Stacking rocks on the KVR

[Necro]

I like the rock art, harms nothing!

No, it doesn't.

[60-YEARS-in-Ktown]

Lets take a vote, the rock piles dont bother me....but I have yet to see them.

[TylerM4]

Man what a bunch of weirdos we've all become. In this case - 1 group of people trying to feel good about themselves at expense of others.

Rock stacking is harmless. The "leave no evidence" crowd needs to know when to draw the line. Start preaching about stacking rocks and you'll just scare people away from the core of meaning of that principle which is "don't do any damage".

I agree, if part of the attraction of that area is the rocks/rock patterns and people have messed them up by stacking the rocks - it's not cool. But along the KVR? Where it's nothing but miles of shattered stone from blasting? Ugh. This is the definition of "Choosing your battles". The trail environment is already scarred from human use and nothing like it would have looked like had humans not been there - in fact that's why people come!

[Atomoa]

I agree, if part of the attraction of that area is the rocks/rock patterns and people have messed them up by stacking the rocks - it's not cool. But along the KVR? Where it's nothing but miles of shattered stone from blasting? Ugh. This is the definition of "Choosing your battles".

Exactly.

[Donald G]

IMO stacked rocks are a form of graffiti similar to tagging your gang colors on rock face, or discarding your Tim Horton wrappers along the trail. Like further damaging the face of a famous painting by adding your personal insignia.

It does not reflect what is left of natures artistry that people trek into "Natural" terrain to experience. Others obviously feel different.

[TylerM4]

IMO stacked rocks are a form of graffiti similar to tagging your gang colors on rock face, or discarding your Tim Horton wrappers along the trail.

It does not reflect what is left of natures artistry that people trek into "Natural" terrain to experience. Others obviously feel different.

No, It's very different. Here's why. It's possible those stones *could* have ended up that way naturally. Unlikely, but possible. The biggest difference tho is that it doesn't impact the environment other than visually. Whereas paint is totally unnatural, it'll kill any bugs/moss growing on the surface, chemicals leach into the soil, etc. Similar with story with garbage.

Long story short - the impact of rock stacking on the environment is visual only unless it's done to an extreme. It's no worse that hiking on a trail and the rocks you'll accidently move/reposition as you hike. Your other examples have other much more dire impacts.

[ferri]

i thought the complaint was silly until i went to the site and looked at the pics. it does look...almost trashy. one or two would be no problem, but there are way more than that. (i'd knock them over if i had a few hours to kill...lol)

[TylerM4]

i thought the complaint was silly until i went to the site and looked at the pics. it does look...almost trashy. one or two would be no problem, but there are way more than that. (i'd knock them over if i had a few hours to kill...lol)

Depends on the location. That 1 spot by the waterfall, I agree that it's detracting from the beauty of the area. The KVR picture seems like a lot until you realize it's just 1 small location that's like that along many miles of rail bed.

In most cases, when I see these stacked rocks I smile. Not because I like them aesthetically, but because I know that these rocks were stacked mostly by children and young adults who are getting out into the bush rather than hanging out in a shopping mall. They're stacking rocks instead of "building forts" or starting fires, or whatever other alternative activity that they could be doing that is much more impactful to the environment.

As adults we're happy to look. Children and young adults - that's not enough to keep them interested and I'd much rather they stack some rocks than partake in other activities.

[bidwell2]

I'll bet dollars to dumplings that most of the wannabe 'rock builders' don't know what an inukshuk is or what it's original use was by the Inuit. A few like me have actually seen ancient inukshuks in the middle of nowhere in the Arctic, and bothered to find out what they mean. If you want to build cairns or whatever, then do it for a reason that means something, not just to display your talents at balancing rocks. And show the Inuit a bit of respect.

[60-YEARS-in-Ktown]

If they bother you so much kick them over..
Now kick the Hortons cup a dozen times..
Now and this is the hard part...think.. Which is more unsightly....

[ken531a]

as a person that knew the kvr,little white,myra 45 years ago the tourist rock stacking is a joke. most concerned about it would not understand what was lost by having the whole place turn into tourist trap in the first place.

[Catri]

I had no idea this was such a big deal! It seems like the no cairn policies in national parks make sense, but on the KVR, for all the reasons already put forth in this thread, it does not. It doesn't equate to graffiti or littering, it's really just people playing with rocks. It's harmless, like making a sandcastle on the beach. It's not permanent, they're not mortared together. If you don't like them, kick them over.

[XT225]

I had no idea this was such a big deal! It seems like the no cairn policies in national parks make sense, but on the KVR, for all the reasons already put forth in this thread, it does not. It doesn't equate to graffiti or littering, it's really just people playing with rocks. It's harmless, like making a sandcastle on the beach. It's not permanent, they're not mortared together. If you don't like them, kick them over.

Agreed. Next thing you know, some of the complainers will be whining about who piled up the rocks on Easter Island for goodness sake!

[LoneWolf_53]

Leave nothing but tracks, take nothing but pictures. I agree. But stacking rocks really harms nothing. It's not an improvement nor a detriment.

How do you know it harms nothing?

They could easily harm small wildlife when they fall.

Leave no trace is fairly self explanatory to me, but apparently difficult for some to grasp.

[LoneWolf_53]

No, It's very different. Here's why. It's possible those stones *could* have ended up that way naturally. Unlikely, but possible.

Yeah if they grew legs and learned how to jump. More like unlikely and impossible.

Long story short - the impact of rock stacking on the environment is visual only unless it's done to an extreme.

And by your definition the pictures and video in the article are not examples of "extreme"? That women must have kicked over almost fifty of the things in a fairly small area.

I'm simply amazed that we've reached a point in society, where we have to spend money on an advertising campaign to explain what "Leave No Trace" means. Sheesh!

What doesn't surprise me is the identity of many who see nothing wrong with this conduct, with but a couple of exceptions.

Some couldn't hide being a product of the entitled generation if their lives depended on it.