People suffering from the debilitating effects of chronic stanophobia have just as much right as anyone to enjoy the majesty and spirit elevating beauty of nature without being subjected to undue and traumatizing actual dangers from sudden rapidly accelerating mineral agglomerations.
Ah. Your claim, which goes against everything else said about the 170 million year rock formation, is based on your independent “expert” analysis of a video. (Your post is your cite.) Got it.
Wondering though about your justification for this action based on the fact that the Parks department does things to move rocks around … the Parks Department cuts down trees and even does controlled fires. Do you think it is no big deal for a private citizen to come into the parks and determine that a particular set of trees are “obviously” at risk to set off a major blaze or fall, and cut them down or burn them down? Trees are going to fall or burn eventually anyway. More people have been killed by trees in one of those ways then have ever been injured by unstable hoodoos. (Zero according to the Parks Department.) If not is a a $500 fine the right response to such an action?
What do you think a hoodoo is? “A rock sitting on dirt from water erosion” is a pretty decent working definition, although “dirt” is pretty meaningless in geological terms (and this one is on sandstone).
Fess up, the rock vandal is your uncle/cousin/stepfather.
Magiver, you were wrong about the nature of the rock formation and also wrong about pretty much everything else you’ve posted in the thread. You threw out a half-baked opinion based on watching 20 seconds of a fuzzy video. It happens. Just accept it and move on.
Got a new thesaurus for Christmas, hmm?
Very serious. It’s a troop sponsored by the Mormon church, but there is only silence from the church. They are hoping that no one but us ex-Mormons notice this.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he was officially told to be quite about his “inspiration” in order to keep the church out of it.
I kind of hope he advances the idea even as a legal defense, but that’s a pretty heinous claim. Is that sort of thing condoned by the church when it isn’t PR liability? I mean, do Mormons regularly give testimony/ excuses that sounds like this? Because claims of divine intervention are what leads to monarchies and child brides and witch trials. It’s one thing to claim God called one to minister, it’s quite another to claim God called one to commit antisocial acts.
A hoodoo is a rock formation. The entire structure is rock. If it’s sitting on dirt then it’s a rock sitting on dirt, which is about every other other rock on the planet. They aren’t all sacred monuments. You can go to a park like Zion and see where they chiseledand hackedout a path up the mountain.
So I’ll ask the question again. How do you think a court case is going to play out? He moved a rock that probably weighed between 5 and 10 thousand lbs which was a hazard to other hikers. It was not his job and he should have reported it but at the end of the day it was a rock sitting on dirt just like a zillion other rocks disturbed by tourists or park rangers. It’s a fine at best. If they deem it sacred they can move it back to it’s location and bill the guy.
Glenn Taylor claimed a hazard existed. But we don’t know if he was correct. Based on the video, the rock looked stable to me.
While that’s true that it was his claim he was in fact able to move a very heavy rock. Again, he can put it back were it belongs like any other rock or they can fine him for disturbing a trail. He didn’t take anything from the park and he didn’t destroy anything other than the positioning of the rock in question. I don’t see where the park will gain much in a court case.
You don’t know what you’re talking about. A hoodoo is formed when a hard, erosion-resistant rock caps a formation of softer rock that is then eroded out from underneath it. Dirt (which again has no geological meaning) is a byproduct of erosion - eroded rock frequently looks like dirt.
I don’t understand why you’re highlighting Angels’ Landing here, either - it undermines your point more than it supports it. It’s neither chiseled nor hacked out of the mountain - it was formed naturally by erosion from wind, rain, and freeze-thaw cycles. The park service installed the chains to help keep hikers safer than they otherwise would be, but it’s an inherently dangerous trail that’s maintained that way because it’s representative of a spectacular natural process. It’s a textbook example of the NPS protecting the natural processes of parks, even if it means an environment that’s more dangerous for visitors than we often accept.
ETA: ok, the switchbacks below the summit were cut into the rock - not in the pictures, so I didn’t immediately think of that. Still, management of the parks has evolved a bit since the 1920’s, and it’s ridiculous to use policies from that time in the context of what happens today.
Here’s what they are facing:
http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/57012279-219/rock-taylor-formation-hall.html.csp
Here are a couple of charts that set out the basic penalties (on top of which there may be surcharges and/or restitution orders), namely misdemeanor up to 6 months/$1000, felony up to 15 years/$10,000.
Note that when it comes to aggravating and mitigating sentencing factors, developmental disability is a mitigating factor. 
Taylor noticed it was loose. “I put my hand on a rock and it moved,” he said.
So this dick had never heard of rocking stones?
Mind you, they’re not the only vandals - they are in company with the Royal Navy (Who knocked over the Logan Rock in Cornwall - but put it back after complaints from the locals.
I know there will never be a consensus on this; but from my perspective a year in jail and a $100,000 fine is way too severe. At the end of the day, all they did was push a rock over. Yeah I get it, it took millions of years to get that way. What if the rock weighed a few ounces? No one would care. Ten lbs? nope. 100 lbs? Probably 1 in a million would care. I agree that they should be punished. Let the punishment fit the crime. Have them clean grafitti and things like that. So that they can see how other peoples selfish actions take beauty away from others. The bottom line is it didn’t hurt anyone, but it did take away a beautiful sight that others used to enjoy.
On an unrelated misdemeanor, compare it to domestic abuse which is generally only a $500 fine, and 90 days in jail as a worse case scenario. I think beating your spouse is a much more grievous crime than pushing a really old rock formation over. I’d be more in favor of making the domestic abuse a $100,000 fine and a year in jail.
Sentence them to hard labor in a quarry. They can throw all the rocks down there they want.
At some point we have to draw a line: what is worth protecting and what isn’t? Once we draw that line we enforce it, even if something is barely over that line. Otherwise we get knuckleheads who decide a Sequoia is just a stupid old tree and cut it down. In this case the “line” is the borders of the park and everything in it is protected, even if it might not merit the protection; it’s a real easy line to understand and there’s no reason to violate it. These knuckleheads violated that line and for that deserve severe punishment. I don’t have any problems with a large fine ($5k?) or a six-month sentence. Or both.
I don’t understand why people are seriously suggesting jail. Big fine, definitely. But jail? These guys are morons but they aren’t dangerous or violent and despite this dumb action they are probably overall more of an asset to society than a detriment. A jail term would likely result in them losing their jobs and it’s their families who will suffer from that. They deserve public shaming (check) and a big fine but not to have their lives ruined
Try again.
mon·u·ment
[n. mon-yuh-muhnt; v. mon-yuh-ment]
noun
1.
something erected in memory of a person, event, etc., as a building, pillar, or statue: the Washington Monument.
2.
any building, megalith, etc., surviving from a past age, and regarded as of historical or archaeological importance.
3.
any enduring evidence or notable example of something: a monument to human ingenuity.