Slabcity Gang

I was going to post an example cache as to one person, in my opinion, giving away too much info. but chose not to make it appear as though I am pointing out any particular individual. Instead here is how the cache description ends: "..The cache is a park and grab but in the winter you may have to walk about two tenths of a mile to the cache location. Just look for the lone evergreen tree in the corner of the parking lot. The cache is a camo film container tied to the tree about five feet above the ground." Even thought this cache is close to my house I see no reason to go there and get a smiley, I prefer to work a bit harder than this. I MAY go without a GPS someday to see if it is as easy as it appears to be to find.

I left the choice to them as to whether to multi-cache or not one I hid: Ascutney Assault #1, Ascutney Assault #2 My first thought was to make it a multi but as I was placing them I realized many may not like to spend 6+ hours on the hunt so I made "the challenge" giving them the choice. Many have and I don't regret doing it this way as it is still being hit since placed in 2001.

I try to be prepared for any kind of cache..thus I drive any of the following:

I will soon be doing a 3 stage cache where the first cache gives you half the coordinates for the final cache yet also leads you to the second cache and the second cache gives you the second half of the coordinate for the final "officlial cache". At least that is so far the plan as I'll be scouting out the locations this weekend. So I guess the question is-is this a valid idea? Can Geocacher be used to add to the puzzle aspect without the need to hit a computer to finish this cache? Unless I am missing something I don't see a practical use for Geochecker at all, and I am sure I am missing something. Thoughts on the above or help figuring out this geochecker (perhaps a cache example link other than what Geochecker offers) would be appreciated.

Found this interesting article on the subject in reference to NH: http://www.nh.gov/nhdhr/publications/docum...WallHandout.pdf And if your in the mood grab a drink...pull up a chair and enjoy listening to the following: It starts off with someone building a stone wall but quickly turns to what we are discussing here. http://www.nhpr.org/node/6079

You are not over reacting. This is one of the examples of a bad hide. Finders should be treated like the lowest common denominator amongh them. Wich is to say they can't handle a stone wall hide and the cache should be somwhere else. You should email the owner your concerns. Normally I'm for hiding the cache like you found it but in this case plain view helps with the problem of the LCD finder. I did 9 caches yesterday and of them 2 more were in stone walls and for no apparent reason (one in Vermont one in NH) and I agree they are "bad hides". The one pictured here was in a old 1773 cemetary stone wall no less and I saw no reason for it myself as there was nothing but woods behind it. Why not start in this location and proceed to the woods 10'-20+'? You still accomplish your goal of getting people to this cemetary and enjoying the old stones and more as the owner wanted? I think I may make some stickers refering to the laws in NH and placing them in the caches as well as making the owner aware of the RSA's involved as well as leave them out of the walls, for the most part, so others will do no damage in finding them. Thanks for all the input.

Cache owner has replied ( I contacted as I posted yesterday). They did put it in front of the stone wall covered by brush. It appears others took it for themselfs to relocate it "better" by putting it into the wall as it was clearly covered when I got there. He is going to look into the location, and he was very respectful to my coverage of this all. And I agree some of the stones were clearly moved some time ago much prior to the cache being placed but the photo doesn't show, apparently, the more recent damage. I certainly would not have posted it this was entirely an act of God. I think The Hornet makes a great point! And when New Hampshire is involved, laws are in place, regardless, to protect these. Thanks for all the input thus far.

Just a follow up-NH only: 472:6 Removing or Altering Boundary Markers. – I. Any person who purposely commits or causes to be committed any of the following acts with regard to a boundary marker knowing it to be a boundary marker shall be guilty of a misdemeanor: defacement, alteration of location, or removal of a stone wall or monument, or a mark on a tree, made for the purpose of designating a point, course or line in the boundary of a tract of land or in the dividing line between towns. II. The provisions of paragraph I shall not apply when a boundary marker is moved pursuant to: (a) Mutual agreement between all landowners whose property lines are affected by the moving of the boundary, or (B.) Authorization by government officials in order to more accurately place the boundary, or © A finally adjudicated court order or decree, or (d) A law that requires or allows the movement or alteration. Source. 1983, 21:2, eff. June 11, 1983.

When Geocaching in New England it isn't unusual to come across some beautiful stone walls that appear out of nowhere. It's always nice to look upon them and wonder what animals they kept in or what people they were meant to keep out and always an amazment to think how much work and pride went into making suck a wall when, other than the wall, you are hard pressed to even see a rock anywhere. NH has gone so far as to make laws to protect such priceless things (ref: RSA 472:6, 231:158.IV to name a few). So while I am examining my GPS and see I am getting close then look up and see a stone wall I always get the shivers. Today I was greeting with this: Standing in one spot this is a left view where there obviously was no reading... And turning to the right where there was a solid reading... Perhaps I am overreacting? With such a beautiful area this particular cache is in why pick such an obvious location to hide? Was this stone wall like this prior to the cache? I highly doubt it as the right view had soil all moved around as well as moss damaged on those stones. But yet I read nearly 30 responses and all are happy with the find. I have yet to add to this "Traditional Cache" because I don't know how much good I could actually say about it so instead I have posted here to get thoughts on if this should even be addressed. Am I overreacting? I really would love some feedback on this topic. And I am not even going to start my thoughts of the cacher's who contributed to this. As for me, I found the cache, logged it and left it in plain view. Thanks for letting me rant.