Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Caches on the AT

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Solon, Maine
    Posts
    5,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by attroll View Post
    It is to bad that the Twisted Sister Cedar Stump cache was archived also. I don't think it was archived because it was on the AT though. I think the owner archived it. I looked at the maps and it looks to be far enough off the AT where it should not have been a problem.
    This cache is RIGHT ON the trail. You've got to walk down the trail to get it, and it is only a few feet from it. (Well, unless they moved it since we logged it, I mean! LOL!)

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    So. China Maine
    Posts
    1,588

    Default Twisted Sister

    That's right, Bruce. And I always look for a "path" to a cache,(which would be the only thing the ATC would be concerned with) and there was none to that cache.

    My barber commented today that he's doing some trail maintenence this weekend on Cranberry on the AT. Seems that if there's a lot of use on trails and the campsights and lean to's fill up, the hikers pitch tents in undesignated spots and this causes concern. I guess I don't get the issue. I never thought of hikers as an elite group that turn their noses up to us mere cachers. Hope that's not the cace.

    Quote Originally Posted by WhereRWe? View Post
    This cache is RIGHT ON the trail. You've got to walk down the trail to get it, and it is only a few feet from it. (Well, unless they moved it since we logged it, I mean! LOL!)
    Sometimes the road less traveled is less traveled for a reason.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Brewer, Maine
    Posts
    1,808

    Default

    The impression I've gotten is that the AT policies on caching are still being developed and are NOT set in stone yet. They are not sure how to proceed on a national level and are still "working on it".

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Niskayuna, NY
    Posts
    601

    Post

    This is the log that was posted with the archival on the caches in Mass.

    Groundspeak has been contacted by the National Park Service and asked to archive this geocache listing, effective immediately.

    The National Parks Chief Ranger has identified this geocache as one that is currently placed on National Park Service managed Appalachian Trail Corridor lands and/or state lands where the Appalachian Trail passes through. Geocaching is not permitted on these lands. Consequently, Groundspeak is archiving this geocache. Please ensure that the geocache and all contents are removed from its location immediately.

    Geocaching Placement Guidelines can be referenced here: (
    visit link)




    A house is not a home without a cat.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Auburn
    Posts
    2,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sudonim View Post
    The impression I've gotten is that the AT policies on caching are still being developed and are NOT set in stone yet. They are not sure how to proceed on a national level and are still "working on it".
    This is correct. More and more, Groundspeak and geocachers are showing that we can manage the sport in a responsible manner. Quite often, this means follow directives we don't agree with or appreciate. The ban on caches in our National Parks is still in effect, but there is hope for change in the future.
    The farmer gave permission to place the cache in the field, but the bull charges.

  6. #36

    Default

    When we did Bemis we saw lots of hiking needs placed along the trail. A shirt hung in a tree with a tag stating it was a men's medium, a crutch, some bandaids nailed to a tree, some safety pins and numerous other things left for the hikers coming through. Most of these were right on the trail and on one hand we thought wow these could come in handy for through hikers passing through on the other we thought it looked kinda trashy. We assumed these things were place mostly near the trail heads for the most part. Maybe leaving some ammo hiking swag cans would make the trails look a little nicer. Cachers can leave something and get a smiley and the hikers could take something they may need.
    Cindy the cinderblock TB probably wouldn't move much

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Litchfield, Maine
    Posts
    3,589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WhereRWe? View Post
    This cache is RIGHT ON the trail. You've got to walk down the trail to get it, and it is only a few feet from it. (Well, unless they moved it since we logged it, I mean! LOL!)
    The way I remember the cache was that you took a left off the trail on a side trail to the pond and then walked the waterline to an old tote road. That was the way I got to it. I suppose if you were caching not thinking or observing things around you then some cachers would have took a direct route from the AT straight to the cache and that is why caches are being eliminated from the AT.
    Blazing Troll

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    So. China Maine
    Posts
    1,588

    Default At

    [The cache was very close to the trail but I don't understand your comment. I'm not trying to be a wise guy here but are you saying that if a cache is off the trail, which most would be, that it would be ok if people didn't go straight to it, ie if they "meandered" to it? I think the concern must be "geocaching trails" that result but to me that could easily be avoided by placing caches close to the trail where there are natural openings and no obvious sensitive flora. The cache placer could add a waypoint where the a cacher is supposed to leave the trail. Stephanie did that on her Survival of the Prepared cache in Unity. To me, a cache close to the trail, like Twisted Sister, with natural openings, like Twisted Sister, would be environmentally neutral.

    The ATC would benefit from forming a partnership with the geocaching community.


    Quote Originally Posted by attroll View Post
    The way I remember the cache was that you took a left off the trail on a side trail to the pond and then walked the waterline to an old tote road. That was the way I got to it. I suppose if you were caching not thinking or observing things around you then some cachers would have took a direct route from the AT straight to the cache and that is why caches are being eliminated from the AT.
    Last edited by attroll; 09-19-2008 at 09:27 AM.
    Sometimes the road less traveled is less traveled for a reason.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Litchfield, Maine
    Posts
    3,589

    Default

    Yes I agree with you. I guess my point was that the nature of geocaching is that most people will use their GPS and take the most direct and quickest route they can to get there quicker. That is just the nature of it. It does not matter if you spell it out in the cache description not to walk of the trail because someone is going to do it and once someone does it and a small path starts to form then others are going to follow that path. This path is what they are trying to avoid happening. There whole idea is to Leave No Trace and when a path develops then it voids the LNT.

    I can see both sides to this. I would love to see caches along the AT but I have also seen some very disruptive caches that have been placed on the AT. You know the old saying "it only takes a few to ruin it for others".
    Blazing Troll

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bradley, Maine
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Absolute POWER corrupts Absolutely! Once you let a group/organization/entity etc, become too powerful then it is all over. They become arrogant and then THEY determine/define what is right and what is wrong, AND it never ends. EVER! Once they get control its like watching the tide come in and erode the sandcastle that was once your fun.

    Where the hell is that thing?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •