Cache damaging area

August 17, 2006

A few weeks ago, I found this cache. It's located in a garden/park at a university. There are signs saying to keep on the trail and off the rocks, plants, etc. This cache happens to be hidden off the trail behind one of the rocks. In fact, you have to walk on rocks near a pond and over a big rock to get to it. Sadly, it's done some damage to the vegetation. When I got there, a few leaves/plants were already pressed into the ground pretty well. It seems it's only gotten worse. From reading the logs, I'm not alone in the concern- several others have reported feeling guilty about finding it. I sort of regret finding the cache knowing I may have contributed to some of that damage.

In my log, I expressed my concern. A few weeks ago, I e-mailed the owner and suggested they find a new location and/or container. They could make a bench cache pretty easily- or there was a sitting area underneath a canopy. They could just move the cache by one of the buildings across the street, where there are some big hedges. Well... I've gotten no response from them. I don't think they really have any interest in moving it.

Any advice on what to do about it? Or should I just let this one go?

2.2k · August 17, 2006

I would try contacting the hider one more time. Be polite, and explain what is happening to the site. By the profile, it is obvious they are new to caching, so I would suggest trying to be encouraging in your attempt to help them understand. We do not want geocachers to get a bad rep, and we obviously will when someone discovers why the vegetation is trampled.

If they don't respond in a reasonable time, either contact the reviewer that published it, or post an SBA note to the cache page to get the reviewers attention to the problem.

That's my couple-o-pennies on it...

August 17, 2006

I'd go ahead with the SBA. They've been on the site as recently as August 8th, and your original email was 'a few weeks ago.'

Eventually damage to the garden area will be noticed, and if the cache is identified as the culprit it's a nasty black eye for geocaching.

August 17, 2006

I'd go ahead with the SBA. They've been on the site as recently as August 8th, and your original email was 'a few weeks ago.'

Eventually damage to the garden area will be noticed, and if the cache is identified as the culprit it's a nasty black eye for geocaching.

Actually, I just checked. I was wrong- I only e-mailed them a week ago. It seemed like it's been longer, though. I think I'll wait another week or two, e-mail them again, and then do the log.

By SBA, do you mean to write a log saying it needs archived or maintenance?

38.2k · August 17, 2006

Looking at the logs I 'd say an SBA is definitely in order. Several logs mention damage or the "stay on the trails" sign. Its obviously a bad place for a cache.

August 17, 2006

By SBA, do you mean to write a log saying it needs archived or maintenance?

Yes. "Archived" is probably the appropriate choice, since I'm not sure that moving the cache to a more suitable location fits "Maintenance."

38.2k · August 17, 2006

If you don't want to issue an SBA and risk the wrath of the cache owner, perhaps an e-mail to the reviewer is in order.

August 17, 2006

Thanks for everyone's input. I e-mailed the owner one last time. It was a very detailed message explaining why it's a bad location and how that impacts geocaching. I also offered help in finding a better location for their cache if they wanted. I closed by saying if I don't hear from them in a week, I would request the cache be archived and explained my reason for that. I'm trying to balance being nice and patient (since they are new cachers and El Paso has been having some terrible weather- flooding in some areas) with my desire to keep the park in good condition. I think two weeks is enough time to contact me if they have any interst in it (it's been one week since my original e-mail and now I'm giving them another week to contact me and/or do something about the cache).

6.7k · August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

August 18, 2006

One thing you might want to remember is that people do go on vacation during the summer and may not have computer access. We just got back from a trip and had access only 2 days out of 10. (I know, we could have gone to a library, etc... we just didn't have time. 5 days on the road, and the other 5 getting my daughter moved into her new apartment... buying supplies, furniture, getting to know the area, etc.....) They may not have had a chance to check their e-mail.

Malia

August 18, 2006

One thing you might want to remember is that people do go on vacation during the summer and may not have computer access. We just got back from a trip and had access only 2 days out of 10. (I know, we could have gone to a library, etc... we just didn't have time. 5 days on the road, and the other 5 getting my daughter moved into her new apartment... buying supplies, furniture, getting to know the area, etc.....) They may not have had a chance to check their e-mail.

Malia

I'm thinking that's very possible, which is why I don't want to contact a reviewer just yet. This is the owner's first cache hide, so I'd like to give them as much of a chance as possible to do something about their cache.

2.1k · August 18, 2006

One thing you might want to remember is that people do go on vacation during the summer and may not have computer access. We just got back from a trip and had access only 2 days out of 10. (I know, we could have gone to a library, etc... we just didn't have time. 5 days on the road, and the other 5 getting my daughter moved into her new apartment... buying supplies, furniture, getting to know the area, etc.....) They may not have had a chance to check their e-mail.

Malia

I'm thinking that's very possible, which is why I don't want to contact a reviewer just yet. This is the owner's first cache hide, so I'd like to give them as much of a chance as possible to do something about their cache.

Edit: I tried not to look at the cache page and just respond and move on but I couldn't help myself. I looked. And now I'm not so trigger happy. Giving the owner a bit more time because they are new sounds like a good idea. But you will have to weigh the damage to the landscape vs. giving the owner the time needed to fix it. Good luck.

Edited August 18, 2006 by Team Sagefox

August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Same here. If I see a situation that warrants a SBA, I'll do it without hesitation.

August 18, 2006

I'll post a SBA if I see the need, but I don't see that here.

It appears that the cache was begun by a relatively new cacher and a group of children as part of a geocaching lesson put on by the college (Treasure Hunting: Adventures in Geocaching class at UTEP).

It probably needs to be moved, but it doesn't necessarily need to be archived. Archived implies shut down, done away with, closed for business, put away, done away with, etc.

It apparently a nice cache in a nice place that just may be causing some damage to the area--or may not, since the second person to post a find was already commenting on the damage--the day after the cache was placed, it could be that they chose a spot that was already a bit scruffy.

In any case it's on campus and was made as a campus activity, so it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone on campus that the cache is there. I think this one can wait a bit for the owner to get back over there and take a look at the cache area. I notice that the cache owner only geocaches sporadically. When they do notice the notes, they will probably decide to move the cache just to ease the mind of the people who come to find it. If there isn't any reponse or action in a reasonable amount of time, the local reviewer might step in.

Someone does need to tell the family that picked up the geocoin on August 5th that they need to log it out of the cache, though.

August 18, 2006

I'm all for not discouraging the new cacher and I like how nice you were with your offer of help, but whether he moves the cache to another area in the park or not the current one still needs to be archived. I think giving him a week to archive it himself is just giving the area one more week of damage.

38.2k · August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Because sometimes you will wind up with a very ticked off cache owner. If he is local you may run into him on the trail or at an event and there could be some unpleasantness. If its a popular cache, or if the owner has a high profile in the community, you risk becoming a pariah.

There are also some vindictive people out there who can make trouble for you and play games with your caches.

6.7k · August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Because sometimes you will wind up with a very ticked off cache owner. If he is local you may run into him on the trail or at an event and there could be some unpleasantness. If its a popular cache, or if the owner has a high profile in the community, you risk becoming a pariah.

There are also some vindictive people out there who can make trouble for you and play games with your caches.

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution? :anitongue:

Are there so many bad actors in our community that we should be afraid to act?

I am sorry, Brian, you da man, but that's a terrible answer!

All this business about the owner deserving emails and personal contact from a finder to give them a chance to address something before placing a Needs Maintenance or SBA log is over the top.

I am all for communication and cooperation, but don't think cache owners should be so sensitive that a Needs Maintenance or Should Be Archived log sets them on a warpath.

If there is an issue with the cache the Reviewer should know about it and at least monitor it, if not actively deal with it.

I suspect the Reviewers, God bless their volunteer hearts, might promote private communications because they want cachers to work things out among themselves and ease the Reviewer work-load, but hey, that's their job!

Lastly, there ARE bad caches out there, and the folks with thick enough skin to dare report hem should be valued, not derided as cache cops and insulted. One cacher in Alabama constantly filed SBA and NM logs and became something of a pariah in the community - but after his Reviewer learned that each SBA and NM log from this guy in fact pointed out a real issue with a cache, not nit-picking or aimed at any particular cacher, that Reviewer came to highly appreciate the cacher's reports to help keep the game in good shape.

Ed

August 18, 2006

Lastly, there ARE bad caches out there, and the folks with thick enough skin to dare report hem should be valued, not derided as cache cops and insulted. One cacher in Alabama constantly filed SBA and NM logs and became something of a pariah in the community - but after his Reviewer learned that each SBA and NM log from this guy in fact pointed out a real issue with a cache, not nit-picking or aimed at any particular cacher, that Reviewer came to highly appreciate the cacher's reports to help keep the game in good shape.

Sure, so THAT person in Alabama exercises good judgement and discretion in his SBA notes, which is awesome, and valuable, like you say. But not everyone is going to use as good judgement, and there will be people who abuse it. I had a bad day and your micro was the only DNF out of 25 caches, that pissed me off, so SBA. You did something personally to bother me so I'll nitpick and call SBA on your caches. Whatever. Sure, the cache reviewer will have a look and probably end up saying "move along, nothing to see here" but that's unneeded work for him and potential embarrassment for you and I.

If my neighbor has a party and it's too loud, the first thing I would do is go over there, knock on his door, and politely explain why his noisy party is bothering me (and probably in violation of city bylaws). It's common courtesy, and chances are we could resolve the issue right there. I could just call the police immediately, but I would have an unhappy neighbor, and rightly so.

Calling SBA is escalating an issue to one level above in the chain of command, and a lot of people don't like to feel like they've been "skipped over", especially if they were never contacted in the first place to try and make things right. That applies to any situation, really, not just caching.

1.5k · August 18, 2006

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

If there was an option to post an anonymous SBA (and by anonymous I mean to everyone except admins) then there would be less fear of retribution or being labeled the local "cache cop".

Some people play mean and dirty. If you tick them off they'd go steal your hides. It's happened. The only way to really prevent that from happening is to use a sock puppet account to post your SBA logs. It would be much easier if SBAs could be anonymous.

6.7k · August 18, 2006

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

If there was an option to post an anonymous SBA (and by anonymous I mean to everyone except admins) then there would be less fear of retribution or being labeled the local "cache cop".

Some people play mean and dirty. If you tick them off they'd go steal your hides. It's happened. The only way to really prevent that from happening is to use a sock puppet account to post your SBA logs. It would be much easier if SBAs could be anonymous.

Hooboy, don't get me started on anonymity!

In every case anonymity leads to disaster - folks who are apparantly nice and 'normal' turn into monsters when they can't be held accountable for their actions!

In the 1960s CB Radio was really the individual American's first ability to communicate anonymously, and they killed it, made it a wasteland of hate and vile behavior. Amatuer Radio kept strict licensing and behavioral standards, personal accountability for every operator and his equipment, and you will rarely hear an unpleasant exchange.

Misuse of our telephone system ran rampant until the phone companies started tracking the originator of every call, and later Caller ID displayed it, vastly reducing misuse.

Would the Internet be the mess it is if folks were known and accountable for their behavior? Heck no! It'd be a much more civil and socially acceptable place!

Make every Internet user identifiable and not only would these forums be better off, but porn and the like would just about dissappear overnight from the Internet, instead of being its most profitable traffic!

Restricting anonymity does not restrict freedom, it simply places individual responsibility where it belongs, in this case, on the cacher.

If you are not personally and publicly willing to stand behind what you post, don't post it!

Ed

August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Because sometimes you will wind up with a very ticked off cache owner. If he is local you may run into him on the trail or at an event and there could be some unpleasantness. If its a popular cache, or if the owner has a high profile in the community, you risk becoming a pariah.

There are also some vindictive people out there who can make trouble for you and play games with your caches.

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

Are there so many bad actors in our community that we should be afraid to act?

I am sorry, Brian, you da man, but that's a terrible answer!

All this business about the owner deserving emails and personal contact from a finder to give them a chance to address something before placing a Needs Maintenance or SBA log is over the top.

I am all for communication and cooperation, but don't think cache owners should be so sensitive that a Needs Maintenance or Should Be Archived log sets them on a warpath.

If there is an issue with the cache the Reviewer should know about it and at least monitor it, if not actively deal with it.

I suspect the Reviewers, God bless their volunteer hearts, might promote private communications because they want cachers to work things out among themselves and ease the Reviewer work-load, but hey, that's their job!

Lastly, there ARE bad caches out there, and the folks with thick enough skin to dare report hem should be valued, not derided as cache cops and insulted. One cacher in Alabama constantly filed SBA and NM logs and became something of a pariah in the community - but after his Reviewer learned that each SBA and NM log from this guy in fact pointed out a real issue with a cache, not nit-picking or aimed at any particular cacher, that Reviewer came to highly appreciate the cacher's reports to help keep the game in good shape.

Ed

Yeah, cache owners should not be so sensitive, but let's face it, this is the real world we're dealing with and not what "should be". What really is is that there are people out there who regard any complaints about their caches as "politics" or "political maneuvering" - on both sides of the fence. If a cacher posts SBA or NM on one of their caches, boom, they go around bad-mouthing the SBA-er.

Or who will say, "They posted an SBA on my cache because they don't like me / are being big jerks / sore losers / couldn't find it / whatever." And you'd be surprised how many people believe that, even if they "should" (there's that word again) know better from their interactions with both cachers.

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

If there was an option to post an anonymous SBA (and by anonymous I mean to everyone except admins) then there would be less fear of retribution or being labeled the local "cache cop".

Some people play mean and dirty. If you tick them off they'd go steal your hides. It's happened. The only way to really prevent that from happening is to use a sock puppet account to post your SBA logs. It would be much easier if SBAs could be anonymous.

Agreed. I know of a few cachers that have contacted the reviewer instead of hitting "SBA" because the cache was in a really bad location, but they didn't want to get into a poopstorm with their local cachers. And I know of a few others that wanted to post an SBA but ultimately did nothing...because of the poopstorm factor.

I like the idea of having the SBA anonymous to everyone but reviewers / admins. That would at least cut down on the chances of a jerk posting SBAs on a particular person's caches just because Jerk didn't like Cacher - or at least would cut down on the chance of them being taken seriously.

But it would encourage those of us who have seen the need for SBAs to be posted to actually post them without fear of "local" retribution.

38.2k · August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Because sometimes you will wind up with a very ticked off cache owner. If he is local you may run into him on the trail or at an event and there could be some unpleasantness. If its a popular cache, or if the owner has a high profile in the community, you risk becoming a pariah.

There are also some vindictive people out there who can make trouble for you and play games with your caches.

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

Are there so many bad actors in our community that we should be afraid to act?

I am sorry, Brian, you da man, but that's a terrible answer!

....SNIP...

Ed

You might not like the answer, but its a fact of life. People have suffered repercussions from the owner or their local community after logging an SBA. I don't blame people for not wanting to deal with that.

August 18, 2006

There's also something about an SBA log that seems so harsh, so final. And of course, that's what it is, by definition. Your cache "should be archived". As in "your cache does not deserve to exist any longer".

In our area there was a new cache that popped up recently, it was the first hide by a new geocacher. In fact in his cache description he proudly tells the story of how his 11-year-old boy set up the container and the hide location.

The very first log that cache got was an SBA from a well-established local cacher (over 1000 finds) who stated simply "This cache is too close to another existing one in the area."

Well, that maybe 100% true, and "deserving" of an SBA note, but doesn't that just seem harsh? I would be heartbroken if that was my cache (especially if I was the son!)

The well-established cacher was absolutely right (in fact, the too-close cache was one of his, so he was obviously in a position to know). I just think that when you write something that terse, it can be misinterpreted in any number of ways. All you need to do is be friendly about it, like the next couple of logs, which were encouraging words to the cache hider. "Wow, you guys did a great job. Don't worry, if there's a problem, all you need to do is move it a little further down the trail!"

The hider was a good sport, and when he found the conflicting cache, he too agreed "Yep, we definitely placed it way too close, we will move it ASAP". So in this case it worked out well and amicably. But I can see where it might not have gone so well.

If it had been my hide, I would probably have sent the hider a private note saying the very same thing, and leave the public record alone. Let the hider have the dignity of posting his own note saying "Whoops, we discovered this was too close, we'll move it along".

Ah well. To each his own, I guess. :anitongue:

Edited August 18, 2006 by GreyingJay

6.7k · August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Because sometimes you will wind up with a very ticked off cache owner. If he is local you may run into him on the trail or at an event and there could be some unpleasantness. If its a popular cache, or if the owner has a high profile in the community, you risk becoming a pariah.

There are also some vindictive people out there who can make trouble for you and play games with your caches.

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

Are there so many bad actors in our community that we should be afraid to act?

I am sorry, Brian, you da man, but that's a terrible answer!

....SNIP...

Ed

You might not like the answer, but its a fact of life. People have suffered repercussions from the owner or their local community after logging an SBA. I don't blame people for not wanting to deal with that.

Not to beat a dead horse, but folks get robbed in mall parking lots frequently, but they don't stop shopping.

I don't know, I guess it has to do with world-view, but I think most peope are good and expect them to act that way.

I can't imagine being afraid to act right for fear of some jerk's repercussion.

I think 'Don't file an SBA, it might make someone mad, and they'll steal everybody's caches' takes us in entirely the wrong direction.

If Groundspeak felt this way I am sure they would have made the mechanism first fire off an email to the owner, wait for a response, and alert the Reviewer only if none is received.

As a geocacher I think it is my responsibility to file an SBA when one is due. Self-policing is our only way to keep the game clean.

Are there meanies and abusers out there? Yes, but we can't base our behavior on fear of them.

Ed

August 18, 2006

I don't reckon I understand the angst about or hesitation to use the Should Be Archived (SBA) note.

The Reviewer will respond, investigate and act appropriately.

Because sometimes you will wind up with a very ticked off cache owner. If he is local you may run into him on the trail or at an event and there could be some unpleasantness. If its a popular cache, or if the owner has a high profile in the community, you risk becoming a pariah.

There are also some vindictive people out there who can make trouble for you and play games with your caches.

That may be the single most dissappointing and scary answer from an official that I have ever seen here!

We can't do the right thing, use the Should Be Archived note when we believe the cache needs to be archived and want to ask the Reviewer to investigate, for fear of retribution?

Are there so many bad actors in our community that we should be afraid to act?

I am sorry, Brian, you da man, but that's a terrible answer!

....SNIP...

Ed

You might not like the answer, but its a fact of life. People have suffered repercussions from the owner or their local community after logging an SBA. I don't blame people for not wanting to deal with that.

Not to beat a dead horse, but folks get robbed in mall parking lots frequently, but they don't stop shopping.

I don't know, I guess it has to do with world-view, but I think most peope are good and expect them to act that way.

I can't imagine being afraid to act right for fear of some jerk's repercussion.

I think 'Don't file an SBA, it might make someone mad, and they'll steal everybody's caches' takes us in entirely the wrong direction.

If Groundspeak felt this way I am sure they would have made the mechanism first fire off an email to the owner, wait for a response, and alert the Reviewer only if none is received.

As a geocacher I think it is my responsibility to file an SBA when one is due. Self-policing is our only way to keep the game clean.

Are there meanies and abusers out there? Yes, but we can't base our behavior on fear of them.

Ed

You're right, we can't base our behavior on fear of the jerks, but we can choose to avoid them. Not every cache is the "hill I want to die on" - however, some caches are problematic and do need to be taken care of. Privately emailing the reviewer is one option. Since Groundspeak offers that option, cachers who take it are actually also "self-policing". They're just choosing a much more private option than you, personally, would prefer. The SBA is a tool, just like emailing the reviewer is a tool. Neither is wrong, and neither is the sole option.

August 18, 2006

Just an update for anyone interested. The owner contacted me and said he'll move the cache to another location when he can get to it. In the mean time, he said he'll temporarily disable it.

August 18, 2006

Just an update for anyone interested. The owner contacted me and said he'll move the cache to another location when he can get to it. In the mean time, he said he'll temporarily disable it.

Oh, excellent! That's a good resolution. Thanks for letting us know!

August 18, 2006

Great resolution.

However I notice that despite everyone's concerns about the vegetation there is not one note in the log that says they gave up because of the likely damage to the vegetation.

It may have been in a bad place to hide the cache but maybe consideration should be given to the thought that it may be a bad place to hunt for a cache.

18.9k · August 18, 2006

I've run across one that had a lot of vegitation damage nearby - this despite the fact that the cache page clearly states the cache is not in the plants. An area about 20 foot radiating our from the cache in the garden area is heavily damaged. I recommended moving it but the owner won't budge.

2.7k · August 19, 2006

Are there so many bad actors in our community that we should be afraid to act?

YES

It has been my experience that ANYTHING negative or even that someone could twist in the most unimaginable way into being perceived as "negative" causes problems. That is why I have chosen to quit logging altogether.

I would think that people that actually threaten or act out are VERY rare, but those that get UPSET might well be the majority.

As a moderator was once fond of writing in the forums "it is a big sandbox..." I always hated that demeaning comment, but after a few years hanging around here, I think that mod hit the nail right on the head, the geocaching community has a LOT of juveniles.

The SBA log should post only an icon on the cache page to alert other seekers that someone perceives a problem and the text of the note, along with the loggers ID, should be seen by the reviewer ONLY.

On this site, posting an SBA is perceived as calling your buddy *insert bad name here*.

August 19, 2006

We recently had a cache placed here in Amarillo under an Evergreen bush. The cache was very small and well hidden. A clue of where to find the cache was also placed in the bush. This cache violated two rules:

1. it was buried

2. it was on private property that the owner did not know about the cache.

I do understand that the reviewers can not take the time to make sure that every person has permission to hide a cache. There are several new cachers in the area and they have damaged the bush. Another cacher went to the business owner and told her what was going on. The cache has since been archived at the request of the business owner.

The whole point of this long story is that I feel like there could have been a better way to handle the whole thing.

Newer cacher could be more respectful of landscaping

More experienced cachers could be more tactful in how they handle the situation.

6.7k · August 19, 2006

We recently had a cache placed here in Amarillo under an Evergreen bush. The cache was very small and well hidden. A clue of where to find the cache was also placed in the bush. This cache violated two rules:

1. it was buried

2. it was on private property that the owner did not know about the cache.

I do understand that the reviewers can not take the time to make sure that every person has permission to hide a cache. There are several new cachers in the area and they have damaged the bush. Another cacher went to the business owner and told her what was going on. The cache has since been archived at the request of the business owner.

The whole point of this long story is that I feel like there could have been a better way to handle the whole thing.

Newer cacher could be more respectful of landscaping

More experienced cachers could be more tactful in how they handle the situation.

I have been questioned by a number of security folk and owners while looking for a cache that was placed without permission.

I generally explain the game, show them the cache, and ask for permission to let it stay.

Most owner's will allow it, after expressing something like "Well, I certainly wish they'd asked". In that case I note the encounter in the log and identify who gave permission.

Others want the cache removed immediately. Some I have picked up at their request, some I say "I will notify the cache owner immediately" and leave in place.

Even without such an encounter, if I find a cache that I know for a fact was placed without permission in a place where permission is required I will file an SBA note... to heck with tactful, this cacher should know better, likely does, and is threatening landowner relationships. Action is required, not tact.

August 19, 2006

I am beginning to agree with you. The cache owner put the cache back out today in the same location. I have already emailed him to ask if he got permission. We do not have a lot of caches and I am afraid he is going to give us all a bad name.

August 20, 2006

I have to say the cache owner emailed me the cache is in fact on public land. I have no more complaints about this cache.

Cache damaging area

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation