Geocaching Manifesto

[Guest BigFig]

It does raise some interesting questions. Personally, I think caches located on the side of a trail would be too easy to find and get vandalized before any geocachers could find them. Perhaps the prudent course of action would be to give hints on what trail to take that will take the geocacher close to the cache, then plant the cache off in the bush closeby where "normal" hikers would not stumble across it. That's what I did this weekend (my first cache) and the bushwhacking part did bother me a bit. I was just thinking "what's the area going to look like after 20 people have trudged through here". Wishful thinking on my part ....

 

In reality, the area I'm planting in is already heavily traveled by horses, mountain bikes, hikers, etc. so, I doubt a few geocachers is going to hurt much.

[Guest Eoghan]

Jeremy, any way we can see the post where the guy was flaming us? I'll go ahead and add my thoughts on the topic based on the other replies.

 

I've also noticed the difference in damage to an area as more and more geocachers start approaching it. In one location there is almost a hardpacked trail leading to the cache. Not good for the cache's safety but probably better than the situation I've seen at other locations where people trudge toward the cache from just about every direction and then tromp around all over the side of a hill in an area about 100' from the cache. I love this game but unless we get a strong message about responsibility out there as part of the credo we'll end up causing a lot of damage and making enemies out of every conservation and management group/agency out there. If you want to see the potential for damage, visit your local disc golf course. Because discs tend to fly off into the woods, you have to go out searching for them. After lots of people start doing this, what was once a nice little clear lane between the tee and the basket ends up being a 100' wide series of hardpacked interlacing trails with every branch lower than 10' broken off. It's even worse where there is any hill or creek involved. And this sort of damage is caused by people who are just playing the game. There are also those involved who make it even worse by leaving trash, etc. Yesterday I was out with my girlfriend while she looked for a cache that I'd found before but that she hadn't been to. While she was looking around for it she saw some white showing beneath the edge of a rock and thought she'd found it. Turns out it was just some maps that someone had thrown aside after they were done with them. Maps from Topozone and Mapblast. Maps they got from links on geocaching.com. Maps left by a geocacher. I was pissed.

The more this thing grows the bigger the problem is going to be. From now on all the caches I place are going to take the terrain into careful consideration. No more easily eroded hill sides. No more heavy brush for bushwhacking. I'm going to try to find spots that have at least 30' around them of more tolerant walking surfaces - rocks, flat areas, sparser vegetation. And I'm going to start adding more notes to the clues as well, such as "please stay on marked trails until you are within x feet of the cache." or "please approcah the cach from the n/s/e/w to help prevent erosion" etc.

I'm also going to take a lot more time and care when searching for caches. It's exciting to just go blazing out into the unknown with the little pointer leading the way, but probably not a good long term strategy. I'll make more use of the maps to PLAN an apporach based on the trails indicated, and once there I'll try to be a little more patient about finding the cache itself and not just take the first approach off the path - there just might be a better way if I explore any other surrounding trails first.

I'm also going to start raising the bar for the non-urban caches I place in terms of how far you have to go to get to them and how hard it is to get to them. (Kind of following the wisdom of backpacking - once you get more than a day or two hike from any trail head, your chance of encountering a drunk redneck or some cluelessly destructive newbie drops WAY down.) So all my new caches will require more time and effort to get to on the premise that the people who are more likely to go to the extra effort are the people least likely to cause damage, and because further out means fewer visits (i.e. less damage to the site)

[Guest Paul Lamble]

Here's another rule I'd suggest for the manifesto:

 

--Always get permission to place a cache.--

 

The bad press of tromping in the woods and tearing up the ground will be nothing compared to the rage landowners, parks departments, and such will vent if they think people are stashing stuff in their woods without them knowing of it.

 

My guess is that less than 10 percent of caches are there with permission though.

[Guest WrongWay]

s obscene content, I could do without it.

 

Jim

[Guest Paul Lamble]

I had the good fortune of seeing the negative post before it was yanked. The poster said he was disgusted (he repeated the word) by the behavior of some people stomping about in the woods, literally rolling around. One woman was so entangled in briars that she had to have her boyfriend pull her out of them. These people were definitly off-trail, and in the eyes of the poster, they were tearing up the forest floor. He asked them what they were doing, and they told him they were geocaching. He was alarmed by their behavior. Later on his hike he encountered some others who were doing the same thing.

 

He feared that this new sport would do nothing but help destroy the wilderness, and he said he is considering reporting his complaint to every conservation and environmental organization and publication he could find.

 

He was not unreasonable. He was alarmed though. It sounded to me like he ran into some newbie geocaching boobs. And if that is all he ever knows of our sport, he'll continue to fear it.

 

I'm not sure he can be reconciled to geocaching, but it does send a lesson to all of us that we must police ourselves or this sport is going to die before it has a chance to take off.

[Guest Krepism]

I personally do not even think the event even happened, atleast not he way he said it. He sounded like a greenpeace freak to me. I believe that he made up the story, knowing that no one could prove it other wise, just to get a rise out of us. Its not that I am so nieve that this kind of thing could never happen, I just hink this guy is nuts!! I agree that we as a group need to do all we can to preserve what is around our caches and to be responsible in there placement.

[Guest BigFig]

Paul et al - I saw the post as well. I don't think the individual that posted it was looking for an intelligent rebuttal. It was a cheap shot, not a "hey what are you guys doing, do you know you could be hurting the environment. If the poster had taken the time to look at some of the other fourms and see some of the discussion that was going on they would have realized we were pretty dadgum green already. The tone went something like "I was out in the woods and ran into this group of freaking idiots with GPSs who don't practice the religion of environmentalism to my standard". You can't discuss our concerns/viewpoint with someone who thinks everyone who isn't as radically green as themselves is an idiot. If he or she was so concerned, why were they out in the dadgum woods to start with. WE ALL do some damage by just being there - including the yahoo who posted. Get off our *** and go hassle the loggers, but don't expect them to be as nice.

[Guest daviskw]

We kind of got off the original subject. I think a few rules or entries in a FAQ along with what fiser said could be;

 

1. If you take something, leave something.

2. Despite the straight-line travel promoted by your GPS, stay on established trails as much as possible, to minimize your impact.

3. Pick up at least one piece of litter for each person in your group.

4. Always get permission from the property owner or caretaker before placing a cache.

5. Under no circumstances, park or walk on private property without permission.

6. It is the cache owner?s responsibility to maintain his cache and remove it if there is an adverse environmental impact.

7. It is the Geocacher?s responsibility to notify the cache owner of a missing, vandalized, or inappropriate cache that could impact our sport.

8. It is the Geocachers responsibility to be mindful of the rules and regulations governing the area they are geocaching.

 

Now a comment about caches in wilderness areas. I believe caches far off trails will have less impact than those close to trails. Caches that require wilderness skills will be visited less often, and will have less impact on the environment. The harder a cache is to get to the less it will be visited. My last point, the wilderness is there to enjoy, not look at on a map. Yes we must be careful and considerate, and promote that type of behavior on this site, but not be paranoid because someone falls in a briar patch.

 

Butch

[Guest BigFig]

Ah, a diplomat. I agree with all points. Frankly, I would have posted my first (and only so far) cache further off the trail, but it was cold, raining and the dadgum wind on the ridge kept blowing my poncho back over my head. I'd rather place fewer, yet more inaccessable caches - makes it more fun to hike in, practice my "real" (just a goodhearted dig) land navigation skills and just have a good time. Problem is, this would remove geocaching from the reach of good folk just looking for a day of fun with the kids or significant other. Maybe we could strike a balance?? I'm going to place some easily accessable caches in my area simply because there are none. I really like the idea of "kiddie caches" I've seen others do. But my real desire is to place at least one or two that require a camp over. That would be in "wilderness areas", but I can't imagine the traffic would be that high and everyone taking the same route.

[Guest WrongWay]

Although I agree with the points above I disagree that they need to be enumerated as a manifesto or code of conduct.

 

Once a group starts placing conditions for participation, the activity loses appeal and in some cases becomes oppressive (e.g. rogue homeowners associations). Ok, that was way off topic and a slam on HOA's, but I used it for dramatic purposes. How would you like to be fined if your cache is not up to someone elses defined standards ?

 

I guess I just don't want to see this fun activity start to require a recital of a Geocacher's Creed every time you turn your receiver on.

 

Safety and Common sense should rule the day.

A FAQ would be great, title it something like Tips On Protecting The Geocaching Activity...

 

Just my $0.02 probably worth as much,

 

Jim

[Guest Mystery_Pirate]

I think you guys are very thoughtful to consider the damage you are doing, even though it is so slight. You see, I am new to this GeoCache thing, but I am no stranger to Botany. First of all, all plants adapt to their environment differently. And walking on grass DOES NOT KILL IT, and I seriously doubt these people are walking in the exact same spot to get to the cache. But if you are worried about the grass, here is a hint: Look for the cache around midnight and bring a law mower set 2 inches off the ground. Most grasses will thrive using this procedure. Wild Grasses when they grow too tall are knocked and beaten down by animals so they can enough resources to grow. As they get bigger they exhaust their resources and causes the ugly brown tops of most long-stem wild grasses. You see Mother Nature has a way of equalizing everything. PEOPLE INCLUDED!

Sorry this was so long.

[Guest jeremy]

Not too long! Probably too short, actually. And very informative.

 

One big worry for me is people running up and down hills prone to erosion. Mucky mucking around Washington's ferny forests probably won't do much, though I still step lightly, even where the lumber companies have done their clearcut work.

 

Jeremy

[Guest mcb]

I think that even if a cache receive one visit a day the damage to the environment would be minimal. I don?t understand people's objection to "bushwhacking" cross country. When I walk through the woods I hardly leave a trail especial if there is no snow on the ground. Pick you feet up and walk heal-to-toe and you should disturb little of the ground cover. If you have a group, spread out a little so you don?t make an obvious trail. This will protect the environment and the location of the cache. And even if a trail develops so what; the cache will be gone in a few months and mother nature will take care of any trails. Even if the cache was there for years once it was remove the trail would be gone in a matter of a couple of seasons. Mother nature has all the time in the world to clean up your mess. I know that here in north east Ohio most of the ground cover damage I have seen is not from hikers but from our flourishing wild turkey population. Have you ever see a flock of turkey moving through the woods when there hunting for food? They turn up great areas of leaves looking for food. Deer routinely use the same trail over and over. No one talks about the erosion problems caused by deer and other large animals. I think the environmental impact argument some have made against geocaching is from people that are reactionary and I don?t think really understand the environment around them. Sure there are those environments that can be damage buy only a little bit hiker traffic but these areas are few and far between.

 

I agree with some of the above comments that we should place them further off the trail. This will minimize the number of visits and more importantly if the cache is further out the chance of people using the same point to exit the trail would be less. Thus spreading out the impact of our evil "bushwhacking" through the woods.

 

Matt

[Guest Mystery_Pirate]

Alright, I have read a few more of these posts and I did not realize just how much traffic these caches received. My other post is still accurate however I must agree that constant steady traffic will have a drastic effect. I forget that some people are not as considerate as others, and some do litter and break branches and perhaps even cut down shrubs. I think something should be done, but you must realize it won't stop these people from doing it. There will be no simple solution because some will continue to hide their cache in strange outlandish places, so I guess avoid the places like that?

 

AGAIN I APOLOGIZE FOR UNDERESTIMATING THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST IN THIS FANTASTIC GAME!

 

I found my first cache last night, and had a great time!

[Guest Mystery_Pirate]

I agree with "mcb" mother nature will heal the wounds, but that does not mean we should be so careless. Natural wildlife areas are absolutely beautiful and we should feel obligated to be careful. Just watch out people. MCB had some really great ideas I thought.

[Guest ScottJ]

Despite my uncharacteristically sharp replies to *matt in other forums, I do understand what he's getting at, but I resent his "You'd better..." attitude and his obvious overboard response.

 

I think some general guidelines need to be made more clear to new cachers. I do see lots of logs where people have said they "went direct" or "bushwhacked" to the cache rather than staying on the trail, and the like.

 

My suggestions for these guidelines:

 

1) When approaching a cache, remain on established trails as long as possible, minimizing your off-trail distance.

 

2) When hiking off-trail to a cache, avoid disturbing plant or animal life in your path. Don't cut brush, and don't step on delicate flora.

 

3) Never dig in the earth, nor place caches by digging.

 

4) Don't climb, unless the cache details specifically mention that climbing is required and is permitted by the landowner. Don't place caches that require climbing to access unless the landowner approves.

 

5) Don't leave behind any trash, and pack out any trash you find on-site. Leave the area as you found it.

 

6) When walking off-trail in areas where the incline is steep, be particularly cautious not to disturb ground cover, as it is very easy to start erosion that can radically change the landscape in a very short time.

 

Most of us who were outdoorsmen before Geocaching came along are already well aware of the need for these precautions, but I'm sure there are those who could use some education.

 

I still think the "can not take foot traffic" stuff is a bit over the top, though.

 

Scott

[Guest Paul Lamble]

Here's one to consider, borrowed from my days (long, long ago) as a Boy Scout:

 

"Leave a cache site better than you found it."

[Guest RyckZ]

Great ideas here. I tend to agree with most everything I have read so far. After looking at the "location" for the posters in this thread I thought I would stress a point not mentioned made clear. (or that I missed) There are vast differences in traffic to caches depending on how close they are to urban areas. Remote area will naturally have less traffic and the immediate cache locations may not need to as carefully chosen. However parks, preserves, and similar areas that are only a few minutes driving time from urban areas could see massive traffic very soon. It is still winter in NW Ohio. In less than a month we have grown from no caches in our area to seven! What will happen this spring? The closer to an urban area, the more prudent and more careful everyone must be GeoCaching or this could be a short lived activity. My $.02

[Guest AZMark]

Grass is a good weed. Dose tend to grow back fast, but not all of us live in grassy areas.

 

In AZ you step on one small cactus you could have killed off years of growth. Trails are good, looking where you are stepping is good, picking up the trash of others is very good.

 

On the lighter side. 4x4 - very bad - sorry guys.

[Guest Choberiba]

All though it's been said, many times, many ways... ScottJ reminds us:

 

Never dig in the earth, nor place caches by digging.

 

I understand that digging in a sensitive area is not such a great idea.

 

Why is this universal?

[Guest Markwell]

It's the lack of precision and accuracy of the devices. Unless it's a metal detector cache (and there are some) if you tell me it's out on the beach and I can get within 50' of accuracy, that's a lot of beach I'll be digging up. Not a good image for cachers.

[Guest scruffy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eoghan:

...snip

I'm also going to start raising the bar for the non-urban caches I place in terms of how far you have to go to get to them and how hard it is to get to them. (Kind of following the wisdom of backpacking - once you get more than a day or two hike from any trail head, your chance of encountering a drunk redneck or some cluelessly destructive newbie drops WAY down.) So all my new caches will require more time and effort to get to on the premise that the people who are more likely to go to the extra effort are the people least likely to cause damage, and because further out means fewer visits (i.e. less damage to the site)

---

 

I heartily agree with Eoghan and like his ideas. I would like to add to the quoted above by saying that I have noticed that multi-leg caches tend to have a lower find rate; if placing a cache in a preserve or sensitive area, add a couple of legs in more tolerant areas and get the effect similar to Eoghan's hypothesus and receive fewer visits.

 

Other ideas would be to occasianally move the cache, or if need be, archive it for a season.

 

But to be honest with y'all, just like anything involving our environment, you are going to have people who will be conscientious to the impact they impart and there will be others, who you can lay out a route a child could follow for them, and they will still choose to bushwhack their way to the cache, blindly following the bouncing arrow, squishing horny toads and sensitive fauna beneath their plodding boots, searching for a piece of plastic full of 99 Cents store items and trade show squishy toys, all for whatever reason known only to them.

 

I'm sure all of us have gone beelining for a cache, especially when first starting out, but I believe we should follow Eoghan's lead and the suggestions of others, and try and promote a more ecological friendly approach to our cache placement and hunting styles.

[Guest bunkerdave]

Well, as far as "beelining" goes, I guess I am guilty. In fact, in Utah, when a cacher takes a bearing with a GPS, looks in the direction of the cache, and goes straight for it, it's called "BunkerDave-ing." Yes, really.

 

I do not buy the argument that doing this is necessarily harmful, or causes erosion, or any "damage" whatsoever. When I have done this, (hiked off-trail) which is absolutely necessary in another geo-sport, Geodashing, I am going through brush that even rabbits wouldn't go through. I usually cross game trails that criss-cross the terrain, and I leave no trail whatsoever. Would it be easier to stay on the trail? Sure. The reason I left the trail (assuming I was ever ON one) is because it wasn't getting me where I was going, often because I started from the wrong spot. My question is: What is the likelihood of anyone else ever traveling the same route? Usually after I get to the cache site, I find the "right" path, and take it, since it is always easier than the one I took coming in. I doubt that any other hunter is going to be silly enough to try and take some of the cross-country routes I have taken. I wouldn't even take them again MYSELF.

 

I understand that there are many caches that have trails all around them. I have seen many myself, and when I do, I mention it in my log. OTOH, it is a weak argument that my taking the "crow's route" to a cache does any more damage than any of the deer or elk that travel through the same areas daily. No one is telling THEM to stay on the trails.

[Guest badbitbucket]

the forest's beauty. It's as natural as the deer wearing a trail to thier favorite watering hole.

 

some erosion issues may be valid in some areas, but these are the rare exception, and yes, those caches should be moved to a more appropriate location.

 

-BBB

[Guest Eoghan]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eoghan:

No more heavy brush for bushwhacking. I'm going to try to find spots that have at least 30' around them of more tolerant walking surfaces - rocks, flat areas, sparser vegetation.

---

 

Man, I didn't realize I had gotten so d#$%*'d Green this past spring. One of those times it's surprising to see that what you're reading is actually something you wrote yourself.

I think I let that original inflammatory post set the terms a little too much. Sure we should try to be careful with cache placement, but a blanket rule like that now seems rather silly.

Maybe it's best just to encourage people to follow good outdoor etiquette and to be aware of the type of terrain they're in. Like someone else pointed out, most places can be trompled extensively and still easily bounce back when the cache is removed. Scruffy's comments about transitioning cachers into more 'delicate' areas with multi-leg caches seems like a pretty good idea.

[Guest brokenwing]

Aside from any potential ecological impact, (a sticky issue I'm not even going to touch) I hate to see "social trails" to caches because it makes the cache location so obvious. It kind of ruins the "hunt" for me when I find a beaten path right to the cache. IMHO, it just makes for a better hide to place caches in areas that are less susceptible to trails forming. From that aspect alone, I'm all for being more selective about where we place our caches.

 

Thanks,

brokenwing

 

------------------

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[Guest web-ling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by daviskw:

Now a comment about caches in wilderness areas. I believe caches far off trails will have less impact than those close to trails. Caches that require wilderness skills will be visited less often, and will have less impact on the environment.

---

 

I agree. A cache placed far from a trail won't cause a social trail to be formed, because every cacher approaching the cache will take a different route. They may all come from the same general direction, but won't all take the exact same route. The caches close to trails are the ones prone to causing social trails to form, because almost everyone will approach it from exactly the same point.

 

Studies have been done on the impact of orienteering on the environment. The conclusions of most of these studies is that there is no permanent impact. One study even stated a net positive impact, due to the orienteers leaving the place cleaner than when the got there.

 

Web-ling

[Guest SirRalanN]

Well I made the mistake of hiding a cache in a wilderness area. It has come to my attention that the USFS will remove it and return it to me if I do not d so first. They have set a date and I plan to beat them to it. Well To continue with what I was going to say... I found a loction with several possible approaches and all around the cache area ia a hardpacked woods floor with a LARGE amount of rocky surface. I specificly looked for a location such as this for two reasons...

ONE) Rocks are great hiding spots...

TWO) Severe minimization of impact due to foot travel.

 

It is about .15miles off the trail but unfortunatly in a wilderness area. Now that I kno the rule I will not be placing them in this sort of area again.

 

I like the Manifesto

[Guest Walkin Stick]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul Lamble:

Here's another rule I'd suggest for the manifesto:

 

--Always get permission to place a cache.--

 

The bad press of tromping in the woods and tearing up the ground will be nothing compared to the rage landowners, parks departments, and such will vent if they think people are stashing stuff in their woods without them knowing of it.

 

My guess is that less than 10 percent of caches are there with permission though.

---

[Guest sdstack]

quote:

---

causing some serious erosion problems in places

---

 

e·ro·sion (-rzhn)

n.

 

The group of natural processes, including weathering, dissolution, abrasion, corrosion, and transportation, by which material is worn away from the earth's surface.

 

Exactly how many people would it take to have an impact great enough to warrant the use of the word "erosion?"

 

Short of using machetes, shovels, motorized vehicles, etc.

 

Trees and vegetation are quickly renewed. That is how God planned it. Most vegetation dies out in the winter anyway. The fallen leaves take care of most of it.

 

Be sure not to wear your golf shoes when hunting caches.

[Guest sdstack]

quote:

---

causing some serious erosion problems in places

---

 

e·ro·sion (-rzhn)

n.

 

The group of natural processes, including weathering, dissolution, abrasion, corrosion, and transportation, by which material is worn away from the earth's surface.

 

Exactly how many people would it take to have an impact great enough to warrant the use of the word "erosion?"

 

Short of using machetes, shovels, motorized vehicles, etc.

 

Trees and vegetation are quickly renewed. That is how God planned it. Most vegetation dies out in the winter anyway. The fallen leaves take care of most of it.

 

Be sure not to wear your golf shoes when hunting caches.

[Guest breaktrack]

"e·ro·sion (-rzhn)

n.

 

The group of natural processes, including weathering, dissolution, abrasion, corrosion, and transportation, by which material is worn away from the earth's surface. "

 

Let's put this another way....

The group of unnatural processes, including propaganda, misinformation, and scare tactics, by which rights are worn away from the individual's an area is MEANT to be enjoyed by.

 

 

------------------

Single dad looking for, dang, what the heck was I looking for again??? Where's my GPS?

[Guest Eoghan]

It's not really a manifesto, more like a list of suggestions, but I put a article on geocaching etiquette up in August if you're interested.

[Guest fiser]

We have a few basic guidelines: if you take something, leave something; pick up litter on the way, etc. If we were going to make a few simple rules for geocaching, (Let's say five) what would they be?

 

A few I was thinking of:

 

1. If you take something, leave something.

2. Despite the straight-line travel promoted by your GPS, stay on established trails to minimize your impact.

3. Pick up at least one piece of litter for each person in your group.

 

I feel the need to come up with a few simple rules because of some of the problems created by geocaching.

I realize I've hidden caches in wild areas.

I used trails to get where I was going, and the average geocacher (at least from the logs I've read and emails I've traded with visitors to my caches) is trampling through the woods, causing some serious erosion problems in places, and ignoring established trails.

 

An unregistered user from out West wrote an anti-geocaching rant this morning. His post disappeared a few minutes after I read it. I don't know if the moderator deleted it, or if *matt did it himself, but I thought his post raised some issues that we need to discuss.

 

[This message has been edited by fiser (edited 03-05-2001).]