Unintended Consequences - Safety

[+btgeocacher]

As an engineer I started my career in petrochemical plants. When you work around things that easily go "boom" you get a LOT of safety training. Some of that came back to me the other day as I thought about some of the "clever" hides I've found. I wonder if we aren't sometimes a bit "too clever." Consider that every cacher learns something every time he/she finds a new cache. To a great extent we are "trained" by our finds. I've been exposed to a number of caches that turned out to be micros or magnetic caches secreted behind various escutcheons. Apparently the so called "lamp post" hides are a matter of some infamy in some caching circles. As an electrical engineer, the first time I found one of these under a lamp post escutcheon in a supermarket parking lot, one of my first thoughts was "I wonder if there is any live or exposed 120/220V wiring under here?" Now having been thus "trained" by such a find, on subsequent forays, I found myself considering all manner of other escutcheons in the environs at the coordinates for investigation. The problem is that such covers and escutcheons are there for a reason, sometimes more than just cosmetics. If we too cleverly hide things, we are inadvertently training our seekers/finders to consider similar hiding places in the future. It occurred to me then that when it came time to hide my own caches, I need to give some consideration to the "message" it is sending about reasonable and safe hiding places. I'd hate to inadvertently train folks to do unsafe things.

 

Here's an example of one recent micro that I saw that gave me pause. The micro was a cleverly fabricated bolt that had a sort of double head. Inside the cylindrical bolt body was a cavity where one could stash the smallest paper log or perhaps a slip of paper for next stage coordinates in a multi. I asked myself this question: "How would the successful finder of such a cache be trained by it and what discovery behavior might it promote on future hunts? The obvious answer was that bolts might be "fake" and hide a microcache. The finder would be thus encouraged to twist on similar looking bolts he might find (not uncommonly) at other potential cache sites. But what if he "unscrewed" a bolt only to realize as something fell on him or otherwise injured him that the bolt was merely a bolt and that though loose, it in fact held something in place? Some property might be damaged or someone might get hurt all because a clever cache effectively trained the hunter to meddle with things they really should not meddle with in unfamiliar surroundings.

 

Generally speaking I don't think we should be hiding caches where they encourage a mindset of snooping under escutcheons or which promote partial disassembly of items (like micros suspended from chain link post caps inside fence poles) in order to be found. Certainly removal of bolts or other structural fasteners should not be encouraged by our clever cache hiding.

 

So the next time you hide a cache, give some thought to what you are training your hunters to expect in the way of hides. Then ask yourself if there is some way that behavior repeated in a different context might have them poking in places where they shouldn't. Yes, it's their responsibility to use good judgment but we all know in the heat of the hunt that we are influenced by the hides we've found in the past ant it is just too easy to explore without thinking. I submit that the "hider" bears some responsibility for what their hide accomplishes in terms of training by example.

 

I've seen a number of cache descriptions and log entries that described hazards like traffic, unsure footing, steep slopes, etc. that have made me wonder what the hiders were thinking when they hid things that required this kind of warning. Surely we can do better. I recently passed on a cache that I'd located but which was clearly too risky for me (age 55) or my 12 year old daughter.

 

My old flight instructor used to ask the question "When do you execute a go around maneuver (instead of landing.)?" The answer is, when it first enters your mind. When do you abandon the chase for a cache? When the idea that continuing might be the least bit unsafe for life and limb. It just isn't worth it. Those hiding caches should ask themselves not only is my hide as safe as I can reasonably make it for those that will hunt but also what am I perhaps unintentionally teaching about suitable hiding places/explorations with my hide and might that "train" the hunters inappropriately in future hunts? Hunters need to consider abandoning the hunt in the interest of safety the first time the thought that proceeding might be unsafe enters their mind.

 

Let's be safe out there and do that which promotes safety for all of us whether hiding or hunting.

 

FWIW,

 

-dB

[+J-Way]

I completely agree with pretty much everything you said. I'm also an engineer, and have received many many hours of safety training including quite a few hours watching safety videos. Some of which include real-life video and pictures showing people with missing body parts (and usually dead) after a close encounter with live electrical equipment.

 

As for the loose bolts, just because a bolt isn't holding anything up right this second doesn't mean it won't be necessary to hold that sign in place during the next thunderstorm (instead of letting the sign fly across a parking lot and hit YOU in the head).

 

Another pet peeve of mine are caches that encourage the destruction of wildlife habitat, especially realistic-looking fake bird nests (complete with fake eggs!) and fake bat houses (complete with fake bat poo!).

 

I'm not saying you absolutely shouldn't stick that magnetic hide-a-key on the back of a 480V transformer, but maybe hiding it inside the loose panel on that same transformer isn't such a good idea.

[Clan Riffster]

I tend to make a rather different assumption of what cache seekers are learning from unusual hides.

Starting at the obvious point, (which you mentioned already), cache seekers assume all risks when hunting for a cache, as noted in the Disclaimer. The existence of this disclaimer told me right from the beginning, that the act of caching may, on occasion, be unsafe, and that I would need to excessive due care in all my hunts, whether I'm looking for a film canister under a lamp post kilt or a hollow bolt.

 

I have also learned that cache hiders are a pretty diverse lot, and I try to avoid assumptions when leap frogging from one cache to the other. If I leave one cache, which I found behind an escutcheon, (I had to look that one up), I will not assume that the next one I drive up to will also be hidden behind an escutcheon. Each hunt is a unique experience for me.

[+Mule Ears]

There might be a positive unintended consequence: thinning the ranks of parking-lot cachers.

[+RIclimber]

My first thought was "that thing has a name?". I hate caches hidden there and will not look for them.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Let's not get too het up about cache safety!

 

Have you heard of a geocacher getting shocked lifting a skirt? Ever? Anywhere?

 

Under a lamp skirt may well be the safest place to put them! All kinds of dangers lurk on forest paths!

 

And if we're really going to fret over safety, is geocaching where we should focus our attention?

 

After all we drive our car to the cache site, likely the most dangerous thing most of us do, without a second thought.

 

Our nation's driver training for the children who share our roads basically teaches them 'when something goes wrong, jam on the brakes and hope for the best!'.

 

Every store and bar up and down the road is selling alcohol to drivers.

 

The OP mentions pilot training - yep, now there's a safe passtime!

 

Come to think of it geocaching may well be the safest thing we do!

[+Zolgar]

Come to think of it geocaching may well be the safest thing we do!

 

Naw, safest thing we do is sit on these forums and talk ABOUT geocaching.

 

[Edited by moderator... we talk about geocaching in a family-friendly way.]

Edited April 16, 2008 by Keystone

[+dew cache]

I agree with the OP pretty much but it is up to every person to decide what the danger is to them. What may be dangerous to one may not be dangerous to another.

 

I don't like the fake birds nest that teaches people to look at all bird nests. The other one I really don't like is the fake sprinkler head once you find one all sprinkler heads are now fair game, I wonder how many real sprinkler heads have been broken or at worst misalined.

[+tozainamboku]

My first thought was "that thing has a name?". I hate caches hidden there and will not look for them.

I was going to start using escutcheon but when I googled it I couldn't find any example of escutcheon being used for the thing covering the bolts at the base of the lamp post. The best I could come up with is that the bottom part of the pole that the bolts go through is called the shoe and the cover would be a shoe cover. But that just isn't exotic enough. A similar cover at the base of a flag pole is called the pole flanging. I like escutcheon but aside from it's meaning in heraldy and for the plate on the stern of a ship with it's name, it seems to only be used for door knobs and plumbing fixtures.

[+Viajero Perdido]

Have you heard of a geocacher getting shocked lifting a skirt? Ever? Anywhere?

Yes

[+StarBrand]

I have to agree that it is not a good idea to hide caches on/in electrical things. However, I don't see steep slopes, rocks and other terrain in the same light. The earth is not flat, caches are going to be in diverse terrain situations. No cacher should attempt to go after anything that would place them in unreasonable amounts of danger. Each cacher must decide for themselvles where that line is - and not worry about any messages being sent or anything like that.

 

I recently passed on one that was located in some big rocks on a North facing slope. I would normally have no problem going after such a cache but there was still some snow and ice out there and that made it too dangerous to attempt. Later in the summer, it will be no problem at all.

[+Sioneva]

<snip>

I've seen a number of cache descriptions and log entries that described hazards like traffic, unsure footing, steep slopes, etc. that have made me wonder what the hiders were thinking when they hid things that required this kind of warning. Surely we can do better. I recently passed on a cache that I'd located but which was clearly too risky for me (age 55) or my 12 year old daughter.

 

<more snippage>

 

Well, I've hidden caches up in trees, in rock fields with uncertain footing, and on steep slopes. What was I thinking when I placed these caches, you're wondering? I was thinking, "This is a nice spot for a cache, and hopefully, it'll be a good challenge." I issue the 'warnings', as you put it, so that people who don't like those kind of caches know what they are getting into when they go looking. After that - well, it's their responsibility, not mine. You did the right thing, you passed on the cache; but that doesn't mean others wouldn't like it, and that it doesn't have a right to exist.

 

I was literally out on a limb today, high in a tree going after a cache. I'm scared to death of heights, so it took a lot of willpower to get up there. Did I enjoy it? Sure did! Was I really proud of myself after? You better believe it!

 

I like to think that's what hiders are thinking about when they place 'hazardous', ie, challenging, caches.

[+Team GeoBlast]

Before getting into my slightly different spin on this, I have to say that there was something very endearing about reading the original post. It's hard to pin down but I think it is just concern for your fellow cacher, expressed in engineer lingo, that I found kinda cool.

 

I think that looking for Geocaches helps people develop and hone a sense of surroundings and nearby objects that might not be otherwise be stimulated. For example, I've watched experienced cachers search for things in an urban environment and pretty much everything that could be hollow is considered. I've also noticed these cachers proceed with a caution or heightened sense of awareness that perhaps they developed from Geocaching as much as they do. In other words, I think the "training" to observe things that "could be" a Geocache has already been done with the caches that are out there now.

 

My vote for an approach to this would be to "train" cachers to concentrate on being safe and forthright when they cache rather than try to discourage certain types of hides. Like I said, these caches are already out there and it's really too late, we are already "trained" to look -there-. Developing a higher state of awareness and concern for safety can be a positive outcome of this game and I appreciate the topic very much.

Edited April 15, 2008 by Team GeoBlast

[+PhxChem]

QUOTE(TheAlabamaRambler @ Apr 14 2008, 06:17 PM)

Have you heard of a geocacher getting shocked lifting a skirt? Ever? Anywhere?

 

Yes

 

I'll have to take your word that this is indeed a skirt-lift-type LPC and that any "shock" would be confined to the area under under the skirt.

 

Any other cachers might be skeptical....

 

As for me, I'm trying the new "New born baby head" cache. I hope it doesn't send the wrong message......

[+Rockin Roddy]

As an engineer I started my career in petrochemical plants. When you work around things that easily go "boom" you get a LOT of safety training. Some of that came back to me the other day as I thought about some of the "clever" hides I've found. I wonder if we aren't sometimes a bit "too clever." Consider that every cacher learns something every time he/she finds a new cache. To a great extent we are "trained" by our finds. I've been exposed to a number of caches that turned out to be micros or magnetic caches secreted behind various escutcheons. Apparently the so called "lamp post" hides are a matter of some infamy in some caching circles. As an electrical engineer, the first time I found one of these under a lamp post escutcheon in a supermarket parking lot, one of my first thoughts was "I wonder if there is any live or exposed 120/220V wiring under here?" Now having been thus "trained" by such a find, on subsequent forays, I found myself considering all manner of other escutcheons in the environs at the coordinates for investigation. The problem is that such covers and escutcheons are there for a reason, sometimes more than just cosmetics. If we too cleverly hide things, we are inadvertently training our seekers/finders to consider similar hiding places in the future. It occurred to me then that when it came time to hide my own caches, I need to give some consideration to the "message" it is sending about reasonable and safe hiding places. I'd hate to inadvertently train folks to do unsafe things.

 

Here's an example of one recent micro that I saw that gave me pause. The micro was a cleverly fabricated bolt that had a sort of double head. Inside the cylindrical bolt body was a cavity where one could stash the smallest paper log or perhaps a slip of paper for next stage coordinates in a multi. I asked myself this question: "How would the successful finder of such a cache be trained by it and what discovery behavior might it promote on future hunts? The obvious answer was that bolts might be "fake" and hide a microcache. The finder would be thus encouraged to twist on similar looking bolts he might find (not uncommonly) at other potential cache sites. But what if he "unscrewed" a bolt only to realize as something fell on him or otherwise injured him that the bolt was merely a bolt and that though loose, it in fact held something in place? Some property might be damaged or someone might get hurt all because a clever cache effectively trained the hunter to meddle with things they really should not meddle with in unfamiliar surroundings.

 

Generally speaking I don't think we should be hiding caches where they encourage a mindset of snooping under escutcheons or which promote partial disassembly of items (like micros suspended from chain link post caps inside fence poles) in order to be found. Certainly removal of bolts or other structural fasteners should not be encouraged by our clever cache hiding.

 

So the next time you hide a cache, give some thought to what you are training your hunters to expect in the way of hides. Then ask yourself if there is some way that behavior repeated in a different context might have them poking in places where they shouldn't. Yes, it's their responsibility to use good judgment but we all know in the heat of the hunt that we are influenced by the hides we've found in the past ant it is just too easy to explore without thinking. I submit that the "hider" bears some responsibility for what their hide accomplishes in terms of training by example.

 

I've seen a number of cache descriptions and log entries that described hazards like traffic, unsure footing, steep slopes, etc. that have made me wonder what the hiders were thinking when they hid things that required this kind of warning. Surely we can do better. I recently passed on a cache that I'd located but which was clearly too risky for me (age 55) or my 12 year old daughter.

 

My old flight instructor used to ask the question "When do you execute a go around maneuver (instead of landing.)?" The answer is, when it first enters your mind. When do you abandon the chase for a cache? When the idea that continuing might be the least bit unsafe for life and limb. It just isn't worth it. Those hiding caches should ask themselves not only is my hide as safe as I can reasonably make it for those that will hunt but also what am I perhaps unintentionally teaching about suitable hiding places/explorations with my hide and might that "train" the hunters inappropriately in future hunts? Hunters need to consider abandoning the hunt in the interest of safety the first time the thought that proceeding might be unsafe enters their mind.

 

Let's be safe out there and do that which promotes safety for all of us whether hiding or hunting.

 

FWIW,

 

-dB

 

THANK-YOU!!! I've commented on this very thing a few times, usually received with people telling me I'm nuts. OK, seems there are plenty of us "nuts" to go around then!!

[+TeamGumbo]

I've only seen one LPC, but there were no wires under there...it would seem the wiring goes up inside the pole itself?

[+sbell111]

I've only seen one LPC, but there were no wires under there...it would seem the wiring goes up inside the pole itself?

Agreed. The plastic cover is there to protect the bolts from the weather, not to protect anyone from electric shock.

 

If the bolt area was energized, so would the pole, itself. If there was a reasonable danger of that happening, poles would either be drastically redesigned or they would be surrounded by a fence to protect the public.

 

As geocachers people, it is each of our responsiblity to decide which specific geocache activity is beyond our abilities. Avoid anything with a danger level that is too great for you, but don't tell me what is too dangerous for me. Streets, slopes, whatever.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I've only seen one LPC, but there were no wires under there...it would seem the wiring goes up inside the pole itself?

Agreed. The plastic cover is there to protect the bolts from the weather, not to protect anyone from electric shock.

 

If the bolt area was energized, so would the pole, itself. If there was a reasonable danger of that happening, poles would either be drastically redesigned or they would be surrounded by a fence to protect the public.

 

As geocachers people, it is each of our responsiblity to decide which specific geocache activity is beyond our abilities. Avoid anything with a danger level that is too great for you, but don't tell me what is too dangerous for me. Streets, slopes, whatever.

Unfortunately, for many, the "danger level" with some of these hides is unknown to them. Especially when caching with kids....

[+TeamGumbo]

Unfortunately, for many, the "danger level" with some of these hides is unknown to them. Especially when caching with kids....

 

I usually geocache with between 2 and 4 kids (hence the "Team" part of my ID), ages 7 to 13. If I were to get to a place/situation that I felt was unsafe, I would call it off.

 

They might talk me into it, though (they are pretty adventurous).

 

[+Rockin Roddy]

Unfortunately, for many, the "danger level" with some of these hides is unknown to them. Especially when caching with kids....

 

I usually geocache with between 2 and 4 kids (hence the "Team" part of my ID), ages 7 to 13. If I were to get to a place/situation that I felt was unsafe, I would call it off.

 

They might talk me into it, though (they are pretty adventurous).

 

 

And I very much appreciate your caring for and protecting the kids...how about when you find an electric box cache?? Do you abandon those types of hides? If not, do you discuss the potential dangers involved with those locations?

 

I agree with what was said above, it's already too late as there are these kinds of caches out there. How we "train" our young and even ourselves might need addressed a bit. Maybe, when placing a cache that might be nearby to a sprinkler head (which then might be mistaken for the cache), we should add a comment stating no need to disrupt the system. Maybe if a cache is nearby to an electric box of any kind, a short "not on or in the electric system" comment is called for? You don't have to give away the hiding location, just save the equipment if you even think your hide will cause extended searching!

 

Also, if you MUST hide on an electric box (I mean, if there really isn't a better spot???), make them easy enough to find without prolonged searching or at the least let the finders know where not to stick their hands??

Edited April 15, 2008 by Rockin Roddy

[+sbell111]

I've only seen one LPC, but there were no wires under there...it would seem the wiring goes up inside the pole itself?

Agreed. The plastic cover is there to protect the bolts from the weather, not to protect anyone from electric shock.

 

If the bolt area was energized, so would the pole, itself. If there was a reasonable danger of that happening, poles would either be drastically redesigned or they would be surrounded by a fence to protect the public.

 

As geocachers people, it is each of our responsiblity to decide which specific geocache activity is beyond our abilities. Avoid anything with a danger level that is too great for you, but don't tell me what is too dangerous for me. Streets, slopes, whatever.

Unfortunately, for many, the "danger level" with some of these hides is unknown to them. Especially when caching with kids....

I suspect that parents caching with children are more intuned to potential dangers, not less.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I've only seen one LPC, but there were no wires under there...it would seem the wiring goes up inside the pole itself?

Agreed. The plastic cover is there to protect the bolts from the weather, not to protect anyone from electric shock.

 

If the bolt area was energized, so would the pole, itself. If there was a reasonable danger of that happening, poles would either be drastically redesigned or they would be surrounded by a fence to protect the public.

 

As geocachers people, it is each of our responsiblity to decide which specific geocache activity is beyond our abilities. Avoid anything with a danger level that is too great for you, but don't tell me what is too dangerous for me. Streets, slopes, whatever.

Unfortunately, for many, the "danger level" with some of these hides is unknown to them. Especially when caching with kids....

I suspect that parents caching with children are more intuned to potential dangers, not less.

 

In most cases....I have seen otherwise. More than once.

[+TeamGumbo]

If not, do you discuss the potential dangers involved with those locations?

 

Most of our safety discussions involve alligators.

 

[hardkoretech]

As geocachers people, it is each of our responsiblity to decide which specific geocache activity is beyond our abilities. Avoid anything with a danger level that is too great for you, but don't tell me what is too dangerous for me. Streets, slopes, whatever.

Well said!

[+Kit Fox]

I agree with the OP, and so do many other geocachers. The primary defenders of this type of hiding spot are cachers who like "easy 1/1s" to help them maintain their hundred finds a day average.

 

Geocaching Electrical Safety

 

Electrical Box Caches?, Any surprises?

 

Brain Freeze Help! What are they called...

[+sbell111]

I agree with the OP, and so do many other geocachers. The primary defenders of this type of hiding spot are cachers who like "easy 1/1s" to help them maintain their hundred finds a day average.

Somebody has a hundred finds a day average. Wow.

[+mvigor]

The reason life insurance companies make money is because we all work very hard to make sure that our heirs don't get to collect the money very soon.

 

People have a natural tendency to keep themselves alive.

[+btgeocacher]

I'm pleased that so many folks are giving thought to the issue. Indeed many caches ARE already out there. But my post is forward looking. Just because we have bad examples already in the field doesn't mean we can't learn from them and do better. I think that if you carefully read my original post I put the responsibility for safety on both parties. Those hiding and those hunting. To those hiders that appeal to disclaimers, you might want to consider the well known principle of "attractive nuisance" in tort law. Google it. You be the judge if some clever lawyer might not use it to fleece you for a poorly conceived hide where someone was injured.

 

The cache I most recently passed on was under a bridge footing. Not only was it hazardous to attempt physically for someone my age (a nine year old boy would have no hesitation I'm sure!) I hadn't even thought of the terrorist angle whereby we might inadvertently raise suspicion by hiding/snooping around public structures that might be terrorist targets of opportunity. This discussion raised my awareness. That's why discussion like this periodically is a good thing. It broadens our thinking. I'm not sure, however, that I buy the argument that having caches that push the envelope is a good idea to promote geo-awareness as some seem to suggest.

 

I can see how cachers walking around with unknown electronic equipment in unusual places might give those not familiar with the hobby reason to wonder. I'll confess some unease at a recent cache where I was walking around in a store parking lot festooned with numerous CCTV cameras. I wondered what any observers must be thinking of this guy and his kids obviously snooping around their back lot.

 

My intent in the OP was to provoke thoughtfulness in both hides and pursuit. It has obviously met that objective. My aim was to encourage consideration of possible "unintended consequences" of our actions in both hiding and hunting. I don't think the hiders can escape some responsibility no matter how cleverly and stridently they protest. The responsibility of the hunters is perhaps more self evident. All the more reason to underscore the former in an effort to achieve proper balance.

 

Good and safe caching to all.

 

-dB

Edited April 15, 2008 by btgeocacher

[+btgeocacher]

Before getting into my slightly different spin on this, I have to say that there was something very endearing about reading the original post. It's hard to pin down but I think it is just concern for your fellow cacher, expressed in engineer lingo, that I found kinda cool.

 

....

 

Thanks. You captured the spirit of the post. The intent was to promote thoughtfulness, not prescribe. I had to give a few personal examples to avoid being completely abstract but I'm not smart enough to pass any absolute judgment on what is a "good" or "bad" hide beyond my own needs. If, however, I can provoke a measure of that same thoughtfulness towards their fellow cachers then my objective has been well met.

 

-dB

[+Renegade Knight]

As an engineer I learned early on that people will die using what engineers have designed. They will find all kinds of creative, inventive, stupid, accidental, and sometimes unavoidable ways to die. Our job is to skew the odds in their favor and learn, so that we keep getting better at skewing the odds in their favor. Their job (and ours), is to exercise prudence so as to delay their removal from the gene pool until a more acceptable way comes along like a heart attack, or old age.

 

Some rules of thumb:

 

The hider didn’t kill themselves hiding this cache. You don’t need to kill yourself finding it.

The hider is as lazy as you are. If the way in sucks, they probably had a better way.

The hider didn’t tear apart the world placing the cache. When finding the cache you don’t need to either.

If you are uncomfortable seeking a cache. Don’t. There are more.

 

They should be mindful of the finders that will come along, but they are not responsible for training them just by having placed a cache safely and without harm. Finders will do as they will and it’s beyond the control of the cache owner. That is why finders alone are responsible for any lessons they learn through their own efforts while on the hunt. Most owners having safety and successfully placed the cache anticipate finders being able to do the same.

Edited April 15, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

...I hadn't even thought of the terrorist angle whereby we might inadvertently raise suspicion by hiding/snooping around public structures that might be terrorist targets of opportunity....

 

This is part of my training. Not anywhere near the extent that a LEO would recieve but enough to know that virtually everything a cacher does fits the profile of suspicious activity. That not to say that there is a problem with caching. Just that you should be aware that people will take notice. This is part of being mindful when you place a cache. Police Stations, Schools, Courthouses. Major Bridges (not foot bridges) tend to get caches noticed more often in all the ways that we want to avoid.

[+Thrak]

Geocaching is dangerous. I bonked my head pretty good yesterday after work. I stood on a rock and hit my head on a tree branch. I didn't see the branch because I was wearing a hat (bald on top = need for sun protection!). It seems that wearing the hat had unintended consequences. I'll still wear it anyway. Everything is dangerous. I almost got backed over in the parking lot at work one day - by someone who generally drives like a little old lady. You just never know..........

[+PhxChem]

I agree with the OP, and so do many other geocachers. The primary defenders of this type of hiding spot are cachers who like "easy 1/1s" to help them maintain their hundred finds a day average.

 

Well, I disagree with the OP and so do many other geocachers. Apparently, I'm only a secondary or maybe even a tertiary defender. I just happen to like many types of caches and don't feel the need for the self-appointed cache police.

 

That's all....

[+Rockin Roddy]

I agree with the OP, and so do many other geocachers. The primary defenders of this type of hiding spot are cachers who like "easy 1/1s" to help them maintain their hundred finds a day average.

 

Well, I disagree with the OP and so do many other geocachers. Apparently, I'm only a secondary or maybe even a tertiary defender. I just happen to like many types of caches and don't feel the need for the self-appointed cache police.

 

That's all....

 

I knew I could count on someone to bring up the CP slant in the first page...well done!! Belittle people for caring about others...that's about right!

 

I don't see anyone asking for guidelines changes here, no one is asking for a crackdown...why must you label us as CP for pointing out potential problems and trying to DISCUSS the options. Rude is my take on that. I do see suggestions (THAT'S SUGGESTIONS) which could be implemented by the cache owners as a simple "heads-up" that there are ways to word some caches to protect both the caher and the property...I know, what a horrid idea! No suggestion was being stuffed down anyone's throat, they were thrown out there for anyone who WANTS to own safe caches to use...simple!

 

Cache police....yeah, that's about right...SHEESH!

[+Kryten]

The biggest safety risk associated with lamp post hides is exposure to whatever toxins the local canine polulation are carrying around in their bladders.

[+sbell111]

I agree with the OP, and so do many other geocachers. The primary defenders of this type of hiding spot are cachers who like "easy 1/1s" to help them maintain their hundred finds a day average.

Well, I disagree with the OP and so do many other geocachers. Apparently, I'm only a secondary or maybe even a tertiary defender. I just happen to like many types of caches and don't feel the need for the self-appointed cache police.

 

That's all....

I knew I could count on someone to bring up the CP slant in the first page...well done!! Belittle people for caring about others...that's about right! ...

It's funny that you are all over PhxChem for 'belittling' Kit Fox, but have no problem with KitFox 'belittling' everyone who disagrees with him. I guess that's because you agree with Kit Fox.

 

Something to think about...

[+sbell111]

The biggest safety risk associated with lamp post hides is exposure to whatever toxins the local canine polulation are carrying around in their bladders.

You have some very tall dogs in your area. My dog was pretty big, but she couldn't hit a lamp post skirt.

[CoyoteRed]

Let's be safe out there and do that which promotes safety for all of us whether hiding or hunting.

I agree with part of your post about training folks with hides. Some "clever" hides are simply unwise on the level of burying caches. If buried caches were allowed and someone couldn't find a cache on the surface then they'd break out the shovel. All hides create a certain paradigm and we should be aware of it.

 

On the point of danger, I disagree. Danger is part of being outside. Some of us thrive on it. A simply hike in the woods can be dangerous. I've been on hunts that made my behind pucker, yet I supremely enjoyed the experience. I'd do it again and recommend others do the same.

 

You did dance around a good point. One should be aware of their own limitations and don't go beyond it. "Limitations" and "comfort zone" are two different things. I think being beyond your comfort zone is great. It makes you stronger. It can push your limit higher and higher until you can do the things that used to be beyond your limit.

 

Don't let your age hold you back. The more you cache, the more able you'll become. Other cachers older than yourself have proven this.

[+sbell111]

Let's be safe out there and do that which promotes safety for all of us whether hiding or hunting.

I agree with part of your post about training folks with hides. Some "clever" hides are simply unwise on the level of burying caches. If buried caches were allowed and someone couldn't find a cache on the surface then they'd break out the shovel. All hides create a certain paradigm and we should be aware of it. ...

That is not why buried caches are not allowed.

[CoyoteRed]

Let's be safe out there and do that which promotes safety for all of us whether hiding or hunting.

I agree with part of your post about training folks with hides. Some "clever" hides are simply unwise on the level of burying caches. If buried caches were allowed and someone couldn't find a cache on the surface then they'd break out the shovel. All hides create a certain paradigm and we should be aware of it. ...

That is not why buried caches are not allowed.

To state the obvious...

 

Hey, why are you following me around in the forums?

Edited April 16, 2008 by CoyoteRed

[+Kit Fox]

It's funny that you are all over PhxChem for 'belittling' Kit Fox, but have no problem with KitFox 'belittling' everyone who disagrees with him. I guess that's because you agree with Kit Fox.

 

Something to think about...

 

SBell,

 

Please enlighten me as to whom I belittled by stating the primary defender of lamp post caches are cachers who like to find lots of easy caches in a day's time?

 

Had I said that the defenders of lamp post hides are fat, lazy, good for nothing, that have lower fun standards than I, you would have a point. That is not what I said.

[Mushtang]

There are dangers in every aspect of life. You should definitely avoid anything you're unsure about.

 

As a mechanical engineer I have also been exposed to multiple classes and seminars on safety, injury avoidance, risk assessment, etc. and agree 100% that there are some things that are just too dangerous to do.

 

I'll go to the extreme and say that it's too dangerous to jump off a tall building, therefore I won't do it. That doesn't mean I won't walk on the roof of one if there's a reason to (such as equipment inspection or survey). That also doesn't mean that I'll spend my time on top of tall buildings if I don't need to be there and risk falling off or otherwise injured.

 

It's too dangerous to open a wire cover and stick my hand inside a lamp post where the live wires are, therefore I won't do it. That doesn't mean I won't lift a skirt if there's a reason to (when there's a cache in there). That also doesn't mean that I'll spend my time lifting skirts and messing with every lamp post I see and risk getting shocked for no reason.

 

One of my favorite seminars I ever took as an engineer was on risk assessment, and we compared the risks of things we do every day vs. how much we try and protect ourselves from these risks. As someone earlier in this thread pointed out, driving your car to the lamp post is WAY more dangerous than lifting a skirt and getting the cache out. There are no threads asking people not to drive to caches - why not? We've read lots of stories about cachers breaking bones and even dying on cache hikes up mountain sides or other dangerous places, but there are no threads asking people not to place caches on mountain sides - why not?

 

The one example given so far of someone getting zapped sounded more like a surprising shock than an electrocution. Yet this isn't even close to being the first thread where someone is asking LPCs not to be hidden due to safety reasons.

 

Again, I agree 100% that safety should be a major concern and we should all try and keep ourselves and people we're caching with safe, but we should also moderate that with the actual risks of danger and enjoy the game too.

 

I'll ride my motorcycle a lot this summer despite the fact that most people reading this would never get on one because they're "too dangerous". And I might even stop by a lamp post to find a cache while riding by on my motorcycle too. Some people reading this would jump on a motorcycle in a heartbeat - because they've been trained on motorcycle safety and they're careful riders - but still will chime in about how dangerous LPCs are despite no reported injuries to date.

 

[edit - I can think of at least 3 people that will read this and conclude that mushtang is against being careful at caches, and is promoting hiding caches near exposed wiring]

Edited April 16, 2008 by Mushtang

[+Rockin Roddy]

I agree with the OP, and so do many other geocachers. The primary defenders of this type of hiding spot are cachers who like "easy 1/1s" to help them maintain their hundred finds a day average.

Well, I disagree with the OP and so do many other geocachers. Apparently, I'm only a secondary or maybe even a tertiary defender. I just happen to like many types of caches and don't feel the need for the self-appointed cache police.

 

That's all....

I knew I could count on someone to bring up the CP slant in the first page...well done!! Belittle people for caring about others...that's about right! ...

It's funny that you are all over PhxChem for 'belittling' Kit Fox, but have no problem with KitFox 'belittling' everyone who disagrees with him. I guess that's because you agree with Kit Fox.

 

Something to think about...

 

I must have overlooked that part of his comment, I do see that as being rude as well.

 

My comments aren't aimed at the LPC's or any of the hiking hazards which some have brought up...I'm worried about electric boxes and other electrical equipment. There are many other dangers out there, yes. I have a problem with the idea some would simply abandon their concerns once in the heat of the hunt...have seen this before too.

 

Mountain climbing is dangerous...no doubt about it, you could end up in some big trouble very quickly. I used to take a friend with me who'd stand over the edge and even hunch down over the edge at times...I told him to stop, but he wasn't as concerned about it. I stopped taking him as I wasn't about to feel guilty for his falling if I did take him. No, wouldn't have been my fault he was taking too much of a chance, but since I did take him there.... I view the cache much the same way, I'd rather not feel guilty if someone were to get hurt looking for one of my caches (no, not a broken leg because of a slippery slope...that's happened and likely will again).

[+sbell111]

Let's be safe out there and do that which promotes safety for all of us whether hiding or hunting.

I agree with part of your post about training folks with hides. Some "clever" hides are simply unwise on the level of burying caches. If buried caches were allowed and someone couldn't find a cache on the surface then they'd break out the shovel. All hides create a certain paradigm and we should be aware of it. ...

That is not why buried caches are not allowed.

To state the obvious...

 

Hey, why are you following me around in the forums?

Whatever. The world does not revolve around CR. You are not being stalked. If you post something nutty in a forum. People are likely to reply to it.

Edited April 16, 2008 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

It's funny that you are all over PhxChem for 'belittling' Kit Fox, but have no problem with KitFox 'belittling' everyone who disagrees with him. I guess that's because you agree with Kit Fox.

 

Something to think about...

 

SBell,

 

Please enlighten me as to whom I belittled by stating the primary defender of lamp post caches are cachers who like to find lots of easy caches in a day's time?

 

Had I said that the defenders of lamp post hides are fat, lazy, good for nothing, that have lower fun standards than I, you would have a point. That is not what I said.

You belittled people to the same extent that PhxChem did. Some would say greatly. Some would say not at all.

[+Renegade Knight]

...As someone earlier in this thread pointed out, driving your car to the lamp post is WAY more dangerous than lifting a skirt and getting the cache out. There are no threads asking people not to drive to caches - why not?..

 

Roads. That's my department. Earlier this week a guy on an overpass managed to dump a bobcat off of his trailer onto the interstate below. Nobody was hurt. Amazing both because nobody was hurt, and because he managed to dump his bobcat to begin with. How the heck do you design for that? (Actually you can design for that, but at the risk of making something else more likely to happen less safe). People find far more ways to do things than we engineers can ever fathom. Even if there was a 3000 car pile up as a result of that with enough deaths to turn the roads red, people would wake up tomorrow, and go to work on the same road.

 

PS: A recent study showed that the risk of death increases by 20,000 if you are a male riding a motorcycle in the wee hours of the morning. My motorcycle was the most fun I've ever had trying to kill myself.

Edited April 16, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

It's funny that you are all over PhxChem for 'belittling' Kit Fox, but have no problem with KitFox 'belittling' everyone who disagrees with him. I guess that's because you agree with Kit Fox.

 

Something to think about...

 

SBell,

 

Please enlighten me as to whom I belittled by stating the primary defender of lamp post caches are cachers who like to find lots of easy caches in a day's time?

 

Had I said that the defenders of lamp post hides are fat, lazy, good for nothing, that have lower fun standards than I, you would have a point. That is not what I said.

You belittled people to the same extent that PhxChem did. Some would say greatly. Some would say not at all.

 

As a defender of LPC's I'd say that the broad brush they used doesn't work. I defend LPCs because I believe in the freedome of cache owners to place the caches they enjoy placing.

 

It's askin to saying that the detractors of LPCs hate the handicapped. It's enough to recognize what is. Some people don't like them. Others do. Others still can't help but wonder about the wires, and some even know what the real name for the skirt is.