Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Woodland Hiker

"Leave No Trace"

Recommended Posts

I guess neither of you has ever seen a deer bedding area?

 

In NJ many areas are so overpopulated by deer they have destroyed the entire understory. There is barely any plant life from the ground to as high as a deer can reach in many parks. The next generation of trees has been destroyed.

 

The state of NY's DEC had a longstanding ban on geocaching on their lands. Then someone there decided to do a study. The result? They found that geocaching causes no real harm and they lifted the ban, even for their "forever wild", constitutionally protected forest preserves.

Edited by briansnat

Share this post


Link to post

A governmental agency did a study and positive action was taken as a result? Isn't this a sign of the apocalypse? :)

Share this post


Link to post
6 months from you being there, a big tree falls over 5 feet up hill

You mean this tree? (about 100 yards from the waterfall) :mad:

 

00dbd7b8-e707-4d8d-9839-b21b080b1de8.jpg

 

You're right that one small group won't make much of a difference but someone bushwhacks out to the waterfall and places a cache there, cachers follow and create a geotrail to the site and around the site, hikers find the trail and follow it making a bigger trail, then teenagers see the bigger trail and follow it and start climbing the rocks, etc. etc.

 

While by ourselves geocachers can't do much damage there is the potential for us creating problems in some spots.

 

But as I said before overall, I don't think there's any problem with geotrails. But there are some places that are more sensitive and some caches that are poorly placed (environmentally speaking).

Edited by Stump

Share this post


Link to post
...but someone bushwhacks out to the waterfall and places a cache there, cachers follow and create a geotrail to the site and around the site, hikers find the trail and follow it making a bigger trail, then teenagers see the bigger trail and follow it and start climbing the rocks, etc. etc....

The 17 people a year who might visit that cache? Teenagers are lazy. They will only go as far out of town as needed to avoid scrutiny for parties.

Share this post


Link to post
I guess neither of you has ever seen a deer bedding area?

 

In NJ many areas are so overpopulated by deer they have destroyed the entire understory. There is barely any plant life from the ground to as high as a deer can reach in many parks. The next generation of trees has been destroyed.

 

The state of NY's DEC had a longstanding ban on geocaching on their lands. Then someone there decided to do a study. The result? They found that geocaching causes no real harm and they lifted the ban, even for their "forever wild", constitutionally protected forest preserves.

Exactly! (how could i forget that?) We have a NYS DEC official here that's now a geocacher!

 

Let's recap. THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION CONDUCTED A STUDY ON GEOCACHING!!! The DEC is not exactly passive when it comes to the protection and preservation of open space. They found geocaches have little or no impact on the environment. The NYS DEC published a very positive article on geocaching in their Conservationist Magazine!

Share this post


Link to post
...Let's recap. THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION CONDUCTED A STUDY ON GEOCACHING!!! The DEC is not exactly passive when it comes to the protection and preservation of open space. They found geocaches have little or no impact on the environment. The NYS DEC published a very positive article on geocaching in their Conservationist Magazine!

Good ammo for South Carolina.

Share this post


Link to post
...Let's recap. THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION CONDUCTED A STUDY ON GEOCACHING!!!  The DEC is not exactly passive when it comes to the protection and preservation of open space.  They found geocaches have little or no impact on the environment.  The NYS DEC published a very positive article on geocaching in their Conservationist Magazine!

Good ammo for South Carolina.

Good point. I'll get as much info as I can and forward it to Sissy and CR I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Piper expressed he/she was "probably one of the least environmental gung-ho people here" might indicate he may not be able to recognize a game trail from a human trail.

 

Actually, the statement was more to qualify that while I've noticed the social trails, it doesn't necessarily mean that the world should stop and take notice and halt geocaching to Defend Wildlife. That and that I'm more the type that drives and 8cyl Jeep around, advocate drilling in the arctic wildlife refuge, feel that in general recycling is a waste of time, etc. That said, I've spent a fair amount of time outside, and while I'm not up to tracking animals, my personal opinion is that I'd be able to determine the difference between an animal trail and a human one at better than chance.

 

I also should qualify that except in one instance, any trails I've seen formed by geocachers were not in areas that I would consider to be sensitive areas, so it's not a huge deal (as long as it doesn't ultimately get areas closed to geocaching, like 4x4 trails have been closed because of people that don't follow the trails). It's just something that I've noticed while caching. (One person careless with a cigarette is going to cause far more damage than any of these trails have).

 

(Note, I put the statements in here not to start a political discussion about my viewpoints, but to characterize the earlier statement I made. I fully recognize that many of you won't agree with my viewpoints, so let's not derail things into a discussion of that)

Share this post


Link to post

I originated the topic “Leave no trace” and, being new to this caching and forum, I really appreciate the response and interest. I do want to be more specific about what I see as a potential problem in hopes of averting the problem as much as possible.

I’m speaking of two caches in particular where good coordinates were not able to be given, and therefore, obviously, good coordinates were not able to be read by searchers. That is KEY to the main problem I’m addressing.

One is in a canyon and a water runoff area during snow melt and rainfall. The bad coordinates are causing the entire area of approximately 150’ by 300’ to be trampled.

The other a steep hill of mostly loose gravel with sparse vegetation recovering from several years of draught. The area being investigated because of bad coordinates is perhaps 500’ by 500‘. The gps does not give good readings in these places because of the surrounding rocks etc. (Yes, very tall rocks, etc; beautiful!)

In both locations you can see where the sparse vegetation is abused as footholds and handholds while climbing or sliding.

I guess my real gripe is this; when the gps cannot give good coordinates, each person tramples a much greater area than necessary. Both of these places already have erosion problems, especially the one in the canyon where all the water rushes at once, then empties, taking with it lush vegetation loosened by us, as well as it’s surrounding fertile organic composted earthy loamy mulch.

And, for those who expressed an interest; yes I’m very new to geocaching, as I said, but have been a Woodland Hiker for 40 years +, have hiked something in most of the 48 states, and hiked off and on here on the Front Range for more than 20 years. I also once owned land with a creek running through it, eroding so swiftly that 4 acres of pasture went down stream in one rainy week. You don’t have to be a geocacher to recognize the potential for erosion.

To simplify, if we’d be careful to hide the cache in a place where coordinates can be read accurately, there will be much less damage to the land.

Share this post


Link to post
...I do want to be more specific about what I see as a potential problem in hopes of averting the problem as much as possible...

I too, am a hiker and steward of backwoods for many years. I simply do not see any evidence associated with geocaching of a potential problem of this nature. By my experience, geocachers are among the finest stewards of our more pristine natural areas.

 

There may be some localized areas with problems as you suggest, but this does not appear to be a problem in any area I've cached.

 

I have always been a leave no trace kind of guy, but I think one thread about it is enough. :mad::D

Share this post


Link to post
A governmental agency did a study and positive action was taken as a result? Isn't this a sign of the apocalypse? :mad:

He failed to mention that it cost $132 billion.

Share this post


Link to post
To simplify, if we’d be careful to hide the cache in a place where coordinates can be read accurately, there will be much less damage to the land.

Alternatively, additional descriptive information on the cache page could decrease the size of the search area.

Share this post


Link to post
I just hiked 3 days straight and now will probably work 2 weeks with little hiking time, but I will e-mail you these 2 places.

I received your email. I haven't done either of the caches you mentioned, but will put them on my list of caches to do.

Share this post


Link to post

I see what you mean. I have went to caches before and followed the trails straight to the cache, "although its not something that I do all the time" if I can follow the trails to the cache than that means anyone could. Not to mention what it is doing to the environment, you should stay on the trail as long as possible then tread lightly over vegitation to the cache.

Share this post


Link to post

Woodland,

 

There's little doubt that you're intentions are good and you're probably more than qualified to make a judgment on what is considered significant damage. There're people who have posted in here that blow thing very far out of proportion. Because in my experience I have yet to see anything anyone would consider a problem, I get a little jumpy about the subject. I had someone show me what he thought was a geo trail. The trail went past the cache and across the main trail to a pond. This is someone who should have been able to recognize that that was clearly a deer trail but instead he was bent on blaming geocaching.

 

At any rate, could you tell us what caches you're talking about? How many people have found them, or DNF them? Are there other caches in the area? Have you contacted the owner? Maybe even meet the cache owner at the site and show them why you're concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Not to mention what it is doing to the environment,

 

No, please do mention it. What's it doing to the environment?

Share this post


Link to post
Not to mention what it is doing to the environment,

 

No, please do mention it. What's it doing to the environment?

I do not like your remarks toward my post!

 

It would take an idiot not to realize that when you tread on fragile vegitation that it eventually dies, when you go off a path and walk through plants to find a cache and that same path gets walked on when retrieving the cache by all cachers then eventually those plants are going to die. And thats one of the reasons that some parks are banning geocaching inside them.

Share this post


Link to post

Okay Okay I have seen deer bedding areas and I know animals can tear up an area but it is not the same as when you place a cache and there is a three foot side stomping throgh the grass for the fun of a geocache. Now I'll agree and say that man is an ANIMAL and some of the arguments for protecting an environment is rediculious. We have as much right to be there as any other creature and if the white footed mouse can't survive then I guess evolution has slotted him for extention. And most the social trails I have seen and trampled areas are of minimal impact the grass will grow back and the sun will stil shine but I find some environments issues just plain silly. There are two sides of the argument.

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Not to mention what it is doing to the environment,

 

No, please do mention it. What's it doing to the environment?

I do not like your remarks toward my post!

 

It would take an idiot not to realize that when you tread on fragile vegitation that it eventually dies, when you go off a path and walk through plants to find a cache and that same path gets walked on when retrieving the cache by all cachers then eventually those plants are going to die. And thats one of the reasons that some parks are banning geocaching inside them.

You'd be surprised. Vegetation doesn't die off all that easily, even after several people have walked over it. Within weeks, even days that vegetation will bounce back. Also, plants die every day; it has no effect on the environment.

 

Profile for User: treasure_hunter

Hobbies:

I enjoy GEOCACHING, Dirtbiking, Hiking, and playing Basketball.

 

One pass with your dirt bike, even on an established trail, does more damage than 100 people searching for a typical cache.

Share this post


Link to post
You'd be surprised. Vegetation doesn't die off all that easily, even after several people have walked over it. Within weeks, even days that vegetation will bounce back. Also, plants die every day; it has no effect on the environment.

 

You should see some of the trails I maintain. I try to kill the vegetation by cutting and pulling it out. In some sections a month later it looks like its been abandoned for years. Totally overgrown.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Profile for User: treasure_hunter

Hobbies:

I enjoy GEOCACHING, Dirtbiking, Hiking, and playing Basketball.

 

One pass with your dirt bike, even on an established trail, does more damage than 100 people searching for a typical cache.

I have to agree, we have lots of trouble with dirt bikers in our beautiful North woods of Michigan. The scars they leave on the land are very visible, and disturbing from the ecology point of view. Geocachers never do that kind of damage! But most of them stay on the designated trails. So I have to say that some people need to get this all in perspective! I f they want to ban geocaching, they definately need to ban dirt biking and off road vehicles. Next will come snowmobiles and cross country skiing, and snow shoeing! The land is ours, right?

Share this post


Link to post
...Let's recap. THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION CONDUCTED A STUDY ON GEOCACHING!!!  The DEC is not exactly passive when it comes to the protection and preservation of open space.  They found geocaches have little or no impact on the environment.  The NYS DEC published a very positive article on geocaching in their Conservationist Magazine!

Good ammo for South Carolina.

I thought the problem in South Carolina had to do with caches in cemetaries and historic area. How does the environmental impact of geocaching have anything to do with those issues?

Share this post


Link to post
How does the environmental impact of geocaching have anything to do with those issues?

In general terms, this Ceips person portrays geocachers as a bunch of hooligans. Anything to the contrary helps.

 

But yeah, the SC stuff isn't related to environmental impact, but tresspassing, which is already a crime.

Share this post


Link to post

Could it be that cachers place their loot on or at the end of already-made "social" trails to make it easier for themselves and others? This was the case with a cache I found a couple days ago.

 

That having been said, I think it is best (environmentally) for the cache to be just off a main trail. I used to make an assumption that the cache owner would not place a cache in the middle of the woods far from the trail, but that is obviously not the case with some. I really appreciate the owners who list that each cache is not more than an arms length from the trail and I believe this would be the best practice for all of us.

 

I wonder how many tramplers a month it takes to wear a trail? If one or two people find the "deep woods" caches each month is this pretty low impact? Perhaps certain caches could be limited to two a month if we wanted... if there are two found postings for the cache you have to wait til the next month.

 

I'm really trying to take the fun out of the game, can you tell. I appreciate this conversation - I think I might abandon some finds if I can't reach the cache without hearing all kinds of vegetation snap and crackle under my feet.

Share this post


Link to post
It would take an idiot not to realize that when you tread on fragile vegitation that it eventually dies, when you go off a path and walk through plants to find a cache and that same path gets walked on when retrieving the cache by all cachers then eventually those plants are going to die. And thats one of the reasons that some parks are banning geocaching inside them.

Treading on fragile vegetation?

 

Man, you should have seen what the bulldozer did to the fragile vegetation when they cleared the lot for your house. Or when the road grader scraped the fragile vegetation up to put in the road to your house. Or the massive destruction of acres of vegetation when they built the walmart so you wouldn't have to drive so far. Or the....

:P

 

Sheesh. Stupid plants will grow back or die off. That's the whole premise of evolution remember?

Share this post


Link to post

Forgive me for growing up in the Rocky Mountain Region and out on the high plains but just what are we "preserving" the 99.99% of land off of designated trails for?

 

If I am not allowed to walk over some grass and look at nature, it just makes no sense to me.

 

In my book, you can be environmentally friendly without having to worry about each blade of grass, each unturned stone and each rotting tree stump. If we all follow some of the menatality being displayed in this thread then there would never be ANY "established" or "social" trails leading anywhere.

 

Why is it that where a man walks it is considered "un-natural and destructive" but if the forest animals do it, it is just nature at work?

 

sigh - just ranting here - I know there are areas that are highly sensitive, I know that erosion can occur, I know that there is a fine line between ok and too much. But worrying about some broken grass blades??!!!??

 

Squarely back on-topic, I have noticed a sort of path being worn near just one of my caches (straight line approach vs trail approach). It gets few enough visitors that I am more worried about giving away the cache than any "permanent" damage.

 

:P:P

Share this post


Link to post

I think my post was mistaking, I am not one of those people who is just crazy about the Environment, I am just saying when you are so lazy that you will not stay on a path to take you to the cache that you have to make another one through the vegitation that is just down right lazy and destructive. Thats why I put on my cache pages, NO BUSHWHACKING REQUIRED!

Share this post


Link to post
I think my post was mistaking, I am not one of those people who is just crazy about the Environment, I am just saying when you are so lazy that you will not stay on a path to take you to the cache that you have to make another one through the vegitation that is just down right lazy and destructive. Thats why I put on my cache pages, NO BUSHWHACKING REQUIRED!

Really? I guess you forgot to put it on this one:

(ratings out of 5 stars. 1 is easiest, 5 is hardest)

Difficulty:  **1/2  Terrain: **     

 

This cache is located off of US 119 on Pine Mountain on Little Shepherds Trail. You are looking for a camoflauged container.

 

    Be sure to place the cache back exactly like you found it. BYOP. Happy Caching.

 

Additional Hints (Decrypt)

and this one...

Difficulty:  **  Terrain: *1/2     

 

This cache is located off of US 119 on Pine Mountain at an overlook on the side of the road. The altitude at this location read around 2704 ft.

 

    This is where you can find some of the prettiest views around, from here you can see down to the foothills of Pine Mountain in the town of Whitesburg, you can also see the distant Appalachian Moutains in the surrounding areas. This place makes for some of the best pictures around, especially in the moring if you are lucky enough to catch a sunrise or the fog lifting from down in the valley. The evening is also good if you can see the sunset. Be sure to take plenty of pictures while you are here to post on your logs.

 

    The cache is a Magnetic Key Holder. BYOP

 

    HAPPY CACHING!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Additional Hints (Decrypt)

 

and this...

Difficulty:  **1/2  Terrain: **     

 

This cache is located along the Little Shepherd Trail on Pine Mountain, to access the trail take Hwy. 119 across Pine Mountain then Take Rt. 1679 East, which is the Little Shepherd Trail.

 

    This cache is a small container, with log and pen. Please place the cache back the way you found it. Nice place to CITO, watch for snakes. You may park on the side of the road to get this cache.

 

    Happy Caching!!!!!!!!!

 

Additional Hints (Decrypt)

 

and here...

Difficulty:  ***1/2  Terrain: ***     

 

This cache is located along the Little Shepherd Trail on Pine Mountain, to access the trail take Hwy. 119 across Pine Mountain then Take Rt. 1679 East, which is the Little Shepherd Trail.

 

    The cache is a tupperware container, there is room for trading, the original contents are:

    Kinfe, Hand warmers, Motorcycle, and a few other things.

 

    Be careful when retrieving this cache.

 

    Happy Caching!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Additional Hints (Decrypt)

 

 

What does my dirtbike have to do with Geocaching and this topic?

 

Because the TOPIC is about possible damage to land. You're getting your panties in a bunch because of a f'in PLANT dying but dirt bikes causes severe damage to land and erosion which allows toxins to seep into the aquifer and effects the WATER THAT WE DRINK.

 

And one more thing... knives are not allowed in caches. :P Unless of course you meant to write Kinfe in which case I have no idea what you're talking about.

Edited by JMBella

Share this post


Link to post
...That having been said, I think it is best (environmentally) for the cache to be just off a main trail. I used to make an assumption that the cache owner would not place a cache in the middle of the woods far from the trail, but that is obviously not the case with some. ...

I have to disagree with you. If the cache is near the trail, all cachers will take the same route to it. If the cache is away from the trail, cachers will tend to arrive at the site using differing routes. This will minimize the chances of creating a social trail.

Share this post


Link to post

That having been said, I think it is best (environmentally) for the cache to be just off a main trail. I used to make an assumption that the cache owner would not place a cache in the middle of the woods far from the trail, but that is obviously not the case with some. I really appreciate the owners who list that each cache is not more than an arms length from the trail and I believe this would be the best practice for all of us.

Well, there is another school of thought here.

 

If you place a cache close to an established trail, chances are everyone is going to leave the trail at the same point and follow the same route to the cache; thus possibly creating a social trail.

 

If you place the cache far off the trail, no 2 people are going to take the exact same route to the cache, so the impact to any one specific spot is nil.

 

EDIT: Great minds think alike! And so does Sbell111 and myself!

Edited by Mopar

Share this post


Link to post
Ban it all!  Let's just set at home, with mittens on our hands. :D

This is what I was thinking after reading some of the posts. Some seem to feel humans don't have any right to enjoy our natural resources. I only wish I could kill the weeds in my lawn by walking on them. It never seems to work. :P

 

Quite frankly I'm more concerned about our overuse of asphalt than making a small trail that will overgrow after a short time.

 

Some of you must be really angry with Mt. St. Helens. Stuff happens. The Earth adapts better than we can fathom.

 

Wait, I have it. Jetpacks for all cachers. No more trails to follow. :P

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post

I'll third the part about placing caches further from a trail meaning two cachers will likely take different paths.

 

I also looked at my caches to make sure they are placed appropriately. These are grouped mainly by type of trail to the cache:

 

Desert Isle had no trail, but crossed a mostly dry riverbed. Any trail formed would be washed away with the next rain.

Cabezon Cache was very close to a 4x4 road (10 feet) and the bushes don't cover the ground in the desert, they're in clumps with room to walk between them.

The Cache at the End of the Universe was within 100 feet of a 4x4 road with the same type of vegetation as Cabezon.

Snake! Oh a Snake! is placed in a bunch of scrub bushes. It's nearly impossible for two people to take the same path. High school kids had already made trails through parts of the area, but there is not one leading to the cache even after several finders.

Ventenas Trail Cache is hidden near a walking path with similar vegetation to Cabezon. There are also large rocks to walk on just in case the dirt is endangered. :P

Pike's View had a gravel trail when I placed it, the city tore that out and poured concrete! Who's damaging the environment? :D The actual cache is not far from the trail, no damage seen during any of my visits.

Balance is hidden in a landscaped area (in New Mexico that means gravel).

Balance 2 followed either paved paths or existing social trails. No new trails formed during the life of this cache.

Balance 3 is accessible from the pavement.

Balance 4 is accessible from the concrete path.

Balance 5 was accessible from the pavement.

Balanced is accessible from a concrete path.

Vector Cathedral was hidden under a rock wall in a grassy park 10 feet or so from the concrete path. No damage noted on any of my visits.

7 of Diamonds is accessible from the pavement.

Don't Fall In is hidden in a grassy park. No trail has formed, even though many seekers have a hard time locating this easy cache.

Sax at the Summit notes on the cache page that you don't need to trample any vegetation to find the cache. Hidden in a park.

Merry Sax-mas is within 100 feet of an existing trail, but there is more than one trail in the area that will get you close. No new trails formed or damage noted on any of my maintenance visits.

Nature's Symphony followed existing trails at the start, then was placed about 400 feet off a trail. It is visited so rarely (being in a remote location) that there is no danger of a trail forming.

Little Horse Mesa follows an existing State Park trail. The cache is hidden in a rocky area so it's pretty hard for anyone to trample vegetation.

Opportunity Trail is my most remote cache. It follows an existing State Park trail until the last 0.1 miles or so. It is only accessible about 5 months a year and no two people take the same path. You'd be amazed at how fast the plants grew between the time I placed it and my first maintenance visit 4 months or so later!

 

Edit to add Cinco de Saxo has not been out long enough to notice any social trails. It also hasn't had many visitors. I guess that 5/5 rating keeps seekers away :P

Edited by Team GPSaxophone

Share this post


Link to post
Ban it all!  Let's just set at home, with mittens on our hands. :D

This is what I was thinking after reading some of the posts. Some seem to feel humans don't have any right to enjoy our natural resources. I only wish I could kill the weeds in my lawn by walking on them. It never seems to work. :P

 

Quite frankly I'm more concerned about our overuse of asphalt than making a small trail that will overgrow after a short time.

 

Some of you must be really angry with Mt. St. Helens. Stuff happens. The Earth adapts better than we can fathom.

 

Wait, I have it. Jetpacks for all cachers. No more trails to follow. :D

 

Mike

Jet packs would roast, to a golden brown, the small area around the cache when you launch. We're at 90 posts here just talking about some lightly squashed crab grass...can you imagine what would happen in these threads over a cache facilitated launch pad?

:P:D:):wub::D

Share this post


Link to post
Wait, I have it. Jetpacks for all cachers. No more trails to follow. :P

 

Mike

Nope that won't work either. Then you have to worry about scorching the treetops. Dont' even get me started about the emissions. With all of us cachers we'll deplete the O-Zone in no time. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Wait, I have it. Jetpacks for all cachers. No more trails to follow.  :P

 

Mike

Nope that won't work either. Then you have to worry about scorching the treetops. Dont' even get me started about the emissions. With all of us cachers we'll deplete the O-Zone in no time. :P

Don't worry about emissions. My jetpack will operate on methane from Cow fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Wait, I have it. Jetpacks for all cachers. No more trails to follow.  :D

 

Mike

Nope that won't work either. Then you have to worry about scorching the treetops. Dont' even get me started about the emissions. With all of us cachers we'll deplete the O-Zone in no time. :P

Don't worry about emissions. My jetpack will operate on methane from Cow fodder.

Holy Crap!!!

 

sorry, couldn't help myself. :P

Share this post


Link to post
...I thought the problem in South Carolina had to do with caches in cemetaries and historic area. How does the environmental impact of geocaching have anything to do with those issues?

The SC bill covers Cemeteries, Historical and Archaeological Sites. These areas already tend to welcome low impact uses such as bird watchers, joggers etc. Showing geocaching is low to no impact can't hurt. Geocaching is harmless and now a study shows that to be the case.

 

Remember the bill bans tupperware, not people. People are already allowed in most of those locations. It's not a trespassing bill in a strict sense. Showing that the reasons for the bill are not really a concern from an authority with credibility is a step in the right direction. Geocachers are typically good people. However our credibility was harmed due to political machinations of a less than reputable state representative.

Share this post


Link to post
Holy Crap!!!

 

sorry, couldn't help myself.  :D

According to leave no trace, it is best to bury all crap, even Holy crap, in catholes. :P:P

Share this post


Link to post
...TI only wish I could kill the weeds in my lawn by walking on them. It never seems to work. :P ...

Good point. Heck even if I pull the suckers they still don't die.

Share this post


Link to post
...TI only wish I could kill the weeds in my lawn by walking on them. It never seems to work.  :P ...

Good point. Heck even if I pull the suckers they still don't die.

Hide a cache there, some of us think that will do the trick.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×
×
  • Create New...