Jump to content

Inappropriately Placed Caches


Stefanoodle

Recommended Posts

As South Africans we have a way of pushing the envelope and trying to bend the rules in many ways. However, sometimes we tend to flout authority which may not be the best way to go.

 

I have come across several caches -- and have read about more in logs for caches I still want to find -- that have been placed in direct contravention of some sign: either in an area with a sign that says "no access" to hikers, or on a road that says "private road, no access without authorisation", or beyond the boundary fence on someone's farm. Given that none of us want our caches to be muggled, it's quite tempting to hide in a place that won't be visited by too many people other than cachers who will ignore the sign.

 

Most of these caches have probably been placed without any intention of causing a problem, but I'm sure Farmer Brown wouldn't be too impressed if he knew strangers were hopping his fence to dig up a container hidden in his field. And people in nature conservation might also pop a fuse if a select few visitors thought they were above the rules and traipsed over areas that were closed for rehabilitation.

 

Most of us are probably guilty of going for that smilie anyway, and perhaps logging a comment about the location being a tad inappropriate. But that's where it ends. Some of you may have been following the heated events regarding caching in South Carolina, and how legislation was being passed to ban it, or highly regulate it. Seems it was sparked by caches in cemetaries and cachers perhaps being insensitive about visiting the areas.

 

So, while most of the caches I have found have been in magnificent areas, and there have been no problems with their placement, it would be sad if geocaching in SA were to become a frowned-upon activity by organisations such as nature or heritage conservation because of a few inappropriately-placed containers.

 

The guidelines for geocaching cover this adequately, but what suggestions does anybody have for getting the situation rectified when necessary? Obviously, nobody wants to seem like a spoil-sport and be the first to send a note to the cache owner to suggest the cache is moved slightly to a better location, although I have done it once or twice. Any other ideas? Fire away, I'm wearing my flame-proof suit. :lol:

Link to comment

That's a good point Erik makes, as the reviewer's details are now posted at the bottom of the log.

 

The question is where do you draw the line? What will Nature Conservation think of geocaches placed on their property? Raise the issue with them and you WILL get a (negative) knee-jerk reaction. So we quietly go about our business and try to keep a low profile. Personally I think caches placed in cemetaries is just downright poor taste.

 

There was a recent discussion about the Drakensberg authorities being a little upset with geocachers. From an outsiders point of view it would be seen as a nuisance. Of course we know better, and believe that geocaching does, after all, encourage one to visit the natural wonders of our country. And appreciate it. How does one make the uniformed see it that way?

 

It seems that the timing is perfect to arrange that CITO event Vespa and Goofster have been making noises about... could even get some local newspapers in on the act to cast some positive exposure on the activity. Plus, as cownchicken pointed out, have a good breakfast beforehand. But then that's a different story entirely.

 

B

Link to comment

I think its also important to note that most of South Africa’s best assets are behind private property signs. Unfortunately if something interesting or beautiful is not locked behind a fence with a price attached to it - chances are it will be stolen or vandalized.

 

I do agree that placing caches where it could harm the environment or any people are really very distasteful. Everyone has to asses the situation and look at the area objectively. It is important to realize that our natural heritage is what makes Geocaching in South Africa so rewarding. I agree that people who wish to lodge complaints or concerns regarding cache placement should do so via the cache reviewer as they have the power to archive etc.

 

Getting the authorities involved can be a really risky business as they tend to shun that which they do not understand. We may even end up paying a new GEO tax for the right to Geocache in SA.

 

Personally I think caches placed in cemeteries is just downright poor taste.

Ouch B!! There goes that idea <_<

Link to comment

You guys are probably right that Conservation would probably veto before thinking. That's why I suggested to Larks, Vespa and Goofster at our cache event that perhaps a CITO in the Cape of Good Hope NR might get them on our side. The Atlantic shoreline in places was quite littered from what ships discharge and throw overboard. I'm also trying to track down a journalist friend of a friend who could possibly publicise the event, but with the holidays right now people seem to be away. I though Larks would be a good cacher to have on board, as he works for SAN Parks. January, when everybody is back, will probably be a good time.

 

I also just need to gauge whether I'm overreacting to certain placements. I'm thinking of a few placements, such as Tygerberg Tortoise Cache; it's only a few metres off the path, which I wouldn't normally worry about, but there is a sign that says "No through path for hikers".

 

Or West Coast Flowers; it's not very far beyond the fence (300 metres?), but does the farmer know?

 

There are quite a few more. These are great caches, and I'm definitely not calling for their archiving. I enjoyed finding them. But I wouldn't want geocaching as an activity to end up being banned or associated with trespassing and vandalism.

 

We do have several caches on private land, such as Papkuilsfontein 4x4, or Peg's Treasure that have the landowner's permission, so I think this is what we should be encouraging, if we want to place caches not generally accessible to the public.

 

Thanks, Erik, I'll bear in mind sending a note to the reviewer. It's not that I worry about the cache owner getting stroppy with me personally. But it is probably slightly better that the appropriateness question comes from higher up. That means that all cachers should at least be aware that a cache might be placed a tad out of bounds. Unfortunately, not all of them read the forums.

Edited by Stefanoodle
Link to comment
What will Nature Conservation think of geocaches placed on their property?

Well, if they're not approached in the right way with a feasible solution you can kiss 90% of the caches in the cape goodbye.

 

Those caches behind "DO NOT TRESPASS SIGNS" or behind a fence on private land without permission..... well would strongly urge the owners to move them. We certainly don't want to hear of stories of cachers removing lead from their nether regions.

Link to comment

Interestingly enought while you guys were talking, I finally managed to relocate the Montagu Springs Cache and report to CNC on an illegal trap set in the Montagu Mountain Reserve.

 

I don't see much fuss attached to it. As I did a FTF on that cache in Oct I saw it's inappropriate placement: Off the Badskloof hiking trail in a well visible location for other hikers to notic ones "illegal" off trail venturing. Being a member of the Montagu Mountain Reserve Committee, I contacted the owner of the cache and recomended a relocation.

 

She agreed and asked me to arrange it for her due to the distance to her home base - which points to another point of concern: Maintanance of ones caches, how far is feasible?...

 

The cache is now closer to the old trail (13m) and out of sight of the redirected "hikers highway" In addition I've chosen a location that is more obvious and will prevent long searches in the enviroment - remember it is a Mountain RESERVE!

 

It's new waypoint is S33°46.264' E20°06.905' at 246m asl with an 7m accuracy due to the high cliffs and bad satelite pos at the time of taking. I've notivied the owner. Yet Eric you might check up on it. Since the site is down on my side (due to maintainance, it said...)

 

Further more I placed a notice in the old location, since I'm sure there will be cachers with "old" printed out cache info heading this way...

 

the beauty of my little operation was as mentioned above also the discovery of an potentially illegal set trap in the reserve plus the spotting of yet some more OFF-TRAIL hikers hi up in the rocks... No climbers I might add! and this after we had a fatal accident here in Montagu just a month ago, of someone hiking off trail and falling to his death...

 

Awareness & Responcibility please and we'll keep Geocaching alive for long while coming!

 

On the note of No Tresspassing signs (being a farmer myself) I might just add that its main reason is for legal purposed to help prevent squatting on farm land, without the sign we have almost no change to get squatters removed from private lands. Any "visitor" with good intend (e.g. geocaching) is always welcome, bear in mind that you are able to maintain that cache too!!!

 

To ask for permission from the farmer for placement of a cache in the above case is just added curtecy and should be part of the operation, speciall if you drive into the farm as compaired to fence hopping. on the last point before I head for breakfast if you do so please make sure you use gates or near poles and don't damage the fence and create hole for livestock to escape nore should you remove the rocks placed at the bottom of the fence either.

 

thanks folks and excuse my english... :(

Link to comment

Updated the log this morning.

 

Was quite happy to have the cache shifted because - even though it wasn't that far from a well-worn footpath - the last thing we intend is to damage the ecology. In fact, we've given up on "founds" while standing 15m away from a cache that looks to be just out of reach over some pristine fynbos. Just couldnae do eet :lol:

 

Anyway, cache has been edited.

 

As for maintenance, I'm less than two hours drive away, but at the time, asked Matata if he were to get there sooner than I could, if he could shift it... given too that he knows the area and which parts are off limits. Reckon we're close enough to maintain and active enough to archive/disable until the couple of weeks it may take us before we're back in the area.

 

Another note on maintenance is that we've had quite a few generous "foster parents" and willing looker-afterers of caches that may be further away than we can get to daily. We appreciate when these guys drop us a line to say "checked up on it and all is well" or dash out for a quick reconnaissance mission after someone's logged a "not found". We have our own foster cache-kid within walking distance of 1/2-Baa!'s folks' place and check it up every time we're there.

 

Nobody likes finding a sodden cache filled with unidentifiable goop, so this is a courtesy that I think the majority of us are happy to extend. :D

Link to comment
As for maintenance, I'm less than two hours drive away, but at the time, asked Matata if he were to get there sooner than I could, if he could shift it... given too that he knows the area and which parts are off limits.  Reckon we're close enough to maintain and active enough to archive/disable until the couple of weeks it may take us before we're back in the area.

I agree with this but I wonder if some (not saying anyone here in the forum) use this to place a cache anywhere. I have a cache in the United States that is still active from when I lived there. I post a note whenever I need to so the next finder can carry out whatever maintenance might be needed. I have also just placed one in Port Elizabeth which is 750 kms from home, but my in-laws live there and I go every month or two, so I can disable if needs be for me to get out there and maintain it. But you have to use discretion on these placements.

 

I have heard people say that they make up fake people for the reviewer so it gets approved even though they live really far away. This might work at times, like in remote areas where there are very few caches and chances of it being messed with is low, but in general in downgrades the area for caches. I tried to find one that someone placed in the middle of a UNESCO archelogical site, and fortunately it was removed, but was not archived by the owner who lived in a seperate country. The clues said under some rocks! You should never move rocks around in a spot like ruins. :laughing: I didn't move rocks, in case you were wondering why I was searching. Gave a second opinion so an administrator could archive it.

 

So point is, I agree with what is being said and am glad that it is brought up so others can remind themselves.

Link to comment

Here's an interesting conundrum - I recently agreed to maintain a cache in the south peninsula placed by a visitor from Zimbabwe. Problem is, I didn't find it on my first visit, and I haven't heard from the cache owner again (he might still be on the road and not able to access the internet). I've asked for an 'assist' as I'm not going to spend another 30 minutes looking for it. It has been found already, by bob, but he was not working alone . . .

Link to comment
..."foster parents" and willing looker-afterers of caches that may be further away than we can get to daily...

 

Could not agree more!

 

Fostering should be a honor to all cache hunters. This allows for a greater distribution of caches and get the caching community closer together. After all it doesn't matter who owns the cache! The location, the challange, the experience is priority!!!

 

I my view the enviroment comes first hence I'm very disapointed that the locationless caches have been stopped. They allowed endless posibilities without "polluting" nature, plus you always learn about some awesome facts and location.

Link to comment
..."foster parents" and willing looker-afterers of caches that may be further away than we can get to daily...

 

Could not agree more!

 

Fostering should be a honor to all cache hunters. This allows for a greater distribution of caches and get the caching community closer together. After all it doesn't matter who owns the cache! The location, the challange, the experience is priority!!!

 

I my view the enviroment comes first hence I'm very disapointed that the locationless caches have been stopped. They allowed endless posibilities without "polluting" nature, plus you always learn about some awesome facts and location.

Agreed. I wish virtuals and locationless caches had stayed on the same site. But I guess majority ruled on this one. I also see no problem getting a fellow cacher to 'sponsor' a cache while the owner is not able to maintain it as quickly. Anything to promote caches from disappearing around here is A ok with me.

Link to comment

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...
×
×
  • Create New...