medoug

Hi, I'm medoug, I'm a "geocop", but I can change, if I have to, I guess.

**removed**

**removed**

I actually sent the original message some time ago. 6 of the "archived" caches had been found since then. The last 3 were found nearly 2 months after they were initially archived. Yes, I would say that they were also "abandoned".

Apparently at least one local cacher has still been looking for (and sometimes finding) these archived caches. He must had also heard that they hadn't actually been removed. So far, he has found 6 of these archived caches. The last 3 were found nearly 2 months after they were archived. So, I think it's safe to say that the caches are still unretrieved (unless you believe that this finder is also part of this "scheme" to make the cache owner look bad). The typical archiving note has been "Sorry, past its prime." Nothing about it sounded like it was a forced archival due to unresponsiveness. Leaving non-natural, non-biodegradable items in the woods with no continued purpose or no intention to ever remove them is littering. I want beautiful natural areas to stay beautiful... that's why I care. Let me emphasize that these were not quick easy caches to find. They typically have high difficulty/terrain ratings. Most were micros in the woods. Many have had around 50% DNF logs. A few never were found. Why would I spend 30 minutes, 1 hour, or 2 hours looking for something that isn't my responsibility to retrieve, especially when they aren't my kind of cache? (My email to them took maybe 10 minutes to write.) It would be much simpler/quicker for the cache owner to show some responsibility and spend one day to quickly retrieve all of their archived caches.

Looking at some of the archiving posts, it sounds like they were tired of those old caches and felt it was time to put out new fresh ones. Archiving appeared to be voluntary. No signs of being asked or forced to archive them. As I mentioned, this team appears to be active cache hiders, not ones that started caching and have since grew tire of it.

In my above post I mentioned that these are not the type of caches I like to find. I also don't have the spare time to spend an hour or more (maybe) finding each micro in the woods. Not in the least bit enjoyable for me. Was it really that bad? That's why I asked about it here. I guess I was trying to share my feelings, educate them (if needed) on proper caching edicate, and suggest that they take action to make it right.

I've seen many containers pushed/pounded into the soil (some a few feet). I've also seen the dog leash anchors used with a chain or cable to deter theft or the elements from removing a container. Screwing an anchor into the soil isn't the same as digging a hole. I'm not saying that makes it right, but I think there is some interpretation to the "thou does not bury" rule. I don't really see a random slab of cement poured into a small pile in the woods much different than placing a geocaching container or small boulder there. None of which actually damages or modifies what is originally in the area. I would feel a little funny having it anchored as I mentioned as a permanent fixture though. Maybe a big enough glob of cement attached to the outside of the ammo can (in addition to it being partially filled) would be sufficient to deter thieves. It could still be constructed in the woods with a few trips of cement to result in a container weighing more than a thieve could easily carry out. One thing that I hadn't mentioned until now is that part of the trick to the cache is that the ammo box would be padlocked closed. Hopefully that would help deter the casual muggle or minor vandal. medoug.

Just for clarity.... The members of the caching team share a single geocaching name used for their hides. Also, the message was sent to this single geocahing account only, and was not shared with other area geocachers to further propagate angst against these geocachers as might have been suggested. The above post is the first time my message had been shared with others. I doubt that any of the local cachers visit these forums much and as stated, names and details have been withheld. I guess what bothered me the most was that these hiders were able to find the time to hide many more caches, yet didn't take the time to remove their archived cache containers. A couple of months had passed from the time the old caches were archived and when people had verified that they hadn't actually been retrieved.

I recently sent the below message to an area caching team (details replaced in {} to provide anonimity): "Hi {caching team}, I attended {nearby caching event} last weekend. During the event, it was mentioned by some of the other cachers in attendance that you had recently archived quite a few {local city} area geocaches that you had hidden, but hadn't retrieved the old cache containers. Some, including I, felt that leaving the containers unretrieved is a form of littering. This even has a name in geocaching circles, "geotrash", and is generally frowned upon. Geocaching is often under scrutiny as we utilize many public lands (parks, roads, etc.). To keep on good terms with the managers of these lands, I'm kindly asking you to strongly consider retrieving your archived cache containers. Thank you, medoug." Note that this team is still quite active and had hidden many newer caches after they had archived their earlier ones. These aren't the type of cache that I enjoy hunting, so I won't be looking for them. Also, most of these caches were cheap plastic vials which aren't particularly good containers worth retrieving for most cachers' use. Was I out-of-line sending this message to them? Was I being a "geocop" and sticking my nose where it's none of my business? medoug. P.S. I did not receive a response, and have no idea if any of their containers had since been retrieved.

Thanks for the ideas. Keep them coming. I hadn't thought of filling the ammo can mostly with cement to make it less attactive to thieves. I've been thinking of how cement could be used to further deter theft. Here's what I'm now leaning toward: Drill holes in opposite sides of the can near its bottom. Run threaded rod with fasteners and rubber seals through the can through those holes with plenty of length extending out each side of the can. Fill the can with enough cement to cover the rod and fasteners. Go to the hiding site and screw one of those large corkscrew rods used for anchoring dog leashes into the ground. Leave part of it exposed. Now, mix up some cement mix with water and pour a small pad onto the exposed portion of the leash anchor and push the bottom of the ammo can into the pad so the threaded rods are also submerged in the cement. Use plenty of the cement mix along with heavy wire or rebar to reinforce so it can't be easily broken up. What do you think? The biggest problem with this idea is that the cache container becomes a permanent fixture and can't be moved or modified by even myself if needed. I'm open to other suggestions or improvements to this idea. Unfortunately, it's probably too cold this time of the year for cement to properly set so this might need to wait until Spring to actually incorporate. My biggest regret now is that I didn't do this with my originally container. Perhaps I had too much trust in others seeing that the ammo can was clearly marked as being part of a game and would be left alone by others. medoug.

I'm 99% certain that 1 of the 2 ammo cans taken in the last year was NOT done by a fellow geocacher. It's difficult to explain how I know this, but it would involve giving away the "trick" involved with the clever hide. So, I don't think changing the cache to a premium membership would have made any difference. In both cases, the cache was hidden off the main trail. The location chosen really didn't lend itself to a hide a considerable distance (long hike) from the parking area. So, making these remote caches really wasn't an option. Originally, the hiding spots required trekking off the main trail through considerable brush and brambles. One factor that probably contributed to the containers disappearing is that in both cases, a pretty visible geotrail had formed from geocachers looking for the container. This made for a convenient route for non-cachers to explore. I think ideas for tethering might be the most practical solution in light of what I have explained above. Any examples (photos or descriptions) of what you have done or seen other do would be most appreciated. Thanks again, medoug.

Hi. I've been geocaching for several years now and enjoy hiding clever caches in cool places even more than finding geocaches. I've hidden a few ammo cans in my time. Until recently, I've only lost one to muggles, and had another vandalized but fixable, but within the last year I've now lost two. I have only a limited supply of these and don't feel like continuing to supply these to thieves. Does anyone have any practical suggestions for making an ammo can muggle-proof or at least muggle-resistant yet still remain functional (watertight) and still hideable as a geocache. Keep in mind that hunting, trapping, foraging, hiking, and mushroom hunting are common activities in the area so seldom can an ammo can be made invisible to all but fellow geocachers playing the game. Let me add that I had spent considerable amount of time and expense modifying one of the ammo cans and it's contents so I was out much more than just the cost of simply an ammo can. I can't really go into too much detail but it had to do with the clever nature of the cache. I have received a lot of praise and favorites points for this particular hide so I DO want to ultimately replace it (several feet away from the original hide) with a new container, but don't want to risk another loss of my time, cost, and effort again. Part of the problem is that I'm not sure how determined the original thief will be to return to the area (possibly with tools) to steal another can. Thanks, medoug.

You know, I went to the "Ohio" page yesterday to look up Midwest Geobash (this weekend). It shows up on the 5th page of new caches though, because there are daily August Flash mobs all over the State. Rather than "pretty cool idea", I think this is an "incredibly lame and cheesy idea". But whatever floats the numbers crowds boats. I now see that some people are now hiding 31 physical caches specifically for people to find during the 31 souvenier days of August. I've found that everytime people hide mass numbers of caches (as part of an event, for a powertrail, 29 caches for leap day, etc.) they are pretty much 100% lame caches. Understandably, it's just too hard to come up with 31 unique ideas, clever containers, and new great locations in that timeframe. I guess as long as there's still lamp posts and guardrails spaced further than .1 mile apart, this will continue. In my opinion, geocaching had jumped the shark long ago.

Cancelling accidental double post.

Cool idea, but a ziploc bag won't be enough protection for a geocache of any duration. Even if you soak the book with silicone spray, there will be no protection for the logbook inside. I think a better solution would be to hide the book someplace with more protection like in a shelter house where it can at least be somewhat protected from the elements or put it inside a better sealed container like a lok'n'lok or ammo can.

That is why it is important to place these caches where there is still some remaining structure, or at least give a detailed account of what makes the place special in the description. One technique that my brother and I have used is to include old photos or sketches in the description that shows what the structure or place had looked like at the time of the famous historical event. Even a LPC placed where something historic once took place is better than an ordinary LPC if the description provides details of the historic event and what things would have looked like at that time. If not, then I agree that it's pretty much just another lame LPC.

Not all preforms are 50mL. They come in a variety of sizes. Larger ones are used for making milk jugs and other larger bottles. These larger preforms are often more than 100mL qualifying them as "small". I've hidden a couple of them myself.

Me too. More than half of my 37 active caches have some type of local historical connection. Here's a list of some of the historical sites I have brought people to through geocaching: 1800's beer cellar, abandoned satellite complex, historical bridges, 1960's nuclear fallout shelter, 1800's grain mills, interesting gravesites, homes of historically significant figures, and more. If interested, you can read about them here:medoug's caches

Hmmm, well it could be that BOTH maps are off about 50 feet, and there MIGHT be an issue. There's no substitute for 'boots on the ground, eyes on the scene' observation. Agreed. Here's what the maps show (approximately same scale): You can see why the geocaching.com map had me concerned, but the google aerial view map looks much better.

By (hopefully) being familiar with the 'rails-to-trails' trails in their area. Have you been to the location? Do you know for sure the rail line there is active? If so, please be a whistle-blowing cache cop and report what you see to the reviewer. Peoples lives could be at stake, and certainly a trespassing ticket from a railroad cop is no laughing matter. Nevermind. I've done some additional investigation. Although the geocaching maps show the railroad VERY close to the caches in question, Google maps aerial views show that the railroad is actually the proper distance from the caches. Apparently the rail line shown on the geocaching map is off a bit (more than 100') from where it is really located.

By (hopefully) being familiar with the 'rails-to-trails' trails in their area. I think this would be difficult as reviewers often cover a very large area. Have you been to the location? Do you know for sure the rail line there is active? I'm familiar with the area and know that it is indeed an active rail line, but I have not attempted to find the caches yet. I guess there's a possibility that there is a natural barrier between the cache and the rails as some others had mentioned earlier in this thread.

So, with many rails-to-trails still shown on maps as rail lines, how does a reviewer know whether a cache is on a legitimate walking trail or illegally placed too close to an active railroad? I can think of at least one recently placed cache that appears to break the 150-foot rule, and the only conclusion that I can imagine is that the reviewer may have misinterpreted the railroad as being a trail.

"I'm looking for a contact lens."