The article “War against graffiti” by Brian Maffly (Aug. 27) raises questions.

I am sympathetic to addressing the damage graffiti causes to the environment, water supply and viewshed. At the same time, how can we talk about people the way they are spoken of in this article? Whom is Michael Nebeker talking about when he refers to “the sickness” he says should not be allowed “to come up here”” The LDS Church hauled away mountains of stone and is characterized as a part of a venerable history, while those who tag the rocks left behind are vandals?

I was unclear what Maffly meant when he wrote: “This painting could be considered art if only the ‘artists’ had applied it to a canvas and hung it in their own neighborhoods.” If we are talking about U.S. Forest Service land (wasn’t clear), then those lands belong to everyone, not just people who can afford expensive climbing equipment.

Instead of a GoFundMe to build a fence and plant stinging nettles to keep people out of nature (mentioned in the online article), how about a fund to support arts programs and outdoor activities for youth? And might The Tribune, like West View Media (, report on the creative art projects on the west side — Jordan Parkway Revitalization art projects and the murals funded in part by the National Endowment for the Humanities, for example?

Susie Shannon Porter, Salt Lake City