Vandalism and development are just two threats to ancient rock art. The third is as contemporary, as state-of-the-art, as it gets: the dissemination of specific informationโmaps and directions to rock art and sacred sitesโon the World Wide Web that thieves can use to find unprotected art.
โWeโre always concerned about people publishing guides to archaeology sites, and to rock art sites in particular,โ says Bureau of Land Management archaeologist Pat Barker. โThe problem is, that kind of thingโs protected by First Amendment free-speech rights. Weโve tried to convince people not to do that, but our hands are tied in terms of doing anything about it, because they can publish anything they want. If the site is well-known and getting high visitation, we strive to try to interpret it and manage it, but we donโt reveal locations of sites that arenโt being heavily [traveled]. The Archaeological Resources Protection Act gives us the opportunity to withhold that information, [which] is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. You canโt get it that way, so weโre very confident and very strong in our legal ability to protect that information.โ
Free speech could be the cloak covering the collective ass of all those Internet entities that provide specific archaeological site information and locations, freely accessed on search engines. A representative of the media relations office at Yahoo! was unfamiliar with the word โpetroglyphsโ and unaware of the issues surrounding publication of ancient Native rock art sites. Indeed, the representative seemed unaware that the Internet is a frequent source reporters turn to in the course of conducting research.
When asked to comment on why potential vandals can find maps and directions to rock art sites on the Yahoo! search engine, the mega dot-comโs official response was, โNo comment.โ
