Keep an eye out for "art" in the parks

[rebeccaC]

I guess I see water based hybrid acrylic paints and markers made from plant oils and resins, plant dyes and natural binders with no ammonia or formaldehyde as pretty good alternatives to the list of heavy metals and other toxic ingredients in the acrylic, varnish and oil based paints your Columbia article listed as hazardous waste....which they are. For a young cousin's art projects I've bought very earth friendly paint products at art supply stores....the same child safe markers that it looks like Nocket used.

[salsabike]

Most water based acrylic paints still have a polymer emulsion base, which is plastic. Those of us who use them are forever worrying about the best and least harmful way to dispose of leftover paint. They leave a footprint in the natural environment that is not benign. There ARE other earth-friendly paints with a corn starch base. But I would guess that is not what Nocket used since she did not say that. And I would argue that urban graffiti art--which I love and value--is different than contaminating protected national parks and wild ecosystems.

[rebeccaC]

We have an extremely effective Toxic Enforcement Act in my state. A paint/marker with any EPA hazardous waste or health danger ingredient needs to have a warning label and those ingredients need to be listed on the products Material Data Safety Sheet. That includes the EPA’s RCRA 8 list of elements that are in pigments and where the most toxicity can be if indeed the water based acrylic has them. That actually was done in large part for paint/marker use in education environments.

In one photo it looks like Nocket is using a Liquitex marker which has a number of them with no listed hazardous wastes or RCRA 8 elements and have CL and AP seals verifying accurate toxicological evaluation and accurate labeling.

In Washington state only oil based paints are considered hazardous waste for disposal purposes. They suggest you let water based paint, acrylic, latex etc. dry out and dispose it as a solid waste into your regular trash. Oregon’s great product stewardship program accepts any water based or oil based paint into it’s statewide facilities for recycling/disposal.

How about I say (like protection during sex) safer not safe…........and geezzz i'm not an advocate for graffiti in national parks.

Perhaps i'm just less upset about it as some who have posted in this thread, especially with the generational blame.....you can't begin to compare this to the selfish destruction laid upon the planet over the past 60 years by my previous generations

[salsabike]

One of my favorite street art sites: http://www.streetartutopia.com/

[rebeccaC]

nice site i bookmarked it....thanks

a couple of my favorites....for a global view

the street spot has some interesting posts and great list of links

and 50mm for my local inspiration

[Jolt]

What was she thinking? It takes some very poor judgment to graffiti in national parks to begin with, let alone post the evidence online! I hope she is made to clean it up...while it may be "art", it is certainly not in the appropriate place. Who wants to see that kind of thing in what is supposed to be a natural environment? I would even be irritated if I saw something like the chalk work somebody upthread described in Glacier NP...I know it is temporary but it spoils the wilderness atmosphere IMHO. It would be a different story in a city park.

[smilingcat]

leaving a mark in the wilderness is just not acceptable. No matter what is said or how its done. IT IS SIMPLY VERY WRONG!

Just because someone call it an art doesn't make it so.

Who wants to see that kind of thing in what is supposed to be a natural environment? I would even be irritated if I saw something like the chalk work somebody upthread described in Glacier NP...I know it is temporary but it spoils the wilderness atmosphere IMHO.

+1 for jolt.