Joe poses is "should locations be kept secret?" My response is no. Hansenaz gave a good reply with solutions that satisfy the needs of most I believe. Anyone interested should read his thoughts. Folks like us that have an interest in visiting and learning from these sites will put forth the effort to find the right people/sources to satisfy our desire to find a particular site. I'm referring to ruin/petroglyph/pottery locations. The cave situation will be better served if addressed by someone with knowledge on that similar but very different topic.

I'm sure a lot of us that go to these places have stories on how irreparable damage has been done to some sites since the inception of the Intra-Webs, Facey-Tweets, YooToob, etc. Most damage and looting occurred during the late 19th century on through the 1970's. Pot digging "parties" were commonplace, even within the wealthy upper class of American society during our early years. There are amazing photos of women wearing hoop dresses digging for pots while others set the picnic table and the "men-folk" drank and showed off their latest horse and buggy. Government policies were finally put in place regarding public lands, but as we all know, some people don't obey laws. I hope none of what I have said sounds elitist...let's just not put out figurative neon signs pointing to the locations of sensitive areas.

I'm on a couple of FB petro and ruin sites and most members hold their locations close to their chests. But there are the Youtube Indiana Jones wannabees that have to post up their dumb @$$$$$$ vids. It's like trophy hunting to them. One posted up a petro vid of a site I didn't know about and went on about the bushwhacking and how hard it was to get there. Because of background info I found it in about 10 minutes on GE and it was only a 100 yards from a road. Yeah the hard bushwhacking part I brought up in my post and thanks for showing me a site I didn't know about. It was removed in a matter of minutes.
I have been delving into aviation archeology and have spent 2 months trying to find an AF site. I thought the ruin and petro folks were tight lipped, but nothing compared to the aviation folks. Why? Because we know the names of these people who perished and their families hold these places sacred. So these places are on public land and should the crash sites be made public?

My viewpoint stems from the fact that I do long-form backpacking videos from wilderness areas. I like to show as much as I can for interested parties; the main impetus is to show trail conditions, terrain, landscapes, how-to's, camping locations, water sources, etc. Basically the same type of information one goes onto HAZ to discover for themselves - but in video form.

I have hiked in many areas that are considered to be ecologically fragile. Some of the most precious and sought after -- Grand Gulch in Utah, is a good example. Those sites were pillaged long before they attained federal protection status. A lot of work went into restoring them to a more pristine condition. When I walked up to ruins, most frequently there were laminated pieces of paper in the granary openings, with BLM instructions to not touch, take, mark, vandalize or enter structures, pottery sherds and other artifacts; talk of jail time & fines, etc. But in a few locations - I did bushwhack off trail and found unmarked ruins. It's kind of incredible to find that many in such a concentrated location.

I will return there this spring and I will do a video. Showing all of it. But only because they are already federally protected and well known to the public. You also have to have a permit to be there, and rangers patrol when in-season; my making a video is not going to put those particular ruins and artifacts in any more jeopardy than they already are.

In contrast, I think if I were making a hiking video in a more public and easily accessed area - like the front range of the Superstitions, and stumbled upon something either undiscovered or just not well known, unpublished ruins -- I think I would have to think hard about whether I wanted to share them with my Youtube audience or HAZ. I don't think there is an easy binary answer to this question as it is highly situational.

Ultimately, I think it would be OK to show *what* you found - but frame the pictures/videos, etc. in such a way that makes discovery of the location obscure and difficult to ascertain. Closeups of pottery sherds or whatnot, without revealing the exact location. I don't think that is very damaging, but it does contribute positive knowledge to the hiking community.

I've seen mention about the GPS route issue.. It's actually quite easy to modify a GPS route in post before uploading to a public site. You can even do this on HAZ. It's not necessary to keep your GPS route hidden if you happened upon some ruins. Just modify it to avoid showing where you walked in that moment.

If it was part of a larger site that was unmarked on maps, not previously publicized - I would take caution as to the location... For example; if I'm really far from a road or trailhead, then I know whoever else is going to go out there is going to have to really work hard to try and find it for themselves. Selfie-Stick-Steve and Drone-Flying-Francis aren't putting all that work in to go vandalize a native site that far out there. I'd probably share it with HAZ in an obfuscatory way to where they'd need to ask me specific questions to figure out where I was.

Sharing or keeping secret, what you found is a personal choice - but I think there is a way of doing so that doesn't have to involve encouraging the idiots, morons and half baked amateurs of the hiking crowd from trying to visit them.

wildwesthikes wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 10:17 am I will return there this spring and I will do a video. Showing all of it. But only because they are already federally protected and well known to the public. You also have to have a permit to be there, and rangers patrol when in-season; my making a video is not going to put those particular ruins and artifacts in any more jeopardy than they already are.

Federally protected doesn't mean squat if you're not caught. In 2013, we were there for 5 days "in season" and never saw a Ranger. And we had 10 kids with two adults throwing rocks down on us from the Ruin ledge. With the staffing levels of the Agencies these days, they can't stop the damage or the theft. That place isn't as well known to the Public as you think and even a lot of the people that know about it, don't know the extent of it. Depending on the audience for your Video, you could impact that area a lot. It's one thing to post on a Hiking Site, it's another to post it to the world.

In regards to this "federal protection" discussion happening--

All archaeological sites are federally protected. Designating something a monument does not mean it wasn't protected prior.

§470ee. Prohibited acts and criminal penalties

(a) Unauthorized excavation, removal, damage, alteration, or defacement of archaeological resources
No person may excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface, or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological resource located on public lands or Indian lands unless such activity is pursuant to a permit issued under section 470cc of this title, a permit referred to in section 470cc(h)(2) of this title, or the exemption contained in section 470cc(g)(1) of this title.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USC ... c470ee.htm

outdoor_lover wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 11:21 am Federally protected doesn't mean squat if you're not caught.

This is true, you're not wrong. It's disappointing to hear about the kids; even more disappointed in the adults! When I was last in GG in 2018 it was August and I was literally the only person in that 20+ mile canyon. But I've heard all about how crowded it can get in Spring.

While I do agree that mine or anyone else's content may be used by people who are up to no good - I don't believe that is a reason alone to not produce the content and showcase what is out there. For one thing, I have yet to produce a video from an area that hasn't already been done to death by any number of GoPro aficionados. And I have no plans to go off exploring on video anytime soon. I just seek to put my own spin on what others have already made public. The videos I do are not easily digestible to tourists. They are detailed, long videos made specifically for a serious hiker crowd that was probably already interested in the area.

This is in contrast to the average hiking/backpacking video that I come across, which - the only words that come to my mind are "music video". That is not what I do. You mentioned "depending on my audience"... That is exactly why I engage with my audience. Almost without exception I have found that it is the serious hiking types watching. I can only base that assumption off the comments I receive - but they are fairly consistent across the board. Of course, that can change as a channel grows; I acknowledge that risk. But there is always an opportunity cost to not doing something.

On that note... I regularly make a point to speak about wilderness trail ethics -- things like LNT, campfire safety, etc. There are plenty of videographers that disregard speaking about that stuff - I think it's a missed opportunity for public education. I have on numerous occasions shown fire rings that were used by others as trash bins, our national toilet paper flower that seems to blossom all over the Supes every winter, and so on. So I do my part to make clear as I record myself walking through areas on what not to do. How to approach ruins is no different - but I am not making a point to show newly discovered or unpublished ruins. So you may take from that, that I am trying to educate the public about the do's and don'ts - this can extend to how one should behave around archeologically sensitive areas. I think that this is a sensible approach, because if people want to go, they are going to go. They aren't going to glean anything new from my content that they couldn't have gotten from someone else's. But if they base their trip upon my content, then I better have covered my bases and helped educated them in the process. That's the best I can do.

Here's an example - this past October I did a 5 day trip video from Canyonlands and on my last night I found some wall art on a side canyon hike. This side hike, I did off-trail after I had made camp for the day. I showed the hike, but I didn't show the wall art. Because it wasn't really published anywhere that it existed. I'm sure I wasn't the first person to have stumbled across them, but I wasn't about to show them on video as I didn't want to encourage further off-trail travel to lesser known glyphs.

Going into Grand Gulch is no different - I believe that simply showing how cool the ruins are, to get a rad edit, or whatever, would be a disservice and irresponsible. That's the kind of thing that might encourage irresponsible behavior. What I try to do is show the ruin from a distance (that's what telephoto lenses are for), I go over the regulations, BLM signs, describe the historical context of the area - WHY they are important to preserve and HOW to responsibly hike near them - as I show it. I think this is in line with what LindaAnn was speaking about in this same thread. The way I see it is that by making videos, I have a huge responsibility to teach the public the right way to be respectful and tread lightly on public lands. Pfew - that was a long reply but as a content creator I feel it's important to answer for my actions, hope it makes sense.

Tough_Boots wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 1:29 pm

§470ee. Prohibited acts and criminal penalties

(a) Unauthorized excavation, removal, damage, alteration, or defacement of archaeological resources
No person may excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface, or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological resource located on public lands or Indian lands unless such activity is pursuant to a permit issued under section 470cc of this title, a permit referred to in section 470cc(h)(2) of this title, or the exemption contained in section 470cc(g)(1) of this title.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USC ... c470ee.htm

See this is great info - this is something I can put in the description of my own videos if/when I do trip videos into areas with significant historical ruins as a supplemental resources. Again, I do not want to sound like a broken record but I'm not showing unknown areas. They are always popular-ish hiking destinations. But I want to cover all the bases in educating the public if I am going to show them. Hiding unpublished sites from the public is one possible solution that seems to gain traction in some circles. But getting more eyeballs on the regulations and educating on the why/what/how of these sites to the public can be equally important, so thank you.

outdoor_lover wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 11:21 am It's one thing to post on a Hiking Site, it's another to post it to the world.

This "hiking site" isn't hidden from "the world" and has very good search engine optimization. You might be surprised the reach it has.

@wildwesthikes I understand. Educate, Educate, Educate, that is the Motto. But trust me when I say that Education only goes so far and it may change some peoples way of thinking. Some being the operative word there. You get someone who's into collecting artifacts or wants cool new shots of a place that isn't found on a lot of Social Media, and all your Education Talk falls on deaf ears. I know, I did a lot of "Educating" in my last job and maybe changed the thinking of 1 out of 10 people. And they were risking Criminal Citations. Didn't matter. You make a difference to the 1, but the damage continues with the other 9. And if you think that only ethical Hikers or Hikers that actually take to your "Education" will be the only ones taking the time to view your long Video Production, you would be mistaken. Just some thoughts. I don't know you, but I know quite a few that like to use Education for an excuse to gain attention for sharing something cool. They think it's justifiable to post whatever they want that way. And then their "something cool" gets shared and the Education part gets lost in cyberspace. Trust me when I say that I'm not trying to come down on you, because, I really don't know you, but these are the thoughts I have when people want to go ahead and publish sensitive areas, even if they are somewhat "known". You and I and many others have seen this area, and already seen the damage that's been done. Put it in the spotlight and it's only going to get worse, education or not.

outdoor_lover wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 4:20 pm You make a difference to the 1, but the damage continues with the other 9. And if you think that only ethical Hikers or Hikers that actually take to your "Education" will be the only ones taking the time to view your long Video Production, you would be mistaken.

Part of my day job is training and the other half is quality control so I can totally relate the cynicism and futility of trying to teach a group of people an important concept; only for them to later learn by royally screwing something up. And then you have the ones who never learn and you eventually have to give them the boot.

I do know there are people out there listening - I engage with my audience. It's either that or do nothing at all. You raise a valid point and it is worth considering. However, in the extreme case of GG -- that place is known specifically for its Puebloan ruins, seems likes the main reason that people go there. I can jump on board with the idea that more people might go there because I made a video. But then there are already dozens of videos on it; that is after all how I educated myself on that area. And I'm only stealing the crappy pottery. And then the trip reports, vlogs - an endless array of knowledge. Even Andrew Skurka wrote a blog post on his trip there with a ton of pictures. I'm wondering where we draw the line at then?

And there are strict permit controls on how many people per day may enter and at what trailhead. So I don't think this is necessarily the best example in the world, now that I think about it. Perhaps a less managed and lesser known wilderness where my video might be one out of maybe two or three total. I could see that having a significant potential negative impact like you say. And I probably would either not do a video at all in that case - or I would keep the entire location secret. There is a good example of this where a Youtuber by the name of Jamal Green used a code name for some of the minimally visited lower Escalante canyons he was in. I figured out where he was, but only because I'd been in the area before and I had to do an extensive amount of detective work to figure it out. I kind of like that approach for seldom traveled areas. I know this won't deter people who are going to always do their favorite thing no matter what. I discussed this concept briefly in a recent video regarding the Woodbury fire. That's exactly how it started - some fool did what they wanted anyway despite the signs and the regulations.

outdoor_lover wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 4:20 pm I don't know you, but I know quite a few that like to use Education for an excuse to gain attention for sharing something cool. They think it's justifiable to post whatever they want that way. And then their "something cool" gets shared and the Education part gets lost in cyberspace.

I can detect some skepticism about whether I am genuinely coming from an educational angle. All I can say is smash that like button and subscribe for more!
Seriously though, I believe entertainment is part of education. You can't wrangle someone into your ethical viewpoints if you can't hook them on something interesting. I deleted all my social media accounts a long time ago and it is way too much work to turn a 4 hour hike into an 8 hour hike and then spend a week in editing for the likes or just to show something cool.

outdoor_lover wrote: ↑Feb 02 2020 4:20 pm You and I and many others have seen this area, and already seen the damage that's been done. Put it in the spotlight and it's only going to get worse, education or not.

I am not so sure about that - I think framing and how one presents a subject is important. I have gone to great lengths to try and show the outcome of the Woodbury Fire for example. I could have just said, "yeah this wilderness burned and it sucks... check out my awesome campsite!". But instead I went in depth about campfire safety. I think that kind of stuff can help to educate and I have gotten comments echoing on the campfire safety angle with people saying it was good to put that information out there. The same concept can translate to well known ruins. Again - I'm not going to publicize the unknown ones. And perhaps I did not make that clear before. I really do have some optimism that people are watching and learning about these places and seeing that there is a reason to respect them; I know, because that's how I did. If not for youtube videos, I would have had a steeper learning curve on the concepts we are discussing for myself including reasons why we protect significant sites. I am trying my best to give benefit of the doubt that most people want to do the right thing.

This has been an interesting discussion for me. I know we don't all agree on this subject but it has informed my thinking on doing videos of rarely seen archeological sites a bit more and I find that valuable.

I've shared many obscure Indian ruins on this website as destinations with full details. My site naming has always been a personal choice based on nearby named land features on topo maps. I lost track a long time ago just how many I've posted. Every site I've shared is a location that I physically found by my own efforts. It's a passion of mine. I've always been an explorer. I love the hunt, I love visiting them, and I love sharing them with others. I have no regrets. I'm not a fan of secret-handshake destinations although I realize there are times when that's necessary. My personal rules on posting ruins has always been simple.. Artifacts (amount and type), site condition, and location. A couple of sites pushed my posting rules but they were so dang remote and nasty to reach that I wasn't particularly worried about it. There's actually only been one site of my personal finds that I posted as generic on this website and it was due to excessive sensitive artifacts. I visited that site three times. I literally scooped my hand into some random dirt on one visit and pulled up a perfect crystal bird tip arrowhead. It just didn't feel right to share that one.

I publicly share the Indian ruins I've found because I want average people to be able to visit something unique and special that they wouldn't be able to do otherwise by their own efforts. I'm likely both loved and hated on this website for what I've done. Some people may abused my generosity but I believe most will appreciate and respect the site's I've shared. Maybe I'm a nice guy and overly trusting but that's what I believe. In the early history of our state archaeological study groups scoured the land studying and publicizing everything they found in books. I'll also add commonly gutting the sites in the name of science. Was that okay? Obviously information is much easier to find now than it was back then but anybody that wanted it could go to a library and get it.

I don't know.. Maybe it was right and maybe it was wrong. It sure was fun and it brought me great pleasure sharing my world with others. Posting everything as secret generic would have personally felt like vein self-promotion. At least by openly sharing everything it wasn't all for nothing. I've left a legacy of information that will live on the web as long as Joe keeps this website up and running. This is the only place it lives. That's just how I chose to do it. Someday it will be nothing but a distant memory.

Well I was wondering if this was in response to my recent triplog with photoset where I mentioned an ancient fortress and a nearby hill with lots of petroglyphs. Maybe it's just coincidental timing.

I stumble across ruins quite often, same with petroglyphs. There are such a huge number it's really not hard at all. I'm not sure I'd want to find out where any are ahead of time as it's just too easy to come across them without.