Too Dangerous to Cache

[Tahosa and Sons]

The local muggles might just shoot you. Warning.

And here is a recent cache log

[+StarBrand]

I'll refrain from a political rant here.............which leaves me precious little else to say except - how sad that cachers or anybody should have to worry about such things in the USA.

[+BulldogBlitz]

....and in other geocaching news

[+Team Cotati]

Detroit.

 

South Central.

 

West Oakland.

[+dorqie]

woah... I think of myself as pretty fearless, and don't tend to take in to account the "colour" of any particular area when caching (I've found one in our local red light district) but that would scare me away. Maybe righfully so, maybe I'm just being overly cautious, who knows, but I wouldn't want to field test it.

[+Minimike2]

Sounds like a good place to deploy the National Guard.

[+roziecakes]

Wow... that's very frightening. I think it's very nice of the person who posted the cache log note to warn others. Then folks can make an informed decision about whether or not to cache there.

 

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I have mixed feelings on this.

 

Trusting strangers is always risky. I usually do not know the CO yet I inherently trust that they will not lead me into danger that is not obvious. Silly, I know. Birmingham, as does any large city, has areas that I simply will not enter. The risk to walk around in those areas is not acceptable for any reason. Some areas I will not even drive through because a flat tire or breakdown would make me an instant target. In fact Birmingham has areas that the police will not enter alone. I know where they are and avoid them. I would expect the same of any cacher... I assume an area to be acceptably safe if the CO wants me to come hunt a cache there.

 

On one hand danger is not a consideration, nor should it be, when hiding a cache.

 

Geocachers must determine the level of risk that is comfortable for them.

 

On the other hand warning cachers of higher-than-normal but unseen risk is the correct thing to do so that cachers can have a choice as to whether they will feel comfortable hunting the cache.

 

I would not hide a cache in an area like this because I would not want to lead cachers into an area if I felt there was high risk. I am pretty risk-averse and don't take on risk without compelling reason. Entering a high-crime area to get a cache does not have a risk-reward ratio that I would find acceptable.

 

That's not to say they shouldn't be listed, just that I wouldn't do it, and I would certainly appreciate the CO placing a warning on the listing so that I could make an informed decision.

 

The danger of a cache hanging over the edge of a cliff is obvious and the cacher can see that a personal risk evaluation must be made.

 

A cache in an area known to the CO to have a high and violent crime rate is not a danger a traveling cacher would expect (or even some locals) and therefore could lead the unwary into situations they would have avoided if given the choice.

 

Please put a warning in the listing if you are going to hide a cache in an area with such above-normal invisible risk.

[+J the Goat]

I have mixed feelings on this.

 

Trusting strangers is always risky. I usually do not know the CO yet I inherently trust that they will not lead me into danger that is not obvious. Silly, I know. Birmingham, as does any large city, has areas that I simply will not enter. The risk to walk around in those areas is not acceptable for any reason. Some areas I will not even drive through because a flat tire or breakdown would make me an instant target. In fact Birmingham has areas that the police will not enter alone. I know where they are and avoid them. I would expect the same of any cacher... I assume an area to be acceptably safe if the CO wants me to come hunt a cache there.

 

On one hand danger is not a consideration, nor should it be, when hiding a cache.

 

Geocachers must determine the level of risk that is comfortable for them.

 

On the other hand warning cachers of higher-than-normal but unseen risk is the correct thing to do so that cachers can have a choice as to whether they will feel comfortable hunting the cache.

 

I would not hide a cache in an area like this because I would not want to lead cachers into an area if I felt there was high risk. I am pretty risk-averse and don't take on risk without compelling reason. Entering a high-crime area to get a cache does not have a risk-reward ratio that I would find acceptable.

 

That's not to say they shouldn't be listed, just that I wouldn't do it, and I would certainly appreciate the CO placing a warning on the listing so that I could make an informed decision.

 

The danger of a cache hanging over the edge of a cliff is obvious and the cacher can see that a personal risk evaluation must be made.

 

A cache in an area known to the CO to have a high and violent crime rate is not a danger a traveling cacher would expect (or even some locals) and therefore could lead the unwary into situations they would have avoided if given the choice.

 

Please put a warning in the listing if you are going to hide a cache in an area with such above-normal invisible risk.

 

I'm going with overkill. Here's my issue(s) with this whole thing. First off, 5 miles is a pretty big area. My entire town isn't 5 miles from one end to another. Does that mean that if there's a rough neighborhood at one end that the entire place isn't safe?

 

Second. Any urban area has potential to be a dangerous area. When I say this, I am strictly referring to violence, vehicle accidents, and the like. Some are more prone than others (see team cotati's nice little list above) and those are the areas that you can choose to stay away from.

 

I agree Rambler, placing hides in dangerous areas is an interesting street to roll down. Fewer visits due to the danger factor, but well within their rights if they, and those hunting, choose to take the risk.

[+t4e]

 

A cache in an area known to the CO to have a high and violent crime rate is not a danger a traveling cacher would expect (or even some locals) and therefore could lead the unwary into situations they would have avoided if given the choice.

 

Please put a warning in the listing if you are going to hide a cache in an area with such above-normal invisible risk.

 

sounds to me like you are saying that the CO placed it there knowing of the dangers, the cache that the OP linked to was placed in 2005, and the dangerous activity has been noted only recently

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I'm going with overkill. Here's my issue(s) with this whole thing. First off, 5 miles is a pretty big area. My entire town isn't 5 miles from one end to another. Does that mean that if there's a rough neighborhood at one end that the entire place isn't safe?

 

Second. Any urban area has potential to be a dangerous area. When I say this, I am strictly referring to violence, vehicle accidents, and the like. Some are more prone than others (see team cotati's nice little list above) and those are the areas that you can choose to stay away from.

 

I agree Rambler, placing hides in dangerous areas is an interesting street to roll down. Fewer visits due to the danger factor, but well within their rights if they, and those hunting, choose to take the risk.

Danger and risk indeed lurk everywhere. The vast majority of Birmingham is as safe as any city... it varies from block to block, day or night, and day of the week.

 

I've spent 46 years here and didn't really realize how risky some areas are until I became a Case Monitor for the Department of Youth Services working to help juveniles return to their community after a stint in a lock-up facility. It was my job to make sure that they returned home to a safe environment, were in by curfew, weren't being pimped for dope money by their parents, went to school, etc. This introduced me to a nightmare world that I had no idea existed. Some areas never worried me, others such as certain poverty-stricken government project housing were simply too dangerous for me to go into, especially at certain times. On weekend nights just after the third of the month when they'd just gotten their welfare checks (all too often used quickly for drug and alcohol money) I rode with the police, no way would I go in there alone. Yet I would go there on a weekday morning without too much concern.

 

No way would I put a geocache in there... strangers in the brickyards are almost guaranteed to become victims. The predators are real and waiting on you.

 

Would I hide caches in Birmingham and feel good that cachers could hunt them safely 24/7? Yes, for the vast majority of the city. We have thousands of caches within the Metropolitan Statistical Area encompassing 14 cities in one large urban/suburban mix and I have no fear to hunt any of them. Would I hunt or hide a cache within the approximately 2 square miles of the Gate City suburb? Not on your life! There is no safe time to go there, and there is no way for most folks to realize the danger there, so they cannot make an educated decision.

 

This is the same situation as in the OP - I am sure that most of that area is relatively safe. Corridors within it however may carry risk that is unseen and higher than the average cacher is willing to knowingly accept.

 

I spent a decade on the left coast, some of that time living quite near the border, and there were some areas more dangerous than others.

 

In those areas a warning would be appropriate and appreciated.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

sounds to me like you are saying that the CO placed it there knowing of the dangers, the cache that the OP linked to was placed in 2005, and the dangerous activity has been noted only recently

Cool, things change. Once I was notified that the area around my cache had become one of legitimate concern I would either post a warning or archive the cache, depending on my appraisal of the risk to geocachers.

[JohnX]

You can guess which neighborhoods are bad but sometimes you never know what will happen. I got mugged and pistol whipped at noon in broad daylight. Totally clueless and I was trying to figure out if this was a joke by some guy I knew in high school until he hit me with the gun. Most people don't pay attention to their surroundings especially when they are dead set on finding that cache.

[+OHail]

I had an encounter at a cache on the road right of way about a year ago. My experience in law enforcement led me to believe it was on the borderline of becoming violent by the person who approached me even though I was explaining geocaching in between apologies and trying to leave.

 

A recent log at the same cache said the "neighbor" had a gun when he confronted the cacher.

 

IMHO, this presents an unnecessary and unforeseen danger to cachers and the possibilty of a violent encounter there is escalating.

 

Cache owner hasn't been on gc.com since February.

 

Recent log

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I was caching with a group of about ten geocachers in the way-back woods of Alabama, hunting Cemetery Mountain Cache, a night-cache near an ancient abandoned cemetery in an area that has received international attention over the years as being 'haunted', when an old boy rolled up and put his whompin' big revolver out the truck window on me and asked what I thought I was doing out there. It could have been real trouble except his southern belle (with what appeared to be three green teeth) convinced him to leave us alone so they could go get more beer.

[+cowpill]

I have mixed feelings on this.

 

Trusting strangers is always risky. I usually do not know the CO yet I inherently trust that they will not lead me into danger that is not obvious. Silly, I know. Birmingham, as does any large city, has areas that I simply will not enter. The risk to walk around in those areas is not acceptable for any reason. Some areas I will not even drive through because a flat tire or breakdown would make me an instant target. In fact Birmingham has areas that the police will not enter alone. I know where they are and avoid them. I would expect the same of any cacher... I assume an area to be acceptably safe if the CO wants me to come hunt a cache there.

 

On one hand danger is not a consideration, nor should it be, when hiding a cache.

 

Geocachers must determine the level of risk that is comfortable for them.

 

On the other hand warning cachers of higher-than-normal but unseen risk is the correct thing to do so that cachers can have a choice as to whether they will feel comfortable hunting the cache.

 

I would not hide a cache in an area like this because I would not want to lead cachers into an area if I felt there was high risk. I am pretty risk-averse and don't take on risk without compelling reason. Entering a high-crime area to get a cache does not have a risk-reward ratio that I would find acceptable.

 

That's not to say they shouldn't be listed, just that I wouldn't do it, and I would certainly appreciate the CO placing a warning on the listing so that I could make an informed decision.

 

The danger of a cache hanging over the edge of a cliff is obvious and the cacher can see that a personal risk evaluation must be made.

 

A cache in an area known to the CO to have a high and violent crime rate is not a danger a traveling cacher would expect (or even some locals) and therefore could lead the unwary into situations they would have avoided if given the choice.

 

Please put a warning in the listing if you are going to hide a cache in an area with such above-normal invisible risk.

 

I personally do not trust anybody. Here in Rural Torrance county NM there are some nefarious characters here that just want to be left alone.....period. I afford them that right. I also reserve the right to defend myself if being left alone isn't enough.

[+Don_J]

 

A cache in an area known to the CO to have a high and violent crime rate is not a danger a traveling cacher would expect (or even some locals) and therefore could lead the unwary into situations they would have avoided if given the choice.

 

Please put a warning in the listing if you are going to hide a cache in an area with such above-normal invisible risk.

 

sounds to me like you are saying that the CO placed it there knowing of the dangers, the cache that the OP linked to was placed in 2005, and the dangerous activity has been noted only recently

 

True. The problem didn't begin to develop until January of last year.

[+Pinehurst]

Wow

[knowschad]

Wow

Oh oh! Looks like there's a leak in the Geocaching.com Website forum! Somebody may want to look into patching it.

[sabrefan7]

I was caching with a group of about ten geocachers in the way-back woods of Alabama, hunting Cemetery Mountain Cache, a night-cache near an ancient abandoned cemetery in an area that has received international attention over the years as being 'haunted', when an old boy rolled up and put his whompin' big revolver out the truck window on me and asked what I thought I was doing out there. It could have been real trouble except his southern belle (with what appeared to be three green teeth) convinced him to leave us alone so they could go get more beer.

It sounds like you were invading his "romacin" spot

[+Mike & Jess]

Coming from a sheltered city, it is hard to believe there is that much danger south of the border.

Even when I lived in bigger cities like Toronto, I had very little worries or concerns about particular areas.

 

Here, the bears are vegitarians, We own long guns (shotguns and riffles) for hunting, not protection.

The only thing that you have to worry about attaching you is the mosquitos.

The total lack of poisoness insects is also nice.