Cache In Trash, Cacher Trashed

[braintrals]

I have been somewhat dissapointed lately by the number of caches placed in such places as dumps, filthy secluded hideaways for the homeless, swampy muckland and places where animal carcases had been dumped. While this may be funny to the cache hider, the cacher is often put in harms way. In other cases if we have driven some distance to hunt a cache only to be confronted with something of an unpleasant nature, it can be a real let down.

 

Is it possible that cache hiders be more thoughtful of the cachers? If we want to keep the game going the finder comments will be positive, otherwise a cache can be just as well destroyed with negative comments. How would you want your hide to be found and reported?

 

What does anyone else out there think or what have your experiences been?

[Skovar]

I think "if someone places it, someone will seek it." This topic has been discussed many times before, and I think the official position could be boiled down to: Geocaching.com is a listing service and has neither interest nor the resources to act as a guarantor of quality.

 

In other words, "Caveat Emptor."

[+Airmapper]

I guess it is up to the seekers to say when enough is enough, if it's a bad spot, say so in your logs, if future cachers agree, then you have a start.

 

But until then Mapcreate, or Mapsource ain't going to tell you if the cache is next to the homeless camps or the shantytown.

Edited October 9, 2005 by Airmapper

[+Kit Fox]

I have been somewhat dissapointed lately by the number of caches placed in such places as dumps, filthy secluded hideaways for the homeless, swampy muckland and places where animal carcases had been dumped. While this may be funny to the cache hider, the cacher is often put in harms way. In other cases if we have driven some distance to hunt a cache only to be confronted with something of an unpleasant nature, it can be a real let down.

 

Is it possible that cache hiders be more thoughtful of the cachers? If we want to keep the game going the finder comments will be positive, otherwise a cache can be just as well destroyed with negative comments. How would you want your hide to be found and reported?

 

What does anyone else out there think or what have your experiences been?

In cases like this, I'm brutally honest in my online logs. I make sure future cachers know what they will encounter before they get there. Another option is to bring a digital camera and take pictures of the "scenery." Upload the scenic pictures with your log, so others see what your talking about.

[braintrals]

Hi Kit Fox

 

Thank you for the very good and constructive comments. I will indeed do those suggestions. I have assisted another cacher on many other finds so my comments are not from lack of experience. We really appreciate your wisdom.

 

Thanks

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I have been somewhat dissapointed lately by the number of caches placed in such places as dumps, filthy secluded hideaways for the homeless, swampy muckland and places where animal carcases had been dumped.  While this may be funny to the cache hider, the cacher is often put in harms way.  In other cases if we have driven some distance to hunt a cache only to be confronted with something of an unpleasant nature, it can be a real let down.

 

Is it possible that cache hiders be more thoughtful of the cachers?  If we want to keep the game going the finder comments will be positive, otherwise a cache can be just as well destroyed with negative comments.  How would you want your hide to be found and reported?

 

What does anyone else out there think or what have your experiences been?

 

Many -- but certainly not all -- cache hunters love to hunt caches placed in weird or extreme places, and there is even a loose category of caches called "extreme geocaches". At least some of the placements you have described may fall in the category of extreme geocaches. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the types of cache placements that you have described, but only (and this is the true test and also the zinger) so long as the following conditions have been fully met:

• the cache has been assigned an appropriately high Difficulty and Terrain rating.
  full disclosure has been made on the cache page of any relevant known dangers, hazards, etc. Some typical dangers which might be listed may include falling, drowning, death, acquiring infectious disease, being mugged, drive-by shootings, etc.
  full disclosure has been made of special skills needed, such as piloting a helicopter, SCUBA diving, rock-climbing, spelunking, self-defense, stealth, etc.
  full disclosure has been made of gear which might be needed, such as helmet, hardhat, flashlights, flashlights, headlamps, sidearm weaponry, SCUBA gear, wet suit, SCBA breathing apparatus, hazmat-rated Tyvek protective bunny suit, rock climbing gear, boat, etc.
  full disclosure has been made on the cache page of any precautions which cache hunters may wish to take if seeking the cache. These precautions might range from something as simple as "do not go alone; travel with one or more teammates!" to suggestions for tetanus shots, vaccinations for disease organisms found in raw sewage, quarantine for 120 days after having completed cache, carrying special gear, etc.
  

In other words, I feel that extreme or even "weird" caches are fine, but the prospective cache hunter should receive fair advance warning. A number of my Psycho Urban series and Psycho Backcountry series caches include a number of the above caveats and warnings, including mentions of:

• dangerous areas where there have been frequent drive-by shootings
  long hikes over relatively rough terrain
  dangers of drowning
  climbs requiring rock-climbing skills
  climbs requiring rock-climbing gear
  cave caches requiring both climbing skills plus spelunking skills/gear
  suggestions for tetanus shots or other vaccinations
  high danger of death or severe injury if caution is not employed
  

Having said the above, some of my favorite cache finds have been caches where I had to slog for hundreds of yards through hip-deep mud, or crawl in long dark wet tunnels, visit a backcountry rattlesnake den, climb a tree 50 feet to reach a hidden container, crawl down into an abandoned well, or climb out on the rusty beams under an abandoned railroad bridge a hundred feet above a raging river. In fact, my wife Sue and I still intend to drive to North Carolina one of these days to get the cache submerged deep in the toxic sewage runoff from a toxic waste dump. Yummy!

[Skovar]

In cases like this, I'm brutally honest in my online logs. I make sure future cachers know what they will encounter before they get there. Another option is to bring a digital camera and take pictures of the "scenery."

 

Of course, cache owners are free to delete any and all logs and photos, and some are known to delete anything that is remotely critical. It then becomes a game of who is more stubborn. Log ... delete. Log ... delete, etc.. Who knows where, and to what extent, it eventually leads?

 

To think, so much turmoil over a crummy container that probably didn't contain even $1.00 worth of trinkets. It's times like those that force one to ask: Is geocaching really a game played primarily by adults?

Edited October 9, 2005 by Skovar

[+Crazy Aaron]

I have a cache in a place like this: I Pledge To CITO

 

This cache works because:

 

1) The location, although completely trashed and disgusting, would be a great cache spot (if it was clean)

2) The whole point of this cache is to promote CITO

3) The hide is clever and 'fits' the theme of the cache

4) The location is clearly described on the cache page

 

I agree with you though. There are many caches with no indication that they are magnetic key holders on the side of a smelly restaurant dumpster. No fun!

[CoyoteRed]

Of course, cache owners are free to delete any and all logs and photos, and some are known to delete anything that is remotely critical. It then becomes a game of who is more stubborn. Log ... delete. Log ... delete, etc.. Who knows where, and to what extent, it eventually leads?

This is my expereince, first hand.

 

That or you get snide comments like "owner was not attempting to point out charming areas to visit." So what's the point?

 

The problem is there is no real avenue for community feedback if the owner doesn't want it.

[trekgek]

What a mix of comments...

 

Sheer stupidity on one hand and then there are those with intelligent comments backed up with reason and experience.

 

The whole point has been missed by some, caches placed in trash, not challenging locations. Like duh

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

What a mix of comments...

 

Sheer stupidity on one hand and then there are those with intelligent comments backed up with reason and experience.

 

The whole point has been missed by some, caches placed in trash, not challenging locations. Like duh

With all due respect, one of my points in my previous post was that some folks like caches hidden in places such as:

• toxic waste dumps
  garbage dumps
  high-crime areas
  high up sheer cliffs
  deep inside caves
  deep inside storm drains
  deep in sewage ponds
  deep in muddy swamps
  

However, most people want to know about these things up front. The real issue, as I tried to point out, is one of disclosure. Has the cache owner fully disclosed the risks, hazards and needed precautions, and have they assigned an appropriately high Difficulty and Terrain rating?

[Skovar]

The whole point has been missed by some, caches placed in trash, not challenging locations.

I thought the main point of the original post was "Is it possible that cache hiders be more thoughtful of the cachers?"

 

I've read many times in these threads that the very act of placing any cache is nothing less than a selfless act of kindness by the hider.

 

RE: Disclosure. While the cache owner is required to provide complete information to the reviewers so that they can make a fair determination, the cache owner is only required to provide starting coordinates on the cache page. Any other information the cache owner chooses to disclose is entirely discretionary. Many times, less is more, and more is less. To repeat what I said in the first response to this thread, it's a matter of "Caveat Emptor." To some people, that uncertainty is undoubtedly the primary attraction of the game.

Edited October 9, 2005 by Skovar

[+sweetlife]

we had a offset cache archived for a reason similar to this, at a local wayside where we had the coord under a toilet seat and our local approver thought this was unexceptable. here is the waypoint GCPW40 if you wanna look

[+Renegade Knight]

I enjoy caches in some of the locations singled out as bad. It's all relative to what you enjoy. One of the things I enjoy is knowing the world I live in. Not just the pretty and scenic parts. It's a big world and for the most part a cache near a homless camp is not blocking a cache 4 miles up the road by the waterfall.

 

It's sixes.

[+olbluesguy]

While walking about Geocaching or just hiking I often run into these dumpy places

covered with litter.If I'm prepared I haul some out.If I'm not prepared ,more often than not I just shake my head in disgust and walk on.

I'm thinking of creating a cache that contains nothing but garbage bags...

Find the cache, take a bag ,fill it up go home and log your visit.

Take nothing but a bag,leave nothing but a bag.

[+Kit Fox]

In cases like this, I'm brutally honest in my online logs. I make sure future cachers know what they will encounter before they get there. Another option is to bring a digital camera and take pictures of the "scenery."

 

Of course, cache owners are free to delete any and all logs and photos, and some are known to delete anything that is remotely critical. It then becomes a game of who is more stubborn. Log ... delete. Log ... delete, etc.. Who knows where, and to what extent, it eventually leads?

 

To think, so much turmoil over a crummy container that probably didn't contain even $1.00 worth of trinkets. It's times like those that force one to ask: Is geocaching really a game played primarily by adults?

I have yet to have one of my"honest" logs deleted, but I did have a cache owner politely disagree with me, via a note on his cache page.

 

The cache I'm referring to was hidden in between two rows of two-story apartment buildings, on the "grassy knoll." Cachers had to snoop in front of everyone's window, while trying not to act suspicious. The container was a fake sprinkler.

 

I have also made one enemy, because I was critical of his cache that was hidden in the "dumping grounds" aka bathroom area of the local homeless people. He promptly archived the cache, and sent me a nasty email

[+WalruZ]

An SBA is seen by the area reviewer, even if the cache owner deletes it. If it's not bad enough to SBA it, then say what you think without being insulting.

 

Experienced cachers in a given area know who the crap hiders are. Go to your local events and compare notes.

[+drat19]

I have been somewhat dissapointed lately by the number of caches placed in such places as dumps, filthy secluded hideaways for the homeless, swampy muckland and places where animal carcases had been dumped.  While this may be funny to the cache hider, the cacher is often put in harms way.  In other cases if we have driven some distance to hunt a cache only to be confronted with something of an unpleasant nature, it can be a real let down.

 

Is it possible that cache hiders be more thoughtful of the cachers?

Amen.

 

I have documented this very concern in the following articles I published:

 

Dave's Opinions on Geocache Hiding

 

Dave's Note to Local Hiders

 

FWIW...

Edited October 12, 2005 by drat19

[tossedsalad]

What a mix of comments... 

 

Sheer stupidity on one hand and then there are those with intelligent comments backed up with reason and experience. 

 

The whole point has been missed by some, caches placed in trash, not challenging locations.  Like duh

With all due respect, one of my points in my previous post was that some folks like caches hidden in places such as:

• toxic waste dumps
  garbage dumps
  high-crime areas
  high up sheer cliffs
  deep inside caves
  deep inside storm drains
  deep in sewage ponds
  deep in muddy swamps
   
  

However, most people want to know about these things up front. The real issue, as I tried to point out, is one of disclosure. Has the cache owner fully disclosed the risks, hazards and needed precautions, and have they assigned an appropriately high Difficulty and Terrain rating?

Vinny, I always thought you were kidding about the toxic waste dump. Please tell me you are kidding!

 

I never heard you mention high crime areas before. Is that also a joke? In that type of hide, it should be permissible to include knives as swag.

[+GRANPA ALEX]

I heartily agree with the OP, hiders should be reasonable and considerate as to the safety, well-being and concerns of those who will seek their hides.

 

We must be careful, however, not to use this properly directed concern and genuine interest in our friends be a limiting factor in the type of hides/containers we find fun & acceptable to hunt or hide.

 

I HAVE deleted logs of one individual who used rudeness, bogus excuses, unwarranted derision of the cache owner and ouright prevarication to describe me/my cache. This, because the true motive was to be the cache-policeman and keep micros out of HIS town at any cost, there was nothing really wrong with the caches which are of types seen in many-many other places.

 

We can be kind, reasonable and considerate in how we treat others, what we expect of others . . . without trying to police how they may enjoy playing.

 

This is important in our consideration of what we say in logs and over the forum . . . others are reading and making choices as to their participation. We want our best face iout there & encourage everyone who sees us.

[Skovar]

Experienced cachers in a given area know who the crap hiders are. Go to your local events and compare notes.

Why did Voltaire pop into my mind when I read that quote?

 

I wouldn't take someone else's word on whose caches to avoid or boycott by anything I heard at a cache event; especially not from some self-anointed local "authority." In order to avoid unwittingly participating in someone's personal vendetta, I'd go out and make my own determination. At the very worse, I would discover whether the information I had received was worth a grain of salt.

[CoyoteRed]

We must be careful, however...

Yes, we must not mention anything that might take away from some poor cache owner's enjoyment who only wants to leave a "gift" for fellow cachers to enjoy.

 

Nevermind the suspicious and/or illegal activity, nevermind the defacing public property, nevermind the habitual lack of maintenance. It's all good.

 

BTW, might want to check on "Precision" because the object you attached it to has been replaced. Oh, and I doubt anyone could claim they "found" a hole with this new object--not that I believed it the first time.

 

Also, mine aren't the only logs you've deleted, is it? When you have a cache on your watchlist, you get the original log.

Edited October 12, 2005 by CoyoteRed

[Skovar]

I HAVE deleted logs of one individual who used rudeness, bogus excuses, unwarranted derision of the cache owner and ouright prevarication to describe me/my cache.

Which would you prefer ... someone to tell you in no uncertain terms what they thought of your cache, or for that someone to simply remove the cache, toss it into the nearest dumpster, and not say a word to anyone?

 

I'd prefer the former; even if the person had been rude or unkind, I could always delete the log (and know who to suspect when the cache subsequently disappeared.)

[CoyoteRed]

I'd prefer the former; even if the person had been rude or unkind, I could always delete the log (and know who to suspect when the cache subsequently disappeared.)

And that's the reason on three different occassions with three different people I've had to discourage anything that might cause the cache to disappear, because I'm the person he is refering to. Who do you think he would blame if it did happen? I was only the person who was the most vocal about the hides.

 

Talk about "ouright prevarication," before the incident we had several micros, all of which were pretty decent--some, if not most, of which were even trading caches! So, no, I'm not against micros, never have been. You can even search on my posts to see even when folks complain about "trashy micros" I mention it's not the size, but the hide.

[+Always & Forever 5]

dangerous areas where there have been frequent drive-by shootings

Why in the world would anyone want to place, let alone go find, a cache here???!!?!

 

[Skovar]

And that's the reason on three different occassions with three different people I've had to discourage anything that might cause the cache to disappear, because I'm the person he is refering to. Who do you think he would blame if it did happen? I was only the person who was the most vocal about the hides.

Just to be clear, I was speaking in the abstract, and not about CR's situation.

 

I agree with CR that it is entirely possible the wrong person(s) would fall under suspicion. That's one of the reasons I used the LOL icon.

[+GRANPA ALEX]

I would normally have responded via email rather than tire others, but you have asked me not to write to your email address . . . so, I will only this once, respond on the forum.

 

Because of your rancor, you ARE right CR, you might well be the target of interest if a cache came up missing. Though when it HAS ocurred - no one blamed you. This is as it should be.

 

In truth, everything I said was from your own unkind and rude comments in the forums regarding micros and me personally . . . I am sure that the world of forum readers saw this or can find it.

 

It was not only concerning 'trashy' micros, which is a question of personal taste, not a qualitative matter. My Charleston caches have earned very favorable posts from finders who enjoyed them, many kind words have been awarded.

 

When last I serviced all of my caches & repaired/replaced a missing one (Precision), I made a note in the logs of each cache . . . the very next finder on the Precision cache found pieces of the attachment to the fixture, but no cache - this only a few days after it was replaced. Your name did not come up then, either.

 

As to maintenance, someone unknown to me has helped me, replaced a container & log and helped me care for one cache . . . someone who did not give their name or seek acknowlegement. I thanked them in a note on the cache page that they probably, and unfortunately, did not see unless they too have a watchlist. I do care this for caches of others, it is nice to see courtesy and have the favor of consideration returned.

 

Further, when I did my care for the caches, I replaced filled logs for the most part - all else was fine, as I recall, except the one that was missing. Finally, I never said prevaricably that there were no other micros around before I placed a few, as I had found some before & since and enjoyed them immensely - I simply love micros, I would seek them first and know if they were near.

[+GRANPA ALEX]

Which would you prefer ... someone to tell you in no uncertain terms what they thought of your cache, or for that someone to simply remove the cache, toss it into the nearest dumpster, and not say a word to anyone?

 

I would certainly prefer someone to tell me exactly what a situation is with a cache, what they think of it is important to me . . . constructive, too. This can be done in a reasonable and considerate manner, though.

 

What I address is the suggesting in the logs that the cache be boycotted, that the area is mortally dangerous (my own family neighborhood) which is not true, even seeking to have caches archived that are servicable and fun to hunt. This is NOT constructive but quite the contrary.

 

Deleting a log can hurt/confuse/anger the writer and can, as an act, be misconstrued. I will communicate with the writer before deleting, sharing my thoughts and asking them to modify comments out of consideration for others - this HAS been successful.

[CoyoteRed]

What I address is the suggesting in the logs that the cache be boycotted, that the area is mortally dangerous (my own family neighborhood) which is not true, even seeking to have caches archived that are servicable and fun to hunt. This is NOT constructive but quite the contrary.

Someone reading the above would think all of it could be credited to me. Don't try to put all that on me.

 

Oh, and I will continue to SBA illegal caches. Unless you can provide some proof that a local utility said it was okay for you to drill a hole in an active power pole and mangle a pole ID tag? Was that okay? Is that acceptable practice where you're from?

[+humanloofa]

I would prefer to know before hand that I will be rooting through filth so I can be prepared with gloves or a hazmat suite, instead of showing up and thinking I wish I had gloves to root through a mounain of garbage. I have only had this happen once and DNF'd it. Now if it was posted as a CITO I would go and help clean up.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I have yet to have one of my"honest" logs deleted, but I did have a cache owner politely disagree with me, via a note on his cache page.

I have had one log deleted. The whole multi was a needle-in-the-haystack hunt, with coords usually fifty feet off. The final was 170' off in a very large pile of concrete road slabs. (The pile of slabs was thirty feet across, twenty feet high, and maybe a quarter mile long.)

 

Back on topic: I once posted that "This is the second ugliest place that I've ever searched for a cache." The owner thought that was uproariously funny! And, of course, he wanted to know what the ugliest one was. (The ugliest one actually had beautiful views, but was in an area of dilapidated docks, next to a sanitation pier. It was a homeless person's bedroom, and had the largest rats that I've ever seen! ) (The last two mentioned caches have been archived.)