[duckm]

if to get at a micro, you have to take a nut off a bolt on a sign? I put in the listing that tools will be required. I had a cacher refer to this as vandalism. I was interested in what anyone else thought.

[Luckless]

I vote yes. They may not replace the bolt and it could get lost.

[Ichabod]

duckm, on Oct 18 2006, 04:20 AM, said:

if to get at a micro, you have to take a nut off a bolt on a sign? I put in the listing that tools will be required. I had a cacher refer to this as vandalism. I was interested in what anyone else thought.

Well, so long as the hole the bolt is in was already there, how is that vandalism? If, however, someone had to make or modify an existing hole ...

[pigpen4x4]

To me, if the hardware in question is to hold up the sign, then yes it is. If you added the bolt, probably not. But then, how does it appear to others when we are standing there apparently taking apart a sign?
PP

[tands]

pigpen4x4, on Oct 18 2006, 03:55 AM, said:

To me, if the hardware in question is to hold up the sign, then yes it is. If you added the bolt, probably not. But then, how does it appear to others when we are standing there apparently taking apart a sign?
PP

I agree. This is especially true since people steal traffic and road signs all the time at great expense to various road and highway maintenance departments.

- T of TandS

[sbell111]

If the bolt was added by the cache owner to an existing hole, it isn't vandalism.

[SG-MIN]

sbell111, on Oct 18 2006, 07:28 AM, said:

If the bolt was added by the cache owner to an existing hole, it isn't vandalism.

yup

[Big Max]

My concern would be more in line with what is the appearance to the general public. Whether it is right or wrong, having to spend a 1/2 hour trying to convince a police officer you weren't trying to steal the sign or worse yet getting issued a citation and trying to convince a judge what you was doing wouldn't be fun. Most of the signs in our city have a sticker on the back saying modifying or defacing a road sign is illegal. IF they wanted to get picky or in need of revenue they could probably make a case that sticking a bolt through a hole down low on the post is considered modifying.

[SniperChicken]

I agree that as long as you are not removing or tampering with a primary support for the sign that you are not "vandalizing" the sign. If you are going to do a cache in this manner it would be best that the sign is in an area that you could access the cache and put it back with as little threat of being witnessed by "the uninformed" as possible,or list when the most appropriate times for searching for this cache would be.

[ThePropers]

Big Max, on Oct 18 2006, 08:48 AM, said:

My concern would be more in line with what is the appearance to the general public. Whether it is right or wrong, having to spend a 1/2 hour trying to convince a police officer you weren't trying to steal the sign or worse yet getting issued a citation and trying to convince a judge what you was doing wouldn't be fun. Most of the signs in our city have a sticker on the back saying modifying or defacing a road sign is illegal. IF they wanted to get picky or in need of revenue they could probably make a case that sticking a bolt through a hole down low on the post is considered modifying.

This is my concern too. I did one of those "fake bolts on a guardrail" caches a couple of weeks ago that was right along the road. I was sure that the owner had removed the bolt to make it (perfect match down to the company and number on the head of the bolt..etc). The hider did insist that they got the bolt from a piece of guardrail in a scrap yard and managed to find this guardrail which had one of the bolts missing, which is fine, and I took his word for it.

However, I wouldn't want to be the cacher trying to explain that to the police officer who is driving by while you're removing the bolt from the guardrail. "Well you see officer, this is actually a bolt from another guardrail the hider found in a scrapyard, and this here guardrail just happened to be missing one..."

This post has been edited by ThePropers: 18 October 2006 - 04:54 AM

[hikemeister]

We had a similar example here in Florida, where there are at various stations large well heads where city trucks fill up with water for irrigating grass along highways. A geocacher removed one of the bolts holding two of the large pipes together, hollowed it out, and replaced it as a micro. It was nearly impossible to find, except that I knew from earlier finds that this was the method. It concerned me, however, that someone had messed around with what may have been an integral part of a high pressure water system, city property, etc...in that case it seemed that he was taking it over the edge and doing something that could reflect badly on geocachers.

[team moxiepup]

Is there any way that, instead of using a working bolt, that you could "add" one that has been modified to hold a cache, and then attached with a magnet?

This way, the integrity of the sign remains in place, and the cache could easily and quickly be removed by cachers, without attracting too much attention.

[worldtraveler]

Part of cache finder's log:

Quote

Nice idea but I have a real problem when I have to vandalize public property to get to a cache. There were many, many muggles about walking the trails.

No need to haggle over semantics and details. If a fellow geocacher who found the cache in an area frequented by "many, many muggles" perceived it as vandalism, how do you suppose the general public and law enforcement officers are likely to view it? One may be able to explain one's way out of the situation, but why create the situation to begin with? Ask yourself: Is this more likely to create good will or ill will towards geocaching?

Change the cache; we don't need more bad PR.

[sbell111]

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

No need to haggle over semantics and details. If a fellow geocacher who found the cache in an area frequented by "many, many muggles" perceived it as vandalism, how do you suppose the general public and law enforcement officers are likely to view it? ...

I think it's amusing that you think all geocachers think the same.

[TeamHarrison]

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

Change the cache; we don't need more bad PR.

I concur. The smiley isn't worth potentialy tarnishing the sport.

[duckm]

I really appreciate the feedback on this topic. I'll see what I can do to modify the existing cache. The bolt in question is is one of two that holds the sign. Adding a bolt of my own may be the way to go. I sure don't want anyone to get in trouble or have to explain their actions. Thanks.

[Clan Riffster]

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

Part of cache finder's log:

Quote

Nice idea but I have a real problem when I have to vandalize public property to get to a cache.

Hopefully this was a "Note" or "DNF". I'm assuming someone who got that worked up about it would walk away..... or did they?

[TheAlabamaRambler]

I don't know that this case rises to the level of vandalism, but it surely puts finders in a bad position.

I personally don't like any cache that requires the disassembly of infrastructure.

Magnet on the sign, fine. Film can in the sign post, kewl, but I don't want to be standing there wrench in hand removing bolts from a sign when the cops come calling!

I do consider a hollowed bolt in a guardrail or, as in one famous cache in my area, on a train in a museum (with permission) to be different, as these things aren't really targets of thieves; for whatever reason signs often are.

Ed

[worldtraveler]

sbell111, on Oct 18 2006, 08:37 AM, said:

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

No need to haggle over semantics and details. If a fellow geocacher who found the cache in an area frequented by "many, many muggles" perceived it as vandalism, how do you suppose the general public and law enforcement officers are likely to view it? ...

I think it's amusing that you think all geocachers think the same.

And I think it's amusing that you think I think all geocachers think the same. Reference please?

The OP asked what we thought. I provided mine. Looks like he was grateful and will take the suggestion. End of topic for me.

[duckm]

Clan Riffster, on Oct 18 2006, 06:03 AM, said:

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

Part of cache finder's log:

Quote

Nice idea but I have a real problem when I have to vandalize public property to get to a cache.

Hopefully this was a "Note" or "DNF". I'm assuming someone who got that worked up about it would walk away..... or did they?

It was on a find.

[sbell111]

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 06:25 AM, said:

sbell111, on Oct 18 2006, 08:37 AM, said:

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

No need to haggle over semantics and details. If a fellow geocacher who found the cache in an area frequented by "many, many muggles" perceived it as vandalism, how do you suppose the general public and law enforcement officers are likely to view it? ...

I think it's amusing that you think all geocachers think the same.

And I think it's amusing that you think I think all geocachers think the same. Reference please?

The OP asked what we thought. I provided mine. Looks like he was grateful and will take the suggestion. End of topic for me.

Acrually, the OP asked us whether this act was vandalism, not what how we thought it would affect the game. Further, your response made the assumption that all geocachers would feel the same about this cache, while all non-geocachers would feel differently. My point was that feelings about this issue (like most issues), are not as clearly broken down as you had assumed.

[sbell111]

duckm, on Oct 18 2006, 06:30 AM, said:

Clan Riffster, on Oct 18 2006, 06:03 AM, said:

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

Part of cache finder's log:

Quote

Nice idea but I have a real problem when I have to vandalize public property to get to a cache.

Hopefully this was a "Note" or "DNF". I'm assuming someone who got that worked up about it would walk away..... or did they?

It was on a find.

I find it interesting that someone would do something that they thought was illegal and then post about it in their log.

[hikemeister]

Here is another interesting twist and a bad outcome.

A geocacher I knew before we moved away from south Florida placed some caches disguised as electric boxes. He even had them going into the ground with a long metal conduit and located near structures in public areas where one might expect to find such items. They were mystery caches because you needed to figure out the combination to the lock to open the box and get at the micro inside.

I know at least one person held for awhile by the police for suspected vandalism of public property on these caches.

PS -- yes you can add bolts. The best one I have seen was a fake rusted metal bolt on a fishing pier.

[nfa]

I assume that the cache owner got permission to place the cache, and to have cachers remove and replace the bolt...

Jamie - NFA

[NorthWes]

As the front office guy for a company that specializes in manufacturing and installing highway signs I'd tell you to absolutely leave the sign's structural components alone. Tampering with regulatory highway signage can be chargeable as a felony in most jurisdictions. Contributing to the cause of an accident related to a missing or damaged sign can make you party to damages, no matter how small your contribution appears to you. In some cases the personal injury claims related to missing or damaged regulatory signs total in the millions of dollars. Not a good situation to find yourself involved in.

Is it vandalism? Yes - if the structure is altered - all components (including the nuts and bolts) have to meet DOT specifications - changing the nut or bolt changes the designed failure point of the fastener. Here's what a typical stop sign on a 2" x 2" perforated square steel post costs in Anchorage AK: $68.75 for the sign, and $49 for the 10' post. We charge in most cases $195 additional to install to code. County and state highway departments take a dim view of folks messing with their installations, as the cost of sign materials is small compared to the labor costs involved in maintaining the sign infrastructure in their care. Drunk drivers and weather do enough damage to road signs - don't add caching to the list.

Unfortunately, cachers hang around 'ground zero' for a lot more time than typical sign vandals do, and during more 'observable' hours, making it a lot easier to vector a patrol officer to your caching location. As someone else said, do you really want to get involved in explaining what you're doing messing with a traffic sign, given the possible consequences?

And, in an attempt at humor in an otherwise humorless post,
I leave you with this message from the traffic sign industry -
(what we'd really like to say on those message boards out there):

[Renegade Knight]

duckm, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

if to get at a micro, you have to take a nut off a bolt on a sign? I put in the listing that tools will be required. I had a cacher refer to this as vandalism. I was interested in what anyone else thought.

You are walking a fine line. If you added a bolt to the sign that was different than the others...probably not. If you have to take a bolt off the sign, you are inviting trouble. You are not harming the sign, but you are putting the sign in harms way from other cachers who will not be as careful as you.

NorthWes makes a valid observation. When I said add a bolt I was thinking of what we have here for city street signs, Square tubes with holes up and down. How they mount the sigh to it's foundation on the bottom in some cases is engineered to break away. In other cases it's not. Some signs are built to break away in sections to minimize harm to errant drivers. Those would have special bolts in more locations than at the bottom. When in doubt, don't.

This post has been edited by Renegade Knight: 18 October 2006 - 01:20 PM

[Confucius' Cat]

NFA, on Oct 18 2006, 12:58 PM, said:

I assume that the cache owner got permission to place the cache, and to have cachers remove and replace the bolt...

Jamie - NFA

Suuure.

If I saw on the cache page, "bring a wrench", I would ignore the cache, permission or not.

The thing you have to consider is, "which bolt"?

Hiders seem to lack realization that they know exactly where to look but their seekers do not. Therefore, if the seeker knows they have to loosen a bolt in a sign to get the cache, they will most likely loosen all of the bolts in the sign (or at least as many as they have to loosen before they find the one with the cache).

Besides the obvious problem of how to explain it to the cops, my concern is that the bolts might not get tightened back properly and thus cause a hazard of the sign falling.

Hiding caches like this is foolish and irresponsible. Our game does not need this kind of hide.

I must confess to trying to loosen bolts with slight hand turning to determine if it might be a cache. Even this could cause problems- a loose bolt still holds to some extent, a missing bolt (because of losing the nut perhaps?) does not.

If the cache IS a fake bolt and it cannot be removed by slight hand turning or pulling, I will consider it a DNF and move on.

As to the exact OP ? : Vandalism by the hider, NO- provided the hole already existed. Vandalism by the seeker, Most likely, YES- really no other way to find the cache.

[Torry]

duckm, on Oct 18 2006, 08:57 AM, said:

I really appreciate the feedback on this topic. I'll see what I can do to modify the existing cache. The bolt in question is one of two that holds the sign. Adding a bolt of my own may be the way to go. I sure don't want anyone to get in trouble or have to explain their actions. Thanks.

Yes. That was an act of vandalism. Had a police officer observed you removing the bolt to place your cache you could have very easily been cited for destroying or damaging the item in question.

This post has been edited by Torry: 18 October 2006 - 07:59 PM

[eagletrek]

You got to wonder what has happened to common sense? If you think an action may be perceived as vandalism by law enforcement and the general public, then why do it? Is your imagination so limited that you can't find another place or type of cache to hide?

[sbell111]

eagletrek, on Oct 19 2006, 06:13 AM, said:

You got to wonder what has happened to common sense? If you think an action may be perceived as vandalism by law enforcement and the general public, then why do it? Is your imagination so limited that you can't find another place or type of cache to hide?

Is it possible to post in a thread without attacking an individual?

[GreyingJay]

I had something similar on a hide of mine but it did not require the cache seeker to manipulate the sign at all. I wrote the coordinates on a fender washer and attached it to an existing sign bolt with another nut.

Unfortunately after about a year the coordinates faded (I should have etched them onto the washer). I admit however that I felt very conspicuous the first time I went out there to place the washer and bolt (even waited until near-midnight) and really didn't feel like going out there to do it again, so instead I changed the cache setup to skip that waypoint.

[welch]

worldtraveler, on Oct 18 2006, 08:20 AM, said:

Part of cache finder's log:

Quote

Nice idea but I have a real problem when I have to vandalize public property to get to a cache. There were many, many muggles about walking the trails.

No need to haggle over semantics and details. If a fellow geocacher who found the cache in an area frequented by "many, many muggles" perceived it as vandalism, how do you suppose the general public and law enforcement officers are likely to view it? One may be able to explain one's way out of the situation, but why create the situation to begin with? Ask yourself: Is this more likely to create good will or ill will towards geocaching?

Change the cache; we don't need more bad PR.

My question is, how does one ensure that the people looking for the cache take out the right bolt? Even if the fake one is not vandalism, would messing with one of the other bolts be, right?
You can't idiot proof everything, but telling people to bring tools and having more than one bolt around would seem like tempting fate. Maybe it would be better if the bolt was magnetized or something, so no tools are needed.

[boda]

Quote

My question is, how does one ensure that the people looking for the cache take out the right bolt? Even if the fake one is not vandalism, would messing with one of the other bolts be, right?
You can't idiot proof everything, but telling people to bring tools and having more than one bolt around would seem like tempting fate. Maybe it would be better if the bolt was magnetized or something, so no tools are needed.

That's a good point. I haven't found too many fake bolts, but there were three a few Sundays ago. One is not really relevant to this topic, but two were on signs - both rectangular info signs. In both cases the bolts were magnetic. They looked real and fooled us for awhile. One had a magnetized nut/bolt-end opposite the bolt-head piece. When you touched them, it was obvious that this was the cache and that no tools, etc. were required.

I agree that the scenario posted by the OP could be considered vandalism. At the least it would interest any LEO in the vicinity. I would not attempt to remove an actual bolt. As an aside, I've always been nervous about messing with road signs. Kids stole a stop sign near my house when I was in grade school (about 50 years ago). A speeder went right through and hit a car, killing 5 people. Makes you a bit sensative to messing with street signs.

[K0BKL]

I found a fake bolt in a ladder bridge on a motorcross bike trail.
A hole was drilled and the bolt was added, trouble was, it was
too tight for me to separate the two halves of the bolt to
get to the log book.
In this case, the bolt was not holding anything, planks were
laid over a wooden ladder to make a bridge for the motocross
bikes. Where does one obtain such an item?

[sbell111]

K0BKL, on Aug 23 2007, 07:40 AM, said:

I found a fake bolt in a ladder bridge on a motorcross bike trail.
A hole was drilled and the bolt was added, trouble was, it was
too tight for me to separate the two halves of the bolt to
get to the log book.
In this case, the bolt was not holding anything, planks were
laid over a wooden ladder to make a bridge for the motocross
bikes. Where does one obtain such an item?

I think that most people make them for themselves, but I have seen a few on ebay.

This post has been edited by sbell111: 23 August 2007 - 04:47 AM

[Rockin Roddy]

Vandalism? maybe, maybe not...but I have to agree with MOST that this isn't a good idea. Especially after reading you said it was an original bolt you replaced from the sign.

[sbell111]

Rockin Roddy, on Aug 23 2007, 08:20 AM, said:

Vandalism? maybe, maybe not...but I have to agree with MOST that this isn't a good idea. Especially after reading you said it was an original bolt you replaced from the sign.

Pssst. This thread's a year old.

[Lotho]

Look who it is!

This post has been edited by Lotho: 23 August 2007 - 06:37 AM

[Dinoprophet]

K0BKL, on Aug 23 2007, 04:40 AM, said:

I found a fake bolt in a ladder bridge on a motorcross bike trail.
A hole was drilled and the bolt was added, trouble was, it was
too tight for me to separate the two halves of the bolt to
get to the log book.
In this case, the bolt was not holding anything, planks were
laid over a wooden ladder to make a bridge for the motocross
bikes. Where does one obtain such an item?

I know the thread's a year old, but this post presents a new case.

The bolt, not so much a problem. Drilling a hole is very much vandalism. Hopefully the hider either owns the trail or used an existing hole.

[K0BKL]

Dinoprophet, on Aug 23 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

K0BKL, on Aug 23 2007, 04:40 AM, said:

I found a fake bolt in a ladder bridge on a motorcross bike trail.
A hole was drilled and the bolt was added, trouble was, it was
too tight for me to separate the two halves of the bolt to
get to the log book.
In this case, the bolt was not holding anything, planks were
laid over a wooden ladder to make a bridge for the motocross
bikes. Where does one obtain such an item?

I know the thread's a year old, but this post presents a new case.

The bolt, not so much a problem. Drilling a hole is very much vandalism. Hopefully the hider either owns the trail or used an existing hole.

This is a rough woods area behind a YMCA
A motocross club has made trails using ladders covered with boards
for bridges. All very rough and unpainted. No one is going to care.

[JohnnyVegas]

Here is a photo of a cache the any one should consider vandalism
I found this cache a few weeks ago. I would post a SBA but the last time I posted a SBA the local cachers went nuts.

[sbell111]

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 10:30 AM, said:

Here is a photo of a cache the any one should consider vandalism
I found this cache a few weeks ago. I would post a SBA but the last time I posted a SBA the local cachers went nuts.

<SNIP>

I'd have to know quite a bit more about it before I jump on the vandalism bandwagon.

This post has been edited by sbell111: 23 August 2007 - 07:33 AM

[Ambrosia]

K0BKL, on Aug 23 2007, 08:07 AM, said:

Dinoprophet, on Aug 23 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

K0BKL, on Aug 23 2007, 04:40 AM, said:

I found a fake bolt in a ladder bridge on a motorcross bike trail.
A hole was drilled and the bolt was added, trouble was, it was
too tight for me to separate the two halves of the bolt to
get to the log book.
In this case, the bolt was not holding anything, planks were
laid over a wooden ladder to make a bridge for the motocross
bikes. Where does one obtain such an item?

I know the thread's a year old, but this post presents a new case.

The bolt, not so much a problem. Drilling a hole is very much vandalism. Hopefully the hider either owns the trail or used an existing hole.

This is a rough woods area behind a YMCA
A motocross club has made trails using ladders covered with boards
for bridges. All very rough and unpainted. No one is going to care.

Groundspeak would care.

[Quiggle]

sbell111, on Aug 23 2007, 10:16 AM, said:

Rockin Roddy, on Aug 23 2007, 08:20 AM, said:

Vandalism? maybe, maybe not...but I have to agree with MOST that this isn't a good idea. Especially after reading you said it was an original bolt you replaced from the sign.

Pssst. This thread's a year old.

It appears to be a valid open discussion, regardless of when it was originally started.

I'll take this opportunity to remind everyone that the forum guidelines apply to all threads, even the ones that are a year old.

[sbell111]

Quiggle, on Aug 23 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

sbell111, on Aug 23 2007, 10:16 AM, said:

Rockin Roddy, on Aug 23 2007, 08:20 AM, said:

Vandalism? maybe, maybe not...but I have to agree with MOST that this isn't a good idea. Especially after reading you said it was an original bolt you replaced from the sign.

Pssst. This thread's a year old.

It appears to be a valid open discussion, regardless of when it was originally started.

I'll take this opportunity to remind everyone that the forum guidelines apply to all threads, even the ones that are a year old.

My point was that the OP is likely not still checking on it to get input. Therefore, giving him advice isn't going to be fruitful.

This post has been edited by sbell111: 23 August 2007 - 07:38 AM

[JohnnyVegas]

sbell111, on Aug 23 2007, 08:32 AM, said:

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 10:30 AM, said:

Here is a photo of a cache the any one should consider vandalism
I found this cache a few weeks ago. I would post a SBA but the last time I posted a SBA the local cachers went nuts.

<SNIP>

I'd have to know quite a bit more about it before I jump on the vandalism bandwagon.

The cache was place last March, The hole was drilled for the cache, there is not reason for the hole to be there other than to hide a cache. It is drilled into a single piece of lumber that is part of the support structure for the bench in the park. The bolt was painted to make it look old.

If you look at the photo you can see the wood inside of the hole is not weathered.
Redwoods cache

[Renegade Knight]

duckm, on Oct 18 2006, 05:20 AM, said:

if to get at a micro, you have to take a nut off a bolt on a sign? I put in the listing that tools will be required. I had a cacher refer to this as vandalism. I was interested in what anyone else thought.

No it's not vandalism in that no damage is done. However it's not what I'd call "right" either. People should not muck with signs and property this way.

[Renegade Knight]

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 09:30 AM, said:

Here is a photo of a cache the any one should consider vandalism
I found this cache a few weeks ago. I would post a SBA but the last time I posted a SBA the local cachers went nuts. ...

That may or may not be vandalism depending on the circumstances specific to the cache itself that you would not know unless you helped place it.

[sbell111]

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 10:53 AM, said:

sbell111, on Aug 23 2007, 08:32 AM, said:

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 10:30 AM, said:

Here is a photo of a cache the any one should consider vandalism
I found this cache a few weeks ago. I would post a SBA but the last time I posted a SBA the local cachers went nuts.

<SNIP>

I'd have to know quite a bit more about it before I jump on the vandalism bandwagon.

The cache was place last March, The hole was drilled for the cache, there is not reason for the hole to be there other than to hide a cache. It is drilled into a single piece of lumber that is part of the support structure for the bench in the park. The bolt was painted to make it look old.

If you look at the photo you can see the wood inside of the hole is not weathered.
Redwoods cache

I still can't say that it was vandalism.

[J-Way]

sbell111, on Aug 23 2007, 08:16 AM, said:

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 10:53 AM, said:

sbell111, on Aug 23 2007, 08:32 AM, said:

JohnnyVegas, on Aug 23 2007, 10:30 AM, said:

Here is a photo of a cache the any one should consider vandalism
I found this cache a few weeks ago. I would post a SBA but the last time I posted a SBA the local cachers went nuts.
<SNIP>

I'd have to know quite a bit more about it before I jump on the vandalism bandwagon.

The cache was place last March, The hole was drilled for the cache, there is not reason for the hole to be there other than to hide a cache. It is drilled into a single piece of lumber that is part of the support structure for the bench in the park. The bolt was painted to make it look old.
If you look at the photo you can see the wood inside of the hole is not weathered.
Redwoods cache

I still can't say that it was vandalism.

sbell... THEY DRILLED A HOLE IN SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY!! You don't think drilling a hole in someone else's property is vandalism?

If your argument is that you think the hider might have used an existing hole instead of drilling a new one, or if the hider got permission from the owner first, then I'll agree with you. But drilling a hole in something that belongs to someone else without permission would be considered vandalism by almost any LEO you ask.