View Full Version : Appropiate Cache site?



team teebow
08-01-2006, 12:45 PM
I read another log this morning for the Fitz Cache (GCW1PE) and it really concerns me that we are sending cachers to this area? I know that this cache was brought up in the past and checked out and seemed okay. BUT with this most recent cache log I don't think we should be sending cachers there. Please tell me if I am wrong in thinking this. We have not gone to this cache so we don't know what the area is really like. Is it worthy of a cache that we need to risk bringing a younger cacher along then having to explain what they might see??

I know, to each his own and everyone has a right to their opinion but this cache just doesn't seem right. Again tell me if I am over stepping my boundaries as a fellow cacher or shouldn't be saying anytihng especially if I haven't even been there.

If we want to promote caching in Maine to out of staters, is this what we want to promote?? Just a thought...............

If the owner of the cache reads this, I apologize in advance that I didn't e-mail you first., I just wanted to see if I was doing the right thing or not.

Team Teebow 2 (Cheryl)

attroll
08-01-2006, 12:59 PM
I personally wrote to GPSFUN just now and told him about this. I hope he will get a hold of the cache owner and tell him to remove it.

team teebow
08-01-2006, 01:01 PM
Well, I did e-mail gpsfun this morning. I was disgusted reading the most recent log I just don't get it? Why would you place a cache in that kind of area in the first place? Just plain ole creepy. Thanks for supporting me on this one, Rik.

Team Teebow 2 (Cheryl)

pjpreb
08-01-2006, 01:01 PM
If we had read the logs, we would have never gone there. I would *not* take a child there. We will probably take a pass on all "Rest Stop Caches" from now on. This area is an active meeting place for homosexual activity and in my opinion should be archived.

team teebow
08-01-2006, 01:12 PM
If we had read the logs, we would have never gone there. I would *not* take a child there. We will probably take a pass on all "Rest Stop Caches" from now on. This area is an active meeting place for homosexual activity and in my opinion should be archived.

I don't blame you on that decision BUT we have been to other rest stop caches and they certainly were no signs of this kind of activity. I wouldn't giv eup on other rest stop caches, I would just make sure that I read the logs for them before deciding to do them.

Sabby
08-01-2006, 01:29 PM
I was there on July 7 and posted a DNF because I found the place so "creepy" that I would not get out of the car. I never got to see the areas talked about by others who found the cache. From what I did see I would not want to stop there to eat a picnic lunch.

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 02:11 PM
:mad: I share your opinions . . . but of course my opinions didn't really seem to matter to the cache hider since my logs were deleted without even a single e-mail letting me know that my "find" was now null and void (my original find stating how I felt uncomfortable and was approached by several men and another log stating that locals I had talked to said this was most certainly a hotbed for . . . well . . . uh . . . you know what sort of activity I'm talking about). We won't get me started about my opinion of folks deleting log entries without any notification since that's a whole other thread for me to rant about.

After some thought I realized that re-posting the whole kit n' caboodle would most likely end up with the hider deleting my log again so I opted to simply post a find with the statement that the past log entry was deleted . . . however never one to be satisfied I also e-mailed GPSFun who then posted a note to this cache which I thought was very appropriate as it was diplomatic to both the cache hider and seekers. The problem as I see it however is two-fold: 1) Not everyone checks out the log entries and 2) GPSFun's note is now "buried" and is easily over-looked unless you look at all logs.

I have noticed that the cache hiders have not been active since May of this year with only a handful of caches found . . . once again the topic of newbies hiding a cache without getting some experience and a feel to know where to hide the cache, how to hide the cache, etc. is another topic to rant and rage about . . . but not here. :mad:

I will say that I do not think this site is OK by any stretch of the imagination . . . I'm not saying it is an unsafe area because I suspect most of the folks here probably have a "live and let live" policy. My main issue is the same as yours -- is this an appropriate place for a cache when there is a darn good chance families may be exposed to something they may not be expecting to see or would want to see. The way I view this is that if I knew a certain city park was a hotbed of activity for drug users I would not place a cache here -- not because I would be afraid that someone would become a drug user, but because it is not an activity I would want children to see.

And in answer to your question . . . is this a really great cache that makes the "risk" worth keeping it around? Opinions are like . . . well, you know -- everyone has their own opinion as to what makes a good cache. My own opinion is that this was not one of my favorite caches -- and in fact it has been the only cache where I have been uncomfortable.

In defense of the cache hider . . . I suspect they may not have known about the activity going on here. It was an honest mistake and more-over as newbies they may have felt a personal affront when folks started to berate the cache and call into question why they placed it where they did. It is a public place and it is a good place for traveling geocachers to stop and stretch their legs . . . but unfortunately a certain element has taken to also using this site.

There are many other sites in Maine that are also used by this "element" or by other individuals engaging in behaviors that are illegal or not appropriate for young children . . . many rest stops apparently are known for being pick-up points as well as a couple of parks right here in Bangor (which I will not name here in public since they do not appear to be as much of a problem). The difference for me is that I have never seen so many people log so many negative experiences as I have at this cache. Cachers at the other spots may not even be aware that they have been in an area known for this activity -- at least I haven't seen any problems in these area's logs.

I don't know if there is an easy solution however.



I read another log this morning for the Fitz Cache (GCW1PE) and it really concerns me that we are sending cachers to this area? I know that this cache was brought up in the past and checked out and seemed okay. BUT with this most recent cache log I don't think we should be sending cachers there. Please tell me if I am wrong in thinking this. We have not gone to this cache so we don't know what the area is really like. Is it worthy of a cache that we need to risk bringing a younger cacher along then having to explain what they might see??

I know, to each his own and everyone has a right to their opinion but this cache just doesn't seem right. Again tell me if I am over stepping my boundaries as a fellow cacher or shouldn't be saying anytihng especially if I haven't even been there.

If we want to promote caching in Maine to out of staters, is this what we want to promote?? Just a thought...............

If the owner of the cache reads this, I apologize in advance that I didn't e-mail you first., I just wanted to see if I was doing the right thing or not.

Team Teebow 2 (Cheryl)

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 02:15 PM
Well, I did e-mail gpsfun this morning. I was disgusted reading the most recent log I just don't get it? Why would you place a cache in that kind of area in the first place? Just plain ole creepy. Thanks for supporting me on this one, Rik.

Team Teebow 2 (Cheryl)

I think it was (or prefer to think it was) an honest mistake made by a new geocacher who may not have realized what many people do at this site -- which makes sense since there have been many other cachers who have done this cache without any incident. I imagine that whether a person is uncomfortable or not depends largely on when they go -- I'm speculating here, but probably a Saturday evening around dusk when I went is probably a VERY BAD time to go as opposed to going in middle of an afternoon on a weekday.

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 02:16 PM
If we had read the logs, we would have never gone there. I would *not* take a child there. We will probably take a pass on all "Rest Stop Caches" from now on. This area is an active meeting place for homosexual activity and in my opinion should be archived.

This proves one of my points . . . a lot of folks don't read the logs so even if GPSFun were to sticky note his words of advice at the top of the log entries many folks may not see the warning.

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 02:19 PM
I was there on July 7 and posted a DNF because I found the place so "creepy" that I would not get out of the car. I never got to see the areas talked about by others who found the cache. From what I did see I would not want to stop there to eat a picnic lunch.

Trust me . . . you didn't miss much other than a ratty looking old mattress, lawn chair and a bunch of other junk that looked as though a couple of bums were staying in the area.

Hiram357
08-01-2006, 02:23 PM
at first I thought most of the logs were probably over exaggerated, and I thought what the heck, I'm usually well armed, and I was working and had nothing better to do... so I went a did the cache last week. And those of you that know me, know that it takes a lot to bother me... and this place had me bothered, and the goings on around the area were very creepy, when I drove home the same cars that were there 3 hours before were still there. I don't think it's a good spot for a cache and i for one would like to see the cache... or better yet, how bout the whole place removed...

Hiram357
08-01-2006, 02:28 PM
I think it was (or prefer to think it was) an honest mistake made by a new geocacher who may not have realized what many people do at this site -- which makes sense since there have been many other cachers who have done this cache without any incident. I imagine that whether a person is uncomfortable or not depends largely on when they go -- I'm speculating here, but probably a Saturday evening around dusk when I went is probably a VERY BAD time to go as opposed to going in middle of an afternoon on a weekday.

I went there at 9am thinking it would be an ok time... 6 vehicles were parked there, only 2 were occupied (one with his parking lights on...) so I opted to not go... i went back around noon, there were a few of the same cars still there! there we're a lot more people there though actually using the rest stop for its intended purpose so I decided it would be ok to grab it, after I found the cache within minutes and started making my way out, i found one person was watching me, and 3 other men had recently left their parked vehicles and made their way down the trail too... very disturbing, especially if you've never seen a 45yr old man wearing spandex... :eek:

WhereRWe?
08-01-2006, 02:35 PM
I went there at 9am thinking it would be an ok time... 6 vehicles were parked there, only 2 were occupied (one with his parking lights on...) so I opted to not go... i went back around noon, there were a few of the same cars still there! there we're a lot more people there though actually using the rest stop for its intended purpose so I decided it would be ok to grab it, after I found the cache within minutes and started making my way out, i found one person was watching me, and 3 other men had recently left their parked vehicles and made their way down the trail too... very disturbing, especially if you've never seen a 45yr old man wearing spandex... :eek:

Seems to me that this area has had a reputation for some time - kinda makes you wonder about the cache owner and why a cache was placed here! :eek:

Anyone know the cache owner? Doesn't look very active - 5 caches found and ONE cache hidden - and is not a member of geocachingmaine.org.

Hiram357
08-01-2006, 02:39 PM
Seems to me that this area has had a reputation for some time - kinda makes you wonder about the cache owner and why a cache was placed here! :eek:

Anyone know the cache owner? Doesn't look very active - 5 caches found and ONE cache hidden - and is not a member of geocachingmaine.org.

it wouldn't be a bad spot for a cache if it wasn't for the obvious reasons, but I've had that same thought before bruce, they have been awfully quick about deleting the posts. but then again it could just be someone trying to avoid trouble with their cache. We only know half the story...

team teebow
08-01-2006, 03:48 PM
Okay, so do you all think we have reason enough to have this cache archived? I have never been there and I won't be going there any time soon..you can bet on that!! I just never know what to do...I don't want to step on any ones toes, or be the nag......it is just that my gut feeling is that this cache should be put to rest. If the cache owner is deleting logs and hasn't been that active then why bother with the cache at all???

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 04:05 PM
I went there at 9am thinking it would be an ok time... 6 vehicles were parked there, only 2 were occupied (one with his parking lights on...) so I opted to not go... i went back around noon, there were a few of the same cars still there! there we're a lot more people there though actually using the rest stop for its intended purpose so I decided it would be ok to grab it, after I found the cache within minutes and started making my way out, i found one person was watching me, and 3 other men had recently left their parked vehicles and made their way down the trail too... very disturbing, especially if you've never seen a 45yr old man wearing spandex... :eek:

Guess I could be wrong . . . by the way thanks for that image of the 45 year old wearing spandex . . . and after I finally got the image of Dave1976 with the Speedos out of my mind!:D :eek:

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 04:08 PM
Seems to me that this area has had a reputation for some time - kinda makes you wonder about the cache owner and why a cache was placed here! :eek:

Anyone know the cache owner? Doesn't look very active - 5 caches found and ONE cache hidden - and is not a member of geocachingmaine.org.

I believe it is a couple from the e-mailed discussions I had with them . . . but of course I could be wrong as it is all too easy to hide one's real personality and agenda behind a keyboard.

I honestly do not believe the cache owner put a cache there with malicious intentions . . . I think they simply figured it would be a good spot. I suspect these folks may be just a bit more clueless than me or may not live right in the area and be aware of the activities that go on there. I say this because I can't imagine any really good reason for putting a cache there for malicious reasons.

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 04:10 PM
Okay, so do you all think we have reason enough to have this cache archived? I have never been there and I won't be going there any time soon..you can bet on that!! I just never know what to do...I don't want to step on any ones toes, or be the nag......it is just that my gut feeling is that this cache should be put to rest. If the cache owner is deleting logs and hasn't been that active then why bother with the cache at all???

I'm kind of curious to hear what GPSFun might have to say about this . . . he seems to be the voice of reason (and has helped me fix problems with my caches so he's A-OK in my book).

hollora
08-01-2006, 04:33 PM
Did the cache with my daughter a while ago. We were aware of ffjake's logs and all. Figured we wouldn't be bothered and weren't but there are definitely some concerns in my mind.

If you do not immediately find the cache and overshoot on the trail - there is a very awful meeting place to view. Certainly not a place or site/sight for children. There are folks wandering in the woods - which is creepy and perhaps not friendly for some genders.

This is what I would describe as a rural DOT picnic area. It is not frequently supervised or visited by State workers I presume and therefore folks hang out. This is opposed to Rest Stops in more open areas such as I-95 with Visitor Centers.

Many of these rural areas and even some on I-95 without the Formal Buildings have been closed. I believe because of just the concerns expressed over this area.

When I first read about this cache, I could not believe anyone in or from the area would have placed a cache here as the history of this "rest area" is known far and wide. It is not family friendly and certainly not an area I, as a Native Mainer, want out-of-state folks to remember if they add caching to their visiting activities.

Hope GPS fun looks at the location, along a route which is usually traveled by tourists, and considers this in his decision. It is not the cache container or contents - just the general location.

Has anyone emailed the owner? I think I know at least one person who did with no response. Others?

attroll
08-01-2006, 04:34 PM
I'm kind of curious to hear what GPSFun might have to say about this . . . he seems to be the voice of reason (and has helped me fix problems with my caches so he's A-OK in my book).
As I said I wrote to GPSFUN about this and I will let everyone know as soon as I here from him.

team teebow
08-01-2006, 04:39 PM
Thanks Rik. I will let everyone know what he says in regards to my e-mail also.

WhereRWe?
08-01-2006, 04:40 PM
I believe it is a couple from the e-mailed discussions I had with them . . . but of course I could be wrong as it is all too easy to hide one's real personality and agenda behind a keyboard.

I honestly do not believe the cache owner put a cache there with malicious intentions . . . I think they simply figured it would be a good spot. I suspect these folks may be just a bit more clueless than me or may not live right in the area and be aware of the activities that go on there. I say this because I can't imagine any really good reason for putting a cache there for malicious reasons.

If you've emailed them before, you might want to email them again, encourage them to stop by here and view the concerns people have with their cache, and recommend that they archive it.

Not sure why they wouldn't have done so already if they KNOW there are concerns. :confused: :confused:

Haffy
08-01-2006, 05:09 PM
I too have emailed the owner and expressed my concerns even though I havent been to the cache myself. If it were my cache and I had similar emails and others had concerns about it's location I would have removed it long ago. . When and if I do receive a reply I will be sure to let everyone else know what they had to say about it.

d’76
08-01-2006, 05:10 PM
GPSfun has posted a note to the web page

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4866d860-d475-4be1-addb-8d9be7853f42

becket
08-01-2006, 05:42 PM
GPSfun has posted a note to the web page

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4866d860-d475-4be1-addb-8d9be7853f42

i like what gpsfun wrote and i hope the owners respond. i had no trouble when i went to the cache - it hadn't been out long at that point - but there were 3 cars there in the parking lot, and only one had people in it. as it was raining, i couldn't see who was in the car, but apparently i didn't interest them much! :D i overshot the cache, and the mattress and lawn chair i spotted a little further on were quite disgusting! this place is well known to the local police.

WhereRWe?
08-01-2006, 06:40 PM
GPSfun has posted a note to the web page

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4866d860-d475-4be1-addb-8d9be7853f42

I think we've got one of the best gc.com reviewers in GPSFun! Great guy - and a lot of us have enjoyed meeting him at geocaching events. We're lucky! :D

team teebow
08-01-2006, 06:51 PM
Thanks Rik. I will let everyone know what he says in regards to my e-mail also.

He e-mailed me and said that he posted a note on the cache page. Guess it is a wait and see thing now.

Gpsfun is a great guy. Always helping when needed. We haven't met him yet though.

hollora
08-01-2006, 07:17 PM
GPSfun post is very appropriate and gentle. I agree he is a great reviewer. We have all verbalized well our concerns (both good and bad) about this cache.

If you are at all uncomfortable - after reading it all here and what is left on the cache page - then don't do it - it is not worth that one number.

Hope this great container and items can be moved to a more user friendly spot and I am sure that are loads of cachers who would help the owner if asked.

Kacky
08-01-2006, 07:46 PM
I'd rather fight to take the area back, than pull the cache and hand the park over to those guys. It's not about being gay; it's about public sex. They're not even secretive. One guy even asked if I worked for the Bird Sanctuary, since "I haven't seen you here before". I emailed the State Police and did not get a response. I am going to email once more as a courtesy to let them know that if they don't respond, it's going to be in the Bangor Daily News. We can stay away and write the place off, or we can take it back for the public.

firefighterjake
08-01-2006, 07:52 PM
I'd rather fight to take the area back, than pull the cache and hand the park over to those guys. It's not about being gay; it's about public sex. They're not even secretive. One guy even asked if I worked for the Bird Sanctuary, since "I haven't seen you here before". I emailed the State Police and did not get a response. I am going to email once more as a courtesy to let them know that if they don't respond, it's going to be in the Bangor Daily News. We can stay away and write the place off, or we can take it back for the public.

I agree with you 100% . . . to me it's all about using an area for a purpose that it was not designed to do (i.e. be a place where travelers could stop and stretch their legs, walk their dogs or use the restroom) and now it's simply a place to hook up . . . and like you for me it's not about the sexual orientation . . . I would feel the same if it was folks using the area to buy drugs.

Sad to say what will most likely happen in this case as has happened in other places similar to this is that the DOT will simply erect barricades or bulldoze the place in and therefore everyone loses.

Beach Comber
08-01-2006, 07:53 PM
I'd rather fight to take the area back, than pull the cache and hand the park over to those guys. It's not about being gay; it's about public sex. They're not even secretive. One guy even asked if I worked for the Bird Sanctuary, since "I haven't seen you here before". I emailed the State Police and did not get a response. I am going to email once more as a courtesy to let them know that if they don't respond, it's going to be in the Bangor Daily News. We can stay away and write the place off, or we can take it back for the public.

I couldn't have said it better Kacky! I didn't say anything initially because I was looking for the words to say that is not about being gay at all. Well done! I hope the police respond. I am always disappointed when law enforcement doesn't demonstrate what seems to be reasonable attentiveness to an issue.

Hiram357
08-01-2006, 09:29 PM
The sad part is that if it's not there, it's someplace else... and then there will be another ruined public spot because of this kinda stuff. It happens all over, rest stops, parks, shopping malls. it's not even safe to pull over to a busy rest area to go to the bathroom anymore. :mad:

Beach Comber
08-01-2006, 09:58 PM
The sad part is that if it's not there, it's someplace else... and then there will be another ruined public spot because of this kinda stuff. It happens all over, rest stops, parks, shopping malls. it's not even safe to pull over to a busy rest area to go to the bathroom anymore. :mad:

That's right - and if/when you have kids, it will become that much more apparent!

Hiram357
08-01-2006, 10:07 PM
That's right - and if/when you have kids, it will become that much more apparent!

I can only imagine, I don't want to see the stuff to begin with, I don't even want to think of what it would be like to take a kid there and have to explain somethin like that, or even if somethin would happen. :(

brdad
08-02-2006, 05:37 AM
I feel more against these caches for the most part, and then on the other hand I wonder if it's any different than other dangerous caches. There are several caches in Central Park, NYC for one (I know a geocaching cop who has taken people to get these at night). And then there are the rock climbing caches, deep water hydro caches, and others. But still, I'd rather not see the Fitz type caches around.

What really gets me is you know if someone complained about someone sneaking through these woods to get a cache, there's a good chance the authorioties would be all over us, and yet they seem to do little about the other behaviors going on.

Kacky
08-02-2006, 09:14 AM
What really gets me is you know if someone complained about someone sneaking through these woods to get a cache, there's a good chance the authorioties would be all over us, and yet they seem to do little about the other behaviors going on.
Pretty ironic!

It is a risk; a rest stop next to Lake Auburn is closed for this very reason. It went to the next level, which is that the cruising attracted predators. Some sick person decided to bait and kill a gay man and knew right where to find one.

I think it has reached a point where the risk of it closing is not an issue, since the place can't be used anyway.

Kacky
08-02-2006, 10:31 AM
This thread reminded me to follow up with the State Police and Mr. McCausland responded that the MDOT is in charge of the rest area. Should I keep it going, or would you folks like to join forces on a group letter/petition?

Haffy
08-02-2006, 12:07 PM
Well I did indeed email the cache owner about this cache and I might have overstepped my boundaries with a certain remark that I made and I did return another email and did apologize for the inference that I made against this individual. But here is the original email that I sent and then the response that I got.

"It would seem from all the complaints that have
been logged about the
individuals that seem to be hanging around this
cache area that the
sensible thing to do would be to remove it don't
you think? I am
referring to your so called Rest Area cache Fitz
cache is it called?
Unless of course you have something in common
with these types of
people. I mean come on now this is supposed to be
a family friendly
activity and to subject younger kids to this type
of scene is quite
uncalled for. Just my opinion. Haffy


This is the response that I got in return.

"I will clearly post a note on the cache page so
that people are aware.
Regardless if I have something in common with
"those type of people"
that has nothing to do with the cache and saying
something like that is
not with the spirit of caching. Instead of
bringing your concern you
instead try and say something negative about a
group of people and
myself (and just in case you're wondering I am
straight).
Fitz42


I'm not so sure if this is the type of response I was hoping for and it seems just putting out a notice to people about it is not in tune with what I think we want to see but I'll let you all decide.

I guess I was a little too blunt in my original response and like I said I did apologize for making that part of my statement. "Open mouth and insert foot" I seem to be doing that alot lately.:( But again do we really need this type of cache placed knowing what goes on here? I was hoping that the cache owner ,after reading a couple of the posts on the location and goings on at the site that they would have had some common sense and removed it but I guess they prefer to just give notice to whomever decides to go there to make their own choices,which I suppose is within the guidlines so to speak.

hollora
08-02-2006, 01:04 PM
At least Haffy got a response from the cache owner....that's more than someone else I know who wrote them. As of today, they still have not revised the info on this cache. If that was their position they should have jumped on the revision before responding to you. In fact it looks like they haven't been on the GC.com web site since 7/17.

As for kacky's question - I think a nicely composed letter to DOT is appropriate. They should clean up the junk in that rest area and request the police (state, local/as this is in Ellsworth, and county) to patrol more frequently. Perhaps the local State Representative should be invited on a Geocaching trip.

attroll
08-02-2006, 01:33 PM
After reading all this and also hearing from other individuals about this I have sent the following email to the cache owner. If he does not see it fit that the cache be removed after my email then I hate to say this but he is not a responsible cache owner.




To whom it may concern

I would like to point out that the cache you placed called “The Fitz Cache” is a scary cache for people to go to and from what I have read and heard from other cachers that have gone to that cache is not very good. I would like to personally request that you remove it or relocate it. I think you know what I am referring to. If not I am referring to the gay activity being done there. I do not think it is appropriate for a male or any other person to go looking for a cache and finding another male individual masturbating in the area. I have nothing against gay people. However if my 16 year old son were to go and do your cache by himself I don’t think it would be in very safe conditions. I do not think it would be appropriate for him to do and any young kid to be in that area looking for the cache. Caching is a sport for all young and old and this spot I feel is not a proper spot to put a cache in because of the activity going on in that area. I am requesting that you please move this cache to another location. I can not make you or force you to do so. I am asking for to please move it to another location. The choice is yours.

Thank you very much

team teebow
08-03-2006, 12:32 AM
Thanks for all of your support on this cache issue. I think we should bring a state representitive or maybe the local police on a cache hunt there and see what they think or how they feel. I can't seem to put into words what I would like to say...all I keep saying is that it just does not seem right for a cache to be there. Actualy everything the rest of you have been saying is pretty much how I feel. Some very good points on this.

attroll
08-03-2006, 01:01 AM
Thanks for all of your support on this cache issue. I think we should bring a state representitive or maybe the local police on a cache hunt there and see what they think or how they feel. I can't seem to put into words what I would like to say...all I keep saying is that it just does not seem right for a cache to be there. Actualy everything the rest of you have been saying is pretty much how I feel. Some very good points on this.
I don't know what bringing a state representitive or maybe the local police to the place would acomplish. They have not say so if a cache gets placed there or not. Maybe bringing them there would let them see the problem though and maybe the area would get cleaned up.

MoxieMan
08-03-2006, 07:51 AM
I found a cache at a very similar location near downtown Concord, NH the other day. I kept my cell phone to my ear to look busy so I wouldn't be "bothered".

team teebow
08-03-2006, 10:40 AM
I don't know what bringing a state representitive or maybe the local police to the place would acomplish. They have not say so if a cache gets placed there or not. Maybe bringing them there would let them see the problem though and maybe the area would get cleaned up.

I meant that like you said, maybe if these people could see what is gong on at rest stops that maybe something would be done. I highly doubt it though. It is just a scary world out there and you never know what you might be walking into. It's a shame.

Kacky
08-03-2006, 11:07 AM
Whoever you bring out there will be asking themselves 2 questions. 1. Will it hurt my career if I don't do something about this? 2. Will it help my career if I do?

If a State Rep or a cop has a stake in it, they'll help. If it looks like it's going to be a lot of trouble for not much gain, they will ignore you. I think a news reporter would see it as a way to create a sensational story and get themselves in line for an award, so that's why I'm planning to go to the press with it if I get no response from MDOT. I'll either go to the BDN or one of the TV stations. I won't bother with the Ellsworth American because I don't think they'll do a story that reflects badly on business and tourism. I'd do it myself but I have no outlet in that region. Cynical, huh?

The other route is what some citizens are doing in other cities, which is to show up with cameras and start taking movies and stills, and tell the men we're delivering the pictures to the press ourselves.

Kacky
08-03-2006, 11:56 AM
I wish we could go back to editing our own messages! I just want to add that I feel bad about it because the men were polite on the day that I was there. One guy even stopped to talk about the weather. But if I had run into anyone having sex, I would have been pretty upset. And if I were a man, I would not have felt safe at all. Also the privy seems to be a message drop and I wouldn't want a child to read that stuff.

J_Cyr
08-03-2006, 05:16 PM
In another responce to a thread by haffy, I will post my $.02 here.

I just read the forum about this on geocaching fourms. I agree, a cache like that should be taken away, replaced, or atleast disabled. Without reading the logs to that cache, others wouldn't know what to be aware of, but back to the point, why the hell is there a cache here... Maybe the owner did not know about these "activities" here, but if he did that's just wrong in so many counts.

A new thread? http://www.geocachingmaine.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1584 (http://www.geocachingmaine.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1584)

GeoMaine
08-04-2006, 01:25 AM
Before this gets MORE carried away, I'd like to make a suggestion? Everyone just needs take a moment, take a deep breath and remove their PERSONAL BELIEFS from their posts for this topic before submitting them. Going to ANY place for a geocache where people are unexpectedly and openly engaging in sexual acts are hopefully the ONLY issue people are having, not the sexual orientation of the people that meet here for it. A hotel window cache or a cache under the bed of a married couple should be no less disturbing.

To reference this cache as ‘bad’ and also to mention the cache owner by name is completely uncalled for. They haven’t signed into their account for two weeks now and have only found five caches. They hid this in the middle of May, probably way before any of this would have been obvious. They also could have hid it in April as well and waited to submit it to geocaching.com – why this ‘topic’ ever got posted to the groundspeak forums is beyond me. Now there are STUPID posts regarding mosquitoes of all things! A simple e-mail to gpsfun and it would have been over and done with, even though he was already well aware of the situation.

Here at geocachingmaine? Posting a simple ‘Hey, you might want to check out this cache listing before you go do it… just in case’ note and locking the topic on this site would have been the way to go.

I hope all of you are ready to stand behind TAT (no matter what!) if someone comes along and inadvertently does something similar as to what Haffy just did. I'm sure this geocacher is equally as blindsided as TAT would be right about now?

J_Cyr
08-04-2006, 01:36 AM
... There is now 2 topics on this and if you read what Attroll said in the other forum --- you might want to read the whole story before basising your opinion...your not making much sense.

attroll
08-04-2006, 01:37 AM
To reference this cache as ‘bad’ and also to mention the cache owner by name is completely uncalled for. They haven’t signed into their account for two weeks.
It does not matter whether they have signed into there account in two weeks or not. They have been replying to emails from cachers within the last week. So they know the problem but continue to ignore it. We have gotten GPSFUN involved in it and and I am sure it will be taken care of.

GeoMaine
08-04-2006, 01:53 AM
What I am saying is that gpsfun has already known about this since May 22 and has been following it since then. It's now August and it's getting rehashed times two; you have less gotten GPSFUN involved than you have actually second guessed him.

E-mails or not; if I was that geocacher, I would certainly be 'ignoring' some of the comments I've been reading, lest I go and think that there are way too many ignorant people in Maine.

If ANY of you are thinking that you don't have a friend, child, co-worker or a fellow geocacher among you that is gay or lesbian, it's time to dig yourself out of the 1700's!

attroll
08-04-2006, 02:00 AM
What I am saying is that gpsfun has already known about this since May 22 and has been following it since then. It's now August and it's getting rehashed times two; you have less gotten GPSFUN involved than you have actually second guessed him.

E-mails or not; if I was that geocacher, I would certainly be 'ignoring' some of the comments I've been reading, lest I go and think that there are way too many ignorant people in Maine.

If ANY of you are thinking that you don't have a friend, child, co-worker or a fellow geocacher among you that is gay or lesbian, it's time to dig yourself out of the 1700's!
Wake up and smell the roses here GeoMaine. This is not about being gay. No one is bashing gay people. It is about doing indecent things at this particular rest stop. You seem to be reading between the lines and find hidden messages that are not there.

J_Cyr
08-04-2006, 02:04 AM
AGAIN... this is not about someone having lesbian or gay friends, family or whatnot, it's the fact of the matter of what goes on here and people that don't want to be around these sexual acts in the woods. It's not bashing gays and lesbians, but do you see straight people going at it in the woods when you are looking for a cache? No.
You probably don't have kids, but one would imagine you wouldn't want your kids looking for a cache and saying "Look dad!" Think outside the box for a change.
Don't worry about GPSFUN, he is old enough to take care of himself.
Who are you calling ignorant, your not even reading whats going on here are you?

GeoMaine
08-04-2006, 02:08 AM
Rick, you probably should go through all of the posts and actually READ them (not just skim them) before you make a blanket statement like that? Not just the last page. ALL of them. I have and there are many examples.

Better yet, just delete both my posts, it's immediately obvious I'm not ever going to be welcome here with an opinion that isn't shared by the masses.

attroll
08-04-2006, 02:19 AM
Rick, you probably should go through all of the posts and actually READ them (not just skim them) before you make a blanket statement like that? Not just the last page. ALL of them. I have and there are many examples.

Better yet, just delete both my posts, it's immediately obvious I'm not ever going to be welcome here with an opinion that isn't shared by the masses.
Enough of this. I am not going to keep this going. I will leave your posts up. I will not reply anymore. It seems like you are just trying to lead me on and I fell victim to it for a bit but I am not going to fall for it again. Ta Ta

GeoMaine
08-04-2006, 04:29 AM
You probably don't have kids, but one would imagine you wouldn't want your kids looking for a cache and saying "Look dad!"

Quite the assumption but honestly, I'm very much used to it. Actually, I do have a daughter. She's six. I already have to explain all too many things to her, us surprising a couple that are having sex on said cache trail would honestly NOT be on that list I want to have to get to anytime soon. In fact, I'm pretty good with never. : )

As to what that couple was actually comprised of? That's the part that wouldn't bother me in the least.

firefighterjake
08-04-2006, 08:03 AM
I feel more against these caches for the most part, and then on the other hand I wonder if it's any different than other dangerous caches. There are several caches in Central Park, NYC for one (I know a geocaching cop who has taken people to get these at night). And then there are the rock climbing caches, deep water hydro caches, and others. But still, I'd rather not see the Fitz type caches around.

What really gets me is you know if someone complained about someone sneaking through these woods to get a cache, there's a good chance the authorioties would be all over us, and yet they seem to do little about the other behaviors going on.

I'm still unsure if I would call this a "dangerous" cache . . . I was uncomfortable and that "little voice in my head" (no, not the one yelling RedRum, RedRum . . . the other little voice ;) :D ) kept telling me that something was going on besides just a few folks taking a break.

My personal take on the whole thing is that there should at the very least be a sticky note or note in the description alluding to the fact that there may be some questionable activities going on here . . . the same words of warning I would expect to see if I was to do a cache has other elements that folks should be aware of (i.e. nearby poison ivy, steep cliff, abandoned well, etc.)

firefighterjake
08-04-2006, 08:07 AM
. . . A hotel window cache or a cache under the bed of a married couple should be no less disturbing . . .



Hmmm . . . you can't be talking about any caches under my bed since I've been married now close to 10 years and about the only thing disturbing under our bed are the dust bunnies . . . well that and my wife has about a bazillion half-completed puzzle books which she has accumulated over the years. ;) :D

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
08-04-2006, 08:19 AM
I'm still unsure if I would call this a "dangerous" cache . . . I was uncomfortable and that "little voice in my head" (no, not the one yelling RedRum, RedRum . . . the other little voice ;) :D ) kept telling me that something was going on besides just a few folks taking a break.

My personal take on the whole thing is that there should at the very least be a sticky note or note in the description alluding to the fact that there may be some questionable activities going on here . . . the same words of warning I would expect to see if I was to do a cache has other elements that folks should be aware of (i.e. nearby poison ivy, steep cliff, abandoned well, etc.)

Should there be a warning for the lightpost micro at the Wal-Mart parking lot saying its not kid safe. After all there have been several abductions. I agree that I don't want to see the "activity" that is alledged to have happened at the Fitz cache but placing a "attribute" to warn others of such behavior...hmmm. Your cache on top of the mountain,,,one of the first you placed FFJ,,,,should have a warning that there may be partying and "other" activity happening there. That could be a rowdy situation if you arrived unawares. Any cache that is remote should then come with that warning.
It should be implied that anytime someone ventures into areas unknown that they should expect the unexpected. Using the general rules of, "Never put yourself in a dangerous situation." and "Trust your instincts." should keep you out of most trouble. Putting that kind of information in the cache description should not be necessary.

firefighterjake
08-04-2006, 08:22 AM
Before this gets MORE carried away, I'd like to make a suggestion? Everyone just needs take a moment, take a deep breath and remove their PERSONAL BELIEFS from their posts for this topic before submitting them. Going to ANY place for a geocache where people are unexpectedly and openly engaging in sexual acts are hopefully the ONLY issue people are having, not the sexual orientation of the people that meet here for it. A hotel window cache or a cache under the bed of a married couple should be no less disturbing.

To reference this cache as ‘bad’ and also to mention the cache owner by name is completely uncalled for. They haven’t signed into their account for two weeks now and have only found five caches. They hid this in the middle of May, probably way before any of this would have been obvious. They also could have hid it in April as well and waited to submit it to geocaching.com – why this ‘topic’ ever got posted to the groundspeak forums is beyond me. Now there are STUPID posts regarding mosquitoes of all things! A simple e-mail to gpsfun and it would have been over and done with, even though he was already well aware of the situation.

Here at geocachingmaine? Posting a simple ‘Hey, you might want to check out this cache listing before you go do it… just in case’ note and locking the topic on this site would have been the way to go.

I hope all of you are ready to stand behind TAT (no matter what!) if someone comes along and inadvertently does something similar as to what Haffy just did. I'm sure this geocacher is equally as blindsided as TAT would be right about now?



I have to say I agree with some points made here . . . it did seem that all of a sudden folks were being whipped into a frenzy about this cache even though it's been operating since May or so. It almost seemed like we were about ready to grab the pitchforks and flaming torches.

I imagine these folks may feel rather blindsided by the sudden barrage of flaming e-mails and in one way I feel bad for them . . . I said my piece a long time ago and after I said what I needed to say about deleting logs without notifying folks I moved on. That said, as others have mentioned, these folks have (or should be) receiving regular e-mails that clearly show a pattern where folks were surprised to find out what has been going on here, many felt uncomfortable and there are few positive comments . . . I know these folks are new, and maybe it's just me, but after receiving more than a few negative comments about the activities going on here I think I would consider archiving this cache myself.

I would hope that folks are more upset about the sexual activity rather than the sexual preference that is occurring here. Honestly, I've done a few caches in areas where a couple is engaged in some activities that are one or two steps below being illegal (at least in public) and I didn't particularly like it then either . . . but the main difference for me has been seeing a single set of lovers versus five or six folks looking for love. Maybe it's just me and my prudish Puritanical ways . . .

I'm not saying I like this cache . . . and in fact quite honestly this was probably one of the worse caches that I've done . . . but that's my opinion.

I was more upset that the cache owners arbitrarily deleted my log entry without me knowing . . . although the issue of other geocachers knowing about the area was important enough to me personally that I sent GPSFun an e-mail about the cache and he put up a note in the log entries which I though was well worded. For me personally, that was pretty much the end of my involvement with this cache . . . although I keep it on my watchlist just to see what other folks think of the cache.

Mainelyroses
08-04-2006, 09:30 AM
[quote=Trezurs*-R-*Fun] Your cache on top of the mountain,,,one of the first you placed FFJ,,,,should have a warning that there may be partying and "other" activity happening there. That could be a rowdy situation if you arrived unawares. Any cache that is remote should then come with that warning.

Maybe you didn't read the description on FFJ's cache...but he clearly states that it has been known to be a "partying" place.
A place where people occasionally have parties is a far cry from a place where people meet for sexual encounters.

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
08-04-2006, 10:48 AM
[quote=Trezurs*-R-*Fun] Your cache on top of the mountain,,,one of the first you placed FFJ,,,,should have a warning that there may be partying and "other" activity happening there. That could be a rowdy situation if you arrived unawares. Any cache that is remote should then come with that warning.

Maybe you didn't read the description on FFJ's cache...but he clearly states that it has been known to be a "partying" place.
A place where people occasionally have parties is a far cry from a place where people meet for sexual encounters.

I clearly read it,,,but it doesn't have an "Attribute" associated with it. Where in the description does it say its not "kid friendly." That is my point, we're adults and everyplace we go we should understand that we may encounter something we may not feel comfortable with. The seperation you suggest; "...partying being a far cry from sexual encounters"....LOL..LOL..LOL.

If you think I''m picking on that cache, your wrong. You could say the same for all my caches. The point I'm making is that even going to Wal-Mart, you have to be aware of your surroundings. But a Wal-mart lamp post cache would not need an "Attribute" saying its not kid friendly because there have been abductions in the past.

Cache On!!!!

firefighterjake
08-04-2006, 12:32 PM
Should there be a warning for the lightpost micro at the Wal-Mart parking lot saying its not kid safe. After all there have been several abductions. I agree that I don't want to see the "activity" that is alledged to have happened at the Fitz cache but placing a "attribute" to warn others of such behavior...hmmm. Your cache on top of the mountain,,,one of the first you placed FFJ,,,,should have a warning that there may be partying and "other" activity happening there. That could be a rowdy situation if you arrived unawares. Any cache that is remote should then come with that warning.
It should be implied that anytime someone ventures into areas unknown that they should expect the unexpected. Using the general rules of, "Never put yourself in a dangerous situation." and "Trust your instincts." should keep you out of most trouble. Putting that kind of information in the cache description should not be necessary.



I guess the difference for me is that I have yet to see a single person who has visited the Thrill Cache (much less any of my other caches) mention that they were uncomfortable, that there were people there doing questionable things (i.e. drinking, drugging, cruising, etc.) versus this cache where many, many cachers have mentioned seeing this questionable activity.

To me it comes down to a frequency issue in these cases -- if the problems reported at the Fitz cache were rare then I would say an attribute or even mentioning it in the description would not be necessary, but when nearly every single cacher (or it seems as though every other cacher) has mentioned folks cruising the woods and following them into the woods then I would say it may be indicative of a problem and not just a cacher who is imaginging things or making a mountain out of the proverbial molehill.

As Rose mentioned I did mention in the Thrill cache description (and I know you're only using this as a possible example and not that you have a problem with this cache . . . especially since I actually got the coords right on this one!) that it is possible that folks may be up on the mountain partying -- although in fact I have yet to be up there and see any folks partying, drugging, drinking, cruising, etc. . . . and I will say I have met many folks up there who have hiked up the hill, rode their ATV there, driven up in their pick-up, etc. I added that tag-line just in case folks happen to be doing a cache on a Friday or Saturday evening and just in case there happens to be a party going on. Again, I have yet to see a log mentioning any bad encounters or experiences.

Again, to me it boils down to the frequency of the problem. If say the fictional "Lover's Getaway Spot" has a cache placed at it and cachers often report interrupting young lovers in passionate acts then I would say that a word of warning (maybe even an attribute) might be necessary . . . at the very least I (as a responsible cache hider/owner) would want to post a word of warning since many folks have young children and many folks don't really want to see that type of thing) . . . and if I felt the problem was serious enough I would consider archiving that cache. If, on the otherhand, LGS cache was more hype than reality and/or there were no or an infrequent reports of questionable activity I might not feel compelled to type up some words of warning (of course the definition of "infrequent" is subjective but I would base it on the time the cache is at a site and the number of cachers who have found/looked for the cache).

I do agree with you on one point however -- any cache can be dangerous in the right -- or perhaps I should say wrong -- situation depending on the time of day, location, etc. It is a matter of balancing that risk against one's skills, knowledge, etc. As an example . . . choosing to not do Hole in the Wall at 11 at night in the pitch black after it has rained all evening is probably a good decision. ;) Even simple caches can turn bad . . . i.e. grabbing a dalmatian alongside busy Rt. 1 could prove deadly if a child were to excitedly run into the road to be the first in the group to find the cache (although one would hope that most normal cachers -- OK, maybe a bad word choice with the word "normal") -- would realize the inherent danger of the traffic without being told since it should be pretty obvious (although I have done caches where I have been warned about the traffic . . . and I have at one cache even warned folks to be careful where they park due to the traffic).

OK, enough rambling . . . I'm not sure if I'm even making sense anymore.

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
08-04-2006, 03:37 PM
.... To me it comes down to a frequency issue in these cases -- if the problems reported at the Fitz cache were rare then I would say an attribute or even mentioning it in the description would not be necessary, but when nearly every single cacher (or it seems as though every other cacher) has mentioned folks cruising the woods and following them into the woods then I would say it may be indicative of a problem and not just a cacher who is imaginging things or making a mountain out of the proverbial molehill.




I've read the logs for the Fitz cache and while it doesn't sound like its a place I want to be (...thats just wrong in my book) I don't see this "frequency" issue. There are easily as many "good" remarks as there are "neutral" and "bad" remarks. I've read the cache description for the first time and someone even included a "bookmark" suggesting this cache as a place to visit. The attributes say that its not available 24/7 but it does say its kid friendly. Maybe so during the day light hours?:confused:

My question is, what "attribute" or disclaimer should be associated with the cache that would tell people that they are in MORE danger here than any other rest area in the United States?? What danger are they in?? Has anybody been accosted? Is what the "bad" people are doing against the law?

My wife will NOT stop at any rest area on her way to visit family in Presque Isle unless I'm with her. The implied danger of these areas are universal, why is this one to be treated any differently than every other rest area?? I've heard the what ifs; maybe a young child is with them or what not. I guess as a parent, if I pulled up and saw this activity I would put my childs safety and consideration first and simply leave. I wouldn't continue on to the cache. On the flip side of the coin, I've had to explain to my 4 year old while shopping in Augusta why a man was wearing a dress. There are no signs along my way into Augusta saying that my children may see questionable "things." These things happen and while I don't wish to be part of these alternate lifestyles how can I be assured they will never "see" them. Heck, I don't want to see them. Are we not responsible for ourselves anymore? Just because someone placed a cache somewhere does it mean that we should throw all our "street sense" out the window and assume things will go perfectly. What if someone pulled into your "Thrill cache" and the people partying were rowdy and decided to fight. Even if it was only one time in 25 years, because of it being infrequent it isn't just as dangerous to the individual at that moment? I remember your cache description saying this is a party place but did you say be careful?? Shouldn't a cacher be when entering this area? It was implied when you said a party area and it should be implied when someone says rest area.

The frequency means what in reference to the Fitz Cache?? That a cachers chance of being grossed out are increased, big deal. So then it becomes the cache owners fault for not protecting cachers from being "grossed out." While I don't condone, partake or even want to hear of the "questionable" activity that may be happening there, why should this cache be treated any differently than any other cache?

Cache On!!!

team teebow
08-04-2006, 09:13 PM
Okay I was the one that started this thread and by no means did I mean it to start arguments over what sexual preference some one is. I wanted to hear the opinions of other cachers about the cache. That is all.....

Rik - I apologize..I didn't realize this thread would turn into what it has.

Team Teebow 2

Kacky
08-04-2006, 09:28 PM
My question is, what "attribute" or disclaimer should be associated with the cache that would tell people that they are in MORE danger here than any other rest area in the United States?? What danger are they in?? Has anybody been accosted? Is what the "bad" people are doing against the law?



You aren't in any danger here, but you & your kids might have to see activities, and it does seem to happen daily.

attroll
08-05-2006, 10:09 AM
Sorry about closing the thread but I think it has gotten off topic from what it was originally intended. No fault of anyone in particular. I just do not want it getting to the point that it is a hindrance.