Logscaler and Red

Uh, maybe it's because I don't want to? I don't even read them when looking for caches, I don't sort my PQ's with them and I could not care less about them even being there. I have to agree with TotemLake, EraSeek, W7WT and Shop99er as well. I hunt geocaches for the adventure. Not to have my hand held and lead by the nose to the cache. I read the cache pages for my information, not the attributes. I go after caches because I want to enjoy the outdoors and for the entertainment.

"Geocache placements do not deface or destroy public or private property. Geocaches are placed so that the surrounding environment is safe from both intentional or unintentional harm. Keep both natural and human-made objects safe. No object or property may be altered to provide a hiding place, clue, or means of logging a find." Seems to me this would throw out about 90 percent, or more, of geocaches I have seen placed. Who defines "unintentional" and "altered"? Cachers have one idea and eco freaks would cringe at walking across a wet meadows where you might leave footprints. You walk across the grass in a park? You "altered" the soils by compacting it and now the worms can't burrow there, the footprint will retain water and possibly accelerate erosion in that area, you mashed some newly sprouting grass/forb/lichen/moss/ or crushed the egg sack of some poor bug or spider. Heck, you might have even mashed and destroyed the next evolutionary stage of some species or the next. Now they will go extinct. Do you feel guilty yet? Shifting even one rock or limb to place a cache could be construed as "altering" from a different viewpoint then a cachers. How many times in locating a cache or replacing a cache have you moved, brushed past or stepped on vegetation? You just "altered" property. How many geotrails have you seen? If you walked down one, your guilty of "altering". I find that there is a difference between destruction or being destructive then "altering" the environment to place a cache. As for nailing/attaching items to tree. Get real. The USFS, BLM, ALL State Wildlife agencies, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS, timber companies, City Park's people, County Parks people, private land owners, etc. attach Bat houses, Bird houses, signs, fences, gates, Section markers, Bearing tree markers, Trail signs, snow route markers, etc to trees. How do you think they attache them? Glue? Wishful thinking? Boring into a dead tree? What do you think the bugs are doing to the same tree? At most, you will just add easy access to the critters to get in. The most damage I have seen while geocaching is when some jackass places a "micro" trash and the place get's torn up while people look for it. I guess from now on I will take photos of the geotrails, torn up landscaping, shifted rocks, shifted limbs, broken branches, etc to send to the reviewers and request the cache be archived and quote this line: "Geocache placements do not deface or destroy public or private property. Geocaches are placed so that the surrounding environment is safe from both intentional or unintentional harm. Keep both natural and human-made objects safe. No object or property may be altered to provide a hiding place, clue, or means of logging a find." I know, you think its over the top what I said. Where do you want to draw the line at?

Myself, I think the most dangerous part of geocaching is driving to them. "Know your limits."

Audit logs and premium memberships will only do so much as there is a workaround for skipping the audit logs. If you place the cache on private property and notify the suspected thief he is not welcome on said property you might have a chance of getting a trespass charge on him. Mostly, you have to either wait for him to get over his childishness and hissyfits or not place any bugs around the area. Possibly getting his photo raiding the cache with a trailcam and publishing them will deter him somewhat.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=e8b88c0f-8c12-4cf5-baf6-5221d4270961&IID=f500d409-79a1-40f4-913f-e68a0d78e4a9

Dang, sad to hear about this one. That happens to be on of my very first finds and one of my very first FTF's as well. Myself, I hope you do keep it up and running.

Double postings are such a pain.

Any of the caches in the Badlands proper are always good. You could even move the Mail while out there if you want. There are several interesting ones up on Pine Mountain and then there are always the Lookouts. As long as you avoid the crappy micro caches out there, everything should be good.

I know. Quite astonishing isn't it. But trust me, 'tis oh so true. Sometimes, I just like to argue and stir the pot. Kinda like a rubber band airplane. Wind them up and see where they fly off too. Sorry

Yes it is simple, and I have no issue with your interpretation (though mine is different, e.g. I would accept a photo of the log). But others take even a "stricter" view, and have posted that you need to sign THE log, adding additional paper is not valid. So what may seem simple and obvious to you, others may not agree with. That is why the thread is so long. Each cache owner has their own level of acceptance for what they will constitute as signing the log. I have no problem with your accepting a photo, I have no problem with owners wanting you to sign only "THE" log as long as the owners do maintenance in a timely manner so cachers can sign as required. What I have a problem with is the cache finders not making the effort to follow the "Spirit" and original "intent" of the game, and yes it is only a game. I have to wonder about people who take short cuts at a hobby as that makes me think they take bigger short cuts at work. Seems to me it is just being sloppy and lazy. If your not going to complete the effort, why make it in the first place? But say "It's just a game" to someone who is an avid Major Sport's fan when their team losses when another team uses "irregular" methods to win. (Patriots come to mind.)

Yea, I read this whole thing. Got kinda monotonous after a while. It all comes down to personal ethics. If your comfortable claiming a find that you did not physically sign the log on without a valid reason, so be it. If the log is wet, do your level best to sign it one way or the next. I try and carry extra paper, bags or even a permanent marker. Then you need to post a NM log or archive log if the owner is no longer active or a real pinhead and will not maintain their caches. One point I have to make here and I know I will catch flak over it but so be it. We have solved the problem of getting micro - nano cache logs out of and back into the container. Don't hunt them. Simple and easy to just ignore them either with PQ's or GSAK. As for the other type of caches, when we started caching, signing the log was a given for the found it online log. No question asked about it, it was a given Let's hear the purist - elitist - slams and move along to something worthwhile. Got it out of your system yet? Good. Now as for several of the people in this thread who said it was alright to log a find if you even see the container. Wrong on several levels but if your ethics are such, so be it. I have seen several caches that I could not get at and sign the log. DNF. Remember, you don't loose points for DNF's. I have a couple out that I will make you earn a found it and I do check the log. Yea, I do delete logs without concern for your feelings. Grow up and realize the world does not revolve around you, sorry. There are a lot of puzzle caches out there where you will find the cache but not be able to get the cache or log book out without some sort of special equipment, some sort of special knowledge or some special skill, will you log a found it even if you do not solve the puzzle as the cache owner intended the cache to be completed? I hope not but then personal ethics come into play again don't they. No scribble stick? You did intend to find the cache did you not? You understand that not all caches will have a scribble stick in them or that not all of the pens will work or that not all the pencils will be sharp and YOU did not bring one with you? Why is that the CO's fault and why should they give you special dispensation because you screwed up? My final point. If you do not sign the (a) logsheet - logbook or make the effort to do either even if it means placing your own piece of paper into the cache with your handle on it , you did not complete the challenge set forth for you. Simple isn't it? Find it, sign it, claim it.

Hey, we are first of the New Year it seems like with our "GC22KZE - Green Mountain LOT" cache we placed on 01-02-2010. Many more in our sights as well.

We have been finding some Remington .17 in caches also. Seems to me like it they be better applied to a rock chuck somewhere. Can't be cheap either. Yes, we take all the ammo out we find. Even the spent casings. I used to have a 5 gallon bucket of empty brass here until I gave it to a buddy of mine who reloads. Our daughters grew up with cutting and wrapping Deer and Elk on the kitchen table. No big deal to them. Yes, they have even helped dress them out in the woods as well. They don't hunt but I keep getting the "Do you have any Deer or Elk meat we can have?" calls during season. I hope she stays involved in it and continues to enjoy the experiences. Logscaler and Red

Bold and underlined is my edit. I would say this thread has strayed from the original question. I left the FTF hounds out on purpose as the question applies to to all logs, not just FTF hounds. Any answer from the Lily pad? I am not a lawyer but it seems to me that admitting to breaking the law in a log could amount to or be viewed as an admission of guilt by way of confession and therefore be subject to citation. Do you wanna be the one to test the "new" DA?

Not in the mind frame to argue this morning but I see some points I have to address. No offense intended if implied. Don't read between the lines to "see" something not there. If I have something to say, I will come right out and say it. I get in trouble for this "problem" a lot. So here goes. In reply to Post #876. I think in principal we are on the same side RK, just a slightly different view of the same problem. "....Why is GC being held as the "offending" party when they are just reacting to a situation thrust upon them by a few cachers who want to see how far they can push? I would bet there is just a few percentage points of cachers who have brought this whole thing down on the rest of us.... I'll tackle this. GC is the offending party because they took the action. Cache owners are the offending party when they list a cache with ALR's that are unpopular. That's simple." Without the latter, the former would not have happened as I see it. Cachers willing to accept and do the stupid ALR's can be held to task as well. "I tried ALR's and they were a PITA. However there are a few ALR's out there that make me smile. Nude Finds. Man I'd likely never play, but I actually like that someone did it, and I like that others find ways to hold the log sheet to get their photo in. I like what we live in a world where Nude Cacher can be free, and where Anal Rentantive Engineers can see what the woods are like when they break free of their office. They may even meet Nude Cacher and have a good conversation." These conditions are acceptable to you and others but what about the few who do not accept the idea of meeting Nude people on the trails - at a cache? Are you not forcing them to accept something they are against? Yes, the could not look for "that" cache but if said cache is in a public location with several caches along the trail or in the area, they still run the risk of meeting nudist therefore they have to avoid the entire area. You would be punishing them and the other cachers owner by requiring nudity. Just a minor few are offended you say? Isn't that the whole point to this entire thread? A minority of cachers caused this and we the caching majority now have to deal with it. "For me this entire thing is about freedom. Cache owners make this world go. They have to learn lessons. One of the lessons is that ALR's are not popular. But every now and then one breaks the mold and people like it. I like that that one out of a thousand can exist. For losing that one. For making the box that defines what caching is smaller I do hold GC.com and all the whiny finders who hate freedom but love the concept of a home owners association to tell us what color we can paint our house and that our 67' Camaro, or Old International Scout are 'wrecks' and need to be hauled off responsible. Piss on them. I'd rather live next to an interesting family with an ALR in their front yard hidden inside their rusty 57 Chevy up on blocks than the Yuppie clones." I tend to agree with your statement but the few who did not learn their lesson slung mud all over the rest of us and we as a group have to clean it up. Yes, we are now restricted from doing certain things. It is kinda like the one person running their ATV through a creek bottom and cutting a cookie in the mud. Now the entire trail has to be re-routed so no one else can get close enough to do it again. All punished for the one. NOT the fault of the land manager but the land manager will be blamed and held accountable by the masses. They will get flak from both sides. From those wanting MORE restriction by barring all ATV's in an area and flak from those who are now barred from the location.They just reacted to a situation with the tools they have at their disposal. They can not win no matter which way they jump. Kinda like GC.com. "Most ALRs suck. Some don't. Let the finders vote by avoiding the cache. The prior system was simple enough. Those finders who don't read the cache page deserve the surprise. I've got a couple of caches that the advice on the cache page keeps you from trespassing. I didn't make those ALRs. Another cache I adopted out the ALR was actually related to bat hibernation though I didn't explain that on the cache page (because I didn't want to advertise the problem I was working around)" I agree with you but those few caused the entire problem. Enough cachers voted with their feet - car- 4 wheeler by doing the stupid ALRs to cause a reaction. In this case, a negative one. All cachers will be painted with the same brush by LEO, land mangers and property owners when the few cause the problem. I personally hate to give up even small liberties like this. It bothers me to the core and I blame low IQ's on behalf of the person's writing the stupid ALRs - vindictive about something maybe? - as well as the people doing them, but mostly I blame the people who caused the restrictive ALRs to be needed in the first place. I can accept the humors ALRs as part of the entertainment factor involved in this game seeing as this game is supposed to be fun. Anyway, I have spoken my piece and it is off to do some yard work until Red gets home, then a few caches to be found and an event to attend tonight. I am not going to let this effect my outlook on life in the least. It's kinda like stepping in dog crap in the park. Who caused the problem? Who knows. The rest of the people just have to live with the problems caused by the few. Just don't let the idiots drag you down to their level or they win. Just do your part in keeping caching on the positive side and hope the idiots get bored and fall to the wayside. After all, supposedly change works both ways. Logscaler.

Boy, My wife is P.O.ed off at you people. I am tired and groggy so this may read different later today when I re-read it but here goes. I sat here and read this entire thread last night and this morning. (Out of work and no life at this stage.) As I understand it, a burden was placed upon cache reviewers to decide if an "extra" task to log a cache was overboard or not. People started pushing the limit in ways no one had imagined, considered "reasonable" or bordered on just plain sick. (Sick is MY term for someone wanting photos of decaying animals.) Anyway, A line had to be drawn somewhere, thus the new "guideline" we have now. Why is GC being held as the "offending" party when they are just reacting to a situation thrust upon them by a few cachers who want to see how far they can push? I would bet there is just a few percentage points of cachers who have brought this whole thing down on the rest of us. I will skip through the nitpicking details of the "he said - she said" arguments I read here already but the way I read the new "guideline" was things where starting to get out of control, even bordering on the stupid, and GC is trying to bring some sort of control back to cache listings. Yes, some have said "cracking a nut with a sledge hammer" but some people need smacked in the forehead with a 2x4 to get their attention. Now GC has your attention. IF we geocachers had policed ourselves, I doubt this would have even been an issue. Yes, we can control cachers with our comments on the cache pages, in these forums, at events, in the local area forums and by word of mouth via e-mails and such as. Just because a cache is out there does not mean anyone has to look for it. After a while, people will get the idea they did something wrong. Yea, I know. There are people out there that will look for ANY cache. Since this new "guideline" was installed, It seems as I have had to delete more logs in the last month then in the last 8 years, combined. People pushing. (It's 36 counties, not 1). I first try to start a dialog with the offending party but if they do not respond, what is a cache owner supposed to do ? Puzzle cache = Task to be completed to get the coordinates to a cache. ALR cache = Task to be completed to log a cache. Big difference as I see it. No gray area at all. Your choice to attempt the cache or not depended on your abilities. (As it still does) You either skipped the caches, completed the caches as designed, teamed up to do the caches with people who had different skill levels then you or you found a different way to complete the cache staying within the scope of the intent of the cache hider. Anyway, it is way early. I need some zzzz's. I retain the right to edit this whole thing later after waking up. It sounds good now. But later? We will see.

Hello trail mix 3. In case anyone is interested, we bought several of these journals from trail mix 3 before they left our area. They make very good gifts, swag and "light" activity cacher gear. We still have a couple around here somewhere I found in a box while moving from the old house to the new one. If you don't use GSAK (we do), go paperless (we do) then they will work great for keeping track of your caching experience. Logscaler & Red

Here is a shot of a critter we found.

As is the cache owner prerogative. Pine Mt. Ridge Runner is still outside that distance, as well as Rooster Rock.

No much/any information to be gathered from a broken point from a plowed field the cows graze in. Other then to say "Yea, someone was here and shot at a Duck on a pond. Missed it looks like." Sell them? Why? The shipping and wrapping would cost more then the value of the items. logscaler

We have been leaving Arrowheads, Spear points and stone tools in caches for years. Several hundred at least I would say. All broken or poor conditioned items but real anyway. They don't stay long either. Oh, before anyone ask. Yes, they are the real items that where legally found on private property with the land owners permission.

This sounds good at first. Then someone does not want to play nice. Check out this cache and the aftermath. BLM'S Burmuda Triangle Logscaler

Thanks for a interesting cache hunt. Now, maybe I can hunt all the caches in an area without driving by caches on our way to somewhere with a lookout. Logscaler

I/we leave a map on the computer of the area I/we will be in with a GSAK file loaded of all the caches I/we will be looking for. As for a return time, that is very flexible as I/we could expand my/our trip to more areas, but still in the same basic GSAK file area. A lot of the places I/we go, cell phones make a good paperweight and thats about it. Logscaler

Several caches without even taking the gpsr out of the ride or pocket. Several FTF's without the right coordinates but our best one was 49 miles off. One number is all it takes. And who says this game isn't about the numbers?