View Full Version : Is it coming to this?



Haffy
02-06-2007, 01:31 AM
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=155484&pid=2699578&st=0&#entry2699578

WhereRWe?
02-06-2007, 07:34 AM
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=155484&pid=2699578&st=0&#entry2699578

Sheesh! I never did like "urban microcaches".

I followed the link to this story (http://www.wmur.com/news/10937311/detail.html), and saw this:

"One of the suspicious packages took the form of a tiny box wrapped in duct tape. It caused quite a stir when someone found it attached to an electrical unit behind Shaw’s Supermarket Sunday."

So, I can't really fault the local authorities. Geocachers are killing the sport themselves. Some are just so consumed by "the numbers", and of being a TOP geocacher, that they're placing small/micros EVERYWHERE (visit Tennessee if you don't believe me). Our caching experiences on our trip along the east coast last summer, and the proliferation of meaningless micros in Maine are the main reason we're not caching as much as we used to. Walking up to a stop sign or guard rail just isn't what we like about caching.

brdad
02-06-2007, 07:54 AM
I think that's where I was headed in the Boston thread.

It's not just micros, but any caches hidden where a finder may be seen and considered a possible spot to sabotage. Unfortunately, the large percentage of these types of caches are urban micros. While some people are concerned with caches in wetlands or cemeteries, I fear for those that could drastically change caching as we know it, or end it.

People hide these thinking it's just a film canister, that is doesn't look like a bomb... Does anyone know what a bomb looks like? In reality, it can look like anything the maker wants it to look like.

I'd like to post a list of caches, but I don't want to single anyone out. Instead I wonder if anyone who has hidden an urban cache will answer this:

Is it in an area or way that could be considered suspicious?
Is it on private property?
Did you get permission?
Were enough people that manage the property informed in case someone reported the cache suspicious?

My only urbanish cache is Old 470. I don't think it's a prime suspicious target since not many gather there at once, but we all know suspicious people often have great imaginations. It's on town owned property, and the only permission I got was a "ya, whatever..." from someone in the office. Probably not the permission I should have gotten, but it was a different era then. I probably would try a litle harder next time.

I would really like to see many of these caches reconsidered. I'd hate to see a couple nice urban caches banned because of a few ill placed ones. You can't expect every finder to be as stealthy as you may have been when you hid it. Assume they won't when you hide caches.

And to reinforce Bruce's statement, I am glad they check into such reports of activity. They are just protecting us after all. If I saw someone hiding a box under a lamp post I would be suspicious too, and would not be pleased if the autorities didn't pursue my reporting it.

Haffy
02-06-2007, 08:54 AM
Here is a follow up to Bruce's link.

http://www.cityofportsmouth.com/POLICE/press020407.htm

d’76
02-06-2007, 09:03 AM
And so it begins.....:(

This is how it starts and then the future of caching get dark. I guess I wont run right out and buy that 60csx.:(

Hiram357
02-06-2007, 09:03 AM
My only urbanish cache is Old 470. I don't think it's a prime suspicious target since not many gather there at once, but we all know suspicious people often have great imaginations. It's on town owned property, and the only permission I got was a "ya, whatever..." from someone in the office. Probably not the permission I should have gotten, but it was a different era then. I probably would try a litle harder next time.

yeah, but I drive by there all the time and there's usually someone there, that obviously arent geocaching, but are climbing all over the darned thing checking it out and tryin to take it apart...

This story makes me kinda nervous, and has me thinking about taking out my caches in the public eye.

I too think this whole thing seems a little drastic, but how long will it be until a terrorist gets a bright idea to hide a bomb as a geocache...

Hiram357
02-06-2007, 09:04 AM
Here is a follow up to Bruce's link.

http://www.cityofportsmouth.com/POLICE/press020407.htm


they make geocaching seem so evil. :(

Haffy
02-06-2007, 09:11 AM
I think education is the best tool we can all use now to make sure that all new cachers are aware of the ramifications that will take place if we continue to place caches in places that will call attention to them and also placing them in areas where we don't have permission. I have noticed a profileration of micro caches all across the state and hope we don't go the way of other states. In lew of recent developements in Boston and other cities where bomb squads have been called out because ill thought out placement of caches we should be aware of these things being brought up.

d’76
02-06-2007, 09:19 AM
I think education is the best tool we can all use now to make sure that all new cachers are aware of the ramifications that will take place if we continue to place caches in places that will call attention to them and also placing them in areas where we don't have permission. I have noticed a profileration of micro caches all across the state and hope we don't go the way of other states. In lew of recent developements in Boston and other cities where bomb squads have been called out because ill thought out placement of caches we should be aware of these things being brought up.


Bomb squad was called to a cache just north of old town last fall. It is very close to home.

I certainly think this could be a discussion that could make positive changes in the state

brdad
02-06-2007, 09:34 AM
Bomb squad was called to a cache just north of old town last fall. It is very close to home.

I certainly think this could be a discussion that could make positive changes in the state

Yes, and that was a relatively scare free location. Imagine the same thing happening at one of our malls or a downtown office building. Remember the cache at the Federal Building in Bangor? That always made me wonder. Then assume nobody by gc.com and us knows that it's a cache.

I agree education is key. But there is a fine line there. And not just the newbies, how do we convince the avid urban cache hiders that what they are doing may not be in the best interest of the sport? The cache I mentioned above was placed by someone who has been caching longer than I have.

Haffy
02-06-2007, 09:41 AM
they make geocaching seem so evil. :(

On the contrary, I think the ill-informed,ignorant and ill-concieved notions of other geocachers who are placing these caches is the REAL evil and not the police. I am glad they are doing their job.

d’76
02-06-2007, 09:46 AM
On the contrary, I think the ill-informed,ignorant and ill-concieved notions of other geocachers who are placing these caches is the REAL evil and not the police.

unfortunatly, I agree :(

Haffy
02-06-2007, 10:12 AM
Slate provided this link to another article in today's newspaper.

http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/02062007/nhnews-ph-p-scavenger.html

MacFriends
02-06-2007, 11:50 AM
We just returned from eight days of caching in southern Georgia and northern Florida. We logged about 150 caches to reach a new milestone for Macfriends. In this area we came across so many "mindless caches" under light poles, in the bushes, on electrical boxes, on gas and water pipes. These were all in high muggle areas such as at gas stations, in front of convenience stores, Home Depot, Lowes and on private property - what's the point. Other caches we found were ammo boxes that just seemed to dropped in the brush near the side of the road or a short way down a trail. these may or may not have been on private property. We felt very uncomfortable in most of these areas. It's these kinds of thoughtless caches that are going to become a problem in the future. I was tempted to send a copy of Brdad's posting of Rules of Geocaching but we already have one of these geocachers pissed-off at us so we have refrained for now. We keep saying that the best caching in the country is in New England and especially in Maine - let's keep it that way.

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
02-06-2007, 11:52 AM
On the contrary, I think the ill-informed,ignorant and ill-concieved notions of other geocachers who are placing these caches is the REAL evil and not the police. I am glad they are doing their job.


Haffy, when you have a minute tell me how you feel about those "other cachers." ;) ;)

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
02-06-2007, 12:19 PM
Has anyone here read Richard Preston's, "The Cobra Event"? Great fictionalized story of bio-terrorism. He also wrote "The Hot Zone", which was made into a movie. "The Cobra Event" is even scarier.

All this talk about containers and urban micros made me think of it. The concerns here regarding geocaching highlight points made in the book.


------

I think Geocaching contains alot of elements that alarm police.

Secrecy, people stalking around trying not to look conspicuous while searching for a cache.
High tech gadgetry, even though its becoming more common place, people walking around with GPS's, handheld computers and such do draw attention, especially if they are engaged in being secretive.
The cache itself. Some experienced and well intentioned cachers put lots of thought into concealing caches, urban or not. No matter where that container is hidden it will raise suspicion by muggles if discovered. The fact that the container is camoflagued would indicate that it was not suppose to be found making it all the more suspicious.I believe GeocachingMaine.org has taken appropriate steps by organizing and creating a strong support base for geocaching. The question I now have is, "How do we get out the message that geocaching is safe and this is how we can make it better?"

Beach Comber
02-06-2007, 12:33 PM
they make geocaching seem so evil. :(

I don't see it as evil. I think they just want people to understand that this behavior is not insignificant. Unfortunately, it is hard for people to tell the difference from geocaching fun and potentially placing something harmful. It is unfortunate, but it really doesn't surprise me - it has just been a matter of time.

They are indeed, doing their job. It reminds of the daily fire alarm pulls that are happening at my son's school. Though it is very unlikely that there is a problem I would be upset if appropriate attention was not paid to the situation.

Give me the pile of sticks at the end of a great walk in the woods!!

Beach Comber
02-06-2007, 12:35 PM
The question I now have is, "How do we get out the message that geocaching is safe and this is how we can make it better?"

I agree - here is an opportunity for sure.

Cache Maine
02-06-2007, 01:05 PM
I agree - here is an opportunity for sure.

I think our board can help with this. If we work together, further education may be the key.

Hiram357
02-06-2007, 04:07 PM
I don't see it as evil. I think they just want people to understand that this behavior is not insignificant. Unfortunately, it is hard for people to tell the difference from geocaching fun and potentially placing something harmful. It is unfortunate, but it really doesn't surprise me - it has just been a matter of time.

They are indeed, doing their job. It reminds of the daily fire alarm pulls that are happening at my son's school. Though it is very unlikely that there is a problem I would be upset if appropriate attention was not paid to the situation.

Give me the pile of sticks at the end of a great walk in the woods!!

I meant that statement more along the lines from the article making geocaching look evil, I know they're doing their jobs, but the writeup makes it look like a secret society of anarchists, they have the hotline at the bottom to report caching activity and everything...

Beach Comber
02-06-2007, 04:43 PM
Perhaps there is also opportunity to lobby GC.com to revise some of the placement guidelines. Maybe they could ask for more detail in where the cache is located and how it is hidden. If they knew that it was, let's say, in a light pole, etc. perhaps they could deny the placement. That is an aspect that probably should be reviewed as well, it is unrealistic to believe that thousands and thousands of cachers will revise their hiding style based on articles in the paper. But then again, the potential fine of $1000 or being charged with a felony is not something I care to be charged with - maybe that will motivate others to change their hiding style.

Haffy
02-06-2007, 05:31 PM
At this point in time I think that this site and the other site where I also got a dialog going regarding this very issue are the places to be discussing these things. We, as representatives of geocaching in Maine, should be the ones setting the correct examples to others. It is only through education and information that we can be sure that all cachers be made aware of the consequences in selecting a site to place their cache. I don't think that GC.com wants to be the cache police and make decisions regarding where caches are to be placed.

It is on sites like this where we can talk about these issues and make the proper correct decisions about how geocaching will take us into the future. We have guidelines and a mission statement where hopefully others will read which should be pretty clear as to how we stand on issues such as this. I would hate to see us as well being the so-called cache police but I think by setting an example in how and where we place our caches is a good step in the right direction.

I don't think the so-called urban micro is the whole issue here either but it's the complacent attitude that some cachers have as to where they can hide them that is the crux of this whole problem. We just have to take a moment and ask ourselves if this is the proper place and if permission is indeed warranted in placing a cache. Just because a cache is placed on public property doesn't make it right and neither is a cache placed on private property with permission. I have at times been very hesitant to go onto someones personal property to find a cache even though permission has been granted. It's a thin line and with more people getting involved with caching this thin line will be stretched to it's limit as we are beginning to see.

tat
02-06-2007, 05:39 PM
Has anyone thought of contacting their local law enforcement regarding their own caches? I haven't, but perhaps that's all that needs to be done.

kayakerinme
02-06-2007, 06:15 PM
Has anyone thought of contacting their local law enforcement regarding their own caches?

Once I had gone to the Conservation Commission here in Cape Elizabeth in order to get permission for some new caches, I also contacted the police chief here in Cape. Along with the email about the caches here in Cape (particularly the ones in Fort Williams), I offered to show him where they were and what they looked like, to him or any of the Cape officers. While he was aware of geocaching, he was not aware of the particular caches in Ft Williams or around Cape Elizabeth but politely declined the tour or wanting to know their exact placement. But he does have my phone number and email in case there are any questions or situations that come up.

brdad
02-06-2007, 07:07 PM
Has anyone thought of contacting their local law enforcement regarding their own caches? I haven't, but perhaps that's all that needs to be done.

I have contacted someone in hopes he can assist in our discussion. We can't stop all these caches from being placed, but perhaps there should be a few people that could be contacted or something else done in case a cache wrongly gets reported.

Haffy
02-06-2007, 07:29 PM
I have on a couple of occasions given the reviewer a heads up on what I thought was an illegally placed cache. In both instances the hider was a newbie and was unaware that the location was not a legal place for a cache. I let the reviewer decide if it needed to be removed or disabled and after being notified by the reviewer the caches in question were removed. I think that the more people get into caching, we will be seeing more of this happening in the future. I don't think an email to the reviewer as to a questionable cache hide is very hard to do and will save someone some embarrassment in the future.

tat
02-06-2007, 07:56 PM
...let the reviewer decide if it needed to be removed or disabled ...

I agree! The reviewers in our area know a lot more than I ever will about the "big picture".

tat
02-06-2007, 08:04 PM
I was a bit concerned about my caches since I live just one town away from Portsmouth., so I spoke with the Kittery PD about my Geocaching. It seems that Geocaching is not under the radar any more! The officer raised some good points:

1. Geocaches are very difficult to identify, especially if they are placed without permission near buildings, bridges, parking lots, etc. An ammo box is exactly the same container a terrorist may use. Even when permission is granted, there can still be a problem unless the people there at the time know about it. For example, the officer said since I have permission to hide a cache at the Kittery Trading Post, even though they have firearms and are a logical target, it would likely not be a problem because they are very well organized and prepared. Whereas, a lamp post at in the middle of a parking lot may be much worse because the person on duty may not have been told about permission for the cache.
2. The officer was also concerned that a terrorist could use Geocaching to allow placing a device. Police can only enforce laws. If a cache is placed and it does not violate a law, they cannot remove it.
3. Neither the federal government, Home Land Security, state government or local government have given the Kittery PD any direction on how to deal with Geocaching.
4. Geocaching is an activity that people should be allowed to enjoy. But, like a lot of things these days, we need find ways to make it work.

So, what can we do?

The officer recommended sending a letter to the town manager letting the town know where my caches are and getting formal permission. He also suggested using “letter head” from an organization to help speed the process. This may be a perfect opportunity open lines of communication with local government.

Team2hunt
02-06-2007, 08:06 PM
At this point in time I think that this site and the other site where I also got a dialog going regarding this very issue are the places to be discussing these things. We, as representatives of geocaching in Maine, should be the ones setting the correct examples to others. It is only through education and information that we can be sure that all cachers be made aware of the consequences in selecting a site to place their cache. I don't think that GC.com wants to be the cache police and make decisions regarding where caches are to be placed.

I remember just a few months ago that a few cachers were speaking up for the rest of us. Thanks to those who did. Shouldn't we be speaking with a unified voice, for the sport we love. We should be talking with authorities and towns who have preserves that we cache on now. I think that, " someone " should have a direct affiliation with the Maine web site. Like the BOARD we elected. We need to be preactive not reactive.

Beach Comber
02-06-2007, 09:08 PM
I agree, Gary. This is just the type of thing that was presented during pre-voting discussion as a potential role for the board. Such as - to come up with a potential plan, language that could possibly be used in letters, an organized approach to contacting local governments, etc. Proactive is usually best rather than a reactive approach to a problem that has surfaced.

In my view, contacting our reviewer and asking for removal of a cache, etc. is essentially the same as asking GC.com to be involved in determining the appropriate placement of a cache. They are relying on us to let them know if something is inappropriate AND taking our word for it. On the GC website the Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines were last updated updated November 2, 2005. They do say this in the very first paragraph......

"Before a cache is listed a volunteer will review the page for inaccuracies, bad coordinates, and appropriateness before posting the cache to the site."

Given the state of concern regarding potential suspect behavior around the country in the last couple of years, it seems to me that the reviewers can play a big role in helping to educate those who participate in geocaching about what is appropriate or note. It would require asking a few questions and would help to not only educate, but also to reduce the negative view that at least some of the public will have.

Education is important and I, too, believe as others have said that taking the opportunity to set an example individually and share knowledge with others is important. It is definitely a step in the righ direction, but it can come from a variety of angles and through many approaches.

tat
02-07-2007, 01:49 PM
I agree, Gary. This is just the type of thing that was presented during pre-voting discussion as a potential role for the board. Such as - to come up with a potential plan, language that could possibly be used in letters, an organized approach to contacting local governments, etc. ...

This is just my opinion, not necessarily the board's opinion:

I think the advisory board should provide advice and organization. The members should come up with the plan, language, etc.
We should all work on this together.

In this situation, I think we should concentrate on urban caches that are near structures and were large numbers of people congrgate, i.e. parking lots. These places are more likely to cause evacutations, which seems to be the biggest concern of law enforcement.

I also think the individual cacher should approach thier own town because the local contact is very important. The plan and documents can certainly come from this site and cary our letterhead, as long as the contact is a local contact.

Haffy
02-07-2007, 02:08 PM
This is just my opinion, not necessarily the board's opinion:

I think the advisory board should provide advice and organization. The members should come up with the plan, language, etc.
We should all work on this together.

In this situation, I think we should concentrate on urban caches that are near structures and were large numbers of people congrgate, i.e. parking lots. These places are more likely to cause evacutations, which seems to be the biggest concern of law enforcement.

I also think the individual cacher should approach thier own town because the local contact is very important. The plan and documents can certainly come from this site and cary our letterhead, as long as the contact is a local contact.

I agree as well about working with the membership in developing a plan. I think it should be up to each individual to decide if the cache that they have placed would be under scrutiny. Working with your own town or locality should be the beginning of developing a relationship with those individuals. You know what or should know if it would cause any troubles. Having worked with a couple of land trusts in getting caches approved myself has been a great asset to not only the cachers but developing communication between those individuals involved. I think it is our responsibility to be good stewards. I would like to propose that if you have a cache that you think might be questionable then feel free to ask here on this site,I'm sure we can come to a concensus. Better to be safe than sorry.

brdad
02-07-2007, 04:46 PM
I agree the whole site should participate, not just the board.

There are two sides to this. There is what can we do about caches that are placed in less than favorable areas and what to do about them being placed. We have been discussing that.

The second which I am not sure eveyone is considering is what to do if someone reports a cache as suspicious. Even if everyone were to report all their urban caches to the respective town offices, we can't expect the list to be updated on a regular basis, and we can't expect the offices to remember where they all are. So what do we do? Find some authority who could look up cache info? Have a few of us for references to call in case something comes up and they want to ask if it might be a cache? Educate cachers to be alert in case something comes up they can contact the authorities? Something else?

Preventing a scare attack is great, but if one starts it seems Geocaching would take the least impact if the authorities could be alterted to the fact it may just be a cache. They may have to still treat it as a threat, but that knowledge could help in many cases.

Haffy
02-07-2007, 04:52 PM
We have a large enough membership and I think it would be good if we started to get some feedback from some of the others who might not usually submit anything to the site and see what they have to say. We seem to have a core group of participants on the site and it would be good to see more participation from the membership at large.

Sabby
02-07-2007, 05:47 PM
Ok. From one insane cat. How's this for starters.

No cache container of any type shall be placed within 0.1 miles of any building structure, bridge, railroad track, road, utility line, monument, playground, or in areas frequented by large numbers of people.

WOW! It eliminates just about all urban caches and a lot of park and grabs, but it leaves wide open the quality caches that are numerous in Maine.

It would go a long way towards making caches less suspicious to others in that they would not be close by.

We all need to think about how others see us and what we appear to be doing in this post 9-11 world.

My 2 cents worth.

brdad
02-07-2007, 05:56 PM
Ok. From one insane cat. How's this for starters.

No cache container of any type shall be placed within 0.1 miles of any building structure, bridge, railroad track, road, utility line, monument, playground, or in areas frequented by large numbers of people.

WOW! It eliminates just about all urban caches and a lot of park and grabs, but it leaves wide open the quality caches that are numerous in Maine.

It would go a long way towards making caches less suspicious to others in that they would not be close by.

We all need to think about how others see us and what we appear to be doing in this post 9-11 world.

My 2 cents worth.

I love it! Of couse, I'd have to can one of my caches and move another. But I'd do it.

While we're at it, we can increase the minumim distance between all, caches to 1 mile?

Unfortunately, most cachers don't share my opinions on that subject.

You are right in that we do need to be more aware when placing caches.

Beach Comber
02-07-2007, 06:25 PM
This is just the type of thing that was presented during pre-voting discussion as a potential role for the board. Such as - to come up with a potential plan, language that could possibly be used in letters, an organized approach to contacting local governments, etc.

I want to clarify the point I was trying to make here. The potential plan, language, etc. would be put forth as recommendations from the board rather than a dictum or final decision.

I heard clearly during pre-voting discussions that it was not of interest to have a group of individuals making decisions for the populus as a whole, but rather to have a smaller group brainstorm and then put out some recommendations. I totally agree with that approach. I think it is helpful to have a starting point to review and discuss rather than having a blank slate and a large number of individuals trying to identify a product. That is that value of having a committee or in this case, an informal board approach. We have tried the open slate approach in the past and made little to no progress - I would prefer to have the board establish a timeline to discuss this and then put out a draft. The membership could then review and provide feedback.

The G Team
02-07-2007, 06:47 PM
No cache container of any type shall be placed...in areas frequented by large numbers of people.


How many people is a "large number" ;-)

Sabby
02-07-2007, 07:34 PM
How many people is a "large number" ;-)

Oh I don't know lets start with

If 25 or more people could pass by the cache each day. ;) ;)

WhereRWe?
02-07-2007, 07:37 PM
I think education is the best tool we can all use now to make sure that all new cachers are aware of the ramifications that will take place if we continue to place caches in places that will call attention to them and also placing them in areas where we don't have permission. I have noticed a profileration of micro caches all across the state and hope we don't go the way of other states. In lew of recent developements in Boston and other cities where bomb squads have been called out because ill thought out placement of caches we should be aware of these things being brought up.

EXACTLY! We've seen caches in ridiculous locations. In some areas, "cachers" place new caches because "this area needed a cache" - which means that there wasn't another within 500 feet.

Our motto used to be "Maine - The Way Geocaching Should Be". Sadly, I think that geocaching in Maine is now the same as it is in a lot of other states... :( :(

WhereRWe?
02-07-2007, 07:44 PM
Has anyone thought of contacting their local law enforcement regarding their own caches? I haven't, but perhaps that's all that needs to be done.

No, but I had to see the Chief of Police in Milo one time to get back one of my caches that had been found by a geomuggle and turned in to the police! LOL!

Hiram357
02-07-2007, 07:54 PM
No, but I had to see the Chief of Police in Milo one time to get back one of my caches that had been found by a geomuggle and turned in to the police! LOL!

did they turn it in because they thought it was dangerous? or did they just happen to find it?

WhereRWe?
02-08-2007, 04:19 PM
did they turn it in because they thought it was dangerous? or did they just happen to find it?

It was as well hidden as any other cache, but the guy's DOG found it. As he didn't know what it was, he was suspicious. :p :p

brdad
02-08-2007, 08:06 PM
For anyone that doesn't get weekly Groundspeak notifications (is there anyone that doesn't?), here is their note reguarding this subject:

Important Geocache Placement Reminder
-----------------------------
This week, a marketing campaign for a television show was mistaken for a terrorist threat and the city of Boston, USA was temporarily shut down. For geocachers worldwide, this raises the issue of proper cache placement.

Please make sure to avoid placing a geocache in any location where it might be confused with something dangerous.

Important things to consider when placing or maintaining your geocache:
1. Make sure that your geocache can easily be identified as a geocache.
2. Use a clear container, if possible, so that the contents are easily identified.
3. Identify your container as a geocache by marking the outside of the container or attaching an Official Geocache sticker.
4. Make sure that you have permission from the landowner to place your cache on their property.

Please take the time to ensure that your cache is appropriately placed and contributes to the positive experience of others.

Zoltarus
02-08-2007, 08:55 PM
I have been approached by police officers on several occasions asking about my suspicious behavior while I was out geocaching. They asked to see identification, not 'did I have permission' from the owner. Somehow I don't think the question of permission factored into the Portsmouth incidents or the recent Boston Terror fiasco, which btw: resulted in one felony charge of placing a hoax device and one charge of disorderly conduct.

If you look closely at what is happening here, there is a paradigm shift from "intent" to "result" that I find very disturbing. While I do believe geocachers are responsible for being aware and taking precautions against serious misunderstandings by the public, the burden of proof for criminal activity used to be based upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of intent to harm. The worst thing that could happen to someone who failed to see how a reasonable person might react was a charge of negligence. But Now! how irrational people over-react to something that looks out of place is a criminal act?

I don't know about y'all'all, but I take exception to being held responsible for something over which I have no control. What next, should the reviewer charged as an accomplice? What about all the people who visited the cache and didn't report it to the police, are they guilty of "placing" the "device" as well or are they simply accessory after the fact? It is unlikely anyone will be able to come up with a set of rules that will prevent all possible misunderstandings.

WhereRWe?
02-09-2007, 07:45 PM
[COLOR=black]I have been approached by police officers on several occasions asking about my suspicious behavior while I was out geocaching.

LOL! I don't know you, but you probably LOOK suspicious! (You're not Black, are you? :eek: :eek:) (New profiling method: caching while Black! LOL!)

;) ;)

firefighterjake
02-12-2007, 09:35 AM
LOL! I don't know you, but you probably LOOK suspicious! (You're not Black, are you? :eek: :eek:) (New profiling method: caching while Black! LOL!)

;) ;)


I'm not quite sure how to read this statement or what the intent is. . . . :confused:

Beach Comber
02-12-2007, 10:50 AM
I'm not sure how many people are watching the cache activity in the Southern NH area. Since they are in my catchman area for notifications from GC.com, I have noticed some significant activity - quite a few caches are being archived and/or reviewed by the owner to revisit whether it meets the placement criteria.

tat
02-12-2007, 09:21 PM
Yes, it looks like quite a few are gone. I hope this make Geocaching stronger in the long run.

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
02-13-2007, 07:59 AM
Yes, it looks like quite a few are gone. I hope this make Geocaching stronger in the long run.

May I ask, how will this make geocaching stronger?

tat
02-13-2007, 01:39 PM
May I ask, how will this make geocaching stronger?

I think the caches were archived because the hiders incorrectly assumed they had permission.

Removing caches that do not have landowner permission shows everyone that Geocaching.com (and Geocachers) are responsible and will react positively when problems arise. I'm sure cachers in this area will be more careful about getting permission, and that will make geocaching stronger. I also hope the local government will realize they can work with us.

Trezurs*-R-*Fun
02-13-2007, 07:59 PM
I think the caches were archived because the hiders incorrectly assumed they had permission.

Removing caches that do not have landowner permission shows everyone that Geocaching.com (and Geocachers) are responsible and will react positively when problems arise. I'm sure cachers in this area will be more careful about getting permission, and that will make geocaching stronger. I also hope the local government will realize they can work with us.


I sure hope you're correct. Like you, I believe it will be in our best interest as geocachers to work together to improve the sport. To bad this incident had to be a 'reactive' approach versus a 'proactive'. I understand that sometimes you can't avoid being reactive as its hard to predict what may happen but in the case of getting permission there really are few excuses.

I hope, as you have stated, that it proves that we as a geocaching community do care and maybe it will lead to some more proactive and insightful ideas to preserve geocaching as a whole.


Cache On!!! :)

Zoltarus
02-13-2007, 08:02 PM
LOL! I don't know you, but you probably LOOK suspicious! (You're not Black, are you? :eek: :eek:) (New profiling method: caching while Black! LOL!)

;) ;)



I'm not quite sure how to read this statement or what the intent is. . . . :confused:


I am suspicious. . . how can I be sure I can trust you?

WhereRWe?
02-14-2007, 08:48 AM
I'm not quite sure how to read this statement or what the intent is. . . . :confused:

Read the part I quoted - where it says "color=black" LOL! ;) ;)

firefighterjake
02-14-2007, 09:16 AM
Read the part I quoted - where it says "color=black" LOL! ;) ;)

At first read I thought it was a semi-racist comment . . . which confused me since I'm pretty sure you're a good and decent person. I understand the intent of the comment now.

WhereRWe?
02-14-2007, 10:27 AM
At first read I thought it was a semi-racist comment . . . which confused me since I'm pretty sure you're a good and decent person.

Sheesh! A nice, harmless, loveable little fuzzball like me? ;) ;)

WhereRWe?
02-14-2007, 10:34 AM
I think the caches were archived because the hiders incorrectly assumed they had permission.

Removing caches that do not have landowner permission shows everyone that Geocaching.com (and Geocachers) are responsible and will react positively when problems arise. I'm sure cachers in this area will be more careful about getting permission, and that will make geocaching stronger. I also hope the local government will realize they can work with us.

I remember the "old days", when you were out caching in the woods, along a nice trail, and the most obvious question from a passer-by would be "Are you lost?" or "did you lose something"? LOL!

Now the question in "urban caching" seems to be (when observed lurking around guard rails, parking lot light posts, and stop signs) : "What area you doing there?"

Sheesh!

AnglzOfMyHrt
02-14-2007, 10:35 AM
I believe that the caches with the toys are the funnest because of the intrigue of what might be in it. I don't like looking for micros. The kids remain interested longer when we go for the buckets to trade. It makes it more of a family experience, and gets them away from the tv. That is why I am in it and not for the numbers. I really hope that our future brightens this sport not darkens it. I don't mind the cemetary ones either as long as it shows respect, and there is something to learn or it is dedicated to someone there. I have learned about unknown confederate soldier in the next town over from me because of a cache. So if done correctly it is ok. These are just my thoughts.

ArthurMorrissey
06-05-2007, 10:44 PM
This is such an important topic - thanks for all the thoughtfulness in the various responses. As one who owns no caches but who has visited about 130+ I see this sport as mostly about quality of place: I like to be surprised, astonished and delighted by the places I visit while caching. I like to see wildlife, I like interesting and creative hides, I like the sense of connection with an unknown fellow traveler that comes from finding a cache.

True there are times when I have nabbed a micro in a guardrail simply to be able to log a find in a new state or when I have been en route somewhere else, but that's not why I do it (hence, I suppose, my relatively low number of finds over the years).

My opinion is that micros work well when they are part of a grand scheme - say the wonderful Snow White and the Seven Dwarves series in Falmouth -- and there are times when they make sense, but so many of the urban micros seem to be more or less pointless.

I also share the opinions of several posters who indicate how they feel uncomfortable in some circumstances slinking around and looking suspicious. I have no desire to get acquainted with the cops doing this sport.


So here's a vote for quality over quantity! Thanks for the posts!

Haffy
06-05-2007, 11:21 PM
Glad my thread was brought up again as it brings up the subject once again of getting permission. Just recently I emailed the owner of a cache who put one out where in the past they weren't allowed by the Fish and Wildlife department. I realize sometimes we have all put out caches at one time or another where we thought just because it is public domain it is Ok to put one out. In this particular instance a previous cache had been put out and the FWD found out about it and had it archived by the reviewer. Not too long after that cache was archived another cacher put one out and I emailed that owner and informed them that another cache at that spot had been archived and they removed it before it even had one find. This being the 3rd cache and the new owner not knowing that 2 previous caches had been archived I emailed them and told them about the rules regarding this particular spot being off limits to caching. They in turn disabled the cache. I wasn't trying to be the cache police but we have to remember that we are supposed to be respresenting geocaching at it's best and to make sure that we are following our own mission statement here at GM.org. The owner understood and now they will think twice and make sure it is ok before placing another cache.

brdad
06-06-2007, 05:38 AM
Educating cache placers would be the bast option, but we could also help avoid this problem if we could obtain the boundaries of these areas and let GPSFun aware of them. Perhaps someone should see if they could find out who to contact. If we could even get a rough map with the property lines, I could digitize them so we could extract coordinates from it.

It's not foolproof, but it's better than hoping someone catches it before it causes problems.

Some of these area are harder to keep track of, like the National Wildlife Refuge, because some caches have been allowed there.

AnglzOfMyHrt
06-06-2007, 07:31 AM
I agree with all of you. Author you said it plain and simple. I couldn't have said it better. QUALITY OVER QUANTITY. I live in a beautiful area with a mountain park, and there are some good cache's up there, but for some reason there are a couple people who put out way too many micros. Everytime I want to make a day of it, it is very hard to find a regular cache that would be interesting, and that I would not feel like I was doing something sneaky. I hope a lot of people read this thread just to see how others feel about what they do. This sport is not about the numbers. For me it is about learning about places I've never seen or knew about and getting a surprise at the end. Also more kids would stay involved if there were better cache's out there. They hate micros. They won't even go with me if there is a micro in the plan. I really started this to get them out and away from the TV and video games. I love the family time, and this is getting harder. Thanks for listening.

Haffy
06-06-2007, 10:10 AM
Educating cache placers would be the best option, but we could also help avoid this problem if we could obtain the boundaries of these areas and let GPSFun be aware of them.

GPSfun was aware of this one problem because he was the one to bring about the archiving of the 2 previous caches there but with all the caches that he has to approve it probably just got by him. It is hard sometimes to be aware of all the places that might be in jeopardy for placing caches and I don't fault either the cache hider who is a newbie or the reviewer. It was a members only cache as well so it probably wouldn't have gotten the traffic a regular cache might have gotten . I don't want to single out the cache owner
but from all this description you might have figured out which cache I am referring to. I recognized the name in the cache and then responded to the owner about it. They were quite receptive and even went so far as again getting in touch with the Fish and Wildlife dept for permission but were refused once again. I guess they thought it would be too much of a disturbance to other fisherman in the area.

Maybe this would be a good instance where we could get in touch with Fish and Wildlife and help better explain geocaching to them and get them to read our mission statement. Might do some good and certainly can't hurt. I really couldn't see where a geocache in that area would harm anything but what do I know. I was just fortunate enough to let the hider know and we certainly don't need any bad publicity from geocaching now do we?

Signed the Cache Police ;)

ribnag
06-08-2007, 04:06 PM
dave1976 : This is how it starts and then the future of caching get dark. I guess I wont run right out and buy that 60csx.

Nah - It'll just go semi-underground and become even more fun, with people focused more on enjoying every cache they can even get the coordinates to, rather than "How many guard-rails can I visit on my way to Grandma's house".

Of course, that probably won't do Groundspeak much good.